Evolution of the MPSO (monocolumn production, storage and offloading system)

One of the most difficult challenges in the offshore industry is to reduce hydrocarbon production costs, which increase as exploration advances to deeper water regions. Most of the Brazilian oil companies demand the use of a conventional ship-shaped FPSO (Floating Production, Storage and Offloading System) as a solution for offshore production due to the lack of pipelines, soft local environmental condition, and the characteristics of the oil fields. However, the small roll damping and the relatively large heave motions of the FPSO pose some limits to the use of rigid risers and nearly forbid the use of dry tree completion system facilities. In order to make the application of rigid risers and dry tree completion feasible on an FPSO, Brazilian universities and research institutes, in a partnership with Petrobras, have developed a new concept of a hydrocarbon exploration and production platform - the MPSO (Monocolumn Production Storage and Offloading System) - which is a floating unit based on a monocolumn with a moonpool.The development of the MPSO concept was focused on reducing the motions, keeping storage capability and allowing the use of rigid risers. Furthermore, recent studies have pointed towards the possibility of using dry tree completion system in MPSO. Considering this scenario, the MPSO concept evolution in which the hull forms and hydrodynamic appendages were developed, always aiming at motions mitigation, is presented herein. Initially, the MPSO was proposed to operate in the Campos Basin (Brazil) and, after new design considerations, it is being adopted to operate in the Gulf of Mexico (USA) at a no pipeline area. Thus, the MPSO solution proved to be versatile enough to be adapted to any location, including the pre-salt in Brazil.

[1]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Influence of the Ballast Tanks Loading on the Allowable VCG in Damage Case , 2006 .

[2]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Estimation of Damping Coefficients of Moonpools for Monocolumn Type Units , 2005 .

[3]  Carlos Levi,et al.  Monocolumn behavior in waves: Experimental analysis , 2007 .

[4]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Study of Numerical Modeling of Moonpool as Minimization Device of Monocolumn Hull , 2004 .

[5]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  VORTEX-INDUCED MOTION OF A MONOCOLUMN PLATFORM: NEW ANALYSIS AND COMPARATIVE STUDY , 2009 .

[6]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Stability Criteria and Analysis of a Monocolumn Concept , 2004 .

[7]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Mitigation of Vortex-Induced Motions in a Monocolumn Platform , 2009 .

[8]  Dominique Roddier,et al.  Influence of the Reynolds Number on Spar Vortex Induced Motions (VIM): Multiple Scale Model Test Comparisons , 2009 .

[9]  André L. C. Fujarra,et al.  Relevant Aspects in Vortex-Induced Motions of Spar and Monocolumn Platforms: A Brief Overview , 2009 .

[10]  Sergio H. Sphaier,et al.  Experimental and Numerical Analysis of the Behavior of a Monocolumn With a Moonpool , 2008 .

[11]  São Paulo ANÁLISE DOS CRITÉRIOS DE ESTABILIDADE PARA PROJETOS DE PLATAFORMAS DO TIPO MONOCOLUNA , 2008 .

[12]  Arthur Curty Saad,et al.  Motion Behaviour of the Mono-Column FPSO Sevan Piranema in Brazilian Waters , 2009 .

[13]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Numerical Moonpool Modeling , 2006 .

[14]  Gu¨nther F. Clauss The Conquest of the Inner Space - Challenges and Innovations in Offshore Technology , 2007 .

[15]  Kazuo Nishimoto,et al.  Stability Analysis of a MPSO (Mono-Column Floater, Production, Storage and Offloading Unit): MonoBR , 2006 .