作者中心
专家审稿
编委审稿
主编审稿
STUDY ON HORIZONTAL BEARING CAPACITY OF SUCTION BUCKET FOUNDATION FOR OFFSHORE WIND POWER IN SOIL
-
摘要: 砂性土地基中海上风机吸力桶基础水平承载特性对海上风机稳定性至关重要。本文通过室内模型试验，对不同荷载循环比作用下砂性土地基吸力桶基础水平承载特性进行了研究。试验表明：当循环荷载比ζb=0.33时，吸力桶基础累积变形在循环过程中变化不大; 当循环荷载比ζb=1.0时，吸力桶基础累积变形随循环次数增加一直增大并且有继续增大的趋势，循环结束后，ζb=0.33及ζb=1.0的循环累积变形分别为0.006D、0.149D。在ζb=0.33及ζb=1.0的水平循环荷载作用下，50次循环结束后累积旋转角度分别为不同循环荷载比作用下第1次循环累积转角的1.43倍和1.76倍，随着循环次数增加，旋转中心的位置逐渐向上移动，最终稳定在砂面以下0.8L处左右。研究结果可为砂性土地基海上风机吸力桶基础的设计与施工提供理论依据。Abstract: Compared with pile foundation,suction caisson has the advantages of convenient construction and recyclability,and is more suitable for deep sea area. Horizontal cyclic response is important for the stability analysis of suction caisson as it suffers the long-term wave loads in service period. This paper presents the results of a series of 1g model tests under horizontal cyclic loading in sand. The cumulative deformation,rotation angle and rotation center of model caisson are discussed in detail. Test results indicates that the horizontal displacement of model caisson in sand accumulates with increase of cyclic numbers and horizontal loading. Under the horizontal cyclic loads of ζb=0.33 and 1.0,the change rule of bucket caisson rotation angle and rotation center is consistent with the cumulative deformation. After 50 cycles,the cumulative rotation angle is 1.43 times and 1.76 times of the first cycle under different cyclic load ratios. With the increase of the number of cycles,the position of the rotation center gradually moves upward,and finally stabilized at about 0.8L below the sand surface. This study can provide theoretical basis for the design of suction caisson as offshore wind power foundation in sand.
-
Key words:
- Sand /
- Suction caisson /
- Horizontal circulation /
- Cumulative deformation /
- Center of rotation
-
图 6 0.01kN水平力循环过程荷载-位移关系
Figure 6. Load displacement relationship of 0.01kN horizontal load
图 7 0.03kN水平力循环过程荷载-位移关系
Figure 7. Load displacement relationship of 0.03kN horizontal load
图 8 桶形基础累积变形与循环次数N之间的关系
Figure 8. Relationship between cumulative deformation of bucket foundation and number of cycles N
表 1 土粒试样物理力学参数
Table 1. Mechanical parameters of sand
物理参数 平均粒径d50/mm 最小干密度ρd，min /g·cm-3 最大干密度ρd，max /g·cm-3 相对密度Dr 内摩擦角φ /(°) 重度γ /kN·m-3 量值 0.71 1.37 1.72 51.39% 34 20 
下载: 导出CSV
-
Anderson K H, Murff J D, Randolph M F, et al. 2005. Suction anchors for deepwater applications[C]//Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics. Chen W, Randolph M F. 2007. External radial stress changes and axial capacity for suction caissons in soft clay[J]. Géotechnique, 57 (6): 499-511. doi: 10.1680/geot.2007.57.6.499 Cheng L P, Zhang Y K, Li D Y. 2020. Review of uplift capacity and pullout mechanism of suction caisson for offshore foundation[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 28 (3): 639-649. Cox J A, O'Loughlin C D, Cassidy M, et al. 2014. Centrifuge study on the cyclic performance of caissons in sand[J]. International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 14 (4): 99-115. doi: 10.1680/ijpmg.14.00016 Ding H, Zhang P, Le C. 2010. Behavior of bucket foundations for offshore wind turbines under cyclic horizontal loading[C]//Proceedings of the E-Product E-Service and E-Entertainment(ICEEE). Foglia A, Ibsen L B. 2016. Monopod bucket foundations under cyclic lateral loading[J]. International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering, 26 (2): 109-115. doi: 10.17736/ijope.2016.jcr48 Gao Z A, Li P, Xiao J J, et al. 2020. Evaluation of shear strength of unsaturated loess using conventional direct shear test[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 28 (2): 344-351. He Y P, Tan J H. 2002. The development history and typical application of bucket foundation[J]. China Offshore Platform, 17 (6): 10-14. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/90530X/200206/7276872.html Hossain M S, Cassidy M J, Hu Y. 2016. T-bar to spudcan design approach in single-layer clays and calcareous silts[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(7): 04016025. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001486 Houlsby G T. 2016. Interactions in offshore foundation design[J]. Géotechnique, 66 (10): 791-825. doi: 10.1680/jgeot.15.RL.001 Hu R L, Li X, Wang Y, et al. 2020. Research on engineering geomechanics and structural effect of soil-rock mixture[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 28 (2): 255-281. Iskander M, Ei-gharbawy S, Olson R. 2002. Performance of suction caissons in sand and clay[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39 (3): 576-584. doi: 10.1139/t02-030 Kang S, Zhao Q H, Peng S Q, et al. 2019. Effect of gravel-soil characters on lateral bearing capacity of pile foundation[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 27 (3): 559-568. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-GCDZ201903013.htm Kelly R B, Houlsby G T, Byrne B W. 2006. A comparison of field and laboratory tests of caisson foundations in sand and clay[J]. Géotechnique, 56 (9): 617-626. doi: 10.1680/geot.2006.56.9.617 LeBlanc C, Byrne B W, Houlsby G T. 2010. Response of stiff piles to random two-way lateral loading[J]. Géotechnique, 60 (9): 715-721. doi: 10.1680/geot.09.T.011 Li D Y, Chen Q J, Zhang Y K, et al. 2020. Review of horizontal loading on suction caisson of offshore wind turbines[J]. The Ocean Engineering, 38 (4): 137-147. Li D Y, Zhang J R, Zhang Y K, et al. 2021. Bearing behavior and accumulated rotation of modified suction caisson(MSC)in saturated sand under cyclic loading[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 42 (3): 611-619. Li D Y, Zhang Y K, Gao Y F, et al. 2012. Model tests on penetration of suction anchors in medium-coarse sand[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 34 (12): 2277-2283. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/95758X/201212/44164368.html Li X C, Sun D A, Xu Y F. 2019. Study on correlations of physical and mechanical property indexes of Yangzhou clays[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 27 (2): 333-340. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-GCDZ201902014.htm Luo L B, Wang Y, Huang J Q, et al. 2021. Study on effects of cyclic loading on lateral capacity of suction bucket foundations[J]. Acta Energiae Solaris Sinica, 42 (3): 142-147. Mansur C I, Kaufman R I. 1956. Pile tests, low-sill structures, Old River, Louisiana[J]. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 82 (4): 1-33. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/288847369_Pile_tests_low-sill_structure_Old_River_Louisiana Tran M. 2005. Installation of suction caissons in dense sand and the influence of silt and cemented layers[D]. Sydney: University of Sydney. Wang Z, Du S J, Wang D Y. 2009. Numerical analysis of the ultimate bearing capacity behavior of Spar platform's suction foundation[J]. The Ocean Engineering, 27 (3): 54-61. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-HYGC200903008.htm Wu K, Luan M T, Fan Q L, et al. 2008. Numerical analysis of bearing capacity behavior of bucket foundation based on elasto-plastic FEM[J]. Journal of Dalian University of Technology, 48 (5): 702-707. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-DLLG200805014.htm Zhang Z, Cheng X. 2017. Predicting the cyclic behaviour of suction caisson foundations using the finite element method[J]. Ships and Offshore Structures, 12 (7): 900-909. doi: 10.1080/17445302.2016.1158686 Zhu B, Byrne B W, Houlsby G T. 2013. Long-term lateral cyclic response of suction caisson foundations in sand[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 139 (1): 73-83. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000738 Zhu B, Kong D Q, Tong J G, et al. 2011. Model tests on penetration and pullout of suction caissons in silt[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 33 (7): 1045-1053. doi: 10.1139/t11-021 Zhu B, Zhang W L, Ying P P, et al. 2014. Deflection-based bearing capacity of suction caisson foundations of offshore wind turbines[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 140(5): 04014013. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001107 Zhu W B, Dai G L, Yuan L J, et al. 2018. Experimental study on the long-term horizontal bearing characteristics of suction caisson foundation[J]. The Ocean Engineering, 36 (3): 26-32. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-HYGC201803004.htm 陈林平, 张雨坤, 李大勇. 2020. 吸力基础抗拔与拔出机理的研究进展[J]. 工程地质学报, 28 (3): 639-649. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2019-024 高志傲, 李萍, 肖俊杰, 等. 2020. 利用常规直剪试验评价非饱和黄土抗剪强度[J]. 工程地质学报, 28 (2): 344-351. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2019-238 何炎平, 谭家华. 2002. 筒型基础的发展历史和典型用途[J]. 中海洋平台, 17 (6): 10-14. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGHY200206003.htm 胡瑞林, 李晓, 王宇, 等. 2020. 土石混合体工程地质力学特性及其结构效应研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 28 (2): 255-281. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2020-077 康舜, 赵其华, 彭社琴, 等. 2019. 碎石土土体性状对桩基水平承载能力的影响[J]. 工程地质学报, 27 (3): 559-568. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2018-231 李大勇, 陈庆剑, 张雨坤, 等. 2020. 海上风机吸力基础的水平受荷研究综述[J]. 海洋工程, 38 (4): 137-147. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HYGC202004017.htm 李大勇, 张景睿, 张雨坤, 等. 2021. 饱和砂土中裙式吸力基础水平循环特性和累积转角变化规律[J]. 岩土力学, 42 (3): 611-619. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX202103003.htm 李大勇, 张雨坤, 高玉峰, 等. 2012. 中粗砂中吸力锚的负压沉贯模型试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 34 (12): 2277-2283. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTGC201212022.htm 李旭昶, 孙德安, 徐永福. 2019. 扬州土物理与力学性质指标的相关性分析[J]. 工程地质学报, 27 (2): 333-340. doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2017-486 罗仑博, 王媛, 黄景琦, 等. 2021. 海洋循环荷载对吸力桶基础水平承载力的影响研究[J]. 太阳能学报, 42 (3): 142-147. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TYLX202103021.htm 王志, 杜守继, 王德禹. 2009. Spar平台吸力式基础极限承载特性数值分析[J]. 海洋工程, 27 (3): 54-61. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9865.2009.03.008 武科, 栾茂田, 范庆来, 等. 2008. 桶形基础承载性能弹塑性有限元数值分析[J]. 大连理工大学学报, 48 (5): 702-707. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DLLG200805014.htm 朱斌, 孔德琼, 童建国, 等. 2011. 粉土中吸力式桶形基础沉贯及抗拔特性试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 33 (7): 1045-1053. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTGC201107008.htm 朱文波, 戴国亮, 袁龙锦, 等. 2018. 吸力式沉箱基础长期水平荷载作用下承载特性试验研究[J]. 海洋工程, 36 (3): 26-32. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HYGC201803004.htm -
点击查看大图
图(11) / 表(1)
计量
- 文章访问数: 342
- HTML全文浏览量: 63
- PDF下载量: 39
- 被引次数: 0
