Rankine Lecture 2014

Imperial College, 19 March 2014

Interactions in Offshore Foundation Design

Prof. Guy Houlsby

Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford
 Summary
• Part 1
– Installation of jack-up units
• Part 2
– Performance of jack-up units
• Part 3
– Foundations for offshore wind turbines

Rankine Lecture 2014 2

 Part 3: Foundation for offshore wind turbines

• Why offshore renewables?

• Challenges and solutions for offshore turbine
foundations
– Conventional, unconventional and completely novel solutions

Rankine Lecture 2014 3

 Loads on an H
H
offshore turbine
foundation
V V

V2
V1
M
H
H1 H2

Rankine Lecture 2014 4

Foundation 60
type related
to size and 50
depth Beatrice Beatrice
Water depth (m)

40 Most future
developments?
Monopiles
30
Walney 2
Gabbard
Past Walney
London Array developments Sheringham
20 Thanet London Ormonde
Barrow
Lynn
Dowsing
Robin
Teesside Rigg Lincs
10 North Hoyle Gunfleet
Rhyl
Gunfleet 3
Blyth

Scroby Kentish Burbo

2 3 4 5 6 7
Turbine power (MW)
Rankine Lecture 2014 5
 Foundations for offshore turbines

• Conventional: monopiles
– cyclic loading
• Unconventional: suction caissons
– why?
– challenges: installation, tension capacity
• Novel: screw piles
– solution to the tension problem

Rankine Lecture 2014 6

 Monopiles

photo: Anholt Offshore Wind Farm

photo: Ciscon

• Oil and gas • Offshore wind monopile

Length: 30m - 80m Length: approx. 30m
Diameter: 1m - 2m Diameter: 4m to 6m
L/D approx. 30 - 60 L/D approx. 5 to 7
Rankine Lecture 2014 7
 Delivery team:
PISA
PROJECT
Lead partner:

Partners:

PISA = Pile Soil Analysis

Rankine Lecture 2014 8
 Cyclic loading tests

Reaction Frame

Motor
Mass

Mass

Mass

Rankine Lecture 2014 LeBlanc, Houlsby and Byrne (Géotechnique, 2010) 9

 Approximately 100,000 cycles

1000 9000 90000

cycles cycles cycles

Rankine Lecture 2014 data supplied by Abadie 10

 Stiffness increases with load cycles
One-way load cycles
zb = 0.20

zb = 0.27

zb = 0.40

zb = 0.53 Increasing
amplitude

Rankine Lecture 2014 LeBlanc, Houlsby and Byrne (Géotechnique, 2010) 11

 Accumulated rotation
zb = 0.53
zb = 0.40
zb = 0.27
zb = 0.20
Increasing
amplitude


 k  N 0.31
 static

Rankine Lecture 2014 LeBlanc, Houlsby and Byrne (Géotechnique, 2010) 12

 Effect of cycle type
Tb Tc

One-way cycling


 Tb  Tc  N 0.31 Symmetric
 static cycling

M M
1.0
MR MR
0.75
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.25
-0.5
0 0
-1.0
Rankine Lecture 2014 LeBlanc, Houlsby and Byrne (Géotechnique, 2010) 13
 Flow Suction caissons
Installed by:
1. Self weight
Pressure 2. Suction
W
differential
Advantages:
• Less expensive equipment
for installation
• No pile driving noise

Flow

photo: Universal Foundation A/S

Rankine Lecture 2014 14
 Main issues for suction caissons
• Can they be installed?
OK except:
– Very stiff or fissured clays
– Very coarse-grained soils
– Layered and other non-
homogeneous soils Wind and
wave

• Tensile capacity
Tension

• Cyclic loading

Rankine Lecture 2014 15

 Capacity on tensile loading (sand)

Rankine Lecture 2014 16

 Screw piles

• Small diameter shaft (D)

• Large diameter helical plates (Dp)
• Installed by twisting motion from
hydraulically driven torque-motor
• Some downward vertical load helps
installation

Rankine Lecture 2014 17

 Screw piles

Onshore:
• Used regularly for light
construction
• Quick and easy to install
Offshore:
• Why?
– Tension capacity
– Silent installation
– Torque measurement
helps confirm capacity
• Challenges:
– Scale up to much larger
sizes and capacities
– Develop installation
equipment

photograph: FLI
Rankine Lecture 2014 18
 Key Dimensionless Groups
• Geometry: Dp/D, s/Dp, N
V or Vt
T
• Capacity
– clay: V/(suDp2)
– sand: V/(g’Dp3)

Dp
• Installation (T = torque) s
– clay: T/(suDp3)
– sand: T/(g’Dp4)

• Key ratios: VDp/T , Vt/V D

(not V/T as often currently used onshore)

Rankine Lecture 2014 19

 Summary data of screw pile experience
(model tests and onshore)

Source Test type Soil VtDp/T Vt/V

Min Mean Max
Tsuha et al (2010) Centrifuge Sand 6.0 8.3 12.5

Rao et al (1991) Laboratory Soft Clay 0.64

Sakr (2009) Field Oil Sand 5.2 0.52
Livneh and El Naggar (2008) Field Clayey Silt 6.4 8.0 10.9
Ghaly et al (1991) Laboratory Sand 3.2 5.0 6.1
Cerato and Victor (2009) Field Layered soil 2.6 14.4 23.3
Perko (2009) Various Various 1.6 8.5 24.6 0.8-0.96
(implied)

Tensile capacity x Diameter / Torque

Rankine Lecture 2014 20

 Compressive capacity
Independent Envelope
plates

Rankine Lecture 2014 21

 Tension capacity
Independent Envelope
plates

Rankine Lecture 2014 22

 Compression and tension capacity
Total Bearing Load, kN
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
0
Minimum - Compression
5 Independent - Compression
Interacting - Compression
10 Tension
Pile Tip Depth (m)

15

20

25

30

35

Rankine Lecture 2014 23

 Dimensionless torque ratio
Torque Ratio, VtDp/T
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0

10
Pile Tip Depth (m)

15

20

25

30

35
Rankine Lecture 2014 24
 Tension/compression capacity ratio
Tension/Compression capacity ratio, Vt /V
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1
0

10
Pile Tip Depth (m)

15

20

25

30

35
Rankine Lecture 2014 25
 Maplin Sands Lighthouse
(1838)
• Foundation designed by
Alexander Mitchell

• 9 screw piles into sand

• 1.2m (4 ft) diameter
• 0.125m (5 inch) shaft diameter
• 7m (22 ft) depth below mudline
• Operated till 1931 illustrations provided by Alan Lutenegger
Rankine Lecture 2014 26
 Whether this broad spiral flange, or ‘Ground Screw’, as it
may be termed, be applied to the foot of a pile to support a
superincumbent weight, or be employed as a mooring to
resist an upward strain, its holding power entirely depends
upon the area of its disc, the nature of the ground into which
it is inserted, and the depth to which it is forced beneath the
surface.
The proper area of the screw should, in every case, be
determined by the nature of the ground in which it is to be
placed, and which must be ascertained by previous
experiment.

Mitchell “On Submarine Foundations”, 1848

Rankine Lecture 2014 27

 Conclusions from Part 3

• Offshore wind will be a key element of the UK’s

energy mix

• Larger structures in deeper water will see a transition

from monopiles/monopods to multiple footing
structures

• We need innovative solutions to drive costs down:

helical piling is an old solution to a new problem

Rankine Lecture 2014 28

28
 Centre for Doctoral Training in Renewable Energy Marine Structures

• Structures by Cranfield and Geotechnics by Oxford

• Training leaders with high level technical expertise
• Cohorts of at least 10 graduate students per year for 5 years
• University based PhD and industry based EngD students
R
• 4-year research degrees with taught components E
M
• > 15 companies have pledged involvement (inc. Arup, Atkins, Centrica, DNV, S
EDF, e.on, Fugro, GE, HRW, Mojo Maritime, Qinetiq, RES, Skanska , Tata Steel, RWE) …

…but we need more

• Contact byron.byrne@eng.ox.ac.uk for more information

Rankine Lecture 2014 29