Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog

Blog summary

I’ve been at BP for around 7 weeks working in the Projects & Modifications team. Unlike most other Phase 2 attachments, the BP one is slightly different. The overall ‘project’ doesn’t always exist as they are often carried out on a discrete basis, but, like all brownfield offshore engineering, it requires a lot of interface management with the core business of production, and other functional areas of the organisation (reliability and maintenance, wells, inspections etc).

I’ve recently taken up a project which involves the fabrication and installation of a hydraulic fracturing (frac) hanger to connect pipelines during a frac campaign of 4 wells. This is a purely structural project (even though I’m E&M!) but was given to me as it is being fast tracked through the project life cycle to meet an offshore construction date in July. The discrete nature of the project allows for sole ownership under direction from the asset programme manager. The scope is simple but allows exposure to the various stages of the project life cycle in a short time frame, while interfacing between various departments.

Background

The frac hanger is to be installed on to a laydown area of the platform which will allow for interface between the frac vessel and the platform. A 4” co-flexip pipeline is to be lifted in to position using the platform crane and connected into temporary flowlines located on the platform. This interface allows the vessel to pump large volumes of frac fluid down the well to initiate fracture. It will be used for the duration of the frac campaign and removed thereafter. There is not much requirement to chat through the design but I’ve added a picture of the proposed solution and an example of a ‘landed’ co-flexip style pipeline onto a frac hanger. The 3 pins are the interface between the hose and platform. An offshore survey is currently on going to confirm the exact scope of works required, but will probably include a destruct of a side panel and a construct of the frac hanger and new side panel. The hanger is designed to support the worst case scenario, 8.1MTe, of an emergency release of the pipeline from the boat end. Structural assessments have been carried out on the frac hanger and global structure of the platform. These are to be reviewed by a BP structural discipline engineer before approval for construction is granted.

Frac hanger design

Previous frac hanger project with hose landed

Commercial

The well is co-owned and therefore when something, such as a frac campaign is scheduled, it must have agreement from all parties and will generally be co-funded accordingly. This is unless one party is willing to solely fund the operation to boost the production levels. In this instance, however, this is not what is happening. A third party contractor is funding the whole operation in return for a percentage of the production for a number of years. They are therefore carrying the risk of a non-increase in production (possible), while BP profit from the campaign if this isn’t so. That being said, the actual costs for engineering are fairly straightforward. The frac hanger is being constructed under the Engineering, Procurement and Construction contract that BP have in place with Wood Group (WG). WG will submit an estimate for all aspects required to get the frac hanger in place, BP will pay them while the third party contract will reimburse BP. Simple. I have no appreciation for costs in the construction industry but £250k for what is standard UBs and stock steelwork seems quite a lot.

General offshore construction observations

If you have got this far with reading, well done! I’ll finish off with some general offshore construction observations.

• Offshore construction scheduling is driven by the number of persons on board (POB) on the platform. There is a requirement for a number of ‘core crew’ to continue with production at all times. There is then a float above this for any others that may be working on the platform, with a self-imposed maximum POB (less than the beds available). This is then further constrained by flight frequency to the platform. In order to secure POB the requests must go through levels of authorisation at 12, 6 & 2 week gates, with the risk being accepted by the ‘gatekeeper’. Sort of like Gandalf on the bridge of Khazad-dûm. The ‘bums on seats’ on the flights must be confirmed at the 2 week gate. Below is an example of a platform POB level. In short, everyone requires POB and it is the asset planner’s responsibility to ensure that the correct POB are on the asset at the right time. This often means projects being delayed until areas of lower POB.

Platform POB level

• The BP contract with WG is well established and works well. Value for money, probably not, but I’m not sure anything in oil and gas is. When WG are given a SoR they will engineer, procure and construct everything that is required. They have project and asset programme managers who are responsible for the delivery of the project with embedded construction supervisors on the platforms. Most of the onshore positions are also replicated on the BP side too! There appears to therefore be an element of ‘man-marking’ when it comes to the delivery of a project, however, the BP side is acting more as performance managers than project managers. That doesn’t mean you can sack all BP project managers, where they become invaluable is the integration with other functions within the organisation. This is key when ensuring that the project is actually delivered as they are rarely conducted without the help of the platform’s core crew. This is particularly difficult to understand when new to the business as decision rights aren’t always that straight forward.

I’ll look to blog when anything exciting happens, but in the mean time I’ll just explain other works areas I find myself part of.

• Construction of 4 lots of new choke valve pipework. I haven’t actually received the scope yet so nothing more is known than that!
• The appraise/select for the increase of 2 x electric heater capacities to allow 3 gas turbines to be run simultaneously on the platform. This involves selecting the best option based on estimates conducted by Costain and the technical knowledge of the various process, electrical, mechanical etc. engineers.