Você está na página 1de 42

An FSO/FPSO Providers View on Station Keeping Options

FPSO Design Conference 2007 Beijing March 2007 Poul Erik Christiansen

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

Who is MISC ?

MISCs Fleets
Description Current as at Feb 07 Average Age (yrs) Contracted/ New builds Total

LNG CARRIERS PETROLEUM TANKERS - VLCCs - Aframax Crude Tankers - Panamax Crude Tankers CHEMICAL TANKERS BULK CARRIERS CONTAINERSHIPS FPSO / FSO

21 49 7 37 1 18 2 20 5

10.0 1.6 7.5 5.0 9.9 3.5 8.0 1

8 5 1 -

29 55

- Pool of Tankers 18 (>50 tankers) for potential Conversion - to FSO / FPSOs 2 2 3 22 8

Total

112

7.7

19

131
4

Development of MISC OBU


Yr 2002 to 2004 Yr 2005 to 2008 Yr 2008 onwards

Resilient & Capability Building


Business Set-up Management Approval Vision & Mission Setting Team Formation FSO Caspian Sea FPSO B.Kertas Capability Building Corporate Alignment Organisational Building Develop Partnership FSO Angsi FPSO Kikeh FSO Cendor FPSO Baram FSO Abu Cluster

Growth

Regional/International Marketing Leverage with International Business Niche-Technology/Capability Consortium/Partnership Local Shallow/Deepwater Regional Deepwater South Africa/America Deepwater

MISC FPSO/FSOs in Malaysia PSCs


Block B & 48/95
MORAGOT

(UNOCAL)

Vietnam
44 37

Ca Mau

Myanmar

Laos

Hanoi

Can San Island

7 /9 52 ) k CAL oc O Bl (UN
TON SAK

Thailand

Vietnam
South China Sea

Philippines

FPSO Kikeh

Andaman Sea

Cambodia

Ho Chi Minh City Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Brunei

45
Noi Lake BONGKOT MUDA Thale Luang Lake TAPI JENGKA MALI AMARIT SURYA BUMI B. PAKMA B. DAHLIA BGADING ULAR B. ORKID B. TERATAI

38

Singapore

(CPOC) 39

B17

FSO CaspianHindi Ocean Sea FSO Caspian Sea FSO Caspian Sea
34

Indonesia

Songkhla

SENJA

BULAN

Armada LEGEND
B. KEKWA B. RAYA BUNDI

FPSO Perkasa
22

A18 (CTOC) C19 (CPOC)


Pattani Satun

TALISMAN

GAJAH

PM-302
(Mutiara)

PM-301
(Mutiara)

DAMAR LAWIT BINTANG

PM-5 PSC (Open)


MESAH

FPSO B.Kertas

28

SHELL CARIGALI CS MUTIARA

Thailand
Narathiwat Alor Setar

FSO Cendor JERNEH


PM-311
SEPAT

PIATU

AMERADA HESS

NORING KUDA

(Murphy)
LAHO

LARUT

PM-312
(Murphy)
N. LUKUT BINDU ABU PENARA BUBU

PM-8 PSC (Open)


LEREK

EMEPMI CPOC

23

Kota Bharu

PM-303
(Shell)
P. Perhentian P. Redang P. Bidong

INAS BEDONG TUJOH

MELOR BUJANG TANGGA

PM-309
(Open)

CTOC FSO Abu Cluster

30

UNOCAL MURPHY Blocks Offered Open Areas Oil Field Gas Field Gas/Condensate Field Non-producing Oil Fields Non-producing Gas Fields Non-producing Gas/Condensate Fileds Oil Pipeline Gas Pipeline

PM-306
(Carigali)
MERANTI

LABA B.

SERUDON RAYA

PANTAI LANGAT CNGAT PETA BELUMUT

24

DULANG RESAK

TELOK TABUGUNTONG SEMANGKOK SEROK IRONG CENDOR NW. BESAR TEMBIKAI ANGSI PALAS TAPIS BEKOK

KETUMBAR

George Town

PM-304

SELIGI PULAI OPHIR LEDANG ANOA

Peninsular Malaysia
Taiping

Kuala Terengganu
Kenyir Dam

(Open)

FSO Angsi
PM-307
(Carigali)

BESAR S. ANGSI SOTONG DUYONG ANDING DELAH MALONG

PM-12
(Carigali)

Condensate Pipeline 25 50 Kilometers

Ipoh

Kerteh

Corporate Organisation

Heavy Engineering Yard Topside Fabrication


Ship and Offshore Structures Conversion & Ship Repair

FSO/FPSO Operations
Facility Ops & Mgnmnt Logistics Marine Operations

OTHER SUBSIDIARIES

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

Station Keeping Overview

Spread Mooring Turret Mooring Dynamically Positioning

Station Keeping Overview


Spread Mooring
Generally used on floating production systems in milder environments. The spread mooring performs two main functions Maintains vessel on station through multiple mooring lines directly connected to the vessel at both the stern and the bow of the vessel. The floating production system heading has to be optimised by mooring the vessel facing the most heavily loaded environmental direction.

10

Station Keeping Overview


Turret Mooring
Weathervaning mooring systems are a common choice for ship based floating production systems in moderate to harsh environments. The turret mooring performs four main functions Maintains vessel on station through multiple mooring lines which come together at a single point, the turntable. Allows weathervaning or rotation of the vessel to adopt to the optimum orientation in response to environmental conditions. Incoming fluid transfer from the risers to the process plant / storage tanks and gas/water export via a swivel path system Provides transfer of electrical, hydraulic and other control signals.
11

Station Keeping Overview


Thruster Based Dynamically Positioning
Sole source of station keeping or used to assist a catenary mooring system The DP Thrust System provide thrust to keep equilibrium with external forces of: Current Waves Wind Other external forces e.g. from risers or export tanker The DP system consists of the following main sub-systems Thruster system (typically four to six thrusters) Power generation system Control system Sensors, a position reference system Main applications of DP station keeping to date is for deepwater Drill Ships and Drilling Semis

12

Station Keeping Design Considerations


Establish representative and accurate environmental conditions:
For Spread Mooring particular directionality data For Turret Mooring or DP systems (weather vaning) particular co-linearity of wind, wave and current

Determine vessel motions with high accuracy Select a mooring system with sufficient compliancy to not overload mooring lines, while maintaining vessel excursions within allowable limits of riser system Evaluate the interface with supply boat operations and export tanker berthing to maximise operability
13

First & Second Order Motions


FPSO Surge Motion Time History
Surge Motion (m )
30 20 10 0 -10 0 -20 -30
600 1200 1800 2400 3000 3600

Time History (sec)

FPSO Wave Frequency Surge Motion Time History


30 20 10 0 -10 0 -20 -30

Surge Motion

(m )

600

1200

1800

2400

3000

3600

Time History (sec)

30 20 10 0 -10 0 -20 -30

FPSO Low Frequency (Second Order) Surge Motion Time History

Surge Motion

(m )

600

1200

1800

2400

3000

3600

Time (sec)

14

Motion Sensitivity to Wave Height


100 90

10% Increase in Wave Height 19% Increase in Excursion


Excursion @ 6.50m Hs = 28.08 m Excursion @ 7.15m Hs = 33.44 m (33.44 - 28.08)/(28.08) = 0.19 = 19%

80

Vessel Excursion (m)

70

60 Wave Frequency Motion Low Frequency Motion 40 Total Excursion

50

30

20

10

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Significant Wave Height Hs (m)

15

Mooring Line Loading


10000 9000

10% Increase in Wave Height 37% Increase in Line Load


Line load @ 6.50m Hs = 2600 kN Line load @ 7.15m Hs = 3550 kN (3550-2600)/(2600) = 0.37 = 37%

8000

7000

Line Tension (kN)

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Vessel Excursion (m)

16

Typical South China Sea Survival Environmental Data


100 Year Return Period Extreme Survival Environmental Data N Significant Wave Height, Hs (m) Peak Period, Tp (Sec) Mean Zero Crossing Period, Tz (sec) Max Wave Height, Hmax (m) Associated Period, Tmax (sec) 1 hour Associated Wind Speed (m/sec) 1 min Associated Wind Speed (m/sec) Associated surface current (m/sec) 5.0 9.4 7.2 8.9 9.5 19.2 22.6 0.83 NE 6.4 9.9 7.8 11.4 10.0 22.1 26.0 0.87 E 2.8 8.4 6.2 5.1 8.4 16.1 19.0 0.68 SE 1.8 7.7 5.5 3.4 7.8 4.0 4.7 0.22 S 3.0 8.5 6.3 5.5 8.6 14.6 17.3 0.65 SW 3.0 8.5 6.3 5.5 8.6 17.5 20.7 0.82 W 3.4 8.7 6.5 6.1 8.8 17.4 20.5 0.69 NW 3.1 8.6 6.4 5.7 8.6 10.5 12.4 0.46

17

Typical South China Sea Operating Environmental Data


1 Year Return Period Operating Environmental Data N Significant Wave Height, Hs (m) Peak Period, Tp (Sec) Mean Zero Crossing Period, Tz (sec) Max Wave Height, Hmax (m) Associated Period, Tmax (sec) 1 hour Associated Wind Speed (m/sec) 1 min Associated Wind Speed (m/sec) Associated surface current (m/sec) 3.6 8.8 6.6 6.5 8.9 14.5 17.1 0.69 NE 4.6 9.3 7.1 8.3 9.3 16.7 19.7 0.70 E 2.0 7.9 5.6 3.7 7.9 12.2 14.4 0.55 SE 1.3 7.2 5.0 2.5 7.3 3.0 3.6 0.19 S 2.2 8.0 5.8 4.0 8.0 11.1 13.1 0.54 SW 2.2 8.0 5.8 4.0 8.0 13.3 15.7 0.68 W 2.4 8.2 5.9 4.4 8.2 13.1 15.5 0.56 NW 2.3 8.0 5.8 4.1 8.1 7.9 9.4 0.38

18

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

19

Case Example 1 Angsi FSO


Spread Moored FSO Bridge Linked to MOAB Platform

20

Case Example 1 Angsi FSO


Description
475,000 BBL Storage FSO (Panama Max) 15 year design life PM305 South Angsi Field - Malaysia

Key Features
Orientation North-East / South - West 12 point Spread Mooring 92 mm Studless Chain 6 Above water chain stoppers forward
6 Underwater fairleads & deck mounted stoppers aft 2 Holdback Mooring Buoys for export tanker mooring 46m Personnel Transfer Bridge with +22/-6m stroke 3 x 6 Interconnecting Hoses Crude Oil Import Fuel Gas Import Diesel Oil Export Stern Offloading (floating hose with MBC & QCDC + hawser with QRH)

Project Highlights
9 month conversion schedule Fist Oil August 2005 46 No of Off-Takes Total 13.4 mill bbl exported
21

Case Example 1 Angsi FSO


Operational Experience
Personal Transfer Bridge uptime 100% FSO oil receiving uptime 100% Underwater Stern Moorings proven to avoid chafing of offloading hose and interference with boat operations Berthing of export tankers proven to be difficult during South-West monsoon period (weather approach FSO stern) Port closed for up to 13 days Lost production 190,000 bbl Parting of lines between export tanker and Hold Back Mooring Buoys Main Mooring Hawser breakage 1 & sometimes 2 additional tug required for export tanker berthing (against originally 2 support vessels planned)

Hold Back Mooring Buoy


22

Case Example 2 Cendor FSO


MOPU with Flexible Subsea Hose Export to Spread Moored FSO

23

Case Example 2 Cendor FSO


Description
350,000 BBL Storage FSO (PanamaMax Size) 3-5 year design life PM304 Cendor Field - Malaysia

Key Features
Orientation North - East / South - West Asymmetric mooring system accommodates the higher beam conditions from the NW. 10 point Spread Mooring 87 mm Studless Chain Two (2) groups of three (3) portside.
Two (2) groups of two (2) starboard side. 1 Holdback mooring buoy for export hose mooring

Project Highlights
9 month conversion schedule First Oil September 2006 5 No of Off-Takes Total 1.4 mill bbl exported
24

1 x 6 Subsea Flexible Export Hose from MOPU to FSO Bow & Stern Offloading (floating hose w MBC & hawser w QRH)

Case Example 2 Cendor FSO


Operational Experience
FSO oil receiving uptime 100% FSO oil exporting uptime 100% The FSO has the facility for offloading from either the bow or the stern depending the monsoon direction (manifold to bow and stern, two (2) QRH systems, one (1) Hawser and one (1) Offloading hose). The option of Bow and Stern export tanker mooring proven to be very useful Potential for chafing of offloading hose on the mooring lines. Mooring buoy required to moor the offloading hose from interference with mooring lines Hawser and Hose needs to be transferred to the favored end at short notice

25

Case Example 3 Bunga Kertas FPSO


Bow Turret Moored FPSO

26

Case Example 3 Bunga Kertas FPSO


Description
30,000 bbl/d process train & 40mmscfd gas reinjection 619,000 BBL Storage (Aframax) 20 year design life Penara & North Lukut Fields - Malaysia

Key Features
Submerged Turret with 3x3 Mooring 95 mm Studless Chain with heavy section in touch down zone Risers
2 x 12 Oil Import from Wellhead Platforms 2 x 6 Gas Lift/Re-injection to Wellhead Platforms

Project Highlights
14 month project schedule Fist Oil April 2004 29 No of Off-Takes Total 7.8 mill bbl exported

Stern Offloading (floating hose w. MBC & hawser w QRH)

27

Case Example 3 Bunga Kertas FPSO


Operational Experience
FPSO uptime 99.8% No downtime contributed to mooring system arrangement Leaking swivels in the turret resulted in loss of barrier fluid from annulus between main and secondary seal

28

Operational Statistics
Only 1 SW Monsoon Season in Ops 1000 Statistics
Days (Log Scale) 100 Days of operation Port Closure 10

Daily Records

Only 4 month of Operational Data in Statistics

Port Closure & Production Loss Downtime


6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00%

FSO Angsi (Spread M - Single Offtake Station)

FSO Cendor (Spread M - Bow & Stern Offtake Station)

FPSO Bunga Kertas (Turret Moored)

Port Closure Downtime Lost Production

29

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

30

Dynamically Postioned FPSO


MISC Strategic Initiative DPFPSO
Focus on making production from stranded oil reservoirs in South China Sea economical by extended well testing or full life of filed production

31

THE DP FPSO CONCEPT


DP CONCEPT FOR EXTENDED WELL TESTING AND MARGINAL FIELD PRODUCTION A 500,000 bbls storage vessel (PanamaMax) with production capability for 15,000 to 30,000 bbls/day based on plug & play modularized process facility Thruster system to maintain heading into the weather and station keeping in conditions up to 100 year return storm Power sharing between topside facility and DP system for extreme design condition Minimum requirement equivalent to IMO Class 2 DP redundancy so no single fault in the active system will cause the system to fail. The FPSO riser system is disconnectable and provides transfer of product from the wellheads to the vessel. The cantilever riser platform allows the transfer of product fro the riser system to the vessel. Then export tanker moored at the stern is used for the transportation of the stabilised crude to the onshore refineries.

32

Typical Environmental loading


Fy

180 deg Fx

Load Case

Vessel Wave Wind Current Condition Direction

1 Year 100 Year 1 Year 100 Year

Loaded Loaded Ballast Ballast

180 deg 180 deg 180 deg 180 deg

Wave Fx (kN) 54.0 68.1 54.0 68.1

Vessel loading Wind Current Fx Fx (kN) (kN) 269.11 23.20 468.76 35.80 286.33 19.20 498.74 29.50

Total Loading Fx

(kN) 346.31 572.66 359.53 596.34

(m.tons) 35 58 37 61

Panamax vessel size


33

DP System Components

Components of the DP system consists of the following main subsystems:


Thruster system
The thruster system comprises 5 azimuthing variable pitch units with an anticipated capacity of 3-4 MW each.

Power generation system


The power generation system consists of an adequate number and capacity of gas turbine generators with power sharing between topside and DP system.

Control system
The control system consists of a computer system executing automatic thrust control to produce command output to the thruster.

Sensors
A position reference system with at least two position reference sensors will be provided to indicate position data with adequate accuracy.

34

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

35

Economics Typical CAPEX


1.20 1.00 Relative Cost 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 Spread Moored Turret Moored (2 Risers) DP Vessel (2 Risers) Offshore Installation Shipyard Work Support Steel Equipment

36

Typical OPEX Breakdown


Annual OPEX Costs Associated with Type of Station Keeping System Used
Anual OPEX Cost (USD)

10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0


Spread Moored FSO Angsi Spread Moored FSO Cendor Turret Moored FPSO Bunga Kertas DP FPSO (Free Fuel) DP FPSO (Diesel Powered)
Fuel Cost for Station Keeping Export Tanker Demurage Line & Support Boats incl Fuel

Facility

37

Economics Single Field Usage


Accumulated Costs Associated with Type of Station Keeping System Used
160 Total Accumulated Cost (USD Mill) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 2 4 6 8 Year
38
Spread Moored FSO Angsi Spread Moored FSO Cendor Turret Moored FPSO Bunga Kertas DP FPSO (Free Fuel) DP FPSO (Diesel Powered)

10

12

14

16

Economics Relocation Every 4 Years


Accumulated Costs Associated with Type of Station Keeping System Used
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 2 4 6 8 Year
39

Total Accumulated Cost (USD Mill)

Spread Moored FSO Angsi Spread Moored FSO Cendor Turret Moored FPSO Bunga Kertas DP FPSO (Free Fuel) DP FPSO (Diesel Powered)

10

12

14

16

Scope of Presentation
Brief Introduction to MISC Station Keeping Options with Focus on South China Sea
Design Features and Considerations Case Examples (Moored Options) Operational Feed Back Dynamically Positioning CAPEX and OPEX Economics Key Findings / Conclusions

40

Key Findings / Conclusions


Spread Mooring
Spread mooring is the most difficult system to design correctly and require very reliable environmental data Spread Mooring Systems although cheaper CAPEX wise may be the most expensive solution for longer service lives The economics of Spread Mooring System relies on effective technical solutions for managing the berthing, mooring and loading of the export tankers

Turret Mooring
Turret Moored Systems provide a robust solution for longer service lives

Dynamically Positioning
DP Station Keeping is an attractive solution where multiple field use of the FSO/FPSO asset is considered, provided fuel (i.e. fuel gas) is freely available at no cost
41

THANK YOU

42