Proceedings of the Twentieth (2010) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

Beijing, China, June 2025, 2010

Copyright 2010 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE)
ISBN 978-1-880653-77-7 (Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set); www.isope.org

Jacket Launch and Self-Upending Analyses with Small-Hole Flooding Scheme

Min He, Huailiang Li, Zhiquan Wu, Wentai Yu, Jianwei Qian, Dr. Alan M. Wang
Installation Division, Offshore Oil Engineering Co., Ltd.,
Tanggu, Tianjin, China

approximately 240 km South East of Hong Kong, which is located in a

water depth of 200m with a 0.82m MSL. The total weight of the jacket
is about 16,200Te with a top dimension of 18,00044,000 at EL(+)8m
and a bottom dimension of 74,00074,000 at EL(-)197.67m. The total
height of the jacket is 212.32m. The world second largest 30,000Te
launch barge was used to launch and self-upend the 16,200Te jacket. A
small-hole flooding scheme was employed to launch and self-upend the
large jacket. The jacket is designed with 13mm free-flooding holes at
the jacket bottom members to self-upend the jacket upon launching.
Refer to Fig. 1 for the jacket pre-launch condition.

ABSTRACT
The 30,000Te new-built launch barge CNOOC 229 was used to launch
the 16,200Te Jacket for the PY30-1 Project. This is the first time to
adopt a small-hole flooding scheme to launch and self-upend a large
jacket in the Chinese waters. The jacket is designed with 13 mm freeflooding holes at the jacket bottom members to self upend the jacket
upon launch. This paper describes the launch and self-upend analysis
methodology whose findings are used to determine the pre-launch
condition and guide the jacket installation design and operation
procedures. The software MOSES is used to perform the 3-D time
domain launch and self-upending simulations. The analysis results are
used to predict barge and jacket trajectory, check barge and jacket
stability, verify barge global strength and rocker arm strength, and
perform jacket structural analyses during launch and just upon launch.
The parametric sensitivity study of jacket launch and self-upend
analyses are performed to gauge the effect of jacket weight and CoG
variation on the jacket launching and upending, thus identifying
hazards and risks during jacket installation and developing contingency
plans to ensure a safe operation.

KEY WORDS: Jacket Launch; Self-Upending; Small-Hole Flooding;

Parametric Sensitivity Study.

NOMENCLATURE
EL
CNOOC
MSL
LCG
TCG
VCG
CoG
GM

Fig. 1: Stern View of PY30-1 Jacket Pre-Launch Condition

= Elevation
= China National Offshore Oil Corporation
= Mean Sea Level
= Longitudinal center of gravity
= Transverse center of gravity
= Vertical center of gravity
= Center of Gravity
= Metacentric Heights

This paper describes the launch and self-upend optimization study

whose findings determine that an initial draft of 11.0m associated with
4.25 degrees trim by stern is an optimal pre-launch condition. The
software MOSES was used to perform the launch and self-upend
analysis with small holes flooding scheme in 3D time domain. A
parametric sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the effects
of varying several jacket properties, thus guiding the jacket installation
design and helping develop the installation procedures. A series of the
3-D time-domain launch and self-upending simulations were conducted
to predict barge movement and jacket trajectory; to check barge and
jacket stability during launch; to verify barge global strength, local
strength, and rocker arm strength; and to perform jacket structural

INTRODUCTION
The Panyu 30-1 Gas Field is located at Liuhua Block 07 area in the
basin of Pearl River Delta in South China Sea. The PY30-1 Platform is

400

analyses in 75 basic load cases including pre-tipping, tipping,

intermediate stages between tipping and separation, separation, and
after separation. The jacket parametric upending analysis was
performed to investigate the feasibility of the jacket self upending and
to determine if the jacket floodable members could accomplish a self
upending. The findings were used to check against the minimum
requirements of bottom clearance and final reserve buoyancy. The
predicted time for the nominal jacket to self upend is approximately
two and a half hours, which has a general agreement with the selfupending record of two hours and 45 minutes.

where

S = cI + fC + K

s = s [ aI + dC ] q(t1 ) [bI + eC ] q (t1 )

Once

INSTALLATION & ENVIRONMENT CRITERIA

Table 1 summarizes the design environmental criteria that were applied
to the launch barge upon arrival at the installation site. The total
environmental forces acting on the launch barge due to design sea
states can be decided. This information is used to determine the
requirement of positioning tugs for barge station keeping prior to
launch.

BASIC ALGORITHMS
Time domain processes were used to initiate jacket launch and upend
analyses, which are simply a set of configurations which satisfy the
basic equations of motion. The equations of motion are quite important
since they are the only means of properly accounting for all aspects of
this problem of interest. Unfortunately, the time domain analyses are
also computationally expensive. These equations of motion are
differential equations, or called Integro-Differential Equations. A
Newton Method is employed to provide an effective solution by
converting them into a sequence of algebraic equations. There are many
techniques which can be used in this process, each of which can claim
superiority in certain situations. The one which seems to work well in
most circumstances, and is described below, is the Newmark method.
The equations of motion can be written as follows:
(1)
Iq(t ) + Cq (t ) + Kq (t ) = s

Table 1. Design Environmental Criteria for Launch Barge

Environmental Parameters

is the

Table 2. Launch Barge Station Keeping Loads at Launch Draft

Wind Force (KN)
Wave Force (KN)
Current Force (KN)
Total Environment
Force (KN)

(2)
from

Eq. 2 yields

(3)

where

a = 1

1
2

d = 1

,
2

1
1
c=
,
,
2

e = 1 ,
f =

b =

(4)

Combining Eq. 3 and Eq. 1 gives the following equation which can be
solved for the location at t2.

S [ q (t 2 ) q (t 1 ) ] = s

Head Seas

Quarter Seas

1,283kN
156kN
904kN
2,342kN

1,463kN
379kN
12,555kN
14,397kN

Beam Seas
1,625kN
580kN
17,730kN
19,935kN

The following points highlight the operation criteria associated with the
launch of the jacket:
1) During launch, the intact jacket bottom clearance shall be no less
than 5.0m or 10% of water depth (200m), whichever is greater,
that is, 20.0m. When one compartment is damaged, the jacket
clearance shall be greater than 0.0 m.
2) Based on the nominal total intact buoyancy, the jacket reserve
buoyancy shall comply with the following criteria.
y After launch, the intact reserve buoyancy shall be no less than
15%;
y After launch, when one compartment is damaged, the reserve
buoyancy shall be no less than 5%.
3) After launch, the transverse and longitudinal metacentric height
GM shall be a minimum of:
y The Intact GM shall be no less than 0.5 m;
y The Damaged GM shall be no less than 0.2 m.

q(t2 ) = aq(t1 ) + bq (t1 ) + c [ q (t2 ) q (t1 ) ]

q (t2 ) = dq(t1 ) + eq (t1 ) + f [ q (t2 ) q (t1 ) ]

200.62m
2.5m
5.7 8.7 sec
ISSC
1.0m/sec
17.6m/sec
NPD

The initial launch barge condition is a draft of 11 meters amidships and

a trim angle of 4.25 degrees by stern. Table 2 shows the total
environmental forces are estimated at the design sea-state criteria.

generalized force. The solution at t2 can be estimated from the known

solution at time t1. Therefore, Eq. 1 can be rewritten as:

q(t2 ) = q(t1 ) +
q (t2 ) = q (t1 ) + q(t1 ) +
1
q (t2 ) = q (t1 ) + q (t1 ) + 2 q(t1 ) + 2
2
where = t 2 t1 and , , are constants. Eliminating

Value

Nominal Water Depth

Significant Wave Height
Range of Peak Period
Wave Spectrum
Surface Current Speed
1-Minute Mean Wind Speed at EL(+) 10m
Wind Spectrum

Where I is the inertia matrix which depends only on the inertial

properties of the body, the generalized coordinates, and perhaps the
time. The matrices C and K are the tangent damping and stiffness

q (t2 ) is obtained, Eq. 3 can be used to solve q(t2 ) and q (t2 ) .

Eq. 3 is nonlinear in that all of the quantities depend on q (t 2 ) . In

practice, MOSES iterates this solution evaluating the functions at the
last iterant until the change in location is less than a specified tolerance.
Also, a few words should be said about the Newmark parameters
and . The defaults are 0.25 and 0.5. There is almost no numerical
damping with these values. Refer to Nanchlinger (2001) for details.

These parametric sensitivity analyses were also used to gauge the

effects of jacket weight and center of gravity variation on the jacket
launching and upending and thereby identifying hazards and risks
during jacket installation and developing contingency plans to ensure a
safe offshore operation.

matrices at the state ( q0 , q 0 ) respectively. The vector

(6)

(5)

401

4)

The reserve buoyancy is reported as a percentage of the submerged

buoyancy and is calculated using Eq. 7:

At the time of jacket tipping, the jacket velocity, relative to the

barge, shall be a minimum of 1.0 m/sec.

R=

LAUNCH ANALYSES

S W

100%

(7)

W
Where R is the reserve buoyancy, S is the submerged buoyancy and W
is the jacket weight.

The MOSES software was used to perform the 3D time-domain launch

simulations of the PY30-1 jacket. This analysis with different barge
launch conditions determined the optimal pre-launch condition of the
barge and also predicted barge and jacket trajectory. A parametric
sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the effects of varying
several jacket properties, thus guiding the jacket installation design and
helping develop the installation procedures. The jacket was transported
onboard and launched from the launch barge CNOOC229. Descriptions
of the jacket and barge models are provided in the following.

The launch legs, modeled simply as tubular sections in SACS, were

converted to LLEG shapes in MOSES. This shape allows for better
representation of the prismatic section of the launch runners/cradles.
The SACS member loads and buoyancies were adjusted to account for
the changes in these sections.
The bottom of each jacket leg was allowed to free-flood up to EL(-)
189 m. This is the elevation of the bottom bulkhead in each leg. Above
this bulkhead, each outer leg has three compartments, namely Ballast
Tank, Trim Tank, and Weight Tank, which were included in the model.
These tanks will be flooded sequentially for final setdown and are not
used within the launch analysis except for investigating damaged
conditions during the parametric analyses. Table 4 describes the leg
compartments. The jacket legs above EL (-) 124.3 m are modeled as
void spaces.

Jacket Model
The MOSES jacket model was converted from the SACS in-place
jacket model. The coordinate system of the jacket is the in-place
coordinate system, where the origin is located at the waterline and the
center of the jacket. The x axis is positive towards Row 4, the y axis is
positive towards Row B, and the z axis is positive up. Fig. 2 shows a
plot of the MOSES model and defines the coordinate system.

Table 4. PY 30-1 Jacket Flooding Leg Compartments

Tank
Name
Ballast A1
Trim A1
Weight A1
Ballast A4
Trim A4
Weight A4
Ballast B1
Trim B1
Weight B1
Ballast B4
Trim B4
Weight B4

Table 3 summarizes the weight and submerged buoyancy of the jacket.

Table 3. PY 30-1 Jacket Model Summary
Value

Parameter

Weight

158517.67 kN

XCG
YCG
ZCG
KXX

-0.20 m
-3.64 m
-113.99 m
68.90 m

KYY

69.10 m

Submerged
Buoyancy
XCB
YCB
ZCB
Res. Buoyancy
w/
members
void
Res. Buoyancy
w/
members
flooded

KZZ

33.90 m

Maximum
Ballast
1554.4 kN
1625.1 kN
1631.5 kN
1554.4 kN
1625.1 kN
1631.5 kN
1554.4 kN
1625.1 kN
1631.5 kN
1554.4 kN
1625.1 kN
1631.5 kN

Bottom
Elevation
-189.000 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-189.000 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-189.000 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-189.000 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m

Top
Elevation
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-124.300 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-124.300 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-124.300 m
-167.800 m
-146.000 m
-124.300 m

The horizontal framing members at EL (-) 197.67 m and at EL (-)

183.00 m and the vertical braces between these elevations are flooded
via two 13mm holes per member. In addition, the tubular mudmat
support members are flooded via similar holes. Since all of these
members will not be flooded until they are submerged and the flooding
time is much longer than the time to complete the launch, the flooding
of these members is not considered in launch analyses. The flooding of
these jacket members will be only considered during the upend
analyses.

Fig. 2: Coordinate System of Jacket MOSES Model

Parameter

Analysis
ID
BLLA1
TRMA1
WTA1
BLLA4
TRMA4
WTA4
BLLB1
TRMB1
WTB1
BLLB4
TRMB4
WTB4

Value
187,444.59 kN

Launch Barge model

-0.15 m
-3.50 m
-110.86 m
15.43 %

The length overall of the launch barge is 215.00m, the breath moulded
is 52.50m, the depth moulded is 14.25m, the lightship weight is
approximately 27075.44Te with LCG = 111.41m, TCG = 0.00m and
VCG = 8.08m. Fig. 3 shows the coordinate system of the launch barge
model.

7.17 %

The maximum allowable submergence of the barge hull during launch

is 38 meters. The barge launch skid beams are 2.035m deep resulting in
the height of the skid beams above the keel of 16.285m. The rocker pin
is located at 213.65m from bow and the tilt beam depth at pin is 7.535m.

402

The barge/jacket stability was evaluated at three stages during launch:

y
Jacket at the initial position, i.e. the trailing end of jacket is at
32m aft of the bow;
y
Jacket just prior to tipping, i.e., the trailing end of jacket at
139.5m aft of the bow;
y
An intermediate position, say the trailing end of jacket is at 89.3
m aft of bow.
The jacket/barge system passes the stability criteria for all optimization
cases. For the base case, the results of the stability study are presented
in Table 6.

Fig. 3: Coordinate System of Launch Barge Model

Launch Optimization Study

Table 6. Base Case Jacket/Barge Stability Results

Initial
Position
Stability 60 > 20
Range
Area
13.03 > 1.4
Ratio

In order to determine the ideal pre-launch condition of the barge, a

launch optimization study was performed. This study included running
a launch analysis for several combinations of initial vessel draft and
trim. Barge drafts amidships ranging from 9m to 11m and trim angles
of 3 to 5 were considered. In all, a total of 35 cases were investigated.
The main purpose of this was to determine the ideal pre-launch
condition of the barge and to verify that the jacket designers prelaunch condition was suitable. Each case considered the barge/jacket
stability during pre-tipping stages, the global barge strength and the
rocker arm reactions. For some cases, jacket structural checks were
performed to investigate the effects on the jacket.

Intermediate
Position
GM
8.88 > 0

Pre-Tipping
Position
GM
9.34 > 0

Heel
Angle

Heel
Angle

0.19 < 1

0.16 < 1

Base Case Launch

Based on the results of the optimization study, the base case launch
condition was selected. This case uses the nominal weight and CoG of
the jacket, a dynamic coefficient of friction of 0.06, and an initial draft
of 11 meters and an initial trim of 4.25 degrees. A three dimensional
time domain analysis was carried out for the base case jacket. The time
steps that were used during the launch analysis is 0.125 seconds prior to
tipping, 0.075 seconds after tipping and before separation, 0.250
seconds after separation until end of simulation, respectively.

For all cases associated with the launch optimization study, the nominal
jacket weight and CoG were used. In addition, the jacket initial position
was held constant at 32 meters aft of the bow and a dynamic coefficient
of friction of 0.06 was used for all the cases. The results indicated that
the combination of the 11m draft amidships and 4.25 trim by stern is
an optimal pre-launch condition when considering all aspects. This
deeper draft and larger trim combination provides smaller rocker arm
reactions than some of the shallower drafts while maintaining adequate
stability during launch and ensuring barge global strength.

Figs. 4~7 show the initial position, jacket tipping, jacket separation and
final position of the jacket base case launch trajectory.

Barge Global Strength Check: As part of the launch optimization

study, the global barge strength during each launch case was considered.
For each analysis, the barge bending moment was evaluated when the
jacket was at the initial position, in position just prior to tipping, and an
intermediate position. For each draft and trim combination, a launch
analysis was performed. Then the initial time, tipping time, and an
intermediate time were extracted. For each of these three times, the
jacket was stopped and the velocities were set to zero. Then a structural
analysis of the barge was performed to determine the maximum
bending moment. This bending moment was then compared to the
maximum allowable bending moment of 4,416,021kNm. For each
launch case, the maximum barge moments occurred at the pre-tipping
stage. The maximum bending moment at the condition of 11m draft and
4.25 trim is 4,246,259kNm.

Fig. 4: Base Case Jacket Launch at Initial Position (11m/4.25 )

Barge & Jacket Stability Checks: The stability of the barge/jacket

system was investigated for each case in the launch optimization study.
Table 5 provides the stability criteria that were used in the evaluation.

Fig. 5: Base Case Jacket Launch at Tipping (t = 38.13sec)

Table 5. Jacket/Barge Stability Criteria during Launch

Prior to Jacket Sliding
Wind Speed

50 kts

After Jacket Sliding and

Prior to Tipping
Wind Speed
30 kts

Min. Stability Range

20

Min. GM

0.0 m

Min. Area Ratio

1.4

Heel Angle

acceptable
Fig. 6: Base Case Jacket Launch at Separation (t = 56.02sec)

403

Maxima
Barge CG Long. velocity
Jacket CG Long. velocity
Jacket CG Vert. velocity
Fig. 7: Base Case Jacket Launch at Final Position ( t = 100.63sec)

-2.00 m/s
3.55 m/s
-3.17 m/s
Minima

Jacket Trim Angle

Jacket Roll Angle
Jacket Yaw Angle
Barge Roll Angle
Barge Yaw Angle

The relative motion between the barge and the jacket after separation
was examined by looking at the relative velocities of the jacket and
barge. As shown in the launch output results, the barge and jacket are
moving in opposite directions at separation. The relative velocity in the
x direction is 5.25 m/sec, much greater than the minimum requirement
of 1.0m/sec. The clearance between the jacket and the barge was also
examined. The minimum distance between the rocker pin and the
trailing ends of the launch legs was 7.61m. This is greater than the
7.535m depth of the tilt beam. In addition, the clear separation between
tips of rocker arms and aft ends of launch cradles has been examined by
plotting the trajectory of the tips of rocker arms and the aft ends of
launch cradles, respectively.

-19.42
-0.55
-0.13
-0.13
0.00

Jacket Launch Parametric Study

Once the optimal pre-launch condition had been established and the
base case jacket analyzed, several more launch simulations were
performed to investigate the sensitivity of varying several jacket
parameters. These jacket parametric cases varied several properties
including jacket weight, center of gravity, and dynamic coefficient of
friction. Damaged cases were also considered in which the three
compartments on Leg A1 were allowed to free flood at the point of
submersion. Table 8 describes the parametric jacket cases that were
analyzed. Refer to Jo et al. (2002) and Sircar et al. (1990) for the
procedures of jacket launch parametric study.

For the base case, the results of the stability study are presented in
Table 7. The predicted time for the jacket separating is 56.2sec, which
has a general agreement with actual separation record of jacket launch.
That is, 47sec.
Table 7. Base Case Jacket Launch Analysis Results

Table 8. Parametric Jacket Launch Cases

Initial Conditions
Jacket Weight
Jacket CG, in part system
Jacket Buoyancy
Jacket CB, in part system
Draft amidships
Trim Angle by stern

158518 kN
X=-0.20m, Y=-3.60m, Z=-114.00m
187445 kN
X=-0.10m, Y= -3.50m, Z= -110.90m
11.00 m
4.25
Jacket Tipping

Time
Length of Leg on deck
Port Rocker Load
Stbd Rocker Load
Total Rocker Load
Percent of Jkt Weight
Jacket Trim Angle
Barge Trim Angle
Jacket Displacement
Jacket Velocity (x)
Jacket Velocity (y)
Jacket Velocity (z)
Barge Velocity (x)
Barge Velocity (y)
Barge Velocity (z)

Case 1: Nominal Jacket - Base

Case Launch
Case 2: Increase Jacket Weight
by 2.5%
Case 3: Decrease Jacket
Weight by 2.5%
Case 4: Shift Jacket XCG +
0.5 meters
Case 5: Shift Jacket XCG - 0.5
meters
Case 6: Shift Jacket YCG +
0.5 meters
Case 7: Shift Jacket YCG - 0.5
meters

38.13 sec
71.32 m
43022 kN
41706 kN
84729 kN
53 %
6.56
6.56
72132 kN
3.04 m/sec
0.01 m/sec
-0.22 m/sec
-0.79 m/sec
0.00 m/sec
-0.09 m/sec

Jacket Separation
56.20 sec
1.09 m
14607 kN
14111 kN
28718 kN
18 %
18.34
4.93
N/A
3.26 m/sec
0.01 m/sec
-3.11 m/sec
-1.99 m/sec
0.00 m/sec
-0.04 m/sec

The analysis results show that all the parametric launch analysis results
meet the minimum requirements. To sum up, the maximum rocker
reaction at tipping time is equal to 55% of the jacket weight at Case 10.
The maximum rocker reaction at separation time is equal to 18% of the
jacket weight at some load cases. The minimum bottom clearance is
115.86m at Case 4. The barge/jacket minimum relative velocity is
4.77m/s at Case 11, greater than the required 1.0m/sec. The
submergence of the barge during launch is 24.06m at Case 11, less than
the allowable 38m.

Maxima
Jacket Displacement
Jacket Trim Angle
Jacket Roll Angle
Jacket Yaw Angle
Barge Trim Angle
Barge Roll Angle
Barge Yaw Angle
Jkt dive depth @ top
Barge keel submergence

Case 8: Shift Jacket ZCG + 1.0

meters
Case 9: Shift Jacket ZCG 1.0
meters
Case 10: Dynamic Friction
Coefficient = 0.04
Case 11Dynamic Friction
Coefficient = 0.08
Case 12Damaged
Compartment Ballast A1
Case 13Damaged
Compartment - Trim A1
Case 14Damaged
Compartment - Weight A1

Jacket Structural Checks

179227 kN
18.68
0.58
0.20
6.64
0.00
0.12
83.00 m
23.40 m

Structural checks were also performed on the base case jacket and the
parametric jacket with the XCG shifted -0.5 meters. This parametric case
was chosen as it resulted in the highest rocker arm reaction. During the
launch analysis, load cases are generated at time steps where a launch
truss joint crosses the rocker pin and at time steps where the rocker pin
is half way between two launch truss joints. The software saves the
loads acting on the jacket at each of these load cases and then performs
structural checks during the launch post processing. For the base case

404

jacket analysis a total of 75 basic load cases were created, including 11

load cases after separation. Table 9 provides the time steps at which the
load cases were created during the base case launch analysis.

members, have two 13mm small holes that allow free flooding.
Each upend analysis began with the jacket free-floating in its postlaunch condition with Row B roughly at the waterline. All freeflooding members are assumed to be empty at the initial position. Two
types of upend analyses were performed. First a static upend was
analyzed. This floatation analysis simply fills all floodable members
100% and finds a new floating equilibrium position. The second
analysis is a time-domain upending study. This analysis begins with the
jacket in the initial position but allows the floodable members to fill
dynamically through the 13mm holes. The time domain analyses were
performed for duration of 10,000 seconds. The small-hole dynamic
flooding time is controlled by the flooding flow rate governed by the
following equation:

Table 9. Structural Check Load Cases for Base Case Launch Analysis
Time

Time

Time

Time

Time

Time

Time

13.00s
13.44s
13.87s
13.99s
14.11s
16.54s
18.71s
20.69s
22.55s
22.64s
22.73s

22.82s
22.91s
24.73s
26.50s
28.19s
29.87s
29.99s
30.11s
30.21s
30.31s
32.14s

33.98s
34.05s
34.12s
35.04s
35.97s
36.86s
37.75s
37.88s
38.01s
38.11s
38.21s

39.29s
40.41s
41.57s
42.74s
42.85s
42.97s
43.07s
43.17s
44.34s
45.46s
46.51s

47.51s
47.64s
47.77s
47.87s
47.96s
49.04s
50.10s
51.13s
52.14s
52.23s
52.31s

52.41s
52.50s
53.25s
53.99s
54.72s
55.44s
55.55s
55.66s
55.73s
58.13s
60.13s

62.13s
64.13s
66.13s
68.13s
70.13s
72.13s
74.13s
76.13s
93.04s

Q = UAC f 2 gh

(8)

where A is the cross sectional area of the flooding hole or valve; Cf is

the friction coefficient for the hole or any piping system, which is less
than 1.0; Q is the flow rate in cubic feet per minute or cubic meters per
minute; g is the gravitational constant; h is the differential head, that is,
the elevation difference between the two holes per member; and U is a
unit conversion constant which makes the units work out correctly. The
average flow rate between two subsequent events of a static process is
used to calculate the time to flood a compartment.

Two passes were made through the structural solver. Before tipping the
flexibility of the barge was accounted for and after tipping a rigid barge
was assumed. The connection between the jacket and the barge was gap
elements between the launch leg nodes and the nearest barge node.
Before tipping, launch leg nodes on the barge get gaps, and after
tipping, the jacket nodes on the tilt beams (at least two per leg) get gaps.
Prior to tipping, the interaction of the jacket with the barge is entirely
due to the gaps and the forces in the gaps are the force which is
transmitted between the two bodies. After tipping, the rocker load was
applied as two trapezoidal distributions, each half the length of the
rocker arm and symmetric about the rocker pin. The sketch in Fig. 8
illustrates the load distribution. Since the rocker distribution is the sum
of the other forces acting on the jacket, the loads in the gaps after
tipping should nominally be zero.

The criteria during jacket self-upending are given as follows:

1) During self-upending, the intact jacket bottom clearance shall be
no less than 5.0m or 10% of water depth (200m), whichever is
greater, (that is 20.0m). However, due to the small-hole flooding
scheme, the minimum bottom clearance requirement can be
reduced to 10.0m. When one compartment is damaged, the
bottom clearance shall be greater than 0.0m.
2) Based on the nominal total intact buoyancy, the jacket reserve
buoyancy shall comply with the following criteria.
y After launch, the intact reserve buoyancy shall be no less than
15%. Note: due to the small-hole flooding scheme, the intact
minimum reserve buoyancy requirement can be reduced to
6%. Refer to Gair et al. (1991) for details of the jacket
installation design criteria.
y After launch, when one compartment is damaged, the reserve
buoyancy shall be no less than 5%.
3) During upending, the transverse and longitudinal metacentric
heights should satisfy the following stability requirements:
y The intact GMT 0.5m and the damaged GMT 0.2m;
y The intact GML > 0.0 m and the damaged GML > 0.0m.

Base Case Upend

Fig. 8: Post Tipping Load Distribution Modeling

The base case jacket with nominal weight, nominal CoG and no
damaged compartments was upended in the numerical simulations.
Table 10 presents the initial floating condition, the time domain step
associated with the minimum bottom clearance and the orientation of
the final upended jacket. Since not all floodable members were 100
percent full at time step 10,000sec, the final upended position
represents the static upended condition with all the flooding tanks
completely full. RX denotes the major angle of rotation as the jacket
upends around its x axis.

In the load cases mentioned above, jacket member checks, wave

slamming checks, joint can checks, launch cradle checks, hydrostatic
collapse checks, appurtenance checks, and rocker arm checks were
performed for the nominal launch analysis and the Case 4 parametric
launch analysis. The results from the launch analyses and some hand
checks indicated that the strength of these structural members was
found to be adequate.

UPEND ANALYSES

Figs. 9 and 10 show the initial free floating jacket and the upended free
floating jacket. Figs. 11 and 12 show the jacket inclination angles and
the bottom clearance, respectively, during upend. As shown in the
figures, the minimum bottom clearance is 10.96m occurred at the time
7,153sec during jacket self-upend, which is greater than 10m of the
minimum criteria. During self upending when the CoB goes from being

The PY 30-1 jacket is designed to be self upended with the help of the
free-flooding jacket bottom members. As mentioned in the model
description, the jacket members at EL(-)183m and EL(-)196.7m, the
jacket framing members between these two elevations, and the mudmat

405

below the CoG to above the CoG, the jacket GM and righting arm are
minimal at this transition point. Table 10 shows that at the time of
4,173 sec the jacket appears to have a minimum GM where GMT =
1.07m and GML = 0.76m. The predicted time for the nominal jacket to
self upend is approximately two and a half hours, which has a general
agreement with the actual self-upending record of approximately two
hours and 45 minutes. However the size of flooding holes may been
further investigated to determine the optimum hole size for fast
transition through the low GM region. Larger diameter holes can
decrease the self upending time in the field, thus reducing the jacket
heel, while smaller diameter holes can ensure the strength integrity of
jacket structure.

Fig.12: Base Case Jacket Bottom Clearance during Upend

Table 10. Summary of Base Case Jacket Upend Analyses
RY
RZ
Base Case
Time
Minimum
RX
Jacket
Step
Bottom
Upend
Clearance
Initial Free 0sec
118.68 m
81.69 -0.02
-0.21
Floating
Condition
Time
7,153sec 10.96 m
11.67 -2.21
4.81
Domain
through
10,000 sec
Final
N/A
13.12 m
1.63
-0.56
-0.03
Static
Upend w/
100% full
Stability
Time
GM
RX
RY
RZ
Results
Step
Time
4,173sec GMT=1.07m 45.33 -3.61
1.95
Domain
GML=0.76m
through
10,000 sec

Fig. 9: Base Case Jacket Initial Free Floating Position

Jacket Structural Checks

Fig. 10: Base Case Jacket Final Upended Free Floating Position

A parametric study of the self upend was performed to gauge the effect
of jacket weight and CoG variations on the upending. The parametric
cases are the same as those used for the launch parametric study with
the exception of Cases 10 and 11 which varied the coefficient of
friction of the launch ways. Table 11 summarizes the parametric
upending study.
Table 11. Summary of Parametric Upend Analyses

Time
Domain
Min. Bottom
Clearance
10.96 m

13.12 m

6.46 m

91.67 m

8.4 m

Case

Fig. 11: Base Case Jacket Inclination Angles during Upend

406

Fully Upended Static Analysis Results

Bottom
Clearance

RY

RZ

1.63

-0.56

-0.03

6.02 m

1.94

-0.3

-0.02

27.50 m

33.52

-3.2

2.38

10.37 m

2.24

7.35

0.39

RX

9.08 m

10.27 m

2.36

-9.2

-0.51

9.66 m

10.60 m

-8.69

-0.88

0.03

Bottom
Clearance

Time
Domain
Min. Bottom
Clearance
11.78 m

10.26 m

13.58

-1.08

-0.13

21.14 m

12.62 m

2.7

-0.86

-0.06

Case

As the launch analysis shows, the barge and jacket are moving in
opposite directions during separation. The relative velocity in the x
direction is 5.25 m/sec, much greater than the minimum requirement of
1.0m/sec. The minimum distance between the rocker pin and the
trailing ends of the launch legs was 7.61m, which is greater than the
7.535m depth of the rocker arms. There is a clear separation between
tips of rocker arms and aft ends of launch cradles, which has been
examined by plotting the trajectory of the tips of rocker arms and the
aft ends of launch cradles, respectively.

Fully Upended Static Analysis Results

RX

RY

RZ

12.07 m

13.37 m

1.17

-0.38

-0.02

12

6.96 m

7.67 m

6.25

-4.6

-0.45

13

6.715 m

7.45 m

6.29

-4.79

-0.47

14

6.625 m

7.47 m

6.16

-4.81

-0.48

The jacket parametric upend study indicates that when the weight of the
jacket increases to a certain degree, there will be no adequate bottom
clearance to meet the minimum clearance requirement. Also, if the
weight of the jacket decreases to a certain degree, the incline angle of
the jacket upon upending may become too large. This may cause
difficulty in accessing the partially upended jacket and hooking up the
lifting riggings in a large inclined rigging platform. As Table 11 shows,
when the jacket weight decreases by 2.5%, the roll angle of the jacket
upon upending will be 33.25 degree. To avoid these installation
difficulties the jacket weight should be well controlled within a
tolerance of 1%, which posed a challenging task in jacket design and
fabrication. Consequently the Dyneema ropes were selected to replace
the conventional steel slings to lower jacket onto the seabed. The
Dyneema rope is very light and easy to handle for lifting rigging
connection. In case of large incline angle of the jacket, the rigging
platform can be accessed through one of the four outer leg access
ladders. First hook up the lifting riggings and then level the inclined
jacket by flooding the pre-defined compartment ballast tanks. And then
continue lowering the jacket via flooding jacket compartments until
final setdown. The static floatation analysis of final upend position can
also be used to determine the small-hole flooding members, thus
minimizing any potential accidental touchdown. Finally, the self-upend
simulations indicate that with the small-hole flooding scheme the selfupend process lasts more than two and half hours, which matched with
the actual self-upending record of approximately two hours and 45
minutes. This long upending duration gives a cause for concern about
position-keeping the upending jacket upon launch and jacket heeling
during upending. Additional bollard pull requirement, as well as a
contingency plan, was taken into consideration with due care and
attention.

CONCLUSIONS & INSTALLATION APPLICATION

This paper presents the optimization study and the parametric
sensitivity study of 3-D time-domain launch and self-upending analyses
for the PY30-1 jacket installation. These numerical simulations include
prediction of barge movement and jacket trajectory, stability
assessment of barge and jacket during initial launch, verification of
barge global strength and rocker arm strength, evaluation of jacket
structural strength during launch and just upon launch. The
optimization study determines the optimal pre-launch condition while
the parametric sensitivity study gauges the effect of jacket weight and
CoG variation on the jacket launching and upending, thus identifying
hazards and risks during jacket installation and developing contingency
plans to ensure a safe operation. Fig. 13 shows the successful
installation of PY30-1 platform in South China Sea.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Several people have contributed to this work in many vital ways. Very
special thanks to Mr. Andrew Hughes and Mr. Greg Hook from CEA
and our colleagues Mr. Xie Weiwei, Mr. He Chen and Mr. Wang
Xinwei for their enthusiastic support, invaluable experience and
expertise.

Fig.13: Post-Installation Overview of PY30-1 Platform

The findings obtained from the launch and self-upend analyses are used
to determine the pre-launch condition and guide the jacket installation
design and operation procedures. The optimization study indicates that
an initial draft of 11.0m associated with 4.25 degrees trim by stern is an
optimal pre-launch condition. The tiedown removal analysis was also
performed to verify that upon approval from MWS surveyors the
tiedowns could be sequentially removed, say in 4 different stages,
without overstressing the remaining seafastenings or the jacket
members when subjected to a specified rotation. The design loads of
anti-launch plates were evaluated to avoid any pre-mature launch
during the tiedown removal stages. The station-keeping analysis of the
launch barge laden with the jacket provided the total environmental
forces acting on the launch barge in the design sea states. The findings
may be used to determine the positioning tug requirements of the barge
prior to launch.

REFERENCES
Jo, CH, Kim, KS, and Lee, SH (2002). Parametric Study of Offshore
Jacket Launching, Journal of Ocean Enigneering, Vol 29, Issue 15.
Nanchlinger, RR (2001). Theory Manual: How MOSES Deals with
Technical Issues, Ultramarine Inc, 47pp.
Sircar, S, Chandra, TK, Manguno, S, Mills, TRJ, and Roberson, WP (1990).
Transportation, Launch, and Self-Upend Analysis of the Kilauea Jacket
Using Proven Analytical Techniques, Offshore Technology
Conference Paper OTC-6264, Houston, Texas.
Gair, R, Mills, T, Windus, J, and Bhattacharjee, S (1991). Jacket
Installation Design Criteria, The Society of Naval Architects and
Marine Engineers, Design Criteria and Codes Symposium.

407