Book contents
- Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- Cambridge Ocean Technology Series
- Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface to the Second Edition
- Preface to the First Edition
- 1 Introduction to Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- 2 Structural Steel Selection and Construction
- 3 Ocean Environmental Conditions
- 4 Site-Specific Wave-Induced Hull Girder Loads
- 5 Serviceability Limit States
- 6 Fatigue Limit States
- 7 Ultimate Limit States
- 8 Accidental Limit States
- 9 Mooring System Engineering
- 10 Sloshing Impact Engineering
- 11 Seismic Impact Engineering
- 12 Aircraft Impact Engineering
- 13 Quantitative Risk Assessment and Management
- 14 Life-Cycle Corrosion Assessment and Management
- 15 Lifetime Healthcare and Safe Decommissioning
- Book part
- Index
- References
9 - Mooring System Engineering
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2022
Book contents
- Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- Cambridge Ocean Technology Series
- Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface to the Second Edition
- Preface to the First Edition
- 1 Introduction to Ship-Shaped Offshore Installations
- 2 Structural Steel Selection and Construction
- 3 Ocean Environmental Conditions
- 4 Site-Specific Wave-Induced Hull Girder Loads
- 5 Serviceability Limit States
- 6 Fatigue Limit States
- 7 Ultimate Limit States
- 8 Accidental Limit States
- 9 Mooring System Engineering
- 10 Sloshing Impact Engineering
- 11 Seismic Impact Engineering
- 12 Aircraft Impact Engineering
- 13 Quantitative Risk Assessment and Management
- 14 Life-Cycle Corrosion Assessment and Management
- 15 Lifetime Healthcare and Safe Decommissioning
- Book part
- Index
- References
Summary
A mooring system, thrusters, a dynamic positioning system or a combination of these elements is critical for the station-keeping of a floating structure in various environmental conditions involving wind, waves and current. Thus, position keeping and motion control are both required to enable the functional and operational requirements of ship-shaped offshore installations to be met. The analysis of the fluid dynamic behaviours of offshore installation structures above sea level, which are subjected to wind, involves a different set of complications from the analogous analysis of submerged parts, which are subjected to waves and current.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ship-Shaped Offshore InstallationsDesign, Construction, Operation, Healthcare and Decommissioning, pp. 288 - 302Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
ABS (2014). Rules for Building and Classing Floating Production Installations. American Bureau of Shipping, Houston, TX.Google Scholar
API (2001). Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Floating Production Systems. API Recommended Practice 2FPS, American Petroleum Institute. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Boggs, D., Barton, C., Albaugh, E. K. and Davis, D. (2020). ‘2020 worldwide survey of floating production, storage and offloading (FPSO) units’. Offshore Magazine/Endeavor Business Media, Houston, TX, August/September.Google Scholar
Cabrera-Miranda, J. M., Sakugawa, P. M., Corona-Tapia, R. and Paik, J. K. (2018). ‘On design criteria for a disconnectable FPSO mooring system associated with expected life-cycle cost’. Ships and Offshore Structures, 13(4): 432–442.Google Scholar
Daniel, J., Mastrangelo, C. F. and Ganguly, P. (2013). ‘First floating production storage and offloading vessel in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico’. Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 24112, Houston, TX, 6–9 May.Google Scholar
De Leon, D. and Ang, A. H. S. (2008). ‘Confidence bounds on structural reliability estimations for offshore platforms’. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 13: 308–315.Google Scholar
DNV (2015). Fatigue methodology of offshore ships: Recommended Practice, DNV-RP-C206, Det Norske Veritas, Oslo.Google Scholar
Eckert, C. and Gatzert, N. (2017). ‘Modeling operational risk incorporating reputation risk: An integrated analysis for financial firms’. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 72(C): 122–137.Google Scholar
HSE (2001). Rationalisation of FPSO design issues: Relative Reliability Levels Achieved between Different FPSO Limit States. Health and Safety Executive, London.Google Scholar
Li, D., Yi, C., Xu, Z. and Bai, X. (2014). ‘Scenario research and design of FPSO in South China’. Proceedings of the Twnenty-fourth International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference, Busan, 15–20 June.Google Scholar
LR (2016). Rules and Regulations for the Classification of Offshore Units. Lloyd’s Register, Southampton.Google Scholar
Ma, K. T., Luo, Y., Kwan, T. and Wu, Y. (2019). Mooring System Engineering for Offshore Structures. Gulf Professional Publishing, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Shimamura, Y. (2002). ‘FPSO/FSO: State of the art’. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 7: 59–70.Google Scholar
Stahl, B. (1986). ‘Reliability engineering and risk analysis’. Planning and Design of Fixed Offshore Platforms, edited by McClelland, B. and Reifel, M. D.. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Villa-Caro, R., Carral, J. C., Fraguela, J. A., Lilla, M. and Carral, L. (2018). ‘A review of ship mooring systems’. Brodogradnja/Shipbuilding/Open Access, 69(1): 123–149.Google Scholar