Numerical modeling of the seismic performance of monopile supported wind turbines in sandy soils susceptible to liquefaction.
-
2018-04-15 https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.13.12676 -
Use about five key words or phrases in alphabetical order, Separated by Semicolon. -
Abstract
Since 1980, as wind farms have moved from coastal to offshore areas, the wind energy industry has been completely transformed which in turn has led to the increase in the construction of wind turbines. On the other hand, harsher offshore environmental conditions have led to larger lateral loads and anchorages applied to the wind turbines and specifically to their piles than other coastal and offshore structures. Thus, more solid piles are required to ensure proper rigidity and bearing capacity. Liquefaction is one of the most important seismic hazards through which various damages caused to different parts of wind turbines. In order to develop coastal and offshore structures in Iran, a study of liquefaction is of great importance due in part to the high risk of seismicity. In this study, the effect of liquefaction on seismic response of offshore wind turbines is examined taking advantage of a finite element model. To this end, all analyzes have been carried out in both occurrence and non-occurrence of the liquefaction, so that by comparing these two modes, the mechanisms affecting the seismic behavior of wind turbines are understood. As depth increases, the possibility of liquefaction is reduced due to higher pressure. Liquefaction is considered to a depth of 20 m and structural behavior is evaluated based on the level of seismic hazard, the thickness of the susceptible layers, soil compaction, the non-fluidizing top layer, the gradient of the earth, the thickness of the monopole, the dimensions of the wind turbine and different soil layering conditions. According to the mentioned factors, a comprehensive and parametric study of the behavior of wind turbines in seismic zones, and in different loading conditions, pile diameters and soil layering is carried out in soils prone to liquefaction. Since analyzes are performed in both occurrence and non-occurrence of the liquefaction, the number of analyzes and computational cost in this research becomes enormous. Therefore, there is a need for a highly effective software and a practical modeling method that will allow for this comprehensive study. Open Sees software and beam on nonlinear Winkler foundation approach are used to model the soil-pile-structure interaction. The minor differences observed in the laboratory values compared to the numerically calculated ones may refer to the fact that the chamber is not modeled. In the bottom layer, as the depth decreases, the elastic response spectra record larger values which are due to the resonance in the structure.
Â
Â
-
References
[1] Lombardi, D., S. Bhattacharya, and D.M. Wood, Dynamic soil–structure interaction of monopile supported wind turbines in cohesive soil. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2013. [49]: p. 165-180.
[2] Cunha, A., et al., Resonance phenomenon in a wind turbine system under operational conditions. 2014.
[3] Wang, L., et al., Seepage Induced Soil Failure and its Mitigation during Suction Caisson Installation in Silt. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 2014. 136(1): p. 011103.
[4] Zhang, J., et al. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Monopile Foundation for Offshore Wind Farm. In The Twentieth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference. 2010. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers.
[5] Bhattacharya, S., Challenges in design of foundations for offshore wind turbines. Engineering & Technology Reference, 2014. 1(1).
[6] Houlsby, G.T., L.B. Ibsen, and B.W. Byrne, Suction caissons for wind turbines. Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics: ISFOG, Perth, WA, Australia, 2005: p. 75-93.
[7] Kuo, Y.-S., M. Achmus, and K. Abdel-Rahman, Minimum embedded length of cyclic horizontally loaded monopiles. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2011. 138(3): p. 357-363.
[8] Nielsen, A.W., et al. Wave loads on a monopile in 3D waves. In International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. 2012.
[9] Zheng, X.Y., et al., Joint earthquake and wave action on the monopile wind turbine foundation: An experimental study. Marine Structures, 2015. 44: p. 125-141.
[10] Zargar, E., A.A. Aghakouchak, and M. Gholami. Nonlinear Seismic Soil-Pile-Structure Interaction Analysis of Fixed Offshore Platforms. In ASME 2009 28th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. 2009. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
[11] Meymand, P.J., Shaking table scale model tests of nonlinear soil-pile-superstructure interaction in soft clay. Vol. 1. 1998: University of California, Berkeley.
[12] Maheshwari, B., et al., Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis for seismic soil–pile-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2004. 24(4): p. 343-356.
[13] Bolton, M., An alternative mechanism of pile failure in liquefiable deposits during earthquakes. Geotechnique, 2004. 54: p. 203-213.
[14] Abdoun, T., et al., Pile response to lateral spreads: centrifuge modeling. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental engineering, 2003. 129 (10): p. 869-878.
[15] Kamijo, N., et al., Seismic tests of a pile-supported structure in liquefiable sand using large-scale blast excitation. Nuclear engineering and design, 2004. 228(1): p. 367-376.
[16] Motamed, R., et al., Experimental modeling of large pile groups in sloping ground subjected to liquefaction-induced lateral flow: 1-G shaking table tests. Soils and foundations, 2010. 50(2): p. 261-279.
[17] GHOSH, B., N. PEIRIS, and Z. LUBKOWSKI. Assessment of seismic risk for the design of offshore structures in liquefiable soil. In fourth International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering. 2007.
[18] Ku, C.-Y. In addition, L.-K. Chien, Modeling of Load Bearing Characteristics of Jacket Foundation Piles for Offshore Wind Turbines in Taiwan. Energies, 2016. 9(8): p. 625.
[19] Katsanos, E.I., S. Thöns, and C.Τ. Georgakis, Wind turbines and seismic hazard: a stateâ€ofâ€theâ€art review. Wind Energy, 2016. 19 (11): p. 2113-2133.
[20] Abhinav, K. and N. Saha, Stochastic response of jacket supported offshore wind turbines for varying soil parameters. Renewable Energy, 2017. 101: p. 550-564.
[21] Austin, S. and S. Jerath, Effect of soil-foundation-structure interaction on the seismic response of wind turbines. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 2017. 8(3): p. 323-331.
[22] Prevost, J.H., A simple plasticity theory for frictional cohesionless soils. International Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 1985. 4(1): p. 9-17.
[23] Elgamal, A., et al., Modeling of cyclic mobility in saturated cohesionless soils. International Journal of Plasticity, 2003. 19(6): p. 883-905.
[24] Ilankatharan, M. and B. Kutter, Modeling input motion boundary conditions for simulations of geotechnical shaking table tests. Earthquake Spectra, 2010. 26(2): p. 349-369.
[25] Chiaramonte, M.M., et al., Seismic analyses of conventional and improved marginal wharves. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2013. 42(10): p. 1435-1450.
[26] Khosravifar, A., R.W. Boulanger, and S.K. Kunnath, Effects of liquefaction on inelastic demands on extended pile shafts. Earthquake Spectra, 2014. 30(4): p. 1749-1773.
Romney, K.T., Soil-bridge interaction during long-duration earthquake motions. 2013
-
Downloads
-
How to Cite
Tirandazian, M., & Nouri, G. (2018). Numerical modeling of the seismic performance of monopile supported wind turbines in sandy soils susceptible to liquefaction. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(2.13), 263-271. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.13.12676Received date: 2018-05-10
Accepted date: 2018-05-10
Published date: 2018-04-15