LOTOS SIWZ A1-3 Z12 112996-EnG-RPT-00003 R02 IFC Pipeline Installation Analysis

PIPELINE INSTALLATION ANALYSIS REPORT
Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003. Rev 02
Client: LOTOS PETROBALTIC S.A.

Project Number: Z12/112996
Project Name: B8 GAS PIPELINE INSTALLATION ENGINEERING
Date Revision Description of Revision Prepared Checked Approved
11.08.2016 02 Issued for Construction M. Bowie G. Cowie A. Cowie
Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 1 of 30

DOCUMENT COMMENT SHEET
PROJECT : B8 Gas Pipeline Installation
CLIENT: Lotos Petrobaltic Date : 13.06.2016
Engineering
Comments : The response to : Installation Engineering Report Document
Document Type : Report
Document No.: Z12/112996-ENG-PT-00003 Revision : 00 Date : 10.06.2016
Document Title : Pipeline Installation Analysis Report
Received by : M. Maciejewski Date : 13.06.2016 Transmittal No. CSL-OPS-P422-DTN-004
Item Reference Comment Comment Contractor’s

By Response
1. Section 1.2 First paragraph reads “The objective of this A. Wojcikowski Noted and will correct to
Objective document is to review the process of laying the 4” use 4.5”OD
coil tubing pipeline,” (20.06.2016)
Pipeline is 4.5”OD, please add ND or use OD

2. Section 2.4 Second paragraph reads “The roller box A. Wojcikowski Text amended to “The
Stinger Design arrangement must be such that they do not risk roller box arrangement
damage to the coating under the loads from the (21.06.2016)
must be such that they do
pipelay analysis.” not risk damage to the
coating under the loads
LPB question is, how to arrange this for protecting from the pipelay analysis.
coating from side loads, any special material for The rollers must rotate
rollers (e.g. Teflon) or another polymer? freely and contact surfaces
consist of a material which
has minimal risk of coating
damage. The pipe should
not contact any surface
which is fixed and cannot
move relative to the pipe,
unless it can be
demonstrated that coating
damage will not occur.”
3. Section 3.1 Third paragraph reads “A preliminary dynamic A. Wojcikowski For clarity text changed to:
General analysis is performed to determine typical limiting
sea state for pipelay based on the pipe behaviour, (21.06.2016) “A preliminary dynamic
although the limits will require details of the analysis is performed to
proposed vessel to be confirmed.” determine the typical
limiting sea state for
pipelay based on the pipe
LPB asks whether detailed dynamic analysis will be
prepared by Contractor later on or for this purpose behaviour and loadings /
as noted is it sufficient to determine sea state moment imparted onto the
limitations? pipe.
The selected Installation

Contractor shall perform a
full dynamic analysis
based on the actual vessel
proposed and final stinger
design, confirming the pipe
loadings and limiting sea
states for installation.”
Sheet 1 of 3
By Response
4. Section 3.3 Third paragraph reads “With reference to the A. Wojcikowski The behavior of the pipe at
Effect of Zap- analysis output below, it can be seen that the stress the joint is identical
increase at the Zap-Lok™ joint ends is relatively (21.06.2016)
Lok™ on between CTP and API 5L
Normal Lay low, with the stress across the main part of the joint, in the absence of any
significantly less due to the double wall thickness.” bending and ovality. The
ovality may affect the
Was this analysis prepared for CTP (Coiled Tubing bending capacity slightly;
Pipeline) or anther kind of pipe? Maybe this however the bell forming
behaviour can be quite different for CTP, when process removes some of
analysis did for pipe according to API 5L? this. For the purpose of
the Orcaflex analysis this
is a global analysis to
determine the effect of the
rigid section assuming no
smooth transition from the
joint area to the pipe.
5. Section 3.4 General comment. M. Maciejewski Noted and will amend
Start-Up (21.06.2016) relevant document section
Please add information that LPB have to pick-up accordingly.
buoyancy buoy with wire attached to pipe on the
bottom.
6. Section 3.4 Second paragraph reads “The first stage involves A. Wojcikowski All winches should have a
Start-Up recovery of the HDD end, which with reference to load readout; however
the recovery table in Appendix A, should be (21.06.2016)
their accuracy at low loads
performed with a constant A&R winch line pull of must not be accurate.
approximately 1 tonne.”
To be accurate in the
Does this mean all winches need to have wire load measurement, a loadcell
indicator with scale? Please answer, if other may be attached to the
equipment needs load indication, please let us diverter sheave location.
know?
7. Section 3.6 Third paragraph reads “During detail engineering A. Wojcikowski Noted and wording
Abandonment the required tensions for each abandonment depth amended. The Installation
may be defined to a greater level of accuracy but (21.06.2016)
& Recovery Contractor should perform
are expected to be in the region of 1 – 1.5 tonnes.” this as part of the
Installation Engineering
Is detailed engineering required? Maybe installation and insert the tensions
manual with safety procedures and working required in their Offshore
procedures will cover this mentioned by Contractor Procedure.
phase?
8. Section 3.8.3 General comment. A. Wojcikowski Noted and wording

Conclusion (21.06.2016) amended.
From conclusion point of view, in LPB opinion it’s
good to add information that DP vessel is required Re-numbered to section
instead of Anchor Mooring vessel. Please if in next 3.8.4
document particular information won’t be written as
well or combined in shallow water region?
9. Section 4.1 First paragraph reads “The stinger should a M. Maciejewski Noted and will amend
Stinger minimum of approximately 40m radius and 30m relevant document section
length in order to maintain the pipeline within its (21.06.2016)
accordingly.
yield strength during laying.”
Please add this information into document RPT-

00005, section 3.11
10. Section 4.1 Third paragraph reads “The spacing between roller M. Maciejewski Noted and will amend
Stinger boxes should be in the region of 5m. Spacing’s relevant document section
greater than this may increase the local bending (21.06.2016)
accordingly.
moment on the pipeline due to the larger span
between roller boxes.”
Please add this information into document RPT-

00005, section 3.11
Sheet 2 of 3
By Response
11. Section 5.0 Second paragraph reads “The pipeline limitations A. Wojcikowski Proposed change for
Weather can be determined by full dynamic analysis once the clarity is as follows:
installation vessel is known; however indications are (21.06.2016)
Limitations “The pipeline limitations
that the pipeline is susceptibility to direct wave
action and movement in the shallower water can be determined by full
sections.” dynamic analysis once the
Installation Contractors
LPB suppose that potential installation vessel was proposed vessel is known.
presented during this document preparation, wasn’t The response of the
it? vessel is dependent upon
the hull profile, beam,
working draught, length
and stability based on the
deck load it carries.
Indications are however

that the pipeline is
susceptibility to direct
wave action and
movement in the shallower
water sections. This is
independent of the vessel
motions, but a function of
the catenary profile,
stinger design and
configuration. Indication
as that the limiting sea
state will be in the region
of Hs 1m to Hs 2m,
subject to the wave
heading and period.”
12. Section 6.0 Fifth paragraph reads “In the shallow water of 14m A. Wojcikowski Noted and will add
Temporary the pipeline is very sensitive to the wave period and additional suggested
height and thus may be unstable in relatively benign (21.06.2016)
Stability wording into this section
Requirements conditions.”
For this reason, LPB is going to use mattresses to

protect left pipeline from November till April 2017,
after that in spring recovery of abandoned pipe will
start.
13. Appendix A – Normal Lay Analysis Table – 14m water depth A. Wojcikowski There is no margin or
Lay Table results for 98m layback distance. factor of safety applied to
(21.06.2016)
the calculated footprint
LPB asking is it recommended parameters to keep within the Lay Analysis
and results, does it have any margin? Especially for table.
this water depth region.
14.
Sheet 3 of 3
REVISION RECORD SHEET
Date Revision Status Reason for Change(s)
11.08.2016 02 IFC Issued for Construction
01.07.2016 01 IFA See attached comment sheet(s)
10.06.2016 00 IFK Issued for Review
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 General .................................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 Objective................................................................................................................................................ 3
1.3 CODES & STANDARDS ............................................................................................................................ 3
2.0 PIPELAY LIMITS ............................................................................................................................ 4
2.1 Pipeline Stress ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Tensioner Load ...................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Minimum Pipeline Tension .................................................................................................................... 4
2.4 Stinger design. ....................................................................................................................................... 4
3.0 LAY ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 General .................................................................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Normal Lay ............................................................................................................................................. 5
3.3 Effect of Zap-Lok™ on Normal Lay ......................................................................................................... 7
3.4 Start-Up ................................................................................................................................................. 9
3.5 Laydown .............................................................................................................................................. 10
3.6 Abandonment & Recovery .................................................................................................................. 10
3.7 Effect of Current .................................................................................................................................. 11
3.8 Preliminary Dynamic Analysis .............................................................................................................. 12
4.0 LAY SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................... 15
4.1 Stinger.................................................................................................................................................. 15
4.2 Station Keeping System ....................................................................................................................... 15
4.3 Tensioner ............................................................................................................................................. 15
5.0 WEATHER LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................ 16
6.0 TEMPORARY STABILITY REQUIREMENTS................................................................................... 17
APPENDIX A – Lay Tables....................................................................................................................... 18
APPENDIX B – Dynamic Analysis Results ............................................................................................... 27

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Lotos Petrobaltic are planning an offshore gas pipeline which will connect a production platform
located on the B8 field to a combined heat and power plant (CHP) situated onshore in
Wladyslawowo. Prior to being transported in the pipeline the natural gas will be separated from the
crude on the production platform. The platform is located in the Poland exclusive economic zone
(EEZ) in the Baltic Sea. The B8 field spans an area of 387.1sqare km which was defined in the
Concession No. 1/2006 on 5th September 2006 and amended by the Minister for the Environment
No. DGiKGe-4770-69/4579/09/MO on 26 October 2009.
1.2 Objective
The objective of this document is to review the process of laying the 4.5” OD coil tubing pipeline,
defining the laying parameter and quantifying the effect of the Zap-Lok™ connection on the laying
operation.
The document does not address the Zap-Lok™ connection procedure or the vessel deck layout /
operations and is instead focussed on the functional requirements of the stinger and vessel to safely
lay the pipeline.
1.3 CODES & STANDARDS
DNV-OS-F101, “Submarine Pipeline Systems”,

DNV RP-C205 “Environmental Conditions and Environmental Loads,

2.0 PIPELAY LIMITS

The limits for pipelay primarily consist of the following aspects.
 Maximum pipeline stress, strain or bending moment.
 Maximum tensioner load
 Minimum pipeline tension.
 Pipeline behaviour on the stinger
2.1 Pipeline Stress

The maximum stress in the pipeline should typically be maintained below the yield strength of the
material to minimise the risk of residual curvature being introduced into the pipe. Residual curvature
can induce torsion in the pipeline which will require to be managed during the joint connection.
Code requirements vary for the allowable stress; however, since the limiting yield stress is to
minimise residual curvature only, the key criteria for the local pipe in terms of integrity is the
buckling capacity.
2.2 Tensioner Load

The tensioner requirement will be determined by the pipelay analysis and tensioner selected on the
basis of the loads predicted.
2.3 Minimum Pipeline Tension

The pipeline must be laid under tension; however compressive loads may occur during the operation
due to wave action.
2.4 Stinger design.

The pipeline is being laid in an empty condition and thus is very light. The behaviour of the pipeline
on the stinger requires consideration to determine what functional requirements are needed from
the stinger, i.e. side rollers.
The roller box arrangement must be such that they do not risk damage to the coating under the
loads from the pipelay analysis. The rollers must rotate freely and contact surfaces consist of a
material which has minimal risk of coating damage. The pipe should not contact any surface which is
fixed and cannot move relative to the pipe, unless it can be demonstrated that coating damage will
not occur.

3.0 LAY ANALYSIS
3.1 General
The pipelay analysis has been conducted in order to determine the pipelay settings, including the
stinger length and radius plus the sensitivity of the pipeline catenary to ship motions in the various
water depths.
The document addresses the normal laying operation firstly in order to determine the required
stinger configuration and lay tensions. The start-up analysis will be addressed once these normal lay
parameters are determined.
A preliminary dynamic analysis is performed to determine the typical limiting sea state for pipelay
based on the pipe behaviour and loadings / moment imparted onto the pipe.
The selected Installation Contractor shall perform a full dynamic analysis based on the actual vessel
proposed and final stinger design, confirming the pipe loadings and limiting sea states for
installation.
3.2 Normal Lay

The normal lay analysis is the process of laying the continuous section of coiled tubing. The key
aspect to this is determining the allowable footprint of the vessel using various stinger configuration
for the different water depth, taking into consideration the pipeline stress and tensions.
The footprint assessment has been performed for the following water depths. The pipelay is most
sensitive to the shallow depths.
Water Stinger Stinger Allowable Nominal top Nominal tdp

depth length radius footprint +/-m tension (tonnes) tension (tonnes)
14m 30m 40m +/-1m 1.33 1.18
20m 30m 40m +/-2m 0.96 0.77
30m 30m 40m +/-3m 1.14 0.89
50m 30m 40m +/-7m 1.10 0.72
90m 30m 40m +/-12m 1.63 1.00
90m 45m 40m +/-15m 1.38 0.75
Table 1 - Allowable vessel footprint.
The full results are in Appendix A. The allowable footprint of the ship in 14 – 20m of water is small.
The limiting factor if the ship moves too far forward is high tensions. If the ship moves too far back
the pipe touchdown will be in compression or the bending stress will exceed SMYS.
As the water becomes deeper the footprint increases and the limiting factor for pipeline becomes
keeping a positive touchdown tension.

The touchdown tension can be increased by allowing the pipeline to flood during lay, which will
increase the tensions by approximately 1.5 – 2.0 tonnes (results not included in this report revision).
The footprint in deep water can be increased and thus options to reduce the bottom (tdp) tension
can be achieved by use of a stinger extension of circa 15m. This will allow a steeper catenary profile.
The range of permissible pipeline catenary profiles is illustrated below in plots from the 14m and
90m water depth simulations. It can be seen that in 14m the catenary is tight and there is little
movement possible from the ship. In 90m of water the catenary is steeper and more compliant.
Figure 1 - Pipelay in 14m water depth (range of permissible catenaries)

Figure 2 - Pipelay in 90m water depth (range of permissible catenaries)
It should be noted that the laying of the coil tubing is a continuous process, where-as the connection
of the Zap-Lok™ joint is the stage where the ship is stationary.
Therefore the laying rate for the pipeline will need to be closely monitored to match the pipeline
pay-out rate and ship forward speed.
3.3 Effect of Zap-Lok™ on Normal Lay

The effect of the Zap-Lok™ connection being deployed over the stinger has been assessed by a set of
snapshots of the stress in the pipeline as the connections pass over the roller boxes which create the
highest stresses.
The analysis has considered a Zap-Lok™ pup-piece of 3m in length.
With reference to the analysis output below, it can be seen that the stress increase at the Zap-Lok™
joint ends is relatively low, with the stress across the main part of the joint, significantly less due to
the double wall thickness.

Figure 3 - Effect of Zap-Lok™ on pipeline stress over stinger roller boxes..
The increase in stress on the pipeline at the Zap-Lok™ interface is estimated to be in the region of 4-
5%.

3.4 Start-Up
The start-up of the pipelay is the most sensitive operation, since the ship will be in the shallowest
water and this will be the first Zap-Lok™ joint to deploy.
The first stage involves recovery of the HDD end, via a pre-laid recovery pennant and surface buoy.
With reference to the recovery table in Appendix A, the HDD recovery should be performed with a
constant A&R winch line pull of approximately 1 tonne. To monitor this tension a calibrated load cell
should be provided on the deck sheave diverter.
The ship will have to move back during this phase and hence maintaining the winch in constant
tension mode will control the catenary profile and hence pipeline stresses.
The critical phase is as the pipeline contacts the roller boxes at the top of the roller, which is where
the over bend or the pipe will be formed. The tension in the winch should be increased to
approximately 1.3 tonnes to achieve this and pull through the open tensioner.
The pipeline recovery is illustrated below with the pipeline approximately 10m from the stinger.
Touchdown point
Pipeline end
Figure 4 - Pipeline Initiation in 14m water depth.
During the connection of the next pipeline joint using Zap-Lok™, the pipeline will have to be
restrained on deck and hence the station keeping requirements of the vessel will be as per the
normal lay analysis. The allowable footprint for the nominal 100m layback distance configuration will
be circa +/-1m.
The initiation of the pipeline with the Zap-Lok™ joint has been addressed in the previous section
where the lay of the connection over the stinger introduced a small increase in the stresses. The
commencement of laying should maintain a layback distance of approximately 100m to ensure the
pipeline stress are maintained within the SMYS plus ensure the pipeline is laid with a positive residual
tension.

3.5 Laydown
The laydown of the pipeline will be performed in circa 88m water depth. The results of the analysis
of the operation are contained within Appendix A.
The laydown can be performed using equal ship moves and pay-out length as per the table, whereby
the ship moves, for example, 10m as 10m of A&R wire is paid out.
Alternatively the pipeline can be paid out, initially with a constant tension of 1.5 tonnes, but reducing
as the pipeline exits the stinger and the stresses drop off significantly.
The pipeline laydown is illustrated below with the pipeline approximately 10m from the stinger.
Touchdown point
Pipeline end
Figure 5 - Pipeline Laydown in 88m water depth.
3.6 Abandonment & Recovery

The abandonment of the pipeline at the emptying of the last reel on deck can be performed by
maintaining a constant tension on the A&R winch as the ship moves forward
The recovery of the pipeline is the opposite of abandonment and will involve the same philosophy.
The water depth varies along the route and hence the abandonment tension will also vary between
approximately 1 – 1.5 tonnes. The Installation Contractor should perform the analysis of these
tensions as part of the Installation Engineering and insert the tensions required in their Offshore
Procedure.

3.7 Effect of Current

The effect of current on the pipeline catenary has been investigated by applying a current of 1 knots
perpendicular to the pipeline.
As can be seen from the illustrated below looking from above, the pipeline is bent in the direction of
the current, which will move the touchdown point off the lay route plus introduce a bending at the
stinger tip.
OrcaFlex 9.8e: S-NL-4-30m - current.dat (modified 14:38 on 31/05/2016 by OrcaFlex 9.8e)
Azimuth=270; Elevation=90 Y
Statics Complete
To counteract this ship should change heading to keep the pipeline within
20 mthe stinger plus offset into
the current to pull the pipeline back on the laying route. X
Moved by current Pipeline route
Figure 6 - Effect of current on pipelay and procedure to correct lay.
The pipelay tensions and stresses are not significantly affected by the ‘crabbing’ of the ship into the
current.

3.8 Preliminary Dynamic Analysis

The preliminary dynamic analysis has been performed to assess the sensitivity of the pipeline to the
vessel motions, both in terms of the tensions and any compression observed, but also the impact on
the pipelay stresses.
The most critical case of 14m water depth and 90m water depth has been assessed.
Regular waves have been used for the analysis and given the laying direction being predominately in
a Northerly direction waves have assumed as reaching the vessel as quartering head seas.
3.8.1 14m Water depth

The plots of pipeline stresses as a result of the following wave conditions are given in Appendix B.
 Wave height 2m, period 5 & 7 seconds

 Wave height 4m, period 5 & 7 seconds
The response is highly dependent upon the wave height and period which in turn is subject to and
very sensitive to the vessel used.
In general, the pipeline stresses are controlled by use of a stinger in the upper part, with the most
dynamic section, where the pipe departs the stinger seeing greater stress variations. The sagbend or
section from stinger to seabed sees increasing fluctuations in the stresses as a result of waves
passing and ‘lifting’ the catenary, due to the pipe being relatively light compared to the cross-
sectional area presented.
The pipe tension at the top of the stinger is also plotted for the most onerous case, which illustrates
the potential for the pipe to go into compression in severe weather, plus very high snatch loads up to
4 tonnes (40kN).
OrcaFlex 9.8e: S-NL-4-14m-H2m-T5s.dat (modified 10:28 on 01/06/2016 by OrcaFlex 9.8e)
Time History: Line13 Effective Tension at End A
50
40
Line13 Effective Tension (kN) at End A
30
20
10
Figure 7 - Top tensions in quartering sea H4m, T7s

-10
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (s)
Part of this behaviour is due to the stinger design, which should consider side rollers to encapsulate
the pipeline more. The behaviour of the pipe on the stinger with just V-rollers is illustrated below.
The indications from the pipelay analysis are that the limiting heave of the vessel at the stern will be
in the region of +/-1m.
Figure 8 - Pipeline behaviour on stinger in extreme conditions.

Note in the above illustrations the roller boxes are red when the pipeline is in contact and light blue
when not in contact.
3.8.2 90m water depth

The response of the pipeline in the deeper water is not as severe, mainly due to the steeper angle of
the pipe at departure and thus being less influenced by direct wave action.
The plot of stress and tension is illustrated in Appendix B for the most extreme case analysis for 14m
water depth.
The pipeline stresses tend to increase across a greater range on the stinger with a more moderate
variation in the sagbend. The pipeline tension varying significantly; however, the movement is lesser
than for 14m water depth, plus the pipeline remains within the stinger V-rollers.
The indications from the pipelay analysis are that the limiting heave of the vessel at the stern will be
in the region of +/-2m.

3.8.3 Minimum laying Radius.

The minimum radius in which the pipeline can be laid on the seabed is determined by the following
equation;
Where;
T = tension in pipeline at the seabed or touchdown point

R = Radius of turn along pipeline route
wsub = Submerged weight of pipe
µ = Friction between pipe and seabed (nominally 0.5)
with reference to Section 3.2 the bottom tensions vary between approximately 0.7 tonnes and 1.2
tonnes assuming pipeline is being laid in the middle of the ship’s allowable footprint.
This would give a minimum allowable laying radius of approximately 400 – 800m.
The tensions are likely to vary significantly at the shallow water section; therefore, the route should
be as straight as possible to minimise the risk of the pipeline being pulled out of its lay curve.
As the water depth increases the allowable footprint of the vessel increases also, and thus there is
more scope to maintain the lay radii of the route (especially the platform approach) to radii in the
region of 500m.
Once the curves along the pipeline route have been determined the analysis should be consulted to
confirm the feasibility of laying such curves.
3.8.4 Conclusion
The preliminary dynamic analysis has indicated that the pipeline is susceptible to large motions from
direction wave actions in the shallower water depths. The stinger design should consider this
movement in its selection and design.
The limiting installation sea state is discussed later in the document, but generally in the absence of
specific vessel being known the limitations for pipelay should be considered as the heave at the stern
of the vessel of +/-1m for 14m water depth and +/-2m for the 90m depth.
These values can be revised upon identification of the proposed vessel and detailed engineering.
The vessel planned to be used for the installation will be Dynamically Positioned (DP); however
subject to the station keeping capability of the vessel (i.e. vessel size, number of thrusters and
power, etc) and weather during installation, the vessel may not be able to hold station accurately
enough to prevent damage to the pipe. Therefore, consideration should be given to a mooring
system aft which the vessel can attach to, controlling the position of the vessel more accurately.

4.0 LAY SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

The principal requirements for the lay system is a stinger of sufficient radius and roller box distances
to ensure the pipeline stress is not beyond code requirement and such that the maximum expected
allowable installation can be sustained with minimal risk to pipe integrity.
4.1 Stinger
The stinger should a minimum of approximately 40m radius and 30m length in order to maintain the
pipeline within its yield strength during laying.
A tighter radius may be possible; however, this will require closer scrutiny of the bending moments
applied to the pipeline and the risk of residual twist in the pipeline from any plastic deformation
resulting.
The spacing between roller boxes should be in the region of 5m. Spacing’s greater than this may
increase the local bending moment on the pipeline due to the larger span between roller boxes.
4.2 Station Keeping System

The station keeping requirement for the shallow water sections are onerous due to the tight
catenary required.
The installation may have to take place in very benign conditions plus the positioning system should
consider the back-up of 2 trailing mooring lines from the ship stern to control the surge of the vessel
whilst the pipeline is being recovered and the first couple of Zap-Lok™ joints are being made up.
Beyond approximately 30m water depth the station keeping requirements of the vessel are less
onerous.
4.3 Tensioner
The pipelay tensions are a function of the catenary profile; however, a maximum tension of
approximately 5 tonnes is recommended, since at tensions above this level the pipeline stresses are
potentially excessive.

5.0 WEATHER LIMITATIONS

The weather limitations for the pipelay operation are a function of a variety of considerations,
namely;
 Pipeline stress
 Pipeline tension
 Pipeline buckling resistance in compression.
 Stinger seabed clearance.
 Vessel response / motions.
 Current speeds
 Wave height, period and direction
 Safe handling operations on deck.
 Confidence in the weather forecast.
 Ship forward speed.
The pipeline limitations can be determined by full dynamic analysis once the Installation Contractors
proposed vessel is known. The response of the vessel is dependent upon the hull profile, beam,
working draught, length and stability based on the deck load it carries.
Indications are however that the pipeline is susceptibility to direct wave action and movement in the
shallower water sections. This is independent of the vessel motions, but a function of the catenary
profile, stinger design and configuration. Indication as that the limiting sea state will be in the region
of Hs 1m to Hs 2m, subject to the wave heading and period.
When considering the limiting weather conditions, the accelerations at the stinger need to be
understood in terms of the limits for safe personnel working and whilst installation sea states beyond
this limit may theoretically be possible but practicality and safe limits may preclude laying in higher
weather conditions.
The currents speed may require adjustment of the ship heading which may bring waves onto the
vessel in a more unfavourable (or better) direction and therefore the maximum extent of ship
‘crabbing’ required should be determined by way of closer examination of the tidal current speeds.
This is especially the case in the shallow water areas.
Due to the installation being performed as continuous unspooling of the pipeline then pauses for the
Zap-Lok™ connection there are plenty opportunities to consider a laydown of the pipeline should the
forecast wave conditions be deemed unsafe to continue.

6.0 TEMPORARY STABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The temporary stability of the pipeline has been assessed assuming the pipeline is empty.
The weather conditions are undefined since the month for laying the pipeline is not yet confirmed,
but it is expected to be in the summer season.
The pipeline is very light and hence the limiting conditions will be assessed for stability in the
following water depths.
Water depth Maximum H Maximum current

(no current) (Hs 2m)
14m 1.5 – 2.0m <0.1m/s
25m 3 - 3.5m ~0.6m/s
35m 4 - 4.5m n/a
50m 5 – 6m n/a
70m 6 – 7m n/a
90m 7 – 8m n/a
Table 1 - Estimated conditions to destabilise the pipeline (preliminary)
In the absence of any wave action the pipeline appears to be stable in currents up to circa 1.5knots,
measured 1m above the seabed.
In the shallow water of 14m the pipeline is very sensitive to the wave period and height and thus
may be unstable in relatively benign conditions. Concrete mattresses will be installed by the
Installation Contractor to aid stability of the pipeline
As the pipeline moves into the deeper water sections beyond approximately 25 – 30m in will be less
affected by wave action; however, it will be more exposed to swell waves, which can penetrate
deeper through the water column.

APPENDIX A – Lay Tables

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Seabed friction 0.5 depth 14 m
Pipe weight subsea 9.44 kg/m (dry) SMYS 448 Mpa
Stinger
Stinger radius 40 m length 30 m
Layback Tensions (tonnes) Max bend

distance Catenary moment Max stress Ship move
(m) Top tdp length (m) (kNm) (Mpa) (m)
54 -0.2 -0.36 58.0 18.0 327
59 0.0 -0.18 62.0 18.0 328
61 0.1 -0.04 64.0 18.1 328
65 0.3 0.11 68.0 18.0 329 -1.0
72 0.4 0.28 75.0 18.0 329 -0.8
77 0.6 0.46 80.0 18.3 334 -0.6
83 0.8 0.66 85.0 18.2 334 -0.4
88 1.0 0.89 90.0 18.4 339 -0.2
98 1.3 1.18 100.0 18.7 346 0.0
108 1.7 1.57 110.0 19.0 353 0.2
118 2.2 2.08 120.0 19.4 362 0.4
134 3.0 2.82 135.0 20.1 378 0.6
154 4.0 3.89 155.0 19.3 369 0.8
179 5.6 5.49 180.0 17.2 338 1.0
214 8.2 8.06 215.0 14.7 304
Notes:
1. Layback distance is from stern to touchdown point on seabed
2. Catenary length is from stern to touchdown point on seabed
3. Ship move is the allowable distance forward or aft from a chosen layback distance.

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Stinger

58 -0.2 -0.40 64.0 0.0 408
62 0.0 -0.18 68.0 0.0 328 -2.0
70 0.2 0.03 75.0 0.0 330 -1.5
75 0.4 0.24 80.0 0.0 332 -1.0
86 0.7 0.47 90.0 0.0 332 -0.5
96 1.0 0.77 100.0 0.0 334 0.0
112 1.4 1.20 115.0 0.0 338 0.5
132 2.0 1.84 135.0 0.0 350 1.0
158 3.1 2.93 160.0 0.0 368 1.5
198 5.2 5.02 200.0 0.0 402 2.0
269 9.7 9.48 270.0 0.0 341
Notes:

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Stinger

64 0.0 -0.28 75.0 0.0 434
70 0.2 -0.09 80.0 0.0 330
81 0.3 0.09 90.0 0.0 331 -3.0
87 0.5 0.30 95.0 0.0 332 -2.0
103 0.8 0.54 110.0 0.0 335 -1.0
119 1.1 0.89 125.0 0.0 337 0.0
140 1.7 1.43 145.0 0.0 340 1.0
171 2.6 2.39 175.0 0.0 349 2.0
222 4.6 4.30 225.0 0.0 378 3.0
313 9.3 9.05 315.0 0.0 419
Notes:

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Stinger

83 0.4 0.00 105.0 0.0 417
89 0.5 0.08 110.0 0.0 360 -6.8
96 0.6 0.18 115.0 0.0 332 -5.1
108 0.7 0.32 125.0 0.0 334 -3.4
120 0.9 0.49 135.0 0.0 335 -1.7
131 1.1 0.72 145.0 0.0 337 0
153 1.4 1.05 165.0 0.0 340 1.7
180 1.9 1.56 190.0 0.0 345 3.4
216 2.8 2.39 225.0 0.0 351 5.1
268 4.3 3.90 275.0 0.0 374 6.8
325 7.6 7.21 330.0 0.0 401
Notes:

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Stinger

109 0.8 0.18 155.0 0.0 489
117 0.9 0.24 160.0 0.0 466
130 1.0 0.33 170.0 0.0 435 -12.0
143 1.1 0.43 180.0 0.0 393 -9.0
156 1.2 0.57 190.0 0.0 342 -6.0
169 1.4 0.75 200.0 0.0 340 -3.0
192 1.6 1.00 220.0 0.0 342 0.0
215 2.0 1.35 240.0 0.0 345 3.0
248 2.5 1.85 270.0 0.0 349 6.0
291 3.2 2.60 310.0 0.0 356 9.0
314 4.6 4.00 330.0 0.0 373 12.0
Notes:

Normal Lay Analysis
Water
Stinger

109 0.8 0.16 155.0 0.0 334 -15.0
117 0.9 0.23 160.0 0.0 335 -12.0
130 0.9 0.32 170.0 0.0 336 -9.0
143 1.1 0.43 180.0 0.0 337 -6.0
156 1.2 0.57 190.0 0.0 338 -3.0
169 1.4 0.75 200.0 0.0 340 0.0
192 1.6 1.00 220.0 0.0 342 3.0
215 2.0 1.35 240.0 0.0 345 6.0
248 2.5 1.85 270.0 0.0 349 9.0
291 3.2 2.60 310.0 0.0 356 12.0
314 4.6 4.00 330.0 0.0 373 15.0
Notes:

HDD Pipeline Recovery
Water
Stinger
Length of Layback Tensions (tonnes) Max bend

A&R wire distance Pipeline Catenary moment Max stress
out (m) (m) A&R Wire tdp length (m) (kNm) (Mpa)
80.0 88 1.0 0.8 90.0 4.8 92
70.0 88 1.1 1.0 90.0 4.0 78
60.0 93 1.1 1.0 95.0 3.9 75
50.0 93 1.1 1.0 95.0 3.8 73
40.0 93 1.1 1.0 95.0 3.6 70
30.0 93 1.1 1.0 95.0 3.4 66
20.0 98 1.0 1.0 100.0 2.9 57
10.0 98 1.0 0.9 100.0 2.2 45
0.0 98 1.3 1.2 100.0 18.7 346
Notes:

Pipeline Laydown at Platform
Water
Stinger
Length of Layback Tensions (tonnes) Max bend

A&R wire distance Pipeline Catenary moment Max stress
out (m) (m) A&R Wire tdp length (m) (kNm) (Mpa)
0 184 1.5 0.9 212.0 17.5 324
20 184 1.5 0.9 212.0 18.2 336
45 184 1.5 0.9 212.0 4.2 81
70 184 1.4 0.9 212.0 4.3 83
95 180 1.3 0.9 207.9 4.6 87
120 178 1.2 0.8 206.0 5.0 95
145 176 1.0 0.7 204.2 5.4 101
170 178 0.9 0.6 206.0 4.7 88
195 179 0.9 0.6 207.5 1.5 30
Notes:

APPENDIX B – Dynamic Analysis Results


Range Graph: Line13 Max von Mises Stress, t = 20.000 to 25.000s
Minimum Maximum Mean Allowable Stress

Line13 Max von Mises Stress (kPa), t = 20.000 to 25.000s
400E3
350E3
300E3
250E3
200E3
150E3
100E3
50E3
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Arc Length (m)
14m water depth - Pipeline Stress - Quartering Seas H 2m, T 5s


400E3
350E3
300E3
250E3
200E3
150E3
100E3
50E3
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Arc Length (m)



400E3
300E3
200E3
100E3
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Arc Length (m)


400E3
300E3
200E3
100E3
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Arc Length (m)

OrcaFlex 9.8e: S-NL-4-90m.sim (modified 16:05 on 31/05/2016 by OrcaFlex 9.8e)

Range Graph: Line7 Max von Mises Stress, over Whole Simulation

Line7 Max von Mises Stress (kPa), t = -5.000 to 25.000s
400E3
300E3
200E3
100E3
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Arc Length (m)

OrcaFlex 9.8e: S-NL-4-90m - H4m T7s.dat (modified 11:02 on 01/06/2016 by OrcaFlex 9.8e)
Time History: Line7 Effective Tension at End A
35
30
Line7 Effective Tension (kN) at End A
25
20
15
10
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (s)
90m water depth - Pipeline Tension at Top of Stinger - Quartering Seas H 4m, T 7s

LOTOS SIWZ A1-3 Z12 112996-EnG-RPT-00003 R02 IFC Pipeline Installation Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LOTOS SIWZ A1-3 Z12 112996-EnG-RPT-00003 R02 IFC Pipeline Installation Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIPELINE INSTALLATION ANALYSIS REPORT

PIPELINE INSTALLATION ANALYSIS REPORT

Client: LOTOS PETROBALTIC S.A.

Date Revision Description of Revision Prepared Checked Approved

11.08.2016 02 Issued for Construction M. Bowie G. Cowie A. Cowie

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 1 of 30

Item Reference Comment Comment Contractor’s

Pipeline is 4.5”OD, please add ND or use OD

The selected Installation

8. Section 3.8.3 General comment. A. Wojcikowski Noted and wording

Please add this information into document RPT-

Please add this information into document RPT-

Indications are however

For this reason, LPB is going to use mattresses to

REVISION RECORD SHEET

Date Revision Status Reason for Change(s)

11.08.2016 02 IFC Issued for Construction

01.07.2016 01 IFA See attached comment sheet(s)

10.06.2016 00 IFK Issued for Review

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 2 of 30

1.3 CODES & STANDARDS

DNV-OS-F101, “Submarine Pipeline Systems”,

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 3 of 30

2.0 PIPELAY LIMITS

2.1 Pipeline Stress

2.2 Tensioner Load

2.3 Minimum Pipeline Tension

2.4 Stinger design.

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 4 of 30

3.0 LAY ANALYSIS

3.2 Normal Lay

Water Stinger Stinger Allowable Nominal top Nominal tdp

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 5 of 30

Figure 1 - Pipelay in 14m water depth (range of permissible catenaries)

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 6 of 30

Figure 2 - Pipelay in 90m water depth (range of permissible catenaries)

3.3 Effect of Zap-Lok™ on Normal Lay

The analysis has considered a Zap-Lok™ pup-piece of 3m in length.

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 7 of 30

Figure 3 - Effect of Zap-Lok™ on pipeline stress over stinger roller boxes..

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 8 of 30

Figure 4 - Pipeline Initiation in 14m water depth.

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 9 of 30

Figure 5 - Pipeline Laydown in 88m water depth.

3.6 Abandonment & Recovery

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 10 of 30

3.7 Effect of Current

Moved by current Pipeline route

Figure 6 - Effect of current on pipelay and procedure to correct lay.

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 11 of 30

3.8 Preliminary Dynamic Analysis

3.8.1 14m Water depth

 Wave height 2m, period 5 & 7 seconds

Figure 7 - Top tensions in quartering sea H4m, T7s

Figure 8 - Pipeline behaviour on stinger in extreme conditions.

3.8.2 90m water depth

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 13 of 30

3.8.3 Minimum laying Radius.

T = tension in pipeline at the seabed or touchdown point

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 14 of 30

4.0 LAY SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

4.2 Station Keeping System

Z12/112996-ENG-RPT-00003 Rev 02 11.08.2016 Page 15 of 30

5.0 WEATHER LIMITATIONS