Enhanced Technology Qualification: A Reliable Path When Facing Changing Conditions and Demands
Authors: Mcgeorge Dag , Ahjem Vidar , Viteri Martha , Borg Jonas 
Published: April 2012

Abstract
Historically, successful introduction of new technologies in the offshore oiland gas industry has been based on different strategies. With support from theindustry DNV formulated a Recommended Practice (RP) that defined systematicsfor Qualification of New Technology in 2001. Today, it has earned thereputation of an accepted industry practice.
Experience gained from 10 years of industry use has been implemented in anupdated RP. The main improvements relate to:Qualification process alignment with business needs.Adaptation to technology development challenges.Facilitation of rapid improvement cycles based on preceding versions of thesame technology.Use of modern methods within systems engineering and dependability.
Two industry examples illustrate how the improvements apply to the users of theupdated DNV-RP-A203:Fiber rope technology.Qualification of a new cold-repair technology for offshore units.

Introduction
This paper presents two case examples where the TQ systematics are of benefit. Then the principles along with the background and motives are summarized, andthe changes made to the DNV-RP-A203 are reviewed.
The use of the TQ systematics in various project phases is explained withreference to the case examples. Applicability of evidence from precedingqualification is discussed, addressing how the problems of starting the TQprocess late can be overcome, how to effectively make incremental technologychanges and how to qualify technology for new ways of use.

Background
Throughout history, new technologies have been developed and used to captureopportunity and solve problems. In the offshore oil and gas industry, newtechnologies allowed oil producers to use floating installations and subseadevelopments to produce in deeper waters. Technologies have been developed andemployed, and then refined such that technologies have evolvedcontinually.
However it can be problematic if new solutions are introduced without riskevaluation, or when an unknown service context is encountered. In each case, unanticipated problems may occur.
In parallel with modern technology developments, engineering methods have alsodeveloped, most of all in the military, aerospace and nuclear industries. Theobjective was to move from a reactive approach to a proactive approach, aimingto anticipate potential accidents and take precautions for accidents that havenot yet occurred.
Traditionally, standards have been written in a prescriptive format providingdetails for acceptable designs. Hence, interpretation of the standard tends tobe straight forward, and it is simple to verify compliance with it. Thepotentially streamlined and predictable processes are an advantage of theprescriptive approach. A disadvantage is - however - that it tends to lock theindustry to specific solutions where innovation and development would bebetter. Another disadvantage is potential application of an inadequate standardin the absence of a standard that covers the technology precisely. Use of astandard that is only partly relevant can allow serious flaws to slip throughthe design reviews. Inadequacy of standards may further threaten the success ofan innovation process, and in the final instance safety is at risk.