Technical Note For The Certification of Grouted Connections For Offshore Wind Turbines, Revision 0 (PDF-Version)

Technical Note
Certification of Grouted Connections for

Offshore Wind Turbines
Revision: 0
Date: 2013-12-04
Contact:
GL Renewables Certification
Germanischer Lloyd Industrial Services GmbH
Phone: +49 40 36149-0
Fax: +49 40 36149-1720
E-Mail: renewablescertification.energy@dnvgl.com
Brooktorkai 18
20457 Hamburg
Germany
www.dnvgl.com/energy
This Technical Note was compiled by GL Renewables Certification in cooperation with the
Wind and Marine Energy Committee. The Wind and Marine Energy Committee consists of representatives from
public authorities, wind turbine and component manufacturers, engineering consultants, institutes, universities,
technical associations and insurance companies.
The current members of the Wind and Marine Energy Committee are named on our website:
Interpretation of the Technical Note is the exclusive prerogative of GL Renewables Certification. Any reference to
the application of this Technical Note is permitted only with the consent
of GL Renewables Certification.
GL Renewables Certification
Germanischer Lloyd Industrial Services GmbH
Brooktorkai 18, 20457 Hamburg, Germany
Phone: +49 40 36149-0
Fax: +49 40 36149-1720
renewablescertification.energy@dnvgl.com
The latest edition of the General Terms and Conditions

of Germanischer Lloyd Industrial Services GmbH is applicable.
Reproduction by printing or photo static means, even of extracts, is only permissible with the consent
of GL Renewables Certification.
Table of Contents
Symbols and Abbreviations
List of Figures
1
Introduction
1.1 Objective
1.2 Applications of Grouted Connections
1.3 Applicable codes and standards
1.4 Current state of research and development
1.5 Geometric parameters of a grouted connection
10
10
11
12
14
15
2
Requirements for the Structural Design
2.1 Geometric requirements
2.2 Requirements for shear key arrangement
2.2.1
Horizontal shear keys
2.2.2
Vertical shear keys
16
16
17
17
18
3
Material Requirements
3.1 General
3.2 Steel material properties
3.3 Grout material properties
3.3.1
General requirements / suitability and identity tests
3.3.2
Compression strength
3.3.3
Development of compressive strength
3.3.4
Biaxial compression
3.3.5
Tension
3.3.6
Development of tensile strength
3.3.7
Youngs modulus
3.3.8
Poissons ratio
3.3.9
Creep and shrinkage
3.3.10 Fatigue behaviour
18
18
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
4
Requirements for Manufacturers, Quality Control, Production and Installation
4.1 General
4.2 Shear keys
4.3 Grout seal
4.4 Grouting procedure
4.4.1
Method statement
4.4.2
Checks during grout installation
20
20
21
23
23
23
24
5
Strength Analysis - General Assumptions
5.1 Load calculation
5.1.1
Ultimate limit state (ULS)
5.1.2
Fatigue limit state (FLS)
5.2 Combined loading
5.2.1
Combined loading for ULS
5.2.2
Combined loading for FLS
5.3 Load history
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
26
Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
3
5.4
5.5
5.6
Verification of serviceability (SLS)

Load distribution
Stress concentration due to attachments
26
27
29
6
Strength Analysis - Safety Concept
6.1 General
6.2 Loading
6.3 Material
6.3.1
Steel
6.3.2
Grout material
6.4 Imperfections
6.4.1
Global Imperfections
6.4.2
Local Imperfections
6.5 Early-age cycling / Movement of construction
6.6 Friction between steel and grout
6.7 Crossing compression struts
29
29
29
29
29
30
31
31
32
32
32
32
7
Strength Analysis Numerical Verifications
7.1 General notes
7.2 Verification for ultimate limit state (ULS)
7.2.1
General notes
7.2.2
Material behaviour of steel members
7.2.3
Material behaviour of grout material
7.2.4
Verification of steel (ULS)
7.2.5
Verification of grout (ULS)
7.2.6
Buckling capacity of the grouted connection
7.3 Verification for fatigue limit state (FLS)
7.3.1
General notes
7.3.2
Detail categories for shear keys
7.3.3
Detail categories steel tubes and attachments
7.3.4
Material behaviour steel members
7.3.5
Fatigue behaviour of the grout material
7.3.6
Verification of steel members
7.3.7
Verification of grout
32
32
33
33
34
34
34
34
35
36
36
36
36
37
37
37
37
8
Plausibility Check (Analytical Approach)
8.1 General notes
8.2 Procedure for verification and load evaluation
8.2.1
Procedure for ULS loading
8.2.2
Procedure for FLS loading
8.3 Verification of shear key (steel)
8.3.1
ULS verification
8.3.2
FLS verification
8.4 Verification of compression strut (grout)
8.4.1
Verification for ultimate limit state (ULS)
8.4.2
Verification for fatigue limit state (FLS)
43
43
43
43
44
45
45
46
46
46
46
9
Recommendations for FE-Modeling
9.1 General notes for modelling (pre-processing)
9.2 General notes for evaluation of results of FE-analysis (post-processing)
47
47
48

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
4
9.2.1
9.2.2
Hot-spot interpolation
Reduction factor av,FE due to load redistribution
48
49
10
Periodic Monitoring
50
11
Acknowledgement
50
12
References
51
Appendix 1: National Requirements for Approval in the German EEZ (BSH Approval)
Appendix 2: Recommendations for Design Basis
Appendix 3: Elastomer bearings (for information only)

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
5
Symbols and Abbreviations

Ap
= steel cross section area of the pile
Ac0
= cross section area 0 in compression strut
Ac1
Ac2
Aproj
= projected square area
D
= Palmgren Miner fatigue damage
Dg
= outside diameter of grout annulus
DLim
= fatigue damage limit
Dp
= outer diameter of pile
Ds
= outer diameter of sleeve (jacket design), outer diameter of transition piece (monopile design)
E
= modulus of elasticity for steel
Eg
= modulus of elasticity for grout
Ecm
= mean secant youngs modulus of the grout
Ecd,min = minimum design value for grout youngs modulus
Ecd,max = maximum design value for grout youngs modulus
Fx
= axial force
Fy, Fz = horizontal shear force
I1
= first stress invariant
J2
= second stress invariant
L
= total length of grouted section
Lg
= effective length of grouted section
M
= global bending moment on grouted connection
Md
= maximum resulting bending moment for design loads
Mx
= torsional moment
My, Mz = bending moments
N
= axial force per unit circumferential length of shell structure, number of cycles to fatigue failure
Nnom
= nominal number of operational load cycles
Pd
= maximum load components of grouted connection, axial force
Rp
= outer radius of the pile
= outer radius of transition piece
RTP
Rs
= outer radius of sleeve (same as RTP in monopile structures)
Scd,max = design value of maximum compressive stress level for fatigue
SLim
= limit for the compressive stress level for fatigue
T
= intended service life
V
= shear force in pile
bef
= width of compression strut (according to EN 1992-1-1)
f(l1,J2, ) = failure criteria
fck
= characteristic uniaxial cylinder compressive strength of the grout at 28 days
fck,insitu = characteristic uniaxial cylinder compressive strength of the grout under insitu conditions
fcd
= design value of uniaxial compressive strength of the grout
fctk;0,05 = characteristic 5 % quantile of uniaxial tensile strength
fctd
= design value of fctk;0,05
fcd,fat
= design value of the uniaxial fatigue strength of the grout under compressive strength for fatigue
fcd,fat,red = reduced design value of the compressive strength for fatigue
fy
= yield strength of steel
h, hShk = height of shear keys
lstrut
= length of compression strut
n, nShk = number of effective shear keys given by minimum number of compression struts for upward and
downward direction, which can be activated in the grout layer.
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
6
nR
= rated rotor speed
r
= number of rotor blades
rinf
= minimum coefficient for youngs modulus
rsup
= maximum coefficient for youngs modulus
s
= distance between center of shear keys
t
= thickness
tg
= thickness of grout
tp
= thickness of pile
tTP
= thickness of transition piece
ts
= thickness of sleeve (same as tTP in monopile structures)
= Poissons ratio for steel

w
= width of shear keys, displacement in the radial direction of shell
= angle of compression strut

tt
= reduction factor for transverse tension
tt,fat
= reduction factor for transverse tension for fatigue loading
eff
= reduction factor for effective width of loading area
= displacement, height of surface irregularities, fabrication tolerance

H
= displacement in the horizontal direction
V
= displacement in the vertical direction
V0
= maximum relative vertical displacement around circumference of transition piece
= angle of inclination
= diameter of the cylinders

offshore = partial safety factor for grout material considering offshore conditions
M
= partial safety factor for grout material
Sd
= partial factor accounting for model uncertainty
dis
= reduction factor for non-symmetric load distribution on struts
F
= partial factor for loads
av,FE = reduction factor due to load redistribution for FE post-processing
= grout to steel interface coefficient of friction

c
= factor for considering the non-uniform distribution of the concrete (see GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2)
= stress
v,d
= von Mises stress for design load
c,max = maximum grout compressive stress for FLS loading
cd,tension = maximum tensile stress of the grout for ULS loading
cd,Ac0 = maximum compressive stress for design load at shear key support area A0
cd,Ac1 = maximum compressive stress for design load section area A1
cd,Ac2 = maximum compressive stress for design load section area A2
cd,fat,Ac0 = maximum compressive stress for FLS load at shear key support area A0
cd,fat,Ac1 = maximum compressive stress for FLS load at section area A1
cd,fat,Ac2 = maximum compressive stress for FLS load at section area A2
Rd,c,Ac0 = maximum resistance stress for design load at shear key support area A0
Rd,c,Ac1 = maximum resistance stress for design load section area A1
Rd,c,Ac2 = maximum resistance stress for design load section area A2
= angle of inclination
= Lode-angle

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
7
BSH
= Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency
DC
= detail category
DNV = Det Norske Veritas
FEM = finite element method
FLS
= fatigue limit state
GC
= grouted connection
GL
= Germanischer Lloyd
JIP
= joint industry project
LRF
= load reserve factor
MP
= monopile
MT
= magnetic particle testing
OWTG = offshore wind turbine generator
OWTSS = Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structures
RT
= radiographic testing
SCF
= stress concentration factor
SKVM = shrinkage class
SLS
= serviceability limit state
TN
= technical note
TP
= transition piece
ULS
= ultimate limit state
UT
= ultrasonic testing
VT
= visual testing
WPQR = welding procedure qualification record
WTG = wind turbine generator

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
8
List of Figures
Fig. 1-1: Various types of grouted connections from GROW [15] from left to right: Monopile, Tripod, Jacket,
Gravity based foundation
Fig. 1-2: Jacket foundation with grouted connection from Schaumann et al. [39]
Fig. 1-3: Grouted joints in monopile from Schaumann et al. [41]
Fig. 1-4: Parameters of grouted connections ISO 19902: 2008 [7]
Fig. 1-5: Geometry of shear keys ISO 19902: 2008 [7]
Fig. 1-6: Parameters for grouted joints DNV [3], [5]
Fig. 2-1: Limitations as per different standards
Fig. 2-2: Types of shear key arrangement for different types of GC
Fig. 2-3: Crossing compression struts from Fehling [43]
Fig. 4-1: Shear Key welding requirement for weld beads according to GL
Fig. 5-1: Load transfer between shear keys (exemplary) from DNV [5]
Fig. 5-2: Compression struts in axial loaded connections from Anders [16]
Fig. 5-3: Bending, modified Fig. 5-2 by GL
Fig. 5-4: Compression struts within Strut and-Shell model from Fehling [53]
Fig. 5-5: Arrangements of vertical shear keys (exemplary)
Fig. 6-1: General imperfections (global eccentricity, global inclination, local buckle) from GROW [15]
Fig. 7-1: Different methods for modelling the stress-strain relationship of grout
Fig. 7-2: Von Mises stress at collapse load [5], [44]
Fig. 7-3: Local imperfection in the pile from DNV [5]
Fig. 7-4: Input values for simplified fatigue analysis
Fig. 7-5: Load spectra for the damage calculation according Palmgren/Miner
Fig. 7-6: Transfer function for FLS verification of grout material
Fig. 7-7: Extended concept for FLS verification of grouted joints from Schaumann et al. [35]
Fig. 8-1: Compression strut [51] with detail of support area in grouted connection
Fig. 9-1: Hot-Spot Interpolation according to IIW Fatigue Recommendations from IIW-1823-07:2008 [11]
Fig. 9-2: Averaging between compression struts
Fig. A3-1: Moment distribution between the spring assemblies and the grouted connection
11
14
15
15
16
16
17
18
18
23
27
28
28
28
29
31
33
35
36
37
39
40
42
44
49
49
57

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
9
1
1.1
Introduction
Objective
This technical note describes the current state-of-the-art for the application of Grouted Connections (GC) for
Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structures (OWTSS).
It shall be considered as a supplementary document in combination with the GL Rules and Guidelines - IV
Industrial Services - Part 2 Guideline for the Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines (GL-IV-2), Edition 2012 [1]. In
special cases it might be used as a supplementary document in combination with GL-IV-2, Edition 2005 [2], after
agreement with Germanischer Lloyd Industrial Services GmbH, Renewables Certification (GL).
Due to observed vertical settlements in GC in OWTSS [13] it became aware that existing knowledge in design of
GC does not explain the actual load bearing behaviour under ultimate and fatigue loading conditions sufficiently.
GL publishes this technical note to reflect the latest state of research and support the industry in avoiding past
failure.
Further research work is considered to be necessary while, at the same time, the planning process for new
offshore wind farms continues.
With this technical note, GL wants to provide a contribution to summarize the existing knowledge which can be
used as a basis for design and construction of GC.
It includes guidance on design calculation and structural details as well as requirements for the manufacturing,
quality control, installation and monitoring.
For the designer, it should be clear that uncertainties exist for the time being which shall be covered by
assumptions considered to lead to a safe design.
Note: This technical note focuses on grouted connection types with cylindrical shape and shear key
reinforcement. Apart from that also conical connections without shear keys are design variants, which can be
applied. In case a conical type of a grouted connection shall be assessed reference is made to DNV-OS-J101 [3]
and DNV-TR- No. 2010-3620 [71].

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
10
1.2
Applications of Grouted Connections
Also undersea
Fig. 1-1: Various types of grouted connections from GROW [15] from left to right: Monopile, Tripod,
Jacket, Gravity based foundation
The technical note focuses on GCs for Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structures
For wind turbine support structures, dynamic loads are of a significant importance for the structural design.
Here it shall be distinguished between GC under predominant axial forces and GC under predominant bending
moment.
Note: However, it shall be investigated within the design calculations if other load components provide a
significant share of the overall utilization of the structure for all cases.
Depending on the foundation design and special load attributes the following grouted connection types can be
defined:
Monopile / Gravity based foundation:
-
mainly loaded by bending moment
Jacket/Tripod/Tripile:
-
loaded by cycling axial forces and bending moment
Pile Sleeve design (postpiled)
Pin Pile design (prepiled)
extended jacket leg in prepiled pile
Note: The technical note covers all types of structural design as mentioned above. The approach for calculation
is universal and can be applied for every type of grouted connection.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
11
1.3
Applicable codes and standards
A list of codes and standards that may be applied for certain aspects of the design, construction and installation of
GC is given in the following. Additional literature and references are provided in section References at the end
of this technical note.
It shall be noted that a comprehensive set of standards with a uniform safety concept shall be chosen for the
individual case of application. In general it is not allowed to mix design rules from different standards. For special
cases different standards might be referred to, if the safety level for loads and material is proved to be
conservative. In case of doubt, GL should be contacted.
National requirements have to be considered as mandatory.
Offshore standards:
-
GL Rules and Guidelines - IV Industrial Services - Part 2 - Guideline for the Certification of Offshore
Wind Turbines, Edition 2012 [1]
DNV-OS-J101: Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures, 2013 [3]
DNV-OS-C502: Offshore Concrete Structures, 2012 [6]
DIN EN ISO 19902 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Fixed steel offshore structures, July 2008 [7]
Wind energy standards:

-
DIN EN 61400-3 Wind Turbines Part 3: Design requirements for offshore wind turbines, January 2011
[28]
Deutsches Institut fr Bautechnik (DIBt): Richtlinie fr Windenergieanlagen, Einwirkungen und

Standsicherheitsnachweise fr Turm und Grndung, 2012 [29]
European (EN) Standards:

-
EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures, Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings,
December 2010
EN 1993-1-1: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings,
December 2010
EN 1993-1-6, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-6: Strength and Stability of shell structures,
December 2010
EN 1993-1-9, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-9: Fatigue, December 2010
EN 206-1: Concrete Part 1: Specification, performance, production and conformity, June 2001
EN 197: Cement - Part 1: Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements,
February 2000
EN 12620 Aggregates for concrete, July 2008
EN 13139: Aggregates for mortar, March 2011

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
12
EN 13263: Silica fume for concrete - Part 1: Definitions, requirements and conformity criteria, July 2009
EN 934: Admixtures for concrete, mortar and grout - Part 1: Common requirements, April 2008
EN 13670: Execution of concrete structures, 2009
German National (DIN) Standards:

-
DIN EN 1992-1-1/NA, National Annex Nationally determined parameters - Eurocode 2: Design of

concrete structures, January 2011
DIN 1045-3: Concrete, reinforced and prestressed concrete structures - Part 3: Execution of structures Application rules for DIN EN 13670
DIN 1164-10: Special cement - Part 10: Composition, requirements and conformity evaluation for cement
with low effective alkali content
DIN V 20000-103: Anwendung von Bauprodukten in Bauwerken Teil 103: Gesteinskrnungen nach
DIN EN 12620:2003-04, April 2004
Other Standards:
-
Guideline for Self-compacting concrete (DAfStb) [48]
VeBMR-Guideline (DAfStb) [19]
CEB FIB Model Code 1990 [24]
Additional Regulating German National standard (mandatory in Germany):

-
Bundesamt fr Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie (BSH) Standard: Design of Offshore Wind Turbines
2007 [9]
Note: A comprehensive set of standards which complies best with this TN is:
-
steel members: GL Guideline for Offshore Wind Turbines (GL-IV-2 [1]) & EN 1993-1-1: Eurocode 3
grout members: GL Guideline for Offshore Wind Turbines (GL-IV-2 [1]) & EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
13
1.4
Current state of research and development
The origin of the design recommendations for GC given in oil and gas standards ISO 19902 [7] and API [38] is
based on research work done in the 1970 to 1990s, e.g. Billington et al. [8].
Within the last years, additional research was initiated in order to investigate the particularities induced by the
offshore wind turbines.
From 2006 to 2010, the GROW project at the Institute for Steel Construction, Leibniz University Hannover (LUH)
in cooperation with GL, SIAG Anlagenbau Finsterwalde and Heijmans Oevermann investigated the fatigue
performance of GC with shear keys under predominant bending. Additional background information can be found
in Schaumann & Wilke [41] and Schaumann et al. [15].
The follow-up of the previously described GROW (Fkz.: 0327585) project named GROWup (Fkz: 0325290)
has been kicked-off in 2011. The investigations within this project focus on grouted connections for braced
structures like jackets or tripods where the connection is between the substructure and the foundation piles (see
Fig. 1-2). In contrast to monopiles, the governing loads are derived from axial loading and not from bending
moments. Additionally, the testing will be performed under water and the geometric tolerances are bigger. This
second aspect leads to an increased thickness of the grout layer between the steel tubes.
Additionally, GROWup focuses on the behaviour of the grout material when being pumped into the annulus.
Questions concerning the flowability of grout, the stability and cohesion of grout under water, additional
requirements during grout installation in order to ensure to get a reliable high quality grout inside the annulus are
discussed in this research project.
Actual results of research projects about Grouted Connections have been published in the Phd-Theses of Anders
[16], Lochte-Holtegreven [46] and Wilke [47].
Numerical analyses in the pre-studies indicate that the width of the annulus has a significant impact on the
stiffness of the connection and therefore on the fatigue resistance in particular. Experimental data that covers the
dimensions and load pattern of future offshore wind farms is not existent.
Fig. 1-2: Jacket foundation with grouted connection from Schaumann et al. [39]

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
14
Due to thee slippage of monopiles in executed

e
projeects, a Joint Inndustry Projecct (JIP) has beeen initiated leead by
DNV in orrder to investiggate the reasoons for this faiilure. In this coontext, conical grouted connnections havee been
developedd and tested as
a alternative design [5].
In a second phase of thhis JIP, focus was set on GC
C with shear keys.
k
Results have been puublished in Febbruary
2013 [4].
1.5
G
Geometric parrameters of a grouted conneection
Legend::
tS: thicknness of sleevee
tG: thicknness of grout layer
tp: thicknness of pile
Ds: Outeer diameter of sleeve
Dp: Outeer diameter of pile
p: inclinnation of pile after
a installatioon
Fig. 1-3: Gro
outed joints inn monopile frrom Schaumaann et al. [41]]
Fig. 1-4: Parrameters of ggrouted conneections ISO 19902:

1
2008 [77]
1
inner steel tubbular member (pile in foundaation pile-to-slleeve connecttion)
oouter steel tubbular member (sleeve in fouundation pile-too-sleeve connnection)
ggrout layer
sshear keys
Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections

C
fo r Offshore Windd Turbines
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
15
Fig. 1-5: Geometry oof shear keyss ISO 19902: 2008

2
[7]
Fig. 1--6: Parameterrs for grouted

d joints DNV [3], [5]
2
2.1
Reqquirements fo
or the Structu
ural Design
G
Geometric reqquirements
The follow
wing table (seee Fig. 2-1) sum
mmarize the ggeometric andd material bounndary conditioons given by different
d
standardss. Further information for thee design of axxial loaded groouted joints caan be found in Schaumann et al. [45].
These lim
miting values may
m be seen as
a recommenddations for thee design. In moost cases, thee requirementss were derived from
m tests, which were used forr the determinnation of simpllified design foormular. Sincee the researchh is
continuouusly ongoing, these
t
boundaries might be exceeded to a certain amouunt. In such caases, an argumentation
is to be suubmitted to annd agreed by GL.
G
Nevertheless the follow
wing boundaryy conditions arre mandatory and have to be verified:
-
the minim
mum thicknesss of the grout laayer includingg all effects of tolerances shhould be not leess than
50 mm in the area of thhe shear keys and shall not be less than 30mm
3
in the rremaining areaa.
Note: An undercut of thhese limits maay be acceptabble in case furrther investigaations or capaacity checks arre
approvedd by GL.
C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
16
the angle of the effective compression struts (see section 6.7) between the shear keys including all
effects of tolerances shall be not less than 30 degrees referring to the horizontal plane.
the present TN is applicable for grout strength up to strength class C100/115 [22],[61].
fcu
w/h
h/s
max
API
ENISO19902
NorsokN004
DNVOSJ101
Note: Materials with higher strength may be used after consultation with GL
min
max
min
max
min
max
min
[MPa]
[]
[] <0.1 <0.1
80
20
80
20
110 17,5
<0.1
0,0
3,0
<0.1
1,5
0,0
3,0
<0.1
1,5
0,0
Dp/tp
[]
60
10
40
20
40
20
40
Ds/ts
[]
140
18
140
30
140
30
80
Dg/tg
[]
45
10
45
10
45
h/Dp
[]
Dp/s
[]
16
2.5
16
2.5
16
2.5
Le/Dp
[]
10
10
0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012
Fig. 2-1: Limitations as per different standards

2.2
Requirements for shear key arrangement
2.2.1 Horizontal shear keys

The arrangement of circumferential shear keys is required for cylindrical shaped grouted connections. In case the
torsional moment is not oscillating in phase with bending moment and axial forces it is recommended to arrange
vertical shear keys additionally. In accordance to Schaumann et al. [41] GL recommends to arrange the shear
keys depending on the dominating type of loads that have to be transferred by the grouted connection. For
multipile foundations with mainly axial load type A shall be preferred with an even distribution along the overlap
length. For monopile foundations, where loading is dominated by bending moment, type B is recommended to
concentrate the shear keys in the middle part of the overlap length.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
17
F 2-2: Types of shear keey arrangemeent for different types of G

Fig.
GC
It is recom
mmended thatt the design annd installation tolerances shhall not result in crossing coompression strruts for
vertical annd horizontal direction
d
(see section 6.7).
mpression sttruts from Fehling [43]

Fig. 2-3: Crossing com
2.2.2 V
Vertical shearr keys
Concerninng the design details of weldings we refeer to GL-IV-2 [11], section 3.44.2.5.3 (7). It iss recommendeed to
arrange thhe vertical sheear keys outside the area off influence of the horizontal shear keys. I n all other casses, the
superposition of both directions has to be investigaated. For fatiggue verificationn the number oof load cycless for each
load component (i.e. beending moment and torsion al moment) caan be taken innto account.
3
3.1
Matterial Requireements
Geeneral
The geneeral requiremeents for materiaals have to coomply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.3.

C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
18
3.2
Steel material properties
The general requirements for weldings have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.4.
The general requirements for the verification of steel have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.3.
3.3
Grout material properties
3.3.1 General requirements / suitability and identity tests

The special behaviour (high/ultra high strength, mechanical properties) of grout material has to be taken into
account within the design for the grouted connection.
The designer has to specify the grout properties (e.g. fresh grout properties, flowability, stiffening behaviour,..)
that are required during the grouting procedure, during hardening phase and in the final state of the GC. Project
and site-specific conditions have to be considered.
All grout properties have to be tested and conformed by an independent test lab taking into account project
specific parameters, such as geometry of GC, environmental conditions etc. Specific grout properties (e.g.
compressive strength, flowability, air void content) have to be checked on each batch of the grout during grout
installation.
An external quality control should be performed by a laboratory acknowledged by GL or by an accredited
laboratory.
The general requirements for materials have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.3.4.4.5. Additional information
and test methods can be obtained from DAfStb Vergussmrtel [19], BAW-Merkblatt [20] for freeze/thaw
resistance and Guideline for Self-compacting concrete (DAfStb) [48] / Additional rules for Self-compacting
concrete (SCC) [65].
Note: A GL-Product certificate for the grout material is recommended.
3.3.2 Compression strength
The compressive strength of the grout is based on the characteristic uniaxial cylinder compressive strength (fck)
after 28 days according to Standard EN 206-1 [21].
The grout strength class for the design shall be defined with cylinders of D/H 150 x 300 mm or cubes of 150 x 150
x 150 mm (EN 206-1 [21]). For the continuous intern and external quality control other specimen geometries can
be used, but the strength has to be modified by a geometry factor determined in the suitability and identity test.
Additionally, the variation of results that has to be expected for in-situ conditions offshore has to be considered in
the design for high strength grout by an additional including allowance (offshore). If there is no appropriate
information a value of 1.1 shall be used for offshore.
If the temperatures at the construction site while hardening of grout are lower than 20C, the time until fck is
achieved is longer than 28 days. Site specific environmental conditions (e.g. temperature) may significantly affect
the strength development offshore. This has to be considered in the design calculations and installation process,
especially for early age cyclic movements of the Grouted Connection during hardening.
fck,insitu = fck / offshore
If experimental data determined by an accredited laboratory is available, these values may be used in
consultation with GL.
3.3.3 Development of compressive strength
For project specific offshore conditions the early age strength for different states of construction while hardening
(e.g. early age cycling verification) has to be taken into account.
The development of compressive strength depends on several factors (e.g. environmental temperature, type of
cement). Especially for early age movements and low temperatures (T 20C) hardening tests shall be
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
19
performed to determine the strength development for the expected offshore conditions. These tests shall be
performed prior to the grouting process at a certified test lab.
3.3.4 Biaxial compression
The biaxial compression strength is required for multiaxial failure behaviour of the grout in the FEM-Calculation
(see chapter 8). The biaxial bearing capacity is a grout material specific property. It decreases with increasing
grout strength and can be determined by experimental investigations (e.g. [50]). The design values shall be
determined in agreement with GL.
3.3.5 Tension
For the multiaxial material behaviour of grout in the FE-Calculation (section 0) it is allowed to take into account
the tensile strength of the grout (see section 6.3.2). The maximum stress that can be reached under axial tension
is defined as tensile strength fct. The characteristic 5% quantile of axial tensile strength (fctk;0,05) shall be used.
3.3.6 Development of tensile strength
If the tensile strength is taken into account for design, the time- and temperature-dependant development of
tensile strength has to be considered.
3.3.7 Youngs modulus
The Youngs modulus of the grout (Ecm) shall be checked according to DIN 1048-5 [64]. Variations of grout
stiffness have an influence on the deformations, stress results and hotspot results of the FE-calculation.
3.3.8 Poissons ratio
If no other values or test results are available, the Poissonss ratio for the uncracked grout should be between
0.20 and 0.16. The recommended value for grout is 0.19.
3.3.9 Creep and shrinkage
The influence of autogeneous shrinkage has to be minimized by using appropriate grout materials. The influence
of shrinkage should be considered in the design and verification.
3.3.10 Fatigue behaviour
The design value of the fatigue strength of the grout (fcd,fat) is defined in GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2.The fatigue
analysis of the grout material shall be performed in accordance with Model Code 1990 [24]. The S/N-curves
according Model Code 1990 [24] shall also be used for grout.
The S/N-curves specified in the Model Code 1990 [24] are valid for concrete in constantly dry condition only.
Recent experimental investigations on the fatigue behaviour of grout material [60] as well as of the GC [58] in wet
environment show a significantly lower fatigue resistance. For that reason the influence of water on the grout
properties has to be considered for grouted connections under water or in the splash zone.
Based on the currently published test results, GL recommends to determine the accordant fatigue strength of the
grout by reducing the number of allowable load cycles by a factor of 10.
In case that further results from accordant studies or grout specific experimental data for the fatigue resistance of
grout under water are available, these results can be taken as a basis for the design of the GC in agreement with
GL.
4
Requirements for Manufacturers, Quality Control, Production and Installation
4.1
General
-
GL recommends, especially for Grouted Connections under water (e.g. Jacket- or Tripod-Constructions),
to perform an onshore test of the grouting procedure. This is helpful to avoid later problems while
grouting offshore:

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
20
4.2
control of suitability of grout pipes with regard to specific grout type
grout pumpability test for grout material and equipment under consideration of offshore
environmental conditions
the test should be witnessed by a GL inspector (or an inspector recognised by GL).
the functionality of the grout seal for installation shall be proven by tests or by experience with similar
applications.
according to the Guideline for the Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines, Edition 2012 [1], 25% of
grouted connections of a windfarm shall be inspected by GL (or an inspector recognised by GL) during
installation. In particular, the first two units, that are installed offshore, shall be performed as on-the-spot
inspection. (For the rest of the 25% also an inspection of installation protocols might be sufficient after
agreement with GL.)
special care has to be taken if the grouting volume has a boundary to subsea soil and no grout seal is
used (i.e. for pre-piled grouted connections). The preparation and control measures need to be agreed
by GL or an inspector recognised by GL.
Shear keys
Weld beads to be used as shear keys within grouted connections have to be seen as a primary structural member
according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.3.2.
However, from the practical point of view it is very difficult to examine the structural detail of weld beads by
ultrasonic testing (UT) and radiographic testing (RT).
The minimum scope of non-destructive inspections and testing for different connection types and various
structural member categories is listed within GL Guideline for Offshore Wind Turbines (GL-IV-2 [1]), Edition 2012,
Table 3.4.3.
Note: A reference to GL-IV-2, Edition 2005 is possible, but requires an agreement by GL
As a main critical item the weld transition between base material and weld seam has been identified. To address
this issue the focus on inspections is shifted towards to the surface testing (visual testing, VT) and magnetic
particle testing (MT). Thus the amount of MT shall be increased to 100% for the examination of weld beads
according to table 1 of this technical note. Nevertheless, in case that MT or VT shows inconsistencies, additional
testing (e.g. UT) may be requested from case to case. The test procedure shall be agreed in detail with GL and if
necessary supervised by GL or an inspector recognized by GL.
Category
Type of
connection
Weld beads
Primary structural
members (welding)
RT
UT
MT
0%
0%
100%
Table 1: Minimum scope of non-destructive inspections and testing for weld beads on piles

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
21
In general, a welding procedure qualification record (WPQR) for weld beads shall be performed by the
manufacturer and approved by GL or an accredited certification body. Furthermore, plates have to be cleaned at
the proposed location of the weld beads at least at a distance of +/-25 mm before welding on the surface. This
becomes necessary in order to ensure freedom of rust and scale in the root.
The admissible imperfection for weld beads shall be in accordance with EN ISO 5817 [25] assessment class B.
In case vertical shear keys are applied the requirements for crossing welds given in GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.4.2.5.3
(7) have to be considered.
All requirements referring to the detail category chosen have to be fulfilled according to GL-IV-2 [1].
In case DC 90 is chosen for verification an accurate manufacturing and control procedure is required.
For all weld beads the following requirements have to be fulfilled additionally:
-
the geometry assumed for verification shall be filled with weld material.
in case of multilayer application the depth of the notch between two arbitrary locations on different layers
is not allowed to exceed 1 mm.
the transition radius between weld bead and tube shall not be less than 1 mm.
the shear key should be shaped in that way that air pockets during grouting procedure are avoided.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
22
Fig. 4-1: Shear Key welding requirement for weld beads according to GL
4.3
Grout seal
A test of the grout seal is recommended in order to check the strength capacity of the elastomeric grout seal
concerning the high pressure loads during installation. It has to be shown, that the tightness of the grout seal is
sufficient so that no leakage is possible. The maximum eccentricity (minimum annulus on one site and maximum
annulus on the other site) should be considered in the seal test.
Other parameters, like environmental conditions (i.e. temperature range), and the design of the fastening (i.e.
bolted connection) shall be tested as well.
The tests shall be agreed and witnessed by a GL inspector or an inspector recognised by GL.
4.4
Grouting procedure
4.4.1 Method statement

The grouting procedure has to be defined in detail by the manufacturer of the grouted connection. All important
information concerning the material, the equipment, the personnel and all accordant requirements as well as a
detailed description of the working procedures have to be provided in a method statement.
In general, the method statement should provide the following information:
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
23
general description of content / scope of works
materials used
responsibilities and qualification of personnel
storage of materials (grout, binder, mixing water)
equipment used (mixing plant, pump, grout lines, crane)
detailed description of separate work steps during grouting procedure
detailed description of measures to be taken in case of unforeseen interruptions in grouting process
specification of environmental conditions required during and after finalization of grouting process,
definition of required weather window (see item 4.4.2.1).
detailed description of quality control ( material tests etc.)
specification of requirements for health/safety
4.4.2 Checks during grout installation

The following checks have to be performed by inspections accompanying the grout installation process. All
checks shall be documented.
4.4.2.1
-
Before grouting
check of permissable environmental conditions:
e.g. air temperature, water temperature, wind and wave conditions, temperature of mixing and pumping
equipment, temperature of relevant steel parts, grout temperature, suitable weather window for grouting
process, comparison with accordant specifications in method statement
inspection of components and check of structural details:

e.g. dimensions of components, state and condition of grout seal, surface properties, corrosion
protection, marine growth
check of base materials:

grout material: type, batch, manufacturing date, check of data sheets, storage conditions on installation
vessel mixing water: storage conditions, no saltwater
check of mixing and pumping equipment:

visual check of mixer, pumps and grout lines with regard to serviceability for grouting process
check of implementation of quality control system on the installation vessel as per method statement:
self monitoring of manufacturer, independent third party control
4.4.2.2
-
During grouting process

check of environmental conditions as per item 4.4.2.1

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
24
check of mixing procedures and grout properties:

maximum mixing water content, visual inspection of the mixed grout
material tests as per method statement (flowability, air void content, sampling for compressive test)
documentation of irregularities and deviations from the grouting procedure as per method statement
In case that the grouting process had to be interrupted and no procedure has been defined how to continue the
grouting process in the method statement, GL has to be involved before continuation of the grouting process in
order to agree on a suitable procedure to continue the works.
4.4.2.3
5
5.1
After grouting
check of environmental conditions as per item 4.4.2.1
check of grout overflow
check of flowability of grout at the end of the grouting process
analysis of test results and documentation

Strength Analysis - General Assumptions
Load calculation
For the load analysis the grouted connection can be modelled by simple beam-based framework, in contrary to
numerical FE-models with solid elements for investigating the bearing capacity of a grouted connection.
5.1.1 Ultimate limit state (ULS)
Based on a transient load calculation according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 4.4, the maximum load components with
the corresponding value of the other load components shall be determined: Axial force: Fx; Horizontal shear: Fy,
Fz; Torsional moment: Mx; Bending moments: My, Mz
Section area, section modulus and moment of inertia shall be determined after agreement with GL.
As minimum six loading conditions with the maximum value of each load component respectively have to be
investigated. For each maximum load component a set of remaining corresponding components shall be
determined comprising one loading condition.
The course of load components shall be determined, in order to simulate the load distribution with a numerical
verification approach. Therefore the lead components on top and at the bottom of the grouted connection have to
be determined.
In general the impact of all load components has to be investigated. In some cases it might be allowed to neglect
some components with low influence. Agreement with GL is required in such cases, e.g. if torsional moment is
omitted.
5.1.2 Fatigue limit state (FLS)
The general requirements for fatigue analysis of steel members have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], chapter 4
(loads), Appendix 4.B (loads), and section 5.3.4.2.1 (steel).
Based on a transient load calculation according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 4.4, all load ranges for the relevant
components shall be determined based on a rainflow count calculation including the number of cycles and
intervals for the range value (load spectra). For a detailed analysis the load spectra is required to be summarised
in form of a Markov-matrix at top and bottom of the grouted connection, including the mean value for each range.
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
25
Note: For fatigue verification the number of load cycles for each load component (i.e. bending moment and
torsional moment) shall be taken into account in a conservative manner.
5.2
Combined loading
5.2.1 Combined loading for ULS

The behaviour of a grouted connection is highly non-linear. (e.g. gap, ovalisation, plastic strain and cracks in
grout material). Therefore a calculation for combined loading is not allowed to be performed by superposition of
single loads, but only by combined application, unless one component is classified as negligible. An agreement
with GL is required in such cases.
5.2.2 Combined loading for FLS
The general requirements for fatigue analysis of steel members have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section
5.3.4.2.4.
The relevant components depend on the type of foundation.
For a monopile foundation only the range of bending moments (Mx, My) and torsion moment Mz has to be
investigated, since it is assumed that the resulting stress ranges due to vertical and horizontal forces can be
neglected.
Concerning the bending moment the damage calculation can be performed separately for each component. In
case the load calculation is taking into account the direction of loads, the relevant coordinate system for the
bending moments has to correspond to the maximum resulting bending moment in global coordinates.
For a jacket, tripod or tripile foundation type it is required to determine a stress spectra for minimum and
maximum principle stress for critical locations.
Note: The mean stress level resulting from self weight loads shall be considered for damage calculation of the
grout material.
5.3
Load history
For the calculation of the stresses in the fatigue verification both situations, cracked and uncracked state of the
grout, have to be taken into account separately as a conservative approach.
Note 1: This requirement reflects the fact, that ULS loads might change the state of the grout
(cracked/uncracked) near the shear keys due to crack initiation, respectively leads to degradation of stiffness.
Since the ULS load case might occur in the beginning or the end of lifetime, both points shall be covered by the
verification procedure. It shall be stated that the effect of degradation is not covered by the safety factors on
material and load side.
Note 2: No guidance is offered concerning the load history. The approach from the designer has to be discussed
and agreed by GL on an individual basis.
5.4
Verification of serviceability (SLS)
The dynamic behaviour of the whole structure consisting of turbine, tower and support structure has to be
investigated in order to avoid resonant response. The procedure of verification has to comply with GL-IV-2 [1],
section 6.6.4.
It can be assumed that for the performance of a modal analysis, nonlinear effects of gap building, ovalisation and
frictional contact can be neglected and a beam model (or framework) can be used. The stiffness along the length
of the grout shall be estimated by equivalent stiffness taking into account shear coupling.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
26
It is required to validatee the equivalent stiffness vaalue by numerical analysis inn the context oof ULS strenggth
analysis.
5.5
Looad distributionn
The applied loads havee to be distribuuted from the upper steel tuube (transition piece, sleevee member) to the
t pile
tube usingg the grout layyer as transfer medium.
Due to thee specific matterial propertiees of the groutt material, whiich allow high compressive stress and neearly no
tension sttress, this loadd transfer is mainly
m
realisedd by compresssion struts betw
ween the sheaar keys. Also frictional
f
load transsfer and horizoontal compresssion struts beetween the steeel tubes occuur to a certain aamount.
Note: Up to now, it is not
n finally clariified how the frfrictional resisttance is influenced by cyclicc loading. As a
consequeence, GL recommends the coefficient
c
for friction has too be limited forr the numericaal verification to
t
= 0.25, see also secttion 9.1. Addittionally a degrradation of stifffness dependding on the num
mber of load cycles
c
shall be taaken into accoount. The amoount of degraddation has to be
b agreed withh GL. Referennce is given to LochteHoltgreveen [46].
Fig
g. 5-1: Load transfer betw
ween shear keeys (exemplarry) from DNVV [5]

C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
27
Fig. 5-2: Com

mpression sttruts in axial loaded
l
conneections
from Anderss [16]
Fig. 5-3: Bending, mod ified Fig. 5-2 by GL
nd-Shell modeel from Fehlinng [53]

Fig. 5--4: Compresssion struts wiithin Strut an
The torsioonal moment is
i mainly transsferred by horrizontal comprression struts between verticcal shear keyss, if
arranged.. Otherwise toorsion momentts are distributted by frictional forces betw
ween inner andd outer tubes,
concentraating in the support areas off the shear keeys.

C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
28
Fig. 5-5: Arrangements of vertical shear keys (exemplary)

5.6
Stress concentration due to attachments
An increase of stresses (Stress Concentration Factors SCF) due to load application by attachments shall be
taken into account for steel and grout material.
6
Strength Analysis - Safety Concept
6.1
General
For the verification of a grouted connection a semi-probabilistic safety concept is applied.

The general requirements for loads have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], chapter 4.
The general requirements for weldings have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.4.
The general requirements for the verification of steel have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.3 and 6.6.
The general requirements for finite element modeling have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.A.
It is required that global and local imperfections are defined and documented by the designer in the beginning of
the (basic) design phase.
6.2
Loading
It shall be noted that the load safety factors to be applied for installation load cases may differ from the load safety
factors during operation, see GL-IV-2 [1], section 4.4.
Partial safety factors for DLC while grouting
6.3
TP without grout (without person on TP):
DLC 8.2,
(for F)
while grouting (with person on TP):
DLC 8.1,
(for F)
after grouting (without person on TP):
DLC 8.2
(for F)
Material
6.3.1 Steel
The partial material safety factors for steel have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 6.6.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
29
A grouted connection is seen as not accessible and therefore the partial material factor of M = 1.25 is required
for fatigue assessment.
Note: ln case of periodic monitoring and maintenance it is allowed to reduce M = 1.15, after agreement with GL.
The reduction reflects the fact that periodic condition monitoring gives the possibility to support a GC with nonregular behaviour by mitigation measures.
Nevertheless, a reduction of safety factor always implies a higher risk for the owner, that costly repair actions are
necessary to reach the lifetime of operation. For circumferential welds in the grout zone connecting the tube cans
M = 1.25 is mandatory.
The requirements for the steel members are classified according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 3.3.
The steel within the area of the overlap length has to comply with the requirements given for the category
Primary Structural Member.
Surface treatment of steel tubes is not subject of the technical note at present state. The influence of the surface
roughness on the bearing capacity of the grouted connection is neglected.
lt shall be mentioned that rough surface properties of the contact surface between grout and steel may slightly
improve the bearing capacity. This should be neglected in the design because the long-term behaviour cannot be
established.
For the shear key design the following requirements are recommended:
-
the distance between the shear keys should be equal.
only one type of shear key is applied (types see Fig. 1-5).
a verification of the shear key strength has to be performed.
6.3.2 Grout material

Partial safety factors for ULS:
The partial safety factors M for grout material have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.
Compression:
The design value of the compressive strength (fcd) of the grout shall be determined similar to concrete based on
GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.
Tension:
The design value of the uniaxial concrete tensile strength fctd has to be calculated with the same partial safety
factors (M and Offshore) as the corresponding design value of the compressive strength.
Partial safety factors to determine the resistance at fatigue limit state (FLS):
The design value of the compressive strength for fatigue (fcd,fat) of the grout shall be determined similar to
concrete based on GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2.
With increasing concrete strength also the design value for fatigue fcd,fat increase up to a peak. This peak-value
can also be used for higher strength grout material.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
30
Grout material strengthened by steel fibres is not subject of this technical note. Publications dealing with this topic
are Schmidt et al. [49], Lohaus et al. [37] and Curbach et al.[50].
6.4
Imperfections
6.4.1
Global Imperfections
Fig. 6-1: General imperfections (global eccentricity, global inclination, local buckle) from GROW [15]
In addition to a correct load application, the influence of the exceedance of certain installation tolerances has to
be investigated:
-
vertical eccentricity
It shall be proven analytically, that reversing compression struts do not affect the same area (see
Fig. 2-3 ), or crossing compression struts have to be assumed (see section 6.7).
horizontal eccentricity
The following cases shall be considered (if bending is applied, otherwise a) is sufficient):
a)
Minimum horizontal eccentricity with maximum pressure on the side with small thickness of
grout layer.
b)
Minimum horizontal eccentricity with maximum tension on the side with small thickness of
grout layer.
inclination
The following cases shall be considered (if bending is applied, otherwise c) is sufficient):
c)
Maximum inclination with maximum pressure on the side with small thickness of grout layer
at top.
d)
Maximum inclination with maximum tension on the side with big thickness of grout layer at
top.
local out-of-roundness and dimples, respectively buckles.

The local tolerances shall comply with the standard chosen to perform the buckling verification. In
that case no further investigation has to be done. Otherwise both, out-of-roundness and buckles
have to be taken into account for the numerical analysis.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
31
It is required to investigate all combinations of maximum eccentricity and maximum inclination and
find the most unfavourable case.
6.4.2 Local Imperfections
For verification of buckling resistance local imperfections have to be taken into account.
The magnitude is generally defined by the standard, which is applied, e.g. EN 1993-1-6 [17].
6.5
Early-age cycling / Movement of construction
The movement between pile and sleeve during and after grouting (hardening) should be avoided until the 28dstrength is reached. In case the movement occurs, early age cycling with the time-dependent in-situ strength (see
section 3.3.3) shall be taken into account.
Additional verification based on the actual loading situation (e.g. environmental conditions), state of construction
and strength testing of grout sample cubes can be done by the designer to continue the installation process
before the 28d-strength is reached.
Note 1: It is not always possible to reduce movements to zero, but it is crucial that the designer consider
installation scenarios and provides a concept for fixation/support during the hardening phase.
6.6
Friction between steel and grout
Note: Up to now, it is not finally clarified how the frictional resistance is influenced by cyclic loading. As a
consequence, GL recommends to limit the friction coefficient for the numerical verification to = 0.25.
Additionally a degradation of stiffness depending on the number of load cycles shall be taken into account. The
amount of degradation has to be agreed by GL. Reference is given to DNV-TR 2012-0371 [4] and LochteHoltgreven [46].
6.7
Crossing compression struts
There is no data base of tests concerning the bearing capacity of crossing compression struts for fatigue loads.
We recommend to use the following procedure.
Crossing compression struts have to be taken into account, if the angle of the load distribution between two shear
keys is less than 30.
Occurrence of crossing compression struts has to be checked considering horizontal and vertical installation and
manufacturing tolerances. In case of crossing compression struts the following approach has to be applied for the
verification:
7
7.1
the number of effective shear keys considered for verification has to be reduced by one.
the overlap length has to be reduced by the shear key distance.
the number of load cycles for fatigue verification of the compression strut has to be doubled for Ac1
and Ac2 (see Fig. 8-1). The load application area Ac0 can be excluded from this doubling.
Strength Analysis Numerical Verifications

General notes
It has to be proven, that the bearing capacity of a grouted connection is sufficient to withstand ULS loads, taking
into account all members of the grouted connection (steel tubes, shear keys, welds, grout layer) as well as
possible imperfections.
For the proof of the grouted connection the interaction of the pile, sleeve, shear keys (horizontal and vertical) and
grout as well as the non-linear effect of gap initiation and ovalisation has to be considered.
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
32
In general, a numerical analysis by FE-modelling is recommended. Since the results contain highly non-linear
behaviour of the interaction between the grout material and the steel members an analytical calculation as
plausibility check is required as well (see chapter 8).
Alternatively, reference is made to DNV-OS-J101 [3] and DNV-TR 2012-0371 [4].
In case vertical shear keys are arranged for load distribution of the torsional load, it is required to consider the
vertical shear keys in the numerical model.
The effective grouted connection length shall be calculated as the overall length of the grout reduced by the nonstructural lengths (according to ISO 19902:2007, section 15.1.4 [7]). Additional sections due to e.g. packer failure
and grout plug shall be considered.
Effective overlap length Lg
Lg = Loverlap - 2tG
Lg < Loverlap - s
7.2
Verification for ultimate limit state (ULS)
7.2.1 General notes

Two different methods are recommended for verification, depending on the material law which is applied in FEM
for the grout material:
Fig. 7-1: Different methods for modelling the stress-strain relationship of grout
(A) Method without post peak behaviour
A stress strain relationship is assumed until reaching the limit of design compressive strength. A non-linear
stress-strain relationship for the grout material can be used.
The post-cracking behaviour is not considered in this method.
Recommendations for post-processing and verification procedures are given in chapter 9 of the present technical
note.
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
33
(B) Method considering post peak behaviour

A non-linear stress-strain relationship for the grout material considering post-cracking behaviour is assumed.
Thus method (B) leads to a redistribution of stresses, in case the defined strength limit is reached at any location.
For this case the softening behaviour after crushing should be modelled realistically. The required material
parameters for the grout shall be determined based on results derived from or in consultation with qualified
experts. The procedure has to be chosen in agreement with GL.
Two limits of compressive strength fcd,min = fcd and fcd,max = fck shall be considered.
Recommendations for modelling are described in chapter 9. All global tolerances (see section 6.4) have to be
considered.
7.2.2 Material behaviour of steel members
The material parameters of steel shall comply with EN 10225 [27].
If Method (A) is used, it is recommended that the stress-strain relationship for the steel follows a linear function.
If Method (B) is used, it is required that the stress-strain relationship for the steel follows a linear function.
Plasticity cannot be traced.
7.2.3 Material behaviour of grout material
For the numerical calculation a failure model for the grout is required to describe the grout-failure under multiaxial
loading realistically. The failure surface of a multiaxial model can be described by a function f(l1,J2,) depending
on the first invariant of the stress tensor, the second deviatoric stress tensor and the lode angle, see Chen et al.
[31]. The used failure model for the FE-calculation shall take into account the grout behaviour.
-
Appropriate strength hypothesis and failure models are: Willam/Warnke [32], Ottosen [33] or equivalent
(e.g. Speck [59]).
The Tresca-yield criterion is not applicable for grout.
The used material failure model for the grout material and the input values for the numerical calculation shall be
agreed with GL. Furthermore, it shall be proven that the failure model and the input values are applicable for the
grout material used. In order to verify the applied material law it is recommended to perform plausibility checks on
simple FE-models (patch tests) for different stress-states (e.g. bi- and triaxial stress state) based on multiaxial
test results. An agreement with GL concerning these tests is also recommended.
It shall be verified by the designer that the assumed multi-axial concrete failure model for the grout is in
accordance with the real material behaviour and is valid for all stress combinations that will appear in the grout.
7.2.4 Verification of steel (ULS)
No plastification is allowed.
Design criteria determined by von Mises stress
v,d fy/M
verification of von Mises stress
Additionally a verification of safety margin against buckling failure has to be performed (see section 7.2.6)
7.2.5 Verification of grout (ULS)
In case the material law has been applied correctly, the failure criteria f(l1,J2,) 0 is fulfilled for the grout at each
nodal point of the FE-model. For relevant points in the grout the failure criteria shall be checked additionally for
the occurring stress.
It should be checked that following boundary conditions are fulfilled at the last iteration step of the FE-calculation:
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
34
f(l1,J2,)
failure criteria
cd,tension
fctd
additional check for tension
In the vicinity of the shear keys hot spot stresses occur and can be verified according to section 9.2. It has to be
proven that the compressive stress in that area is not exceeding the valid limit.
7.2.6 Buckling capacity of the grouted connection
A verification of the design resistance for buckling behaviour has to be performed.
Recognized standards describe the verification of buckling of undisturbed tubes only and do not cover edge
pressing, ovalisation and gap building. Hence it is recommended to perform a numerical buckling verification by
means of EN 1993-1-6, chapter 8 [17].
Fig. 7-2: Von Mises stress at collapse load [5], [44]

It is seen as sufficient to use a model without shear keys for buckling analysis.
Boundary conditions shall cover the effects of edge pressing, ovalisation and gap building.The requirements for
tolerances of manufacturing shall comply with the standard chosen to perform the buckling verification (e.g. EN
1993-1-6), see also requirements for FE-modelling.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
35
Fig. 7-33: Local impeerfection in th

he pile from DNV
D [5]
Simplifiedd procedures are
a allowed foor verification aafter agreemeent with GL.
7.3
Veerification for fatigue

f
limit state (FLS)
7.3.1 G
General notess
It has to bbe verified, thaat the bearing capacity of a grouted connection is sufficcient to withstaand FLS loadss for the
given lifettime, taking into account all members of tthe grouted coonnection (steel tubes, sheaar keys, weldss, grout
layer) as well as possibble geometric imperfectionss due to manuffacturing and installation proocess.
The fatiguue analysis is based on dam
mage calculatiion according to Palmgren/M
Miner rule andd follows a diffferent
proceduree for steel andd grout materiaal. The proceddures are show
wn in the following subchappters.
All global installation toolerances (seee section 6.4) hhave to be takken into accouunt.
Two different methods of fatigue anaalysis -similar tto the ULS annalysis- are reccommended, ddescribed by the
material laaw, which is applied
a
(see seection 7.2.1).
The stresss in the grout material determined in the numerical solution shall be checked by aanalytical analysis for
plausibilitty (see chapteer 8).
Recommeendations for pre- and postprocessing caan be found in chapter 9.
7.3.2 D
Detail categorries for shear keys
k
The sheaar keys can bee verified by means of nominnal stress appproach or strucctural hot spott stress approaach
(according to IIW, Fatiggue recommenndations, 20088 [11].
For the noominal stress approach the detail catego ry DC 80, resppectively DC 71
7 (undercut > 0.5 mm) cann be
assumed according to Radaj et al.[566].
For the sttructural hot spot stress appproach DC 90 can be assum
med (see note section 7.3.66). The requireements for
meshing sshall be obeyeed.
Note: S/N
N curves for shhear keys are not validatedd.
A verification of the fatigue life for maaximum loadeed shear key iss required.
7.3.3 D
Detail categorries steel tubes and attachm
ments
For detaill categories foor horizontal and vertical weelds see GL-IV
V-2 [1], appenddix 6.A.
C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
36
7.3.4 Material behaviour steel members

The material parameters for steel shall comply with EN 10025 [26] or EN 10225 [27].
7.3.5 Fatigue behaviour of the grout material
Multiaxial dynamic loading has a significant influence on the fatigue behaviour. This behaviour is part of ongoing
research. Approaches can be found in Ghlmann [34] or Lochte-Holtgreven [46]. Actual studies from Grnberg et
al. [30] show that the bearing capacity under multiaxial compression loading for fatigue is lower than for static
multiaxial compression loading.
7.3.6 Verification of steel members
A verification of the steel tubes, the welds (longitudinal and horizontal), and the shear keys has to be performed.
The verification for fatigue loads has to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.3.4 and 6.6.6. Linear damage
accumulation according to Palmgren/Miner shall be applied.
For detail categories for steel tubes, welds and attachments, see GL-IV-2 [1], appendix 6.A.
For evaluation of shear key spot according to IIW structural hot spot procedure DC 90 is allowed.
Note: The assumption of DC 90 is a GL approach, which is acknowledged but not validated by any scientific data.
It is only allowed for weld beads. Special requirements for manufacturing of the weld beads are given in section
4.2.
The detail categories for steel tubes with weld beads as shear keys are defined in section 7.3.2.
7.3.7 Verification of grout
The FLS-verification for the case without stress redistribution and degradation of grout stiffness can be done by
simplified fatigue analysis (I) or damage accumulation (II). If stress redistribution or degradation of grout stiffness
is considered in the analysis by method (III) or method (IV) shall be used. Method (III) is similar to method (I), but
the fatigue design limit is reduced to fcd,fat,red. In Method (IV) the interaction between degradation of stiffness and
stress redistribution is considered in the calculation and the verification is done by a damage accumulation.
(I) Simplified fatigue analysis
For this verification only the maximum compressive stress in the grout (c,max) and the total number of load cycles
(Nnom) are relevant. The minimum compressive stress is set to zero.
c
c,max
Nnom
Load Cycle
Fig. 7-4: Input values for simplified fatigue analysis

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
37
The verification has to be done according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2:

Scd,max SLim
with:
Scd,max = Sd c,max,compression c / fcd,fat
where: Sd = 1.1 a partial safety factor to consider the inaccuracies of the model for
stress calculation
c,max,compression = maximum compressive stress in the grout (see Fig. 7-4)
c = 1.0
fcd,fat = design value of the fatigue strength of the grout (according GL-IV-2
[1], section 5.4.2.2)
The limit SLim = 0.4 is valid only for dry environmental condition of the grouted connections. New research
works show a significant decrease in fatigue behaviour for wet environmental condition (see
section 3.3.10). The influence of water on the grout properties has to be considered for grouted
connections under water or in the splash zone.
Based on the currently published test results, GL recommends to determine the accordant fatigue
strength of the grout by reducing the limit for the compressive stress level for fatigue (SLim).
In case that further results from accordant studies or grout specific experimental data for the fatigue
resistance of grout under water are available, these results can be taken as a basis for the design of the
GC in agreement with GL.
Note: This verification is valid for a nominal number of operational load cycles Nnom = r nR T 2 109 (see GLIV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2 (3)).
For a higher number of load cycles the simplified verification can also be used, but the limit Scd,max has to be
modified applying the S/N-curve for Scd,min = 0, see Model Code 1990 [24].
(II) Damage accumulation for load spectrum
A linear damage accumulation according to Palmgren/Miner is assumed for the grout material in this verification.
Basis for FLS loading used for this verification is a Markov-Matrix including ranges of stress values and
corresponding mean values, evaluated according to section 5.1. Fig. 7-5 shows exemplarily the maximum
compressive stress in the concrete caused by load spectra for three mean values.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
38
Fig. 7-5: Load spectra for the damage calculation according Palmgren/Miner
It is required to determine a transfer function which reflects the relation between external (global) stressing the
steel tube and internal (local) stress in the grout layer. The transfer function can be used to determine the
compressive stress in the grout for each load level of the Markov-Matrix and perform a complete damage
accumulation.
It is seen as conservative that the graph of the transfer function is linear.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
39
Fig. 7-6: Transfer function for FLS verification of grout material

The S/N curves shall be chosen according to Model Code 1990 [24](see section 3.3.10).
The damage calculation shall be done by applying the Palmgren-Miner for each load level from the load
spectrum. For every location in the grout the Palmgren-Miner summation has to be less than DLim:
Verification:
D DLim
with
DLim = 1.0
Optionally it is possible to consider a degradation of stiffness for each interval of the load spectrum. The
verification for this case is described in method (IV).
(III) Fatigue analysis considering post peak behaviour
This method is similar to the Method (I) but with a reduced value for fcd,fat = fcd,fat,red. Only the maximum occurring
compressive stress after stress redistribution in the grout (c,max,compression,rearranged) and the total number of load
cycles (Nnom) are relevant. The minimum compressive stress is set to zero. This verification is valid for a nominal
number of operational load cycles Nnom = r nR T 2 109 (see GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2 (3)).
fcd,fat,red = SLim / Sd fcd,fat
with SLim = 0.4; Sd = 1.1 according to GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.4.2.2
works show a significant decrease in fatigue behaviour for wet enviromental condition (see
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
40
Note: For higher number of load cycle this verification can also be used, but the value SLim has to be modified
applying the S/N-curve for Scd,min = 0 according to Model Code 1990 [24].
For every grout element the maximum occurring compressive stress has to be less than fcd,fat,red:
Verification:
c,max,compression,rearranged fcd,fat,red
In case method (III) is applied it is emphasized that the results are suitable only for the verification of the grout
material. For verification of the steel members method (III) is not valid.
(IV) Damage accumulation for load spectrum considering stress redistribution and/or degradation of stiffness
This method is similar to the method (II), but the interaction between degradation of stiffness and stress
redistribution is considered in the calculation and verification. The fatigue design with degradation of stiffness for
grout is similar to concrete. An approach for degradation of concrete stiffness under fatigue loading can be found
in Ghlmann [34]. As a result of stiffness degradation stress redistribution occurs. The design procedure is
described by Schaumann et al. [35].

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
41
Fig. 7-7: Exten

nded conceptt for FLS veriification of grrouted joints from Schaum
mann et al. [335]
If stiffnesss degradation is taken into account
a
for th e verification, the load histoory influences the result andd has to
be considdered in a conservative wayy, after agreedd with GL.
For everyy grout elemennt the Palmgreen-Miner summ
mation has to be less than DLim:
V
Verification:
D DLim
with
DLim = 1.0
Note: Duue to numericaal reasons it is common, thaat local zones near the sheaar keys show ddamage valuees D > 1,
which doees not reduce the global cappacity of the cconnection as mentioned in Schaumann eet al. [35].
Neverthelless, if damagge values D > 1 occur, it is rrequired to verrify, that load redistribution
r
iis permissiblee. A
possible aapproach is deescribed by Pfanner [36].
Alternativvely it can be shown
s
by stiffnness reductionn of damaged elements that this reductioon does not leaad to
significannt changes of the
t stiffness (zzipper effect, m
measured i.e. by deformatioons).

C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
42
Plausibility Check (Analytical Approach)
8.1
General notes
-
the performance of a plausibility check is required in order to confirm the numerical analysis.
all tolerances have to be considered by the plausibility check, e.g. maximum and minimum values for
thickness of the grout layer as well as distribution angles of the compression strut due to vertical and
horizontal eccentricities.
the method applied in DNV-TR 2012-0371from DNV [4] is acknowledged by GL and may be used as
plausibility check.
it is seen as sufficient, if the capacity of the grout material and the shear key capacity are checked for
plausibility.
the plausibility check has to be documented and is required additionally to the FE-analysis.
Note: A new simplified approach (the strut-shell-model) is published in Fehling et al. [53]. This model allows
examining directly the loading in the compression struts under consideration stiffness, eccentricity and inclination.
This model could be applied.
In sections 8.2 to 8.4 a possible way to perform plausibility checks is described. The format of this check is not a
requirement, but a suggestion and offers an approach for certain boundary conditions like loading by bending
moment and axial force only. If a torsional moment or shear force is affecting significantly the results, the method
has to be adapted accordingly.
8.2
Procedure for verification and load evaluation
8.2.1 Procedure for ULS loading

It is required to determine a transfer function which reflects the relation between external (global) stress and
internal (local) stress. The maximum stress at the supporting area (Ac0) near the shear keys of the inner steel
tubes has to be determined e.g. in case the torsion moment and shear forces can be neglected:
cd,Ac0 = eff(Pd/Aproj + Md/Wproj) / nShk / dis
with
-
cd,Ac0: stress on shear key of inner steel tube
Pd , Md maximum load components of grouted connection (axial force, resulting bending moment)
nShk number of active shear keys
dis magnification factor for non-symmetric load distribution on struts
dis = minimum (1.3; 1/red,FE) with red,FE according to section 9.2.2
Aproj projected square area of support of ideal compression strut (including tolerances)
Wproj projected section modulus of support of ideal compression strut (including tolerances)
eff()effective width of loading area = beff/hshk as function of angle () of strut, see Fig. 8-1

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
43
Fig. 8-1: Compression strut [51] with detail of support area in grouted connection
* A geometry check according to EN 1992-1-1 [22] is required.
The assumed width of the support area a0 and the factor for the effective width eff depend on geometric
parameters:
E.g. for a circular shear key shape the width a0 is given to: a0 = 1.53sin (+22.5)h =eff()/h
8.2.2 Procedure for FLS loading
The FLS-verification can be done by simplified fatigue analysis (A) or a damage accumulation (B). Method (B) is
considering each stress level of load spectra, taking into account the mean value for damage accumulation. For
this method FLS loading as a Markov-Matrix including ranges of stress values and corresponding mean values is
required.
It is required to determine a transfer function which reflects the relation between external (global) stress and
internal (local) stress (see section 7.3.7).
Note: The relevant load level for the upper (maximum) value of vertical compression stress has to be found within
the load spectra at top and bottom of the grouted connection. Using this load level as input values, the pressure
on the support area of the inner shear key can be determined by analytical formula. E.g. in case the torsion
moment and shear forces can be neglected:
cd,fat,Ac0 = eff(Pmax,fat/Aproj + Mmax,fat/Wproj) / nShk / dis
with
-
cd,fat,Ac0: stress on shear key of inner steel tube for load level with maximum vertical compressive stress
Pmax,fat, maximum absolute value of axial force reached with FLS load spectra, which can be calculated
by means of Markov-Matrix considering load range and mean value

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
44
Mmax,fat, maximum absolute value of bending moment reached with FLS load spectra, which can be
calculated by means of Markov-Matrix considering load range and mean value
dis magnification factor for non-symmetric load distribution on struts.
dis = minimum (1.3; 1/red,FE) with red,FE according to section 9.2.2
Aproj projected square area of support of ideal compression strut (including tolerances).
Wproj projected section modulus of support of ideal compression strut (including tolerances).
eff() effective width of loading area = beff/hshk as function of angle () of strut
A) Simplified fatigue analysis (see section 8.4.2.1)

For this verification only the maximum occurring compressive stress in the grout (c,max,compression) and the total
number of load cycles (Nnom) are relevant (see section 7.3.7).
Scd,max SLim
with Scd,max = Sd c,max c/fcd,fat
Sd =1.1 and c =1.0
The Limit SLim = 0.4 is valid only for dry environmental condition of the grouted connections. New
research works show a significant decrease in fatigue behaviour for wet environmental condition (see
Note: This verification is valid for a nominal number of operational load cycles Nnom = r nR T 2 109 (see GL-IV2 [1], section 5.4.2.2 (3)).
modified applying the S/N-curve for Scd,min = 0 according to Model Code 1990 [24].
B) Detail damage accumulation for load spectrum (see section 8.4.2.2)
A linear damage accumulation according to Palmgren/Miner is assumed for the grout material in this verification.
Basis for FLS loading used for this verification is a Markov-Matrix including ranges of stress values and
corresponding mean values, evaluated according to section 5.1.
This method is comparable to FE-Verification (section 7.3.7, method (II)).
8.3
Verification of shear key (steel)
The general requirements for the verification of steel have to comply with GL-IV-2 [1], section 5.3.
8.3.1 ULS verification
Due to concentrated load distribution by shear keys the bearing capacity of the shear key against ULS loads has
to be proven by the verification of shear key strength by simplified cantilever model (Fig. 7-2). (see Fig. 8-1).
The von Mises stress shall not exceed v,d fy/M.
Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
45
8.3.2 FLS verification

Due to concentrated load distribution by shear keys the bearing capacity of the shear key has to be proven by a
damage calculation according to Palmgren/Miner rule. The total damage shall be D 1.0.
8.4
Verification of compression strut (grout)
The following verifications shall be performed (see Fig. 8-1):

(a) partial area loading (Ac0, near to the shear key)
(b) theoretical area to accommodate the resistance partial area load (Ac1 3Ac0) Geometric boundary
condition have to comply with EN 1992-1-1, section 6.7 [22]
(c) middle of compression strut (Ac2)
8.4.1 Verification for ultimate limit state (ULS)
a) Verification for partial area loading near shear key
Near to the shear key partial loading of an area can be considered.
Design resistance:
Rd,c,Ac0 = fcd
Criteria for Verification:
with: : factor considering the multiaxial compressive

state near to the shear keys: 1 <= <= 3
cd,Ac0 Rd,c,Ac0
b) Verification for distributed area Ac1 (Partial area loading)

Design resistance:
Rd,c,Ac1 = fcd
cd,Ac1 Rd,c,Ac1
with: cd,Ac1 = cd,Ac0 a0/a1
c) Middle of compression strut (area Ac2)

Width of compression strut: bef = a2 = 0,5lstrut+0,65a0 (a0 lstrut/2)
(bef according to EN 1992-1-1 [22])
Design resistance:
Rd,c,Ac2 = tt fcd
with: tt = 0.5 reduction factor for transverse tension
cd,Ac2 Rd,c,Ac2
with: cd,Ac2 = cd,Ac0 a0/a2
d) Verification of splitting stresses in the compression strut

The occurring splitting stresses in the compression strut according Schlaich/Schfer [51] have to be less than fctd.
8.4.2 Verification for fatigue limit state (FLS)
8.4.2.1 Simplified fatigue analysis
For the simplified fatigue analysis only the maximum occurring stress in the grout and the total number of load
cycles are relevant (see section 7.3.7).
Scd,max SLim
with Scd,max = Sd c,max c/fcd,fat
Sd =1.1 and c =1.0

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
46
works show a significant decrease in fatigue behaviour for wet environmental condition (see
Note: This verification is valid for a nominal number of operational load cycles Nnom = r nR T 2 109 (see GL-IV2 [1], section 5.4.2.2 (3)).
modified applying the S/N-curve for Scd,min = 0 according to Model Code 1990 [24].
a) Verification for partial area loading (Ac0) near shear key
Near to the shear key partial loading of an area can be considered.
Scd,max SLim
with
Scd,max = Sd c,max,Ac0 c/fcd,fat
c =1.0 and Sd =1.1
b) Verification for distributed area Ac1 (Partial area loading)

Scd,max SLim
with
c =1.0 and Sd =1.1
with
c =1.0 and Sd =1.1
c) Middle of compression strut Ac2

Scd,max
tt,fat
SLim
tt,fat
8.4.2.2
= 0.5 reduction factor for transverse tension
Detail damage accumulation for load spectrum
The fatigue verification for the plausibility check can also be done for a load spectrum. The stresses are
calculated by analytical formula as described in section 8.2.2. The further procedure for this verification is similar
to section 7.3.7, Method (II).
9
Recommendations for FE-Modeling
9.1
General notes for modelling (pre-processing)
In the following general requirements for FE modelling are given:

-
the model shall include the complete overlap area (structural overlap length Lg) and additionally parts of
the connecting steel tubes.
the length of the steel tubes on both sides of the grouted connection has to cover the area which is
affected by (local) disturbance of the load transfer from sleeve to pile.
a minimum distance of 2 times the diameter for both, the sleeve and pile shall be kept on both sides
between grouted area and model boundaries.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
47
in case the influence of the torsional load can be neglected and no geometric aspect is violated, a half
model with symmetric boundary conditions is sufficient for verification. In such cases, agreement with GL
is required.
contact element layers (friction) shall be used at outside and inside of the grout
solid elements for grout and steel shall be used
coefficient of friction can be taken out of a range of = 0.3 0.4 for dry friction conditions. For
underwater conditions or FLS verification we recommend to reduce the friction coefficient by safety
factor 1.5.
Note: This approach is not validated. In case of new experimental data, the application might be refused or the
requirement might be tightened.
-
the number of elements in the grout layer shall be chosen to a more or less constant value. The absolute
number is given by the scaling relation between shear key, thickness of grout layer and aspect ratio of
the elements < 1.5.
the steel layers shall consist of minimum two elements perpendicular to the layer.
the end of the pile can be fixed by a rigid support.
the load application has to satisfy the load distribution determined in section 5.1.1
Special application notes for modelling of shear keys

-
the shear key geometry can be modelled as semi circle or polygonal. A check of the aspect ratio of the
elements is required (< 1.5).
the shear key shall consist of minimum six elements on the surface area which has contact to the grout
material.
the grout material shall consist of minimum six elements on the surface area, which has contact to the
shear key.
Note: In general the mesh should look well arranged. The more triangular elements can be avoided the better
the mesh is. We recommend to agree the mesh geometry in advance with GL.
9.2
General notes for evaluation of results of FE-analysis (post-processing)
9.2.1 Hot-spot interpolation

The numeric results always show singularities of the stress components on the root of the shear keys. The values
of these singularities are far beyond realistic values.
This effect is caused by load distribution out of the compression strut into the small shear key on nodal basis.
Combined with geometric characteristics, the load distribution is concentrating on one single node.
To establish a realistic value an evaluation method in accordance with IIW-1823-07:2008, Recommendations for
fatigue design of welded joints and components [11], section 2.2.3, Structural hot spot stress and especially
section 2.2.3.1 can be used to calculate the structural hot-spot stress.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
48
Fig. 9-11: Hot-Spot In

nterpolation according
a
to IIW Fatigue Recommenda
R
ations from IIIW-1823-07:2008 [11]
For steel members the interpolation points are reccommended as given in IIW [11].
It is required to check the
t resulting values by plaussibility check (i.e.
( analytical approach), seee chapter 8.
Note: Thee procedure inn section 9.2.11 is a GL apprroach, but not validated by scientific
s
testss. Research is still
ongoing aand might leadd to a short-term revision off this section.
9.2.2
R
Reduction facctor av,FE due to
t load redistrribution
It is allow
wed to reduce the
t calculatedd stress by a reedistribution faactor av,FE.
For calculating the factor it is necesssary to determ
mine the relevaant stress in thhe middle of thhe compressioon strut.
Fig. 9-2:
9 Averaginng between co
ompression struts
s
av,FE = mmin,avg / min,1
with
min,1 = highest
h
value of
o minimum prrinciple stress at hot spot,
min,avg = average value of minimum
m principle streess of neff-2 moost loaded sheear keys
neff = effeective numberr of shear keyss described byy the numberss of compressiion struts

C
Revision: 00, 2013-12-04
49
Note: The procedure in section 9.2.2 is a GL approach, but not validated by scientific tests. Research is still
ongoing and might lead to a short-term revision of this section.
10
Periodic Monitoring
Periodic monitoring is recommended. In case movements or settlements are observed measurements and
periodic monitoring have to be launched and agreed by GL.
11
Acknowledgement
Major Parts of the investigations described in this paper were made within the research project GROW (Fkz.:
0327585) funded by the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU).
Many sources were consulted during the preparation of this paper. Especially, the authors gratefully acknowledge
the continuously good cooperation with our project partners of the GROW research project and all our colleagues
at GL and at the Leibniz University Hannover.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
50
12
[1]
References
Germanischer Lloyd: GL Rules and Guidelines - IV Industrial Services - Part 2 - Guideline for the
Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines, Edition 2012.
[2]
Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines, Edition 2005.
[3]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV): DNV-OS-J101: Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures, February 2013.
[4]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV): Technical Report: Capacity of Cylindrical Shaped Grouted Connections with
Shear Keys, Summary Report, Report No. 2012-0371, Rev.5, dated 19.02.2013.
[5]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV): Summary Report from the JIP on the Capacity of Grouted Connections in
Offshore Wind Turbine Structures, Report No. 2010-1053, Rev.5, dated 12.05.2011.
[6]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV): DNV-OS-C502: Offshore Concrete Structures, September 2012.
[7]
DIN EN ISO 19902: Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Fixed Steel Offshore Structures, 2008.
[8]
Billington, C. J. and Lewis, G. H. G.: The Strength of Large Diameter Grouted Connections OTC Paper
No 3083. Houston, 1978.
[9]
Bundesamt fr Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie (BSH): Standard Design of Offshore Wind Turbines,
dated 20.12.2007.
[10]
Bundesamt fr Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie (BSH): Verfahrenshinweise fr die Zustimmung im

Einzelfall (ZIE) beim BSH Groutverbindung, dated 09.08.2011.
[11]
Hobbacher, A.: Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components, International
Institute of Welding (IIW/IIS), IIW Document XIII-1823-07/XV-1254-03, 2007.
[12]
NORSOK N 004: Design of Steel Structures, Rev.3, 2013.
[13]
Schaumann, P. et al.: Durchrutschende Grout-Verbindungen in OWEA-Tragverhalten, Instandsetzung

und Optimierung, Stahlbau 79, September 2010.
[14]
Schaumann, P.; Lochte-Holtgreven, S.; Wilke, F.: Bending Tests on Grouted Joints for Monopile
Support Structures, in: Proceedings of the 10th German Wind Energy Conference- DEWEK 2010,
Bremen, 2010.
[15]
Schaumann, P. et al.: Experimentelle und numerische Untersuchungen zum Tragverhalten von GroutStrukturen fr Offshore-Windenergieanlagen, Final Report of Research Project GROW, Institute for
Steel Construction, Leibniz University Hannover, 2011.
Anders, S.: Betontechnologische Einflsse auf das Tragverhalten von Grouted Joints, Dissertation,
Institute of Building Materials Science, Leibniz University Hannover, 2007.
[16]
[17]
EN 1993-1-6, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures Part 1-6 Strength and stability of shell structures.
[18]
Fib-bulletin 42, Constitutive modelling of high strength / high performance concrete, Lausanne,
Switzerland, January 2008.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
51
[19]
DAfStb-Richtlinie, Herstellung und Verwendung von zementgebundenem Vergussbeton und

Vergussmrtel, Juni 2006.
[20]
Bundesamt fr Wasserbau (BAW), Merkblatt Frostprfung von Beton, Dezember 2004.
[21]
EN 206-1 Beton Teil 1: Festlegung, Eigenschaften, Herstellung und Konformitt.
[22]
EN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures.
[23]
EN 13412, Products and systems for the protection and repair of concrete structures Test methods Determination of modulus of elasticity in compression.
[24]
CEB Bulletin No. 213/214 CEB-FIP: Model Code 1990, 1991/1993.
[25]
EN ISO 5817, Welding Fusion-welded joints in steel, nickel, titanium and their alloys (beam welding
excluded) Quality levels for imperfections.
[26]
DIN EN 10025, Hot rolled products of structural steels.
[27]
DIN EN 10225, Schweigeeignete Bausthle fr feststehende Offshore-Konstruktionen - Technische

Lieferbedingungen.
[28]
IEC 61400-3, Wind Turbines Part 3: Design requirements for offshore wind turbines.
[29]
Deutsches Institut fr Bautechnik (DIBt): Richtlinie fr Windenergieanlagen, Einwirkungen und

Standsicherheitsnachweise fr Turm und Grndung, 2012.
[30]
Grnberg, J.; Ertel, C.: A Triaxial Fatigue Failure Model for ultra high performance concrete (UHPC),
HiPerMat 2012, Kassel, 2012.
[31]
Chen, W. F.: Plasticity in Reinforced Concrete, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1982.
[32]
Willam, K. J.; Warnke, E. P.: Constitutive Model for Triaxial Behavior of Concrete Concrete Structures
Subjected to Triaxial Stresses, International Association for Bridges and Structural Engineering,
Bergamo, 1974.
[33]
Ottosen, N. S.: A Failure Criterion for Concrete Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division ASCE, Vol.
103, EM 4, 1977.
[34]
Ghlmann, J.: Zur Schdigungsberechnung an Betonkonstruktionen fr Windenergieanlagen unter

mehrstufiger und mehraxialer Ermdungsbeanspruchung, Dissertation, Institut fr Massivbau, Leibniz
Universitt Hannover, 2009.
Schaumann, P.; Wilke, F.: Design of Large Diameter Hybrid Connections Grouted with High
Performance Concrete, Proceedings of the 17th International Offshore and Polar Engineering
Conference, Lisbon, 2007.
[35]
[36]
Pfanner, D.: Zur Degradation von Stahlbetonbauteilen unter Ermdungsbeanspruchung, Dissertation,

Konstruktiver Ingenieurbau, Ruhr-Universitt Bochum, 2002.
[37]
Lohaus, L.; Lindschulte, N; Anders, S.: Oppertunities and risks of steel fibres in Grouted Joints, EWEC
2010, Warschau.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
52
[38]
American Petroleum Institute (API:2000): Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and
Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms Working Stress Design, December 2000.
[39]
Schaumann, P.; Bechtel, A.; Lochte-Holtgreven, S.: Fatigue Design for Prevailing Axially Loaded
Grouted Connections of Offshore Wind Turbine Support Structures in Deeper Waters, EWEC 2010.
[40]
Wesarg, B.: Untersuchung der Grout-Verbindungen von OWEA mit Variationen der geometrischen
Randbedingungen mittels nichtlinearer Beulanalyse, TUHH, 2012.
[41]
Schaumann, P.; Wilke, F.: Design of Large Diameter Hybrid Connections Grouted with High
Performance Concrete, ForWind, Institute for Steel Construction, Leibniz University of Hannover.
[42]
Schaumann, P.; Lochte-Holtgreven, S.: Schdigungsmodell fr hybride Verbindungen in OffshoreWindenergieanlagen, Stahlbau 80 , Heft 4, 2011.
[43]
Fehling, E.: Werkstoffmodelle und Bemessungsanstze fr Grouted Joints, Seminar Grouted-Joints

bei Windkraftanlagen, Universitt Kassel, 2011.
[44]
Klose, M.; Mittelstaedt, M.; Mulve, A.: Grouted Connections Offshore Standards Driven by the Wind
Industry, Germanischer Lloyd, ISOPE 2012, Rhodes.
[45]
Schaumann, P.; Bechtel, A.; Lochte-Holtgreven, S.: Nachweisverfahren zur Tragfhigkeit berwiegend
axial beanspruchter Grouted Joints in Offshore-Tragstrukturen, Stahlbau 81 , Heft 9, 2012.
[46]
Lochte-Holtgreven, S.: Zum Trag- und Ermdungsverhalten biegebeanspruchter Grouted Joints in

Offshore Windenergieanlagen, PhD-Thesis, Vol.29, Institute for Steel Construction, Leibniz University
Hannover, 2013 (in German).
[47]
Wilke, F.: Load Bearing Beahviour of Grouted Joints Subjected to Predominant Bending, PhD-Thesis,
Institute for Steel Construction, Leibniz University Hannover, 2013 (to be published).
[48]
SVB-Richtlinie: DAfStb-Richtlinie Selbstverdichtender Beton. Deutscher Ausschuss fr Stahlbeton

(DAfStb), Berlin, November 2003
[49]
Schmidt et al.: Sachstandsbericht Ultrahochfester Beton, Deutscher Ausschuss fr Stahlbeton (DAfStb),

Heft 561, Beuth, 2008
[50]
Curbach, M..; Speck, K.: Versuchstechnische Ermittlung und mathematische Beschreibung der
mehraxialen Festigkeit Von ultra-hochfestem Beton (UHPC) - Zweiaxiale Druckfestigkeit. Dresden :
Technische Universitt Dresden, Institut fr Massivbau, 2007
[51]
Schlaich, J.; Schfer, K.: Konstruieren im Stahlbetonbau, in: Bergmeister, K.; Wrner, J.-D. (Hrsg):
Beton-Kalender 2001, Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2001.
[52]
Schmidt, M.; Fehling, E.; Braun, T.: Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbine Structures Part 1:
Individual Approval, Materials and Quality Control in: Steel Construction 6 (2013), Issue 6, pp. 207-215,
Ernst & Sohn Verlag, 2013
[53]
Fehling, E.; Leutbecher, T.; Schmidt, M.; Ismail, M.: Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbine
Structures - Part 2: Structural Modelling and Design of Grouted Connections in: Steel Construction 6
(2013), Issue 6, pp. 216-228, Ernst & Sohn Verlag

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
53
[54]
Lohaus, L.; Lindschulte, N.; Scholle, N.; Werner, M.: Betontechnologie fr Grouted Joints, Stahlbau 81
(2012), Heft 9, Ernst & Sohn Verlag
[55]
Lohaus, L.; Schaumann, P.; Lochte-Holtgreven, S.; Bechtel, A.; Griese, R.; Lindschulte, N.: Zustimmung
im Einzelfall fr Grout-Verbindungen in Tragstrukturen fr die Offshore-Windenergie, Bautechnik 90
(2013) , Heft 7, 2013, Ernst & Sohn Verlag
[56]
Radaj, D.; Sonsino, C.M.: Fatigue Assessment of Welded Joints by Local Approaches, Abbington
Publishing, 1998, Cambridge.
[57]
DIN 1045-3: Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Spannbeton Teil 3: Bauausfhrung
Anwendungsregeln zu DIN EN 13670, Mrz 2012, Beuth Verlag
[58]
Schaumann, P.; Raba, A.; Bechtel, A.: Impact of Contact Interface Conditions on the Axial Load Bearing
Capacity of Grouted Connections, Proceedings of the EWEA 2013, 4th - 7th February 2013, Vienna,
Austria.
Speck, K.: Beton unter mehraxialer Beanspruchung, Ein Materialgesetz fr Hochleistungsbetone unter
Kurzzeitbelastung, Technische Universitt Dresden, Fakultt Bauingenieurwesen, Dissertation, 2008
[59]
[60]
Hmme, J.: Einfluss der Feuchtigkeit auf das Ermdungsverhalten druckschwellbeanspruchter

hochfester Vergussbetone", 1. DAfStb Jahrestagung 2013, Bochum, November 2013
[61]
DIN EN 1992-1-1/NA, National Annex Nationally determined parameters - Eurocode 2: Design of

concrete structures, January 2011
[62]
Soerensen, E. V.: Fatigue Life of High Performance Grout in Wet or Dry Environment for Wind Turbine
Grouted Connection, Poster 178, EWEA Offshore November 2011, Amsterdam, 2011
[63]
Certification of Offshore Substations, Edition 2013.
[64]
DIN 1048-5:1991-06: Prfverfahren fr Beton; Festbeton, gesondert hergestellte Prfkrper, Juni 1991,
Beuth Verlag
DIN EN 206-9:2010-09: Ergnzende Regeln fr selbstverdichtenden Beton (SVB); Deutsche Fassung
EN 206-9:2010, September 2010, Beuth Verlag
[65]
[71]
Det Norske Veritas (DNV): Technical Report: Testing of Conical Shaped Grouted Connections
subjected to Axial Loading and Dynamic Bending Moment, Report No. 2010-3620, dated January 2013.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
54
Appendix 1:
National requirements for offshore windfarms in the German EEZ (subject to BSH approval)
For the construction and operation of offshore windfarms in the German EEZ, approval from the Federal Maritime
and Hydrographic Agency (BSH) needs to be granted.
The requirements stated in the BSH Standard Design of Offshore Wind Turbines [9] shall be fulfilled.
Within the Design Basis documentation, a clear hierarchy of applicable standards shall be defined with BSH [9] as
the governing standard. Wherever possible, German or European standards shall be applied. When applying the
Eurocodes, the German national annexes shall be considered.
With respect to grouted connections, some special requirements need to be considered [10]. As the grouted
connection is considered to be a non-standardized construction while at the same time the grout is considered to
be a non-standardized material, a so-called single-case approval (Zustimmung im Einzelfall, ZiE) needs to be
given by BSH.
This approval has to be applied for by the developer of the wind farm. A nominated expert needs to be contracted
to describe the design concept including specific material properties, verification methods and further
requirements. The design of the grouted connection can be based on the material properties given in his expert
report for the specific project, if the nominated expert is acknowledged by GL and can validate his material
specifications with test data available. The nominated expert and GL shall agree on the concept in good time
before the final design documentation is submitted.
Agreement on the requirements between the expert, the certification body, BSH and related authorities should be
achieved at an early stage of the design process.
A binding statement of the expert on the verification of the grouted connection is required to be delivered within
the 2nd release of the BSH approval process. The single-case approval needs to be finalized within the 3rd release
of the BSH approval process.
The grout material is classified according DIN 1045-3 [57] as berwachungsklasse 3. An external monitoring
(Fremdberwachung) by accredited, neutral bodies in the meaning of DIN 1045-3 (e.g. Federal Institut for
Material Research and Testing (MPA)) is required.
More information concerning the site specific approval in the individual case can be found in Lohaus et al. [55]
and Schmidt et al.[52].
It shall be noted that the BSH Standard [9] is currently under revision and a new edition is expected to be
published in the near future.

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
55
Recommendations for Design Basis
Appendix 2:
The Design Basis is a concept for the Basic Design (static calculation) and is required for the 2nd BSH-release.
The Basic Design is Part of the 3rd BSH-release.
The Design Basis should include special methods, if they are not part of the standards or guidelines. The experts
report cannot be taken as single document for the verification of the design basis, because it does not cover all
aspects (see below).
Please separate the documents for Design Basis (2nd BSH-release) and Basic Design (3rd BSH-release) clearly.
The Design Basis should at least contain information to the following subjects for jacket- and monopileconstruction:
-
standards
(applied standards, experts report, )
design description
(drawings, geometry and shape of shear key, installation tolerance, imperfection, )
material properties
(Steel: steel grade, DC shear keys, )
(Grout: material properties (compression strength, youngs modulus), S/N-curve, )
numeric modelling
(boundary conditions, mesh, material model for the grout (incl. input values), )
concept of ULS analysis

(Steel, Grout)
concept of FLS analysis

(Steel, Grout)

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
56
Appendix 3:
Elastomer bearings (for information only)
In case of grouted connection without shear keys which has been considered as a design option in the past,
relative sliding between grout and steel has been reported in number of wind farms. These settlements are mainly
due to the surface irregularities, negative impact of cyclic bending in axial capacity and accumulated relative
sliding effects etc. This problem could be solved using the elastomer bearings. Please refer to [5] for detailed
information about the failure mechanism and recommended repair method.
Repair action
One possible solution can be to install rubber bearings on the top of monopile rim. The rubber bearings will
transfer 100% of the dead load, axial force and partial bending moment coming from the transition piece and wind
turbine to the monopile, hence surpass the grouted connection.
Fig. A3-1: Moment distribution between the spring assemblies and the grouted connection

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
57
Important points to be considered while designing a rubber bearing:

1. analysis shall be performed for the extreme and fatigue loads
2. effect of gripping shall be considered in the design
3. variation in bearing stiffness is caused by e.g. age, temperature and salinity. A range of bearing stiffness
shall be considered to take the uncertainties and variations between final fabricated bearings in to account
4. pre stressed analysis shall be performed in order to take the local stresses on the structure during
installation
5. in order to avoid uplifting, the rubber bearings shall be pre stressed
6. from the ULS analysis the extreme bearing loads and strains shall be determined and checked to be within
allowable limits
7. the rubber bearings have no tension capacity. The rubber bearings need to be under compression to avoid
instability. In order to avoid uplifting, the rubber bearings shall be pre compressed during the installation to
ensure that they always remain under compression, even in the worst case situation (after relaxation, tower
without nacelle condition etc.)
8. laminated rubber bearings shall be provided
9. 2nd order effects shall be considered for the ULS conditions
10. rubber bearing are frequently used in combination with support system which provide connection between
rubber bearing and the components to be connected
11. the rubber bearings material non linearity shall be taken in to account

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
58
Bearing properties to be submitted

-
bearing dimensions
number of bearings
type of material
shape factor
check for uplift forces
check for compressive stress levels and strain
check on stability against buckling
check on bulging / clearance
check on vertical deformation
load - deformation diagram
eigenfrequency of the bearings
physical properties like hardness, density
Drawings to be submitted
-
in place assembly
installation drawings
sectional drawings
support system drawings
arrangement drawings including longitudinal weld position

Revision: 0, 2013-12-04
59

Technical Note For The Certification of Grouted Connections For Offshore Wind Turbines, Revision 0 (PDF-Version)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Technical Note For The Certification of Grouted Connections For Offshore Wind Turbines, Revision 0 (PDF-Version)

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Technical Note

Certification of Grouted Connections for

The latest edition of the General Terms and Conditions

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Verification of serviceability (SLS)

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Symbols and Abbreviations

= Poissons ratio for steel

= angle of compression strut

= displacement, height of surface irregularities, fabrication tolerance

= diameter of the cylinders

= grout to steel interface coefficient of friction

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Applications of Grouted Connections

mainly loaded by bending moment

loaded by cycling axial forces and bending moment

Pile Sleeve design (postpiled)

Pin Pile design (prepiled)

extended jacket leg in prepiled pile

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Applicable codes and standards

DNV-OS-J101: Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures, 2013 [3]

DNV-OS-C502: Offshore Concrete Structures, 2012 [6]

Wind energy standards:

Deutsches Institut fr Bautechnik (DIBt): Richtlinie fr Windenergieanlagen, Einwirkungen und

European (EN) Standards:

EN 12620 Aggregates for concrete, July 2008

EN 13139: Aggregates for mortar, March 2011

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

EN 13670: Execution of concrete structures, 2009

German National (DIN) Standards:

DIN EN 1992-1-1/NA, National Annex Nationally determined parameters - Eurocode 2: Design of

Guideline for Self-compacting concrete (DAfStb) [48]

VeBMR-Guideline (DAfStb) [19]

CEB FIB Model Code 1990 [24]

Additional Regulating German National standard (mandatory in Germany):

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Current state of research and development

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

Due to thee slippage of monopiles in executed

Fig. 1-4: Parrameters of ggrouted conneections ISO 19902:

inner steel tubbular member (pile in foundaation pile-to-slleeve connecttion)

oouter steel tubbular member (sleeve in fouundation pile-too-sleeve connnection)

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections

Fig. 1-5: Geometry oof shear keyss ISO 19902: 2008

Fig. 1--6: Parameterrs for grouted

0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012

Fig. 2-1: Limitations as per different standards

Requirements for shear key arrangement

2.2.1 Horizontal shear keys

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections for Offshore Wind Turbines

F 2-2: Types of shear keey arrangemeent for different types of G

mpression sttruts from Fehling [43]

Technical Note Certification of Grouted Connections

Steel material properties

Grout material properties

3.3.1 General requirements / suitability and identity tests

Requirements for Manufacturers, Quality Control, Production and Installation