HEIDRUN TLP MODEL TESTS Summary of results (Pictures and figures are partly prepared by Marintek personel)

Similar documents
Freak Waves: A Suggested Definition and Possible Consequences for Marine Structures

TLP Minimum tendon tension design and tendon down-stroke investigation

Aalborg Universitet. Published in: Proceedings of Offshore Wind 2007 Conference & Exhibition. Publication date: 2007

FREAK WAVE EVENT AT DRAUPNER JACKET JANUAR

Characterizing Ireland s wave energy resource

On the Challenges of Analysis and Design of Turret-Moored FPSOs in Squalls

Metocean criteria for fatigue assessment. Rafael V. Schiller 5th COPEDI Seminar, Oct 8th 2014.

WAVE IMPACTS DUE TO STEEP FRONTED WAVES

Modelling of Extreme Waves Related to Stability Research

Background material and considerations of sea-state limitations for helicopter landing and take-off on passenger ships and ferries are undertaken.

RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION FROM WIND AND WAVES TO LOADS ON OFFSHORE WIND TURBINES

Development of Self-Installing Deepwater Spar. Ashit Jadav February 2017

Deepwater Floating Production Systems An Overview

PUV Wave Directional Spectra How PUV Wave Analysis Works

Site-Specific Assessment of Jack-Ups Part 1: Jack-Up Basics & Why We Do Site-Specific Assessments

TRIAXYS Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Comparison Study

Low Cost Flexible Production System for Remote Ultra-Deepwater Gulf of Mexico (GOM) Field Development, Phase 2

Crew Transfer Vessel (CTV) Performance Benchmarking. Presented by Stephen Phillips of Seaspeed Marine Consulting Ltd

Dynamic Stability of Ships in Waves

STATION KEEPING EXTENSIVE MODEL TESTING OF A DRY-TREE SPREAD-MOORED BARGE IN BRAZILLIAN WATERS

CHAPTER 132. Roundhead Stability of Berm Breakwaters

MaxWave Rogue Waves Forecast and Impact on Marine Structures

Wave Loads in Shallow Water 12th International Workshop on Wave Hindcasting and Forecasting, Hawaii s Big Island, Oct. 30th Nov.

IACS URS11 defines the dimensioning wave load for ship design, but what does it mean from a statistical point of view?

RIGID RISERS FOR TANKER FPSOs

The Benefits Of Composite Materials In Deepwater Riser Applications. 26 th March 2015 Hassan Saleh Senior Engineer 2H Offshore Engineering Ltd

Air gap on semi-submersible MOUs under DNVGL Class. Current & Future Design Practice

PHYSICAL AND NUMERICAL MODELLING OF WAVE FIELD IN FRONT OF THE CONTAINER TERMINAL PEAR - PORT OF RIJEKA (ADRIATIC SEA)

REVISITING GLOBAL RESPONSE OF FPSOS IN SHALLOW WATER AND THE RISER ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

Proceedings of the ASME th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering OMAE2011

Design Challenges & Solutions for Large Diameter Export Risers

Influence of wave steepness on extreme ship hull vertical wave bending moments

E. Agu, M. Kasperski Ruhr-University Bochum Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Sciences

ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines

2600T Series Pressure Transmitters Plugged Impulse Line Detection Diagnostic. Pressure Measurement Engineered solutions for all applications

Top Tensioned Riser Challenges and Solutions for Dry Tree Facilities in Asia Pacific

ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines

STABILITY OF MULTIHULLS Author: Jean Sans

Development of Accidental Collapse Limit State Criteria for Offshore Structures

Comparison of flow models

DNVGL-RP-C103 Edition July 2015

COMPARISON OF CONTEMPORANEOUS WAVE MEASUREMENTS WITH A SAAB WAVERADAR REX AND A DATAWELL DIRECTIONAL WAVERIDER BUOY

Floatover Installation Method

Semi-Submersible Offshore Platform Simulation Using ANSA & META

Numerical Simulation of Wave Loads on Static Offshore Structures

Hydrodynamic Analysis of a Heavy Lift Vessel during Offshore Installation Operations

An Investigation of a Safety Level in Terms of. Excessive Acceleration in Rough Seas

RESOLUTION MSC.141(76) (adopted on 5 December 2002) REVISED MODEL TEST METHOD UNDER RESOLUTION 14 OF THE 1995 SOLAS CONFERENCE

Probability of occurrence of rogue sea states and consequences for design

CVEN Computer Applications in Engineering and Construction. Programming Assignment #4 Analysis of Wave Data Using Root-Finding Methods

ESTIMATION OF THE DESIGN WIND SPEED BASED ON

Comparison and Sensitivity Investigations of a CALM and SALM Type Mooring System for Wave Energy Converters

Analysis of Shear Lag in Steel Angle Connectors

Results and Discussion for Steady Measurements

U S F O S B u o y a n c y And Hydrodynamic M a s s

for Naval Aircraft Operations

Hywind. Deep offshore wind operational experience. Finn Gunnar Nielsen, Statoil RDI

COMPARISON OF CONTEMPORANEOUS WAVE MEASUREMENTS WITH A SAAB WAVERADAR REX AND A DATAWELL DIRECTIONAL WAVERIDER BUOY

Steel Lazy Wave Risers A Step Change in Riser Technology for the NWS

Numerical Simulation of Basal Aquifer Depressurization in the Presence of Dissolved Gas An Update

Sea State Analysis. Topics. Module 7 Sea State Analysis 2/22/2016. CE A676 Coastal Engineering Orson P. Smith, PE, Ph.D.

Air-Sea Interaction Spar Buoy Systems

THE BALLISTIC PENDULUM

Innovative and Robust Design. With Full Extension of Offshore Engineering and Design Experiences.

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 7, Issue 10, October ISSN

Slide 2 / 28 Wave Motion. A wave travels along its medium, but the individual particles just move up and down.

A comprehensive method for the structural design and verification of the INNWIND 10MW tri-spar floater

Ocean Wave Forecasting

Proceedings of the ASME st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering OMAE2012 July 1-6, 2012, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Puyallup Tribe of Indians Shellfish Department

INCLINOMETER DEVICE FOR SHIP STABILITY EVALUATION

AGEC 604 Natural Resource Economics

Technical Brief - Wave Uprush Analysis Island Harbour Club, Gananoque, Ontario

Wind Turbine Shuttle. Ferdinand van Heerd

Sea-going vessel versus wind turbine

Energy capture performance

Statistician s Report on Bonus Points 2016

Test Method of Trap Performance for Induced Siphonage

139 South Meals, Suite 202 Drive, P.O. Box 3089 Valdez, Alaska / Fax 907/

17J Third Edition, January 2008 Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe

PARAMETRIZATION OF WAVE TRANSFORMATION ABOVE SUBMERGED BAR BASED ON PHYSICAL AND NUMERICAL TESTS

Offshore Oil and Gas Platforms for Deep Waters

Inter-comparison of wave measurement by accelerometer and GPS wave buoy in shallow water off Cuddalore, east coast of India

EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH ON COEFFICIENT OF WAVE TRANSMISSION THROUGH IMMERSED VERTICAL BARRIER OF OPEN-TYPE BREAKWATER

Subj: Explanation of Upper Level Capacity and Stability Characteristics for Rolling Boat, Inc. Vessels.

Floatover Installation Method

Minor changes. Updated for comments. Issued to inform

Table 1. Sequence of bubble and dredging tests with prevailing tide stage and number of bucket cycles recorded for each test.

LOCALLY CONCENTRATED SEVERE BEACH EROSION ON SEISHO COAST CAUSED BY TYPHOON T0709

Variation of Nordic Classic Ski Characteristics from Norwegian national team athletes

Ocean Wave Forecasting at ECMWF

1. For the purposes of this standard, the maximum weight capacity of a boat is:

Stress and deformation of offshore piles under structural and wave loading

Learn more at

ZIPWAKE DYNAMIC TRIM CONTROL SYSTEM OUTLINE OF OPERATING PRINCIPLES BEHIND THE AUTOMATIC MOTION CONTROL FEATURES

AIRMOUNT VIBRATION ISOLATION

Modelling and Simulation of Environmental Disturbances

SUPERGEN Wind Wind Energy Technology Rogue Waves and their effects on Offshore Wind Foundations

Moyno ERT Power Sections. Operational Guidelines

A New Approach to the Derivation of V-Line Criteria for a Range of Naval Vessels

Transcription:

HEIDRUN TLP MODEL TESTS Summary of results (Pictures and figures are partly prepared by Marintek personel) Sverre Haver, Statoil, December Content: Background for and aim of model test Model and instrumentation Environmental conditions Phase Examples, results and conclusions Phase Examples, results and conclusions Comparison with original design values December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary Background and Aim More severe accidental wave conditions (i.e. wave conditions corresponding to an annual probability of - ) are predicted. Significant wave height increased from 8.6m to m. (ULS sea state conditions ( - ) are more or less as before, increased from 5.5m to 6m.) With updated accidental wave conditions, the topside structure (in particular the MSBs) is much more exposed to wave impacts than accounted for in original design. Due to these impacts, increased structural response is expected in lower hull, in main support beams (MSBs), in tethers, and in tether connections to hull and bottom foundation. Life boats may also be exposed to wave impacts. The aim of the model test is to establish the background for predicting reliable estimates for the - response in all structural elements mentioned above. Phase should identify the critical - environmental condition and ensure that a proper instrumentation was carried out. Phase should ensure that the inherent randomness of the extremes was accounted for by executing a large number of realizations for the critical environmental condition. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary

Heidrun TLP December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary Test Model December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary

LOCATION OF AIRGAP AND FORCE SENSORS In Phase, the lifeboat force sensor was moved to a lifeboat closer to centerline. Some airgap sensors were also moved December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5 SENSORS FOR MEASURING DECK IMPACTS December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6

ENVIRONMENTAL CONTOUR LINES FOR SEA STATE CHARACTERISTICS H s and T p HEIDRUN SITE December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 7 Contour lines for individual wave parameters, H and T December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 8

Example from Test Regular waves with height m and period s December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 9 Example from Test 75 Regular waves with height 5m and period 6.5s December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5

MAX TETHER LOAD FOR REGULAR WAVES Note: Given height and period are target values, actual values may differ somewhat, especially for the height. TETHER LOAD (MN) IN H FOR REGULAR WAVES 7 DEG. Target wave period (s) 5 6.5 8.7 Target 65.7 7.8 56.8. 8 6.6 wave 99. 57.5 6.8 5 height 5 7. 6 (m) 8.7 59.9 TETHER LOAD (MN) IN H FOR REGULAR WAVES 5 DEG. Target wave period (s) 5 6.5 8. 5..5 7.9 6. 7.9 Target 7.5 8.7 8.5 5.9 6..6 wave.5 65.6.8 8. height 5 8.9. (m) 85.6 67.5 December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary OBSERVATIONS FROM REGULAR WAVE TESTS The most critical individual waves are steep waves with a rather large crest height. Too much weight should not be given to the total tether forces shown in table on previous page in particularly not for the highest waves. When repeating such extreme waves, the offset and therefore the setdown will be very much amplified. The mean tension will be significantly overestimated (5-%) as compared to the mean tension in a severe storm. Focus should be on the dynamic tension. However, this quantity is also somewhat conservative since an overestimation of the set-down will make topside more exposed to wave impacts. The criticality of steep waves may seem to be in conflict with the selected extreme sea state, h s = m and t p = s (irregular sea state). However, this sea state is likely to be of a combined nature, i.e. a considerable amount of the energy is concentrated around a period band much shorter than s, see figure next page. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6

WAVE SPECTRUM OF CRITICAL ALS SEA STATE Note combined nature of sea state (swell + wind sea) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary Example from Test Irregular sea states with h s =.m and t p =s December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 7

Example from Test 6 Irregular sea state with h s =7.5m and t p =5.5s December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5 RESULTS OF IRREGULAR SEA STATE TESTS PHASE The next figures show: The -hour maximum tether tensions for the most exposed corner are shown for all tests. The minimum air gap are given for a number of positions. (Zero air gap is defined as the airgap when the wave crest reach cellar deck level.) Test numbers, wind/current offset = 5m (xxx = 7deg. and xxx = 5deg.): hs=.m, tp=s:,,,, hs=.5m, tp=s:,,,5,,,,5 hs=7.5m, tp=5.5s: 6,7,8,9, 6,7,8,9 hs=8.8m, tp=7s:,,,,,,, hs=9.8m, tp=8.5s: 5,6,7,8, 5,6,7,8 hs=m, tp=s:,,,,,,, hs=9m, tp=s: 5,6, 5,6, : Repeating to check repeatability.,,: Repeating with wind/current induced offset: m,.5m, m : Repeating with offset m, 5: Repeating with offset m : Repeating with no deck.,,: Repeating with offset: m,.5m, m : Repeating with offset m. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6 8

MAX TETHER TENSION PHASE TESTS 7deg. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 7 MAX TETHER TENSION PHASE TESTS 5deg. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 8 9

AIRGAP AT FRONT OF MSB_WEST 7deg. Wave crest reaches MSB for an airgap less than 8.5m December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 9 AIRGAP IN FRONT OF MSB_EAST 7 deg. Wave crest reaches MSB for an airgap less than 8.5m December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary

AIRGAP AT TWO LIFE BOAT POSITION-7 deg. Wave crest reaches life boat if airgap less than about 8m NORTH WEST CORNER NORTH BETWEEN MSBs December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary AIRGAP AT TWO LIFE BOAT POSITIONS 5 deg. NORTH WEST CORNER NORTH BETWEEN MSBs December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary

AIRGAP AT FRONT OF MSB-WEST 5 deg. Wave crest reaches MSB for an airgap of less than 8.5m December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary CONCLUSIONS OF PHASE The most critical - sea state is the sea state defined by h s =m and t p =s. Large tether loads are also observed for a sea state defined by h s =8.8m and t p =7s. The largest deck impact loads are observed for beam sea direction. A comparable tether load level is observed for both the diagonal and the beam sea direction. This because fewer tethers () have to carry the most of the dynamic load for the diagonal direction. (In original design the diagonal direction was found to be the most critical direction because deck impacts were less pronounced.) In Phase a large number () of runs with different random seeds of the critical sea state are carried out for both beam sea and diagonal sea. For the most extreme events, the tests are repeated without the deck structure in order to isolate deck impact induced ringing from classical ringing. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary

HORISONTAL DECK IMPACT VERSUS UNDISTURBED CREST HEIGHT Phase and Phase results 7deg. 5 Hor. deck impact load (MN) 5 5 5 6 Wave_Cal crest (m) Wave_Cal: Undisturbed incoming crest height at nominal position of MSB_west December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5 VERTICAL VERSUS HORISONTAL IMPACT LOAD Phase and Phase results, 7 deg. Maximum ver. deck load (MN) 8 6 8 6 5 5 5 Maximum hor. deck load (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6

HISTOGRAM DECK IMPACT LOADS -hour maximum of each test with hs=m and tp = s, obs. No. of obs. 5 5 Histogram - -hour max horisontal deck impact load 5 5 65 85 5 5 Impact Load (MN) Histogram - -hour max vertical deck impact load 5 65 85 FIGURES CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE THE VERY LARGE SCATTER FROM REALIZATION TO REALIZATION. THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE NEED OF A RATHER LARGE NUMBER OF -HOUR REALIZATIONS OF THE CRITICAL SEA STATE, HERE REALIZATIONS ARE SELECTED. IF THERE HAD BE NO SCATTER FROM REALIZATION TO REALIZATION, WE COULD HAVE ADOPTED THE MEAN -HOUR MAX OF THE - SEA STATE AS AN ADEQUATE ESTIMATE OF THE - IMPACT LOAD. DUE TO THE SCATTER, LOADS LARGER THAN THE MEAN MAY BE OBSERVED FOR LOWER SEA STATES. IN ORDER TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS, A HIGHER FRACTILE HAS TO BE SELECTED. 5 HERE THE 9% FRACTILE IS SELECTED. 5 5 5 5 55 65 75 85 95 5 5 5 5 5 55 65 No. of Obs. Impact Load (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 7 -HOUR EXTREME VALUE DISTRIBUTION FOR DECK IMPACTS FYMAX_7_Fase + ( obs.) Momenttilpassing 9% FRACTILE:.5 -ln-lnp(x<x)) Data -min Gumbel -min - - 6 8 6 8 NB! NB! When selecting design impacts, more weight is given to upper tail than what standard fitting suggests, i.e. the design values given below are based on an eye fit to upper tail. T (MN) ALS DESIGN IMPACTS: FY_MAX = 5MN FZ_MAX = MN Both MSBs has to be checked for the horizonal impact load. The vertical impact load is mainly caused by wave-deck (not MSB) and has to be implemented in a conservative way. -ln-lnp(x<x)) FZMAX_7_Fase + ( obs.) Momenttilpassing Data -min Gumbel -min - - 6 8 6 8 T (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 8

DECK IMPACT AND TETHER RESPONSE Example December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 9 TETHER TENSION VERSUS DECK IMPACTS WAVE DIRECTION: 7 DEG. Estimated ALS impact 75 Stagkraft H (MN) 5 5 75 5 5 5 5 5 Hor. dekklast (MN) For a horisontal impact load of 5MN (ALS-impact), the corresponding tether force is likely to be between 5 and 5MN. Estimated ALS impact 75 5 For a vertical impact load of MN (ALS-impact), the corresponding tether force is expected to be between and 5MN. Stagkraft H (MN) 5 75 5 5 5 5 5 Vert. dekklast (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5

HISTOGRAM -HOUR MAX TETHER LOAD No. of obs. 6 5 Histogram -hour max tether load, H 5 55 65 75 85 95 5 5 5 5 5 55 65 75 Tether Load (MN) Large scatter is observed, Consequently a higher fractile has to be selected as the proper estimate of - tether load. (See comments on slide no. 7.) Histogram -hour max tether load, H 5 No. of obs. 5 55 65 75 85 95 5 5 5 5 5 55 65 75 Tether Load (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary HISTOGRAM -HOUR MIN. TETHER LOAD Histogram -hour min tether load, H No. of obs. 9 8 7 6 5-5 5 5 5 5 5 55 65 Tether Load (MN) Histogram -hour min tether load, H No. of obs. 8 7 6 5-5 5 5 5 5 5 55 65 Tether Load (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6

-HOUR EXTREME VALUE DISTRIBUTION TETHER LOAD ( TETHERS) -ln-lnp(x<x)) H_7_Fase + Momenttilpassing Data -hour max Gumbel - - 6 8 6 8 T (MN) NB!NB! MORE WEIGHT IS GIVEN TO UPPER TAIL WHEN CHARACTERISTIC VALUES ARE SELECTED, SEE ALSO SLIDE No 7. 9% FRACTILE ASSUMED TO ACCOUNT PROPERLY FOR SCATTER AROUND THE MEAN. (See slide no.7) 9% FRACTILE:.5 ALS TETHER LOAD, AUTUMN : TETHERS: 5MN PR. TETHER: 6.5MN ALS ORIGINAL DESIGN: -ln-lnp(x<x)) - H_7_Fase + Momenttilpassing Data -hour max Gumbel PR. TETHER: 5.MN - 6 8 6 8 T (MN) December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary EXAMPLE : EFFECT OF DECK IMPACT ON TETHER LOADING December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 7

BUDGET ALS MAX TETHER LOAD (The last column will be updated as the results from Phase is properly analysed.) SOURCE WAVE SLAMMING INDUCED RINGING (INCL. AS STATIC LOAD IN ORIGINAL DESIGN) DYNAMIC LOAD, EXCL. RINGING ORIGINAL DESIGN.6 MN 7MN MODEL TEST (PRELIMINARY APPROXIMATE NUMBERS EXCEPT THE SUM) -MN 8MN CLASSICAL RINGING MN MN (*) SUM DYNAMIC 7.5MN 6MN SUM TOTAL 5.5MN 6MN (Preliminary) (*) Based on tests with and without deck, at present no reason to change original ringing estimate. Further data analysis will be carried out. A CONSIDERABLE INCREASE IN THE DYNAMIC LOAD IS ESTIMATED December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 5 CONCLUSIONS OF TESTS - TOPSIDE IMPACT LOADS ARE ESTIMATED TO BE: 5MN HORISONTAL AND MN VERTICAL. ALS DYNAMIC TETHER LOAD (NON-YIELDING FULL SCALE MODEL ) FROM IRREGULAR WAVE TESTS (H S =m and T P =s): 6MN DYNAMIC TETHER LOAD (NON-YIELDING FULL SCALE MODEL) FROM REGULAR WAVE TEST (ALS WAVE H=m and T=s): MN (THIS LOAD IS RATHER CONSERVATIVE SINCE THE REGULAR WAVE TEST CAUSE A VERY LARGE MEAN OFFSET AND, CONSEQUENTLY, A LARGE MEAN SET-DOWN.) SUGGESTED ALS ROBUSTNESS CRITERIUM: THE NUMERICAL PLATFORM RESPONSE ANALYSES ACCOUNTING FOR YIELDING AND SLACK TETHERS OF REAL FULL SCALE MODEL - SHALL ENSURE THAT THE HEIDRUN TLP WILL- WITH A REASONABLE MARGIN - WITHSTAND THE EXTERNAL FORCES CAUSING A DYNAMIC TETHER LOAD OF 6MN WHEN NO YIELDING IS ACCOUNTED FOR. AS A MEASURE OF A REASONABLE MARGIN MN DYNAMIC TETHER LOAD IS SUGGESTED. December Heidrun TLP Model Tests - Summary 6 8