manned underwater intervention during deep

MANNED UNDERWATER

INTERVENTION DURING

DEEP-WATER OPERATIONS

Presentation at UTC 2010

Mikal Sjur Lothe

Technip Norge Diving Manager

2Title of presentation in Header and Footer

The Background:

► The new frontiers are remote (Arctic), deep (Deep Triangle) or both.

Intervention methods are normally automated / remote.

► Remote operations and manned operations should be seen as

complimentary, not adverse.

► The development in remote operated systems are pre-requisite for our

pushing the deep frontiers.

► Manned underwater operations have been technologically developed over

the last 5 years

► How can these developments improve the tools available for work towards

the frontiers.

3January 2010

Technological solutions to address deeper water

(How deep are we?)

Towards 3,000 m and beyond

► Perdido (2008)

• Spar operating with

the deepest water

depth: 2,350 m

• Subsea pipelines

(depth: 2,950 m)

► Cascade & Chinook (2009)

• A new application of FSHR

further to the PDET project with

Petrobras

• 5 Free Standing Hybrid Risers

• Water depth: 2,500 - 2,640 m

► Pazflor IPB (2010)

• Following first supply

and installation of 8 IPB

risers on the Dalia field,

new contract for 2 IPB

risers on the Pazflor

project, offshore Angola

• Water depth: 800 m

4January 2010

Floating LNG solutions

Remote areas solutions

Processing systemCryogenic

flexible pipe

FPSO Subsea services

& product provider

FPSO LNG (FLNG)

Cryogenic

pipe-in-pipe

A unique combination of technologies and know-how

Options for Hybrid solutions

►Free Standing Hybrid Risers

Example

• Technip Design to install a riser from

very deep water to a depth where a

flexible riser is connected to the FSHR.

• Option to engineer the top part of the

assembly diver friendly, thereby

maximising on the divers’ flexibility

close to surface

• FSHR has been used in 1800 msw

supporting an 18” rigid riser

• The FSHR has been used in 2500 msw

to support 95/8” production riser and

7,5” Gas Export risers.

• The rigid risers and the flexibles can be

installed in a staggered manner.

• Result: optimal cost efficiency


6February 2010

Subsea technological achievements

► Angola, Dalia (Total), 2006

• 71 subsea wells in 1,400 m of water

• Integrated Production Bundle: 10.75” ID

• Temperature monitoring with optical fibers

• High performance pipe-in-pipe (Aerogel technology)

► Brazil (Petrobras), 2006

• Deepest flexible pipe structure tested at a water depth of 2,100 m

► Norwegian Continental Shelf, Åsgard (Statoil), 2007

• First smoothbore flexible pipe gas export riser (13.7” ID)

► US Gulf of Mexico, Perdido (Shell), 2008/2009

• Deepest reeled flowline installation at a water depth of 2,961 m

• Deepest reeled steel catenary riser installation at a water depth of 2,469 m

Intervention Flexibility

Water depths down to 250 msw

►Solutions for the use of divers• The development in diving now makes it feasible

to operate with divers at 4-5 different depths,

enabling flexible manned intervention.

• Flexibility of Depth– Normal DSV: max 3 depths + decompression,

normally 2 depths

– New DSV: 5 depths + decompression

• Flexibility of hold systems and variations

in depth:– Normal DSV: Manual maintenance of depths and

decompression, risk for mistakes and high stress

on Life Support Personnel

– New DSV: PLC and automatic control of the

parameters: Very low risk for mistakes and no

increase in the stress of the Life Support

Personnel

• ROV and Diver cooperation– Normal DSV: ROV are add-on in the system.

– New DSV: ROV are integral part of the

intervention system of the vessel

7Title of presentation in Footer

Flexibility in water depths 0 – 20 msw

Tie-in to platform / FPSO / Buoy

Most floaters have their risers and umbilicals

tied into the hull at water depths between 20

msw and surface.

Saturation diving become inflexible shallower

than 25 msw.

Surface Oriented diving• Use of Nirox and new generation surface oriented

diving platform Light Dive Craft - LDC) remote from

mother vessel ensure access in difficult areas

• LDC working parameters is up to Hs 2.2, dependent

on heading and crew seasickness

ROV operations duringTie-in

ROV operations close to surface has improved,

but the ROV start coming into its right in clear

water deeper than 30 msw.

ROV operations in shallow water has resulted

in vehicles lost in thrusters.


Launch and Recovery System (LARS)• Dedicated LARS based on Mother-Daughter design for

Search & Rescue allows the LDC to operate the LARS

up to Hs 8

• Efficiency of system means that the operations at site

defines cut-off point, not the launch and recovery.

The Safety AspectThe problem with the small boat operations has been the LARS.

With a dedicated LARS capable of operations far above the

weather conditions when the LDC operations has to stop due to

motion and other safety aspects results in improved operations

window and improved safety in the Laundh and recovery.


CONCLUSIONS 1

► The period from 1990 till today has seen fantastic improvements in deep

technology based on Remote Operated Systems

► Little improvement has been seen regarding Man in Water since the early

80’s.

► Since 2006, New technology is introduced in Saturation and Surface

oriented diving. The new technologies are now tested and tried, with very

good results

► The intervention method for different jobs should be based on obtaining

the most cost effective operations.

► Personnel saturated on various depths opens a new possibility for

”hybrid” operations where man and machine interface better.

► Such ”hybrid” operations improve the flexibility of the project both

regarding

• Logistics

• Flexibility


CONCLUSIONS 2

Reasons for considering Man in Water

► Tried and tested construction method in water depths up to 180m / 250m

• Good experience from subsea tiebacks using diving

• Safety aspects of diving has not resulted in added safety concerns

► No specialist tooling required (limiting availability)

• No need to own / rent tooling

• Hubs are generally longer lead time than flanges

• Operations can be conducted with off-the-shelf equipment

► Cost effective

• More robust regarding schedule in case of deviations in engineering

• Less costly project specific equipment required

► Keeps size/weight down

• On umbilical terminations

• On flow/guide bases

► Problems are easier to spot / resolve

• Dexterity / vision of divers is far greater than ROV

• Rigging problems can be bridged using variations to low complexity equipment


► There are still jobs that can only be made with the following tooling:

• Mk 1 H manipulators

• Mk 1 stereographich H camera system

• Mk 1 H Intelligence Technology

• Mk 1 H Coordination software

• Mk 1 H communication system

• Mk 1 H report compiler

Technip Diving Capability and Experience - 25th March 2010

VI/ Advantages of Diving

manned underwater intervention during deep

Documents