See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337514744

A Simulation Program for Load-Out Operation Using Self-Propelled Modular

Transporters

Conference Paper · June 2019

DOI: 10.1115/OMAE2019-95673

CITATIONS READS
0 4,295

3 authors:

Zunfeng Du Haiming Zhu

Tianjin University Tianjin University
39 PUBLICATIONS   239 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dong Xu
Tianjin University
94 PUBLICATIONS   864 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vortex-Induced Vibration: Modelling, Simulation & Experiment View project

Study on coupling mechanisms of vortex-induced vibration of flexible submarine pipelines and 3-dimensional local scour of sandy seabed View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Haiming Zhu on 17 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 DRAFT
Proceedings of the ASME 2019 38th International
Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
OMAE2019
June 9-14, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland

OMAE2019-95673

A SIMULATION PROGRAM FOR LOAD-OUT OPERATION USING SELF-PROPELLED

MODULAR TRANSPORTERS

Zunfeng Du1 Haiming Zhu Dong Xu

School of Civil Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, State Key Laboratory of
Tianjin University Tianjin University Hydraulic Engineering Simulation
Tianjin, China Tianjin, China and Safety, Tianjin University
Tianjin, China
Collaborative Innovation Center
for Advanced Ship and Deep-Sea
Exploration
Shanghai, China

ABSTRACT can be represented by the model in Figure 2. The platform is

Self-propelled modular transporters (SPMTs) are special
vehicles designed for transporting massive objects. It is
becoming popular to transport offshore structure modules
onboard using SPMTs in recent years. The operation is a high-
risk task which needs to be carefully planned. This paper aimed
at developing a load-out simulation program that can be utilized
to improve the existing planning method. To achieve this goal,
the risks in load-outs were addressed, and an analysis procedure
was established based on the principle of SPMT hydraulic
system and ship hydrostatics. We built the simulation program
on the basis of the analysis procedure. It enables users to
practice load-out operations in a virtual environment. By using
the program, engineers can obtain an overview of the load-out
process and a clear knowledge of the risks that will arise. The
load-out plan can be made, verified, and optimized beforehand,
which is quite beneficial to minimize the risks and get well
prepared for the operation.
Keywords: SPMT, load-out, simulation, program
INTRODUCTION
Offshore structure modules are constructed in shipyards
onshore before they can be transported away by vessels for
installation. The operation of moving modules onboard is called
load-out. There are several techniques for load-out [1], such as
skidding, lifting, float-on, etc. In this paper, we focused on a
unique load-out method using self-propelled modular
transporters (SPMTs). Figure 1 demonstrates a set of SPMTs
transporting a module in the shipyard. The structure of SPMT
used to carry massive cargos and the large array of wheels can
distribute the weight. A group of SPMT units can be combined
head-to-tail or side-by-side, depending on the dimensions and
weight of the cargo, to meet the needs of transportation. The
power pack units (PPUs) are attached to provide power and
control. The suspensions connect the wheels and the platform.
The length of the suspensions can be adjusted within a range to
adapt to an uneven surface. A complex hydraulic system controls
each suspension individually which enables SPMT to drive,
brake, steer, and lift in a precise manner. Due to their high load
capacity and mobility, SPMTs have been widely used in load-
outs.
In a typical load-out operation (as depicted in Figure 3), the
SPMTs pick up the offshore structure modules from the
assembly area and drive them onto the vessel directly. Due to
their enormous weight (usually thousands of tons or more), the
modules are usually loaded longitudinally onboard, otherwise, a
roll-over of the vessel will very likely occur. Therefore, the
vessel is moored to the bollards with a perpendicular angle to the
wharf. A set of load-out ramps are used for bridging the gap
between the vessel and the wharf so that SPMTs can pass.
Fenders are necessary between that gaps for the anti-collision
purpose. The SPMTs will onboard from stern then drive the
modules to the target position.
Load-out is a high-risk task. There are some detrimental
events that may occur [2]. E.g., if SPMTs are overloaded, the
tires can burst, and the structure can fail. The module might slip
out as a result of unequal load distribution or large inclination

1
Contact author: dzf@tju.edu.cn

1 Copyright © 2019 by ASME

angle. The vessel could be unable to withstand the moment force
and roll-over. Some of the accidents are caused by the
inappropriate setup of SPMT model and vessel, while others are
because of improper operations. These accidents may possibly
cause injuries, fatalities, and serious damage to the module,
SPMTs, and vessel.
Figure 1: A photograph of transporting offshore structure
module by SPMTs in a shipyard. (Source: COOEC).
Figure 2: The simplified model of a 6-axle-line SPMT unit.
In order to minimize the risks, load-out must be well planned
beforehand. Usually, engineers would develop a basic load-out
plan based on their experiences, then making safety checks on
several significant load cases. This method has obvious
limitations. Most of the accidents caused by inappropriate setup
can be avoided, yet those due to improper operations cannot.
When the load-out is in progress, all the environmental factors
change and influence each other dynamically. Engineers and
operators are not clear of what kind of situations would arise, and
how to deal with the situations properly. All in all, the safety of
several load cases cannot guarantee the safety of the whole
process.
The most difficult part is providing a level surface formed by
wharf ground, ramps, and vessel deck to meet the safety
requirements. Since the wharf is fixed and the inclination of
ramps are determined by the wharf-vessel misalignment, the
remaining challenge is to keep heel, trim, and height change of
the vessel within a narrow range. By summing up experiences,
we learn that a few measures are necessary for solving the
problem. Firstly, the initial draught and tide level should be
chosen carefully. As the SPMT moving onto the vessel, the load
on deck increases dramatically, which requires an abundant
ballast adjustment margin. Also, a rising tide can be helpful for
neutralizing the height drop of the deck. Secondly, the movement
of the SPMT should be slow and intermittent, so that the
monitoring and ballasting operations can be performed. Thirdly,
the ballast should be adjusted in real-time by means of ballasting,
de-ballasting, and transferring water inside, depending on the
status of the SPMTs, vessel, and tide.
Figure 3: The typical load-out setup.
Though the measures are known, it is quite difficult to take
them properly on site without practice in advance. It will be
helpful if engineers can practice SPMT load-out operation in a
simulation environment on a computer. However, as far as the
authors know, there are few handy programs available. Some
recent studies are relevant and inspiring. Silvianita et al. [3]
conducted an analysis of time and cost analysis of jacket
structure load-out. Yang et al. [4] develop a load-out design
methodology and numerical evaluation. Sinha et al. [5]
introduced a method of simulating and predicting the series of
loads during Tension Leg Platforms (TLP) load-out. Li and Suo
[6] established a safety assessment approach of load-out
procedures based on unascertained measures. Kurniawan and
Ma [7]present a method of finding a more accurate ballast plan
which considers the flexibility of barge. However, these studies
did not focus on transporting by SPMTs. Ham and Roh [8]
developed a dynamic analysis program for offloading simulation
using SPMTs. Their study did not focus on the load-outs, the
2 Copyright © 2019 by ASME
theoretical background is thus not applicable. They replicate
ballasting and de-ballasting by shifting the center of gravity of
vessels. This simplification ignored the tank arrangements,
pumping capacity, and time consumed, therefore, the result
might not be accurate enough.
This study aimed at developing a program which can
provide an open load-out simulation environment. It would help
engineers to get prepared in planning stage. To achieve this goal,
we took a deep look into the load-out process and established an
analysis procedure based on the principle of SPMT hydraulic
system and the theory of ship hydrostatics. The developed
program can help users practice load-out operations, minimize
the risks, estimate the time required, and make optimized load-
out plans.
METHODOLOGY
This section presents the overview and details of the above-
mentioned analysis procedure. Figure 4 depicts the information
flow of the model. The steps in the flowchart are divided into
three groups, which are “Set-up”, “Calculation”, and “Actions”.
The “Set-up” group represents the planning stage before load-
outs. In this stage, engineers should decide the SPMT model,
choose the vessel, set initial ballast condition, and pick the initial
tide level. Then the information will be passed to the
“Calculation” group as inputs. The “Calculation” group contains
the approach of solving mechanical problems. The suspension
compensations are considered as the safety indicators and will be
obtained after the calculation process. By comparing the
compensations to the limits, engineers would know whether the
operation is safe to carry on and decide the next move. Once one
of the actions in “Actions” group is taken, a few parameters in
“Calculation” group would change correspondingly. Hence the
calculation process should be repeated. Detailed descriptions of
these groups are provided in the following paragraphs.
Figure 4: Information flow of the analysis procedure.
Set-up
SPMT assembly plan should be made based on the
dimensions and weight of the module. The assembled SPMT
model should have enough longitudinal and transverse stability
when moving the module. Also, the model should have enough
axles to distribute the weight, so that loads of axles do not exceed
maximum and the load per square meter on the ground is within
the bearing capacity.
The vessel should provide abundant deadweight tonnage
and high pumping capacity. It usually takes several hours to
complete load-out mainly because the ballast adjustments are
time-consuming.
Prior to the load-out, the initial tide and initial ballast must
be confirmed based on the estimated time window (Figure 5).
The initial tide level should not be too low. In that case, the
shallow draft of the vessel cannot provide enough adjustment
margin. Also, the initial tide level should not be too high because
the rising window will be short.
Figure 5: Load-out window.
Calculation
SPMT axle load
The hydraulic suspensions of SPMTs can be divided into 3
or 4 groups. Figure 6 demonstrates the examples of SPMTs with
3 and 4 suspension groups. The suspensions within a group are
connected by hydraulic pipelines or hoses. Every axle in the
same group bears the same axle load according to Pascal’s law
(Figure 7). Therefore, SPMTs can be considered as being
supported at the geometric centers of the suspension groups. By
solving force-balance equations and moment-balance equations,
we can obtain the axle loads of each group.
Loads on the deck
The loads on the deck consist of two parts: load from the
ramps and loads from the axles on deck (Figure 8). The overall
loads are related to the magnitudes and acting points of the
separated axle loads. Therefore, the loads on the deck will
change correspondingly when SPMT moves. It can be calculated
by solving force-balance equations and moment-balance
equations.
Vessel trim, heel and draft
With the information of ballast and loads on the deck, we
can calculate the trim, heel, and draft of the vessel based on the
theory of ship hydrostatics. Hydrostatic curves are used in the
calculation. Hydrodynamic forces are not considered because the
3 Copyright © 2019 by ASME
motion of vessel is slight, and operations only take place when
sea state is calm in the port area.

Figure 8: Calculation of load on ramps and deck. Where 𝐹dr is

the force that the deck of vessel applied on the ramps, while 𝐹rd
is the reaction force that the ramps applied on deck. In this
example, from the j-th to the k-th axles are on ramps, and from
the p-th to the q-th axles are on vessel deck.

Figure 6: Example of SPMTs with 3 and 4 Suspension groups.

If there are 4 groups, they are usually labeled clockwise, starting
from the top-right group in top view, by letter A, B, C and D. In
case of 3 groups, one of the groups will be considered as a
combination of two adjacent groups and inherent their labels.
Figure 9: Describing the working surface by a function. The top
surface of the wharf is chosen as the base x-y plane, function
𝑧(𝑥, 𝑦) measures the elevation above the base plane at
position(𝑥, 𝑦).

Figure 7: The axle loads within a suspension group are equal.
Where n is the number of axles in group D, while m is the number
of axles in group A. 𝑃𝑖 is the force that the i-th axle applied on
the surface underneath.
Suspension compensations
When the working surface is uneven, the hydraulic system
of SPMTs will adjust the length of each suspension to adapt to it.
The length difference is usually called compensation. A positive
compensation indicates the suspension being extended, while the
value becomes negative when the suspension is compressed
(Figure 10).

Wharf-ramps-deck surface
SPMTs drive through the wharf, ramps, and deck
successively. The surface formed by wharf, ramps, and deck is
referred to as “working surface” in the following paragraph. We
can define a function that measures the height at any position to
describe the working surface, as shown in Figure 9. Once the
trim, heel, draft and tide level are known, we can learn the height
and angle of the deck relative to the wharf. The slope of ramps
can be obtained as well based on the position of the stern. Figure 10: The compensations of suspensions.

4 Copyright © 2019 by ASME

 The length of a suspension equals the height difference of
the platform surface and the working surface at a given position
with a constant offset. Since the height of the working surface is
known, and the platform surface can be described by three
parameters, which are the mean height, longitudinal inclination,
and transverse inclination, the suspension compensations can
also be described by these three parameters. The governing
equation is that the sum of compensations in a group is zero, due
to the volume of hydraulic fluid is a constant. After solving the
governing equation, we can obtain the above three parameters,
as well as the suspension compensations.
Actions
Due to the mechanisms of SPMT, the compensations cannot
go beyond limit values, otherwise, the suspension will be
damaged. For safety purpose, we set 200 mm as “warning
value”. If a compensation exceeds the “warning value”, an alert
will arise. After going through the calculation process, there will
be two situations:
a. None of the compensations exceeds warning value. In
this situation, it is safe to proceed with the load-out.
Figure 11: Screenshot of the simulation program.
Figure 12 shows the structure of the program. Users have
full control of SPMTs and vessel in the virtual load-out
environment. As discussed above, it is not necessary to take
hydrodynamic forces into consideration. Hence, the program can
instantly finish the calculation, update the views and dashboard,
and give user real-time feedback on user’s interactions.
SPMTs can move forward with a small step.
b. One or some of the compensations exceed warning
value. In this case, some actions must be taken until all
compensations are below warning value.
The most effective action is adjusting ballast by means of
taking out water from the vessel or transferring water between
tanks. The change of tide cannot be ignored because pumping
water is quite time-consuming. Waiting for the tide to rise is
another approach when the deck is slightly lower than the wharf.
These actions are divided into small steps. The calculation
should be repeated after each step since some parameters are
changed.
SIMULATION PROGRAM
Based on the analysis procedure, this study developed a
load-out simulation program with a friendly interface (Figure
11). Ribbon-style menu tabs contain buttons of different
functionalities. Side, top and front views provide the image of
load-outs from different perspectives. The dashboard shows the
value of some key parameters.
The database is an indispensable part of the program. The
information of SPMT units, vessels, wharf layouts, and tide
tables of ports are stored as presets under different categories.
Users can also add new data to the database. It is convenient to
input a set of information by picking a stored preset.
5 Copyright © 2019 by ASME
 Figure 13: Indicators of suspension compensations.

CASE STUDY
Figure 12: Structure of the program. In this section, we explain the load-out simulation of a
3,000-ton module in order to demonstrate how the program
For an upcoming load-out operation, engineers can drill in works.
the program beforehand. Firstly, engineers should input the
following information into the “Setting Panel” of the program: Table 1: Basic information about the module.
a. The assembly plan of SPMT units. As well as the Item Unit Value
suspension grouping plan. Wight t 3000
b. The selected vessel for the task. Length m 25
c. The initial ballast plan. Width m 25
d. The selected initial tide level. Height m 15
The program will pass the information into the analysis Limit Value of Compensation mm 250
procedure and update the views and dashboard after the Warning Value of Compensation mm 200
calculation cycle. Usually, the initial ballast plan and tide level
need to be adjusted several times until we gain a satisfied set-up.
Secondly, users can give instructions by pressing action
buttons in “Operation Control Panel” or “Right-click Menu”.
The action buttons are corresponding to the actions in analysis
procedure. They are listed below:
a. Move SPMTs in any direction for a certain step.
b. Ballast, de-ballast or transfer water between tanks.
c. Wait for the tide level to change for a certain time.
Each action will trigger a re-calculation and auto-update. The
feedback helps the users make the decisions of what action to be
taken. E.g., if the parameters in the dashboard are of good
condition, users can continue to move SPMTs onboard.
Otherwise, the other two actions are required.
In most cases, the module can be successfully transported
onboard after a few attempts. However, it is possible that the
load-out cannot be completed no matter how to operate. That Figure 14: Arrangement of the suspension groups.
means the set-up plan needs modification and the above process
has to be repeated. Table 2: Basic information about the vessel.
During the simulation, the time required of every action was Item Unit Value
added up. The overall time is an important parameter for load- Length (P.P.) m 108
out planning. Breadth m 28
The suspension compensations were monitored. There is an Depth m 7.28
option of turning on those indicators in Figure 13. The number Height m 15
under a wheel represents the compensation of the suspension. If Scanting draft m 5
a compensation goes beyond warning value, the color of the Design draft m 3.5
wheel turns blue. If the number exceeds the limit value, the color Pumping Capacity m3/h 1400
goes red. This will remind users to take necessary measures.

6 Copyright © 2019 by ASME

 The basic information of the test module is listed in Table
1. The center of gravity is in the geometric center. We assembled
an SPMT model with 4 PPUs and 208 axles to carry the module.
The suspensions are divided into 3 groups as Figure 14 shows.
In this case, the limit value of compensation is ±250mm, and
warning value is set ±200mm. The information of the selected
vessel is provided in Table 2. The carrying capacity of the
SPMTs and vessel are verified competent to the transportation
task.
The test operation was successfully performed in the
program. The general process can be divided into several steps
(Figure 15) and will be introduced in the next paragraphs.
Firstly, the initial tide level and ballast condition were
confirmed (a). The goal of this step is to achieve an even working
surface, as well as leaving enough room for adjustment for the
(a)
(b)
whole process. In the first several attempts, the load-outs cannot
be completed in the follow-up operations. The failures were
mainly caused by insufficient initial ballast. Then we modified
the set-up plan. The load-out began around two hours before the
tide reached the peak, leaving abundant time to fulfill the
operations. More importantly, it led to a relatively high initial
tide and sufficient volume of initial ballast. This set-up plan was
proved appropriate in the following steps.
Secondly, we started moving SPMTs forward until the first
several axle lines are on deck (b). In this stage, the draft would
not change dramatically yet the trim would increase a bit. Hence
it was reasonable to de-ballast the tanks near stern and ballast the
tanks near the bow. The fastest approach, under a limited
pumping capacity, was transferring water from stern to bow.
7 Copyright © 2019 by ASME
 (c)
(d)
Figure 15: The process of the test simulation.
In the third step, we moved SPMTs until all the axle lines
are on deck (c). We had to take out a great volume of water since
the loads on the deck increased dramatically. The tanks near stern
were completely de-ballasted and some water was taken out from
the bow as well to keep the deck even.
Finally, we continued moving SPMTs until the module
reached the target area (d). In this step, the equivalent acting
point of loads moved to the bow. Therefore, we needed to
transfer water back to the stern.
It took 123 minutes for the entire process. This load-out
plan may not be optimal and can be optimized in further
simulations.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper focused on the load-out of offshore structure
modules using SPMTs. We researched the load-out process and
established an analysis procedure. The procedure consists of
steps divided into three groups, which are “Set-up”,
“Calculation”, and “Actions”. In “Set-up” group, the load-out
set-up plan will be made. The “Actions” includes necessary
operations. The “Calculation” contains the approach of solving
mechanical problems based on the following theories:
a. Axle loads can be calculated according to the principle of
the hydraulic system.
b. The loads on the deck are determined by the position of
SPMTs.
c. Trim, heel, and draft of the vessel are related to the loads
on the deck and ballast condition. Ship hydrostatic theory
is applied.
d. Tide level must be considered when describing the
wharf-ramps-deck surface.
e. Suspension compensations are considered as the safety
indicators and can be calculated since the volume of
hydraulic fluid is a constant.
8 Copyright © 2019 by ASME
 A simulation program was then built on the basis of the
analysis procedure. The program provides an open simulation
environment with the following functions:
a. Making and optimizing load-out set-up plans.
b. Practicing load-out operations and optimizing operation
plans.
c. Monitoring key parameters.
d. Providing real-time feedback.
This program can be a complement to the exiting load-out
planning method. Engineers can obtain an overview of the
upcoming load-out process and a clear knowledge of the risks
that will arise. By practicing operations in advance, engineers
will find an optimized load-out plan and get well prepared for
the operation. The program can also be helpful in training
engineers and operators who lack experiences.
This study can be improved in several aspects in future
studies. Firstly, the necessity of hydrodynamic forces can be
evaluated. If the influence is significant, the hydrodynamic
forces should be included for a more accurate result. Secondly,
wind pressure and mooring forces are not considered in the
current calculation process and can be added in the future.
Thirdly, there are some other SPMT operations to be studied,
such as reducing the compensations by increasing or decreasing
the volume of hydraulic liquid.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study is a part of the research on “Simulation
technologies of load-out by SPMTs.” We would like to extend
our greatest gratitude to Offshore Oil Engineering (Qingdao) Co.
Ltd. for financially supporting the research project.
View publication stats
REFERENCES
[1] J. A. Quintana. “Alternative Installation Methods for
Offshore Wind Substations.” M.S. thesis, University of
Strathclyde, UK, 2016.
[2] I.A. Ali. “Structural Modelling of Offshore Module for
Loadout. Transportation and Installation.” M.S. thesis,
University of Stavanger, Norway, 2014.
[3] Silvianita, R.D. Pradana, D. M. Chamelia, W. L
Dhanistha. “Time and cost analysis of jacket structure
load out using skidding.” IOP Conf. Series: Earth and
Environment Science, 2018, vol. 202, pp. 012024.
[4] Y. T. Yang, B. N. Park, S. S. Ha, “Development of
load-out design methodology and numerical strength
evaluation for on-ground-build floating storage and
offloading system.” Ocean Engineering, vol. 32, pp.
986-1014, 2005.
[5] S. K. Sinha, E. Luquiau, S. Reddi. “Engineering
Simulation for Loadout of a Tension Leg Platform.”
Offshore Technology Conference, 2018.
[6] Y. Li, J. Suo. “Safety assessment of platform loadout
procedures based on unascertained measures.” Chinese
Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, vol. 25 pp.354-
358, 2007.
[7] A. Kurniawan, G. W. Ma. “Optimization of ballast
plan in launch jacket load-out.” Structural and
Multidisciplinary Optimization, vol.38, pp.267-288,
2009.
[8] S.H. Ham, M.I. Roh. “Dynamic analysis of block
offloading using self-propelled modular transporters.”
Automation in Construction, vol. 96, pp. 411-432,
2018.
9 Copyright © 2019 by ASME