Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2011
June 19-24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
OMAE2011
June 19 - 24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

OMAE2011-50007
OMAE2011-50007
INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF MOORING AND RISER SYSTEMS FOR FPSOS IN HARSH
SHALLOW WATER ENVIRONMENTS
M. Martens, J. R. Whelan, Y. Drobyshevski
INTECSEA Pty Ltd
Level 2, 600 Murray Street,
West Perth, Western Australia, 6005
Australia

ABSTRACT
Shallow water mooring and riser systems for permanently
turret moored FPSOs present significant design challenges.
Many FPSOs, in particular in the South-East Asia region, are
required to remain on-station in 100-year return period tropical
revolving storm (typhoon) conditions. Extreme sea states
combined with the restricted height of the water column
generate large mooring loads and make it difficult to
accommodate conventional riser configurations. Metocean
conditions in such areas can be highly directional. This
directionality can be exploited by undertaking an integrated
mooring and riser design analysis.
The critical interface between the mooring and riser
systems is the turret offset and the associated turret heave. The
conventional approach is to identify a single offset envelope for
each design case, comprising the mooring system (intact or
damaged) and FPSO condition (loaded or ballasted), which is
then used in riser design.
This paper presents a more developed approach, the
integrated approach, which is based on conducting the mooring
and riser analyses simultaneously for a common set of design
cases. To exploit the directionality of the metocean conditions,
an offset envelope for each governing metocean condition is
calculated from time domain mooring simulations, followed by
a parameterisation scheme. As a result, multiple turret offsets
and associated metocean conditions and FPSO headings are
identified which form a family of offsets for each compass
octant of the environment.

The integrated approach is applied to an example FPSO

with an external turret supporting seven risers arranged in
double wave tethered configuration. The drivers and
advantages for selecting a particular riser configuration are
discussed. It is shown how application of an integrated analysis
approach leads to less conservative combinations for use in the
riser design, and enables the development of a feasible riser
system. An optimal mooring pattern, both leg make-up and
orientation for riser layout, is also developed.
1. NOTATIONS
API
CALM
CL
ELC
FPSO
HAT
Hs
HSE
LAT
LF
MSL
PA
PVDF
QTF
RAO
SALM
SD
Tp
TRS
WF

American Petroleum Institute

Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring
Centre Line
Environmental Load Case
Floating Production, Storage and Offloading
Highest Astronomical Tide
Significant Wave Height
Health Safety and Environment
Lowest Astronomical Tide
Low Frequency
Mean Sea Level
Polyamide
Polyvinylidene-fluoride
Quadratic Transfer Function
Response Amplitude Operator
Single Anchor Leg Mooring
Mooring Offset
Spectral Peak Period
Tropical Revolving Storm
Wave Frequency

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

2. INTRODUCTION
A traditional design practice for FPSO mooring and riser
systems tends to de-couple the design of the mooring and riser
systems. The mooring is usually designed to restrain the FPSO
turret offsets to some sufficiently small limit to facilitate riser
design. The key interfaces in this process are the motions of
the vessel at the riser hang-off and the offset envelope of the
turret, which are used in the riser design. A number of design
iterations may be required to identify the working riser and
mooring designs and to account for coupling effects between
the two systems such as low frequency damping, current drag
forces, contribution from risers into the mooring stiffness and
mooring-riser clashing. This is usually implemented by
incorporating some elements of one system into an analytical
model of the other, such that the interaction effects are
captured. Various aspects of such analytical integration of the
two systems have been discussed and implemented in the past,
up to a fully coupled analysis method ([11], [12]).
Although the integration of the mooring and riser analyses
models is possible, the practical design approach adopted in the
offshore industry should better be called interfaced rather
than integrated, as it tends to limit the number of mutual
design cases to a minimum in order to manage the exchange of
information between parties (mooring designers and riser
designers). The mooring and riser designers follow somewhat
different design practices and codes; they may have a different
interpretation of metocean combinations, vessel behavior, etc.
For example, interpretation of the wave-wind-current
directionality for mooring design, weather from the sitespecific data or from typical patterns recommended by
Classification Societies ([4], [6], [7]) is not always similar to
how Near, Far and Cross conditions are generated for riser
analysis as per API 17B [3]. This is in spite of the fact that both
approaches intend to describe the same ocean environment.
In some circumstances a feasible riser and mooring system
may not be identified using the traditional design practice. In
these situations a more refined approach is required which
allows for closer coupling between FPSO offsets, the metocean
conditions causing these offsets, vessel mean heading, riser
hang-off motions and other parameters affecting the mooring
and riser analyses. The integrated analysis method allows this
coupling to be implemented by setting design conditions for the
riser system which are matched with metocean conditions,
offset envelope and mean FPSO heading. This approach allows
directional environmental effects to be treated consistently in
both the mooring and riser design. This is particularly useful
when the metocean conditions are harsh and the metocean
directionality needs to be exploited to allow a feasible and
economic system to be developed.
The design of shallow water mooring and riser systems for
FPSOs in harsh conditions provides a good example of where
the integrated approach is warranted and necessary in order to
cope with more onerous riser design conditions. The shallow
water combined with the high sea states, wind and current
result in large mooring forces and large mooring offsets as a
percentage of water depth. The efficiency of a catenary

mooring system reduces with water depth and as such the

mooring system is potentially expensive.
Similarly, the design of a flexible shallow water riser
system presents a number of challenges. In particular, the
limited water depth makes finding a riser configuration which
can accommodate mooring offsets, does not clash with the sea
bed, other risers, mooring lines or the hull challenging. These
challenges call for a design methodology which would remove
unnecessary conservatism by integrating the mooring and riser
designs together.
The paper is set out as follows. The integrated analysis
approach is presented in Section 3, where both the mooring and
riser design cases are discussed. The basis of this approach is
the formation of the common design cases which enables
effective coupling between directional metocean conditions,
resulting mooring offsets and the design cases for the riser
system. To facilitate this method Section 4 presents a
parametric scheme to quantify the mooring offset envelope
which allows efficient calculation. This approach takes
advantage of the environmental directionality without the need
to run an extremely large number of analysis cases. Challenges
for the shallow water FPSOs are discussed and a case study is
described including the main input data, selected concepts and
design approach in Section 5. Concluding remarks are given in
Section 6.
3. INTEGRATED ANALYSIS APPROACH
The critical interface between the mooring and riser
systems is the turret offset and motions for associated
environmental load cases, which are functions of mean vessel
heading, mooring design condition and vessel draft.
In order to establish an efficient design spiral capturing the
mooring and riser system the proposed integrated approach
utilizes common design cases, which incorporate vessel loading
conditions, mooring system condition (intact, single line
failure), vessel headings and individual offset envelopes for a
series of Environmental Load Cases. Table 1 shows variables
which usually form the mooring and riser design cases and an
indicative number of cases. The total number of design cases
covering analyses of both systems, in particular for risers, can
be up to 5,000 - 10,000. The main variables are discussed
below.
Environmental Load Cases
Environmental Load Cases consist of combinations of
metocean parameters describing the appropriate N-year and
associated metocean conditions (e.g. wave, wind or current
dominated) at the field location. In the first instance, the omnidirectional wind, wave, current and water depth (tide level)
may be combined to generate Environment Load Cases that are
then applied to the mooring system and riser systems. The
relative direction of the wind, wave and current may be selected
based on typical patterns such as that recommended by
Classification Societies ([4], [6], [7]).
If the site-specific directional metocean data are available
Environmental Load Cases may be developed incorporating

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

environmental directionality, which is often described in terms

of N-year metocean conditions prevailing from each compass
octant (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, and NW). A series of
directional Environmental Load Cases may be developed by
combining the N-year and associated conditions for each
compass octant using the standard relative direction patterns.
Mooring Design Cases
Mooring analysis is usually undertaken for a number of
design cases, which are a combination of Environmental Load
Cases with Vessel Loading Condition (typically Full Load and
Ballast) and two or more mooring conditions (intact, single line
failure) [1]. The number of mooring design cases is of the order
of one thousand, which can be easily reduced to a more
manageable size by a screening process.
Table 1: Complete Design Case Matrix
No. of
Cases

Mooring System

Riser System

431

Environmental Load Cases: (8 compass octants) x

(3 dominant) x (3 directional combinations) x (2
water depths) + Sensitivity to wave periods

Vessel Loading Condition: Full Load, Ballast

2+

Mooring System: Intact, Single Line Failure

Riser Content

Marine Growth

Buoyancy modules age

Total

for each ELC

Vessel heading

for each ELC

Mooring offset (envelope)

1,728+

6,912+

Riser Design Cases

The riser design cases are formed from a combination of
Environmental Load Cases with several riser-specific
variables:

Contents (Full of Water, Producing, Empty);

Marine Growth (Start of Life, End of Life);

Buoyancy Modules (unsaturated, saturated);

and a number of mooring-specific variables that are produced

by motions and mooring analyses:

Vessel Draught (Loading Condition - typically Full Load,

Ballast);

Motions at the riser hang-off computed from motion RAOs

for a particular vessel heading for a given Environmental
Load Case. The vessel heading is typically predicted by
the weather vaning or mooring analysis; and

Turret offset from mooring centre or offset envelope for a

particular Environmental Load Case and mooring

condition (intact, damaged), which is predicted by the

mooring analysis.
In addition, a number of sensitivity cases examining
installation tolerances and special cases such as the mid-life
change-out of individual risers (differential marine growth and
drag characteristics with adjacent risers) may also need to be
analysed. Thus the number of riser design cases may reach
several thousand, which is too large to be used in the design
process especially if time domain analysis is used. The size of
the riser design case matrix therefore needs to be significantly
reduced.
Conventional Approach
Traditionally the risers are designed focusing on the group
of riser-specific variables, whereas the mooring-specific
variables are considered to be fixed for various reasons, but
most of the time because they are produced by independent
parties. This leads to conservative assumptions about possible
combinations of fixed values of the mooring variables with
riser-specific variables. For example, maximum offset
envelope (or even a single value of the maximum offset) can be
combined with a vessel heading and turret motions that may
physically never occur simultaneously.
As a result, the number of riser design cases is traditionally
reduced to a manageable size at the expense of loosing
important physical information which relates the performance
of the mooring and riser system. For example, mooring offsets
might be supplied to the riser designer as single values for a
limited set of environmental and loading conditions, but this
provides only a limited insight into the design space.
Integrated Analysis Approach
By using an integrated approach both the riser-specific
and mooring-specific variables are included in the same
design spiral. If necessary, limitations in one component are
mitigated by modifications in the other. Key to this approach is
the ability to use the same design cases for both systems, and to
conduct the two analyses simultaneously. This means that all
of the cases required for the design of both the mooring and
riser systems need to be captured in the Complete Design Case
Matrix (Table 1).
As opposed to the traditional approach the integrated
approach requires the reduction of the Complete Design Case
matrix to be carried out consistently for the mooring and riser
analyses, so that all variables including riser-specific and
mooring-specific are captured with the appropriate
Environmental Load Cases. This enables the design space for
the riser and mooring systems to be explored and both systems
optimized within the same design spiral. This allows for the
true integration of the mooring and riser analyses whereby
more detailed and less conservative methods can be used. An
example, as mentioned earlier, is the ability to exploit
directional environmental data, which can be treated in both the
mooring and riser design, without using a prohibitively large
case matrix.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

Common Design Cases

Table 1 shows that by combining directional mooring
offsets and vessel headings for the various vessel conditions
together with the riser system conditions one arrives at a matrix
of cases that is too large to be used in the search for a feasible
solution, or an effective optimization of the riser system.
For this reason the Complete Design Case Matrix (Table 1)
must be subjected to an efficient screening such that the
governing design cases for the mooring and riser systems are
identified. The key step in this process, which is shown in
Figure 1, is the identification of the offset-governing cases by
the screening mooring analysis and the prediction of the
directional offset envelopes for each octant (this is described in
Section 4). This information forms the Common Design Cases
together with the corresponding Environmental Load Cases and
the mean vessel heading.
The Common Design Cases can be further screened to identify
the following Selected Cases for each compass octant:
a.

One case with maximum mooring offset and associated

environmental conditions

b.

One case with maximum wave height and associated

mooring offset, vessel heading and current conditions; and

c.

At least one case corresponding to the cross, diagonal or

an in-line riser load condition.

The obtained Selected Cases, which are a subset of the

Common Design Cases, capture the worst mooring offsets, the
worst vessel behavior and the associated Environmental Load
Cases for the riser system. The Selected Cases are dependent on
the configuration and orientation of the riser system and
therefore as the riser system design evolves during design
iterations, the Selected Cases also need to be updated. The
same applies to possible changes in the mooring configuration.
For a shallow water system, such as the one described later
in this paper, this is particularly necessary as the governing
design cases may change between each design iteration due to
the sensitivity of the system.
Figure 1 : Integrated Approach Flowchart
4. DEVELOPMENT OF MOORING OFFSETS
A key element in the integrated analysis approach is the
development of the directional offset envelopes which describe
the mooring offset for a particular Environmental Load Case.
This section presents a method based on time domain
simulations and a parameterization scheme, which enables the
directionality of the environment and asymmetry in the
mooring system to be efficiently captured.
By Octant Offset Envelopes
For each prevailing direction of the environment (defined,
for example, by compass octants) the series of Environmental
Load Cases are analyzed and an offset envelope developed for

each. The individual offset envelopes are based on the

maximum mooring offset (SD) and a general parameterized
offset envelope shape. The following steps are involved:
a.

Calculate mooring offset (SD) for each Environmental

Load Case (ELC). Identify the Critical ELC
corresponding to the maximum absolute SD;

b.

Undertake a detailed analysis of the offset envelope shape

for a Critical ELC by running a sufficient number of time
domain analysis realizations and relative direction
patterns for wind, wave and current (see below);

c.

Parameterise the critical offset envelope so that it may be

scaled based on the SD calculated for the complete series
of Environmental Load Cases;

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

d.

e.

Scale and rotate the parameterised offset envelope for

each Environmental Load Case based on the SD for each
particular case; and
Superimpose the scaled offset envelopes for all cases thus
developing the complete family of offset envelopes.

Design Offset
The SD may be calculated using mooring analysis software
such as ARIANE 3D. For integrated analysis with riser design
only the vessel mean and low frequency (LF) in-plane motions
(surge, sway and yaw) need to be assessed. The wave
frequency (WF) vessel motions are accounted for in the riser
analysis. It is noted that the approach adopted combines the
mean offset and maximum LF motion with the maximum WF
motion which is conservative compared with the
recommendations of design codes ([1]). An alternative, less
conservative, formulation would combine the mean offset with
the significant LF and max WF or Max WF with Significant
WF.

Parameterization
A parameterized offset envelope is then constructed so as
to conservatively encapsulate the calculated offset envelope as
shown in Figure 3. The parameterization scheme is presented in
Table 2 and a schematic shown in Figure 4. The scheme is
developed based on the relative angle to the prevailing weather
. That is, as the prevailing weather direction changes the
parameterisation scheme changes orientation by a
corresponding angle so as to maintain the same relative
orientation. Further, it has been assumed that the sway
sideways envelope is symmetrical for both port and starboard.
The sway sideways sectors are defined based on the maximum
offset in either port or starboard parts of the sector. The surge
forward sector and surge backwards sector are defined by circle
arcs.
The parameterised offset envelope is made nondimensional so that it may be scaled for each Environmental
Load Case SD. A contingency factor () is introduced to inflate
the parameterised offset envelope to account for uncertainty.
Overall Offset Envelope

Critical Case Offset Envelope

The mooring offset envelope for the Critical
Environmental Load Case is developed in the following
manner:
a.

A comprehensive matrix of relative direction patterns for

wind, wave and current is developed based on
recommendations of [4], [6], [7]; or by using site specific
metocean data;

b.

Time domain simulations are run for each directional

combination and the trajectory (x, y) of the turret is
calculated as a function of time. Multiple repeats of each
directional combination are simulated so as to quantify the
variability associated with different realisations of the
wave spectrum; and;

c.

Each of the turret trajectories are overlaid and an offset

envelope is developed by converting the (x, y) trajectories
of the turret into polar coordinates (R, ). The maximum
R in each sector is then found from the individual
simulations.

An overall offset envelope for each Mooring Design

Condition (Intact and Damaged / Full Load and Ballast) may be
developed by superimposing individual offset envelopes
associated with each Environmental Load Case. The maximum
offset in each compass octant can then be identified, as too can
the associated environmental condition and mean vessel
heading.

An example of an individual offset envelope based on two

different directionality combinations is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 3 : Example Parameterized Offset Envelope

Figure 2: Example Offset Envelope

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

stiffness of the proposed Double Tethered Wave configuration,

the dynamic effects caused by slugs and pigs were limited, and
could be managed in the design and operation. For other
shallow water riser configurations, the slug flow effects were
found to have a severe impact on the riser feasibility.

2.
3.

Fatigue of both the mooring and risers is an equally

important design issue which must be addressed.
The
integrated analysis approach presented herein is focused on the
extreme load cases. However, similar principles could be
applied to facilitate the fatigue analysis of mooring and risers in
directional environmental conditions.

4.
5.
6.

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
7.

The integrated approach for the design of the mooring and

riser systems aims to bring both systems into a common design
spiral. This is achieved by generating the Common Design
Cases by the (screening) mooring analysis, from which a set of
governing design cases for the riser analysis is extracted. These
design cases contain all necessary information, including the
Environmental Load Case, vessel heading and the directional
offsets, which enables an efficient screening to be made for
selecting the cases which govern the riser behaviour. As a
result, a close link is provided between the vessel, the mooring
system and the riser system performance.

8.
9.

10.

The integrated approach for the mooring and riser analyses

offers the following advantages:

It provides a consistent and complete representation of the

design conditions for the mooring and riser systems,
thereby removing unnecessary conservatism;

It may potentially capture more onerous riser design

conditions which are not obvious when the conventional
approach is applied;

It simplifies interface between the mooring and riser

design processes, effectively integrating the two together
into a single design process; and

11.

12.
13.
14.

It enables an efficient use of directional metocean data to

be made for the development of an optimum design.
15.

The only potential difficulty with the application of the

integrated approach is the large amount of input data and
results, which need to be correctly handled, checked,
documented and used. However, this may cause concern only
when analyses are carried out by different parties, in which case
an efficient data interface protocol should be set up to ensure
smooth transfer of information between the parties.

16.
17.
18.
19.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Contributions by Eng Sem Ng, Kwong Kui, Job Pinkster,
and Adam Tyler of INTECSEA Pty Ltd are appreciated for
their assistance in preparing calculations and figures presented
in this paper.

20.

(October 2005). American Petroleum Institute, API

RP 2SK.
Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe, American
Petroleum Institute, ANSI / API Specification 17J.
Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe, American
Petroleum Institute, ANSI / API Recommended
Practice 17 B.
Classification of Mooring Systems for Permanent
Offshore units (July 2008). Bureau Veritas, Guidance
Note NI 493 DTM R01.
Quasi-Dynamic Analysis of Mooring Systems Using
Ariane Software (May 1998). Bureau Veitas NI 461
DTO R00 E.
Position Mooring (October 2004), Det Norske Veritas,
Offshore Standard DNV-OS-E301
Rules and Regulations for the Classification of a
Floating Offshore Installation at a Fixed Location, Part
1 Regulation (April 2008). Lloyds Register
Duggal, A. S., Liu, Y. H., Heyl, C. N. (2004), Global
Analysis of Shallow Water FPSOs, Offshore
Technology Conference, OTC 16720
DSouza, A.B., et al. (1990), Design Development of
a Soft-Yoke Mooring System for the SZ36-1 Field in
Liaodong Bay, China, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 6450.
Erkenbeck, E. F., Chen, H. (1982) Systematic
Evaluation of Rigid Yoke SPM Design For Mooring
Large Offshore Floating Plants, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 4345.
Connaire, A., Kavanagh, K., Ahilan, R, Goodwin, P.
(1999) Integrated Mooring and Riser Design:
Analysis Methodology, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 10810.
Garret, D.L. (2005) Coupled Analysis of Floating
Production Systems Ocean Engineering, 32 (2005) pp
802-816.
Leeneer Y.D., Eik, G. (2004) Multiple Riser system
for shallow, Offshore Technology Conference,
OTC16721.
Tan, Z., Hou, Y, Loper, C., Sheldrake, T. (2009)
Application of Flexible Risers in Shallow Water
Weight Added Wave Configuration, OMAE2009
79476
Hanonge, D., (2010) Challenges of Flexible Riser
Systems in Shallow, Petromin, Sept Oct, 2010
MORA Manual, CJ Garrison
Y. Himeno, Prediction of Roll Damping-State of the
Art Report No. 239, Sept 1981, University of
Michigan
OrcaFlex Manual 9.2F, Orcina Ltd.
Nestegard A., Krokstad J. R. (1999) JIP-DEEPER:
Deepwater Analysis Tools, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 10811.
Colby C., Katla E. Okkenhaug S. (2000) Coupling
Effects for a Deepwater Spar, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 12083.

REFERENCES
1. Recommended Practice for Design and Analysis of
Station keeping Systems for Floating Structures

11

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

and may be mitigated by adding weight to the upper catenary of

the riser.
Wave induced water particle velocities and accelerations
act essentially across the entire water column and consequently
the entire riser configuration. The wave action may induce
significant motion of the risers potentially causing them to
clash with each other, the mooring lines or the vessel hull. This
is exacerbated by adding buoyancy tanks or modules.
Furthermore, if a riser needs to be changed-out or added during
the life of the field the differential wave loading on the new (no
marine growth) and old risers may cause an increased potential
for clashing.
Other issues which may require particular attention for
shallow water riser design include:

The effect that the vessel hull has on the current and wave
flow fields and the consequent effect that this has on riser
dynamic performance;

The effect of dynamic slug flow in the risers;

The effect of differential settling of liquid and gas phases

in the sag-bend and hump, during shut-in, on the riser
motions;

The installation of a shallow water riser system is likely to

require tight installation tolerances due to the requirement
to position the riser in the water column with a high degree
of accuracy.
A number of flexible riser configurations and proprietary
designs were proposed to address the above challenges, some
of which are described in [8], [13], [14], and [15].

Figure 5 : Intensity Factors: Directional Metocean

Effect / Omni-directional Effect (directions from).

FPSO Requirements
The FPSO is required to have a storage capacity of
700,000 bbl and production capacity of 60,000 bbl/day and to
remain permanently moored for the life of the project. The
FPSO hull was based on a converted large AFRAMAX tanker.
The FPSO general arrangement is shown in and main
particulars in Table 3. To accommodate the external turret the
vessel bow will need to be modified during conversion to allow
the mooring chains to pass un-hindered beneath the hull.

Metocean Data
The metocean conditions at the considered location are
harsh. The MSL is of the order 45.0 m with 100-year HAT and
LAT of +1.0 and -2.0 m respectively and storm surge of +1.0
m. The site is affected by both the monsoon and typhoons,
with the typhoon conditions generally dominating. The 100year typhoon omni-directional Hs was of the order 10.0 m; 1minute wind velocity 40.0 m/s and current velocity 2.0 m/s.
The directionality factors relating typhoon omni-directional
conditions to directional conditions are plotted in Figure 5. No
directional data was available for typhoon current. From
Figure 5 it is evident that the environment is significantly
milder from the S and SE than it is from other compass octants.
The NE octant displays the most extreme conditions for wind
wave and current. The wind speed from the NW and W is
similar to that from the NE however the limited fetch in these
directions mitigates the development of the sea and hence the
Hs is lower.

Table 3: FPSO Main Particulars

Description
Units
Value
Storage Capacity

[bbl]

700,000

[bbl/d]

60,000

Length Overall

[m]

318.6

Length Between Perpendiculars

[m]

259.6

Moulded Beam

[m]

44.0

Moulded Depth

[m]

23.5

Draft - Ballast

[m]

8.66

Draft - Full

[m]

15.28

Displacement Ballast

[Te]

76,076

Displacement Full

[Te]

140,996

Turret CL from Mid-ship

[m]

162.6

Production Capacity

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

regular wave analysis was undertaken with the wave height set
to the most probable maximum wave height which would occur
during a 3-hour storm.

Figure 6 : FPSO General Arrangement

Riser System Requirements

A flexible riser system incorporating 7 risers was required
with the following service requirements:

3 x 12" Production;

1 x 10" Water Injection;

1 x 6" Gas Lift;

1 x 12" Gas Export; and

1 x 8" Power Umbilical.

The risers were to be hung-off from the external turret of

the FPSO. The elevation and location of the turret were to be an
output from the mooring design work. No restrictions were set
on the hang-off sequence or the seabed tie-in locations; as such
the risers could be hung-off in the most favourable directions
based upon the riser global analysis, which allowed for
implementation of an optimized riser system based upon the
integrated analysis, as described in this paper.
Due to the very limited vertical space between the FPSO
hull and the seabed, buoyancy control became difficult, as there
is not enough space or length of riser to accommodate self
adjusting catenaries. This was exacerbated by the weight
varying greatly due to two factors:

Significant marine growth: after 5 and 15 years will make

the risers 25% and 40% heavier respectively; and

Contents: a weight difference between a gas filled riser and

a product filled riser of 30%.

Analysis Methodology And Software

The mooring analysis was performed using Ariane-3D.

Ariane-3D is an industry standard time domain quasi-dynamic
mooring analysis package developed by Bureau Veritas and is
used extensively by the offshore oil and gas industry [5].
Ariane-3D adopts an uncoupled approach for the low frequency
floater motions (surge, sway and yaw). The influence of the
mooring and riser system damping on these motions was
included through linear damping terms which were calculated
using a forced oscillation method. This was done using
Orcaflex [18] by setting up a model of the combined mooring
system and imposing oscillatory motion with a given amplitude
and period. The amplitude was selected to match the maximum
low frequency motions and the period was set to the natural
period of the mooring system. Fourier analysis was then used
to recover the damping. Analysis methods such as this have
previously been used, for example, [19] and [1]. Different
damping values were calculated for the full and ballast drafts;
the surge damping for full draft was 0.274x106 kgs-1 and for
ballast draft 0.408x106 kgs-1.
The design offsets (SD) of the turret were calculated from
the Ariane-3D simulations based on Bureau Veritas guidance
[4]. This approach combines the mean offset with the standard
deviation of the maximum offsets calculated from n
realisations: S D = S mean + S sd . In the current study 20
realisations of a 3-hour storm were simulated for each
Environmental Load Case. As noted previously only the mean
plus low frequency vessel motions were considered in the
integrated analysis as the wave frequency motions were
accounted for in the riser analysis.
Mooring System Concept
The mooring system concept is an external turret mooring.
The mooring system was designed to sufficiently limit the
turret offsets to make the riser system feasible. The mooring
system is asymmetric with 13 legs arranged in 4 groups (3
groups of 3 and 1 group of 4) (Figure 7) due to the highly
directional nature of the environmental conditions. The
mooring legs are composed of 114 mm R3S studless chain and
an excursion limiter of 135 m of 2 x 157 mm R3 studless chain.

The hydrodynamic and motions analyses have been carried

out using the suite of programs MORA, developed by C J
Garrison [16]. The package is based on the three-dimensional
diffraction theory, which enables the computation of the 1st
order wave loads and motions (RAOs) for a given vessel, and
the 2nd order wave (mean drift and low frequency) forces and
motions (QTFs). The viscous roll damping of the FPSO was
predicted following the methodology described by Himeno [17]
and was included in the calculated RAOs using an iterative
stochastic linearisation approach.
The riser analysis was performed
9.2f. Orcaflex is a marine dynamics
Orcina for static and dynamic analysis
cable systems in an offshore/marine

using Orcaflex version

program developed by
of flexible pipeline and
environment [18]. A

Figure 7 : Mooring Layout

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

Environmental Load Cases and other system

parameters for both the mooring and riser systems;

Riser System Concept

A bespoke riser system has been developed by INTECSEA
as part of a concept selection process, based on appropriate
riser properties. The selected riser concept was the Double
Tethered Wave configuration illustrated in Figure 8. Three
tethers are used in conjunction with attached buoyancy and
ballast to control the vertical position of the riser, while
accommodating the considerable variations in weight due to
contents and marine growth. Even with this combination of
buoyancy, ballast and tethers it was found necessary to have
regular marine growth removal campaigns or to apply anti-foul
to all of the attached components.
A tendency for the flexibles to over-bend either side of the
tethers is managed by using bend stiffeners. Further resistance
to over-bending over the whole length of the riser was provided
by increasing the bend stiffness when compared with the initial
flexible properties by either increasing the thickness of the
plastic layers or by changing the plastic materials used. The
latter was possible due to design temperatures of up to 80oC,
which allows the use of most of the commonly used plastic
materials in flexible pipe manufacture, which have a wide
range of Youngs Moduli of between 350N/mm2 (PA) and
1700N/mm2 (PVDF).

Figure 8: Double Tethered Wave Riser Configuration

Integrated Analysis Approach and Results
First, preliminary static and dynamic analyses were
conducted based on omni-directional metocean data, extreme
mooring offset and turret heave motions. On the basis of these
analyses the preferred mooring and riser concepts were
selected, including orientation of the mooring lines and the
risers. However, the dynamic riser analysis based on the omnidirectional offset and motions could not confirm that the
proposed riser configuration was feasible. A more refined
approach was therefore required. The integrated analysis
approach was applied, which included the following major
steps:
a.

The Complete Design Case Matrix was developed

consisting of 6,912 design cases, covering 236

b.

Screening mooring analysis was conducted through all

Environmental Load Cases to identify governing cases
for the mooring line tensions (71 ELCs selected) and
for the turret offsets (20 ELCs selected);

c.

A critical environment direction was identified

producing the highest absolute offset and mooring line
tension (NE wave dominated condition), refer to
Figure 9. The parameterization scheme was employed
based on multiple (5) time domain mooring analysis
realizations for each relative direction pattern for
wind, wave and current. In this study the Bureau
Veritas [5] patterns were used (10 patterns). 5
realisations for each pattern were found to be adequate
to define the shape of the Parameterised Offset
Envelope. It should be noted that the Parameterised
Offset Envelope is a non-dimensional shape which is
scaled with design offset (SD) for each ELC; the
statistics of turret offset are therefore accounted for
through the calculation of each SD;

d.

Based on the parameterized offset envelope, further

mooring analyses were conducted for other octant
directions. A family of directional offset envelopes for
20 offset-governing design cases was developed. For
each of these offset envelopes, the mean vessel
heading and the associated ELC were established,
which formed the Common Design Case Matrix;

e.

By screening the Common Design Case Matrix a

subset of Selected Cases was identified based upon a
set of criteria (Section 4), which ensured that the cases
critical for the riser behaviour had been captured
(including Near, Far, Cross and Diagonal) for each
compass octant;

f.

The matrix of Selected Cases was dynamic through

the design process, as these cases changed due to
changes implemented in the riser configuration. This
reflected the sensitivity of the riser system; and

g.

In its final form, the matrix of Selected Design Cases

contained 204 cases covering both Full Load and
Ballast conditions of the FPSO, intact and damaged
conditions of the mooring system, and the worst
combinations of the mooring offset, turret motions and
wave and current conditions with respect to the risers.

Overall offset envelopes developed for the Full Load and

Ballast conditions, and for the intact and damaged conditions of
the mooring system are presented in Figure 10. These offset
envelopes encompass the family of 20 envelopes produced for
the Common Design Cases. They display a high level of
directionality with the largest offset being caused by the NE
environmental conditions and the lowest for the SE conditions.
The offsets for Full Load condition were higher than those for
Ballast condition. This is attributed principally to the reduction
in mooring stiffness resulting from the increased draft at Full
Load; the change in draft was a significant percentage of the
water depth (15.7%).

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

It is worth noting that large surge motions were predicted

by the mooring analysis, not only in the down-wave direction
(surge back) but also in the up-wave direction (surge forward).
These surge motions are attributed to relatively small mean
offsets, small low frequency damping and large wave frequency
motions in shallow water.

15.0

10.0

5.0

Figure 11 and Figure 12 depict the final Selected Cases

used for the dynamic riser analyses. It can be seen that there is
a number of governing cases inside the maximum offset
envelope, as the worst offset did not always coincide with the
maximum turret heave or the most onerous wave and current
directions relative to the risers. The final riser configuration
was confirmed to meet all the design criteria for these cases.

0.0
-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0
Fully Loaded, Intact
Fully Loaded, Damaged
Maximum Offset Envelope

-20.0

Figure 11 : Selected Cases FPSO Full Load

15.0

10.0

5.0

Figure 9 : Offset Envelopes for Critical NE

Environmental Load Case (Full Load)

0.0
-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0
Ballast, Intact
Ballast, Damaged

-20.0

Maximum Offset Envelope

Figure 12 : Selected Cases FPSO Ballast

Other design issues

Figure 10 : Offset Envelopes: Ballast (left) Full (right)

The dynamic effect of the slug flow, in which the contents

density might vary rapidly, was considered to be a concern due
to the sensitivity of the riser system to weight variations.
Similar concern existed for the effects caused by large pigs
used for inspection and maintenance. A special study was
conducted together with Flow Assurance specialists, again
using a common set of design cases, and the information from
pig vendors. For the slugging analysis, a range of slug relative
densities, velocities, distributions and frequencies were
considered. It was found that due to the considerable vertical

10

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME

stiffness of the proposed Double Tethered Wave configuration,

the dynamic effects caused by slugs and pigs were limited, and
could be managed in the design and operation. For other
shallow water riser configurations, the slug flow effects were
found to have a severe impact on the riser feasibility.

2.
3.

Fatigue of both the mooring and risers is an equally

important design issue which must be addressed.
The
integrated analysis approach presented herein is focused on the
extreme load cases. However, similar principles could be
applied to facilitate the fatigue analysis of mooring and risers in
directional environmental conditions.

4.
5.
6.

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
7.

The integrated approach for the design of the mooring and

riser systems aims to bring both systems into a common design
spiral. This is achieved by generating the Common Design
Cases by the (screening) mooring analysis, from which a set of
governing design cases for the riser analysis is extracted. These
design cases contain all necessary information, including the
Environmental Load Case, vessel heading and the directional
offsets, which enables an efficient screening to be made for
selecting the cases which govern the riser behaviour. As a
result, a close link is provided between the vessel, the mooring
system and the riser system performance.

8.
9.

10.

The integrated approach for the mooring and riser analyses

offers the following advantages:

It provides a consistent and complete representation of the

design conditions for the mooring and riser systems,
thereby removing unnecessary conservatism;

It may potentially capture more onerous riser design

conditions which are not obvious when the conventional
approach is applied;

It simplifies interface between the mooring and riser

design processes, effectively integrating the two together
into a single design process; and

11.

12.
13.
14.

It enables an efficient use of directional metocean data to

be made for the development of an optimum design.
15.

The only potential difficulty with the application of the

integrated approach is the large amount of input data and
results, which need to be correctly handled, checked,
documented and used. However, this may cause concern only
when analyses are carried out by different parties, in which case
an efficient data interface protocol should be set up to ensure
smooth transfer of information between the parties.

16.
17.
18.
19.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Contributions by Eng Sem Ng, Kwong Kui, Job Pinkster,
and Adam Tyler of INTECSEA Pty Ltd are appreciated for
their assistance in preparing calculations and figures presented
in this paper.

20.

(October 2005). American Petroleum Institute, API

RP 2SK.
Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe, American
Petroleum Institute, ANSI / API Specification 17J.
Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe, American
Petroleum Institute, ANSI / API Recommended
Practice 17 B.
Classification of Mooring Systems for Permanent
Offshore units (July 2008). Bureau Veritas, Guidance
Note NI 493 DTM R01.
Quasi-Dynamic Analysis of Mooring Systems Using
Ariane Software (May 1998). Bureau Veitas NI 461
DTO R00 E.
Position Mooring (October 2004), Det Norske Veritas,
Offshore Standard DNV-OS-E301
Rules and Regulations for the Classification of a
Floating Offshore Installation at a Fixed Location, Part
1 Regulation (April 2008). Lloyds Register
Duggal, A. S., Liu, Y. H., Heyl, C. N. (2004), Global
Analysis of Shallow Water FPSOs, Offshore
Technology Conference, OTC 16720
DSouza, A.B., et al. (1990), Design Development of
a Soft-Yoke Mooring System for the SZ36-1 Field in
Liaodong Bay, China, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 6450.
Erkenbeck, E. F., Chen, H. (1982) Systematic
Evaluation of Rigid Yoke SPM Design For Mooring
Large Offshore Floating Plants, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 4345.
Connaire, A., Kavanagh, K., Ahilan, R, Goodwin, P.
(1999) Integrated Mooring and Riser Design:
Analysis Methodology, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 10810.
Garret, D.L. (2005) Coupled Analysis of Floating
Production Systems Ocean Engineering, 32 (2005) pp
802-816.
Leeneer Y.D., Eik, G. (2004) Multiple Riser system
for shallow, Offshore Technology Conference,
OTC16721.
Tan, Z., Hou, Y, Loper, C., Sheldrake, T. (2009)
Application of Flexible Risers in Shallow Water
Weight Added Wave Configuration, OMAE2009
79476
Hanonge, D., (2010) Challenges of Flexible Riser
Systems in Shallow, Petromin, Sept Oct, 2010
MORA Manual, CJ Garrison
Y. Himeno, Prediction of Roll Damping-State of the
Art Report No. 239, Sept 1981, University of
Michigan
OrcaFlex Manual 9.2F, Orcina Ltd.
Nestegard A., Krokstad J. R. (1999) JIP-DEEPER:
Deepwater Analysis Tools, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 10811.
Colby C., Katla E. Okkenhaug S. (2000) Coupling
Effects for a Deepwater Spar, Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC 12083.

REFERENCES
1. Recommended Practice for Design and Analysis of
Station keeping Systems for Floating Structures

11

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2011 by ASME