Proceedings of the ASME 2013 32nd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2013
June 9-14, 2013, Nantes, France

OMAE2013-10136

MODELING SUCTION PILE LOWERING THROUGH THE SPLASH ZONE

Robert B. Gordon Guttorm Grytøyr Mayuresh Dhaigude
DNV DNV DNV
Katy, Texas, USA Katy, Texas, USA Katy, Texas, USA

ABSTRACT video of the lowering of one of the Rockefeller Field suction

This paper describes a direct time domain modeling piles (http://youtu.be/bBQzXKwyJW4).
procedure for suction pile lowering through the splash zone. Modeling and statistical characterization of taut and slack
The paper specifically addresses pile lowering from a relatively line conditions is required so that the owner and installation
small installation vessel with the pile oriented with its long axis contractor may make a rational decision on what conditions to
nearly parallel to the water surface. The model consists of time lower in.
domain simulation of the crane/wire/sling/pile system. This Slack line conditions are of particular concern since these
system is subjected to vessel motions at the crane tip, can result in sudden shock or “snap” loading in the winch wire.
hydrodynamic loading on the pile, and pile flooding. As noted in Thurston, et al. (2011), snap loading can have a
The paper also describes the sensitivity of winch wire tension magnitude many times greater than the dynamic tension
to seastate, lowering velocity and hydrodynamic model resulting from the steady state response of the system.
coefficients, and suction pile characteristics. The objectives of this paper are to:
Finally, a brief comparison is made between this model and • Elucidate the important physics (hydrodynamic forces, time
others that have been proposed within the industry, some of dependent mass, vessel and pile motions) associated with the
which have been incorporated in design standards and simulation of winch wire maximum and minimum tensions
guidelines such as DNV-RP-H103. while lowering through the splash zone.
• Describe the Monte Carlo simulation approach used to
INTRODUCTION capture variability of the responses occurring during passage
Suction piles are widely used in such applications as anchors through the splash zone. The lowering occurs randomly
for mooring systems and foundations for subsea equipment. within a seastate.
There has been growing use of smaller vessels to install suction • Describe the statistical methods used to predict slack lines
piles due to their lower day rates compared with large derrick and maximum tensions in a given seastate.
barges (Fig. 1). However, smaller vessels are subject to lower • Compare against other models in use within the industry.
operational seastate limits. In certain cases, due to crane height
limitations, it is necessary to lower the suction pile with its
length parallel or nearly parallel to the water surface. In
planning such an operation, it is essential to accurately
determine the limiting seastates in order to minimize the chance
that the crane wire will become slack or be overloaded.
Installation contractors generally prefer to avoid seastates that
can result in a slack winch wire because of the uncertainties
associated with snap loading after the wire goes slack.
Accurate simulation of lowering through the splash zone is
challenging as it involves consideration of complex
hydrodynamic forces (slamming, drag, inertia), time varying
buoyancy, vessel motion, waves (including spreading),
flooding of the pile, 3-D large amplitude motion of the pile and
possible snap loading in the crane wire and slings. Some
insight into the dynamic behavior can be observed by viewing a
Figure 1: Lowering a suction pile (Parimi, et al., 2008).

1 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 The success of numerical simulation depends on accurate DNV-RP-H103 also includes a Simplified Method for
definition of the hoisting system (the stiffness of the crane, the estimating characteristic forces on objects lowered through the
wire and the damping coefficients), selection of the wave zone (Bøe, 2009). It is generally recognized (e.g., Sarkar
hydrodynamic coefficients for the structure, extreme value and Gudmestad, 2010) that this Simplified Method leads to
estimation of the dynamic analysis results and selection of the conservative estimates.
acceptance criteria. These items are addressed in this paper. DNV-RP-H103 also describes the use of a time domain
simulation. The benefit of time domain irregular wave method
NOMENCLATURE over the Simplified Method is that it will retain the phase
CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics information in addition to the load magnitudes. The simplified
RAO - Response Amplitude Operator method only captures the magnitudes of the forces and not the
RP - Recommended Practice relative phase information.
SIMO - Simulation of Marine Operations
A - characteristic acceleration REVIEW OF PRIOR ANALYTICAL WORK
a33 - heave added mass per unit length Over the past decade, there has been a considerable amount
of modeling and simulation work performed addressing the

A33 - instantaneous high-frequency limit heave added mass lowering of objects through the splash zone (e.g.; Thiagarajan,
et al., 2001; Cermelli, et al., 2003; Bunnik and Buchner, 2005;
Ap - horizontal projected area of object
Sakar and Gudmestad, 2010; Valen, 2010; Johansen and Grave,
CA - high frequency heave added mass coefficient 2011; Sandvik, 2011; Thurston, et al., 2011). The problem is
CD - drag coefficient challenging as it involves estimation of water impact or
“slamming” loads acting on objects having complex geometry
CDS - drag coef. for steady flow past a circular cylinder
and the possibility of snap loads in the winch wire.
CS - slamming force coefficient Important parameters include lowering speed, crane tip
D - outer diameter of the suction pile motions, crane and winch wire stiffness, seastate, and body
DIN - inner diameter of the suction pile shape and mass. Wave shielding, reflection and diffraction
effects can also have a significant impact on the waves
h - submergence relative to surface elevation experienced at the suction pile.
Hs - significant wave height There have been many investigations of slamming loads.
KC - Keulegan-Carpenter number Prasad (1994) developed a theoretical formulation for wave
L - Suction pile length impact forces on a horizontal cylinder and compared his results
Lin - Suction pile interior length with wave flume measurements of impact loads on fixed
Mw - mass of water accelerated by pile at impact cylinders. Sun and Faltinsen (2006) and Zhu, et al. (2007)
ns - number of slack conditions counted provide Boundary Element Models of water impact on a free-
N - number of simulations performed falling horizontal circular cylinders into still water that
Pslack - probability of slack condition compares well with laboratory data.
r - radius of suction pile The use of CFD to model the hydrodynamic loads associated
s - submergence of cylinder with lowering through the splash zone is growing rapidly.
Tp - spectral peak period Buckner, et al. (2004), Bunnik and Buchner (2004, 2005), and
vs - slamming velocity Bunnik et al. (2006) describe a Volume of Fluid method used to
simulate slamming loads resulting from installation of subsea
V - characteristic velocity structures through the splash zone. Moen (2011) has also
Vz,rel - relative vertical velocity between crane tip and considered the use of CFD in subsea lifting analysis.
instantaneous water line The prediction of highly nonlinear dynamic tensions in
  KC  - wake amplification factor cables due to snap loading has been considered analytically by
 - water density Liu (1973), Niedzwecki and Thampi (1991), Vassalos and
Kourouklis (1998) and Thurston, et al. (2011).
EXISTING GUIDANCE The use of simulation techniques to investigate lowering
DNV-RP-H103 (DNV, 2011) provides a Recommend through the splash zone has been addressed by Buchner, et al.
Practice for Modelling and Analysis of Marine Operations. This (2004), Bunnik, et al. (2006), and Valen (2010). These
RP includes specific guidance for lowering through the wave techniques involve time-domain numerical simulation. They are
zone including considerations of loads and load effects, very general and can include representation of time-dependent
hydrodynamic coefficients, and calculation methods for buoyancy and hydrodynamic loading components due to slam,
estimation of hydrodynamic forces. Nestegård (2008) provides inertia and drag as a function of immersion (e.g., Prasad, 1994)
an overview of the basis for this RP. as well as three-dimensional motion of the body being lowered.

2 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 They can also account for time-dependent flooding as occurs in translational degrees of freedom. The winch wire is modeled as
the lowering of a suction pile through the splash zone. a spring. The length of the winch wire increases at a constant
Monte Carlo simulation is generally required as the order 10- rate due to lowering of the suction pile.
minute lowering operation through the splash zone can occur
anytime within a statistically stationary seastate (typically of 3-
hr duration). For an operability study, it is generally required to
consider a range of seastates (including directionality and
spreading), and lowering speeds. Consequently, time-domain
simulation can be quite computationally costly, requiring
hundreds or even thousands of simulations in order to define
operational limits.
Although time-domain simulation techniques are very
powerful, they also are difficult to check since the
hydrodynamic loading and line tension responses are complex. Figure 2: SIMO model.
Thurston, et al. (2011) made use of a relatively simple but
insightful model based on momentum conservation that does Figure 3 shows a sketch of the pile cross-section and indicates
not require explicit characterization of slamming loads. The the parameters defining the geometry.
resulting linear model equation was solved stochastically using
the Monte Carlo method to yield a relationship between the
probability of slack winch wire conditions, Pslack, and such
inputs as system stiffness, crane tip motion and seastate.
Vertical wave particle velocity and the vertical crane tip
velocity and acceleration are assumed to be normally
distributed random variables. For each realization, the model
predicts whether the tension of the winch wire is slack or not
slack. Pslack is a discrete random variable determined as the
number of realizations having slack line divided by the total
number of realizations. Pslack follows a discrete distribution.
This method has the distinct advantage in that it can be
implemented in a spreadsheet. We have implemented this
Figure 3: Elevation section sketch of suction pile geometry.
method to serve as a check of our full time domain simulation
results.
Vessel motions are calculated within SIMO using the input
motion RAOs and wave spectrum. The resulting motion at the
METHODOLOGY crane tip then forms the boundary condition to the spring-mass-
Nonlinear, three-dimensional time domain analysis using damper system. The stiffness of the crane and winch wire is
irregular waves was performed to simulate the lowering modeled as a single equivalent linear spring.
operation through the splash zone. This operation typically The mass of the pile increases as it penetrates into the water
takes on order 10 minutes from the time that the suction pile is both due to added mass effects and flooding.
lifted off its supports until it is completely submerged. The
methodology used for modeling, simulation and extreme value Hydrodynamic Loading
estimation are described in this section. This method is referred Hydrodynamic forces acting on the suction pile include
to later in the paper as the “Full Simulation” method to slamming impact force, varying buoyancy force, drag force,
differentiate it from other simpler methods to which it is and mass force. These are fully described in Section 3.2 of
compared. DNV-RP-H103 (DNV, 2011).
The analysis was performed using MARINTEK’s Simulation The slamming force dominates as the pile initially penetrates
of Marine Operations (SIMO) program (MARINTEK, 2009). the water surface. The slamming force can be written in terms
The essential features of SIMO for this application include of a slamming coefficient CS as Fs  t   0.5  Cs Ap vs where
2

flexible modeling of coupled multi-body systems, non-linear

time domain simulation of hydrodynamic forces, and time- CS is defined by
dependent mass due to flooding.  
2 dA33 2 dA33
Model System CS   (1)
 Ap vs dt  Ap dh
Figure 2 shows the model system. The installation vessel is
modeled as a rigid body with six degrees of freedom. The
subsea structure is modeled as a rigid body with three

3 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 
where dA33 dh is the rate of change of added mass with
submergence. The slamming coefficient model proposed by
Campbell and Weinberg (1980) for a smooth circular cylinder
experimental values is used:
must be taken to assure that a sufficient number of components
are used so that the wave time history does not repeat during
the duration of the simulation. The Newmark  predictor-
corrector method was used.

 D 0.107 s  1.4E+06
CS  5.15   (2)
 D  19 s D  Added Mass
1.2E+06
where Entrained Mass

s = h  D 2 = submergence of cylinder 1.0E+06 Total Mass

D = diameter of cylinder

Mass (kg)
h = distance from center of cylinder to SWL 8.0E+05

SIMO requires definition of A33  h  rather than CS . Figure 6.0E+05

4 illustrates the variation of A 

33  h  with h consistent with Eq. 4.0E+05
(1). During the initial stage of immersion, the added mass
increases with h/D due to the occurrence of slamming. The 2.0E+05
entrained mass is significant. It is about the same as the added
mass after complete submergence of the suction pile. In 0.0E+00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
comparison, the steel mass of the suction pile is 1.6x105 kg.
h/D
Following the guidance in DNV-RP-H103, we used
Figure 4: Variation of added and entrained mass with
CD  CDS   KC  where CDS is the drag coefficient for steady
immersion for example suction pile.
flow past a circular cylinder,   KC  is an wake amplification 2,500
factor arising from the oscillatory flow, and KC is the
Keulegan-Carpenter number. We assumed the suction pile to be Slam

hydrodynamically rough ( CDS =1.05). The function   KC  is

2,000
Drag
Inertia
based on laboratory measurements and is given as an envelope
Force (kN)

1,500 Buoyancy
of the test data in Figure 3-8 in DNV-RP-H103. CD varies
between 0.3 and 2.2 depending on the KC number and the
scatter in the data. 1,000

The high frequency heave added mass coefficient, C A , is

defined by: 500

C A  a33 /  r 2 (3)
0
Figure 3-5 in DNV-RP-H103 provides a definition of a33 vs. 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

h/r.
Figure 5 provides an example of the buoyancy and
hydrodynamic forces on the suction pile considered in the
example case (Table 1) as a function of immersion, h,
normalized by the pile diameter, D, for a characteristic velocity,
V, of 2.5 m/s and a characteristic acceleration, A, of 2.8 m/s2.
The slamming force dominates as the suction pile initially
penetrates into the water column but quickly decreases with
increasing immersion. Drag, inertia and buoyancy forces
increase with increasing immersion.
Time Domain Simulation
Repeated lowering through splash zone in an irregular sea
was performed for each seastate. The time series of wave
responses are generated by superposition of harmonic
components with uniformly distributed phases by means of
time domain summation of the harmonic components. Care
h/D
Figure 5: Variation of hydrodynamic and buoyancy forces
with immersion for example suction pile with V= 2.5m/s
and A= 2.8m/s2.
Extreme Value Estimation
A stochastic approach is used to estimate the probability of
exceeding certain winch wire tension levels. Simulations of the
ten-minute long lowering operation into a stationary seastate
are made using irregular waves. A large number of realizations
(~100) are computed in which the start time for the lowering is
the same. This is equivalent to selecting random start times
within the 3-hr seastate. The maximum and minimum winch
wire tension is stored from each simulation. Each realization is
based on the wave spectrum using deterministic wave
amplitudes with random phase angles. Histograms are

4 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 established based on the sample minima and maxima, and a 3-
parameter Weibull distribution is fit to these data.
EXAMPLE
This example considers establishing operability limits for
lowering a suction pile at a speed of 0.3 m/s from an
installation vessel such as the one shown schematically in Fig.
2. The displacement of the vessel is approximately 13,000 MT,
and the vessel has a length of 140 m. The crane tip is 29 m
above the mean water surface. Table 1 presents the parameters
the crane tip and the instantaneous water surface vs. Tp for the
three values of Hs considered. The slamming and drag loads are
proportional to the square of Vz,rel, and the inertia load is
proportional to Az,rel. The largest value of Vz,rel occurs at a Tp of
6.5s and the largest Az,rel occurs at a Tp of about 6s. For this
range of Tp, there is significant heave and pitch response.
Figure 7 shows the Weibull fit to the maximum crane wire
tensions for Hs = 1.5m and Tp = 5.5s.
3.0

for the suction pile, crane wire, slings and the effective stiffness (a)

MPM Z Relative Velocity at Crane Tip (m/s)
of the winch wire and slings. The crane is assumed to be rigid. 2.5

Parameter Unit Value or Range 2.0

Suction Pile
   Weight in Air MT 160.5 1.5
   Length m  23.6
   Diameter m 6.0 1.0
   Heave Added Mass* MT 1270 Hs=0.75m
   Displacement MT 21.0 0.5 Hs=1.00m
Crane Wire Hs=1.50m
   Diameter mm 128 0.0
   EA MN 909 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Spectral Peak Period (s)
   Length at Impact m 14.0 3.5
   Stiffness N/m 6.49E+07 (b)
MPM Z Relative Acceleration at Crane Tip 

Sling Wires (2) 3.0

   Diameter mm 86
2.5
   EA MN 310
   Sling Length m 19.1 2.0
(m/s^2)

   Sling Stiffness (each of 2) N/m 1.62E+07

Effective Spring Constant N/m 2.16E+07 1.5

* includes entrained water when fully submerged
Table 1: Parameters for example case.
The heave added mass for a circular cylinder when the body
is far from the free surface is given analytically in Appendix A
of DNV-OS-H101 as a function of the length to diameter ratio.
For this example, this ratio is 4. Figure 3 shows the variation of
added mass and entrained water volume with immersion. The
entrained water volume is the volume of water entering the pile
as it submerges in still water assuming that the pile long axis
remains parallel to the water surface.
The Pierson-Moskowitz wave spectrum was used. Fifteen
seastates (0.75m  Hs  1.5m and 4.5s  Tp  10s) and one
wave direction (waves approaching 30º CW off bow) were
considered. A total of 100 realizations were run for each
seastate. This resulted in 2100 simulations. Each simulation
was started with the suction pile located at about 3 m above the
mean water level and ended when the hook dropped below the
water line.
Figure 6 shows the crane tip maximum single amplitude
relative vertical velocity (Vz,rel) and acceleration (Az,rel) between
1.0
Hs=0.75m
0.5 Hs=1.00m
Hs=1.50m
0.0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Spectral Peak Period (s)
Figure 6: Crane tip vertical (a) relative velocity and (b)
acceleration vs. Tp for a range of Hs. Waves are
approaching from 30 degrees CW off the bow.
The crane wire tension is difficult to predict since when the
line goes slack, the tension response may be governed by snap
loads, which do not conform to the population of non-slack
values that define the Weibull probability distribution fit. Note
that SIMO does not fully model the winch wire response to
snap loads since the winch wire is represented as a spring.
Improved representation of transient wire tension associated
with snap loading could be achieved using a dynamic elastic
model such as is available in MARINTEK’s RIFLEX program.

5 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 COMPARISON WITH OTHER MODELS
We compared the winch wire tension for Hs=0.75m,
Tp=6.5s as calculated in the full SIMO model with DNV-RP-
H101 Simplified Method (referred to as the “H-103 Model”),
which is implemented in a spreadsheet. SIMO predicted a zero
probability for slack in the winch wire while the Simplified
Method predicted that slack would occur. As pointed out in the
Review of Prior Analytical Work section, this conservatism seen
in the Simplified Method is consistent with observations from
others performing detailed time domain simulation, and it is to
be expected due to the simplifying, conservative assumptions
made.

1.0

0.8
Figure 7: Weibull distribution for crane wire tension Hs=0.75m
(response in kN) for Hs=1.5m, Tp=5.5s.

Probability of Slack Line
Hs=1.0m
0.6
Figure 8 illustrates the behavior of winch wire tension with Hs=1.5m
time for the seastate (Hs=1.5m, Tp=5.5s) by presenting two of
the 100 realizations simulated. These show that zero tension in 0.4
the winch wire can occur multiple times during the simulation
and that zero tension can occur first after the slamming impact
0.2
force has diminished.
5000
0.0
Seed_13
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

4000 Seed_15 Spectral Peak Period (s)

Tension in crane wire (kN)

Figure 9: Probability of the winch wire going slack from

3000
Full Model.

1.0

2000 Hs=0.75m

0.8 Hs=1.0m
Praobability of Slack Lines

1000 Hs=1.5m

0.6

0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Simulation Time (s) 0.4

Figure 8: Two examples of the first 25 seconds of winch

wire tension time histories for (Hs=1.5m, Tp=5.5s). 0.2

Figure 9 shows the probability of the winch wire going slack,

Pslack. This is defined as 0.0
n 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Pslack  s (4) Spectral Peak Period (s)
N
where ns is the number of slack conditions counted and N is the Figure 10: Probability of the winch wire going slack from
number of simulations performed. The dependence on Hs and Shell Model.
Tp is apparent. It should be noted that these probabilities have The stochastic model of Thurston et al. (2011) is
not been factored to account for the probability of occurrence subsequently referred to as the “Shell Model”. As discussed
for each seastate. previously, this model is very quick to run in a spreadsheet due
its use of a momentum conservation formulation. To do so, it

6 Copyright © 2013 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 makes a simplifying assumption regarding the amount of mass
that moves with the load after impact (assumed to be half the
added mass).
Figure 10 shows what the Shell Model predicts for the
probability of the winch wire going slack, Pslack. When
compared with the Full Model (Fig. 9), it is apparent that the
Shell Model does capture the trend of decreasing Pslack with
increasing Tp. However, the values of Pslack are quantitatively
different from those in the Full Model, especially at low and
high values of Pslack.
The comparison is shown directly in Figure 11, which
compares the probability that the winch wire will go slack at
least once in a given seastate, Pslack, as predicted by the Full
Simulation method presented in this paper with that predicted
by the Shell Model. It should be noted that the Shell Model
only considers initial impact of the pile with the water surface
while the Full Model considers all forces acting on the pile as it
submerges through the splash zone. Also, as seen in Fig. 4, the
Full Model captures increases to the total mass (mass + added
mass + entrained mass) as the suction pile submerges.
Simulations from the Full Model show that slack line
conditions can occur after the suction pile has partially
submerged through the water surface (i.e., after initial impact)
due to the upward action of buoyancy, drag and mass forces.
That coupled with the fact that the forces are, in general,
nonlinear leads to the winch wire tensions being non-normally
distributed. Since wire rope cannot support compression, line
tensions are usually considered log-normally distributed (e.g.,
DNV, 1992). The correlation between the two estimates is quite
high. However, the Shell Model underestimates SIMO at high
Pslack and overestimates at low Pslack. This appears to be due to
the Shell Model assumption that the mass of water that moves
with the suction pile after impact is half of the fully submerged
added mass.
1.0
0.8
SIMO Pslack
0.6
0.4
Hs=0.75m
0.2
Hs=1.0
Hs=1.5m
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Shell Pslack
Figure 11: Comparison of slack line probability from the
Full Model (“SIMO”) with that from the Shell Model with
Mw=0.5A33.
Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Equation (1) shows that the added mass varies as the suction
pile becomes immersed. The Shell Model also neglects drag
and buoyancy forces after impact and assumes all random
variables are independent. As Thurston, et al. (2011) point out,
this is not strictly true for the crane tip displacement, velocity
and acceleration, which exhibit some degree of correlation.
However, the strong correlation between Pslack from the two
models indicates that the Shell Model can be used effectively as
a check of the full simulation method and can also serve as
useful tool for performing sensitivity studies.
PARAMETRIC STUDY
The Shell Model was used to perform a parametric study to
show sensitivity of winch wire tension to seastate, lowering
velocity, effective stiffness of the crane/winch wire/sling and
suction pile characteristics. Figure 12 shows the sensitivity of
Pslack to the assumed mass of water accelerated by the suction
pile at impact with the water surface. Pslack increase roughly as
the square of the mass of water accelerated.
Pslack also increase as the square of the lowering speed. This
is expected since the slamming force is proportional to the
square of the relative velocity. Pslack varies roughly linearly
with the equivalent stiffness of the crane/wire/sling.
DISCUSSION
The simple H-103 and Shell Models have been useful in
investigating the behavior of the complex dynamic system
investigated. They have also been useful as tools in performing
quality checks in the “Full Simulation” model presented here.
Other potentially useful idealized models such as Laplace
transform methods may provide additional insight to this
problem.
0.25
0.20
Hs=0.75m
Hs=1.0m
0.15 Hs=1.5m
Pslack
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Mass of Water Accelerated by Pile / Added Mass
Figure 12: Probability of the winch wire going slack vs. the
mass of water accelerated by the suction pile as a fraction
of the added mass (Tp=7.5s).
When defining the limiting seastates for the suction pile
lowering operation, it is also necessary to consider the
7 Copyright © 2013 by ASME
 probability of occurrence of each seastate. This is usually
represented by a scatter diagram in which the probability for
each seastate, as represented by its (Hs, Tp) pair, is given. Then
one can weigh the importance of a high Pslack in a particular
seastate against the likelihood that the seastate will occur.
Some practical aspects of suction pile installation have not
been addressed in this initial study. For example, the pile may
not flood or empty as rapidly as it is submerged or lifted. The
pile may tilt (which has not been considered in this initial
study) as it enters the water and this may result in additional
buoyancy if the open end is out of the water. Placement of
vents at the top of the pile may influence outcomes. Bad
experiences with snap loading due to sudden loss of buoyancy
caused by pile tilting and placement of vents have been
reported by one installation contractor. It may be best to enter
the water at an angle to reduce slamming and ensure rapid
flooding of the pile.
It should also be noted that the winch wire can go slack with
a subsequent snap load after the pile submerges, despite the
relatively mild seastate. Clearly more study is warranted
regarding these items.
CONCLUSIONS
Characterization of winch wire loads for offshore lifting
operations is critical for defining safe, accurate seastate limits.
This paper describes and illustrates a procedure for performing
nonlinear, three-dimensional time domain simulation for
investigating the lowering of suction piles through the splash
zone. DNV-RP-H103 provides a sound basis for the simulation
analysis by summarizing the state-of-the-art for hydrodynamic
coefficients and the time domain analysis methodology.
The following can be concluded:
1. Fully nonlinear, time domain simulation of the lowering of
suction piles through the splash zone is a comprehensive,
efficient way to plan operations. The example described in
this paper required 2100 time domain simulations, which
were accomplished within a few days time from model
setup to post-processing of results.
2. The DNV-RP-H103 Simple Method provides quick but
conservative results when compared to full time domain
simulation.
3. It is recommended that operability studies consider seastate
probabilities when assessing wait-on-weather times.
4. The “Shell Model” (Thurston, et al., 2011) is a very useful
tool for checking full time domain simulation results and
for initial screening and sensitivity studies. Once
calibrated, it provides good estimates of snap probability.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank DNV management for permission to release the
paper. We also thank the comments provided by two
anonymous reviewers.
REFERENCES
1. Bøe, Tormod (2009), “DNV Marine Operations’ Rules for
Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Subsea Lift Operations - New Simplified Method for
Prediction of Hydrodynamic Forces,” DNV presentation,
Dec. 2, 2009.
2. Buchner, Bas, Tim Bunnik, Dick Honig and Geert Meskers
(2004), “A New Simulation Method for Installation of
Subsea Structures from the Splash Zone to the Ultra Deep,”
DOT Conf. November 30-December 2, 2004 - New
Orleans, Louisiana.
3. Bunnik, Tim and Bas Buchner (2004), “Numerical
Prediction of Wave Loads on Subsea Structures in the
Splash Zone,” ISOPE 2004.
4. Bunnik, Tim and Bas Buchner (2005), “Simulation of the
Dynamic Motions of Complex Sub-Sea Structures in the
Splash Zone During Deepwater Installations,” DOT Conf.,
November 8-10, Vitoria, Espirito Santo, Brazil, 2005.
5. Bunnik, Tim, Bas Buchner and Arthur Veldman (2006),
“The Use of a Volume of Fluid (VOF) Method Coupled to a
Time Domain Motion Simulation to Calculate the Motions
of a Subsea Structure Lifted Through the Splash Zone,”
OMAE2006-92447.
6. Campbell, I.M.C. and Weynberg, P.A. (1980)
“Measurement of parameters affecting slamming,” Final
Report, Rep. No. 440, Technology Reports Centre No. OT-
R-8042, Southampton University.
7. Cermelli, Christian, Denby Morrison, Hugo Corvalan San
Martin and Mitch Guinn (2003), “Progression of Ultradeep
Subsea Deployment Systems,” OTC 15147.
8. DNV (1992), “Structural Reliability Analysis of Marine
Structures,” Classification Notes No. 30.6, July 1992.
9. DNV (2011), “Modelling and Analysis of Marine
Operations,” Recommended Practice DNV-RP-H103, April
2011.
10. Isaacson, Michael and Sundar Prasad (1994), “Wave
Slamming on a Horizontal Circular Cylinder,” Int. J. of
Offshore and Polar Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 2.
11. Johansen, Ernst-B. And Signe Marie Grave (2010), “Lifts
through the splash zone - Principles and a case study,” The
15th North Sea Offshore Cranes & Lifting Conference,
April 27-29, 2010, Aberdeen, UK.
12. Liu, F. C. (1973), “Snap Loads in Lifting and Mooring
Cable Systems Induced by Surface Wave Conditions,”
NCEL Technical Note N-1288, Port Hueneme, CA, Sept.
1973.
13. MARINTEK (2009), “SIMO – Theory Manual Version 3.6,
Rev. 2,” MARINTEK Report 516412.00.03.
14. Moen, Peter (2011), “CFD in subsea lifting analysis,”
Subsea Lifting Operations, November 29-30, 2011,
Stavanger, Norway.
15. Nestegård, Arne (2008), “New Recommended Practice on
Modelling and Analysis of Marine Operations, DNV-RP-
H103,” Subsea Lifting Operations, Stavanger, Norway,
December 2-3, 2009.
16. Niedzwecki, J. M. And S. K. Thampi (1991), “Snap loading
of marine cable systems” Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 13,
Bo. 5.
8 Copyright © 2013 by ASME
 17. Parimi, Madhav, Zhengmin Qian and Lars Hvam (2008),
“Installation of Large Suction Piles in the Gulf of Mexico,”
Subsea Lifting Operations, Dec. 2, 2008.
18. Prasad, Sundar (1994), “Wave Impact Forces on a
Horizontal Cylinder,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
British Columbia, July 1994.
19. Sandvik, Peter Chr. (2011), “Subsea lifting operations,”
Subsea Lifting Operations, November 29-30, 2011,
Stavanger, Norway.
20. Sarkar, Arunjyoti and Ove T. Gudmestad (2010), “Splash
Zone Lifting Analysis of Subsea Structures,” OMAE2010-
20489.
21. Sayer, P. (2008), “Hydrodynamic loads during the
deployment of ROVs,” Ocean Engineering, Vol. 35, pp. 41-
46.
22. Sun, Hui and Odd M. Faltinsen (2006), “Water impact of
horizontal circular cylinders and cylindrical shells,” Applied
Ocean Research, Vol. 28, pp. 299-311.
Downloaded From: http://www.gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/21/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
23. Thiagarajan, Krish P. And Neil Yann (2001), “Assessment
of One Company’s Regulations for Offshore Lifting
Operations,” OTC 13242.
24. Thurston, Kevin W., Richard C. Swanson and Frans Kopp
(2011), “Statistical Characterization of Slacking and Snap
Loading During Offshore Lifting and Lowering in a Wave
Environment,” OMAE2011-49273.
25. Valen, Magnus (2010), “Launch and recovery of ROV:
Investigation of operational limit from DNV Recommended
Practices and time domain simulations in SIMO,” Masters
Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
June 14, 2010.
26. Vassalos, D. And A. Kourouklis (1998), “An Experimental,
Theoretical and Full-Scale Investigation on the Snap
Loading of Marine Cables,” UK HSE Report OTH 558.
27. Zhu, Xinying, Odd M. Faltinsen and Changhong Hu (2007),
“Water Entry and Exit of a Horizontal Circular Cylinder,” J.
Of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vol. 129,
pp. 253-264, November 2007.
9 Copyright © 2013 by ASME