You are on page 1of 21

Monopiles in Sand

Stiffness and Damping


Christian LeBlanc Thilsted, DONG Energy Renewables
Niels Jacob Tarp-Johansen, DONG Energy Renewables

EWEA 2011, 14-17 March, Brussels

Outline
Introduction, soil stiffness and damping
Impact on design
Experience
Soil damping
Overview of soil damping
Theoretical derivation of damping due to
pore pressure dissipation
Conclusions
On-going and future work
Full-scale measurements

Impact on design
Soil stiffness

Soil damping

Wind-wave misalignment cause the resonant response to be


governed by soil damping
Damping (excl. aerodynamic damping) become a design driver

Increasing water depths and larger turbines


reduces the 1st natural frequency
Soil stiffness become a major design driver

Consequence of underestimation soil damping:


increased use of steel
higher costs

Consequence of underestimating soil stiffness :


increased use of steel
higher costs
applicable range of monopile foundations limited
to water depths less than ~30 m.
3

Soil damping - theoretical

Damping presently used for design calculations is based on


a theoretical reconstruction of damping contributions
Source

1st mode
(%)

Remark

Soil

~3-5

Visco-elastic

Hydrodynamic

~0.75

Radiation only

Steel tower + pile

~1.2

Disregarding grout

Tower damper

Typically > 2

Turbine
dependent

Aerodynamic

~1

80 m
0.3 Hz

20 m

Inherent in BEM

( modal = Modal log. decr., 2, = damping ratio)

20 m

Table adapted from: Niels Jacob Tarp-Johansen et al. Comparing Sources of


Damping of cross-wind Motion, European Offshore Wind 2009, Stockholm

D=4.7 m

Soil damping - measurements

Emergency stops, i.e. no aerodynamic damping

Horns Rev 1 Offshore Wind Farm


Burbo Offshore Wind Farm

Measurements show more damping (excl. aerodynamic damping) than assumed in present
design calculations
Current design = Theoretical approach: modal = 8 %
Measurements:

modal > 10 %
5

Soil stiffness - theoretical


Scale effects?
The 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)

Is a monopile a pile?

Soil stiffness - measurements


Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm
Soil: sand and clay layers

Back-calculation on soil stiffness:


60-150% higher than predicted
Closest prediction in wind farm

Figure: Scour hole depth from xyz-point cloud

1st Natural Frequency:


Calculated value: 0.302-0.308 Hz
Measured value: 0.314 Hz

Outline
Introduction, stiffness and damping
Impact on design
Experience
Soil damping
Overview of soil damping
Theoretical derivation of damping due to
pore pressure dissipation
Conclusions
On-going and future work
Full-scale measurements

Soil damping

Geometrical damping (wave radiation)


Vanishing for frequencies < ~1 Hz

Material damping
Non-linear hysteresis. Investigations indicates modal 3-5%

Damping contribution from pore pressure dissipation?

Type

Particle size [mm]

Clay

0-0.002

Silt

0.002-0.06

Sand

0.06-2

Gravel

2-60

Rodenhausen, Moritz (2010), "Soil Response of Offshore Wind Turbines - Stiffness


and damping of monopile foundations", Master Thesis, University of Stuttgart
9

Soil damping from pore pressure dissipation

Grid of two-dimensional soil model in Flac3D

FLAC3D, Itasca
3D disc model
Partially drained simulation
Linear elastic soil / Darcy flow
Undrained response

flux

Decreasing
permeability

Fully drained response

10

Soil damping from pore pressure dissipation

Replication FLAC3D results using


a simple spring-dashpot mode

kG
shear-stiffness

Damping due
to Darcys flow
d

kK
bulk-stiffness

Comparison results (marker) with simple


spring-dashpot model (solid lines)

Spring-dashpot constants
calibrated to FLAC3D results.

11

Soil damping from pore pressure dissipation


Pile diameter: 5 m
Natural frequency: 0.3 Hz
Soil stiffness representative of a typical sand

Schematic illustration of soil response af function of soil permeability

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
12

Outline
Introduction, stiffness and damping
Impact on design
Experience
Soil damping
Overview of soil damping
Theoretical derivation of damping due to
pore pressure dissipation
Conclusions
On-going and future work
Full-scale measurements

13

On-going and future work - Walney Offshore Wind Farm


Full-scale measurements
1 Monopile
Commisioning in spring 2011
Soil profile: Sand
L/D = 4

Mono pile

Transition Piece

14

36 strain gauges (9 levels)


8 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 sensors
Rostock, Germany
EEW (steel work) / HBM (sensors)

15

Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm


Monopile sensors
Rostock, Germany
EEW (steel work) / HBM (sensors)

16

Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm


Transition piece sensors
Barrow, UK
HBM (Sensors)

17

Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm

18

Sensor installation at Walney Offshore Wind Farm

19

On-going and future work London Array


Full-scale measurements
1 or 2 Monopile(s)
Commisioning in 2012
Soil profile: Clay

Monopiles in Sand
Stiffness and Damping
Christian LeBlanc Thilsted, DONG Energy Renewables
Niels Jacob Tarp-Johansen, DONG Energy Renewables

EWEA 2011, 14-17 March, Brussels