OTC 23931 Qualification of Flexible Fiber-Reinforced Pipe ... · OTC 23931• Qualification of FFRP...

OTC 23931Qualification of

Flexible Fiber-Reinforced Pipe (FFRP®)for Ultra-deepwater Applicationsfor Ultra-deepwater Applications

Mark Kalman, Liang Yu, Amir Salimi, Jing Liu

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

• Project Scope and Management• Design Premise• Pipe Design – Layers & Features• Riser System and Global Analysis Summary• Results from critical pipe structure analyses• FMECA• Qualification Plan

Slide 2

• Qualification Plano Materialso Layerso Full scale tests

• Conclusions/Discussion

OTC 23931• Qualification of FFRP for UDW Applications• Mark Kalman

PROJECT SCOPE & MANAGEMENT

To field qualify a single Flexible Fiber Reinforced Pipe (FFRP) riser solution in three phases of work:

• Phase 1 – Engineering Study

• Phase 2 – Prototype Manufacturing and Qualification Testing

Slide 3

RPSEA

Working

Committee

RPSEA

TOTAL

SHELL

US DOE/NETL

Qualification Testing

• Phase 3 – Field Deployment Supply

Key Objective: Develop a pipe design and riser system which safely conveys hydrocarbons from ultradeep wells to an FPSO without leakage to the environment


SHELL

CHEVRON

DEEPFLEX

Project Team

Subcontractors

DNV

MCSK

SWRI

ETA

STATOIL

PHASE I ENGINEERING STUDY SCOPE & SCHEDULE

Slide 4


PROJECT DESIGN PREMISE

Slide 5

Parameter Value

Internal Diameter 7-inch

Design Pressure 68.9 MPa (10,000 psi)

Design Temperature 120 °C

Maximum Operating

Temperature110 °C

Design Water Depth 3048 meters


Internal Fluid Multiphase Sour Production Fluid

Location Gulf of Mexico

Vessel Disconnectable turret moored FPSO

GOVERNING STANDARDS

Slide 6

Standard Applicability

API 17J Draft Fourth Edition

Specification for Unbonded

Flexible Pipe, June 2012 and

FPTG Comments & Resolution

November 2012

• Polymer layers

• Metallic layers

• Pipe and end fitting assembly

• Riser system

DNV-OS-C501• Composite armor layer design,

testing and qualification.


DNV-OS-C501

Composite Components

October 2010

testing and qualification.

• LRFD methodology applies to

composite armor utilization

API 17B Draft Fifth Edition

Recommended Practice for

Unbonded Flexible Pipe, June

2012 and FPTG Comments &

Resolution November 2012

• Guidelines for design, analysis,

manufacture, testing, installation and

operation

• Annex H provides guidelines in

applying DNV-OS-C501 to composite

armor design

PIPE DESIGN PROPERTIES

Slide 7

Parameter Value

Inner Diameter 177.8 mm (7 inch)

Design Temperature 120 °C

Design Pressure68.9 Mpa

(10,000 psig)

Outer Diameter356.8 mm

(14.05 inch)

167.5 kg/m

A single pipe structure with required:

• tensile strength at riser hang off• internal pressure capacity• collapse resistance• axial compression capacity at

touch down


Weight Empty in Air 167.5 kg/m

Weight Empty in

Seawater65.0 kg/m

Storage Bend Radius 2.87 m

Operating Bend Radius 4.04 m

Burst/Design Ratio 2.0

Collapse/Design Ratio 2.1

Failure Tension 22,328 kN

PIPE DESIGN – LAYERS & UNIQUE FEATURES

• Hybrid pressure armor

o R1 metallic + R2 composite

• Anti-collapse sheath

o R0 + R1 provide collapse

resistance

Slide 8

resistance

• Dual annulus

o Permeated gas flow to surface

via inner annulus flow path

o Outer annulus flooded during

installation


RISER CONFIGURATION - LOW LAZY WAVE

Slide 9


� 4174 m riser length

� 1930 m horizontal offset

GLOBAL ANALYSIS LOAD CASES

Slide 10

• The FPSO is fully weathervaning

• Head seas are considered

• 10 year hurricane and 100 Year

winter storm environment analysis

• 210 load cases

o 2 environment conditions

o 3 wave/current directions

Anchor point

22.5°

Static mean position

Offset

Far Cross 1


o 3 wave/current directions

o 7 wave periods/direction

o 5 vessel positions

� Near Case

� Far Case

� 3 Cross Cases

Cross 2 Cross 3

Near

RISER SYSTEM ANALYSIS – RESULTS SUMMARY

Slide 11

• Worst Case scenario regarding top

tension:

o Near Case

o Wave period = 14 s

o Wave direction = 157.5 deg 3000.0

3100.0

3200.0

3300.0

3400.0

3500.0

3600.0

3700.0

3800.0

3900.0

4000.0

12 13 14 15 16 17

To

p E

ffe

ctiv

e T

en

sio

n

Near Case - 157.5 deg

Near Case - !80 deg

Far Case - 157.7 deg

Far Case - 180 deg


12 13 14 15 16 17

Wave Period (s)

ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT

Slide 12

Buoyancy ModulesBend Stiffener


OrcaFlex 9.4g: case-NS8.sim (modified 4:29 PM on 2/27/2013 by OrcaFlex 9.4g)

catenaryriser End Force at End A vs catenaryriser End Force Ez-Angle at End A

catenaryriser End Force Ez-Angle (deg) at End A, t = 145.000 to 160.000s201816141210864

ca

ten

ary

ris

er E

nd

Fo

rc

e (

kN

) a

t E

nd

A,

t =

14

5.0

00

to

16

0.0

00

s

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

• Module Upthrust: 827 kg

• Outer Diameter: 1.5 m

• Module Length: 1.79 m

GAS PERMEATION ANALYSIS

Slide 13


Carcass + liner collapse depth

• 2380 m (78 % of water depth)

With 1.15 Safety Factor

• 2070 m (68% of water depth)

Two cases considered

• Wet Annulus – with condensed water

filling inner annulus

•Dry Annulus – no condensation

GAS PERMEATION ANALYSIS – DRY ANNULUS

Slide 14

Maximum pressure at subsea end vs. flow path restriction


GAS PERMEATION ANALYSIS – WET ANNULUS

Slide 15

Liquid water buildup rate vs. pipe length available for water permeation

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

Wa

ter

bu

ild

up

ra

te (

m p

ipe

/da

y)

Shielding Factor 70%

Shielding Factor 80%


0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

200025003000350040004500

Wa

ter

bu

ild

up

ra

te (

m p

ipe

/da

y)

Pipe Length for water permeation (m)

Water build up rate to collapse

carcass in 200 years

FMECA

Slide 16

� In accordance with DNV-RP-A203: Qualification of New Technology

� Qualification Basis: Design Premise + Design Report per API 17J

� Technology Status Assessment and Risk Ranking conducted for Riser System,

Pipe Structure, Layers, End Fitting, Ancillary Equipment

� Workshop conducted at DNV with Working Committee/Test Subcontractors


� Qualification plan based on mitigating risk for failure modes ranked “Critical”

INCREASING PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE OF THE FAILURE MECHANISM→

RISK RANKING IMPROBABLE RARE FREQUENT VERY FREQUENT

INC

RE

AS

ING

CO

NS

EQ

UE

NC

E O

F

FA

IUR

E O

CC

UR

EN

CE

→

LOW LESS IMPORTANT LESS IMPORTANT NORMAL NORMAL

MEDIUM LESS IMPORTANT NORMAL NORMAL NORMAL

HIGH NORMAL NORMAL CRITICAL CRITICAL

VERY HIGH NORMAL CRITICAL CRITICAL CRITICAL

1 - Proven

2 - Limited field

history or not

used by company

3 - New or

Unproven

1 - Known 1 2 3

2 - Limited

Knowledge2 3 4

3 - New 3 4 4

1 = No new technical uncertainties

2 = New technical uncertainties

3 = New technical challenges

4 = Demanding new technical challenges

Application Area

Technology Maturity

QUALIFICATION PLAN

Slide 17

� Material/Layer Qualification underway

o Composite Layers

o Metallic Layers

o Polymer Layers

o End Fitting

API 17B TEST

API 17B

PROTOTYPE

TESTS/CLASS

RECOMMENDED PER

FMIRR

Burst I X

Axial Tension I X

Collapse I X

Thermal Cycling (High Temp

Only)

I X

Dynamic Fatigue II X

Crush Strength II X

Combined Bending + Tension II X

Sour Service Test II

Fire Test II

Erosion Test II

Combined pressure + tension II X


� Full Scale Qualification Plan per

API 17B Draft Chapter 6

Combined pressure + tension II X

Outer sheath holding system II X

External sealing system II X

Dynamic tension/tension II X

Curved collapse II X

Vent Valve Test X

Bending stiffness III X

Torsional stiffness III X

Abrasion test III

Rapid decompression test III

Axial compression III X

Thermal characteristic test III

Arctic test III

Weathering test III

Structural damping test III

Internal pressure cycling III

Lateral buckling test III X

Impact III X

PLANNED GOM MANUFACTURING FACILITY

Slide 18


CONCLUSIONS

• A single pipe design has been developed which meets the

specified conditions in the design premise (7-inch ID, 690 barg

design temp, 120 °C design temperature, 3048 m water depth, GOM, turret moored FPSO installation)

• Critical analyses have been completed to confirm the pipe

design and riser configuration meet requirements

• A FMECA has been completed which provides input to defining

Slide 19

• A FMECA has been completed which provides input to defining

the system and product qualification plan to mitigate risk

• Ongoing work to complete Phase 1:o Complete detailed Engineering – End fitting design, thermal

analysis at bend stiffener, service life analysiso Manufacturing & Qualification Plano Field development cost estimate –

Installation, Integrity Management Plano Proposal for Phase 2


Acknowledgements / Thank You / Questions

Special thanks to:

U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory

Slide 20

Paper # • Paper Title • Presenter Name

U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory

Working Committee: RPSEA, TOTAL, SHELL, CHEVRON, STATOIL

DEEPFLEX: Investors, Executive Team and Co-Authors

Contact: [email protected]

OTC 23931 Qualification of Flexible Fiber-Reinforced Pipe ... · OTC 23931• Qualification of FFRP...

Documents

Transcript of OTC 23931 Qualification of Flexible Fiber-Reinforced Pipe ... · OTC 23931• Qualification of FFRP...