 Research
 Open access
 Published:
FPSO/LNG hawser system lifetime assessment by Gaidai multivariate risk assessment method
Energy Informatics volume 7, Article number: 51 (2024)
Abstract
Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) unit being an offshore vessel, storing and producing crude oil, prior to crude oil being transported by accompanying shuttle tanker. Critical mooring/hawser strains during offloading operation have to be accurately predicted, in order to maintain operational safety and reliability. During certain types of offloading, excessive hawser tensions may occur, causing operational risks. Current study examines FPSO vessel’s dynamic reactions to hydrodynamic waveinduced loads, given realistic in situ environmental conditions, utilizing the AQWA software package. Current study advocates novel multidimensional spatiotemporal risks assessment approach, that is particularly well suited for large dataset analysis, based on numerical simulations (or measurements). Advocated multivariate reliability methodology may be useful for a variety of marine and offshore systems that must endure severe environmental stressors during their intended operational lifespan. Methodology, presented in this study provides advanced capability to efficiently, yet accurately evaluate dynamic system failure, hazard and damage risks, given representative dynamic record of multidimensional system’s intercorrelated critical components. Gaidai risk assessment method being novel dynamic multidimensional system’s lifetime assessment methodology. In order to validate and benchmark Gaidai risk assessment method, in this study it was applied to FPSO and potentially LNG (i.e., Liquid Natural Gas) vessels dynamics. Major advantage of the advocated approach is that there are no existing alternative risk assessment methods, able to tackle unlimited number of system’s dimensions. Accurate multidimensional risk assessment had been carried out, based on numerically simulated data, partially verified by available laboratory experiments. Confidence intervals had been given for predicted dynamic highdimensional system risk levels.
Introduction
One of the most widely used technologies at the moment for exploring offshore oil and gas potential is FPSO technology. This study places a particular emphasis on numerical analysis of critical hawser tensions. Since offloading operations constitute essential part of oil and gas exploration and production process, mooring/hawser systems play significant role in the overall FPSO design. Tandem offloading being popular method, suitable for offshore deepwater areas. However, it was shown that SBS (i.e., SideBySide) offloading being more feasible, costefficient, as compared with tandem offloading for FPSOs operating for example in Bohai Bay offshore area, which being main focus of the current study.
During SBS offloading operations, it’s necessary to consider how 2 vessels move relative to each other, accounting for fenders’ response forces, along with tensions in the mooring hawsers. Insitu ecology might suffer potential damage and there could be considerable financial losses, if the SBS offloading system malfunctions in a difficult climate. Hawser mooring tensions, which are our primary reliability concern here, hence being the focus of this study, (Stanisic et al. 2018). Numerous researches on hydrodynamic interactions between 2 nearby floating objects had been conducted within recent decades, for more FPSO accident analysis details, (Cho et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2022). Utilizing Wigelytype model, the authors (Bhardwaj et al. 2021) have evaluated the second order pressures and moment for the SBS arrangement. In (Bhardwaj et al. 2022) authors used a timedomain numerical modeling, to assess hydrodynamic interactions of an LNGFPSO with its moored LNG (i.e., Liquid Natural Gas) carrier. In (Kashiwagi et al. 2005; Kim et al. 2003) authors focused on the hydrodynamic reactions between the driving LNGFPSO along with its SBS positioned LNG carriers by using linear 3D (i.e., 3Dimensional) potential theory. In (Hagen et al. 2015; Hong et al. 2005) reliability approach has been utilized, to study FPSO offloading operations, while in Zhang et al. 2016a; Zhang et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2023) weakest failure/hazard/damage modes were studied for insitu SBS offloading operations. For recent research on excessive mooring and hawser FPSO tensions include following studies, (Buchner et al. 2001). In this work, the offloading process between the FPSO and its ST (shuttle tanker) was accurately numerically modelled utilizing FEM (i.e., Finite Element Method) AQWA software, (AQWA user’s manual 2013; AQWA theory manual 2013).
Note that aforementioned methods could not handle multidimensional risk assessment problems for SBS dynamic offloading and mooring system. Each hawser is essential for operational safety because of the unique features of the SBS offloading process. Due to the linked dynamic mooring system’s complexity along with high dimensionality, new, precise, and reliable methods are needed throughout the SBS offloading process. Any hawser failure might have detrimental effects on the environment in addition to monetary losses. In order to handle all hawser concurrently during SBS offloading operations, the authors have created a unique approach. Applying a unique multidimensional risk assessment approach to the complicated SBS offloading processes of the FPSO and ST under actual insitu environmental circumstances was the main goal of this work. To tackle various mechanical nonlinear effects associated with FPSO hawser mooring/hawser line tensions, without any reductions beyond those already present in numerical models, this research has concentrated on utilizing a simple yet highly applicable enhanced numerical MC (i.e., Monte Carlo) based technique, (Naciri et al. 2007). Major engineering benefit of the advocated MCbased approach, being that there are no existing alternative matching reliability methods, able of tackling large number of dynamic system’s components/dimensions. The reliability evaluation approach for SBS offloading FPSO mooring system, which is based on identifying the weakest failure mechanism, refer to Zhang et al. 2016b.
For experimental study on SBS offloading operations of FSRU, LNGC vessels, see (Failed 2012). For experimental investigations on FLNG connection system’s dynamic response, during SBS offloading operations see (Zhao et al. 2017). For experimental investigations on influence of liquids inside FLNG tanks subjected to wave loads during SBS offloading operation, see (Vieira et al. 2018; Wang et al. 2012). For contemporary practices and relevant research directions within hydrodynamics for FLNGSBS offloading, see (Zhao et al. 2018a). For hydrodynamics aspects of conceptual FLNG system in SBS offloading operations, see (Jin et al. 2019).
Figure 1 provides schematic flow diagram for the MCbased multivariate system reliability analysis.
Wave statistics
The insitu wave scatter diagram in the Bohai Bay (also called Bohai Sea) region (within potential FPSO area of operations) had been obtained, using satellitebased insitu areal wave statistics, (Global wave statistics (2024); OCIMF 1994). Annuallyaveraged spatial PDF (i.e., Probability Density Function) of wave heights, and associated wave periods within the Bohai Sea in situ planned operational area, (Lv et al. 2014) had been used to produce relevant load case scenarios for MC simulations. For each insitu environmental seastate \(\left({H}_{s},{T}_{p}\right)\), corresponding environmental conditions have been used to identify relevant environmental seastates, assuming for simplicity headwind’s and wave’s 180° direction, as in Fig. 2.
In the next section numerical modelling details will be presented.
Numerical modeling of SBS operation of FPSO next to its SBS ST
Nonlinear impacts between the time and frequencydomains have been combined using the FEM software programme AQWA to precisely evaluate vessel movements, according to recommended practices, (DNVRP DNV 2010; Veritas 2012, 2011; Design API 2005). The main FPSO parameters, along with its ST are shown in Table 1. Figure 3 left shows the SBS offloading system and the multipoint an FPSO mooring system.
Hawser lines arrangement presented in Fig. 3 left. Figure 3 right schematically illustrates the connected panel concept for FPSO, positioned next to its ST. As this study was focused on a general applicability of the advocated lifetime assessment methodology, only few most critical load cases, corresponding to particular sea states, within insitu scatter diagram, had been taken into consideration in MC simulation. The significant waveheight range has been selected to be between 1.5 m and 2.5 m, with 4 random seeds calculated for each significant waveheight.
Experimental validation notes
Experimental setup for ST model next to its FPSO in the laboratory tank, with fitted SBS hawser system, has been described in more detail in Xu et al. (2023). While being activated by regular waves of various insitu frequencies, vessel RAO (i.e., Response Amplitude Operator) of 2 vessels had been experimentally measured. The motion RAOs of the FPSO estimated, using software package AQWA and associated experimental data had been compared, (Xu et al. 2019, 2023; Balakrishna et al. 2022); AQWA numerical results had been found to be in quite good agreement with available experimental dataset, the latter acted as software package AQWA partial validation. CFD (i.e., Computational fluid dynamics), software tools like ANSYS Fluent had been utilized to estimate currentrelated force coefficients, see (Fan et al. 2014). Ten hawsers (H_{1},…, H_{10}), as shown in Fig. 3, constitute SBS hawser system. These contained 110 mm diameter nylon ropes. Figure 4 illustrates loadextension curve for the nylon rope.
Proper friction model for nylon ropes may account for inner friction effects, contributing to fatigue—the latter, however, was beyond the scope of this study.
Gaidai risk assessment method
This section briefly presents methodology, suitable for LTD (i.e., Life Time Distribution) estimation, suitable for complex environmental or energy dynamic systems, given multiple hazard/failure/risk modes, active during entire predesigned operational time. When hazard/failure thresholds are selected, successive time spans (i.e., lifetimes) between data points show crossings of the relevant hazard/failure threshold. These crossings are represented as ’s, which show the sequential life durations \({L}_{i}\) of the dynamic, where \(i=\text{1,2},\dots\), multidimensional FPSO vessel system. Thus, L, which represents the lifespan of a dynamic system, being a random variable. In for instance, modern engineering risk assessment approaches do not necessarily provide readily applied solutions to evaluate the LTD of complicated energy or highdimensional environment systems, particularly if the number of important dimensions/components (failure modes) of a system is significant. Let one assess CDF (i.e., Cumulative Distribution Function)
this CDF may be directly assessed through either enough measurement data, or through direct extensive MC simulations, (Gaidai et al. 2021, 2022b, 2023a, 2022a, 2022c, 2022d, 2022e; Gaidai and Xing 2022). Both potential experimental expenses, as well as computing costs may be well prohibitive for many engineering complex offshore energy systems. The authors have proposed a unique way for evaluating the limited computational and measurement expenditures that are necessary during the design phase of a system. This innovative LTD method is appropriate for complicated multidimensional environmental, engineering, and energy systems.
Let one examine a structurally dynamic MDOF (i.e., MultiDegreeOfFreedom) that is depicted by a response/load (a component) vector \(\left(X\left(t\right), Y\left(t\right), Z\left(t\right), \dots \right)\),. This vector is composed of the critical/key flexible components of the system \(\left(X\left(t\right), Y\left(t\right), Z\left(t\right), \dots \right)\), that are either calculated or mathematically simulated through a representative \((0,T)\) timelapse that is long enough. The global maxima of a multidimensional vessel systems component or 1D (unidimensional) dynamical energy are then indicated below, as \({X}_{T}^{\text{max}}=\underset{0\le t\le T}{\text{max}}X\left(t\right)\), \({Y}_{T}^{\text{max}}=\underset{0\le t\le T}{\text{max}}Y\left(t\right)\), \({Z}_{T}^{\text{max}}=\underset{0\le t\le T}{\text{max}}Z\left(t\right), \dots\). By sufficiently long (namely, representative) timelapse \(T\) one primarily means large enough \(T\) value, with respect to the dynamic or vessel system’s autocorrelation, as well as dynamic vessel system’s relaxation times. With \({X}_{1},\dots ,{X}_{{N}_{X}}\) being temporally increasing vessel system’s critical component’s process \(X=X(t)\) local maxima, extracted from the raw timeseries, recorded at discrete timeincreasing temporal instants \({t}_{1}^{X}<\dots <{t}_{{N}_{X}}^{X}\) spotted throughout \((0,T)\). The other essential components of the MDOF system are defined in the same way:\(Y\left(t\right), Z\left(t\right), \dots\) specifically \({Y}_{1},\dots ,{Y}_{{N}_{Y}};\) \({Z}_{1},\dots ,{Z}_{{N}_{Z}}\) etc. The local maxima of every system with dynamics were taken to be positives for the purpose of simplification, and
having been a possibility of surviving for the target dynamical system, possessing critical levels of that system’s essential components, represented as\({\eta }_{X}\),\({\eta }_{Y}\),\({\eta }_{Z}\),… and \({p}_{{X}_{T}^{\text{max}}, { Y}_{T}^{\text{max}}, { Z}_{T}^{\text{max}} , \dots }\) being the joint PDF of individual vessel system critical component’s global maxima. High dimensionality of complex systems means that most complicated dynamic offshore environmental, mechanical, and offshore energy systems could be much beyond the reach of both experimental expenditures and computing expenditures. With a conditional probability decomposition, nonexceedance chances/probability \(P\left(\lambda \right)\) may now be evaluated
Since neighboring \({R}_{j}\) dependencies are not always insignificant in reality, the a singlestep (level of conditioning \(k=1\)) memory approximations that follows is presented.
With \(2\le \text{j}\le \text{N}\) (conditioning level \(\text{k}=2\)), the approximate result provided by Eq. (4) may be precisely stated as
wherein \(3\le j\le N\) (the conditioning level \(k=3\)), etc. The later derivation's primary goal was to avoid locally intercorrelated exceeds from cascades or clustering by recording each individual failed or hazard that happened directly initial and on time, (Gaidai et al. 2023b, 2022f, 2022g, 2023c, 2023d, 2023e, 2023df; Gaidai et al. 2023g, 2023h, 2023i, 2023j, 2023k). Updates to the statistical independence assumptions in Eq. (5). The latter category of approximations enables a more precise representation of statistical dependence effects among neighboring maxima. Assuming that the first MDOF process, \({\varvec{R}}\left(t\right)\), is ergodic and thus stationary, the probability \(p_{k} \left( \lambda \right):{\text{ = Prob}}\{ R_{j} {\text{ > }}\eta _{j}^{\lambda } R_{{j  1}} \le \eta _{{j  1}}^{\lambda } ,R_{{j  k + 1}} \le \eta _{{j  k + 1}}^{\lambda } \}\) for \(j\ge k\) is dependent on the conditioning level \(k\) and independent of \(j\). Consequently
Equation (6) deviates from Eq. (1) by eliminating \(\text{Prob}({R}_{1}\le {\eta }_{1}^{\lambda })\approx 1\), as \(N\gg k\) and the expected failure/hazard probability needs to be modest. It is rather obvious that there is converging with respect to the level of conditioning \(k\)
With a nonexceedance probability connection, Eq. (6) for \(\text{k}=1\) yields the commonly used means upcrossing rates function as well.
The authors have proposed a unique approach for LTD assessment, which may reduce the expenses associated with experimentation, measurement, and calculation. This technique is particularly appropriate for a range of highdimensional offshore environmental and energy systems. It may not always be practically sensible to estimate the joint PDF \({p}_{{X}_{T}^{\text{max}}, { Y}_{T}^{\text{max}}, { Z}_{T}^{\text{max}} , \dots }\) of the target system, and thus the target dynamic system survival probability\(P\), using sufficient lab measurement data or by conducting extensive direct (or enhanced) MC simulations when the number of degrees of freedom of the environmental or offshore energy dynamic system is large (Gaidai et al. 2023l, 2023m, 2023on 2023o, 2023p, 2023q, 2023r, 2023s, 2023t, 2023u, 2023v, 2024a). Following Eq. (1), it is simple to determine the damage/hazard/failure risk/probability \({P}_{\text{failure}}\) of a system as well as the predicted \({L}_{\text{expected}}\) of a connected dynamic system from the lifespan CDF distribution \(\text{LTD}\left(L\right)\) of an underlying dynamic system.
having the damage/failure/hazard risk/probability of the system\({P}_{\text{failure}}=1P\), which is supplementary to the longevity probability \(P\) of the dynamic system. The dynamical technology is now considered to have failed or been damaged instantly (or to have reached a hazardous condition), if either of its critical components\(X\left(t\right)\), or\(Y\left(t\right)\), or \(Z\left(t\right)\) etc., once exceeded\({\eta }_{X}\), or\({\eta }_{Y}\), or\({\eta }_{Z}\), etc., respectively. Fixed damage/hazard/failure levels\({\eta }_{X}\),\({\eta }_{Y}\),\({\eta }_{Z}\),… this is determined for each 1D system separately dynamic system critical components\({X}_{{N}_{X}}^{\text{max}}=\text{max }\{{X}_{j}\hspace{0.17em};j=1,\dots ,{N}_{X}\}={X}_{T}^{\text{max}}\),\({Y}_{{N}_{Y}}^{\text{max}}=\text{max }\{{Y}_{j}\hspace{0.17em};j=1,\dots ,{N}_{Y}\}={Y}_{T}^{\text{max}}\),\({Z}_{{N}_{z}}^{\text{max}}=\text{max }\{{Z}_{j}\hspace{0.17em};j=1,\dots ,{N}_{Z}\}={Z}_{T}^{\text{max}}\), … Dynamic system’s 1D critical components \(X, Y, Z, \dots\) being now rescaled, and nondimensionalized
making all dynamic system’s components nondimensional, and having same target hazard/failure limits, when \(\lambda =1\), with dynamic system’s target damage/hazard/failure risk/probability \(P=P\left(1\right)\). \(P\left(\lambda \right)\) to be a normal function of the inserted nondimensional levels may be defined using Eq. (9).
The localized maxima of the 1D dynamical system’s critical component are then combined to form the 1D temporally not declining systems vector \({\varvec{R}}\left(t\right)\equiv \overrightarrow{R}=\left({R}_{1}, {R}_{2}, \dots ,{R}_{N}\right)\) in line with the merging temporalvector \({t}_{1}<\dots <{t}_{N}\), \(N\le {N}_{X}+{N}_{Y}+{ N}_{Z}+\dots\), of the associated dynamic system. The local maxima of \({R}_{j}\) for each dynamical system component, which are associated with \(X\left(t\right)\) or \(Y\left(t\right)\), or \(Z\left(t\right)\), or any other dynamic system's crucial component, are actually confronted by the local maxima of the dynamical or environmental system’s crucial components, [Gaidai et al. ]. It is absolutely essential to note that the generated synthetic 1D \(\overrightarrow{R}\)vector has an overall 0 (zero) losses on the data set. Having now introduced increasing in time, synthetic system 1D vector \(\overrightarrow{R}\), along with its increasing occurrence time instants \({t}_{1}<\dots <{t}_{N}\), the LTD random variable \(L\) may be now presented as
for \(i=2,\dots ,N\). Hence, composed 1D synthetic dynamic system process \({\varvec{R}}\left(t\right)\) holds a key information about the target dynamic system LTD. Survival probability \(P=P\left(1\right)\) may be expressed via associated mean upcrossingratefunction
with \({\nu }^{+}(\lambda )\) being the mean upcrossingrate of damage/limit/failure threshold level \(\lambda\) for the above discussed synthetic nondimensional structure vectors \(R\left(t\right)\) in 1D. The Rice formula is used to express the mean of the upcrossingratefunction in Eq. (12), where \({p}_{R\dot{R}}\) represents the combined PDF for \(\left(R, \dot{R}\right)\) and \(\dot{R}=R{\prime}\left(t\right)\) is the appropriate timederivative (if it is easily distinguished), (Wang et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2022; Xu et al. 2018; 2019; 2023; Yakimov et al. 2023). When \(\lambda \to 1\), a dynamic system will get closer to its specified damage, failure/hazard state
in line with Eq. (12). Here, we suppose that the MDOF dynamical system is jointlystationary. Each unique environmentally shortterm environment phase has a distinct probability \({q}_{m}\) and \(\sum_{m=1}^{M}{q}_{m}=1\) considering an insitu environmentally scatterdiagram having \(m=1,..,M\) environmentseastates. The conventional longterm probabilities the equation is that
Having \({p}_{k}(\lambda ,m)\) denoting the same functions that are used in Eq. (6), and \(m\) standing for a particular shortterm surrounding sea condition. The next section will provide examples of how the relevant LTD \(q\) quantiles
may be evaluated using the Poisson assumptions and \(q\in \left(0, 1\right)\) from the observed or simulated timeseries of the fundamental dynamic systems. Function \({\text{LTD}}^{1}\) is the LTD function’s inverse, or LTD \({\text{LTD}}^{1}=1\), where \(^\circ\) denotes functional composition and \(1\) is the identity operator. The dynamic system’s breakdown, risk, and danger events become almost independent at high or severe damage, collapse, and hazardous levels. As a result, the system’s lifespan PDFs closely resemble the distribution of Poisson, with parameter \({\nu }^{+}\left(\lambda \right)\hspace{0.17em}T\). Although this research’s primary foundation is the previously mentioned Poisson procedures concept, it may have broader applicability if dynamic system critical components that are approaching breakdown or hazards levels do not indicate an impending system breakdown or destruction; rather, they merely reflect streaming critical/damaging intercorrelated/clustered actions. The PDFtail extrapolation method is based on an improved (4parameter) Weibull extrapolation technique, (Yakimov et al. 2023a; 2023b; Yan and Gu 2010; Yoo et al. 2022; Yue et al. 2020; Zhang et al. 2016a; 2016b).
Table 2 lists main benefits of the advocated Gaidai risk assessment methodology.
Classic reliability methods being mostly restricted to 2D, whereas Gaidai risk assessment methodology having no restriction on NDOF, (Zhang et al. 2019; 2023; Zhao et al. 2014; 2017; 2018a; 2018b).
Discussion and results
Research on the SBS dynamics of the floating multiobjects system has been reported recently in a number of publications. Authors in Liu and Falzarano (2019) have investigated the coupling effects and hydrodynamic interaction of two floating platforms, and findings revealed considerable differences in roll and sway between exact and approximation solutions. Using the SIMO software tool, the authors of Zhao et al. (2014) examined the hydrodynamics for LNG carriers and found that the stiffness and hawser pretensions of the system had an impact on the entire hydrodynamic reliability of the dynamical SBS offloading system. Given the in situ environmental circumstances of the Caspian Sea, scholars in Tafazzoli et al. (2021) investigated the hydrodynamic interactions between the FPSO and its ST using the boundaryelement approach. Employing potential flow theorybased techniques, the authors of Liu and Falzarano (2019) proposed a walldamping approach for SBS offloading operational gap prediction. The damping lid technique was utilized in Yue et al. (2020) to study the hydrodynamic associations of the LNG SBS dynamic mooring system with the FSRU (i.e., Floating Storage and Regasification Unit), and the findings showed good agreement with existing experimental data. Potential flow theory was used by the researchers in Zhao et al. 2018a to evaluate gaps resonant. Authors examined LNGFPSO parameter optimization in Tannuri et al. (2021) by combining neural network technology with optimization techniques. Using an improved Weibull approach, the authors of Gaidai et al. (2021) looked at the excessive hawser stresses of the FPSO along with ST. Research has shown that potential theory of flow is both feasible and useful for modelling the dynamic SBS offloading mechanism that operates between the FPSO along with its shuttle’s carrier. Consequently, this research also used the potential flow theorybased programmed AQWA to investigate high hawser tensions that arise during SBS offloading procedures. In order to conduct a series of MC numerical models for the offloading operating process between the FPSO and its ST, this research made use of the potential flowbased software programmed AQWA for both the time and frequency domains; for additional information, consult the AQWA instructions, (AQWA theory manual 2013).
This Section offers an example of the abovementioned procedure in action. Provided head windwave direction, 4 different most critical FPSO internal hawser tension forces (H_{1},.., H_{4}, shown in Fig. 3) had been selected, as system’s critical components \(X, Y, Z, W\) providing an illustration of a 4dimensional dynamics vessel systems. FPSO numerical simulations had been performed with fine discrete timestep \(dt=0.2\) seconds, see Fig. 5. For other load cases with different windwave directions, critical hawser set, as well as number of critical hawsers will obviously vary—the latter however will not alter applicability of the suggested methodology. Note that this is methodological study—hence there was no objective to cover all possible load cases (including windwave directions), therefore only few head windwave direction had been studied.
For simplicity the global maxima of each hawser 1D tension force, had been taken as its critical/limit/risk thresholds, causing the whole FPSO hawser system to be damaged or fail. To bring all four measured underlying timeseries together \(X, Y, Z, W\), following scaling has been carried out, following Eq. (6), making all 4 vessel system’s critical components nondimensional, having the same failure/hazard/risk limits, equal to 1. Next, all local maxima from 4 measured timeseries have been merged into 1D single timeseries, by keeping them in a temporally increasing order:\(\overrightarrow{R}=\left(\left\{{X}_{1},{Y}_{1},{Z}_{1}, {W}_{1}\right\},\dots ,\left\{{X}_{N},{Y}_{N},{Z}_{N}, {W}_{N}\right\}\right)\) with the whole synthetic vector \(\overrightarrow{R}\) being sorted, according to the nondecreasing times of occurrences of these assembled dynamic system component’s local maxima, with \(\text{NDOF}\equiv N=4\), (Zhang et al. 2019, 2023, 2016b; Buchner et al. 2001; AQWA user’s manual 2013; AQWA theory manual 2013; Naciri et al. 2007; Zhao et al. 2017, 2018a, 2014, 2018b; Vieira et al. 2018; Wang et al. 2012; Jin et al. 2019; Koo and Kim 2005; last accessed January 2024; OCIMF, Oil 1994, 2007; Lv et al. 2014; Yoo et al. 2022; DNVRP, D. N. V. 2010; Veritas 2012, 2011; ABS 2011; Design 2005; Xu et al. 2019, 2023, 2018; Balakrishna et al. 2022; Fan et al. 2014; Gaidai et al. 2021, 2022a, 2022b, 2022c, 2022d, 2022e, 2023a, 2023b, 2022f, 2022g, 2023c, 2023d, 2023e, 2023df; Gaidai and Xing 2022; Gaidai et al. 2023g, 2023h, 2023i, 2023j, 2023k, 2023l, 2023m, 2023on 2023o, 2023p, 2023q, 2023r, 2023s, 2023t, 2023u, 2023v, 2024a, 2024b, 2024c, 2024d, 2024e, 2024f, 2024g, 2024h; Failed 2024; Gaidai 2024; Jian et al. 2018; Liu and Falzarano 2019; OCIMF, Oil Company International Marine Form 2013; Qian et al. 2014; Tannuri et al. 2021; Tafazzoli et al. 2021; Stansberg et al. 2002; Sun et al. 2023, 2023a; Yakimov et al. 2023, 2023a; Yakimov et al. 2023b; Yan and Gu 2010; Yue et al. 2020).
A nondimensional constructed system’s 1D vector \(\overrightarrow{R}\), represented by the local maxima of the constructed system's critical components and determined FPSO hawser tension forces, is shown in Fig. 6a. The \(\lambda >0.05\) cuton constrain has only been used as a demonstration because lower values \(\lambda \ge 0\) are obviously not relevant for extrapolating the damage/failure/hazard PDF tail regarding the desired level \(\lambda =1\). Because 1D synthetic vectors \(\overrightarrow{R}\) is made up of many important components of the system, it should be noted that it might not have any physical significance by itself. Just a running index of the local maxima from the dynamic system component observed in the expanding temporal sequence is represented by index \(j\). The estimated 95% CI for the goal dynamic system survival probability \(P\left(\lambda \right)\) is shown by dotlines in Fig. 6b. Figure 6b exhibits quite narrow 95% CI, the latter being a clear advantage of the advocated approach. For the target hazard/failure/damage level \(\lambda =1\) meanupcrossingrate \(P\left(\lambda \right) \approx \text{exp }({\nu }^{+}(\lambda )\hspace{0.17em}T)\) have been extrapolated, one may conclude, that target dynamic system’s LTD follows the homogeneous Poisson’s distribution, having Poisson parameter \({\nu }^{+}(\lambda )\hspace{0.17em}T\), with \({\nu }^{+}\left(1\right)\) being mooring system’s failure/hazard rate, measured in years^{−1}. Expected dynamic system’s LTD being then \({L}_{\text{expected}}=\frac{1}{{\nu }^{+}\left(1\right)}\) following Eq. (9).
Extrapolation in Fig. 6b highlights CPU cost reduction, when using advocated methodology. It is seen that extrapolation in the PDF tail was done \(l\) orders of magnitude down on the decimal logarithmic scale, \(l>2\). Since \(N\)dimensional MDOF system has been analyzed with \(N=4\), the total cost reduction will be \(n\cdot l\) decimal orders of magnitude. Figure 6b visually illustrates 95% CI, uncertainty is roughly speaking inversely proportional to the dataset size and quality, thus it does not originate from the advocated method itself, as proposed method being exact.
To summarize results:

Classical reliability methods mostly deal only with system’s unidimensional components, which even being critical, do not fully reflect multidimensionality of the whole system. Moreover, only expected lifetime \(\text{E}\left[\text{LTD}\right]\) being given.

Advocated Gaidai risk assessment methodology, on the contrary, tackles nonlinear multivariate dynamic system as a whole, accounting for complex intercorrelations between different systems’ critical components. The latter approach will lead to a more conservative design estimate of the system’s projected lifetime. Moreover, Gaidai risk assessment methodology supplies full LTD (i.e., Life Time Distribution), instead of only single expected lifetime value \(\text{E}\left[\text{LTD}\right]\).
Advocated methodology being designed for multidimensional nonlinear dynamic systems, when direct MC methods may become simply unaffordable. As mentioned above, the key novelty of Gaidai risk assessment methodology being its ability to treat complex nonstationary systems with practically unlimited number of critical components/dimensions. To author’s knowledge there are no alternative multivariate risk assessment methods that can treat systems with number of dimensions higher than 2, hence the only validation that can be done is versus direct MC simulations. For the latter sake of method’s validation, the original data sample size had been reduced 10 times, by keeping only each 10th datapoint, then predictions by Gaidai risk assessment method have been compared with the original raw/full dataset, and quite close estimates have been obtained. Regarding future work, nonstationary systems, especially systems with initial damage will be studied by applying Gaidai risk assessment methodology. Regarding proposed methods validation versus alternative reliability/risk assessment methods, to author’s knowledge there are no available general purpose reliability methods, suitable for systems with dimensionality higher than 2, \(N>2\). Hence only extrapolation itself can be validated, but any extrapolation method can be plugged into by Gaidai risk assessment methodology.
Conclusions
Contemporary timeseries risk assessment approaches being often unable to take into account nonlinear crosscorrelations between highdimensional environmental and offshore energy system’s critical components. Suggested methodology’s key benefit lies within its robust capacity to assess complex dynamic system lifetime distribution, especially for highdimensional nonlinear offshore engineering and environmental systems. This study examined FPSO mooring system dynamics, under realistic insitu environmental loads. Brief note on experimental validation has been provided. Dynamic system service lifetime distribution, assessed throughout the whole course of intended design lifespan, has been accurately estimated, using novel Gaidai system’s risk assessment approach. Theoretical underpinning of the advocated methodology has been briefly presented. Although direct measurements, as well as extensive MC simulations being attractive methods to assess complex dynamic systems risk assessment, highdimensional dynamic systems necessitate development of novel, accurate, yet reliable risk assessment approaches, that can reduce necessary underlying dataset size, yet optimize its usage. Methodology, advocated in this study has previously shown quite effective, when employed for a large variety of simulation models, but only for onedimensional dynamic system components. To summarize key findings:

Main objective of this study was to provide a multidimensional, multipurpose, spatiotemporal, yet userfriendly environmental and offshore energy system’s risk assessment approach. As has been shown, the proposed Gaidai risk assessment methodology yielded reasonably narrow confidence intervals.

Suggested methodology could be well useful for complex risk assessment evaluations of various nonlinear environmental and offshore dynamic systems. Provided offshore engineering example restricts in no way potential use of the novel methodology.

Future studies will include more complex nonstationary dynamic systems, for example systems with initial manufacturing imperfections or with fatigue crack propagation. For that purpose, system component’s limits within advocated methodology should be made slowly variable with time.
Primary limitation of the presented multivariate risk assessment methodology lies within assumption of system quasistationarity. In case of nonstationary systems, with strong underlying trend, e.g., system degradation, one has to identify trend first, before applying advocated methodology.
Data availability
Data will be available on request from the corresponding author.
Abbreviations
 CDF:

Cumulative Distribution Function
 CFD:

Computational Fluid Dynamics
 CI:

Confidence Interval
 FEM:

Finite Element Method
 FPSO:

Floating Production Storage and Offloading
 FSRU:

Floating Storage and Regasification Unit
 GEV:

Generalized Extreme Value
 LNG:

Liquid Natural Gas
 LTD:

Life Time Distribution
 MC:

Monte Carlo
 MDOF:

MultiDegreeOfFreedom
 PDF:

Probability Density Function
 SBS:

SideBySide
 ST:

Shuttle Tanker
References
ABS (2011) Guidance notes on the application of fiber rope for offshore mooring. ABS 90–2011
AQWA theory manual (2013) Release 15.0, ANSYS, Inc.
AQWA user’s manual (2013) Release 15.0, ANSYS, Inc.
Balakrishna R, Gaidai O, Wang F, Xing Y, Wang S (2022) A novel design approach for estimation of extreme load responses of a 10MW floating semisubmersible type wind turbine. Ocean Eng 261:112007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112007
Bhardwaj U, Teixeira AP, Soares CG, Ariffin AK, Singh SS (2021) Evidence based risk analysis of fire and explosion accident scenarios in FPSOs. Risk Assess Eng Syst Safety 215:107904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107904
Bhardwaj U, Teixeira AP, Soares CG (2022) Casualty analysis methodology and taxonomy for FPSO accident analysis. Risk Assess Eng Syst Safety. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.108169
Buchner, B., Van Dijk, A., De Wilde, J. (2001, June). Numerical multiplebody simulations of sidebyside mooring to an FPSO. In ISOPE International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference (pp. ISOPEI). ISOPE. Paper Number: ISOPEI01053
Cho S, Sung H, Hong S, Hong S, Kim Y, Ha M, Choi Y, Yu B, Rae D (2012) Experimental study on the sidebyside offloading operation of FSRU And LNGC. The Twentysecond International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference
Design API (2005) analysis of station keeping systems for floating structures: API RP 2SK. API, Washington DC
DNVRP DN (2010) C205 environmental conditions and environmental loads. Det Norske Veritas, Oslo
Fan T, Qiao D, Ou J (2014) Innovative approach to design truncated mooring system based on static and damping equivalent. Ships Offshore Struct 9(6):557–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2013.867631
Gaidai O (2024) Global health risks due to the COVID19 epidemic by Gaidai reliability method. Sci Talks. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sctalk.2024.100366
Gaidai O, Xing Y (2022) Novel risk assessment method validation for offshore structural dynamic response. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.113016
Gaidai O, Xu X, Sahoo P, Ye R, Cheng Y (2021) Extreme hawser tension assessment for FPSO vessel during offloading operation in Bohai bay. Marine Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2020.102917
Gaidai O, Xu J, Yan P, Xing Y, Wu Y, Zhang F (2022a) Novel methods for wind speeds prediction across multiple locations. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598022240614
Gaidai O, Yan P, Xing Y (2022b) Prediction of extreme cargo ship panel stresses by using deconvolution. Front Mech Eng. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmech.2022.992177
Gaidai O, Wang F, Wu Y, Xing Y, Medina AR, Wang J (2022c) Offshore renewable energy site correlated windwave statistics. Probab Eng Mech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2022.103207
Gaidai O, Fu S, Xing Y (2022d) Novel risk assessment method for multidimensional nonlinear dynamic systems. Mar Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2022.103278
Gaidai O, Wu Y, Yegorov I, Alevras P, Wang J, Yurchenko D (2022e) Improving performance of a nonlinear absorber applied to a variable length pendulum using surrogate optimization. J Vib Control. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775463221142663
Gaidai O, Xu J, Hu Q, Xing Y, Zhang F (2022f) Offshore tethered platform springing response statistics. Sci Rep 12(1):21182. https://doi.org/10.1038/s4159802225806x
Gaidai O, Xing Y, Balakrishna R (2022g) Improving extreme response prediction of a subsea shuttle tanker hovering in ocean current using an alternative highly correlated response signal. Result Eng 15:100593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100593
Gaidai O, Wang K, Wang F, Xing Y, Yan P (2023a) Cargo ship aft panel stresses prediction by deconvolution. Mar Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2022.103359
Gaidai O, Xu J, Xing Y, Hu Q, Storhaug G, Xu X, Sun J (2023b) Cargo vessel coupled deck panel stresses risk assessment study. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.113318
Gaidai O, Xu X, Xing Y (2023c) Novel deconvolution method for extreme FPSO vessel hawser tensions during offloading operations. Res Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100828
Gaidai O, Cao Y, Xing Y, Balakrishna R (2023d) Extreme springing response statistics of a tethered platform by deconvolution. Int J Naval Archit Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2023.100515
Gaidai O, Xing Y, Xu X (2023d) Novel methods for coupled prediction of extreme wind speeds and wave heights. Sci Rep 13(1):1119. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598023281368
Gaidai O, Cao Y, Xing Y, Wang J (2023e) Piezoelectric energy harvester response statistics. Micromachines 14(2):271. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14020271
Gaidai O, Xing Y, Balakrishna R, Xu J (2023g) Improving extreme offshore wind speed prediction by using deconvolution. Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13533
Gaidai O, Cao Y, Xu X, Xing Y (2023h) Offloading operation bivariate extreme response statistics for FPSO vessel. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598023315338
Gaidai O, Wang F, Xing Y, Balakrishna R (2023i) Novel risk assessment method validation for floating wind turbines. Adv Energy Sustain Res. https://doi.org/10.1002/aesr.202200177
Gaidai O, Hu Q, Xu J, Wang F, Cao Y (2023j) Carbon storage tanker lifetime assessment. Global Chall. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.202300011
Gaidai O, Xing Y, Xu J, Balakrishna R (2023k) GaidaiXing risk assessment method validation for 10MW floating wind turbines. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598023336997
Gaidai O, Xu J, Yakimov V, Wang F (2023l) Analytical and computational modeling for multidegree of freedom systems: estimating the likelihood of an FOWT structural failure. J Marine Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11061237
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Wang F, Hu Q, Storhaug G, Wang K (2023m) Lifetime assessment for container vessels. Appl Ocean Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2023.103708
Gaidai O, Wang F, Yakimov V, Sun J, Balakrishna R (2023o) Lifetime assessment for riser systems. GRN Tech Res Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44173023000137
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Zhang F (2023o) COVID19 spatiotemporal forecast in England. Biosystems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2023.105035
Gaidai O, Liu Z, Wang K, Bai X (2023p) Current COVID19 epidemic risks in Brazil. Epidemiol Int J 7(2):1–10. https://doi.org/10.23880/eij16000259
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Balakrishna R (2023q) Dementia death rates prediction. BMC Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888023051722
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Wang F, Zhang F, Balakrishna R (2023r) Floating wind turbines structural dtails fatigue life assessment. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598023435544
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Wang F, Zhang F (2023s) Safety design study for energy harvesters. Sustain Energy Res. https://doi.org/10.1186/s4080702300085w
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, van Loon E (2023t) Influenzatype epidemic risks by spatiotemporal GaidaiYakimov method. Dialogues in Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dialog.2023.100157
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Niu Y, Liu Z (2023u) GaidaiYakimov risk assessment method for highdimensional spatiotemporal biosystems. Biosystems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2023.105073
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Sun J et al (2023v) Singapore COVID19 data crossvalidation by the Gaidai risk assessment method. Viruses. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44298023000060
Gaidai O, Sheng J, Cao Y et al (2024) Limit hypersurface state of art Gaidai risk assessment approach for oil tankers Arctic operational safety. J Ocean Eng Mar Energy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40722024003162
Gaidai O, Wang F, Cao Y et al (2024a) 4400 TEU cargo ship dynamic analysis by Gaidai risk assessment method. J Shipp Trd 9:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072023001594
Gaidai O, Wang F, Sun J (2024b) Energy harvester risk assessment study by Gaidai risk assessment method. Climate Resil Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1002/cli2.64
Gaidai O, Sheng J, Cao Y, Zhang F, Zhu Y, Loginov S (2024c) Public health system sustainability assessment by Gaidai hypersurface approach. Curr Probl Cardiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102391
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Hu Q, Loginov S (2024d) Multivariate risks assessment for complex biosystems by GaidaiXing risk assessment method. Syst Soft Comput. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sasc.2024.200074
Gaidai O, Sheng J, Cao Y, Zhu Y, Loginov S (2024e) Generic COVID19 epidemic forecast for Estonia by Gaidai multivariate risk assessment method. Franklin Open. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fraope.2024.100075
Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Wang F et al (2024f) Gaidai multivariate risk assessment method for energy harvester operational safety, given manufacturing imperfections. Int J Precis Eng Manuf. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1254102400977x
Gaidai O, Sheng J, Cao Y, Zhang F, Zhu Y, Liu Z (2024g) Gaidai multivariate risk assessment method for cargo ship dynamics. Urban Planning Trans Res 12:1. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2024.2327362
Gaidai O, Cao Y, Li H, Liu Z, Ashraf A, Zhu Y, Sheng J (2024h) Multivariate Gaidai hazard assessment method in combination with deconvolution scheme to predict extreme wave heights. Results Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.102326
Global wave statistics (2024) http://www.globalwavestatisticsonline.com/, Accessed Jan 2024
Hagen Ø, Falkenberg E, BitnerGregersen EM (2015) Risk assessment based approach for offloading operation related to motion of two sidebyside moored LNG carriers. Appl Ocean Res 51:381–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2015.01.014
Hong SY, Kim JH, Cho SK, Choi YR, Kim YS (2005) Numerical and experimental study on hydrodynamic interaction of sidebyside moored multiple vessels. Ocean Eng 32(7):783–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2004.10.003
Jian Z, Gaidai O, Gao J (2018) Bivariate extreme value statistics of offshore jacket support stresses in Bohai bay. J Offshore Mech Arctic Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4039564
Jin Y, Chai S, Duffy J, Chin C, Bose N (2019) Hydrodynamics of a conceptual FLNG system in sidebyside offloading operation. Ships Offshore Struct 14(1):104–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2018.1482041
Kashiwagi M, Endo K, Yamaguchi H (2005) Wave drift forces and moments on two ships arranged side by side in waves. Ocean Eng 32(5–6):529–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2004.09.005
Kim, M. S., Ha, M. K., Kim, B. W. (2003, May). Relative motions between LNGFPSO and sidebyside positioned LNG carrier in waves. In: ISOPE International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference (pp. ISOPEI). ISOPE. Paper Number: ISOPEI03031
Koo BJ, Kim MH (2005) Hydrodynamic interactions and relative motions of two floating platforms with mooring lines in sidebyside offloading operation. Appl Ocean Res 27(6):292–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2006.02.001
Liu Y, Falzarano J (2019) A wall damping method to estimate the gap resonance in sidebyside offloading problems. Ocean Eng 173:510–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.12.071
Lv X, Yuan D, Ma X, Tao J (2014) Wave characteristics analysis in Bohai Sea based on ECMWF wind field. Ocean Eng 91:159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.09.010
Naciri M, Waals O, de Wilde J (2007) Time domain simulations of sidebyside moored vessels: Lessons learnt from a benchmark test. Int Conf Offshore Mech Arctic Eng 42673:801–811. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE200729756
OCIMF, Oil Companies International Marine Forum. (1994). Prediction of Wind and Current Loads on VLCCs, 2nd edition. ISBN: 1856090426, 9781856090421
OCIMF, Oil Company International Marine Form (2007) Mooring equipment guide
OCIMF, Oil Company International Marine Form (2013) Ship to ship transfer guide for petroleum, chemicals and liquefied gases
Qian J, Sun L, Song L (2014) Material selection for hawsers for a sidebyside offloading system. J Mar Sci Appl 13(4):449–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1180401412728
Stanisic D, Efthymiou M, Kimiaei M, Zhao W (2018) Design loads and long term distribution of mooring line response of a large weathervaning vessel in a tropical cyclone environment. Mar Struct 61:361–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2018.06.004
Stansberg CT, Ormberg H, Oritsland O (2002) Challenges in deep water experiments: hybrid approach. J Offshore Mech Arct Eng 124(2):90–96. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1464129
Sun J, Gaidai O, Xing Y, Wang F, Liu Z (2023) On safe offshore energy exploration in the Gulf of Eilat. Quality Risk Assess Eng Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.3402
Sun J, Gaidai O, Wang F et al (2023a) Gaidai risk assessment method for fixed offshore structures. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s4043002304607x
Tafazzoli S, Shafaghat R, Alamian R (2021) Numerical investigation on the multibody hydrodynamic interactions under Caspian sea environmental conditions. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109048
Tannuri EA, Huang AS, Queiroz Filho AN, Ferreira MD, Passarelli FM, Korneliussen PB, Stuberg P (2021) Numerical analysis of the Cargo transfer vessel offloading operation in a Brazilian oil field. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108467
Veritas DN (2011) Modelling and analysis of marine operations. Offshore Standard. 80
Veritas B (2012) Classification of mooring systems for permanent offshore units. Guidance Note NI, 493
Vieira D, Mello P, Dotta R, Nishimoto K (2018) Experimental investigation on the influence of the liquid inside the tanks in the wave behavior of FLNG vessels in sidebyside offloading operations. Appl Ocean Res 74:28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2018.02.019
Wang ZF, Wu KJ, Zhou LM, Wu LY (2012) Wave characteristics and extreme parameters in the Bohai Sea. China Ocean Eng 26:341–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1334401200260
Wu H, Cui L, Liu W, Zhang Z, Kang J (2022) Performance changes of an engineering ship with one mooring line failure. Eng Failure Anal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106233
Xu S, Guedes Soares C, Teixeira ÂP (2018) Risk assessment analysis of short term mooring tension of a semisubmersible system. Int Conf Offshore Mech Arctic Eng Am Soc Mech Eng. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE201878751
Xu X, Sahoo P, Evans J, Tao Y (2019) Hydrodynamic performances of FPSO and shuttle tanker during sidebyside offloading operation. Ships Offshore Struct 14(1):292–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2019.1580845
Xu X, Gaidai O, Yakimov V, Xing Y, Wang F (2023) FPSO offloading operational safety study by a multidimensional risk assessment method. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114652
Yakimov V, Gaidai O, Xu J, Wang F (2023) Liquid carbon storage tanker disaster resilience. Environ Syst Decis 1(12):746
Yakimov V, Gaidai O, Wang F, Xu X, Niu Y, Kelin W (2023a) Fatigue assessment for FPSO hawsers. Int J Naval Architect Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2023.100540
Yakimov V, Gaidai O, Wang F, Wang K (2023b) Arctic naval launch and recovery operations, under ice impact interactions. Appl Eng Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apples.2023.100146
Yan G, Gu Y (2010) Effect of parameters on performance of LNGFPSO offloading system in offshore associated gas fields. Appl Energy 87(11):3393–3400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.04.032
Yoo JH, Schrijvers P, Koop A, Park JC (2022) CFD prediction of wind loads on FPSO and shuttle tankers during sidebyside offloading. J Marine Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10050654
Yue J, Kang W, Mao W, Chen P, Wang X (2020) Prediction of dynamic responses of FSRULNGC sidebyside mooring system. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106731
Zhang X, Sun L, Ma C, Fassezke E, Sun H (2016a) A risk assessment evaluation method based on the weakest failure modes for sidebyside offloading mooring system of FPSO. J Loss Prev Process Ind 41:129–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2016.03.011
Zhang X, Sun L, Ma C, Fassezke E, Sun H (2016b) A reliability evaluation method based on the weakest failure modes for sidebyside offloading mooring system of FPSO. J Loss Prev Process Ind 41:129–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2016.03.011
Zhang J, Gaidai O, Wang K, Xu J, Ye R, Xu X (2019) A stochastic method for the prediction of icebreaker bow extreme stresses. Appl Ocean Res 87:95–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2019.03.019
Zhang J, Gaidai O, Ji H, Xing Y (2023) Operational risk assessment study of ice loads acting on oil tanker bow. Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15189
Zhao W, Yang J, Hu Z, Tao L (2014) Prediction of hydrodynamic performance of an FLNG system in sidebyside offloading operation. J Fluids Struct 46:89–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2013.11.021
Zhao D, Hu Z, Chen G (2017) Experimental investigation on dynamic responses of FLNG connection system during sidebyside offloading operation. Ocean Eng 136:283–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.03.034
Zhao W, Pan Z, Lin F, Li B, Taylor PH, Efthymiou M (2018a) Estimation of gap resonance relevant to sidebyside offloading. Ocean Eng 153:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.056
Zhao W, Milne I, Efthymiou M, Wolgamot H, Draper S, Taylor P, Eatock Taylor R (2018b) Current practice and research directions in hydrodynamics for FLNGsidebyside offloading. Ocean Eng 158:99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.03.076
Funding
No funding was received.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
O. Gaidai—conceptualization, Y. Cao—data analysis, A. Ashraf—software, J. Sheng—visualization, Y. Zhu—validation, Z. Liu—project management.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publications
Not applicable.
Competing interests
Authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Gaidai, O., Cao, Y., Ashraf, A. et al. FPSO/LNG hawser system lifetime assessment by Gaidai multivariate risk assessment method. Energy Inform 7, 51 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42162024003502
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42162024003502