Appendix 5 Foundation Checks to Updated ISO Sections - 116C. 1. Introduction

Similar documents
Design of pile foundations following Eurocode 7-Section 7

EN Eurocode 7. Section 10 Hydraulic Failure Section 11 Overall Stability Section 12 Embankments. Trevor L.L. Orr Trinity College Dublin Ireland

Embedded Retaining Wall Design Engineering or Paradox?

vulcanhammer.net This document downloaded from

Worked Example 2 (Version 1) Design of concrete cantilever retaining walls to resist earthquake loading for residential sites

vulcanhammer.net This document downloaded from

METHODS FOR ACHIEVEMENT UNIFORM STRESSES DISTRIBUTION UNDER THE FOUNDATION

Selecting and Sizing Ball Screw Drives

Improvement in physical properties for ground treated with rapid impact compaction

RESEARCH REPORT 289. Guidelines for jack-up rigs with particular reference to foundation integrity HSE

REINFORCED CONCRETE. Reinforced Concrete Design. A Fundamental Approach - Fifth Edition. Walls are generally used to provide lateral support for:

ENGINEERING SCIENCE H1 OUTCOME 1 - TUTORIAL 3 BENDING MOMENTS EDEXCEL HNC/D ENGINEERING SCIENCE LEVEL 4 H1 FORMERLY UNIT 21718P

Number of Sides Required to Have a Handrail

How To Model A Shallow Foundation

MECHANICS OF SOLIDS - BEAMS TUTORIAL 2 SHEAR FORCE AND BENDING MOMENTS IN BEAMS

Lecture 4. Case Study of 16 th C Church in Old Goa

Design and Construction of Cantilevered Reinforced Concrete Structures

Core Fittings C-Core and CD-Core Fittings

International Association of Drilling Contractors

VERTICAL STRESS INCREASES IN SOIL TYPES OF LOADING. Point Loads (P) Line Loads (q/unit length) Examples: - Posts. Examples: - Railroad track

CE 366 SETTLEMENT (Problems & Solutions)

FOOTING DESIGN EXAMPLE

CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS & FINDINGS...9 APPENDIX

Seismic Analysis and Design of Steel Liquid Storage Tanks

BEARING CAPACITY AND SETTLEMENT RESPONSE OF RAFT FOUNDATION ON SAND USING STANDARD PENETRATION TEST METHOD

GUIDELINE FOR HAND HELD SHEAR VANE TEST

Design of diaphragm and sheet pile walls. D-Sheet Piling. User Manual

GRI Standard Practice GT7 * Determination of the Long-Term Design Strength of Geotextiles

EFFECT OF GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT ON LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF A COARSE SAND BED

FOUNDATION DESIGN. Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

HOW TO DESIGN CONCRETE STRUCTURES Foundations

SPECIFICATION FOR DYNAMIC CONSOLIDATION / DYNAMIC REPLACEMENT

JRC MOU Location & Move Warranty Survey Scope of Work (A revision on behalf of the JRC)

INTRODUCTION TO LIMIT STATES

Micropiles Reduce Costs and Schedule for Merchant RR Bridge Rehabilitation

Pullout Testing of Xgrid PET PVC 40/20 IT and Xgrid PET PVC 80/30 IT In Sand

Appendix A Sub surface displacements around excavations Data presented in Xdisp sample file

Ground improvement using the vibro-stone column technique

PDHonline Course S151A (1 PDH) Steel Sheet Piling. Instructor: Matthew Stuart, PE, SE. PDH Online PDH Center

CEEN Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory Session 7 - Direct Shear and Unconfined Compression Tests

c. Borehole Shear Test (BST): BST is performed according to the instructions published by Handy Geotechnical Instruments, Inc.

ASSESSMENT OF SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY FROM INDIRECT INSITU TESTS

Numerical Simulation of CPT Tip Resistance in Layered Soil

FRANKIPILE. High Pile Loads Optimum Adaptation to Foundation Soil Low-noise Manufacturing Process

FLUID MECHANICS. TUTORIAL No.7 FLUID FORCES. When you have completed this tutorial you should be able to. Solve forces due to pressure difference.

MEK4450. Templates & Manifolds. 29 August Templates and Manifolds. This module will cover:

Module 7 (Lecture 24 to 28) RETAINING WALLS

Treasure s report of 1 st Lizzi Scholarship

PDCA Driven-Pile Terms and Definitions

Work, Energy & Momentum Homework Packet Worksheet 1: This is a lot of work!

InstaPATCH ZERO Solution Guide

Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures

Shear Forces and Bending Moments

Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structures

Detailing of Reinforcment in Concrete Structures

Report Number BTC 17755F

Specification Guidelines: Allan Block Modular Retaining Wall Systems

A N Beal EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES - worked examples 1

Laterally Loaded Piles

SHAFT VERSUS FOOT ALIGNMENT TOLERANCES A Critique of the Various Approaches by Alan Luedeking, Ludeca, Inc.

Rail Track Analysis User Manual. LUSAS Version 15.0 : Issue 1

Seismic Risk Prioritization of RC Public Buildings

Dimensional and Structural Data for Elliptical Pipes. PD 26 rev D 21/09/05

ENCE 4610 Foundation Analysis and Design

LABORATORY II. PLASTICITY - Atterberg limits. w L - Cone test, Cassagrande test

Examples of Scalar and Vector Quantities 1. Candidates should be able to : QUANTITY VECTOR SCALAR

Copyright 2015 Pecivilexam.com all rights reserved- Breadth Exam 120 solved Problems.

General (1) This Section applies to the design and construction of interior and exterior stairs, steps, ramps, railings and guards.

An Automatic Kunzelstab Penetration Test

Section 5A: Guide to Designing with AAC

Swedge. Verification Manual. Probabilistic analysis of the geometry and stability of surface wedges Rocscience Inc.

Perthometer. Surface Texture Parameters New Standards DIN EN ISO / ASME

Figure CPT Equipment

ALLOWABLE LOADS ON A SINGLE PILE

Module 5 (Lectures 17 to 19) MAT FOUNDATIONS

AN EXPLANATION OF JOINT DIAGRAMS

1997 Uniform Administrative Code Amendment for Earthen Material and Straw Bale Structures Tucson/Pima County, Arizona

Standard Door Specification

ick Foundation Analysis and Design

GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY

NATIONAL ANNEX TO STANDARD SFS-EN 1990 EUROCODE BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN

Physics 125 Practice Exam #3 Chapters 6-7 Professor Siegel

Dubai Municipality Standard DMS 1: Part 5: 2004

Structural Analysis. EUROCODE 2 Background and Applications

Acceleration Introduction: Objectives: Methods:

OMBU ENTERPRISES, LLC. Process Metrics. 3 Forest Ave. Swanzey, NH Phone: Fax: OmbuEnterprises@msn.

Development of P-Y Curves for Monopiles in Clay using Finite Element Model Plaxis 3D Foundation

Trigonometry Hard Problems

Scheduling Maintenance for Infiltration Basins and Trenches

UltiMate Torque Arms & UltiMate Torque Tubes

5 Steel elements. 5.1 Structural design At present there are two British Standards devoted to the design of strucof tural steel elements:

Uniformly Accelerated Motion

6 RETROFITTING POST & PIER HOUSES

APOLLO SALES LTD SITE SCAFFOLD STEP DESIGN CHECK CALCULATIONS

Drained and Undrained Conditions. Undrained and Drained Shear Strength

Solving Simultaneous Equations and Matrices

PVC PIPE PERFORMANCE FACTORS

Design of Steel Structures Prof. S.R.Satish Kumar and Prof. A.R.Santha Kumar

System. Stability. Security. Integrity. 150 Helical Anchor

Calculating Forces in the Pulley Mechanical Advantage Systems Used in Rescue Work By: Ralphie G. Schwartz, Esq.

Transcription:

Appendix 5 Foundation Checks to Updated ISO Sections - 116C 1. Introduction Clauses 9 and A.9 of ISO 19905-1 have been significantly revised since the benchmarking work was commissioned. A key area of interest is the final geotechnical utilizations. This Appendix documents an additional work scope for the 116C rig where the utilizations using the updated Clauses 9 and A.9 for both the sand and clay foundations are reported as follows: Old ISO 19905-1 geotechnical utilizations New ISO 19905-1 geotechnical utilizations SNAME geotechnical utilizations Ratio of new ISO utilizations to SNAME utilizations (i.e. ISO/SNAME) Ratio of old ISO utilizations to SNAME utilizations (i.e. ISO/SNAME) Ratio of new ISO utilizations to old ISO utilizations (i.e. ISO new /ISO old) The global loading for the 116C sand case was reduced so that the new checks are closer to the yield surface. A copy of the revised Clauses 9 and A.9 to be used in the assessment was provided by the Benchmark Panel in an email dated 11/8/2010. 2. Aligned Reactions The tables below detail the reactions used. It is noted that the sand case reactions were modified while the clay case reactions remain the same and include the effect of p-y curves (which greatly reduces the horizontal loads on the footing). It is noted that the response analyses were performed assuming degrading moment fixity with constant linear vertical and horizontal springs and therefore Step 2b checks apply. Table A5.1 Leg Reactions 116C ISO Sand Case Storm heading ( o ) 60 120 Leg ID BS Vertical Moment KN KN KN-m Bow 3,727 19,348 23,854 Port 3,721 18,766 23,897 Stbd 2,878 43,858 0 Bow 3,446 34,823 20,549 Port 3,201 11,766 20,047 Stbd 3,436 35,379 20,578

Table A5.2 Leg Reactions 116C ISO Clay Case Storm heading ( o ) 60 120 Leg ID BS Vertical Moment KN KN KN-m Bow 72 25,417 186,022 Port 63 25,070 185,723 Stbd 133 38,654 187,368 Bow 125 33,422 179,276 Port 249 22,053 169,354 Stbd 126 33,637 179,276 3. 116C ISO Sand Case Results The old and new ISO Sep 2b checks for sand are essentially the same as γ R,VH = 1,10 for partial embedment in both cases. The V-H envelope is shrunk towards the origin (F H = F V = 0) and the unit checks are calculated using for the origin of the vectors (F H = 0, F V = 0,5*Q V /γ R,VH ). The SNAME T&R 5-5A checks will differ in that the V-H envelope is shrunk towards the still water reaction point (F H = 0, F V = 27.32 MN) and this same point is used as the origin of the vectors for the unity checks. The key parameters used in this case are the same for ISO and SNAME: Q V = 51.4 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Q H = 6.2 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Φ = 34 o, γ = 29 o, γ = 11 kn/m 3 (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) A s = 8.3 m 2 (Lateral Spudcan Area, partial penetration) k a = Tan 2 (45 o - Φ /2) = 0.283 k p = 1/K a = 3.537 h 1 = 0; h 2 = 2.7m (penetration to tip) Unfactored V-H envelopes for sand: Bearing: [F H / Q H ] 4 [F V / Q V ] [1 F V / Q V ] = 0 Sliding: F H = F V tan (γ) + 0.5 γ (k p k a ) (h 1 + h 2 ) A s Figure A5.1 shows the V-H envelopes as well as the leg reactions from Table A5.1. It can be seen that the maximum vertical leg reaction (leeward leg in 60 deg environment) exceeds the factored bearing capacity envelope.

F V (MN) 55 50 45 Leg Reaction -60 Deg Head Leg Reaction -120 Deg Head Origin -ISO Origin SNAME 40 35 Unfactored 30 25 Factored SNAME 20 15 10 5 Factored ISO 0 F H (MN) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Figure A5.1 V-H Envelopes for Sand Case

Table A5.3 summarizes the unity checks obtained. It is noted that all ISO UCs are vectorial while the SNAME sliding UC is: BS / (0.8*Q H ). Table A5.3 Summary of Unity Checks 116C Sand New ISO / Old ISO / New ISO Old ISO New ISO SNAME SNAME SNAME / Old ISO Bearing 1.17 1.17 1.04 1.12 1.12 1.00 Sliding 0.77 0.77 0.67 1.15 1.15 1.00 A Step 3 check was performed and an additional settlement of 5cm would be sufficient to accommodate the maximum leg vertical reaction, which is acceptable. The rig therefore meets all the necessary foundation checks for the reduced environment considered in this Appendix. The ISO checks for sand appear to be more penalizing than those of SNAME for this sand case. 4. 116C ISO Clay Case Results The old and new ISO Sep 2b checks for clay use the same V-H unfactored envelope but shrunk to different origins. The new ISO envelope is shrunk towards the origin (FH = 0; FV = WBF,o - BS), while the old ISO envelope was shrunk towards the origin (FH = 0; FV = 0). In both cases the bearing capacity unit checks use for the origin of the vectors F H = 0 and F V = 0,5*Q V /γ R,VH. However, γ R,VH for full embedment was 1,15 in the old version and now is 1,10. In both cases the sliding unity check is F H Q H / γ R,Hfc, where γ R,Hfc = 1.56. The key parameters for the ISO checks are: Q V = 64.4 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Q Vnet = 48.0 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Q H = 16.2 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) A s = 50.4 m 2 (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) A = 143.6 m 2 (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) B = 13.5 m (see RPSE note, Appendix 2)

D = 25.6 m (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) a = D /2.5B = 0.76 W BF,o - B S = 16.36 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Origin: F V = 0,5*Q V /γ R,VH = 29.27 MN Unfactored V-H envelopes for clay in ISO: Bearing: [F H / Q H ] 2 16 (1 - a) [F V / Q V ] 2 [1 F V / Q V ] 2 4 a [F V / Q V ] [1 F V / Q V ] = 0 Sliding: F H = Q H The SNAME Sep 2b checks for clay use an unfactored bearing capacity envelope formulation that is shrunk towards the still water reaction (F H = 0; F V = 29.70 MN). The unit checks are calculated using for the origin this same still water reaction. It is noted that SNAME has a much lower horizontal capacity as deep penetration effects are not considered. The key parameters for the SNAME checks are: Q V = 64.2 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) Q H = 8.6 MN (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) A s = 50.4 m 2 (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) A = 143.6 m 2 (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) B = 13.5 m (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) D = 24.4 m (see RPSE note, Appendix 2) a = D /2.5B = 0.723 Origin: F V = 29.70 MN Figure A5.2 shows the V-H envelopes as well as the leg reactions from Table A.5.2. It can be seen that the maximum vertical leg reaction (leeward leg in 60 deg environment plus 16.36 MN of backflow and infilling during preload) approaches but does not exceed the factored bearing capacity envelopes. It is noted that by coincidence the origin for the unity checks in the ISO New checks and SNAME checks has similar numeric values: 29.27 MN and 29.70 MN respectively.

F V (MN) 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 Leg Reaction -60 Deg Head Leg Reaction -120 Deg Head Origin -ISO New and SNAME Backflow / Infill Weight Origin -ISO Old Unfactored - ISO 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 Factored SNAME Factored -ISO New 15.00 10.00 Unfactored SNAME Factored -ISO Old 5.00 F H (MN) 0.00 0.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 17.50 Figure A5.2 V-H Envelopes for Clay Case Table A5.4 summarizes the unity checks obtained. The rig meets all the necessary foundation checks. The bearing capacity checks for ISO and SNAME appear reasonably similar for this clay case. The sliding checks in ISO are much more favorable than in SNAME in this clay case due to much greater horizontal capacity arising from deep penetration corrections included in ISO but not in SNAME.

Table A5.4 Summary of Unity Checks 116C Clay New ISO / Old ISO / New ISO / Old ISO New ISO SNAME SNAME SNAME Old ISO Bearing 0.96 0.84 0.86 0.97 1.12 0.87 Sliding 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.53 0.53 1.00