eS NOB - ~ BD) one The Marine Operations of Self Elevating Platforms © Copyright Noble Denton Europe Ltd. Revision 5, May 2002= NOBLE Introduction au DENTON INTRODUCTION This series of notes has been prepared in association with the course entitled “THE MARINE OPERATIONS OF SELF-ELEVATING PLATFORMS" presented jointly by Aberdeen Skills and Enterprise Training (ASET) and Noble Denton Europe Ltd. (NDE) It is emphasised that this course is introductory and has been prepared to assist personnel to have a better understanding of the marine operations involved when ‘moving self-elevating units and also to promote the adoption of good and safe practice in the conduct of such operations. The course is not intended to train persons who could be responsible for moving a rig, or any other aspect of such an operation. Such expertise can only be acquired by qualified personnel who have had active participation in a number of rig moves under the guidance of a person proven ‘competence. Whilst every effort has been made to present information in these notes in an accurate form, any reference to either a specific rig, or a generic rig type, should be considered illustrative only. It is always the responsibility of those engaged in any marine ‘operation to ensure that they are in possession of all relevant information necessary to properly plan and execute the proposed operation. Neither ASET nor Noble Denton can accept any responsibility for any inaccuracies contained in these notes or for any actions that may be taken in accordance with these notes. © Copyright Noble Denton Europe Ltd Revision 6, October 2004 ©0900= NOBLE Introduction wu DENTON 0 | Feb1se1 | HMC _| Original issue of notes. 1 Mar 1991 | HMC | Extensive minor amendments throughout. Major amendments to Chapter 4. Chapter 5 re-ttled "Foundations ‘Additional appendices included in Chapter 8. 2 ‘pr 1991 | HMC | Minor amendments throughout, Chapter 2 & 3 re-structured and recttled “Legislation and ) Documentation” and “Organisation’ respectively New material relating to procedures included. Chapter 7 recttled "Elevated Operations”. New material relating to procedures in the event of foundation failure included in Chapters 788, Chapter 8 rectiled "Typical Field or Location Move" Ghapter 10 re-written Chapter 11 resid “Incidents. References to "Accidents" amended to read “Incidents” in Chapter 11. New material relating to “Gorila 1” incident included Mar 1982 | HMC | Minor amendments throughout. Chapter 4 restructured, Chapter 10 extensively amended New material relating to “West Gamma' incident in Chapter 14 4 van 1992 | JP | Minor amendments throughout | Chapters 1, 6, 10 and 11 updated with latest information. 8 May 2002 | JP | Contributions by: MJRH, RJ -NOE London, NJR, DM — NDE » Aberdeen, DAS ~ NDE Middle East 6 ‘Oct2004 | JWM |General revision of all sections with latest available information. ©2900 AuouENCOUSE= NOBLE Chapter 4 === DENTON 1 414 AseroRENCOUESE TYPES OF MOBILE OFFSHORE DRILLING UNITS. CLASSES OF UNIT Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODU's) can be divided into two principal classes, determined by their means of support when in operation ‘These classes are as follows Floating Units These units remain entirely supported by their own buoyancy throughout all operational phases. This class can be further sub-divided into two principal types, as follows: a) Diilships and drilbarges b) Semi-submersible (or column stabilised) units Bottom Supported Units In normal operations, the seabed supports this class of unit. However, when being ‘moved from one location to another the mode of operation changes, and these units are then supported by their buoyancy. ‘Again this class can be further sub-divided into two principal types, thus: a) Jack-up (or self-elevating) units b) Submersible units ‘The following sketches illustrate each of the principal types identified above. a om oe Figure 1-1: Types of Mobile Offshore Units: ©0800a aaa etal 12 ® AseDENCOUEC NOBLE Chapter DENTON According to recent data, the mobile offshore dling rig fleet consists of: Rig Type Quantity Percentage Jack-up 296 44.85 Independent Leg/Mat Support 76 11.52 Submersible 39 591 Semi-submersible 153 23.18 Driliship, 96 14.54 TOTAL 660 100.00 It is clear, then, that jack-up units constitute the largest category. They are likely to remain the largest group in the future, due to their effectiveness in water as deep as 150 metres and considering the various new designs under development, JACK-UP RIG HISTORY, PRESENT AND FUTURE Self-elevating platforms for use in the marine environment, which could be moved from ‘one location to another making use of their own buoyancy, were first constructed in the latter part of the 19” century. They were developed to serve as mobile work platforms supporting inshore or estuarial construction activities, ‘Typical examples were the four units designed by William Arrol & Company specifically for the task of repairing the Tay Bridge in 1882. These had rectangular hulls and were equipped with four 65' cylindrical legs, each fitted with "cookie cutter’ spud-cans to prevent the scouring likely in the strong tides of the Tay Estuary. The Jacking system installed was a hydraulic single acting recycling pin system, examples of which remain in use today. ‘The first mobile jack-up unit intended to support offshore oil-exploration was built in 1954. Round cylindrical legs and the DeLong recycling pneumatic gripper jacking systern were installed on this unit. In 1956 Le Tourneau built the "Scorpion", which may be considered as the first important step towards the modern type jack-up units. This unit had rack and pinion jacking systems; three legs of truss type construction, each fitted with “double-cone” spud-cans. During the same period 4 legged jack-ups with pin and cylinder jacking systems and mat type jack-ups were also further developed. In comparison to modem standards, these Units were intended for shallow water and relatively low wave heights or wind speeds. It is therefore perhaps understandable that several incidents involving the total loss of these early units occurred in severe weather. Despite some of these accidents the concept of the jack-up rig was generally considered tobe a success. Larger units were developed, intended to operate in deeper water and in more severe environmental conditions. The problems of soll failure and excessive leg penetration were partly resolved by the development of leg footings or spudcans. Cylindrical legs became impractical for larger units, due to the excessive weights involved and the high wave and current loadings ddeveioped as their cross-sectional area increased. The open truss-ype legs, using high strength steels, became a typical characteristic of the modern larger jack-ups rigs. ©0800om — NOBLE Chapter 4 amma DENTON 4.24 43 ® Another interesting development was the slant leg rig, where stability was improved by tilting the bottoms of the legs outwards thus increasing the resistance of the unit to over- turing. Problems in the connection between the legs and the hull, and difficulties ‘experienced in certain soll conditions have restricted the development of this type of unit. However, this type is again under consideration for deep-water locations, ADVANTAGES OF SLANT LEG JACK UP UNIT + Lower cost, deck size will not be determined by over turning factor requirements, and less stee! is required for the legs ‘+ Greater platform capability, ie. deeper water/ higher wave height + Lower platform sway + Lower natural period + Less leg damage due to rapid penetration + Greater overturning safety factor + No bending movements due to hull sagging + Lower susceptibility to leg damage from foundation movement ‘+ May be fabricated to looser tolerances between leg and hull guides, while stil retaining platform sway rigidity + Rack chock machinery not required for deep water application ‘The arrangement of a slant leg unitisilustrated below: Figure 1-2: Slant Leg Units DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ‘The design of any vehicles or structures intended to operate in the marine environment, js, of necessity, a compromise. Many factors must be taken into account when determining their “operating envelope’. ©0800hassel ae =m ® NOBLE Chapter 4 DENTON ‘Among those most relevant on the design of the self-elevating driling unit are the following: - 1. Water Depth Environmental Conditions Soil Conditions Driling Capacity Variable Load (Payload) Capacity ‘Accommodation Requirements Proposed Nature of Employment Construction and Operating Economics eNausun ‘The relative weight given to the various factors will be the subject of discussion between the designer, owner and possibly potential operators, These discussions, together with the laws of physics, will, to a large extent, determine the eventual design and specifications of the unit, However, as indicated above, even the design which is eventually finalised is a compromise. The designer must balance the demands of the various parties likely o be involved in the construction and operation of the unit. He must then attempt to develop a design that can most closely comply with these requirements. It can therefore be seen that there is. no single “ight answer’ to the design problem, as is ilustrated by the considerable variation in the types of self elevating units currently in service. ‘The overall objective in all cases must be to ensure that the unit can be employed safely, economically and effectively in its intended area of operations. Economic aspects of design and operation will normally be assessed by the owner andlor operator, who must also ensure that good engineering practice has been observed in fuffling the specifications agreed. The latest designs of self-elevating drilling units are typical of the term “Harsh Environment Type’, which may operate satisfactorily in water depths in the region of 110, to 124 metres in the North Sea and other similar hostile areas throughout the year. ‘The principal particulars of three of the latest designs are as follows: Le Tourneau KFELS Mod VI Msc 170-150 MC Enhanced Gorilla Hull Length 93.3 metres 74A metres 88,8 meties Breadth 914 76.2 1025 Depth 110 110 115 Leg Length 1750 1707 208.3 Spud Can Diameter 114 188 Weights: Storm Elevated Diiling Elevated Variable Storms Variable Driling mons 16250 kips 13437 kips 10000 kos (incl. hook toad) Water Depth Maximum (metres) 122 122 160 ©0800=e NOBLE Chapter 4 eum DENTON 134 As OUECE Within the range of their operating capability, self-elevating units can be employed in almost all offshore activities. Jack-up units may be designed to operate in the Tender Assisted Dring mode, whereby the driling package may be detached from the main body of the cantilever and relocated on the adjacent platform. The dil floor is then placed by a lift and roll system. In addition to acting as driling units, when they may operate either independently or adjacent to existing facilities, self-elevating units are often employed to provide accommodation service on offshore construction and hook-up projects. Certain jack-ups. have also been modified to act as production platforms, or as crane barges, whilst at least one unit has been equipped to lay pipe. Jack-up units have been used as rocket launching pads, particularly satelite installation ‘The versatility of these units to move location, especially in the equatorial regions has made them attractive to various space agencies. Personnel likely to be employed on these units should therefore be aware of the wide range of operations with which they may be involved. A thorough understanding of the capability of the unit on which they are serving will enable them to make valuable Contribution to the overall success of the project. Advantages of Self Elevating Units In comparison with other offshore driling and service units, jack-up rigs, in their ‘operational mode, offer the following principal advantages: a) Platform Stability ‘After pre-loading has been completed, it can be normally assumed that the platform is ‘supported on a firm foundation with minimal motions, even in quite severe weather. The extemal environment has therefore less of an effect on operations actually on board the unit ‘As an additional benefit, since the motions are minimal, the specifications of certain items (of equipment can be relaxed thus reducing the initial cost. b) Location of Well-Head Equipment (On most selfelevating driling units the entire wellhead assembly is located at or just below the main deck level The crew has therefore direct and immediate access to these important items of equipment. ©) Complexity of Well-Head Equipment Since itis located above the surface the complexity of the design and operation of the wellhead equipment is reduced. There is no requirement for a sub-sea B.0.P. stack or a marine riser system. Together with their associated handling arrangements and operating mechanisms these are major Costs items in the initial outfitting and maintenance of floating driling unitsam ba bememmcs NOBLE Chapter 4 DENTON d) Machinery and Equipment Outfit ‘A unique feature of jack-up units is the legs, together with the associated elevating machinery and control mechanisms. However, since the units are moved almost entirely with the aid of tugs and a large proportion of their time is spent in the elevated position, the requirement for propulsion machinery and navigation equipment is limited, though some owners have chosen to provide a limited thruster capacity to assist manoeuvring the unit, Furthermore, whilst the cost of installing and maintaining the mooring systems on the floating units is considerable, the requirement for such arrangements on jack-ups is limited to that necessary for assistance in positioning the unit alongside fixed structures in ‘good weather. Arrangements may even be omitted entirely in certain circumstances. ©) Ability to Service Fixed Structures Dependent upon the water depth and seabed conditions of the location, jack-up units can be positioned alongside fixed platforms to provide driling, accommodation and other services. ‘The topside, and hence overall design requirements for platforms which can be serviced. is significantly reduced, with a consequent saving in field development costs. Originally this concept was restricted to shallow water and/ or relatively benign environments. However, the development of deeper water fields in the central northern sector North Sea demonstrated that, whilst specialised techniques may have to be developed, by utilising the large jack-up units now available, these field development methods can be employed in water depth in excess of 120 metres, even when severe conditions can be expected. Disadvantages of Self Elevating Units The disadvantages of units of this type are primarily functions of their sensitivity to environmental conditions. a) Refloating or Elovating ‘When the operating mode of the unit is being changed, anticipated or actual motions likely when freeing the legs from the seabed, or engaging bottom are critical ‘These motions are principally determined by the prevailing sea conditions, and can result in some significant restrictions to operations. In general, even the largest units should not, under normal circumstances, be refloated or elevated clear of the water where the sea height exceeds 2.5 - 3 metres, particularly when long period swell elements are present. For smaller units, the limits must be reduced accordingly. Certain units have been provided with motion suppression systems to reduce thelr weather sensitivity when changing the operating mode. However, these must be used with caution, since their operation in unsuitable conditions can result in further problems. b) On Passage Without exception, jack-up units when afloat have a very low freeboard. Hence, even in moderate weather, seas are likely to break on board, whilst in severe weather there will be large volumes of water continuously washing over the deck, often up to a depth of several metres, In these circumstances, personnel and deck fitings are constantly at risk, not only from the water itself, but also from any objects which may become dislodged by the actions of the sea ©0800am) Ceememeal ® AnorENCoUce NOBLE Chapter 4 DENTON In addition, in very severe weather, the motions of the units may be such that the design capacity of certain structural elements are exceeded causing them to fail, with probably catastrophic consequences, As will be seen when accidents are considered in Section 11, the majorty of incidents involving the loss of jack-ups under tow have resulted from a combination of the above. ¢) On Location ‘Whilst the fact that the platform is supported by the seabed is the principal advantage of this type of unit, that is the reduction in motions when on location, it will be appreciated that the nature of the seabed itself may give rise to problems, These will be discussed more fully in Section 3. Briefly however, exceptionally soft seabeds, particularly those comprised of soil, having an irregular strength profile are likely to give rise to concern, On the other hand, ‘exceptionally hard seabeds, such as bed rock or coral are associated with their own Particular problems, whilst sandy soils, in areas where strong bottom currents prevail are likely to be mobile, giving rise to progressive loss of foundation integrity, 4) Difficulties in Towing ‘Some of the particular features of moving jack-up units will be considered in greater detail in Section 8, Mention must be made here, however, ofthe difficulties in controlling the movement of these units, partcularly in a confined waterway. The hull shape affords litle or no directional ‘stabilty. The units movements are unduly influenced by the windage presented by the legs when elevated, or by the sub surface currents as they are lowered towards the seabed ©), Water Depth Limitations It will be appreciated that jack-up units have a limited water depth capabilty. To a degree this may be overcome by building larger units with longer legs. However, a stage is reached when the design philosophy must change from considering a "low, fat" and rigid structure to one which is “tall, thin" and more mobile ‘The problems associated with this change in philosophy are considerable. It is arguable that the current generation of large, severe environmental units are close to the limits of those which can be built employing present design practices. 110 metres water depth had previously been suggested for all year round operations. Present day building of ultra harsh environment jack-up units have rated depths of 150 metres. ©0800= NOBLE Chapter 1 mum DENTON 14 144 ® ausoENCOUESE DESIGN TYPES Seif elevating units can be divided into two principal design types. The principle features of each type are considered below: - Mat Supported Units ‘The principal structural element of these units is the upper hull in or on which is installed all the operating machinery equipment and systems. The accommodation spaces together with storage facilies for all consumables and ballast water are also located in the upper hull ‘The operating systems referred to above include the elevating mechanisms, which act upon the legs installed through wells in the hull. The operations of the elevating machinery causes the legs to move up or down through these wells. Details of the elevating machinery normally provided are considered later in this section. ‘The bottom of each of the legs is connected to the lower hull, or mat, which is 2 large structure, of approximately similar dimensions to the upper hull, sub-divided into a ‘number of compartments used principally for ballast water or as void spaces. ‘The connection between the legs and mat is effectively rigid and therefore allow for only slight gradients in the seabed. The legs and mat operate as a combined unit, and one leg cannot be raised or lowered independently of the remainder. Figure 1- 3: Typical Mat Supported Unit Mat supported units have the advantage that, since their weight is spread over the entire area of the lower hull, the bearing pressure on the seabed is considerably reduced ‘These units are therefore principally employed on certain types of softer soils, or where coral underlying sand is a feature. ‘Mat supported units are not particularly numerous, and comprise only approximately 20% of the global jack-up fleet. The principal designer and builder is Bethlehem Stee! Corporation, ©00e= NOBLE Chapter 1 was DENTON 142 ® asepEEiCouEse Independent Leg Units This type of unit is similar to that considered above, in that the hull, which contains or supports the operating machinery, systems and equipment, together with the ‘accommodation space and storage facilities is the principal structural element. In the majority of units the legs are installed in wells through the hull. The legs are raised fr lowered through these wells by the action of the elevating machinery installed immediately adjacent. A variety of leg designs have been developed, including, both square and cylindrical column types, or open lattice space-frame structures. These latter types are by far the ‘most common, particularly in larger classes of unit. A wide range of different elevating mechanisms has also been developed. ‘At the bottom of each leg, a footing is provided, by which the load carried by that leg is transferred into the seabed. Whilst some leg footings are relatively small, in most cases a large spud tank, or can is provided. AA variety of spud-can designs have been developed having the common objective of reducing the bearing pressure imposed on the seabed, and thus extending the range of soil types in which the unit can be satisfactorily employed. In operation, these spud cans, which are usually fairly open structures, are fully ballasted and vented, to ensure that no differential in external or internal pressure exists. Since they are not physically connected, each leg can be operated independently of its neighbours. The leg positions relative to the hull can therefore be adjusted to ‘accommodate a wide range of seabed gradients and penetrations, Whilst, in certain cases, special procedures or additional equipment may be necessary, independent leg units can operate satisfactorily in almost any soil types. They must therefore be considered the more versatile, this being reflected in the fact they account for approximately 80% of the global jack-up fleet and that almost all new buildings recently commissioned are of this type. Rowan-Le-Tourneau, Friede & Goldman and Marine Structure Consultants are the principal current designers of independent leg units. Shipyards throughout the world have ‘built units in accordance with their designs under licence, Figure 1- 4: Typical Jack-up Servicing a Fixed Platform ©0800ae ws oman 18 NOBLE Chapter 1 DENTON DRILLING STRUCTURE AND ARRANGEMENT Certain self elevating units have been designed and built to serve principally in Construction support or accommodation roles. The majority however, are intended to support offshore driling operations. The support and manoeuvring of the driling rig associated with such operations requires the provision of special arrangements. Arrangements must to made to permit the drilling derrick to be manoeuvred directly ‘above the area of operations. In addition to carrying the derrick itself, which may weigh Up in excess of 800 tonnes, these arrangements must also be capable of supporting the hook and set-back loads likely in normal driling operations, which can together amount to a further 1700 tonnes. In early units, a large cut-out, or slot, which extended over the full depth, was provided at the after end of the hull. The derrick was supported by a sub-structure, which in turn was carried on large beams extending along either side of the slot By a variety of methods, depending on the design of the unit, the substructure could be skidded longitudinally along these beams, so that the derrick was positioned over the slot, affording clear access through the hull. Since these longitudinal skidding beams formed part of the principle structural arrangements, the derrick and drilling toads imposed on them were transmitted directy into the hull, and from thence through the legs to the seabed foundations, Arrangements were also provided whereby the derrick could be moved to port or starboard of the centreline by skidding across the top of the sub-structure. It can therefore be seen that within limits, by using a combination of the two movements, described above, the centre of the derrick, or rotary table, can be positioned as required over the slot ‘These arrangements enabled the dling rig to be positioned over the scene of the operation as required, but had the disadvantage that the slot cut into the hull considerably restricted the available deck area. Furthermore, where the provision of driling services over fixed structures was reauired, other restrictions become apparent. Most important of these was that the unit must be manoeuvred so that the fixed structure to be serviced is within the slot area. In addition to being a very weather sensitive operation, such a requirement imposes considerable restrictions on the design of the structure, and whilst such restrictions are acceptable for shallow water developments, as water depths increased and the sizes of the structures became larger, they could no longer be tolerated. (On more modern units therefore, the driling package consisting of the sub-structure and the derrick with its associated equipment, is carried on two deep longitudinal beams. These beams which are in turn supported by the principal hull structure in a similar manner to that described above, are also moveable, being provided with skidding arrangements enabling them to be moved froward and aft. Holding-down arrangements, which are connected to the main structure are provided throughout their length. When the unit is in the operational mode, the beams are skidded aft, to act as cantilevers, supporting the dling package outboard of the after end of the hull. During location moves, the beams are skidded forward, so that the driling package is inboard, above the hull Slotlever units, a combination of a slot and cantilever were introduced into the design of some harsh environment units, providing greater flexibility in criling operations. ‘These arrangements have considerably increased the versatility of units so equipped and ‘are now almost universally adopted, but they pose their own particular problems. ©e00eon Sem NOBLE Chaptor 4 wa DENTON Additional arrangements may be necessary to support the conductor pipe and wellhead assembly, whilst the overturning moment, developed as a result of driling operations. being conducted outboard of the hull, is increased. This is likely to be of increased concer in deeper water. It will be appreciated that whatever arrangements are adopted, once the unit is elevated clear of the water at its new location the scope of movement of the driling package is limited. Hence, the designers of the unit normally define an area, or “driling envelope" in which operations may be conducted satisfactorily This envelope normally defined in terms of distances from longitudinal and transverse axes, usually the centreline and the after end of the slot or hull respectively. It should be noted that owing to the design of the particular unit the area might not necessarily have a regular shape. The definition also includes the drilling loads which may be developed on various points within the envelope. Throughout the greater part of the envelope this will be determined by the maximum capability of the draw-works or block assemblies provided. At the extremities of the envelope, structural limitations dominate and the driling load which can be developed may well be significantly reduced. It is important to recognise these limitations when planning certain eritical operations. 200K 750K 200K Transom Figure 1- §: Gorilla Drilling Envelope ® ©0600= mm NOBLE Chapter 4 waa DENTON 16 1.6.4 AsiHOENCOUESE LEG TYPES General In the elevated condition the legs are subject to many large forces. The weight of the platform and operating loads is transferred to the legs through the jacking or lock-off systems. In addition, they are subject to lateral loads caused by environmental forces. They must also be capable of withstanding occasional collisions. In severe weather and sea conditions these forces can be significant as will be discussed in more detail when considering elevated operations. In some leg designs, the dimensions and steel quality is consistent throughout the length. In others, however, these specifications may vary. The leg sections will have greater cross-sectional areas and will be stronger where greatest loads are likely to be developed when in the elevated condition (roughly the top third) and around the first four bays above the spudcan, to withstand the stresses induced during towage. Some designs may also have different thicknesses at every half a bay. AAs previously described, on many earlier units the legs were of the cylindrical or tubular constructions due to their relatively simple design and fabrication. However, as water depths and wave heights increase, the forces on this type of leg becomes too great. The use of truss or lattice type legs therefore becomes necessary. Due to their open construction these legs offer less resistance to passing waves, currents, ‘and wind, consequently the lateral forces will be relatively lower. Therefore, on units designed for more severe conditions, the use of truss lattice type legs is virtually universal Truss legs are, however, more expensive to build and repair. High strength steels, requiring excellent quality control during both initial construction and any subsequent repairs, are essential Earlier designs normally had more robust legs in relation to their size. The designers knew that the unit would be subjected to certain environmental and operational loads, and legs were designed to support these. The effects of wave, wind and current loadings were then calculated for the resulting leg design. This gave rise to an iterative process Which resulted in a further increase in member sizes. Legs fitted to Marathon-Le- Tourneau units are typical ofthis design philosophy. ‘A second approach was to design a lighter structure by altering the load path through the Use of chocks or fixed jacking systems. This resulted in a leg that was more "transparent" to the environment. This design was based on hydrodynamic analysis, with the structure developed accordingly. This approach results in a leg profile which appears light when ‘compared with earlier designs. Legs developed using these principles, typical of which are those installed on Friede & Goldman designed units have proved themselves in service but are somewhat more susceptible to "punch-through” damage. During moves or ocean tows, the forces on the legs due to the rolling and pitching of the unit may be very large and as a result ofthis the strongest part of the leg is normally the section positioned immediately above the spudcans. ©0800=a NOBLE Chapter 4 16.2 ® Figure 1-6: Tubular Leg and Truss or Lattice Leg ‘The number of legs for a jack-up design may vary. In earlier designs up to 16 legs were installed. However, most current designs are of the 3 legged type, though units with 4 legs are also currently in service. In general, for a given size, the 3 leg type is likely to be ‘more economical to build, and the distribution of the platform weight over each leg is more easily determined ‘The types of members used in the fabrication of truss types legs may vary considerably. Usually the bracing members are tubular in cross-section, often strengthened by additional tubular sleeves and gusset plates at their nodal junctions. However, it is not ‘uncommon for the first two or three bays above the spudcan to be constructed using "I" section material. The chord configuration may vary tremendously, since a variety of shapes are employed depending on design requirements. Some chord designs are shown in Figure 1.7. Generally for rack-and pinion type elevating mechanisms these will be divided into two categories, thus: - ae aan Opposed Rack and Single Sided Rack Figure 1- Configuration ‘Three or four chords resulting in legs of triangular or square horizontal sections are most ‘commonly constructed. The strength characteristics of these two types do not significantly vary, However, 4-chord legs will result in greater drag characteristics, both above and below the water. ©0600a NOBLE Chapter 1 16.3 a7 Ass0ENCOUECE BS Figure 1-8: "K” Braced, “x” Braced and Inverted For many years, with the exception of the Levingston 'Z' braced leg, the 'K’ braced leg was the only type of truss used in the construction of jack-up legs. Internal bracing pattems for both the square and triangular leg was not, however, standardised. Recently, two other types of leg bracing have become popular, these being the ‘bracing and the ‘Alternating’ or ‘Inverted K’ bracing, In an "X' bracing design, bays are formed by diagonal tubulars extending from chord to cchord, joined at mid-span, The ‘Alternating K' truss is similar to the ' truss except that every other 'K’ is inverted. This eliminates alternate horizontal braces. Both the 'X’ and ‘Alternating K’ designs have been shown to be weight conserving truss. forms. They also demonstrate improved capability to withstand "punch-through” when ‘compared with the conventional 'k’ truss form, Log Footings Footings or spudcans have been designed and builtin many different shapes and sizes. In general, their purpose is to increase the bearing area at the bottom of the leg. Footing reactions on a harsh environment jack-up unit during storm loading can reach 12,600 tonnes or more. With a footing diameter of 18.5 metres, the pressure would ‘equate to 46.5imé Unless the rig owner imposes specific requirements, designers will select a compromise footing design to cover a wide range of requirements that may include the following: - ) Provide a bearing area that is large enough to operate in relatively soft soil, limiting excessive penetration into the seaffoor. 'b) Incorporate a sharp cone to provide some minimal penetration in hard soils for lateral resistance. ©) Capability to be retracted in the platform far enough, to allow easy dry transport of the rig and limit draft aftoat. 4) If scouring is anticipated as being a problem, special skirts or systems may be incorporated into the footing design, JACKING SYSTEMS Jacking systems may be divided into two principal categories, thus a) Recycling Systems b) Continuous Operation Systems ‘Typical systems are considered in greater detail overleaf, ©0800a Sem, NOBLE Chapter 4 aun DENTON 4.74 Recycling Systems a) Inflatable Gripper Systom ‘Systems common on small units employed in the construction industry for coastal and harbour works are the De Long and Blohm & Voss Air Jack Systems. These are relatively. light duty systems and as a result are usually found on units having a large number of legs. ‘One set of grippers is fixed, the other being raised or lowered through a distance of approximately one metre by means of hydraulic rams, ‘The system consists of two sets of inflatable rubber grippers. Each set of grippers, when. inflated, grip the leg at various stages during the lifting or lowering sequence. ‘The advantage of these systems is that they operate on a simple cylindrical leg section. If required the legs can be driven through the jacks, welded to the hull and the jacks removed to make a permanent structure. The jacks can then be utilised elsewhere. Figure 1-9 b) Pin Systems This eystem employs the same lifting action as the Air Jack systems described above. However, the inflatable grippers are replaced with pins that are inserted into holes in the leg. AA significant advantage of this system is that when the pins are engaged the weight of the hull is supported even if the operating system fails. This system is employed Conjunction with both solid (cylindrical) legs and open truss legs. Typical designs are those developed by Bethlehem Stee! and the Offshore System. These systems may be either single-acting, where only one set of pins move, or double- acting, where two sets of moving pins are provided. ® ©0900 Averoatncourst ae dvcopment pees17.2 Chapter 1 Figure 1-10 ©) Catchor Systoms Using a similar lifing sequence as above, the Gusto designed catcher system grips the solid rectangular section legs by inserting a horizontal yoke or catcher in a castellated rack protruding from opposite sides of the leg. Figure 1-14 Continuous Operation System a) Rack and Pinion System ‘With the rack and pinion system the legs, (of either the "solid" or truss type) have heavy ‘saw tooth type racks, which are engaged by large slow turning pinions. These large piinions are driven through a system of reduction gears, by either electric (Marathon, National, Brissonneau & Lotz), or hydraulic (Baker Marine, Gusto) motors. These motors are normally provided with a fail-safe spring loaded brake system which engages automatically when the power is cut or the hydraulic pressure drops. The brake is therefore only released when the motor is operational. When elevated, the platform is normally supported by the brake system, unless some other leglocking device is provided ©e800=a vem NOBLE Chapter 4 wa DENTON Figure 1-12 17.3 ® Comparison of Jacking Systems In conjunction with independent legs, the rack-and-pinion jacking system has both advantages and disadvantages. It provides a continuous, infinitely adjustable method for elevating and supporting the hull Greater gradients in the seabed can therefore be accommodated, and the time taken to engage or clear bottom will be reduced. However rack elements protruding from the chords increase the resistance of these members to wind, wave and current loadings. Recycling jacking systems are usually incorporated into the basic leg element (with the ‘exception of the Gusto system) thereby having litle effect on the wind, wave or current loadings. The smooth profile of the leg tends to provide a lower drag coefiicient for wave and current loadings but this advantage may be offset by larger diameters and more added However the smooth, large cylindrical shapes ofthe legs most commonly associated with this type of jacking system may be subject to vibration due to vortex shedding if the ‘exposed portions are not fitted with spoilers. Stress concentrations at pinholes have also been shown to be probable causes of crack initiation. Cylindrical legs are therefore more favourable for shallow water designs or those rated for very mild environments. The average jacking speeds of the re-cycling systems are usually noticeably slower than those where continuous operation is possible. Most such systems are single-acting and the legs become stationary while the moving pins, grippers or catchers are repositioned from one section to the next. This recycling may well occur when engaging bottom. Under these circumstances the legs will be subject to an Increased number of impact loadings. The interaction between the jacking system and the leg depends upon the type of chord, The force components between the rack and the pinions of a single-sided rack are such that additional bending stresses are introduced reducing the allowable axial stress, and thus the net capacity of the chord. Designs using opposed racks are not subject to such additional stresses since the force ‘components are resolved into axial forces alone. ©0800Chapter 1 eS NOBLE wu DENTON However, due to the non-opposed pinion loading, the single-sided rack has a certain ability to deflect thus allowing the loads to be distributed more evenly between the pinions. Opposed rack systems will experience more load in the lower pinions than those higher up the "stack". Other factors which affect the design must be taken into consideration include, a) Fixed and Floating Jacks Floating Jacks : Allow greater leg deflection More moment taken through guide Higher bracing loads at guides 18 AssERNEOUESE : Chord bending at midbay : Stronger braces and jackhouse required. Rigid Jacks : Smaller guide reactions More moment through pinions = Lower bracing loads - smaller braces (not if single-sided rack) + More pinions required = Holding rating approx. 2x jacking = Higher chord loadings. b) Electric and Hydraulic Jacking Power Electric Power : Uses same power as driling system (normally) : High slip-type motors distribute pinion evenly when jacking 3 Not sufficiently sensitive to distribute pinion loads during holding - Cannot detect brake malfunction or leg binding Hydraulic Power = Better speed control at ttle extra cost = Faster leg lowering 3 Self compensating and distributes load evenly 7 Needs additional equipment not normally useable during driling. LEG LOCKING DEVICES Several designers use various devices to make a more positive connection between the legs and hull of the units. Whilst there is some dispute as to the features considered important for locking devices to be effective, it is generally agreed, however, that the device should try to approach the characteristics of a fixed connection. ©0800me NOBLE Chapter 1 wun DENTON Principal differences are the methods of restraining the locking element, its complexit and the mechanisms that engage and disengage the locking element, ‘An efficient locking device should include: 1. Positive restraint ofleg for both movement and moment transfer. 2. Adjustabilty to engage the leg in any position at elevations which may vary from leg to leg and chord to chord 3. Engaging mechanism should be capable of positioning the locking element in positive engagement with the rack and holding it in position for a period of time during adverse conditions without relying on outside power sources. 4, Locking devices should not be required for pre-loading operations but should only be engaged once the hull is safely elevated and stabilised or when securing the legs for tow. The provision of a leg-locking system will result in 2) Relative motion between leg and hull being no longer possible, which will ) really reduce ‘+ horizontal movement of the leg within the guides, thus avoiding ‘wear of guide plates and shock loads during transit; = vertical sliding of leg along guides due to jacking system backlash andor jacking system support, thus avoiding wear to guide plates and leg chords furthermore the cyclic loading on the jacking system during a considerable part of its lifetime are significantly reduced; ‘+ the need for load sharing devices between the pinions, thus avoiding the use of complicated automatic, or manually operated devices, ) The load transfer between leg and hull being changed so that + shear in the leg between the guides is greatly reduced, lessening the stresses in the bracings and in bracing-to-chord nodes. Consequently the fatigue of leg sections in the way of the lower guide is reduced. ‘+ shear deformation in the part leg section between the guides is eliminated. This results in an increase of the leg stiffness of ) approx. 40% fora gven design, whi is important in reducing effects of deflection and dynamic amplification. Disadvantages of a leg-/ocking system include: 1. Costly to install, although this is normally offset by a reduction in leg scantling sizes, 2. Will involve a considerable amount of time fiting the locking devices on each location. 3. If scantings are reduced as a result of the locking system, the legs may be more prone to damage during critical operations, such as when engaging bottom, during pre-loading or in the event of "punch-through’. ® ©0800 ABRORENTOUEE soe declopment pees19 ® Chapter 1 Figuro 1-43: Lock Off Devico TORSION BALANCING SYSTEMS. ‘Torsion balancing is not a new concept for jacking systems, and both electric and hydraulic drive units have been designed with this in ming, ‘Such a system is desirable, since without it torsion-balancing or load sharing is effective ‘only whilst rack and pinion jacking systems are actually operating. Once jacking has stopped, there is no mechanical means of assuring that all pinions are equally sharing the static loads. To ensure that this is the case, jacking manufacturers recommend that once the unit is elevated and supported by the brakes of the jacking units, each pinion should be manually torqued to a pre-determined value. This involves releasing the brake and using ‘a torque wrench to engage the pinion with the rack, then resetting the brake. This is a complex and time-consuming operation It is particularly desirable that when pre-loading the pinion loads are distributed evenly. ‘The possibilty of damage to the rack or pinion in the event of a punch-through is reduced, ‘The provision of these systems would therefore help by distributing the loads, both in the static holding mode and when the jacking system is actually operational. ©000eRaye Pag NEN NOBLE DENTON SECTION 1. Introduction of Document 2. Purp 3. Scope of Document 4. Definition of Terms Involved 5. Objectives to be Achieved 6. Description of Unit 7. Support Required 8. Operational Procedures: ontingency Procedures 10.Responsibilties of and Procedures 1.1.Communications and Reporting Parties 12.Personnel on Board 13.Emergency Arrangements 14,Conelusion 15,References 16.Appendices and Exhibits Chapter 2 SUBJECT + Rig Moving + Particulars of locations. + technical terms and abbreviations used in the report + Tolerances required ete Length, breasth and depth Estimated dratt legs Installed Details of mooring system and other equipment that may be employed during operation Vessels ‘On departure from inital locaton ‘On passage between locations: (On arrival at next location Navigation and survey services (On departure from present location (On passage between locations (On arrival at next location Mooring arrangements (On departure from present location ‘On passage between locations ‘On arrival at next location Communication facies Weather forecasting services = Miscellaneous (On departure from present location On passage between locations ‘On arrival and whilst positioning at next location ‘On departure from present location (On passage between locations + Toparties involved To other partes, statutory authorties ete Compliment required (On departure from present locations (On passage between locations (On arrival and whilst positioning at next location Since this report is essentially concerned with operational procedures and arrangements relating to the proposed move it may also be referred to as the “Procedural Manual’ asso EBICOUECE ©6000aa esa 2 24 22 ® AveroatncouEse NOBLE Chapter 2 DENTON LEGISLATION AND ORGANISATION INTRODUCTION It is appreciated that the Statutory requirements outlined in this section may not always. be current due to the time intervals required for review and re-print of the Manual, The contents of the section are to remind those personnel involved of the Statutory requirements of their particular Governments, including Advisory Bodies, and should be read in that context. It must be remembered that the following section relates primarily to the United Kingdom Continental Shelf and that other Sovereign States’ legislation may differ considerably In this section of the course, the legislative and administrative environment in which rig- moves are conducted is discussed briefly. This includes a consideration of the roles and areas of responsibiliy of the various parties involved in the operation. The scope of the more important documents that must be furnished is also discussed, ‘The practices discussed in this section are principally those adopted in the North Sea, and have particular reference to operations on the UK Continental Shelf. It is appreciated that certain readers of these notes may never be involved in operations in these areas. However, it would appear that there is a general trend, however slow, towards the more ‘widespread adoption of the practices currently adopted in the North Sea. Itis therefore hoped that the matters discussed will be of interest and value at some stage to all readers. ‘SOURCES OF LEGISLATION There are two principal sources for the legistation governing offshore operations, including rig moves, wherever they are conducted. To illustrate these it is perhaps best if ‘some terms used in international maritime agreements are employed, ‘The ‘Port State’, or pethaps more correctly in this context, the ‘Sector State’ is the ‘country which, by international agreement has been assigned the beneficial rights of and control over exploitation of the offshore resources occurring on or under the seabed within its “sector”. The area to be included within each country’s sector is also the subject Of international discussion and agreement. This area should not be confused with that over which it exercises sovereignty, or its “territorial waters’. The ‘Flag State’ which relates principally to mobile units, insofar as they are considered “vessels” when afloat, is the country in which they are registered, that is where the official ‘owner's office is located. ‘The ‘Sector State’ and ‘Flag State’ referred to above may be one and the same, but itis ‘more usual to find a unit registered in one country engaged in operations controlled by another. For example, whilst on average, there are approximately 60 driling units operating in the U.K. Sector, these are typically registered in Panama, Liberia, Denmark, the USA and other countries. Furthermore, the Flag State often gives litle indication of either the actual, often referred to as “beneficial” ownership of the unit, or the nationality of the crew. The country of registry is often chosen on the basis of tax, or other advantages offered, Panama, Liberia and Cyprus being typical of these "Flags of Convenience’. Some states insist that certain crewmembers of vessels, including driling units flying their flag, are nationals. This is however, by no means universal, and is in any case not always enforced ©0800—_ Som NOBLE Chapter 2 eam DENTON In the context of offshore rig-moves then, the sector state exercises general control over the design of equipment employed and ‘practices adopted in the course of operations within its area of interest. ‘The flag state exercises further particular control over vessels flying its flag, wherever they may be. After the regulations have been drawn up and enacted by the parliament, or other legislative assembly of the state concerned, they are implemented and enforced by a variety of agencies acting on its behalf. Some of these may be actual government departments, but in many cases independent organisations in the private sector are sub- contracted to act on behalf of the state, For example: in its role as a sector state, the principal agencies acting on behalf ofthe United Kingdom are the Department of Trade & Industry, Health and Safely Executive and Department of Environment Transport & the Regions However the Maritime and ‘Coastguard Agency, is also involved, particularly in relation to the provision of emergency arrangements All these agencies authorise independent inspection organisations, such as the classification saceles or private testing houses, fo act on thelr behalf hn respect of Cerain areas of responsibilty. A similar siuaton exists in most other sectors of the Noth Sea. Most flag states adopt similar practices relating to vessels fying their ag. For example, it's an international requirement, which each martime nation Nes undertaken to enforce with a very few exceptions; every vessel should bein possession of aload.lne cetneate However, inthe great majorly of cases the necessary Inspections are carried out and the certficato lesued by the Classification Sociely under whose rules the vessel Is Constcted, ating on behalf of and with the Authory ofthe Ste. It wil have become apparent that there is a significant international dimension to many of the regulations associated with Shelf Legislation Offshore, IMO, the International Maritime Organisation, is a United Nations specialised agency that encourages the highest practicable standards of marine safety and the prevention of ‘marine pollution from ships. IMO has developed a comprehensive body of international conventions, codes and recommendations for implementation by its member Governments, The technical work of IMO is carried out by a series of Committees: The Maritime Safety Committee (MSC ) ‘This is the main technical committee and oversees its nine sub-committees, initiating new topics. One broad topic it deals with, is the effect of the human element on casualties. ‘This work has been put to all the sub-committees, meanwhile, the MSC has developed a code for the management of ships which will ensure that agreed operational procedures are in place and followed by both ship and shore side staft, The work of these sub-committees is described by their titles as follows: + Safety of Navigation + Radio Communications & Search and Rescue + Ship Design & Equipment, Fire Protection + Stability & Loadiines + Flag State implementation Dangerous Goods + Bulk Liquids & Gas + Standards of Training & Watch-Keeping ® ©e00e asso ENCOUEE ssi declopment eewe NOBLE Chapter 2 mum DENTON AseROEENCOULECE +The Marine Environmental Protection Committee. (This committee is responsible for the MARPOL convention that regulates measures to prevent pollution of the seas by ships) Delegations to the sub-committees include representatives from government departments of the particular Member States. The IMO regulations which are ratified by Participating member governments. apply to the "Port" and “Flag” states previously described in this chapter. The port and flag states will aiso institute legislation that is applicable to their states. This may rofer to Classification Rules introduced by Governments but implemented and’ monitored by Classification Authonties also Government departments such as The Health and Safety Executive and The Maritime & Coastguard Agency in the United Kingdom. Classiication..Role of Class Standardisation and Assurance for Insurance purposes, Regulated surveys and inspections vis: Continuous Survey and Machinery. Class Rules may also be used in support of Shelf Legislation Shelf Legislation ‘This will vary from State to State, but may be inspired by governmental enquiries such as the Lord Cullen Report (United Kingdom) and effect such areas as: + Design & Construction Regulations «+ Fire Protection ‘+ Escape & Evacuation Regulations ‘+ Marine Environment Prevention of Pollution Regulations + Safety Case Regulations, Note: - Cullen Report ‘A detailed discussion of the report prepared by Lord Cullen following his enquiry into the circumstances surrounding the Piper Alpha disaster in 1988 is beyond the scope of these notes. However, this included one of the most thorough reviews of offshore safety ever Lundertaken and itis likely to play a significant role in the development of future legislation governing offshore operations in all parts of the word ‘A total of 106 recommendations were made and the UK government has undertaken to accept them all. Those most likely to fundamentally affect the conduct of operations in waters under the jurisdiction of the UK government include: 2) Future legislation should be of a “goal-setting” nature, rather than “prescriptive” as at present. installation owners would have a certain degree of freedom as to how these goals were achieved, but their proposals would have to be presented for review and auciting by the relevant responsible agency. b) The Department of Energy's dual responsibilty for offshore development and safety should be ended. The responsibilty for ensuring safe practices are ‘observed should be transferred to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), ©) From 1993 any installation (including Jack-ups) intending to operate in the UK Sector of the North Sea must submit a Safety Case to the HSE at least 6 months before the operation commences. This Safety Case must demonstrate that the installation design and the safety procedures are such that risks from a major accident are at the lowest possible level 4d) The Safety Case must include provision for a Temporary Safe Refuge aboard the installation which would protect all personnel for a period of time whilst ‘assessment of an accident ensues. ©0900= NOBLE Chapter 2 wu DENTON All the above impending regulations will have a major impact on the fleet of mobile selt- elevating units operating around the UK. 2.3 CERTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION, As a minimum, the originals of the following documents should be held on board every ‘mobile offshore unit, together with copies of any relevant communications with the issuing authorties. Certificates issued by certain flag or sector states may have titles other than those indicated here, but will essentially serve the same purpose. In these notes, every document is considered under the same format, thus: a) Title or name b) Issuing authority ©) Occasion on which issued ) ¢) Validity fe) Remarks 23.4 Hull Classification a) Issued by Classification Society b) Subject to all surveyors’s requirements. during building being complied with, issued on completion of construction. ©) Validity is continuous, subject to annual, quadrennial and other special surveys, together with inspection of any damage repairs, 4) Confirms unit has been constructed and is maintained in accordance with the Rules issued by the Classification Society, 2.3.2. Machinery Classification a) Issued by Classification Society b) Subject to all surveyors's requirements during building being complied with, issued on completion of construction ©) Validity is continuous, subject to annual, quadrennial and other special surveys, together with inspection of any damage repairs. ) {) Confims units machinery aut has been bul and Is maintained in acordence wi ne Clasateaton Sey Res 233° Load Line a) Issued either by the Flag State, or by other agency, usually Classification Society, on its behalf b) Issued upon completion of construction. May be reissued if any major modifications made. ©). Valid for 5 years, subject to annual survey. ) Defines minimum freeboard (and consequently maximum draft) to which unit can bbe loaded. Also confirms that all watertight closing devices are in order. Must be displayed on board. ® ©e00e ANOLBNTOUIE atdevtopmentspecas= NOBLE Chapter 2 wu DENTON 23.4 Registry )_ Issued by the Flag State b) Issued on delivery, or upon first entry in State's register. New certificate issued (on every change of ownership. ©) Valid continuously whilst unit remains in same ownership. 4) Confirms nationality and legal ownership of unit, ®mw NOBLE Chapter 2 ae wu DENTON 23.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 238 aasoaCoUECe MODU Safety Certificate a). Issued by the Flag State, or by agency acting on its behalf. b) Issued on delivery, or when first entered in State's register. ©) In some cases, may be valid for 5 years with periodic inspections. In other cases, new certificates are issued following bi-annual inspections, 4) Confirms that all life-saving appliances, fre fighting equipment and emergency arrangements are in order and comply with minimum requirements. Defines the maximum complement of the unit, which may be dependent upon the operational mode. Must be displayed on board. International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate a) Issued by the Flag State, or agency, usually Classification Society, acting on its behalf. b)_ Issued on delivery or when first entered into State's registry, ¢) Valid for 5 years, subject to annual inspections. 4) Confirms that cl pollution prevention arrangements and equipment are in order. Registration as Offshore Installation (UK). a) Issued by UK Health and Safety Executive (See Note in Section 2.2) 'b) Must be issued prior to unit commencing operations on UKCS. ©) Valid for 10 years 4) Confirms ownership of unit, and registration with UK Department of Energy, Must be displayed on board. Operating Manual 8) Prepared and issued by unit's builders or designers. ) Issued prior to delivery ¢)_ Valid continuously but subject to periodic amendments by issuer. d) Must be approved by Classification Society, Certifying Authority (in the UK Sector) and also by some Flag States, or agencies acting on their behalf. ‘The requirements and significance of the Operations Manual are discussed more fully in the section relating to that document. It must be understood that the documents referred to above represent minimum requirements only. In practice, many Flag or Sector States will have additional requirements. Furthermore, the requirement for test certificates for individual items of equipment have not been discussed ©0800om “em NOBLE Chapter 2 wu DENTON 24 244 ) AnsouENCOUCE DOCUMENTATION In this Section the principal operational documentation associated with the movement of offshore units is discussed, including, + Operations Manual + Log Books + Location Certificate of Approval + Notification of Move + Procedural Reviews and Manuals + Reports Operations Manual ‘The provision of written instructions is a statutory requirement for operations conducted in the offshore sectors controlled by certain states. Examples of the contents of 3 typical operations manuals are included at the end of this section, From these it can be seen that typically the operations manual will include the following contents: - a) Description of Unit, b) Design Criteria and Classification Particulars {Including the criteria employed for operations both elevated and aftoat), ©) Emergency Arrangements and Equipment @) Arrangements for Ensuring Watertight Integrity (Including description of all watertight doors, ventilators or other deck penetrations). ©) Afloat Operations (including recommendations, limitations, hydrostatic particulars and examples of calculations). f)_ Elevating/Lowering Hull (Including recommendations and limitation relating to lowering the hull into the water, engaging the bottom and in some instances preloading) 9) Elevated Operations (including recommendations and limitation for both platform as @ whole and, where appropriate, driling package to other major items of equipment) h) Emergency Instructions (Including preparations and precautions to be taken in sever weather both elevated and afloat). i) Tank Capacities (including sounding tables, etc. ©2900lassi ba SEES ® AsnoEENCOUESE NOBLE Chapter 2 DENTON i) Miscellaneous Items Which may include the following: - + Items Making up Lightship Weight * Colour Coding Scheme + Symbol List ‘+ Mud Pumproom and Mudpits/Mud Treatment System ‘+ High Pressure Mud and Cement System ‘+ Pre-load Suction System/Pre-load Filling and Discharge System ‘+ Drain system/Arrangement of Bilge System ‘+ Fuel Oil Service and Transfer System + Raw Water and Seawater Service System + Fresh Water System/Dril Water System ‘+ Pumping Pian + Electrical Drawings ‘+ Cathodic Protection Arrangements + Conversion Tables + Specific Gravity + Leg Readings at Upper Guide = Draught + Pipe Sizes and Weights + Welding Restrictions * Caution for Operation of Jack Units ‘+ Openings on Bottom Pilates ‘+ Variable Load Additions and other items of general information It was stated earlier that the provision of an operations manual is a statutory requirement in offshore sectors controlled by certain states. Even where this is not the case, the regularity authorities of the flag states in which the unit is registered are likely to require the provision of such a document, as will the classification society with which the unit is entered. It may well be that before the unit is permitted to commence operations, the manual must bbe inspected and approved by any or all of the bodies above. The warranty surveyors ‘acting for the underwriters may also wish to review the document. In every case, it is presumed by all the above parties that the recommendations and limitations set out in the manual will be observed during actual operations. The unit will be classified, certified “ft for purpose” and approved on this basis. Certificates and similar documents will be issued based on this presumption. ‘Where it is demonstrated that, except for some exceptional reason, the provisions of the manual have not been observed, then all documentation based on this presumption becomes invalid ©0008= NOBLE Chapter 2 uum DENTON Furthermore, in the event of an incident leading to an enquity, those responsible for directing operations under these circumstances would find it very dificult to defend their actions, Irespective of the location, It can therefore be seen that this document is central to all operations in which the unit might be engaged Having regard to its importance, and the reliance placed upon this document, it is therefore unfortunate, and somewhat surprising, that in some instances more care is not taken in its preparation, ‘There is no standard format for the preparation and publication of the document, thus a manual prepared by one builder or designer may be very different to that prepared by another. This offen leads to confusion, More importantly, there appears to be a lack of appreciation of the criteria employed in the “real world" situation. For example, most seifelevating units are designed to have sufficient stablity to “remain upright in winds up to 100 knots whilst afloat in an intact condition’. The requirement may be complied with but only wien no waves are present. In realty, if afloat in these conditions the unit would be quickly overwhelmed by the 20-30 metre seas generated, It is appreciated that certain minimum standards must apply, but these should be expressed in more appropriate terms. Indeed, considerable concern has been expressed in certain quarters regarding the relevance of the criteria actually employed Further more, in some instances at least, there appear to have been litte thought given to the implications of certain recommendations made. Those preparing these manuals must understand the obligation upon those directing operations to folowing it recommendations except if there isa very good reason to do otherwise. For example, in at least one instance, it is possible that following the recommendations laid down in the operations manual led to the loss of the unit, fortunately without loss of lite, Under certain circumstances therefore, it may be necessary to depart from the recommendations of the manual. However, this course of action should not be taken lightly Where it is considered necessary, the agreement of as many of the parties referred to earlier which can be contacted under the circumstances and without prejudicing the safety of the unit or its personnel should be sought. A full report, giving details of the ‘conditions at the time, the circumstances necessitating departure from the operations manual and any alternative actions proposed or under taken should be included in the unit's official log book. The entry should be countersigned by at least two independent witnesses. Log Books ‘As with the operations manual the maintenance of an official log book is a statutory requirement for ‘installations’, including self-elevating units located in the offshore ‘sectors controlled by certain states. The format for the log books and items to be entered therein will normally be defined in the relevant legistation Other records will be kept, including the owner's marine log book, for which there is no standard format. In all instances, however, details of the unit's location, weather and ‘operations in progress should be recorded at regular intervals, together with other pertinent remarks. ® ©0800 AsmDHENCOUEGE “ont deapment pet= NOBLE Chapter 2 wu DENTON 24.3 ® ABORBICOUESE On driting units, the International Association of Driling Contractors (IADC) log book will also be maintained. This is normally a requirement of the contract between the owner and the chartering operator. It must be bome in mind by those responsible for the maintenance of these lag books that in the event of an incident leading to an enquiry to all records will be required by the ‘courts. At such an enquiry, these documents may be produced in evidence, and all entries, even those not directly related to the incident giving rise to the enquiry, will be closely scrutinised. Careful consideration should therefore be given to any entry made in any log book. It should be clear, concise and legible. Where alterations are necessary, the original entry should be cancelled in such a manner that it remains legible, the cancellation being initialled by the original author. Following this, a new entry can be inserted Itis often forgotten that, in addition to the “official” lag book referred to above, courts of enquiry will also wish to inspect “unofficial” records, including diaries or “day books’ ‘maintained by crew members in the course of their activities, where they are made aware of the existence of such documents. Where necessary, subpoenas will be issued for such documents, which will be scrutinised in a similar manner to the regular log books. Personnel making entries in such documents should be aware of this possiblity. Entries, which cannot be substantiated by other evidence, particularly remarks relating to other personnel should not be included. Location Certificate of Approval It is lkely to be a requirement of the underwriters that conditions at the proposed new location are thoroughly investigated by an independent consultant fo ensure thatthe unit can safety operate there. In particular, they will seek confirmation that whilst the unit remains at the location the criteria employed during design and construction wil nt be exceeded The investigation wil usually be undertaken by the warranty surveyors, who will examine such factors as: + the design and construction ofthe unit, + the nature of sea bed and sub-surface soils, + the water depth, + the maximum anticipated current, ‘+ the maximum anticipated wind strength (usually the 60 year storm return) both for duration of operations and forthe full year), + the maximum wave height, based on the above wind speeds, + the maximum possible storm surge. From ther investigation, the consuitants will determine whether operations at this location are feasible. If this is the case, the minimum air gap to which the unit must be elevated willbe calculated The consultants will also seek to identity any hazards, for example: underwater obstructions that may pose a threat to proposed activites at this locaton. Where operations at the proposed location are found to be feasible, the results of the ‘consultants’ investigations will be contained in a report. This may include recommendations relating to the towage from one location to the next and precautions to bbe taken when establishing the unit at her new location. ©8900= NOBLE Chapter 2 waa DENTON Attached to the report will be a “Certificate of Approval’ for operations at the new location. It should be noted that, in marginal conditions, it may be found that operations are only possible at certain times of the year. If this is the case, this will be indicated in the report, and the Certificate of Approval will be endorsed accordingly. In the offshore sectors controlled by certain states there may also be a statutory requirement for such site investigations. For example, for operations on the UK Continental Shelf, Section 3(2) of the Offshore: Installations (Construction & Survey) Regulations 1974, SI No. 289 states: - (2) On or after the date specified in paragraph (1), no mobile installation shall be moved to a station in the relevant waters unless, prior to moving, the owner of the installation has obtained, from a competent person, a report on the environmental factors at that station and the owner has reasonable grounds for believing that the installation is ‘capable of withstanding those factors." Schedule 2 attached to the Regulations gives details of the factors that must be taken. into account. The relevant parts are included below: - Part ll Environmental Considerations 1. Every offshore installation shall be capable of withstanding any combination of- a) meteorological and oceanological conditions; b) properties and configuration of the sea bed and subscil; to which the installation may forseeably be subjected at the place at which it is, or is. intended to be, as assessed in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3. 2. An assessment of the matters referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made by a ‘competent person and (to such extent as may be relevant to the installation ‘concemed) shall take into consideration: - a) the water depth, the tidal range and the height of wind-induced and pressure-induced wave surges; b) the frequency and direction of winds and their respective speeds, averaging periods and heights above the surface of the sea; ©) the heights, directions and periods of waves, the probability of their ‘cccurrence and the effect of currents, sea bed topography and other factors likely to modify their characteristics, d) the direction, speed and duration of tidal and other currents; ) characteristics of the sea bed which may affect the foundations of the installation; 1) airand sea temperature extremes; 9) the extent to which marine growth may form on the submerged sections of the installation; hh) the extent to which snow and ice may accumulate on or against the installation. 3, Inassessing the matters referred to in paragraph 2- ) the minimum values to be ascribed by the competent person shall not be less than those likely to be exceeded on average once only in any period (of 50 years; and ® ©0000 Asnoesncousce “pn decopment oesa Sem, NOBLE Chapter 2 eum DENTON 24.4 ABROENTOUE ) full account shall be taken of the records, predictions and other information available from the Institute of Oceanographic Science, the Meteorological Office of the Ministry of Defence or from any other body of comparable status fuffling substantially the same functions or any of them. Part Ill Foundations 1, Those parts of an offshore installation which from time to time or at all times are, Of are intended to be, in direct contact with, and transmitting loads to, the sea bed and subsoil. They shall be capable of maintaining the integrity of the primary structure of the installation and of the seabed and subsoil and generally of supporting the installation and maintaining it in a safe and stable condition. 2. An assessment of the matters referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made by a ‘competent person and shall include an investigation of the site or intended site of the installation concerned in order to ascertain and take into consideration: - a) the configuration of the sea bed and subsoil, b)_ the properties and condition of the sea bed and subsoil ©) the presence of any man-made hazards or obstructions; and 4d) all other factors likely to affect the stability of the sea bed and subsoil, at that site, such investigation to comply, so far as possible under marine conditions, with a recognised code of practice.” ‘The consultant carrying out the site investigation on behalf of the underwriters is deemed to be a “competent person" in the context of these regulations. The issuing of a Certificate of Approval for the new location is evidence that an investigation in compliance with the regulations has been carried out. Notification of Move In certain parts of the world there is a requirement for the owner of a unit to give notice of any proposal to move the unit from one location to another. This notification is usually addressed to the marine administration of the state in question and is additional to any driling permits applied for. The purpose is to enable to be promulgated to ship owners, rescue services and similar organisations. Advance details required will include the following: - a) name of unit ) present location, designation and position ©) intended location, designation and position 4) proposed date of move ) anticipated duration ‘Once the move has commenced, the authorities should be kept advised of its progress, and arrival at the new location should be confirmed, ‘The operator may undertake to do this, but it remains the responsiblity of the owner and he must ensure that the regulations are complied with, ©0800awn NOBLE Chapter 2 mua DENTON 2.4.5 Procedural Reviews and Manuals In section 8.1.1 of these notes, the advantage of the owner, operator or some other party acting on their behalf reviewing all aspects of the proposed move is discussed Attention is also drawn to the fact that such a review is presently a recommendation, and may soon be a requirement, for operations conducted in the offshore sectors controlled by certain states, For example Sections 2 and 3 of Safety Notice No. PEDA 16/90, issued by the United Kingdom Department of Energy state: - Section2. Planning 2.1 All aspects of the rig move should be subject to review by competent persons having the necessary qualifications and experience of the proposed operations. Aspects reviewed should include: - + details of the preparation for the tow; ‘+ the towing vessets to be used and the basis for their choice + the faciities on and capabilities ofthe towing vessels; + the towing arrangements and towing gear; + proposed tow route: ‘+ navigation procedures; + weather erteria; + contingency plans and emergency procedures; + facilities for effective external communications throughout the tow; + procedures for establishing the installation at the new location Soction 3. _Pro-Move Meeting 3.1 Apre-move meeting should be held between the owner, operating company and other parties directly concemed. The objectives of the meeting should be to raise and resolve any anticipated problems that might occur, clarify tasks and responsibilities, and review the procedures to be followed. These procedures should include those aspects listed in 2.1". Certain of these items must also be considered in the preparation of the Safety Case proposed in the Cullen Report referred to earlier in this section ‘This review should consider ail operations involved in the three principal phases of the move, these being: - ) departure from present location b) passage between locations ©) arrival and positioning at new location Upon completion of the review, the party undertaking it will normally prepare a report of the results. For illustrative purposes, the typical format for such a report is included below. Items, which should be considered in each of the sections of the report, are also included. ® ©0000 ABEIDEINCOUESE “ont delopent prea= NOBLE mam DENTON The document described serves several principal functions, thus: - 2.4.6 Chapter 2 a) It draws attention to the various areas of concem that must be resolved prior to the commencement of the move. 'b) It forms the principal item on the agenda of the pre-move meetings that should be arranged and attended by representatives of the various parties involved. ©) It provides guidance for those actually involved in the operation. d) It provides proof that proposed operations have been reviewed in accordance with the recommendations or requirements of statutory or other authorities having an interest in the move. Reports Reports on operations conducted during the move will be prepared, not only by the ‘owners’ personnel, but also by the attending warranty surveyor, and operators’ marine representative, if on board There is no standard format for these rig move reports, which are used primarily for management purposes, or for submission to underwriters. They should, however, include the following particulars: - SECTION Locating departing Particulars Locating Arriving Particulars Personnel Atending Move Weather Pat Vessels Assisting and/or Attending During Move Details of Move lars SUBJECT ‘Sequence of events Delays Stability, weight and preloadipre-drive particulars. Certfication and Documentation Record ‘Comments on Mooring Arrangements Details of any damage to unit which has been caused or become apparent during move Details of previous report Details of certificates of approval relating to towage of unit to new location Log, or record of events Comments Recommendations ©0800bagel aw enamel NOBLE DENTON 2.4.7 Examples of Operating Manuals ® ‘A. LE TOURNEAU ENHANCED GORILLA CLASS Title Page Table of contents Revisions SECTION 1 - GENERAL Introduction General Description Characteristics Design Environmental Temperatures Pre-load Requirements Limits of Service Afloat Design Limits of Legs Design Limits of Legs Afloat Limits of Services Elevated (Stor) Basic Weight Information Driling Loads Weights and Loads Liquid Capacities, Design Deck Loadings Leg Footing Reaction, Maximum Lightship Condition Load Capacities Definition Outboard Profile (Illustration) (Overall Dimensions (llustration) Main Deck Layout (Iustration) Machinery Deck (tllustration) Inner Bottom Tank Layout (llustration) Quarters Layout (Illustration) ‘Substructure Orientation Layout (llustration) Hazardous Area Layout — Plan llustration) Hazardous Area Layout ~ Elevation (illustration) ‘Several Operating Recommendations ©0800 Chapter 2=a om NOBLE Chapter 2 wa DENTON SECTION Il- TEST DRILLS AND INSPECTION Means of Communication Emergency Lighting Emergency Generator Storage Batteries Line Throwing Apparatus Boat Drill Lifeboats Inflatable Literaft Servicing Liferaft Winches Firefighting Equipment Fire Dri SECTION Ill - WATERTIGHT INTEGRITY General Notes Tank Vents and Sounding Tubes (Illustration) Inner Bottom Manhole Arrangement (Illustration) Ballast System — Pre-load Dump Piping (Illustration) Ballast System ~ Raw Water Piping (llustration) Bilge Suction Piping (illustration) List Main Deck Penetrations Main Deck Penetrations ~ Notes ‘Main Deck Penetrations (Illustration) List of Watertight Bulkhead Penetrations Machinery Deck & Bulkhead Penetrations — Notes ‘Watertight Bulkheads & Doors Layout (Ilustration) SECTION IV - OPERATION AFLOAT Limits of Service Afloat and Table Notes on Afloat Operations Weight Distribution Procedure for Using Weight Calculation Sheets Hydrostatic Properties (Tables) Free Surface Correction Table of Free Surface Corrections ‘Sample Loading Conditions Maximum Allowable Key Curves (Curves) Operational Instructions while Afioat ©0800 ABR ENCOUCE atts detopment peaswe NOBLE Chapter 2 === DENTON Changing Modes of Operation Afloat Leg Clamping Orientation Layout (Illustration) Recommendations for Storms while Afloat SECTION V ~ PREPARATIONS FOR ELEVATING THE UNITS Preliminary Checklist Maximum Allowable Loads Maximum Roll and Period Allowed Going on Location Roll and Period SECTION VI - OPERATIONS ELEVATED Engaging Bottom and Elevating Hull Elevated Conditions Drilling Mode Driling Mode Weigh Distribution Driling Loads Cantilever Beam Load Chart ‘Simple Elevated Conditions Allowable Driling Criteria Tables (Tables) Elevated Storm Mode Weight Distribution (Elevated Storm Mode) Operational Recommendations for Storm while Elevated ‘Sample Elevated Storm Condition ‘SECTION VII - LOWERING HULL AND REFLOATING UNIT Lowering Hull and Refloating Unit ‘Spud Tank Jet Piping SECTION Vill ~ DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ‘Sample Responsibilities Lists ‘Sample Rig Move Report (Form) ‘SECTION IX - EMERGENCIES AFLOAT AND ELEVATED Flooding: Afloat ~ Hull Penetration Flooding: Afloat - Internal Cause Flooding: Elevated - Internal Cause Fire ‘Abandonment Emergency Signals Fire Fighting Equipment and Lifesaving Appliances Main Deck and Substructure (Illustration) ©0800 ABRORENEOUEEaye Ra sant ANROEENCOUEGE NOBLE Chapter 2 DENTON Machinery Deck (tlustration) Quarters (istration) D.C. Block Diagram — One Line (Iustration) Lighting and Receptacies, Main Deck (tlustration) Heliport Fitings (Ilustration) Sound Powered Telephone, Wiring Diagram (Ilustration) Intercom System Wiring & Connection Diagram (lustration) SECTION X— CRANES Certificates and Records Crane Load Chart (Chart) SECTION XI TANK CAPACITIES ‘Assumptions Reference Axis Signs Remarks ‘Tank Capacities (Tables) INDEX B, FRIEDE AND GOLDMAN L780 Title Page Revisions Table of Contents SECTION 1 - GENERAL 11. Introduction 2. General Description 3. Characteristics 4. Environmental Data 5. Maximum Elevated Loads 6. Environmental Effects When Elevated 7. Environmental Effects When Elevated 8. Environmental Effects When Under Tow 9. Hull, Basic Load and Stationary Fixed Load 10, Movable Fixed Load 11. Legs and Spud Cans 12. Cantilever Driling Loads 13, Maximum Variable Loads, Elevated 14, Liquid Capacities ©0008Rm we el ABERORNCOLLECE NOBLE Chapter 2 DENTON 15. Design Deck Loadings 16. Maximum Leg Footing Reaction (Pre Load and Storm) and Overturning Safety Factor 17. Lightship Condition 18. Load Capacities 19, Definitions 20. General Operating Recommendations. Outboard Profile (liustration) ‘Overall Dimensions (lilustration) ‘Main Deck Arrangement (lilustration) 4,75 Level Arrangement (Illustration) Tank Top Arrangement (Ilustration) Inner Bottom Arrangement (Illustration) ‘Quarters Arrangement (llustration) ‘SECTION Il - COMMUNICATIONS AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT 21, Means of Communication 22. Emergency Lighting 23. Emergency Generator 24, Storage Batteries 25. Line Throwing Apparatus 26. Lifeboat Drill 27. Lifeboat and Launching Equipment - Inspection and Testing 28. Inflatable Liferaft 29. Electric Power Operated Lifeboat Winches 30. Fire Fighting Equipment 31. Fire Drill SECTION Ill - WATERTIGHT INTEGRITY 32. General Notes 33. List Main Deck Penetrations 34, Main Deck Penetrations — Notes 35, Watertight Integrity 36. List of Watertight Bulkhead Penetrations 37. Tank Top W.T. Bulkhead Penetrations — Notes ‘Tank Vents & Sounding Tubes (Illustration) ‘Tank Top Manhole Arrangement (llustration) re-load Dump Valve Operators (llustration) ©0600a NOBLE Chapter 2 mum DENTON Main Deck Penetrations (Ilustrations) Watertight Bulkheads and Penetrations (Ilustrations) Watertight Bulkheads Inner Bottom (Ilustrations) SECTION IV - OPERATIONS AFLOAT 38. General 39. Mode of Operation - Field Transit (Shallow Water Transit) 40. Mode of Operation - Field Transit (Maximum Draft) 41, Mode of Operation - Ocean Transit 42. Notes on Afloat Operations 43, Weight Distribution (Afloat) 44, Procedure for Using Weight Calculation Sheets Maximum Allowable KG Curve (lustration) 45, Free Surface Correction 46. Table of Free Surface Corrections Hydrostatic Properties (Tables) ‘Sample Loading Calculations — Afloat Blank Loading Calculation Afloat Forms 47. General Operating Instructions while Afloat 48. Definitions of Fleld/Ocean Transit 49. Special Instructions for Afloat Operations Critical Motion Curves (llustration) Upper Guide Wedge Installation Illustration) Jack Case Guide Wedge Installation (Illustration) Cantilever Securing Clamp Installation (tlustration) Drill Floor Securing Arrangement (llustration) Rack Chock System (illustration) ‘SECTION V - PREPARATION FOR ELEVATING THE UNIT 50. Operating Instructions for Elevating the Units 51. Preparation for Elevating the Unit 52. Afloat Prior to Elevation (Maximum Allowable Loads) ‘SECTION VI - OPERATIONS ELEVATED '53. Instructions for Elevating the Unit 54, Elevated Conditions Leg Chord and Spud Can Loading Limitation 55. Total Load and Variable Load Limits 56. Drilling Load Limit ® ©0600me NOBLE === DENTON 57, 58. Cantilever Load Limits Procedure for Using Weight Calculation Sheets Cantilever Beam Load Chart (lustration) ‘Sample Elevated Loading Conditions Blank Loading Calculation Elevated Forms SECTION VII - LOWERING HULL AND REFLOATING THE UNIT 59. 60. Preparations for Lowering the Unit Instructions for Lowering the Unit SECTION Vill - DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 61. ‘SECTION IX - EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS AFLOAT AND ELEVATED 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67, 68. 69. Duties and Responsibilities Blank Rig Move Report Forms Flooding: Afloat - Hull Penetrations Flooding: Afloat - Internal Cause Flooding: Elevated - Internal Cause Fire Hazardous Gases/DC Motors Cooling System Failure ‘Abandonment Emergency Signals Electrical System Shutdown Sequence Firefighting Equipment (illustration) SECTION X - CRANES AND DRILLING DERRICK 70. Certificates and Records Grane Load Chart (lilustration) Derrick Capacity (Chart) ‘SECTION XI - TANK CAPACITIES 71. ‘Tank Capacities (Illustrations Included) Table of Free Surface Corrections (Tables) SECTION XI - DESIGN PARAMETERS 72. Calculations ‘SECTION XIII - APPENDIX 73. 74, INDEX ® ARDENT OLE Addresses: Reference Drawings ©0800 Chapter 2= NOBLE Chapter 2 ea DENTON C. KEPPEL FELS MOD 6 UNIVERSE CLASS 4.0 GENERAL 14 General Description 1.2 Principal Particulars 1.3. General Arrangement Drawings a) Outboard Profile b) Main Deck Arrangement ©) Cabin Arrangement (A & B Deck) d) Cabin Arrangement (C Deck) ) Below Main Deck Arrangement 2.0 CLASSIFICATION AND DESIGN CRITERIA 2.1 Class, Rules and Regulations 22 Design Criteria 23 Stability 2.4 Afloat Condition a) Tow Position Drawing 2.5 Derrick Strength 28 — Load Capacity a) Deck Loading b) Allowable Drilling Area ©) Cantilever Allowable Load Chart 3.0 GENERAL OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS, 3.1 General 3.2 Operations of Ventilators 3.3 Damage Control 3.4 Watertight Integrity Main Deck 3.5 Watertight integrity Machinery Deck 3.6 Conductor Tensioner Operations 3.7 Raw Water Tower System Operation a) Secondary Raw Water Tower Securing Points 3.8 Loss of Pressurisation in Hazardous Area 3.9 Isolation of DC Motors 4.0 BALLAST AND DEBALLASTING OF SPUDCANS 5.0 LEG JETTING SYSTEM 5.1. Water Supply Pumps 52 Operation @® ©0600 svesoeNCouese A dereopn= NOBLE Chapter 2 wa DENTON 6.0 JACKING THE BARGE 6.1 Lowering and Floating the Unit 62 Elevating the Unit 63 Elevated Storm Survival Condition 64 Storm Limitations 6.5 Numbering of Leg and Jack Unit 7.9 TOWING 74 Field Transit 7.2 Field Tow Check List 7.3 Ocean Tow 7.4 — Ocean Tow Check List 7.5 Tow Position Drawing 7.8 Limits of Afloat Condition 7.7 Afloat Condition during Storms. 7.8 — Wedge Stabiliser System 7.9 Upper Substructure Securing Device at Operation Condition 7.40 Securing of Cantilever 7.41 Securing of Upper Substructure at Towing Condition 7.42 Towing System 8.0 CALCULATIONS AND LOADING SHEETS. 81 General 82 Rig Co-ordinate System 8.3 Weight Distribution Work Sheets a) Sheet 11 General b) Trimming and Heeling Table ©) Free Surface Moment ) Draft Correction Curves @) Leg Load Calculations 1) Preload Calculations 9) Leg Load Distribution Factor 84 Breakdown Basic Weights 85 Cantilever and Upper Substructure CG Locations 86 Pipe Rack Locations 9.0 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS 9.1 Afloat Condition Water 9.2 Jack Up Condition ® ©0600~~ “om, NOBLE Chapter 2 emma DENTON 93 Preload Condition 9.4 Maximum Preload Condition 9.5 Operating Condition 96 Storm Condition 10.0 SNOWAND ICING CONDITIONS 11.0 EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS AND EQUIPMENT APPENDICES ‘APPENDIX “A” ~ DRAWINGS 1, Boat Muster Fire Muster Legend Fire Fighting and Rescue Equipment Fire Fighting Equipment and Detection Systems Rescue Equipment and Escape Routes Hazardous Areas 7. Leg Assembly Drawing APPENDIX “B” - ALLOWABLE LOAD CURVES 1, Maximum Allowable KG Curve 2. Allowable Pitching and Rolling Curve for Jacking 3. Critical Angles and Periods while under Wet Tows APPENDIX “C" - HYDROSTATIC TABLES. ‘APPENDIX “D” - TANK TABLES. 1, Tank Capacity Table 2. Tank Plan ©6060 AseDEBICOUECE