Proceedings of the Twenty-second (2012) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

Rhodes, Greece, June 1722, 2012

Copyright 2012 by the International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE)
ISBN 978-1-880653-944 (Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set)

www.isope.org

Design of Piles for Offshore Wind Energy Foundations with Respect to Horizontal Loading
Martin Achmus and Khalid Abdel-Rahman
Institute for Geotechnical Engineering, Leibniz University of Hannover
Hannover, Germany

ABSTRACT
Monopiles and tripod or jacket structures are favorized foundation
solutions for offshore wind energy converters. The piles of these
structures are subject to intensive cyclic loading by wind and wave
actions. Degradation of pile capacity as well as pile stiffness and
accumulation of deflections can occur and has to be considered in the
design according to German guidelines. The state of knowledge
regarding the behavior of piles under cyclic horizontal loading is
discussed and methods to account for cyclic load effects in the design
are presented.

KEY WORDS: Offshore Wind Energy; monopiles; cyclic loading;

displacement accumulation; pile design.

Fig. 1. Principle sketches of a monopile (left) and a jacket foundation

(right)

INTRODUCTION
In the North Sea and the Baltic Sea in Europe a vast number of offshore
wind farms are being planned and several have already been installed in
recent years. In the beginning, in most cases wind farms were erected in
moderate water depths (less than 20m) and monopile foundations have
been built as support structures for the wind tower and the turbine.
Diameters of up to 5m have been realized recently, and monopiles with
diameters of 6m or even more are under planning.

Design methods and experience with offshore piles exist mainly from
structures built by the oil and gas industry. However, the loading
conditions for offshore wind mill foundations are different. The vertical
loads are much smaller than for usual oil or gas platforms, and thus the
horizontal loads at least for monopiles are of similar magnitude
compared to the vertical loads. This means that the extremely cyclic
nature of wind and wave forces is much more important than for very
heavy structures. Due to that, consideration of cyclic load effects is
extremely important. According to German guidelines, the effects of
cyclic loading on the pile behavior have to be considered explicitly in
the design. In that, a 35h-design storm has to be taken into account with
respect to degradation of capacity. For the estimation of deflection,
cyclic load spectra representing all loads over the structures lifetime
have to be considered. An accurate prediction of permanent deformations is of particular importance for monopile foundations, since
wind energy converters are relatively sensitive to permanent tilting.

A monopile consists of a single open steel pipe pile of large diameter

which is driven into the seabed. The tower is connected to the monopile
by a transition piece located above the water level (Fig. 1, left). This
type of foundation transfers the loads from wind and waves mainly by
horizontal stresses into the ground and is believed to be suitable for
water depths of up to 25m.
For larger water depths, steel frame structures (jackets with four legs or
tripods with three legs) can be used, which are supported by four or
three piles located in the edges of the construction (Fig. 1, right).
Although the axial loads are usually design-driving regarding the
required lengths of these piles, also for these piles cyclic horizontal
loading has to be considered in the design.

The objective of the paper in hand is to present the state of knowledge

regarding the behavior of piles under cyclic horizontal loading and to
give recommendations for practical design. Open questions are
addressed and thus research needs are identified.

143

BEHAVIOR OF PILES UNDER CYCLIC HORIZONTAL

LOADING

p y 1 / 3
u
p= 2 y
c

pu

p-y Method
The usual design procedure for foundations of offshore wind energy
converters in Germany is given in the Germanische Lloyd (GL) rules
and regulations (GL, 2005). In these regulations, concerning the
behavior of piles under horizontal loading reference is made to the
regulation code of the American Petroleum Institute (API, 2000). In the
API code the p-y method is recommended for the design of horizontally
loaded piles. Also the Scandinavian guideline DNV (2007) proposes
the p-y method for the design of horizontally loaded piles.

In principle, the p-y method is a subgrade modulus method with nonlinear and depth-dependent load-deformation (p-y) characteristics of
the soil springs. API (2000) and DNV (2007) describe the construction
of p-y-curves for soft and stiff clay as well as for sandy soils.

(1a)

pud = c3 D ' z

(1b)

for y 8 y c

(4)

for y > 8 y c

Here, yc = 2.5 50 D. 50 is the strain which occurs at one-half the

maximum stress in undrained triaxial compression tests with
undisturbed samples.
For cyclic loading, the maximum resistance in depths z > zR is
limited to p = 0.72 pu. For shallow depths (z < zR) a softening, i.e. a
further reduction of the soil reaction p with increasing deflection,
has to be considered for deflections y > 3 yc:
1/ 3

pu y

2 y c

y 3yc

p = 0.72 p u 1 (1 z / z R )
12 y c

0.72 p u

According to these guidelines, p-y-curves for sandy soils can be

derived as follows:
The maximum mobilized soil reaction force per unit length of the
pile pu depends on the regarded depth under sea bed z, the
submerged unit weight of the soil , the pile diameter D and on the
angle of internal friction of the sand:
pus = (c1 z + c2 D ) ' z

empirical constant ranging from 0.25 to 0.5 dependent on the soils

consistency.
The p-y curve for static loading is given as follows:

for y 3 y c

for 3 y c < y 15 y c

(5)

for y > 15 y c

The general shape of the p-y curves is depicted in Fig. 2. It should

be noted that the approach gives an infinite initial slope of the p-y
curve. In cases were initial stiffness matters, alternative approaches
given in DNV (2007) for the initial slope shall be used.

The first mentioned equation applies to small depths (pus) and the
second equation to larger depths (pud), the smaller of both values is
to be considered. The influence of the internal friction angle is
described by the factors c1, c2 and c3, which are given in API (2000)
dependent on the angle of internal friction of the sand.
The p-y-curve is described by the following equation:

kz
p = A p u tanh
y
A pu

(2)
Fig. 2. p-y curves for cohesive soil according to DNV (2007)

with A = 3.0 0.8 z/D for static loading and A = 0.9 for cyclic
loading.
Here p is the soil resistance per unit length of the pile and y is the
horizontal deflection. The parameter k also given in API (2000)
describes the initial modulus of subgrade reaction and is dependent
on the relative density ID and with that on the angle of internal
friction.

The approach was proposed by Matlock (1970) based on load tests with
piles with a diameter of ca. 0.3m in lightly overconsolidated clays.
The p-y method was used successfully over decades in the design of
offshore structures. However, no experience exists with the application
to monopiles with very large diameter. Most applications and also the
pile load tests used for the calibration of the p-y approaches were done
with flexible piles. Monopiles have a very large bending stiffness and
behave thus more like rigid piles, which means that a significant
deflection of the pile toe (toe kick) usually occurs under extreme
loading.

The method was originally derived by Reese et al. (1974) based on the
results of a number of pile load tests (Cox et al. 1974). The piles in
these tests had a diameter of 0.61m. Murchison & ONeill (1984)
modified the approach by introducing the tanh-function. The parameter
A is a calibration factor introduced to match the theoretical approach
for the maximum soil reaction pu with the experimental results.

Wiemann et al. (2004) showed that the p-y approach for sand
overestimates the soil stiffness for large diameter piles in larger depths.
This has a minor effect for flexible piles, since here the deflections in
larger depths are very small or zero. However, for very stiff piles this
overestimation matters. Abdel-Rahman & Achmus (2005) and also
Achmus et al. (2008) carried out numerical simulations and showed
that the p-y method for monopiles in sand significantly underpredicts
pile head deflections. Recently, Soerensen et al. (2010) proposed an
approach with under-linear and diameter-dependent increase of the
initial stiffness of the p-y curves, based on numerical simulations.

For cohesive soils, the following p-y approach is given in DNV (2007):
The static ultimate lateral resistance shall be calculated as
(3 c + ' z ) D + J cu z
pu = u
9 cu D

for 0 < z < z R

for z > z R

(3)

Here zR is a transition depth, below which the first term exceeds

9 cu D. cu is the undrained shear strength of the soil, and J is an

144

Augustesen et al. (2010) applied this approach to monopiles from the

Horns Rev wind farm in Denmark and found also that the original p-y
method underpredicts pile deflections.

modified p-y approach can then be used for the design of the other
monopiles in the wind farm.
Of course the material law used for the soil in the simulations must
be capable to predict the pile behavior sufficiently accurate. To
check that, a comparison of the results for a small-diameter pile
with the results from p-y method calculations can be carried out.

Fig. 3 left shows the deflection lines for monopiles with different
diameters in homogeneous dense sand, derived once by the p-y method
and once by a numerical simulation with an elastoplastic material law
for the sand. To ensure a similar pile behaviour, different pile lengths
were examined, and typical service loads for the different pile
geometries were applied.

Both methods have already been used in wind farm projects with
monopile foundations. The latter procedure is elucidated in Fig. 4. First
the numerical model is validated by comparison of results for a pile
with an ordinary (small) diameter. Then the large-diameter pile is
analyzed and a modified p-y approach is seeked which predicts similar
deflections as obtained in the numerical simulation.

The stiffness parameters of the numerical model were calibrated by

comparison with the results of the p-y method for the pile with a
diameter of 1.5m. Thus, the deflection lines of both methods are almost
identical for this case. The results show that for larger diameters the p-y
method underestimates the pile deflections. For a pile with a diameter
of 4m, the deviation is 27% with respect to pile head deflection. For the
pile with a diameter of 7.5m, the respective deviation is 38%.
Fig. 3 right compares the numerically obtained pile deflection lines for
the D = 7.5m pile to the results obtained by the above mentioned
approaches of Wiemann et al. (2004) and Soerensen et al. (2010). The
results obtained here are in good agreement with the Wiemann
approach, whereas the approach of Soerensen et al. predicts an even
larger diameter effect.

Fig. 4. Principle procedure for the determination of a modified p-y

approach for large-diameter piles

Fig. 3. Comparison of the pile deflection lines for different pile

diameters, calculated by FE and p-y method

Another limitation of the p-y method regards the consideration of cyclic

load effects. The p-y approaches described above account for cyclic
load effects just by using another parameter A in the case of sand (see.
Eq. 2) or in limiting or decreasing p-values in the case of cohesive soil
(see Fig. 2). This results in reduced capacity and reduced stiffness of
the pile-soil system. However, the explicit number of load cycles is not
considered. In the pile tests used for the calibration of the p-y
approaches only a limited number of cycles was applied. In the tests of
Reese et al. (1974) for piles in sand at maximum 200 and in most tests
much less cycles were applied. Due to that, the p-y method is usually
assumed to be valid for up to 100 cycles.

It must thus be stated that there is an urgent need of research in order to

develop and validate new p-y approaches applicable also to very stiff
pile-soil systems. At the time being, the following ways might be taken
in order to consider the shortcomings of the p-y method for monopiles
in the design:
An increased bandwidth of soil parameters might be considered in
the design. Usually, upper and lower bound soil profiles are applied
in the design to account for the uncertainty in the determination of
soil parameters. Further uncertainties resulting from the design
model can be accounted by using a larger bandwidth of parameters.
For instance, a decrease of the angle of internal friction by only 2 or
3 induces a significant decrease of soil reactions in sand and can
thus account for additional model uncertainties.
The load-deflection behavior of a monopile can be analyzed by a
numerical simulation in order to quantify the error in the p-y
approach for the system under consideration. This can be done for a
number of reference locations in a wind farm, and from the results a
suitable modification of the p-y parameters can be identified. This

For piles supporting offshore wind towers, up to 109 load cycles have to
be considered over the structures lifetime of usually 20 or 25 years.
Although the load amplitudes vary and the largest part of the cycles
have small amplitudes, the question has to be answered how the actual
number of cyclic loads can be considered in the design. An important
aspect in that regard is how to determine the minimum pile length to
ensure sufficient stability, i.e. limited deflections, under cyclic load
action.

145

Here, Tb and Tc are dimensionless parameters depending on the

magnitude of the cyclic load, the relative density of the sand and the
type of cyclic loading (see LeBlanc 2009). s is the pile head rotation
under static load.

Accumulation of Deflections
It is known from different experimental investigations that the
deflections of a horizontally loaded pile increase under one-way cyclic
loading. As an example, model test results of Hettler (1981) for flexible
piles in homogeneous sand are shown in Fig. 5.

Lin & Liao (1999) proposed to determine the parameter t in Eq. 8 with
the following equation:
t = 0,032

In general, the increase of head deflection can be described by the

following equation:
y N = y1 f N ( N )

Here yN and y1 are the horizontal pile head deflections after N load
cycles and after 1 load cycle (static loading), respectively. fN(N) is a
function which describes the increase of deflections. As long as the
cyclic load amplitude is well below the ultimate pile capacity, sedation
behavior can be expected, which means that the deflection rate
decreases with increasing number of load cycles. The most common
functions for piles under cyclic loading that are found in literature are
of the exponential type such as Eq. 7 (e.g. Little & Briaud 1988) and of
logarithmic type such as Eq. 8 (e.g. Hettler 1981):
(7)

f N = 1 + t ln N

(8)

(10)

with l 0 = 5 EI / n h (elastic length).

(6)

fN = N m

l0

Here, l is the pile length, EI is the piles bending stiffness and nh is a

parameter determining the subgrade modulus ks of the soil for static
load, which is assumed to increase linearly with depth z: ks(z) = nh z. ,
and are correction factors taking the relative density of the soil, the
pile installation method and the type of cyclic loading into account, see
Lin & Liao (1999).
The approach of Lin & Liao (1999) is the only one which takes the
stiffness of the pile into account. From Eq. 10, a smaller accumulation
rate results for stiff piles with a large elastic length. However, the few
existing experimental results show the opposite trend, i.e. the
accumulation rate for stiff or rigid piles is larger than for flexible piles.
Moreover, a layering of the subsoil as usually present will affect the
pile behavior under cyclic loads. Thus, several questions remain open
and further research is needed to develop generally applicable empirical
relations.

Here m and t are empirical degradation parameters. Assuming that

these parameters (m and t) are constants, Equations 7 and 8 imply that
the function of load cycle number is independent of the load amplitude.
Peralta & Achmus (2010) found, based on model tests, that the
exponential function of displacement increase with respect to number
of load cycles better fits the cyclic displacement curves of almost rigid
piles while the logarithmic function better fits the displacement curves
of flexible piles.

Stiffness Degradation Method

The stiffness degradation method (SDM) developed by the authors and
co-workers is a method based on a combination of a finite element
simulation of the pile-soil interaction and an evaluation of drained
cyclic triaxial tests. For details reference is made to Achmus et al.
(2009).
In cyclic drained triaxial tests, the accumulation of plastic strains with
the number of cycles under different loading conditions can be
observed. This increase of plastic strain can be interpreted as a decrease
in soil secant stiffness. Assessing the stress conditions in the distinct
elements and introducing the stiffness degradation obtained by
comparison with the cyclic test results in the finite element model
yields the accumulated deformations of the pile-soil system. This is the
basic concept of this model.
In the numerical simulation, an elastoplastic material law with MohrCoulomb failure criterion and a stress-dependent stiffness approach is
applied. This simulation model forms the basis for the cyclic analysis.
The degradation stiffness approach to account for cyclic loading effects
is elucidated in Fig. 6. In a cyclic triaxial test, an increase of the plastic
axial strain can be observed. Assuming the elastic strain to be
negligible, the degradation rate of secant stiffness after first cycle Es1
and Nth cycle EsN can be presented by the plastic axial strains after first
cycle acp,N=1 and after Nth cycle acp,N according to the following
equation:

Fig. 5. Model test results of Hettler (1981)

These empirical equations take the number of load cycles explicitly into
account. However, only one parameter governs the displacement
accumulation, and it is more or less unknown how this parameter is
affected by soil, geometry and loading conditions.
LeBlanc (2009) carried out model tests with an almost rigid monopile
and derived the following approach for the increase of the pile head
rotation (N):
( N )
= Tb Tc N 0.31
s

E sN cp , N =1
a
E s1
cp , N
a

(9)

146

(11)

Fig. 6. Degradation of secant modulus under cyclic loading in the pilesoil model (schematic)

Fig. 7. Schematic sketch of the determination of degradation stiffness in

the pile-soil system

The accumulation of plastic strains in a cyclic triaxial test can be

estimated from a semi-empirical approach of Huurman (1996). With
that, the degradation of stiffness can be described using two material
parameters b1 and b2 as follows:
b2
E sN cp , N =1
= a
= N b1 ( X )
E s1
cp , N

By back-calculation of model tests it was shown that the method can

well capture permanent deformation responses of a soil element and of
a pile-soil system (Achmus et al. 2009, Kuo 2008).

In Fig. 8, calculation results are depicted for a monopile with a

diameter of 4m embedded in dense sand. A steel pipe pile with a wall
thickness of 46mm was considered. A horizontal load was applied with
a moment arm of 37.9m. The load magnitude was chosen to 40% of the
ultimate load. The deflection lines depicted in Fig. 8 top show that the
monopile with an embedded length of 15m behaves almost rigid,
whereas the pile with an embedded length of 21m behaves more
flexible.

(12)

Here N is the number of load cycles and X is the cyclic stress ratio
defined by Huurman (1996) for cohesionless material as follows:

X =

1,cyc
1, sf

(13)

The stiffness degradation method was applied, using the typical

parameters b1 and b2 for dense sand stated above. In Fig. 8 bottom the
relative increases (with regard to the static deflection) of pile head
displacement are shown. These curves can be interpreted as a measure
of the cyclic performance of a pile. The longer flexible pile (L=21m)
has a greater deflection under cyclic load, but it performs better than
the shorter and almost rigid pile (L=15m) under cyclic loading. Thus,
the function fN(N) (cf. Equations 7 and 8) is obviously also dependent
on the pile-soil system, i.e. the relative stiffness of the pile.

where 1,sf is the major principal stress at static failure state and 1,cyc is
the major principal stress for the cyclic stress state under consideration.
The cyclic stress ratio is thus dependent on the confining pressure and
on the cyclic stress level.
From cyclic triaxial test results documented in the literature, typical
regression parameters b1 and b2 were found for dense sand to be b1 =
0.20, b2 = 5.76 and for medium dense sand b1 = 0.16, b2 = 0.38 (Kuo
2008).

The calculated performance curves can be well described by the

exponential equation type given in Eq. 7. The parameter m is m=0.145
for the shorter pile and m=0.123 for the longer pile. These values are
plausible. Little & Briaud (1988) reported measured m-values for long
and flexible piles between 0.04 and 0.09, whereas from results of
Long & Vanneste (1994) m-values for rigid piles between 0.10 and
0.25 can be derived. For a driven pile in dense sand, the
Long & Vanneste-approach yields m=0.136.

A problem to be dealt with is that the Equations 11 and 12 are valid for
triaxial test conditions with isotropic initial stress conditions and a
constant confining pressure 3 during cyclic loading. In the pile-soil
system, the initial stress conditions (before application of the horizontal
load) are anisotropic and the minor principal stress in the elements as
well as the direction of the principal stress axes in general change with
the application of the load. To overcome this problem, a characteristic
cyclic stress ratio Xc is defined here as

XC =

X (1) X ( 0)
1 X ( 0)

(14)

Consideration of variable load amplitudes

The empirical prediction methods and also the presented numerical
method demand the definition of a cyclic swell (one-way) load with a
corresponding number of load cycles. Actually, the horizontal loads to
be considered for offshore monopiles are highly variable. To apply the
methods, a constant load with an equivalent number of load cycles must
be defined.

Here the index (1) means the cyclic stress ratio at loading phase and the
index (0) means at unloading phase (cf Fig. 7). At the initial (and
unloading) phase, only the vertical load V due to the tower weight is
considered, and the lateral load H is applied subsequently in the loading
phase. The characteristic cyclic stress ratio is derived from the
difference between the stress ratios in the loading and the unloading
phase. Due to the denominator in Eq. 14 this value varies from 0 to 1.
The accumulation of plastic strain and the degradation of stiffness of
the soil element can be obtained from Eq. 12 by replacing X by Xc.

Lin & Liao (1999) proposed the use of a strain superposition method.
Here the static pile head deflections under the different loading classes
are used to assess the effect on the accumulation of deflections. The
resultant head deflection under n different loading classes Bi (defined
by bending moment and horizontal load at pile head) is obtained by the
following equation:

In the last step of the simulation (model C in Fig. 7), the deformation
response of the system is analyzed using the degradation stiffnesses
obtained from evaluation of models A and B.

147

accumulated deflection or rotation at pile head, and

determination of the stiffness of the pile-soil system under
operational loads. This is necessary for the calculation of the
natural frequency of the whole structure, which significantly affects
the fatigue loads.

The only practically applicable calculation method is the p-y method.

In the following it is presumed that for a large-diameter pile a suitable
modification found by comparison with numerical simulations is made
or the model uncertainty is taken into account by an enlarged
bandwidth of the soil parameters. The following recommendations are
thus focused on the consideration of effects due to cyclic loading.

ULS design proof

According to German regulations for offshore wind energy foundations
a potential pile capacity degradation induced by a design storm has to
be taken into account. The problem in that is that for horizontally
loaded piles no such calculation method exists. However, in the view of
the authors of the paper in hand the explicit consideration of loads
induced by a design storm is obsolete. Instead, the p-y method with p-y
curves for cyclic loading can be used for the analysis of the pile
behavior under extreme load. These curves are valid for about 100 load
cycles of the extreme load. If the actual load spectrum of the design
storm would be transferred to an equivalent number of load cycles of
the extreme load, probably a load cycle number much smaller than 100
would result. Thus, it can be assumed that the strength and stiffness
reduction due to a design storm are considered by the cyclic p-y
approach. In that context it should be noted that for the monopile
foundations realized so far no problems regarding lateral capacity under
storms have been reported.

Fig. 8. Deflection lines of monopiles D=4m in dense sand (top) and

results of the stiffness degradation method (bottom)

y res = y1,1 1 + t ln N1 + N k*

k =2

with

N k*

=e

An at least qualitative assessment of a possible accumulation of excess

pore pressure which leads to a reduction of strength can be done by
carrying out cyclic undrained triaxial tests. By a series of tests or
alternatively by a multi-stage test a critical cyclic stress ratio (CSR) can
be determined. The principle procedure is elucidated in Fig. 9. A loadcontrolled cyclic test is executed, in which the confining stress 3 is
adapted to the stress state at the depth under consideration in situ. The
cyclic stress ratio is defined as follows:

(15)

1 y1, k
(1 + t ln N k )1
t y1,1

Here y1,i is the (static) pile deflection under the load Bi and Ni is the
respective number of load cycles. The approach assumes the validity of
Eq. 8 regarding the cyclic increase of deflections.

CSR =

It has to be mentioned that this approach is not yet validated in a

sufficient manner. Also, the effect of two-way loading cannot be
accounted for. LeBlanc (2009) carried out model tests with two-way
loading and proposed a conservative approach to deal with that.
However, an urgent need of research is existing in this field.

( 1 3 ) cyc
( 1 3 ) f ,stat

(16)

The critical cyclic stress ratio CSRcrit is reached when the excess pore
pressure progressively increases with increasing time or load cycle
number, respectively. In the design of the pile it has then to be ensured
that the actual cyclic stress ratio remains well below the critical value.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DESIGN

In view of
methods or
horizontally
Possibilities
following.

the deficient knowledge the question comes up which

concepts shall currently be used in the design of
loaded piles for offshore wind energy foundations.
to carry out the practical design are presented in the

Essentially, the following geotechnical design proofs have to be carried

out:
Proof of sufficient bearing capacity with respect to horizontal
loading under extreme load (ULS, ultimate limit state),
proof of serviceability (SLS, serviceability limit state), in particular
determination or at least conservative estimation of the permanent

Fig. 9. Results of a cyclic triaxial CU test (multi-stage test,

schematically)

148

The problem with the assessment of such tests is that the boundary
conditions in the tests do not coincide with the actual boundary
conditions in situ. At the pile, in particular the drainage conditions are
different to the test conditions. At the pile high excess pore pressures
occur only locally, and drainage can occur upwards, downwards or
horizontally around the pile, which was shown in numerical simulations
from Grabe et al. (2004). Moreover, the magnitude of excess pore
pressures in cyclic tests is frequency dependent.

It should be noted that the calculation methods give the pile head
deflection and rotation after N load cycles under load. Thus, the elastic
portion has to be subtracted to obtain the (plastic) permanent deflection.
As an approximation, the elastic pile deflection line can be determined
by calculating the pile behavior using linear springs having the initial
stiffnesses of the p-y curves.

Stiffness under operational loads

Thus, the behavior of a soil element cannot be directly transferred to
the system behavior. Generally, by the element tests in the laboratory a
complex material law for the soil must be calibrated, and then by means
of a numerical simulation model the behavior of the pile-soil system
can be analyzed. This was done by Grabe et al. (2004) and recently also
by Cuellar et al. (2010). However, this effort cannot be done in a
practical design. Besides, material laws capable of realistically
modeling the soil behavior for arbitrary stress paths are still a matter of
research. Thus, cyclic undrained triaxial tests or other element tests can
only enable a qualitative assessment of a possible pile capacity
reduction.

For load calculations due to wind and waves usually dynamic

calculations of the system consisting of blades, tower, foundation
structure and piles have to be carried out. Time series of wind and wave
loads are applied in such calculations. In order to limit the numerical
effort, the behavior of the foundation structure with the piles has to be
linearized. Thus, by calculations with the p-y method linear spring
stiffnesses representative for operational loading conditions have to be
derived. From the p-y results, a linear (secant) spring stiffness k=p/y
can be calculated and used in the dynamic calculations.
In the view of the authors, static p-y curves can be used in these
calculations. This is due to the fact that the stiffnesses seeked for are
un- and reloading stiffnesses. Model tests of LeBlanc (2009) showed
that un- and reloading stiffnesses of a monopile-sand system do not
decrease, but even increase with the number of load cycles. Moreover,
the secant stiffnesses derived from the p-y method are first loading and
not un- or reloading stiffnesses. Thus, the use of secant stiffnesses
might even give a conservative estimation of the operational pile
stiffness.

SLS design proof

A critical value for monopile foundations is the permanent rotation of
the pile head induced by the accumulated permanent pile deflections. In
recent projects usually a maximum permanent rotation of 0.5 had to be
ensured over the whole lifetime of the structure.
The authors recommend to use a design criterion stated in DNV (2007)
and elucidated in Fig. 10 to find a preliminary value for the required
embedded pile length. The pile length should be chosen such that a
further elongation has only minor effect on the pile head displacement
under characteristic extreme load. Of course, for the length chosen also
sufficient pile capacity has to be proved.

CONCLUSIONS
For the design of horizontally loaded piles for offshore wind energy
foundations, explicit consideration of capacity and stiffness reductions
due to cyclic loading is required from German authorities. Also, the
permanent deflections to be expected over the structures lifetime has to
be predicted.
The paper in hand presents the knowledge regarding these questions
and makes evident that research is needed to clarify several aspects of
pile behavior under cyclic loading.
Methods and possibilities to account for cyclic load effects in the
design are presented. In general the p-y method can be used in the
design, For ULS design, additionally the results of undrained cyclic
triaxial tests can be used to verify the results. With regard to
accumulated deflections and rotations, a numerical simulation method
is presented. This method makes use of the results of drained cyclic
triaxial tests and helps to assess the stability of cyclic horizontally
loaded piles.

Fig. 10. Design criterion for monopile lengths according to DNV

(2007)

REFERENCES

For the estimation of the permanent rotation at mudline a calculation

with the SDM method described above can be carried out.
Alternatively, the strain wedge method might be used. This method (see
e.g. Lesny 2008) also enables the consideration of results of cyclic
drained triaxial tests. For the characteristic extreme load an
accumulation curve (see Fig. 8 bottom) should be derived. By a
comparison with the accumulation curve for a very long, rigidly
clamped pile the cyclic performance and thus the stability with respect
to cyclic loading can be assessed.

Abdel-Rahman K. and Achmus, M. (2005). Finite Element Modelling

of Horizontally Loaded Monopile Foundations for Offshore Wind
Energy Converters in Germany. In: Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics, ISFOG, Perth,
Australia, 2005. p. 309-396.
Achmus, M., Abdel-Rahman, K. and Kuo, Y-S. (2008). Design of
Monopile Foundations for Offshore Wind Energy Plants, 11th Baltic
Geotechnical Conference Geotechnics in Maritime Engineering,
Gdansk, Poland, Vol. 1, pp. 463-470.

149

Achmus, M., Kuo, Y.-S. and Abdel-Rahman, K. (2009). Behavior of

monopile foundations under cyclic lateral load. Computers and
Geotechnics 36 (2009), pp. 725-735.
API (2000). API Recommended Practice 2A-WSD, Recommended
Practice for Planning, Designing, Constructing Fixed Offshore
Platforms - Working Stress Design; 21st edition, Dallas.
Augustesen, A.H., Soerensen, S.P.H., Ibsen, L.B., Andersen, L.,
Moeller, M., Broedbaek, K. T. (2010). Comparison of calculation
approaches for monopiles for offshore wind turbines, Numerical
Methods in Geotechnical Engineering, Proc. of the 7th European
Conference, Trondheim/Norway, 2.-4. June 2010.
Cox, W. R., Reese, L. C., Grubbs, B. R. (1974). Field testing of
laterally loaded piles in sand, 6th Annual Offshore Technology
Conference, Vol.2, pp. 459-472.
Cuellar, P., Baeler, M., Georgi, S., Rcker, W. (2010). Special issues
for the coupled transient simulation of laterally loaded offshore piles
and novel experimental findings, in: Workshop Grndung von
Offshore-Windenergieanlagen (ed. T. Triantafyllidis), Publications
of the Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock Mechanics, Karlsruhe
Institute of Technology (KIT), No. 172.
DNV (2007). Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures. Offshore
Standard DNV-OS J101, Det Norske Veritas, Norway.
GL (2005). Germanischer Lloyd Rules and Guidelines, IV Industrial
Services, Guideline for the Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines.
Germanischer Lloyd Wind Energie GmbH, Hamburg/Germany,
Edition 2005.
Grabe, J., Dhrkop, J., Mahutka, K.-P. (2004). Monopilegrndungen
von Offshore-Windenergieanlagen Zur Bildung von
Porenwasserberdrcken aus zyklischer Belastung, Bauingenieur 79,
pp. 418-422 (in German).
Hettler A. (1981). Verschiebungen starrer und elastischer
Grndungskrper in Sand bei monotoner und zyklischer Belastung,
Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Geo- and
Environmental Sciences, Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock
Mechanics, University of Karlsruhe, Germany (in German).
Huurman, M. (1996). Development of traffic induced permanent strain
in concrete block pavements. Heron 1996; 41(1):29-52.
Kuo, Y.S. (2008). On the behavior of large-diameter piles under cyclic
lateral load, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering and
Geodetic Science, Institute of Soil Mechanics, Foundation

Engineering and Waterpower Engineering, Leibniz University of

Hannover.
LeBlanc, C. (2009). Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Support
Structures, Ph.D. thesis, Aalborg University, Denmark, DCE Thesis
No. 18.
Lesny, K. (2008). Grndung von Offshore-Windenergieanlagen Werkzeuge fr Planung und Bemessung. Habilitation thesis, Institute
of Foundation Engineering and Soil Mechanics, University of Essen,
VGE Verlag GmbH, Essen, Germany (in German).
Lin, S.S., Liao, J.C. (1999). Permanent strains of piles in sand due to
cyclic lateral loads. Journal of the Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering Division (ASCE) 1999; 125(9):798802.
Little, R.L., Briaud, J.L. (1988). Full scale cyclic lateral load tests on
six single piles in sand. Miscellaneous paper GL-88-27. Texas:
Geotechnical Division, Texas A&M University.
Long, J.H., Vanneste, G. (1994). Effect of cyclic lateral loads on piles
in sand. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE)
1994; 120(1):33-42.
Matlock, H. (1970). Correlations for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles
in Soft Clay. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference,
Paper No. OTC 1204, Houston, Texas.
Murchison, J. M., ONeill, M. W. (1984). Evaluation of p-y relationships in cohesionless soils. Analysis and Design of Pile Foundations,
J. R. Meyer (ed.), ASCE, New York, pp. 174-191.
Peralta, P., Achmus, M. (2010). An Experimental Investigation of Piles
in Sand Subjected to Lateral Cyclic Loads. 7th International
Conference on Physical Modeling in Geotechnics (ICPMG 2010),
Zurich, Switzerland, June 28 July 1.
Reese, L. C., Cox, W. R. and Koop, F. D. (1974). Analysis of laterally
loaded piles in sand, 6th Annual Offshore Technology Conference,
Vol.2, pp. 473-484.
Soerensen, S.P.H., Ibsen, L.B., Augustesen, A.H. (2010). Effects of
diameter on initial stiffness of p-y curves for large-diameter piles in
sand, Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Engineering, Proc. of the
7th European Conference, Trondheim/Norway, 2.-4. June 2010.
Wiemann, J., Lesny, K. and Richwien, W. (2004). Evaluation of the
Pile Diameter Effects on Soil-Pile Stiffness. Proceedings of the 7th
German Wind Energy Conference (DEWEK), Wilhelmshaven,
Germany.

150