OLF/NSA Davit-Launched Lifeboat Project (DLLBP)

Summary by Project Manager Ole Gabrielsen

Contents
Brief historical overview
Findings and conclusions for four phases:

Lowering
Water entry (landing)
Release of wire falls
Sail-away

Test run of lifeboat engines

Raft HAZID
Main conclusions

28.10.2011

Brief historical overview of DLLBP

Initiated in December 2009, completed in Juni 2011.

Scope of work defined based on findings from NSA Lifesaving Appliances
Project (LAP) and previous work for davit-launched lifeboats.
Funded by Norwegian Shipowners Association and The Norwegian Oil
Industry Association (OLF).
Organized in six work packages:

WP 1
WP 2
WP 3
WP 4
WP 5
WP 6

Release systems
Lowering, landing and sail-away
Forces on occupants
Third-party verification of WP 2
Raft HAZID, test run of lifeboat engines and evacuation methodology
Hull capacity

Work performed by consultancy companies reporting to project manager.

Project managed by an Owners Group with representatives from oil
companies and drilling rig companies with davit-launched lifeboats.
The overall goal of the project was to provide guidance/advice to use of
existing davit-launched lifeboats such that these, as far as reasonably
possible, can continue to satisfy the intentions laid down in the regulations.

Lowering Phase (1/2)

A considerable amount of
simulations performed in wind
spectres with gust winds
Key parameters:
Loaded and empty boat
Three lowering heights
(22, 50 og 80 m)
Three lowering speeds
(0.5, 0.9 og 1.5 m/s)
Three wind speeds
(Beaufort 10, 11 og 12)
Three wind directions
(beam wind, bow quartering
and near to head wind)

Example of plots on the right

Lowering Phase (2/2)

A lowering speed of around 1.0 m/s appears to be a sound
compromise between acceleration levels and release
window requirements (time from water entry until the
wave moves downwards).
Lifeboat lowering from great heights (more than 50 m) in
strong wind may lead to large pendulum motions.
The project recommends implementation of pull & go
loweringlring, if not already implemented by the owners.
Pull & go launching of lifeboats is in line with NORSOK R002, but in conflict with requirements from IMO through
SOLAS/LSA-code.

Water Entry Forces on Occupants (1/3)

Work based on acceleration pulses generated for :

3 boats
2 lowering speeds (0.9 m/s og 1.5 m/s)
5 wave directions (0, 45, 90 (beam sea), 135, 180 (head sea) degrees)
7 wave conditions (8.5, 11.7, 14.7, 16.0, 17.0, 17.8 and 20.3 m
regular waves corresponding to rough waves in 100-year storms)
6 seats per boat
Injury evaluation according to levels established by the Free-fall
Lifeboat Project (Human Load Level)

Selected simulations compared to laboratory tests.

Water Entry Forces on Occupants (2/3)

There is a minor risk of injury to lifeboat occupants during water
entry, even in waves representing extreme conditions.
The largest risk occurs in beam sea conditions, mainly related to
high loads on head and neck.
Boat 1

Below lower limit

6

Boat 2

Between lower and upper limit

Boat 3

Above upper limit

Water Entry Forces on Occupants (3/3)

Another study investigated the effect of various parameters such as
posture, belt arrangement and use of cushions. Proposals for
improvement have been established.
An assessment of the interaction between occupants sitting next to
each other, opposite each other and back-to-back did not reveal
any critical effects, but highlighted the possibility of collision
between occupant if 2-point belt systems are used.
A third study looking at the effect of body sizes concluded that the
overall conclusions for forces on occupants are valid also for
smaller and bigger occupants.

Water Entry Hull Capacity (1/3)

The slamming methodology developed by
the FFLBP was adjusted and applied to
davit-launched lifeboats.
Main steps in method:
Selection of design loads and load factors
Establish skin model of lifeboat with indicator
panels
CFD analyses giving pressure on indicator
panels
Preparation of structural model of lifeboat
Load mapping onto structural model
Evaluation of stress and deflection

The hull slamming capacity of two davitlaunched lifeboats have been evaluated.

Water Entry Hull Capacity (2/3)

The analyses show that the lifeboats have sufficient
capacity for head sea and bow quartering sea.
Requirements may be required for beam sea, stern
quartering sea and following sea.
Further work is required to determine specific
reinforcements to each type of boat.

Water Entry Hull Capacity (3/3)

Video from CFD-simulation
CFD = Computational Fluid Dynamics

10

Release Phase (1/4) - Summary

Survey of release systems
Existing systems in use
Novel systems under development

Gap analysis vs. NORSOK R-002

Development of new release systems is
required to fulfil all requirements of
NORSOK R-002 (Preliminary edition April
2010).

11

Release Phase (2/4) - Summary

Simulation parameters

2 lifeboats
2 lowering heights (28 m and 80 m)
3 lowering speeds (0.5 m/s, 0.9 m/s and 1.5 m/s)
5 weather directions (0, 45, 90 (beam sea), 135, 180 (head sea) deg)
6 sea states (7.5, 10, 13, 15, 18 and 20 m regular waves
corresponding to rough waves in a 100-year sea state)
10 landing positions in each wave

It is important to release the lifeboat from the wire falls as soon as

it is waterborne (on the first wave) to prevent re-entry. Rapid
release is vital to avoid detrimental loads on occupants and on the
lifeboat itself.
Time to release (time from the boat is in contact with the water
until the wire falls are released) should be less than 3 seconds. For
a time to release of 3 seconds there is a very small risk of severe
re-entry loads.
The risk of severe re-entry loads is eliminated for a time to release
of 1 second.
The importance of rapid release should be communicated to
lifeboat crews and training centres so that the crew may practice
rapid releases.
12

Release Phase (3/4) - Results

Lowering speed: 0.9 m/s

Percentage of non-exceedence (%)

100 %

97 %

90 %
80 %
71 %

70 %
60 %
50 %
40 %
30 %

22 %

20 %

Time to release = 1.0 s

Time to release = 3.0 s
Time to release = 5.0 s

10 %
0%
0
13

10
20
30
Time from water contact to release (s)

40

Release Phase (4/4) Full-scale Tests

14

Full-scale tests have been performed for several release systems. The
newest systems have results from 1 to 1.5 seconds.

Sail-away Phase (1/3)

A study of the sailing phase concludes that the setback for davitlaunched lifeboats in head sea and bow quartering sea is
considerable even at moderate sea states (Beaufort force 7).
The setback is influenced by engine size and delay or no delay in
engagement of propulsion.
For beam sea, following sea and stern quartering sea the setback is
small.

15

Sail-away Phase (2/3)

Setback in head sea

16

Sail-away Phase (3/3)

Setback in bow quartering sea

17

Overview of numerical simulations

Phase(s)

Scope/objective

Lring/frigjring

Effect of delayed release and lowering speed on peak

accelerations at water entry, wire forces and CAR
index

3 600

Study of pendulum effects; effect of lowering speed

and weight

9 900

Water
entry

Establish peak accelerations (acceleration pulses)

Evaluation hull capacities

18

3 500 (giving 21 000

acceleration pulses)
20 CFD analyses
40 structural analyses

G-force parameter study: belt systems, postures,

cushions

156

Interaction between occupants with 2-point belt

systems

18

Boat-specific analyses of G-forces during water entry

Sail-away

Number of
simulations

1 260

Injury potential in extreme re-entry loads

55

Study of correlation between numerical simulations of

dummy models and human models

27

Simulation of setback and propulsion in various sea

states

12 600

Procedure for Test Run of Lifeboat Engines

A separate study evaluating the procedure for test run of

lifeboat engines concluded that idle-running should not
exceed 3 minutes to avoid soothing that may impair the
engines maximum output.
The optimal test interval is every second week (in contrast
to SOLAS which prescribes once a week).

19

HAZID of Raft Systems

The HAZID report highlights that the owners should, in cooperation
with equipment suppliers, evaluate amount and type of training to
ensure high probability of correct use.
The importance of correct training was called for by the employee
representatives who participated in the HAZID.
The HAZID revealed a number of uncertainties which should be
evaluated by the owners.
It is the responsibility of the owners to evaluate the findings of the
raft HAZID and to initiate any minigating measures.

20

Main Conclusions

21

Lowering

A loweing speed of around 1.0 m/s is recommended.

Pull & go principle should be implemented.

Water Entry

There is a small risk of injury for occupants during water entry.

Hull reinforcement should be evaluated.

Release

Development of novel release systems is required to fulfil all

requirements of NORSOK R-002 (April 2010 edition).
Detrimental re-entry loads (on occupants and boat) in the
release phase can be avoided by ensuring rapid release of wire
falls.

Sail-away

The setback in head sea and bow quartering sea can be

considerable.
The setback may be reduced by optimazing the bollard pull and
launching procedure.

Other

The findings from the project should be implemented in

training programs for lifeboat crew.
The owners should address the findings of the raft HAZID.
Idle-running should not exceed 3 minutes to avoid soothing
that may reduce the engines maximum output. The optimum
test interval is every second week.

22