ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 (Jack-Ups) SITE … · ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 - Jack-Ups Minutes of 29th Meeting of WG 7, 5th May 2011, Houston ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 (Jack-Ups) SITE ASSESSMENT OF

ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 - Jack-Ups Minutes of 29th Meeting of WG 7, 5th May 2011, Houston

ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 (Jack-Ups)

SITE ASSESSMENT OF JACK-UP RIGS Minutes of Meeting of 5th May 2011

..\iso\meetings\mtg-29\… Rev 0, 3rd June 2011 Page 1

DISTRIBUTION (INCLUDES):

ATTENDEES G.C. Bagnell Rowan Companies Inc Canada J. Brekke Transocean USA (Acting P1-2 Convenor) A. Ghonheim DNV USA (Visitor) B. Grasso Bennett & Associates L.L.C. USA H. Hofstede GustoMSC Netherlands (Visitor) M.J.R. Hoyle (Convenor) GL Noble Denton UK D. Kennedy Transocean USA (Visitor) G. Kudsk Maersk Drilling Denmark (P11 Convenor) D.R. Lewis Lewis Engineering Group USA (Visitor) M. Melkowits ENSCO USA (Visitor) B. Mobbs LeTourneau Technologies Inc USA (Visitor) C.J. Mommaas GustoMSC Netherlands A. Morandi Global Maritime USA (Chair SNAME OC7) M.J. Perry Keppel Offshore & Marine Technology Singapore (Visitor) O.A. Purwana Keppel Offshore Technology Development Singapore (Visitor) M. Quah Keppel Offshore Technology Development Singapore (Visitor) R. Rogers Transocean USA (Visitor) J. Rousseau ABS Singapore (Visitor) A. Spackman IADC (liaison to TC67) USA (Visitor) H. Stadsgaard Maersk Drilling Denmark (Visitor) J.J. Stiff ABS Consulting USA (P10 Convenor) D.J. Stock Digital Structures Inc USA (P5 Convenor) J Templeton SAGE USA USA (Visitor) J.W. Turner ExxonMobil USA (Visitor) P. Versowsky Chevron USA (Visitor) P. Wong ExxonMobil Development Company USA (P4 Convenor) APOLOGIES J.A. Afonso Petrobras Brazil Assem Alameldin Seadrill USA (Visitor) R.J. Allan Transocean USA W.T. Bennett Bennett & Associates L.L.C. USA J.F. Bowes LeTourneau Technologies Inc. USA M. Cahay Technip France (Visitor) P. Chakrabarti Zentech Inc USA C.C. Chan Keppel FELS Singapore (Visitor) M.J. Dowdy Rowan Companies Inc USA G. Ersdal Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (Corresponding) J. Fawcett Braemar Falconer Vietnam S.R. Vietnam P.A. Frieze PAFA Consulting Engineers UK (Visitor) P. Handidjaja Braemar Falconer Singapore (isitor) H. Hsu Rowan Companies Inc USA (Visitor) R.J. Hunt Shell U.K. Limited UK W. Jones HSE UK (Visitor) J. Lebourhis John Lebourhis & Associates Inc. USA (Visitor) A. Kiayei Noble Drilling USA (Visitor) M.R. Marcom Rowan Drilling & Aviation Netherlands E. Mei ENI Italy J. Moore JF Moore International USA L. Munch-Søegaard Seadrill Management AS Norway C Nelson Transocean USA (Visitor) J.P. Norhelm DNV Norway (Visitor) J.J. Osborne RPS Energy UK (Alt. P4 Convenor) C. Perol TPG France (Visitor) J. Pittman Nekton Marine, Inc. USA J.P. Riber Maersk Olie Og Gas Denmark D.M. Rioche Total France R. Ruinen Vryhof Anchors BV Netherlands B.P.M. Sharples Offshore: Risk & Technology USA Bob Shetti Jindal Drilling USA D. Smith ENI UK UK (WG3/P1) N.P. Smith LeTourneau Technologies Inc USA P-L Tan ABS USA (P3 Convenor) R.L. Thomas - USA J.H. Vazquez Bennett & Associates L.L.C. USA M. Yang Baker Marine Technology Inc USA (Visitor) OTHERS M. Greenley (SC 7 Secretariat) BSI UK P. Smedley (Chair SC 7) BP UK



SITE ASSESSMENT OF JACK-UP RIGS

Agenda for Meeting of 5th May 2011

ExxonMobil URC, Three Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas, USA


1. Roll Call / Apologies, New Members & Resignations. 2. Minutes of last meeting (21st October 2010, Hamburg, Germany). 3. Action Items and Matters arising (for items not covered elsewhere on the Agenda). 4. Report on SC 7 activities (Hoyle). To include:

4.1. Status of and schedule for other 1990x series standards. 4.2. Other SC7 Matters.

5. Panel Reports: 5.1. Panel Convenors (Hoyle). 5.2. Editing-Review Panel (Hoyle). 5.3. Panel 0 - Preamble (Hoyle). 5.4. Panel 1/2 - MetOcean & Actions (Bagnell). 5.5. Panel 3 - Structures & Responses (Tan). 5.6. Panel 4 - Foundations (Wong). 5.7. Panel 5 - Earthquake (Stock). 5.8. Panel 10 - Acceptance Criteria (Stiff). 5.9. Panel 11 - Long Term Applications (Kudsk).

6. Status update on Benchmarking (Stiff). 7. ISO 19905-3 - Floating Units (Hoyle / Stiff) 8. Status, Actions & Schedule for completion of:

8.1. ISO 19905-1 8.2. ISO/TR 19905-2 8.3. ISO 19905-3.

9. Future WG 7 meeting schedule: September 12th - 16th - City University, London. (SC7 2nd - 3rd November 2011, Houston) May 2012 - Houston, OTC week - 30th April to 4th May 2012 (host needed)

10. Any Other Business. 11. Confirm Action Items.



SITE ASSESSMENT OF JACK-UP RIGS

Minutes of Meeting of 5th May 2011

ExxonMobil URC, Three Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas, USA

ITEM MINUTE ACTION


1. APOLOGIES/ROLL CALL.

The meeting commenced at about 0915 hrs under the Convenership of Mike Hoyle who welcomed those present and thanked them for attending the meeting.

John Stiff advised the meeting that Alan Dixon had lost his battle with cancer in April, and wished to record the valuable, insightful and diplomatic contribution that Alan had made over the years.

Formal apologies had been received from Assem Alameldin, José Alexandre Afonso, Julian Bowes, Marc Cahay, CC Chan, Mike Dowdy, John Fawcett, Paul Frieze, Paul Handidjaja, Rupert Hunt, Wayne Jones, Mike Marcom, Eric Mei, James Moore, Colin Nelson, Jon Petter Norhelm, Christian Perol, Pharr Smith, Pao-Lin Tan, Roger Thomas, John Vingoe and Mark Yang.

Apologies were assumed for Rod Allan, Bill Bennett, Partha Chakrabarti, Lars Munch-Søegaard, Julian Osborne, Jim Pittman, Jens Peter Riber, Daniel Rioche, Roderick Ruinen, Malcolm Sharples, Don Smith and Bob Shetti.

The full roll call is shown in Attachment 1 and business cards for most of those present are shown in Attachment 2.

2. MINUTES OF LAST MEETING (21ST OCTOBER 2010, HAMBURG).

The minutes of the last meeting were accepted.

3. ACTION ITEMS AND MATTERS ARISING (FOR ITEMS NOT COVERED ELSEWHERE ON THE AGENDA).

Action Items

3.1 Item 1 of previous meeting - The WG Convenor has established that the previously un-notified members from Argentina (2), China (1), Japan (3) & Russia (1) are from national standards bodies that wish to monitor our progress.

3.2 Item 3.1 of previous meeting. The revised text from P5/Karthi on radiation damping and their text on frequency dependent stiffness, was due before December, so that P4 could undertake their action to review it. For current status/approach, see P5 report.

3.3 Item 3.6 of previous meeting. WG Convenor's action to chase inputs to, and then issue questionnaire regarding, the need for standard for on/off location. He has still not received all the feedback he had been promised (for mid November) and the questionnaire has therefore not been issued. In the absence of further guidance as to the needs from Canada, it was agreed that the matter will be dropped.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


3.4 Item 3.14 of previous meeting. Patrick's action to review Dave Edward's text on the modification/expansion of the V-H envelope in clay for low V was completed by P4/ERP.

3.5 Item 3.18 of previous meeting. Jack T's action to take P5's request regarding the elimination (positive non-inclusion) of torsional foundation stiffness to P4 has been completed. A statement was included in A.9.3.4.1.

3.6 Item 3.19 of previous meeting. The action to obtain, if possible, geometric data for newer chord shapes for inclusion in Annex F was completed. Brad Mobbs had supplied data for LeTourneau and Hugo for GustoMSC; José had not provided the data he had offered for BASS. John Stiff had approached F&G who declined to supply any additional data. The WG Convenor approached BMC, but received no response.

3.7 Item 4.3 of previous meeting - floaters - see Item 7.

3.8 Item 5.3 of previous meeting - Preamble - The action regarding geotechnical definitions was completed.

3.9 Item 5.3 of previous meeting - Preamble - The actions to resolve queries and finalise Figure 5.2-1 were completed.

3.10 Item 5.4 of previous meeting - Cross references in Table A.6.5-1 were checked.

3.11 Item 5.6 of previous meeting - The three P4 issues were eventually closed out.

3.12 Item 5.7 of previous meeting - ExxonMobil (Adel Younan) wanted to include text on frequency dependent stiffness. A draft was being prepared by Doug, Jack, Karthi and Adel. See P5 report.

3.13 Item 5.8 of previous meeting - The action on Dave to update Annex F.1 was closed out.

3.14 Item 7 of previous meeting - Benchmarking. John had received the presentations and Patrick had received MSC's material (at least for the updated foundation check). Final reports had been submitted in the required format. KFELS had been sent the B-Class results by GLND and reviewed them but had only recently received the BASS results which were under review. LeTourneau had requested and reviewed the Gorilla results and Go-By document.

3.15 Item 8.1 of previous meeting - Actions to progress 19905-1. The inputs from the last meeting were received in due time and included in an update.

3.16 Item 8.1 of previous meeting - Actions to progress 19905-1. The other actions to be completed by mid-November were closed out, but in some cases, including finalising the GoMex Annex, by the ERP.

3.17 Item 8.1 of previous meeting. The various meetings and conference calls took place.

3.18 Item 9 of previous meeting - Meeting schedule for this week was completed, and dates for next meeting established.

Matters Arising

3.19 There were no other Matters Arising.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


4. REPORT ON SC 7 ACTIVITIES SINCE LAST WG7 MEETING.

4.1 Status of and schedule for other 1990x series standards.

4.1.1 The SC7 schedule, as updated at the last SC7 meeting held in Singapore in January 2011, is shown in Attachment 3. The WG Convenor summarised the key points of the present status which, in full, is as follows:

4.1.2 ISO 19900:2002 ‘General requirements’ is being updated under WG1, convened by Tom Brown of Canada, with CSA as secretariat. WG1 met in September 2008, June 2009, March 2010 and January 2011. This included WG7 Convenor's input on site investigation requirements (reviewed by Patrick) and consequence text (developed with Richard Snell & David Galbraith & including most of WG7's text). Points of interest:

A WD had been issued in July 2010 and the WG Convenor had submitted comments. There had been further iteration on the 19900 and 19905-1 consequence class text, with ERP input.

A further WD was issued in December, prior to WG1 meeting in January at which:

It was reported that API are concerned that floaters are not adequately addressed.

A "road-map" was mandated. This has been developed since the meeting and, with ERP assistance, we have had input to it.

An attempt to improve the 19900 definition of mobile & jack-up by WG Convenor with Andrea Mangiavacchi.

An attempt to use "operator" and "owner" more appropriately - as per 19905-1.

The consequence text has been iterated further; some updates carried into our FDIS.

The CD, that was due in March 2011, is now expected imminently. The DIS due in March 2012, FDIS in May 2013 and ISO in September 2013. The WG Convenor will post this at: WG Convenor http://www.nodent.co.uk/iso-tc67-sc7-wg7/WG1 Drafts

4.1.3 ISO 19901-1 ‘Metocean design and operating conditions’ was published in November 2005. Errata can be found on the SC7 website. WG3/P1-2 is now convened by Don Smith of ENI UK. They met recently in London. The panel is concentrating on updating Regional Annexes (RAs) for GoMex and Canada and adding new RAs for Caspian, China Sea and Sea of Okhotsk. The DIS of the update, expected in January 2011, is imminent. GLND have raised a number of queries regarding inconsistencies and omissions e.g. phi factors for winter storms in TRS areas and other areas that are not embraced by the present descriptions. Comments/queries on the text on apparent and intrinsic wave periods have also been submitted. These were raised again at the recent WG3/P1-2 meeting.

4.1.4 ISO 19901-2:2004 ‘Seismic design procedures and criteria’ was published in December 2004. A New Work Item (NWI) to update the document has been approved. A small technical group is looking at deferred comments on the 1st

edition. Doug, the Convenor of the WG3 P5 (also of WG7 P5), had previously advised that they are reviewing the return period possibilities. The Panel proposes 2,500 year return but Norway and Canada wants 10,000 year return, so Norwegian and Canadian Annexes are needed. A refreshed panel is being formed to progress the update and the schedule is to be discussed at the next SC7 meeting.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


4.1.5 ISO 19901-3 ‘Topsides structures’. The ISO was published in December, however and error was found in the Building Code Factor and an urgent corrigendum is needed; seems to be taking too long. WG Convenor was actioned to determine the reasons for the ongoing delay. WG Convenor

4.1.6 ISO 19901-4:2003 ‘Geotechnical and foundation design considerations’ was published in August 2003. Work on an update is ongoing. WG10 wish to revise the title to align with API-RP2-GEO. The next version is expected to include most of the updates that are in the parallel API RP2-GEO - which essentially includes everything on piles from 19902. [the text from] 19902 is to be updated to cover lessons learned from the hurricanes, including specific guidance for assessments, updated p-y curves for clay, updated design guidance for CPT's in sand, and inclusion of pile flexibility in ultimate capacity curves. Other documents may need to be changed and/or included in cross-references. Longer term, WG10 want to transfer all the geotechnical information in the other standards to 19901-4. Although 19905-1 was ring-fenced by Resolution 274 (Milan, 2009), the API document seems to include material that overlaps with or differs from our guidance. WG10 had an action to define the impact on the structure specific documents (in presentation from London meeting). The agreement of a schedule for the update was deferred yet again to the next SC7 meeting, by which time WG10 should have raised a NWIP for ballot in accordance with Resolution 304 (Singapore, 2011).

Susanne Lacasse will be standing down as convenor, and it is proposed that Jean-Louis Colliat (Total/France) replace her, subject to submission of CV and SC7's approval. Philippe Jean-Jean has been re-elected as chair of the API RG7 for a further 4 years. WG10 and RG7 are essentially the same group.

In Resolution 303 (Singapore, 2011), WG10 was tasked with resolving an issue wrt the differentiation of piles and caissons in 19902 by means of a Technical Corrigendum or Amendment. It had been thought by some that the foundations of free-standing caisson structures are covered by the clauses in the foundations section on piles, however the intent was that the foundations section covers deep piles only and is considered inappropriate for shallow "caisson" piles, where additional safety factors are needed on lateral resistance. Nothing yet sighted.

4.1.7 ISO 19901-5:2003 ‘Weight engineering during design and construction’ was published in July 2003. WG6 met last year and early in 2010; new members include Brazil and Canada. The update will address comments from the approval of the NWI and general re-writing to include clearer definitions on Allowance and Contingency. There will be a new informative on weight control management during operations, a revised clause on weight reporting, expanded Informative, revised section 3 on definitions and general improvements in the content. WG6 has some issues with ISO directives, and want to provide pro-forma spreadsheets for use by purchasers. WD Rev 2 was due at the end of March 2010 with WD Rev 3 by end of June 2010 for comment by the end of September 2010. The WG6 meeting planned for end of 2010 to discuss comments on WD3 was delayed to February. The latest schedule is: CD in April/May 2011, DIS May 2012, FDIS July 2013, ISO November 2013.

4.1.8 ISO 19901-6 ‘Marine operations’ was published in December 2009. Understand it is being referenced and has received some praise. However, the correctness of equation 15 has been questioned and a conservative subscripting error found (The term Frhl,I should be Fsrhl,i). Per Resolution 301 (Singapore, 2011), a corrigendum is to be issued, but has not yet been sighted.

4.1.9 ISO 19901-7 ‘Station keeping’ was published in December 2005. It was intended that the publication of an update by WG5/P5 be expedited using the minor


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


amendment protocol, however ISO advised that the changes were too extensive. After some delays whilst the way forward was agreed, the DIS was eventually issued on 10th March 2011 (so the ballot period closes on 10th August), with an associated note in accordance with Resolution 296 (Singapore, 2011), that requested that comments be limited to the new text. If there are no negative comments, the intent is to omit the FDIS. This means that the earliest date for publication is now October 2011. If there are comments, and an FDIS is needed, this will extend to March 2012.

The largest change in the update is the addition of detailed informative text incorporated directly from API RP 2SK on all types of anchor design. In the first edition of this international standard, this material was previously addressed only by reference to API RP 2SK. Informative material has also been added from API RP 2SK regarding the analysis and mitigation of vortex-induced motions (VIM) of large cylindrical hulls. Consequently the normative text has been modified to remove reference to API RP 2SK and to cross-reference portions of the expanded informative annex.

The only other significant change is the updating of guidance on polyester rope mooring design to conform to the provisions of the recent amendment to API RP 2SM. The changes include new definitions of stiffness, recognition of effective filter barriers, removal of the prohibition against the rope touching the seafloor, and more detail on minimum tension requirements, among others. Additionally, minor corrections were made to the text in 7.4.4, Wind actions, and 8.3.4, Riser considerations, and the terminology "most probable maximum" has been standardized throughout. Finally, the Norwegian Annex has been updated at the request of Norway, and a new Canadian Annex has been added. Otherwise the text remains as it was in the first edition.

The 4th edition of API RP 2 SK will be developed using the updated ISO 19901-7 as the core document.

4.1.10 19901-8 ‘Marine soil investigations’ - This is the NWI on MSI. In Resolution 273 (Milan, 2009), SC7 required that this be structured to accommodate geophysical investigations in the first update; nevertheless, WG10 continue to propose alternatives, and Resolution 302 (Singapore, 2011) was agreed, confirming SC7's requirements. The CD on site investigation is still expected in July 2011, with DIS in July 2012, FDIS in September 2013 and ISO in January 2014. The first WD for the Geophysical update, originally expected in May 2012, is now scheduled for December 2012.

4.1.11 ISO 19902 ‘Fixed steel offshore structures’ was published in December 2007. A number of errors were introduced during publication. Errors/comments and responses are published on SC7 web page: http://www.galbraith.plus.com/SC7/sc7query.htm A corrigendum has been drafted; in January this was to go to SC7 in "near future", but is still awaited. WG Convenor to determine reasons for delay. WG Convenor

The systematic review was issued in November for response by mid February; outcome not yet circulated.

There is still an intent to divide parts out into other documents:

Clause 6 definitions to 19900 Clause 8 Temporary phases to 19901-6 Clauses 19-22, Annexes B-G (Materials) to 19901-x [ also text from 19901-3 ] Clauses 23-25, Structural Integrity Management (SIM) to 19901-y [ together

with text from 19901-3, 19903 and 19904 ]


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


Possible move of geotechnical information to 19901-4.

4.1.12 ISO 19903:2006 ‘Fixed concrete offshore structures’ was published in December 2006. The systematic review at the end of 2009 confirmed the document. Some issues were raised by Canada, as 19903 does not stand alone but relies on standards that are outside the ISO umbrella which cannot be tackled in terms of technical issues. No update planned.

4.1.13 ISO 19904-1:2006 ‘Floating offshore structures - Monohulls, Semi-submersibles and Spars’ was published in November 2006 and confirmed in the systematic review towards the end of 2009. Some technical comments on the DIS will be resolved in a subsequent update. To be reviewed when 19900 is re-issued.

The API Task group for RP2 FPS has developed 2nd edition using ISO 19904-1 as the core document with an API “wrapper” that addresses items covered in RP 2 FPS but not currently in ISO 19904-1, i.e. Hurricane design and survival issues for GOM, issues relevant to disconnectable FPSOs, air gaps for semisubmersibles and spars, some design issues for monohulls, robustness check requirements ensuring failure sequence is as required, plus items not included in the original issue.

API RP2-FPS was being re-balloted in January. It is effectively an updated version of 19904-1 and will provide a part-basis for the next update of ISO 19904-1, which will also account for changes needed to accommodate the site-specific assessment of MODUs. No user comments to date.

4.1.14 19904-2 – ‘Floating offshore structures - TLP's. On hold until a business case can be made. WG5 are developing a strategy for bringing material from API RP 2T, published in July 2010, in to ISO. This is to be presented at the next SC7 meeting.

4.1.15 19905-1, -2 – ‘Site-specific assessment of mobile jack-up units’. See Item 8.

4.1.16 19905-3 – ‘Site-specific assessment of mobile floating units’. See Item 7.

4.1.17 ISO 19906 ‘Arctic offshore structures’ was published in December 2010. The companion, referenced, OGP report no 422 on ice-load calibration was published at the same time. It is anticipated that additional informative material will be added in 2012/2013. The WG8 convenor Denis Blanchet is resigning and a replacement will be nominated by WG8. CSA will continue a secretariat. Papers are planned at three conferences in 2011.

4.2 Other SC7 matters:

4.2.1 The WG Convenor advised of the following SC7 matters of interest:

There had been further debate regarding the publication of the InSafe JIP report as a 19905 series document. SC7 deferred a decision until it has reviewed the document. Furthermore they suggested that the title would become dated and should be revised. The alternative of publication by OGP was suggested. Given the complications, InSafe have now published via a website:

http://insafe.woking.rpsplc.co.uk/Default.asp

We need to update 19905-1 bibliography accordingly. WG Convenor

The nominated replacement for David Galbraith (WG3) is Abraham Moises; however, SC7 is still waiting to see his CV, and he has been unresponsive to correspondence. The replacement for Bob Wolfram (WG5) is Paul Erb of BP who has been actively picking up his new role.

A forward strategy for SC7 is being developed. The key is that WG's and Panels retain core expertise and that document upgrades are progressed


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


regularly. An Ad Hoc group is to assist Phil Smedley in taking this forward. He has initiated quarterly teleconferences with WG leaders. The key points of the strategy are:

Revise standards at least every 10 years. Need to maintain technical panels and leadership between revisions. Enhance harmonisation of effort with other bodies. Maintain member databases and refresh expertise where gaps arise. Wider dissemination of ISO activities to panellists. More frequent but less comprehensive revisions to standards

o Minimal normative change o Update for new technology o Ensure consistency across 19900 series o Update informative o Update bibliography

Less drive to update entire standard in one go Phased updates focussing on specific clauses/issues Retain project leaders or replace between updates to answer queries

The feedback mechanism discussed. It was felt that corrigenda, etc. should

appear on a publicly accessible location on the ISO website, and that future standards should include reference to this location. SC 7 promotes its website as providing a place to deal with technical questions on its standards so this should be exploited too, but perhaps with a link to source data on ISO's live-link.

The next SC7 is in Houston on 2nd-3rd November 2011.

5. PANEL REPORTS:

5.1 Panel Convenors Liaison Meeting

The Panel Convenors had met on Sunday morning; thanks to John for doing the work and ABS for funding him. All were present with Graham Bagnell continuing as the acting P1-2 Convenor. The meeting was joined by David Lewis and Pharr Smith.

Meeting Arrangements: The arrangements for this week were looking good. Thanks are due to Patrick, ExxonMobil and their support staff. Next meeting - see Item 8.

Status of FDIS & Comments matrix for DIS.

The FDIS text was essentially ready for submission last year. There was a delay whilst the figures were completed by 3rd party - expedited to some extent by appearing at his premises in ABZ in mid December.

The FDIS was eventually submitted to ISO on 7th February, only to be rejected as the PDF copy was in too new a release of Acrobat. It was re-submitted on 8th February and formally accepted for processing on 1st March.

The FDIS of 19905-1 was received back from ISO CS for our "2 week review" of their edits on 7th April, with some specific comments. In John Stiff's words, "ISO did indeed edit what we submitted to them, and the edits fall into the expected Clint Eastwood style - "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" (some very good, and some very ugly).

We have also received a number of comments from users, "go-by"-ers and ERP. Some of these revealed a more fundamental under-lying problem.

The response to ISO is in the formal comments matrix format.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


One issue is duplicate symbols. A collation has been prepared. The Panel Convenors agreed that their meetings will look at changes proposed so far (at end of pre-publication comments matrix table). The goal was to resolve as many clashes as possible during this week, either by means of a few getting together or possibly using spare time from the P0 meeting.

Key issues for the Panel meetings:

Confirm any technical responses in pre-publication comments matrix.

Completing outstanding responses to pre-publication comments matrix.

Adding any further issues to pre-publication comments matrix

Noting carry-forward items (for 1st update)

Finalising TR 19905-2. Sorry; lost the time allocated to editorial work to 2-week review activities and other personal distractions.

Schedule to completion: Was discussed (see Item 8).

Benchmarking/Checking: Was discussed (see Item 7).

Future of WG and Panels:

See Item 4.2.1 regarding the SC7 chair's strategy document, and the key points therein.

WG7 has a number of carry forward issues we can start to address, which should provide a focus for continuing to meet; we should aim to update as we can and not follow the 5-year review cycle. Hoyle's present suggestion is to continue to meet annually, probably in Houston; others favour alternating with Europe. Dave warned that IADC may no longer support attendance by key consultants. PC's felt this would be retrograde; unlike the other documents in the 19900-series, they are the key technical contributors, and their input needs to be maintained.

Publicity: Suggestion for overview presentations or papers on some key issues at CU:

Benchmarking.

P10 - Column checks & more (per JJS e-mail).

Net/Gross foundation capacity.

Intrinsic / Apparent wave periods.

Additional dynamics cases.

In addition a special session at OTC was suggested; there is a need to identify sponsor societies, lead authors and session and paper titles. An outline prepared WG Convenor the previous day was reviewed and amended as follows:

OTC session:

Panel(s) Topic(s) Author(s)

Overview / Key Note : MJRH / JJS / RJH /

Benchmarking JJS

P1/2 : Spreading - previous OTC ask OMO ? Apparent/Intrinsic ?JJS

P3 : SIPM revised PLT / MP / JT Limits on SDOF & SIPM


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


Additional cases near resonance Hysteretic damping

P4 : SAGE upgrades - Stiffness Reduction & Horizontal capacity JT / PW Gross / Net v/s Vlo Hossain backflow

P5 : Kathi's stuff on frequency dependent stiffness & damping DJS New screening strategy

P10 : Lots of new member checking - ISO tubulars, PAFA Chords inc. new column curve JJS / PF / DRL Hydrostatics simplification and inclusion for prismatics

P11 : Overview. GK / ?CJM

Regional Annexes: GoMex DRL / JJS / ?RR Norway? World-wide application

P3/P10/P4 GoMex Measurement program DJS

P4 Other jack-up foundation papers e.g. from NUS. PW to advise

5.2 Editing-Review Panel (ERP)

Since October, the ERP met for 4 days at the end of December / early December. The core ERP comprises: WG Convenor, Dave Lewis, John Stiff, Doug Stock. Thanks are due to Patrick and Jack Templeton for their contributions and to the P4 members that joined a WebEx / Teleconference. John Stiff is supported by ABS and the remainder by OGP, whose current funding round includes a contribution from the IADC JUC.

Many thanks to Jim and his admin staff for hosting the first days of the meeting at Greenway Plaza and to ABS & John and his support staff for hosting the final day of the meeting at Greenspoint. Thanks are also due to Jim Brekke who has agreed to host future meetings at Transocean.

The focus was closing out the remaining issues in the document and comments matrix for the DIS.

The ERP had also met three times by teleconference for some 3 hours each time to review the edits by ISO and the comments from others

The WG Convenor thanked the ERP members for their efforts and was of the opinion that the ERP has made further valuable progress. Doug Stock noted that the WG Convenor had undertaken various actions to close out items that have also assisted the progress.

5.3 Panel 0 - Preamble.

The WG Convenor reported that P0 had met on Tuesday afternoon. There was good attendance and continuity with the previous meetings. The attendees were Dave Lewis, Gregers, Hans, Hugo, Jim, Joe, Mason, the WG Convenor together with Russell Buhler acting as host for ExxonMobil. P0 got through it's action items.

We reviewed the ISO's edits with no key concerns. We also looked over the updates to 19900 Consequence text and have a few comments (some more have since been


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


raised by John Stiff). These were submitted after the meeting, but seems they are to late for inclusion in the CD, as it has already gone to ISO for issue. The comments will be included in the comments to the CD.

The remaining time was spent trying to resolve symbol duplication - and made some progress. Since then a further problem has been identified, which the WG Convenor hoped would be addressed by the ERP later in the day.

Thanks are due to the Panel for their input.

5.4 Panel 1/2 - MetOcean & Actions.

Graham Bagnell reported that the panel had met on Monday afternoon. The meeting was well attended with 9 participants (partly because it was a joint meeting with Panel 11).

The actions from the last meeting had been completed. Graham had shared items of note from the Panel Convenors meeting with the Panel. The meeting had reviewed the pre-publication comments on the edits by ISO for clauses 6 & A.6 and 7 & A.7, and had concurred with the comments raised, with no new comments from the Panel.

The meeting spent the bulk of its time addressing the clauses of the Technical Report addressing Clauses 6, A.6 and 7, A.7. The panel has a number of action items for completion by the end of May. These include:

A review of the equation numbers,

A review of the text for consistency with the FDIS and SNAME 5-5A.

Updating some of the tables to improve their format.

The changes have been noted and will be sent to the WG Convenor.

Re-numbering.

Graham thanked the panel for their active participation, noting that they had completed on time, and propose that their next meeting is again a half-day, shared with P11.

Post meeting note: Comments arising from the TR review by P1/2 are shown in Attachment 4.

5.5 Panel 3 - Structures (Clause 8) & Responses (Clause 10).

John Stiff reported that Pao-Lin Tan had convened the meeting, but offered his apologies to WG7. The panel had a half-day meeting on Wednesday, and had succeeded in finishing early.

The panel had reviewed the comments on a number of issues that had been resolved by the WG Convenor and/or ERP after the Hamburg meeting. They have a few comments on the comments, but nothing serious.

They reviewed the pre-publication comments on ISO's edits, and had some minor changes to Annex C.

They then spent time on the TR. A reference may be needed to the SIPM source document for the Drag Inertia method. There was some debate in the WG as to the best way of sourcing the original document for inclusion in the TR. Post Meeting Note: ExxonMobil have since provided a scanned copy that is better than the one held by the WG Convenor. The WG Convenor will continue to seek an electronic WG Convenor copy from Shell. Check that SIPM source is referenced in bibliography. WG Convenor

Jens Juncher Jensen has submitted a new method via Gregers. The panel felt it would be premature to include this since (i) it has not yet been used "in anger" and


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


(ii) including it without verification would be inconsistent with the request that Jack Templeton demonstrates that his hysteretic damping approach be verified.

5.6 Panel 4 - Foundations.

Patrick Wong reported that the panel had a full-day meeting on Wednesday with 22 present (fewer than normal) including 10 practicing geotechnical experts, three by WebEx/Dial-in.

Key topics from the Panel Convenors meeting were shared with the Panel.

The Panel had reviewed the pre-publication comments on ISO's edits and other matters.

The panel had reviewed and agreed the ERP's suggested updates to resolve an inconsistency in respect of the formulations and figures for Hcav.

Had elected to delete "cohesive" from all occurrences of "undrained cohesive shear strength" (all in definitions).

Had, after consulting text books provided by Jack, corrected the Qvnet equation for sand, that had been missing a term.

Made minor changes to the headers of the tables for stiffness depth factors, for consistency with the text.

Included some additional words of clarification in A.9.3.6.6 wrt the analyses required to address a range of predicted penetrations.

Patrick reported that the meeting had finished early. He thanked the ERP for their efforts to bring his clauses to completion and others who had captured feedback that he had not managed to include in the document.

5.7 Panel 5 - Earthquake.

Doug Stock reported that P5 had met for a half day on Tuesday. There was plenty to do.

Doug thanked Michael Perry for pointing out the need to have an enabling clause to be able to include radiation damping in the screening process.

In Hamburg Victor Karthigeyan (Karthi) of the HSE had promised to provide inputs to the TR on frequency dependent radiation damping and stiffness. A few weeks before this meeting he had called to say that he would be offering his input and some 20 pages were received about a week before the meeting.

Doug had been through 3 editorial iterations prior to the panel meeting. The meeting had scanned through the text and detected a number of inconsistencies, especially between the figures and text. Significant effort is still needed to finalise this material. The meeting was reminded that ExxonMobil (Adel Younan) want to review this work. The plan is to have Adel review the material to bless it or otherwise. It is possible that it will need to be included with caveats. Doug (Adel)

John Stiff noted that some re-arrangement and a "road map" is needed from Karthi. Doug advised that he will need to obtain the equations and figures in a form that can Doug (Karthi) be edited. Patrick suggested the material could be included as "provisional". Doug hoped that Adel will agree with the technical content of the new text. John suggested that if not, it could be held over to the first update.

5.8 Panel 10 - Acceptance Criteria.

John Stiff reported that panel 10 had a half-day meeting on Monday. They had spent a little time reviewing the pre-publication comments on ISO's edits. The remainder of the time was spent on the content of the TR.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


John advised that the panel had:

Deleted rather less than he had hoped, although the text on relative ductility had been removed because this aspect is addressed by Class material requirements.

Retained the example showing the determination of plastic moment capacity in a simple section with tow yield strengths.

Had a look at the formulation for determining the limiting hydrostatic head for this to be ignored, and detected that the formulation needed limits to avoid unsafe conclusions for thin plates.

Resolved a few symbol clashes.

John reported that the meeting used all the time allocated and thanked the panel for their input.

5.9 Panel 11 - Long Term Applications.

Gregers Kudsk advised that P11 had met on Monday afternoon with P1-2 with 9 present.

The panel had reviewed the pre-publication comments on ISO's edits and concluded that both the editorial comments and the ERP's revision of Table A.11.3-2 are acceptable.

The panel has no content in the TR.

Gregers advised that P11 plans that its next meeting be held jointly with P1-2.

6. STATUS UPDATE ON BENCHMARKING

John Stiff reported that the benchmarking had been essentially complete by the time of the Hamburg meeting, with the exception of the final reports, which had been issued shortly afterwards.

Little has been done with the reports so far. They revealed no major problems. Comments on the text from the benchmarkers generally resulted in updates.

The benchmarking panel (himself, Pao-Lin Tan, Jim Brekke, Yi Li, Dave Lewis, Ward Turner and Rupert Hunt) needs to meet to discuss the benchmarking reports in the near future to determine the path forward. John Stiff

Michael Perry (again) recommended that the text that had caused divergences be reviewed and improved as necessary.

GL Noble Denton had produced the "go-by" based on the version of the DIS from December 2009 that was used for the benchmarking. They have since been commissioned to update this to align with the FDIS as submitted to ISO. There are some aspects that are new in the FDIS that are not covered in the update.

John advised that he is still hoping for further funding from Chevron (to date, funding is from IADC JUC, ExxonMobil and Shell), to:

Finalise the "go-by",

Allow the funded preparation of a report summarising the work.

Paul Versowsky advised that progress on the contract with Chevron had faltered because of illness and anticipated that it would be finalised next week. Paul Versowsky


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


7. ISO 19905-3 - FLOATING UNITS

John Stiff had been asked to convene Panel 53 addressing floating units some two years previously. John had managed the ABS JIP addressing the performance of floaters in GoMex hurricanes. At that time, Industry was not happy at the prospect of a separate document for the SSA of floaters.

John had spent some time evaluating the need. WG5's ISO 19901-7 addressing station keeping is essentially API RP2 SK, and provides information for MOU's. Their ISO 19904-1 provides information for determining loading, but explicitly excludes MOU's.

The initial proposal was to address floating MOU SSAs by re-wording 19901-7 and 19904-1 to accommodate these.

In the meantime, Bob Wolfram (ExxonMobil) announced he would retire as WG5 convenor and SC7 accepted Paul Erb (BP) as his replacement. In February, John and the WG Convenor (by conference call) joined a hand-over meeting with Bob, Paul and Andrea Mangiavacchi. John had shared his previous evaluation before the meeting. It was concluded that it was structurally difficult to implement the suggested approach. WG5 even suggested an annex to 19905-1. It was eventually concluded that 19905-3 is needed.

John advised that:

It will not be a large document,

It will reference existing documents,

It will address SSA issues for floaters, along the lines of 19905-1,

There will be no details of calculations or acceptance criteria,

DP is not well covered in the existing material.

John has developed a first draft based on 19905-1. It is about 25 pages long, including the ISO pre-amble and an Annex outlining the content of an assessment report. It has been circulated to a few, and is available for review/comment. Some think that it needs relatively little work to complete. The draft will be posted on the GLND download location. WG Convenor Post meeting note: See http://www.nodent.co.uk/iso-tc67-sc7-wg7/Panel 53

John had talked to Dave Smith (ExxonMobil), one of the original opponents of a separate document. He now sees it has merit and suggested that the document also points to relevant riser documents (ISO 13624-1, 13624-2, the ISO equivalents to API 16Q) with respect to the decision process for disconnection, watch circles, etc.

To progress the document, John needs both working panel members who will develop the text and corresponding panel members who will review the result. The John Stiff panel needs to have strong ties with WG7, but will also need to include key members of the floater community such as Dave Smith, and probably also the riser community. Any suggestions to John. All

The work can start as soon as the panel is formed. To progress through the ISO system a New Work Item Proposal is needed. This will need the support of 5 WG Convenor / nations participating in SC7. The intent is that this be developed in time for the SC7 John Stiff meeting in November, using John's draft as the attachment. The anticipated time scale for the work is 2 years.

Alberto Morandi advised that there is a US Coastguard initiative with IMCA and that it would be appropriate to talk to Warren Weaver about this. He also noted that John Stiff floaters are usually more critical in the operating mode than in survival mode.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


8. STATUS, ACTIONS & SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF:

8.1 ISO 19905-1

The WG Convenor needs to receive and collate the inputs from this week to the pre-publication comments on ISO's edits. Input from Patrick already received and John has input from the other panels which he sent after the meeting. WG Convenor Post meeting note: Done and updated matrix posted at the top of: http://www.nodent.co.uk/iso-tc67-sc7-wg7/wg7-drafts

The updated matrix will be sent to ISO. It may be necessary to meet with them in Geneva. It is hoped that the FDIS will be published for ballot by early in July so that comments from the 2-month ballot period can be reviewed during the week of the City University jack-up conference. Once ISO have responses to the comments received, publication should take 2 months.

8.2 ISO/TR 19905-2

In Resolution 297 (Singapore, 2011) SC7 agreed, after some debate, that the title will be changed to “Part 2: Jack-ups commentary and detailed sample calculation".

To achieve publication at about the same time as 19905-1, we need a CD that SC7 can review. SC7 requested a 3-month review period, so to receive comments in time for review during the week of the City University jack-up conference, the CD needs to be issued by 10th June.

The WG Convenor requested that he receive the latest versions from the panels ASAP so that he can work on the layout in consultation with ISO whilst the final text is being prepared. Convenors of P1-2, P3, P5 & P10

WG Convenors to submit final draft TR inputs by early June (say before 6th) for Convenors of collation by WG Convenor & submission to SC7. P1-2, P3, P5 & P10

8.3 ISO 19905-3

See Item 7.

9. FUTURE WG 7 MEETING SCHEDULE.

[SC7 is due to meet in Houston on November 2nd and 3rd 2011, with a WG1 meeting on November 1st.]

The next series of meetings will take place in September 2011 around the City University Jack-Up Conference in the week commencing 12th September (the Conference is on 13th & 14th September). WG Convenor to develop the schedule, based on the following requirements. WG Convenor

Panel Convenors Brief meeting Panel 0 2 hours (if req'd) Panel 1-2 & 11 1/2 day Panel 3 1/2 day Panel 4 1/2 day Panel 5 1/2 day Panel 10 1/2 day

WG7 (before OC7) 2.5 hrs SNAME OC7 1½ hrs SNAME Revs 2 hrs SNAME GoMex 1 hr


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


The following meetings will take place during OTC week 2012 (week commencing 30th April). Thereafter, it is likely that meetings will take place annually.

10. ANY OTHER BUSINESS.

10.1 None

11. CONFIRM ACTION ITEMS.

The action items from the meeting are summarised below [internal panel actions are generally not listed]:

11.1 Item 4.1.2. The WG Convenor will post the CD of 19900 at: WG Convenor http://www.nodent.co.uk/iso-tc67-sc7-wg7/wg1 drafts

11.2 Items 4.1.5 & 4.1.11. The WG Convenor to determine reasons for ongoing delay in publishing corrigenda to ISO 19901-3 and ISO 19902. WG Convenor

11.3 Item 4.2.1. Update 19905-1 bibliography for InSafe download location: WG Convenor http://insafe.woking.rpsplc.co.uk/default.asp

11.4 Item 5.1. OTC Session: Determine session and paper titles and lead authors. WG Convenor

11.5 Item 5.5. SIPM method text for TR. Pursue Shell for source document in electronic WG Convenor format. Check this is referenced in bibliography of 19905-1. WG Convenor

11.6 Item 5.7. Have Adel Younan review proposed TR content. Doug Stock

11.7 Item 5.7. Obtain figures and equations from Karthi in editable format. Doug Stock

11.8 Item 6. Hold meeting of benchmarking panel. John Stiff

11.9 Item 6. Finalise contract for additional benchmarking funding from Chevron. Paul Versowsky

11.10 Item 7. Post first draft of ISO 19905-3 at: WG Convenor http://www.nodent.co.uk/iso-tc67-sc7-wg7/Panel 53

11.11 Item 7. Form Panel 53 (working and corresponding members). Suggestions to John. John Stiff / All

11.12 Item 7. Develop New Work Item Proposal. WG Convenor / John Stiff

11.13 Item 7. Check on USCG/IMCA initiative with Warren Weaver. John Stiff

11.14 Item 8.1. Receive and collate inputs to Pre publication comments matrix. WG Convenor

11.15 Item 8.2. Submit latest versions of TR so that WG Convenor can work on layout, Convenors of etc. P1-2, P3, P5 & P10

11.16 Item 8.2. Submit final versions of TR before 6th June for collation by WG Convenor. Convenors of and submission to SC7. P1-2, P3, P5 & P10

11.17 Item 9. Prepare schedule for City University week. WG Convenor

12. CONCLUSION.

12.1 Prior to concluding the meeting the WG Convenor expressed his thanks to ExxonMobil for hosting the series of meetings, and to Patrick Wong and those who had assisted him for doing the work to make the week successful. He also thanked those who had attended the WG7 and preceding meetings and who had contributed to the success of the week.


ITEM MINUTE ACTION


12.2 There being no further business, the meeting closed at approximately 1145 hrs, and was followed by a presentation by Jack Templeton on his ongoing work to calibrate his approach to hysteretic damping.


ATTACHMENT 1

ISO TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 Attendance Record for 29th Meeting

5th May 2010, ExxonMobil URC, Three Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas, USA



ATTACHMENT 1 (cont)





ATTACHMENT 1 (cont)





ATTACHMENT 1 (cont)





ATTACHMENT 2



ATTACHMENT 2 (cont)



ATTACHMENT 2 (cont)



ATTACHMENT 3



ATTACHMENT 4

..\iso\meetings\mtg-29\… Rev 0, 3rd June 2011

ISO SNAME Consistent SNAME Consistent ISO FDIS

Comments

TR 6.4.1 C.3.3 Complete Consistent Ed: “(“ TR 6.4.2.2 C.3.5.1 Complete, copy of the

6 relevant paragraphs, remaining part copied in TR 6.4.2.3.1

Consistent

TR 6.4.2.3 C.3.5.1.2 Complete copy of SNAME text SNAME refers to section 4.4, which corresponds to ISO FDIS A.7.3.3.3.1.

Inconsistent. Text applicable to A.6.4.2.3 is correct. New text added that should now make the section to be consistent with A.6.4.2.3

Reference corrected to correct Clause A.7.3.3.3.1 Revised text

TR 6.4.2.3.1 C.3.5.1 Complete, remaining part of C.3.5.1, not in TR 6.4.2.2. Change: OTM, BS and/or deck displacement Check: Table TR 6.4.2.2-1 all numbers checked and OK (SNAME C 3.5.1) Table TR 6.4.2.2-2 all numbers checked and OK (SNAME C 3.5.2)

Consistent Ed (4x): Stokes’ fifth as per FDIS i.s.o. Stoke’s fifth Wrong reference: Fig TR 7.4.3-1 -> Fig TR 7.3.3.3-2 Remove “a” Remove “-“ somewhere in the table !: In notes to Table to include upto “Airy Wheeler stochastic load = d (other load)”

TR 6.4.2.4 C.3.5.2 SNAME text deleted. Replaced with new background.

Consistent

TR 6.4.2.5 3.5.3 & C.3.5.3

SNAME section 3.5.3, except the part already in Clause A.6.4.2.5 itself, is copied and complete. C3.5.3 is added completely

Consistent. A part is double in A.6.4.2.7 and in TR.6.4.2.5 on peak enhancement factor. Propose to leave it as is. Added ref to Clause A.6.4.2.7 Text is added to show equivalence between SNAME

Deleted sentence on a recommended = 3.3 as it is already and appropriate in A.6.4.2.5 Ref [1] corrected to [A.6.4-4] In both equations TR 6.4-3 and TR.6.4-4 was an error, where Tpf

-1 should be (Tpf -1) as per SNAME. This verified and corrected.


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


spectral formulation and ISO 19901-1.

Two figures need be replaced by new ones

TR 6.4.2.6 C.3.5.1.1 SNAME section copied completely

Consistent Incorrect references. Consistent lay-out of eq (A.6.4-9). Changed: ‘Only Airy currently applicable’, as it may be somewhat outdated to ‘Airy may be applicable’

TR 6.4.2.8.1 3.5.4 & C.3.5.4

Complete copy of part not already in Clause A.6.4.2.8

Consistent with A.6.4.2.8. Comparison of SNAME recommendations and ISO 19901-1 recommendations added in sub 2 and 3

Corrected reference to Section 3.5.4 in SNAME Added reference to [6.4-1 on kinematics reductions Replaced n consistently by m, which is to distinguish between SNAME and ISO formulation Should be

TR 6.4.2.8.2 - New text - - TR 6.4.2.8.3 - New text INCONSISTENT:

A.6.4.2.8 states s = 17 where TR6.4.2.8.3 states s=15 (figures confirm). S=15 must be correct

-

TR 6.4.3 - New text - - TR 6.4.4 C.3.7 Consistent Consistent - TR 6.4.5 - New text. The text in

SNAME C3.4 was deleted/dismissed

InConsistent (new text) Changed TR.6.4.6 into TR.6.4.5 to be consistent with ISO an added subsection TR.6.4.5.1 Updated fig references too

NOTE: There are 2 wrong references in ISO A.6.4.5.1 referring to TR.6.4.6.1 and A.6.4.6.2 ISO A.6.4.5.1 refers to wind speed of 10 m/sec which must be 20 m/sec. TR = correct. This is


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


INCONSISTENT. Glossary of terms

Exact copy of glossary of terms SNAME C3

Highly probable NOT

Likely subject to revision, but not done

References TR 6.4

Ref C3 All references identical incl numbering

Appendix TR 7.B

Appendix C4.B

Complete copy, consistent reference in TR 6.4.2.3.1

Summary on TR 6.4: All sections in SNAME Commentary 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7 were either correctly captured/copied or dismissed/replaced on purpose. Some outstanding actions on TR 6.4:

- 2 new figures on spectra comparison - Should be - ISO style glossary of terms and references - Glossary of terms may not be consistent!!??

Comments to ISO 19905-1 (inconsistencies): Clause A.6.4.5.1: 2nd paragraph: reference to A.6.4.6.2 -> A.6.4.5.2 2nd paragraph: reference to TR.6.4.6.1 -> TR.6.4.5.1 2nd paragraph: The stated wind speed of 10 m/sec shall be 20 m/sec (as in the TR, which is correct seen from the figures)


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


TR 7 ISO SNAME Consistent SNAME Consistent ISO

FDIS Comments

TR 7.1 C4.1 Consistent Consistent. Some text modifications applied

TR 7.3 - - Main section number and header added for consistency

TR 7.3.2 C4.6 Consistent TR 7.3.2.1 TR 7.3.2.1.1 TR 7.3.2.1.2 TR 7.3.2.1.3

C4.6.1 (part) C4.6.2 (full) C4.6.3 (full) C4.6.4 (full)

Copy Consistent. C4.6.2,3,4 moved up to relate to A.7.3.2.1.1 to A.7.3.2.1.3

CHECK: Compliance with ISO 19901-1 shielding&solidification

TR 7.3.2.2 C4.6.1 (part) Copy. Correction: A was in subscript i.s.o. full text (ref SNAME) Ref to Clause corrected

Now consistent. Added rn

Changed sect title

TR 7.3.2.3 TR 7.3.2.3.1 TR 7.3.2.3.2

C4.6.1 (part) C4.6.5 (full) C4.6.6 (full)

Copy. Correction: A was in subscript i.s.o. full text (ref SNAME) New subsections introduced Ref to Clause corrected

Now consistent Changed section title. Added rn. and ∑

TR 7.3.2.4.1 C.4.7.1 General Copy, but 1 text revision

Consistent Text revised: “be somewhat larger than” > “differ from”

TR.7.3.2.4.2 C.4.7.2 Tubular Complete copy

Now Consistent. Corrected reference to Table A.7.3-2. Changed MWL to MSL

CHECK NUMBERS IN TABLES: TR.7.3.2.4-1 (C.4.7.2.2)

TR.7.3.2.4.3 C.4.7.4 Brackets Copy.

Now Consistent. Changed ‘brackets’ into ‘gussets’.

TR.7.3.2.4.4 C.4.7.5 Complete copy of C 4.7.5

Ref to Clause corrected

Lay-out correction to eq TR.7.3-10, where the note to CD1 was


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


Ref to table 7.3-2 corrected

more general than only to CD1 [ref SNAME eq 4.7.4

TR.7.3.2.4.5 C.4.7.6 Other shapes Copy.

Consistent

TR 7.3.2.5 C.4.7.3 Copy Consistent Could be left out TR 7.3.3.1 C 4.3 Copy. Comment on

large diameter members added (new) in TR 7.3.3.1.1

Consistent

TR 7.3.3.2 & TR 7.3.3.2.1

C.4.3.1 Consistent Consistent. Sub-section .1, .2, and .3 in TR not in A.7.3.3.2 Ref Clause checked

New sub-header TR.7.3.3.2.1 Sub-sections TR.7.3.3.2.2 and TR.7.3.3.2.3 as per SNAME

TR 7.3.3.2.2 C.4.3.2 Complete copy Consistent.

Propose to leave the doubling intact.

TR 7.3.3.2.3 C.4.3.3 Complete copy Inconsistent, but considered consistent after modifications: Added part on added mass and structure accelerations to (TR.7.3-16) and text below Ref to figure A.7.3-1 checked

ACTION

TR 7.3.3.3 C4.4.1 Copy, reference checked

Inconsistent: Standard doesn’t speak of “only Airy” anymore -> replaced “only” by “traditional”

TR 7.3.3.3.1 C4.4.2 Copy ? TR 7.3.3.3.2 C4.4.3 Copy, reference

checked Same comment as TR 7.3.3.3 Replaced “mean” by “still” for d

A.7.3.3.3.3 Effect of directionality and spreading on response – no TR in SNAME

No guidance

TR 7.3.3.4 C4.5 TR 7.3.3.4.1 C4.5.1 Copy, references Consistent.


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


checked TR 7.3.3.4.2 C4.5.2 Copy, references

checked Consistent.

TR 7.3.3.4.3 C4.5.3 Copy, references checked

Consistent. Replaced D1 by DF for consistency

TR 7.3.3.4.4 C4.5.4 Copy, references checked

Consistent.

A.7.3.3.5 Intrinsic/apparent wave period

No guidance

TR 7.3.4 C4.2 Consistent copy. Checked references to Clauses

Now Consistent. Deleted that Standard recommends power law, is phrased differenty in A.7.3.4. Some text added. One reference corrected

-

TR 7.8 C4.8 Copy of SNAME text but with a fundamental change to the applicable limits: ‘> i.s.o. <. Additional guidance given

NOT CHECKED CHECK whether this change of limit is correct! VIV stated in 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 only. Where to put this section is unclear

Glossary of terms

Exact copy of glossary of terms SNAME C4

Highly probable NOT

Likely subject to revision, but not done

References TR 7

Ref C4 All references identical incl numbering Ref 68, 69, 70 new specific for ISO TR

Appendix TR 7.A

Appendix C4.A Complete copy. Tables checked.

Appendix TR 7.B

Appendix C4.B Complete copy.

Inconsistent where referred to PRACTICE. Replaced by: as per SNAME rev 2

Appendix TR 7.C

Appendix C4.C Complete copy -

- VIV cl 7.8


ATTACHMENT 4 (cont)


- No guidance on Intrinsic/apparent wave period - No guidance on directionality and spreading - Shielding & solidification (ISO 19901-1), check?

Comments to ISO 19905-1 (inconsistencies): Clause A.7.3:

1. Equation (A.7.3-7) has a major error in the formula, where 9/7 should be stated is.o. the theta/7.

2. Eq (A.7.3-13) doesn’t show the r (acceleration of member) in the pdf. I know it must be there, probably lay-out only?

3. A.7.3.3.3.2: Reference to figure 7.3-23 of TR to be replaced by TR.7.3.3.3-2

4. A.7.3.4.1: Reference to A.6.4.6.2 should be A.6.4.5.2

Documents

ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 (Jack-Ups) SITE … · ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 - Jack-Ups Minutes of 29th Meeting of WG 7, 5th May 2011, Houston ISO/TC 67/SC 7/WG 7 (Jack-Ups) SITE ASSESSMENT OF