Required test durations for converged short-term wave and impact extreme value statistics — Part 1: Ferry dataset

For the design of maritime structures in waves, the extreme values of responses such as motions and wave impact loads are required. Waves and wave-induced responses are stochastic, so such responses should always be related to a probability. This information is not easy to obtain for strongly non-linear responses such as wave impact forces. Usually class rules or direct assessment via experiments or numerical simulations are applied to obtain extreme values for design. This brings up questions related to the convergence of extreme values: how long do we need to test in order to obtain converged statistics for the target duration? Or, vice versa: given testing data, what is the uncertainty of the associated statistics? Often the test or simulation duration is cut up in ‘seeds’ or ‘realisations’, with an exposure duration of one or three hours based on the typical duration of a steady environmental condition at sea, or the time that a ship sails a single course. The required number of seeds for converged results depends on the type of structure and response, the exposure duration, and the desired probability level. The present study provides guidelines for the convergence of most probable maximum (MPM) wave crest heights and MPM green water wave impact forces on a ferry. Long duration experiments were done to gain insight into the required number of seeds, and the effect of fitting. The present paper presents part 1 of this study; part 2 [1] presents similar results for wave-in-deck loads on a stationary deck box.     

Required test durations for converged short-term wave and impact extreme value statistics–Part 2: Deck box dataset

In the assessment of wave-in-deck loads for new and existing maritime structures typically model tests are carried out. To determine the most critical conditions and measure sufficient impact loads, a range of sea states and various seeds (realisations) for each sea state are tested. Based on these measurements, probability distributions can be derived and design loads determined. In air gap model testing usually only few, if any, impact loads occur per 3-hour seed. This can make it challenging to derive reliable probability distributions of the measured loads, especially when only a few seeds are generated. In addition wave impact forces, such as greenwater loading, slamming, or air gap impacts are typically strongly non-linear, resulting in a large variability of the measured loads. This results in the following questions: How many impacts are needed to derive a reliable distribution? How is the repeatability of individual events affecting the overall distribution? To answer these questions wave-in-deck model tests were carried out in 100 x 3-hour realisations of a 10,000 year North Sea sea state. The resulting probability distributions of the undisturbed wave measurements as well as the measured wave-in-deck loads are presented in this paper with focus on deriving the number of seeds and exposure durations required for a reliable estimate of design loads.The presented study is Part 2 of a combined study on guidance for the convergence and variability of wave crests and impact loading extreme values. The data set of Part 1 ([1]) is based on greenwater loads on a sailing ferry and the data set of Part 2 on wave-in-deck loads on a stationary deck box.     

Review of the uncertainties associated to hull girder hydroelastic response and wave load predictions

This paper reviews the importance of uncertainties in hull girder loads influenced by flexible fluid structure interactions. The focus is on developments in the field of hydroelastic modelling, simulation and model tests of practical relevance to the prediction hull girder wave load predictions and their validation. It is concluded that whereas hydroelastic methods for use in design development and assessment become increasingly useful, challenges in realizing and modelling uncertainties can be attributed to: (1) the limitations of numerical methods to suitably model nonlinearities; (2) the ambiguity of model tests; and (3) the systematic use of data emerging from computational, model- or full-scale methods. An approach is recommended to assess the uncertainty in the hydroelastic responses to wave loading and an example is provided to demonstrate the application of the procedure.