Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510

Reduction of VIV using suppression devicesAn

empirical approach
Gro Sagli Baarholm
a,
, Carl Martin Larsen
b
, Halvor Lie
a
a
MARINTEK, P.O. Box 4125 Valentinlyst, N0-7450 Trondheim, Norway
b
Centre for Ships and Ocean Structures (CeSoS), NTNU, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
Received 14 April 2005; received in revised form 2 January 2006; accepted 20 January 2006
Abstract
Helical strakes are known to reduce and even eliminate the oscillation amplitude of vortex-induced
vibrations (VIV). This reduction will increase the fatigue life. The optimum length and position of the
helical strakes for a given riser will vary with the current prole.
The purpose of the present paper is to describe how data from VIV experiments with suppressing
devices like fairings and strakes can be implemented into a theoretical VIV model. The computer
program is based on an empirical model for calculation of VIV. Suppression devices can be
accounted for by using user-dened data for hydrodynamic coefcients, i.e. lift and damping
coefcients, for the selected segments.
The effect of strakes on fatigue damage due to cross ow VIV is illustrated for a vertical riser
exposed to sheared and uniform current. Comparison of measured and calculated fatigue life is
performed for a model riser equipped with helical strakes. A systematic study of length of a section
with strakes for a set of current proles is done and the results are also presented.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Vortex induced vibrations; Suppression devices; Marine risers
1. Introduction
Vortex induced vibrations are known to contribute signicantly to fatigue damage for
deepwater risers and free span pipelines. The tools for VIV analysis that are presently used
ARTICLE IN PRESS
www.elsevier.com/locate/marstruc
0951-8339/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.marstruc.2006.01.003

Corresponding author. Tel.: +47 73 59 56 88; fax: +47 73 59 57 76.

E-mail address: Gro.S.Baarholm@marintek.sintef.no (G.S. Baarholm).
by the industry are semi-empirical, meaning that the response models rely only on
empirical coefcients.
Empirical models for VIV prediction of slender marine structures have been applied
since the early eighties. The models have traditionally been based on data from oscillation
tests with short (two-dimensional) cylinder sections, and some assumptions on application
of such results for a slender beam with an unlimited number of eigenfrequencies and
modes. The simplest model can handle uniform current and uniform cross sections, and is
based on the assumption that the response will appear at an eigenfrequency and have the
shape of the associated eigenmode, see Larsen and Bech [1]. There is a long evolution from
that stage to todays models, and the research effort that has made this improvement
possible has been substantial. An overview of recent research on aspects of VIV related to
empirical models is presented by Larsen [2].
A strong effort has been seen at several institutions aiming at improving these methods,
and new versions of computer programs like SHEAR7, Vandiver [3], VIVA, Triantafyllou
[4], and VIVANA, Larsen et al. [5] have been released. Parallel to this work we have also
seen progress made on alternative methods based on direct numerical simulations [6].
Strakes are used to reduce vortex-induced vibrations and belong to a larger group of
VIV suppression devices. During the years, several experiments have been conducted to
measure the effect of these devices. Some attempts have also been done to implement the
effect of strakes and other suppression devices in empirical models. So far it seems that the
existing methods are premature. Effort must be put into understanding the physics as well
as implementation and verication against experimental data.
2. Theoretical background
The purpose of this section is to give a brief introduction to the analysis method applied
by VIVANA, and to describe how suppression devices can be accounted for in this model.
A more detailed presentation of this theory is given by Larsen [5]. The model is based on a
general three-dimensional beam nite-element model that in principle can account for
variation of current and cross section properties along the structures. The element theory is
described by Fylling et al. [7].
2.1. Basic concepts
The present version of the model is based on some basic concepts:
1. The response takes place at a limited number of discrete frequencies that are all
eigenfrequencies, but with an added mass as a function of the local ow conditions. The
added mass coefcient is a function of the local ow condition, the oscillation frequency
and the cross section geometry.
2. The current prole is unidirectional and always in a plane dened by the slender stretch
or perpendicular to this plane.
3. VIV are assumed to have a cross-ow component only, meaning that oscillation in the
current direction is not accounted for.
4. A structure in sheared current will normally have one or more excitation zones (energy
input) and damping zones (energy dissipation). There will be a balance between energy
input and energy dissipation during one cycle at dynamic equilibrium, see Fig. 1.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 490
5. The excitation force is given by
F
L

1
2
rC
L
DU
2
Dl, (1)
where C
L
is a lift coefcient. The magnitude of this coefcient is given by the local ow
condition, the cross section geometry, oscillation amplitude and frequency.
6. Damping outside the excitation zone is dened by a damping coefcient also which is a
function of the same parameters as the lift coefcients.
The structural model and the method for dynamic response analysis are based on
fundamental principles well known from nite element theory, while all hydrodynamic
coefcients are empirical, found from two-dimensional experiments on rigid cylinder
sections.
2.2. Hydrodynamic coefcients
The analysis model is based on empirical coefcients for lift force, added mass and
damping. All coefcients will depend on the non-dimensional frequency
^
f
f
osc
D
U
, (2)
where f
osc
is the oscillation frequency, D is the diameter and U is the ow velocity. Both D
and U may vary along the riser, which means that all coefcients also may vary.
The lift coefcient C
L
will depend on the oscillation amplitude A as well as on the
frequency. This is obtained by use of lift coefcient curves as shown in Fig. 2. C
L
is here
given as function of the non-dimensional amplitude A/D. The lift coefcient curves are in
addition a function of the non-dimensional frequency. Hence, if the response frequency is
known, the C
L
versus A/D curve will be known at any location along the riser.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
U
C
Low flow
velocity
damping
High flow
velocity
damping
Large
amplitude
damping
A
D
A
D
=

f
U
c
Energy
in
Energy
in
0.125 0.2
Excitation
zone
f
0
D
CL=0
Fig. 1. Energy balance for vibrating riser in sheared current.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 491
The added mass coefcient is assumed to be independent of the amplitude and is
therefore given as a simple function of the frequency only.
The damping model proposed by Venugopal [8] is used in the Gopalkrishnan VIV
model. It is partly based on Fylling et al. [7] experiments on an oscillating cylinder.
Gopalkrishnan [9] made other experiments and conrmed that the damping model is
conservative, meaning that real damping normally is higher than that predicted by the
model. The model applies different formulations for damping in high and low ow velocity
regions. This VIV model includes in addition a damping term for high response amplitude
in order to take the self-limiting character of VIV into account. The term follows directly
from the lift coefcient curve in Fig. 2. If the amplitude exceeds A=D
C
L
0
, the lift
coefcient becomes negative. This means that the phase of the lift force shifts and the force
will act opposite to the velocity. Hence, the lift force will dissipate energy and thereby
contribute to damping. This effect is in particular important for cases with uniform ow
velocity. Fig. 1 illustrates the energy balance for a case with all the mentioned damping
types.
2.3. Identication of response frequencies
Before a dynamic analysis can be carried out, it is necessary to nd the static equilibrium
condition. The next step will be to identify possible response frequencies for VIV.
A response frequency is assumed to be an eigenfrequency, but since added mass will vary
with frequency and ow velocity, iterations are required. Such iterations must be carried
out for a large number of eigenfrequencies.
A subset of response frequency candidates will dene the complete set of possibly active
frequencies. These are found from an excitation range criterion dened in terms of an
interval for the non-dimensional frequency where excitation can take place. The present
study applies an interval of
0:125o
^
f o0:2. (3)
This is a pragmatic choice based on the results in Gopalkrishnan [9]. By use of this interval
one can nd an excitation zone for each response frequency, and eigenfrequencies without
an excitation zone cannot become active. Excitation zone identication is illustrated in
Fig. 1.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
C
L
A/D
D
CL=0
)
)
A
Fig. 2. Example of possible lift coefcient curves for two different non-dimensional frequencies
^
f .
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 492
The next step is to decide which eigenfrequency will dominate. The dominating
frequency is identied according to the excitation parameter, g
exc
, dened as
g
exc

Z
L
E
U
2
D
3
A
D

C
L
0
dl, (4)
where A=D
C
L
0
is found from the lift coefcient curve, see Fig. 2. A=D
C
L
0
depends on
the non-dimensional frequency
^
f . L
E
is the length of the excitation zone. The frequency
candidates are ranked according to the numerical value of this integral and the dominating
frequency has the largest value. The dominating frequency will retain its complete
excitation zone in the subsequent response analysis. The division of the remaining regions
into excitation zones for the non-dominating response frequencies will be discussed later.
2.4. The response analyses
The frequency response method is used to calculate the dynamic response at the
dominating frequency identied in the previous step. The analysis applies an iteration that
is needed since lift and damping coefcients depend on the local response amplitude.
A part of this iteration is to obtain correct phase between lift force and response at all
positions along the pipe. The result of this analysis hence gives complete information of
exciting forces and damping coefcients along the pipe.
The frequency response method is well suited for this application since the loads are
assumed to be acting at a known discrete frequency. Use of the nite element method will
give a dynamic equilibrium equation that may be written as
M rt C_ rt Krt Rt, (5)
where M is the mass matrix, C is the damping matrix and K is the stiffness matrix. r, _ r, r are
the displacement, velocity and acceleration vectors, respectively. The external loads will in
this case be harmonic, but loads at all degrees of freedom are not necessarily in phase. It is
convenient to describe this type of load pattern by a complex load vector X with harmonic
time variation at frequency o:
Rt Xe
iot
. (6)
The response vector is expressed as
rt xe
iot
. (7)
Eqs. (6) and (7) can be introduced into (5). The mass and damping matrices can be split
into structural and hydrodynamic parts. Hence we have
o
2
M
S
M
H
x ioC
S
C
H
x Kx X. (8)
The damping matrix C
S
represents structural damping and will normally be assumed to be
proportional to the stiffness matrix. C
H
contains terms from hydrodynamic damping.
Elements in the external load vector X are always in phase with the local response velocity,
but a negative lift coefcient will imply a 1801 phase shift and hence turn excitation
to damping. Since the magnitude of the lift coefcient depends on the response amplitude
(cf. Fig. 2), iteration is needed to solve the equation. Note that the response frequency is
xed during this iteration.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 493
The response vector x is complex and is hence able to describe a harmonic response at all
nodes, but the responses may have different phase. This means that the response will not
necessarily appear as a standing wave, but may also have contribution from travelling
waves. From a mathematical point of view x is equivalent to a complex mode as found
from a damped eigenvalue problem.
The iteration will identify a response shape and amplitude that gives consistency
between the response levels, lift coefcients and the local ow condition. The mode shape
corresponding to the selected response frequency is used as an initial estimate for the
response vector, but the nal result is not dened in terms of normal modes.
In the general case, the dominating frequency will not have an excitation zone
that covers the total riser length. Consequently, excitation may take place at
other frequencies in zones outside the primary zone. A similar analysis must therefore
be carried out for other frequencies, but the excitation zone for these frequencies
will be reduced according to the zone already taken by the more dominating ones. Hence,
zone overlaps are avoided, and the dominating frequency will have the largest possible
zone.
A fundamental assumption is that the responses from the frequencies involved can be
linearly superimposed. This assumption has never been veried by dedicated experiments.
Nevertheless, linear superposition of contributions from a set of discrete response
frequencies has often been assumed as basis for empirical methods [3] and is generally
recognized to give conservative results.
3. Hydrodynamic damping model
Elements outside of the excitation zone will add damping to the system. The damping
model for the bare riser in the VIV model consists of a low velocity model and a high
velocity model. The term refers to current velocities that are lower or higher than the
velocity within the excitation zone. The damping on sections equipped with VIV
suppression devices is calculated using the lift curves valid for the actual suppression
device. Note that the lift coefcient curves are used to calculate both excitation forces and
damping for the section with suppression devices. This means that lift coefcient curves as
illustrated on Fig. 2 must be known for the cross section shape in question for a sufciently
large range of the non-dimensional frequency
^
f . An illustration of the damping
and excitation zones for a riser partly equipped with VIV suppression devices is shown
in Fig. 3.
3.1. Bare riser
For the bare riser the damping model proposed by Venugopal [8] is applied. The model
is partly based on experiments done by Gopalkrishnan [9] in driven cylinder oscillation
tests. Miliou et al. [6] veried that the model is conservative also for the case where the
response consists of two frequencies: one corresponding to the local vortex shedding
frequency and the other at either higher or lower frequency.
The damping force coefcient on a cylinder section with diameter D, oscillating with
cross-ow amplitude of x
0
, frequency o, in a uid with density r, viscosity n, and incident
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 494
velocity U (if current), is given as
1. Damping in still water:
c
sw

oprD
2
2
2

2
p

Re
o
p k
sw
x
0
D

2
" #
, (9)
where Re
o
oD
2
=n. The rst part corresponds to the skin friction according to Stokes
law. The second part is the pressure-dominated force. The factor k
sw
is a value found from
curve tting to be 0.25.
2. Low reduced velocity damping:
c
1
c
sw
rDUc
vl
. (10)
The damping is increasing linearly with respect to the incident ow velocity. The coefcient
c
vl
was found to be 0.18 based on measurements.
3. High reduced velocity damping:
c
2
r
U
2
o
c
vh
. (11)
This coefcient is independent of the amplitude ratio. The coefcient c
vh
was found to be
0.2 based on measurements.
The force coefcient above has dimensions [(N/m)/(m/s)] and corresponds to the
F
damp
c
f
_ x part of the dynamic equilibrium equation. It is straightforward to nd the
corresponding non-dimensional negative lift coefcients that yield the same damping
(or energy dissipation). Fig. 4 shows that the Venugopal [8] damping model is conservative
compared to the results from the experiments both for low- and high-reduced velocities.
The dots mark the measured lift coefcient found from the experiments, while the lines
show the lift coefcient predicted by the Venugopal damping model. The experiments are
conducted with sub-critical ow conditions.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Strakes
riser
Damping
zone
Damping
zone
Bare
risers
f
min

f
max

Venugopal (high velocity)

damping

f (z)
Damping and excitation
force from lift curves for
riser with strakes
U(z) D(z)
Excitation force from lift
curves valid for bare riser
Venugopal (low velocity)
damping
Zone, L
E
Excitation
Fig. 3. Damping and excitation zones for partly straked riser.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 495
3.2. Riser with VIV suppression devices
A riser can be partly covered with VIV suppression devices, such as strakes. Strakes will
normally not contribute to excitation, but only to damping. In the present model a straked
segment can be dened to be within the excitation length. However, the effect on the
damping is taken into account when computing the excitation parameters.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 4. Low- and high-reduced velocity-damping results compared to model, Vikestad et al. [10].
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 496
Fig. 3 shows a sketch of a vertical riser with uniform cross section exposed to sheared
current. The excitation zone for a given response frequency is shown with black arrow. The
straked segments consist of an excitation zone and a damping zone. The damping on the
upper part of the riser is calculated using the lift curves dened for the sections with
suppression devices. This implies that the lift coefcients must be negative for all
frequencies and all A/D ratios. In the damping zone, the damping contribution is
calculated using
c
cl

rDU
2
C
L
2oA
, (12)
where C
L
is the lift coefcient. An example of lift curves for strakes is shown in Fig. 5 for a
set of non-dimensional frequencies, MARINTEK [12]. The strake height is 15% of the
diameter.
If the lift coefcient in the excitation zone is negative, the lift force will dissipate energy and
we will have a damping contribution. The damping coefcient is calculated using Eq. (12).
This implies that the damping model is identical to the model used in the excitation zone.
So far, only the damping on sections exposed to current is treated. However, there is
damping on a segment with zero current, i.e. still water damping. For straked segments,
the still water damping is found using the still water damping coefcient, c
sw
, dened as
c
sw

oprD
2
2
1
A
D

2
" #
F
still
, (13)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
-5
-4.5
-4
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
A/D [-]
C
L

[
-
]
Strakes-STK.150
f=0.677 [-]
f=0.304 [-]
f=0.195 [-]
f=0.144 [-]
f=0.115 [-]
f=0.096 [-]
f=0.084 [-]
f=0.074 [-]
Fig. 5. Lift curves for strakes with strake height 15% of the diameter, Huse and Sther [11].
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 497
where F
still
is a scaling coefcient. This coefcient must be found from decay tests in still
water. The still water damping coefcient as a function of the A/D ratio is shown in Fig. 6
together with the data points.
3.3. Hydrodynamic damping, C
H
The coefcients in the hydrodynamic damping matrix for an element are found in the
standard FEM way:
C
ij

Z
l
cxN
i
xN
j
x dx, (14)
where N denotes the shape functions for the element. c(x) represents any of the previous
dened damping coefcients c
sw
, c
1
, c
2
, c
f
and c
cl
. Note that these shape functions must be
the same when calculating the damping as for the mass and the stiffness matrix.
4. Case study
The VIV model is in the following sections used to calculate vortex induced vibrations
and the corresponding fatigue life on a vertical riser exposed to uniform and sheared
current. The maximum current speed is in both cases 0.5 m/s. Finally, the theoretical model
is used to calculate the fatigue damage on a model riser (High Mode VIV test) and the
results are compared to experimental data, MARINTEK [12]. The current proles and
current speeds applied are listed in Table 3 together with the corresponding test numbers.
The risers are partly covered with strakes. The strakes are in all cases applied from the
top of the riser. The strakes have a height of 0.14D and the pitch is 5D. The lift curves for a
very similar prole with 5D pitch and 0.15D height are used as input to the numerical
model. The lift curves are shown in Fig. 5.
The physical properties of the riser models are shown in Table 1. The structural damping
ratio is 1% for all cases.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
A/D [-]
c
s
w

[
k
g
/
m
s
]
Fig. 6. Still water damping using general lift curves.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 498
4.1. SN-curves
The fatigue damage is calculated using Miner summation assuming Rayleigh distributed
stress ranges and counting the stress cycles using rainow counting.
The SN-curve is dened as
log N
i
log a mlog Ds
i
, (15)
where a is the scale parameter and m is the slope parameter. N
i
is the number of cycles to
failure at stress range Ds
i
.
Throughout the analysis, the D curve NORSOK standard [13] is applied. The curve
chosen is valid for specimens in seawater exposed to free corrosion. Since this SN-curve
consists of one segment, applying other curves with m 3 will just introduce a scale
difference in the estimated fatigue damage. The choice of curve is therefore of less
importance in this study.
The SN-data applied are listed in Table 2.
The stress concentration factors are set to 1.0 for all cases. The thickness of the pipe is
less than the reference thickness. Hence, no thickness correction is applied.
4.2. Vertical riser in uniform and sheared current
The dominating mode as a function of the strake coverage is shown in Fig. 7. It can be
seen that the dominating mode for uniform current is constant and equal to 10 for all
cases. This is as expected since the dominating mode is determined using the excitation
parameter (Eq. (4)). The excitation parameter is equally reduced for all mode candidates
and the frequency rank will be dened by the parameter A=D
C
L
0
only. Hence, the same
frequency will always be selected, independent of the length of the bare riser. The
dominating mode number for sheared current is decreasing as the strake coverage is
increasing. This is the consequence of applying strakes from the top of the riser in
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 1
Physical property of risers
Parameters Vertical riser Model riser
Total length between pinned ends 612 m 38.00 m
Outer diameter 0.5 m 27 mm
Wall thickness 15 mm 3.0 mm
Bending stiffness 1.39 10
5
kNm
2
37.2 Nm
2
Axial stiffness 4.7 10
6
kN/m
2
5.09 10
5
N
Mass (air lled) 179.5 kg/m 0.761 kg/m
Table 2
SN-curve
SN-curve log K m Ref. thickness (mm)
D 11.687 3.0 25
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 499
combination with a triangular current prole, meaning that excitation will take place at a
lower current speed for increasing length of the straked section.
The excitation length is plotted in Fig. 8. The frequency candidates are ranked according
to the numerical value of the excitation parameter. The primary frequency will retain the
complete excitation zone in the succeeding response analysis. One consequence of this is
that the excitation zone that covers the straked section of the riser will still be considered as
excitation even if the lift curve is negative and gives a negative lift, i.e. only damping
contribution. This is illustrated in Fig. 8 showing the excitation length as a function of the
strake coverage. Based on the above, the excitation length for uniform current will always
be constant. However, the excitation length for the sheared current case will decrease, since
dominating mode number decreases.
When the excitation lengths are determined, the response analysis can be conducted. The
lift coefcient for bare riser, 25% and 58% strake coverages as a function of the water
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Dominating Mode
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 80 60 40 20
Strake coverage [%]
sheared
uniform
Fig. 7. Dominating mode in uniform and sheared current as a function of strake coverage.
Excitation Length
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
sheared
uniform
0 80 60 40 20
Strake coverage [%]
Fig. 8. Excitation lengths in uniform and sheared current as a function of strake coverage.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 500
depth, is shown in Fig. 9. Results for both sheared and uniform current are included. As
can be seen, the lift coefcient for a bare riser is always positive for the sheared current
case. This is because the (A/D) ratio is small and large amplitude damping is hence
avoided. For the uniform current case, the lift coefcient is negative at some parts of the
riser. This is due to large amplitude damping. Adding strakes on the top part of the riser,
the lift coefcient becomes negative on the straked part. The strakes contribute to a
negative lift, i.e. damping. Increasing the strake coverage to 58%, the riser in the uniform
ARTICLE IN PRESS
-2 -1 0 1
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
C
L
[-] C
L
[-]
W
a
t
e
r

d
e
p
t
h

[
m
]
Uniform
-0.5 0 0.5 1
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
Sheared
0% strakes
25% strakes
58% strakes
Fig. 9. Lift coefcient for dominating modes for strake coverages 0% (bare riser), 25% and 58% for riser in
uniform and sheared current.
Fatigue life [years]
0.0
0.1
1.0
0 40 20 60
Strake coverage [%]
uniform
Fig. 10. Fatigue life as a function of strake coverage, uniform current prole.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 501
current case experiences a large negative excitation force. For the corresponding case when
the riser is exposed to sheared current, the lift coefcient is positive in the excitation zone,
but negative where strakes are found within the excitation zone. This is basically the result
of the excitation zone only being on the bare riser part. One should remember that the
damping is properly accounted for on the straked part of the riser. The lift curves for the
straked segments are used when the damping force is calculated.
Finally, the fatigue life is calculated. The minimum fatigue life for uniform and sheared
current is shown in Figs. 10 and 11 as a function of the strake coverage. As can be seen, the
fatigue life increases as the strake coverage increases. The increment is signicantly larger
for the sheared current cases. The increase in fatigue life is inuenced by curvature and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fatigue life [years]
1
100
10000
1000000
100000000
60 40 20 0
Strake coverage [%]
sheared
Fig. 11. Fatigue life as a function of strake coverage, sheared current prole.
Table 3
Test number of the selected cases for VIV simulations
Uniform
u (m/s) Bare riser 5D pitch and 0.14D height
VIVANA: 100% 90% 75% 50%
Experiments: 91% 82% 62% 41%
0.9 2070 6070 6670 7270 7870
1.0 2080 6080 6680 7280 7880
1.1 2090 6090 6690 7290 7890
Shear
u (m/s) Bare riser 5D pitch and 0.14D height
VIVANA: 100% 90%
Experiments: 91% 82%
0.9 2370 6370 6970
1.0 2380 6380 6980
1.1 2390 6390 6990
The strake coverage used in the experiments and VIV simulation is shown in percent.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 502
response amplitude. As already mentioned, the mode number is constant for the uniform
case while the mode number decreases for sheared current. For the latter case, this implies
that the curvature decreases as well. Hence, the increase in fatigue life for sheared current is
a result of the combination of reduced mode number and response amplitude. The main
contribution to the increase in fatigue life for the uniform case is the reduction in response
amplitude and consequently a smaller change in fatigue life.
The intention of this study is solely to illustrate the use of the program. The results are
not veried by tests. However, the next section makes a comparison with test results.
4.3. Model riser in sheared and uniform current
The model riser is exposed to sheared and uniform current. The strake coverage in the
experiments varies from 41% to 91%. In the experiments, the model riser did not have a
continuous strake section. Since the model riser is heavily instrumented, there were
intervening gaps. This implies that a riser with 91% strake coverage is a model of a riser
completely covered with strakes. For 91% and 82% strake coverage the distribution of
strakes is uniform along the riser. For 62% and 41% coverage the strakes were removed
from the riser such that the highest current region remained covered during the linear shear
ow tests. In the experiments, two different strake congurations were tested out.
However, in this study one has been concentrating on the test with strakes with 5D pitch
and 0.14D height that resembles the strakes in Fig. 5 as accurately as possible.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
10
3.8
10
3.5
10
3.2
Case No.:2070
0 10 20 30 40
10
5
10
10
Case No.:6670
0 10 20 30 40
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
8
Case No.:7270
Position [m] Position [m]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
10
3
10
4
10
5
Case No.:7870
Fig. 12. Fatigue life (top left: bare riser, top right: 90%/82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom
right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current U
max
0.9 m/s.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 503
The cases chosen for comparison with the theoretical model are listed in Table 3.
Totally 24 cases are chosen for this study. For the case of simplicity, the gap between the
strakes used for the instrumentation during the experiments is not accounted for in the
VIVANA simulations. The area covered with strakes will therefore be somewhat larger
than in the tests. The strake coverage used in the simulations and experiments are found in
Table 3.
The fatigue distributions for the uniform current cases are shown in Figs. 1214. The
gures show the envelope fatigue life curves from the top of the riser (pos 0) to the
bottom (pos 38) calculated by VIVANA. In addition, the fatigue life calculated from
measured bending strain is included. As can be seen, not all the cases listed in Table 3 are
reported in terms of fatigue plots. This is because the theoretical model did not calculate
the fatigue damage if the cross ow displacement was found to be less than 1% of the
diameter. Nor is fatigue damage reported if the riser is completely covered with strakes
only contributing to damping. These cases are considered to have zero VIV fatigue
damage.
Looking at Figs. 1214 it seems that the calculated fatigue life corresponds adequately to
fatigue life found from measured strains for cases with strake coverage of 41% and 62%.
Note that an amplitude error of e will be amplied by e3 (exponent) for fatigue damage
because of the SN curve exponent. For cases with 82% and 91% strake coverage, the
strake model fails to represent the observed behaviour.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
10
4
10
3
10
2
Case No.:2080
0 10 20 30 40
10
4
10
6
10
8
10
10
Case No.:6680
0 10 20 30 40
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
8
Case No.:7280
Position [m] Position [m]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
10
3
10
4
10
5
Case No.:7880
Fig. 13. Fatigue life (top left: bare riser, top right: 90%/82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom
right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current U
max
1.0 m/s.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 504
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
10
2
10
3
10
4
Case No.:2090
0 10 20 30 40
10
4
10
6
10
8
10
10
Case No.:6690
0 10 20 30 40
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
8
Case No.:7290
Position [m] Position [m]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
10
3
10
4
10
5
Case No.:7890
Fig. 14. Fatigue life (top left: bare riser, top right: 90%/82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom
right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current U
max
1.1 m/s.
0 10 20 30 40
10
4
10
5
10
6
Case No.:2370
0 10 20 30 40
10
4
10
5
10
6
Case No.:2380
0 10 20 30 40
10
3
10
4
10
5
Case No.:2390
Position [m]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
F
a
t
i
g
u
e

l
i
f
e

[
y
r
s
]
VIVANA
experiments
Fig. 15. Sheared current cases (top left: 0.9 m/s, top right: 1.0 m/s, bottom left: 1.1 m/s). Bare riser.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 505
Fig. 15 shows the fatigue life distribution for the bare riser exposed to sheared
current. The fatigue life calculated with the VIV model seems to be larger than the
fatigue life found using the measured strain. When the model is equipped with strakes, the
VIV model reports insignicant fatigue damage. Hence, no plots are presented for these
cases.
The cross ow displacements estimated using VIVANA for the same cases and
compared to the measured displacement are shown in Figs. 1619. As can be seen, the
displacement compares well with the measured results for the cases with strake coverage
41% and 62%. Comparison of dominating modes and frequencies are shown in Table 4.
The main visual observations are summed up in Table 5. It seems that the results can be
divided into three categories. The categories are bare riser, partly straked riser and fully
straked riser. The VIV model is able to calculate the fatigue damage reasonably good for
the cases with 41% and 62% strake coverage, but for the cases where the riser is almost
completely covered with strakes the VIV model is inadequate. This is because the physical
characteristics for the partly straked riser are similar to a bare riser, while the fully straked
riser has other characteristics not implemented in VIVANA.
In MARINTEK [14] it is found that the 5D strakes have signicantly different physical
characteristics compared to the 17.5D strakes. The VIV response using 5D strakes can be
estimated using the existing VIV tools for partly covered strakes. However, the
characteristics of the 17.5D strakes do not resemble a bare riser and hence the VIV
tools will fail to work. This phenomenon is also mentioned by Frank et al. [15].
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Case No.:2070
0 10 20 30 40
0
2
4
6
10
-3 Case No.:6670
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
Case No.:7270
Position [m] Position [m]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Case No.:7870
Fig. 16. Displacement standard deviation given on non-dimensional form (A/D). (Top left: bare riser, top right: 90%/
82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current U
max
0.9 m/s.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 506
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
Case No.:2080
0 10 20 30 40
0
2
4
6
Case No.:6680
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Case No.:7280
Position [m] Position [m]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Case No.:7880
10
-3
Fig. 17. Displacement standard deviation given on non-dimensional form (A/D). (Top left: bare riser, top right:
90%/82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current
U
max
1.0 m/s.
Table 4
Dominating modes and frequencies from experiments and simulations
Current
prole
U
max
(m/s) Test no. Strake
coverage (%)
Dominating mode Mode frequency (Hz)
Experiments Simulations Experiments Simulations
Uniform 0.9 2070 0 6 9 5.0 6.2
1.0 2080 0 7 10 7.5 6.3
1.1 2090 0 8 12 6.4 7.0
0.9 6670 82 6 6 3.4 4.3
1.0 6680 82 7 6 3.5 4.8
1.1 6690 82 8 8 4.1 5.3
0.9 7270 62 9 9 5.2 5.6
1.0 7280 62 9 10 5.5 6.3
1.1 7290 62 10 12 6.1 6.9
0.9 7870 41 8 9 5.1 5.6
1.0 7880 41 9 10 5.7 6.3
1.1 7890 41 9 12 6.2 6.9
Shear 0.9 2370 0 6 6 4.6 4.3
1.0 2380 0 7 6 4.9 4.8
1.1 2390 0 7 8 8.5 5.3
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 507
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
Case No.:2090
0 10 20 30 40
0
2
4
6
Case No.:6690
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Case No.:7290
Position [m]
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Case No.:7890
10
-3
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
Fig. 18. Displacement standard deviation given on non-dimensional form (A/D). (Top left: bare riser, top right:
90%/82% strakes, bottom left: 75%/62% strakes, bottom right: 50%/41% strakes). Uniform current U
max

1.1 m/s.
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Case No.:2370
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
Case No.:2380
VIVANA
experiments
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Case No.:2390
Position [m]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
A
/
D
r
m
s

[
-
]
Fig. 19. Displacement standard deviation given on non-dimensional form (A/D). Sheared current cases (top left:
0.9 m/s, top right: 1.0 m/s, bottom left: 1.1 m/s). Bare riser.
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 508
5. Conclusions
A theoretical VIV model is presented. The theoretical model is implemented in a
computer program based on an empirical model for calculation of VIV. Suppression
devices can be accounted for by using user-dened data for hydrodynamic coefcients, i.e.
lift and damping coefcients, for selected segments.
The theoretical model can cover cases with up to approximately 75% coverage of VIV
suppression devices. For these cases the bare riser controls the VIV behaviour (frequency,
mode, etc.).
For larger coverage the straked riser takes control of the VIV behaviour. Model tests
indicate a different physical behaviour depending on the pitch and height of the strake
triple start. The behaviour seems to be strongly dependent on pitch and height of the
strakes. In general, the responding frequencies and mode numbers are lower than for the
cases controlled by the bare riser.
Acknowledgements
The present work has been supported by the Norwegian Marine Technology Research
Institute (MARINTEK), the Norwegian Deepwater Program (NDP) and the Centre of
Excellence on Ships and Ocean Structures (CeSOS) at the Norwegian University of
Technology and Science (NTNU).
References
[1] Larsen CM, Bech A. Stress analysis of marine risers under lock-in conditions. Proceedings from the 5th
OMAE conference, Tokyo; 1986.
[2] Larsen CM. Empirical VIV models. WVIVOS, workshop on vortex-induced vibrations of offshore
structures. Sao Paulo, Brazil; 1416 August 2000.
[3] Vandiver JK, Li L. SHEAR7 V4.2f program theoretical manual. Department of Ocean Engineering MIT,
Massachusetts, USA; 2003.
[4] Triantafyllou MS, Triantafyllou GS, Tein D, Ambrose BD. Pragmatic riser VIV analysis. OTC 10931; 1999.
[5] Larsen CM, Vikestad K, Yttervik R, Passano E. VIVANA, theory manual. MARINTEK Report,
Trondheim, Norway; 2000.
[6] Miliou A, Sherwin SJ, Graham JMR. Three-dimensional wakes of curved pipes. OMAE2002-28308; 2002.
[7] Fylling IJ, Larsen CM, Sdahl N, Ormberg H, Engseth AG, Passano E, et al. RIFLEXtheory manual.
SINTEF Report STF70 F95219, Trondheim; 1995.
[8] Venugopal M. Damping and response prediction of a exible cylinder in a current. PhD thesis, Department
of Ocean Eng, MIT; 1996.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 5
VIVANA fatigue damage trends
Current prole Percentage coverage 5D strakes
Bare riser Partly straked riser
(41% and 62%)
Fully straked riser (82% and 91%)
Uniform Reasonable Reasonable Insignicant VIV response for VIVANA
Sheared Reasonable Insignicant VIV response for VIVANA
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 509
[9] Gopalkrishnan R. Vortex-induced forces on oscillating bluff cylinders. ScD thesis, Department of Ocean
Engineering, MIT, and Department of Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering, WHOI, USA; 1993.
[10] Vikestad K, Larsen CM, Vandiver JK. Norwegian deepwater program: damping of vortex-induced
vibrations. OTC Paper 11998, Houston, TX, USA; 2000.
[11] Huse E, Sther LK. VIV excitation and damping of straked risers. 20th international conference on offshore
mechanics and arctic engineering. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2001.
[12] MARINTEK report: NDP riser high mode VIV tests. main report. 2004-03-24, DRAFT report no.
512394.00.01 (Condential).
[13] NORSOK Standard. Design of steel structuresAnnex Cfatigue strength analysis; 1998.
[14] MARINTEK report: NDP riser high mode VIV testsCTR02: modal analysis, 2004-05-12. DRAFT report
no. 590002.00.02 (Condential).
[15] Frank WR, Tognarelli MA, Slocum ST, Campbell RB, Balasubramanian SR. Flow-induced vibration of a
long, exible, straked cylinder in uniform and linearly sheared currents. OTC 2004 / OTC16340; 2004.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.S. Baarholm et al. / Marine Structures 18 (2005) 489510 510