Effect of load eccentricity and stress level on monopile support for offshore wind turbines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently monopiles are the most common foundation solution for offshore wind turbines. The design of monopiles relies on empirical data from tests performed on long, slender, small-diameter piles loaded predominantly in shear. In contrast, a monopile is a large-diameter, relatively short pile on which load is applied with a large eccentricity. With centrifuge tests as the basis, this paper investigates the behaviour of a rigid pile loaded with a high eccentricity. A test series was carried out to simulate idealized monotonic load cases for monopiles supporting an offshore wind turbine. Centrifuge tests were performed on model monopiles subjected to stress distributions equal to prototype monopiles with pile diameters ranging from 1–5 m and eccentricities ranging from 8.25–17.75 pile diameters. It was possible to identify a unified response of all of these tests by using dimensional analysis and Rankine’s passive earth pressure coefficient as a normalization parameter. The normalized ultimate soil resistance was unaffected by acceleration level and load eccentricity, indicating that the failure mechanism was the same for all tests. Based on the centrifuge tests, a reformulation of soil–pile interaction curves is presented. The normalized initial stiffness of the soil–pile resistance curves was seen to increase linearly with depth in the centrifuge tests. The reformulation differs from current guidelines in terms of the shape of the interaction curve and magnitude of ultimate resistance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".