Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

Regu Ramoo
Altair ProductDesign
Troy, Michigan USA and

Thomas Lamb
University of Michigan
Michigan USA

Abstract
Current interest in Natural Gas offshore systems is focused on the Floating Oil/LNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FOLNGPSO) Floating LNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FLNGPSO, Floating Oil/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FOCNGPSO) Floating CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FCNGPSO). A number have been built and many more are in design. A new tank containment system which has shown significant operation and acquisition cost benefits is even more beneficial to the FOGNGPSOs and FCNGPSOs especially its ability to withstand sloshing loads in partially filled LNG tanks. The paper reports on the benefits of the Cubic Dough-nut tank containment system on the supporting platform design especially its ability to operate with liquid levels in the tank from empty to full.
Keywords: LNG and CNG Containment Tank, FOLNGPSO, FOCNGPSO

1.0

Introduction

In the past few years interest in Floating Oil/LNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FOLNGPSO) Floating LNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms (FLNGPSO) has increased and a number have been built, are under construction, and many more are in design. More recently interest in Floating CNG Platforms has developed and a number of designs completed. It has been concluded that the best way to collect and transport gas from a small field is by compressing it. Compressed natural gas (CNG) requires a storage volume approximately twice that of LNG but does not need the expensive refrigeration plant at the source or the gasifying equipment at the receiving end. Even though the capacity of natural gas is small, a CNG platform would still be relatively large in length. The problem is that the weight of the gas storage tanks is great, about 50,000 t for a cargo deadweight of only 15,000 t. This results in a very low deadweight ratio. A solution that has superior volumetric and weight usage is proposed that utilizes a new containment tank system that can be applied to both LNG and CNG, namely the Cubic Doughnut Tank System (CDTS). Previous papers (LAMB 2009OTC, RAMOO 2009, LAMB 2009) have described the development of the CDTS and its applications to both LNG and CNG Car-riers with a brief mention of its application to floating production and storage
Altair Engineering 2011 X-1

platforms for both LNG and CNG. The first two of these papers also presented detailed structural analysis for LNG and the last one for CNG applications and these will not be repeated in this paper. However, updates to the analysis will be presented.

2.0

CDTS Description

The CDTS was developed over 30 years ago but nothing was done with it as interest in importing LNG disappeared along with the cessation of diplomatic relations with Algeria. The basis for its design was constructing a self-standing tank surface composed of 12 identical, in form, intersecting cylinders that formed the twelve edges of a cube that would have a significantly better volumetric efficiency than a spherical tank. Where the intersecting cylinders met in the center of each face a closing cap was provided. Figure 1 (from the original patent) shows the form of the tank. Since 2005 ALTAIR Engineering joined Lamb in developing the CDTS using their advanced structural analysis and simulation systems. A detailed description of the tank development can be found in the first three references to this paper. The most recent tank configuration is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1. Cubic Doughnut Tank System (CDTS)

Figure 2. Latest Configuration of CDTS

Altair Engineering 2011 Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System 5-2

3.0

Comparison of CDTS with other Containment Systems

Figure 3 shows the outlines in two views of membrane, spherical and CDTS tanks of equal volume.

Figure 3. Comparison of Outlines for Different Containment

It can be seen that the spherical tank is larger in all dimensions whereas the membrane tank is only larger than the CDTS in length and breadth. The CDTS has a volumetric efficiency between the current membrane tanks system and the proposed PRISM membrane sys-tem (Noble 2005). The volumetric efficiency of different types of tanks is compared in Table 2. It can be seen from the table that the CDTS is 60% better that spherical tanks.

Table 2. Comparison of Tank Volumetric Efficiency

Next the use of ship space was compared. Figure 6 shows the hold space required by each of the systems being compared for a 300,000 m3 LNG Tank Capacity. It can be seen that the Length usage for the CDTS is better than the other systems. The major operating problem is the sloshing of the liquefied natural gas especially in partially filled large membrane tanks. Liquid sloshing limits the carriage of LNG in large side to side membrane tanks to be either over 80% or less than 10% full to avoid damage to the tank lining and insulation. This is impractical for a FOLNGPSO and FNGPSO where the tanks will be filled and emptied continuously. Spherical containment tanks do not suffer from this problem but they are un-suitable for floating processing and storage platforms as their arrangement restricts the available deck space for the processing equipment. Tank sloshing has been around with ship designers and operators since liquids were first carried in ships. However the liquids were carried in tanks with much smaller capacities
Altair Engineering 2011 Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System 5-3

(dimensions). Even the tanks in the largest tankers were less than 50 m in length and 30 m in breadth whereas LNG tanks can be over 50 m in length and over 40 m in breadth. Also the tanks in tankers are integral structural tanks and thus more able to withstand the sloshing loads and usually have a transverse SWASH Bulkhead at mid-length of the tanks which reduces the fore and aft sloshing loads on the tight transverse bulkheads, whereas the current trend in LNG carriers is the membrane lined and insulation box supported tanks, which has been shown to have sloshing problems (damage to lining and insulation) as size increases. 3.1 Impact on LNG Platform Design LNG has a specific gravity slightly more than half that of oil. Thus the LNG tank space dominates the design. To date the existing FONG and those in design follow a tank arrangement as shown in Figure 4. Due to the heavier oil in the extreme forward and aft tanks, this tank arrangement results in a large still water and wave at midship hogging moment that increases the required section modulus in the longitudinal structure of the hull, even when the LNG tanks are fully loaded. If the oil tanks were full and the LNG tanks empty the hogging moment is enormous. To overcome this bending moment problem a unique approach for arranging the tanks, which was developed by a team of students in 2006 for their final Capstone Design Course at the University of Michigan, is shown in Figure 5. This arrangement reduced the maximum Bending Moment by 30%. By using the CDTS for LNG Tanks there are even further benefits in that the tank length is reduced by 80 m or 25% and the Length Overall by 100 m or 29% and the bending moment by a further 40%. This is shown in Figure 6 to the same scale as Figures 4 and 5. The reduced hold length for the CDTS is the clear ad-vantage. Coupled with the proposed unique tank arrangement it results in a significantly smaller platform length as can be seen from Table 3 that compares plat-form characteristics an existing and one design FOLNGPSO with one of equal capacity using the CDTS. The reduction in length has immediate impact on the structural design in that the Wave Bending Moments are reduced to half those of the longer membrane FOLNGPSO. The maximum Bending Moment will also be reduced by the tank arrangement compared to the arrangement shown in Figure 8 by 50%. Both these bending moment reductions will result in a smaller required Sectional Modulus and Moment of Inertia which in turn will be met with less longitudinal section-al area thus reducing structural weight.

Figure 4. Current Tank Arrangement Design

Figure 5. Parallel Tank Arrangement

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-4

Figure 6: Tank Arrangement with CDTS

Table 3. Platform Characteristics for 160,000 m3 /1.4 M Bbls FOLNGPSO Table 4 shows the difference in characteristics for a hypothetical 300,000 m3 FOLNGPSO Figure 7 shows the General Arrangement of the proposed FOLNGPSO using the CDTS.

Table 3. Platform Characteristics for 160,000 m3 /1.4 M Bbls FOLNGPSO

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-5

Figure 7. CDTS FOLNGPSO Profiles

3.2 Impact of LNG Platform Cost Building Cost Estimates were made for the FOLNGPSO with Membrane and CDTS LNG containment systems in Table 3 which shows that the CDTS design would cost 7% less than the membrane design. It also shows that the Gross Tonnage would be 5% less which would result in operating cost savings. All cost estimates were made using a Preliminary De-sign Cost Estimating Model. This approach (or methodology) has been found over time to predict shipbuilding cost within plus or minus 10% with very few outliers.

4.0

Construction Benefit

A major construction benefit results for the CDTS by uncoupling the tank building and installation schedule from the ship construction schedule, whereas the Membrane Tank System requires a significant time afloat to install the insulation and membrane lining, often as long as the hull erection time. Like other independent tank systems the CDTS would significantly reduce the tank installation time afloat to almost zero compared to the membrane tank system. The CDTS offers all the benefits of the independent tank systems such as the spherical and prismatic self-standing tank systems, but with a simpler hull construction and tank/hull integration such as: no need to stage the hold to apply insulation and lining to the structure, tanks can be installed in one piece at the best time in the ship construction build sequence, tanks can be constructed from aluminum or special steel, tanks can be structurally and leak tested before installation in the ship, eliminates the significant welding of the insulation and lining securing strips and the lining onboard the ship, is not subject to the same damage from dropped items as the membrane tank containment system, a smaller skirt system compared to the spherical tank containment system, the service/maintenance benefit in that the internal ships structure and the tank insulation can be inspected, and tank insulation is shaped only in two dimensions not three as in spherical tanks.

Further, the CDTS can be constructed using typical shipyard rolling and forming equipment. It is made up of 12 identical partial cylindrical tubes (made from identical or mirror image plates) and 8 identical spherical corners. One design option even deletes the spherical corners to simplify the construction and increase capacity, but at an additional material cost and design complexity. While the CDTS offers benefits just from the tank design, construction and installation in the ship, it offers unique benefits in the design of the ship including significant reduction in length from 370m to 264m, which has construction benefits in reduced steel weight and less work content for the same capacity ship com-pared with any other system. The Impact of the CDTS on the platforms structural arrangement can be seen from Figure 8, the Midship Section and Figure 14, the Centerline Profile.

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-6

Figure 8. Midship Section Baseline CDTS vs. Membrane TANK In the previous study (Lamb and Ramoo, 2009), sloshing simulations of a rigid CDTS (baseline) and a rigid membrane tank of nearly equal capacity were per-formed using the SPH (Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics) approach available in RADIOSS. The finite element model of the membrane tank used is shown in Figure 12a. The volume of both the tanks was 40,000m3. The tanks were subjected to an oscillatory motion (Figure 12b) about their longitudinal, transverse, and mid off-axis to simulate the motion of the ship in beam, bow and bow-quartering seas.

Figure 9. Rigid Membrane Tank

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-7

Figure 10. Enforced Rotation The period of the sloshing motion was 8 seconds. This was based on the anticipated roll period of an LNG ship carrying six CDTS and a peak roll amplitude of 30o. The sloshing simulations were performed with two different tank capacities. One with 80% and another with 50% tank capacity. The total sloshing loads on the sides of the tank at 50% and 80% tank capacities for roll motion (bow seas) are shown in Figure 11 and 12 respectively. The higher sloshing loads in the case of the membrane tank could be attributed to the waves impinging directly on the flat walls of the membrane tank unlike in the case of CDTS where the waves could decelerate along the curved walls. Also, the free surface was larger in the case of the membrane tank whereas in the case of CDTS the cross braces appeared to break the waves and there-by reduced the velocity of the fluid before impacting the walls of the tank.

Figure 11: Sloshing Loads at 80% Tank Capacity (Roll Motion/Bow Seas)

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-8

Figure 12: Sloshing Loads at 50% Tank Capacity (Roll Motion Bow Seas) CDTS Sloshing Loads and Wall Stress In this study, the sloshing simulation was performed using the current design of the CDTS, employing the ALE (Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian) approach available in RADIOSS. The ALE approach was opted since it gives a smooth variation of the sloshing load compared to the SPH approach for the same level of discretization. The CDTS was considered deformable with a uniform thickness of 100 mm. The skirt is considered rigid. The tank was filled to 80% capacity. The fluid (LNG, specific gravity 0.5) was modeled using hexahedral elements and 2-phase liquid-gas mixture material model with a Me Grneisen equation of state (material law37). The rest of the tank was filled with air (hexahedral elements and material law37).The finite element half model of the CDTS used for the sloshing simulation is shown in Figure 18. Symmetry boundary conditions were imposed on both the structural and fluid nodes.

Figure 13: Finite Element Model of CDTS used for Sloshing Simulation The simulation was composed of two steps. In the first step a constant gravitational load (9.81 m/s2) was applied to the tank and the fluid for 0.5secs. In the next step a roll motion was enforced on the tank for 7.5 seconds. The gravitational load was held constant for the entire duration of the roll period. Figure 14 depicts the fluid motion during the event as well as the distribution of the sloshing loads or the fluid impingement loads at different instances of time (2.6 seconds, 2.9 seconds). These loads were extracted from the sloshing simulation (ALE/RADIOSS) and consi-dered as static load cases for further optimization of the tank design. The contour
Altair Engineering 2011 Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System 5-9

plots of von Mises stress in MPa at these instances of time from the sloshing simulation are shown in Figure 15. Structural Analysis An earlier paper (LAMB OTC2009) presented details of the structural analysis for the CDTS containing LNG and it will not be presented in this paper.

5.0

Application to CNG

It was always the intention to explore the use of the tank for pressures above atmospheric, and recently the application of the CDTS to CNG Carriers and FOCNGPSO and PCNGPSO was examined. Whereas the CDTS size for LNG application had no limitation up to that required for the largest LNG Carriers under development, the CDTS tank for the carriage of CNG will be much smaller due to its thicker shell and thus weight and will be a compromise between shell thickness, weight and manufacturability.

Figure 14. Fluid Motion and Impingement Loads at 2.9 seconds

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-10

Impact on CNG Platforms The CDTS has been applied to CNG Carrier design (Lamb 2009) and offers significant acquisition and life cycle cost savings compared to other tank containment systems. It has been found to offer similar cost savings for CNG offshore platform applications. The CDTS has superior volumetric efficiency and weight com-pared to any other proposed CNG Marine containment systems. It has a hold volumetric efficiency of 0.33 (VOTRANS 0.18 and SEA NG 0.20) a ship volumetric efficiency of 0.14 (VOTRANS 0.09 and SEA NG 0.09) and the platforms utilizing CDTS would have a cargo deadweight coefficient of 0.133 The CDTS offers many of the benefits to LNG also to CNG and in addition the following benefits compared to other proposed systems for CNG Carriers and offshore platforms: 1. Building cost reduction of 12 % for platform and 10 to 20% for the containment system, 2. significant reduction in platform length, 3. significant reduction in Gross Tonnage 4. significant reduction in tank surface area and thus CNG gain of heat. This is important as it impacts the heat transfer into or out of the contained CNG and this in turn increases the CNG pressure due to increasing in gas temperature. 5. the in service maintenance benefit in that the tank structure can be inspected, and 6. significantly reduced number of tank manifolds The result of its many benefits is significant acquisition and life cycle cost savings compared to the other pro-posed designs. A range of CDTS size was explored in the preliminary structural analysis to determine tank volume and aver-age shell thickness, and is presented in Table 5. The 10 m CDTS tank was selected to demonstrate its appli-cation to CNG platforms, as it was the best compromise between shell thickness, weight and other construction limits.

Table 5. CDTS Tank Characteristics FOCNGPSO Tank Arrangement Before the natural gas can be transported by ships it must first be collected. Unfortunately many of the gas fields are small compared to the large oil fields. Thus it has not been economically viable to recover the gas from them up until now. However with increasing demand, and a decreasing supply of easily recovered energy it is becoming necessary to investigate how to change the situation. The first Floating Liquefied Natural Gas (FLNGPSO) platform is in operation. Figure 15 shows a concept design for a 10.5 MMscm/200,000 Bbl FOCNGPSO.

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-11

Length BP = 230m Beam = 60m Depth at Side = 21m Operating Draft = 8.84m Displacement = 111,284t Light Ship = 70,962t CNG = 8,000t Oil=25,000t

Figure 15. 10.5 MMscm/200,000 Bbls CDTS FOCNGPSO Arrangements Figure 16 shows the midship structural arrangement. A smaller and A larger combinations are given in Table 6. Ongoing Work The initial class certification and a detailed manufacturing/facility plan are all underway. Also a detailed cost estimate for the CDTS tanks is being performed along with the manufacturing /facility Plan. 5.1 Structural Analysis Again the structural analysis of the CDTS for CNG was presented in an earlier paper (LAMB 2009) and only updates to those findings will be presented.

Table 6. CDTS FOCNGPSO Series

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-12

Figure 16. FOCNGPSO Midship Section Introduction ALTAIR Engineering Hyperworks was used to analyse the tank structure for CNG. Altair Engineerings Hyperworks is a computer-aided engineering (CAE) simulation software platform that allows businesses to create superior, market-leading products efficiently and cost effectively. The Hyperworks platform offers modeling & visualization as well as analysis & optimization solutions. The CDTS is a complex shape and as such does not lend itself to simple analysis. An advanced structural analysis approach is required. Starting from 2005, the Hyperworks suite of advanced structural de-sign, analysis and optimization tools were used to improve the design to meet the structural objectives which could not otherwise be attained by the proposed original design. This involved connecting the center of all faces by an internal cross brace. The finite element analysis and optimization was performed using Altair OPTI STRUCT, which is a linear finite element solver available in Altair Engineerings Hyperworks. An earlier paper (RAMOO 2009) describes the finite element analysis and optimization of the CDTS as applied for LNG applications. The CDTS was originally intended for LNG applications and was designed to withstand the hydrostatic and sloshing loads. A CNG tank will see none of those loads. Instead the design is driven by internal pressure and must meet ASTM and Classification Society Rules for pressure vessels. In this study a modified version of the CDTS is considered for CNG applications. The central cross brace was eliminated as shown in Figure 2 and the cylinders were directly connected. A brief overview of the different optimization techniques that are available in Altair Optistruct is presented in the next section. Results of the analyses and optimization of the CNG tank under internal pressure are discussed in the subsequent sections. Optimization Techniques The mathematical statement of any structural optimization problem can be posed as Minimize f(X) = f(X1,X2,Xn) Subject to gj (X) 0 j = 1,2,m Where f(x) is the objective function, X1,X2,Xn are the design variables and gj(X) are the constraints. Typically the objective function is the compliance of the structure for the given loading and boundary conditions and the constraint is on the mass, volume fraction of the material in the design space or any response like displacement, stress, etc. When there are multiple load cases, a weighted compliance is used as the objective. The weighted compliance is given by Cw = wiCi , where Ci and wi are the compliance and weight associated with each load case respectively. Topology Optimization Topology Optimization is a mathematical technique that produces an optimized material distribution/shape of the structure within a given package space. As in the size and free-size
Altair Engineering 2011 Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System 5-13

optimization, the objective function is typically the weighted compliance of the structure for the given load cases. The design variable is the material density of each element in the finite element model of the design space and it varies continuously between 0 and 1 which represent the states of void and solid respectively. A distinction should be made between this density and the physical mass density of the material of the structure. The goal of any topology optimization is to achieve a value of either 0 or 1 for the density variable. Since the density variable is continuously varying, many intermediate values are possible though not desirable. In order to avoid intermediate values for the density variable, a penalization technique is use and is given by K () = p K Where K is the actual element stiffness matrix (the real density of the material is used to compute the actual element stiffness matrix), K is the penalized element stiffness matrix, is the material density or the design variable and p is the penalization constant which varies between 2 and 4. Using a value of p greater than 1 gives a small value for the stiffness and thus penalization is achieved when the optimization problem is posed as minimization of compliance (or maximization of stiffness). For details of the different optimization techniques mentioned above the reader is directed to RA-DIOSS/OPTISTRUCT 9.0 Users Guide, Altair Engineering Inc., 2008. Free-Size Optimization In free-size optimization, the thickness of each element in the finite element model of the design space is treated as a design variable. This is the fundamental difference between free-size and conventional size/gage optimization. Unlike conventional size optimization, free-size optimization results in continuously variable shell thickness in the design space, between the given lower and upper bounds of the thickness. A part with variable thickness is typically far more expensive to manufacture and may not be a viable choice at first glance. It should be emphasized that the results of free-size optimization should not be considered as a final design. Based on this result, the design space should be subdivided into smaller zones and a conventional size optimization could then be performed to fine tune the thickness of the different zones. The design variables for this size optimization would be the thickness of various zones. Size/Gage Optimization Conventional finite-element based size optimization techniques require the use of engineering judgment or intuition to make a priori decisions as to how the design space should be discretized using different design variables. Based on how the design variables are defined, the optimization algorithm then iteratively explores the combination of design variable levels that minimizes the objective function subject to the constraints that were imposed. The number of design variables is typically limited to about 50 to 300 due to computational cost and effectiveness of computational search algorithms.

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-14

Figure 17. Baseline Design of the CDTS Any size parameter in the finite element model of the design space like the thickness of a shell component, the moment of inertia of a beam component etc. could be used as a design variable. Results: CNG Tank Baseline Design The baseline design of the CNG tank is shown in Figure 17. The tank made of 12 identical cylinders of diameter about 4.7m which intersect at the four corners to spherical caps. The size of the cube circumscribing the CDTS (excluding the base) is 10m. A uniform shell thickness of 100mm was initially assumed. The material used for the tank is manganesemolybdenum steel alloy with a modulus of 210,000 MPa and Poissons ratio of 0.3. The mass of the baseline design is 873 t. An internal pressure of 2000 psi was applied on the walls of the tank. Due to symmetry, a quarter model of the tank was considered for the finite element analysis. The base was constrained in vertical displacement and symmetry boundary conditions were applied to the two planes of symmetry. The contour plot of von Mises stress is shown in Figure 18. The average value of the ultimate strength of manganese-molybdenum steel alloy is about 800 MPa. The desired stress level was set as 400 MPa which is about 50% of the average value of the ultimate strength. As can be seen in Figure 18, a significant portion of the tank is above the desired stress level of 400 MPa. Topology optimization was then performed on the base-line design in order to determine the optimal material distribution that would result in a lower stress level. The design space used for the topology optimization is shown in Figure 19. The objective of the topology optimization was minimization of the compliance with a constraint on the volume fraction of the material as 30%. The design space was filled with first order tetrahedral elements. The load path or the optimal material distribution obtained from the topology optimization is shown in Figures 20 and 21. Using the load path of the topology optimization as a guideline, internal bulkheads were added as shown in Figures 22 and 23. Since topology optimization is a design tool used to provide critical insight to the structural load path, manufactura bility and fabrication considerations must be taken into account when interpreting these results.

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-15

Figure 18. Von Misses stress in Map Baseline A free size optimization was then performed on the modified design in order to determine an optimal thickness distribution that reduces the mass and yet maintains a lower stress level. The free-size optimization was posed as minimization of compliance due to the 2000 psi internal pressure with a stress constraint of 400 MPa and mass constraint of 500 t. The thickness of the various components of the tank was allowed to vary from15mm to 120mm. The continuously variable thickness distribution obtained from the free-size optimization is shown in Figures 27 and 28.

Figure 19. Design Space used for Topology Optimization

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-16

Figure 23. Load Path from Topology Optimization

Figure 24. Load pat from Topology Optimization

Figure 25. Bulkheads Incorporated based on the Load

Figure 26. Bulkheads Incorporated based on the Load Path from Topology from Topology

Figure 27. Thickness from Free Size Optimization

Figure 28. Thickness from Free Size Optimization

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-17

Figure 29. Discrete Thickness Map

Figure 30. Contour Map of Von Mises Stress (MPa)

Figure 31. Trimmed Bulkhead

Figure 32. Contour Plot of Von Mises Stress (MPa)

Figure 33. Contour Plot of Von Mises Stress (MPa) at the outer surface from Shell Model

Figure 34. Contour Plot of Von Mises Stress (MPa) at the outer Surface (skin) from Solid Model

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-18

Figure 35. Contour Plot of Von Mises Stress (MPa) at the inner surface from Shell Model

Figure 36. Contour Plot of Von Mises Stress (MPa) at the inner surface (skin) from Solid Model

Optimization Using the load path of the topology optimization as a guideline, internal bulkheads were added as shown in Based on these results, discrete thickness values were assigned to different parts of the tank so as to minimize the number of regions with disparate thicknesses. The mass of the tank is about 594 t. This discrete thickness map is shown in Figures 29. The resulting von Mises stress distribution is shown in Figure 30. With this thickness distribution the maximum stress is just above the desired level of 400 MPa. Considering the stress contours of Figure 30 and factoring manufacturability considerations, the internal bulk-heads were trimmed (Figure 31). The critical load path contours from the earlier topology runs also indicated a sparser material distribution on the bulkheads adjacent to the spherical caps. Additionally, limiting the welding of the bulkheads to the seams of the intersecting cylinders and cap instead of the center of the cap will significantly reduce construction complexities and the need to weld the bulkheads to the spherical caps. High stress concentration seen at the corners of the trimmed bulk-heads (Figure 32) could be addressed by designing in generous fillets in these regions. In order to determine the accuracy of the results of the shell model it was deemed necessary to compare the results of the shell model with that of an equivalent solid model. Hence a solid model with the same thickness as the shell model was created using hexahedral and pentahedral elements and the analysis was Figures 33 to 36 compare the results obtained using the shell and solid models. The results obtained are in good agreement. This adds credibility to the design and analysis approach using the shell model. For future work only the shell model will be used as it is easier to implement design changes to a shell model than a solid model.

6.0

Conclusions

The paper has shown the benefits of a new tank containment system, namely the CDTS, for the storage of LNG and/or CNG in floating offshore production and storage platforms, which compared to other existing designs: eliminated the sloshing problem for LNG platforms, improved volumetric efficiency for CNG storage,
Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System 5-19

Altair Engineering 2011

significantly reduced the size (length and displacement) compared to the other LNG and CNG systems currently being developed, reduced the estimated acquisition cost of platform (excluding containment system and processing plant cost) by 7%, reduced the Gross Tonnage and therefore many operating costs by 5% to 10%, reduced surface area for CNG containment sys-tems, and thus heat transfer, by a factor of 8 com-pared to VOTRANS and 50 compared to SEA NG,

all combining to offer a technical cost effective solution for both FDLNGPSO/FLNGPSO and FOCNGPSO /FCNGPSO. It also presented the results of the preliminary structural analysis showing the adequacy of the design while de-monstrating the use of ALTAIR Engineering's Hyper-works suite of software. Structural simulation studies evaluating trade-offs between material and fabricating cost with containment pressures and temperatures are currently ongoing.

7.0

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge with thanks the support of ALTAIR Engineering and their vision of a future for the CDT system.

8.0

References

LAMB, T, and RAMOO, R, "The Application of a New Tank Containment System to ULTRALarge LNG Carriers," Paper, OTC 2009 LAMB, T, and RAMOO, R., "A New Concept for CNG Carriers and Floating CNG/Oil Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms," CNG Forum, London 2009 RAMOO, R., PARTHASARATHY, M., SANTANI, J., and LAMB, T., "The use of Advanced Structural Analysis and Simulation Tools to Validate a New Independent LNG Tank Containment System," ICCAS 2009 NOBLE, P., LEVINE, R., and COLTON, T., Planning the Design, Construction and Operation of a New LNG Transpor-tation System Ships, Terminals and Operations, (2004) RINA International Conference on the Design & Operations of Gas Carriers, September 2004, London RADIOSS/OPTISTRUCT 9.0 Users Guide, Altair Engineer-ing Inc., 2008.

Altair Engineering 2011

Floating LNG/CNG Processing and Storage Offshore Platforms Utilizing a New Tank Containment System

5-20