Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Future for Flexible Pipe Riser Technology in Deep Water: Case Study
T. Hill, Y. Zhang, and T. Kolanski, Wellstream Intl. Ltd.
Unbonded flexible pipe has been an enabler for deepwater Optimize riser solution for intended operating conditions.
(<3,300ft) and ultra deepwater (>3,300ft) developments for Evaluate qualification testing needs.
over 15 years. The technology has enabled the industry to Optimize buoyancy requirement
initially produce in deepwater in the early 90s and then into Detail method of attaching/intrgating buoyancy in the
ultra deepwater up to 6,500ft in the late 90s. Water depths riser system.
greater than 6,500ft push the envelope where typical free
hanging riser configurations can operate. High tension loads Introduction
from free hanging pipe weight coupled with high pressure Oil and gas production in deepwater and ultra deepwater
loads creates a challenge for any riser system. continues to grow. For 2006 to 2010 deepwater and ultra
deepwater E&P spend is estimated at $65 billion [1]. As the
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the technical industry goes to water depths greater than 6,500ft, advances in
feasibility of unbonded flexible pipe risers in ultra deepwater unbonded flexible pipe capabilities and riser system solutions
greater than 6,500ft. A case study is presented herein for a are required. This paper confirms the feasibility of unbonded
flexible pipe riser: 6-inch internal diameter x 10,000ft water flexible pipe meeting the ultra deepwater needs of the E&P
depth x 12,500psi design pressure. The key challenges for this industry. The key challenges for flexible risers in ultra
water depth and internal pressure combination are: deepwater are:
Top tension load Top tension load
Collapse load Collapse load
Birdcage load And potentially birdcage load.
The case study presented herein will quantify each of the key The case study presented herein will quantify each of the key
technical challenges and set forth methods for meeting each technical challenges and set forth methods for meeting each
challenge. Methods for meeting the challenges include: unique challenge. Pipe design and riser configuration system
riser configurations. optimizations are summarized and technical feasibility
confirmed.
The results of the case study confirm the ability of unbonded
flexible pipe to operate in ultra deepwater under high Flexible Pipe Riser Design
pressures. In addition to the operability of the risers, The flexible pipe riser is designed using proprietary design
unbonded flexible pipe offers numerous other advantages in tools calibrated with test data. The flexible riser is designed
deepwater including: for the parameters listed in Table 1.
Increased flexibility in field architecture, particularly in
congested developments
Re-use as part of the economic assessment
2 OTC 17768
Table 1 Design Parameters layeres also contribute support to the hoop layers to support
Internal Diameter (in): 6 the internal pressure. The utilization ratios are given in Table
Internal Design Pressure (psi): 12,500 4. The burst to design ratio is 2.08. The proposed riser
Temperature (F): 150
Water Depth (ft): 10,000
structure meets the API 17J requirements with margin to
Service: Sweet production spare.
Host: FPSO, turret moored
Table 4 FAT Pressure Test Load Results
API 17J Specification for Flexible Pipe Design provides the Pipe ID FAT pressure Hoop utilization Tensile
(inches) (psi) utilization
design load cases and correseponding utilization factors. The 6 19,500 0.77 0.70
key load cases for this design are summarized in Table 2.
Collapse Analysis
Table 2 Key Design Load Cases The basis of the collapse analysis is a well calobrated wet
Design Load Case Description Hoop Tensile
utilization utilization Flexlok, rough bore collapse model [2] which is calibrated
Fatory Acceptance Test: Tension=0; Internal 0.91 0.91 with numerous deepwater flexible pipe designs. As part of the
pressure=1.5 x Design Pressure Petrobras Roncador qualification program [3], 6 to 8-inch ID
Collapse of the internal carcass layer: flooded 0.85 N/A designs were subject to collapse testing with collapse
pipe annulus; internal pressure=atmospheric
Extreme Operation: 100 yr wave, 100yr 0.85 0.67
pressures up to 9,000ft water depth. The pipe structure
current; Design Pressure proposed in this study is the same basic strucutre as those
tested for the Roncador Development but with stronger
The resulting flexible pipe riser cross section design is materials. The design water depth for the Roncador Field is
illustrated in Figure 1. The corresponding flexible pipe riser 6,500ft; here the design water depth is 10,000ft. The collapse
properties are listed in Table 3. prediction for this design is given in Table 5.
Factory Acceptance Hydrostatic Pressure Test Table 6 Net Buoyancy Load Summary
The factory acceptance hydrostatic pressure test is performed Buoyancy Total Net Maximum Maximum
Distribution Buoyancy Buoyancy Riser Tension
in the factory for a hold period of 24 hours. This test serves to (tons) Module WD(ft) (tons)
prove the pressure integrity of the product before it leaves the CD 275 3100 300
factory and to condition the flexible pipe. Currently, API 17J LD 425 7200 135
standards specify the FAT pressure for a flexible riser to be
tested to 1.5 times design pressure. The pipe structure
proposed in Figure 1 utilizes two hoop layers to achieve the
high rating of 12,500psi. The helically wound Flextensile
OTC 17768 3
OrcaFlex 8.7b: TOP90-10-dy1.dat (modified 10:31 OrcaFlex 8.7b: TOP90-fh-10-dy1.dat (modified 11:05 AM on 1/2
Statics Complete Statics Complete
200 m
Z
X
Brazil.
Effective Tension (ton)
300
The maximum current speed occurs at the water
Minimum
Maximum
200
surface and is 4.3ft/s.
The density of the production fluid is 56 lb/ft^3.
100
300
Minimum
Net buoyancy (lb/ft)
600 Maximum
200
400
CD Distribution
200 100
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
arc length (ft)
Arclength along Riser (ft)
Net buoyancy (lb/ft)
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
arc length (ft)
400 0.12
0.1 Minimum
Effective Tension (ton)
300
Minimum Maximum
Curvature (1/m)
0.08
Maximum
200 0.06
100 0.04
0.02
0
0
-100 -0.02
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000
Arclength along Riser (ft) Arclength along Riser (ft)
Figure 10 CD Catenary Riser Tension Load Distribution Figure 13 CD Catenary Riser Curvature Distribution
400
0.045
Effective Tension (ton)
300 0.04
Minimum Minimum
0.035
Curvature (1/m)
Maximum 0.03 Maximum
200
0.025
0.02
100 0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
-0.005
Arclength along Riser (ft)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000
Figure 11 LD Catenary Riser Tension Load Distribution Arclength along Riser (ft)
500
FHC max
400 CR LD min
300 CR LD max
200
100
0
-100
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Arclength along Riser (ft)
150
FHC min
Effective Tension (ton)
-50
7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 10000 10500
Arclength along Riser (ft)
Figure 16 Steel Spool Piece Buoyancy Clamp Arrangement Figure 17 Steel Sleeve Buoyancy Clamp Arrangement
References
3 Qualification Testing of Non-bonded Flexible Pipe
1 The World Offshore Drilling Spend Forecast 2006-
for Petrobras Roncador Project, Brazilian Conference, March
2010, Douglas-Westfield, January 2006
1999, A. Littleton, T.Hill, C. Durr