Evaluation of the Safe and Failure Zones of Mooring and Riser Systems in a CALM Oil Terminal

Abstract

The mooring and riser system is the most critical part of an offshore oil terminal. Traditionally, these two parts are designed separately without considering the nonlinear interaction between them. Thus, the present paper aims to develop an integrated design process for riser systems with a lazy-S configuration and mooring systems in the offshore catenary anchor leg mooring (CALM) oil terminal. One of the important criteria considered in this integrated design is the offset diagram and safe operation zone (SAFOP) related to the mooring system and the riser, respectively. These two diagrams are obtained separately by different analyses; therefore, codes or standards are available separately for two components. In this methodology, the diagrams of both risers and mooring lines are incorporated into a single spiral, thus identifying the safe and failure zones of risers and the mooring lines of the oil terminal. This, in turn, leads to substantial benefits in terms of overall system response, cost reduction, and safety to the offshore oil terminal. To implement this process, three different riser lengths with the lazy-S configuration are considered at three different sea depths at the terminal installation site. For each condition, the integrated design of the mooring system and riser is executed according to the derived procedure. Then, coupled dynamic models, wherein both buoys and hoses are included, are developed using OrcaFlex. Results show that the criteria of the relevant regulations are not satisfied by reducing the length of the riser relative to the designed size. Further, as water depth increases, this type of riser configuration shows good coupled performance while interacting with the mooring system. In the cross offset mode, the maximum margin is created between the offset diagram and the SAFOP diagram, while the most critical dynamic response of the tanker and terminal system occurs in the near and far modes. Therefore, with this method, the best position for the riser direction with the tanker direction is 90° in the best case.

Keywords

Catenary anchor leg mooring / Integrated design / Mooring System / Oil terminal / Riser system

References

[1] Amaechi CV, Wang F, Hou X, Ye J. Strength of submarine hoses in Chinese-lantern configuration from hydrodynamic loads on CALM buoy. Ocean Eng, 2020, 171: 429-442

[2] ANSYS (2014). AQWA theory manual version 2014.

[3] ANSYS ANSYS Aqwa Theory Manual, Release 18.2, 2018, Canonsburg: ANSYS Inc, 38-94

[4] API Recommended practice for flexible pipe. API RP 17B, 2002, 44, 3rd edition, Washington: American Petroleum Institute, 71-90 http://mycommittees.api.org/standards/isotc67sc4/ndocs/2003/n246annex.pdf

[5] API (2008). API RP-17B. Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC.

[6] API Design and analysis of stationkeeping systems for floating structures. API RP 2SK, 2014 American Petroleum Institute Washington, 14-98 Issue October 2005

[7] Bae YH, Kim MH, Kim HC. Performance changes of a floating offshore wind turbine with broken mooring line. Renew Energy, 2017, 101: 364-375

[8] Brady I, Williams S, Golby P. A study of the forces acting on hoses at a monobuoy due to environmental conditions. Proc Ann Offshore Technol Conf, 1974, 1974: 1051-1057

[9] Cruces Girón AR, Corrêa FN, Jacob BP, Senra SF. An integrated methodology for the design of mooring systems and risers of floating production platforms. Int Conf Offshore Mech Arctic Eng, 2012, 44885: 539-549

[10] Det Norske Veritas (2010a). DNV-OS-F201 dynamic risers. Issue October, 91. http://rules.dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/DNV/codes/docs/2010-10/Os-F201.pdf

[11] Det Norske Veritas (2010b). Environmental conditions and environmental loads, DNV-RP-C205, 68-97.

[12] Eiken C. Pre-commissioning hose operations on the Valemon field in the North sea, 2013, Norway: University of Stavanger, 52-68 http://hdl.handle.net/11250/183174

[13] Girón ARC, Corrêa FN, Jacob BP. Evaluation of safe and failure zones of risers and mooring lines of floating production systems. Proc Int Conf Offshore Mech Arctic Eng - OMAE, 2013, 1: V001T01A024

[14] Girón ARC, Corrêa FN, Hernández AOV, Jacob BP. An integrated methodology for the design of mooring systems and risers. Mar Struct, 2014, 39: 395-423

[15] Karegar, S. (2013). Flexible riser global analysis for very shallow water. Master thesis, University of Stavanger, Norway.

[16] OCIMF Prediction of wind and current loads on VLCC’s, 1977, London: Oilcompanies International Marine Forum, 37-51

[17] Olsen MK (2011). Estimation of annual probability of mooring line failure as a function of safety factor. Master’s thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

[18] Orcaflex OrcaFlex Manual, Version 9.8a. Ulverton, 2015, Cumbria: Orcina Ltd, Available at: https://www.orcina.com/SoftwareProducts/OrcaFlex/Documentation/index.php

[19] Pecher A, Foglia A, Kofoed JP. Comparison and sensitivity investigations of a CALM and SALM Type mooring system for wave energy converters. J Mar Sci Eng, 2014, 2(1): 93-122

[20] Qi X, Chen Y, Yuan Q, Xu G, Huang K (2017). Calm buoy and fluid transfer system study. Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 932-939.

[21] Rutkowski G. A comparison between conventional buoy mooring CBM, single point mooring SPM and single anchor loading sal systems considering the hydro-meteorological condition limits for safe ship’s operation offshore. Trans Nav, 2019, 13(1): 187-195

[22] Wang J, Xie B. A simplified method for predicting global motion of moored semi-submersible platforms, 2012, Rhodes: Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 983-988

[23] Wang K, Er GK, Iu VP. Nonlinear dynamical analysis of moored floating structures. Int J Non-Linear Mech, 2018, 98: 189-197

[24] Ziccardi JJ, Robbins HJ. Selection of hose systems for SPM tanker terminals. Offshore Technology Conference Proceeding -OTC 1152, 1970, Dallas: OnePetro, 83-94