r IECNNI$CHE UP1fl1ERSngg

Laboratorium voor
SCheepshydrmhI
rchief
Mekelweg 2, 2628 CD Delit
'ICL 016- 1868/s . Fa 015 78183S

EFFECT OF SIZE AND POSITION OF SUPPORTiNG BÔYS ON THE DYNAMICS OF

SPREAD MOORING SYSTEMS

Luis 0. Garza-Rios
Michael M. Bernitsas
Department of Naval Architecture
and Marine Engineering
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,Michigan

ABSTRACT total length of the mooring line

Vessels moored in deep water may require buoys to support
part of the weight of the mooring lines. The effects that ( 1wt = +
size, and location of supporting buoys have on the dynamics total lencth of AC
of Spread Mooring Sysems SMS at different water depths total length of SC/location of buoy along the
are assessed by studying the slow motion nonlinear
mooring line
dynamics of the system. Stability analysis and bifurcation In mass of vessel
theory are used to determine the changes in SMS dynamics m8
in deep water based as functions of buoy parameters. mass of buoy
Catastrophe sets in a two-dimensional parametric design n number of mooring lines
space are developed from bifurcation boundaries, which number of buoys
separate regions of qualitatively different dynamics. SI anchored catenary segment
Stability analysis defines the morphogeneses occurring as S2 suspended catenary segment
bifurcation boundaries are crossed. The mathematical model S2A segment of suspended catenary running from
of the moored vessel consists of the horizontal plane - the buoy to the lowest point of SC
surge. sway and yaw - fifth-order, large drift, low speed S2B segment of suspended catenary running from
maneuvering equations. Mooring lines made of chains are the vessel to the lowest point of SC
modeled quasistatically as catenaries supported by buoys SC suspended catenary
including nonlinear drag and touchdown. Steady excitation SMS Spread Moonng S)stem
from current, wind and mean wave drift are tnodeled. horizontal tension components of SI (AC)
Numerical applications are limited to steady current and shOw
that buoys affect both the static and dynamic loss of horizontal tension components of S2 (SC)
stability of the sYstem, and may even cause chaotic Uc current speed
response. (x.v,z) inertial reference frame/position of vessel CG
with respect to inertial frame
(x5,8.z8) position of the center of gravity of buoy with
NOMENCLATURE respect to the inertial frame
AC anchored catenary
(X.Y.Z) vessel fixed coordinate system
CG center of gravity
(X3. Y8. ZB) buoy fixed coordinate system
D8 buoy diameter
FPSO Roatin Production Storage and Offload coordinates of the anchoring point oat the sea
h water depth floor
depth of AC body fixed coordinates of the vessel faii'léad
depth of segment S2A of SC a current angle with respect to (x,v,:) frame
depth of segment S2B of SC Q horizontal angle between the X-axis and the
L length of vessel mooring line.
I. INTRODUCTION
Station-keeping of ships and other floating production
systems cart.' be achieved via mooring and dynamic
positioning. In recent years. the design problem of
moorirg FPSOs has gained considerable attention as the
water depth of oil reserves, gas and other natural 'resources
has increased. Presently. station-keeping in deep waters
(700 - 1800 meters) via FPSOs is generally achieved by
dynamic positioning 15, 19]. while mooring takes place
mostly in shallow and intermediate water depths (less than
700 meters). The next logical step toward achieving an
efficient and less expensive station-keeping design would be
to develop a hybrid system with dynamic positioning and
mooring. To design sound mooring systems in deep waters,
however, it is necessary to gain a qualitative understanding
of their slow motion dynamics in such an environment.
Several studies show that mooring systems dynamics
strongly depend on certain design parameters, such as the
number of mooring lines; the fairlead position, material,
orientation, pretension of lines, etc. [1-4. 6. 7, 10, II. 13.
16, 18, 20]. A preliminary study of the nonlinear dynamics
of Turret Mooring Systems (TMS) in relatively deep waters
(on the order of 1200 meters) without buoy supports [7]
shows that the system tends to lose its dynamic stability
with increasing water depth. In deep waters, the weight
exerted by the mooring lines on the vessel and onto
themselves may lead to high stresses on the vessel and
mooring line breakage. This problem can be solved by
supporting the line weight by buoys, utilizing different
types of lines (such as chains, synthetic fiber ropes, and
steel cables), or a combination of both. In this work, the
dynamics of mooring systems with anchoring chains and
supporting buoys are studied, and the effects of the position
and size of the buoys on the system are assessed based on
the design methodology for mooring systems developed at
the University of Michigan since 1983 [2, 3, 4, 10, 18].
Section 11 describes the mathematical model of the system,
mooring line model, and external excitation. The state
space representation of a spread rhooring system with
supporting buoys, and the equations to solve for system
equilibria are derived in Section III. In Section IV. stability
analysis is performed and bifurcation theory used to assess
the behavior of two different geometries of a four-line, four-
buoy system. Catastrophe sets around the principal
equilibrium position are constructed to discern the system
dynamics for different water depths and buoy size and
position along the mooring lines. These sets reveal that the
effects of buoy size and position on the system dynamics
vary widely with system geometry. In Section V. the
feasibility of mooring in deeper waters with buoy supported
chains is discussed.
Ii. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The slow-motion dynamics of a Spread Mooring System
(SMS) with chain mooring lines and their supporting buoys
is modeled in this section in terms of the equations of
motion and the kinematics of the vessel and each supporting
buoy, the mooring line catenary equations of the system,
and external excitation consisting of time independent
current, wind and mean wave drift. The vessel hvdrodynamic
maneuvering model is based on the large drift angle. low
speed. fifth-order maneuvering equations [21. 22]. The
equations of motion of the system consist of the horizontal
plane - surge. sway and yaw - slow motions for the vesel.
and motions or each supporting buoy in surge. sway nd
heave. First the mooring line model with one supporting
buoy is derived.
11.1. Mooring Line Model
The mooring lines of the system are model'ed
quasistatically as a submerged catenary partially supported
with buoys. To facilitate discussion, the concepts describ'ed
in this paper apply to SMS with a single buoy supporting
each cacenary. A complete SMS mathematical model with
any number of buoys per line is derived by Garza-Rios and
Bernitsas, 1999 [81.
Figure 1 shows the general geometry of a submerged twp.
dimensional catenary whose weight is partially supported b
a single buoy in water depth h. The inertial frame (x.z
has its origin at the anchoring point on the ocean floor.
The catenary is divided into two segments. Segment SI
consists of the portion that spans from the mooriIg
terminal on the ocean floor to the supporting buoy, and is
labeled as AC (Anchored Catenary) [9]. Segment S2
connects the buoy to the floating body. is labeled as SC
(Suspended Catenary) [17]. and is further divided into
segments S2A and S2R. as shown in Figure 1. Segment S2A
runs from the point of connection of the buoy to the Iowest
point of the SC. and segment S2B runs from the lowest
point 'of the SC to the point of attachment on the vessl.
The geometric properties of the catenary shown in Figure 1
are: P. the total length of the horizontal projection of AC:
.
the length of the horizontal projection of the suspendd
part of AC: d. the horizontal distance of AC in the ground:
1,. the length of the horizontal projection of SC: '., tte
length of the horizontal projection of segment S2A: f,5,
the length of the horizontal projection of segment S2B; h.
the vertical distance of the lower point of the buoy from th'e
sea bed.. is also the depth of AC; h4. the vertical distanc
from the lower point of SC to the lower point of the buoy.
is also the depth of S2A: and ''B' the vertical distance from
the lower point of SC to the point of attachment to th
floating vessel, is also the depth of S2B. The following
relations hold:
(1
': =F4+P5 (2)
h=hIh,A+h.B (31
The total length of the catenary ('wT) is the sum of its
components F arid F.. which correspond to the lengths.
of segments SI and S2. respectively..
= 1w1 + (4)
The external forces acting on the catenary of Figure I are
[8]: F05 is the buoy drag force due to current: F!D is the,
drag force on segment SI of the catenary: F. and F:8D
are the drag components on segments S21 and S2B,
respectively; and F5. is .the force imposed by the floating:
 vessel on the moorinc line at the point of attachment .tôthe + Fcwa) (lOp
vessel (an end-point condition). In addition. L!.is the
current speed acting in the - .r direction.
The tension in each of the catenary end points is given by
(L + J. )r = NH + X{iY sin/3m - F.}
r.=.j72.+12. (5) - . (II)
1=1

where T. is the tension of segment S. and 1, and 7. are

the horizontal and vertical tension components of segthent
S.. respectively. The horizontal tension components of
segments SI and S2 are therefore denoted by 7 arid 7,.
The horizontal tension components of segments S2A and
S28 are equal in magnitude. The vertical tension component
of each of the three segments is.given by [8]:
sinh[.2LJ.
= 7,.
=7 Siflh[.B)
112. Fquations of. Motion
The catenary model presented in Subsection 11.1 is used
here to model the line forces exerted on the floating vessel.
Figure 2 shows the general geometry of a n-line SMS
showing 2 + B reference frames, where n8 is the number of
buoys in the system and 11 is the number of mooring lines
(B = n). In Figure 2, (.t. v. ) is the inertial reference frame
with its origin located at mooring terminal 1; (X,Y,Z) is
the vessel-fixed reference frame with its origin located at the
center of gravity of the vessel (CG); (X.Y'.Z) is the
buoy-fixed reference frame of the i-ih (1 = 1,.., n5) buoy.
with X pointing horizontally in the direction of its
anchoring point (x,v.:), and Z pointing upwards.
Figure 2 also shows that the deformation of the two
seements of each line, AC and SC. is two dimensional. Due
to the drag forces acting on the buoys, however, the two
segments of each line are in different vertical planes making
the overall deformation of each line three dimensional.
The slow motion dynamics of the system can be modeled
by three equations for the horizontal plane slow motions of
the vessel in surge. sway and yaw, and three equations of
motion in surge, sway and heave for each buoy in the
system.
The horizontal plane equations of motion of the vessel in
surge. sway and yaw are given by
where in is the mass of the vessel; ,n and m are the added
mass terms in surge and sway; L is the second moment of
inertia about the Z-axis; .1... is the added moment of inertia:
u. v, and ii, v are the relative velocities and accelerations
in surge and sway with respect to water; r and r are the
relative angular velocity and acceleration in yaw with respect
to water. For each mooring line in equations (7) - (9). (xe.
(6) 'ce) are the vessel-fixed coordinates of the mooring line
fairlead; $ is the. horizontal angle between the X -axis and
the mooring line measured counterclockwise from the vessel:
(7)
'BDx and F.80 are the .drag forces on segment 2B of SC in
the X and Y directions, respectively [8, 9, IS].
(8) In equations (9)-ill).. X. H' N are the velocity
dependent horizontal plane hull hydrodynaniic forces and
moment in surge. sway and yaw expressed in terms of the
large drift, slow motion derivatives. [10, 21. 22) as:
XH = X,, +Xuu+LXuuu2 +X.vr (12)
= }.v + + }.v5 + Yurur+ Y,.urIr1 + 1cjrlITI (13)
Nfl .'sv + Nuv + + + Nrr + Ndd
+N1,juvIr+ N.v2r (14)
In addition. Fsurge. and are the external forces
and moment acting on the vessel due to steady wind and
second order mean wave drift [3]. These forces are not
considered in the numerical applications in this study since
the focus here is the effect of buoys on SMS design.
The vessel kinematics are given by
.i= ucosi' - +1]. cosa , (15)
V=usinW+vcosW+USina , (16)
(17)
where (J is the current speed; a is the current angle with
direction as shOwn in Figure 2. and ' is the drift angle of
the vessel.
The equations of motion for each of the supporting buoys.
in surge. sway and heave are given by [8]:

(m+m)u(m+ni)rt = XH + {lcos/3w
-
(m +.4i" = 7j +Tjcos$' F'F., . (18)
(m' + )V = Tj' cos$ - - - F,1 . (19)
+ 1C'surge (9) p,(i)
)(I) = F" - 7;
j{7sini3'i - F}
(m + .4 sinh(__y5_J
= +
 (piJ '
"
(I)
f)
(20) x =[u. . r ..v. r. ty, v, x'. r'. .LJI
i=l .....n8,. (2)
for 1=1.
Then, the nonlinear model for the SMS with supporting
buoys takes the form:
For each buoy in the system, m9 is the buoy mass; A11,
A,, and A33 are the buoy added mass components in surge,
sway and heave; u8, v8 and w8 are the buoy relative XH + (rn + ,n,,)rv {i cos$' F,. } + F;ure
accelerations in surge. sway and heave: F8 is the net 1= (26
buoyancy force of the buoy, i.e. the difference between its (m+m)
buoyancy and its weight; F0, and FDBY are the drag forces p(s)
- (m + m )ru + {i sin - F,,, } +
on the buoy in surge and sway [8J; F4, and LI are the drag -

forces on AC in the directions parallel and perpendicular to (27

-- (m+m)
the mooring line motion [8]; F,A and F.ADy are the drag n
forces on segment S2A Of SC in the X3 and Y9 directions, NH + x{isin$') - 12BD1}
respectively [8]; and $8 is the horizontal angle between the - i=! --
two segments of the catenary, measured coUnterclockwise (l. +J)
from X8.
The 3 n8 associated kinematic relations of the buoy cos$ cb }
system are [8J: (28.)
(I__ +J..)
(I) x = ucosyi - sini +U cosa
i=ucosyvsiny+U!_cosa (21) =usinW+vcosy/+Usina
(iI yF=r.
' =usiny+vcosy+U!L_sina (22)
7 +7 cos$' F -
.(i)_ (I) (23) +A)
'-8 (m
- (t j) (1) (i)
T4i) COS -R - DR) -
for i=l......n8. B
- (rn+A)
LI .4DY

In equations (21) - (23), UB. VB and w8 are the relative

Pe° pç(i)
velocities of the buoy in surge, sway and heave; YB is the
F' -, TJ sintI__] 7sinh[_L'
horizontal angle between the x-axis and Sl, measured (j
counterclockwise from the buoy: and z8 is the vertical (m +A)
ordinate of the center of gravity of the buoy. Notice that -(I)
kinematics (21) - (23) assume a linear current profile. .=ucosy_vsiiyUL_cosa
III. STATE SPACE REPRESENTATION AND =usiny +vcosy +Ucsina
EQUILIBRIA OF SMS _(iJ (i)
_8
The nonlinear mathematical model for the buoy supported
SMS in deep water presented in the previous section consists,
of the following 6(1 + n8) equations: three equations of for i=l......
motion for the vessel in surge, sway and yaw (9)-(1 1); 3 n8
All . variables in equations (26) - (37) are direct or indirect
buoy equations of motion in surge. sway and heave (18)- functions of the state space. vector field '25).
(20): and their respective 3+3 n8 kinematic relations (15)-
(17) and (21)-(23). 111.2. Equilibria of SMS
The equilibria of the nonlinear model of SMS are
111.1. State Space Representation stationary flows of vector field . X. and correspond to
The equations of motion and kinematic relations of the singular points of equation (24). Equilibria can be found by
system can be recast as a set of first order nonlinear coupled setting the time derivative of the state variable vector to
differential equations of the form zero, i.e.

i=f(x). (24) e is an equilibrium of

i=f(x) f(i)=O . (38)
by selecting the following state space variables:
 where the overbar on the state variable vector i denotes an
equilibrium state. ii't sin ?' + t)cos) +U- sna = 0 (50
The number of equations that must be solved
simultaneously to find an equilibrium constitute the zero
solution to equations (26).37). The so!ution to such for i=I....... n9.
equations, however, requires that the tension components The auxiliary equations that must be solved along with
1 and i,, be known. Therefore. additional auxiliary equations (43) - (50) are [8):
equations are needed to solve for the tension components
required in the equations of motion and the geometrical
properties of the catenaries [8. Due to state space equations sinh(..!)] _____,JO(zW+2__)_o (-51)
(29) and (30). the equilibrium values for the vessel velocity
components u and v can be recast in terms of the 1 7(1) '\ I 7(i) '\ 1 7(i ( (j)
equilibrium drift angle t,v as f011ows: sinhi
27) Icoshi
27)I+coshl .4- Isinhi -4k-
t.27 ) (27j
u=ULcos(i7a)
7=Usin(i7a) .
. (39)
(40)
__' 0 (52)

(i) ( 7(1) \
Furthermore, state space equations (31) and (37) reveal that e°4 _.._.i_sinhI I (53)
the values for the vessel rotational velocity r and the buoy P
heave velocities w, (i=l, n8), are zero at (i) I 7(t) \ (I) I 7(i) \
equilibrium; i.e. ----sinhI 2A
sinhI 2B
(54)
U- p i;: ) P (27)
(55)

Thus, the 6(1 + n8) state space equations that must be solved
simultaneously to find the SMS equilibria can be reduced to
((ii)2 +(1)i))2 -7 =o. (56)

3+5 n8- cquations. In addition. 6B auxiliary for i=1 .......n8.

tension/geometry equations need tà be solved in conjunction
with the remaining state space equations to find an Thus. 3 +1 1 ri equations must be solved for equilibrium. In
equilibrium [8].
expressions (51) and (52). it has been assumed that the
The equilibrium equations for the-vessel thus become:
vertical position of the buoy center of gravity z is
approximately equal to the depth of its corresponding AC
+ cos urge = 0 (43)
{?O
- + (h'). The relation between these is given by

R + (57)
(44)

NH +x {jsinW _TU}
where is the radius of the i-th buoy.
In equations (55) and (56). for mooring line i. (.x. v)
are the horizontal plane coordinates of the anchoring point
ye, v{T cos/3" - + caw = 0 (45) on the sea floor: and (i!, .t).) are the horizontal plane
attachment coordinates on the vessel with respect tO the
inertial reference frame (x. v).
where it is implied that the functions containing i d
can be replaced by relatioris (39) - (41).
The buoy equilibrium equations become: IV. STABILITY AND BIFURCATIONS OF
EQUILIBRIA
Equilibria of nonlinear dynamical systems and the
behavior of such systems near equilibrium provide local
information on dynamical flows (trajectories) [12]. Such
(i) I
- (1r)1 [.L.J iflh_[ 7(1
')
information can be useful in surmising the global beiàvior
of a system in the time domain or in a phase space.
Consequently. knowing all equilibria and - their nature
:i) provides global information ol the qualitative behavior of
the system and renders time simulations unnecessary in
general [1, 3. 4. 7. 18]. Further, bifurcations of equilibria
and their corresponding morphogeneses make it possible to
identify areas of qualitatively acceptable dynamics. Th.0 Table I. Properties of the tanker SMS
eliminates the need for trial and error in design of mooring Property
systems. Based on this philosophy and numerical
applications we assess in this section the effects of buoy (length overall) 272.8 m
LOA
size and position on the design of SMS in deep water. 259.4 m
LWL (length of waterline)
B (beam) 43.1 rn
IV.1. Theoretical Considerations 16.15 m
D (draft)
Nonlinear stability analysis is used to discern the C8 (block coefficient) 0.83
dynamics of specific SMS/buoy configurations. The
stability properties of the system can be obtained by 1 (displacement) I.5374x105 tons
performing eigenvalue analysis around all system equilibria. m 9.110x106 kgs
If all eigenvalues of the system have negative real parts, a
particular equilibrium is stable, and all trajectories initiated m 1.360x 108 kgs
near that equilibrium will converge toward it asymptotically. 7.180x 1011 kg.m2
I--
If at least one eigenvalue has a positive real part. that
equilibrium will be unstable and a small disturbance from J.- 5.430xl0H kg.m2
equilibrium will cause the system trajectories to diverge from
it t23). Bifurcation sequences are then studied to find
qualitative changes in the dynamic behavior of the system Table 2 and Figure 3 show that the only difference
by varying one or more design variables for a specific between geometries GI and G2 is in the aperture between th
mooring system configuration. Such sequences determine two forward mooring lines, which is bigger in geometry G2.
regions of qualitatively similar behavior, such as stable. Also note that the horizontal pretension component for both
unstable. periodic, and chaotic. Graphically they are plotted segments of each catenary are equal. These are based ot
in stability charts. commonly referred to as catastrophe sets.
In this paper, catastrophe sets are constructed as functions
pretension values for the pair D8 =7 m. f,
=700 m.
Figure 4 shows a series of catastrophe sets for th&
of two parameters: the diameter of the buoys (D3). and the principal equilibrium position of the system for both
location of the buoy along the mooring line, defined by geometries GI and G2 in the parametric design space (D5
t,,2. All buoys have the same diameter and all are placed at w2) with the following ranges
the same location along the corresponding line. The water 5mD8 7m.
depth h is used as parameter in catastrophe sets for 600 m S F,,, 5 750 m . I

h =700. 750 and 800 m. The ranges of buoy size and its fOr water depths of 700. 750 and 800 meters.
position along the mooring line depend on a number of
factors such as the water depth and the net buoyancy force of
Table 2. Characteristics of SMS geometries GI and G2
each buoy. Thus, for a particular chain mooring line in a
specific water depth. only a certain range of combination of Characteristic Geometry GI Geometry G2
buoy size and position can be used effectively to support the
weight of the chain. In this paper, rather than providing a Fàirlead Coordinates (m)
complete study of size-location combination for buoys. we
determine bifurcation sequences for specific ranges of those
x. v 125.00. -4.1023 125.0. -4.1023
42), 2) 125.00, -4.1023 125.0. -4.1023
parameters. This allows us to assess the effects of the
supporting buoys on the dynamics of SMS. -129.69. 0.00 - 129.69, 0.00
IV..2. Analysis of the SMS -129.69. 0.00 -129.69, 0.00
To illustrate the possible effects of buoy size and position
on the dynamics of the system, we consider a 4-line tanker Orientation of lines (deg)
SMS whose geometric properties are shown in Table 1 [10) £7(l) 350.00 315.00
in a 2 knot head current, a 180'. The dimension of the
10.00 45.00
state space is 6(1 + n5). For a 4-line SMS with one (3)
170.00 170.00
supporting buoy per line. n8 = n =4, and the state space £714)
becomes 30-dimensional. In this example, all moonng 190.00 190.00
lines have the same length ',. = 1500 meters. with an Horizontal Pretension (kN)
average breaking strength of 5159 kN [14). In addition. to Line I 260.5628 260.5628
different geometries of the SMS (denoted as UI and G2 are Line 2 260.5628 260.5628
considered, and their characteristics shown in Table 2. The Line 3 104.2251 104. 225 1
tanker is moored in a symmetric pattern with its (X.Y) a.'us Line 4 104.225 I 104.2251
parallel to the (x.v) reference frame as shown in Figure 3.
The orientation of each line in Table 2 is defined by £7. the The catastrophe sets of Figure 4 present three regions of
horizontal angle between the vessel-fixed X -axis and the qualitatively different dynamics, and are labeled as I, hand
mooring line measured counterclockwise. Ill. The three lines on the right correspond to bifurcation
 boundaries for geometry GI: the remaininc two lines on the system is'stable for all ( DB. Ps,,) values for a water depth of
left correspond to bifurcation boundaries of geometry G2. 700 m.
Thus, regions Gl-1 and GI-Il pertain exclusively to geometry A preliminary conclusion of the dynamics of the buoy-
GI. while regions G2-1 and G2-lIl pertain to geometry G2 in supported SMS is that geometry GI renders a more stable
Figure 4. These regions are described as follows: configuration, since the unstable region leads to alternate
Region I: The principal equilibrium of the system is stable;
stable equilibria, while geometry G2 may result in chaotic
all 30 eigenvalues have negative real parts. A small random
disturbance from the principal equilibrium initiates behavior. The selected ranges of parameters (D5. t,.,. h).
trajectories converging to it in forward time. however, lead to wide variations in the depths of each
Region II: The principal equilibrium of the system is mooring line segment (h1 for segment SI, h2A for segment
unstable with a one-dimensional unstable manifold. i.e. it S2A, and h8 for segment S2B), and therefore variations in
has a real eigenvalue with positive real part. The system the mooring line tension. Thus, it may be impractical to try
undergoes static loss of stability when crossing from region to design a mooring system based on all parameter ranges
I to region II. with the genesis of two additional stable for the pair (D9, ',) in Figure 4. Table 3 shows the
equilibria. These may be stable or unstable for the
parametric ranges shown in Figure 4 depending on the size principal equilibrium values of the various depths h1 . h.,4
and position of the buoy. Stability and bifurcation analyses and h for both geometries Gl and G2 at the four end
around these equilibria is, however, out of the scope of this points of Figure 4, for a water depth of 750 m. Due to the
paper. symmetric nature of the system, the equilibrium values of
Region lii: The principal equilibrium of the system is these variables are equal for Mooring Lines (ML) I and 2:
unstable with a four-dimensional unstable manifold. Two the same holds true for Mooring Lines (ML) 3 and 4.
complex pairs of eigenvalues have positive real parts. This
corresponds to dynamic loss of stability of the two forward Table 3. Equilibrium values for vertical distances of each
buoys when crossing from region I to region Ill. Since catenarv segment (rn). h =750 m
there are no other nearby equilibria to attract the trajectories.
the forward buoys oscillate. Since the motions of the buoys Geometry GI Geometry G2
and the vessel are coupled. the system itself exhibits chaotic
motions due to the large amplitude oscillations of the \ILI and 2 ML 3 and 4 ML I and 2 ML 3 and 4
forward buoys. In simulations this is manifested in the
chaotic motion of the vessel. In region Ill, the dimension (DB, ',) (m) = (5.0,600.0)
of the unstable manifold is four.
The dynamics exhibited by each geometry in Figure 4 is 182.279 184.771 188.033 184.754
detailed below: h.1 0.179 1.149 3.120 0.940
Geometry GI: As shown in Figure 3, geometry GI is h,B 567.901 566.378 565.070 566.186
characterized by the small angle of aperture between the two
forward mooring lines (20'). The sets of three lines at the
right of Figure 4 correspond to static bifurcation boundaries (DB. w2) (m) = (5.0,750.0)
of geometry GI for water depths of 700, 750 and 800
meters. As previously mentioned, the pnnëipal equilibrium h1 .121.391 124.119 118.622 125.247
of the system loses its static stability when crossing from h 19.530 27.101 9.679 30.007
region I (stable) to region II (unstable), and two alternate 648.2 19 652.982 641.057 654.760
stable equilibria result from such bifurcation. Note that for
the ranges of parameters shown, stable region I increases
with increasing buoy position ( '. buoy size (DB) and (P8. ') (m) = (7.0,600.0;
water depth (h).
Geometry G2 This geometry is characterized by a, large 496.815 504.623 485.993 511.548
angle of aperture of the forward mooring lines (90') as h 94.207 102.619 72.440 115.619
shown in Figure 3. and thus it is expected to exhibit h 347.392 347.997 336.447 354.070
qualitatively different dynamics with respect to geometry GI.
The sets of two lines to the left of Figure 4 correspond to
dynamic bifurcations of geometry G2 for water depths of 750 (D5, 2) (m) = (7.0.750.0)
and 800 meters. Specifically, these lines denote boundaries
of dynamic loss of stability of the forward buoys in the h1 436.595 443183 424.823 451.128
system, and occur when crossing from region I to region Ill. '2A 120.096 128.419 95.357 144.126
The principal equilibrium of the system is thus stable to the
right of its corresponding bifurcation line and unstable h,3 433:5b1 435.237 420.534 442.998
(chaotic) to the left. Since there are no other equilibria to
attract the trajectories, the system undergoes chaotic One design goal. for a buoy is that the depth of neither
(unpredictable) motions resulting ultimately in line catenarv segment becomes equal to the water depth. U that
breaking. Notice from Figure 4 that such unstable region were to be the case. there would be no need to implement
increases as the position and size of the buoy decrease, and buoys in the system. As shown in Table 3. neither calenary
as the water depth increases. As shown in Figure 4, the segments depth reaches the water depth at any one
parametric end point in Figure 4. Notice from Table 3 that
with increasing distance the weight that each buoy
must support increases as well. For a particular buoy size.
this leads to a decrease in the '.ertical distance of the AC
(h1) and an increase in the depths of S2A and S2B.
Conversely, as the size of the- buoy D9 increases for a
particular value of P, the net buoyancy of the buoy also
increases, thus providing an added upward force and
increasing the depth of AC. This also increases the depth of
S2A (hzA) and decreases the depth of S2B( h,5). Table 3
also shows that at the two end points of Figure 4 for DB =5
m, the depths of segments S2B are excessively high. The
same holds true for end point (DB i7 m. e,,, =600 m) for
the values of h1. - The end point (D8 =7 m. ',,2 =750 m)
results in well distributed values for the various depths at
equilibrium, and thus a design based on these values would
be more practical. Also note from Table 3 that the lower
left corner end point ( D =5 m, es.. =600 m) results in
small values for the depth h,A. In simulatiOns, the large
motions of the vessel will cause the system to lose the
geometry of Figure I. In such case, the nature of the
suspended catenary is lost, resulting in excessive mooring
line tensions.
Other combinations of buoy size/position in Figure 4 may
result in inadequate mooring line tensions, which are
proportional to the depth of the catenary. The most
practical values for DR and , therefOre lie within some
specific ranges of the parameters considered in Figure 4.
Table 4 shows the equilibrium values of h1 . h and h5
both geometries G I and 02 for the pair (D8 =6.85 rn.
1w2 =695 m) at a water depth of 750 m. Notice thaL the
equilibrium values for the depths of the segments are less
than those in Table 3 for the pair (DB =7 m, 'w2 =750 m).
This results in lower vertical mooring line tensions and
therefore are more practical. In addition, this parametric
configuration is stable for both geometries, as shown in
Figure 4 Other combinations of the parameters (D8, 2)
may result in more practical geometric configurations as
well. The stability and bifurcation analysis presented in this
section. however, should be used to determine whether such
geometries result in sound stable systems.
Table 4. Equilibrium values for vertical distances (m).
D5 =6.85 m. 695 m, h 750 m
Geometry 01 Geometry 02
ML I and 2 ML 3 and 4 ML I and 2 ML 3 and4
h1 426.884 433.297 41&327 440.113
h,A 101.481 109.741 79. 222 123.2 18
h!B 424.597 426.444 412.895 433. 106
The results obtained in Tables 3 and 4 indicate that the
practical values for the pair (D8, f,) exclude, for the most
part, all ranges in the lower and left sides of Figure 4. For
the remaining ranges, geometry 02 shows stable behavior of
its principal equilibrium, while geometry G I may fall in
static loss of stability, resulting in a non-svmmetric
equilibrium. The design of a buoy supported SMS based n
either -geometry (or any other system conliguration and
catastrophe sets would require further analysis based on
simulations to assure that the maximum limits of the vessel
motions and the mooring line tensions are satisfied.
V. CONCLUDING REMARKS -
A mathematical model has been developed for modeli9g
the slow motion horizontal plane dynamics of moorirg
systems with supporting buoys: The design methodology
developed at the University of Michigan fOr spread mooridg
systems [1-4 10. 18] has been extended to include buoy.
This methodology makes it possible to assess the effects of
buoys on the system behavior without trial and error dr
repealed simulations. It is based on deriving tim1e
independent properties of mooring systems with buoys such
as equilibria and their stabilities, bifurcation sequences an$i
their singularities, and morphogeneses across bifurcation
boundaries. Numerical applications of a 4-line FPSO with
one buoy per mooring line have been used to illustrate this
methodology and assess the importance of buoys in mooring
dynamics. It has been shown that variations in position and
size of supporting buoys may lead to static and dynamic loss
of stability and even to chaos, depending on the geometry
of the. system. The effect of water depth on the systerii
dynamics has also been studied, and it was shown that the
dynamically unstable region increases with increasing wate
depth. while the opposite effect is observed for staticalh
for unstable systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is sponsored by the University o:
Michigan/Industry Consortium in Offshore Engineering. anc
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
University of Michigan. Industry participants includt
Amoco. Inc.; Conoco. Inc.: Chevron. Inc.: Exxor
Production Research; Mobil Research and Development
Shell Companies Foundation; and Petrobrás, Brazil.
REFERENCES
[I] Bernitsas MM. and GarzaRios, L.O., "Effect of
Mooring Line Arrangement on the Dynamics of Spreadl
Mooring Systems.' Journal of Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering, Vol. 118, No. 1, February 1996.
pp. 7-20.
Brnitsas. M.M and Garza-Rios. L.O.. 'Mooring
System Design Based on Analytical Expressions of
Catastrophes of Slow-Motion Dynamics.' Journal of
Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Vol. 119.
No. 2, May 1997. pp. 86-95.
Bernitsas MM., and Papbulias. F.A.. "Nonlinear
Stability and Maneuvering Simulation of Single Point
Mooring Systems,' Proceedings- of Offshore Station
Keeping Symposium. SNAME. Houston. Texas.
February 1-2. 1990. pp. 1-19.
Chung. J.S.. and Bernitsas, M.M.. "Dynamics of Two-
Line Ship Towing/Mooring Systems: Bi furcations.
 Singularities of Stability Boundaries. Chaos," Jo..u:nal
of S/up Research, Vol. 36. No. 2, June 1992 pp.93-
105.
[5] Davison. N.J.. Thomas, N.T.. Nienhus. V. and
Pinkster. J.A., 'Application of an Alternative Concept
in Dynamic Positioning to a Tanker Floating
Production System" Proceedings of the 19th Annual
Offshore Technology Conference, OTC Paper No.
5444, Houston. April 1987, pp. 207-223.
(6] Fernandes, A.C. and Aratanha, M.. "Classical
Assessment to the Single Point Mooring and Turret
Dynamics Stability Problems," Proceedings of the 15th
International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering (OMAE), Vol. I-A, Florence, Italy,
June 1996, pp. 423-430.
Garza-Rios, L.O., and Bernitsas, M. M., "Nonlinear
Slow Motion Dynamics of Turret Mooring Systems in
Deep Water." Froceedin.gs of the 8th International
Conference on the Behaviour of Offshore Structures
(BOSS), Delft, the Netherlands, July 1997, pp. 177-
188.
GarzaRios, L.O. and Bernitsas, M.M., "Slow Motion
Dynamics of Mooring Systems in Deep Water With
Buoy Supported Catenary Lines." Report # 339.
University of Michiganl Industry ConsOrtium in
Offshore Engineering, Department of Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor. January 1999.
[91 Garza-Rios. L.O., Bernitsas, M.M. and Nishimoto. K.,
"Catenary Mooring Lines With Nonlinear Drag and
Touchdown," Report # 333, University of Michigan.
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine
Engineering. Ann Arbor, January 1997.
[tO] Garza-Rios, L.O.. Bernitsas, M.M., Nishimoto. K. and
Masetti.. I.Q., "Preliminary Design of Differentiated
Compliance Anchoring Systems," Journal of Offshore
Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vol. 121, No. I,
February 1999. pp. 9-15.
[II] Gottlieb. 0.. and Kim, S.C.S., "Nonlinear Oscillations,
Bifurcations and Chaos in a Multi-Point Mooring
System with a Geometric Nonlinearity," Journal of
Applied Ocean Research. Vol. 14. 1992. pp. 832-839.
[12] Guckenheimer. J.. and Holmes. P.. Nonlinear
Oscillations. Dynamical Systems, and .Bifurcations of
Vector Fields. Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc., 1983.
[131 Leite, .A.J.P.. Aranha, J.A.P., Umeda, C. and de Conti,
M.B., "Current Forces in Tankers and Bifurcation of
Equilibrium of Turret Systems.; Hydrodynamic Model
and Experiments." Journal of Applied Ocean Research.
Vol.. 20, 1998. pp. 145-156.
(l4( Nippon Kaiji Kyokai . Guide to Mooring Systems.
N.K.K.. Tousei. TOkyo. 1983.
Nishimoto, K.. Kaster. F., and Aranha, J.A.P. "Full
Scale Decay Test of a Moored Tanker, ALAGOAS-
DICAS System." Report to Petrobrás. Brazil, February
1996.
Nishimoto,K., Brinati, H.L. and Fucatu, C.H..
"Dynamics of Moored Tankers SPM and Turret."
Proceedings of the Seventh International Offshore and
Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE), Vol. 1.
Honolulu, 1997. pp. 370-378.
[171 Papoulis. F.A.. and Bernitsas. MM.. "MOORLINE; A
Program for Static Analysis of MOORing LINEs.
Report to the University of Michigan/Sea
Grant/Industry Consortium in Offshore Engineering.
and Department of Naval Architecture and Marine
Engineering, The University of Michigan. Ann Arbor.
Publication No. 309, May 1988.
Papoulias, F.A. and Bernitsas, M.M., "Autonomous
Oscillations, Bifurcations. and Chaotic Response of
Moored Vessels", Journal of Ship Research. Vol. 32.
No. 3. September 1988. pp. 220-228.
Pinkster. J.A. and Nienhus. V.. "Dynamic Positioning
of Large Tankers at Sea " Proceedings of 18th Annual
Offshore Technology Conference. .OTC Paper No.
5208. Houston. May 1986. pp. 459-476.
120) Sharma. S.D.. Jiang. T., and Schellin. T.E.. "Dynamic
Instability and Chaotic Motions of a Single Point
MOored Tanker." Proceedings of the 17th ONR
Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, The Hague.
Holland, August 1988. pp. 543-562,
Takashina, J.. "Ship Maneuvering Motion due to
Tugboats and its Mathematical Model." Journal of the.
Socierv of Naval Architects of Japan. Vol. 160. 1986.
pp. 93-104.
Tanaka. S., "On the Hydrodynamic Forces Acting on a
Ship at Large Drift Angles." Journal of the West
Society of Nai,al Architects of Japan. Vol. 91. 1995.
pp. 81-94.
(231 Wiggins. S. Jntroduction. to Applied Nonlinear
Dynamical Systems and Chaos Springer-Verlag. New
York. Inc.. 1990.
 Figure 1. Geometry of buoy-supported catenary

Figure 2. General geometry of Spread Moodng System

 GEOMETRY Gi

Figure 3. Geometric characteristics of Ci and G2

\\ _:_
750 ---
\ \. h - 700 m
h-7-50m

725-
' \ ----- h-800-rñ

S.

700-'.

G I - 11 Gi i
67-5 -
-
S.

S S.

S.
S.

S.

S.

650
HI \ G2-- i
-

G2 -
-

S.
-S.
.5 ..

\\ \\
625 -\

I.

DB (m)
0 52 54 56 60 612 64 616 68
hgure -4. Catastrophe set of buoy supported SMS - Geometries Gi and G2