See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269276606

EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS

IN FSRU BILGE KEELS DESIGN

Conference Paper October 2012

CITATION READS

1 91

5 authors, including:

Andrea Del Guzzo

Saipem S.p.A.
6 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Andrea Del Guzzo on 08 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN FSRU BILGE KEELS
DESIGN

F. Gaggiotti, A. Esposito, A. Del Guzzo, C. Rossetti

Saipem S.p.A.
Via Toniolo 1,
61032 Fano Italy
e-mail: {Federico.Gaggiotti, Andrea.Esposito3, Andrea.DelGuzzo,
CristianAlberto.Rossetti}@saipem.com

ABSTRACT
Roll damping is crucial for Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRU) design, especially due to
operability needs during offloading when the unit is connected to oil/LNG carriers.
In ship-shaped FSRUs, the roll motion is largely determined by damping. The bilge keels are an effective
device to increase roll damping and reduce roll motion for ships with block coefficient less than 0.8.
Practically they contribute to significantly reduce roll motion at resonance. In this paper, the theoretical and
experimental aspects of a specific FSRU bilge keels design are presented, with the problems incurring
when model scale results are compared with results from literature formulas, and hydrodynamic flow
interpretation.

1 INTRODUCTION
Potential roll damping, which can be assessed by well-established calculation methods (strip
theory or 3D potential solution), is responsible for a small part of the overall damping. Semi-
analytical methods have been developed mainly by Japanese naval architects (Himeno, 1981)
to model viscous damping and eddy making phenomena, and fit a great amount of experimental
data from model and full scale tests.
Structural design of bilge keels requires insight studies that include hydrodynamics and forcing
regime from fluid that are acting on the plates. Roll damping can be predicted by both
calculation and model tests, as briefly presented in this paper, while the forces exerted are
difficult to measure at model scale. Careful hydrodynamic studies are required, looking into
hydraulic regimes of interaction. In particular, the flow condition around the plates shall be
analysed taking into account the low Keulegan-Carpenter number and the fluid volume involved.
Computational Fluid Dynamics can help. A correct load history is needed to design bilge keels
for strength and fatigue life.
A brief presentation of semi-analytical methods is given in Section 2, model tests for a specific
case are compared to analytical results in Section 3, while a simplified assessment of bilge
keels forces is described in Section 4.

2 SEMI-ANALYTICAL METHODS
The main contributions to roll damping for an FSRU as described by Himeno (1981), are briefly
presented in the following Sections.
2.1 Friction Damping
It is caused by the skin friction between the water and hull surface. One of the most cited
studies was carried out by Kato (1966), who applied laminar and turbulent flow formulas to the
case of a rolling cylinder. Many experimental and analytical studies confirmed the validity of
Katos work (Himeno, 1981). The skin friction damping is in general very small with respect to
the overall roll damping.

2.2 Eddy Making Damping

It is a non-linear term, related to the pressure effect of the hull shape during roll motion,
excluding the pressure effect of the bilge keels. Since this contribution to damping is caused by
the pressure drop where the flow separates from the hull, the problem has been treated as a
drag problem in steady flow, with a drag coefficient varying with the oscillation amplitude (Ikeda
et al., 1976).

2.3 Wave Damping

This term is almost linear, and is related to the increment of hull pressure damping due to the
presence of surface waves. Direct measurements of this term are impossible, but comparison of
strip theory results with radiation wave measurements show good agreement, such that
numerical calculation is deemed reliable.

2.4 Bilge Keels Damping

This term includes both the normal force damping related to the plate drag, and the hull
pressure contribution due to the change in pressure distribution when the bilge keels are
installed. The distinction between the two is not only important for the understanding of the
phenomena, but also because only the normal force damping is related to the force applied on
the bilge keels plates, and therefore to sizing and fatigue calculation.
Normal force damping calculation can be carried out as a drag problem, in which the drag
coefficient is known to vary with the velocity/period of motion, or Keulegan-Carpenter number.
Through manipulation of the Keulegan-Carpenter number formula for the case of harmonic
rotational motion around roll axis, and fitting of experimental data, Ikeda et al. (1976)
determined a semi-empirical equation also confirmed by subsequent test campaigns. Other
studies added empirical coefficients to take into account other parameters such as the bilge
circle radius.
The hull pressure change coefficient due to the bilge keels is dependent on the motion
amplitude, and several studies have been performed based on the measured pressure
distribution during dedicated tests.

2.5 Total Damping

Due to geometry, the previous contributions shall be evaluated at a number of representative
sections, and then the total damping is calculated by integration over the ship length, taking into
account the length of each section. The effect of appendices like rudders can be added to the
total if relevant. See Figure 2 and Figure 3 for an example of the relative weight of each
component on the total damping.

3 MODEL TESTS
The impact of scale effect on roll damping shall be considered when dealing with model tests:
while the potential damping is linear and independent from scale effect, friction damping is
strongly dependant on scale, even if quite small with respect to the total. The picture on the
scale effects on the eddy making and bilge keels contributions is much less clear: while some
literature asserts the dependency is small, some tests (Section 0) evidence scale effects that
can be addressed to the vortex size.
A dedicated campaign of model tests has been performed to comparatively assess the
performance of different designs of bilge keels for a FSRU with the main characteristics shown
in Table 1. The model scale was 1:58.
Table 1. FSRU Main Parameters
Description Value Unit
Length between perpendiculars 274 m
Breadth 48 m
Draft 10.97 m
3
Displacement volume 98145 m
Block coefficient 0.68 -
Midship coefficient 0.98 -

The different bilge keels configurations tested are listed in Table 2. In particular, in addition to
the bare hull configuration included for comparison, there are combinations of 2 lengths and 2
breadths. An additional configuration with a bracket, inspired by Jeong (2002) was tested, see
Figure 1. To be noted that at model scale, the brackets are just 7 mm wide.

Table 2. Tested Bilge Keels Configurations

Config. # Length (m) Breadth (m) Notes
1 - - Bare Hull
2 110 1
3 145 1
4 145 1 With 0.4 m Wide Brackets
5 110 2
6 145 2

Figure 1. Bilge Keel with Bracket

Different types of model tests have been performed for each bilge keels configuration:
Free Roll Decay
Moored Roll Decay
Roll Response in Waves
In particular the Free Roll Decay tests are the reference, the Moored Roll Decay tests are
needed to assess the effect of the mooring, the Roll Response in Waves evidences the Roll
RAO reduction corresponding to the roll damping increase.
Particular attention is here paid to the Free Roll Decay test, for easier comparison with semi-
analytical model and because the roll damping phenomenon is isolated from sources of error.
3.1 Damping Prediction

Preliminary analytical analyses were carried out with the methods described at Section 2 to
allow for comparison and give confidence during the tests. The damping coefficients are plotted
in Figure 2, split by friction, eddy making and bilge keels contributions. It is evident that most of
the predicted damping is estimated to be due to the bilge keels, while the skin friction
component is negligible. The latter component is expected to be instead more significant during
model tests, since it is the most affected by scale effects.

Figure 3 shows in particular the split of the pressure change and normal force contributions to
roll damping due to the longer bilge keels: it can be observed that the pressure change
contribution is in general growing with a steeper slope with roll angle, with respect to the normal
force contribution. Nevertheless, the ratio between the two contributions can vary depending
mostly on the breadth, even though the order of magnitude remains similar.
6.0
145x2

110x1
110x2
5.0 145x1
145x2
Skin Friction
110x2
Eddy Making
4.0
Roll Damping (%)

3.0

145x1

2.0
110x1

1.0

Eddy Making

0.0 Skin Friction

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Roll Amplitude (deg)

Figure 2. Roll Damping Components at Resonance Period

4.0
145x1 Normal Force
145x1 Pressure Change
3.5
145x2 Normal Force 145x2 Normal Force
145x2 Pressure Change

3.0

145x2 Pressure Change

2.5
Roll Damping (%)

2.0

1.5
145x1 Pressure Change

1.0 145x1 Normal Force

0.5

0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Roll Amplitude (deg)

Figure 3. Bilge Keels Roll Damping Components at Resonance Period, 145 m long bilge keels
3.2 Free Roll Decay
The Free Roll Decay test are executed in still water, with the model completely free from
mooring and positioned in the middle of the basin to minimize the effect of reflected waves. An
hook positioned on one side of the ship model, longitudinally corresponding to the CoG to avoid
induced pitch, is pulled with a rope from the ceiling, and suddenly released. The roll time history
is processed as a generic linearly damped process, see e.g. Journe (2001), ensuring that the
roll time history is cut before reflected waves come back to the model. In particular, the full
oscillation amplitude is used here, with each oscillation compared to the next, see following
formulas and Figure 4:

i i 1 i 2 i 3
a
4
for i 1,3,5,
1 i i 1

ln
2 i 2 i 3

1
3
10

8 ...
6

4
Roll Angle (deg)

0
115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150
-2

-4

-6

2 4
-8

-10
Time (s)

QL_FSRU_ROLL Peaks

Figure 4. Roll Angle Time History Example During Free Roll Decay Test

Each pair of a and values is a point on the roll amplitude/linear damping plane, the points
are then linearly fitted and confidence intervals can be calculated.
The plots from Figure 5 to Figure 10 show the results for the studied case, where the dots are
the experimental points, the blue lines are the linear least squares best fit, the red lines
represent the 95% confidence interval (95% probability that the statistically distributed values
are between the red parabolic lines). The green lines represent the estimate made with semi-
analytical methods as per Himeno (1981). No estimate is provided for the case with brackets
(Figure 8) since this kind of shape is not included in the mentioned studies. Note that the
damping scale in Figure 9 and Figure 10 is wider with respect to the other cases.
The following can be observed:
1. The semi-analytical methods predicted damping is always lower than the basin test
damping. This is partly for general conservativeness of methods to be used in
design phase and partly due to scale effects that overestimate damping in basin
tests.
2. The difference between prediction and measurement is quite constant with respect
to the roll amplitude, and is roughly equal to 1% with the bare hull, 1.5% with 1 m
bilge keels.
3. The 2 m wide bilge keels show significant deviation between prediction and
measurement: the size of the plates is in this case out of what Himeno defines the
ordinary range.
4. The configuration with brackets shows an unexpected reduction of roll damping, as
opposed to the Jeong (2002) results, despite the similar scale of the model and
proportion of bilge keels. The reason of these unexpected results could lie in the
different vessel shape (box with no bilge radius in Jeong experiments). The
reduction measured in this test campaign could also be related to the brackets
cutting the vortexes, affected by the scale effect.
 Linear damping
Bilge Keels #1 (bare hull)

5.0%

Experiment (%)
BG (%)
4.5% LB (%)
UB (%)
Himeno Theory

4.0%

3.5%
Linear Damping Coefficient

3.0%

2.5%

2.0%

1.5%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 5. Model Test vs. Semi-Analytical Damping Bilge Keels Config. #1

Linear damping
Bilge Keels #2 (110x1 m)

5.0%

Experiment (%)
4.5% BG (%)
LB (%)
UB (%)
Himeno Theory
4.0%

3.5%
Linear Damping Coefficient

3.0%

2.5%

2.0%

1.5%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 6. Model Test vs. Semi-Analytical Damping Bilge Keels Config. #2

 Linear damping
Bilge Keels #3 (145x1 m)

5.0%

4.5%

4.0%

3.5%
Linear Damping Coefficient

3.0%

2.5%

2.0%

1.5%

Experiment (%)
1.0% BG (%)
LB (%)
UB (%)
Himeno Theory
0.5%

0.0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 7. Model Test vs. Semi-Analytical Damping Bilge Keels Config. #3

Linear damping
Bilge Keels #4 (145x1 m with brackets)

5.0%

4.5%

4.0%

3.5%
Linear Damping Coefficient

3.0%

2.5%

2.0%

1.5%

Experiment (%)
1.0% BG (%)
LB (%)
UB (%)

0.5%

0.0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 8. Model Test Damping Bilge Keels Config. #4

 Linear damping
Bilge Keels #5 (110x2 m)

10%

9%

8%

7%
Linear Damping Coefficient

6%

5%

4%

3%

Experiment (%)
2% BG (%)
LB (%)
UB (%)
Himeno Theory
1%

0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 9. Model Test vs. Semi-Analytical Damping Bilge Keels Config. #5

Linear damping
Bilge Keels #6 (145x2 m)

10%

9%

8%

7%
Linear Damping Coefficient

6%

5%

4%

3%

Experiment (%)
2% BG (%)
LB (%)
UB (%)
Himeno Theory
1%

0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Mean Roll Angle (deg)

Figure 10. Model Test vs. Semi-Analytical Damping Bilge Keels Config. #6
3.3 Response in Waves
The roll damping effect shall be estimated in terms of reduced response, since this is the
objective of the design in the first place. The reduction in the peak roll RAO amplitude can be
immediately appreciated, and the correspondence with the values determined by means of Free
Roll Decay tests can be evaluated with simple relationships valid for second order mechanical
systems in resonance conditions.
For a mass-spring-damper system, the Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF) at resonance is
given by the following relationship (see also Figure 11):
peak 1
DAF
static 2
4.5

peak 1
4
Config.#1 - (bare hull)

static 2
Config.#2 - (110x1m)
Config.#3 - (145x1m)
3.5 Config.#4 - (145x1m with brackets)
Config.#5 - (110x2m)
Config.#6 - (145x2m)

Target Natural Period
3
Amplitude [deg/m]

2.5

2
static

1.5
2 peak
1

0.5

0
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25
Period [s]

Figure 11. Roll Damping as Calculated from Roll RAO

The damping ratio is calculated as shown in Figure 11 based on the Roll RAO as provided by
the basin equipment. The process is extremely easy, yet can be affected by several source of
errors, in the present case the following are highlighted:
To read the static value, waves should be generated such that sufficient energy
is provided at wave periods considerably longer than the resonance period.
RAOs should be obtained by means of white noise wave generation rather than
the common wave spectra adopted to simulate wind sea.
The sampling of the signals to be processed should be fast enough to have
good resolution around the resonance peak. Since the signal processing works
at constant frequency intervals, the sampling in the domain of the periods can
easily become coarse enough to cause uncertainty in the peak amplitude value,
considering the curve steepness around resonance.
The results of this analysis for a 5 m significant wave height are presented in Table 3 in terms of
roll damping increase with respect to the bare hull case. The comparison evidences good
correspondence with all the 1 m wide bilge keels, while the 2 m bilge keels show less damping
increase in waves than in free decay.
Table 3. Roll Damping Increase for Each Bilge Keels Configuration, Comparison Between Free
Roll Decay and Irregular Wave Tests

Bilge Keels Configuration Free Irregular

Decay Waves
#2 (110x1m) 2.8% 2.4%
#3 (145x1m) 2.7% 3.1%
#4 (145x1m with brackets) 3.0% 3.1%
#5 (110x2m) 8.1% 5.3%
#6 (145x2m) 9.2% 6.1%

4 ASSESSMENT OF FORCES ON BILGE KEELS

Once the size/length of the bilge keels has been selected to suit the environmental and
operational conditions, the structural analysis problem shall be faced with care, especially
where harsh environmental conditions demand for significant plate sizes.
Even in presence of dedicated experimental studies, hydrodynamic interpretation is needed to
separate the differential pressure component from the overall damping. An additional analysis of
the process is here proposed, to provide a phenomenological explanation rather than fitting of
experimental data like semi-empirical methods in literature.
In oscillating flow problems, similarity is evaluated by means of the Keulegan-Carpenter
number:
vmaxT
K
D
where the maximum velocity during oscillation, period of oscillation and characteristic dimension
are used. Note that Ikeda suggests using the double of the bilge keel breadth.
First, the role of hydrodynamic inertia can be clarified by means of a simple plate model. The
fluid volume involved in the plate oscillation is an intermediate between the free plate situation
and the wall bounded situation, see Figure 12, such that an equivalent drag coefficient range
can be calculated and compared with the semi-empirical estimate to understand the relative
importance of the two phenomena.

oscillation

free plate
added mass
wall bounded
added mass

ship bilge

Figure 12. Fluid Volume Involved by Plate Oscillation

The involved fluid volume range is between:

bBK 2 bBK 2
Vmin and Vmax
4 2
The maximum hydrodynamic inertia force during one cycle is therefore, for each of the two
volumes:
bBK 2 bBK 2
Fi ,min A r
2
Fi ,max A 2 r
4 2
By equality with a pure drag force expression, the range of the equivalent drag coefficient is
determined:
bBK bBK
C D ,min C D ,max
2 A r A r
For the present project, the equivalent drag coefficients from inertia are much lower than the
drag coefficients predicted by means of semi-analytical methods, such that the drag shall be
used for the structural sizing of the plate and hull connection. Only at lower velocities (low
Keulegan-Carpenter numbers), the inertia component becomes comparable with the drag, and
in general the significance of inertia shall be checked.
As a second comparison, the general theory for oscillating plates can be applied, as in
Sarpkaya (1995), where the results of experiments with free and wall-bounded plates at several
Keulegan-Carpenter numbers are presented. For the vessel object of the present study, the
coefficients predicted by semi-analytical methods are still higher at higher Keulegan-Carpenter
numbers, thus for the cases in which the normal plate forces are higher. Again, for other
applications, the designer shall ensure that, in absence of direct force measurements or more
sophisticated modelling, the most conservative theory is applied.

4.1 Motion Analysis vs. Sizing

The comparison between semi-analytical methods and experiments shown that, as one would
expect, the predicted damping is lower than measured in model tests. This is partly due to the
conservativeness of the semi-analytical methods that where designed to assist the motion
analysis, and partly due to the scale effects that amplify the roll damping especially with smaller
models.
When it comes to the bilge keels structural sizing, the problem of the correct force estimation
arises: the plate drag force from Himeno theory wouldnt be conservative, but most often a
direct measurement of plate force is not available from model tests.
The most rough and conservative design approach could be to address all the additional
damping measured with respect to the estimate as drag force damping. The structural design
will then be based on highly amplified forces as an input, to be further amplified depending on
the codes to be applied on the project.
Another more realistic approach is to consider that the drag force will be increased in the same
proportion as the total damping is increased in model tests with respect to the prediction. Since
the hydrodynamic study of the scaled tests shows that not all the components of the roll
damping are equally amplified, and that in particular viscous effects are more affected by the
scale, this approach is still deemed conservative.
Further studies like CFD or dedicated tests with load cells fitted bilge keels would be needed if
the conservativeness needs to be reduced, while keeping the design safe.

5 CONCLUSIONS
The work described in the paper was aimed at the comparison of semi-analytical and
experimental methods for the estimation of the roll damping introduced by different sizes and
shapes of bilge keels. When the roll damping behaviour is mission-critical, as in FSRU design,
the comparison of different methods and careful evaluation of the phenomena involved is
needed to ensure that both motion analysis and structural design are carried out with sufficient
level of confidence on the conservativeness of the results.
Semi-analytical methods have proved to be effective as long as the bilge keels dimensions
belong to the range tested during the campaigns on which the formulas are based. The safety
margin on damping shall be taken into account during structural design of the bilge keels, in
which the effect on the safety factors is opposite.
Basic hydrodynamics and mechanics are useful to gain understanding of the phenomena and
confidence over the whole calculation process.
6 REFERENCES
Kato, H.: Effect of Bilge Keels on the Rolling of Ships, Memories of the Defense Academy,
Japan, 1966
Ikeda, Y., Himeno, Y. and Tanaka, N.: Ship Roll Damping Frictional Component and Normal
Pressure on Bilge Keel, J Kansai SNA, 1976
Schmitke, R. T.: Ship Sway, Roll, and Yaw Motions in Oblique Seas, SNAME Transactions,
1978
Graham, J. M. R.: The Forces on Sharp Edged Cylinders in Oscillatory Flow at Low Keulegan-
Carpenter numbers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1980
Himeno, Y.: Prediction of Ship Roll Damping - State of the Art, September 1981
Sarpkaya, T. and OKeefe, J. L.: Oscillating Flow About Two and Three Dimensional Bilge
Keels, OMAE 1995
Journe, J.M.J. and Massie, W.W.: Offshore Hydromechanics, 2001
Jeong Heon Na, Woo Chang Lee, Hyun Soo Shin, In Kyu Park: A Design of Bilge Keels for
Harsh Environment FPSOs, 2002