The FPSO market: Available assistance from ABS
REGIONAL FOCUS: U.S. GULF OF MEXICOThe FPSO market: Available assistance from ABSPart 1 – ABS (the American Bureau of Shipping) has become involved in design / construction / maintenance of vessels, and offers several important services to guide prospective entrants to FPSO/FPS marketsMalcolm Sharples, Vice President of Offshore Project Development, ABS
The presentation comprises two parts. Part 1 overviews key guides / management systems / analytical tools, including: 1) the Asset Integrity Management System (AIM); 2) SafeHull analysis tool; 3) Rules and Risk-Based Inspection (RBI); 4) three guides for building / classing: floating production installations, offshore facilities and pipelines / risers; and 5) ABS SEAS – Site-specific environmental analysis system. A comprehensive set of guidance notes on Application of Synthetic Mooring Ropes is introduced. Part 2 will continue discussions on maintaining integrity through: human factors, 3-D visualization, surveys / inspection, risk analysis tools, regulatory / safety compliance, electronic data management and owner / class society-cooperation. Introduction
While industry eagerly awaits a final decision from the Minerals Management Service (MMS) on use of floating production / offloading storage (FPSO) units in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM), operators and service companies alike are actively considering strategies for deepwater development that previously were not feasible. Distance from shore, distance from infrastructure and sheer water depth have stymied development plans in recent years. But within a short time, several deepwater fields – many widely spread and some within massive canyons along any seabed route, making pipeline transportation prohibitive – may become economic using FPSOs for development. In fact, within the next decade, some 50 FPSOs may operate in the GOM in water depths up to 10,000 ft, with the first unit expected to be permanently moored within three years. As an important point, the availability of FPSOs – and shuttle tankers for transporting production to U.S. markets – may facilitate an operator’s ability to secure optimum pricing for quality, deepwater production without the possible commingling of oil from shallow-water reservoirs. Most, if not all, of these FPSOs will be newbuilds, purpose-built to address both regulatory issues and field economics. While exciting and certainly technically feasible, significant issues remain unresolved, including:
Further, to what extent, if any, will the Coast Guard or MMS require oil-spill containment and removal of equipment beyond current requirements. And to what extent will FPSOs be double hull. Industry Guidance From ABS ABS certainly is not in a position to answer the questions posed by the above list of issues. However, as a class society with 130 years’ experience in the marine industry – including more than 50 years in the offshore industry – and 47% market share in classing FPSOs, the Bureau is in a unique position to offer industry guidance in understanding how FPSOs can work efficiently and safely in the Gulf of Mexico and worldwide. Additionally, ABS is well suited to assist industry in its interface with regulatory bodies. With regard to FPSOs operating in U.S. Gulf waters, at least four U.S. regulatory groups will have an impact: MMS, USCG, U.S. Customs and the U.S. Labor Department (regarding manning requirements). ABS has extensive experience in managing the interface between these groups and, in some instances, even acts on behalf of the USCG via federal codes NVIC 10-82, 10-92 and the Alternative Compliance Program. Further, ABS is assisting MMS with a recently commissioned risk assessment for FPSOs to help the regulatory body and industry understand key hazards and risks associated with these "novel" types of facilities. Results of this assessment will likely provide a basis for development of regulations concerning use of these mobile production systems in the GOM. ABS the "Bureau" is a participant, and ABS-affiliate EQE is a facilitator for the study. And while FPSOs are a relatively "new" phenomenon in U.S. waters, the structures are successfully used elsewhere in the world, making their use attractive to operators eager to develop deepwater GOM discoveries. FPSOs are technically feasible in any body of water; however, adherence to appropriate standards / rules is a must to ensure safe operations and environmental protection.
Asset integrity management. Further, regardless of an FPSO’s physical location, operators have a critical need to protect their floating assets throughout their life cycles from a variety of external and internal hazards. ABS recommends an Asset Integrity Management System (AIM) to ensure that all facets of FPSO use are addressed, and in complete accordance with regulating bodies. ABS and its affiliated companies employ modern "risk" tools to assist owners in establishing / maintaining vessel integrity from early design, during construction, through safety compliance management and through inspection / maintenance. An organization responsible for asset management integrity requires:
Elements of integrity management include:
Combining these components into one "intelligent system" is critical to efficient operations and enhanced safety. Effective management using AIM requires a significant Information Technology (IT) network, incorporating a developed infrastructure of databases, software and information systems. A traditional asset integrity system is often limited to brief annual and special surveys undertaken by class society surveyors, or similarly qualified certifiers of contractors. This system confirms that structural / mechanical fitness-for-purpose requirements (according to class rules, or published standards) have been met. Using AIM, however, owners and operators gain an understanding of additional internal, external and systems hazards not covered by the rules. Maintaining integrity of the asset in the most efficient way possible is a fundamental goal of most sophisticated owners. An asset integrity management system gives a comprehensive overview of issues and leads to informed, life-cycle management decisions. ABS’ involvement in asset integrity management began in 1947 with the industry’s entree into offshore. Starting at that time, ABS’ role as a class society called for certification / classification of platforms all over the world. Although it is very difficult to quantify the safety benefits of certification and classification, there is ample evidence of problems identified during the process at design / construction stages which would have had major implications for cost / production as well as safety – had they gone undetected. The industry has good experience in coping with fixed-platform systems, which evolved from land-based systems. The transition – with the complications that arise when production equipment is placed on floating marine systems – has caused concern. Construction developments, operations as a site-specific vessel and regulatory approvals have occasionally been tortuous for both owner and operator. There are, equally, a number of areas where good initial planning can lead to a methodology which vastly improves the ability to easily manage a vessel’s integrity throughout the FEED / design / construction processes, and throughout its entire life cycle. The life cycle of a floating production system includes:
Asset Integrity Management services begin at the conceptual stage and provide informed life-cycle support until decommissioning. Maintaining integrity begins at the design stage, or even prior to that with a full risk analysis of the facility and the intended operation. By applying an in-depth understanding of the vulnerabilities to both natural and man-made hazards, future integrity can be maintained. Maintaining integrity over the future requires information on the current situation and as production goes forward. Even still, owners re-assess operations with the constant question, "Is this the best that it can be?" Design / maintenance involvement. ABS has progressively evolved from its original purpose of "classifying" vessels to being more intimately involved in design / maintenance as well as vessel construction. As technology developed, ABS progressed the rules to the point where the asset integrity of structural / mechanical components was assured through rules compliance. In 1993, ABS revolutionized ship design with its SafeHull analysis tool. Now, primary design is completed with automatic code checking – direct within the same software package. In the last three years, ABS has developed a system for asset integrity management for floating production / offloading systems. One of the developments arising from that decision was to extend the SafeHull concept to include SafeHull for shipshape FPSOs operating in site-specific weather conditions. In concert, SafeNet was extended to the offshore market. Maintaining integrity has two parts. The first calls for maintaining vessel integrity for safety of life, property and the environment – this is traditionally the role of ABS the "Bureau," which handles this with its class infrastructure. Class, however, implies a "minimum industry-acceptable" standard. Working the issues to a company-specific or different standard is not easily accomplished through the class system. Nor does the class system generally deal with issues that might lead to downtime, unless safety of life, property and the environment are also an issue. For flagged FPSOs, class is a basis for flag-state requirements. If, indeed, the vessel is neither classed nor flagged, then coastal-state regulations – which are similar to class – apply. If the owner is intent on its own standards, and several are, then deciding which standards are to be used, how they integrate together and how they can be shown to comply with regulatory agencies can be a chore. The second part of this strategy calls for improving the integrity on: owner / operator issues to owner-imposed safety levels; issues not covered by class and regulation, such as downtime and business interruption; and on-site or vessel-specific issues not covered by rules or standards. On the last item, ABS has embraced systems checks and is developing its basis toward risk-based rules and Risk-Based Inspection (RBI). An ongoing program is necessary and prudent, and ABS’ affiliated companies consult with owners to determine an appropriate level of ongoing inspection and / or surveying to comply with an owner’s, and other, requirements. As ABS moves toward RBI, this opportunity may offer more allowance for the "owner’s system" to reap the benefits of class, while selecting a system of compliance within the intent of classification. Maintaining Integrity By Design ABS has developed technology to specifically look at a vessel’s history prior to its going into service as an FPSO. For shipshape vessels, ABS’ SafeHull proprietary program is used, together with weather data, to look at the trading history of a vessel and determine approximate extent of theoretical fatigue at the point it goes into FPSO service. Since the loadings are somewhat different for an FPSO, and weather data is somewhat more precise for the intended location, ABS has developed SafeHull for FPSOs, to determine design suitability for a particular site-specific location. As corrosion is an ongoing problem with FPSOs – because ballast tanks are filled and emptied far more often than those of a trading tanker – this issue is significant. Fortunately, this condition is one of the variables that can be anticipated and input into SafeHull for FPSOs data when delivering the required scantlings. Fatigue is a critical issue. The costs of taking an FPSO offline for repair is enormous, so proper analysis must be conducted upfront to ensure the lightest, yet most robust structure possible. This point can be made for every element of an offshore production system, from moorings to risers to control-room design. Through the promotion of research / participation in joint-industry studies, understandings of the failures are better known. ABS has a reporting system to identify problem areas of all vessels, including FPSOs, so that designs / modifications can be enhanced. In some instances, a more robust "first principles" approach may be recommended – for instance in the case of innovative designs. While FPSs are site-dependent structures, it is anticipated that these vessels may very well become more mobile and require the same kind of checks used for the MODU community to confirm each site. Maintaining work pattern integrity for the FPS may depend on the ready ability of the owner / operator to re-assess the suitability for an existing FPS at a new site. With records kept in a suitable AIM system, the historical record can be readily retrieved and evaluation of another specific site quickly carried out. Three New Standards Guides
As the oil / gas industry ventures into ultra-deep waters, floating production systems are becoming an increasingly important field development option. The development of appropriately safe standards for cost-efficient design, fabrication and operation of floating production storage (FPS) and offloading (FPSO) installations is critically linked to the success of deepwater opportunities. For this reason, ABS recently launched a suite of three guides that bring technical clarity to efficient development / use of floating production systems worldwide. These are intended to help the offshore industry address risk-management / integrity-maintenance issues associated with deepwater development. The guides are, ABS Guide for Building and Classing: 1) Floating Production Installations; 2) Facilities for Offshore Installations; and 3) Pipelines and Risers. Encompassing the experience / knowledge of some 100 floating production / storage vessels which ABS currently has in class, the guides provide design criteria for assessment of realistic loads, comprehensive design analysis tools, a consistent and common basis for FPSO design / evaluation and opportunities for risk-based alternatives. The long-term benefits include reduced risk of structural failure, lower life-cycle maintenance / repair, and an improved ability to predict facility performance in a frontier environment. Floating production installation guide. This is the first such guide to match hull design with field performance, and it delineates design criteria necessary for a site-specific vessel from requirements for tankers classed for unrestricted service. Until now, the requirement for ship-type FPSOs was that the vessel’s hull satisfy all strength requirements for ocean-going tankers in unrestricted service. But many FPSOs are located in areas where environmentally induced loadings are far below the level used to define "unrestricted service for tankers." The guide also represents improved design criteria for vessels operating in environments where expected loads are more extreme than for trading tankers, thus enhancing vessel safety. From a safety viewpoint, ABS and industry are now better equipped to determine site-specific vessel requirements – which will provide more safety in harsh environment areas – while allowing planners to design with local, extreme-weather criteria in mind. This development is a huge step forward as a technological solution. ABS SEAS – Site-Specific Environmental Analysis System – Module of SafeHull for FPSOs, is a new development. By using the new system, FPSOs can be evaluated for actual stillwater- and wave-induced loads expected during transit, trials and while stationed onsite. By using actual wave spectrum and stillwater loads, ABS is able to obtain the most efficient structure from both strength and fatigue standpoints. Most shipshape vessels to date have used the North Atlantic trading route as the base requirement. There are many locations in West Africa and Southeast Asia where this full requirement is unnecessary, and with the new issue of ABS Rules for Floating Production Installations, reduction in required bending moment is now allowed. In the case of an FPSO to be located in a relatively benign environment, such as the GOM, ABS-required hull scantlings for a newbuild may be rationally reduced below those required in unrestricted service. In the case where environmentally induced loads are more severe than those for unrestricted tanker service, again the module will assist the designer in determining: 1) how much the strength of the hull needs to be increased, or 2) otherwise reduce the loads it may experience. Further, with a full assessment by SafeHull, owners will be able to identify "hot spots" or critical inspection areas. This process can form the start of an RBI program. Guide for building / classing facilities. Technology advancements in topside facilities in the last decade have necessitated a revised ABS Guide for Building and Classing Facilities for Offshore Installations. The guide incorporates requisite standards for production facilities installed on both fixed and floating installations, giving operators a clear understanding – and increased flexibility – of specific requirements for each type of installation. The previous version of the facilities guide did not make this distinction, leaving questions as to appropriate requirements for floating / fixed installations. For example, the new guide addresses issues such as stresses induced by acceleration forces of floating installations, for consideration in equipment design. This information is a real contribution to the industry, particularly as manufacturers move from fixed to floating production markets. Often an oil company will contract a manufacturer to construct the process equipment skids but the manufacturer does not know whether the skids are to be installed on an FPSO, with vertical, horizontal, heave and pitch motions, or on a TLP, which moves much less. Motions of these floating platforms are very different and may have unique effects on equipment. In fact, equipment not designed for a particular environment may not work at its best efficiency and this may even impact safety. The impact on piping by deck flexing, for example, can be significant. Design load on floaters needs to consider the stress induced by attachments to pressure vessels because nozzles connecting to vessels can "snap" or break if not properly supported. The guide is extensively cross-referenced with existing rules, industry standards and codes to help clarify application. Separately, the facilities guide clarifies the use of firefighting systems onboard floating installations. Fixed platform installations follow standards set down by the National Fire Protection Agency. Ships and floaters, however, are subject to international codes, such as Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). The facilities guide addresses the interface between marine and industrial systems, giving clarity for the application for appropriate rules and codes. The guide offers a method of integrating standards for topsides with standards for marine systems in an appropriate safety system. For instance, hydraulic power services, typically for marine support functions, must be designed to meet Steel Vessels Rules and Power Piping Code (ASME B-31). A similar system provides the process control service, which is governed by the Chemical Piping Code (ASME B-31.3), set by the American Petroleum Institute. The industrial systems, including the process support mentioned above, tolerate higher risk but typically require a high level of inspection. Confusion arises where both functions are served by the same system. The facilities guide also incorporates risk-based criteria for alternative use of risk methodology. The approach is derived from OSHA’s Process Safety management and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Risk Management Program regulations, opening the door to risk-based design. The flexibility allows risk analysis to be tailored to risks associated with particular equipment design, and addresses areas of concern on an item-by-item basis. From a commercial viewpoint, the owner also can utilize risk rather than prescriptive rules to determine how and where resources are allocated. Guide for pipelines and risers. This ABS publication provides technical documentation for the design, fabrication, installation and operation of offshore pipelines and risers. Issues addressed include design, materials / welding, testing / survey, and inspection / maintenance. The revised guide reflects current industry practices and technology developments, including limit-state design criteria, structural reliability analysis, risk management and assessment of corrosion, dent and crack-like defects. The guide incorporates the latest research for strength and fatigue analysis for rigid pipelines / risers, thereby facilitating cost-efficient, reliable design methods for deepwater installations. Because offshore design / fabrication is often unique, or of a prototype nature, it is rare that prescriptive requirements alone will be both applicable and sufficient. ABS offshore engineers work in concert with surveyors and industry / regulatory bodies to ensure that safety concerns are fully satisfied to at least equivalent safety criteria. The risk-based alternative is a technique using sound engineering practice to avoid emotional criteria. This latitude gives the industry improved access to risk-based design, supported by industry-accepted risk assessment techniques and bringing increased flexibility for deepwater applications. For the risk-based process, ABS is involved from the conceptual phase to address hazard operability (HAZOP) and hazard identification (HAZID) issues. The commercial benefit of this approach is that these standards allow operators to optimize dollars / resources by focusing capital on the technical areas of most concern for maintaining integrity through the life of the asset. Station Keeping, Synthetic Ropes In maintaining the integrity of floating production systems for deep water, station-keeping system integrity is crucial. This issue may have more significance to regulators in areas with tropical revolving storms, where loads are high, or where there is a significant platform infrastructure creating increased risk should an FPS break loose. As industry ventures into deeper water, synthetic mooring systems are expected to offer improved efficiencies for optimum field development schemes. Such innovative advances must be tempered with the wisdom of industry knowledge at the time. With this in mind, ABS has delivered a comprehensive set of Guidance Notes on the Application of Synthetic Ropes for Offshore Mooring. The availability of synthetic materials and alternate mooring systems is extending the economic capability of existing floating technology into deeper waters. By incorporating synthetic rope into current-day, deepwater technology, a floating production facility can support more revenue-producing equipment as the industry readies for ultra-deepwater basins. The synthetic rope guidance notes address this issue and other fundamental industry concerns, including non-linear stiffness or behavior, minimum tension requirements, creep phenomena and effective handling and storage of rope. To maintain the integrity of these mooring systems,
further research is needed on long-term effects, and the ability to detect, in-place, system deterioration. On
this issue, maintaining the integrity is best achieved through funded research projects.
Coming in Part 2: Continued discussions on maintaining integrity through: human factors, 3-D visualization, surveys / inspection, risk analysis tools, regulatory / safety compliance, electronic data management and owner / class society-cooperation.
|
||||||||||||||||||
ithin
the next decade, as many as 50 FPSOs could be operating in the Gulf of Mexico. ABS, with its 50 years’
experience in the marine industry, has evolved from its solely-vessel-classification role to more involvement
in design / construction / maintenance technology. Introduced here are several guidance documents / services
offered, or recommended, by ABS that can assist companies planning on entering this growing market in the U.S.
Gulf, and elsewhere.
- Applying ultra-deep LWD resistivity technology successfully in a SAGD operation (May 2019)
- Adoption of wireless intelligent completions advances (May 2019)
- Majors double down as takeaway crunch eases (April 2019)
- What’s new in well logging and formation evaluation (April 2019)
- Qualification of a 20,000-psi subsea BOP: A collaborative approach (February 2019)
- ConocoPhillips’ Greg Leveille sees rapid trajectory of technical advancement continuing (February 2019)
