Flexible Pipe Technology JIP – What’s in the Pipeline Konvertert/Health, safety and... ·...

Flexible Pipelines and Risers SeminarStavanger12.12.2007

Flexible Pipe Technology JIP – What’s in the Pipeline

Michael O’Sullivan, Engineering ManagerEoin Burke, Senior Engineer (Presenter)

Iggy Roddy, Senior Engineer

Flexible Pipelines and Risers Seminar

Stavanger

12.12.2007

Contents

1. Background to the JIP2. Objective of the JIP3. Current Participants4. Knowledge Transfer & Liaison with 3rd Party Initiatives5. Core Areas of Investigation

1. Design Requirements *2. Manufacturing3. Qualification & Prototype Testing *4. Integrity Management

6. Design Philosophy for Flexible Pipe *7. Summary8. Acknowledgements9. Q&A


Stavanger

12.12.2007

1.1 Background to the JIP

§ API Spec 17J & RP 17B published in 1996 &’98, respectively§ Success in the industry universally recognised§ Basis of this success:

– Collation of State-of-the-Art at that time– Identification of settled technology– Consensus on minimum requirements between operators,

suppliers and regulatory bodies

§ Since then:– State-of-the-Art has evolved– More operational experience with unbonded flexible pipe– New technology incorporated– More challenging applications, e.g., deeper waters etc.– Significant new learnings

• JIPs (Marintek, InDec, MCS), Rilsan User’s Group, Operator experiences


Stavanger

12.12.2007

1.2 Background to the JIP

Riser Years in Operation - 2002

0 5 10 15 20

AlbaAnasuria

AngusAsgard AAsgard BAsgard C

BalderBalmoral

BanffBanffBanff

BlenheimBuchanCaptainCurlewCook

Durward / DauntlessFife

FloraFergus

FoinavenGalley

GryphonHardingHeidrunHudson

Ivanhoe/Rob RoyJaniceJotun

LeadonMacCulloch

NjordNornePierceRoss

SchiehallionSnorre B

Snorre TLPTeal/Guillemot

TritonTroll BTroll C

VargVeslefrikk

Visund

Fiel

dYears in Operation

Total Number of Operational Riser Years in North Sea and West of Shetland

185

866

1112

38

1426

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Up to Year

Riser Years


Stavanger

12.12.2007

1.3 Background & Overview of JIP

§ In response:

– A new generation of company specs have

developed giving supplementary requirements

§ Threatens the pre-eminence of 17J in the

industry

§ Not in the interests of either operators or

suppliers


Stavanger

12.12.2007

2.1 Objective of the JIP

§ Mission Statement:– brings together flexible pipe stakeholders

• operators, suppliers, designers, regulatory bodies

– identify new settled technology in key areas• design criteria, materials, manufacturing, qualification/testing,

life-time integrity management, etc.

– re-establish an industry consensus on minimum technical requirements

– update the API and ISO standards

– help to ensure that flexible pipes remain a competitive, enabling solution


Stavanger

12.12.2007

2.2 Objective of the JIP

§ Specifically:– To develop a design philosophy for flexible pipe– An in-depth investigation in four key areas

• Design Requirements• Manufacturing• Qualification and Prototype Testing• Integrity Management

– Strive for consistency with the requirements for other offshore tubulars in the subsea system

– Provide a forum to promote knowledge transfer


Stavanger

12.12.2007

3.1 Current Participants (22)

§ Operators: Agip, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Inpex,

Petrobras, Petronas, Shell, StatoilHydro, Woodside

§ Manufacturers: DeepFlex, NKT Flexibles, Technip

Flexi France, Wellstream

§ Contractors: Acergy, Saipem, SBM, Subsea7

§ Regulatory Bodies: API, HSE (UK), Petroleum

Safety Authority (Norway)


Stavanger

12.12.2007

4.1 Knowledge Transfer & 3rd Party Initiatives

§ Work of the FPT JIP is not being carried out in a vacuum

§ JIP is actively seeking input, lessons learned from relevant third parties– Serves to inform the develop of the revised standards

– Provides a forum for knowledge transfer between stakeholders

§ FPT workshops have included contributions from:– DNV, Limit State Design

• Acceptance Criteria for Offshore Components (A. Echtermeyer)

– NTNU, Reliability-based Methods• Fatigue Design Formats for Flexible Pipe (B. Leira)

– Technip, Update to API RP 2RD (P. Stanton)


Stavanger

12.12.2007

4.2 Knowledge Transfer & 3rd Party Initiatives

§ Joint FPT JIP – InDec Polymer JIP Workshop– Providing update on

• PA-X JIP• SESAM PA11• SESAM XLPE

§ These have influenced thinking in development of candidate design philosophy for flexible pipes and provided valuable input to the core areas of investigation


Stavanger

12.12.2007

5. Core Areas of Investigation

§ Design Requirements§ Manufacturing§ Qualification and Prototype Testing§ Integrity Management


Stavanger

12.12.2007

5.1 Design Requirements

§Load Combinations of Load Conditions

Test

• 10-5Seasonal• 10-4• 10-3• 10-2Combined Probability, All Loads, Pc

XXXAccidental loads, Pc

10-2 - 10 -4Seasonal• 10-210-2• 10-2Environmental loads, Pc

AssocAssoc.• Max Incidental pressure

Design pressure

Max. operating pressure

Internal pressure

Extreme operation

Normal operation

SurvivalTemporaryAbnormal event

Permanent operationLoad conditions


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§New definitions– Pressures & temperatures

§New load conditions– Temporary– Survival

§Load conditions defined on basis of a consistent set of combined occurrence probabilities

SeasonalTemporary

10-5Survival

10-4Abnormal

10-3Extreme

10-2Normal

Min. ProbabilityLoad Class


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ Design Criteria– Not proposed to change existing (Table 6) stress,

strain criteria

§ New criteria– Survival – allowable stress utilisation of 1.0– High strength tapes – allowable stress & strain

utilisations– Armour wire buckling load criteria– End fittings

• Inclusion of an anchoring system capacity utilisation


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ Polymer Materials

– Incorporate aspects of current thinking on PA

aging not captured in API 17TR2

• Long term effect of methanol

• TAN

• The existence of an equilibrium CIV

• Re-appraisal of role of water and CO2

– Knowledge transfer with other initiatives


Stavanger

12.12.2007

5.5 Qualification and Prototype Testing

§ Currently lack of clarity on purpose of tests and

quantitative acceptance criteria

§ Now all tests given clearly defined purpose,

procedure and quantitative acceptance criteria

§ Factory Acceptance Testing– Introduction of a sealing test

• to confirm the integrity of the external sheath and sealing / crimping of the external sheath at the end fitting

• Vacuum or positive pressure test acceptable


Stavanger

12.12.2007

5.6 FAT

to confirm the integrity of the external sheath and sealing / crimping of the external sheath at the end fitting

Sealing Test

to demonstrate that the gas-relief system functions properly

Gas-venting System

to check the integrity of the pipe cathodicprotection system

Electrical

to identify latent defects in the pipeHydrostatic Pressure

detect blockages and any gross deformationsGauge

PurposeFAT


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ What constitutes a new pipe design?

– “A pipe concept whose constituting materials, design

methodologies, manufacturing processes, and prototype testing

results have not been reviewed and accepted by an Independent

Verification Agent”;

– “A pipe concept whose performance, for a specific application,

has not been approved by the purchaser through results,

submitted by the manufacturer, of theoretical complementary

analyses and of prototype tests”.


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ Prototype test

– The purpose of a prototype test is to establish and / or

verify a performance characteristic for a new pipe design.

§ Prototype qualification test,

– A prototype qualification test establishes the performance

limits for a new pipe design.

§ Prototype proof test

– A prototype proof test establishes the fitness-for-purpose

of a new pipe design for a specific application.


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ New prototype tests being considered– Thermal cycling test

– Insulation/cool down time test

– Touchdown compression test

– DIP test

– Deepwater lateral buckling test

– Vent valve qualification test

– Prototype test for mid-line connections

– End fitting resin filling

§ Existing small-scale and full-scale test protocols are being re-appraised in light of above and also knowledge transfer– E.g., Corrosion Fatigue JIP (test protocol for fatigue testing of armour

wires)


Stavanger

12.12.2007

6.1 Design Philosophy for Flexible Pipe

§ Why a design philosophy?– Existing standard suffers from lack of clarity in the origin

of, and justification for, utilisation factors

– In contrast many of limit state codes have well defined

design philosophies

– It is not proposed to change design criteria in this JIP, per

se

– However it is desirable to establish a framework whereby

design criteria may be changed in the future

– A design philosophy will provide a rigorous and consistent

methodology for doing so


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ Criteria for the development of a design philosophy1. Assurance that the pipe shall be designed, manufactured,

tested/qualified in a manner that ensures that it will remain fit for purpose for its service life

2. Produce a set of unambiguous design criteria that are straight forward to use by engineers

3. Be, if possible, consistent with design philosophies for other offshore tubular structures that have similar functional requirements, e.g., metallic risers and umbilicals


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ What approach?– The improved understanding of flexible pipe

failure modes suggests a limit state approach

§ Limit State, the implications?– Its use for flexibles is more complicated because

the larger number of potential failure modes.

– the appropriate limit states should be selected on the basis of the riser service.


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§JIP is considering– Combination of limit state

and WSD

– Based on service the

appropriate limit state is

identified

– For that limit state, a

WSD approach is used

– with the utilisations being

selected/calibrated based

reliability based methods

Allowable Utilisations

Determine Probability of Failure

using FORM

Design Checks WSD

Accept/Reject Design

Limit State Design

Identify Relevant Limit States

Riser Type i . Service ii. Loading iii. Functional Requirements

Calibration Method • Testing • Etc.

Loading Regime

Test Data

Prediction Model

Uncertainties

Statistical Distributions i. Uncertainties ii. Variances

Determine Safety Index based on quantified uncertainties in i. Load Effects ii. Resistances


Stavanger

12.12.2007


§ Work on-going in JIP to trial design philosophy by means of a burst case study based on data supplied by flexible pipe manufacturers

§ The approach has been the subject of considerable development in the “Enhanced Fatigue Design Formats JIP”

§ The aim is to circulate a separate Technical Report detailing the design philosophy, for industry consideration


Stavanger

12.12.2007

7. Summary & Future Work

§ FPT JIP is tasked with producing major revisions to the API and ISO standards for unbonded flexible pipes

§ a draft revision of the Specification document has been substantially completed

§ a design philosophy is under development based on a hybrid limit state and working stress design approach

§ Future work includes:– update prototype testing requirements

– a re-evaluation of polymer material design, manufacturing and qualification issues

– Re-structure the Recommended Practice to facilitate its application as a user-orientated guidelines document


Stavanger

12.12.2007

8. Acknowledgements

§ Contributions of members of Flexible Pipe Technology JIP§ Advice and contributions from

– Beirnt Leira (NTNU)– Andreas Echtermeyer (Det Norsk Veritas)– Morten Eriksen (InDec)– Stig Berge (Marintek)


Stavanger

12.12.2007

9. Questions?

Date post:	18-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	danghuong
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

Flexible Pipe Technology JIP – What’s in the Pipeline Konvertert/Health, safety and... ·...

Documents