Research Papers: Ocean Renewable Energy

An Automated Approach for Optimizing Monopile Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines for Serviceability and Ultimate Limit States Design

[+] Author and Article Information
James P. Doherty

School of Civil, Environmental and
Mining Engineering,
The University of Western Australia,
Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia
e-mail: james.doherty@uwa.edu.au

Barry M. Lehane

School of Civil, Environmental and Mining
The University of Western Australia,
Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia
e-mail: barry.lehane@uwa.edu.au

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received July 23, 2017; final manuscript received February 19, 2018; published online April 24, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Qing Xiao.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 140(5), 051901 (Apr 24, 2018) (7 pages) Paper No: OMAE-17-1125; doi: 10.1115/1.4039523 History: Received July 23, 2017; Revised February 19, 2018

Pile foundation design is conventionally conducted using a process of trial and error, where the dimensions of a pile are estimated and the performance is computed and compared with design criteria. The dimensions are varied and the process is repeated in order to converge to a safe and economical design. In this paper, this time-consuming and labor intensive process is replaced with an automated approach using the example case of an offshore monopile supporting a wind turbine. The optimum length and diameter of the monopile are determined with the aim of minimizing the pile weight while satisfying both serviceability and ultimate limit state criteria. The approach handles general soil and loading conditions and includes an ability to incorporate cyclic loading.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Bhattacharya, S. , 2014, “Challenges in Design of Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines,” Eng. Technol. Ref., 2014, pp. 1–9.
Golightly, C. , 2014, “Tilting of Monopiles Long, Heavy and Stiff; Pushed Beyond Their Limits,” Ground Engineering, EMAP, London, pp. 20–23.
Schmoor, K. A. , and Achmus, M. , 2015, “Optimum Geometry of Monopiles With Respect to Geotechnical Design,” J. Ocean Wind Energy, 2(1), pp. 54–60. http://www.isope.org/publications/jowe/jowe-02-1/jowe-02-1-p054-jcr24-Schmoor.pdf
API, 2011, “Geotechnical and Foundation Design Considerations,” American Petroleum Institute Publishing Services, Washington, DC, Standard No. API RP 2GEO. https://global.ihs.com/doc_detail.cfm?document_name=API%20RP%202GEO&item_s_key=00568133&item_key_date=850231
Suryasentana, S. K. , and Lehane, B. M. , 2014, “Numerical Derivation of CPT-Based p–y Curves for Piles in Sand,” Geotechnique, 64(3), pp. 186–194. [CrossRef]
Suryasentana, S. K. , and Lehane, B. M. , 2016, “Updated CPT-Based p–y Formulation for Laterally Loaded Piles in Cohesionless Soil Under Static Loading,” Geotechnique, 66(6), pp. 445–453. [CrossRef]
Dyson, G. J. , and Randolph, M. F. , 2001, “Monotonic Lateral Loading of Piles in Calcareous Sand,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 127(4), pp. 346–352. [CrossRef]
Doherty, J. P. , and Lehane, B. M. , 2016, “Data Driven Design- a Vision for an Automated Approach,” Fifth International Conference of Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterisation (ISC5), Gold Coast, Australia, pp. 1205–1210. http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/data-driven-design-a-vision-for-an-automated-approach(071d6dab-9e66-4b9e-946f-8d58ef155414).html
Doherty, J. P. , Krisdani, O'Neill, M. , Erbrich, C. , Bransby, F. , White, D. J. , and Randolph, M. F. , 2018, “The Design of Subsea Foundations Subject to General Cyclic Loading Using a Massively Scalable Web Based Application,” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, Apr. 30–May 3, Paper No. OTC-28911-MS.
Arany, L. , Bhattacharya, S. , Macdonald ., and Hogan, S. J. , 2015, “A Critical Review of Serviceability Limit State Requirements for Monopile Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbine,” Offshore Technology Conference, Huston, TX, May 4–8, Paper No. OTC-25874-MS.
ISO, 2007, “International Standard, Petroleum and Gas Industries-Fixed Steel Offshore Structures,” International Organisation for Standardisation, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 19902:2007(E). https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:19902:ed-1:v1:en
DNV, 2004, “Offshore Standard, Design of Offshore Steel Structures,” Det Norske Veritas, Oslo, Norway, Standard No. DNV-OS-C101.
Eurocode 7, 1997, “Geotechnical Design,” European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels, Belgiums, Standard No. EN 1997-1. https://www.ngm2016.com/uploads/2/1/7/9/21790806/eurocode_7_-_geotechnical_designen.1997.1.2004.pdf
Doherty, J. P. , 2016, “Lateral Analysis of Piles User Manual,” accessed Mar. 28, 2018, http://geocalcs.s3.amazonaws.com/LAP/LapManual.pdf
Doherty, J. P. , 2017, “A Web Based Application for the Lateral Analysis of Pile (LAP) Foundations,” ASME Paper No. OMAE2017-61600.
Reese, L. C. , Cox, W. R. , and Koop, F. D. , 1974, “Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles in Sand,” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 6–8, Paper No. OTC-2080-MS.
O'Neill, M. W. , and Murchison, J. M. , 1983, An Evaluation of p–y Relationships in Sands, American Petroleum Institute, Houston, TX.
Mathworks, 2016a, “MATLAB and Optimization Toolbox,” The Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA.
LeBlanc, C. , Houlsby, G. T. , and Byrne, B. W. , 2010, “Response of Stiff Piles in Sand to Long-Term Cyclic Lateral Loading,” Geotechnique, 60(2), pp. 79–90. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic representation of the problem

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Traditional design process for monopile foundation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Proposed design approach

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Pile rotation at seabed for a range of D and L values with contour satisfying the SLS criterion for D/t = 80

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Beam spring finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Pile displacements at seabed for a range of D and L values with contour satisfying the SLS criterion for D/t = 80

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Ultimate capacity for a range of D and L values applying material factors to soil and pile material with contour line for factored design load (pile D/t = 80)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Pile volume for each D and L combination with contour lines corresponding to the two SLS constraints and the ULS constraint for D/t = 80

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Pile volume to satisfy ULS and SLS as a function of D/t

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Performance of fmincon with initial estimate of D = 5.5 m and L = 25 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Variation in optimized pile dimensions with load cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Function relating Tb to load parameter ζb

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pile response with optimized dimensions of L = 21.672 m and D = 4.910 m for D/t = 80: (a) pile load versus head rotation and (b) pile load versus displacement



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