FLOAT-OVER OPERATIONS USING DYNAMICALLY POSITIONED VESSELS

M. Beerendonk, NMA Maritime and Offshore Contractors B.V., Netherlands

Capt. N. Groves and R. Palmer, Noble Denton Consultants Limited, United Kingdom
SUMMARY
A float-over operation is where a topside is installed directly from the transportation barge or vessel on to a pre-installed
jacket without the need for a crane vessel. Float-over operations are becoming more common as large crane vessel
availability in certain parts of the world is limited and, or costs are high. The main benefits of a float-over operation are
the relatively low costs involved when compared to the use of a crane vessel and the ability to install platforms utilising
a single transportation and installation vessel. Float-over operations (especially those when a long transport is involved
from the topside fabrication yard to the installation site) are more frequently being performed by means of self-propelled
heavy lift vessels than by means of dumb-barges. One of the issues that requires special attention during the preparation
and execution of a float-over operation is the design and installation of a mooring spread required to manoeuvre and
position the vessel or barge into the jacket. As an alternative to using a mooring spread, float-overs have recently been
performed using the vessel's Dynamic Positioning system (DP), without the use of a mooring spread.
Three float-over operations have been performed using semi-submersible heavylift vessels, equipped with a Class II DP
system. This paper describes the operational differences between mooring assisted float-over operations and float-overs
using a DP system. Case studies are presented explaining the various steps of a typical float-over operation using a
vessel on DP. Operational issues are also addressed that highlight the advantages of a DP float-over that include the
reduction in required weather windows.
NOMENCLATURE
Asurge
Asway

D
DP
hp
L
LMU
Re
S
Uc

Added Mass in Surge

Added Mass in Sway
Angle between the current velocity and the
longitudinal surge axis (degrees)
Drag coefficient for cross-flow past an infinitely
long cylinder with cross-sectional area of the
vessel at the longitudinal co-ordinate (x)
Draught of vessel (metres)
Dynamic Positioning
Horse Power
Vessel length at waterline (metres)
Leg Mating Unit
Reynolds number
Wetted surface area (square metres)
Current speed (knots)
Kinematic viscosity 1.4x10-6 (m2s-1)

1.

INTRODUCTION

CD(x)

from using the DP capabilities with mooring tethers to

full un-aided DP float-overs.
This paper introduces the advantages of DP float-overs
compared to traditional moored type float-overs from the
engineering to operational phases and highlights the
advantages of DP float-overs with case studies and the
lessons learnt.
This paper does not go into the detail of the standard
equipment required to perform a float-over (such as leg
mating units etc.) as these are the same regardless of the
method used. Nor does this paper focus on the
transportation advantages of utilising a self-propelled
heavylift vessel compared to dumb-barge for the
transportation as these advantages have historically been
well documented elsewhere.
2.

The term float-over describes the operation of installing a

topside onto a pre-installed jacket by means of an
installation barge or vessel. The installation barge or
vessel enters the jacket slot and then transfers the load to
the jacket typically by ballasting. Once the topside makes
contact with the pre-installed jacket and the full topside
weight is transferred to the jacket, the installation barge
or vessel then exits the jacket. Typical views are shown
in Figures 1 to 4.
Three topside float-over installation operations have been
performed utilising the DP capabilities of the COSCOL
owned Tai An Kou and Kang Sheng Kou, these range

DEVELOPMENT OF FLOAT-OVERS

There have been many float-overs performed worldwide

since the mid to late 1970s. Initially these were deck
mating operations performed inshore on the concrete
gravity base structures that were built in the Norwegian
fjords.
Since the late 1970s float-overs have become more
common worldwide, in part due the limited availability
of large crane vessels, which tend to operate in Europe,
West Africa and the US Gulf and in part due to the
advantages of hook-up and commissioning of large
topside onshore.
Initially float-overs were performed inshore and then as
the technology developed float-overs moved offshore

initially being performed with barges and more recently

with self-propelled vessels that entered the jacket with
the aid of a spread mooring and tugs.

During the docking the Leg Mating Unit (LMU) and

jacket leg clearances are checked to ensure sufficient
clearance.

Float-overs have now been performed on DP with the

vessel entering the jacket and holding station during
weight transfer without the aid of moorings; the most
recent float-over from entering to exiting the jacket was
completed within three hours.

3.1 (c) Mating

3.

DP FLOAT-OVER METHOD

3.1

INSTALLATION SEQUENCE OVERVIEW

The mating should preferably commence on a falling tide

and by ballasting the vessel. The LMU cone capture
radius is maintained by the fenders and DP system. A
typical mating stage is shown in Figure 3.

The typical float-over stages are outlined as follows for a

DP assisted float-over.
3.1 (a) Stand-Off and Pre-Docking
Vessel arrives at field and stands-by at transportation
draught. Once clearance to commence the operation is
given the vessel is de-ballasted to the pre-entry draught.
This is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 3: Typical View During the Mating Stage
3.1 (d) Load Transfer
The LMUs contact the jacket leg cones with the LMU
vertical loads increasing until full topside load is
transferred to the jacket. The topside can then be lowered
using a combination of LMU elastomer creep and
operation of the sand jacks.
3.1 (e) Un-Docking and Vessel Exit

Figure 1: Typical View Immediately Prior to Docking

Ballasting then continues until an adequate clearance

exists between the topside and the top of the grillage. The
vessel can then exit the jacket.

3.1 (b) Docking

The vessel is aligned with the jacket slot using DP and
the surge fenders. This is shown in Figure 2.

Once the clearance has been obtained, the vessel shall

exit from the jacket slot, ballast to transit draught and demobilise. This is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 2: Typical View During the Docking Stage

Figure 4: Typical View During the Exit Stage

3.2

DETERMINING DP CAPABILITY

3.2 (a) Overview

As each topside (or cargo) is different it is important that
the DP capability of the vessel is assessed on a case-bycase basis to ensure that the DP system can counter the
anticipated environment for the specific cargo.
The DP system counters the steady environmental forces,
and effectively damps out low-frequency motion, but is
not used to counteract the wave frequency loads which
fluctuate rapidly in comparison with the steady force and
the slow drift force.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) RP 2SK [1]
gives guidance on the type of analysis that can be used to
assess the dynamic positioning capability, the efficiency
of the propulsion system and consequently the amount of
thrust that can be delivered to the water. Two methods
are suggested to analyse the holding capability of a DP
system: mean load reduction method, and system
dynamic analysis.
In the mean load reduction method the thrusters are
assumed to counter only the mean environmental loads in
the surge, sway and yaw directions. This is essentially a
static equilibrium analysis.
In the system dynamic analysis a simulator generates
mean and low-frequency vessel motions and thruster
responses corresponding to specific environmental force
time records. In this analysis constant wind and current,
steady wave drift forces and low-frequency wind and
wave drift forces are typically included. The wave
frequency forces that are not countered by the DP system
are excluded. The system dynamic analysis is a time
domain analysis, and to obtain proper maximum values it
may be necessary to generate a number of force and
response records for the duration of the required
installation seastate and calculate the expected maximum
value using a statistical approach.
The International Marine Contractors Association
(IMCA) Specification [1] gives guidance on the creation
of DP capability plots based on the mean load reduction
method. Guidance is given on obtaining mean loads due
to one minute averaged wind speed, current speed and
wave drift loads. These loads may be obtained from
model tests, or from analytical methods.
The IMCA guidelines also give approximate values for
the amount of net thrust per horsepower imparted to the
water.
Fixed azimuths indicate that whatever the fluctuations in
wave, wind or current directions the azimuths always
stay at a fixed heading relative to the vessel. Free
azimuths are permitted to rotate around to compensate
for the change in environmental load and direction.

3.2 (b) Environmental Parameters

The IMCA Specification [1] recommends the application
of a constant 1 knot current speed, the use of one minute
averaged wind speed at 10 metres above sea level, and
specific significant wave height and period relationships
that have corresponding one minute mean wind speeds.
However the DP capability equally be derived for the site
specific environmental data to evaluate the vessels DP
capability for the specific location.
3.2 (c) Wave Drift Forces and Wave Load Coefficients
Waves give rise to steady and slowly varying load
components; only the steady wave loads are of interest in
mean load reduction method. The wave drift force
coefficient values that give rise to the steady wave drift
force are dependent on the wave frequency and incidence
direction. The IMCA Specification [1] recommends that
in the absence of model test data a hydrodynamic
computer program can provide the relevant forces.
Typically the drift force coefficients for surge, sway and
yaw are evaluated using the far-field conservation of
momentum/energy technique. This technique is chosen
because it gives the most stable values throughout the
frequency and direction ranges.
Wave coefficients are typically derived from a diffraction
type analysis.
3.2 (d) Wind Load Coefficients
Wind gives rise to both steady and slowly varying wind
loads; only the steady wind loads are of interest for a DP
capability analysis.
The wind loading methodology as described in the
IMCA guidelines [1] has been followed. In this technique
the wind force on the hull, below the uppermost
continuous deck and on the superstructure above this
deck are evaluated separately. Height and shape
coefficients as presented in [1] are used. The
methodology accounts for the angle of incidence of the
wind in the evaluation of the wind areas.
3.2 (e) Current Load Coefficients
The current force gives rise to steady current loads. If
there are no model test values for current loads, an
empirical method of evaluation can be used [2]. The drag
force in the longitudinal direction will be mainly due to
friction forces. Hence procedures from estimation of ship
resistance may be generalised to a stationary vessel in a
current. The surge direction current load can be evaluated
approximately using the following formula:
Fsurge =

0.075

(log10 Re 2)2 2

SU c 2 cos( ) cos( )

To evaluate the transverse viscous current sway force

and current yaw moment on the vessel, the cross-flow
principle is used. This assumes that the flow separates
due to cross-flow past the hull and that the longitudinal
current components do not influence the transverse
forces on a cross-section. It is also assumed that the
transverse force on a cross-section is mainly due to
separated flow effects on the pressure distribution around
the ship. The transverse current force on the ship is:
Fsway =

1
C D (x )D(x )dx U C 2 sin ( ) sin ( )
2 L

azimuth direction and percentages of thrust such that the

vessel maintains heading and position control. The DP
system is considered to be capable of maintaining the
position and heading if the thrust for the azimuthing
thrusters and tunnel thrusters are both less than the net
thrust values. This procedure is repeated for each
environment incident angle, typically every 15 degrees.
From the results of this analysis a DP Capability Plot can
be generated.
The governing equations in the analyses are as follows:
r

where the integration is over the length of the vessel. The

values for CD(x) are typically taken from representative
cross-sections given in [2].

M yaw

The added mass terms can be derived from the

hydrodynamic diffraction analysis program.
3.2 (f)

Net Thrust Evaluation

It is normally assumed that the tunnel thruster gives

identical amount of thrust in positive and negative
directions. The azimuthing thrusters are assumed
however to give different thrust in the ahead and astern
pitch conditions. It is further assumed that the azimuthing
thrusters may operate on either fixed or free azimuthing
modes.

n r
FThrusteri = 0 (Surge/Sway Balance)
i =1

n r
r r
r
FEnv LEnv FThrusteri LThruster i = 0 (Yaw Balance)
i =1

where :
r
r
r
r
FEnv = FWind + FCurrent + FWave

The yaw moment due to current flow is the sum of the

Munk moment and the viscous yaw moment due to
cross-flow:
2
1
1 2
= CD (x )D(x )xdxU C sin ( ) sin ( ) + U C (Asway Asurge )sin (2 )
2 L
2

Env

3.2 (h) Typical DP Capability Plot

The result of the above analysis is normally presented in
a DP capability plot. Figure 5 shows a typical plot which
illustrates the capability of the vessel to withstand a
certain wind speed (on the radial scale) for all possible
headings. Figure 5 shows that for the example case
presented the vessel can withstand higher wind forces
from a head (or stern direction) that it can on the beam.

The IMCA guidelines [1] recommend that in the absence

of full-scale bollard trials standard values of thrust
should be used per unit of rated power regardless of
manufacturer. These are 13kg per hp in ahead pitch and
8kg per hp in astern pitch for azimuthing thrusters. For
tunnel thrusters the net thrust in either direction should
be 11 kg per hp.
Figure 5: Typical Intact DP Capability Plot
3.2 (g) Mean Load Equilibrium and Mode of Operation
The wind, wave and current mean loads on the vessel are
counter-balanced by the steady thruster forces. The
Floatover operations require that the vessel maintain
position and heading control. It is assumed necessary that
the vessel will operate with the azimuth thrusters free to
rotate.
The aim of the Mean Load Equilibrium analysis in the
free mode operation is to determine the angle of rotation
of the azimuthing thrusters and the percentage of thrust
required from the tunnel and azimuth thrusters to
maintain position and heading. This analysis is done by
incrementing the wind speed and wave height parameters,
thus incrementing larger loads, and solving for the

DP capability plots are prepared for a range of current

speeds and for both intact and one-thruster failed
scenarios for a DP Class II vessel.
3.3

ENGINEERING

The engineering requirements for the float-over on DP

and moorings differ only with regards to the moorings
and DP analysis. All other elements generally remain
unchanged.
3.4

VESSEL PREPARATIONS

For a DP float-over the vessel preparations are minimal

when compared to a mooring assisted float-over. For

example there are no requirements for winches and

power-packs to be placed on the main deck, with the
associated walkways to provide safe access.
Jacket entry aids at the stern of the vessel and surge
fenders are still required to be installed on the vessel, as
for a mooring assisted float-over.
3.5

SAFETY

The number of interfaces is reduced dramatically when a

float-over is performed on DP. There are no mooring
lines to handle and tension, a simplified operational chain
of command (no winch operators and other vessels to
control) all of which contributes to a lower risk operation.

FIELD PREPARATIONS

As a float-over on DP requires no mooring lines to hold

the vessel during the operation, field preparations are
minimal, with only tidal reference gauges being required
to be installed on-site (as for a mooring assisted floatover).
Most importantly there is no need for anchoring or preinstalling buoyed moorings required by some field
operators for conventional float-over operations.
This advantage provides significant savings for fields
where there a number of subsea assets, pipelines and
other platforms which cause obstructions for the mooring
system.
3.6

3.10

OPERATIONS

Performing a DP float-over is significantly simpler than

that of a mooring assisted float-over as the significant
proportion of operations are controlled and performed
from the bridge of the vessel. There is no need to hookup to pre-layed moorings and therefore no additional tugs
or winch operators to control therefore reducing the risk
and increasing the safety of the operation.

A DP float-overs simplicity is its most important factor

in terms of safety and economy.
4.

MOORED FLOAT-OVER METHOD

As an alternative to the float-over sequence for a DP

vessel detailed in Section 3.1 of this paper, the following
describes how, for a moored float-over, the DP capability
of a vessel can be replaced by mooring lines.
Traditionally, a float-over operation has been performed
using a (pre-installed) mooring spread to which the
vessel or barge is hooked-up prior to entering the jacket.
During the early stages of the project (design stage),
consideration needs to be given to accommodating the
required mooring lines running through or connected to
the jacket.
In general, the following mooring lines are used
(assuming the barge or vessel is manoeuvred inside the
jacket stern first):

Stern mooring lines: These normally serve as

longitudinal lines to pull the vessel or barge towards
and partly through the jacket during the first phase of
the operation. These lines can either be connected to
the jacket legs or running through the jacket,
connected to pre-installed anchors.

When compared to a mooring assisted float-over a DP

operation requires a minimal offshore spread, as anchor
handling vessels are not required to pre-lay the mooring
system, connect the barge or vessel to the pre-laid
mooring spread and to remove the mooring spread post
installation.

Bow mooring lines: These serve for both

longitudinal control and as a pull-back device, in
case this is required. For a vessel these wires are
normally connected to the vessels bow anchor
chains (whereby the ships anchors have been
removed using an anchor handling vessel).

3.8

Cross mooring lines: For transverse control of the

vessel or barge, transverse mooring lines can be
rigged to both the jacket legs and to pre-installed
mooring lines.

Tethers: The function of the tethers is to hold the

vessel and thereby the topside in position so that the
leg pins remain within the capture radius of the
receiver cones on the jacket during the mating
operation. Tethers require detailed engineering. They
are manufactured to unique specifications (based on
mating analyses tether strength and stiffness) and
require the set up of winches on the barge or vessel
deck and tensioning arrangements for them to be
operated.

3.7

MARINE SPREAD

WEATHER WINDOWS

Due to the elimination of time required to connect the

vessel or barge to the pre-laid mooring system a shorter
weather window is required for a DP float-over. The
shorter weather window requirements of DP float-overs
demonstrate one of the real advantages of DP float-over
operations. With a typical planned installation period of
12 hours the allowable reference period required for the
environmental data is only 24 hours. A typical reference
period for a mooring assisted float-over is 72 hours.
3.9

POST INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES

Once the load transfer to the jacket is completed for a

float-over on DP the vessel can depart the field
immediately post the float-over operation.

It can be concluded that a considerable amount of

preparatory work is required both on the offshore site and

on the float-over vessel or barge itself. Offshore work

consists of installing (and testing) pre-laid moorings
(while considering existing pipelines and other offshore
structures such as platforms and bridges) and connecting
pennants to the jacket legs. Preparatory work on the
vessel consists of installation of winches, sheaves and
fairleads on the vessels deck (with associated
foundations and safe walkways).
Typically it can take up to 36 hours to connect a vessel to
the mooring spread and to perform the float-over
operations.
Finally, during the float-over operation itself, additional
anchor handling vessels will be required to connect the
vessel lines to the pre-laid moorings and to remove them
once the installation is complete.
5.

TAI AN KOU AND KANG SHENG KOU

SPECIFICATIONS

5.1

GENERAL SPECIFICATION

5.2

The DP systems of both vessels are IMO DP

Consequence Class II. Consequence Class II is defined
as: loss of position is not to occur in the event of a single
fault in any active component or system.
The vessels have two bow tunnel thrusters of 800kW
each and two aft SSP fully azimuthing thrusters (fixed
pitch) of 4,300kW each.
6.

COMPARISON BETWEEN
AND DP FLOAT-OVERS

6.1

GENERAL

Length Overall
Length Between Perp.
Beam (Moulded)
Depth (Moulded)
Max. Sailing Draught
Max Submerged Draught
Typical Service Speed
Deadweight

156.0 metres
145.0 metres
36.0 metres
10.0 metres
7.4 metres
19.0 metres
14.0 knots
20,131.0 tonnes

Figure 6 shows the general arrangement drawing for the

vessels. Note that both aft buoyancy casings are fully
removable.

MOORED

In this section, a comparison is made between the

moored and DP assisted float-over operation. The
comparison is made for the three main aspects, namely
time, costs and safety. The comparison is based on using
a float-over vessel already equipped with a DP system.
6.2

The COSCOL owned and operated Tai An Kou and Kang

Sheng Kou (the vessels), both DP Class II are identical
(from August 2008) and have the following principal
dimensions:

DP AND POWERING SPECIFICATION

DURATION

With regards to duration the most obvious benefit for a

DP assisted float-over operation is the reduced window
required to perform the actual float-over. Without the
need to connect mooring lines and significant on-site
preparations, the float-over operation itself can be
performed in a much shorter timeframe, which also is
beneficial with respect to costs and safety. For the vessel
or barge itself, there is no need for extensive vessel
preparations such as installation of mooring equipment.
There is however some time required for a DP trial prior
to entering the jacket, given the importance of a reliable
DP system for the intended operation.
6.3

COSTS

6.3 (a) Introduction

Obviously, costs for a DP-assisted float-over can be
considerably less than a mooring-assisted operation,
given the fact that no anchors, lines and winches need to
be purchased or rented. Also, fewer anchor handling
vessels will be required to assist during the operation.
6.3 (b) Cost Estimation Assumptions
To illustrate the cost benefits for a fully DP float-over
when compared to moored float-over or lifted installation
it has been assumed that a topside of 10,000 tonnes is to
be transported from Korea to West Africa via the Suez
Canal and installed on to a pre-installed jacket.

Figure 6: General Arrangement of the Tai An Kou and

Kang Sheng Kou

All costs exclude loadout specific items such as skid

beams as these will be similar between all of the methods.
Furthermore it has been assumed that the crane vessel is
already working in the West Africa region and that it
requires minimal mobilisation.

6.3 (c) Cost Comparison Matrix

7.

CASE STUDIES AND LESSONS LEARNT

Table 1 shows the relative cost matrix for a lifted

installation, moored float-over and a float-over on DP
based upon the assumptions given in Section 6.3 (b). All
off the costs presented are relative to a moored float-over
performed with a tug and barge.

7.1

INTRODUCTION

Vessel
Type
Tug and
Barge
Standard
Vessel
DP
Vessel

Lifted
Installation

Moored
Float-Over
Bench
Mark

DP
Float-Over

+5%

-15%

-25%

+15%

As discussed in this paper the main cost savings for a DP

float-over when compared to other methods is that the
moorings or crane vessel can be dispensed with.
SAFETY

When using a mooring spread, the effect of a single

broken mooring line is already assessed in the design
phase and the effect is mitigated as far as practically
possible. In order to meet safety standards, DP trials are
conducted prior to entering the jacket, while also a
dedicated DP-capability plot is prepared during the
engineering phase of the project.
SUMMARY

Table 2 compares the key aspects of a DP and mooring

assisted float-over (for the existing DP vessels, which are
limited to 36 metres beam):
Criteria
Impact on Jacket Design
Suitable for Large Decks [1]
Proven Track Record
Costs
Duration of Operation
Safety

Bunga
Raya A
Bunga
Raya E

DP FloatOver
+
+
+
+
+

Moored
Float-Over
+
+
+

[1] This is a function of the deadweight capacity of the current DP

vessel, not of the DP method itself.

Table 2: Comparison of Moored and DP Assisted Floatovers

Date

Method

July 2003

DP with Mooring Tethers

February
DP with Mooring Tethers,
2006
but Tethers Not Used
August
DP with No Mooring
Rong Doi
2006
Tethers
Table 3: Summary of DP Float-Overs
Table 3 shows that as the confidence in the vessels DP
capabilities and also the competence of the vessel crew
has increased with each successive project, progressive
savings have been made; these savings are illustrated in
this Section.
7.2

Safety is the governing issue. The main benefit of a DP

assisted float-over operation lies in the reduced weather
window required to perform the actual float-over
operation. Also the redundancy in the vessels DP system
should be considered, since a one component failure
cannot result in unacceptable risks for the operation.

6.5

Project

Table 1: Relative Installation Cost Matrix Relative to a

Moored Float-Over with a Tug and Barge

6.4

Table 3 details the float-overs that have been performed

with the Tai An Kou and Kang Sheng Kou and these and
are presented as case studies in this paper.

BUNGA RAYA A ON TAI AN KOU

7.2 (a) Introduction

The Bunga Raya A Topside was the first to be installed
from a DP Vessel, namely the Tai An Kou.
Bunga Raya A is located in Block PM3 between Vietnam
and Malaysia in the Gulf of Thailand. Bunga Raya A and
associated its installations are operated by Talisman
Malaysia.
As this was the first time that a topside was installed
from a DP vessel the plan included many safeguards to
recover the situation should the DP system fail.
The philosophy was based on an installation procedure
for a conventional barge (or basic vessel) so that if the
then unproven DP system failed, the installation could
still be successfully completed.
For this reason, in addition to the DP system, all the
conventional methods, equipment and services were
available for use.
These included a full position management survey spread
manned by two hydro-graphic surveyors, motion
monitoring, assisting tugs, bow and stern moorings and
tethers and tether monitors as required by the client.
7.2 (b) Topside Characteristics
The following are Bunga Raya As Topsides Module
main characteristics:

Topside Weight (Approx.)

Topside Length

9,000 tonnes
60.00 metres

Topside Breadth
Topside Height (Inc. Flare)

32.00 metres
64.20 metres

Figure 7 shows the Bunga Raya A topsides loaded on the

Tai An Kou.

the temporary fenders the topsides would be in the

mating position.
Two conventional tethers, together with winches and a
tensioning arrangement were installed on the vessels
deck. Their function was to hold the vessel in position
with the fenders in contact.
7.2 (d) Installation Operation
On reaching one nautical mile from the location the
vessel was stopped and DP system trials were undertaken.
For the trials the vessel was brought to the approach
heading to best simulate the actual docking operation.
The trials were successful.
At the appropriate time the approach to the jacket was
started to ensure that the vessel was in position, ready to
enter into the jacket, at the optimum time based on
predicted tide and current.

Figure 7: Bunga Raya A Topside Loaded on Tai An Kou.

7.2 (c) Preparations
During the planning stage a DP capability plot, with the
vessel loaded with the topside, was prepared to establish
that the DP systems operational limits were in excess of
the environmental conditions prevailing at the
installation location.
At the clients request the Differential Global Positioning
System (DGPS) was used as the position reference for
the DP system. To improve accuracy a local digital
station was established on an adjacent structure to
transmit the correction signals.
To prepare for this requirement the DP system was
modified and a DP engineer was hired to ensure that the
modifications did not jeopardize the systems
performance. The system was thoroughly tested and run
prior to departure from the loadout port during which
time the reliability of satellite signals were also checked.
It was observed that signals were unreliable during the
morning twilight period as a result of ionospheric
scintillation. Unfortunately this coincided with the
optimum time for topsides installation.
The position management system was installed on the
vessel bridge. It displayed the Bunga Raya A jacket and
all pipelines and other structures within 500 metres of the
jacket centre. The display showed a track line for the
vessel to follow and the position and heading of the
vessel in real time.
A surge fender was fitted on either side of the vessel. The
surge fenders were designed to make contact with
temporary fenders fitted on the jacket legs. The position
of the surge fenders was such that when in contact with

Initially the vessel was moved stern first towards the

jacket in 10 metre steps. At the end of each step the
vessel was brought to a stop to allow her position to
stabilise before continuing. When 50 metres from the
jacket the steps were reduced to 5 metre intervals. The
DP system worked well and the vessel maintained
heading and did not deviate from the track by more than
1 metre between 250 and 50 metres from the jacket
centre.
Prior to starting the approach it had been the intention to
attach a tug to the bow of the vessel as a precautionary
measure. The function of the tug was to remain on a
slack line and follow the vessel. If, during the approach,
the vessel could not, for whatever reason, be manoeuvred
accurately the tug would have been used to pull the
vessel clear.
When the tug came in to take a line it was clear that the
tug master was experiencing difficulty in maintaining her
position in the prevailing conditions. The risk of the tug
inadvertently imposing a load on the vessel was
perceived as being a greater than the risk of a vessel
control system failure. For this reason the tug was not
attached and, instead, ordered to maintain a distance of
100 metres from the vessel ready to take a line should the
need arise.
At about 50 metres from the jacket it had been the
intention to run the stern cross lines as per conventional
float-over practice. The risk of the lines fouling the
propellers had always been a concern. As the vessel had
been maintaining heading and position it was decided to
continue the approach without running the stern cross
lines or the bow moorings.
When about 20 metres from the jacket the anticipated
satellite signal failure occurred and the vessel
momentarily lost position reference. As required the

vessel maintained station on memory but it did

demonstrate the disadvantage of using satellites when a
clear geographically stable jacket is close by that could
be used as a reference. After the position reference had
been recovered the approach continued in 2 metre steps
until 10 metres off.
At that time it was noted that the predicted tidal height
did not agree with the height that was observed on the
jacket height marks. The success of the operation was
dependant on the vessel entering and departing at times
determined by tidal height. It was decided to replace the
predictions and manually enter the visual observations.
Guides had been fitted to the stern of the vessel to centre
the vessel between the jacket legs if she was offset
during the final approach. In the event heading and
position were so good that they did not make contact
with the jacket.
Clearance between the vessel shell plating and the jacket
fenders was approximately 90mm on either side. As the
vessel continued her entry into the jacket there was light
sliding contact between the side plating and jacket
fenders. This contact was absorbed with minimum
reaction by purpose designed Trellex rubber fendering
which worked extremely well.
Figure 8 shows the Bunga Raya A topside in position
prior to commencing the mating operation.

The propulsion and steering of the vessel on the approach,

and subsequent entry into the jacket, was controlled
through the DP system.
At any time during the approach the operation could have
been safely aborted in the event of a DP failure. After the
vessel had entered the jacket DP was not essential. The
vessel could have been equally well manoeuvred
manually by use of joystick or direct control of the
propulsion and thruster units.
7.2 (f)

Lessons Learnt - Moorings

Although moorings were purchased, installed and

prepared ready for running they were not used. The
function of the moorings was based on barge (or basic
vessel) installation practice as a means of assisting the
barge during the approach and positioning.
The approach and positioning stage of the operation
could have been aborted at any time. If no moorings were
provided the initiation of the operation would be
dependant on DP. Class II DP provides redundancy for
all subsystems or components. It can therefore be argued
that moorings provide a second level of redundancy that
could be dispensed with.
Alternatively sometimes moorings and winches that are
part of the vessels standard equipment can be utilised for
the float-over. Additional cost is only incurred in the
supply and fitting of connection arrangements on the
jacket. As such cost would be a minor element of the
total. Retaining them might provide the opportunity of
continuing to progress an installation in the event of total
failure of the vessels propulsion system.
7.2 (g) Lessons Learnt - Tethers
The function of the tethers was to hold the vessel and
thereby the topside in position so that the leg pins
remained within the capture radius of the receiver cones
during the mating operation.
The tethers were connected and used. It had been the
intention to stop the vessels propulsion once the tethers
were rigged and tensioned. Despite the fact that they
were rigged and tensioned in accordance with the
procedure the vessel propulsion units were used to
maintain station during the mating operation.

Figure 8: The Bunga Raya A Topside in Position Prior to

Commencing the Mating Stage
7.2 (e) Lessons Learnt - DP
The DP system was proven adequate to manoeuvre a
vessel from seaward towards a jacket for the installation
of a topside with significant wind area in benign
conditions.

The tethers required detailed engineering. They were

manufactured to unique specifications and required the
hire and set up of winches and tensioning arrangements
for them to be operated. The tensioning procedures
required that they be tensioned so that the fenders were
touching but not compressed. In practice this was not
easy to achieve or measure.
The azimuthing thrusters of the Tai An Kou are capable
of performing the function of the tethers. It can be argued

that as they are azimuthing they can direct force in any

required direction and are therefore more efficient than
tethers which only provide a resistance force in one
direction.

Tai An Kou is configured to use the fan beam as a

reference and was thoroughly tested during her initial
commissioning trials.
7.2 (j)

Lessons Learnt - Motions Monitoring

7.2 (h) Lessons Learnt - Position Management System

A fully redundant position management package was
installed on the vessels bridge; the package included
tidal prediction. It was managed by two surveyors.
The tidal information proved to be at variance to actual
tidal conditions experienced.

A motion monitoring system capable of showing actual

motion; motion history and trends for the topsides in roll,
pitch, heave, yaw, surge and sway was installed on the
bridge. The system was used extensively during the
ballasting operations and was considered to be very
beneficial.
7.2 (k) Lessons Learnt - Tug Support

The information concerning seabed obstructions would

have been essential for a conventional barge or ship
operation where anchors may have been run.
The position management system provided a track line
upon which the heading and movement of the vessel
towards the jacket could be tracked in real time. Similar
information could have been obtained from other sources
that were already installed and available on the bridge of
the vessel.

Two tugs were used to support the installation. Their

function was to provide contingency support. They were
not used. Due to the nature of offshore installation
activities operations will only proceed in favourable
conditions thus reducing their necessity.
7.3 (l)

Lessons Learnt - Fendering

The package was useful for this operation as DGPS was

used as a positioning reference and the DP satellite
receivers had not been configured to accept a local
correction signal. For future operations, should DGPS be
necessary, the DP satellite receivers should be modified
to accept local correction signals.

The jacket legs were fitted with temporary fenders at

entry and contact points. The function of the fenders was
to protect the legs and to provide a positioning aid. To
absorb impact the bearing surfaces were fitted with
purpose designed Trellex rubber fendering. This worked
extremely well, absorbing impact loads without binding,
creating no significant resistance to the vessels ingress
and without damaging the hulls paintwork.

7.2 (i)

7.2 (m) Conclusions - Bunga Raya A

Lessons Learnt - DGPS

DGPS was used as a reference system as initially

requested by the client. Various discussions were held on
possible use of fan beams or other local reference
systems, but eventually these were not used.

Class II DP provides sufficient redundancy and is

adequate for vessel installation operations. A lesson
learnt for future projects was that mooring connecting
arrangements only are required for contingency use.

DGPS together with Hydro-acoustic Position Reference

(HPR) or Taut Wires are conventional DP position
reference inputs. DGPS provides a position on the earths
surface relative to orbiting satellites. This is essential for
initial open water installation operations were there are
no local references.

Tethers are unnecessary when installation is performed

from a vessel having twin (i.e. redundant) azimuthing
thrusters and could, together with tension monitors, be
dispensed with for subsequent similar operations.

When installing a topside on a jacket a local reference,

the jacket, exists. As the ultimate objective is to position
the topside on the jacket it is logical to use the jacket as
reference and eliminate the inaccuracies and failings
inherent in a DGPS system.
The use of a fan beam is strongly recommended for this
type of operation. It is based on a simple passive reflector
being placed on the target which is observed by a
tracking head installed on the vessel. The tracking head
reads bearing and distance which is then input to the DP
system. As the distance between the reflector and
tracking head reduces as the vessel approaches so the
accuracy of the bearings increases. The DP system on the

The position monitoring package provided little that

could not be otherwise provided by the vessel, and even
if DGPS is to be used, this could still be dispensed with.
The advantages of the fan beam system far outweigh
those of other systems and should be used for future
similar operations.
For future installation operations the same or a similar
motion monitoring system should be specified.
For contingencies one suitable tug should be sufficient to
support installation operations utilising either the Tai An
Kou or Kang Sheng Kou.
For future installation operations the same or similar
fendering should be specified.

7.3

BUNGA RAYA E ON KANG SHENG KOU

shelf lines were obtained, the only controlling criteria

being breaking load.

7.3 (a) Introduction

The Bunga Raya E topside was installed by the Kang
Sheng Kou in February 2006.
With the agreement of the Installation Contractor and the
Field Operator amendments to the Bunga Raya A
installation methodology were made based upon the
lessons learnt. For this case study only significant
differences from Bunga Raya A are detailed.

To avoid the cost of installing (and demobilising)

additional tether specific winches a tensioning system
was devised to ensure that sufficient tension could be
applied using the Kang Sheng Kous own cargo handling
winches.
They were not used as the vessels thruster system
proved more than adequate.
7.3 (e) Position Management System

7.3 (b) Topside Characteristics

The following are Bunga Raya Es Topsides Module
main characteristics:

Topside Weight (Approx.)

Topside Length
Topside Breadth
Topside Height

9,500 tonnes
62.00 metres
30.00 metres
30.00 metres

Figure 9 shows the Bunga Raya E topside Post to loadout

on to the Kang Sheng Kou.

The use of a position management system was

discontinued based upon the experiences with Bunga
Raya A.
7.3 (f)

DGPS

DGPS was replaced with a fan beam system.

Redundancy was provided by using two fan beams with
primary and secondary reflectors.
7.3 (g) Motion Monitoring
Motion Monitoring was provided by the DP system
provider Nautronix PLC, who, on request, developed a
Height Differential Monitoring System (HDMS) which
was linked to the DP position display.
With manual inputs for vessel draught and tide height the
HDMS provided real time and historic clearances
between topside cones and jacket legs, on approach, in
transit and in final position.
The Height Differential Monitoring System consisted of
a high accuracy motion reference sensor in conjunction
with a PC running custom software developed by
Nautronix in association with Noble Denton. The HDMS
software is customizable to allow user entry of receptacle
offsets, draft and tidal data.

Figure 9: Bunga Raya E Topside Post Loadout

7.3 (c) Moorings
To ease connection, conventional moorings (and tethers)
require attachment lines to be pre-installed on the jacket.
For Bunga Raya E they were pre-installed, lashed and
covered to provide ultra-violet and salt spray protection.
Despite the lashings they were disturbed twice by
unfavourable seas breaking over the boat landing
platforms. Considerable time, effort and expense was
expended in untangling and re-positioning them.
Ultimately they were not used.
7.3 (d) Tethers
The tethers were de-rated to contingency use only and
instead of highly engineered fibre lines standard off the

The HDMS System also provided logging capabilities

that recorded readings from the motion reference sensor
along with user entered draft and tidal data to provide a
complete electronic record of operations. A screenshot of
the HDMS system is shown in Figure 10.
The HDMS equipment was installed onboard the vessel
during the seafastening of the topside and after
successful completion of dockside trials the vessel
departed port for a two day sail to the installation site.
HDMS was used for the secondary function of
monitoring topside motions during passage.
Once on location the float-over operation was
successfully completed using the vessels Nautronix
ASK5002 Dynamic Positioning System.

7.4

RONG DOI ON KANG SHENG KOU

The following are Rong Dois Topsides Module main

characteristics and the topside float-over operation was
performed by the Kang Sheng Kou:

Topside Weight (Approx.)

Topside Length
Topside Breadth
Topside Height (Ex. Flare)

6,000 tonnes
66.00 metres
30.20 metres
33.00 metres

Photographs of the Rong Doi installation are contained in

Figures 1 to 4 of Section 3.1 of this paper.

Figure 10: HDMS System Screenshot

7.3 (h) Tugs
Tugs were specified and in attendance but not used.
7.3 (i) Conclusions - Bunga Raya E
This was the first time that a float-over operation had
been carried out by the vessel using dynamic positioning
alone.
All parties involved were pleased at the
performance of the DP System especially given the fact
that there was only 7 centimetres clearance between the
side of the vessel hull and the jacket pins.

The Rong Doi installation was planned as a conventional

installation although the procedures used were based on
those originally written for Bunga Raya A with one
major difference.
The jacket leg fenders were dispensed with and the final
clearance between vessels side fendering and jacket leg
reduced to 100mm, 50mm on either side. The stern and
side fendering is shown in Figure 12.

Figure 11 shows the Bunga Raya E topside on the Kang

Sheng Kou entering the jacket slot.

Figure 12: View of the Docking Stage Showing the Stern

and Side Fendering for the Rong Doi Installation
The installation demonstrated one of the real advantages
of DP installations. With a planned installation period of
14 hours (subsequently reduced to 12 hours) the
allowable reference period was only 24 hours. On
arriving at location the weather conditions were
unsuitable and few immediate windows were forecast.
Figure 11: Kang Sheng Kou Entering the Jacket Slot
During the transit and float-over operation the HDMS
performed flawlessly to provide invaluable information
on vessel movement characteristics to the marine crew.
The HDMS earned praise from the charterers marine
representative who commented on the cost savings
provided by the HDMS over traditional survey
methodology.

After discussions onboard with the charterer and marine

warranty surveyor approval was given to proceed with a
reduced weather window subject to the operation being
fully conducted on DP. Figure 13 shows the fan beam
installation on the deck of the Kang Sheng Kou.
The Rong Doi topside was installed in less than 3 hours
on DP alone; the time was measured from vessel entry to
exit of the jacket.

9.

REFERENCES

1.

IMCA, Technical Report, Specification For DP

Capability Plots, IMCA Report No: GM-08110992-1473a, May 2000.

2.

API, Recommended Practice for Design and

Analysis of Stationkeeping Systems for Floating
Structures, API Recommended Practice 2SK,
Second Edition, December 1996, Effective
Date: March 1st 1997.

10.

AUTHORS BIOGRAPHIES

Marc Beerendonk holds the current position of Lead

Engineer and Naval Architect at NMA Maritime and
Offshore Contractors. He is responsible for transportation
related engineering and naval architecture.

THE FUTURE AND CONCLUSIONS

Capt. Nigel Groves holds the current position of Marine

Superintendent at Noble Denton Consultants Limited. He
is responsible for the planning and execution of load-outs,
transportations and float-overs.

Using a DP vessel for a float-over operation is a

relatively new technique; while only two DP heavy-lift
vessels are available it is a very valuable alternative to
the traditional mooring-assisted float-overs.

Richard Palmer holds the current position of Principal

Engineer and has worked at Noble Denton Consultants
Limited for 10 years. He is responsible for transportation
related engineering and naval architecture.

Figure 13: Fan Beam Installation on the Main Deck

8.

The additional advantages of relatively high speed

transports shorter exposure time means less probability
for the environment to pose a threat to safety and a floatover performed on DP by a single vessel makes such an
operation attractive. Additionally the cost savings are
significant when compared to a lifted installation or
mooring assisted float-over.
Operational experience of the vessel's DP capabilities
and also the competence of the vessel crew has increased
with each successive project allowing for progressive
savings to be made.
Given the DP vessels capabilities (deadweight-wise),
mooring assisted operations (especially those for large
topsides) will remain a viable alternative to a DP-assisted
float-over operation.
Notwithstanding this a further 5 float-over contracts have
been secured for these vessels that will be performed
using their DP capabilities.