Floating Production Systems: Committee V.2

16th INTERNATIONAL SHIP AND OFFSHORE STRUCTURES CONGRESS 20-25 AUGUST 2006 SOUTHAMPTON, UK VOLUME 2
COMMITTEE V.2
FLOATING PRODUCTION SYSTEMS

COMMITTEE MANDATE Concern for the design of floating production systems. Specific emphasis shall be given to FPSO hulls and the recent industry experience that influences the design methodology. Consideration shall be given to identification and quantification of uncertainties for use in reliability methods.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS Chairman: D T Brown I K Chatjigeorgiou W C de Boom H Nedergaard T Netto K Orbech Nilssen R Li M Wang Y S Won
KEYWORDS FPSO, FPS, floating production, offloading, monohull, semi-submersible, spar, tension leg platform, hull, riser, pipe in pipe, steel tube umbilical, steel catenary riser, mooring, anchor, tether, offloading, LNG, GTL
61
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems CONTENTS 1. 2.
63
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 65 ENVIRONMENT, LOADING AND RESPONSE.................................................... 66 2.1 Loading and Response of FPS units and components........................................ 66 2.1.1 General ........................................................................................... 66 2.1.2 FPSOs............................................................................................. 67 2.1.3 Spars ............................................................................................... 69 2.1.4 TLPs ............................................................................................... 69 2.1.5 Risers .............................................................................................. 70 2.2 Extreme Environments........................................................................................ 71 2.2.1 Tsunamis ........................................................................................ 72 2.2.2 Hurricanes ...................................................................................... 72 STRUCTURAL DESIGN........................................................................................... 73 3.1 Ship-Shaped Oil FPSOs...................................................................................... 73 3.1.1 Newbuildings.................................................................................. 73 3.1.2 Structural Condition Assessment Candidates for Conversion....... 74 3.1.3 Dynamic Positioning FPSOs.......................................................... 75 3.1.4 Specific Structural Design Issues Related to FPSOs ..................... 75 3.2 Ship-Shaped Gas FPSOs..................................................................................... 76 3.3 Non Ship-Shaped Units ...................................................................................... 77 3.3.1 TLPs ............................................................................................... 77 3.3.2 Semi-Submersibles and Spars ........................................................ 77 3.4 Novel Hull Developments .................................................................................. 78 3.5 Deep Water Moorings ........................................................................................ 78 3.5.1 Catenary moorings ......................................................................... 78 3.5.2 Synthetic fibre moorings ................................................................ 79 3.6 Fluid Transfer Systems ....................................................................................... 79 3.6.1 Metallic Riser Design..................................................................... 79 3.6.2 Flexible Riser Design ..................................................................... 81 3.6.3 Gas Offloading Systems................................................................. 82 CONSTRUCTION...................................................................................................... 83 4.1 General................................................................................................................ 83 4.2 Fabrication Standards, Material Selection and Structural Testing..................... 83 4.2.1 Fabrication Standards..................................................................... 83 4.2.2 Use of Higher Strength Steel.......................................................... 83 4.2.3 Fabrication Inspections and Structural Testing Programs ............. 84 4.3 On-Ground Construction of FPS ........................................................................ 84 4.3.1 Drivers for Development of the On-ground Construction Method...................................................................... 84 4.3.2 Characteristics of the Conventional FPS Construction Method...................................................................... 85
3.
4.
64
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 4.3.3 On-ground Construction Method ................................................... 85 4.4 Innovative Approaches for FPSO Topsides Fabrication, Installation and Integration ................................................................................. 86 4.4.1 Conventional Topside Fabrication, Installation and Integration ... 86 4.4.2 Development of New Approaches ................................................. 86 4.4.3 Integrated Deck Concept................................................................ 87 4.4.4 Jack-Deck Method ......................................................................... 87 4.4.5 Other Methods................................................................................ 88 4.4.6 Interface Issues ............................................................................... 88
5.
INSTALLATION........................................................................................................ 89 5.1 General................................................................................................................ 89 5.2 Platform and Subsea Hardware Installation ....................................................... 89 5.3 Mooring and Riser Installation ........................................................................... 90 5.4 Reeled Pipe and SCRs ........................................................................................ 90 OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE............................................................................... 91 6.1 General................................................................................................................ 91 6.2 Lessons Learned from Operations ...................................................................... 91 6.3 Inspection, Maintenance and Repair .................................................................. 94 REGULATORY ISSUES ........................................................................................... 96 7.1 General................................................................................................................ 96 7.2 Recent Developments in Coastal (Shelf) State Legislation................................ 96 7.2.1 Global Regulatory Trends.............................................................. 96 7.2.2 Regional Developments ................................................................. 96 7.2.3 Unification of Coastal State Regulations ....................................... 98 7.3 Recent Developments in Maritime (Flag) Authority Legislation....................... 98 7.3.1 New MARPOL Annex 1 Guideline for FPSOs............................. 98 7.3.2 New Air Pollution Regulations (IAPP MARPOL Annex VI)....................................................................................... 99 7.3.3 International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code............ 99 7.4 Recent Developments by Classification Societies.............................................. 99 7.5 Recent Developments within Standardisation Activities ................................. 100 7.6 Special Regional Legislation ............................................................................ 101 7.7 Areas of Special Interest ................................................................................... 101 7.7.1 Transit Phases............................................................................... 101 7.7.2 Working Environment Regulations.............................................. 101 7.7.3 Floating LNG and GTL facilities................................................. 102 RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................... 102
6.
7.
8.
REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 104
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 1. INTRODUCTION
65
The offshore industry has 250% more Floating Production Systems (FPS) than it did 10 years ago and this strong growth is set to continue. As of April 2004 there were 37 production floaters on order 26 Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessels, 5 spars, 4 production semi-submersibles and 2 TLPs, and 5 storage units (FSUs). This report presents the research and industry experience that has been published on FPS and their components over the relevant 3-year period (mid-2002 through mid-2005). In line with the Committee mandate the report concentrates on work associated with FPS hulls and the recent experience that influences their design methodology. The life cycle of an offshore development, i.e. analysis of environmental conditions and loads, design aspects, construction, installation , operation, maintenance and repair and endof life disposal, are dealt with in this report. The current status of the relevant certification guidelines, rules and regulations are also provided together with recent and future planned changes. The issues that were flagged in the FPS Committee 2003 report as noticeable uncertainties requiring further attention have been considered. Substantial progress was made by the research community and industry with respect to specific localized loadings on FPSO hulls such as green water, sloshing, slamming, etc, offshore production and transfer of LNG, guidelines for fatigue assessment and design together with deep-water applications of various riser arrangements. Additionally the first studies were considered for dynamically positioned FPSOs, without the use of mooring lines. One further observation is that there is an ever-growing trend to satisfy the industry need for rapid development of specific technical knowledge concerning Floating Production Systems by the initiation of research and development via a large variety of Joint Industry Programs (JIPs). Much of this work has been combined within the so-called FPSO Research Forum and Deep Star Projects. The FPSO Research Forum represents a collection of individual JIPs with variable participant groups. The JIPs are organized as stand-alone projects, controlled by steering committees composed of participants. The following subjects are amongst those that are covered: FPSO Structural Integrity, FPSO Fatigue Capacity, Batelle Structural Stress, FPSO Offloading Operability, Green water impacts, Review of mooring failures, Shallow water waves and moorings, Ship motions in relation to sloshing. The Deep Star Forum is a permanent research programme, for which funding is raised via participant membership fees. Through regular meetings participants control the contents and priority of the research. DeepStar has defined a number of example field developments that embrace environmental conditions, water depths and/or technologies, which are beyond current expertise. These include:
66
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems
Gulf of Mexico (HPHT Oil) Canopy Field Gulf of Mexico (HPHT Gas) Diablo Field Brazil (API 18 - Gravity Oil) Pele Field West of Africa (API 13 - Gravity Oil) Pumba Field Using operator interviews, missing technology associated with these developments is determined and the most important areas for future work are established. These include a wide variety of subjects being considered for the next phase (Phase 8) of DeepStar, comprising amongst others deep water model testing guidelines, riser configurations, Spar vortex induced motions, marginal field concepts, and HPHT Dry tree semi-submersibles. In addition to the above JIPS a large Norwegian development program DEMO 2000 has been developed, utilizing the same principle as DeepStar, i.e. defining a number of example field developments and studying the missing technology: Norway Oil Field to Shore (300 km) Ivers Field Norway Gas Host (Remote) Kniksen Field Norway Oil Field to FPSO with 400 km gas line Tommy Field. Other recent JIPs include deepwater installation of subsea hardware, durability of polyester mooring ropes, development of guidelines for reeling of pipelines, cost effective marine operations, riser integrity management, sandwich technology for ship design, composite patch repair for FPSO structures, etc. The results of the studies within the above JIPs are restricted to participants for a limited number of years. However, overview publications are prepared during the execution of the projects (when endorsed by the related participants) and results become accessible via more detailed publications and technical papers after expiration of the confidentiality period. The following sections of the report quote an important number of such publications originating from JIPs.
2. 2.1 2.1.1
ENVIRONMENT, LOADING AND RESPONSE Loading and Response of FPS units and components General
The successful design and operation of floating production units involves consideration of the environmental conditions and the appropriate evaluation of the environmental loads that prevail during transportation, installation and operation. There is nowadays a trend followed by the classification societies to extend the relevant classification notes to include guidance for specific contributions from environmental loadings, which have usually been ignored in the past. Examples where recommended design practice is provided are: higher order wave
67
loads, run-up and air gap, breaking waves, green water loads, nonlinear sea surface statistics, joint environmental loads for wind, current and waves etc. (reference can be made to for instance RP-C205 updated version of DNV Classification note 30.5). There are also additional areas related to the FPSO systems, for which on-going research could provide answers and propose procedures for increased safety and improved operation. Examples are the slowly varying motions of moored floating systems especially in tandem configurations, loads on LNG storage units due to sloshing, coupled response of terminal and carrier assemblies and effective operation of tug/work boats assisting LNGs. With regard to FPS mooring systems and risers, important issues are the bottom-soil interaction effects for catenary configurations, compression loading at the lower portion of the risers due to vertical motions of the floaters, unstable lateral tether response of TLPs, and VIV effects on Spars. 2.1.2 FPSOs
With the trend towards offshore LNG production and offloading, sloshing of LNG in partially filled tanks has become an important research subject for the offshore industry. Sloshing may induce significant impact pressures on the containment system of the LNG FPSO or carrier. LNG sloshing motion must be carefully studied to ensure that the tank walls can withstand possible impact loads. This problem has been investigated by Kyoung et al (2005), numerical results being obtained by imposing the exact nonlinear free surface conditions and comparing with those predicted by Morisons formula. The theoretical model was based on potential flow theory. Graczyk et al (2005) investigated the problem of determining characteristic extreme values of sloshing pressures for structural design. In the analysis the authors conclude that further work is required to establish an accurate yet robust method for determining the waveinduced stochastic sloshing response reflecting long-term loading characteristics. They also suggest that the method should account for variation in significant wave height, mean wave period, ship speed and tank filling ratio. Wemmenhove et al (2005) addressed the two-phase flow that occurs in partially filled LNG tanks using CFD techniques within the ComFLOW JIP. Experimental measurements were compared with predictions obtained by an incompressible one and two-phase model. The authors concluded that the incompressible two-phase model matched the experimental results more closely and it was suggested that further research is required for developing a compressible two-phase model. Of concern also is the effect of the cargo motion upon the response of the supporting vessel itself. Related to this a JIP has been initiated (SALTSeakeeping Affected by Liquid motions in Tanks) to address the influence of this cargo-hull coupling induced by roll. Gaillarde et al (2004) reported this study, and state that roll, and to a lesser extent sway and yaw, of a moored LNG FPSO with partially filled tanks subjected to beam seas, shows strong couplings. Even the second order drift forces in the transverse direction and the mean second order yaw moment appeared affected, which is relevant to the design of the FPSO mooring system.
68
Hong et al (2005) investigated the interaction characteristics of side-by-side moored vessels using numerical and experimental methods. A higher-order boundary element method combined with generalized mode approach was applied for analysing the motion and drift force of side-by-side moored multiple vessels (LNG FPSO, LNGC and shuttle tankers). Side-by-side floaters representing an LNG-FPSO and shuttle tanker system were also studied by Kashiwagi et al (2005). Specific attention was given to the wave drift forces and moments. For solving the first-order radiation and diffraction problems the authors applied a higher-order boundary-element method directly to the whole wetted surface of the two vessels. The second-order wave drift forces were computed by the near-field method based on pressure integration. Ye et al (2005) considered the coupled dynamics of LNG carriers when attached alongside floating re-gasification systems. The newly developed Floating Regasification Unit (FRU) concept is considered for LNG import in the US GoM region. For the evaluation of the radiation forces and exciting force transfer functions a 3-D sink-source technique was applied. The same method was also used by Inoue et al (2005) for calculating the hydrodynamic loading on an FPSO-LNG system. Both studies underline the importance of appropriate evaluation of the hydrodynamic interactions between the two vessels and especially the second-order hydrodynamic effects. Other environmental loading and response issues relate to berthing of carriers alongside LNG terminals, include tug boat assistance for such operations. Buchner et al (2005) addressed the behaviour of tugs used to assist LNG carriers during berthing and offloading operations. The experimental investigation was performed with a length scale ratio of 1:35 and for the tugs in pull and push mode. Brown and Ekstrom (2005) investigated the performance of thrusters when influenced by adjacent thrusters or by a current field showing that current as well as thruster-thruster interactions influence tug efficiency significantly. Publications addressing the response of FPSOs have been presented by Morishita et al (2005) and Mazaheri et al (2005). In the first paper the authors performed a systematic study on the dynamics of a turret moored FPSO in single and tandem configuration to formulate a control strategy for the shuttle vessel. The second paper addressed the accurate prediction of the extreme excursions and the corresponding forces applied on the moorings in multi-directional environmental conditions. A response-based method was used with calculations for a 200,000 dwt FPSO. Ma and Cooper (2005) have considered the transit time of LNG tankers from Western Australia to the Far East concluding that a routing simulator that allows for the influence of weather, forecast errors, and ship dynamics can be a useful tool for design of time and weather-sensitive transits. Such a method can equally be applied to transit of FPS hulls from fabrication yard to the field site.
69
A significant amount of work has been carried out on green water impacts on FPSOs. For example Nielsen et al (2004) used a Navier-Stokes CFD solver with a free surface capturing scheme to model green water loads on a moored FPSO exposed to head sea waves. The authors reported good agreement between their numerical calculations and existing experimental measurements, and concluded that 3D effects are not dominant. The CFD techniques described by Kleefsman et al (2005) using a volume-of-fluid based description of the free water surface, are promising. The technique was further developed within the ComFLOW JIP for simulating green water flows on decks, Yilmaz et al (2003) performed experiments with FPSO models. The observations led the authors to understand that the flow of the water over the deck edge, and onto the deck, resembled a suddenly released wall of water rather than a breaking wave. 2.1.3 Spars
The recent research work on Spars primarily deals with the hull dynamic behaviour. Of concern is also the coupled response of Spars with moorings and risers, the calculation of damping for low KC numbers and VIV effects. Koo et al (2004a) treated the problem of Mathieu type instabilities that the Spar may experience in heave. Damping and hull/mooring/riser coupled effects are investigated on the principal Mathieu instability. The same authors (Koo et al (2004b)) extended their work by studying the multi-contact coupling between vertical risers and guide frames inside the Spar's moon-pool. Tao and Cai (2004) investigated the vortex shedding flow of a Spar type oscillating vertical cylinder with a disc attached at its keel. For solving the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations they applied a finite difference method. Tao and Thiagarajan (2003) proposed a quantitative method for identifying the vortex shedding flow regimes and for estimating the heave damping at low KC flows. In the same context, Korpus and Liapis (2005) applied the computational RANS method (ReynoldsAverage Navier-Stokes) for calculating the vortex induced motions on Spar platforms. Liang et al (2004) introduced the concept of using a Spar buoy as a floating breakwater and studied the wave reflection and transmission characteristics and the mooring line tensions. Agarwal and Jain (2003a, b) researched the 6 dof coupled dynamic behaviour of a spar platform. Their solution model was based on common formulations for the stiffness provided by the mooring system and the damping due to hydrodynamic drag. 2.1.4 TLPs
Work on Tension Leg Platforms includes investigations driven by the increasing use of mini TLPs at marginal water depths. Bhattacharyya et al (2003) studied the dynamic behaviour of the SeaStar mini TLP, with Morison hydrodynamic damping, giving special attention to platform-tether coupling. Younis and Przulj (2006) extended an existing method for fluidflow simulations to capture the free surface evolution around a full-scale mini TLP. The focus of the work was the prediction of the hydrodynamic loading in turbulent flow conditions, and on quantifying the effects of the free surface distortion on this loading. Chen et al (2006) examined the coupled dynamic behaviour of a mini-TLP both numerically and
70
experimentally. They reported that the wave loads can be accurately predicted using Morison's equation provided that the wave length of incident waves is much longer than the diameters of the columns and pontoons, and the wave kinematics used are sufficiently accurate. Liagre and Niedzwecki (2003) applied the reverse multiple input/single output (RMI/SO) technique in combination with the dynamic response model of a compliant offshore structure for the identification of the system parameters from real excitation and response data. The analysis was developed around the nonlinear coupled equations of motions for a deepwater mini-TLP design, and included consideration of nonlinear stiffness, quadratic damping, surge/pitch and sway/roll coupling together with the frequency dependence of the hydrodynamic added mass and damping coefficients. Additional work appertains to specific types of TLP platforms. Soylemez and Yilmaz (2003) investigated the hydrodynamics of a TLP offloading platform, planned to operate in the North-East of the Marmara Sea. The paper discussed the general properties of the platform and environmental conditions. Chandrasekaran et al (2004) presented the influence of hydrodynamic coefficients on the response of two triangular TLP models. The study focused on the influence of hydrodynamic drag and inertia terms, omitting diffraction effects. Lee and Wang (2003) analyzed the wave induced surge motion of a twin platform tension legged structural system, indicating that by ignoring the interaction effects between tethers and waves the wave induced response could be overestimated. An important issue related to the dynamic response of TLP structures that requires further investigation is the behaviour of TLP tethers due to the heaving motions of the platform. TLP tethers can be formulated as long slender structures and may exhibit instabilities under certain excitation conditions. In this field Chandrasekaran et al (2006) performed a modal analysis, using a linear cable equation to model the tether, subjected to tension varying along its length. A Mathieu stability analysis was then performed for TLPs of different shapes in varying water depths to obtain the amplitudes of tether vibrations. Chatjigeorgiou and Mavrakos (2005) investigated the transverse dynamics of a slender structure representing a riser or a TLP tether using a parametrically excited Mathieu-Duffing oscillator. 2.1.5 Risers
The behaviour of riser-type structures is a wide area for research as verified by the volume of work regularly published on this subject. Recent work addresses the VIV induced hydroelastic response, clashing with adjacent structures, bottom-soil interaction effects, coupled response of risers and floating units, and compression loading at the lower section due to tension variation along the riser length. On the other hand the global research community appears to disregard the influence of riser internal flow. Other ISSC Committees report on this work in detail, therefore the FPS Committee has selected to focus only on specific aspects associated with riser behaviour. Of particular importance is the structuresoil interaction effect for catenary risers. Significant progress has been made for cables in this field by Gatti-Bono and Perkins (2004), together with Ong and Pelegrino (2003)). However applying this work to risers raises issues such as their larger size and finite bend
71
bending stiffness, thus making the static and dynamic formulation more complicated. Clearly more work is required to quantify the influence of the impulsive loading on the lower portion of the riser structure during soil impact. Another complex issue is the effect of soil friction during riser out-of-plane motions. Due to the complexity of the problem there are limited publications during the reporting period. Examples are the works reported by Pesce and Martins (2004) and Giertsen et al (2004). The first paper addressed the soil and bending stiffness effects for bottom lying risers using asymptotic and perturbation methods. The second contribution presented results obtained from the CARISIMA (CAtenary RIser/Soil Interaction Model Analysis) Joint Industry Project for estimating riser-soil interaction effects. An additional feature associated with the dynamic response of catenary risers is the possible compression loading which may be experienced due to tangential excitations. This compression is caused because of the variation of static tension along the structure and is amplified at the lower suspended part due to the lower tension there. Although riser-soil interaction effects relate only to catenary risers, compression loading may also affect vertical risers. Here the problem of dynamic equilibrium is rather simpler because of the vertical static configuration. Nevertheless, it has been observed that these structures may fall into a dynamic instability region despite the effect of hydrodynamic drag. This is caused by the coupling between axial and lateral motions. Contributions in this field are by Suzuki et al (2004), Morooka et al (2004) and Chatjigeorgiou (2004). 2.2 Extreme Environments
The December 2004 earthquake and tsunami events triggered intensive study of these extreme phenomena and the impact it could have on hydrocarbon structures. This was further amplified because of the 2005 hurricanes (mainly Katrina and Rita) that hit areas in the GoM and caused human casualties and economic loss of enormous proportions. When considering the design of floating units, hurricanes appear more important, as tsunamis are less likely to occur and their influence is more severe in very shallow water. There are first indications, based on measurements during the Katrina hurricane event, that the design wave height for hurricane conditions may need to be increased. Moreover there are other natural phenomena not yet fully described which are important from the engineering point of view and which are related to the operation of floating systems. An example is the large swells offshore West Africa. For most areas, especially in Nigerian waters, swells have two dominant periods, separate from the wave period. The popular spectrum models, such as JONSWAP, PM, ISSC or Bretschneider formulae, are incapable of modeling the combined waves and swells. The Ochi Hubble spectra, is capable of modeling double-peak phenomenon but not three peaks. For ultimate strength design of floaters this is not a problem because it is feasible to identify the worst case from the three highest loading conditions. However, for fatigue analysis this issue has attracted much attention, but at the present causes design uncertainty.
72
As the global climate continues to alter, it may be assumed that the study of extreme environments and the possibility of their recurrence will intensify. This report highlights some of the relevant bibliography and provides information related to the recent analysis of extreme environmental phenomena and the aspects that are of concern for the offshore industry, and particularly floating offshore structures. At present this concentrates on an improved understanding of the environment that is extending to include floater global and local response. 2.2.1 Tsunamis
According to Sobey (2005) the normal mode decomposition is a useful analysis methodology for evaluating the storm tide and tsunami hazard at a coastal site. The prediction of the normal modes was formulated as a SturmLiouville problem. The author demonstrated a spectral line plot as a suitable analysis summary for a historical storm tide or tsunami event. Hayir (2005) presented the solutions for the near-field tsunami amplitudes caused by submarine landslides spreading in two orthogonal directions. The author concluded that the normalized peak amplitudes for the models were small because of the interaction of the velocities. Zahibo et al (2005) demonstrated the role of nonlinear effects on the computed dynamics of tsunami waves in shallow seas and the applicability of the rigorous and approximated solutions of the nonlinear theory of water waves to explain the results of the numerical simulation. Gedik et al (2005) performed experiments in a channel for investigating the tsunami run-up and the erosion area on permeable slope beaches. Cho et al (2004) investigated the run-up heights of near-shore tsunamis in the vicinity of a circular island by developing a numerical model based on quadtree grids. The governing equations of the model were the nonlinear shallow-water equations. 2.2.2 Hurricanes
Hurricanes are inevitably important for offshore applications especially in areas such as GoM because of the repeated occurrence of such extreme phenomena. The reporting period has provided several interesting papers dealing with the development of hurricanes and the impact that they may have on drilling and production units. In this context Rao and Mandal (2005) performed a neural network approach to estimate the wave parameters from cyclone generated wind fields. In their work the authors considered eleven cyclones, which crossed the SE coast of India between 1962 and 1979, and used the parametric hurricane wave prediction model for hindcasting the wave heights and periods. Tolman and Alves (2005) presented a continuously moving spatial grid model in order to investigate the wind waves generated by tropical cyclones in deep water away from the coast, applying their theoretical model to the 2002 GoM Hurricane Lili. Kumar et al (2003) presented an estimation of the wave and wind characteristics based on cyclones that hit the east coast of India during 1960-1996. Cheung et al (2003) described a model package that simulated coastal flooding resulting from storm surge and waves generated by tropical cyclones. This consisted of four component models implemented at three levels of nested geographic regions, namely, ocean, coastal, and
73
near-shore. Young (2003) reviewed sea states generated by hurricanes, while Phadke et al (2003) compared three commonly used parametric models of tropical cyclone winds and evaluated their application in the wave model WAM. They also applied the model package for hindcasting the wind and wave conditions of Hurricane Iniki, which hit the Hawaiian Island of Kauai in 1992.
3. 3.1 3.1.1
STRUCTURAL DESIGN Ship-Shaped Oil FPSOs Newbuildings
In recent years newbuild FPSOs are increasingly considered as the preferred operating platform, for relatively large offshore developments. Site specific analysis is accepted as a basis for the structural design of FPSOs. Adequate rules and regulations are provided by the Classification Societies for ship-shaped permanent offshore installations. It is no longer necessary to fall back to standard tanker rules for FPSO design; see Section 7 for further discussion. FPSO guidelines generally account for the specific difference between a ship-shaped platform and a tanker: the offshore platform remaining moored on-site for its entire service life and a sailing ship, which can undergo repairs during its five-yearly special survey. This, in part, explains why the industry, after extensive research in the field of structural integrity and fatigue loading, has focused on fatigue response of FPSO hulls. Work within the FPSO Research Forum, see Section 1, has emphasised this key area. The various tasks carried out by the contributors to the FPSO fatigue capacity JIP has led to the issue of a comprehensive report on fatigue design recommendations for FPSOs given by Lotsberg et al (2003). Bergan et al (2004) presented a general overview of the FPSO fatigue capacity JIP, executed in two phases between 1998 and 2003. This JIP also provided numerous interesting papers including Kang et al (2004), considering the fatigue properties of the bent type hopper corner detail. Since newbuild FPSOs must be of double hull (or at least double sided) construction, the interest in this detail is understandable. The bent hopper detail shows lower fatigue capacity than the conventional welded type, so that local reinforcement of the hopper joint or weld toe treatment is necessary. Fricke et al (2004) presented work on fatigue crack initiation at fillet-welds around stiffener and bracket toes. They revealed the importance of residual welding stress at the end of the attachment. Because of the nature of these stresses (compressive) actual test results were significantly more favourable than predictions. Lotsberg et al (2004) indicated that fatigue damage of the side longitudinals in a typical FPSO structure, was significantly more severe in the ballast than the loaded condition. With regard to fatigue analysis methodology, Dong (2004) presented a new structural stress method, based on element nodal stresses, opening possibilities to cover
74
welds of various type classification into one master S-N curve. This Battelle structural stress method, using a computed equivalent structural stress parameter instead of the so-called hot-spot stress derived by extrapolation of surface stresses towards the weld toe, is being studied in the continuing Batelle Structural Stress JIP. Apart from fatigue damage, corrosion protection is an important issue, considering the anticipated duration of uninterrupted service for an FPSO. MacMillan et al (2004) presented a comprehensive overview of corrosion related issues. They concluded that a combination of coating, cathodic protection and corrosion allowance is recommended for newbuilding FPSOs. The design of cathodic protection (generally composed of sacrificial anodes in tanks and an impressed current cathodic protection (ICCP) for the wet hull surface) needs to account for temperature and water depth effects. DNVs Recommended Practise DNV-RP-401, Cathodic Protection Design, 2005, provides design values. The ICCP system for the hull needs to be sized, taking into account a sufficient length of mooring chain. Assuming that the mooring system is not electrically isolated from the vessel, current drain will most likely occur. Corrosion of the mooring chain itself is addressed by Wang et al (2004). This publication described general design practises and pointed at uncertainties in the quantification of corrosion rates in cold, oxygen-rich waters in a harsh environment, as well as in tropical areas having benign sea conditions. Inspection requirements appear not always consistent with design requirements for mooring chain corrosion, and the paper suggested that for FPSO mooring chains the required inspection regime would be reconsidered by the regulatory bodies. 3.1.2 Structural Condition Assessment Candidates for Conversion
Although newbuild FPSOs are increasing in number, the majority of offshore field developments using FPSOs are still based on conversions of existing tankers. Budgetary restrictions as well as project time schedules are driving factors for conversions. Wyllie (2004) described a series of three tanker-FPSO conversions, indicating the industry approach to fast track conversion projects. Various criteria play a role in the selection of a trading tanker as candidate for conversion into an FPSO, but its structural condition is one of the major ones. Biasotto et al (2005) presented an overview of factors which influence the selection process. They recommended a finite element analysis (FEA) to be the appropriate basis for selection. The analysis has to address previous trade and operating conditions, as well as fabrication standards. Emphasis was given to the history of the vessel. This is information which is sometimes difficult to obtain, and additionally the supporting FEA is time consuming, being not always compatible with fast-track conversion projects. The importance of the trade history in the selection of a candidate tanker for conversion is also addressed by Newport et al (2004). In the study a tanker, which had traded on the TAPS route (Trans-Alaska Pipeline System), showed substantial fatigue damage. Paik et al
75
(2003) presented a summary of research on time-dependent risk assessment of aging ship structures. The comprehensive paper comprised mathematical models for prediction of corrosion and fatigue cracking damage as a function of ship age. Snieckus (2004) discussed the scrutiny being given to Suezmax tankers and VLCCs that are prime candidates for FPS duty. Red alert areas calling for close attention are the number and reputation of previous owners, vessel trading area, damage and crack records, use of high tensile steel, structure connections, deck buckling strength, extent of deck corrosion and coating in water ballast and cargo tanks. Extensive studies are presented into the ultimate strength reduction characteristics of ship panels that are wasted due to pit corrosion, fatigue cracking or local denting damage. Time dependent variations of ultimate longitudinal strength of ship type FPSOs are studied, accounting for degrading structural members, see for example Wang et al (2003) who studied corrosion rates of structural members in oil tankers. The paper compared observations of tanker corrosion rates with databases published by the Tanker Structure Cooperative Forum (TSCF) in 1992. TSCF have recently published further guidance on condition assessment and corrosion rates of tanker structures, see TSCF (1997) and TSCF (2002). 3.1.3 Dynamic Positioning FPSOs
Within the DeepStar JIP comparative studies have been made into the application of various platform concepts for Gulf of Mexico conditions, in 10,000 ft water depth. Chitwood et al (2005) presented the conclusions of the study. With emerging solutions based on existing technology, the FPSO concept, and for certain field applications specifically the dynamic positioned FPSO concept, appear to be viable competitive options. In a separate study Soeters et al (2005) reported a successful temporary replacement of offshore production facilities by a full dynamically positioned FPSO in the South China Sea, while case studies of early production and full field conceptual applications of similar FPSOs were presented by Duggal et al (2004) and Poldervaart et al (2004). 3.1.4 Specific Structural Design Issues Related to FPSOs
Significant research effort has been devoted to the phenomenon of structural response to impact loading. The research has contributed to a growing understanding of the phenomena of both green water and bow wave impact, as reported by Hodgson et al (2004) and Fyfe et al (2004). Potential collision between a shuttle tanker and an FPSO is clearly of importance and is considered in reliability methods for hull design. Smedley et al (2004) provided information about penetration depths for collisions at typical energy levels. Additionally Vinnem et al (2003) analysed risk of collision between DP shuttle tankers and FPSOs. Both human and organisational factors together with technical measures, which reduce the collision risk, are discussed in the paper.
76 3.2 Ship-Shaped Gas FPSOs
There has recently been considerable focus on gas production offshore, together with its storage, transportation to shore and re-gasification. Ruyter et al (2005) presented an overview of existing floating LPG installations, and described in detail the design of a newbuild FPSO unit, put in operation in 2005. The LPG containment system comprises of self-standing prismatic IMO-type-B (SPB) storage tanks, built of low-temperature carbon steel (design temperature -50 oC).
Figure 1: Sanha FPSO LNG applications offshore have also received significant R&D attention. Various containment systems are in use for LNG carriers, and work is focusing on the optimum system for operation with partially filled tanks (inevitable during either production or regasification). Sloshing research, as reported in Section 2.1.2., is on-going and CFD techniques will become viable for use in design, once they are further developed. Lee et al. (2005) described the first LNG re-gasification vessel, based to a large extent on existing LNG carrier and oil FPSO technology. Further publications on the design of floating LNG production or re-gasification facilities tend to be conceptual/economic overview papers.
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 3.3 3.3.1 Non Ship-Shaped Units TLPs
77
In this report period a limited number of publications are attributed to the TLP platform concept. The papers mainly describe general project execution overviews. Interface management is important for these projects, since substructure and platform deck are usually not constructed in the same location. Furthermore tendon and riser installation and hook-up, a key part of the overall project, are strongly linked with the basic design of the units. Technical papers are mainly in the field of VIV response, with minimal work on new structural design issues addressed. In view of increasing water depths, novel materials are being studied for the tendons components. Sparks et al (2003) described the advantages of carbon fibre composite tendons. Initial testing is encouraging but further qualification and certification for offshore use is not yet completed. Leverette et al (2004) acknowledged the progress in development of composite tendons, but present an ultra deepwater alternative based on conventional steel tendons, incorporating an oscillation suppression system. 3.3.2 Semi-Submersibles and Spars
As with TLPs, the majority of the research publications about semi-submersibles and spars, in this reporting period, focus on mooring and riser design and VIV response of floater and risers. These subjects are covered by other sections in this report. The small number of publications on structural issues do not mean that no structural design achievements are being made. Worthy of mention is the fabrication of the first-of-a-kind cell spar design for the Red Hawk development, described by Hogan et al (2005). The largest Spar built to date is the Holstein Truss Spar, see Fig 3.2 (Sablok et al (2005)), the complexity of design details at the riser hull interface being one of the major issues to be tackled. Perryman et al (2005) gave a good overview of the technical solutions adopted. The structural design of the spars helical strakes for vortex induced motion suppression, has been presented by DeMerchant et al (2005). The strakes, which are higher than usual because the spar is located in an area with high loop currents, needed a careful evaluation of differential pressures inside and outside the strake enclosed volume. The publication indicated that there are still important design challenges for FPS structures, even when focussing on detailed structural elements.
78
Figure 2: Holstein Spar - computer image (left) and mating operation (right) 3.4 Novel Hull Developments
There is renewed interest in the application of concrete for hull construction driven in part by steel construction prices, the sizeable order books of shipyards worldwide, the growing dimensions of newbuild FPSOs and in particular LNG FPSO concepts. The use of concrete materials for hull construction is not novel. In 1975 the Ardjuna LPG FPSO was installed offshore Indonesia, based on a concrete barge. The renewed interest focuses both on the traditional application of concrete, see for example Raine et al (2003) describing a concrete LNG FPSO concept, but also on new applications, such as Bergan et al (2005) who presented work on concrete based sandwich structures. Special lightweight concrete is applied between relatively thin-walled steel sheets, resulting in reduced structural weight and reduction of fatigue prone details. In addition to materials, new floater shapes are explored. In the Far East a series of cylindrically shaped FPS hulls is being built, with an oil storage capacity of 300,000 bbls. Application is envisaged in Brazil and in the UK sector of the North Sea. It will be interesting to learn more about this kind of novel hull concepts by future reports of their performance. 3.5 3.5.1 Deep Water Moorings Catenary moorings
A good report of catenary mooring design issues, their integrity, causes of failures, etc. was presented by Brown et al (2005). The material originates from the Floating Production Mooring Integrity JIP, carried out as part of the FPSO Research Forum. The work provides
79
support to the industry on how to inspect moorings, key design areas and consequences of mooring failures. Although deep water mooring lines are generally not composed of chain over the full length, chain may be used for the top section near the floater, to facilitate hook-up and tensioning. Unexpected failures of chain sections in moorings with high pretension, have initiated research in fatigue of mooring chains. Jean et al. (2005) presented the mechanism of out of plane bending fatigue of an individual chain link as the assumed cause for the failures experienced. 3.5.2 Synthetic fibre moorings
Polyester mooring ropes are widely accepted for deep water mooring applications. Banfield et al (2005) presented a comprehensive overview of the performance of polyester deep water mooring ropes based on a JIP into The Durability of Polyester Mooring Rope. Internal abrasion appeared to be the only mode of fatigue damage in polyester ropes. Test data suggest that the polyester rope design T-N curve has a similar slope as the steel rope curve, but the polyester rope has a fifty-fold superior fatigue performance. Work presented by Davies et al (2003) focused on the long term behaviour of synthetic mooring lines under tension. Polyester, aramid and HMPE ropes are compared and models are provided for strain and creep. 3.6 3.6.1 Fluid Transfer Systems Metallic Riser Design
Steel Catenary Risers (SCR) and other steel riser systems for deepwater applications are nowadays relatively mature solutions. Recently, Gonzalez et al (2005) presented the conceptual design of 43 risers for a single FPSO at 1800m water depth at the Roncador field, Brazil. Steel risers can be arranged in catenary, lazy or steep wave configurations. Where the free-hanging catenary is not feasible due to high top tensions in combination with high fatigue loading, the lazy wave configuration has been investigated as an alternative. Franciss et al (2004), Tanaka et al (2005) and Roveri et al (2005) all presented extensive studies into the lazy wave configuration, generally for Brazilian conditions. In the report period, alternative systems and configurations, such as the hybrid riser tower and sub-surface buoy system, have been proposed as feasible alternatives, and new riser materials such as composite pipes are explored. Hybrid Riser Tower Hybrid riser towers offer significant advantages for riser installation in ultra deepwater and harsh environments. Large bore specification (high production rates) combined with strict insulation requirements in deepwater applications inhibit the use of conventional systems using flexible or metallic risers. Hybrid riser towers, despite high cost and complexity of design and installation may represent a good solution. The first riser tower was installed by
80
Placid Oil in the Gulf of Mexico in 1988. The concept underwent some changes for application at the Girassol field in Angola (2002), where three towers have been installed. More recently, an 18 OD oil export line of the P52 semi-submersible platform, to be located at Roncador field, was designed to operate in a free standing hybrid riser (FSHR) system, as presented by Roveri et al (2005). ). The system presented utilizes a buoyancy can arranged around the top of the vertical riser, just underneath the gooseneck transition piece to the flexible jumper. Earlier designs used a separate buoyancy tank, connected via a shackle to the riser top and the gooseneck transition piece. The proposed arrangement simplifies the interface between the buoyancy can and vertical riser, and allows preassembly of the flexible jumper to the gooseneck before deployment of the vertical riser. Thibaud et al (2005) reported on a concept to adapt the hybrid riser tower to much deeper waters (around 2500m) and relatively severe environments such as the Gulf of Mexico loop current or hurricane wave conditions, though further studies must be performed before project execution. Amongst the design modifications, they proposed the use of the pipe-inpipe technology for combined efficient insulation and structural resistance. Structural design and manufacturing aspects of pipe-in-pipe systems are well covered in the literature, the main studies being related to collapse resistance and instability propagation. Reference can be made to Kyriakides et al (2003 and 2004) and Estefen et al (2005). The manufacturing process including adhesion between layers was considered by Pasqualino et al (2005). Sub-surface Buoy: An alternative method proposed for the installation of SCRs in 1800m water depth, is the use of a subsurface boy, located approximately 100m below the water surface, and anchored to the sea bed, as described by Franciss (2005), see Fig 3.3. This has the advantage of uncoupling the movements of the platform from the risers, reducing the riserplatform load transfer and allowing the installation of the system before the installation of the production vessel. Composite pipe: A new concept for submarine pipes and risers for deepwater applications is the metalcomposite pipe, see for example Oliveira et al (2005), which comprises a metallic inner pipe with an outer layer of composite material. The advantage of this structure is that the composite layer provides both thermal insulation and structural strength when coupled with the inner pipe, which can significantly reduce the weight of the structure yet preserving good collapse resistance.
81
Figure 3: Sub-surface buoy riser system (Franciss, 2005). 3.6.2 Flexible Riser Design
Flexible riser durability Williams (2003) presented a flexible pipe integrity review on observed flexible pipe failure modes, as summarized in Figure 4. External sheath damage, the highest rate failure mode, often occurs during installation. Contamination of the armour wires (flooded annulus) can lead to reduction in fatigue life. Aging of the internal pressure sheath can mostly be attributed to high temperatures and rising water cut. For high temperature environments, PVDF (PolyVinyliDene Fluoride) became the industrys solution due to its chemical stability up to temperatures in the region of 275oF (135oC). Some of the failure modes reported in this study have already been solved by the use of a new PVDF resin. These various failure modes and different flexible pipe design are still the biggest limitation for the development of a reliable pipeline integrity management. Flexible pipes for ultra deep water: New technologies are under investigation to allow operation of flexible pipes in ultra deep water. Novitsky et al (2003) indicated that dynamic flexible risers are qualified to operate in 1500m water depth, while static flexible flowlines are proven up to 2000m. In order to qualify flexible risers to operate in water depths up to 2000m, Technip and Petrobras performed deep immersion performance tests with a 7 and 9 flexible riser in 2000m and 1800m water depth respectively, see Bectarte et al (2004) and Brack et al (2005). The tests showed tensile armour instability problems, (bird caging), lateral buckling and also rupture of the high resistance tapes. Results were not conclusive, indicating that flexible risers are not yet qualified to operate in 2000m. The results implied that further experimental tests and numerical analysis need to be performed.
82
External Sheath damage
0.25
Fraction
Aged Internal Sheath Pull-out PVDF Birdcaging
0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

Failure Modes
Overbending Ancillary Device failure Ovality/ kink End fitting leak Vent bloackage Others
Figure 4: Main failure modes for flexible pipes (Williams (2003)) 3.6.3 Gas Offloading Systems
While offloading from oil FPSOs has become standard practice, the transfer of LPG or LNG is still a significant research topic. Both the offloading from LNG FPSOs into LNG carriers as well as the gas transfer in shallower waters from the LNG carrier to a floating or GBS type re-gasification unit have been subject of development studies. McDonald et al (2004) presented a comprehensive overview of the concepts being developed. Work by Van der Valk et al (2005) discussed model testing of offloading systems from a weathervaning LNG production unit. Naciri et al (2004) presented an SPM LNG transfer unit for shallow water based on the Soft-Yoke mooring principle. Krekel et al (2004) outlined an alternative single-point mooring/LNG transfer concept, comprising of a monopod structure to which the LNG carrier moors, and a long semi-floating arm, swivelling around the monopod, which carries the LNG offloading booms hooking up to the carriers midship manifold. Liu et al (2005) described a recently developed duplex yoke mooring system and conventional boom-to-tanker LNG offloading arms to carry out tandem offloading of LNG in open sea areas with significant wave heights up to 5.5m. The authors concluded that the technology is ready to be implemented for safe and reliable transfer of LNG in harsh open sea environments. While most of the systems attempt to create a flexible mechanical connection between the LNG carrier and the FPSO or the terminal, progress is also made in the development of cryogenic hoses, see for example Witz et al (2004) and Eide et al (2004).
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 4. 4.1 CONSTRUCTION General
83
This section focuses on construction and fabrication technologies and the new developments that significantly influence FPS construction industry and research. Some common aspects or issues of steel fabrication are expected to be covered by the report of ISSC Committee V.3 (Fabrication Technology). Many fabrication issues are design, equipment or facility dependent. To cope with limited availability of publications, this section focuses on the topics selected below. 4.2 Fabrication Standards, Material Selection and Structural Testing
In general, industry practices in fabrication are that ship-shaped FPS follows tanker standards. Some practices that have been widely applied to trading tankers may not be appropriate for ship-shaped FPS. Key industry considerations and recommendations for dealing with these requirements during the fabrication phase are reviewed below. 4.2.1 Fabrication Standards
It has been realized that the conventional fabrication standards for trading tankers, such as Japanese Shipbuilding Quality Standards (JSQS), are acceptable for the majority of shipshaped FPS but additional or more rigorous requirements may need to be adopted for FPS structures. Adhia G. et al (2004) presented the additional requirements beyond JSQS for the Escravos LPG FPSO, including mis-alignment control, selection of critical joints. Perira et al (2004) also discussed quality acceptance criteria based on the case studies that were collected. In general, development of fabrication standards for FPSOs have lagged the development in design. Classification Societies have recently established relevant standards, eg DNV OSC401: Fabrication and Testing of Offshore Structures, April 2004. More joint efforts by the fabrication industry, owners or operators, classification societies are required to improve the standards and practices. 4.2.2 Use of Higher Strength Steel
Because the unit price of steel has significantly increased during past few years, shipbuilding industry has increased the portion of higher strength steel as the basic material in ship construction to reduce cost and also to improve economic performance of seagoing ships. Higher strength steel 320 MPa) constitutes as much as 75% of total steel weight for FPS. This trend has raised concerns of FPS owners and/or operators as higher strength steel has higher strength capacity but its fatigue performance is equal to or only marginally better than mild steel. Extensive use of higher strength steel can significantly increase risks to hull integrity. Wang and DSouza (2004) pointed out this issue based on their experience and
84
engineering practices. Work by Adhia et al (2004 & 2004) discussed special requirements for the higher strength steel areas. When structural details of FPS hulls are categorized according to their criticality, accessibility, and sensitivity to fatigue loads, a rational approach can be established for appropriate use of higher strength steel, e.g. as proposed by DNV OS-C102: Structural Design of Offshore Ships, April 2004. In addition to consideration of fatigue, use of higher strength steel should also take corrosion into account. 4.2.3 Fabrication Inspections and Structural Testing Programs
More rigorous inspection and testing programs are needed for FPS. Pereira et al (2004) presented a comprehensive discussion of the issues and requirements for fabrication inspection and various tests for FPS. The historic cases presented provide useful experience and lessons learned for fabrication of FPSOs. However, the work fails to provide a systematic specification of the applicable requirements. Both in air and hydrostatic tests of bulkheads, the very important aspect of welding tests, are also not covered in the paper. Classification Rules (for instance ABS Steel Vessel Rules, 2005) allows testing of one selected tank, this being representative of a group of similar structure tanks. This practice may be adequate for trading tankers because they can be dry-dock inspected and maintained in a regular basis. However, this practice can be inadequate for FPS schemes that are required to stay on station for long periods without dry docking. Most FPS owners or operators require that all bulkheads be hydrostatically tested, which involves filling more tanks. 4.3 4.3.1 On-Ground Construction of FPS Drivers for Development of the On-ground Construction Method
Dry dock schedule for major shipyards have in recent years been so tight that it has been difficult to get a dry dock slot without very early booking. Availability of dry dock slot has become a key factor for planning of an FPS project and selection of fabrication contractors. Production including block fabrication, erection and assembly in dry dock, and outfitting by quays has been arranged in a similar manner to the production lines of modern factories which do not allow addition of any unplanned work or delay in any segment of the production line. Unfortunately, construction of FPS cannot usually avoid changes to design or fabrication or both during the construction phase. Such changes usually lead to fabrication schedule delays, which negatively impact the yards overall production schedule and profit. This situation has driven the fabrication industry to find solutions that can accommodate the necessary changes requested by their clients and are also capable of helping reduce, if not eliminate, the impact of schedule delays in FPS construction on shipyard operations and financial performance.
85
4.3.2
Characteristics of the Conventional FPS Construction Method
Construction methods for FPS are a combination of shipbuilding and offshore structure fabrication practices. Following the well established modern shipbuilding methods and procedures, the fabrication and assembly of FPS and other types of floating offshore structure hulls are carried out in the dry dock of a shipyard by stacking the pre-fabricated unit blocks sequentially from lower to upper levels. Topsides modules are fabricated on the ground in the fabrication yard in a conventional manner. Major interfaces are usually set at the top plate of the module supports. The completed hull is then towed to the quay side of the integration yard for installation of topsides modules by land based or floating heavy lifting cranes. Alternatively, depending on the contract arrangement and suitability and availability of facilities, the installation and integration of topsides modules can be carried out in the topsides fabrication yard or in the hull construction shipyard. 4.3.3 On-ground Construction Method
Hyundai Heavy Industry (HHI) Offshore Division decided to resolve the issues by developing a method of FPSO construction which does not require use of dry docks. The on-ground construction method that was developed has been applied to construction of the 340,000 DWT Class Elf Amenam FSO in 2002. Unfortunately, no thorough description of all method details has been found in public literatures except the brief report by RINAs The Naval Architect in January 2003. Yang et al (2003) presented the methodology, design and analysis for load-out of the completed FSO to a semi-submersible double barge, one of the key operations for this construction method applied to the Amenam FSO project. The hull was constructed on-ground using the traditional block-stacking method and the completed topside integrated with the hull. Due to the limitation in length of the usable construction area, the hull together with its associated topsides modules was divided into a 138m forward section and a 160m aft section, see Figure 5.
Figure 5: On-Ground Construction Site
86
Figure 6a
Figure 6b
Figure 6c
Figure 6d
Sequence of Section Integration, Loadout, and Float-off of Amenam FSO (RINA, Jan 2003) After completion of the two sections, the aft section was moved towards the quay edge (Figure 6a) with part of this section supported by a temporarily installed support (Figure 6b). Then the forward section was moved transversely to fit up with the aft section for integration of these two sections (Figure 6c). The completed FSO was then loaded out to the semi-submersible double barge (Figure 6d) for float-off in the next step. Details of the loadout operations and solutions to the technical critical issues can be found in the paper. Floatoff consisted of clearing off the decks and progressively ballasting the double barge until the FSO was afloat with adequate clearance between the bottom of the hull and the skid shoes on the barge deck. Finally the barge was towed away. 4.4 Innovative Approaches for FPSO Topsides Fabrication, Installation and Integration Conventional Topside Fabrication, Installation and Integration
4.4.1
Many technical papers have been published describing the conventional method of topsides fabrication. Thomas (2003) provided a good summary of the method and its drawbacks. The installation and integration may take as long as 12 months, depending on the number of modules, and degree of complexity in connections and integrations, Maintaining the installation and integration schedule is frequently a critical components in the successful execution of an FPSO project. 4.4.2 Development of New Approaches
The offshore industry developed new lifting based approaches for installation and integration of topsides to overcome the disadvantages of the conventional method. The Integrated Deck (ID) concept was originally developed for fixed platforms. The topsides are built on-ground and fully integrated as a single unit. Examples of the popular methods include single barge Floatover and Versatruss methods, the latter shown in Figure 7.
87
Figure 7: Versatruss Installation of ID to Fixed Platform Starting in the early 1990s, ideas of applying the integrated deck concept to FPSOs have been explored. Two approaches are described below and others will be briefly referred to. 4.4.3 Integrated Deck Concept
The Integrated Deck concept was applied to both the Girassol FPSO and Amenam FSO. These FPS units were both constructed in HHI, using similar approaches for installation of the topsides to the hull. Bang (2002) and Loez (2002) provided general descriptions of the Integrated Deck concept and the installation approach. The topsides were built on a 7m high Module Support Frame (MSF). The bottom part of this integrated deck was utilized as a pipe rack for both topsides piping and cargo piping systems. The Girassol FPSO project used a piece meal approach for installation of the Integrated Deck onto the hull. The modules were lifted onboard the hull deck sequentially and the topsides assembled onboard. The Concept has both advantages and drawbacks as described in the papers. 4.4.4 Jack-Deck Method
Thomas et al (2003) described an innovative method for deck integration having some similarity to the floatover approach for installation of an integrated deck to a fixed platform. Figure 8 shows a point of the installation sequence. Once the construction of the integrated module is completed, it is loaded out to a barge for transporting to the installation site where it is received by the FPSO hull. The jack legs are lowered down to the sea floor and the module jacked up to allow the barge to be towed away. After the transportation barge is clear of the site the FPSO hull is towed underneath and the module lowered down until it fully rests on its supports. The maximum allowable weight for an Integrated Module is reported to be in the region of 19,800 tons, sufficient for a middle size FPSO topsides to be built as a single unit. The topsides of large FPSOs, such as for West African fields, may need to be constructed in two or even three modules.
88
Figure 8: Concept of Jack-Deck Installation Method
4.4.5
Other Methods
There have been numerous installation methods and the associated design and fabrication approaches proposed by the offshore industry. Many of these are protected by confidentiality, and so it is not possible to find publications that describe them in a reasonable level of detail. 4.4.6 Interface Issues
Interfaces are normally defined as the point where two work scopes meet and data/information needs to be supplied from one interface party to the other. For FPS, key interface areas include: Marine vs. topside systems (e.g. electrical power generation and distribution, firewater, diesel, seawater, flare, vent & drains, produced water disposal, steam, instrument air, etc). Hull vs topside structure (e.g. supports, load transfer, weight control & distribution) Subsea/turret - topsides & hull (e.g. topsides installed subsea control equipment, swivel and turret transfer aspects)
FPSO projects tend to experience significant interface problems due to reasons such as: Lack of understanding of scope at the interface areas Failure to identify gaps in work scopes or contract scopes Lack of experience in project teams Inadequate interface management systems Poor communication
89
Failure to recognise that FPSO projects are different from fixed platforms or a trading vessel Lack of understanding of interdependence between interface parties Components manufactured at different sites or countries to different standards.
It is therefore important that interface data requirements are addressed in contracts and project contracting strategies that reduce the number of interfaces or at least clarify the ownership for the management of interfaces clearly. Consideration should be made towards treating Interface Management as a separate project activity through a hierarchy of interface management activities and documents/databases.
5. 5.1
INSTALLATION General
FPS installation involves the use of a wide range of technology. Most of the research and development publications address capabilities of specialized offshore installation contractor equipment. Furthermore research is being carried out to support specific installation methodologies and its compatibility with the equipment to be installed. This section highlights the trends in offshore installation, with focus on deepwater, and specifically addresses the volume of research to support the reel lay method of pipelines, steel catenary risers (SCRs) and pipe-in-pipe structures. 5.2 Platform and Subsea Hardware Installation
Several papers present the capabilities of integral offshore facility installation vessels. Dijkhuizen et al (2003) performed a comprehensive overview of installation tasks for the Horn Mountain Spar in 1650m water depth. The mooring lines were deployed from one installation platform, the risers installed via a J-lay system, the integrated deck lifted on top of the Spar structure and final hook-up achieved. It is noted that as an alternative to offshore heavy lifts, integrated deck float-over concepts have been studied, as discussed in Section 4, but have been executed, to date, only in sheltered waters. During deepwater installation, heavy equipment has to be lowered to the seabed. This may consist of templates or similar equipment or suction anchors, nowadays regularly utilized for deep water moorings. Large offshore cranes, which are based on multi-part reevings, need appropriate lengths of hoisting cable to reach the seabed in deepwater conditions. Additional drawbacks are the self-weight of the cable, which can significantly reduce the maximum allowable payload that can be lifted. Alternatively, heavy duty winches are used to lower equipment to the seabed, from DP offshore service vessels, in a single rope arrangement. These service vessels show more
90
wave induced heave motions than the large semi-submersible crane vessels, which carry the heavy duty offshore cranes. The imposed motions at the top of the lowering wire may cause resonant tension oscillations in the wire. Wire failures have been reported due to such resonant behaviour. Dalmaijer et al (2003) investigated an active heave compensation system, which significantly suppresses the top heave motions. The industry has recognized that the lowering of heavy objects to the seabed is not a straight forward operation, and a JIP termed DISH (Deepwater Installation of Subsea Hardware) has been undertaken. Standing et al (2004) present the objectives, work scope and key findings of this JIP. 5.3 Mooring and Riser Installation
Deepwater mooring installation often involves nowadays the installation of polyester mooring lines. Petruska et al (2004) give a step-by-step, installation procedure for the polyester mooring of the Mad Dog truss spar with Bugg et al (2004) discussing the regulatory process. The installation of the sub-surface-buoy deep water riser arrangement, as described in Section 3.6.1., was outlined by Kvello et al (2003). Landing of the SCRs on the sub-surface buoy is considered the most critical stage of the installation. Limited sea conditions and heave compensation in the pull-in wire are considered necessary to make this installation procedure feasible. An example paper of reeled SCR installation (see also Section 5.4) was presented by Kavanagh et al (2004). The paper describes both riser design and installation for the GoM Matterhorn TLP. The so-called cold core eddy current for which the SCR system had to be designed, was an important factor. 5.4 Reeled Pipe and SCRs
One of the most cost-effective installation methods for metallic risers is the reel-lay process, in which pipe segments are welded onshore and subsequently bent over a cylindrical rigid surface (reel) at a laying vessel. During installation, the line is unreeled, straightened, and then laid into the sea under tension. However, the bending, unbending, and straightening processes as applied on the vessel, introduces pipe bending/curvature histories, which are well within the plastic range of the material. Although the pipe is straightened prior to launch, distortions in the form of residual out-of-roundness, residual stresses, changes in material properties due to plasticity, and growing of eventual welding flaws may occur. These effects may have an influence in both the ultimate strength and subsequent fatigue performance of the line. Thus, in addition to ultimate strength design, the use of SCRs, which will be inevitably subjected to cyclic loading during operation, implies a careful examination of the possibility of riser failure due to fatigue, as described by Netto et al (2005). Over the last 4 years the influence of installation methods, involving pipeline material and geometric changes, has been extensively investigated and relevant results are now available.
91
DNV, TWI and Sintef conducted a Joint Industry Project, entitled Fracture Control for Installation Methods Introducing Cyclic Plastic Strain - Development of Guidelines for Reeling of Pipelines, Wastberg et al (2004) summarized these guidelines. Tivelli et al (2005) studied the effect of plastic deformation pattern due to reeled pipes, after reeling and ageing. Pasqualino et al (2004) showed that the reeling process has little influence on the collapse pressure of reeled pipes even when considering small bending radius (6m). Although the reeling method affects the fracture mechanics proprieties of the base metal, heat affected zone (HAZ) and welds, fatigue life requirements can still be met through appropriate design that considers engineering critical assessment (ECA) analysis for flaw acceptance criteria and fatigue analysis using both S-N and fracture mechanics approaches, as presented by Netto et al (2005), Tivelli et al (2005) and Torselletti et al (2005).
6. 6.1
OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE General
Once an FPS is operational, the effort expended during design and fabrication are tested and challenged under the real conditions for the first time. The results and outcome of these tests are therefore vital for gathering experience, setting standards that form the basis for future projects. As expressed by van den Boom et al (2005): Experience has always been a driver for improvements. Some people have argued that experience is mainly based on mistakes. Others have stated that there is no such thing as a bad experience as we always learn from them. 6.2 Lessons Learned from Operations
Experience derived from floating production operations are drawn upon by national or operators associations. A Norwegian example of such is the FPSO Experience Transfer network, which was set up under the sponsorship of the OLF Health, Safety and Operations Committee. The committee recognized in 2001 the need to capture lessons learned during several North Sea FPSO projects during the 1990s, and to gather experience from 20 operating years with FPSOs on the Norwegian Continental Shelf. The outcome is a database available on the web at http://www.olf.no/lesson/. The following issues have been highlighted as the most important (note that a number of these are appropriate because of the severe weather conditions): Green water - damage to equipment and windows at the accommodation block Hull strength - cracks in-between tanks Turret location - free turret recommended Turret design - wear in bearings General layout - more effort in design required Capex over-run - better interaction between contractor and company
92
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems Compression problems - due to undersized gas-scrubbers Accommodation - too few beds for e.g. maintenance crew Uptime performance - excellent but often due to significant unscheduled modification/repair Safety - no evidence that FPSOs are less safe than other offshore installations In situ repair and modifications - marine standards assume periodic visits to port & dry docking.
The association of operators on the UK continental shelf, UKOOA has also established a committee to deal specifically with issues relating to FPSOs and other floating structures. UKOOA FPSO studies includes among others, design guidance notes, flexible pipe assessments and incident reports, all available on the web at http://www.ukooa.co.uk/issues/fpso/. An additional source of operational data and lessons learned is included in the report on incidents related to FPSO offloading to shuttle tanker in the UK sector, see Jenman et al (2005). The report deals with four categories of incidents: I II III IV Loss of Life or major pollution Collision with loading point, emergency disconnection, minor pollution Position excursion causing emergency shut down Station keeping problem causing concern
Figure 9: FPSO offloading incidents per year for UK sector distributed on the defined categories, from Jenman et al (2005)
93
Fig 6.1, based on operational data, indicates that no fatalities or major pollution incidents (category I) occurred for the observed period, however a number of collisions occurred! The significant increase in category IV incidents is considered to be due to improved reporting and awareness, thus seen as a positive tendency. Such data are very useful for developing probability based design studies and inspection planning methods. The availability of data is valuable for design of new structures or modifications of existing vessels. The current trend whereby operators supply data that has been compiled is very positive. Knowledge about the corrosion rate of the hull is also important at the design stage, Garbatov et al (2005) presented a study where service measured data were used as a basis for a corrosion wastage model. Brock (2003) carried out work describing the transition of the Auger TLP from field development to tie-back host, a possibility for some mature fields. A comprehensive guideline including operational experience for corrosion prediction and protection is given by MacMillan et al (2004). Hall (2005) has assessed data from 29 FPS schemes and draws the conclusion that mooring chain elongation is most significant at the touch down position and at the surface. Brown et al (2005) concluded that the wear can be larger on the leeside mooring chains than the windward lines. FPS exposed to hurricanes may yield important data with respect to design load and response, Tahar et al (2005) examined mooring data for a spar platform, recommending that the friction in fairleads should be included when modelling the mooring system for response analysis. In a comprehensive study Idse-Nss et al (2005) report on operator experience of anchor systems in Norwegian waters indicating that recent anchoring incidents are caused by a number of factors including failure to organise work or responsibility appropriately, deficient training and failure of equipment. Morandi et al (2004 and 2004) established detailed response data and comparison with design values for the Brutus and Typhoon TLPs exposed to Hurricane Lili. Despite the fact that the environmental conditions (wave, wind and current) exceeded the 100 year event, the measured tendon tension was within the design values. The likely explanation was indicated to be the conservatism in the standard design assumptions such as peak environmental conditions lasting 3-hours, stationary narrow-banded process and constant collinear wave, wind and current directions. Data for explosion recurrence modelling based on field data was investigated by Yasseri et al (2004). Morandi et al (2005) discussed the importance of skilled and well trained personnel for deep water FPS. The key issue is that the requirements call for multi-skilled personnel, which requires collaboration between industry and the different educational institutions.
94 6.3
ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems Inspection, Maintenance and Repair
Unlike normal vessels that regularly enter port and periodically dry dock, FPS are normally planned to have a full service life at location of the order of typically 5 to 20 years. This requires a different mindset regarding inspection, maintenance and repair, compared to that traditionally experienced by the shipping industry.
Figure 10: Spread of failures/defects on six selected FPSOs, from UK sector, based on incident reports compiled by Lloyds Register (2003)
95
UKOOA commissioned Lloyds Register (2003) to undertake a study into FPSO maintenance, repair and inspection best practice on the UK continental shelf. Here incident information was collected and compiled from a series of operators with the objective to improve safety, drive down operating and maintenance costs and disseminates the lessons learned, as indicated in Fig 6.2. Detailed incidents reports are included within the study. Inspection and monitoring of deep water risers has been described by Chapin (2005) and Thethi et al (2005) both authors discussing problems associated with ROV access to the risers in deep water. A monitoring programme consisting of measurement of the riser topangle and related design analysis combined with a fatigue monitoring system has been described by Vogel et al (2004). Marques et al (2004) investigated use of a specially designed ROV to inspect of the bottom shell plates of an FPSO. Assessment of FPSO fatigue by Hoogeland et al (2003) highlighted the necessity of improved models for prediction of loading at structural details and Sigurdsson et al (2004) gave associated inspection planning examples. Marshall et al (2005) described experience gained through inspection management for a fleet of spars. Nowadays, a large portion of operational cost is devoted to inspection and maintenance. Risk based inspection (RBI) planning can establish a cost-effective inspection strategy while maintaining the desired level of safety. The essence of RBI planning is to express the cost of inspection, repair and failure in probabilistic terms and establish the optimum inspection plan, this process being well described by Goyet et al (2004). Inherent in the method is that improved inspection which results in lower probability of undetected defects will be valuable, despite the higher costs. Further description and application of risk based inspection can be found with Holdbrook (2004), Li et al (2004) and Ku et al (2005). However, it is noted that the main difficulty is to establish the probability functions with adequate accuracy. This relies heavily on operational data and its open sharing within the design community. Regarding flexible pipes, the complexity and variety of these multi-layer structures with their interacting failure mechanisms (Williams, 2003), the somewhat poor defect detection capability of existing inspection techniques, and the lack of broad longterm inspection data hamper the development of an effective RBI planning for their integrity management. Though not yet applied for flexible pipes, Bayesian updating (Straub and Faber, 2005) is a potential tool for reducing uncertainties in RBI planning of such structures. FPS repairs are normally carried out on location at the same time as processing hydrocarbons. An example of how to avoid hot work during operation has been described by Kennedy et al (2003), where welding is substituted by the use of elastomers and sandwich plates. Field maintenance experience was reported by Hoppe et al (2004), and Newport et al (2004) gave valuable information on the inspection and repair of local cracks in FPSO tank structures, the solution being to reduce stress concentration factors by modifications in the field. Although generally an FPS is maintained and repaired on location, Soeters el al (2005) described a project where an FPSO is exchanged with another during necessary maintenance in dry dock, allowing production to be maintained.
96 7. 7.1 REGULATORY ISSUES General
FPSOs are subjected to regulation and standardisation by the coastal state, flag state, class, international and national standardisation bodies as well as regional directives. Here the principle relationships between the different regulators as applied to FPSOs are outlined, and recent regulatory and standardisation developments and trends are reviewed. Priority areas of future interest are suggested in section 8. 7.2 Recent Developments in Coastal (Shelf) State Legislation
The overriding and governing legislation for an FPS will be those of the Coastal State in the area of operation. FPS schemes can operate locally without being flagged/classed, unless specifically required by the coastal state. Coastal regulations will, however, often refer to maritime codes, rules and standards with respect to maritime aspects of floating units, since these are regarded as the industry standard within these areas. 7.2.1 Global Regulatory Trends
New provinces tend to seek to develop and implement relative prescriptive regulations based on industry best practice relying much on class/flag for floating units. Typical examples are the West-African states. More mature provinces, on the other hand, generally move from prescriptive regimes to risk based goal setting regulations based on operators total responsibility and applied self-control. Examples of such mature provinces include Norway, UK, Australia, and partly also Canada where studies in goal setting direction are underway. 7.2.2 7.2.2.1 Regional Developments Norway
The new regulations in force from 2002 introduced significant changes related to regulation of floating units. Flagged and classed floating units may now be accepted on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) based on compliance with maritime rules and standards as an alternative to meeting the petroleum regulations. This applies to aspects of maritime nature; however production plant and working environment issues still need to comply directly with the Petroleum Regulations. The primary reason for this change is probably related to wanting to attract more units to the NCS and reduce the amount of costly upgrading of international units before being allowed to operate. Norway also plans to introduce an approval scheme for FPSOs from 2006. This is called Acknowledgement of Compliance (AoC). The scheme is in operation for drilling units, and one of its advantages is that a general acceptance of the unit is obtained from the
97
regulator, thus avoiding expensive and time consuming re-qualification of the unit for every new job and/or re-entry to Norwegian waters. 7.2.2.2 UK
Following several problem issues with FPSOs operating on the UK shelf during the 1990s, particularly related to green sea impact and cracking in ballast tanks, the HSE has expressed concern about the adequacy of maritime standards applied to FPSOs. Several studies have been commissioned by HSE, the more important of these being: RR 324: Steep wave impact pressures and the structural dynamic response of FPSO (2005) RR 047: Analysis of accident statistics for floating monohull and fixed installations (2003) RR 083: Margins of safety on FPSO hull strength (2003) RR 095: Accident statistics for floating offshore units on the UK Continental Shelf 1980-2001 RR 113: Operational safety of FPSOs shuttle tanker collision risk summary report (2003) Analysis of green water susceptibility of FPSO/FSUs on the UKCS (OTO 2001/005)
No specific legislative actions/changes have emerged as a result of these studies, but HSE expects that FPSO owners, designers and operators ensure that findings and recommendations in the reports above are adopted. 7.2.2.3 US
A decision to formally allow FPSOs in US waters was made by the Mineral Management Services (MMS) in January 2002. Up until recently FPSOs have not been allowed in the US GoM. The MMS has considered FPSOs for some time and released a final environmental impact statement (EIS) on the potential use of FPSOs in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico in February 2001. No FPSOs have, however, been approved for operation in the Gulf of Mexico so far, but MMS indicates that they are ready to accept applications. FPSO solutions are expected to become more interesting in the future as development move out to deeper waters where there is no pipeline infrastructure. 7.2.2.4 West Africa
Present legislations are prescriptive and include aspects of safety, environment and fiscal revenues. Local regulators expect operators to use their best practice. Young regimes seek advice from more mature sectors, especially on resource management, but also on HSE
98
issues. As an example Nigeria is planning to ban flaring. Current practice for all FPS schemes is to comply with the maritime safety regime (flag and class); an approach which appears to satisfy local authorities and ensure a licence to operate is obtained. 7.2.3 Unification of Coastal State Regulations
Coastal state regulations have no common denominator, and units moving among several states are therefore subjected to a complex and costly compliance process. This is particularly relevant for drilling units, but also challenging for FPSOs on short or medium term contracts. For drilling units a project was undertaken in the period 2001-2003 to harmonize legal requirements and make uniform approvals for drilling units following concerns about the difficulties in moving rigs across North Sea coastal state borders. Behind the project stood both industry and the coastal state regulators, the North Sea Offshore Authorities Forum (NSOAF). The results may also benefit the free movement of FPSOs across borders. 7.3 Recent Developments in Maritime (Flag) Authority Legislation
Production/storage units do not generally need flagging, but are free to move in international waters when flagged. Individual coastal states may however require FPSOs to be flagged and classed. The degree to which IMO guidelines are enforced for FPSOs depends on the flag state, and may vary from state to state. 7.3.1 New MARPOL Annex 1 Guideline for FPSOs
The most important development happening within the last 3 years has been the development and issue of new IMO Guidelines for the Application of the Revised MARPOL Annex I Requirements to Floating Production, Storage and Offloading Facilities (FPSOs) and Floating Storage Units (FSUs). These were issued in 2003, as MEPC/Circular 406, and provide a long needed uniform interpretation of the application of MARPOL Annex 1 (Oil pollution) to FPSOs. The most important issues of the new guidelines are the following: New purpose built FPSO/FSOs shall have double sides, but need not have double bottom. Existing units and conversions do not need to comply with the double side requirement. Existing pre-MARPOL single hull tankers can in future still be converted to FPSO/FSOs. This has already proved to become a popular re-use of old tankers which are being phased out because they are no longer allowed to trade as tankers any more due to stricter MARPOL tanker requirements.
99
MARPOL damage stability requirements shall apply to FPSO/FSOs. This may cause restrictions on allowable topside loads on smaller size (Aframax) FPSOs that were originally designed according to MODU code requirements.
The Guidelines recommend adoption by member states within 2 years. FPSOs/FSOs contracted, built, or converted before August 2005 need not be upgraded. 7.3.2 New Air Pollution Regulations (IAPP MARPOL Annex VI)
This is a new provision for air pollution prevention which came into force in May 2005. The Code applies for: All new and existing ships (including barges) of 400 gt and above, Fixed and floating drilling units and other platforms (incl. FPSOs).
New builds delivered after 19 May 2005 will need to obtain an IAPP Certificate at delivery. Existing units will need to be certificated by 19 May 2008. The extent of application for offshore units is likely to include engines used for propulsion, station keeping, cranes and marine services, while engines only used for drilling and processing related activities are exempt (e.g. mud/cement pump engines, engines directly linked to drilling equipment) 7.3.3 International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code
This code applies to offshore units in transit, but not at the offshore location. The code, however, recommends that coastal states should consider establishing appropriate security measures on location. No specific coastal state legislation has been issued yet. 7.4 Recent Developments by Classification Societies
All major class societies offer classification services for FPSOs and BV, LRS, ABS and DNV have dedicated rules and standards for FPSOs. Flag authorities require flagged units to be classed. Coastal states may require class, and most of them refer to class as the recognised standard for maritime aspects of FPSOs. Coastal state regulators and oil majors often state that class rules applied for FPSOs are in practice ship standards not particularly suitable for the purpose. This may have been true in the early days of the FPSO and for some converted tankers, but through extensive feed-back and lessons learnt, the major class societies have performed and are continuously carrying out extensive rule development within the floating offshore unit area, which have resulted in state-of-the-art dedicated FPSO and MOU rules and standards. Class societies are probably the only organisations where rule/standards for FPSOs are developed and improved on a continuous basis.
100
Examples of recent FPSO relevant class publications are: ABS Guide to Building and Classing Floating Production Installations, last issue August 2005 Lloyds Register Rules and Regulations for the Classification of a Floating Offshore Installation at a Fixed Location, 1999 DNV Rules for Classification of Floating Production and Storage Units, latest edition October 2003 (new edition in 2006)
DNV have issued dedicated publications to cover this aspect of additional verification to shelf requirements based on class: DNV-OSS-201 Verification for Compliance with Norwegian Shelf Regulations , July 2003 DNV-OSS-202 Verification for Compliance with UK Shelf Regulations, March 2001
Class societies carry out extensive JIP projects and in-house R&D, and are assisting the industry by turning the results of these activities into useful industry practice through new rules, recommended practices and industry guidance, thereby enabling new technology to be quickly applied. 7.5 Recent Developments within Standardisation Activities
Apart from class societies, a range of standards that influence FPSO design, fabrication and operation are: International standards (e.g. ISO, IEC) Regional (European) standard (e.g. CEN, CENELEC) National standards (e.g. BS, NS) Industry standards (e.g. API, NORSOK, EMUUA) International standardisation mainly takes place within ISO and IEC. FPSO relevant standards are primarily the responsibility of ISO the Technical Committee (TC) 67. API has the chairmanship of TC67, thus assuring good co-operation between ISO and API. The international oil and gas industry and national standardisation organisations support these standards. Once issued, American, European and other standards bodies adopt them for regional and national use, and most regulatory bodies will refer to them as recognised codes. FPSO related ISO standards which have been recently issued include: ISO/ISO 10418 - Offshore production installations - Basic surface process safety systems (2003)
101
ISO/ISO 19900 - General requirements for offshore structures (2002) ISO/ISO 19901-5 - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 5: Weight control during engineering and construction (2003)
Standards developed and now underway through the hearing processes are: ISO/FDIS 19901-1 - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 1: Metocean conditions and criteria ISO/CD 19901-3 - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 3: Topsides structures ISO/FDIS 19901-7 - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 7: Station keeping systems for floating offshore structures and mobile offshore units ISO/DIS 19904-1 - Floating offshore structures - Part 1: Monohulls, Semisubmersibles and Spars ISO/CD 19901-6 - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 6: Marine operations 7.6 Special Regional Legislation
Regional legislation such as the EC directives will impact on FPSOs located within the European Economic Area. There is, however, a large degree of uncertainty among regulators as to what extent the directives shall apply. Current practice appears to be that the industrial part (process plant and associated equipment) of the FPSO must comply with the directives, while the maritime parts are exempt. Discussions are ongoing among regulators about a uniform interpretation, but no verdict has been reached to date. 7.7 7.7.1 Areas of Special Interest Transit Phases
Tows may be regarded as temporary phases where the unit does not need any formal certificates, while independent voyages require the unit to have valid maritime certificates. For FPSOs we normally see that the units are issued with voyage certificates as bulk carriers. An important aspect of the transfer is the loading conditions which apply to the unit. These may be significant and should be included in the design basis for the unit. Class normally include the effect of such loadings in their approval basis. 7.7.2 Working Environment Regulations
The local working environmental regulations may have a strong influence upon the size of the FPSO. Unfortunately these requirements are often introduced late in projects with subcontractors not having knowledge about them. There are to date no common international standards which cover the area adequately. The main message is that these aspects must be properly understood and clarified at an early stage of the project, requiring significantly more investment at the design/engineering stage.
102
7.7.3
Floating LNG and GTL facilities
With the growing worldwide demand for natural gas and the difficulty in finding and permitting onshore sites, together with safety considerations, a number of offshore import terminals are currently being proposed. Similarly the need to develop associated and stranded gas in remote locations has encouraged the consideration of offshore LNG production and export terminals. Class societies have met this challenge by introducing publications for design, construction and verification of such facilities. These are: DNV-OSS-309 Verification, Cert. and Classification of Gas Export and Receiving Terminals, January 2005 DNV-OSS-103 Rules for Classification of LNG/LPG Production and Storage Units, May 2001 DNV-OS-C503 Concrete LNG Terminal Structures and Containment Systems, October 2004 LRS Classification of Offshore LNG Production and Storage Installations; Guidance Notes, 2002 ABS Guide for Building and Classing Offshore LNG Terminals, 2004.
Standardisation is also taking place within CEN (European Committee for Standardisation) for offshore gas loading arms. A draft for a new EN 1474 Part III: Offshore Transfer Systems will be ready for industry hearing by the end of 2005.
8.
RECOMMENDATIONS
This section suggests areas where future research work would be beneficial in reducing uncertainty in the design, construction, installation and operation of floating production systems. As highlighted in the ISSC FPS 2003 Report further study and measurement is still required to quantify the joint occurrence probability of extreme waves, wind and current in terms of both magnitude and direction. Further research should also be carried out on the quantification and use in design of loop currents in the Gulf of Mexico, multi-peaked wave spectra offshore West Africa, and green water effects on hull and deck equipment in high sea state locations. Development of new offshore fields in or near to Arctic areas will pose severe requirements on the safety and reliability of floating units in these environments. ISO has a new Arctic Structures Standard underway, planned for issue in 2009, and IMO has issued new guidelines for Arctic shipping. Drilling operations in the Norwegian part of the Barents Sea
103
have been initiated with a zero pollution philosophy, which has proved to be difficult to enforce in practice. This will likely follow through to similar requirements for FPS operations and at other locations worldwide. Further work is needed in these important areas. Although FPS schemes are regularly considered in shallow water there appears to be little work or guidance on the issue of squat in extremely small water depths. Conversely as offshore drilling continues to set new boundaries in terms of ultra-deep water there continues to be demand for research allowing the design, manufacture and installation of suitable production schemes and the associated sub-surface riser, umbilical and mooring architecture. In the reporting period there were a limited number of papers documenting FPS responsebased design methods and results. Here the objective is to obtain a target level of reliability, operability and availability rather than a storm-level based design approach. At present development of a robust and workable method is more crucial than analysis of individual load cases. Similarly, as indicated in the 2003 report, there appears to be only limited work carried out on the development and use of LRFD (Load and Resistance Factor Design) methodology. Though computationally time consuming LRFD shows high potential and has been documented in certification rules and guidelines. More work is required to quantify the occurrence frequency and influence of the impulsive loading on the lower portion of riser structures during impact with the soil. The influence of riser internal flows on their local structural response has also been neglected. There is renewed interest in the application of concrete for hull construction including lightweight concrete applied between thin-walled steel sheets, to achieve reduced structural weight and fatigue risk. However further work is needed in this area to understand the behaviour of this in the field. Construction techniques increasingly involve the fabrication and mating of integrated decks or modules rather than conventional modularized hull components. The structural response of the integrated deck, including the influence of its deformation and deflection on topsides piping systems, and the increased stiffness relative to the traditional modular design, are all areas that would benefit from future research. In many FPS developments the transportation loads govern, and this can lead to overconservative structural design and build detail. Approaches allowing consideration of each segment of the transportation route have been reported and further studies will contribute to the significant progress being made in this area. Because of the numerous interfaces between FPS components (eg topside, hull, marine, water column, seabed) FPS construction projects tend to experience significant interfacing problems. It would be useful if methods and tools were developed to ensure that interface data requirements could be addressed in an improved manner with the aim to reduce the number of interfaces, or at least clarify the ownership of interfaces more clearly. In a similar
104
vein industry has expressed a need for further research on the standardisation of systems and equipment. In terms of FPS operations there is a need for the development of additional comprehensive databases that capture operational experience. Ideally these should be made freely available allowing further improvements in safety and efficiency. Furthermore such data are useful as input for probabilistic methods allowing risk based inspection planning. Previous databases have for example pointed to requirements to consider ballast tank failures at an early design stage, internal cracking between tanks, excessive roll limiting operations, turret bearing/swivel issues, layout problems with generators, exhaust/flare radiation and workshop/store locations, together with the occurrence and consequence of collisions between FPS and offloading tankers. Work on Reliability Centred Maintenance (RCM) for FPS schemes, where the importance of each component of a system is balanced with the probability of failure, thus forming a more optimal maintenance strategy, appears not to have been considered during the reporting period. The application and benefits from the use of RCM should be investigated. Although monohulls continue to be the most popular concept for new developments, various innovative floater shapes are being considered, such as the large cylindrical hull design envisaged for application in Brazil and in the UK North Sea. Additionally with the present day and anticipated future accelerating requirement for environmentally friendly gas, amplified by recent no flaring requirements, LNG storage and re-gasification units (LNG FSRUs) are being designed and constructed. This is likely to be followed shortly by Gas to Liquids (GTL) floating facilities processing both hydrocarbon and petrochemicals on a single floating platform. Further work will, in the future, be required on all aspects of the life cycle of these new concepts. Industry demand for FPS schemes continues to accelerate for both conventional and new designs operating in an expanding range of water depths and environmental conditions to produce an increasing variety of hydrocarbon products. With the key drivers of improvements in safety and efficiency further emphasis should be placed in the future on the development of research results in a form more accessible for use in reliability based methodologies, as these are increasingly being employed both by the classification societies and the offshore industry to quantify and minimize uncertainty.
REFERENCES
The following conference publications are denoted as indicated: OMAE - Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, OTC Offshore Technology Conference, ISOPE International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, DOT Deep Offshore Technology.
105
Adhia, G., Pellegrino, S., Ximenes, M.C., Awashima, Y., Kakimoto, M. and Ando, T., (2004). Owner and shipyard perspective on newbuild FPSO contracting scheme, standards and lessons, Proc. OTC 16706. Adhia, G. and Pellegrino, S., (2004). Practical considerations in the design and construction of FPSOs, Proc. OMAE Specialty Symposium on Integrity of Floating Production, Storage & Offloading (FPSO) Systems, Houston, Texas, USA, Proc. OMAE FPSO 0090. Agarwal, A.K. and Jain, A.K. (2003a) Dynamic behaviour of offshore spar platform under regular waves, Ocean Eng, 30, 487-516. Agarwal, A.K. and Jain, A.K. (2003b) Nonlinear coupled dynamic response of offshore Spar platforms under regular sea waves, Ocean Eng, 30, 517-551. American Bureau of Shipping (2005), Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels, Part 3 Section 3. Banfield, S.J., Casey, N.F. and Nataraja, R. (2005). Durability of polyester deepwater mooring rope, Proc. OTC 17510, Houston, USA. Bang, P. (2002) Girassol: The FPSO Presentation and Challenges, Proc. OTC 14172. Bectarte, F. and Coutarel, A. (2004). Instability of tensile armour layers of flexible pipes under external pressure. Proc. OMAE 51352. Bergan, P. G. and Lotsberg I. (2004). Advances in fatigue Assessment of FPSOs, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0012, Houston, USA. Bergan, P.and Bakken, K. (2005). Sandwich Design: A solution for marine structures?, Proc. Eccomas Marine, Computational Methods in Marine Engineering, June, Oslo, Norway. Bhattacharyya, S.K., Sreekumar, S. and Idichandy, V.G. (2003) Coupled dynamics of SeaStar mini tension leg platform, Ocean Eng, 30, 709-737. Bjornoy, O.H., Jahre-Nilsen, C.; Marley, M.J.; Williamson, R. (2001) RBI planning for pipelines, principles and benefits, Proc. OMAE 4007. Biasotto, P., Bonniol, V. and Cambos, P. (2005). Selection of Trading Tankers for FPSO Conversion Projects, Proc. OTC 17506, Houston, USA. Brack, M, Troina, L.M.B. and Souza, J.R.M. (2005). Flexible riser resistance against combined axial compression, bending, and torsion in ultra-deep water depths. Proc. OMAE 67404. Brock V.A., (2003) Auger an asset in transition, OTC 15111. Brown D.T. and Ekstrom L. (2005). Vessel thuster-thruster interactions during azimuthing operations. Proc OMAE 67500. Brown M.G., T.D. Hall, D.G. Marr, R.O. Snell, (2005) Floating production mooring integrity JIP key findings, Proc. OTC 17499. Buchner, B., Dierx, P. and Waals, O. (2005). The behaviour of tags in waves assisting LNG carriers during berthing along offshore LNG terminals, Proc. OMAE 67219. Bugg, D.L., Vickers, D.T. and Dorchak, C.J. (2004). Mad Dog Project: Regulatory approval process for the new technology of synthetic (polyester) moorings in the Gulf of Mexico, Proc OTC 16089. Chandrasekaran, S., Chandak, N.R. and Anupam, G., (2006). Stability analysis of TLP tethers, Ocean Eng, 33, 471-482.
106
Chandrasekaran, S., Jain, A.K. and Chandak, N.R., (2004) Influence of hydrodynamic coefficients in the response behaviour of triangular TLPs in regular waves, Ocean Eng, 31, 2319-2342. Chapin G., (2005) Inspection and monitoring of Girassol hybrid riser towers, Proc. OTC 17696. Chatjigeorgiou, I.K (2004) On the parametric excitation of vertical elastic slender structures and the effect of damping in marine applications, Applied Ocean Research, 26, 2333. Chatjigeorgiou, I.K. and Mavrakos, S.A. (2005) Nonlinear resonances of parametrically excited risers-numerical and analytic investigation for =21, Computers and Structures, 83, 560-573. Chen, X., Ding, Y., Zhang, J., Liagre, P., Niedzwecki, J. and Teigen, P. (2006) Coupled dynamic analysis of a mini TLP: Comparison with measurements, Ocean Eng, 33, 93-117. Cheung, K.F., Phadke, A.C., Wei, Y., Rojas, R., Douyere, Y.J.-M., Martino, C.D., Houston, S.H., Liu, P.L.-F., Lynett, P.J., Dodd, N., Liao, S. and Nakazaki, E. (2003) Modelling of storm-induced flooding for emergency management, Ocean Eng, 30, 1353-1386. Chitwood, J. E., Hanrahan, S., and Adhia, G., (2005). DeepStar FPSO solutions for 10,000 fsw GOM field development, Proc. OTC 17200, Houston, USA. Cho, Y-S, Park, K-Y and Lin, T-H. (2004). Run-up heights of nearshore tsunamis based on quadtree grid system, Ocean Eng, 31, 1093-1109. Dalmaijer, J.W. and Kuijpers, M.R.L., (2003). Heave compensation system for deep water installation, Proc. 15th DOT, Marseille, France. Davies, P., Chailleux, E., Bunsell, A., Grosjean, F. and Francois, M., (2003). Prediction of long-term behaviour of synthetic mooring lines, Proc. OTC 15379, Houston, USA. DeMerchant, T., Magee, A., Penn, J., Li, Z., Loken, A. and Perryman (2005). Holstein Spar hard tank strake structural design, Proc. OTC 17300, Houston, USA. Dijkhuizen, C., Coppens, T. and Van der Graaf, P., (2003). Installation of Horn Mountain Spar using the enhanced DCV Balder, Proc. OTC 15367, Houston, USA. DNV Classification Notes No. 30.5 (2000), Environmental conditions and environmental loads, March DNV, Recommended Practice RP B401 (1993), Cathodic Protection Design, Det Norske Veritas Industri Norge AS. Dong, P., (2004). Recommended structural stress analysis procedures for fatigue assessment, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0029, Houston, USA. Duggal, A., Lopez-Cortijo, J.,Van Dijk, R. and Matos, S., (2004). Full field and early production ultra-deep waters: The DP-FPSO and DP-EFPSO concepts, Proc. OTC 16710, USA. Eide, J. , Holden, H., Steen K.E. and Jenkins, P. (2004) qualification of a flexible pipe for use in a transfer system of LNG between two floating vessels in harsh environment an update, AIChE Spring National Meeting, April, New Orleans, USA. Estefen, S., Netto, T.A. and Pasqualino, I.P. (2005). Strength analyses of sandwich pipes for ultra deepwater. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 72:4, 599-608.
107
Fatigue Design Recommendations for FPSOs, (2003). Rpt 03-0582 Rev. 02, DNV/B Veritas. FPSO Experience Transfer, OLF Health, Safety and Operations Committee, Norway, http://www.olf.no/lesson/ Franciss, R. (2005). Subsurface buoy configuration for rigid risers in ultra deepwater. Proc. OMAE 67203. Franciss, R. and Ribeiro, E. (2004). Analyses of a large diameter steel lazy wave riser for ultra deepwater in campos basin. Proc. OMAE 51176. Fricke, W., Doerk, O.,and Grnitz, L., (2004). Fatigue strength investigation and assessment of fillet-welds around stiffener and bracket toes, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0010, Houston, USA. Fyfe, A.J. and Ballard, E.J., (2004). A design evaluation methodology for green water and bow impact type problems, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0065, Houston, USA. Gaillarde, G., Ledoux, A. and Lynch, M., (2004). Coupling between liquefied gas and vessels motions for partially filled tanks: effect on seakeeping, Proc. International Conference Design and Operation of Gas Carriers, Sept., London, United Kingdom. Garbatov Y., Guedes Soares, C. and Wang, G., (2005). Non-linear time dependent corrosion wastage of deck plates of ballast and cargo tanks of tankers, Proc. OMAE 67579. Gatti-Bono, C. and Perkins, N.C., (2004) Numerical simulations of cable/seabed interaction, Int Journal of Offshore and Polar Eng, 14(2), 118-124. Gedik, N., Irtem, E. and Kabdasli, S. (2005) Laboratory investigation on tsunami run-up, Ocean Eng, 32, 513-528. Giertsen, E., Verley, R. and Schroder, K. (2004) CARISMA. A catenary riser/soil interaction model for global riser analysis, Proc. OMAE 51345, Vancouver, Canada. Gonzalez, E.C., Mourelle, M.M., Lima, J.M.T.G. and Moreira, C.C.(2005). Steel catenary riser design and analysis for Petrobras Roncador field development. Proc. OTC 17670. Goyet J., A. Rouhan, M.H. Faber, (2004). Industrial implementation of risk based planning lessons learned from experience: (1) The case of FPSOs, Proc. OMAE 51572. Graczyk, M., Moan, T. and Rognebakke, O. (2005) Probabilistic analysis of characteristic pressure for LNG tanks, Proc. OMAE 67096, Halkidiki, Greece. Hall A.D., (2005). Cost effective mooring integrity management, Proc. OTC 17498. Hayir, A. (2005). The near-field tsunami amplitudes caused by submarine landslides and slumps spreading in two orthogonal directions, Ocean Eng, 1-11. Hodgson, T. and Barltrop, N., (2004). Structural response of bow type structures to impact by steep fronted waves and resulting structural design. Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0064, USA. Hogan, J., Kuuri, J. and Maher, J., (2005). Red Hawk cell spar hull fabrication, Proc. OTC 17333, USA. Holdbrook S.J., (2004). Risk based inspection planning for an fpso hull lessons for design, Proc. ISOPE, ISBN 1-880633-62-1.
108
Hong, S.Y., Kim, J.H., Cho, S.K., Choi, Y.R., Kim, Y.S. (2005) Numerical and experimental study on hydrodynamic interaction of side-by-side moored multiple vessels, Ocean Engineering, 32, 783-801. Hoogeland M.G., C.G.J.M van der Nat, M.L. Kaminski, (2003) FPSO fatigue assessment; Feedback from in-service inspections, Proc. OTC 15064. Hoppe R.A., R.K. Gomes, V.C.S. Krzonkalla, (2004) FPSO hull maintenance field experience, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0070. Idse-Nss, T-B., Nielsen, L.R., Kvitrud, A., Vinnem, J.E., (2005). Anchoring of facilities on the Norwegian shelf, Norwegian Petroleum Safety Authority Report. Inoue, Y. and Kamruzzaman, M. (2005) Numerical simulation on mooring performance of LNG-FPSO system in realistic seas, Proc OMAE 67190, Halkidiki, Greece. Jean, P., Goessens, K. and LHostis, D., (2005). Failure of chains by bending on deep water mooring systems, Proc. OTC 17238, Houston, USA. Jenman C. A. and J. Farrell-Dillon (2005) Report on UKCP shuttle tanker incidents 19982004, ISBN 0 717661105. Kang, J-K., Kim, Y. and Heo J.H., (2004). Fatigue strength of bent type hopper corner detail in double hull structure, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0011, Houston, USA. Kashiwagi, M., Endo, K., Yamaguchi, H. (2005) Wave drift forces on two ships arranged side by side in wave, Ocean Engineering, 32, 529-555. Kavanagh, W.K., Harte, G., Farnsworth, K.R., Griffin, P.G., Hsu, T.M., Jefferies, A. and Desalos, A.P., (2004). Matterhorn steel catenary risers; critical issues and lessons learned for reel-layed SCRs to a TLP, Proc. OTC 16612, Houston, USA. Kennedy S.J., J. Bond, D. Braun, P.G. Noble, J.D. Forsyth, (2003) An innovative No Hot Work approach to hull repair on in-service FPSOs using sandwich plate system overlay, OTC 15315. Kleefsman, T., Loots, E., Veldman, A., Buchner, B., Bunnik, T. and Falkenberg, E., (2005). The numerical simulation of green water loading including vessel motions and the incoming wave field, Proc. OMAE 67448, Halkidiki, Greece. Koo, B.J., Kim, M.H. and Randal, R.E. (2004a) Mathieu instability of a spar platform with mooring and risers, Ocean Eng, 31, 2175-2208. Koo, B.J., Kim, M.H. and Randal, R.E. (2004b) The effect of nonlinear multi-contact coupling with gap between risers an d guide frames on global spar motion analysis, Ocean Eng, 31, 1469-1502. Korpus, R. and Liapis, S. (2005) Active and passive control of Spar vortex-induced motions, Proc. OMAE 67245, Halkidiki, Greece. Krekel, M.H., Leeuwenburgh, R., Bishop, W.M. and Davis,J.F., (2004). Single point mooring system for an offshore LNG import terminal, Proc. OTC 16717, Houston, USA. Ku A.P., Spong, R.E., Wu, X.S., Basu, R. and Wang, G., (2005). Structural reliability applications in risk-based inspection plans and their sensitivity to different environmental conditions, OTC 17535. Kumar, V.S., Mandal, S. and Kumar, K.A. (2003) Estimation of wind speed and wave height during cyclones, Ocean Eng, 30, 2239-2253. Kvello, O., Cruz, I., Lacourt, R., Charnaux, C. and Francis, R., (2003). SCRs installation to sub-surface buoy, Proc. DOT, Nov. 2003, Marseille, France.
109
Kyoung, J.H., Hong, S.Y., Kim, J.W., Bai, K.J. (2005). Finite element computation of wave impact load due to a violent sloshing, Ocean Engineering, 32, 2020-2039. Kyriakides, S. and Netto, T.A. (2004). On the dynamic propagation and arrest of buckles in pipe in pipe systems. International journal of solids and structures, 41, 5463-5482. Kyriakides, S. and Oslo, E. (2003). Internal ring buckle arrestor for pipe in pipe systems. International journal of solids and structures. , 38, 267-284. Lee, J.H., Janssens, P. and Cook, J., (2005). LNG regasification vessel The first offshore LNG facility, Proc. OTC 17161, Houston, USA. Lee. H.H. and Wang, W-S. (2003). On the dragged surge vibration of twin TLP systems with multi-interactions of wave and structures, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 263, 743-774. Leverette, S.J., Rijken, O.R. and Spillane, M.W., (2004). Development of tension leg platform for 10,000 ft water depth, Proc. DOT, New Orleans, US. Li D., S. Zang, W. Tang, (2004). Risk Based inspection and repair optimization of ship structures considering corrosion effects, Proc. OMAE 51016. Liagre, P.F. and Niedzwecki, J.M. (2003). Estimating nonlinear coupled frequencydependent parameters in offshore engineering, Applied Ocean Research, 25, 1-19. Liang, N-K, Huang, J-S and Li, C-F (2004). A study of spar buoy floating breakwater, Ocean Eng, 31, 43-60. Liu, Y. and Boatman, L.T. (2005). Analysis of duplex yoke mooring system for tandem offloading of LNG, Proc. OMAE, Halkidiki, Greece, 67119. Lloyds Register/UKOOA, (2003). FPSO inspection, repair and maintenance, Study into best practice, Report R20281-5_UKOOA, Lloyds Register of Shipping. Loez, B. (2002), Girassol: The biggest FPSO in the world: as seen by its contractor. OTC 14212. Lotsberg, I., Sigurdsson, G., Maherault-Mougin, S. and Francois, M., (2004). Fatigue design recommendations for FPSOs. Rep. 0582, Rev 2. Det Norske Veritas/Bureau Veritas. Lotsberg, I. and Landet, E., (2004) fatigue capacity of side longitudinals in floating structures, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0015, Houston, USA. Ma, W. and Cooper, C. (2005). Estimating the voyage duration of transoceanic LNG transports. Proc. OMAE, 67398. MacMillan A., K.P. Fisher, H. Carlsen, . Goksyr, (2004) Newbuild FPSO corrosion protection a design and operation planning guideline, Proc. OTC 16048. Marques F.C.R., Martins, M.V.M., Brasil W.C., (2004) Special ROV designed for shell hull plates evaluation, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0033. Marshall K.L., G.H. Smith, (2005) Inspection management experience for a fleet of Spars in the Gulf of Mexico, Proc. OTC 17619. Mazaheri, S. and Downie, M.J. (2005) Response-based method for determining the extreme behaviour of floating offshore platforms, Ocean Eng, 32, 363-393. McDonald, D., Chen-Hwa Chiu and Adkins, D., (2004) Comprehensive Evaluations of LNG Transfer Technology for Offshore LNG Development, 14th Int. Conf. on LNG, Mar., Doha Qatar. Morandi A., D. Martinez, C. Smith, (2004) Statistics of TLP tendon tension behaviour during hurricane Lili, Proc. OMAE 51445.
110
Morandi A.C., J.K. Galiotos, (2005) Integrity management of deep water floating production facilities: Towards better and safer workforce personnel, Proc. OMAE 67572. Morandi A.Q., Mercier, J.A. Bea, R.G., (2004) Performance of deepwater floating production facilities during hurricane Lili, Proc. OTC 16804. Morishita, H.M. and Bolognati, Y. (2005) Dynamics and control of a two-body floating system under realistic environmental loads, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 164, 573-590. Morooka, C.K., Coelho, F.M., Kubota, H.Y., Ferrari Jr., J.A. and Ribeiro, E.J.B. (2004) Investigations on the behaviour of vertical production risers, Proc. OMAE 51190. Vancouver, Canada. NACE, Standard Recommended Practice (2003), Corrosion control of steel fixed offshore structures associated with petroleum production, NACE Standard RP0176, , item No. 21018. Naciri, M. and Poldervaart, L., Design Aspects of SPM LNG Terminals in Shallow Water, Proc. OTC 16715, Houston, USA. Netto, T.A., Botto, A., Loureno, M.I and Quaranta, F. (2005). On the feasibility of installing SCRs by the reel method. Proc. 12th Intl Congress of Intl Maritime Assoc. of the Mediterranean, 2, 1447-1454. Newport A., R. Basu, A. Peden, (2004) Structural modifications to the FPSO Kuito cargo tanks, Proc. OMAE-FPSO-0085. Nielsen, K.B. and Mayer, S. (2004) Numerical prediction of green water incidents, Ocean Eng, 31, 363-399. Novitsky, A. and Gray, F. (2003). Flexible and rigid pipe solutions in the development of ultra-deepwater fields. Proc. OMAE 37401. Oliveira Jr, S.C., Pasqualino, I.P. and Netto, T.A. (2005). Metal-composite pipes for deepwater applications. Proc. 18th Intl Congress of Mech. Eng., Ouro Preto, Brazil, Nov. Ong, P.P.A. and Pelegrino, S. (2003) Modelling of seabed interaction in frequency domain analysis of mooring cables, Proc OMAE 37465. Paik, J.M., Wang, G., Thayamballi, A.K., Lee, J.M.and Park, Y.I., (2003). Time-dependent risk assessment of aging ships accounting for general/pit corrosion, fatigue cracking and local denting damage, Proc. SNAME Annual Meeting, 17-20 October, San Francisco, USA. Pasqualino, I.P., Silva. S.L. and Estefen, S. (2004). The effect of the reeling laying method on the collapse pressure of steel pipes for deepwater. Proc. OMAE, 51513, Cancun, Mexico. Perryman, S., Gebara, J. Botros, F. and Yu, A., (2005). Holstein truss spar and top tensioned riser system design challenges and innovations, Proc. OTC 17292, Houston, USA. Pesce, C.P. and Martins, C.A. (2004) Riser-soil interaction: Local dynamics at TDP and a discussion on the eigenvalue problem, Proc OMAE 51268. Vancouver, Canada. Pereira, M., Speck,J. and Still, J., (2004). FPSO Structural Integrity A TWI Collection of Case Studies, Proceedings of OMAE Specialty Symposium on Integrity of Floating
111
Production, Storage & Offloading (FPSO) Systems, Paper No. OMAE-FPSO040086. Petruska, D., Rijtema, S.,Wylie, H., Geyer, J., (2004). Mad Dog polyester mooring installation, Proc. 16th DOT, New Orleans, USA. Phadke, A.C., Martino, C.D., Cheung, K.F. and Houston, S.H. (2003), Modelling of tropical cyclone winds and waves for emergency management, Ocean Eng, 30, 553578. Poldervaart, L., Van Cann, B. and Westhuis, J-H., (2004). A DP-FPSO as a First-Stage Field Development Unit for Deepwater Prospects in relatively mild environments, Proc. OTC 16484. Raine, B., Kaplan, A. and Jackson, G., (2003). Technical issues associated with the integration of LNG production and storage facilities using floating concrete substructures, Proc. OTC 15299, Houston, USA. Rao, S. and Mandal, S. (2005) Hindcasting of storm waves using neural networks, Ocean Eng, 32, 667-684. RINA, On-ground construction technique for new Hyundai VLCC-size FSO, The Naval Architect, January 2003 page 24. Roveri, F.E. and Pessoa, P.R.F., (2005). Free standing hybrid riser for 1800 m water depth. Proc OMAE 67178. Ruyter, W. de, Pellegrino, S. and Cariou, H. The Sanha LPG FPSO, (2005). Proc. OTC 17361. Sablok, A. Lui, C., Gebara, J.,Cattell, A. and Perryman, S., (2005). Mating of the Holstein hard tank and truss - challenges, execution, dimensional control and analysis, Proc. OTC 2005, Paper 17297, Houston, USA. Ship Structure Committee, (1999). Fatigue resistant detail design guide for ship structures, SR-1386, SSC-405, August 6. Sigurdsson G., E. Landet, I. Lotsberg, (2004) Inspection planning of a critical block weld in an FPSO, OMAE-FPSO 0032. Smedley, P., Fyfe, S. and White, R., (2004). Shuttle Tanker to FPSO Collision scenarios and associated energy levels, OMAE-FPSO 0051, Houston, USA. Snieckus D., (2004). Testing time for tankers. Offshore Engineer, Apr., 111. Sobey, R.J. (2005). Normal mode decomposition for identification of storm tide and tsunami hazard, Coastal Eng, In Press, corrected proof, available on-line, Nov. Soeters M., H. Brugts, P. Williams, (2005). Temporary replacement of production facilities by a dynamic positioned FPSO, Proc. OTC 17363. Soylemez, M. and Yilmaz, O. (2003). Hydrodynamic design of a TLP type offloading platform, Ocean Eng, 30, 1269-1282. Sparks, C., Zivanovic, I., Luyckx, J. and Hudson, W., (2003). Carbon fibre composite tendons for deepwater tension leg platforms, Proc. OTC 15164, Houston, USA. Standing, R.G., Jackson, G.E., Rainford, D.J., Snell, R.O. and Trowbridge, G., (2004). The challenge of installing subsea hardware in ultra-deepwater using a fibre rope deployment system, Proc. 16th DOT, New Orleans, USA. Stiehl G. and Hampshire L., (2004). West Seno project & construction management challenges, Proc. OTC 16525.
112
Straub, D. and Faber, M.H. (2005). Risk based inspection planning for structural systems. Structural Safety, 27, 335355. Suzuki, H., Takano, K., Emonoto, K. and Oka, N. (2004). Axial and lateral coupled response of a deepsea riser for scientific drilling, Proc. OMAE 51094, Vancouver, Canada. Tahar A., L. Finn, P. Liagre, J. Halkyard, (2005). Full scale data comparison for the Horn mountain spar mooring line tension during the hurricane Isidore, Proc OMAE 67439. Tanaka, R.L., Martins, C.A., Takafuji, F.C.M., Silveira, L.M.Y. and Balena, R. (2005). Dynamic analysis of lazy-wave steel risers. Proc. COBEM 1848. Tao, L. and Cai, S. (2004). Heave motion suppression of a Spar with a heave plate, Ocean Eng, 31, 669-692. Tao, L. and Thiagarajan, K. (2003) Low KC flow regimes of oscillating sharp edges. II. Hydrodynamic forces, Applied Ocean Research, 25, 53-62. Thethi R., Howells H.,Natarajan, S. and Bridge C., (2005) A fatigue monitoring strategy & implementation on a deepwater top tensioned riser, Proc. OTC 17248. Thibaud, F., Luteyn, S. and Prinet, D. (2005). Design drivers of hybrid riser towers. Proc. OMAE 67307. Thomas, P.A., Malek, S., Tcherniguin, N. and Bestel, V., (2003). A solution for FPSO module integration, Proc. OTC 15314. Tivelli, M., Cumino,G., Izquierdo, A., Anelli, E. (2005). Effect of plastic deformation pattern typical of reel laying on the in-service mechanical performance of pipes and girth welds. Proc. Rio pipeline IBP1008-05. Tolman, H.L., Alves, J-H.G.M. (2005) Numerical modelling of wind waves generated by tropical cyclones using moving grids, Ocean Modelling, 9, 305-323. Torselletti, E., Vitali, L. and Bruschi, R. (2005). Bending capacity of girth-welded pipes. Proc. OMAE 67487. TSCF (Tanker Structure Co-operative Forum) (1997), Guidance Manual for Tanker Structures, Witherby & Co.Ltd., England, ISBN 1 85609 093 0. TSCF (Tanker Structure Co-operative Forum) (2002), Guidelines for Ballast Tank Coating Systems and Surface Preparation, Witherby & Co.Ltd., England, ISBN 1 85609 214 3. UKOOA, Association of Operators UK continental shelf, http://www.ukooa.co.uk/issues/fpso/ van den Boom H., J. Koning, P. Aalberts, (2005) Offshore monitoring; Real world data for design, engineering and operation. Proc. OTC 17172. Van der Valk, C.A.C. and Watson, A., Mooring of LNG Carriers to a weathervaning floater Side-by-Side or Stern-to-Bow, Proc. OTC 17154, Houston, USA. Vinnem, J.E., Hokstad, P., Dammen, T., Saele, H., Chen, H., Haver, S., Kieran, O., Kleppestoe, H., Thomas, J.J. and Toennessen, L.I., (2003). Operational safety analysis of FPSO-shuttle tanker collision risk reveals areas of improvement, Proc. OTC 15317, Houston, USA. Vogel H., K.A. Nyhus, D.K. Schouw-Hansen, (2004) In-service monitoring of riser fatigue, Proc. ISOPE, ISBN 1-880633-62-1.
113
Wang, G., Spencer, J. and Elsayed, T., (2003). Estimation of corrosion rates of structural members in oil tankers, Proc. OMAE 37361, Cancun, Mexico. Wang, M. and DSouza, R., (2004). Consistent practical fatigue design for FPSO integrity, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0020, Houston, Texas. Wang, M. and DSouza, R., Mooring chain corrosion design considerations for an FPSO in Tropical Water, Proc. OMAE-FPSO 0046, Houston, USA. Wastberg, S., Pisarski, H. and Nyhus, B. (2004). Guidelines for engineering critical assessments for pipeline installation methods introducing cyclic plastic strain. Proc. OMAE 51061. Wemmenhove, R., Loots, E., Luppes, R. and Veldman, A., (2005). Modelling two-phase flow with offshore applications, Proc. OMAE 67460, Halkidiki, Greece. Williams, P.R. (2003). The reliability of flexible pipe and its failure modes. Journal of Pipeline Integrity, Fourth quarter, ISSN 14754584. Witz, J.A., Ridolfi, M.V. and Hall, G.A., (2004). Offshore LNG transfer A new flexible cryogenic hose for dynamic service, Proc. OTC 16270, Houston, USA. Wyllie, M.W.J., (2004). Fast track FPSOs for deepwater and ultra-deepwater, Proc. OTC 16708. Yasseri S.F., J. Prager, (2004) Explosion recurrence modelling, Proc. OMAE 51048. Yang Y.T., Cho H.G., Yoon K.Y., Ha S.S. and Kang H.S. (2003), Development of load-out methodology for on-ground-build FPSO, Proc. OTC 15313. Ye, W., Luo, Y. and Pollack, J. (2005) LNG floating regasification Unit (FRU) side-by-side mooring analysis, Proc. OMAE 67117, Halkidiki, Greece. Yilmaz, O., Incecik, A. and Han, J.C. (2003) Simulation of green water flow on deck using non-linear dam breaking theory, Ocean Eng, 30, 601-610. Young, I.R., (2003) A review of the sea state generated by hurricanes, Marine Structures, 16, 201-218. Younis, B.A. and Przulj, V.P. (2006) Prediction of hydrodynamic loading on a mini TLP with free surface effects, Ocean Eng, 33, 181-204. Zahibo, N., Pelinovsky, E., Talipova, T., Kozelkov, A., Kurkin, A. (2005) Analytical and numerical study of nonlinear effects at tsunami modelling, Applied Mathematics and Computation, In Press, corrected proof, available on-line, Jul. 05.

Floating Production Systems: Committee V.2

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Floating Production Systems: Committee V.2

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

16th INTERNATIONAL SHIP AND OFFSHORE STRUCTURES CONGRESS 20-25 AUGUST 2006 SOUTHAMPTON, UK VOLUME 2

FLOATING PRODUCTION SYSTEMS

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems CONTENTS 1. 2.

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 1. INTRODUCTION

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

STRUCTURAL DESIGN Ship-Shaped Oil FPSOs Newbuildings

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

76 3.2 Ship-Shaped Gas FPSOs

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

External Sheath damage

Aged Internal Sheath Pull-out PVDF Birdcaging

0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems 4. 4.1 CONSTRUCTION General

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

Characteristics of the Conventional FPS Construction Method

Figure 5: On-Ground Construction Site

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

Figure 8: Concept of Jack-Deck Installation Method

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE General

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

96 7. 7.1 REGULATORY ISSUES General

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

Floating LNG and GTL facilities

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

ISSC Committee V.2: Floating Production Systems

Você também pode gostar