Upstream Engineering Centre

Design Requirements for Moorings in

Standards ISO 19901-7 & API RP 2SK/SM
Philip Smedley, BP
Twickenham Stadium, London
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 2
Stationkeeping Standards - Summary
1. Historic (e.g. API RP 2FP1)
2. API 2SK Stationkeeping & 2SM Synthetic Fibre rope
3. ISO 19901-7 Stationkeeping design including fibre rope, plus fibre rope
specifications 18692 (Polyester) & 17920 (HMPE)
4. Class Rules:
1. DNV OS E301 E304 POSMOOR Design and Component requirements
2. BV NI 493 (Design) & NI 432 (Fibre)
3. LR Rules for Floating Offshore Installations & MODU
4. ABS Rules Offshore Installations & MODUs + Guidance Note Fibre rope
5. IMO / IMCA Thruster Dynamic Positioning systems
6. Requirements for mooring to vessel interface (i.e. structure and
equipment, winches, hawsers, etc).
7. Differentiation of Mobile & Permanent mooring systems
Summary of limit states
Ultimate Limit State ULS
Intact system: Line & Pile strength
Intact system: Vessel maximum offset (defined in riser
design)
Damaged system: Line and Pile strength
Damaged system: Vessel maximum offset (defined in riser
design)
Fatigue limit state - FLS:
Intact system
Accidental Limit State ALS (ONLY disconnectable systems)
Serviceability Limit State - SLS
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 3
Ultimate Limit State - Intact
Failure criteria = Min. Ultimate Strength not Min. Yield Strength Criteria.
Failure criticality = Vessel excursion envelope exceeded risers damaged
Factors of Safety ULS (1.0 on offset) Intact system:
P = Permanent mooring (100 ys storm)
M = Mobile mooring ( 5 yr storm or Norway 10 yr storm)
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 4
Dynamic Quasi-Static
API & ISO 1.67 (P&M) 2.00 (M)
Norway CC3
(very close & risers)
2.20 (P&M) 2.50 (M)
Norway CC2
(risers connected)
2.00 (P&M) 2.30 (M)
Norway CC1
(disconnect risers)
1.50 (P)
1.67 (M)
2.00 (M)
Ultimate Limit State Damaged (Abnormal?)
Factors of Safety ULS (nothing on offset) Damaged system:
P = Permanent mooring (100 ys storm) & M = Mobile mooring ( 5 yr
storm or Norway 10 yr storm)
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 5
Dynamic Quasi-Static
API & ISO (-1) 1.25 (P&M) 1.43 (P&M)
Norway CC3 (-1 or -2)
(very close & risers)
1.50 (P&M) 1.80 (M)
Norway CC2 (-1 or -2)
(risers connected)
1.35 (P&M) 1.65 (M)
Norway CC1 (-1 only)
(disconnect risers)
1.20 (P) / 1.25 (M) 1.43 (M)
Ultimate Limit State
Combined thruster and line loss?
Piles more consistency between Standards:
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 6
Ultimate Limit State
Background Reliability
API (ISO) RP 2SK Appendix G = Deepstar CTR 4404 (1997)
Deepmoor (late 1990s) Strength and Fatigue
Normoor (Ongoing) Intact strength
Same factors for chain studlink, chain studless, wire rope (w/out
sheathing), fibre rope (polyester, aramid, HMPE).
Areas for possible review:
Damaged = ULS or Abnormal or Temporary limit state?
Combined redundancy thruster out of action and line loss?
Disconnectable systems (currently risk assess)
DP only systems.
FPSO vs Semi/Spar vs buoy vs riser tower?
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 7
Fatigue Limit State
Tension (TT) fatigue:
Factors of Safety API TN (load) curve vs DNV SN (stress) curve
API FoS on design curve = 3.0
DNV FoS on design curve = 5.0 to 8.0 (spread lines to bundled lines).
Scale effect or not?
Different curves for studlink chain, studless chain, six / multi-strand wire
rope, and spiral strand wire rope. Limited data fibre rope (primarily
polyester) shows it to be >> equivalent wire rope.
Bending (BT) fatigue:
Around fairlead BT fatigue < 20% of TT fatigue, move chain periodically.
Bending at fixed stopper need OPB (&IPB) calculation by expert contractor.
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 8
Fatigue Limit State Tension fatigue
Background DNV Deepmoor & ExxonMobil study for API Work
Group.
DNV: Based on 2,200 links: P(any 1 link < 10
-3
), P(two lines < 10
-5
)
API: Based on 10,000 links: P(one link = 10
-4
)
Criticality:
1. Number of links
2. Scatter in data (SN curve)
3. Load bias and uncertainty
4. Other factors
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 9
Fatigue Limit State API TN vs DNV SN Curves
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 10
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3 4 5 6 7 8
l
o
g
(
S
)
log(N)
API DNV
API/3 DNV/8
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3 4 5 6 7 8
l
o
g
(
S
)
log(N)
API DNV
API/3 DNV/8
Studless D = 76mm Studless D = 150mm
Fatigue Limit State Areas for possible review
Fatigue FoS based on thousands of component links in series
What about rope only moorings?
What about local effects, e.g. OPB?
Almost all chain fatigue tests based on 76mm R3/R4 chain
Assurance at 190mm?
Assurance of Grade R5?
Scale effect or not? Two equally valid methods.
What about Reliability of Thrusters?
More benefit given for quality of analysis, c.f. strength?
Globally, around 4 single line and one multi line failures per year!
What about riser towers, failure critical single components? e.g.
Chinook GoM Grade R5, D = 190mm failed due to illegal weld
repair as fabricator could not achieve quality required within
budget/schedule.
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 11
11-May-12 Risks in Offshore Moorings 12
Mooring Reliability - More than just design code
DNV & API:
One line (Design Code) < 1 x 10
-3
Two or more lines (Design Code) < 1 x 10
-5
Offshore evidence:
One line 2.0 x 10
-2
(1 in 50 yrs)
Two or more lines 2.8 x 10
-3
(1 in 350 yrs)
Increased safety factors are pushing design to larger components with
higher grade steel (>1000 MPa / 145 ksi) that have problems with
manufacture and handling, HISS cracking?.
Fatigue safety margin - OPB example
04 Dec 2012 Reliability of Offshore Structures - Stationkeeping 13
Free corrosion design life = 1.0 x DL
Remove 100% bearing contingency factor = 6.1 x DL
Lower bound to mean bearing friction = 8.8 x DL
Remove safety factor of 10 = 88 x DL
Mean SN curve = 219 x DL
x6.1
x1.5
x10.0
x2.5
Design life is 219 times lower than
best estimate mean life
Probably more as further hidden
conservative assumptions in OPB
design calculation