0
Research Papers: Ocean Renewable Energy

Experimental Study on Installation of Composite Bucket Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines in Silty Sand

[+] Author and Article Information
Puyang Zhang

Associate Professor
State Key Laboratory of Hydraulic
Engineering Simulation and Safety;
Key Laboratory of Coast Civil Structure Safety,
Ministry of Education,
School of Civil Engineering,
Tianjin University,
Tianjin 300072, China
e-mail: zpy@tju.edu.cn; zpy_td@163.com

Zhi Zhang, Yonggang Liu

School of Civil Engineering,
Tianjin University,
Tianjin 300072, China

Hongyan Ding

Professor
State Key Laboratory of Hydraulic
Engineering Simulation and Safety;
Key Laboratory of Coast Civil Structure Safety,
Ministry of Education,
School of Civil Engineering,
Tianjin University,
Tianjin 300072, China

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 25, 2015; final manuscript received August 12, 2016; published online September 16, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Lance Manuel.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 138(6), 061901 (Sep 16, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: OMAE-15-1034; doi: 10.1115/1.4034456 History: Received April 25, 2015; Revised August 12, 2016

The composite bucket foundation (CBF) is a cost-competitive foundation for offshore wind turbines, which can be adapted to the loading characteristics and development needs of offshore wind farms due to its special structural form. There are seven sections divided inside the CBF by steel bulkheads, which are arranged in a honeycomb structure. The six peripheral sections with the skirt have the same proportions while the middle orthohexagonal one is a little larger. With the seven-section structure, the CBF has reasonable motion characteristics and towing reliability during the wet-tow construction process. Moreover, the pressure inside the compartments can control the levelness of the CBF during suction installation. Several large-scale model tests on suction installation of CBF have been performed in order to explore the feasibility of the tilt adjusting technique in saturated silty sand off the coast of Jiangsu in China. The composite bucket foundation in the tests has an outer diameter of 3.5 m and a clear wall height of 0.9 m. During the suction-assisted penetration process, the pressures in all the compartments were controlled to level the foundation in a timely operation. A convenient method is to improve the CBF inclination by controlling the inside differential pressure among the compartments. It can be commonly carried out by applying suction/positive pressure with intermittent pumping among the seven compartments. Another adjusting technique for a big tilt with deeper penetration is operated with decreasing the penetration depth achieved by suction-assisted lowering the relatively high compartments and positive pressures raising the relatively low compartments. Test results show that the reciprocating adjustment process can be repeated until the CBF is completely penetrated into a designed depth.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Byrne, B. W. , and Houlsby, G. T. , 2002, “ Experimental Investigations of Response of Suction Caissons to Transient Vertical Loading,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 128(11), pp. 926–939. [CrossRef]
Liu, R. , Zhou, L. , Lian, J. J. , and Ding, H. Y. , 2015, “ Behavior of Monopile Foundations for Offshore Wind Farms in Sand,” J. Waterw. Port Coastal Ocean Eng., 142(1), p. 04015010. [CrossRef]
Zhu, B. , Byrne, B. , and Houlsby, G. , 2013, “ Long-Term Lateral Cyclic Response of Bucket foundation Foundations in Sand,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 139(1), pp. 73–83. [CrossRef]
Houlsby, G. T. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2000, “ Suction Caisson Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines and Anemometer Masts,” J. Wind Eng., 24(4), pp. 249–255. [CrossRef]
Houlsby, G. T. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2005, “ Design Procedures for Installation of Suction Caisson in Clay and Other Materials,” Geotech. Eng., 158(2), pp. 75–82. [CrossRef]
Li, D. , Zhang, Y. , Feng, L. , and Gao, Y. , 2015, “ Capacity of Modified Suction Caissons in Marine Sand Under Static Horizontal Loading,” Ocean Eng., 102, pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
Liu, R. , Chen, G. S. , Lian, J. J. , and Ding, H. Y. , 2014, “ Vertical Bearing Behaviour of the Composite Bucket Shallow Foundation of Offshore Wind Turbines,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 7, p. 013123. [CrossRef]
Zhu, B. , Kong, D. Q. , Chen, R. P. , Kong, L. G. , and Chen, Y. M. , 2011, “ Installation and Lateral Loading Tests of Suction Caissons in Silt,” Can. Geotech. J., 48(7), pp. 1070–1084. [CrossRef]
Lian, J. J. , Ding, H. Y. , Zhang, P. Y. , and Yu, R. , 2012, “ Design of Large-Scale Prestressing Bucket Foundation for Offshore Wind Turbines,” Trans. Tianjin Univ., 18(2), pp. 79–184. [CrossRef]
Lian, J. J. , Sun, L. Q. , Zhang, J. F. , and Wang, H. J. , 2011, “ Bearing Capacity and Technical Advantages of Composite Bucket Foundation of Offshore Wind Turbines,” Trans. Tianjin Univ., 17(2), pp. 132–137. [CrossRef]
Ding, H. Y. , Lian, J. J. , Li, A. D. , and Zhang, P. Y. , 2013, “ One-Step-Installation of Offshore Wind Turbine on Large-Scale Bucket-Top-Bearing Bucket Foundation,” Trans. Tianjin Univ., 19(3), pp. 188–194. [CrossRef]
Ding, H. Y. , Liu, Y. G. , Zhang, P. Y. , and Le, C. Y. , 2015, “ Model Tests on the Bearing Capacity of Wide-Shallow Composite Bucket Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines in Clay,” Ocean Eng., 103, pp. 114–122. [CrossRef]
Zhang, P. Y. , Ding, H. Y. , and Le, C. H. , 2013, “ Hydrodynamic Motion of a Large Prestressed Concrete Bucket Foundation for Offshore Wind Turbines,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 5(6), p. 063126. [CrossRef]
Zhang, P. Y. , Ding, H. Y. , and Le, C. H. , 2013, “ Motion Analysis on Integrated Transportation Technique for Offshore Wind Turbines,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 5(5), p. 053117. [CrossRef]
Zhang, P. Y. , Ding, H. Y. , and Le, C. H. , 2014, “ Seismic Response of Large-Scale Prestressed Concrete Bucket Foundation for Offshore Wind Turbines,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 6(1), p. 013127. [CrossRef]
Zhang, J. F. , Zhang, X. N. , and Yu, C. , 2016, “ Wave-Induced Seabed Liquefaction Around Composite Bucket Foundations of Offshore Wind Turbines During the Sinking Process,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 8(2), p. 023307. [CrossRef]
Lian, J. J. , Chen, F. , and Wang, H. J. , 2014, “ Laboratory Tests on Soil–Skirt Interaction and Penetration Resistance of Suction Caissons During Installation in Sand,” Ocean Eng., 84, pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
Zhang, P. Y. , Ding, H. Y. , and Le, C. H. , 2013, “ Installation and Removal Records of Field Trials for Two Mooring Dolphin Platforms With Three Suction Caissons,” J. Waterw. Port Coastal Ocean Eng., 139(6), pp. 502–517. [CrossRef]
Feld, T. , 2001, “ Suction Buckets, a New Innovative Foundation Concept, Applied to Offshore Wind Turbines,” Ph.D. thesis, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Kelly, R. B. , Houlsby, G. T. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2006, “ A Comparison of field and Laboratory Tests of Caisson Foundations in Sand and Clay,” Geotechnique, 56(9), pp. 617–626. [CrossRef]
Ibsen, L. B. , Larsen, K. A. , and Barari, A. , 2014, “ Calibration of Failure Criteria for Bucket Foundations on Drained Sand Under General Loading,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 140(7), p. 04014033. [CrossRef]
Senders, M. , 2008, “ Suction Caissons in Sand as Tripod Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines,” Ph.D. thesis, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Yu, H. , Zeng, X. , Neff, F. H. , Li, B. , and Lian, J. , 2015, “ Centrifuge Modeling of Offshore Wind Foundations Under Earthquake Loading,” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 77, pp. 402–415. [CrossRef]
Dekker, M. J. , 2014, “ The Modelling of Suction Caisson Foundations for Multi-Footed Structures,” M.Sc. Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Dong Energy, 2014, “ Dong Debuts Bucket at Riffgrund,” reNews Ltd., Winchester, UK, http://renews.biz/73160/dong-debuts-bucket-at-riffgrund/
Dong Energy, 2014, “ Dong Energy Signs Another Suction Bucket Deal With SPT Offshore,” OffshoreWind.biz, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, accessed Aug. 20, 2016, http://www.offshorewind.biz/2014/05/22/dong-energy-signs-another-suction-bucket-deal-with-spt-offshore/
Golightly, C. R. , 2014, “ Monopile and Tripod/Jacket Foundations for Offshore Wind Foundations,” Braemar Adjusting Forms, London, accessed Aug. 20, 2016, http://braemaradjusting.merchanttech.co.uk/files/Lecture-81_Monopile-and-Tripod_Jacket-Foundations-for-Offshore-Wind-Foundations-10th-April_Chris-Golightly-GO-ELS-Ltd.pdf
Myounghak, O. , Osoon, K. , Keunsoo, K. , and Hyun, K. , 2015, “ Study on the Penetration Resistance of Suction Bucket Foundation,” EWEA OFFSHORE Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, March 10–12.
Senders, M. , and Randolph, M. F. , 2009, “ CPT-Based Method for the Installation of Suction Caissons in Sand,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 135(1), pp. 14–25. [CrossRef]
Houlsby, G. T. , Kelly, R. B. , Huxtable, J. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2005, “ Field Trials of Bucket Foundations in Clay for Offshore Wind Turbine Foundations,” Geotechnique, 55(4), pp. 287–296. [CrossRef]
Houlsby, G. T. , Kelly, R. B. , Huxtable, J. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2006, “ Field Trials of Bucket Foundations in Sand for Offshore Wind Turbine Foundations,” Geotechnique, 56(1), pp. 3–10. [CrossRef]
Thieken, K. , Achmus, M. , and Schröder, C. , 2014, “ On the Behavior of Suction Buckets in Sand Under Tensile Loads,” Comput. Geotech., 60, pp. 88–100. [CrossRef]
Randolph, M. F. , and Gourvenec, S. M. , 2010, Offshore Geotechnical Engineering, Taylor & Francis, London.
Cotter, O. , 2010, “ The Installation of Suction Caisson Foundations for Offshore Renewable Energy Structures,” Ph.D. thesis, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Foglia, A. , and Ibsen, L. B. , 2014, “ Bucket Foundations: A Literature Review,” Department of Civil Engineering, Aalborg University, Denmark, Technical Reports No. 176.
Madsen, S. , Andersen, L. V. , and Ibsen, L. B. , 2013, “ Numerical Buckling Analysis of Large Suction Caissons for Wind Turbines on Deep Water,” Eng. Struct., 57, pp. 443–452 [CrossRef]
Dendani, H. , and Colliat, J. L. , 2002, “ Girassol: Design Analysis and Installation of the Suction Anchors,” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, OTC Paper No. 14209.
Dendani, H. , 2003, “ Suction Anchors: Some Critical Aspects for Their Design and Installation in Clayey Soils,” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, OTC Paper No. 15376.
Peire, K. , Nonneman, H. , and Bosschem, E. , 2009, “ Gravity Base Foundations for the Thornton Bank offshore wind farm,” International Association of Dredging Companies, The Hague, The Netherlands, https://www.iadc-dredging.com/ul/cms/terraetaqua/document/2/5/8/258/258/1/article-gravity-base-foundations-for-the-thornton-bank-offshore-wind-farm-terra115-3.pdf
Ibsen, L. B. , Liingaard, M. , and Nielsen, S. A. , 2005, “ Bucket Foundation, A Status,” Conference Proceedings Copenhagen Offshore Wind, Copenhagen, Denmark, Oct. 26–28.
LeBlanc, C. , 2009, “ The Monopod Bucket Foundation—Recent Experience and Challenges Ahead,” DNV GL, Oslo, Norway, last accessed Aug. 20, 2016, http://www.gl-group.com/pdf/No12_Bakmar.pdf
Tran, M. N. , Randolph, M. F. , and Airey, D. W. , 2007, “ Installation of Bucket Foundations in Sand With Silt Layers,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 133(10), pp. 1183–1191. [CrossRef]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV), 1992, “ Foundations,” Classification Notes No. 30.4,” Det Norske Veritas, Hovik, Norway.
Lehane, B. A. , Schneider, J. A. , and Xu, X. , 2005, “ The UWA-05 Method for Prediction of Axial Capacity of Driven Piles in Sand,” International Symposium on Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics (IS—FOG 2005), Perth, Western Australia, Australia, Sept. 19–21, pp. 683–689.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Pictures of the composite bucket foundation: (a) The prototype composite bucket foundation and (b) a 2.5 MW offshore wind turbine supported by CBF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The test model of composite bucket foundation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Layout of different sensors: (a) on the top lid of CBF, (b) along the skirt of compartment 5 (view 1), (c) along the skirt of compartment 2 (view 2), and (d) pictures of sensors inside the bucket

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The layout of the main equipment: (a) scheme of the equipment arrangement and (b) picture of the equipment of the CBF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

CPTs results: (a) cone resistance and (b) sleeve friction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The illustration of the foundation penetration process: (a) penetration depth versus time and (b) the foundation with the tilting angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison among measured air pressure values and empirical formulae predictions: (a) pressures in all compartments and (b) required pressures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Variations in the pore pressure of the compartment 2: (a) inside and (b) outside

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Variations in the earth pressure of the compartment 2: (a) inside, (b) outside, and (c) top lid

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In