Pile-soil Interaction in Offshore Wind

Structures

Abhinav K A
Research Fellow
Cranfield University

abhinavka@gmail.com

13 July 2018
 Soil
Firmness classification of soil in-situ
(Craig, 2017)

Soil type Term Field test

Loose Can be excavated with a spade
Sands,
Dense Requires a pick for excavation
gravels
Slightly cemented Visual examination; lumps in soil
Soft or loose Easily moulded or crushed with fingers
Silts
Firm or dense Can be crushed by strong pressure in fingers
Very soft Exudes between fingers when squeezed
Soft Moulded by light finger pressure
Clays
Stiff Cannot be moulded by the fingers
Very stiff Can be indented by the thumbnail
Firm Fibres already compressed together
Organic,
Spongy Very compressible and open structure
peats
Plastic Can be moulded in the hand
2
 Cohesive and cohesionless soils
Classification based on strength:
• Cohesive soils - fine-grained, with average grain-size < 0.075 mm
– e.g., clays
– exhibit cohesion from intermolecular attraction

• Cohesionless soils - coarse-grained, with average grain-size >

0.075 mm
– e.g., gravels and sands
– strength is derived from friction between particles

3
 Soil investigation

Description of soil layers 4

 Soil investigation (contd.)

Design parameters 5
Offshore wind foundations

6
Offshore wind foundations

7
 Load transfer mechanisms

(Bhattacharya et al., 2017) 8

 Market-share of foundations in Europe

(WindEurope, 2017)

Share of foundation types for grid-connected wind turbines (units) 9

Loads on an offshore wind turbine

10
 Forcing frequencies and safe regimes

NREL 5-MW offshore wind turbine

11
 Design considerations for OWT foundations
1. Ultimate limit state (ULS)
a) Estimate maximum loads on the foundation
b) Output-minimum dimensions and wall thickness
2. Target natural frequency and serviceability limit state (SLS)
a) Calculate the natural frequency and mudline deformation
over the lifetime of the turbine
3. Fatigue limit state (FLS) and long-term deformation
a) Predict fatigue life and long term load effects
4. Robustness and ease of installation

12
Examples of ULS and SLS failure

(Arany et al., 2017)

13
 Pile foundations
• Long, slender column structures,
penetrating into the soil
• Transfers loads from the
superstructure to greater depths
• Made of steel, concrete or timber,
with hollow or solid sections
• Can be driven or cast-in-place
• Offshore piles are typically steel
with tubular sections, driven
through the legs of the jacket
• Monopiles are large diameter
tubular steel pipe piles

(Gerwick, 2007)
14
 A 7.5 m diameter monopile for Gode Wind Offshore Wind Farm
15
(Kallehave et al., 2015)
A monopile at Horns Rev

(Augustesen et al., 2009)

16
 Methods for pile-soil-interaction analysis
1. Level 1 – linear stiffness foundation modelling
2. Level 2 – substructure approach
3. Level 3 – beam on a nonlinear Winkler foundation
4. Level 4 – continuum model
5. Level 5 – finite element modelling

Level 1 – apparent fixity model

Apparent fixity depth

(Bush, 2009) 17
 Winkler foundation modelling
• the pile and soils are subdivided into a number of discrete layers
• the pile-soil-interaction is represented by a series of nonlinear
springs attached to the pile
• the springs transfer loads between piles and surrounding soils
• the spring characteristics are given by
the p-y, t-z, and Q-z curves
• formulations are given in design
codes – API-RP2A (2007)

Typical p-y curve

18
 Lateral loads on piles
• Winds
• Ocean waves
• Earthquakes
• Blasts

• Lateral loads are resisted by shear, bending and passive earth

resistance
• Important parameters – pile stiffness and configuration, soil
type, soil stiffness, soil strength, end conditions
• Soil characteristics near the mudline are of particular importance
in lateral resistance

19
 p-y method
• each spring is represented by a lateral load–displacement curve
to simulate the mobilization of resistance from surrounding soils
when the pile deflects
• laterally loaded piles embedded in soil can be modelled by the
differential equation:

𝑑4𝑦 𝑑2 𝑦
𝐸𝑝 𝐼𝑝 4 + 𝑃𝑥 2 − 𝑝 + 𝑊 = 0
𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑥

Px = axial load on the pile

y = lateral deflection of the pile at a point x along its depth
p = soil reaction per unit length
EpIp = bending stiffness of the pile
W = distributed load along the length of the pile
20
 p-y method (contd.)
𝑑3 𝑦 𝑑𝑦
𝐸𝑝 𝐼𝑝 3 + 𝑃𝑥 =𝑉
𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑥

𝑑2 𝑦
𝐸𝑝 𝐼𝑝 2 = 𝑀
𝑑𝑥

𝑑𝑦
=𝑆
𝑑𝑥

V = shear force in the pile

M = bending moment of the pile
S = slope of the curve defined by the axis of the pile

21
 p-y method (contd.)

Representation of deflected pile p-y curves

(Reese and van Impe, 2011)

22
 𝑝 = 𝐴𝑝𝑢 𝑡𝑎𝑛ℎ
𝑘𝑥
𝑦
p-y curves in sand
𝐴𝑝𝑢 (O’Neill and Murchinson, 1983)

𝑥 ultimate lateral bearing capacity

𝐴𝑠 = 3 − 0.8 ≥ 0.9
𝐷 𝑝𝑢𝑠 = 𝐶1 × 𝑥 + 𝐶2 × 𝐷 × 𝛾 ′ × 𝑥
𝐴𝑐 = 0.9
𝑝𝑢𝑑 = 𝐶3 × 𝐷 × 𝛾 ′ × 𝑥

(DNV, 2011)

Modulus of subgrade reaction Coefficients as functions of φ 23

 p-y curves in sand (contd.)

Variation with depth Variation with angle of internal friction

γ‘ = 18 kN/m3, φ = 33⁰, d = 1.8 m γ‘ = 18 kN/m3, H = 5 m, d = 1.8 m

24
 Piles under axial loading
Based on the method of axial load transfer, piles can be classified as:
– End-bearing piles
– Friction piles

25
 Piles under axial loading (contd.)
Offshore piles are generally open ended steel pipes
• better driving performance due to lesser resistance
• similar bearing capacity as a closed ended pile due to mobilization
of internal skin friction

𝑄𝑢 = 𝑄𝑎𝑛 + 𝑄𝑜𝑢𝑡 + 𝑄𝑝𝑙𝑢𝑔

𝑄𝑝𝑙𝑢𝑔 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(𝑄𝑖𝑛 , 𝑄𝑏 )

Soil plug

Bearing capacity of an open ended pile (Kumara et al., 2016) 26

 Piles under axial loading (contd.)
• similar to p-y curves, t-z and Q-z curves are used to represent
springs in the axial direction

𝑡 𝑧 𝑧
=2 − ; 𝑧 ≤ 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 = 𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 ; 𝑧 ≥ 𝑧𝑐
𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑧𝑐 𝑧𝑐

3
𝑞 𝑧
= ; 𝑄 ≤ 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑧𝑚𝑎𝑥

Illustration of Q-z curve (d is the pile diameter)

(Jia, 2018) 27
 Long term design issues for OWT foundations

• Piles under scour

• Soil stiffness variation under repeated cyclic loading

28
 Piles under scour
• results in a complete loss of lateral and axial resistance down
to the depth of scour below the original seabed
• p–y and t–z curves have to be generated on the basis of a
modified seabed level considering the depth of general scour

29
 Soil stiffness degradation
• arises from cyclic loading
• results in accumulation of pile head deflection with time
• empirical techniques such as the Deterioration of Static p-y
Curve (DSPY) method degrades both soil resistance and
deflection, considering the nature of cyclic loading, method of
installation of the pile and the density of soil

𝑝𝑁 = 𝑝1 𝑁𝑐−0.4𝑡

𝑦𝑁 = 𝑦1 𝑁𝑐0.6𝑡

30
 Limitations of the p-y method for monopiles
• p-y curves have been verified only for piles up to 2 m diameter
• Pile - soil stiffness for large diameter piles is over-estimated
• p-y curves used in oil & gas structures were derived for the
ultimate collapse criteria, but fatigue and dynamic response
are more important for monopiles
• For layered soil, the interaction between the layers is neglected

Flexible pile Rigid pile

(Augustesen et al., 2009) 31

 FEM for soil-structure-interaction

Monopile modelled in PLAXIS 32

 References
• API-RP2A-WSD, APIRP - 2A - WSD Recommended practice for planning, designing and
constructing fixed offshore platforms–working stress design. API Publishing Services, 2000.
• L Arany, S Bhattacharya, J Macdonald & SJ Hogan, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 92, 2017, 126-152
• AH Augustesen, KT Brødbæk, M Møller, SPH Sørensen, LB Ibsen, TS Pedersen & L.
Andersen, Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Civil, Strut. Environ. Eng. Computing, 2009
• S Bhattacharya, G Nikitas, L Arany & N Nikitas, Eng. Technol. Ref., 2017, 1–16
• EA Bush, A Comparison of Alternative Foundation Models for Offshore Wind Turbines and
Resulting Long-Term Loads, Masters’ Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 2009
• RF Craig, Soil Mechanics, Springer Science
• DNV, Offshore Standard DNV-OS-J101, 2011
• BC Gerwick, Construction of Marine and Offshore Structures, 2007, CRC Press
• J Jia, Soil Dynamics and Foundation Modeling, 2018, Springer
• D Kallehave, BW Byrne, CL Thilsted & KK Mikkelsen, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. A., 2015, 373:
20140100
• JJ Kumara, Y Kikuchi & T Kurashina, Geo-Eng., 2016, 7:1
• MW O’Neill & JM Murchison, Research Rep. No. GT-DF02-83, 1983, University of Houston
• LC Reese & WF Van Impe, Single Piles and Pile Groups Under Lateral Loading, 2011 , CRC
Press
• WindEurope, Offshore Wind in Europe - Key trends and statistics, 2017
33
THANK YOU

abhinavka@gmail.com

34
 p-y method
• the lateral resistance is modelled by uncoupled horizontal
springs
• each spring is represented by a lateral load–displacement curve
to simulate the mobilization of resistance from surrounding soils
when the pile deflects
• the p-y method was developed by McClelland and Focht in the
1950’s, for the petroleum industry
• the p-y method can be used to solve problems including
different soil types, layered soils, nonlinear soil behavior,
different pile materials, cross sections, and different pile head
connection conditions

35