Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In-Service Response of Shallow On-Shore Wind Turbine Generator Foundation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two in-service, on-shore wind turbine generator (WTG) foundations were instrumented to monitor pressure and deformation responses of lean clay foundation soils. Field data were collected and interpreted under various WTG operational cases (e.g., startup, shutdown, and normal wind profile). The pressure distribution in the foundation soil was highly variable, both temporally and spatially, depending on the distance from the centerline and eccentricity of loads. Soil pressure changed as a function of the horizontal wind loading and trended (relative amplitude and in-phase) with wind loads. After 1.5 years of monitoring, the difference of soil deformation between maximum and minimum varied from 0.04 mm at the center of the WTG foundation to 0.09 mm on the leeward side of the predominant wind direction. Resonant column testing was conducted on undisturbed soil specimens to evaluate shear modulus and cyclic shear strain responses. The shear modulus obtained from this testing was similar to the modulus estimated by Stokoe’s equation (using the measured in situ strain of the soil). The comparisons showed that for the 0.0073% vertical strain observed in the field, the reduced shear modulus used per conventional design guidance is three times smaller than the measured value for these subgrade soils. This observation might indicate that current design specifications could lead to over-conservative designs for the rotational stiffness subjected to stress change due to the operation process. Thus, in-service response of the foundation needs to be carefully examined for a more realistic foundation design and sustainability of wind turbine structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Some or all data, models, or codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Arshad M, O’Kelly BC (2017) Model studies on monopile behavior under long-term repeated lateral loading. Int J Geomech 17(1):04016040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASCE/AWEA Recommended Practice for Compliance of Large Land-based Wind Turbine Support Structures (ASCE/AWEA RP2011) © The American Wind Energy Association.

  • Basack S, Nimbalkar S (2017) Numerical solution of single pile subjected to torsional cyclic load. Int J Geomech 17(8):04017016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basack S, Nimbalkar S (2018) Measured and predicted response of pile groups in soft clay subjected to cyclic lateral loading. Int J Geomech 18(7):04018073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biglari M, Ashayeri I (2012) An empirical model for shear modulus and damping ratio of unsaturated soils. In Proceedings 5th Asia-Pacific Conference on Unsaturated Soils, Pataya, Thailand, pp. 591–596

  • Borowicka H (1943) Über ausmittig belastete, starre platten auf elastisch-isotropem untergrund. Arch Appl Mech 14(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02084318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowles JE (1988) Foundation analysis and design. McGraw-Hill Book Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerato AB, Lutenegger AJ (2007) Scale effect of shallow foundation bearing capacity on granular material. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 133(10):1192–1202. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:10(1192)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho G, Dodds J, Santamarina JC (2006) Particle shape effects on packing density, stiffness, and strength: natural and crushed sands. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(5):591–602. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:5(591)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng L, Kutter B, Kunnath S (2014) Seismic design of rocking shallow foundations: displacement-based methodology. J Bridg Eng 19(11):43–54. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Det Norske Veritas (DNV). 2002. Guidelines for design of wind turbines. Risø National Laboratory, Copenhagen

  • Diaz-Rodriguez JA, Lopez-Molina JA (2008) Strain Thresholds in Soil Dynamics. In Proceedings of the 14th Wolrd Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 12–17 October 2008. Vol. 1.

  • Dobry R, and Vucetic M (1987) State-of-the-art report: dynamic properties and response of soft clay deposit. Proceeding of the International Symposium on the Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soil, Mexico City, Mexico, 3–14 August 1987. Edited by M. Mendoza and L. Montańez. Mexican Society for Soil Mechanics, Mexico City. Vol. 2, pp. 51–87.

  • Dong Y, Lu N, McCartney J (2016) Unified model for small strain shear modulus of variably saturated soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(9):04016039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enos C, Yilmaz M, Wu Z, Tinjum JM, and Fratta D (2018) Field and Laboratory Characterization of the Operational Response of Wind Turbine Generator Foundation Soil. In IFCEE 2018 (pp. 243–253).

  • Enos C (2018) Assessment of wind turbine foundation response using field instrumentation and dynamic laboratory testing of unsaturated site soil. MS Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison.

  • Gajan S, Kutter B (2009) Effects of moment-to-shear ratio on combined cyclic load-displacement behavior of shallow foundations from centrifuge experiments. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(8):1044–1055. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GL (2010) Rules and guidelines, IV–Industrial services. Part 1–Wind Energy, Guidelines for the Certification of Wind Turbines, Germanischer Lloyd Wind Energie GmbH, Hamburg, Germany.

  • Hao E, Liu C (2017) Evaluation and comparison of anti-impact performance to offshore wind turbine foundations: Monopile, tripod, and jacket. Ocean Eng 130:218–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin BO, Black WL (1969) Vibration modulus of normally consolidated clay: closure. J Soil Mech Found Div 95(6):1531–1537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtz RD, Kovacs WD, Sheahan TC (2011) An introduction to geotechnical engineering, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA. 2013. International Energy Agency: Technology Roadmap –Wind Energy. Available from http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Wind_2013_Roadmap.pdf. [accessed 15 February 2015].

  • IEC. 2005. International Electrotechnical Commission. 61400–1 Wind turbines- part 1: design requirements. International Standard, 1–92.

  • Ishibashi I, Zhang XJ (1993) Unified dynamic shear moduli and damping ratios of sand and clay. Soils Found 33(1):182–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwasaki T, Tatsuoka F, Yoshikazu T (1978) Shear modulus of sand under cyclic torsional shear loading. Japan Soc Soil Mech Found Eng 18(1):41–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Khosravi A, Salam S, McCartney J, Dadashi A (2016) Suction-induced hardening effects on the shear modulus of unsaturated silt. Int J Geomech 16(6):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang, P.J. 2012. Sensitivity of shallow wind turbine foundation design and soil response to geotechnical variance with construction cost implications. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI

  • Geokon Instruction Manual, Model 4430 VW Deformation Meter. Geokon Inc. New Hampshire, USA.

  • Mayne PW, Poulos HG (1999) Approximate displacement influence factors for elastic shallow foundations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 125(6):453–460. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:1(99)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan D, Ault GW (2008) Condition monitoring benefit for onshore wind turbines: sensitivity to operational parameters. IET Renew Power Gener 2(1):60–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerhof GG (1953) The bearing capacity of foundations under eccentric and inclined loads. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation. Organizing Committee ICOSOMEF. 440–445.

  • Morgan K, and Ntambakwa E (2008) Wind turbine foundation behavior and design considerations. Awea Windpower Conference, Houston, TX, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, pp. 1–14.

  • Oh WT, Vanapalli SK (2014) Semi-empirical model for estimating the small-strain shear modulus of unsaturated non-plastic sandy soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 32(2):259–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh WT, Vanapalli SK, Puppala AJ (2009) Semi-empirical model for the prediction of modulus of elasticity for unsaturated soils. Can Geotech J 46(8):903–914. https://doi.org/10.1139/T09-030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh WT, Vanapalli SK (2011) Relationship between Poisson’s ratio and soil suction for unsaturated soilsUnsaturated Soils: Theory and Practice 2011 Jotisankasa, Sawangsuriya, Soralump and Mairaing (Editors) Kasetsart University, Thailand, ISBN 978–616–7522–77–7

  • O’Kelly BC, Arshad M (2016) Offshore wind turbine foundations–analysis and design. offshore wind farms. Woodhead Publishing, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulus HG and Davis EH (1974). Elastic solutions for soil and rock mechanics. URL: http://research.engr.oregonstate.edu/usucger/PandD/PandD.htm [Accessed on May 27, 2018].

  • Ram SL and Mohana R, (2020) Simulation and numerical analysis of offshore wind turbi9ne with monopile foundation. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 872 (1), p. 012046. IOP Publishing.

  • Richards BG (1985) Moisture Flow and Equilibria in Unsaturated Soils for Shallow Foundations. Golden Jubilee of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering: Commemorative Volume. Barton, ACT: Institution of Engineers, Australia, 71– 101.

  • Richart FE, Hall JR, Woods RD (1970) Vibrations of soils and foundations. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Salciarini D, Tamagnini C (2009) A hypoplastic macroelement model for shallow foundations under monotonic and cyclic loads. Acta Geotech 4(3):163–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-009-0087-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santamarina CJ (2001) Soil behavior at the microscale: particle forces. Soil Behav Soft Ground Construct Ladd Symp, MIT 119:25–56. https://doi.org/10.1061/40659(2003)2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santamarina CJ, Klein A, Fam MA (2001) Soils and waves: particulate materials behavior, characterization and process monitoring. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawangsuriya A, Edil TB, Bosscher PJ (2009) Modulus-suction moisture relationship for compacted soils in postcompaction state. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(2):131–142. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seed HB, and Idress IM (1970) Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses. Rep. EERC-7010, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California-Berkely, Berkely, CA.

  • Serrano-González J, Lacal-Arántegui R (2016) Technological evolution of onshore wind turbines—a market-based analysis. Wind Energy 19(12):2171–2187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha S, Ravichandran N, Rahbari P (2018) Geotechnical design and design optimization of a pile-raft foundation for tall onshore wind turbines in multilayered clay. Int J Geomech 18(2):04017143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanislav L (2004) The effect of density and water content upon the dynamic properties of reconstituted moraine samples in the small strain range. Academic Open Internet Journal, Vol. 11. Available from http://www.acadjournal.com/2004/V11/Part7/p1/index.htm [accessed 6 January 2016].

  • Stokoe KH, II, Darendeli MB, Andrus RD, and Brown LT (1999) Dynamic soil properties: Laboratory, field and correlation studies. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 21–25 June 1999, pp. 811–845.

  • Stokoe KH, II, Darendeli MB, Gilbert RB, Menq F-Y, and Choi W-K (2004) Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material damping curves. In Proceedings of the NSF/PEER Int. Workshop on Uncertainties in Nonlinear Soil Properties and their Impact on Modeling Dynamic Soil Response, Univ. of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, Accessed from http://peer.berkeley.edu/lifelines/Workshop304/ [25 December 2015].

  • Tatsuoka F, Presti DL, and Kohata Y (1995) Deformation characteristics of soil and soft rocks under monotonic and cyclic loads and their relationships. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of recent Advances in Geotechnics, Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics. University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, MO. 3, 851–879.

  • Tinjum JM, Christensen RW (2010) Site investigation, characterization and assessment for wind turbine design and construction. In: JohnSorensen Jens D NN (ed) Wind energy systems. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinjum JM, Lang P (2012) Wind energy geotechnics. Geo-Strata 16(1):18–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsukamoto Y, Ishihara K, Sawada S, Fujiwara S (2012) Settlement of rigid circular foundations during seismic shaking in shaking table tests. Int J Geomech 12(4):462–470. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vucetic M, Dobry R (1991) Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. J Geotech Eng 117(1):89–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu S, Gray D, Richart FE (1984) Capillary effects on dynamic modulus of sands and silts. J Geotech Eng 110(9):1188–1203. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1984)110:9(1188)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz M, Schubert S, Tinjum JM, and Fratta D (2014) Foundation soil response to wind turbine generator loading. In Proceedings of the Geo-Congress 2014 Technical Papers, Atlanta, GA, 23–26 February 2014, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, pp. 1493–1502.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Civil Engineering, Bitlis Eren University, Bitlis, Turkey

    Mehmet Yilmaz

  2. Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA

    Jongwan Eun

  3. Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    James M. Tinjum & Dante Fratta

Authors
  1. Mehmet Yilmaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jongwan Eun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James M. Tinjum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dante Fratta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jongwan Eun.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yilmaz, M., Eun, J., Tinjum, J.M. et al. In-Service Response of Shallow On-Shore Wind Turbine Generator Foundation. Geotech Geol Eng 40, 977–994 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-021-01938-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-021-01938-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation