1 views

Uploaded by syafiuddin

just upload

- Sop_coring and General Sampling Procedure_nopw
- 2014--Off Shore Kablolar (Bfu-rfu Ti̇pi̇ Kablolar)
- Guided_Boring.pdf
- Ships Transverse Stability
- Harbour and Coastal Assignment
- Drilling Driving Mechanisms 01
- Abandonment Operations - New Technologies
- 5 Safety Uscg
- IADC Bit Dull Grading System
- FM-1
- Proposal of Stinger Bits
- 4. design of an interlinked.pdf
- appendix_E_questions_and_answers.pdf
- RoOliNg TaNk
- Solution_Ex 4_List %26 FSE
- 8x10 Goodman
- 1. Casing Drilling
- Draft Surveys
- Advanced real-time drilling software (C++/Qt), Written for oil-gas industry
- 50000843-MAN-001 (1)

You are on page 1of 9

John Bandas, Sarah Schlosser, Sean Finn, Nathan Garza, Andy Lister, and Jeff Phillips

Ocean Engineering Program, Zachry Department of Civil Engineering

Texas A&M University

College Station, TX 77843-3136

Abstract- ConocoPhillips asked the team to design a self designed to be functional despite any heavy gear worn by the

propelled jack up drilling rig for exploratory work in the crew.

Chukchi Sea, during the warm water season, at a location that is To ensure that this jack up rig can be built with the support

approximately 131 feet (40 meters) in water depth. This was

accomplished using computer programs including StabCAD, of the different classification societies the following

SolidWorks, AutoCAD, and Visual Analysis. The legs of the jack regulations were complied with during design. The jack up rig

up were designed to withstand ice collisions with the aid of is classified by ABS as a Self-Elevating Drilling Unit [3]. This

patrolling ice breakers. The jack up rig had to be capable of unit is capable of floating freely to the desired location under

traveling at speeds up to 11 knots (5.65 m/s). The stability during its own power or tow, and raises itself on its legs to a

transit was analyzed for an intact condition as well as a damaged determined elevation. Particularly, this drilling unit had to

condition (assuming two ballast tanks are damaged). The centers

encounter first- and second-year ice over its operation. This

of gravity and buoyancy were calculated, as well as metacentric

height. A geotechnical analysis was performed on the spud cans required special accommodations as shown in the ABS Steel

of the rig . The rig was designed to comply with all safety Vessel Rules [4].

regulations specified by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), The vessel had to meet the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit

the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) Rules, the (MODU) rules which are created by ABS and reference the

International Maritime Organization (IMO) rules, and the T&R International Maritime Organizations (IMO) stability

5-5A Design Criteria set by the Society of Naval Architects and requirements. These requirements entailed an intact stability in

Marine Engineers (SNAME) and Marine Pollution Act (Marpol

73/78).

100 knot (51.5 m/s) winds, and damaged stability in 50 knot

(25.8 m/s) winds. The final waterline could not submerge any

watertight opening, and the righting moment had to equal

I. INTRODUCTION twice the heeling moment at a certain angle [3].

Environmental loading rules are given in Reference [3].

A jack up drilling rig was designed to operate in the These rules cover loads due to wind, waves, and currents, as

Chukchi Sea. The rig meets the requirements of Conoco well as phenomena such as vortex shedding and gravity

Phillips and is capable of surviving the open water season. loadings due to the unit resting on the seabed. Additionally,

The drilling location is 71°N, 165°W between Alaska and the design loads and pressures encountered by ice are

Russia where the water depth is approximately 131 feet (40 described in Ref. [3].

meters). Fire and safety measures are also described. The bulkhead

The jack up is intended to be used during the open water divisions are characterized along with the various means of

season which is from June to mid December when the ice is escape. The overall structure arrangement is defined by

minimal in this location. The rig is capable of operating in MODU and SOLAS safety guidelines. Other required

broken ice conditions that are typical during the beginning and guidelines include procedure for escaping in case of

end of the open water season in the Chukchi Sea, holding emergency, and are followed by making sure all the

enough fuel and supplies as well as have enough storage for equipment needed for proper evacuation are within the jack up

the entire season, and accommodating 110 people. The jack up rig [2].

rig was designed in accordance with the ABS Class Rules as Fire fighting systems were arranged to protect the general

well as the Site Specific Requirements to SNAME T&R 5.5 area of the rig as well as the drilling area [5]. Additionally, fire

criteria [1]. water stations are located along the drilling area per ABS

Some major design considerations include the effect of the guidelines. All fire hoses are collapsible and are within the

ice and the extreme temperatures. The ice is a major design required length of 30m (100ft) [3]. Portable fire extinguishers

consideration due to the catastrophic consequences of ice were provided in accordance with National Fire Protection

colliding with the jack up rig. The rig was designed to be able Association (NFPA) standards in type and size [6].

to sustain minor collisions. The comfort of the crew was also In the event of an evacuation, the rig was designed to

taken into account. With temperatures reaching as low as -20 provide multiple routes of escape. Stairways and ladders are

degrees Celsius, the crew needed to be able to function in provided to be used during evacuation. In machine areas,

these extreme temperatures [2]. Operations on the deck were vertical ladders were installed to ensure a quicker and more

practical means of exiting the areas. These machine areas is derived from MODU 3-1-A2 and is found using (1) [3].

consist of two vertical ladders each which are insulated to

(1)

provide a safe escape and fire shelter [3]. For evacuation Here pressure is a function of density , gravity g, and

purposes, five 25 man life rafts are on both the starboard and

depth d. The dynamic pressure applied to the structure takes

port side and numbered even and odd, respectively. There are

into account the wave number and varies exponentially with

300 life jackets on site to account for the crew with half

depth as shown in (2). H refers to wave height, while k is the

located throughout the rig itself, and the other half located

wave number.

near the life rafts. A three minute evacuation plan is also in

place to satisfy Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) guidelines [6]. (2)

Through site research, the team determined this is rarely ever The dynamic and static pressures were superimposed to

pack ice, meaning it is usually just relatively small pieces determine the total pressure profile. At a depth of 131 feet (40

floating, therefore not requiring the use of a special ice m), the total pressure is 731.3 kips (3250 kN).

capable life raft. The wind loadings were calculated using the beam and

The superstructures for the hull, decks and deckhouses are bow profiles of the jack up rig. The projected areas of the rig

constructed of ASTM A53 Grade B steel which can withstand from both views were calculated and a shape coefficient is

temperatures as low as -60°C and is used primarily in offshore given to each section. The two profiles of the jack up were

structures [8]. Steel was chosen due to its high modulus of then taken and divided further and given a height coefficient.

elasticity and is also used for framing and ceiling construction The height coefficient changes as the height increases every

as well. Other areas such as control and service spaces are 51.5 ft (15.7 m).

constructed using material with minimal flame-spread The annual frequency of occurrence of wind in the

characteristics. Chukchi Sea was obtained from reports by ConocoPhillips

The bulkhead divisions of the rig were designed in [10]. From statistical analysis of this table the average wind

accordance with MODU 3-4-1 and SOLAS Regulation II- conditions were found as well as storm conditions for up to a

2/3.3 [2][6]. The selected division for the structure is to be A- 100 year storm. The average wind conditions are presented in

60 class division, subdivided by space classifications ranging Figure 1 and the direction they normally propagate in any

from control stations to sanitary spaces to the fire integrity of given year is shown in Figure 2. The average wind speeds in

bulkheads separating adjacent spaces [2]. When cables and the Chukchi Sea range from 8.2 ft/s to 24.6 ft/s (2.5 m/s to 7.5

other pipes penetrate through the hull, the open spaces are m/s) as shown in Figure 1 and this wind is coming for the

made air tight in order to prevent smoke and fire from northeast nearly 30% of the time. This data is useful when

spreading. To prevent oil spills several safety precautions are positioning the rig as tests can be run to determine which

implemented on the rig. Containment modifications to the angle allows for the least drag when drilling.

hull design are implemented as well to avoid hydrocarbons According to ABS MODU rules the rig must be designed

entering the surrounding environment [8]. Pressure relief to withstand storm conditions of a 100 year storm [3].

valves are placed into the process line to avoid over pressure Through statistical analysis, conditions for 3 different storm

of the oil. In case the oil pressure does supersede the set cases: 1 year, 10 year and 100 year, were performed and are

pressure the valve will discharge into the secure gutter area. presented in Figure 3.

Additionally, vapor depressurizing is used to drop the pressure The wind calculations pertaining to this jack up rig were

to 50 percent of the design pressure to bring the system to a calculated in the bow, beam and quartering seas directions. A

safe operating condition. Emergency shutdown stations are design wind speed of 14.5 knots (7.5 m/s) was used since it

placed in critical locations around the rig such as the was the highest average wind speed encountered at this site.

helicopter deck, process deck and control station. This should Under this design wind, the wind load is 203.5 kips (905.2

allow for the crew to halt operations when the process area is kN), 232.6 kips (1034.7 kN), and 291 kips (1294 kN) for bow,

experiencing severe over pressure and other methods such as beam, and quartering directions, respectively.

the pressure relief valves and depressurizing do not suffice. The current forces applied to the structure were calculated

Additional safety guidelines are followed in the event of using Ref. [3]. The current profile was determined using (3)

an actual oil spill. Curbing at deck level is implemented to from the surface to a depth of 16.4 ft (5 m), which is

prevent any oil spill. Protective walls along the gutter are in

place to prevent the oil from draining into the environment.

Recessed drip pans are installed to collect any oil spilled in the

deck area.

The total pressure acting on the legs, during drilling, is a

combination of static and dynamic pressure. The static

pressure is a function of height and increases linearly with the

depth from the mean water level (MWL). The static pressure Figure 1. Occurrence of Given Wind Speed

Figure 2. Occurrence of Wind Direction

Figure 3: Wind Speed, Wave Height, and Peak Period for Storms

considered the boundary layer. From the boundary layer to the

seabed (4) was used to calculate the current profile because well. If the ice approaches 10 nautical miles (18.5 km)

the wind does not affect the current below the boundary layer. drilling will be stopped and the rig will enter survivor mode.

In these equations, Vt denotes the tidal velocity, Vs the storm Further, the rig is designed for minimal ice collisions, in

tide velocity, Vw the wind driven current, and w the wind the event the detection system falters. The ice loading

velocity. calculations were performed as stated in Ref [3]. To determine

the load, the design pressure due to the ice was calculated

(3) using (6).

(6)

(4) The K1 and K2 coefficients were determined based on the

The wind driven current velocity was determined using a class of ice encountered. Dice corresponds to the displacement

frictional coefficient which is derived from the Coriolis weight of the ice chunks. The ice class that the rig is designed

parameter. The Coriolis parameter is dependent on the latitude to encounter is B0, which can be very large when assissted by

of the drill site. The average current force was calculated, and an ice breaker. This corresponds to a value of K1 0.165 and a

was found to be approximately 2.04 kips (9 kN). value of K2 0.38. The angle of the structure in the ice belt,

Regarding environmental loads, the rig needed to be able which is 90° for this rig, was used to determine the K3

to withstand the worst case scenario of loading which led to coefficient (7). The flare angle, of the structure in the ice is 90

the load being applied from three different directions, bow degrees. This angle resulted in a K3 value equal to 0.6.

seas, beam seas and obliquely. The current load was

calculated for one leg of the jack up. These loads were (7)

calculated as 2.1 kips (9.2 kN) for bow and beam seas, and 1.4 When (6) was computed, the ice loads were calculated to be

kips (6.2 kN) for oblique seas. 1072 ST (9.54 MN).

The jack up was designed with an air gap sufficient to III. JACK UP DESIGN

prevent waves from hitting the deck, however proper

consideration was needed for the waves hitting the legs. To The arrangement of the equipment and material on the

calculate this load Morrison’s equation, was used, shown in deck of the rig is very important to the stability of the facility

(5). FI and FD correspond to the inertial and drag forces, and is shown in Figure 4. The center of gravity needed to be as

respectively, while CS and CD are inertial and drag close to the center as possible to avoid having a rotating

coefficients. This equation was specified in the MODU rules moment on the deck. The deck itself, from a starboard view,

[3]. has a trapezoidal profile to minimize the amount of drag on

the hull during transit. The top of the deck is 232.9 ft (71 m)

from bow to stern 177 ft (54 m) from starboard to port. The rig

(5) is required to accommodate 120 people and researching

For the Chukchi Sea, the design period was given as 5.5 s existing crew quarters. The quarters are 4 stories tall, with

at a water depth of 131 ft (40 m). Using this information we dimensions of 84 ft (25.6 m) by 42 ft (12.8 m) and 52 ft (15.9

can solve (5). The structure was found to be drag dominant, m) in height with a total weight of approximately 200,000 lbs

with a drag force of 2.25 kips (10 kN), a inertial force of 0.65 (890 kN) [11]. The helipad is attached to the crew quarters to

kips (2.9 kN), for a total wave force of 2.90 kips (12.9 kN). allow quick access in the event of an emergency and is

This jack up rig is outfitted with an ice radar system which octagonal in shape with a diameter of 72 ft (22 m). An

tracks ice flow near the rig and has two ice breakers assisting aluminum deck was chosen, to alleviate some weight, with the

in minimizing ice collisions. The ice breakers operate at a capacity to hold a S92 helicopter [12]. The center of the

perimeter of 20 nautical miles (37 km) to break any pack ice topside contains a pit where the casing and piping used for

that penetrates that initial boundary. In the case of ice drilling are stored which cuts into the hull of the topside

breaching a boundary of 15 nautical miles (28 km) the crew approximately 10 ft (3m) to negate the wind forces on the

will continue normal operations while preparing to secure the materials. In order to reach the entire span of the topside, four

load in the analysis of the center of gravity [13]. The

aluminum helipad was chosen for its lightweight properties,

weighing approximately 48 kips (214 kN) [12]. The cantilever

and drilling derrick were combined into a total weight of 360

kips (1600kN). The legs are made of ASTM A53 Grade B

steel and weigh approximately 905 kips (4026 kN) total. The

materials needed for drilling have an approximate weight of

14000 kips (62000 kN) giving the entire rig an estimated

weight of approximately 19500 kips (86000 kN).

With the different weights being arranged around the deck,

a moment was created about the longitudinal axis. The

moments were taken using the distance from the datum, which

is the center of the deck for every axis. Ballast tanks were

Figure 4: General Arrangement of Structures on Deck used to offset this moment during transit. The hull contains

twelve ballast tanks in total and flooding two of these tanks

cranes are required. The cranes chosen are capable of lifting diminished the moment about the longitudinal axis by

300 tons and are mounted on pedestals on the deck. They are bringing the longitudinal and transverse center of gravity to

13.1 ft by 13.1 ft (4 m by 4 m) [13]. the center. This eliminates the overturning moment during

The drilling derrick is located on the cantilever which can transit and caused the vertical center of gravity to be 11.8 ft

be retracted during transit to keep water from flowing into the (3.6 m) due to the legs being completely retracted.

pit containing the pipes and casing. The cantilever is 100 ft One of the design requirements for the jack up is that it

(30.5 m) in length and can reach a distance of 70 ft (21.3 m) should be self-propelled at a speed of 11 knots (5.66 m/s). In

away from the deck. The entire structure will be supported by order to find the required power to propel the ship, the

triangular legs that are 361 ft (110 m) in length. The legs were resistance of the hull was calculated. There are several types

designed with an inverted K truss to add strength and stability. of resistance, including frictional, wave-making, form, and

The square holes in the hull allow the spud cans to be retracted appendage resistance. Without model tests or programs to

into the hull during transit to reduce drag. The spud cans are calculate the resistance, all forms of the resistance save for the

octagonal in shape, 26.2 ft (8 m) from point to point. frictional resistances are extremely difficult to calculate. To

In order for the rig to be stable during transit and for simplify the calculation of resistance, it was assumed that the

preloading purposes, ballast tanks were required. The rig is frictional resistance is equal to or greater than all other forms;

designed to have twelve ballast tanks, two of which are filled that is, the total resistance was calculated as simply twice the

during transit; they are labeled in Figure 5. In order to stabilize frictional resistance. The frictional resistance was calculated

the rig during transit the two ballast tanks are filled to 4.8 ft using (8), where S is the surface area and V is the ship's

(2.1 m). The center compartments in Figure 5 are used for velocity [14].

mud and portable water storage.

The distribution of the weight on the deck is very (8)

important in relation to the stability and moments on the Using these calculations, the resistance of the hull is found

facility. The weight of one crane and pedestal is to be approximately 50.4 kips (224 kN). Multiplying by the

approximately 493 kips (2200 kN) and was treated as a static velocity yields a power requirement of 1700 hp (1.3 MW).

This kind of power can be achieved using retractable thrusters,

which retract into the hull when not in use (when the legs are

deployed). Thrusters of this type were found that can achieve

600 hp (447 kW) [15]. Four thrusters are installed on each

corner of the ship. Coupled with the weight of a power plant,

this setup weighs approximately 3.3 million pounds (1.5

million kg).

Considering the high bearing capacity of the soil in the

North Chukchi Sea, spud cans were chosen as the foundation

support for the jack up rig as opposed to a mat footing which

is generally used for unstable soils [16]. A design is shown in

Figure 6 where the initial diameter was set at 26.2 ft (8 m).

The projecting tapered point on the bottom helps to reduce the

risk of slipping in the case of shallow penetration, which is

typical in soils with high bearing capacities [16].

When the legs are retracted during transit the spud cans are

(11)

where cu is the undrained shear strength, Sc is the shape factor,

dc is a depth factor, and p'o is the effective pressure at the

penetration depth.

The un-drained shear strength varies over a range; and the

average of this range was used in the calculations. The bearing

capacity factor was found using (12). Here, is the latitude of

the drilling location.

(12)

Figure 6. Spud Can Profile Drawing The shape factor was calculated using (13), where the

bearing capacity factor is given in the SNAME code to be 5.14

able to fit into the hull to reduce drag. To calculate the and the foundation length is equal to the diameter of the spud

bearing area, the spud can was treated as a flat octagonal plate can due to its octagonal shape.

as shown in the plan view of Figure 6 to simplify the

calculations. This bearing area was used in calculating the

vertical reaction force the soil provides to the structure. The (13)

lateral area, shown in the profile view of Figure 6, was used in To calculate the depth factor, the depth to diameter ratio

the horizontal reaction force provided by the soil. The spud had to be evaluated; since it was less than 1, (14) was used.

cans are made of plates of ASTM A53 grade B steel with a .5

in (13 mm) thickness.

The SNAME T&R 5.5A required a check on backflow (14)

over the spud can when fully penetrated to determine if it The effective pressure at depth was calculated using (15).

should be factored into the preloading requirements. The A is the projected area of the spud can.

criteria of (9) was used to determine if this rig experienced (15)

any backflow [1]. If (9) is satisfied there is no backflow, The vertical and horizontal reaction forces could then be

which was the case with this jack up rig. In (9), Dsoil is the calculated using (16) and (17), respectively. To calculate the

penetration depth, Ncu is a bearing capacity factor, and ' is the horizontal reaction force, the lateral projected area of the spud

effective soil weight. can was needed. This area was determined by looking at a side

view of the spud can and calculating the area.

(9) (16)

SNAME also required a design to be checked against any

squeezing of the clay (10) [1]. If this equation is satisfied there (17)

is no clay squeezing which was the case for this jack up. All of these equations were specified by Ref. [1]. The

diameter of the spud can was designed to be 26.2 ft (8 m).

(10) Using this diameter and a penetration depth of 9 ft (2.75 m),

the vertical reaction from the soil was calculated as 7065 kips

where B is the diameter of the spud can and Tsoil is the depth of

the clay layer. (31.4 MN) and the horizontal reaction force was 19 calculated

In the northern Chukchi Sea, the soil was classified as as 18600 kips (82.7 MN). These values create factors of safety

clayey silt according to the geotechnical report provided by in the horizontal and vertical directions of 240 and 1.45,

ConocoPhillips [10]. Clay tends to be very plastic regardless respectively.

of water content meaning it can be deformed without To calculate the preloading requirement for installation the

maximum loading possible was calculated and magnified to

breaking, cracking, or changing in volume. Clay possesses

very high strength properties while silt tends to have little or include safety factors. This maximum loading was compared

no plasticity giving it very little strength [17]. The first 15 ft with the vertical leg reaction which has been reduced by 10%

(4.5 m) of soil in the northern Chukchi Sea is very soft clayey due to the built in safety factors. To calculate the preloading

silt while the soil down to 75 ft (22.9 m) tends to be stiff to amount, (18) was used [1].

very stiff clays. (18)

With these denser soil properties spud cans were used for While preloading, 7200 kips (32000 kN) must be loaded

a foundation as opposed to using a mat which is generally on each leg to ensure proper stability in the soil. When the rig

used in softer soils. Using these soil properties the bearing is installed it will lower two legs, diagonal of each other, and

capacity of the soil was calculated using (11) [1]. This fill ballast tanks until this preloading amount is reached. While

equation is specific to the non-squeezing and no backflow the tanks are filling the legs will begin to penetrate the soil

cases discussed earlier.

until the preload is met, and they should be reaching their

maximum penetration of 9 ft (2 m).

An overturning moment is created at the spud can due to

the environmental loads which is then counteracted by a

restoring moment due to the soil. ABS requires a minimum

factor of safety of 1.1 for these moments. They overturning

moment was calculated using Visual Analysis and was found

to be approximately 91.8 k-ft (125.6 kN-m). The restoring

moment was calculated using (19) [16]. This restoring

moment was calculated to be 116.1 k-ft (158.8 kN-m) creating

a factor of safety of 1.26 which satisfies ABS rules.

(19)

where Ms is the restoring moment, Mso is the restoring moment

assuming a rigid structure, n is the number of legs, P is the Figure 7. StabCAD Model

axial load in the legs, and e is displacement.

The vessel must meet the MODU stability requirements as ratio. The stability curves for the normal conditions are shown

stated by ABS. This entails an intact stability in 100 knot in Figure 8.

(51.5 m/s) winds, and damaged stability in 50 knot (25.8 m/s) This is the lowest wind speed allowed for design, and the

winds. The final waterline should not submerge any watertight moment area ratio of 6.52 far surpasses the criteria required of

opening, and the righting moment must equal twice the 1.4 specified by the MODU rules. Note that in this figure, the

heeling moment at a certain angle according to [3]. Following allowable KG is stated to be 36.1 ft (11 m); this is not the true

the specification on the jack up’s topside arrangements; the KG. The true allowable KG is retrieved from StabCAD by

model for StabCAD was completed as shown in Figure 7. For forcing the area ratio to equal 1.4. For the normal conditions,

StabCAD analysis, the vessel appendages were configured for the allowable KG is 290 ft (89.1m). Even in the severe storm

a freely floating condition, the period of deployment between condition shown in Figure 9, the area ratio is 3.18, and the

transit and jacking up. In accordance with the ABS MODU allowable KG is found to be 290 ft (88 m). For both wind

rules, the vessel must be stable during every stage of speeds, the range of stability is 8.25° which is greater than the

deployment; since the center of gravity is highest with the legs 7° requirement according to ABS MODU rules.

up, this configuration is good for design. Note that the crane For the damaged stability, MODU requires that the vessel

and leg trusses are modeled here as cylinders. StabCAD maintain a range of stability of 7 degrees when the hull is

allows for such an approximation by means of a shape penetrated to a horizontal depth of 5 ft (1.4 m) [3]. The wind

coefficient, specified by the user, which converts the condition for damaged stability is 50.2 knots (25.8 m/s) [3].

properties of the cylinder to that of the desired truss shape The worst case is a puncture at the bulkhead boundary,

[19]. For this analysis, the shape coefficient is left at a default flooding two compartments. When comparing this drawing

value of 0.5, as suggested by the StabCAD manual for with the general arrangement of bulkheads, Figure 5, it shows

approximating trusses. that two of the ballast tanks would be damaged.

According to the MODU rules, the area under the wind With the damaged tanks, the vessel has a static angle about

righting moment curve must be 40% larger than the area of the the inclination axis of 0.58 degrees, found in Figure 10.

wind heeling moment (have an area ratio of 1.4), over a range However, the range of stability is 7.23 degrees, which is

of inclination from rest to the down flooding angle of the satisfactory and the allowable KG is well above the calculated

vessel [3]. Also, the angle between where the moments are KG of 33 ft (10 m).

equal and the down flooding (the range of stability) must be The rig was designed to have triangular-shaped legs due to

above 7 degrees. The down flooding angle is the angle to cost effectiveness. The truss form of the legs are a reverse K

which weather tight integrity is preserved. The inclination is arrangement, which helps stability and reduces the amount of

taken about the axis most susceptible to down flooding; in this material. Figure 11 is a 2-dimensional model of the rig with

case, diagonally across the hull, or 40.6 degrees from inline. the cantilever retracted. There are plates attached at the bottom

For the intact condition, the vessel must meet the above to simulate the spud cans. The main deck consists of steel

criteria of moment areas in both calm and storm conditions. plate sections which include the ballast tanks and bulkheads as

For normal operations, the vessel is designed for 70 knot noted in the general arrangement. The total height of the legs

(36m/s) winds, while the design for severe storms is 100 knots is 361 ft (110m); the excess length helps provide reserve

(51.5 m/s) [3]. The program is run with a KG of 32.8 ft (10 strength for the lowersections which are subjected to various

m). The longitudinal and transverse center of gravity is environmental loads.

assumed to be in the center of the hull and a draft of 9.19 ft The wind loads are 788.21 lb/ft (36.4 N/m) distributed

(2.8 m) is used. linearly along the top side legs and start dissipating at 10 ft

StabCAD computes the righting and heeling moments, (3.05 m) above the main deck to 0 at the deck line. The

and automatically generates a down flooding angle and area

Figure 8: Moments of Inclination in 70 knot (36 m/s) Winds Figure 10. Moments of Inclination in Damaged Condition

cumulative topside weight is 510.5 kip/ft (2270.8 kN/m) and maximized at 92.6 kip·ft (125.60 kN·m).

placed 86.12 ft (26.25 m) from the bow. This configuration In order to ensure the stability of our structure the rack and

represents the cantilever retracted; for the operational case pinion system had to be able to withstand the above mentioned

where the cantilever is extended the deck load is 87.63 ft moment and the soil had to withstand the forces created at the

(26.71m) from the bow. The operational water depth is 131 ft spud cans.

(40m) with a calculated 49.2 ft (15 m) air gap placing the The primary goal of structural analysis was to prove that

bottom of the deck at 180.45 ft (55 m). Each test used 616.86 the structure as a whole can withstand the applied loads

lb/ft (9 kN/m) wave and current loads at the mean water level without failure. A 3-dimensional model was constructed and

and linearly decreasing to 0 at 16.4 ft (5 m) below the mean the loads applied. The topside structures in the model were

water level. modeled as plates to help get a more accurate computation of

With the rack and pinion system used to jack up the legs the wind loading. The increased surface area subjected to the

and support the deck, the strength and stability of the wind loads will have a greater impact on the resulting moment

connecting joints was a very important design consideration. experienced by the connecting supports between the legs and

With the two cantilever scenarios, the maximum moments main deck and the rack and pinion system. In order to simulate

were 7.04×105 kip·ft (9.54×105 kN·m); the operational the weight of the topsides a uniformly distributed load of

cantilever slightly changed the location of the center of gravity 0.0215 ST/ft2 (2.06 MPa) was placed on the deck plates. This

but had minimal effects on the joint reactions and member value was calculated by dividing the total estimated topside

forces. weight (7496 ST) by the operational area of the deck.

The total deck and topside produces a maximum vertical The results of the 3-dimensional loadings are applied to

force of 18.14 kips (80.70 kN) on each leg; this required the the bow (x-direction) are shown in Figure 12. The deck

rack and pinion supports to be able to withstand these forces experienced minimal deflections demonstrating the current

as well. The moments experienced on the spud cans were

Figure 9. Moments of Inclination in 100 knot (51.1 m/s) Winds Figure 11. 2D Model Depicting Retracted Cantilever

bulkhead configuration was adequate for the environmental

loading.

The members angled out just above where the deck is

located are basic models of the rack and pinion system used to

support and jack up the hull. As expected, the maximum

stresses are experienced within the internal truss members.

The max stress for an internal member is 8.75 ksi (60.3 MPa).

Maximum shearing and moments were both found within the

members of the simplified rack and pinion system. A max

shearing force of 6.23 kips (27.7 kN) and moment of 18.95

kip·ft (25.7 kN·m) were both located at the base of the rack

and pinion member. Most of this force is attributed to wind

loading; the actual members will be shielded from the

elements therefore only needing to withstand the deck loads

and topside wind loading.

The results of the 3-dimensional loadings were also

applied in the beam direction (y-direction), as shown in

Figure 13. As with the previous case, most of the stresses were Figure 13. Member Forces of Beam Loading Results

found in the internal members of the truss and the forces

located in the rack and pinion system. The maximum stress a factor of safety of 34.97. Also, the available flexural strength

and axial stresses were found to be 21.47 ksi (148 MPa) and of this steel is 81.4 kip·ft (110.36 kN·m) found in AISC Table

0.26 ksi (1.8 MPa), respectively. Both of these were located 3-15. The steel is able to withstand the maximum moment of

on the upper part of the leg and resulted solely from wind 49.12 kip·ft with a factor of safety of 1.66. All of the structural

loading. The upper limits of the shearing forces and moments members withstand the applied environmental loading with

were 10.68 kips (47.5 kN) and 49.12 kip·ft (66.6 kN·m), adequate factors of safety with respect to the failure modes of

respectively. These two forces were experienced on the the ASTM A53 Grade B steel pipe used for the structure [18].

support members of the rack and pinion system once again. IV. COST ANALYSIS

Due to all of the extreme forces were experienced on the

starboard wind loading model, proper consideration was The cost of the rig was determined using modern day ship

needed to determine if the steel used in construction is capable yard estimates. It was found to be around $900 million with

of handling such stresses. All of the steel members are circular the funds allocated as shown in Figure 24. The contingency

8 XS pipe with an outer diameter of 9 in (.023 m) and a 1.02 cost of the rig is about 10% of the total cost bringing the total

in (.026 m) thickness of ASTM A53 Grade B steel for the cold cost up to $1 billion. From this figure one can see that the

weather conditions. The minimum yield stress for this steel is topside equipment and hull steel take up the bulk of the cost

Fy=35 ksi. The maximum stress and axial stress are both with a total of $643 million. This cost is higher than the

within the yield stress limit giving a factor of safety of 1.63. average for today’s jack up rigs which cost around 650 to 800

With a design K-value of .65 and effective length of 25.78 ft million dollars due to its required different steel and sheer

(7.86 m), the available strength in axial compression (c Pn ) size.

is 373.47 kips [18]. The shearing force of 10.68 kips is well

below the allowable 373.47 kips, giving V. FINAL DESIGN SUMMARY

The jack up drilling rig designed in this report was for

operation in the northern Chukchi Sea in a water depth of 120

ft (40m). The jack up works in the warm water season when

ice is at a minimum; however, to deal with ice, the jack up has

radar detection systems and an escort of ice-breakers. The

design calls for four triangular truss legs that are 20 ft (6 m)

wide and sit atop spud cans that are octagonal in shape with a

diameter of 26.2 ft (8 m). The top of the deck is 232.9 ft (71

m) from bow to stern and 177 ft (54 m) from starboard to port.

The hull houses 4 cranes, accommodations for 120 people,

helideck, and piping for two different drilling locations.

Additionally, the ship is self-propelled, up to a speed of 11 kts

(5.66 m/s). The total weight of the jack up is 19 million

pounds, or (8.6 million kg). The jack up has been designed to

comply with the MODU, ABS and SNAME rules in their

Figure 12. Member Forces of Bow Loading Results

entirety as well as accommodate the extreme climate issues

that arise with drilling in the Arctic Ocean.

The forces on the ship were calculated for wind, current, The authors thank Dr. Robert E. Randall, Dr. Charles

wave, and ice conditions. The wind force was based off 100 Aubeny, and Dr. Terry Kohutek from Texas A&M University

year storm conditions and quartering seas are taken as the for their guidance. Thanks to Mr. Peter Noble and Mr. Randall

worst case scenario. For a 100 year storm with wind speed of Shafer of ConocoPhillips for access to geotechnical data and

24.6 ft/s (2.5 m/s), the wind force was 291 kips (1294 kN).The guidance on the drilling design process. The authors also

calculated value for a current load on a single leg is 2.1 kips thank Alberto Monrad, of Global Maritime, and J. Andrew

(9.2 kN). The wave force was 1.47 kips (6.45 kN), from Breuer, Pao-Lin Tan, and Han Yu of the American Bureau of

Morrison’s Equation. For ice, the MODU rules list equations Shipping.

that yield an ice force of 217.8 metric tons (240 short tons) for

each leg; the pressure is calculated to be 16 psi (1104 MPa) REFERENCES

for each leg. The area of the leg occupying the ice belt is [1] Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) T&R 5-5A

found to be 235 ft2 (21.6 m2) and with four legs to multiply (2002). Site specific assessment of mobile jack-up units. Society of

by, the total force was found to be 1072 short tons (9.54 MN) Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, New Jersey.

[2] "Weather & climate | alaska.com." Alaska Travel, Jobs, Homes, Fishing,

on the structure. Hiking and more... | alaska.com. 22 Feb. 2009

The in situ geotechnical analysis was performed by <http://www.alaska.com/about/weather/story/1921.html>.

McClelland Engineers and the data was provided to the team [3] American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). Rules for Classing and Building

by ConocoPhillips [10]. The bearing capacities were Mobile Offshore Drilling Units. Vol. 3. Houston: ABS, 2001.

[4] American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). Steel Vessel Rules. Houston:

calculated using the dimensions of the spud can, un-drained ABS, 2007.

shear strengths and penetration depths. From this data, the [5] American Petroleum Institute (API). RP 14C: Recommended practice

spud cans are able to withstand horizontal and vertical forces for analysis, Design, Installation and Testing of Basic Surface Safety

Systems on Offshore Production Platforms. 3rd ed. Houston: API, 1984.

with factors of safety 240 and 1.45, respectively. The [6] National Fire Protection Association. Fire Code. Quincy, Ma: NFPA,

maximum penetration depth is 9 ft (2 m). 2009.

The vessel must meet the MODU stability requirements as [7] International Maritime Organization. SOLAS. London: IMO, 2004.

published by ABS while in the freely floating condition, the [8] "Steels for Cryogenic and Low-Temperature Service." KEY to METALS

• Steel -- Welcome to the World's 39 Most Comprehensive Steel

period of deployment between dry-towing and jacking up. The Properties Database. 05 May 2009

program StabCAD was utilized to calculate the moments, <http://steel.keytometals.com/articles/art61.htm>.

hydrostatics, and down flooding angles of the vessel. The rig [9] International Maritime Organization. MARPOL. London: IMO, 2006.

was analyzed for an intact stability in 100 knot (51.5 m/s) [10] Noble, Peter. Chukchi Sea Geotechnical Report. Rep. McClelland

Engineers, 26 Jan. 2009.

winds, and damaged stability in 50 knot (25.8 m/s) winds [3]. [11] "Living Quarters / Bunk Houses | GML - General Marine Leasing."

The vessel was found to meet all the stability requirements. GML General Marine Leasing - An Oil States International Company -

In order to support the topsides, deck weight and drilling Offshore & Onshore portable workforce accommodations, auxiliary

equipment, & support services. 19 Feb. 2009

equipment and have the ability to withstand the harsh <http://www.generalmarineleasing.com/buildings/living+quarters+bunk

environmental loading; this rig has four triangular reverse K +houses>.

truss legs for support. Using computer modeling this design [12] "Standard Helidecks | Aluminium Offshore - Aluminium Safety

has been found to have minimal deformation. To ensure the Helidecks, Helideck Support Frames and Offshore Structures."

Aluminium Offshore - Pioneer in the Design and Production of

structural strength of the steel members, 8 XS pipe with an Aluminium Alloy Structures | Aluminium Offshore - Aluminium Safety

outer diameter of 9 in (.023 m) and a 1.02 in (.026 m) Helidecks, Helideck Support Frames and Offshore Structures. 13 Feb.

thickness of ASTM A53 Grade B steel was used for 2009 <http://aluminium-offshore.com/our-business/standard-

construction of the truss legs. After calculations using the helidecks>.

[13] HUISMAN - Home (en). 3 Mar. 2009 <http://www.huisman-itrec.com>.

AISC Steel Code this material contains the needed strength to [14] Tupper, Eric C. Introduction to Naval Architecture. 4th ed. Oxford:

support this vessel with acceptable factors of safety [18]. Elsevier, 2007.

Based on current shipyard estimates and steel prices, this [15] "Retractable Thrusters." Thrustmaster of Texas. 03 May 2009

<http://www.thrustmastertexas.com/products/retractableThrusters.html>

rig is estimated to cost approximately $1 billion. .

Approximately 75% of the total cost is attributed to topside [16] Tirant, P. Le. Design Guides for Offshore Structures (Collection

equipment and steel. This estimate is slightly higher than most Patrimoines). Minneapolis: Editions Technip, 1993.

jack up rigs, but this is attributed to ice fitting the vessel with [17] McCarthy, David F. Essentials of Soil Mechanics and Foundations :

Basic Geotechnics. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2006.

special steel and extra safety precausions. [18] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). Steel Construction

Manual. 13th ed. Chicago: AISC, 2005.

[19] StabCAD User Manual. Engineering Dyanmics Inc, Rep. Version 4.3

(2003).

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

- Sop_coring and General Sampling Procedure_nopwUploaded bySyarif Muhammad Hikmatyar
- 2014--Off Shore Kablolar (Bfu-rfu Ti̇pi̇ Kablolar)Uploaded bybehnam197
- Guided_Boring.pdfUploaded bymuthoot2008
- Ships Transverse StabilityUploaded byYogesh Yadav
- Harbour and Coastal AssignmentUploaded byEoghan O'Driscoll Collins
- Drilling Driving Mechanisms 01Uploaded byFaisal Khokhar
- Abandonment Operations - New TechnologiesUploaded byRubén De la Cruz
- 5 Safety UscgUploaded byavinash90
- IADC Bit Dull Grading SystemUploaded byAlexander
- FM-1Uploaded byDallas Hubbard
- Proposal of Stinger BitsUploaded byAbhinav Sharma
- 4. design of an interlinked.pdfUploaded bySebastian Nawrath
- appendix_E_questions_and_answers.pdfUploaded bypothirajkalyan
- RoOliNg TaNkUploaded bySyuhada Raz
- Solution_Ex 4_List %26 FSEUploaded bySudheerRawat
- 8x10 GoodmanUploaded byKrishnamurthy Mirajkar
- 1. Casing DrillingUploaded byleonardosandoval
- Draft SurveysUploaded bylostnfnd
- Advanced real-time drilling software (C++/Qt), Written for oil-gas industryUploaded byalizadeh911
- 50000843-MAN-001 (1)Uploaded byfarman ali ahmed
- SPE-136107-PA-PUploaded byPhilip Albert Hutapea
- Chapter IIUploaded byZulhamIshak
- STCW a II2 Question BookUploaded byAbdel Nasser Al-sheikh Yousef
- Drilling Course Basic SalehUploaded byFarzin Miri
- IBC Code Amendments 2012 MSC MEPC.5 Circ.7Uploaded byVasileios Iliopoulos
- AIS Assisted CollisionsUploaded byDheerajKaushal
- UntitledUploaded byeurolex
- UntitledUploaded byeurolex
- Pub05 SMRunder 90m Part3Uploaded byjanzero
- Notice: Arms Export Control Act: Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern AffairsUploaded byJustia.com

- Empirical prediction of resistance of Fishing vessel.pdfUploaded bysyafiuddin
- 16292-33165-1-SMUploaded bysyafiuddin
- White Et Al Sname Trans 2015Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Studi Hull Form Kapal Barang-penumpang TradisionalUploaded byaldandanal
- Evi Tamala - Analisa Kebutuhan Angkutan Penyeberangan (Motor Air) Jurusan Sungai Bemban - Sungai Selamat Kab KubuUploaded bysyafiuddin
- IMSAR Volume 3Uploaded byKelly Patrick
- Deep Blue Outline Document 2.12Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Vol1 Search and Rescue Administration NATSARManual Sept2018Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Talahatu - Konsep Puskesmas Terapung sebagai wujud paradigma baru kawasan pantai di IndonesiaUploaded bysyafiuddin
- A Djunaidi - Desain Kabin Puskesmas Keliling Wilayah Perairan Dan Kepulauan Dengan Konsep Mudah Berbasis Kapal LCT 15 mUploaded bysyafiuddin
- Infografis Program Prioritas KKP 2017 2018Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Komponen Biaya Perintis PM_15_Tahun_2017 -Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- MarineTechnology-2019-01Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Jadwal Training 2019 Phitagoras Rev.0.41019Uploaded byAgungBolaang
- Jadwal Training 2019 Phitagoras Rev.0.41019Uploaded byAgungBolaang
- LNG Bunkering Summit 2019Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- REPORT-07-01-19Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- DNV GL Key Challenges With Fleet Performance Data 7-2016Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- DNVGL - The State of Safety_the Outlook for the Oil and Gas Industry in 2018Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Lamp Standar Pelayanan SarUploaded bysyafiuddin
- Lamp Standar Pelayanan SarUploaded bysyafiuddin
- PETUNJUK Installasi Dan Aktivasi Matlab 01 ITSUploaded bysyafiuddin
- Rules for Fiberglass Reinforced Plastics Ships, 2016.pdfUploaded byResandi Sasmita
- feasibilityUploaded bysyafiuddin
- TWS LiftboatUploaded bysyafiuddin
- The Effects of Roll Motion of the Floating PlatformUploaded bysyafiuddin
- 1.-Pengumuman Cpns Ristekdikti 2018Uploaded byfenwick
- BD_Msc_report_final.pdfUploaded bysyafiuddin
- ABS Marine Fuel Oil Advisory 2018Uploaded bysyafiuddin
- Safety Management on Loading Process With Rubber tUploaded bysyafiuddin

- HAPAS Cert 13-H201 TensarTech TW1 Wall System for Reinforced Soil Retaining Walls and Bridge AbutmentsUploaded bysandycastle
- Criteria for Power driven fastenersUploaded byIshmael Wooloo
- Chapter 1 Introduction - Concept of StressUploaded byJordan Junot
- Personnel Lifting GuideUploaded byAmit Kumar
- Bollard GuideUploaded byCtr Yl
- docslide.com.br_probability-based-load-criteria-for-structural-design.pdfUploaded byJessica Castricini
- Análisis de esfuerzos para un montacargas tipo clamUploaded byJuan Esteban Parra Henao
- DIPRA Thrust Restraint DesignUploaded byhussien_azahari
- rr524Uploaded byKoshy John
- Face GearsUploaded byosaniamec
- ws33739_a_all[1]Uploaded byshellfire6
- ECtools BrochureUploaded byducke
- etas___design_methods_for_anchors_in_construction_18_10_12_vi.pdfUploaded byFreddie Koo
- ONGC - EIL - Structural Design Criteria- Part IUploaded byvhprao
- CAEfatigue_Use_Cases.pdfUploaded bygaurav patil
- Stress Analysis - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded byjoe smoe
- HeavyWeight 3.5 25.58lbs NC-38Uploaded byИнженер Луис А. Гарсиа
- An Overview of the Pipeline Defect Assessment Manual (Pdam)Uploaded byJorge Altamirano
- SUOS2011Uploaded byWong Ching
- Injection Precast Concrete PileUploaded byLee Cw
- Analysis and Verification of Foundations and SettlementsUploaded byCorina Moldovan
- Stresses in machine parts-4.pptxUploaded bymujtabahassan
- Code of Practice for Precast Concrete ConstructionUploaded byAlaaGaballa
- 48-6-1.pdfUploaded byJason Roberts
- Proeceedings of Geotechnical Advancement in Hong Kong Since 1970s, 15 May 2007, Hong KongUploaded bycheewingyuen
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Limit AnalysisUploaded byKathirgamanathan Sivanathan
- Assessment of Bridge Substructures-Ba5506Uploaded bymattiland
- ansi.a10.5.2006.pdfUploaded byPhanHatham
- Ds Concrete Forming HandbookUploaded byaliomair
- Corrugated Compression StrengthUploaded byAnkit Jhunjhunwala