Walk To Work Offshore
Walk To Work Offshore
Walk To Work Offshore
Ampelmann
Demonstrator
Final Report
V1.2
1 July 2008
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Authors:
This project was carried out under the WE@Sea programme under number
2006-008-RL5
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Summary
The Delft University of Technology is developing a Demonstrator of the Ampelmann, a motion
compensation platform for access to offshore wind turbines. The project is sponsored by the
University, We@Sea, Shell, SMST and Smit. The goal is to design, build and operate this
system in offshore conditions to further develop the safety system, operational procedures and
prove the motion compensation capability of the system.
For access to offshore wind turbines, the current limit for ship based transfer is Hs = 1.5 m
(73% for Dutch North Sea conditions. The Ampelmann has been designed for a typical 50m
long vessel and full compensation to Hs = 2.0 m (85%) with a possibility of allowing some
motions when transferring in Hs = 2.5 m (93%). In this demonstrator phase, a smaller vessel
(25 m) will be used to prove full motion compensation up to Hs = 1.0 m and test the reduced
compensation mode for higher sea states.
The platform design has a base diameter of 6 m and a cylinder stroke of 2 m. The gangway
system is designed in such a way that after connecting to the turbine, the gangway can rotate
and translate freely to compensate for small motions of the Ampelmann transfer deck in normal
operation and larger motions for operation in the ride-through-failure mode. Maximum length
of the gangway is 16m including a telescopic part of 6m. The vessel will keep a mean distance
of 7 m.
Regarding safety, the system is designed to have sufficient backup and redundancy to be able to
continue an operation when a single component fails. This ride-trough-failure mode must last at
least 10 s, depending on the part failing and the activity at the moment of failure and could even
last more than 30s. During the ride-through-failure, the person transferring has enough time to
finish or abort this accessing procedure and return to his seat on the Ampelmann or to escape to
the offshore structure. When the access procedure is completed or aborted, the Ampelmann
operator can retract the gangway and bring the system to its settled position. The procedure
does have time limits after which the system automatically takes over to return the Ampelmann
to a safe position. All component failure modes are studied in an FMEA (failure mode effect
analysis) to come to sufficient redundancy, regular checks and maintenance philosophy.
Furthermore, the operational execution is examined in a HEMP study to identify all critical
steps and precautions to be taken by personnel on board the vessel and the Ampelmann.
The project is executed by a team of 5 residing under the Offshore Engineering group, lead by
Dr. Ir. Jan van der Tempel. The team is supported by a vast number of experts in all disciplines
from inside and outside the University and from the sponsoring companies in particular.
The design of the Ampelmann Demonstrator started in September 2006. Final design was
completed in December 2006. Components were ordered early January and delivered in May.
System assembly was completed in 4 days in May. The unit was tested offshore on June 27th
and July 11th. Compensation of a sea state to Hs = 1.5m was excellent with only 4cm heave and
less than 0.5o roll and pitch residual motions.
Finalizing of the system was carried out over the summer. Onshore tests were completed on
December 7th for an audience of Shell, SMIT, Vestas, Lloyd’s Register and Staatstoezicht op de
Mijnen. The next day, the Ampelmann was installed on the SMIT Bronco and sailed to
IJmuiden. On Friday, December 14th, a safe transfer was made to and from WTG 03 of the
Offshore Wind farm Egmond aan Zee (OWEZ) owned by Shell and Nuon. The Ampelmann
returned to Rotterdam where demobilization was completed on Friday, December 21st, just
before lunch.
The project met the set goals: design, build and test an Ampelmann unit with a compensation
test inn Hs = 1.5m and a transfer in Hs < 0.5m. Durability testing and access in higher wave
conditions will be done in future projects.
The project was a success proving that motion compensation can be performed by an
Ampelmann under offshore conditions and that offshore access can indeed be “as easy as
crossing the street”.
I
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
II
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Table of contents
Summary ......................................................................................................................................I
Table of contents.......................................................................................................................III
1. Introduction and background ......................................................................................... 5
1.1 Demonstrator project .......................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Project goals ....................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Invention............................................................................................................................. 5
1.4 History of the Ampelmann ................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Document setup .................................................................................................................. 6
2. Design philosophy ............................................................................................................. 7
2.1 General design considerations ............................................................................................ 7
2.2 Demonstrator design goals ................................................................................................. 7
3. Ampelmann operational procedure ................................................................................ 8
4. Platform design ............................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Boundary conditions of platform...................................................................................... 10
4.2 Design steps for platform ................................................................................................. 11
4.3 Platform geometry ............................................................................................................ 16
5. Gangway design .............................................................................................................. 18
6. Safety ............................................................................................................................... 22
6.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 22
6.2 Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) ............................................................................ 22
6.3 Hazard Effect Management Process (HEMP) .................................................................. 24
7. Ampelmann Test Plan .................................................................................................... 25
8. Testing ............................................................................................................................. 29
8.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 29
8.2 Cylinder control and motion envelop testing.................................................................... 29
8.3 Platform x-y-z control ...................................................................................................... 30
8.4 Load-out: testing plug & play........................................................................................... 31
8.5 Offshore motion compensation......................................................................................... 32
8.6 Offshore motion compensation test I................................................................................ 33
8.7 Intermediate: View on Delft ............................................................................................. 35
8.8 Offshore motion compensation test II .............................................................................. 36
8.9 Endurance test: World Port Days ..................................................................................... 37
8.10 Onshore completion and testing ....................................................................................... 37
8.11 Offshore Access................................................................................................................ 38
9. Conclusions and Outlook ............................................................................................... 43
10. Inventor’s contemplations.............................................................................................. 44
Appendix I Project Partners & Sponsors............................................................................... 45
Appendix II Test Report OWEZ............................................................................................. 47
Appendix III Risk Analysis OWEZ access.............................................................................. 3
III
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
IV
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
1.3 Invention
In the summer of 2002 Jan van der Tempel and David-Pieter Molenaar attended the World
Wind Energy Conference in Berlin. One of the speakers discussed his solution for offshore
access. The animation shown in that presentation was somewhat distorted with regard to scale.
The comments from the audience were not really satisfactorily answered by the speaker.
Later that afternoon, after having done a small tour of the city, Jan and David-Pieter sat down
outside Café Adler, just around the corner from Checkpoint Charlie, discussing the access
solution of the speaker. It was decided that an offshore engineer and a controls engineer should
be able to tackle this problem once and for all.
Beer in hand, the following requirements were drafted:
• Ship based system
• No contact with structure
• No requirements on structure
The basic problem is that the vessel moves in all six degrees of freedom. It was an easy step
from that to the Stewart platform (also used for flight simulators) that is also capable of moving
in these 6 DOFs. Should it be possible to measure the motions of the vessel accurately and feed
these to the control of the Stewart platform fast enough, a stand-still transfer deck can be
created. From this platform a simple gangway could be extended to the offshore wind turbine.
The basic systems were therefore defined:
• Use a Stewart platform
• Measure the ship motions on board (no reference to the structure or seabed)
To be able to discuss the invention in front of others, without giving away the clue, a code
name was needed. Fun and effectiveness came together in picking the Ampelmann, the little
man in the pedestrian traffic light (Ampel) who wears a hat in the East-German part of Berlin;
one of the few remaining artifacts of the DDR age. The choice proved even more effective as it
provides a fitting slogan to the system (created a few days later):
5
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Demonstrator
Sept 06- Dec07 Demonstrator construction and testing (this project)
6
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
2. Design philosophy
2.1 General design considerations
The Ampelmann concept has been based on a very limited set of design requirements. These
requirements have remained fixed up to this point and serve to narrow the options for motion
compensation to a digestible number.
• Cancel all motions 6-DoF system: Stewart platform
• Stand-alone system all systems on ship: power, measure, control, gangway
• Plug-and-play system can be installed on any vessel without interfacing
The design of the safety system is the key to the success of this Demonstrator phase. Experts
from the offshore, offshore wind, automatic pilot, drive-by-wire and the medical life support
systems fields of expertise are being consulted to translate the requirements from those
disciplines regarding safety, reliability and redundancy to the Ampelmann operations. The main
functionality of the Ampelmann system during component error or failure has currently been
set to the following:
• The system always returns to its safe, settled position
• The system never becomes a launching pad: introducing very large accelerations
• When extending the gangway and when connected to the turbine, the system does not
shut down due to any failure but remains operational for at least 10 s and preferably
30 s (= 6 wave periods). This gives people on the gangway time to either retreat to the
Ampelmann platform or step on to the turbine. The compensation characteristics must
meet 95% of full compensation during this period. After the 10 s period, the platform
returns to its safe, settled position.
7
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
1. Vessel sails to offshore wind farm, Ampelmann disengaged and turned off
2. Vessel arrives at offshore wind turbine and engages Station Keeping Assistance or
Dynamic Positioning System
3. Crew approaches Ampelmann
6. HPU (Hydraulic Power Unit) is turned on, Ampelmann goes to neutral position (half of
cylinder stroke)
7. Ampelmann is switched to compensation mode
8. Gangway is turned toward turbine
8
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
15. Ampelmann compensation mode is switched off, Ampelmann returns to the neutral
position
16. Ampelmann returns to the settled position
17. Gangway is extended, HPU is switched off, vessel sails away.
9
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
4. Platform design
4.1 Boundary conditions of platform
Introduction
The use of this Ampelmann as a demonstrator implies the following:
• Load cases are determined for demonstration purposes (higher than dedicated design)
• Maximum allowable dimensions are to be taken into account for transport and
mounting on vessel.
Load Cases
In the design process, two load cases will be considered: one for cargo stabilization and one for
personnel transfer. Both load cases are illustrated below in figures 4.1 and 4.2, corresponding
values are listed in table 4.1.
Size limits
For practical reasons, the Ampelmann platform is allowed to have limited dimensions, which
are to be taken into consideration during the design process. The two main limiting factors are:
• Road transportation must be possible
• Platform must fit on ship deck
10
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Exceptional Transport
Normal transport
(exemption required)
< 40 m no convoy
max length
22.00 m < 50 m 1 escort
total vehicle
> 50 m 2 escorts
The deck space for the Ampelmann depends on the vessel. On a smaller vessel such as the Smit
Bronco, the limited deck space will require the platform to be placed on top of two 20 ft
containers, forcing the base plate to fit on a 6 m x 6 m square.
top platform
z
y
x gimbal
ot
actuator
z
y base platform
ob x
11
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
The entire design process is illustrated in figure 4.4 below; all blocks in this process are treated
in this chapter.
Other
Geometry
Parameters
Design Criteria
Size Limits
Preferred Geometry
Buckling
HPU
Time Series Max Velocity Flow Valves
Stroke length
The main input parameter for this design procedure is the stroke length of the cylinders. The
stroke length of a cylinder is defined as the difference between the minimum and maximum
cylinder lengths as depicted in figure 4.5.
Stroke length
The first four of these parameters are illustrated in the figures 4.6 and 4.7 below.
12
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
y
t2 y
b2
t3 b1
120°
b3 120°
120° γt t1 γb
x sb x
t6
Rt b4 120°
Rb
t4 b6
sb t5 b5
Figure 4.6 Top platform parameters Figure 4.7 Base platform parameters
The dead length of a cylinder is defined as the minimum cylinder length (gimbal to gimbal)
minus the stroke length; this is the length that is not used for length augmentation.
Size Limits
When choosing values for the base and top radii, a special consideration must be given to the
size limits mentioned earlier. A too large top or base platform might cause difficulties for
transport, assembly or mounting on the vessel.
Calculation Procedure
A set of calculation procedures can now be performed for different geometries in a MATLAB
calculation sequence. Stewart platform geometries can be changed by varying top and base
radius, top and base gimbal distances and the dead length, while the stroke length remains fixed.
By creating loops in the calculation program, all required calculations can be performed for a
set of varying parameters, allowing a quick assessment within a large number of platform
configurations.
In the calculation procedure, the following steps are performed. First, the workspace limits are
determined for a given geometry. This is done by varying the displacements and rotations of
the base plate in small steps while the top plate remains fixed. When one of the cylinders
reaches its minimum or maximum length, the workspace limit is found. While doing this, a
large amount of platform poses is defined. Next, the dexterity of the platform can be calculated
for each pose. Finally, also for each pose the axial forces in each cylinder can be determined for
both load cases.
The MATLAB sequence can eventually summarize the main results of the calculation
procedure for each given geometry:
• Minimum dexterity
• Maximum axial forces in cylinders
• Workspace limits
By using design criteria, the different geometries can be assessed and the optimal geometry can
be selected.
13
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Design Criteria
Based on the output of the calculation procedure, a preferred geometry can be selected using
the following criteria.
First of all, the minimum dexterity of any Stewart may not be too low: platforms with low
dexterities can become singular and cylinders will experience very high axial forces. In flight
simulator design, a practical minimum value of 0.2 is used. However, the use of this value is
questionable since dexterity is scale dependent. In this case, it is more efficient to compare the
minimum dexterity of different platform architectures and discard the architectures that yield
the lowest dexterities..
Second of all, a platform will preferably have low axial forces in its cylinders. High axial forces
call for cylinders with a larger rod diameter and a larger casing diameter, which calls for a lot
of other larger components making the platform more expensive.
Finally, the workspace limits are to be taken into account. Since the Ampelmann aims to
compensate ship motions, the functionality of this system increases with a larger workspace.
Generally, when comparing ship motions to the limits of the workspace of a Stewart platform,
it becomes clear that the limiting degree of freedom of a Stewart platform is the heave. A
platform that can perform large heave excursions is therefore preferred.
The assessment of different platforms is thus based on a combination between high dexterities,
low axial forces and large heave excursions. It is advised to do a comparison between platforms
with more heave but larger axial forces and platforms with less heave but smaller axial forces,
for it is not yet known which criterion is the real design driver.
Preferred Geometry
After the calculation procedure is performed, a preferred geometry can be selected for further
research. It is however advised to select several geometries for a more exact assessment
between geometries once the corresponding cylinders, valves and HPU have been designed. A
more precise comparison between different designs can then be based on financial arguments as
well as workability percentages.
Maximum Force
One of the results from the calculation procedure is the maximum axial force in the cylinders,
both of tension and compression. It is obvious that a cylinder should be designed to withstand
those loads. It should however be noted that these loads are merely the result of a static analysis;
the forces caused by the accelerations of the top loads have not been considered. Since the main
purpose of the Ampelmann is to keep the top load static, it can be assumed that the top loads
will not experience large accelerations. There are however two situations to consider where the
accelerations can indeed have an influence on the cylinder loads: during start-up and in cases of
emergency.
During start-up, the platform will first be in settled position and the top load has the same
motions as the vessel. Next, the platform is lifted towards neutral position, while the top is in
motion. Finally, motion compensation is engaged and the accelerations on the top platform
become negligible. After transfer procedures, the platform compensation mode will be ended
and the platform is lowered back towards settled position. During the lifting and lowering
procedures, the accelerations caused by the vessel motions might cause extra loads on the
cylinders. It is advised to have these forces calculated.
14
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Buckling
The first design step for the cylinders is to determine the rod size and the cylinder casing size
by the buckling criterion. For this, DNV uses the following equation:
E ⋅π 2
P=
1000 ⋅ L ⋅ Z ⋅ s
L1 L2 1 1 L L
Z= + + + sin 2π 1
I1 I 2 I 2 I1 2π L
With:
DNV further states that a lower safety factor than 4.0 may be accepted for more accurately
validated calculation methods. Relevant parameters to be included in such a method are:
- Yield strength of piston rod material
- Bending moments caused by the rotation of the bearings
- Guiding length
- Clearance between gland and piston rod
- Actual deflection curve.
It should be noted that the maximum axial force in a cylinder does not necessarily has to occur
in combination with the maximum cylinder length. The buckling check could thus be
performed for several length-force combinations, rather than just the combination of the
maximum values of both parameters.
Cylinder Size
Cylinder manufacturers can deliver cylinders in different standard sizes. It is advised to choose
a cylinder with standard dimension for ease in production. Preferably, one chooses the cylinder
with the smallest dimensions that still satisfies the buckling criterion. Another check to perform
concerns the bottom end and the annular end cross sections: the cross section area must be large
enough to allow the oil-pressure to withstand the maximum forces.
Time series
Up tot this point, only static calculations have been performed on the Ampelmann. The next
step in the design process is to take time series into account. For this, the preferred geometry,
the future vessel and the exact location of the Ampelmann on the vessel is required. By
combining the vessel's RAOs with different sea states (combinations of Hs and Tz), time series
for the base plate of the Ampelmann system can be generated. By using these time series, the
actual Ampelmann performance can be simulated: while keeping the top plate fixed, the base
plate motions are simulated. For each time step, the required cylinder lengths can be calculated.
A statement can then be given on the Ampelmann performance: for each sea state, percentage
of time can be calculated in which the cylinder lengths do not enable full motion compensation.
By choosing an arbitrary boundary limit for this performance, the maximum sea state can be
15
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
determined in which the specified Ampelmann can operate. This sea state shall be used to
generate a time series of the base plate motions for the subsequent calculations.
Maximum velocity
The time series for the Ampelmann base platform are not only used to determine the required
cylinder lengths at any instant and thereby determining its performance. They also enable
calculating the velocities of all cylinders, which is required to determine the required flow in
the system. A set of time series, adding up to twenty hours of simulation is used for this.
Flow
After determining the cylinder velocities, the flow in the cylinder can be determined from the
following equation:
Q = v⋅ A
with:
Q = Flow [m3/s]
v = Cylinder velocity [m/s]
A = Cylinder cross section area [m2]
Simulations using the time series yield the nominal and peak flows for each cylinder separately
as well as for the entire system. To reduce the flow, a double acting cylinder is used with the
annular end being charged with pump pressure. This significantly reduces the maximum
required flow at the bottom end, because when the cylinder extends the flow from the annular
end is available for the supply to the bottom end (Figure 4.8).
16
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
2.75 3.00 0.25 0.25 1.25 2.15 3.40 66.8 -33.7 0.233 0.149 3.63 3.31 2.50 55 53 76
3.00 3.00 0.25 0.25 1.50 2.39 3.63 66.3 -35.2 0.234 0.154 3.79 3.43 2.48 50 48 73
2.75 3.00 0.25 0.50 1.00 2.02 3.25 67.8 -35.7 0.233 0.138 3.59 3.30 2.46 55 53 75
2.50 3.00 0.25 0.25 1.25 2.25 3.47 65.4 -34.2 0.231 0.133 3.59 3.29 2.45 61 58 83
3.00 3.00 0.25 0.50 1.25 2.27 3.49 67.6 -38.1 0.234 0.145 3.75 3.42 2.44 50 47 72
3.00 3.00 0.50 0.25 1.25 2.27 3.49 67.2 -37.7 0.234 0.150 3.75 3.42 2.44 51 48 72
2.75 3.00 0.25 0.25 1.50 2.51 3.72 65.9 -36.3 0.233 0.139 3.74 3.41 2.42 55 52 79
2.50 3.00 0.25 0.50 1.00 2.10 3.31 66.5 -34.5 0.232 0.124 3.56 3.28 2.42 61 57 81
3.00 3.00 0.25 0.25 1.75 2.74 3.95 68.3 -37.5 0.234 0.146 3.89 3.53 2.41 50 47 76
17
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
5. Gangway design
Telescopic requirements
The main dimensions of the gangway are displayed in table 5.1.
The required minimum and maximum length of the gangway (telescopic behaviour) is
determined using figure 5.1 and is listed in table 5.2.
The required survival modes of the telescopic behaviour of the gangway are determined by
table 5.2 and illustrated in figure 5.2.
18
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Flexibility gangway
The required rotational flexibility of the gangway is listed in table 5.3. These are split in:
- Directional mode: Active steering of the gangway to the offshore structure
- Operational mode: Passive mode while the gangway is connected to the
offshore structure with the Ampelmann in full compensation.
- Survival mode: Passive mode while the gangway is connected to the
offshore structure with total failure of the Ampelmann.
19
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Yaw.
A controlled rotation of 2 times 180° (Directional) is minimal required. The resulting yaw
motions during operation will be maximally 2°. If the Ampelmann fails a passive survival
rotation of plus and minus 45° is required (negotiable). The directional, operational and
survival angles of yaw are displayed in figure 5.3.
Pitch.
During operation the gangway must be positioned between an angle of 0° and 22°. When in
survival mode a maximum angle of 30% is required as shown in figure 5.4.
20
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Loads:
- Operational loads on tip:
The maximum operational loads on the tip of the gangway are displayed in table 5.5. The total
maximum combined load is 440 kg.
The result of the design process is shown in figure 5.5 as a composition photo of all extreme
positions of the telescopic access bridge.
21
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
6. Safety
6.1 Introduction
The Safety Strategy of the Ampelmann strives after a fail-safe Ampelmann system. The
Ampelmann Demonstrator will be designed following two types of safety management systems:
• Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA): Safety management system that prevents, detects
and corrects failures with respect to potential breakdown of its system components.
• Hazard Effect Management Process (HEMP): Safety management system that reduces the
risk of potential hazards in the different operational modes.
22
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Main components:
Container
Hexapod
Gangway
23
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
24
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Preceding tests
The Ampelmann Demonstrator project has been running since September 2006. The
Demonstrator was operational at the end of May 2007 and several tests have already been done.
A short summary of these tests is given here as background. Some of the test me reoccur in the
offshore tests, others are conclusive on their own.
Coupling of Octans
The final loop in the control system is that the set points of the transfer deck are delivered by
continuous measurements from the Octans. The system proved be capable of following the
Octans motions or counteracting them.
25
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
cylinders move makes the person on the transfer deck feel unstable. When looking to the
horizon or passing ships, the sensation of being on a vessel is lost instantly.
Onshore testing
The following tests will be carried out before fitting the Ampelmann on the vessel. The tests
incorporate the full system functionality including transfer deck and telescopic access bridge
and the training of the operator.
26
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Redundancy checking
Again, the redundancy of the components is tested actively, with the operators present to have
them witness the failure modes and the associated control panel messages.
Access test
When the training program of the operators is completed, the people who have been selected to
make the transfer to the offshore structure, will perform a complete dry run of the docking
procedure: check of the Ampelmann system, including performance test. Access to transfer
deck, strapping into seat, Ampelmann engaged to neutral height, including residual motions.
Docking of the TAB against dummy boat landing and transfer of 2 persons following standard
procedures. Furthermore, several failure modes are tested to make the operator and personnel
familiar with the procedures, signals and codes.
Station keeping
• Upon arrival 500m zone structure: 1 test for station keeping check maneuverability
and tidal current
• @ 50m from structure: 1 test of 5 minute station keeping, again check tide
• @ 20m from structure 2 test of minimum 5 minutes
• @ 10m from structure 3 tests of 10 minutes, different headings
27
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Engaging Ampelmann
• Test in port, all systems functioning, once
• Test in port, extend gangway against dummy boat landing, 3 times
• Test in port, gangway against boat landing residual motions of 25 cm, 3 times
• Test in port, gangway against boat landing failure mode in 1.5m Hs, 3 times
• Test offshore, just outside port: engage Ampelmann, 3 times, min 5 minutes
• Test offshore, just outside port: engage Ampelmann, operate gangway max extension
and luffing, 3 times, min 5 minutes
• @ 20m from structure: engage system and measure compensation visually, 3 times,
min 5 minutes
• @ 20m from structure: engage system operate gangway, no connection, 3 times, min 5
minutes
• @ 7m from structure, engage system, operate gangway and connect, at least 3 minutes,
3 times
Offshore Access
• Engage system, operate gangway and connect, when safe: transfer one person,
disconnect
• Engage system, operate gangway and connect, when safe: retrieve person, disconnect
• Engage system, operate gangway and connect, when safe: transfer two persons,
disconnect
• Engage system, operate gangway and connect, when safe: retrieve persons, disconnect
28
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
8. Testing
8.1 Introduction
The testing of the Ampelmann Demonstrator comprises all tests performed from the moment
the unit was assembled to the final test of transferring a person to an offshore wind turbine. In
building the software of the unit, several tests were performed as part of the building process.
Of all major tests a plan was drafted and records were made. This chapter gives a broad
overview of the different test phases.
Figure 8.1 First cylinder connected directly to power pack and control system testing
When the cylinder control was tested sufficiently, the hydraulic piping was fitted to the
platform and the hydraulic hoses connected to all 6 cylinders as shown in figure 8.2 which gave
the opportunity to test motions of all 6 cylinders simultaneously. In this phase all cylinders
were controlled on extension only: no platform control was fitted yet.
Figure 8.2 Fitting of hydraulic piping and connection of hoses to all 6 cylinders.
Having control over all 6 cylinders enabled the motion envelop testing. As the platform can
reach an umbrella of positions, it is critical in the testing to check whether all components can
follow the cylinder positions without components touching or even damaging each other.
Figure 8.3 shows the system in different extreme positions. All components passed the test and
no adaptations were required for the platform to reach all cylinder length combinations that are
possible.
29
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Heave Yaw
Surge Roll
Sway Pitch
30
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
At this stage, the Octans was also connected to the system, but manual control by moving the
Octans proved very uncomfortable due to the scale effects between human reach and the
platform reach. Furthermore, very fast motions can be performed easily by moving the Octans
and with the Ampelmann running at maximum velocity, it can follow, but again at a very
uncomfortable high velocity for spectators. Further manual testing was therefore discontinued.
The load-out itself took less than 2 hours: rolling the system out of the construction hall and
lifting it onto the barge. For this lift, the power packs and Ampelmann were still connected via
the hydraulic hoses. This meant only one lift was required, but it also made it necessary to use a
spreader bar and two cranes as shown in figure 8.6.
Figure 8.6 Transport to quay side and lifting with spreader bar and two cranes
The system was installed on a SMIT barge and fixed to it by welding the footplates and fixing
the power packs and containers using steel profiles. Installation and welding is shown in figure
8.7.
31
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
As only the electrical control umbilical needed to be connected, the time to be operational after
lifting was less than 1 hour. The entire load-out took approximately 8 hours, spread over 2 days.
Biggest improvement to be introduced was the disconnection of the hydraulic hoses from the
power packs. Although an extra lift is then needed, the expensive and complicated duo lift can
be abandoned.
32
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
On the 29th of June, the Ampelmann was taken offshore by the SMIT tug Eerland 28. The tests
were carried out at the mouth of the Port of Rotterdam, off Hook of Holland, as shown on the
map in figure 8.11. Weather conditions resembled fall more than summer with only 12oC,
clouds, rain and a sea state just above Hs = 1.0m at the test site. The system was tested first for
heave, pitch and roll compensation. Later surge and sway were added. For yaw a reset button
was created. The surge and sway motions are doubly integrated accelerations, slowly drifting
with the vessel co-ordinates, the heading is a true compass measurement without drift. When
following it throughout longer period tests, the increasingly yawed platform disallows other
motion compensation.
Station keeping performances of the barge and tug were moderate, but sufficient for the first
tests. Visual check against the horizon gave very good confidence on motion compensation, but
video footage shot from the barge or tug was influence by the ship motions (the human eye can
correct for vessel motions, cameras cannot). It was therefore decided to have a camera onshore
and a measurement device on the platform for the next test.
Pictures of the tests are shown in figure 8.12.
33
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Test site
Figure 8.11 Sailing route from SMIT HQ to test site at mouth of the Port of Rotterdam
34
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Mayor of Delft: B. Verkerk; Chairman DUT: H. van Luijk; Director NZW: H. den Rooijen; Ampelmann: Jan van der Tempel
35
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Figure 8.15 Second offshore motion compensation test on July 11th 2007
36
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Figure 8.16 Opening of World Port Days by Gerard Cox on the Ampelmann Demonstrator
The remainder of the weekend, the public could control the six degrees of freedom of the
Ampelmann. For a full two and a half day children and their parents were invited to use the
control panel and let the Ampelmann make motions. The weekend was primarily an endurance
test for the system operating 10 hours on end and being operated by untrained personnel. All
systems functioned without problems.
37
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
The tests ended with an demonstration on Friday, December 7th for representatives of Shell,
NZW, Vestas, Staatstoezicht op de Mijnen and Lloyd’s Register. The demonstration included
an introduction to the platform, visual inspection and a transfer. Several comments were
recorded and used for further improvement to prepare for the offshore access tests.
38
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
deck less safe. The next day, the installation continued with installation of the power pack,
transfer deck and control computer between 10:00 and 12:00. The remainder of the day was
spent on welding the Ampelmann to the deck and re-connecting hydraulics and electronics. The
system was operational at noon on Monday. De-mob and Mob are shown in figure 8.19.
Figure 8.19 De-mobilizing from Franeker and installation on SMIT Bronco in Harlingen
On Tuesday, December 11th, the SMIT Bronco set sail for IJmuiden. Offshore conditions were
beyond the Ampelmann testing conditions: Hs > 2.0m. Nevertheless, the system can run in
simulation mode and was able to compensate all measured motions with less than 15 cm
residual movement due to cylinder length limitations. These results exceeded ship motion
simulations: they were more conservative than the real situation. Figure 8.20 shows the tour
from Harlingen via the Shell co-owned offshore wind farm OWEZ to IJmuiden.
Figure 8.20 Sailing from Harlingen to Ijmuiden, Tuesday, December 11th 2007
Unfortunately, the sailing trip had some negative effects on the functioning of one of the power
packs. Due to moist in the connectors, the power pack did run, but would not start its hydraulic
pump. Offshore correction by feeding it by-passed information from the Ampelmann PLC did
help and made the power pack functioning within 2 hours, but an intermediate shutdown during
the first test resulted in aborting further efforts. The power pack controls were repaired the next
morning in the Port of IJmuiden. Figure 8.21 shows images of the transit to Ijmuiden.
39
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Figure 8.21 Transfer from Harlingen to IJmuiden: setting sail on the Waddenzee, passing ECN
in Petten (shot from behind HAWT and zoom (pictures: Jos Beurskens))maximum roll: 11
degrees, maximum heave: 2.8m (Ampelmann: 2.5m) And OWEZ at touching distance………
40
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
The Ampelmann was further prepared for the offshore trials and all licences were gather to be
able to enter the Offshore Wind farm Egmond aan Zee (OWEZ). Both operator, Noordzee
Wind (NZW), a joint venture of Shell & Nuon, and the maintenance contractor BCE (Vestas
and Ballast Nedam) were co-operative and critical to make the effort safe. The Risk Analysis to
acquire a Permit to Work is shown in Appendix III. The most significant outcome of the safety
meetings was to land the Ampelmann gangway not on the ladder, but beside it. By pressing the
tip against the structure and the side of the ladder, it could be fixed in all directions. Should
contact be lost and the gangway move up, it would not hit the person who just transferred while
he was climbing the ladder. The OWEZ wind turbines have an additional benefit for this
working method: the tip could be landed at the level of the spider deck. The person transfer
therefore only needs to step on the ladder and step sideways directly out of reach of the
gangway. The ladder and spider deck are shown in figure 8.21.
The transfer was executed on Friday, December 14th 2007. The mv Fortuna accompanied the
SMIT Bronco and had an MOB boat in the water on standby. The conditions were ideal for
testing a transfer, but not for demonstration of motion compensation behaviour: < 0.5m wave
height. The transfer was executed by Jan van der Tempel to WTG 03. Figure 8.22 shows the
images of the transfer.
The following days more landings were performed under different approach angles and tidal
conditions. The co-ordination between operator and Master improved significantly.
Improvements to the station keeping on manual control were implemented over the weekend.
Detailed description by the Shell representative on board are shown in appendix II.
On Wednesday, December 19th, the SMIT Bronco left IJmuiden and set sail to Rotterdam
where the Ampelmann was de-mobilised and stored for future projects.
41
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
42
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
The Ampelmann Demonstrator project reached these goals. The platform has performed well to
a sea state of Hs = 1.5m with only 4cm heave residual motions in the transfer deck. Furthermore,
a series of landings on offshore wind turbines have been executed in the OWEZ wind farm. On
Friday, December 14th 2007, a safe transfer was made to and from turbine WTG 03. Wave
conditions were minimal. During that week a maximum wave height of Hs = 0.5m was
encountered while landing the gangway against the monopile.
Improvements on the design and control system of the Ampelmann Demonstrator have been
ongoing throughout the project, up to the last tests. The system proved to be robust and
offshore proof. The main improvements will be made in the Station Keeping Assistant: a device
to tell both the Vessel Master and the Operator what the relative positions are. Furthermore, the
operational experience has changed the team’s view on redundancy. In this Demonstrator, all
redundancy was externally monitored and enforced by PLC and control computers. Though
functional, inherent system redundancy will be an easier way forward, tackling failures at the
core and not at the end of the flow lines.
The Ampelmann Demonstrator proved that offshore access can be made as easy as crossing the
street.
43
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
I am proud to have worked with all of the Dutch industry: from builders of components to
system integrators to critical end-users. WE did it, all of us!
If there will ever be a time and place to thank all, it is now in this beautiful picture show and for
me on Christmas Eve: we did it! You did it! Thank you! And be proud!
Ampelmann has always been more than just a cool image, it has become an icon of
accomplishment, and we made it happen. I am grateful and forever in dept to all those beautiful
people who owned this idea as I did.
Most indebted I am to my team: Frederik, David, Jillis and Arjan. You gave more than I could
ask. When weekends became working days and sleep a luxury, you were there, always. You
were there even when I was not. The perfect proof of a perfect team!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and the Ampelmann is beyond beholding…
THANK YOU!
44
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Partners:
45
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
Sponsors:
46
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
47
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
48
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
49
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
50
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
51
Ampelmann Demonstrator
Final Report 1-7-2008
52
AMPELMANN DEMONSTRATOR
Appendix III
Risk Analysis OWEZ access
Offshore Tower Access Trapping of feet • Sea - Swell / State Injury 3 4 12 • Trained personnel 3 1 3
between ladder rungs • PPE to include – floatation suit –
Routine access to ladder and tip of the Life Jacket – Head protection Gloves
gangway – Safety Footwear.
• SOP to be followed
• Transfer to WTG not to take place
over the set parameters for sea state
(vessel master has overall authority).
• Tip of gangway pushes against side
of inclined ladder above boat
landing to prevent being trapped
Offshore Tower Access Impacting into • Sea - Swell / State Damage to: 3 3 9 • Competent Vessel Master 3 1 3
fenders & ladders. Ladders • Competent Ampelmann operator
Routine access to ladder J Tubes • Rubber fender on tip gangway
Vessel • Gangway in freefloating mode to
follow any residual motions
• Transfer to WTG not to take place
over the set parameters for sea state
(vessel master has overall authority).
Offshore Tower Access Impacting into • Sea - Swell / State Injury 3 3 9 • Vessel Master to check sea state 3 1 3
fenders & ladders. with Marine Coordinator before
Routine access to ladder departure
• Local Sea conditions to be assessed
by vessel master.
• Each engineer to personally assess
the sea state for accessing tower - is
it within their own capabilities. One
man says no, no one to accesses the
tower.
• Ampelmann operations limit
exceed maximum prescribed sea
state limit for testing
Offshore Tower Access Slip on ladder • Marine growth and Injury 5 3 15 • Good grip footwear 5 1 5
Fall into water moisture Drowning • Maintain 3 points of contact with the
Climbing ladder Fall onto boat • Falling tools or Hypothermia ladder while climbing.
Carrying Equipment • Work Boat on stand by throughout
tools/equipment climb.
• Correct survival equipment for water
temperatures.
• Rescue equipment on Work Boat.
• Personnel will not climb access to
turbine with tools or equipment.
• Standby boat ready to pick up
MOB
• Gangway turned away from ladder
• No tools carried by transferring
crew
• Access to higher ladder: no marine
growth
Offshore Tower Access Hit by falling objects • Dropped tools or Injury to: 3 3 13 • All persons to wear hard hats when 3 1 3
equipment Person climbing in the vicinity of WTG.
Climbing ladder ladder. • No tools carried by transferring
Personnel in crew
boat.
Offshore Tower Egress Fall into water • Sea – Swell / State Injury 5 3 15 • Trained personnel 5 1 5
Fall into boat Drowning • PPE to include – floatation suit –
Routine Access to Boat Hyperthermia Life Jacket – Head protection Gloves
– Safety Footwear.
• SOP to be followed
• Transfer to & from WTG not to take
place if over the set parameters for
sea state (vessel master has overall
authority)
Offshore Tower Egress Personnel stranded • Change in sea state (to Inability to 5 3 15 • Work boat to be on standby within 5 1 5
on WTG severe). safely access/ the Wind Farm at all times.
Adverse weather • Snow, sleet, hail egress WTG. • Personnel not to be placed on WTG
• Visibility less than 700m if there is any doubt of being able to
get them off.
• Work Boat to have adequate capacity
to evacuate all operatives working
within the wind farm.
• Weather to be monitored regularly –
Personnel to be evacuated from
WTG’s before the conditions
deteriorates.
• Work Boats to carry WTG Survival
Packs containing welfare equipment
for enforced stay on a WTG.
• Do not access ladder when visibility
drops below 700m
Ampelmann operation Component failure: Injury 5 3 15 • Redundant power pack and Piston 5 1 5
• Loss of hydraulic Drowning type accumulator
Access/egress Falling into water power Hypothermia • UPS electrical power back up with
Falling onto • Loss of electrical power relay switches
gangway • Loss of valve control • Double valves on cylinders
Being hit by • Failure of position • Double position transducers
gangway transducers • Double measurement device
• Failure of measurement • Failsafe redundant control
system computers
• Failure of control
computer
Ampelmann operation Falling into water Loss of contact tip – Injury 5 4 20 • Limit to maximum workable sea 5 1 5
Falling onto structure due to: Drowning state < than maximum
Access/egress gangway • Ampelmann exceeds Hypothermia Ampelmann sea state
Being hit by motion envelope • Warning to captain and operator
gangway • Gangway too short about extension gangway: only in