Redefining Riser-Guard System for Fixed

Offshore Platforms
Palaniandy, D.K.1, Syed, Z.I.1, Liew, M.S.1, and Karuppanan, S.2
1

Civil Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Tronoh, Malaysia

Email: nesharan@gmail.com
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Tronoh, Malaysia
Email: {second.author, third.author}@hostname2.org

Abstract Steel riser-guards are provided to protect the

risers in offshore platforms against accidental collision from
supply vessels. In the absence of riser-guards, vessel
collision can damage risers and result in severe oil spill, or
even explosion. Conventional riser-guards consist of a mesh
made of welded steel tubular members are used to shield the
risers from a vessel impact. Repair or replacement of a
conventional riser-guard can be costly when its integrity is
compromised due to vessel impact. At present, the
performance and structural response of conventional riserguards are not well studied. In this paper, the collision
mechanism for conventional steel riser-guard systems is
presented. Prospect of using commercially available high
strength steel wire mesh to replace the conventional steel
riser-guard is explored.
Index Terms Impact, offshore supply vessels, riser guard

I. INTRODUCTION
Conventional riser-guards consisting of tubular steel
space frames are designed to resist static forces
equivalent to a collision [1]. Steel riser-guards on jacket
platform provide a shield for the risers against accidental
vessel collision. These risers in some cases extend on the
outer side of the jacket, secured against the jacket braces
or jacket leg for additional support. Crude oil or drilling
fluids are carried to and from the platform deck and
seabed through the riser. The conventional steel riserguard was installed on jacket platforms in Malaysian
waters to provide means of protection against offshore
supply vessel impact. In an event of collision, any plastic
deformation observed on the conventional riser guard
must be followed by maintenance work, which requires
the removal and replacement of the tubular members.
Due to the heavy weight of the conventional riser-guard
system, repair and replacement of the riser-guards can be
time consuming, costly, and involves major safety
concerns. However, without riser-guards, accidental
vessel collision with risers can cause severe damage and
even results in major explosion.
Vessel collision with offshore structures has been
highlighted in many design manuals and standards for
offshore structures design [2-5]. The main focuses of
those studies were based on the structural response of the
overall offshore structure. The structural response and
performance of conventional riser-guards were however,
not highlighted. The design of conventional riser-guards
is often dictated by the design principles for boat fenders.
Better understanding of the structural response and

behaviour of conventional riser-guards can provide

economic and more promising option in material and
design of riser-guard. A riser-guard can experience a high
number of collision incidents over its design life. In a
research report published by the HSE department of UK,
the number of offshore collision events that took place
between the years of 1975 and 2001 by vessel types was
reported [6]. Table I shows the summary of published
collision incidents reported in the UK Continental Shelf.
Although, the collision incident reported in the database
is not specifically for riser-guards, it can clearly indicate
the frequency of these types of events involving offshore
structures and their components. A review conducted
based on the collision incidents in the UK part of North
Sea [6] suggests various divisions of collision
assessments, which are classified by different shipplatform involvements.

TABLE I
REPORTED COLLISION INCIDENTS IN THE UK CONTINENTAL SHELF
FROM THE YEARS OF 1975 TO 2001 [6]
Vessel
type
Number of
Incidents
Percentage
of
occurrence

Supply
Vessels

Standby
vessels

Attendant
vessels

Passing
Vessels

Unspecified
vessels

353

87

74

35

63.4%

15.6%

13.3%

1.4%

6.3%

II. COLLISION MECHANICS

Impact force due to collision largely depends on the
vessel mass, velocity at impact, and the time taken by the
vessel to stop. One of the main approaches that were used
to estimate vessel collision force on cable stayed bridges
is the Impulse-Momentum approach [7]. This approach
equates the impact force to the change in momentum of
the impacting vessel, as in the following equation.
(1)
where m is the total mass of vessel (kg), and
are the
initial and final vessel velocity (m/s) respectively, and t is
the vessel stopping time (s). The same approach was also
used by US Army Corps of Engineers to determine the

impact forces of wooden debris on floodplain structures

[8].
Guidelines on impact forces on a vessel colliding with
platform legs are also presented in the DNV
recommended practice for design against accidental loads
[3]. The collision forces were established based upon the
penetration of an infinitely stiff steel cylinder (D=1.5m)
for jacket legs, and large cylindrical columns (D=10m).
From this study, the recommended deformation curve for
bow, stern, and broadside impact was established. Figure
1 shows the deformation curve as recommended by DNV.

reduction in impact force [1]. Mild steel with typical

yield strength of 240 MPa is commonly used for the
conventional riser-guard.

Figure 2. Conventional riser-guard on fixed offshore platforms

Figure 1. Recommended Deformation curve in DNV RP-C204 [3]

During impact, the kinetic energy of impacting vessel

will partly remain as kinetic energy, and partly dissipated
as strain energy by riser-guard, platform and also vessel
deformation [3]. The amount of collision energy to be
dissipated depends on the purpose of the installation.
Current design approach used for the conventional riserguard in the PETRONAS Technical Standards (PTS) [9]
is an adoption of the boat fender design criteria which can
be found under Section 4.11 of Design Criteria for
Substructures of PTS. Table II shows the impact energy
required to be absorbed by installations i.e riser-guards as
highlighted in PTS with respect to operating vessel
displacements.
TABLE II
DESIGN IMPACT ENERGY OF CONVENTIONAL RISER- GUARD
SYSTEM BY PTS [9]
Vessel displacement (Tonnes)
1000
1500
2000
2500

Energy (MJ)
1.00
1.25
1.80
2.25

III. CONVENTIONAL RISER-GUARD SYSTEM ON FIXED

OIL PLATFORMS
PETRONAS has been using a riser protection system
that is similar to a boat fender on their fixed offshore
platforms in Malaysian waters. This simple system
shown in Figure 2 consists of welded steel tubular
members forming a mesh-like structure, shielding the
risers against vessels. This design is plasticity based
where it allows the riser-guard to undergo large
deformation for higher energy dissipation and for

The conventional riser-guards are not designed in

compliance to any specific standard or design as there is
no such established requirements yet. At present, the
conventional riser-guard configuration is a mere
adaptation of the boat fender configuration. The
following issues have been identified over the use of
conventional riser-guard on fixed jacket platforms:
i.

ii.

iii.

Excessive weight: A 14 m wide and 10 m high

conventional riser-guard system weighs up to 63
tonnes.
Huge cost: Due to its weight, floating vessels
will have to be used to install the conventional
system on existing platforms. The rate of
floating vessel usage is known to be around RM
500,000 (approximately 150,000 USD) per day.
Time
consuming:
The
installation
on
conventional system requires welding works that
not only involves time and large workforce, but
also raises safety issues.
IV. OTHER RISER-PROTECTION SYSTEMS

A. Barge Bumper Boat Landing and Riser Protector

(BBBLRP)
This type of riser protection was introduced by Oil and
Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) of India after the fatal
collision between Mumbai High North oil and gas
platform and a 4400 tonnes supply vessel. This collision
resulted in 22 perished crew members and a total damage
amounting up to USD 195 million to the [10]. This
incident was ranked as the 7th costliest disasters as of
2007 by The International Association of Drilling
Contractors [11]. The ONGC introduced BBBLRP
system is similar to the conventional riser-guard, as
shown in Figure 3. BBBLRP was developed by the
Dolphin Offshore Enterprises (India) Ltd in consortium
with Naftogaz [12].

This system consists of the protector (16), upper

portion (16A) and lower portion (16B). The upper portion
shaped as a truncated cone is mounted just below the
semi-submersible platform deck and is meant to resist
contact with ice floes (9) while the bottom portion (16B)
of the protector which is shaped as a grid-like truncated
cone diverts the ice floes away from the riser [14]. In the
event that the semi-sub platform is subjected to high
wave impacts and no ice floes, these protectors can be
easily detached to reduce wave impact on the protectors
[14].

Figure 3 BBBLRP system developed by DOEIL and Naftogaz [12]

B. Riser Protection on Tension-Leg Platforms

Tension Technology International (TTI) has developed
Riser Protective Nets (RPN) using synthetic polyester
fibre ropes capable of bearing a maximum tensile load of
up to 650 tonnes and halt a 7500 tonnes deadweight
supply vessel moving at 2m/s with an equivalent kinetic
energy of 22MJ [13]. This system however undergoes a
large deflection during impact and is not apposite for
fixed platform. As of the year 2002, TTIs RPN have
been installed on a number of tension leg platforms such
as Auger TLP (Shell), Heidrun TLP (Conoco), Asgard B
FPS (Statoil), Modec Prince Mini TLP and Modec Marco
Polo Mini TLP [13]. Figure 4 shows the RPN system
developed by TTI attached to an oil platform.

Figure 4. TTI's RPN system installed on oil platform [13].

C. Marine Riser Protector

Oil platforms operating on icy waters are always at risk
of being struck by ice floes. To combat this situation, in
the year 1985 Nobuyoshi Yashima has designed a system
that protects risers below the semi-submersible platforms.
Figure 5 shows an image of the riser protector.

Figure 5. Riser protector system by Nobuyoshi Yashima [14]

D. Potential Replacement System

At present, no studies have been published on the
mode of dynamic reaction forces transmission to the
jacket legs during vessel collision against the
conventional riser-guard. Dynamic reactions are a vital
factor if the conventional riser-guard design has to be
improved or replaced with other systems.
High strength steel wire meshes are often used in a
number of practises, namely for security engineering and
geohazard solutions. For security engineering, steel wire
meshes are used for prevention of intrusion and escape in
penitentiaries, boat barriers for offshore facilities and
harbour, protection fence at motorsport arena, armoured
vehicles and ships protection against rocket propelled
grenades (RPG), and crowd control at major events.
Geohazard solutions comprise of protection against
rockfall, unstable slopes, landslide, mudflow and
avalanches [15]. As far as offshore applications are
concerned, Geobrugg [15] produced fixed security
barriers to prevent boat intrusion, which has been very
useful as a protection against security breech by terrorists.
Geobruggs GBE system which is made of the TECCO
and SPIDER wire meshes is believed to possess the
capacity to replace the conventional riser-guard with the
advantage of being lighter and easier to attach. This
particular system can sustain impact energy of up to 8000
kJ, which is much higher than the requirement stated in
PTS. However, this system is very flexible and can only
be used as riser-guard if the deflection upon impact can
be controlled. At present, the minimum gap between
riser-guard and risers on the conventional system is about
1.5 m. Figure 6 shows the GBE system by Geobrugg
being tested by dropping a 20 tonne concrete block from
a height of 43 m right through the protective net.

Figure 6. Geobrugg's GBE system being tested against free falling

20 tonne concrete block generating 8000 kJ impact energy.

At the point of impact, the concrete block attains a

speed of 103 km/h. With proper modification to control
the net deflection upon impact, this system can
potentially replace the conventional riser-guard. In an
event that the GBE system is proven to possess the
capacity to replace the conventional riser-guard, methods
to attach the system onto existing platforms will have to
be established. Prior to the development of new
attachment system, the mode of dynamic support reaction
on the conventional system will have to be studied.
V.

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Preliminary investigations were conducted to find the

performance of the conventional riser-guards and also to
explore the possible suitability of GBE system as a
possible alternative. Non-linear transient structural
analysis was conducted on a 14 m wide conventional
riser-guard system, using ANSYS Transient Structural.
Impulsive force equivalent to a broadside collision of a
2500 tonne vessel with an impact velocity of 1.5 m/s is
applied to the model. The stopping time of vessel is
assumed to be 0.4 s and the resulting deformation
corresponding to the impulse force is presented in Figure
7.

Figure 9. Model strain energy upon impulse load application.

Strain energy presented in Figure 9 only accounts for

the symmetric model. This implies that the total strain
energy for a full model will be twice as the symmetric
model, which is approximately 2.6 MJ. The PTS standard
for 2500 tonne vessel impact is 2.25 MJ and the variation
between the model result and design standard is
approximately 15%.
CONCLUSIONS
The preliminary investigation on the conventional
riser-guards and the possible substitute indicate that indepth invesitigation on the load transfer mechanism and
structural response of riser-guard can contribute to a new
and efficient riser protection for offshore platforms.
Further study on the support reaction of conventional
riser-guard will help in designing suitable connection
systems for the high strength wire mesh as potential
alternative to the existing riser protection system.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Figure 7. Conventional riser guard response due to impulse load

application.

The resulting strain energy from impulse load

application and dynamic support reaction for the model is
presented in Figure 8.

The authors would like to express their highest

gratitude to Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP), the
Offshore Engineering Centre of UTP and also
PETRONAS Carigali Sdn. Bhd for their utmost
cooperation in this research. A special note of gratitude
also goes to family and friends for all their since the
commencement of this research.

REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]
Figure 8. Resulting support reaction correspondoing to impact
energy and impulse load application.

[4]

M.A.
El-Reedy,in:Offshore
Structures
Design,
Construction and Maintenance, ion, Gulf Professional
Publishing, Oxford 2012, p. 192.
American Petroleum Institute: Recommended Practice for
Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore
Platforms-Working Stress Design, Washington: American
Petroleum Institute, 2007.
Det Norske Veritas: Design Against Accidental Loads,
Oslo: Det Norske Veritas, 2010.
International Stadard (ISO: 19902), Petroleum and
Natural Gas Industries-Fixed Offshore Steel Structures,

vol. Edition 1, Switzerland: ISO, 2007.

[5] J.P. Kenny,in: Protection of Offshore Installation Against
Impact, HMSO Books Publishing, London, 1988.
[6] J.K. Robson: Ship/platform Collision Incident Database,
HSE Books, Norwich, 2003.
[7] A. A. Sayed and W. A. Attia, Finite Elements Analysis
Techniques of Vessel Collision with Cable-Stayed
Bridge, Life Science Journal, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 11791190, 2012.
[8] R.B. Haehnel and S. F. Daly, Maximum Impact Force of
Woody Debris on Floodplain Structures, Virginia, 2002.
[9] W.B. Shiiun, Design of Fixed Offshore Structures,
PETRONAS, Kuala Lumpur, 2012.
[10] N.K. Mitra, P. K. Dileep and A. Kumar: Revival of
Mumbai High North-A Case Study, Mumbai, 2008.

[11] L. Hutchison: Well-Informed, American Society of Safety

Engineers, vol. 2, no. 3, 2007, p. 8.
[12] Information
on:
http://www.dolphinoffshore.com/mp_bbblrp.asp.
[13] Information
onhttp://www.tensiontech.com/papers/technical_notes/T
N04_Riser_Protection_Nets.pdf.
[14] N. Yashima, Japan Patent 4,505,618. (1985)
[15] Information on http://www.geobrugg.com/contento/enus/tabid/2775/Default.aspx.