Forum
Important Notice for New User Registrations
To combat an increasing number of spam and bot registrations, we now manually approve all new user registrations. While this may cause a delay until your account is approved, this step is essential to ensure the quality and security of this forum.
To help us verify your registration as legitimate, please use a clear name as user name or an official email address (such as a work, university, or similar address). If you’re concerned that we may not recognize your registration as non-spam, feel free to email us at with a request to approve your username.
Design on substructure‘s inertia
Quote from Easey on 27. November 2023, 14:18Dear David,
To get more accurate results, I need to calculate the inertia of the platform and then add it to the 6×6 SUB_MASS matrix.
From the definition of OC4, I found the geometry of the whole substructure. I got all the locations and mass of every element and tried to calculate the inertia the document presented as Graph 1 shows.
In my attempt, I use the formula ” I_roll=Mass multiply distance^2″ to compute each element’s inertia. In this approach, I assumed the element was a lump point of its centroid, and multiplied the distance from the centroid to CM.
But in this way, the result of my hand calculation can’t be consistent with the given data.
So my problem is: Do they use each subelement as a lump point to calculate inertia in the official document? Or they were using some software to get the value of inertia, and every point of the element distribution is considered instead of simply one concentrate point? Is that the reason I can not reproduce the same value by hand calculation?
Best Regards,
Easey
Dear David,
To get more accurate results, I need to calculate the inertia of the platform and then add it to the 6×6 SUB_MASS matrix.
From the definition of OC4, I found the geometry of the whole substructure. I got all the locations and mass of every element and tried to calculate the inertia the document presented as Graph 1 shows.
In my attempt, I use the formula ” I_roll=Mass multiply distance^2″ to compute each element’s inertia. In this approach, I assumed the element was a lump point of its centroid, and multiplied the distance from the centroid to CM.
But in this way, the result of my hand calculation can’t be consistent with the given data.
So my problem is: Do they use each subelement as a lump point to calculate inertia in the official document? Or they were using some software to get the value of inertia, and every point of the element distribution is considered instead of simply one concentrate point? Is that the reason I can not reproduce the same value by hand calculation?
Best Regards,
Easey
Uploaded files:- You need to login to have access to uploads.
Quote from David on 27. November 2023, 16:17Hi Easey,
from your description it seems that your approach is correct. However, I cant really help you with the details of the floater model, since we were not involved in its design and also dont know all the details regarding the published reports etc.
One critical aspect to consider, though, is the inclusion of the ballast mass (the mass of water-filled members) in your inertia calculations. Overlooking this could lead to inaccuracies in your results.
BR,
David
Hi Easey,
from your description it seems that your approach is correct. However, I cant really help you with the details of the floater model, since we were not involved in its design and also dont know all the details regarding the published reports etc.
One critical aspect to consider, though, is the inclusion of the ballast mass (the mass of water-filled members) in your inertia calculations. Overlooking this could lead to inaccuracies in your results.
BR,
David