Conference Collection: IMETI 2021 – Original Manuscript SCIENCE PROGRESS

Science Progress

Experimental and numerical 2022, Vol. 104(S4) 1–29

© The Author(s) 2022

simulation on dynamics of a Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

moored semi-submersible in DOI: 10.1177/00368504221096003

journals.sagepub.com/home/sci

various wave directions

Thi Thanh Diep Nguyen1, Van Minh Nguyen2

and Hyeon Kyu Yoon3
1
Department of Smart Ocean Environmental Energy, Changwon
National University, Korea
2
Department of Transportation Mechanical Engineering, The University
of Danang - University of Science and Technology, Vietnam
3
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Changwon
National University, Korea

Abstract
A moored floating platform has great potential in ocean engineering applications because the
mooring system is necessary to keep a floating platform in the station. It relates directly to oper-
ational efficiency and safety of a floating platform. This study presents a comprehensive assessment
of the dynamics of a moored semi-submersible in waves by performing model test and numerical
simulation. First, a three-dimensional panel method was used to estimate the motion of a moored
semi-submersible in waves. A semi-submersible is modelled as a rigid body with six degrees-of-
freedom (6DOF) motion. Dynamic response analysis of a semi-submersible is performed in regu-
lar wave and irregular wave. Second, the model test is performed in various wave directions. An
Optical-based system is used to measure 6DOF motion of a semi-submersible. Numerical results
are compared with the experimental results in various wave directions. Wavelength and wave dir-
ection showed significant effects on the motion response of a semi-submersible in regular wave.
Third, to obtain a better understanding of response frequencies, the time histories of motion
responses in irregular wave are converted from the time domain to the frequency domain.
Effects of the wave frequency component on motion responses and mooring dynamics are ana-
lyzed. Motion spectrum in irregular wave has a strong response to the natural frequency of a
moored semi-submersible and the peak of wave frequency. Finally, exceedance probability is esti-
mated to predict probable extreme values of motion responses of a moored semi-submersible as
well as mooring dynamics.

Corresponding author:
Van Minh Nguyen, Department of Transportation Mechanical Engineering, The University of Danang -
University of Science and Technology, Vietnam
Email: [email protected]

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original
work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
2 Science Progress 104(S4)

Keywords
A moored of semi-submersible, model test, numerical simulation

Introduction
A moored floating platform has great potential in ocean engineering applications because
the mooring system is required to keep a floating platform in the station. It relates directly
to the operational efficiency and safety of a floating platform to reduce the risk of accident
at sea. Thus, it is essential to find the effect of mooring configuration on motion response
of a floating platform to provide guidance in selecting the best possible configuration of a
mooring system in various wave directions. Many researchers have studied motion
responses of floating platform with a mooring system. Natarajan and Ganapathy1 have
performed the experiment on moored ships to investigate the behavior of a moored
ship under the load of waves and current. Xiao et al.2 have investigated the heave,
pitch and roll motions of the semi-submersible by performing the numerical simulation
and experiment in random waves. Ma et al.3 have analyzed the response of motion
and mooring system in different sea states. In addition, the effect of the wind and
wave load on the system was investigated. Xiao et al.4 have studied wave run-up
along the broad side of a single point moored Floating Production Storage and
Offloading (FPSO) in oblique waves by conducting experiments. Montasir et al.5 have
studied the effect of mooring line configuration on dynamic responses of truss spar plat-
forms using the numerical simulation. Jose et al.6 have studied the influence of mooring
lines on dynamics of floating wind turbine and tension in mooring lines. Catherine et al.7
have investigated current-induced motion of a lifeboat with a single point mooring by
performing experiment. Li et al.8 have performed an experiment and simulation to
predict the motion and dynamic responses of the semi-submersible in freak wave.
Choi et al.9 have investigated the coupled motion between the tension leg platform and
the semi-submersible. An eigenvalue analysis was applied to investigate this coupled
motion by performing numerical simulation and experiment. Xu et al.10 have conducted
the experiment and numerical simulation to investigate the performance of the mooring
systems. In their study, the experiment was carried out in beam sea, head sea and quarter-
ing sea. Liang et al.11 have proposed a simplification methodology for reducing mooring
lines in a very large floating structure (VLFS) at a moderate water depth. In their study, a
simplified mooring system was effective in designing to replace the original mooring
system in a scale model. Junbo et al.12 have conducted the experimental investigation
to measure the drag of the cage and static deformation of a mooring system using a
scale model. Xu et al.13 have investigated on the hybrid mooring system for heaving-
buoy wave energy converter. Several studies have analyzed mooring lines and responses
of floating structures. Lin et al.14 have investigated the effect of wave heading angle,
mooring model and wave drift forces on the motion of the semi-submersible wind
float by the numerical simulation. Wei et al.15 have investigated the effects of the
motion coupling on the resonance of the semi-submersible. In this paper, a mathematical
model was proposed based on the potential theory to simulate the motion responses. An
experiment was conducted to confirm the simulation results using a new mathematical
model. Li et al.16 have conducted the numerical simulation and the model test to
Nguyen et al. 3

investigate the second-order resonant motions of the semi-submersible in various sea

states. In their numerical simulation, the quadratic transfer function was applied by the
mean of the commercial boundary element method. Guo et al.17 have conducted an inves-
tigation of the motion response of the dry tree semi-submersible by performing numerical
and experimental studies. In their study, a lower pontoon was used to reduce the motion
and tendon responses of the semi-submersible. Nevertheless, only a few studies have
investigated the response of a moored semi-submersible in regular wave and irregular
wave in various wave directions. The primary objective of this study is to investigate a
comprehensive assessment of the dynamics of a moored semi-submersible in waves by
performing model test and numerical simulation. A three-dimensional panel method is
used to estimate the dynamic response analysis of a semi-submersible in waves. In add-
ition, the model test is performed in various wave directions. An Optical-based system is
used to measure 6DOF motion of a semi-submersible. Numerical results are compared
with experimental results in various wave directions. Effects of wavelength and wave dir-
ection on the motion response of a semi-submersible in regular waves is discussed.
Effects of the wave frequency component on the motion responses of a moored semi-
submersible are analyzed.

Numerical method
Governing equation
In this study, the motion response of a ship in regular wave was calculated by the three-
dimensional panel method based on the potential theory. If the fluid is assumed incom-
pressible, inviscid and irrotational, the governing equation becomes a Laplace equation.
The velocity potential that satisfies the Laplace equation, free surface, bottom and body
boundary condition is estimated to calculate the pressure distribution acting on the ship
hull. Eq. (1) is the three-dimensional Laplace equation for the velocity potential. Eq. (2) is
the classical linear free-surface condition for steady-state harmonic oscillatory motion of
wave frequency. For mean wetted hull surface and sea floor surface, boundary conditions
are estimated by Eqs. (3)∼(4). The bottom boundary condition is considered in Eq. (3),
there is no flow through the seabed. ω and d are wave frequency and sea depth, respect-
ively.
∂2 ϕ ∂2 ϕ ∂2 ϕ
Governing equation: Δϕ = + + =0 (1)
∂x ∂y ∂z
∂ϕ
Free surface boundary condition: − ω2 ϕ + g = 0 on z = 0 (2)
∂z
∂ϕ
Bottom boundary condition: = 0 on z = −d (3)
∂z
⎧
−iωnj for radiation potential
∂ϕ ⎨
Body boundary condition: = ∂ϕ (4)
∂n ⎩ − for diffraction potential
∂n
4 Science Progress 104(S4)

where ϕ is the velocity potential. It can be defined in term of wave-particle velocity such
u, v and w as shown in Eq. (5). The first order velocity potential can be estimated by Eq.
(6). a, g, ω, s, d and θ are wave amplitude, acceleration due to gravity, wave frequency,
effective water depth, water depth and wave phase, respectively.
∂ϕ ∂ϕ ∂ϕ
u= , v= and w = (5)
∂x ∂y ∂z

ag cosh ks
ϕ1 = sin (θ) (6)
ω cosh kd
According the linear assumption, the total velocity potential that satisfies Eq. (1) is sub-
divided into incident potential ϕI , diffraction potential ϕD and radiation potential ϕR .
Each velocity potential component must satisfy the governing equation by Eq. (1) and
boundary conditions by Eqs. (2)∼(4). Total velocity potential can be estimated by Eq. (7).
 
6


ϕ(X)e −iωt
= (ϕI + ϕD ) + ϕrj xj e−iωt (7)
j=1

where X
= (X, Y, Z) is the location of a point on the body, ϕrj is the radiation wave
potential due to the motion in j direction and xj is the motion in j direction. The incident
wave velocity potential can be estimated by Eq. (8). The diffraction potential and radi-
ation potential can be estimated by Eqs. (9)∼(10). ξ, α, r and n are the amplitude of trans-
lational motion (surge, sway and heave), the amplitude of rotation motion of the form
(roll, pitch and yaw), position vector and outward unit normal vector on the body
surface, respectively. Thus, six degrees of freedom can be represented by Eq. (11).
The generalised expression of radiation potential can be estimated by Eq. (12).

iωt = − igaw cosh ks i[−ωt+k(X cos χ+Y cos χ)+ε]

ϕI (X)e e (8)
ω cosh kd

∂ϕ(1) ∂ϕ(1)
D
=− I (9)
∂n ∂n

∂ϕ(1)
R
= −iωn.(ξ|(1) + α(1) × r) (10)
∂n
 (1)
ξj for j = 1, 2, 3
xj = (11)
α(1)
j−3 for j = 4, 5, 6


6
ϕ(1)
R = ϕ(1)
j xj (12)
j=1

where ϕ(1)
j is the velocity potential of rigid body motion with unit amplitude in the j
th
st
mode when the incident wave does not exist. The 1 order dynamic pressure distribution
Nguyen et al. 5

can be estimated using linearzed Bernoulli equation by Eq. (13).

t)
∂Φ(X,
p(1) = −ρ
−iωt
= iωρϕ(X)e (13)
∂t
where, ρ is the fluid density. By determining the distribution of pressure, the 1st order
hydrodynamic forces on the body can be obtained by integrating fluid pressure over
wetted surface. The 1st order hydrodynamic forces on the body can be written in a gen-
eralised form of Eq. (14). By combining Eqs. (7) and (14), the 1st order wave force can be
expressed by Eq. (15).

Fj e−iωt = − p(1) nj dS = −iωρ
j dS e−iωt

ϕ(X)n (14)
S0 S0

 

6
Fj = (FIj + FDj ) + Frjk xk e−iωt , j = 1, . . . , 6 (15)
k=1

where S0 and nj are the mean wetted surface and the unit normal vector of hull surface,
respectively. FIj is the Froude-Krylov force due to an incident wave. FDj is the diffraction
force due to diffracting wave and Frjk is the radiation force due to radiating wave induced
by kth body motion. These hydrodynamic forces can be estimated by Eqs. (16)∼(19). The
added mass and damping can be estimated from Frjk by expressing the radiation wave
potential ϕrj in a complex form by Eqs. (19)∼(20).

FIj = −iωρ
j dS
ϕI (X)n (16)
S0

FDj = −iωρ
j dS
ϕD (X)n (17)
S0

Frjk = −iωρ
j dS
ϕRk (X)n (18)
S0

Frjk = −iωρ
+ iIm[ϕrk (X)]}n

{Re[ϕrk (X)]
j dS
S0
(19)
= ωρ
j dS − iωρ
iIm[ϕrk (X)]n
j dS = ω A jk + iωB jk
Re[ϕrk (X)]n 2
S0 S0

ρ
j dS
A jk = Im[ϕrk (X)]n
ω S0
(20)
B jk = −ρ
j dS
Re[ϕrk (X)]n
S0
6 Science Progress 104(S4)

Dynamic of mooring lines

Mooring line dynamics are modelled by the lumped-mass method using a discretization
along the length and an assembly of the mass. The mooring line is modelled by the
Morison element as a chain under the influence of different external forces. A single
element of a mooring line subjected the distribution of external hydrodynamic, structural
and inertia loading as shown in Figure 1. Equation of motion for a single element of the
mooring line can be estimated by Eq. (21).

∂T
∂V

2


h = m ∂ R
+
+F
+w
∂Se ∂Se ∂t 2
(21)


∂M

∂R
+
= −
q
×V
∂Se ∂Se
where Se is the length of the element, De is the diameter of the element, T
is the tension

is the bending moment vector, V
force vector, M
is the shear force vector at the first node

is the weight of the element. m is the structural mass per unit length,
q is
of the element, w
the distributed moment per unit length, R
is the position vector of the first node of the


mooring line element. Fh is the external hydrodynamic loads per unit length. The
wave excitation force is ignored on the dynamic of mooring line. Thus, for a single
element mooring line, the hydrodynamic load Fh is the combination of the drag load
Fd , the buoyant load Fb and the added mass Fa by Eq. (22). ma ,
aj and
a j+1 are the
added mass matrix of the mooring line element, the acceleration of the mooring line at
node j and the acceleration of mooring line at node j + 1, respectively.
Fh = Fb + Fd + Fa (22)

Fh = Fb + Fd − ma [
aj ,
a j+1 ]T (23)

The element buoyant force matrix can be estimated by Eq. (24). ρw is the density of
water, Acj is equivalent cross sectional area of the mooring line element, Mb is the

Figure 1. Modelling of mooring lines. a) Modeling of a dynamic mooring line. b) Forces on a

mooring element.
Nguyen et al. 7

mass of the buoy. The time-dependent drag force of the mooring line element can be esti-
mated by Eq. (25). Uj , Vj , Cdb , Cdc , Sb , Sc are the structural velocity matrix at j, the current
velocity matrix at j, the drag coefficient of intermediate buoy, the drag coefficient of
clump weight, the surface area of intermediate the buoy surface area of clump weight,
respectively. Segment tension can be estimated by Eq. (26), ψ is the segment length
error vector, T k is the tentative segment tension vector at the k th iteration, Δψ is the
length error derivative matrix.
T
1 1
Fb = 0, 0, ρw Acj Lj g, 0, 0, (ρw Acj Lj + Mb )g (24)
2 2
⎧ ⎫
⎪ 1 ⎪
⎨ fd (j) − Cdc Sc ρw |Uj (t) − Vj (t)|{Uj (t) − Vj (t)} ⎬
Fd (t) = 2 (25)
⎩ fd (j + 1) − 1 Cdb Sb ρ |U j+1 (t) − V j+1 (t)|{U j+1 (t) − V j+1 (t)} ⎪
⎪ ⎭
w
2
T k+1 (τ + Δτ) = T k (τ + Δτ) − [Δψ(τ)]−1 ψ k (τ) (26)

Equation of semi-submersible motion

In order to investigate the six-degree of freedom (6DOF) motion of the semi-submersible,
we assumed that the body is rigid and in a state of stable equilibrium in a calm water. By
considering hydrodynamic forces acting on the body, the equation of motion can be
obtained by Eq. (27). The total hydrodynamic load Fj is the combination of the wave
excitation forces and the mooring forces acting on the structure. In this study, the
mooring forces are estimated based on geometric coordinates of mooring at the given
time and ignoring the dynamic effects of the mooring movement.

6
[(M jk + A jk )η̈k + (B jk + Bvjk )η̇k + C jk ηk + K jk ηk ] = Fj , j = 1, . . . , 6 (27)
k=1

where, ηk is the amplitude of the periodic motion of the ship, M jk is the body inertia
matrix including moments of inertia for rotational modes, A jk is the added mass coeffi-
cient matrix, B jk is the damping coefficient matrix, Bvjk is the viscous damping matrix,
C jk is hydrostatic stiffness and K jk is the mooring stiffness.

Experiment
Experimental method
A scaled model of the semi-submersible was carried out in square wave basin at the Ship
Dynamics and Control Laboratory in Changwon National University (CWNU). Figure 2
shows the square wave basin, the wave generation system and wave absorber at CWNU.
The square wave basin has a length of 20 m, a width of 14 m and a maximum water depth
of 1.8 m. The carriage’s fastest speed is 1.0 m/s. Both regular and irregular waves can be
generated with a wave generation system. The wave generation system can generate
8 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 2. Square wave basin in CWNU.

Figure 3. Measurement instruments.

waves with period ranging from 0.5s to 30s. A wave absorber was installed at the furthest
end of the square wave basin to effectively dissipate waves. The maximum wave height
and wavelength are 30 cm and 3 m, respectively. Instruments used in this experiment are
shown in Figure 3. Wave elevation was evaluated using a CHT6-50E wave probe, as illu-
strated in Figure 3a. The wave probe was utilized to calibrate the wave elevation at the
semi-submersible position before the experiment. Tension gauges were used to
measure the pretension of the mooring lines. The tension gauge used in this experiment
is shown in Figure 3b. The motion of the semi-submersible was measured by a non-
contact 6DOF measurement system, consisting of an OptiTrack camera and a data acqui-
sition system. The OptiTrack V120-Trio is the model of OptiTrack camera utilized in this
experiment, as shown in Figure 3c. NaturalPoint was the business that developed it. The
area available for tracking markers is 5.2m long, 4.3m wide and 4.6m high from the
center of the OptiTrack camera. Figure 5d shows the NI USB-6212 A/D converter
Nguyen et al. 9

(National Instruments Corporation) used during this experiment. An A/D converter was
used to convert an electrical signal from the wave probe and tension gauges into a digital
signal. The 6DOF of the semi-submersible was measured by the optical-based system. In
order to record the motion of rigid body, a detailed hypothesis and standard of the optical-
based system presented by Filho18 were used.
Figure 4 shows the processing of an optical-based system to measure the 6DOF motion
of the semi-submersible. There are four steps in the process of measuring the 6DOF motion.
To start, markers are appended on the semi-submersible. In the initial step, the Image
Acquisition utilized an OptiTrack Camera to catch pictures of markers. Quickly, the situ-
ation of markers is progressively distinguished based on the marker location. To help this

Figure 4. Measurement processing of 6DOF of the semi-submersible.

Figure 5. Model of the semi-submersible.

10 Science Progress 104(S4)

cycle, the OptiTrack Camera presented an aides programming called Motive which was
created by the NaturalPoint company. These markers are identified by utilizing auto label-
ling. The auto labelling will decide identified focuses. It is related to markers in the caught
picture. The auto labelling on the next frames will be naturally refreshed dependent on the
underlying naming of the primary edge. To keep away from the secret corner of the marker,
a spherical marker is utilized for the following items. The OptiTrack camera utilized new
advantaged advancements to follow the movement with a high exactness at an extremely
high testing rate. On the following stage, a three-dimensional (3D) position recreation is uti-
lized to obtain 3D focuses from two-dimensional (2D) acquired from the picture. Then 3D
position remaking was identified by setting up a connection between markers recognized in
the picture of various perspectives. In this cycle, space resection is one of the direction
errands of PC vision and photogrammetry. In the event that three markers are recognized,
and an inflexible body is made on a picture, its 2D point areas will decide a picture
plane. From catching pictures, the 3D situation of the markers is remade from the 2D situ-
ation of the markers by space resection. Displacements are determined as the displacement
of the markers. Rotations are determined as the rotation of the image plane created by three
markers. At last, the 6DOF motion of the semi-submersible in waves is obtained. The esti-
mation handling of the 6DOF rigid body is displayed in Figure 4.

Description of model and test conditions

The model scale was set at 1:100 due to the wave generation system’s limitation for large
waves at big model scale. The scale factor was determined using Froude’s law of simi-
larity. As illustrated in Figure 5, the model of the semi-submersible has two demi-hulls
with a separation of 0.52 m between their centers. Main parameters of the semi-
submersible are summarized in Table 1. Four mooring lines are designed to moor the
semi-submersible. To investigate the moored semi-submersible’s hydrodynamic per-
formance in various wave directions, model test was done in regular and irregular
waves. Totally, ten wave conditions were considered, including seven regular wave con-
ditions and three irregular wave conditions. In regular wave conditions, wavelengths
were varied from 0.5L to 2.0L while the wave height was fixed at 3.25cm in all runs.
The test condition for regular wave conditions is listed in Table 2. In irregular wave con-
ditions, the significant wave height and wave period were chosen corresponding to the
condition of sea state 4, 5 and 6. Waves that were tested matched to the wave conditions
of sea state 4, 5, 6, respectively. Irregular waves were generated by the ITTC
(International Towing Tank Conference) spectrum using Eq. (28), where H1/3 is the sig-
nificant wave height, T1 is the average period, T0 is the spectral peak period, S(ω) is the
wave spectrum. Test condition for irregular waves is listed in Table 3. Figure 6 shows
comparison between target wave spectrum and measured wave spectrum. Remarkably,
the discrepancy between the target wave spectrum and the target wave spectrum is
quite small, confirming that generated waves have good agreement with target waves.
The natural frequency of model scale and full scale are listed in Table 4.
A −B/ω4
S(ω) = e (28)
ω5
Nguyen et al. 11

Table 1. Principal dimensions of the semi-submersible.

Item Unit Real Model

Scale ratio - 1 1/100

Length overall m 104.00 1.040
Length perpendicular m 99.10 0.991
Beam overall m 65.00 0.650
Draft m 18.00 0.180
Depth overall m 36.40 0.364
Pontoon length m 104.00 1.040
Pontoon depth m 9.70 0.097
Pontoon width m 13.00 0.130
Width of rectangular column m 13.00 0.130
Height of rectangular column m 19.00 0.190
Length of deck m 79.50 0.795
Height of deck m 7.60 0.076
Distance between center of pontoon m 52.00 0.520
Separation distance m 39.00 0.390
Displacement ton 31636 0.0317
Radius of gyration about the x axis m 26.000 0.260
Radius of gyration about the y axis m 26.125 0.261
Radius of gyration about the z axis m 26.125 0.261

Table 2. Regular wave conditions.

Wave height [m]

λ / L [−] λ [m] Wave frequency [rad/s] Wave period [s] Real scale Model scale

0.50 0.523 10.86 0.58 3.25 0.0325

0.75 0.784 8.87 0.71 3.25 0.0325
1.00 1.045 7.68 0.82 3.25 0.0325
1.25 1.306 6.87 0.91 3.25 0.0325
1.50 1.568 6.27 1.00 3.25 0.0325
1.75 1.829 5.80 1.08 3.25 0.0325
2.00 2.090 5.43 1.16 3.25 0.0325

2
H1/3
where, A = 173 T14
, B = 691
T4
and T1 = 2πm
m1
0
1

Mooring setup
In this experiment, the mooring system was studied, including chain, polyester and
optical fiber. The length of chain, polyester and optical fiber are 0.3m, 2.5m and
0.25m, respectively. Table 5 summarizes main properties of mooring line segments. A
turnbuckle is used to adjust the pre-tension on the mooring lines in a consistent
manner. The stiffness of the mooring system is calculated from component stiffnesses
12 Science Progress 104(S4)

Table 3. Irregular wave conditions.

Sea Real significant wave Scale significant wave Real wave average Scale wave average
state height [m] height [cm] period [s] period [s]

4 1.88 1.88 8.8 0.88

5 3.25 3.25 9.7 0.97
6 5.00 5.00 12.4 1.24

Figure 6. Comparison of ITTC wave spectrum at model scale.

Table 4. Natural frequency of model scale and full scale.

Natural frequency [rad/s]

Motion Model scale Full scale

Surge 1.75 0.18

Sway 1.27 0.13
Heave 3.57 0.36
Roll 1.33 0.13
Pitch 1.77 0.18
Yaw 1.24 0.12

of chain K1 , polyester K2 and optical fiber K3 using Eqs. (29)∼(30).

1 1 1 1
= + + (29)
K K1 K2 K3
K1 K2 K3
K= (30)
K1 K2 + K2 K3 + K1 K3
 Nguyen et al.

Table 5. Main properties of mooring line segments.

Polyester Chain Optical fiber Single mooring

Item Unit Symbol Real Model Real Model Real Model Real Model

Length scale ratio - λ 1 0.010 1 0.010 1 0.010 1 0.010

Diameter scale ratio - β 1 0.024 1 0.039 1 0.058 1 0.058
Length m - 250.000 2.500 30.000 0.300 25.000 0.250 305.000 3.050
Diameter m - 0.127 0.003 0.102 0.004 0.120 0.007 0.120 0.007
Stiffness kN/m K 17.6E + 05 9.810 31.7E + 05 49.150 3056 0.104 2945.44 0.103
13
14 Science Progress 104(S4)

The dynamic response of a mooring line is scale-dependent, making it difficult to

obtain perfect dynamic similarities between prototypes and model tests. To achieve
dynamic similarity, three parameters corresponding, including the length scale, the diam-
eter scale and scale of wave in model celerity must be equal to those in prototypes. The
length scale λ between the model and prototypes can be estimated by Eq. (31). The diam-
eter scale is used to allow the model diameter to be chosen independently of the length
scale. The diameter scale β between the model and prototypes can be estimated by Eq.
(32). Lm and Lr indicate the length of the model mooring and the length of the actual
mooring, respectively. dom and dor indicate the diameter of the model mooring and the
diameter of the actual mooring, respectively. Similarly, the scale of wave celerity
can be estimated by Eq. (33). Eq. (34) can be used to calculate the stiffness ratio
between the model and prototype proposed by Bergdahlet19 based on the fact that the
wave celerity is the same in both. Km and Kr are stiffness of the model and the prototype,
respectively.
Lm
λ= (31)
Lr
dom
β= (32)
dop
cm √
= λ (33)
cr
Km c2m γ om Cvm 2
= 2 = λβ = φλβ2 (34)
Kr cr γ or Cvr
 πd2
where, c = K / γ 0 , γ 0 = Cv 40 ρc and φ = CCvm
cr
Wave celerity c is the propagation celerity of longitudinal elastic waves. Cvm and Cvr
are volume coefficients for each of the model mooring system and the real mooring
system, respectively. γ 0 represents the mass per unit length of the mooring system. Cv ,
d0 and ρc are the volume coefficient (Cv = 1), the diameter of mooring system and the
density of the mooring system, respectively.

Experimental setup
Figure 7 shows a detailed mooring setup of the semi-submersible in wave direction of 90
degrees. The model was fixed by a system of 4 mooring lines that tied symmetrically
through x and y axes of the hull. Turnbuckle, optical fiber, tension gauge, polyester and
chain are all parts of the mooring system. A 20 kg weight at the bottom of the square
wave basin locks the mooring system to the bottom of the tank. The pre-tension applied
to the moorings is adjusted consistently to guarantee that the semi-submersible is not ham-
pered by tension differences between mooring lines. The tension of four mooring lines is
monitored by four tension gauges to check the pretension of mooring lines before perform-
ing the experiment. To manage the tension of the mooring line, the turnbuckle was linked to
the mooring line and the tension gauge. Figure 8 shows a real experimental setup that
Nguyen et al. 15

Figure 7. Diagram showing the mooring setup of the semi-submersible.

Figure 8. Diagram showing the experimental setup of the semi-submersible in wave tank.

comprises a semi-submersible model, mooring line, tension gauge and an OptiTrack camera.
The model and the mooring systems are rotated to create varied wave directions acting on
the hull while changing the direction of waves acting on the hull. In this experiment, the
water depth is 1.5 m, the scale mooring setup of the semi-submersible is considered in
wave direction 180 degrees. In this experiment, the model of the semi-submersible is
installed in the center of the square wave tank as shown in Figure 8. The wave generation
system is codirectional at the zero heading angle. Tension gauges of four mooring lines are
denoted by numbers 1, 2, 3, 4. During the test, a wave probe is utilized to measure the wave
height. The wave probe is positioned ahead of the model’s location and fastened in this
place. Three makers are positioned in the semi-submersible main deck’s center. As indicated
in Figure 8, the measuring equipment is designated by the number 5. A OptiTrack optical-
based system is used to measure the motion of the semi-submersible. The OptiTrack camera
is mounted on the carriage above the semi-submersible and records the movement of
markers on the deck of the semi-submersible. A set of three markers connected to the semi-
submersible are tracked by three stationary cameras.
16 Science Progress 104(S4)

Results and discussion

Motion response of semisubmersible in regular wave
The 6DOF motion of the moored semi-submersible is directly related to the operational
efficiency and safety of the floating platform. Thus, it is studied and discussed to minim-
ize the incidence of an accident at sea. The duration of the model test in regular waves was
at least 10 times the corresponding wave period as recommended by ITTC.20 Results of
the surge and sway amplitude variation with incident wave amplitude are illustrated in
Figure 9 to make it much easier to examine the influence of the mooring system on
surge and sway. Figure 9 shows Response Amplitude Operators (RAOs) of the semi-
submersible in surge and sway obtained from the model test and the numerical simulation
in various wave directions. Numerical simulation results for surge and sway are generally
similar to experimental results.
The surge is most noticeable in the head sea, accompanied by the following sea. It
gradually diminishes in the beam sea. Because the surge is well correlated with the ver-
tical motion of the water surface in head sea and the moored semi-submersible moves
backward away from the incident waves before going forward. However, the incident
wave moves the excursion to the moored semi-submersible in the beam sea. As a
result, sway is significantly greater than the response in surge in oblique sea and beam
sea. The largest surge RAOs of semi-submersible occurs in head sea and following
sea. RAOs of surge increases dramatically when the wavelength is larger than 1.5
times the semi-submersible’s length. In contrast, the sway RAOs is the greatest in
beam sea. It reduces when the wave direction reaches to head sea and following sea.
Surge RAOs from experimental and numerical results are very similar in the short wave-
length. Some surge and sway RAO discrepancies were most likely caused by ignoring
nonlinearities, resulting in a decrease in the accuracy of hydrodynamic forces in the hori-
zontal plane. Nevertheless, the numerical simulation accurately captured variations in
wave-induced motions as a function of wave direction and wavelength. It was discovered
that displacements of the moored semi-submersible are strongly influenced by the
mooring system and the direction of the incident wave. Figure 10 shows motion RAOs
of the semi-submersible in heave and roll obtained from the model test and the numerical
simulation in various wave directions. The simulation results of the heave RAO and roll
RAO are similar to the experimental results. Based on these results, it can be seen that the
numerical simulation correctly predicted the hydrodynamic force which include the wave
excitation forces and mooring forces acting on the structure. The heave RAO has a small
value in short wavelength. However, it has a large values in various wave directions as the
wavelength increases and is greater than the length of the semi-submersible. This is
because the heave is directly associated with the vertical motion of the water surface
in various wave directions. The majority of the motion of the moored semi-submersible
is coupled with the heave. However, the roll RAO is the most noticeable in the beam sea,
accompanied by the oblique sea. It gradually diminishes in the head sea and following
sea. This is because the wave frequency is close to the natural frequency of the roll
and the sway is coupled with the roll of the moored semi-submersible. Figure 11
shows motion RAOs of the semi-submersible in pitch and yaw obtained from the
Nguyen et al. 17

Figure 9. Surge RAO and sway RAO of the semi-submersible.

18 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 10. Heave RAO and roll RAO of the semi-submersible.

Nguyen et al. 19

model test and the numerical simulation in various wave directions. The simulation result
of the pitch RAO is similar to the experimental result. Based on these results, it can be
seen that the numerical simulation correctly predicted the hydrodynamic force including
wave excitation forces and mooring forces acting on the structure. Some yaw RAO dis-
crepancies were most likely caused by ignoring nonlinearities, resulting in a decrease in
the accuracy of hydrodynamic forces in the horizontal plane. Nevertheless, the numerical
simulation accurately captured the variations in wave-induced motions as a function of
wave direction and wavelength. Pitch RAO has a small value in short wavelength, but
has a large value in various wave directions as the wavelength increases and is greater
than the length of the semi-submersible. The pitch RAO is most noticeable in the
beam sea and following sea, accompanied by the oblique sea. It gradually diminishes
in the beam sea. This is because the pitch is coupled with the surge of moored semi-
submersible. The yaw of the moored semi-submersible is the smallest in the head sea,
following sea and beam sea. It becomes the largest in the oblique sea. This could be
due to the effect of the incident wave’s direction, which pushes the moored semi-
submersible against mooring lines as the wave propagates away.

Motion response of semi-submersible in irregular waves

In irregular waves, the motion spectrums of the semi-submersible were investigated. The
wave test was performed prior to the experiment to ensure the quality of the wave. The
difference in significant wave height between measured and target significant wave
height is 0.04%. As a result, the wave quality is sufficient to perform the seakeeping
test in an irregular wave. The model test was carried out in various wave directions.
Motions signal of the semi-submersible for each test were recorded during the experi-
ment. The sampling time to analysis was for each test was 200s, which equals to
2000s in full scale. Under irregular waves, the time history of motion responses of the
moored semi-submersible was recorded at a frequency of 100 Hz. Spectral analyses
were performed for measured time histories to determine frequency-domain characteris-
tics of motions.
Hence, time history of motion responses are transformed from the time domain to the
frequency domain to gain a better understanding of response frequencies. Figures 12∼14
show effects of the frequency component on motion responses induced by wave excita-
tion in irregular waves. Figures 12∼14 show motion spectrum in various wave directions
at sea state 4, sea state 5 and sea state 6, respectively. In sea state 4, the surge spectrum has
the three peaks. The 1st peak of surge spectrum occur in low frequency. This is because
the surge storing force of the mooring system has large effects due to 2nd wave drift force.
The 2nd peak of surge spectrum occurs near the peak of target wave spectrum. The 3rd
peak of surge spectrum occurs near the natural frequency of the mooring system. It
can be confirmed that the surge is mainly at low frequency. However, the wave frequency
cannot be neglected. Surge spectrum is dominant in head sea and following sea, while
sway spectrum is dominant in beam sea. Sway spectrum has three peaks. The 1st peak
of sway spectrum occurs at low frequency in beam sea. The 2nd peak of surge spectrum
occurs near the peak of target wave spectrum. The 3rd peak of sway spectrum is observed
at the natural frequency of the mooring system. As a consequence, the peak of heave
20 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 11. Pitch RAO and yaw RAO of the semi-submersible.

Nguyen et al. 21

Figure 12. Motion spectrum of the semi-submersible at sea state 4. a) Surge b) Sway c) Heave d)
Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

spectrum at the wave frequency increases gradually until it reaches the peak. This con-
firmed that the heave is dominated by the natural frequency of the heave. The effect of
the natural frequency of heave is stronger than the peak of wave frequency. The roll spec-
trum is dominated by the natural frequency of the roll. Peak of the roll spectrum is close to
the natural frequency of the roll. The peak of roll spectrum is dominant in beam sea, the
effect of peak of wave spectrum is weaken with natural frequency of the roll. The pitch
spectrum also has three peaks. The 1st peak is close to the natural frequency of pitch. 2nd
peak occurs at peak of wave spectrum. 3rd peak of surge spectrum occurs near the natural
frequency of mooring system. It mean that the pitch is dominated by natural frequency of
22 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 13. Motion spectrum of the semi-submersible at sea state 5. a) Surge b) Sway c) Heave d)
Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

the pitch. The effect of peak of wave spectrum is weaken with the natural frequency of the
pitch. The yaw spectrum is smaller than the roll and pitch spectrum in various sea states
and various wave directions. It indicates that the wave direction has a direct effect on the
motion response of the semi-submersible. The extreme surge depends on the type of sea
state and the wave direction, while heave is dominated by wave frequency component
only. This is because the surge is usually affected by the low frequency component
which causes a non-linear wave force. In sea state 5 and sea state 6, the roll spectrum
and the pitch spectrum are opposite phenomenon. In beam sea, the roll spectrum is the
largest, while the pitch spectrum is the smallest On the other hand, the pitch spectrum
Nguyen et al. 23

Figure 14. Motion spectrum of the semi-submersible at sea state 6. a) Surge b) Sway c) Heave d)
Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

is largest in head sea and following sea, while the roll spectrum is the smallest The surge
and sway are coupled with pitch and roll, respectively. Hence, the surge and sway have
the same tendency as the pitch and roll, respectively. In addition, the 1st peak value of
pitch spectrum occurs at pitch natural frequency. The 2nd peak value of pitch spectrum
occurs at natural frequency of heave and the 3rd peak value of pitch spectrum occurs
at wave peak frequency. The geometry of the semisubmersible is nearly identical at
bow and stern. As a result, the motion spectrum in the head sea is similar to that in the
following sea. Furthermore, the motion response in the bow quartering sea is equivalent
24 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 15. Exceedance probability of the semi-submersible at sea state 4. a) Surge b) Sway c)
Heave d) Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

to that in the stern quartering sea. Surge and pitch motions of the semi-submersible have
largely been influenced by the 2nd wave loads in head sea and following sea. In contrast,
sway and roll responses have a dominant influence in beam sea. The sway and roll
responses are reduced by half when the wave direction is toward the oblique sea com-
pared with ones in beam sea. The direction of the wave has small effect on the heave
response. The heave response in the oblique sea is greater than that in other wave direc-
tions, although the difference is not significant. The yaw response is greatly influenced by
Nguyen et al. 25

Figure 16. Exceedance probability of the semi-submersible at sea state 5. a) Surge b) Sway c)
Heave d) Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

the wave load in the oblique sea. However, the yaw response is nearly zero in the beam
sea because the geometry of the semi-submersible is the same at bow and stern.

Exceedance probability
Based on ITTC procedures,21 the exceedance probability can be calculated to predict
likely extreme values of the moored semi-submersible’s motion responses. After
sorting peak values of motions induced by wave excitation in irregular waves,
26 Science Progress 104(S4)

Figure 17. Exceedance probability of the semi-submersible at sea state 6. a) Surge b) Sway c)
Heave d) Roll e) Pitch f) Yaw.

exceedance probability can be estimated. Figures 15∼17 show exceedance probability

distribution for motions induced in irregular waves based on sea conditions and wave
directions. Using a statistical analysis and an exceedance probability distribution, the
return period that occurs during an extreme motion can be estimated. Compared to
other wave directions and sea conditions, the exceedance probability distribution of the
surge in head sea and following sea gradually shifted to the right. This suggests that
the surge at sea state 4 and sea state 5 have less extreme values than that at sea state
6. This implies that the sea state is the most important factor in determining the value
Nguyen et al. 27

of the surge. The exceedance probability distribution of the sway in beam sea gradually
shifted to the right when compared to other wave directions and sea conditions. This sug-
gests that the sway at sea state 4 and sea state 5 have less extreme values than that at sea
state 6, implying that the sea state and the beam sea are the most important factors in
determining the value of the sway. The exceedance probability distribution of the
heave gradually shifted to the right and the heave changes independent of different
wave directions compared with other wave directions and sea conditions. This implies
that the heave is influenced less by wave direction but more by sea conditions. The excee-
dance probability distribution of the heave occurs in sea state 6. The exceedance probabil-
ity distribution of the roll in beam sea gradually shifted to the right compared to other
wave directions and sea conditions. This suggests that sway is coupled with the roll in
various wave directions and sea conditions, implying that the sea state and beam sea
are the most important factor in determining the value of the roll. The exceedance prob-
ability distribution of the pitch in beam sea gradually shifted to the right when compared
to other wave directions and sea conditions. This implies that the surge is coupled with
the pitch in different wave directions and sea conditions, implying that the sea state, fol-
lowing sea, and head sea are the most important factors in determining the pitch value.
Compared to other wave directions and sea conditions, the exceedance probability distri-
bution of the yaw in oblique sea gradually shifted to the right. This suggests that the sway
at sea state 4 and that at sea state 5 have less extreme values than those at sea state 6,
implying that the sea state and oblique sea are the most important factor in determining
the value of the yaw.

Conclusion
Experimental and numerical investigations of motion responses of the semi-submersible
in various wave directions were performed in waves. The followings are conclusions
drawn from the semi-submersible’s response analysis:
First, a three-dimensional panel method was used to estimate the motion of a moored
semi-submersible in waves and the mooring line dynamics were modelled by the lumped-
mass method. Simulation results of motion responses of the moored semi-submersible
were similar to experimental results except some surge and sway RAO discrepancies
were most likely caused by ignoring nonlinearities. However, the numerical simulation
and experiment accurately captured variations in wave-induced motions as a function
of wave direction and wavelength.
Second, it was noted that characteristics of motion responses of a semi-submersible
could be affected by mooring systems. Since the moored semi-submersible was a sym-
metrical object, ship motions have a similar trend in cases of wave direction as
follows: 180 degrees with 0 degrees and 135 degrees with 45 degrees. In regular
waves, amplitude motions of semi-submersible were noted to change dramatically at
each wave frequency and wave direction. In irregular waves, dynamic responses of the
model in frequency domain and time domain substantially differed from those under
sea conditions. The peak of wave frequency and natural frequency directly affected on
frequency domain characteristics of horizontal motion and mooring tension of
semi-submersible.
28 Science Progress 104(S4)

Finally, effects of wave direction and wavelength on motion responses of the semi-
submersible were investigated. Through model test in irregular waves, the effect of
wave direction and sea state on motion responses of semi-submersible were analysed
based on spectral analysis. Effects of the wave frequency component on motion responses
of the semi-submersible were analysed.

Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the
Korea government (MSIT) (No. 2019R1F1A1057551). This work was supported by The
University of Danang, University of Science and Technology, code number of Project: T2022-
02-04.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/
or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/
or publication of this article: This work was supported by the National Research Foundation
of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT), (grant number No.
2019R1F1A1057551).

ORCID iD
Van Minh Nguyen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0404-7952

References
1. Natarajan R and Ganapathy C. Technical note: model experiments on moored ships. Ocean
Eng 1997; 24: 665–676.
2. Xiao L., Yang J., Yang L., et al. (2009) Analysis on low frequency heave, roll and pitch motion
of a deep water semisubmersible, Proceeding of the ASME 2009 28th international conference
on ocean, offshore and Arctic engineering, pp. 1–16.
3. Ma Y, Hu ZQ and Xiao LF. Wind-wave induced dynamic response analysis for motions and
mooring loads of spar-type offshore floating wind turbine. Journal of Hydrodynamics 2014;
26: 865–874.
4. Xiao L, Tao L, Yang J, et al. An experimental investigation on wave runup along the broadside
of a single point moored FPSO exposed to oblique waves. Ocean Eng 2014; 88: 81–90.
5. Montasir OA, Yenduri A and Kurian VJ. Effect of mooring line configurations on the dynamic
responses of truss spar platform. Ocean Eng 2015; 96: 161–172.
6. Jose EGR, Julio GE, Borja SC, et al. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of the response of moored
floating structures. Marine Structures 2016; 49: 116–137.
7. Catherine JH, Nicholas CT and James IRB. Experimental investigations into the
current-induced motion of a lifeboat at a single point mooring. Ocean Eng 2017; 146: 192–
201.
8. Li X, Deng YF, Li L, et al. Motion and dynamic responses of a semisubmersible in freak
waves. Journal of Chinese Ocean Engineering Society and Springer 2017; 31: 754–763.
Nguyen et al. 29

9. Choi YM, Nam BW, Hong SY, et al. Coupled motion analysis of a tension leg platform with a
tender semi-submersible system. Ocean Eng 2018; 156: 224–239.
10. Xu S, Ji CY and Soares CG. Experimental and numerical investigation a semi-submersible
moored by hybrid mooring systems. Ocean Eng 2018; 163: 641–678.
11. Liang M, Xu S, Wang X, et al. Experimental evaluation of a mooring system simplification
methodology for reducing mooring lines in a VLFS model testing at a moderate water
depth. Ocean Eng 2020; 219: 1–18.
12. Junbo Z, Hiroki S, Hirotaka N, et al. Water-tank experiment and static numerical analysis of
the mooring system of a controllable depth cage. Aquacult Eng 2020; 91: 1–10.
13. Xu S, Wang S and Soares CG. Experimental investigation on hybrid mooring system for wave
energy converters. Renewable Energy 2020; 158: 130–153.
14. Lin YH and Yang CH. Hydrodynamic simulation of the semi-submersible wind float by inves-
tigating mooring systems in irregular waves. Applied Sciences 2020; 10: 1–26.
15. Wei H, Xiao L, Low YM, et al. Effects of bracings and motion coupling on resonance features
of semi-submersible platform under irregular wave conditions. J Fluids Struct 2020; 92: 1–21.
16. Li D, Lu W, Li X, et al. Second-order resonant motion of a deep-draft semi-submersible under
extreme irregular wave excitation. Ocean Eng 2020; 209: 1–11.
17. Guo J, Lu H and Yang J. Numerical and experimental study on motion responses of a dry tree
semi-submersible platform with vertically coupled multi-body effects. Ocean Eng 2021; 236:
1–17.
18. Filho GG. Optical motion capture: theory and implementation. Journal of Theoretical and
Applied Informatics 2005; 12: 61–89.
19. Bergdahl L, Palm J, Eskilsson C, et al. Dynamically scaled model experiments of a mooring
cable. J Mar Sci Eng 2016; 4: 1–18.
20. ITTC. Recommended Procedured and Guidelines: Seakeeping experiments. 2017.
21. ITTC. Recommended Procedures and Guidelines: Sloshing model test 2017.