Chapter.

Literature Review

According to available resources, it is evident that Jack up Spud can / Mud mat interaction studies in
weak offshore subsoil assessment is a recent history. It is difficult to get research papers in this area in
earlier years of 1970’s. Some of research papers are narrated here.

1.) Ralph Scales, T.J. Hirst, J.E. Steele, N.D. Remy (1976) [1] had worked on mat supported jack up
foundation. The findings of the scales have been reproduced here in terms of advantage of mat foundation
to jack up. A mat supported rig with bottom bearings founds to be very well suited for all types of
environmental conditions. These types of Rigs had performed very well under the event of hurricane also
on extremely weak soils like Mississippi river delta area. One more interesting advantage of jack up
supported mat is it works as active damper in the entire system. Lowering of the mat at the particular site
location allows the jack up deck to be jacked up out of the water very quickly. The lowered mat which is
leveled to the sea bed top acts as damper which gradually eliminates wave induced rig heave and wave
condition in comparison with other types of Jack up. Therefore impacting or pounding on the bottom.
This characteristic permits the jack up to move to more severe and harsh wave condition in comparison
with other types of Jack up.

Remarks: Ralph Scales has not given any mathematical expression for his research.

2.) W.P.Stewart (2007) London [2] has done extensive work in bearing capacity analysis and percentage
increase in resisting overturning moment of jack up rig maleo producer which is supported by large cut
out mats as shown in figure. Here Study has been carried out in soft clays on level sea bed. Mud mat rigs
will penetrate into the sea bed until a depth where the soil bearing capacity is just sufficient to support the
weight of the structure less its buoyancy weight. Particular Mat penetrates in clay slowly. Jack up
penetrating the soil unevenly. Jack up uneven penetration causes the structure to tilt back and forth and
the bearing pressures to increase and decrease from one side of the mat to the other which are difficult to
assess.
 Fig. 1. Jack up with Mat foundation with skirt cut outs in elevation & plan

W. P. Stewart has made Comparison of bearing capacity by taking initial bearing capacity of soil
calculated by local soil investigation. Particular bearing capacity is considered as basic bearing pressure
before placement and lowering the mat support to seabed. And then after lowering the mat supported jack
up at the site the bearing pressure indicates rise of 50% to 66% compared to basic value. Here one can
also visualize the effect of skirt – Confinement of soil beneath skirt plate gives rise in bearing capacity by
around 16%.

Mat overturning resistance has been calculated by assuming strip foundation method for the mat cut outs.
The Strip foundation method proves to be better in comparison of the slip circle of method of soil. In this
method simple single force acting vertically in the center of each cut out strips. The overturning resistance
is taken as the sum of each force multiplied by its horizontal distance or lever arm, from assumed
horizontal axis of rotation. The moment calculated from the axis of rotation may add or subtract to the
overturning moment caused by environmental loading. This is generally combination of wind, wave and
current forces and their vertical distances above the assumed horizontal axis of rotation. Factor of safety
against overturning or OTSF is defined as

OTSF = (SRmoment-Wmoment)/OTmoment Where,

SR moment= soil ultimate capacity resisting moment
W moment= (Weight –Buoyancy) Moment
OT moment= over turning moment from environmental forces
W.P. Stewart worked out the particular OTSF under initial condition before installation of jack up mat
was about 0.97 against statuary requirement of American bureau of shipping (ABS) as 1.5. While after
installation of jack up with skirt considering bearing capacity increment, OTSF value increases up to 3.72.
This is quite satisfactory.
Remark: Jack up mat with skirt increases bearing capacity by 16%. Overturning factor of safety
increases to twice.

3.) Eric J. Parker, Francesco Mirabelli & Lorenzo Paoletti (2008) [3] from Italy had studied the
concept of predicting jack up leg penetration from the conventional mathematical expressions. They
compared predicted and observed Jack up spud can leg penetrations in their research for 15 offshore sites.
Although soft formulation for the same approach had not been mentioned in the research paper. They had
attempted to give bearing capacity formulas for spud can by making changes into conventional bearing
capacity equations for various soil layers as well as in multiple soil layers.

Fig.2 Spud Can geometry in Vertical Section. Dimensions are given in meters.

In general jack-up leg penetration can be well predicted by simple bearing capacity equations. Practical
Spud can penetration in sands usually stops when the maximum section comes to bear on the sand layer.

Leg penetrations can be large in normally consolidated clays. Penetration stops either at the base of
Holocene Wedge or on silty / sandy interbedds. Predictions are most difficult in interbedded profiles, with
the most critical cases being the presence of thin silty layers in soft layers for purposes, the greatest risk of
punch through is found in the Holocene wedge area.

Remarks: No mathematical expressions for the same research are available.

4.) Zhao Tianfenga, Sun Chengmeng (2014) [4]

An earlier solution by various researchers has been carried out to increase bearing capacity and increasing
stability. Spud can with buoyancy modules are suggested by Zhao Tianfenga and Sun Chengmeng by
considering problems associated with the retrieval operations of Jack up spud can legs. Most of the cases
in spud can embedded legs it is found that retrieving requires very heavy uplift pressure to remove spud
cans which are embedded in intermediate layers of soil. Hence to overcome these problem spud cans
with buoyancy modules has been suggested.

It is proposed to remove the soil resting on the upper surface of the spud can and thus reduce the pull-out
resistance during the extraction process after drilling. The new spud can has three pontoons, each
composed of three prismatic ballast cabins equipped with mud-filtering devices, jetting nozzles, jetting
lines and gas injection lines. By injecting compressed air, the cabins can discharge ballast water through
the mud-filtering devices on the pontoons, which act as drainage channels. Several mud fenders are
positioned on the outside surfaces of the pontoon to protect the jetting nozzles, which are the outlets of
the jetting lines inside the pontoon. Periodic jetting can be carried out to avoid soil consolidation near the
leg. In comparison with existing spud cans, the buoyancy spud cans occupy the cavity space and reduce
the amount of soil above the spud can to gain a significant reduction in pull-out resistance. After the
ballast water is discharged, buoyancy forces can also be acquired from empty pontoons to help leg
extraction.

Fig.3 Spud Can Section with Buoyancy module, Compressed air and Jetting Water arrangement

5.) Geir Svano, Tor Inje Tjelta [5] Norway 1996 has found that existing spud can equipped with skirt
cylinder increases moment fixity substantially in any kind of soil whether sand or clay. They had taken
case study from STATAOIL. This indicates the penetration resistances offered by the normal spud cans
foundations against pre loading as compared with the skirted spud can foundation.
Fig. 4 Spud can having skirt cylinder beneficial in resisting overturning moment, increases bearing
capacity.

6.) Nicholaos Gazis & J P Kenny (2013)[6] Houston USA

Authors had derived Mud Mat Stability Analysis using methods available in API RP 2 A and more
recently by API RP 2 Geo. Soil Properties are evaluted statically represented by DNV RP C 207. Mud
mat stability evaluation has been carried out using classical approach and probabililstic approach.

Classical approach: Undrained bearing capacity for mudmat stability as per API RP 2 Geo has beeen
given by equation as follows.

𝑘𝐵′
𝑄𝑑 = 𝐹(𝑠uoNc + )𝐾𝑐𝐴′
4

Where Qd=Maximum total vertical load at the base of the footing at failure (Excl. soil plug inside skirt
under undrained condition).

F= Correction Factor given as function equivalenet to kB’/4

k= Rate of increase of undrained shear strength of soil with depth

suo = Undrained shear strength of soil at the base of the footing

Nc = Dimensionless Constant equal to 5.14

B’ = Mimimum effictive lateral dimension of foundation

A’= effective area of foundation depending on load eccentricity

Kc = Correction factor which account for load inclination, footing shape, depth of embedment, inclination
of base and inclination of seafloor surface.
Qv = Total Applied vertical force

Facotr of Safety F.O.S. = Qd/Qv ≥ 2 => Acceptable as per recommended practise.

It is noted by Randolph et. al. 2005 that above classical approach yields conservative results for many
offshore shallow foundation design.

Approximate Analytical Approach:

𝑘𝐵′
𝐹(𝑠uoNc + )𝐾𝑐𝐴′
4
SF (suo) =
𝑄𝑣

This particular equation can be rewritten as y=g(x), which can be understood as bearing capacity as
function of soil shear strength. Where y and x are random variables. One can determine the mean of y
and other expected values by calculating appropiate expected values using probability density function of
x in integraton. The particular function y= g(x) is monotonic and invertible. However due to empirical
nature bearing capacity equation has no inverse solution and is not monotonic. Therefore function must be
generated that fits least square regression methods. Various regression techniques should be investigated
in order to derive a function that best fits the bearing capacity response equation. After an equation that
is monotonic and invertible is found for a best fit curve for y= g(x). Hence suitable value must be found
out using this particular approach. This gives realistically reasonable value for bearing capacity in
compared approach.

Gazi has carried out validation of the same problem by Monte Carlo Simulation. The Monte Carlo
simulation is sampling experiment involving the generation of random variants using deterministic
methods.

Remarks: Here it is concluded that by comparison of Classical & Analytical approach of mud mat
stability analysis, good results are yielded in approximate analytical method.

7.) Ping Lu and David Maclaren 2016 [7] United Kingdom

Authors have worked on Geotechnical challenge of offshore mud mat foundation stability:
combining analytical and finite element investigation of bearing capacity of sand overlying soft clay
– A case study.

An offshore jacket has a mud mat foundation or mud mat, which transfers the temporary loads to the
seafloor soils before completion of pile driving operation and acts as a temporary support during the
jacket installation. Mud mats are usually made of stiffened steel plates, fabricated at the bottom of the
jacket and generally located adjacent to the jacket leg at the mud line level. Each mud mat needs to be
designed to have adequate stability against vertical and lateral load reactions from a combination of dead
load, variable live load, environmental load such as wind, wave and current etc.

GK jacket is to be located in the North Sea. The shallow soil conditions at the GK jacket site govern the
mud mat design and are of a complex soil layering; immediately below the top 1m sand layer are very
soft to soft clays gradually increasing in strength with depth below seabed. This imposes a big
geotechnical challenge for the design of the GK jacket mud mats.

The design of mud mat foundations under idealized shallow soil conditions, such as uniformed sand or
clay, can be performed in accordance with DNV/ISO procedures based on general bearing capacity (for
example Brinch Hansen) formula. This mainly involves:

1) Calculating the load reactions by analyzing load cases of mud mat stability under variable
loading combinations of dead, live and environmental loads;
2) Sizing the mud mat and developing a relevant bearing capacity envelope (or V-H diagram) for
either undrained or drained soil conditions;
3) Plotting the calculated load reactions onto the developed V-H diagram to check if the load
reactions fall inside the bearing capacity envelope.

For a complex soil setting up such as at the GK site where sand overlying soft clay, consideration has
to be made for soil layering behavior to achieve a satisfactory design. If assuming that the soils at GK
site should entirely consist of soft clays it would underestimate the mud mat capacity, leading to a
rather onerous design; or it would overestimate the mud mat capacity and impose significant risk to the
jacket installation, if entirely assuming the soils as sand. That means the routine mud mat design
procedure, often appropriate for using under an idealized condition of uniform soil type, is not
appropriate for the GK site, since it is impossible to reflect the mud mat stability behavior of layering
soils realistically. To meet such geotechnical challenge for the design of the mud mats at the GK site,
advanced finite element (FE) analysis technique has therefore been used to facilitate the design.

In the paper, soil formations and soil conditions at the GK jacket site, as revealed by the site
geotechnical investigations were briefly described and discussed with its low, representative and high
strength profiles. The challenge imposed by layering soils as to how soft clays underlying sand in the
shallow part was discussed. The impacts of the challenge on the mud mat design at the GK site was
highlighted mainly as two aspects: one is bearing capacity failure due to inadequate mud mat capacity
caused by not appropriately representing the soft clays underlying the sand and another is failure for
skirt penetrating to penetrate to the target depth due to high soil resistance of the sand.

This paper presents the FE modeling strategies adopted. The 2-D Plaxis FE package was used to
investigate the bearing capacity of the mud mat. The paper describes the geometry of the mud mat and
its skirts for the Gk jacket, and the FE modeling boundary conditions, then the idealized FE model
corresponding to the layered soil profiles and the input soil parameters. The anisotropic features of the
soils and the stiffness parameter used are also considered.

The FE modeling of the mud mats at the GK jacket involved using both options of “Prescribed Loads”
and “Prescribed Displacement” in Plaxis. For the cases of combining vertical and horizontal loadings,
the option of “Prescribed Load” was used, accounting for the major part of the FE modeling. In the
modeling with the “Prescribed Load” option, a prescribed vertical loading was assigned, and the mud
mat was increasingly loaded by incremental horizontal loading. The modeling process continued until a
failure mechanism had developed in the soils. The horizontal loading (Pxi) leading to the development
of the failure mechanism and the prescribed vertical loading (Pyi) defines a point (Pxi, Pyi) for
deriving a bearing capacity envelope under such a particular combination of the vertical/horizontal
loadings. The process was repeated for various combinations of vertical and horizontal loadings and
led to defining points of delineating the bearing capacity envelope. The “Prescribed Displacement”
option was applied to either pure vertical or pure horizontal loading case. In the modeling with the
“Prescribed Displacement” option, the mud mat was increasingly loaded vertically (or horizontally)
until the incremental vertical (or horizontal) displacements did not give any further change in vertical
(or horizontal) force and a failure mechanism had developed in the soils. This defines the limit for
deriving either vertical or sliding capacity of the mud mat.
 Figure Mud mat bearing capacity graphs, GK Site

As part of the mud mat structure, the mud mat skirts help increase resistance to horizontal loading,
which was incorporated into the FE modeling for the GK jacket mud mats.
Allowable Loads

The FE modeling helped to understand the failure mechanism of the soils loaded by the mud mats at
the GK jacket. The FE modeling revealed that, at the GK jacket site, the weakest place would be on the
soft clay immediately underlying the top sand and sliding failure would mainly occur at the interface
between the top sand and the soft clay immediately below the sand, i.e. at 1m depth below seabed.
Based on such failure mechanism, a hand calculation of the sliding resistance was made which was
also taken into consideration for the mud mat design. The paper also briefly presents the skirt
penetration analysis, which was performed based on the high soil strength profile, to ensure the target
skirt penetration depth achievable.

The FE modeling, together with simplified analytical analyses, has led to final development of the
bearing capacity envelope (see Figure enclosed) and facilitated finalizing the design of the mud mats
for the GK offshore project. The paper has also discussed the aspects of making improvements on the
mud mat design and to mitigate the risk of offshore pile installation related to mud mat stability.
The investigation of the GK jacket mud mat stability has demonstrated how the geotechnical challenge
could be met with the right strategy and holistic approaches. The design practice has provided useful
reference information for defining the bearing capacity envelope of a skirt mud mat and would help
design mud mats for future offshore projects, especially for those with similar soil layering setting up
and mud mat/skirt make-up. The FE modeling helped to understand the failure mechanism of the soils
loaded by the mud mats at the GK jacket. The FE modeling revealed that, at the GK jacket site, the
weakest place would be on the soft clay immediately underlying the top sand and sliding failure would
mainly occur at the interface between the top sand and the soft clay immediately below the sand, i.e. at
1m depth below seabed. Based on such failure mechanism, a hand calculation of the sliding resistance
was made which was also taken into consideration for the mud mat design. The paper also briefly
presents the skirt penetration analysis, which was performed based on the high soil strength profile, to
ensure the target skirt penetration depth achievable. The FE modeling, together with simplified
analytical analyses, has led to final development of the bearing capacity envelope facilitated finalizing
the design of the mud mats for the GK Jacket. The paper has also discussed the aspects of making
improvements on the mud mat design and to mitigate the risk of offshore pile installation related to
mud mat stability. The investigation of the GK jacket mud mat stability has demonstrated how the
geotechnical challenge could be met with the right strategy and holistic approaches. The design
practice has provided useful reference information for defining the bearing capacity envelope of a skirt
mud mat and would help design mud mats for future offshore projects, especially for those with similar
soil layering setting up and mud mat/skirt make-up.

Remark: No mathematical expressions are generated for the same.

8.) X. Feng, M.F. Randolph, S. Gourvenec, R.Wallerand 2014 [8.] COFS Australia

Authors have worked on conceptual development for Design approach for rectangular mud mats
under fully three-dimensional loading. The research presented here derives from research collaboration
between the Centre for Offshore foundation Systems (COFS) and Subsea 7. Subsea 7 is the owner of the
intellectual property resulting from the collaboration and some features contained in this work are
covered by pending patent. The Centre for Offshore Foundation Systems (COFS) is currently supported
as a node of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and
Engineering and in partnership with The Lloyd’s Register Foundation.

Mud mats are used in the offshore oil and gas industry to support subsea infrastructure for pipeline
terminations and well manifolds. Expansion and contraction of connected pipelines and jumpers due to
changing thermal and pressure conditions impose fully three-dimensional loading on the foundations,
dominated by horizontal, moment and torsional loading rather than high vertical loads. The mudmat
foundations are rectangular, and include shallow skirts in order to increase capacity, particularly for
sliding. Offshore design guidelines for shallow foundations tend to excessive conservatism; optimization
of mudmat capacity under general loading has thus become critical in order to keep foundation footprints
within the limits of current installation vessels. Author proposes alternative design methodology, based
on failure envelopes derived from an extensive programme of three-dimensional finite element analyses,
focusing on the sliding and rotational capacity of the foundation. Starting from expressions that quantify
the uniaxial capacity under each of the six degrees of freedom, failure envelope shapes for different
biaxial combinations are developed. Ultimately, the allowable capacity under the six degree of freedom
loading is expressed in terms of a two-dimensional failure envelope for the resultant horizontal and
moment loading, after due allowance for the vertical and torsional components of load.

Here theoretical derivation is not discussed much in details. Some of theoretical equations given by
authors for different capacities under different loading are given here.

Pure Uniaxial Vertical Capacity

  d 
 5.7 1  0.234 tanh  4.78   1  0.2k  0.012k 2  0.0004k 3 
Vult
Asuo   B 

Horizontal Capacities parallel to X & Y Axes

Hxult d B  k d 
 1   Np  2 skirt 1  
Asuo B L  2 B 

Hyult d B  k d 
 1   Np  2 skirt 1  
Asuo B L  2 B 

Uniaxial Moment Capacity

M ult rec tan gular B

 1  0.22
M ult strip L

  d 
 0.84 1  0.254 tanh  4.51   1  0.2k  0.01k 2  0.0004k 3 
Myult
ABsuo   B 
   d 
 1.04 1  0.124 tanh  8.31   1  0.3k  0.028k 2  0.00134k 3 
Mxult
ALsuo   B 

Uniaxial Torsional Capacity

Tult d  Np   B   B k d 
2

  1      1.4 skirt  1  

ALsuo B  4   L   L   2 B 

These are above mentioned equations for different capacities of mudmat under V-M-H Loading. Failure
envelopes under biaxial loading planes and torsional effects on failure envelopes as well combined failure
envelopes are not discussed here. For further details of the particular failure envelopes, one can go
through original research paper enclosed in reference list.

Remarks: Finite element analyses considered a rectangular mudmat with aspect ratio B/L of 0.5 and
embedment ratios d/B up to 0.2 in soil with linearly increasing shear strength with depth, 0 ≤ κ = kB/su0
≤ 10. Design methodology is proposed whereby the six degree-of-freedom interaction is reduced to a two
dimensional failure envelope in resultant H-M space, adjusted for the effects of vertical and torsional
loading. Algebraic expressions are proposed for prediction of uniaxial and combined loading capacities.
The expressions presented in the paper are accurate for interpolating mudmat capacity within the range
of conditions considered in this study. The methodology is considered applicable for a wider range of
conditions but the coefficients of the fitting expressions, and in some cases the fitting expressions
themselves, may need redefining for foundation aspect ratios, B/L, much less than the value of 0.5
considered, or for embedment ratios significantly greater than 0.2.

Table.1 Design steps for Jack up Mudmat Design under V-M-H loading
9.) Xiaowel Feng, Susan Gourvenec [9] 2014 USA

Due increased use of rectangular mudmat in deeper waters to support subsea infrastructures leads to
renewed interest in optimization of design of offshore shallow foundations as per industry guidelines API
RP2 GEO & ISO 19901-4. Which are based on classical bearing capacity theories of a plain strip footing
on the surface of a uniform tresca material. More realistic approach has been developed by Feng and
Susan Gourvenec by superimposing empirical modification factors and the effective width principal.

The details discussion of failure envelopes, readers are requested to refer original research paper as
mentioned in the reference. Here only Modified equations are presented.

Notations used for Reference Research Paper [8] & [9]

A =Area of Rectangular Mudmat Foundation

B = Mudmat Breadth

d = Mudmat Embedment

Hx, Hy = Horizontal load along X & Y axis

Hxult, Hyult = Ultimate Horizontal load along X & Y axis

h = Normalized horizontal load (H/Hult)

k = Shear strength gradient

L = Mudmat Length

Mx, My = Moment along x- and y- axis

Mxult, Myult = Ultimate Moment Along x- and y-axis

m = Normalized Moment (M/Mult)

sum = Undrained Strength at Mud line level

suo = Undrained Strength at level of skirt tip

su = Undrained Shear Strength

T = Torsion

Tult = Ultimate Torsional Capacity

t = Normalized Tension (T/Tulti)

V = Vertical Load

Vulti = Ultimate Vertical Load

v = Normalized vertical load (V/Vult)

αskirt = Friction Ratio of Skirts

ϒ’ = Effective Unit weight

θ = Direction of resultant horizontal load

θm =Direction of Resultant Moment

K = Soil heterogeneity factor

10.) B. Abdalla, F. Steven Wang, M. Kabir Hossain [10] 2013 USA

Authors have worked on the FEA based stability analysis of mud mats –coupled soil structure flow line
interaction model. The traditional method of calculating the bearing capacity of offshore subsea mudmat
is to use classical method using API RP 2A/2 Geo. This concept may be overly conservative under
combined loading for foundations.

Fig.1 Soil Foundation Mudmat Structural Fig.2 Deformation pattern under installation of
System Mudmat at Sea Bottom.

Concluding Remarks:

This paper demonstrated the use of advanced numerical techniques in bearing capacity predictions of
mudmat for subsea structures. This becomes very useful in circumstances where the FOS as determined
by classical approach (API-RP-2A/2GEO) does not meet the minimum code requirements. In such cases,
and after refinement of soil profile, it is crucial to refine the applied loads before considering a change in
mudmat size. The loading accuracy can be improved by conventional finite element modeling of the
structure and jumpers, typically in structural analysis software, where by the foundation soil is
represented by equivalent springs. The reactions collected at the center of mudmat are then used in the
classical approach.

Further improvement is presented in this paper by adopting a FEA-based approach for estimating
foundation stability. In this approach, the structure (with sliding mechanism), soil foundation, jumpers,
and flow line are modeled in a 3D FE model as realistically as possible so as to capture the more accurate
interactions among the different parts of whole sled- soil system.

According to the results of the numerical example presented herein, the following conclusions can be
drawn:

- The interactions between the soil, sled, jumpers and the flow line can be captured with the integral
FEA based approach. It further reduces the conservatisms in the classical and conventional FE
 methods.
- FEA-based soil failure definition showed an increase in the FOS in comparison with that in the
classical API RP 2GEO. In the study example, FOS of the pipeline sled foundation increased by
approximately 9% when conventional FE is used, and by 26% when using the fully integrated FEA
approach.
- With von Mises constitutive model, the soil vertical displacement at bearing failure is less than 2%
of the mudmat width. This is rather a “brittle” deformation behavior compared to the “more
ductile” behavior usually observed for the foundations in clay when load tested.

Finally, it is important to note that mud mats should generally be designed to meet the required FOS
based on API-2A/2GEO, and the FEA-based approach presented herein is recommended only in cases
where the mudmat size is constrained, and the calculated FOS from classical approach is close but
slightly less than the code requirements.