GLND - L25336 - IsO Additional Geotechnical Investigation

Noble House
39 Tabernacle Street
London
EC2A 4AA
Phone +44 20 7812 8700

Fax +44 20 7812 8701
www.gl-nobledenton.com
REPORT
ISO PHASE 2 BENCHMARKING
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
COMPARISON OF REVISED GEOTECHNICAL CLAUSES

WITH ORIGINAL CLAUSES AND SNAME
Report No: L25336 , Rev 0 , Dated 30-11-2010
Addendum to Reports L25217 and L25316
Distribution: ISO Committee

Company: ABS Attn: Mr John Stiff
Attn:
W/S No: 05-130553 CTR 2
File: l25336 - iso additional geotechnical investigation.doc
Noble Denton Consultants Ltd trading as GL Noble Denton

Registered in England No. 5513434 Registered Office: Noble House, 39 Tabernacle Street, London, EC2A 4AA, UK
POST PHASE 2 BENCHMARKING
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
COMPARISON OF REVISED GEOTECHNICAL CLAUSES WITH ORIGINAL CLAUSES AND SNAME
REVISION DETAILS
Revision Date Description Author Checker Approver
th
0 29 Nov 2010 Draft for Internal Review ARM DHE MJRH
th
1 30 Nov 2010 Initial Issue to ISO committee for comment DHE ARM RWPS
DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES
Revision Section Change
INSERTED DOCUMENT/FILE REGISTER

Path and Filename Details of File
Report No: L25336 , Revision: 0, Dated: 30 November 2010 W/S No: 05-130553 CTR:
File: L25336 - ISO Additional Geotechnical Investigation.doc Page 2 - of 36
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1 SCOPE OF WORK 6
1.1 INTRODUCTION 6
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK 6
2 GEOTECHNICAL THEORY 8
2.1 GENERAL 8
3 FOOTING REACTIONS 9
3.1 FOOTING REACTIONS FROM SUPER GORILLA ANALYSIS 9
3.2 FOOTING REACTIONS FROM KFELS MOD B ANALYSIS 9
3.3 ADDITIONAL INTERESTING FOOTING REACTIONS 10
4 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES AND FOUNDATION
UTILISATIONS 11
4.1 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES 11
4.2 FOUNDATION UTILISATIONS 18
4.3 STEP 3A ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS 22
5 ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS 23
5.1 NEW ISO VS OLD ISO 23
5.2 NEW ISO VS SNAME 24
5.3 SAND FOUNDATIONS 27
6 CONCLUSIONS 33
REFERENCES 36
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
FIGURES
Figure 1: Nov 2010 Revised ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for Super Gorilla
Unit 12
Figure 2: Original Dec 2009 DIS ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for Super
Gorilla unit 13
Figure 3: SNAME V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from ISO analyses 14
Figure 4: Nov 2010 Revised ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for KFELS B Class 15
Figure 5: Original Dec 2009 DIS ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for KFELS B
Class 16
Figure 6: SNAME V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from ISO
analyses 17
Figure 7: Example Vertical-Horizontal Capacity Envelope Showing Bearing Capacity Check 18
Figure 8: Example Vertical-Horizontal Capacity Envelope showing Sliding Capacity Check 19
Figure 9: Comparison of New ISO with Old ISO Bearing Capacity and Sliding Envelopes -
Super Gorilla 23
KFELS B Class 23
Figure 11: Comparison of New ISO with SNAME Bearing Capacity and Sliding Envelopes
for Super Gorilla unit (SNAME shifted for backfill and spudcan soil buoyancy) 25
for KFELS B Class unit (SNAME shifted for backfill and spudcan soil buoyancy). 25
Figure 13: ISO DIS V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from ISO analyses 29
Figure 14: SNAME V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from SNAME
analyses 30
Figure 15: ISO DIS V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from ISO
analyses 31
Figure 16: SNAME V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from SNAME
analyses 32
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
TABLES
Table 2-1 Footing Reactions 8

Table 4-1 Bearing Capacity Utilisations for Super Gorilla 20
Table 4-2 Bearing Capacity Utilisations for KFELS B Class 21
Table 4-3 Additional Settlement for Super Gorilla unit 22
Table 4-4 Additional Settlement for KFELS B Class unit 22
Table 5-1 Final assessment results for the Super Gorilla 28
Table 5-2 Final assessment results for the KFELS B-Class 28
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
1 SCOPE OF WORK
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 GL Noble Denton has been instructed by ABS, on behalf of the ISO benchmarking
committee, to carry out the phase 2 benchmarking of the ISO 19905-1 Petroleum
and natural gas industries - Site-specific assessment of mobile offshore units -
Part 1: Jack-Ups (Draft Industry Standard) (ISO) (Ref [2]) which has been
developed from SNAME bulletin 5-5A (Ref [1]).
1.1.2 Following the completion of the benchmarking analysis GL Noble Denton has been
instructed by ABS, on behalf of the ISO benchmarking committee to carry out
additional foundation bearing capacity checks based on revised Clauses 9 and A.9
of the ISO document issued in November 2010. The revisions to these Clauses
have been made since publication of the version of the DIS document issued in
December 2009 for the original benchmarking study.
1.1.3 This document shows a comparison between the geotechnical utilisations obtained
using the revised ISO clauses, the original ISO DIS clauses and using the SNAME
methodology described in Ref [1].
1.1.4 This report should be considered as an addendum to the original GL Noble Denton
benchmarking reports L25217 and L25316 (Refs. [3] and [4]).
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK
1.2.1 The purpose of this work is to provide a comparison between the geotechnical
utilisations obtained using the revised ISO clauses, the original benchmarked ISO
clauses and the SNAME methodology described in SNAME bulletin 5-5A Rev 3
(Ref [1]).
1.2.2 The footing reactions for this assessment have been taken from the benchmarking
analysis of the Super Gorilla, as reported in L25217 (Ref. [3]), and the KFELS
Mod V B as reported in L25316 (Ref. [4]), with additional realistic footing reactions
added for the purposes of the comparison.
1.2.3 We have not compared the differences in utilisations for the sand foundation case
as the only differences between the DIS and revised version of the ISO were a
change in the origin used for determining the utilisations and constructing the
factored V-H bearing capacity envelope that amounted to 0,3% of the preload
footing reaction and hence would have negligible effect upon the results obtained.
The resistance factor used for a partially penetrated spudcan in sand has not
changed in the November 2010 revision.
1.2.4 The deliverables include a report that details the findings of the study. Specific
items that are reported include:
Executive Summary;
Geotechnical Theory;
Footing reactions used for the comparison;
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Plots of the V-H envelope with footing reactions following the revised ISO
document;
Plots of the V-H envelope with footing reactions following the benchmarked
ISO DIS;
Plots of the V-H envelope with footing reactions following the SNAME
methodology;
Tables of utilisations comparing the three methodologies;
Comments, discussion and analysis of the results;
Conclusions which can be drawn from the comparisons.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
2 GEOTECHNICAL THEORY
2.1 GENERAL
2.1.1 This report compares the results obtained using the Step 2a foundation checks from
SNAME, the original DIS (December 2009) and revised ISO DIS of November 2010.
The changes to the foundation check in the ISO DIS were made in order to ensure
an appropriate origin for factoring the V-H bearing capacity envelope that does not
factor the weight of backfill and spudcan buoyancy, and to apply a consistent
resistance factor regardless of whether the foundation is partially or fully penetrated
into the seabed.
2.1.2 The formulation for calculating the unfactored bearing capacity envelope and the
formulation for calculating the origin used to define the foundation utilisations has
not been revised. It is, however, noted that for fully penetrated spudcans the origin
used to define the foundation utilisations will have changed as a consequence of the
change of the resistance factor from 1,15 to 1,1.
2.1.3 The revisions are summarised below in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Footing Reactions
Bearing capacity Origin used for

Utilisation resistance factor, R,VH construction of
Origin Partial Fully factored V-H
(FH,FV)ORG Penetration penetrated envelope
SNAME (0,SWL1) 1.11 1.18 (0,0) 2

ISO DIS (0,QV/2R,VH) 3 1.1 1.15 (0,0)
Revised ISO (0,QV/2R,VH) 1.1 (0,WBF,O-BS)
1
SWL = Stillwater footing reaction
2
This origin is adopted by GLND for SNAME foundation checks. We are aware that
some consultants choose a different interpretation of the SNAME Recommended
Practice in this respect.
3
We note that there is an inconsistency in the DIS version whereby the origin is also
referred to as (0,QV/2), which we have presumed to be a typographic error.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
3 FOOTING REACTIONS
3.1 FOOTING REACTIONS FROM SUPER GORILLA ANALYSIS
3.1.1 The footing reactions calculated by GL Noble Denton for the Super Gorilla during
the benchmarking analysis are presented below. Note, the weight of backfill (44317
kN) is included in the vertical reactions.
Storm Maximum Hull Weight Minimum Hull Weight

Leg
Heading FH (kN) FV (kN) FM (kN-m) FH (kN) FV (kN) FM (kN-m)
Bow 13 689 87 927 385 118 13 477 82 667 388 102
60 Port 13 586 88 737 385 447 13 381 83 367 388 629
Starboard 9 007 205 617 1 203 8 870 195 517 820
Bow 12 801 127 047 365 612 12 311 120 167 377 007
90 Port 13 815 61 577 385 369 12 888 60 987 391 380
Starboard 9 115 193 617 29 761 9 943 180 417 190 177
Bow 10 665 159 617 288 225 10 572 150 617 316 192
120 Port 12 119 62 637 390 108 11 637 60 057 390 299
Starboard 10 503 159 917 287 994 10 432 150 817 319 717
3.2 FOOTING REACTIONS FROM KFELS MOD B ANALYSIS

3.2.1 The footing reactions calculated by GL Noble Denton for the KFELS B Class during
the benchmarking analysis are presented below. Note, the weight of backfill (20421
kN) is included in the vertical reactions.
Storm Maximum Hull Weight Minimum Hull Weight

Leg
Heading FH (kN) FV (kN) FM (kN-m) FH (kN) FV (kN) FM (kN-m)
Bow 3 394 50 820 136 614 3 237 47 460 137 183
60 Port 3 434 50 040 137 026 3 267 46 660 137 311
Starboard 2 384 86 730 35 316 2 649 80 690 76 449
Bow 3 208 62 500 125 303 3 149 58 290 130 208
90 Port 3 365 42 040 137 899 3 227 38 920 137 311
Starboard 2 590 83 070 64 648 2 727 77 600 89 193
Bow 2 904 73 730 101 740 2 923 69 000 113 315
120 Port 3 345 39 300 137 791 3 237 36 080 137 330
Starboard 2 943 74 570 99 228 2 972 49 315 111 726
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
3.3 ADDITIONAL INTERESTING FOOTING REACTIONS

3.3.1 Additional footing reactions are proposed corresponding to utilisations of 1,0
according to each method in order to compare the utilisations obtained using each
methodology. These comprise two points on the factored V-H envelope at low and
high horizontal load components, and one point on the factored sliding line, as
shown in Figure 1 to Figure 6. Sets of values are proposed for both rig types. Note,
the weight of backfill is included in these vertical reactions; the weight of backfill is
44317 and 20421 kN for the Super Gorilla and KFELS units respectively.
Super Gorilla KFELS B Class

Load case
FH (kN) FV (kN) FH (kN) FV (kN)
On V-H Envelope
981 179 670 981 82 326
small FH
New ISO
On V-H Envelope
(Nov 28 302 162 110 10 546 74 281
large FH
2010)
On Sliding
34 060 117 720 12 743 49 050
Envelope
On V-H Envelope
981 168 006 981 76 969
small FH
Old ISO On V-H Envelope
27 076 151 211 10 085 69 278
DIS large FH
On Sliding
34 060 117 720 12 743 49 050
Envelope
On V-H Envelope
981 169 942 981 77 530
small FH
On V-H Envelope
SNAME 13 410 156 708 5 425 74 577
large FH
On Sliding
15 078 135 666 7 564 60 558
Envelope
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
4 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES AND FOUNDATION

UTILISATIONS
4.1 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES
4.1.1 Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3 overleaf present the footing reactions calculated for
the Super Gorilla unit from the ISO analyses plotted onto the yield envelopes
derived using the revised ISO DIS methodology, the original benchmarked ISO DIS
methodology and the SNAME methodology. Note that the footing reactions plotted
against the SNAME envelope exclude the weight of soil backfill in order to be
comparable with the bearing capacity envelope.
4.1.2 Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6 present the same plots for the KFELS Mod V B Class
analyses.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic Super Gorilla at Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking
V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPE
Location Details Spudcan Geometry

Name : Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking
Coordinates : N/A N, N/A E
Depth of water : 85.0 m (279 ft) 85.0 279
Jack-up Unit Details

Name : Generic Super Gorilla
Design : Super Gorilla
Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Seabed Level

Preload reaction VLo : 15,876 tonnes (35,001 kips) 15,87635,001
Stillwater reaction : 8,582 tonnes (18,920 kips) 8,582 18,920
Parameters Used in V-H Calculations
Expected spudcan tip penetration : 42.02 m (138 ft) 138

Maximum spudcan contact area, A : 243.2 m2 (2,618 sq.ft) 2,618
Laterally projected spudcan area, As : 99.4 m2 (1,070 sq.ft) 1,070
o
Steel/sand interaction factor, : N.A. 0.0
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : 59 kPa (1,232 lb/sq.ft) 1,232
cu at spudcan tip, cut : 61 kPa (1,274 lb/sq.ft) 1,274
Preload resistance factor, R,PRE : 1.10
Partial resistance factor horizontal capacity, R,Hfc :
Partial resistance factor foundation capacity, R,VH :
1.56
1.10
} Revised ISO 19905-1 Nov 2010
V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

Fh (kips)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
25000
Maximum Hull Weight
50000
Minimum Hull Weight
SNAME UC=1,0
20000
Unfactored V-H capacity Old ISO UC=1,0
40000
Factored V-H capacity New ISO UC=1,0
15000
Fv (tonnes)
Fv (kips)
30000
Stillwater spudcan
reaction (triangle)
10000
Unfactored sliding capacity
20000
Factored sliding capacity
5000
Origin used for utilisation 10000
checks (diamond)
0,5QV/R,VH
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Fh (tonnes)
spud_pen ISOv0 W.S. 05-130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: MJRH Date: 27-Nov-10
Figure 1: Nov 2010 Revised ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for Super Gorilla Unit
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic Super Gorilla at Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking



Preload reaction VLo : 15,876 tonnes (35,001 kips) 15,87635,001

Laterally projected spudcan area, As : 99.4 m2 (1,070 sq.ft) 1,070
o
1.56
1.15
} ISO DIS 19905-1

Fh (kips)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
25000
Maximum Hull Weight
Minimum Hull Weight 50000
SNAME UC=1,0
20000
New ISO UC=1,0 40000
Factored V-H capacity
15000
Fv (tonnes)
Fv (kips)
30000
Stillwater spudcan
reaction (triangle)
10000
20000
5000
10000
Origin used for utilisation
checks (diamond)
0,5QV/R,VH
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Fh (tonnes)
Figure 2: Original Dec 2009 DIS ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for Super Gorilla unit
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic Super Gorilla at Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking (SNAME)
Name : Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking (SNAME)

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Predicted Penetration

Preload reaction : 15,876 tonnes (35,000 kips) 15,87635,000

2
Maximum spudcan contact area : 243.2 m (2,618 sq.ft) 2,618
2
Laterally projected spudcan area : 52.8 m (568 sq.ft) 568
Preload resistance factor, P : 0.90
Sliding resistance factor, Hfc or Hfs :
Resistance factor for combined V-H loads, VH :
0.64
0.85
} SNAME (Rev. 3 January 2008)

Horizontal load capacity (kips)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
20000
Maximum Hull Weight
18000 Minimum Hull Weight 35000

SNAME UC=1,0
16000
30000
New ISO UC=1,0
14000
Vertical load capacity (tonnes)
Vertical load capacity (kips)

25000
12000
10000 20000
8000
15000
Stillwater spudcan
6000 reaction
10000
4000
5000
2000
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Horizontal load capacity (tonnes)
spud_pen v2.1 Soils Database Ref. W.S. 05/130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: RWPS Date: 27-Nov-10
Figure 3: SNAME V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from ISO analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic KFELS B Class at Generic clay location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking


Name : Generic KFELS B Class
Design : KFELS Mod V B Class

Preload reaction VLo : 7,143 tonnes (15,748 kips) 7,143 15,748
Including spudcan and leg buoyancy.

Laterally projected spudcan area, As : 43.7 m2 (470 sq.ft) 470
o
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : 44 kPa (919 lb/sq.ft) 919
cu at spudcan tip, cut : 47 kPa (982 lb/sq.ft) 982
1.56
1.10
} ISO DIS 19905-1

Fh (kips)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
10000
Maximum Hull Weight

9000 20000
Unfactored V-H capacity Minimum Hull Weight
8000 SNAME UC=1,0
Factored V-H capacity Old ISO UC=1,0

7000
15000
New ISO UC=1,0
6000
Fv (tonnes)
Fv (kips)
5000 Stillwater spudcan

reaction (triangle) 10000
4000
Origin used for

3000 utilisation checks
(diamond)
5000
2000 0,5QV/R,VH
1000
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Fh (tonnes)
Figure 4: Nov 2010 Revised ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for KFELS B Class
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)



Preload reaction VLo : 7,143 tonnes (15,748 kips) 7,143 15,748

Laterally projected spudcan area, As : 43.7 m2 (470 sq.ft) 470
o
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : 44 kPa (919 lb/sq.ft) 919
cu at spudcan tip, cut : 47 kPa (982 lb/sq.ft) 982
1.56
1.15
} ISO DIS 19905-1

Fh (kips)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
10000
Maximum Hull Weight
9000 Minimum Hull Weight 20000
Unfactored V-H capacity
SNAME UC=1,0
8000
Old ISO UC=1,0
New ISO UC=1,0
7000
15000
6000
Fv (tonnes)
Fv (kips)
5000
Stillwater spudcan
10000
reaction (triangle)
4000
Origin used for

3000 utilisation checks
(diamond)
0,5QV/R,VH 5000
2000
1000
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Fh (tonnes)
Figure 5: Original Dec 2009 DIS ISO V-H Envelope and Footing Reactions for KFELS B Class
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Coordinates : N/A


Preload reaction : 7,095 tonnes (15,641 kips) 7,095 15,641

Maximum spudcan contact area : 152.6 m2 (1,643 sq.ft) 1,643
Laterally projected spudcan area : 43.7 m2 (470 sq.ft) 470
0.64
0.85

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
8000
Maximum Hull Weight

Unfactored V-H capacity 16000
7000 Minimum Hull Weight
SNAME UC=1,0 14000
6000 Factored V-H capacity
Old ISO UC=1,0

12000
New ISO UC=1,0
5000
10000
4000
Stillwater 8000
spudcan
3000
reaction
6000
2000
4000
1000 2000
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
spud_pen v2.1 Soils Database Ref. W.S. 05-130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: RWPS Date: 30-Nov-10
Figure 6: SNAME V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from ISO analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
4.2 FOUNDATION UTILISATIONS
4.2.1 The foundation utilisations are calculated using a similar vector approach for all
three methods, however the location of the origin used for the vector checks is
defined differently for each method. An example vector check following the original
ISO methodology is shown in Figure 7 below:
250
FV (MN)
Unfactored bearing
200
capacity envelope
Factored bearing
capacity envelope
150
Stillwater footing
Unfactored sliding capacity envelope

reaction
Factored sliding capacity envelope

100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
FH (MN)
Figure 7: Example Vertical-Horizontal Capacity Envelope Showing Bearing Capacity Check
4.2.2 The V-H bearing capacity check is performed by measuring the ratio of the distance
of the storm footing reaction point from the utilisation origin to the distance from the
utilisation origin to the factored V-H bearing capacity envelope along the same
vector direction, as shown in Figure 7.
4.2.3 The sliding check compares the maximum horizontal load component of the storm
footing reactions with the factored sliding capacity envelope. Figure 8 shows an
example of the sliding check following the original ISO (2009) methodology.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
250
FV (MN)
200 Unfactored bearing

capacity envelope
150
Factored bearing
Stillwater footing
Unfactored sliding capacity envelope

capacity envelope
Factored sliding capacity envelope

reaction
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
FH (MN)
Figure 8: Example Vertical-Horizontal Capacity Envelope showing Sliding Capacity

Check
4.2.4 Sliding check:
FH
U = = 0,41
QVH

R , Hfc
In the case of clay R,HFc = 1,56
4.2.5 Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 show a comparison of the foundation utilisations obtained
using the ISO footing reactions for the Super Gorilla and KFELS B Class units
following the revised ISO, the original benchmarked ISO and the SNAME
methodologies. Note, the values marked in red represent the maximum utilisation
for which the additional settlement comparison is performed. Furthermore
utilisations marked with an s are based on the sliding capacity rather than the
bearing capacity. Due to the differing intersections of the factored V-H curve and
factored sliding lines for the ISO and SNAME methods, in some cases the SNAME
utilisation is calculated using the factored sliding line whereas the ISO uses the V-H
bearing capacity envelope.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Table 4-1 Bearing Capacity Utilisations for Super Gorilla
Utilisations Comparisons
Storm New ISO Old ISO New ISO
Leg Old ISO
Heading New ISO
[1]
[2] SNAME / / /
(2009)
SNAME SNAME Old ISO
Bow 0,40 s 0,40 s 0,91 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
60 Port 0,40 s 0,40 s 0,90 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
Hull Weight = 19394t
Starboard 1,31 1,45 1,72 0,76 0,84 0,90

Bow 0,50 0,59 0,85 s 0,59 0,69 0,85
90 Port 0,41 s 0,41 s 0,92 s 0,45 0,45 1,00
Starboard 1,18 1,31 1,48 0,80 0,89 0,90
Bow 0,81 0,92 0,97 0,84 0,95 0,88
120 Port 0,36 s 0,36 s 0,80 s 0,45 0,45 1,00
Starboard 0,81 0,94 0,97 0,84 0,97 0,86
Bow 0,40 s 0,40 s 0,89 s 0,45 0,45 1,00
60 Port 0,39 s 0,39 s 0,89 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
Hull Weight = 17290t
Starboard 1,20 1,36 1,52 0,79 0,89 0,88

Bow 0,43 0,52 0,82 s 0,52 0,63 0,83
90 Port 0,38 s 0,38 s 0,85 s 0,45 0,45 1,00
Starboard 1,03 1,17 1,28 0,80 0,91 0,88
Bow 0,71 0,81 0,81 0,88 1,00 0,88
120 Port 0,34 s 0,34 s 0,77 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
Starboard 0,71 0,81 0,81 0,88 1,00 0,88
V-H Low FH 0,88 1,00 1,00 0,88 1,00 0,87
SNAME
V-H High FH 0,80 0,91 1,00 0,80 0,91 0,87
U = 1.0
Sliding 0,67 s 0,77 s 1,00 s 0,67 0,77 0,87
V-H Low FH 0,88 1,00 1,00 0,88 1,00 0,88
ISO DIS
(2009) V-H High FH 0,89 1,00 1,80 s 0,49 0,56 0,89
U = 1.0
Sliding 1,00 s 1,00 s 2,26 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
V-H Low FH 1,00 1,15 1,19 0,84 0,97 0,87
ISO DIS
revised V-H High FH 1,00 1,12 1,88 s 0,53 0,60 0,89
U = 1.0
Sliding 1,00 s 1,00 s 2,26 s 0,44 0,44 1,00
[1]
New ISO refers to the November 2010 revised ISO foundation capacity checks
[2]
Old ISO refers to the December 2009 version of the ISO DIS used in the
benchmarking (Ref. [2])
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Table 4-2 Bearing Capacity Utilisations for KFELS B Class
Utilisations Comparisons
Leg Old ISO
Heading New ISO
[1]
[2] SNAME / / /
(2009)
SNAME SNAME Old ISO
Bow 0,32 0,38 0,45 S 0,71 0,84 0,84

60 Port 0,30 0,36 0,45 S 0,67 0,80 0,83
Hull Weight = 10069,8t
Starboard 1,11 1,24 1,52 0,73 0,82 0,90

Bow 0,57 0,66 0,42 S 1,36 1,57 0,86
90 Port 0,26 S 0,26 S 0,45 S 0,58 0,58 1,00
Starboard 1,04 1,16 1,34 0,78 0,87 0,90
Bow 0,82 0,94 0,83 0,99 1,13 0,87
120 Port 0,26 S 0,26 S 0,44 S 0,59 0,59 1,00
Starboard 0,84 0,96 0,80 1,05 1,20 0,88
Bow 0,25 S 0,3 0,43 S 0,58 0,70 0,83
60 Port 0,26 S 0,29 0,43 S 0,60 0,67 0,90
Hull Weight = 8770,3t
Starboard 0,99 1,10 1,19 0,83 0,92 0,90

Bow 0,47 0,55 0,42 S 1,12 1,31 0,85
90 Port 0,25 S 0,25 S 0,43 S 0,58 0,58 1,00
Starboard 0,89 1,04 1,00 0,89 1,04 0,86
Bow 0,71 0,80 0,58 1,22 1,38 0,89
120 Port 0,25 S 0,25 S 0,43 S 0,58 0,58 1,00
Starboard 0,73 0,82 0,61 1,20 1,34 0,89
V-H Low FH 0,88 1,00 1,00 0,88 1,00 0,80 ??
SNAME
V-H High FH 0,87 0,99 1,00 0,87 0,99 0,84
U = 1.0
Sliding 0,68 s 0,59 s 1,00 s 0,68 0,59 1,15
V-H Low FH 0,88 1,00 1,00 0,88 1,00 0,88
ISO DIS
(2009) V-H High FH 0,89 1,00 1,33 s 0,67 0,75 0,89
U = 1.0
Sliding 1,00 s 1,00 s 1,68 s 0,60 0,60 1,00
V-H Low FH 1,00 1,35 1,27 0,79 1,06 0,74
ISO DIS
revised V-H High FH 1,00 1,23 1,46 0,68 0,84 0,81
U = 1.0
Sliding 1,00 s 1,00 s 1,68 s 0,60 0,60 1,00
[1]
New ISO refers to the November 2010 revised ISO foundation capacity checks
[2]
Old ISO refers to the December 2009 version of the ISO DIS (Ref. [2])
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
4.3 STEP 3A ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS
4.3.1 The maximum level of additional settlement predicted for the Super Gorillas
starboard leg for a storm heading of 60 for the Step 3a displacement check using
each of the three methodologies is shown in Table 4-3 below along with the relevant
comparisons. Note that in order to make a valid comparison the additional
settlements using SNAME were calculated using the storm footing reactions
obtained from the ISO analysis.
Table 4-3 Additional Settlement for Super Gorilla unit
Additional Settlement Comparisons

Leg
Heading New ISO Old ISO SNAME / / /
SNAME SNAME Old ISO
60 Starboard 4,0 7,2 9,2 0,43 0,78 0,56
4.3.2 The maximum level of additional settlement predicted for the KFELS B Class units
starboard leg for a storm heading of 60 for the Step 3a displacement check using
each of the three methodologies is shown in Table 4-4 below along with the relevant
comparisons.
Table 4-4 Additional Settlement for KFELS B Class unit
Additional Settlement Comparisons

Leg
Heading New ISO Old ISO SNAME / / /
SNAME SNAME Old ISO
60 Starboard 2,0 3,2 4,1 0,49 0,78 0,63
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
5 ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS
5.1 NEW ISO VS OLD ISO
5.1.1 Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the differences between the factored V-H bearing
capacity checks using the new and old ISO methods for the Super Gorilla and
KFELS B Class for the clay soil profile.
250
Unfactored bearing capacity envelope

FV (MN)
New ISO factored bearing capacity envelope
Old ISO factored bearing capacity envelope
200
150
Stillwater footing
reaction

New ISO origin for utilisations
100

Old ISO origin for utilisations
50 envelope
envelope
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
FH (M N)
Super Gorilla
100
Unfactored bearing capacity envelope
FV (MN) 90 New ISO factored bearing capacity envelope
Old ISO factored bearing capacity envelope
80
70
Stillwater footing
reaction
60
50 New ISO origin for utilisations

Old ISO origin for utilisations

40
30
20
envelope
envelope
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
FH (MN)
KFELS B Class
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
5.1.2 The factored V-H bearing capacity envelope using the revised ISO is consistently
larger due to the use of a material factor of 1,1 for full penetration, hence the
utilisations will be lower than with the old ISO. The unfactored envelope and both
unfactored and factored sliding lines remain unchanged.
5.1.3 The utilisation origin has increased slightly compared to the old ISO also due to the
revision of the resistance factor. The effect of this change on its own would be to
increase the utilisations slightly.
5.1.4 The results presented in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 mirror the effects of the new larger
factored V-H bearing capacity envelope; all the bearing capacity utilisations for both
units have reduced by 10% - 17% when compared with the old ISO results.
Utilisations based on sliding capacity remain unchanged between the two methods
as demonstrated by Figure 9 above, as the same method of calculation is used in
both versions.
5.1.5 The level of additional settlements predicted by the revised ISO method for the
Super Gorilla and KFELS B Class units are 3,2m and 1,2m less than that predicted
by the old ISO method which is due to the difference in the size of the factored yield
envelope.
5.1.6 Both the utilisations shown in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 and the chart shown in
Figure 9 demonstrate that, for the case of the Super Gorilla, lower bearing capacity
utilisations are achieved using the new ISO method when compared with the old
ISO method with about a 10% - 17% difference for the Super Gorilla and KFELS B
Class storm cases. Additional settlements are also reduced by around 44% and
37% for the Super Gorilla and KFELS B Class units respectively.
5.2 NEW ISO VS SNAME
5.2.1 Figure 11 and Figure 12 show the differences between the new ISO and SNAME
methods with regards to the shape of the yield envelopes for the Super Gorilla and
KFELS units. Note, the SNAME envelope does not usually include consideration of
the weight of backfill or spudcan soil buoyancy, however for the purposes of the
comparison the SNAME envelopes and origin for utilisation checks have been
shifted up the Fv axis to account for the weight of backfill and spudcan soil buoyancy
and to enable a direct comparison with the ISO envelopes.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
250
SNAME unfactored bearing capacity envelope
FV (MN) SNAME factored bearing capacity envelope
New ISO unfactored bearing capacity envelope
200
150
New ISO unfactored sliding

100 Stillwater footing
SNAME unfactored sliding
New ISO factored sliding

reaction
SNAME factored sliding

New ISO origin for
capacity envelope
capacity envelope
capacity envelope
capacity envelope
utilisations
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
FH (MN)
for Super Gorilla unit (SNAME shifted for backfill and spudcan soil buoyancy)
100
SNAME unfactored bearing capacity envelope
SNAME factored bearing capacity envelope
FV (MN) 90
New ISO unfactored bearing capacity envelope
80
70
SNAME factored sliding capacity envelope
60
Stillwater footing
reaction
SNAME unfactored sliding capacity
50
40
New ISO unfactored sliding
New ISO factored sliding
New ISO origin for

30 utilisations
capacity envelope
capacity envelope
20
envelope
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
FH (MN)
for KFELS B Class unit (SNAME shifted for backfill and spudcan soil buoyancy).
Arrows indicate utilisation check for case where SNAME utilisation is less than ISO utilisation:
Min. hull weight, storm heading = 120, Bow Leg: UISO = 0,71, UISO=0,58 UISO/USNAME = 1,22
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
5.2.2 Comparison of the utilisations obtained with the new ISO methodology and SNAME
is more complicated than for the comparison of the ISO DIS due to the number of
differences that result in different:
Unfactored V-H envelopes;
Unfactored sliding envelopes;
Intersections between the factored V-H bearing capacity envelope and

factored sliding envelopes;
V-H bearing capacity resistance factors;
Origins used to construct factored envelopes;
Origins used to determine foundation utilisations;
Not all of these result in lower utilisations for the ISO methodology, precluding a
straightforward comparison of utilisations.
5.2.3 Bearing Capacity
The bearing capacity envelopes shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12 clearly show that
the SNAME factored V-H bearing capacity envelope is entirely inside the ISO
factored V-H bearing capacity envelope. For the case of the Super Gorilla unit this
has resulted in consistently lower utilisations for the ISO method compared to
SNAME as demonstrated in Table 4-1 for the Super Gorilla. A comparison of the
cases where neither methodology results in a sliding check shows the new revised
ISO utilisations to be between 76% - 88% of the SNAME utilisations. The margin,
however, reduces for footing reactions that are close to the factored V-H envelopes
for a horizontal force component of less than around 7,0MN where the two
envelopes are relatively close.
In the case of the KFELS B Class unit analysis, however, the ISO does not
necessarily result in lower utilisations with ISO utilisations ranging between 78% and
122% of those from SNAME for the case where both methodologies result in a V-H
bearing capacity envelope check. This is a consequence of the different origins
used to define utilisation in the new revised ISO and SNAME methods as illustrated
in Figure 12 for the case of the minimum hull weight bow leg footing reaction for a
storm heading of 120 where UISO/USNAME=1,22.
The preload ballast capacity of the KFELS B Class as a proportion of the stillwater
footing reaction is less than for the Super Gorilla. The stillwater footing reaction is
therefore closer to the factored V-H envelope and, for some cases, the SNAME
utilisation will be lower than for the revised ISO which uses the new utilisation origin
that is significantly further from the factored envelope than the stillwater footing
reaction.
To understand this more easily, for a given storm footing reaction point and with
reference to a single factored envelope, the closer the stillwater footing reaction is to
the ISO utilisation origin, the more similar the utilisations will be for the ISO and
SNAME methodologies. Conversely the closer the stillwater footing reaction is to
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
the factored V-H envelope, the larger the ISO utilisation will be compared to the
SNAME utilisation.
The interplay of the differing utilisation origins, V-H bearing capacity envelopes
(further complicated by the change in the incorporation of the laterally projected area
component), resistance factors, origins for constructing the factored envelope and
intersection of the V-H and sliding lines means that no one method will consistently
provide lower utilisations than another - each can give utilisations that are greater or
lower than the other depending on the rigs preload capabilities and position of the
particular storm footing reaction in relation to the corresponding factored envelopes.
It is therefore not possible to state that the new ISO will produce utilisations that are
5% less than SNAME, all one can conclude is that they will be different to those
given by SNAME.
The origin of the utilisations specified in the ISO documents does, however, have a
more rigorous basis compared to SNAME, which uses the stillwater footing reaction,
as the origin can, in the case of rigs with very limited preload capabilities, result in
apparently low foundation utilisations for storm footing reactions that are, in absolute
terms, very close to the factored V-H envelope.
5.2.4 Sliding Capacity
The sliding capacity utilisations calculated according to the SNAME methodology

are only 44% of those calculated using the new ISO methodology. This is
demonstrated by both the sliding utilisations shown in Table 4-1 and by the chart
shown in Figure 11. For the KFELS B Class the SNAME sliding capacity utilisations
are around 59% of the SNAME sliding capacity utilisations.
5.2.5 Additional Settlement
The additional settlements for the Super Gorillas starboard leg for a storm heading
of 60 calculated using the revised ISO method are 4,2m compared to 9,2m using
SNAME. Similarly for the KFELS B Class, the additional settlements for the
starboard leg for a storm heading of 60 calculated using the revised ISO method
are 2,0m compared to 4,1m using SNAME.
There is clearly a significant reduction in the additional settlements caused by

expanding the V-H envelope in the Step 3a check due to the larger factored V-H
bearing capacity envelope which requires the V-H envelope to be expanded by a
lesser amount in order to encompass all the storm footing reactions.
5.3 SAND FOUNDATIONS
Sand foundations have not been considered in this addendum due to the fact that
the November 2010 ISO approach is identical to the December 2009 ISO approach
used in the Benchmarking study. A comparison of the ISO approach to the SNAME
approach is described in GLND Report L25217 (Ref. [3]) for the Super Gorilla and
L25216 (Ref. [4]) for the KFELS B-Class. A summary of utilisations from these
reports is repeated below.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Table 5-1 Final assessment results for the Super Gorilla
Criteria ISO SNAME ISO/SNAME

Spudcan
0,91 0,95 0,96
penetration (m)
Utilisations Heading UC Heading UC -
Preload Capacity 60 1,16 60 1,17 0,99
Foundation bearing
60 1,63 60 1,82 0,90
capacity
Additional
- 0,1 - 0,13 0,77
settlements (m)
Windward leg
120 1,30 120 1,22 1,06
sliding
Table 5-2 Final assessment results for the KFELS B-Class
Criteria ISO SNAME ISO/SNAME

Spudcan
1,95 2,00 0,98
penetration (m)
Utilisations Heading UC Heading UC -
Preload Capacity 60 1,11 60 1,15 0,97
Foundation bearing
60 1,34 60 1,54 0,87
capacity
Additional
60 0,10 60 0,17 0,59
settlements (m)
Windward leg
120 0,84 120 0,85 0,99
sliding
Please note that the footing reactions used to calculate the SNAME UCs in Table
5-1 and Table 5-2 are different to those used to calculate the ISO UCs as the
SNAME footing reactions were calculated using the SNAME site assessment
methodology rather than the ISO methodology.
The corresponding SNAME and ISO V-H bearing capacity envelopes and sliding
envelopes are shown in Figure 13 to Figure 16 for the Super Gorilla and KFELS B
Class units.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic Super Gorilla at Generic medium dense sand location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking

Name : Generic medium dense sand location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking



Maximum spudcan contact area : 156.3 m2 (1,682 sq.ft) 1,682
Laterally projected spudcan area : 7.7 m2 (83 sq.ft) 83
o
Steel/sand interaction factor, : 29.0 29.0
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : 0 kPa 0
cu at spudcan tip, cut : 0 kPa 0
1.25
1.10
} ISO DIS 19905-1

FH (kips)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
18000
Maximum Hull Weight
Minimum Hull Weight
16000 35000
14000
30000
12000
25000
Fv (tonnes)
Fv (kips)
10000 Stillwater spudcan

8000 Origin used for utilisation
checks (diamond)
15000
6000

10000
4000
2000 Unfactored sliding capacity 5000
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
FH (tonnes)
spud_pen ISOv0 W.S. 05-130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: MJRH Date: 03-Oct-10
Figure 13: ISO DIS V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from ISO analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic Super Gorilla at Generic medium dense sand location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking
Depth of water : 121.9 m (400 ft) 121.9400



2
2
o
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : N.A. #######
cu at spudcan tip, cut : N.A. #######
0.80
0.90

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
18000
Maximum Hull Weight
16000
14000
40000
Factored V-H capacity Vertical load capacity (kips)
12000
10000 30000
8000
Stillwater spudcan
reaction
20000
6000
4000
10000
2000 Factored sliding capacity Unfactored sliding capacity
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
spud_pen v2.1 Soils Database Ref. W.S. 05/130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: RWPS Date: 03-Oct-10
Figure 14: SNAME V-H Envelope for Super Gorilla with footing reactions from SNAME analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic KFELS B Class at Generic medium dense sand location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking




2
Maximum spudcan contact area : 91.1 m (981 sq.ft) 981
2
o
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : 0 kPa 0
cu at spudcan tip, cut : 0 kPa 0
1.25
1.10
} ISO DIS 19905-1

Fh (kips)
0 500 1000 1500 2000
8000
Maximum Hull Weight
7000
14000
6000
12000
5000
Stillwater spudcan
Fv (tonnes)

Fv (kips)
4000
Origin used for
utilisation checks 8000
3000
6000
2000
4000

1000 2000
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Fh (tonnes)
Figure 15: ISO DIS V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from ISO analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
Generic KFELS B Class at Generic medium dense sand location for ISO Phase 2 Benchmarking
Coordinates : N/A
Depth of water : 106.7 m (350 ft) 106.7350



2
2
o
cu at maximum bearing area, cuo : N.A. #######
cu at spudcan tip, cut : N.A. #######
0.80
0.90

0 500 1000 1500 2000
8000
Maximum Hull Weight
7000
14000
6000

12000
5000
10000
4000
8000
Stillwater spudcan
3000 reaction
6000
2000
4000

1000 2000
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
spud_pen v2.1 Soils Database Ref. W.S. 05-130553 Calc: DHE Appvd: RWPS Date: 20-Nov-10
Figure 16: SNAME V-H Envelope for KFELS B Class with footing reactions from SNAME analyses
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
6 CONCLUSIONS
6.1 A comparison has been made of the V-H bearing capacity checks and utilisations
using the methodology described in SNAME, the December 2009 ISO DIS used for
benchmarking and the November 2010 revision to the ISO V-H bearing capacity
foundation checks section.
6.2 The comparison has been limited to the clay foundation case as the sand soil profile
resulted in partial spudcan penetrations being predicted for which the revision to the
ISO has a negligible effect.
6.3 A comparison of the ISO approach to the SNAME approach is described in GLND
Report L25217 (Ref. [3]) for the Super Gorilla and L25216 (Ref. [4]) for the KFELS
B-Class which shows the foundation bearing capacity utilisations and additional
settlements to be lower using the ISO DIS methodology compared to SNAME.
6.4 The reduced V-H resistance factor implemented in the November 2010 revision to
the ISO results in a factored V-H bearing capacity envelope that will always be
larger than that calculated using the December 2009 ISO DIS methodology.
6.5 The November 2010 revision gives a factored capacity envelope that exceeds that
of SNAME. The increase in size is greatest for sliding failure for spudcans with
deep penetrations in clay.
6.6 Furthermore the revised origin used to construct the factored V-H bearing capacity
envelope has also resulted in a larger factored V-H bearing capacity envelope.
6.7 The results of the comparison for the Super Gorilla unit indicate that the utilisations
determined for the set of storm footing reactions examined are consistently lower
using the November 2010 revised ISO compared to both the December 2009 ISO
DIS and the SNAME Recommended Practice.
6.8 The results of the comparison for the KFELS Mod V B unit indicate that the
utilisations determined for the set of storm footing reactions examined are
consistently lower using the November 2010 revised ISO compared to the
December 2009 ISO DIS. This is due to the reduced V-H bearing capacity
resistance factor introduced in the November 2010 revision.
6.9 The utilisations determined for the KFELS Mod V B unit may, however, be higher or
lower than those calculated using the methodology described in the SNAME
Recommended Practice. This is due to the unit having a proportionately lower
preload ballast capacity compared to the Super Gorilla and consequently the
stillwater footing reaction is relatively closer to the factored V-H bearing capacity
envelope, result in lower SNAME foundation utilisations compared to those given by
either the ISO DIS or the November 2010 revision of the ISO.
6.10 This is a result of the new origin for defining foundation utilisations that was
introduced in the ISO specifically to address the issue of relatively low foundation
utilisations that can be calculated using the SNAME Recommended Practice for
storm footing reactions close to the factored V-H bearing capacity envelope for units
with low preload ballast capacities.
6.11 Importantly, SNAME utilisations of unity will always correspond to utilisations that
are less than unity using the November 2010 revision of the ISO.
6.12 For both units the additional settlements required to expand the V-H envelope for a
Step 3a check for the November 2010 revised ISO are significantly lower than those
using both the December 2009 ISO DIS and SNAME Recommended Practice as the
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
November 2010 revised ISO factored V-H bearing capacity envelope is always
larger than those calculated using the December 2009 ISO DIS and SNAME
Recommended Practice.
6.13 The ISO DIS (2009) and revised ISO utilisations are always significantly lower than
SNAME when limited by lateral/sliding capacity due the greatly increased horizontal
foundation capacity from the ISO mythologies.
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
This report is intended for the sole use of the person or

company to whom it is addressed and no liability of any
nature whatsoever shall be assumed to any other party
in respect of its contents.
GL NOBLE DENTON
Signed: ________________________________________
David Edwards, MEng., M.Sc., Ph.D., DIC

Senior Geotechnical Engineer, Jack-up and Geotechnical Engineering
Countersigned: ________________________________________
Richard Stonor, B.Sc., Ph.D., C.Eng., MRINA
Manager, Jack-up and Geotechnical Engineering
Dated : London, 30th November 2010
ISO 19905-1 (DIS)
REFERENCES
[1] SNAME Technical and Research Bulletin 5-5A. Recommended Practice for Site Specific
Assessment of Mobile Jack-Up Units, 1st Ed., Rev 2., Jan 2002.
[2] ISO 19905-1, Petroleum and natural gas industries - Site-specific assessment of mobile
offshore units - Part 1: Jack-Ups, Draft DIS, 12, 2009.
[3] GL Noble Denton Report No. L25217, ISO PHASE 2 BENCHMARKING ISO 19905-
1.(DIS) VALIDITY CHECK, LETOURNEAU SUPER GORILLA CLASS, Rev 2, 19TH
November 2010.
[4] GL Noble Denton Report No. L25316, ISO PHASE 2 BENCHMARKING ISO 19905-
1.(DIS) VALIDITY CHECK, KFELS B CLASS, Rev 0, 20th November 2010.

GLND - L25336 - IsO Additional Geotechnical Investigation

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

GLND - L25336 - IsO Additional Geotechnical Investigation

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Noble House

Phone +44 20 7812 8700

ISO PHASE 2 BENCHMARKING

ISO 19905-1 (DIS)

COMPARISON OF REVISED GEOTECHNICAL CLAUSES

Addendum to Reports L25217 and L25316

Distribution: ISO Committee

File: l25336 - iso additional geotechnical investigation.doc

Noble Denton Consultants Ltd trading as GL Noble Denton

INSERTED DOCUMENT/FILE REGISTER

Table 2-1 Footing Reactions 8

1.2 SCOPE OF WORK

2.1.3 The revisions are summarised below in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1 Footing Reactions

Bearing capacity Origin used for

SNAME (0,SWL1) 1.11 1.18 (0,0) 2

Table 3-1 Footing Reactions

Storm Maximum Hull Weight Minimum Hull Weight

3.2 FOOTING REACTIONS FROM KFELS MOD B ANALYSIS

Table 3-2 Footing Reactions

Storm Maximum Hull Weight Minimum Hull Weight

3.3 ADDITIONAL INTERESTING FOOTING REACTIONS

Table 3-3 Footing Reactions

Super Gorilla KFELS B Class

4 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES AND FOUNDATION

4.1 V-H BEARING CAPACITY ENVELOPES

Location Details Spudcan Geometry

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Seabed Level

Parameters Used in V-H Calculations

Expected spudcan tip penetration : 42.02 m (138 ft) 138

V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

Location Details Spudcan Geometry

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Seabed Level

Parameters Used in V-H Calculations

Expected spudcan tip penetration : 42.02 m (138 ft) 138

V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Predicted Penetration

Parameters Used in V-H Calculations

Expected spudcan tip penetration : 46.4 m (152 ft) 152

V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

18000 Minimum Hull Weight 35000

Vertical load capacity (kips)

Factored V-H capacity

Location Details Spudcan Geometry

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Seabed Level

Expected spudcan tip penetration : 34.07 m (112 ft) 112

V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

Maximum Hull Weight

8000 SNAME UC=1,0

Factored V-H capacity Old ISO UC=1,0

5000 Stillwater spudcan

Origin used for

Location Details Spudcan Geometry

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Seabed Level

Expected spudcan tip penetration : 34.07 m (112 ft) 112

V-H Bearing Capacity Envelope

Origin used for

Jack-up Unit Details

Calculated Spudcan Reactions at Predicted Penetration