Main Thesis Report

PROBABILISTIC CALCULATION FOR
FATIGUE LIFE OF THE STEEL

CATENARY RISER

A THESIS

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF
SCIENCE

SUBMITTED TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE &
MARINE ENGINEERING OF STRATHCLYDE
UNIVERSITY

BY
RONGRITH PICHAIYONGWONGDEE
AUGUST 2011
ii

This thesis is the result of the author's original research. It has been
composed by the author and has not been previously submitted for
examination which has led to the award of a degree.
The copyright of this thesis belongs to the author under the terms of the
United Kingdom Copyright Acts as qualified by University of
Strathclyde Regulation 3.50. Due acknowledgement must always be
made of the use of any material contained in, or derived from, this thesis.
Signed: Date:

iii

This page is intentionally left blank.

iv

To Mom and Dad

v

Abstract

In the past decade, the free-hanging SCR is an alternative riser system since the oil
reservoirs are found at the depth greater than 1,000 meters where the flexible riser
application is limited by the extreme hydrostatic pressure. In this circumstance, the
SCR can overcome the difficulty by adding extra pipe thickness. Also, extra benefits
of this SCR riser system are inexpensive, simpler installation and easier maintenance
which allow companies operate the deepwater field with less complexity system.

However, the failure of riser can be occurred and its possibility is greatly associated
with the random nature of environmental loads e.g. waves, winds and currents
because these environmental loads have immense influence on the vessels motions.
Therefore, evaluating these factors is an essential criterion in the riser design to
estimate the fatigue life. In the past, the riser design was based on the deterministic
calculations which the loads are based on common sea states. It was merely possible
to utilize all wave and wind data in the calculations because the calculations were
limited by its complexity, requirement for huge data storage and long simulation
time. However, with the improved capability of today computer, the detail
engineering simulation can be done to present accurate and meaningful answers. In
this study, the optimal design of the steel catenary riser (SCR) will be examined,
even though; the riser fatigue life will be calculated by using probabilistic approach.

vi

List of Figures

Figure 1 World map of the deepwater oil exploration and production. ....................... 4
Figure 2 Segments and nodes in riser model. ............................................................ 19
Figure 3 Wall tension and pipe pressure force. .......................................................... 19
Figure 4 Frame of reference of pipe stress calculation. ............................................. 20
Figure 5 Free-body diagrams for FPSO and riser system. ......................................... 22
Figure 6 Wave force RAOs for surge and heave motions ......................................... 23
Figure 7 Estimate riser profile in static condition. ..................................................... 25
Figure 8 Nodes displacement in X-axis. .................................................................... 27
Figure 9 Nodes displacement in Y-axis. .................................................................... 27
Figure 10 Tensile stress profiles for each riser segment. ........................................... 29
Figure 11 SN curve (API Class X). ............................................................................ 36
Figure 12 Block diagram represents the approach for project (1). ............................ 37
Figure 15 Location of Montara field, Timor Sea. ...................................................... 40
Figure 16 Deep water areas in the Timor Sea (water depth > 500 Meters). .............. 40
Figure 17: Existing development fields in the Timor Sea.......................................... 41
Figure 18 Swells from south Indian Ocean to Timor Sea. ......................................... 43
Figure 19 Annual wave rose diagrams measured at Jabiru field. .............................. 44
Figure 20 Monthly wave rose diagrams measured in Jabiru field. ............................ 45
Figure 21 Montara FPSO. .......................................................................................... 47
Figure 22 Montara FPSO specifications. ................................................................... 48
Figure 23 FPSO model (Side view). .......................................................................... 49
Figure 24 FPSO model (Front view). ......................................................................... 49
Figure 25 Plot of maximum von Mises stress and allowable pipe stress. .................. 51
Figure 26 Plot of riser utilization (API RP 2RD). ...................................................... 51
Figure 27 Bending radius profile. .............................................................................. 53
Figure 28 Riser curvature profile. .............................................................................. 53
Figure 29 Pipe collapse pressure and the net hydrostatic pressure. ........................... 55
vii

Figure 30 Shape configurations of the steel catenary riser. ....................................... 57
Figure 31 Mean von Mises combined stress (vary outside diameter). ....................... 58
Figure 32 Mean axial stress profile (vary outside diameter). ..................................... 59
Figure 33 Mean bending stress profile (vary outside diameter). ............................... 59
Figure 34 Mean hoop stress profile (vary outside diameter). .................................... 60
Figure 35 Riser shapes for various length of riser. .................................................... 61
Figure 36 Mean von Mises stress profiles (vary length of riser). .............................. 62
Figure 37 Mean axial stress profiles (vary length of riser). ....................................... 62
Figure 38 Mean bending stress profiles (vary length of riser). .................................. 63
Figure 39 Mean hoop stress profiles (vary length of riser). ....................................... 63
Figure 40 Riser shape configurations when vary the initial offset of FPSO. ............. 64
Figure 41 Mean von Mises combined stress (vary initial offset). .............................. 65
Figure 42 Mean axial stress profile (vary initial offset). ............................................ 66
Figure 43 Mean bending stress profile (vary initial offset). ...................................... 66
Figure 44 Mean hoop stress profile (vary initial offset). ........................................... 67
Figure 45 FPSO heave motion (vary FPSO size). ..................................................... 68
Figure 46 Mean von Mises combined stress (vary FPSO size). ................................ 69
Figure 47 Mean axial stress profile (vary FPSO size). .............................................. 69
Figure 48 Mean bending stress profile (vary FPSO size). ......................................... 70
Figure 49 Mean hoop stress profile (vary FPSO size). .............................................. 70
Figure 50 Wave scatter diagrams prepared in 4 directions. ....................................... 76
Figure 51 Cumulative probability distribution of maximum stress. .......................... 78
Figure 52 Cumulative probability distribution of stress range................................... 79
Figure 53 Cumulative probability distribution of the fatigue life. ............................. 80
Figure 54 Probability distribution of the fatigue life. ................................................ 80
Figure 55 Displacement RAOs (Amplitude, 0 degree wave direction) ..................... 85
Figure 56 Displacement RAOs (Phase, 0 degree wave direction) ............................. 85
Figure 57 Displacement RAOs (Amplitude, 30 degree wave direction) ................... 86
Figure 58 Displacement RAOs (Phase, 30 degree wave direction) ........................... 86
viii

Figure 63 Displacement RAOs (Amplitude, 120 degree wave direction) ................. 89
Figure 64 Displacement RAOs (Phase, 120 degree wave direction) ......................... 89
Figure 69 Wave load RAOs (Operating draft, 0 degree wave direction)................... 96
Figure 70 Wave load RAOs (Phase, 0 degree wave direction) .................................. 96
Figure 71 Wave load RAOs (Operating draft, 30 degree wave direction)................. 97
Figure 72 Wave load RAOs (Phase, 30 degree wave direction) ................................ 97
Figure 77 Wave load RAOs (Operating draft, 120 degree wave direction)............. 100
Figure 78 Wave load RAOs (Phase, 120 degree wave direction) ............................ 100

ix

List of Tables

Table 1: Stress definition according to API 2RD....................................................... 30
Table 2 Design matrix for rigid risers ........................................................................ 32
Table 3 S-N curve parameter for API Class-X .......................................................... 35
Table 4 Pipeline specifications .................................................................................. 50
Table 5 Simulation parameters used in the base case ................................................ 56
Table 6 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary outside diameter) ..................................... 58
Table 7 Cases for riser length sensitivity analysis ..................................................... 61
Table 8 Fatigue damage sensitivity analysis (vary initial offset) ............................... 65
Table 9 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary vessel length) ........................................... 68
Table 10 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary simulation time) ..................................... 71
Table 11 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary length per segment)................................ 72
Table 12 Omnidirectional wave scatter diagram prepared for 20 years period ......... 74
Table 13 Directional wave statistics prepared for 20 years period ............................ 75
Table 14 Occurrence matrix of directional wave for fatigue analysis (315, 45) .... 77
Table 15 Occurrence matrix of directional wave for fatigue analysis (45, 135) .... 77
Table 16 Occurrence matrix of directional wave for fatigue analysis (135, 225) .. 77
Table 17 Occurrence matrix of directional wave for fatigue analysis (225, 315) .. 77
Table 18 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle = 0 degree) ....................................... 92
Table 19 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle = 30 degree) ..................................... 92
Table 22 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle = 120 degree) ................................... 94
Table 23 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle =150 degree) .................................... 94
Table 24 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle = 180 degree) ................................... 95
Table 25 Wave load RAOs (Relative angle = 0 degree) .......................................... 103
Table 26 Wave load RAOs (Relative angle = 30 degree) ........................................ 103
Table 29 Wave load RAOs (Relative angle = 120 degree) ...................................... 105
x


Content
Abstract ....................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures ............................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ............................................................................................................. ix
Content ........................................................................................................................ 1
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3
2. Aims of the Project ............................................................................................. 7
3. Critical Review ................................................................................................... 8
4. Motions of FPSO .............................................................................................. 12
4.1. Displacement RAOs ................................................................................... 12
4.2. Wave Load RAOs ...................................................................................... 12
4.3. Wave and Wind Drag force........................................................................ 13
4.4. Stiffness, Damping and Added Mass Loads .............................................. 14
5. Motions of Riser ............................................................................................... 17
5.1. Tension Force ............................................................................................. 17
5.2. Bending Moment ........................................................................................ 20
5.3. Pipe Stress .................................................................................................. 20
6. Example Calculations ...................................................................................... 22
6.1. Static Analysis ............................................................................................ 22
6.2. Dynamic Analysis ...................................................................................... 25
7. Recommended Practices for the Design ......................................................... 30
7.1. Stress Element ............................................................................................ 30
7.2. von Mises stress ......................................................................................... 31
7.3. Allowable Stress ........................................................................................ 32
7.4. Collapse Pressure ....................................................................................... 33
7.5. Fatigue Life of Riser .................................................................................. 34
7.6. Rainfall Counting ....................................................................................... 35
7.7. S-N Curve .................................................................................................. 35
7.8. Fatigue Life ................................................................................................ 36
8. Case Studies ...................................................................................................... 37
8.1. Overview of the Project ............................................................................. 37
2

8.2. General Information about the Timor Sea ................................................. 39
8.3. Waves Statistics in the Timor Sea .............................................................. 41
8.4. FPSO Simulation Model ............................................................................ 46
8.5. Riser Simulation Model ............................................................................. 49
9. Sensitivity Analysis .......................................................................................... 56
9.1. Sensitivity Analysis: Outside Diameter ..................................................... 57
9.2. Sensitivity Analysis: Riser Length ............................................................. 60
9.3. Sensitivity Analysis: FPSO Initial Position ............................................... 64
9.4. Sensitivity Analysis: FPSO Size ................................................................ 67
9.5. Sensitivity Analysis: Simulation Time ...................................................... 71
9.6. Sensitivity Analysis: Length of Segment ................................................... 72
10. Probabilistic Fatigue Life ................................................................................ 73
10.1. Waves for Fatigue Calculation ................................................................... 73
10.2. Cumulative Stress Probability Distributions .............................................. 78
10.3. Fatigue Life Probability Distributions ....................................................... 79
11. Discussion .......................................................................................................... 81
12. Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 82
13. Recommendations ............................................................................................ 83
Reference ................................................................................................................... 84
Appendix I: Plots of Displacement RAOs .............................................................. 85
Appendix II: Tables of Displacement RAOs ......................................................... 92
Appendix III: Plots of Wave Load RAOs .............................................................. 96
Appendix VI: Tables of Wave Load RAOs ......................................................... 103
Appendix V: Wave Scatter Diagrams .................................................................. 107

3

1. Introduction

Over the next decades, the worlds energy needs will double whereas the existing
hydrocarbon supply will significantly depleted since they were consumed vastly to
support the world economic growth in the twentieth century. To survive in the future,
the offshore industries will be more diverse to develop new technologies and to
explore new assets in more challenging environment. The company corporation,
sharing know-hows and the best practices across different disciplines will be
emphasized in order to quickly invent new technologies greatly demanded in the
future. One of the promising areas for the future oil explorations is the deepwater
where water depth is much greater than depth along the continental shelf. The
deepwater normally range from few hundreds meter to about 6,000 meter for very
deep areas. Because of the greater depth and mostly situated in the harsh
environment, the exploration and production of hydrocarbon in the deepwater
required advanced engineering and the multibillions investment to develop the
projects meanwhile risk involved especially in the exploration stage is very high.

In last 10 years, oil companies and drilling companies further out the sea to reach the
last remaining oil reserves which are believed laid under the deepwater. A deepwater
drilling used to be very dangerous and expensive activities in 20
th
century, but they
seem suited in the current years. Also, the great energy demand from developing
countries leads to the higher oil price which makes deepwater project become
feasible and contributed to a renewed interest in further offshore explorations. For
example, Gulf of Mexico is the deepwater region where deepwater drilling is very
intense. According to the US Minerals Management Service (US MMS), there are 31
rigs drilling deepwater wells in the Gulf of Mexico in 2008 compared with only 3
rigs operating in 1992. Seven gigantic deepwater projects come on stream in the US
in 2008 including Thunder Horse field which is the largest field in the region. As
well the deepwater exploration and production have continued in other regions in
several corners of the world including Brazil, Angola, Nigeria, Australia, India,
Indonesia, Australia and etc. However, most of deepwater oil has been found at the

great exte
Africa. Ex
says that t
the future
consumpti

Fi

Surface fa
have been
5 years, 6
floating p
tensioned
preferable
refer to th
SPAR and
height in t
Africa due
significant

nt in the go
xxon Mobil
the deepwat
the deepwa
ion.
igure 1 Wor
acilities and
n tripled in n
66 potential
roduction p
led platfor
e types for
he distinctiv
d TLP types
the hurrican
e to the adv
tly for marg
olden triang
, as claims
ter explorat
ater oil will
rld map of t
d subsea tieb
numbers of
l deepwater
platforms in
rm (TLP), s
the ultra-d
ve requirem
s are being
ne season, w
vantages of
ginal oil fiel
gle area wh
to be the la
tion has beg
l become m
the deepwat
backs in the
producing
r platforms
nclude the
semisubmer
eepwater. T
ent in the d
chosen as c
while FPSO
f the platfor
lds.
hich made u
argest comp
gun in only
more signific
ter oil explo
e Gulf of M
platforms in
will be in
storage and
rsibles (SEM
The differen
different env
common opt
Os are very
rm mobility
up of Mexic
pany in deep
half of the
cant propor
oration and p
Mexico, Wes
n last 5 yea
nstalled in m
d offloadin
MI) and SP
nt types of
vironment.
tion becaus
engaging i
y saving the
co, Brazil an
pwater prod
know field
rtion of the
production.
st Africa an
ars. And, in
major regio
g vessels (
PAR which
f floating p
In Gulf of
e the extrem
in Brazil an
e project inv
4
nd West
ductions,
ds and in
total oil

.
nd Brazil
the next
ons. The
FPSOs),
h are the
platforms
Mexico,
me wave
nd South
vestment
5

As water depth increase, so do the drilling and completion cost as well. Therefore,
the next challenges are to minimize the cost of drilling, increase well productivity
and developing technologies suitable for the deepwater environment. The techniques
such as multilateral well, smart well completion, and extended well were developed
by universities and famous research centers to make drilling and completion simpler
and cheaper. Another importance issue is the platform stability in order to survive in
unpleasant sea conditions. Generally speaking, TLPs have a practical limit of a 1,500
meter water depth, so for the deeper water the choices will be SPAR, FPSO or SEMI.

The production riser is another main challenge for subsea engineers. In the
deepwater, the hydrostatic pressure and temperature are tremendous obstacles for the
oil production because they can causes of riser integrity problems such as riser
collapse, cracking and fatigue damage. Hence, several types of riser are constructed
to suit with the different the water depth, floating platforms and sea environment.
The first and simplest riser system used in deepwater is the steel catenary riser
system which the riser is manufactured from the steel tube painted with the anti-
corrosion chemicals. The Steel Catenary Riser (SCR) has been extensively used in
deepwater operations because the cost of material and installation is significantly less
than using flexible riser. Therefore, SCR has been vigorously demanded by the deep
water development especially where the spool base for flexible riser is not available
in that region. Besides, the SCR system is remarkable for its reliability, simplicity
and robustness which make it as the first choice for the high pressure-temperature in
deepwater applications.

The Steel Catenary Riser is a simple riser system made of continuous rigid pipe. It
must be installed from a floating structure and gently laid to the seabed. At the top
end, the riser is connected with a flexible joint which is an equipment to allow small
angular movement which makes the riser be less restricted to avoid excessive
bending moment occurred at the outer rim. At the bottom end, the riser gradually
touches the sea bed. The touchdown is known as a critical part on riser because it is
where usually subjected with the maximum bending stress so as to the potential of
crack and leak are high. The riser failure must be avoid in all means because
6

consequences are extremely destructed. For the business, it brings in the complicated
repairing program and reduction of companies revenue. For environment, it causes
seriously environmental strains by the spilling hydrocarbon to the nature. Hence,
industrial standards for different riser applications are established and enforced to the
new deepwater projects. In addition, engineers have been developing a better, more
accurate and reliable methods for designing the riser. The study will investigate
possibility and perform the preliminary engineering design to make some
recommendation for the PTTEP deepwater project in Timor Sea.

7

2. Aims of the Project

The objective is to discover the optimal design configurations for the riser and also to
estimate the fatigue life by using a probabilistic approach. A gas export riser
connected with the internal turret FPSO will be modeled to investigate the stress on
riser which the stress will be induced by the FPSO motions.

The industry practices for the riser design (API 2RD) are applied in the study to
ensure the feasibility of being carried out. The important requirements specified in
API 2RD such as the allowable stress, allowable deflection, hydrostatic collapse and
fatigue life will be strictly followed. In addition, the study will investigate on how
key design parameters such as riser diameter, wall thickness, riser length and FPSO
size can affect the overall of riser design. The principle stress such as tensile,
bending and hoop stresses will examine along the length to identify the critical
segment. Afterwards, the fatigue damage will be calculated by using the S-N curve
and rainfall half-cycle methods and combined fatigue damage of all sea states by the
Minors rule. Lastly, a distribution curve of stress and fatigue life will be established.
8

3. Critical Review

The steel catenary riser has been adopted for many deepwater development projects
developed on floating hosts in the North Sea and Gulf of Mexico (GoM). The
experience in these area show that the fatigue problem is the most challenging issue
for the riser design particularly true for a large diameter riser.

The loading fatigue damage is directly related to the combined effect of various
parameters such as environment condition, fluid density and water depth. Also, the
riser design is very sensitive to motion characteristics of the host platforms. In ultra-
deepwater, the combined mass of the mooring lines, risers and umbilical have a great
proportion to the total mass and drag force of the system. So, in the past, the riser and
vessel motions will be analyzed by the uncoupled method where the FPSO motions
will be calculated separately from riser. The results of FPSO motion then will be
applied as initial conditions for the analysis of the riser motions. However, this
method seems associated with huge error in hydrodynamics damping force and the
resonant responses of the system. As described in the motion studies performed by J.
Xu in 2006, he suggests that the restoring stiffness of mooring and riser, mass and
viscous damping will change the roll and pitch frequency as well as the slowly
varying drift motions.

In the riser design, the characteristics of the floater have strongly link with the
dynamic of the riser. The main interfaces are such as hang-off locations, flexible
joint, stiffness of the mooring system and maximum heel, yaw and pitch of the vessel
in survival conditions. These factors are not exhaustive, and a numbers of piece of
information must be collected and exchanged along with the designing phase of riser
and floater. The riser design is the result of compromises between tension at the top,
maximum bending stress at the touchdown point and risk of the collision with nearby
structures due to lateral displacement. In most case, the tension needs to be
minimized in order to reduce the hang off load, limit impact to the mooring system
and minimize horizontal load at the touchdown point to prevent slipping of flow line.
9

However, the tension is limited by the demand of size and length of riser as well as
the lateral tension required for suppressing the bending stress at the touchdown point.
If the analyses are well understood and easy to perform, the riser configuration will
be easy to verify. Also, the fabrication and installation method should be done
without difficulty. However, at every step of calculations, there are uncertainties
involved which have significant impact on the riser configuration such as actual pipe
thickness, installation tolerance for subsea equipment, uncertainties in the
measurement of the position of the floater, uncertainties of the water depth, sea
condition variations and etc. The consequence of all these uncertainties should be
analyzed carefully especially the sections included special characteristic; for
example, different wall thickness, steel grade and welding method.

In the dynamic condition, several parameters can affect to the riser motions such as
the first and second order motions of the vessel, length of riser and sea conditions
which they could make the touchdown point shift vertically and horizontally. During
the movement, the riser is subjected to additional axial stress making the touch down
region highly sensitive to the fatigue failure damage. Also, the platform motions will
cause changes in the departure and curvature of the riser, which leads to significant
excessive bending stress. Different methods and tools to analyses the risers behavior
were invented to combat these challenges and to perform the riser design in the time
frame of a project.

The extreme analysis of riser, where wave loads based on maximum wave height, is
another essential study for the riser design. However, the calculation of extreme
wave height is subjected to a large numbers of errors. First, errors arise in the data
collection due to malfunction or inaccuracy of the either equipment or method of
measurement. Second, the long-term distribution to describe wave characteristics
maybe not selected appropriately. The criteria for selection are theoretically various
and still unclear. In other means, no reason is to select one particular distribution to
describe the wave nature over another. Most of the time, it is often based on the
judgment of engineers. Last is an uncertainty from insufficient collected wave data.
Because the prediction has extrapolated 20, 50 or 100 years exceed from the service
10

life, but usually only a few years data collection can be gathered when starting the
design. Therefore, it is clear that a high degree of uncertainty is surely expected in
the calculation results. In addition, the accuracy results require the time domain
analysis of wave frequencies as well as quasi static offset of the system. In such
analyses, they are CPU time consuming process which is in general not applicable in
the earlier design stage. Therefore, some shortcuts are necessary to be applied; for
example, the vessel motions induced by low frequencies wave and the mean
environment loads are defined as a static initial offset of the vessel.

Another necessary analysis for riser is the fatigue analysis, especially the case of the
large production riser. There are two places on riser prone to the fatigue failure. First
is the touchdown point where the bending stress is the highest. Second is the first
welding seam below the flexible joint, where the maximum axial stress is occurred.
Since there are several uncertainties involved in the calculations, several methods
come up in order to achieve higher accuracy for the results. The recent attempts to
manage the uncertainty contained in the calculation of probabilistic fatigue life is
introduced by Wirsching (Wirsching, 1984) and recently emphasized by Tapan
(Tapan K Sen, 2008). However, the study did not embrace the effect of low
frequency excursion (slow drift motion), torsional stress and VIV. Also, the random
nature of waves which have immense effect on the stress of riser is limited to single
directions because the limitation of software used at that time (Virtual Orcaflex
2001). Tapan simulated a typical FPSO operating in the West Africa where water
depth is around 1,200 meters. Sea states data are compressed to a number of
equivalent wave height and time crossing periods (H
es
and T
ez
) in order to reduce the
numbers of cases and time for simulations. Waves are categorized by the wave
height which the equivalent wave height (H
es
) is calculated by using weighted
average with H
6
for any waves having the same time crossing period (T
ez
). This
approximation is due the fact that stress is proportional to square of wave height
(H
2
), and fatigue damage is approximately proportional to the third power of the
stress range (S
3
). Tapan simulated the stress time history at a node near the
touchdown point to analyses the stress ranges and return periods by using traditional
rainfall counting method. After that, the fatigue life is done by using Monte Carlo
11

Simulation with the probability assigned to input parameters e.g. wall thickness,
eccentricity, stress range and stress concentration factor. In his study, the non-
directional wave data was utilized to avoid large number of load cases. However, the
lack of wave direction data may result in an unacceptable high uncertainty of the
simulation results.
12

4. Motions of FPSO
4.1. Displacement RAOs
The FPSO motion can be described by a displacement RAOs (Response Amplitude
Operators). The RAOs consist of pair of numbers to define responses in 6 DOFs
(surge, sway, heave, roll, pitch and yaw) of a particular wave period in a certain
wave direction. The RAOs are composed of the response amplitude (R) which
defines the response when the FPSO exposed to 1 meter wave height. Another
component is the phase difference to define a lagging or leading phase of FPSO
relative to the approaching wave. The RAOs are strongly related to the shape, size
and draught of FPSO normally obtained from the hydrodynamics experiment or the
simulation. The RAOs can be expressed mathematically by using the following
equation.

cos( - ) x R a wt =
....................................
(1)
where
x = vessel displacement (m)
R = RAO Amplitude (m)
a = wave amplitude (meter)
= wave frequency (rad/s)
t = time (second)
= phase difference between wave and FPSO responses (rad)

4.2. Wave Load RAOs
Force and moment can be represented by wave load RAOs in the same manner as the
displacement RAOs. In the simulator, the force and moment from wave load RAOs
will be combined with other loads to describe the motion by using the Newtons law
of motions. Because the wave load RAO consists of force and moment, their unit are
Newton and Newton-meter per wave height respectively.

cos( )
F
Force R a t e =
................................ (2)

cos( )
M
Moment R a t e =
.............................. (3)
13

F
M
where
R = wave load RAOs (N)
R = wave moment RAOs (N)
a = wave amplitude (meter)
= wave frequency (rad/s)
t = time (seconds)
= phase difference between wave and FPSO responses

4.3. Wave and Wind Drag force
Hydrodynamic drag is an important force component for modeling the FPSO motion
especially the slow drift motion. Drag forces can be modeled with a relation of the
relative velocity, yaw rate and roll rate.

Drag force due to Relative Velocity
Drag force due to water or wind flowing toward the buff body will be calculated by
substituting the velocity relative, drag coefficient and projection area into the
equations which express drag forces in surge, sway and yaw directions.

2
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Surge w Surge Surge
Sway w Sway Sway
Yaw w Yaw Yaw
F C A V
F C A V
M C A V
=
=
=
................................ (4)
3
w
2
where
= density of water or air (kg/m )
C = drag coefficient in the direction respected to vessel heading
A = projection area in surge, sway and yaw (m )
V = relative velocity of the water or air past the vessel (m/s)

Drag force due to Yaw Rate
For wind drag, the yaw rate term is insignificant and will be omitted from the
calculations; but it is still influential for wave drag to describe the motions of FPSO.
The drag due to yaw rate can be expressed by the following formula.
14

1
2
1
2
1
2
Surge w Surge
Sway w Sway
Yaw w Yaw
F K
F K
M K
e e
e e
e e
=
=
=
................................. (5)

3
w
where
F = drag force (N)
= density of sea water (kg/m )
= yaw rate (rad/s)
K = damping coefficient (s/m)

Drag force due to Roll Rate
As similar as the yaw rate term, the row moment is modeled by using the equation
defined in the following.

Roll L Q
M K V K V V = + .................................. (6)

L
Q
where
M = moment due to roll rate (N m)
V = angular velocity component (rad/s)
K = linear roll damping coefficient
K = quadratic roll damping coefficient
Roll

4.4. Stiffness, Damping and Added Mass Loads
The stiffness, damping coefficient and added mass and are important hydrodynamic
variables for evaluating the FPSO motions. These parameters refer to the forces
which are described in the following.

Stiffness Load
Force due to stiffness occurs when the vessel is offset from the equilibrium position.
The stiffness (heave, roll and pitch) can be represented by the stiffness matrix and it
15

is a function of vessel type, draught and water plain area shown by the following
equations.

Heave Heave
Roll Roll
Pitch Pitch
F O
M K O
M O
( (
( (
=
( (
( (

.................................... (7)

where
F = hydrodynamic stiffness force (N)
M = hydrodynamic stiffness moment (N-m)
K= hydrodynamic stiffness (N/m)
O = offset from equilibrium position (m)

Damping Load
The damping load is equal to -D*V, where D is the specified damping matrix and V
is the vector of FPSO velocity relative to the stationary. The damping loads are
calculated by using the following matrix equation.

X X
Y Y
Z Z
X X
Y Y
Z Z
F V
F V
F V
D
M
M
M
e
e
e
( (
( (
( (
( (
=
( (
( (
( (
( (
( (

...................................... (8)

where
F = hydrodynamic dampling force (N)
M = hydrodynamic damping moment (N-m)
D = damping coefficient (s/m)
V = velocity (m/s)
= angular velocity (rad/s)

16

Added Mass Load
The added mass load is calculated as similar as the damping loads, but the added
mass matrix is used instead of the damping matrix.

X X
Y Y
Z Z
ADD
X X
Y Y
Z Z
F V
F V
F V
M
M
M
M
e
e
e
( (
( (
( (
( (
=
( (
( (
( (
( (
( (

................................... (9)
ADD
2
2
where
F = hydrodynamic dampling force (N)
M = hydrodynamic damping moment (N-m)
M = added mass coefficient (kg)
V = linear acceleration (m/s )
= angular acceleration (rad/s )

17

5. Motions of Riser

In the simulation, a riser is divided into a series of line segments which are then
modeled by straight-massless model where each segment will have node at each end.
The segments will represent axial and torsional stresses occurred in the riser. On the
other hand, properties such as mass, weight and buoyancy will all lump to the nodes.
A line segment is divided into two halves and the properties such as mass, weight,
buoyancy and drag coefficient of each halfsegment will be lumped to the node at the
segment end. Forces and moments are calculated in 4 categories and applied at the
nodes.

1. Tension Forces
2. Bend Moments
3. Circumferential force
4. Shear Forces (neglected due to insignificant magnitude)

5.1. Tension Force
The tension of each segment is calculated by using the linear stiffness assumption. In
this case, the linear axial stiffness represents the axial spring and damper at the center
of each segment. A mathematic expression for the tensile force is described below.

( )
e w o o i i
T T PA PA = +
.................................. (10)

( )
( )
( )
( )
e
w
i
o
2
i
Where
T = effective tension kN
T = wall tension kN
P = internal pressure psi
P = external pressure psi
A = internal cross sectional stress (m )

18

The wall tension (T
w
) is tension on the riser measured at the pipes circumference. It
consists of three main components. First is the elongation tension in axial direction,
the second is the tension due to the line pressure effect and the last is due to the
damping effect. The wall tension can be described by the following equation.

w o o i i
EA.e
T = EA 2 (P A -PA )
o
dL
L dt
c v
| |
+
|
\ .
.................. (11)

Where
EA = axial stiffness (kN/m)
= total mean axial strain = (L - L0) / (L0)
L = instantaneous length of segment (m)
= expansion factor of segment
L
0
= upstretched length of segment (m)
= poisson ratio
P
i
, P
o
= internal pressure /external pressure (psi)
A
i
, A
o
= internal / external cross sectional areas (mm
2
)
e = damping coefficient of the riser
dL/dt = rate of changing of risers length (mm/s)

To unders
tension, co
either side
forces on
hold in th
illustrates

F
stand the fo
onsider the
e are to rep
them are ca
e contents e
the tension
Fi
Figure 2 Seg
ormula and
forces acti
present a len
alculated as
exposed to
n and pressu
igure 3 Wal
gments and
d the differe
ng axially a
ngth of pipe
if the lengt
the interna
ure forces.
ll tension an
nodes in ri
ence betwe
at the midp
e plus its co
th of pipe re
l and extern
nd pipe pres
ser model.
een effectiv
point of a s
ontents. Mo
epresented h
nal pressure
ssure force.

ve tension a
segment. Th
ore importa
had end cap
e. The figur
19
and wall
he nodes
antly, the
ps which
re below

5.2. B
In case of
which me
moment c

Where
EI = bendi
D = bendi
C = curvat
t = time (s

5.3. P
The stress
outside dia
which can
shown in
centerline
normal to

Consider a
(R, C, Z) w
Bending
f linear ben
eans the x-
an be calcu
ing stiffnes
ng damping
ture of segm
sec)
Pipe Str
s calculatio
ameters are
n be either s
the followi
where O
z

the pipe ax
Figur
at point P,
where R is
Momen
nding, the f
- and y- b
lated by usi
M
s (N. m
2
)
g value for a
ment (m)
ress
on will be a
e given. The
steel or titan
ng diagram
is the direc
xis in the cro
re 4 Frame o
which can
radically ou
nt
formula is
bending stif
ing the belo
Moment E =
a segment (
applied by
e cylinder is
nium riser.
m, the frame
ction along
oss-sectiona
of reference
be identifie
utwards, C i
based on t
ffness are
ow equation
d
EI C D +
N-sec)
a simple c
s assumed t
When cons
e of referenc
the pipe ax
al plane.
e of pipe stre
ed in the pip
is in the circ
the isotropi
identical. T
n.
C
dt
............
cylinder wh
to be made
sider a cros
ce has an o
xis. In addit
ess calculat
pe section.
cumferentia
c bending
Therefore,
..................
hich the ins
of uniform
s-section of
origin locate
tion, O
x
and
tion.
A local set
al direction
20
stiffness
bending
. (12)
side and
material
f pipe as
ed in the
d O
y
are

t of axes
and Z is
21

parallel to the axial direction. Regarding to these axes, the stress component at P is
3x3 matrixes which will be given by

RR RC RZ
RC CC CZ
RZ CZ ZZ
o o o
o o o
o o o
....................................... (13)

The diagonal entries of the matrix o
RR
, o
CC
, o
ZZ
are the principle stress for radial,
hoop and axial stresses respectively. The other 6 off-diagonal components are the
shear stresses in 3 dimensions. However, the diagonal stress components are
considered as insignificant for the stress and fatigue damage; therefore they will be
disregarded in this study.

6. Ex

6.1. S
The static
condition.
length is e
means, the
forces e.g.
the calcula
simulation

xample
Static An
c analysis
In this exa
equally divi
e segment p
. wave and
ations. Neve
n to obtain b
Figure
e Calc
nalysis
is perform
ample, the st
ided to 4 se
properties a
wind drag f
ertheless, th
better accur
5 Free-bod
ulatio
med to obta
teel riser is
egments by
are specifie
force will b
hese forces
acy and reli
dy diagrams
ns
ain the ris
deployed to
y using the
ed into the e
e ignored in
will be take
iability.
for FPSO a
er position
o 1000 met
lumped ma
each node.
n this stage
en into calcu
and riser sys
n in the st
ter water de
ass method.
The hydrod
in order to
ulations in O
stem.
22
tationary
pth. The
. By this
dynamic
simplify
Orcaflex

Figure 6 Wave for

rce RAOs f

for surge and d heave mootions
23

24

6.2. D
The dyna
occurred i
from wav
design crit
after mult
stress is a
presents h
and stress

Fig
Dynamic
amic analys
in the riser
ves and FPS
terion for r
tiplied with
always und
how the calc
when 1 m w
gure 7 Estim
c Analys
sis is perfo
in dynamic
SO. In the
iser becaus
h the safety
der the reco
culations are
wave of 8 s
mate riser pr
is
ormed to in
c situations
dynamic an
e the riser s
y factor. He
ommendatio
e done for t
econd retur
rofile in stat
nvestigate
s which gen
nalysis, the
stress will b
ence, the de
ons in all c
the node dis
rn period ap
tic condition
the motion
nerated by t
von Mises
be limited b
esign must
conditions.
splacement,
pproaches at
n.
n, force an
the excitatio
s stress is a
by its yield
be ensure
In the exa
elongation
t the bow of
25

nd stress
on force
a critical
strength
that the
ample, it
, tension
f FPSO.

26

Figure 8 N
Figure 9 N
Nodes displ
Nodes displ
lacement in
lacement in
X-axis.
Y-axis.
27

28

Figuree 10 Tensile

e stress proffiles for each h riser segmment.
29

30

7. Recommended Practices for the Design
The API 2RD design practices are widely used in the offshore industry to provide the
guideline for the safe and practical design. The critical design parameters are such as
maximum stress, bending moment, hydrostatic collapse and the fatigue life which
will be explained more in this chapter.

7.1. Stress Element
Three principle stresses will be investigated at the critical sections along the length of
riser to ensure that the principle stress is under the allowable quantity. For plain
cylinder riser, the principle stress will be classified as one of the following.

Table 1: Stress definition according to API 2RD
Primary
Any normal or shear stress that is necessary to have static equilibrium
of the imposed forces and moments. Thus, if a primary substantially
exceeds the yield strength, either failure or gross structural yielding
will occur.
Membrane
o
p
is the average value across the thickness of solid
section excluding the effects of discontinuities and stress
concentrations. For example, the general primary
membrane a loaded in pure tension is the tension
divided by the cross- sectional area. o
p
may include
bending as in the case of simple pipe loaded by a
bending moment.
Bending
o
b
is the portion of primary stress proportional to from
centroid of a cross section, excluding the effects of
discontinuities and stress concentrations.
Secondary
o
q
is any normal or shear stress that develops as a result of material
restraint. This type of stress is self-limiting which means that local
yielding can relieve the conditions that cause the stress, and a single
application of load will not cause failure.
31

7.2. von Mises stress
For plain round pipe, where transverse shear and torsion are negligible, three
principal stress components of primary membrane stress will be equivalent to von
Mises stress. The equation is showed in the equation below.

2 2 2
1
( ) ( ) ( )
2
e pr p p pz pz pr u u
o o o o o o o = + +
.......... (14)

2
e
2
pr
2
p
2
pz
where
= von Mises equivalent stress, N/mm
= principle stress in radial direction, N/mm
=principle stress in hoop direction, N/mm
= principle stress in axial direction, N/mm

For a thick walled pipe, the principle stress will be derived from the following
equations

o o i i
o i
-(P D +PD )
D +D
( )
2
( )
2
pr
o
p i o i
pz o
D
P P P
t
T M
D t
A I
u
o
o
o
=
=
=
................................. (15)

2
i
2
o
o i
2
where
P = internal pressure, N/mm
P = external pressure, N/mm
D ,D = outside,inside diameter, mm
t = pipe wall thickness, mm
A = crosssection area, mm
T = wall tension, N
M = bending moment in pipe, N-mm
I
4
= moment of inertia, mm

32

7.3. Allowable Stress
Regarding to the API 2RD for a plain pipe, the von Mises stress should be less than
the allowable stress defined by the product of the design case factor (C
f
) and the
allowable stress (
a
).

( )
p e f a
C o o <
......................................... (16)

a a y
y
a a
where
= C . = allowable stress
= material minimum yield stregth
2
C = allowable stress factor, C =
3
design case factor
f
C =

Table 2 Design matrix for rigid risers
Design
Case
Load
Category
Environmental
Conditions Pressure C
f

1* Operating Maximum operating Design 1.0
2 Extreme Extreme Design 1.2
3 Extreme Maximum operating Extreme 1.2
4 Extreme Maximum operating Design 1.2
5 Temporary Temporary Associated 1.2
6 Test Maximum operating Test 1.35
7 Survival Survival Associated 1.5
8 Survival Extreme Associated 1.5
9 Fatigue Fatigue Operating N/A

33

7.4. Collapse Pressure
Riser design must be ensured that it will not be collapsed during any operations.
Therefore, the riser should be able to withstand hydrostatic pressure at any time
during installation, production as well as workover. The effect of variations in pipe
thickness, ovality, eccentricity and residual stress from pipe manufacturing should be
included in the pipe collapse pressure. The allowable collapse pressure and collapse
pressure for round pipe can be calculated by using the following formula.

a f c
P D P s
........................................... (17)
f
c
where
D = collaspe design factor (0.75 for seamless or ERW pipe)
P = collaspe pressure (psi)

2 2
( )
e y
c
e y
PP
P
P P
=
+
....................................... (18)
max
min
where
D,t = nominal pipe outside diameter and wall thickness (mm)
D = maximum outside diameter of pipe (mm)
D =minimum outside diameter of pipe (mm)
E, = modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio (N/
2
2
y
2
2
e
3
i
m )
= specified minimum yield stress (N/m )
A = cross secional area of pipe (m )
a = cross sectional area of wall (mm )
T = effective tension (N)
G = unit weight of water (kg/m )
H = water depth (m)
P = i
{ }
( )
{ }
i
a e i
1/2
2
r y a y a y
y r
nternal pressure (psi)
P = net external pressure = GH-P
S = mean axial stress = (T -PA)/a -P
Y = reduce yield stress = 1-3(S /2 ) - S /2
P = yield pressure with simultaneous tension =2Yt/D
P
e
(

=
2 3
elastic buckling pressure = 2E/(1- )( / ) t D u

34

For a pipe designed to meet the external collapse criteria outlined above, collapse
will be initiated at a lower pressure by accidents e.g. impact or excessive bending
due to tensioner failure. The maximum allowable collapse pressure will be done
using the formula below to ensure the pressure differential will be less than the
predicted propagation pressure.

d p p
P D P s
...........................................
(19)
p
2.4
p y
where
D = collaspe propagation design factor = 0.72
P = collasse propagation pressure=24 (t/D)

7.5. Fatigue Life of Riser
The fatigue damage in riser comprises of several contributions such as vessel
motions, direct wave loads, transportation and VIV. Damage due to vessel motions
can be further split into that due to the wave-frequency and the slowly-varying
motions. The former refers to the small in the stress magnitude but comparatively
rapid in the return periods. Whereas the latter can be perceived as an enormous in
magnitude, but less frequent in term of return period. In the API practices, the design
fatigue life should be at least 3 times greater than the service life (SF 3). This
recommendation will be applied for any locations that the safety and pollution risk
are low and the regular inspection is possible. On the other hand, for locations where
the riser cannot be inspected regularly or the safety and pollution risk are highly
concerned, the design fatigue life is recommended to be at least 10 times the service
life (SF 10). In this study, the environment in the Timor Sea is considered as a
tolerable condition which the regular inspection and maintenance can be performed
regularly. Therefore, the design factor of 3 will be used to evaluate the riser design in
this project.

Service life Design factor Fatigue life =
.............. (20)

35

where
Design factor = 3.0
Service life = 15-20 years

7.6. Rainfall Counting
The rainfall counting technique is used to analyze the stress time history and present
it in form the stress range and the time crossing period. With this technique, the
fatigue damage created by different sea states can be integrated by using Minors rule
which is very effective way to analyze fatigue damage in complicate structures.

7.7. S-N Curve
An S-N curve defines cycles to failure of structures subjected to cyclic loadings. The
S-N curve can be derived from either direct experimental or follow the API
recommended numbers. Generally, the API Class X is a recommended code for the
riser design and it can be expressed by the following equation.

( )
m
N A SCF o

=
................................... (21)

where
N = cycle to failure (cycles)
S = stress range, (MPa)
m = empirical numbers

Table 3 S-N curve parameter for API Class-X
APIClass-X
A
13
2.50*10
m 3.74
SCF 1 . 0

7.8. F
From the
Minors ru
is shown b

where
D = fatigu
FL = fatig
n = numb
N = numb

Fatigue L
S-N curve,
ule. Therefo
below.
ue damage
gue life (yea
bers of stres
bers of stres
Figure
Life
, the annua
ore, fatigue
(%/year)
ar)
s cycle in 1
ss cycle to f

11 SN curv
al fatigue da
life is the r
D =
FL =
year
failure

ve (API Clas
amage will
reverse of to
n
N
=
.......
1
=
D
......
ss X).
be accumu
otal damage
...................
...................
ulated by u
e in one yea
..................
..................
36

using the
ar which
. (22)
. (23)

8. Cas
8.1. O
The objec
design an
constructio
Timor Sea
to investi
sensitivity

Next, the
stress at th
away +/-
parameter
nodes wil
individual
of wave h
the wave b
excitation
find the m

se Stud
Overview
ctives of the
d estimate
on the FPS
a, West Aus
gate the st
y analysis w
extreme w
he critical s
10% of th
rs, such as
ll be chan
l wave data
eight. The p
bins. After
force at th
mean fatigue
Figure 12 B
dies
w of the
e study are
fatigue life
SO model in
stralia. The
tress profile
will be perfo
wave load w
segment. In
he water d
FPSO size
ged to obs
a will be cla
probability
that, 4 wav
he FPSO. L
e life of riser
Block diagr
Project
e to identify
e of the ste
n Orcaflex
most likely
es and ide
rmed to see
will be gene
n this case,
depth from
e, drifting d
serve the i
assified into
based on th
ve trains fro
Lastly, the f
r.
ram represen
y the critica
eel catenary
to represen
y sea states
entify the c
ek the optim
erated to ob
the FPSO
the mean
distance, sim
impacts to
o bins which
he statistical
m 4 directio
fatigue life
nts the appr
al section,
y riser. The
nt a typical
will be use
critical poin
mized config
bserve the t
is assumed
position. In
mulation tim
the fatigu
h are create
l wave data
ons will be
distribution
roach for pr
seek the op
e study sta
l FPSO use
ed in the sim
nt on the r
gurations.
tensile and
d to be able
n addition,
me and nu
ue damage.
ed for certa
a will be ass
simulated t
n will be pl

roject (1).
37
ptimized
arts from
ed in the
mulation
rise and
bending
e to drift
several
umber of
Lastly,
ain range
signed to
to create
lotted to

Figure 13 B
Figure 14 B
Block diagr
Block diagr

ram represen
ram represen
nts the appr
nts the appr
roach for pr
roach for pr
roject (2).
roject (3).
38

39

8.2. General Information about the Timor Sea
The Timor Sea is the relatively shallow sea bounded from the north by the Timor
Island, from the south by Australia and from the west by the Indian Ocean. Beneath,
considerable oil and gas reserves are laid. Nowadays, numbers of offshore
production platforms and drilling rigs are in operations in the shallow water depth
areas and also trench in the deepwater regions.

Montara field is an oil development filed operated by PTTEP Australasia in the shelf
region of the Timor Sea. This field is situated 250 km southwest of the Timor Island
and 685 km west of the Darwin city in Australia. The metocean data have been
collected extensively in Montara and Jabiru field which is another field nearby. The
measuring data provides the fundamental information about wind, wave and current
which are essential to evaluate the riser design.

For the Timor Sea, key oceanographic features are listed below.
- The Pacific-Indian ocean flow likely generates persistent west to west-
south currents.
- The monsoons are the controlling factor of metocean in the Timor Sea for
the short return period wind and wave. Tide is a dominant factor to
control the oceanic current.
- The Coriolis effect is comparatively weak due to the low latitude and the
tropical cyclones are likely immature. However, small but intense tropical
cyclones could control the long return period waves and winds.

Figu
Fig
ure 16 Deep
gure 15 Loc
p water area
cation of Mo
as in the Tim
ontara field
mor Sea (wa
, Timor Sea
ater depth >
a.
> 500 Meter
40

s).

8.3. W
No specifi
most appr
(away to t
data recor
from Octo
will be use

Figure
Waves St
fic wave me
opriate mea
the northea
rded in 2, 3,
ober 1983 to
ed in the stu
17: Existin
tatistics
easurements
asured wave
ast ~75 Km
, and 4 hour
o January 1
udy is availa
g developm
in the T
s existed in
e data for th
m). Most of
rly intervals
993, but the
able only fr
ment fields in
Timor Se
the Montar
he Montara
the data ta
s. The meas
e full year o
rom Decemb
n the Timor
ea
ra area. The
Field is the
aken are om
surement is
of direction
ber 1995 D
r Sea.
e best availa
e data in Jab
mnidirection
done over
nal wave dat
December 1
41

able and
biru field
nal wave
10 years
ta which
1996.
42

Wave Climate
The ambient wave climate for the Montara field is composed of separated sea and
swell waves, with a wind-sea/swell separation of 9 seconds (0.111 Hz) found from
the plotted Jabiru wave spectra. The combination using the square root of the sum of
the square wave height results in the total waves.

2 2
total sea swell
Hs Hs Hs = + .............................. (24)
Sea Waves
Sea waves are waves locally generated by wind. As such, the sea wave climate is
very closely allied with the summer westerlies and winter easterlies. Transient
variations to these persistent seasonal regimes are caused by the various storm types,
which occasionally affect the region. As a result of the very long fetched storm, sea
waves may have periods ranging from 2 or 4 seconds to as long as 6 or 8 seconds.

Swell Waves
Surface wind waves which are generated by remote storms (i.e. 400 - 7000 km away)
and propagate to a site independently of the storm, are known as swell. In the
Southern Hemisphere, swell results predominantly from storms in the Southern
Ocean or the southern portion of the Indian Ocean. After generation, swell may
propagate towards the equator, gradually dispersing and decreasing in amplitude
before arriving at the Timor Sea from the southwest. Since longer period swell suffer
less dissipation, periods of long-travelled swell are usually greater than 14 seconds
commonly ranging up to 20 seconds and occasionally exceeding 22 seconds. Shorter
period swell (6 to 10 seconds), may result from tropical cyclones, and from winter
easterlies over the Arafura Sea and eastern portions of the Timor Sea.

Maximu
Within an
maximum
significant
mean wav
been empl

Seasona
The month
in the wav
monsoona
shifting to
Figure
um Single
ny sea stat
m individual
t wave, wit
ve period. T
loyed in this
al Variabi
hly variatio
ve rose dia
al wind dire
o predomin
18 Swells f
e Waves
te character
l wave hei
th correspo
The formula
s study.
lity
on in total w
agrams. The
ections, with
nantly easte
from south I
rized by a
ights (EH
ma
onding perio
ations of G
max
max
EH
ET =
wave height
e wind wav
h westerly s
erly from A
Indian Ocea
particular
ax
) may be
ods ~10%
Goda (1985)
1.86
1.15
Hs
Tm
=
=
...
t, period and
ves or sea
seas prevail
April to ear
an to Timor
significant
e up to twi
longer than
) for non-cy
...................
d direction
waves will
ling from D
rly Novemb
r Sea.
t wave hei
ice as high
n the signif
yclonic wav
..................
are shown
closely fo
December to
ber, before
43

ight, the
h as the
ficant or
ves have
. (25)
in detail
llow the
o March,
shifting

back to th
present in
that gener
predomina
west). Som
The mon
correspond

he west. A v
n the summe
rally form
ant swell di
me shorter p
nths with
ding to the
Figure 19
very small
er months,
to the eas
irection rem
period swel
the smalle
calmest mo
Annual wav
easterly win
possibly at
t of the M
mains from
ll will occas
est waves
onths for win
ve rose diag
nd wave co
ttributable t
Montara Fie
the southw
sionally app
are Marc
nd.
grams meas
omponent m
to distant tr
eld. Throug
west (and to
proach from
ch, Octobe
sured at Jabi
may occasio
ropical distu
ghout the y
a lesser de
m the east in
er and No
iru field.
44
onally be
urbances
year, the
egree the
n winter.
ovember

Figure 20 MMonthly waave rose diaagrams meassured in Jabbiru field.
45

46

Non-Cyclonic Storm Waves
The summer and winter monsoonal and trade wind surges also generate the strongest
non-cyclonic storm waves, which could be coupled with the perennial west-
southwest background swell component. It could result in the maximum non-
cyclonic total sea states. These non-cyclonic total sea states are the controlling storm
type for the shorter return periods less than 5 years. Applying a minimum total
significant wave height threshold of 2.7 m (annual), 2.7 m (summer) and 2.5 m
(winter) to the measured ambient wave database in the Montara Field and excluding
any tropical cyclone events resulted in the annual extreme events. These extreme
wave events are then subjected to the Conditional Weibull extreme analysis
technique. The corresponding parameters such as the extreme significant wave
heights (H
s
), return period mean wave periods (T
m
), spectral peak periods (T
p
) and
average zero crossing periods (T
z
) are derived from the storm peak correlations and
shown in the table below.

Table 1 Return period of non-cyclonic winds, waves and currents in Montana field

8.4. FPSO Simulation Model
The FPSO model is constructed based on information derived from an existing
Montara FPSO and the specifications are described in the following table. For the
hydrodynamic parameters such as the displacement and wave load RAO will be
adopted from the typical ship-shaped FPSO. These detail information of FPSOs
hydrodynamic parameters will be provided in the appendix.

1 2 5 10 25
SignificantWaveHeight Hs m 3.52 3.82 4.15 4.37 4.62
SpectralPeakWavePeriod Tp s 9.66 10.07 10.49 10.76 11.06
SpectralMeanWavePeriod Tm s 7.4 7.71 8.04 8.25 8.48
AverageZeroCrossingPeriod Tz s 6.75 7.04 7.33 7.52 7.73
MaximumSingleWaveHeight EHmax m 6.55 7.11 7.73 8.12 8.59
PeriodofMaximumWave THmax s 8.52 8.87 9.25 9.48 9.75
ReturnPeriods(Yrs)
NonCyclonicAnnualReturn
Periods
Parameter Unit

Figgure 21 Montara FPSO O.
47

Figure 22 Montara FPPSO specifi fications.
48

8.5. R
The assum
riser and s
(ERW) or
Riser Sim
mption for t
steel tubula
r double- su
Figure 2
Figure 2
mulation
the riser is
ar will be m
ubmerged a
23 FPSO m
24 FPSO mo
n Model
that X70 c
manufacture
arc welded
model (Side v
odel (Front
carbon steel
d by either
(DSAW). T
view).
view).
l will be us
the electric
The materia
sed to fabri
c-resistance
al specificat
49

icate the
e welded
tions are
50

assumed to conform with the established industry specifications for the minimum
tensile strength, service temperature, fatigue resistance, internal corrosion and wear
resistance.

Table 4 Pipeline specifications
Steel grade X70
Outer diameter (13') 0.3302 (m)
Inner diameter (11') 0.2794 (m)
Mass per unit length 0.173 (te/m)
SMYS 70 Kips
Bending stiffness 4.60E+04 (kN.m^2)
Axial stiffness 4.66E+06 (kN.m^2)
Poisson ratio 0.293

To justify he pipe specifications above, calculation is made according to the API
practices. The allowable stress in pipe, fracture toughness requirement, riser
deflection, and collapse pressure and collapse propagation will be checked with the
pipe properties. Below is the simulated case when 1 meter wave with about 6-8
second return period is approaching the FPSO.

Allowable Stress in Plain Pipe
The figure below illustrates combined stress profiles from top to bottom of riser. The
minimum, maximum and mean of von Mises stress are plotted in the graph in blue,
green and black respectively. The red line is the limiting stress for steel pipe which is
greater than the combined stress for every pipe section. The Riser API 2RP
Utilization, reported as percentage of pipe stress over the allowable stress, is
averaged at 0.4 with in a range of +/- 0.2. So, it proves that the purposed riser can
withstand the typical sea condition.

Fig

Minimum
The minim
fracture a
mechanics
loaded me
temperatu
gure 25 Plot
Fig
m Fracture
mum fractu
at the expe
s based con
embers such
ure is anoth
t of maximu
gure 26 Plot
Toughness
ure toughne
ected stress
nsiderations
h as the con
her critical
um von Mis
t of riser uti
s
ess of mate
s level ove
s are appro
nnections an
factor influ
ses stress an
ilization (AP
erial should
er anticipat
opriate and
nd welded s
uenced stee
nd allowable
PI RP 2RD)
d be sufficie
ted service
more impo
seams. In ad
l behavior
e pipe stress
).
ent to avoi
life. The
ortance for
ddition, low
to be more
51

s.

id brittle
fracture
r highly-
w service
e brittle.
52

Therefore, the careful testing for steel toughness should be performed to compare the
results between different testing methods. The testing procedures such as Charpy
test, CTOD, drop weight tear test are standard test for steel used in the pipeline
industry.

Riser Maximum Deflection
The maximum riser deflection is specified to prevent the excessive high bending
stress in riser which may cause riser leakage and failure. Even when the riser stress is
under the manufactures recommended, the larger riser deflection is needed to be
controlled to prevent multiple risers from interfering and crashing. Therefore, the
riser system may include additional equipment such as tensioners, flexible
connections and telescopic joints to provide bending and rotating abilities of the
riser. These tools should be designed at the worse condition in the extreme case
analysis.

Two figures illustrated below indicated smoothly change of the curvature and
bending radius of riser. The maximum bending stress occurred at 2000 meter where
the riser is gently approaches the sea bed. The maximum curvature this particular
point is averaged at 0.0006 rad/m which is the relatively low when compare with
other stress component. Therefore, the planned riser configuration with this
trajectory seems to be applicable in the real operations.

Pipe Colla
The criteri
exceed th
operations
by severa
stress in
apse Pressu
ion for colla
e ability of
s during the
al factors su
material. S
Figure
Figure
ure
apse pressu
f riser to w
e service lif
uch as abil
So, these va
e 27 Bendin
e 28 Riser cu
ure is that th
withstand th
fe. Theoreti
ity, eccentr
ariables res
ng radius pro
urvature pro
he external h
e hydrostat
ically, the c
ricity, aniso
sult in trem
ofile.
ofile.
hydrostatic
tic pressure
collapse res
otropy as w
mendous di
pressure sh
e experience
istance is in
well as the
ifficulties to
53

hould not
ed in all
nfluence
residual
o obtain

precise es
pressure o
pressure P
pressure.

timation of
of riser is g
P
a
and the sa
f the collaps
given by P
c
afety factor
se pressure
which is th
r. The below
. However,
he multiplic
w is exampl
in the prac
cation of th
le calculatio

ctical way,
he allowable
on for pipe
54
collapse
e design
collapse

Figure 29 PPipe collaps

se pressure aand the net hydrostatic pressure.
55

56

9. Sensitivity Analysis
The sensitivity analyses are performed to investigate the relationship between key
design parameters and the riser internal stress. Several parameters such as the outside
diameter, risers length, initial position, FPSO size, simulation time and the length
per segment will be examined in this study. The study excludes wave drift motion
effect in order to avoid model complexity and enormous time required for
simulation, but the study will focus more on the effect due to the heave and pitch
oscillating motions because they are believed as the primary factors influence to the
fatigue life.

Table 5 Simulation parameters used in the base case
Base case
Steel grade X70
SMYS 482E+3 kips
Wave height 1 m
Water period 6 sec
Wave direction Bow
Water depth (d) 1000 m
Horizontal departure (X) 3000 m
Riser length (L) 3300 m
Half span (l) 1756 m
Internal pressure at z =0 2500 psi
Fluid in riser Gas
Density of fluid 0.205 te/m^3

9.1. S
The purpo
of riser w
damage. In
13.0 to 1
concentrat
at the riser
of the rise
is highly e

From the r
design bec
occurred i
Although
still a pre
which is m

Sensitivit
ose of this s
which is ab
n this study
5.0 inches.
tion. In add
r top in whi
er. Next is th
elevated bec
results, 1 in
cause it pro
in common
a thicker pi
eferable cho
much greate
Figure 3
ty Analy
study is to id
ble to resis
y, the OD is
From the
dition, two c
ich the tensi
he area arou
cause the ris
nch wall thi
ovides suffic
sea states (
ipe will resu
oice becaus
er than expe
30 Shape co
ysis: Out
dentify the
st collapse
set up in 5
results bel
critical secti
ile stress is
und the tou
ser is lifted
ckness (see
cient streng
(allowable h
ult in a less
e its can p
cted field p
onfiguration
tside Dia
critical sect
pressure a
different ca
low, the sm
ions are ide
extremely h
chdown po
off from th
e case 1) is t
gth to withst
hoop stress
fatigue dam
provide suff
roduction li
ns of the ste
ameter
tion and fin
s well as m
ases with th
maller OD
ntified on th
high due th
int where th
e seabed.
the appropr
tand the ma
= 347 MPa
mage, a 1 in
ficient fatig
ife (20 year
eel catenary
nd the optim
minimizing
e OD increa
is the large
he riser. Th
e suspended
he bending
riated choic
aximum hoo
a, using SF
ch thicknes
gue life (11
rs).
y riser.
57
mum size
g fatigue
ase from
er stress
he first is
d weight
moment
e for the
op stress
= 0.72).
ss riser is
1 years)

F

Case n
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Table 6
Figure 31 M
no. OD
1
13.
2
13.
3
14.
4
14.
5
15.
Fatigue dam
ean von Mi
(in) ID (
00 11.0
50 11.0
00 11.0
50 11.0
00 11.0
mage sensit
ises combin
in) t (in
00 1.0
00 1.2
00 1.5
00 1.7
00 2.0
tivity (vary
ned stress (v
n) Dama
00
8
25
5
50
2
75
2
00
1
outside diam
vary outside
ge per year
.98E-03
.22E-03
.86E-03
.14E-03
.11E-03
meter)
e diameter).
r Fatigue L
111
191
349
467
899
58

Life (yr)
1
1
9
7
9

Figure 3
Figure 33
32 Mean axi
Mean bend
ial stress pro
ding stress p
ofile (vary o
profile (vary
outside diam
y outside di
meter).
ameter).
59

9.2. S
The purpo
span of ri
touchdown
lengths are
step.

From the
fatigue da
production
conditions
return per
of the ris
probabilis
configurat
around 1.3
Figure 3
Sensitivit
ose of the st
iser (d/l) in
n point. Us
e used. The
below resu
amage of 60
n period (20
s; whereas t
iod in realit
ser. The is
tic fatigue
tion of the
32 in order t
34 Mean hoo
ty Analy
tudy is to fin
n which it
sing the sam
e length vari
ult in case 6
02 years w
0 years). H
the random
ty can gene
sue of ran
calculation
steel caten
to maximiz
op stress pro
ysis: Rise
nd the optim
is able to
me conditio
ies from 3,3
6, the 1.32
which is con
However, the
wave cond
erate higher
ndom sea s
ns. All in
ary (d/l) ris
e the fatigu
ofile (vary o
er Lengt
mal ration o
minimize
on as the pr
300 to 3,700
half-span r
nsiderably l
e model is
itions with
r stress resu
states will
all, this st
ser using 1
e life.
outside diam
th
of the water
annual fati
revious stud
0 meters in
ratio offers
longer than
based on th
larger wave
ulting in the
be scrutini
tudy sugge
3 OD and
meter).
r depth and
gue damag
dy, 9 differ
50 meter in
a minimum
n the expect
he general s
e height and
e shorter fat
ized further
ests that th
d 11 ID sh
60

the half-
ge at the
rent riser
ncrement
m annual
ted field
sea state
d shorter
tigue life
r in the
he shape
hould be

Case n
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Fig
Tab
no. Depth
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
gure 35 Rise
ble 7 Cases
h/Half-Span
0.56
0.68
0.81
0.95
1.10
1.32
1.56
1.89
2.27
er shapes for
for riser len
Length (
3300
3350
3400
3450
3500
3550
3600
3650
3700
r various le
ngth sensiti
(m) Dama
9
2
3
3
2
1
1
2
4
ngth of rise
vity analysi
age per yea
9.41E-03
2.96E-03
3.17E-03
3.48E-03
2.92E-03
.66E-03
.72E-03
2.59E-03
4.39E-03
er.
is
r Fatigue L
106
338
315
287
342
602
582
386
228
61

Life (yr)
6
8
5
7
2
2
2
6
8

Figure 36
Figure 3
Mean von M
37 Mean ax
Mises stress
xial stress pr
s profiles (v
rofiles (vary
vary length
y length of r
of riser).
riser).
62

Figure 38
Figure 3
8 Mean ben
39 Mean ho
nding stress
oop stress pr
profiles (va
rofiles (vary
ary length o
y length of r
f riser).
riser).
63

9.3. S
The purp
wave con
position b
are assum
conditions
meters an
extreme w

From the
stretched
where the
also show
can be o
approxima
to just 2 y
influence
extreme w

Figu

Sensitivit
ose of the s
ndition. In
by +10%, +
med as conse
s. In the ex
nd 7.73 seco
wave correla
simulation,
rather than
tensile stre
w that the of
observed in
ately 100 m
years. Ther
to the stress
wave conditi
ure 40 Riser
ty Analy
study is to
the study,
+5%, -5% an
equences of
xtreme case,
onds which
ation.
the results
n being slac
ess is domin
ffset distanc
n case 5. I
meters, but it
refore, it im
s and fatigu
ion where th
shape conf
ysis: FPS
ensure that
FPSO initi
nd -10% of
f the slow w
, wave heig
h are derive
show that t
cked. This i
nated over t
ce has signi
In case 5,
t significant
mplies that
ue of the ris
he occurren
figurations w
SO Initia
t riser desig
ial position
f the water
wave drift m
ght and wav
ed from the
the annual d
is because
the bending
ificant effec
the FPSO
tly decrease
the wave d
er. Howeve
nce probabil
when vary t
al Positio
gn can surv
ns are shift
depth. The
motion durin
ve period a
e extrapolat
damage incr
the initial
g stress. The
ct to the fati
O offset in
es the fatigu
drift effect
er, the study
lity is consid
the initial of
on
ive from a
ted from th
ese horizont
ng the extrem
are assumed
tion of the
reases when
position is
e simulation
igue damag
creases by
ue life from
may have
y is simulate
derably low
ffset of FPS
64
extreme
he mean
tal shifts
me wave
d at 8.59
Weibull
n riser is
situated
n results
ge which
5% or
15 years
a strong
ed in the
w.
SO.

Case
Cas
Cas
Cas
Cas
Cas
Table 8 Fa
Figure 41
e no.
se 1
se 2
se 3
se 4
se 5
atigue dama
Mean von M
Offset
-10%
-5%
Mean
+5%
+10%
age sensitiv
Mises comb
t Dam
ity analysis
bined stress
mage per
1.76E-01
8.31E-02
6.54E-02
1.67E-01
5.99E-01
s (vary initia
(vary initia
r year Fa
1
2
2
1
1
al offset)
al offset).
atigue Lif
6
12
15
6
2
65

fe (yr)

Figure
Figure 4
e 42 Mean a
43 Mean be
axial stress p
ending stres
profile (var
s profile (va
ry initial off
ary initial o
fset).
ffset).
66

9.4. S
Under the
in step of
improvem
the minim

From the
FPSO bec
direction
suppress i
results in
motions w
limited by
size FPSO
in case 1,
250 to 35
meters wh
Figure
Sensitivit
e extreme w
50 meter. T
ment of FPS
mum fatigue
sensitivity
cause the in
far off the
induced hea
the larger
which make
y the top fac
O will be tre
2 and 3. Th
50 meters. T
hich is appro
e 44 Mean h
ty Analy
wave conditi
These differ
SOs stabilit
damage.
analysis, i
ncreased si
e typical w
ave motion
hydrodyna
es riser life
cilities and
emendously
he study sug
Therefore,
oximately th
hoop stress
ysis: FPS
ion, the FPS
ent sizes are
ty and deter
increasing F
ize shifts th
wave freque
due to the w
amic dampin
much long
the field req
y suffered f
ggests that a
the FPSO
he same siz
profile (var
SO Size
SO size is
e simulated
rmine the o
FPSO size
he natural f
encies. The
wave excita
ng force w
ger. Howev
quirement.
from the gre
a suitable si
size in this
e of the Mo
ry initial off
varied from
d in this stud
optimal FPS
will enhan
frequency e
erefore the
ation. As w
which can m
ver, the size
On the othe
eat effect of
ize of FPSO
s study is p
ontara FPSO
fset).
m 100 to 35
dy to investi
SO size resu
nce the stab
especially i
inertia eff
well, the gre
minimize th
e will be ph
er hand, the
f wave clea
O should ran
purposed to
O.
67

50 meter
igate the
ulting in
bility of
in heave
ffect can
ater size
he heave
hysically
e smaller
arly seen
nge from
o be 250

Cas
Ca
Ca
Ca
Ca
Ca
Ca
Table
Fig
se no. V
ase 1
ase 2
ase 3
ase 4
ase 5
ase 6
9 Fatigue d
gure 45 FPS
Vessel len
100
150
200
250
300
350
damage sens
SO heave m
gth (m) Da
sitivity (var
motion (vary
amage pe
5.07E+0
3.41E+0
2.88E-0
9.12E-0
3.11E-0
7.30E-0
ry vessel len
FPSO size)
er year Fa
00
00
01
03
03
04
ngth)
).
atigue Life
0
0
3
110
322
1369
68

e (yr)

Figure 46
Figur
6 Mean von
re 47 Mean
Mises com
axial stress
mbined stress
s profile (va
s (vary FPS
ary FPSO siz
O size).
ze).
69

Figure
Figur
48 Mean b
re 49 Mean
ending stres
hoop stress
ss profile (v
s profile (va
vary FPSO s
ary FPSO siz
size).
ze).
70

71

9.5. Sensitivity Analysis: Simulation Time
The purpose of the study is to find the optimum time step to minimize the
computational error. Under the same condition as in the previous study, the
simulation times vary from 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 minutes. Next, the fatigue
damage derived from different simulation time will be scaled up to 1 year damage
for the comparison. From the results, there is no significant difference among
different cases which maybe because the steady wave assumption used in the study.
If the waves are modelled by using irregular wave model e.g. JONSWAP, the
simulation time may have more influence on the result accuracy. The study in the
next chapter will be based on the regular wave assumption; therefore 10 minute
simulation time will be used for e time effectiveness without sacrificing accuracy.

Table 10 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary simulation time)

Case no. Sim.time (min) Damage per year % Diff from Case1
Case 1 10 5.07E+00 100.00
Case 2 20 5.06E+00 99.92
Case 3 30 5.07E+00 99.92
Case 4 40 5.06E+00 99.94
Case 5 50 5.07E+00 99.97
Case 6 60 5.07E+00 99.98
72

9.6. Sensitivity Analysis: Length of Segment
Under the same condition, the length per segment is varied from 10, 8, 6, 4 to 2
meter to investigate the effect of them with the result accuracy. Generally, the
smaller the length is the better the accuracy, but simulation will become very time
consuming process for a very fine segment. From the result, the segment length has
negligible effect on the result accuracy. The first case result, assumed to have the
highest accuracy because the length is the shortest, is just slightly different from
other cases. The 4th case seems to be the optimum point because it will balance
between accuracy and time required for simulation because it gives 96.6% accuracy
before the accuracy decreases to 92.4% in case the next case. Hence, the length of 8
meters will be used to model the riser in the probabilistic fatigue analysis.

Table 11 Fatigue damage sensitivity (vary length per segment)

Case no. Riser length/Segment (m) Damage per year % Diff from Case1
Case 1 2 5.48E+00 100.0
Case 2 4 5.44E+00 99.3
Case 3 6 5.37E+00 97.9
Case 4 8 5.29E+00 96.6
Case 5 10 5.06E+00 92.4
73

10. Probabilistic Fatigue Life

10.1. Waves for Fatigue Calculation
Data available for this study included 1 year of measured directional wave data (1995
1996) from Jabiru location presenting the ambient wave data, and 35 years of
modeled tropical cyclone wave height, period and direction time series to represent
the storm wave climate. From the deterministic fatigue analysis, it provides estimates
of the number of single waves that might affect a marine facility in a nominated
lifetime. Modeled ambient data are combined with model storm data with the limit
that H
s
values should not exceed the return period value corresponding to the
exposure period. The probability of occurrence of waves for a range of wave height
intervals is determined for each H
s
using the Forristall (1978) distribution shown
below. The distribution and table represent wave height and wave period of
individual waves generated in 20 years return periods in octane directions.

In the probabilistic fatigue analysis, data in scatter diagrams are compressed into a
smaller number of bins which the bins represent waves in a particular directions. The
integration is done by selecting the wave period and lumping all wave height
associated with that particular period. The equivalent wave height (H
se
) for each
period (T
z
) is calculated by using the weighted average of wave numbers with the H
6
s
due to the fact that stress range is raised to the approximate power of three of the S-N
curve, and relationship between the wave height and the wave load has a power of
two approximately. By this mean, the compressed sea state bins can be calculated
and shown in the following table.

Deterministic wave height distribution modeled by Forristall (1978)

2.126
2.263*( )
( ) e
o
s
H
H
o
prob H H

> = ............................................ (26)

74

Table 12 Omnidirectional wave scatter diagram prepared for 20 years period

Location:MontaraField(MeasuredJabirudata)
Project:J2464
Client:CoogeeResources
DirectionConvention:FROM
Longitude:124.538048Latude:12.673610DepthHeight:85.000000m
Montara
Omnidirectional
Components:Storm,Ambient
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
to to to to to to to to >
IndividualWaveHeight <3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
0 0
0.000.50 14371318 48038016 23427298 12524810 4149134 1246705 234028 11219 104002528
0.501.00 808487 6765381 4915752 1137528 494625 243144 86926 4778 14456622
1.001.50 61461 1665836 2135886 323361 140920 43184 23889 1458 4395998
1.502.00 3387 370380 927168 151886 64933 5109 3834 283 1526985
2.002.50 173 75960 390890 87364 36175 773 446 62 591847
2.503.00 7 14665 156481 50152 20779 429 77 19 242613
3.003.50 0 2707 59536 26877 12055 393 47 5 101624
3.504.00 0 478 21794 13190 6914 360 43 1 42783
4.004.50 0 80 7767 5931 3865 317 39 0 18001
4.505.00 0 12 2713 2470 2113 267 34 0 7611
5.005.50 0 1 929 969 1148 217 29 0 3296
5.506.00 0 311 367 631 169 23 0 1505
6.006.50 0 101 138 354 128 18 0 742
6.507.00 0 31 53 202 93 14 0 396
7.007.50 0 9 21 116 66 10 0 224
7.508.00 0 2 8 66 45 7 0 131
8.008.50 0 0 3 36 30 5 0 77
8.509.00 0 0 1 19 19 3 0 45
9.009.50 0 0 0 10 12 2 26
9.5010.00 0 0 5 7 1 14
10.0010.50 0 0 2 4 1 8
10.5011.00 0 0 1 2 0 4
11.0011.50 0 0 0 1 0 2
11.5012.00 0 0 0 0 0 1
12.0012.50 0 0 0 0 0 0
12.5013.00 0 0 0 0 0 0
13.0013.50 0 0 0 0 0 0
13.5014.00 0 0 0 0 0 0
14.00. 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 15244835 56933516 32046676 14325138 4934115 1541490 349489 17830 0 0 125393080
.signifiesnooccurrence
Datadescription:ambient+cyclonic
Recordperiod:06:38:0002/12/1995TO11:12:0020/12/1996+30storms
Exposureperiod:20.000000years
Totalcount:125393056
AverageZeroCrossingPeriod(secs)
(Deterministic)OccurrenceMatrixofIndividualWaveHeight(m)vsAverageZeroCrossingPeriod(secs)
75

Table 13 Directional wave statistics prepared for 20 years period

Location:MontaraField(MeasuredJabirudata)
Project:J2464
Client:CoogeeResources
DirectionConvention:FROM
Longitude:124.538048Latude:12.673610DepthHeight:85.000000m
Montara
Omnidirectional
Components:Storm,Ambient
337.5 22.5 67.5 112.5 157.5 202.5 247.5 292.5
to to to to to to to to
IndividualWaveHeight(m) 22.5 67.5 112.5 157.5 202.5 247.5 292.5 337.5 Total
0 . . . . . . . . 0
0.000.50 1037965 5391401 7196918 6528604 4458223 46853688 30933388 1602229 104002424
0.501.00 161689 1102829 2614662 1532569 592579 4066729 4037205 348366 14456632
1.001.50 54447 250895 1017012 525147 135480 912868 1386132 114016 4395999
1.502.00 22539 45841 327917 189321 35999 300611 560006 44750 1526987
2.002.50 10296 9218 96958 69767 12418 128508 246439 18241 591847
2.503.00 4612 2895 26970 24765 5338 60600 110443 6986 242613
3.003.50 1877 1439 7301 8379 2537 29141 48344 2602 101624
3.504.00 685 868 2196 2793 1224 13811 20145 1058 42783
4.004.50 232 547 898 978 572 6328 7917 526 18001
4.505.00 79 347 507 387 253 2773 2943 319 7611
5.005.50 29 220 333 182 105 1160 1049 214 3296
5.506.00 13 139 225 100 41 468 368 147 1505
6.006.50 6 87 151 62 15 185 133 100 742
6.507.00 3 54 100 40 5 74 52 65 396
7.007.50 1 33 64 26 1 30 22 41 224
7.508.00 0 20 41 17 0 13 10 25 131
8.008.50 0 12 25 11 0 6 5 15 77
8.509.00 0 7 15 7 0 2 2 8 45
9.009.50 0 4 9 4 0 1 1 4 26
9.5010.00 0 2 5 2 0 0 0 2 14
10.0010.50 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 1 8
10.5011.00 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4
11.0011.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
11.5012.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
12.0012.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12.5013.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13.0013.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13.5014.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14.00. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1294481 6806874 11292323 8883175 5244796 52377000 37354608 2139725 125392984
.signifiesnooccurrence
Datadescription:ambient+cyclonic
Recordperiod:06:38:0002/12/1995TO11:12:0020/12/1996+30storms
Exposureperiod:20.000000years
Totalcount:125392976
(Deterministic)OccurrenceMatrixofIndividualWaveHeight(m)vsAverageZeroCrossingPeriod(secs)
AverageZeroCrossingPeriod(secs)

In the stu
height, wa
tables. En
results wi
fatigue life

udy, waves
ave period a
ntirely, there
ll be extrac
fe of riser.
Figure 5
will appro
and occurre
e are 3,072
cted and an
50 Wave sc

oach the FP
ence probab
2 load cases
nalyzed late
catter diagra
PSO from 4
bility of wav
s generated
er in next c
ams prepare
4 octant dir
ves are show
for the stu
chapter to d
ed in 4 direc
rections. Th
wn in the fo
udy. The sim
determine th
ctions.
76
he wave
ollowing
mulation
he mean

77

Table 14 Occurrence matrix of directional wave for fatigue analysis (315, 45)




Direction(0)
Bin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Tze 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50 7.50 8.50 9.50 10.50 11.50 12.50
Hse 0.65 1.03 1.23 1.46 4.52 5.28 . . . .
Prob 4.58E03 1.91E02 1.64E02 5.92E03 3.43E05 3.70E06 . . . .
OccurrenceMatrixofEquivalentWaveHeight(m)vsEquivalentZeroCrossingPeriod(secs)
Direction(90)
Bin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Tze 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50 7.50 8.50 9.50 10.50 11.50 12.50
Hse 0.62 1.00 1.42 1.50 4.10 5.18 5.41 1.81 . .
Prob 1.36E02 8.40E02 4.99E02 5.14E03 7.77E05 2.56E05 4.17E06 3.06E06 . .
Direction(180)
Bin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Tze 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50 7.50 8.50 9.50 10.50 11.50 12.50
Hse 0.56 0.83 1.55 1.51 1.63 0.81 1.01 1.81 . .
Prob 4.72E02 1.40E01 5.46E02 2.84E02 1.21E02 3.68E03 2.62E04 3.06E06 . .
Direction(270)
Bin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Tze 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50 7.50 8.50 9.50 10.50 11.50 12.50
Hse 0.52 0.90 1.53 1.60 1.73 0.79 0.96 0.95 . .
Prob 5.62E02 2.11E01 1.35E01 7.48E02 2.71E02 8.59E03 2.52E03 1.36E04 . .

10.2.
After a str
distributio
stress rang
P100 max
52.3 MPa,
curves hav
occurs, it w

F
. Cumu
ress history
on curves ar
ge. The curv
ximum von M
, and the P5
ve smooth
will grow st
Figure 51 C
ulative S
y has been
re plotted to
ves are pre
Mises stress
50 of both ar
and relativ
teadily and
Cumulative
Stress Pr
generated f
o indicate th
sented in th
s and P100
re 122.4 and
vely continu
continuous
probability
robabilit
for a collec
he mean valu
he figures b
stress range
d 21.5 MPa
ues shape w
ly.
distribution
y Distrib
ction of cas
ue of maxim
below. The r
e are approx
a respectivel
which impli
n of maximu
butions
ses, the cum
mum stress
results indi
ximate at 12
ly. In additi
ies that if c
um stress.
78
mulative
and also
cate that
29.3 and
ion, both
cracking

10.3.
In this stu
load comb
when esta
response
However,
mooring s
the FPSO

The fatigu
figures, th
90%, 50%
fatigue lif
safety fact
(with 20
technically

Figure 52
. Fatigu
dy, lifetime
binations tha
ablishing th
to primary
the effect o
system is as
to drift awa
ue life prob
he value of
% and 10%
fe should b
tor calculat
years appro
y and practi
2 Cumulativ
ue Life P
e operating c
at can contr
he long ter
y wave he
of second o
ssumed to a
ay from mea
bability dist
P10, P50 a
confidence
e at least 3
ted at mean
oximate ser
ically achiev
ve probabili
Probabil
conditions a
ribute signif
rm distribut
eights and
order wave
able to prov
an position.
tribution is
and P90 are
e. Follow t
3 times (SF
n value is 4
rvice life).
ved API sta
ity distributi
lity Distr
are applied
ficantly to f
tion of the
d frequenci
force is ign
vide suffici
.
prepared i
e 30, 85 and
the API 2R
F =3.0) of i
4.25 which m
Hence, the
andard of th
ion of stress
ribution
to evaluate
fatigue are b
stress. Th
es variatio
nored in the
ient restorin
in the figur
d 147 years
RP recomm
its service
meet the A
e designed
he riser desig
s range.
s
the fatigue
being accou
he effects o
ons are co
e study bec
ng forces to
re below. F
s which refe
ended prac
life. Theref
API design p
configurat
gn.
79

life. All
unted for
of cyclic
ombined.
cause the
o restrict
From the
fer to the
ctice, the
fore, the
practices
tions are

Figure 53 C
Figu
Cumulative
ure 54 Proba

e probability
ability distri
y distributio
ibution of th
on of the fat
he fatigue li
tigue life.
ife.
80

81

11. Discussion

Fatigue life is critically important for the riser design because the riser failure could
cause major accidents which are extremely harmful for human and environment.
Therefore, several methods are developed to estimate the fatigue life of riser. One of
them is by using computer simulation which engineers constructed the riser model
based on the law of physics and experimental data to predict the stress and fatigue
damage. However, the procedures for estimation are still complicated, inconvenient
and required sophisticated computer software. Also, with lacking of powerful
computer in the past, it is nearly impossible to solve the system of hundred
differential equations simultaneously. Another problem is that the simulation
requires several inputs which most of them must be accurately measured at certain
locations or carefully collected from the experiment in the laboratory. All these make
the simulation expensive, time consuming and unproductive methodology for the
marginal projects. Alternatively, the riser analysis can be done by deterministic
calculations which the calculations are simplified by substituting input at the mean
value to reduce the simulation tasks and complexity of the overall process. However,
the results are highly uncertain, inclined to erroneous and unreliable especially for
situations that environmental loads are distributed over a broad spectrum.

In past several years, computer capability is incredibly improved. Now, a personal
computer can manage million commands and solve thousands equations
simultaneously which make the simulations is cheaper, simpler and easier and for
engineer. The simulation has been extending to be more sophisticated and be able to
include several interactions acted on the FPSO and riser. In this study, wave drift
force and vortex induced vibration (VIV) may be very influential factors the riser
fatigue life in certain circumstances such as deepwater productions. In the deepwater,
riser design will become more critical because the service life of riser is very
marginal when compared with the design fatigue life. Hence, these could be the
potential research topic for the further investigation.

82

12. Conclusion

In this study, a FPSO and riser models are constructed in Orcaflex which is the
commercial software to analyze the riser properties. The environmental load included
in the study is only the wave. Wind and current force are excluded from the study to
simplify the models and they are believed that they have considerably less influence
than the wave.

In the Orcaflex, waves are simulated from the measured data in the Timor Sea where
it would be a future deepwater project of PTTEP Australasia Limited. For the FPSO
model, it is constructed based on the current FPSO used in Montana field. A primary
engineering design for gas export riser has indicated that 13 OD with 1 thickness
should be sufficient to withstand all stresses based on the API recommendations.
Thereafter, sensitivity studies have been performed for several OD, riser length,
FPSO offset and FPSO size to identify the values which the optimal fatigue life can
be achieved. With the wall thickness of 1 inch, the study suggests that the risers
depth over half-span should be about 1.32 to compromise between the tensile stress
and the bending stress. And, this is where the minimal combined stress or so-called
von Mises stress will be achieved. Next, the FPSO length overall (LOA) should be
about 250 meters to achieve the good deck stability meanwhile not oversized the
FPSO. Lastly, the probabilistic fatigue analysis reveals that the P50 fatigue life is 85
years. This number satisfies the safety standard used in the API 2RP. In summary,
the study proves that the field development option by using FPSO and steel catenary
riser (SCR) as production facility is a possible development scheme for the
deepwater development in Timor Sea.

83

13. Recommendations

During the productions, the riser internal and external conditions should be
monitored to reveal whether design conditions have been exceeded. Monitoring and
recording fluid composition, internal pressure, external pressure and temperature in
the situations of storms and accidental loads also should be carried out. Regularly,
the riser should be visually examined for external damage, pipe distortion, excessive
curvature, marine growth, corrosion, changing conditions of buoyancy modules and
subsea buoys to ensure all equipment are in good condition. Moreover, the defection
of any equipment should be documented properly. Internal and external corrosion
should be measured appropriately by either direct or indirect method. The direct
method such as short test pipe or corrosion coupons should be installed in the riser
where the test material can be retrieved after certain intervals. As well as, the indirect
corrosion measurement should be applied to confirm the degradation of riser. This
information is essential to predict remaining life of the riser accurately. So as to, the
design philosophy should begin with the FEED which carefully integrals the regular
maintenances and inspections into the critical components of the system.
Furthermore, the regular inspection and preventive replacement should be available,
scheduled and clearly described in details as part of normal operating practices.

84

Reference

Capitio, R. (1995). Wave predictions based on scatter diagram data. Lisbon,
Portugal: National Laboratory of Civil Engineering (LNEC).
Chaudhury, G. (1999). Design,Testing, and Installation of Steel Catenary Risers.
OTC. OTC.
Hatton, S. A. (1998). Steel Catenary Risers for Deepwater Environments. OTC.
Houston, Texas,: OTC.
J. Xu, A. J. (2006). Wave Loading Fatigue Performance of Steel Catenary Risers
(SCRs) in Ultradeepwater Applications. OTC. Houston, Texas,: OTC.
Karunakara, D. (1999). Steel Catenary Riser Configurations for North Sea Field
Developments. OTC. Houston, Texas: OTC.
NAKHAEE, A. (2010). Study of the fatigue life of steel catenary risers in interaction
with the seabed. Texas: Texas A&M University.
O.B. Sert, P. S. (1996). Steel Catenary Riser for the Marlim Field FPS P-XVIII .
OTC. Houston, Texas: OTC.
Quintin, H. (2007). Steel Catenary Riser Challenges and Solutions for Deepwater
Applications . OTC. Houston, Texas: OTC.
Resources, C. (2005). FINAL METOCEAN DESIGN CRITERIA, MONTARA FIELD.
MetOcean Engineers Pty Ltd.
Shi, C. (2008). Risk-based Fatigue Estimate of Deep Water Risers. Texas :
University of Texas at Austin.
Tapan K Sen, K. B. (2008). Fatigue in Deep Water Steel Catenary RisersA
Probabilistic Approach for Steel Catenary Riser. OTC. OTC 19425.
Torres, A. L. (2008). Influence of Fatigue Issues on the Design of SCRs for
Deepwater Offshore Brazil. OTC. Houston, Texas: OTC.
Wirsching, P. (1984). Fatigue Reliability for Offshore Structures. ASCE J. Struct.
Eng., Vol. 110, No. 10, Oct. 1984, 23402356.

Appe
Fi
endix I
igure 55 Di
Figure 56 D
I: Plot
splacement
Displaceme
ts of D
RAOs (Am
ent RAOs (P
Displac
mplitude, 0 d
Phase, 0 deg
cement
degree wav
gree wave d
t RAO
e direction)
direction)
85
Os

)

Figgure 57 Dis
Figure 58 D
splacement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Am
nt RAOs (P
mplitude, 30
Phase, 30 de
degree wav
egree wave d
ve direction
direction)
86

)

Figgure 59 Dis
Figure 60 D
splacement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Am
nt RAOs (P
mplitude, 60
Phase, 60 de
degree wav
egree wave d
ve direction
direction)
87

)

Figgure 61 Dis
Figure 62 D
splacement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Am
nt RAOs (P
mplitude, 90
Phase, 90 de
degree wav
egree wave d
ve direction
direction)
88

)

Fig
F
gure 63 Disp
Figure 64 D
placement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Amp
nt RAOs (Ph
plitude, 120
hase, 120 de
0 degree wav
egree wave
ve direction
direction)
89

n)

Fig
F
gure 65 Disp
Figure 66 D
placement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Amp
nt RAOs (Ph
plitude, 150
hase, 150 de
0 degree wav
egree wave
ve direction
direction)
90

n)

Fig
F

gure 67 Disp
Figure 68 D
placement R
Displacemen
RAOs (Amp
nt RAOs (Ph
plitude, 180
hase, 180 de
0 degree wav
egree wave
ve direction
direction)
91

n)

92

Appendix II: Tables of Displacement RAOs

Table 18 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle = 0 degree)


Surge Sway Heave Row Pitch Yaw
Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase
(sec) (m/m) (deg) (m/m) (deg) (m/m) (deg) (m/m) (deg) (m/m) (deg) (m/m) (deg)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0.01 217 0 0 0.03 101 0 0 0.14 94 0 0
4.8 0.02 326 0 0 0.18 228 0 0 0.3 202 0 0
4.9 0.02 11 0 0 0.2 240 0 0 0.29 231 0 0
5.5 0.11 36 0 0 0.27 263 0 0 0.78 256 0 0
6 0.11 10 0 0 0.3 288 0 0 0.55 242 0 0
6.5 0.03 353 0 0 0.32 303 0 0 0.27 320 0 0
7 0.08 155 0 0 0.32 320 0 0 0.77 346 0 0
7.4 0.19 146 0 0 0.36 337 0 0 1.17 341 0 0
7.6 0.24 142 0 0 0.39 344 0 0 1.32 338 0 0
7.8 0.29 138 0 0 0.42 349 0 0 1.43 336 0 0
8.1 0.35 133 0 0 0.47 354 0 0 1.56 331 0 0
8.3 0.41 129 0 0 0.52 357 0 0 1.65 327 0 0
8.7 0.47 124 0 0 0.59 359 0 0 1.71 322 0 0
9.2 0.55 119 0 0 0.67 2 0 0 1.73 317 0 0
9.9 0.62 114 0 0 0.74 2 0 0 1.69 311 0 0
10.7 0.7 108 0 0 0.82 3 0 0 1.57 304 0 0
11.8 0.76 103 0 0 0.88 2 0 0 1.4 298 0 0
13 0.81 99 0 0 0.92 2 0 0 1.2 293 0 0
14.8 0.85 95 0 0 0.95 1 0 0 0.97 287 0 0
18.4 0.88 90 0 0 0.99 1 0 0 0.65 281 0 0
22.9 0.9 87.99 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.42 277 0 0
27 0.91 88 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.3 276 0 0
Infinity 1 90 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
DisplacementRAOs(Relativeangle:0degree)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0 0 0.03 360 0.05 170 0.15 351 0.11 142 0.05 240
4.8 0.03 37 0.02 309 0.2 252 0.02 1 0.37 256 0.02 167
4.9 0.05 43 0.01 273 0.23 260 0.18 180 0.5 265 0.05 160
5.5 0.1 20 0.05 144 0.26 287 0.77 154 0.65 255 0.02 103
6 0.03 3 0.11 128 0.32 308 0.89 143 0.3 303 0.13 295
6.5 0.08 152 0.16 121 0.34 323 0.8 143 0.78 344 0.29 276
7 0.19 142 0.2 117 0.38 339 0.7 152 1.22 339 0.42 263
7.4 0.28 134 0.23 116 0.45 351 0.69 166 1.5 333 0.51 253
7.6 0.32 130 0.25 115 0.49 354 0.73 173 1.58 330 0.54 249
7.8 0.36 128 0.26 115 0.52 356 0.77 178 1.64 326 0.56 245
8.1 0.41 124 0.28 115 0.58 359 0.87 185 1.7 322 0.59 241
8.3 0.45 120 0.3 115 0.62 0 0.99 190 1.72 319 0.6 236
8.7 0.5 116 0.31 117 0.68 2 1.19 193 1.72 316 0.61 232
9.2 0.55 112 0.35 120 0.75 2 1.59 191 1.68 310 0.61 226
9.9 0.6 108 0.43 123 0.81 3 2.31 180 1.59 305 0.58 222
10.7 0.66 103 0.61 113 0.86 2 3.04 141 1.43 299 0.55 218
11.8 0.7 99 0.59 97 0.91 2 1.93 104 1.25 294 0.52 211
13 0.73 95 0.54 93 0.94 2 1.14 92 1.07 289 0.46 204
14.8 0.75 93 0.52 92 0.97 1 0.72 90 0.85 286 0.37 199
18.4 0.78 89 0.52 92 1 0 0.38 89 0.56 280 0.25 192
22.9 0.79 87 0.52 91 1 0 0.23 90 0.37 277 0.17 187
27 0.79 87 0.5 91 1 0 0.16 90 0.26 275 0.12 186
Infinity 0.866 90 0.5 90 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
93



0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0.01 347 0.02 247 0.09 259 0.18 131 0.2 253 0.05 129
4.8 0.02 145 0.12 95 0.22 331 0.89 120 0.42 330 0.12 249
4.9 0.03 152 0.15 96 0.26 339 0.89 120 0.54 342 0.2 253
5.5 0.14 140 0.26 100 0.39 352 0.81 135 1.22 345 0.5 246
6 0.23 126 0.35 102 0.5 2 0.86 155 1.64 331 0.7 237
6.5 0.3 115 0.42 103 0.63 6 1.01 166 1.74 320 0.8 229
7 0.34 108 0.48 103 0.73 6 1.14 174 1.71 313 0.85 223
7.4 0.37 104 0.52 104 0.79 5 1.27 177 1.64 307 0.86 219
7.6 0.38 101 0.54 104 0.82 5 1.34 179 1.59 305 0.86 217
7.8 0.39 100 0.56 104 0.84 5 1.41 180 1.54 303 0.85 215
8.1 0.4 98 0.58 104 0.86 4 1.51 183 1.48 300 0.83 212
8.3 0.41 96 0.6 105 0.88 3 1.64 185 1.41 298 0.81 210
8.7 0.42 94 0.62 107 0.9 3 1.84 187 1.32 296 0.78 208
9.2 0.43 92 0.66 109 0.93 2 2.22 184 1.21 293 0.73 205
9.9 0.44 90 0.75 112 0.95 2 2.89 175 1.08 290 0.67 203
10.7 0.45 88 0.92 108 0.96 1 3.57 147 0.92 286 0.59 202
11.8 0.46 86 0.97 98 0.98 1 2.72 116 0.78 284 0.54 199
13 0.46 84 0.93 93 0.99 1 1.78 102 0.65 281 0.47 195
14.8 0.47 84 0.9 92 0.99 1 1.22 97 0.5 279 0.38 191
18.4 0.47 83 0.9 91 1.01 0 0.65 93 0.33 276 0.26 187
22.9 0.48 83 0.9 91 1 0 0.39 92 0.21 274 0.17 184
27 0.48 84 0.87 90 1 0 0.28 92 0.15 274 0.12 183
Infinity 0.5 90 0.866 90 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0 0 0.27 10 0.16 15 0.61 14 0.08 318 0.09 129
4.8 0.01 60 0.4 49 0.45 42 0.77 53 0.18 309 0.09 134
4.9 0.02 60 0.42 53 0.52 42 0.78 57 0.2 302 0.09 133
5.5 0.03 43 0.5 66 0.83 36 0.75 67 0.22 266 0.08 267
6 0.04 27 0.56 73 1.03 24 0.63 73 0.17 234 0.07 124
6.5 0.04 19 0.6 78 1.08 14 0.5 79 0.11 213 0.07 121
7 0.03 18 0.63 81 1.07 9 0.3 89 0.08 198 0.06 115
7.4 0.03 19 0.65 83 1.08 6 0.15 118 0.06 190 0.06 111
7.6 0.03 20 0.66 85 1.07 5 0.12 160 0.04 186 0.05 109
7.8 0.03 21 0.67 86 1.06 4 0.18 199 0.04 183 0.05 107
8.1 0.03 23 0.68 88 1.05 3 0.35 220 0.03 179 0.05 103
8.3 0.03 25 0.68 89 1.05 2 0.58 227 0.03 175 0.05 99
8.7 0.03 27 0.68 91 1.04 2 0.92 228 0.02 170 0.05 92
9.2 0.03 28 0.69 95 1.03 1 1.43 223 0.01 165 0.05 83
9.9 0.04 31 0.72 103 1.03 1 2.38 208 0.01 157 0.06 64
10.7 0.04 34 0.94 109 1.02 0 3.66 169 0.01 142 0.06 19
11.8 0.04 37 1.08 99 1.02 0 2.94 130 0 0 0.04 337
13 0.04 39 1.07 94 1.01 0 1.97 112 0 0 0.02 321
14.8 0.04 42 1.04 91 1.01 0 1.33 103 0 0 0.01 306
18.4 0.05 47 1.04 90 1.01 0 0.74 97 0 0 0 0
22.9 0.05 54 1.04 90 1.01 0 0.45 94 0 0 0 0
27 0.05 63 1 90 1 0 0.33 93 0 0 0 0
Infinity 0 0 1 90 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
94


Table 23 Displacement RAOs (Relative angle =150 degree)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0.01 235 0.02 358 0.05 157 0.46 330 0.18 197 0.14 6
4.8 0.02 180 0.12 38 0.06 85 0.45 346 0.49 30 0.34 221
4.9 0.04 183 0.14 42 0.1 61 0.46 339 0.69 39 0.42 233
5.5 0.15 194 0.23 52 0.33 33 0.62 323 1.42 52 0.66 267
6 0.24 200 0.3 59 0.54 21 0.81 319 1.76 56 0.8 287
6.5 0.3 205 0.36 64 0.68 13 0.95 317 1.83 58 0.85 300
7 0.33 210 0.4 68 0.77 8 1.05 312 1.78 60 0.87 309
7.4 0.36 214 0.44 70 0.82 6 1.16 307 1.69 63 0.87 316
7.6 0.37 217 0.44 72 0.84 5 1.21 304 1.64 64 0.86 320
7.8 0.37 219 0.46 73 0.86 5 1.27 301 1.59 65 0.85 322
8.1 0.38 221 0.46 75 0.88 4 1.37 294 1.51 66 0.83 326
8.3 0.39 223 0.47 77 0.9 3 1.49 287 1.44 67 0.81 328
8.7 0.39 225 0.46 80 0.91 2 1.7 278 1.35 69 0.78 333
9.2 0.4 229 0.46 86 0.94 2 2.08 265 1.23 71 0.74 337
9.9 0.4 233 0.46 100 0.95 1 2.76 241 1.1 73 0.71 343
10.7 0.4 238 0.68 113 0.97 1 3.51 194 0.94 75 0.67 345
11.8 0.4 242 0.88 102 0.98 0 2.7 149 0.79 77 0.59 345
13 0.4 247 0.91 95 0.99 0 1.77 127 0.65 80 0.49 347
14.8 0.4 252 0.89 92 1 0 1.18 112 0.51 82 0.39 350
18.4 0.4 258 0.9 90 1.01 0 0.65 101 0.33 84 0.26 354
22.9 0.39 261 0.9 90 1 0 0.39 96 0.21 86 0.17 357
27 0.39 262 0.87 90 1 0 0.28 94 0.15 86 0.12 356
Infinity 0.5 270 0.866 90 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0.01 221 0.04 144 0.02 324 0.29 87 0.15 316 0.06 37
4.8 0.03 298 0.02 167 0.11 191 0.26 329 0.49 184 0.15 331
4.9 0.05 308 0 0 0.16 182 0.45 339 0.61 192 0.14 346
5.5 0.07 331 0.07 40 0.27 158 0.78 7 0.43 218 0.01 15
6 0.01 161 0.12 53 0.23 121 0.71 17 0.35 6 0.19 241
6.5 0.12 173 0.16 59 0.24 68 0.55 12 0.98 27 0.35 260
7 0.23 181 0.19 63 0.34 36 0.46 352 1.4 35 0.47 274
7.4 0.31 188 0.21 66 0.45 22 0.49 327 1.64 40 0.54 285
7.6 0.35 192 0.21 67 0.5 18 0.55 317 1.71 42 0.57 289
7.8 0.39 195 0.22 68 0.54 15 0.62 309 1.76 45 0.59 294
8.1 0.43 199 0.22 69 0.6 12 0.74 299 1.8 48 0.61 299
8.3 0.47 202 0.23 70 0.65 9 0.88 291 1.81 49 0.62 303
8.7 0.51 206 0.22 72 0.7 7 1.1 283 1.79 52 0.62 308
9.2 0.55 212 0.21 77 0.76 6 1.5 272 1.74 57 0.61 316
9.9 0.59 217 0.18 100 0.82 4 2.22 250 1.63 60 0.6 324
10.7 0.63 224 0.38 126 0.87 2 2.99 196 1.46 65 0.6 331
11.8 0.66 231 0.52 104 0.92 1 1.91 146 1.27 68 0.54 333
13 0.68 237 0.52 95 0.95 1 1.14 126 1.07 72 0.46 338
14.8 0.69 244 0.51 91 0.97 0 0.71 113 0.85 76 0.37 343
18.4 0.7 251 0.51 89 1 0 0.38 102 0.56 80 0.25 349
22.9 0.71 257 0.52 90 1 0 0.23 97 0.37 83 0.17 353
27 0.71 259 0.5 90 1 0 0.16 94 0.26 85 0.12 355
Infinity 0.866 270 0.5 90 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period
95


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 0.01 131 0 0 0.05 31 0 0 0.06 331 0 0
4.8 0.01 342 0 0 0.09 261 0 0 0.14 159 0 0
4.9 0.02 306 0 0 0.1 227 0 0 0.37 173 0 0
5.5 0.1 318 0 0 0.27 167 0 0 0.8 193 0 0
6 0.09 330 0 0 0.31 140 0 0 0.32 209 0 0
6.5 0.01 181 0 0 0.26 106 0 0 0.39 15 0 0
7 0.12 173 0 0 0.27 65 0 0 0.95 27 0 0
7.4 0.23 180 0 0 0.34 39 0 0 1.34 33 0 0
7.6 0.28 184 0 0 0.39 31 0 0 1.47 36 0 0
7.8 0.33 187 0 0 0.43 25 0 0 1.57 38 0 0
8.1 0.39 191 0 0 0.49 19 0 0 1.69 41 0 0
8.3 0.44 195 0 0 0.55 15 0 0 1.75 44 0 0
8.7 0.49 200 0 0 0.61 11 0 0 1.8 47 0 0
9.2 0.56 206 0 0 0.69 8 0 0 1.8 51 0 0
9.9 0.62 213 0 0 0.76 5 0 0 1.74 56 0 0
10.7 0.69 220 0 0 0.83 3 0 0 1.59 61 0 0
11.8 0.74 227 0 0 0.89 2 0 0 1.41 65 0 0
13 0.77 234 0 0 0.93 1 0 0 1.21 70 0 0
14.8 0.79 241 0 0 0.96 0 0 0 0.97 74 0 0
18.4 0.81 250 0 0 0.99 0 0 0 0.65 79 0 0
22.9 0.82 255 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.42 82 0 0
27 0.82 258 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.3 85 0 0
Infinity 1 270 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Period

Appe
Fig
endix I
gure 69 Wa
Figure 70
III: Pl
ave load RA
0 Wave load
ots of
AOs (Operat
d RAOs (Ph
Wave
ting draft, 0
hase, 0 degr
e Load
degree wav
ree wave dir
d RAO
ve direction
rection)
96
Os

n)

Figgure 71 Wav
Figure 72
ve load RAO
Wave load
Os (Operati
d RAOs (Ph
ing draft, 30
hase, 30 degr
0 degree wa
ree wave di
ave direction
irection)
97

n)

Figgure 73 Wav
Figure 74
ve load RAO
Wave load
Os (Operati
d RAOs (Ph
ing draft, 60
hase, 60 degr
0 degree wa
ree wave di
ave direction
irection)
98

n)

Figgure 75 Wav
Figure 76
ve load RAO
Wave load
Os (Operati
d RAOs (Ph
ing draft, 90
hase, 90 degr
0 degree wa
ree wave di
ave direction
irection)
99

n)

Figuure 77 Wav
Figure 78
e load RAO
Wave load
Os (Operatin
RAOs (Pha
ng draft, 120
ase, 120 deg
0 degree wa
gree wave d
ave directio
direction)
100

on)

Figuure 79 Wav
Figure 80
e load RAO
Wave load
Os (Operatin
RAOs (Pha
ng draft, 150
ase, 150 deg
0 degree wa
gree wave d
ave directio
direction)
101

on)

Figu

ure 81 Wav
Figure 82
e load RAO
Wave load

Os (Operatin
RAOs (Pha
ng draft, 180
ase, 180 deg
0 degree wa
gree wave d
ave directio
direction)
102

on)

103

Appendix VI: Tables of Wave Load RAOs
Table 25 Wave load RAOs (Relative angle = 0 degree)


(sec) (kN/m) (deg) (kN/m) (deg) (kN/m) (deg) (kN/m) (deg) (kN/m) (deg) (kN/m) (deg)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 277 39 0 0 2560 288 0 0 146000 282 0 0
4.8 366 148 0 0 9270 57 0 0 182000 32 0 0
4.9 354 193 0 0 9750 69 0 0 165000 62 0 0
5.5 1530 217 0 0 9350 95 0 0 323000 90 0 0
6 1270 191 0 0 8150 123 0 0 171000 77 0 0
6.5 288 174 0 0 6660 139 0 0 59600 165 0 0
7 692 336 0 0 4820 159 0 0 137000 194 0 0
7.4 1460 327 0 0 4140 183 0 0 163000 193 0 0
7.6 1740 323 0 0 3970 194 0 0 162000 194 0 0
7.8 2000 319 0 0 3810 204 0 0 154000 196 0 0
8.1 2230 314 0 0 3630 217 0 0 138000 198 0 0
8.3 2490 310 0 0 3660 225 0 0 128000 200 0 0
8.7 2590 305 0 0 3450 240 0 0 105000 212 0 0
9.2 2710 300 0 0 3350 262 0 0 91300 233 0 0
9.9 2640 295 0 0 3600 290 0 0 100000 259 0 0
10.7 2550 289 0 0 4610 314 0 0 120000 273 0 0
11.8 2270 284 0 0 6250 329 0 0 141000 280 0 0
13 1990 280 0 0 7900 338 0 0 146000 282 0 0
14.8 1610 276 0 0 9840 344 0 0 142000 282 0 0
18.4 1080 272 0 0 12500 350 0 0 115000 284 0 0
22.9 713 270 0 0 14100 353 0 0 84400 288 0 0
27 518 270 0 0 14900 354 0 0 65800 293 0 0
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
WaveLoadRAOs(Relativeangle:0degree)
Period
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 8 149 1760 183 4330 357 6030 179 114000 329 31800 64
4.8 551 219 698 135 10300 81 1260 148 225000 87 8410 352
4.9 877 225 369 72 11100 89 2490 15 288000 96 20200 345
5.5 1380 201 1830 333 9110 119 9780 338 269000 88 6410 289
6 340 185 2920 317 8700 141 10600 325 88500 141 35100 122
6.5 803 333 3360 310 6850 159 9220 321 184000 186 66700 103
7 1630 323 3480 307 5620 180 7810 321 216000 185 83400 91
7.4 2140 315 3490 306 5310 199 7010 324 207000 184 90800 81
7.6 2320 311 3570 306 5180 206 6820 324 192000 185 91200 77
7.8 2480 309 3500 306 4940 212 6490 325 174000 184 89800 74
8.1 2610 305 3470 307 4710 221 6140 326 147000 188 87800 70
8.3 2730 301 3520 307 4540 227 6030 327 130000 191 85100 65
8.7 2760 297 3320 311 4080 241 5440 329 102000 205 78800 62
9.2 2710 293 3400 315 3750 260 5160 330 85300 227 70600 56
9.9 2550 289 3750 319 3860 290 4580 328 91400 255 58100 53
10.7 2400 284 4740 307 4730 312 4150 324 107000 269 47300 50
11.8 2090 280 3700 289 6370 329 3050 324 124000 277 36900 44
13 1800 276 2730 285 8000 339 2460 327 129000 279 27100 38
14.8 1420 274 2000 286 10000 344 1840 333 125000 283 16900 35
18.4 957 271 1290 289 12600 349 1340 338 99900 285 7560 32
22.9 625 269 844 291 14100 353 960 344 75300 290 3420 31
27 450 269 595 294 14900 354 752 349 58100 296 1790 34
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period
104



0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 272 170 973 57 7770 85 3900 334 208000 81 31800 313
4.8 378 326 4840 284 11300 160 19100 297 255000 161 50500 74
4.9 540 333 5640 284 12600 168 19700 297 311000 173 80700 78
5.5 1950 321 7250 288 13500 184 17900 303 506000 179 160000 72
6 2690 307 7990 291 13300 197 17000 310 516000 167 189000 64
6.5 2980 296 8090 292 13000 205 16000 313 412000 159 184000 56
7 2910 289 7910 293 11600 209 14700 314 299000 156 169000 51
7.4 2830 285 7650 294 10100 212 13800 315 221000 155 153000 47
7.6 2750 282 7520 295 9380 215 13300 315 187000 156 145000 45
7.8 2680 281 7400 295 8580 218 12800 315 157000 158 136000 44
8.1 2550 279 7090 295 7390 223 11900 314 120000 162 124000 41
8.3 2480 277 6980 297 6740 226 11500 315 97700 166 115000 39
8.7 2320 275 6570 299 5510 237 10500 316 67700 181 101000 38
9.2 2120 273 6320 302 4530 255 9530 315 50000 211 84500 35
9.9 1870 271 6350 306 4200 286 8320 314 53900 248 67100 34
10.7 1640 269 6910 302 4950 311 6880 310 64200 265 50800 34
11.8 1370 267 5980 291 6610 329 4940 313 75300 275 38400 32
13 1130 265 4660 286 8260 338 3900 317 77600 279 27700 29
14.8 892 265 3450 286 10100 345 2850 328 73200 284 17400 27
18.4 577 265 2230 288 12700 350 2140 335 60900 291 7860 27
22.9 380 265 1460 291 14100 353 1620 342 46600 301 3420 28
27 273 266 1040 293 14900 354 1250 348 39200 310 1790 31
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 5 325 14900 194 14000 201 36300 197 81400 143 57200 313
4.8 182 243 14400 234 23500 231 32200 237 111000 134 37800 319
4.9 348 242 14500 238 25700 231 31900 241 118000 126 36300 318
5.5 416 224 13600 251 29800 227 27500 255 104000 89 25700 93
6 465 208 12700 259 28500 217 23600 263 75800 56 18900 311
6.5 395 200 11500 264 22900 210 20100 269 51900 33 16100 308
7 255 199 10300 268 17300 208 16900 274 40900 21 11900 303
7.4 228 200 9480 270 13900 209 14900 277 35700 14 10700 299
7.6 216 201 9090 272 12300 211 14000 280 32200 10 8440 297
7.8 205 202 8730 273 10800 212 13300 282 31400 9 8020 296
8.1 190 204 8170 276 8900 216 12200 285 29500 7 7440 292
8.3 181 206 7710 277 7850 219 11300 287 29200 6 7090 288
8.7 165 208 6950 280 6040 230 10100 290 27900 4 6460 282
9.2 147 209 6250 286 4550 249 9140 295 27000 2 5790 273
9.9 169 212 5680 297 4020 284 8060 298 26800 2 6010 255
10.7 145 215 6860 304 4860 312 7120 301 26400 2 5160 211
11.8 119 218 6590 292 6630 331 5300 303 26500 0 2840 170
13 98 220 5330 287 8270 339 4230 310 26300 0 1180 155
14.8 76 223 3980 285 10200 345 3090 319 26300 0 458 142
18.4 61 229 2580 287 12600 351 2300 331 26300 0 0 0
22.9 40 236 1690 290 14200 353 1780 340 26300 0 0 0
27 29 245 1190 293 14900 355 1410 349 26000 0 0 0
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period
105



0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 262 57 1630 172 4300 343 12700 156 188000 25 89000 190
4.8 378 3 4410 218 3040 277 11300 197 303000 220 143000 46
4.9 712 5 4840 222 4670 252 11100 198 403000 230 169000 58
5.5 2090 15 6090 233 11200 224 10700 206 593000 246 212000 93
6 2800 21 6590 240 14200 213 10300 214 559000 254 216000 114
6.5 2980 26 6690 246 13700 207 9700 223 441000 260 196000 127
7 2820 31 6350 250 11800 205 8540 232 324000 269 173000 137
7.4 2750 35 6200 253 9940 207 8050 239 246000 278 155000 144
7.6 2680 38 5840 255 9020 208 7400 243 214000 284 145000 148
7.8 2540 40 5770 256 8150 211 7270 247 186000 290 136000 151
8.1 2420 42 5280 259 6850 215 6530 253 152000 299 124000 155
8.3 2360 44 5070 261 6140 218 6170 258 134000 307 115000 157
8.7 2150 46 4410 265 4710 228 5540 266 111000 324 101000 163
9.2 1970 50 3810 273 3600 250 5290 276 96400 345 85700 167
9.9 1700 54 3240 294 3300 289 5130 286 93600 9 71100 174
10.7 1460 59 4800 311 4410 318 5180 291 95100 25 57600 177
11.8 1200 63 5320 297 6280 334 4030 290 97300 38 41900 178
13 985 68 4520 289 8060 341 3200 297 93900 46 28800 181
14.8 759 73 3400 286 10100 347 2310 313 86700 51 17900 186
18.4 491 80 2230 287 12600 351 1840 329 68900 53 7860 194
22.9 309 83 1460 290 14100 354 1500 339 51900 49 3420 201
27 222 84 1040 293 14900 355 1210 347 43100 44 1790 204
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 275 39 2340 320 1680 151 9110 287 157000 144 38200 221
4.8 546 121 461 358 5520 20 2910 144 301000 15 63100 156
4.9 872 130 392 168 7620 11 6290 163 354000 23 56500 171
5.5 963 152 2330 219 9560 348 10200 201 180000 54 3210 201
6 124 344 3010 234 6450 315 8930 220 114000 199 51300 68
6.5 1190 354 3220 242 4860 268 7070 229 234000 227 80500 87
7 1970 2 3170 246 4900 238 5590 235 250000 241 93400 102
7.4 2370 9 3050 249 5060 226 4610 238 232000 253 96100 113
7.6 2540 13 2850 250 4960 224 4080 238 214000 259 96200 117
7.8 2680 16 2800 251 4700 223 3830 240 197000 267 94600 123
8.1 2740 20 2550 252 4260 225 3300 241 170000 278 90800 128
8.3 2850 23 2490 253 4030 226 3090 244 155000 286 87900 132
8.7 2810 27 2080 255 3250 236 2600 247 131000 305 80100 138
9.2 2710 33 1640 260 2610 259 2290 256 119000 332 70600 146
9.9 2510 38 1030 299 2760 298 1980 271 124000 359 60100 155
10.7 2290 45 2820 327 3960 323 2020 292 134000 20 51600 163
11.8 1970 52 3200 299 5940 337 1850 293 146000 34 38400 166
13 1670 58 2600 289 7780 344 1560 299 146000 44 27100 172
14.8 1310 65 1950 285 9820 348 1210 311 136000 52 16900 179
18.4 859 73 1260 286 12500 352 985 328 108000 57 7560 189
22.9 562 79 844 290 14100 354 842 340 81200 58 3420 197
27 404 81 595 293 14900 355 696 347 62700 55 1790 203
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period
106


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.9 276 312 0 0 4360 218 0 0 62300 158 0 0
4.8 186 163 0 0 4710 90 0 0 87100 348 0 0
4.9 355 129 0 0 4860 58 0 0 215000 4 0 0
5.5 1380 140 0 0 9330 357 0 0 333000 27 0 0
6 1040 151 0 0 8470 332 0 0 103000 50 0 0
6.5 107 4 0 0 5560 304 0 0 93500 211 0 0
7 1030 354 0 0 4150 270 0 0 168000 232 0 0
7.4 1760 1 0 0 3860 247 0 0 187000 245 0 0
7.6 2030 5 0 0 3860 240 0 0 182000 252 0 0
7.8 2270 8 0 0 3690 236 0 0 173000 259 0 0
8.1 2480 12 0 0 3400 235 0 0 157000 270 0 0
8.3 2670 16 0 0 3320 235 0 0 147000 281 0 0
8.7 2700 21 0 0 2750 243 0 0 128000 300 0 0
9.2 2760 27 0 0 2340 264 0 0 120000 326 0 0
9.9 2640 34 0 0 2560 302 0 0 129000 356 0 0
10.7 2510 41 0 0 3820 326 0 0 144000 17 0 0
11.8 2210 48 0 0 5790 339 0 0 160000 32 0 0
13 1900 55 0 0 7640 344 0 0 162000 43 0 0
14.8 1500 62 0 0 9730 348 0 0 154000 51 0 0
18.4 994 72 0 0 12400 352 0 0 124000 58 0 0
22.9 649 77 0 0 14100 354 0 0 90700 59 0 0
27 467 80 0 0 14900 355 0 0 70100 58 0 0
Infinity 0 0 0 0 17000 0 0 0 26000 0 0 0
Period

Appe

endix VV: Wa ave Scaatter DDiagraams
107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

Main Thesis Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Main Thesis Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROBABILISTIC CALCULATION FOR

FATIGUE LIFE OF THE STEEL

You might also like