Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 ω0
fs ≈ (08)
3 2π
with ω0 the lowest natural frequency of the riser,
given by
C EI
ω0 = (09) Figure 3. Fluctuating lift and drag forces
L2 me
with C the end boundary coefficient, E the A comprehensive review on vortex induced
Young’s modulus of the material and is given in [06]. The implications of VIV on the
π design of marine risers are addressed in [07-09].
I=
64
(D 4
o − Di4 ) (10) Details on fluid-structure interaction to predict
flow induced oscillations in marine risers are
the moment of inertia, where given in [10-11], while the use of COMSOL
multiphysics is highlighted in [12-13]. In this
Di = Do − 2 t (11) paper, these modelling techniques are applied to
study proximity effects of adjacent marine risers
is the inner diameter of the riser. The effective exhibiting wake interference.
mass me includes mass of the steel structure
3. Flow Patterns for Two Tandem Risers
π
m = ρ st
4
(D 2
o − Di2 ) (12)
A careful review of flow interference
between two circular cylinders in various
= ρ st π ( Do − t ) t arrangements has been presented by Zdravkovich
[14], including an extensive list of references on
this subject. Different studies for the tandem
the internal fluid mass arrangement of two adjacent risers [15-18] have
π Di2 shown that the changes in drag, lift and vortex
mi = ρi (13) shedding are not continuous. Instead, an abrupt
4 change for all flow characteristics is observed at
and the added mass a critical spacing between the risers.
π D02 In this section, COMSOL Multiphysics is
ma = Ca ρ w (14)
applied to predict the optimal spacing between
4
two adjacent risers in order to reduce excessive
where the added mass coefficient Ca = 1 for
drag and avoid contact or collision. The
vertical pipes and risers. Figure 3 shows the
simulation setup is shown on Figure 4.
evolution of the drag (02) and lift (03) forces
when the von Karman vortex street is fully
developed. Note that the average lift force is
zero, while the average drag force is a measure
for the resistance against fluid flow.
Due to the alternating vortex wake, the
oscillations in lift force FL(t) occur at the vortex
shedding frequency fs, and oscillations in drag
force FD(t) occur at twice this frequency. These
oscillations can give rise to an ‘8-shaped’ motion
of the marine riser, which is detrimental to its Figure 4. Simulation setup for tandem risers
fatigue resistance.
The fluid flow velocity can be expressed as
u (t ) = U1 + U 2 cos (ω t ) (15)
to account for both steady tidal currents and
oscillatory flow induced by waves. For a more
detailed description of the current profiles for
deepwater risers design, the reader is referred to
[19]. The horizontal spacing between the risers is
shown as L, while e ≠ 0 allows simulating risers
in staggered arrangements as well. The simulated
grid is 15D by 5D.
(
− ∇ ⋅ − p I + η ∇u + ( ∇u )
T
)
Drag coefficient data [17-18] shows that the
(16)
∂u upstream cylinder takes the brunt of the burden,
( )
+ ρw + ρ w u ⋅∇ u = F
and that the downstream has little or no effect on
∂t the upstream one. For different values of spacing
whilst L/D, the drag coefficient
− ∇⋅ u = 0
FD (t )
(17) CD = (18)
1 ρ U 2
D
On Figure 5, the flow pattern is shown for two
2
adjacent risers with L/D = 2.
predicted by COMSOL is shown in Figure 7.
Clearly, the drag coefficient on the upstream
cylinder is not influenced by the downstream
one, but a significant change in drag is observed
on the downstream cylinder for L/D > 3.5.
Figure 5. Flow patterns for tandem risers and L/D = 2