Cathodic Protection Strategies for FPSOs

Jim Britton
Deepwater Corrosion Services Inc.
Houston, TX.

ABSTRACT
FPSO (Floating Production Storage & Offloading) structures present some interesting C.P. challenges. Are
they ships or floating production platforms? Is impressed current the way to go? How do we handle the
ballast tanks? What about the mooring systems? Can the systems last 25 years without dry dock
maintenance? These and a number of other questions are addressed.
INTRODUCTION
FPSOs generally fall into two categories; new build vessels and conversions. There is no doubt
however in either case that the end result still looks like a ship (Figs. 1 & 2). When considering cathodic
protection strategy however, it is not looks that should be paramount in the decision, rather operability and
function over the intended life cycle.
The shipping world is comfortable with impressed current C.P systems for the hull. This
reasoning is well justified when one considers the operation and function of a tanker, for example.
Impressed current systems offer a number of advantages:

Low anode profile on hull reduces drag; saves fuel thus reduces operational cost.
Small number of anode sites makes dry dock maintenance relatively straightforward. Reduces
welding on the hull exterior.
The ability of the system to be potentially controlled, optimizes system performance in various
geographical areas, particularly from seawater to brackish or river water conditions.
Familiarity of ship builders with the systems gives a generally lower initial installed cost.
Classing agencies are very familiar with systems, and have pre-approved many designs.

The operation and function of an FPSO varies significantly from an oceangoing tanker in the following
areas:

It is moored in one offshore location for protracted periods of time.

Regular dry-docking is not possible.
There are a number of appurtenances, risers, umbilical, mooring lines and turret structures that
may be in close proximity to the hull.

These differences should be considered when developing a long term C.P. strategy. This may make the use
of sacrificial anode systems more attractive.

-1-

HULL SYSTEM COMPARISONS

Overview of Corrosion Control
Coatings As with many other offshore structures the primary corrosion control method is the
coating applied to the hull, this is backed up by a cathodic protection system that takes care of exposed
steel at coating defects. When designing the C.P. system, it is necessary to predict the efficiency of the
coating system both initially and at the end of life. Given that regular ocean-going vessels are required to
be dry-docked at intervals not exceeding 5 years, there is always an opportunity to repair or re-coat the hull
during the ships life, thus the coating degradation has only to be considered over this time span. An FPSO
on the other hand may be offshore for 15+ years. This will require a re-evaluation of the coating
performance at the end of this period and appropriate re-sizing of the cathodic protection system current
capacity to deal with the increased bare steel area.
Special attention must be paid to the compatibility of the coating system with cathodic protection,
this is particularly true of impressed current systems that will generate higher negative potential values at
the edges of the dielectric shields associated with hull mounted anodes.
Impressed Current C.P Many vessels that are candidate for conversion to FPSO service are fitted
with hull mounted impressed current systems. For this reason most operators want to use the same system
to protect the vessel in its new role. If this is the proposed strategy the following areas must be carefully
considered to avoid problems later on in the life.
Control Electrode Location The control reference electrode(s) monitor the potential of the hull at
the area where they are located, this signal monitored by the controller built into the transformer rectifier
power supply and the output current from the anode systems is adjusted to maintain the potential of the hull
within an acceptable range. On a regular ship system, this will usually be somewhat close to the anode
locations (Fig. 3). This site selection is based on the desire to minimize the risk of coating damage at areas
where the potential is expected to be more negative. When other subsea structures are introduced,
particularly turret structures and risers, two problems can (and frequently do) arise;
1.

Due to the intricate nature of the turret structure (Fig. 4) and the risers that pass through it,
there may be problems of shielding that make it difficult for the impressed current system to
adequately polarize the annular spaces. This is usually addressed by locating sacrificial
anodes on some areas of the turret structure. Because the turret and the hull are electrically
bonded, this can cause the sacrificial anodes to also provide protective current to the hull.
The control reference electrode may then sense protected potentials and will not allow the
impressed current system to activate. This can lead to early consumption of the small
sacrificial anodes, accompanied by subsequent under protection of critical areas.

2.

The addition of dynamic riser components and the creation of more highly stressed joints
associated with their support structures may shift the priority of where high potentials or
under protected potentials are unacceptable. The standard electrode locations may not lend
this degree of flexibility.

It is recommended that additional reference electrodes are located at these critical areas with a facility to
have one of them control the system if required. Existing electrodes can be used for monitoring rather than
control. It is also a good idea to use dual element reference electrodes (Fig. 5) the standard electrodes
provided are normally not expected to last 15 20 years. The dual element electrodes combine accuracy of
silver/silver chloride sw (Ag/AgCl) with the long-term reliability of Zinc sw (Zn).
Anode Design Hull mounted impressed current anodes have three major critical components.
1.
2.
3.

The anode to supply cable connection and hull penetration.

The dielectric shielding system.
The active anode element and mounting.

-2-

The most important area here is the dielectric shielding system (Fig. 6). This is applied to the area
of the hull immediately behind and adjacent to the active anode element. In most systems this consists of
two areas, a primary and secondary shield. The primary shield is usually a fiberglass or thermoplastic sheet
that goes under the anode and extends about 1-2 feet (30 60 cm.) from the anode element in all directions.
The shield is often mechanically fastened to the hull and a sealing/bonding compound introduced between
the shield and the coated hull surface. The secondary shield is usually an area of high build epoxy or
mastic coating that extends an additional distance 3-4 feet (90 120 cm.) beyond the primary shield. The
integrity of this shield is critical if the CP system is to distribute protective current to all areas of the hull.
Any damage to the shield will result in unacceptably high potentials on the exposed hull (if the anode is
operated anywhere close to its rated current). This normally results in hydrogen evolution at the steel hull
surface, which causes progressive disbondment failure of the shield to the point where the anode can no
longer be operated. This area is virtually always in need of maintenance during 5 yearly dry dockings.
Some systems have been observed where only a coating is used for both primary and secondary shield
areas, varying only in applied thickness between the two sites, these systems should not be used.
Anode elements can usually be designed to last as long as required, so the protracted design life
may not be a problem provided that the dielectric shield holds up. Problems can however arise, thus it is
advisable to have the anode elements easily diver replaceable. While most manufacturers claim to have
this facility, the writer is not aware of a successful offshore in-situ anode replacement having ever been
completed.
Stray Current Interference - Whenever impressed current is used offshore it is important to be
aware of potential interference sites. In certain instances, cathodic protection currents can be picked up
inductively on steel surfaces and subsequently discharged back through the seawater to another part of the
structure. At the point of discharge localized corrosion can result. In order for this to occur the affected
structure must be within the field gradient of the anode, and must be either electrically isolated or be
connected through a high resistance path to the main cathodically protected structure. A good example of
this is pipelines associated with fixed platforms, location of impressed current anodes must be such that the
isolated pipelines do not lie within the close field of the anodes, otherwise there is a risk of current jumping
from the pipeline riser to clamps attached to the structure. On an FPSO, this risk may exist on mooring
components close to the hull, or on mechanical couplings associated with the risers within the turret
structure. Modeling of anticipated voltage gradients at maximum rated anode output will facilitate
prediction of potential problems.
Sacrificial Anodes If the vessel is a new build, a life cycle economic comparison will almost
certainly favor the use of galvanic anodes over impressed current (Fig. 7). There are a number of reasons
for this the main ones being:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Ability to confidently design for 20 year + life.

No maintenance required.
Very high reliability.
No modifications on hull interior, and no hull penetrations.
Zero risk of interference.
Compatibility with other CP systems on subsea equipment.
Lower overall life cycle cost.

Anodes selected are normally platform-sized anodes 350 500 lb. (160 230 Kg.) modified for flush
mounting. Aluminum alloys are preferred based on higher efficiency coupled with lighter weight.
Retrofit Systems With approximately 70 FPSOs currently in operation or under construction
worldwide, there are inevitably some vessels that require CP retrofits. One such FSU vessel operating
offshore West Africa is being studied for application of a new type of impressed current retrofit system.
The original sacrificial anodes are virtually depleted, and offshore replacement of the depleted system
would be cost prohibitive due to the extended amount of diving activity required. Economic studies of
various types of retrofit system have shown the remote buoyant anode to be the most favorable. . The

-3-

anode sleds will sit on the seabed and the feed cables will be deployed in a Lazy S configuration. The
FSU in question is spread moored and is thus particularly suited to this strategy. The advantages of this
system are very obvious:

Anodes (2) are at a remote location, and thus current distribution can be expected to be
very uniform over all the protected areas of the vessel and its appurtenances.
There is no risk of stray current interference with remote anodes, no locally high voltage
gradients to deal with.
Installation can be accomplished in one or two days, using only ROV support.
Only two such sleds (400 Amperes each) are required.

Installation is planned for 2003. A typical buoyant sled of the type to be used is shown Fig. 8.
Recommended Strategy
For any vessel whether new-build or conversion, the recommendation would have to be for a
sacrificial anode system if the expected on station life is greater than 10 years. This recommendation will
be supported by both economic and reliability studies. For depleted systems requiring offshore retrofit the
recommendation will usually be to deploy impressed current, if the system is allowed to weather vane
360 degrees around a turret, a deep suspended system would almost certainly be the most cost effective. If
full 360-degree rotation is limited, or the vessel has a spread mooring, then the seabed-deployed system
will usually be the best option. We can see little if any justification for keeping a close fitted impressed
current system on what is essentially a floating production system.
TANKS
On an FPSO, tanks can be in a variety of different services including, seawater ballast, void,
produced water storage and wet and dry oil storage. As with other parts of the system, the issue is again the
longer life requirement, and the difficulty of entering the tanks for inspection and maintenance with the
vessel operational. The use of dehumidification systems is growing for protection of void tanks, for the
remainder coatings and cathodic protection are the norm.
Zinc or Aluminum Anodes? Our company was recently engaged in the offshore retrofit of an
FPSO tank that was in produced water service; temperatures were around 160F (70C). The tank coating
system was fairly badly degraded and the anodes in the tanks were heavily depleted. There is some
concern using Aluminum anodes in certain areas of tanks due to the risk of sparking if the anodes fall off,
zinc is preferred. In this case the only choice was aluminum, the zinc anodes would have probably
passivated in these tank fluids. Indeed the aluminum anodes had to be carefully alloyed (Table.1) to
optimize their galvanic capacity that tends to fall off rapidly with increased service temperature above
about 140F (60C). The anodes were deployed on rack type structures (Fig. 9) that were assembled inside
the tank and attached with mechanical connections; this was necessary due to the limited access and the
inability to perform hot work with the vessel in service. In addition two permanent reference electrodes
were installed to facilitate ease of monitoring of the system.
Caution Whenever a retrofit is planned inside a tank with a degraded coating, it is important to
consider the rate of hydrogen build-up in the tank from the corroding anodes. This is a particular risk for
tanks that have a small ratio of void space to filled space, tanks that are often filled and emptied and tanks
with limited or restricted venting. Before embarking on such a project calculate the volume of hydrogen
that will be discharged during the worst case, i.e. when tank is being quickly refilled after having been
empty. If the potential hydrogen concentration approaches the lower explosive limit, the use of soft
coatings should be investigated, this will reduce current demand and hence the volume of hydrogen
produced. This was not a problem on the aforementioned tanks, which never exceeded 75% of fill.
Monitors The use of permanent reference electrodes makes a lot of sense. In ballast tanks, the
most reliable electrode is a zinc sw. electrode. A low cost field installable electrode system has been
developed for this purpose. Electrodes can be easily routed in the tanks and may be built to length

-4-

offshore. (Fig.10) Routing through a deck penetration allows the tanks to be monitored with no hatch
removal or tank entry required.
MOORING SYSTEMS
General
Most mooring systems for FPSOs comprise of an upper chain section that may include some
jewelry to control the catenary angle. This is usually connected to a wire rope taut catenary section that
covers the majority of the water column. A further section of chain is often used to connect the taut
catenary to the anchoring device. Fairleads or bending shoes are usually attached to the turret structures to
control the attitude of the mooring lines.
Pitfalls The following section identifies some areas where we have been asked to investigate
corrosion problems, and also contains recommendations to ensure that the moorings are not compromised
through corrosion damage.
Fairleads The fairleads are designed to allow movement, and have a number of mixed materials
in the bearings and swivels. The main caution is to ensure that the fairleads are electrically continuous with
the structure to which they are attached, if this is not checked, anodes provided on the cheek plates of the
fairleads may prematurely consume due to current losses to the chain, after this localized corrosion may
result in the bearing areas. If properly grounded with a flexible cable jumper, the turret or hull CP system
can accommodate current losses to the chains while maintaining protection on the fairlead components.
Chain Connectors Like the fairleads, the connectors between chains and rope sections have
various mixed metallurgy that can result in localized galvanic attack (often on chain links adjacent to the
connector plates). It is therefore important to ensure that an adequate weight of anode material is attached
directly to the connector assembly, and that there are no electrically isolated components. Jumper wires
should be used across all mechanical joints. A rule of thumb is to allow for current drain to approximately
100 feet (30 M), of chain in each direction.
Chains Chains are notoriously difficult to cathodically protect, and are therefore normally
provided with a corrosion allowance. The biggest problem is that they drain some current from the CP
systems on other components to which they are attached. It is important to allow for this drain by
providing additional anode weight.
Wire Ropes The large diameter spiral strand rope commonly used will normally have its own
corrosion protection scheme that may include blocking compounds, sheaths, sacrificial anode strands and
galvanic coatings on the strands. It is preferable to use sheathed rope over non-sheathed and to use Zn/Al
alloyed coatings on the strands rather than just galvanize. Always ensure that there is adequate anode
material, and a good quality coating on the wire rope connectors.
SUMMARY
Day One Deployment - From a cathodic protection standpoint, it is wise to think of FPSOs as
floating production structures rather than ships. With this guideline, the cathodic protection system can be
designed in much the same way as one would approach a Tension Leg Platform (TLP) or a SPAR type
structure. These structures are somewhat more complex than the average FPSO, but have many of the
same attributes on a larger scale. Unless there are very good reasons why impressed current should be
used, we recommend sacrificial anodes as the most reliable and cost effective long term option.
It is important to ensure that there is electrical continuity through various mechanically connected
components, and that all systems are compatibly designed.
Retrofit In the event that a system needs to be replaced offshore, we would recommend
consideration of impressed current deployed remotely from the hull.

-5-

FIGURES & TABLES

Element
Indium
Iron
Copper
Silicon
Zinc
Others Each
Aluminum

Normal Range Wt. %

0.010 0.020
0.09 Max
0.004 Max
0.10
4.75 5.75
0.02 Max
Remainder

Modified Range Wt. %

0.016 0.025
0.06 Max
0.003 Max
0.12
4.75 5.25
0.02 Max
Remainder

Table 1. AlZnIn Chemical Composition Modification for Produced Water Service

-6-

Figure 1. Typical FPSO Turret Moored

Figure 2. Typical FPSO Spread Moored

(Photo Courtesy of Oceaneering Production Systems Inc.)

-7-

Figure 3. Typical Ship ICCP Layout

(Courtesy www.cathelco.co.uk)

Figure 4. Typical FPSO Turret Detail

(Courtesy Statoil)

-8-

Figure 5. Permanent Dual Element Reference Electrode

Figure 6. Typical Hull Mounted ICCP Anode Primary Dielectric Shield

-9-

Figure 7. Shells BONGA Hull Protected With AlZnIn Sacrificial Anodes

Figure 8. Buoyant Anode Sled (400 Ampere) Shown With Cable Dispensing Hopper

- 10 -

Figure 9. Retrofit Anode Racks Inside a FPSO Produced Water Tank

- 11 -