2011 Marine Cybernetics AS Trondheim, Norway Marine Cybernetics

Transcription

1 AS Trondheim, Norway

2 3rd Party Testing of Drilling Control Systems Ingeniørkonferansen 2011 AS Trondheim, Norway

3 Outlines Challenges of Drilling Control Systems Concept of HIL testing Delivery Model Scope of Work and Utilizing 3D

4 Challenges

5 Software on modern ships and rigs SW technology: evolved from sledge-hammer to space-shuttle technology SW is now an essential part of many safety-critical and operation-critical systems: Drill-floor Control Systems Crane Control Systems BOP Control Systems DP PMS Different vendors Testing and verification of software has not kept pace with the development

6 3 rd Party Verification Process for Drilling Systems Important principle when high standards of safety are required. Both Class and FMEA companies have a third party role Does not replace internal test activities Development (vendor 1) Testing (vendor 1) Development (vendor 2) Testing (vendor 2) 3 rd party verification by HIL testing (Marine Cybernetics) Installation and operation Development (vendor 3) Testing (vendor 3)

7 Vendor vs Independent 3 rd party testing Test by 3 rd party utilizes: Core Business: SW testing and test methodology Broad testing experience Experienced in identifying SW weakness and failure Non-biased/filtered test selection No economic consequence when identifying failures and weakness in SW

8 Key factor of success Customer 3rd Party 3rd Party Role Integrity Respect Controll and verify Vendor 1 Vendor n Vendor 2 Cooperation and dialogue

9 HIL

10 The concept of HIL testing HIL simulator The control system thinks it connected to the real plant Facilitates: early testing of the SW. thorough and extensive testing; testing can be done outside the critical timeline for vessel construction. testing of failures and off-design situations that would be difficult, dangerous, or costly to test onboard the vessel testing that could cause damage to equipment if conducted onboard the vessel integration testing of control systems from several vendors. third party testing, since no detailed design knowledge about the control system SW is needed for testing. reduces NPT: test on replica hardware system not available on site

11 HIL Testing of Installations Configuration: The computers/plcs are connected with the driller s chair through some sort of network. The computers/plcs control the drilling equipment Challenge: Extensive testing of drilling equipment is important to avoid computer errors Proposed Solution: HIL testing by Marine Cybernetics Drillers Cabin Drilling Control Network (UDP/TCP/IP) PLC Computers Drilling Equipment

12 HIL Testing of Installations Configuration: The computers/plcs are connected with the driller s chair through some sort of network. The computers/plcs control the drilling equipment which are simulated in the HIL simulator Advantage with the approach of Marine Cybernetics: Extensive testing can be done before installation Efficiency in testing for detailed failure situations Drillers Cabin Drilling Control Network (UDP/TCP/IP) PLC Computers Marine Cybernetics HIL Simulator HIL Simulator of Drilling Equipment

13 3 rd party verification established for drilling systems Project Description Verification of computer system on drilling systems using HIL Scope of Work Detailed HIL simulators HIL testing of computer system in lab test The Role of Marine Cybernetics 3 rd party tester/independent test supplier What was done? Functional testing: Does the computer system work according to functional specifications, documentation and customer demands? Failure testing: Does the computer system detect and handle failure situations?

14 Good results from HIL testing of drilling systems Scope: Detailed operational situations Detailed failure situations Single machine, integrated system and zone management Evaluation: Verification and correction Good cooperation between parties HIL for drilling systems validated Extensive, detailed and systematic test scope Saved time during installation and commissioning on the rig Identified errors that would not been found with other methods

15 Delivery model

16 Why Drill-HIL in laboratory? Distributed PLCs Vendor limited access on rig limited when building phase is finalized limited rig down time during SW update installation, testing and verification on site. More extreme testing; Safer Drill-HIL in laboratory PLCs from several different vendors located in the same room. Restricted access Black Box testing Vendor PLC software access not necessary to HIL-test.

17 Delivery Model Ideal process Rig SW SW on rig SW on rig Vendor SW SW update HIL SW TaL TaL TaL retest

18 Delivery Model Testing while commissioning Rig SW SW on rig Commissioning/ Development SW on rig SW on rig Vendor SW SW update SW Merge HIL SW TaL TaL TaL retest TaL service

19 Scope of Work

20 Test Plan HIL Commissioning: Duration: 3-5 weeks Involved parties: HIL supplier and Vendors Activities: Interface testing, scaling of parameters, tuning of models etc TaL 1: Duration 3-4 weeks Involved parties: HIL supplier, Vendors and Customers Activities: Single machine/system testing Integrated functionality Anti-Collision/ZMS testing Reporting: Test Results and Test Summaries TaL 2: Duration 2-3 weeks Involved parties: HIL supplier, Vendors and Customers Activities: Retest: Follow up and closing of findings, and spot checking Reporting: New revision of Test Results and Test Summaries

21 Interface HIL simulator - Drilling control system Interfaces all relevant IO for each machine or system to the HIL simulator Drilling control system Operator stations Typical numbers of HW I/O Draw work with VFD 800 hardwired and serial IO signals Top Drive with VFD: 300 hardwired and serial IO signals Hardwired IO/ Serial IO (e.g. Profibus DP, SSI encoders) Pipe handling machines (each): hardwired and serial IO signals HIL simulator Replacing HW I/O during HIL HW IO between Control may be replaced by remote IO

22 Test scope Typical # of tests for each machine / system: 200 tests for Draw work / VFD 150 tests for Top Drive / VFD 20% are test of functions 80% are test of functions while simulating a failure 150 tests for complex pipe handling machines tests for simpler pipe handling machines 100 tests for heave compensating system 100 tests for anti-collision/zone management system

23 Expected results and acceptance criteria Functionality according to Rules and regulations Specifications Design and operations philosophy Operator manuals Acceptable Failure Consequences Alarms Fail-to-safe Machine stops Safe recovery after failure Emergency stop No deadlock Integrity of barriers HES Safe and adequate limitation of operation

24 Utilizing 3D visualisation i HIL testing 3D graphics is a powerful tool when performing HIL testing of drillfloor systems Integrated Functions - Machine interlocks - Pipe Interlocks

25 Utilizing 3D visualisation i HIL testing 3D graphics is a powerful tool when performing HIL testing of drillfloor systems Multi machine and automatic sequences

26 Utilizing 3D visualisation i HIL testing 3D graphics is a powerful tool when performing HIL testing of drillfloor systems Multi machine and automatic sequences

27 Utilizing 3D visualisation i HIL testing 3D graphics is a powerful tool when performing HIL testing of drillfloor systems Zone Management Systems/ACS Collision warning and detection

28 Utilizing 3D visualisation i HIL testing 3D graphics is a powerful tool when performing HIL testing of drillfloor systems However; The essential core is the simulator models running in the background and HIL framework

29 References Vendors: Yards: Vessel owners: E&P companies:

30 Thank you for your attention!