mono pile in sand
DESCRIPTION
Mono Pile in SandTRANSCRIPT
-
Monopiles in SandStiffness and Damping Christian LeBlanc Thilsted, DONG Energy RenewablesNiels Jacob Tarp-Johansen, DONG Energy Renewables
EWEA 2011, 14-17 March, Brussels
*
-
Introduction, soil stiffness and dampingImpact on designExperience
Soil dampingOverview of soil dampingTheoretical derivation of damping due to pore pressure dissipationConclusions
On-going and future workFull-scale measurements
*Outline
*
-
Wind-wave misalignment cause the resonant response to be governed by soil damping Damping (excl. aerodynamic damping) become a design driver
Consequence of underestimation soil damping: increased use of steel higher costs
*Soil dampingIncreasing water depths and larger turbines reduces the 1st natural frequency Soil stiffness become a major design driver
Consequence of underestimating soil stiffness :increased use of steelhigher costsapplicable range of monopile foundations limited to water depths less than ~30 m.
Soil stiffness
Impact on design
*
-
Damping presently used for design calculations is based on a theoretical reconstruction of damping contributions
*Soil damping - theoretical0.3 HzTable adapted from: Niels Jacob Tarp-Johansen et al. Comparing Sources of Damping of cross-wind Motion, European Offshore Wind 2009, Stockholm( modal = Modal log. decr., 2, = damping ratio)
Source1st mode (%)RemarkSoil~3-5Visco-elasticHydrodynamic~0.75Radiation onlySteel tower + pile~1.2Disregarding groutTower damperTypically > 2Turbine dependentAerodynamic~1Inherent in BEM
*
-
*Soil damping - measurementsEmergency stops, i.e. no aerodynamic damping
Horns Rev 1 Offshore Wind FarmBurbo Offshore Wind Farm
Measurements show more damping (excl. aerodynamic damping) than assumed in present design calculationsCurrent design = Theoretical approach: modal = 8 %Measurements: modal > 10 %
-
Soil stiffness - theoreticalThe py curves for piles in sand described by Reese et al. (1974) and ONeill & Murchison (1983) led to recommendations in the standards (DNV, 1977; API, 1993)
Scale effects?Is a monopile a pile?
*
-
Soil stiffness - measurements
Figure: Scour hole depth from xyz-point cloud Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm Soil: sand and clay layers
1st Natural Frequency:
Calculated value: 0.302-0.308 Hz Measured value: 0.314 Hz
60-150% higher than predicted Closest prediction in wind farm
Back-calculation on soil stiffness:
-
Introduction, stiffness and dampingImpact on designExperience
Soil dampingOverview of soil dampingTheoretical derivation of damping due to pore pressure dissipationConclusions
On-going and future workFull-scale measurements
*Outline
-
*Soil damping
Geometrical damping (wave radiation)Vanishing for frequencies < ~1 Hz
Material dampingNon-linear hysteresis. Investigations indicates modal 3-5%
Rodenhausen, Moritz (2010), "Soil Response of Offshore Wind Turbines - Stiffness and damping of monopile foundations", Master Thesis, University of Stuttgart
Damping contribution from pore pressure dissipation?
TypeParticle size [mm]Clay0-0.002Silt0.002-0.06Sand0.06-2Gravel2-60
-
*
Grid of two-dimensional soil model in Flac3DSoil damping from pore pressure dissipation
p FLAC3D, Itasca 3D disc model Partially drained simulation Linear elastic soil / Darcy flow
Decreasing permeabilityFully drained responseUndrained response
*
-
*
Soil damping from pore pressure dissipation Comparison results (marker) with simple spring-dashpot model (solid lines)
Replication FLAC3D results using a simple spring-dashpot mode
Spring-dashpot constants calibrated to FLAC3D results.
*
-
*Soil damping from pore pressure dissipation Pile diameter: 5 m Natural frequency: 0.3 Hz Soil stiffness representative of a typical sand
Conclusions: Transition range over two orders of magnitude of permeability Undrained (stiffer) response in typical sand and silts Up to modal 1%, however Significant damping only in gravels and highly permeable sands
Schematic illustration of soil response af function of soil permeability
*
-
Introduction, stiffness and dampingImpact on designExperience
Soil dampingOverview of soil dampingTheoretical derivation of damping due to pore pressure dissipationConclusions
On-going and future workFull-scale measurements
*Outline
-
Full-scale measurements1 MonopileCommisioning in spring 2011Soil profile: SandL/D = 4
*On-going and future work - Walney Offshore Wind FarmMono pile36 strain gauges (9 levels)Transition Piece8 strain gauges (2 levels)6 accelerometers (2 levels)12 displacement transducers (6H 6V)2 manual inclinometers (NS & EW)
-
Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm
*Monopile sensorsRostock, GermanyEEW (steel work) / HBM (sensors)
-
Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm
*Monopile sensorsRostock, GermanyEEW (steel work) / HBM (sensors)
-
Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm*Transition piece sensorsBarrow, UKHBM (Sensors)
-
Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm
*
-
Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm
*
-
Full-scale measurements1 or 2 Monopile(s)Commisioning in 2012Soil profile: Clay
On-going and future work London Array
-
Monopiles in SandStiffness and Damping Christian LeBlanc Thilsted, DONG Energy RenewablesNiels Jacob Tarp-Johansen, DONG Energy Renewables
EWEA 2011, 14-17 March, Brussels
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*