PIPELINE SHORE APPROACH

CONSTRUCTION - 48 BONNYPIPELINE

By
TUNDE ALABI
AYOOLA OLATUNJI

SHELL PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT

COMPANY, NIGERIA

Offshore West Africa Conference,

Ghana, January 2014
Abstract:

Title: Pipeline Shore Approach Construction - 48'' Bonny Pipeline

Offshore development of oil and gas fields often involve laying of pipelines from offshore to the
shore to transport produced hydrocarbon for processing or sales. The transition region between
offshore and the shore also referred to as shore approach is usually prone to waves, currents and
winds and has its peculiarities regarding topography, soil properties and metocean condition. The
shore approach often poses some challenges to pipeline construction and requires a special
construction process.

This paper discusses the methods of pipeline shore approach construction and factors to consider
in selecting the method to apply. It focuses more on the pulling method and gives typical
calculations of pulling forces, pull force profile and equipment selection.

A 48 pipeline shore approach constructed with the pulling method at Bonny, West Africa is
used as a case study. The challenges encountered during construction, mitigating measures taken
and lessons learnt are shared.

Acknowledgement:

We wish to acknowledge the Shell Petroleum Development Company, Nigeria for the
permission given to use the data and information obtained on the Bonny Terminal Integrated
Project in this presentation/paper.

ii

Contents:

Abstract and Acknowledgement ii.

Contents iii.

Section 1: Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Objective and Scope 1
Section 2: 48 Bonny Pipeline Shore Approach Construction 2
2.1 Introduction 2
2.2 Shore approach 48 Bonny Pipeline 3
2.3 Pipeline Shore Approach Construction Methods 3
2.4 Selection of Pipeline Route and Shore Approach Construction Method 7
2.5 Codes and Standards 8
2.6 Pull Force 9
2.7 Calculation of Buoyancy Aid to Reduce the Pulling Force 10
2.8 Hydrodynamic Forces on the Pulled Pipeline 10
2.9 Winch Capacity Calculations 11
2.10 Pull Force Profile 11
2.11 Check on Tensile Strength of Pipeline 12
Section 3: Construction 12
3.1 Construction Activities 12
3.2 Managed Risks 14
3.3 Actual Pull Force Profile 14
Section 4: Post Construction Analysis 15
4.1 Pull Force Profiles Analysis 15
4.2 Execution Challenges 16
4.3 Lessons Learnt 16
Chapter 5: Conclusion 16

References 17

iii

Section 1: Introduction

1.1 Background
Offshore oil and gas field development often requires transporting produced hydrocarbon in
pipelines from subsea systems or offshore facilities through the shore approach to the shore. This
includes laying a continuous pipeline from offshore to onshore. Figure 1.1 depicts a pipeline layout
showing landfall /shore approach. Pipeline shore approach construction may also apply to disposal
pipelines taking treated produced water out into the Offshore Disposal Zone to meet statutory
requirements.
The pipeline shore approach construction method is totally different from the offshore and onshore
construction methods and has its peculiar challenges arising from the environment.
At the shore approach region, metocean, nature of soil and topography play a significant role in the
selection of a construction method.

Figure 1.1: Pipeline Layout Showing Landfall /Shore Approach [1]

1.2 Objective and Scope

The main focus of this paper is the pulling method used on the 48 Bonny Pipeline. The paper
describes the different methods used to construct pipelines at shore approaches, their merits,
challenges and selection method.

The paperr shows the calculationss for the pulll force requuired for layying the pippeline acrosss shore
approach zone
z and thee pull force profile
p and how
h it is useed to determ
mine the capaacity of the ppulling
equipmentt to be emplo
oyed. A postt constructio
on analysis iss carried outt comparing the calculatted and
actual pulll force profiles for the 48
4 pipelinee, and the chhallenges and lessons learnt on the pproject
are shared.

Section 2: 48 Bonny
y Pipeline Shore Appro
oach Projectt

2.1 Introd
duction:
The 48 x 39.5km Bo ne is an oil export pipelline that oriiginates from
onny pipelin m Bonny Teerminal
and termin
nates 32km offshore
o at the
t Single Point
P Moorinng / Pipelinee End Maniffold (SPM/P
PLEM).
The pipeline was consstructed in 2007 by Hyu
undai Heavy Industries ((HHI) and iss operated byy Shell
Petroleum Developmeent Company
y (SPDC), Nigeria.
N Figuure 2.1 show
ws the map off West Africca with
an insert of
o Bonny area, Gulf of Guinea
G he 48 pipelline.
and th

Figurre 2.1: Map of West Afrrica with an iinsert of Bonnny area [2] [3]

Environm
mental Data for Bonny [4]
[

Wiind speed: 35
5.6m/s
Seaa temp: 28 Deg.
D C
Waater depth: 5-8m
Tid
de: 2.2/3.6m
m
Meean Sea Leveel (MSL): 1.43m
Waave height: 1.05/1.44m
1

 Steeady current speed: 1.553

3/1.692m/s
Calm weather window:
w No
ovember - Feebruary

2.2 Shoree Approach 48 Bonn

ny Pipeline
A shore ap
pproach or laandfall is thee transition between
b offsshore and onnshore regions. The featuures of
the shore approach
a reg
gion are influ
uenced by th
he nature of the two adjooining zoness - the sea siide and
the onshorre side. Thee 48 pipeliine crosses the
t Bonny sshore approaach, Gulf off Guinea where the
shore line is relatively flat or with a gentle slop
pe and with no outcropss or rocks, reefer to Figuree 2.2.

Figu
ure 2.2: Bon
nny Shore Approach
A in Gulf
G of Guinnea [4]

2.3 Pipeliine Shore Approach Co

onstruction Methods
The shoree approach co
onstruction methods
m include the folllowing:
Pulling
g
Horizo
ontal Directio
onal Drilling
g (HDD)
Tunnelling
Otherss.

2.3.1 Pullling Method

d
The pullin
ng method may
m be catego
orized into tw
wo types:
i. Pulling from
f the on
nshore side of
o the shoree approach ((refer to Figgure 2.3)
In this pullling method
d, linepipes are
a welded together
t on a lay barge ooffshore andd a pulling ccable is
attached to
o its end with the aid of a pulling heead. The cabble is conneccted to a winnch which puulls the
welded pip
peline from the
t barge to the shore.

High impaact of waves and curren

nt on the piipe at the shhallow wateer at the shoore approachh often
necessitatees requirement for exccavating seaabed to prottect the pullled pipe frrom being ppushed
laterally.

Figure 2.3: Typical lan

ndfall site lay
yout of a pip
peline pullinng operation of a 30 pippeline [5]

Also, depeending on th
he nature of the beach, a cofferdam
m may be connstructed to manage efffects of
tidal moveement of watter, waves an
nd current. The
T inside oof the cofferddam is excavvated to ensuure the
pipe is su
ubmerged du
uring pullin han being drragged on soil. The trrenched section is
ng rather th
backfilled and the site is reinstated
d on complettion. Floaterrs may be atttached to redduce pull forrce.
The key equipment reequired inclu
ude: piling machine,
m dreedger, excavvator, lay baarge, pulling winch
y vessel.
and survey

ii. Pulling from the offfshore sidee of the shorre approach

h
This meth
hod has som
me similaritiees with the method desscribed abovve except thhat the pipeeline is
pulled tow
wards the offfshore side. The
T linepipees are welde d together oonshore and a cable is atttached

to its end with the aid of a pull head and it is pulled by means of a winch installed on a barge
offshore.

Some merits of the pipeline pulling method include:

The method is well understood.
Favourable where there is a natural gentle slope with no outcrops and rocks.
Appropriate where the waves and current conditions are benign.
Favourable where there is minimal social and commercial activities.
The pipeline line may be laid down and left for future tie-in.
Laying operation may continue offshore directly using the same lay barge.
Some challenges of the pulling operation include:
Sourcing offshore trenching equipment with the capacity to trench to the required depth.
Construction of a cofferdam can be time consuming.
Disruption of beach activities during construction.
Subjected to adverse weather which may slow down the pace of construction work.
Rotational control during pulling in case of piggy-back pipes.
To prevent damage to coating a special coating material may have to be applied.
Site reinstatement after completion and backfilling of trench.

2.3.2 Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD)

Horizontal directional drilling (HDD) is a method whereby a drilling rig is positioned at an inclined
angle, drills a hole in the ground and a pipeline is pulled in through the drilled hole. The drilling
commences with a pilot hole which is drilled across the shore approach, such that the hole is drilled
from the shore side of the landfall to the offshore end, the hole is reamed to expand it and the
pipeline is pulled in. Figure 2.4 shows the front view of an HDD equipment in operation.
Some merits of the HDD method include:
Reduced impact on environment.
May be used at a shore approach with high waves and current.
May be used at a beach that is environmentally sensitive to construction activities.
Pipeline is buried deep and is protected from future soil degradation or erosion.
Technology has been available for some time and is growing.

Figure 2.4: Front view of an HDD Rig in Operations [6]

Some challenges of the HDD method include:

Limitations in terms of the length and size of pipe that can be handled.
Handling of drilling mud and spoils.
There may be some deviation from the target exit point.
Buried rocks and loose gravel would slow down the process or make it less attractive.

2.3.3 Tunneling
Tunneling is a method whereby a tunnel or shaft is constructed from the shore below the shore
approach to come out of the seabed and the pipeline is built in the tunnel which may accommodate
a bundle of pipes to be laid. Figure 2.5 shows the sketch of the Kalsto shore approach tunnel, a
landfall pipeline crossing with the pipelines placed in 600 metres of concrete tunnel at the
Norwegian coastline with a rocky bottom and large topographical variations. [7]

Some merits of the tunneling method include:

May be used in areas with outcrops and rocks and where HDD is not feasible.
Good for areas where the pipeline needs to be protected against surfing and eroding shore line.
Suitable for a bundle of pipes to be laid in the same tunnel.

Some challenges of the tunneling method include:

Effective control of water in the tunnel during construction and pipeline pulling.
The method is time consuming and costly.
6

Figure 2.5: Sketch of the

t Kalsto sh
hore approacch tunnel [7]]

2.3.4 Oth
her Pipeline Shore Apprroach Construction Meethods
Other meth
hods of pipeeline shore ap
pproach con
nstruction incclude:
A variiant of botto
om tow metthod where a welded piipe is towedd to site, aliigned at thee shore
approaach and drop
pped in a tren
nch in a conttrolled mannner.
In shore approach
hes with tidaal flats / sw
wampy terraain a trench is excavateed with a drredger/
excavaator and a baarge is used to
t weld the pipeline
p whicch is floatedd and droppeed in the trennch.
A com
mbination of pulling
p and tunneling
t orr HDD methoods may be uused.

2.4 Selecttion of Pipelline Route and

a Shore Approach
A C
Construction
n Method
The pipeliine route sellection and shore appro
oach construuction methood are usuallly influenceed by a
number off factors whicch include:
Metocean:: This is a co
ombination of
o the wordss - metrologyy and oceanllogy and esssentially com
mprises
data on waaves, curren
nt, wind, and
d tidal movem
ment. It is vvital to consiider the effeect of metoccean on
design and
d constructio
on of pipelin
nes at the sh
hore approacch because thhe effect of waves and ccurrent
on beachess, amongst others,
o may lead
l to a retrreating shoreeline and expposure of a bburied pipeliine.

Nature of shore appro

oach: This co
overs topogrraphy, outcrrops, nature of soil (sanndy, clayey, rocky)
and seabed
d conditionss. A survey of the seab
bed is requirred to ascerttain the state of the seaabed to
prevent un
nnecessary expenses,
e delays or lossees. Challengges of landfaalls include ooutcroppingg rocks,
unstable clliffs, and varriable shore profiles.

Social / Commercial
C activities: Pipeline ro
oute or shorre approachh constructioon method having
negative im
mpact on en
nvironmentaally sensitivee areas or ddisrupting coommercial aand daily acctivities
should be avoided.

Constructiion window and equipm

ment: The choice
c of coonstruction method is influenced by the
available construction
c n windows, in terms off favourable weather annd time of tthe year. It is also
influenced
d by the types of equipmeent, resourcees required, their availabbility, and ecconomics.
A simplifieed flow charrt for selectin
ng constructtion method is shown in figure 2.6

Figurre 2.6: Flowcchart for seleection of pip

peline shore aapproach coonstruction m
method

2.5 Codess and Stand

dards
Applicablee codes and standards fo
or the pipelin
ne shore apprroach designn and construuction includde:
API RP-1111: ommended practice forr designing offshore ppipeline andd risers conttaining
Reco
hydrocarbo
ons.
ASME B31.4- Pipeline Transportaation System
ms for Liquidd Hydrocarboons and otheer Liquids
ASME B31.8 - Gas Trransmission and Distribu
ution Piping Systems
BS 8010: Onshore
O and
d offshore oil and gas pip
pelines 3 P
Parts (PD 80010)
DNV OS-F
F101- Subm
marine Pipelin
ne Systems
EN14161 - Design off petroleum and
a gas transsport system
ms
3 - Petroleum
ISO 13623 m and naturaal gas industrries - Pipelinne transportaation system
ms
API 9A - Specification
S n for wire ro
opes
BS 302:19 w ropes forr cranes, exccavators and general enggineering purrposes
968 - Specification for wire
8

2.6 Pull Force

The pull force calculation is based on the Coulomb friction principle, that is, the sum of the product
of the respective weights of pipe and cable and their friction factors on the seabed/sand, expressed
as:
Pull Force = (Weight of pipe)(Friction Factor) + (Weight of cable)(Friction Factor) + Back Tension
Pull force, Pf = W.. L + T
where,
is Friction Factor L is Length of pipe/cable to be pulled
W is Unit weight of pipe/cable/pull head T is Back tension
The seabed friction factor is important in the assumptions made. Figure 2.7 shows a sketch of the
side view of a pulling operation.

Pulling
Winch Cofferdam
Pulling

cable Pulling

Head Pipeline

Seab
Shore
SHORE Approach Friction

Figure 2.7: Sketch showing side view of a pulling operation

Pull force is calculated at various stages of the pulling operation:

i. Pull force with pipe at touchdown point, Pi, (see Figure 2.8) is:

(Weight of cable section submerged) x (Friction factor) + (weight of cable section in air) x (Friction
factor) + Back tension
9

 Pulling
Winch
Beach
Cable
Pulling Pi


Head

Touchdown
Point

Figure 2.8: Pull head pulled up to the touchdown point

ii. Pull force with a section of the pipe at touchdown point, Pii, (see Figure 2.9) is:

(Weight of cable section submerged)(Friction factor) + (Weight of cable section in air) x (Friction
Factor) + (Submerged weight of pull head and pipe) (Friction Factor) + Back tension

Pulling
Winch
Beach Cable
Pulling
Head Pipeli

Touchdown
Point

Figure 2.9: Pull head pulled beyond touchdown point

iii. Pull force with pull head at tie-in point, Piii, (see Figure 2.10) is:
(Weight of cable in air) (Friction factor) + (Weight of pipe section and pull head in air) (Friction
factor)+ (Submerged weight of pipe) (Friction factor) + Back tension
10

 Pulling
Winch Pulling
Head Beach
Pipeline

Touchdown
Point

Figure 2.10: Pull head pulled up to the tie-in point

The total pull force is determined with pull force, Piii, above and is used for the selection of pulling
winch and confirmation of cable selection with factors of safety provided.
The pull force profile over the pull length is plotted with the calculations made above.
Calculated Pull Force was 226 MTon (2216KN)

2.7 Calculation of Buoyancy Aid to Reduce The Pulling Force

This is carried out iteratively in order to determine the optimum buoyancy spacing or by selecting
the desired pull force and working backwards to determine net buoyancy.
Total pull force with buoyancy, Pfb = Pf Bt
Total buoyancy force, Bt = n. B
where,
n - expected number of buoys
B - Buoyancy of buoy

2.8 Hydrodynamic Forces on the Pulled Pipeline

The wave effect is highest when the orientation of the pipeline is parallel to the wave crest and
minimum when at 90 degrees. Figure 2.11 shows a typical pipeline designed to approach the shore
at 90 degrees.

11

Trenching and cofferdam construction can be carried out to overcome or reduce the effect of the
cross flow on the pipeline being installed.

Figure 2.11: Typical pipeline designed to approach the shore at 90 degrees [1]

2.9 Winch Capacity Calculations

The pulling arrangement comprises two linear winches that provide the pulling force for the wire
(cable), and the reel winders on which the wire is spooled which has a revving device to ensure
even spooling on the drum refer to Figure 2.12. A power pack provides hydraulic power to drive
the winch. The winch itself is secured to anchor piles with enough capacity to restrain its movement
during pipe pulling operation.
Winch Strength = (225)(2)/1.5 = 300MTons
Winch strength capacity is its rated capacity divided by a safety factor of 1.5

12

 Wire
drum

Winch
Steelwire Pullhead

Rotating
pulleys
Static
pulley

Power
pack Pulldirection
Anchoring

Figure 2.12: Two-Single Linear Winch Pull Arrangement

2.10 Pull Force Profile:

The shore approach construction pull force profile is a graphical plot of pull force against pull
length. Figure 2.13 shows a typical pull force profile. It is a function of friction factor (running and
breakout friction) and tidal level (low and high water levels). Pull force is higher at low tide than at
high tide; and at breakout (starting) than at running (finishing). With the pull force profile the
pulling activity can be monitored during construction.

13

 Total
Pull
CapacityofWinch
Force
(Tonnes)

Breakout Lowwater
Friction

Highwater
Running
Friction
Laybarge
Tension Touchdown
Point

Laybarge DistancefromLaybarge(m) S

Figure 2.13: Pull force profile showing low water, high water and breakout/running friction [1]

Typical values for variants of friction factor - breakout friction factors are: Pipe on beach 1.0; Pipe
on seabed 0.9 (medium sand); Wire on beach 1.3; Wire on seabed 1.3. [1]

2.11 Check on Tensile Strength of Pipeline

Tensile strength check is carried out to ensure that the pipeline is not subjected to a pull stress
greater than its yield stress.
Allowable tensile strength, allow = (Safety Factor). y
Acceptance criterion: TS < allow = 0.6y
where, y - specified minimum yield stress (SYMS) of the pipeline material
TS - Actual Tensile Strength, and Safety factor is 0.6

14

Section 3: Construction
3.1 Construction activities include:
Survey
Constructing Winch Yard and Access Road
Constructing a cofferdam
Trenching
Installation of 2 winch system and hold back anchor
Barge set up and deployment of messenger rope
Running of pulling wires
Pipe string production on barge and pay out
Pulling pipeline string towards landfall
Post trenching
As-built survey
Reinstatement of Winch Yard and Beach crossing

Figure 3.1, 3.2: Backviewoftwowinchesforpullingof48BonnyPipeline[4]

Figure 3.3: Constructionofcofferdam[4]

15

Figure 3.4: Pulling of 48 Bonny Pipeline from the shore with lay barge at background [4]

Figures: 3.5, 3.6: Pull head and pipe pulled to the shore [4]

3.2 Managed Risks:

Some of risks managed on the project include:
Risk of unexpected parting of wire.
Residual forces in cables even when pulling operation is completed.
Poor co-ordination of pulling operation and subjecting the cable to excessive stress.
Using wrongly rated pulling cable.
Damaged sections of the cables regular inspection of the cable is required.

3.3 Actual Pull Force Profile

Figure 3.7 shows a pull force profile for the 48 x 1.1km pulled pipe crossing showing start
(breakout), finish (running) and average pull force profiles at intervals of 10 lengths (120m) of
pipes pulled. This is a smoother curve for simplicity and ease of analysis with the calculated pull
force profile. Figure 3.8 shows the calculated pull force and the average actual pull force profiles.

16

 PullForceProfile48''ShoreApproachPipeline
3,500
3,000

PullForce(KN)
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000 Start(KN)
Finish(KN)
500 Average(KN)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NoofPipesPulled(x10)

Figure 3.7: Pull force profile for 48 shore approach pipeline

PullForceProfile48''PipelineShoreApproach
3,500

3,000

2,500
PullForce(KN)

2,000

1,500

1,000 Winch(KN)
Plan(KN)
500
AvActual(KN)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NoofPipesPulled(x10)

Figure 3.8: Calculated and Actual Pull Force Profiles for 48 pipeline

Section 4: Post Construction Analysis

4.1 Pull Force Profiles Analysis
Referring to figure 3.7, the actual pull force profile shows that as pull length increased pull force
also increased, and the pull force at start pull was higher than that of corresponding finish pull.
The difference between the actual start and finish pull forces may be attributed to the breakout
friction factor that is higher at start pull than the running friction factor for finish pull. Recall that
the actual 48 pipeline shore approach pulling operation was not continuous and was made
intermittently, after each linepipe was welded on the laybarge.
At some points actual pull force was much higher than expected and it showed as spikes implying
some presence of resistance that had to be overcome in addition to the breakout friction. This was
experienced especially at low tide when the pull head hit a sand profile (bar) on the seabed/beach
17

and it was pulled against the sand mass. The maximum pull force calculated was 2216 KN against
maximum actual start pull force of 3114 KN (a difference of approximately 32%). The additional
pull force required was however taken care of by the safety factor built into the winch capacity.
Referring to figure 3.8, there is a fair correlation between the calculated and actual pull force
profiles for the 48 pipeline. Both showed the same trend of pull force increasing with pull distance
and the friction factor of 1.3, for the cable against seabed and sand appears conservative enough to
take care of breakout friction factor experienced at initial stage of pull. Also, the friction factors of
0.9 and 1.0 are adequate for the pipe and pull head against the seabed and sand respectively. Taking
an average, the pull forces were: calculated 1868KN and actual 1979KN (a difference of 6%).
The variance between the calculated and actual pull forces at the tail end of the pulling activity also
showed the effect of the shallow end where a good section of the pipeline was pulled close to the
seabed thereby increasing the pull force unlike when a good section of the pipe was submerged and
pipe buoyancy was higher. This may call for the need to vary the friction factor upward when pull
head is pulled close to the beach.

4.2 Execution Challenges:

To deliver to schedule and budget safely.
Crowded/Narrow offshore corridor for laying the pipeline dredging and laying
Availability of equipment: Pipe trencher to handle 48 pipeline and lay barge for 48
pipeline (HD 289 with 3.685m draft)
Variance between calculated and actual pull force profiles.
Bad weather need to abandon and recover pipe
Interface management with stakeholders

4.3 Lessons Learnt:

Some lessons learnt on the project include:
Comprehensive integrated plan is required.
Need to obtain as-built documentation of existing facilities from stakeholders.
Need to order/source for fit for purpose equipment and materials early eg. Lay barge.
Ensure adequate safety factor is provided especially for the pull winch.
Data and formula can be fine tuned for use on future projects
Design of a long cofferdam was helpful (250m long)
Variable friction factor to be higher towards the end of the pull.
18

 Need to define and monitor sea state limits for pipe lay down/abandonment
Continuous interface management with stakeholders.

Section 5: Conclusion
The pulling method for pipeline shore approach construction is favoured in areas with benign
metocean conditions, low social activities, gradual slope and without outcrops and rocks.
The actual pull force profile recorded during construction of pipeline shore approach for the 48
Bonny pipeline was compared with the calculated pull force profile and found to be fairly
comparable. Challenges and lessons learnt on the project were shared in this paper.
References

1. JEE Pipeline, Riser and Subsea Engineering Courses: Installation Calculation for Subsea
Pipelines; JEE Limited Kent, England, 2008.
2. Map of West Africa, Reference No. 4242, UNITED NATIONS, Depart. of Peacekeeping Ops.,
Cartographic Sect.; UNHCR website (2005).
3. Bonny Map Satellite Images of Bonny; Maplandia.com; Maplandia website (2011).
4. Bonny Terminal Integrated Project, SPDC, Nigeria, 2007.
5. Braestrup, M. W.; Andersen, Jan B.; Andersen, L. W.; Bryndum, M.S.; Christensen, C. J. and
Nielsen, Niels-J. R.; Design & Installation of Marine Pipelines; Blackwell Sc, Oxford, 2005.
6. OES, Oil and Gas Engineered Systems; Pipeline Approach HDD Photographs; OES,
Australia, 2009.
7. Berge, B.; Waagaard, K. and Harneshaug, K.; Pipeline Shore Approach Tunnel at Kalsto: The
Damage and the Repair; OTC, Houston, Texas, May, 1993.
8. Alabi, O.; Pipeline Shore Approach / Tie-in Engineering and Construction; Faculty of
Engineering, University of Aberdeen, 2012.
9. King, C.A.M.; Beaches and Coasts; St. Martin Press, New York, 1972.
10. Palmer, Andrew C. and King, Roger A.; Subsea Pipeline Engineering; PennWell Corporation,
Oklahoma, US, 2004.

19