1. Kumang Cluster Drilling Platform (F9JT-A)
Present by:
DANAZ Consultant

2. Board of Directors Datuk Seri Ir Muhammad Azfar Bin Mohd Zuber
Project Director
Ir Muhammad Nur Dahlan Bin Abd Razak
Geotechnical Engineer
Ir Mohamad Zulbahari Bin Mohamad Zu
Environment Engineer
Ir Siti Nazira Binti Mohd Som
Water Resource Engineer
Ir Anis Dalila Binti Dawam
Structural Engineer

3. Presentation Outline Project Background Topside Analysis
Jacket Analysis
Sustanaibality
Conclusion

4. PROJECT BACKGROUND

5. Location coordinate :
Kumang Cluster fields consists of Central Processing Platform (CPP) Kanowit Field (KAKG-A), F9JT-A wellhead, Kumang (KUJT-A) wellhead, and Kanowit (KAJT-A) wellhead. The Kumang field is located approximately 200km from the MLNG plant offshore Bintulu, Sarawak. 
The drilling platforms will be designed for unmanned operation with interconnecting pipelines to KAKG-A.
Minimum facilities with only small power generation, pedestal crane, telecommunication, well head control panel, pig trap, wet gas metering, vent system, temporary shelter, and helideck.

6. KUMANG DRILLING PLATFORM (F9JT-A)
04 ̊ 25’ 56”.774 N, 111 ̊ 47’ 23”.584 E, KUJT-A
04 ̊ 22’ 01”.983 N, 111 ̊ 57’ 58”.682 E, KAKG-A
-85 m elevation
20.5 km
178.0 km
198.0 km
MLNG in Bintulu

7. TOPSIDE ANALYSIS

8. Outline Basic Design Criteria Load Data Analysis Miscellaneous
Design Load
Load Combination
Metocean Criteria
Wind Load characteristic
Analysis
Design Load Imposed
In-place Analysis
Design Brief for Flare Boom
Miscellaneous

9. BASIC DESIGN CRITERIA Serviceability design life 25 years.
Slenderness ratio requirement
KL/r ≤ 120 (PTS).
Rolled tubular diameter to thickness ratio
Check tubular diameter to thickness ratio (D/T) –
Range: 20≤D/T≤60
Deflection limit - (PTS).
LRFD Resistance Factor

10. Cont.. LRFD Resistance Factors Tubular Non-tubular
Yield stress factor = 1
Tubular
Axial tension factor = 0.95
Axial compression factor = 0.85
Bending factor = 0.95
Shear factor = 0.95
Hoop factor 0.8
Non-tubular
Axial tension factor = 0.9
Bending factor = 0.9
Shear factor = 0.9

11. Cont.. Plate Girder per AISC – Grating and plating –
Practical lightweight –

12. LOAD DATA
Design Load
A total of 93 Load Cases were considered in the design analysis including (Both topside and Jacket analysis):
Self-weight of Structures
Live loads
Environmental load
Wind load
Equipment support load
Drilling loads
Future loads

13. Cont..
The loads were obtained based on the Vendor’s supplied weight and generated automatically by computer
i.e; Structural Dead Load (computer generated), Drilling load (calculated based on T9- Tender Assisted Platform Rig)
The load cases were further divided into three cases:
1-year operating condition
100 year-storm condition
Maximum gravity and hydrotest condition
The helideck is designed based on maximum load of Sikorsky-S92 Helicopter
Widow maker reaction with various rig position also being applied

14. Cont..
Load Combination
A total of 21 load combinations are listed as follows:

15. Cont..
Load combination contain various combination of load cases stated previously with designated load factor
Various directional degree were considered to define the direction of maximum load combination contribute to max unity check

16. Cont.. Metocean Criteria based on PTS :BARAM DELTA (WATER DEPTH 75m)
At Mid-depth : 0.5*85m = 42.5m
At near seabed : 0.01*85m = 0.85m

17. At water depth of 85m under MSL and the wave period of 8.9 seconds,
the wavelength (L) = 124m.
Wave celerity = m/s.
Water particle velocity
horizontal = m/s.
vertical = m/s.
Water particle accelerations
horizontal = m/s
vertical = m/s
Water particle displacements
horizontal = m
vertical = m

18. Cont.. Wind Load Characteristics
Design wind loads were generated in accordance with API-RP2A [3] recommendations.
One minute duration wind speed 17m/s and 24m/s at 10 m elevation above MSL.
The wind force calculated is included in the load cases previously.
Top side structure
Wind directions
10 meters
MSL
Side view of top side structure.

19. Plan view of top side structure.
Cont..
Wind Directions
Plan view of top side structure.

20. Cont..
Forces on flat surface are assumed to act normal to the surface.
Forces on cylindrical surface are assumed to act in direction of the wind.
Shape Coefficients.
Beams
Sides of building
Cylindrical sections
Overall projected area of platform - 1.0

21. ANALYSIS Design Load Imposed
Load Case 62 to 97 is excluded from topside analysis because it involve wave and current
No wave and current effect should be applied to topside structure
Following are the list of the waves and currents:

22. Cont..

23. Cont..
In-place Analysis UC
DEFLECTION
SLENDERNESS

24. Effective Slenderness Y-Y Effective Slenderness
Cont..
Check for max slenderness
Structure Section
Member
Group
Effective Slenderness Y-Y
Effective Slenderness
Z-Z
Remarks
topside
JT2
98.38 OK
C1G
71.91
73.65
92.06
110.88
110.84

25. Cont..
Identifying member in POSTVUE

26. Cont.. Design Brief for Flare Boom
The platform orientation according to SACS axis defined

27. Cont.. The orientation of the tower is opposing X-direction because;
Wind force is bigger at positive Y-direction
FX = 119 kN
Fy = kN
Thus, flare will not be blown to the deck at most critical wind condition

28. Cont.. Different Side View of Flare Boom in Precede
(arrow showing critical joints)

29. Cont.. Member Unity Check for maximum UC
Joint Unity Check –especially for critical joints; joint attach to the deck:
5193
7891
7889
Manually calculated according to API-RP2, Section:
4.3.2
4.3.4
4.3.6
and 4.4 (Overlapping Joints)

30. Cont..
Information is extracted from POSTVUE in SACS

31. Cont.. Joint Strength Unity Check 5193 0.45 7891 0.32 7889 0.65 9019
0.21
Member
Member Code
Max Unity Check
Critical Condition
Load Case
FAA
0.344
TN+BN DL
0.146
C<.15
FAG
0.183
C>.15A

32. Cont.. Minimum and Maximum material thickness GROUP MIN (cm) MAX (cm)
SECTION C1
1.0
1.5
Topside C4
2.54
CRA
2.5 D1 DL
4.0 FA
0.8
1.3
Flareboom HE
1.59 RG
1.27 T
Telecom Tower

33. MISCELLANEOUS
Maintenance and Inspection Inline with Operating Philosophy
Inspector: should have demonstrated ability and experience, or be qualified to codes AWS (D ), ASME/ANSI, equivalent
Fabrication Inspection
Materials are in good quality with specific requirements
Made during all phase of fabrication (pre-fabrication, rolling, forming, welding, interim storage, erection, etc.)
Welding inspection and testing aim to prevent introduction of defects into weld
Other inspections: loadout, seafastening, transportation and installation inspection

34. Cont..
Crane Boom Rest
Design for dead load of the crane plus minimum of 2 times static loads
No increase in dynamic loads is required
Design to resist fatigue during the life of structure

35. Drilling Interface (ISO)
Cont..
Drilling Interface (ISO)

36. Cont..

37. Deck plating –
Joint detail design –
Access service platform -

38. Cont.. Installation of the platform (API) –Mating Method
“Deck mating" and "float over"
Used for a deck.
Installation when the weight of the deck exceeds the available crane capacity.
Installation of decks of the semi-submersible vessels over their hulls.
Mostly done onshore.
Hookup and commissioning : Single piece completed onshore.

39. JACKET ANALYSIS

40. Outline Basic Design Criteria Analysis Miscellaneous Splash zone
Marine Growth allowance
Analysis
Design Load Imposed
In-place Analysis
Miscellaneous
Cathodic Protection
Shear Keys

41. BASIC DESIGN CRITERIA Splash Zone Splash zone
The splash zone is defined as that region below +5.0m MSL and above -3.0m MSL for Malaysian waters.
Top side structure
Splash zone
+5 meters
10 meters
MSL
-3 meters
Side view of top side structure.

42. Cont.. Marine Growth allowance:
Marine growth increases wave forces (increasing member diameter and surface roughness) and mass of the structure
MUDLINE ELEVATION = M
ZONE ABOVE
MUDLINE (M)
THICKNESS (CM)
DENSITY (TON/CUM) CD CM
ROUGHNESS HEIGHT (CM)
TYPE
0.00
74.00
0.000
1.02
1.300
CONSTANT
83.00
5.000
2.500
95.00
10.000
6.400

43. ANALYSIS Design Load Imposed:
Excluding load case 40 to 61 as it is driven by wind force
A total of 22 load cases were excluded for the jacket analysis.
Following are the load cases excluded:

44. Cont..

45. In-place Analysis
Max UC

46. Effective Slenderness Y-Y Effective Slenderness Z-Z
Cont..
Check for max slenderness
Structure Section
Member
Group
Effective Slenderness Y-Y
Effective Slenderness Z-Z
Remarks
jacket
1A4
107.49
12.16 OK
2BH
105.27
9.76
35.6
3JH
109.45
18.89
3NH
109.49
55.06
4BH
109.51
27.95
12.67
5A2
115.11
73.18
115.34
73.33
CON
90.42
mudmat
KB1
111.27
168.38
165-A096
MM1
95.41
74.46

47. Check for min and max material thickness
GROUP
MIN
MAX
SECTION 1
0.45
2.54
Mudmat (steel)
0.8
Mudmat (main) 2
0.5
Jacket Plate 3
0.6 4 5
Jacket Bracing
CS1
Conductor
CT1
1.59
JST
1.27
KB1
Mudmat Steel
KB2 L
Jacket Main Chord M
0.7 RT
0.65
Riser V
3.5
Jacket Vetical Member

48. MISCELLANEOUS
Cathodic Protection (PTS)Sacrificial anode systems are to be designed.
Type B1: to be used for all platform designs for oil field.
According to PTS code. (Appendix VI)
5 wells for F9.
Surface area of jacket = 435m².
Surface area of piles and conductors = 150m².

49. Cont.. Establish total current required (I) = 46.15 Amps.
Establish total alloy weight (M) =
4492 kg
Establishment number of nodes =
Number of anodes by mass = 13 anodes
Number of anodes by current = 9 anodes

50. Cont.. Summarize design Total mass = 4628 kg.
Polarization current available = Amps.
Polarization current density = 263.
Maintenance current available = Amps.
Maintenance current density =
End life current available = Amps.
End life currency density =

51. Shear Keys (API) LOAD CONDITION CREST POSITION M DEG LOAD
MUDLINE ELEVATION
MAXIMUM SHEAR AT MUDLINE
186.09
345.00 kN
-94.8M
MINIMUM SHEAR AT MUDLINE
56.64
105.00 kN

52. SUSTAINABILITY

53. Decommissioning Complete removal Partial removal
Explosive
Non-explosive
Partial removal
Reuse: bring to onshore and process

54. Proposed alternative Use the structure as attractive vacation spot
Submerge the structure as breeding spot for aquatic life

55. Sustainability: Decommissioning

56. CONCLUSION

57. TYPE OF STEEL, DIMENSION USED

58. Before
After

59. BACKUP SLIDE

60. Total force for inclined member (API RP2A)

61. V1T (357 – 401)

62. V1T (357 – 401)

63. Inertia and Drag Force (API RP2A)

64. Vertical member. (VA2 - 202 - 206)

65. Vertical member. (VA2 - 202 - 206)

66. Leg member. (L )

67. Leg member. (L )

68. Horizontal member. (3EH - 514 - 519)

69. Horizontal member. (3EH - 514 - 519)

70. Adequacy of a tubular cross-joints (API)

71. (4A )

72. (4A )

73. Total force for inclined member

74. V1T (357 – 401)

75. V1T (357 – 401)

76. Weld Improvement Techniques
Minimum structure tend to be less stiff than conventional structures, hence dynamic effects and fatigue are of more concern even in shallow water depth
Post-weld fatigue improvement techniques may be used to improve fatigue life.
Well profiling
Weld toe grinding
Full profile grinding
Hammer peening
Post-Weld Heat Treatment

77. JACKET LOAD CASES FATIGUE ANALYSIS:
Cannot be done by using SACS due to lack of input data:
Fatigue Input File
First Common Solution File