Pipelaying – example from Ormen Lange

Development concept

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 2

Ormen Lange bottom topography

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 3

Pipeline routing
Shelf (-250m)

Development area
(-900m)

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 4

Free spans – Early routing

-200

-300

-400

Water Depth
-500

-600

-700

-800

-900
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
KP
Route 2000
Route B

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 5

 Early route alternative – Distribution of free
spans

20.5
Span Height [m]

15.5

10.5

5.5

0.5
40 140 240 340 440

Typical Span Length [m]

maximum

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 6

S – laying versus J - laying

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 7

Critical length – a fatigue issue

Critical Length

Critical length depends upon natural frequencies and current velocity:

zLength
zDiameter
zSupport conditions
zFatigue capacity

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 8

Vortex induced vibrations (VIV) of free
spanning pipelines

z Induced by current.
z Simplistic estimation tools
z Determines maximum length of free spans.
z Fatigue
z Puts severe constraints on pipeline routing
z Cost driver: Intervention work in deep water.
z Ormen Lange:
z Pioneer project.
z Basis for improved future methods

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 9

Span rectification several options

Rocksupports
(Pre/Post dumping) Dredging/Trenching
Submerged floating pipeline

0
-100
-200
-300
Depth [m]

-400
-500
-600
-700
-800
-900

-1000
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Length [m]

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 10

 SHORT versus LONG FREE SPANS

SHORT SPAN
L/D ≈ 100
• BEAM BEHAVIOUR GOVERNING
• SINGLE HALF WAVE MODE
• EXISTING DNV - G14

LONG SPAN
L/D ≈ 200

• CABLE DOMINATED BEHAVIOUR

• MULTIPLE MODE EXCITATION
• NOT COVERED BY EXISTING DNV - G14

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 11

 Cable, beam and sag effect on 1st natural frequency,
Large sag, high axial stiffness
1
Sagging cable (Triantafyllou)
Cable w/o sag
0.9 Equation 2
Equation 2 w/o beam effect
0.8 Equation 2 w/o sag effect
FEM values, IL
0.7 FEM values, CF

0.6
f (1/sec)

0.5
1

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
L/D

cable cable
small sag large sag
Eq 2:

1 N eff ⎛ P π 2
kδ 2
⎞
f1,CF = ⎜1 + E
+ ⋅ 0 ⎟ (Hz)
2L me ⎜⎝ N eff 4 L N eff ⎟⎠
Cable Beam Sag
Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 12
Reliability analysis & RP-F105
z IL vibration controls fatigue life.

z Single (idealized) span length can be

increased from 40 – 60 m to 80 – 110m
(Shortest in slide area, longest in development
area)

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 13

Shoulder contact force. Soft versus stiff soil

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 14

Improved routing & intervention work
z Shorter spans with short shoulders. I.e. interaction between spans.
z Max. allowable length of a span depends upon neighbouring spans and
shoulder properties (stiffness & geometry)
z Improved current and soil information

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 15

DNV-RP-F105 Span interaction

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 16

S – laying versus J - laying

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 17

 Characteristic forces S- versus J-lay
S-Lay

Submerged Water Barge Residual Overbend Touchdown Pipe

Weight Depth Tension Tension 1) Strain Distance 2) Span3)
(N/m) (m) (kN) (kN) (%) (m) (m)
920 1100 2100 1000 0.25 1490 2000
1 ) Tension in pipe on bottom
2) Horisontal distance from last tensioner
3) Length of pipe from stinger to touch down.

J-Lay

Submerged Water Barge Residual Max. BM Touchdown Pipe

Weight Depth Tension Tension1) Sagbend2) Distance3) Span4)
(N/m) (m) (kN) (kN) (kNm) (m) (m)
920 250 695 108 1338 245 380
920 1100 1920 529 392 1002 1583

1) Tension in pipe on bottom

2) Maximum bending moment in sagbend. The maximu m allowable bending moment is 1620 kNm.
3) Horisontal distance from last tensioner
4) Length of pipe from stinger to touch down.

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 18

Simulation of marine
operations
Pipelaying
 Simulator for complex marine operations

Terrain module
SIMULATOR
CONTROL Visualization ROV control and
GL view visualization

High level architecture (HLA) / Run -Time

Infrastructure (RTI)

SIMLA
RIFLEX SIMO Pipelaying
cables and risers vessel INC. DP Free spans

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 20

 Pipe Laying

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 21

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 22
 Gravel supports in Bjørnsundet
Basis for laying analysis

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 23

 Virtual ROV picture

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 24

 Rock installation

Date: 2004-01-16 • Page: 25