ATMA 2014 20 YEARS OF RESEARCH IN HYDRODYNAMIC AND … · 2015. 11. 27. · Pétrole, then at Bureau Veritas since 1991. HydroStar is now used by all the Bureau Veritas technical

ATMA 2014

20 YEARS OF RESEARCH

IN HYDRODYNAMIC AND STRUCTURE

AT BUREAU VERITAS

Quentin DERBANNE, Sime MALENICA, Xiao-Bo CHEN,

Louis DIEBOLD

BUREAU VERITAS – Division Marine & Offshore – Neuilly-sur-Seine

RESUME

Les travaux du Département Recherche du Bureau Veritas ont été récompensés par le prix 2013 du

CEMT (Confederation of European Maritime Technology Societies). A cette occasion, ce mémoire

revient sur les innovations principales de ces 20 dernières années dans les domaines de

l’hydrodynamique et de l’hydro-structure. Les logiciels HydroStar et Homer, développés par Bureau

Veritas, ont bénéficié de nombreuses innovations et sont maintenant des références dans leur domaine

largement utilisés de par le monde. Dans le domaine du sloshing, Bureau Veritas a su développer une

expertise de haut niveau grâce à des essais sur maquette indépendants, à l’emploi de la CFD et à des

travaux sur les statistiques des pressions de sloshing. Enfin des travaux importants ont été menés sur

les méthodologies de design, permettant de faire le lien entre l’approche calcul direct et l’approche

réglementaire.

SUMMARY

The Confederation of European Maritime Technology Societies (CEMT) 2013 Award in recognition

of a significant contribution to the European Maritime Industry was made to the Research Department

of the Marine Division of Bureau Veritas for their outstanding research in the field of hydrodynamics

and hydro-structure. This paper gives a quick overview of the past 20 years of innovations in these

fields. HydroStar and Homer software, developed by Bureau Veritas, are based on many innovations,

and are now at the state of the art level and widely used worldwide. Bureau Veritas has developed a

very high level expertise in sloshing, based on independent sloshing model tests, the use of CFD and

research on statistical laws to extrapolate the sloshing pressures. Finally important work has been done

on design methodologies that enables to treat the direct computation approach and the rule approach in

a consistent manner.

1. INTRODUCTION

Annually the CEMT (Confederation of

European Maritime Technology Societies) to

which ATMA is member, grants awards in

recognition of the outstanding contribution

made to the success of the European maritime

industry by an individual, company or

organisation. The 2013 award have been

granted to 4 engineers of the Research

Department of Bureau Veritas, so it appears of

interest to remind, in their main lines, the

studies which have been performed within this

Tous droits de reproduction réservés – ATMA 2014

department since some 20 years ago, in the

domain of competence of the recipients:

hydrodynamic and hydro-structure.

The aim is not to detail all research studies

performed during this period at Bureau Veritas.

We shall remind only that the competences of

this department extend on a large set of

disciplines: hydrodynamic, mooring, hydro-

structure, tests and measurements, sloshing,

ice, structural integrity and risk, safety, energy

and environment, design methodologies, ….

2. HYDRODYNAMIC

Referring hydrodynamic, the most important

Bureau Veritas bringing is surely the

development of the HydroStar software,

seakeeping software which solves the potential

equations of the fluid dynamic around floating

or fixed structures. It is the result of research

studies started in 1984 at the Ecole Centrale de

Nantes during the Xia-Bo Chen Phd thesis,

then continued at the Institut Français du

Pétrole, then at Bureau Veritas since 1991.

HydroStar is now used by all the Bureau

Veritas technical teams, and by external clients

(some fifty licences have been sold all around

the world).

We shall not describe here the software

functions in detail but provide a quick view of

some innovative functionalities which have

been developed by Dr Chen and his team and

which now make HydroStar one of the best

computer code of this type in the world.

2.1. Efficient algorithms

Since its design HydroStar has been thought to

be quick and robust.

The Green function is a very complex

mathematical function, which is the basic brick

used to solve the potential flows. If its

formulation is known since very long time, the

methods to calculate it may be different. The

calculation of the Green function in HydroStar

is based on a separation between a singular

part (Rankine) and a regular part. To save

calculation time, the regular part is

approximated by a series of polynomials, the

coefficients of which have been pre-calculated

and integrated in the computer code.

Figure 1 : Regular parts of the Green function

with infinite depth (upper part) and

complements for limited depth (lower part)

Always in the aim to improve the calculation

time, the used solvers to solve the integral

equations have been optimised, and the

software thought in a modular way.

2.2. Validations and comparisons

Since its design, the HydroStar code results

have been compared to existing analytical

results of simple geometries (half sphere,

cylinder, …) or to model test basin results for

more realistic geometries. Today a testing

procedure has been set up which compares

automatically the results of each new version

with reference results in view to verify the

code non-regression.

The HydroStar code results are also regularly

compared to competing codes. The result is

that HydroStar is a very robust code, as well

for the meshing convergence than for the

irregular frequencies treatment, all with a

calculation speed rather higher than the

average. The differences are more visible for

the second order loads, as illustrated here after.


Figure 2 : Added masses and added damping

comparison with a half sphere analytical

results

Figure 3 : Test-calculation comparison for a

side by side tanker and FPSO

Figure 4 : Different computer codes drift loads

comparison

2.3. Second order loads

HydroStar presents significant differences with

its competitors by the innovations in the

calculation of the second order loads. The

classical theory considers two methods for the

calculation of these loads.

The near field method is based on a direct

integration of the hull pressures. This method

presents a very low convergence: it requires a

very fine mesh to obtain good results.

The far field method allows to solve this

dependence to the mesh, but its application is

limited to horizontal plane drift loads, and for

only one floater.

An intermediate method, called middle field,

has been introduced in HydroStar. It uses a

control surface which surrounds the floater and

allows to obtain the advantages of the two

previous methods: determination of all

components of the loads, applicability to multi-

floaters simulation, drift loads and low

frequency loads O(), very good

convergence with respect to the mesh.

Figure 5 : Control surface used by the mean

field method


Figure 6 : Drift loads: mesh influence for the

near and mean field methods

The calculation of the second order low

frequency loads, resulting of the interaction

between two wave components with close

frequencies is very time consuming. An

approximated method, proposed by Newman,

allows a simple calculation of these low

frequency loads from the drift loads (mean

loads). But, this approach is only valid for very

low frequencies. An intermediate approach has

been introduced in HydroStar, based on an

innovative formulation, and it provides much

better results than the Newman approximation,

with a calculation time scarcely greater.

Figure 7 : Comparison of the second order

loads obtained with the complete QTF, the

Newman approximation, and the

approximation O()

2.4. Introduction of dissipation in the

potential flows

The potential theory presents the great

advantage to allow very efficiently solving of

the fluid dynamic equations, taking into

account very precisely the inertial effects

(waves, behaviour on wave, …), but locally it

leads to neglect the dissipation from the

viscous and turbulent origins, and so can lead

to very bad previsions for some pathological

cases.

A possibility offered by HydroStar is to

introduce a damping effect in the potential

equations, not to simulate precisely the viscous

flow, but to globally take into account the

resulting energy dissipation.

A damping area can be created on the free

surface. It is, for example, the case when two

ships side by side are simulated. In this case;

the potential theory has a tendency to over-

estimate the wave height between the two

ships. The introduction of a damping, which is

introduced by HydroStar directly at the level of

the integral equations which include the

dissipation area, allows to obtain a realistic

simulation of this case.

Figure 8 : Test-calculation comparison of the

surface motions between two barges

The other application case is the tank sloshing

simulation. The potential theory predicts, when

the excitation frequency is equal to the tank

free frequency, an infinite liquid motion

associated to infinite loads. Effectively, there is

no damping of potential origin. The

introduction of a numerical dissipation on the

tank walls allows to limit the sloshing to

realistic values, and to allow the calculation of

the ship dynamic coupled with her tanks

(tanker, LNG, FPSO).


Figure 9 : Ship motion coupled with her tanks

3. HYDRO-STRUCTURE

The developments in the hydro-structure area

started at the beginning of the 2000s. It appears

necessary at that time to be able to link the ship

behaviour on wave performed with HydroStar

with the structural calculations performed with

a finite elements software (Nastran, Abaqus,

…). The exploratory studies, initiated by Sime

Malenica, lead in 2012 to the Homer software.

This software transfers the calculated pressures

by HydroStar to the ship structure mesh, then

collects the stresses and the deformations

calculated by the structural computer code. But

this apparent simplicity hides in fact numerous

more complex details to assure a robust and

efficient link.

3.1. An original solution to transfer the

pressures

The coupling requires a transfer of the

pressures calculated by the hydrodynamic code

to the structure mesh. But in general the

considered mesh to solve the hydrodynamic

problem differs from the mesh used to solve

the structural problem. The more intuitive

method consists to interpolate the pressures of

the hydrodynamic mesh toward the structural

mesh, but this method is not robust as the

interpolation introduces errors, and the loads

obtained by pressure integration on the

structural mesh are then different than the

loads considered in the seakeeping code! The

result is that the model is not correctly

balanced for the finite element calculations.

Figure 10 : Structure and hydrodynamic mesh

of a container ship

Homer uses an original method which comes

from the core of HydroStar using the

properties of the Green function. HydroStar is

only used to solve the flow around the ship.

Then it calculates the pressures directly at the

Gauss points of the structural mesh (no

interpolation). The global loads are then

obtained by pressure integration on the

structural mesh, and the ship motions are

solved by Homer. This method assures a

perfect equilibrium of the finite element

model, whatever are the differences between

the hydrodynamic and structural mesh. Homer

is, as we know, the only hydro-structure

software in the world that applies this method.

3.2. Hydro-elastic calculations

For large size ships it has become necessary to

take into account dynamically the ship girder

main deformations. The method used by

Homer is based on a modal approach. The

method is not new, but it is used here with a

3D approach for the structure. The free modes

of the dry ship are obtained from a modal

analysis of the finite element model. The

deformations are then transferred to the

hydrodynamic model, and the ship motions

and deformations are solved in the same way

than for a rigid body, the only difference being

that there are now N deformation modes

instead of 6.

The coupled elastic hydrodynamic behaviour

solution leads to resonance peaks at the

structural natural frequencies, which can

induce a significant increase of the fatigue

damage of the structural details.

The modal approach has the advantage to

allow to take into account some free mode

resonances of the ship hull girder, but

considers a cut-off of the ship deformation

basis. The direct approach (also called quasi

static) does not take into account the structure


dynamic, but take into account all degrees of

freedom of the structural model. The approach

used in Homer is hybrid; it combines the two

previous approaches: the response is split

between a quasi static response and a dynamic

response. The quasi static response is

calculated by a direct approach and the

dynamic response by the modal approach. The

so obtained total response combines the

advantages of the two previous methods.

Figure 11 : Free mode of a container ship and

application of the deformation to the

hydrodynamic mesh

Figure 12 : Transfer function of a hatch corner

stress

3.3. Whipping simulation

The large container ships are subject to

whipping, transient vibration induced by the

wave impacts on the ship bow, with a possible

significant increase of the stresses in the ship

structure. The hydro-elastic model previously

presented can be used to simulate this

phenomenon. To do so a simplified model for

the impact loads is introduced, and the ship

motions are solved in time domain, taking into

account the hydrostatic deformations and

incident wave non linear loads. Studies are

always under progress to improve the impact

load prediction.

Figure 13 : Midship section bending moment

with whipping

3.4. A very general software

Homer, even if it has been developed to

answer to an urgent need of hydroelastic

simulations of container ships, can be applied

for any kind of ship or offshore structures, and

for any type of simulation (quasi static,

springing, whipping, multi-bodies).

Figure 14 : Homer simulations of different

units

4. SLOSHING

The sloshing phenomenon in LNG carriers

corresponds to the LNG motion induced by the

ship motions during navigation or at fixed

point. The sloshing is a multi scale

phenomenon highly non-linear and can be

violent, i.e., can induce damages in LNG,

FLNG or FSRU tanks. Since the 2000s,


research studies have been performed at

Bureau Veritas by Mirela Zalar and Louis

Diebold, based on the experimental and

numerical approaches.

4.1. CFD calculations

The target of the CFD (Computational Fluid

Dynamics) is to evaluate the flow cinematic

and the loads applied to the structure which

lays behind the insulation system. The Flow3D

code, used at the beginning has been

substituted by the OpenFOAM code which is a

parallel CFD code and an "open source" which

can simulate complex flows (large scale

simulations, RANSE model, compressible

flows…). This calculation tool has been

validated by numerous comparisons with test

results.

Within the scope of the European project

Marstruct, a series of tests have been

performed in a quasi 2D tank. The agreement

between tests and OpenFOAM (CFD

calculations) are excellent for the free surface

elevation, the applied moment by the fluid on

the tank walls and for the pressure as

illustrated on figure 15.

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20

Pre

ssure

at sensor N

°3

Time (s)

Case B - T=T0 - Sensor N°6

Comparison Experiments / Numerics

Num.

Exp.

-4

-2

0

2

4

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Glo

bal T

orqu

e

Time (s)

Case A - T=T0 - Global Torque

Comparison Experiments / Numerics

Exp.

Num.

Figure 15 : Comparison between tests and CFD

calculations of the surface elevation, pressure and

global moment induced by the fluid on the tank

Within the scope of a cooperation with Ecole

Centrale de Nantes, BV performs its own

sloshing test programs. Numerous filling

configurations, motion amplitudes and

frequencies have been tested. The comparisons

between the measured loads and the loads

calculated by Flow3D and OpenFOAM are

presented on figure 16.

-100

-50

0

50

100

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Fy(N

)

Time (s)

comparison -Flow3d-OpenFoam-EXP- test586

Amplitude=1m

Frequency=0.854

OpenFoam 1m Fy

Flow3D 1m Fy

EXP essai 586 Fy

Figure 16 : Comparison of the global loads

given by tests and CFD calculations (Flow3D

& OpenFOAM) – 20%H – 1m – f=0.854Hz.

The computers today allow to perform long

simulations of several hours for irregular sea

states, to extract the statistics of the loads and

to compare them to the measured loads during

tests. Here also the statistical comparison is

very good.

Figure 17 : Comparison of the global loads on

irregular waves and convergence with different

meshes (simulation of 3 hours)

4.2. Dynamic gauges

An innovation of Bureau Veritas in CFD

calculations has been the development of a

dynamic gauges module.

In principle, the CFD calculations providing all

data at each time step and in all mesh can

provide a complete representation of the

sloshing impacts on the tank walls.

Unfortunately the CFD studies must be only

concentrated on predefined areas (as for the

sloshing test on small scale model) as the

storage of all the data at each time step

requires too much place on a storage disc.

To solve this problem a specific post-treatment

called "Dynamic gauge" has been developed at


Bureau Veritas. At each time step, the flow is

analysed and the eventual sloshing impacts are

detected and recorded when the pressure or the

velocity normal to wall flow exceeds a

threshold fixed by the user level. When an

impact is detected (pressure or normal velocity

exceeding the threshold) a "dynamic gauge" is

created at the impact point. Each impact is then

recorded within a time window also fixed by

the user for a later verification. Finally this

specific post-treatment tool allows to obtain a

complete knowledge of all sloshing impacts on

the tank walls and that during all the

simulation time.

The following figure 18 represents all sloshing

impacts detected on the tank top during a

simulation of a real sea state (i.e. irregular

motions and simulation corresponding to a

duration of 5 hours).

Figure 18 : Map of impacts on the tank top for

a sea state simulation during 5 hours at real

scale with OpenFOAM

4.3. Independent tests

Thanks to a cooperation with Ecole Centrale

de Nantes and to GTT which provided a tank

model, Bureau Veritas has been able to have

its own tests in view to obtain its own expertise

leading to the writing of the guidance note

NI554 which describes the method to evaluate

the sloshing loads and the tank wall scantlings.

In particular this note indicates the tests to be

performed, the pressure gauges to be used, the

sampling frequencies, the identification of the

pressure peaks, the type of statistical post-

treatment …

Figure 19 : Sloshing test on hexapod

4.4. Sloshing statistics

The applied approach for the LNG tank design

was based at the beginning of the 2000s on a

called short term approach, using only the 3h

pressures obtained on some design sea states.

The method is now a long term method taking

into account all sea states encountered by the

ship. This method requires the extrapolation of

the test results on durations much longer than

the test durations.

The Weibull distribution is generally applied

by industry as statistical adjustment for

pressure samples. In view to determine if this

Weibull law is the best adapted adjustment law

for peak pressures, Bureau Veritas performed a

specific test campaign to obtain a sample of

480 hours (96 tests of 5 hours), instead of the

maximum 30 hours generally considered, and

adjusted the pressure samples using different

techniques: Weibull law, Pareto or GEV law,

POT method, Maxima Block method. The

studies have shown that the Weibull law leads

systematically to underestimate the extreme

pressures. On the opposite, the Pareto law, or

the Maxima Block method allow a better

statistical evaluation of the extreme pressures.


Figure 20 : Extrapolation of a 5h duration test

with a Weibull and a Pareto law

Figure 21 : Sloshing test of 480h duration

5. DESIGN METHODOLOGIES

All these direct calculation software which

allow to precisely simulate the hydrodynamic

and structural response of a ship under a given

sea state are of no use if they are not associated

with a design methodology. The target of a

direct calculation procedure, or a rule

approach, is to provide the scantling of a ship

or offshore structure versus the environmental

and operational conditions which will be

encountered. It is necessary to evaluate, on the

whole life time of the unit, the extreme

responses in terms of stresses, deformations or

motions, and the fatigue damage.

The rule procedures are more and more

substituted, or complemented, by direct

approaches, based on deterministic

calculations (for example whipping

calculation) or by tests (sloshing tests). To

assure the consistency between these two

approaches, it is necessary that both are based

on the same hypothesis in terms of

environmental and operational conditions. It

will be therefore even possible to use direct

calculations to validate or modify rules.

5.1. Direct calculation methodology

There is a great number of types of

deterministic simulation models (HydroStar,

Homer, CFD, ….) from the simplest and less

calculation time consuming models till the

more precise and more time consuming ones.

All are unfortunately not able to simulate the

total life of a structure (25 years for a ship;

more than 50 years for an offshore structure).

It is therefore necessary to be able to simplify

the encountered sea state statistics to be able to

have shorter simulations.

The most complete description is given by a

statistic of the sea states classed versus

significant height and peak period. These

tables are used for a long term approach which

consists to simulate all the life time of the unit.

The use of this approach is limited to very

simplified deterministic simulations (linear

approach for example).

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

0 0 1 3 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 13

0 1 3 6 7 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 26

0 0 2 7 13 13 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 48

0 1 5 16 24 20 11 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 83

0 2 14 33 39 27 13 5 1 0 0 0 0 133

0 0 7 32 57 51 28 11 3 1 0 0 0 0 191

0 2 22 62 74 49 21 6 2 0 0 0 0 238

0 10 50 77 56 24 7 2 0 0 0 0 226

0 1 9 12 6 2 0 0 0 0 31

1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 Total

0 0 0 2 21 93 199 249 209 129 62 25 8 2 1 0 0 0 1 000

< 1

�

Up-crossing period Tz

Total

4 - 5

3 - 4

2 - 3

1 - 2

8 - 9

7 - 8

6 - 7

5 - 6

Sig

nif

ican

t w

ave

he

igh

t (m

)

> 16

15 - 16

14 - 15

13 - 14

12 - 13

11 - 12

10 - 11

9 - 10

Figure 22 : IACS sea states table

With certain hypothesis it is possible to reduce

the sea states table to only some design sea

states for which the extreme responses will be

determined: This is the short term approach.

It is sometime necessary to simplify even more

the sea state description to consider only one

wave, or one group of waves: It is then the

design wave approach.

Evidently, each time that we simplify the

environmental description, accuracy is lost for

the sea state representation, but is gained for

the ship response simulation with the used of a

more precise simulation software.

The optimal design approach is the approach

which will combine these different approaches

to step by step reduce the simulation


conditions and increase the complexity of the

simulations.

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

-50 -25 0 25 50Time (s)

Wave

Figure 23 : Irregular design wave

The extreme simplification of the sea

conditions consists to delete the hydrodynamic

calculations and to apply formulas which

provide directly the loads to be applied to the

structure. It is the approach selected for the

classification society rules. These require to

verify the structure with a limited number of

loading cases, indicating each time the load to

be applied. These loading cases are in fact a

rule simplification of the design waves which

are finally a simplification of some 70 000 sea

states that the ship will see during her life.

5.2. Direct calculation and rules

development

When the consistency is found between the

direct calculation and the rules approach, it is

possible to use the calculation for the rules

evolution.

A first example has been, within the IACS, to

harmonize the tanker and bulk carrier rules.

Bureau Veritas was in charge of a working

group dealing with the scantling loads. At this

occasion the application of the design waves

has been generalised, and all the loading

combination coefficients as well as the sea

pressure have been calibrated applying this

approach. The application of the design wave

approach has also been applied to justify the

selection of a limited number of the rule

loading cases, for fatigue and for extreme

responses.

In addition, a refine analysis of the

contribution of the stress cycles to the

cumulative fatigue has shown, because more

robust, that it is better to define the rule loads

for fatigue with a probability level of 10-2

(there were before defined at 10-4

). This

approach, duly justified by calculations, is a

major modification in the fatigue rule

approach, and a lot of pedagogy and patience

have been necessary to convince our IACS

partners.

N25

s ref

P ref * N25

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1E+00 1E+02 1E+04 1E+06 1E+08

Cumulative number of cycles

Str

ess

ran

ge s

x = 1.15

x = 0.8

10-6

10-4

10-2

1

Probability

Figure 24 : Weibull law distribution shape

parameter influence on the fatigue life time

Other works in progress within IACS planned

to be finalized at the end of 2014, aim to

redefine the rule vertical wave bending

moment formula, using direct calculation

results. The calculations effectively allow to

identify the different components of the rule

formula: wave parameter, non dimensional

part, non linearity coefficient. The results show

that the difference between the current formula

and the calculation are more important for

containerships that for tankers or bulk carriers.

The new formula, which are always under

discussion, aim to decrease this difference.

0.50

0.70

0.90

1.10

1.30

1.50

1.70

1.90

0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0

Cb / Cw

Lin

ear

VB

M / R

ule

valu

e

Bulk Carriers Oil Tankers

Containerships General Cargo

LNG Carrier Passengerships & Ro-Ro

Figure 25 : Comparison between the rule

vertical bending moment and the calculated

moment by a direct approach


6. CONCLUSION

The Research and Development works allow

Bureau Veritas to develop its own tools and

methods at the upper level of the State of the

Art in view to acquire an independent expertise

to develop its classification rules, answer to the

client questions, and act within IACS and the

maritime and offshore scientific community.

Research and Development is based on a

continuous questioning in view to maintain a

newer as possible eye on the problems which

we have to face.

Within the future research axis in Bureau

Veritas, the CFD is called to be extended. The

CFD, which is used since some ten years to

solve the ship resistance and ship hull

optimisation has now reached a sufficient

maturity to begin to be used for ship behaviour

on waves, which requires to be able to simulate

irregular sea state during long time. It will

allow so, to more precisely answer to the

slamming, green water on deck, ship behaviour

on extreme waves, wave added resistance,

local and violent flows problems. The aim for

the coming years is to develop CFD tools and

to include them in the global methodological

approach which will have to efficiently apply

the linear, non linear potential codes, and the

CFD to obtain the more complete and precise

design procedure.

Another important research axis deals with the

dynamic simulation of one or various offshore

structures coupled with their mooring lines,

risers, including the effects of current, wind,

the second order loads, the wave non linearity,

the large motion amplitudes.

Finally, the rule development is always at the

working agenda to allow to propose rules each

time more precise, but also easier to be

understood, and more coherent with the direct

approaches.

7. REFERENCES

7.1. Hydrodynamic

[1] Evaluation de la fonction de Green du

problème de diffraction/radiation en

profondeur d’eau finie, 4èmes Journées

de l’Hydrodynamique, 1993

[2] On the Irregular Frequencies Appearing

in Wave Diffraction-Radiation

Solutions, S. Malenica and X.B. Chen,

Int. J. of Offshore and Polar Eng., 1998,

vol.8, no.2

[3] Hydrodynamics in Offshore and Naval

Applications, Chen X-B., 6th

International Conference on

Hydrodynamics, Perth, Australia, 2004

[4] Middle-field formulation for the

computation of wave-drift loads, J. Eng.

Math., 2007, vol.59

[5] Second-Order Wave Loads on a LNG

Carrier in Multi-Directional Waves, M.

Renaud, F. Rezende, O. Waals, X.B.

Chen and R. van Dijk, OMAE, 2008

[6] First and Second Order Wave-Current

Interactions for Floating Bodies, C.

Monroy, Y. Giorgiutti and X.B. Chen,

OMAE, 2012

[7] Hydrodynamic issues of FLNG systems,

X.B. Chen, L. Diebold and G. de

Hauteclocque, OMAE, 2013

[8] A Practical O() Approximation of

Low Frequency Wave Loads, C.

Monroy, G. de Hautecloque and X.B.

Chen, OMAE, 2013

7.2. Hydro-structure

[9] Hydroelastic response of a barge to

impulsive and non-impulsive wave

loads, Malenica S., Molin B., Remy F.

& Senjanovic I., 3rd Int. Conf. On

Hydroelasticity, 2003

[10] Hydro structure interactions in

seakeeping, Malenica S., International

Workshop on Coupled Methods in

Numerical Dynamics, 2007

[11] Consistent hydro-structure interface for

evaluation of global structural responses

in linear seakeeping, Malenica S.,

Stumpf E., Sireta F.X. & Chen X.B,

OMAE 2008

[12] 3DFEM – 3DBEM model for springing

and whipping analyses of ships,

Malenica S. & Tuitman J., RINA Conf.

on Design and Operation of Container

Vessels, 2008

[13] Fully coupled seakeeping, slamming and

whipping calculations, Tuitman J.T. &

Malenica S, Journal of Engineering for

Maritime Environment Vol. 223, No

M3, 2009


[14] Consistent hydro structure interface for

partial structural model, Sireta F.X.,

Malenica S., Chen X.B. & Marchal N,

Deep water Offshore Specialty

Symposium, 2009

[15] Transfer of non-linear seakeeping loads

to FEM model using quasi static

approach, Tuitman J.T., Sireta F.X.,

Malenica S. & Bosman T.N, ISOPE

2009

[16] Local hydro-structure interactions due to

slamming, Malenica S., Sireta F.X.,

Tomasevic S., Tuitman J.T. &

Schipperen I., MARSTRUCT 2009

[17] Validation of the global hydroelastic

model for springing & whipping of

ships, Derbanne Q., Malenica S.,

Tuitman J.T., Bigot F. & Chen X.B,

PRADS 2010

[18] Discussion on hydroelastic contribution

to fatigue damage of containerships, Q.

Derbanne, F.X. Sireta, F. Bigot and G.

de Hauteclocque, 6th Int. Conf. On

Hydroelasticity, 2012

[19] Global Hydroelastic Ship Response:

Comparison of numerical model and

WILS model tests, F. Bigot, Q.

Derbanne, F.X.Sireta, S. Malenica,

ISOPE 2011

[20] Hydroelastic response of a ship

structural detail to seakeeping loads

using a top-down scheme, FX Sireta, Q.

Derbanne, F. Bigot, S. Malenica and E.

Baudin, OMAE 2012

7.3. Sloshing

[21] Dynamic coupling of seakeeping and

sloshing, S. Malenica, M. Zalar & X.B.

Chen, ISOPE 2003

[22] Sloshing effects accounting for dynamic

coupling between vessel and tank liquid

motion, M. Zalar, L. Diebold, E. Baudin,

J. Henry and X.B. Chen, OMAE 2007

[23] Design Sloshing Loads for LNG

Membrane Tanks, NI554 DT R00 E,

Guidance Note, May 2011

[24] Statistical Post-Processing of a Long

Duration Test, B. Fillon, L. Diebold, J.

Henry, Q. Derbanne, E. Baudin and G.

Parmentier, ISOPE 2011

[25] Experimental and Numerical

Investigations of Internal Global Forces

for Violent Irregular Excitations in

LNGC Prismatic Tanks, L. Diebold, N.

Moirod, E. Baudin and T. Gazzola,

ISOPE 2011

[26] Détermination des Chargements dus au

Sloshing. Application aux unités

flottantes d’opération et de liquéfaction

de gaz (FLNG, FSRU), L. Diebold, N.

Moirod, T. Gazzola and E. Baudin,

ATMA 2012

[27] Dynamic Probes: an on-the-fly CFD

Plug-in for Sloshing Impact Assessment,

T. Gazzola and L. Diebold, ISOPE 2013

[28] Bureau Veritas Sloshing Model Tests &

CFD Calculations within ISOPE

Benchmark, E. Baudin, L. Diebold, B.

Pettinotti, J.M. Rousset and M. Weber,

ISOPE 2013

[29] Extreme Values Theory Applied to

Sloshing Pressure Peaks, B. Fillon, J.

Henry, L. Diebold and Q. Derbanne,

ISOPE 2013

[30] Statistical Behaviour of Global and

Local Sloshing Key Parameters, L.

Diebold, Q. Derbanne and T. Gazzola,

ISOPE 2013

7.4. Long term methodologies

[31] Long-term non-linear bending moment

prediction, Q. Derbanne, J.F. Leguen, T.

Dupau, E. Hamel, OMAE 2008

[32] Evaluation of Rule-Based Fatigue

Design Loads Associated at a New

Probability Level, Q. Derbanne, F.

Rezende, G. de Hautecloque and X.B.

Chen, ISOPE 2011

[33] Comparison of Design Wave Approach

and Short Term Approach with

Increased Wave Height in the

Evaluation of Whipping Induced

Bending Moment, Derbanne Q., Bigot F.

and de Hauteclocque G, OMAE 2012

[34] Comparison of different equivalent

design waves with spectral analysis, G.

de Hauteclocque, Q. Derbanne and A.

El-Gharbaoui, OMAE 2012


[35] Non Linearity of Extreme Vertical

Bending Moment: Comparison of

Design Wave Approaches and Short

Term Approaches, Q. Derbanne; G. de

Hauteclocque and T. Mienhaou, OMAE

2013

[36] Non Linearity of Extreme Vertical

Bending Moment: Discussion on the

Existing Rule Formulation, Q.

Derbanne, G. de Hauteclocque and T.

Mienhaou, OMAE 2013

[37] Design Wave Selection for Strength

Assessment of Floating Structures, Q.

Derbanne, G. de Hauteclocque, A. El-

Gharbaoui, P. de Belizal, PRADS 2013

Documents

ATMA 2014 20 YEARS OF RESEARCH IN HYDRODYNAMIC AND … · 2015. 11. 27. · Pétrole, then at Bureau Veritas since 1991. HydroStar is now used by all the Bureau Veritas technical