Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Ocean Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apor

Spudcan extraction from deep embedment in soft clay

Omid Kohan , Christophe Gaudin, Mark J. Cassidy, Britta Bienen
Centre for Offshore Foundation Systems and ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and Engineering, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA
6009, Australia

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 27 September 2013
Received in revised form 11 May 2014
Accepted 3 August 2014
Keywords:
Spudcan
Centrifuge modelling
Soft clay
Suction
Extraction

a b s t r a c t
After drilling is completed, spudcan footings of mobile jack-up rigs are extracted from the seabed before
the jack-up is manoeuvred to a new location. In some instances, the extraction may prove to be difcult
and time consuming, especially when the spudcans are deeply embedded, because the pull-out capacity
of the rig is less than the extraction resistance of the spudcans. In soft soil, the extraction resistance
may be signicantly augmented by the development of suction at the spudcan invert. To investigate this
phenomenon, a deeply embedded 30 mm diameter model spudcan was extracted in a series of physical model experiments conducted at an acceleration of 200 g in a geotechnical beam centrifuge. The
spudcan, instrumented with two pore pressure transducers, one at the top and one at the bottom face,
was extracted from normally consolidated clay and under undrained conditions. Eight tests are reported
exhibiting embedments ranging from 1.5 to 3 spudcan diameters and varying operation periods. The
excess pore pressure and maximum breakout force measured reveal insights into the magnitude of the
suction forces at the spudcan invert, which were observed to increase with the embedment depth. No
change in failure mechanism was observed between 1.5 and 3 spudcan diameters depth.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Self-elevated mobile jack-up units (Fig. 1) play an important role
in offshore drilling in shallow waters, up to approximately 150 m
depth. The inverted conical footings of jack-ups, which are known
as spudcans and can be in excess of 20 m in diameter in a modern
jack-up [3], can be penetrated in a wide range of soil conditions. In
softer soils, spudcans require large penetration before meeting sufcient bearing capacity to withstand the jack-ups self-weight and
the expected operational loads. Penetration of up to two or three
spudcan diameters may be necessary before reaching equilibrium
during the preloading process [6,20].
When a jack-up rig is removed from a site and redeployed, its
spudcans must be extracted from the seabed. To overcome the soil
resistance, the hull is oated, and lowered beyond neutral draft.
However, tolerances on the maximum allowable overdraft within
the marine operations manual restrict the maximum extraction
pull to between 30% and 50% of the maximum compressive load
that can be applied during installation [24]. In soft soils for deep
spudcan penetration (>1.5 times the spudcan diameter) and long
operation periods, the buoyancy of the hull may not be sufcient
to extract the spudcan. It is reported that spudcan extraction from
penetration depths of one or two spudcan diameters can require

Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 (0) 457587242.

E-mail address: 20729963@student.uwa.edu.au (O. Kohan).
0141-1187/$ see front matter 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2014.08.001

one or two weeks, and in some extreme cases, up to ten weeks

[13]. The spudcan extraction process, especially from soft clay, may
therefore be a time-consuming process. With average jack up day
rate in the range US$60,000 to US$160,000 (depending on the water
depth), this has signicant nancial impact.
Fig. 2 shows failure mechanisms during initiation of undrained
spudcan extraction, as developed by Gaudin et al. [8,9] from observations from Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) analysis of physical
tests by Purwana et al. [23] and numerical analysis by Zhou et al.
[30]. In the rst stage of the undrained extraction of the spudcan,
the main soil resistance is comprised of the weight of the soil above
the spudcan, the resistance along a shear plane generated above the
spudcan and negative excess pore pressure, namely suction, that
is developed at the spudcan base in undrained extraction. In fact,
the extraction mechanism is a combination of an uplift mechanism
of the soil at the top of the spudcan and reverse end bearing at
the spudcan invert due to suction. The contribution of both theses
mechanisms is inuenced by the duration of the jack-up operation.
At the top of the spudcan, Purwana et al. [24] measured via T-bar
tests a reduction of 67% of the shear strength immediately after
spudcan installation, followed by an increase of 30% (raising the
shear strength to 87% of the undisturbed undrained shear strength)
after an operation period of 400 days. Similarly, the gain in shear
strength underneath the spudcan after the same operation period
time was evaluated as 1.70 times the undisturbed strength by Purwana et al. [24] from numerical analysis. Both outcomes imply an
increase in effective stresses within the soil underneath and at the

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

127

Nomenclature
A
cv
D
Gs
g
H
LL
Nc
Nball
PL
q
qe
qp
qp-op
Q
Qp
Qe
sop
su
Toper
Tv
U
V

v
b
ui,ex
ui,ins
ui,op
ut,ex
ut,ins
ut,op
u
v



contact area of spudcan

coefcient of consolidation
diameter of spudcan
specic gravity
gravity acceleration
depth
liquid limit
undrained bearing capacity factor
undrained bearing capacity factor of the ball penetrometer
plastic limit
Pressure resistance
extraction resistance
penetration resistance
operational pressure
net vertical load
penetration load
extraction load
settlement during operation
undrained shear strength
operation period
time factor
degree of consolidation
normalised penetration velocity
spudcan penetration or extraction velocity
breakout depth
excess pore pressure at invert of spudcan at the
breakout point
excess pore pressure at invert of spudcan at the end
of the installation
excess pore pressure at invert of spudcan at the end
of the operational period
excess pore pressure at top of spudcan at the breakout point
excess pore pressure at top of spudcan at the end of
the installation
excess pore pressure at top of spudcan at the end of
the operational period
excess pore pressure
effective vertical stress
submerged unit weight
angle of internal friction

top of the spudcan, resulting from dissipation of the excess pore

pressures generated during the penetration process, albeit at a different rate and magnitude. The phenomena governing the changes
in effective stresses in the soil are complex and for the soil at the
top, potentially include changes in total stresses due to arching.
In a second stage, the extraction resistance typically reaches a
peak followed by a dramatic reduction in resistance. The failure
mechanism is then replaced by a localised ow around mechanism, still associated with an uplift mechanism of the soil above
the spudcan [8,9].
From the observed failure mechanism described, it may be
inferred that suction forces contribute signicantly to the peak
undrained extraction resistance. The importance of base suction
generated during spudcan extraction was rst revealed by a series
of centrifuge tests performed at an acceleration of 100 g and simulating the installation and extraction of spudcans from uniform soft
clay with an undrained shear strength in the range of 1240 kPa [5].
Results indicated that the magnitude of suction was related to the
compressive loading history and the associated embedment ratio

Fig. 1. Typical jack-up and spudcan (modied after Reardon [26]).

prior to extraction. However, issues such as the operational period

that the jack-up is installed for were not studied by and these form
an important component of the testing programme discussed in
this paper.
Purwana et al. [22] experimentally investigated the effect of
operation period and operating load magnitude level on spudcan extraction. Results demonstrated that the extraction resistance
increases with the operation period. In contrast, the level of jackup operating load (i.e. the load maintained during the operation
period) has an insignicant effect on spudcan extraction in comparison with the time that a jack-up is under operation. It is
noteworthy that Purwana et al. [22] investigated spudcan extraction from embedment up to 1.5 spudcan diameters. To the authors
knowledge, the deepest spudcan penetration reported is 78 m in
the Gulf of Mexico, corresponding to an embedment ratio of 5.6
[19], although this is exceptional and penetrations up to a maximum of three spudcan diameters are more common [20].
The objective of the present study is to extend the database
of Purwana et al. [22] to embedment up to 3 times the spudcan diameter, to notably investigate if a change of mechanism

128

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

Fig. 2. Failure mechanisms during undrained spudcan extraction (after Gaudin et al. [8,9]).

Commercial Kaolin clay with characteristics provided in Table 1

was used to create a soft soil sample in the beam centrifuge at the
University of Western Australia [8,9,28]. The mixture of Kaolin and
water at a moisture level of twice the liquid limit formed a de-aired
clay slurry, which was then poured into a rectangular strongbox
over a 15 mm thick drainage sand layer.
Thereafter, the sample was consolidated under self-weight in
the centrifuge at an acceleration of 200 g for a period of approximately ve days. Over the consolidation time, settlement of the
sample was measured, and at the end, the nal height of the soil
specimen was approximately 180 mm.
A 15 mm diameter miniature piezoball penetrometer (as also
used by Mahmoodzadeh et al. [18]) was used to derive the
undrained shear strength prole of the sample with a bearing
capacity factor of 10.5 [1517]. The test was performed in ight
at a rate of 1 mm/s to ensure that undrained conditions were measured [4]. The average shear strength gradient was approximately
1.1 kPa/m (Fig. 3).

Table 1
Kaolin clay characteristics (after [27]).
Liquid limit (LL)
Plastic limit (PL)
Plasticity index (Ip)
Specic gravity (Gs)
Angle of friction ( )
Consolidation coefcient, cv (at OCR = 1
and v = 112.5 kPa)
Submerged unit weight,   (at
v = 112.5 kPa)

A model spudcan with diameter D of 30 mm was fabricated to

investigate the extraction of deeply embedded spudcans (Fig. 4).
The spudcan was manufactured from aluminium alloy 6061-T6 and
was connected to a two-dimensional actuator via a load cell. The
model spudcan was instrumented with two pore pressure transducers (one at the top face and one at the base) that were installed
at approximately half the distance between the centre and the edge
of the spudcan. The cross-section of the pore pressure transducers
at the top and base of the spudcan is illustrated in Fig. 5.
Eight tests were performed at an acceleration of 200 g in a
beam geotechnical centrifuge [25]. Tests one to four were designed
to investigate the effect of the embedment depth on spudcan
extraction, whereas tests ve to eight were performed to investigate the effect of the duration of operation time on spudcan
extraction. In the rst four tests, the spudcan installation depth
was varied from 1.5 to 3 times the spudcan diameter. In these
tests, spudcan extraction occurred after two years operating load

Undrained Shear Strength, su (kPa)

10

15

20

25

shear strength gradient

~ 1.1 kPa/m
5

6.2 kN/m3

0
0.5
1
1.5

10

2
2.5

15

3
20

61%
27%
34%
2.6
23
3.99 m2 /year

30

3.5
4

25

4.5
30

5
Fig. 3. Centrifuge sample undrained shear strength prole.

Normalised spudcan depth, H/D (-)

2. Soil preparation and characterisation

3. Experimental programme and procedure

Depth, H (m)

at deeper embedment may affect the suction generation at the

spudcan invert. For this purpose, a series of centrifuge tests were
performed, featuring penetration and extraction after varying operating period of a model spudcan penetrated at embedment ratio
between 1.5 and 3.
Vertical loads and pore pressures at the top and bottom of the
spudcan during the installation, operation period and extraction
of the spudcan were monitored, and the results are reported and
discussed.

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

129

Table 2
Testing programme.
Test number

Test namea

Penetration depth
m

Embedment ratio


kN/m3

v
kPa

cv
m2 /year

Non-dimensional velocity
vD/cv

Operation time
Year

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

3.0D2.0Y
2.5D2.0Y
2.0D2.0Y
1.5D2.0Y
1.5D3.0Y
1.5D1.0Y
1.5D0.5Y
1.5D0.0Y

18.13
15.01
11.91
8.85
8.87
8.84
8.84
8.84

2.99
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50
1.50

6.20
6.20
6.05
6.05
6.05
6.05
6.05
6.05

112.42
93.06
72.04
53.52
53.65
53.49
53.49
53.48

3.99
3.65
3.23
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81

71.19
77.68
87.80
101.01
100.89
101.04
101.04
101.04

1.93
1.94
1.99
2.01
3.01
1.01
0.52
0.00

The nomenclature of the naming system is the embedment depth ratio followed by the operational holding period before extraction in prototype years.

Fig. 4. Model spudcan and load cell.

The same test procedure was used for all cases and consisted
of three stages. In the rst stage, spudcan penetration was performed in-ight in displacement-control mode. The embedment
depth ranged from approximately 8.8 m to 18.1 m (prototype scale)
corresponding to an embedment ratio of 1.53, respectively. In the
second stage, the jack-up operation period was simulated by holding a constant vertical load of approximately 85% of the maximum
installation load for up to three years in prototype scale. For operating period of 2 years and above, pore pressure measurements
at the spudcan invert indicated that at least 85% of consolidation
was achieved. Finally, in the third stage, spudcan extraction was
performed at a constant rate of 0.3 mm/s.
For all stages, the vertical force on the spudcan (corresponding
to the penetration resistance, the applied load, and the extraction
resistance for the three stages of testing, respectively) and pore
pressures at the top and the invert of the spudcan were monitored.
4. Experimental results

(in prototype scale). In the remainder of the tests, the operation

period varied from immediate extraction to three years, and the
spudcan embedment ratio was 1.5D. Details of the test programme
are provided in Table 2.
Spudcan penetration and extraction was undertaken at a penetration rate v of 0.3 mm/s, resulting in a normalised velocity
V = vD/cv greater than 30 (assuming a coefcient of consolidation cv of 3.99 m2 /y, at a stress level consistent with the spudcan
embedment, see Table 2). This ensured that spudcan installation
and extraction occurred under undrained conditions [7], mimicking in-situ conditions. In the eld, successful spudcan extraction
may require between 6 h and 30 h. Considering spudcan diameters in the range 1020 m and coefcient of consolidation in the
range 0.1100 m2 /year, normalised extraction velocity in-situ are
typically greater than 30.

4.1. Installation resistance

The development of penetration resistance Qp , excess pore pressure (with respect to the hydrostatic pressure) at the spudcan invert
ui and at the spudcan top ut , are presented in Figs. 68, respectively, for the installation, operation and extraction stages.
Fig. 9 presents the normalised net vertical load Qp /(Asu ) where
Qp is the net penetration resistance measured by the load cell, A the
projected area of the spudcan and su the undisturbed shear strength
at the spudcan embedment, against the normalised embedment
H/D, where H is the penetration depth and D the spudcan diameter. Note that the spudcan embedment is dened at the lowest full
diameter of the shoulder of the spudcan. This provides insight into
the net bearing capacity factors during penetration.

Fig. 5. Model Spudcan and location of the pore pressure transducers (dimensions in mm).

130

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

Fig. 6. Penetration and extraction resistances for tests with 2 years operation period
(tests 14).

During installation, excess pore pressures, both at the top and

the invert of the spudcan, increase linearly with depth. Tests performed by Purwana et al. [22] on a larger spudcan, instrumented
with both total and pore pressure transducer at the top and invert of
the spudcan, demonstrated that excess pore pressures where equal
to the change in total pressures during penetration, indicating no
change in effective stresses and so a fully undrained process. Based
on the same assumption, the penetrating pressure, comprising of
the applied pressure qp = Qp /A and the excess pore pressure at the

Fig. 7. Excess pore pressure at the spudcan invert for tests with 2 years operation
period (tests 14).

Fig. 8. Excess pore pressure at the top of the spudcan for tests with 2 years operation
period (tests 14).

top of the spudcan ut,ins , is compared to the resisting pressure

ui,ins corresponding to the excess pore pressure at the spudcan
invert in Fig. 10. Values at the end of the installation phase presented in Table 3. The agreement is reasonably good throughout
the full penetration process, conrming the observations from Purwana et al. [22], and demonstrating the undrained response of the
soil.
This result is however surprising. The phenomena governing the
changes in pore pressures at the invert and at the top of the spudcan
are complex and involve changes in both effective and total stresses.

Fig. 9. Normalised load for tests with 2 years operation period (tests 14).

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

131

Table 3
Summary of experimental results (installation and operation).
Test
number

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
a

Test
name

3.0D2.0Y
2.5D2.0Y
2.0D2.0Y
1.5D2.0Y
1.5D3.0Y
1.5D1.0Y
1.5D0.5Y
1.5D0.0Y

Penetration
resistance

Settlement during
operation

Normalised net Excess pore pressure

vertical load
at the spudcan invert

Excess pore pressure

at the spudcan top

Penetrating
pressure

Qp (MN)

qp = Qp /A
(kPa)

sop (m)

Q/(Asu )a

End of the
installation,
ui ,ins (kPa)

End of the
operating
period, ui ,op
(kPa)

End of the
installation,
ut ,ins (kPa)

End of the
operating
period, ut ,op
(kPa)

qp + ut ,ins
(kPa)

5.78
4.88
3.69
2.39
2.49
2.31
2.24
2.45

200.57
172.44
132.83
87.46
91.30
84.52
82.29
89.93

0.36
0.22
0.83
0.31
0.27
0.26
0.25
0.00

10.06
10.44
10.14
8.99
9.36
8.69
8.46
9.25

249.11
229.70
156.20
122.60
138.12
126.53
110.80
119.05

30.22
26.31
26.48
17.60
9.22
30.51
53.93
119.05

67.57
56.44
39.38
35.82
32.67
34.41
33.30
34.09

33.45
21.81
18.69
21.30
16.14
24.43
30.18
34.09

268.14
228.88
172.21
123.28
123.97
118.93
115.59
124.02

The undrained shear strength su is considered at the spudcan installation depth.

At the spudcan invert, the soil is essentially sheared so an element of

soil underneath the spudcan is expected to experience a reduction
in effective stresses, reecting the remoulding of the soil, as well
as an increase in pore pressures. The magnitude of the reduction in
effective stresses is difcult to assess and is likely to vary along the
spudcan. At the top of the spudcan, the phenomenon is even more
complex. Pore pressures at the top of the spudcan are likely induced
from the shearing of the soil (which is owing from underneath the
spudcan), but also from a cavity expansion mechanism associated
with the cylindrical leg of the spudcan, and a reduction in total
stresses due to arching and potential silo effect along the column of
soil on the top of the spudcan. Similarly to the invert of the spudcan,
changes in effective stresses are expected, although they were not
observed by Purwana et al. [22], and are not suggested by Fig. 10.
Indeed, accurate assessment of the contribution of the various
components to the penetration resistance is difcult as both the top
and invert pore pressure measurements are local measurements
extrapolated over the entire surface. Purwana et al. [22], using a
larger model with several pore pressure transducers, showed that
the excess pore pressures at the spudcan invert increased towards
the centre of the spudcan. In addition, the pore pressures were

measured at the soil spudcan interface (rather then in the soil body)
and do not necessarily reect changes within the soil underneath
and at the top of the spudcan.
While spudcan penetration is a complex problem, it is noteworthy that it can be elegantly captured by only two parameters, a
bearing factor Nc and the undrained shear strength su , as demonstrated in Fig. 9. Immediate back-ow on the top of the spudcan was
observed visually during testing. This conrms the analysis made by
Hossain et al. [12], indicating that deep failure mechanism, characterised by symmetrical ow-around, occurs at a relatively shallow
embedment for soft soils. Indeed, the normalised net vertical load
development in Fig. 9 exhibits a constant value from an embedment
ratio of about 0.7. Bearing factors calculated from the experimental
measurements are compared in Fig. 9 with large deformation nite
element (LDFE) analysis in ideal Tresca soil and Tresca soil modied to account for strain softening and strain rate effects [10,11].
The centrifuge results lean towards the modied numerical solution, i.e. yielding a bearing factor in the range 910.4, indicating
that undrained conditions are prevalent within the soil and that
signicant strain softening takes place.

4.2. Operating period

Fig. 10. Comparison of the penetrating (qp + ut,ins ) and resistance pressure (ui,ins )
for test 1.5D2.0Y.

Following penetration, 85% of the maximum penetration load

(except for Test 2.0D2.0Y in which the holding load was 100% of the
installation load due to a temporary technical problem in the centrifuge) was maintained on the spudcan for operating times ranging
from 0 to 3 years prototype (see Table 3). This stage resulted in
the consolidation of the soil underneath (and to a reduced degree
at the top of) the spudcan and additional spudcan settlement as
summarised in Table 3. During the operating period, excess pore
pressure at the top and bottom of the spudcan dissipated, as shown
in Fig. 11, which presents the development of the degree of consolidation with the time factor Tv = tcv /D2 , where t is the time since the
beginning of the operational period and cv has been assumed to be
the virgin coefcient of consolidation (estimated as a function of
the stress level, see Table 2).
It is noteworthy that degrees of consolidation ranging from 85%
to 90% were achieved at the spudcan base at the end of the operation
period for all tests, whereas at the top of the spudcan, the degree
of consolidation of about 4060% was inferred (Fig. 11). The lower
degree of consolidation at the top is best explained by a reduction of the coefcient of consolidation by potentially one order of
magnitude. Such a large reduction may be explained partially by
the lower stress level experienced by the highly remoulded soil at
the top of the spudcan, but also by a signicantly higher modulus of compressibility. It is however important to recognise, as for
the installation process, that the pore pressure measurements are

132

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

Fig. 11. Degree of consolidation during operating period for tests with 2 years operation period (tests 14).

undertaken at one single point and do not necessarily reect the

behaviour of the entire mass of soil at the bottom and at the top of
the spudcan.
4.3. Spudcan extraction increasing embedment depth and
constant operating period tests 14
As previously reported by Purwana et al. [22], Bienen et al. [1],
and Kohan et al. [14], negative excess pore pressures (or suction)
generated during extraction reach a peak at the point of maximum
extraction resistance, also termed breakout point. In the present
case, maximum suction was measured slightly after the breakout
point, after displacements ranging from 0.02D to 0.06D. There is no
explanation for this behaviour, except potential delay in the pore
pressure measurements resulting from poor saturation of the transducer porous stone. Accordingly, the analysis assumes that both
peak suction and peak extraction resistance occur simultaneously.
Fig. 7 presents the development of suction with spudcan penetration. Peak suction values are reported in Table 4. It is noteworthy
that the excess pore pressure at the end of the operation period
is relatively similar for tests 14 (see Table 3). This is expected
because they all experienced the same operation period of 2 years.
Accordingly, the change in magnitude of suction force during
extraction is solely related to the spudcan embedment.
To investigate this point further, the peak suction is plotted

against the initial effective stress v0
in Fig. 12. It is evident
that the magnitude of peak suction developed at the spudcan
invert increases linearly with the initial effective stresses. Under
undrained extraction, the variation of effective stresses during
shearing is identical for all embedment depths and is related to the
spacing between the normal consolidation line and the critical state
line (or an identical portion if the operation period has not allowed
full reconsolidation). Accordingly, the suction generated is the difference between the change in effective stresses and the change in
total stresses. This will increase with the increasing change in total
stresses as the embedment increases. Therefore, unless there is a
change in mechanism (and thus a change in total stress), a linearly
increasing relationship between effective stress and excess pore

Fig. 12. Variation of peak excess pore pressure during extraction at the spudcan top
and invert with in situ effective stress for tests with 2 years operation period (tests
14).

pressure generated, as observed in Fig. 12, is expected. The only

factor limiting the suction developed is the cavitation pressure. At
ambient temperature, water will undergo cavitation at pressure
about 8095 kPa below the atmospheric pressure [29]. Considering
the range of suction pressure measured (see Table 4), with respect
to the hydrostatic pressure (from 88 to 170 kPa), it is evident that
cavitation cannot occur in any of the tests. It can therefore be reasonably concluded that the extraction mechanism described for the
embedment depth of 1.5D by Gaudin et al. [8,9] is also valid for
embedments up to 3D.
This is further demonstrated by the value of the ratio of peak
suction generated at the breakout point to extraction resistance.
For the four tests considered, the ratio varies within a narrow range
of 7080%, independent of the spudcan embedment. Gaudin et al.
[8,9] reported values of about 70% for a spudcan embedded at 1.5D
and with a degree of consolidation of 90% at the end of the operating
period, while Purwana et al. [22] reported value of about 60% for
spudcans with long operation periods and an embedment ratio of
1.5D.
Additional insights are provided in Table 5, which compares the
variation of load q between the end of the operation period and
the peak extraction resistance with the variation of pore pressures
at the top and bottom of the spudcan u = ui + ut , both contributing to the extraction resistance. The ratio u/q is lower
than 1 for all tests (but test 8), indicating that the change in load is
not entirely accounted for by the change in pore pressures. Interestingly, the weight of the soil plug on top of the spudcan varies
between 54 kPa and 108 kPa (increasing with depth), assuming a
value of   equal to 6 kN/m3 and contributes essentially for the
difference between q and u (although a signicant scatter is
acknowledged, that may be explained by (i) the uncertainty of the
unit weight of the remoulded soil plug at the top of the spudcan,
(ii) the single point measurement of the excess pore pressures and
(iii) maybe more importantly, the contribution of the friction along
the shearing planes of the soil plug). This observation validates the
extraction mechanism at peak extraction presented in Fig. 2.

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

133

Table 4
Summary of experimental results (extraction).
Test number

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Test name

3.0D2.0Y
2.5D2.0Y
2.0D2.0Y
1.5D2.0Y
1.5D3.0Y
1.5D1.0Y
1.5D0.5Y
1.5D0.0Y

Extraction resistance

Break-out depth

Time factor

Excess pore pressure at the

spudcan invert

Excess pore pressure at the

spudcan top

Qe (MN)

qe = Qe /A (kPa)

b (m)

Tv = cv t/D2

ui ,ex (kPa)

ut ,ex (kPa)

6.14
5.62
4.13
3.29
3.43
2.82
2.42
1.58

213.46
199.06
148.32
120.77
126.08
103.53
88.83
58.10

17.90
14.65
12.14
8.68
8.61
8.57
8.60
8.27

0.217
0.203
0.183
0.162
0.243
0.081
0.040
0.001

170.16
136.66
102.38
87.96
97.73
74.33
50.75
2.95

116.24
96.28
65.72
45.29
46.45
44.88
47.38
47.18

4.4. Spudcan extraction varying operation period at an

embedment ratio of 1.5 tests 48
Five tests (test numbers four to eight) were performed to investigate the effect of the operation period on the mechanism associated
with spudcan extraction. The operation period ranged from less
than one day to three years (in prototype dimensions), all for an
embedment ratio of 1.5 (see Table 2).
Fig. 13 presents the comparisons of the loads developed with
displacement during installation, operation, and extraction for different operating periods. The excess pore pressures generated
during installation dissipate during the operation period and reach
a value close to the hydrostatic pressure for operation time of 2
years and longer (Table 4).
Longer consolidation periods result in higher extraction resistance (Fig. 13), which are concomitant with a higher development
of suction at the spudcan invert (Fig. 14). This is better illustrated in
Fig. 15, which presents the evolution of peak suction at the spudcan
invert and peak extraction resistance with the time factor Tv .
The comparison of the magnitude of the excess pore pressure at the beginning of extraction and at the breakout point
ui = ui,op ui,ex in Tables 3 and 4 shows that the negative
excess pore pressure ui generated during extraction is approximately constant between the tests and falls within a relatively

narrow range of 104107 kPa, with the noticeable exception of the

test without an operation period, where the difference is 122 kPa
(this point is discussed latter in the paper). This is illustrated in
Fig. 14, and in Fig. 16, which presents the measured pore pressures
at the invert and at the top of the spudcan and the end of the
operation period, and at peak extraction, as a function of the time
factor Tv .
Consequently, the total level of suction generated, which
directly governs the magnitude of the extraction resistance
depends on the pore pressure at the end of the operating period.
This was also observed by Purwana et al. [22], although a higher
magnitude of excess pore pressure between the end of the operation period and the peak extraction was reported (201230 kPa),
but for a different type of clay, with a higher soil strength ratio (0.24
compared with 0.18) and a different initial strength at spudcan
embedment (30 kPa versus 10 kPa).
When the spudcan is extracted immediately after penetration, the suction developed brings the absolute pore pressure at
the spudcan invert to a value close to zero, such that no active
suction at the spudcan invert contributes to the extraction resistance. This potentially indicates that a different mechanism takes
place compared to the cases where extraction is performed after
a period of consolidation. Three other elements conrm that
hypothesis:

Fig. 13. Penetration and extraction resistances for tests at an embedment ratio of
1.5 (tests 48).

Fig. 14. Excess pore pressure at the spudcan invert for tests at an embedment ratio
of 1.5 (tests 48).

283.17
237.44
175.89
129.55
137.26
125.29
121.88
135.09
116.24
96.28
65.72
45.29
46.45
44.88
47.38
47.18

Fig. 15. Development of uplift resistance and suction pressure at the spudcan invert
with operation period for tests at an embedment ratio of 1.5 (tests 48).

1 The load extraction curve (Fig. 13) exhibits a smooth reduction

post peak, while a sharper reduction is observed for the tests with
consolidation period. This indicates a change in mechanism post
peak for tests with a consolidation period (as discussed in Gaudin
et al. [8,9]), which does not occur for immediate extraction.
2 The excess pore pressure curve at the invert (Fig. 14) exhibits no
changes post peak, while a sharp reduction in suction is observed
post peak for the tests with a consolidation period. This indicates that a partial suction relief mechanism occurs for the test
with a consolidation period, which is not observed for immediate
extraction. This reinforces the observation from point 1.

The holding load was 100% of the installation load.

a

383.94
345.63
281.15
195.11
203.69
175.37
158.78
134.54
170.48
146.57
132.83a
74.34
77.61
71.84
69.95
76.44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

200.57
172.44
132.83
87.46
91.30
84.52
82.29
89.93

213.46
199.06
148.32
120.77
126.08
103.53
88.83
58.10

30.22
26.31
26.48
17.6
9.22
30.51
53.93
119.05

170.16
136.66
102.38
87.96
97.73
74.33
50.75
2.95

200.38
162.97
128.86
105.56
106.95
104.84
104.68
122.00

33.45
21.81
18.69
21.30
16.14
24.43
30.18
34.09

82.79
74.47
47.03
23.99
30.31
20.45
17.20
13.09

u = ui + ut
(kPa)
ut = ut ,op ut ,ex
(kPa)
ut ,ex
(kPa)
ut ,op
(kPa)
ui = ui ,op ui ,ex
(kPa)
ui ,ex
(kPa)
ui ,op
(kPa)
q = qop qe
(kPa)
qe
(kPa)
qp-op = 0.85qp
(kPa)
qp
(kPa)
Test number

Table 5
Data analysis.

0.74
0.69
0.63
0.66
0.67
0.71
0.77
1.00

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

u/q

134

Fig. 16. Excess pore pressure development at spudcan invert and top for tests at an
embedment ratio of 1.5 (tests 48).

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

3 The ratio of total change in load to the total change in pore pressure at the invert and at the top of the spudcan q/u presented
in Table 5 is 1 for immediate extraction, while it ranges from 0.67
to 0.71 for tests with consolidation period.

The combination of these three observations demonstrates that

a ow round mechanism takes place for immediate extraction
(q/u = 1), while a partial reverse end bearing mechanism takes
place for tests with a consolidation period, due to the heterogeneous effective stress eld resulting from localised consolidation.
This difference in mechanism explains the difference in change in
pore pressure at the invert ui = ui,op ui,ex between immediate and delayed extraction (122 kPa against 104107 kPa). The
zero active suction indicates that the soil ows from the top below
the spudcan, without being sucked in, which is consistent with a
full ow mechanism. Interestingly, the ratio of extraction to penetration resistance for immediate extraction is 0.64. This is close
to the same ratio for T-bar tests in normally consolidated clay
(0.7), indicating that immediate spudcan extraction resistance
can potentially be assessed from in situ T-bar tests results.
As the operation period increases, the difference in excess
pore pressures ui reduces to 104107 kPa and remains constant regardless of the consolidation time This indicates that the
extraction mechanism remains identical for all non-zero consolidation times. Comments made about the ratio u/q for tests
with increasing embedment are equally valid for tests with increasing consolidation time. The ratio u/q is in the range 0.660.71,
decreasing with consolidation time, reecting an increasing contribution of the soil plug, most likely due to an increase of the friction
along the shearing planes. Indeed, the excess pore pressures measured at the top of the spudcan at peak extraction remain relatively
constant, around 50 kPa (see Fig. 15), with consolidation time, indicating a constant contribution of the weight of the soil plug. This
assumes that the pore pressures and total pressures at the top are
equal during extraction, as observed by Purwana et al. [22].

5. Conclusions
Centrifuge tests have been performed to investigate spudcan
extraction resistance in normally consolidated soil as a function of
the initial embedment and the operation period. Results demonstrate that the mechanism at the point of maximum extraction
resistance involves a reverse end bearing mechanism associated
with plug uplift. This mechanism is valid for initial embedment
ratio up to 3 times the spudcan diameter and when there is an
operational hold of vertical load on the spudcan. For immediate
extraction, the mechanism consists of a full ow round, with a ratio
of extraction to penetration resistance similar to that measured in
a T-bar test.
It was also demonstrated that the contribution of the plug
uplift is constant with the operation period. This is in contrast
with the peak suction at the spudcan invert, which increases with
the operation period, so longer operation periods result in higher
extraction resistance. However, the difference in pore pressure
between the end of the operation period and the peak suction is
approximately constant. Additional work is required to link this
constant value with particular mechanisms and soil characteristics
(including strength softening and hardening due to consolidation),
enabling its assessment for a wide range of spudcan geometry and
soil strength.
The above conclusions are restricted to the range of the experimental centrifuge tests, but are believed to provide relevant
insights into the extraction mechanisms taking place for a deeply
embedded spudcan. Further studies are required to understand

135

whether the extraction mechanism is different for spudcan embedment ratios greater than 3.
Acknowledgments
This work forms part of the activities of the Centre for Offshore
Foundation Systems (COFS), currently supported as a node of the
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and Engineering and as a Centre of Excellence by the
Lloyds Register Foundation (CE110001009). Lloyds Register Foundation invests in science, engineering and technology for public
benet, worldwide. The rst author is also supported by the Robert
and Maude Gledden Postgraduate Research Scholarships. The third
and fourth authors are the recipients of an Australian Research
Council (ARC) Laureate Fellowship and Postdoctoral Fellowship
(DP110101603) respectively. This support is gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] Bienen B, Gaudin C, Cassidy MJ. The inuence of pull-out load on the efciency
of jetting during spudcan extraction. Appl Ocean Res 2009;31(3):20211.
[3] Cassidy MJ, Quah CK, Foo KS. Experimental investigation of the reinstallation
of spudcan footing close to existing footprints. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE
2009;135(4):4746.
[4] Chung SF, Randolph MF, Schneider JA. Effect of penetration rate on penetrometer in clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 2006;132(9):118896.
[5] Craig WH, Chua K. Extraction forces for offshore foundations under undrained
loading. ASCE J Geotech Eng 1990;116(5):86884.
[6] Endley SN, Rapoport V, Thompson PJ, Baglioni VP. Prediction of jack-up rig
footing penetration. In: Proc. 13th Offshore Technology Conference. 1981.
[7] Finnie IMS, Randolph MF. Punch-through and liquefaction induced failure of
shallow foundations on calcareous sediments. In: Proc. Int. Conference on
Behaviour of Offshore Structures. 1994. p. 21730.
[8] Gaudin C, Bienen B, Cassidy MJ. Investigation of the potential of bottom water jetting to ease spudcan extraction in soft clay. Gotechnique
2011;61(112):104354.
[9] Gaudin C, Cassidy MJ, Bienen B, Hossain MS. Recent contributions of geotechnical centrifuge modelling to the understanding of jack-up spudcan behaviour.
Ocean Eng 2011;38(7):90014.
[10] Hossain MS, Randolph MF. Effect of strain rate and strain softening on the
penetration resistance of spudcan foundations on clay. Int J Geomech ASCE
2009;9(3):12232.
[11] Hossain MS, Randolph MF. New mechanism-based design approach for
spudcan foundations on single layer clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE
2009;135(9):126474.
[12] Hossain MS, Randolph MF, Hu Y, White DJ. Cavity stability and bearing capacity
of spudcan foundations on clay. In: Proc. 13th Offshore Technology Conference.
2006.
[13] InSafe JIP.Minutes of the 2nd Progress Meeting of the InSafe JIP. 2008.
[14] Kohan O, Bienen B, Cassidy MJ, Gaudin C. Centrifuge experiments to study
extraction of a deeply embedded spudcan using top jetting. In: Proc. 32nd International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering (OMAE).
2013.
[15] Lee KK, Cassidy MJ, Randolph MF. Use of epoxy in developing miniature ball
penetrometers for application in a geotechnical centrifuge. Int J Phys Model
Geotech 2012;12(3):11928.
[16] Lee KK, Cassidy MJ, Randolph MF. Bearing capacity on sand overlying clay soils:
experimental and nite element investigation of potential punch-through failure. Gotechnique 2013;63(15):127184.
[17] Low HE, Randolph MF, Lunne T, Andersen KH, Sjursen MA. Effect of soil characteristics on relative values of piezocone, T-bar and ball penetration resistances.
Gotechnique 2011;61(8):65164.
[18] Mahmoodzadeh H, Boylan N, Randolph MF, Cassidy MJ. The effect of partial
drainage on measurements by a piezoball penetrometer. In: Proc. 30th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering (OMAE).
2011.
[19] Menzies D, Lopez CR. Four Atypical Jack-up Rig Foundation Case Histories. In:
13th International Conference, The Jack up Platform. 2011.
[20] Menzies D, Roper R. Comparison of Jackup rig spudcan penetration methods in
clay. In: Proc. 40th Offshore Technology Conference. 2008.
[22] Purwana OA, Leung CF, Chow YK, Foo KS. Inuence of base suction on extraction
of jack-up spudcans. Gotechnique 2005;55(10):74153.
[23] Purwana OA, Leung CF, Chow YK, Foo KS. Breakout failure mechanism of jackup
spudcan extraction. In: Proc. 6th Int. Conference on Physical Modelling in
Geotechnics. 2006. p. 66772.
[24] Purwana OA, Quah M, Foo KS, Nowak S, Handidjaja P. Leg extraction/pullout
resistance theoretical and practical perspectives. In: Proc. 12th Jack up Conf.
2009.

136

O. Kohan et al. / Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 126136

[25] Randolph MF, Jewell RJ, Stone KJL, Brown TA. Establishing a new centrifuge
facility. In: Proc. Int. Conference on Centrifuge Modelling, Centrifuge 91. 1991.
p. 39.
[26] Reardon MJ. Review of the geotechnical aspects of jack-up unit operations.
Ground Eng 1986;19(7):216.
[27] Stewart DP (Ph.D. thesis) Lateral Loading of Pile Bridge Abutments Due to
Embankment Construction. University of Western Australia; 1992.

[28] Stewart DP, Randolph MF. T-bar penetration testing in soft clay. J Geotech Eng
1991;120(12):22306.
[29] Thorne CP, Wang CX, Carter JP. Uplift capacity of rapidly loaded strip anchors
in uniform strength clay. Gotechnique 2004;54(8):50717.
[30] Zhou XX, Chow YK, Leung CF. Numerical modelling of extraction of spudcans.
Gotechnique 2009;59(1):2939.