Marine Technology, Vol. 33, No. 1, Jan. 1996, pp.

58-68

Cargo Oil Heating Requirements for an FSO Vessel Conversion

Bill C. M. C h e n 1

Highly viscous crude oil stored in a floating-storage-and-offloading (FSO) vessel can provoke
cargo pumping and remain-on-board (ROB) problems. Cargo oil heating in the vessel to reduce the
viscosity and minimize the problems is studied in this paper as well as heating requirements. An
operating scenario is introduced for a vessel of 300 kdwt with assumed data. Heat dissipation from
warm cargo to ambient, heat addition to incoming cold cargo, and heat depletion during cargo
offloading are analyzed for the vessel. A simplified but robust heat loss analysis for the vessel is
presented. Using the readily available product crude as the boiler fuel to heat cargo is a logical
decision. Fuel consumption is estimated for the vessel. Boiler loads for heating steam generation
and heating devices are discussed. The cargo offloading configurations between the vessel and
shuttle tanker are investigated for heated and unheated cargo to determine its deliverability. The
configuration dictates the length of offloading hoses from the vessel to the tanker. High pressure
losses within long hoses may prevent unheated cargo from being delivered at the design rate to the
tanker. Alternatives to cargo heating are postulated. Addition of heating coils to an ultra-large crude
carrier (ULCC) built in the 1970's or 1980's is considered during the vessel conversion. The cost
estimates of addition and conversion for cargo heating are assessed. The transportational considerations are discussed. Conclusions and recommendations are presented.

Introduction
BOSCAN crude from Venezuela and Duria crude from Indonesia are typified by high viscosity and high specific gravity
[1]. 2 Adverse problems such as cargo pumping and remainon-board (ROB) can occur during exporting crude oil from a
floating-storage-and-offioading (FSO) vessel. A trading oil
tanker shuttling from the vessel to m a r k e t can encounter the
same problems during transportation of viscous crude. Heating cargo oil stored on a vessel to reduce its viscosity and to
minimize these problems is examined in this study.
The cargo pumping problem relating to unheated viscous
crude is caused by the high rate of shear due to the rotating
speed of the impeller within a centrifugal pump. The high
shear rate results in the high pressure (or friction) loss and in
the lower pump discharge pressure, discharge rate, and efficiency. Premature pitting and wear of the impeller ring and
pump casing can also be caused by pumping viscous crude oil
with centrifugal pumps.
The ROB problem stems from viscous crude with a high
pour point and is aggravated by the wax content. The problem with wax is its buildup in cargo tanks or in offioading
hoses as the crude oil temperature drops below its pour point
and cloud point. Unheated viscous crude and accumulated
wax can choke off pump suctions or block off crude flow within
hoses. For an FSO vessel moored in warm water, such as at
Venezuela or the Indonesian coast, the ROB problem may be
not an issue. The problem may be a serious issue for the
shuttle t a n k e r when it reaches Northern Europe or J a p a n
where the ambient ocean temperatures may drop below the
crude's pour point especially during winter.
Crude oil is readily available on board the vessel; therefore, it is the logical choice to replace the regular boiler fuel
for the vessel's steam power plant and for heating its cargo.

1 Senior principal engineer, Gulf Interstate Engineering Com-

pany, Houston, Texas.

2 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper.
Manuscript received at SNAME headquarters April 25, 1995.
58

JANUARY 1996

Boiler conversion for burning product crude is the prerequisite for this replacement.
The history and applications of FSO vessels are detailed in
various papers [2]. In the present study, the FSO vessel is a
converted ultra-large crude carrier (ULCC). The planned
ULCC is 300-plus thousand deadweight tons (kdwtl, built in
the 1970's or 1980's. During this era, ULCCs were usually
steamships [3]. ULCCs of t h a t size typically do not have any
cargo oil heating facility on board. Therefore, addition of
heating coils in the vessel is required if cargo heating is
deemed necessary. Smaller very-large crude carriers
(VLCCs) may have heating coils installed on board.
Crude oil is produced and processed from inland or subsea
wellheads. The product crude oil is loaded onto the FSO vessel via a subsea pipeline, pipeline-end-manifold (PLEM) assembly, and hose-string. Cargo from the vessel is pumped
through an oifioading hose-string to a shuttle t a n k e r berthed
alongside, in tandem, or at a remote buoy.
The hose length, which is dictated by the finalized offloading configuration, can also affect the cargo pumping problem
due to high pressure loss of viscous crude flowing through
hoses. The offioading configuration considered for the FSO
vessel in this study is one of the following:
Alongside offioading, Fig. 1: The shuttle t a n k e r is
berthed side-by-side to the FSO vessel. Cargo oil is offioaded to the tanker through a short hose string connected between the midship-to-midship manifolds. The
vessel can be moored to a buoy by a single-point-mooring
(SPM) system. The buoy is connected to the vessel's bow
(or stern) through an articulated yoke which provides
multi-degrees of freedom. The buoy is moored by chains
in a catenary-anchor-leg mooring (CALM) arrangement.
Tandem offloading, Fig. 2: The shuttle t a n k e r is berthed
in-tandem to the FSO vessel. Cargo oil is oifioaded to the
tanker through a long hose string connected between the
aft, port manifold to midship manifold. The vessel can be
moored by the chains of an SPM system. The vessel's
bow- (or stern-) turret, which is a structural extension of
the vessel, is moored in a CALM arrangement.
Remote-offtake buoy off[oading, Fig. 3: The shuttle

0025-3316/96/3301-0058500.47/0

MARINE TECHNOLOGY

FSOVESSEL ~ ~
MOORING-~_
YOKE ~ / ~

/;Y

"~'~:~

~~~...-~-~

--

~;y'~-s~-~--T"-~

PLEM

~..--:'>........

"~

,,'""

,-"'"

.,":-ff

SPM
/MOORING
CHAIN (TYP.)

~ "~.S

"~-"",,
"~ . . . . . . . .

- ~ ~--'=--

..~_

Fig. 1 Alongside offloading configuration

SHU'I-I'LE

/ ~

HAWSERS\

l~ ---~ ~
.-.-~-~

TURRET~

~_................
~-~

/'""

-"'"

,/'-

-=S~

- ~
-J

::
~
"',~-

~
~

OFFLOADING
HOSES

....

:~?
""-,
""-..

SPM
~MOORING
CHAIN (TYP,)

Fig. 2 Tandem offloading configuration

tanker is berthed at a buoy distanced from the FSO vessel. Cargo oil is offioaded to the tanker through a subsea
pipeline and hose strings. The offloading hose string is
connected between the buoy and the midship manifold.
This configuration is affiliated with the vessel anchored
by a spread mooring system. The buoy is secured by a
CALM system.
This study defines the initial planning philosophy and cost
basis, and supports the later engineering or operational efforts. It is not the intention of this study to work out detailed
design and engineering, to define detailed procedures for operation and maintenance, or to determine the specific equipment needed. The objectives of this study are to:
JANUARY 1996

--analyze and calculate heat losses from heated cargo in

the vessel,
--estimate the fuel consumption for heating cargo in the
vessel,
--devise steam heating requirements,
--define offioading system requirements for heated or unheated cargo, and
--evaluate alternatives, estimate costs and consider transportation issues.
A s c e n a r i o o f F S O vessel o p e r a t i o n s
Every existing FSO vessel in the world operates differently. Operations are determined by production and offioadMARINE TECHNOLOGY

59

~WSERS

c ~

BUOY ," ",

.osEs-~!.)

~' ~

OFFLOADING

FSO VESSEL
.//~

,:'

~~~-":=:::::

/~JJ:-~

:'-~',~""::::: -""'d.......

CHAIN

~ -- FLHE_X!IBEEL
(TYP.)

/
Fig. 3

Remote-offtake buoy configuration

ing rates, vessel and shuttle t a n k e r sizes, sea states, etc. To

avoid being puzzled by these u n k n o w n factors, a simple rule
can be e s t a b l i s h e d for the vessel operations. The rule is t h a t
w h a t e v e r is incoming to the vessel should be offloaded to a
shuttle tanker(s) in order to have o p t i m u m operations and to
m a i n t a i n continuous production. G e n e r a l l y speaking, t h e r e
are two operation modes in a n operation period (n) for the
vessel. The s t a n d b y mode (nl) r e p r e s e n t s days in which no
t a n k e r is b e r t h e d to the vessel. The offloading mode (n2) represents days in which a t a n k e r receives cargo from the vessel.
Times for the t a n k e r ' s waiting, b e r t h i n g and castoff are not
included in the offloading mode. The commercial t e r m s such
as laytime, l a y d a y s , and others are i r r e l e v a n t to the operation period in this study. Detailed t a n k e r operations are described in other sources [4].
The vessel c o n s t a n t l y receives incoming product crude
from the subsea pipeline. Downtimes due to w e a t h e r or mechanical problems or both are excluded from this scenario.
W i t h i n an operation period, n = nl + n2, the volume variation of crude oil in the vessel can be expressed as
(nl + n2) ql - n~q2 = AQ
where
ql, q2 = m e a n r a t e s (bbl/day) of crude oil incoming to
vessel and offioading to shuttle tanker,
respectively
n~, n2 = n u m b e r of days when vessel is in standby and
offloading, respectively
AQ = Q2 - Q1 = volume (bbl) difference of crude oil
stored in vessel at end of n2 and b e g i n n i n g of
n~
The t e r m n2q2 is the oifioading parcel size and also the dwt
of a shuttle t a n k e r . AQ can be > 0, = 0, or < 0. A typical FSO
vessel operation is shown in Fig. 4. A scenario of vessel operations in this study is a s s u m e d to be: ql = 200 000 bbl/day
60

JANUARY 1996

(assumed field production rate), q2 = 45 000 bbl/hr from

t a n k e r d a t a [3] (total pump discharge r a t e from t h e vessel of
300 kdwt), and n 2 q 2 = 90 to 250 k d w t s h u t t l e t a n k e r s (app r o x i m a t e l y 0.66 to 1.90 10 ~ bbl from t a n k e r d a t a [3]).
Only the p a r t i c u l a r solution is sought in t h i s study, i.e., AQ
= 0. This p a r t i c u l a r solution is t r u e for the scenario when
t h e r e is a fleet of dedicated s h u t t l e t a n k e r s being long-term
chartered for the FSO vessel. Therefore, the offloading mode
(n,~) r a n g e s from 0.61 to 1.76 days. The s t a n d b y mode (n 1)
spans from 2.69 to 7.74 days. The operation period (n) covers
from 3,30 to 9.50 days. In conclusion, the offioading modes are
less t h a n 20% of all operation periods. This percentage will
be used to justify t h e a v e r a g e fuel consumption from t h e
m a x i m u m fuel rate.
Vessel heat loss analysis
The cargo oil offloading r a t e from the FSO vessel is a l w a y s
much g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t of incoming crude oil to the vessel.
The volume of crude oil stored in the vessel changes cons t a n t l y due to the continuous incoming and i n t e r m i t t e n t
offloading. The h e a t loss in this n o n s t e a d y s t a t e of the crude
oil incoming/offloading requires detailed a n a l y s i s which is
outside the scope of this study. However, t h e a n a l y s i s can be
solved with a few a s s u m p t i o n s and t r a n s f o r m e d into a
steady-state approximation.
Depending on the size of the s h u t t l e t a n k e r , the vessel can
v a r y from n e a r e m p t y to press-full over a period of several
days. The near-full condition of 95% provides a conservative
and steady-state analysis for the m a x i m u m h e a t loss scenario as shown in Fig. 4. W i t h this assumption, the h e a t loss
is n e a r the m a x i m u m and y e t t h e r e is still room for incoming
cargo to be w a r m e d up w i t h i n the vessel. A vessel 98% full is
recognized as completely full in the m a r i n e industry.
H e a t dissipates from the w a r m e r cargo t h r o u g h the vessel
hull to the cooler s u r r o u n d i n g atmospheric a i r and seawater.
MARINE TECHNOLOGY

~J3
~3

MAXIMUM HEAT LOSS

C)
V)

z
_J
O

AVERAGE HEAT LOSS

uJ
0c
o

kQ,
NOTE

DAYS

OPERATION EQUATION
q~(n + r~2)- q2r~ = 0 2- Q~
LEGEND
n~

VESSEL IN STANDBY MODE

;q2 VESSEL IN OFFLOADING MODE

PRODUCTION RATE ( q, )
- -

PRODUCTION RATE - OFFLOADING RATE ( q , QI

CRUDE 0IL AT BEGINNING OF r~

Q2

CRUDE OIL AT END OF n z

Fig. 4

q~)

Typical

FSO vessel operation

Additional heat is required to warm the continuous incoming

cooler crude, while heat is removed along with intermittent
offioaded cargo. Heat required for cargo heating in the vessel
at standby and offioading modes can be expressed as:
a. FSO vessel in standby mode for about 2.69 to 7.74 days
(from previous section):
Heat required = Qair 4- Qwater + Qin
b. FSO vessel in offloading mode for about 0.61 to 1.76
days (from previous section):
Heat required

Qair

+ Qwater +

Qin - Qoe

where
Qair = heat loss to air through vessel's main deck and
fore-and-aft bulkheads
Q w a t e r = heat loss to seawater through vessel's
sideshells and bottom plate
Qin = heat transfer to incoming oil
Qo~ = heat depletion to offioaded oil
Heat required for the FSO vessel in the oifloading mode
does not provide the near-peak heat loss since the vessel is
partially empty while oil is oifioaded. Therefore, the heat loss
calculation during this operating mode will not be performed.
The final crude oil consumption based on 95% full at all times
will be adjusted to represent the vessel under all operating
periods. The heat loss calculations for the vessel of 300 kdwt
is detailed in Appendix 1. Basic heat transfer techniques are
applied to the calculations.

for the actual nonsteady operating conditions. The fuel consumption for cargo oil heating is detailed in Appendix 1. The
conclusions are summarized as follows:
The average crude oil consumption for cargo heating
is estimated to be 51.3 short tons/day or 114 920 bbl/
year. This estimate is based on the FSO vessel being
partially full on average and heating steam being
turned on about half of all operation periods. The
average heating cost of burning crude for cargo
heating is estimated to be 2.30 million $U.S. per
year at an assumed crude price of $20/bbl. This cost
excludes any other operational expenses such needs
as cargo offioading, electricity generation, hotel
equipment, or accommodations.
In order to arrive at the above fuel consumption rate for
cargo heating, the cargo tanks in the FSO vessel are simplified into a single large tank as shown by the dotted lines in
Fig. 5 (which is shown with another SPM system). The simplified tank floats on seawater and is subjected to a set of
prescribed environmental conditions. The desirable cargo
heating temperature is assumed to be 120F. In this study,
the bulk of cargo in the tank is maintained at this temperature, which implies that heating coils are installed in all
tank bottoms evenly. Other coil installations, such as installing in selected large tanks or at sides or both, are not believed applicable to this methodology. Other assumptions for
crude oil consumption calculations are included in Appendix 1.
Steam heating requirements

Fuel c o n s u m p t i o n
The fuel consumption of crude oil burning in the vessel
boilers for cargo heating is proportional to the heat required
to maintain cargo at a constant temperature. The heat loss
and fuel rate from the steady-state assumption are averaged
JANUARY 1996

No attempts have been made to assess whether the vessel's

existing boilers can generate sufficient steam to heat and
maintain cargo at the temperature of 120F. A heat balance
design [5] sheds light on boiler loads for steam generation
and utilization. The existing two boilers may have sufficient
MARINE TECHNOLOGY

61

FSO VESSEL

ARTICULATED

'

RISER~
"

"~"~MpO.R.ING
JACKET

Fig. 5 Simplifiedcargo tank on FSO vessel of 300 kdwt

capacity to generate superheated high pressure (HP) steam

to be converted to low pressure (LP) steam to heat cargo at a
temperature while the vessel is in the standby mode. During
this mode, one boiler is sufficient for supporting vessel operations. This boiler is under 25% of the rated load in the heat
balance design. However, boilers may not have enough capacity to heat cargo while the vessel is in the offioading mode.
During this mode, turbines of cargo transfer pumps consume
up to 62% of each boiler load as shown in the design. Addition
of an auxiliary boiler on the vessel's main deck for cargo
heating is a conceivable solution in this circumstance.
An alternative to conserve fuel is to heat cargo just prior to
the arrival of the shuttle tanker. This is applicable if the
vessel's heating coils have enough capacity and the standby
mode is long enough to let the cargo be heated to the desired
temperature.
The cargo heating system includes steam coils in all cargo,
slop and forward fuel tanks; an LP steam generator; and a
drain tank. Selection of the heating coil material will depend
on the crude oil properties and service factors. Stainless steel
or nickel brass is the recommended coil material. An LP
steam generator converts superheated HP steam into LP
heating steam for use in coils. A separate steam condensate
return system is required and includes an inspection tank, oil
monitors, scrubbers, etc. to detect and treat oil contaminants.
The cargo steam heating system is usually separate from the
main steam system to avoid contamination.
Ottloading system requirements
Offloading a highly viscous cargo poses problems for existing FSO vessel transfer pumps of the centrifugal type. Pumping viscous fluid through offloading hoses generates unusually high pressure losses which are adverse for any pumping
operations. In an extreme case, it may not be possible to
deliver cargo at a specific rate to the shuttle tanker,
It is assumed that the existing transfer pumps in the
ULCC will be retained in the FSO vessel conversion. The
pumps are usually centrifugal type and their discharge pressures are predetermined. For a typical ULCC of 300 kdwt,
the maximum offioading rate is assumed to be 60 000 bbl/hr at
120 psig at the offloading manifold, and 45 000 bbl/hr at 150
psig is assumed to be the average offloading rate for heated
cargo [6]. The transfer pump discharge rate is assumed to be
30 000 bbl/hr at 75 psig at the offioading manifold for unheated viscous cargo, which is interpreted from pump characteristic curves [7]. Other assumptions are included in Part
I, Appendix 3. The type of vessel mooring system will have
minimal effect on hose length determination. The vessel off62

JANUARY 1996

loading requirements with and without cargo heating are

addressed for three different configurations in the following
sections.
Alongside offloading (Fig. 1)
The offioading hose is estimated to be 60 ft long for this
configuration as demonstrated in Appendix 2. This hose
length shall be long enough to span the midship-to-midship
manifolds and the 10-ft-diameter fenders between the FSO
vessel and shuttle tanker. The elevation difference due to
draft changes between the vessel and t a n k e r is included in
the hose length calculation.
The hose size is calculated to be two, 16-in.-diameter flexible hoses for the unheated cargo from the preliminary analysis as shown in Part II of Appendix 3. Other combinations of
hose sizes may be applicable for this configuration.
Crude oil does not require heating due to the short hose
span for delivery, but at a severely restricted rate. In other
words, cargo from the vessel can reach the shuttle t a n k e r at
the much lower oifloading rate with existing transfer pumps
and without cargo heating under this configuration. In order
to achieve the maximum and average offloading rates, cargo
must be heated.
Tandem offioading (Fig. 2)
The offloading hose is estimated to be 1000 ft long for this
configuration as demonstrated in Appendix 2. This hose
length shall be long enough to cover the distance between
two manifold receiving flanges on the FSO vessel and shuttle
tanker, The vessel's manifold is assumed to be located at the
aft and port side. The freeboards of the vessel and t a n k e r are
included in the hose length calculation.
The hose size is calculated to be two 20-in.-diameter floating hoses for heated or unheated cargo from the preliminary
analysis as shown in Part III of Appendix 3. Other combinations of hose sizes may be applicable for this configuration.
Calculations show that crude oil can be delivered to the
shuttle tanker at varying rates with or without heating. In
other words, crude oil does not require heating for delivery at
a much lower offioading rate even though the hoses are
rather long. In order to achieve the maximum and average
rates, cargo heating is required. The pressure drops for
heated and unheated cargo are calculated for comparison.
For the heated cargo calculation, the assumption is made
that cargo is kept at 120F within hoses without any temperature drop. In reality, the majority of long hoses will float on
the sea with surface currents and breezes which tend to cool
off heated cargo along the way. A heat transfer analysis is
MARINE TECHNOLOGY

needed to determine heat dissipation from floating hoses. Another consideration is the consequence of the crude oil remaining in hoses between offioading modes, which can range
from about 3 to 8 days. Crude may deposit wax, making it
necessary to flush hoses or circulate cargo.

Remote-offtake buoy otfloading (Fig. 3)

The otfloading hose is estimated to be 840 ft long from a
remote offtake buoy as shown in Appendix 2. The buoy is
loaded through a subsea pipeline 2.4 miles long (assumed)
from the FSO vessel for this configuration. This hose length
shall be long enough to cover the distance between two manifold receiving flanges on the buoy and shuttle tanker. The
shuttle tanker freeboard is included in the hose length calculation.
The hose size is calculated to be two 20-in.-diameter floating hoses for heated cargo from the preliminary analysis as
shown in Part IV of Appendix 3. The subsea pipeline is recommended to be 36-in. diameter. Considering these sizes of
hoses and the pipeline, the maximum oliloading rate is not
achievable, but the average ottloading rate can be sustained
with heated cargo. A crude temperature higher than 120F is
required for the maximum rate.
Crude oil is heated and maintained at a constant temperature of 120F throughout hoses and the subsea pipeline.
Crude oil does require heating for delivery due to the long
hose span and the subsea pipeline. In other words, under this
configuration cargo in the FSO vessel cannot reach the shuttle tanker with the existing transfer pumps and without
cargo heating. Positive displacement booster pumps may be
installed for this configuration if cargo heating is undesirable.
For this study, it is assumed that the cargo oil temperature
is maintained at 120F within hoses and the subsea pipeline
without any temperature drop. In reality, the majority of the
long hoses will float on the sea with surface currents and
breezes which tend to cool off heated cargo along the way. An
insulated subsea pipeline may be required. The subsea pipeline will lie on the seabed, which will also dissipate heat and
cool down heated cargo. A heat transfer analysis is required
to determine the heat dissipation from floating hoses and the
subsea pipeline.

Alternatives to cargo heating

Besides cargo heating in the FSO vessel, methods for overcoming the pressure loss in hoses are (i) arranging a short
hose offloading configuration, (ii) increasing piping and hose
diameters, (iii) adding booster pumps, and (iv) injecting a
drag-reducing agent.
The lengths of oifloading hoses are dictated by the vessel
offioading configuration as well as the size of the shuttle
tanker. The configuration is selected for the vessel's optimum
offloading and maneuvering operations rather than for the
cargo pump discharge pressure. The hose diameter should be
limited to 24 in., which is the maximum commercially available hose size.
Addition of booster pumps is one of the remedies for overcoming the high pressure drop in the offloading hoses if heating is undesirable. Gear or screw pumps are ideal for the
booster pump for pumping the viscous fluid. However, the
pump discharge pressure shall not exceed the hose design
pressure of 225 psig. The discussion of booster pump addition
is outside the scope of this study.
Using a drag-reducing agent extensively and indefinitely
in crude oil to reduce its viscosity artificially is expensive,
according to estimates.
JANUARY 1996

Cost estimates
Addition of heating coils to the FSO vessel is estimated to
cost about 2.0 million $U.S., of which installation and material cost is $1.0 million. The total cost includes engineering,
materials, installation and general shipyard service. The
coils are installed near tank bottoms of all cargo holds. Other
alternatives such as coil installation in selected large tanks
will cost less and change the analysis scenario of cargo heating of this study.
The boiler conversion for the crude oil burning is estimated
to cost about $2.5 million. The cost excludes the boiler overhaul for repair and life extension which are performed during
the vessel conversion. About half of the total cost is for engineering and procuring boiler equipment and the other half
for the installation in a shipyard. The boiler equipment includes new burners, valves, instrumentation, extraction and
ventilation fans, burner management and control system,
and gas detection system.

Transportational considerations
From the transportation viewpoint of a shuttle tanker, viscous cargo is required to be heated during the tanker voyage
whether or not it is heated in the FSO vessel [1]. From a
preliminary analysis, heated cargo will lose all its thermal
energy to the environment from an noninsulated shuttle
tanker during the first few days of the voyage. Cargo heating
during the voyage will put an extra burden on the shuttle
tankers during transportation.
The shuttle tankers in the class of ULCC or large VLCC
typically do not have any heating facility, whereas smaller
tankers may be fitted with heating coils. Thus, the average
offioading parcel size from the vessel will probably be reduced. Under this condition, the vessel's offloading mode (n2)
will decrease.

Conclusions and recommendations

For offloading configurations of alongside and in tandem,
cargo heating is required to achieve the maximum and average offloading rates. If cargo heating is not activated, calculations show that the otfioading rate is reduced by an order
of 50% of the maximum rate. The FSO vessel's offioading
mode may be doubled if cargo is unheated under these configurations. The production may have to be shut down due to
the reduced offioading rate--possibly even less than the production rate!
For the remote-offtake buoy configuration, cargo heating is
required to maintain the average offioading rate. The maximum offloading rate cannot be achieved without cargo heating to a higher temperature than proposed in this study. The
unheated cargo cannot be delivered to the shuttle tanker due
to the excessive pressure drop in hoses for this configuration.
The vessel offioading mode may need to be increased if cargo
is not heated to the proper temperature under the configuration. Otherwise, production may be shut down due to the
lower offloading rate.
Transferring viscous cargo without heating can increase
the maintenance requirements of cargo pumps. The pumps
can be subjected to excessive wear and the maintenance cost
increases accordingly.
Based on this study, it is recommended that cargo heating
coils be installed in order to maintain operational flexibility.
Installation of coils during the vessel conversion is more cost
effective than installing them later. As operational experience is gathered during initial years of operations, it will be
determined to what extent cargo heating is necessary. HavMARINE TECHNOLOGY

63

ing cargo heating available provides a reserve capacity to

increase ollloading rates if the need arises during high production periods.
Examining the cost of fuel oil for cargo heating, it may be
e c o n o m i c a l to a d d i n s u l a t i o n to c a r g o t a n k s i n t h e F S O v e s sel. T o m i n i m i z e t h e i n s u l a t i o n c o s t , o n l y t h e e x t r e m e o u t e r

boundaries of all cargo tanks (shown as dotted lines in Fig. 5)

require insulation.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the management of Gulf Interstate Engineering Company for permission to publish this
paper. Appreciation also is extended to Mr. William M. Olson
for his guidance and to Drs. Donald Chang and Jim Caldwell
for their technical suggestions and assistance. Thanks also
should be offered to Mrs. Judy F. Chen for her proofreading of
the draft.

References
1 Price, R.I. in Ship Design and Construction, Chapter II, Second
Printing, SNAME, 1986.
2 "FPSO Technology," SNAME, Texas Section, Feb., 1993.
3 The Tanker Register, Clarkson Research Studies, Ltd., 1992.
4 Marton, G. S., Tanker Operations, Cornell Maritime Press, Inc.
5 Chen, B. C. M., "Heat Balance Design and System Modifications for
an FSO Vessel Conversion," u n d e r consideration for publication.
6 Petroleum Tankship Operations, Tanker Advisory Center, Inc., Feb.
1992.
7 Soete, G. W. in Marine Engineering, Chapter 12, Third Printing,
SNAME, 1980.
8 Gooding, R. M., Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Section 7, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 7-23.
9 Chapman, A. J., Heat Transfer, 2nd ed.
10 Bridgestone, Marine Hose, H4338E-7, p. 137.
Metric Conversion Factors

1 ft
1 Btu
1 knot
1 Btu/bbl
1 Btu/hr-ft-F
1 Btu/lb-F
1 ft2/sec

-=
=
=
=
=
=

1 lb
1 psi
F
I dwt

=
=
=
=

0.3048 m
1055 J o u l e s
0.447 m/sec
6627 J / m 3, h e a t i n g v a l u e
17.3 W / m - K , t h e r m a l c o n d u c t i v i t y
4184 J / k g - K , specific h e a t
929 c e n t i s t o k e s (cSt) (cm2/sec), k i n e m a t i c
viscosity
0.454 k g
0.07 k g / c m 2
C x 1.8 + 32
1.016 t o n n e s

Appendix 1
Calculations of crude oil consumption for cargo
oil heating
Summary
Maximum crude oil consumption for cargo heating--The v a l u e s
cited are t h e m a x i m u m possible crude oil c o n s u m p t i o n , w h i c h is
obviously o v e r e s t i m a t e d d u e to a s s u m p t i o n s m a d e for t h i s study.
These values can be viewed as t h e u p p e r b o u n d of t h e possible cons u m p t i o n . T h e a v e r a g e c o n s u m p t i o n clearly will be less t h a n t h e
m a x i m u m . A m u l t i p l i e r c a n be applied to t h e m a x i m u m r a t e to det e r m i n e t h e a v e r a g e rate.
F S O VESSEL HEAT LOAD OF:
Qwaterl = 26.944 X 106 B t u / h r loss t h r o u g h v e s s e l ' s 2 s i d e s h e l l s
to seawater

64

JANUARY 1996

Qwater2 = 45.395 x 106 B t u / h r loss t h r o u g h v e s s e l ' s b o t t o m

p l a t e to s e a w a t e r
Qa~rl = 4.273 106 B t u / h r loss t h r o u g h v e s s e l ' s m a i n deck to
air
Q~,rz - 1.595 10 e~B t u / h r loss t h r o u g h v e s s e l ' s fore a n d aft
b u l k h e a d s to air
Qin = 61.111 x 106 B t u / h r a d d i t i o n to i n c o m i n g crude oil
Total h e a t loads - 139.318 x 106 B t u / h r for n e a r - p e a k s c e n a r i o
DAILY CRUDE OIL CONSUMPTION:
C r u d e oil h e a t i n g value, low = 5.9 x 106 Btu/bbl [8] for A P I 20
deg ( a s s u m e d )
Boiler t h e r m a l efficiency - 90% from h e a t b a l a n c e d e s i g n

[5]
C r u d e oil c o n s u m p t i o n - 26.24 bbl/hr or 629.77 bbl/day
(102.6 s h o r t tons/day)
Cost of b u r n i n g crude oil = $12 594/day (a $20/bbl
(assumed)
ANNUAL CRUDE OIL CONSUMPTION:
T h e m a x i m u m c r u d e oil c o n s u m p t i o n for t h e cargo oil h e a t i n g
is e s t i m a t e d to be 229 840 bbl/year. T h i s e s t i m a t e is b a s e d on
t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e FSO vessel is 95% full at all t i m e s in
all o p e r a t i n g periods. T h e cargo is m a i n t a i n e d at a c o n s t a n t
t e m p e r a t u r e of 120F. T h e m a x i m u m h e a t i n g cost of b u r n i n g
crude oil is e s t i m a t e d to be 4.60 m i l l i o n $U.S. per y e a r at t h e
a s s u m e d crude price of $20/bbl.

Average crude oil consumption for cargo heating--The vessel is

m o r e realistic at 50% full for all t i m e s on a v e r a g e u n d e r all o p e r a t i n g
modes. Cargo does n o t need to be h e a t e d d u r i n g t h e s t a n d b y m o d e for
fuel c o n s e r v a t i o n . In t h e cited scenario, cargo n e e d s to be h e a t e d
d u r i n g t h e offloading mode, w h i c h is less t h a n 2 0 ~ of all o p e r a t i o n
periods. C a r g o c a n be w a r m e d up to t h e d e s i g n t e m p e r a t u r e d u r i n g
t h e s t a n d b y mode j u s t prior to t h e a r r i v a l of a s h u t t l e t a n k e r , w h i c h
a m o u n t s to s a y a n o t h e r 25% of a n operation period S u m m a r i z e d from
above, it is safe to a s s u m e t h a t t h e fuel c o n s u m p t i o n is a b o u t 50% of
t h e m a x i m u m rate.
C r u d e oil c o n s u m p t i o n = 114 920 bbl/yr (314.9 bbl/dayl or
51.3 s h o r t t o n s / d a y
Cost of b u r n i n g crude oil = $6298/day (~ $20/bbl ( a s s u m e d ) or
$2.30 m i l l i o n / y r

Analysis data
FSO vessel's particulars--The v e s s e l is conceived to be a conv e r t e d U L C C of 300 k d w t w h i c h h a s a capacity of 2.3 x 106 bbls [3].
Typical d i m e n s i o n s of t h e U L C C a r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1066 ft in l e n g t h
b e t w e e n p e r p e n d i c u l a r s (LBPI, 184 ft in b r e a d t h , a n d 94.5 ft in
depth. For t h e simplicity of t h i s s t u d y , t h e cargo h o l d s are c o n s e r v a tively a n d globally a s s u m e d to be a big t a n k of 760 x 180 x 94.5 ft
or 2.30 x 106 bbl, Fig. 5. A f u r t h e r a s s u m p t i o n is m a d e t h a t t h e cargo
t a n k is 95c full at all t i m e s a n d t h e final idealized cargo t a n k in t h e
vessel is 760 x 180 90 ft or 2.19 x 10 ~ bbl, T h e vessel d r a f t is
a s s u m e d to be 90 ft for s i m p l i f y i n g h e a t t r a n s f e r r~lculations.
Assumed environmental conditions-S e a w a t e r t e m p e r a t u r e - 78F
A i r t e m p e r a t u r e - 78F

Current = 2 knots
W i n d = 10 m p h

Assumed crude oil (API 20 degJ rates and properttes [8]-H e a t e d crude oil t e m p e r a t u r e
Production rate
SG, specific g r a v i t y
%, specific h e a t
K, t h e r m a l c o n d u c t i v i t y
~, t h e r m a l e x p a n s i o n coefficient
~, absolute viscosity
v, k i n e m a t i c viscosity
~, absolute viscosity

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

120F
250 000 bbl/day (~t 80F
0.93, or 58.032 lb/ft a
0.45 Btu/lb-F
0.08 Btu/hr-ft-F
0.000 343/F
178 centipoise (cP) (u 120F
~/SG - 191.4 cSt
191.4 x 1.076 x 10 s x
58.032 x 3600 - 430.25
lbm/ft-hr

Conversion factors for crude oil (API 20 deg) (a 0.93 SG and (w

80F--

MARINE TECHNOLOGY

lft 3
lgal
1 metric ton
1 centistoke

=
=
=
=

7.48052gal
7.7581b
6.766 bbl
1.076 10 5 ft2/sec

lbbl =
lbbl =
1 short ton =

42gal
325.831b
6.138 bbl

Seawaterproperties (assumed same as fresh water except for density) @ 78F

K,

thermal conductivity
v, k i n e m a t i c viscosity
ix, a b s o l u t e viscosity
p, d e n s i t y

=
=
=
=

0.355 B t u / h r - f t F
0.0334 ft2/hr
2.08 lbm/ft-hr
64 lbm/ft 3

Maximum heat loss calculations

Qwaterl = Heat loss to seawater through 2 vertical sideshells o f
F S O vessel--Heat t r a n s f e r s from h e a t e d c r u d e oil t h r o u g h s i d e s h e l l s
of t h e steel plate to s e a w a t e r h a v i n g a 2 k n o t (3.3 ft/sec) c u r r e n t
flowing p a r a l l e l to t h e v e s s e l ' s l o n g i t u d i n a l axis. C r u d e oil a n d seaw a t e r e a c h form a t h i n l a y e r w h i c h a d h e r e s to e a c h side of t h e steel
plate. T h e l a y e r s c o n s t i t u t e t h e r m a l r e s i s t a n c e to t h e h e a t t r a n s f e r .
T h e h e a t t r a n s f e r for c r u d e oil is u n d e r free convection w h e r e a s t h e
s e a w a t e r is u n d e r forced convection. All f o r m u l a s a n d e q u a t i o n s
s h a l l be referred to C h a p t e r s 8 a n d 9 of reference [9].
CRUDE OIL HEAT TRANSFER BY FREE CONVECTION:
Npr = IXCp/K,P r a n d t l n u m b e r = 430.25 0.45/0.08 =
2420
NG r = .y~3 [3At/v2, G r a s h o f n u m b e r
= 32.2 (90) 3 0.000343 (120 - 78)
(3600)2/(430.25/58.032) 2
= 7.973 10 l
NprNGr = 1.9295 1014, log (NprNcr) = 14.28
log (NNu) = 3.70 from Fig. 9.3, NNu = hl/K or N u s s e l t n u m b e r
= 5011.9
ho~1 = 5011.9 0.08/90 - 4.455 Btu/hr-ft2-F, crude oil
h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient

K = 20 Btu/hr-ft-F, or
hstee1 = 240 Btu/hr-ft2-F ( a s s u m e 1 in. wall t h i c k n e s s ) , steel
plate h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient
3.3 FT/SEC

Npr = 5.85
NR~ = vl/v, R e y n o l d s n u m b e r
= 3.3 760 3600/0.0334 = 270.323 10 ~,
t u r b u l e n t flow
NNu = 0.036 (NRe) 's (NRr) lj3 from e q u a t i o n (8.6) =
361017.06
h . . . . . t~ = 168.6 Btu/hr-ft2-F, s e a w a t e r h e a t t r a n s f e r
coefficient
TOTAL

HEAT

LOSS:

Qw,~rl =

=
=
=
=

6.378 1011
1.543 1015
0.14 (NprNGr)1/3 f r o m e q u a t i o n (9.6) = 16160.9
7.183 Btu/hr-ft2-F, c r u d e oil h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient

T h e t h e r m a l r e s i s t a n c e of steel a n d s e a w a t e r is negligible comp a r e d w i t h t h a t of crude oil.

TOTAL HEAT LOSS:
Qwate~2 = At (area)/(1/hoi 1) = 41.268 106 B t u / h r
A d d 1 0 ~ to t h e final h e a t loss d u e to t h e cooling fins effect of
stiffeners, girders, braces, a n d f r a m e s on t h e b o t t o m plate. Qwater2
= 45.395 106 B t u / h r .
Qa~rl = Heat loss to air through horizontal main deck o f F S O vess e l - H e a t t r a n s f e r s f r o m h e a t e d c r u d e oil t h r o u g h t h e m a i n deck of
t h e steel plate to t h e a t m o s p h e r i c air h a v i n g 10 m p h w i n d p a s s i n g
parallel to t h e vessel's l o n g i t u d i n a l axis. C r u d e oil a n d air e a c h f o r m
a t h i n b o u n d a r y l a y e r a r o u n d t h e m a i n deck. T h e l a y e r s c o n s t i t u t e
t h e t h e r m a l r e s i s t a n c e s to t h e h e a t t r a n s f e r . T h e h e a t t r a n s f e r for
crude oil is u n d e r free convection w h e r e a s air is u n d e r forced convection. T h e air g a p of 95% full, w h i c h is above t h e c r u d e oil a n d
below t h e m a i n deck, also provides t h e r m a l r e s i s t a n c e d u e to free
convection a n d radiation. T h e air h e a t c o n d u c t i o n w i t h i n t h i s g a p is
negligible. All f o r m u l a s a n d e q u a t i o n s s h a l l be r e f e r r e d to C h a p t e r s
8, 9 a n d 13 of reference [9].
AIR HEAT TRANSFER BY FORCED CONVECTION ABOVE MAIN DECK:
hair1 = 5.5 Btu/hr-ft2-F, air h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient as
r e c o m m e n d e d by A m e r i c a n Society of H e a t i n g a n d
Ventilating Engineers
A I R HEAT TRANSFER BY FREE CONVECTION BELOW MAIN DECK AND
ABOVE HEATED CRUDE OIL:

hair2 - 0.12 IAt/1) 14 from Table 9.1 - 0.0834 Btu/hr-ft2-F, a i r

h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient
A I R HEAT TRANSFER BY RADIATION BETWEEN THE AIR GAP BELOW
MAIN DECK AND ABOVE HEATED CRUDE OIL:

STEEL HEAT TRANSFER BY CONDUCTION:

SEAWATER HEAT TRANSFER BY FORCED CONVECTION OF

CURRENT:

NG~
Np~Nc~
NNu
hoi1

At (area)/(1/hoi 1 + 1/hstee1 + 1/h . . . . . ter )

(120 - 78) (760 90 2)/(1/4.455 + 1/240 +
1/168.6) = 24.495 106 B t u / h r

T h e t h e r m a l r e s i s t a n c e of steel or s e a w a t e r is negligible c o m p a r e d
w i t h t h a t of c r u d e oil. A d d 10% to t h e final h e a t loss d u e to t h e
cooling fins effect of stiffeners, girders, braces, a n d f r a m e s w i t h i n t h e
cargo t a n k s : Qwaterl = 26.944 106 B t u / h r .
Q w a t e r 2 = Heat loss to seawater through horizontal bottomplate of
F S O vessel--All f o r m u l a s a n d e q u a t i o n s s h a l l be referred to C h a p t e r s 8 a n d 9 of r e f e r e n c e [9].

ha,r3 = (r(to, 1 + tstee l) X (~,l + t~t~d)/[(1/Eo,l) + (1/E.~teel) -- 1]

from e q u a t i o n (13.8) -~ 0.780 Btu/hr-ftU-~F, a i r g a p
r a d i a t i o n coefficient
CRUDE OIL HEAT TRANSFER BY FREE CONVECTION:

ho, l = 7.183 Btu/hr-ft2-F from Qwater2, crude oil h e a t t r a n s f e r

coefficient
TOTAL HEAT LOSS:

Qa,rl

At x (area)/[1/ha,rl + 1/(hair2 + haw3) z_ 1/holl ] = 3.885

10 ~ B t u / h r

A d d 10% to t h e final loss due to t h e cooling fins effect of stiffeners,

girders, braces, a n d f r a m e s below m a i n deck plate. Qairl = 4.273
106 B t u / h r .

Qa~r2 - Heat loss to air through vertical fore a n d aft bulkheads in

F S O vessel--All f o r m u l a s a n d e q u a t i o n s s h a l l be r e f e r r e d to C h a p t e r s 8 a n d 9 of reference [9].
AIR IN VENTILATED ROOM SUCH AS PUMP ROOM:
h ~ r = 1.4 Btu/hr-ft2-F, air h e a t t r a n s f e r coefficient as
r e c o m m e n d e d by A m e r i c a n Society of H e a t i n g a n d
Ventilating Engineers
CRUDE OIL HEAT TRANSFER BY FREE CONVECTION BEHIND
BULKHEADS:

hoi~ = 4.455 Btu/hr-ft2-F from Q w a t e r l , crude oil h e a t t r a n s f e r

coefficient

CRUDE OIL HEAT TRANSFER BY FREE CONVECTION:

Np~ = 2420 f r o m Qwaterl

JANUARY 1996

TOTAL

HEAT

LOSS:

MARINE TECHNOLOGY

65

Q~i~2 = A t (area)/(1/h~r + 1/ho~) = 1.450 106 B t u / h r

Line distance from buoy-

- 824 ft including t a n k e r

. O f f l o a d i n g hose l e n g t h - -

freeboard only
= 840 ft

Add 10% to the final h e a t loss due to cooling fins effect of stiffeners,
girders, braces, and f r a m e s on bulkheads. Qa,r2 - 1595 106
Btu/hr.
Q i , = H e a t t r a n s f e r to i n c o m i n g c r u d e oil onto F S O

vessel--

A s s u m e d production rate = 10 420 bbl/hr, or 3.395 106 lb/hr

(a, 80F
Q ~ = (mass) cp A t = 61.111 106
Btu/hr

Appendix 2
Calculations of ofltoading hose length
Vessel and tanker particulars
The FSO vessel is a s s u m e d to be a converted ULCC of 300 kdwt.
Typical d i m e n s i o n s of the ULCC are a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1115 ft in length
overall ( L O A ) , 184 ft in b r e a d t h , and 94.5 ft in depth [3]. The design
draft is 74 ft. The largest s h u t t l e t a n k e r is a s s u m e d to be a 250 kdwt.
The typical d i m e n s i o n s of the t a n k e r are a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1141 ft in
L.O.A., 170 ft in b r e a d t h , and 84 ft in depth. The design draft is 66
ft and the light ship draft is a s s u m e d to be 20 ft.

Alongside offioading configuration with

midship-to-midship manifolds

Appendix 3
Calculations of pressure losses in hose strings
Part I. Assumed crude oil properties and transfer
pump characteristics
Absolute viscosity of crude, ~ = 178 cP (a'120F [heated), or
848 cP (~ 80 F (unheated)
Kinematic viscosity of crude, v = W/P, 191.4 cSt or 191.4
10 Gm 2 sec for h e a t e d
crude cargo t 120F, or
912 or 912 x 10 6 m 2 s e c
for u n h e a t e d crude cargo
(~i 80F
Specific g r a v i t y of crude, p = 0.93
Specific w e i g h t of crude, ~
929.73 kg m 3 at all t e m p e r a t u r e
(assumed)
Cargo t r a n s f e r p u m p s discharge r a t e and p r e s s u r e at the vessel's
offioading manifold:
Case 1. m a x i m u m rate and h e a t e d cargo (a 120F =
60 000 bbl h r (a 120 psig
Case 2. a v e r a g e r a t e and heated cargo (6 120F =
45 000 bbl h r (a 150 psig
Case 3. average rate and u n h e a t e d crude cargo (w80F 30 000 bbl h r (a 75 psig

Part II. Alongside olttoading configuration

V e r t i c a l d i s t a n c e , a s s u m e b o t h m a n i f o l d s are s a m e h e i g h t f r o m
main decks-a. FSO vessel freeboard
- 20 ft
b. s h u t t l e t a n k e r freeborad - 64 ft
c. net freeboard difference - 4 4 f t
Horizontal distance-a. fender size, d i a m e t e r
= lOft
b. manifold to deck edge
= 20 ft for both ships
c. total distance
- 30ft
Straight-line distance- 53.3 ft
= 60 ft w i t h two 30-ft hose s t r i n g s
. O f f l o a d i n g hose l e n g t h - -

Tandem otttoading configuration with an aft, port

manifold to a midship manifold
V e r t i c a l d i s t a n c e - - S a m e as i m m e d i a t e l y preceding for alongside
offioading configuration.
Horizontal distance-a. h a w s e r
= 150 ft
b. h a l f of t a n k e r l e n g t h
= 570 ft for midship manifold
c. t a n k e r manifold to deck edge - 15 ft including manifold
height
d. vessel manifold to s t e r n
= 100 ff ~ r aff, p o r t m a n i ~ l d
e. allowances
= 60
f. total distance
-895
Line distance- O f f l o a d i n g hose l e n g t h - -

979 ff including FSO vessel

freeboard
-1000

Remote-offtake buoy configuration with

bow-to-midship manifolds
Vertical distance, a s s u m e both manifolds the s a m e h e i g h t from
m a i n d e c k s - - S a m e as preceding for alongside offloading configuration
Horizontal distance from buoy-a. h a w s e r
= 150 ft
b. h a l f of t a n k e r l e n g t h
- 570 ft for midship manifold
c. t a n k e r manifold to deck edge = 15 ft including manifold
height
d. allowances
= 25 ft including vessel bow
to SPM
e. total distance
- 760 ft

66

JANUARY 1996

One hose size is a s s u m e d for the whole hose string. P r e s s u r e required to overcome the elevation difference of crude oil b e t w e e n the
FSO vessel and s h u t t l e t a n k e r is included. All f o r m u l a s shall be
referred to reference [10].
Conditions--

hose size = 0.380 m inside d i a m e t e r for

16-in. *hose
hose length = 18.3 m from A p p e n d i x 2

C a l c u l a t i o n s for a v e r a g e o f f l o a d i n g r a t e - - C a s e 3:
Offloading r a t e for u n h e a t e d cargo (a 80F, Q = 30 000 0.15899
= 4769.7 m3/hr
Flow velocity in each of 2-hose string: V - 4 (Q/2)/[3600 ~ (h) 2]
IV16 in. = 4 (4769.7/2)/[3600 ~ I0.380) 2] = 5.84 m/sec
Reynolds n u m b e r , NRe -- D V / v , N R d 6 ,n. = 0.380 5.84/(912
10 6) = 2434
Friction factor, h - 0.0096 + 5.7 (K/D) 1'2 + 1.7 (1/NRe) ~/2
h~G in. = 0.0096 + 5.7 (0.3 10 ~/0.380W '~ + 1.7 (1/2434) 1/2
= 0.049122
P r e s s u r e loss, A p = ~ L V 2 "y 10 4/(2gD)
Adding 10c~ to original hose l e n g t h to account for i r r e g u l a r s of
elbows, fittings etc.:

5PlGi, = 0.049122 20.1 (5.84) 2 929.73 10- 4/

(2 9.81 0.380)
= 0.42 kg/cm 2 - 5.97 psi > 4.04 psi
Aph -- 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from
Appendix 2 = 17.73 psi
Total Apl Gi n = APlG in. + APh = 23.70 psi < 75 psig for
u n h e a t e d cargo ffi 80F
Conclusions: Case 1.
Case 2.
Case 3.

Part III.

Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e

tanker.
Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e
tanker.
Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e
tanker.

Tandem offioading configurations

The h e a t loss along hoses is neglected in the study. One hose size
is a s s u m e d for a whole hose string. P r e s s u r e r e q u i r e d to overcome
the elevation difference of crude oil b e t w e e n the FSO vessel and
s h u t t l e t a n k e r is included. All f o r m u l a s shall be referred to reference
[10].

MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Conditions--

hose size = 0.486 m inside d i a m e t e r for

20 in. *hose
hose l e n g t h = 305 m from Appendix 2

o f ] l o a d i n g r a t e - - C a s e 1:
Offloading r a t e for heated cargo O 120F, Q = 60 000 x 0.15899
= 9539.4 mS/hr
Flow velocity in each of 2-hose string: V2o in. = 4 x (9539.4/2)/
[3600 ~ (0.486) 2]
= 7.14 m/sec
Reynolds n u m b e r , NR~20,n = 0.486 X 7.14/(191.4 X 10 6) =
18 130
Friction factor, ~2o m. = 0.0096 + 5.7 x (0.3 x 10 a/0.486) ~/2 +
1.7 x (1/18 130) 1~2
= 0.026704

string. P r e s s u r e r e q u i r e d to overcome the elevation difference of

crude oil in the FSO vessel and s h u t t l e t a n k e r is included. Two
swivels are a s s u m e d in the configuration. All f o r m u l a s shall be referred to reference [10].

Calculations for maximum

P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose l e n g t h to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of elbows, fittings etc.:
hp2o in. = 0.026704 335.5 17.14) 2 x 929.73 x 1 0 - 4 /
(2 x 9.81 x 0.486)
= 4.45 kg/cm 2 = 63.33 psi
APh = 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from
Appendix 2 = 17.73 psi
Total 5p2 o i~. = hP2o ,n + h P h = 81.1 psi < 120 psig for heated
cargo (a 120F
C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r a v e r a g e o f f l o a d i n g r a t e - - C a s e 2:

Otttoading r a t e for h e a t e d cargo (d, 120F, Q = 7154.6 m3/hr

Flow velocity in each of 2-hose string, V2o ,n = 5.36 m/sec
Reynolds n u m b e r , Np~2o ,. = 13 610
Friction factor, k2o ,n. = 0.028650
P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose l e n g t h to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of elbows, fittings etc.:
Ap2o in. : 38.29 psi
Aph = 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from
Appendix 2 = 17.73 psi
Total hp2o ,,. = Ap2o j,. + Aph = 56.0 psi < 150 psig for h e a t e d
cargo @ 120F
C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r u n h e a t e d o # l o a d i n g r a t e - - C a s e 3:

Offloading r a t e for u n h e a t e d cargo (co 80F, Q = 4769.7 m3/hr

Flow velocity in each of 2-hose string, Veo i~ = 3.57 m/sec
Reynolds n u m b e r , NR~2O ~n = 1903
Friction factor, ~2o in = 0.053048
P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose length to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of t u r n s , fittings etc:
Ap2o m. = 31.45 psi
Aph = 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from Appendix B = 17.73 psi
Total Ape om. = Ap2o ,.. + APh = 49.2 psi < 75 psig for u n h e a t e d
cargo @ 80 F
Conclusions: Case 1.
Case 2.
Case 3.

Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e

tanker.
Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e
tanker.
Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e
tanker.

Conditions

Offtake s u b s e a pipe size, l e n g t h = 36 in. a' (0.9144 m inside

diameter) x 0.625-in.
wall thickness, 1.5 k m
Offioading hose size, l e n g t h = 0.486 m inside d i a m e t e r for
20 in. hose, 256 m from
Appendix 2

r a t e - - C a s e 1:
Oittoading rate for h e a t e d cargo @ 120F, Q = 60 000 x 0.15899
= 9539.4 m3/hr

Calculations for maximum

Flow velocity

V36 = 4 x (9539.4)/[3600 ~ (0.9144) 2]

= 4.04 m/sec (13.25 fps) for 36 in. steel
pipeline
V2o ,n = 4 X (9539.4/2)/[3600 ~r (0.486) 2]
-- 7.14 m/sec for each 20 in. hose

Reynolds n u m b e r NR~36 ~n =
=
NRe2O in. =
=

0.9144 X 4.04/(191.4 X 10 G)
19 301 for 36-in. ~ steel pipeline
0.486 X 7.14/(191.4 X 10 ~)
18 130 for each 20-in. hose

Friction factor
)t361n. = 0.0096 + 5.7 x (0.5 x 10 6/0.9144)1:2 + 1.7 x
(1/19 301) 1~2
= 0.026052 for 36-in. ~ steel s u b s e a pipeline
k2oin. = 0.0096 + 5.7 x (0.3 x 10 6/0.486) 1/2 + 1.7 x
(1/18 130) 1/2
= 0.026704 for each 20-in. ~ hose

P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose l e n g t h to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of elbows, valves etc:
Apae in. = 0.026052 x 1650 x (4.04) 2 x 929.73 x 10-4/(2 x
9.81 0.9144)
= 3.64 kg/cm 2 = 51.70 psi for 36-in. steel s u b s e a
pipeline
Ap2o in = 0.026704 X 281.6 X (7.14) 2 X 929.73 X 10 4/(2 X
9.81 X 0.486)
3.74 kg/cm 2 = 53.15 psi for each 20-in. ~ hose
h p h = 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from
Appendix 2 = 17.73 psi
Total Ap = AP36 in. + Apeo in. + Aph + APswivel X 2
51.70 + 53.15 + 17.73 + 10 X 2
142.58 psi > 120 psig for h e a t e d cargo @ 120F

C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r a v e r a g e r a t e - - C a s e 2:

Oittoading rate for h e a t e d cargo @ 120F, Q = 7154.6 m~/hr

Flow velocity V36 in. = 3.03 m/sec for 36-in. ~ steel s u b s e a
pipline
V2o in. = 5.36 m/sec for each 20-in. hose

Reynolds n u m b e r Nae3~ in. = 14 476 for 36-in. ~ steel s u b s e a

pipeline
13 610 for each 20-in. ~ hose
NRe2O i n
Part IV. Remote-offtake

buoy configuration

H e a t losses along the s u b s e a pipline of 2.4 miles long and hoses are
ignored in this study. One hose size is a s s u m e d for the whole hose

JANUARY 1996

Friction factor )t3~ in. = 0.027944 for 36-in.steel s u b s e a

pipeline
k2o in. = 0.028650 for each 20-in. ~ hose

MARINE TECHNOLOGY

67

P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose l e n g t h to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of elbows, valves etc:
AP36 in = 2.19 kg/cm 2 = 31.19 psi for 36-in. ~ steel s u b s e a
pipeline
Ap2o ~. = 2.26 kg/cm 2 = 32.14 psi for each 20-in.* hose
hph = 44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from
Appendix 2 = 17.73 psi
Total Ap = Ap36 i~. + Ap2o m. + hph + Ap . . . . . 1 + 2
= 101.07 psi < 150 psig for h e a t e d cargo (a 120F

Calculations for average rate--Case 3:

Offioading r a t e for u n h e a t e d cargo (~ 80F, Q - 4769.7 m~/hr

P r e s s u r e loss
Adding 10% to the original hose length to account for i r r e g u l a r s
of elbows, valves etc:

P36m .
AP2o in
Aph-

Total Ap -

1.80 kg/cm 2 = 25.60 psi for 36-in. ~ steel s u b s e a

pipline
1.86 kg/cm 2 = 26.40 psi for each 20-in. ~' hose
44 ft, elevation difference of manifolds from A p p e n d i x
2 = 17.73 psi
~P36 in. ~P2o m. + ~Ph -F ~p . . . . . l X 2
89.33 psi > 75 psig for u n h e a t e d cargo (w 80F < 225
psig for hose design

Flow velocity V36 ~. = 2.02 m/sec for 36-in. 'b steel s u b s e a

pipline
Veo m. = 3.57 m/sec for each 20-in. * hose
Reynolds n u m b e r Nrea6 ~. =
NR~2O m.

2025 for 36-in. 6 steel s u b s e a

pipeline
1902 for each 20-in. '~ hose

Conclusions: Case 1.
Case 2.

Friction factor k3~ in =

~'20

68

JANUARY 1996

m.

0.051593 for 36-in. * steel s u b s e a

pipeline
0.053059 for each 20-in. '~ hose

Case 3.

Cargo oil cannot be delivered to

shuttle tanker.
Cargo oil can be delivered to s h u t t l e
tanker.
Cargo oil cannot be delivered to
shuttle tanker.

MARINE TECHNOLOGY