Integrated Load and Strength Analysis for Offshore Wind Turbines with Jacket Structures

Marcus Klose, Peter Dalhoff, Kimon Argyriadis

Germanischer Lloyd Industrial Services GmbH, Business Segment Wind Energy Hamburg, Germany

ABSTRACT
The paper presents results of an integrated analysis of wind turbine behaviour and structural dynamics of a complex support structure (jacket) under combined wind and wave loads in the time domain. This work will be compared to more simplified state-of-the-art approaches using separated analysis of wind turbine and structure. First results will be presented in the paper and possible optimization discussed. A second focus is put on the detailed fatigue analysis of the tubular nodes of the jacket using the loading derived by integrated analysis. Here again, the authors expect a high potential of optimization by using sophisticated analysis tools such as 3D-FE calculations. Germanischer Lloyd (GL) is taking part in this joint European project in order to investigate the applicability of existing standards and guidelines and the optimization potential in view of a later serial production. As it is intended to extend the wind farm to several hundred units serial production effects have to be considered.

KEY WORDS: Wind Energy; Offshore; Wind Turbine; Support Structure; Jacket; Load Simulation. INTRODUCTION
Within the last few years, a number of offshore wind farms have been put to operation in European countries like Denmark, the UK and the Netherlands. They all have in common that they are situated in shallow water, i.e. less than 25m and relatively close to the shore. Therefore it was economical to use simple concrete gravity foundations or steel monopiles as substructures. Projects that are currently being developed aim for deeper water sites due to certain boundary, e.g. environmental conditions. Other foundation solutions will be necessary in that case. During 2006, a prototype of the REpower 5M (5 MW) wind turbine has been erected near the Beatrice Oilfield in the Scottish North Sea, founded on a jacket foundation (Fig. 1). This one and a second turbine form a demonstrator project to investigate the feasibility for a latter offshore wind farm of 200 turbines. The site is situated in the Moray Firth, 25 km away from the shore in a water depth of approximately 45 m, i.e. beyond existing experience within offshore wind energy. Linked to this wind farm is the EU funded DOWNVInD (Distant Offshore Windfarms with No Visual Impact in Deepwater) research project.

Fig.1: Installation of a 5 MW Turbine on Jacket Substructure (Source: REpower Systems AG)

Paper No. ISOPE-2007-SH-02

Argyriadis

Total number of pages 7

GENERAL
Offshore wind turbines (OWTs) could be regarded as minimal and unmanned offshore structures deployed in large numbers. This is true when looking on the principals of loading and structural analysis, but the complexity and specialized issues of OWT design do not allow a direct application of offshore oil and gas industry design principles. In contrast the assumption that OWTs are like their onshore pendants having only wet feet does not hold, too. Hydrodynamic, material, soil, operation and maintenance issues require a special engineering approach. A typical difference in approach of the two industries is, that wind turbines are standardized products while offshore structures are usually custom made. OWTs and wind farms are in between. Within a wind farm the turbine structure will experience the same wind and almost the same wave conditions, while water depth and soil conditions may vary significantly. Even between the different wind farms in a greater area (e.g. North Sea) the wind conditions will not vary significantly or be a function of simple parameters as distance to shore, height etc. It can be shown, that the influence of site specific parameters, like water depth, wave height and soil conditions, on the support structure (foundation and tower) are significant, resulting in site specific designs. Conversely it can be shown that the influence of the site parameters (except wind) on the machinery design (above yaw bearing) is limited, allowing type standardization.

LOAD ANALYSIS
General When performing a load analysis it has to be recognized, that a wind turbine, and especially an OWT is a highly non linear and elastic system. As a result load analysis for wind turbines is usually performed in the time domain considering the systems elastic response (aeroelastic coupling). The main reasons for non-linearity are: Aerodynamics (quadratic nature of wind load combined with stall effects at high angles of attack). Control system influence (blade pitching and rotor speed variation as a function of required power and load). Wave load (drag load and kinematics in shallow waters) Non-linear elastic response due to load-soil interaction. The non-linear influences are further influenced by the high dynamic response of the OWT structure. Characteristically it can be stated that the support structure of most offshore wind turbines shows a fundamental natural period in the region between 2s and 4s which is well in the high energy region of both wave and wind spectra. Additionally the response is influenced by the aerodynamic damping which is again influenced by the aerodynamics and the control system of the turbine. A common method to obtain an analysis of a system like an OWT is to simulate turbulent wind fields and wave trains in time domain. The response of the structure is calculated for each time step using the blade element theory for the wind loads and the Morison equation for wave loads. It is essential that the global elasticity of the support structure and the rotor are modeled properly and efficient. To produce fatigue load time histories stochastic wind fields for different wind speed classes (characterized by mean wind speed and standard deviation) and accompanying wave trains (characterized by significant wave height and peak period) are generated. Using these as input the response of the structure is calculated and the sectional forces are analyzed with the rainflow method and extrapolated with the Weibull distribution for the design life time. This procedure is very time consuming since several seeds of 10 minutes long time histories have to be generated per bin to achieve statistically acceptable results. For space frame structures like jackets the wind and wave directionality

may play considerable role, since the load direction in combination with the orientation of the members may result in very different results. For monopile structures it is often assumed that wind and waves are always collinear and from the same direction. For jacket structures this may not be conservative. A problem is that, to be exact, not only mean wind or wave direction is needed but the misalignment of the two load sources has to be considered. Unfortunately the information needed in form of a five-dimensional scatter diagram is usually missing and simplifying assumptions have to be made. Further the amount of cases to be analyzed is so high that the data are difficult to handle. Due to the time consuming approach of time domain simulations it is often desired to develop simple methods. An issue to be solved when looking for simplified methods is the correct phasing of wind and wave load as well as the mutual interaction of the loads due to the systems elasticity. In integrated time domain analysis the calculation would result in a correct phasing of wind speed and wave elevation and resulting load (provided the simulation length and number is big enough). Further the mutual interaction is inherently correctly taken into account. As stated separated analysis is lucrative due to its effectiveness but some problems have to be solved using general assumptions. Firstly the phasing of wind and wave load has to be assumed stochastic and noncorrelated. Second, empirical adjustments of the aerodynamic damping when analyzing wave load for elastic structures have to be made. Further possible amplification of wind loads due to wave excitation or interaction of the turbine control with wave induced vibrations have to be considered. This has been performed with some success for monopile structures by Kuehn, Schwarz and van der Temple. The direct addition of the spectra will result in too conservative load assumptions. A very simple method is the quadratic addition of the equivalent load spectra, this is used here. Kuehn is proposing a weighted quadratic superposition, based on the zero and second order spectral moments. The difference in the present structure is that a very big turbine is used on a transparent and stiff structure at very deep water. Modeling of the integrated structure For the present analysis a model of the support structure was built using Bladed software. The model considers an OWT with following main characteristics: Rotor diameter Rated power Number of blades Hub height Water depth Jacket height (about) Total mass (about) 126 5 3 84 45 62 1100 m MW m LAT m LAT m t

The support structure being a jacket structure was modeled using a simple beam element model as shown in Fig. 2. The support structure model consists of about 200 tubular elements with about 750 degrees of freedom. The rotor model is built up from about 25 elements per blade and considers twist and bending-twist interaction. Further drive train torsional flexibility as well as generator, pitch and torque control system dynamics are considered. The problem in the model building is the optimization between discretization, time and space needed to perform the analysis. To reduce calculation time modal analysis of the rotor and the support structure are used. It has to be stated, that with modal analysis it is impossible to consider the load-soil stiffness non-linearity,therefore linearization has to be performed. In the present case the tangent stiffness at low load was used (linear part of the soil springs), since the highest number of cycles

is occurring at low load conditions.

Tower top

the sites wind rose. Even these simplifications result in a minimum amount of about 170 cases with a total of 85 simulation hours. As a first approach simplified analysis over the diagonals and the flat side of the structure alone was performed. The loads are compared at three different locations, tower base (intersection point transition piece to cylindrical tower), jacket column bottom at the adjustment point of their pile sleeve and K-node at -30m LAT. Figures 4 and 5 show sample time series of the load. For confidentiality reasons, the absolute values on the y-axis have been deleted in the following.
34

Wind & wave direction Tower base

32 30

Tower Myz [MNm]

28 26 24 22 20

Sample node

Member 6 (Column) Node 15 Member 57 (Brace)

18

Node 29

Node 1

16 14

Node 43

12 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time [s]

Fig. 2: Support structure model for load analysis When performing an integrated load analysis the global elastic behavior of the structure is of interest. Consequently the number of modes taken into account can be reduced. As a rule modes with frequencies up to 4Hz to 5Hz are used. In the present case the 12 first rotor and 12 first support structure modes were considered. Figure 3 shows examples of the main support structure modes. It has to be stated, that the lowest natural period of the structure is at about 2.8s.

Fig 4. Resulting bending moment at the tower base

-1000

Node 29

Tower Fx [kN]

-2000

-3000

Node 15

-4000

Node 43
-5000

-6000

Node 1
-7000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time [s]

Fig 5. Normal force at the four column bottom nodes. Fig. 3: Suport structure modes 1, 3 and 6 Simulation Several analysis runs were performed, based on the external conditions derived for the site in a scatter 3D-diagram. As a simplification a single combination of mean wind speed, standard deviation, wave height and peak period was considered per bin (wind speed bins of 2m/s). The wind and the waves were assumed to be always co-linear. The different probability of the bins over the direction was taken into account using Comparison of loads from wave and wind When performing load analysis the influence of different load sources is of fundamental interest. Its knowledge allows for simplifications and considerable reduction of load cases to be considered. In the present case 3 sets of load calculations were performed. One with wind and waves, one with wind only and still water and one with the support structure only, without rotor. In the latter case the tower top mass was adjusted to include the whole nacelle and the structural damping was increased to 6% of critical to take account of the aerodynamic damping.

Figure 6 shows sample time series at the jacket column bottom and figure 7 the resulting load spectra at the same node.

-3000

only limited local impact. This is quite surprising especially in view of the chords where it could have been expected that the diagonal impact would have been worse. This phenomenon requires further investigation with a detailed interpretation of the time-dependent relation of the load components.
5

-3500

wind and wave -4500

Normal force cycle range [MN]

Tower Fx [kN]

-4000

dir. 0 [Tower Fx, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] dir -45 [Tower Fx, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] dir 0 [Tower Fx, Location=Mbr 57 End 1.] dir -45 [Tower Fx, Location=Mbr 57 End 1.]

-5000 wave only -5500

-6000

wind only

-6500

-7000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0

Time [s]

Fig. 6: Sample normal force time series at the jacket column bottom due to wind, waves and wind and waves loading

Cumulative cycles [.]

Fig. 8: Normal force load spectra for direction of 0 and -45 at the Knode, column member 6 and diagonal member 57.
4.5

Cycle range normal force, column 1 [MN]

90

wind and wave dir. 0 [Tower Mz, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] dir 315 [Tower Mz, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] dir. 0 [Tower My, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] dir 315 [Tower My, Location=Mbr 6 End 1.] 0.0 1.0e+03 1.0e+04 1.0e+05 1.0e+06 1.0e+07 1.0e+08 8.0e+08 0

wave only

wind only

Cumulative cycles [.]

Fig. 7: Normal force load range spectra at the jacket column bottom. From the results it can clearly be seen that the wind load is the dominating load source. This is surprising considering the high water depth but easy understandable. Due to the low hydrodynamic load on the support structure and the huge size of the wind turbine the wind loads are clearly dominating. It has to be kept in mind that the horizontal displacement of the jacket is less then a quarter compared to the displacement of a monopile for an equivalent turbine at similar water depths. Since fatigue wave loads are inertia dominated it can be assumed that corresponding wave load is direct proportional to the displacement. Of further interest, is the influence of the directionality on the load of the different members. Figures 8 and 9 show the load spectra for a wind and wave direction of 0 (over the diagonals) to that over the flat side (45) for the K-node members at -30m water depth. It can be seen, that the columns take most of the aerodynamic force and directionality has

[kNm]

Cumulative cycles [.]

Fig. 9: Bending Moment My and Mz load spectra for direction of 0 and -45 at the K-node, column member 6.

FATIGUE ANALYSIS OF TUBULAR NODES

General For OWT support structures, the fatigue performance of welded connections is a design driving criterion for many structural details. One reason for this is the fact that the load level of the fatigue loads as well as the number of load cycles to be considered is considerable higher compared to offshore oil and gas platforms. The number of load cycles generated from the rotor of a wind turbine within the design life time of 20 years usually reaches more than 1x 109 load cycles.

Beside this, geometric nonlinearities lead to stress concentrations that need to be considered within the fatigue assessment. Figure 10 shows the transition piece that is situated between tower and jacket of the demonstrator turbines as an example of irregular structures where local stress concentrations have to be taken into account.

The geometric parameters are as follows:

t= T= d= D= g= =

10 mm 50 mm 580 mm 870 mm 462 mm 46

Fig. 11: Geometric Parameters With this input data, stress concentration factors for axial stresses, inplane-bending and out-of-plane-bending have been derived using the Efthymiou equations. A number of different approaches to calculate the resulting damage was planned to be tested and compared: separate simulation of wind and wave loads and (conservative) addition of section forces integrated simulation of wind and wave loads linear damage accumulation according to Miners rule with ascending degree of accuracy

Fig. 10: Transition Piece (Source: http://www.downvind.com/) Tubular joint design is a well-known field of research of the offshore industry. For fatigue verifications, it is common practice to evaluate the calculated damage based on hot spot stresses in combination with related S-N curves. The GL Offshore Wind Guideline follows the concept of the IIW recommendations and proposes a FAT-100 curve for a full penetration butt weld. The slope of the S-N curve is m=3 and m=5 respectively with the knee at N = 5 x 106. A thickness correction for t > 25 mm is considered with a size exponent of n = 0.2 in accordance with the actual Eurocode for fatigue design. For the design calculations of the demonstrator jacket structure, the hot spot stresses have been estimated by the design engineer on the basis of the Efthymiou equations as provided e.g. in ISO 19902. For a selected node, an additional finite element calculation was performed to show that these equations can be considered to be conservative. As a result of the analysis, the minimum fatigue life of some nodes was lower than the scheduled 20 years. Therefore the respective welds had to be toe grinded at the saddle position in order to improve the fatigue resistance. In view of future serial production, it should be investigated in the following if such kind of extensive manual work could be avoided by more sophisticated analysis. Sample Calculation In the following, one of the lower K-nodes at -30 m (LAT) has been picked for a sample calculation. The fatigue loads have been applied as described in the previous section.

Due to the results of the load analysis showing that the wind load would govern the fatigue loads as described above, only the combined loads (upper line in Fig.7) were used for the sample calculation. Regarding the last point, the easiest approach uses damage equivalent loads (DEL). This is a method commonly used in wind energy engineering for fast and easy comparisons of fatigue load spectra. It requires a constant slope of the design S-N curve in order to transfer the load spectra to a one-step rectangular load spectrum for a defined reference number of load cycles (see Fig. 12). Usually, m = 4 is chosen for welded steel structures, intersecting the m=3 branch of the S-N curve at N = 1 x 106. More information is included in the combined load spectra (see Fig. 12). For the load spectra the bi-linear S-N curve with m=3 and 5 is used. In case that the mean level of the oscillation is required, e.g. in case of cast components, Markov or rainflow matrices are required. Both contain similar information, but the Markov matrix gives range and mean values of oscillations together with the respective number of cycles while the rainflow matrix uses upper and lower border of the oscillations. The most accurate analysis could be done by using the time series directly. Here, all load components are combined simultaneously. This procedure is considered to be most accurate with the least conservatism, but requires high efforts on computation.

The eigenvalue analysis shows an increase in the main periods of vibration by 1% - 2% (excluding the 1st eigenmode) and thus a slight reduction of overall stiffness if local joint flexibility is taken into account.
Load range [ kNm]

Simplified rectangular load spectrum

Due to the consideration of local effects the force distribution within the framework slightly changes which leads to both lower moments in the discontinuous and higher moments in the continuous members of the X-bracings. Overall the jacket structure shows a high stiffness that the changes due to flexible modeling of joint connections do not affect the magnitude of forces and moments. However, the stiffness of the connection of the jacket to the pile sleeves has not been investigated and will be subject to further research.

Accumulated no. of stress cycles n

Fig 12: DEL and Combined Load Spectra For the sample node (see Fig.2), the resulting damage was calculated for the upper brace. For the DEL as well as for every step of the combined load spectra, the stress range was derived according to the following formula according to ISO 19902:

PILES UNDER CYCLIC TENSION LOADS

For pile foundations the capacity of the single piles against tension loads is generally smaller compared to compression loads. This effect is even more severe when it comes to cyclic loading. Anyone who has ever tried to pull out a simple pole of his garden fence knows about the reduction of tensile capacity after cyclic loading (moving the pole backand-forth a few times helps a lot!). For an offshore wind turbine (OWT) with more than 108 load cycles this should be judged as a serious and maybe critical issue. The following article gives an overview about some research work in this field and describes the state-of-the-art of the design procedures for OWT pile foundations. Background The effect of cyclic loading on civil engineering structures can be described as a progressive accumulation of displacement and a reduction of the bearing capacity. As an example, field studies of Koreck (1986) performed on vertically loaded piles revealed a reduction of the pull-out capacity by a factor of 5 for some cases. These tests were performed with less than a few thousand load cycles which is some orders less compared to the number of load cycles experienced by wind turbine structures during their scheduled life time of 20 years or more. On the other hand, it has been shown on an experimental basis that the initial deflections should be expected to have the largest part of the accumulated deflections. Another factor that has an influence on the long-term behaviour is the load level of the cyclic loads. The following graph from Wang (2000) shows the development of the displacement of a sample pile under repeated loading for different utilizations. For a pile that is loaded to 70% or 80% of his capacity against static loads, the cyclic failure occurs quite soon after less than 500 load cycles. Tests performed with 30% of the static capacity only had a slow accumulation of deflections in that case.

= SCFAX

M M N + ( SCFIPB IBP ) 2 + ( SCFOPB OBP ) 2 A W W

where SCF are the stress concentration factors for axial forces (AX), inplane bending (IPB) and out-of-plane bending (OPB), N and M are the respective section forces and moments and A and W are the crosssection area and the section modulus respectively. As a result, the calculated damage at the brace results as D = 3.87 with DEL and D = 3.82 with the combined load spectra, i.e. the lifetime would be reduced to approximately 5 years. This includes a safety factor of M = 1.25 for underwater structures according to the GL guideline. Both results are in the same order, i.e. the DEL matches the criterion of being damage equivalent quite well. As the S/N curve does not consider effects of the mean value, the use of Markov matrices would not show any change. Second, it can be seen that the required lifetime of 20 years is not reached. Therefore it would be necessary to proceed with a more accurate calculation approach. Especially, the procedure of adding stress ranges is highly conservative. The design engineer of the demonstrator structures used a more sophisticated approach similar to the one described below and achieved acceptable results (cf. Seidel). This will include the consideration of the wind direction distribution. In the previous damage calculation, it had been assumed conservatively that the loads would act in the same direction all the time.

LOCAL JOINT FLEXIBILITY

Consideration of joint flexibility tends to reduce member end bearing moments and increases mid-span moments. However, it does not significantly affect the primary axial forces in a framework. The inclusion of joint flexibility may reduce the overall stiffness of a framework structure. To estimate the effect of local joint flexibility a finite element model of the overall jacket structure has been evaluated regarding global dynamic behavior (eigenfrequencies) and local reactions to horizontal load onto one brace.

suggested, although it is stated that there is a wide range of assumptions that can be used regarding boundary conditions, solution characteristics, etc., that lead to an unlimited number of variations for either of the two approaches. It shall be noted that the significance of cyclic loading is less important for most oil&gas platforms compared to the situation of OWTs. At the moment, several research institutes are working on methods for an improved prediction of the long-term behaviour of wind turbine structures under cyclic loading with a focus on the soil behaviour. An important subject in this context is the improvement of laboratory test methods for cyclic load behaviour. The results would be needed to perform fatigue analyses in a similar way as for construction materials, for further information see Wichtmann et al. This would be the prerequisite for an optimised pile foundation design.

CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK

The paper presents a sample calculation of a 5 MW OWT with jacket foundation in relatively deep water compared to existing offshore wind farms. The size is comparable to future wind farms in the North Sea that are currently in the design phase. For the OWT configuration investigated in this article, it was shown that the wind loads are governing the fatigue design while the wave impact is only of minor importance. In consequence, it would be possible to use design procedures similar to onshore wind turbines on braced structures (e.g. lattice towers) at least for preliminary design. On the other hand, it has to be pointed out that the effect could be completely different in case of smaller turbines (2-3 MW class) and for different support structures like a tripod. This should be investigated in future research work. Within the next steps of the DOWNVInD research project, further possibilities of integrated analyses will be examined, especially under consideration of the wind and wave direction distribution. The software used for the load simulations allows the combination of the resulting forces and moments that are derived for all structural members. Multiplication of these results with the SCF values and division by cross section properties lead to time series of the member stresses. Finally, rainflow counting and calculation of the accumulated damage lead to the calculated lifetime. It is expected that this approach will lead to a satisfying reduction of the calculated damage. On the other hand, due to the complexity of the structure the effort regarding simulation time and interpretation of results will increase significantly. It should be judged afterwards if this additional effort is justified by the gain of information.

Fig 13: Displacement accumulation with number of load cycles for different loading levels (Source: Wang)

Design Approaches For wind turbines that are built for onshore applications, 20 years of experience have been gathered regarding the design procedures. In Germany, more than 20,000 turbines have been set up so far. Many of them, especially in the windy coastal areas of the northern parts are founded on pile foundations. The basic requirements have been implemented in the guideline of the DIBt. Based on the knowledge described in the previous paragraph, it was decided that cyclic loading of the piles shall not be allowed under cyclic loads derived from typical turbine operation such as full load operation at nominal wind speed (Design Load Case DLC1.1). This approach has been followed as well for GLs Offshore Wind Guideline which has been published in 2005. Until now, this has not been used for OWTs with jacket structures so far, but it may be expected that this requirement may become designrelevant when very light-weight strutures are to be used. Tension loads in jacket piles could either be reduced by additional deadweight or by increasing the overall width of the jacket. Therefore it could be necessary to look for more sophisticated design approaches regarding the soils capacity e.g. if an existing jacket design should be used for a location with higher loads on the structure. The procedure as described above is based on experience and simplified engineering approaches for practical applications. It shall be noted in this context that the DLC 1.1 does not represent the highest fatigue load occuring during the turbines lifetime. Another engineering estimation is given in DIN 1054. There, it is mentioned that a significant reduction of the bearing capacity of the pile should be expected if the cyclic loads would be in the order of more than 20% of the static bearing capacity. The API guideline for the design of offshore platforms of the oil & gas industry gives an explicite procedure for the verification of piles against cyclic fatigue loads. Here, the same procedure as for static loads is used implementation of the soil behaviour as non-linear springs (t-z and Qz-curves). It is stated that cyclic loading may lead to accumulated deformations or decrease in loading carrying resistance. For detailed investigations, discrete element models and continuum models are

Fig 14: Lifting of Substructure (Source: Newsline Scotland Press) An important goal of GLs work package within the DOWNVInD research project is the identification of optimization potential of the structural design. As the extension of the latter wind farm aims for up to 200 structures, this will be a key concern for the profitability of the project. Production and installation procedures (Fig.14) should be timeoptimized in order to install all units within an acceptable time frame. By using state-of-the-art design and calculation tools, efficient use of material and manpower can be achieved. In the near future, the investigations described in this paper will be complemented by additional parametric FE calculations in order to reduce the conservatism included in the parametric equations used so far. An alternative investigation will be performed to see if the use of cast nodes may be a promising option for serial production. The results obtained from the DOWNVInD research project will be implemented within the upcoming revision of guidelines for OWTs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Parts of the investigations described in this paper were investigated within the EU-funded research project DOWNVInD. Many sources were consulted during the preparation of this paper. Especially, the authors gratefully acknowledge the continuously good cooperation with all our colleagues at GL.

REFERENCES
Argyriadis, K, Klose, M (2006), Interaction of Load Analysis and Structural Design of Offshore Wind Turbines, Proceedings of OMAE2006, 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany Bossanyi, e, A, Bladed Theory Manual, Garrad Hassan, Document 282/BR/009, Issue 16, June 2006. EN 1993-1-9:2005, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Part 1-9: Fatigue Germanischer Lloyd WindEnergie GmbH (2005), "Guideline for the Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines", Hamburg

Hobbacher, A, Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components, (2003) IIW doc XII-1965-03 / XV-1127-03. IEC 61400-3: Wind Turbine Generator Systems Part 3: Safety requirements for offshore wind turbines, committee draft, 2005 ISO 19902. "Petroleum and natural gas industries - Fixed steel offshore structures" Khn, M, Dynamics and Design Optimisation of Offshore Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Delft University Wind Energy Research Institute, Report 2001.002, ISBN 90-76468-07-9 van der Temple, J, Design of Support Structures for Offshore Wind Turbines Delft University Wind Energy Research Institute, Report 2006.029, ISBN 90-76468-11-7. Schwartz, S, Argyriadis, K, Certification of Offshore Wind Farms, Proceedings of the European seminar for Offshore Wind Energy in Mediterranean and orthe European Seas (OWEMES) 2003. Schwartz, S, Argyriadis, K, Analysis of the Fatigue Loading of an Offshore Wind Turbine using Time Domain and Frequency Domain Methods, Proceedings of the European Wind Energy Conference. 2001. Seidel, M, e. A, Integrated analysis of wind and wave loading for complex support structures of Offshore Wind Turbines, Proceedings of the Offshore Wind Conference. Copenhagen. 2005. Seidel, M, Foss, G, Impact of different substructures on turbine loading and dynamic behaviour for the DOWNVInD Project in 45m water depth, Proceedings of the EWEC Conference. Athens. 2006. American Petroleum Institute (API, 1993): Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms Load and Resistance Factor Design (RP 2A-LRFD), Washington,DC Bundesamt fr Seeschiffahrt und Hydrographie (BSH, 2007): Standard Konstruktive Ausfhrung von Offshore-Windenergieanlagen, Hamburg. Deutsches Institut fr Bautechnik (DIBt, 2004): Richtlinie fr Windenergieanlagen, Berlin Germanischer Lloyd (2005): Guideline for the Certification of Offshore Wind Turbines, Hamburg Koreck, H. (1986): Zyklische Axialbelastung von Pfhlen in Beitrge zum Symposium Pfahlgrndungen, TH Darmstadt Wang, Z.(2000): Behaviour of Soils and Foundation Structures under Cyclic Loading, Glckauf-Verlag, Essen Wichtmann, T., Niemunis, A., Triantafyllidis, T. (2006): Is Miners rule applicable to sand? in Bautechnik 83 Berlin (in German language)