Ref.

Ares(2021)1345229 - 18/02/2021

Transport & Installation Manual

D5.1

Grant Agreement No. 774253

Start date of Project 1 November 2017

Duration of the Project 36 months

Deliverable Number D5.1

Deliverable Leader Jordaens Alexander

Dissemination Level CO

Status 3.0

Submission Date 26-03-2020

Jordaens Alexander, DEME Offshore

Author Köpke Karsten, GICON
Olbert Gerrit, TUHH

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
under grant agreement No 774253.

The opinions expressed in this document reflect only the author’s view and in no way reflect the European
Commission’s opinions. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the
information it contains.

PU=Public, CO=Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services), CI=Classified, as referred to in
Commission Decision 2001/844/EC.
774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Modification Control

Version # Date Author Organisation

V1.0 28-02-2020 JOAL DEME Offshore
V2.0 17-03-2020 JOAL DEME Offshore
V3.0 31-03-2020 JOAL DEME Offshore
V4.0 19-02-2021 JOAL DEME Offshore

Release Approval

Name Role Date

Alexander Jordaens WP Leader 31-03-2020
Maarten Flikkema Coordinator 31-03-2020
Wendy Murtinu van Schagen Project Office 31-03-2020

History of Changes

Section, page number Change made Date

V1.0 First revision sent to Project Manager Maarten Flikkema 28-02-2020
V2.0 Final paper after comments Project Manager 17-03-2020
V3.0 Final paper including link to online platform for 3D T&I video’s 26-03-2020
V4.0 Request for revision of deliverable submission 19-02-2021

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 2

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Contents
Executive Summary 6

Introduction 9

1.1 Definitions 10

1.2 Abbreviations 10

1.3 Work Package description/connection with this report 11

Supply chain 12

2.1 Island configuration focus 13

Marshalling port selection 14

3.1 Introduction 14

3.2 Potential marshalling ports 15

3.2.1 Port of Marseille 15

3.2.2 Shipyard MB92 in La Ciotat 16

3.2.3 Shipyard MB92 in Barcelona 17

3.3 Selection of marshalling port Mediterranean Sea 18

3.4 Selection of marshalling port North Sea 19

Basis of design 20

4.1 Anchor point and mooring line design 20

4.2 Floating module design 21

Transport & installation setup – Mediterranean Sea 22

5.1 Transport & installation of marine equipment 24

5.1.1 Pre-installation of anchoring points 24

5.1.2 Transport of floating modules to offshore site 27

5.1.3 Offshore installation of floating modules 29

5.2 Transport & installation planning 30

5.2.1 Scenario I – T&I only during the good season Mediterranean Sea 30

5.2.2 Scenario II – T&I during the entire year Mediterranean Sea 30

5.3 Transport & installation cycle time calculations 31

5.3.1 Cycle times – net duration 31

5.3.2 Cycle times – weather downtimes 31

Transport & installation (T&I) Manual – Mediterranean Sea 33

6.1 Pre-installation of mooring system (anchor points & mooring lines) 33

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 3

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.1 Preparatory works & Engineering 33

6.1.1.1 Preparatory works 33

6.1.1.2 Engineering – environmental conditions during transport 34

6.1.1.3 Engineering – environmental conditions during transport offshore pile installation 37

6.1.1.3.1 Lifting loads 38

6.1.1.3.2 Vessel Motion 39

6.1.1.3.3 Current induced displacement 41

6.1.1.3.4 Conclusion 41

6.1.2 Marine equipment 42

6.1.3 Mobilization 43

6.1.4 Vessel transit 43

6.1.5 Load out at marshalling port 43

6.1.6 Vessel deck lay-out 44

6.1.7 Transit to offshore site 47

6.1.8 Installation methodology 48

6.1.8.1 Installation methodology: driving piles with vibro-hammer 48

6.1.8.2 Installation methodology: driving piles with impact hammer 53

6.1.9 Transit back to marshalling port and demobilization 55

6.2 Transport of floating modules and offshore installation 55

6.2.1 Engineering and preparatory works 55

6.2.1.1 Engineering 55

6.2.1.2 Wave drift 55

6.2.1.3 Current drag 55

6.2.1.4 Wind 56

6.2.1.5 Tow efficiency 56

6.2.2 Marine equipment 58

6.2.3 Mobilization 59

6.2.4 Transit 59

6.2.5 Installation methodology 60

6.3 High level (T&I) manual – Space@Sea Mediterranean Sea configuration 71

6.4 High level (T&I) Manual – North Sea 73

6.4.1 Marine equipment 73

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 4

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.4.2 Mobilization and transit 73

6.4.3 Load out at marshalling port and transit to offshore site 73

6.4.4 Installation methodology 74

Conclusions 76

Annex 77

Annex 1: Installation manual HLV Orion with impact hammering 77

Annex 2: T&I schedule with HLV Orion 81

Annex 3: T&I schedule with OCV 82

Annex 4: Technical leaflet JUV Innovation DEME 83

Annex 5: Technical leaflet HLV Orion DEME 84

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 5

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide a Transport & Installation (T&I) manual of the multi-use platforms including
the mooring systems and focuses only on the floating island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea. It has been
concluded by WP3 that in the current island lay-out, without breakwaters, the proposed mooring system is not feasible
in the North Sea location. A high level but qualitative evaluation of the differences in T&I operations for the two (2)
locations and its accompanying costs has been described in this report (ref 6.4).

The proposed T&I procedure in this report is limited to all activities which take place between the marshalling port
(e.g. assembly port) and the offshore site, assuming all floating modules and assets require last checks and
commissioning activities before being permanently installed offshore. Section 2 provides a detailed overview on the
Engineering, Procurement, Transport & Installation (EPCI) supply chain of the Space@Sea project. This T&I manual
is only limited to the installation of the Energyhub@Sea (ref. WP6) and Logistics@Sea (ref. WP7) floating modules
as these two (2) setups are the most challenging activities during the transport & installation phase since they require
extra offshore work by connecting the floating structures with the pre-installed mooring lines and uses specific marine
equipment. Reference is made to section 6.3. The transport and installation of all other setups (Living@Sea,
Farming@Sea, and Wave Energy) has been evaluated on a high level but qualitative basis.

This report starts with describing and selecting the most appropriate marshalling port for both the Mediterranean and
North Sea location. Based on various evaluation criteria, this report concludes in section 3 that the Port of Marseille
is the most suitable marshalling port of the island configuration on the Mediterranean Sea and the Port of Antwerp
for the North Sea configuration.

After selection of the marshalling port, a high level T&I planning has been made based on the required offshore
activities. In general, two (2) different offshore activities will be executed which start with the installation of the
anchor points, consisting of the anchor foundation piles and the mooring lines. Subsequently, the floating modules
will be towed from marshalling port to offshore site and connected with both the pre-installed mooring lines and the
pre-installed floating modules. Based on these activities, two (2) different T&I planning scenarios have been
proposed. The first scenario (I) indicates that all activities can only be executed during the good weather period of a
year 20xx, which might lead to a split of the offshore works over two (2) years, whereas the second scenario is limited
in project time and suggests to execute all the works in the same year and starting and ending respectively before and
after the good weather period, despite the more cost due to more weather delay days.

It has been concluded that the ‘basis’ setup consisting of Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea can be installed
following scenario II (ref. 5.2.2). However, for installing the entire island with all setups, it is highly recommended
to consider scenario I (ref. 5.2.1) which divides the two (2) above mentioned offshore works over two (2) years in
order to minimize the amount of weather delays and its associated cost. This scenario is also commonly used in the
offshore wind business where wind turbine foundations are being installed in two phases to reduce the installation
cost (e.g. installation of monopiles and transition pieces).

A detailed description and selection of the proper marine equipment for transport and installation has been analysed
based on the design of the mooring system (WP3), the floating modules and their top structures and the connectors
between the modules (WP4). This work package (WP5) was highly depending on the results of other work packages.
Section 5 provides a detailed transport and installation manual based on the results from other work packages. Values
have been frozen since beginning of January 2020. Updates from other WP’s have since then not been integrated in
this report, however this report is made such that certain flexibility in design is applicable without major impact on
the T&I.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 6

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Due to multiple criteria written in the report, it has been concluded to use a heavy lift vessel (HLV) such as but not
limited to the DEME owned vessel ‘Orion’ for the first installation activity which is the installation of the anchor
foundation and mooring lines. This vessel has the capacity and capability to install the anchor points in only one (1)
cycle, resulting in a fast installation time and straightforward installation procedure. A high level but qualitative
comparison with the use of another vessel (e.g. Offshore Construction Vessel) instead of the HLV has been integrated
in this report.

Three (3) anchor handling tugs and one (1) additional Offshore Construction Vessel (OCV) are required for the
second installation activity which is the towing operation and manoeuvring and connection of the floating modules
with the pre-installed mooring lines and modules.

In this report, a new state-of-the-art piling technology (vibro-hammering) has been chosen for installing the anchor
piles in the seabed of the Mediterranean Sea. It has been proven in this report that this technology reduces the
installation times drastically due to faster handling times, resulting in cost reductions. Additionally, this technology
requires less investments in installation equipment, which further decreases the total installation cost. A high level
but qualitative evaluation on impact hammering has been made to show the differences in technology. Impact
hammering is commonly used in the offshore wind business and is highly recommended when the soil type is not
optimal. Therefore, impact hammering has been considered as the only right solution for the North Sea configuration.

Based on the selected marine equipment (HLV Orion), driving equipment (Vibro-piling), marshalling port (Port of
Marseille) and the associated T&I scenario, it can be concluded that the total project time for transport and installation
of the Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea modules at the Mediterranean Sea takes approx. 5.5 months with a project
start on 01/04/20xx and project completion mid-September 20xx including mob-and demobilization. Two (2)
months are required for the first activity and at least three (3) months for towing and offshore installation. This ‘basis
setup’ project can be executed according to planning scenario II but it is on the limit. The total duration of the second
activity can be drastically reduced if the design limit of installing the rigid connectors offshore (i.e. Hs = 0.5m) can
be increased. A maximum wave height of only 0.5m together with a weather window of up to 24 hours results in
very low work abilities and high amount of weather delay days. More information can be found in section 6.1.8.1
and 6.2.5

In order to reduce the amount of offshore connection handling and its associated weather delays as much as possible,
it is decided in section 5.1.2 to conduct a “triple body towage”. This means that three (3) floating modules will be
pre-connected at the marshalling port and towed to offshore site. This minimizes the fuel consumption, decreases the
installation time and reduces the amount of weather delays.

It has been estimated in section 6.3 that it takes approx. 11 months, including mobilization and demobilization to
install the complete island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea which doubles the project time from the basis
setup. As the average good weather period in one (1) year is only up to five (5) months, It is highly recommended to
divide the offshore works over two (2) years and execute the works during the good weather period (e.g. April 20xx
– September 20xx). Driving all the anchor points and mooring lines takes approx. one (1) month excluding
mobilization, and the towage and offshore installation of Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea takes an additional
three (3) months excluding demobilization. The installation of Living@Sea, Farming@Sea includes an additional
two (2) months and the project ends with the installation of the wave energy converters around the island
configuration and takes an additional two (2) months. Extra time for mobilization and demobilization should be
foreseen and is an additional three (3) months. See detailed table below.

A high level but qualitative assessment has been made in section 6.4 on the transport and installation of the North
Sea configuration. It has been concluded that this location requires other marine equipment due to its shallow water
depths and different soil type. A Jack up Type vessel is required in addition with an impact hammer, which leads to
higher costs and longer project time durations.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 7

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Below table provides a more visual executive summary on the transport and installation durations for the island
configuration of the Mediterranean Sea.

Nr. Activity Activity duration Comments

1 Preparation of HLV Orion in the port of Flushing (NL) and transit 1 month mobilization
to offshore location

2 Offshore installation: vibro-hammering anchor piles 1 month

3 Transit HLV Orion to NL and demobilization (dismantling) 1 month Demobilization

4 Preparation of CSV and anchor handling tugs and transit to (1 month) Simultaneous operation
offshore site with nr. 3

5 Towage and offshore installation Energyhub@Sea and 3 months

Logistics@Sea
6 Towage and offshore installation Living@Sea and Farming@Sea 2 months
7 Towage and offshore installation WEC 2 months
8 Transit OCV and Tugs to demobilization port (dismantling) 1 month Demobilization
TOTAL 11 months Including mobilization and
demobilization

Figure 1 Overview on the installed focus setup (Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea)

Reference is made to the below URL for two (2) transport & installation video’s
- HLV Orion installing anchor piles with vibro-hammering
o https://youtu.be/RUD2mTQR8ho
- Towage and offshore installation with OCV and anchor handling tugs
o https://youtu.be/bSHIB0Mdurw

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 8

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

All below information is subject to further analysis and might change in the future, if design and scope of work
changes.

Introduction
In the scope of the Space@Sea project, a basic design for a single floater module of the modular island concept has
been established. The detailed design with regard to displacement, connections and compartmentation was done in
parallel to the work described in this deliverable. Therefore design details were frozen in January 2020 as input to
the work described in this deliverable.
At this phase of the project, possible transport and installation procedures shall be evaluated based on the available
basic design and a corresponding best practise guideline formulated. The installation procedure is divided into two
(2) parts, namely: the pre-installation of the anchoring points in the seabed and the towing operation of the pre-
assembled modules to the devised deployment site together with the connection of the modules to the pre-installed
mooring system or, if available, to an already moored floating module. These two (2) T&I procedures are the basis
through this report.
According to the Grant Agreement, the Transportation and Installation is assessed in Task 5.2 and deliverable D5.1
in a joint effort of the partners DEME OFFSHORE, GICON and TUHH.

Table 1 Scope of work for each partner

Company Task

Reporting of installation scenarios and cost & asset requirements

Responsible for the establishment of guidelines for max. allowable environmental

conditions for installation and the coordination of tug maneuvering during installation

Advisory role based on offshore transport & installation experience in offshore wind (fixed
bottom/floating). DEME OFFSHORE is the former GEOSEA

Several conference calls and physical meetings have been organized in order to align towards the content of the
deliverable. The three (3) organizations have the necessary knowledge and experience to find a technical solution
on how to transport and install the floating modules offshore. It should be noted that this scope is highly depending
on input from other work packages and all below topics are still subject to further improvements. This report provides
certain methodologies and values which forms only a basis and direction. None of the below provided values and
results are binding.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 9

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

1.1 Definitions
In the context of this document, the following definitions apply:

Marshalling port A port in the vicinity of the offshore site where are all assets (structures, equipment, tools
etc.) comes together before being installed permanently
Island setup An island setup refers to each five (5) different activities on an island configuration.
Energyhub@Sea, Logistics@Sea, Farming@Sea, Living@Sea and Wave Energy Converters
are the island setups of Space@Sea
Island configuration An island configuration is a whole of all island setups together. For the Space@Sea project,
there are only two (2) island configurations; Mediterranean Sea and North Sea.

Basis configuration A basis configuration refers to the two (2) island setups in which this report focuses on.

Anchor point An anchor point is a term that describes the anchor foundation and the mooring lines. This
term has the same meaning as a ‘mooring system’.
Mooring line A mooring line is part of a mooring system or anchor points. It refers to the catenary lines
which is attached to the anchor foundation.

1.2 Abbreviations
In the context of this document

AHT Anchor Handling Tug

EPCI Engineering, Procurement, Construction and Installation
DAF Dynamic Amplification Factor
DNV-GL Det Norske Veritas – Germanischer Lloyd
DOF Degree of Freedom
HAZID Hazard Identification Studies
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Analysis
HLV Heavy Lift Vessel
JUV Jack Up Vessel
LNG Liquid Natural Gas
MGO Marine Gas Oil
MWS Marine Warranty Surveyor
NM Nautical Miles
O&M Operations & Maintenance
OCV Offshore Construction Vessel
SHL Statical Hook Load
SIMOP Simultaneous Operation
T&I Transport and Installation
UXO Unexploded Ordnance
WP Work Package

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 10

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

1.3 Work Package description/connection with this report

WP1 Business case

WP3 Design and engineering of a dedicated mooring system for the modular platform concept which can flexibly and
efficiently cope with the platform imposed mooring forces

WP4 Design of an optimized standard modular concept for a floating island and engineering of the limiting criteria under
different setups.

WP6 Energy hub @ Sea platform which will produce its own power to be self-sufficient, and will be the basis for O&M
of offshore wind farm producing the power for Space@Sea.

WP9 Logistics @ Sea platform which will unlock the potential of floating platforms for flexible, modular and enlargeable
offshore port.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 11

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Supply chain
The supply chain of constructing offshore floating island modules is comparable with that of an offshore windfarm
consisting of multiple foundations, inter array and export cables, rock placement, turbines and many more. The
engineering, procurement and construction (combined EPC) of multiple different structures are often globally
provided by different (sub)contractors. All structures are transported to a dedicated area (so called marshalling port)
for further commissioning until ready for load out, transport and permanent installation. In this supply chain, the T&I
contractor is responsible from the moment the first structures have been loaded out from the quay side of the
marshalling port to the installation vessel. Below figure shows an example of a marshalling port used by DEME
Offshore for an offshore wind project. All foundations (monopiles and transition pieces) and components are being
transported to one (1) dedicated area close to the offshore site where the assets are picked up and brought to the
construction site.

Figure 2 Jack Up Vessel Innovation (DEME Offshore) at Marshalling port (Maasvlakte II)

Figure 3 shows a preliminary EPCI supply chain proposal for the Space@Sea project. The below figure is pure
indicative and is subject to further investigation. This report is only focusing on the route from assembly port to
offshore site and forms a basis for further estimations of logistical scenarios from fabrication yard to marshalling
port.

Figure 3 Preliminary proposal of EPCI supply chain Space@Sea

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 12

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

2.1 Island configuration focus

The investigation presented in this report focuses on the island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea, as this turns
out to become more feasible than the North Sea with respect to the design of the mooring system. Below figure shows
the preliminary island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea. In later sections, this report describes high level the
T&I scenario for the North Sea configuration.

Figure 4 Preliminary island configuration (left with all island setups, right with mooring lines)

The above island configuration figure consists of the following setup;

Table 2 Island configuration

Energyhub@Sea 27 modules

Living@Sea 7 modules

Farming@Sea 15 modules

Logistics@Sea 2 modules

Wave Energy Converters (WEC) 27 modules

TOTAL 78 modules

This report considers only the T&I of surrounding modules consisting of 27 modules of Energyhub@Sea and two
(2) modules of Logistics@Sea. It is these two (2) island setups which have to be connected to the mooring lines.
The installation of these two (2) island configurations (called ‘basis configuration’) implies all necessary offshore
activities which are also applicable on the other island setups. This report will describe both in detail the basis
configuration and high level the full island configuration.

Figure 5 Basis island configuration (yellow: Energyhub@Sea, Blue: Logistics@Sea)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 13

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Marshalling port selection

3.1 Introduction
This section describes the selection of potential marshalling ports to be used during the transport and installation of
the island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea. The selection is based on evaluation criteria which are generally
used in the offshore wind business. Looking at the area around the Mediterranean Sea installation site, the number
of potential marshalling ports is limited.

Figure 6 Position of Offshore installation site at Mediterranean Sea

The Port of Marseille and the shipyards MB92 in La Ciotat and Barcelona are worth shortlisting. In order to serve as
a marshalling port, further criteria must be checked. The following criteria have to be considered:

- Distance to offshore site

- Onshore/offshore storage capacity
- Maximum width of storage area
- Assembly capabilities
- Construction capabilities
- On-site equipment

It is assumed that the floating modules of the Energyhub@Sea setup, consisting of the O&M hub module, the wind
turbine and the photovoltaic module, will be delivered fully assembled and connected by the manufacturing shipyards
and moored at the quay side of the marshalling port. If necessary, the sensitive components such as the wind turbine
and the photovoltaic modules can be further assembled and commissioned at marshalling port. When selecting the
marshalling port, sufficient onshore / offshore storage capacity, maximum width of storage area, construction and
assembly capabilities have to be available to ensure sufficient space for components and materials, tools and
installation aids, as well as the possibility to accommodate the installation vessels.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 14

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

3.2 Potential marshalling ports

3.2.1 Port of Marseille

The Port of Marseille in the south of France is characterized by its proximity to the installation site of only 70 nautical
miles (NM). The port has a large dry dock to carry out work on the floaters in the underwater area. The storage
capacity and berthing length can be assessed as good. However, the construction and assembly capacities are very
limited and have to be provided by (sub)contractors.

Figure 7 Port du Marseille with large dry dock and berthing area

The results of the evaluation of criteria for marshalling port for the Port of Marseille can be viewed in the table
below.

Table 3 Results for marshalling port selection - Port of Marseille

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 15

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

3.2.2 Shipyard MB92 in La Ciotat

The shipyard in La Ciotat in the south of France is located south east of Marseille at the same distance of approx. 70
NM to the offshore site. This shipyard is specialized in the production, conversion and repair of all kinds of motor
yachts. It has numerous construction and assembly capacities such as a large dry dock and ship lift. The free storage
and berthing capacities are very limited and occupied by the shipbuilding activities of the shipyard. If the shipyard
would serve as a marshalling port, special agreements must be contracted with the shipyard beforehand in order to
use the shipyard's capacities as a marshalling port. The La Ciotat shipyard could also serve as a supporting shipyard
for Marseille.

Figure 8 Shipyard MB92 in La Ciotat

The results of the evaluation of criteria for marshalling port for the shipyard in La Ciotat can be viewed in the table
below.

Table 4 Results for marshalling port selection – Shipyard in La Ciotat

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 16

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

3.2.3 Shipyard MB92 in Barcelona

The shipyard in Barcelona in eastern Spain belongs to the same group as the shipyard in La Ciotat. The MB92
headquarters are located there. The distance to the offshore site amounts to approximate 130 NM. This shipyard is
also specialized in the construction, conversion and repair of all kinds of motor yachts. It has numerous construction
and assembly capacities - such as a large dry dock and ship lift. The free storage and berthing capacities are also very
limited here and occupied by the shipbuilding activities of the shipyard. If the shipyard would serve as a marshalling
port, special agreements must be concluded with the shipyard beforehand.

Figure 9 Ship yard MB92 in Barcelona

The results of the evaluation of criteria for marshalling port for the shipyard in Barcelona can be viewed in the table
below.

Table 5 Results for marshalling port selection – Shipyard in Barcelona

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 17

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

3.3 Selection of marshalling port Mediterranean Sea

The ‘Port of Marseille’ has been chosen as the marshalling port of the Mediterranean Sea island configuration. It is
characterized by its proximity of only 70 NM to the offshore site. The port has a large dry dock to carry out work in
the underwater area of the floaters. The storage capacity and berthing length can be assessed as good in order to be
able to store the equipment and offshore spread of the T&I (sub)contractors respectively of their installation vessels,
anchor handling and towing tugs. The construction and assembly capacities have to be provided by subcontractors.
The shipyard MB92 in La Ciotat could be used as a support and alternative port. The following table shows all three
destinations at a glance.

Table 6 Comparison of potential marshalling ports

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 18

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

3.4 Selection of marshalling port North Sea

The envisaged North Sea installation location of the Space@Sea project is located outside the delta of the river
Scheldt close to the coast of the Netherlands as can be seen in Figure 10. A number of large ports are available within
less than 60 NM from the site, such as the ports of Antwerp, Rotterdam and Dunkerque which all have shipyards
with sufficient dimensions of dry docks and berths to host the Space@Sea modules. A list of dry docks with
appropriate dimensions is shown in Table 7.
It should be noted, that unlike the dock in the port of Marseille, which mostly focusses on the repair of cruise vessels,
the North Sea docks host all vessel types and may therefore show a higher degree of capacity utilization per year. It
may therefore still be necessary to allocate dedicated building and assembly locations for the Space@Sea modules if
they are to be built at the Marshalling Port.
In terms of viability, the port of Antwerp, where the facilities of Engine Deck Repair are located, seems a suitable
choice for a marshalling port. Since the Space@Sea North Sea configuration installation is planned to extend the
capacities of the Port of Antwerp container hub, the transits between Antwerp and the floating island offer the
possibility of exploiting synergies in the transport of cargo and routes to be taken for crew transfer and maintenance.
The port of Antwerp is therefore chosen as marshalling port for the Space@Sea North Sea configuration. All below
provided data and calculations are based on this location. A more detailed analysis of the available capacities will
have to be conducted once a more detailed layout of a North Sea logistic hub is generated.

Figure 10: Location of North Sea installation site and possible Marshalling Ports

Table 7: European ship yards with sufficient dry dock capacity in vicinity to North Sea installation site

Ship Yard Country Distance Dock Length Dock Width

Engine Deck Repair Belgium 50nm 312m 50m

ARNO Dunkerque France 45nm 310m 50m

Damen Rotterdam Netherlands 56nm 307m 46m

Damen Verolme Netherlands 52nm 405m 90m

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 19

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Basis of design

4.1 Anchor point and mooring line design

It has been concluded by WP3 to use fixed anchor piles as foundation for the island configuration of the
Mediterranean Sea. Taking into account the most predominately encountered soil types in the Mediterranean being
either clay or sand or being found inter layered, an anchor pile provides the most viable and cost effective anchor
point solution. The justification for selecting the anchor pile as being most viable and cost effective solution are due
to the following;

• The design and installation method can be fully engineered eliminating the overall installation risk and
therefor reducing the risk of overrun on the installation cost.
• An optimal pile weight is achieved once the soil strength parameters at each location are known. This can be
achieved by optimizing pad-eye elevation and pile length for the same diameter so the installation equipment
can remain the same for all conditions.
• That the system can cope with a wide range of soil strength values so one anchoring method is only required
for mooring the entire island irrespectively of whether the actual soil conditions are known.

Below table provides the technical parameters;

Table 8 Design parameters anchor point Mediterranean Sea configuration

Parameter Unit Value

Outside Diameter [m] 1.8288

Pile Wall Thickness [mm] 30-50

Overall Pile Length [m] 45

Distance pad-eye to pile top [m] ± 15

Pile Top Elevation [m] Level with Seabed

Embedded Pile Section [m] 45

Estimated Pile Weight (Including pad-eye [tonnes] 90

structure)

Estimated weight mooring line [tonnes] 493 kg/m

Length mooring line [m] ± 750

Figure 11 Floating modules and mooring lines (indicative)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 20

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

4.2 Floating module design

The calculations in this report are only based on the 45 by 45 meter floating module configuration and not on the 90
by 90 meter. It should be noted that the 90x90m configuration will require higher bollard pulls resulting in larger
tugs and increased installation cost. The bollard pull calculations, further described in this report, are based on data
from below figure, provided by WP6 and is subject to further improvements when more details on the dimensions
and weight are available.

Figure 12 Design floating module Energy hub @ sea

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 21

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Transport & installation setup – Mediterranean Sea

This section provides a detailed overview on the transport and installation (T&I) of the Energyhub@Sea and
Logistics@Sea configuration in the Mediterranean Sea. The T&I consists of following offshore main activities:

1. Pre-installation of the anchoring points: driving subsea anchor piles, pulling and pre-tensioning of mooring lines

2. Transport of the floating modules from marshalling port to offshore site: Single and Triple towage

3./4. Positioning of the first set of the floaters at offshore site, connection of first set of floaters with mooring lines

5. Connection of floaters with pre-installed floaters and connection of mooring lines

Reference is made to Figure 13 Transport & Installation – main offshore activities

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 22

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Figure 13 Transport & Installation – main offshore activities

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 23

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5.1 Transport & installation of marine equipment

Based on the provided foundation design parameters (ref. 4) received from WP3 and the proposed Transport and
installation setup (ref. 5), the most appropriate installation vessel has been selected to install the anchoring points
offshore and support the towage and installation of the floating modules.

5.1.1 Pre-installation of anchoring points

For driving the anchor piles into the seabed, there are three (3) different types of vessels which are able to perform
the works:
- Jack up Vessel (JUV)
- Heavy Lift Vessel (HLV)
- Offshore Construction Vessel (OCV)

Figure 14 JUV Innovation (DEME), HLV Orion (DEME), OCV (DEEPOCEAN)

The offshore site in the Mediterranean Sea reaches water depths of up to 200 meters, which limits the selection of
vessels to only floating applications. Jack up Vessels are not applicable in this island configuration but are considered
for the North Sea (ref. section 6.4)
An HLV has a large deck size which enables it to transport many (heavy) structures such as but not limited to:
foundation structures, mooring lines, installation equipment etc. Due to its large dimension, this type of vessel has
the capability to install all foundations in one trip and pull and pre-tension the mooring lines without the need of an
additional vessel. This results in faster installation times, lower project management and installation costs and an
increased installation flexibility due to the single vessel approach. These positive aspects must be outweighed against
the relatively high day rates compared to OCV’s.
OCV’s are able to store foundations on deck but are still limited and require one or more additional vessels to feed
the piles offshore (e.g. tug and barges). Due to the heavy weight of the mooring lines (493 kg/m), a heavy lift crane
with a capacity of around 500 tons is required on the vessel, which limits the selection of vessels drastically. This
type of vessels offers a lower charter day rate than heavy lift vessels but requires an extra anchor handling tug with
sufficient bollard pull to pull and pre-tension the mooring line up to 300 tons. The extra vessels for pile and mooring
line feeding and extra bollard pull reduce the installation flexibility and increase the total installation time. Below
table shows a high level comparison between a heavy lift vessel and an offshore construction vessel with support
vessels.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 24

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 9 Comparison matrix HLV and OCV

Heavy Lift Vessel (e.g. HLV Orion DEME) Offshore Construction Vessel (e.g. OCV Deepocean)

1x OCV

2x barges and 2x tugs

1 x HLV

1x Anchor Handling Tug (150 BP)

Single vessel Approach Multiple vessel Approach:

- Transport - Transport piles and mooring lines by 2 tug and barges. OCV has
not sufficient deck space for piles and mooring lines.
- Offshore Installation
- Installation by OCV with sufficient crane capacity (up to 500 mT)
- Pulling & pre-tensioning
- Extra anchor handling tug (150 BP) for supporting OCV during
pulling and pre-tensioning

High level day rate HLV: 200 000 € / day (excl. fuel) High level day rate OCV: 120 000 € / day (excl. fuel)
High level day rate 2x Barge: 10 000 €/day x 2 = +20 000 €/day
High level day rate 2x Tugs: 15 000 €/day x 2 = +30 000 €/day
High level day rate AHT 150 BP: +25 000 €/day

1 cycle (no transfer back and forth to marshalling port) Multiple cycles (back and forth to marshalling port)
- Load out all piles and mooring lines from quay side to vessel - Load out piles and mooring lines from quay side to barge(s)
- Transit HLV to offshore site - Transit OCV and tug & barges to offshore site
- Upend piles and vibrate - Barge connection with vessel
- Connect mooring line - Upend piles and vibrate
- Pulling & pre-tensioning - Connect mooring line
- Go to next position - AHT connection with OCV
- Pulling & pre-tensioning by OCV and AHT
- Go to next position

Flexible, straightforward installation Complex installation

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 25

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

It has been concluded to use Heavy Lift Vessel Orion to install all the anchor points for the following reasons:

- Installation of all light-weight foundation piles and the heavy catenary lines requires sufficient crane
capacity, deck space and deck load.
o HLV Orion has sufficient deck space to store all assets and with its 5000 mT crane capacity it can
easily upend the foundation piles, lower it down up to 200m and drive pile into the seabed. In
addition, this vessel has sufficient power to pre-tension the mooring line 750m away
o An OCV does not have sufficient deck space and deck load to store all piles and mooring lines and
requires extra tug and barges for feeding the vessel. Importantly, this requires extra offshore handling
time (and associated weather limits) and sufficient crane capacity for lifting the heavy mooring lines
to the gypsy winch. This type of OCV with crane exists but is very rare. This type of vessels has not
sufficient power to pre-tension the mooring line.
- Single vessel approach.
o HLV Orion is able to install all piles and perform the pulling and pre-tensioning of the mooring lines
o An OCV requires an additional AHT for providing sufficient pulling capacity up to 300 tons. This
requires extra offshore handling time.
- Flexibility
o HLV Orion has certain flexibility due to its independency of other vessels. This has also a positive
impact on the weather delays as only the HLV limits are the limiting factor.
o Using multiple vessels creates low flexibility due to its dependency on other vessels and introduces
additional weather delays. Offshore pile feeding from barge is here very critical.

This report describes the use of HLV Orion since the vessel data is available from one of the partners (DEME). A
profound cycle time assessment has been made based on strictly confidential vessel and installation limits (wave
height, wind speeds, wave period etc.) in combination with the predictive weather data at the specific offshore
location in order to provide a qualitative estimate on the total duration for transport & installation. It should be noted
that this kind of estimation tools are used during tender phases and hence not generating accurate data. All data
necessary for calculating the netto durations for the transport & installation activities cannot be disclosed in this
report.

More details on the installation of the anchor points with a HLV can be found in section 6.1.8

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 26

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5.1.2 Transport of floating modules to offshore site

The regulations on offshore transport operations of large structures usually differentiate between dry and wet tow
operations. Dry towage refers to operations where the transported object is stored on a floating support structure, as
for example a barge, as is shown in Figure 15. If the transported object provides floatation by itself, the tow procedure
is defined as wet tow.
In this study, only wet tow scenarios of the Space@Sea floating modules are considered. Since the bodies are
designed for a long-term deployment in an offshore environment, their characteristics regarding stability and strength
are deemed sufficient for the operation. With regards to hydrodynamics, the estimated resistance of these bodies is
not deemed to have a major impact on the economic viability of the operation, since tow velocities are small, travel
distances are comparatively short and the hydrodynamic properties of barges are not highly superior since their hull
shape does not differ much from the currently envisioned Space@Sea floater design. A dry towage would further
require two lifting operations, as well as the rental of a large size barge, hence increasing the cost of the transport
operation. Therefore, only the wet tow transport option is investigated in this report.

Figure 15: Tow operation of a top-site at open sea (dry towage)

A wet tow operation is conducted using one or multiple tug vessels which pull the object behind them. Depending
on size and shape of the towed object as well as the environmental conditions along the towing route, one or more
additional tugs at the rear may be required for manoeuvring purposes or to ensure course stability.
As a large number of floating modules will have to be transported from marshalling port to the offshore deployment
site, the simultaneous towage of two (2) or even three (3) modules has been considered. A reduction in drag of the
rear modules could decrease the cost of transport per module.
The large dimensions of the towed modules are inherent with considerable forces when exposed to environmental
influences such as wind and waves. Therefore, in order to guarantee the safety of the towing crew and the integrity
of the convoy, the distance between the towed objects should be large to prevent collision or entanglement of towing
lines. By increasing the distance to realistic dimensions, the benefits of the multi-tow configurations regarding
reduced drag are significantly diminished. This applies to all multi-tow scenarios covered in the current classification
regulations shown in Figure 16.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 27

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Figure 16:Multiple wet towage types according to DNVGL-ST-N001

However, when preassembling the floating modules using the rigid or flexible connection system that has been
designed by the companies ICE and Mocean in the scope of WP4 of the Space@Sea project, a safe and more efficient
tow operation may be achieved. Since the tow operation will be conducted in much less severe sea states than the
design sea state of the modules at the deployment site, stability and structural integrity of modules and connectors
are adequate for the loads experienced during tow.
A main consideration for the application of this “multi”-tow is not only the decrease in fuel consumption, which may
be obtained during transport due to the lower resistance of the new configuration. Same as for the single towage of
three modules, three tugs will be required for safe tow and manoeuvring of the pre-assembled three-floater
configuration. The main difference is the pre-installation establishment of the connection between adjacent modules.
The pre-assembly of floaters can be conducted in sheltered waters at the marshalling port, hence reducing the work
to be conducted at sea. Furthermore, since virtually no down-times are to be expected for the protected harbour or
coastal waters, the risk level of the operation is reduced and less equipment is needed.

Figure 17 Triple towage with three (3) tugs

Due to the decreased need for offshore operations and the inherent reduction in associated risk the triple-tow
configuration is deemed most advantageous for the installation procedure and will be considered in the following
sections of this document when overall operation periods and cycle-times are investigated.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 28

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5.1.3 Offshore installation of floating modules

Floating module towage and offshore installation should be seen as a whole, as these two (2) activities are considered
to be installed in one (1) installation window. Towing the modules without offshore installation will never occur. If
the weather allows for towing the modules but not to install, the execution will be cancelled.
The three (3) tugs, used for towage, will be used for manoeuvring the single or triple body to the exact position. An
additional OCV is used to connect the floating modules to the mooring lines and/or to other modules. The considered
OCV is a dynamic positioning vessel with a large crane on deck in order to winch up the mooring lines from the
seabed and perform the connections of the mooring lines to floaters and assists during the connection of the floating
modules.

Figure 18 Offshore Construction Vessel 'Edda Freya' (Deepocean)

Figure 19 Technical leaflet Edda Freya (Deepocean)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 29

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5.2 Transport & installation planning

5.2.1 Scenario I – T&I only during the good season Mediterranean Sea
Scenario I assume to start in the good weather window of year 20xx (green zone) with the pre-installation of the
anchor points and mooring lines. The good weather window is supposed to be optimal as from May and ends in the
end of August. This scenario foresees to perform the offshore works only during the good weather window of the
year which may result in a split of all offshore works to a minimum of two (2) years. This scenario limits the extra
costs caused by weather delays but is inadequate for projects where time is limited.
Figure 20 shows an example of splitting the offshore works over two (2) years wherein in 20xx the anchor points are
considered to be installed and in 20xx+1 the transport and installation of the floating modules. This type of scenario
is common in the offshore wind industry with respect to the installation of wind turbine foundations.

Figure 20 T&I scenario 1 divided over 2 years (indicative)

5.2.2 Scenario II – T&I during the entire year Mediterranean Sea

Scenario II takes into account the project time restriction and assumes to perform the offshore works, consisting of
installation anchor points and transport & installation of floating modules, during year 20xx regardless of the weather.
This scenario implies more installation costs due to more weather delays. Figure 21 shows an indicative example of
scenario II.

Figure 21 T&I scenario II for one year (indicative)

Based on the results of section 6.1.8.1, it has been concluded that Scenario I is the most appropriate T&I planning
for the Space@Sea project. It is recommended to install the full island configuration according to Scenario I. It should
be noted that the above provided good weather windows are average and each location varies in start and end date.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 30

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5.3 Transport & installation cycle time calculations

5.3.1 Cycle times – net duration

Cycle times will be generated using a custom-made calculation tool made by DEME Offshore. The calculation tool
allows to estimate the netto durations of the whole T&I procedures. The tool is linked to weather data of the specific
offshore location in order to calculate the amount of weather delays the installation vessels will encounter, based on
the period of execution.
A variety of scenarios will be worked out to assess which vessel is the most (cost) efficient solution for performing
the offshore works in combination with the different planning scenarios. Reference is made to chapter 6.

5.3.2 Cycle times – weather downtimes

For every offshore activity or combination of activities, a weather (time) window is defined that is required going
from safe-state to safe-state by not exceeding operational weather limits such as:

- Significant wave height

- Swell period

- Wind speed

- Combined Wind speed / Significant wave height

- Combined Significant wave height / Swell period

- Current speed/direction

- Visibility

- Etc.

The considered operational weather windows for this project can be found in Table 18 and Table 19
The operational limits for towage are defined by the motion analysis and design properties of the floating modules
with its large and heavy top-structures. By performing a persistency analysis on the available time series data,
persistency tables (= workability tables) will be generated for every combination of:

- Weather window (Combined or single activity)

- Operational limits

- Month of installation

- Percentiles to be considered (P50, P75, P90)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 31

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

The persistency analysis is carried out in Matlab using the software ORCA (by Deltares) in combination with some
in-house DEME developed software (for the percentiles). Persistence refers to the time for which a storm of a given
severity, or a period of calm weather is likely to persist. In order to derive the statistics of the persistence of storms
or calm periods it is necessary to have a time series over a sufficient long period. A weather window has a continuous
time interval of specified minimum duration and with specified conditions like maximum wave height, wind speed
or a combination. The analysis is capable of determining continuous periods of favorable or unfavorable conditions
and the occurrence of these specific weather windows in a specific month.
The outcome of the persistency analysis may be an average over the entire time series. However, to know the
variability of the persistence analysis from year to year, percentiles can be calculated as well. For example, the 95th
percentile (or P95) gives the percentage of persistency (for a certain duration and condition) for which 95% of the
years from the entire time series is equal or better. The P50 gives the median percentage of all years.
As an example, suppose we have a time series of 10 years (1990-2000). We are interested in a specific working
window of 12 hours during which the wave height (Hs) should be lower than 1 meter (per month). First, the
percentage of time that such working windows exist per year and for each month separately is being calculated. For
a certain month (in this example January) this results in the following table (NB: this is an example with fictive
numbers):
Table 10 percentage of time that working windows exists per year

YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

JANUARY 5% 1% 4% 0% 2% 7% 3% 12% 10% 5%

From the above it follows that 1993 was a very ‘bad’ year without any working window in January. The year 1997
is an example of a ‘good’ year with working windows during 12% of time.
Next the percentiles can be calculated by sorting the 10 percentages from the table above and calculate the
exceedances:
Table 11 exceedance calculations

Rank Workability Exceeded by Percentile

1 0% 95% P95

2 1% 85% P85

3 2% 75% P75

4 3% 65% P65

5 4% 55% P55

6 5% 45% P45

7 5% 35% P35

8 7% 25% P25

9 10% 15% P15

10 12% 5% P5

The value in the middle (i.e. the median) is than the P50, in this case it is the average of the 5th and 6th value (or the
average of the P45 and P55, so 4.5%). The P95 is the value that is exceeded by 95% of the data points, in this case it
will be 0%. For the Space@Sea project, a percentile of P50 has been used. The underlying considerations to be made
for each individual part of the installation procedure are elaborated in the corresponding parts of section 6.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 32

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Transport & installation (T&I) Manual – Mediterranean Sea

6.1 Pre-installation of mooring system (anchor points & mooring lines)

6.1.1 Preparatory works & Engineering

6.1.1.1 Preparatory works

Prior to the transport and installation operations, T&I Contractor has to arrange all marine engineering works
necessary for the correct and safe installation of the foundations such as but not limited to;
- Site specific soil data;
- Agreed metocean data;
- Side scan sonar survey and any additional geophysical survey required;
- UXO survey and confirmation of clearance of UXO’s

Based on the above information and together with detailed design information, T&I Contractor will arrange for
marine engineering such as:
- Prepare passage plans
- Prepare and arrange towing plant, provide details on equipment and vessels used
- Prepare transportation method statements and risk assessments
- Perform a Site Specific Assessment for the installation vessel (defining operational and survivability
limitations)
- Pile driveability and stability studies
- Lifting studies including DAF (Dynamic Amplification Factor) analysis due to splash effect
- Sea-fastening studies
- Design of grillage for lifting equipment
- Design of grillage for foundation components

The above marine engineering preparations will be presented to a Marine Warranty Surveyor (MWS) for
review/feedback. The following preparations will be made prior to the first installation:
- Assignment of project team (project manager, works manager, project engineer, etc.)
- Pre-job meetings with The Employer, subcontractors, etc.
- Conducting HAZID’s and HAZOP’s
- Preparing detailed method statements, quality plans, HSE plans, etc. (including calculations, drawings,
details of equipment used etc.)
- Acceptance of method statements, quality plans, HSE plans, etc. by the Employer and Marine Warranty
Surveyor (MWS)
- Mobilisation, preparation and testing of installation vessel, lifting equipment, driving equipment and other
required equipment

After completion of the above mentioned steps the first installation can start. The following preparations will be
completed prior to every installation:
- Check condition of installation vessel and other equipment
- Check operational conditions (weather forecasts)
- Check permissions (port control, MWS, etc.)
- Check target coordinates for installation vessel

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 33

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.1.2 Engineering – environmental conditions during transport

The transport operation of cargo such as piles and mooring boxes via sea is subject to a number of regulations which
can be applied. A transport on the HLV falls under the category of dry transport and requires the certification of
several aspects of the transport operation to ensure all necessary precautions were taken to guarantee safety of vessel,
crew and cargo.
In general, a three-dimensional motion analysis of the vessel including the deck-mounted cargo shall be conducted
at zero and at service speed for a range of encounter angles between vessel and waves in design wave conditions.
This serves to assess the maximum motion amplitudes and accelerations the vessel is exposed to. The assessment of
accelerations is necessary to ensure an appropriate dimensioning of sea-fastenings to store the transported cargo on
deck of the vessel and to check whether vessel stability is given under all relevant environmental conditions.
Furthermore, the sea-fastenings have to be designed in a way that allows to remove single parts of the cargo without
affecting the secure fastening of other objects during installation of the piles. While this calculation procedure has to
be conducted for all aspects of the installation procedure, i.e. transport, pile installation, tow operation etc., it is
introduced in detail here and then applied identically in the later sections of this report.
The following paragraphs provide a brief introduction into the motion analysis required for the assessment of limiting
conditions. It should be noted that due to confidentiality reasons a generic hull form similar to the HLV Orion is used
to demonstrate how the operational limits of the vessel are assessed. In this case, the software Ansys AQWA has
been used to compute the vessel’s response to waves. The vessel is sailing at design sailing speed as listed in Table
15, since the evaluation has to be conducted for this velocity according to regulation. For zero-speed condition, a
similar evaluation has to be conducted for this and the pile installation operation and is thus presented in the later
pile installation section.
Figure 22 shows a discretized surface model of an HLV hull in AQWA, as used for computation. A frequency domain
analysis is conducted to compute the linearized vessel response for a wide range of discrete wave frequencies and
directions. The response is computed in form of coefficients – so called Response Amplitude Operators (RAOs) that
represent the induced vessel motion per incident wave height for each degree of freedom for a discrete wave
frequency and encounter angle.
Using these coefficients, arbitrary wave spectra may be applied and the actual vessel response computed in frequency
and time domain by superposing the individual response components for each wave frequency and direction and all
degrees of freedom. For this investigation, frequency domain simulations were conducted, as the vessel response of
interest is of statistical nature, which may be considered using the frequency domain approach for a first estimate. It
should be noted that as this approach is chosen, the most severe combination of maximum motion amplitudes for all
individual degrees of freedom has to be combined, which will likely result in a very conservative design condition,
while time domain analysis allows to include phase information of the respective Degree of Freedoms (DoF) and
may lead to a reduction in design loads.

Figure 22: Exemplary mesh of a Heavy Lift Vessel in a 3D panel code used for time domain motion analysis

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 34

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

While all six degrees of freedom have to be analyzed, specific values like the maximum roll angle and maximum roll
acceleration are of main interest, since these may lead to large heeling moments and large forces acting on the sea-
fastenings of the deck load. The following paragraphs outline how the limiting values of a specific motion component
may be determined for a given operational reference period, a design sailing speed and a given vessel load case.
Assuming a discrete wave spectrum with a known spectral density function 𝑆𝜁 (𝜔) and a respective set of transfer
coefficients 𝑌̂
𝑎/𝜁 (𝜔), a discrete response function 𝑆𝑎 (𝜔) for a degree of freedom a can be computed as:

̂
𝑆𝑎 (𝜔) = |𝑌 2
𝑎/𝜁 (𝜔)| ⋅ 𝑆𝜁 (𝜔)

The values of the transfer coefficients, the RAOs, are determined using the Green Function based 3D panel code
Ansys AQWA. A JONSWAP spectral description of a wave spectrum is used for 𝑆𝜁 (𝜔). Using the spectral density
distribution of the computed response spectrum 𝑆𝑎 (𝜔), the zeroth moment of the spectrum 𝑚0 can be computed by
integrating the discrete values over the range of frequencies, thus computing the area under the spectral density curve
of the response function.
When only considering the extreme values of a time-domain response, e.g. the maximum roll amplitude or roll
acceleration per wave encounter, only one peak will occur per wave period. The value of these extrema can be
statistically assessed. For long durations, the probability distribution of maxima of the response can be modelled as
a small-banded Rayleigh-density function (Blendermann, 2001). For Rayleigh-type spectra, the probability
distribution function may be described as:
2
1 𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹(𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) = 1 − exp (− ).
2 𝑚0
This formula describes the probability that the amplitude 𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥 of an arbitrary degree of freedom is exceeded. This
function can be rearranged to compute a value, which on average is only exceeded every n amplitudes or every n
waves:
𝑎1/𝑛
= √2 ln 𝑛 .
√𝑚0,𝑎
Prior to applying this formula, the zero-th moment has to be computed for the respective degree of freedom. E.g. if
one wants to compute the quantile 𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥,0.999, as a heave motion amplitude which on average is only exceeded every
thousand oscillations - since one extremum occurs per oscillation - the value is computed as:
𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥,0.999 = √2𝑚0,𝑧 ln 1000,
with

𝑚0,𝑧 = ∫ 𝑆𝑧 (𝜔)𝑑𝜔.

The number of oscillations n to be considered here is calculated as the operation reference period of the transport
voyage 𝑇𝑅 divided by the zero up-crossing period of the sea state.
𝑛 = 𝑇𝑟 /𝑇𝑧
As the vessel’s response to a sea state will vary depending on the encounter angle, the maximum response 𝑎1/𝑛 has
to be computed for a range of directions. Since the vessel’s response will depend of the characteristics of the sea
state, a range of 𝐻𝑠 − 𝑇𝑝 combinations is tested.
Table 12 shows a scatter diagram for the Space@Sea Mediterranean Sea installation site. The table shows ranges of
significant wave heights 𝐻𝑠 and peak periods 𝑇𝑝 and the probability of their combined occurrence in per cent of the
year. The wave data was analyzed in 3 hour time windows and fitted to a JONSWAP spectral distribution function.
As can be seen, the vast majority of sea states has peak periods below 6s-7s and significant wave heights of less than
2m.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 35

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 12: Scatter diagram showing the statistical occurrence of specific Hs-Tp combinations in % of the year for the Mediterranean Sea
installation site. Source: MetOceanView

Tp [s]
Hs[m] 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5 - 6 6 - 7 7 - 8 8 - 9 9 - 10 10 - 11 11 - 12
0 - 0.5 0.53 0.14 7.59 14.21 7.59 2.75 1.38 0.41 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.00
0.5 - 1 0.00 0.00 0.78 10.72 12.23 5.90 2.18 1.01 0.36 0.08 0.02 0.01
1 - 1.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 9.18 7.73 2.15 0.68 0.33 0.17 0.02 0.00
1.5 - 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17 6.95 2.38 0.50 0.13 0.06 0.01 0.00
2 - 2.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 1.52 2.04 0.44 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00
2.5 - 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.59 0.42 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00
3 - 3.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.20 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00
3.5 - 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00
4 - 4.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.5 - 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure 23 shows the maximum responses for pitch and roll statistically encountered every 1000 transport operations
for a range of 𝐻𝑠 − 𝑇𝑝 combinations. From the plots it becomes obvious that in transit conditions the roll motion in
quartering beam seas are likely the most critical scenario. Motions leading to an exceedance of the sea fastening
design load have to be avoided and hence the 𝐻𝑠 − 𝑇𝑝 combination leading to these motions represent the weather
limit of the specific operation.
It should be noted that in order to compute the design loads of the sea fastenings, the loads resulting from each
individual degree of freedom have to be added to obtain the total design force. This can be considered a rather
conservative approach, since the maximum forces of all degrees of freedom will in reality not necessarily occur at
the same time.
Optionally, a time domain analysis can be conducted to directly assess the combined influences of all degrees of
freedom on the accelerations experienced at a specific point. While more accurate, this type of assessment requires
significantly more time as a reliable prediction of the maximum load can only be made if long time windows are
simulated. Applying either path, limiting operational conditions are obtained. These are compared to the
environmental data available for the sites of operation to estimate the expected down times and hence compute the
average cycle times, as presented in section 6.1.8.1.
In the planning of offshore operations, a safety factor α is usually employed to account for uncertainties in prediction
and in order to account for the statistical nature of the environmental conditions. The value of the α-factor depends
on the sensitivity of the operation, the level of weather forecasting reliability and the planned operation period. For
transport, lifting and subsea installation procedures, a weather forecasting level B (moderate) can be applied.
Depending on whether the design loads are determined using allowable stress design (ASD) or load and resistance
factor design (LRFD), the values for the safety factor can be taken as 0.59 or 0.66 for wave induced forces and as
0.62 or 0.7 for wind induced forces. A detailed description on the selection of appropriate α-factors is provided in
DNVGL-ST-N001.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 36

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Figure 23: 99.99 Percentile maximum response for Pitch and Roll in two different significant wave heights for a generic HLV at service speed

For the storage of the piles aboard the transport vessel, a specific section is devoted to the transport of tubular
structures in DNVGL-ST-N001, section 11.9.9.2. However, a detailed analysis of pile positioning would go beyond
the scope of this installation manual and can be conducted upon demand based on the steps provided by the
classification societies for this type of standard procedure. The maximum sea fastening loads to be considered also
depend on the type of sea fastening that it chosen by the operator. A detailed description of the sea fastening design
procedure is given in DNV-OS-H202.

6.1.1.3 Engineering – environmental conditions during transport offshore pile installation

The installation of piles which serve as an anchor for offshore-based floating structures is a procedure which is
performed at increasing occurrence over the last decade. Especially due to the increased interest in deployment of
floating offshore wind turbines, classification societies have devoted more attention to the definition of rules and
recommendations for this type of operation.
The main concerns to be considered here are the precise positioning of the vessel and crane while lowering the piles
down to the seabed and the safety of the vessel crew and equipment when lifting heavy loads over deck. The lift
operation can be divided into five steps:
1. Lift-off of load object from deck
2. Positioning of object in air
3. Transit of splash zone

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 37

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

4. Lowering object to full depth of submergence

5. Landing on sea bottom
6. During driving operation

Additionally, the position of the lifting vessel has to be maintained throughout the procedure. A detailed step-by-step
description of the procedures is given in sections 6.1.8.

6.1.1.3.1 Lifting loads

The assessment of the lift-off operation needs to consider the wave induced motion of the vessel and hence the boom
tip which holds the cargo object. Due to the small weight of the piles (approx. 90t) compared to the vessel
displacement, the effects of the moving load on the vessel do not have to be considered. The motion analysis can be
conducted based on a 3D time domain model to simulate the wave induced motion of the vessel and a multi-body
dynamics tool to simulate the motion of the cargo when suspended from the crane. In all cases, it should be avoided
to allow a motion excitation in the vicinity of the natural frequency of the hanging load, which for a simple pendulum
may be estimated as:

𝐿
𝑇 = 2 𝜋√ .
𝑔

In this formula, L represents the length of the line and g refers to the gravitation acceleration. If a typical wave period
encountered at the installation site is around 6s, a line length of approximately L=871m has to be avoided. As can
easily be derived, this exceeds the necessary lifting height by far and thus is rather uncritical for this operation.
Nevertheless, higher order harmonics should be considered.
A further aspect to consider is the maximum load each component of the lifting gear is exposed to. This includes but
is not limited to: the hook, pad eyes, line, sling, etc. In addition to the weight of the lifted object, loads due to motion
of the vessel and object have to be considered by applying a factor to the original load. This factor is called the
Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF) and can be defined empirically based on DNVGL guidelines:

100
𝐷𝐴𝐹 = 1 + 0.25 √ ,
𝑆𝐻𝐿

wherein SHL refers to the Static Hook Load in tons. This formula is applicable to Static Hook Loads between 3t and
100t, whereas static coefficients are used for heavier loads. The vibro-hammer and equipment are assumed to have a
total mass of approx. 10t. If the actual mass exceeds this estimate, the above formula will provide a conservative
estimate, since for lifts with >100t total lift load, a static DAF of 1.25 is applied. By applying the DAF factor to the
combined weight of the pile and equipment, a total load of 125t is obtained. As the main crane of HLV Orion has a
crane capacity of 3000t for 57m reach, the capacity is deemed sufficient for this operation. As the piles have an open
bottom, the effect of wave impact in the splash zone is reduced.
An onboard lift operation has to be conducted in order to position the mooring line boxes for the connection to the
pile and the unwinding when lowering the pile to the sea bed. Based on the thickness of the links and the total length
of the chain, a weight of approximately 400t is estimated for each mooring box. Due to the large capacity of the
Orion main crane and the fact that no transit through the splash zone has to occur, this operation is deemed less
critical in terms of overall risk. Nevertheless, it presents the maximum load lift for the crane equipment. For loads
between 300t and 1000t static hook load, DNVGL recommends a constant DAF of 1.20. This results in a maximum
dynamic hook load of 480t. Since the lever for this operation is small, crane and crane equipment are deemed suitable
for this operation.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 38

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 13: Maximum Design Loads for Crane and Crane Equipment

Operation Static Hook Load DAF Dynamic Hook Load

Lifting of Piles 100t 1.25 125t

Lifting of Mooring Boxes 400t 1.20 480t

6.1.1.3.2 Vessel Motion

A motion response analysis of the vessel should be conducted in order to assess the limiting environmental conditions
of the operation. These are defined as the conditions under which the motion excitation of vessel and cargo does not
allow safe operation. For this demonstration, a 3D panel method is used to compute the maximum accelerations and
motion displacement encountered during 1000 operations for defined 𝐻𝑠 − 𝑇𝑝 combinations and encounter angles. If
the vessel and equipment are designed such that these accelerations and displacements can be tolerated, the operation
can be rated with a safety of 99.99%.
As a simplification, only linear wave response is investigated, which is considered appropriate here, as the installation
procedure is a highly sensitive operation and will thus only be conducted in conditions when induced motion of the
vessel is comparatively small and may thus be approximated well using linear potential flow theory.
The following plot was computed for a generic Heavy Lift Vessel similar to the HLV Orion and should only serve
to illustrate the computation-assisted procedure of operation planning. The diagram has been computed for two
different significant wave heights and for a range of peak periods, which correspond to the most frequently occurring
sea states at the envisaged installation site.
The upper images of Figure 24 show the vessel’s pitch response over encounter angle for different combinations of
significant wave height and peak period. The lower images show the same for the roll motion amplitude. In order to
obtain a more realistic vessel roll response, an empirically defined linear roll damping approach based on
Wassermann (Wassermann, 2018) has been used.
As becomes obvious, the roll motion is small in head and stern seas, while becoming large for beam seas. Using the
vessels dynamic positioning capacities, the ship orientation may be adjusted to obtain minimal response, i.e. if roll
motion is to be avoided, the DP thrusters turn the vessel to an encounter angle of 0°. In this case, only a range of
encounter angles from -30° to +30° has to be accounted for in the design of the procedure. This is not applicable for
the transit, since during transit only minor adjustments can be made to the ship course and hence the encounter angle
without significantly increasing the operation times.
Another aspect to consider in the planning of the operation is the position keeping ability of the vessel. The mean
drift forces induced by waves, wind and current should be computed and compared to the dynamic positioning
capability of the vessel to ensure that the position can be held during the whole operation reference period.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 39

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Figure 24: 99.99 Percentile maximum response for Pitch and Roll in two different significant wave heights for a generic HLV at zero speed

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 40

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.1.3.3 Current induced displacement

Upon entering the water, the wave and buoyancy induced forces on the lifted object have to be considered. In order
to maintain a stable hook load, the piles are not sealed, so that lift due to buoyancy is kept small. Wave conditions
should be low enough to ensure that wave impact does not damage the piles or lead to collision of vessel and hanging
load. This aspect is of minor concern, since the HLV provides a large crane reach and can thus lower the load with
adequate distance from the hull. For smaller vessels with a smaller crane capacity and thus a smaller reach, this
should be considered in more detail.
Once submerged, the piles may be subjected to marine currents. Due to the large diameter and height of the piles, a
current induced displacement off the vertical hook axis may be induced. The offsetting force may be approximated
by the following formula:
1
𝐹𝑐 = 𝜌𝑢𝑐2 ⋅ 𝑐𝐷 ⋅ 𝐴.
2
The cross-sectional area A is computed as the product of length and diameter of the pile. For cylindrical bodies with
a large length to diameter ratio, the drag coefficient cD is given with a value of 1 in literature. In order to obtain the
resulting offset, an equilibrium has to be established between drag forces and inertial forces, including the reduced
weight due to buoyancy.

Figure 25: Current induced offset of submerged pending load as equilibrium of current induced drag and gravity

For a pile length of 45m and a diameter of 1.8m, a current induced drift force of approximately 5.2t may be
experienced in current velocities of 0.5m/s. It should however be noted that current velocities usually decrease with
increasing depth of submergence and rarely reach the value of 0.5m/s for the investigated area. Furthermore, the
weight of the pile including the vibro-hammer gear has a weight of about 100t. Thus the resulting angle of the line
will be relatively small when not considering the drag forces on the cables, which will also have a minor influence
(α <2°).
As two different scenarios of pile driving are evaluated, different limiting conditions apply and the resulting statistical
workability is presented in the respective sub-section.

6.1.1.3.4 Conclusion

The above data and results prove that the selected heavy lift vessel will not cause any risk to perform the offshore
works. Subsequently, the results show that the alternative installation vessel, an offshore construction vessel, should
require sufficient crane capacity and a certain stability for installation. Because this types of OCV’s with certain
requirements are very rare and limited, it strengthens our advice to opt for a single heavy lift vessel.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 41

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.2 Marine equipment

With a total installed capacity of 44 MW, heavy lift vessel ‘Orion’ is equipped with a high-tech crane with lifting
capacity of 5,000 tonnes at 35 metres. The loads can be lifted to a height of more than 170 m and is able to install
foundations in water depths up to 300m. Deck space has been maximised to provide high transport and load capacity.
The 216.5 metres long Orion, featuring DP3 capability, can accommodate a crew of up to 131 people. Technical
details of the vessel can be found in Annex 5: Technical leaflet HLV Orion DEME.

Figure 26 HLV Orion (DEME)

Environmental considerations have been an important element of the vessel design. ‘Orion’ has dual fuel engines and
can run on natural gas (LNG). It has a Green Passport and Clean Design notation.

Figure 27 technical specification HLV Orion (DEME)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 42

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.3 Mobilization

The heavy lift vessel will move to the offshore site after execution of its previous DEME offshore project. Due to the
fact that it is unknown when and where the Space@Sea project will be executed, it is assumed that HLV Orion will
be mobilized from the port of Vlissingen, the Netherlands. In this port, the vessel will be prepared for the project by
setting up all the required installation equipment on deck of the vessel. In general, it takes around two (2) weeks to
make the vessel ready for execution. Section 6.1.2 shows all the required equipment which needs to be installed on
deck of the vessel.

6.1.4 Vessel transit

HLV Orion will sail from the Netherlands to the allocated marshalling port (ref. section 3) where all structures and
components are ready for loading onto the vessel. With an empty sailing speed of approx. 13 knots, the vessel will
reach the marshalling port in approx. 7.5 days.

Figure 28 vessel transit from NL to marshalling port (indicative)

6.1.5 Load out at marshalling port

Reference is made to section 3 where the Port of Marseille has been selected as marshalling port. HLV Orion will
enter the port, load all the required structures and leaves the port. It has been assumed in this report that the vessel is
able to enter and leave the port. The time for loading out the piles and mooring lines on board of the vessel has been
included in the cycle time calculations (see 6.1.8). The calculations start when the vessel enters the port of Marseille.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 43

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.6 Vessel deck lay-out

The following equipment is required for executing the offshore works.

Table 14 Required equipment on deck HLV

Nr. Action Equipment

1 Driving operation - Base case: Vibro-hammer (VH)

- Alternative case: Impact hammer and piling template

2 Foundations - 71 piles (in racks of 4x4)

- 71 mooring line in box (partly in deck, mainly on
deck)

3 Noise Mitigation - Noise mitigation system (NMS) and/or bubble

curtains if use of alternative case

4 To fasten the equipment and piles during - Sea fastening (frames and grillages)
transfer and installation

5 Lifting operations - Pile Lifting tool (in case of alternative case)

- upending cradles
- spreader bars, rigging, slings
- etc.

6 Miscellaneous - ROV
- Gypsy winch (Figure 31)
- etc.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 44

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Below drawing shows an indicative example of the deck lay out HLV Orion for the Space@Sea operation with a
vibro-hammer, piles and mooring lines on board. The drawing is pure indicative.

Figure 29 indicative deck lay out HLV Orion

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 45

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

HLV Orion will use for the Space@Sea project a purpose made pile foundation rack which carries up to 16 (4 by 4)
piles per rack. This pile rack can be controlled automatically and consists of an upending cradle to lift the piles to its
vertical position. By having an upending cradle for each piles, it reduces the offshore handling time significantly.

Figure 30 Pile rack on JUV Apollo (DEME) for the Moray East project (UK)

A gypsy winch is required in order to let the catenary line follow the pile during the piling operation. This tool is
custom made and depends on the size and weight of the catenary lines.

Figure 31 example of gypsy winch system

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 46

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.7 Transit to offshore site

The following table shows the total time to transit from marshalling port to offshore site and back. These values are
integrated in the cycle time calculations which is shown in the coming sections.

Table 15: Transit times and sailing speed for the transport of piles to offshore site

Marshalling port Port of Marseille

Sailing distance to offshore site 70 NM

Sailing speed (loaded) 11 knots

Sailing duration (loaded) Approx. 6.5 hours

Sailing speed (empty) 13 knots

Sailing duration (empty) Approx. 5.5 hours

Time per cycle x #cycles ± 12 hours

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 47

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.8 Installation methodology

Two (2) different installation methodologies are described below. The first methodology describes the installation of
subsea anchor piles by driving with a vibro-hammer and is a rather new state-of-the-art technology. The second
installation methodology consists of driving piles with an impact hammer, which is commonly used in the offshore
wind business. Both methodologies require different techniques and equipment and vary in installation cost and
duration.
A conclusion on the most appropriate method for the Space@Sea project is described in chapter 7

6.1.8.1 Installation methodology: driving piles with vibro-hammer

Figure 32 installation methodology - driving piles with Vibro-hammer (HLV Orion)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 48

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

1 HLV Orion leaves the marshalling port after loading

foundations and mooring lines on deck and sails to
offshore site

2 Arriving at the offshore site, HLV Orion manoeuvres

on dynamic positioning (DP3) to its first installation
location. The main crane will be unseafastened and
the deck is prepared for its first installation activity.

3 The main crane will move the piles from horizontal

position to vertical position by using the vibro-
hammer, which consists of an internal lifting tool
After upending, the pile will be moved sideward and
lowered down to the seabed

4 The pile will be lowered down by the vibro-hammer.

Once the piles penetrates the seabed due to its own
weight, the vibro-hammer will generate vibrations
which drives the pile into the seabed. The vertical
alignment will be managed by the vibro-hammer.
Depending on the soil, this can be very quick
operation.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 49

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5 Once the piles penetrate the seabed due to its own

weight, the vibro-hammer will generate vibrations
which drives the pile into the seabed. The vertical
alignment will be managed by the vibro-hammer.
Piles can be easily retrieved by vibrating and pulling
out the pile.
Depending on the soil, this can be very quick
operation.

6 Pile will be driven below the seabed. The internal

lifting tool of the vibro-hammer will release its grip
and will be retrieved back on deck.

7 The remaining part of the 750m long catenary line

will be lowered down as preparation for procedure 8

8 Once the full catenary line has been winched down in

the water, HLV Orion will pull the catenary line with
heavy force because the first part of the catenary (so
called inverse catenary) is driven in the seabed.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 50

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

9 At final position, 750m away from the anchor point,

HLV Orion will lower down the catenary line on the
seabed and installs a buoy system to mark its position
for the connection with the floating modules.

10 HLV Orion moves to the next location and starts

again with procedure no. 1.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 51

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

The total amount of cycles and net duration of driving piles with a Vibro-hammer with HLV Orion are shown in
below table. Reference is made to Annex 2: T&I schedule with HLV Orion for a complete T&I schedule.

Table 16 Cycle times HLV Orion with Vibro-hammering (good weather period)

HLV Orion with vibro-hammering – Start date: 01/04/20xx (Mediterranean Sea)

Activity Net duration (incl. 90% efficiency) Repetitions

Enter the port 3.3 hours 1

Lifting 71 piles and mooring lines 37.8 hours 1

Sea fastening & leaving port 3.3 hours 1

Sailing to site 7.1 hours 1

Offshore execution works 7.5 hours 71

Sailing to port 6.0 hours 1

TOTAL 25.7 days (including 1 day learning curve)

Weather down time Q50 (Figure 33) +2.3 days

Mobilization, transit, demobilization + 39 days (14+7.5+7.5+10 days)

Total Project duration Start project 01/04/20xx

Mobilization and transit to offshore site 01/04/20xx – 24/04/20xx

Offshore installation 24/04/20xx – 21/05/20xx

Transit and demobilization 21/05/20xx – 06/06/20xx

End project 06/06/20xx

Figure 33 monthly weather related workability

Applying an offshore construction vessel instead of a heavy lift vessel results in more net duration days due to more
offshore handling, and more weather down time due to lower vessel limits. However, there is still adequate time for
finishing the project before the bad weather starts. Introducing an offshore construction vessel for the offshore works
results in extra 20 days, finishing the driving operation in 26/06/20xx (ref. Annex 3: T&I schedule with OCV)

Below section provides an alternative installation methodology, which is currently used in the offshore wind business.
This method has not been taken as base case for this report as it is assumed that this new technology will evolve in
the upcoming years, and it turns out that this technology decreases the installation time and accompanying costs
drastically.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 52

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.8.2 Installation methodology: driving piles with impact hammer

Figure 34 concept sketch installation methodology (1)

Driving piles with an impact hammer is currently used for the installation of windfarm foundations (e.g. monopiles).
This methodology has not been taken as base case due to the following reasons.
- It requires a specific pile design made for impact. This results in more pile weight
- Driving piles with an impact hammer emits heavy noise which affects marine mammals. During this
operation, it is required to provide a noise mitigation system which has an impact on the installation time and
its accompanying cost.
- A piling template is required to grip the pile underwater during the change of installation tools (e.g. from
internal lifting tool to impact hammer). This results in longer installation time and extra investment cost.

A detailed description on driving the piles with an impact hammer can be found in Annex 1: Installation manual HLV
Orion with impact hammering

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 53

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Below table shows the durations for impact hammering with HLV Orion.

Table 17 Cycle times HLV Orion with Impact hammering (good weather period)

HLV Orion with impact hammering – Start date: 01/04/20xx (Mediterranean Sea)

Activity Net duration (incl. 90% efficiency) Repetitions

Enter the port 3.3 hours 1

Lifting 71 piles and mooring lines 37.8 hours 1

Sea fastening & leaving port 3.3 hours 1

Sailing to site 7.1 hours 1

Offshore execution works 12.2 hours 71

Sailing to port 6.0 hours 1

TOTAL 39.6 days (including 1 day learning curve)

Weather down time Q50 (Figure 35 monthly +4.2 days

weather related workability

Extra installation time compared to vibro- 16 days extra

hammering

Start project 01/04/20xx

Mobilization and transit to offshore site 01/04/20xx – 24/04/20xx

Offshore installation 24/04/20xx – 06/06/20xx

Transit and demobilization 06/06/20xx – 22/06/20xx

End project 22/06/20xx

Figure 35 monthly weather related workability

The above figure shows the results from the cycle time calculation tool which presents the workability of the vessel
in different periods based on vessel limitations per activity. For instance when the vessel starts with upending the
pile, it should consider both the wind speed and the wave height as from the start of upending until driving the pile
into the seabed. So throughout the activity from pile upending until pile driving, we need an adequate weather window
where the wind and wave height shall not exceed a certain pre-defined limiting value (for instance 15m/s wind and
3m Hs are the ultimate weather limits of the main crane). Each vessel and its main equipment have their own limits
which are strictly confidential which we cannot disclose in this report, as well as the calculation tool itself.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 54

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.1.9 Transit back to marshalling port and demobilization

After executing the offshore works for the Space@Sea project, HLV Orion will sail back to mobilization port in the
Netherlands and takes approx. 10 days for dismantling the vessel.

6.2 Transport of floating modules and offshore installation

6.2.1 Engineering and preparatory works

6.2.1.1 Engineering

The transport of the preassembled modules from Marshalling port to the offshore deployment site is conducted using
one or multiple tugs, towing the floating bodies through the water. In order to plan this procedure, limiting
environmental conditions are defined. The probability of weather windows with less severe conditions than the
limiting state should be high enough to guarantee that the operation can be conducted within the assigned operation
reference period.
Within the defined limiting environmental conditions, the tug or tugs should be able to compensate the towing
resistance, composed by the drift forces induced by wind, waves and current, under all conditions. The scenario of
zero forward velocity is typically referred to as “Bollard Pull” condition. The required bollard pull force, exerted by
the tugs at this condition, depends on the responsiveness of the towed object to the acting environmental forces,
consisting of wind and current induced drag as well as wave induced drift forces. First order wave response is not
considered here since only an average force over 1min is considered.

6.2.1.2 Wave drift

Since towage of floating structures is a standard operation of marine engineering, DNVGL ruling provides an
empirical formula to estimate wave induced drift forces for a given body and significant wave height (DNV, 2011):
1
𝐹𝑤𝑑 = 𝜌𝑤 𝑔𝑅 2 𝐵 ⋅ 𝐻𝑠2 .
8
In this formula, B refers to the breath of the towed object, ρw to the density of sea water, g to the magnitude of
gravitational acceleration and Hs to the significant wave height. R represents an empirically defined reflection
coefficient. For square faced objects in tow, a reflection coefficient of R=1 is given in the literature.

6.2.1.3 Current drag

The devised installation site in the Mediterranean Sea shows only minor influences by tidal or other currents. As a
conservative approximation, a value of 0.5m/s is assumed for the tow operation. The resulting drag force can be
estimated based on:
1
𝐹𝐷 = 𝑐𝐷 𝑣 2 𝐴,
2
with v as the relative velocity of towed object and free stream, A as the lateral area of the object exposed to the
current and cD as the drag coefficient. Since the area A only refers to the submerged area, it is defined as the product
of draft and breadth of the floater module. For rectangular structures such as the floaters investigated in this study,
DNVGL guidelines provide empirical values for the drag coefficient, which may be taken with a value of 1, just as
for the reflection coefficient above.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 55

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.2.1.4 Wind

Wind forces may be approximated similar to the drag forces described in the paragraph above. The velocities to be
applied here are based on the average wind velocities which may be expected during the tow and installation
operation. While statistical data can be used for the general planning of the procedure, reliable weather forecasts have
to be consulted before starting the operation. In this study, data from Argoss has been taken. Other, free data
repositories like the ERA5 data base established by ECMWF within the Copernicus program can be consulted for
statistical data on environmental conditions within European waters.

6.2.1.5 Tow efficiency

In order to account for reduced efficiency of the tugs due to hydrodynamic interaction, age of equipment, marine
growth and similar effects, the nominal bollard pull of the tugs is multiplied by a tow efficiency factor. An estimation
of an efficiency factor may also be derived from DNVGL ruling, which provides an empirical formula:
𝑇𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 80 − (1 − 0.0417 ⋅ 𝐿𝑂𝐴 ⋅ √𝐹𝐵𝑃 − 20) ⋅ (𝐻𝑠 − 1)
In this formula, FBP refers to the static bollard pull of the tug. It should be noted that this formula is only deemed
applicable for tugs up to an overall length of LOA=45m and a static bollard pull between 20t and 100t.
In addition to the Bollard Pull requirement, the tug should be able to provide the desired service speed to complete
the operation within the given time frame. A service speed of 5kn is assumed for the tow operation of a single floater
and 3kn for the triple-floater configuration. The total resistance resulting at service speed can be modelled as a
superposition of calm water resistance for the defined forward velocity and wave induced drift forces, also known as
added wave resistance.
This simplification is only valid at very slow forward velocities, since the forward velocity of a partly-submerged
body may have a significant influence on the added mass component of the inertia term in the equation of motion.
Resistance values for a single module with the properties of the accommodation hub developed in WP6
Energyhub@Sea, were computed for calm water conditions using the RANS CFD code StarCCM+. Velocities of
1kn to 5kn in steps of 2kn were tested. The resulting force in axial direction for the respective velocity is shown in
Figure 36.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 56

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Figure 36: Tow Resistance of Single Module in [t] over Towing Speed, based on the WP6 accommodation hub

Based on the results of the empirical formulae in combination with the calm water resistance of the bodies, the
limiting environmental conditions can be defined based on the desired operability. Based on the wave scatter
diagram and the average wind speeds, the following limiting conditions under consideration of the α-factor were
defined:

Table 18 Design limiting values of environmental forces for tow operation

Environmental Load Component Limiting Value

Wind Speed 15m/s

Current Speed 0.5m/s

Significant Wave Height 2m

Under the conditions listed in Table 18, 2 tugs of each 100 ton BP and an over length (LOA) of 45 meters or more,
or a 200 ton BP tug (Figure 37) would be able to conduct the operation as planned. With regard to the Bollard Pull
requirement as included in the DVNGL recommendations on tow operations, this tow configuration would be able
to operate in conditions as listed in Table 19

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 57

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 19:Maximum Limiting Bollard Pull Condition for Tow Operation using two 100t BP tugs or one 200t BP tug with LOA>45m

Environmental Impact Limiting Value

Wind Speed 20m/s

Current Speed 0.5m/s

Significant Wave Height 4.5m

6.2.2 Marine equipment

As per above, two tugs of each 200 tons are required for towing the module from marshalling port to offshore site
and one additional tug is needed for maneuvering purposes in the vicinity of the deployment site. During transit, the
tug will be attached to the rear of the three-floater configuration to enhance maneuvering capabilities in case of
emergency. For the single floater transport scenario, the tug may stay at the deployment site or may also assist during
transit if the weather conditions require additional safety measures.

Figure 37 Example of a 200t BP tug boat

As can be determined from the statistical weather data for the installation site, the conditions listed in Table 18 are
only exceeded during less than 20% of the year. Nevertheless, in order to further increase the safety margin of the
operation, the size of tugs can be increased to 120t BP. In the following calculations, this larger tug size was used to
assess the cost associated with the respective tow configuration options. The tow operations are assuming a tow of
pre-assembled modules from the harbor presented in section 3 to the installation site.
During installation, an additional Offshore Construction Vessel is required for supporting the connection with the
mooring lines and/or pre-installed floating modules. Edda Freya from Deepocean has been selected due to its high
capacity crane (400/600 mT) to ensure it can lift up the mooring line from the sea-bed and deliver it to the floaters.
This is done using messenger lines, small lines that are easily manageable, connected to the mooring chain. While
the messenger line is hauled in using adequate equipment on the floaters, the weight of the mooring line, which will
later keep the island in position, has to be compensated by the OCV. In the subsequent step, this procedure has to be
repeated for the opposite side of the floaters, in order to establish an equilibrium of mooring forces, before the tugs
can disconnect from the island. Therefore, at least four vessels are needed on site for the installation procedure.

Figure 38 Example of OCV with sufficient crane capacity (Edda Freya Deepocean)
Version 4.0 19-02-2021 58
774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.2.3 Mobilization

Possible solutions for the tow operation would be the tugs Eraclea and Kamarina, both based in the port of Catania,
Sicily. With a nominal bollard pull of respectively 120t and 123t, these vessels would be able to cope with the
environmental conditions encountered on the route.

Figure 39 Tugs Earclea and Kamarina (indicative)

6.2.4 Transit

The tug and empty will sail from the port of Catania to the marshalling port (ref. 3) where the barges will be prepared
for towing operations. With a sailing speed of approx. 10 knots (empty), the vessel will reach the marshalling port in
approx. 8.5 days.

Figure 40 vessel transit from Italy to Port of Marseille

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 59

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.2.5 Installation methodology

Below procedure and figure shows the offshore installation sequence of the floating modules to the pre-installed
mooring lines. This report is only describing the transport & installation activities for the outside floaters as it implies
the connection of the floaters with the pre-installed mooring lines but also requires specific marine equipment to pick
up the mooring lines from the seabed and connect them to the floating structures. Once we have installed the outside
floaters, we can install the inside with less (expensive) marine equipment. This report does not provide any other
form of installation sequence and is subject for a follow-up trajectory.
The full installation procedure can be found in section 8.

Figure 41 Overview floating modules, permanent mooring lines (black) and temporary mooring lines (orange)

It has been decided to mainly opt for a triple body towage which means that three (3) floating modules will be pre-
connected in the marshalling port before towage. Figure 41 shows mainly triple towage installations and in the end
only single towages (nr. 26-27-28-29) for completing the base case configuration and if needed some single towages.
Below figure shows the three (3) connected floating modules at marshalling port.

Figure 42 Triple towage (pre-connected at Marshalling Port)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 60

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Two (2) tugboats and an additional support tug will tow the triple body from marshalling port to offshore site with
a speed of only five (5) knots. The supporting tug and CSV keep an eye on the connectors and will intervenes if
something goes wrong.

Figure 43 triple body towage to offshore site

When arriving at the offshore site, the three (3) tugs will manoeuvre the three floating modules to its first location
ready to be connected to the pre-installed mooring lines.

Figure 44 Arriving at offshore site

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 61

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

The first location with three (3) floating modules will be connected with six (6) mooring lines (black). To keep the
modules stable and in place during the installation period, it is required to prolong three (3) mooring lines with
temporary auxiliary mooring lines (red) to the module. These temporary auxiliary lines are steel wires and will be
removed throughout the installation phase. This is also shown in below figure

Figure 45 mooring line and auxiliary lines

The CSV will move to the first pre-installed buoy to pick up the mooring line from the seabed. This buoy was
previously installed by HLV Orion during the driving operation of the anchor piles. The steel wire will be connected
to the mooring line and pulled towards the floating modules. After the connection of the floating modules with the
auxiliary lines, the connection of the pre-installed mooring lines with the floating modules will be executed. The
three (3) tugs will sail back to marshalling port to pick up the second triple body.

Figure 46 offshore connection of auxiliary line with floating module

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 62

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

When the second triple body arrives at offshore site, next to the first module, two (2) of the six (6) modules will be
connected to each other with the rigid connectors. This report considers the rigid connection (designed by WP 9) as
base case for the connection between the floating modules. The offshore assembly of the rigid connection will be
done in the following steps.

1. Positioning the modules to be coupled with the help of tugboats

2. Temporary mooring between modules using a removable winch and bollards
fitted on deck
3. Folding the arms of each connector in the fitting position starting with the
lowest one towards the highest one
4. Introduction of the guide bolts into the eyes of the bearings
5. Pulling the bolt with a manual and removable lifting device
6. Locking the bolt through the end plates

Figure 47 rigid connection between floating modules (WP 9)

Since it is not possible to reach the inner connector with an installation vessel, this operation requires manual handling
in combination with a small crane that will be installed temporary (or permanent) on the floating structure to provide
support during the guidance of the bolt inside the eyes of the bearing.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 63

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

The above procedure is highly sensitive to relative motion of the modules and can therefore only be conducted in
small significant wave heights or for short wave periods. An acceptable motion range of neighbouring floating
modules than are to be connected should not exceed the size of the bearings.
As can be seen in Figure 48, even for small significant wave heights, combined pitch and roll motion are likely to
prevent a safe connection operation for most of the investigated 𝐻𝑆 − 𝑇𝑃 combindations. However, for wave spectra
with peak periods smaller than 6s, a significant reduction in maximum significant response amplitude can be
observed. In these sea states, most wave components are shorter than the module dimensions and thus result in less
severe motion excitation. For the Mediterranean Sea deployment site, sea states with peak periods of 5s and shorter
occur during approximately 50% of the year, as is shown in Table 12. Therefore, while being forced to operate
significant wave heights of 0.5m or less for wave periods longer than 6s, a good level of workability may nevertheless
be reached as shorter wave periods enable work in significantly higher significant wave heights. This specifically
applied to the summer months, when the probability of calm weather is higher and the weather windows during which
these conditions are maintained are correspondingly longer.
In case of the triple body installation, a reduction of response may occur due to the increased overall mass of the
structure. The effective response will however depend on the relative direction of incoming wave and axis of pre-
installed connections. In case of 90° relative angle, the motion will be almost identical to the single body cases, since
gap effects have been shown to be of minor importance for small waves. As the orientation of the assembled floaters
cannot be adjusted based on the instantaneous wave direction but has to be set according to the installation design
and the pre-installed mooring lines, an optimization of encounter angle cannot be guaranteed and the same body
response as for single bodies is assumed, as this represents a conservative approach.

Figure 48: 99.99 Percentile maximum response for Pitch and Roll in two different significant wave heights for a single Space@Sea floater
module (WP6 – Accommodation Hub)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 64

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Eventually, two (2) triple floating bodies have been transported and installed offshore. The transport from marshalling
port to offshore site, the connection with the pre-installed mooring lines, the installation and connection of auxiliary
wires and the rigid connection with the floating modules forms the basis of the towage and offshore installation
section.

Figure 49 completed connection of floating modules

The total amount of cycles and net duration of towage and offshore installation of the floating modules of the
Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea are provided in below table. Reference is made to Annex 2: T&I schedule
with HLV Orion for a complete T&I schedule.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 65

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 20 Cycle times of towage and offshore installation of floating modules

Towage and offshore installation – Start date: 07/06/20xx (Mediterranean Sea)

Activity Net duration (incl. 90% efficiency) Comments

Towage single/triple body from 311 hours See text below

assembly port to offshore site and back

Offshore positioning and connection 216 hours See text below

Offshore handling with mooring lines 312 hours See text below

Deinstallation aux. lines 48 hours See text below

Overall Learning curve ±24 hours See text below

TOTAL ±38 days

Weather down time Q50 +40.5 days minimum*

Mobilization, transit, demobilization +39 days

Project duration Pile installation 01/04/20xx – 06/06/20xx

Project duration T&I floaters Start project 15/05/20xx

Mobilization and transit 15/05/20xx – 06/06/20xx

Preparation floating modules 07/06/20xx – 13/06/20xx

Towage and offshore installation 14/06/20xx – 31/08/20xx

Transit and demobilization 31/08/20xx – 18/09/20xx

End project 18/09/20xx

*minimum has been taken as it is considered to be more. The above calculation is only based on maximum weather windows of 40 hours as
it turns out that work abilities are 0% for longer weather windows. The following installation limit have been taken into account

Figure 50 Weather down times during towage and offshore installation

Activity Max. transport & installation limits

Towage 2m Hs wave height and 15m/s wind speed

Offshore connection with pre-installed floaters Only 0.5m Hs wave height (based on input WP9)

Offshore handling of mooring lines, auxiliary lines 1.5m Hs wave height and 15m/s wind speed

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 66

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

The towage and offshore installation of the floating structures are divided into different main activities. A single
towage activity from assembly yard to offshore site takes 14 hours considering a transport speed of 5 knots and a
distance of 70 NM from the assembly yard (Port of Marseille). For a triple towage, we have assumed a rather
conservative time of 24 hours. The cycle time calculation tools consider for this activity a maximum wave height of
2m and maximum windspeed of 15 m/s. In total we have 9 triple bodies and 4 single bodies which results in a total
towage time of 311 hours including transfer empty to the assembly port. For the latter activity, we have not assumed
any limiting factors since we are sailing empty.
When arriving at site, the floater(s) need to be positioned and connected to each other. For the positioning of the first
triple body we have assumed a total duration of 24 hours and with an additional 27 hours for handling 6 mooring
lines (incl. aux lines). For the 2nd triple body we have assumed again 24 hours to connect two (2) of the six (6) floaters
and 42 hours since we must handle 12 mooring lines. For the offshore connection we have assumed a maximum
wave height of 0.5m (input WP9) and maximum windspeed of 15 m/s. For the offshore handling of the mooring lines
we have considered a maximum wave height of 1.5 m and wind speed of 15 m/s. Sailing back to port has limited
restrictions since we have no structures to tow.
It should be noted that the below netto durations are high level and is subject for further in-depth analysis. The goal
of this report is to have a first indication on the total duration of installation the outer rim of the floating island. For
the installation of the inner side, we expect to re-use the above results for extrapolations. A dedicated calculation tool
has been used that integrates the below activities, and for each activities it calculates the netto duration and weather
delays based on the integration limiting factors linked to accurate weather data.
We can conclude that the full operation for the transport and installation of 9 triple bodies and 4 single bodies
including connection with each other and the pre-installed mooring lines takes approx. 38 days. Based on the above
wave and wind limitations we can conclude that the offshore connection with floaters has very low work abilities
since we consider a max. wave height of 0.5m based on input from WP9. Below figure shows indicatively the work
abilities for all 4 activities and shows during the wintertime lower work abilities than the summer which makes sense.
However when you look at the work abilities for the offshore connection of the floaters this remains very low and
this is the reason why we have almost the same amount of weather delays as the netto duration. Increasing the
installation limit of the connector will result in higher work abilities and hence less weather down times.

As an example, we have changed the wave height limits for the offshore connection from 0.5m to 1m and it is clear
that the work abilities are increasing drastically resulting in less weather delays.

A more elaborated estimation on the cycle time durations and weather delays at the specific location is required to
have more accurate results on both the durations but also the accompanying costs.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 67

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Below table shows detailed information on the towing and offshore installation procedure;
Table 21 detailed overview on towing and offshore installation

Details offshore connection with pre-installed floaters / mooring lines

Floaters Activity Net duration Island setup

#1 - #3 Towage 1st set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#1 - #3 Positioning 1st set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#1 - #3 Handling of 6 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 1 st set of floaters 27 hours Energyhub@Sea

#1 - #3 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+82 hours

#4 - #6 Towage 2nd set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#4 - #6 connection 2nd set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (1st set) 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#4 - #6 Handling of 12 mooring lines (and 2 auxiliary lines) with 2 nd set of floaters 42 hours Energyhub@Sea

#4 - #6 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+97 hours

#7 - #9 Towage 3rd set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#7 - #9 connection 3rd set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (2nd set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#7 - #9 Handling of 8 mooring lines (and 2 auxiliary lines) with 3rd set of floaters 30 hours Energyhub@Sea

#7 - #9 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+73 hours

#10 - #12 Towage 4th set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#10 - #12 connection 4th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (3rd set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#10 - #12 Handling of 9 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 4th set of floaters 36 hours Energyhub@Sea

#10 - #12 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+79 hours

#13 Towage 5th set of floater: single floater 14 hours Energyhub@Sea

#13 connection 5th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (4th set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#13 Handling of 0 mooring lines (and 0 auxiliary lines) with 5th set of floaters 0 hours Energyhub@Sea

#13 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+33 hours

#14 - #16 Towage 6th set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 68

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

#14 - #16 connection 6th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (5th set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#14 - #16 Handling of 18 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 6th set of floaters 63 hours Energyhub@Sea

#14 - #16 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+106 hours

#17 - #19 Towage 7th set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#17 - #19 connection 7th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (6th set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#17 - #19 Handling of 4 mooring lines (and 2 auxiliary lines) with 7th set of floaters 18 hours Energyhub@Sea

#17 - #19 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+61 hours

#20 - #22 Towage 8th set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#20 - #22 connection 8th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (7th set) 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#20 - #22 Handling of 8 mooring lines (and 2 auxiliary lines) with 8th set of floaters 30 hours Energyhub@Sea

#20 - #22 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+73 hours

#23 - #25 Towage 9th set of floaters 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#23 - #25 connection 9th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (8th set) 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#23 - #25 Handling of 0 mooring lines (and 4 auxiliary lines) with 9th set of floaters 12 hours Energyhub@Sea

#23 - #25 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+67 hours

#26 Towage 10th set of floaters 14 hours Energyhub@Sea

#26 connection 10th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (3rd and 4th sets) 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#26 Handling of 0 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 10 th set of floaters 9 hours Energyhub@Sea

#26 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Energyhub@Sea

+54 hours

#27 Towage 11th set of floaters (SIMOP with #26) (14 hours) Energyhub@Sea

#27 connection 11th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (6th and 7th sets) 24 hours Energyhub@Sea

#27 Handling of 0 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 11th set of floaters 9 hours Energyhub@Sea

#27 Towage empty to marshalling port (SIMOP with #26) (7 hours) Energyhub@Sea

+33 hours

#28 Towage 12th set of floaters 14 hours Logistics@Sea

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 69

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

#28 connection 12th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (1st set) 12 hours Logistics@Sea

#28 Handling of 3 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 12 th set of floaters 18 hours Logistics@Sea

#28 Towage empty to marshalling port 7 hours Logistics@Sea

+51 hours

#29 Towage 13th set of floaters (SIMOP with #28) (14 hours) Logistics@Sea

#29 connection 13th set of floaters to pre-installed floaters (9th set) 12 hours Logistics@Sea

#29 Handling of 3 mooring lines (and 3 auxiliary lines) with 13 th set of floaters 18 hours Logistics@Sea

#29 Towage empty to marshalling port (SIMOP with #28) (7 hours) Logistics@Sea

+30 hours

SUBTOTAL 839 hours 35.0 days

Rest De-installation of auxiliary lines +48 hours

Rest Learning curve +24 hours

TOTAL 911 hours 38 days

Figure 51 Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea

Conclusion: It takes around 3 months for transporting and installing the floating modules of the Energyhub@Sea
and Logistics@Sea at the offshore site of the Mediterranean Sea. Based on the data of the rigid connection from
Work Package 9, it is assumed that the floating modules can only be installed during a suitable sea state of 0.5m
wave height and calm weather. However, such a low wave height does not exist for long time windows, resulting in
extreme low work abilities. Therefore, it is suggested by the authors of this report that the offshore installation limits
of the rigid connection should be revised and optimized to higher sea levels.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 70

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.3 High level (T&I) manual – Space@Sea Mediterranean Sea configuration

The above sections conclude that it takes around 2 months for installing the anchor piles and an additional 2.5
months for transporting and installing 29 floating modules, consisting of 27 modules of Energyhub@Sea and 2
additional modules of Logistics@Sea. The installation of these two (2) island setups can be combined with the piling
operation as the total project time matches the good weather window. However, it is highly recommended to install
the rest of the island setups (Living@Sea, Farming@Sea, WEC) during the good weather period of the next year
20xx+1 (ref.5.2.1, scenario I) to reduce the amount of weather delays drastically. Below Figure 52 shows the
installation procedure in year 20xx (focus islands) and Figure 53 shows the installation procedure of 20xx+1 for the
other islands.

Figure 52 Installation setup Energyhub@Sea (blue) and Logistics@Sea (orange)

Figure 53 Installation setup other setups Living@Sea (green) and Farming@Sea (yellow)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 71

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

After installation of all floating setups, the project will be finalized with the installation of the Wave Energy
Converters (WEC) around the outside of the island and is shown in below figure.

Figure 54 installation of the WEC

Below table shows an overview on the total durations of the installation of the full island configurations of the
Mediterranean Sea. This table does not include the durations for mobilization and demobilizations of vessels.

Table 22 offshore operations project durations

Offshore operation Start date End date Project duration

Driving operation (71 piles) 01/04/20xx 06/06/20xx ± 2 months

Towage and offshore installation 07/06/20xx 31/08/20xx ± 3 months

- Energyhub@Sea (27)
- Logistics@Sea (2)

Towage and offshore installation 01/04/20xx+1 31/05/20xx+1 ± 2 months

- Living@Sea (7)
- Farming@Sea (15)

Towage and offshore installation 01/06/20xx+1 01/08/20xx+1 ± 2 months

- WEC (27)

TOTAL transport & installation time ± 9 months

The towage and offshore installation in 20xx+1 requires an extra offshore activity by removing one (1)
Logistics@Sea module in order to create space for entering the site. This means that floating module nr. 28 will be
disconnected from floating module 1 and tentatively connected to the other side of module 1 (from east to south).
Subsequently, module nr. 29 will be tentatively moved and connected to module nr. 23 (from west to south). Due to
its modularity of the floating island, this extra procedure should not form any problem.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 72

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.4 High level (T&I) Manual – North Sea

6.4.1 Marine equipment

Due to the shallow waters in the North Sea, a Jack Up Vessel (JUV) can be used for the installation of the anchor
points. DEME’s Jack up Vessel “Innovation” is suitable to perform the offshore works due its high crane capacity
(1500 mT) and large deck space. The technical leaflet is provided in Annex 4: Technical leaflet JUV Innovation
DEME

Figure 55 Jack Up Vessel Innovation (DEME)

6.4.2 Mobilization and transit

Like with HLV Orion, also JUV Innovation will be mobilized from the port of Vlissingen, the Netherlands. All
required installation equipment will be installed on deck of the vessel. In general, it takes around two (2) weeks to
make the vessel ready for execution. The same installation equipment is required as the Mediterranean sea
configuration. Due to the fact that the mobilization port is very close to the marshalling port (ref. 3) the transit days
are neglectable.

6.4.3 Load out at marshalling port and transit to offshore site

Reference is made to section 3.4 where the Port of Antwerp has been selected as marshalling port. JUV Innovation
will enter the port, jack up and load out all the required structures and leaves the port. It has been assumed that the
vessel is able to enter, jack up and leave this selected port. The time for loading out the piles on board of the vessel
has been included in the cycle time calculations. The start of the load out procedure indicates the start of the entire
installation period.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 73

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

6.4.4 Installation methodology

Figure 56 installation methodology with a jack up vessel

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 74

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Table 23 cycle times JUV Innovation with impact hammering

JUV Innovation with Impact hammering – Start date: 01/05/20xx (North Sea)

Activity Net duration (incl. 90% efficiency) Repetitions

Enter the port 5.6 hours 9

Lifting 8 piles and mooring lines 5 hours 9

Sea fastening & leaving port 5.3 hours 9

Sailing to site 7.1 hours 9

Offshore execution works 16.4 hours 71

Sailing to port 6.5 hours 9

TOTAL 60.5 days (including 1 day learning curve)

Weather down time Q50 (Figure 33) +5 days

Mobilization, transit, demobilization + 24 days (no transit)

Total Project duration 01/05/20xx – 01/08/20xx

Δ with floating installation and ± 35 days more

vibro-hammering

Amount of vessels required

- 1x Jack Up Vessel Innovation
- 1x Bubble Curtain Vessels (Noise mitigation during impact hammering)

Extra required installation equipment compared to HLV Orion

- Impact Hammer
- Piling Template (custom made)

Figure 57 high level deck lay out JUV Innovation (indicative)

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 75

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Conclusions

The following techno-economical conclusions and recommendations have been made based on the above provided
data and calculations.

1. The new driving technology “vibro-piling” has been selected as the most appropriate installation technique.
This state-of-the-art technology minimizes the amount of offshore handling which results in faster
installation time and reduces the amount of installation equipment, resulting in less investments. The
difference in project duration is approximately two (2) weeks.

2. A Heavy Lift Vessel (HLV) has been selected as the most appropriate vessel for driving the anchor piles in
the seabed of the Mediterranean Sea. This type of vessel has a faster installation time and minimizes the
amount of vessel in the field to only one (1). Compared to an Offshore Construction Vessel, this vessel type
is approx. 20 days faster in installation. The total cost for both approaches is similar in favor of HLV.

3. For towage and offshore installation, it has been concluded that three anchor handling (3) tugs and one (1)
offshore construction vessel is required. It takes around 3 months for towing and installing the floating
modules of Energyhub@Sea and Logistics@Sea. The long duration for offshore installation is caused by the
very low work abilities by connection the floaters to each other. The towage and offshore installation of the
full configuration is approx. 7 months.

4. Applying the rigid connection between the floaters generates a large amount of weather delays due to its
limited sea state limit. It is recommended to WP9 to re-consider the offshore installation limit of 0.5m wave
height. A more flexible connection will reduce the amount of weather delays significantly and reduces the
total cost of installation.

5. Based on conclusion nr.4 it has been decided to perform as much as possible triple towage, which means
that three (3) floating modules will be connected to each other at the marshalling port. This improves the
installation time and reduces the weather delays and it associated costs.

6. The transport and installation of the full island configuration of the Mediterranean Sea, consisting of the
pile & mooring line installation and towage & offshore installation of the floating module, takes
approximately 11 months including the mobilization and demobilization. Due to this long period of transport
& installation, it is highly appreciated to consider planning scenario I, which divides the offshore works over
two (2) years during the good weather windows.

7. The transport and installation of the North Sea configuration implies a Jack up Vessel due to its shallow
waters and impact hammering due to its rougher soil type. This will result in longer installation times and
more cost. It takes 35 days more for installing the anchor piles compared to HLV Orion with vibro-
hammering.

8. It is recommended to use the 45 by 45m configurations in order to keep the island modular. Applying the 90
by 90m configurations require larger vessels and limits the amount of (nearby) marshalling ports which
makes the project less flexible during T&I and O&M.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 76

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Annex

Annex 1: Installation manual HLV Orion with impact hammering

1 HLV Orion leaves the marshalling port after loading

foundations on deck and sails to offshore site

2 Arriving at the offshore site, HLV Orion manoeuvres

on dynamic positioning to its first installation
location. The main crane will be unseafastened and
the deck is prepared for its first installation activity.

3 The main crane of the HLV lifts off the Piling

Template (PT) and lowers it down on the seabed.
ROV’s will assist this operation by providing real-
time video.
Depending on the condition of the seabed, the
template will level itself out in order to be stable and
to ensure the verticality of the driven pile.

4 The main crane will upend the piles from its

horizontal position by using an internal lifting tool
and upending cradle.
After upending, the pile will be moved sideward and
lowered down to the seabed

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 77

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

5 The foundation pile will be lowered down through the

sleeve of the PT until it touches the seabed.
The pile will softly penetrate the seabed a few meters
due its own weight.
The PT sleeve will clamp the pile to ensure it remains
at place during procedure 6. The PT can adjust the
inclination of the pile if needed.

6 The internal lifting tool will release its grip and will
be retrieved by the main crane on deck. The tool will
be disconnected and the impact hammer will be
connected.
The hammer will be lowered down to the pile

7 The impact hammer will connect with the top part of

the pile and starts its driving operation.
Once the impact hammer reaches the PT, the sleeve
will open automatically to ensure the pile can be
driven to final depth without the PT blocking the
operation.
The piles will be driven below the seabed. No pile
stick up is required.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 78

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

8 Once the pile is driven into the seabed, the impact

hammer will be disconnected and retrieved back on
deck
The piling template will be retrieved back on deck.

9 After retrieving the PT, the remaining part of the

750m long catenary line will be lowered down as
preparation for procedure 10.

10 Once the full catenary line has been winched down in

the water, HLV Orion will pull the catenary line with
heavy force because the first part of the catenary (so
called inverse catenary) is driven in the seabed.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 79

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

11 At final position, 750m away from the anchor point,

HLV Orion will lower down the catenary line on the
seabed and installs a buoy system to mark its position
for the connection with the floating modules.

12 HLV Orion moves to the next location and starts

again with procedure nr. 1.

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 80

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Annex 2: T&I schedule with HLV Orion

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 81

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Annex 3: T&I schedule with OCV

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 82

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Annex 4: Technical leaflet JUV Innovation DEME

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 83

774253 Space@Sea D5.1
D5.1 T&I Manual

Annex 5: Technical leaflet HLV Orion DEME

Version 4.0 19-02-2021 84