Mooring Analysis of a Weathervaning FPSO in Bi-Directional Sea-States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental studies were carried out at the Institute for Ocean Technology, Canada, in collaboration with the University of Western Australia (UWA) to assess the response of a moored 1:60 scaled Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) model in bi-directional seastates. The seastates comprise of a regular swell approaching in the head sea condition, and a JONSWAP wind sea approaching at various angles. The FPSO was moored in position by four spring-loaded mooring lines attached to an internal turret about which the model could weathervane. Previous papers by the authors have described the unpredictable yaw instability of the FPSO driven by long period swells, which was evidenced in the experiments. This creates difficulties in comparing motions from unidirectional and bi-directional seas, because the headings alter the response. However, the mooring tensions are relatively immune to yaw instabilities and this paper discusses effects of bi-directional seas on the mooring tensions. Numerical simulations are conducted using a time domain analysis software which simulates the motions of floating and moored structures in response to irregular seas. Simulations based on the software when compared with model tests at 45, 60 and 90 deg separation between the sea and swell shows reasonable agreement in terms of mooring tensions. Simulations are then conducted for a range of separation angles, and the effects of bi-directionality are further evaluated. It is found that a linear addition of the individual seastates can produce non-conservative results, which reinforces the fact that bi-directional seastates are important considerations for offshore operations of an FPSO.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".