OTC 16523

Design and Analysis of West Seno Floating Structures

Jafar Korloo (Unocal), Jared Black (Unocal), Chunfa Wu (SEA Engineering), Hans Treu (SEA Engineering)

Copyright 2004, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 36 May 2004.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference or its officers. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print
is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented.

Abstract
This paper describes the metocaen data, design and analysis of
the West Seno TLP, the mooring system design for the
Floating Production Unit, and the coupled TLP and the
drilling tender assist vessel.
The paper is divided into the following sections:
o

o
o

The collection of metocean data, extrapolation,

and application to design. Particular emphasis is
given to current data.
The model test program in a deep water basin
facility with capability of generating steady
current, with all the risers and tendons modeled.
Application of test results to design.
Method of analysis and validation of analytical
tools and procedures. The analysis was based on
fully coupled time domain simulations with all
the risers and tendons modeled.
FPU mooring system design and analysis.
Fully coupled drilling tender vessel and TLP
mooring system design and simulations.

Metocean
Wind design criteria was developed from 16 years of wind
data recorded at the Sepinggan airport, site measurements
carried out by the Institute of Technology Bandung, wind
measurements by the Navy in the Makassar Strait, and wind
and wave measurements from the drilling vessels and fixed
installation.
There were no specific wave measurements, the wave
data were determined from the wind by hindcasting. The
wave growth in each direction was determined by the water
depth, the wind speed, the duration of an event and the
directional spreading. The hindcast modeling was verified by
applying the same procedure to one of the wind and wave

measurements from an offshore platform in the area.

The current conditions in the strait were of prime
concern, both for their effect on the floating facilities as well
as on the sub -surface elements such as tendons, well
conductors and the steel catenary risers for intrafield and
export oil and gas pipelines. To determine the design current
data, a long term current measurement program was initiated
lasting 13 months with data collection intervals in four phases.
The data were obtained from six instruments mounted on a
subsurface buoy mooring. These consisted of a near surface
ADCP, three current meters, temperature/depth recorder, and a
pressure sensor.
There is a persistent southward flow through the
strait from the Pacific Ocean on the sorth through the Java Sea
to the Indian Ocean on the south, which are referred to as the
Indonesian Through Flow (ITF) (Figure 1). The flow,
however, is complicated by the geometry of the strait, which
at the Seno site produces an eddy and a flow that is
intermittently counter to the southward flow. The strongest
currents in the region flow northward, parallel to the
bathymetric (depth) contours. Bottom currents were oriented
perpendicular to the depth contours, running back-and-forth
through the slope canyon. Most of the current variability was
identified as currents that change slowly over periods of weeks
or months, which appear to be linked to larger scale of the
ITF. The extreme current measured during the campaign is
presented in Figure 2.
Model Test Program
A comprehensive series of model tests were conducted
between the FEED and detail engineering phases of the
project. The main objectives of the model test program were
to verify the design, provide data for calibration and
verification of analytical tools, and finally capture any
unknown phenomenon that may have not been captured
during the preliminary design.
Considering that the current is the major design
driver, it was important to model test at a deep water basin
with capability of generating good steady current through the
water column. The model tests were conducted at MARINs
deepwater basin at a scale of 1:50.
The model included
instrumented TLP, 8 tendons, and 24 risers. To avoid
truncation, the tendons and risers were anchored inside the
basins pit extending 10m below the main floor (Figures 3, 4
and 5). The current could only be generated in the main basin

OTC 16523

with a 10m depth which is equivalent to 500m water depth at

full scale. To minimize the scale effects the risers and tendons
diameters were adjusted to the equivalent diameters resulting
in comparable prototype drag force per unit length.
Considering that the dominant current is in the upper 500m
depth, not having current modeled in the 500m to 1020m
depth was a good compromise compared to truncation of risers
and tendons.
The test program included the 1 year, 10 year and
100 year conditions with presence of current and without
current as well as a number of regular waves. The second
phase of the test program was modeling of the coupled TLP
and Drilling Tender Vessel (DTV). These tests were run for a
number of headings and current conditions.
Finally, a series of model tests for the Floating
Production Unit (FPU) barge were conducted at the
Indonesian Hydrodynamic Laboratory located at Surabaya,
Indonesia.
The following conclusions could be made:

Wave and current interactions and current

modeling is essential for deepwater systems with
multiple risers,
There were no major surprises,
TLP design was validated,
It proved the feasibility of the drilling tender
assist concept,
Provided an excellent source of data for the
verification and calibration of the design tools
during the detailed engineering,
Based on the results of the model tests, costs
saving changes were made to the system.

TLP Design and Analysis

The wind and waves in the Makassar Strait are quite benign.
However, the area is subject to strong currents. The West
Seno TLP design drivers are different from most TLPs. This
TLP has more steel area below the surface than above;
consequently the design for the most part is governed by
current.
The simulations and derivation of design loads and
motions were based on fully coupled risers and tendons time
domain simulations. The analytical tools and procedures were
validated and calibrated against the model test data.
This Section summarizes the methodology,
comparison between model test data and calculations, and the
final design.
General Overall System Description. The West Seno TLPA
is a conventional TLP with four columns and four pontoons.
Total displacement at mean design draft is about 23,000 mt. It
is moored by 8 tendons of 660 mm outer diameter. It supports
28 production risers and a tender drilling rig with minimal
production facility. There is no SCR since production liquid is

transferred to the FPU by flexible flowlines.

Time Domain Simulation Modeling. A fully coupled time
domain analysis approach is adopted for the analysis of West
Seno TLPA. The analysis is performed with the programs
WINDOS, WAMIT, WINTCOL and WINPOST. WINDOS is
a wind force calculation program developed by MARIN.
WAMIT is a hydrodynamic diffraction/radiation program
developed by MIT. WINTCOL is a hydrodynamic diffraction
program developed by Texas A&M and WINPOST is a fully
coupled floating body and mooring analysis program
developed by Texas A&M.
In WINPOST, the floating structure is assumed to be
a rigid body and represented by a spatial node with a 6x6 mass
matrix. The 1st order wave forces in six degrees of freedom
are represented by time traces of forces derived from a
specified wave spectrum and the added mass, damping and
exciting force coefficients calculated by WAMIT. The 2nd
order wave force time traces are derived from the wave
spectrum and quadratic transfer functions of sum and
difference frequency forces calculated by WINTCOL. The
sum frequencies are the high frequencies whereas the
difference frequencies correspond to low frequencies.
In addition to wave forces, the floating structure also
experiences wind and current loadings. The wind load
consists of mean wind load corresponding to the 1-hr wind
speed and time varying wind load generated according to NPD
wind spectrum. Wind force coefficient is calculated by the
WINDOS based on the topside equipment layout and
dimensions. Current load on the hull is modeled by equivalent
Morison members with the appropriate drag coefficients. The
Morison members generate a load according to the
instantaneous relative velocity between the member and the
surrounding fluid. This load consists of a mean component
(including the mean current load and viscous drift load) and a
slowly varying component due to the non-linearity of the
Morison equation.
Tendons, risers and mooring lines are modeled by 3D beam elements.
These elements not only possess
hydrodynamic properties such as added mass and viscous drag
force, but also possess the property of a structure member with
the appropriate self weight, buoyancy and structure stiffness.
Each tendon, riser or mooring line is discretized into a number
of finite elements.
In the finite element implementation of the fully
coupled system, the rigid floating structure is regarded as one
node in the global stiffness matrix. Additional body nodes,
the number of which equals the number of tendons, risers and
mooring lines, are attached to the rigid floating structure.
Each body node in the fully coupled system is capable of large
displacement, allowing the floating structure to displace in any
degrees of freedom. Each line representing the tendons, risers
and mooring lines is represented by a body node, a node
connected to the sea bed and a number of nodes in between.
All nodes are capable of large displacements.

OTC 16523

Comparison to Model Test Results. To compare, verify and

calibrate the analytical results the static load deflection, the
natural periods, the damping and the dynamic simulations for
several conditions and return storm cases were considered.

minimum design tendon tension, maximum set-down and

minimum airgap, TLP natural periods, TLP mean, maximum
and minimum offsets, TLP CG and deck accelerations, as well
as TLP yaw motion.

Free decay simulation were performed to derive the

numerical models natural periods and damping. The results
and comparison with the model test results are presented in
Table 1.

FPU Mooring System Design and Motion Analysis

This section addresses the FPU mooring system design,
mooring and motion analysis.

Time domain simulations were performed for all the

model tested cases. These included the regular waves, 1 year,
10 year, and 100 year return storm conditions with and with
out presence of currents.
The results of the key variable for the 100 year return
storm conditions with current and without current and
comparison to measured data are presented in Tables 2 and 3.
From the results the following conclusions could be
made:

There is good correlation between the static

results,
The natural periods are close to the measured
results,
The measured damping values in heave pitch
and yaw are considerably higher in the model
test than the analytical results,
In general there is a reasonable correlation
between the model test motions and calculated
results for the similar conditions. The main
differences in surge could be attributed to the
fluctuation of the current in the model test basin.
This could be noted from comparison between
cases with current and without current. For the
case without current, the numerical results over
predict the dominated motions while for the
similar case with current, the model test results
are higher than the numerical results. This is
particularly evident in the low frequency
component of the surge. The same pattern could
be noted for the low frequency component of the
tendon tensions.
The high frequency component of the tendon
tensions are influenced by the tendon VIV,
which is not considered in the analytical model.

Prototype Design and Simulations. With the numerical

simulation tools successfully calibrated with model test
results, the fully coupled riser and tendons numerical
simulation were made for 105 load cases. These include intact
extreme cases with and without rig, maximum operating cases
with rig, one compartment flooded cases, one tendon removed
cases, one compartment flooded cases, and additional cases
based on directional wind, wave and current environment.

General Description of FPU & Mooring Legs. The FPU is

a barge shaped vessel with the following principal dimensions:
Length Overall
Beam
Depth
Draft
Displacement

152.4 meters
38.1 meters
10.1 meters
5.2 meters
28,770 mt

The FPU is moored using twelve catenary mooring

legs, in a 4 x 3 arrangement. The mooring pattern is not
symmetric due to variations in extreme environmental
conditions for each compass quarter, due to bathymetry and
also due to the proximity of the DTV and TLP lateral
moorings. Some of the mooring leg pattern was also impacted
by some abandoned wells on the seafloor. The water depth at
the anchors ranges from about 1100 meters in the SE to about
860 meters in the NW (Figure 6).
Each FPU mooring leg starting from the anchor
comprises a high holding power drag embedded anchor
designed for permanent moorings, 70mm diameter studless
chain ranging from 450m to 650m lengths, 75mm diameter
wire rope ranging from 950m to 1500m length, and 70mm
studless chain approximately 270m long terminating at the
chain stopper.
The FPU moorings are designed for installation by
means of anchor handling vessels, and all anchors were proof
loaded to 100% of the maximum dynamic intact anchor load.
All twelve mooring legs were pre-installed and proof
loaded within a target box of 50m by 50m prior to the FPU
arrival. Prior to FPU hookup, the mooring leg catenaries were
re-calculated using the as-installed coordinates and corrected
fairlead chain lengths were derived for each leg.
On Vessel Mooring Equipment. Each group of three
mooring legs attaches to a chain jack and fairlead assembly,
which comprises three fixed steel curved plate fairleads, one
permanent chain stopper for each leg, and one hydraulic chain
jack which can be moved between the three legs. Figure 7
shows the typical on vessel equipment assembly at each corner
of the barge. Only one chain jack is provided per barge corner
for the group of three mooring legs, since mooring line
adjustments are only required when additional SCRs are
installed and to perform some small pay-ins or payouts to limit
wear and fatigue of the links on the fairlead.

Design quantities evaluated include, maximum and

Inboard of the chain stopper, the fairlead chain passes
over a curved steel turndown fairlead and is led into a small

OTC 16523

chain locker. In each leg there is a small amount of additional

fairlead chain length on board to allow for adjustments and to
assist with the initial mooring leg attachment.
Mooring System Design and Analysis. The FPU mooring
system was designed to meet the requirements of ABS Guide
for Building and Classing Floating Production Installations,
and API RP 2SK. Design offset limits are 8% of water depth
for intact moorings and 10% for one line damaged cases. The
system is designed for 0, 2 and 5 SCRs installed on the south
end of the FPU.
Fully coupled time domain analyses were performed
for the final design of the system using the following
programs:

DYNFLOAT; A fully coupled time domain

dynamic analysis program developed by MARIN
was used for the mooring analysis.
This
program accounts for low frequency and wave
frequency motions and the dynamic behavior of
the mooring lines and SCRs
WAMIT; a hydrodynamic diffraction radiation
analysis program developed by MIT.
The
programs hydrodynamic output file is used as
input in DYNFLOAT.
WINDOS; A wind load calculation program
developed by MARIN for the calculation of
wind force coefficients as input into
DYNFLOAT.

Current force coefficients were derived from model

test information.
The FPU mass, CG and radii of gyrations are based
on detailed weight calculations. Viscous damping coefficients
were determined from numerical analysis. Since roll viscous
damping is a non-linear function of roll amplitude, two
different roll viscous damping coefficients were used, one for
maximum storm cases (10 and 100 year storms) and one for
the much lower fatigue sea states.
All 12 mooring legs and a maximum of 5 SCRs were
modeled in DYNFLOAT, and suitable drag and inertia
coefficients for the mooring chain, mooring wire and SCR
pipe were input. Three SCR configurations were analyzed,
one with no SCR, one with the 2 export SCRs and one with
five SCR, consisting of the 2 export SCRs and 3 SCRs to the
future TLP-B.
To keep the FPU at its design neutral position
regardless of the number of SCRs, the fairlead chain lengths
and pretensions are adjusted as more SCRs are installed. For
each of the SCR installations several fully coupled time
domain dynamic simulations were conducted. These included
intact mooring system and damaged conditions for multiple
environmental headings.
Fatigue Analyses. Fatigue analyses were preformed for the

fairlead chains and the intermediate wire ropes in order to

confirm a fatigue life safety factor of no less then 10.
Fully coupled time domain simulations were
conducted using 71 sea-states for each of the SCR
configurations. From the DYNFLOAT results, 101 tension
range bins were derived for 2 legs in each group of 3 legs.
The fatigue life was estimated using time domain cycle
counting RAINFLOW method to estimate the number of
cycles in each tension range bin.
Mooring Analyses Results. The FPU mooring safety factors
for the intact and damaged conditions were well above the
minimum required values of 1.67 and 1.25 for the intact and
damaged conditions.
The FPU excursions for the intact and damaged
conditions were approximately 8% and 10% of water depth
respectively.
The drag embedded anchors were selected
conservatively in order to ensure that anchor drag distance
during proof loading would remain small. As a result, the
anchors safety factors well exceeded the minimum safety
factors required for intact and damaged conditions.
The fatigue analyses show that the NE group of legs
has the highest fatigue damage since seas are predominantly
from the North through East. Calculated fatigue lives are well
above the 200 year design life.
Drilling Tender Assist Mooring and Analysis
The TLP drilling operation concept is based on utilizing a
drilling tender assist vessel (DTV). The mooring system has
been designed to be able to continue the drilling operations up
to the 10 year return storm with a significant wave height of
2.2m.
General Description of Moorings. In order to be able to
utilize tender vessels of opportunity which may not have deep
water mooring systems, in field preset moorings were
installed.
The moorings for the DTV were designed to be able
to accommodate barge and semi -submersible type vessels .
During drilling operations the DTV is moored with its bow to
the North face of TLP by means of 2 sets of 2 nylon hawsers.
At the same time the stern of the DTV is moored to four preset
mooring legs. To counter the restoring force of the DTV stern
mooring legs, and hawsers, and provide additional positioning
control of the TLP, the south face of the TLP is moored to two
preset mooring legs. For this purpose, the TLPs North
columns are each equipped with a wire rope mooring winch
on top of the column and a submerged wire rope fairlead
(Figures 8 and 9).
In the mooring system layout shown in Figure 6, the
DTV mooring legs are numbered D1 through D4, while the

OTC 16523

TLP mooring legs are called TH1 and TH2. Water depth at
the anchors ranges from 1100 meters at leg TH1 to 860 meters
for legs D3 and D4.
The NE DTV mooring legs (D1 and D2) lay across
the NW FPU mooring legs, while TLP leg TH1 lies across the
SW FPU legs and the SCRs. To ensure adequate vertical
clearances between the FPU and DTV mooring lines, each of
the DTV and TLP mooring lines are connected to a surface
buoy from which a horizontal line is extended to the DTV or
TLP winches. To maintain an overall symmetrical mooring
stiffness, the other legs, D3, D4 and TH2 are provided with
the same type surface buoys. The surface buoys also serve to
minimize the mooring winch loads by supporting the
submerged line weight while connected, and serve as the
surface support buoys while the mooring leg is in its preset
condition without the DTV.
Starting from the anchor, each DTV/TLP mooring
leg comprises of a high holding power drag embedded anchor,
64mm diameter studless chain, with length ranging from 550
meters to 760 meters, 64mm diameter intermediate wire rope
with lengths ranging from 1405 meters to 1584 meters, a
surface buoy comprising of a 64mm diameter riser chain,
swivels, triplates, shackles, and a section the surface wire rope
extending to the DTV (or TLP) mooring winches.
Mooring system pretensions were designed to fully
couple the TLP and DTV in the low frequency motions while
minimizing the wave frequency motions. This enables a fully
operational system up to the 10 year return storm condition
with sufficient safety factors and clearances.
Two hawser configurations were considered in the
design; one using two pairs of crossed hawsers and two pairs
of parallel hawsers.
Each hawser consists of a 16
circumference nylon hawser with terminations and chafe
chains. The double hawser system is primarily to provide
additional redundancy in the system.
During drilling rig and equipment transfer to the
TLP, the DTV was moored at about 3 m separation from the
TLP for approximately 36 hours (Figures 10 and 11).
The DTV currently operating in the field is a semi
which is moored at a 20m separation from the TLP (Figure
12). This standoff distance is maintained during the drilling
operations. The DTV may be pulled closer to the TLP for
transfer of equipment between the two vessels.
Mooring System Analyses. The analyses of the DTV and
TLP spread mooring system posed a significant challenge for
the following reasons:

The vessels are coupled by means of the mooring

hawsers,
The TLP is moored by its tendons and risers,
The numbers of risers varies from zero at the
start of drilling to a maximum of twenty-eight
when all wells are in place,

The TLP had to be pulled over into the current

during stabbing of the riser.

The analyses were conducted in time domain by

using fully coupled TLP with tendons and risers, coupled with
the semi and its mooring system. Several iterations were
conducted to determine the optimum pretensions in all the
lines.
Several conditions ranging from no riser to 24 risers
with the environment ranging from normal operating
conditions to the limiting 10 year return storm conditions were
carried out.
Mooring Analysis Results. The TLP / DTV mooring line
safety factors and offsets were found to be as follows:
Minimum factors of safety in the hawsers (10-year
storm conditions):
3.2 for intact moorings and hawsers;
2.3 for one hawser damaged and spread mooring
legs intact.
Maximum TLP offsets for 10-year survival storm
conditions:
~5.0% of water depth for intact moorings (24
risers case);
~5.9% of water depth for one line damaged
conditions.
Maximum TLP offsets for extreme 1-year operating
conditions:
~3.5% of water depth for intact moorings.
In case that one of the TLP mooring legs is damaged,
the TLP tendons and risers absorb the loads from the missing
TLP mooring line and therefore, the tension in the remaining
TLP leg actually goes down.
Maximum and minimum TLP tendon tensions for the
TLP/DTV coupled conditions were found to be within the
design envelop.
The relative surge and heave between the DTV and
TLP corners was found to be less than 1m, and 1.2m
respectively. Due to the fact that the DTV has no bow anchor
lines, during sever quartering sea-states there exists a relative
mean sway of approximately 5m with relative sway dynamic
amplitude of about 1.5m.
Mooring Leg Clearances. Since several of the TLP and DTV
mooring legs lay across FPU legs and SCRs, mooring leg and
SCR clearances were checked for operating and extreme 10year storm conditions for both intact and damaged mooring
lines.
From safety point of view the following criteria were
adopted:

Maintain a minimum of 20m separation between

OTC 16523

the crossing lines in the worst conditions,

In case of mooring line failure ensure that there

is no contact between the broken line and the
FPU mooring line(s) or SCR(s).

In all cases, the clearance between mooring legs and

mooring legs and SCRs were more than 20 meters, which was
established as the minimum allowable.
To prevent a damaged TLP/DTV mooring line from
impacting on an FPU leg or SCR, the following additional
measures were taken:

The surface buoys in legs D1, D2 and TH1 are

always located over, or outboard of the line
crossing point(s), such that a mooring line failure
below the buoy will cause the line to fall
harmlessly to the bottom;
The surface buoys were designed to sustain
flooding of one-compartment at the maximum
buoy load without sinking the buoy;
In leg TH1, buoyancy collars are clamped on the
submerged wire rope between the TLP fairlead
and surface buoys triplate, such that a failure of
this line will not result in this wire rope
impacting the SW FPU legs and SCRs.

TLP/DTV Mooring Experience. The DTV has been in

operation since February 2003 without unplanned
disconnection. During this period several sever storms have
passed the site. The overall system has been performing in
accordance with expectations. From time to time some field
adjustments have been made to the pretensions to
accommodate ease of operations.

OTC 16523

Table 1: Comparison of Natural Periods and Damping

Natural Periods
% Critical Damping
Without Current
% Critical Damping With
Current

Numerical
Experiment
Numerical
Experiment
Numerical
Experiment

Surge
(sec)
117
120
62
67
100
100

Sway
(sec)
117
125
62
65
90
100

Heave
(sec)
2.53
2.43
2
29
2
20

Roll
(sec)
2.57
2.46
2
52
3
47

Pitch
(sec)
2.47
2.44
2
30
3
43

Yaw
(sec)
116
100
12
41
100
100

Table 2: Comparisons of results for the 100 year return condition with current
Surge

Experiment

Numerical

(m)

Sway

Heave

(m)

(m)

Pitch

Tendon1

Tendon4

(deg)

(KN)

(KN)
38
240

LF std

0.7

0.14

0.04

0.007

28

WF std

0.2

0.01

0.028

156

0.003

22

16

160

243

HF std
Total std
LF std

0.73

0.14

0.05

0.029

0.87

0.06

0.012

80

99

133

229

WF std

0.25

0.04

0.013

0.027

HF std

0.02

0.01

0.01

0.013

Total std

1.04

0.87

0.06

0.033

48

51

163

255

Experiment

Numerical

Table 3: Comparisons of results for the 100 year return condition with no current
Surge

Sway

Heave

Pitch

Tendon1

Tendon4

(m)

(m)

(m)

(deg)

(KN)

(KN)
32
243

LF std

1.39

0.24

0.014

0.005

27

WF std

0.21

0.001

0.011

0.029

161

0.003

20

22

165

247

HF std

0.001

0.001

Total std

1.4

0.24

0.018

0.029

LF std

0.98

0.17

0.008

0.007

18

14
231

WF std

0.21

0.02

0.01

0.028

136

HF std

0.021

0.01

0.01

0.018

35

40

1.01

0.18

0.017

0.034

142

235

Total std

Notes:
LF = Low frequency
WF = Wave frequency
HF = High frequency
Std = Standard deviation

OTC 16523

Measured Maximum Speeds

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

-100

-200

-300

-400

-500

-600

-700

-800

-900

-1000
speed (kts)

Figure 1: Makassar Strait Current Flow

Figure 2: Annual Extreme Current Profile

OTC 16523

Current generated
depth

Basins Pit

Figure 3: Model Test Setup

10

OTC 16523

Figure 4: Model Test Setup

Figure 5: Underwater view of the model

OTC 16523

11

Figure 6: Overall Filed Layout

12

OTC 16523

Figure 7: Chain Jack System

OTC 16523

13

Figure 8: TLP/DTV Plan View

14

OTC 16523

Figure 9: TLP/DTV Mooring Arrangement

OTC 16523

15

Figure 10: Standoff position during rig and e quipment transfer to TLP

Figure 11: Rig transfer to TLP drill deck

16

OTC 16523

Figure 12: Overview of the field