Loading…

Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation

The paper presents the interpretation of five model tests on soft clay performed to qualify the concept of a monobase gravity platform for the Troll field in the North Sea. The test program contained one static, one static after cyclic, and three cyclic model tests. The cyclic tests were run with di...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of geotechnical engineering 1989-11, Vol.115 (11), p.1550-1568
Main Authors: Andersen, K H, Dyvik, R, Lauritzsen, R, Heien, D, Haorvik, L, Amundsen, T
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 1568
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1550
container_title Journal of geotechnical engineering
container_volume 115
creator Andersen, K H
Dyvik, R
Lauritzsen, R
Heien, D
Haorvik, L
Amundsen, T
description The paper presents the interpretation of five model tests on soft clay performed to qualify the concept of a monobase gravity platform for the Troll field in the North Sea. The test program contained one static, one static after cyclic, and three cyclic model tests. The cyclic tests were run with different moment arms and with widely different cyclic load history compositions. In general, the interpretation supported the calculation procedures that are presently used in foundation design of offshore deep-water gravity platforms on soft clay. The calculated bearing capacities, failure surface locations and failure modes (large cyclic rotations) agreed well with the measurements for all the model tests. The calculated static and cyclic displacements also agreed reasonably well with the measurements. The deviations that did occur indicated smaller calculated displacements than measured. This should be kept in mind in design since it implies that the calculations may underestimate the displacements. However, the deviations primarily occurred at small and moderate loads and may be explained by small imperfections in the model tests (false deformations). Both the calculated and measured cyclically induced settlements were small for the vertical static load applied in these model tests.
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_25286326</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>25286326</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_252863263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0MDc21rU0MTTgYOAqLs4yMDAyNDU14WQw8M1PSc1RCEktLilWyE9TcC9KLMssqVQIyEksScsvyi22UvDMK0ktKihKLUksyczP42FgTUvMKU7lhdLcDGpuriHOHroFRfmFpUBj4nMzi5NTc3IS81LzS4vjjUyNLMyMjcyMiVYIAGxoNdg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>25286326</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation</title><source>American Society Of Civil Engineers ASCE Journals</source><creator>Andersen, K H ; Dyvik, R ; Lauritzsen, R ; Heien, D ; Haorvik, L ; Amundsen, T</creator><creatorcontrib>Andersen, K H ; Dyvik, R ; Lauritzsen, R ; Heien, D ; Haorvik, L ; Amundsen, T</creatorcontrib><description>The paper presents the interpretation of five model tests on soft clay performed to qualify the concept of a monobase gravity platform for the Troll field in the North Sea. The test program contained one static, one static after cyclic, and three cyclic model tests. The cyclic tests were run with different moment arms and with widely different cyclic load history compositions. In general, the interpretation supported the calculation procedures that are presently used in foundation design of offshore deep-water gravity platforms on soft clay. The calculated bearing capacities, failure surface locations and failure modes (large cyclic rotations) agreed well with the measurements for all the model tests. The calculated static and cyclic displacements also agreed reasonably well with the measurements. The deviations that did occur indicated smaller calculated displacements than measured. This should be kept in mind in design since it implies that the calculations may underestimate the displacements. However, the deviations primarily occurred at small and moderate loads and may be explained by small imperfections in the model tests (false deformations). Both the calculated and measured cyclically induced settlements were small for the vertical static load applied in these model tests.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0733-9410</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of geotechnical engineering, 1989-11, Vol.115 (11), p.1550-1568</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Andersen, K H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyvik, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauritzsen, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heien, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haorvik, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amundsen, T</creatorcontrib><title>Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation</title><title>Journal of geotechnical engineering</title><description>The paper presents the interpretation of five model tests on soft clay performed to qualify the concept of a monobase gravity platform for the Troll field in the North Sea. The test program contained one static, one static after cyclic, and three cyclic model tests. The cyclic tests were run with different moment arms and with widely different cyclic load history compositions. In general, the interpretation supported the calculation procedures that are presently used in foundation design of offshore deep-water gravity platforms on soft clay. The calculated bearing capacities, failure surface locations and failure modes (large cyclic rotations) agreed well with the measurements for all the model tests. The calculated static and cyclic displacements also agreed reasonably well with the measurements. The deviations that did occur indicated smaller calculated displacements than measured. This should be kept in mind in design since it implies that the calculations may underestimate the displacements. However, the deviations primarily occurred at small and moderate loads and may be explained by small imperfections in the model tests (false deformations). Both the calculated and measured cyclically induced settlements were small for the vertical static load applied in these model tests.</description><issn>0733-9410</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1989</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpjYeA0MDc21rU0MTTgYOAqLs4yMDAyNDU14WQw8M1PSc1RCEktLilWyE9TcC9KLMssqVQIyEksScsvyi22UvDMK0ktKihKLUksyczP42FgTUvMKU7lhdLcDGpuriHOHroFRfmFpUBj4nMzi5NTc3IS81LzS4vjjUyNLMyMjcyMiVYIAGxoNdg</recordid><startdate>19891101</startdate><enddate>19891101</enddate><creator>Andersen, K H</creator><creator>Dyvik, R</creator><creator>Lauritzsen, R</creator><creator>Heien, D</creator><creator>Haorvik, L</creator><creator>Amundsen, T</creator><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19891101</creationdate><title>Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation</title><author>Andersen, K H ; Dyvik, R ; Lauritzsen, R ; Heien, D ; Haorvik, L ; Amundsen, T</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_252863263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1989</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Andersen, K H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyvik, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauritzsen, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heien, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haorvik, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amundsen, T</creatorcontrib><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of geotechnical engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Andersen, K H</au><au>Dyvik, R</au><au>Lauritzsen, R</au><au>Heien, D</au><au>Haorvik, L</au><au>Amundsen, T</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation</atitle><jtitle>Journal of geotechnical engineering</jtitle><date>1989-11-01</date><risdate>1989</risdate><volume>115</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1550</spage><epage>1568</epage><pages>1550-1568</pages><issn>0733-9410</issn><abstract>The paper presents the interpretation of five model tests on soft clay performed to qualify the concept of a monobase gravity platform for the Troll field in the North Sea. The test program contained one static, one static after cyclic, and three cyclic model tests. The cyclic tests were run with different moment arms and with widely different cyclic load history compositions. In general, the interpretation supported the calculation procedures that are presently used in foundation design of offshore deep-water gravity platforms on soft clay. The calculated bearing capacities, failure surface locations and failure modes (large cyclic rotations) agreed well with the measurements for all the model tests. The calculated static and cyclic displacements also agreed reasonably well with the measurements. The deviations that did occur indicated smaller calculated displacements than measured. This should be kept in mind in design since it implies that the calculations may underestimate the displacements. However, the deviations primarily occurred at small and moderate loads and may be explained by small imperfections in the model tests (false deformations). Both the calculated and measured cyclically induced settlements were small for the vertical static load applied in these model tests.</abstract></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0733-9410
ispartof Journal of geotechnical engineering, 1989-11, Vol.115 (11), p.1550-1568
issn 0733-9410
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_25286326
source American Society Of Civil Engineers ASCE Journals
title Model Tests of Gravity Platforms: Interpretation
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-03-04T09%3A16%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Model%20Tests%20of%20Gravity%20Platforms:%20Interpretation&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20geotechnical%20engineering&rft.au=Andersen,%20K%20H&rft.date=1989-11-01&rft.volume=115&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1550&rft.epage=1568&rft.pages=1550-1568&rft.issn=0733-9410&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E25286326%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_252863263%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=25286326&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true