ISODC, IIT Kharagpur Team, May 2008

IIT Kharagpur, May 2008
Page 1

DESIGN OF FPSO FOR USAN FIELD, NIGERIA

Submitted By:-
ASHISH KUMAR JHA
GYANENDU SAHOO
PRABHAKAR TIWARI
SAURABH SINGH
VIVEK GUPTA

Department of Ocean Engineering and Naval Architecture
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur-721302, India

Page 2

CONTENTS
LIST OF IMPORTANT TABLES......4
LIST OF FIGURES..5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......6
INTRODUCTION...11
COMPETANCY AREAS...18
1. GENERAL ARRANGEMENT & HULL DESIGN..18
1.1 Preliminary Analysis....18
1.2 Checking against ILLC regulations..21
1.3 Checking against MARPOL 73/78 Regulations..22
1.4Frame Spacing...22
1.5 Slop Tanks and Fuel Oil tanks .....22
1.6Crude Oil Tanks and Compartments definitions...23
1.7 Engine Room Layout....25
1.8Accommodation Layout....29
1.9Topsides.....38
2. WEIGHT, BUOYANCY AND STABILITY..41
2.1 Weight and Buoyancy ..41
2.2 Stability Considerations........46
2.2.1 Intact Stability.....47
2.2.2 Damage Stability.....49
2.2.3 Probabilistic Damage Assessment.....52
3. WIND AND CURRENT LOADING..57
3.1 Wind Force Calculations..57
3.2 Current Force Calculations..58
3.3 Steady Wave Loads.59
3.4 Net Environmental Loads....60
4. STRENGTH AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN GENERAL...61
4.1 Work Flow...62
4.2 Load Calculations63
4.3 Results..65
4.4 Structural Components.65
4.5 Final Analysis...70
5. MOORING AND STATION KEEPING....72
5.1 Design Environmental Criteria.....72
5.2 Vessel Design Characteristics...73
5.3 Vessel Offsets and Design Pretensions.....74
5.4 Analytical Procedure....75
5.5 Mooring Line Configuration.75
5.6 Mooring System Evaluation.75
5.6.1 Environmental Loads..75
5.6.2 Mooring System Design......76
5.7 Anchoring System....77
5.7.1 Anchor Design.....78
5.8 Turret Concept..79
5.8.1 Function of a Turret System.......80

Page 3

5.8.2 Weathervaning....81
5.8.3 Parts of a Turret system......81
5.8.4 Interfaces.....82
5.8.5 Load Transfer for a Turret System..82
6. POWER GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ELECTRIC LOAD ANALYSIS.83
6.1Calculation of various load cases..84
6.2 Power Estimation for Production Modules.......86
6.3 Selection of TPPL (Total Plant Peak Load)...88
6.4 Selection of Power Plant....89
6.5 Use of Heat Recovery System...89
6.6 Power Plant Calculations.......90
7. RISK ASSESSMENT ......100
7.1 Leak of Gas and/or Oil...101
7.2 Non process Incident..102
7.3 Marine Events.....103
7.4 Hazards due to Shuttle Tanker Operations.....105
7.4.1 Approaching and Berthing....105
7.4.2 Connection of Shuttle Tanker with FPSO.....106
7.4.3 Unberthing and Departure.....107
7.5 Risk Evaluation...108
7.6 Escape Route..109
8. CONSTRUCTION, FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION....109
8.1 Activities in FPSO Construction....110
8.2 FPSO Construction Process...110
8.3 Block Distribution of FPSO...111
8.4 Construction Strategy.....113
8.5 Block Fabrication....114
8.6 Engine Room Construction.....117
8.7 Welding Details..118
8.8 Outfitting.....119
8.9 Topside Modules Installation....119
8.10 Installation of FPSO.120
9. DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING..120
9.1 Requirements for Recycling...121
9.1.1 Risers.121
9.1.2Turret Re-utilization...122
9.1.3 Subsea Systems......123
9.2 Dismantling (Ship Breaking)..................................123
9.3 Conclusion..124

References...125

APPENDIX.126
APPENDIX I...127
APPENDIX II.131
APPENDIX III....204
APPENDIX IV....215
APPENDIX V.240
APPENDIX VI....251
APPENDIX VII..268

Page 4

LIST OF IMPORTANT TABLES

1.1 ABS requirements for Accommodation.30
1.2 Topsides Definitions..39
2.1 Final weight chart of Power plant..42
2.2 Weight and CG of topside modules...43
2.3 Weight of cargo tanks....44
2.4 Weight of slop tanks..45
2.5 Weight of fresh water tanks...45
2.6 Weight of MDO tanks...45
2.7 Calculation of various drafts of FPSO..46
2.8 Offloading schedule when FPSO is full48
2.9 Day 6 type offloading schedule....49
2.10 Day 11 type offloading schedule.49
2.11 Extent of side damage..50
2.12 Volume of wing and centre cargo tanks...51
2.13 Damage cases Analysis...52
2.14 Calculation of S1..55
2.15 Calculation of S2..56
2.16 Calculation of S12.56
2.17 Calculation of PiSi....56
3.1 Dimension and extreme drafts...57
3.2 Wind force results for extreme drafts58
3.3 Current force results for extreme drafts.59
4.1 Horizontal Wave bending moment64
4.2 Wave bending moment from 100 yr data..65
4.3 Design bending moment65
4.4 Final Scantlings..71
5.1 British Standard-6349 anchor system efficiencies.78
5.2 Comparison among 3 types of turret systems80
6.1 Efficiency data of motor85
6.2 Factors determining size of pump..87
6.3 Selection of Total Plant peak load.88
6.4 Rated power of engine...92
6.5 Engine dimensions.....92
7.1 Risk matrix...100
7.2 Risk assessment of Leak of oil and gas102
7.3 Risk assessment of Non Process Incident103
7.4 Risk assessment for marine event hazards...105
7.5 Hazards due to approaching and berthing106
7.6 Hazards due to connection of shuttle tanker with FPSO..107
7.7 Risk evaluation.108
8.1 Block in cargo hold..113
8.2 Block in engine room...113
8.3 Problem due to part fabrication115
8.4 Welding processes119

Page 5

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 Profile and Plan View.18
1.2 Preliminary Estimate of Dimensions..19
1.3Estimation of Fuel and Slop Tank volumes.23
1.4 Cargo and Ballast Tanks.24
1.5 Frames where Bulkheads are located.24
1.6 Engine Room layout : Elevation.25
1.7 Engine Room layout : Plan: Level 0...26
1.10 Plan of Living Quarters.31
1.11 Plan of Helideck31
1.12 Isometric view of Accommodation...32
1.13 Plan of Floor 1..33
1.14 Plan of Floor 2 and 5.34
1.15 Plan of Floor 3 and 6.35
1.16 Plan of Floor 4..36
1.17 Plan Floor 7(for Officers) 37
1.18 Topsides : Plan View40
2.1 The US Navy criteria..47
2.2 Equivalent Cross Sectional View53
3.1 Added Resistance RAO for full load case..59
3.2 Added Resistance RAO for ballast load case.60
4.1 Wave Form .62
4.2 Midship section...71
5.1 Major Oil Producing Areas Worldwide..72
5.2 Mooring Analysis Flow Chart.74
5.3 Deep Water Mooring Line Configuration...75
5.4 Generic Subsystem within a typical mooring system.80
5.5 Schematic Diagram showing the interfaces for an FPSO turret.81
6.1 A Centrifugal Pump....84
6.2 The diagram showing entire on field processing....87
6.3 FPSO prime mover electrical net efficiencies at various loads...91
6.4 FPSO prime mover de-rating at various ambient temperatures..91
6.5 The dimensions of Engine...93
6.6 Essential Generator.97
6.7 Emergency Generator.98
6.8 Power Distribution..99
8.1 Main Activities in FPSO Construction.110
8.2 Group Technology for Advanced Shipbuilding111
8.3 Block Construction of FPSO.112
8.4 Construction Strategy....113
8.5 Sub Block Assembly.....115
8.6 Flat Panel...116
8.7 Block Assembly....117
8.8 Engine Room Construction...118
8.9 Matching the Frame Spacing of two structures....119
9.1 Major ship breaking Tasks (taken from www.osha.gov) .124

Page 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OWNERS REQUIREMENTS
The USAN field located 110km off the coast of Nigeria has to be developed for commercial production of
crude oil which is capable of producing up to 200,000 bbls/d. The owner is not interested in laying a
pipeline to the shore as the crude oil produced will be directly supplied to the consumer refineries. The
structure must be able to store 2 million barrels of oil at production site. The owner wants the offshore
structure to be compliant with the rules of the day and is also interested in proper decommissioning of the
structure due to ever increasing environmental concerns. The crew on the structure must be provided all
the comforts possible to increase their efficiency. The owner has already consulted geologists. The
structure will vary out production through 35 riser lines (20 producer and 15 injectors). The owner does
not mention any specific offshore structure to be installed for the project and leaves the decision on the
design team.
OFFSHORE STRUCTURE SELECTED AND CHRIESTENING
FPSO (Floating, production, Storage, Offloading System) was selected as the first choice for the field.
The dimensions L=305.2m, B=56.52m, D=29.8m, T=22m. The topside of the FPSO has following
processing capacity: Oil storage: 2,000,000 bbls , Oil Production: 200,000bbls/d, Liquids treatment:
300,000b/d, Produced water treatment: 180,000b/d, Water Injection: 390,000b/d at 150 bar, Seawater
Sulfate Removal : 400,000b/d ,Gas injection: 8,000,000Sm3/d at 285 bar. The FPSO will be christened as
Azikiwe.
Regulations and guidelines followed:
ILLC (International Load Line Convention)
ABS rule for building and classing steel hull vessels (double hull tankers)

Page 7

MARPOL Regulations
SOLAS Regulations(1974) on Damage stability
ABS rules and guidelines for Crew Habitability on Ships
API( American Petroleum Institute) in Mooring Design
US NAVY Criteria to check intact and damage stability.
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT & HULL DESIGN
The general arrangement consisted of hull form design, tank distributions, accommodation, topside
arrangement, engine room design, and escape route. The general arrangement had to be done taking into
account restrictions imposed by regulatory guidelines (MARPOL, SOLAS), classification society (ABS)
and restrictions imposed by other competency areas. Like, the cargo tanks had to sized taking into account
MARPOL and SOLAS regulations at the same time they were supposed to begin and end on transverse
frames of the FPSO and satisfy the cargo capacity requirements (2,000,000bbls), ballast requirements and
slop capacity requirements(14000m
3
).
WEIGHT, BUOYANCY AND STABILITY
The weight of the FPSO was divided into the following components: (a) Hull Weight (26972 tonnes)),(b)
Weight of the Topside Modules(28,393 tonnes), (c) Accommodation Weight(1873tonnes),(d) Power Plant
Weight(2542.38) tonnes. The US Navy Criteria was used to check both intact static and intact dynamic
stability and also the damage stability. The intact stability was checked during offloading, when the free
surface effect was maximum and the vessel was expected to least stable. During the offloading it was
assumed that the production was still taking place, as well as the dehydration of produced crude was
taking place. For damage stability regulations of MARPOL were followed. Thirteen damage cases were
made, by assuming adjacent two sets of tanks damaged. The stability was checked by both deterministic
method and probabilistic assessment. The effects of free surface due to tanks in topside processing
modules were neglected due to non availability of data.

Page 8

WIND AND CURRENT LOADING
The Wind and Current Loads were calculated for the 100 year wave, data taken from the Wave Atlas, for
the production field. The environmental force calculations were done for 2 extreme load cases: (1) Full
load case (draft =22m), (2) Ballast load case (draft =7.895m). The wind and current velocity were taken
to be constant with time. The wind and current forces in Full load case were estimated as 1262.7 kN and
2953.466 kN and the same were estimated for ballast case as 1780.814 kN and 1205.893 kN. The steady
wave force was calculated by the added resistance of the FPSO in waves for both the Full and Ballast load
cases. The net force, maximum out of these 2 cases, was accepted as the design environmental force for
FPSO.
STRENGTH AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN - GENERAL
The FPSO was modeled in hydromax for the calculation of bending moments. The design wave for the
FPSO was considered to be of wavelength equal to length of the FPSO and wave height equal to H
1/10

(6.36m) taken from the 100 year wave spectrum for USAN field site with Hs(5m). The design bending
moment was found to be 22.8010
6
kN-m
.
The ABS rules for building and classing steel hull vessels
(double hull tankers) were used to determine the midship section.
MOORING AND STATION KEEPING
We have accepted the Turret concept for Single Point Mooring of our facility to enable it for weather
vaning. The Design environmental force was used to design the mooring system for our facility. The
mooring system design consisted of the configuration of mooring line for water depth 850 m (a
combination of chain from fairlead to some distance, then wire rope in the middle and finally the chain up
to the anchor point) , the selection of material of mooring line (chain and wire rope, type and
configuration), determination of tension in the mooring line, the safety factor for the operation and finally
the anchoring system design (anchor weight, holding capacity and efficiency). The 3 possible

Page 9

configurations of mooring line ( one is only chain and other being the 2 different combinations of chain
and wire rope) were assumed and analyzed for total working tension and then the decision was made for
the best suitable combination on the basis of least self weight of mooring line and least working tension.
API and IACS guidelines were followed.
POWER GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ELECTRIC LOAD ANALYSIS
The power requirements of various systems of the FPSO were calculated and the TPPL ( Total Plant Peak
Load= 56887 Kw). The systems or components whose power requirement could not be directly calculated
were extrapolated from data of FPSO available taking processing capacity as reference. The power plant
was selected on the basis of N-1 principle where the power plant should be capable of supporting the
electrical load with N-1 generators and in case of failure of a generator should be able to support the
supply with N-2 generators until the spare one is started. The FPSO also has a heat recovery system
installed to minimize consumption of fuel. The dual fuel medium speed engine (5 x 18V50DF) was
selected as prime movers for the generators. The FPSO has an essential generator (7L32) with 3360 Kw
output and an emergency generator (6L26) with 1960Kw output.
RISK ASSESSMENT
Risk assessment is done qualitatively for the various operations in the FPSO. Shuttle tanker interaction
with the FSPO is considered to be the most important operation w.r.t. the hazards associated with it hence
considered separately. Risk level for each event is found on the basis of frequency and consequences
associated with it and accident cause and prevention or mitigation method is given to prevent the
occurrence or to escalation of hazard. Brief description of escape route is given for the evacuation of the
personal in case of any hazard of total loss of FPSO.
CONSTRUCTION, FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION
Construction of FPSO is done by dividing the hull into (11+2) Grand blocks and then further subdivided
into 2 blocks for each Grand block. Gantry crane used for assembly of Grand blocks is of capacity 1200

Page 10

tonnes. As our FPSO consist of large quantity of flats panels so we introduce group technology for mass
production of flat panels and blocks. Details of the outfitting, welding and production process are
provided for the smooth production process. Installation of modules is done for two types of modules,
custom made and second hand modules, and procedure for installation of FPSO at USAN field is briefly
explained.
DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING
The need to include the decommissioning and dismantling was felt due to ever increasing environmental
safety concerns. The FPSO should be such that it does not pollute the environment during its life time and
at the time of decommissioning. All the systems of the FPSO should be recovered and no mal practice
should be allowed. The construction should be such that removal of toxic gases and fumes is easier at the
time of dismantling. At the time of decommissioning and dismantling all the international and local rules
must be taken into account. The safety of workers should be a top priority and the owner should ensure
that FPSO is dismantled in a breaking yard which complies with international regulation and respects the
international labor laws and local regulations. Ship breaking is an area where the owners must rise against
profiteering in favor of right of workers in third world countries.

Page 11

INTRODUCTION
Conditions in Nigeria
Nigeria's proven oil reserves are estimated to be 36 billion barrels; natural gas reserves are well
over 100 trillion cubic feet. Nigeria is a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries (OPEC), and in 2006 its crude oil production averaged around two million barrels per
day. Poor corporate relations with indigenous communities, vandalism of oil infrastructure,
severe ecological damage, and personal security problems throughout the Niger Delta oil-
producing region continue to plague Nigeria's oil sector. Efforts are underway to reverse these
troubles. Although, the FPSO will remain away from the potentially dangerous areas of Nigeria,
it is very important for the operator to take the people and government of Nigeria into confidence
before starting any operations.
There are about 120 languages spoken in Nigeria. The main ethnic groups are the Yorubas,
Hausar-Fulani and the Igbos, none of whom constitute a majority of the population. The naming
of project should be such that it does not offend anyone in Nigeria. So, the project will be named
Azikiwe, after Benjamin Nnamdi Azikiwe (November 16, 1904 May 11, 1996), the founder
of modern Nigerian nationalism and the first President of Nigeria.

Oilfield
The USAN field located 110 Km from the coast of Nigeia, is result of successful exploration
during 2000-2005. The industry expects the field to be developed by 2010. The peak production
of the field is expected to be 200,000kboe/d. The operating depth is 850m. The oilfield is
expected to be economically viable for at least 20 years.

Figure showing location of USAN field.

Page 12

Onsite Environmental Conditions
A wave height of a 100-year return period is used design criterion, which was extended by
employing the combination of the 100-year wave with the 100-year wind data. The data shown
below has been taken from World Wave Atlas.

100 year Wave data Specific Wave height = 5.00 m
Wave Period = 12 sec
100 year wind data Wind speed = 12 m/s
100 year current data Current speed = 1.33 m/s

Selection of the Offshore Structure
Sl. No. Offshore Structure Type Operational Depth
1. Fixed Platforms Steel template Structures
Concrete Gravity Structures
Upto 500ft (150m)
2. Compliant tower Compliant Tower
Guyed Tower
Articulated Tower
Upto 500ft (150m)
3. Floating Structures Semi-submersible Platform 600 to 6,000 ft
(180 to 1,800 m).
Tension-leg platform 6,000 ft (2,000 m)
FPSO

Operational for
large depths upto
10000ft (3000m)
Various offshore Structures and their general operational depth.
Looking at the various options available, we found TLP, Semi submersible and FPSO as the
choices as according to operational water depths(850m). But TLP and Semi submersible need
separate storage unit which an FPSO doesnt need. Moreover, the installation of FPSO is much
easier and cost effective as compare to TLP and Semi Submersible. Thats why we selected the
FPSO as the wisest choice for this production field.
Advantages of FPSO at time of decommissioning:
Due to the barge shape of FPSO, it is relatively easier to transport it to conversion yards and
then to the new field. This minimizes the offshore work and hence, is economical.
Crane vessels are not required for offshore module separation unlike fixed platforms where
structural connections are cut; modules are removed, placed on barges and transported to
yard.
Extensive underwater cutting is not required in FPSO as compared to fixed structures, and
hence, no more complicacies that are associated with the cutting mechanism. No adverse

Page 13

effects on environment that generally results due to the disposal of drill cuttings on the
seabed. The cost of offshore work also drastically reduces due to all these factors.
No partial removal of the structure as in case of gravity based structures or fixed jacket
structures. Structure, which is either toppled or partially left on seabed, may affect adversely
the sea environment like fishing and navigation. But that does not happen in case of FPSO.

The Team Organization
The design team consists of five third year, UG , students of the Department of Ocean
Engineering and Naval Architecture, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur working under
guidance of Prof. S.C. Misra. The competency areas are:-

Fundamental Competencies:
General Arrangement and Overall Hull or System Design
Weight, Buoyancy and Stability
Strength and Structural Design - General
Construction, Fabrication, and Installation
Risk Assessment

Specialized Competencies - Floating Structures
Wind and Current Loading
Mooring/Station Keeping Power Generation, Distribution, and Electric Load Analysis
The team members and competency areas headed by them are:
Name( alphabetic order) Competency Area
1 ASHISH KUMAR JHA General Arrangement and Overall Hull or
System Design
Power Generation, Distribution, and Electric
Load Analysis
2 GYANENDU SAHOO Weight, Buoyancy and Stability
3 PRABHAKAR TIWARI Wind and Current Loading
Mooring /Station Keeping
4 SAURABH SINGH Construction, Fabrication, and Installation
Risk Assessment
5 VIVEK GUPTA Strength and Structural Design
Each member of team headed a set of competency area. The competency areas Weight,
Buoyancy and Stability and Strength and Structural Design being very time consuming were

Page 14

assigned to one person each. The entire process of designing the FPSO is iterative in nature
where the output from one competency area is input to another and vice versa. The design steps
are repeated and corrected until satisfactory results are produced. The entire process can be
suitably represented by the flow chart shown below.

Planning and Scheduling of Tasks
The iterative design process made it necessary to plan the entire process. The team worked on a
number a number of competency areas simultaneously to minimize the duration of project and
complete the work in time. Suitable decisions were taken in case of conflicting requirements or

Page 15

results among various competency areas. The scheduling of the project is shown by help of Gantt
chart shown below.

Coott cbott sbowloq scbeJolloq of tosks

Page 16

The production process
The diagrammatic representation of entire production process:

The oil freshly coming out of well contains gaseous hydrocarbons and water which are extracted
at H.P./L.P. separators. After this processing, the oil that is produced is in emulsion form. This
oil is allowed to settle for about a day and later chemical and electrical treatments are done to
ensure acceptable levels of moisture in oil. For this we need two tank sets (tank set 5 and tank
set6, i.e. Cargo5.1, Cargo5.2, Cargo5.3, Cargo6.1, Cargo6.2, Cargo6.3). On a particular day one
tank is being filled while from other emulsified oil is withdrawn and dehydrated and stored in
another cargo tank. Produced water is stored in Slop tanks and they are considered to be 50% full
in all the cases to consider worst case. Also MDO tanks in engine room and fresh water tanks
were considered 50% full for maximum surface effect. The offloading is also complicated by
fact that while dehydrated oil is being offloaded, emulsified oil is being stored in one of the
tanks(5 or 6) and emulsified oil from previous day is being continuously dehydrated and stored
in another tank.
The rate of transfer of crude and oil emulsion:
(a)Rate of production of emulsion from H.P./L.P. separators = 13250m3/hr (2million barrels
production capacity)
(a)Rate of transfer of emulsion from one tank to another (dehydration) =1325m3/hr
(b) Rate of transfer of crude from FPSO to shuttle tanker = 6625m3/hr
Oil/Gas
Separator
Production
from
Wellhead
DEHYDRATOR
WET
GAS
WET
OIL
RECOVERED
OIL
OIL
DEHYDRATION
DRY
OIL
STORAGE
GRAVITY
SEPERATION
GRAVITY
SEPERATION
GAS-
FLOATATION
SEPARATION
TRANSPORT
TO
SHORE
PRODUCTION
WATER
DISCHARGE
DISPLACEMENT
WATER
DISCHARGE
DRY
GAS
ONBOARD
CONSUMPTION
COMPRESSION
AND
REINJECTION

Page 17

The topside of the FPSO has following processing capacity:
Oil storage: 2,000,000b/d
Oil Production: 200,000b/d
Liquids treatment: 300,000b/d
Produced water treatment: 180,000b/d
Water Injection: 390,000b/d at 150 bar
Seawater Sulfate Removal : 400,000b/d
Gas injection: 8,000,000Sm3/d at 285 bar

For proper designing of FPSO the production and offloading schedule has to be decided. The
following 12 day cyclic production schedule was decided. This was necessary to know the state
of FPSO during offloading, as the stability of FPSO has to be considered in worst case i.e. when
surface effect is maximum. The FPSO is assumed to be working in normal conditions and there
is no delay in schedule of shuttle tankers. The shuttle tanker arrives on 6
th
day and on departs on
7
th
day. Next the shuttle tanker arrives on 8
th
day and departs on 12
th
day.(The days represent
only the time at which the shuttle tanker is ready to offload and the time spent on positioning and
mooring the FPSO is assumed to be before and after the respective days.) The stability during
offloading has been considered under Weight, Buoyancy and Stability competency area as
Day6 and Day11 type heading.
Color Code
oil empty emulsion

Day/Tank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Day1 empty empty empty empty full empty empty empty empty empty
Day2 empty empty full empty empty full empty empty empty empty
Day3 empty empty full empty full empty empty full empty empty
Day4 full empty full empty empty full empty full empty empty
Day5 full empty full empty full empty empty full empty full
Day6 full full full empty empty full empty full empty full
Day7 empty empty empty empty full empty empty empty full empty
Day8 empty empty full empty empty full empty empty full empty
Day9 empty empty full empty full empty empty full full full
Day10 full empty full empty empty full empty full full full
Day11 full empty full empty full empty empty full full full
Day12 empty empty full empty empty full empty empty empty empty

Page 18

COMPETENCY AREAS
1. GENERAL ARRANGEMENT & HULL DESIGN REPORT
The aim of the general arrangement task is assignment of spaces for all the required functions
and equipments, properly coordinated for location and access. Before this it is necessary to
estimate the dimensions of the FPSO.

Fig. 1.1: Profile and Plan View
1.1 Preliminary Analysis: Determination of Dimension
For the preliminary analysis a data set of existing FPSOs was created by extensive search
through various journals on Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering.The data is shown in
Table 1.1 of Appendix 1. The data was used in initial estimation of length (L), breadth(B),
Depth(D), draft(T) of the FPSO. The results from the preliminary analysis were checked against
regulations of International Convention On Load Lines, 1966. The height of double bottom
were checked against the rules of MARPOL Annex 1.

First step in determination of dimensions is to estimate the L/B, B/D and T/D ratio of FPSO. A
graph of ratios vs storage capacity was plotted and corresponding equations for the ratio was
found by linear curve fit. The graph and results are shown below.

Page 19

0.0
5.0x10
4
1.0x10
5
1.5x10
5
2.0x10
5
2.5x10
5
3.0x10
5
3.5x10
5
4.0x10
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Data Plot FPSO
R
a
t
i
o
(
L
/
B
,

B
/
D
,

T
/
D
)
-
-
-
>
Storage Capacity(m3)--->
L/B
B/D
T/D
Fig 1.2 Preliminary Estimate of Dimensions

Equations from linear curve fit:-
L/B=5.76265-1.14349*10^-6*Storage
B/D=1.9456-2.19749*10^-7*Storage
T/D=.6653+1.41368*10^-7*Storage
Desired Storage=2million barrels=317974.6m3
L/B=5.4 B/D=1.9 T/D=0.71
In order to estimate the dimensions of the FPSO volume of the FPSO below the main deck and
between the perpendiculars were obtained by two formulae and matched iteratively. For a given

Page 20

length of FPSO all other dimensions were calculated using the ratios calculated above. Then two
volumes and percent error between them was calculated. The error between the volumes must be
less than 0.25%. The required dimensions were the ones for which the above error condition was
satisfied.
V
h
= C
BD
*L*B*D; C
BD
=C
B
+(1-C
B
)[(0.8D-T)/3T]
&
V
h
= Volume required for cargo + Volume required for Ballast + 15%of LBD (for engine room
slop etc.)
The double bottom height and width of side tanks were assumed to be 2.5m and calculations
were done then they were checked against MARPOL rules. (This was a guess work, if the
assumed values didnt satisfy the regulations new values were assumed and calculations were
done again).

Code for the preliminary estimate of dimensions:

L=305.2; %input length(m) of fpso
Cb=0.98; %block coefficient

B=L/5.4; %Breadth(m) of fpso
D=B/1.9; %depth(m) of fpso
T=D*0.71; %draft(m) of fpso

V1=2*(10^6)*0.158987/.95/.98+2.5*L*B+2*2.5*L*(D-2.5)+0.15*L*B*D;%Req.Capacity
Volume m3

Cbd=Cb+(1-Cb)*(0.8*D-T)/(3*T);%Assuming no sheer and camber
V2=L*B*D*Cbd; %Estimated capacity volume(m3)

disp((V2-V1)/V1*100);%error:This should be less than 0.25%

Results
L=305.2m
B=56.52m
D=29.8m
T=21.12m
Cb=0.98

The results we get here are just a preliminary analysis and does not carry enough importance.
However design process being iterative process, it gave us a raw data for the iterations. Later on

Page 21

when weight calculations were done and matched with buoyancy, slight change in design draft
(T=22m) had to be done ,the remaining dimensions remaining unaltered.

Final Results
L=305.2m
B=56.52m
D=29.8m
T=22m
Cb=0.98
Freeboard=7.8m

1.2 Check the freeboard rules with ILLC (only important applicable rules to FPSO
mentioned)
Regulation27: Defines freeboard computation for ship shaped structures as Type A and Type
B. Our FPSO satisfied the requirements of Type A.
Regulation28: Gives a table for computation of tabular freeboard. Tabular freeboard
obtained=3.256m
Regulation30: Where the block coefficient (Cb) exceeds 0.68, the tabular freeboard specified in
Regulation28 shall be multiplied by the factor ((Cb+0.68) / 1.36).
Correction to Cb= 3.256*(Cb+0.68)/1.36 = 3.974m

Regulation31: Where D exceeds (L / 15) the freeboard shall be increased by (D-(L / 15))R mm,
where R is (L / 0.48) at lengths less than 120 metres and 250 at 120 metres length
and above.
Correction due to depth=2.3m
Freeboard=3.974+2.3 =6.274m
Regulation38: Not considered as no Sheer or Camber in FPSO
Regulation33: No deduction due to Superstructures taken into account.
Regulation 39: The bow height defined as the vertical distance at the forward perpendicular
between the waterline corresponding to the assigned summer freeboard and the
designed trim and the top of the exposed deck at side shall be not less than:
7000(1.36 / (Cb+0.68))mm
( for ships of 250 metres and above in length)
Min. Bow Height= 7000(1.36/(Cb+0.68))=5.73m < 8.4

Regulation 40: The minimum freeboard in summer shall be the freeboard derived from the tables
In Regulation 28 as modified by the corrections in Regulations 27, as applicable,
29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 38 and, if applicable, 39.

Min Freeboard=6.274m which is less than the freeboard of FPSO i.e.7.8m. So, ILLC rules are
satisfied by the FPSO.

Page 22

1.3 Check wing tanks and double bottom thickness from Annex I of MARPOL 73/78
Regulations:
a)The minimum width of the side tanks as specified in the rules is w = 0.5 + (DW/20000) (m) or
w = 2.0 m, whichever is the lesser. Deadweight (DW) is an expression of a ship's carrying
capacity, including the weight of the crew, passengers, cargo, fuel, ballast, drinking water, and
stores. At this stage the deadweight is not determined. But the cargo weight is known (2million
barrels; density of crude=0.9tonnes/m
3
; 1 barrel=0.159m
3
)= 286200 tonnes. The dead weight is
going to be larger than this value. We calculated w by using cargo weight as dead weight. Then
w=14.81m. According to the rule then w=2m, the minimum width of side tanks. We took the
side tank width at 2.5m, so this regulation is satisfied.

Even when the deadweight of the ship was accurately known at later stage this result need not be
rechecked as the application of above result will lead to w>14.81m(when calculated using
accurate deadweight) as a result the minimum w from regulations remains same at 2m.

b) The minimum height of double bottom according to regulations is: h = B/15 (m) or h = 2.0 m,
whichever is the lesser. The minimum value of h = 1.0 m. For the FPSO h= 56.52/15=3.786m.
So the minimum value of h is 2m. We took double bottom height to be 2.5m. So this regulation
is also satisfied.

1.4 Determination of frame spacing:
Rules for frame spacing:
a) The normal frame spacing between aft peak and 0.2L from F.P. may be taken as:
450+2L [mm] for transverse framing and
550 + 2L [mm] for longitudinal framing. However, it is generally not to exceed 1000mm
b) Elsewhere, the frame spacing is not to exceed the following:
In peaks and sterns: 600[mm] or as in (a) whichever is lesser.
Between collision bulkhead and 0.2L from perpendiculars

Using the above rules the transverse framing were fixed in the following manner:
Frame 0-16 --- 600mm
Frame 16-86 --- 750mm
Frame 86-287 --- 900mm
Frame287-288 --- 850mm
Frame 288-357 --- 750mm
Frame 357-373 --- 600mm

The frame spacing is in the domain of Strength and Structural Design Competency area. The
information for frame spacing was needed in General Arrangement to fix tank and
compartments as the bulkheads separating all the tanks and compartments must line on frames.
The web frames were also decided to be placed at every fifth frame.

1.5 Determination of Slop Tank and Fuel Oil tank Volumes:
The total capacity of cargo tanks is known at this point. We need to estimate the volume of slop tanks and
Diesel tanks for the FPSO. In absence of any reliable data, the estimation was carried out by plotting the
data collected and finding the required volume by curve fitting.

Page 23

0.0
2.0x10
4
4.0x10
4
6.0x10
4
8.0x10
4
1.0x10
5
1.2x10
5
1.4x10
5
1.6x10
5
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
Slop Tank Volume =170.28334+.04392*x
Fuel Oil Volume= 215.05236+.02412*x
T
a
n
k

V
o
l
u
m
e
(
m
3
)
-
-
-
>
Storage(m3)--->
FUEL OIL TANK
SLOP TANK

Fig1.3 Estimation of Fuel and Slop Tank volumes

Slop Tank Volume for 2 milliom barrel(317974m
3
) = 170.28334+.04392*317974=13965.462 m
3

Fuel Tank Volume for 2 milliom barrel(317974 m
3
) = 215.05236+.02412*317974=7884.59 m
3

These values rounded off and finalvolumes were decided to be:--

Slop Tank Volume=14000 m
3

Fuel Tank Volume=8000 m
3

1.6 Position of Tanks and Compartments considering transverse frames:

The naming of cargo tanks is shown below. x represents the set of tanks being considered. x=1 for set of
tanks placed just after the engine room compartment and continues till x=10, after which we have slop
tanks.

Page 24

Fig 1.4: Cargo and Ballast Tanks

Fig 1.5 : Frames where bulkheads are located

Check MARPOL Regulation: MARPOL Regulation 24, was used to determine the size and position
of tanks. Since it involves the use of hypothetical rate of oil outflow in case of damage, the determination
of size of tanks and position are reported under Weight, Buoyancy and Stability competency area . The
tanks sizes reported above satisfy the Regulation 24 of MARPOL. The frame number, length, breadth,
height and position of tanks are shown in Table1.2 of Appendix 1.

<---Ballast bottom x.1
Cargo x.1
Cargo x.2
Cargo x.3
Ballast Starboard x
Ballast Port x
Fr.0 Fr.16
Fr.56,58 Fr.90 Fr.117 Fr.144 Fr.171 Fr.198 Fr.225 Fr.252 Fr.279 Fr.310 Fr.342 Fr.357
Fr.373
E
N
G
I
N
E
R
O
O
M

Page 25

1.7 Engine Room Layout
The selection of engine-generator sets are discussed under Power Generation, Distribution and
Electrical Load Analysis competency area.

ENGINE ROOM LAYOUT

(a)ELEVATION

Fig 1.6: Engine Room layout : Elevation

Page 26

(b) PLAN -Level 0

Fig 1.7 Engine Room layout : Plan: Level 0

Page 27

(b)PLAN: Level 1

Fig 1.8: Engine Room layout : Plan: Level 1

Page 28

(c)PLAN: Level 2

Fig 1.9: Engine Room layout : Plan: Level 2

Emergency Generator
6L26

Page 29

1.8 Accommodation Layout
In offshore industry workers have to work under harsh conditions for extended periods of time.
The quality of the accommodations where offshore installation crews sleep, eat and relax
influences their job performance and overall sense of comfort and well-being. In order to provide
comfortable and relaxing atmosphere to the crew of FPSO, the guidelines of Crew Hability on
Offshore Installations, ABS, were followed and all effort were made to provide facilities in
excess of those mentioned in the rules. The FPSO needs 120 workers during normal operations
and may need up to 150 people during repairs and installation. The accommodation has been
designed to support 120 people. Separate room for every worker has been provided. However
during repairs and installation some workers may have to share the rooms. In total FPSO has 120
rooms, 20 on each of the 6 floors. Separate sanitary spaces have been provided for each worker
although the rules require sanitary space for every 6 workers. Seventh floor is for officers and
their offices. On top of accommodation is helideck which is large enough for a S-61 helicopter
capable of carrying up to 30 people and payload (fuel and cargo) of up to 3200kg.

UITILTY/FACILITY MINIMUM REQUIREMENT
FROM RULES
PROVIDED
Berthing floor area per
crew member includes
berths, lockers, chest of
drawers and seats

Minimum berthing floor area for
1 person room = 4.75 m
2
/person
Berthing floor area for 1
person room = 17.19
m
2
/person, officers provided
with drawing room
Sanitary spaces

Free space area per person in
sanitary spaces = 0.75 m
2
or 1.1
m
2

Each room provided with
separate toilet, area=3.78 m
2

Headroom in all sanitary spaces
= 1980 mm (78 in ) or 2050 mm
(80 in).

Headroom provided=2.15m
Width of toilet stall is 810 mm
(32 in).

Width of toilet stall is 1.74m
Food service areas

Headroom in all food services
area = 1980 mm (78 in ) or 2050
mm (80 in).

Door width to mess room = 915
mm (36 in).

Door width to mess room =
1.92m.

Door width to galley, pantry,
kitchen and storeroom = 760
mm (30 in)

Door width to galley,
pantry, kitchen and
storeroom = 1.94m.
Width of door to freezer and Door width to freezer and

Page 30

cold storage rooms = 900 mm
(35 in ) and open 180 deg

cold storage room = 1.94m.
Deck area requirements for
planned seating capacity are: - at
least 1 m2 (10.8 ft2) or 1.7 m2
(18.4 ft2) per person for officers
and ratings=238(taking 1.7/
m
2
person)

Total seating area available
= 300 m
2
(two floor each
159 m
2
i.e. total area =300
m
2
)
Recreational areas

Headroom = 1980 mm (78 in )
or 2050 mm (80 in).
The recreational area(s) goal is
to provide space for 1/3 of the
crew to participate
simultaneously in some form of
leisure activity
For every floor recreational
area is provided.
The deck area provided for crew
member exercise for each
physical fitness station within
the space:
- is at least 1.85 m2 (20 ft2)
- is at least 4.5 m2 (48 ft2).

Provided.
A central stowage area for books
is provided with at least 300 mm
(12 in) of shelving for every five
crew members.

Provided.
At least one seat and writing
surface is provided in a
recreation lounge for every six
crew members.

Provided.
Medical

Headroom = 1980 mm (78 in )
or 2050 mm (80 in).
The medical accommodations
are fitted with berths in the ratio
of 1 berth to every 12 crew
members or portion thereof,
which are not berthed in single
occupancy rooms.
Provided.

Table 1.1: ABS requirements for Accommodation

Page 31

Escape Route in Accommodation
The first priority for designing an accommodation for an FPSO is safety. In the accommodation
layout below the escape route to lifeboats have been clearly shown with red arrows. The rules
make it mandatory for access to life boats both from inside and outside the accommodation.
Therefore the stairs case in accommodation is designed to act like a staircase well during
emergency, so that workers can easily reach floor4 where lifeboats are kept. Also, stairs have
been provided outside of accommodation (shown in red). An escape plan on the main deck is
also necessary. This is shown in general arrangement of topsides.

Plan of Room

Fig 1.10: Plan of Living Quarters

Plan of Helideck

Fig 1.11: Plan of Helideck
Officer Room
R
O
O
M
Worker Room
B
E
D

R
O
O
M

Page 32

Isometric view of Accommodation

Fig 1.12: Isometric view of Accommodation

Page 33

Plan of Floor 1

Fig 1.13: Plan of Floor 1
ROOM ROOM ROOM ROOM ROOM ROOM ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN

Page 34

Plan of Floor 2 and 5

Fig 1.14: Plan of Floor 2 and 5
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
MESS
AND
SERVING
COUNTERS

Page 35

Plan of Floor 3 and 6

Fig 1.15: Plan of Floor 3 and 6

ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
MEDICAL
AREA
EXERCISE AREA
STORAGE AND
LAUNDRY
(crew laundry
,clean linen, crew
baggage and
lockers )
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN

Page 36

Plan of Floor 4

Fig 1.16: Plan of Floor 4
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
ROOM
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN

Page 37

Plan Floor 7(for Officers)

Fig 1.17: Plan Floor 7(for Officers)
SHAFT
FOR
KITCHEN
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
BED ROOM
Officers Residencial Area
Officers working Area

Page 38

1.9 Topsides

The general layout of the topsides is governed by safety considerations with the most hazardous
equipment being arranged away from the accommodation area. Therefore modules like Turret,
LP/HP Separator, Inlet Manifold. Gas Dehydration Module, Lift Gas Compressor Module have
been placed as far from accommodation as possible and Water Injection Sulphate removal
Module, Lay down Areas and Local equipment Room are placed aft of these modules. The flare
being most dangerous component has been placed in bow region.

Other considerations include Green Water which is wetting of main deck by waves. This must
be avoided in FPSO. So a gap of 2.5m has been given between the main deck and topside
modules. Providing this gap also allows workers to move from one part of FPSO to another
without much hindrance as all the topside components are arranged above. Same gap has been
given for pipe rack also. Also a covered emergency access route has been put in this gap so that
workers can be evacuated quickly, without any loss of life, in case of an emergency.

Such a design, where topside modules and pipe racks are placed above the main deck, creates its
own problems with respect to designing the FPSO. The general position of modules was decided
by safety concerns, but exact position had to be decided by taking framing of FPSO into account.
As stated earlier web frames are placed every fifth frame. The modules and pipe racks were
placed onto every fifth frame. The construction details have been shown in Construction,
Fabrication and Installation competency area. The frame number shown below in the tables are
the frame numbers on which the FPSO is placed. For example, for Pipe rack - main 1(MPR1) the
frame no. are 170-185. This means MPR1 has been placed on web frames between frame
number 170-185 (i.e. 170, 175,180 web frames support this pipe rack). This however does not
mean that module or pipe racks do not extend beyond these frames. These frames only support
the topsides. The exact extent of modules and pipe racks are shown by Position column of the
table below.

TOPSIDE MODULE
Module
No.

POSITION
Frame
X(m , m) y(m , m) z(m , m)

From To From To From To
Pipe rack - main 1 MPR1
170-185
133.07 153.771 -3.11 +3.15 32.30 52.44
190-210
155.70 176.401 -3.15 +3.15 32.30 52.58
210-235
176.40 196.16 -3.19 +3.07 32.30 52.58
235-260
196.71 217.41 -3.19 +3.07 32.30 52.76
Pipe rack - truncated 1 TPR1
65-105
56.31 69.133 -3.15 +3.15 32.30 40.31
Pipe rack - truncated 2/1 TPR2/1
95-110
69.70 85.10 -3.17 +3.13 32.30 40.67
110-130
85.35 101.25 -3.17 +3.13 32.30 40.67
130-145
101.25 117.15 -3.17 +3.13 32.30 40.67
150-165
117.40 132.80 -3.17 +3.13 32.30 40.67
255-280
217.81 233.705 -2.43 +3.83 32.30 43.10
280-295
233.96 249.355 -2.43 +3.87 32.30 43.10

Page 39

Pipe rack - truncated 5 TPR5
295-315
249.63 265.063 -2.43 +3.53 32.30 41.70
Flare Tower M1
N.A.
275.72 286.114 -3.50 +16.71 29.80 95
Lay down area M6
160-175
127.48 142.075 -3.50 -27.35 32.30 42.3
Lay down area M10
135-165
112.88 142.075 -3.50 -27.35 32.30 42.3
Lift gas compressor M12
190-210
150.37 179.347 -3.50 -26.53 32.30 45.85
Gas dehydration M13
245-275
209.56 227.347 -3.50 -22.36 32.30 49.64
Chemical injection
package & utilities
M23
225-240
181.08 208.056 -3.50 -26.52 32.30 47.70
Inlet Manifold M31
220-250
182.56 212.856 +3.30 +26.90 32.30 57.27
LP / HP Separation M33
195-210
151.59 179.634 + 3.50 +24.88 32.30 47.37
Water Injection- sulphate
Removal & Water
treatment
M42
140-170
108.07 141.719 + 3.50 +27.10 32.30 49.90
Local Equipment Room M51
100-140
80.73 110.303 -3.50 -26.40 32.30 50.55
Turret
TR
N.A.

Rest Room 1
RR1
90-101
65.7 75.6 +8.76 +25.76 29.8 32.8
Rest Room 2
RR2
90-101
65.7 75.6 -8.76 -25.76 29.8 32.8
Rest Room 3
RR3
297-310
250.60 260.35 +8.76 +25.76 29.8 32.8
Rest Room 4
RR4
297-310
250.60 260.35 -8.76 -25.76 29.8 32.8

Table 1.2: Topside Definitions

ESCAPE ROUTE ON TOPSIDE

The escape route was decided under Risk Assessment competency area. The details of escape
route are discussed in Section 7.9 of Risk Assessment. The escape route is shown below with red
arrows and evacuation zones and life boats are clearly marked. The yellow line in the Figure 1.18
separates the evacuation zones 2 and 3.

Page 40

Fig 1.18: Topsides : Plan View

E
v
a
c
u
a
t
i
o
n

Z
o
n
e

1
E
v
a
c
u
a
t
i
o
n

Z
o
n
e

2
E
v
a
c
u
a
t
i
o
n

Z
o
n
e

3

Page 41

2. WEIGHT, BUOYANCY AND STABLITY REPORT

2.1 Weight and Buoyancy
Preliminary Estimates: In the general arrangement report only preliminary estimates of
dimensions of FPSO have been shown. The accurate knowledge of total weight and buoyancy is
necessary for determination of full load draft and scantling draft. These drafts are used in
estimation of maximum bending moment for which the FPSO has to be designed. The details are
presented in Strength and Structural Design competency area. The preliminary weight
estimation was determined by Ship Design for Efficiency and Economy H. Schneekluth and V.
Bertram.

To begin with an idea of weight of various components of FPSO had to be made. The
components are Machinery Weight, Accommodation Weight, Hull Weight, Weight of
Production Modules and Pipe Racks. Later on as the work progressed, more accurate estimates
of the weights were used.The outfit weight was included in weight of modules.

(a)Power Plant Weight: Exact Power Plant weight could be known only when the engine and
generators were selected in Power Generation, distribution and Electric Load Analysis
competency area. Until this was done we had to rely on preliminary estimation of weight. The
estimated power of FPSO was about 85MW which has been taken from similar FPSOs.
W
m=
0.72*MCR
0.7
= 2277tonnes

Once the engine was selected, the manufacturer data were available and exact weight of the
power plant was known:

Item
No.
Pieces DESCRIPTION Weight (including
liquids)Kg/unit
Total Weight
(tonnes)
1 5 Engine Generator Set 350,000 1750
2 5 Auxiliary module including 9150 45.75
3 5 Trunk Route Pipe Rack 2500 12.5
4 2 Booster Unit 2500 5
5 5 Lube Oil Separator Unit 1520 7.6
6 2 Maintenance Water Tank 11500 23
7 5 Cooling Water Expansion Vessel 1500 7.5
8 12 Oil Wetted Filter 2114 25.37
9 5 Charge Air Silencer 820 4.1
10 1 Steam Header 770 0.77
11 12 Ventilation Unit (Engine Room) 2700 32.4
12 6 Ventilation Unit (Auxiliary Area) 2100 12.6
13 2 Working Air Unit 545 1.09
14 1 Starting Air Unit 1700 1.7
15 4 Starting Air Bottle 1500 6

Page 42

16 5 Exhaust Gas Silencer 7200 36
17 1 Heat Recovery System Container 35000 35
18 1 Black Starting Unit 5500 5.5
19 30 Cooling Water(LT/HT)-Radiator 3750 112.5
20 3 Exhaust Gas Boiler 34000 102
21 1 Fire/Raw water Tank 316000 316
Total Weight 2542.38 t
Table 2.1: Final Weight Chart of Power Plant

The final weight of engine generators and its components were 2542.38tonnes.

(b)Accommodation Weight: The preliminary estimate of Accommodation was 2000 tonnes, taken
from similar FPSOs. Once the accommodation layout was done in general arrangement, the
weight per unit floor area of accommodation was taken as approximately 250kg/m
2
.The weight
of accommodation thus finalized was
W
acco
=250*51.52*20*7*/1000=1803tonnes
To this the weight of helipad was added, which was 70tonnes (taken from www.aluminium-
offshore.com).
So final weight of accommodation was W=1873tonnes.

(c) Weight of the Topside Modules:
The weight of topside modules and their CGs are shown in table below:

TOPSIDE MODULE Module No.
Operating
Weight
(tonnes)
Lift weight
(tonnes)
oslLlon of
CC(wrL lSC
orlgln)
Cg x Cg y Cg z

Pipe rack - main 1 03/MPR1 340 437 143.421 0.021 42.368
Pipe rack - main 2 03/MPR2 830 604 166.031 -0.684 46.322
Pipe rack - truncated 1 03/TPR1 194 164 62.72 0 36.306
Pipe rack - truncated 2/1 03/TPR2/1 227 160 77.4 0 36.488
Pipe rack - truncated 4/1 03/TPR4/1 264 217 223.733 0.361 37.696
Pipe rack - truncated 4/2 03/TPR4/2 264 217 241.633 0.036 37.696
Pipe rack - truncated 5 03/TPR5 224 187 237.363 0.211 36.998
Flare Tower 1 423 464 273.722 10.106 39.633
Lay down area 6 1860 484 133.323 -13.334 37.296

Page 43

Lay down area 10 1860 484 120.173 -13.334 37.3
Lift gas compressor 12 2034 1917 164.839 -16.313 39.076
Gas dehydration 13 1180 924 218.684 -14.399 40.972
Chemical injection
package & utilities
23
2176 1430 194.368 -13.703 39.996
LP / HP Separation 31 3034 3007 197.706 13.791 44.786
Inlet Manifold 33 2287 1830 163.746 14.482 39.836
Water Injection,sulphate Removal
& Water treatment
42
2304 1904 124.894 13.892 41.1
Local Equipment Room 51 2720 2734 93.303 -16.738 41.426
Turret
TR 2000 2000 313.2 0 29
Table 2.2: Weight and CG of topside modules

(d)Hull Weight: Preliminary estimate of hull weight was necessary because the total weight(of
which hull weight is a significant component) determines the draft of the FPSO, then these draft
values are used to estimate the maximum bending moment and then the corresponding mid-ship
section is determined. The scantlings and plates cross-section area is used to determine weight
per unit ship length and then the hull weight of the FPSO. The estimated and calculated weights
of FPSO must match in acceptable limits , therefore an iterative process was followed. The first
estimate was made using the formula given in DNV 1972, rules for tankers. This was done to get
an initial value and reduce the number of iterations.
First estimate of hull weight:

wst = A|o
L
+o
1
_1.uu9 - .uu4 _
I
B
]_ - u.u6 - _28.7 - _
I
]_]

o
L
= u.97 - (u.uS4 + u.uu4 - IB)(u.189 - (1uu - I)
0.78
)

o
1
= u.u29 + u.uu2SS - (A1uu,uuu)

> o
L
= 1.74u9 - 1u
-3

> o
1
= u.uS76S
> w
S1
= 1S812.92tonncs
> w
S1
= 17S9S tonncs(incluJing morgin o 1u% )
Using this estimate the weight of hull was calculated as described in Strength and Structural
Design competency area. After a number of iterations the hull weight was 26000.7 tonnes.
(e)Weight of Tanks when completely full: The tanks were modeled in Hydromax and it was
necessary to calculate the storing capacities of various tanks to check if the FPSO met the
required storing and processing capacity.The tanks were assumed to have a permeability of 0.95

Page 44

and it was also assumed that they were only 98% filled when full and 2% filled when empty.
This is because of the restrictions on the pumping capacity of the pumps.
Cargo Tanks: The FPSO must Store 2 million barrels of oil.
Tank Permeability % full
Weight
(tonnes)
Cargo 1.1 0.95 98% 9442
Cargo 1.2 0.95 98% 9731
Cargo 1.3 0.95 98% 9442
Cargo 2.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 2.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 2.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 3.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 3.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 3.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 4.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 4.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 4.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo5.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 5.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 5.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo6.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 6.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 6.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo7.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo 7.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 7.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo8.1 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo8.2 0.95 98% 9612
Cargo 8.3 0.95 98% 9327
Cargo9.1 0.95 98% 9423
Cargo 9.2 0.95 98% 9711
Cargo 9.3 0.95 98% 9423
Cargo10.1 0.95 98% 9212
Cargo 10.2 0.95 98% 9493
Cargo 10.3 0.95 98% 9212

Total
Weight 282951
Table 2.3: Weight of cargo tanks

The total storing capacity of FPSO is approximately 282951 tonnes.
Taking one barrel=0.159m
3
, and density of crude oil 0.8883tonnes/m
3

Page 45

282951 tonnes = 2,003,339.005barrels of oil= 2.003339 million barrels of oil.
Thus the FPSO meets the requirement of storing 2million barrels of oil.
Slop Tanks: The FPSO must have capacity to store 14000m
3
of slops (determined in
general arrangement).
Weight
(tonnes)
Slop tank1 0.95 98% 4438
Slop tank2 0.95 98% 4574
Slop tank3 0.95 98% 4438

1oLal
WelghL 13450
Table 2.4: Weight of slop tanks

The FPSO has a Storing Capacity of 13450 tonnes = 14731.65m
3
> 14000m
3

Fresh Water Tanks: These tanks are necessary for storing potable water for the crew.
According to regulations the capacity must be at least 0.2t/(person x day). The supplies
reach FPSO every 30 days and during repairs as many as 150 people may be onboard the
FPSO. So, minimum capacity of the tanks are 900tonnes.
Weight
(tonnes)
FW Tank Port 0.95 98% 509.4
FW Tank
Starboard 0.95 98% 509.4

Total
Weight 1018.8
Table 2.5: Weight of fresh water tanks

The storing Capacity of FW tanks is greater than the minimum required by the rules.

MDO Tanks: These tanks stored MDO (marine diesel oil) for the engines to work in case
of shortage of gas produced from oil field. The minimum capacity for these tanks are
8000 m
3
=6720tonnes( density of MDO=0.84 tonnes/m
3
)
Weight
(tonnes)
MDO Tank Port 0.95 98% 3519.18
MDO Tank
Starboard 0.95 98% 3519.18

Total
Weight 7038.18
Table 2.6: Weight of MDO tanks

Page 46

Enough storing capacity is available for MDO.

(f) Calculation of Full Load Draft and Ballast Draft
The FPSO was modeled in Hydromax and the calculations were done. The modeling and
detailed results(along with the definitions for various load cases) are shown in Appendix2.4. The
Full Load Case, Ballast Load Case are used in mooring calculations and for structural
calculations Full Load Case, Ballast Only Case, Cargo Only Case was used.

CASE Displacement of FPSO( tonnes) Draft(m)
Full Load Case 386360 22
Ballast Load Case 140543 7.985
Ballast Only Case 165780 9.44
Cargo Only Case 345696 19.705
Table 2.7 Calculation of various drafts of FPSO

2.2 STABILITY: The US Navy Criteria to check both intact static and intact dynamic
stability.

Winds cause heeling moments that tend to capsize a floating structure. The FPSO must be
designed to remain stable and seaworthy under the conditions specified by the criteria chosen to
test the stability. In our case we have chosen US Navy criteria. The intact stability is checked
under a wind whose speed depends on the service conditions. All vessels that must withstand
tropical storms should be checked for winds of 100 knots. The values of GZ for this criteria is
effective GZ
eff
, which is calculated taking into account the free surface effect. The formula for
wind arm is:

where V is the wind velocity in knots, A, the sail area in m
2
, l, the distance between half draught
and centroid of sail area in m and A, the displacement in tones.

The first angle of static equilibrium is
st1
. The criteria for static stability requires that the
righting arm at this angle be not larger than 0.6 of the maximum righting arm. To check the
dynamical stability the regulations assume that the ship is subjected to a gust of wind while
heeled 25 to the windward of
st
. The area a between the wind heeling arm and the righting arm

Page 47

curves up to
st1
, and the area b between the two curves, from the first static angle , up to the
second static angle,
st2
, or up to the angle of downflooding whichever is less. The ratio of area
b to area a should be at least 1.4.

Fig 2.1: The US Navy criteria
2.2.1 INTACT STABILITY
The intact stability of FPSO was considered for as many cases as possible. The stability of FPSO
not only depends upon its dimensions but also factors like blowing wind and free surface effect.
So before we can judge stability of FPSO we have to consider various scenarios under which an
FPSO may operate, and check its stability in all those scenarios. Since during offloading the free
surface effect will be maximum ,therefore we analysed the stability of FPSO while offloading.
An important assumption is that free surface effect from the topside modules have been
neglected due to non availability of data.

The oil freshly coming out of well contains gaseous hydrocarbons and water which are extracted
at H.P./L.P. Separators. After this processing, the oil that is produced is in emulsion form. This
oil is allowed to settle for about a day and later chemical and electrical treatments are done to
ensure acceptable levels of moisture in oil. For this we need two tank sets (tank set 5 and tank
set6, i.e. Cargo5.1, Cargo5.2, Cargo5.3, Cargo6.1, Cargo6.2, Cargo6.3). On a particular day one
tank is being filled while from other emulsified oil is withdrawn and dehydrated and stored in
another cargo tank. Produced water is stored in Slop tanks and they are considered to be 50% full
in all the cases to consider worst case. Also MDO tanks in engine room and fresh water tanks

Page 48

were considered 50% full for maximum surface effect. The offloading is also complicated by
fact that while dehydrated oil is being offloaded, emulsified oil is being stored in one of the
tanks(5 or 6) and emulsified oil from previous day is being continuously dehydrated and stored
in another tank.

The rate of transfer of crude and oil emulsion:
(a)Rate of production of emulsion from H.P./L.P. separators = 13250m3/hr (2million barrels
production capacity)
(a)Rate of transfer of emulsion from one tank to another (dehydration) =1325m3/hr
(b) Rate of transfer of crude from FPSO to shuttle tanker = 6625m3/hr

The percentage of tank filled mentioned below, implies that tank set x is filled to that level. The
tank set includes Cargox.1, Cargox.2 and Cargox.3. So, a tank set will be filled with wing tanks
Cargox.1 and Cargox.3 being filled simultaneously and then the central tank Cargo x.2. This
process may take place vice-versa. However in order to maximize the surface effect and take into
consideration worst case scenario we assume that all the three tanks are being filled
simultaneously.

Stability during offloading: Three cases were considered in offloading of FPSO, one in which all
the tanks of FPSO are full and it is emptied completely, second and third cases the ones
described as Day6 and Day11 type of unloading condition described in the Introduction.

Color Code
oll empLy emulslon
(a)FPSO fully loaded and then emptied in 48 hrs. In this case only offloading is being considered
and no production of oil is taking place. This case may be needed in some emergency.

Pours/1ank seL 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10
0 full full full full full full full full full full
4.8 full 30 full full full full full full 30 full
9.6 full empLy full full full full full full empLy full
14.4 full empLy full full 30 30 full full empLy full
19.2 full empLy full full empLy empLy full full empLy full
24 full empLy full 30 empLy empLy 30 full empLy full
28.8 full empLy full empLy empLy empLy empLy full empLy full
33.6 30 empLy full empLy empLy empLy empLy full empLy 30
38.4 empLy empLy full empLy empLy empLy empLy full empLy empLy
43.2 empLy empLy 30 empLy empLy empLy empLy 30 empLy empLy
48 empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy empLy
Table 2.8: Offloading schedule when FPSO is full

Page 49

In the cases below both production and offloading have been considered simultaneously. This is
a normal operation of FPSO and not any contingency. The shuttle tanker arrives at 0Hr. and
leaves at 24 Hr.

(b) Day6 Type:

Pours/1ank seL 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10
0 full full full empLy empLy full empLy full empLy full
4.8 full full 30 empLy 20 80 empLy 30 20 full
9.6 full full empLy empLy 40 60 empLy empLy 40 full
14.4 30 full empLy empLy 60 40 empLy empLy 60 30
19.2 empLy full empLy empLy 80 20 empLy empLy 80 empLy
24 empLy empLy empLy empLy full empLy empLy empLy full empLy
Table 2.9: Day 6 type offloading schedule

(c) Day11 Type:

Pours/1ank seL 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10
0 full empLy full empLy full empLy empLy full full full
4.8 full 20 30 empLy 80 20 empLy 30 full full
9.6 full 40 empLy empLy 60 40 empLy empLy full full
14.4 30 60 empLy empLy 40 60 empLy empLy full 30
19.2 empLy 80 empLy empLy 20 80 empLy empLy full empLy
24 empLy full empLy empLy empLy full empLy empLy empLy empLy
Table 2.10: Day 11 type offloading schedule
All the above cases were checked for stability and results have been shown in Appendix2.2. All
the cases passed the stability regulations.

2.2.2 DAMAGE STABILITY:
Before checking damage stability it necessary to check MARPOL regulations, which restrict size
of tanks and compartment to restrict pollution in case of damage. If the tank sizes decided for the
FPSO fail to meet the requirements of MARPOL, then the tanks will have to be resized and this
directly affects the general arrangement of FPSO. The data presented in this report are final data
that have been obtained after a number of iterations taking into account both the owners
requirements and necessary regulations.

MARPOL CH.III: Requirements for minimizing oil pollution from oil tankers due to side and
bottom damage

(a) Regulation 22: Damage Assumptions

Page 50

The extent of side damage (bottom damage not considered, as FPSO is not a moving
structure and will remain in deep sea all through its life) is given by:

Rule
Longitudinal extent (l
c

) 1/3L or 14.5m whichever is
less (=>101.733 or 14.5)

14.5m
Transverse extent(t
c

) B/5 or 11.5m whichever is
less(=>11.304 or 11.5)
11.304m
Vertical Extent(v
c

) From Baseline upwards
without limit
From bottom to top
(0-29.8m)
Table 2.11: Extent of side damage

(b) Regulation 23: Hypothetical outflow of oil
The hypothetical outflow of oil in the case of side damage (O
c
) was calculated by
damage extents defined Reg.22.
O
c
= LW
i
+ LK
i
C
i
Where
W
i
= volume of wing tank damaged.
C
i
=Volume of centre tank, for segregated ballast tanks C
i
=0.

K=1-b
i
/ t
c
; when bi is equal to or greater than tc Ki shall be taken equal to zero.
b
i
is the width of tank in meters under consideration.

The breadth and height of all cargo tanks in the FPSO are same. So for our case we have C
i
=0
(as FPSO has segregated ballast tanks), K=0 (as b
i
(17m) > t
c
(11.304m). Tanks have different
lengths. From Table, we choose maximum length of tank, so that we get maximum hypothetical
outflow. This length is 24.55m. We assume two adjacent tabks have been damaged.

W
i
= 24.55*27.3*17 = 11393.655m
3
O
c
= 2*W
i
= 2*11393.655=22787.31m
3

From Regulation24 maximum value of O
c
is 30,000 m
3
.

(c) Regulation 24: Limitation of size and arrangement of cargo tanks
(i)Cargo tanks shall be of such size and arrangement that the hypothetical outflow O
c
,
calculated in Reg. 23 anywhere in the length does not exceed 30,000m
3
or 400(DW)
1/3
,
whichever is greater, but subject to a maximum of 40,000m
3
.
(ii)The volume of any one wing cargo oil tank shall not exceed 75% of the hypothetical
oil outflow. The volume of any centre tank shall not exceed 50,000m
3
. However, in
segregated ballast the volume of wing tanks situated between two segregated ballst tanks,
each exceeding l
c
in length, may be increased to the maximum limit of hypothetical oil
outflow provided tahta the width of the wing tanks exceed t
c
.
(iii)The length of cargo tanks shall not exceed 10m or one of the following values,

Page 51

whichever is greater.
(i)Where no bulkhead is provided inside cargo tank: (0.5b
i
+0.1)L
(ii)Where centerline bulkhead is provided inside cargo tanks: (0.25b
i
+0.15)L
(iii)Where two bulkheads are provided inside the cargo tanks:
(1) For wing tanks: 0.2L
(2)For centre cargo tanks:
If b
i
/B is equal to or greater than one fifth: 0.2L
If b
i
/B is less than one fifth: 0.2L
Where no centerline longitudinal bulkhead is provided: (0.5b
i
+0.1)L
Where centerline bulkhead is provided: (0.25b
i
/B+.15)L

Application of Reg. 24
Since our FPSO has two longitudinal bulkheads, Reg. 24(iii), (iii) is used for determining the
length of cargo tanks.

Reg. applicable Min. Length
of Wing
Tank
Min. Length
of Centre
Tank
Max. Length of
Wing Tank
Max. Length of Centre
tank
Reg.24(iii),(iii) L
min
=10m L
min
=10m L
max
=0.2L=61.04m b
i
/B=17.32/56.52=.306
>1/5
So L
max
= 0.2L = 61.04m

The lengths of wing and centre cargo tanks chosen taking into account framing of FPSO into
account were 24.6m, 24.3m, 24.55m and 24m, none of which violate Regulation24.
Restriction on volume of tanks by Reg. 24(i) and Reg 24(ii)
The Reg. 24(i) and Reg. 24(ii) impose restriction on the volume of central and wing cargo tanks.
The tanks size must be such that it does not exceed hypothetical oil flow 30000m
3
. None of the
tanks designed for FPSO exceed this limit. Besides there is a restriction on size of wing tank, that
sets maximum size of wing tank at 0.75*O
c
.

Length Type Volume of Tank Max. Volume of
wing tank from
hypothetical oil
outflow=0.75 *O
c
Max. Volume of
wing tank from
hypothetical oil
outflow=O
c

Wing Centre
24.60m 11416.86 m
3
11631.76m
3
22500 m
3
30000 m
3

24.30m 11277.63 m
3
11489.90 m
3
22500 m
3
30000 m
3

24.55m 11393.66 m
3
11608.13m
3
22500 m
3
30000 m
3

24.00m 11138.40 m
3
11348.06m
3
22500 m
3
30000 m
3

Table 2.12: Volume of wing and centre cargo tanks

Page 52

Considering Reg. 22 on the damage assumptions we found that the damage of lc = 14.5m, t
c
=
11.5m can flood two sets of tanks on port or starboard side. Based on this thirteen damage cases
were made considering every set of adjacent tanks. The stability of the FPSO was verified by the
U.S. Navy criteria described both for static and dynamic stability. It is assumed that only
starboard side of FPSO gets damaged, this is because it is symmetric about its centerline,
therefore damage along port and starboard sides will give same results.The table shows the Static
Stability Result and Dynamic Stability in damaged case. The results are shown in Appendix 2.1.
Damage
Case
Tanks Damaged Static
Criteria
Dynamic
Criteria

Dcase1
Slop ballast bottom 1.1 ,Slop ballast starboard,
Slop tank1, Ballast tank forwardmost

PASS

PASS
Dcase2
Slop ballast bottom 1.1 ,Slop ballast starboard,
Slop tank1, Cargo10.1, Ballast starboard10, Ballast bottom10.1

PASS

PASS
Dcase3
Cargo10.1, Ballast starboard10, Ballast bottom10.1, Cargo9.1, Ballast
starboard9, Ballast bottom9.1

PASS

PASS
Dcase4
, Cargo9.1, Ballast starboard9, Ballast bottom9.1,Cargo8.1, Ballast

PASS

PASS
Dcase5
,Cargo8.1, Ballast starboard8, Ballast bottom8.1,Cargo7.1, Ballast

PASS

PASS
Dcase6
Cargo7.1, Ballast starboard7, Ballast bottom7.1 Cargo6.1, Ballast

PASS

PASS
Dcase7

PASS

PASS
Dcase8

PASS

PASS
Dcase9

PASS

PASS
Dcase10

PASS

PASS
Dcase11

PASS

PASS
Dcase12
Cargo1.1, Ballast starboard1, Ballast bottom1.1, Cofferdam b/w ER &
Cargo, Engine Room(ER), ER ballast starboard2, ER ballast bottom2.2

PASS

PASS
Dcase13
Engine Room(ER), ER ballast starboard2, ER ballast bottom2.2,
Ballast Tank aftmost

PASS

PASS
Table 2.13: Damage cases Analysis

2.2.3 PROBABLISTIC DAMAGE ASSESMENT
The SOLAS regulations on subdivision and damage stability, as contained in part B-1 of SLAOS
chapter II-1, are based on probabilistic concept which takes probability of survival after
collision as a measure of ships in damaged condition. The probability of survival is determined

Page 53

by the formula for entire probability as a sum of the products for the each compartment or group
of compartments of the probability that the space is flooded multiplied by the probability that
ship will not sink with considered space flooded. The aim of the rules is to provide ships (FPSO)
with a minimum standard of subdivision. The degree of subdivision to be provided was
determined by required subdivision index R.
R= (0.002+0.0009L)
1/3
where L is in meters
The required subdivision index for the FPSO (L=305.2m) is 0.6516.
The attained subdivision index A was calculated by formula: A=LP
i
S
i
.
The values of P
i
and S
i
were calculated by method given in Appendix2.3.
For the required subdivision index, it is assumed that two adjacent set of tanks are completely
damaged. P
1
is the probability that only tank set 1 is damaged. P
2
is the probability that only tank
set 2 is damaged P
12
is the probability that both tank set 1 and tank set 2 are damaged. The
damage assumptions are same as Reg.22 of MARPOL.

Since there is no horizontal subdivision above water line the Regulation 25-6-3 is not applied.
Therefore the FPSO midship section is equivalent to

Fig 2.2: Equivalent Cross Sectional View

The contribution of such a section to the attained subdivision index is given by:
dA= P
i
x[ R
1
* S
1 +
(R
2
R
1
)* S
12
+ (1-S2)*S
123
]
where
P
i
accounts for the probability that only compartments or group of compartments under
consideration may be flooded disregarding any flooding.
S accounts for the probability of survival after flooding the compartments or group of
compartments under consideration including the effects of any horizontal subdivision.

Calculation of LPiSi :
The probability of two adjacent tanks being damaged is given by:
P
i
= P
12
-P
1
-P
2
.

Page 54

S
i
= [ R
1
* S
1 +
(R
2
R
1
)* S
12
+ (1-S2)*S
123
]
Code for Probabilistic Damage Assesment:
x1=0;%the distance from the aft terminal of Ls to the foremost
%portion of the aft end of the compartment being considered
x2=9.6; %the distance from the aft terminal of Ls to the aftermost
%portion of the forward end of the compartment being considered

Ls=305.2; % in m
B=56.52;
b=2.5; %measured from outer shell to longitudinal bulkhead.
%Taken b=min{b1,b2,b3.....bn}
E1=x1/Ls;
E2=x2/Ls;
E=E1+E2-1;
J=E2-E1;
if (E>0)
Jdash=J-E;
end
if (E<0)
Jdash=J+E;
end
Jmax=48/Ls;
if (Jmax>0.24)
Jmax=0.24;
end
a=1.2+0.8*E;
if (a<1.2)
a=1.2;
end

F=0.4+0.25*E*(1.2+a);
y=J/Jmax;
z=Jdash/Jmax;

if (y<1)
F1=y^2-y^3/3;
F2=z^3/3-z^4/12;
end
if (y>=1)
F1=y-1/3;
F2=z^2/2-z/3+1/12;
end

p=F1*Jmax;
q=0.4*F2*Jmax^2;

pi=a*p;

if (J>=0.2*b/B)
if(b/B<=0.2)
r=b/B*(2.3+.08/(J+0.02))+0.1;
end
if(b/B>0.2)
r=0.016/(J+0.02)+b/B+.36;
end

Page 55

end

if(J<0.2*b/B)
if(b/B<=0.2)
r=b/B*(2.3+.08/(J+0.02))+0.1;
end
if(b/B>0.2)
r=0.016/(J+0.02)+b/B+.36;
end
r=J*(r-1)*B/(0.2*b)+1;
end

Calculations of various parameters: In order to calculate S
1
,S
2
and S
12
GZ
max
and Heel Angle
was found by using Hydromax. The results have been tabulated below:

Calculation of S1
Case Full Load Partial load
Gzmax (m) Heel angle(deg) S
l
Gzmax (m) Heel angle (deg) S
p
S1
0.5(S
l
+ S
p
)
DCase1 3.424 3.4 1 5.852 0.9 1 1
DCase2 3.24 3.4 1 5.718 1.4 1 1
DCase3 3.302 3.4 1 5.837 1.1 1 1
DCase4 3.3 3.4 1 5.842 1.1 1 1
DCase5 3.3 3.4 1 5.847 1.1 1 1
DCase6 3.298 3.4 1 5.852 1.1 1 1
DCase7 3.297 3.4 1 5.857 1.1 1 1
DCase8 3.295 3.4 1 5.861 1.1 1 1
DCase9 3.293 3.4 1 5.866 1.1 1 1
DCase10 3.291 3.4 1 5.87 1.1 1 1
DCase11 3.3336 1.4 1 5.875 1.1 1 1
DCase12 3.367 -0.7 1 6.019 0.9 1 1
DCase13 3.274 -0.5 1 6.146 0.4 1 1
Table 2.14: Calculation of S1

Calculation of S2
l
p
S2
0.5(S
l
+ S
p
)
DCase1 3.424 1.6 1 5.852 0.9 1 1
DCase2 3.275 2.7 1 5.57 2.3 1 1
DCase3 3.377 1.9 1 5.524 2.9 1 1
DCase4 3.377 2 1 5.551 2.6 1 1
DCase5 3.375 1.9 1 5.577 2.3 1 1
DCase6 3.372 1.9 1 5.6 2 1 1
DCase7 3.372 1.9 1 5.62 1.8 1 1
DCase8 3.367 1.9 1 5.639 1.5 1 1
DCase9 3.364 1.9 1 5.656 1.3 1 1
DCase10 3.36 1.9 1 5.671 1.1 1 1

Page 56

DCase11 3.405 1.9 1 5.681 0.9 1 1
DCase12 3.368 -0.2 1 5.915 2.1 1 1
DCase13 3.274 0 1 6.146 1.1 1 1

Calculation of S12
l
p
S12
0.5(S
l
+ S
p
)
DCase1 3.424 1.6 1 5.852 0.9 1 1
DCase2 3.365 2.6 1 5.67 2.4 1 1
DCase3 3.578 1.8 1 5.718 3.2 1 1
DCase4 3.581 1.8 1 5.77 2.8 1 1
DCase5 3.581 1.8 1 5.797 2.4 1 1
DCase6 3.581 1.8 1 5.81 2.1 1 1
DCase7 3.579 1.8 1 5.818 1.8 1 1
DCase8 3.576 1.8 1 5.826 1.6 1 1
DCase9 3.571 1.8 1 5.835 1.3 1 1
DCase10 3.565 1.8 1 5.847 1.1 1 1
DCase11 3.615 -0.7 1 5.862 0.8 1 1
DCase12 3.506 -1.8 1 5.992 0.6 1 1
DCase13 3.274 -0.5 1 6.146 0.4 1 1

Calculation PiSi

1 2 12 82 81 S1 S2 S123 lSl

uCase1 0.0039 0.0133 0.0494 0.8873 0.2418 1 1 1 0.0282
uCase2 0.0133 0.0399 0.119 0.8231 0.2278 1 1 1 0.0438
uCase3 0.0399 0.038 0.1347 0.7944 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0368
uCase4 0.038 0.0333 0.1762 0.7939 0.2214 1 1 1 0.0847
uCase3 0.0333 0.0484 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0349
uCase6 0.0484 0.0333 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0349
uCase7 0.0333 0.0333 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0698
uCase8 0.0333 0.0333 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0698
uCase9 0.0333 0.0333 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0698
uCase10 0.0333 0.0333 0.1368 0.7943 0.2213 1 1 1 0.0698
uCase11 0.0333 0.0343 0.1368 0.7938 0.2214 1 1 1 0.069
uCase12 0.0343 0.0329 0.1314 0.7833 0.2191 1 1 1 0.0442
uCase13 0.0329 0.007 0.0824 0.8083 0.2246 1 1 1 0.0223
zlSl= 0.7317
Table 2.17: Calculation of PiSi

Page 57

The attained subdivision index(0.7517) > required subdivision index(0.6516). Therefore the
FPSO design satisfies probabilistic damage assessment criteria.

3) Wind and Current Loading:
Of primary concern in holding a ship stationary is opposing forces resulting from wind and
current action. Forces, arise from currents, are essentially irresistible forces; the resulting vertical
movement of the FPSO must be allowed for and cant be opposed. Similarly, the wave forces
acting on a stationary ship are essentially oscillatory in nature; they can be minimized by the
reorienting the ship or by detuning its natural response but little can be done to oppose the
oscillatory ship motions resulting from wave actions. Thus, the brief discussion herein of the
environmental constraints involved in a mooring or a dynamic positioning system design will be
limited to wind and current forces, neither waves nor tides.
The wind and current forces have been calculated for 2 extreme drafts: (a) Full Load draft and
(b) Ballast Load draft because in full load case the wind force will be minimum while the current
force will be maximum while in ballast load case the wind load will be maximum due to huge
exposed area to the wind and current load will be minimum. So well look towards the case in
which net load will be maximum.
Ship Dimensions 305.2m56.52m29.8m
Full Load Draft 22 m
Ballast Load Draft 7.895 m
Table 3.1: Dimension and Extreme Drafts.
3.1 Wind Force Calculations: Air moving across a water surface has a varying velocity with
altitude due to the interaction between the surface and the air mass. Saunders (1957) gave a
conclusion that the most consistent average of various data was one where the velocity varied as
the fifth root of the height above the surface. This is expressed as:

v
v
c
= (
h
h
c
)
0.2

Where I: airstream velocity at an height h
I
o
: airstream velocity at some standard height ho

And the Wind force is expressed in the terms:

F =
C
D
p
2
A:
2

Where p = mass density of air
: = the wind velocity
A = the area with all terms in consistent dimensions

Page 58
= 1.183, a constant drag coefficient

The standard used for wind velocity measurements over ground is a height ho of 10 m. To
calculate the wind force on a projected strip of a ship of length L and height h2-h1, the following
equation is used;
F = kII
o
2
] [
h
h
c
Jb
h
2
h
1

> F = _
kLI
o
2
1.4b
o
1.4
] (b
2
1.4
-b
1
1.4
)

When calculating wind forces and moments for any mooring and dynamic positioning
application it is usually desirable to determine the force distribution with the wind at various
angles to the ship and also the yawing moment that the wind can apply as a function of wind
angle.

First thing is to calculate the longitudinal wind forces (at angle of attack o = u) and transverse
wind forces (at angle of attack o = 9u). The above water areas to be included are all of those
structures that the wind will impinge upon.

After calculating the wind forces for longitudinal and transverse directions, we have calculated
the wind force at each angle of attack from 0 to 180 varying at each 10 off the bow. These
calculations were done using the Flow forces and Centre Multipliers (Appendix 3 and Table 3.1),
data taken from The Ship Design And Construction, by Taggart.

The detailed wind force calculations have been shown in Appendix 3:

The calculation results are as follows:

Load Case Draft(m) Net Wind Force (kN)
Full Load 22 1262.707 ( at 90)
Ballast Load 7.895 1780.814 (at 90)

Table 3.2: Wind Force results for extreme drafts

3.2 Current Force Calculations: The movement of body of water in which a ship is moored or
dynamically positioned applies a downstream force to the hull that must be counteracted by the
mooring system to the extent that the ship does not move outside its boundaries. When secured
to a SPM, the boundaries are often established to allow the ship to move around to a heading
where the current has a minimum effect, and thus the mooring system can be designed for this
adaption to minimal environmental forces. As in the calculation of wind effects on the above
water structure, the current forces have been calculated for any direction of flow relative to the
hull and similarly the centre of application of these forces has been calculated.

For a ship type hull, without locked propellers, the axial resistance to a bow-on current is
calculated as:

Page 59

F
L
c
=
p
2
(u.u88) C
X
B I :
2

And transverse resistance to beam-on current is calculated as:

F
1
c
=
p
2
(u.Su) I I :
2

Where;
p = mass density of water
C
X
= maximum section coefficient
I =mean water body length
I =mean draft
: =current velocity
The detailed current force calculations have been shown in Appendix 3:
The calculation results are as follows:

Load Case Draft(m) Net Current Force (kN)
Full Load 22 2953.466 ( at 90)
Ballast Load 7.895 1205.893 (at 90)
Table 3.3: Current Force results for extreme drafts.

3.3 Steady Wave Loads:
The Steady wave loads have been approximated by the Added Resistance when FPSO is exposed
to 100 year sea conditions. Since the FPSO is turret moored, it is weathervaning. Thus, waves are
always at zero degrees to the FPSO.
Added Resistance:1. Full Load Case (Draft =22m)

Fig 3.1: Added Resistance RAO for full load case

Page 60

R
uw
u
2
= SS1.286
kN
m
2
_ot = u.27
roJ
s
] ....... . rom gropb
> R
uw
= SS1.286 (2.S)
2
kN
> R
uw
= 219S.S4 kN
2. Ballast Load Case (Draft =7.895m)

Fig 3.2: Added Resistance RAO for ballast load case
R
uw
u
2
= 669.227
kN
m
2
_ot = u.uu
roJ
s
] ....... . rom gropb
> R
uw
= 669.227 (2.S)
2
kN
> R
uw
= 4182.67 kN
3.4 Net Environmental Load:
Case 1: Full Load Condition (Draft=22m)
Max Force (Wind+ Current) = 4216.174 kN at 90
Steady Wave Force = 2195.54 kN at 0
Net Steady Force (Wind+ Current+ Wave) = V4698.266
2
+ 219S.S4
2
kN
= 5185.95 kN

Page 61

tan0 =
Forcc (Bcom wisc)
Forcc (Bow wisc)

> 0 = 6S
So, The Net Steady Environmental Load is 5185.95 kN acting at 6S off the bow.
Case 2: Ballast Load Condition (Draft= 7.985m)
Max Force (Wind+ Current) = 2986.70 kN at 90
Steady Wave Force = 4182.67 kN at 0
Net Steady Force (Wind+ Current+ Wave) = V2986.7u
2
+ 4182.67
2
kN
= 5139.56 kN

tan0 =
Forcc (Bcom wisc)
Forcc (Bow wisc)

> 0 = SS.S

So, The Net Steady Environmental Load is 5139.56 kN acting at SS.S off the bow.
Since the Full Load Case provide greater Environmental Load, we take 5185.95 kN as our
Design Load for Mooring System Design.
4. Strength and Structural Design General
The design of the ship structures is highly regulated by the International Classification Societies.
In order for a ship to be approved for construction, it must meet the standards of classification
society. The objective of the project is to store oil in the FPSO after extraction from the oil field.
So we have chosen a double hull oil tanker shape to serve this purpose. This vessel is built to
meet the rules and regulations set forth by American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)-rules for
building and classing Steel Vessels (Double Hull Tankers). The scantlings of the structure can be
calculated only from the ABS rules for specific vessel i.e. double hull tankers. But since the
FPSO is positioned at a particular position on a long term basis, the environmental loading at that
site should be taken into account while doing calculations. Hence, the structural design was
modified accordingly to reflect the site-specific environmental loads. The calculations were done
using softwares HYDROMAX and MATLAB.

Page 62

4.1 Work Flow:-
The first step is to determine a midship section with certain number of girders, stiffeners and
other members at their approximate positions. A midship section with double bulkheads was
considered.
Then the minimum thickness of plates and other primary support members were calculated
according to the rules given in ABS for double hull tankers (Section 8/2.1.5) which is given in
Appendix IV, Table 4.1. With the midship section with us, we calculated the vertical neutral axis
of the midship taking into account the basic values obtained. A program was formulated in
MATLAB to determine the vertical neutral axis of the midship section. Thereafter the net
vertical and horizontal hull girder moment of inertia was calculated.
The ship model was created in Hydromax with the tanks at appropriate positions. Since for a
FPSO the environmentally induced loads are dominated by waves, past 100 years wave data was
collected from the wave atlas for the specific site i.e. Usan field. For the 100 years sea spectrum,
the significant wave height (H
s
) was 5 m. Then H
1/10
was calculated using the formulae H
1/10
=
1.273 H
s
. Then a wave having wavelength equivalent to length of the vessel and wave height as
calculated before was imposed on the ship model in hydromax as if the ship is statically poised
on it. The maximum vertical bending moment and shear force were determined for the
corresponding load cases. This bending moment value was compared with the one calculated
from ABS rules for double hull tankers for each load set and the maximum of the two is taken
into account for further calculations.

Fig 4.1: Wave Form

Page 63

Next the calculations were done for the different structural members by considering the
respective load sets given for each of them in the ABS rules (Section 8/Table 8.2.7) which is
given in Appendix IV, Table 4.5. For each load set, the specifications on load component, design
load combination, acceptance criteria and other parameters are mentioned as in ABS rules (Table
8.2.8) or Appendix IV, Table 4.6 of our report. The static and dynamic load components were
calculated from the ABS rules and their significance are given in Appendix IV, 4.2. For each
structural member various load sets were considered and thickness calculations were done. Out
of those, the maximum value was chosen and that was assigned as the minimum thickness value
for that member.
After thickness calculation of all the members, the minimum section modulus for stiffeners was
determined from ABS (Section 8/Table 8.2.5) or Appendix IV, Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 of the
report. Then the size of the stiffeners for the corresponding section modulus was determined
from the Bureau Veritas rules for steel vessels.
With the minimum thickness and size of stiffeners calculated, the new vertical neutral axis of the
midship was determined. The above steps were repeated and iteration resulted in final thickness
values for the members. The material class and grades of steel used in various positions of a
double hull oil tanker were also taken into account as in (Section 6/Table 6.1.3 and Table 6.1.4)
of ABS rules or (Appendix IV, Table 4.8) in our report. MATLAB was used for calculation of
neutral axis of midship, various load components, thickness, and section modulus and weight
estimation. The programs made for the calculation of all the above elements are shown in
Appendix 4.5.
With the obtained neutral axis and thickness values the stress level at deck and keel were
calculated. These stress level should be within limits for the type of steel that is used. If stress is
not within limits then thickness are changed accordingly but keeping in mind the minimum
values. Numbers of iterations are made varying the thickness of the plates. Once the shear stress
at deck and keel are within limits, the thickness values are finalized for the structural members.
After the scantlings are finalized, the weight per unit area of midship section was found. This is
extrapolated forward and aft of amidships. Hence, the total steel weight of the ship was
determined. This should be comparable to the steel weight estimation in preliminary design.
Finally, 10% of the calculated weight was taken as the margin for the brackets, web frames,
floors, transverse bulkheads etc.
4.2 Load Calculation:-
The vertical bending moment at amidships was calculated by using ABS rules for double hull
tankers and from the 100 year wave data. The values obtained from all the above two methods
were compared and the maximum of them was selected for further calculations.

Page 64

1. Using the ABS rules for double hull tankers, the still water and wave bending moment at
amidships was determined.
The minimum hull girder hogging and sagging still water bending moment at amidships for
sea going and harbor operations were calculated from (Section 7/2.1.2) of ABS rules for
double hull tankers.

These values are given below:-
Hogging:-
M
sw-hog-mid
= 0.01C
wv
L
2
B (11.97-1.9C
b
) = 5.682 X 10
6
kNm
(Where C
wv
is the wave coefficient and is equal to 10.75)
Sagging:-
M
sw-sag-mid
= -0.05185C
wv
L
2
B (Cb+0.7) = - 4.93 X 106 kNm

Comparing the above two values we finalize the still water bending moment at amidships to
be, M
sw-sea
= 5.682X 10
6
kNm

The still water bending moment at amidships for harbor condition was calculated.
M
sw-harb
= 1.25 M
sw-sea
= 7.05 X 10
6
kNm
The vertical and horizontal wave bending moment at amidships were also found out from the
ABS rules (Section 7/3.4.1 and 3.4.2 respectively) or (Appendix IV, 4.1) of our report.
The vertical wave bending moment for hogging and sagging case are given as follows:-
M
wv-hog
= 10.54 X 10
6
kNm
M
wv-sag
= - 10.46 X 10
6
kNm
The horizontal wave bending moment, M
h
was calculated for all the load sets:-
Load cases Moment (kNm)
Scantling case 11 X 10
6

Cargo only 8.52 X 10
6

Ballast only 3.279 X 10
6

Table 4.1: Horizontal Wave Bending Moment
2. The bending moment calculations were also done on the basis of 100 year wave data.

Page 65

A wave of wavelength equivalent to the length of the vessel was assumed, whose height was
taken to be equal to H
1/10
= 6.36 m. This wave was imposed on the ship and the bending
moment calculations were done for both hogging and sagging case.
Scantling case M
wv-hog
= 22.8 X 10
6

M
wv-sag
= 7.11 X 10
6

Cargo only M
wv-hog
= 5.75 X 10
6
M
wv-sag
= 22.17 X 10
6

Ballast only M
wv-hog
=11.5 X 10
6
M
wv-sag
= 5.36 X 10
6

Table 4.2: Wave bending moment from 100 yr data
The graphs are shown in Appendix 4.3.
4.3 Results:
The still water bending moment was finalized as per the ABS rules for double hull tankers.
Still water bending moment at amidships for sea going operations:
M
sw-sea
= 5.682X 10
6
kNm
Still water bending moment at amidships for harbour condition:
M
sw-harb
= 7.05 X 10
6
kNm
For vertical wave bending moment, comparisons were done for all the above 3 methods. The
maximum among them was finalized for further analysis.
Scantling case 22.8 X 10
6

Cargo only 22.17 X 10
6

Ballast only 11.5 X 10
6

Table 4.3: Design bending moment
4.4 Structural Components:
Keel Plate:-
The minimum thickness for keel plating from Table 4.1 was found to be 14.6 mm. The keel plate
breadth is only affected by the length of the vessel. The calculated breadth was 2.326 m (using
the formulae b=800+5L mm from ABS rules for double hull tankers Section 8/2.2.1) and the
installed breadth is 2.5 m. The thickness of the keel took into account the material strength,

Page 66

corrosion factor and stress factor. Corrosion addition was determined from the Table 4.9 and
Figure 4.1. The corrosion addition was taken as 3.0 mm. The calculated thickness was 22mm.
Bottom Plate:-
The minimum thickness for bottom plating from Table 1 was found to be 12.65 mm. Next using
the formulae in Table 4.2 we calculate the thickness for different load sets. Pressures
corresponding to each load set were calculated using the Tables 4.4, 4.5, 4.6. The dynamic wave
pressure (P
wv-dyn
) and static sea pressure (P
hys
) for load set 1 and 2 were calculated. The dynamic
tank pressure (P
in-dyn
) and static tank pressure (P
in-tk
) for load sets 7 and 8 were also calculated.
Taking into account the load combination (Appendix IV, Table 4.7) and acceptance criteria for
each load set minimum thickness were calculated using the formulae in Table 4.2 as follows:
Load set Load component (KN/m
2
) Thickness (mm)
1 274.7 19.8
2 249.25 18.9
7 25.55 8.0
8 258 19.3

Hence the minimum thickness of bottom plating was finalized as 19.8 mm. Corrosion additions
were taken into account.
Side Shell:-
The minimum thickness for side shell form Table 1 was found out to be 13.6 mm. Same load sets
were considered as bottom plating for calculation by referring the Table 4.4, 4.5, 4.6. The
pressures were calculated for various positions. Static and dynamic pressure for region below the
load waterline was considered.
2
) Thickness (mm)
1 220.742 17.1
2 149.4 16.0
7 27.66 8.0
8 157.9 15.5

Considering the corrosion additions, the minimum thickness of side shell plating was finalized as
17.1 mm.
Inner Bottom Plate:-
The minimum thickness was calculated as 10.6 mm from Table 4.1. Next different load sets were
considered to calculate thickness. For load case 3 in Table4.4, the static and dynamic cargo tank
pressure were calculated and the summation was the total pressure considered for calculation.

Page 67

But for load set 5, summation was made for static and dynamic pressure for ballast tanks. The
thickness was calculated for all the load sets and load combinations by using the Table 4.2.
2
) Thickness (mm)
3 336.87 23.0
4 324.64 21.5
5 299.64 19.0
Considering the corrosion additions, the minimum thickness of inner bottom plating was
finalized as 23.0 mm.
Inner Side shell:-
The above procedure was repeated for side shell thickness calculation. The minimum thickness
from the Table 4.1 was calculated as 10.6 mm. For the load set 3, pressure on the side shell was
considered from the cargo tank region and for the load set 5 and 6 pressure from ballast tanks
was taken into account while calculation.
2
) Thickness (mm)
3 231.72 17.8
4 307.3 21.6
5 235.76 18.0
The minimum thickness of the inner side shell was finalized as 21.6 mm.
Deck Plate:-
Initial deck thickness was calculated from Table 4.1. It was found to be 10.6 mm. The thickness
calculation for deck plating was done both for weather deck condition and distributed or
concentrated load condition. When weather deck is considered, for various load sets like
scantling, cargo only and ballast cases, the sea pressure, cargo pressure or only ballast water
pressure is calculated respectively. But since the thickness we obtained was very less,
concentrated load condition was also taken into consideration. The arrangement of modules on
the top deck is known. The size and weight per area of each module is known. The weight per
area of each module gives the pressure and the maximum pressure is considered and is added
with static pressure to give the total pressure. For load case 10 only the concentrated load
pressure of the modules was taken and thickness was calculated. The final thickness of deck was
finalized as 17.5 mm.
2
) Thickness (mm)
1 34.3 12.2
3 40.67 13.4
9 253.43 17.5
10 181.22 16.3

Page 68

Longitudinal Bulkhead:-
The minimum thickness was determined as 10.6 mm from Table 4.1. Then the cargo only case
was considered and the minimum thickness was calculated. Two cases were evaluated- inner
tank empty, outer full and outer tank empty, inner full. The dynamic and static pressure of the
tanks were calculated and their summation yields the total pressure on the bulkhead. The
corrosion addition made is 2.5 mm.
2
) Thickness (mm)
3 216.95 16.4
4 307.3 21.0
11 210 19.1

Girders:-
The thickness of double bottom centerline girder and other girders were calculated using the
Table 4.1. The thickness of centerline girder is 13.13 mm and other girder thickness was 11.6
mm. Then the thickness was calculated for ballast load set where pressure from one side of
ballast tank was taken into consideration. For each girder pressure on that due to the water on
one side was calculated and this pressure was used to further determine the thickness of the
girders using Table 4.2. The corrosion addition was also considered from Figure 4.1.

Centerline Girder:-
2
) Thickness (mm)
5 387.17 21.3
6 307.29 20.6

Girder under bulkhead:-
2
) Thickness (mm)
5 368.78 21.1
6 307.29 21.0

Side girders:-
2
) Thickness (mm)
5 350.61 20.6
6 307.29 21.2

Page 69

Side Shell Girder:-
During this calculation, due to different vertical heights of the girders the pressure on each girder
is different. Hence the thickness comes out to be different. The maximum thickness out of all
those calculated, was finalized and assigned as the scantling of the side shell girder for each load
case. And out of all the load cases, the maximum thickness obtained was finalized as the
minimum thickness required for the side shell girder.

2
) Thickness (mm)
5 223.22 16.4
6 208 17.3
11 185.02 15.0

Bottom Longitudinal:-
The section modulus requirement was calculated by determining the effective span of the
longitudinal and longitudinal length. The span for these longitudinals was taken as 1 m and the
effective length as 3.4 m, the distance between major frames. The pressure corresponding to the
maximum thickness for any load set was taken into consideration. This pressure was used in
calculation of the section modulus using Table 3. The factors considered for the calculation were
yield stress of material, distance from neutral axis and hence hull girder bending stress. The
section modulus for bottom plating and inner bottom plating are:
Bottom plating - 1085.7 cm
3

Inner bottom plating- 1331.4 cm
3

Side Longitudinal:-
The side longitudinal section modulus requirement was identical to the one above. The pressure
used was the same as in calculation of general side plating thickness. The allowable stress
consisted of the material factor, stress factor, distance from baseline to neutral axis and distance
from base to the point in the question. The section modulus was found to be 974.3 cm
3
. For inner
side shell pressure from cargo region was taken into consideration and the section modulus found
out to be was 1041.7 cm
3
.
Deck Longitudinal:-
The pressure taken into consideration was the same as in thickness calculation. The bending
stress at deck is considered which in turn depends on the distance between the vertical neutral
axis and the deck. The section modulus calculated was 1030.9 cm
3
.

Page 70

Longitudinal Bulkhead Section Modulus:-
The same procedure was implemented as above. Pressure considered was the same from the
thickness calculation. With the material yield stress known the section modulus was determined.
The location of the stiffeners was also taken into account as in side shell stated above. The span
was determined to be 1.0 m since these longitudinals would tie into the longitudinal framing
system of main deck and bottom structure. The section modulus hence calculated was 1041 cm
3
.

4.5 Final Analysis:
The thicknesses of all the members of the midship section were determined. From the section
modulus at different positions we decided the type and size of stiffeners to be used in the
midship section. For the sake of standardization the stiffeners used in double bottom region were
chosen to be bulb sections of 370x13 mm
2
and the stiffeners for side shell, longitudinal bulkhead
and deck were chosen to be 340x12 mm
2
. The new position of the neutral axis was found out.
After that the stress level at deck and keel was calculated which depend on the distance between
the neutral axis and deck or keel. If the stress level is not within permissible limits then further
iterations were done. The scantlings are changed accordingly but keeping in mind the steel grade
requirement at a specific position. Sidewise the weight per area of the midship is also calculated
and it is extrapolated to find the overall steel weight of the ship. This weight that we have
calculated should be comparable to the weight estimated while doing preliminary design. With
all these factors taken into account we decided the final scantlings of the midship section as
given in the Table below. The final neutral axis of the midship section was determined as 13.55
m from bottom. The stress at deck was calculated to be 172.41 N/mm
2
and at keel it was found to
be 143.75 N/mm
2
, both are within permissible limits. The steel weight of the ship was calculated
to be approximately 23637 tonnes.
Structural Components Minimum Actual
Keel plate breadth (mm) 2326 2500
Keel plate thickness (mm) 22 35
Bottom plating thickness (mm) 19.8 30
Side shell thickness (mm) 17.1 28
Inner bottom thickness (mm) 23 32
Inner side shell thickness (mm) 21.6 30
Deck plate thickness (mm) 17.5 40
Longitudinal bulkhead (mm) 21 28

Page 71

Girder below long. bulkhead (mm) 21.1 28
Other double bottom girder (mm) 21.2 26
Side shell girder thickness (mm) 17.3 28
Shear strake thickness (mm) 20 40
Bottom plate section modulus (cm3) 1085.7 1424
Inner bottom section modulus (cm3) 1331.4 1446
Side shell section modulus (cm3) 974.3 1096
Inner side shell section modulus (cm3) 1041.7 1114
Long. bulkhead section modulus (cm3) 1041 1096
Deck long. Section modulus (cm3) 1030.9 1169
Table 4.4: Final Scantlings

Midship Section
Fig 4.2: Midship Section

Page 72

5. Mooring and Station Keeping:

The ship-shaped vessels used as FPSOs generally have the advantages of large oil storage
capacity and high stability margin. The vessel motions, however, in both wave energy spectral
period range (3-25 seconds) and slowly varying period range (>50 seconds) are inevitably large
due to the excessive water plane area of a ship-shaped vessel. In addition, the high length-to-
beam ratio of a ship-shaped vessel necessitates the vessel be able to weathervane into the
prevailing environmental loads due to wind, current and waves in order to minimize the loading
on the mooring system. Therefore, the critical design issues of a mooring system for an FPSO
are:

Line dynamics due to six degrees of freedom wave frequency vessel motions (in surge,
sway, heave, roll, pitch and yaw),
Low frequency vessel motions in surge, sway and yaw, and
Effects of non-collinear environments of wind, current and waves on the responses of the
vessel and its mooring system.

From the designers point of view, there are options in the selection of vessel size, design
pretension, turret location, mooring pattern, line configuration and anchoring point. The
proposed design options can reduce the possibility of progressive failure of a mooring system
under extreme design events. This in turn will enhance the reliability of a mooring system
designed for FPSOs operating in geographic areas with tropical environments.

5.1 Design Environmental Criteria:

The mooring system of an FPSO is usually designed to survive in a 100-year return period event
in a combination of wind, current and waves for a specific project site. Figure 5.1 shows major
oil producing offshore areas of the world, where FPSOs are anticipated.

Fig 5.1: Major Oil Producing Offshore Areas Worldwide

In selecting the design environmental criteria for a vessel allowed to weathervane, special
attention is to be given to the non collinear environments of wind, current and waves and the
design wave period range. This is due to the sensitivity of the environmental mean loads to the
directionality of environments off the bow for a ship-shaped FPSO vessel with a large length-to-

Page 73

beam ratio. In addition, the wave-induced vessel motion responses are also very sensitive to
wave directions relative to the vessel and the design wave periods.

5.2 Vessel Design Characteristics:

The vessel size is usually dictated by the oil storage capacity and the topside layout as the
functional requirements of an offshore project. The physical dimensions of a vessel and its
general arrangement of deck and hull will in turn determine the wind, current and wave forces
and moments acting on the vessel. The hull shape and geometry of a vessel together with its
mass properties in terms of the center of gravity location and radii of gyration in roll, pitch and
yaw will define the hydrostatics and motion response characteristics. Subsequently, these vessel
design characteristics will be used to determine the mooring system responses under the design
environmental conditions.

In selecting the vessel size it is important to keep the natural periods in surge and sway for the
total system (vessel with its mooring system) longer than at least three times the design wave
spectral peak period. This will minimize the possible dynamic amplification of total system
responses under the effects of wave frequency energy in the period range of 3 to 25 seconds. To
keep the natural periods in pitch and roll longer than the design wave spectral peak period is also
desirable for reducing wave frequency motions of an FPSO. In most cases, this is, however,
difficult to achieve. Bilge keels have, on occasion, been introduced to dampen roll and pitch
motions.

5.3 Vessel Offsets and Design Pretensions:

Under the design environmental conditions of wind, current and waves, the total vessel offset
and motions consist of three components:

1. Mean steady offset and equilibrium vessel heading due to static mean forces and yaw
moment of wind, current, and

2. Low frequency motions due to slowly-varying wind and wave drift forces, and

3. Wave frequency motions due to first order wave excitations.

There are mooring line tensions corresponding to each of these vessel-offset positions, headings
and motions.

The mean offset and low frequency motions are a function of the mooring system stiffness. The
mooring system stiffness can be adjusted by varying the initial design pretension of a mooring
system under no environmental loading. The higher the design pretension and the mooring
system stiffness the smaller the vessel offset will be. Usually the riser design will dictate the
vessel offset criteria for the mooring system design. The unnecessarily high design pretension,
however, will impose larger total line tension and thus result in lower safety factors for a
mooring design.

Page 74

5.4 Analytical Procedure:

For FPSO mooring systems, both vessel/mooring system and line dynamic analyses are to be
performed. A simplified method of line dynamic mooring analysis is outlined in following Flow
diagram.

Fig 5.2: Mooring analysis flowchart

5.5 Mooring Line Configuration:

The conventional mooring lines generally consist of the combination of chain and wire rope.
Submersible buoys and/or clump weights may be introduced along a mooring line for various
design considerations. As shown in following figure in deep water (greater than 300m), the wire
rope is used for most of the suspended portion of a mooring line to increase the stiffness and
reduce the top tension of a mooring line. In ultra deep waters (greater than 2000m), even the

Page 75

conventional chain-wire combination will become too heavy and too soft in horizontal stiffness
to resist environmental loads.

Fig 5.3: Deep water mooring line configuration.

5.6 Mooring System Evaluation:

To determine the mooring line tensions and anchor specification, we need to calculate the
Environmental Loads.

5.6.1Environmental Loads:

Environmental loads have been calculated for 2 extreme drafts:

1. Full Load draft(22 m)
2. Ballast draft(7.895 m)

Once the environmental loads for these 2 drafts have been calculated, we design the mooring line
for maximum environmental loads. Environmental Loads for these 2 drafts are as follows:

Page 76

1. Full load Draft (22m):
a. Wind Loads = 1262.707 KN
b. Current Loads=2953.466 KN
c. Wave Loads=2195.54 KN
d. Net Loads = 5185.95 KN at 65

2. Ballast Draft (7.895m):
a. Wind Loads = 1780.814 KN
b. Current Loads=1205.893 KN
c. Wave Loads=4182.67 KN
d. Net Loads = 5139.56 KN at 35.5
Thus our design load will be the environmental load in Full load conditions.
5.6.2 Mooring System Design: (Appendix: V)
FPSO is Turret Moored. We assume that the mooring line configuration is 12- leg Catenary
(6*2). Water depth is 850 m. The maximum possible deflection as limited by Riser system is
20% of the water depth.

The natural period of mooring system = 200 sec (Table: 5.7)

From the Surge model of turret moored FPSO:

I = 2n(H + o)K

Assuming the added mass to be equal to 25% of the total mass, this equation leads to a max.
desirable stiffness.

M=386546 tonnes (Displacement of FPSO)
a= 96636.5 tonnes

> Kmax = 47. 88
KN
m

In order to avoid the excessive motions the designer always wishes to limit the displacement of
the system. Suppose the risers limit the acceptable deflections to 20% of the water depth. This
will result in minimum stiffness requirement for the system.

The steady force taken by the mooring system= 5186 KN

Kmin =
5186
20% o] 850 m

Page 77

> Km|n = 3. 51
KN
m

We are considering 3 different combinations of chain-and-wire rope to find out the most suitable
mooring line.

Case1: Only Chain
Case2: Chain-Wire rope-Chain (depth wise 100m-650m-100m)
Case3: Chain-Wire rope-Chain (depth wise 100m-500m-250m)

Mooring Line Tension Analysis has been shown in Appendix: 5

The results clearly indicate that combination of chain and wire rope in case3 gives minimum
working tension and minimum weight of mooring line.

5.7 Anchoring System:

The anchoring points fixed to the seabed are the critical part of a mooring system for keeping an
FPSO on location. Depending on soil conditions and the required performance, there are various
types of anchors that can be selected. There are basically two types of anchors:

Conventional drag embedment anchors, and
Anchors, which are designed to resist vertical loads, such as pile, suction and vertically loaded
plate anchors (VLAs).

There are concerns about VLAs designed to take vertical loads. These anchors may exhibit
complete loss of their holding capacity after pulling out from the seabed. This is in contrast to the
Conventional drag embedment anchors, which can still retain considerable amount of holding
capacity even after some movement under the environmental extremes. In addition, there will
always be some uncertainties involved in the analysis of the site-specific soil conditions.
Therefore, ABS (Huang and Lee, 1998) requires higher safety factors for ultimate design holding
capacities of VLAs as compared with conventional drag embedment anchors. The safety factors
of both types of anchors are listed below for comparison:

(a) Intact Design Environmental Condition
(1) VLA Anchors - 2.0
(2) Conventional - 1.5

(b) One- line Broken Design Environmental Condition
(1) VLA Anchors - 1.5
(2) Conventional - 1.0

Conventional drag embedment anchors are considered to have some consequential advantages
over VLAs. In case the design environmental criteria would be exceeded and causing the anchor
to move, these drag anchors still can retain most of their holding capacity. In addition, with
anchor movement the grouped mooring lines will adjust line tensions among themselves to
reduce the peak line tension of the most-loaded line.

Page 78

5.7.1 Anchor Design:

The efficiency of an anchor is defined as the ratio of Anchors holding capacity and Anchors
weight. The following equation represents the anchor efficiency.
E =
P
w

Where E= efficiency
W= weight of anchor in air (kN)
P= ultimate holding capacity (kN)

British Standard 6349, Part 6: 1989 cites the following anchor system efficiencies:

Anchor Type Efficiency in poor soils, silts
and soft clay
Efficiency in good soils, sand
and firm clay
Deadweight anchors 0.3 0.5
Stockless anchors 2.0 5.0
Stock anchors 5.0 10.0
High holding power anchors 10.0 30.0
Table 5.1: British Standard-6349 anchor system efficiencies.

The anchor system also is subjected to dynamic loads as the ship surges, sways and yaws in
adverse weather and is buffeted by wave action. A Z-factor multiple is applied to approximate
the anticipated force increase required in a static analysis. This factor, based on Navy experience,
uses a value between 1.25-1.50 for small ships with fine lines; 1.50-1.70 for larger more fully
shaped ships; 1.75-2.00 for cargo ships and auxiliaries with more blunt shapes.
After selecting the Z-factor the horizontal component of the anchor line tension becomes:
H = ZF
R

Where;
F
R
= total wind and current load
E = total resistance corrected for dynamic forces
Thus, Required anchor weight (in air) =
H
F
,

In our case;
F
R
= 4698.266 kN
Z=2
>> H=9396 kN
Taking the Stock Commercial Anchors and soil
conditions to be firm;
E=10
>>W=95.78 tonnes

Page 79

5.8 Turret Concept:
Spread Moorings, on which a vessel heading angle is essentially fixed, are suitable for semi-
submersible which are not too sensitive to incident wave direction. However tankers are very
sensitive to wave direction so in open water, unless the climate is very mild or the waves always
come from the same direction, it is usually best to allow a tanker to weathervane around the
mooring. This will reduce mooring forces and vessel roll. It requires the mooring to be attached
to a single point, usually at the bow, hence the term Single Point Mooring or SPM.

The many types of SPM involve mooring the tanker to a loading buoy or column. Important
design considerations are:

(1) the avoidance of collision between tanker and its mooring column or buoy etc.
(2) the control of mooring system forces,
(3) the control of deflections, in order to avoid damaging the oil loading pipes and risers,
(4) the need or otherwise for a launch to assist with mooring and hose connection.

We have employed Turret concept for SPM.
There are mainly three types of commonly used Turret systems:
1. External Raised Turret
2. External Bottom Clamped Turret
3. Internal Turret

The merits and drawbacks of these systems are discussed in following table:
External Raised External Bottom
Clamped
Internal
The hull integrity is least
affected and the
integration to hull is most
straightforward.
The hull integrity is not
significantly affected and
the integration to hull is
relatively simple.
The hull is to be modified
to have a moon pool with
necessary reinforcement.
There is a loss of cargo
space.
Risers The number of riser
depends on the chain
table and bearing sizes.
Typical limit is around
20.
Usually has small column
diameter to accommodate
a limited number of risers.
Up to 47 risers has been
designed and concept of
large internal turret to
accommodate up to 100
risers has been proposed.
Bow
Interference
Require an extended
cantilever to avoid
anchor leg and hull
interference. Sometimes,
the bow has to be cut.
None None

Page 80

Installation The installation is
straightforward because
the turret is above water
and moorings and risers
can be pulled in along
their natural angles.
The pull in of the anchor
legs can be difficult
because of the pulling
arrangement and the
limited space available.
The installation needs
careful planning to route
the pulling of the
anchoring legs and risers.
Wave
Slamming
Usually avoided by
positioning the turret
above wave crest.
The wave slamming load
is to be accounted for in
the design.
The turret is inside the
moon pool and thus
protected.
Vertical
motion
High because the turret is
extended over the bow.
High because the turret is
at the bow.
Reduced as the turret
position is closer to the
mid-ship.
Bearing
Loads
The bending moment is
high because the chain
table is extended like a
cantilever below the
bearing. The mooring
and riser horizontal and
vertical loads can cause
large bending moment at
the bearing.
The bearing horizontal
load and bending moment
is significant reduced
because of the lower
support.
The bearing horizontal
load and bending are
significantly reduced
because of the lower
support and upper
elastomeric support.

Table 5.2: Comparison amongst the 3 types of turret systems.

5.8.1 Function of a Turret System:
The turret system performs four main functions in a typical FPSO:
Maintaining the vessel on station through single mooring.
Allowing weathervaning or rotation of the vessel to adjust to climate conditions.
Fluid transfer from the risers to the process plant.
Providing transfer of electrical, hydraulic and other control signals.

Fig 5.4: The generic sub-systems within a typical turret system.

Page 81

Figure 5.5: Schematic diagram showing the interfaces for an FPSO turret and the areas of internal
and external load transfer.

An FPSO turret system contains the following three main systems:

The turret itself.
A fluid transfer system, usually a multi-path swivel to transfer production fluids to the process
Plant on the vessel.
Turret transfer system, intermediate manifolding, which provides a link between the turret and
the FTS. The TTS is often referred to more generally as the turnable or turnable manifolding.

5.8.2 Weathervaning:
An advantage of a turret system over other options for floating installations such as spread-
mooring is that it allows the vessel to rotate and adopt the optimum orientation in response to
weather and current conditions. This rotation of the vessel about the turret is known as
weathervaning.
In most cases the vessel can freely rotate through 360 degree; known as free weathervaning. If
the rotation is restricted this is described as partial weathervaning. The latter is the case for
turrets with a drag chain for fluid transfer, which can only rotate +/- 270 degrees in either
direction.

5.8.3 Parts of a Turret System:
The turret system is considered in the following four parts:

Page 82

Turret (T): This provides the single-point mooring and allows weathervaning of the vessel. It
includes the turret shaft, turret casing, main and lower bearings and the mooring spider.

Fluid Transfer System (FTS): This is typically a multiple swivel assembly. It transfers the
process fluids and other signals from the turret to the process plant on the vessel. It is positioned
above the turret and linked via the turret transfer system.

Turret Transfer System (TTS): This refers to the intermediate manifolding linking the turret
and the FTS. Positioned on a turnable on top of the turret. It rotates with the turret. It is otherwise
referred to as the turnable or turnable manifolding.

Interfacing systems (IS): This includes swivel access structure, mooring lines and flexible
below the turret and other ancillary equipment.

5.8.4 Interfaces:
There are four main external boundaries separating the turret system from the vessel. These are
important from a safety and operational standpoint as they are all points of load and/or
hydrocarbon transfer:

Fluid Transfer System to ship (to process plant).
Main turret bearing.
Lower turret bearing and cavity containing moonpool or turret cavity (moonpool refers to the
Vessel structure adjacent to the turret and the access space between the turret and vessel. It is
Partially filled with seawater).
Mooring spider or mooring buoy (disconnectable) to mooring lines and flexible risers.
The interface between the FTS and the process plant on the vessel is known as the FPSO/turret
interface.

In addition there are internal interfaces within the turret system:

FTS to TTS.
T to TTS.
Turret shaft to mooring buoy or spider.

Usually flexible risers connect the swivel to the FPSO/turret interface.
Another important interface on an FPSO from a safety standpoint is between the marine and
offshore structures. This is usually considered to be at deck level. In this paper the turret system
is considered to be part of the offshore structure.

5.8.5 Load Transfer for a Turret System:
The turret system will encounter significant loading from the single point mooring from waves
and current, and from the weathervaning FPSO vessel. The external interfaces represent the areas
of load transfer. For a typical turret system the areas of load transfer are as follows:

Torque arms to swivel

Page 83

Main turret bearing
Lower bearing pads
Connections to single point mooring
Bend-stiffeners on flexible risers

Where the turret includes a separate mooring spider, or mooring buoy in the case of
disconnectable systems, then there will be significant load transfer across this internal interface.
The main bearing is the main area of load transfer from turret to the vessel including both axial
and radial loads. The lower bearings, usually pads, take much lower loading. The vessel structure
adjacent to the turret cavity can encounter significant ovality and loads and is a common area for
development of cracking.

6. Power Generation, Distribution, and Electric Load Analysis:
Electrical power in a FPSO is required for various purposes which include deck machinery,
illumination, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, stores, cargo refrigeration, galley, fresh water
and sanitary systems, fire and bilge system, communication systems, radio, radar, electronic
equipments and most important from economic point of view the production modules .The
power production plant must be able to supply sufficient power to all the systems. For this it is
necessary that an accurate estimate of power requirement of FPSO be made at an early stage, so
that power plant order can be placed and unnecessary delays during the construction can be
avoided. This calls for an accurate development of load cases. The highest power consuming
load case gives the Total Plant Peak Load (TPPL). The power plant to be selected must satisfy
this power requirement. Modern practices call for an allowance to meet future expansions which
is unknown at construction stage.
Besides this the FPSO electrical system must be capable of withstanding power failures and be
designed to create a less hazardous environment for workers, like in case of fire, provisions for
power supply to lifeboats, helideck, firefighting equipment and other life saving equipment must
be made. At the same time it should protect the economic interest of the project, i.e. in case of a
local or complete power failure provisions to protect the production modules must be made.
For this the electrical load is classified into three categories- i)Vital Load, ii) Essential Load,
iii)Non-essential Load. Vital Loads when loose power may jeopardize safety of personnel or
cause serious damage within the plant. Essential loads when loose power cause degradation of
the manufactured product. Non-essential loads have no serious effect on safety or production.
Some processes in FPSO may handle fluids that are critical to the loss of power e.g. fluids that
rapidly solidify and therefore must be kept hot. Other processes such as general cooling water
services, air conditioning, sewage pumping may be able to tolerate a loss of supply for several
hours without any long-term serious effects.

Vital loads are normally fed from a switchboard that has one or more dedicated generators. The
generators provide power during the emergency when the main source of power fails. Hence
these generators are usually called emergency generators and are driven by diesel engines.

Page 84

They are designed to automatically start, run-up and be closed onto the switchboard whenever a
loss of voltage at the busbars of the switchboard is detected. Similarly to take care of essential
loads there is a separate generator called essential generator.

6.1 Calculation of various load cases
For the calculation of necessary electrical load a list of major equipment was necessary. The
department library had the list of such equipments for a FPSO of 60,000bbls/d processing
capacity. So it was necessary to recalculate the power requirement for an FPSO of 200,000bbls/d
processing capacity. The list of the equipment is given in Appendix 6.

i)Calculation of power requirement for pumps:

The ideal hydraulic power to drive a pump depends on the mass flow rate, the liquid density and
the differential height

Fig 6.1: A Centrifugal Pump
- either it is the static lift from one height to an other, or the friction head loss component of the
system - can be calculated as
P
h
= q g h / 3.6 10
6

where
P
h
= power (kW)
q = flow capacity (m
3
/h)
p = density of fluid (kg/m
3
)
g = gravity (9.81 m/s
2
)
h = differential head (m)

Shaft Pump Power
The shaft power - the power required transferred from the motor to the shaft of the pump -
depends on the efficiency of the pump and can be calculated as

P
s
= P
h
/ (s)
where

Page 85

P
s
= shaft power (kW)
q (s)= pump efficiency

Motor Power
The motor runs the pump and therefore the power requirement of the motor has to be calculated
so that it can give required shaft power. The shaft efficiency data necessary was taken from
NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association).

Power Power
HP Kw Eff(%)
1 to 4 0.7456 - 2.9827 78.8
5 to 9 3.728 - 6.7104 84
10 to 19 7.456 - 14.1664 85.5
20 to 49 14.972 - 36.5344 88.5
50 to 99 37.28 - 73.8144 90.2
100 to 124 74.56 - 92.4544 91.7
>125 >93.2 92.4
Table6.1:Efficiency data of motor

P= P
s
/ (m)

where
P= motor power(kw)
P
s
= shaft power (kW)
q(m) = motor efficiency
The calculated motor power is the power to be supplied by local switch board.

Ballast Pumps
The ballast pump must have a capacity to fill and drain out all the ballast tanks in one day (taking
into account the crude offloading time). These pumps are also used for deck washing. Total
three pumps are on continuous duty and one is on standby mode, so total there are 4 ballast
pumps. The three pumps working simultaneously give a flow rate of 3228m3/hr at 60m pressure
head. Taking motor efficiency into account this translates to a power requirement of at least
975kw.

Crude Offloading Pumps
The FPSO should have capacity to unload 5 days production, i.e. 5x200,000=1,000,000bbls in
one day. This gives total rate of flow of 6625m3/hr at 200m pressure head. Each tank is
provided with one deep well pump. Also there is one extra portable pump at standby mode in
case any one of the pump fails. The size of pump to be chosen depends upon factors given
below:

Page 86

Case 1 All 30 pumps working simultaneously. Each pump
221m3/hr(30x221=6630m3/h>min total rate of flow),
200m head.
No heel or trim but large
surface effect
Case 2 3 pump working for set of 3 tanks. Each pump
2210m3/h (3x2210 =6630m3/h> min total rate of
flow),200m head.
No heel but trim may take
place without appropriate
ballast.
Case 3 Total 6 pumps working such that three offload from aft
and three from forward tanks. Each pump 2210m3/h
(6x1105 =6630m3/h> min total rate of flow),200m
head.
No heel and trim but high
stress may develop in the
structure. So an offloading
scheme must be decided,
which will cause least stress.
Table 6.2: Factors determining size of pump

Whatever be the case the total power consumption remain same. Currently Case3 seems to be
best. The crude offloading system also consists of a tank cleaning pump (300m3/h, 120 m head)
which is used to clean the tanks during regular repair and maintenance or inspection. The
offloading does not take place by pipelines, hence booster pumps are not required and have not
been included in calculation. However in future if the need arises the spare power from the
power plant may be used.

The electrical power consumption for accommodation is 1.5kw per person during normal
operation and 0.75 kw during emergency. The power requirements for the electronic equipments
and other systems have been decided after extensive search on internet and journals.

6.2 Power Estimation for Production Modules
The power requirement of FPSO topside modules was done by calculating requirements of
individual units taken from Appendix 6 and also studying the characteristics process plant.

The FPSO is designed for the following main functions:
Wellstream processing and oil stabilization and treatment of produced water.
Gas dehydration and compression, gas-lift for the flowline risers and re-injection of
produced gas for reservoir pressure maintenance.
Seawater sulfate removal and water injection for reservoir pressure maintenance and
flooding.
Storage of stabilized oil, oil metering and offloading of produced oil to export tankers.
Chemical and methanol injection.

Page 87

Fig 6.2 The diagram showing entire on field processing

In absence of any expertise or data base the power requirements of equipment such as condenser,
reboiler, cooler exchanger, and compressor was extrapolated from the original values. The power
for each pump was calculated by estimating the rate of flow and pressure head. In order to
estimate the rate of flow and pressure head, it was necessary to study and tabulate the pumping
requirements at every stage of processing. The necessary data for the plant of following capacity
was searched on internet and central library.

The topside of the FPSO has following processing capacity:
Oil storage: 2,000,000b/d
Oil Production: 200,000b/d
Liquids treatment: 300,000b/d
Produced water treatment: 180,000b/d
Water Injection: 390,000b/d at 150 bar
Seawater Sulfate Removal : 400,000b/d
Gas injection: 8,000,000Sm3/d at 285 bar

Oil Treatment
The wellhead fluid is treated onboard the FPSO through a single three stage train with gas, oil
and water separation at the following pressures (Figure6.2):
- 1st stage : 20 to 30 bar..
- 2nd stage : 6 to 6.5 bar.
- 3rd stage : 1.5 bar.

Page 88

Oil heating between first and second stage (Fig.) separators is required to achieve a suitable
temperature(65C) at the desalting stage. After desalting, oil is cooled to 45C before storage in
the tanks.

Gas Treatment
Flashed-off gas from the separation train is compressed, dried and used as fuel gas and lift gas
with the remaining gas re-injected in the reservoir. The gas compression system includes a low
pressure (LP)/medium pressure (MP) two-stage centrifugal electric compressor train and two HP
three-stage centrifugal compressors. The FPSO is equipped with a 95m high vertical flare. About
1,000,000m3/d of fuel gas is produced which is supplied to the main engine for power
production.

Sea Water Treatment:
The main seawater lifting system comprises electric motor driven submerged lift pumps each
sized for 2,300m3/h. The lifted water is divided so that half each flows into the cooling and
sulfate removal Treated seawater is pressurized by the three HP water injection pumps (capacity:
860m3/h each), up to 150 bar, and directed to water injection wells. The remaining (70 m3/h) of
the treated seawater is used as wash water for the desalters (oil treatment).

A careful calculation of rate of flow and pressure head of pumps and knowing the motor
efficiency, the power consumed by that pump can be estimated. Other unit where this could not
be done , the power requirement was simply extrapolated from the original FPSO data.Once the
power requirements of each unit was calculated, the load cases were then tabulated. In all seven
load cases have been tabulated. The details are available in Appendix 6. The load case giving
maximum power consumption gives TPPL (Total Plant Peak Load). This TPPL is used in
selection of power plant. Also load cases give the emergency and essential loads which have
been used to select emergency and essential generator of the FPSO.

6.3 SELECTION OF TPPL (Total Plant Peak Load): Details shown in Appendix 6.
LOAD CASE CASE DESCRIPTION POWER(Kw)
CASE 1 Processing Plant Working 48779.78841

CASE 2 Processing Plant +Ballast and Crude Offloading Control Working 56450.24295

CASE 3 Processing Plant +Ballast and Crude Offloading Control +Accommodation 56660.243

CASE 4 All systems except Ballast and Crude Offloading 49216.36906

CASE 5 All systems working simultaneously(excluding emergency systems) 56886.8236
Max power
CASE 6 Emergency Power Requirements 1877.736494

CASE 7 Essential Power Requirements 3196.802245

Table 6.3: Selection of Total Plant peak load
The LOAD CASE 5 the power requirement is highest.The details are available in Appendix B.
So, TPPL=56886.8236

Page 89

6.4 Selection of Power Plant
After the load has been carefully estimated it is necessary to select the ratings and numbers of
generators from a power utility company. A plant may require a combination of generators and
incoming feeders. The supply capacity consists of two parts, one part to match the known or
initial consumption and a second part to account for keeping a spare generator or feeder ready for
service. Any allowance required for future load growth should be included in the power
consumption calculations. This two-part approach is referred to as the N 1 philosophy, where
N is the number of installed generators or feeders. The philosophy is that under normal operating
conditions in a fully load plant N 1 generators or feeders should be sufficient to supply the load
at a reasonably high load factor.

Let
Pl = power consumption required at the site ambient conditions
Pg = rated power of each generator at the site ambient conditions
Fo = overload power in % when one generator or feeder is suddenly switched out of service
Fi = load factor in % of each generator or feeder before one is switched out of service
N = number of installed generators

Pl and Pg are the known variables, with Fi and Fo being the unknown variables. Several feasible
ratings of Pg may be available and the value of N may be open to choice. A good choice of Pg
and N will ensure that the normally running load factor is high i.e. between 66.7% and 90%,
whilst the post-disturbance overload on the remaining generators or feeders will not be so high
that they trip soon after the disturbance, i.e. less than 125%.

The initial load factor can be found as,

Fi = 100*Pl/(Pg(N 1))% ; 66.7% < Fi < 90.0%

The post-disturbance overload can be found as,

Fo = 100*Pl/(Pg(N 2)) % ; 80 < Fo < 125%

The power plant to be installed in the FPSO must satisfy these restrictions imposed by initial
load factor and post-disturbance overload factor. No margin for future expansion of systems is
being considered at this stage, as we will see later that power plant capacity under constraints
imposed gives a room for extra power, i.e. power that can be produced is slightly more than
required power. So, FPSO can handle minor expansions like increase in utilities in
accommodation, installation of new electronic system etc. but major expansions that may take
place in processing plant cannot be accommodated.

6.5 USE OF HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Current interest in reducing emissions and reducing engine operating costs is leading towards the
use of more effective waste heat recovery. By using Total Heat Recover Plant, an electrical
output of about 10% (this data has been taken from literature made available by WARTSILA) of
engine power is possible. Such savings can make a major contribution to improving both plant
efficiency and engine emissions.

Page 90

The details of how this recovery takes place have not been considered. The power plant
calculation now includes two cases (i)Heat recovery system fully functional, so that it
supplements the power requirements, and (ii) Heat recovery system not function (in case it
breaks down). In both the cases the power plant should have the capacity to to meet the power
demands of FPSO and also obey the constraints imposed by load factors.

6.6 POWER PLANT CALCULATIONS

The power plant generators were selected from the data available on internet at Wrtsil website
(www.wartsila.com). The prime mover for the generators were decided to be dual fuel engine
which can take both MDO/HFO and natural gas (produced from wells) as fuel. Now there are
two alternatives available in market-i) turbines-both steam and gas and ii) recently developed
reciprocating dual fuel diesel engines. Considering various facts, as discussed below, the steam
turbines were rejected and reciprocating dual fuel diesel engines were selected for use as prime
movers for the generators. The steam turbines were rejected because of the following reasons
(source of information is www.wartsila.com):-

i)Engine Room Space: Steam turbines occupy a lot of space inside engine room where as new
dual fuel engines are compact. This enables increased cargo capacity for a given displacement, or
alternatively smaller FPSO dimensions for a given cargo capacity.

ii) Green power: The ratification of the Kyoto Protocol and continuously tightening
environmental legislation is driving owners and operators to adopt more environmentally sound
solutions. The most critical emissions, CO2 and NOX, are significantly lower in the case of dual-
fuel engines compared to turbines. The NOX emissions of the Wrtsil dual fuel engines are
about one-tenth those of the equivalent diesel engines. The combination of the engines low fuel
consumption and their maximum use of natural gas means the Wrtsil dual fuel engines also
have low CO2 emission levels.

iii)Safety: From the safety point of view the dual-fuel engines low-pressure fuel gas (5 bar(g)) is
preferable to the high-pressure fuel gas (30 bar(g)) required by the gas turbine.

ii)Efficiency: The key feature of reciprocating dual fuel diesel engines plants is their superior
electrical efficiency compared to similar installations with gasturbines and steam turbine plants.
Figure shows the electrical net efficiencies of typical power plants operating at various loads.
The efficiency can be improved for both dual-fuel and gas turbine plants with combined cycle
plants (i.e. additional waste heat recovery connected to a steam turbine plant).

Page 91

Fig 6.3 :FPSO prime mover electrical net efficiencies at various loads.

v)Derating, ageing and degradation: The dual-fuel engine offers major advantages over gas
turbine installations in terms of derating, ageing and degradation. These features, typically
considered a drawback of gas turbines, are almost negligible with the dual-fuel engine. Derating
of power plants due to ambient temperatures is described in Figure . Dual-fuel engines start to
derate at an ambient temperature of 45 C, whereas gas turbines are rated at 15 C and will
derate at temperatures above this.

Fig 6.4:FPSO Prime mover derating at various ambient temperatures.

Page 92

From the list of standard available engines two engine-generator sets were selected to be
considered for the power plant. The two engines are 16V50DF and 18V50DF.The engine
specifications are given below:

Main data
Cylinder bore ...............................500 mm
Piston stroke.................................580 mm
Cylinder output ............................950 kW/cyl
Speed ...........................................500, 514 rpm
Mean effective pressure ..............20.0, 19.5 bar
Piston speed................................. 9.7, 9.9 m/s

Fuel specification:
Fuel oil .................................... 730 cSt/50 C
7200 sR1/100 F
ISO 8217, category ISO-F-DMX,
DMA and DMB

Natural gasMethaneNumber: 80
LHV: min. 28 MJ/nm, 5.5 bar
BSEC 7410 kJ/kWh

Engine: 16V50DF & 18V50DF

RATED POWER(50/60Hz)
Engine type Engine Kw Generator Kw

16V50DF 15200 14670
18V50DF 17100 16500
Output based on generator efficiency 96.5%
Table 6.4: Rated power of engine

ENGINE DIMENSIONS (mm) and WEIGHTS (tonnes)
Engine
Type
A B C D F Weight

16V50Df 12 665 4 055 4 530 3 600 1 500 220
18V50Df 13 725 4 280 4 530 3 600 1 500 240
Table 6.5: Engine dimensions

Page 93

Fig 6.5: The dimensions of engine.

The systems like ballast and crude offloading are not be needed 24 hrs a day. So, in the
calculations a separate case has been considered where ballast and crude offloading systems are
switched off and we try to find out if we can have a power plant capable of handling other
systems efficiently. If we get such a plant we will have a separate generator which will be
switched on only when these two systems need to be operated. Also cases with and without heat
recovery system have been considered.

Power requirements:

All systems except Ballast and Crude Offloading = 49216.369Kw (49300Kw app.)
All systems working simultaneously= 56886.823 Kw (57000Kw app)
When Heat Recovery system is working it will give 10% of the engine power as output and this
may be deducted from total consumption.

CASE Heat Recovery System Working Heat Recovery System
Failed
All systems except Ballast and
Crude Offloading

44300Kw

49300Kw

All systems working
simultaneously

51200Kw

57000Kw
Table 6.6:

Page 94

Case1: All systems except Ballast and Crude Offloading
a) Heat Recovery System Working
POWER PLANT CALCULATIONS
All Systems Except BW & Crude Offloading Working
Pl Pg N Fi(%) Fo(%)
44300 14670 3 150.9884117 301.9768 Unacceptable
44300 14670 4 100.6589411 150.9884 Unacceptable
44300 14670 5 75.49420586 100.6589 acceptable
44300 14670 6 60.39536469 75.49421 Unacceptable

44300 16590 3 133.5141652 267.0283 Unacceptable
44300 16590 4 89.00944344 133.5142 Unacceptable
44300 16590 5 66.75708258 89.00944 acceptable
44300 16590 6 53.40566606 66.75708 Unacceptable
Table 6.7:

b) Heat Recovery System Not Working

All Systems Except BW & Crude Offloading Working

Pl Pg N Fi(%) Fo(%)
49300 14670 3 168.02999 336.05999 Unacceptable
49300 14670 4 112.02 168.02999 Unacceptable
49300 14670 5 84.014997 112.02 acceptable
49300 14670 6 67.211997 84.014997 acceptable

49300 16590 3 148.58348 297.16697 Unacceptable
49300 16590 4 99.055656 148.58348 Unacceptable
49300 16590 5 74.291742 99.055656 acceptable
49300 16590 6 59.433394 74.291742 Unacceptable
Table 6.8:

Case2: All systems Working Simultaneously(Load Case5)
a) Heat Recovery System Working

All systems Working Simultaneously

Pl Pg N Fi(%) Fo(%)
51200 14670 3 174.5057941 349.0116 Unacceptable
51200 14670 4 116.3371961 174.5058 Unacceptable
51200 14670 5 87.25289707 116.3372 acceptable
51200 14670 6 69.80231766 87.2529 acceptable

51200 16590 3 154.3098252 308.6197 Unacceptable
51200 16590 4 102.8732168 154.3098 Unacceptable
51200 16590 5 77.1549126 102.8732 acceptable
51200 16590 6 61.72393008 77.15491 Unacceptable
Table 6.9:

Page 95

a) Heat Recovery System Not Working


All systems Working Simultaneously

Pl Pg N Fi(%) Fo(%)
57000 14670 3 194.2740286 388.548057 Unacceptable
57000 14670 4 129.5160191 194.274029 Unacceptable
57000 14670 5 97.13701431 129.516019 Unacceptable
57000 14670 6 77.70961145 97.1370143 acceptable

57000 16590 3 171.7902351 343.58047 Unacceptable
57000 16590 4 114.5268234 171.790235 Unacceptable
57000 16590 5 85.89511754 114.526823 acceptable
57000 16590 6 68.71609403 85.8951175 Unacceptable
Table 6.10:

Here, as stated earlier,
Pl = power consumption required at the site ambient conditions
Pg = rated power of each generator or feeder at the site ambient conditions
Fo = overload power in % when one generator or feeder is suddenly switched out of service
Fi = load factor in % of each generator or feeder before one is switched out of service
N = number of installed generators or feeders.

In both the cases the configuration which will work satisfactorily with and without heat recovery
system is selected.

Two sets of generators satisfy all the constraints. They are:
a) 5 installed generators each of 14670Kw output (if this system is installed separate generator
for BW and crude offloading is needed)
b) 5 installed generators each of 16590Kw output (very low load factor)

Two sets of generators satisfy all the constraints. They are:
a) 6 installed generators each of 14670Kw output (number of generators increased by one)
b) 5 installed generators each of 16590Kw output

Out of the above two 5 installed generators each of 16590Kw output seems to best. This power
production system is selected.

Page 96

Therefore, the FPSO has a power production system consisting of 5 dual fuel engine-gensets of
Wrtsil (18V50DF) giving an output of 16590Kw each. Of these 5 generators only 4 work at
time and one is on standby mode.

Now the maximum power output for this power plant must be known. For this once initial load
factor ( Fi) is fixed at its maximum value and the power output (Pl) and overload factor (Fo) is
calculated. The calculated value of overload factor must be between acceptable limits i.e. ;
80 %< Fo < 125%. If this is condition is true then calculated value of Pl is acceptable. Next,
overload factor(Fo) is fixed at its maximum value and corresponding power output (Pl) and
initial load factor(Fi) is calculated. Again, the calculated value of initial load factor must be
between acceptable limits, i.e. 66.7 %< Fi < 90%. If this is true then maximum of the two
calculated value of power output is the maximum power output of the plant.


Maximum power load by 5
generator plant

Pg N Fi(fixed) Pl(max) Fo
16590 5 90 59724 120 Acceptable

Pg N Fo(fixed) Pl(max) Fi
16590 5 125 82950 100 Unacceptable
Table 6.11:

From above table it is clear that maximum output of the power plant is 59724Kw. This is greater
than the required power consumption (TPPL=57000 Kw). If heat recovery system works with
this power plant at full efficiency, the power output increases to 65696.4Kw. So, the plant is
capable of meeting any increase in electrical demand due to future expansions.

SELECTION OF ESSENTIAL AND EMERGENCY GENERATORS

a)Power output of essential generator= 3196.802245 Kw= 3200Kw(app.)
Engine selected from Wartsila database is 7L32
Main data
Cylinder bore .....................................320 mm
Piston stroke.......................................400 mm
Cylinder output ................................ 480, 500 kW/cyl
Speed ................................................720, 750 rpm
Mean effective pressure .................. 24.9 bar
Piston speed..................................... 9.6, 10.0 m/s
Voltage ........................................... 0.4 13.8 kV
Generator effi ciency ...................... 0.95 0.97

Fuel specification:

Page 97

Fuel oil.730 cSt/50C
7200 sR1/100F
ISO 8217, category ISO-F-RMK 700
SFOC 172 - 180 g/kWh at ISO condition

RATED POWER
Engine type

480 kW/cyl, 720 rpm

500 kW/cyl, 750 rpm

Engine(Kw) Gen.(Kw) Engine(Kw) Gen.(Kw)
7L32 3360 3230 3500 3360
Table 6.12:

ENGINE-GENERATOR DIMENSIONS (mm) and WEIGHTS (tonnes)
Engine
Type
A E I K L Weight

7L32 9520 2490 1630 2345 4120 65.5
Table 6.13

Fig 6.6: Essential Generator

b)Power output of emergency generator= 1877.736494Kw= 1900Kw(app.)
Engine selected from Wartsila database is 6L26
Main data
Cylinder bore .....................................260 mm
Piston stroke.......................................320 mm
Cylinder output ................................ 325, 340 kW/cyl

Page 98

Engine speed .....................................900, 1000 rpm
Mean effective pressure ....................23.0 - 25.5 bar
Piston speed...................................... 9.6, 10.7 m/s
Generator voltage .............................0.4 - 13.8 kV
Generator efficiency ........................0.95 - 0.96

Fuel specification:
Fuel oil.730 cSt/50C
7200 sR1/100F
ISO 8217, category ISO-F-RMK 700
SFOC 172 - 180 g/kWh at ISO condition

RATED POWER
Engine type

325 kW/cyl, 900 rpm

340 kW/cyl, 1000 rpm

Engine(Kw) Gen.(Kw) Engine(Kw) Gen.(Kw)
6L26

1 950

1 870

2 040

1 960

Table 6.14:

ENGINE-GENERATOR DIMENSIONS (mm) and WEIGHTS (tonnes)
Engine
Type
A E I K L Weight

6L26 7345 2300 1250 2420 3020 37.7
Table 6.15

Fig 6.7: Emergency Generator

Page 99

Simple line diagram showing distribution of power in FPSO. No transformers are shown or
distribution voltage, only power distribution has been indicated.

Fig 6.8: Power Distribution

Page
100

7 Risk Assessment :
Risk assessment is an important step towards the risk management process. The basic principle
for the risk assessment is to identify each hazard and its risk level, where risk level can be
obtained from the consequences and frequency of the occurrence of the hazard. There are two
methods of doing risk assessment
Qualitative risk assessment: Risk assessment in which consequences and frequency are
estimated as a quality or kind (eg. High, low, medium.)
Quantitative risk Assessment: Risk Assessment in which consequences and frequency are
calculated as numerical value.
Risk assessment in this project is done qualitatively and the basic method we apply in the
assessment is to first find the hazards and their respective consequences and frequencies to
determine risk level and then the preventive action and mitigation. It would be useful to construct
a qualitative risk matrix to find risk level with consequences forming the columns and frequency
forming the rows.
Risk Matrix
Consequences
High Marginal Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Medium/high Acceptable Marginal Unacceptable Unacceptable
Low/medium Acceptable Acceptable Marginal Unacceptable
Low Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Marginal
Low Low/medium Medium/high High
Frequency of occurrence

Table 7.1: Risk matrix
Frequency of occurrence:
Low : The mishap scenario is considered highly unlikely.
Low/medium : The mishap scenario is considered unlikely.
Medium/high : The mishap scenario might occur.
High : The scenario has occurred in the past and/or expected to occur in the future.

Consequences:
High : Major damage to FPSO and/or serious injury to personal and/or major oil spills
High/ medium : damage to FPSO which does not cause major damage or pollution but may
cause major damage if not repaired immediately and/or injury to personal.
Medium/low : small structural damage and/ or spills or small injury to personal
Low : damage that can be repaired without disturbing the process and/ or discomfort
to personal.

Risk level:

Page
101

Acceptable : Preventive work can be done without disturbing the process
Marginal : Process may be shutdown to do the repair work, preventive measures should
be taken immediately to prevent it to escalate.
Unacceptable : Process must be shutdown immediately, preventive measures must be done
to insure the FPSO and personal safety. Process should be started after all
the arrangements are done to insure that the event will not occur again.

Hazards in FPSO can be grouped as:
1. Leak of gas and/or oil
a) Blowouts
b) Riser or pipeline leak
c) Process leaks
d) Others.
2. Non process incident
a) Maintenance
b) Fires
c) Tank cleaning
d) Others.
3. Marine Events
a) Shuttle tanker operation.
b) Collision
c) Failures
d) Others.
7.1 Leak of Gas and/ or Oil:
The oil spills is one of the major hazard caused by the FPSO. Oil spill is hazardous to the
environment as well as FPSO, when spills takes place it forms a pool in the sea surface which
may catch fire and approximately 75% of the oil may burn, if FPSO is in close proximity of pool
fire it may cause serious effect and FPSO may collapse too hence FPSO must be moved away
from the pool and also care should be taken such that the flames coming out of fire should not
pass through FPSO.
Hazards Consequences Accident causes Risk level Control/Prevention
Blowout Major Release
of oil to sea
Earthquake,
Dropped object,
Material Failure
Unacceptable Blowout can not be
controlled, FPSO
should be far enough
Riser/pipeline
leaks

Subsea
wellhead
manifolds
Release of oil to
sea
Earthquake,
material failure,
dropped object.
Unacceptable Emergency shutdown,
FPSO should be far
enough
Production
Riser leak
Pipeline and
riser contents
Earthquake,
dropped object,
Marginal Emergency shutdown

Page
102

release to the
sea
material failure,
Extreme vessel
motion
Flow-line leak Pipeline and
riser contents
releases to the
sea
Earthquake,
dropped
object.Material
failure, extreme
vessel motion
Marginal Emergency shutdown
Process leaks
Swivel leak Direct release of
spilled oil to sea,
Fire at the
swivel,
explosion at the
swivel
Dropped object,
tall structure
collapse,
helicopter crash
Marginal Emergency shutdown,
cover with foam
Leak from
Process pipes,
flange, valves,
pumps
Oil spill over the
main deck,
limited fire
Loose fittings,
corrosion
Marginal Emergency shutdown.
Periodic maintenance
and checking
Leak from
Storage tank
Oil leakage to
ballast tank can
escalate to
damage the hull
or bulkhead
Corrosion Marginal Stop the tank loading
immediately, empty the
tank for maintenance,
regular check for
maintenance.
Leakage
during loading
/unloading
Oil spill on the
deck or sea,
catch fire or
explosion
Loose fitting,
material defect,
handling errors
Marginal Stop the process and
check the connections.
Explosion on
Turret
Damage the hull Dropped object,
helicopter crash
cover with foam
Table 7.2: Risk assessment of Leak of Oil and Gas
7.2 Non Process incident:
Non operation includes the hazards caused due to the which are not involved in the normal
loading and unloading, these hazard generally do not have serious consequences but they will
affect the normal FPSO operations.

Hazards Consequences Accident cause Risk level Control/prevention
Fire
Electrical Fire Electrical
failure,
shutdown of
related process
High voltage or
current, short
circuit, from
other fire events
Acceptable Fire alarm, cutoff the
electrical circuit. Do
not use water.
Accommodation
fire
Injury to person,
localized fire
Human error. Unacceptable Water sprinklers, CO2,
fir alarm,

Page
103

Methanol Fire Limited fire,
release of some
cargo
Gas weepage
from cargo area.
Structural support
failure
main deck plate
strength,
Fire alarm,
Machinery Fire Damage to
machinery
Gas weepage
from cargo area,
poor maintenance
Unacceptable Fire alarm, emergency
shutdown
Generator Fire Process fire. Excess vessel
motion,
Poor maintenance
use of emergency
generator.
Heating System
fire
Cargo fire,
explosion
Gas weepage
from cargo area.
deluge and foam.
Workshop Fire Injury to
personal
Human error
Tank cleaning Tank explosion
during high
pressure water
washing
Oxygen content
is greater than
accepted
limit(8%) in the
tank
Marginal Inert gas generator
must be run constantly
to ensure that the tank
atmosphere maintained
in the non-explosive
range ,fire fighting
Maintenance
hazards during

Tank inspection Serious injury
to personal
Oxygen content
higher than
accepted limit
Unacceptable Crude oil washing
must be effectively
completed, tank
atmosphere must be
inert to prevent
explosion, person must
wear, always have
rescue equipment on
stand-by, Fire Fighting

Deck
maintenance
Serious injury
to personal
Green water,
rough weather
condition, FPSO
motion
Unacceptable Weather forecast,
escape route,
communication
Table 7.3 : Risk assessment of Non Process Incident
7.3 Marine Events:
Marine events are mainly related to the operation of shuttle tanker with FPSO and the major
hazard occurs during this operation is collision between FPSO and shuttle tanker, there are some
events which leads to collision with FPSO like supply vessel, support vessel, passing merchant
vessel, Fishing vessel etc., there are also some events related to structural failure like mooring
failure, shuttle tanker operation is consider separately

Page
104

Hazards Consequences Accident
causes
Risk level Control/Prevention
Collision with
passing merchant
vessel
Major
structural
damage, major
oil spill
Navigation
error in the
merchant
vessel
unacceptable Radio contact with
merchant vessel,
transfer cargo from
damaged tank to
undamaged tank,
shutdown production
Collision with supply
vessel
Minor
structural
damage, less or
no oil spill
Navigation
error in supply
vessel, severe
weather
condition
Marginal DP on supply vessel,
proper
communication
between two vessels.
Collision with
Fishing vessel
Minor
structural
damage
Error in traffic
control
acceptable Coast guard must not
allow fishing vessel
to operate near
FPSO(nearly a range
of 500m from FPSO)
Failure and loss
Mooring failure Failure of two
or more
mooring lines
result in vessel
drifting off
station
Material
failure, severe
weather,
dropped object
Marginal Provide tug
assistance.
Foundering(Structural
failure)
Major damage
to vessel
Severe
weather
condition,
ballasting
errors, poor
cargo
distribution
Marginal Shutdown, Remove
cargo to shuttle
tanker and remove
vessel to dock.
Foundering(capsize) Loss of vessel,
major oil spills
Severe
weather,
ballasting
errors, poor
Marginal Remove cargo shut
down all the process.
Evacuate all the
persons from the

Page
105

cargo
distribution
vessel.
Crane collapse Structural
damage to
vessel or
module nearby.
Large vessel
motion,
material
defect,
working over
capacity.
Marginal Must working under
crane capacity.
Table 7.4: Risk assessment for Marine event Hazards
7.4 Hazards due to Shuttle Tanker operation:
Here the shuttle tanker used is a DP shuttle tanker and the loading is done in tandem position.
The main hazard occurs due to shuttle operation is collision of shuttle tanker with FPSO whose
frequency of occurrence is more than that of platforms. Consideration is given to hazardous
events that are potentially liable to affect the shuttle tanker in a typical cargo offtake.
Consideration is also given to environmental conditions that a tanker is likely to be subjected to.
The base case risks for each hazardous events and conditions are identified are then subjected to
certain reasonable practicable risk reduction measures. The events and condition are considered
under three separate headings all of which apply inside the 500 meters zone of the FPSO export
facility, viz,

7.4.1 Approaching and berthing
Hazards Consequences Risk level Prevention
Main Propulsion
Failure
Tanker out of control
and may lead to
collision with FPSO
Marginal Provide tug assistance, provide tanker
with thrusters to provide auxiliary
propulsion and ensure that main
propulsion and thruster are separated
as far as possible so that loss of main
propulsion does not result in loss of
thruster.
Thruster Failure Reduction in heading
transverse momentum
control, collision with
FPSO
Marginal Provide tug assistance
Steering Gear
Failure
Loss in heading control Marginal Provide alternative heading control
by main propulsion and thrusters.
Main Power or
Electrical Failure
Loss in propulsion and
position control,
collision
Marginal Provide tug assistance, ensure
technical person recover from failure
as early as possible.
Position control Loss in position Marginal Provide tug assistance,

Page
106

system failure control, collision Provide alternative means of
controlling position of the tanker.
FPSO dynamic
interaction
Not any Acceptable
Adverse weather
condition
Loss of control, may
lead to collision if close
to FPSO
Marginal Provide information about the
environment conditions like wave
heights, speed and direction of
waves.
Fixed obstruction
like pipelines,
wellheads,
installation
Collision with fixed
obstruction
Marginal Insure adequate space for
maneuvering during approaching, use
tug to tow the tanker in case of
collision
Other marine
activity (fishing
boats, supply
boats).
Delay, collision with
marine vehicle
Acceptable Information about tanker operation
should be given to the nearby traffic
control
Table 7.5: Hazards due to approaching and berthing of shuttle tanker
7.4.2 Connection of shuttle tanker with FPSO:
There are some hazards due to the dynamic interaction between FPSO and shuttle tanker. When
loading is started FPSO is in loaded condition and have a substantial draft hence surface current
waves force will be dominant force acting on FPSO and shuttle tanker is in ballast condition
hence having less draft and the wind force will be dominant in shuttle tanker, hence force acting
on both the vessel may be in different direction and there will be relative motion between the
vessels.
Hazards Consequences Risk level Prevention
Main Propulsion
Failure
Loss of control,
collision with FPSO,
Structural damage,
potential loss of oil
into sea
Unacceptable Provide tanker with twin main
propulsion, twin main engine, twin
screw and separated auxiliaries, alarm
to warn main propulsion failure,
consider hawserless offtake operation
to overcome potential problems with
recoil action of hawser under tension.
Thruster Failure -same- Marginal Equip tanker with two main
propulsion,
Ensure that shuttle tankers forward
section and FSPO export facility is
protected against potential collision.
Steering Gear
Failure
Potential collision
and station keeping
difficulties
Unacceptable Provide adequate emergency steering
facility with straightforward change
over
Main Power or
Electrical Failure
Loss of propulsion
and position control,
collision with FPSO,
Unacceptable Separate power generation from main
engine, provide tanker with
redundancy in term of power

Page
107

potential loss of oil
into sea
generation and distribution.
Position control
system failure
Loss of position
control , collision
with FPSO
Unacceptable Provide alternative means of
controlling position of tanker
FPSO dynamic
interaction
Collision, loss of
some oil into sea
Unacceptable Adequate separation distance at the
shuttle tanker-FPSO
interface(typically 80meters), Provide
FPSO with DP control system ,thus
maintenance of alignment with the
tanker during tandem position,
Ensure that the personal involved are
adequately trained in dealing with
problem associated with the dynamic
interaction.
Adverse weather
condition
Potential collision Unacceptable Provide information about the
environment conditions like wave
heights, speed and direction of waves.
Fixed obstruction
like pipelines,
wellheads,
installation
Collision Marginal Restricted sectors are well defined
and understood and clearly marked
on charts,
Provide stand by support vessel in
ready to tow condition
Other marine
activity (fishing
boats, supply
boats).
Acceptable Information about tanker operation
should be given to the nearby traffic
control
Table 7.6: Hazards due to connection of shuttle tanker with FPSO

7.4.3 Unberthing and departure
We are not considering the hazards due to unberthing and departure of shuttle tanker because the
FPSO is moored in weathervane and shuttle tanker attached at stern hence if there is any power
loss of propulsion loss, just by disconnecting the shuttle tanker from FPSO wind and current
force will tend to move shuttle tanker away from FPSO. Hence unbething will not cause any
serious hazards.

Page
108

7.5 Risk evaluation
Hazards Frequency Consequence Risk level
Blowout Low/medium High Unacceptable
Riser/pipeline leaks
Subsea wellheads manifolds Low/medium High Unacceptable
Production Riser leak Low/medium High/medium Marginal
Flowline leak Low/medium High/medium Marginal
Process leak
Swivel leak Medium/high Medium/low Marginal
Leak from Process pipes, flange, valves
, pumps
Medium/high Medium/low Marginal
Leak from storage tanks Medium/high Medium/low Marginal
Leakage during loading /unloading Medium/high Medium/low Marginal
Explosion on turret Low/medium High/medium Marginal
Non-Process events
Fire
Electrical Fire Medium/low Medium/low Acceptable
Accommodation fire Medium/high High Unacceptable
Methanol Fire Low/medium Medium/high Marginal
Machinery Fire Medium/high high/medium Unacceptable
Generator Fire Medium/high Low/medium Marginal
Heating System fire Medium/high Low/medium Marginal
Workshop Fire High/medium Low/medium Acceptable
Maintenance hazards
Tank cleaning Low/medium Low/medium Acceptable
Tank inspection Low/medium High Unacceptable
Deck inspection Low/medium High Unacceptable
Marine Events
Collision with passing merchant vessel Low High Unacceptable
Collision with supply vessel Low/medium High/medium Marginal
Collision with fishing vessel Low High/medium Acceptable
Failure and loss
Mooring failure low High Marginal
Foundering(structural failure) Low High Marginal
Foundering(capsize) Low High Marginal
Crane collapse Low/medium High/medium Marginal
Table 7.7: Risk evaluation

Page
109

Risk level for the Shuttle tanker operation is directly calculated from the consequences it causes
because the frequencies of the consequences are nearly same for most of the hazards.
7.6 Escape Route:
Escape route plays an important role in the safety of personal during occurrence of hazards. The
objective of the escape is to ensure a person to reach at safe place at the time of any hazard and
to escape from the FPSO in case of total loss of the FPSO.
Details of the location of escape routes are given in the General Arrangement drawing.
Following considerations are taken for design of the escape route:
1) There are two escape routes on the deck running parallel to the normal route. All the
working areas on the deck must be connected to at least one of the escape routes.
2) Routes are in between the normal access route and the side hull of the FPSO hence to
secure the routes from damage in case of hull damage and in far apart form each other
such that if hazard occur on deck it should not be able to affect both routes
simultaneously.
3) The routes in the deck will be in between topside deck and main deck.
4) These routes will be connected to the escape route in the accommodation.
5) Two routes are chosen because if any route is closed during hazard then one can use the
other one.
6) Escape route is divided into three zones one for accommodation and two in the deck. The
evacuation in topside modules is divided into two zones for the evacuation of the
respective persons working on those zones.
a) Evacuation Route 1: People in accommodation and those are working in the engine
room will escape from this route.
b) Evacuation Route 2.
c) Evacuation route 3
The zones are developed for rescue to take less time hence insure the safety of
personals.
7) Insulation in all the walls of the route to prevent from Green water and Fire.
8) All the working areas must be connected to atleast one of the escape routes.
9) Life Boat is provided for each zone.

8. CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION AND FABRICATION:
Construction and Fabrication are the most important processes for the completion of any Marine
Structure project. It will be largely governed by the facilities in shipyard. As our FPSO is of
barge shape, it will be largely consisting of the flat panel. So we can use the process of Mass
Production and Group Technology (Appendix VII 7.1). Installation is the last process before the

Page
110

working of FPSO. This report gives a brief idea of about shipyard facilities and planning of
FPSO production and installation.
8.1 Activities in FPSO Construction
Main activities in FPSO construction are as follows:
1. Hull form: drawing and lines plan.
2. Hull structure
3. Machinery
4. Outfit

Fig 8.1: Main Activities in FPSO Construction
8.2 FPSO Construction process
Hull structure (steel work) consist most of the part of FPSO construction. The hull structure part
of construction process consists of a component production stages followed by assembly stages
of increasing complexity in which larger assemblies are progressively built up from components
and smaller assemblies culminating in the complete vessel. The manner in which FPSO is
divided into intermediate products at different levels is largely governed by the facilities,
standards and working practices of the shipyard. We are dividing our vessel in following manner
for construction of steel hull structure.
1. Zone: Cargo hold, Engine room, Superstructure
2. Grand Block: 13 grand block.
3. Block: 2 block for each grand block.
4. Assembly.
5. Sub assembly.
6. Component/Raw material
As our vessel consist of lots of similar block and also similar flat plate assembly. This leads that
shipyard must be using group technology for advance shipbuilding.

lSC
PuLL lC8M PuLL S18uC1u8L MACPlnL8?
PuLL Cu1ll1

Page
111

Fig 8.2: Group Technology for Advanced Shipbuilding
8.3 Block Distribution of FPSO
The block distribution of FPSO will be governed by the facilities, standards and working
practices of the shipyard. It is assumed that the shipyard must have following facilities:
1. Gantry crane: maximum capacity 1200 tonnes.
Detail:
1. Engine room is divided in two grand blocks.
2. Remaining hull structure is divided into 11 grand blocks. Each grand block is further
divided into 2 blocks [port (P), starboard(s)].
3. Dimension and weight of each blocks are:
(Block in cargo hold):

Page
112

Fig 8.3: Block Construction of FPSO
(Block in cargo hold):
Grand
Block
Block Dimension Weight(tonnes)
Length(m) Deck
breadth(m)
Bottom
breadth(m)
1 1S 24.6 29.76 27.76 1188.6
1P 24.6 26.76 28.76 1181.4
2 2S 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
2P 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
3 3S 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
3P 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
4 4S 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
4P 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
5 5S 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
5P 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
6 6S 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
6P 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
7 7S 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
7P 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
8 8S 24.3 26.76 28.76 1167.7
8P 24.3 29.76 27.76 1174.8
9 9S 24.55 29.76 27.76 1186.3
9P 24.55 26.76 28.76 1179.1

Page
113

10 10S 24.0 26.76 28.76 1154.0
10P 24.0 29.76 27.76 1161.1
11 11S 20.35 29.76 27.76 993.60
11P 20.35 26.76 28.76 987.65
Table 8.1: Block in cargo hold

(Block in engine room):

Grand
Block
Block Dimension Weight(tonnes)
Length(m) Breadth(m) Height(m)
E1 E1S1 20.8 28.26 12 901.75
E1P1 20.8 28.26 12 901.75
E1S2 20.8 28.26 12 901.75
E1P2 20.8 28.26 12 901.75
E2 E2S1 20.8 28.26 17.8 825.85
E2P1 20.8 28.26 17.8 825.85
E2P2 20.8 28.26 17.8 825.85
E2S2 20.8 28.26 17.8 825.85
Table 8.2: Block in engine room
8.4 Construction Strategy

Fig 8.4: Construction Strategy

Page
114

Arrow 1: Arrow gives the manufacturing process. (Bottom to top)
Arrow 2: Arrow gives the planning process. (Top to bottom)
8.5 Block Fabrication
Since all the blocks consist of flat panel assembly. Also most of the blocks are of similar shape
and dimension except engine room blocks. So we are giving the details of fabrication and
construction of one of mid ship block (6S).
Block fabrication steps:
1. Plate preparation

Crane and roller

2. Part Fabrication
The manufacturing process for plates and rolled section can be grouped together based on
the differences in row material, finished part, fabrication process and relevant facilities as
a) Rectangular flat plate
b) Non rectangular flat plate (used in block 11).
c) Internal parts from flat plates.
d) Straight rolled sections.
The different work stages during parts fabrication are:
a) Marking.
b) Cutting.
Following table shows different problem area, associated work stage and facilities during
part fabrication:
PROBLEM AREA WORK STAGE FACILITIES
Rectangular flat plates Marking, Cutting, Edge
Preparation
Flame planer
Non-rectangular flat plates Marking, Cutting, Edge Flame profiler
SLockyard (plaLe and secLlon)
ShoL 8lasLlng, plaLe sLralghLenlng and
palnLlng

Page
115

Preparation
Internal parts from flat
plates
Marking, Complex contour
cutting, Edge Preparation
Flame profiler
Straight rolled sections Marking, Cutting, Sniping,
Scallops
Profile burner, Guillotine
Table 8.3: Problem during part fabrication
3. Part Assembly:
This process is carried away to reduce excessive volume of work at the sub assembly
level. Part assemblies will be grouped according to their problem areas as:
a) Built-up section: e.g. heavy scantling T-sections (deck girder).
b) Sub-block part: e.g. bracket plate stiffened with a face plate or flat bar.

4. Sub block assembly:
Block is divided into following sub-blocks
a) Double bottom sub-block
b) Double hull side shell sub block (side shell, inner side shell and side shell
girders).
c) Stiffened longitudinal bulkhead.
d) Stiffened transverse bulkhead.
e) Stiffened deck plate

Fig 8.5: Sub Block Assembly

Page
116

This level of manufacturing consists of assembled structural parts like longitudinals,
transverse, girders, web frames, floors, etc.
In our FPSO case this level can be done on mass production theory. As stiffened panels,
consisting of plates attached to stiffeners, constitute almost part of sub assembly. So these
sub-assemblies can be mass produced size by size in process with appropriate welding,
equipment and facilities for material handling and transfer.
For this we will go through Panel line (flat panel assembly) process. See appendix VII,
7.2.

Fig 8.6: Flat panel
5. Block Assembly:
Figure below is showing how the sub-block will be joined to complete a block. Numbers
given in figure are indicating the order in which sub-blocks are welded to form a block.
Step1: Laying of Double bottom.
Step2: Welding of Side shell Sub-block with Double Bottom.
Step3: Welding of Longitudinal bulkhead with Double Bottom.
Step4: Welding of Transverse bulkheads with Double Bottom, Longitudinal
bulkhead and side shell.

Page
117

Step 5: Welding of Deck plate with side shell, transverse and longitudinal
bulkhead.

Fig 8.7: Block Assembly
8.6 Engine room Construction:
Engine construction will de done in following steps:
1. Block E1P, E1S will be constructed first. The process of fabrication of block is same as
described for the 6S block.
2. E1 grand block will be constructed at dry dock with both of the blocks.
3. Then 5 duel fuel engines will be installed in double bottom of E1 block.
4. Block E2S and E2P will be welded with Grand Block E1, Grand Block will only have
Level 2 Deck initially.
1
2
3
4 4
3

Page
118

5. Now machines and auxiliary machines will be installed at level 2 Deck
6. Level 3 deck will be welded.
7. In similar manner auxiliary machines and generator and other decks will be installed or
welded.
8. Finally main deck will be welded after installation of all the machines.

Fig 8.8: Engine Room Construction
8.7 Welding Detail:
Following table shows the welding process we are using during fabrication and construction,
with detail of application of each welding.
SI
No.
PROCESS APPLICATION
1 Shielded Metal Arc-Manual All position welding
2 Gravity Welding For down-hand welding of stiffeners with plates.
Stiffeners are welded during panel fabrication.
3 Submerged Arc Welding For two side butt welding of plate with another plate,
also for joining two panels.
4 Flux Cored Arc Welding Welding of the deck plate during block erection.
5 Gas Shielded Welding Short welds protected from wind
6 Electroslag Welding Long vertical butt welding of side shell plating and
longitudinal bulkhead. Welding between transverse and

Page
119

bulkheads with deck plating. Longitudinal junction with
transverse or bulkheads.
7 Electro gas welding Vertical fillet welding of transverse bulkheads to
longitudinal bulkheads and side shell plating.
Table 8.4: Welding processes
8.8 Outfitting:
Outfitting will be done in such a manner such that the process can carried out in assembly hall so
that we can get better working condition and better access.
Outfitting will be carried out in following steps
1) On -flat panel assembly.
2) On -block.
3) On board. On board outfitting work is carried out at the hull erection stage or at the
post launch stage.

Outfitting work like fittings of pipes, brackets, lifting pads etc can be performed at all stage.
Outfitting work like installation of modules, accommodation, mooring and anchoring equipment
can be done at on-board stage.

8.9 Topside Modules Installation
Selection of modules will depend upon the owner of the FPSO. Whether owner wants to order a
new module meeting the requirement of the FPSO or just purchased a old module which was
used previously in other installation.

Modules can be of two types
1) Custom made modules: Newly constructed Topsides ordered specifically for this FPSO.
Frame spacing of the module casing must match the frame spacing of the FPSO hence
during installation of there modules each frame of the FPSO comes under the module will
be directly connected with the frames of module.
2) Purchased modules: Modules that have been used in other offshore installations and have
been recovered from them when decommissioned. These modules can have different
frame spacing than FPSO, hence during installation of these modules we have to match
the frame spacing by proving some extra structural member. Figure shown below is an
example of how to match the frame spacing of the two structures.

Fig 8.9:Matching the Frame Spacing of Two Structures

Page
120

Dark plates are from FPSO with transverse T-Beam supporting the module of less
spacing. The supporting bar extending from the T-Beam is supporting the module such
that the spacing at the end of the supporting bar will be equal to the frame spacing of the
module hence these supporting bar will be connected with the module frame spacing.
Hence all the load of the module will be transmitting through module frames to
supporting bar to the FPSO frame.

8.10 Installation of FPSO
There is no propulsion system in our FPSO, since it is not required during the service life. FPSO
is therefore towed to site using tugs. The towing operator and towing vessels should be carefully
selected to ensure that they will be able to reliably tow the FPSO at the desired speed within the
schedule and during an acceptable weather window.

For executing the installation work of FPSO the operator has three discrete tasks to manage:
a) Installation of mooring anchor legs
b) Hook-up of the FPSO with its anchor legs
c) Installation of riser an subsea system

Installation of mooring anchor legs is done prior to the FPSO arrival
The type of vessel ( tug or supporting vessel) used for installation will depend largely on
location, the environmental condition, water depth, mooring and riser system design. Mooring
system on FPSO are specific for each installation so the vessels recovering handling and
transferring the mooring system will almost certainly be required to be specially adopted for that
specific task.

After installation of mooring anchor leg system hook-up with the FPSO will be done. A
sufficient number of vessels should be available to ensure that the FPSO should be maintained in
the desired position and heading under all likely environmental condition. While the tugs hold
the FPSO in position other tugs pick-up the ends of the preinstalled mooring anchor lines and
bring them toward the FPSO fairleads where they are connected to winches that are installed on
the FPSO. The tugs are released when a sufficient number of anchor lines are connected. The
mooring line hook-up operation continues until all the anchor legs are connected and tensioned.
Finally riser and subsea system will install.

9. DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING:
Decommissioning is the process where the operator of an offshore oil or gas installation and
pipeline goes through in order to plan, gain approval for and implement the removal, disposal
and re-use of an offshore installation when it is no longer needed for its current purpose. The
decommissioning and re-use are very important, both with respect to environmental and
economical conditions. While decommissioning of the system, care must be taken so that the site
will be restored to a condition that minimizes residual environmental impacts, permits
reinstatement of fishing in that area and unimpeded navigation through it. The vessels are
designed with the prospect that it would be modified later to be used in other fields. Though the
process facilities of these vessels are generally custom made for a specific application, other

Page
121

major components including pressure vessels, piping, and equipment that can be used on similar
fields in future applications. If initially designed with an eye towards an extended life, and the
potential for expansion, the equipment could more easily be converted and moved to another
field with similar fluid characteristics. FPSOs lend themselves readily to such conversions and
movements because of their ship shape.
9.1 Requirements for Recycling
Before reuse and recycling, engineering documents of the equipment should be checked for
compatibility with the new production fluid composition and design conditions: manifolds,
pressure vessels, valves, piping, pumps, heat exchangers, water treatment facility, flare system,
gas compression system, and E&I system. This is followed by a thorough inspection survey of
existing equipment and infrastructure. Once the existing and new requirements are investigated
for suitability, an appropriate modification plan will be made.
The following requirements are key factors to judge re-usability of an FPSO vessel for a new
field:
Operation duration requirement at the new field
Crude storage capacity requirements
Double hull requirement.

If the FPSO is judged to be reusable for the next assignment, the following factors will be
studied and the conversion plan will be developed accordingly:
Life extension and repair
Conversion of offloading system
Conversion of tank heating
Conversion of safety facility
Regulations
Site environment.
9.1.1 Risers:
Risers are typically, custom designed for a specific site. The design of the structure and the
configuration is a complicated function of fluid service, site, water depth, environment, and
flowing vessel response characteristics. However, careful design in the choice of riser
configuration, size and interface between vessel and the wellheads can allow the re-utilization of
the FPSO without major modifications at the riser interface. In the initial design, it is important
to properly design the structure and configuration to enhance the potential for re-use.
Configurations like the lazy wave and free hanging catenary risers are more readily adaptable to
re-utilization as the riser forms part of the flow line after touchdown; thus the length of the riser
is not too dependent on water depth.
The following are key parameters for judging the reusability of the riser system:
Service life: Is the residual life adequate for the new field life?
Type of service

Page
122

Design temperatures and pressures
Site particulars: water depth and ocean environment?
Riser configuration: Does the riser configuration allow for use at another site?
Installation equipment
A thorough inspection plan must be carried out on the recovered riser. This includes the end
fittings, external sheath wear, external buoyancy modules, and possible NDE inspection of the
inner carcass. Re-certification of the riser by the riser manufacturer or the certifying authority
may also be required. A detailed inspection plan with specific reject/accept criteria must be
developed with the riser manufacturer and/or classification society for the new field. A detailed
examination of the external sheath and the end fittings will be required. Buoyancy modules will
need to be removed, refurbished, and replaced during re-installation.
9.1.2 Turret Re-utilization:
FPSO tanker turret facilities can vary tremendously in type, size, and function. Given that the
most basic capabilities of a turret are governed by load capacity and riser space availability,
turrets may be categorized accordingly:
Load capacity: Turret load capacity may be categorized as either low load capacity or
high load capacity for simplicity. Low load capacity may be considered when the total
maximum resultant load due to off-vessel moorings plus risers is less than approximately
1,200 tons.
Riser capacity: Turret categories based on riser capacity are: few risers, less than 10;
moderate number of risers, between 10 and 25; and many risers, greater than 25.
The turret system piping, manifold, swivels, and safety features must be evaluated for
compatibility with the new field requirements following a thorough inspection to determine the
existing condition. Evaluation of the swivels, piping, manifold, and other components must
consider materials, corrosivity, pressure, size, and pigging requirements.

Other factors involved in the process of decommissioning and re-use include the following:
Decommissioning: Prior to disconnection of the mooring and riser systems, the
machinery related to anchor leg or riser installation/de-installation is reconditioned.
Refurbishment, conversion: Turret system refurbishment is best carried out at a
shipyard. Dry-docking may be required depending on the modification plan.
FPSO mooring: Anchor leg patterns and component sizes, grades and lengths are
generally specific to a certain site.

With proper consideration of corrosion, wear, fatigue and handling, modern anchor chain and
wire components may be considered for reuse. Inspection programs to re-certify anchor chain
exist and should be adopted or modified to meet the new field's functional requirements. Careful
planning for the recovery of the anchor legs must allow for handling operations, which will not
damage the components.

Page
123

9.1.3 Subsea systems:
Subsea systems are a packaged system; they incorporate intricate machined hardware sized for
the flow rates, well shut-in pressures, installation vessel interfaces, and intra-field connections.
Suitability of subsea hardware for decommissioning and re-use is primarily a function of valve
size, material class, and its remaining useful design life. Subsea hardware decommissioning is
accomplished during well abandonment. After the well is controlled and killed, cement is usually
circulated into the well through prepared perforations in the tubing string. Once the well is dead,
the flowlines and associated subsea hardware, such as subsea manifolds, flowline connection
hardware, and other components are circulated with water. The flowline and control umbilical
connections are disconnected and the subsea tree is recovered. Subsea wellheads are then cut
approximately 3 meters below the seafloor and pulled up as a single salvaged unit; wellhead,
guide bases, casing hangers, pack-offs, and casing joint stubs. All remaining subsea hardware is
either removed from the seafloor, or abandoned in place, depending on local regulation
requirements, water depth, and proximity to shipping lanes or anchorages, and abandonment
costs.
9.2 Dismantling (Ship Breaking)
Consideration of dismantling is considered due to rising awareness about the plight of workers in
ship breaking yards of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh where cheap unskilled labor is easily
sourced and exploited for the ship breaking activity. The attempt is to identify problems and
suggest changes so that working environment can be made less hazardous. Banning of ship
breaking in these countries would deny the meager income these workers have from this industry
and is therefore unacceptable.

Some of steps that a owner of FPSO being dismantled can take are:
Before beaching of FPSO, the topsides must be cleaned and ensured that they do not
carry hazardous materials. Tanks of FPSO must be cleaned.
The owner should supply a detailed process of dismantling, so that collapse of structure
during dismantling is avoided.
The owner should also supply a detailed document to breaking yard, indicating zones
where there is possibility of toxic fumes and gases.
There are few countries which build offshore structures or ships and even less that
decommission them. Each group of countries could be specifically targeted, for example,
to require those ordering ships to write recyclable material into their specifications and to
document any hazardous material used.
While the ultimate goal would be a Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Ship
Scrapping, a number of interim steps such as training videos, hand-outs (translated into
the local languages), seminars and workshops could be organized, with the goal of
improving worker safety.

Page
124

Fig.9.1: Major ship breaking Tasks (taken from www.osha.gov)
9.3 Conclusion:
The timing of future decommissioning activities is not fixed. It depends on the length of the
lease, the rate of reservoir depletion, the market value of oil or gas, and whether the unit might
serve an extended use. The abandonment of an offshore installation is governed by the global or
regional regulations. At the end of production life of the USAN field, the FPSO will
decommission and abandon the site according to the regulations and laws at that time. Sub-sea
infrastructure will be removed; wells will be plugged and abandoned; buried flowlines will be
abandoned after flushing. The ultimate disposition of the FPSO will depend upon its condition at
the end of the production life at the USAN field. All anchor, lines, and chains will be recovered.
The topsides equipments will be decommissioned at yard if the FPSO is not fit for re-use.

Page
125

References:
Practical Ship Design, Watson
Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures, You Sheng Wu, Wei Cheng Cui and
Guo-Jun Zhou
Ship Design Methods, Thomas Lamb
The Ship Design And Construction, Taggart
Principles of Naval rchitecture, Vol I,II,III, Edward V. Lewis
Hand Book of Ocean Engineering, Subrata Chakrabarti
Guidelines for Risk Based Process Safety, Centre for Chemical Process Safety
International convention for Safety of Life at Sea,1974
MARPOL Regulations
International Load Line Convention,1966 including protocol of 1988 relating to the Load Lines
Convention, 1966
Offshore Hydromechanics, J.M.J Journee and W.W. Massie
ABS Crew Habitability on Offshore Installations
ABS Rules for Building and Classifying Steel Vessels
www.osha.gov
www.aluminium-offshore.com
www.wartsila.com

Page
126

APPENDIX

Page
127

APPENDIX I
1) GENERAL ARRANGEMENT & HULL DESIGN
Name L B D T Storage Slop tank Fuel Oil
m m m m m3 m3 m3
Aoka Mizu 248.12 42 21.2 14.9 105132 7150 2982
Bloe Holm 242.3 42 21.2 119502 7602 2900
Gas Dowr 242.3 42 21.1 113800 6650 2650
Hwene Brim 252 42 23.2 101065 3315 3000
Munin 252 42 23.2 101236 3315 3158
Uisge Gorm 248.3 39.9 20.5 101350 4450 2400
Hanne Knutsen 264.68 42.5 22 15 144799 4860 3743
Griffin Venture 243 42 23 15 105556
Bohai ming zu 210 33 18 12 62005
Bohai You Yi Hao 217 31 18 10 62005
Cang Qing Hao 217 31 18 11 58504
Schiehallion 246 45 27 20 151038
Girassaol 300 60 31 23 317974
Balder 211 36 21 14
Jotun A 223.5 41.5 23.75 98071 2882 2278
Crystal Sea 101 21 12 9 7450 500 350
Challis Venture 238.5 39 21.4 14 139000
Gryphon A 259 41 24 16 82469
Mitsui F601 FPSO 219 38 23 17
Navion Munin 252 42 23 16
Berge Hugin 252 42 23 16 101400
San Jacinto 105 21 9 6 8427
Terra Nova 292 46 28 19
Petrojarl I 209 32 18 13
Petrojarl Varg 214 38 21 16 15263
Ramform Banff 120.4 53.4 16 12 19079
Anoa Natuna 194 39 21 14 87443
Seillean 250 37 21 12 28618
Anasuria 226 45 24 17
Asgard A 278 45 27 19
Nome 260 41 25 19
Captain FPSO 214 38 24 18
Northen Endeavour 273 50 28 19
Offshore oil III 262 46 24 158987
Qinhuangdao 287 51 158987
Henrique Dias 330 54.5 27.8 317974

Page
128

Jose Bonifacio 320 54.5 28 317974
Kizomba A 285 63 32.2 349771.4
Kizomba B 285 63 32.2 349771.4
Greater Plutonio 310 58 32 317974
Akpo FPSO 310 61 31 317974
Jabiru Venture 285 41 22 17
Challis Venture 238.5 39 21.4 14.35 139000
Anoa Natuna 166 39 21.4 14.45 87600
Table 1.1: Ship Data Used

1ANk
Irame
No.
Lengt
h 8readth ne|ght os|t|on

begln-
end m m m m-m m-m m-m
x ? Z
8allasL 1ank afLmosL 0 9.6 36.32 22.8 0-9.6 -28.26 Lo 28.26 0-22.8
L8 ballasL boLLom1.1 16-36 13 28.26 2.3 9.6-24.6 0 Lo -28.26 0-2.3
L8 ballasL boLLom1.2 16-36 13 28.26 2.3 9.6-24.7 0 Lo +28.26 0-2.3
L8 ballasL porL1 16-36 13 2.3 27.3 9.6-24.8 +23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
L8 ballasL sLarboard1 16-36 13 2.3 27.3 9.6-24.9 -23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
L8 ballasL boLLom2.1 36-38 16.3 28.26 2.3 24.6-41.1 0 Lo -28.26 0-2.3
L8 ballasL boLLom2.2 36-38 16.3 28.26 2.3 24.6-41.1 0 Lo +28.26 0-2.3
L8 ballasL porL2 36-38 16.3 2.3 27.3 24.6-41.1 +23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
L8 ballasL sLarboard2 36-38 16.3 2.3 27.3 24.6-41.1 -23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Lnglne 8oom(L8) 16-36 30 31.32 27.3 9.6-39.6 -23.76 Lo 23.76 2.3-29.8
Cofferdam b/w L8 &
Cargo 36-38 1.3 31.32 27.3 39.6-41.1 -23.76 Lo 23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom1.1 38-90 24.6 17 2.3 41.1-63.7 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom1.2 38-90 24.6 17.32 2.3 41.1-63.7 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom1.3 38-90 24.6 17 2.3 41.1-63.7 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL1 38-90 24.6 2.3 27.3 41.1-63.7 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
8allasL sLarboard1 38-90 24.6 2.3 27.3 41.1-63.7 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo 1.1 38-90 24.6 17 27.3 41.1-63.7 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 1.2 38-90 24.6 17.32 27.3 41.1-63.7 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 1.3 38-90 24.6 17 27.3 41.1-63.7 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom2.1 90-117 24.3 17 2.3 63.7-90 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom2.2 90-117 24.3 17.32 2.3 63.7-90 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3

Page
129

8allasL boLLom2.3 90-117 24.3 17 2.3 63.7-90 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL2 90-117 24.3 2.3 27.3 63.7-90 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
8allasL sLarboard2 90-117 24.3 2.3 27.3 63.7-90 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo 2.1 90-117 24.3 17 27.3 63.7-90 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 2.2 90-117 24.3 17.32 27.3 63.7-90 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 2.3 90-117 24.3 17 27.3 63.7-90 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom3.1 117-144 24.3 17 2.3 90-114.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom3.2 117-144 24.3 17.32 2.3 90-114.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom3.3 117-144 24.3 17 2.3 90-114.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL3 117-144 24.3 2.3 27.3 90-114.3 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
8allasL sLarboard3 117-144 24.3 2.3 27.3 90-114.3 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo 3.1 117-144 24.3 17 27.3 90-114.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 3.2 117-144 24.3 17.32 27.3 90-114.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 3.3 117-144 24.3 17 27.3 90-114.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom4.1 144-171 24.3 17 2.3 114.3+138.6 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom4.2 144-171 24.3 17.32 2.3 114.3+138.6 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom4.3 144-171 24.3 17 2.3 114.3+138.6 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL4 144-171 24.3 2.3 27.3 114.3+138.6 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
8allasL sLarboard4 144-171 24.3 2.3 27.3 114.3+138.6 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo 4.1 144-171 24.3 17 27.3 114.3+138.6 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 4.2 144-171 24.3 17.32 27.3 114.3+138.6 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 4.3 144-171 24.3 17 27.3 114.3+138.6 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom3.1 171-198 24.3 17 2.3 138.6-162.9 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom3.2 171-198 24.3 17.32 2.3 138.6-162.9 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom3.3 171-198 24.3 17 2.3 138.6-162.9 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL3 171-198 24.3 2.3 27.3 138.6-162.9 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo3.1 171-198 24.3 17 27.3 138.6-162.9 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 3.2 171-198 24.3 17.32 27.3 138.6-162.9 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 3.3 171-198 24.3 17 27.3 138.6-162.9 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom6.1 198-223 24.3 17 2.3 162.9-187.2 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom6.2 198-223 24.3 17.32 2.3 162.9-187.2 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom6.3 198-223 24.3 17 2.3 162.9-187.2 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL6 198-223 24.3 2.3 27.3 162.9-187.2 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo6.1 198-223 24.3 17 27.3 162.9-187.2 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 6.2 198-223 24.3 17.32 27.3 162.9-187.2 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 6.3 198-223 24.3 17 27.3 162.9-187.2 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom7.1 223-232 24.3 17 2.3 187.2-211.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom7.2 223-232 24.3 17.32 2.3 187.2-211.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom7.3 223-232 24.3 17 2.3 187.2-211.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3

Page
130

8allasL por7 223-232 24.3 2.3 27.3 187.2-211.3 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo7.1 223-232 24.3 17 27.3 187.2-211.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 7.2 223-232 24.3 17.32 27.3 187.2-211.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 7.3 223-232 24.3 17 27.3 187.2-211.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom8.1 232-279 24.3 17 2.3 211.3-233.8 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom8.2 232-279 24.3 17.32 2.3 211.3-233.8 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom8.3 232-279 24.3 17 2.3 211.3-233.8 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL8 232-279 24.3 2.3 27.3 211.3-233.8 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo8.1 232-279 24.3 17 27.3 211.3-233.8 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo8.2 232-279 24.3 17.32 27.3 211.3-233.8 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 8.3 232-279 24.3 17 27.3 211.3-233.8 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom9.1 279-310 24.33 17 2.3 233.8-260.33 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom9.2 279-310 24.33 17.32 2.3 233.8-260.33 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom9.3 279-310 24.33 17 2.3 233.8-260.33 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL9 279-310 24.33 2.3 27.3 233.8-260.33 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo9.1 279-310 24.33 17 27.3 233.8-260.33 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 9.2 279-310 24.33 17.32 27.3 233.8-260.33 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 9.3 279-310 24.33 17 27.3 233.8-260.33 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL boLLom10.1 310-342 24 17 2.3 260.33-284.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
8allasL boLLom10.2 310-342 24 17.32 2.3 260.33-284.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
8allasL boLLom10.3 310-342 24 17 2.3 260.33-284.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
8allasL porL10 310-342 24 2.3 27.3 260.33-284.3 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
8allasL sLarboard10 310-342 24 2.3 27.3 260.33-284.3 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Cargo10.1 310-342 24 17 27.3 260.33-284.3 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 10.2 310-342 24 17.32 27.3 260.33-284.3 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Cargo 10.3 310-342 24 17 27.3 260.33-284.3 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
Slop ballasL boLLom
1.1 342-337 11.23 17 2.3 284.33-293.6 -8.76Lo-23.76 0-2.3
Slop ballasL boLLom
1.2 342-337 11.23 17.32 2.3 284.33-293.6 -8.76Lo+8.76 0.2.3
Slop ballasL boLLom
1.3 342-337 11.23 17 2.3 284.33-293.6 +8.76Lo+23.76 0-2.3
Slop ballasL porL 342-337 11.23 2.3 27.3 284.33-293.6 +23.76Lo-28.26 2.3-29.8
Slop ballasL
sLarboard 342-337 11.23 2.3 27.3 284.33-293.6 -23.76Lo+28.26 2.3-29.8
Slop Lank1 342-337 11.23 17 27.3 284.33-293.6 -8.76Lo-23.76 2.3-29.8
Slop Lank2 342-337 11.23 17.32 27.3 284.33-293.6 -8.76Lo+8.76 2.3-29.8
Slop Lank3 342-337 11.23 17 27.3 284.33-293.6 +8.76Lo+23.76 2.3-29.8
8allasL Lank 337-373 9.6 36.32 29.8 293.6-303.2 -28.26Lo-28.26 0-29.8

Page
131

Table 1.2 : Tank and Compartment Definitions

APPENDIX II
2) WEIGHT, BUOYANCY AND STABILITY

2.1) Damage Stability
CASE T Displacement Vw Area z l A
m tonne knot m2 m m
Dcase 1 22.648 381703 100 5787.6454 34.36457024 23.04057 0.059391
Dcase 2 22.112 372521 100 5951.2326 34.03513894 22.97914 0.062408
Dcase 3 22.003 365308 100 5984.4994 33.96855731 22.96706 0.063962
Dcase 4 21.997 365185 100 5986.3306 33.96489616 22.9664 0.064001
Dcase 5 21.991 365275 100 5988.1618 33.96123542 22.96574 0.064003
Dcase 6 21.987 365271 100 5989.3826 33.95879515 22.9653 0.064016
Dcase 7 21.984 365267 100 5990.2982 33.95696507 22.96497 0.064025
Dcase 8 21.982 365264 100 5990.9086 33.95574507 22.96475 0.064032
Dcase 9 21.982 365263 100 5990.9086 33.95574507 22.96475 0.064032
Dcase 10 21.982 365262 100 5990.9086 33.95574507 22.96475 0.064032
Dcase 11 21.766 362441 100 6056.8318 33.82424607 22.94125 0.065174
Dcase 12 23.482 367946 100 5533.1086 34.88437866 23.14338 0.059164
Dcase 13 22.307 368109 100 5891.7186 34.15459323 23.00109 0.062584
Table 2.1: Calculation of parameter A for the equation Heeling arm = A cos^n(phi)
a) Dcase1
Tanks Damaged: Slop ballast bottom 1.1, Slop ballast starboard, Slop tank1, Ballast tank
forward most.

forwardmosL
lW 1ank orL --------- 9.6 9.3 6 0-9.6 0 Lo +9.3 23.8-29.8
lW 1ank SLarboard --------- 9.6 9.3 6 0-9.6 0 Lo -9.3 23.8-29.8
MuC 1ank orL(ln
L8) --------- 30 18 10 9.6-39.6 +7.76 Lo +23.76 19.8-29.8
MuC 1k.
SLarboard(L8) --------- 30 18 10 9.6-39.6 -7.76 Lo -23.76 19.8-29.8

Page
132

Fig 2.1

RESULT
Static Stability: Righting arm at the first angle of static equilibrium (
st1
) should not be larger
than 0.6 of the maximum righting arm.
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= .0135/3.424 =.0039 < 0.6 (PASS)

Ratio of areas type 2 - general wind
heeling arm unit Pass
Heeling arm = A cos^n(phi)
A = 0.0594 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
Area1 integrated from the greater of
spec. heel angle 0 deg
angle of equilibrium (with heel arm) 2.6 deg 2.6
GZ
st1
=0.0135

to the lesser of
angle of first GZ peak 58.5 deg
angle of max. GZ 58.5 deg 58.5 GZ
max
=3.424
angle of max. GZ above heel arm 58.5 deg
first downflooding angle n/a deg
angle of vanishing stability (with heel arm) 104 deg
Area2 integrated to the lesser of
roll back angle from equilibrium (with heel
arm) 25.0 (-22.4) deg -22.4
Area1 / Area2 shall be greater than (>) 140 % 404.251 Pass
Intermediate values
Equilibrium angle with heel arm deg 2.6
Area1 (under GZ), from 2.6 to 58.5 deg. m.deg 104.847
Area1 (under HA), from 2.6 to 58.5 deg. m.deg 2.365
Area1, from 2.6 to 58.5 deg. m.deg 102.483
Area2 (under GZ), from -22.4 to 2.6 deg. m.deg -23.918
Area2 (under HA), from -22.4 to 2.6 deg. m.deg 1.433
Area2, from -22.4 to 2.6 deg. m.deg 25.351
Table 2.2: Dynamical Stability

Page
133

Draft Amidsh. m 22.648
Displacement tonne 381703
Heel to Starboard degrees 1.6
Draft at FP m 25.02
Draft at AP m 20.276
Draft at LCF m 22.548
Trim (+ve by stern) m -4.744
WL Length m 305.237
WL Beam m 56.542
Wetted Area m^2 32911.885
Waterpl. Area m^2 16525.742
Prismatic Coeff. 0.868
Block Coeff. 0.841
Midship Area Coeff. 0.969
Waterpl. Area Coeff. 0.958
LCB from Amidsh. (+ve fwd) m -1.547
LCF from Amidsh. (+ve fwd) m -6.422
KB m 11.315
KG fluid m 18.333
BMt m 11.753
BML m 316.732
GMt corrected m 4.73
GML corrected m 309.709
KMt m 23.068
KML m 328.047
Immersion (TPc) tonne/cm 169.422
MTc tonne.m 3873.419
RM at 1deg = GMt.Disp.sin(1)
tonne.m 31508.02
Max deck inclination deg 1.8
Trim angle (+ve by stern) deg -0.9
Table 2.3: Equilibrium Result

Page
134

Graph 2.1

b) Dcase2
Tanks Damaged: Slop ballast bottom 1.1 ,Slop ballast starboard, Slop tank1, Cargo10.1, Ballast
starboard10, Ballast bottom10.1.

Fig 2.2

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.0560/3.275 =.0171 < 0.6 (PASS)

Ratio of areas type 2 - general wind heeling
arm Pass
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
Max GZ = 3.424 m at 58.5 deg.
Ratio of areas type 2 - general wind heeling arm
Heel to Starboard deg.
G
Z

m

Page
135

A = 0.0624 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
angle of equilibrium (with heel arm) 3.8 deg 3.8 GZ
st1
=0.0560
to the lesser of
angle of first GZ peak 58 deg
angle of max. GZ 58 deg 58 GZ
max
=3.275
angle of max. GZ above heel arm 58 deg
angle of vanishing stability (with heel arm) 102.5 deg
arm)
25.0 (-
21.2) deg -21.2
Intermediate values

Draft at FP m 22.89
WL Length m 305.204
WL Beam m 56.582
Block Coeff. 0.872

Page
136

KB m 11.061
KG fluid m 18.553
BMt m 11.789
BML m 331.697
KMt m 22.849
KML m 342.757
tonne.m 27751.561
Table 2.5: Equilibrium analysis

Graph 2.2

c) Dcase3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
Max GZ = 3.275 m at 58 deg.
G
Z

m

Page
137

Tanks Damaged: Cargo10.1, Ballast starboard10, Ballast bottom10.1, Cargo9.1, Ballast
starboard 9, Ballast bottom 9.1.

Fig 2.3
RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.058694/3.377 =.0174 < 0.6 (PASS)

Ratio of areas type 2 - general wind heeling
arm Pass
A = 0.0639 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
angle of equilibrium (with heel arm) 3 deg 3
to the lesser of
angle of max. GZ 58 deg 58
arm)
25.0 (-
22.0) deg -22
Intermediate values
Equilibrium angle with heel arm deg 3

Page
138

Draft at FP m 22.431
WL Length m 305.201
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.884
KB m 11.009
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.721
BML m 336.83
KMt m 22.731
KML m 347.839
tonne.m 26424.595
Max deck inclination deg 2


Page
139

Graph 2.3
d) Dcase4
Tanks Damaged: Cargo 9.1, Ballast starboard 9, Ballast bottom 9.1, Cargo 8.1, Ballast starboard
8, Ballast bottom 8.1.

Fig 2.4
RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.056143/3.377 =.0166 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
140

A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
angle of vanishing stability (with heel
arm) 103.3 deg
roll back angle from equilibrium (with
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.1) deg -22.1
Intermediate values

Heel to Starboard degrees 2
WL Length m 305.201
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.887

Page
141

KB m 11.01
KG fluid m 18.555
BMt m 11.719
BML m 349.227
KMt m 22.729
KML m 360.237
tonne.m 26399.6
Max deck inclination deg 2

Graph 2.4

e) Dcase 5
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
142

Fig 2.5

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.054469/3.375 =.0161 < 0.6 (PASS)

Dynamical Stability
heeling arm Pass
A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

Page
143


Draft at AP m 21.71
WL Length m 305.201
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.89
KB m 11.008
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 358.649
KMt m 22.73
KML m 369.657
MTc tonne.m 4201.76
tonne.m 26419.186

Table 2.10: Equilibrium Analysis

Page
144

Graph 2.5

f) Dcase 6

Fig 2.6

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.05802/3.372 =.0172 < 0.6 (PASS)

-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
145

heeling arm Pass
A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
arm) 103.3 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.892

Page
146

KB m 11.008
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 364.846
KMt m 22.73
KML m 375.855
tonne.m 26418.615

Graph 2.6

-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
147

g) Dcase 7

Fig 2.7

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.059571/3.372 =.0177 < 0.6 (PASS)
heeling arm Pass
A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
arm) 103.4 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

Page
148


Draft at FP m 22.13
WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.895
KB m 11.008
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 367.892
KMt m 22.73
KML m 378.899
tonne.m 26418.103


Page
149

Graph 2.7

h) Dcase 8

Fig 2.8
RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.060571/3.367 =.018 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
A = 0.064 m
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
150

n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
arm) 103.4 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.896

Page
151

KB m 11.008
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 367.785
KMt m 22.73
KML m 378.793
tonne.m 26417.603
Trim angle (+ve by stern) deg 0


Graph 2.8

i) Dcase 9
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
152

Fig 2.9

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0.06102/3.364 =.0181 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
arm) 103.4 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

Page
153


WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.899
LCB from Amidsh. (+ve fwd) m 1.208
LCF from Amidsh. (+ve fwd) m 1.059
KB m 11.007
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 364.526
KMt m 22.73
KML m 375.533
tonne.m 26417.1
Table 2.18: Table for equilibrium analysis

Page
154

Graph 2.9

j) Dcase 10

Fig 2.10

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0. 058367/3.36 =.0174 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
155

A = 0.064 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
angle of max. GZ above heel arm 58 deg
arm) 103.5 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
22.2) deg -22.2
Intermediate values

Trim (+ve by stern) m 0.048
WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.553
Block Coeff. 0.899

Page
156

KB m 11.007
KG fluid m 18.554
BMt m 11.722
BML m 358.114
KMt m 22.73
KML m 369.122
tonne.m 26416.614

Graph 2.10
k) Dcase 11
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
157

Fig 2.11

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0. 056122/3.405 =.0165 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
A = 0.065 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
angle of max. GZ 57 deg
angle of max. GZ above heel arm 57 deg 57
arm) n/a deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
24.8) deg -24.8
Intermediate values

Page
158

Heel to Starboard degrees -0.6
WL Length m 305.201
WL Beam m 56.523
Block Coeff. 0.917
KB m 10.883
KG fluid m 18.662
BMt m 11.788
BML m 350.871
KMt m 22.671
KML m 361.754
tonne.m 25429.351


Page
159

Graph 2.11
l) Dcase 12
Tanks Damaged: Ballast starboard 1, Ballast bottom 1.1,Cargo1.1, ER Ballast starboard 2, ER
Ballast bottom 2.1, ER Ballast bottom 2.2.

Fig 2.12

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0. 051/3.368 =.0151 < 0.6 (PASS)

Ratio of areas type 2 - general wind heeling arm Pass
A = 0.059 m
n = 2
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
160

gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
angle of first GZ peak 55.5 deg
angle of max. GZ 55.5 deg 55.5
arm) 99.9 deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
24.9) deg -24.9
Intermediate values
Area2 (under HA), from -24.9 to 0.1
deg. m.deg 1.41


WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.524
Block Coeff. 0.957

Page
161

KB m 10.992
KG fluid m 18.672
BMt m 12.076
BML m 353.065
KMt m 23.068
KML m 364.057
tonne.m 29016.684


Graph 2.12

m) Dcase 13
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
Max GZ = 3.368 m at 55.5 deg.
G
Z

m

Page
162

Tanks Damaged: ER, ER Ballast starboard 2, ER Ballast starboard 1, ER Ballast bottom 1.1,ER
Ballast bottom 2.1, Ballast tank Aftmost.

Fig 2.13

RESULT
st1
(GZ
st1
) / GZ
max
= 0. 031/3.27 =.0095 < 0.6 (PASS)

heeling arm Pass
A = 0.062 m
n = 2
gust ratio 1
to the lesser of
angle of max. GZ 56 deg
angle of max. GZ above heel arm 56 deg 56
arm) n/a deg
heel arm)
25.0 (-
24.6) deg -24.6
Intermediate values

Page
163


Draft at AP m 23.39
Trim (+ve by stern) m 2.207
WL Length m 305.208
WL Beam m 56.522
Block Coeff. 0.904
KB m 11.225
KG fluid m 18.708
BMt m 11.906
BML m 333.069
KMt m 23.13
KML m 344.293
tonne.m 29152.03
Trim angle (+ve by stern) deg 0.4


Page
164

Graph 2.13

2.2) Intact Stability
a) Completely full case
Time T delta Vw Area z l A
hr m tonne knot m2 m m
48 8.985 157829 100 9957.593 26.59718298 22.10468 0.237083
43.2 9.827 172789 100 9700.6146 27.05259358 22.13909 0.211296
38.4 11.253 197673 100 9265.3994 27.82822466 22.20172 0.17691
33.6 12.112 212744 100 9003.2326 28.29837501 22.24238 0.160019
28.8 13.562 238227 100 8560.6926 29.09764175 22.31664 0.136331
24 14.289 251005 100 8338.8122 29.50134444 22.35684 0.126264
19.2 15.72 276123 100 7902.071 30.30257354 22.44257 0.109184
14.4 16.538 290498 100 7652.4174 30.7649743 22.49597 0.100742
9.6 18.242 320417 100 7132.3566 31.74021996 22.61922 0.085594
4.8 20.062 352405 100 6576.8926 32.80338207 22.77238 0.07225
0 22.066 386546 100 5965.2718 34.00702383 22.97402 0.060272
Table 2.27: Complete full case

0 hr:
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-25 0 25 50 75 100
G
Z

m

Page
165

Graph 2.14

Max GZ = 3.632 : Area1/Area2 shall be greater than (>) 140 % = 413.698 (PASS)

4.8 hr:

Graph 2.15

Page
166

9.6 hr:

Graph 2.16
14.4 hr:

Graph 2.17

Page
167

19.2 hr:

Graph 2.18
24 hr:

Graph 2.19

Page
168

28.8 hr:

Graph 2.20

33.6 hr:

Graph 2.21

Page
169

38.4 hr:

Graph 2.22

43.2 hr:

Graph 2.23

Page
170

48 hr:

Graph 2.24

b) Day 6 type
0 13.871 243662 100 8466.3858 29.26897179 22.33347 0.131921
4.8 12.594 221221 100 8856.1262 28.56323875 22.26624 0.151535
9.6 11.35 199364 100 9235.795 27.88119939 22.2062 0.174884
14.4 11.806 207386 100 9096.6238 28.13062553 22.22763 0.165746
19.2 11.142 195724 100 9299.2766 27.76763904 22.19664 0.179284
24 11.034 193812 100 9332.2382 27.70872632 22.19173 0.181654

Table 2.28: Day 6 type
0 hr:

Page
171

Graph 2.25

4.8 hr:

Graph 2.26

Page
172

9.6 hr:

Graph 2.27

14.4 hr:

Graph 2.28

Page
173

19.2 hr:

Graph 2.29
24 hr:

Graph 2.30

Page
174

c) Day 11 type
0 15.675 275345 100 7915.805 30.27723359 22.43973 0.109669
4.8 14.658 257476 100 8226.1934 29.70707967 22.37808 0.121544
9.6 13.575 238474 100 8556.725 29.10484233 22.31734 0.136131
14.4 12.57 220815 100 8863.451 28.55003177 22.26503 0.151931
19.2 11.59 203598 100 9162.547 28.01239517 22.2174 0.169975
24 11.344 199261 100 9237.6262 27.87792177 22.20592 0.175007
Table 2.29: Day 11 type

0 hr:

Graph 2.31
4.8 hr:

Page
175

Graph 2.32
9.6 hr:

Graph 2.33
14.4 hr:

Page
176

Graph 2.34
19.6 hr:

Graph 2.35
24 hr:

Page
177

Graph 2.36

2.3) International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974(SOLAS)
Chapter II-1, paper B-1

Regulation 25-1:
1. The requirements in this part shall apply to cargo ships over 100 m in length (Ls) but shall
exclude those ships which are shown to comply with subdivision and damage stability
regulations in other instruments developed by the Organization.

2. Any reference hereinafter to regulations refers to the set of regulations contained in this part.

3. The administration may for a particular ship or ground of ships accepts alternative
arrangements, if it is satisfied that at least the same degree of safety as represented by these
regulations is achieved. Any administration which allows such alternative arrangements shall
communicate to the organization particulars thereof.

Requirements 25-2:
For the purpose of these regulations, unless expressly provided otherwise:
Subdivision load lone is a waterline used in determining the subdivision of the ship.

1.2 Deepest subdivision load lone is the subdivision load line which corresponds to the summer
draught to be assigned to the ship.

Page
178

1.3 Partial load line is the light ship draught plus 60% of the difference between the light ship
draught and deepest subdivision load line.

2.1 Subdivision length of the ship (Ls) is the greatest projected moulded length of that part of the
ship at or below deck or decks limiting the vertical extent of flooding with the ship at the deepest
subdivision load line.

2.2 Mid-length is the mid-point of the subdivision length of the ship.

2.3 Aft terminal is the aft limit of the subdivision length.

2.4 Forward terminal is the forward limit of the subdivision length.

3 Breadth (B) is the greatest moulded breadth of the ship at or below the deepest subdivision
load line.

4 Draught (d) is the vertical distance from the moulded baseline at mid-length to the waterline in
question.

5 Permeability () of a space is the proportion of the immersed volume of that space which can
be occupied by water.
Regulation 25-3:

1. These regulations are intended to provide ships with a minimum standard of subdivision.

2. The degree of subdivision to be provided shall be determined by the required subdivision
index R, as follows:
R = (0.002 + 0.0009Ls)
1/3
where Ls is in meters.

Regulation 25-4:

1. The attained subdivision index A, calculated in accordance with thios regulation, shall not be
less than the required subdivision index R, calculated in accordance with paragraph 2 of
regulation 25-3.

2. The attained subdivision index A shall be calculated for the ship by the following formula:
A = _ p
i
s
i

Where:
i represents each compartment or group of compartments under consideration.
p
i
accounts for the probability that only the compartment or group of
compartments under consideration may be flooded, disregarding any
horizontal subdivision,
s
i
accounts for the probability of survival after flooding the compartment or
group of compartments under consideration, including the effects of any
horizontal subdivision.

Page
179

3. In calculating A, level trim shall be used.

4. This summation covers only those cases of flooding which contribute to the value of the
attained subdivision index A.

5. The summation indicated by the above formula shall be taken over the ships length for all
cases of flooding in which a single compartment or two or more adjacent compartments are
involved.

6. Wherever wing compartments are fitted, contribution to be summation indicated by the
formula shall be taken for all cases of flooding in which wing compartments are involved; and
additionally, for all cases of simultaneous flooding or a wing compartment or compartments, be
the adjacent inboard compartment or compartments assuming a rectangular penetration which
extends to the ships centerline, but excludes damage to any centerline bulkhead.

7. The assumed vertical extent of damage is to extend from the baseline upwards to any
watertight horizontal subdivision above the waterline or higher. However, if a lesser extent will
give a more severe result, such extent is to be assumed.

8. If pipes, ducts or tunnels are situated within assumed flooded compartments, arrangements are
to be made to ensure that progressive flooding cannot thereby extend to compartments other than
those assumed flooded. However, the administration may permit minor progressive flooding if it
is demonstrated that its effects can be easily controlled and the safety of the ship is not impaired.

9. In the flooding calculations carried out according to the regulation only one breach of the hull
need to be assumed.

Regulation 25-5:

1. The factor p
i
shall be calculated according to paragraph 1.1 as appropriate, using the following
notations:

x
1
= the distance from the aft terminal of Ls to the foremost portion of the aft end
of the compartment being considered;
x
2
= the distance from the aft terminal of Ls to the aftermost portion of the
forward end of the compartment being considered;

E
1
= x
1
/ Ls ; E
2
= x
2
/ Ls ; E = E
1
+ E
2
-1

J = E
2
E
1

J = J E, if E_0
J = J + E, if E<0

The maximum non-dimensional damage length
J
max
= 48/Ls , but not more than 0.24.

Page
180

The assumed distribution density of damage location along the ships length
a = 1.2 + 0.8 E, but not more than 1.2.

The assumed distribution function of damage location along the ships length
F = 0.4 + 0.25E (1.2 + a)
Y = J/ J
max

p = F
1
J
max

q = 0.4 F
2
(J
max
)
2

F
1
= y2- y
3
/3 if y<1
F
1
= y 1/3 otherwise

F
2
= y
3
/3 y
4
/12 if y<1
F
2
= y
2
/2 y/3 + 1/12 otherwise

1.1 The factor p
i
is determined for each single compartment.

1.1.1 Where the compartment considered extends over the entire ship length Ls:
p
i
= 1

1.1.2 Where the aft limit of the compartment considered coincides with the aft terminal:
p
i
= F + 0.5ap + q

1.1.3 Where the forward limit of the compartment considered coincides with the forward
terminal:
p
i
= 1 F +0.5ap

1.1.4 When both ends of the compartment considered are inside the aft and forward terminals of
the ship length Ls:
p
i
= ap

1.1.5 In applying the formulae of paragraphs 1.1.2, 1.1.3 and 1.1.4, where the compartment
considered extends over the mid-length, these formulae values shall be reduced by an amount
determined according to the formulae for q, in which F2

is calculated taking y to be J/ J
max
.

2 Wherever wing compartments are fitted, the p
i
value for a wing compartment shall be obtained
by multiplying the value, as determined in paragraph 3, by the reduction factor r according to
paragraph 2.2, which represents the probability that the inboard spaces will not be flooded.

2.1 The p
i
value for the case of simultaneous flooding of a wing and adjacent inboard
compartment shall be obtained by using the formulae of paragraph 3, multiplied by the factor
(1-r).

2.2 The reduction factor r shall be determined by the following formulae:

Page
181

For J _ 0.2 b/B:
r = b/B (2.3 + 0.08/ (J + 0.02)) + 0.1, if b/B _ 0.2
r = 0.016/ (J + 0.02) + b/B + 0.36, if b/B > 0.2

For J < 0.2 b/B the reduction factor r shall be determined by linear interpolation between:
r = 1, for J = 0
and
r = as for the case where J _ 0.2 b/B for J = 0.2 b/B,
where:
b = the mean transverse distance in meters measured at right angles to the centerline at
the deepest subdivision load line between the shell and a plane through the outermost portion of
and parallel to that part of the longitudinal bulkhead which extends between the longitudinal
limits used in calculating the factor p
i
.

3 To evaluate p
i
for the compartments taken singly the formulae in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be
applied directly.

3.1 To evaluate the p
i
values attributable to groups of compartments the following applies:

for compartments taken by pairs:
p
i
= p
12
p
1
p
2

p
i
= p
23
p
2
p
3
etc

for compartments taken by groups of three:
p
i
= p
123
p
12
p
23
+ p
2

p
i
= p
234
p
23
p
34
+ p
3
etc.

for compartments taken by groups of four:
p
i
= p
1234
p
123
p
234
+ p
23

p
i
= p
2345
p
234
p
345
+ p
34
etc.
where:
p
12,
p
23,
p
34
etc.,
p
123,
p
234,
p
345
etc., and
p
1234,
p
2345,
p
3456
etc.
shall be calculated according to the formulae in paragraphs 1 and 2 for a single compartment
whose non-dimensional length J corresponds to that of a group consisting of the compartments
indicated by the indices assigned to p.

3.2 The factor p
i
for a group of three or more adjacent compartments equals zero if the non-
dimensional length of such a group minus the non-dimensional length of the aftermost and
foremost compartments in the group is greater than J
max
.

Requirements 25-6:

1 The factor s
i
shall be determined for each compartment or group of compartments according to
the following:

Page
182

1.1 In general for any condition of flooding from any initial loading condition s shall be:
s = C \0.5 (GZ
max
) (range)
with:
C = 1, if 0
e
_ 25 deg,
C = 0, if 0
e
> 30 deg,
C = \ (30- 0
e
) /5 otherwise
GZ
max
= maximum positive righting lever (meters) within the range as given below but not more
than 0.1 m;

Range = range of positive righting levers beyond the angle of equilibrium (degrees) but not more
than 20 deg, however, the range shall be terminated at the angle where openings are not capable
of being closed weather-tight are immersed.

0
e
= final equilibrium angle of heel (degrees)

1.2 s = 0 where the final waterline taking into account sinkage, heel and trim, immerses the lower
edge of openings through which progressive flooding may take place. Such opening shall include
air-pipes, ventilators and openings which are closed by means of weather-tight doors or hatch
covers, and may exclude those openings closed by means of watertight manhole covers and flush
scuttles, small watertight hatch covers which maintain the high integrity of the deck, remotely
operated watertight doors, access doors and access hatch covers of watertight integrity, normally
closed at sea and side scuttles of the non-opening type. However, if the compartments so flooded
are taken into account in the calculations the requirements of this regulation shall be applied.

1.3 For each compartment or group of compartments s
i
shall be weighted according to draught
considerations as follows:

s
i
= 0.5 s
l
+ 0.5 s
p

where:
s
l
= s-factor at the deepest subdivision load line.
s
p
= s-factor at the partial load line

2 For all compartments forward of the collision bulkhead, the s- value, calculated assuming the
ship to be at its deepest subdivision load line and with assumed unlimited vertical extent of
damage, is to be equal to 1.

3 Wherever a horizontal subdivision is fitted above the waterline in question the following
applies.

3.1 The s-value for the lower compartment or group of compartments shall be obtained by
multiplying the value as determined in paragraph 1.1 by the reduction factor v according to
paragraph 3.3, which represents the probability that the spaces above the horizontal subdivision
will not be flooded.

Page
183

3.2 In cases of positive contribution to index A due to simultaneous flooding of the spaces above
the horizontal subdivision the resulting s-value for such a compartment or group of
compartments shall be obtained by an increase of the value as determined by paragraph 3.1 by
the s-value for simultaneous flooding according to paragraph 1.1, multiplied by the factor (1-v).

3.3 The probability factor v
i
shall be calculated according to:
v
i
= (H-d)/ (H
max
d) for the assumed flooding up to the horizontal
subdivision load line, where H is to be restricted to
a height of H
max
.

v
i
= 1, if the uppermost horizontal subdivision in way of
the assumed damaged region is below H
max
.
where:
H = is the height of the horizontal subdivision above the baseline (meters) which
is assumed to limit the vertical extent of damage.
H
max
= is the maximum possible vertical extent of damage above the baseline
(meters), or

H
max
= d + 0.056 Ls (1-Ls/500), if Ls_250 m
H
max
= d + 7, if Ls>250 m
whichever is less.

Regulation 25-7:

For the purpose of the subdivision and damage stability calculations of the regulations, the
permeability of each space or part of a space shall be as follows:

Spaces Permeability
Appropriated to stores 0.60
Occupied by accommodation 0.95
Occupied by machinery 0.85
Void spaces 0.95
Dry cargo spaces 0.70
Intended for liquid 0 or 0.95
Regulation 25-8:

1 The master of the ship shall be supplied with such reliable information as is necessary to
enable him by rapid and simple means to obtain accurate guidance as to the stability of the ship
under varying conditions of service. The information shall include:
a curve of minimum operational height (GM) versus draught which assumes compliance with the
relevant intact stability requirements of regulation 25-1 to 25-6, alternatively a corresponding
curve of the maximum allowable vertical centre of gravity (KG) versus draught, or with the
equivalents of either of those curves;
instructions concerning the operation of cross-flooding arrangements; and
all other data and aids which might be necessary to maintain stability after damage.

Page
184

2 There shall be permanently exhibited or readily available on the navigating bridge, for the
guidance of the officer in charge of the ship plans showing clearly for each deck and hold the
boundaries of the watertight compartments, the openings therein with the means of closure and
position of any controls thereof, and arrangements for the correction of any list due to flooding,
In addition, booklets containing the afore mentioned information shall be made available to the
officers of the ship.
3 In order to provide the information referred to in paragraph 1.1, the limiting GM (or KG)
values to be used, if they have been determined from the considerations related to the subdivision
index, the limiting GM shall be varied linearly between the deepest subdivision load line and the
partial load line. In such cases, for draughts below the partial load line if the minimum GM
requirement at this draught results from the calculation of the subdivision index, then this GM
value shall be assumed for lesser draughts, unless the intact stability requirements apply.

Requirement 25-9:
1 The number of openings in watertight subdivisions is to be kept to a minimum compatible with
the design and proper working of the ship. Where penetration of watertight bulkheads and
internal decks are necessary for access, piping, ventilation, electrical cables, etc., arrangements
are to be made to maintain the watertight integrity. The administration may permit relaxation in
the watertight-ness of openings above the freeboard deck, provided that it is demonstrated that
any progressive flooding can be easily controlled and that the safety of the ship is not impaired.
2 Doors provided to ensure the watertight integrity of internal openings which are used while at
sea to be sliding watertight doors capable of being remotely closed from the bridge and are also
to be operated locally from each side of the bulkhead. Indicators are to be provided at the control
position showing whether the doors are open or closed, and an audible alarm is to be provided at
the door closure. The power, control and indicators are to be operable in the event of main power
failure. Particular attention is to be paid to minimizing the effect of control system failure. Each
power-operated sliding watertight door shall be provided with an individual hand-operated
mechanism. It shall be possible to open and close the door by hand at the door itself from both
sides.
3 Access doors and access hatch covers normally closed at sea, intended to ensure the watertight
integrity of internal openings, shall be provided with means of indication locally, and on the
bridge showing whether these doors or hatch covers are open or closed. A notice has to be
affixed to each such door or hatch cover to the effect that it is not be left open. The use of such
doors and hatch covers shall be authorized by the officer of the watch.
4 Watertight doors or ramps of satisfactory construction may be fitted to internally subdivide
large cargo spaces, provided that the administration is satisfied that such doors or ramps are
essential. These doors or ramps may be hinged, rolling or sliding doors or ramps, but shall not be
remotely controlled. Such doors or ramps shall be closed before the voyage commences and shall
be kept closed during navigation. The time of opening such doors and ramps in port and of
closing them before the ship leaves port shall be entered in the log book. Should any of the doors
or ramps be accessible during the voyage, they shall be fitted with a device which prevents
unauthorized opening.
5 Other closing appliances which are kept permanently closed at sea to ensure the watertight
integrity of internal opening shall be provided with a notice which is to be affixed to each such
closing appliance to the effect that it is to be closed. Manholes fitted with closely bolted covers
need not be so marked.

Page
185

Requirement 25-10:
1 All external openings leading to compartments assumed intact in damage analysis, which are
below the final damage waterline and required to be watertight.
2 External openings required to be watertight in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be of
sufficient strength and, except for cargo hatch covers, shall be fitted with indicators on the
bridge.
3 Openings in the shell plating below the deck limiting the vertical extent of damage shall be
kept permanently closed while at sea. Should any of the openings be accessible during the
voyage, they shall be fitted with a device which prevents unauthorized opening.
4 Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph 3, the administration may authorize that
particular doors may be opened at the discretion of the master, if necessary for the operation of
the ship and provided that the safety of the ship is not impaired.
5 Other closing appliances which are kept permanently closed at sea to ensure the watertight
integrity of external openings shall be provided with a notice affixed to each appliance to the
effect that it is to be kept closed. Manholes fitted with closely bolted covers need not be so
marked.

2.4 Draft and Weight Calculation for Full Load And Ballast Cases:

Page
186

Fig. Modelled FPSO in Hydromax
Full Load Case (all cargo tanks full, heel and trim 0deg)
Tank and Load Distribution
Item Name Quantity
Weight
(tonne) Long. Arm
Vertical
Arm
Transverse
Arm
Free
Surface
moment FSM type
Lightship 1 26000 152.6 15 0 0
Machinery 1 2542 24.6 10 0 0
Accommodation 1 1803 23 35.8 0 0
m03 tpr1 1 193.1 62.72 36.306 0 0
m03 tpr2/1 1 226.4 77.4 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr2/2 1 226.4 93.3 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/1 1 226.4 109.2 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/2 1 226.4 125.1 36.488 0 0
m03 mpr1 1 539.5 143.421 42.368 0.021 0
m03 mpr2 1 829.2 166.051 46.522 -0.684 0
m03 mpr3 1 546.1 185.81 42.442 -0.022 0
m03 mpr4 1 542.8 207.06 42.532 -0.021 0
m03 tpr4/1 1 263.1 225.755 37.696 0.361 0
m03 tpr4/2 1 263.1 241.655 37.696 0.036 0
m03 tpr5 1 223.1 257.363 36.998 0.211 0
m33 1 2284 165.746 39.836 14.482 0

Page
187

m31 1 5028 197.706 44.786 15.791 0
m34 1 1848 164.868 29.05 30.322 0
m51 1 2717 95.503 41.426 -16.738 0
m10 1 1858 120.175 37.3 -15.534 0
m06 1 1858 135.325 37.296 -15.534 0
m23 1 2174 194.568 39.996 -15.705 0
m13 1 1179 218.684 40.972 -14.399 0
m12 1 2031 164.859 39.076 -16.313 0
m42 1 2503 124.894 41.1 15.892 0
m01 1 126.7 275.722 59.653 10.106 0
Turret 1 2000 315.2 29 0 0
Ballast bottom1.1 98% 1145 53.4 1.225 18.51 0 Maximum
Ballast bottom1.2 98% 1028 53.4 1.225 0 0 Maximum
Ballast bottom1.3 98% 1145 53.4 1.225 -18.51 0 Maximum
Ballast bottom2.1 2% 23.08 77.85 0.025 18.51 15393.504 Maximum
Ballast bottom2.2 2% 20.73 77.85 0.025 0 11164.416 Maximum
Ballast bottom2.3 2% 23.08 77.85 0.025 -18.51 15393.504 Maximum
Ballast
bottom10.1 2% 22.79 272.35 0.025 18.51 15203.459 Maximum
Ballast
bottom10.2 2% 20.48 272.35 0.025 0 11026.582 Maximum

Page
188

Ballast
bottom10.3 2% 22.79 272.35 0.025 -18.51 15203.459 Maximum
Ballast port1 98% 1602 53.4 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
Ballast starboard1 98% 1602 53.4 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
Ballast port2 2% 32.31 77.85 2.773 27.01 32.438 Maximum
Ballast starboard2 2% 32.31 77.85 2.773 -27.01 32.438 Maximum
Ballast por7 2% 32.31 199.35 2.773 27.01 32.438 Maximum
Ballast
starboard10 2% 31.91 272.35 2.773 -27.01 32.037 Maximum
Cargo 1.1 98% 9442 53.4 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 1.2 98% 9731 53.4 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 1.3 98% 9442 53.4 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.1 98% 9327 77.85 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.2 98% 9612 77.85 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.3 98% 9327 77.85 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.1 98% 9327 102.15 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.2 98% 9612 102.15 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.3 98% 9327 102.15 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.1 98% 9327 126.45 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.2 98% 9612 126.45 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.3 98% 9327 126.45 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo5.1 98% 9327 150.75 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 5.2 98% 9612 150.75 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 5.3 98% 9327 150.75 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo6.1 98% 9327 175.05 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 6.2 98% 9612 175.05 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 6.3 98% 9327 175.05 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo7.1 98% 9327 199.35 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum

Page
189

Cargo 7.2 98% 9612 199.35 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 7.3 98% 9327 199.35 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo8.1 98% 9327 223.65 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo8.2 98% 9612 223.65 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 8.3 98% 9327 223.65 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo9.1 98% 9423 248.075 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 9.2 98% 9711 248.075 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 9.3 98% 9423 248.075 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo10.1 98% 9212 272.35 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 10.2 98% 9493 272.35 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 10.3 98% 9212 272.35 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Slop tank1 50% 2264 289.975 9.325 17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop tank2 50% 2334 289.975 9.325 0 4603.036 Maximum
Slop tank3 50% 2264 289.975 9.325 -17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.1 2% 10.68 289.975 0.025 18.51 7126.621 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.2 2% 9.598 289.975 0.025 0 5168.71 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.3 2% 10.68 289.975 0.025 -18.51 7126.621 Maximum
Slop ballast port 2% 14.96 289.975 2.773 27.01 15.018 Maximum
Slop ballast
starboard 2% 14.96 289.975 2.773 -27.01 15.018 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.1 98% 1011 17.1 1.225 14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.2 98% 1011 17.1 1.225 -14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.1 98% 1113 32.85 1.225 14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.2 98% 1113 32.85 1.225 -14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast port1 98% 977.1 17.1 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast
starboard1 98% 977.1 17.1 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast port2 98% 1075 32.85 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast
starboard2 98% 1075 32.85 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
FW 50% 259.9 4.8 25.3 4.75 685.864 Maximum
FW 50% 259.9 4.8 25.3 -4.75 685.864 Maximum
Diesel tank 50% 4321 13.45 9.325 0 73708.28 Maximum
Ballast tank
forward FP 25% 3044 299.95 3.726 0 77878.977 Maximum
Ballast Tank aft
A.P. 98% 11517 4.8 11.172 0 0 Maximum

Total
Weight= 386360 LCG=153.102 VCG=16.938 TCG=0.002 563484.67

FS
corr.=1.458

VCG
fluid=18.396

Page
190

Equilibrium Result
Draft Amidsh. m 22
Heel to Starboard degrees 0
WL Length m 305.203
WL Beam m 56.52
Block Coeff. 0.963
Midship Area Coeff. 1
KB m 11.001
KG fluid m 18.396
BMt m 12.003
BML m 348.409
KMt m 23.004
KML m 359.41
RM at 1deg = GMt.Disp.sin(1) tonne.m 31067.323

Ballast Load Case ( minimum draft so that FPSO satisfies stability criteria and heel and
trim 0deg )
Item Name Quantity
Weight
(tonne) Long. Arm
Vertical
Arm
Transverse
Arm
Free
Surface
moment FSM type

Page
191

LlghLshlp 1 26000 132.6 13 0 0
Machlnery 1 2342 24.6 10 0 0
AccommodaLlon 1 1803 23 33.8 0 0
m03 Lpr1 1 193.1 62.72 36.306 0 0
m03 Lpr2/1 1 226.4 77.4 36.488 0 0
m03 Lpr2/2 1 226.4 93.3 36.488 0 0
m03 Lpr3/1 1 226.4 109.2 36.488 0 0
m03 Lpr3/2 1 226.4 123.1 36.488 0 0
m03 mpr1 1 339.3 143.421 42.368 0.021 0
m03 mpr2 1 829.2 166.031 46.322 -0.684 0
m03 mpr3 1 346.1 183.81 42.442 -0.022 0
m03 mpr4 1 342.8 207.06 42.332 -0.021 0
m03 Lpr4/1 1 263.1 223.733 37.696 0.361 0
m03 Lpr4/2 1 263.1 241.633 37.696 0.036 0
m03 Lpr3 1 223.1 237.363 36.998 0.211 0
m33 1 2284 163.746 39.836 14.482 0
m31 1 3028 197.706 44.786 13.791 0
m34 1 1848 164.868 29.03 30.322 0
m31 1 2717 93.303 41.426 -16.738 0
m10 1 1838 120.173 37.3 -13.334 0
m06 1 1838 133.323 37.296 -13.334 0
m23 1 2174 194.368 39.996 -13.703 0
m13 1 1179 218.684 40.972 -14.399 0
m12 1 2031 164.839 39.076 -16.313 0
m42 1 2303 124.894 41.1 13.892 0
m01 1 126.7 273.722 39.633 10.106 0
1urreL 1 2000 313.2 29 0 0
8allasL boLLom1.1 98 1143 33.4 1.223 18.31 0 Maxlmum
8allasL boLLom1.2 98 1028 33.4 1.223 0 0 Maxlmum
8allasL boLLom1.3 98 1143 33.4 1.223 -18.31 0 Maxlmum
8allasL boLLom4.1 2 23.08 126.43 0.023 18.31 13393.3 Maxlmum
8allasL boLLom4.2 2 20.73 126.43 0.023 0 11164.42 Maxlmum
8allasL boLLom4.3 2 23.08 126.43 0.023 -18.31 13393.3 Maxlmum

Page
192

8allasL porL1 98 1602 33.4 13.877 27.01 0 Maxlmum
8allasL sLarboard1 98 1602 33.4 13.877 -27.01 0 Maxlmum
8allasL porL4 2 32.31 126.43 2.773 27.01 32.438 Maxlmum
8allasL sLarboard4 2 32.31 126.43 2.773 -27.01 32.438 Maxlmum
8allasL por7 2 32.31 199.33 2.773 27.01 32.438 Maxlmum
Cargo 1.1 2 192.7 33.4 2.773 17.26 8946.646 Maxlmum
Cargo 1.2 2 198.6 33.4 2.773 0 9793.002 Maxlmum
Cargo 1.3 2 192.7 33.4 2.773 -17.26 8946.646 Maxlmum
Cargo 2.1 2 190.3 77.83 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 2.2 2 196.2 77.83 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum

Page
193

Cargo 2.3 2 190.3 77.83 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 3.1 2 190.3 102.13 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 3.2 2 196.2 102.13 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum
Cargo 3.3 2 190.3 102.13 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 4.1 2 190.3 126.43 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 4.2 2 196.2 126.43 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum
Cargo 4.3 2 190.3 126.43 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo3.1 2 190.3 130.73 2.773 17.26 8837.337 Maxlmum
Cargo 3.2 2 196.2 130.73 2.773 0 9673.371 Maxlmum
Cargo 3.3 2 190.3 130.73 2.773 -17.26 8837.337 Maxlmum
Cargo6.1 2 190.3 173.03 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 6.2 2 196.2 173.03 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum
Cargo 6.3 2 190.3 173.03 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo7.1 2 190.3 199.33 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo 7.2 2 196.2 199.33 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum
Cargo 7.3 2 190.3 199.33 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo8.1 2 190.3 223.63 2.773 17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo8.2 2 196.2 223.63 2.773 0 9673.377 Maxlmum
Cargo 8.3 2 190.3 223.63 2.773 -17.26 8837.342 Maxlmum
Cargo9.1 2 192.3 248.073 2.773 17.26 8928.463 Maxlmum
Cargo 9.2 2 198.2 248.073 2.773 0 9773.099 Maxlmum
Cargo 9.3 2 192.3 248.073 2.773 -17.26 8928.463 Maxlmum
Cargo10.1 2 188 272.33 2.773 17.26 8728.436 Maxlmum
Cargo 10.2 2 193.7 272.33 2.773 0 9334.149 Maxlmum
Cargo 10.3 2 188 272.33 2.773 -17.26 8728.436 Maxlmum
Slop Lank1 2 90.37 289.973 2.773 17.26 4203.221 Maxlmum
Slop Lank2 2 93.34 289.973 2.773 0 4603.036 Maxlmum
Slop Lank3 2 90.37 289.973 2.773 -17.26 4203.221 Maxlmum
Slop ballasL 1.1 98 323.3 289.973 1.223 18.31 0 Maxlmum
Slop ballasL 1.2 98 470.3 289.973 1.223 0 0 Maxlmum
Slop ballasL 1.3 98 323.3 289.973 1.223 -18.31 0 Maxlmum
Slop ballasL porL 98 732.8 289.973 13.877 27.01 0 Maxlmum
Slop ballasL
sLarboard 98 732.8 289.973 13.877 -27.01 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL
boLLom1.1 98 1011 17.1 1.223 14.13 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL
boLLom1.2 98 1011 17.1 1.223 -14.13 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL
boLLom2.1 98 1113 32.83 1.223 14.13 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL
boLLom2.2 98 1113 32.83 1.223 -14.13 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL porL1 98 977.1 17.1 13.877 27.01 0 Maxlmum

Page
194

L8 ballasL
sLarboard1 98 977.1 17.1 13.877 -27.01 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL porL2 98 1073 32.83 13.877 27.01 0 Maxlmum
L8 ballasL
sLarboard2 98 1073 32.83 13.877 -27.01 0 Maxlmum
lW 2 10.4 4.8 23.86 4.73 683.864 Maxlmum
lW 2 10.4 4.8 23.86 -4.73 683.864 Maxlmum
ulesel Lank 2 172.8 13.43 2.773 0 73708.28 Maxlmum
8allasL Lank
forward l 98 11932 299.949 14.604 0 0 Maxlmum
8allasL 1ank afL
A.. 98 11317 4.8 11.172 0 0 Maxlmum

1oLal
WelghL= 140333 LCC=131.601 vCC=17.099 1CC=0.134 329926.6

lS
corr.=3.771

vCC
fluld=20.87

Equilibrium Result
Draft at FP m 8.001
Draft at AP m 8.001
Trim (+ve by stern) m 0
WL Length m 305.2
WL Beam m 56.523
Block Coeff. 0.961
KB m 4
KG fluid m 20.87
BMt m 33.001
BML m 957.812

Page
195

KMt m 37.001
KML m 961.812

Ballast Only Case(all the ballast tanks filled)
Item Name Quantity
Weight
(tonne) Long. Arm
Vertical
Arm
Transverse
Arm
Free
Surface
moment FSM type
Lightship 1 26000 152.6 15 0 0
Machinery 1 2542 24.6 10 0 0
m03 tpr1 1 193.1 62.72 36.306 0 0
m03 tpr2/1 1 226.4 77.4 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr2/2 1 226.4 93.3 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/1 1 226.4 109.2 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/2 1 226.4 125.1 36.488 0 0
m03 mpr1 1 539.5 143.421 42.368 0.021 0
m03 mpr2 1 829.2 166.051 46.522 -0.684 0
m03 mpr3 1 546.1 185.81 42.442 -0.022 0
m03 mpr4 1 542.8 207.06 42.532 -0.021 0
m03 tpr4/1 1 263.1 225.755 37.696 0.361 0
m03 tpr4/2 1 263.1 241.655 37.696 0.036 0
m03 tpr5 1 223.1 257.363 36.998 0.211 0
m33 1 2284 165.746 39.836 14.482 0
m31 1 5028 197.706 44.786 15.791 0
m34 1 1848 164.868 29.05 30.322 0
m51 1 2717 95.503 41.426 -16.738 0
m10 1 1858 120.175 37.3 -15.534 0
m06 1 1858 135.325 37.296 -15.534 0
m23 1 2174 194.568 39.996 -15.705 0
m13 1 1179 218.684 40.972 -14.399 0
m12 1 2031 164.859 39.076 -16.313 0
m42 1 2503 124.894 41.1 15.892 0
m01 1 126.7 275.722 59.653 10.106 0
Turret 1 2000 315.2 29 0 0

Page
196


Page
197

Ballast por7 98% 1583 199.35 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
Cargo 1.1 2% 192.7 53.4 2.773 17.26 8946.646 Maximum
Cargo 1.2 2% 198.6 53.4 2.773 0 9793.002 Maximum
Cargo 1.3 2% 192.7 53.4 2.773 -17.26 8946.646 Maximum
Cargo 2.1 2% 190.3 77.85 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 2.2 2% 196.2 77.85 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 2.3 2% 190.3 77.85 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 3.1 2% 190.3 102.15 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 3.2 2% 196.2 102.15 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 3.3 2% 190.3 102.15 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 4.1 2% 190.3 126.45 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 4.2 2% 196.2 126.45 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 4.3 2% 190.3 126.45 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo5.1 2% 190.3 150.75 2.773 17.26 8837.537 Maximum
Cargo 5.2 2% 196.2 150.75 2.773 0 9673.571 Maximum
Cargo 5.3 2% 190.3 150.75 2.773 -17.26 8837.537 Maximum
Cargo6.1 2% 190.3 175.05 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 6.2 2% 196.2 175.05 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 6.3 2% 190.3 175.05 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo7.1 2% 190.3 199.35 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo 7.2 2% 196.2 199.35 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 7.3 2% 190.3 199.35 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo8.1 2% 190.3 223.65 2.773 17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo8.2 2% 196.2 223.65 2.773 0 9673.577 Maximum
Cargo 8.3 2% 190.3 223.65 2.773 -17.26 8837.542 Maximum
Cargo9.1 2% 192.3 248.075 2.773 17.26 8928.463 Maximum
Cargo 9.2 2% 198.2 248.075 2.773 0 9773.099 Maximum
Cargo 9.3 2% 192.3 248.075 2.773 -17.26 8928.463 Maximum
Cargo10.1 2% 188 272.35 2.773 17.26 8728.436 Maximum
Cargo 10.2 2% 193.7 272.35 2.773 0 9554.149 Maximum
Cargo 10.3 2% 188 272.35 2.773 -17.26 8728.436 Maximum
Slop tank1 2% 90.57 289.975 2.773 17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop tank2 2% 93.34 289.975 2.773 0 4603.036 Maximum

Page
198

Slop tank3 2% 90.57 289.975 2.773 -17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.1 98% 523.5 289.975 1.225 18.51 0 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.2 98% 470.3 289.975 1.225 0 0 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.3 98% 523.5 289.975 1.225 -18.51 0 Maximum
Slop ballast port 98% 732.8 289.975 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
Slop ballast
starboard 98% 732.8 289.975 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.1 98% 1011 17.1 1.225 14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.2 98% 1011 17.1 1.225 -14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.1 98% 1113 32.85 1.225 14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.2 98% 1113 32.85 1.225 -14.13 0 Maximum
ER ballast port1 98% 977.1 17.1 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast
starboard1 98% 977.1 17.1 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast port2 98% 1075 32.85 15.877 27.01 0 Maximum
ER ballast
starboard2 98% 1075 32.85 15.877 -27.01 0 Maximum
FW 2% 10.4 4.8 23.86 4.75 685.864 Maximum
FW 2% 10.4 4.8 23.86 -4.75 685.864 Maximum
Diesel tank 2% 172.8 13.45 2.773 0 73708.28 Maximum
Ballast tank
forward FP 98% 11932 299.949 14.604 0 0 Maximum
Ballast Tank aft
A.P. 98% 11517 4.8 11.172 0 0 Maximum

Total
Weight= 165782 LCG=153.321 VCG=15.800 TCG=0.131 361861.4

FS
corr.=2.183

VCG
fluid=17.983

Equilibrium Result
Draft at FP m 9.772
Draft at AP m 9.108
WL Length m 305.201
WL Beam m 56.522

Page
199

Block Coeff. 0.937
KB m 4.72
KG fluid m 17.983
BMt m 27.977
BML m 812.003
KMt m 32.697
KML m 816.723

Cargo Only Case (only cargo tanks filled)
Item Name Quantity
Weight
(tonne) Long. Arm
Vertical
Arm
Transverse
Arm
Free
Surface
moment FSM type
Lightship 1 26000 152.6 15 0 0
Machinery 1 2542 24.6 10 0 0
m03 tpr1 1 193.1 62.72 36.306 0 0
m03 tpr2/1 1 226.4 77.4 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr2/2 1 226.4 93.3 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/1 1 226.4 109.2 36.488 0 0
m03 tpr3/2 1 226.4 125.1 36.488 0 0
m03 mpr1 1 539.5 143.421 42.368 0.021 0
m03 mpr2 1 829.2 166.051 46.522 -0.684 0
m03 mpr3 1 546.1 185.81 42.442 -0.022 0
m03 mpr4 1 542.8 207.06 42.532 -0.021 0

Page
200

m03 tpr4/1 1 263.1 225.755 37.696 0.361 0
m03 tpr4/2 1 263.1 241.655 37.696 0.036 0
m03 tpr5 1 223.1 257.363 36.998 0.211 0
m33 1 2284 165.746 39.836 14.482 0
m31 1 5028 197.706 44.786 15.791 0
m34 1 1848 164.868 29.05 30.322 0
m51 1 2717 95.503 41.426 -16.738 0
m10 1 1858 120.175 37.3 -15.534 0
m06 1 1858 135.325 37.296 -15.534 0
m23 1 2174 194.568 39.996 -15.705 0
m13 1 1179 218.684 40.972 -14.399 0
m12 1 2031 164.859 39.076 -16.313 0
m42 1 2503 124.894 41.1 15.892 0
m01 1 126.7 275.722 59.653 10.106 0
Turret 1 2000 315.2 29 0 0

Page
201

Ballast
bottom10.1 2% 22.79 272.35 0.025 18.51 15203.46 Maximum
Ballast
bottom10.2 2% 20.48 272.35 0.025 0 11026.58 Maximum
Ballast
bottom10.3 2% 22.79 272.35 0.025 -18.51 15203.46 Maximum
Ballast por7 2% 32.31 199.35 2.773 27.01 32.438 Maximum
Ballast
Cargo 1.1 98% 9442 53.4 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 1.2 98% 9731 53.4 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 1.3 98% 9442 53.4 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.1 98% 9327 77.85 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.2 98% 9612 77.85 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 2.3 98% 9327 77.85 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.1 98% 9327 102.15 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.2 98% 9612 102.15 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 3.3 98% 9327 102.15 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.1 98% 9327 126.45 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.2 98% 9612 126.45 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 4.3 98% 9327 126.45 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo5.1 98% 9327 150.75 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 5.2 98% 9612 150.75 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 5.3 98% 9327 150.75 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum

Page
202

Cargo6.1 98% 9327 175.05 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 6.2 98% 9612 175.05 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 6.3 98% 9327 175.05 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo7.1 98% 9327 199.35 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 7.2 98% 9612 199.35 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 7.3 98% 9327 199.35 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo8.1 98% 9327 223.65 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo8.2 98% 9612 223.65 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 8.3 98% 9327 223.65 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo9.1 98% 9423 248.075 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 9.2 98% 9711 248.075 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 9.3 98% 9423 248.075 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo10.1 98% 9212 272.35 15.877 17.26 0 Maximum
Cargo 10.2 98% 9493 272.35 15.877 0 0 Maximum
Cargo 10.3 98% 9212 272.35 15.877 -17.26 0 Maximum
Slop tank1 2% 90.57 289.975 2.773 17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop tank2 2% 93.34 289.975 2.773 0 4603.036 Maximum
Slop tank3 2% 90.57 289.975 2.773 -17.26 4205.221 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.1 2% 10.68 289.975 0.025 18.51 7126.621 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.2 2% 9.598 289.975 0.025 0 5168.71 Maximum
Slop ballast 1.3 2% 10.68 289.975 0.025 -18.51 7126.621 Maximum
Slop ballast port 2% 14.96 289.975 2.773 27.01 15.018 Maximum
Slop ballast
starboard 2% 14.96 289.975 2.773 -27.01 15.018 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.1 2% 20.64 17.1 0.025 14.13 28922.45 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom1.2 2% 20.64 17.1 0.025 -14.13 28922.45 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.1 2% 22.71 32.85 0.025 14.13 31814.69 Maximum
ER ballast
bottom2.2 2% 22.71 32.85 0.025 -14.13 31814.69 Maximum
ER ballast port1 2% 19.94 17.1 2.773 27.01 20.023 Maximum
ER ballast
ER ballast port2 2% 21.94 32.85 2.773 27.01 22.026 Maximum
ER ballast
FW 2% 10.4 4.8 23.86 4.75 685.864 Maximum
FW 2% 10.4 4.8 23.86 -4.75 685.864 Maximum
Diesel tank 2% 172.8 13.45 2.773 0 73708.28 Maximum
Ballast tank
forward FP 2% 243.5 299.95 0.298 0 77878.98 Maximum
Ballast Tank aft
A.P. 2% 235 4.8 0.228 0 144435.5 Maximum
Total 345696 LCG=160.905 VCG=17.808 TCG=0.063 872013.5

Page
203

Weight=

FS
corr.=2.522

VCG
fluid=20.331

Equilibrium Result
WL Length m 305.292
WL Beam m 56.533
Block Coeff. 0.82
KB m 9.957
KG fluid m 20.331
BMt m 13.428
BML m 389.823
KMt m 23.385
KML m 399.78
MTc tonne.m 4297.95

Page
204

APPENDIX III

WIND AND CURRENT LOADING:

Flow Forces and Center Multipliers:
Flow Angle FL/FLo FT/FTo
(LCP-LCR)/(L/2-
LCR)
( deg)

0 1 0 _
10 1.087 0.174 0.5
20 1.321 0.342 0.5
30 1.5 0.5 0.5
40 1.4 0.643 0.451
50 1.125 0.766 0.415
60 0.75 0.866 0.325
70 0.375 0.94 0.225
80 0.1 0.985 0.133
90 0 1 0
100 -0.1 0.985 -0.133
110 -0.375 0.94 -0.225
120 -0.75 0.866 -0.325
130 -1.125 0.766 -0.415
140 -1.4 0.643 -0.451
150 -1.5 0.5 -0.5
160 -1.321 0.342 -0.5
170 -1.087 0.174 -0.5
180 -1 0 _
Table 3.1

3.1) Environmental Load Calculation: Case 1: Full Load Case (Draft=22m)
Longitudinal Wind Force
Sl.
No.
Above Water
Region H2 H1 L B
Wind
Speed FLo
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m/s) (N)

1
main hull (full
load) 32.3 22.006 305.2 56.52 12 95497.445
2 m03tpr1 40.312 32.3 12.825 6.3 12 9314.6909

Page
205

3 m03tpr2/1 40.676 40.312 15.4 6.3 12 442.28839
4 m03tpr2/2 - - - -
5 m03tpr3/1 - - - -
6 m03tpr3/2 - - - -
7 m03mpr1 52.436 43.092 20.7 6.26 12 12047.268
8 m03mpr2 - - - -
9 m03mpr3 52.584 52.436 20.7 6.26 12 198.26247
10 m03mpr4 52.764 52.584 20.7 6.26 12 241.43098
11 m03tpr4/1 43.092 41.696 15.9 6.26 12 1716.6608
12 m03tpr4/2 - - - -
13 m03tpr5 41.696 40.676 15.4 6.26 12 1239.8792
14 m33 47.372 32.3 27.775 21.38 12 61655.202
15 m31 57.272 49.9 30.3 23.6 12 37526.95
16 m51 50.552 47.692 29.6 22.9 12 13645.985
17 m10 42.3 32.3 14.6 23.845 12 44470.817
18 m06 - - - -
19 m12 45.852 42.3 28.975 23.025 12 16316.723
20 m42 49.9 47.372 33.65 21.38 12 11216.668
m42-m33 49.9 32.3 - 2.222 12 7573.4937
21 m23 47.692 45.852 26.975 23.025 12 8655.9114
22 m13 - - - -
23 m01 119.799 29.8 10.392 13.2 12 288257.13
24 Accommodation 44.8 29.8 20 20 12 55898.937

Net
Force = 665915.74
Table 3.2

Page
206

Transverse Wind Forces:
Sl.
No.
Above Water
Region H2 H1 L LCP (m)
Wind
Speed FTo Moment LCR (m)
(m) (m) (m)
(from
midship) (m/s) (N) (N-m)
(from
midship)
1
main hull (full
load) 32.3 22.006 305.2 -1.074 12 515672.69
-
553832.47
2 m03tpr1 40.312 32.3 12.825 -89.88 12 18962.049 -1704309
3 m03tpr2/1 40.676 32.3 15.4 -75.2 12 23850.394
-
1793549.6
4 m03tpr2/2 40.676 32.3 15.9 -59.3 12 24624.757
-
1460248.1
5 m03tpr3/1 40.676 32.3 15.9 -43.4 12 24624.757
-
1068714.5
6 m03tpr3/2 40.676 32.3 15.4 -27.5 12 23850.394
-
655885.83
7 m03mpr1 52.436 32.3 20.7 -9.179 12 81671.876
-
749666.15
8 m03mpr2 52.584 32.3 20.7 13.451 12 82327.472 1107386.8
9
m03mpr2-
m03mpr1 47.372 32.3 1.93 2.136 12 5565.6941 11888.323
10 m03mpr3 52.584 32.3 20.7 33.21 12 82327.472 2734095.3
11 m03mpr4 52.764 32.3 20.7 54.46 12 83125.814 4527031.8
12 m03tpr4/1 43.092 32.3 5.896 73.155 12 11915.92 871709.11
13 m03tpr4/2 43.092 32.3 15.4 89.055 12 31123.671 2771718.5
14 m03tpr5 41.696 32.3 15.4 104.763 12 26900.576 2818185
15 m33 - - -
16 m31 57.272 52.764 30.3 45.106 12 29778.785 1343201.9
17 m51 50.552 40.676 29.6 -57.097 12 59103.828
-
3374651.3
18 m10 - - -

Page
207

19 m06 - - -
20 m12 - - -
21 m42 49.9 40.676 25.002 -27.706 12 46495.873
-
1288214.6
22 m23 - - -
23 m13 49.644 32.3 10.399 66.084 12 34886.473 2305437.7
24 m01 - - -
25 Accommodation 44.8 29.8 20
-
130.9005 12 55898.937
-
7317198.8
1262707.4
-
1475615.8
-
1.168613

Table 3.3

Page
208

Wind Forces and Moments:
Wind
Angle
Wind
Speed FTo FLo
FL/FL
o
FT/Ft
o FT FL
Resultant
Force
Resultant
Angle
(LCP-LCR)/(L/2-
LCR) LCP
Moment About
Midship
(deg) (m/s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (Deg)
LCR=-
1.168612564m (m) (N-m)

0 12 1 0 0 665915.74 665915.7377 0 _ _ _
10 12 1.087 0.174 219711.09 723850.41 756460.4259 16.88463468 0.5 71.512647 54096487.55
20 12 1.321 0.342 431845.94 879674.69 979958.4055 26.14707607 0.5 71.512647 70079419.72
30 12 1.5 0.5 631353.72 998873.61 1181675.081 32.29549959 0.5 71.512647 84504713.13
40 12 1.4 0.643 811920.88 932282.03 1236270.723 41.05238676 0.451 64.389884 79603328.14
50 12 1.125 0.766 967233.89 749155.2 1223427.531 52.24089041 0.415 59.156833 72374098.17
60 12 0.75 0.866 1093504.6 499436.8 1202160.35 65.45222605 0.325 46.074206 55388583.96
70 12 0.375 0.94 1186945 249718.4 1212929.379 78.11877488 0.225 31.537954 38253311.35
80 12 0.1 0.985 1243766.8 66591.574 1245548.208 86.93509308 0.133 18.164603 22624888.14
90 12 1262707 665916 0 1 1262707.4 0 1262707.431 90 0 -1.1686126 -1475615.769
100 12 -0.1 0.985 1243766.8
-
66591.574 1245548.208 -86.93509308 -0.133 -20.501828 -25536014.71
110 12 -0.375 0.94 1186945 -249718.4 1212929.379 -78.11877488 -0.225 -33.875179 -41088200.37
120 12 -0.75 0.866 1093504.6 -499436.8 1202160.35 -65.45222605 -0.325 -48.411431 -58198303.34
130 12 -1.125 0.766 967233.89 -749155.2 1223427.531 -52.24089041 -0.415 -61.494058 -75233523.74
140 12 -1.4 0.643 811920.88
-
932282.03 1236270.723 -41.05238676 -0.451 -66.727109 -82492771.14
150 12 -1.5 0.5 631353.72
-
998873.61 1181675.081 -32.29549959 -0.5 -73.849872 -87266553.83
160 12 -1.321 0.342 431845.94
-
879674.69 979958.4055 -26.14707607 -0.5 -73.849872 -72369803.13
170 12 -1.087 0.174 219711.09
-
723850.41 756460.4259 -16.88463468 -0.5 -73.849872 -55864505.87
180 12 -1 0 0
-
665915.74 665915.7377 0 _ _ _
1262707.431 at 90 -22600461.72
Table 3.4

Page
209

Current Forces and Moments:
Current
Angle
Current
Speed FTo FLo FL/FLo FT/Fto FT FL
Resultant
Force
Resultant
Angle
(deg) (m/s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (Deg)

0 1.31 1 0 0 96263.67 96263.665 0
10 1.31 1.087 0.174
513903.
2 104638.6 524448.0645 78.49084416
20 1.31 1.321 0.342 1010086 127164.3 1018058.848 82.82432897
30 1.31 1.5 0.5 1476733 144395.5 1483776.161 84.4151549
40 1.31 1.4 0.643 1899079 134769.1 1903855.171 85.94057969
50 1.31 1.125 0.766 2262356 108296.6 2264946.161 87.25919828
60 1.31 0.75 0.866 2557702 72197.75 2558721.089 88.38290143
70 1.31 0.375 0.94 2776259 36098.87 2776493.538 89.25483316
80 1.31 0.1 0.985 2909165 9626.367 2909180.792 89.81020012
90 1.31 2953466.9 96263.67 0 1 2953467 0 2953466.868 90
100 1.31 -0.1 0.985 2909165 -9626.37 2909180.792 -89.81020012
110 1.31 -0.375 0.94 2776259 -36098.9 2776493.538 -89.25483316
120 1.31 -0.75 0.866 2557702 -72197.7 2558721.089 -88.38290143
130 1.31 -1.125 0.766 2262356 -108297 2264946.161 -87.25919828
140 1.31 -1.4 0.643 1899079 -134769 1903855.171 -85.94057969
150 1.31 -1.5 0.5 1476733 -144395 1483776.161 -84.4151549
160 1.31 -1.321 0.342 1010086 -127164 1018058.848 -82.82432897
170 1.31 -1.087 0.174
513903.
2 -104639 524448.0645 -78.49084416
180 1.31 -1 0 0 -96263.7 96263.665 0

2953466.868 at 90
Table 3.5

Net Force (Wind + Current force):
Flow
Angle
Wind
Speed
Current
Speed FT (Wind) FL(Wind)
FT
(Current)
FL(Current
)
FT (Wind +
Current)
FL(Wind +
Current)
Resultant
Force
Result
ant
Angle
(deg) (m/s) (m/s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (deg.)

0 12 1.31 0 665915.7377 0 96263.665 0 762179.4027 762179.4027 0
10 12 1.31 219711.093 723850.4069 513903.235 104638.6039 733614.328 828489.0108 1106609.246 41.52
20 12 1.31 431845.9414 879674.6895 1010085.669 127164.3015 1441931.61 1006838.991 1758661.856 55.07
30 12 1.31 631353.7155 998873.6066 1476733.434 144395.4975 2108087.15 1143269.104 2398144.215 61.53
40 12 1.31 811920.8781 932282.0328 1899079.196 134769.131 2711000.074 1067051.164 2913437.761 68.52
50 12 1.31 967233.8921 749155.2049 2262355.621 108296.6231 3229589.513 857451.828 3341477.527 75.13

Page
210

60 12 1.31 1093504.635 499436.8033 2557702.308 72197.74875 3651206.943 571634.5521 3695683.726 81.10
70 12 1.31 1186944.985 249718.4016 2776258.856 36098.87438 3963203.841 285817.276 3973496.722 85.87
80 12 1.31 1243766.82 66591.57377 2909164.865 9626.3665 4152931.685 76217.94027 4153631.033 88.95
90 12 1.31 1262707.431 0 2953466.868 0 4216174.299 0 4216174.299 90.00
100 12 1.31 1243766.82 -66591.5738 2909164.865 -9626.3665 4152931.685
-
76217.94027 4153631.033 -88.95
110 12 1.31 1186944.985 -249718.402 2776258.856
-
36098.87438 3963203.841 -285817.276 3973496.722 -85.87
120 12 1.31 1093504.635 -499436.803 2557702.308
-
72197.74875 3651206.943
-
571634.5521 3695683.726 -81.10
130 12 1.31 967233.8921 -749155.205 2262355.621
-
108296.6231 3229589.513 -857451.828 3341477.527 -75.13
140 12 1.31 811920.8781 -932282.033 1899079.196 -134769.131 2711000.074
-
1067051.164 2913437.761 -68.52
150 12 1.31 631353.7155 -998873.607 1476733.434
-
144395.4975 2108087.15
-
1143269.104 2398144.215 -61.53
160 12 1.31 431845.9414 -879674.69 1010085.669
-
127164.3015 1441931.61
-
1006838.991 1758661.856 -55.07
170 12 1.31 219711.093 -723850.407 513903.235
-
104638.6039 733614.328
-
828489.0108 1106609.246 -41.52
180 12 1.31 0 -665915.738 0 -96263.665 0
-
762179.4027 762179.4027 0.00

Max Force
(N) = 4216174.299 At 90
Table 3.6

Case 2: Ballast Load Case (Draft=7.895m)
Longitudinal Wind Forces:
Sl.
No.
Above Water
Region H2 H1 L B
Wind
Speed FLo
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m/s) (N)
1
main hull (ballast
load) 32.3 8.985 305.2 56.52 12 191445.6368
2 m03tpr1 40.312 32.3 12.825 6.3 12 9314.690927
3 m03tpr2/1 40.676 40.312 15.4 6.3 12 442.2883914
4 m03tpr2/2 - - - -
5 m03tpr3/1 - - - -
6 m03tpr3/2 - - - -
7 m03mpr1 52.436 43.092 20.7 6.26 12 12047.26755
8 m03mpr2 - - - -
9 m03mpr3 52.584 52.436 20.7 6.26 12 198.2624682
10 m03mpr4 52.764 52.584 20.7 6.26 12 241.4309785
11 m03tpr4/1 43.092 41.696 15.9 6.26 12 1716.660789
12 m03tpr4/2 - - - -
13 m03tpr5 41.696 40.676 15.4 6.26 12 1239.8792
14 m33 47.372 32.3 27.775 21.38 12 61655.20207

Page
211

15 m31 57.272 49.9 30.3 23.6 12 37526.9499
16 m51 50.552 47.692 29.6 22.9 12 13645.98514
17 m10 42.3 32.3 14.6 23.845 12 44470.81679
18 m06 - - - -
19 m12 45.852 42.3 28.975 23.025 12 16316.72287
20 m42 49.9 47.372 33.65 21.38 12 11216.66792
m42-m33 49.9 32.3 - 2.222 12 7573.493691
21 m23 47.692 45.852 26.975 23.025 12 8655.911423
22 m13 - - - -
23 m01 119.799 29.8 10.392 13.2 12 288257.1251
24 Accommodation 44.8 29.8 20 20 12 55898.93722

761863.9293
Table 3.7

Transverse Wind Forces:

Sl. No. Above Water Region H2 H1 L LCP (m) Wind Speed FTo Moment LCR (m)
(m) (m) (m) (from midship) (m/s) (N) (N-m) (from midship)

1 main hull (full load) 32.3 8.985 305.2 -1.074 12 1033779.3 -1110279
2 m03tpr1 40.312 32.3 12.825 -89.88 12 18962.049 -1704309
3 m03tpr2/1 40.676 32.3 15.4 -75.2 12 23850.394 -1793549.6
4 m03tpr2/2 40.676 32.3 15.9 -59.3 12 24624.757 -1460248.1
5 m03tpr3/1 40.676 32.3 15.9 -43.4 12 24624.757 -1068714.5
6 m03tpr3/2 40.676 32.3 15.4 -27.5 12 23850.394 -655885.83
7 m03mpr1 52.436 32.3 20.7 -9.179 12 81671.876 -749666.15
8 m03mpr2 52.584 32.3 20.7 13.451 12 82327.472 1107386.8
9 m03mpr2-m03mpr1 47.372 32.3 1.93 2.136 12 5565.6941 11888.323
10 m03mpr3 52.584 32.3 20.7 33.21 12 82327.472 2734095.3
11 m03mpr4 52.764 32.3 20.7 54.46 12 83125.814 4527031.8
12 m03tpr4/1 43.092 32.3 5.896 73.155 12 11915.92 871709.11
13 m03tpr4/2 43.092 32.3 15.4 89.055 12 31123.671 2771718.5
14 m03tpr5 41.696 32.3 15.4 104.763 12 26900.576 2818185
15 m33 - - -
16 m31 57.272 52.764 30.3 45.106 12 29778.785 1343201.9
17 m51 50.552 40.676 29.6 -57.097 12 59103.828 -3374651.3
18 m10 - - -

Page
212

19 m06 - - -
20 m12 - - -
21 m42 49.9 40.676 25.002 -27.706 12 46495.873 -1288214.6
22 m23 - - -
23 m13 49.644 32.3 10.399 66.084 12 34886.473 2305437.7
24 m01 - - -
25 Accommodation 44.8 29.8 20 -130.9005 12 55898.937 -7317198.8

1780814.1 -2032062.3 -1.1410862
Table 3.8

Page
213

Wind Forces and Moment:
W|nd
Ang|e
W|nd
Speed I1o ILo IL]ILo I1]Ito I1 IL
kesu|tant
Iorce
kesu|tant
Ang|e
(LC-LCk)](L]2-
LCk) LC
Moment
About
M|dsh|p
(deg) (m]s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (Deg)
LCk=-
1.14108616Sm (m) (N-m)

0 12 1 0 0 761863.93 761863.93 0 _ _ _
10 12 1.087 0.174 309861.63 828146.09 884217.28 20.313943 0.3 71.340174 63237037
20 12 1.321 0.342 609038.42 1006422.3 1176336 31.180239 0.3 71.340174 84136716
30 12 1.3 0.3 890407.04 1142793.9 1448726 37.923776 0.3 71.340174 103642113
40 12 1.4 0.643 1143063.3 1066609.3 1364872.6 47.031473 0.431 64.41741 100803038
30 12 1.123 0.766 1364103.6 837096.92 1611022.6 37.837796 0.413 39.184339 93347339
60 12 0.73 0.866 1342183 371397.93 1644636.8 69.669368 0.323 46.101733 73820606
70 12 0.373 0.94 1673963.2 283698.97 1698170.6 80.31433 0.223 31.363481 33603373
80 12 0.1 0.983 1734101.9 76186.393 1733733.6 87.312813 0.133 18.192129 31940932
90 12 1780814.1 718l.9l 0 1 1780814.1 0 1780814.1 90 0 -1.1410862 -2032062.3
100 12 -0.1 0.983 1734101.9 -76186.393 1733733.6 -87.312813 -0.133 -20.474301 -33947869
110 12 -0.373 0.94 1673963.2 -283698.97 1698170.6 -80.31433 -0.223 -33.847633 -37479091
120 12 -0.73 0.866 1342183 -371397.93 1644636.8 -69.669368 -0.323 -48.383903 -79373930
130 12 -1.123 0.766 1364103.6 -837096.92 1611022.6 -37.837796 -0.413 -61.466332 -99023970
140 12 -1.4 0.643 1143063.3 -1066609.3 1364872.6 -47.031473 -0.431 -66.699382
-
104376347
130 12 -1.3 0.3 890407.04 -1142793.9 1448726 -37.923776 -0.3 -73.822346
-
106948333
160 12 -1.321 0.342 609038.42 -1006422.3 1176336 -31.180239 -0.3 -73.822346 -86841363
170 12 -1.087 0.174 309861.63 -828146.09 884217.28 -20.313943 -0.3 -73.822346 -63274994
180 12 -1 0 0 -761863.93 761863.93 0 _ _ _

1780814.1 ot 90 -2892428
Table 3.9

Page
214

CURRENT FORCES AND MOMENTS

Current Angle Current Speed FTo FLo FL/FLo FT/Fto FT FL Resultant Force Resultant Angle
(deg) (m/s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (Deg)

0 1.31 1 0 0 39304.233 39304.233 0
10 1.31 1.087 0.174 209825.53 42723.701 214130.9574 78.49084519
20 1.31 1.321 0.342 412415.69 51920.892 415671.1237 82.82432962
30 1.31 1.5 0.5 602946.92 58956.35 605822.4488 84.41515541
40 1.31 1.4 0.643 775389.74 55025.926 777339.7585 85.94058006
50 1.31 1.125 0.766 923714.68 44217.262 924772.3931 87.25919854
60 1.31 0.75 0.866 1044304.1 29478.175 1044720.031 88.38290157
70 1.31 0.375 0.94 1133540.2 14739.087 1133636.03 89.25483323
80 1.31 0.1 0.985 1187805.4 3930.4233 1187811.935 89.81020014
90 1.31 1205893.8 39304.23 0 1 1205893.8 0 1205893.84 90
100 1.31 -0.1 0.985 1187805.4 -3930.4233 1187811.935 -89.81020014
110 1.31 -0.375 0.94 1133540.2 -14739.087 1133636.03 -89.25483323
120 1.31 -0.75 0.866 1044304.1 -29478.175 1044720.031 -88.38290157
130 1.31 -1.125 0.766 923714.68 -44217.262 924772.3931 -87.25919854
140 1.31 -1.4 0.643 775389.74 -55025.926 777339.7585 -85.94058006
150 1.31 -1.5 0.5 602946.92 -58956.35 605822.4488 -84.41515541
160 1.31 -1.321 0.342 412415.69 -51920.892 415671.1237 -82.82432962
170 1.31 -1.087 0.174 209825.53 -42723.701 214130.9574 -78.49084519
180 1.31 -1 0 0 -39304.233 39304.233 0

1205893.84 at 90
Table 3.10
Net force (wind +current )
Flow
Angl
e
Wind
Speed
Current
Speed FT (Wind) FL(Wind)
FT
(Current) FL(Current)
FT (Wind +
Current)
FL(Wind +
Current)
Resultant
Force
Resultant
Angle
(deg) (m/s) (m/s) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (deg.)

0 12 1.31 0 7.62E+05 0 39304.233 0 801168.1623 801168.1623 0
10 12 1.31 309861.6506 8.28E+05 209825.5282 42723.70127 519687.1788 870869.7924 1014144.447 30.83
20 12 1.31 609038.4167 1.01E+06 412415.6933 51920.89179 1021454.11 1058343.143 1470870.051 43.98
30 12 1.31 8.90E+05 1.14E+06 602946.92 58956.3495 1493353.962 1201752.244 1916850.153 51.18
40 12 1.31 1.15E+06 1.07E+06 775389.7391 55025.9262 1920453.195 1121635.427 2224006.858 59.71
50 12 1.31 1.36E+06 8.57E+05 923714.6814 44217.26213 2287818.269 901314.1826 2458959.066 68.50

Page
215

60 12 1.31 1.54E+06 571397.947 1044304.065 29478.17475 2586489.062 600876.1218 2655367.73 76.92
70 12 1.31 1.67E+06 285698.9735 1133540.21 14739.08738 2807505.449 300438.0609 2823534.996 83.89
80 12 1.31 1.75E+06 76186.39293 1187805.432 3930.4233 2941907.305 80116.81623 2942998.011 88.44
90 12 1.31 1.78E+06 0 1205893.84 0 2986707.924 0 2986707.924 90.00
100 12 1.31 1.75E+06 -76186.39293 1187805.432 -3930.4233 2941907.305 -80116.81623 2942998.011 -88.44
110 12 1.31 1.67E+06 -285698.9735 1133540.21 -14739.08738 2807505.449 -300438.0609 2823534.996 -83.89
120 12 1.31 1.54E+06 -571397.947 1044304.065 -29478.17475 2586489.062 -600876.1218 2655367.73 -76.92
130 12 1.31 1.36E+06 -8.57E+05 923714.6814 -44217.26213 2287818.269 -901314.1826 2458959.066 -68.50
140 12 1.31 1.15E+06 -1.07E+06 775389.7391 -55025.9262 1920453.195 -1121635.427 2224006.858 -59.71
150 12 1.31 8.90E+05 -1.14E+06 602946.92 -58956.3495 1493353.962 -1201752.244 1916850.153 -51.18
160 12 1.31 609038.4167 -1.01E+06 412415.6933 -51920.89179 1021454.11 -1058343.143 1470870.051 -43.98
170 12 1.31 309861.6506 -8.28E+05 209825.5282 -42723.70127 519687.1788 -870869.7924 1014144.447 -30.83
180 12 1.31 0 -7.62E+05 0 -39304.233 0 -801168.1623 801168.1623 0.00

MAX FORCE
(N) = 2986707.924 At 90
Table 3.11

APPENDIX IV
4) STRENGTH AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN-GENERAL
1) Moment Calculation
a) The envelope hogging and sagging vertical wave bending moments were taken as:-
M
wv-hog
= f
prob
0.19 f
wv-v
C
wv
L
2
BC
b
kNm
M
wv-sag
= -f
prob
0.11
fwv-v
C
wv
L
2
B (C
b
+0.7) kNm

Where f
prob
= 1.0 for scantling calculations; Distribution factor, f
wv-v
= 1.0 at amidships;
Wave coefficient, C
wv
= 10.75
L Length between perpendiculars
B Breadth of ship
C
b
= Block coefficient

b) The envelope horizontal wave bending moment at amidships:-

M
h
=f
prob
(0.3 + L/2000) f
wv-h
C
wv
L
2
T
LC
C
b
kNm

Where f
prob
= 1.0 for scantling calculations; Distribution factor, f
wv-h
= 1.0 at amidships;
Wave coefficient, C
wv
= 10.75
T
LC
Draught in loading condition being considered
L Length between perpendiculars
B Breadth of ship

Page
216

C
b
= Block coefficient

2) Load Calculation:

In this section the significance of the all the load components, taken into consideration while
calculating the scantlings of the ship, is mentioned. The formula used in calculating the load
components are also mentioned as in ABS rules (Section 7/2.2)

a) P
hys
- Static sea pressure
P
hys
= p
sw
g (T
LC
z) kN/m
2

Where:
z = vertical coordinate of load point, in m, and is not to be greater than T
LC

p
sw
= density of sea water, 1.025tonnes/m
3

T
LC
= draught in the loading condition being considered, in m
g = acceleration due to gravity, 9.81m/s
2

Fig 4.1

b) P
in-tk
- Static tank pressure
P
intk
= pgZ
tk
kN/m
2

Where:
Z
tk
= vertical distance from highest point of tank, excluding small hatchways, to the load
point

c) P
in-air
- Static tank pressure in the case of overfilling or filling during flow through
ballast water exchange
P
inair
= psw gZ
air
kN/m
2

Page
217

Where:
Z
air
= vertical distance from top of air pipe or overflow pipe to the load point, whichever
is the lesser, sees Figure 7.2.3, in m = Z
tk
+ h
air

h
air
= height of air pipe or overflow pipe, in m, is not to be taken less than 0.76 above
highest point of tank, excluding small hatchways. For tanks with tank top below the
weather deck the height of air-pipe is not to be taken less than 0.76m above deck at side
unless the tanks are arranged with overflow tank

Fig 4.2

d) P
in flood
- The pressure in compartments and tanks in a flooded or damaged condition.
P
in flood
= p
sw
gZ
flood
kN/m
2

Where:
Z
flood
= vertical distance from the load point to the deepest equilibrium waterline in
damaged condition obtained from applicable damage stability calculations or to freeboard
deck if the damage waterline is not given, in m

e) P
in-test
- The tank testing pressure is to be taken as the greater of the following:-
P
in-test
= p
sw
gZ
test
kN/m
2

P
in-test
= p
sw
gZ
tk
+ P
valve
kN/m
2

Where:
Z
test
= vertical distance to the load point, is to be taken as the greater of the following
(a) Top of overflow
(b) 2.4 m above top of tank
Z
tk
= vertical distance from highest point of tank, excluding small hatchways, to the load
point, see above figure
P
valve
= setting of pressure relief valve, if fitted, is not to be taken less than 25 kN/m
2

Page
218

f) P
stat
- The pressure on decks and inner bottom:-
P
stat
= P
deck
kN/m
2

Where:
P
deck
= uniformly distributed pressure on lower decks and decks within superstructures, in
kN/m
2
. Pdeck is not to be taken less than 16 kN/m
2.

g) F
stat
- The load acting on supporting structures and securing systems for heavy units of
cargo, equipment or structural components, is to be taken as:
F
stat
= m
un
g kN
Where:
m
un
= mass of unit not less than 20 tonnes

h) P
drop
- The added overpressure due to sustained liquid flow through air pipe or overflow
pipe in the case of overfilling or filling during flow through ballast water exchange, is to
be taken as 25 kN/m
2
.

i) P
in-dyn
- The simultaneously acting dynamic tank pressure, for tanks in the cargo region,
is to be taken as:
P
in-dyn
= f
(f
v
P
in-v
+ f
t
P
in-t
+ f
lng
P
in-lng
) kN/m
2
Where:
P
in-v
= envelope dynamic tank pressure due to vertical acceleration as defined in ABS
rules for double hull tankers (Section7/3.5.4.1)

P
in-t
= envelope dynamic tank pressure due to transverse acceleration as defined in ABS
rules for double hull tankers (Section7/3.5.4.2)

P
in-lng
= envelope dynamic tank pressure due to longitudinal acceleration as defined in
ABS rules for double hull tankers (Section7/3.5.4.3)

f
v
= dynamic load combination factor for vertical acceleration for considered dynamic
load case.
f
t
= dynamic load combination factor for transverse acceleration for considered dynamic
load case.
f
lng
= dynamic load combination factor for longitudinal acceleration for considered
dynamic load case.
For all the factors given above i.e. f
v
, f
t
, f
lng
refer ABS rules Section7/6.3.1.2).

f heading correction factor, as given below:-
f
= 0.8 for beam sea dynamic load cases

= 1.0 for all other dynamic load cases
For tanks outside the cargo region,
P
in-dyn
= f
(f
v
P
in-v
+ |f
t
P
in-t
|+ |f
lng
P
in-lng
|) kN/m
2

j) P
wv-dyn
- The simultaneously acting dynamic wave pressure, for the port and starboard
side within the cargo tank region for a considered dynamic load case is to be taken as

Page
219

follows, but not to be less than p
sw
g(T
LC
z) below still waterline or less than 0 above
still waterline:

P
wv-dyn
= P
ctr
+ |y| (P
bilge
- P
ctr
)/0.5B
local
between centerline and start of bilge

P
wv-dyn
= P
bilge
+ z (P
WL
-P
bilge
)/TLC between end of bilge and still waterline
P
wv-dyn
= P
WL
10 (z- T
LC
) for side-shell above still waterline

Where:
Pctr = dynamic wave pressure at bottom centerline, to be taken as, f
ctr
P
ex-max
kN/m2

P
bilge
= dynamic wave pressure at z = 0 and y = Blocal/2, to be taken as f
bilge
P
ex-max

kN/m2.

P
WL
dynamic wave pressure at waterline, to be taken as f
WL
P
ex-max
kN/m2

P
ex-max
= envelope maximum dynamic wave pressure, in kN/m2, as defined in ABS rules
(Section7/3.5.2.2).

f
WL
= dynamic load combination factor for dynamic wave pressure at still waterline for
considered dynamic load case.
f
bilge
= dynamic load combination factor for dynamic wave pressure at bilge for
considered dynamic load case
f
ctr
= dynamic load combination factor for dynamic wave pressure at centerline for
considered dynamic load case.
B
local
= local breadth at waterline for considered draught, in m
T
LC
= draught in the loading condition being considered, in m

Page
220

3) Scantling Calculation:

Minimum Net Thickness for Plating and Local Support Members

Table 4.1

Minimum Net Thickness for Primary Support Members

Table 4.2

Page
221

Thickness Requirements for Plating

Table 4.3

Page
222

Section Modulus Requirements for Stiffeners

Table 4.4

Page
223

Design Load Set for Plating and Local Support Members

Page
224

Table 4.5

Specifications of Load Combinations and other Parameters for each Load Set

Page
225

Table 4.6

Design Load Combination

Table 4.7

Page
226

Material Classes or Grade of Structural Members

Table 4.8

Page
227

Materials Grade

Table 4.9

Page
228

Corrosion Addition

Fig 4.1

Page
229

4) Moment curves:
a) Scantling Case
Hogging Case:

Graph 4.1
Sagging Case:

Graph 4.2
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Moment = Long. Pos. = -2328.639 tonne.mx10^3 137.774 m
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
-750
-500
-250
0
250
500
750
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3

Page
230

b) Cargo only
Sagging:
Graph 4.3
Hogging:

Graph 4.4
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-10
-7.5
-5
-2.5
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3

Page
231

c) Ballast Only
Sagging:

Graph 4.5
Hogging:

Graph 4.6

-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-12
-8
-4
0
4
8
12
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
-1200
-800
-400
0
400
800
1200
Buoyancy
Weight
Net Load
Shear
Moment
Moment = Long. Pos. = 1173.655 tonne.mx10^3 145.238 m
Long. Pos. m
L
o
a
d

t
/
m
S
h
e
a
r

t
x
1
0
^
3
M
o
m
e
n
t

t
o
n
n
e
.
m
x
1
0
^
3

Page
232

5) MATLAB Codes:

Page
233

Page
234

Page
235

Page
236

Page
237

Page
238

Page
239

Page
240

Appendix V

5.1 Mooring Line Materials

a) Chain:

Fig A5.1: Stud Chain Link

Weight and Stiffness: Weight and stiffness properties of chain are independent of grade.
Typically, for a mooring analysis, submerged weight per unit length (w)
and axial stiffness (AE) of chain are necessary. The following equations provide these for
any stud chain diameter, D:

w = u.187S
2
N
m
( in mm) eq. 1
AE = 9uuuu
2
N
m
( in mm) eq. 2
Breaking Strength: Breaking strength of a chain is a very important and highly uncertain
parameter. As chain is a series, it is only as strong as its weakest link. The breaking strength
quoted by the manufacturers is the catalogue break strength (CBS) whilst the chain is only tested
up to the proof load.

Proo IooJ = c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm) eq. 3
The factor c is selected according to material grade and whether the CBS or proof load is
required.

Grade (specification) Catalogue Break Strength Proof Load
ORQ (Oil Rig Quality) 21.1 14.0
3 22.3 14.8
3S 24.9 18.0
4 27.4 21.6

Table 5.1: Values of factor c

Drag and Inertia Coefficient: The drag and inertia coefficient apply to the nominal projected
area and volume respectively of a circular cylinder with the given nominal chain diameter.
Reference Drag Coefficient Inertia Coefficient
Huse (1992) 2.6 -
Larsen and Sandvik (1990) 3.0 2.0
Table 5.2: Drag and Inertia coefficients

b) Wire Rope:

Fig A5.2: Six Stranded Wire Rope (IWRC)

Weight and Stiffness: The weight and stiffness of wire ropes vary depending not only on rope
construction but also on the manufacturer. Thus it is always necessary to establish these
properties specifically for the ropes in question. However, the following table gives generic
equations which may be used to compute these properties, as a first esti
construction types based on the nominal diameter of the rope, d.

Construction
Six strand (IWRC)
Spiral strand
Table 5.3: Wire rope weight and stiffness properties
Breaking Strength: The breaking strength is dependent upon the construction of rope as well as
the grade of steel used.

Construction
Six strand (IWRC)
Six strand (IWRC)
Spiral strand
Table 5.4: Nominal breaking strength of steel wire mooring ropes

Drag and Inertia Coefficients: The following

Reference
Huse (1992)
Larsen and Sandvik (1990)
DNV (1996)
Table 5.5: Wire drag and inertia coefficients

Page
241

: Six Stranded Wire Rope (IWRC) Fig A5.3: Spiral Stranded Wire Rope

equations which may be used to compute these properties, as a first estimate, for the different
construction types based on the nominal diameter of the rope, d.
Submerged weight/ length, w Stiffness/ length,
0.034 N (d in mm) 45000
0.043 N (d in mm) 90000
Table 5.3: Wire rope weight and stiffness properties

Ultimate Tensile Stress (N/mm
2
) Breaking S
1770 525
1860 600
1570 900
Drag and Inertia Coefficients: The following table summarizes the drag and inertia coeff.
Drag Coefficient Inertia Coefficient
1.8
Larsen and Sandvik (1990) 1.5
1.8
Table 5.5: Wire drag and inertia coefficients

: Spiral Stranded Wire Rope
mate, for the different
Stiffness/ length, AE
N (d in mm)
N (d in mm)
Breaking Strength (N)
(d in mm)
(d in mm)
(d in mm)
table summarizes the drag and inertia coeff.
Inertia Coefficient
-
2.0
-

Page
242

c) Properties of Typical Systems:

The purpose of a mooring system is to maintain the moored vessel on station with as little an
excursion as possible. Clearly some station keeping tolerance should be achieved which trades
off excursion for reduced line tension and hence reduced mooring size and cost. The following
tables present typical excursions and natural periods for a range of typical mooring systems.

Water Depth (m) Mooring Type Semi-submersible Ship
30 Chain/Wire 30-45% 40-55%
150 Chain 15-25% 30-40%
500 Chain/Wire 25-30% 20-30%
1000 Fibre ropes 5-10% 5-15%
Table 5.6: Extreme excursions as a percentage of water depth

Water Depth (m) Mooring Type Semi-submersible Ship
30 Chain/Wire 30 45
150 Chain 60-120 60-150
500 Chain/Wire 120-180 150-250
1000 Fibre ropes 90-110 120-150
Table 5.7: Typical natural period of mooring systems

d) Guidance, Rules and Regulations:

For drilling rigs, the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) has agreed on
the safety factors on line tensions for survival performance but associated calculation
methodology to arrive at the characteristics tensions is still not uniquely defined. Typically,
when quasi-static analysis methodology is used (i.e. line dynamics is ignored) in survival
conditions, safety factors on line tensions which are commonly applied come from IACS as
presented below.

Condition Safety factor (=Break strength/ Max. Tension)
Intact 1.8
One line removed 1.25
Transient 1.1
Table 5.8: IACS safety factors

Page
243

2) Graphs from Floating structures: a guide for design and analysis

Fig 5.4: Geometric horizontal force-deflection characteristics

Fig 5.5: Horizontal tangent stiffness Fig 5.6: Geometric vertical force-horizontal
def. (excluding elastic effects) characteristics of a 6 catenary SPM

Page
244

Fig 5.7: Effect of elastic flexibility

Fig 5.8: Maximum chain length to Fig 5.9: Max and Min line tensions
Touch down point

Page
245

5.2 Dynamic Contribution to the mooring line tension:
In order to get a better understanding of the dynamics and to provide simple tools for preliminary
assessment of the feasibility of mooring systems, Polderijk (1985) derived approximate analytic
solutions and provided a number of checks for their applicability.
Check 1:
Drag-inertia parameter =
1
2
pdC
d
u
m(1+
l
C
c
)
>>1
Where a is amplitude of oscillation, Ca is added mass coefficient and m and p
I
are mooring line
mass per unit length and density respectively. If this check is satisfied then the effects of line
inertia can be neglected.
Check 2:
K = [
L
1u
(K
d
o
2
2
I) < 1 quosi stotic
> 1 Jynomics go:crncJ by byJroJynomics Jomping

Where L is the suspended length, T is the line tension at the top, K
d
is the damping coefficient
and e is the frequency of motion in radians per sec.
Depending upon the outcome of check 2, the dynamic tension can be calculated from either of
following 2 expressions:
Quasi-static: AI =
_
w
1+
12y
(26)
1.S
_(1-6)
[x-
26
e

j[1 -
6
1-6
+
xe
1-6
u + [x -
e
1-6
-
6
e
:[
Where: o =
wh
1
; y =
wL
AL
; e= 1 - (1 - o)
2
; x = ln|
1+e
1-6
]

Damping Dominated Dynamics: AI =
3n
16

6e
2
1-6
q w
y
2
Fsin [ - tan
-1
(
P
2
)
1.5
-
u

Where: =
w
K
d
ho
2
; F u.u1

5.3 Mooring Calculations:

Mooring line configuration: 62 legs
Environmental Load, H= 5.186 MN
The maximum excursion of system= 15% of water depth

Case 1: Only chain (R3S)

N
chun
= 2;

Determination of diameter:
From Appendix III,1

CBS = N
chun
c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm)

Page
246

c=24.9 (for R3S chain)

Suppose D=100mm

CBS = N
chun
c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm)
> CBS = 17.928 HN

The design strength (the mean load) =
1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.976 HN > S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Thus this diameter is acceptable.

Suppose D=90mm

CBS = N
chun
c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm)
> CBS = 14.844HN

1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = 4.9S HN < S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Thus this diameter is NOT acceptable.

Suppose D=95mm

CBS = N
chun
c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm)
> CBS = 16.S6HN

1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.4S HN > S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Thus this diameter is acceptable.

Suppose D=92mm

CBS = N
chun
c(44 - u.u8)
2
N ( in mm)
> CBS = 1S.444HN

1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.148 HN < S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
So, the minimum acceptable diameter is D=95 mm.
Choose To/wh:
For each pair of chains:
Using eq. 1
w = SS84
N
m
onJ AE = 1.624 1u
9
N
m

Page
247

> wb = 2.876 1u
6
N
>
E
wb
= 1.8uS
From figure: 9.48
>
Io
wb
= 1.S => Io = 4.S14 HN

Dynamic Contribution to Tension:
From Appendix 5;
AI = 4.494 1u
4
N
Thus, net tension T= To+AI
I > 4.S6 HN
Total Line Length:
From figure 9.53; L=1593.75m
The maximum line tension is;
1
wh
= 2.Su7 > I = 6.64 HN
Safety Factor:
socty octor =
Hoximum Icnsion
ultimotc Brcoking Strcngtb (CBS)

> socty octor = u.4u6 < 1.8 ... . rom AppcnJix S
So the mooring line is acceptable.

Case 2: Chain-Wire rope-Chain (depth wise 100m-650m-100m)
The maximum excursion of system= 30% for chain and 20% for wire rope.

N = 2;

From Appendix 1;

CBS = N - u.uS4
2
N ( in mm)
Suppose D=100mm

> CBS = 1u.S HN
1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.S HN < S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Suppose D=200mm

> CBS = 42HN
1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = 14 HN > S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Thus this diameter is more than required.

Page
248

Suppose D=125mm

> CBS = 16.41HN
1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.47 HN > S.186 HN (En:ironmcntol looJ)
Thus this diameter is ACCEPTABLE.

Choose To/wh:
For each pair of ropes:
w = 1u62.S
N
m
onJ AE = 1.41 1u
9
N
m

> wb = u.9 1u
6
N
>
E
wb
|ropc = S.762
Also, for the chain of Diameter =95mm
>
E
wb
|cboin = 1.8uS
From figure: 9.48
>
Io
wb
|ropc = 2.u => Io = 1.8 HN
>
Io
wb
|cboin = 1.S => Io = S.74 HN
From Appendix 5;
AI|ropc = 84.42 N N
Thus, net tension I|ropc = To+AI
> 1.8 HN
AI|cboin = 2.87kN
Thus, net tension I|cboin = To+AI
> S.74 HN
Total Line Length:
From figure 9.53;
L|rope=2080m
L|chain=500m
Equivalent Stiffness K=
YA
L

Where; Y=youngs modulus; A=cross section area ; L=total length
Equivalent Stiffness of combination of Chain and wire rope;

K
eq
= (K
cha|n
-1
+ K
rupe
-1
)
-1

K
chun
= 1.7
HN
m

K
opc
= 1.1S
HN
m

K
cq
= u.686
HN
m

Page
249

Thus Net tension in the combination =2.58 MN
For this tension value the Factor of safety for both the conditions, intact and damage, are within
the limits stated by IACS. Thus, the mooring line is acceptable.

Case 3: Chain-Wire rope-Chain (depth wise 100m-500m-250m)
The maximum excursion of system= 30% for chain and 20% for wire rope.

N = 2;
The friction in the grounded length is frequently ignored in static calculations but its inclusion
simply reduces the horizontal load as one progress from the touchdown point to the anchor. Thus
the anchor load is lower than H, the constant horizontal component of the line tension in the
water column. This tension variation is given by;

I
g
= E - x
g
w;
Where x
g
the grounded length from the touchdown is point and is the coeff. of friction,
commonly taken to be 1 and 0.6 for chain and wire rope respectively.

Thus, I
g
= S.494 HN
From Appendix 1;

CBS = N
opc
u.uS4
2
N ( in mm)

Suppose D=95mm

> CBS = 1u.8S HN
1
3
CBS
> Jcsign strcngtb = S.61 HN > S.494 HN (Ig)
Thus this diameter is ACCEPTABLE.

Choose To/wh:
For each pair of ropes:
w = 61S.7
N
m
onJ AE = 1.624 1u
9
N
m

> wb = u.Su68 1u
6
N
>
E
wb
|ropc = 11.S9
Also, for the chain of Diameter =80mm
For each pair of chain:
w = 24uu
N
m
onJ AE = 1.1S 1u
9
N
m

> wb = u.84 1u
6
N

Page
250

>
E
wb
|cboin = 4.16
From figure: 9.48
>
Io
wb
|ropc = 2.6 => Io = u.797 HN
>
Io
wb
|cboin = 1.S => Io = 1.26 HN
From Appendix 5;
AI|ropc = 8.S6 1u
4
N
Thus, net tension I|ropc = To+AI
> u.88 HN
AI|cboin = u.SS2HN
Thus, net tension I|cboin = To+AI
> 1.79 HN
Total Line Length:
From figure 9.53;
L|rope=2000m
L|chain=1094m
Equivalent Stiffness K=
YA
L

Where; Y=youngs modulus; A=cross section area ; L=total length
Equivalent Stiffness of combination of Chain and wire rope;
K
eq
= (K
cha|n
-1
+ K
rupe
-1
)
-1

K
chun
= u.SS1
HN
m

K
opc
= u.7u8
HN
m

K
cq
= u.Su9
HN
m

Thus Net tension in the combination =1.392 MN
For this tension value the Factor of safety for both the conditions, intact and damage, are within
the limits stated by IACS. Thus, the mooring line is Acceptable. Moreover, this combination
gives the least working tension and least weight of mooring line for same environmental load.
Thus this combination is accepted over the other two.

Page
251

APPENDIX VI
LIST OF UNITS CONSUMING POWER
T
O
P
S
I
D
E

S
Y
S
T
E
M

D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N

DESCRIPTION
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
Y

R
A
T
E
D

P
O
W
E
R
(
K
W
)

1
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Oil Corrosion Inhibitor Injection Pump
(Wellhead)
1 2.2
2
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Wellhead)
1 2.2
3
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Topsides)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
4
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Topsides)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
5
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Topsides)
1 2.2
6
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Scale Inhibitor Injection Pump (Topside)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
7
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Scale Inhibitor Injection Pump (Downhole)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
8
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Scale Inhibitor Injection Pump (Topside &
Downhole)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
9
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump (Wellhead)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
25
10
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump ((Wellhead)
1 x 100%
stand-by
25
11
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump (Downhole) 25
12
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Demulsifier Injection Pump (Topside)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
13
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Demulsifier Injection Pump (Topside)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
14
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Demulsifier Injection Pump (Downhole) 2.2
15
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Demulsifier Injection Pump (Wellhead)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
5.5
16
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Demulsifier Injection Pump (Wellhead)
1 x 100%
stand-by
5.5
17
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Asphaltene Inhibitor Injection Pump
(Topside)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
18
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Downhole)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2

Page
252

19
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
(Topside & Downhole)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
20
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Down Hole Chemical Inhibitors Injection
Pump
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
21
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Down Hole Chemical Inhibitors Injection
Pump
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
22
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Methanol Injection Pump (Topside)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
280
23
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Methanol Injection Pump (Topside)
1 x 100%
stand-by
280
24
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Methanol Injection Pump (Wellhead)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
280
25
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
1 x 100%
cont. Service
280
26
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
1 x 100%
Disc. Cont.
Service
280
27
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Polyelectrolite Injection Pump (Produced
Water)
(Topside)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
28
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Polyelectrolite Injection Pump (Produced
Water)
(Topside)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
29
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Defoamer Injection Pump (Topsides)
1 x 100%
cont. Service
2.2
30
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Defoamer Injectioon Pump (Topsides)
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
31
CHEMICAL INJECTION
SYSTEM
Chemical Transfer Pump 1 x 100% 20
32 MANIFOLD SYSTEM H.P Pump HP1 1 1310
33 MANIFOLD SYSTEM H.P Pump HP2 1 1310
34 MANIFOLD SYSTEM L.P Pumps LP1 1 762
35 MANIFOLD SYSTEM L.P Pumps LP2 1 762
36 MANIFOLD SYSTEM Return Reservoir Pump, HP3 1 20
37 SEPARATION SYSTEM Slurry Pump 1 x 100 % 45
38 SEPARATION SYSTEM Dehydrator feeding Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
270
39 SEPARATION SYSTEM Dehydrator feeding Pump
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
270
40
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Oil Dehydrator
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
750
41
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Oil Desalter
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
750
42
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Produced Water Recycle Pump A
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
330
43
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Produced Water Recycle Pump B
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
330

Page
253

44
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Treated Oil Pump A
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
270
45
CRUDE OIL
TREATMENT
Treated Oil Pump B
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
270
46 FLARE SYSTEM HP Flare KO-Drum pump A
1 x 100%
interm. Service
30
47 FLARE SYSTEM HP Flare KO-Drum pump B
1 x 100%
stand-by
30
48 FLARE SYSTEM LP Flare KO-Drum pump A
1 x 100%
interm. Service
22
49 FLARE SYSTEM LP Flare KO-Drum pump B
1 x 100%
stand-by
22
50
GAS COMPRESSION
SYSTEM - 1st TRAIN
Gas Compression Package (1st train)
1 x 50 %
Cont service
5800
51
GAS COMPRESSION
SYSTEM - 2nd TRAIN
Gas Compression Package (2nd train)
1 x 50 %
Cont service
5800
52
GAS COMPRESSION
SYSTEM - 3rd TRAIN
Gas Compression Package (3rdt train)
1 x 50 %
Stand-by
5800
53
GAS COMPRESSION
SYSTEM
Pre Lube Pump 1 8
54
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Glycol Transfer Pump
1 x 100 %
Discontinous
Service
8
55
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Glycol circulation Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
16
56
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Glycol circulation Pump
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
16
57
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Antifoam and pH Controller Dosing Pump
1 x100 %
Cont. Service
1
58
COOLING MEDIUM
SYSTEM
Cooling Medium Pump A
1 x 100 %
Cont service
210
59
COOLING MEDIUM
SYSTEM
Cooling Medium Pump B
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
210
60
HEATING MEDIUM
SYSTEM
Heating Medium Pump A
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
240
61
HEATING MEDIUM
SYSTEM
Heating Medium Pump B
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
240
62 SEA WATER SYSTEM Sea Water Coarse filter A
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
2.2
63 SEA WATER SYSTEM Sea Water Coarse filter B
1 x 100%
stand-by
2.2
64 HULL Sea Water Lift Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
1200
65 HULL Sea Water Lift Pump
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
1200
66 HULL Oil Circulation Pump 1 100

Page
254

67 HULL Oil Pressure Pump 1 100
68
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Air Scour Blower "A"
1 x 33 %
Cont. Service
60
69
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Air Scour Blower "B"
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
60
70
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Sulphate Removal Pump "A"
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
1700
71
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Sulphate Removal Pump "B"
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
1700
72
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Sulphate Removal Pump "C"
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
1700
73
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Vacuum Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
80
74
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Vacuum Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
80
75
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Water Injection Pump A
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
12200
76
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Water Injection Pump B
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
12200
77
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Water Injection Pump C
1 x 50 %
Cont. Service
12200
78
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing pump 1 x 100% 3
79
WATER INJECTION
SYSTEM
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing pump 1 x 100% 3
80
FRESH WATER
GENERATION SYSTEM
FW maker HP Pump "A"
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
300
81
FRESH WATER
GENERATION SYSTEM
FW maker HP Pump "B"
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
Service
300
82
FRESH WATER
GENERATION SYSTEM
Fresh water Pump A
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
60
83
FRESH WATER
GENERATION SYSTEM
Fresh water Pump B
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
Service
60
84
PRODUCED WATER
SYSTEM
Flotation unit Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
100
85
PRODUCED WATER
SYSTEM
Flotation unit Pump
1 x 100 %
Stand-by
100
86
PRODUCED WATER
SYSTEM
Produced Water Booster Pump
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
100
87
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Gas Dehydration Package
1 x 100 %
Cont. Service
350
88
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Reflux condenser 1 x 100 % 10

Page
255

89
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Glycol Reboiler ** 1 x 100 % 200
90
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Rich / Lean Glycol Exchanger 1 x 100% 200
91
GAS DEHYDRATION
SYSTEM
Glycol cooler 1 x 100% 60
Table 6.1

LIST OF POWER REQUIREMENTS OF VARIOUS FPSO SYSTEMS
PROCESSING
PLANT
Flow Rate Head
Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Shaft
Power
Motor
Eff.
Power of
each unit
m3/h m Kw Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 15 2.2 0.788 2.791878173
Wax Inhibitor
Injection Pump
3 2 25 0.885 28.24858757
Demulsifier
Injection Pump
2 1 5.5 0.84 6.547619048
Methanol Injection
Pump
500 120 5 4 280 0.924 303.030303
Chemical Transfer
Pump
1 1 20 0.885 22.59887006
H.P Pump
HP1(Manifold)
1987.5(300,000BPD) 325 2 2 1310 0.924 1417.748918
L.P Pumps
LP1(Processing)
1325 140 2 2 762 0.924 824.6753247
Return Reservoir
Pump
1 1 20 0.885 22.59887006
Slurry Pump 1 1 45 0.885 50.84745763
Dehydrator feeding
Pump
500 120 2 1 270 0.924 292.2077922
Oil Dehydrator Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 750 0.924 811.6883117
Oil Desalter Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 750 0.924 811.6883117
Produced Water
Recycle Pump
1192.5(180,000BPD) 70 2 1 330 0.924 357.1428571
HP Flare Pump 2 1 30 0.885 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 1325(200,000BPD) 50 2 1 22 0.885 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 1 270 0.924 292.2077922
Gas Compressors Extrapolated N.A. 3 2 5800 0.924 6277.056277
Lube & Glycol
Transfer pump
2 2 8 0.84 9.523809524
Glycol circulation
Pump
2 1 16 0.855 18.71345029
Cooling Medium
Pump
720 70 2 1 210 0.924 227.2727273
Heating Medium
Pump
720 80 2 1 240 0.924 259.7402597
Oil Circulation Pump 350 70 2 2 100 0.924 108.2251082
Air Scour Blower 2 1 60 0.902 66.51884701

Page
256

Sulphate Removal
Pump
2650 (400,000BPD) 140 3 3 1700 0.924 1839.82684
Vacuum Pump 2 2 80 0.917 87.24100327
Water Injection
Pump
860 1550 3 3 6100 0.924 6601.731602
Non Oxydizing
Biocide dosing pump
Extrapolated N.A. 2 2 3 0.788 3.807106599
FW maker HP Pump 220 300 2 1 300 0.924 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 100 130 2 1 60 0.902 66.51884701
Produced Water
Booster Pump
100 210 1 1 100 0.924 108.2251082
Gas Dehydration
Package
Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 350 0.924 378.7878788
Reflux condenser Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 10 0.84 11.9047619
Glycol Reboiler Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 200 0.924 216.4502165
Rich / Lean Glycol
Exchanger
Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 200 0.924 216.4502165
Glycol cooler Extrapolated N.A. 1 1 60 0.902 66.51884701

Table6.2

BALLAST
WATER
CONTROL

Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Shaft
Power
Motor
Eff.
Power of
each unit
Ballast Water Pump 3228(total) 60 4 3 300 0.924 974.025974
OFFLOADING
CRUDE
CONTROL

Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Power
Motor
Eff.
Unit Power
Crude Offloading
Pumps
6625(total) 200 30 6 910 0.924 984.8484848
Tank Cleaning Pump 300 120 1 1 163.5 0.924 176.9480519
Portable Unloading
Standby Pump
1105 200 1 0 910 0.924 0

ACCOMODATION
Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Power
Motor
Eff.
Power of
each unit
Power assuming
1.5Kw per person
N.A. N.A. 210

Electronic System N.A. N.A.
Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Power
Demand
factor
Power of
each unit
Main control
Console
N.A. N.A. 1 1.5 0.6 0.9
Engine Room Panel N.A. N.A. 1 3 1 3
Compass N.A. N.A. 1.2 0.5 0.6
Interior
Communications
N.A. N.A. 2.3 0.2 0.46
Radio N.A. N.A. 4.6 0.4 1.84
Battery Charger N.A. N.A. 3.5 0.2 0.7
Alarm N.A. N.A. 0.1 1 0.1
Smoke/Gas detactors N.A. N.A. 5 1 5

Page
257

Other System
Total
Qty
Contd.Qty
Rated
Power
Demand
factor
Power of
each unit
Sewage Grinder 1 2.1 1 2.1
Life Boat
Winch(each winch
7men)

20(each
12.7)
254 0.1 25.4
Refrigeration
compressor
N.A. N.A. 1 231 0.1 23.1
Potable water Pump 10 1 10
Main Bilge, Fire,
G.S. Pumps
500 200 3 460 0.1 150
Work Shop N.A. N.A. 16.3 0.1 1.63
Sewage Blower 1.4 1 1.4
Helideck N.A. N.A. 1 1 1
Table 6.3
Extrapolated: The values have been extrapolated from original FPSO

LOAD CASE 1:ONLY PROCESSING PLANT WORKING ( UNLIKELY CASE)
PROCESSING PLANT
Total
Qty
Unit Power Unit in Use Load Factor Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 1 41.87817259
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump 3 28.24858757 2 1 56.49717514
Demulsifier Injection Pump 2 6.547619048 1 1 6.547619048
Methanol Injection Pump 5 303.030303 4 1 1212.121212
Chemical Transfer Pump 1 22.59887006 1 1 22.59887006
H.P Pump HP1(Manifold) 2 1417.748918 2 1 2835.497835
L.P Pumps LP1(Processing) 2 824.6753247 2 1 1649.350649
Return Reservoir Pump 1 22.59887006 1 1 22.59887006
Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 1 50.84745763
Dehydrator feeding Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Produced Water Recycle Pump 2 357.1428571 1 1 357.1428571
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 1 12554.11255
Lube & Glycol Transfer pump 2 9.523809524 2 1 19.04761905
Glycol circulation Pump 2 18.71345029 1 1 18.71345029
Cooling Medium Pump 2 227.2727273 1 1 227.2727273
Heating Medium Pump 2 259.7402597 1 1 259.7402597
Oil Circulation Pump 2 108.2251082 2 1 216.4502165
Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701

Page
258

Sulphate Removal Pump 3 1839.82684 3 1 5519.480519
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 1 174.4820065
Water Injection Pump 3 6601.731602 3 1 19805.19481
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing
pump
2 3.807106599 2 1 7.614213198
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 1 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Produced Water Booster Pump 1 108.2251082 1 1 108.2251082
Gas Dehydration Package 1 378.7878788 1 1 378.7878788
Reflux condenser 1 11.9047619 1 1 11.9047619
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Rich / Lean Glycol Exchanger 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
48779.78841

Table 6.4
The rest of the systems are not working in this case. So, total power requirement for load case 1
is 48780kw(app.).

LOAD CASE 2:PROCESSING PLANT +BALLAST+CRUDE SYSTEM WORKING
PROCESSING PLANT Total Qty Unit Power
Unit in
Use
Load Factor Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 1 41.87817259
Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 1 50.84745763
Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 1 12554.11255

Page
259

Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 1 174.4820065
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing pump 2 3.807106599 2 1 7.614213198
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 1 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
48779.78841

BALLAST WATER CONTROL Total Qty Unit Power
Ballast Water Pump 4 974.025974 974.025974
OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL
Total Qty Unit Power
Crude Offloading Pumps 30 1086.580087 6519.480519
Tank Cleaning Pump 1 176.9480519 176.9480519
Portable Unloading Standby Pump 1 0 0
Table 6.5
The power consumption for load case2 is
(48779.78841+974.025974+6519.480519+176.9480519+0)=56450.24295Kw

LOAD CASE 3:PROCESSING PLANT +BALLAST+CRUDE SYSTEM
+ACCOMMODATION WORKING
Unit in
Use
Load Factor Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 1 41.87817259
Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 1 50.84745763

Page
260

Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 1 12554.11255
Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 1 174.4820065
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 1 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
48779.78841
OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL
ACCOMMODATION(1.5Kw/person,
total 140 people)
N.A. N.A. 210
Table 6.6

LOAD CASE 4: ALL SYSTEMS WORKING EXCEPT BALLAST AND CARGO
SYSTEM
Unit in
Use
Load
Factor
Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 1 41.87817259

Page
261

Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 1 50.84745763
Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 1 12554.11255
Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 1 174.4820065
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 1 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
48779.78841

Ballast Water Pump 4 974.025974 0
OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL
Crude Offloading Pumps 30 1086.580087 0
Tank Cleaning Pump 1 176.9480519 0

ACCOMODATION Total Qty Unit Power
Power assuming 1.5Kw per person 210 210

Electronic System Total Qty Unit Power
Main control Console 1 0.9 0.9
Engine Room Panel 1 3 3

Page
262

Compass 0.6 0.6
Interior Communications 0.46 0.46
Radio 1.84 1.84
Battery Charger 0.7 0.7
Alarm 0.1 0.1
Smoke/Gas detactors 5 5

Other System Total Qty Unit Power
Sewage Grinder 1 2.1 2.1
Life Boat Winch(each winch 7men) 20(each 12.7) 25.4 25.4
Refrigeration compressor 1 23.1 23.1
Potable water Pump 10 10
Main Bilge, Fire, G.S. Pumps 3 149.3506494 149.3506494
Work Shop 1.63 1.63
Sewage Blower 1.4 1.4
Helideck 1 1

Total
Power
49216.36906
Table 6.7
The total power consumption for load case 4 is 49216.36906Kw.

LOAD CASE 5: ALL SYSTEMS WORKING SIMULTANEOUSLY(EXCLUDING
EMERGENCY SYSTEMS)
Unit in
Use
Load Factor Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 1 41.87817259
Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 1 50.84745763
Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 1 811.6883117
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 1 12554.11255

Page
263

Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 1 174.4820065
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 1 324.6753247
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 1 216.4502165
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
48779.78841

OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL


Compass 0.6 0.6
Radio 1.84 1.84
Alarm 0.1 0.1

Life Boat Winch(each winch 7men) 20(each 12.7) 25.4 25.4
Work Shop 1.63 1.63

Page
264

Helideck 1 1
Total Power 56886.8236
Table 6.8

LOAD CASE 6: EMERGENCY SUPPLY LOAD CASE
PROCESSING PLANT Total Qty Unit in Use Load Factor Power

Small Sized Pump 22 15 0 0
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump 3 2 0 0
Demulsifier Injection Pump 2 1 0 0
Methanol Injection Pump 5 4 0 0
Chemical Transfer Pump 1 1 0 0
H.P Pump HP1(Manifold) 2 2 0 0
L.P Pumps LP1(Processing) 2 2 0 0
Return Reservoir Pump 1 1 0 0
Slurry Pump 1 1 0 0
Dehydrator feeding Pump 2 1 0 0
Oil Dehydrator 1 1 0 0
Oil Desalter 1 1 0 0
Produced Water Recycle Pump 2 1 0 0
HP Flare Pump 2 1 0 0
LP Flare Pump 2 1 0 0
Treated Oil Pump 2 1 0 0
Gas Compressors 3 2 0 0
Lube & Glycol Transfer pump 2 2 0 0
Glycol circulation Pump 2 1 0 0
Cooling Medium Pump 2 1 0 0
Heating Medium Pump 2 1 0 0
Oil Circulation Pump 2 2 0 0
Air Scour Blower 2 1 0 0
Sulphate Removal Pump 3 3 0 0
Vacuum Pump 2 2 0 0
Water Injection Pump 3 3 0 0
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing pump 2 2 0 0
FW maker HP Pump 2 1 0 0
Fresh water Pump 2 1 0 0
Produced Water Booster Pump 1 1 0 0
Gas Dehydration Package 1 1 0 0
Reflux condenser 1 1 0 0
Glycol Reboiler 1 1 0 0
Rich / Lean Glycol Exchanger 1 1 0 0
Glycol cooler 1 1 0 0
0

Page
265

BALLAST WATER CONTROL Total Qty
Ballast Water Pump 4 0
OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL
Total Qty
Crude Offloading Pumps 30 0
Tank Cleaning Pump 1 0
Portable Unloading Standby Pump 1 0

ACCOMODATION Total Qty
Power assuming 1.5Kw per person
Consider only
emergency(.75kw/person)
105
systems of accomodation
Electronic System Total Qty
Main control Console 1 0.9
Engine Room Panel 1 3
Compass Also UPS Power=12.6Kw 0.6
Interior Communications 0.46
Radio 1.84
Battery Charger 0.7
Alarm 0.1
Smoke/Gas detactors 5

Other System Total Qty
Sewage Grinder 1 0
Life Boat Winch(each winch 7men) 20(each 12.7)
Demand facor 1 for
lifeboat winches=>
254
Refrigeration compressor 1 0
Potable water Pump 10
Main Bilge, Fire, G.S. Pumps 3 1493.506494
Work Shop 1.63
Sewage Blower 0
Helideck 1

for emergency
generator

Table 6.9

LOAD CASE 7: ESSENTIAL SUPPLY LOAD CASE
PROCESSING PLANT Total Qty Unit Power Unit in Use Load Factor Power
Kw
Small Sized Pump 22 2.791878173 15 0 0
Wax Inhibitor Injection Pump 3 28.24858757 2 0 0
Demulsifier Injection Pump 2 6.547619048 1 0 0

Page
266

Methanol Injection Pump 5 303.030303 4 0 0
Chemical Transfer Pump 1 22.59887006 1 0 0
H.P Pump HP1(Manifold) 2 1417.748918 2 0 0
L.P Pumps LP1(Processing) 2 824.6753247 2 0 0
Return Reservoir Pump 1 22.59887006 1 0 0
Slurry Pump 1 50.84745763 1 0 0
Dehydrator feeding Pump 2 292.2077922 1 0 0
Oil Dehydrator 1 811.6883117 1 0 0
Oil Desalter 1 811.6883117 1 0 0
Produced Water Recycle Pump 2 357.1428571 1 0 0
HP Flare Pump 2 33.89830508 1 1 33.89830508
LP Flare Pump 2 24.85875706 1 1 24.85875706
Treated Oil Pump 2 292.2077922 1 1 292.2077922
Gas Compressors 3 6277.056277 2 0 0
Lube & Glycol Transfer pump 2 9.523809524 2 0 0
Glycol circulation Pump 2 18.71345029 1 0 0
Air Scour Blower 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Sulphate Removal Pump 3 1839.82684 3 0 0
Vacuum Pump 2 87.24100327 2 0 0
Water Injection Pump 3 6601.731602 3 0 0
Non Oxydizing Biocide dosing pump 2 3.807106599 2 0 0
FW maker HP Pump 2 324.6753247 1 0 0
Fresh water Pump 2 66.51884701 1 1 66.51884701
Produced Water Booster Pump 1 108.2251082 1 0 0
Gas Dehydration Package 1 378.7878788 1 0 0
Reflux condenser 1 11.9047619 1 0 0
Glycol Reboiler 1 216.4502165 1 0 0
Rich / Lean Glycol Exchanger 1 216.4502165 1 0 0
Glycol cooler 1 66.51884701 1 0 0
1187.465752

Ballast Water Pump 4 974.025974
Ballast
pump
function
0
OFFLOADING CRUDE
CONTROL
as
emergency
pumps

Crude Offloading Pumps 30 1086.580087 0
Tank Cleaning Pump 1 176.9480519 0



Page
267

Compass 0.6 0.6
Radio 1.84 1.84
Alarm 0.1 0.1

Life Boat Winch(each winch 7men) 20(each 12.7) 25.4 254
Work Shop 1.63 1.63
Helideck 1 1


for esential
generators

Table 6.10

SELECTION OF TPPL (Total Plant Peak Load)
LOAD CASE CASE DESCRIPTION POWER(Kw)
CASE 1 Processing Plant Working 48779.78841

CASE 2 Processing Plant +Ballast and Crude Offloading Control Working 56450.24295

CASE 3 Processing Plant +Ballast and Crude Offloading Control +Accommodation 56660.243

CASE 4 All systems except Ballast and Crude Offloading 49216.36906

CASE 5 All systems working simultaneously(excluding emergency systems) 56886.8236
Max power
CASE 6 Emergency Power Requirements 1877.736494

CASE 7 Essential Power Requirements 3196.802245

Table A6.11
The LOAD CASE 5 the power requirement is highest. So, TPPL=56886.8236

Page
268

APPENDIX VII
1. Group technology
Group technology consist both type of production organization, product (or group) organization
and Mass production organization. In group organization the worker and his equipment is fixed
and the work object moves from one workstation to another and the intermediate products
produced in this manner are combined to make the final product. A Mass production
organization maximizes the use of mechanization, continuous flow lines, and specialization of
activities at sequential workstations. Group technology is something which deals with both type
of organization.
Group technology can be seen as a concept in which the production facilities are organized in
self contained groups or cells. Each self regulating group or cell is capable of producing a family
of products of similar manufacturing characteristics. Each cell has a number of machines and
workers who are capable of using several machines or process, thereby requiring less workers.
The Group technology having following characteristic:
1. Components are classified into groups or families according to the production process by
which they are produced.
2. Work loads are balanced among production groups into which production facilities are
organized rather than between separate manufacturing operations.
3. Each cell works with a considerable degree of autonomy.
2. Panel line (Flat panel assembly)
Stiffened panels, consisting of plates attached to stiffeners, constitute a large percentage of
structural fabrication work in a shipyard. So to improve the productivity at the block assembly
stage the stiffened panels are produced in an automated flow line production facility called the
panel line. This works with different work station. All work station use one sided butt welding
for joining plates and gravity welding for stiffeners. Process is carried out in following step:

Plate arrival, Alignment and Tacking: Plates after shot blasting arrive at this station. The
plates are positioned, aligned and tack welded manually.
Plate welding: The tack welded plates arrive at this station where one sided butt welding is
carried out.
Marking and Cutting: marking on the joined plate panel is carried out next. The marketing at
this stage allows for a more accurate panel shape. Subsequently, the plate panel is cut to size,
including deck opening, lightening holes, etc., using numerical control flame cutting machine.
Egg Box Assembly of Stiffeners: on a parallel conveyor which is along side the plate panel line,
the longitudinals and transverses are assembled together using lugs and jigs.
Egg Box Stiffener Feed-in: the assembled egg-box of longitudinals and transverses is
transferred on to the plate panel and positioned using overhead cranes.
Welding of Stiffeners to Plate Panel: using gravity welding machine or other automatic
welding machine.
Inspection and Repair: the stiffened panel is checked for welding defects and accuracy at this
stage. If required, minor repairs are carried out. Outfitting work like fitting of pipes, scaffolding
brackets, lifting pads, etc. is performed at this stage.

Page
269

END OF REPORT
THANKYOU.

ISODC, IIT Kharagpur Team, May 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISODC, IIT Kharagpur Team, May 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISODC, IIT Kharagpur Team, May 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IIT Kharagpur, May 2008

= 1.183, a constant drag coefficient

= 0.8 for beam sea dynamic load cases

You might also like