DP Assisted Offloading O ti i B ili W tOperations in Brazilian Waters · 2015-01-07 · 08 Enhanced...

OPERATIONSOPERATIONS

DP Assisted Offloading O ti i B ili W tOperations in Brazilian Waters

Eduardo A. Tannuri The University of São Paulo

October 13 -14, 2009

Return to Session Directory

DP Assisted Offloading

Operations in Brazilian

Waters

Eduardo A. Tannuri (USP) Arthur C. Saad (CENPES/PETROBRAS)

Sylvio Henrique S. Correa da Silva (E&P/PETROBRAS)

Vinicius L.F. Mattos (E&P/PETROBRAS)

Alexandre N. Simos (USP)

Helio M. Morishita (USP)Sergio H. Sphaier (COPPE/UFRJ)

October 2009Tanque de Provas

Numérico

• Several aspects of DP assisted offloading

operations in Brazilian Waters.

• Objective: to define a more accurate set

of premises to the design of the DP

System of the new Shuttle Tankers (ST) that will operate in Brazilian waters and to

expose the actions that Brazilian scientific and industry communities are taking to

define those premises.

Summary

– Introduction

– Petrobras Operational Guideline

– Full Scale Measurements

–Comparison DP x non-DP offloading

–Model Scale Tests

–Hydro/Aerodynamic Interaction FPSO/ST

–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

Introduction

PeriodPeriodPeriodPeriod Offshore Terminal TypeOffshore Terminal TypeOffshore Terminal TypeOffshore Terminal Type

70’s 70’s 70’s 70’s 70’s 70’s 70’s 70’s -------- 80’s80’s80’s80’s80’s80’s80’s80’s 1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys1 FSO and CALM Buoys

90’s90’s90’s90’s90’s90’s90’s90’s CALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPMCALM Buoys, FSOs and the 1st SPM--------TurretTurretTurretTurretTurretTurretTurretTurret

19981998199819981998199819981998--------20092009200920092009200920092009 DPDPDPDPDPDPDPDP--------FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret FPSO (Seillean), SPMs Turret (14 units)(14 units)

Spread MooredSpread MooredSpread MooredSpread MooredSpread MooredSpread MooredSpread MooredSpread Moored (09 units)(09 units)

From 2009From 2009From 2009From 2009 more FPSOs are expected more FPSOs are expected more FPSOs are expected more FPSOs are expected (Spread Moored)

Significant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last yearsSignificant changes in Brazil over the last years

FPSOFPSOFPSOFPSO----based exploitation expansion More based exploitation expansion More based exploitation expansion More based exploitation expansion More ShuttlesShuttlesShuttlesShuttles

Introduction

Conventional offloadingNO - DPFPSO

ST

Tug

Introduction

DP offloading

Introduction

Today• Interval among loadings: 5 days • More than 600 off takings per year• 12 DPSTs: 9 from TRANSPETRO, 3 hired abroad

Comparison DP x Non-DP ST• Risk analysis recommended DP tankers to reduce the risk of collision (Spread Moored FPSO)

• 35% total operational time reduction• Time for mooring and hose connection phases decreased• Possible operations during the night

Near Future• New Spread Mooring FPSO’s• Higher demand for more DP tankers

Introduction

From 2002From 2002From 2002From 2002

� Trading Tankers Trading Tankers Trading Tankers Trading Tankers (gradually replaced)

� 04 DP Class04 DP Class04 DP Class04 DP Class----1111

� 08 Enhanced DP Class08 Enhanced DP Class08 Enhanced DP Class08 Enhanced DP Class----1111

� 01 DP Class01 DP Class01 DP Class01 DP Class----2222

� 04 more vessels on 200904 more vessels on 200904 more vessels on 200904 more vessels on 2009----2010201020102010

�More vessels are expectedMore vessels are expectedMore vessels are expectedMore vessels are expected

Until 2002Until 2002Until 2002Until 2002

�Conventional Trading Tankers Conventional Trading Tankers Conventional Trading Tankers Conventional Trading Tankers

Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program Renewing Fleet Program

Introduction

Petrobras specification

• 1994 - ST initial specification (BLS requirement)

• 1999 - ST with maneuvering assistance (thrusters) – no DP

• 2002 – DP Class 1 Enhanced

• 2006 – Additional thruster (8MW)

• 2009 – Additional thruster (10.6MW)

Introduction

• Constantly evolution scenario

• Cooperative programs with Brazilian scientific community

• Experimental and numerical studies to support important decisions about regulation and operational requirements for the offloading

Numerical Simulators

Experimental Facilities

Design Methodologies

Advanced Hidro/Aerodynamics

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

Operational Guideline

14

01010101 azimuthazimuthazimuthazimuth thrusterthrusterthrusterthruster

02020202 tunneltunneltunneltunnel thrustersthrustersthrustersthrusters


01010101 tunneltunneltunneltunnel thrusterthrusterthrusterthruster

01010101 CPPCPPCPPCPP

01010101 HighHighHighHigh LiftLiftLiftLift RudderRudderRudderRudder

Harsh Environmental OperationsHarsh Environmental OperationsHarsh Environmental OperationsHarsh Environmental Operations

2009 configuration

Spread Moored OperationsSpread Moored OperationsSpread Moored OperationsSpread Moored Operations

2006 configuration



01010101 CPPCPPCPPCPP

01010101 highhighhighhigh liftliftliftlift rudderrudderrudderrudder




AZIMUTH THRUSTER AZIMUTH THRUSTER AZIMUTH THRUSTER AZIMUTH THRUSTER 2,200 kW2,200 kW2,200 kW2,200 kW

2,600 mm 2,600 mm 2,600 mm 2,600 mm ∅∅∅∅

STERN THRUSTERSTERN THRUSTERSTERN THRUSTERSTERN THRUSTER

1.400 kW x 2.000 mm Ø1.400 kW x 2.000 mm Ø1.400 kW x 2.000 mm Ø1.400 kW x 2.000 mm Ø

BOW THRUSTERBOW THRUSTERBOW THRUSTERBOW THRUSTER

1.760 kW x 2.750 mm Ø1.760 kW x 2.750 mm Ø1.760 kW x 2.750 mm Ø1.760 kW x 2.750 mm Ø


16

ItemItemItemItemItemItemItemItem Enhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP ClassEnhanced DP Class--------

11111111

DP ClassDP ClassDP ClassDP ClassDP ClassDP ClassDP ClassDP Class--------22222222

DP SystemDP SystemDP SystemDP SystemDP SystemDP SystemDP SystemDP System ••ControllersControllersControllersControllersControllersControllersControllersControllers -- DUPLEX configurationDUPLEX configuration

••SensorsSensorsSensorsSensorsSensorsSensorsSensorsSensors02 gyros, 02 MRUs, 02 gyros, 02 MRUs,

02 anemometers02 anemometers

•• Independent Independent UPSsUPSsUPSsUPSsUPSsUPSsUPSsUPSs for the DP systemfor the DP system

•• 03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS03 PRS –– DARPS, Artemis and FanbeamDARPS, Artemis and Fanbeam

Enhanced DPEnhanced DPEnhanced DPEnhanced DP----1 X DP1 X DP1 X DP1 X DP----2: No differences concerning the traditional ST systems.2: No differences concerning the traditional ST systems.2: No differences concerning the traditional ST systems.2: No differences concerning the traditional ST systems.


Spread Mooring

Turret

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

Full Scale Measurement

• Full Scale Measurements of DP operations for validation of simulation codes

1st case: offloading of a Monocolumn platform

Property FPSO

Length 65.1m

Beam 65.1 m

Draft Full 18.0m

Draft Ballasted 11.2m

Depth 27.0 m

Displ. Full 54276 MTons

Displ. Ballasted 34315 MTons

Thruster Thrust Power

1- Tunnel Bow 28tonf 1935kW

2- Azimuth Bow 36tonf 2000kW

3- Azimuth Stern 36tonf 2000kW

4- Tunnel Stern 16tonf 1050kW

5- Main Propeller 220tonf 18891kW


-3500 -3000 -2500 -2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

Eas t Posi ti on (m)

Nort

h P

ositio

n (

m)

Approach

Hose Connection

Heading Correction

Disconnection

-1000 -500 0 500 1000

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

East Position (m)

Nort

h P

ositio

n (

m)

Sailing


Current16º ; 0.74knots

Wind

124º ; 10.7knots

Wave 98º

Hs=2.8mTz=4.9s

Current26º ; 0.77knots

Wind129º ; 10.5knots

Wave 89º

Hs=2.5mTz=6.2s

Before After

Surge Thrust (tonf) 4.3 3.1

Sway thrust (tonf) 28.5 10.2

Yaw Moment (tonf.m) 592 306

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

17:45:36 18:14:24 18:43:12 19:12: 00 19:40:48 20: 09:36 20:38:24 21:07:12 21:36:00

T ime

Sw

ay

To

tal

Fo

rce

(to

nf)

heading change

Sway Thrust

Heading correction


Cluster: 1800 processors;

50 TeraFLOPSVirtual reality environment

Tanque de Provas Numérico

(Numerical Offshore Tank)

Finite Element Line models

DP SystemMulti-vessel dynamics


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

BowTunnel BowAzi SternAzi SternTunnel Main Prop.

Mean

Th

rust (

tonf)

Before

After

Simulation

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

BowTunnel BowAzi SternAzi SternTunnel Main Prop.

Mea

n T

hru

st (tonf)

Before

AfterReal


Simulation Real

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 35000

5

10

15

20

Time (s)

Bow Azimuth Thrust (tonf) - Simulation

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Frequency (Hz)

Pow

er S

pectru

m (to

nf2/H

z)

wave frequency range

Bow Azimuth Thrus t (tonf) - Experimental

0

5

10

15

20

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

Time (s)

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Frequency(Hz)

Pow

er S

pectrum

(to

nf2/H

z)

Wave frequency range

Bow azim

uth propeller

Std = 2.75 tonfStd = 2.86 tonf


–Next step:

–Validation of a DP crane and pipe-laying barge

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

• Utilization of numerical simulator for:

– Failure / Consequence analysis

– Environmental Change

–Downtime Estimation

Comparison DP x non-DP offloading

• Failure / Consequence analysis


0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Co

nve

nt.

DP

Approach Mooring Connection Oil Transfer Disconection Way out

Moderate

Intolerable

Number of events



FPSO

ST

Environment

D~70m

Fprop

-500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

0 200 40 0 600 8 00 1000 12 00 14 00 1600 1 8000

50

1 00

1 50

Hawse r Te nsion (ton f) - max = 1 83.3 tonf min = 0.0t onf me an = 27. 7ton f

-500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500

50

100

150

Thr

us.3

5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500

-50

0

50

Th

rus

.4

Time (s )

Failure of Main Engineduring connection

Conventional DP

Hawsertension Azimuth

thruster



Typical DP failuresBlackout

Time to collision

-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

-25 0 -200 -15 0 -100 - 50 0 5 0 10 0 150 200 250- 250

- 200

- 150

- 100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

X ( m)

Y (

m)

Drive-off into the environment

176

204

140

148152

162

176

184

222

150

158

168

146

138

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Wind Speed (m/s)

Drive-o

ff T

ime (

s)

75% Loaded

Ballasted

Enviroment

Drive off

• Environmental variation


(1) (2) (3)

(4) (5)

Common variation Campos Basin

Non-DP Shuttle

• Environmental variation


Common variation Campos Basin

DP Shuttle

(1) (2) (3)

(4) (5)

• Downtime Estimation


Analysis of Environmental

Conditions

Generation of a set of conditions

Simulation (Time Domain)

Verification of safety criteria

Downtime

Uptime

Cu rre nt (m/s)

méd io N NE E S E S S W W NW TOTA L TOT AL ac um. (%)

0 0. 1 0 .0 5 1 9 2 3 2 9 36 47 41 17 14 226 2 .7 1%

0 .1 0. 2 0 .1 5 2 1 1 9 4 0 88 1 23 70 40 24 425 7 .8 1%

0 .2 0. 3 0 .2 5 6 7 2 1 7 0 1 04 2 40 1 41 39 12 694 16 .1 3%

0 .3 0. 4 0 .3 5 1 2 1 8 7 8 1 21 4 17 2 10 41 17 914 27 .1 0%

0 .4 0. 5 0 .4 5 1 4 2 9 9 9 1 28 7 74 2 41 22 12 131 9 42 .9 2%

0 .5 0. 6 0 .5 5 1 3 3 6 9 7 1 22 9 55 2 46 27 9 150 5 60 .9 7%

0 .6 0. 7 0 .6 5 2 8 3 9 5 8 1 02 8 55 2 51 25 8 136 6 77 .3 5%

0 .7 0. 8 0 .7 5 3 4 8 4 5 76 5 19 1 57 19 5 872 87 .8 1%

0 .8 0. 9 0 .8 5 8 3 3 1 3 64 2 58 59 20 12 467 93 .4 1%

0 .9 1 0 .9 5 0 1 1 1 72 1 37 12 24 14 271 96 .6 7%

1 1. 1 1 .0 5 0 5 0 26 1 30 2 6 3 172 98 .7 3%

1 .1 1. 2 1 .1 5 0 0 0 8 67 0 0 0 75 99 .6 3%

1 .2 1. 3 1 .2 5 0 0 0 2 22 0 0 0 24 99 .9 2%

1 .3 1. 4 1 .3 5 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 4 99 .9 6%

1 .4 1. 5 1 .4 5 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 100 .0 0%

1 .5 1. 6 1 .5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 .0 0%1 .6 1. 7 1 .6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 .0 0%

1 .7 1. 8 1 .7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 .0 0%

1 .8 1. 9 1 .8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 .0 0%

1 .9 2 1 .9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 .0 0%

TOT AL 18 5 28 2 53 0 9 51 45 49 14 30 280 130 833 7

méd io m/ s 0 .3 6 0 .5 4 0 .4 4 0. 52 0. 58 0. 50 0. 47 0. 46 0. 54

% to ta l 2 .2 % 3. 4% 6. 4% 1 1. 4% 54. 6% 17. 2% 3. 4% 1 .6 % 100 .0 % val or médi o

% >0. 7m/ s 0 .1 % 1. 2% 0. 7% 3. 0% 13. 6% 2. 8% 0. 8% 0 .4 % 22 .6 % 0. 45

% <0. 7m/ s 2 .1 % 2. 2% 5. 6% 8. 4% 40. 9% 14. 4% 2. 5% 1 .2 % 77 .4 % 0. 86

f aix a

U< 0, 7m/ s

U>0 ,7 m/s

• Downtime Estimation


FPSO DPST Non-DPST

Downtime

%

Downtime

days/year

Downtime % Downtim

e

days/year

Turret 1.8 to 2.4 7 to 9 2.4 to 3.0 9 to 11

Spread

Moored

4.4 to 12.1 16 to 44 18.5 to 26.3 67 to 95

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

Model Scale Tests

• DPBR – National capacitation for DP tests

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

Interaction

Offloading of SMS FPSO: Situations when shuttle is kept close to the borders of operational zone are not uncommon.

In this situations, significant wake

effects may influence the

environmental forces on the shuttle

•Offloading Operations: Safety criterion demands operation performed by shuttle tankers assisted by Dynamic Positioning (DP) system.

DP design must take such effect into

account

–Current

Interaction

-100 0 100 200 300 400-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

FPSO

CFD modelExperimental Validation

( )

−ρ−

−′ρ−

++′+′ρ−

+α′α′

πρ−

−α′α′

α′+

π−′ρ=

′ρ−

−+′+′ρ−

+α′α′′ρ=

+

α′+ρπ−

−α′ρ=

∫

∫

∫

∫

∫

∫

∫

−

−

−

−

−

−

−

23

Y4

r3

2/L

2/LD

2/L

2/L

2

2/L

2/L

2

v2o

R,Z

r2

2/L

2/LD

2/L

2/Lv

2R,Y

2 2

2/L

2/La

22

2/L

2/LC1

2R,X

r).r,0(Irr.16

CTL

2

1

ru.N.TL2

1

dxx.r)x(v).x.r)x(v)(x(C.xT2

1

dx.)x(cos).x(senL

TTLU

2

1

dx.)x(cos).x(sen2

)x(cos1.

L

TNTLU

2

1)r,'v,'u(N

ru.Y.L.T2

1

dxx.r)x(v).x.r)x(v)(x(CT2

1

dx.)x(cos).x(sen.Y.TU2

1)r,'v,'u(F

rvMdx).x(cosr4

1rvLT

4

1

dx)).x((CTU2

1r,'v,'uF

Heuristic Model

DP calculation

30º

Not considering current wake effect may result up

to 5,3% of DP power under-estimation !!!

–WaveShadow effect computed by potential WAMIT

Interaction

-600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

X(m)

Y(m

)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

-600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

X(m)

Y(m

)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

30% overestimation of DP

power

8% under estimation of DP

power

–Wind

Interaction

CFD model (FPSO only)Experimental or CFD Validation

Heuristic Model (still working)

DP calculation

15% total DP

power

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

150 160 170 180 190 200 210

Po

we

r (k

W)

Angle (degrees)

Total DP Power

No Shadow

Wind Shadow Ef fect

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Topics

– Introduction






–Conclusions

–Acknowledgments

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Brazilian scientific financing agencies

Acknowledgments

DP Assisted Offloading O ti i B ili W tOperations in Brazilian Waters · 2015-01-07 · 08 Enhanced...

Documents

Transcript of DP Assisted Offloading O ti i B ili W tOperations in Brazilian Waters · 2015-01-07 · 08 Enhanced...