DNV cutting edge projects 2012

CUTTING EDGE VIEW

DNV 27 Cutting Edge projects 2012

02 CUTTING EDGE

CONTENTS

MARITIME & CLASS p 32–51

34 Bunkering LNG as fuel for ships 36 LNG bunkering in Australian ports feasible 38 LNG case study in Baltic container market39 Gas carrier research & development40 Arctic shipping: Updating ice load tools42 Nauticus Hull – capturing engineering knowledge43 Nauticus Air – and environmental benchmarking44 Particulate matter – getting the whole picture 46 A closer look at sulphur scrubbers 48 Propulsion machinery performance investigated50 Powering ships with DC power51 Making hybrid ship design easier

SERVICE DIRECTORS p 6–7

FURTHER ON p 52–53

OIL & GAS FRONTIERS p 8–31

10 The remaining life of offshore assets12 Pipeline Recommended Practices get updated14 MARV proves itself to the pipeline industry16 Submarine pipeline systems17 The life of a well18 Measuring risk in real time20 Blow-Out Prevention (BOP) meets automation22 Major accident risk revisited23 Safe operations in the Arctic frontier24 Onshore pipeline verification arrives25 Recommendations for risk management of shale gas26 An offshore oil rig for the future28 Offshore wind turbine vessels Improving29 Jack-ups: Rewriting users’ rule experience30 When hot repairs should go cold

CUTTING EDGE 03

CUTTING EDGE VIEW 2012

That is because we believe that colleagues working closely with our customers all over the world have the keenest appreciation for our customers’ needs. As a consequence, we can and do address important industry issues as they arise.

In 2012, 166 of these project ideas got realized. We think that sharing knowledge is a key driver to success. This Cutting Edge View is meant to be a sample of how we are focusing that knowledge. We have selected 27 projects within the categories, Maritime & Class and Oil & Gas, to present in this publication.

We welcome your responses, and invite you to contact us, whether it is to provide input, get more information, or join us in our efforts. Together, we will continue to solve industry challenges and lead the way.

Contact [email protected] for more information or for an overview of ongoing Joint Industry Project initiatives.

EVERY YEAR WE INVITE OUR STAFF TO PROPOSE NEW IDEAS FOR TECHNOLOGY AND SERVICE DEVELOPMENT.

04 CUTTING EDGE

INTRODUCTIONMANAGING RISK HAS MANY FACETS

Henrik O. Madsen, CEO

Managing risk has many facets. While most of our customer projects focus on managing the risks of building a new ship or safeguarding an existing offshore structure, our Cutting Edge projects are different. They are established on the premise that managing today’s risks is not enough – we also have to manage tomorrow’s risks. Since our customers are constantly moving into new territories with more complex technologies operat-ing in more challenging environments, they are facing an uncertain risk picture. Our Cutting Edge projects are designed to keep us in the forefront of technology development and qualification, enabling us to help our customers identify and manage their risk frontiers.

Growing demand for energy, combined with an increased focus on environmentally friendly technologies, drives a constant need for innovation. At DNV, we invest heavily in research and innovation to enhance and develop services, technologies, software, rules and industry standards in the energy and maritime sectors. Many of the technology solutions developed by DNV have helped define internationally recognized standards.

Our efforts are implemented worldwide. As a knowledge-based company, our prime assets are the creativity, knowledge, and expertise of more than 10,000 employees from more than 85 nations. A selection of recent projects is presented in the following pages, illustrating the depth and extent of our work. They are based on ideas from creative individuals in our worldwide organization, generated by interaction with, and the involvement of, a number of our key customers. We are excited and proud of the results, and look forward to continuing our work with the industry to lead the way.

Happy reading!

CUTTING EDGE: 05

6%n The long term perspective DNV Research and Innovation looks into the future, focusing on long term strategic research programs to acquire new knowledge and competence.

n Challenging the industry DNV conducts short-term, intense projects where project teams are taken out of production to work full-time to answer specific challenges. These “extraordinary innovation projects” are deep-dives into real industry challenges, addressed by innovatively combining existing technologies with concepts that can be further matured by the industry.

n Increased efficiency DNV’s Platform initiatives are large development programs initiated by DNV management. These initiatives aim to improve our competitive edge through process and efficiency enhancements and through development of our IT and production systems.

n Responding to expressed customer needs DNV’s Cutting Edge portfolio is a “bottom-up” innovation initia-tive in which ideas for development projects are collected from creative DNV employees from around the world. The projects in the resulting portfolio aim at developing services that add value to our clients by collaborating with them, and focusing on solving their real-life challenges.

n Technology development DNV’s Technology Leadership is centred on its core technical disciplines, and is driven by our subject matter experts. The objective of the initiative is to maintain and further develop state-of-the-art technology.

This publication showcases a selection from DNV’s 2012 Cutting Edge and Technology Leadership projects. Our goal is to give you a taste of the range of exciting development initiatives carried out by DNV around the world, just in the last year.

Fo r almo s t 150 yea r s , DNV ha s been mee ting cu s tome r s’ and so cie t y ’s need s, g rowing th rough it s s t rong

vision, pu rpo s e and value s. Ou r s e r vice s a re to iden tif y, a s s e s s and manage ris k s to c r ea t e and p ro te c t

value fo r ou r cu s tome r s and so cie t y a t la rge. We build the s e s e r vice s on ou r s t rong ba s e o f te chnologie s,

ou r compe ten cie s, and ou r independen ce and third pa r t y role. DNV ha s e s t ablished thou s and s o f initia -

tive s fo r innova tion and te chnology developmen t, fulfilling sp e cific and alway s fo rwa rd -looking pu rpo s e s.

INNOVATION IN DNV

Research and innovation

Challenging concepts

Increased efficiency

We invest 6% of our revenue in research and development

In 2012 we ran 29 Joint Industry Projects within the Cutting Edge portfolio

Service development

Technology development

29 JIPNumber of projects within the categories

06 CUTTING EDGE

We focused in 2012 on assisting the industry in complying

with an increasing number of environmental regulatory

requirements. By the end of January, 2015, the permitted

levels of sulphur in marine fuels, or emissions from ships’

engines, will fall in emission-control areas. To comply with

these changes, ship owners need to make some key business

decisions: should they opt for vessels that use low-sulphur

fuels, should they install exhaust scrubber systems on their

ships or should they invest in gas-powered tonnage?

The Ballast Water Management Convention is expected to

enter into force within the next two years and require all

ships and offshore structures to clean their ballast water.

This will have a major effect on operations and involve

major investments in technology. DNV has become the

industry’s preferred technical and advisory partner in

ballast water management.

It is not only in the area of environmental protection that

we see new regulations coming into effect; in August,

2013, the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) will enter

into force. DNV Development trained MLC inspectors in

2012, in preparation for this new Convention, which aims

at providing decent working and living conditions for

seafarers onboard ships.

DNV has developed a Port State Control App for smart-

phones. The Port State APP enables customers to under-

take pre-PSC checks, using standard checklists. This service

will reduce down time, create hassle-free operation without

detentions, reduce the cost of delays and minimize unin-

tentional disturbances in daily operations. Our focus on

port state has shown results, as our customer are amongst

those with the fewest detentions in both the Paris and

Tokyo MOUs.

We bring our expertise in class services to a global clientele

to help them manage their compliance needs and prepare

for a bright future, for our customers, the broader industry

community, and the world.

IN A WORLD OF INCREASING ENERGY DEMAND, BALANCED BY STRICTER ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS AND HIGHER COST, DNV PROVIDES KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIENCE AND SERVICES TO ITS CUSTOMERS.

CLASSIFICATION SERVICES

Geir Dugstad Service Director

“We assist our customers to ensure compliance with conventions and regulations.

DNV delivers verification services in all phases of a

project: concept, design, operation and de-commis-

sioning. We make our verification services transparent

in the DNV Service Specifications, framework and

activity.

DNV has developed a range of Offshore Standards and

Recommended Practices, together with the industry,

to set requirements and offer guidelines based on new

technology and the state of knowledge. One example

is our Offshore Standard for Submarine Pipeline which

is the leading international technical standard for pipe-

lines. This offshore standard is supported by a number

of Recommended Practices. The DNV Offshore Service

Specification for Certification and Verification of Pipe-

lines has been adopted as the industry standard.

Lately, DNV has successfully developed service docu-

ments also for onshore applications and, in 2012,

developed a DNV Service specification for Verification

of Onshore Pipelines. Historically, onshore pipeline

systems are normally not subject to independent veri-

fication. However, there is an increasing need to

involve independent verifiers to provide operators

VERIFICATIONSERVICES

IN AN EVOLVING MARKET, THE OIL & GAS INDUSTRY FACES MANY RISKS DURING DESIGN AND OPERATIONS OF THEIR FACILITIES. BY OFFERING HIGHLY TECHNICAL COMPETENCE AND DELIVERING RISK BASED VERIFICA-TION SERVICES, DNV HELPS OUR CUSTOMERS MANAGE THESE RISKS.

“Customers are drawing on the extensive experience and technical expertise of our employees.

CUTTING EDGE 07

Close collaboration with the industries has been key to the results we have created.

Astri GaardeService Director

“

The maritime industry is rapidly embracing new and

more environmentally friendly technology. The risks

associated with these opportunities need to be managed,

and last year DNV engaged in a number of technology

projects focusing on more environmentally friendly fuel,

propulsion and ship design. One good example is the

project we did on SOx abatement technologies, to use

scrubbers to remove sulphur from fuel oil exhaust. We

also did several projects focusing on LNG, including on

LNG bunkering and on the design of innovative ship

concepts using LNG-fuelled engines.

When we look further north, sustainable operations

become more important, and we engaged together with

other industry partners in Joint Industry Projects focusing

on Safe Arctic Operations.

Our risk management and technology qualification

services for the oil & gas industry are continuously

working to make the industry safer, as the industry’s focus

is still to regain confidence after the Macondo accident.

One project we delivered last year focused on establishing

safety indicators giving early warnings when things are

not in place. And, as existing installations and pipelines

grow older, managing the risk of degradation was another

key focus area of our studies last year.

We will bring our knowledge from all these development

projects into our advisory services, managing the risks of

today and tomorrow for our customers and the broader

industry community.

SAFEGUARDING OUR INDUSTRIES AND MANAGING THEIR RISKS AS THEY MOVE INTO NEW FRONTIERS IS THE GOAL OF ALL THE UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS DNV ACCOMPLISHED THIS PAST YEAR, THE BEST OF WHICH ARE PRESENTED HERE.

ADVISORY SERVICES

Sverre Alvik Service Director

with the required level of confidence that their facili-

ties are compliant.

In 2012, DNV also set the standard for Shale Gas Risk

management by launching a Recommended Practice

for the entire life cycle of shale gas extraction based

on risk management principles.

This addresses public concern about the consequences

of shale gas operations. We believe our Recommended

Practice will contribute to increasing trust and confi-

dence among all stakeholders. These efforts demonstrate

how we bring knowledge forward to address the needs

of our customers and the broader industry community.

image size: 540x210mm

08 CUTTING EDGE > OIL & GAS FRONTIERS

OIL & GAS FRONTIERS > CUTTING EDGE 09

OIL & GAS FRONTIERSChanges in the oil & gas industry are taking place at increasingly rapid pace, and projects today will need to be robust against the changing requirements of tomorrow.

Within only a few years, the shale revolution has changed and will continue to change the world energy supply and demand profiles. However, environmental risk in addition to trust from authorities and local communities are major issues that must be handled. Another example is projects targeted in the Arctic, seen as the last frontier for the industry. Here, new technologies need to be developed to meet the additional risks.

At the same time, global oil & gas infrastructure continues to expand, often around existing hubs, thereby further extending field life often well beyond the initial design life of assets. Therefore, continued safe operation of mature assets against a verified level of integrity is going to be critical, particularly for offshore assets and for wells where life-cycle integrity is more difficult to measure.

Reducing the risk of major accidents is intrinsic to the license to operate.

Remaining Life, Remaining life assessment, Offshore assets, Fixed offshore platforms, Ageing units, Life extension

AGE ING OFFSHORE TODAY

Ageing assets form a substantial world market,

as more offshore assets – in all geographic areas

– reach or surpasstheir design life-span. Life

extension is a top priority. For example, hun-

dreds of Fixed Offshore Platforms (FOUs) in

the Middle East are approaching or have

exceeded their design life. North Sea offshore

production facilities, built in the ‘70s and ‘80s,

had a design life of 25 years and are over 20

years old. The average age of Norway’s offshore

installations is near 25 years, past the intended

productive lifespan. Similar situations exist

in the U.S., Brazil, and in South East Asia.

PROJECT WORK

This project took ongoing life extension assess-

ment techniques and created a comprehensive

Remaining Life Assessment (RLA), unified

across the various facilities and elements of

offshore assets. The DNV Abu Dhabi office

took the lead, coordinating, analyzing and

compiling the methodology. The methodology

is derived from DNV best practices and other

relevance references from outside DNV. Subject

matter experts contributed from DNV offices

around the globe.

REPORT RESULTS

The report captures the methodology for the

assessment of remaining life for the structure,

pipeline, topside and wells of an ageing FOU.

The methodology provides the basis for techno-

economical assessments upon which decisions

can now be made for the safe extension of FOUs

beyond their original design life. The compre-

hensive RLA also analyzes the status of the instal-

lation, its associated facilities and the investment

needed to ensure that the extension period is

economically efficient.

The report proposes that at the start of a life

extension assessment, a high level risk assess-

ment of all major components be undertaken

to identify critical and focus areas for further

detailed assessment. Future cost analysis forms

a part of evaluation. A Regulation Gap Analysis

is then carried out to identify current regula-

tory gaps and assess the risks taken when oper-

ating with gaps. The critical equipment and

facilities identified through as-is condition

assessment may need detailed evaluation to

Ageing assets pose challenges to oil & gas when operated past their design life. With the

high level of oil & gas prices on the world market, buoyed by the lack of any viable alter-

native source to satiate growing energy demand, operators are seeking to maintain pro-

duction from existing facilities for longer than their intended design periods. While they

endeavour to do so, the risk to safety, reliability, and the environment need careful

consideration.

DNV has various services tailored to this ever growing market. However, few docunents

addressed the requirements of a fixed offshore asset comprehensively. Driven by the need

to capture life extension requirements of all important facilities under one umbrella, DNV

has now created a comprehensive methodology for life extension of fixed offshore units.

In his present role, Anupam drives the DNV Verification, Certification and Asset Integrity Management work in the Middle East – India market. He is responsible for the commercial and technical delivery of oil & gas projects.

Anupam has more than 21 years’ experience in core energy engineer-ing industries including oil & gas, as well as in business and engineering management, the last three years located at Abu Dhabi for DNV.

Before joining DNV, he was respon-sible for the development of the oil & gas business in the Middle East and Africa regions for Lloyds Regis-ter EMEA, where he was involved in several oil & gas and maritime projects. Anupam has technical expertise encompassing safety case verification, design of structure, pressure equipment, lifting equip-ment, marine equipment and Asset Integrity Management, among other areas.

PROJECT MANAGERANUPAM GHOSAL

THE REMAINING LIFE OF OFFSHORE ASSETS

Illustration of the life extension process

Degradationmodel 1

Installation

Life extensionevaluation

Originalservice life

Extendedservice life

Newdesign life

Originaldesign life

Degradationmodel 2

Acceptancelevel

Integrityassessment


arrive at actions and recommendations for life

extension. For topside facilities of fixed off-

shore structures, the methodology suggests

appropriate analysis for life extension of static

equipment, rotating equipment, electrical and

instrumentation components.

The structures of fixed offshore platforms are

constantly exposed to a hostile environment.

The approach detailed in the RLA identifies

the structural asset reliability, integrity, vulner-

ability and risks associated with safe operations

that need to be managed before it is approved

for operating beyond its design life.

The methodology also addresses pipelines,

addressing potential problems by using a variety

of engineering methods to predict the remain-

ing safe lifespan. These methods include both

simple and complex fitness for purpose analyses

as well as other care and maintenance

elements.

Following the Macondo accident, a greater

focus on safe drilling and well operations is

present in the industry. Traditionally, well

integrity management has been conducted

independently from integrity management of

other assets. Only in recent years have operators

started to use systematic integrity management

principles. The RLA developed by DNV pre-

sents a recommended approach to integrated

well integrity management and risk based

inspection. The methodology presented cap-

tures the practices that DNV has adopted to

help global operators maintain production

from existing facilities for longer periods,

safely and efficiently.

RESOURCES RESOURCES

LEADERSHIP

RESULTS

People and organisation

Materials

Information and IT systems

People and organisation

Materials

Information and IT systems

ContinualImprovement

Act

Plan

Do

Check

Overall framework for an Asset Integrity Management System.

ASSET INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, ORGANIZATION, REPORTING

SAFETY BARRIERS

Technical integrity:

Understanding of POF for Critical Equipment and implement appropriate Measure

Operational integrity:

Monitoring andRecording of process parameters in order to maintain the designed operating envelope

Design integrity:

Identification of operational risk early in the design phase in order to implement suitable measures in future

Integrity Management

OIL & GAS FRONTIERS > CUTTING EDGE 1 1

Felix is currently involved in the implementation and development of DNV’s Pipeline Integrity Management services at the Operations Technology unit at DNV Høvik. His work includes the development of Recommended Practices for integrity management of submarine pipeline systems, the development of risk based inspection programmes, and integrity assessments.

Felix is a Principal Engineer with a specific work interest in asset integrity services including Risk Based Inspec-tion (RBI) of offshore topsides static mechanical equipment and Pipeline Integrity Management. Before joining DNV in 1998, he worked for two years in the Norwegian Army Mate-rial Command in projects aimed at assisting them in evaluating opera-tional and maintenance concerns while developing and acquiring complex military systems. Felix is a System Engineer with his Master’s degree from Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Sweden (1996).

Corrosion, Corrosion monitoring systems, Submarine pipeline corrosion, Key performance indicators, Integrity management, DNV-RP-F101 “Corroded Pipelines”, DNV-RP-F116 “Integrity Management of Submarine Pipeline Systems”, DNV-OS-F101 “Submarine Pipeline Systems”, Joint Industry Project, JIP, Recommended Practice

IT’S CALLED INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT

For decades, key performance indicators (KPIs)

have been used to ensure the integrity of oil &

gas installations. KPIs include such things as

the number of failures, violations, and inspec-

tions, and are usually expressed in diagrams

– trends and ‘traffic lights’. Yet, KPIs have not

been applied to submarine pipelines as often

as to processing facilities.

Potential KPIs related to managing corrosion

threats have been one of the subjects of a DNV

Joint Industry Project (JIP), with a revision to

DNV-RP-F116 “Integrity Management of Sub-

marine Pipeline Systems”.

LEADERSHIP PROJECT THINKING

Potential KPIs have been identified based on

a combined integrity management and barrier

concept. In this context, barriers include any

kind of measure put in place to prevent a haz-

ardous event, as well as any measure that breaks

the chain of events to prevent or minimize

consequence escalation should the hazardous

event take place. Such measures can be physi-

cal and/or non-physical (e.g. organisational).

The resulting set of potential KPIs can be used

as input when choosing indicators to be

included in existing or planned company KPI

systems, and tracked to actual pipeline systems

for follow-up.

CORROSION IN FOCUS

A second element of the work in this area

involved revisions to DNV-RP-F101 “Corroded

Pipelines”. Another DNV JIP has been contrib-

uting with significant input since 2011. The

revisions improve guidance on how to account

for system effects, how to perform probabilistic

assessments, and include a new assessment

methodology for long axial corrosion. The new

RP will reduce conservatism in current methods

for assessing interacting defects, while permit-

ting pipelines to achieve full compliance with

the broader DNV Standard, DNV-OS-F101

‘Submarine Pipeline Systems’.

SHARING FORWARD

DNV and its partners will now go forward to

craft the final RPs – following numerous work-

shops held in connection with their develop-

ment. With further cooperation, constructive

discussions and key experts, the last phase will

include an external hearing process for all

interested parties before new revisions are

issued later in 2013. This effort addresses key

industry concerns, and is a welcome addition to

DNV’s leadership in the continuous improve-

ment of quality, safety and efficient operations.

Corrosion of submarine pipelines in the North Sea is the most common threat for loss of

pressure containment in oil pipeline operations. The industry’s experience shows that pipe-

line failures are often due to a lack of sound corrosion monitoring systems. Such systems

are an important part of an integrity management system, a system that must support

management oversight. Two DNV Recommended Practices (RPs) were revised in 2012 in

order to do a better job of assisting the industry in integrity management and corrosion

assessments, with publication expected in 2013.

PIPELINE RECOMMENDED PRACTICES GET UPDATED

PROJECT MANAGERF E L I X SAINT-VICTOR

C A U S E

3

C A U S E

2

C A U S E

1

CONSE-QUENCE

3

CONSE-QUENCE

2

CONSE-QUENCE

1

LOSS OF CONTAINMENT

PRESSURECONTAINMENTAND PRIMARYPROTECTION

PIPELINEINTEGRITYCONTROL

OPERATIO-NAL/PROCESSCONTROL

PIPELINEINTEGRITYIMPROVE-MENT

Barriers to prevent hazardous event

LEAKDETECTIONANDEMERGENCYSHUTDOWN

OPERATIONAL/PROCESS CONTROL

COMMUNI-CATION, COMBAT, DIVERSION AND RESCUE

PIPELINEREPAIRSYSTEMS

Barriers to control consequences and effects



“To be a surrealist… means barring from your mind

all remembrance of what you have seen, and being always on the lookout

for what has never been.”

RENÉ MAGRITTE, QUOTED IN TIME, APRIL 21, 1947

Gerry is a Senior Principal Engineer in the Materials and Corrosion Technology Center, and works with DNV R&I to develop MARVTM into a commercially viable risk manage-ment tool and to create superusers in the DNV operating units globally.

Gerry started as a Senior Metallurgist at Fokker Aircraft working on the development of hybrid aircraft com-ponents. In 1980, he began work at Battelle Memorial Institute on materi-als and corrosion in coal-fired power plants, before he moved to CC Technologies in 1990. He became part of a core team that grew CC Technologies from a small testing laboratory to a company that com-manded a significant portion of the North American onshore pipeline research and engineering market. Following their acquisition by DNV in 2005, where Gerry was active in the integration process, he has worked on structural integrity of oil & gas pipelines and upstream equipment.

MARV, Pipelines, Bayes theorem analysis, Risk modelling, Risk assessment, Pipelines, Joint Industry Project, JIP

MARV PROVES ITSELF TO THE PIPELINE INDUSTRY

PROJECT MANAGERG ERRY KOCH

PIPELINE RISKS

Pipelines continue to be the safest way to trans-

port liquids and gas. However, pipeline acci-

dents do occur and pose considerable risk,

threatening the public and the environment.

With the ageing of both onshore and offshore

pipelines, the likelihood of pipeline failure is

increasing, and pipelines that were once remote

are now often encroached upon by other oper-

ations. As a result of the increasing likelihood

of pipeline incidents and the potentially severe

consequences of these to safety, health and the

environment, operating pipelines must be

better understood, and risks managed in a

more comprehensive and sophisticated manner.

MARV™ stands for Multi-Analytic Risk

Visualization, and gives pipeline operators the

ability to predict and visualize significant cur-

rent and future risks to pipelines. The tool uses

the Bayes theorem in its network model – ena-

bling this prediction, drawing from theoretical

models and empirical learning – and provides

a robust probabilistic method of assessing risk

in conditions of uncertainty.

DEALING WITH DATA

In order to develop a truly comprehensive risk

assessment method, it is critical to use ‘all’

available information about a pipeline. Many

types and sources of information exist and not

all information is readily available. The types

of information regarding a pipeline can be

grouped into three (3) main categories: inci-

dent databases, time-based data, and geographi-

cally based information. The MARV™ tool

box can interface with a wide variety of data

sources, including unreliable data sources or

data that is changing over time.

Risk on a pipeline is location dependent.

Therefore any risk assessment tool must be

able to manage risk by location. Past failure

data alone is not sufficient as the environment

around pipelines and the operating conditions

change with time. Predicting future risk of

pipeline failure requires connecting potential

causative factors in a quantitative manner to

failure processes. Once such data is analyzed, it

is integrated into different data sets as input to

risk assessment. Risks are then presented in a

visually comprehensible manner.

In 2012, the MARV™ tool was presented to the

global pipeline industry through workshops

organized by local DNV units in Houston,

Columbus, Tulsa, Abu Dhabi, Rio de Janeiro,

London, Aberdeen, Groningen, and Oslo.

Industry feedback was very favourable, and

their participation in validation work has made

it possible to now offer MARV modules on

current and future risks resulting from:

■n internal corrosion

■n external corrosion

■n stress-corrosion cracking, and

■n third-party damage.

GOOD VISUALIZATION

A good visualization tool is essential in a risk

management program. The MARV™ tool is

location and time specific, and shows the

results of the risk assessment in terms of both

risk probability and risk consequences. Further,

the tool makes it possible to drill down and

discover more detailed information. All num-

bers and calculations used to assess the risk can

be made available, if so desired. From a practical

standpoint, technological developments will

enable us to receive the information electroni-

cally via touch screen interfaces anywhere we go.

EXPANSION POTENTIAL

Now that the MARV™ pipeline risk tool has

been developed to the point that we can offer

the tool as a service to pipeline operators, the

global market outlook is very promising. The

risk tool will continuously be upgraded as the

Bayesian network continues to learn from the

various inputs. The tool will further take full

advantage of continuously improving informa-

tion and visualization technology. Further plans

are to combine advanced sensor technology

with MARV™, which will allow for real time

risk assessment and data management. And

while the MARV™ development has been

MARVTM is a DNV tool used to predict future risk to pipelines. Developed by DNV in 2011,

this risk information and management tool was introduced to the global pipeline industry

in 2012. Industry feedback was favourable and several pipeline operators agreed to work

with DNV to validate the tool using their actual pipeline data. Based on the successful

outcome of this validation work, DNV is ready to offer several MARV modules to pipeline

operators that will significantly improve their assessment of current and future risks.


focused on pipelines, the concept has a much

broader application potential. As was con-

cluded through a Business Model Canvas,

MARV™ can have a future application any-

where risk management is used, from pipe-

lines, offshore structures, wind farms, utilities,

and grid systems to healthcare, bio risk and

climate change. Hence, once MARV™ for

pipelines is fully ready for the pipeline market,

it will be transferred to DNV’s operating units,

and the MARV™ team will move on to the

next phase of MARV™ application, where risk

management and risk prediction is crucial.

WOR LD CLASS

This is an example of what happens when

DNV’s Research and Innovation Materials

Group works with stakeholders and DNV’s

operating units across the globe.

Results of a Bayesian calculation

Tempera-ture

pH

CO2 O2

ID

Lowestpoint

Pig Run

Sand

Flange or Valve

DiameterChange

Bend

T-Piece

SulfidesTempera-

tureHydro-carbon

Oxygen

Pipe inclanation

OilDensity Oil

Viscosity

OilVelocity

Water Cut

Fe2+

CorrosionRate

Acidic/alkiline...

PassiveFilm

CorrosionUnde...

Wall Lossin...

FlawDepth

BurstingPress...

Pipe Section

Fa...

+

......

...

S...

Pr...

Deposits

WaxDeposit

Asphalat.D...

OD SigmaPipewallThick...

OperatingPres...

FlawLength

Last FlawDepth

Galvanic Cell

LocalizedInhibi...

Oil type

Water Wetting

Water Layer Prob...

Sand Deposits

Total Velocity

GeometryCha...

GAB

Protection from...

Shelter Source ofEnergy

SRBpresence

GAnB

SRBConditions

SRBMIC

Microbio-logical...

FavourableEnvi...

Protection from...

Erosion

InhibitedCorros...

Wall Lossfrom...

LocalizedCorr...

...

CorrosionInhibi...

Chlorides

Slug Flow

H2S


Steinar is a Principal Specialist and lead within fracture mechanics including brittle and ductile fracture analyses and fatigue crack growth analyses. He has worked in the Mate-rials Laboratory since beginning at DNV in 2001. Steinar’s work also involves FE analyses, materials testing and probabilistic analyses. Work has focused on pipelines, but fracture evaluations are also undertaken for various components in pressure vessels, ship structures, jack-ups, valves, shackles, mooring sockets, processing plants and wind turbines. Additional work has focused on projects related to technology qualifi-cation and component testing. Steinar has worked on several suc-cessful and significant Joint Industry Projects.

Before joining DNV, Steinar worked at ABB Offshore Systems AS with mechanical design. He holds a Mechanical Engineering degree from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).

Submarine pipeline systems, Fracture mechanics analysis, ECA, DNV-OS-F101, JIP, Joint industry project, Oil & gas industry pipelines, Pipeline weld analysis, Pipeline structural reliability-based methodology, Recommended Practice, Verification

A BIT OF BACKGROUND

The need for this work arose from what some

considered unnecessarily conservative weld

defect acceptance criteria, but also because

some of the assessment procedures used are

not in full accordance with DNV-OS-F101. In

most cases, it is believed that the current DNV-

OS-F101 assessment procedure is unnecessarily

conservative and that a reliability-based

approach would reduce costs due to fewer

repairs of weld defects, less intervention work

and easier verification of ECAs by third parties.

In order to develop a reliability-based fracture

mechanics assessment approach, the accuracy

of fracture mechanics analyses itself had to be

significantly improved, in particular for strain-

based loading. A reliability based fracture

mechanics approach will ensure more consistent

results from different ECA providers and make

it easier to verify the safety and reliability of

other assessment procedures on an ongoing

basis.

ABOUT THE PROJECT

DNV staff in fracture mechanics and structural

expertise worked on the idea of improving the

current simplified fracture limit state specified

in DNV-OS-F101, which is a “worst case” deter-

ministic approach, for several years. In 2012,

the background work, a detailed description

for a Joint Industry Project was prepared. The

JIP will result in continued evaluations in the

field, using the methodology developed for

performing reliability-based fracture mechan-

ics analyses. “The goal now is to get the word

out to potential sponsors about DNV’s inten-

tion to update the deterministic fracture limit

state with a reliability-based methodology,”

states Steinar Bjerke, Project Manager.

INDUSTRY IMPORTANCE

Fracture mechanics analyses are increasingly

important in monitoring and assessing the

integrity of submarine pipeline systems due to

more complex and challenging pipeline pro-

jects. The intention is to develop a separate

DNV Recommended Practice which may be

revised more frequently than the DNV pipeline

standard. Several research programs related to

fracture mechanics analyses are ongoing in the

industry, and this JIP will also use these results

in developing future standards.

Submarine pipeline systems in the oil & gas industry are designed and constructed to

withstand remarkable natural conditions. Their safety and reliability are assured in part

by meeting standards for pipeline girth welds that include fracture mechanics analysis

(ECA). Current standards are based on calculations of the crack driving force using ‘worst

case’ inputs. In this project, DNV has started to develop a reliability-based, probabilistic

approach – one that will enable operators to determine a correct and uniform safety

level for the fracture limit state, considering the design life of pipeline girth welds.

SUBMARINE PIPELINE SYSTEMS

PROJECT MANAGERS TEINAR LINDBERG BJERKE


© D

NV

/Nin

a E.

Ran

gøy

Life of a Well, Well integrity, Well lifecycle, Well information management, Ontology Based Data Access, Linked Data

BACKGROUND

Operators are required to ensure the integrity

of their oil & gas (O&G) wells for authorities,

shareholders and the society at large. Yet, direct

inspection of most aspects of an O&G well is

not feasible. Well integrity is managed with a

host of data sources, including design basis,

manufacturing records, and the operational

history of safety barriers. Excellent information

management is thus vital to securing sufficient

lifetime integrity.

BETTER INFORMATION FOR BETTER

CONTROL

Life of a Well was one of three tightly integrated

projects aimed at creating a Next Generation

Well Integrity solution. The approach was to

pull together a suite of information models and

technologies into a single system, and apply it to

the problem.

DNV is developing the Life of a Well (LoW)

system for cradle-to-grave O&G well informa-

tion management, with initial application to

well safety barriers and offshore incidents. The

system utilizes a vendor agnostic Linked Data

architecture, enabling stakeholders to achieve a

new level of collaboration. LoW combines three

services: storage of well information in non-

proprietary form to ensure the information can

live as long as the O&G facilities themselves; a

knowledge base and encyclopedia of the O&G

domain; and data search and retrieval.

SUPPORTS INTEGRATION

LoW is designed to complement, not replace,

existing well information systems. The data

store is structured using an open and extend-

able information model – an ontology. This

brings an integrated view to the enterprise

portfolio of well IT applications and databases,

and facilitates stepwise incorporation of data

from external sources, across the full range

required for well management. The LoW

knowledge base function builds on the Sky-

brary™ aviation incident system, developed

and operated by DNV for EUROCONTROL,

to provide a user-friendly portal tailored to

domain expert tasks and workflows.

INTERFACE FOR THE FUTURE

DNV is continuing the work on information

management for safer and more efficient O&G

wells. The approach demonstrated in the LoW

prototype is relevant to O&G stakeholders inter-

nationally: operators, service providers, and

public bodies. The potential reach of LoW is

also substantial. One evident opportunity lies

in integrating international well registries with

incident databases, making the information

available in a non-proprietary interface. The

enterprise also stands to benefit from synchro-

nizing core business objects among well appli-

cations and work processes.

The overall challenge here was oil well integrity. How could we improve the safety and

efficiency of a well, across its long lifecycle, from planning to abandonment? Reliable

information is crucial to well integrity management, but the industry faces problems in

lack of data consistency, lack of standardization and high complexity. It was time to take

a hard look at the life of a well, and to find a better way to handle the many different

kinds of information about oil wells. DNV is now in the process of solving the information

management problem.

Johan is a Dr. Philos. and a Principal Specialist in the Information Risk Management unit. He is part of a team dedicated to bringing ontolo-gies and Linked Data to the energy industry, primarily oil & gas.

Johan works at the interface between research and industry, drawing on his background in applied philosophical logic as well as hands-on experience with enterprise databases. His current engagements include master data integration and governance for major Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) clients; and introducing cutting-edge ontology based data access (OBDA) methods to oil & gas exploration. Johan has contributed to several Joint Industry Projects, including Integrated Opera-

tions in the High North (IOHN, 2008–2012) and the on-going Optique JIP, Scalable End-user Access to Big Data (EU FP7 program, 2012–2016).

THE LIFE OF A WELL

PROJECT MANAGERJ OHAN WILHELM KLÜWER

Ignition

Corrosion

Fatigue

Barriers

Reservoir

TIMETopics addressed over a lifecycle


Peter is the Region UK Business Development leader for Advisory Services. He has broad experience in the application of hazard identifica-tion, as well as risk analysis, technical and business risk assessment, safety engineering and regulatory compli-ance assurance services. These are provided primarily in the upstream and allied marine sector globally.

Peter has managed significant multi-disciplinary and long term projects covering various DNV services, includ-ing SHE, ARM, ERM and TQ services.

Peter is routinely involved in new technology, the application of new techniques and the export of such techniques to new market sectors, including aviation, rail, downstream, and marine sectors. His work has extended to all geographical areas, with paper presentations highlighting the application of new services to different sectors and regions.

Peter has been with DNV for over 18 years.

Quantitative risk assessment, Real-time risk assessment, Offshore oil installations, Upstream industry risk management, Safer Operations Upstream Landscaping (SOUL), Demonstration project, Joint Industry Project, JIP

THE SOUL PROJECT

Everyday, operators of offshore oil installations

collect data associated with risk, data difficult

for them to use quickly and readily. The indus-

try relies on static Quantitative Risk Assessments

(QRAs) and models that remain uninfluenced

by daily risk changes. Furthermore, the time-

frame needed to build and run conventional

QRA prevents its use in real time decision-

making. Wouldn’t it be useful to provide actual

risk information in real time that could be used

to address operational risk-based

decisionmaking?

This was the aim of the SOUL Project, a dem-

onstration project to show how diverse risk-

related data can be used to yield live risk infor-

mation. SOUL represents not just an evolution

in operational risk management thinking but

clears a completely new road. That is Land-

scaping, Safer Operations Upstream Land-

scaping (SOUL). It also aims to be something

that is ‘virtual’ – it works subtly in the back-

ground without the need for costly integration

or interference with operator running demands.

It also interfaces with existing industry data

management systems.

HELPING ONE TODAY

As a demonstration project, DNV aimed to

develop a prototype model, learning from the

leadership and innovation work. Project scope

was limited to an exploration drilling case,

suitable for the upstream oil & gas exploration

and production market. Using a Bayesian

model, it allows the illustration of many factors,

including primary and secondary well control

systems, developments leading to blowout,

human competence, risk modeling, safety

culture, and trends.

AND MANY TOMORROW

The upstream market is already extremely

keen on this type of application, with both

academia and leading operators wanting to

move toward real-time risk assessments. That’s

‘facing facts’ in the daily life of this industry,

which remains under constant operational

change in a post-blowout era. DNV is planning

to expand on SOUL, with a full range of major

accident hazard scenarios and a future Joint

Industry Project.

Offshore oil installations generally rely on static risk models and assessments. While these

may help identify general risk-trend areas and responses, they are not operating in real

time to reduce the operational potential for hazards and accidents as an outgrowth of

current data. Yet, offshore installations are collecting data associated with actual risk

position, often difficult to interpret and use in-place, in real time. This demonstration

project did just that, interfacing with existing industry data management systems to

create real-time risk assessment information key to industry operators.

MEASURING RISK IN REAL TIME

PROJECT MANAGERP ETER BOYLE

PRIMARY

WELL

CONTROL

FAILURE

DRILL

FLOOR

BLOWOUT

SECONDARY

WELL

CONTROL

FAILURE

FACTORS AFFECTING

PRIMARY WELL

CONTROL FAILURE –

PHYSICAL, PEOPLE, PROCESS

FACTORS AFFECTING

SECONDARY WELL

CONTROL FAILURE –

PHYSICAL, PEOPLE, PROCESS

MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM

FACTORS

SAFETY CRITICAL

ELEMENT STATUS

ACHIEVEMENT

AGAINST

PERFORMANCE

STANDARDS

ACCIDENT AND

INCIDENT

HISTORY

MAINTENANCE

STATUS

ETC...


ANDRÉ BRETON

“The imaginary is what tends to become real.”


Peder Andreas works as Approval Engineer and Offshore Surveyor in the section for Drilling and Well Intervention. He is working with approval of drilling systems and advanced drilling technologies in addition to component certification of drilling equipment. He also over-sees various floating rigs for compli-ance with DNV Class. He is Project Manager for a novel modular drilling system for compliance to NORSOK. Peder Andreas started at DNV in 2009, and worked for a time as a NB Surveyor at Hyundai Heavy Industries in Ulsan, South Korea, and as a UiO/SiO Surveyor in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Peder Andreas holds a Mechanical Engineer degree from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).

BOP, Oil drilling industry, Blow-out prevention systems, Offshore oil drilling, Deep water oil drilling, Automated drilling operations, JIP, Joint industry project, Well control

THE HUMAN FACTOR

BOP systems have received substantial negative

publicity, partly due to the general misconcep-

tion that the BOP is an emergency solution: if

all else fails, the BOP will shut in the well. The

truth is that current design criteria for BOPs

do not address ‘blowout stoppage’ scenarios.

We cannot assume that a BOP designed accord-

ing to current standards is, in fact, able to stop

a blowout. Like all systems, the BOP is doing

its job when used in accordance with its opera-

tional limitations and specifications. This means

that the BOP must be activated before a blow-

out occurs – in order to prevent it.

This DNV project evaluated how human inter-

vention can best be supported by automation

in a well control event, in order to ensure that

correct actions are taken in time.

MAN VS. MACHINE

BOP functions have remained unaltered for

decades; designs are extrapolated to compen-

sate for more extreme conditions. In deep

waters, well ‘kicks’ can be difficult to detect.

A highly compressed undetected gas kick that

enters the marine drilling riser can expand

and replace large volumes of mud as it moves

up in the marine riser, causing considerable

problems.

Automated drilling operations are expected to

increase dramatically in coming years, in part,

to allow for entering reservoirs with narrower

pressure margins, thus setting a higher bar for

responsible well shut-in.

Automated BOP functions are considered pos-

sible and believed to increase safety. However,

the efficiency and reliability of such a system

will depend upon early and accurate kick

detection.

SMART AUTOMATION

In this project, a fully automated BOP system

was contemplated, one monitoring the drilling

process and coming into play when needed.

Ideally, the BOP control system should auto-

matically close off the wellbore when manual

activation fails or is ignored after kick detec-

tion. If correct actions are taken manually, the

system remains in a monitoring/advising state

and activates no functions.

The overall goal is to close off the wellbore

before the well is flowing at considerable rates,

when rams are moving towards closed position.

To ensure this system works as planned, among

the factors that must be identified for each

operational scenario are which parameters

shall be governing for identifying a kick, defin-

ing a kick quantitatively and knowing which

actions are correct in any given situation. To

do this, the various operational scenarios must

be analysed to identify correct well control

actions from the governing well control proce-

dure. Based on the above, the system will iden-

tify a well control incident and inform the

driller as to what has been detected, what is the

recommended action and when the system will

automatically execute this action.

The time limit for response will depend on kick

magnitude and development rate, based on

real-time feedback from the well. The person

responsible for well control remains responsi-

ble and obliged to manually activate the BOP

as before if a kick is detected. However, in

addition, the system can activate functions if

manual activation is not performed for any

reason, in this way, becoming a backup resource.

The driller would have the opportunity to

bypass the automated action if it were consid-

ered a low risk situation.

The quality and reliability of the information

flow is imperative. The automated system will

depend on real-time data from both topside

and from the well, including bottom-hole

pressure, temperature and flow rates.

TIME FOR TEAMWORK

This project was run by DNV Offshore

Classification in close cooperation with the

Subsea consultancy environment. Team mem-

bers considered all BOP operational factors,

presenting the results as an overall philosophy

for automated BOP activation. The results will

In the offshore oil drilling industry, the shutting in of a well can only be initiated by human

action. This project asked, is this an adequate and robust approach for the future? As drilling

operations become more complex, and well control becomes more challenging, DNV decided

to take a closer look at current well control systems and philosophies. This project analyzed

BOP automation potential, creating a framework for moving forward.

PROJECT MANAGERPEDER ANDREAS VASSET

BLOW-OUT PREVENTION (BOP) MEETS AUTOMATION


now be presented to key industry players with

the intention to take this work further, through

a Joint Industry Project.

This work demonstrates DNV’s leadership role

– with foresight, customer focus and a results

orientation.

© S

canpix

Macondo showed the importance of the BOP. The project seeks to give a direction to the industry by initiating the developments of a system that is believed to increase the overall safety of drilling operations.


Solveig has worked in DNV Risk Management Solutions since 2010. Her work has focused on safety barrier management, management systems and emergency prepared-ness analysis for customers in the offshore oil & gas industry.

Solveig joined DNV Maritime Solu-tions in 2009, working on projects related to safety culture, risk man-agement, strategy development and business performance management for customers in the maritime industry.

Solveig has a Master of Science degree in Marine Technology from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trond-heim, taken in 2009. She specializes in marine systems, focusing on risk analysis and safety management, and wrote her thesis in cooperation with DNV.

MARInd, Major accident risk indicators, Performance indicators, Human Reliability Analysis, Safety barrier management, Barrier management, Bow-tie analysis

THE WAY THINGS WERE

What is it that reduces the risk of major acci-

dents in the oil & gas industry? When the

Macondo field accident occurred in the Gulf

of Mexico, plenty of understanding existed as

to ‘occupational accident’ risk. Systems and

procedures were in place. Yet, there was little

comprehensive understanding in the industry

of the organizational and operational factors

that could play a part in a major accident. DNV

was already strong on the technical aspects, so

getting organizational and operational factors

in place was an extension of prior research

tools and techniques. DNV decided to act.

For major accident indicators to be applicable

for risk-informed decisionmaking, it was

important that their effects on major accident

risk be thoroughly analyzed.

PROJECT ACTIVITY

A multi-disciplinary team of DNV experts have

been working alongside industry representa-

tives to take major accident risk indicators to

the next level.

The objective of this project was to specify a

DNV point of view on established indicators

for major accident risk, and to develop a frame-

work for identifying such indicators. The frame-

work has been developed using barrier man-

agement and human reliability analysis. The

results were presented internally and exter-

nally in 2012, and have already had a positive

impact on ongoing barrier management

projects.

THE RIGHT RISK RECIPE

“Our goal was to find key performance indica-

tors linked to the actual risk, which are verifi-

able and actionable,” states Project Manager,

Solveig Walsøe Pettersen. “That is the reason

for using the barrier/bow-tie model as a basis

for the indicator framework. As Solveig states,

“The industry is going to learn that it is not just

‘defining indicators’ that reduce the risk of a

major accident, but – of primary importance

– the risk-informed decisions made by staff.”

An oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico blows up. Why did this have to happen? In this

project, DNV staff dissected the elements at play in a major accident risk scenario – in

order to better understand how to effectively reduce the risk of major accidents in oil & gas

industry field operations. Safety barrier management and human reliability analysis were

used to go that one step further, identifying key performance indicators in complex risk

scenarios. The framework developed may help the industry reduce risk and prevent a repeat

scenario.

PROJECT MANAGERSOLVEIG PETTERSEN

MAJOR ACCIDENT RISK REVISITED

In the Gulf of Mexico more than 50 miles southeast of Venice on Louisiana’s tip shows the Deepwater Horizon oil rig burning in April 21, 2010.


© A

P/ G

eral

d H

erber

t

Arctic operations, Propulsion systems, Marine propulsion, Environmental footprint, Ice loads, Joint Industry Project, JIP

ARCTIC LIMITS

DNV and others are “setting the Arctic stand-

ard”. Arctic operations are an emerging market,

and limited knowledge, data and experience are

shaping much of the current situation.

Identifying gaps in knowledge, practice and

regulatory regimes is essential for all. Shaping

marine Arctic development at an early stage

will assure risk levels within acceptable limits,

and contribute to safeguarding life, property

and the environment.

PROJECT ACTIVITY

DNV’s ‘SafeArc’ project is a cross-disciplinary

project that is developing and documenting

improved knowledge. Ice loads acting on pod-

ded propulsion systems that operate in Arctic

waters are in focus. In addition, the project is

assessing solutions for efficiency in Arctic opera-

tions and studying precisely how to reduce the

‘environmental footprint’ generated by marine

activities there.

The project team consists of Rolls Royce Marine

Propulsion and DNV, and is financed by the

Norwegian Research Council with a budget of

12 million NOK. Work is involving the world’s

leading ice navigators and vessel operators.

Top class knowledge is being generated within

this field and, as a result of this project, knowl-

edge closely linked to national and interna-

tional regulatory regimes applicable to Arctic

operations will be pushed into the future.

State of the art reports were developed to bring

the project up to speed on the latest develop-

ments in the field. This was followed by full-

scale testing of ice loads on rimtruster, con-

ducted at production facilities in Ulsteinvik,

Norway. Several outreach initiatives have also

been carried out, from the Norwegian University

of Science and Technology (NTNU) to industry

symposiums.

CROSS-DISCIPLINARY SUCCESS

Already, it is clear that safe and efficient Arctic

operations result from a cross disciplinary

approach, with sustainability objectives. This

includes not compromising on environmental,

human or economic issues, and identifying

linkages and key risk drivers. The outcomes

of the project already go beyond immediate

improvements to Arctic ops, although they will

do that also: creating knowledge that will be

utilized to develop better designs for podded

propulsion systems, and that will feed into the

calibration of class requirements, and new

offerings in advisory services to clients.

It seems like a ‘last frontier’: Arctic operations hold a promise of great potential for devel-

opment while also challenging everything we think we know about competence, technol-

ogy and cooperating with nature. We and others are getting “ready for the cold rush”

with a safe path forward in all related operations. This DNV project is studying ice loads

on propulsion systems operating in Arctic waters. The team’s cross-disciplinary approach

is helping to secure acceptable levels of risk and safety knowledge within this high-risk

environment, pushing knowledge into the future, the Arctic.

Knut Espen has, since 2009, worked as a Project Manager in DNV Techni-cal Advisory on issues related to shipping, the Arctic and climate change. Knut Espen started his career at DNV in 1999 when writing his master’s thesis on the environ-mental aspects of ship demolition, continuing as a Superintendent for several Norwegian shipowners.

Knut Espen has vast experience from the Arctic, having conducted several expeditions to the area, including wintering with a sailboat in the Northwest Passage and in north Greenland from 2003 to 2005.

Besides working for DNV, Knut Espen runs Fotspor AS, a company that facilitates scientific fieldwork related to climate change and economic development in the Arctic. Knut Espen has published two books on the Arctic.

Knut Espen has an MSc degree in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering.

PROJECT MANAGERK NUT ESPEN SOLBERG

SAFE OPERATIONS IN THE ARCTIC FRONTIER

© S

afeA

rc/K

nut

Espen

Solb

erg


Ali is the Head of the Pipeline and Subsea section in the London Approval Centre, and also leads pipeline activities in the DNV region UK. Before joining the Approval Centre, Ali led the Pipeline and Integrity Assurance section at London Solutions.

Ali is a Principal Integrity Engineer with a specific interest in pipeline design verification, engineering critical assessment, Fitness for services and residual stress. He has published and presented more than 30 technical papers in international conferences and is a member of the British Standards BS7910 and R6 sub-committees on residual stress.

Before joining DNV, Ali worked at The Welding Institute (TWI) Ltd. in Structural Integrity Technology. He has also worked with British Energy Ltd. as a part-time research contrac-tor. Ali is a Charted Mechanical Engineer with a Ph.D. in Fracture Mechanics.

Onshore pipes, Pipelines, Specifications, Verification, Pipeline support, Recommended Practice

ONSHORE HAZARDS

Onshore pipeline systems present a wide spec-

trum of hazards, often adjacent to public areas.

The industry has recognized an increasing need

to involve an independent verifier to provide

the required level of confidence that their facili-

ties are in compliance with regulatory require-

ments and recognized codes and standards.

RESPONDING TO NEED

DNV responded with a global team of experts

and the new service specification, DNV-DSS-

316. Participation included senior engineers

and stakeholders in Norway, the UK, Singapore,

Australia, Canada and the Netherlands.

The new service specification outlines DNV

recommendations on the scope and depth of

involvement by a verification body for onshore

pipeline systems. This service specification

provides criteria for, and guidance on, verifica-

tion of complete onshore pipeline systems and

the integrity of parts and phases of a pipeline

system. DNV-DSS-316 follows a risk based

approach. The level of verification activity is

differentiated according to the risk. Where the

risk associated with the pipeline element or

process is higher, the level of verification

involvement is greater. Conversely, where the

risk associated with the aspect is lower, the level

of verification activity can be reduced without a

consequent reduction in effectiveness.

TAILORED BENEFITS

DNV-DSS-316 outlines different levels of verifi-

cation involvement, to be selected by the client.

This ensures that the verification body’s scope

is well defined and transparent. Third party

verification of onshore pipelines has the benefit

of providing stakeholders with confidence that

the system’s integrity is assured, and that risks

to personnel and the environment are

reduced.

Additionally, it is good business practice to

subject such critical work to a third-party check

as this minimises the possibility of undetected

error. A Statement of Compliance will be avail-

able, to be issued by DNV, on completion of

each particular project phase, and will be

based on a dedicated verification report.

The production of this service specification is

very welcome in the industry and complements

offshore pipeline Recommended Practices and

specifications produced by DNV earlier, now in

use by operators and pipeline support compa-

nies worldwide. “With close collaboration of

different DNV offices, today we reached

another milestone in providing our unique

verification services to our clients,” states Ali

Sisan, Project Manager.

Historically, onshore pipeline systems have not been subject to independent verification.

However, with changing regulatory environments and industry norms requiring greater

scrutiny, an increased need for pipeline oversight was identified. DNV responded with a

new service specification. This service specification provides criteria and guidance on the

verification of complete onshore pipeline systems, their parts and the phases of their

development and completion.

ONSHORE PIPELINE VERIFICATION ARRIVES

PROJECT MANAGERALI SISAN

© iS

tock

Imag

es


Shale gas, Natural gas, Recommended Practice, Verification, Joint Industry Project, JIP

TOPIC UNDER PRESSURE

Extracting natural gas from shale rock forma-

tions became more feasible as technological

advances occurred in drilling and fracturing.

Fracturing fluids are injected at high pressure

to create fissures in the rock, providing a path

to the well for extraction. Resulting wastewater

and chemical releases present substantial issues

and must be managed properly. Already, shale

gas extraction represents 15 percent of natural

gas production in the U.S. alone, a figure expec-

ted to triple in the next 25 years. Yet, no single

recommended practice has existed. Until now.

FOUNDATIONAL WORK

DNV’s Recommended Practice is based on risk

management principles and industry best prac-

tices and standards. The objective was to form

the foundation for future development of a

globally recognized standard for safe and sus-

tainable shale gas extraction.

The framework was developed over an 18-month

period, and included collaboration with stake-

holders as well as review of existing practices

and guidelines. Many organisations have already

developed recommendations and guidelines.

Yet a complete risk management framework

had not existed.

THE NEW RP

The RP recommends a risk-based approach to

shale operations, including monitoring and

reporting guidelines. Proper points of refer-

ence are established for all stages of extraction

operations. The RP also advises on extensive

baseline surveys prior to the commencement

of shale gas activities, as well as open discussion

with all stakeholders, including the general

public.

Thon explains, “One of the key elements of

the RP is about encouraging transparency – for

example in what chemicals are used, disclosing

accidents or near misses and uncontrolled

emissions. Operators should report to authori-

ties not just from a regulatory point of view but

also to stakeholders from a corporate social

responsibility point of view.”

The RP, DNV-RP-U301 ‘Risk Management of

Shale Gas Developments and Operations,’ is

intended not only as a reference document for

independent assessment or verification; it is

also hoped that it will influence overall aware-

ness of the risks of shale gas activities, and pro-

vide a basis for identifying risk management

interventions throughout – in the application

of processes, tools and methods. It also com-

piles the references to existing standards

impacting the shale gas extraction operation,

identifies management principles which should

be in place, and analyzes the nature of related

risk identification and mitigation activities.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RISK MANAGEMENT OF SHALE GAS

Steinar is currently Project Director at DNV Risk Management Solutions. Since late 2011, he worked as Pro-ject Manager on the development of the Recommended Practice for Risk Management of Shale Gas Activities. Steinar joined DNV in 1974 and has had an extensive career, including several years as a manager and direc-tor, with eleven years of international experience. His technical competence areas are within offshore classification and verification, structural strength analysis and the evaluation of offshore structures. Steinar recently led a three-year project for the European Commission on knowledge manage-ment in the field of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

Steinar holds a Master of Science degree from the Norwegian Univer-sity of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim.

The foundation for the future development of a globally recognized standard for safe

and sustainable shale gas extraction has been built using risk management principles.

DNV launched its Recommended Practice (RP) for the entire life cycle of shale gas extraction

in 2012.

PROJECT MANAGERSTEINAR THON

DNV’S SHALE GAS RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOCUSES ON:

■n Management systems

■n Safety, health, and the environment

■n Well integrity

■n Management of water and energy

■n Infrastructure and logistics

■n Public engagement

■n Stakeholder communication

■n Permitting


Jingyue is currently a Senior Researcher on IT programs in DNV R&I with a specific interest in soft-ware verification and validation. Jingyue joined DNV in 2011 and, since 2002, has been conducting research on empirical software engineering and studying software process improvement and software quality assurance, in particular.

Jingyue has vast experience as a researcher from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), the University College of London, and the University of Washing ton. He also worked as an Associate Professor at NTNU in 2008–2009. He has more than 40 scientific publications in software engineering journals and at inter-national conferences, and received the “Best Paper Award” from the 4th ACM/IEEE International Sympo-sium on Empirical Software Engineer-ing and Measure ment in 2010.

Jingyue holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree from NTNU (2006).

CatDrill, Oil drilling, Offshore oil rigs, Integrated software systems, ISDS, Cat D oil rigs, Semi-submersible rigs, Operational scenarios, Software system rules, Offshore rules, Joint Industry Project, JIP

CAT D TERRITORY

On the Norwegian continental shelf (NCS), a

new oil rig was needed, the kind that could

manoeuvre about, inspecting mature oil fields

for untapped resources, working in well drill-

ing and well completion processes – under-

water.

The Cat D is a semi-submersible rig that can

operate at water depths up to 1,300 metres and

drill wells down to 8,500 metres. It is tailor-

made for mid-water depth segments on the

NCS, and is planned for eventual use in deep

water, in high pressure, high temperature

(HPHT) environments, and in the Arctic. As

many software intensive control systems from

different suppliers will be installed and inte-

grated on the rig, one of the key challenges is to

verify software quality, system integration and

commissioning.

DNV’S APPROACH

A new offshore rule, OS-D203, Integrated

Software Dependent Systems (ISDS), is geared

to the Cat D to help ensure the delivery and

integration of the systems with high opera-

tional reliability. Documented operational

scenarios contribute to reducing integration

costs and time during the new building phase,

and increase safety during operations.

PUSHING THE PROJECT ENVELOPE

Creating realistic operational scenarios is tech-

nically difficult and complex work. DNV’s

Research and Innovation staff worked in close

coordination with the ISDS software team,

creating a “handle drift off operational sce-

nario” example based on the technical specifi-

cations and expected operations of the“Cat D”

drilling rig. The ‘OpS’ example and template

have been presented to and reviewed by engi-

neers of rig owner, Songa Offshore, and yard

owner, Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine

Engineering Co., Ltd., DSME.

As a result of this work, owners, operations,

engineers, integrators and suppliers working

on the Cat D are getting a better understand-

ing of the OpS concept. Additional critical

OpS scenarios are now being developed, fol-

lowing DNV’s example and template, and a

new rig by Fred. Olsen Energy will use the new

rule to class a new build. The knowledge and

expertise developed by DNV is also going

beyond the Cat D, to assist other customers

with advisory service contracts.

As oil becomes more scarce and offshore exploration pushes forward, innovative new

equipment and the systems to protect it are coming into place. In the case of the ‘Cat D’

oil rig, operational scenarios were to be a part of this. However, operational scenarios

are difficult to develop and assess. DNV has now created examples to assist our clients.

This work helps ensure that integrated software dependent systems (ISDS) deliver high

operational reliability in remarkable new circumstances.

PROJECT MANAGERJINGYUE LI

AN OFFSHORE OIL RIG FOR THE FUTURE

© S

tato

il.co

m


OIL & GAS FRONTIERS > CUTTING EDGE 2 7

“We may brave human laws, but we cannot resist natural ones.”

JULES VERNE,

20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA

Wind turbines, Offshore wind turbines, MOUs, Mobile Offshore Units, WTI vessels, Wind turbine installation vessel, Hybrid vessels, Fatigue analysis, Strength analysis

A LITTLE HISTORY

By the end of the year 2000, DNV had fielded

its first request to provide a proposal for classifi-

cation of a vessel that would be dedicated to the

installation of wind turbines offshore. Previously,

small self-elevating units or converted, small

feeder containers could only be partially jacked

up for this task. The new concept was to create a

wind turbine installation vessel, one that would

perform the work done by several units, and

faster. This idea resulted in a hybrid vessel that

included the characteristics of a self-elevating

unit – for operating in the water depth range of

the future wind farms, along with the mobility

of a Dynamic Positioning unit.

This new unit, now named MPI Resolution,

would change the way the Wind industry

worked, along with a pioneering Class

Notation developed by DNV.

FAST FORWARD

As new Wind Turbine Installation Units (WTIs)

came into operation, some typical issues began

to emerge, reoccurring particularly at the design

and manufacturing stages, but also as the result

of years of experience in the field. The WTI

vessel operates in a multitude of conditions,

ranging from harbour loading, either floating

or jacked up, to transit, to operations in jacked

up mode. WTI vessels are exposed to substan-

tial loading. In addition, weather, seabed and

cargo conditions all impact operating limits.

CUTTING EDGE RESULTS

DNV initiated this project to improve the class

requirements for the WTI vessel’s materials,

strength and fatigue, and address the frequent

movement of the vessels. The project unified

the different approval groups with experience

in the design and fabrication of WTI: London,

Høvik and Poland.

The team defined a simplified assessment

approach sufficiently flexible to assess the

vessel during all operational phases. The pro-

posed fatigue assessment methodology pro-

vides a simple way to check the evolution of

fatigue damage considering the actual param-

eters of operation of the unit during the in-

service life. So far, this project’s results have

been incorporated into updates to related

DNV Offshore Standards (OS-J301, OS-C101

and OS-C104). Some tests are ongoing, and

once final results are available, either a

Guidance note or Appendix to OS-J301

will be issued.

Offshore wind turbine installations appear surreal, floating on the surface of the blue

waves. Yet, nothing about their installation or maintenance can be taken for granted.

The vessels that build and maintain them are, equally, design wonders. Wonders that

DNV helped to build from the start.

In this DNV project, staff revisited the design specifications and tolerances for offshore

wind turbine vessels. The in-depth work performed in 2012 has resulted in new, and at

the same time, streamlined classification requirements on materials, fabrication inspection

and structural integrity.

Claudio is a Senior Principal Engineer and Surveyor at the Section for Pipelines, Subsea, Wave and Tidal at DNV UK. He is responsible for the development of the certification process for certification of wave and tidal energy converters. He has also been responsible for approval of the MPI Resolution, the first vessel designed for wind turbine installation, and the MPI Adventure and MPI Discovery, recently delivered.

Before joining DNV UK in 1993, he worked for five years at DNV Brazil with structural analysis, marine warranty and certification of offshore installations.

Claudio is a Structural Engineer (1984) and took an MSc in Dynamic of Structures in 1990. He has exten-sive knowledge of Sesam modeling of jacket structures and FE modeling of fixed and floating structures, and is specialized in certification and classification of fixed and floating structures.

PROJECT MANAGERC LAUDIO BITTENCOURTFERREIRA

OFFSHORE WIND TURBINE VESSELS IMPROVING

MPI Discovery

© D

NV


MOUs, Mobile offshore units, Rule book revision, Jack-ups, Self-elevating ships

DNV’S APPROACH

Providing a service means more than just estab-

lishing rules, correct procedures, clear guid-

ance and information for the service providers

in the field, and an exchange of knowledge

– all are essential elements. Fortunately for the

project, in this case, expertise was not in short

supply, taking advantage of DNV segment

specialists with deep experience in the jack-up

segment.

NEW RULE BOOK, NEW FORMAT

Many technical standards ensure safety and

reliability of results while working at the edge

of the operational and design envelope. This,

however, has a price in the complexity of the

resulting standards. In other words, rules do

not always give the sort of clear guidance that

designers, yards and owners are looking for.

This clear guidance is especially important in

the self-elevating market.

DNV prioritized this area in 2012. To answer the

market’s challenge, the project team decided to

create a new rule book format. The new book

has seven sections which cover the entire class

service concept, from newbuilding design

requirements, component certification and the

survey on the newbuilding site, to the survey in

the operational phase after delivery. Each sec-

tion is based on the renowned DNV offshore

standards, but also explains in detail specific

challenges faced in the jack-up high risk area.

GOING BEYOND THE RULES

“Looking back, the team has had so much

agility – remarkable in the often traditional

and bureaucratic world of classification

societies,” says Michiel van der Geest. “A new

rule book with an innovative format and a

revamped focus service delivery approach –

from scratch, and in a timeframe usually associ-

ated with defining a first business concept.”

It all makes this project a good example of

DNV’s strengths, effective and efficient net-

works bringing people together all over the

world to meet market needs.

Almost 50 percent of the world’s Mobile Offshore Units (MOUs) are self-elevating units or

jack-ups. They deserve attention and focus. For example, when their fixed platforms are in

elevated mode, not all regulations and rules for MOUs apply to them. Then there is the

naturally developed complexity of myriad rules and standards, not all applicable for jack-ups.

This created a clear drive for DNV to define a new jack-up rule book. The new and unique

concept and format chosen meet the need for a balance between detail and overview,

covering each phase of a jack-up’s lifecycle.

Michiel is an Offshore Class Product Manager with a broad background in management of operations and technical and strategical projects. Before joining DNV, he concluded a 13-year career as Lieutenant Com-mander in the Dutch Navy. Beside his operational skills, he achieved Master’s degrees in Electrical Engi-neering, Business Administration and Project Management. In his latest role, he managed a technol-ogy development program in state-of-the-art radar technology.

Since 2006, Michiel has built up Classification experience as a nauti-cal safety approval engineer/sur-veyor with assignments in Norway and Korea. Later, he took this experi-ence further as a Classification Product Manager, from 2010, with a primary focus on the Offshore Segment. In this role, he combines his background and project approach to develop the DNV Offshore Class Service further to cover business needs and technical developments.

JACK-UPS: REWRITING USERS’ RULE EXPERIENCE

PROJECT MANAGERM ICHIEL VAN DER GEEST

© D

NV


Not Hot, Cold repair, FPSOs, Floating structures, Oil & gas industry service vessels, Corrosion, Corrosion repair, Recommended Practice

Jan is a Principal Engineer in the Materials Laboratory at Høvik, Norway. He is the coordinator of DNV’s global Materials Technology Leadership initiative, whose aim is to develop Cutting Edge competence within materials technology.

He also has responsibility for the development of cold repair methods, in particular bonded patch methods. He has edited two books on adhesive bonding and published more than 25 articles. He is a member of the Techni-cal Committee ISO/TC 67, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas indus-tries, Subcommittee SC 6.

Jan worked previously with non-metallic materials and coatings, NDT and repair of composites. He was Project Manager for two major projects on adhesive bonding in shipbuilding, and was Research Programme Director for strategic materials research at DNV. Jan holds a Doctor of Philosophy in Materials from the University of Southampton, UK (1997).

PROJECT MANAGERJAN WEITZENBÖCK

WHEN HOT REPAIRS SHOULD GO COLD

THE INDUSTRY PICTURE

An FPSO is a floating production, storage and

offloading unit used by the offshore oil & gas

industry to process hydrocarbons and store oil.

FPSOs are being utilised beyond their initial

design life, resulting in increased corrosion and

degradation. When repairs are needed, the

traditional tools involve burning, welding and

grinding, all potential fire or explosion sources.

This requires safety measures including degas-

sing of tanks and shutting down of oil opera-

tions during repair work. Associated industry

losses in revenue are estimated to be in the

millions of U.S. dollars per day. Cold repair has

become a go-to strategy, but one which required

substantial testing and detailed examination.

A PROJECT WITH PURPOSE

To address repair of FPSO and tanker structures,

DNV initiated, as early as 2001, a series of Joint

Industry Projects. Cold repair in situ of struc-

tures that are difficult to access or remove was

the goal. Cold repair would be economically

efficient, and could be used, in some cases, to

postpone emergency repairs until planned

maintenance or refitting.

Cold repair thus became a new structural

repair method that could change maintenance

strategies, allowing some repairs to be delayed

until planned maintenance events. While not a

‘silver bullet,’ it has proven effective, in particu-

lar, for repair of corrosion damage, and for

specified timeframes.

PLANNING TO PERFECTION

The project’s primary deliverable is the

Recommended Practice, DNV-RP-C301 –

Design, Fabrication, Operation and Qualification

of Bonded Repair of Steel Structures, published in

April, 2012. The bulk of the development work

was carried out by staff at the DNV Material Lab

in Høvik, Norway. Key results were presented

at industry meetings in Houston and

Stavanger, Norway.

The past decade has been used to develop this

repair method for structural applications. We

are now starting to see commercial applications,

and expect steady growth of its use in the future. © D

NV

Corrosion pits or cracks

(I)

(II)

Bounded patch


“Cold repairs” improve the reliability of operations for floating structures and vessels as

repairs can be carried out without disrupting operations. In 2012, DNV released a new

guideline on cold repairs, the primary result of a multi-year series of projects which exam-

ined the potential for making cold repairs to floating structures.


SALVADOR DALÍ

“Intelligence without ambition

is a bird without wings.”

Although marine transportation is considered energy efficient compared to other transportation alternatives, shipping is now facing a new reality. Media, politicians and the public at large are increasingly focusing on environmental issues. Carbon emissions that contribute to global warming are particularly in the spotlight.

Vessels ordered today may still be in operation beyond 2040.

MARITIME & CLASS

image size: 540x210mm

32 CUTTING EDGE > MARITIME & CLASS

MARITIME & CLASSPredicting the future is a challenging task, and prioritizing which competence to focus on is equally difficult. That said, a few topics will certainly continue to dominate the shipping agenda in the coming years, including a continuous cost focus, energy efficient ship operations, and environmental performance. The industry has already come a long way within these areas, well assisted by existing and upcoming regulations, but the pace of innovation towards a cost efficient shipping operation will continue at high speed. Alternative fuels – LNG, biofuel, fuel cells – are of particular interest. At the same time, we will not remove our focus from our longstanding goal: safer shipping.

MARITIME & CLASS > CUTTING EDGE 3 3

Bungas, LNG, LNG bunkering, Bunkering systems, Bunkering barges, Bunker stations, Bunkering risk assessment, LNG risk assessment, Joint Industry Project, JIP

HISTORICAL NOTES

According to the IGC-Code, only LNG carriers

can utilize LNG boil-off gas in the machinery

space as fuel. Since 2000, a few LNG-fuelled

vessels not covered by the Code have come

into service, with national administration

permission and in compliance with DNV class

rules. Due to missing safety requirements, the

IGF-Code (Gas as Ship Fuel) was proposed to

the IMO in 2004. The goal is an international

standard for natural gas-fuelled engine installa-

tions. Interim guidelines adopted in 2009 give

criteria for arranging and installing LNG fueled

machinery to achieve a level of integrity equiv-

alent in safety, reliability and dependability to

conventional oil-fuelled machinery. The IMO

is currently developing the IGF Code, with a

first revision planned for 2014. DNV and oth-

ers are working to contribute their expertise

and developed knowledge in that effort.

WANTED: STANDARDS

When the BUNGAS Joint Industry Project (JIP)

was begun, there was no common industry

standard for equipment and procedures for

the use of LNG as fuel. Even now, there are

still a limited number of bunkering infrastruc-

ture arrangements available worldwide. The

development of standards was therefore seen

as both timely and important. The work was

started with the aim to develop sound equip-

ment, ship designs and to develop accurate

risk assessments to evaluate design alternatives.

A number of projects for LNG refuelling sys-

tem development are planned or ongoing in

Europe. Nevertheless, a general approach cov-

ering the technical, legislative, organizational

challenges in a way so as to be able to transfer

the results within the EU in general is missing.

This project is developing an overall technical

basis for the design and operation of safe bun-

ker stations onboard gas fuelled commercial

vessels, and is addressing the related bunker

supply vessels. It is developing the baseline for

safe and competitive gas refuelling in European

ports in a way that the results can be applied to

all types of gas fuelled ships, and it includes the

requirements for a basic design of a bunker

vessel with a suitable transfer system.

PROJECT DETAILS

Work has focused on five main areas:

1.■ Bunkering requirements: setting the base-

line requirements for an LNG bunker sys-

tem and identifying how these differ from

more traditional marine bunkering

arrangements;

2.■ The design of a bunker ship: developing a

concept for a bunker vessel which can be

used to bunker a range of different ship

types and sizes, with a focus on safety and

bunkering equipment;

3.■■The design of a bunker station: designing

a bunker station including best suitable

placement of control and safety systems

on the receiving ship;

4.■■Risk assessment of the bunkering operations,

including estimating leak probabilities and

modelling the consequences; and

5.■■Training needs for bunkering: requirements

for crews on both vessels.

DNV’S ROLE

DNV’s role, to date, has been in developing

state of the art bunkering procedures based

on current experience gathered from existing

ships in operation in Norway. DNV has also

modelled leak probabilities from LNG bunker-

ing as well as their potential consequences, by

use of the DNV softwares, LEAK and PHAST.

In addition, the consortium members have

developed a concept for a bunker barge and

a bunker station on a passenger vessel.

RESULTS IN 2012

“The main accomplishment from our side was

the modeling of gas dispersion and potential

fire scenarios given a leakage of LNG or gas

during bunkering operations,” stated project

staff. “We modeled the receiving vessel and

bunker barge in KFX software and modeled

This project’s acronym, BUNGAS, stems from its objective, to address issues related to bun-

kering of liquefied natural gas (LNG) when used as fuel on ships. Answering some of the

related challenges of LNG as fuel were part of the challenge, as LNG becomes a more

common alternative to traditional petroleum fuels. DNV contributed critical LNG bunker-

ing data and risk assessment materials to this wide-ranging project effort during 2012.

Peter is currently the Discipline Leader Operational Safety and Risk in Maritime Advisory. His position includes extensive quantitative and qualitative risk assessments related to maritime operations and ship-ping, including the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) approach devel-oped by IMO. The group is responsi-ble for the development of compe-tence and methodology in the field, as well as building a local market and supporting the global organisation. Peter has been with DNV for more than ten years and has extensive experience from work with risk assessment for worldwide maritime customers. In addition, he has con-ducted energy efficiency studies for various European customers and has spent years studying how to reduce emissions-to-air from ships including the related barriers to implementa-tion. Peter holds an MSc degree in Naval Architecture, received in 2000.

BUNKERING LNG AS FUEL FOR SHIPS

PROJECT MANAGERPETER NYEGAARD HOFFMANN


different leak rates, gas/LNG pressures and

weather conditions in order to see what the

potential consequences would be.”

The results of this JIP will now be used as input

to the ongoing development of industry stand-

ards and best practices for LNG bunkering.

There are very many initiatives ongoing in the

industry to develop rules and standards for

bunkering of gas and the use of LNG as fuel

for ships, and the aim is to contribute to overall

knowledge in the industry. DNV’s role includes

continuation of a full risk assessment, which

will include further study of the probability

for leaks occurring and gas igniting, the aim

for work continuing in 2013.

Ecore bunker ship, a very large ore carrier (VLOC) concept designed to lower fuel costs and improve loading efficiency.

© D

NV

/Eco

re d

esig

n c

once

ot

FACTS REGARDING THE BUNGAS PROJECT:

■n A three-year JIP with the main objective to develop a bunkering system for

refueling of commercial vessels with LNG including the development of

technical and organizational solutions with focus on ship to ship bunkering.

■n The main partners are: Germanischer Lloyd (Lead), AIDA Cruises, Meyer Werft,

MAN and DNV

■n Partly funded by German and Norwegian governments

■n Total budget: 1.9 million Euro

■n DNV budget: 200,000 Euro with main focus on risk assessment

MARITIME & CLASS > CUTTING EDGE 35

Liquefied natural gas, LNG, Natural gas, Bunkering, JIP, Joint industry project, LNG feasibility study

PA R TNERS FOR PROGRESS

DNV led this Joint Industry Project on the

feasibility of LNG bunkering in Australian

ports. The partners on the JIP included the

Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA),

BOC Limited (Linde Group), Farstad Shipping

Pty. Ltd., Ports Australia, Rolls-Royce Marine

AS, SVITZER Australia, Swire Pacific Offshore

Operations (Pte) Ltd., Teekay Shipping

(Australia) Pty. Ltd. and Woodside Energy Ltd.

Together, they conducted a detailed study

designed to produce practical results. DNV

and all parties are now optimistic about the

future of LNG as maritime fuel in Australia

after having screened the possibilities to estab-

lish LNG bunkering in ten Australian ports.

STUDY RESULTS

This study recommends that additional techni-

cal guidelines be established, and encourages a

clearer regulatory framework, along with finan-

cial incentives to kick-start development. When

establishing LNG bunkering, the critical busi-

ness phase occurs in the first 2–4 years of oper-

ation, when the LNG suppliers rely on a few

foresightful ship owners willing to be industry

forerunners. After some years of successful

operation, a second wave of ships is expected

to enter the market, which will reduce suppli-

ers’ uncertainty and reinforce the business

case. The JIP focused specifically on the initial

phase, and created roadmaps for necessary

action for the most rapid establishment of

LNG bunkering in shortlisted ports. An acceler-

ated approach could open up LNG bunkering

in Australia by 2016.

Key conclusions of the JIP were (1) that there

is an attractive payback period, from the addi-

tional investments required for LNG fuelled

shipping to the reality, and (2) that there were

no significant legal restrictions hindering

development of LNG bunkering in Australia.

POSITIVE POTENTIAL

DNV Maritime Country Manager, Tim Holt,

states “We have been impressed with the inter-

est and commitment shown by the Australian

shipping industry in investigating LNG as a

cleaner and locally available marine fuel.”

JIP Project Manager, Henning Mohn adds,

“Increasing LNG production along with new

international regulations boosts interest in

LNG fuelled shipping; this could actually, to

some extent, cause ships to switch from fuel-

ling with imported fuel to using domestically

produced LNG.”

The use of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as a fuel for ships is seen as one of an array of

options to address the future environmental and commercial challenges in the shipping

industry. With a proper combination of LNG storage and bunkering solutions, including

tank trucks, permanent tanks and barges in selected and destination ports, efficient LNG

bunkering can be established. In this 2012 project, DNV experts and DNV’s partners deter-

mined that LNG bunkering in Australian ports is feasible. The study presents details and

timeframes for development.

Henning now heads the Green Shipping Advisory group in Singa-pore following the merger of Tech-nical Advisory with the maritime portion of DNV Clean Technology, where he was Head of Section.

Henning has been with DNV since 2008 and is knowledgable in ser-vices related energy efficiency, LNG as fuel, emissions, ballast water purification and maritime technology. He has experience from running large LNG bunkering studies in Europe, Asia and Australia, with more than 17 years of experience from environmental engineering, and has until recently been the main advisor to a dominant green shipping funding scheme in Norway.

Before DNV, Henning worked at Scanship Environmental AS as Chief Marketing Officer, the Norwegian Institute for Water Research as a Research Manager, and at Miljø-Kjemi as Project Manager. Henning has MSc degrees in Environmental Engineering (1995) and Civil Engi-neering (1993).

LNG BUNKERING IN AUSTRALIAN PORTS FEASIBLE

PROJECT MANAGERHENNING MOHN

ECA

ECA

SOx – ECA

ECA

ECA

NOx and SOx – ECA

Existing ECA areas. Source: IMO.



“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

LNG TEU, LNG, Liquefied natural gas, LNG feasibility study, JIP, Joint industry project, Container vessel market, Baltic Sea feeder market, Emission control area, ECA, Pollution control requirements

POLLUTION CONTROL MEETS

THE MARKET

Reducing pollution is the subject of new ship-

ping regulations. Emission targets adopted by

the International Maritime Organization are

affecting the maritime industry in a series of

stages, requiring reductions in the emission of

nitrogen oxides and sulphur oxides, unburnt

hydrocarbons, and particulate matter as well

as greenhouse gases.

Emission Control Areas (ECAs), such as the

Baltic Sea market area, already have stricter

requirements regarding emission targets than

global standards. Starting in 2015, the maxi-

mum sulphur content of fuel oil is limited to

0.1% SOx for vessels operating in ECAs.

LNG is being explored as one possible approach

to meeting these needs. In 2011, container ship

owners and operators were asked about the

future of Baltic feeders. The feedback showed

the majority believed that the container feeder

size would increase compared to the fleet today,

‘newbuildings’ would have to replace existing

fleet and LNG as fuel would become an impor-

tant fuel type for the Baltic trade.

THE FUTURE IN FOCUS

DNV worked with partners, Shanghai Merchant

Ship Design & Research Institute, CSSC (SDARI)

and MAN Diesel & Turbo SE to develop a

1,900TEU gas fuelled Baltic feeder. The result

is a feasibility study evaluating 2-stroke versus

4-stroke dual fuel engine options, integration

with MAN dual fuel engines, and design evalu-

ation of the LNG tank and safety layout of the

fuel gas supply system.

The resulting model LNG-as-fuel design mini-

mizes hazardous areas and potential risks to

the safety of the ship, personnel and equipment,

while the economic analysis demonstrates the

feasibility of LNG as fuel in the Baltic container

feeder market area.

This JIP demonstrates a promising path ahead

for the realization of much-needed shipping

innovation in the search for efficient and effec-

tive pollution control responses, while also

illustrating LNG’s particular applicability to

the Baltic Sea market area.

We know that shipping transportation is polluting. New standards are impacting the industry,

challenging them to respond with innovative solutions. The use of liquefied natural gas

(LNG) as fuel is being studied for use. This Joint Industry Project (JIP) examined the feasibility

of using LNG fuel on container vessels, and involved a case study of the Baltic Sea market

area. A limited cost-benefit analysis was also performed. The results show the viability of

LNG as a potential solution particularly suited to this short sea shipping container market.

Pål has since 2012 been working as DNV’s Business Development Man-ager in Shanghai for the pre-contract and marketing department. He started working for DNV in 1998 in the Hull Approval section as Hull Responsible Approval Engineer, where he was PMA for the world’s largest cruise ship, Oasis of the Seas.

In 2009, he joined the Container Lift program. He worked for Seaspan, a major container ship owner, in Vancouver, Canada, focusing on operational challenges with a focus on fuel-saving initiatives. Returning to DNV, he became Project Manager for implementation of the Container Lift program. Further, he has been part of various development projects for container ships, including the Quantum 6000 and 9000, in addi-tion to being Project Manager for “Ecore,” an large, eco-friendly ore carrier.

Pål is a Principal Engineer in DNV Maritime Advisory, and holds a Master of Science degree from the University of Glasgow, with a focus on Naval Architecture, from 1998.

PROJECT MANAGERPÅL WOLD

LNG CASE STUDY IN BALTIC CONTAINER MARKET

Annual fuel and exhaust cleaning cost [MUSD] (reference oil price + oil linked gas price)

Vessels in the Baltic 2011

Mi

ff2-stroke diesel 2-stroke diesel + scrubber 2-stroke Dual Fuel 4-stroke Dual Fuel

10

8

6

4

2

0

HFO MDO LNG Scrubber

ff

Dry cargo

Miscellaneous

Pass/Ferry

Tanker

Container

Bulker

Roro

Offshore

Reefer

Combination


Gas carriers, Offshore oil & gas industry, Gas tank structural requirements, Gas carrier requirements, Independent tank types, Classification notes, Structural integrity of tanks, Strength analysis of LNG carriers, Joint Industry Project, JIP

NEW CLASSIFICATION NOTES

The structural reliability of LNG tanks is of

primary importance for the safety of gas carri-

ers and vessels using gas as fuel. In 2012, DNV

finalized a set of new Classification Notes for

Strength Analysis of independent tanks Types

A, B and C. Independent tanks are defined in

the IGC-Code as self supporting structures

which do not form part of the ship’s hull. The

documents are expected to be officially intro-

duced in June, 2013.

SLOSHING MEASUREMENTS

This JIP project continues to measure sloshing

onboard an LNG IMO. It is measuring the

structural response in the load carrying insula-

tion of the membrane type LNG containment

system to improve our understanding of the

nature and effect of sloshing impacts in LNG

tanks. The sloshing impact measurement sys-

tem has been fully operational since 2010.

However, collection of suitably large measure-

ment samples to enable evaluation of statistical

parameters and meaningful comparison of

statistical parameters between application and

experiment is a time consuming task. The main

activities in 2012 included tests to better under-

stand the relationship between measured struc-

tural response and impact pressure in the tank,

which is complicated by the need to replicate

the cryogenic temperature conditions in the

tank.

NEW NEEDS MET

DNV has classed vessels carrying LNG tank

types for decades, but the acceptable strength

analyses procedures have, so far, not been

described in detail in official documents. This

market segment has been relatively small, with

a few competent designers and with a close

group of DNV engineers handling approvals.

However, with the growth of the gas carrier

segment, new designers entering the field, the

introduction of new tank designs and the need

to distribute approval work globally, it has

become increasingly important to formalize

this to ensure uniform handling of class

approval.

■n 2013-082 Classification Notes no 30.12

(new) Strength analysis of LNG carriers

with independent Type A prismatic tanks

■n 2013-083 Classification Notes no 30.13

(new) Strength analysis of LNG carriers

with independent Type B prismatic tanks

■n 2013-084 Classification Notes no. 30.14

(new) Strength analysis of independent

Type C Tanks.

Increasing interest in using liquefied natural gas (LNG) has led to a boom in the market for

ships carrying LNG, and a significant drive for development of new containment systems for

carriage and storage. DNV has, for decades, developed competence, standards and guide-

lines to support and facilitate industry development in this segment. In 2012, efforts included

a continuation of a JIP for measurements of sloshing impacts in the cargo tanks of a mem-

brane type LNG carrier, and the completion of Classification Notes for strength analyses of

independent type cargo tanks for carriage and storage of liquefied gases at sea.

Tom currently works for Maritime Advisory as a Project Manager for internal R&D projects, Joint Industry Projects (JIPs) and consultancy projects related to the LNG trans-portation and delivery chain. He is also frequently involved in projects involving ultimate strength/progres-sive collapse assessment and colli-sion resistance assessment by non-linear finite element analysis.

Tom has more than 14 years of working experience with a focus on R&D activities and classification of LNG carriers. His major areas of competence are safety of contain-ment systems for transportation of liquefied gas, development of structural design rules, classification procedures and guidelines, ultimate strength and progressive collapse of structures, linear and non-linear finite element analyses of structures, as well as software development. He has also published and presented several technical papers at interna-tional conferences.

Tom holds an MSc degree in Structural Engineering (1998).

PROJECT MANAGERTOM KLUNGSETH ØSTVOLD

GAS CARRIER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

© D

NV

/Nin

a E.

Ran

gøy


Arctic shipping, Ice loads, Ice impact assessment, Ice classification rules

Håvard is currently working as a Senior Engineer in the Ship Struc-tures and Concepts section within the DNV Maritime Advisory Unit. His core competence is within buckling and ultimate strength of vessels and offshore structures, ranging from hull approval, rule development and maintenance to R&D, design verifica-tion and technical advisory projects. His main disciplines include Gas Carriers, especially focusing on the design of different types of contain-ment systems, and the design and operational aspects related to ships operating in ice-covered waters.

Håvard holds a Master of Science in Marine Technology from the Norwe-gian University of Science and Tech-nology (NTNU).

UP THERE

Changes in climate and technology are facili-

tating access to the Arctic. This is fuelling great

expectations in the shipping and energy sec-

tors. The ability to safely and securely exploit

oil & gas resources in the Arctic requires ves-

sels and offshore units fit for the conditions.

Ships are increasingly entering ice-bordered

waters.

New developments in the Arctic attract both

experienced and new operators, and vessels

without ice class strengthening. Ships operat-

ing in the Arctic already experience extreme

loads and impacts from heavy ice floes as well

as floating and drifting icebergs/growlers.

These unintentional, accidental impacts are

not explicitly accounted for by the standard ice

classification of ships. Additional hull dimen-

sioning methods may be necessary to provide

the level of structural integrity needed.

BEYOND ‘ICE CLASS’

Ice classes issued by classification societies are

used by the operator to document and stand-

ardize the capability of the vessel for regulatory

and insurance purposes, but are not linked to

the actual operational profile. Both customers

and designers are seeking greater confidence.

Evaluating accident scenarios involving

impacts with heavy ice floes and growlers

means studying the complicated non-linear

structural and material behaviour of both the

hull, the ice growler and their interactions,

considered beyond the scope of standard ice

classification. However, such evaluations will

ensure that structural integrity is maintained.

THE CUTTING EDGE ON ICE

The Cutting Edge on ice is the ice impact

assessment design now developed by this pro-

ject team. While no single defining ice load

modelling approach exists, this project team

has created a guideline that will lead the way.

It provides customers with the latest tools and

procedures to help them document the suit-

ability of their ships consistent with a variety of

potential ice impacts and loads. The guideline

also suggests applicable modelling and analysis

techniques to ensure that all mechanical aspects

of ship-ice collision scenarios are covered. For

more challenging areas, such as ice material

modelling and ice growler/ship hull interac-

tions, directions for beneficial and in-depth

study are suggested.

This work demonstrates DNV’s commitment

to reducing risk while expanding capability –

where and when it matters.

It’s not that ice rules don’t exist. It’s just that they don’t necessarily forecast accidental

impacts with ice. DNV has stepped in. Classification rules addressing hull strength for ice

conditions needed to be linked to actual trade experience. With the work of this project

team, a guideline has been established for the evaluation of such “off-design” ice load

inquiries. The opening of the Arctic continues. DNV is there.

PROJECT MANAGERH Å V A R D NYSETH

ARCTIC SHIPPING: UPDATING ICE LOAD TOOLS

Ice growler impacting a double hull ship side. Computer simula-tions using a non-linear FE model.



“I believe in the future resolution of these two states, dream and reality, which are seemingly so contradictory,

into a kind of absolute reality, a surreality, if one may so speak.”

ANDRÉ BRETON, MANIFESTOES OF SURREALISM

RULES COME ALIVE

The class rules constitute one of DNV’s major

bodies of knowledge. The new DNV Rule

Framework can revolutionize the way rules are

formulated in the future, as the framework is

capable of expressing rules (read formulas) in

a context making the application and interpre-

tation of the rules transparent to the end user.

When combined with the ease of automatic

execution, this body of knowledge becomes a

living asset.

PROJECT ACTIVITY

DNV worked with specialists with long experi-

ence and deep knowledge of hull structures

and wave loads. The goal was to achieve both

rule transparency and efficient execution of

the rules. The rules are implemented in the

DNV Rule Framework, comprised of a state-

of-the-art rule engine with interface toward

the applications using the rules.

A fundamental component of the DNV Rule

Framework is the ability to represent knowl-

edge in the form of rules and use them to infer

results. The DNV Rule Framework provides a

means for putting rules into a context repre-

sented by a task model. Task models and flow-

charting provide a valuable way of representing

procedural knowledge that naturally comple-

ments rules. Together, these form a framework

for expressing knowledge in a very transparent

way.

The DNV Rule Editor offers a long list of fea-

tures not easily available through traditional

programming:

■n Dynamic changes of the rules are possible

without requiring a new release of

Nauticus™ Hull.

■n Parallel rule computing is made possible.

■n There is a clear interface between applica-

tion and rules.

■n Many applications can use the same

rule-base.

■n Domain experts can implement rules without

having detailed programming skills.

■n Multiple rule sets and rule revisions

are supported.

■n Transparency of implemented rules

is provided.

■n Distributed computing – in the cloud –

is supported.

■n Rules can be managed independent

of programming language.

The work puts DNV in the forefront on

rule development.

IACS (International Association of Classification Societies) is presently harmonizing the

Common Structural Rules for tankers and bulk carriers into one common rule set. DNV

is heavily involved in the development, testing and calibration of the harmonized rules.

The Nauticus™ Hull program is a DNV software application for verifying the strength of

ship structures according DNV and IACS Common Structure Rules. The tool is used by DNV

and external shipyards and designers to verify the design of ships. As ship rules become

more and more computerized, the applied rules also become less transparent to the end

user. In this project, DNV has ‘lifted the veil’ on this dilemma – by creating a new rules

service software, DNV Rule Framework. This comprehensive software development has

been carried out in parallel with the harmonized rule development.

Ove is the Head of the Rule Tech-nology section in DNV Software located at Høvik, Norway. He joined DNV in 1993 as a Software Devel-oper and Software Architect. During the last ten years, he has also been Group Leader and Head of Section with Nauticus Hull as his main responsibility.

Before joining DNV, Ove worked at the software company, Coastdesign Norway, selling hull design and fairing, and stability calculation software, mainly in the Nordic countries. He has also worked on an offshore project at the Sterkoder shipyard in Kristiansund, Norway, where he was responsible for strength calculation and participated in making production drawings.

Ove has a Master of Science degree in Marine Technology from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) (1988).

PROJECT MANAGEROVE AAE

NAUTICUS HULL – CAPTURING ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE

Start

End

End?

Calculated Bilgeplate requirement

Calculatedplate requirement

Calculated plate requirement

Rounded Sheer

End?

Add results object

Add results object

End?

FalseTrue

True False

BilgePlate

if sloshing

True False

Add results object

Nauticus Hull, Nauticus™ Hull, Rules promulgation, Ship design software, Rule Editor, IACS Harmonized Common Structure Rules (HCSR)

Figure 1: DNV Rule Framework


Benchmark, Nauticus Air, Environmental efficiency, MARPOL Annex VI requirements, Emissions, ships, Energy efficiency, ships

EMISSION LIMITS

While the shipping industry is facing increased

international pressure to reduce emissions of

CO2, NOx and SOx, regulatory bodies includ-

ing the EU and International Maritime

Organisation (IMO) will begin enforcing

newer and stricter emission limits.

NAUTICUS AIR™

With the Nauticus AirTM tool, ship operators

and owners register and monitor the environ-

mental and energy efficiency performance of

their ships. Nauticus Air has been adopted by

a number of shipping companies world-wide,

resulting in thousands of reports submitted to

the DNV database, capturing and processing

structured and useful information. Daily report-

ing from ships, common for decades, is now

feedback that gives users of the Nauticus AirTM

tool an effective overview of the vessels’ and

fleet’s energy performance, and a useful meas-

ure for ‘active benchmarking’.

BENCHMARK OF ENVIRONMENTAL

PERFORMANCE

Nauticus AirTM provides a simple user interface

where the ship’s crew enters the daily fuel

consumption, distance travelled and cargo

carried onboard. Additional operational indi-

cators can be recorded. Aggregated data in the

form of trend reports are created, available to

the ship operator through a web access solution,

giving the vessel’s crew as well as onshore staff

an accurate picture of the vessel’s actual emis-

sions to air and operational efficiency. As a

result, captured data can be used to compare

the operational performance of different vessels

in a fleet, or other vessels of similar size and

trading pattern.

BENCHMARKING IMPROVEMENT

As a flexible, low-cost solution for reporting of

air emissions according to defined indicators,

Nauticus AirTM conforms with and supports

international (IMO) standards and guidelines.

The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator

(EEOI) is calculated from the reported data as

an indicator of the specific vessel’s operational

efficiency. This ensures compliance with the

requirements of IMO’s Ship Energy Efficiency

Management Plan (SEEMP), which became a

MARPOL Annex VI requirement for all ships

as of January, 2013. By continuously monitoring

the EEOI over time, and actively applying the

results for trending purposes, shipping compa-

nies can readily identify improvement targets

and set key performance indicators. That is

called looking into the future.

Per is currently the DNV Maritime Environmental Program Director covering technical and business development projects serving ship-ping community needs with respect to environmental challenges and performance monitoring. Per has worked with environmental issues at DNV since 2007 and, prior to his current position, his work focused on environmental performance, benchmarking and energy management.

From 1985 to 2007, Per worked in DNV Petroleum Services, the last three years as the Managing Director located in Singapore, with global responsibility for business operations including five fuel laboratories. Prior to his career at DNV, he worked 5 years as a Research Scientist at the Centre for Industrial Research (SINTEF) in Norway.

Per holds an MSc degree in Physical Chemistry from NTNU, Norway (1979).

Active monitoring of environmental and fuel efficiency performance in shipping is becom-

ing a requirement in our time. Simple, reliable and verifiable reporting is necessary. The

Nauticus AirTM tool has proved to be a viable solution to fulfill this need, and is a contribu-

tion to the emerging demand for environmental rating schemes, supporting ship opera-

tors in their efforts to reduce fuel bills and optimize operations. In 2012, this DNV project

further developed methods to establish performance baselines for individual ships and to

facilitate benchmarking when comparing performance between ships in a fleet.

PROJECT MANAGERPER HOLMVANG

NAUTICUS AIR – AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENCHMARKING

IN P U T : DAILYNOON REPORTS

DATA CATUREDIN DNV ‘DATA WAREHOUSE’

ANALYZE REPORT

CALCULATEBENCH-

MARKING

CORRECTIMPROVETROUBLE-SHOOTING

DNV ‘Nauticus Air’: Reporting & Monitoring Tool


Dag Harald is working in the Machinery – Newbuilding Section at the DNV Approval Center at Høvik, with responsibility for diesel & gas engines. He has worked in this section since 1999, and has been involved in type approval of all kind of engines. He is also responsible for NOx certifi-cation of diesel engines.

Dag Harald has also been the DNV representative in two external projects related to particulate matter (PM), one being the PM-NOx project headed up by Marintek, Trondheim, and the second being the EU-financed Hercules-B project with MAN Diesel and Turbo and Wärtsilä as the main project partners.

Before joining DNV, Dag Harald worked as a Development Engineer for the engine manufacturer, Rolls-Royce, in Bergen, Norway.

PartMatt, Particulate matter, PM pollution, PM emissions, Maritime industry pollution, JIP, Joint Industry Project, Verification

THE SITUATION

Particulate matter is not simply innocuous

pollution; the scope of its danger to health and

the environment is only now being fully recog-

nized. Particulate matter, also known as particle

pollution or PM, is “a complex mixture of

extremely small particles and liquid droplets,”

including a wide number of components, acids

such as nitrates and sulphates, organic chemi-

cals, metals, and soil or dust. These are emitted

directly from many sources – including vehicles,

smokestacks and fires. They also form when

gases are emitted from power plants, industrial

processes and gasoline and diesel engines.

MARITIME’S ROLE

The maritime transport sector is known to

contribute significantly to PM pollution, espe-

cially in coastal areas. While there is not yet

direct regulation of PM emissions from ship-

ping, it is widely recognized that the maritime

sector is one of the biggest contributors to PM

pollution of the atmosphere. Ocean-going ships

are estimated to emit approximately 1.2–1.6

million metric tons of particulate matter with

aerodynamic diameters of 10 µm or less annu-

ally, and this number is expected to increase

in the future as shipping activity increases

worldwide.

THE OBJECTIVE

Particulate matter emission from ships’ diesel

engines is likely to become the next hot environ-

mental topic. By participation in this project,

DNV stays in the forefront of understanding the

principles and mechanisms for formation of

particulates during the combustion phase. It is

vital for the maritime sector to have such com-

petence at its disposal, and DNV will profile this

knowledge externally.

RESEARCH LEADS THE WAY

PM emission data from ships is based on meas-

urements done in accordance with ISO stand-

ards which focus on total particulate mass and

do not differentiate particles by size and number.

A relatively high level of PM leads to a demand

for diluting, while methods used do not specify

an upper limit for the dilution ratio. This can

result in variability in measurement results for

high sulphur marine fuels.

Particulate matter is now being subjected to a

wide array of tests in order to identify not only

the effects of PM, but to find practical measur-

ing equipment, documentation and verification

procedures that demonstrate repeatability.

A wide array of conditions have been tested,

including the effects of PM from various fuel

types, and at different stages of the ignition

and fuel-burning process. PM sampling meth-

ods are also being compared.

Further understanding of PM emission forma-

tion in diesel engines is under study. Fuel char-

acteristics influence the formation of PM emis-

sions. DNV research is working to provide

information needed to advise on fuel blends,

as well as to guide developers and producers

of NOx reduction technology equipment.

RESULTS THAT MATTER

Experience from these tests has demonstrated

the complexity related to these kind of meas-

urements and the potential challenges related

to future, on-board documentation and verifica-

tion of PM/NOx emissions. The Joint Industry

Project work, based at Marintek, Trondheim,

Norway, has been supported by the Norwegian

Research Association and several commercial

companies in combination. DNV has also

funded the project at 900,000 NOK to date.

The results of this research, in the form of

scientific papers and global discussion, are

paving the way to a healthier future for the

marine industry and all living things. The

knowledge gathered will be used by DNV in

providing advisory services to its clients.

Particulate matter, or PM, is one of the consequences of traditional industrial and marine

operations, and has been the subject of inquiry and study in recent times. Research is

resulting in new knowledge about the risks PM presents within the maritime industry,

resulting in further investigative efforts, and regulatory discussion.

DNV is active in this work with original research geared toward assisting the shipping

industry in understanding the effects of PM, and in addressing the maritime industry’s

role in reducing PM.

PROJECT MANAGERDAG HARALD WILLIKSEN

PARTICULATE MATTER – GETTING THE WHOLE PICTURE


Nasal Airway

Pharynx

Trachea

Bronchi

Bronchioles

Alveolar ducts

Alveoli

Larynx

Lymph nodes

Vasculature

Alveolus

Blood vessels

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

NASAL, PHARYNGEAL, LARYNGEAL

TRACHEOBRONCHIAL

ALVEOLAR

Diameter (um)

Diameter (um)

Diameter (um)

Percentage of particle deposition in certain segments of human respiratory system (Oberdörster et al., 2005)

MARITIME & CLASS > CUTTING EDGE 4 5

ABOUT PM

The main components of PM are black carbon (soot), sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon and ash. Additionally, PM can be also divided into primary particles and secondary particles depend-ing on their formation mechanism. In case of diesel engine combustion, primary particles are ones produced in the engine and directly emitted into the ambient air, while secondary particles are formed already in the air mainly by interac-tion among gaseous species in the atmosphere via certain chemical reactions. They are mainly the products of atmospheric transformation of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide produced during diesel fuel combustion. Most of such particles can be found in the fine and ultrafine particle size range.

DNV’S PARTICULATE MATTER RESEARCHERS ARE STUDYING:

■n the nature and type of PM effects on

human health,

■n the methods and means of PM formation,

■n the development of evaluative measurement

techniques, and

■n identification of influences on PM formation

in combination with various systems for NOx

abatement.

Tomas has been with DNV since 1991 and currently works in the DNV Maritime Advisory section on issues concerning machinery energy effi-ciency, exhaust gas cleaning technolo-gies and innovation and technology qualification. Before joining DNV Advisory, Tomas was the Head of Section for Machinery Newbuilding Approval.

Within DNV Research and Innovation, Tomas was the initiator and manager of the Joint Industry Project, “Fellow-SHIP,” which developed and demon-strated fuel cells for maritime appli-cations. This project was selected a top sustainable solution at the United Nations Rio+20 conference in 2012.

Tomas has a Master of Science degree in Marine Technology (1990) from the Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, and a Master’s degree in Energy Management (2007) from ESCP (Paris) and the Norwegian Business School (BI-Oslo).

SOXAT, SOx, Sulphur dioxide, Pollution control equipment, Scrubbers, Emission control, Exhaust gas cleaning, Qualification of New Technology, DNV-RP-A-203, “Qualification of New Technology”, Fitness for purpose, Confidence review, Recommended Practice

PROJECT MANAGERTOMAS TRONSTAD

A CLOSER LOOK AT SULPHUR SCRUBBERS

FITNESS FOR PURPOSE

Exhaust gas cleaning systems involve new tech-

nology unfamiliar to many in the shipping

industry. That technology should also meet

fitness-for-purpose criteria in a multi-dimen-

sional and multi-party environment. Factors

include novel technology, operational issues,

compliance regimes and local and international

enforcement strategies. The challenge DNV

was given in this project was to respond com-

prehensively to the question, “How can we be

assured that new SOx abatement technology

and systems will work as intended, and with no

surprises?”

PROJECT DESIGN

DNV utilised Recommended Practice A-203,

“Qualification of New Technology,” as a frame-

work for supporting this task. Qualification is

the process of providing evidence that the

technology will function within specified limits

with an acceptable level of confidence. This also

helped establish the right balance between deep

investigations and effective result oriented pro-

cesses. Project scope included three steps:

1.■Define functional requirements, including

criteria such as ‘no downtime’, ‘lifetime

according to specification’, ‘no unacceptable

safety issues’, ‘meeting international require-

ments’, and ‘energy efficiency’;

2.■Identify hazards and develop a plan for

mitigating risks and hazards at all stages

and levels; and

3.■Execute activities considered part of a com-

prehensive technology qualification plan.

Upon completion of step 1, DNV issued a

“Statement of Feasibility”, documenting that

the technology is considered technically feasi-

ble and suited for further development and

qualification. After step 2, DNV issued a “State-

ment of Endorsement”, documenting that the

technology can be proven fit for service,

through the remaining qualification activities.

Following the third step, a Technology

Qualification Report is issued by DNV. Based

on successful execution of the technology

qualification plan, a “Statement of Fitness for

Service” can be issued, affirming that the new

technology is considered fit for service.

MANAGEMENT FOLLOW-UP

The evaluation process used provides several

stage gates at which upper management in the

client’s organisation can readily and easily

follow the project status. A high level system of

traffic light signals was created and applied to

indicate the degree of compliance with the

functional requirements. As a result, manage-

ment can follow-up and have expressed appre-

ciation for this project’s structure, the approach

used, and the usability of the results, going

forward.

The choice of strategy for compliance with upcoming sulphur dioxide (SOx) emission

requirements is causing frustration as owners weigh up the pros and cons of exhaust

cleaning solutions against low sulphur fuels. The SOx cleaning technology is paradoxical.

On the one hand, it is a favourable economic solution. On the other hand, there are

unknown risks that accompany the introduction of new technology. In this project, DNV

was asked to address this conundrum, and created a thorough plan for responding.

Closing the gap: qualification of new technology provides confidence

IMO environmental requirements, MEPC 184(59)

Core Class 1A1 – Safety for personnel and vessel

“Fit for purpose” = No surprises

LEVEL OF ASSURANCE/DETAILS OF REQUIREMENTS

How do you assure new technology’s fitness for purpose?

Requirements from Specification



“Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a certain point of the mind

at which life and death, the real and the imagined, past and future, the communicable and

the incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as contradictions.”

ANDRÉ BRETON, MANIFESTOES OF SURREALISM

Geir is the current Head of Section of Rotating Machinery, as well as a technical consultant on propulsion and auxiliary machinery.

Geir has had a long career at DNV, starting in 1992, including more than ten years in management positions. His technical experience is within the following areas: machinery drive-train components, power generator-drives and marine propulsion sys-tems; diesel engines and power machinery; shaft dynamics and design; control engineering; proba-bilistic analyses and measurement technology.

Before joining the machinery section in 1997, Geir worked in DNV apply-ing probabilistic methods for mechanical component designs, and developing models for calculating transient dynamics responses in non-linear machinery systems.

Geir holds a Master of Science degree from the Norwegian Univer-sity of Science and Technology (NTNU), taken in 1991.

PROPULSION MACHINERY PERFORMANCE INVESTIGATED

PROJECT MANAGERGEIR DAHLER

Propulsion machinery systems, Propulsion machinery design, Propulsion machinery dynamics, Propeller design, Ship propulsion

BACKGROUND – THE GAP

There is a gap between expected machinery

system performance of new designs and what

is experienced on-board, learned from real

measurements. The gap between theory and

practice is obvious with propulsion machinery.

The reasons are varied: vibrations, uncertainty

in diesel-engine damping and propeller damp-

ing, inertia and excitations, and propeller

forces.

DNV has a substantial amount of data based

on related measurements, made onboard

modern ships during the past decade. This

project aimed to fill in some of those gaps, by

systematically reviewing selected measurements,

comparing the data with design calculations,

and recalculating in selected cases, to identify

how established theory and practices should

be improved.

DATA UNDER REVIEW

Project team members went back, tested the

models, the conventions and past understand-

ings, and re-evaluated the correctness of the

margins of the technology. That revaluation

focused on risk management. “The innovation

element for this project, addressing design

models and reliable operations, was a conse-

quence of the request to save fuel and costs,

and get more efficiency,” states Geir Dahler,

“also thus we are talking about the critical zone

with physical loads, and about problems which

are related to fatigue – they don’t appear sud-

denly but over some years. They may occur

over 20–25 years.”

RESULTS

This project helped identify propulsion failure

boundaries by design element, reducing the

gap between designed performance and actual

performance. Overall, it highlights and devel-

ops DNV’s knowledge of propulsion machinery

performance, and is helping DNV remain in

the technological forefront in this critical area.

This project involved the task of reviewing ship propulsion machinery systems. DNV and

others started to see that modern propulsion systems were not behaving as expected.

Certain propulsion designs were at issue. First, the shaft dynamics were not as expected,

and, second, from a safety perspective, risk of damage and hazard needed reassessment.

DNV took the substantial data at their disposal and reviewed it with an eye towards

assessing new goals: gaining fuel savings, cost reductions, and more efficiency and less

fatigue in the design. The result is a re-evaluation of the state of the technology, and

an updated capacity to assess new designs being developed.

MEGA-TRENDS IN FUEL-SAVING PROPELLER DESIGN

■n Slower speed

■n Larger diameter

■n Less power per diameter

(de-rated engines)

■n Less blade area

■n Shorter blade profile



“Mistakes are almost always of a sacred nature. Never try to correct them. On the contrary:

rationalize them, understand them thoroughly. After that, it will be possible for you

to sublimate them.”

SALVADOR DALÍ

Arne works as a Principal Engineer in Electrical Systems. He joined DNV in 1996 and has experience as an Approval Engineer for electrical systems and equipment, inspection and testing. Besides being stationed at Høvik, he has been working for two years at DNV’s Shanghai Maritime Service Centre, the last year as the Head of the Section on system/statutory approvals.

Today, Arne is primarily involved in the development of new rules for electrical installations, helpdesk cases, clarifications of requirements and the evaluation of new technology in marine electrical systems.

Before joining DNV, Arne worked for large companies, with five years experience as manager of an electri-cal engineering department. Further, he has experience as a service engi-neer for electrical installations on ships, offshore units, and industrial installations, and as a project engineer for industrial frequency converter drives.

B ENEFITS OF DC POWER

Greener

■n Can combine energy sources to meet new

requirements for fuel efficiency and CO2

reductions and take advantage of new and

renewable energy sources such as fuel cells

and solar

■n More energy efficient and up to 20% more

fuel efficient

Smarter

■n Better dynamic response

■n Reduced maintenance

■n Possibly a quicker fault recovery potential

■n Would optimize fuel consumption at a low

investment cost while increasing engine

lifespan

■n Would reduce the power equipment

weight and ‘footprint’ onboard

Electric, Electric power distribution, ships, DC power distribution systems, Fuel efficiency measures, Pollution control technology

AC VS . D C P O W E R

Traditional power distribution systems on ships

have historically used AC electric current

(alternating current) with a frequency of 50

or 60 Hz. This means that the combustion

engines running the generators must be kept

at a constant speed in order to provide the elec-

trical power system with this fixed frequency.

Not surprisingly, engines operating on con-

stant speed with a low load have low fuel effi-

ciency. Developers have tried to address the

technical hurdles to using DC (direct current),

where diesel engines drive electric generators

with variable speed. Using DC for power distri-

bution enables diesel engines to operate with

variable speed, and can result in reduced fuel

consumption, increased engine efficiency and

provide important pollution control benefits.

PROGRESS BEING MADE

DC power generation system developers are

making headway, and two owners are building

new vessels to DNV class, Myklebusthaug at

Kleven yard, with an ABB-designed DC distri-

bution system, and Østensjø at Astilleros

Gondan yard, with a Siemens-designed system.

Before detailed engineering was begun, DNV

was commissioned to create a Design Verifica-

tion and an Approval In Principle. The pro-

ject objective was to evaluate feasibility and

functional requirements in order for the new

systems to comply with rules and requirements

made for traditional AC power distribution

systems. During the newbuilding phase, DNV

is following development and equipment man-

ufacture as a standard class contract.

SPARRING FOR SOLUTIONS & STANDARDS

While relevant rules and technical requirements

today are based on AC technology, relevant

and comparable functional requirements for

DC systems are being developed. One of the

main challenges has been determining how to

evaluate electric protection functions in DC

power distribution systems. The projects DNV

evaluated have also followed certification and

testing routines, and DNV

has been a good ‘sparring

partner’ for the designers

with respect to safety criti-

cal points.

What if you could reduce ship emissions of pollutants while simultaneously reducing fuel

consumption, increasing engine lifespan, reducing the installation’s space and weight, get

rid of transformers, and lower your investment cost? Sound too good to be true? We are

just talking about the difference between using a traditional AC electric power distribution

system or switching to a DC power distribution system. DNV has worked with two differ-

ent projects to evaluate use of DC power distribution system on ships. The projects have

examined the technical challenges and functional requirements of this emerging technology,

with a view towards developing certification and testing standards.

PROJECT MANAGERARNE FÆREVAAG

POWERING SHIPS WITH DC POWER

Onboard DC Grid: A significant step forward in electric propulsion increasing vessel efficiency up to 20%


HybridComp, Hybrid ship design, Dual power ship design, LNG fuel, Liquefied natural gas, Electric battery powered ships, Ferry ship design innovation, Fuel efficient ship design competition, Innovative design, impact on rules, Concept ship, design reviews

DESIGNING THE FUTURE

Ship design is constantly in a state of develop-

ment and improvement, both for fuel efficiency

and pollution emission purposes. Using lique-

fied natural gas (LNG) and electric power bat-

teries offer possible solutions. While a design

approval process looks at the equivalency of

valid related rules, new designs introduce con-

ditions not covered by existing rules, resulting

in a time-consuming and unpredictable process

that increases costs. To the degree that DNV is

able to assist in evaluating new design solutions,

it is doing its customers and the industry a valu-

able service. That is what they did in this project.

APPLYING EXPERTISE

Norway’s Transportation Department held a

competition in 2011 for an energy efficient

ferry, proposed for potential development at

the highway E 39 crossing, Lavik-Oppedal, on

the western coast. DNV initiated a request to

review and analyze two of the concepts

submitted.

One design was for a hybrid solution using an

electric battery pack and LNG-driven generator.

The second concept proposed a pure battery

driven vessel. Project staff included experts in

the System section of DNV Maritime, and DNV

experts in electrical, control, piping and

machinery systems.

The team asked how each design would meet

current requirements for safety and reliable

propulsion, steering and power supply. Project

analysis also revealed what systems and functions

were likely to be questioned, and what explana-

tions and documentation would be sought, in

addition to that required to meet current rules

and requirements.

WIN-WIN RESULTS

The resulting report creates a win-win situation.

The ships’ designers were given the reports for

their information, as would be done in a more

formal Design Review, while DNV experts have

identified potential rule improvements, modi-

fications that can make innovative design both

more predictable and a more attractive option.

Looking forward, new projects to analyze

potential requirement improvements are

already underway.

There are many paths in the forest of innovation. Some cross while others converge.

In the case of this project, both occurred, as DNV reviewed the results of a competition

to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions from a particular Norwegian auto

ferry crossing’s ships. DNV staff got access to two of the design submissions and created

an analysis of their feasibility, as well as a review of the rules that would be impacted.

Improvements in the designs as well as in the rules were identified. The results also

increase DNV readiness for review of more innovative ship designs.

Svein-Olav is currently Approval Engineer for machinery components, and Deputy Head of Section, work-ing with plan approval for machinery components, covering propeller, shafting, reduction gear, thrusters, compressors and diesel engines, pressure vessels and boilers. His earlier work at DNV included approval work of jacking gear for the offshore sector, and work on two projects as project manager, for revisions of steering gear and thruster require-ments. Earlier work also included quality assessment work for SEATRANS.

Svein-Olav holds a Master of Science degree in Marine Engineering from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), taken in 1994, in addition to having sustantial post-degree technical training.

MAKING HYBRID SHIP DESIGN EASIER

PROJECT MANAGERSVEIN-OLAV HANNEVIK

Fjord1 concept


52 CUTTING EDGE

FURTHER ON PMO – OPTIMIZING SYNERGIES IN THE INNOVATION PORTFOLIO

The PMO drives the innovation process

across DNV’s geographic divisions. This

ensures a consistent and transparent

approach for project development through

the entire innovation life cycle, from idea

collection through implementation of pro-

ject results into operational units. Further,

a centrally located PMO optimises the

synergies across various development port-

folios, supporting project managers and

project sponsors, enabling them to focus

on the subject matter, and minimising

their administrative work.

The PMO manages various development

portfolios, ranging from large, centrally

driven, efficiency and work process devel-

opment initiatives, to short term “bottom

up” service and technology development

initiatives like this “Cutting Edge” publica-

tion. Colleagues all over the world contrib-

ute with good project ideas, and projects

are carried out in teams consisting of sub-

ject matter experts assembled from our

global organisation.

CUTTING EDGE – SERVICE AND

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

Cutting Edge projects are typically carried

out within one year. The scope should ful-

fill expressed customer needs. Strategic fit

is ensured through an annual development

plan that links DNV strategy to focus areas

for development. Technology Directors

in our geo divisions, as well as the global

Service Directors, are involved in assess-

ment and selection of the best ideas. A

wide range of services and service docu-

ments (rules and standards, guidelines,

recommended practices etc.) is developed

in close cooperation with customers and

other external stakeholders, and run as

Joint Industry Projects focusing on key

industry challenges. Oil and Gas Frontiers

and Maritime and Class were our main

portfolios in 2012.

SEVEN FOCUS AREAS WITHIN

TECHNOLOGY LEADERSHIP

Seven core technical disciplines have been

identified as focus areas for development

of state-of-the-art technology within our

“Technology Leadership” initiative. Project

ideas originate from global networks of

subject matter experts within DNV,

working closely with our clients within

the following fields:

■n Environmental impact and risk

■n Hydrodynamics and advanced

simulations

■n Structural integrity and fatigue

■n Materials, welding technology and

fracture mechanics

■n Risk, reliability and human factors

■n Integrated systems and software

■n Integrated machinery systems

We welcome your feedback, whether it

is to get to know the projects more, or

suggestions for working together to

solve challenges and lead the way for

the industry.

DNV’s ambition is to maintain its role as technology leader within defined technical

disciplines, as well as to provide Cutting Edge services and technologies to clients in

selected markets. That is why we invest heavily in innovation and technology

through a central Project Management Office (PMO) in Governance and Global

Development.

CUTTING EDGE 53

For further information, please contact

■n Tore Torvbråten (Director of operations,

Technology and Services)

■n Evelin Garnaas

(Processes and Communication)

■n Linn Cathrine Sundby

(Technology Leadership)

■n Christina Høysæter

(Cutting Edge)

54 CUTTING EDGE

INDEX

AAgeing units ............................................... 10Arctic operations .................................... 23,40Arctic shipping ............................................ 40Automated drilling operations ..................... 20

BBaltic Sea feeder market .............................. 38Barrier management .................................... 22Bayes theorem analysis ................................ 14Blow-out prevention systems ....................... 20BOP ............................................................ 20Bow-tie analysis .......................................... 22Bunker stations ........................................... 34Bunkering ................................................... 36Bunkering barges ........................................ 34Bunkering risk assessment ........................... 34Bunkering systems ....................................... 34

CCat D oil rigs ............................................... 26Classification notes ..................................... 39Cold repair .................................................. 30Concept ship, design reviews ....................... 51Confidence review ...................................... 46Container vessel market .............................. 38Corrosion .............................................. 12, 30Corrosion monitoring systems ..................... 12Corrosion repair .......................................... 30

DDC power distribution systems .................... 50Deep water oil drilling ................................. 20Demonstration project ................................. 18DNV-OS-F101 “Submarine Pipeline Systems” .................................. 12, 16DNV-RP-A203 “Qualification of New Technology” .................................... 46DNV-RP-F101 “Corroded Pipelines” ............. 12DNV-RP-F116 “Integrity Management of Submarine Pipeline Systems” ................... 12Dual power ship design ............................... 51

EECA ...................................................... 16, 38Electric battery powered ships ..................... 51Electric power distribution, ships.................. 50Emission control .......................................... 46Emission control area .................................. 38Emissions, ships ........................................... 43Energy efficiency, ships ................................ 43Environmental efficiency .............................. 43Environmental footprint............................... 23Exhaust gas cleaning ................................... 46

FFatigue analysis ........................................... 28Ferry ship design innovation ........................ 51Fitness for purpose ...................................... 46Fixed offshore platforms .............................. 10Floating structures ....................................... 30FPSOs ......................................................... 30Fracture mechanics analysis ......................... 16Fuel efficiency measures .............................. 50Fuel efficient ship design competition .......... 51

GGas carrier requirements .............................. 39Gas carriers ................................................. 39Gas tank structural requirements ................. 39

HHuman Reliability Analysis ........................... 22Hybrid ship design ....................................... 51Hybrid vessels .............................................. 28

IIACS Harmonized Common Structure Rules (HCSR) ............................................... 42Ice classification rules .................................. 40Ice impact assessment ................................. 40Ice loads ............................................... 23, 40Independent tank types ............................... 39Innovative design, impact on rules ............... 51Integrated software systems ........................ 26Integrity management ................................. 12ISDS ............................................................ 26

JJack-ups ...................................................... 29JIP ............................................. 16, 20, 36, 38Joint industry project .... 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 25, 26, 34, 36, 38, 39, 44

KKey performance indicators ......................... 12

L Life extension .............................................. 10Life of a Well (LoW) ..................................... 17Liquefied natural gas ....................... 36, 38, 51LNG ................................................ 34, 36, 38LNG bunkering ............................................ 34LNG feasibility study .............................. 36, 38LNG fuel ..................................................... 51LNG risk assessment .................................... 34

MMajor accident risk indicators ...................... 22Marine propulsion ....................................... 23Maritime industry pollution ......................... 44MARPOL Annex VI requirements .................. 43Mobile Offshore Units ........................... 28, 29MOUs ................................................... 28, 29

CUTTING EDGE 55

NNatural gas ........................................... 25, 36Nauticus™ Air ............................................. 43Nauticus™ Hull ........................................... 42

OOffshore assets ............................................ 10Offshore oil & gas industry .......................... 39Offshore oil drilling ...................................... 20Offshore oil installations .............................. 18Offshore oil rigs ........................................... 26Offshore rules ............................................ 26Offshore wind turbines ................................ 28Oil & gas industry pipelines .......................... 16Oil & gas industry service vessels .................. 30Oil & gas well information management ...... 17Oil & gas well lifecycle ................................. 17Oil drilling ................................................... 26Oil drilling industry ...................................... 20Oil well integrity .......................................... 17Onshore pipes ............................................. 24Ontology-based methods ............................ 17Operational scenarios .................................. 26

PParticulate matter ........................................ 44Performance indicators ................................ 22Pipeline structural reliability-based methodology .............................................. 16Pipeline support .......................................... 24Pipeline weld analysis .................................. 16Pipelines ......................................... 14, 24, 44PM emissions .............................................. 44PM pollution ............................................... 44Pollution control equipment ........................ 46Pollution control requirements ..................... 38Pollution control technology ........................ 50Propeller design........................................... 48Propulsion machinery design ....................... 48Propulsion machinery dynamics ................... 48Propulsion machinery systems ...................... 48Propulsion systems ...................................... 23

QQualification of New Technology ................. 46Quantitative risk assessment ........................ 18

RReal-time risk assessment ............................ 18Recommended Practice . 12, 16, 24, 25, 30, 46Remaining life assessment ........................... 10Risk assessment ........................................... 14Risk modelling ............................................. 14Rule book revision ....................................... 29Rule Editor .................................................. 42Rules promulgation ..................................... 42

SSafer Operations Upstream Landscaping (SOUL) ..................................... 18Safety barrier management ......................... 22Scrubbers .................................................... 46Self-elevating ships ...................................... 29Semantic web technology ............................ 17Semi-submersible rigs .................................. 26Shale gas .................................................... 25Ship design software ................................... 42Ship propulsion ........................................... 48Software system rules .................................. 26SOx ............................................................. 46Specifications .............................................. 24Strength analysis ......................................... 28Strength analysis of LNG carriers .................. 39Structural integrity of tanks ......................... 39Submarine pipeline corrosion ....................... 12Submarine pipeline systems ......................... 16Sulphur dioxide ........................................... 46

UUpstream industry risk management ............ 18

VVerification................................ 16, 24, 25, 44

WWell control ................................................ 20Well information management .................... 17Wind turbine installation vessel ................... 28Wind turbines ............................................. 28WTI vessels .................................................. 28

© Det Norske Veritas AS Design: CoorMedia.com 1301-014 Illustration on the front page and on pages 2–3 and 32–33: Edmond Yang

THIS IS DNVDNV is a global provider of services for managing risk, helping customers to safely and responsibly improve their business performance. Our core competence is to identify, assess and advise on risk management. DNV is an independent foundation with presence in more than 100 countries.

DET NORSKE VERITAS ASNO-1322 Høvik, Norway I Tel: +47 67 57 99 00www.dnv.com

DNV cutting edge projects 2012

Documents

Transcript of DNV cutting edge projects 2012