Analysis of Offshore Rock Socketed Monopile Foundations Considering Stiffness Degradation

Conference paper
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)


There are a number of offshore wind farms where the monopile is socketed into rock layers. Since it is socketed into rock, it may behave different from monopile embedded in soil. A numerical modelling of rock socketed monopile is done using finite element (FE) software Abaqus. A stiffness degradation method (SDM) is applied to FE model in order to predict the behaviour under cyclic loading conditions. Parametric studies are carried out by varying rock socketed depth (d), length of monopile below seabed (L), intensity of horizontal loading (H) and subsoil conditions to evaluate the long-term permanent deformation of offshore rock socketed monopile foundations. Suitable permanent deformation factors are proposed for offshore rock socketed monopiles for the first time in the literature. It is observed from the results that the deformation behaviour of the monopile changes from stiff to flexible with increase in rock socketing and in turn the pile head deflection going down. From the bending moment diagram, flexible and stiff behaviour of monopile can be identified and is an indicator of curvature of the deflection line of pile.


Cyclic loading Rock socketed monopiles Stiffness degradation method Numerical modelling Lateral deformation 



This work has been carried out with scholarship funded by DAAD for Ms. Navy Basheer for a period of six months. This work is a result of collaboration between Institute for Geotechnical Engineering, LUH, Germany and Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Delhi, India.


  1. Abaqus/Standard User’s Manual, Version 6.11-3: Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corporation, Providence, Rhode Island, USA, 2014Google Scholar
  2. Achmus, M.: Design of axially and laterally loaded piles for the support of offshore wind energy converters. In: Indian Geotechnical Conference—2010, GEOtrendz, IGS Mumbai Chapter & IIT Bombay, 16–18 Dec 2010Google Scholar
  3. Achmus, M., Kuo, Y.-S., Abdel-Rahman, K.: Behaviour of monopile foundations under cyclic lateral load. Comput. Geotech. 36(5), 725–735 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Achmus, M., Abdel-Rahman, K., Kuo, Y.-S.: Design of monopile foundations for offshore wind energy plants. In: Proceedings of the 11th Baltic Geotechnical conference of Geotechnics in Maritime Engineering, 15–18 Sept 2008, Gdansk, PolandGoogle Scholar
  5. Achmus, M., Albiker, J.: Prediction of accumulated deformations of cyclic laterally loaded piles in sand. In: Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Engineering (NUMGE), Delft, The Netherlands, 2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Albiker, J., Achmus, M.: Cyclic performance of horizontally loaded piles in layered subsoil. In: Proceedings of the 12th Baltic Sea Geotechnical Conference, Rostock, Germany, May 31st–June 2nd, 2012Google Scholar
  7. Arshi, H.S., Stone, K.J.L.: An investigation of a rock socketed pile with an integral bearing plate founded over weak rock. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference of Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 12–15 Sept 2011, Athens, Greece, 2011Google Scholar
  8. Choy, K.K., Pang, T.C.P., Li, W.W., Tse, S.H.V., Lam, S.C., Kung, W.C.F., Lau, C.W.J., Pappin, J.W., Ng, H.K., Lee, W.H., Wong, N.K.P., Lee, K.K.P., Cheng, M.L.: Code of Practice for Foundations. Technical Report. Buildings Department, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong (2004)Google Scholar
  9. Jaeger, J.C., Cook, N.G.W., Zimmerman, R.: Fundamentals of rock mechanics, 4th Edition, (2008) ISBN: 978-0-632-05759-7, 488 pages. April 2007, Wiley-BlackwellGoogle Scholar
  10. Kellezi, L., Hansen, P.B.: Static and dynamic analysis of offshore monopile windmill foundation. In: Proceedings of the BGA International Conference on Foundations: Innovation, observation, design and practice, 2–5 Sept 2003, Dundee, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Little, R.L., Briaud, J.L.: Full Scale Cyclic Lateral Load Tests on Six Single Piles in Sand. Miscellaneous paper GL-88-27. Texas: Geotechnical Division, Texas A&M University (1988)Google Scholar
  12. Liu, X., Zhang, D., Su, Y.: A method for computing embedded depth in rock of the laterally loaded rock-socketed piles. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference, 2011Google Scholar
  13. Schmoor, K.A., Achmus, M.: On the validation of reliability and partial safety factors for axially loaded piles in dense sand. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Geotechnical Safety and Risk (4th ISGSR), 4–6 December 2013, Hong Kong, 2013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Srinivasamurthy, B.R., Pujar, K.L.: Socketing of bored piles in rock. In: Proceedings of the Indian Geotechnical Conference (IGC) 2009, Guntur, India, 2009Google Scholar
  15. Thieken, K., Achmus, M., Schmoor, K.: On the ultimate limit state design proof for laterally loaded piles. Geotechnik 37(1), 19–31 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wang, J.-H., Chen, J.-J., Li, Y.-L., Fan, W.: The behavior of large diameter rock-socketed piles under lateral loads. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 1–6 July 2007, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (IIT) DelhiHauz Khas, New DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Institute for Geotechnical Engineering (IGtH), Leibniz University of HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations