Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
ABSTRACT
PILE DEFLECTION
THE MODELS
All the analyses have been performed by means of ICFEP (Potts &
Zdravkovic 1999, 2000) on geometrically different steel hollow section
monopiles in stiff clay with the aim of investigating the pile geometry effects
on the pile response to lateral loading (Table 1). Two soil models have been
alternatively considered, namely the Tresca soil model and a more
advanced stiff clay model.
P-y CURVES
By comparing the P-y
curves at the mud line from
the 2D API and 3D
simulations, it can be seen
that the API models
produces non-conservative
results, with the pile
deflection at the initial
stages of loading being
underestimated, as a stiffer
soil response is predicted.
L [m]
h [m]
L/D [-]
t [mm]
P1
10
20
50
91
P4
10
60
50
91
P6
10
25
45
P8
30
25
45
REFERENCES
API 2000. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Construction Fixed Offshore PlatformsWorking Stress Design. 21st Ed. API Recommended Practice 2A-WSD (RP2A-WSD), Dallas.
Potts, D.M. & Zdravkovic, L. 1999. Finite Element Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering: Theory.
Thomas Telford.
Potts, D.M. & Zdravkovic, L. 2001. Finite Element Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering: Application.
Thomas Telford.
DIAMETER EFFECTS
As the initial stiffness is very
similar for all the curves
there is no clear pile
diameter's influence at small
deflection values (agreeing
with the API code). However,
with the increase in pile
deflection, diameter effects
are evident, as significant
difference can be noticed in
the normalised P-y curves
for the two different pile
diameters.
CONCLUSION
The API code produces non-conservative results, with the overestimation of
the soil stiffness for small pile deflection. There is a significant difference in
the short and long piles deflection behaviour. The pile diameter influences
the structures response to lateral loading and the P-y curves.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Professor L. Zdravkovic, Dr D. Taborda, Andreas Fangel