Need for updated standards for the Norwegian Oil and Gas Industry

Subsea Wellhead Fatigue

Seminar at Stavanger Forum 06.12.12

By

Olav Inderberg O-inderb@ebnett.no

07/12/2012 1

2

Where do we come from and where are we?

• We are an industry with empirical roots and it is a challenge to change to a more balanced and more analytical approach

• The future will require such a change

New operations etc. require a thorough check of operational criteria to establish if original design basis is violated

History of subsea standards ISO/API • Early API Standards

– Standard materials and dimensions

• ISO/API Specification 6A / ISO 10423 – Its development and design rules

• ISO/API Specification 16A / ISO 13533 – What are the differences from 6A

• ISO/API Specification 17D / ISO 13628-4 – Different applications and scope

3

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

14D

16A

6A 14th 1961 6A 15th 1985

No Design Methods Design Methods

17A

2010

API

Operations?

Start ISO

Seismic

Timeline Field Life Process

Expl. Concept System Detail Man. Instal. O & M Abandon

Drill Drill

EPC

EPIC

Total CAPEX

Field life

CAPEX OPEX

The overall timeline need to be reflected in norms and communicated in transitions

5

System functionality increases and it is recognized that a subsea development can be modified in operation if reservoir and economics supports it.

A Holistic approach is required. Are we acting as a global industry?

Changing from empirical background to more advanced and analytical. Globalization and subsea to beach IOR and well technology as examples of operational developments

Different regulatory regimes

• Prescriptive regulations • Goal oriented legislation • Safety management and safety case

• Risk acceptance criteria, as upper limits of acceptable risks, have

been used for offshore activities on the Norwegian Continental Shelf for more than 20 years.

• These regimes tie in with standards and norms and the interrelation is important to understand

• Different regulatory regimes can set different needs for standards formulation

Roles in the industry as basis for the regulations

• Norwegian PSA developing regulations, supervise and give consents (enforcing regulations)

• The functional (self regulatory) regime used by Norwegian PSA requires updated standards and norms.

• The tri-party agreement PSA – Operators - suppliers and workers organization has taken on responsibility to keep standards updated.

• The industry is obliged to keep standards and norms updated on the NCS to ensure a functional regulatory regime.

Descriptive regulations ”Command and control”

Functional regulations ”Self regulation”

The tri-party agreement (2001)

What is a standard?

A standard is defined to be a document developed, by consensus and endorsed by recognised institutions and it contains a set of specific requirements and recommendations relating to equipment, systems, processes and services including operations. It has to be developed with a transparent process and include all relevant stakeholders to facilitate consensus Examples: ISO Globally and NORSOK Nationally

They are an asset of accumulated experience and used by all stakeholder in the industry

Laws (Statues, Acts)

Regulations

Guidelines

Voluntary codes and standards development

Comprehensive regulation of HSE in oil and gas industry - How?

Two main considerations:

1. - Accidental risk (prevention of unacceptable risk to personnel safety, the environment and to loss of financial assets)

2. Heath and working environment

Are integrated and maintained in a underlying regulation publication

Authorities responsibility is delegated to an authority responsible for follow-up of

all fields of competence

Source: Norwegian Ptil (Translated)

Maturity (Risk) level; experience and standardisation

07/12/2012 11

• Low risk

– Mature hardware

– Typical operating conditions – typical systems

Low – Moderate risk Mature hardware typical operating conditions Major change to system configuration

Moderate – High Risk Significant extension to operating environment and conditions Non mature equipment for conditions

High Risk Novel unproven products, systems and new operating conditions

How is experience introduced into standards and norms?

Normally gradually introduced being informative, then normative as relevant.

Companies

Industry

Recognised

CONTRACTORS SUPPLIERS

API EEMUA UKOOA ASME

National ANSI BSI

Regional CEN / CENELEC

International ISO / IEC Vienna Agreement

OPERATORS

OGP

Other European

Japan etc.

L i a i s o n

STANDARDISATION BODIES - RELATIONSHIPS

Overview of standards used

How do we control the risk level throughout the life cycle

•As the level of project risk increases so does the required reliability capability of the design contractors, the suppliers and the operator.

•This means life cycle perspective !

07/12/2012 14

Early

Life

failures

Random failures Wear out

Failures

Remove

expensive

Early Life

Failures

Design out all foreseeable early life and through life failures and operate

according to the basis for the design of the facility

Past Decommission

before

wear out

Remove or

Minimise

foreseeable failures

through the life

Early systems installed focussed on this We have now experienced the

Operational phase and can include Life cycle perspective

15

Standards Overview for well drilling and

design.

Casing Tubing, Downhole ISO – tubing (based upon API) API spec API ISO (cement)

Control Systems ISO13628-1,6,7 API Spec 16D (BOP) DNV-OS-E101

Wellhead/XT: API spec’s ISO

BOP ISO’s NORSOK’s NORSOK’s API Spec’s API RP’s DNV-OS-E101

Drilling Equip. API 16 series API spec’s API RP’s DNV-OS-E101

General PSA Norway ISO 13628-1 NORSOK D-001 NORSOKD-002 NORSOK D-010 NORSOK U-001 OLF Guideline 070 DNV-OS-C101

Riser/Umbilicals ISO API RP’s API Spec’s DNV-OSS-302 DNV-OS-F201 DNV-RP-F206

Uniform Safety Level ? Uniform system integrity requirements ?,

Uniform design philosophy, common operational criteria. This is in Petroleum safety authorities requirements

Source DNV

16

Interfaces Vessel & Field Physical and Environmental Data, Reservoir

Wave Motions

Vessel Offset

(+)

Surface

Pressure Pump

Draw Works, Tension

and Stroke

Surface Equipment

Slick Joint

Tensioner Sheaves

Tensioner Tension

and Stroke

Tension Joint

Wave and Current Forces

Gravity

Forces

Outside Diameter

Riser Joints

Effective Tension

Bending Stiffness

External Pressure

Stress Joint

Subsea Equipment

Soil restraint

Bottom hole assy

Conducto

r

Downstrea

m

Exci

tati

on

zon

e

Sh

ear

zon

e

Crest

(+)

Through (-

)

Current

Velocity

Da

mp

ing z

on

e

Upstream

Drill Floor

Magnitude of: Loads, Load paths, etc. Require instrumentation Can only be properly understood in an overall system perspective. We need to log loads and monitor conditions of equipment during operations ”flight recorder approach” We need to establish conditions of existing installed equipment Establishing suitable Sensor and data processing including storage is essential!

17

Global Riser Analysis

Well

Analysis

Loading on the system

Experiences with standards used world wide Defining the challenge operational capacities/limits

Required capacity Charts or descriptions has to be part of industry norms for important interfaces to ensure equipment and operational compatibility during the whole life of a system

As installed Equipment Limits

Experiences with U-001 Update: We have tried since Q 4 2004 to get required funding to update drilling loads (existing is known to be wrong) we have now succeeded in getting the work started under the well structural integrity JIP. Updated loads planned ready 4 Q 2012 GOM (API) is “mainly” focused on pressure testing.

One example:

Interface Management

The objective of interface management is to achieve functional and physical compatility among all interrelated system elements.

The Management and control of interfaces is crucial to successful projects. Interface management is a process to assist in controlling product development when efforts are divided among parties (e. g. customer, contractors, geographically diverse technical teams, etc.) and/or to define and maintain compliance among products that must interoperate.

18

The Criticality of Stakeholders and Interfaces

• Context diagrams identify stakeholders and associated systems.

• Need for defining both external and internal interfaces to the system/equipment

• Interfaces may be different in different program phases or operating modes

• Quantified interfaces define the “under what conditions” and measurable “how well” of each “what”

• The degree to which stakeholders are missing or their requirements are un-

quantified is the degree of “external” risk in system development

System

Stakeholder/

system 2

Stakeholder/

system 3

Stakeholder/

system 4

Stakeholder/

system 1

Interface

description (for

each stakeholder

or system)

Technical Solution:

Consider the human as a central component when doing

logical decomposition and developing design concepts. The User-operators or maintainers will not see the entire system as the designer does, only as the system interfaces with them.

20

21

Technology is only one part of the puzzle

• Future technology gives ample opportunity to reduce risk

• The technical solutions has to be used in the right context

• We need to understand the operational scenario including physical and organizational

• Human factors and communication is perhaps the biggest challenges in the future as well

• Unambiguous formulation is a real challenge

Human factors

Different cultures and perception! Do we have common goals including all stakeholders?

Perception

Multi Cultural Management?

•There is no right or wrong culture only different! •We have to understand the receiving person’s perception to be understood correctly.

Integrity information transfer from phase to phase

Subsea integrity is

Established during the concept, design and construction phases.

Maintained in the operation phase.

Transferred from the development phase to the operation phase. This interface involves transfer of vital data and information about the system.

How do we transfer in depth design understanding through the operational phases and operational experience into the design phase? By huge amount of documentation that are very difficult to fully understand?

By accepting field of life support roles . Stop experimenting with different roles . Look to other more mature industries.

How do we verify and ensure validation Verification: Relative to specific requirements

Validation: That the facility, system, equipment is fit for purpose

What are the requirements and need for documentation?

How are roles considered in a Life Cycle perspective?

07/12/2012 23

We Need to Focus on Critical Issues and Improve

Product & system Verification

What are some of the challenges to keep the industry documents updated and global

• Regional perceived differences in spite of the fact that Global and collective interest is normally the same as national interest. (IP rights discussion and embargo issues are destroying the global aspect and causing loss of momentum.)

• Tools to ensure a system approach across discipline established areas (Communication between expert groups and subcommittee structures)

• Improved ability to gather experience and improve/revise documents. Keep documents at a reasonable size.

• Ensure adequate experienced resources for the work. Difficult since short term and Key Performance Indicators are the focus. Standardisation work require long term engagement

07/12/2012 24

A major incident has a global knock on effect on the whole industry This is reason enough to contribute towards best possible standards and norms.

25

Experience transfer? How to avoid such situations!

• The industry has a challenge with the “great crew change”. • An experienced generation in the workforce is retiring • Are we repeating earlier experiences due to the change? Can we afford to?

Thank you for your attention