ProceedingsofofOMAE04
Proceedings OMAE04
23rd
23 InternationalConference
rd International ConferenceononOffshore
JuneJune 20-25,
ROLE OF MARINE WARRANTY SURVEYORS AND
THEIR REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTED ITEMS
S u s o b h a n ( " S h a w n " ) G h o s h , Global Maritime
M i c h a e l A. Jacobs, Global Maritime
John A. M e r c i e r , Global Maritime
Session: 1 - 2 8 O f f s h o r e D e v e l o p m e n t s II
Abstract
For many decades, marine warranty surveyors provided
services for various marine operations, such as, Ioadout,
lifting, suitability survey of seagoing vessels, seafastening
design approval, etc. But in the last few decades, the
importance of marine warranty survey and their role has
increased significantly because of large scale offshore activities
for deep water oil exploration.
In the ever changing offshore industry, installation activities
have changed with the introduction of new concepts. Not only
have their physical appearances changed but so have the
methods of Ioadout, transportation, and installation. In the
present environment of Spar, TLP, Semisubmersible, compliant
platform, etc. the role of marine warranty surveyors have
increased considerably. For example, installation of deck
weighing 7000 tonnes in a single piece does not surprise the
industry any more. Spars that are basically cylindrical stiffened
steel structures, 750 feet long and 125 feet diameter have
been dry towed for 35-40 days on heavy cargo carrying
submersible ships from the fabrication yard in Finland to the
Gulf of Mexico.
With the changing scenario of platform Ioadout, transportation
and installation, the companies providing marine warranty
services have developed their own strategy to serve the best
interest of the platform owner and the underwriters. This led to
developing their own criteria based on experience and industry
standard and practices.
This paper has outlined primarily the role and importance of
marine warranty services in the offshore industry. Since it is
not possible to cover all issues specific to various methods of
Ioadout, lifting, mooring, seafastening, installation, this paper
limits its scope of presentation to key marine activities for an
installation of gravity based jacket type structure. Industry
standards and practices, guidelines, as well as marine
warranty requirements, and "good" practices are also outlined.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
OffshoreMechanics
Mechanicsand
andArctic
ArcticEngineering
Engineering
20-25, 2004,
2004, Vancouver,
Vancouver, British
British Columbia,Canada
Columbia, Canada
OMAE2004-51357
OMAE 2004-51357
Global Maritime
11767 Katy Freeway, Suite 660
Houston, Texas 77079
Tel: (281) 558-3690
INTRODUCTION
The role and importance of marine warranty (MW) surveyor (s)
is often misunderstood by the participating personnel in a
marine/offshore engineering project. It is often perceived as
"unnecessary nuisance" by many project personnel primarily
because of their lack of knowledge about the purpose of MW.
The role of MW is sometime confused with that of the
classification societies, e.g., ABS, DnV, BV, LR, etc. and other
certification verification agents (CVA). The classification
societies were formed in the early stages for providing a
standard of designing ships. They developed rules for
designing ships based on engineering principles, and empirical
formulations based on experience. These rules have been
tested over the years, and periodically revised to incorporate
engineering development as well as incorporating the lessons
learnt by the industry. The classification also required the ships
to be inspected periodically by surveyors of classification
societies, and thus requiring the ship owners to carry out a
proper maintenance program.
During the last 5-6 decades, offshore exploration and
production engineering designed many floating and gravity
based structures of various shapes and sizes, and they may not
have any resemblance to ship structures. For designing such
structures, major oil companies independently as well as
collectively took the initiatives to develop engineering
standards to meet the challenges. The results of the collective
efforts are available to the industry as recommended practices
published by organizations such as such as API, OCIMF, etc.
To broaden their bases, the classification societies also engaged
themselves to develop rules of designing offshore installations.
It is important to note that these rules and the services provided
by the classification societies primarily address the safety and
soundness of the installations during their entire service life.
However marine warranty services (MWS) companies provide
services for specific marine operations, such as loadouts,
1 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 transportation, installations, etc. They are primarily concerned
with ensuring safe marine operations that would eliminate
and/or reduce the risk of personnel injury and damage or loss of
structures, equipment, etc. It should be noted that MWS is not
an alternative to classification or certification survey, and vice
versa. This paper attempts to identify such tasks, and describes
how MWS handle them to ensure safe marine operations
M a r i n e Warranty Services
In the early days, the major activities of MWS were limited to
selection of ships and tugs for transporting cargos, approving
operations of loadout, lifting, offioading, and seafastening of
cargos during transportation. But with the surge of marine
activities pertaining to installations of offshore structures,
MWS activities broadened considerably to include operations
that are unique to offshore structures. To provide a clear
understanding of the role of MWS, few commonly used
terminologies, e.g., marine warranty, suitability survey, off-hire
survey, on-hire survey, review of certificate, review of
documents and calculations, certificate of approval, etc. are first
described before outlining a) the scope of MWS services, b)
MWS activities, and c) requirements and criteria of selected
items.
Marine Warranty is offered by the underwriters for a fee to
carry out a certain marine operation (s) to an insured company.
This fee is normally referred to as an "insurance premium" that
depends on the type of marine operation, and the nature of risks
(or "perils of the sea") of the operational activities, and the
value of loss in case of accident. Otien the insured company
obtains the insurance ffi'om the underwriters, using a broker as
an agent. All marine operations carry certain risk, and to
minimize the risk and to protect their interest, the underwriters
may write a "warranty" clause in the insurance policy that
would require an independent technical assessment and
approval by a technical and competent marine surveyor and/or
a company. The underwriter may recommend a marine
surveyor and/or company for such assessment. Although the
insured company is normally required to pay for the MWS, the
MWS primarily protects the interest of the underwriter.
A typical marine project may have many marine operations that
may include some activities on land, e.g., lifting of cargo,
moving cargoes in trailer or trucks, pulling and/or sliding
cargoes with or without using jacks, etc., and each of these
operations may need to be approved by designated MWS for
insurance coverage. Any operation without the approval and
presence of MWS will be considered a breach of the warranty
and consequently the insurance coverage may lapse.
Suitability survey is commonly referred to survey activities to
assess suitability of ships, barges, tugs, etc. for their intended
usages. MWS conducts such surveys to assess a proposed
vessel regarding certain operation, such as, cargo
transportation, capability of a tug for towing a cargo barge,
launching a jacket, etc. During the assessment, the surveyor
will use all the pertinent project information, e.g.,
transportation route, bathymetrical data of the route, weather
condition during tow, etc., beside the vessel specific
information, such as condition of the vessel, lightship
characteristics, certificates of classification society and other
regulatory agencies, pumping capabilities, capacity of deck of a
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
deck cargo barge, bollard pull of tug, etc. The assured must
obtain a written document ffi'om the surveyor stating that the
proposed vessel is fit for the intended use.
On-hire and Off-hire surveys are carried out to compare the
condition of the vessel before and after the specific mission to
see if there was any damage to the vessel during the marine
operation. The survey may not be included in the marine
warranty unless they are specifically included. The vessel
owner may use another surveyor to conduct such a survey.
Review of Certifieates includes as appropriate depending on
the specific marine operation, but not limited to, certificates of
crane including crane capability chart, slings, shackles, pin,
jacking system, mooring ropes (wire and/or chain), winches,
valid classification certificates, bollard pull certification,
weighing certificates, any test certificate, etc.
Review of Documents includes all relevant documents that
depend on the specific marine operation, but not excluding,
stability letter provided by regulatory agencies, periodic and
annual survey reports provided by classification society, etc.
MWS is to review all relevant marine procedures, e.g., loadout,
ballast/deballast, rigging, launching, installation, etc.
Review of Calculations includes all calculations pertaining to
mooring arrangement during loadout, berthing condition prior
to sail-away, ballasting, boilard pull, structural integrity of
cargo and vessels, pile driving, on-bottom stability, lifting,
sliding, seakeeping, design of seafastening stnactures, etc.
Certificate of Approval (COA) is issued by the attending MW
surveyor prior to commencement of each marine operation. By
issuing a COA, it is implied that the MWS company finds the
proposed marine operation acceptable based on review of all
relevant documents, procedures, certificates, calculations, etc.
The acceptability is based on meeting industry practices,
regulations, codes, criteria, and sound engineering principles.
It is to be noted that carrying out any marine operation before
obtaining COA or deviating from the approved operation
without the consent of the attending surveyor may cause breach
of warranty.
Scope o f M W S Services and Responsibility
A marine warranty surveyor, unless hired to serve as marine
consultant, is appointed to protect the interest of the
underwriter. To carry out the duty properly, the surveyor
should only approve marine operations that would not have
considerable risk of damaging property, human life, and
environment. Although all marine operations carry some "risk"
element, it is essential that these risks are kept "as low as
reasonably practical" (ALARP). The MW surveyor may note
that the marine warranty companies are not contractually
obligated with any of the assured's contractors, e.g., tug
operators, riggers, shipyards, installation contractor, designers,
etc., and can therefore issue no instructions whatsoever to them.
Although an experienced mariner (surveyor) is the one who has
the fmal authority of issuing the COA and is visible during the
actual marine operations, the marine warranty services consists
of five basic elements, e.g., a) review engineering documents
and calculations, b) verify equipment and related certificates,
2 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 c) review marine operation procedures, d) attend marine
operations, and e) prepare a report.
MW surveyor should at all times act as an independent
unbiased entity during the execution of his services to protect
the interest of underwriter. Although the MWS do not
necessarily include advising services, it has been generally
found that client companies are highly benefited by including
such services in the scope of work. The increase in cost for
such services is minimal, but the return is high because of cost
savings by eliminating and/or reducing re-work and
maintaining the schedule. Even when such services are not
included to start with, very often they are asked to play roles of
advisor to break impasse that may have arisen due to:
• not meeting the original design criteria
• non availability of proposed equipment
• last minute change in procedure
• disputes between various participating parties that may
have arisen due to any or all of the above items.
MW warranty personnel should be encouraged to provide
advices and/or independent calculations as long as they
recognize that such calculations and/or advices, when complied
by the contractors, in effect become warranties themselves.
Thus when offering such services, marine warranty personnel
should take great care that adviees and/or calculations are
proper for the intended operations.
It is important for MW surveyors to maintain un-biasness in
their review and approval process, and to remember that their
primary objective is to ensure all risk elements at each stage of
the marine operations "ALARP". They may face situations
when they may be improperly accused of "playing too safe".
Thus it is important to recognize that while exercising due
diligence, they should avoid the practices of "playing too safe".
It is the broker's and/or owner's responsibility to contact the
MW surveyor for providing the details of marne activities and
scope of insurance coverage at the earliest opportunity. Delay
in contacting MWS company often leads to slippage of the
scheduled marine activities.
Review of En~ineerin~ Documents and Calculations
MWS is supported by a team of engineers specialized primarily
in the areas of naval architecture, ocean, offshore, metocean,
and structural engineering. First, the relevant engineers should
first go over the documents to see if the materials include
engineering calculations to cover the scope of marine activities
using the proposed facilities. Review of engineering
documents and calculations is to confirm not only that they are
appropriate for the proposed marine activities, but also they are
in accordance with proper engineering principles, codes,
criteria, and industry practices.
Although industry would like to have one master list (to be
used as a bible) of items with scope, methods and details of
engineering analyses, it is not practical to prepare such a list.
This should be left with the reviewing engineer because
engineering activities depend not only on type of marine
activities but also on the availability of intended facilities and
equipment. The reviewing engineer should use his discretion
and judgment regarding the nature and quality of documents. It
is found highly beneficial if the contractor's engineer initiate
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
discussion with MW engineers about the plan of submitting
engineering materials with details of method, codes, criteria,
and guidelines. Generally the submitted calculations are to
include concise and clear definitions of the engineering
activities, methods of analyses, references of software, codes
and standards, results, and conclusions. It is very common for
MW engineer (s) to carry out independent analyses to
supplement the submitted calculations to expedite the
procedure of review and approval. These calculations, unless
the contract is otherwise obligated to, are not provided to the
contractor or to the assured party.
Verify Equipment and Certificates
One of the most important tasks of MWS is to inspect the
equipment, such as cargo barge, tug for towing, pipe lay barge,
derrick barge, etc., as well as the facilities for their suitability
for the intended operation. The inspection of ships, barges,
tugs, etc. is inspected to carry out on-hire and off-hire surveys
to assess the suitability of the candidate vessels. Facilities of
fabrication, loadout, and installation are usually selected before
MW company gets involved. MWS company do not approve
such facilities. While attending the marine operation, the
surveyor should get well familiarized with the facilities
regarding capability and limitations so that he can suggest
and/or recommend modifying procedures when necessary to
suit the chosen facility.
Equipment certificates are mainly related to the crane capacity,
mooring chain and wire rope, slings, shackles, pins, jacking
system, vessel class certificates, periodic and annual survey
reports, stability letter by classification societies and/or
regulatory bodies, bollard pull certificate of tug, etc. Many of
these certificates are verified on site while attending marine
operation activities. Other documents, e.g., stability letters,
classification certificates, etc. are verified by engineering staff
in the office. MW personnel verify the validity of the
certificates with respect to time, rated capacity and the
suitability for the proposed activity.
Review Marine Operation Procedures
In an ideal situation, the attending surveyor should familiarize
with the proposed marine operations before coming to the site
of operation. The warranty surveyor has to have the
knowledge, experience and ability to review each proposed
marine operation on its own merit and to decide whether or not
it is reasonable and safe. Most of the operations that he might
review conform to widely used industry practices and he will
therefore be guided by established rules, guidelines and
procedures. For unusual operations, he may have to consult
other personnel and engineers in MWS office for their opinion.
Nevertheless whether the proposed marine operation is normal
or unusual, the MW engineering personnel should always
review the procedure for their feasibility and confirming that
procedure is supported by proper calculations. The surveyor
should be kept informed about the engineering review, and
advised if any precautionary measure is to be taken during the
operation.
The surveyor should try to determine if there is any deviation in
the procedure fi~om "industry practices" that may increase the
risk of the marine operation. If an increase in risk is found, it
will be the surveyor's prerogative to accept the procedure as
3 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 presented or he may either recommend modifying the
procedure, or impose restrictions, e.g., environmental limit,
incorporating contingency plan, additional survey requirement
and/or attendances, etc. to reduce the risk to acceptable level.
Safety of human lives and environment should be the major
consideration when developing the procedures. The procedures
should be outlined in steps with well thought-out contingency
plans in case of bad weather, failure of equipments, damage of
any components, etc.
Attend Marine Operations
On arriving at the facilities, the surveyor should assess the
procedure with respect to the capability of the facilities, and
identify any deficiency that may need to be attended for the
success of planned marine operation. The surveyor should
have open communication with the engineering personnel for
advice and to resolve any issues and concerns.
MW surveyor is to verify on site the conditions and/or
certificates of all equipment, e.g., slings, shackles, pins,
mooring lines, pumps for ballasting, cranes, pulling system,
jacking system, theodolites for leveling, site condition, such as
condition of dock/pier, loading beams, etc. He should review
the contingency plans for their suitability with the facilities. To
minimize wasting time during the actual operation, the
contractor should bring any operational and equipment
deviations to the attending surveyor's attention. The surveyor
will take his time reviewing the deviations for the success and
safety of the intended marine operation. He may need to
discuss the procedure with the expertise at the home office
before approving it.
The surveyor should attend all the meetings related to marine
operation, activities, schedule, personnel assignment, etc. so
that he can organize his schedule and communications with key
personnel. The attending warranty surveyor issues COA's prior
to any marine operations. The contractors should note that
marine operation (s) should not be carried out without
obtaining COA prior to the commencement of the actual
operation, because it may cause breach of warranty.
MWS is to be present on-site during all key activities. All
participating parties must note that the attending surveyor may
advise to stop and/or abandon certain marine activities
whenever such activities in his opinion is unsafe and chances of
success are very low. The stoppage or abandoning operation
may be due to weather, equipment shortcoming, facilities,
capabilities of personnel, etc. If the contractor fails to comply
with surveyor's advice, it may lead to breach of warranty.
Marine Activities
It is not possible to present a complete list all marine operations
that a MWS may get involved in various projects. Marine
warranty services are frequently sought for the following three
types of marine/offshore projects:
Test and Trial of Floating Vessels
Ocean Towage
Offshore Operations
This paper primarily covers offshore marine operations related
to loadout, transportation, and installation of fixed jacket type
structure.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Test and Trial
When a new vessel, e.g., drilling rig, floating production unit,
deck cargo, derrick, pipelay barges, etc. are built or retrofitted,
they are tested before putting them into services. These tests
may involve
• trials of jacking of jack-up rigs
• deballasting procedure of mat supported jack-up rigs
• flooding, pumping, and anchor trials of ships or
semisubmersibles
• inclining test of ships/semisubmersible
• sea trial
The insurance coverage for the above activities are known as
"Builder's Risk". Warranty surveyor's role in such activities is
confined to approving the trial location and ensuring the safety
of rigs during trials.
Ocean Towage in the offshore industry mostly involves deck
cargo barges, submersible barges, and heavy lift ships. Towing
may also involve ships, warships, spars, tension leg platforms,
semisubmersibles, or other novel design of floating vessels or
platforms. Depending on the travel route and towing speed, the
tow exposure can range from 1 to 60 or more days.
It is common practice in the offshore industry to build a
platform, or a component of it in China, Japan, Korea,
Singapore, Finland, Spain, transport it on a heavy lift vessel in
a Trans-Pacific or Trans-Atlantic voyage to the Gulf of Mexico.
When towing through the Panama Canal is not possible because
of width restriction, the tow must travel across the Pacific
Ocean around the Cape Horn to arrive in the Gulf of Mexico.
Similarly, if a platform is built in Japan or Korea for
installation offshore West Africa, a possible tow route is from
the China Sea to the Indian ocean via the Java sea (between
islands of Borneo and Sumatra), and around the Cape of Good
Hope to the West Africa coast. For such a long tow, the tug
selection should be carefully done by assessing the physical
condition of the tug, and her capability and her accessories,
such as, bollard pull, towing line (s), towing bridle, connectors,
etc. Depending on the season, the tow may encounter rough
seas, and thus integrity of the tow is to be maintained by proper
design of securing arrangement, tow lines and towing
accessories, etc.
Ocean towage of a "tow" requires consideration of static and
dynamic stability, directional stability, maneuverability,
stnactural strength of the floating vessel, etc. For example,
towing a dredger on her bottoms could be very vulnerable if the
water-tightness is not ensured. Once water enters the hull of a
dredger the stability becomes critical. Similarly towing
concrete caissons used for port construction may have poor
directional stability and thus making the tow difficult.
The floating platforms in the offshore industry have been
designed in many unconventional shapes, such as tension leg
platform, mat supported and independent legged jack-ups, long
spar, deep draft caisson unit, etc. These are often one of a kind,
and may not be possible to assess by using readily available
standards, rules, and or recommended practices. The warranty
surveyor is thus required to have the knowledge and experience
to review ocean towage for such variety of floating vessels on
its own technical merit and to decide whether the proposed
4 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 towage is acceptable. In the role of MW surveyor, one should
review and approve following items:
f Bridle
• Towing Arrangement
BARGE
• Suitability Survey of Tug
• Suitability of Cargo Barge or Ship
•
•
•
•
Transportation route
Loading of Cargo
Securing of Cargo
Offioading of Cargo
• h Plate

(a) Towing Arrangement with One Tug

Towing Arran2ement and Tu2
Towing arrangement depends on the object being towed,
distance of tow, the design environmental condition, and
contingency plans. The towing arrangement of a raked barge
will be different to that of towing a caisson, an abandoned ship,
warship or a floating dock. Similarly, operation of "tandem
tow" and ?'double tow" should be based on considerations that
are important to specific arrangements. Five common types of
towing arrangements, e.g., Tow with one tug, tow with tugs in
series, tow with tugs in parallel, double tow, and tandem tow
BARGE
1117::::
are shown in Figure 1.
(b) Towing Arrangement with Tugs in Series
The simplest arrangement is with one tug towing a barge as
shown in Figure l(a). Other arrangements include two tugs in
series as shown in Figure l(b) towing one barge, or multiple
tugs in parallel towing one barge as shown in Figure l(c).

I
Arranging the tugs in seres is feasible when a small tug is used 1 TOW
as the lead tug and is connected to the bow of a larger, less BARGE
maneuverable tug in order to improve steering. This
configuration requires all towing gear (towline, pennant,
bridles, fish plate (or triplate), etc., between the second tug and
the barge to be adequate for the total combined bollard pull. It (c) Towing Arrangement with Tugs in Parallel
also requires that the second tug is significantly larger than the
leading tug. Arrangements using multiple tugs in parallel, and
each tug independently connected to the barge by separate tow
lines is considered good practice for towing very large objects,
especially when critical maneuvering along the transporting Barge 2 1C~nary#~ Barge 1
route is necessary. When a large tug is not available, such
arrangement with smaller multiple tugs may be the only J t
alternative available. Catenary# 2 ) Two CatenaryLines 1 & 2,
Double Tow as shown in Figure l(d) involves towing two belowBarge 1 # 1 connecting to Barge 1
connecting to and Line# 2 to Barge2
barges connected to the same tug with separate tow lines. One Barge 2
tow line is significantly larger than the other so that it hangs
below the first barge.
(d) Double tow Arrangement
Tandem Tow arrangement as shown in figure l(e) includes
two or more barges in series behind one tug, i.e., the second
and other barges connected to the previous one.
Double and tandem tows are to be carefially reviewed for Barge 2 Barge 1
maneuvering in close quarter situations, and reconnecting the
towlines after a possible breakage. Such tows are acceptable
for benign areas, and/or short tow in good weather. Tandem
C
Catenary #2
1 Catenary 1
S
tows are often used in ice condition where the barges follow between Barge 1 and 2 connecting the Tug
each other. In ice conditions the towlines between tug and with Barge 1
leading barge, and between barges are short so that the lines
stay clear of the water.
(0 Tandem Tow

Figure 1 Different Types of Towing Arrangement

5 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Suitability Survey of Tugs A~o~nt = projected head-current area in square feet = B x d,
While surveying the tug regarding her condition and Vco~nt = velocity of current in feet per second
characteristics, the towing arrangement, towing route and Cd = drag coefficients, values of typical hull shapes are
distance, towing object, etc. should be considered by the tabulated below for use.
surveyor. The survey should include the vessel, its equipment, B and d being the respective beam and draft of the cargo barge
machinery and manning, and towing gear. The surveyor should
confirm that the following valid documents are on-board the Hull Shape Cd
tug: Typical ships 0.20- 0.35
• Certificate of registry Spoon bow/Faired stem Barge 0.20
• Load line Certificate Spoon Bow/Raked Stem Barge 0.35
• Tonnage Certificate Raked Bow/Raked or Square Stern Barge 0.50
Square Faced Bow Barge 1.00
• Certificate of Class
Fixed Concrete Structure - Circular base 0.70 -0.90
• Cargo Ship safety Certificate
Fixed Concrete Structure - Square base 1.00 - 1.20
• Certificates for Life Saving Appliances Triangular Jack-up w/recessed cans 1.00
• Radio Certificate Triangular jack-up with protruding cans 1.10-1.30
• Deratization Certificate
It should however be noted that the above values are applicable
• Certificates of all Towing Gear including tow lines,
for deep water which is when the water depth is greater than
pennants, triplate, nylons, shackles, etc. twice the draft. For shallow water the above values are
• Stability booklet and approval by Classification increased, and reference material, such as OCIMF Guidelines 1
Society may be used for Ca values for shallow water.
• Bollard Pull Certificate
Wave Drift force, Fdfift, in head seas is calculated as outlined
The "manning" plan should also be reviewed. Typically a team below:
of 10 men comprising of 1 certified and experienced Master, 2 Fddt~ = [ P w a t e r R B Hs2/16] 10-3 kips, where
certified watch keeping mates, 2 certified engineers, 1 Bosun, 3
experienced Seamen, and 1 cook is recommended for ocean Pwater is the specific weight of water (64 lbs/cu, ft.), B is the
towage. The number of crewmen may increase or decrease beam in feet of the vessel carrying cargo or barge, R is the drift
depending on the weather of the transporting route, size, age, coefficient for 16.50 ft significant wave height, Hs is the
and condition of tug, regulations of coastal state, etc. significant wave height in feet. The "R" values depend on
characteristics of the vessel, such as draft, length, natural period
The stability letter by Classification Society may be used for in pitching motion, etc. Nominal values o f R for various bow
the basis of stability approval, and consequently the surveyor shape is given below:
should pay close attention if any limitations are noted in the
stability letter. The bollard pull calculations should verify that Bow Shape R
the selected tug is adequate. The bollard pull calculations Square Face 1.00
determines the pull required to hold the towing object (barge) Concrete Structure - Cylindrical Base 0.94
for zero speed of advance against a 40 knot (20 m/s) wind, Vertical Cylinder 0.78
significant wave height of 16.5 feet (5 m), and a 1 knot (0.5 Raked Bow barge 0.45
m/s) current acting simultaneously in a head sea condition. Spoon Bow Barge 0.31
Wind and current forces are calculated as drag force using the Thus, the static force to keep the vessel in place against 40
equations below in accordance with industry practices. The knots of wind, 1 knot current and a significant wave height of
drag coefficients presented here should be considered as 16.5 feet will be equal to (F~ind+ Fcurrent+ Fdria ). The effective
nominal values. When other values are available based on bollard pull depends on the tug efficiency which depends on
model test or otherwise, they may be used. tug characteristics, such as the hull, propeller sizes and shapes,
Fwind = .00338 (Z AwindCs Ch )Vz2 10 -3 kips, where sea state, etc. For a sea state of 16.5 feet (5 m), tug efficiencies
(Thug) are approximately 0.40-.80 for the tugs normally used in
Awi~dis the projected head wind area in square feet,
the offshore projects.
Cs is the shape factor (or drag coefficient),
The effective bollard pull (BP)etr is given as:
Ch is the height coefficient, and
V~ is the wind speed in knots at a height z above water line (BP)etr = (Fwind+ Feurrent+ F~a )/Thug
which can be determined as Vz = V33 (z/33)a , V33 is the The selected tug should have a bollard pull larger than (BP)efr
wind speed at a reference height of 33 ft (10m), 13 may be Towing Gear includes towlines, pennants, connectors,
taken as 0.1 unless other site specific values are available. winches. Generally tugs with winches are approved, towing
hooks instead of winches are accepted with special
Current force, Feu. . . . t, is similarly calculated as follows: considerations and reviewing carefully towline recovery
Feurrent = .0.5 (PwatJg) (~ AeurrentCd Veurrent2 ) 10 -3 kips, where procedure and capacity of other equipment. The tug should
have a spare tow line with the capacity same as the main line.
Pwater = specific weight of water ,i.e., 64 pounds per cu. feet
1 indicates the reference n u m b e r

6 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms


The length of the main and spare lines depend on the breaking
load of the lines. A line length L is often calculated as:
L = (BP~n4BL) x S feet, where S = 6000**
BL = Breaking Load of Tow line
(**for benign areas ,use S = 3500, i.e., a reduction of 40% approx.)
The minimum breaking load, BL in long tons, of towline for
different bollard pull may be determined as below:
Tug bollard pull (BPcfr) BL (L Tons*)
_< 40 long tons, 3.0 x BPCfr
>_ 90 long tons, 2.0 x BP~ir
40- 90 long tons, [3.0 - (BP~r - 40)/50] BPefr
Benign Areas 2.0 x BP~fr
equals 2240 lbs which is equal to 1.02 tonne (1000 Kg)
The towline connections to barge, bridle, and bridle apex, e.g.,
triplate, smidt bracket etc. should be designed to have an
ultimate capacity larger than the values obtained as given
below:
_< 40 long tons, 3.0 x BPeir
> 90 long tons, 2.5 x BPeff
40- 90 long tons, [3.0 - (BPefr - 40)/100] BPeff
Benign Areas 2.5 x BPeff
When shackles are used as part of the towline, the shackle
strength should be at least 10% greater than that of the towline.
The surveyor should inspect towline connection points to see if
they can be released quickly in adverse conditions, to allow a
fouled bridle or towline to be cleared. The deck local strength
at towline connection point should be strong enough to
withstand the maximum towline loads. All lines should be
arranged so that no chafing of the towlines is likely to take
place.
Suitability of Cargo Barge or Ship
The suitability of cargo barge or ship is based on meeting the
capacity of carrying the cargo with respect to space and weight,
the barge strength, stability, ballasting capability, etc. The
surveyor in charge o f determining the suitability is to verify all
applicable barge/ship related documents that have already been
listed earlier for tug suitability. Relevant engineering
documents are to be reviewed, as necessary, to the extent of
establishing the capacity of deck loading, strength of bulk
heads, flames, towing attachments, etc.
Transportation Route should be evaluated from the point of
view of navigability, maneuverability, obstruction,
environmental condition during the time of transportation,
proximity to locations for shelter, etc. The water depth of the
proposed route should have adequate margin so that the fially
loaded condition of the vessel does not ground. The surveyor
should investigate if there are sharp bend, existing structures,
such as bridges, cables, buoys that may cause problems for
maneuvering. The environmental data, e.g., wave, wind,
current, and tides should be reviewed to verify if the
transportation plan adequately incorporated those data in the
design and execution plan. For example, when inertia forces
due to motion in waves are calculated to design seafastening
structure, the appropriate wave heights and associated periods
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
data for the route should be used in the motion response
analyses.
Loading of Car~o
Loading of cargo on to a barge for transportation by waterways
is carried out by a variety of methods, such as, pulling,
skidding, lifting by crane, by trailer, or combination of these
operations. The methods of operation are often guided by the
capability of the facilities at the loading site. As an example, to
illustrate the loading of cargo, the loading procedure of a jacket
type structure by skidding on to a barge is shown in Figure 2. It
shows the loading of jacket step by step, and also identifies
equipment that would be used for the loading operation. The
step-by-step procedure is generally outlined in a loadout
manual. Marine surveyor while reviewing such documents
should come up with a list of items that are important for the
success of the proposed operation. Although the surveyor may
have been provided with a standard company check list, it is
strongly recommended that the surveyor on his own prepare a
list and then compare with the company check list ensuring that
the standard items are not overlooked.
From the information presented in Figure 2, a list of items may
be prepared that includes the following as a minimum. They
should be reviewed and assessed for their capacity and
condition:
Pulling/Jacking System
Dead-man
Mooring Systems
Stnactural items - skid shoe, skid beam, pier, dock, etc.
Environmental Data
Ballasting
Contingency Plan
Pulling System consists of pulling cable, pulleys, deadman
(anchoring structure). They should be adequate to withstand a
pulling force equal to greater than the break-out static ~ i c t i o n
f o r c e which is approximately 10-15% of the jacket/cargo
weight. The forces on the cables depend on the number of
parts, and each cable should have a safe working load (SWL)
greater than the calculated cable tension. The structural
connections (brackets, pad-eyes, etc.) between the pulling cable
and the skid shoes are to be reviewed for proper loading. All
equipment, such as, winches, jack, leveling theodolite etc.
should be reviewed for their applicability, capacity,
manufacturer specifications, and/or test certificates. Generally,
certificates that are older than 12 months are not accepted.
Dead-man is the anchoring structure on the barge deck for
pulling the jacket from the shore on to the barge. It should be
designed adequately for a load greater than the break-out static
friction force. For the arrangement shown in Figure 2, the load
on dead-man is ultimately transferred to the barge deck, and
thus the local structure of the barge (barge framing, doubler
plate, etc.) needs to be reviewed. To alleviate the problem, the
deadman is sometimes located on the top of the skid way.
Moorin~ System is to be designed to hold the barge against
wind, current and wave during loadout. The design
environmental condition should cover wind, current, wave, and
tide, and they should be based on site specific 10-year seasonal
data. Wind and current speeds should not be less than 20 knots
and 1 knot. Tidal data are necessary to confirm that the barge
7 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 would not be grounded during the proposed operation. The the operation. The barge local structure should also be checked
design calculations should confirm that each of the mooring for all the deck areas that the jacket would be passing during
lines has SWL greater than the maximum design load. Design the skidding operation.
calculations of anchoring structure on the land, all the
connections, local structures, and rigging accessories at the
mooring line ends are to be reviewed, and the manufacturer test
certificates are to be verified by the surveyor. Surveyor should
visually inspect all bits, choks, cleats, etc. on the barge for their
soundness.
Structural Items include jacket structure, barge, skid way, skid
shoe, jacket, and pier or dock, and they should be analyzed Current I /
prior to loadout operation. For the configuration shown in
Figure 2, the jacket rests on 3 pairs of skid shoes. During PullingCables~ / /
loadout operation, the possibility of losing contact of one pair Pulleys~
of skid shoes is real, and thus the jacket structure should be
analyzed with one pair of shoe missing. Thus it is necessary to
review analyses of jacket structure showing that it is strong
enough with any pair of skid shoe missing.
Barge structure (deck, bulkheads, flames) is to be strong
enough to withstand loading at all possible load conditions MooringLines
during skidding. The barge should also be checked for
longitudinal strength. The skid shoes and skid beams should be
so designed not only to withstand the loading, but also for
distributing the load over an area on barge deck. For improving
the distribution of load, timbers (12" x 12" yellow pine, ~wood=
470 ksi in loads with grains perpendicular to grain) are used
because they have good damping characteristics, and possess
better capability of absorbing shock load. The coverage of DeadMan .
timber should be adequate.
The condition of the pier and dock should be inspected,
specially the structural and soil condition of the waterfront.
Usually the waterfront structure is supported on piles and/or
sheet piles. The soil erosion at the waterfront is to be assessed
visually first to see if detailed inspection needed.
Site Specific Environmental Data should include ten-year
seasonal wave, wind, current, and tide data for the site of
loading. Other data that are important are bathymetry data of
the dockside surroundings and the transportation channel to the
P0,,,ngCa,e-
open sea. The water depth, sharp comer, obstructions (such as
buoys, bridges for clearance) in the transportation route should
be identified and reviewed for assessing maneuverability of the
cargo carrying barge.
Bailastine procedure should be reviewed to ensure that the
barge is in even keel position during loading. This may require
a few stops during the loadout for ballasting or debalasting.
The attending surveyor is to assess the adequacy of pumping
arrangement, and would monitor even keelness during the
loadout operation. When the foot print of last skid shoe is
equally between the barge and dock, the barge should be
deballasted (with pulling operation stopped) to lift the skid shoe
off the dock to avoid sudden load transfer on to the barge. To
avoid additional loading due to ballast change, the barge should
be ballasted for the voyage condition before the seafastening
stnactures are welded to the barge deck. The final voyage draft
should have a trim by stem, the trim being in the range of (.3 -
1.0)% of the length of the barge.
The longitudinal strength of the barge with ballast and load at
various stages of loading should be evaluated prior to starting Figure 2 Jacket Loadout by Skidding

8 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Inertia Loads and Cargo Structural Integrity
Figure 3 shows a typical arrangement of a sail-away
configuration of steel jacket structure. The tie-down/
seafastening, and grillage structures are provided to secure the
cargo and transfer the loads experienced by the cargo on to the
transport barge or vessel. The structures are designed to
withstand the inertia loads due to wave induced motions in
addition to static loads. The static loads include the dead
weight, and appropriate components of weight in the heeling
and trimming conditions.
seconds respectively for most cargo transportations in the
offshore industry.
The above criteria have been widely used for the last 4-5
decades. It is believed that these criteria when used to calculate
inertia loads are conservative even with higher values of roll
and pitch periods. The conservatism primarily comes from a)
overestimating the roll and pitch motions, and b) not taking any
consideration of phase differences between different motions.
This method also adds the static loading (own weight of cargo
W~) at maximum roll and pitch angle.

Fr Horlz.Force due to Roll& Gravity

Fvr Vert. Force due to Roll & He~'ve [ [
T', ,~T'~,~ If skidBeam W c Weight of Cargo [ [

rug-, F I
J i '
! >®
cargoCG ]

.Wo
, ]_ G ' ~ CombinedC~_
I -~ .~Heave -~
Selfa N = "
Structures
Figure 4 Inertia Loading on Deck Cargo
/-- Jacket Figure 4 shows a ship in rolling and heaving condition.
Roll Heave Assuming (in a rather simplistic sense) a cargo ship or barge
undergoes harmonic oscillations in six degrees of freedom, i.e.,
roll, heave, pitch surge, sway and yaw during a voyage, an
object on the ship deck will be subjected to inertia loads. For a
ship or barge, roll, pitch and heave are the primary cause of
inertia loading because of their higher frequency of periodic
oscillation (to). The inertia loadings Fr and F~ due to roll and
heave motions as shown in the Figure are calculated3 as:
Fr = Wc [ (4 rt2. ®. z)/(T~Z.g) + sin (0 + I~,e,)]
F~ = Wc [ (4 n 2. 13. F)/(Tr2.g)] + We. Ah
Figure 3 Jacket Sail-away
where [~,ee. is the wind heeling angle, the roll and pitch periods
Tr and T o are taken as 10 seconds as per aforementioned
Calculations of motions of barge and ship in waves have
criteria. Using lower periods will result higher inertia loads.
become routine activities because of easy availability of
software for such calculations. Before the availability of such Similarly for pitch and heave motions, the inertia loads Fp and
software, industry used the following guidelines for motions of F~ due to pitch and heave motions may be calculated as:
cargo carrying barges, and they served the industry very well
for estimating motions, and designing tie-down fastening Fp = Wc [ (4 It2. 0. z)/(Tp2.g) + sin (0 + 13tam)]
structures. F~p = W~ [ (4 7t2. 0./)/(Tp2.g)] + We. Ah
Large Barge SmallBarge InlandTow where ~m is the trimming angle due to wind. The centers of
Roll, 121 (deg) 20 ° 25 ° 5° roll and pitch axes are considered to be at the combined center
of gravity of the vessel and cargo. It may be argued that added
Pitch, 0 (deg) 12.5 ° 15° 5° masses along with the real mass of the ship, lowers the center
Heave, Ah (.20-.30)g (.20-.30)g 0.10g of rotation. As an extreme, the centers of rotation are
sometimes assumed to be at the waterline. Such assumption
where " g " is the acceleration due to gravity = 32.2 ft/sec2
may not be exact, but calculates inertia loads conservatively.
A barge is generally considered to be large when:
length L > 250 ft., beam B > 80 ft., and depth D > 16.50 ft. The methods of calculating ship motions, and inertia loading
have improved significantly with the introduction of sea
The period "T" of motions (both Roll, O and Pitch, 0) have spectral analyses approach. Readily available software based
been traditionally used as 10 seconds. It may be noted that roll on such approaches incorporates the phase differences of
and pitch periods are usually in the range of (6-10) and (4-7) motions, and calculate acceleration responses at discretized
masses of the cargo to determine the inertia loads in three

9 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 orthogonal directions, lateral, longitudinal and vertical. The
cargo structure is then analyzed for its integrity. Depending on
the voyage duration and sea state, fatigue damage during
transportation of the cargo, such as, steel jacket type structure
should be assessed. Available software is capable of analyzing
the structure for various sea states that constitutes the
transportation sea conditions, and the fatigue damage is then
determined by Miner's rule.
Although it has been found that the inertia loads obtained by
using simple harmonic model with standard roll, pitch and
heave values served the industry very well for a long time, the
readers must note that there are several occasions where
calculated values of roll angle exceed 20 degrees for a proposed
design sea state. Such situation may be very expensive to fix at
a later stage of the project.
For the transportation of a jacket across the Atlantic or the
Pacific oceans, the vortex induced vibration of jacket (tubular)
members due to wind may need to be examined. The natural
frequency fl in first mode of structural members, i.e., bracing,
legs, cords, etc. may be calculated2 as :
fl = l l . 5 x 104R/L 2
where R and L are the radius and length of structural member.
The natural frequency f2 in second mode is given by:
f2 = 6.27 fl.
The corresponding lock-in velocity V~t~ of wind that may result
vortex induced oscillation can then be determined by
Vva~ = (fix R)/0.4, where i denotes the mode of vibration
If the prevailing wind velocity is close to Vv~ , the lock in
velocity can be altered by adding a spoiler. A possible solution
for altering V~x is to wrap ropes around tubular members,
simulating the spoiler effect. For further guidelines on
assessment of wind induced vortex shedding, the readers may
refer to Classification Notes 30.5 published by DnV.
Marine warranty review and approval process for any ocean
voyage considers all the relevant information, e.g., barge size
and characteristics, duration of voyage, route and possible
sheltering locations, nature of cargo structure, etc. to judge if
the analyses submitted are adequate for safe voyage. Attending
surveyor (s) have the f'mal authority of approving a voyage, and
they should use their anthodty in a responsible manner.
For example for the sail-away arrangement presented in Figure
3, it shows that there is considerable overhang of the jacket on
both Port and Starboard sides of the barge. In such a case, the
surveyor should ask for engineering calculations to verify if the
overhang structure experiences any wave slamming. For such
cases, the surveyor may impose a limitation on transportation
design sea state to avoid wave slamming, unless engineering
calculations establish the adequacy of jacket and tie-down
structures to withstand wave slamming in addition to static and
inertia loads.
Sea fastening and Grillage Arrangement
A typical sea fastening details of a jacket type structure is
shown in Figure 5. Six pairs of tubular members as shown in
Figure 3 secure the jacket structure against rolling, pitching and
heaving. Jacket cradles support the dead weight of the jacket
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
structure, and the load is finally transferred to the barge deck
through the skid beam. Timbers are often provided between the
cradles and skid beam and/or between skid beam and barge
deck. Timbers help distributing the load, and at the same time
act as a good damping element, and also provide frictional
resistance. The seafastening arrangement shown in Figure 5 (b)
includes 2-3 steel straps (12' wide, 1" thick) at each of the
cradle locations to secure against uplift forces that the jacket
may be subjected to. Many designers apply credit due to
frictional forces between timber and deck in their seafastening
design calculations. Considering the marine environment and
associated uncertainties, a majority of marine surveyors believe
that although the timbers may provide frictional resistance, the
design should ignore such contributions. The authors support
such view because of uncertainties in the values of frictional
coefficients for random loading in an ocean voyage.
The attending surveyor should visually inspect all welds of the
seafastening structural system. Depending on design stress
levels, and welding quality, up to 20% of all welds on the
seafastening structure should be tested by non-destructive
testing (NDT). NDT may be Magnetic Particle Inspection
(MPI), dye penetrant, ultrasonic or any other suitable method.
Ring Stiffener I"-7 .-'%
c ........ :~===~ ........ "¢~
Skid B e a m ~ ~ , , ~ Jacket Cradle
Doubler P l a t e ~ , ~ ~ Timber
~/" ~ [I~ 1[ ~ Barge Deck
(a) Details of Seafastening Structure
UpliftStrap1x 12in.
Skid Beam - ~ I~ JacketCradle
TYP,'~, ~ 3/8,,-~1~Iilt~J~.~Timber
1 th B K T - ' ~ ~-atl~I ~ - BargeDeck
(b) Details of Seafastening against Uplift
Figure 5 Seafastening Details
Another area of great concern is internal sea fastening of cargo.
In the case of jacket transportation, this may not be important,
but for many other cargoes, it is necessary to check for loose
items, and/or items not properly secured. For a production
deck, one may find numerous pipe segments with large
unsupported lengths that may require additional supports in
way of brackets, clamps, etc. Crane booms of a production
deck dunng an ocean voyage are rested on boom rests at a
10 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 considerable high elevation. These booms may require Jacket weight variation: +_ 2.5%
temporary stnactural restraint during the voyage. C.G. Variation: Xcg greater of 1% Of Xdim, or 2.50 feet
In summary, before approving the sail-away of a jacket on a Ycg greater of 1% of Ydim, or 2.50 feet
cargo barge, the attending MW surveyor should include the Zcg greater of 1% Of Zdim, or 5.00 feet
following items in his review list, mainly to confirm that the where Xdim and Y,~m are the principal dimension of the jacket
arrangement and fabrications are in accordance with approved base, and Zdim is the height of jacket.
documents and drawings:
With regard to launching, MW engineer should review
Cargo locations, sizes, weights, and centers of gravity calculations and documents related to winch capacity, ballast
Sail-away draft, trim, and ballast arrangement arrangement, longitudinal strength calculations, capacities of
Weather forecast and compare with the design sea state buoyant elements for hydrostatic pressure for the depth of dive
Terminations of structural attachments, such as brackets at the during launch, and capacity of rocker element for calculated
ends of sea fastening members, doubler plates, etc. rocker load during launch. The attending surveyor should
Welding quality and NDT results verify the winch capacity, ballast arrangement, etc. to ensure
that the launch procedure is in accordance with approved
Jacket L a u n c h and U p e n d i n g calculations.
Depending on the availability of equipment, and size of the
jacket, it may be installed either by crane or by launching from
a launch barge fitted with a rocker arm. For a shallow water
jacket, it is possible to lift the jacket by crane, and then lower it
on to the sea bed in an upright condition. For larger jackets
(>400 ft.), the marine operations of lifting and lowering the
jacket are difficult, launch barge is generally preferred for
launching in lieu of lifting the jacket. For the final upending
operation, a derrick barge is necessary for on-site installations. (a) Jacket sliding over the Rocker Arms
Launch The scenario of launching and subsequent
upending by derrick barge is illustrated in Figures 6 and 7. The ® ®
launch barge is to be ballasted step-by-step from the ocean tow
condition with trim of approximately 0.I degree to a launch
condition with trim of (3.0-4.5) degrees. At each stages of
ballasting, the adequacy of longitudinal strength of the barge is
to be verified for still water condition. To initiate the sliding of
the jacket over the rocker arm, pulling the jacket by winches is
necessary. As the jacket passes over the pair of rocker arm as
shown in Figure 6 (a) and (b), the rocker arms are subjected to (b) Jacket leaving the Rocker Arm
substantial load during the jacket configurations I-3. Figure 6
shows that as it leaves the rocker arm, the jacket dives into the
water (configuration 4), and finally it should be floating in
almost horizontal position with jacket legs piercing the water
line as shown in configuration 5.
As the jacket dives into water, the auxiliary buoyancy chamber
when provided, are subjected to hydrostatic pressure, the
magnitude of which depends on the depth of dive. Thus all
buoyant elements should be checked for the anticipated
hydrostatic pressure using a conservative margin of 20-30%.
The floating condition is usually designed to have a small trim (c) Jacket in Floating Condition
by jacket base to provide a freeboard of 2-6 feet at the top.
Generally the jacket should have reserve buoyancy of 8-10% so
that the jacket does not sink after launching. Additionally when
Figure 6 Jacket L a u n c h i n g Scenario
the largest buoyant member of the jacket is damaged, the
reserve buoyancy should not be less than 5%.
Upend Subsequent to jacket launching, the jacket is to be
Since the parameters, such as, the mass, c.g., buoyancy upended by lifting as shown in Figure 7 with crane in
distribution, etc. are not easy to estimate precisely, sensitivity conjunction with flooding some selected tanks or stnactural
study of mass properties is carried out during the engineering members and/or temporary buoyancy chambers. The lifting
phase of jacket lunch. The recommendations of variations of points on jacket, and pad-eye if any exists should be assessed
parameters by various sources are not exactly the same. Based structurally for the calculated lifting load. The orientations of
on author's experience, the sensitivity study may use the load are to be carefully assessed during upending because
following variation of jacket weight and center of gravity: structural elements, such as, pad-eyes may be subjected to

11 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 considerable out of plane loading. Calculations related to pad-
eye have been elaborated in a later section on lifting.
t withstand the wave, wind and current forces without being
BottomClearanc~_~i
Figure 7 Jacket Upending Operation
The surveyor is to familiarize himself with the venting
arrangement, and then review the vent plan during ballasting
for approving the procedure. During the upending operations,
the sequence of flooding should be watched to see if the jacket
orientations at various stages of upending resemble the
calculations that have already been approved. When the
installation contractor makes any deviations in the upending
plan, they should inform marine surveyor for his concurrence
with the deviation. At each stage of lifting and upending
operations, the crane loads change, the crane radius may also
vary. The clearance between the bottom most point of the
jacket and the sea bed during upending is calculated to ensure
that it does not get stuck in the mud. Generally a clearance of
30-40 feet has been found to be adequate for many projects.
Pile Driving and Installations
This operation includes pile transportation, lifting, upending of
piles, hammering, and joining pile segments as driving
progresses. The associated analyses will only be identified
here, and the reader will be better served if they refer to section
6 of API RP 2A, 20th edition4 for specific requirements,
criteria, and factor of safety for various analyses. Basic
analyses of pile design and installations include:
Pile stick-up analysis
On-bottom stability analysis
Pile capacity calculations
Length of pile segments are determined with the considerations
of a) capability of lifting equipment to raise, lower and stab the
sections, and to place the pile driving hammer on the sections
to be driven, b) the possibility of a large downward movement
of pile following the jacket leg closure, c) stresses developed in
the pile section during lifting, d) stresses due to self weight and
weight of hammer at the pile tip (also known as stick-up
analysis), e) cut-off allowance (2-5 feet) to allow removal of
material damaged by the impact of pile driving.
Pile stick-up analysis should include the effect of static
bending, axial loads, and arresting lateral loads generated
during initial hammer placement. Such analyses get more
critical when the jacket legs are battered.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
On-bottom stability analysis is important because it
establishes the limiting environmental condition at which the
jacket would not require to be held by crane before pile driving
may begin. At this condition, the jacket should be able to
overturned.
Load bearing capacity of piles are primarily contributed by
end bearing and skin ffiiction between pile and soil surrounding
the pile. The ultimate bearing capacity Qd may be calculated as
follow:
Qd = Qf+Qp = f A s + q A p , w h e r e
Qf = skin friction resistance
Qp = total end bearing
f = skin friction capacity per unit area
As = circumferential surface area of piles
q = end bearing capacity per unit area
Ap = gross end area of pile
The pile driving analyses are performed to determine the pile
penetration required for the platform to withstand the loads due
to the platform dead weight and the environmental loading for
design and operating load conditions. These environmental and
load conditions are more onerous than that of the installation
conditions of the jacket and deck. Nevertheless the attending
surveyor will monitor closely the pile driving and the level of
the jacket during installation. The contractor may have to
adjust driving sequence as a corrective action to maintain the
jacket level. All piles will be considered driven when the blow
count per foot of penetration is more or equal than that
provided in the calculations.
Lifting
Since lifting operation is probably the most frequently used
operation in the offshore installation engineering, lifting related
engineering industry practices, and criteria are presented here in
somewhat detail. Typical lifting gear may include sling,
shackle, pin, fitting, spreader bar, pad-eye, and crane.
Majority of the lifting operations by crane use slings and
shackles as shown in Figure 8. Slings are attached with the
pad-eyes, rings, or equivalent structures by using shackles.
Geometries of a shackle and a typical pad-eye are illustrated in
Figure 9 and 10 respectively. The pad-eyes are generally
designed for in line loads unless it is fitted with brackets to
withstand out of plane loading.
Siin~ load is calculated as a static load based on the sling
arrangement, nominal weight of the cargo (We) with due
considerations of margin in weight and variation of calculated
center of gravity. For the case shown in Figure 8, the cargo and
the pad-eye orientations are symmetric, and the center of
gravity is assumed to be located at the geometrical center of the
horizontal plane. The weight margin and e.g. deviations
depend on the quality of weight control. Nevertheless the
design sling load should be calculated based on a gross weight
(Wg), which is calculated as below:
Wg = (1+ MWC/100) We,
using the following factors of minimum weight contingencies
(MWC) for weight:
12 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 Dual Crane Lift Factors (DCL) is applied to compensate for
Nominal Weight, Wc M W C (%)
the practical difficulties of estimating the share of each crane
on weighed weights 3.00 due to center of gravity of the two-crane lifting system, and tilt
on weight control weights 5.00 due to possible operational difficulties. An upward correction
on estimated weights 10.00 of 6% (i.e., DCL = .06) is normally used to take into account of
Additionally c.g. variations of 5% of principal dimensions in uncertainties in dual crane lift operation.
the horizontal plane should be considered for determining the
design sling load. The static sling load Sst~tmay be calculated
for a symmetrical lifting configurations as:
Sstat = ( W g q- n . Wslng)/(n. sin 15)
where Wg is the gross weight of lifting object, n is the number
of slings, Wst~gis the weight of each sling, 13is the angle of the
sling with respect to the horizontal plane. When the lifting
arrangement is not symmetrical, each sling may have different
load, and can be determined as given below if the vertical loads
(Vp~) on the attachment, such as a pad-eye at the end of the
sling is first calculated.
Sstat =(Vpe -I- Wsln0/(sin 15)
For non-symmetrical and statically indeterminate arrangement " pad-eyes a f / g r ~ wffh the ver~ca~ p/awe of sUngs
• Cargo/s assumed ~o be geometr/caUy
of lifting, a factor to take into account of skew loading is to be s y m m e o / c ~ dlmens/onalty and masss

taken into account. Normally lifting should be avoided when

the cargo tilt angle exceeds 2 °. In an operation mode of lifting Figure 8 Lifting Arrangement with Sings,
an object, it should be lifted only 6-12 inches to begin with, and Shackles, and Pad-eyes
then assess and/or adjust the tilting before proceeding further.
All slings are normally selected so that the manufacturer Two-part Slin2 Factor (TPS) is necessary when two-parts
specified safe working load (SWL) is greater than the design sling passes over, round or through a shackle, trunnion, padeye
sling load. Generally, manufacturer specified SWL of a sling is or crane hook, other than at termination to take into account for
based on a factor safety of 5 with respect to the mean breaking possible uneven sharing of load by each part. It is generally
load (MBL). A lower factor of safety may be acceptable for accounted by assuming that the sling parts share as 45-55% of
cases where the lifting plan is well defined, and all fittings and the total load, thus increase the sling design load for each part
equipment are all in good working condition with valid by 55/50, i.e., 1.10, which makes TPS equal to 1.10.
certificates. To use lower factor of safety, the design sling load Sling Termination Efficiency Factor (STE) reduces the sling
should take into account of the following factors: capacity in many cases depending on the type of spliced eye at
Dynamic Amplification the sling end. For example, the sling capacity is factored by
Skew Load 0.75, 1.00, and 1.00 respectively for hand splices, resin socket,
Dual crane Lift and swage fittings such as "Super Loop".
Sling with Two Parts Sling Bending Efficiency Factor (SBE) may reduce the
Sling Termination Efficiency capacity of sling or rope significantly when sling wraps around
Sling Capacity Reduction due to bending a shacke, trunnion, pad-eye, or crane hook. The reduction
Dynamic Amplification Factors (DAF) for lifting in absence depends on the ratio of diameter of pin (trunnion) to that of
of detailed dynamic analyses are to be used as given below: sling diameter. SBE is given by:
Wg in LT* Offshore Inshore SBE = 1 -0.5 ~(Ds~/Opin)l
< 100 1.30 1.15 Normally using sling diameter larger than the pin diameter is
100 < W < 1000 1.20 1.10 not done. Larger the pin diameter, greater is the SBE. The
1000 < W < 2500 1.15 1.05 improvement of SBE values for larger pin diameter is shown
W > 2500 1.10 1.05 below:
equalsto 2240 lbs whichis 1.02tonnes (Dpi./Dsl.g) SBE
For object submerged partially or fully (e.g., jacket upending), 1.00 0.50
DAF should not be less than 1.30 1.50 0.59
Skew Load Factor (SKL) is to be used for indeterminate lifts 2.00 0.65
condition using 4-sling arrangement. A SKL of 1.25 may be 3.00 0.71
used to increase Vpe, and the design sling load. SKL value of 4.00 0.75
less than 1.1 should not be used for a lift which is statically 5.00 0.78
indeterminate. For a determinate lift, the SKL may be reduced For example, in the case of a lifting an object weighing less
to 1.00. than 1000 LT, using nominal values of only MWC (5%) and
DAF(1,20) factors, and assuming weight of sling as 3% of

13 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 cargo weight, the nominal cargo weight W~ should be revised to
a design cargo weight Wd~si~ as given below:
Wdesig~= We (1+.05) x 1.20 x 1.03 = 1.30 W~
Then using a factor of safety of 2.25, mean breaking load
(MBL) of sling should not be less than 1.30 x 2.25 = 2.93 times
the sling static load based on nominal weight of cargo W~.
Thus sling design with a breaking load less than 3 times the
static sling load based on nominal cargo weight W should not
be accepted in offshore operations. This is in accordance with
the guidelines of API 4, Readers should note that the above
example did not take the factors of SBE, STE, SKL, DCL, and
TPS. Thus the designer must assess the lifting arrangement
with respect to these factors, and then use a minimum factor of
safety of 2.25 to determine the acceptable breaking load of the
'" i ! Jaw W dth (Jw)
Sling
(Dia. D=.~
Clearance (C~
b. C mp = [Hsi - D s l n g - R m ] ~ 0.50 D sing, forRm, seeFig. 10
c. Cep = [Jw - t m - n c . t ~ ] / 2 > 0 . 2 0 J w , a n d n o t < 0 . 1 2 5 i n .
Pad-eyes are probably the most commonly used attachment for
lifting. A typical pad-eye consists of a main plate with cheek
plates on either side of it as shown in Figures l0 and 11. In
general designer should not use more than one cheek plate on
either side of the main plate. For lifting operation offshore,
they should be designed for a minimum load factor of 2.0
applied to the calculated static sling Sst~t, i.e., design sling load
as described earlier. This load factor4 of 2 is also applicable to
the structural members framing into the joint where the pad-eye
is attached for transmitting lift force within the structure. All
other structural members transmitting lifting forces, a load
factor of 1.35 may be used for assessment of the structural
adequacy.
Pad-eyes6 are to be designed to withstand in-plane as well as
out of plane loads. In case where the pad-eye is perfectly
aligned with sling direction, it should be designed for an out of
plane load of minimum o f 5% of the in-plane load. For other
situation where existence of out of plane loading is known, the
out of plane loading should be increased by 5% of the in-plane,
or out of plane loads, whichever is greater.

p'
(cheek pl~

sling.
Figure 9 Shaekle Geometry
Shackles transmit the sling load to the cargo structure via pad-
eyes and/or any other equivalent attachments, the dimensional
definitions are shown in Figure 9. Shackles are normally
selected so that the manufacturer's rated safe working load :
L~
Shackle SWL ~_ Sstat
All fittings should also be designed with similar factor of safety
with respect to static sling load Sstat. When the shackle is at the S >l
lower end of the rigging, the weight of the rigging weight
should not be included in determining Sst~t. Based on the
authors' experience, they recommend the following Figure 10 Pad-eye Details
dimensional guidelines for a "good" design of lifting gear: Pad-eye design should meet the following criteria:
C mp Inside clearance between sling and pad-eye main plate et angle between sling and the plane of pad-eye
C cp Inside clearance shackle jaw and pad-eye cheek plate B Length of main plate at the base of pad-eye
D pin Diameter of Pin Fpe. i in-plane load on pad-eye
D hole Diameter of Hole Fpe_o out of plane load on pad-eye
D ~g Diameter of Sling L ue Length of main plate under cheek plate
Jw Jaw width nc number of cheek plates (total)
Rc radius of cheek plate
Hsi Height of shackle inside from the center of pin hole Rh radius of hole
n~ number of cheek plate Rm radius of main plate
Rm radius of main plate t~ thickness of cheek plate
t~ thickness of cheek plate thickness of main plate
tm thickness of main plate
Fpe_i = Sstat x c o s ( R )
The following guidelines are considered to be "good" practices: Fpe-o = S~tatx sin(a)
a. (D pin + .0625) < D hole _< 1.04 D pin Shear stress, T = Fpe-i/Ashear _< "Callow, where
Designers should confirm these dimensions by calculating Shear area, Ashe= -- 2(R o - Rh) n¢ ~ + 2(R m - Rh)tln
Hertz stress (equation provided later in the pad-eye design) Bearing Stress, abea~g = Fpe-i/Abearing, _< ~bearing)allow
for contact between pin and pin-hole in the pad-eye. Bearing Area, Ab = D hole(tm + nc to)

14 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 v

Tensile Stress thru pin hole, ~t = Fpe-i/At _<~tensil~hole)al|ow
Tension Area, A t = 2[t m (Rm -Rh )+ n¢ ~ (Re - Rh)]
Tensile Stress at base, ~tb=Fpe.i/Atb _~ (~teensile)allow
Tension Area at base, Atb = t m B
Contact (Hertz) Stress 7, o¢ is given by:
o c = 0.591 [Fpe_i E (D hole- D pi~)/[(tm+2t~) Dhole X Dpin]0"5
** Asheo,, Ab and At may have to be modified where multiple cheek
plates with di~rent radius and~or thickeness are used.
The weld size "w" between the cheek plate and the main plate
can be determined from the following equation:
2~R¢. x .707w.Fw > Fc, where Fw is the allowable weld stress.
Following items are considered as good engineering practices:
• Limit the number of cheek plates to 2, i.e., one on each
side of the main plate
• t~ of each cheek plate < (3/4) tin

Allowable stress levelss are as follows: Spreader Bar is used in lifting arrangement when the object to
X~.ow = 0.40 (Iyield be lifted is weak against horizontal forces. This is illustrated in
(~bearing)allow : 0-90ayield Figure 12 which shows that a frame structure when lifted by
(~tensile-hole)allow = 0"45Gyield slings and pad-eye, it is subjected to compression, and the
(t~tensile)allow : 0.60~yield frame may not be strong to withstand such compression. It can
(rb~g)allo~ = 0.666yield be remedied by introducing spreader bar (s) which will change
(6¢)anow = 3.006yield (nominally) the load path to vertical as shown in the figure.
((Ycomb)allow = 0-66t~yield
t
P~
P joo°°°'°°°° %%%%e%
Dbole Fm
.... Fc Fc

...... T=i Wrong Rigging II

i l"
I~- a >1
F= = Px~
1L
P= Fro+ 2 Fc ( t
t = tin+ 2tC S Fm Px tm
t Spreader WI2 ~ Z ~ - ~ : T~.%~1~WI2
Bar ~- Fx~__.,~,
Figure 11 Loads on Cheek Plate and Main Plate ]

A section through the main plate, and just below the cheek
plate should be assessed for axial, bending and shear stresses as
well as the principal stress and von Mises stresses (or the
combined stress) as follows:
From the Figure 11 above, the sectional characteristics of the
main plate just below the cheek plate are given by the
followings:
Axial stress, ~a = P sin 0/(L,c x tin)
Bending stress, C~b = BM/Z, where
Bending Moment, BM = Pcos 0 . R~ - P sin 0 (L,~/2 - R~)
Section Modulus, Z = tm • L,¢2/6
Shear stress, x = Pcos 0 / ~ x tin. Q~h), where Q~h is the
coefficient of effective shear area.
Average shear stress Xav = Pcos 0 / (L,~ x tin)
The principal stress, (3rmax is given by:
~max= (Ga+Ob)/2 + ~/[{(ffa+~b)/2} 2 + Xav2 ] _<((~comb)allow
For combined stress, von Mises criterion may be checked as
follow:
(~comb : J ~ x 2 + (~y2 _ a s (~y + 3 T a v 2 ~_ (Gcomh)allow
sliog?. !
Proper Rigging
Figure 12 Lifting with Spreader Bar
With the use of a spreader bar, although the object is not
subjected to compression forces in the horizontal plane, the
spreader bar itself is subjected to such forces. The spreader is
to be designed for the compression forces due to sling loads, in
addition to shear and bending due to its own weight. Designer
should assess the local structural strength at the ends where the
slings are connected. Finite element analysis may be necessary.
A flee body diagram of the spreader bar is shown in Figure 13
showing the bending moment and shear force diagram. For the
design of spreader bar, the compressive forces Fx due to sling
loads may govern the design.
The allowable compressive stress of the spreader bar should be
determined in accordance with Chapter E of AISC s
Specification for Structural Buildings. The length L as shown

15 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 in the figure should be considered as the unsupported length, allowable stresses for short-term loads is not allowed for the
and effective length factor, K may be considered to be equal to structural assessment.
1.0 in determining the allowable compressive stresses. The
analyses should show that the design meets the AISC Closure
requirements of combined stresses due to compression and Although the paper summarizes comprehensively requirements
bending. Depending on the size and type of spreader bar, it of many marine operations that are carried out routinely in the
may be necessary to carry out f'mite element analyses. offshore industry, it is not possible to cover all the operations.
,T T Authors regret that marine operations, such as, moving a
drilling rig from one place to another, mooring system
deployment, pipe-laying, etc. could not be accommodated in
this paper.
i I © no, E, The requirements presented here generally represent the
industry standards and practices primarily for the Gulf of
Dsb Diameter of Spreader bar, wall thickness Mexico region. Although the installations of Spar, TLP,
semisubmersible, compliant platforms, etc. are not addressed in
T = P*~.a,where Pstngincludes the factors MWC, DAF, this paper, most of the requirements described here may be
and weight of Rigging used in such applications. Designer should use their judgments
to assess other standards, and apply them when they are found
•
~,,,, uniformly d i s t r i b u t e d load, w to have merits in engineering soundness and applicability.
I I I-II it I I I I It
Fr"* I I" Nomenclature
BL Breaking Load
BM Bending Moment
M a x B.M. = wL218 COA Certificate of Approval
DAF Dynamic Amplification Factor
DCL Dual Crane Lift
MW Marine Warranty
Shear Diagram MWS Marine Warranty Services
MWC Minimum Weight Contingency
SBE Sling Bending Efficiency
R
SKL Skew Load
STE Sling Termination Efficiency
Figure 13 Free body diagram of a Spreader Bar TPS Two-part Sling

In summary for approving a lifting operation, MW personnel REFERENCES

should review the following items:
• Lifting arrangement identifying the rigging elements,
fitting, and their characteristics.
• Dimensional characteristics of shackles, slings, pad-eyes,
etc. should be reviewed for proper fitting.
• Sling characteristics, e.g, termination, parts, and bending
efficiency should be reviewed and verify if they are
properly accounted for in the design calculations. Other
factors, such as, MWC, DAF, DCL, SKL, and TPS should
be checked if they are applied when applicable.
• Pad-eyes should be reviewed to see if out of plane loading
exists and if they are properly accounted for. Verify all the
stress calculations are within the allowable limits.
• Spreader bar design must satisfy the requirements of
combined stress due to axial compression and bending.
Structural Verifications of the object that is to be lifted should
be analyzed to verify the integrity of the item during lifting.
For offshore lifting, the analyses should use a load factor of 2.0
for the pad-eye and internal members flaming into the joint in
the close vicinity of pad-eye or any other lifting attachment.
Design of all other structural members transmitting lift forces
should be adequate for a load factor of 1.35. It should be noted
that for the assessment of the stress level, AISC increase in
1. "Guidelines & Recommendations for the Safe Mooring of
large Ships at Piers and Sea Islands", compiled by Oil
Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF), 1978.
2. DTMB manual for Structural Vibration.
3. Kossa, Miklos M., "stability and Roll Motions of
OceanBarges", 4th International Tug Convention organized
by Ship & Boat International.
4. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and
Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms, American
Petroleum Institute (API) RP 2A, 20 th Edition.
5. Rules for Planning and Execution of Marine Operations,
Det Norske Veritas, January 2000.
6. Russo, Edwin P., and Hall, Rudolph A., "systematic
Approach to Lifting Eye Design", Ocean Resources
Engineering, November 1977.
7. Roark, Raymond J., and Young, Warren C., Formulas for
Stress and Strain, 5th edition, published by McGraw-Hill
Book company.
8. Manual of Steel Construction - allowable Stress Design,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC),
Ninth Edition.

16 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/26/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms