Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Safety Science and Resilience

journal homepage: http://www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/journal-of-safety-science-and-resilience/

Offshore system safety and operational challenges in harsh Arctic operations

Sidum Adumene a,∗, Hope Ikue-John b
a
School of Ocean Technology, Marine Institute, Memorial University, St. John’s, NL A1C 5R3, Canada
b
Department of Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture, Akwa Ibom State University, Nigeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: Offshore oil and gas drilling operations are going to remote and harsh arctic environments with demands for
Critical offshore infrastructure heightened safety and resilience of operational facilities. The remote and harsh environment is characterized by
Harsh arctic operations extreme waves, wind, storms, currents, ice, and fog that hinder drilling operations and cause structural failures
Metocean
of critical offshore infrastructures. The risk, safety, reliability, and integrity challenges in harsh environment op-
Resilient design
erations are critically high, and a comprehensive understanding of these factors will aid operations and protect
Safety
Digitalization the investment. The dynamics, environmental constraints, and the associated risk of the critical offshore infras-
tructures for safe design, installation, and operations are reviewed to identify the current state of knowledge.
This paper introduces a systematic review of harsh environment characterization by exploring the metocean
phenomena prevalent in harsh environments and their effects on the floating offshore structures performance
and supporting systems. The dynamics of the floating systems are described by their six degrees of freedom and
their associated risk scenarios. The systematic methodology further explores the qualitative, quantitative, and
consequences modeling techniques for risk analysis of floating offshore systems in a harsh environment. While
presenting the current state of knowledge, the study also emphasizes a way forward for sustainable offshore op-
erations. The study shows that the current state of knowledge is inexhaustive and will require further research
to develop a design that minimizes interruption during remote harsh offshore operations. Resilient innovation,
IoT and digitalization provide opportunities to fill some of the challenges of remote Arctic offshore operations.

1. Introduction including riser and mooring systems, resulting in a complicated failure

phenomenon. Understanding the processes, dynamics, and risk involved
Drilling operations in the remote harsh environment present diverse in the remote harsh environment operation is key to safe operation and
technical, operational, and logistics challenges to oil and gas develop- good modeling, particularly in developing resilience and emergency re-
ment. These challenges include but are not limited to catastrophic ac- sponse models. These models are useful and critical in data gathering
cidents, operational downtime, system failures, and occupational risk. and help to better predict the possible accident scenarios in the course
Therefore, consideration should be given to understanding the techni- of operation. Proneness and accuracy are crucial for effective response
cal issues associated with remote deep-water operations, especially with in offshore operations.
machines and resources [1]. Understanding the operational dynamics of The current study presents the state of knowledge and understanding
the system and its performance in harsh environments is a fundamental of the challenges in remote harsh offshore operations, which include the
key to sustainable oil and gas field development. environment, structural dynamics, operational risk, safety, and logistics
In remote harsh environment operations, the metocean (environ- challenges. There exists limited knowledge in actual system design and
mental) factors are complex, resulting in severe consequences for predictions that will minimize interruption and optimize operations. A
drilling facilities and personnel in extreme scenarios [1]. Data gather- systematic methodology is used to explore various effects of the oper-
ing for the operation of the floating system in an extreme and harsh ational dynamics on system performance and operational risk in harsh
environment is limited to enable timely prediction, design, and detec- offshore operations. A way forward for sustainable offshore operations
tion of structural failures, safety assessments, and predictions of perfor- in the remote harsh arctic environment is presented.
mance degradation and the remaining structural life of the systems [2]. The remaining sections of the paper are structured thus: section 2
The high-tech development of real-time monitoring and data gathering of the research characterizes the harsh environment and recent models
equipment for harsh environment offshore operation is still evolving. for prediction. Section 3 presents offshore system dynamics challenges
The complex environmental loads adversely affect the subsea facilities, in remote arctic operations. Section 4 focuses on operational risk and

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Adumene).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2022.02.001
Received 8 November 2021; Received in revised form 26 January 2022; Accepted 7 February 2022
2666-4496/© 2022 China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. Publishing Services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

safety challenges. Section 5 explores knowledge gaps and research op- better understand this criterion at its maximum occurring speed, per-
portunities, while section 6 concludes the paper. missible limits, and probability of occurrence to guide the drillship op-
eration prediction, especially in a harsh environment.
2. Harsh offshore environment characterization
2.1.2. Waves load effects
The remote and harsh operating environment is commonly described In offshore operation, wave modeling is generally defined by wave
as extremely low temperatures, winds, waves, snowdrifts, polar low height and period and is used to design and predict the dynamic insen-
pressures, atmospheric and sea-spray icing, sea-ice induced vibrations, sitivity of the offshore system. The pre-known wave pattern is for a 100-
seasonal darkness, and poor visibility due to fog and snowstorms, etc. year return period analysis of the wave data. For practical modeling, the
Since the reliability performance of Arctic oil and gas facilities is ad- wave data for the period are collected at different wavelets and com-
versely affected by such an environment [3,4], a proper understanding bined in random phases [11]. The waves are represented in an infinite
of its effect on facility integrity is crucial to sustaining operation from number of sinusoidal wavelets with different frequencies and directions.
the design stage. The wave spectrum is used to plot the distribution of these wavelets
The characteristics of these areas like remoteness, lack of infrastruc- against frequency and orientation [12]. Statistical tools are commonly
ture, icing events, sea ice conditions, and harsh climatic conditions in- used to describe the random nature of ocean surfaces. These statistical
tensify these challenges. This should be attributed to high uncertainties properties of spontaneous waves in a sea may be assumed to be approx-
and operational risks [3]. The risk has an adverse effect on the envi- imately constant for short periods of one to three hours [12]. Few fre-
ronment in the case of an accident during operation. The remoteness quency spectra models have been proposed, which include JONASWAP,
causes long supply routes vulnerability and interruption due to sea ice Pierson & Moskowitz, etc. [11]. These models present formulation to an-
conditions, fog, long periods of darkness, and other weather phenom- alyze the spectrum that characterizes the prevailing waves in an open
ena [5]. Polar Low is also a critical phenomenon that affects offshore sea, and the wave height is represented by the routinely estimated pe-
operations in remote arctic environments. The formation results from riod. The significant wave height is denoted by 𝐻𝑠 and represents the
intense mesoscale cyclones with less than 1000 km horizontal exten- height for a sea state [12]. This analysis is dependent on the 100-year
siveness. The cyclone’s formation process is rapid and difficult to pre- return period.
dict clearly in such a harsh environment. It is characterized by sudden The system performance analysis is inadequate for a remote harsh
weather changes with snowfall and a rapid increase in wind speed. Re- environment with limited data and an unpredictable sea state. The im-
search shows that the wind generates sea spray in a harsh environment; pact of this limitation and the wave generation, especially at an extreme
the sea spray causes microbial growth in drilling and production facili- height, affects the offshore operation in such an environment. Research
ties [6]. also shows that swells is predominant in remote and harsh operating en-
The challenging environment, sea ice, icebergs, and fog are critical vironments, affecting the dynamic of the floating structures [13]. Swells
environmental conditions that affect offshore operations [7]. For the are waves with gradually increasing height and period along the path;
Barents Sea, it is reported that ice formation can be up to 2 m thick usually, the period is between ten to twenty seconds. Although the wave
for unreformed first-year ice and 3–5 m for a multi-year period [8]. amplitude may be small, it can cause heavy vessel oscillations because
The foregoing shows that waves, wind, storms, and ice are prevailing the wave period is close to the vessel’s natural period. Therefore, ori-
elements of a remote and harsh environment that describe the metocean enting the ship into the incoming waves (wind-induced waves or swell
characteristic of a region of operations. coming from different directions) is essential to sustain its operability.
Research has shown no firm conclusion of swell spectrum modeling, al-
though Forristall et al. [14] showed that swell spectrum has a triangular
2.1. Metocean (loads) challenges or lognormal shape. Understanding this phenomenon will help predict
its impact on the floating system design and operation. Wave loads on
Metocean analysis presents the interaction of the various natural floating offshore systems play a dominant role in the design, construc-
phenomenon associated with ocean dynamics. These phenomena in- tion, transportation, installation, and process [15]. Wave formation by
clude waves, wind, storms, currents, and tides and are measured using sea state is irregular, and this causes a non-linear loading impact on the
hi-tech equipment to form a data bank for operation (generally, with a floating systems.
100-year return period). These data are used to predict future analysis. The dynamism in sea wave formation calls for a time-history analysis
These data are presented using a probability of exceedance to describe of structural response during extreme loading conditions [16]. Although
the extreme value for a given period. conventional dynamic analysis has been in use, its time-consuming dis-
advantages informed the development of a better methodology. Further
2.1.1. Wind load effects improvement to obtain more optimum solutions and cost reduction anal-
The wind is one of the environmental loads that the floating system ysis under harsh environment wave loading conditions was proposed
experiences in harsh environment operations. Wind speed and direction by [15,17]. The Endurance Time Analysis (ETA) model proposed by
of propagation affect the floating system responses during the drilling Riahi and Estekanchi [17] shows a high degree of accuracy and effi-
operation. Critical wind speed affects other support operations such as ciency for the dynamic structural modeling subjected to a natural dis-
crane and helicopter operations, especially during remote harsh drilling aster (e.g., an earthquake). For modeling irregular wave loading on the
operations [2]. Actual data gathering and prediction of wind projection structure in a harsh environment, Diznab et al. [18] and Jahanmard
in such an environment are crucial in the risk-based analysis for such op- et al. [19] proposed the Endurance Wave Analysis (EWA) technique for
erations. The safety of the offshore system, personnel, and operational the non-linear analysis of the structure. This model shows better perfor-
facilities suffer adverse effects due to the wind load on the structure mance and scope of application compared to ETA.
[9]. Most times, the results are rocking, slamming, flooding of the deck, Further research has been done to fully understand the performance
and acceleration of the state of excitation. Lateral rolling is associated at extreme high environmental loading on the vessel dynamics. Abaei
with wind-induced loading on ships. Zangeneh et al. [10] present the ef- et al. [16] proposed the dynamic modeling of floating structures using
fect of wind loads on structure response in a harsh sea state. The result EWA for considering a range of storm conditions. The methodology was
shows that the heading instability associated with the floating structure applied to a Floating Storage Unit (FSU), and it shows a high degree of
decreases at a certain wind speed with a wavelength ratio greater than credibility for the analysis of offshore structures in a harsh environment.
1.17. This prediction of the operating envelope will guarantee safe op- They subjected the structure to three states of excitation and evaluated
eration in extreme wind conditions. Continuous research is needed to the structural response to the impact of the storm wave. This model

154
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

predicts the operating envelope and an unsafe condition that demands 2.1.3. Current and storm effects
an emergency response during operations. The Intensifying Constrained In a harsh environment, the subsea systems such as the riser, moor-
New Wave model (ICNWM) is also an advanced model used to conduct ing system, and umbilical are susceptible to currents’ effects, and their
risk escalation assessments for offshore structures under storm impact. responses are destructive [1]. The total extreme water level (TEWL)
The model can predict the storm envelope for operational and survival at a location during a stormy event determines the degree of impact
limits of the offshore systems in an extreme state. Its linear form is de- on the topsides and supporting structure of the drillship. This causes
tailed in the work of [18]: a large structural effect that affects the integrity of the structure. The
Further analysis of extreme and rogue waves and their impacts on storm surge is a critical condition that must be estimated during tropical
offshore systems in a harsh environment are recorded in the refer- storms. The storm type formation and surge propagation are classified
enced literature [20,21]. Numerical investigations of extreme and rogue as tropical, extra-tropical, and surge-tide formation [36,37]. The surge
waves based on field data have given a clear understanding of this formation is due to a large-scale increase in the sea level during any
phenomenon’s generation mechanism and dynamic properties. Detailed storm. Physical and environmental processes influence the magnitude
work done can be found in [22,23]. Mohajernassab et al. [24] presented and formation. In the harsh environment of the high tide range, storm-
a modified endurance wave analysis based on the “Modified Intensifying tide formation can be created, and the structure can experience a dual
New-wave (MINW)” for a time-dependent performance prediction. The loading impact.
new-wave model involves a time series superposition of linear wavelets Predictive models for the surge impact analysis, especially for hurri-
for extreme wave prediction in a random sea state. Although Denchfield cane surges and others, are presented in the literature [37–39]. Bernier
et al. [25] and Enderami et al. [26] have demonstrated the application of and Thompson [37] present a 2D non-linear barotropic model to predict
a new-wave model for the prediction of the ship and offshore structure the frequency of storm surges and extreme sea levels in the northwest
performance in random sea state, the modified methodology of Moha- Atlantic. This prediction guides deep sea operators to schedule major
jernassab et al. [24] has provided a more accurate result in offshore projects or maintenance work. The effect of future climates due to storm
safety assessment under extreme wave conditions. surge formation, joint statistics of extreme storm surge, sea severity, and
Sloshing is a phenomenon that occurs due to extreme wave effects; it the statistical model for surge characteristics conditional on the occur-
affects the ship’s motion response and significantly influences the ship’s rence of extreme values of significant wave height are presented in the
hydrodynamic behavior. In most cases, the sloshing flow’s natural fre- literature [40–42]. This provides the range for storm surge probability
quency becomes close to the ship’s motion response, creating signifi- of occurrence at a given location.
cant discomfort and excitation of the vessel. Researchers have used var- Abaei et al. [16] also predicted the offshore structure’s response to
ious theories to model the sloshing effect on LNG carriers and FPSO the storm and developed the structural safety envelope for the offshore
operations to understand their dynamics and predict the impacts on structure’s storm-induced sway and surge motion, as shown in Fig. 1.
the vessel performance for different operating modes [27–29]. Jiang Outside the predicted safe envelope, the drillship will suffer major struc-
et al. [27] analyzed the effect of the sloshing coupling, considering the tural damage resulting in the vessel capsizing due to extreme wave im-
ship motion response and the loading impact on the ship. The numerical pact. This environmental phenomenon is dynamic, so more studies on
model was examined on a three-dimensional LNG-FPSO, and it shows its effect on critical offshore infrastructures are needed to enhance struc-
how the sloshing effect on the vessel can be predicted. More research tural resilience for operations in remote and harsh environments.
is needed for an integrated risk-based framework to predict and ana-
lyze the real-time degradation effect of slamming on offshore systems 2.1.4. Ice loads effects
in remote and harsh environments. Ice formation is characteristic of remote and harsh (arctic) environ-
The green water effect is a non-linear phenomenon that is wave- ments. This environment is harsh to the drilling operation. The iceberg
based and common in harsh environments. The impact of green water is and offshore structure (ship) interaction affect the system’s structural
devastating, resulting in vessels capsizing and destroying of superstruc- integrity. The integrity degradation of the structure is common in the
ture onboard the drillship. Mac Gregor et al. [30] reported damages of arctic environment and is caused by the formation of local and global
bow and superstructure because of green water incidents. Attention has actions, vibration, abrasion, seabed scouring, etc. The iceberg’s loading
been drawn to examine this phenomenon and properly model its effect impact depends on the ice strength, geometry of the interaction, and
on critical offshore infrastructures. Kleefsman et al. [31] presented a the speed of the ice field movement [43]. Research has shown that a
numerical prediction of green water loading together with the vessel ship-shape turret moored system provides better support in severe wave
motion and wave field. The result gave an overview of associated un- conditions and the dynamic condition of an ice field [8]. Offshore struc-
certainty. Further analysis was conducted by Zhu et al. [32] to minimize tures experience sharp oscillation due to very slow-moving ice, and the
uncertainty using a numerical wave tank to simulate the wave-ship in- ice strength is dependent on the loading rate. The oscillations result in
teraction and green water. They adopted the Navier-Stokes equation and excitation of the structural elements and degradation of the structural
continuity equation to model the fluid field. The integrated model was integrity [43]. The ice loading depends on the area of impact on the
able to predict and analyze the impacting forces of green water on the structure. Takeuchi et al. [44] show that the real contact area of the off-
model drillship. shore facility by the iceberg is related to the material strain and stress.
For accuracy and better prediction of wave analysis and design in- This defines the failure pattern of the structure under the iceberg im-
tegration in a harsh environment, some industry regulators have up- pact and its velocity. Numerical modeling of the iceberg behavior and
dated their standards to accommodate extreme and severe wave con- influence on the offshore facilities is also presented [45].
ditions with a 10,000-year return period [33]. This is to guide against The ice-structure interaction is of different types based on the ice-
endangering the structural integrity of the floating or fixed structures in berg’s relatively low and very high velocity. Shkhinek et al. [46] group
a harsh environment. Despite the several applications of modern CFD the interactions into two: (1). An initial impact corresponding to the first
to predict the length of the calm period and the time of occurrence of ice/structure contact; (2). Penetration of the structure into the ice. Ice-
dangerous sea states, there still exists a critical level of uncertainty in induced vibration may create operational challenges (the serviceability
the result of most predictions [34,35]. Continuous research is needed limit state) and lead to fatigue failure of structural elements. Flexible
to understand further the impact of extreme and rogue waves on the structures, such as risers, and the umbilical under ice action, suffer vi-
system dynamics in the operational phase of floating offshore systems bration significantly and can result in total failure. Vibration impact also
in remote and harsh environments. This understanding could be inte- depends on the iceberg’s velocity and the maximum action level [47].
grated into the risk assessment and structural integrity management Increased icing occurs simultaneously with extreme wind speeds and
framework. low air and seawater temperature [48]. Although ice load scenarios are

155
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

Fig. 1. Trajectories of the Sway and Surge motions during the storm [16].

site dependent, the need to understand their geometry in relation to the systems. Swells-based roll becomes more critical with a combination of
dynamic response of the offshore facility (FPSO), in combination with head sea and beam formation and may cause significant roll acceleration
other prevailing harsh environmental factors, calls for further research. that will affect the topside structure, equipment, and subsea systems.
Ice formation and accumulation increase rapidly in extreme wind, Ross [50] presented a non-linear modeling equation for ship maneu-
wave, and tide conditions and impose additional gravity (load) actions vering analysis in waves using convolution integral formulations of the
on the offshore structure or drillship [49]. The safety of these facilities added mass. This model was able to predict the rolling characteristic
is threatened, especially if the vessel is moored and fended. Although of the vessel to a certain degree of accuracy. The weak and strong non-
safety factors might have been integrated in design consideration, cer- linear sea loads on the offshore system under waves’ influence are identi-
tain off-design environmental impacts may occur, and potential life and fied to improve the integral convolution model. He groups the weak and
operational threat scenarios may occur. Further studies for a better un- robust non-linear models for hydrodynamic loads as wave-current-body
derstanding of the ice-structure interaction and prediction are necessary interaction and slamming loads, respectively. High amplitude resulting
for operation in the remote harsh environment. in roll motion is strongly non-linear and exhibits a high chaotic behav-
ior. Fig. 2 demonstrates the direction of motion of the vessel as she lists
3. Floating offshore system operational challenges in remote from the center of buoyancy, and Fig. 3 is a stability diagram that shows
harsh operations that the roll stability is dependent on the roll angle and is crucial in the
design and operation of the floating offshore structure.
Ship motion is described by six degrees of freedom (6-DOF), rep- The dynamic stability method for a ship’s roll motion under waves
resented by the ship’s orientation in the operating environment. These is built on the restoring moment is detailed in the referenced literature
are the roll, pitch, heave, sway, surge, and yaw motions. The environ- [51]. A more complex formation by applying the Taylor series expansion
mental factors’ prevalence in the harsh environment critically affects has been developed from the simple model proposed by Ibrahim and
the dynamic of the offshore system orientation. This combination poses Grace [51]. Lin and Kuang [52] conducted a test for roll-motion predic-
serious challenges for remote offshore operations. tion using a digital self-consistent ship experimental laboratory (DiSSEL)
model. The result shows the effectiveness of roll-damping component
3.1. Roll motion effects accuracy on numerical prediction of its impact. Chakrabarti [53] for-
mulated a model prediction for damping characteristics using the em-
Roll motion is a critical dynamic of the phenomenon of critical off- pirical formula. Several improvements to optimize the non-linear damp-
shore infrastructure and is overexcited by the waves. Swell waves criti- ing term in roll modeling have been made using the non-linear polyno-
cally affect the dynamic of the drillship during operation because they mial term and random decrement, where the wave excitation takes the
attack from a different direction. Anundsen [13] shows that the swell Gaussian white noise process. Ibrahim and Grace [51] developed an ad-
wave effect causes heavy rolling of offshore systems and must be con- vanced ship stability prediction model in beam sea analysis. The model
sidered in design load estimation to ensure the safe operation of the revealed that the hydrodynamic roll moments on the vessel are depen-

156
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

Fig. 2. The Righting Arm.

Fig. 3. Dependence of the Righting Arm on the Roll Angle [51].

dent on the relative motion of the vessel and wave. Further methods for [58], and the successive-transition method [59]. The latter is based on
identifying linear and non-linear damping and restoring roll parameters an analytical approximation for the transition probability density. It can
were described in the referenced literature [54]. The author presented a account for the damping matrix in its application for a one-dimensional
combination of random decrement techniques, linear regression, auto- non-linear model.
and cross-correlation functions, and artificial neural-network techniques For safe offshore system operation in random waves, Liu et al.
for linear and non-linear parameter identification. He notably predicts [60] and Liu et al. [61] consider the instantaneous state of the ship
the ship rolling effect by an unknown excitation in a realistic sea. and narrowband energy spectrum to solve the non-linear roll differen-
Stochastic and probabilistic models have also been developed to pre- tial equation in the time domain. They further integrate the random Mel-
dict the ship’s sea wave-induced roll motion. These models can also in- nikov mean-square criterion to determine the threshold intensity for the
tegrate the pitch equation and represent its coefficient for the restor- onset of chaos. The result shows that the ship may undergo a stochas-
ing moment of the roll motion analysis. Roberts [55], among other re- tic chaotic motion when the real intensity of white noise exceeds the
searchers, has stochastically analyzed the ship roll prediction using the threshold intensity [61]. In extreme roll formation where the roll angle
stochastic averaging methods and obtained the roll angle amplitude. exceeds 5°, drilling operations are interrupted and even suspended. Yin
The probabilistic description of random seas helps to predict the up- et al. [62] predicted the ship roll motion during maneuvering using a ra-
per bound operating envelope against a ship’s capsizing by identify- dial basis function neural network (RBFNN) model. The model showed
ing the ship’s parameter in roll motion. Different approaches have been accuracy in online critical roll angle identification and prediction.
adopted, such as path integral techniques [56], stochastic chaotic roll Fu et al. [63] predicted the ship roll motion using the extreme learn-
motion techniques [57], quasi-two-degree-of-freedom stochastic model ing machine technique (ELM) to address the uncertainty of traditional

157
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

time series models. The prediction gave a more accurate result in com- there is side-to-side interaction with tankers, the hydrodynamic interac-
parison with another model. Rahaman et al. [64] used a potential flow- tion is stronger in the sway direction. Several models predict the sway
based solver to predict ship response in waves. The model was demon- motion interaction and effects on floating vessels. Ching-Tang and Li-
strated on three ship types, and it identified safer ship heading angles Chen [76] presented a model for real-time motion analysis using the
for operation, especially for oceangoing vessels. Different probability Newton-Euler formulation. This new algorithm could predict the linear
approaches are needed in determining the upper bound of roll motion. interaction of the yaw and sway motions without their combination. In
A better understanding of the probabilistic characteristics of the roll Gatis and Peter [77], surge, sway, and yaw dynamic responses were pre-
motion formation will help offshore system reliability prediction and dicted, and the model was able to simulate complex non-linearity in dif-
ensure safe offshore operation in a remote and harsh environment. ferent ships’ applications. Fossen [78] and Chen and Ju [79] predict the
sway motion using transfer function models and time-dependent differ-
3.2. Pitch motion effects ential equations. In side-side operation, sway drift forces act collinearly
in opposite directions. In most cases, this occurs in head wave conditions
Pitch motion involves the ship lifting at the bow, lowering at the and is the determinant parameter for the safe design and performance
stern, and vice versa and is propagated along the y-axis. The angles of of the floating system.
pitch vary with the length of the vessel. They are within the range of
5°−8°. Pitch motion is associated simultaneously with heave and roll
3.4. Heave motion effects
motion occurrence. Various researchers have investigated the heave-
pitch motion of platforms, both fixed and floating systems. Rho and Choi
Heave motion effects on floating vessels or platforms are crucial for
[65] analyzed the heave-pitch motion of a spar platform and showed
the safe operation of such systems. The generation of random waves’
that the non-linearity mechanism developed is due to the energy trans-
loads on board the ship increases the vessel dynamic, as described by the
fer phenomenon between the heave and pitch mode. Most associated
six degrees of motion associated with offshore floating systems. Heave
instability in the spar platform pitch is caused by heave [66]. That is
motion of a floating system or drillship is expressed in the vertical plane
the coupling effect between the heave and pitch on the spar platform.
and vortex-induced in the horizontal plane because of wave impact. A
The coupled non-linear mathematical model was developed by Neves
non-linear mechanism defines Heave-resonance associated with the crit-
et al. [67] to simulate the coupled heave-roll-pitch motion, and the
ical state. Tao et al. [80] revealed that the hull form geometry plays a
model is applied to the dynamic stability of a vertical cylinder in regular
key role in the heave-resonant reduction. A hull shape’s geometry in-
waves.
creases damping and modulates the natural heave period. This reflects
Further analysis was presented by Liu et al. [68] based on Math-
the advances in the structural design of drillships for harsh environment
ieu’s unstable motion and coupled heave-pitch motions in regular waves.
applications.
They applied the model to obtain the parameter domain of wave height
Li and Ou [81] obtained the heave response Amplitude Operators
and the period of unsteady motion. Zhao et al. [69] studied the heave-
(RAOs) of a spar platform using the combination of numerical iteration
pitch coupling of the spar platform and revealed that the energy of
and viscous damping linearization methodology. It shows that the heave
the heave mode was saturated at a specific wave height, which de-
response of the system displays a high level of sensitivity to the wave
fined the characteristics of the safe state of the platform. A 1st-order
period. High wave formation (increases in wave period) critically in-
random wave loads model, Morison equation, 2nd-order, and an inte-
creases the heave response of the floating system. Liu et al. [82] show
grated coupled model were used for the heave-pitch analysis of the spar
that the heaving amplitude increases significantly with transient wave
platforms [70–72].
elevation. Dynamic coupling of moon pool and platform, as presented in
Advanced non-linear vibration modes were presented by Gavassoni
[82,83], shows that the heave motions of a truss spar platform were sig-
et al. [73] to investigate a spar platform’s non-linear dynamic behavior
nificantly affected by the motions of the water of the moon pool. Several
and stability. They were able to predict the structural response under
coupling scenarios are necessary to understand the contributing effects
impact. Liu et al. [74] considered the 1st-order and 2nd-order random
of the heave motion configuration on the safe operation of the floating
wave loads and used the frequency-domain wave load transfer func-
offshore systems in remote and harsh environments.
tions and JONSWAP spectrum to model the platform’s pitch motion.
The result shows that the 2nd-order low-frequency wave loads cause
an increase in the platform’s pitch motion, which shows the contrib- 3.5. Surge motion effects
utory effects of wave loads on the offshore structure. This also has a
contributory effect, when coupled with a heave, on the safe state of the Surge motion describes the floating ship’s linear longitudinal bow
platform. and stern motion and is translational. This motion is internally (rudder-
Wang et al. [75] analyzed the pitch motion for a new sandglass-type hull interaction) or externally (wind or sea current) induced, and it cre-
floating body using a control law and pitch inertial effect. They pro- ates hydrodynamic forces on the vessel. It is necessary to understand
posed a new design concept that shows better pitch response in extreme the phenomenon and its effect on the vessel dynamics in the course
sea states. The result shows that there is a decrease in the pitch motion of operation. Extreme environmental conditions increase the associated
response using sandglass-type floating system. The FPSO operation ex- loading impact of the phenomenon on floating offshore systems. Un-
periences larger pitch motions in long head waves than in bow waves. derstanding this hydrodynamic force, Fonseca et al. [84] and Guedes
Though studies have described the heave-pitch coupled motion effects et al. [85] proposed a diverse methodology integrating strip theory,
on offshore structures, a better understanding of the stochastic state of Cummin’s formulation, Froude Krylov, and hydrostatic model to esti-
the sea and associated complexity in the harsh environment is critical mate the vertical motions and global structural loads resulting from the
for safe operation and needs further investigation. surge motion effect. Determining the surge coefficient help to predict
its impact on the vertical loading influence experienced under extreme
3.3. Sway motion effects wave loads. Journée [86] used a semi-empirical method to calculate the
surge coefficient, which is also dependent on the vessel configuration.
Sway motion is the sideway motion of a ship in maneuvering. It is a The associated viscous damping is dependent on the frictional resistance
translational type of motion influenced by internal and external forces. characteristics equation. In most cases, coupled motion integrates the
These forces may result from rudder-hull interaction, propulsor, wind, surge, heave, and pitch motions to predict the effects on the floating
or sea current. The damping coefficient describes the hydrodynamic in- offshore system [87]. This gives an overall coupled effect on the system
teraction involved in sway motion. In an offloading operation, where performance.

158
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

3.6. Yaw motion effects nature of natural phenomenon occurrence still limits the performance
of these frameworks.
The yaw phenomenon is a mode of ship dynamic (rotation) around Abaei et al. [100] proposed a novel model that integrates the risk
the vertical axis. This phenomenon becomes overexcited in a remote and estimation and the harsh environmental factors to model onboard crew
harsh environment. The most associated effect of the yaw is coupled, ei- evacuation plans and a ship operating envelope in extreme storm con-
ther with roll or other associated degrees of motion. The coupled effect, ditions. They used a numerical model (Endurance Wave Analysis) and
especially in the yaw-roll phenomenon, is critical for offshore system Bayesian network in their prediction; see methodology in Table 1. The
safety. Quartering is one of the effects of yaw-roll coupling on ships. framework provides a better operational envelope for the floating stor-
Quartering results in dynamic instability (broaching) in the high-speed age unit in extreme storm conditions. In Abaei et al. [100], several
ship and the ship capsizing. The yaw-roll coupling effect can also result other contributory factors in the harsh environment were not consid-
in the dynamic instability of a drilling ship. ered. However, to sustain operations and minimize interruption during
Experimental investigation and a three-dimensional model for drill- operations in the harsh environment, further research is needed to de-
ship analysis under wave induced roll-yaw coupling was presented by velop a design-operational framework that can increase the resilience
[88,89]. Their results showed a mutual influence between parametric- of the offshore structures in extreme weather conditions and enhance
roll resonance, bottom slamming, and water-on-deck in the head-sea operational sustainability.
condition of the drillship. They further defined the angle of 180° as the
considering heading angle 𝛽 and the bow-sea due to roll-yaw coupling at 4.1. Risk scenario analysis
175°. An experiment conducted by Greco et al. [90] on an FPSO model
showed that the effect of water on the deck is reduced when a yaw mo- Offshore support systems operation has associated hazards and risks
tion is unrestricted. Although coupled with a roll motion, a high level of in a harsh arctic environment that can interrupt drilling activity if not
excitation promotes instability and affects other associated phenomena properly managed. Various configurations are available in the differ-
like water-on-deck, slamming, etc. ent oil fields, and they are expected to meet functional and safety re-
Lopez et al. [91] presented an experimental study of FPSO behavior quirements. Many factors influence the performance and safe operation
in the Gulf of Mexico. The analysis shows the effect of yaw as repre- of the FPSO. In most environmentally sensitive areas, waves and other
sented by its response amplitudes operator in a beam sea incident wave environmental factors significantly affect the vessel’s stability. Several
condition. Although the purpose of the mooring system is to eliminate risks and failure scenarios have been observed over the years in FPSO
surge, sway, and yaw, the operation of the drillship suffers surge and operation. Risk management (assessment, prevention, mitigation, and
yaw-related impact in most cases during tandem offloading operations. response measures) should be dynamic for holistically safe operation.
This may result in damage to hawsers and spills. The offshore structure/drillship is a complex structure with the pri-
mary purpose of drilling, processing, and storing oil and gas products
4. Offshore systems risk and safety challenges in harsh Arctic using onboard production processing facilities. Its complexity demands
operations a comprehensive risk modeling framework that will integrate the pro-
cess facilities (topside), ship, subsea systems, and auxiliary systems. The
In the past few decades, there has been a range of significant ac- prevailing hazards arise from the drilling, production, processing, and
cidents in offshore facilities with severe consequences (fatalities, eco- offloading operations; risk and reliability analysis of the FPSO has been
nomic loss, and environmental damages). The accidents of Piper Alpha extensively studied over the years. MMS [101] uses a systematic opera-
and the Gulf of Mexico, among other cases, show devastating outcomes, tional safety technique to predict areas in the offshore system that need
causing the semi-submersible platform’s sinking and a helicopter acci- improvement for safer operation. As reported by Capsey et al. [102] and
dent. The operating environment plays a contributory role that affects Amdel et al. [103], risk-based lessons learned for FPSO operation and
human and system performance in a harsh environment. There are re- the FPSO-shuttle tanker interaction, if not managed adequately, result
cent models for human error analysis in offshore operations [92–94] in collision and spill accidents.
and modern safety instrumented systems on offshore facilities, yet the
operation is still not safe. Inherent safety [95] has made tremendous 4.1.1. Spill (release) risk effects
achievements by reducing the degree of offshore accidents in terms of
installation configuration, layout, and operation. Several studies on spill or release incidents with FPSO operations
The extreme harsh environment where catastrophic hurricanes oc- and other offshore platforms have been reported in most harsh arctic
cur, like the Gulf of Mexico, requires a critical analysis of environmen- operations. Ward et al. [104] presented a quantitative risk assessment
tal loading on floating and fixed offshore structures at the operational of subsystem failure and the resulting spill from an FPSO, fixed platform,
phase. Townsend [96] reported the shipwreck incident because of ex- spar, and tension-leg platform (TLP). The research revealed that though
treme vessel responses experienced in a harsh environment. Decision the FPSO poses environmental spill risks, the most contributory spill risk
making in a critical accident situation is difficult because of the terrain of factor is the FPSO-tanker operation, accounting for 63% by volume of
operation. Researchers have assessed floating structure accidents using the total spills from FPSOs. The Mineral Management Service [101] clas-
several models based on historical data [97–99], yet there is still a high sified FPSO risk as generic and site-specific, depending on the prevailing
rate of uncertainty in these predictions. In most cases, the unpredicted sea state, resources sensitivity, structural configurations, vessel shape,

Table 1
Risk assessment methodology for offshore structure under storm [100].

Step 1-Critical Variables Step 2-Risk Model Step 3-Decision Analysis

Hydrodynamic Analysis Probabilistic Analysis Decision Making

Develop a storm based on EWA Define/categorize probability distribution of Determine the crew optimum action in different storm
different sea states and storm conditions
Floating system encounters hydrodynamic storm modeling Find appropriate probability density function for Employ advanced probabilistic techniques such as BN
the critical response of the floating object and ID in decision making
Computational cost minimization during storm simulation Develop a BN for failure analysis
Inference diagram (ID) development

159
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

and other factors. Hazard identification and probabilistic risk analysis A new 2D and 3D formulation have been presented in the literature.
methodology are presented by [105] for modeling oil spills from FPSOs Liu and Amdahl [118] present an energy dissipation model that utilizes
in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM). The frequency and consequences model- the strain energy concept. Their formulation focuses on the external me-
ing were evaluated using fault and event trees. They also categorized chanics and impact analysis and is also applied to ship-iceberg collision
different hazard sources for offshore oil release by volume. modeling. The ship-iceberg collision assessment is done considering a
Regg et al. [106] summarize offtake incidents reports and spills due non-vertical contact surface of the ship, and the mass of the iceberg is
to loading and offloading FPSO operations in a harsh sea environment modeled empirically. Different impact angles are modeled and predicted
(North Sea). Metzger et al. [107] present an overview of the associated the energy dissipated due to the iceberg collision scenario.
risk of FPSO performance relative to the environment. They expatiate Chen [119] describes the tanker drive-off initiation during tandem
the various failure modes in detail and suggest a robust risk manage- offloading as a complex human-machine interaction (HMI). Tandem of-
ment system that integrates strong FPSO design and best operational floading is a complex and complicated marine operation and demands a
practices. Lončar et al. [108] proposed a numerical model for oil spill highly safe procedure. To better understand the accident scenario asso-
risk analysis in the northern Adriatic. The model was applied to a hypo- ciated with tandem offloading in a harsh environment, Chen [119] cat-
thetical case study to predict the dispersive transport phenomenon of oil egorized its finding from the human-caused mode of the incident and
sea pollution. Li et al. [109] presented a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation near misses as initiating action, response action, and latent action. He
mode for oil spill risk analysis. They applied the model to a port-based developed a human error-based probabilistic model for a shuttle tanker.
tank and were able to establish a risk level and management procedure. Excessive surging and yawing motions from environmental constraints
Blvd [110] and Anderson et al. [111] presented an updated spill affect the offloading operations. In excessive yaw motion, heading de-
from different platforms (floating and fixed) and identified causal fac- viation from the tanker vessel could result in position reference signal
tors for equipment failure, human error, weather/natural disaster, and loss between the FPSO and the shuttle tanker [119]. In such a situation,
other external factors. Couples of causal factors can initiate offshore the dynamic positioning inappropriateness and other technical failures
system-related releases. These associated spill risks in floating offshore result in drive-off collision accidents [120]. Rodriguez et al. [121] pre-
systems and auxiliaries’ systems within the remote and harsh environ- sented a cause-consequence model that identifies a physical condition
ment are rooted in riser leaks, topside process releases, cargo tank leaks, that describes hazardous events in offloading operations. The hazardous
swivel leaks, cargo pipe leaks, and structural failure in extreme weather. events identified are classified based on their stage of occurrence. They
Several leak (gas, liquid, or two-phase release) scenarios are associated adopt a qualitative assessment, establish the possibility, and set mitiga-
with drillship (FPSO) operation for 15 years, and the classification of tion for the hazard event occurrence.
major, significant, and minor based conditions are detailed in [112]. Recent approaches for risk analysis in the three operational phases of
In most cases, a large spill or release size is frequently caused by nat- FPSO offloading are presented in the literature [122–126]. The models
ural disasters and harsh weather conditions in floating offshore system cover areas of quantitative risk analysis, qualitative risk analysis, and
related release scenarios. dynamic models. Vinnem et al. [127] present an updated report on the
last decade’s risk analysis and present online decision support models
4.1.2. Collision and offloading risk effects for FPSO-shuttle tanker collision risk reduction. This is expected to inte-
Collision scenarios and related marine risk consequences from FPSO grate and handle data uncertainty and measure, simulate and generate
operations are presented in [113]. The common risk scenario that occurs probabilistic risk information. This integrated framework provides deci-
between an FPSO and an off-take shuttle tanker is a collision. Vinnem sion making aid in safety-critical deep offshore and harsh environment
et al. [114] use risk influencing factors to model the collision frequency operations. Although the model presents a prospective application, un-
of shuttle tankers and FPSOs during offloading operations. They identify certainty, the human factor and extreme environmental scenario still
that human and organizational factors are key elements for such an op- pose interruption and economic risk in offshore operations.
eration. The risk influencing factors (RIF), as presented by Vinnem et al.
[114], are static states that represent an average level of some prevail- 4.1.3. Topside systems risk effects
ing conditions during operation. They are grouped into (1). Operational The drillship configurations are structured into different units with
RIFs describe the shuttle tanker’s safe and efficient loading operation specific functions and operations. Risers connected to the FPSO trans-
and FPSO offloading operations, (2). Organizational (Managerial) RIFs mit production fluids from the subsea oil reservoirs, and the fluids
describe the control and management framework of the operation, and are separated using topside facilities (Fig. 4). The topside facilities in-
(3). Regulatory RIFs describe requirements and guidelines for opera- clude oil treatment (filtering, oil separation, oil storage), gas treatment
tional monitoring and compliance. Similarly, Wang et al. [115] show (gas compression, dehydration, well injection, equipment fuelling), and
that collision in ships generally is affected by a number of factors that water treatment (filtration and processing, sea discharge, well injec-
must be integrated for a holistic collision modeling, especially in struc- tion). Other auxiliary systems include electrical power systems, flaring
tural response assessment. Different scenarios associated with the FPSO- systems, firefighting equipment, the inert gas system, freshwater sys-
shuttle tanker collision incident are shown in Vinnem [116], which he tems/accommodation support and fuel, lubrication, greasing systems,
refers to as the risk influence diagram. etc. The operation of these facilities has associated hazards and risks
The combination of human (operational) and technical failure gives that affect the entire vessel and interrupt the drilling operation if not
a more significant contribution of about 40% of total collision risk. Moan adequately managed. System failures, leaks, overflow, and release are
et al. [117] present a collision risk analysis of an FPSO-shuttle tanker common topside risk scenarios that are also critical to the safe opera-
in structural failure, sinking, or capsizing. They use the accidental limit tion of the drillship. Generally, risk analysis is grouped into qualitative,
state (ALS), which gives a prescriptive or semi-prescriptive analysis of quantitative, and dynamic risk analysis frameworks.
the accident scenario. The ALS approach uses external and internal me- Several qualitative tools have been adopted for offshore process risk
chanics processes. The safety assessment of the FPSO considering the assessment, such as hazard identification (HAZID), hazard and operabil-
failure modes with respect to stability, structural strength, and position- ity (HAZOP), what-if-analysis, structured what-if-technique (SWIFT),
ing could predict the survival limit in accident conditions through ulti- cause and effect diagrams, checklist, strength, weakness, opportunities
mate fatigue strength or ALS. This gives a design check on the structure and threats (SWOT), failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) [129].
to resist abnormal effects (fire, explosion collision) and its response to These techniques, in general, are checklists used to identify and examine
resist specified environmental conditions without extensive failure (to- potential hazards and risks as well as their causes and associated conse-
tal collapse), especially when there is a high annual sea state probability quences. These provide information for design, maintainability, safety,
of exceedance. reliability, probability, and availability analysis for engineering systems.

160
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

Fig. 4. Typical FPSO Modules Layout [128].

Several terms are adopted to describe the individual approaches based Jin and Jang [151] presented a probabilistic-based fire risk anal-
on the areas of applications. ysis model for the topside of an FPSO. The proposed model was de-
Quantitative risk models for the offshore industry have tremendously veloped to solve the common challenges of applying accidental design
improved over the years. The quantitative models integrate risk iden- loads [112] to fire-based structural consequence analysis. The model
tification, ranking, prioritization, consequences, and corrective (pre- was demonstrated on the FPSO separation modules and was able to
cautionary) measures. An overview of the process risk and accident present a cumulative failure frequency of the topside structure, and was
models can be found in [130]. They presented a distinguished com- useful in determining the minimum passive fire protection application
parison of the various models and the most promising offshore acci- area. Jin et al. [152] proposed a quantitative-probabilistic fire risk as-
dent modeling technique. They presented a framework for comparison sessment model that integrates possible scenarios of hazard identifica-
of the quantitative risk analysis and the dynamic risk analysis (DRA) tion and their probabilities with CFD-based simulation. For a release
strategies. scenario, the model was demonstrated the safety of the topside struc-
The capacity of the DRA to include an updated probability of fail- ture (living quarters) on a semi-drilling rig system. The model predicted
ure of safety systems make it most promising for a dynamic risk sce- the damages and temperature distribution and contours because of the
nario. The Bayesian network (BN) is one of the DRA tools that has been release scenario.
extensively used in risk and safety engineering because of its capabil- Baalisampang et al. [153] present a CFD model for fire modeling of
ity to assess scenarios involving dependability, probability prediction, floating LNG process facilities. The model was demonstrated on the top-
and conditional probability formation [131–134]. Advanced configu- side facilities for an LNG spill due to leakage or tank overfilling. The
ration through hybridization of BN has been proposed as seen in the result shows that the consequences are fatal for humans, causing catas-
Dynamic Bayesian Network (DBN) [135] for military application, Bow- trophic failure on structures and equipment damage. High severity of
tie BN framework [136] for offshore application, the Fuzzy BN approach impact was observed in the mixed refrigerant module of the liquefac-
and the Hybrid BN approach [94, 137,138,139] for marine system appli- tion process plant. An integrated, highly sensitive, and proactive risk
cation. Other DRA frameworks, configurations, and applications in the model that will measure and comply with resilience system design is
offshore and process industry, such as the SHIPP models, are detailed in needed to promote performance optimization of these systems and min-
[130–144]. imize frequent interruption in remote and harsh offshore operations.
Accident scenarios have associated consequences in offshore pro-
cess operations. For process operation, common consequences can be 4.1.4. Drilling risk effects
classified as an explosion, fire, and toxic release [145] and for marine The drilling operation process is prone to high risk in remote
(offshore) operation, like collision, foundering, grounding, stranding, and harsh environments. The most critical drilling risky scenario is a
capsizing (loss), fire, and explosion [146]. Several consequences model- blowout. Geuns [154] identified blowout as a critical accident scenario
ing techniques have been proposed over the years for offshore process- in an extreme (arctic) environment. Several concepts for blowout occur-
related operations, ranging from source modeling to impact modeling rence in offshore operations have been presented [154–158]. Abimbola
[147,148]. et al. [159] presented blowout risk analysis for drilling operations us-
Several topside fire models have also been developed. Some are cited ing bow-tie analysis. Abimbola and Khan [160] and Bergan [158] ex-
in [149], where a quantitative risk assessment of gas explosion was car- plained various risk consequences of blowout occurrence. In the remote
ried out on the topside of an offshore platform using a flame accelera- and harsh environment, the drilling operation is prone to frequent well-
tion simulator. They were able to assess the hydrocarbon leak risk and control subsystems’ failures that may result in release, fire, explosion,
various fire consequences due to an accident scenario. Suardin et al. and blowout. Recent models use various techniques to predict and miti-
[128] presented a model for comparative analysis of fire and explosion gate system failures in a harsh environment. The dynamics of the remote
on FPSO topside operations. The model gave an overview and showed and harsh environment require continuous research to understand better
consequences assessment capability with expert systems to identify ar- the best safely prediction in offshore drilling operations in this terrain.
eas for control recovery measures. Dan et al. [150] present a quantitative
consequences-based risk analysis of the LNG Liquefaction process (DMR 4.2. Reliability and integrity challenges
cycle) on an FPSO using PHAST. The model was applied to an optimiza-
tion DMR cycle process of an LNG FPSO, possible leaks scenarios were The remote and harsh environment has been described as character-
identified, and subsequent fire and explosion scenarios were modeled. ized by extreme ice features, wind, waves, and storms. These environ-
The authors were able to establish that for the topside operation, jet ments have posed a dangerous threat due to extreme and complex struc-
fire, explosion, and flash fire are the possible accidents in releases due tural degradation that is unpredictable because of the dynamic nature
to possible leaks. of its elements. The reliability and integrity of structures and equipment

161
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

operating in this terrain are critically threatened, and the need to un- goods, especially if a fracture occurs after the collision. To understand
derstand these risk factors for oil and gas exploration is necessary. The the ice-hull collision impact, structural behavior, and critical scenarios
impacts of these environmental factors cause failures of the offshore sys- [170,171], presented different loadings on the critical part of the ship,
tems and lead to financial losses through frequent interruption, system such as the fore mid-ship and aft end. The ship’s hull form is made of
shutdown, and maintenance. As discussed earlier under risk analysis in steel and the mechanical characteristic of steel after collision changes in
an offshore environment, the qualitative tools mentioned are applicable a low-temperature environment [172]. Based on the energy conserva-
for such systems’ reliability analysis (RAs). tion approach, Bae et al. [173] proposed a numerical simulation model
Several analytical probabilistic models, such as FORM, SORM, and for hull-ice collision modeling. More research is needed to better under-
reliability-based design optimization (RBDO), have been applied to stand the structural susceptibility to harsh environments. This environ-
model different assets’ reliability in the oil and gas industry [161]. ment critically affects the reliability and integrity of the structures and
The merits of this reliability technique over a range of floating struc- causes catastrophic failures.
tures with several failure modes are outlined in [162]. Although insuffi-
cient data, missing data, and insufficient data are still significant issues 4.2.2. Riser system failures
in comprehensive reliability analysis of critical offshore infrastructure In most subsea systems, corrosion fatigue is a critical factor that af-
in the remote and harsh environment, expert systems’ integration can fects performance and causes such systems’ failure. Mainly in the riser
help in data assessment and accuracy [129]. Therefore, a dynamic and system, a couple of serious shortcomings were caused by corrosion of
holistic approach with expert domain application needs critical atten- the armor wires in the top section near the splash zone or above sea
tion to solve the present challenges in harsh environment operations. level [174], common in remote and harsh environments. The most con-
Abaei et al. [94] used BN for moored floating system reliability and in- sequential failure factor is a damaged outer sheath due to a breach. The
tegrated the hydrodynamic response into the modeling structure. The performance analysis of the riser system, especially in the harsh envi-
model shows promise in risk mitigation prediction for offshore systems. ronment that demands new technology, new material, and new design,
Integrity challenges in this environment, such as degradation result- introduces a new failure scenario that is not common to any other ter-
ing from corrosion and cracks, are still a critical concern for the operator rain [175].
in the industry. Thodi et al. [163,164] presented a risked-based integrity The global analysis for riser performance is used for sensitivity and
model to predict environmentally induced defects in the process and off- calibration checks related to flexible subsea systems [176]. It collates the
shore structure. The authors used a sampling-based Metropolis-Hastings external environment conditions for fatigue loading. This external envi-
(M-H) algorithm and demonstrated the framework for asset degradation ronmental impact increases and exhibits the worst unpredicted scenario
mechanisms in process plants. This framework makes a useful predic- in remote and harsh environments. Although design considerations may
tion, considering the uncertainty for corrosion and crack profile over have inculcated safety factors, this system will suffer a setback and fail
time, and assesses cost-based implications of the system’s degradation at certain abnormal sea states. The interconnectivity with the pipeline
in the harsh environment. Winterization is a crucial phenomenon asso- may also be set in pipe-related tension and bending, which may reduce
ciated with harsh environment operations where low-temperature mat- the angular motions relative to an interface of bending curvature or
ters, and continuous research is needed for better prediction. moment [174]. The local fatigue analysis converts the global loading at
selected hotspots to stress in the armor wires and can affect the integrity
4.2.1. Hull structural failures of the riser.
Extreme wave formation with critical wave height and period are
experienced in a harsh environment. These wave-impact related loads 4.2.3. Mooring line failures
(slamming) cause stress impact on offshore structures and can result in The mooring system provides stability for the vessels in deep water
deformation of the structural components. In such systems’ design and operation. There are different types of mooring systems that are com-
operation phase, a better understanding of the environmental load’s im- monly used, such as catenary, semi-taut and taut. In the harsh envi-
pact is critical. The development in the shipping industry has also pro- ronment, the mooring systems experience unstable behavior due to the
moted advanced methodology to predict structural response to slam- extreme wave effect on the drillship and the ship dynamics [177]. Sev-
ming impacts. This impact sets the ship hull into a vibratory response. eral models have been used to analyze moored system stability in rough
Slamming related impacts are presented in [165]. Ramos and Soares weather conditions. For flexible and deep-water operation, the single
[166] predicted the stresses induced on ships’ forms due to wave im- point mooring system is used for permanently mooring in a critical,
pact. They used finite element methods to model the response by modal harsh environment.
superposition. They were able to predict the associated slam-based verti- The mooring systems exhibit instability and fishtailing motion
cal bending moment across the vessel’s length and the place of maximum types in such an environment. Lee and Choi [178] and Aghamoham-
effect. madi and Thompson [179] discussed the fishtailing motion of the moor-
The ship hull’s strength, loading, and bending effect is holistic, and ing system under impact and revealed that the motion arises from the
in practice, the mean longitudinal bending effect is highest near the asymmetry in the restoring force matrix. The asymmetry may be caused
midship. So, in most analyses, the vessel is treated as a single beam by mooring stiffness and fluid loading interaction. Also, there is high
and the strength is analyzed longitudinally using the Euler-Bernoulli nonlinearity in turret mooring, which causes instability or chaotic re-
model. Sagging and hogging are prevailing conditions that could be crit- sponses in operations. For viscous flow-related terms, the yaw motion
ically analyzed when the hull plating is slamming. However, Wang et al. moment on the mooring system can be modeled using the relation pro-
[167] revealed that the vessel experiences more significant slam induced posed by [178].
relative vertical motions at the fore than near midship in the head sea. Mooring line dynamics become complicated in rough weather con-
Wang et al. [168] further analyzed the hydroelastic responses of hori- ditions and are mostly analyzed relative to the drillship response in such
zontal elastic hull plates and discovered that the slam-induced impact a sea state. Large amplitude wave frequency motions and viscous flow-
could also affect the bottom form of the ship. related hydrodynamic effects contribute to the mooring dynamic and
In the harsh arctic environment, the ship hull suffers ice load ei- instability, and the reliability of the mooring systems will be affected
ther from collision or accumulation on floating structures. The collision over time. The research of [179,180], shows that in large amplitude un-
of the iceberg with offshore structures is an alarming experience and stable sea states, the mooring system was unable to keep the drillship on
needs to be evaluated. Haris and Amdahl [169] presented the analy- the station; the state of instability increases with time-dependent vary-
sis of the ice-ship collision effect at midship (hull). The mid-region of ing loads. Therefore, Paton et al. [177] evaluated the unstable behavior
the ship’s structural integrity is very important for the safety of life and of mooring lines based on time-varying loads and suggested that this

162
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

should be accounted for in the stability modeling of mooring systems Yang et al. [190] proposed a risk-based winterization technique to pre-
for harsh environment operation. dict an onboard crew ship’s operational envelope. In remote harsh envi-
Mousavi [181] uses Monte Carlo simulation to predict the fail- ronments, the relationship between these two areas of safety is stronger
ure probability of mooring systems. In his analysis, the mooring sys- than that in normal climatic conditions, and one may lead to the other.
tem sub-components failure is time-dependent (that is, one failure at a Further work was presented by Ratnayake [191] on winterization in-
time), which defines their sub-component functionality. Mousavi et al. tegrity management. The author used a fuzzy-based approach to mini-
[182] further use a progressive reliability method to quantify the relia- mize the variability of the associated winterization risk in offshore op-
bility of a mooring system under sea loading impact and compare it with erations. Research awareness of winterization integrity-based manage-
that of the Monte Carlo simulation. The model was able to predict the ment is evolving, and more dynamic models that can integrate a robust
failure probability of the system and its sub-components., especially for critical element require further work.
a serviceable mooring type. The report of [183] shows the failure trend
of mooring systems of mobile offshore drilling systems in the harsh envi- 4.3. Logistics challenges
ronment. The cases presented were in the harsh North Sea environment.
The result revealed a tendency for a high failure rate of mooring systems Logistics and the supply chain are vital parts of an offshore drilling
in such an environment. The need to understand and develop integrated operation. Transport of drilling facilities, installation, construction, and
models that can predict such a system’s safety in extreme sea states re- production involve a series of logistic services. The offshore operation
quires further work. involves heavy lifting operations, such as positioning rig structures,
subsea installations, and offloading, which are greatly affected in re-
mote and harsh environments. Although the remote and harsh environ-
4.2.4. Umbilical system failures
ment operation is still underdeveloped and there are limited infrastruc-
The umbilical is part of subsea systems that are grouped under flex-
tures that can enhance stress-free oil and gas operation, there is no de-
ible pipes. It provides power and control (electricity, hydraulic power,
veloped network connection in terms of communication and seaports’
chemical injection) to the subsea oil and gas equipment [12]. The per-
infrastructure [188]. Communication and response infrastructures are
formance of the umbilical is condition-based. Therefore, the remote
critical for safe offshore operations in remote and harsh environments
and harsh environment presents an abnormal scenario because of en-
[192]. There are restrictive laws and environmental sensitivity in re-
vironmental and accidental loads. The umbilical system is prone to
mote and harsh arctic environments. Due to the lack of highly effective
vortex-induced vibration in the steady current condition and worsens
emergency infrastructure, limited oil spill contingency measures pose a
in harsh environment operation [12,184]. This scenario increases the
threat to oil and gas development in this region [9,193]. Weather infras-
failure mode of the umbilical system.
tructure that enhances weather predictions is rare in most this region.
Global loading analysis is used to predict the dynamic and non-linear
Especially for adequate weather prediction, we need robust weather
effects of the environmental impact on the umbilical. The study indi-
infrastructure that is technologically sophisticated to account for ev-
cates the displacement and stress results (axial force, bending, and tor-
ery hidden detail of the weather at all sea states. Indeed, the available
sional moment) along the umbilical’s length. It is necessary to integrate
technology cannot accurately predict the size, location, and strength of
fatigue life determination into the stress models for holistic analysis, es-
polar low pressure when it is building up [194]. The region in ques-
pecially in a harsh environment where loading impact is sometimes un-
tion is complex and problematic, affecting logistics and supply chain
predictable. Also, under extreme wave conditions, vessel motion causes
planning.
the umbilical to move in different directions and the touchdown zone to
The costs of the drilling, operation, and logistics in a harsh environ-
vary in time. Fatigue damage sets in due to the seafloor restraints and
ment are expressed in non-linearity with the operation; cost increases
can result in total failure.
exponentially, and the investment risk also increases significantly. The
challenges faced are significant and complex: from the rig to the deep-
4.2.5. Human failures est section of the well. Long distances to the market and suppliers intro-
The drilling operation in remote and harsh environments signifi- duce significant transport logistics and cost problems. In this situation,
cantly increases occupational risk. According to [185,186], slips, trips, service and spare parts delivery takes more time, affecting the prompt
and falls from heights are common events that result in injuries in harsh repair of the breakdown facility. The long distance to the market, com-
environment operations. The operating environment is characterized by bined with the climate condition and lack of suitable infrastructure, can
strong wind and ice loads which affect vessel motion and create a de- lead to unacceptable downtime in the production process and return
teriorating working condition. Safety and production performance are on investment [3]. The harsh environment creates the need for special
essential aspects of offshore drilling investment, which are associated logistic and maintenance strategies that can overcome the problems.
with many uncertainties in remote and harsh environments due to pre- The Arctic (harsh) environment is characterized by freezing tempera-
vailing human failures. tures. Research showed that an annual minimum temperature of −39 °C
The Arctic environmental condition is characterized by extreme cold, to −20 °C can be experienced in the northern part of the Barents Sea
darkness, and isolation, creating difficult working conditions for crew [195]. Offshore operations at such temperatures will be affected, and
operations [3]. The operational and logistics challenges include limited marine icing will affect the offshore facility. Dominant causative factors
oilfield support infrastructure, operation complexity, sparse offset data, are high air humidity, cold rain, accumulation of dense fog, sea spray,
strong ocean currents, and a lack of real operational data for risk analy- and cold temperatures [196,197]. Fog formation affects the visibility,
sis [187,188]. Recent studies by Deacon et al. [189] show a significant which restricts ship and helicopter support service for some periods of
difference between relative human error probabilities in cold and nor- the year. This results in logistics challenges that will affect the offshore
mal conditions and the importance of the effect of cold temperature drilling operations and increase the running cost of the project’s produc-
on human performance. There are associated health-related challenges tion phase.
in the remote environment that critically affect personal performance. Remoteness and lack of highly sensitive infrastructures affect emer-
Some are highlighted in the literature. Occupational safety mainly re- gency oil-spill and logistics responses [198]. No real-time model has
lates to personal safety, and the focus is on the prevention and mitiga- been developed to predict the logistics profile and economic risk due to
tion of hazards that could result in health issues (e.g., slips, trips, and interruption and the environmental constraints in a remote and harsh
falls). environment. However, capacity optimization of the FPSO/drillship is
Winterization is a phenomenon that characterizes the harsh arctic an evolving concept that most of the oil and gas companies are explor-
environment, which greatly affects human performance if not adequate. ing as one of the options. The larger drillship will provide more storage

163
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

Table 2
State of knowledge of challenges in remote and harsh Arctic environment offshore operations.

Importance to offshore operation

Challenges Sub-categorization Current state in remote & harsh environment Recommendation

Environmental Wind loads Models exist for wind load Most important for offshore Continuous research for a
prediction but are site specific reliability generalized model for an
improved wind loads prediction
Waves loads Limited models exist for extreme Critical for safe operation Robust generic models for
scenario real-time higher significant wave
height and wavelength ratio(𝜆/L)
are required to improve the
current models

Ice loads Limited models exist for moored Most important for remote arctic More studies are required to
structure prediction environment understand ice geometry and
impact characteristics better
Current and storm Limited models exist for Most necessary for offshore Continuous research is needed to
structural response in storm system stability prediction improve the current models

Offshore system dynamics Roll motion effects Current models exist for Most critical in offshore system Continuous research to improve
structural dynamic response with structural dynamic response existing models and minimize
uncertainty uncertainty

Pitch motion effects New model proposed for design Important for position reference Improvement required for a
optimization and position in operations generalized application
Heave motion effects Limited models exist for harsh Critical in dynamic response that Continuous research to better
operation prediction defines operational stability understand the complexity of
most critical scenarios

Yaw, sway, surge effects Limited models exist that predict Most important in the tandem More study required to improve
effect minimization offloading operation the current models

Offshore system risk/safety Spill risk No holistic model exists for Most important for The development of a robust
remote harsh environment environmental policy compliance terrain specific algorithm is
necessary
Collision risk Accident limit state and collision Critical in offloading and logistic More study is required for the
models exist operation development of an integrated
dynamic model

Topside/production risk Current qualitative, dynamic, and Critical in the support and Continuous research to
consequences models exist subsystems operations understand critical causative
factors and improve the current
model’s framework
Drilling/blowout risk Current models exist Most critical in safe drilling Continuous research is needed to
operation meet the dynamic terrain
Operational reliability/integrity Limited models exist but not Critical for safe and sustainable More studies are required to
risk adequate operation in the remote harsh better understand the dynamic in
environment reliability and integrity
management in remote harsh
environment

Economic risk No holistic model exists for Critical for investment and The development of a robust
remote harsh environment operational sustainability dynamic terrain specific model is
operational interruption decision making necessary
prediction

Logistics Shipping No model for routing and supply Most critical for sustainable More studies are required to
chain prediction in remote harsh operation (repairs, spare parts, develop a holistic logistic flow
environment maintenance, etc.) and model for the remote arctic
emergency response operations
Air(helicopter) Limited framework for air logistic Most critical for sustainable The development of an integrated
support prediction operation (personnel, supply, dynamic model is necessary
etc.) and emergency response

compartments for goods and support materials needed for the period of ing drilling operations in remote harsh environments, most of the mod-
operation. The concepts have their associated cost and limited applica- els are site specific with a high level of uncertainty. Their inability to
tion in case of critical facilities’ failures. accurately predict multicriteria influences in each time domain is still a
challenge. Although the dynamic structural models for moored-offshore
5. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities systems provide accurate reliability, the system under critical impact
still needs further research. The reviewed operational risk models are
not dynamically structured to capture influential factors’ interdepen-
The characterization of remote and harsh environments is complex
dency (see Table 2). There is a need to develop an intertwined design
and evolving, limiting offshore infrastructure performance and mak-
for safety to integrate the multiple dimensional risk factors during op-
ing failure predictions difficult. Though several models have been pro-
erations in remote arctic offshore environments.
posed for application in offshore systems risk and safety modeling dur-

164
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

The following provides an extended research frontier to improve op- [5] A. Wassink, Development of solutions for Arctic offshore drilling, SPE Arct. Ex-
erational sustainability in remote and harsh offshore operations: trem. Environ. Conf. Exhib. Moscow, Russ. 15–17 Oct. 2013 (2013) 1–12 October,
doi:10.2118/166848-MS.
[6] J.R. Hasle, U. Kjellén, O. Haugerud, Decision on oil and gas exploration in an Arctic
• Development and adoption of data digitalization and IoT for marine area: case study from the Norwegian Barents Sea, Saf. Sci. 47 (6) (2009) 832–842,
system design and operations doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.10.019.
• Development of resilience infrastructure for optimum survivability [7] J. Krüger, Operations and maintenance of oil and gas platforms under Arctic con-
ditions, Master Thesis University of Stavanger, Norway, 2013.
in harsh arctic environments [8] S. Løset, Science and technology for exploitation of oil and gas - an environmental
• Development of optimization tools through data mining and smart challenge, Eur. Netw. Conf. Res. North (1995) 12–16 December.
system for risk management [9] T. Szelangiewicz, B. Wisniewski, K. Zelazny, The influence of wind, wave and load-
ing condition on total resistance and speed of the vessel, Polish Marit. Res. 21 (3)
• Advanced design and material characterization via machine learning
(2014) 61–67, doi:10.2478/pomr-2014-0031.
algorithms for remote arctic operations [10] R. Zangeneh, K.P. Thiagarajan, and M. Cameron, OMAE2017-62134, pp. 1–7, 2017.
[11] N.D.P. Barltrop and A.J. Adams, Dynamics of fixed marine structures, vol. 1, p. 764
pp, 1991, doi:10.1016/B978-0-7506-1046-9.50011-0.
6. Conclusions [12] S. Yasseri and B. Wang, Extreme response of dynamic umbilicals in random sea
extreme response of dynamic umbilicals in random sea, no. June 2014, 2015.
[13] T. Anundsen, “Operability comparison of three ultra-deepwater and harsh environ-
This paper presents the state-of-the-art of offshore system opera- ment drilling vessels,” p. 106, 2008, [Online]. Available: https://brage.bibsys.no/
tional challenges in remote and harsh environments. An assessment xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/182649/Anundsen%2CThorgeir.pdf?sequence=1.
to understand the state of operations and system dynamics in remote [14] G.Z. Forristall, K. Ewans, M. Olagnon, and M. Prevosto, The West Africa Swell
Project (WASP), 2013.
and harsh environment operations has been presented. The review
[15] M. Zeinoddini, H.Matin Nikoo, H. Estekanchi, Endurance Wave Analysis (EWA) and
shows that the remote and harsh operating environment faces seri- its application for assessment of offshore structures under extreme waves, Appl.
ous challenges, and technological development is still evolving to min- Ocean Res. 37 (2012) 98–110, doi:10.1016/j.apor.2012.04.003.
[16] M.M. Abaei, E. Arzaghi, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, S. Chai, A novel approach to safety
imize operational interruption. From the study, the initial challenges
analysis of floating structures experiencing storm, Ocean Eng. 150 (2017) 397–403
are grouped thus:(1) Environmental factors, (2) offshore structural dy- November 2017, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.12.011.
namics, (3) operational risk and safety, (4) logistics challenges. The [17] H. Riahi, H.T. Estekanchi, Seismic assessment of steel frames with the endurance
environmental constraints are waves, wind, currents, storms, and ice time method, J. Constr. Steel Res 66 (6) (2010) 780–792.
[18] M.A.D. Diznab, S. Mohajernassab, M.S. Seif, M.R. Tabeshpour, H. Mehdigholi, As-
phenomena that interrupt operation. The environmental constraints af- sessment of offshore structures under extreme wave conditions by modified en-
fect the offshore systems’ dynamics and stability, causing risky oper- durance wave analysis, Mar. Struct. 39 (2014) 50–59.
ations. The operation in remote and harsh environments is strongly [19] V. Jahanmard, M.A.D. Diznab, H. Mehdigholi, M.R. Tabeshpour, S.M. Seif, Perfor-
mance-based assessment of steel jacket platforms by wave endurance time method,
dependent on the environmental constraint and offshore systems re- Ships Offshore Struct. (2015) 1–11.
sponses. This dependability affects the work and logistical services, [20] ISSC 2015, ISSC 2015 Committee I.1 Environment Report, 2015.
causing an interruption. In terms of operation and economic resources, [21] ISSC, ISSC 2012 Committee I.1 Environment Report, 2012.
[22] A. Osborne, Classification of rogue wave solutions of the nonlinear Schroedinger
risk measurement is also critical in remote and harsh environments. equation, EGU Gen. Assem. Geophys. Res. 2 (2013) NH5Vie.
The drilling, production, and logistics operations are time-bound be- [23] C. Onorato, M. Osborne, A. Serio, M. Cavaleri, L. Brandini, C. Stansberg, Extreme
cause of the terrain. This affects the investment recovery plan. Sum- waves, modulational instability and second order theory: wave flume experiments
on irregular waves, Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids 25 (2022) 86–601.
marized areas of concern, such as structural design and response pre-
[24] S. Mohajernassab, M.A.D. Diznab, H. Mehdigholi, M.S. Seif, M.R. Tabeshpour, Mod-
diction of a modern drillship and semi-submersible platforms, are ification of endurance wave analysis based on New-wave theory, Ships Offshore
presented. Struct. 12 (3) (2017) 330–340, doi:10.1080/17445302.2016.1149319.
[25] S.S. Denchfield, D.A. Hudson, P. Temarel, W. Bateman, and S.E. Hirdaris, Evalau-
Logistics and supply chain planning and prediction are still a chal-
tion of rogue wave induced loads using 2D hydro-elasticity analysis, 2009.
lenge because of the lack of accurate data and meteorological uncer- [26] S. Enderami, M. Zeinoddini, N. Shabakhty, and H. Ameryoun, Dynamic non-linear
tainties. An innovative model development that can integrate logistics analysis of offshore jacket type platforms under extreme wave loads, 2010.
risk prediction in the remote harsh environment is necessary. Several [27] S.C. Jiang, B. Teng, W. Bai, Y. Gou, Numerical simulation of coupling effect between
ship motion and liquid sloshing under wave action, Ocean Eng. 108 (2015) 104–
other risks and consequences models for operational analysis in a re- 154, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.07.044.
mote harsh environment are unable to capture the likely interdepen- [28] Y. Gou, Y. Kim, T.Y. Kim, A numerical study on coupling between ship motions
dencies and instability in influential parameters. For economic risk pre- and sloshing in frequency and time domain, in: Proceedings of the 21st ISOPE
Conference, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 2011, pp. 158–164. June 19-24.
diction due to interruption, a dynamic risk framework that is time and [29] Y.S. Nam, B.W. Kim, Y. Kim, D.W. Kim, Experimental and numerical studies on
space-dependent is needed for a holistic analysis of drilling operations ship motion responses coupled with sloshing in waves, J. Ship. Res. 53 (2) (2009)
in the remote harsh arctic environment. Table 2 in section 5 summarizes 68–82.
[30] J.R. Mac Gregor, F. Black, B. Wright, D, Design and construction of FPSO ves-
the challenges of remote harsh environment operation, recent research sel for the Schiehallion field, Trans. R. Inst. Nav. Archit. Lond. 141 (1999) 270–
contributions and recommendations for future work. 304.
[31] K.M.T. Kleefsman, G. Fekken, A.E.P. Veldman, B. Iwanowski, B. Buchner, A vol-
ume-of-fluid based simulation method for wave impact problems, J. Comput. Phys.
Declaration of Competing Interest 206 (2005) 263–393.
[32] R.C. Zhu, G.P. Miao, Z.W. Lin, Numerical research on {FPSOs} with green water
occurrence, J. Sh. Res. 53 (1) (2009) 7–18.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial [33] NORSOK, “Standard N-003: action and action effects,” 2007.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence [34] E.M. Bitner-Gregersen, et al., Sea state conditions for marine struc-
the work reported in this paper. tures’ analysis and model tests, Ocean Eng. 119 (2016) 309–322 June,
doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.03.024.
[35] J. Hennig et al., OMAE2015-41167, pp. 1–15, 2015.
References [36] H.F. Needham, B.D. Keim, D. Sathiaraj, A review of tropical cyclone-generated
storm surges: global data sources, observations, and impacts, Rev. Geophys. 53
[1] P. Wang, X. Tian, T. Peng, Y. Luo, A review of the state-of-the-art developments in (2015) 545–591.
the field monitoring of offshore structures, Ocean Eng. 147 (October 2017) 148– [37] N.B. Bernier, K.R. Thompson, Predicting the frequency of storm surges and extreme
164 2018, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.10.014. sea levels in the northwest Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 111 (10) (2006) 1–15,
[2] Y. Du, W. Wu, Y. Wang, and Q. Yue, Prototype data analysis on Lh11-1 semisub- doi:10.1029/2005JC003168.
mersible platform in South China Sea OMAE2014-24610, pp. 1–8, 2014. [38] C.P. Jelesnianski, J. Chen, W.A. Shaffer, SLOSH: sea, lake, and overland surges
[3] A. Barabadi, M. Naseri, R.M.C. Ratnayake, Design for arctic conditions: safety from hurricanes, Natl. Ocean. Atmos. Adm. U. S. Dep. Commer. URL. 48 (1992)
and performance issues, in: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 32nd International http//www.nhc. noaa.gov/surge/slosh..
Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering OMAE2013-10287, 2013, [39] M. Reistad, Ø. Breivik, H. Haakenstad, O.J. Aarnes, B.R. Furevik, J.R. Bidlot,
pp. 1–10. A high-resolution hindcast of wind and waves for the North Sea, the Norwe-
[4] F. Khan, G. Reniers, V. Cozzani, Special Issue: safety and integrity in harsh envi- gian Sea, and the Barents Sea, J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 116 (5) (2011) 1–18,
ronments, Saf. Sci. 95 (2017) 148–149, doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.03.008. doi:10.1029/2010JC006402.

165
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

[40] F. Mazas, L. Hamm, An event-based approach for extreme joint probabilities [72] S.A. Islam, M. Jameel, S. Ahmad, Z.M. Jumaat, Nonlinear response of coupled inte-
of waves and sea levels, Coast. Eng. 122 (2017) 44–59 January, doi:10.1016/ grated spar platform under severe sea states, in: The 31st International Conference on
j.coastaleng.2017.02.003. OceaC, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2012, pp. 559–567,
[41] E. Ross, S. Sam, D. Randell, G. Feld, P. Jonathan, Estimating surge in ex- doi:10.1115/OMAE2012-83862. DOI.
treme North Sea storms, Ocean Eng. 154 (2018) 430–444 March, doi:10.1016/ [73] E. Gavassoni, P.B. Gonçalves, D.M. Roehl, Nonlinear vibration modes and instabil-
j.oceaneng.2018.01.078. ity of a conceptual model of a spar platform, Nonlinear Dyn. 76 (1) (2014) 809–826.
[42] E. Vanem, Joint statistical models for significant wave height and wave pe- [74] S. Liu, Y. Tang, W. Li, Nonlinear random motion analysis of coupled heave-pitch
riod in a changing climate, Mar. Struct. 49 (2016) 180–205, doi:10.1016/ motions of a spar platform considering 1st-order and 2nd-order wave loads, J. Mar.
j.marstruc.2016.06.001. Sci. Appl. 15 (2) (2016) 166–174, doi:10.1007/s11804-016-1349-7.
[43] S. Løset, K.N. Shkhinek, O.T. Gudmestad, K.V. Høyland, Actions from Ice on Arctic [75] L. Wang, W. Wang, Y. Du, H. Gao, Y. Huang, Pitch motion problem induced by dy-
offshore and Coastal Structures, 2006. namic positioning system for new sandglass-type floating body, J. Mar. Sci. Tech-
[44] M. Takeuchi, T. Kavamura, T. Sakai, M. Nakazava, N. Terashima, A. Kamio, Z. Mat- nol. 22 (1) (2017) 162–175, doi:10.1007/s00773-016-0403-0.
sushita, H. Kurokawa, H. Akagawa, S, Saeki, Ice load equation by medium scale [76] C. Ching-Tang, F. Li-Chen, VR-based motion simulator for dynamics ship on six
indentation test data, in: Proceedings of the 18th ISOPE Conference, II, 2001, degree-of-freedom platform, Roma, Italy 2007. ICRA International Conference, 2007
pp. 713–720. Stawanger, Norway, June 17–22, 2001Vol. SBN: 1-4244-0601-3.
[45] K. Skorobogatov, A. and Shkhinek, “Numerical simulation of ice/structure interac- [77] B, Gatis, F. Peter, Fast-time ship simulator, Saf. Sea (2007) 2007.
tion,” 2005. [78] T.I. Fossen, Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles. England, Jhon Wiley, 1996.
[46] F. Shkhinek, K.N. Bolshev, A, A, C.S. Maluytin, V., modelling of level ice action on [79] C.T. Chen, F. Ju, Fundamental properties of linear ship steering dynamic models,
floating anchored structures concepts for the Shockman field, in: Proceedings of J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 7 (1997).
the IAHR Ice Symposium., II, 2004, pp. 84–94. Vol. [80] L.B. Tao, K.Y. Lim, K. Thiagarajan, Heave response of classic spar with variable
[47] M. Arif, F. Khan, S. Ahmed, S. Imtiaz, Rare event risk analysis – application geometry, J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 126 (1) (2004) 90–95.
to iceberg collision, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 66 (2020) 104199 February, [81] B. Li, J. Ou, Heave response analysis of truss spar in frequency domain, Ocean Eng.
doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104199. 27 (1) (2009) 8–15.
[48] J.R. Tawekal, “Master ’ S Thesis ‘ice loads; platform design; standards; stavanger,’” [82] L. Liu, A. Incecik, Y. Zhang, Y. Tang, Analysis of heave motions of a truss
no. March 2015, doi: 10.1177/0739456X9401300405. spar platform with semi-closed moon pool, Ocean Eng. 92 (2014) 162–174,
[49] L. Liu, S. Ji, Ice load on floating structure simulated with dilated polyhedral dis- doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.09.048.
crete element method in broken ice field, Appl. Ocean Res. 75 (2018) 53–65, [83] L.Q. Liu, H. Zhou, Y.G. Tang, Coupling response of heave and moon pool water
doi:10.1016/j.apor.2018.02.022. motion of a truss Spar platform in random waves, China Ocean Eng. 29 (2) (2015)
[50] A. Ross, Nonlinear maneuvering models for ships: a lagrangian approach No Title, 169–182, doi:10.1007/s13344-015-0013-3.
2008. [84] N. Fonseca, R. Pascoal, C. Guedes-Soares, G.F. Clauss, C.E. Schmittner, Numerical
[51] R.A. Ibrahim, I.M. Grace, Modeling of ship roll dynamics and its coupling with and experimental analysis of extreme wave induced vertical bend- ing moments on
heave and pitch, Math. Probl. Eng. 2010 (2010) 13–18, doi:10.1155/2010/934714. a FPSO, Appl. Ocean Res. 32 (2010) 374–390.
[52] W. Lin, Q. R, Kuang, Modeling nonlinear roll damping with a self-consistent, [85] C.G. Soares, N. Fonseca, R. Pascoal, Abnormal wave induced load effects in ship
strongly nonlinear ship motion model, J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 13 (2) (2008) 127–137. structures, J. Sh. Res. 52 (1) (2008) 30–44.
[53] S. Chakrabarti, Empirical calculation of roll damping for ships and barges, Ocean [86] J.M.J. Journée, “Technical Report No.1216. Delft University of Technology, Ship,”,
Eng. 28 (7) (2001) 915–932. Hydromech. Lab. (1999).
[54] A.B. Mahfouz, Identification of the nonlinear ship rolling motion equation using [87] S. Rajendran, N. Fonseca, C.Guedes Soares, Effect of surge motion on
the measured response at sea, Ocean Eng. 31 (2004) 2139–2156 17–18. the vertical responses of ships in waves, Ocean Eng. 96 (2015) 125–138,
[55] J.B. Roberts, Effect of parametric excitation on ship rolling motion in random doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.12.034.
waves, J. Sh. Res. 26 (4) (1982) 246–253. [88] M. Greco, C. Lugni, O.M. Faltinsen, “Can the water on deck influence the parametric
[56] J. Kwon, S. Kim, D, Chung, Application of path integral solution to ship rolling roll of a FPSO? A numerical and experimental investigation,”, Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids
motion, in: Proceedings of the 3rd International Offshore and Polar Engineering 47 (2014) 188–201 vol.
Conference (ISOPE ’93), 1993, pp. 657–660. Singapore. [89] M. Greco and C. Lugni, “Numerical and experimental study of parametric roll with
[57] H. Lin, S.C.S. Yim, Chaotic roll motion and capsize of ships under periodic excita- water on deck,” 2012.
tion with random noise, Appl. Ocean Res. 17 (3) (1995) 185–204. [90] M. Greco, C. Lugni, O.M. Faltinsen, Influence of motion coupling and nonlin-
[58] E.T. Yim, S.C. Nakhata, T, Huang, Coupled nonlinear barge motions—Part II: de- ear effects on parametric roll for a floating production storage and offloading
terministic models stochastic models and stability analysis,” in Coupled nonlinear platform, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 373 (2033) (2015),
barge motions—Part II: deterministic models stochastic models and stability analy- doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0110.
sis, in: Proceedings of the 23rd ASME International Conference on Offshore Mechanics [91] J.T. Lopez, L. Tao, L. Xiao, Z. Hu, Experimental study on the hydrodynamic be-
and Arctic Engineering, 2004, pp. 293–302. (OMAE ’04) Vancouver Canada. haviour of an FPSO in a deepwater region of the Gulf of Mexico, Ocean Eng. 129
[59] A. Mamontov, E, Naess, An analytical-numerical method for fast evaluation of (2017) 549–566 August 2015, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.10.036.
probability densities for transient solutions of nonlinear Ito’s stochastic differen- [92] D.G. DiMattia, P... Amyotte, F. Khan, Determination of human error probabilities
tial equations, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 47 (1) (2009) 116–130. for offshore platform musters, in: International conference on Bhopal and its effects
[60] J.Y. Liu, L.Q. Tang, Y.G. Zheng, H.-Y, Gu, Analysis method of capsizing probability on process safety IIT-Kanpur India, 18, 2005, pp. 488–501.
in time domain for ships in random beam waves, J. Tianjin Univ. Sci. Technol. 39 [93] R. Islam, F. Khan, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, Human error probability assessment
(2) (2006) 165–169. during maintenance activities of marine systems, Saf. Health Work 9 (1) (2018)
[61] H.X. Liu, L.Q. Tang, Y.G, Li, Stochastic chaotic motion of ships in beam seas, J. 42–52, doi:10.1016/j.shaw.2017.06.008.
Mar. Sci. Technol. 15 (12) (2007) 123–128. [94] M.M. Abaei, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, S. Chai, F. Khan, Reliability assessment of
[62] J.C. Yin, Z.J. Zou, F. Xu, On-line prediction of ship roll motion during maneuvering marine floating structures using Bayesian network, Appl. Ocean Res. 76 (2018)
using sequential learning RBF neural networks, Ocean Eng 61 (2013) 139–147 51–60 April, doi:10.1016/j.apor.2018.04.004.
October 2017, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.01.005. [95] F. Khan, S.A. Abassi, Assessment of risks posed by chemical industries - application
[63] H. Fu, Y. Wang, H. Zhang, Ship rolling motion prediction based on extreme learn- of a new computer automated tool MAXCRED-III, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 12
ing machine, in: 2015 34th Chinese Control Conference, 2015, pp. 3468–3472, (1999) 455–469.
doi:10.1109/ChiCC.2015.7260174. [96] R.M. Townsend, The European Migrant Crisir (Lulu.com), 2015.
[64] M.M. Rahaman, H. Islam, H. Akimoto, M.R. Islam, Motion predictions of ships in [97] A. Papanikolaou, et al., GOALDS - goal based damage stability, Proc. 11th Int. Sh.
actual operating conditions using potential flow based solver, J. Nav. Archit. Mar. Stab. Work. (2010) 46–57 2010.
Eng. 14 (1) (2017) 65–76, doi:10.3329/jname.v14i1.28674. [98] J. Montewka, S. Ehlers, F. Goerlandt, T. Hinz, K. Tabri, P. Kujala, A framework
[65] J.B. Rho, H.S. Choi, Vertical motion characteristics of truss spars in waves, in: for risk assessment for maritime transportation systems - a case study for open
The Fourteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 2004, sea collisions involving RoPax vessels, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 124 (2014) 142–157,
pp. 662–665. Toulon, France. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2013.11.014.
[66] Y.P. Hong, D.Y. Lee, Y.H. Choi, S.K. Hong, S.E. Kim, An experimental study on the [99] A.D. Papanikolaou, G. Bulian, C. Mains, GOALDS – goal based damaged stability :
extreme motion responses of a spar platform in the heave resonant waves, in: The collision and grounding damages, 12th Int. Sh. Stab. Work. (2012) 37–44.
Fifteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference Seoul, 2005, [100] M.M. Abaei, E. Arzaghi, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, S. Chai, F. Khan, A robust risk as-
pp. 225–232. Korea. sessment methodology for safety analysis of marine structures under storm condi-
[67] M.A.S Neves, S.H. Sphaier, B.M. Mattoso, C.A. Rodríguez, T.F.G Vileti V L, On the tions, Ocean Eng. 156 (2018) 167–178 May, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.02.016.
occurrence of Mathieu instabilities of vertical cylinders, in: The 27th International [101] MMS, Proposed use of floating production, storage and offloading systems on
Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Estoril, Portugal, 2008, the Gulf of Mexico outer Continental Shelf: western and Central Planning Area.
pp. 619–627. Final Environment Impact Statement, OCS EIS/EA MMS 2000-090. Contract No
[68] L. Liu, Y. Tang, W. Wang, Unstability of coupled heave-pitch motions for spar plat- 1435-01-99-CT-30962. Mineral Man, New Orleans, Louisiana (2001) (January
form, J. Sh. Mech. 13 (4) (2009) 551–556. 2001).
[69] J. Zhao, L. Tang, Y. Tang, W. Wang, Internal resonant responses of heave-pitch [102] M. Capsey, D. Lewelyn, and E. Dyrkoren, “A Summary report on FPSO lessons
coupled motions of classic spar platform, J. Tianjin Univ. 42 (3) (2009) 201–207. learned from 5 Norwegian FPSO. Offshore management centre, Robert Gorden Uni-
[70] L.H. Shen, W. Tang Y, Time domain analysis of heave motion for truss spar in versity Abeerdeen UK,” 2002.
random seas, Ocean Eng. 30 (1) (2012) 60–65. [103] R. Amdel, H. Kleppesto, and J. Krokeide, “A Summary Report on FPSO-shuttle
[71] O... Montasir, V... Kurian, Effect of slowly varying drift forces on the motion char- tanker interface. Lesson learned from 4 shuttle tanker operation and 2 Norwegian
acteristics of truss spar platforms, Ocean Eng. 38 (2011) 1417–1429. FPSO/FSUs Operator. OLF FPSO/Shuttle tanker Project. Stavanger Norway,” 2004.

166
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

[104] E.G. Ward, R. Gilbert, A. Wolford, Comparative risk analysis for deepwater pro- [136] N. Khakzad, F. Khan, P. Amyotte, Quantitative risk analysis of offshore drilling
duction system, Final Rep. Offshore Technol. Res. Center (2001) College Station, operations: a Bayesian approach, Saf. Sci. 57 (2013) 108–117 August 2016,
Texas (January 2001),”. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.01.022.
[105] DNVFinal Report, MMS Contract, 2001. [137] S. Ung, Development of a weighted probabilistic risk assessment method
[106] J.B. Regg, A. Staci, B.J. Hauser, J. Hennessey, Bernard J. Kruse, J. Lowenhaupt, B. for offshore engineering systems using fuzzy rule-based Bayesian rea-
Smith , A. White, Deepwater development: a reference document for the deepwater soning approach, Ocean Eng. 147 (2017) 268–276 October 2017,
environment assessment gulf of Mexico OCS, 2000. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.10.044.
[107] B.H. Metzger, D. Salmond, A. Tilstone, FPSO environmental risk management, [138] S. Adumene, F. Khan, S. Adedigba, S. Zendehboudi, H. Shiri, Dynamic risk
Soc. Pet. Eng. - SPE Int. Conf. Heal. Saf. Environ. Oil Gas Explor. Prod. 3 (2010) analysis of marine and offshore systems suffering microbial induced stochas-
1613–1629 April2010. tic degradation, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 207 (2021) 107388 March 2021,
[108] G. Lončar, N. Leder, M. Paladin, Numerical modelling of an oil spill in the northern doi:10.1016/j.ress.2020.107388.
Adriatic, Oceanologia 54 (2) (2012) 143–173, doi:10.5697/oc.54-2.143. [139] S. Adumene, F. Khan, S. Adedigba, Operational safety assessment of off-
[109] Y. Li, W. Wang, B. Liu, X. Zhou, Research on oil spill risk of port tank zone shore pipeline with multiple MIC defects, Comput. Chem. Eng. 138 (2020),
based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, Aquat. Procedia 3 (2015) 216–223, doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2020.106819.
doi:10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.214. [140] S.A. Adedigba, F. Khan, M. Yang, Dynamic safety analysis of process systems using
[110] W. Blvd, 2016 update of occurrence rates for offshore oil spills, 2016. nonlinear and non-sequential accident model, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 111 (2016)
[111] C.M. Anderson, M. Mayes, and R. Labelle, “Update of occurrence rates for offshore 169–183, doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2016.04.013.
oil spills,” p. 87, 2012. [141] S.A. Adedigba, F. Khan, M. Yang, Process accident model considering depen-
[112] J.K. Paik, J. Czujko, Assessment of hydrocarbon explosion and fire risks in offshore dency among contributory factors, Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 102 (2016) 633–647,
installations: recent advances and future trends, IES J. Part A Civ. Struct. Eng. 4 doi:10.1016/j.psep.2016.05.004.
(3) (2011) 167–179, doi:10.1080/19373260.2011.593345. [142] M. Yang, F.I. Khan, L. Lye, Precursor-based hierarchical Bayesian approach for rare
[113] A.W. Sipkema, Single vs double sides for FPSO Hulls- a decision model-paper event frequency estimation: a case of oil spill accidents, Process Saf. Environ. Prot.
SPE 86669, SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and Enviornment 91 (5) (2013) 333–342.
in Oil and Gas Exploision and Production, 2004 Calgary 29-31 March Doi, [143] Q. Tan, G. Chen, L. Zhang, J. Fu, Z. Li, Dynamic accident modeling for
doi:10.2118/86669. high sulfur natural gas gathering station, Process Saf. Environ. Prot. (2013)
[114] J.E. Vinnem, P. Hokstad, T. Dammen, H. Saele, H. Chen, S. Haver, O. Kieran, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2013.03.004..
H. Kleppestoe, J.J. Thomas, L.L. Toennessen, Operational safety analysis of FPSO - [144] S. Rathnayaka, F. Khan, P. Amyotte, Accident modeling approach for safety as-
shuttle Tanker collision risk reveals areas of improvement, Proc. Offshore Technol. sessment in an LNG processing facility, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 25 (2) (2012)
Conf. (2003), doi:10.4043/15317-MS. 414–423 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2011.09.0.
[115] G. Wang, J. Spencer, Y. Chen, Assessment of a ship ’ s performance in accidents, [145] T. Abbasi, H. Pasman, S. Abbasi, A scheme for the classification of explosions in
Mar. Struct. 15 (2002) 313–333, doi:10.1016/S0951-8339(02)00017-5. the chemical process industry, J. Hazard. Mater. 174 (1) (2010) 270–280.
[116] J.E. Vinnem, “Operational safety of FPSOs shuttle tanker collision risk [146] T. Baalisampang, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, F. Khan, M. Dadashzadeh, Review and
summary report,” 2003, [Online]. Available: http://www.hse.gov.uk/ analysis of fire and explosion accidents in maritime transportation, Ocean Eng. 158
research/rrpdf/rr113.pdf. (2018) 350–366 April, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.04.022.
[117] T. Moan, J. Amdahl, X. Wang, J. Spencer, Risk assessment of FPSOs with [147] A. Summers, W. Vogtmann, S. Smolen, Consistent consequence severity estimation,
emphasis on collision, Annu. Meet. Soc. Nav. 110 (2002) 24–27 September Process Saf. Prog. 31 (1) (2012) 9–16.
[Online]. Available http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q= [148] H.W. Witlox, M. Harper, Modeling of time-varying dispersion for releases including
intitle:Risk+Assessment+of+FPSOs+with+Emphasis+on+Collision#0. potential rainout, Process Saf. Prog., 2013, doi:10.1002/prs.11652.
[118] Z. Liu, J. Amdahl, A new formulation of the impact mechanics of ship collisions [149] M. Weber, Some safety aspects on the design of Sparger systems for the, Process
and its application to a ship-iceberg collision, Mar. Struct. 23 (3) (2010) 360–384, Saf. Prog. 25 (4) (2006) 326–330, doi:10.1002/prs.
doi:10.1016/j.marstruc.2010.05.003. [150] S. Dan, C.J. Lee, J. Park, D. Shin, E.S. Yoon, Quantitative risk analysis of fire and
[119] H. Chen, PhD Thesis, 2003. explosion on the top-side LNG-liquefaction process of LNG-FPSO, Process Saf. En-
[120] Statoil., Granskningsrapport fra berøring. Document No. 00A05×0209, 2000., viron. Prot. 92 (5) (2014) 430–441, doi:10.1016/j.psep.2014.04.011.
2000. [151] Y. Jin, B.S. Jang, Probabilistic fire risk analysis and structural safety
[121] C.E.P. Rodriguez, G.F.M. de Souza, M.R. Martins, Risk-based analysis of assessment of FPSO topside module, Ocean Eng. 104 (2015) 725–737,
offloading operations with Fpso production units, 20th Int. Congr. Mech. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.019.
Eng. (2009) noJanuary[Online]. Available http://www.abcm.org.br/anais/cobem/ [152] Y.L. Jin, B.S. Jang, J.Du Kim, Fire risk analysis procedure based on tem-
2009/pdf/COB09-2003.pdf. perature approximation for determination of failed area of offshore struc-
[122] J.E. Vinnem, J.P. Liyannage, Human-technical interface of collision risk under dy- ture: living quarters on semi-drilling rig, Ocean Eng. 126 (2016) 29–46,
namic conditions: an exploratory learning case from the North Sea, Int. J. Technol. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.07.010.
Hum. Interact. 4 (1) (2008) 35–48. [153] T. Baalisampang, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, F. Khan, M. Dadashzadeh, Fire impact as-
[123] N. Leveson, Engineering a Safer World. Systems Thinking Applied to Safety, The sessment in FLNG processing facilities using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD),
MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, 2011. Fire Saf. J. 92 (2017) 42–52 October 2016, doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.05.012.
[124] B. Foss, Process control in conventional oil and gas fields challenges and opportu- [154] L. Van Geuns, The challenges of arctic oil exploration and production,
nities, Control Eng. Pract. 20 (10) (2012) 1058–1064. 2012. [Online]. Available: http://braemartechnical.com/files/Lecture-80_The-
[125] J.E. Vinnem, Offshore Risk Assessment (QRA), Springer, London Uk, 2013. Challenges-of-Arctic-Oil-Exploration-and-Production_13th-March_Grant-Smtih-
[126] M.E.K. Lundborg, Human technical factors in FPSO-shuttle tanker interactions and CEO-Braemar-Adjusting_Please-contact-the-office-for-a-copy-of-this-presentation.
their influence on the collision risk during operations in the North Sea, no. June pdf.
2014. [155] N. Energy, “Advanced risk and impact models for offshore systems advanced risk
[127] J.E. Vinnem, I.B. Utne, I. Schjølberg, On the need for online decision support in and impact models,” no. April 200, 2010.
FPSO - shuttle tanker collision risk reduction, Ocean Eng. 101 (7491) (2015) 109– [156] J.-.E. Vinnem, Offshore risk assessment vol 1., vol. 1. 2014.
117, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.008. [157] S.K. Hansen, Modelling failure mechanisms in subsea equipment, no. June 2016.
[128] J.A. Suardin, A. Jeff McPhate, A. Sipkema, M. Childs, M.S. Mannan, Fire and explo- [158] H. Bergan, Risk analysis of well control operations considering arctic environmen-
sion assessment on oil and gas floating production storage offloading (FPSO): an tal conditions, no. June 2015.
effective screening and comparison tool, Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 87 (3) (2009) [159] M. Abimbola, F. Khan, N. Khakzad, Dynamic safety risk analysis of offshore drilling,
147–160, doi:10.1016/j.psep.2008.12.002. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 30 (1) (2014) 74–85, doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2014.05.002.
[129] M. Leimeister, A. Kolios, A review of reliability-based methods for risk analysis [160] M. Abimbola, F. Khan, Dynamic blowout risk analysis using loss functions, Risk
and their application in the offshore wind industry, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. Anal. 38 (2) (2018) 255–271, doi:10.1111/risa.12879.
91 (2018) 1065–1076 November 2017, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.004. [161] Z. Lu, J. Song, S. Song, Z. Yue, J. Wang, Reliability sensitivity by
[130] A. Al-shanini, A. Ahmad, F. Khan, Accident modelling and analysis in process indus- method of moments, Appl. Math. Model. 34 (10) (2010) 2860–2871,
tries, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 32 (2014) 319–334, doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2014.09.016. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2009.12.020.
[131] G. Bearfield, W. Marsh, Generalising event trees using bayesian networks with a [162] C. Rendón-Conde, E. Heredia-Zavoni, Reliability assessment of mooring lines for
case study of train derailment, Comput. Saf. Reliab. Secur. (2005) 52–66. floating structures considering statistical parameter uncertainties, Appl. Ocean Res.
[132] K. Przytula, D. Thompson, Construction of Bayesian networks for diagnostics., 52 (2015) 295–308, doi:10.1016/j.apor.2015.06.011.
2000. [163] P.N. Thodi, F.I. Khan, M.R. Haddara, The development of posterior probabil-
[133] P. Weber, G. Medina-Oliva, C. Simon, B. Lung, Overview on Bayesian networks ity models in risk-based integrity modeling, Risk Anal. 30 (3) (2010) 400–420,
applications for dependability, risks analysis and maintenance areas, Eng. Appl. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01352.x.
Artif. Intell. 25 (4) (2012) 671–682. [164] P. Thodi, F. Khan, M. Haddara, Risk based integrity modeling of offshore process
[134] S. Adumene, F. Khan, S. Adedigba, S. Zendehboudi, Offshore system safety components suffering stochastic degradation, J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 19 (2) (2013)
and reliability considering microbial influenced multiple failure modes and 157–180, doi:10.1108/13552511311315968.
their interdependencies, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 215 (2021) 107862 November, [165] T.E. Schellin, O. el Moctar, Numerical prediction of impact-related wave loads on
doi:10.1016/j.ress.2021.107862. ships, J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 129 (1) (2007) 39, doi:10.1115/1.2429695.
[135] Z. Zhou, X. Zeng, H. Li, S. Lui, C. Ma, Application of Bayesian networks in [166] J. Ramos, C.G. Soares, Vibratory response of ship hulls to wave impact loads, Int.
dynamic event tree analysis, J. Converg. Inf. Technol. 6 (7) (2011) p. doi, Shipbuild. Prog. 45 (441) (1998) 71–87, doi:10.3233/ISP-1998-4544104.
doi:10.4156/jcit.vol6.issue7.42.

167
S. Adumene and H. Ikue-John Journal of Safety Science and Resilience 3 (2022) 153–168

[167] S. Wang, D. Karmakar, C. Guedes-Soares, Hydroelastic impact due to longi- [183] W. Brindley and A.P. Comley, OMAE2014-23395, pp. 1–9, 2014.
tudinal compression on transient vibration of a horizontal elastic plate, in: [184] G.P. Drumond, I.P. Pasqualino, B.C. Pinheiro, S.F. Estefen, Pipelines, risers and
C. Guedes Soares, T.A Santos (Eds.), MaritimeTechnologyandEngineering, Tay- umbilicals failures: a literature review, Ocean Eng. 148 (2018) 412–425 November
lor&FrancisGroup, London, 2015, pp. 1073–1079. 2017, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.11.035.
[168] S. Wang, D. Karmakar, C.Guedes Soares, Hydroelastic impact of a horizon- [185] Bomel Ltd, Improving health and safety in construction Phase 1: data collection,
tal floating plate with forward speed, J. Fluids Struct. 60 (2016) 97–113, review and structuring, Construction (2001) 246.
doi:10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2015.11.005. [186] G. Song, F. Khan, H. Wang, S. Leighton, Z. Yuan, H. Liu, Dynamic occupational risk
[169] S. Haris, J. Amdahl, Analysis of ship-ship collision damage accounting model for offshore operations in harsh environments, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 150
for bow and side deformation interaction, Mar. Struct. 32 (2013) 18–48, (2016) 58–64 November 2017, doi:10.1016/j.ress.2016.01.021.
doi:10.1016/j.marstruc.2013.02.002. [187] J. Priestley, A. Peters, Managing a remote, complex, deepwater wildcat, Hart’s E P
[170] D.M. Bae, A.R. Prabowo, B. Cao, A.F. Zakki, G.D. Haryadi, Study on collision be- (2012) no. SEPTEMBER.
tween two ships using selected parameters in collision simulation, J. Mar. Sci. Appl. [188] S. Adumene, et al., Dynamic logistics disruption risk model for offshore supply
15 (2016) 63–72. vessel operations in Arctic waters, Marit. Transp. Res. 2 (2021) 100039 November,
[171] A.R. Prabowo, D.M. Bae, J.M. Sohn, A.F. Zakki, Evaluating the parameter influence doi:10.1016/j.martra.2021.100039.
in the event of a ship collision based on the finite element method approach, Int. [189] T. Deacon, P.R. Amyotte, F.I. Khan, S. MacKinnon, A framework for hu-
J. Technol. 7 (4) (2016) 592–602, doi:10.14716/ijtech.v7i4.2104. man error analysis of offshore evacuations, Saf. Sci. 51 (1) (2013) 319–327,
[172] D.-K. Min, C.-S. Shim, D.-W. Shin, and S.-R. Cho, On the mechanical properties at doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2012.07.005.
low temperatures for steels of ice-class, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 171–177, 2011. [190] M. Yang, F. Khan, D. Oldford, L. Lye, H. Sulistiyono, Risk-based winterization
[173] D.M. Bae, A.R. Prabowo, B. Cao, J.M. Sohn, A.F. Zakki, Q. Wang, Numeri- on a North Atlantic-based ferry design, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2015, doi:
cal simulation for the collision between side structure and level ice in event 10.5957/JSPD.32.2.140008.
of side impact scenario, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 13 (16) (2016) 2691–2704, [191] R.M.C. Ratnayake, Minimization of variability in risk-based winterization analysis:
doi:10.1590/1679-78252975. asset integrity assurance in arctic environments, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 245–251, 2017.
[174] F. Nugteren, Flexible riser fatigue analysis Frederike Nugteren, Reposit. Tudelft.Nl [192] M.S. Rahman, F. Khan, A. Shaikh, S. Ahmed, S. Imtiaz, Development of risk
(2015) [Online]. Available http://repository.tudelft.nl/assets/uuid:80488024- model for marine logistics support to offshore oil and gas operations in re-
c2be-4601-832f-050811e5736a/Frederike_Nugteren_-_Final_Report_Graduation_ mote and harsh environments, Ocean Eng. 174 (2019) 125–134 May 2018,
12.05_2.pdf. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.01.037.
[175] J.M. Sheehan, F.W. Grealish, A.M. Harte, R.J. Smith, Characterizing the wave envi- [193] M.S. Rahman, F. Khan, A. Shaikh, S. Ahmed, S. Imtiaz, A conditional dependence-
ronment in the fatigue analysis of flexible risers, J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 128 based marine logistics support risk model, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 193 (2020)
(2) (2006) 108, doi:10.1115/1.2185129. 106623 July 2019, doi:10.1016/j.ress.2019.106623.
[176] J.P. Zhan, Review and verification of marine riser analysis programs, Glob. Re- [194] O.T. Gudmestad et al., “Basic Marine and offshore petroleum engineering and de-
sponse Anal. (2010) 107. velopment of facilities with emphasis on the Arctic offshore.,” 1999, [Online].
[177] C.G. Paton, C.J. Carra, P. Sincock, A. Consulting, OTC 18039 investigation of sway Available: ISBN%0A0100-1.
/yaw motions of deepwater FPSOs, Current (2006) 1–8. [195] ISO, International standard. ISO 19906: petroleum and natural gas industries-Arctic
[178] D.H. Lee and H. Choi, A nonlinear stability analysis of random offloading system, offshore structures. Geneva:ISO 2010, vol. 2010, 2010.
2003. [196] A. Larsen, T. Markeset, Mapping of operation, maintenance and support design
[179] F. Aghamohammadi, J.M.T. Thompson, An experimental study of a large amplitude factors in arctic environments, Taylor Fr. Group, London (2007).
fish-tailing instability of a tanker at a single point mooring, Appl. Ocean Res. 12 [197] NORSOK, NORSOK: N-003 actions and action effects, Nor. Oil Ind. Assoc. Fed. Nor.
(1) (1990) 25–32. Manuf. Ind. (2007) no. September.
[180] M.M. Bernitsas and J.P.J. Matsuura, Revealing nonlinear dynamics phenomena in [198] M.S. Rahman, B. Colbourne, F. Khan, Conceptual development of an offshore re-
mooring due to slowly-varying drift, 2005. source centre in support of remote harsh environment operations, Ocean Eng. 203
[181] M.E. Mousavi, PhD Dissertation, Texas A&M University, 2013. (2020) 107236 March, doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107236.
[182] M.E. Mousavi, P. Gardoni, M. Maadooliat, Progressive reliability method and
its application to offshore mooring systems, Eng. Struct. 56 (2013) 2131–2138,
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.08.016.

168