Evaluation of the Effects Produced by the Commissioning Procedures on Offshore Oil Platform Operability

  • Alexandre Rocha do NascimentoEmail author
  • Andréa Regina Nunes de Carvalho
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


Research indicates that the average operability (production/capacity) of an oil platform is 80% against the target of 90%. This ex post facto case study of an oil platform in its first year of operation reveals that 75% of production losses are related to the commissioning of the platform.


Capital projects Oil and gas sector Commissioning 


  1. 1.
    Adolphe, C.: Commissioning the heating and cooling systems on an FPSO KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management. Stockholm, Sweden (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brito, M., Lopes, R., Rocha, L., Qualharini, E.: Beyond buildability: operability and commissioning of industrial facilities. In: 29th World Congress (IPMA) (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carrasco, J., Lima, F.: Nonlinear operability of a membrane reactor for direct methane aromatization. IFAC—PapersOnLine 48(8), 728–733 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    CII: Construction industry institute best practices. Available at (2018). Accessed date 25 June 2018
  5. 5.
    Coyner, R., Kramer, S.: Long term benefits of building commissioning: should owners pay the price? In: Creative Construction Conference (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    DNV-GL: Maros Training Course (2009) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gil, A.: Metodos e tecnicas de pesquisa social. Editora Atlas. 6a. Edição (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jung, S., Roh, M., Kim, K.: Arrangement method of a naval surface ship considering stability, operability, and survivability. Ocean Eng. 152, 316–333 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lafraia, J.: Manual de confiabilidade, mantenabilidade e disponibilidade. Qualitymark, Rio de Janeiro (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Merrow, E.: Industrial megaprojects: concepts, strategies, and practices for success, 1st edn. Wile, Hoboken, NJ (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mugnaini, M. Addabbo, T. Fort, A. Marino, R. Vignoli, V. Michelassi, C. Pedoto, G.: Large plants failures under modeling under variable commissioning schedules. In: IEEE International Systems Engineering Symposium (ISSE) (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nasir, F.: Metrics Primer. Upstream International Benchmarking Consortium. Independent Project Analysis, Georgetown, DC (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O’Brien, B., Autry, S., Buxo, R., House, D., Hunter, M., Hyland, J., LaRota, J., Leite, F., Lynam, B., Meeks, S., Mikaelsson, R., Parsons, M., Paulson, R., Pellegrino, S., Rammell, J., Vicknair, J.: Enhanced Work Packaging. Implementation resource 272-2. Design Through Workface Execution. Construction Industry Institute and Construction Owners Association of Alberta. Austin, TX (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Connor, J.T., Ermovik, T., Rugh, M.: Critical Success Factors for Project Commissioning and Startup. Research Summary 312-1. Austin, TX (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OREDA: Handbook, 6th edn. (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    PMI: A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sierra, et al.: Modelling the impact of climate change on harbour operability: the Barcelona port case study. Ocean Eng. 141, 64–78 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tezdogan, T., Incensik, A., Turan, O.: Operability assessment of high-speed passenger ships based on human comfort criteria. Ocean Eng. 89, 32–52 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yin, R.: Estudo de caso – Planejamento e métodos. Editora Bookman, Porto Alegre (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre Rocha do Nascimento
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andréa Regina Nunes de Carvalho
    • 2
  1. 1.PUC-RioRio de JaneiroBrazil
  2. 2.Instituto Nacional de TecnologiaRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations