Risk Assessment of Ship Collision With Platform

COLLISION RISK ASSESSMENT OF VESSEL
AND PLATFORM: CASE STUDY OF

PLATFORM CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AT
BINTUNI BAY WEST PAPUA
Presented by: Muhammad Habib Chusnul FIkri

Department of Marine Engineering
Faculty of Marine Technology
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
Purpose
- To
identify
consequence
impact
- To
identify
frequency
collision
- To measure
collision
risk
of
- To give justification of
mitigation
effort
to
reduce risk
Description of Facility
The closest distance
between platforms to
the center of the
shipping lane is around
3000 m.
Platform B
Platform A
Methodology
START
PROBLEM
ANALYSIS
SCENARIO
DEVELOPMENT
MITIGATION
LITERATURE
STUDY
EMPIRICAL
IMPACT
CONSEQUENCE
CALCULATION
no
IMPACT
CONSEQUENCE
SIMULATION
USING FEM
no
VERIFIED ?
yes
COLLISION
FREQUENC
CALCULATION
RISK
ACCEPTABLE
?
no
yes
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATION
FINISH
Passing Vessel Collision Geometry
FCP = N x Fd x P
Where:
N
Total traffic in the lane (vessel

movements/year).
Fd
Proportion of vessels that are in

the part of the lane directed
towards the platform.
Probability of Collision per passing

vessel
Platform Radar
Beacon Failure
8%
Ship Radar
Failure
8%
Human error
80%
Nav. system
failure
15.4%
Ship
control
failure
83.1%
Fd = D x [exp (-k2/2)]/ (2)
Prob of
Collision/
passing
1.66%
Prop. system
failure
2%
5
Drifting Vessel Collision
The mathematical equation is presented

as follow
FCD = Nb x P x D/BL
Where:
Nb
total traffic in the box

(vessels/year)
breakdown or collision
probability in box per passing
vessel
collision diameter
BL
box length perpendicular to

wind direction
Wind/current
blow to
platform
10%
Platform Radar
Beacon Failure
8%
Ship Radar
Failure
8%
Human error
80%
Nav. system
failure
15.4%
Ship
control
failure
83.1%
Prop. system
failure
2%
Prob of
Collision/
passing
0.17%
Visiting Vessel Collision

A = arctan [(D1 + D2)/2L]
where:
A = angle subtended by
platform (rad)
D1 = width of tanker normal
to drift track
D2 = width of platform
normal to drift track
L = initial distance of
tanker from platform
Failure Rate Data

Below data are used. These data are cumulative valuse for 376 observed
objects of ships
Source: Kiriya, Nobuo. Statistical Study on Reliability of Ship Equipment and

Safety Management
8
Impact Energy
There are two criteria of impact level as follows:
Global failure; very large impact collision, resulting in a
very massive deformation that led to failure
of structure and facility shutdown
Local failure; produced impact has exceeded the power
of material elasticity, resulting in permanent
deformation. However, failure of structure
still can be avoided so as facility shutdown is
not necessary.
1
= 2
2
k=1.1 for head on collision
K=1.4 for drifting collision
Platform Structure
Structure Detail
1.
Outer Leg: 1600 x 60 WT mm

Steel
2.
Inner Leg : 1372 x 38 WT

mm concrete pile
3.
Braces
: 762 x 25 WT
mm Steel
10
Dent Depth
The denting of a tubular is described by the equation below. This equation for
impact energy (E), obtained from integration of the impact force as a function of
the dent depth, are:
[Reference: Visser Consultancy. Ship collision and capacity of brace members of

fixed steel offshore platform. 2004]
11
Inner Concrete Pile Energy Absorption

There are concrete piles inside every legs platform structure with particular
dimension. There is a gap between inner pile outer diameter and platform leg
inner diameter. Once the dent produced by impact energy is more than this
value, there is a value of absorbed energy by concrete pile which is calculated by
following equation:
Y = concrete crushing strength, taken as 120 MPa

Maksimum absorbed energy = 0.95 MJ
[Reference: DNV RPF107, sub 4.6.1]
12
Frequency
Assessment
Results
Head-on Collision for External Vessel (1)

Scenario:
1.
Human error by standby

watching officer
2.
Failure of platform location

identification by navigation
system
3.
Failure of propulsion systemdeadship
4.
Failure of determining the

shipping lane, causing the
ship take voyage lane near
platform (within 500 m
prohibited radius)
Ship is engaged in voyage from Maluku sea,

entering bintuni bay towards bintuni port (from
south to north)
14

Thi s ca l cul a tion i s done for 25 yea rs
l i fetime of pl a tform, by cons i deri ng tra ffi c
i ncrement by 5% per yea r
No
Type of Vessel
1 Crew boat/Passengger ferry
2 Fishing Vessel
Annual Traffic Breadth (m)

1152
8.2
10
1 st
five
year
2 nd
five
year
3 th
five
year
4 th
five
year
5 th
five
year
Platform Radar Beacon Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Nav System Failure = 1-(1-A)(1-B)
Human error
Ship Control Failure = 1-(1-C)(1-D)
Prop. system failure
Prob. Of Collission/passing = CxExF
Annual Passing Vessel
Collision Diameter = length of platform +

w idth of passing Vessel
standard deviation in meter
f(A) = (0.5)exp(-k^2/2)/J
k = distance/standard deviation
Fd = proportion of passing vessel crash

tow ard platform = K x I
Distance betw een Centerlane and platform
2320
2320
2320
2320
2320
Width of Shipping Lane (m)
1709
1709
1709
1709
1709
Annual Frequency of Collision = GxHxM
0.223 0.267 0.312 0.357 0.401
15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66%

2880
3456
4032
4608
5184
40
40
40
40
40
1709
1709
1709
1709
1709
0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

1.36
15
1.36
1.36
1.36
1.36
0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47%

This ca lcula tion is done for 25 yea rs
lifetime of pla tform, by cons idering tra ffic
increment by 5% per yea r
No
Type of Vessel
2 Fishing Vessel

1152
2 nd
five
year
3 th
five
year
4 th
five
year
5 th
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Human error

f(A) = (0.5)exp(-k^2/2)/J

3789
3789
3789
3789
3789
2333
2333
2333
2333
2333
0.110 0.132 0.154 0.176 0.197
8.2
10
1 st
five
year
15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66%

2880
3456
4032
4608
5184
40
40
40
40
40
2333
2333
2333
2333
2333
0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

1.62
16
1.62
1.62
1.62
1.62
0.23% 0.23% 0.23% 0.23% 0.23%
Head-on Collision for Internal Vessel (1)

No
Type of Vessel
Annual Trafffic Breadth (m)
1 st
five
year
2 nd
five
year
3 th
five
year
4 th
five
year
5 th
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Human error

f(A) = (0.5)exp(-k^2/2)/J

15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66%

580
696
812
928
1044
76
76
76
76
76
2333
2333
2333
2333
2333
0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

1.62
1.62
1.62
1.62
1.62
0.44% 0.44% 0.44% 0.44% 0.44%
1 LNG Tanker
105
46
3789
3789
3789
3789
3789
2 Condensate Tanker
23
23
2333
2333
2333
2333
2333
3 General Cargo
104
22
0.042 0.050 0.059 0.067 0.076
17
Head-on Collision for Internal Vessel (2)

No
Type of Vessel
1 st
five
year
2 nd
five
year
3 th
five
year
4 th
five
year
5 th
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Human error
80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
8.3%
8.3%
8.3%
8.3%
8.3%
320
384
448
512
576

54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
2046
2046
2046
2046
2046
f(A) = (0.5)exp(-k^2/2)/J
Annual Trafffic Breadth (m) M
15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%
0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

1.16

1.16
1.16
1.16
1.16
0.68% 0.68% 0.68% 0.68% 0.68%
1 Landing Craft Transport
10
24
2371
2371
2371
2371
2371
2 Offshore Supply Vessel
116
24.4
2046
2046
2046
2046
2046
18.8
0.181 0.217 0.253 0.289 0.325
3 Multi Purpose Support Vessel
18
Drifting Collision for External Vessel (1)

Scenario:
Ship is engaged in voyage from Maluku sea,

entering bintuni bay towards bintuni port (from
south to north)
1.
Human error by standby

watching officer
2.
Failure of platform location

identification by navigation
system
3.
Failure of propulsion
system-deadship
4.
Ship became adrift because

of wind and current while
lost control
5.
Collision happened because

of ship already nearby
platform (within 500 m
prohibited radius)
19

No
Type of Vessel
2 Fishing Vessel
2 st
five
year
3 st
five
year
4 st
five
year
5 st
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Nav. system failure
Human error
Ship control failure
Probability of Collision per passing vessel

15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17%

2880
3456
4032
4608
5184
40
40
40
40
40
Probability of w ind/current tow ard platform
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
Width of Collision Lane (m)
1122
1122
1122
1122
1122
Prob of Vessel inside Collision Lane
Annual Frequency of Collision
3.57% 3.57% 3.57% 3.57% 3.57%

0.171 0.205 0.239 0.273 0.307

1152
1 st
five
year
8.2
10
20

No
Type of Vessel
2 Fishing Vessel
1 st
five
year
3 st
five
year
4 st
five
year
5 st
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Nav. system failure
Human error

15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17%

2880
3456
4032
4608
5184
40
40
40
40
40
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
1064
1064
1064
1064
1064
3.76% 3.76% 3.76% 3.76% 3.76%

0.180 0.216 0.252 0.288 0.324
M Annual
Annual Traffic Breadth
(m) Frequency of Collision
1152
2 st
five
year
8.2
10
21
Drifting Collision for Internal Vessel (1)

No
Type of Vessel
1 st
five
year
2 st
five
year
3 st
five
year
4 st
five
year
5 st
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Nav. system failure
Human error

15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17%

580
696
812
928
1044
76
76
76
76
76
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
1064
1064
1064
1064
1064
1 LNG Tanker
105
46
2 Condensate Tanker
23
23
3 General Cargo
104
22
7.14% 7.14% 7.14% 7.14% 7.14%

0.069 0.083 0.096 0.110 0.124
22
Drifting Collision for Internal Vessel (2)

No
Type of Vessel
1 Landing Craft Transport
10
24
2 Offshore Supply Vessel
116
24.4
18.8
3 Multi Purpose Support Vessel
1 st
five
year
2 st
five
year
3 st
five
year
4 st
five
year
5 st
five
year
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Ship Radar Failure
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
Nav. system failure
Human error
320
384
448
512
576

54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
879
879
879
879
879
15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

80%
80%
80%
80%
80%
83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.17%
6.19% 6.19% 6.19% 6.19% 6.19%

0.033 0.039 0.046 0.053 0.059
23
Visiting Vessel Collision

Offshore Supply Vessel
Multi Purpose Support Vessel
Ma neuvering dis ta nce is us ed a s ca lcula tion va ria bel to find out how Ma neuvering dis ta nce is us ed a s ca lcula tion va ria bel to find out how
nea r the ma neuvering dis ta nce cons idera bly s a fe
nea r the ma neuvering dis ta nce cons idera bly s a fe
D1
Length of Vessel
62
62
62
62
D1
Length of Vessel
D2
Length of Platform
30
30
30
30
D2
Length of Platform
Distance w here maneuvering begins
50
60
70
80
Distance w here maneuvering begins
Angle of maneuvering (radian)
0.744 0.654 0.581 0.522
Angle of maneuvering (radian)
0.412 0.387 0.365 0.346
Probability of Collision per visit
0.118 0.104 0.093 0.083
Probability of Collision per visit
0.066 0.062 0.058 0.055
Annual probability of collision
1.184 1.041 0.925 0.831
Annual probability of collision
1.115 1.048 0.988 0.935
24
92.4
92.4
92.4
92.4
30
30
30
30
140
150
160
170
Collision
Consequence
Results at Pile Leg
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Fishing
boats/
Trawlers/
Small crew
200
Passenger/
Ferry
850
Tug
1,000
OSV
1,146
Landing
Craft Unit
4,000
Multi
Purpose
Support
Vessel
8,840
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
0.47
1.05
1.86
2.91
1.98
4.45
7.92
12.37
2.33
5.24
9.32
14.56
2.67
6.01
10.68
16.68
9.32
20.96
37.26
58.22
20.59
46.32
82.35
128.67
Dent Depth
(m)
0.04
0.07
0.10
0.13
0.10
0.17
0.25
0.34
0.11
0.19
0.28
0.38
0.12
0.21
0.31
0.42
0.28
0.48
0.71
0.96
0.48
0.82
1.20
1.62
/D
2%
4%
6%
8%
6%
11%
16%
21%
7%
12%
18%
24%
8%
13%
19%
26%
18%
30%
44%
60%
30%
51%
75%
101%
Absorbed
Energy by
Pile [MJ]
0
0.16
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
Head on
Collision
Consequences
on Leg
Pile Dent
[m]
0
0.01
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
26
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Pipelaying
Vessel
10,000
General
Cargo
14,500
Condensate
Tanker
17,010
LNG Tanker
105,000
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
23.29
52.40
93.16
145.56
33.77
75.98
135.08
211.06
39.61
89.13
158.46
247.59
244.54
550.20
978.14
1528.35
Dent Depth
(m)
0.52
0.89
1.31
1.76
0.66
1.14
1.68
2.26
0.74
1.27
1.86
2.51
2.49
4.27
6.27
8.44
/D
32%
56%
82%
110%
42%
71%
105%
141%
46%
79%
116%
157%
156%
267%
392%
528%
Absorbed
Energy by
Pile [MJ]
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
Head on
Collision
Consequences
on Leg
Pile Dent
[m]
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
27
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Fishing
boats/
Trawlers/
Small crew
200
Passenger/
Ferry
850
Tug
1,000
OSV
1,146
Landing
Craft Unit
4,000
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
0.04
0.15
0.33
0.59
0.16
0.63
1.42
2.52
0.19
0.74
1.67
2.96
0.21
0.85
1.91
3.40
0.74
2.96
6.67
11.86
Dent Depth
(m)
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.05
0.08
0.12
0.02
0.05
0.09
0.13
0.02
0.06
0.10
0.14
0.05
0.13
0.23
0.33
/D
0%
1%
2%
3%
1%
3%
5%
7%
1%
3%
6%
8%
1%
4%
6%
9%
3%
8%
14%
21%
Absorbed
Energy by
Pile [MJ]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.55
RUPTURE
0
0
0.86
RUPTURE
0.00
0.02
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
0.00
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
Drifting Collision
Consequences
on Leg
Pile Dent
[m]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.03
RUPTURE
0
0
0.04
RUPTURE
0.00
0.00
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
0.00
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
28
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Multi
Purpose
Support
Vessel
8,840
General
Cargo
10,000
General
Cargo
14,500
Condensate
Tanker
17,010
LNG Tanker
105,000
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
1.64
6.55
14.74
26.20
1.85
7.41
16.67
29.64
2.69
10.74
24.18
42.98
3.15
12.60
28.36
50.42
19.45
77.81
175.06
311.23
Dent Depth
(m)
/D
0.09
6%
0.22 14%
0.38 24%
0.56 35%
0.10
6%
0.24 15%
0.42 26%
0.61 38%
0.12
8%
0.31 19%
0.53 33%
0.78 49%
0.14
9%
0.34 22%
0.59 37%
0.87 54%
0.46 29%
1.16 72%
1.99 124%
2.92 183%
Absorbed
Energy by
Pile [MJ]
0.82
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
Drifting Collision
Consequences
on Leg
Pile Dent
[m]
0.03
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
RUPTURE
29
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Fishing
boats/
Trawlers/
Small crew
200
Passenger/
Ferry
850
Tug
1,000
OSV
1,146
Landing
Craft Unit
4,000
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
0.47
1.05
1.86
2.91
1.98
4.45
7.92
12.37
2.33
5.24
9.32
14.56
2.67
6.01
10.68
16.68
9.32
20.96
37.26
58.22
Head on
Collision
Consequences
on Brace
Dent Depth
(m)
0.09
0.16
0.23
0.31
0.24
0.41
0.61
0.82
0.27
0.46
0.68
0.91
0.29
0.50
0.74
1.00
0.68
1.16
1.70
2.29
/D
12%
21%
30%
41%
32%
54%
80%
107%
35%
60%
89%
119%
39%
66%
97%
131%
89%
152%
224%
301%
30
Types of
Vessel
Ship
Speed
Displacement [knot]
Multi
Purpose
Support
Vessel
8,840
Pipelaying
Vessel
10,000
General
Cargo
14,500
Condensate
Tanker
17,010
LNG Tanker
105,000
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
4
6
8
10
Impact
Energy
[MJ]
20.59
46.32
82.35
128.67
23.29
52.40
93.16
145.56
33.77
75.98
135.08
211.06
39.61
89.13
158.46
247.59
244.54
550.20
978.14
1528.35
Head on
Collision
Consequences
on Brace
Dent Depth
(m)
/D
1.15 151%
1.97 259%
2.89 379%
3.89 511%
1.25 163%
2.14 281%
3.14 412%
4.23 555%
1.60 209%
2.74 360%
4.02 528%
5.41 711%
1.78 233%
3.05 400%
4.47 587%
6.02 790%
5.97 784%
10.26 1346%
15.05 1975%
20.27 2660%
31
Simulation in 7.42 MJ impact energy
Rather then modeling a ship or simplification of impact energy

simulation, the colliding object simplified as shown above, with
particular mass, velocity, and impact energy
32
This simulation aims to determine the depth of penetration of the steel

structure of the platform leg
33

34

35

36
Impact Analysis Result

From this analysis, it can
be
concluded
that
estimate value of impact
energy
absorbed
by
platform structure is
about 37% of total
impact energy (kinetic
energy from ship)
37
Conclusion
The value of frequency prediction concludes that the probability of collision is
almost impossible even for next 25 years
The impact collision calculation shows that the platform itself wasnt designed to
withstand such a impact energy
To ensure the safety of platform and traffic lane, probability of collision itself
must be reduced by do some mitigation efforts such as:
Mark of restricted area (navigation aid signs)
Radio communication (installation of radio beacon at platform)
Newly update of navigational chart (admiralty chart used by seafarer)
Ships Automatic Identification System must recognized nearby platform
38
Conclusion
By adding restricted area buoy marks, with following coordinates:
Coordinate 1
20 21` 29.7`` S
1330 4` 48.0`` E
Coordinate 2
20 21` 6.7`` S
1330 4` 48.0`` E
Coordinate 3
20 21` 6.7`` S
1330 5` 11.0`` E
Coordinate 4
20 21` 29.7`` S
1330 5` 11.0`` E
39
Thank You Very Much

Risk Assessment of Ship Collision With Platform

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Risk Assessment of Ship Collision With Platform

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COLLISION RISK ASSESSMENT OF VESSEL

AND PLATFORM: CASE STUDY OF

Presented by: Muhammad Habib Chusnul FIkri

Passing Vessel Collision Geometry

Total traffic in the lane (vessel

Proportion of vessels that are in

Probability of Collision per passing

Fd = D x [exp (-k2/2)]/ (2)

Drifting Vessel Collision

The mathematical equation is presented

total traffic in the box

box length perpendicular to

Visiting Vessel Collision

Failure Rate Data

Source: Kiriya, Nobuo. Statistical Study on Reliability of Ship Equipment and

Outer Leg: 1600 x 60 WT mm

Inner Leg : 1372 x 38 WT

[Reference: Visser Consultancy. Ship collision and capacity of brace members of

Inner Concrete Pile Energy Absorption

Y = concrete crushing strength, taken as 120 MPa

[Reference: DNV RPF107, sub 4.6.1]

Head-on Collision for External Vessel (1)

Human error by standby

Failure of platform location

Failure of propulsion systemdeadship

Failure of determining the

Ship is engaged in voyage from Maluku sea,

Head-on Collision for External Vessel (1)

Annual Traffic Breadth (m)

Platform Radar Beacon Failure

Ship Radar Failure

Nav System Failure = 1-(1-A)(1-B)

Ship Control Failure = 1-(1-C)(1-D)

Prop. system failure

Prob. Of Collission/passing = CxExF

Annual Passing Vessel

Collision Diameter = length of platform +

standard deviation in meter

Fd = proportion of passing vessel crash

Distance betw een Centerlane and platform

Width of Shipping Lane (m)

Annual Frequency of Collision = GxHxM

0.223 0.267 0.312 0.357 0.401

15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4%

83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1% 83.1%

1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66% 1.66%

0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47% 0.47%

Head-on Collision for External Vessel (2)

Annual Traffic Breadth (m)

Platform Radar Beacon Failure

Ship Radar Failure

Nav System Failure = 1-(1-A)(1-B)

Ship Control Failure = 1-(1-C)(1-D)

Prop. system failure

Prob. Of Collission/passing = CxExF

Annual Passing Vessel

Collision Diameter = length of platform +

standard deviation in meter

Fd = proportion of passing vessel crash

Distance betw een Centerlane and platform

Width of Shipping Lane (m)

Annual Frequency of Collision = GxHxM