OTC 19437

The Free Standing Flexible Riser: A Novel Riser System for an Optimised
Installation Process
J eroen Remery, Cristiano Silva, Olivier Mesnage, Technip

Copyright 2008, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 58 May 2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.


Abstract

Free Standing Hybrid Risers (FSHR) are being selected more and more often for floating production systems into ever deeper
water, in particular beyond 6500 ft, (2000 m). The main advantages of free standing riser systems are the possibility to
disconnect the project execution of the host platform and the riser system and to reduce the load applied by the risers on the
host. However a draw back of those systems is the need for installation spreads with high lifting and top tension capabilities
to install the buoyancy cans and rigid steel riser pipe as well as the criticality of the supply of some long lead items.

The Free Standing Flexible Riser (FSFR
TM
) allows keeping these advantages but at the same time reducing the requirement
for large offshore equipment for the installation associated with a Free Standing Hybrid Riser (FSHR). Beyond the obvious
difference of the replacement of rigid steel pipe by flexible pipe the FSFR
TM
allows a reduction of the riser top assembly and
avoids the large size tapered stress joints required for a FSHR. Offshore, flexible pipe installation vessels can be used and the
installation method, based on an initiation at the buoy, allows a significant reduction of the suspended length of pipe and of
thus of installation top tensions. Due to the pretension in the riser pipe at the seabed, the design challenges related to the axial
compression induced by the external pressure are avoided, and the flexible pipe design can be optimised.

The paper describes the FSFR
TM
in detail as well as the implication in terms of design of the flexible pipe and other elements
of the system. To give a complete picture the installation method and equipment used are also presented. Several case studies
are performed for different offshore areas and for different riser systems. Aspects as design, fabrication, installation and cost
are included in the comparison allowing to point out in which conditions the FSFR
TM
(for which a patent has been applied for)
is technically and economically a viable solution.

Introduction

Free Standing Risers are more and more often selected for very deepwater developments (PDET oil Export system on
Petrobras P52, Petrobras Cascade Chinook, BP Block 31, Exxon Kizomba). These systems are generally less cost efficient
than more traditional free hanging flexible risers and steel catenary risers but they can be of interest when the project needs
exceed the current proven capabilities of the more traditional technologies or when the system needs to be free standing to
allow a development of the subsea and risers independently from the host/topsides part of the field. A free standing riser also
allows disconnection of the risers in case of hurricanes for example. In addition a free standing riser system will allow
reducing the loads acting on the host floater (Ref 1.).

Several variations on such systems exist, the Free Standing Flexible Riser is another one in the family but with some very
specific particularities that allows a simplification of the offshore installation process.

2 OTC 19437

Riser Top Assembly
Riser Pipe
Spool piece and
PLET to Pipeline
Flexible Pipe
J umper
Buoyancy Can
Host Platform
Riser Base
Presentation of the FSFR
TM
Concept

To understand the concept of a FSFR
TM
the FSHR is a good starting point. A free standing riser is generally composed of the
following elements from seabed to surface:

The foundation to equilibrate the bottom tension will be large, it can be a drilled and grouted conductor, or a suction
pile.
The Lower Riser Assembly is the bottom of the riser, consisting of a taper stress joint and/or a flex joint and the
offtake spool. The Lower Riser Assembly is connected to the foundation via a automatic connector.
The Vertical Pipe Stem is generally made of standard API5L carbon steel pipe in the FSHR.
The Upper Riser Assembly is welded to the top of the riser string and consists of a Taper J oint.
The Top Riser Assembly provides the structural connection between the Buoyancy Can chain tether, the upper riser
assembly and the flexible jumper. The assembly includes a double bend piping terminated with a vertical outlet,
which is the vertical connection point for the Flexible J umper goose-neck.
The Chain Tether attaches the Top Riser Assembly to the Buoyancy Can. The chain is generally made of high
strength carbon steel links and is terminated at both ends with special low friction links that are required to isolate
the relative motions of the buoyancy can.
The Buoyancy Can connected at the top of the tether chain, maintains the tension in the riser. The Buoyancy Can is
generally made of several nitrogen filled compartments and can be of large dimensions to provide the tensions
needed: up to 600 te of net buoyancy.
The Flexible Jumper connects the freestanding section of the riser to the host platform. The J umper connection to
the freestanding riser is generally performed via a goose-neck and hydraulic connector.

























Figure 1: Main elements and layout of a Typical FSHR

The FSFR
TM
is based on the following modifications w.r.t the FSHR. The different alternatives are illustrated in figure 2.

The basic concept is to replace the rigid vertical section of pipe between the seabed and the buoyancy can by a
section of flexible pipe. This allows avoiding the taper stress joints which are critical fatigue elements and critical
procurement items with generally long lead times and limited numbers of qualified suppliers (figure 2, option A).
The FSFR
TM
can thus allow improving the project schedule or at least reduce the schedule risks.
The system can be further optimised by removing the RTA (Riser Top Assembly) and by pulling the flexible
through the buoy at the surface and hanging it off at the top of the buoy. The RTA is an expensive and complex
piece of equipment containing several large forged pieces. (65 te on the Petrobras PDET project) inducing a certain
procurement and schedule risk. Avoiding this TRA it is thus a good improvement (figure 2, Option B). It should be
OTC 19437 3


noted that the issues of fatigue of the rigid piping that prevents avoiding the TRA on an FSHR will be significantly
less on a flexible pipe pipe solution making this optimisation possible.
A third optimisation might be possible in some cases. Replacement of the riser base assembly by a simpler suction
can connected to an intermediate EF on the flexible by a tether. This is a variation on the design of the patented
pliant wave. This third optimisation requires a design of the bottom flexible pipe able to withstand the reverse cap
induced compressive force (figure 2, Option C).


















Figure 2: Possible Evolutions of the Optimisation of a FSHR to a FSFR
TM


Obviously the second and third configurations will be the preferred ones. The goose necks presented for the second and third
options in figure 2 between the jumper and the buoyancy can could also be a replaced by a section of buoyancy modules as in
a steep wave configuration. The choice will depend on project conditions as current profiles, buoy depth, connection modes
etc At both ends of the can the transition between the can and the flexible pipe will be protected by a bend stiffener (fig. 3).


Figure 3: Main components of a typical FSFR
TM

Option A Option B Option C
4 OTC 19437
Design Aspects of an FSFR
TM


Sizing of the Buoyancy Can

One of the main design elements for a free standing riser is the sizing of the buoyancy can. On a FSHR this is driven, by
several elements:

The submerged weight of the riser full of water,
The allowable angular deflection at the bottom, driven by the stress joint and/or flexjoint capabilities,
The allowable offset of the top of the riser and the buoy which is driven by clashing issues, with other risers or
mooring lines,
The fatigue induced by VIV response of the riser which varies with the tension in the riser pipe.

On a FSFR
TM
the same criteria will be relevant (although VIV to a lesser extend) but in addition it is important, for
reasons further explained in the next section, to compensate most of the external pressure induced axial compression on the
flexible riser pipe (also called reverse end-cap effect) with the pre-tension in the riser. This axial compression increases a lot
with the water depth and may reach very important levels, which explains why this new design criterion can drive the buoy
dimensions.

The reversed end cap effect is the compression induced by the external over pressure in the armour wires of the flexible
pipe. This phenomenon and the design impact on the flexible pipe are further detailed in the next section.

Specificities to the design of the flexible pipe induced by the FSFR
TM
Configuration

A flexible pipe is typically composed of the following layers (figure 4) with those functions:

An inner stainless steel carcass that provides collapse resistance.
An extruded thermoplastic pressure sheath that contains the inner fluid.
A carbon steel pressure vault that takes the hoop stress loads and contributes to the collapse resistance.
A pair of cross wound tensile armour wires that give the pipe its axial strength (compression and tension). Generally
carbon steel is used for the armour wires, for deepwater the armour wires can also be made of carbon fibre epoxy
composites.
High strength fibre tapes wound over the armour wires to avoid bird cageing.
An extruded thermoplastic external sheath that protects the inner layers from seawater ingress.




















Figure 4: Typical Flexible Pipe Structure, and flexible pipe with carbon composite armours

In deepwater the design of flexible pipe is mainly driven by the external pressure induced loads: resistance against radial
collapse and the resistance of the armour wire layers against buckling under the axial compression. (Ref. 3). In this section
the focus will be on the latter.
OTC 19437 5

Under the effect of axial compression the tensile armour wires of a flexible will tend to move outwards in a radial
direction. This phenomenon called bird cage is prevented by the high strength fibre tapes wound around the tensile armour
wires. As this mode of buckling is prevented a second mode can appear when axial compression is combined with cyclic
bending of the pipe at small radii: lateral buckling. The armour wires can in such cases buckle in a circumferential direction
around the pipe (lateral to the weak orientation of the wire) (figure 5). More details are provided about this failure mode in
Ref: 3.

In the pipe design lateral buckling is often addressed by a combination of different design measures including increasing
the armouring angle to reduce the pitch length and thus the buckling length and increasing the wire thickness and width.
However those design solutions have a weight and cost impact. Another method to increase the safety factor against lateral
buckling is to increase the smallest radius experienced by the pipe.














Figure 5: Illustration of Bird cage (left) and lateral buckling (right) failure modes as they appeared during tests (ref. 2).

In addition to ensuring very large bending radii of the flexible pipe (the pipe is almost straight), the FSFR
TM
riser
configuration provides an additional design solution to lateral buckling and bird caging. Indeed the pre-tension in the riser
induced by the buoyancy can counter acts all or part of the compression. This allows optimising the design of the armour
wires for the tensile loads:

reduce the armouring angle (lay the armours in a direction closer to the axis of the pipe) thus optimise their
efficiency in taking axial loads,
reduce the thickness of the wires which improves the weight budget,
reduce the width which improves the fatigue behaviour,
reduce the number of high strength fibre tapes needed to prevent bird cageing.

The pre-tension in the riser pipe has an additional advantage when carbon fibre armours are used. Indeed those composite
materials have an exceptional behaviour when under tensile loads but do not withstand very large compressive loads. The
pre-tension in the riser, cancelling the reverse end cap effect compression is thus beneficial for the application of carbon fibre
armours (figure 4).

An additional benefit of the FSFR
TM
(and any freestanding riser) compared to a riser hanging from the surface host
platform, is that the lower (vertical) part of the riser is decoupled from the motions of the surface floater. This will result in
much lower dynamics in that section of the riser. Lower top tensions and lower curvature variations allow further
optimisation of the pipe design or extend the capability to deeper waters.

In addition it is proposed to design the pipes with a flooded annulus per design to reduce the diameter on which the
external pressure applies and thus reduce the global compressive force induced by the external pressure.

Further optimisations are of-course possible for example by using multiple sections and adapt the collapse resistance of
the pipe as a function of the waterdepth.

Installation Aspects of FSFR
TM
Offshore Installation

The offshore installation of deepwater riser systems can be a significant contributor to the total cost of such systems. It is thus
important to consider the installation aspects early in the conceptual phase.
6 OTC 19437
MOONPOOL
S KIP SKIP
SK I P
Power S upply 380 V / 50 Hz Power Supply 440 V / 60 Hz
Power Supply 440 V / 60 Hz
O/B gutter
UPPER DECK CRANE PLATFORM 3100ABOVE
UP DN
DN
CASING ENGINE CASING ER VENT ER VENT DN FUNNEL
ENGINE CASING
DN
CASING
CRANE PEDESTAL
140 DN 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 20 30 10 0
P A I N T C H E M .V E N T .V E N T . V E N T .
V E N T .
1 0 52 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 05 1 0 1 50 7 04 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 6 5 9 5 1 0 09 08 57 5 8 0



The installation solution proposed for the FSFR
TM
is based on the use of a Flex-lay vessel (see figure 6). It will thus make the
vessel availability less critical compared to an FSHR which requires the mobilisation of a deepwater pipelay vessel. Indeed
across the industry the fleet of vessels with flexible pipe/umbilical installation capability is wider than that of deepwater rigid
pipe pipelay vessels. This will give more flexbility in the planning of the project and could allow an improvment of the
project schedule. In addition the use of flexible/umbilical lay vessels will result in lower day rates and thus reduced
installation cost.

At least one tug will be needed to maintain the buoy in position during pull-in operations. For the pull-in of the pipe in the
buoy a possible method is to locate the winch on the buoy. The winch will be recoverable. As the pull-in can be performed
with only a small catenary of pipe, the pull in load will be low and only a reduced size winch is needed. A flooding pump and
hose will also be required on the buoy to perform the ballasting operation.

The installation method proposed is typical of a flexible riser installation with a first end at the buoy (initiation at the buoy).
This allows reducing the catenary length by half and thus reducing the lay tensions.











Figure 6: Type of vessel used for FSFR
TM
installation (Constructor, Deep Pioneer, Sunrise)

Globally an installation will follow a sequence as such:

Buoy positioning/Start-up

The tug arrives on site towing the buoy. Mooring lines are passed between the installation vessel and the buoy
(figure 7).
















Figure 7: Positioning of the installation vessel and Buoyancy Can before pull in.



Transfer of riser extremity

The buoys wire is recovered in the installation vessel moonpool or aft work platform with assistance of the ROV.
The riser extremity is transferred towards the buoy until the pulling head is just below the buoy.
Then the riser is pulled in, the bend stiffener connected and riser head secured. (Figure 8).
OTC 19437 7
Installation vessel pays out the abandonment wire until the riser is vertical.
The flexble jumper can be connected in the dry at this point or be connected subsea at a later stage (This will depend
on the specific project schedule and arrival time of the host platform).

Pull down of the riser

The buoy is positioned over the riser base. The A/R winch wire is paid out until the pre-installed sheave can be
connected to the riser base. The buoy is pulled down step by step until 20 m over the riser base.
Then the pull down is completed by pulling down the riser and the buoy through a system of sheaves, cables and
submarine buoy allowing to exert a constant and controlled downward load free of any heave induced dynamics.






















Figure 8: Pay out of riser in a double catenary shape.



Study Cases

To complete the feasibility study some cases studies were performed:

Basis of Design

The study was performed on a generic case inspired from typical deepwater GOM prospects. It is characterised by the
following:

Water Depth: 2100 m
The host platform assumed is a disconnectable FPSO
Sweet Service
Different lines:
4 x 6 ID Prod lines (10,000 psi design pressure, 100 deg C design temperature)
1 x 7.7 ID Gas Export (4,000 psi design pressure, 50 deg C design temperature)
1 x 13.5 ID Oil Export (3800 psi design pressure, 80 deg C design temperature)

The jumper structures at the top of the riser are all the same but different pipe design are considered for the vertical pipe
section:

Flexible with Steel Armours,
Flexible with Carbon Fibre Armours,
Rigid steel pipe (FSHR).
8 OTC 19437

Riser design

The main elements of the riser design for the different options are presented in table 1 and 2 as well as figure 9.

Pipe Buoyancy Can
Sub weight
full of water
diameter length
net
buoyancy
Main Riser Design Parameters
Sweet Service Option
kg/m m m te
Rigid Pipe 116 4,5 33,4 430
Flex Pipe SA 109 4,5 25 322 6" prod
Flex Pipe CFA 59.7 4.5 18 232
Rigid Pipe 40,6 3,5 31,9 249
Flex Pipe SA 93,8 3,5 42 327 7.7" Gas Export
Flex Pipe CFA 44.9 3.5 29 226
Rigid Pipe 89,1 5,2 39,4 656
Flex Pipe SA 266 5,2 53 882 13.5" Oil Export
Flex Pipe CFA 126 5.2 38 633

Table 1: Sweet Service Riser design: Main parameters (SA: Steel Armours, CFA : Carbon Fibre Armours )

Main Flex Pipe Armour Wire Design
Armouring
Angle
Number of armouring
layers
number of High
Strength tapes
Flex Pipe SA 30 2 3
6" prod
Flex Pipe CFA 30 4 1
Flex Pipe SA 30 2 3
7.7" Gas Export
Flex Pipe CFA 30 4 1
Flex Pipe SA 30 4 4
13.5" Oil Export

Flex Pipe CFA 30 4 2

Table 2: Sweet Service Riser design: Details of the flexible pipe armours design.

It appears that for the two export pipes that have a low internal pressure and for which the designs are driven by collapse
the rigid pipe design is lighter than the flexible pipe. On the other hand for the production lines which were designed for
10,000 psi the flexible is lighter than the rigid steel pipe. This is caused by the use of higher strength steels in the flexible
pipe than in the rigid pipe. This advantage is not significant when collapse drives the design but becomes more important
when the design is driven by the internal pressure. This is illustrated in the graphs in figure 9.

The results in table 2 illustrate what was pointed out earlier. The armouring angles are all small at 30 deg, thus optimised
for the tensile load. While in general for deepwater flexibles higher armouring angles (35 to 40 deg) are selected to have an
increased resistance to armour wire lateral buckling. The number of high strength tapes that prevent bird cageing of the
armours could also be kept to a low value.

OTC 19437 9
Submerged Wei ght of Pi pe
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
6" prod 7.7" Gas Export 13,5" Oil Export
k
g
/
m
Rigid pipe
Flexible SA
Flexible CFA

Net Buoyancy of Can
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
6" prod 7.7" Gas Export 13,5" Oil Export
t
e
FSHR
FSFR SA
FSFR CFA


Figure 9: Submerged weight of riser and buoyancy can size for different designs

In this case study the Buoyancy Can (BC) sizing did not include the possible need to limit the offset of the riser top by
increasing of the pre-tension. In this study the max offset at the top of the BC was in the order of 200 m for the 100 yr loop
current. Such an offset could potentially cause clashing between risers and mooring lines and could thus cause a need to
increase the BC size to reduce the offsets. A senstivity study showed that an increase of 20% of the buoyancy can volume
could result in a reduction of about 30% of the offset for these cases that have an optimised buoyancy can size.


Cost Comparison

The cost estimation (accuracy: +/- 20%) considers several cases and several sensitivities (summarised in table 3)

The ratio of weight of steel of the Buoyancy Can over Net Buoyancy is chosen as a sensitivity to evaluate the
importance of the buoy design and dimensions in the global cost estimation.
The presence or not of a Top Riser Assembly (TRA) is studied as this is one of the main differences between an
FSFR
TM
and a FSHR, and an important cost item.
The use of J -lay or Reel lay installation for the FSHR using the Deep Blue are both considered as this influences the
lay rates.
The location of the field and the availability of installation vessels locally or their need to be mobilised from
overseas can have a significant impact on the cost and on the schedule of a project.
10 OTC 19437


Base Case Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6
Design:
Weight of steel/net
Buoyancy
0,30 0,50 0,30 0,30 0,30 0,30 0,30
Use of TRA for
FSFR
TM

TRA
Included
TRA
Included
TRA
excluded for
FSFR
TM

TRA
Included
TRA
excluded for
FSFR
TM

TRA
excluded for
FSFR
TM

TRA
excluded for
FSFR
TM

Installation
Scenario:

Field Location: USA - GOM USA - GOM USA - GOM Brazil Brazil USA - GOM Brazil
Rigid pipe
installation Vessel
DB,
mobilised
locally
DB,
mobilised
locally
DB,
mobilised
locally
DB,
mobilised in
Mobile
DB,
mobilised in
Mobile
DB,
mobilised
locally
DB,
mobilised in
Mobile
Rigid lay system J Lay J Lay J Lay J Lay J Lay Reel Lay Reel Lay
Flexible pipe
installation
Deep
Pionneer
Mobilised in
LT
Deep
Pionneer
Mobilised in
LT
Deep
Pionneer
Mobilised in
LT
Sunrise
mobilised
locally
Sunrise
mobilised
locally
Deep
Pionneer
Mobilised in
LT
Sunrise
mobilised
locally

Table 3: Overview of the Different Variations Investigated for the Cost Estimation


Results

A comparison of the different total cost is presented in the following table:

Comparison percentage wise
FSHR
FSFR
TM
- Steel
Armours
Base Case 100 97
Alt 1- Larger and Heavier Buoy Designs 100 97
Alt 2- TRA excluded for FSFR
TM
options 100 93
Alt 3 - Field Location Brazil 100 91
Alt 4 - Brazil TRA Excluded 100 87
Alt 5 - Reel Lay for Rigid (GOM) 100 103
Alt 6 - Reel Lay for Rigid (Brazil) 100 95

Table 4: Comparison of the Costs of the Different Options

The results presented in table 4 indicate that the cost differences observed between different solutions can vary for
different project conditions but that globally the costs of a FSHR and a FSFR
TM
are comparable. The FSFR
TM
can thus be
considered an economically viable concept that in some cases can even provide some cost advantages when itallows the use
of a locally available flexible/umbilical lay vessel and avoid the mobilization of a large rigid pipe deepwater pipelay vessel
from abroad.

OTC 19437 11
Conclusions

From this study it can be concluded that the Free Standing Flexible Riser is a technically feasible solution that allows further
extending the capabilities of flexible risers into deeper water. As the FSFR
TM
is installable with flexible/umbilical lay vessels,
that generally have a wider availability than deepwater rigid pipe pipelay vessels, it can create opportunities for schedule
optimisations or reduction of schedule related risks. The good fatigue behaviour of flexible pipe allows leaving out some of
the critical elements required in an FSHR as the large structure of the riser top assembly and the tappered stress joints. This
reduces the issues and risks related to procurement of such long lead items. Cost evaluations and comparisons performed for
different scopes in different regions show that the FSFR
TM
can compete with equivalent solutions as free standing hybrid
risers, and even provide some cost advantage when itallows the use of a locally available flexible/umbilical lay vessel and
avoid the mobilization of a large rigid pipe deepwater pipelay vessel from abroad.

Additonal work is ongoing to further optimise this concept namely with the use of carbon fibre armours for the flexible pipe
which will allow reducing the riser weight and the buoyancy can size and with the study of specific designs for the buoyancy
can.


References

1. J Chung, W.A Dupont, C Mastrangelo, B. Hartman Development of EPS FPSO and Riser System for Deepwater Gulf of
Mexico OTC 19679, Houston 2008.
2. F Bectarte and A Coutarel, Instability of tensile Armour layers of Flexible Pipes under external pressure. OMAE Vancouver
2004.
3. A Novitsky, S Serta Flexible Pipe in Brazilian ultra Deepwater fields: A proven Solution. DOT 02, New Orleans 2002


Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all the people that have provided their assistance or advice in the realisation of this study for their
contribution in the different corporate research departments and in the regional offices of Technip and in particular the
inventors of the FSFR
TM
(Isabel Waclawek, Philippe Espinasse, Alain Coutarel).