Most hydro-aero-servo-elastic (HASE) simulation tools for Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWT) model the platform as a rigid body, limiting their ability to predict internal structural loads. To address this, we present teddy, a new hydroelastic solver coupling the hydrodynamic capabilities of the in-house DIEGO toolbox with the open-source Chrono multibody dynamics library. This integration enables the modeling of fully flexible floating platforms. A multibody Boundary Element Method (BEM) provides the frequency-domain load input for the time-domain simulation. These bodies represent hull parts of the floater and are connected to Finite Element Model (FEM) nodes. Consequently, potential-flow loads in the multibody framework are transferred to the FEM model, implemented within Project::Chrono, which supports large deformations and nonlinear elasticity via the Absolute Nodal Coordinate Formulation (ANCF). The resulting coupled tool is first verified against theoretical results and DIEGO rigid-body simulations, yielding errors below 1% and 0.2%, respectively. Subsequently, the code is validated against experimental measurements from a flexible spar-type Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWT), showing close agreement with experimental strain and motions Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) (errors under 3.5%). A slightly higher discrepancy of 9% is found for the tower-base bending moment RAO, which is attributed to uncertainties in the mass distribution of the experimental load cell. Furthermore, an analysis of a generic tri-floater foundation is conducted with two different hydrodynamic load models. This generic tri-floater is extensively described to be reproducible, and the corresponding results are presented and analyzed. Specifically, several significant bending-moment peaks, with a normalized RAO reaching up to 20 MN m/m, are observed in the brace structures at specific wave frequencies, particularly at T = 6 s where column spacing matches the incident wavelength. This underscores the critical need for hydroelastic modeling in the early design stages.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robaux et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: