Fit-Up Solutions – Latest Practice

Denise Smiles
 Summary
Good fit-up of pipes – what is it and why it is
necessary?
Defining terms – pipe end geometry
Methods for achieving better fit up
Application to SCR and fatigue senstive pipes
Application to flowlines
Conclusions
 Pipe end geometry

Pipe End Example Calliper 2-D Geometry in

Geometry Measurements Laser
(no common datum) Measurement Data
 Choice – Vernier Calliper
No Diameter

If you want this 1 193.4

2 193.9
3 194.1
4 193.8

Use this

Don’t expect to know the pipe shape!

 Choice – Laser Tool
If you want to fit pipes together

Use this

Pipe shape is known

Platform Geometry
 Riser facts
Risers are:
Dynamic structures and hence fatigue sensitive
One of the most challenging aspects of deepwater development
Failure would cause pollution problems
Issues the riser has to deal with:
Waves
Currents more than 1 knot
Winds Hurricane Katrina decreased the expected life of risers that were
affected
Critical regions:
Flexjoint attachment to floating vessel
Touchdown region as riser connects with sea bed
 Automatic Welding
Automatic
Welding is used
routinely
Better control over
parameters
improves welding
reliablity
HiLo is one of the
key factors
Cut-outs are a
significant expense
 Internal Pipe Joint Mismatch (HiLo)
Internal HiLo mismatch
must be less than 0.5
mm

4
End Matching – pick pipe and
rotate to fit
 Rotate to fit
Definition of the
Rotation Mark location
with respect to the
Free Pipe (right)
 If pipes are not Rotation
rotated exactly
right
HiLo increases
dramatically

Sweet
HiLo

spot

Rotation
 Examples of pipe fit up software

Bad fit up, shapes do Good fit up, shapes

not match match
 Graphical Explanation of
reordering requirements
100
Pipes Requiring
Reordering (%)

80
60
40
20
0
1.5 1 0.7 0.5
HiLo Requirement (mm)
OMS Software “Best Possible” Fit
OMS Fit Up Software provides users with a “best
possible” fit up based on a perfect rotation and
alignment of a pipe
Perfect alignment and perfect rotation will not
be achieved all of the time
The next slide shows how alignment and
rotation will affect the HiLo achieved
 Flowline Solutions
OMS has created solutions for Flowlines
HiLo tolerances are relaxed compared to SCR’s
Fabrications efficiencies can be highly cost
effective
Solutions are designed to be as easy to
implement as possible
Results are faster and cheaper production
 What to expect
A typical flowline project will have fit up
requirements of:
Internal HiLo = 1 mm
External HiLo = 2 mm
Such a HiLo requirement would be expected to
result in fit up problems in around 5 – 10% of
the pipes
Any problem pipes would be recycled back into
the firing line sequence at any time
 Obtaining a better fit-up
If the HiLo requirement are lowered – i.e. for a
more accurate fit up then some changes to the
fit up procedure will have to be made
Achieving a lower HiLo becomes harder the
lower the HiLo requirement
Even small HiLo reductions can result in many
more pipes that need reordering
Larger reductions will result in all pipes needing
to be reordered
 Firing Line Welding Stations and AUT etc
Implementation

Beveling
Ready rack
Sorting rack or ‘buffer area’ in
shed
the pipe yard
Unloading rack

Software used when pipes are

Loader - full pulled from stack
Loader - empty Sorting rack / buffer area Pipes are rolled out on the
sorting rack and checked
Pipe Yard Software
used here All pipes delivered to firing
Pipe stacks contain measured
line can be used
pipes awaiting welding
in sequence
 Summary
Management of fit up can be achieved for any
HiLo ID (0.5 mm to 1.0 mm) or OD (1-3 mm)
Problem fit-ups that would normally slow
production can be managed so that they rarely
occur
Cost savings generally pay for the solution
OMS have a range of solutions that enable any
firing line fit up scenario to be improved
Case Study No 1. 20” UOE SCR for Gulf of
Mexico, SLAY – Shell Amberjack/Allseas
Critical pipe lay for project
0.5 mm HiLo requirements
UOE pipe with significant peaking, shape and
size variations
Failed attempt by calliper measurements
Requirement to develop solution with Shell
1 SCR, 1 Spare SCR and contingency planning
 Measurement of pipes
Pipes measured
in New Iberia
Marks on pipe
from failed
attempt to
measure using
calipers
UOE Shape problems

UOE pipes often have

peaking problems near
long seam
This makes it difficult
for these pipes to be
fitted together
 Methodology
Arrange pipes in sequence provided by OMS
Mark one end of each pipe with the rotation
datum mark
When welding pipes rotate new pipe to align
datum with long seam of the existing pipe
Spacer to align
Check HiLo is within specification and weld
Small 20 mm sections allowed to have 0.7 mm
HiLo
Marking datum and rotating to fit
 System proven during pipe lay
Pipes were welded into double joints then put
into Main Line for SLaying
All HiLo’s were found to be in specified
tolerance of 0.5 mm for fatigue critical sections
and 0.7 mm for small regions around the girth of
the pipe
Inspector observed that fit-ups were so good
that the pipes were brought together and
needed no adjustment before welding
 Conclusion – Case
study 1
Difficult SCR was built to specification
All pipes welded in sequence without
requirement for any contingency pipe to be
used
All fit ups within the HiLo requirement
Project manager stated that he would repeat
the methodology the next time
 Case Study No 2. 8” and 10”
Seamless Pipe for spoolbase welding
1 x 8” SCR
1 x 10” SCR
Cold end sized pipes
No counterboring
HiLo to be achieved by:
Specific architecture (matching ends)
Rotation of pipes (to best fit angle)
Specific Pipe Ordering
Pipes are put
together in a specific
order to create the
SCR architecture
A significant
improvement in Fit
Up is achieved by
this specific odering
of the pipes
Client reported
excellent fit up of
pipes for this project
 Fit up table provided to client

Pipe Free (mm)

Tolerance (mm)

Tolerance (mm)
OD Max Hi/Lo

OD Min Hi/Lo
Joint Number

ID Max Hi/Lo
Weld Number

Hi/Lo (mm)

ID Rotation
SCR ID Min
Pipe Fixed

Negative
Rotation

Rotation
Positive
(mm)

(mm)

(mm)

(mm)

(mm)
1 ATP-GR3.01 03025_A 03023_A 0.76 0.21 106 0.93 0.39 -26 33
2 ATP-GR3.02 03023_B 01022_B 0.37 0.37 118 0.86 0.53 N/A N/A
3 ATP-GR3.03 01022_A 01005_A 0.57 0.15 -267 0.61 0.37 -37 29
4 ATP-GR3.04 01005_B 01148_B 0.61 0.13 172 0.64 0.38 -30 36
5 ATP-GR3.05 01148_A 01064_A 0.89 0.15 -87 0.74 0.18 -23 16
6 ATP-GR3.06 01064_B 01204_A 0.78 0.14 -154 0.53 0.36 -24 16
7 ATP-GR3.07 01204_B 01207_A 0.68 0.17 -236 0.71 0.30 -13 10
8 ATP-GR3.08 01207_B 01239_B 0.75 0.18 158 0.76 0.40 -21 15
9 ATP-GR3.09 01239_A 01303_B 0.98 0.18 -249 0.84 0.46 -26 17
10 ATP-GR3.10 01303_A 01224_A 0.82 0.16 314 1.05 0.44 -15 9
11 ATP-GR3.11 01224_B 01234_A 0.93 0.16 -186 0.64 0.22 -13 10
12 ATP-GR3.12 01234_B 01231_B 0.87 0.20 172 0.85 0.43 -10 13
13 ATP-GR3.13 01231_A 01320_B 0.99 0.16 156 0.67 0.26 -14 9
14 ATP-GR3.14 01320_A 01449_A 0.75 0.16 192 0.73 0.38 -20 14
15 ATP-GR3.15 01449_B 01297_A 0.89 0.13 -7 0.53 0.30 -10 14
 Conclusions – Case Study 2
Efficient measurement of pipes
Cold end sized pipes give good fit up but not
good enough for SCR
Rotation gave better fit but still not good
enough
Unique string build gave best result
SCR build successfully and efficiently
 Case Study No 3. Seamless pipe in Brasil,
Spoolbase BC10/TU/P56 – Petrobras/Subsea7
Requirement for ID HiLo of 1.0 mm and OD HiLo
of 2.0 mm
Pipes measured offline
Pipes loaded onto sorting rack
Sequencing of pipes in software
Pipes put into ready rack for firing line in
sequence and with rotation datums marked
 Measurement
Pipes are delivered to racks for OMS to measure
 Operating the system on the
spoolbase

Pipe sorting Sequenced pipes

 OMS Tried and Tested Solution
Rotation of pipes to find the best ID and OD fit provides a huge
benefit in the firing line
The majority of pipes can be used directly
Problem pipes are identified before fit-up at the welding station
A method of dealing with problem fit ups can be implemented in
various locations (examples are provided below)
The impact on logistics/pipe handling is minimal
Benefits are very significant, due to avoidance of fit-up issues
and avoiding disruption due to removal of bad pipes at a welding
station or underaking remedial work in the firing line
 Conclusions – Case study 3
Most pipes can be welded directly (using rotation)
A small proportion need to be held back or diverted
There are several schemes to achieve this
OMS will endeavour to find the optimal solution for
client in terms of:
Minimised Logistics
Ease of implementation in a given yard/spoolbase scenario
Lowest cost/effort in fabricating the strings/stalks overall
 Overall Conclusions
Deliver solutions that achieve the best possible fit-up of
pipes for client – flowline or SCR
Philosophy:
Measure + Analysis or Visualisation Software = Best
Fit-up via End Matching or Counterboring
Solution can be tailored to meet client needs
Best fit-up solution using true pipe geometry
Minimise overall logistics to achieve best result
Up-front management of problems
Packages includes operators or operator training