Abstract

Hydrodynamic force coefficients are important parameters in design and assessment of marine risers. The hydrodynamic coefficients are widely used for assessing marine riser responses due to floater motion excitation and vortex-induced vibrations (VIV). Traditionally, the hydrodynamic coefficients have been obtained from physical model tests on short rigid riser sections. Recently, the offshore industry has started to use computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis for predicting the hydrodynamic coefficients due to the recent advancement of CFD software and high-performance computing capabilities, but a reliable CFD modeling practice is requested for CFD analysis to be a more widely accepted prediction tool in the industry. A joint industry effort has been made for developing and verifying the reliable CFD modeling practice through a working group of the Reproducible Offshore CFD JIP. In the working group, a CFD modeling practice document was written based on existing practices already validated for model test data, and verified by blind validations with three CFD practitioners. The first year works are focused on the bare riser with circular cross-section, and the second year work will be extended to the other riser sections such as staggered buoyancy module and straked riser.

This paper presents the working group’s first-year verification activities for a bare riser with circular cross-section. The verification works covers three test problems: 1) stationary simulation in steady current, 2) forced-oscillation in calm water, 3) forced-oscillation in steady current. In the stationary simulation, mean drag coefficient, standard deviation of lift coefficient, and Strouhal numbers are compared. In the forced-oscillation simulation in calm water, the fully-submerged riser section oscillates with a sinusoidal motion, and damping and added mass coefficients are compared. In the forced-oscillation simulation in current, the riser section oscillates in cross-flow direction to the steady current, and lift coefficient and added mass coefficient are compared. By following the modeling practice, the CFD predictions are consistent with each other and close to the model test data for a majority of test cases.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.