Asset Integrity Assessment and

Management Program for life

preservation of a purpose-built
FPSO and associated subsea
system facilities

Dr Abe Nezamian Director, Asset Integrity Management

www.advisian.com
Low oil price
During challenging market conditions,
effective integrity management of offshore
assets is more important than ever to
ensure theyre safe and reliable.
FPSO
Floating facilities for production, storage and offloading
(FPSO) and subsea facilities are effective options for
exploiting offshore oil and gas resources in remote
marginal fields.
While they offer the industry significant benefits,
they also present a number of complex
challenges to the Asset Integrity Manager
FPSO Overview
 There are currently
+240 floating facilities in service,
with more planned in the future.
Most FPSOs were built after 1997, having less
than 19 years in operation.

Some may be taken to dry dock

Studied FPSO

Schiehallion needed to
Challis Venture be replaced by 2015

Jabiru Venture Nan Hai Kai Tuo Rubby Princess

Lack of data
Although there is considerable growth for these type of
facilities, its generally recognized that when compared
to trading tankers, FPSO/FSOs have limited experience
from which to draw historical data and trends.

As a result, there is limited data for Asset Integrity

Management decision making.
Schiehallion FPSO
Non-disconnectable purpose-built FPSO, with a design life of 20 years
Design constrained
Built with the best available construction
Production fluids worse than expected
Increasing defects (operations expenditure 50% higher)
Operations efficiency down to 60%
Expecting major obsolescence hit
Has been replaced

Source: NOV team

The Schiehallion FPSO
needed to be replaced by 2015
due to poor integrity and field performance 3 years
short of its initial design life

Shutdown period is about 1 year, requiring:

New risers, umbilicals and mostly new mooring lines (12 to 20)
Re-used flowlines/SS hardware

Source: NOV team

Out of all the potential failures to occur on a
FPSO, almost all happened to this facility
Major events as developed for the Joe Leghorn review:

High
Switchboard
Polytropic
connections
tubing
Manageability

Emergency Framo System

Fare tip gen fails Main Gen
failure Seawater
Shuttle tanker
Major Leak incident system failure
PSV failures

Tree corrosion Subsea pipe corrosion Drill centre

Production / erosion / erosion disabled
equip failure Mooring Hull + pipe-
Turret manifolds integrity work defects
T/S sand impact
Swivel fails
Low Thruster failure Riser failure Ware/green Low IR Turret
Fire air water damage struct
compressor

1 5 10 20 40

Low Consequence (Mmbbls) High

Incident occurred on Schiehallion FPSO

 These integrity issues regarding
Schiehallon are not unique, but rather
common with FPSOs
Asset Integrity Management (AIM)
For an FPSO part of the deep-water oil and gas
development in Africa, an AIM program needed to
be developed to prioritize and maximize resources for
availability, while maintaining the risk profile of the
facility (as low as reasonably practicable)
Key features of the facility include:
FPSO hull and topsides + mooring lines + suction piles
Modular topsides
SPM buoy
Flow lines, risers and export line
Umbilicals
Drilling wells
Subsea manifolds
Other subsea equipment
Asset Groups
The asset data was grouped into three parts, based on functionality:

Asset Group Asset Type

Subsea Systems
Main Field Wells
Subsea Flowline Systems

Risers and Umbilicals

Mooring System

FPSO Hull

Topsides Main Facilities

Topsides Utilities

Mooring System

SPM Offloading System

SPM Buoy
Data was stored and secured
in a unique database and
accessible in real-time by
anyone who was acting on
the AIM activities.
AIM Process

Design Data update Decommission

Data Evaluation Strategy Program

Managed system Evaluation of Overall Detailed work

for recording, integrity and inspection, scopes for
archive and fitness-for-service; monitoring, inspection
retrieval of AIM development of maintenance, activities and
data and other remedial actions mitigation and execution to
pertinent records decommissioning ensure integrity
philosophies of asset
The most critical part of the process is
data capture and gap analysis
Data Requirements

Design Basis Data Environmental Data Regulatory Data Operational Process

Requirements Requirements Requirements Data Requirements
General Facility Data Metocean Certification Authority Heat & Mass Balance

Original & Current

Design Data Seismic Facilities Safety Case
Operational Performance

Fabrication Data Soil Data Scheme of Examinations Process Chemistry

Installation Data Weather Events Process Description

Production Limitations

Production Rates

What is developed in the design stage of a development is often based off

presumptions. Once all the required data has been collected, what is done in
the design stage can be recalibrated - data from operations is now available
and therefore uncertainty can be narrowed and reliability increased.
Data Requirements
Condition Data Requirements Engineering Assessment

In-service Inspection Reports Engineering Evaluation

Incident Reports Asset Integrity Manual

Modifications Scour Trend Analysis

Anomaly Register Marine Growth Trend Analysis

Weight Report Corrosion Assessment

Condition Monitoring reports Damage Evaluation

Corrosion Protection Mitigation

Risk Assessment
Analyse data to build a trend for lifecycle
management - look at all the implications Structural Assessment
and determine how these will be managed
for the life of the asset.
Gap Analysis Methodology
Complete a couple of rounds of gap analysis to ensure all data and information has been captured
and correlated to the AIM program.

Component Data
Breakdown Requirements

CDMS
(data
management
Gap Analysis system)

Received /
Conclusions Required Data

Operator Asset Management team

 Performance Indicators
The Performance Indicator area is where degradation, issues and problems can be identified. Its important
to have systems in place to pick up issues before they happen.

Set point Performance Indicators (PIs)

when new required as aging starts Represents design set point
1
when new

1 Represents performance
2 2 degradation that survives
3
through life extension
Performance standard

5 Represents performance
3
degradation that survives to end
Minimum acceptable Life of design life
performance level extension
Structural Integrity Represents performance
4
degradation requiring repair /
Assessment confirms that replacement but still following
acceptance level is the bath tub wear out curve
achieved, exceeded or not
achieved Represents rapid degradation
5
before end of design life
Time
Original design life
Asset Integrity Assessment Criteria
Complete a couple of rounds to optimize and develop the Asset Integrity program, and to develop
an action list.

Condition Risk
Assessment Assessment

Optimized
AIM program

Minimum
Action List
Acceptance

Available AIM System

Safety Management
As part of the review, all safety values need to be put in place as well as a sound monitoring system.

PREVENT DETECT CONTROL MITIGATE

Containment Gas/flame ESD Blowdown Fire protection,
detection deluge

STOP STOP STOP

Hazard

Release Event
Risk Management
Critical throughout the management of an assets integrity program.

Review of the entire

process at intervals to
ensure it continues to be
1.
effective
Establishing the context

Risk identification
3. Risk assessment

2. 5.
Communication and Risk analysis Monitoring and
consultation review

Risk evaluation

This underpins the 4. Monitoring at every

overall risk management Risk treatment stage, feeding back to
process, should occur improvements based on
throughout the cycle increased understanding
and be two-way (as
shown by the arrows)
FPSO degradation mechanisms examples
Operational degradation
Topside facility CP and coating degradation
Marine growth
Subsea systems
CP system depletion
Subsea pipelines internal and external corrosion
Fatigue
Scouring
Erosion
Crane systems de-rating
Examples of FPSO degradation
FPSO degradation mechanisms root causes
Active SRB (Sulfate Reducing Bacteria) corrosion:
A bacteria that obtains energy by oxidizing organic compounds or molecular
hydrogen (H2) while reducing sulfate (SO2) to hydrogen sulfide (H2S)
Breathes" sulfate rather than oxygen
Not familiar
Could be a driving factor for corrosion rate
Have been found on mooring lines and suction pile
SRB can lead to 2x the corrosion, not
accounted for in the design stage.

A program needs to be developed

to control these events.
Purposed RBI Methodology
Qualitative and quantitative risk assessment is required in some cases quantitative data is not available.

Probability of
Asset Hierarchy Qualitative failure
Risk
Subdivision Assessment
Ranking
Tag System (HAZID) Consequences of
failure

Inspection
Plan

Quantitative Detailed RBI

Review of the Component
Assessment of Failure
Documentation Selection
(FDF) (FDF <10)
Risk Rating and Prioritizing

The risk matrix for the project was simplified into three
ratings, helping to prioritize maintenance:

Risk Rating = 1 (unacceptable) design

improvements/mitigations are strongly
recommended;

Risk Rating = 2 (ALARP - As Low

As Reasonably Practicable) design
improvements are suggested;

Risk Rating = 3 (acceptable)

- design features already prevent/
mitigate failures.
AIM Program Implementation

AIM
Manual Maintenance
Philosophy Specifications

Workflow
Inspection RCM
Specifications
Specifications

Workflow
Component
Specifications

Work Package

Workflow

SMR CMMS /
Database
Risk Assessment
Software/Database RBI
Conclusions
Carefully review AIM program and available data
Conduct a gap analysis of the data and determine the areas
for improvement
Update the AIM system and data management systems to optimize
the Asset Integrity Program
Develop a baseline of conditions
Conduct a risk assessment and prioritize maintenance
Develop an acceptance criteria
Determine required mitigations to achieve ALARP Level and
maintenance of fitness-for-service
Develop Requalification and Life Extension plans for the operating
life of the asset
Find out more

Contact:
Abe Nezamian
Director, Asset Integrity Management
E: abe.nezamian@advisian.com

Visit our website:

www.advisian.com
DISCLAIMER
This presentation has been prepared by a representative of Advisian.
The presentation contains the professional and personal opinions of the presenter, which are given in good faith. As such, opinions presented herein
may not always necessarily reflect the position of Advisian as a whole, its officers or executive.
Any forward-looking statements included in this presentation will involve subjective judgment and analysis and are subject to uncertainties, risks and
contingenciesmany of which are outside the control of, and may be unknown to, Advisian.
Advisian and all associated entities and representatives make no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of
information in this document and do not take responsibility for updating any information or correcting any error or omission that may become
apparent after this document has been issued.
To the extent permitted by law, Advisian and its officers, employees, related bodies and agents disclaim all liabilitydirect, indirect or consequential
(and whether or not arising out of the negligence, default or lack of care of Advisian and/or any of its agents)for any loss or damage suffered by a
recipient or other persons arising out of, or in connection with, any use or reliance on this presentation or information.