Upload
vicky-ch
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
1/48
ABThe International Marine
Contractors Association
Guidelines for
The Issue of a Flag State
Verification and Acceptance
Document
www.imca-int.com127 DPVOA
February 1995
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
2/48
ABThe International Marine Contractors Association(IMCA) is the international trade association
representing offshore, marine and underwaterengineering companies.
IMCA promotes improvements in quality, health, safety,
environmental and technical standards through the publicationof information notes, codes of practice and by other
appropriate means.
Members are self-regulating through the adoption of IMCA
guidelines as appropriate. They commit to act as responsible
members by following relevant guidelines and being willing to be
audited against compliance with them by their clients.
There are two core committees that relate to all members:
Safety, Environment & Legislation Training, Certification & Personnel Competence
The Association is organised through four distinct divisions,
each covering a specific area of members interests: Diving,
Marine, Offshore Survey, Remote Systems & ROV.
There are also four regional sections which facilitate work on
issues affecting members in their local geographic area
Americas Deepwater, Asia-Pacific, Europe & Africa and MiddleEast & India.
127 DPVOA
The Marine Division is concerned with all aspects of specialist
vessel operations. Key aspects of its work include an annual
seminar, in particular focusing on practical experience, annual
reports on DP station keeping incidents, also incorporated in an
electronic database available to members of the division,industry-leading guidelines for the design and operation ofdynamically positioned vessels and a wealth of in-depth technical
reports on a range of related issues.
DPVOA merged with AODC to form IMCA in 1995.
www.imca-int.com/marine
The information contained herein is given for guidance only and endeavours to
reflect best industry practice. For the avoidance of doubt no legal liability shallattach to any guidance and/or recommendation and/or statement herein contained.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
3/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 2
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.1.1 In response to the requirement by the flag states and the published IMO
guidelines for vessels with Dynamic Positioning (DP) Systems (Ref:1), theDynamic Positioning Vessel Owners Association (DPVOA) required that a
review of the Flag State Verification Acceptance Document (FSVAD) be carried
out and a set of guidelines be produced, setting out the procedures and
requirements that a flag state could expect, in order to issue a FSVAD to a
vessel.
1.2 Objective
1.2.1 The overall objective of the Flag State Verification Acceptance Document is to:
Provide a comprehensive and safe testing and checking programme for theDP system;
Demonstrate that the DP system is maintained to fulfil the requirements ofthe vessel's capability and integrity;
Reduce over testing of systems such that components are not unnecessarilystressed;
To ensure that new problem areas are quickly incorporated into the systemand resolved;
To provide a continuous and structured record of events which are relevantto the DP operation of the vessel;
Provide a stand alone document which can be easily audited by the flag staterepresentative or by the organisation authorised by the flag state.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
4/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 3
2 GUIDELINES FOR FSVAD
2.1 General
2.1.1 It is recommended that a technically competent person who is familiar with the
overall DP system should be involved in organising the documentation.
2.1.2 The documentation required for a FSVAD can be arranged as a register where it
can be catalogued and kept up to date, thereby providing an easily auditable
system for both vessel's staff and auditor. This can be incorporated within a
quality management system, where the necessary documentation is indexed for
ease of use. An example format has been included in the Appendix 2 for
reference.
2.1.3 On the assignment of the relevant equipment class, the successful completion of
survey and testing in accordance with Appendix 2, and the compilation of the
relevant documentation, a FSVAD will be issued.
2.1.4 The documentation should include the main areas of interest listed below, which
can be presented in a format appropriate to the management system onboard the
vessel. This will expedite the appointed auditors task in assessing the vessel.
2.2 Initial Survey
2.2.1 Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
A systematic description of all systems and major components of the DP
system (Ref:5) is required and this can be accommodated within aFailure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). It is important to have a
FMEA completed as soon as possible (Refs: 2 and 6) to describe the DP
system and identify the relevant failure modes.
2.2.2 System Drawings
A full list or index of drawings that are onboard the vessel should be
available. The drawings listed should be adequate to describe the layout
of all systems including any modifications that have been made to the
DP system. The list should identify the location of the drawings, to
make the identification of systems and major components easier for theappointed auditor.
2.2.3 Pre-Installation Documentation and Certification
A systematic list of all pre-installation documents and certificates along
with Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), installation tests, commissioning
tests for each system and major component should be documented.
Copies of the pre-installation documentation should be filed onboard the
vessel when the vessel is new, or whenever a particular system is
modified. The purpose of the pre-installation documentation list is to
verify that all systems and major components have been tested and dulycertificated.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
5/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 4
2.2.4 DP Proving Trials
Results of the initial sea trials of the DP system after installation onboard
the vessel should be documented. This should include the Harbour
Acceptance Trials (HAT), Customer Acceptance Trials (CAT) and
FMEA Proving Trials (Refs:2 and 3) as appropriate. It is important to
document the programme of trials and completed results from the initialsea trials.
2.2.5 DP Operations Manual
The DP Operations Manual should describe the DP operating system
(Ref:2) specific to the vessel. A description of the procedures for
operating the DP system and the DP set-up procedures should be
detailed, along with the procedures for the start and termination of DP
operations. Vessel DP operational limits should be included to
incorporate weather working limits for DP operations within design and
operational limitations. The DP system description can be augmented byone line diagrams of the system.
2.2.6 Responsibility and Organisation
A description of the vessel's organisation and the responsibilities for DP
operations should be included in the DP Operations Manual, and
incorporated within the vessel's quality management system. It should
include the responsibility for the revision of procedures to include when
and how this should be carried out. Reference should be made to vessel
training and familiarisation of key DP personnel (Ref:8).
2.2.7 Emergency Control and Response
Emergency station keeping control and response procedures should be
included in the DP Operations manual, in the event of loss of DP control
or any situation where the DP status is degraded. A reporting system
should be incorporated to detail any DP incidents and any changes to the
vessel's safety policy.
2.2.8 DP Checklists and Control Procedures
DP checklists and control procedure should be included within the DPOperations Manual and be specific to the vessel. These checks and
controls should be set out in a clear and ordered method, to ensure that
each action is carried out in the correct sequence, accommodates the
nature and equipment class level of the vessel. The checks and controls
should be used to ensure that the vessel is being operated within the
requirements of the appropriate IMO equipment class. The DP
checklists and control procedures should be designed so as to be filed
and used to document each DP operation (Ref:9).
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
6/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 5
2.3 Annual DP Survey
2.3.1 Annual DP Trials
The annual DP trials (Refs:4 and 5) should include all test and control
procedures necessary to verify and document the DP system conforms to
the requirements of design and operational limitations appropriate to theequipment class of the vessel. The annual DP trials control and
procedures should be independently witnessed. The annual DP trials
programme is not fixed and may be changed or be adapted to
accommodate modifications to the system.
2.3.2 Planned Maintenance System
A system for documenting and carrying out maintenance to company
standard or manufacturers recommendations, as appropriate should be
included within an accepted planned maintenance schedule (Refs:1 and
2). Records of all maintenance carried out on the DP system should bereadily available.
2.4 Periodical DP Survey
2.4.1 5-Yearly DP Trials
The five yearly DP trials (Refs:1 and 5) should be carried out in
conjunction with the classification society's 5 yearly survey. The trials
should be used to verify and document that the DP system is operating
within design and operational limits appropriate to the equipment class of
the vessel.
2.5 Modification and Non-Conformances
2.5.1 Test and Control Procedures
Control and test procedures should be adopted (Ref:10) to ensure that
any modifications to the DP system and/or the installation of any new
equipment to the DP system is tested adequately and that DP system
operates within the design and operational limitations appropriate to the
equipment class of the vessel (Refs:2 and 5). This also applies to therectification of any non-compliancies.
Any modification to the software that may effect the DP system should
be documented and tested thoroughly, with the results recorded and filed.
The purpose of documenting and testing of any new equipment is to
incorporate the documentation into the existing system of
documentation.
2.5.2 DP System Records
Records should be kept to document the continuing and historical
condition of the vessel with respect to the DP system (Refs:2 and 5).
This information should be systematic and be arranged to facilitate easy
retrieval of individual reports.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
7/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 6
3 REFERENCES
1 International Maritime Organization (IMO); Guidelines for Vessels withDynamic Positioning Systems, draft MSC Circular DE 37/25/Add.1 Annex 7.
2 DP Vessel Owner's Association (DPVOA); Review of DP RelatedDocumentation on DP Vessels, Report No. GM-1219-0792-1448.
3 DP Vessel Owner's Association (DPVOA); Guidelines for the Design andOperation of Dynamically Positioned Vessels, Report No. GM-510-0189-650.
4 Global Maritime (GM); Example of a DP Vessel's Trials Programme, for DPVessel Owner's Association, 6, November 1991.
5 Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD); Guidelines and Notes No. 24, 15.6.93.
6 Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD); Guidelines and Notes No. 28,
20.10.94.
7 International Maritime Organization (IMO); Guidelines on Dynamic PositioningSystems for New MODUs and Vessels Engaged in Similar Operations, MSC
57/27 paragraph 24.34.
8 DP Vessel Owner's Association (DPVOA); Training & Experience of Key DPpersonnel, Report No. GM-1418-0993-1809.
9 DP Vessel Owner's Association (DPVOA); Example of a DP Vessel's TrialsProgramme, 6 November 1991.
10 United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association (UKOOA); Guidelines forAuditing Vessels with Dynamically Positioned Systems
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
8/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 7
APPENDIX 1 IMO GUIDELINES FOR DYNAMICALLY POSITIONED
VESSELS
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
9/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 8
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION4 ALBERT EMBANKMENTLONDON SE1 7SR
Telephone: 020 7735 7611Fax: 020 7587 3210Telex: 23588 IMOLDN G
Ref. T4/3.03
IMO
MSC/Circ.645
6 June 1994
GUIDELINES FOR VESSELS WITH DYNAMIC POSITIONING SYSTEMS
1 The Maritime Safety Committee at its sixty-third session (16 to 25 May 1994),approved the Guidelines for Vessels with Dynamic Positioning Systems, set out
at annex to the present circular, as prepared by the Sub-Committee on ShipDesign and Equipment at its thirty-seventh session.
2 Member Governments are invited to bring the Guidelines to the attention of allbodies concerned, and apply the Guidelines to new vessels with dynamic
positioning systems constructed on or after 1 July 1994, in conjunction with
implementation of the provisions of paragraph 4.12 of the 1989 MODU Code as
amended by resolution MSC.38(63).
3 Member Governments are also invited to use the proposed model form of flagState verification and acceptance document set out in the appendix to the
Guidelines.
***
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
10/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 9
ANNEX
Guidelines for Vessels with Dynamic Positioning Systems
CONTENTS
PREAMBLE...................................................................................................................10
1 GENERAL .........................................................................................................11
1.1 Purpose and responsibility ................................................................................ 11
1.2 Application........................................................................................................ 11
1.3 Definitions......................................................................................................... 11
1.4 Exemptions........................................................................................................ 12
1.5 Equivalents........................................................................................................ 12
2 EQUIPMENT CLASSES..................................................................................14
3 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................16
3.1 General .............................................................................................................. 16
3.2 Power system .................................................................................................... 16
3.3 Thruster system................................................................................................. 17
3.4 DP-control system............................................................................................. 17
3.5 Cables and piping systems ................................................................................ 20
3.6 Requirements for essential non-DP systems..................................................... 20
4 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS .............................................................21
5 SURVEYS, TESTING AND THE FLAG STATE VERIFICATION
AND ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT (FSVAD) ..............................................22
5.1 Surveys and testing ........................................................................................... 22
5.2 Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document (FSVAD).......................... 23
APPENDIX - MODEL FORM OF FLAG STATE VERIFICATION AND
ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT.........................................................................24
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
11/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 10
PREAMBLE
1 These Guidelines for vessels with dynamic positioning systems have beendeveloped to provide an international standard for dynamic positioning systems
on all types of new vessel.
2 Taking into account that dynamically positioned vessels are moved and operatedinternationally and recognizing that the design and operating criteria require
special consideration, the Guidelines have been developed to facilitate
international operation without having to document the dynamic positioning
system in detail for every new area of operation.
3 The Guidelines are not intended to prohibit the use of any existing vesselbecause its dynamic positioning system does not comply with these Guidelines.
Many existing units have operated successfully and safely for extended periods
of time and their operating history should be considered in evaluating their
suitability to conduct dynamically positioned operations.
4 Compliance with the Guidelines will be documented by a Flag State Verificationand Acceptance Document (FSVAD) for the dynamic positioning system. The
purpose of a FSVAD is to ensure that the vessel is operated, surveyed and tested
according to vessel specific procedures and that the results are properly
recorded.
5 A coastal State may permit any vessel whose dynamic positioning system isdesigned to a different standard than that of these Guidelines to engage in
operations.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
12/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 11
1 GENERAL
1.1 Purpose and responsibility
The purpose of these Guidelines is to recommend design criteria, necessary
equipment, operating requirements, and a test and documentation system fordynamic positioning systems to reduce the risk to personnel, the vessel, other
vessels or structures, sub-sea installations and the environment while performing
operations under dynamic positioning control.
The responsibility for ensuring that the provisions of the Guidelines are
complied with rests with the owner of the DP-vessel.
1.2 Application
The Guidelines apply to dynamically positioned units or vessels, the keel of which islaid or which is at a similar stage of construction on or after 1 July 1994.
1.3 Definitions
In addition to the definitions in the MODU Code 1989 the following definitions are
necessary for the guidelines:
Dynamically positioned vessel (DP-vessel) means a unit or a vessel which
automatically maintains its position (fixed location or predetermined track) by
means of thruster force.
Dynamic positioning systems (DP-system) means the complete installation
necessary for dynamically positioning a vessel comprising the following
sub-systems:
.1 power system,
.2 thruster system, and
.3 DP-control system.
Position keeping means maintaining a desired position within the normal
excursions of the control system and the environmental conditions.
Power system means all components and systems necessary to supply the
DP-system with power. The power system includes:
.1 prime movers with necessary auxiliary systems including piping,
.2 generators,
.3 switchboards, and
.4 distributing system (cabling and cable routeing).
Thruster system means all components and systems necessary to supply the
DP-system with thrust force and direction. The thruster system includes:.1 thrusters with drive units and necessary auxiliary systems
including piping,
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
13/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 12
.2 main propellers and rudders if these are under the control of the
DP-system,
.3 thruster control electronics,
.4 manual thruster controls, and
.5 associated cabling and cable routeing.
DP-control system means all control components and systems, hardware and
software necessary to dynamically position the vessel. The DP-control system
consists of the following:
.1 computer system/joystick system,
.2 sensor system,
.3 display system (operator panels),
.4 position reference system, and
.5 associated cabling and cable routeing.
Computer system means a system consisting of one or several computers
including software and their interfaces.
Redundancy means ability of a component or system to mantain or restore its
function, when a single failure has occurred. Redundancy can be achieved for
instance by installation of multiple components, systems or alternative means of
performing a function.
Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document (FSVAD) means the
document issued by the Administration to a DP-vessel complying with theseGuidelines. (See Appendix for model form.)
1.4 Exemptions
An Administration may exempt any vessel which embodies features of a novel kind
from any provisions of the guidelines the application of which might impede research
into the development of such features. Any such vessels should, however, comply with
safety requirements which, in the opinion of the Administration, are adequate for the
service intended and are such as to ensure the overall safety of the vessel.
The Administration which allows any such exemptions should list the exemptions on
the Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document (FSVAD) and communicate to
the Organization the particulars, together with the reason therefor, so that the
Organization may circulate the same to other Governments for the information of their
officers.
1.5 Equivalents
Where the Guidelines require that a particular fitting, material, appliance,
apparatus, item of equipment or type thereof should be fitted or carried out in a
vessel, or that any particular provision should be made, or any procedure orarrangement should be complied with, the Administration may allow other
fitting, material, appliance, apparatus, item of equipment or type thereof to be
fitted or carried, or any other provision, procedure or arrangement to be made in
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
14/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 13
that vessel, if it is satisfied by trial thereof or otherwise that such fitting,
material, appliance, apparatus, item of equipment or type thereof or that any
particular provision, procedure or arrangement is at least as effective as that
required by the Guidelines.
When an Administration so allows any fitting, material, appliance, apparatus,
item of equipment or type thereof, or provision, procedure, arrangement, noveldesign or application to be substituted, it should communicate to the
Organization the particulars thereof, together with a report on the evidence
submitted, so that the Organization may circulate the same to other Governments
for information of their officers.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
15/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 14
2 EQUIPMENT CLASSES
2.1 A DP-system consists of components and systems acting together to achieve
sufficiently reliable position keeping capability. The necessary reliability is
determined by the consequence of a loss of position keeping capability. The
larger the consequence, the more reliable the DP-system should be.
To achieve this philosophy the requirements have been grouped into three
equipment classes. For each equipment class the associated worst case failure
should be defined as in 2.2 below.
The equipment class of the vessel required for a particular operation should be
agreed between the owner of the vessel and the customer based on a risk
analysis of the consequence of a loss of position. Else, the Administration or
coastal State may decide the equipment class for the particular operation.
2.2 The equipment classes are defined by their worst case failure modes as follows:
.1 For equipment class 1, loss of position may occur in the event of a single
fault
.2 For equipment class 2, a loss of position is not to occur in the event of a
single fault in any active component or system. Normally static
components will not be considered to fail where adequate protection
from damage is demonstrated, and reliability is to the satisfaction of the
Administration. Single failure criteria include:
.1 Any active component or system (generators, thrusters,
switchboards, remote controlled valves, etc.).
.2 Any normally static component (cables, pipes, manual valves,
etc.) which is not properly documented with respect to protection
and reliability.
.3 For equipment class 3, a single failure includes:
.1 Items listed above for class 2, and any normally static component
is assumed to fail.
.2 All components in any one watertight compartment, from fire or
flooding.
.3 All components in any one fire sub-division, from fire or flooding
(for cables, see also 3.5.1).
2.3 For equipment classes 2 and 3, a single inadvertent act should be considered as asingle fault if such an act is reasonably probable.
2.4 Based on the single failure definitions in 2.2 the worst case failure should bedetermined and used as the criterion for the consequence analysis (see 3.4.2.4).
2.5 The Administration should assign the relevant equipment class to a DP-vesselbased on the criteria in 2.2 and state it in the Flag State Verification and
Acceptance Document (FSVAD) (see 5.2).
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
16/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 15
2.6 When a DP-vessel is assigned an equipment class this means that the DP-vesselis suitable for all types of DP-operations within the assigned and lower
equipment classes.
2.7 It is a provision of the guidelines that the DP-vessel is operated in such a waythat the worst case failure, as determined in 2.2, can occur at any time without
causing a significant loss of position.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
17/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 16
3 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
3.1 General
In so far as is practicable all components in a DP-system should be designed,
constructed and tested in accordance with international standards recognized bythe Administration.
In order to meet the single failure criteria given in 2.2, redundancy of
components will normally be necessary as follows:
.1 for equipment class 2, redundancy of all active components;
.2 for equipment class 3, redundancy of all components and physical
separation of the components.
For equipment class 3, full redundancy may not always be possible (e.g., theremay be a need for a single change-over system from the main computer system
to the back-up computer system). Non-redundant connections between
otherwise redundant and separated systems may be accepted provided it is
documented to give clear safety advantages, and that their reliability can be
demonstrated and documented to the satisfaction of the Administration. Such
connections should be kept to the absolute minimum and made to fail to the
safest condition. Failure in one system should in no case be transferred to the
other redundant system.
Redundant components and systems should be immediately available and with
such capacity that the DP-operation can be continued for such a period that thework in progress can be terminated safely. The transfer to redundant component
or system should be automatic as far as possible, and operator intervention
should be kept to a minimum. The transfer should be smooth and within
acceptable limitations of the operation.
3.2 Power system
The power system should have an adequate response time to power demand
changes.
For equipment class 1 the power system need not be redundant.
For equipment class 2, the power system should be divisible into two or more
systems such that in the event of failure of one system at least one other system
will remain in operation. The power system may be run as one system during
operation, but should be arranged by bus-tie breakers to separate automatically
upon failures which could be transferred from one system to another, including
overloading and short-circuits.
For equipment class 3, the power system should be divisible into two or more
systems such that in the event of failure of one system, at least one other system
will remain in operation. The divided power system should be located in
different spaces separated by A.60 class division. Where the power systems are
located below the operational waterline, the separation should also be watertight.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
18/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 17
Bus-tie breakers should be open during equipment class 3 operations unless
equivalent integrity of power operation can be accepted according to 3.1.3.
For equipment classes 2 and 3, the power available for position keeping should
be sufficient to maintain the vessel in position after worst case failure according
to 2.2.
If a power management system is installed, adequate redundancy or reliability to
the satisfaction of the Administration should be demonstrated.
3.3 Thruster system
The thruster system should provide adequate thrust in longitudinal and lateral
directions, and provide yawing moment for heading control.
For equipment classes 2 and 3, the thruster system should be connected to the
power system in such a way that 3.3.1 can be complied with even after failure ofone of the constituent power systems and the thrusters connected to that system.
The values of thruster force used in the consequence analysis (see 3.4.2.4)
should be corrected for interference between thrusters and other effects which
would reduce the effective force.
Failure of thruster system including pitch, azimuth or speed control, should not
make the thruster rotate or go to uncontrolled full pitch and speed.
3.4 DP-control system
General
.1 In general the DP-control system should be arranged in a DP-control
station where the operator has a good view of the vessels exterior limits
and the surrounding area.
.2 The DP-control station should display information from the power
system, thruster system and DP-control system to ensure that these
systems are functioning correctly. Information necessary to operate the
DP-system safely should be visible at all times. Other information
should be available upon operator request.
.3 Display systems and the DP-control station in particular should be based
on sound ergonometric principles. The DP-control system should
provide for easy selection of control mode, i.e. manual, joystick, or
computer control of thrusters, and the active mode should be clearly
displayed.
.4 For equipment classes 2 and 3, operator controls should be designed so
that no single inadvertent act on the operators panel can lead to a critical
condition.
.5 Alarms and warnings for failures in systems interfaced to and/or
controlled by the DP-control system are to be audible and visual.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
19/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 18
A permanent record of their occurrence and of status changes should be
provided together with any necessary explanations.
.6 The DP-control system should prevent failures being transferred from
one system to another. The redundant components should be so arranged
that a failure of one component should be isolated, and the other
component activated.
.7 It should be possible to control the thrusters manually, by individual
joysticks and by a common joystick, in the event of failure of the
DP-control system.
.8 The software should be produced in accordance with an appropriate
international quality standard recognized by the Administration.
Computers
.1 For equipment class 1, the DP-control system need not be redundant.
.2 For equipment class 2, the DP-control system should consist of at least
two independent computer systems. Common facilities such as self-
checking routines, data transfer arrangements, and plant interfaces should
not be capable of causing the failure of both/all systems.
.3 For equipment class 3, the DP-control system should consist of at least
two independent computer systems with self-checking and alignment
facilities. Common facilities such as self-checking routines, data transfer
arrangements and plant interfaces should not be capable of causing
failure at both/all systems. In addition, one back-up DP control systemshould be arranged, see 3.4.2.6. An alarm should be initiated if any
computer fails or is not ready to take control.
.4 For equipment classes 2 and 3, the DP-control system should include a
software function, normally known as consequence analysis, which
continuously verifies that the vessel will remain in position even if the
worst case failure occurs. This analysis should verify that the thrusters
remaining in operation after the worst case failure can generate the same
resultant thruster force and moment as required before the failure. The
consequence analysis should provide an alarm if the occurrence of a
worst case failure would lead to a loss of position due to insufficientthrust for the prevailing environmental conditions. For operations which
will take a long time to safely terminate, the consequence analysis should
include a function which simulates the thrust and power remaining after
the worse case failure, based on manual input of weather trend.
.5 Redundant computer systems should be arranged with automatic transfer
of control after a detected failure in one of the computer systems. The
automatic transfer of control from one computer system to another
should be smooth, and within the acceptable limitations of the operation.
.6 For equipment class 3, the back-up DP-control system should be in aroom separated by A.60 class division from the main DP-control station.
During DP-operation this back-up control system should be continuously
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
20/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 19
updated by input from the sensors, position reference system, thruster
feedback, etc., and be ready to take over control. The switch-over of
control to the back-up system should be manual, situated on the back-up
computer and should not be affected by failure of the main DP-control
system.
.7 An uninterruptable power supply (UPS) should be provided for each DP-computer system to ensure that any power failure will not affect more
than one computer. UPS battery capacity should provide a minimum of
30 minutes operation following a mains supply failure.
Position reference system
.1 Position reference systems should be selected with due consideration to
operational requirements, both with regard to restrictions caused by the
manner of deployment and expected performance in working situation.
.2 For equipment classes 2 and 3, at least three position reference systemsshould be installed and simultaneously available to the DP-control
system during operation.
.3 When two or more position reference systems are required, they should
not all be of the same type, but based on different principles and suitable
for the operating conditions.
.4 The position reference systems should produce data with adequate
accuracy for the intended DP-operation.
.5 The performance of position reference systems should be monitored andwarnings provided when the signals from the position reference systems
are either incorrect or substantially degraded.
.6 For equipment class 3, at least one of the position reference systems
should be connected directly to the back-up control system and separated
by A.60 class division from the other position reference systems.
Vessel sensors
.1 Vessel sensors should at least measure vessel heading, vessel motions,
and wind speed and direction.
.2 When an equipment class 2 or 3 DP-control system is fully dependent on
correct signals from vessel sensors, then these signals should be based on
three systems serving the same purpose (i.e. this will result in at least
three gyro compasses being installed).
.3 Sensors for the same purpose, connected to redundant systems should be
arranged independently so that failure of one will not affect the others.
.4 For equipment class 3, one of each type of sensors should be connected
directly to the back-up control system and separated by A.60 class
division from the other sensors.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
21/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 20
3.5 Cables and piping systems
For equipment class 3, cables for redundant equipment or systems should not be
routed together through the same compartments. Where this is unavoidable such
cables could run together in cable ducts of A-60 class, the termination of the
ducts included, which are effectively protected from all fire hazards, except that
represented by the cables themselves. Cable connection boxes are not allowedin such ducts.
For equipment class 2, piping systems for fuel, lubrication, hydraulic oil, cooling
water and cables should be located with due regard to fire hazards and
mechanical damage.
For equipment class 3, redundant piping system (i.e. piping for fuel, cooling
water, lubrication oil, hydraulic oil, etc.) should not be routed together through
the same compartments. Where this is unavoidable, such pipes could run
together in ducts of A-60 class, the termination of the ducts included, which are
effectively protected from all fire hazards, except that represented by the pipesthemselves.
3.6 Requirements for essential non-DP systems
For equipment classes 2 and 3, systems not directly part of the DP-system but
which in the event of failure could cause failure of the DP-system, (e.g.,
common fire supression systems, engine ventilation systems, shut-down
systems, etc.), should also comply with relevant requirements of these
Guidelines.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
22/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 21
4 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
4.1 Before every DP-operation, the DP-system should be checked according to a
vessel specific location check list to make sure that the DP-system is
functioning correctly and that the system has been set up for the appropriate
equipment class.
4.2 During DP-operations, the system should be checked at regular intervalsaccording to a vessel specific watchkeeping checklist.
4.3 DP operations necessitating equipment class 2 or 3 should be terminated whenthe environmental conditions are such that the DP-vessel will no longer be able
to keep position if the single failure criterion applicable to the equipment class
should occur. In this context deterioration of environmental conditions and the
necessary time to safely terminate the operation should also be taken into
consideration. This should be checked by way of environmental envelopes if
operating in equipment class 1 and by way of an automatic consequence analysisif operating in equipment class 2 or 3. The necessary operating instructions,
etc., should be on board.
4.4 The following checklists, test procedures and instructions should be incorporatedinto the DP operating manuals for the vessel:
.1 Location checklist (see 4.1).
.2 Watchkeeping checklist (see 4.2).
.3 DP-operation instructions (see 4.3).
.4 Annual tests and procedures (see 5.1.1.3).
.5 Initial and periodical (5-year) tests and procedures (See 5.1.1.1 and
5.1.1.2).
.6 Example of tests and procedures after modifications and non-
conformities (see 5.1.1.4).
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
23/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 22
5 SURVEYS, TESTING AND THE FLAG STATE VERIFICATION ANDACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT (FSVAD)
5.1 Surveys and testing
Each DP-vessel which is required to comply with the Guidelines is subject to thesurveys and testing specified below:
.1 Initial survey which should include a complete survey of the DP-system
to ensure full compliance with the applicable parts of the guidelines.
Further it includes a complete test of all systems and components and the
ability to keep position after single failures associated with the assigned
equipment class. The type of test carried out and results should be
documented in the Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document
(FSVAD), see 5.2.
.2 Periodical survey at intervals not exceeding five years to ensure fullcompliance with the applicable parts of the guidelines. A complete test
should be carried out as required in 5.1.1.1. The type of test carried out
and the results should be documented in the FSVAD, see 5.2.
.3 Annual survey should be carried out within three months before or after
each anniversary date of the initial survey. The annual survey should
ensure that the DP-system has been maintained in accordance with
applicable parts of the guidelines and is in good working order. Further
an annual test of all important systems and components should be carried
out to document the ability of the DP-vessel to keep position after single
failures associated with the assigned equipment class. The type of test
carried out and results should be documented in the FSVAD, see 5.2.
.4 A survey either general or partial according to circumstances should be
made every time a defect is discovered and corrected or an accident
occurs which affects the safety of the DP-vessel, or whenever any
significant repairs or alterations are made. After such a survey,
necessary tests should be carried out to demonstrate full compliance with
the applicable provisions of the Guidelines. The type of tests carried out
and results should be recorded and kept on board.
These surveys and tests should be witnessed by officers of the Administration.
The Administration may, however, entrust the surveys and testing either to
surveyors nominated for the purpose or to organizations recognized by it. In
every case the Administration concerned should fully guarantee the
completeness and efficiency of the surveys and testing. The Administration may
entrust the owner of the vessel to carry out annual and minor repair surveys
according to a test programme accepted by the Administration.
After any survey and testing has been completed, no significant change should
be made to the DP-system without the sanction of the Administration, except the
direct replacement of equipment and fittings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
24/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 23
5.2 Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document (FSVAD)
A Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document (FSVAD) should be issued,
after survey and testing in accordance with these Guidelines, either by officers
of the Administration or by an organization duly authorized by it. In every case
the Administration assumes full responsibility for the FSVAD.
The FSVAD should be drawn up in the official language of the issuing country
and be that of the model given in the appendix to the Guidelines. If the language
used is neither English nor French, the text should include a translation into one
of these languages.
The FSVAD is issued for an unlimited period, or for a period specified by the
Administration.
An FSVAD should cease to be valid if significant alterations have been made in
the DP-system equipment, fittings, arrangements, etc., specified in the
Guidelines without the sanction of the Administration, except the directreplacement of such equipment or fittings for the purpose of repair or
maintenance.
An FSVAD issued to a DP-vessel should cease to be valid upon transfer of such
a vessel to the flag of another country.
The privileges of the FSVAD may not be claimed in favour of any DP-vessel
unless the FSVAD is valid.
Control of a DP-vessel holding a valid FSVAD should be carried out according
to the principles of 1.7 in the MODU Code 1989.
Results of the FSVAD tests should be readily available on board for reference.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
25/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 24
APPENDIX 2 EXAMPLE FORMAT FOR FLAG STATE VERIFICATION
ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
26/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 25
APPENDIX - MODEL FORM OF FLAG STATE VERIFICATION AND
ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT
Appendix to IMO MSC Circular 645
FLAG STATE VERIFICATION AND ACCEPTANCE DOCUMENT
(Official seal) (State)
Issued under the provisions of the
GUIDELINES FOR VESSELS WITH
DYNAMIC POSITIONING SYSTEMS
(MSC/Circ.645)
under the authority of the Government of
_________________________________________(full designation of the State)
by ______________________________________________________________(full official designation of the competent person or organization authorised by the Administration)
Distinctive identification(Name or number)
Type Port of registry
OfficialIMO-number
Date on which keel was laid or vessel was at similar stage of construction or onwhich major conversion was commenced ................................................................
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the above-mentioned vessel has been duly
documented, surveyed and tested in accordance with the Guidelines for Vessels
with Dynamic Positioning Systems (MSC/Circ.645) and found to comply with the
Guidelines.
The vessel is allowed to operate in DP Equipment Class .........................................
and in lower equipment classes.
This document remains valid until ............................................................................
unless terminated by the Administration, provided that the vessel is operated,
tested and surveyed according to the requirements in the guidelines and the results
are properly recorded.
Issued at ...................................................................................................................(Place of issue of document)
...................... .......................................................................................................(Date of issue) (Signature of authorized official issuing the certificate)
...................................................................................................................................(Seal or stamp of the issuing authority, as appropriate)
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
27/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 26
LIST OF EXEMPTIONS AND EQUIVALENTS
(ref. items 1.4 and 1.5 of the Guidelines
-
-
-
-
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
28/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 27
LIST OF MAIN SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS COVERED BY FSVAD*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
* All main systems and components included in the dynamic positioning system are to be listed in a systematic
way. As an alternative reference can be made to drawings, etc. It is important that it is possible by this list toidentify all systems and components covered by FSVAD. Software versions should also be identified.Equipment installed after date of issuing FSVAD should only be included in the list after control and testing has
been completed and modifications and non-conformities report signed.
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
29/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 28
RECORD OF ANNUAL SURVEY REPORTS,
AND SPECIAL (5 YEARS) SURVEY REPORTS
Date Test type RemarksReportReferenceDate/Number
*
Sign. ofappointedsurveyor (IR)
Sign. of Master/PlatformManager
*
All reports should be filed together with this FSVAD for use during later testing and inspections bynominated surveyors, flag State surveyors, etc.
IR = if required, ref. item 5.1.2
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
30/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 29
Cover Sheet
Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
SAMPLESHIP 1
Document SH/01/DP doc/01/Rev 1/
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
31/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 30
Part 1 DP SYSTEM AND MAIN COMPONENTS
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
32/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA
DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER LOCATION MODEL SERIALAD
MAIN GENERATOR NO. 3 NISHIBA ELECTRIC MAIN ENG. RM PORT NT AKL-VC 505000 A1A-3 KVA.4
MAIN GENERATOR NO. 4 NISHIBA ELECTRIC MAIN ENG. RM STBD NT AKL-VC 505000 A1A-4 KVA.4
MAIN GENERATOR NO. 5 NISHIBA ELECTRIC MAIN ENG. RM PORT NT AKL-VC 505000 A1A-5 KVA.4
MAIN GENERATOR NO. 6 NISHIBA ELECTRIC MAIN ENG. RM STBD NT AKL-VC 505000 A1A-6 4160V
MAIN SWITCH BOARD PORT NISHIBA ELECTRIC MSB ROOM PORT 12000 X 2990 X 2540 505000-CS10A 4160V
MAIN SWITCH BOARD STBD NISHIBA ELECTRIC MSB ROOM STBD 12000 X 2990 X 2540 505000-CS10B 130 K
PUMP, MAIN SEAWATER COOL #1 NANIWA AUX.MACH.RM.C.P FBWV-450.2
PUMP, MAIN SEAWATER COOL #1E.MOTOR
NISHIBA ELECTRIC AUX.MACH.RM.C.P NTI KK RCT5 505001 M3-2 130 K
PUMP, MAIN SEAWATER COOL #2 NANIWA AUX.MACH.RM.C.P FBWV-450.2
PUMP, MAIN SEAWATER COOL #2E.MOTOR
NISHIBA ELECTRIC AUX.MACH.RM.C.P NTI KK RCT5 505001 M7-1 130 K
PUMP, SEAWATER SUPPLY PORT #1 NANIWA FWD PORT PUMPR FBWV-450.2
PUMP, SEAWATER SUPPLY PORT #1E.MOTOR
NISHIBA ELECTRIC FWD PORT PUMPR NTI KK RCT5 505001 M7-2 130 K
PUMP, SEAWATER SUPPLY PORT #2 NANIWA FWD PORT PUMPR FBWV-450.2
PUMP, SEAWATER SUPPLY PORT #2E.MOTOR
NISHIBA ELECTRIC FWD PORT PUMPR NTI KK RCT5 505001 M7-3 130 K
PUMP, SEAWATER SUPPLY STBD #1 NANIWA STDB PORT PUMPR FBWV-450.2
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
33/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 32
Part 2 SEA TRIALS REPORT
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
34/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 33
Harbour Acceptance Trials (HAT)Customer Acceptance Trial (CAT)
to be provided
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
35/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 34
Document Details and Issue Record
Title: FMEA Proving Trials 1997 Sampleship 1
Issue: Rev. No: Date Reason Author Checked Approved
1 0 28.2.97 Original issue
FMEA Proving Trials 1997
Sampleship 1 for Sample Ship Industries
Report No:
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
36/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 35
Part 3 DP OPERATIONS MANUAL
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
37/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 36
Copy of DP Operations Manual including Checkliststo be provided
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
38/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 37
Part 4 ANNUAL DP TRIALS PROCEDURES
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
39/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 38
Document Details and Issue Record
Title: Annual Trials 1998 Sampleship 1
Issue: Rev. No: Date Reason Author Checked Approved
1 0 28.2.98 Original issue
Annual DP Trials 1998
Sampleship 1 for Sample Ship Industries
Report No:
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
40/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 39
Document Details and Issue Record
Title: Annual Trials 1999 Sampleship 1
Issue: Rev. No: Date Reason Author Checked Approved
1 0 28.2.99 Original issue
Annual DP Trials 1999
Sampleship 1 for Sample Ship Industries
Report No:
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
41/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 40
Part 5 FIVE-YEARLY DP TRIALS PROCEDURE
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
42/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 41
Document Details and Issue Record
Title: Interim 5-Yearly DP Trials 2001 Sampleship 1
Issue: Rev. No: Date Reason Author Checked Approved
1 0 28.2.01 Original issue
Interim 5-Yearly DP Trials 2001
Sampleship 1 for Sample Ship Industries
Report No:
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
43/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 42
Part 6 PLANNED MAINTENANCE SYSTEM
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
44/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 43
STATEMENT
6 January 1995
On the DSV Sampleship a DnV approved planned maintenance system is run on
AMOS-D computer programme. It is based on equipment run hours and on periodical
intervals. The run hours and intervals are in compliance with manufacturers
recommendations and according to on-board experience. All planned maintenance is
kept up to date under the responsibility of the Chief Engineer
Head Operations Department Head Equipment Management Section
AN Other UT Cobbly
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
45/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 44
Part 7 SYSTEM MODIFICATION
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
46/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 45
Extract of QA Management Procedure forDP System Modifications and Documentation
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
47/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
IMCA 127 DPVOA Page 46
Part 8 RECORDS
8/2/2019 IMCAM127
48/48
Guidelines to the Issue of a Flag State Verification Acceptance Document
SAMPLESHIP
RECORD OF DP TESTS AND SURVEYS
6 January 1995
Date Test Type Location Report Signatureof Approval
January 1995 Test prior to job North Sea GM-666-0110-123
May 1997 Suitability test Morecambe Bay DP Trials
Sept 1999 Annual Trials North Sea GM Sept. 1999
July 2001 Annual Trials North Sea GM-999-1111-5252
Aug 2003 Trials for NMD Cl.3 North Sea August 2003
Feb 2005 Trials for NMD Cl.3 Stavanger Feb 2005
June 2007 Annual Trials Bergen GM-1111-5555-66565