OPPORTUNITIES FOR CROSS-FERTILISATION BETWEEN THE

SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY AND THE EMERGENT OFFSHORE WIND

ENERGY SECTOR IN COLOMBIA: AN OVERVIEW OF FLOATING
PLATFORM TECHNOLOGIES

Gabriela Guadalupe Salas Berrocal1, Óscar Alejandro Sanabria Vargas2, Mónica Ruíz Pianeta3

1
Ship Designer, The Science and Technology Corporation for the Development of the Naval, Maritime and
Riverine Industries (COTECMAR), Colombia.
2
Design Assistant, The Science and Technology Corporation for the Development of the Naval, Maritime and
Riverine Industries (COTECMAR), Colombia.
3
Head of Electrical & Electronic Division, The Science and Technology Corporation for the Development of
the Naval, Maritime and Riverine Industries (COTECMAR), Colombia.

e-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

ORCID: 1[0000-0002-0024-7666], 2 [0000-0002-3625-3662],

Summary
Introduction: This paper provides a review and analysis of cross-fertilization opportunities
between the shipbuilding industry in Colombia and the Offshore Wind Energy (OWE) sector.

Problem: In Colombia, there is an offshore wind resource available, so it is necessary to

analyse the potential areas where national shipbuilding industries could take advantage of
their knowledge and experience for the development of OWE projects.

Objective: The study is aimed to identify the main aspects involved in the design and
construction of floating platforms for Offshore Wind Turbines (OWTs) and to examine the
restrictions and capabilities of the Colombian shipbuilding industry for their implementation.

Methodology: A review of the technical aspects related to Floating Offshore Wind Turbine
(FOWTs) and the integration of shipyards at a global level with the OWE value chain was
carried out; subsequently, cross-fertilization opportunities between the shipbuilding industry
in Colombia and the OWE sector were analysed and discussed.

Results: There are multiple areas in which the shipbuilding industry in Colombia could
participate in the value chain of the floating offshore wind energy sector in Colombia, taking
advantage of the knowledge and experience in topics such as shipbuilding, marine
engineering, steelmaking, and construction techniques.
Conclusion: The Colombian shipbuilding industry could enter new R&D areas derived from
OWE projects, while its biggest contribution would be its experience for the design and
construction of vessels for the installation, operation and maintenance of FOWTs.
Originality: Through this investigation, the correlation between the Colombian shipbuilding
industry and the emerging OWE market is identified.
Limitations: At an international level, FOWTs are under development and testing. In the
national context, currently there is not an established OWE sector.
Keywords: Floating Offshore Wind Turbines; Offshore Wind Energy; shipbuilding;
shipyard capabilities.

1. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, the Offshore Wind Energy (OWE) sector is experiencing increasingly rapid
progress in the international arena. Among the currently available large-scale solutions to
harvest energy from renewable sources, the Offshore Wind Turbines (OWTs) have
responded to some of the challenges faced by earthbound applications, such as the land
limitations for new deployments and the congestion of electrical transmission lines (IRENA,
2019).
As the OWT technology develops, it continues its transition to deeper waters where the
conventional fixed-bottom foundations are not technically and economically feasible (Musial
et al., 2019; WindEurope, 2017). This transition is enabled by the use of floating platforms,
designed and constructed to provide a safe and reliable foundation for OWTs to be installed
far away from the coast. Several types of floating structures have been presented in previous
studies (Butterfield et al., 2005; Hannon et al., 2019; Thiagarajan & Dagher, 2014; Wang et
al., 2010), primarily four concepts: barge, semi-submersible, spar-buoy, and Tension-Leg
Platform (TLP). Despite their technical differences, a common feature between these floating
platforms is that traditional shipbuilding skills can be employed for their manufacturing
process (BALance Technology Consulting GmbH et al., 2017; Barry & Kamen, 2009, p. 6).
Consequently, there is a rising number of shipbuilding and maritime-related companies
worldwide who are using their existing knowledge to participate in the value chain of the
OWE sector.
In a local context, although the wind energy generation is not yet widespread Colombia,
some previous reports indicate that there are available onshore and offshore wind resources
along its Caribbean Sea coast, with a promising potential near to La Guajira region (Castillo
et al., 2015; Rueda-Bayona et al., 2019). On the other hand, the Colombian government has
started to promote the implementation of non-conventional energy sources through specific
legislation (e.g. Law 1715 of 2014) and the awarding of five wind energy generation projects
during the last energy market auction held in 2019 (Dinero, 2019). Therefore, it is necessary
to explore the possibilities to take advantage of the offshore wind resource, starting with the
design and adaptation of the existing technology to the Colombian conditions, in order to
form an emergent Offshore Wind Energy Sector in this country.
Having this perspective in mind, the authors analyse the prospective areas where the
national shipbuilding and maritime-related industries can leverage their knowledge and
experience for the development of OWE projects involving floating platforms in Colombia.
For this purpose, this paper presents an initial review of the technical aspects related to
Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWTs). Then, some case studies are summarised to
exemplify the integration of shipyards to the value chain of the OWE. Finally, the
opportunities for cross-fertilisation between the shipbuilding industry in Colombia and the
OWE sector are discussed.

2. REVIEW OF FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND TURBINES (FOWTs)

The concept OWE generation is not new. As argued by Musial and Ram (2010) and
Manwell et al. (2010, p. 461), initial ideas go back to the decade of 1930 with Hermann
Honnef’s drafts for a direct-driven offshore wind installation. Later, in the decade of 1970s,
additional studies were carried out by William Heronemus at the University of
Massachusetts, who proposed the “windship” multi-rotor wind turbine, which was an array
of conventional turbines on a common frame intended to float through a large buoy
(Heronemus, 2006). Although Heronemus’ OWTs were never built, his vision set up the
bases for modern offshore wind farms.

Fig. 1. Conceptual design of the “windship” by W. Heronemus (Environment & Energy Publishing
LLC, 2017)
 The implementation of the first large-scale projects of OWE started in 1990 in Europe,
specifically in the waters of the North Sea (Musial et al., 2006). Nowadays, some studies
show the global cumulative installed capacity of OWE is within the range of 20 GW and 25
GW (IRENA, 2018, p. 7, 2019; Musial et al., 2019, p. 25), while approximately 90% of this
capacity is located in the area of the North Sea (IRENA, 2019, p. 42). There are expectations
of significant growth in the number of deployments for the upcoming years in North America
and Asia.
There is a widespread agreement that one of the main drivers for the offshore wind
industry is the requirement of accessing new areas with higher wind potentials (WindEurope,
2017). These can be found further from the coast, where water depths are usually greater than
the limits for economically-feasible projects using the conventional fixed-bottom
technologies (Musial et al., 2019, p. 33). For this reason, in recent years there has been an
increased interest in the design and development of floating systems for OWTs aimed to
operate in deep waters (more than 60 m). Consequently, the OWT technology is transitioning
towards floating applications, following a path as depicted in Fig. 2. Indeed, Floating
Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWTs) offer some relative advantages over the fixed-bottom
technologies:
- They provide flexibility to reach remote places with stronger and more constant winds,
which translates into a higher energy generation (Manwell et al., 2010; Yan et al., 2016).
- Their installation is less-invasive to the seabed (IRENA, 2016).
- Since their operation is undertaken far away from the shore, the visual and noise impact
of the wind turbines to people is reduced (Yan et al., 2016).
- The possibility to install them in the open ocean, regardless of the water depth and seabed
conditions, enables vast spaces to sit large-scale projects (Manwell et al., 2010; Tong,
1998).
- They have potential for mass production and wide-ranging wind turbine innovation
(Musial et al., 2006).
- FOWTs can be assembled along the coastline and then carried to their final location.
Hence, their sizes are not constraint by the available resources for land transportation
(Yan et al., 2016).

2.1.Basics of Floating Foundations for FOWTs

Although the technological solutions for FOWTs are diverse, previous studies have
described their configurations in terms of principal components, which are common to all of
them. Barter (2018, p. 10) suggests a “building block” approach, presenting a partial list of
ten primary elements that form a wind energy system, namely turbine, platform, mooring,
anchors, tower, drivetrain, assembly, electrical, operation and maintenance, and plant. On the
other hand, Kang et al. (2017) made a system decomposition for a Failure Modes and Effects
Analysis (FMEA), identifying 49 elements which were grouped into the following
categories: Blade system; generator, electrical and electronic components; transmission
system; support system, and auxiliary system. Moreover, Tong (1998) and Serrano Morán
(2015) outline design considerations for three main blocks: the floating structure, the mooring
system, and the wind turbine itself.
Based on the literature findings, the authors propose a System Breakdown Structure
(SBS) for OWTs, as shown in Fig. 3. Given the relevance of the floater and the mooring lines
for FOWTs, a short technical overview of these parts will be provided hereinafter.

Fig. 2. Transition from onshore wind energy generation to FOWTs (Musial & Ram, 2010, p. 5).

Fig. 3. SBS of a floating offshore wind turbine (Source: Authors’ diagram based on Tong
(1998) and Barter (2018))
 2.1.1. Main types of floaters and mooring lines for FOWTs
An FOWT structure is subjected to dynamic forces due to the action of the waves and the
wind. These forces cause movements, as represented in Fig. 4. Therefore, the floater must be
dimensioned to satisfy the following requirements (Withee, 2004):
- Provide enough buoyancy to support the combined weight of its own structure and the
wind turbine.
- Remain in an upright position for all design wind and wave conditions. In other words,
the floating platform should restrain pitch, roll, and heave motions within acceptable
limits (Butterfield et al., 2005), which are usually set by specific standards.
- Prevent excessive loading on the wind turbine due to dynamic forces acting on the floater.
- Must be economically feasible.

Fig. 4. Degrees of freedom in a FOWT (Rao, 2019; Withee, 2004)

Fig. 5 illustrates the most common floating structure solutions for OWTs: barge, semi-
submersible, spar-buoy, and tension leg platform (TLP). Each of these types of structure will
be briefly discussed below.
 Fig. 5. Types of floating platforms for OWTs (WindEurope, 2017)

a. Barge-type: Also known as “pontoon-type”, it is composed by a flat-bottom box-

shaped structure, which maintains its hydrostatic stability employing the concept of
distributed buoyancy, through a large waterplane area and a shallow draft to obtain a righting
moment (Robertson & Jonkman, 2011). For station keeping, the barge-type FOWTs can use
catenary (loose) mooring systems. However, as argued by Wang et al. (2010), this type of
floater is more suitable for calm waters since they are prone to experience large roll and pitch
motions.

b. Semi-submersible type: Sometimes referred to as “column-stabilized”, comprises a set

of large columns connected through smaller tubular members or pontoons (Wang et al.,
2010). As its name indicates, each column is partially submerged, which provides additional
waterplane area for stability. Moreover, ballast weight can be applied to the columns to
contribute to the hydrostatic stability while the interconnecting structures provide extra
buoyancy (IRENA, 2016). Similar to the barge-type, to avoid the platform from drifting, it
can be moored by catenary or taut lines, attached to each column (IRENA, 2016; Robertson
& Jonkman, 2011).
 c. Spar-buoy-type: This type of structure is formed by the floater, which is a central
buoyancy cylindrical tank, and ballast weights for its stabilization (Butterfield et al., 2005;
IRENA, 2016). The spar-buoy requires a large draft to minimize the heave motion, hence it
is necessary to have deep waters for its deployment (Wang et al., 2010). For station keeping,
the spar-buoys can use either catenary (loose) or taut mooring systems with anchors, as
shown in Fig. 5.

d. TLP-type: Consists of a cylindrical central platform with three legs attached to the main
body. Like the semi-submersible type, the TLP-type has part of its structure below the
waterline, although the latter is more buoyant than the former (Al Qubaisi et al., 2018). For
this reason, TLPs employ vertical mooring lines, called tendons or tethers, extending from
their legs to the seabed where they are anchored (Wang et al., 2010). The tethers are intended
to maintain the stiffness of the mooring system while they provide a righting moment for
stability purposes (Murfet & Abdussamie, 2019).

According to literature findings, three classification approaches can be followed for

FOTWs: By their stabilisation method, by their means for station keeping, and by the number
of OWTs in a single platform, as summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. Classification of FOWTs as per literature findings

Type of floating structure

Classification Barge Semi- Spar-buoy Tension-leg
submersible platform (TLP)
(Pontoon)
By stabilisation method Buoyancy- Hybrid (ballast + Ballast-stabilized Mooring line-
(Butterfield et al., 2005; stabilized buoyancy- stabilized
Collu & Borg, 2016; stabilized)
Kausche et al., 2018)

By station keeping Catenary loose Catenary loose Catenary loose Vertical

method mooring mooring mooring (tensioned)
(Rao, 2019; Schneider & mooring
Senders, 2010)

By number of OWT Single-turbine Single-turbine Single-turbine Single-turbine

(Rao, 2019)

Multiple-turbine Multiple-turbine Multiple-turbine Multiple-turbine

Source: Compiled by the authors from the cited references.

 2.2. Design and engineering challenges for FOWTs
FOWTs are considered to be complex systems (Collu & Borg, 2016) due to the strong
interactions of the platform with a variety of environmental factors such as wind turbulence,
waves, currents and tides, lightning, seabed soil mechanics, among many others (Fig. 6). The
FOWT types, presented in the previous section, address the effects of these physical
phenomena through different technical strategies in order to achieve three primary goals
(Tong, 1998, p. 403):
- Minimizing the overall size, thus, the cost.
- Maximizing stability.
- Minimizing dynamic motions response up to permissible levels for the correct operation
of the wind turbine and its auxiliary systems.
As stressed by Butterfield et al. (2005), there is not a perfect type of FOWT. Hence,
during the design process, it is necessary to undertake some trade-offs to reach a balanced
solution, considering that each type of FOWT has its advantages and disadvantages, which
are presented in detail in IRENA (2016, p. 5). As a result, the design process requires a
systems-focused approach (Barter, 2018), where Multi-Disciplinary Analysis and
Optimization (MDAO) techniques can be employed to select an optimal alternative, i.e. the
best functionality at the lowest possible cost, from multiple design configurations generated
from the combination of the FOWT building blocks.

Fig. 6. Interactions of a FOWT with the environment. (Barter, 2018).

 The design of FOWT structures poses some challenges, including:

- FOWTs are tightly-coupled systems, where both aerodynamic and hydrodynamic loads
influence over all the components (Barter, 2018; Muskulus & Schafhirt, 2014). Because
of their physical nature, most of these loads (as well as their interactions) have non-linear
and time-dependent behaviours. Therefore, to represent them, it is required to have
higher-order engineering models (Collu & Borg, 2016). However, designers could opt
for simpler models to optimize the use of computational resources during conceptual and
preliminary stages of a project.

- The initial dimensioning implies a compromise between the floatability and the minimum
draught required to avoid slamming loads (Collu & Borg, 2016). The slamming is an
occasional event caused by waves breaking into the platform which produce severe
impacts into it. These impacts translate into additional loads on the structure, reducing its
lifetime due to fatigue damage (Tu et al., 2017). A way to reduce the occurrence of
slamming is by increasing the freeboard height, hence, reducing the draft. This
requirement imposes a need for weight minimization and a low centre of gravity.

- The selection of the wind turbine tends to be driven by the technological maturity of the
horizontal-axis turbines used for land-based and offshore-fixed wind farms.
Consequently, the use of this type of devices leads to additional constrains for the floater,
in terms of its maximum admissible motions and accelerations.

Regardless of the above-discussed challenges, nowadays, the FOWTs have reached high
Technology Readiness Levels (TLRs) (WindEurope, 2017, p. 4), demonstrating their
evolution from the Research and Development (R&D) stages up to the demonstration and
first product implementation. This trend can be evidenced in Musial et al. (2019, pp. 35–36),
who present a comprehensive list of 38 floating offshore wind projects currently in process
in different locations worldwide. Some of these projects, and their corresponding type of
floating platform, are exemplified in Fig. 7. It can be observed that TLP-based designs are in
earlier phases of development (TLRs 6 and 7), compared with other technologies as the semi-
submersible and the spar-buoy (TLRs 8 and 9).
The experiences in the implementation of each of the projects depicted in Fig. 7 points
out the importance of the knowledge transfer and support among three fundamental actors:
The academia, the government, and the industry. It is possible to identify potential synergies
among these actors, which could lead to the consolidation of the floating OWE sector. One
of these potential synergies can be observed within the shipbuilding industries, as it will be
outlined in the following section.
 Fig. 7. Examples of implementation of FOWTs in different stages of development (up to TLR 8).

3. POTENTIAL SYNERGIES BETWEEN THE SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY

AND THE FLOATING OWE SECTOR: CASE STUDIES IN THE
INTERNATIONAL SCENARIO
In the international context, there is a well-defined legacy from the offshore oil & gas
(O&G) sector towards the OWE industry. As reported by IRENA (2018), some recognised
O&G platform manufacturers have successfully transitioned to the offshore wind market.
On the other hand, and due to their related technical background, ship design offices and
shipyards have valuable know-how in cross-cutting areas for the FOWT projects. These
include, but are not limited to, naval and marine engineering, steelwork, outfit manufacturing,
and corrosion management. In other words, the design and manufacturing of FOWTs requires
traditional shipyard skills in large quantities, as well as the installation, maintenance, and
further decommissioning of the turbines (Barry & Kamen, 2009, p. 6). Hence, the different
actors in the shipbuilding industry (e.g. shipyards, marine equipment manufacturers and
suppliers, classification societies, marine and naval professionals) have a broad range of
opportunities along the value chain of the FOWT projects, as represented in Fig. 8.
 Fig. 8. Opportunities for the shipbuilding industry in the value chain of FOWT projects (Source:
Authors’ diagram, adapted from IRENA (2018)).

Table 2 presents a review of shipyards which are currently involved in the floating OWE
value chain. There have been identified five major business segments of the floating OWE
sector where international shipyards have started to take part, i.e. operation and maintenance
vessels; design and construction of floating structures; construction of offshore electrical
substations; wind turbine manufacturing / installation, and cable-laying vessels.

Table 2. Review of international shipyards with participation in the FOWT value chain

Shipyard (Country) Business segment in the floating offshore wind value

chain
Operation & Floating Electrical Wind Cable-
Maintenance Structures Substations Turbines laying
Vessels vessels
A&R (Germany) X
STX Europe: Chantiers de X
l’Atlantique (France)
China Shipbuilding Industry X X
Corporation (China)
Crist S.A (Poland) X
CSBC corporation (Taiwan) X
 Shipyard (Country) Business segment in the floating offshore wind value
chain
Operation & Floating Electrical Wind Cable-
Maintenance Structures Substations Turbines laying
Vessels vessels
Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine X
Engineering (South Korea)
Damen Shipyards (Netherlands) X X
Fjellstrand AS (Norway) X
Fosen Yard Emden X
GmbH (Germany)
Gdansk Shipyard Group (Poland) X X
Havyard Group (Norway) X
Hyundai Heavy Industries (South X
Korea)
LaNaval (Spain) X X
Lisnave (Portugal) X
Mars (Poland) X
Meyer Turku (Finland) X
MV Werften (Germany) X X
DCNS Naval Group (France) X
Navantia (Spain) X X
Norbiskrug (Germany) X
Nordic Yards (Germany) X
Pella Sietas GmbH (Germany) X
Samsung Heavy Industries (South X X
Korea)
Technip Pori (Finland) X
Ulstein Verft (Norway) X
Source: Compiled by the authors from the shipyard’s websites.

From the findings presented in

Table 2, some case studies of shipyards that have introduced into the market alternative
products and services related with the value chain of the offshore wind energies are
summarised below (Fig. 9):

- Damen Shipyards, in The Netherlands, has diversified its portfolio of designs to satisfy
the requirements in the different lifecycle phases of an offshore wind farm. These include
 vessels for manufacturing, cable-laying, as well as for operation and maintenance
(Damen Shipyards Group, 2020).
- Navantia, in Spain, has built a strong reputation in the construction of fixed foundations
for offshore wind farms, highlighting its participation in the Wikinger project (Baltic sea,
Germany) since 2014 (Navantia, 2018). Moreover, this company actively contributes in
some of the FOWT projects currently in progress, as “Windfloat” and “Hywind”, with
the fabrication of two semi-submersible structures for the former and five spar-buoy type
structures for the latter. Furthermore, in 2019 Navantia reported the upcoming
construction of five additional floating units for the Kinkardine project, located near to
Aberdeen (United Kingdom) (Navantia, 2019).

- Chantiers de l’Atlantique, part of the STX Europe group in France, has developed diverse
solutions for the OWE market. However, its foremost participation is in the segment of
the offshore electrical substations for wind farms, with projects as “Westermost Rough”
in the United Kingdom (2015), where they carried out the detailed design and
engineering, procurement, construction and assembly, painting, and testing of the
electrical substation (Chantiers de l’Atlantique, 2017). Furthermore, in January 2020, this
shipyard cut the first steel for a new electrical substation to be placed in the Saint-Nazaire
offshore wind farm project in France (Durakovic, 2020).

- One of the largest South Korean shipyards, Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI), has several
references in the installation of offshore wind turbines. One of its most relevant projects
is the deployment of a 5.5 MW offshore wind turbine prototype near to Jeju Island in
South Korea (DiFrangia, 2014). Moreover, HHI is also involved in the development of
concepts for the floating structure, as well as the integration of new turbine prototypes
with other manufacturers as Doosan Heavy Industries and Construction, Hanjin
Industries, and Unison (Innovate UK, 2019).

- Other shipyards, like LaNaval in Spain, offer special purpose vessels for cable-lying
operations (LaNaval, 2020). An example is the multipurpose vessel “Living Stone”,
which is capable of undertaking cable installation between the offshore electrical
substation and the diverse wind turbines in a wind farm. This ship was employed in 2018
during the cable-lying process in the installation of the Hornsea One wind farm, located
off the coast of Yorkshire (United Kingdom).

A common aspect between the case studies is that most of the shipbuilders associate with
other companies (not necessarily of the same industrial sector) to face the challenge of a
FOWT project. Hannon et al. (2019) claim that the small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) are increasingly taking an essential part in these associations, providing solutions in
some areas where the shipbuilding industry lacks experience, as the station-keeping systems,
technology design, including novel concepts of floaters and wind turbines, testing procedures
for FOWTs, and installation of underwater power cables, to mention some of them.

Fig. 9. Case studies: Some of the international shipyards currently participating in the FOWT
value chain.

4. DISCUSSION: CROSS-FERTILISATION BETWEEN THE SHIPBUILDING

INDUSTRY AND THE EMERGENT FOW ENERGY SECTOR IN THE
COLOMBIAN CONTEXT
As explained in the previous section, there are many opportunities for the shipbuilding
and maritime industries in the value chain of the FOW energy sector. These opportunities are
underpinned by the fact that the previously accumulated knowledge and industrial bases of
traditional sectors of the economy are highly employed by SMEs in their transition to
emergent markets, as the FOW energy is (Lee, 2010). Thus, it is possible to carry out a “cross-
fertilisation” process where the existing knowledge, infrastructure, and methods of the
shipbuilding industry can be integrated or adjusted to solve the specific requirements of the
FOW energy sector, leading to diverse types of innovation. On the opposite way, the
challenges posed by the FOWT projects stimulate either the development of new capabilities
in the shipbuilding and maritime industries, or the adaptation of the existing ones to be used
differently.
When it comes to the Colombian context, the regulatory framework given by the Law
1715 of 2014, as well as the perspectives summarised in the National Energetic Plan 2050
(UPME, 2015) for the promotion of non-conventional energy sources, provide a motivation
for the different actors participating in the national energetic system to start new initiatives
for the implementation of clean technologies, as the FOWTs. On the other hand, considering
the current scientific and technological capabilities of the Colombian shipbuilding industry
and the some of the R&D areas required for the potential implementation of FOW energy
solutions in Colombia, the authors have identified prospects for cross-fertilisation between
these two sectors. These interactions between the capabilities of the Colombian shipbuilding
industry and the needs or requirements of the FOW energy sector are represented in Fig. 10,
while some additional insights about them are presented in the following sub-sections.

Fig. 10. Areas for cross-fertilisation between the shipbuilding industry and the FOW energy sector
in Colombia (Source: The Authors).

4.1. Design and engineering challenges for FOWTs

The Colombian shipbuilding industry has acquired over the years some scientific and
technological capabilities that enable its involvement in Research, Development, and
Innovation (R&D&I) processes in the FOW energy sector. Its experience in areas as naval
architecture, design and optimisation of naval structures, and marine engineering can be
harvested primarily in the basic design of the floating structure for the OWT. In contrast, at
this stage is not foreseeable the participation in the design and development stages of the
wind turbine.
Regarding the design of the floater, it is worth noting that there are knowledge gaps in
the use of computer tools (e.g. software for CFD and FEM analyses) to model the combined
effect of wind and waves loads on the structure. Also, it will be important to consider the
specific challenges depending on the type of floater (i.e. barge semi-submersible, spar-buoy,
and TLP), which will imply additional design constraints in terms of buoyancy, stability, and
interfaces with the mooring system.
On the other hand, due to the nature of the shipbuilding projects, there is a fluent
relationship between the shipyards and the classification societies, which are non-
governmental organisations that establish standards for the design and construction of ships
and offshore structures. This bond might facilitate the inception of new rules and regulations
in the Colombian shipbuilding industry.
Finally, the association with strategic partners in the FOW energy sector will be necessary
to define the following aspects, which are inputs for the design of the floating structure:
- Optimal location for the project and its environmental parameters, i.e. sea states, wind
speeds and directions, water depths.
- Wind farm arrangement.
- Weights and centres of gravity of the components of the FOWT.
- Maintenance restrictions that could lead to a requirement for additional volume in the
platform.
- Design of the mooring system.

4.2.Opportunities of cross-fertilisation in the FOWT manufacturing process

Colombian shipyards understand very well the engineering and construction processes
for steel floating structures. They have incorporated diverse methods to prepare technical
information (e.g. 3-D models, drawings, specifications, and bills of materials) for production,
as well as building strategies, whose complexity increases with the size of the vessel. For
instance, a modular construction approach can be applied to large ships; this means that they
are sub-divided them into smaller parts or “blocks” to enhance their producibility with
regards to the available infrastructure.
Moreover, in Colombia there is a good industrial base for steelwork and outfitting
production, involving processes as metal treatment and cutting, welding, painting, block
assembly, pipework, electrical foundations manufacturing and installation, etc. Hence, this
knowledge can be leveraged in the construction process of the floater and even the tower of
an OWT (if metallic), although some restrictions could be found in the existing shipyard
facilities to handle the massive scale of these devices.
 These limitations encompass the factors described by Matha et al. (2017):
- The means for transporting the FOWT within the port of the shipyard.
- The use of cranes for fabrication and assembly, whose capacity rely on the size and
weight of the blocks.
- The available infrastructure for the float-out procedure of the structure.
Regarding wind turbine manufacturing, although it is not an area that shipbuilding
industries traditionally share with the FOW sector (excepting the Korean case of HHI), it is
worth to mention that the current capabilities for boat manufacturing result in an expertise to
manage composite materials, which could be utilised in the fabrication of some external
pieces of the turbine.

4.3.Opportunities of cross-fertilisation in the installation phase of the FOWTs

According to Tong (1998), the installation of FOWTs has two distinct phases: First, the
laying of the station-keeping system, and second, the arrival of the wind turbine (already
assembled to the tower and the floater) and its subsequent hook-up to the mooring lines. This
process is highly-specialised, and for the Colombian case, it would require the involvement
of an industrial partner, which is likely to be an international company with experience in
this type of deployments.
As discussed in section 3, the main opportunities for shipyards to support the installation
phase of a FOW farm are through the design and construction of suitable vessels for this
phase, which are illustrated in Fig. 11.

4.4.Opportunities of cross-fertilisation in the testing and commissioning phase of the

FOWTs
The shipbuilding industry in Colombia has background in the performance of trials,
which are part of the quality assurance process for the final delivery of products to the
customers. During these trials, the performance of the vessel or floating platform is verified
against the initial requirements, which are linked to systems and components specifications.
Some of the procedures used for the Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT) and Harbour
Acceptance Tests (SAT) in ships can be applied to the testing phase of the FOWTs,
particularly those applied to the assessment of the structural integrity of the floating platform.
However, there is a knowledge gap in the kind of Sea Acceptance Tests (SAT) applicable
to FOWTs, therefore the guidance of an external organisation (for instance, a classification
society) will be necessary to carry out this type of tests during the commissioning phase of
the project. From the authors’ perspective, some of the aspects that should be considered
during the SATs of the FOWTs are:
- Assessment of the electrical installed power and energy losses due to transmission.
- Stability and seakeeping of the floating structure, i.e. the way the floater behaves when it
is exposed to the waves.
- Performance of the electrical generator control system.
- Revision of the auxiliary systems: Blade pitch control, ballast and stabilisation system,
electrical distribution.

Fig. 11. Examples of ships that could be employed in the installation phase of the FOWTs. (Source:
Authors’ diagram, adapted from Ingeniero Marino.com (2018)).

4.5. Opportunities for cross-fertilisation in the operation and maintenance phases of

the FOWTs
The main contribution from the current capabilities of the Colombian shipbuilding
industry to the operation and maintenance phases of the FOWTs is through the design and
construction of ships equipped to fulfil a diverse range of tasks, from transporting the crew
to undertake minor repairs to providing payload handling equipment for major maintenances.
This range of support vessels is illustrated in Fig. 12.
 Fig. 12. Examples of ships that could be employed in the operation & maintenance phases of the
FOWTs. (Source: Authors’ diagram, adapted from Ingeniero Marino.com (2018)).

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Indisputably, the Floating Offshore Wind Energy sector shares a common technical
background with the shipbuilding industry, with the potential to take advantage of a legacy
of knowledge and experience in subjects as naval architecture, marine engineering,
steelwork, and construction techniques for floating platforms. On the opposite way, the
shipbuilding industry can strengthen its current capabilities by its participation in new areas
of R&D derived from the OWE projects, gaining additional understanding of the interaction
of the wind with a floating structure, which could lead to further optimisation of existing ship
designs.
This process of mutual-enhancement can be capitalised from the opportunities of cross-
fertilisation between the Floating OWE sector and the Colombian shipbuilding industry,
which were explored in this paper. However, the views presented on this topic were only
from a technical perspective, and they did not cover considerations regarding cost and risk,
which are two crucial aspects for any project and, hence, must be tackled in a further study.
In the case of a FOWT project, the cost and risk are intrinsically related to the type of floating
platform, given that not all the types are in the same stage of development. A Multi-
Disciplinary Analysis and Optimization (MDAO) methodology would be strongly
recommendable for future analyses, allowing the integration of the technical performance
dimension with the cost and risk domains. This approach is currently employed during the
concept exploration phase in the design of naval vessels.
From the literature findings and the review of the case studies it could be observed that
the spar-buoy and the semi-submersible types are more mature concepts, compared to the
TLP-type. Moreover, special attention should be given to the challenges or
design/construction constraints posed by a particular type of floating structure, since some of
them could turn into requirements for the physical infrastructure of the shipyard (e.g. cranes,
ship-lifting appliances, workshop layouts, etc.).
On the other hand, although there are multiple areas where the shipbuilding industry in
Colombia could participate in the value chain of the Floating Offshore Wind Energy sector
in Colombia, it is foreseeable that the main contribution of this industry would be the design
and construction of vessels for the installation and operation/maintenance of the FOWTs,
given the relationship of these activities with its core business.
Also, it is important to highlight the relevance of having technological partners to support
the diverse processes throughout the value chain of the FOWTs. The triple helix model of
innovation (i.e. academia, government, and industry) has been widely adopted in previous
FOWTs developments worldwide. Therefore, is it recommendable to strengthen the
synergies between these three actors in the Colombian context. A clear regulatory framework
will also contribute to consolidate these synergies in the FOWT value chain, looking to
achieve innovation through cross-fertilisation of the knowledge and experience of the
different stakeholders.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was carried out within the project “Enhancing Aquatic Renewable Energy
(ARE): Technology design and adaptation programme for Colombia”, led by UCC
(Colombia) with the cooperation of COTECMAR (Colombia), Aquatera (UK), and Heriot-
Watt University (UK), and funded by the Royal Academy of Engineering. The authors wish
to thank COTECMAR and UCC for their kind support for the elaboration of this paper.
Finally, the views expressed in this paper are that of the authors and do not necessarily
represent the views and opinions of COTECMAR or any of the members of the consortium
for the development of the above-mentioned project.

REFERENCES
Al Qubaisi, A. A., Dol, S. S., Khan, M. S., & Azeez, A. A. (2018). Al Qubaisi, A. A., Dol, S. S., Khan, M. S.,
& Azeez, A. A. (2000). Feasibility study and design of floating offshore wind turbine farm in United
Arab Emirates. 2018 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences
(ASET), Abu Dhabi.
BALance Technology Consulting GmbH, Shipyard Economics Ltd., & MC Marketing Consulting. (2017).
Study on New Trends in Globalisation in Shipbuilding and Marine Supplies—Consequences for
European Industrial and Trade Policy (EASME/COSME/2015/005). European Union.
https://maritimetechnology.nl/media/European-Commission-2.pdf
Barry, C. D., & Kamen, P. (2009). An overview of Ocean Renewable Energy. http://www.ascension-
publishing.com/BIZ/OceanEnergy.pdf
Barter, G. E. (2018). Moving Toward Cost-Competitive, Commercial Floating Wind Energy. US Offshore
Wind 2018, Boston. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1457672
Butterfield, S., Musial, W., Jonkman, J., & Sclavounos, P. (2005). Engineering Challenges for Floating
Offshore Wind Turbines. Proceedings of the Offshore Wind Conference. Offshore Wind Conference,
Copenhagen.
Castillo, Y., Castrillón, M., Vanegas-Chamorro, M., Valencia, G., & Villicaña, E. (2015). Role of Non-
Conventional Energy Sources in the Colombian Electricity sector. Prospect, 13(1), 39–51.
Chantiers de l’Atlantique. (2017). Westermost Rough Electrical Offshore Substation. Chantiers de
l’Atlantique. https://chantiers-atlantique.com/en/project-references/westermost-rough-p33/
Collu, M., & Borg, M. (2016). 11—Design of floating offshore wind turbines. In C. Ng & L. Ran (Eds.),
Offshore Wind Farms (pp. 359–385). Woodhead Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-
100779-2.00011-8
Damen Shipyards Group. (2020). Damen to showcase capabilities for US offshore wind sector. Damen to
Showcase Capabilities for US Offshore Wind Sector.
https://www.damen.com:443/en/news/2019/06/damen_to_showcase_capabilities_for_us_offshore_w
ind_sector
DiFrangia, M. (2014). Hyundai Heavy installs Korea’s largest offshore wind turbine. Windpower
Engineering & Development. https://www.windpowerengineering.com/hyundai-heavy-installs-
koreas-largest-offshore-wind-turbine/
Dinero. (2019). Colombia se la juega por las energías renovables. ¿Cuáles fueron los resultados de la subasta
de energía renovable en Colombia? http://www.dinero.com/pais/articulo/cuales-fueron-los-
resultados-de-la-subasta-de-energia-renovable-en-colombia/278329
Durakovic, A. (2020). French Consortium Completes Offshore Substation Trifecta. Offshore Wind.
https://www.offshorewind.biz/2020/01/09/french-consortium-completes-offshore-substation-trifecta/
Environment & Energy Publishing LLC. (2017). WIND: Meet ‘the Captain,’ the father of modern turbines.
E&E News. https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060067379
Hannon, M., Topham, E., Dixon, J., McMillan, D., & Collu, M. (2019). Offshore wind, ready to float? Global
and UK trends in the floating offshore wind market. University of Strathclyde.
https://doi.org/10.17868/69501
Heronemus, W. E. (2006). Offshore wind turbine with multiple wind rotors and floating system (Patent No.
US7075189B2). https://patents.google.com/patent/US7075189?oq=7075189
Ingeniero Marino.com. (2018). Buques Especiales para la Eólica Marina Offshore. Ingeniero Marino.
https://ingenieromarino.com/buques-especiales-eolica-marina-offshore/
Innovate UK. (2019). Japan & South Korea Floating Offshore Wind 2019. Innovate UK Global Expert
Mission. https://admin.ktn-uk.co.uk/app/uploads/2019/08/09_KTN_JPSK_FloatingWind_v7.pdf
IRENA. (2016). Floating foundations: A Game Changer for Offshore Wind Power. International Renewable
Energy Agency. https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2016/IRENA_Offshore_Wind_Floating_Foundations_201
6.pdf
IRENA. (2018). Renewable Energy Benefits: Leveraging Local Capacity for Offshore WInd. International
Renewable Energy Agency.
IRENA. (2019). Future of wind: Deployment, investment, technology, grid integration and socio-economic
aspects (A Global Energy Transformation Paper). International Renewable Energy Agency.
 https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Oct/IRENA_Future_of_wind_2019.pdf
Kang, J., Liping, S., Sun, H., & Wu, C. (2017). Risk assessment of floating offshore wind turbine based on
correlation-FMEA. Ocean Engineering, 129, 382–388.
Kausche, M., Adam, F., Dahlhaus, F., & Großmann, J. (2018). Floating offshore wind—Economic and
ecological challenges of a TLP solution. Renewable Energy, 126, 270–280.
LaNaval. (2020). DPIII Multipurpose Cable Lay Vessel. Multipurpose Cable Lay Vessel.
http://www.lanaval.es/es/productos/buques-offshore/33500-dwt-fallpipe-mining-vessels/dpiii-
multipurpose-cable-vessel.html
Manwell, J. F., McGowan, J. G., & Rogers, A. L. (2010). Wind Energy Explained: Theory, Design and
Application (Second Edition). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Matha, D., Brons-Illig, C., Mitzlaff, A., & Scheffler, R. (2017). Fabrication and installation constraints for
floating wind and their implications on current infrastructure and design. Energy Procedia, 137,
299–306.
Murfet, T., & Abdussamie, N. (2019). Loads and Response of a Tension Leg Platform Wind Turbine with
Non-Rotating Blades: An Experimental Study. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 7(3).
Musial, W., Beiter, P., Spitsen, P., Nunemaker, J., & Gevorgian, V. (2019). 2018 Offshore Wind Technologies
Market Report (Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-74278; DOE/GO-102019-5192; p. 92). U.S.
Department of Energy - Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy.
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/74278.pdf
Musial, W., Butterfield, S., & Ram, B. (2006). Energy from Offshore Wind. Proceedings of the Offshore
Technology Conference 2006, 3, 1888–1898.
Musial, W., & Ram, B. (2010). Large-Scale Offshore Wind Power in the United States: Assessment of
opportunities and barriers (Technical Report NREL/TP-500-40745). National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1036/ML103620046.pdf
Muskulus, M., & Schafhirt, S. (2014). Design Optimization of Wind Turbine Suport Structures—A Review.
Journal of Ocean and Wind Energy, 1(1), 12–22.
Navantia. (2018). Eólica—Diferentes tipos de Jackets. Eólica - Apoyamos la energía limpia.
https://www.navantia.es/es/productos-y-servicios/eolica/jackets/
Navantia. (2019). La UTE Navantia-Windar se adjudica la construcción de 5 unidades flotantes de eólica
marina. Navantia. https://www.navantia.es/es/actualidad/notas-prensa/la-ute-navantia-windar-se-
adjudica-la-construccion-de-5-unidades-flotantes-de-eolica-marina/
Rao, K. R. (2019). Wind Energy for Power Generation: Meeting the Challenge of Practical Implementation.
Springer.
Robertson, A. N., & Jonkman, J. M. (2011). Loads Analysis of Several Offshore Floating Wind Turbine
Concepts. Proceedings. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers - 2011 Conference,
Maui, United States. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/50539.pdf
Rueda-Bayona, J. G., Guzmán, A., Cabello Eras, J. J., Silva-Casarín, R., Bastidas-Arteaga, E., & Horrillo-
Caraballo, J. (2019). Renewables energies in Colombia and the opportunity for the offshore wind
technology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 529–543.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.174
Schneider, J. A., & Senders, M. (2010). Foundation Design: A Comparison of Oil and Gas Platforms with
Offshore Wind Turbines. Marine Technology Society Journal, 44(1), 32–51.
https://doi.org/info:doi/10.4031/MTSJ.44.1.5
Serrano Morán, C. (2015). Diseño de una estructura flotante para un aerogenerador offshore [BS Thesis,
Escuela Politécnica Superior - Universidad Carlos III de Madrid]. https://e-
archivo.uc3m.es/bitstream/handle/10016/23441/TFG_Carlos_Serrano_Moran.pdf?sequence=1&isAll
owed=y
Thiagarajan, K. P., & Dagher, H. J. (2014). A Review of Floating Platform Concepts for Offshore Wind
Energy Generation. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 136(020903).
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4026607
Tong, K. C. (1998). Technical and economic aspects of a floating offshore wind farm. Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 74(76), 399–410.
Tu, Y., Cheng, Z., & Muskulus, M. (2017). A review of slamming load application to offshore wind turbines
from an integrated perspective. Energy Procedia, 137, 346–357.
Wang, C. M., Utsunomiya, T., Wee, S. C., & Choo, Y. S. (2010). Research on floating wind turbines: A
literature survey. The IES Journal Part A: Civil & Structural Engineering:, 3(4), 267–277.
WindEurope. (2017). Floating Offshore Wind Vision Statement. https://windeurope.org/wp-
content/uploads/files/about-wind/reports/Floating-offshore-statement.pdf
Withee, J. E. B. (2004). Fully Coupled Dynamic Analysis of a Floating Wind Turbine System [Ph.D Thesis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a425623.pdf
Yan, J., Korobenko, A., Deng, X., & Bazilevs, Y. (2016). Computational free-surface fluid-structure
interaction with application to floating offshore wind turbines. Computers and Fluids, 141, 155–174.