Tension Leg Platform (TLP)

Edmund Muehlner
Bechtel Oil, Gas & Chemicals, Inc., Houston, TX, USA

control valves (i.e., the Christmas trees or production trees)

1 Introduction 1 located on the deck of the platform. This “dry-tree” arrange-
2 History 1 ment makes TLPs to stand out from most other floating plat-
3 TLP Mechanics 2 forms. Spar type floaters are the only other floating platforms
able to support dry production trees.
4 TLP Functions and Configurations 5
Since the first TLP was put into service in 1984, a total of
5 TLP Design 5
26 TLPs were installed (Table 1). As of this writing (2015),
6 TLP Installation 8 one more TLP is due for installation and several more are
List of Abbreviations 9 in the planning and design stage. TLP technology is mature
Glossary 9 and robust. Only one TLP has ever been lost. That incident
Related Articles 9 happened in 2005 when the TLP installed at the Typhoon
References 9 field in the Gulf of Mexico capsized during hurricane Rita.
TLPs are niche products that mainly serve the narrow
Further Reading 10
market for dry-tree floaters. In this market, however, they
have become the dominant solution. The demand for TLPs
is on average less than one installation per year. As a result,
only a handful of contractors compete for TLP projects. An
1 INTRODUCTION even smaller number of contractors are able to provide the
specialty components for a tendon system.
Tension leg platforms (TLPs, Figure 1) are vertically moored
floating structures typically used for offshore oil and gas
production. They fall into the category of floating systems,
which are plants designed to operate in a marine environ- 2 HISTORY
ment in a buoyantly supported state (Noble, 2013). TLPs
Records of concepts for tethered buoyant structures can be
are permanent installations since they are normally intended
found in the literature from as early as the nineteenth century.
to operate at one specific location for the span of their
They were intended for various marine structures such as
design life.
bridge piers (Schofield, 1860), floating telegraph stations
The mooring system of TLPs consists of multiple near
(Dieuleveult, 1889), or marine lights (Donelly, 1890). In
vertical tension members called tendons. These tendons have
1930, an early concept of a TLP-like configuration was
sufficient axial stiffness to effectively restrain the heaving
patented by Armstrong (1930). His “Seadrom” design was to
and heeling of the platform even in large waves. This, in turn,
be used as a landing place for air ships during transoceanic
allows the use of production risers that have the main well
flight. There is no indication, however, that any of these early
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
concepts was ever built.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. The incentive to build offshore structures came in earnest
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition)
with the advent of the oil and gas industry in the first half
ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2 of the twentieth century. While initially relying on bottom
2 Offshore
Skidable
platform rig
Facilities
Hull
Tendons
Production
risers
Direct tendon/Pile
connection
Wells
Figure 1. Tension leg platform. (Reproduced with permission from
Godfrey et al. (1997). © Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1997.)
founded structures, the need to relocate drilling rigs between
well sites called for floating drilling platforms (Schempf,
2007). In addition, oil exploration had continuously moved
further offshore and into deeper water. By the mid-1940s,
the oil industry was already operating out of sight of land
(Schempf, 2007). Early floating platforms had barge-like
designs. Their movements in ocean waves allowed them to
operate only in rather calm seas. To overcome this short-
coming, vertically moored platform designs were proposed
by different inventors. Willis and Willis (1948), Schurman
and Kidder (1955), and Knapp (1962) are examples of such
early designs. The term tension leg platform appears to have
been used for the first time in literature in 1969 in a patent
application by the inventor Horton (1969). Horton continued
to play an important role in the early phase of the TLP devel-
opment. Demirbilek (1989) reports that Paulling and Horton
(1970) were the first to publish work on TLP performance
and features. Horton and Paulling were also the master minds
behind the first offshore test of a TLP. Over 3 months in 1974
and 1975, they tested a 1/3rd scale model of a three column
TLP in 58 m of water off the coast of California.
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
This project was organized by the Deep Oil Technology
company and was sponsored by 17 oil companies. Additional
tests with this model were carried out in 1978 (Mercier et al.,
1991).
Following these successful sea trials, a number of compa-
nies started their own design studies of TLPs in the late
1970s. These efforts ultimately resulted in the first full-scale
TLP in 1984. This first TLP was installed in a water depth
of 147 m at Conoco’s Hutton field in the North Sea (Mercier
et al., 1991).
Encouraged by the success of the Hutton TLP, the industry
kept pushing ahead with the TLP development. Conoco
installed its second TLP in 1989 at their Jolliett field in the
Gulf of Mexico and followed up with the Heidrun platform
in the North Sea in 1995. Meanwhile, Saga Petroleum of
Norway installed its Snorre TLP in 1992. Shell entered the
TLP arena with its Auger TLP in 1994. Shell went on to
become an important champion for the TLP concept and has
contributed significantly to the development of TLP tech-
nology. To date, Shell has installed a total of six TLPs. The
latest of Shell’s TLPs is the Mars B Olympus TLP that started
production in 2014.
The TLP development continued rapidly throughout the
1990s and in the first half of the 2000s. Atlantia Offshore
developed their single-column “SeaStar” design (Figure 3).
This new design was first used in 1998 for a TLP at the
Morpeth field in the Gulf of Mexico. The SeaStar became
popular for small-payload applications until the Typhoon
SeaStar-type TLP was lost during Hurricane Rita in 2005.
Due to this event, the SeaStar design fell out of favor with
the industry. Another step in the TLP evolution came in 2001
when the El Paso Corporation installed the first MOSES TLP
design (Figure 4) by Modec at the Prince field in the Gulf of
Mexico. Similar to the SeaStar, the MOSES design is geared
toward small payloads and low cost platforms. The MOSES
design later evolved into the SSIP (self-stable integrated
platform), which has a simpler platform installation due to its
improved free-floating stability. To date, there are a total of
five TLPs installed that use the MOSES or the SSIP design.
Another modification of the classic TLP is the extended
pontoon TLP (ETLP, Figure 5) developed by ABB Lummus
Global. The first ETLP was installed by ExxonMobil in 2004
at the Kizomba field offshore Angola. The most recent ETLP
is currently awaiting installation by Chevron at the Big Foot
field in the Gulf of Mexico. With a water depth of 1580 m,
the Big Foot TLP will be the deepest TLP so far.
3 TLP MECHANICS
The tendons of TLPs effectively restrain their vertical
motions in waves. Although TLPs are not free-floating
 Tension Leg Platform (TLP) 3

Table 1. TLP project list.

No. Field Name Year Initial Location Water Depth (m) Hull Type Topside
Installed Operator Function
1 Hutton 1984 Conoco UK North Sea 147 Classic TLP DDP
2 Jolliett 1989 Conoco US Gulf of Mexico 536 Classic TLP DWOW
3 Snorre A 1992 Saga North Sea 335 Classic TLP DDP
4 Auger 1994 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 872 Classic TLP DDP
5 Heidrun 1995 Conoco North Sea 345 Classic TLP DDP
6 Mars 1996 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 894 Classic TLP DDP
7 Ram/Powell 1997 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 980 Classic TLP DDP
8 Morphet 1998 British Borneo US Gulf of Mexico 1699 Sea Star WP
9 Marlin 1999 BP US Gulf of Mexico 1000 Classic TLP DWOW
10 Allegheny 1999 British Borneo US Gulf of Mexico 1005 SeaStar WP
11 Ursa 1999 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 1158 Classic TLP DDP
12 Typhoon 2001 Chevron US Gulf of Mexico 639 SeaStar WP
13 Brutus 2001 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 910 Classic TLP DDP
14 Prince 2001 El Paso US Gulf of Mexico 454 MOSES DWOP
15 Matterhorn 2003 Total US Gulf of Mexico 858 SeaStar DWOP
16 West Seno 2003 Unocal Indonesia 1020 Classic TLP DTADW
17 Marco Polo 2003 Anadarko US Gulf of Mexico 1311 MOSES DWOP
18 Kizomba A 2003 ExxonMobil Angola 1177 ETLP DDW
19 Magnolia 2003 Conoco US Gulf of Mexico 1425 ETLP DWOP
20 Kizomba B 2005 ExxonMobil Angola 1010 ETLP DDW
21 Oveng 2007 Hess Equ. Guinea 271 SSIP DTADW
22 Okume/Ebano 2007 Hess Equ. Guinea 503 SSIP DTADW
23 Neptun 2008 BHP US Gulf of Mexico 1280 SeaStar WP
24 Shenzi 2009 BHP US Gulf of Mexico 1333 MOSES WP
25 Papa Terra 2014 Petrobras Brazil 1185 ETLP DTADW
26 Olympus 2014 Shell US Gulf of Mexico 914 Classic TLP DDP
27 Bigfoot To be installed Chevron US Gulf of Mexico 1580 ETLP DDP
DDP, dry tree, drilling, production; DWOW, dry tree, workover, wellhead; WP, wet tree, production; DWOP, dry tree, workover production; DTADW, dry
tree, tender assist, drilling, wellhead; DDW, dry tree, drilling, wellhead.
Reproduced with permission from D’Souza, Aggarwal, and Basu (2013). © SNAME, 2013.

objects, they are categorized as floating structures because
their working principle is based on buoyancy. Their vertical
restraint has a significant advantage for drilling and produc-
tion platforms that are connected to subsea wells by marine
risers.
Tendons are pretensioned by excess hull buoyancy. The
pretension must be high enough to keep the tendons in
tension in all operating conditions of the platform. The
combined tendon pretension is typically 15–25% of the
hull displacement (Mercier et al., 1991). As illustrated in
Figure 2, the tendon tension FT also provides a horizontal
restoring force FH when the platform offsets laterally. Due
to this effect, TLPs can operate without additional lateral
mooring system provided the tendon pretension is large
enough.
Another effect of the tendon system is that a lateral offset
of the platform is associated with a vertical setdown as shown
in Figure 2. This vertical setdown reduces the clearance
between the deck and the water surface and needs to be taken
into account for selecting the column height.
The tendon’s high axial stiffness also provides the platform
with stability against capsizing. In operating condition, TLPs
are typically not stable without being held by the tendons.
Some TLPs, but not all, can be ballasted such that they are
self-stable in free-floating condition.
The high axial tendon stiffness leads to short natural
periods for the platform’s vertical modes of vibration (i.e.,
heave, pitch, and roll). It is important that TLPs are designed
so that these natural periods are kept below the range of
significant wave energy in order to avoid a dynamic resonant
response of the platform in waves. Typical heave, pitch, and
roll natural periods of TLPs are below 5 s (DNV, 2014).
In horizontal direction, the behavior of TLPs is very
compliant. This results in long natural periods of the hori-
zontal modes of vibration (i.e., surge, sway, and yaw). With
typically 100–200 s, the natural periods in surge, sway, and
yaw are far greater than the longest periods of ocean waves.
Since all natural periods of TLPs are kept outside the
range of significant wave energy, the dynamic response of
the platform to ocean waves is small.
In practice, however, TLPs do experience a certain amount
of resonant vibrations. Such resonant response is gener-
ally undesired because it increases the stress in the tendons
and the riser system. The vibration of the “stiff” modes

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
4 Offshore

Offset

Set-down
π

FG

FB

FH

FT
FV

Figure 4. MOSES TLP design by Modec. (Reproduced with per-

Tendons mission from Modec. © Modec, 2015.)

Figure 2. Forces on a TLP in offset position (drawing by Edmund

Muehlner).

Figure 5. Extended pontoon TLP design by ABB Lummus Global.

(Reproduced with permission from FloaTEC © FloaTEC 2015.)

(heave, roll, and pitch) is called ringing and springing, while

the resonant response of the “compliant” modes in surge,
sway, and yaw are called slow-drift motions. Ringing and
springing are excited mainly by nonlinear wave effects, while
slow-drift motions are mainly excited by wind and to a lesser
extent by nonlinear wave effects.
Figure 3. SeaStar mini-TLP design by Atlantia Offshore. (Repro- In deeper water, it becomes increasingly difficult for TLPs
duced with permission from SBM Offshore. © SBM, 2015.)
to achieve natural periods below the wave excitation range.
That is a consequence of the tendon’s decreasing axial

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2

stiffness with increasing length. To compensate the stiff-
ness reduction due to increased length, tendons have to be
furnished with a larger cross section. As a result, the size and
cost of the tendon system increases progressively with water
depth. For this reason, TLPs are not considered economi-
cally viable in water depths beyond about 1800 m. However,
studies indicate that TLPs are technically feasible in water
depths greater than 1800 m (Alves et al., 2010; Muehlner and
McBee, 2013).
4 TLP FUNCTIONS AND
CONFIGURATIONS
Initially conceived as drilling platforms, TLPs have been
used as production platforms and as combined production
and drilling platforms. There were also three vertically teth-
ered buoys installed that are strictly speaking applications of
TLPs. Two of these buoys are control buoys and one is a flare
buoy (Bone, 2012).
TLPs have also been proposed as platforms for floating
wind turbines. In 2008, a prototype of a wind turbine TLP
design by Blue H was tested for 6 months off the coast of
Southern Italy (Blue H Group, 2015).
TLPs are often selected over other types of floating system
because of their superior motion performance and their small
seafloor footprint (Leffler, Pattarozzi, and Sterling, 2011).
Their low heave and pitch motions allow the production
trees (a.k.a. Christmas trees) to be located on the deck of
the platform. Such production trees are referred to as dry
trees. Wet tree arrangements, on the other hand, have the
production tree located on the seabed.
Oil and gas production using dry trees has several opera-
tional advantages over wet tree arrangements. Currently, the
only other floating platform that allows offshore production
using dry trees is the Spar platform. TLPs are also used for
wet tree developments because wet tree risers, too, benefit
from the TLP’s favorable motion behavior. Examples of pure
wet tree TLPs are the Morpeth and Shenzi TLPs.
Early on in the evolution of TLPs, it was recognized that
TLPs are rather sensitive to the payload and overall system
costs increase significantly with increasing payloads. This
circumstance led to the development of the tension leg well-
head platform (TLWP). The idea behind the TLWP concept
is to use a reduced size TLP together with a second platform.
The function of the TLWP is primarily to support the dry-tree
risers, while other heavy equipment are hosted on the second
facility.
The concept of the TLWP was first applied for Conoco’s
Jolliett TLP installed in 1989. The Jolliet platform had a
reduced process plant and only a completion rig rather than
a full-size drill rigs. It was designed to work in conjunction
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
Tension Leg Platform (TLP) 5
with a bottom founded central production platform 10 miles
away that receives the production streams of the Jolliett TLP
(Mercier et al., 1991). Other development schemes (e.g.,
Kizomba A and Kizomba B) employ configurations using a
TLWP together with a nearby located FPSO.
Tender-assisted drilling (TAD) is another configuration
used to reduce the payload of the TLP. In a TAD configu-
ration, drilling equipment is stored on a tender vessel rather
than on the TLP. The tender vessel is typically a barge or a
semisubmersible. It is moored in close proximity to the TLP,
which allows the transfer of equipment and crew between
the two vessels. Once drilling operations are completed, the
tender vessel can be removed. TAD configurations are not
unique to TLPs and have been used since the early days of
offshore field developments for drilling operations from fixed
platforms, jack-ups, and floating rigs.
Although many TLPs were designed for rather small
payloads, TLPs can also have very large payloads. The
largest TLP to date is the Heidrun TLP with a payload
(topside and riser load) of 637.2 MN, and an oil produc-
tion rate of 1457 m3 /h (220,000 BOPD) (Mitcha, Morrison,
and de Oliviera, 1986). The currently smallest TLP is the
Oveng TLP with a topside weight of 22.1 MN (excluding
riser load) and an oil production rate of 166 m3 /h (25,000
BOPD) (Wilhoit and Supan, 2010).
5 TLP DESIGN
5.1 TLP hull
The primary function of the hull is to provide the buoyancy
to support the weight of the platform and to tension the
tendons. The hull is subdivided into different compartments
to mitigate potential hull damage and accidental flooding.
All hull compartments are accessible for inspection. Most
compartments are void except the ones used as ballast tanks
or as pump rooms. In some cases, the hull is also used to
hold tanks containing consumables. Hydrocarbons are not
normally stored in the hull to avoid hazards. In addition, TLP
hulls inherently do not lend themselves for storing significant
amounts of well products (Chakrabarti, 2005). The hull is
also equipped with a marine system.
TLP hulls are constructed from steel and follow conven-
tional ship design practices using orthogonally stiffened
plate. One exception is the Heidrun TLP, which has a
concrete hull.
The shape of TLP hulls was derived from semisub-
mersibles with vertical water surface-piercing columns and
horizontal pontoons below the water line. This arrangement
lends the platform good hydrodynamic behavior in waves.
6 Offshore

The column height is selected with sufficient freeboard to Tendon top connector
keep the deck above the water elevation in the highest waves.
Flex element
A typical conventional TLP hull consists of four columns
and a four-sided ring pontoon. Circular as well as round Load cell
cross sections have been used for both the columns and
Tendon porch
the pontoons; however, most conventional TLPs have round
columns and rectangular pontoons (Yang and Ren, 2013). A Length adjustment joint
column top frame may be used to connect the top ends of the
columns. The column top frame holds the columns together Hull
during hull dry transport and will also share hydrodynamic
squeeze/pry loads on the columns due to wave action (Yang
and Ren, 2013). It can also be used to support the vertical Tendon connectors
loads of topside modules and the top-tension risers.
The installation of a TLP is greatly simplified if it can
be towed to its installation site in free-floating condition.
However, this typically dictates a larger hull size than
required for its in-place condition when the platform is
attached to the tendons. However, some TLP hulls are not
Pile receptacle
sized to be self-stable in transit condition and therefore need
special preparations for installation. During the evolution of Flex element
the TLP, different designers developed hull configurations
Foundation pile
that deviate from the classic TLP design. These designs Tendon bottom connector
aim to minimize cost by reducing the required size of the
hull and the tendons for a given payload. Atlantia Offshore Seabed
developed the SeaStar design (Figure 3). Modec developed
the MOSES and SSIP designs (Figure 4). ABB Lummus
Global developed the ETLP (Figure 5). Common to these
proprietary designs is that their column spacing is reduced
and their tendon footprint enlarged. The SeaStar design has Figure 6. Tendon assembly (drawing by Edmund Muehlner).
only one central column.

5.2 TLP mooring system
The mooring system of a TLP has typically 6–16 tendons
arranged around the platform in three or four groups. A
sketch of a single tendon is shown in Figure 6. The number
and size of the tendons is chosen so that the platform
will survive the worst design storm even with one tendon
damaged or missing. Shell’s Auger TLP has an additional
lateral mooring system but this feature was not used on any
other platform.
5.2.1 Tendon foundation
Tendon foundations are the structures that anchor the
tendons in the seabed. All TLPs installed after 1995 used
a single-driven pile for each tendon. These piles are steel
pipes with a tendon receptacle and a driving head at their
top. Typical dimensions of these piles are a diameter of
1.5–2.5 m and a length of up to about 130 m.
Prior to 1996, TLPs used gravity foundations and foun-
dation templates. Foundation templates are large structures
anchored to the seabed by multiple piles. They were expen-
sive to build and install and were phased out. Gravity foun-
dations resist the tendon uplift forces by their weight. They
are typically large concrete structures. Today, gravity founda-
tions are still considered viable design alternatives, in partic-
ular for soil conditions where driven piles are not feasible.
5.2.2 Tendon bottom connector
The tendon bottom connector is the mechanism that connects
the tendon bottom end to the foundation. The bottom
connector designs in use are the bayonet-type connector, the
collet-type connector, and the side latch connector (Barl-
trop, 1998). Today, the bayonet-type connector is primarily
used. They are stabbed into the receptacle from the top and
locked by turning the entire tendon string. The collet-type
connector is also stabbed from the top. It is locked by
expanding collet fingers over a flange in the receptacle.
The side latch connector is engaged by sliding it from
the side into the receptacle. All tendon bottom connectors

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2

Figure 7. Section view of flex element in tendon top and bottom
connectors (drawing by Edmund Muehlner).
incorporate a flexible element (Figure 7) that allows the
tendon to tilt by about 15∘ relative to the receptacle.
5.2.3 Tendon body
Tendons are made of seam welded steel pipe with forged pipe
sections at top and bottom. The inside of the tendons is kept
void to achieve a low submerged weight. Typical diameters
of the tendons’ main sections range from 0.5 to 1.1 m; typical
wall thicknesses range from 25 to 40 mm. The pipe cross
section may vary along the length of the tendon in order
to adapt to the changing axial and pressure load at different
water depths.
Most tendons are fabricated in segments of up to about
80 m length. During installation, the segments are joined by
means of mechanical connectors. Two TLPs (Jolliett and
Heidrun) had one-piece welded tendons. However, instal-
lation of this one-piece design proved prone to accidents,
which led to the current installation method of stalking
the tendon section from an installation vessel (D’Souza,
Aggarwal, and Basu, 2013).
The forged tendon top section is designed as length adjust-
ment joint (LAJ). Its threaded outer surface provides the
interface for the tendon top connector clamp.
5.2.4 Tendon top connector
Tendon top connectors attach the tendons top ends to the hull.
In most cases, the tendons are attached to the outside the
hull and below the water line. The tendon load is transferred
into the top connector by a hydraulically operated clamp.
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
Tension Leg Platform (TLP) 7
This clamp resembles a segmented nut. To release the clamp,
the segments disengage from the thread of the tendon’s
LAJ. The tendon lengths are adjusted by opening the clamp,
ballasting the vessel to the desired draft, and then closing the
clamp. As for the bottom connector, the tendon top connector
incorporates a flexible element that accommodates the tilting
of the tendon relative to the tendon porch.
Two of the early TLPs had the tendon top connections
inside the columns and above the water surface. This makes
the top connectors accessible for inspection. However, these
designs require additional tendon cross load bearings at the
tendon exit locations from the columns. It also complicates
tendon installation. Today, internal tendon top connectors
are considered obsolete. Part of the tendon top connector
assembly is also the tendon tension measurement system.
5.3 TLP topside
The topside, also referred to as deck, sits on top of the
columns. It is designed as a separate structural component.
This allows the hull and topside to be fabricated concurrently
and in different fabrication yards, which shortens the fabri-
cation schedule.
The functions and subsystems housed in the topside largely
depend on the purpose of the platform. Oil and gas produc-
tion platforms typically have living quarters, a helicopter
landing pad (helideck), and a production plant. If the plat-
form is used for drilling, completion, or work- over of wells,
a drill rig is also required on the topside.
The architecture of the topside can be either integrated or
modular. An integrated topside is built as a single unit. It has
the equipment fitted into the interstitial space of the struc-
tural frame. Interconnections between different equipment
are completed in the fabrication yard prior to load-out. The
structure of an integrated deck may be an open truss design
or a plated box girder design.
In a modular topside architecture, components and equip-
ment are combined to functional subassemblies, called
modules. Each module has its own structural frame and can
be loaded out separately. To integrate the topside with the
hull, individual modules are separately lifted into place.
Once the modules are assembled, the interconnections
between the modules are completed.
5.4 TLP well system
The well system encompasses the equipment used for well
control and for transfer of fluids between the platform and
the seabed. Its principal components are the risers, which
are conduits that carry the well fluids from the well to the
platform. The following description refers to a top-tension
8 Offshore
riser system as it is used on TLPs. Catenary risers are also
sometimes used on TLPs but are not described here. (The
reader is referred to Risers Introduction; Steel Catenary
Riser SCR’s; Top Tension Risers TTR’s; Drilling Risers
& Well Intervention for a more complete treatise on the
subject of marine risers.)
Dry-tree risers carry the full well pressure up to the plat-
form where the production tree is located. During normal
operation of a TLP, the riser system remains connected to
the wells in all weather conditions. Should the risers fail, a
subsurface safety valve located below the mudline will close
the well.
A typical stack-up of a dry-tree riser includes a wellhead
connector, a riser midsegment, and a top section (Mercier
et al., 1991). The wellhead connector is a releasable mech-
anism that ties the riser to the wellhead. It transitions into
a tapered riser stress joint that accommodates angular riser
movements.
The riser midsegment extends from the tapered stress joint
to the TLP. It comprises of production tubing inside an
outer casing. The well fluids are carried in the production
tubing while the casing is a redundant pressure barrier. Some
designs use two concentric casings for added safety.
The riser top section includes a hydro-pneumatic riser
tensioner that keeps the riser under tension while allowing
it to move vertically relative to the deck. In some designs,
the risers are routed through guide tubes at the keel elevation
of the hull. On top of each riser is the assembly of main
well control valves, called production tree or Christmas tree.
It is connected by flexible jumper lines to a deck-mounted
manifold.
Drilling risers are very similar to production risers except
that the inner most pipe is a drill pipe instead of production
tubing. On top of the riser stack is a blow-out preventer
(BOP) instead of a Christmas tree. The BOP is a safety device
that rapidly seals the well should the release of well fluids
become imminent during drilling or well maintenance. In
some designs, the BOP is located on the seabed and not on
deck of the TLP.
6 TLP INSTALLATION
6.1 Hull-to-topside integration
It is preferred to join the topside with the hull quay-side of
a fabrication yard. This may not always be possible due to
limitation in water depth or in crane lifting capacity or due
to the lack of hull stability. In such cases, the operation has
to be performed near shore of offshore.
Joining the topside with the hull is normally done by
crane lift. Currently, only topsides up to about 13,000 tonnes
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
can be lifted in one piece due to crane capacity limitation.
Larger topsides require multiple lifts thus dictating a modular
topside design.
For some TLPs, the topsides were joined with the hull by
the float-over method. For float-over, the topside is loaded
onto a transportation barge and floated over the ballasted TLP
hull. The weight of the topside is then transferred from the
barge to the hull by deballasting the hull. Topside float-over
is less restrictive to the topside weight but it is depending on
a suitable near-shore site with sufficient water depth.
6.2 Foundation installation
Foundation piles are lowered to the seabed and driven into the
soil by means of a subsea hammer. For designs incorporating
a foundation template, the template is lowered into place first
and then the piles are driven through the template sleeves.
Piles and template are then connected by grouting.
Gravity foundations are lowered into place and become
embedded into the seabed under their own weight. The
seabed penetration may be assisted by pumps that create a
suction pressure underneath the foundation. In that way, the
horizontal alignments of the foundation can be controlled. In
some designs, solid ballast is added on top of the foundation,
once its target embedment is achieved.
6.3 Tendon installation
Tendons can be installed prior to the hull or together with the
hull. The former method is called preinstallation, while the
latter is called coinstallation. Tendon preinstallation aims to
minimize the time for making the TLP storm safe.
For preinstallation, all tendons are installed some weeks
before the TLP arrives at the site. The tendons are assem-
bled one by one by sequentially stacking one tendon segment
on the next and making up their connection. This operation
is normally performed by means of a dedicated installation
vessel. Once assembled, each tendon is fixed to its foun-
dation. Then a temporary buoyancy module is attached to
the upper portion of the tendon just below the LAJ. The
purpose of the temporary buoyancy module is to keep the
tendon upright and tensioned until the TLP is hooked-up to
the tendons.
For coinstallation, four tendons are assembled in the same
way as for preinstallation. Each of the tendons is then hung
off from a different corner of the TLP, while the TLP is held
laterally in place by tugs. Then, the four tendons are stabbed
into their pile receptacles and locked in place. At this stage,
the TLP is storm safe and the remaining tendons are added.
When all tendons are installed, the TLP is deballasted to
achieve the desired tendon pretension.
 Tension Leg Platform (TLP) 9

6.4 TLP hook-up REFERENCES

This step is only required if the tendons were preinstalled. Alves, L., Goulart, R., Mourelle, M., and Poll, P. (2010) TLP—A
To connect the TLP with the preinstalled tendons, the TLP Dry Tree Solution for Pre-salt in Santos Basin. Proceedings of the
is brought over the tendons and ballasted down until the top ASME 2010 29th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore
of the tendons reach through the tendon porches. Then, the and Arctic Engineering, OMAE2010, June 6–11, Shanghai, China,
tendon top connectors are locked and the TLP is deballasted OMAE2010-20656.
to achieve the desired tendon pretension. Armstrong, E. (1930) Seadrome. US Patent No. 1,892,125, granted
December 27, 1932.
Hull stability is an important consideration for TLP instal-
Barltrop, N. (1998) Floating Structures: A Guide for Design and
lation. If the integrated vessel is not stable without tendons,
Analysis, Oilfield Publications Limited, pp. 11-4–11-6.
the TLP cannot free-float to the integration site. In such case,
Bone, D. (2012) The Use of Unmanned Production Buoys to
the installation procedure needs to be engineered for the Develop Marginal or Submarginal Stranded Fields or End of Life
specific situation. A common solution is to use temporary Hydrocarbon Resources. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology
stability tanks attached to the hull prior to the hook-up to the Conference, Houston, Texas, April 30–May 3, 2012, OTC 23494.
tendons. Chakrabarti, S. (2005) Handbook of Offshore Engineering, vol. 1,
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Demirbilek, Z. (1989) Tension Leg Platform: An Overview of the
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Concept, Analysis, and Design, American Society of Civil Engi-
neers, New York, NY.
Dieuleveult, U. (1889) Floating Telegraph Station. US Patent No.
BOPD barrels of oil per day
398,035, granted February 19, 1889.
TLP tension leg platform
DNV (2014) DNV Recommended Practice. DNV-RP-C205, Environ-
TTR top tension riser mental Conditions and Environmental Loads, April 2014.
Donelly, A. (1890) Marine Electric Light. US Patent No. 424,544,
granted April 1, 1890.
GLOSSARY D’Souza, R., Aggarwal, R., and Basu, S. (2013) The Tension Leg
Platform—A Retrospective. Proceedings of the 18th Offshore
Dry-tree Oil or gas well master control valve Symposium, Texas Section of the Society of Navel Architects and
assembly situated above the water Marine Engineers, Houston, February 7, 2013.
surface. Godfrey, D., Haney, J., Pippin, A., Stuart, C., Johnston, D., and
Floating system A plant designed to operate in a marine Orlean, R. (1997) The Mars Project Overview. Proceedings of the
Offshore Technology Conference. Houston, Texas, May 5–8, 1997,
environment in a buoyantly supported OTC 8368.
state. Horton, E. (1969) Tension Leg Offshore Marine Apparatus. US
Offshore A facility located in the ocean, typically Patent Application Ser. No. 821,275, May 2, 1969.
platform used for oil and gas exploration and Knapp, R. (1962) Stable Floating Foundation. US Patent No.
production. 3,154,039, granted October 27, 1964.
Tendon Vertical tension member, used to anchor Leffler, W., Pattarozzi, R., and Sterling, G. (2011) Deepwater
a tension leg platform to the seabed. Petroleum Exploration & Production, PennWell Corp, Tulsa, OK.
TLWP Acronym for tension leg wellhead Mercier, J., Birell, N., Chivvis, J., and Hunter, A. (1991) Tension Leg
platform, a TLP with the primary Platform—Progress and Prospects. SNAME Transactions, Vol. 99,
purpose to support wellheads. 1991, pp. 249–279.
Top tension Tensioned vertical conduit for Mitcha Jr. J., Morrison, C., and de Oliviera, J. (1996) The Heidrun
Field—Development Overview. Proceedings of the Offshore Tech-
riser transporting fluids between the seabed
nology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 6–9, 1996, OTC8084.
and a floating offshore platform.
Muehlner, E. and McBee, H. (2013) Taking TLPs to new depths. E&P
Magazine, November 1, 2013,
RELATED ARTICLES Noble, P. (2013) Floating Systems in the Offshore Oil and Gas
Industry. Presentation to UK Collegium, SNAME Western Euro-
pean Section, October 14, 2013, London, UK.
Floater Introduction
Blue H Group (2015) Floating Platform Technology for Offshore
Spar Wind Energy, http://www.bluehgroup.com (accessed 24 March
FPSO 2015).
Semisubmersibles Schempf, J. (2007) Pioneering Offshore: The Early Years, PennWell
Top Tension Risers TTR’s Custom Publishing, Tulsa, OK.

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
10 Offshore
Schofield, T. (1860) Bridge Pier. US Patent No. 27,571, granted
March 20, 1860.
Schurman, G. and Kidder, R. (1955) Anchoring System for Floating
Drill Structure. US Patent No. 2,939,291, granted June 7, 1960.
Wilhoit, L. and Supan, C. (2010) 2010 Worldwide Survey of
TLPs, TLWPs. Offshore Magazine, February 10, 2010, Avail-
able at:, www.offshore-mag/maps-posters.html/0219OS-TLP-
Poster012510Ads.pdf.
Willis, C. and Willis, D. (1948) Marine Well Drilling Apparatus. US
Patent No. 2,777,669, granted January 15, 1957.
Yang, C. and Ren, M. (2013) TLP hull structural design and analysis,
Journal of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 11(4), 2013,
35–40.
FURTHER READING
American Petroleum Institute (2010) Planning, Design, and
Constructing Tension Leg Platforms. API Recommended Practice
2T, 3rd edn, American Petroleum Institute.
Boles, B. and Mayhall, G. (2006) Kizomba A and B: Project
Overview. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, May 1–4, 2006, OTC 17915.
Curtis, L. (2013) How conoco developed the tension leg platform.
Ocean Industry, 19, 35–46.
Davies, K., Leverette, S., and Spillane, M. (1994) Ringing Response
of TLP and GBS Platforms. Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference on Behavior of Offshore Structures (BOSS), vol. 2,
pp. 569–585.
Ellis, N., Tetlow, J., Anderson, F., Lithgow, S., and Woodhead, A.
(1982) Hutton TLP Vessel—Structural Configuration and Design
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe400
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
Features. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, May 3–6, 1982, OTC 4427.
Enze, C., Brasted, L., Arnold, P., Smith, J., Breaux, J., and Luyties, W.
(1994) Auger TLP Design, Fabrication and Installation Overview.
Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
Texas, May 2–5, 1994, OTC 7615.
Kibbee, S. and Snell, D. (2002) New Directions in TLP Technology.
Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
Texas, May 6–9, 2002, OTC 14175.
Koon, J. and Langewis, C. (1990) Jolliet: The Project. Proceedings of
the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 7–10,
1990, OTC 6359.
Koon, J., Heijermans, B., and Wybro, P. (2002) Development of the
Prince Field. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, May 6–9, 2002, OTC 14173.
Ølen, L. and Sandnes, J. (1988) Deepwater North Sea Development:
Snorre Field Concept. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston, Texas. May 2–5, 1988, OTC 5830.
Paulling, J.R. and Horton, E.E. (1970) Analysis of the Tension Leg
Stable Platform. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Confer-
ence, Houston, Texas, April 22–24, 1970, OTC 1263.
Rainey, R. (2002) Brutus Project Overview. Proceedings of the
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 6–9, 2002,
OTC 13990.
Scott, S. (2002) Typhoon Development Project Overview. Proceed-
ings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May
6–9, 2002, OTC 14122.
Wetch, S. and Wybro, P. (2004) West Seno: Facilities Approach,
Innovation, and Benchmarking. Proceedings of the Offshore Tech-
nology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 3–6, 2004, OTC 16521.