Nonlinear response of a moored buoy

A. Umara-*, T.K. Dattab

a
Department of Civil Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi 110016, India

Received 3 January 2002; received in revised form 30 August 2002; accepted 23 October 2002

Abstract

The nonlinear dynamic analysis of a multipoint slack moored buoy is performed under the
action of first and second order wave forces. The nonlinearity of the system is caused by the
geometric nonlinearity of the mooring lines. The resulting nonlinear equation of motion is
solved by an incremental time marching scheme. The nonlinear responses of the system are
analysed to investigate different kinds of dynamic instability phenomena that may arise due
to the nonlinearity of the system. As an illustrative example, a hollow cylindrical buoy anch-
ored to the sea bed by means of six slack mooring lines is considered. The responses of the
system are obtained and analysed for three regular waves namely, 5 m/5 s, 12 m/10 s and 18
m/15 s. The results of the study show that different kinds of instability phenomena like nT
subharmonic oscillations, symmetry breaking bifurcation and aperiodic responses may occur
in slack mooring systems. Further, a second order wave force may considerably influence the
dynamic stability of such systems.

1. Introduction

Ocean mooring systems include both single and multi-point mooring systems.
Multi-point mooring systems or spread mooring systems exhibit nonlinear behaviour
because of inherent nonlinearities in the system. These nonlinearities are produced
either due to damping nonlinearity or due to nonlinearity in the restoring force or
due to the nonlinear excitation force or any combination of these. Amongst them, the
nonlinearity of the restoring force generally leads to a complex response behaviour of
the moored structure. The reason for the nonlinear restoring force is the geometric
1626 A. Umar, T.K. Datta/Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

nonlinearity or the catenary effect of the mooring lines. As the moored vessel
undergoes large excitation due to a combination of wave, wind and current, some
of the mooring lines slacken and others become taut, thus providing a net nonlinear
restoring force to the vessel.
Moored structures are generally classified under flexible offshore structures. There
have been several studies on the nonlinear response behaviour of flexible offshore
structures such as guyed tower platforms (Morrison, 1983; Jain and Datta, 1990;
Glasscock and Finn, 1984; Brynjolfsson and Leonard, 1988); tension leg platforms
(Kim and Yue, 1988; Kobsyashi et al., 1985; Siddiqui and Ahmad, 1998); and articu-
lated leg platforms (Jain and Datta, 1991; Bar-Avi and Benaroya, 1996). Apart from
presenting different methods of analysis for the structures, the studies also provide
a good understanding of the nonlinear response behaviour of the structures.
Relatively, few studies have been carried out on the nonlinear analysis of moored
vessels. Pinkster (1987) Umar and Datta (2001) presented a simple time-domain
simulation method for estimating the low frequency surge motions of moored vessels.
Bliek and Triantafyllou (1985) studied the dynamics of a mooring line in the non-
linear regime. They, in particular, investigated the effect of non-linearities on the
dynamic tension amplification predicted by linear theory. Van Den Boom (1985)
studied the dynamic behaviour of mooring lines. The dynamic tension amplification
was found to be strongly influenced by non-linearities due to catenary effects, elas-
ticity and drag. Langley (1986) studied the time domain simulation of the second
order motions of a moored vessel when the random sea state is represented by super-
position of "n" harmonic components. Liu and Bergdahl (1997) introduced a linear,
frequency-domain method for dynamic analysis to calculate large motions of slender
structures such as towing and mooring cables and flexible risers. Although the above
studies provide a good understanding of the nonlinear behaviour of moored vessels
under different conditions of excitations, there are certain areas where more work
is needed. One such area is the dynamic stability of the moored vessel under primary
wave force, second order wave force, and combined primary and second order
wave forces.
Herein, the nonlinear response behaviour of a multipoint moored buoy under the
action of both first order and second order wave forces is analysed to investigate its
dynamic stability. The buoy is a large diameter cylindrical floating body, moored
by an array of symmetrical moorings system. The force excursion relationship of
the mooring cables provides the non-linear restoring force for the moored buoy. Both
first and second order wave forces on the cylinder have been determined by the
method proposed by Taylor and Hung (1987). In the response calculation, the effects
of added mass and hydrodynamic damping are duly considered. The responses are
obtained in the time domain by integrating the nonlinear equation of motion by an
incremental time marching scheme.

2. Dynamic analysis
The dynamic analysis has been carried out under the following assumptions:
(i) The mooring system is a single degree of freedom nonlinear oscillator (Fig. 1);
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1627

15m.
Buoy

7 m.s.l.

150m Mooring lines

Clump weight

Elevation

Mooring lines

Buoy -^ /-Mooring lines

Plan

Fig. 1. Moored system.

(ii) Sea waves are assumed to be regular sine waves providing harmonic wave
forces;
(iii) Only the surge motion of the buoy is considered.

Under the above assumptions, the following governing equation of motion has
been derived by considering the equilibrium of geometric restoring forces and small
body motion under wave excitation (Gottlieb and Yim, 1992):
Mx + Cx + R(x) = F1 sin q, (1)
where M=m+m; m is the system mass; m is the added mass; C is the damping
coefficient including structural damping and hydrodynamic damping if any; and R(x)
is the displacement dependent restoring force.
Rearranging the equation of motion, Eq. (1) yields the following first order auton-
omous equations:
=
x = f1 sin 6—r(x)—5y; q = 0) (2)
where

(3)
1628 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

The restoring force r(x) is assumed to be represented by a 5th order antisymmetric

polynomial which closely describes the force displacement behaviour of the mooring
lines and is given by:
r(x) = c1x + c3x3 + c5x5. (4)
The force deformation relationship of the single mooring line is determined by a
separate static analysis of the suspended mooring cable. The analysis involves the
determination of the force-excursion relationship for an applied surge displacement
of the top end of the cable. The analysis procedure, duly takes into account the
geometric nonlinearity of the system (Oppenheim and Wilson, 1982; Chakrabarti,
1990). The force excursion relationship of the moored system is obtained by combin-
ing the force deformation characteristics of all mooring lines for a given surge dis-
placement.

2.1. Determination of primary and second order wave forces

The wave forces on the buoy have been determined by the method proposed by
Taylor and Hung (1987). They have given a complete solution for first and second
order wave diffraction forces on a vertical circular cylinder in regular head waves.
According to their solution, first order force F(2)1 is caused by first order potential
whereas second order force arises due to both first and second order potential. The
second order wave force has two fluctuating components, namely i 7 ^ and F(2)q, and
a steady second order force F%\ Component FXQ) and F(2)q are due to first order
potential and second order scattered potential, respectively. F(2)m arises from nonlinear
coupling of first-order terms, and does not depend on the second order potential.
The forces on the buoy are taken as those acting on a fixed surface piercing cylinder
given by Taylor and Hung (1987).
The first and second order wave forces on a fixed surface piercing cylinder are
given as:

0 eiwt]r=a, (5)

where
Gn = An + Bm (6)

Z0=l/k, (7)

Z1 = Z2= 1/2k, (8)

An = Ajn{kr\ (9)

L>n — uf7iif7 y/vf jj y± yjj

 A. Umar, T.K. Datta/Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1629

where Jn is the Bessel function of the first kind of order n, and Hn(2) is the Hankel
function of the second kind.
p j (— + *% + ^n(n + 1)WG; + 1 }1 , (11)

( % ^ j , (12)
and
^ ^ f %P2a«>], (13)
where

^f^ (14)

(15)

,) X 2 \(G'nG'n+1-A'J'n+1) (16)

n(n + 1)
+ X

where the explicit expressions for F*^ and Fq(2)may be obtained from Eqs (12) and
(13) after substituting for different component terms.

2.2. Response estimation

The response has been obtained by dynamic analysis using a time integration
scheme. Adam's integration scheme has been employed for an assumed initial con-
dition. In the response calculation, the effects of added mass and hydrodynamic
damping are duly considered for the first order wave force and the combination of
first and second order wave forces. The added mass and hydrodynamic damping of
the system are obtained using the curves given by Sabuncu and Calisal (1981). The
responses are obtained for primary and second order wave forces and the combination
of the two for regular sea-state.
1630 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

Table 1
Numerical data used for the analysis

Buoy (diameterxheightxthickness) 15 mx4 mx0.3 m

Submerged depth of the buoy 1.75 m
Mass of the buoy 133002.01 kg
No. of mooring lines 6
Total length of each mooring line 500 m
Mass of the mooring line in water 21 kg/m
Young's modulus of the mooring lines 20.595xl0 9 N/m 2
Clamp length of the cable 30 m
Mass of the clamp in water 90 kg/m
Depth of sea 150 m
Specific gravity of concrete 2.4
Initial angle of inclination 60°
Initial horizontal tension 19000 N
Structural damping 3.25%

3. Numerical study and discussion of results

A hollow cylindrical buoy anchored to the sea-bed by means of six slack mooring
lines, symmetrically placed around the buoy, as shown in Fig. 1, is considered as an
illustrative example. The relevant data for the numerical study are given in Table 1.
The buoy under study virtually derives all its stability and stiffness from the buoy-
ancy and restraint provided by the six mooring lines. All the mooring lines have the
same pre-determined initial tension and the net horizontal force on the buoy is zero
when it is at rest. The extensibility of the mooring lines have been duly considered
in the static mooring lines analysis, since it may reduce the stiffness of the mooring
system. The responses of the system are obtained for three different regular sea
states, namely 5 m/5 s, 12 m/10 s and 18 m/15 s waves.
The force-excursion relationship for one mooring line is shown in Fig. 2. The

Distance (m)

Fig. 2. Force-excursion relationship of a single mooring line.

 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1631

- 3 - 2 - 1 0 1 2
excursion (m)

Fig. 3. Restoring force with excursion.

force-excursion relationship for the entire mooring system is shown in Fig. 3. The
coefficients of the polynomial (Eq. (4)) which best fits the force-excursion relation-
ship shown in Fig. 3 are c1=0.0310, c 3 =-0.00786 and c5=0.004607. It is seen from
the figure that there is an excellent match between the best fit curve and the actual
force-excursion curve.
The relevant computed data for the first and second order wave forces are given
in Table 2 for all the sea-states.

3.1. Response due to 5 m/5 s wave

Fig. 4(a) shows the response of the moored buoy for first order wave force for
the initial condition (x,y=0,0). The steady state response is harmonic. The same
response of the moored buoy is obtained for the changed initial condition (x,y=1,1).

Table 2
Details of wave forces

Wave Excitation Added Hydro- F2(N) 5(s-)

wave mass(kg) dynamic
frequency damping
(rad/s) first
order)
N/(m/s)

5 m/5 s 1.2566 80196.37 47790.76 11470 .73 13538 .300 17891 .30 0.23010
12m/10s 0.6283 79245.44 4102.69 513333 .33 31546 .67 4921 .07 0.02529
18m/15 s 0.4188 70306.56 995.63 746666 .67 73360 .070 1121 .07 0.011120
1632 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

(a) o.6-
0.4 \

0.2 ;

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6
900 920 940 960 980 1000
t (sec)
(b)

-0.1
-0.3

-0.5

-0.7
-0.6 -0.4

Fig. 4. (a) Time history of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [5 m/5 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)]; (b) phase plot of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [5 m/5 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)].

The maximum amplitude of the response is found to be 0.42 m. The phase plot of
the response is shown in Fig. 4(b). It is seen from the figure that the phase plot is
symmetric without having any subharmonic or superharmonic components. There-
fore, the response of the system under primary wave force is stable.
The response of the buoy due to the second order oscillatory force is shown in
Fig. 5 for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). The steady state response is periodic in
nature. An identical response of the buoy is obtained when the initial condition is
changed to (x,y=1,1). The maximum response is only 90 mm, very small compared
to that for the primary wave force. Since the system is stable for the primary wave
force, the response of the system for the second order wave force will be stable,
since its excitation frequency is twice the primary wave force frequency.
The response of the buoy due to the total second order force (oscillating+steady
components) is shown in Fig. 6 for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). An identical
response is obtained when the initial condition is changed to (x,y=1,1). The response
due to total second order forces is larger than the response due to the first order
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1633

900 910 920 930 940 950

Fig. 5. Time history of the response (x) due to the oscillatory second order force [5 m/5 s wave;
,y)=(0,0) and (1,1)].

Fig. 6. Time history of the response (x) due to the total second order force [5 m/5 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)].
1634 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

force. This is due to the presence of steady component F(2)m of the second order force.
The maximum response is 1.487 m, while the maximum response due to the primary
wave force is 0.42 m.
The response of the buoy when subjected to the total wave forces, i.e. the combi-
nation of first and second order wave forces, is shown in Fig. 7(a) for the initial
condition (x,y=0,0). An identical response is obtained when the initial condition is
changed to (x,y=1,1). From Fig. 7(a) it is seen that the response is nearly harmonic
and the maximum response is about 1.90 m. The phase plot of the response shown
in Fig. 7(b) is similar to that for the primary wave force. This is expected since the
response is mainly governed by the primary wave force.

3.2. Responses due to 12 m/10 s wave

Fig. 8(a and b) show the responses of the buoy for a 12 m/10 s wave for the
primary wave force with initial conditions (x,y=0,0) and (x,y=1,0.5). For the latter

(a)

900 920 940 960 980 1000

t (sec)
(b)

-0.7
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
x(m)
Fig. 7. (a) Time history of the response (x) due to the combination of the primary and second order
force [5 m/5 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0) and (1,1)]; (b) phase plot of the response (x) due to the combination of
the primary and second order force [5 m/5 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0) and (1,1)].
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1635

1000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

t (sec)
Fig. 8. (a) Time history of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)];
(b) time history of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,0.5)].

initial condition, the integration had to be carried out for 2000 s (twice that for the
first initial condition) to obtain a steady state response. For both initial conditions,
the response is not harmonic but periodic with a time period of about 50 s. Thus
the response shows a 5T ultra-subharmonic self-similar motion as can be verified
from the phase plot shown in Fig. 9. For another initial condition (x,y=1,1), the
nature of the response is changed with a period of about 10 s (Fig. 10). The phase
plot shows a symmetry breaking bifurcation as shown in Fig. 11. In all the cases,
the maximum response is about 5.8 m. This shows that a possibility of dynamic
instability in the form of bifurcation of response and nT solution exists although the
response may remain within finite bounds.
The response of the buoy due to the oscillatory second order force is shown in Fig.
12 for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). An identical response of the buoy is obtained for
the initial condition (x,y=1,1). For both cases, the response is periodic with an oscil-
lating envelope. The maximum response is about 190 mm which is much smaller
than that obtained for the primary wave force. The phase plot of the response (Fig.
1636 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

Fig. 9. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,0.5)].

900 920 940 960 980 1000

t (sec)
Fig. 10. Time history of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,1)].

13) shows a stable response. It is expected since the second order wave force has
twice the frequency of the first order wave force.
The response of the buoy due to the total second order force is plotted in Fig. 14
for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). An identical response of the buoy is obtained for
the initial condition (x,y=1,1). The maximum response is about 2.35 m. The signifi-
cant increase in the maximum response is due to the presence of steady part F^> of
the second order force. The response is characterized by 5/2 subharmonics as can
be verified from the phase plot shown in Fig. 15. Thus, the possibility of dynamic
instability of the response to the total second order wave force is exhibited for the
12 m/10 s wave.
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1637

-10 -8 8 10

Fig. 11. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,1)].

970 980 990 1000

Fig. 12. Time history of the response (x) due to the oscillatory second order force [12 m/10 s wave;
(X,Y)=(0,0) and (1,1)].

The response and phase plots for the wave forces comprising both primary and
second order forces are plotted in Figs. 16 and 17, respectively, for the initial con-
dition (x,y=1,1). The response is not harmonic but periodic with a time period of 50
s. The response shows 5T ultra subharmonic motion. The response and phase plots
for the changed initial condition (x,y=—1,0.5) are shown in Figs. 18 and 19, respect-
ively. The response is found to be aperiodic and has a different nature than that for
the initial condition (x,y=1,1). The phase plots for both cases show symmetry break-
1638 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

0.3

-0.3

Fig. 13. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the oscillatory second order force [12 m/10 s wave;
,y)=(0,0) and (1,1)].

900 910 920 930 940 950 960 970 990 1000

Fig. 14. Time history of the response (x) due to the total second order force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)].

ing bifurcation. Thus, the possibility of dynamic instability of the response exists
for the total wave force.

3.3. Responses due to 18 m/15 s wave

Figs. 20 and 21 show the response and phase plots, respectively, of the moored
system for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). These figures show the response to be a
T-periodic solution. The maximum response obtained is 5.30 m. When the initial
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1639

-3 - 2 - 1 0 1

Fig. 15. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the total second order force [12 m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)].

900 910 920 930 940 950 960 970 990 1000
t (sec)

Fig. 16. Time history of the response (x) due to the combination of primary and second order force [12
m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,1)].

condition is changed to (x,y=1,1), the response and phase plots are found to be ident-
ical to those obtained for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). The phase plot is symmetric
and does not show any instability phenomenon. The subharmonics in the response
exists because of the nonlinearity of the system.
The response of the mooring system for the second order oscillatory wave force
1640 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

Fig. 17. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the combination of primary and second order force [12
m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(1,1)].

990 1000

Fig. 18. Time history of the response (x) due to the combination of primary and second order force [12
m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(-1,0.5)].

is shown in Fig. 22 for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). The response is periodic. The
maximum response is 4.15 m. The response for a different initial condition
(xj^—1,0.5) is found to be identical to those obtained for the initial condition
(x,y=0,0). The response is stable since the frequency of excitation is twice that of
the primary wave force.
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1641

-12 -1C 10 12

Fig. 19. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the combination of primary and second order force [12
m/10 s wave; (x,y)=(-1,0.5)].

900 920 940 960 980 1000

t (sec)
Fig. 20. Time history of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [18 m/15 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (1,1)].

Fig. 23 shows the response of the moored system due to the total second order
wave force for the initial condition (x,y=0,0). The response is periodic. For the other
initial condition (xj^—1,0.5), the response is found to be identical. In both cases,
the maximum response is found to be 4.35 m.
The response and phase plots for the wave forces comprising both primary and
second order forces are plotted in Figs. 24 and 25, respectively, for the initial con-
dition (x,y=0,0). The maximum response is 9.50 m. The response shown in Fig. 24
1642 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

/^>-—^r\

-10 - 8 - 6 - 4 - 2 0 2 4 6
x(m)
Fig. 21. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the primary wave force [18 m/15 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)].

900 920 940 960 980 1000

t (sec)
Fig. 22. Time history of the response (x) due to the oscillatory second order force [18 m/15 s wave;
(X,Y)=(0,0) and (-1,0.5)].

is periodic with a time period of 15 s. The phase plot (Fig. 25) represents a symmetry
breaking phenomenon. It is interesting to observe that the effect of the second order
wave force was to change the nature of the phase plot from that observed for the
primary wave force alone. While the phase plot for the primary wave force showed
a T-periodic solution, the phase plot for the combined action of the wave force
showed symmetry breaking. Thus, in this particular example, the second order effect
contributed to the change of response characteristics (i.e. from T-periodic solution
under the primary wave force to the symmetry breaking solution under the action
of the combined wave force).
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1643

900 980 1000

Fig. 23. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the total second order force [18 m/15 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)
and (-1,0.5)].

900 920 940 960 980 1000

t (sec)
Fig. 24. Time history of the response (x) due to the combination of the primary and second order force
[18 m/15 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)].

4. Conclusions

The nonlinear response behaviour of a moored buoy is obtained under three regular
sea-states. Nonlinearity in the system is offered by the nonlinear restoring force of
the mooring lines. The nonlinear force-excursion relationship of the mooring system
is represented by a 5th order antisymmetrical polynomial and the responses are
obtained by numerical integration of the equation of motion. The response of the
1644 A. Umar, T.K. Datta / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

V. I
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15

Fig. 25. Phase plot of the response (x) due to the combination of the primary and second order force
[18 m/15 s wave; (x,y)=(0,0)].

system to different kinds of wave forces shows different characteristics. For some
cases, the responses are found to be stable having periodic or harmonic oscillation.
For others, the responses show different kinds of instability such as nT subharmonic
responses, symmetry breaking bifurcation and aperiodic responses. From the present
study, the following specific observations can be made:

1. For a 5 m/5 s regular wave, the response is found to be harmonic under the
primary wave force, whereas the response is found to be oscillating but periodic
in nature under the second order oscillating force.
2. For a 5 m/5 s regular wave, the response due to the total second order forces is
larger than the response due to the first order force. This is due to the presence
of steady component F£> of the second order force. Moreover, the response is
found to be periodic under the combined first and second order wave forces.
3. For a 12 m/10 s regular wave, the nature of the response due to the primary
wave force for two different initial conditions is different. For initial condition
(x,y=1,0.5), the response shows a 5T ultra-subharmonic self-similar motion,
whereas for the initial condition (x,y=1,1), a symmetry breaking bifurcation is
observed.
4. For a 12 m/10 s regular wave, the response of the buoy due to the oscillatory
second order force is periodic with an oscillating envelope.
5. For a 12 m/10 s regular wave, the response of the buoy due to the total second
order wave force is characterized by 5/2 subharmonics. Further, the nature of the
response is found to be different for two different initial conditions under the
combination of first and second order wave forces. For initial condition (x,y=1,1),
response shows periodic motion with a time period of 50 s whereas the response
is found to be aperiodic for the initial condition (x,y=—1,0.5).
 A. Umar, T.K. Datta/Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646 1645

6. For an 18 m/15 s regular wave, the response of the buoy under first order wave
force is obtained as T-periodic; however, the response of the buoy due to the
oscillatory second order force is found to be periodic.
7. For an 18 m/15 s regular wave, the characteristics of responses are different for
the first order wave force and for the combined first and second order wave forces.
The second order effect contributes to the change of response characteristics (i.e.
from T-periodic solution under the primary wave force to symmetry breaking
solution under the action of the combined first and second order wave force).

References

Bar-Avi, P., Benaroya, H., 1996. Nonlinear dynamics of an articulated tower submerged in the ocean.
Journal of Sound and Vibration 190 (1), 77-103.
Bliek, A., Triantafyllou, M.S., 1985. Nonlinear cable dynamics. Proceedings of Behaviour of Offshore
Structures, pp. 963-972.
Brynjolfsson, S., Leonard, J.W., 1988. Effects of currents on the stochastic response to earthquakes of
multiple degree of freedom models of guyed offshore towers. Engineering Structures, Vol. 10,
194-203.
Chakrabarti, S.K., 1990. Non-linear Methods in Offshore Engineering. Developments in Marine Tech-
nology, 5. Elsevier Science Publishers, The Netherlands.
Glasscock, M.S., Finn, L.D., 1984. Design of guyed tower for 1000 ft of water. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 110 (5), 1083-1098.
Gottlieb, O., Yim, S.C.S., 1992. Nonlinear oscillations, bifurcations and chaos in a multi-point mooring
system with a geometric nonlinearity. Applied Ocean Research 14, 241—257.
Jain, A.K., Datta, T.K., 1990. Nonlinear response of guyed towers to random wave forces. Probabilistic
Engineering Mechanics 5 (2), 66-75.
Jain, A.K., Datta, T.K., 1991. Response of articulated towers to viscous drift forces. International Ship-
building progress, Vol. 88, No. (416), 315 - 331.
Kim, M.H., Yue, D.K.P., 1988. The nonlinear sum-frequency wave excitation and response of a tension
leg platform. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Behaviour of Offshore
Structures, BOSS '88, Trondheim, Norway.
Kobsyashi, M., Shimada, K., Fujchira, T., 1985. Study on dynamic response of a TLP in waves. In:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium,
ASME, 1, pp. 29-35.
Langley, R.S., 1986. On the time domain simulation of second order wave forces and induced responses.
Applied Ocean Research 8 (3), 134-143.
Liu, Y., Bergdahl, L., 1997. Frequency-domain dynamic analysis of cables. Engineering Structures 19
(6), 499-506.
Morrison, D.G., 1983. Guyed tower with dynamic mooring properties. Journal of Structural Engineering,
ASCE 109 (11), 2578-2590.
Oppenheim, B.W., Wilson, P.A., 1982. Polynomial approximations to mooring forces in equations of
low-frequency vessel motions. Journal of Ship Research 26 (1), 16-24.
Pinkster, J.A., 1987. On the determination of the statistical properties of the behaviour of moored tankers.
In: Proceedings of a Workshop on floating structures and offshore operations, Wageningen, The
Netherlands., pp. 219-232.
Sabuncu, T., Calisal, S., 1981. Hydrodynamic coefficients for vertical circular cylinders at finite depth.
Ocean Engineering, pp. 25-63.
Siddiqui, N.A., Ahmad, S., 1998. Dynamic response of tension leg platform to second order viscous drift
forces. In: CD Proceedings of International Conference on Theoretical Applied Computational and
Experimental Mechanics, IIT Kharagpur, India, December, Paper No. 17.
1646 A. Umar, T.K. Datta/Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 1625-1646

Taylor, R.E., Hung, S.M., 1987. Second order diffraction forces on vertical cylinder in regular waves.
Applied Ocean Research 9 (1), 19-30.
Umar, A., Datta, T.K., 2001. Stability analysis of a moored system. In: Proceedings of the Structural
Engineering Convention-An International Meet (SEC-2001). I.I.T. Roorkee, India, pp. 636-654.
Van Den Boom, H.J.J., 1985. Dynamic behaviour of mooring lines. In: Proceedings of Behaviour of
Offshore Structures., pp. 359-368.