Upload
dmlsfmm
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
1/20
A COMPUTATIONAL SYSTEM FOR SUBSEA PIPELAYING SIMULATION
Danilo Machado Lawinscky da Silva
Carl Horst Albrecht
Breno Pinheiro Jacob
LAMCSO Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore SystemsDepartment of Civil Engineering, COPPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
Isaias Quaresma Masetti
Claudio Roberto Mansur Barros
Arthur Curty Saad
PETROBRAS Petrleo Brasileiro S.A.
Abstract. Traditional analysis methods for pipelaying simulation consider an uncoupled
model where the motions of the barge are previously determined, without taking into account
the influence of the pipeline, and are then prescribed at the top of the pipeline.
Currently, the analyses of pipelaying operations have been performed by commercial
softwares, such as OffPipe. However, such tools presents restrictions/limitations related to
the user interface, model generation and analysis formulations. These limitations hinder its
efficient use for analyses of installation procedures for the scenarios considered by
Petrobras, using the BGL-1 barge or other vessels.
Therefore, the objective of this work is to present a computational tool in which the modules
follow the Petrobras users specifications. The main objective of such tool is to overcome thelimitations for specific needs and particular scenarios in the simulation of several types of
pipeline procedures. Such tool, called SITUA-PetroPipe, presents an extremely friendly
interface with the user, for instance allowing the complete customization of the configuration
of laybarge and stinger rollers, and includes novel analysis methods and formulations, for
instance the ability of coupling the structural behaviour of the pipe with the hydrodynamic
behaviour of the vessel motions under environmental conditions.
Several simulations of actual operations are shown, in order to illustrate the application of
this new computational tool.
Keywords:Numerical Methods, Offshore Operations, Pipeline Installation Procedures
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
2/20
1. INTRODUCTIONInstallation of pipelines and flowlines constitute some of the most challenging offshore
operations. The technical challenges have spawned significant research and developmentefforts in a broad range of areas, not only in studies regarding different installation methods,
but also in the formulation and implementation of new computational tools required to thenumerical simulation. This work addresses this latter issue.The most common installation methods are the S-Lay, J-Lay, and Reel-Lay methods,
schematically shown in Fig. 1, and Towing methods, schematically shown in Fig. 2 (Guo,Bai, 2005; Kyriakides,2007).
Figure 1 S-Lay, J-Lay and Reel-Lay Methods.
In the S-Lay method, as the laying barge moves forward, the pipe is eased off the stern,curving downward through the water until it reaches the touchdown point. After touchdown,as more pipe is played out, it assumes the S shaped curve. To reduce bending stress in the
pipe, a stinger is used to support the pipe as it leaves the barge. To avoid buckling of the pipe,a tensioner must be used to provide appropriate tensile load to the pipeline (Clauss,1998).This method is used for pipeline installations in a range of water depths from shallow to deep.
In the J-lay method, the pipe is dropped down almost vertically until it reachestouchdown; after that it assumes the J shaped curve. J-Lay barges have a tall tower on thestern to weld and slip pre-welded pipe sections. With the simpler pipeline shape, the J-Laymethod avoids some of the difficulties of S-Laying such as tensile load forward thrust, and
can be used in deeper waters.In the Reel-Lay method, the pipeline is installed from a huge reel mounted on an offshore
vessel. Pipelines are assembled at an onshore spool-base facility and spooled onto a reelwhich is mounted on the deck of a pipelay barge. Horizontal reels lay pipe with an S-Layconfiguration. Vertical reels most commonly do J-Lay, but can also S-Lay.
Towing methods basically consists in weld the pipeline onshore with an onshore pipelinespread. Once the pipeline is complete and hydrotested, the pipeline is dewatered and movedinto the water, while being attached to a tow vessel. It is then towed to an offshore locationwhere each end is connected to pre-installed facilities (Silva,2007b,2008).
There are four variations of the towing method: surface tow, mid-depth tow, off-bottomtow, and bottom tow (Fig. 2). In the surface tow approach, buoyancy modules are added to the
pipeline so that it floats at the surface. Once the pipeline is towed on site by one or twotugboats (Silva,2008), the buoyancy modules are removed or flooded, and the pipeline settles
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
3/20
to the sea floor. The mid-depth tow requires fewer buoyancy modules, and the pipeline settlesto the bottom on its own when the forward progression ceases. The off-bottom tow involves
buoyancy modules and chain weights. In the bottom tow, primarily used for soft and flat seafloor in shallow water, the pipeline is towed along the sea floor
Towing could be cheaper than other methods that use laybarges. However, a case-by-case
analysis is required to determine the cost-benefit ratio.
Figure 2: Tow-in Methods.
2. PIPELAYING IN OFFSHORE BRAZILUsual pipelaying operation in offshore Brazil are performed by S-Lay procedures
employing the BGL-1 barge (Fig. 3) owned by Petrobras. The BGL-1 is a second-generationanchor positioned laybarge that performs installation operations by moving forward using itsown mooring lines. Basically, tug boats drop anchors at some predefined positions; then the
barge winches release the stern mooring cables, and collect the mooring cables located at thebow.
In order to prevent the pipe from buckling in the regions of maximum bending, the bendradius is controlled by keeping the pipe under tension, so that the pipe actually follows a lazyS shape. The tension is applied to the pipe by tensioners on the barge which are usuallyarrays of rubber wheels or belts which surround the pipe and apply an axial force to the pipethrough the friction generated between the tensioner and the pipe external coating as shown inFig. 4.
Figure 3 The BGL-1 Pipeline Launching Barge
The force on the pipeline is reacted at the seabed end of the pipeline by the dead weightof the pipeline and friction between it and the seabed. Obviously the larger the force applied
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
4/20
by the t
of the l
to the p
bend p
As
forwar
mentio
that it c
3. R
Tr
motionthe pip
Fo
deepwa
mandat
Wicher
interact
behavi
implem
couple
It c
designIn the
laybarg
Al
contact
only in
Tr
operati
such to
generat
installa
other v
ensioners t
ying curv
ipe to main
rtion of the
individual
and the
ed before,
an keep mo
QUIREM
ditional an
of the barline, and a
floating
ter scenari
ory for th
s,Heurtier,2
ion of the
r of the
entation of
with the e
an intuitive
f producticase of pi
e can be si
o regardin
mechanis
some point
ditionally,
ns employ
ols present
on and ana
ion proced
essels, con
the pipeli
. Also, as t
tain the de
curve (To
pipe lengt
ew sectio
tugs are us
ving forwa
NTS FO
lysis meth
ge are pree then pres
roduction
s, it has be
e accurate
001; Senra
ydrodyna
ooring lin
such analy
uations of
ly be seen
n platformelines in
nificantly
pipelines
between
s of the ra
Petrobras
ing comm
limitation
lysis form
ures for th
idering fo
ne, the mo
he pipe we
ired bend r
selletti,200
Figure
s are weld
of pipeli
ed to conti
rd.
PIPELA
ods for pip
iously detecribed at th
systems (F
en recogni
numerical
,2002). Co
ic behavi
es and ris
is tools, th
motion of t
hat the use
s, but also-Lay oper
ffected by
n S-Lay in
the pipelin
p and sting
has been
rcial soft
related n
lations. Th
scenarios
instance
e gradual
ight increa
adius and s
6).
4 BGL-1
ed onto th
e passes
uously re
ING SIM
eline layin
rmined wie top of the
PS) under
ed that the
simulatio
upled anal
r of the F
rs, repres
e 6-DOF e
he FEM m
of coupled
for the simations, eve
the structur
stallation o
and the l
er.
performin
are, such
t only to
ese limitati
considered
articular t
ill be the
es it is nec
o prevent b
Tensioner
growing
ver the st
osition the
ULATIO
consider a
hout takinpipeline.
the action
use of cou
, analysis
sis formul
S hull wit
nted by F
uations of
del of the
formulatio
lation of on in shall
al behavior
perations, i
aunching s
g numeric
s OffPipe
he user in
ons hinder
by Petrob
pes of sti
ending rad
essary to a
uckling, pa
.
ipeline, th
nger towa
anchors a
n uncouple
into acco
of environ
pled dyna
and desi
ations con
h the struc
inite Elem
otion of t
ines.
s is impor
ffshore insw waters
of the pipe
t should be
tructure is
l simulati
(Malahy J
erface, bu
ts efficient
as, using t
gers depe
ius in the
ply a grea
rticularly i
e barge is
ds the sea
ead of the
d model, w
nt the infl
mental loa
ic analysi
n (Ormbe
ider the n
tural/hydro
ent models
e platform
ant not onl
allation ophe motion
line.
considered
complex,
ons of pi
, 1996).
also to th
use for an
he BGL-1
ding on d
portion
er force
the sag
inched
bed. As
arge so
here the
ence of
dings in
tools is
rg,1997;
n-linear
ynamic
. In the
hull are
y for the
erations.s of the
that the
pecified
elaying
owever,
e model
lyses of
arge or
pth and
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
5/20
pipeline, with different lengths and geometries adapted to certain laying conditions in S-Layprocedures.
Therefore, the objective of this work is to present the development of a in-housecomputational tool, referred as SITUA-PetroPipe, that overcomes the limitations for specificneeds and particular scenarios in the simulation of several types of pipeline procedures, and
addresses the requirements regarding the analysis formulations mentioned above.As will be described in the remainder of this work, such tool presents an extremelyfriendly interface with the user, allowing for instance the complete customization of theconfiguration of laybarge and stinger rollers.
4. SITUAPROSIMThe SITUA-PetroPipe tool may be seen as specialized modules of the SITUA-Prosim
system (Jacob,1997), which has been developed since 1997, in cooperation by Petrobras andLAMCSO (Laboratory of Computer Methods and Offshore Systems, at the Civil EngineeringDepartment of COPPE/UFRJ, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro)1. This system constitutes
a computational tool that performs coupled static and dynamic nonlinear analyses of a widerange of offshore operations.
The PetroPipe modules described here are based in the SITUA graphical interface, and inthe Prosim numerical solver (Jacob,2005). This numerical solver comprises a time-domainnonlinear dynamic analysis program, which has been employed by Petrobras since 1998 inseveral design activities related to floating production systems.
The coupled formulation of the Prosim program incorporates, in the same computationalcode and data structure, a hydrodynamic model to represent the hull and a finite elementmodel to represent the structural hydrodynamic behavior of the mooring lines, risers and
pipelines. This coupled formulation allows the simultaneous determination of the motions ofthe hull, and the structural response of the lines. Moreover, the results will be more accuratesince all dynamic and nonlinear interaction effects between the hull and the lines areimplicitly and automatically considered. Details of such coupled model are presentedelsewhere (Senra,2002;Jacob,2005), and will not be reproduced here
The original Prosim code was oriented towards the analysis and design of FPS,considering their installed and operational situations. Later, the SITUA-Prosim system wasdeveloped by incorporating a graphical interface and adapting / specializing the code for theanalysis of installation and damage situations (hence its name, from the PortugueseSITUaes de instalao e Avaria).
The SITUA interface (Fig. 5) is designed to work as a pre-processor and model generatorfor the Prosim finite-element based numerical analysis modules, and to provide facilities for
statistical and graphical post-processing and visualization of results. The model generationprocedures of the interface incorporate an analytical catenary solver, able to representcomplex configurations such as lines with multiple segments and different materials,connected to other lines or to platforms, and with flotation elements such as buoys orsegments with distributed floaters.
The interface allows a very simple and intuitive definition of the model of a line. Theuser needs only to specify the number, length and type of segments that comprise the line. Adatabase with several material types is incorporated in the system. Another enhanced facilityfor the definition of lines for actual operations of the BGL barge consists in the definition oftwo of the parameters that define a catenary (including anchor position, horizontal force, total
1 It should be pointed out that the SITUA-Prosim and the PetroPipe modules are not commercial programs; allrights are reserved to Petrobras.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
6/20
top axi
laid len
A
Prosim
proced
can be
4.1 IntTh
bathym
and det
This is
System
informa
vessel e
Th
Soil-pi
node th
represedirectio
Fri
the co
coeffici
4.2 Ba
As
ahead,
chartin
the buo
In
the seq
l tension),
th of the t
eries of ad
system, i
res. Some
ound in (M
eraction w
computat
etric curve
rmine pos
performed
) database
tion about
quipped wi
seabed is
e interacti
at compris
ting the fn (Saevik,2
tion effect
sideration
ents for the
rge Motio
mentioned
long a pre
of a serie
s and the
rder to hel
uence of
n a varia
p segment
aptations a
tended to
ighlights
asetti,2004
Figure
ith Seabed
onal tool i
. It can al
ible interfe
through a
ystem. Th
the bathy
th a ROV (
modeled b
n effects a
s the spati
iction bet004; Mich
s on the se
of anisotr
axial and l
and Inter
before, du
efined rou
of points
ull of the
p the BGL
ooring op
le-length
of the moo
d enhance
specialize
f these too
).
Main sc
s able to i
o automat
rences bet
specialize
s system,
etry and
Remote Op
a surface
e modeled
l discretiz
een pipe alopoulos,1
bed are re
pic frictio
ateral direc
ference M
ing pipela
e. The pla
n this rout
arge.
1 barge cr
rations th
rocedure.
ring line to
ments had
its use
ls are desc
reen of the
corporate
cally cons
een the m
d interface
eveloped
osition of
erated Veh
mesh in w
through no
tion of the
nd soil, a86).
resented b
, through
ions of the
nagement
ing the ba
ning of su
, specifyin
w to devel
t leads to
The syste
comply wi
already be
or simula
ibed in the
SITUA-Pr
he correct
der the po
oring lines
with the
y Petrobra
subsea ob
icle) (2002
ich the z-c
nlinear sca
pipeline.
d also as
y an elasto
the definit
pipeline (S
Modules
ge is move
h procedur
the positi
op safe mo
the barge
then auto
h the give
n incorpor
ion of th
text that f
sim Syste
definition
sition of th
or the pip
SGO (Obs
s, contains
stacles, ga
.
oordinate r
ar element
uch scalar
ontact spri
lastic for
ion of dis
ilva,2006a
d periodic
e consists i
oning of th
oring proce
otion, th
atically ad
parameter
ted in the
BGL-1
llows; mor
.
of the seab
e subsea o
line with o
acles Man
frequently
hered by
presents t
s associate
act on the
ngs on the
ulation th
inct soil-r
.
lly one pip
n the defini
anchors, t
dures and t
system is
justs the
s.
SITUA-
ooring
e details
ed from
stacles,
stacles.
agement
updated
special
e depth.
to each
seabed,
vertical
t allows
sistance
e length
tion and
he lines,
o define
able to
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
7/20
calculate the motions of the barge due to the operations performed with its mooring lines,leading to changes in their catenary configuration (including placement of buoys, variation ofthe onboard/released cable lengths, and relocating anchors).
During the simulation of such mooring operations by the SITUA interface, a specializedinterference management module can be employed to characterize interference situations.
Such situations are detected when an obstacle falls into an exclusion volume defined aroundsegments of a line laying on the seabed, and a vertical distance below suspended segments,with risks of collision and damage to the line and/or the obstacle (a manifold, another
pipeline, etc.).Figure 6 presents a 3D view where the exclusion region around one line is graphically
displayed, showing a possible interference situation with a previously installed pipeline. Amore detailed visualization, including the definition of the types of obstacles and distancesfrom the line, can be observed in 2D views such as the depicted in Fig. 7. In these views theinterferences are indicated by red arrows, with the corresponding distances, and a tag definingthe obstacle.
Once the possible interferences are identified, the BGL-1 operator can take measures to
avoid them, including the placement of buoys in given positions along the line. Figure 8shows a configuration of a mooring line with two buoys, to keep the line suspended well oversubsea obstacles.
Figure 6 3D View of Exclusion Region with Interference.
Figure 7 2D View Detailing Interference.
Figure 8 3D View of Mooring Lines with Buoys.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
8/20
5. SITUAPETROPIPEAs mentioned before, the PetroPipe modules include new tools developed following the
Petrobras users specifications. These tools are intended to automate the generation ofnumerical models for the simulation of pipeline installation procedures (for instance, allowing
the complete customization of the configuration of the laybarge and stinger rollers).Moreover, the PetroPipe modules address the requirements regarding the analysisformulations mentioned in a preceding section, including the coupling of the structural
behavior of the pipe with the hydrodynamic behavior of the vessel motions. Also, the contactof lines (mooring lines, risers, pipelines) with the platform can be rigorously modeled duringa nonlinear dynamic analysis, as well as the contact involving different lines or even thecontact of one line with itself.
5.1 Modeling of ContactTraditional contact models consider for instance a generalized scalar element, consisting
of two nodes linked by a non-linear gap spring (Grealish,2005). Here, the contact modelconsists of a generalized elastic surface contact algorithm. The contact is modeled byaugmentation of the global stiffness matrix, based on the orientation and contact stiffness ofthe contact surfaces. Details of this algorithm are presented in (Silva,2006a,2007a).
The algorithm has been shown to be able of capturing the detailed characteristics of theinteraction between mooring lines, risers, pipelines, hulls, in a sophisticated model such as theillustrated in Fig. 9, depicting the contact between the pipeline and the rollers of the laybargestinger. A more detailed example will be presented in the application presented later.
Figure 9 Contact Model.
5.2 Tensioner ModelAs mentioned before, the tensioner (Fig. 4) is intended to control the tension level in the
pipeline during the pipelaying operation, by keeping it within a feasible operational range.In the PetroPipe modules, the tensioner is represented by a specialized generalized scalar
element, automatically added to the pipeline top end, which consists of two nodes linked by anonlinear gap spring. Force-displacement or stiffness-displacement functions associated toeach local direction are defined, and the local coordinates systems can also be updated at eachsimulation step.
To simulate the tensioner behavior in keeping the tension level at the defined range, theaxial stiffness of this element continually varies, leading to changes in the element length asthe pipeline end moves back and forth. It should be recalled that the pipeline end motions areinduced by the tensioner behavior and by the barge motions applied at the tensioner. Thetensioner model is schematically shown in Fig. 10.
All main characteristics of the tensioner machine are incorporated in this model,including:
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
9/20
Operational Range defines the range of desired tension values; the tensioner is notactivated whenever the pipeline end tension is within this range.
Response Delay Whenever the pipe tension leaves the operational range, thetensioner is activated but only after a given time delay, when it effectively startsworking.
Response Velocity After the tensioner effectively starts working, it does not restorethe tension level immediately, but after a certain period defined by its design responsevelocity.
Displacement Limit This defines the limit in which the tensioner can move thepipeline back and forth in order to compensate its tension level.
Figure 10 Tensioner Model.
6. MODELING OF PIPELINE INSTALLATION PROCEDURESIn the following sections, the facilities incorporated in the PetroPipe modules are
illustrated by their application to real-case pipeline installation scenarios.
6.1 Lateral Deflection ProcedureThe Lateral Deflection procedure, associated to towing methods, may be used to move
the pipeline into the sea. In this context, it consists basically on deflecting the pipeline to thesea (after assembled at the coastline) using a cable connected to a tug boat. Thecharacterization of the deflection procedure involves the determination of the better velocityand direction of the tug boat when the pipeline is leaving the shore in order to minimize itsefforts (especially due to the curvatures).
The PetroPipe modules have been employed to model such a procedure for an actualscenario, as presented in (Silva,2007b). Some steps of the results of numerical simulations forthis procedure are illustrated in Fig. 11: the pipeline is on shore (1), at the coastline, beforestarting towing (2), the pipeline leaves shore (3,4) and is towed to the installation site.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
10/20
Figure 11: Lateral Deflection Procedure6.2 Tow-in
As mentioned before, tow-in operations are performed in many situations to transportpipelines of several lengths. Usually, Petrobras performs these operations following a lateraldeflection procedure such as the previously described. In the typical configuration for surfacetow, the pipe is towed using a front and a back tugboat aligned at the transportation route, asshown in Fig. 12.
Numerical simulations of actual operations were performed using the SITUA-PetroPipesystem, in order to assess the pipeline behavior under environmental loadings. The studies
presented in (Silva, 2008) include an alternative configuration, shown in Fig. 13, where thetugboats are not aligned. Smaller values of cable tension were obtained when the pipeline isnearly aligned with the direction of the resultant of the environmental loadings.
Figure 12: Tow-in Typical Configuration.
Figure 13: Tow-in Alternative Configuration.
A contingency procedure was also analyzed in (Silva,2008), for a situation in which the
back tugboat is disconnected and only the front tugboat is pulling the pipeline. Thisconfiguration simulates a situation in which one of the tugboats loses control and its cable is
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
11/20
disconnected. The results of the analyses indicated that the smaller values of cable tensionswere found in configurations where the back tugboat is disconnected, indicating that the bestsituation occurs when it does not tension the pipe, or simply when it is not connected to the
pipe.Therefore, from the results of the numerical simulations, the actual pipeline
transportation was performed by Petrobras using only one tugboat, employing a smaller boatonly to accompany the transport operation for safety reasons, and to perform the maneuversneeded for the subsequent pipeline launching process. During the operation, all numerical
predictions related to the pipeline behavior were confirmed.
6.3 Shore PullThe shore pull operation illustrated here consists in pulling the pipe from the BGL-1
barge onto the shore by a winch. The winch needs to keep adequate pulling force to ensurethat the pipe is maintained under controlled tension within the allowed stress/strain limits. Theforces applied must be controlled such that no damage to the pipeline anodes or coating
occurs. Buoyancy aids can be used if required to keep pulling tension within acceptablelimits.
During the numerical simulation by the SITUA-PetroPipe system, forces in the pipelineand cable are analyzed including any overloading, friction and dynamic effects that mayoccur. Figure 14 shows snapshots from the animation of the numerical results, as the pipelineis pulled from the barge and arrives on the shore.
Figure 14 Shore Pull Operation.
7. GENERATION OF A S-LAY MODELThe complete generation of an S-Lay model using the specialized interface of the
SITUA-PetroPipe is described in the following sections.
7.1 Laybarge CharacteristicsFigure 15 and Table 1 illustrate the main geometric characteristics of the BGL-1 barge.Detailed actual data, in terms of the geometrical and hydrodynamic characteristics of the
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
12/20
BGL-1 hull, were provided by Petrobras and employed to generate the model of the bargehull, represented in Fig. 16. The geometric data are used in the definition of the contactsurface of the barge hull.
Figure 15 BGL-1 Geometry
Table 1 Main geometric characteristics of BGL-1
Propriety Values (real scale)Drought 5.182 mHeight 9 mBeam 30 m
Length 120 m
Figure 16 SITUA-PetroPipe BGL-1 Model
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
13/20
7.2 Ramp and Stinger DataFigure 17 illustrates the configuration of the ramp and stinger considered for the
application described here. The local ramp-stinger coordinate system has its origin on thestern shoe, X-axis positive direction from bow to stern and Z-axis vertical with positive
direction upwards, as indicated in Fig. 18. The geometric data of ramp and stinger aresummarized in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.The geometric data of the stinger structure are also used in the definition of its contact
surface. During the finite element analysis the stinger is considered a rigid body connected tothe barge hull and all contact forces acting on it are transferred to the barge. Thehydrodynamic characteristics of the stinger are incorporated at the barge hull model by itshydrodynamic coefficients.
Figure 19 shows typical configurations for roller boxes on the laybarge stinger and ramp,respectively.
Figure 17 BGL-1, Ramp and Stinger Geometry
Figure 18 Ramp/Stinger, Local Coordinate System.
Table 2 Ramp radius 150 m
Element X (m) Z (m) Length (m)Tensioner -56.335 1.550 -
Roller Box 1 -38.905 1.094 2.75Roller Box 2 -26.574 0.768 2.75Roller Box 3 -18.078 0.034 2.75Roller Box 4 -9.292 -1.241 2.75Roller Box 5 -0.432 -3.157 3.00
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
14/20
Table 3 Stinger radius 150 m
Element X (m) Z (m) Offset (m) Length (m)Roller Box 1 5.277 -4.632 0.687 4.00Roller Box 2 9.094 -5.825 0.687 4.00Roller Box 3 12.856 -7.156 0.694 4.00Roller Box 4 16.586 -8.555 0.714 4.00Roller Box 5 20.275 -10.099 0.748 4.00Roller Box 6 23.882 -11.770 0.793 4.00Roller Box 7 27.443 -13.581 0.850 4.00Roller Box 8a 29.361 -15.198 0.919 --Roller Box 8 30.883 -15.835 0.950 --
Figure 19 Configuration of Rollers (Stinger and Ramp)
As mentioned before, this configuration of the laybarge ramp and stinger roller boxes canbe easily and completely customized by the new modules of the graphical interface of theSITUA-PetroPipe system, as illustrated in Figs 20, 21 and 22. A general view of the generatedmodel for the BGL-1 is shown in Fig. 22.
Figure 20 Ramp Configuration.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
15/20
Figure 21 Stinger Configuration.7.3 Mooring Lines
The BGL-1 has eleven fairleads, but in usual operations only nine or ten mooring linesare connected. All mooring lines are composed by two segments, with characteristics
presented in Table 4. The length value for segment 2 corresponds to the total length availableon the winch drum; the released length varies during the mooring operations, as presented in(Masetti,2004).
The catenary solver provides the results defining the equilibrium configuration of the
mooring system, and the interference management module allows the identification of severalpossible interferences with obstacles. All interferences are successfully avoided by placingtwo buoys on most of the lines. Detailed tables indicating position in the line measured fromthe anchor, and the length of the pendant for each buoy, can be found in (Masetti,2004).
Figure 22 General View of the Generated Model
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
16/20
Table 4 Characteristics of Mooring Line Segments
Segment Length (m) Material1 (anchor) 150 R3S Stub Chain 3
2 1780 (max) EEIPS Steel Wirerope 2.5
7.4 PipelineAll pipeline characteristics can be defined by the user. A database with common material
properties and usual pipeline characteristics, such as wall thickness and coating, isincorporated in the system. The model generated here considers a typical 16-in pipeline, with
physical and geometric properties presented in Table 5.
Table 5 16 Pipeline data
Parameter Value Unit
Outside Diameter 0.40640 mWall Thickness 0.011125 mYield Stress 414000 kN/m2
Modulus of Elasticity of steel 207000 MPaAxial Stiffness (EA) 2859694.14 kN
Flexional Stiffness (EI) 55894.90 kN*m2Poisson Coefficient 0.3 -
Density of steel 77 kN/m3Corrosion Coating Thickness 0.0032 mCorr. Coating Weight Density 9.32 kN/m3Concrete Coating Thickness 0.0381 m
Concrete Coating Weight Density 21.974 kN/m3Hydrodynamic Diameter 0.489 mTube Length 12 m
Field Joint Length 0.6 mJoint Fill Weight Density 10.065 kN/m3
Weight in Air 2.255935 kN/mWeight Submerged 0.368493 kN/m
7.5 Visualization of the Complete ModelThe initial equilibrium configuration of the pipeline is generated using dynamicrelaxation techniques as proposed in (Silva,2006b). The top tension in the pipeline is the
parameter that defines the S shape. The generated S-Lay configuration is shown in thefigures that follow.
The actual bathymetric data and soil properties are considered for the pipeline behavioron seabed. Information about free-spans is then available during analysis.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
17/20
Figure 23 SITUA-PetroPipe S-Lay Model
7.6 Typical ResultsBesides typical results in terms of tension and Von Mises stresses along the pipe length,
as shown in Figs 24 and 25, information about distances between the pipeline and its supportsas well as the reaction at each roller box are generated during static and dynamic analyses.
Specific reports are automatic generated for relevant information such as distance fromthe laybarge stern and the pipeline touchdown point. Reports for all relevant informationabout the mooring lines are also automatic generated.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
18/20
Figure 24 Von Mises Stress (static).
Figure 25 Von Mises Stress (dynamic).
8. FINAL REMARKSThe in-house computational system described in this work has already been employed by
the BGL-1 crew in the simulation and planning of actual mooring procedures for pipelinelaying operations in Campos Basin. The system has been shown to be able to calculate themotions of the barge due to the operations performed with its mooring lines (including
placement of buoys, and variation of the onboard/released cable lengths), taking into accountgeneral seabed data and interferences with subsea obstacles.
Regarding the simulation of the actual pipeline launching process, the Prosim finite-element numerical solver already included a 3D frame element that can account for all
material and geometrically nonlinear effects that arise in the pipeline behavior during thelaying operation. It was also able to couple the structural behavior of the pipe with thehydrodynamic behavior of the vessel motions under environmental conditions, considering allmooring lines also modeled by Finite Elements, which in itself is a step further overtraditional methods for the numerical simulation of pipelaying operations.
In order to comprise an accurate and user-friendly alternative for the analysis of pipelineinstallation procedures, some adaptations in the SITUA interface and in the Prosim numericalsolver were needed.
Therefore, this work described some of the recent implementations that comprise theSITUA-PetroPipe modules, including: a) Generation of initial finite-element meshes for theS-laying configuration of the pipeline by a dynamic relaxation procedure; b) Inclusion of
generalized scalar elements to represent the tensioner; c) Implementation of automaticcustomization facilities for the definition of the ramp and stinger rollers; d) Development of arigorous contact algorithm to represent the variable contact between the pipeline and therollers; e) Generation of finite-element models for other types of laying operations that mayeventually be considered for the BGL-1 or other laybarges, including J-lay and reelingmethods. Due to limitations in space, these latter facilities (regarding J-Lay and Reeling
procedures) could not be presented here, and will be demonstrated in future works.As the result of the recent implementations described in this work, the SITUA-PetroPipe
system now comprises a computational tool intended to improve the applicability andaccuracy of analysis of pipeline installation operations, making the simulations more realistic.
Several parametric studies are currently being performed considering the described
modeling facilities, for different scenarios including shallow to deep waters, and differentpipeline sizes. The results of these studies will also allow the precise assessment of the
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
19/20
influence of the application of the coupled model (barge + mooring lines + pipeline) on thedynamic pipeline-laybarge behavior in such different scenarios, indicating where a coupled
pipelay analysis, rather than a traditional uncoupled analysis, is required.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the members of the BGL-1 crew that activelycontributed with the development of the SITUA-PetroPipe software, with valuable commentsand suggestions.
REFERENCES
BAI, Y., BAI Q., 2005, Subsea Pipelines and Risers, Great Britain, Elsevier Science, 2d Ed.
CLAUSS, G.F., SAROUKH, A., WEEDE, H., 1998, Prediction of Limiting Sea States forPipelaying Operations. Procs of the 17th Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic
Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
GREALISH, F., LANG, D., CONNOLLY, A., LANE, M., 2005, Advances in ContactModelling for Simulation of Deepwater pipeline Installation, Rio Pipeline Conference &Exposition, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
GUO, B., SONG, S., CHACKO, J., GHALAMBOR, A., 2005, Offshore Pipelines, UnitedStates, Elsevier.
HEURTIER, J.M., BUHAN, P.LE, FONTAINE, E., CUNFF, C.L., BIOLLEY, F.,BERHAULT, C., 2001, Coupled Dynamic Response of Moored FPSO with Risers.
Procs. of the 11th Intl Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Stavanger, Norway.
JACOB, B.P., MASETTI, I.Q., 1997, Prosim: Coupled Numerical Simulation of the Behaviorof Moored Units (in Portuguese), COPPETEC-Petrobras Internal Report, Rio de Janeiro.
JACOB, B.P., 2005, Prosim Program: Coupled Numerical Simulation of the Behavior ofMoored Floating Units Theoretical Manual, ver. 3.0 (in Portuguese),LAMCSO/PEC/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro.
KYRIAKIDES, S., CORONA, E., 2007, Mechanics of Offshore Pipelines, Volume 1:Buckling and Collapse, Slovenia, Elsevier.
MALAHY Jr, R.C., 1996, OffPipe User's Guide - Version 2.05.
MASETTI, I.Q., BARROS, C.R.M., JACOB, B.P., ALBRECHT, C.H., LIMA, B.S.L.P.,SPARANO, J.V., 2004, Numerical Simulation of the Mooring Procedures of the BGL-1Pipeline Launching Barge. Procs of the 23st Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and ArcticEngineering, Vancouver, Canada.
MICHALOPOULOS, C.D., 1986, Nonlinear Random Response of Marine Pipelines inContact with the Seabed. Proceedings of the 5th Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics andArctic Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
7/30/2019 Pap 0354
20/20
ORMBERG, H., FYLLING I. J., LARSEN K., SODAHL N., 1997, Coupled Analysis ofVessel Motions and Mooring and Riser System Dynamics. Procs of the 16th Int. Conf. onOffshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Yokohama, Japan.
SENRA, S.F., CORRA, F.N., JACOB, B.P., MOURELLE, M.M., MASETTI, I.Q., 2002,
Towards the Integration of Analysis and Design of Mooring Systems and Risers: Part I Studies on a Semisubmersible Platform. Procs of the 21st Int. Conf. on OffshoreMechanics and Arctic Engineering, Oslo, Norway.
SAEVIK, S., GIERTSEN, E., BERNTEN, V., 2004, Advances in Design and InstallationAnalysis of Pipelines in Congested Areas with Rough Seabed Topography. Procs of the23rd Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vancouver, Canada.
SILVA, D.M.L., CORRA, F.N., JACOB, B.P., 2006a. A Generalized Contact Model forNonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Floating Offshore Systems. Procs of the 25st Int. Conf.on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany.
SILVA, D.M.L., JACOB, B.P., RODRIGUES, M.V., 2006b. Implicit and ExplicitImplementation of the Dynamic Relaxation Method for the Definition of InitialEquilibrium Configurations of Flexible Lines. Procs of the 25st Int. Conf. on OffshoreMechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany.
SILVA, D.M.L., PEREIRA, A.C.P., JACOB, B.P., 2007a. A Contact Model for theSimulation of Line Collision in Offshore Oil Exploitation. Procs of the XXVIII LatinAmerican Congress on Computational Methods in Engineering, The Port City, Portugal.
SILVA, D. M. L., BAHIENSE, R.A., JACOB, B.P., TORRES, F.G.S., MEDEIROS, A.R.,COSTA, M.N.V., 2007b. Numerical Simulation of Offshore Pipeline Installation byLateral Deflection Procedure. Procs of the 26st Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics andArctic Engineering, San Diego, USA.
SILVA, D. M. L., BAHIENSE, R.A., JACOB, B.P., TORRES, F.G.S., MEDEIROS, A.R.,2008. Analysis of an Alternative Pipeline Installation Procedure that Combines OnshoreDeflection and Offshore Transportation. Procs of the Marine Operations SpecialtySymposium, Singapore.
TORSELLETTI, E., VITALI, L., BRUSCHI, R., LEVOLD, E., COLLBERG, L., 2006,
Submarine Pipeline Installation Joint Industry Project: Global Response Analysis ofPipeline During S-Laying. Procs of the 25th Int. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and ArcticEngineering, Hamburg, Germany.
WICHERS, J.E.W., DEVLIN, P.V., 2001, Effect of Coupling of Mooring Lines and Risers onthe Design Values for a Turret Moored FPSO in Deep Water of the Gulf of Mexico.Procs. of the 11th Intl. Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Stavanger, Norway.
___, 2002. SGO User Manual (in Portuguese) Petrobras, Rio de Janeiro.