Possible solution to past CM examination question

Question 7 - April 2005

Replacement module for offshore platform

by Christopher Clarke

The information provided should be seen as an interpretation of the brief and a possible solution to a past question offered by
an experienced engineer with knowledge of the examiners’ expectations (i.e. it's an individual's interpretation of the brief
leading to one of a number of possible solutions rather than the definitive "correct" or "model" answer).
Description and Interpretation of brief

The Client wants to replace a drilling module with a utilities module on an existing
offshore platform. The new module is to be equipped with a crane and is to be
supported on the platform at its four corner locations on gridlines 1 and 2 as per the
sketch. Fire and blast protection is to be provided to the module from an adjacent
process module by a blast wall located at the east end of the utility module. Internal
bracing is to be avoided in the module. The module is to be transported to the offshore
location by barge and lifted into place by a ‘single lift’ crane with maximum hook
elevation of +58m.

Loading data:
Crane weight = 80tonnes includes the boom weight = 15tonnes
Crane required to lift 40tonnes at a radius of 15m with a load amplification factor of 3
Utility module facilities loading of 15KN/m², internal and roof live loading of
5KN/m². Blast loading from adjacent process module to be taken as 0.80bar.

Q7 - 2005
Offshore facility structures are distinct from many other forms of structures in that
they have to endure several transient loading stages that occur before the structure is
located in place. Once the structure is in place it is then subjected to the location
environment loads, functional loading and the risk of accidental loading.
This replacement utility module question is a fairly commonplace example of a
structure that an Engineer working in the offshore industry can expect to encounter in
their career.

Engineers who have the challenge of developing a concept functional framing that is
stable, efficient in load transfer and does not invalidate the function of the module can
only be performed once the Engineer has attained a good understanding of the
magnitude and directions of the various transient, permanent and accidental loads. An
Engineer must be able to develop simplified load transfer diagrams for all load cases
and then be able to identify the dominant load case for each part of the structure.

The candidate’s functional framing proposed must consider and demonstrate the
influence on structure of the dominating load cases (i.e. where in the structure is their
dominance exhibited?). All proposals must satisfy the design boundaries that have
been set by the Client.

Presentation of load systems shows that the Engineer has the correct thought process
and indicates the Engineer’s understanding of how structures behave.

1. Dominant load cases, influence on structure and design limits:

1.1. Blast overpressure loads. Blast loads (classified as accidental loads) are now
common place for the design of offshore facilities. A feature of blast design
loads is their large magnitude compared to other loading conditions and that
they are combined with functional loads. In this question the blast loads are
horizontal onto the blast wall. The blast load of 0.8bar is 80KN/m². The total
blast design load is thus the blast wall area times by the blast pressure
(80x15x10=12000KN, the transmitted blast reaction can be reasonable
assumed to be reduced to 9,600KN to account for plasticity of the blast
wall). The Engineer needs to decide on the direction of the span of the wall
in order to configure the structure to support the wall. It is usual to span the
blast wall vertically. With this assumption made, the top and bottom chord
of the east truss needs to be part of a horizontal reactive system to
effectively transfer the blast wall reactions to truss 1 and 2 and to the module
supports. Trusses 1 and 2 will need to be configured to transfer the wall
upper blast reactions to the module supports. In order to establish the
dominant nature of blast on the chosen configuration, the wall reactive
forces should be compared to the horizontal transportation loads that the
module will experience during the sea tow.

1.2. Platform crane loads. The crane imposes large local forces on the module
due to its self weight and lifting operations. Crane loads are combined with
functional loads. The loads from the crane in this example come from the
bending moment due to the 40tonne dynamic lift at a lifting radius of 15m
and the self weight of the crane and boom being support some 5m south of
gridline 1. The candidate needs to consider the framing for lifts in all
directions. The dominating effect of the crane can be established by

Q7 - 2005
 comparing the couple imposed on the east module truss and the horizontal
loads developed during sea transportation.

1.3. Lift. The Client has specified a design limit that the module lift will be by a
‘single lift’ crane with maximum hook elevation of +58m. The Engineer
needs to configure a lift rigging scheme that satisfies the ‘single lift’ crane
and limited hook elevation. Ideally, true sling angles should not be less than
60° in order to ensure integrity of the crane hook, keep sling sizes reasonable
and to keep the axial forces in the module upper members to economic
levels. The Engineer needs to recognise that this limit is particularly
influential on the structural configuration of this utility module. Minimal
sling angles can be achieved by configuring the lift points closer together on
gridlines 1 and 2. To achieve this, the main truss framing needs to be
configured to suit these lift points. The Engineer needs to understand that the
lift points should not be configured too close together as there is the risk that
a shift in module lift centre of gravity will severely effect the module load
distribution. Alternatively the Engineer could configure the lift points to the
corners of the module where the module will have inherent strength at the
main trusses intersections. However the Engineer needs to be aware of the
impact of adopting low sling true angles on the module loads, sling and
shackle sizes required loads and crane hook stresses. The Engineer needs to
be able to assess the benefits/deficiencies of the two lift point location
options. For this utility module with the Client lifting constraints, it is not
efficient to install utilising spreader beams with such a restrictive hook
elevation.

1.4. Sea Transport. The Engineer can utilise industry standard transportation
inertial acceleration criteria to develop module forces. For acceleration
induced forces on the structure, the Engineer needs to understand how the
facilities will be supported in the structure. The Engineer can use experience
to expect that the majority of the facility load will be supported on the lower
deck level. For the sake of the examination an 80/20 ratio would be
reasonable. This ratio can then be used to determine the magnitude of
inertial generated load imposed on the roof level and the lower level. The
Engineer can reasonable make the judgement that supporting the module on
the same 4 module support points during transportation and inplace phases is
the most economical. The influence of sea transportation on the trusses will
depend in the framing directions of the two deck levels.
For a module on a large barge, transport accelerations of ±0.5g laterally and
±0.5g vertically may be used. Alternatively, a more rigorous NDA approach
may be made.

1.5. Loadout. The Engineer should try and configure the module framing and
loadout arrangement/ method that minimise any loadout dominance on the
structure. If the chosen method is by hydraulic trailers then the Engineer
should ensure that there is sufficient trailer axle capacity and that the
configuration does not overload the spanning capacity of the trailer spine
beams. If skidding is selected, appropriate level tolerance to be considered
and load transfer to be calculated for differential forces on skid shoes. Lift is
not considered acceptable as it is a very rare approach for a large module.

Q7 - 2005
2. Functional framing Proposals
2.1 Two functional framing proposals (A and B) are shown in the following
sketches. For one of the proposals the load transfer for all transient, permanent
and accidental load conditions are shown. Finally the load transfer is shown
for the governing dominant loadcases. To effectively produce functional
framing sketches, the Engineer has to understand the magnitude and direction
of all of the loads and how structurally to frame the module to effectively
resist these forces. By calculating the loads and the load transfer mechanism,
the information then exists to identify the governing loads for the various parts
of the structure. Performing this exercise the Engineer will begin to develop
feel for how the structure is behaving to the various loads that it will
experience during its life and the sensitivity to variances in these loadings. The
Engineer is also able to make decisions on framing decisions where a best
compromise is required. This experience will provide valuable information for
the Engineer for designing similar modules in the future. With this knowledge
the Engineer is able to clearly appraise his two proposals. This appraisal
should identify the merits and drawbacks of each proposal and can be
effectively presented by a series of bullet points for each scheme.

Q7 - 2005
3. Installation methodology statement
3.1 The Engineer needs to understand the sequence of events that are performed
in order to achieve a successful installation. This starts with weather
forecasting and monitoring, rigging to the crane hook and cutting of
seafastenings to guiding the module into place. The Engineer needs to be
familiar with the bumpers and guides on the module and receiving platform
that will effectively guide the lifted module into its final position on the
platform. The completion of the event involves setting down the rigging and
securing the module to the platform. All of these activities needing to be
performed in a safe manner without causing any damage.

4. Client changes
4.1 The Engineer needs to understand the structure that he/she has designed such
that the impact of changes can be accurately understood and clearly conveyed
to the Client. The Engineer also needs to understand the role and limits that
third parties may have with respect to the new utility module so that any
changes can be assessed to see if they impact them.

5 Calculations
5.1 Calculations should be performed to size: critical main frame trusses, deck
bracing for blast loads, examples of girders and deck beams, crane pedestal
and support structure, Padeyes/padears.

6 Sketches
6.1 It is recommended that ‘double line’ sketches are presented, as these help to
confirm that selected member sizes are sensible, and that the joint
configurations are reasonable (a major part of the Engineer’s task).

Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
Q7 - 2005
 Concept development

•develop two concepts that are:

stable, efficient in load transfer and do not
invalidate the function of the module
•show an understanding of the magnitude and
directions of the various transient, permanent
and accidental loads.
•develop simplified load transfer diagrams for all
load cases
•identify the dominant load case for each part of
the structure.
By performing this concept development
exercise you will demonstrate:

– How the structure is responding to the various

loads that it will experience during its life
– How sensitive the structure is to variances in
loadings.
– How to make decisions on framing where a
best compromise is required.
– How to clearly appraise hi two proposals,
identifying the merits and drawbacks of each
• Show an understanding of the sequence of events that
are performed in order to achieve a successful
installation. This includes
– Weather forecasting and monitoring,
– Rigging to the crane hook and cutting of seafastenings
– Guiding the module into place.
– Setting down rigging and securing the module to the platform.

• Be familiar with configuring bumpers and guides on the

module and receiving platform that will effectively guide
the lifted module into its final position on the platform.
• Show an understanding of the behaviour of the structure
such that impact of any changes can be accurately
understood and clearly conveyed.

• Calculations should be performed to size: critical main

frame trusses, deck bracing for blast loads, examples of
girders and deck beams, crane pedestal and support
structure, Padeyes/padears.

• ‘Double line’ sketches will help to show that selected

member sizes are sensible, and that joint configurations
are reasonable