CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GENERAL This chapter reviews the literature relevant to the present study. The theories available for quantifying the vertical bearing capacity during installation or preloading are discussed in detail. 2.2 BEARING CAPACITY OF SPUDCAN FOOTINGS There are two principal concerns in the assessment of whether a jack-up unit can be safely used at a particular site: (i) (ii) Prediction of footing penetration during preloading (vertical load only), Assessment of footing stability under design storm conditions (combined vertical, horizontal and moment loading). With some basic considerations these two aspects of bearing capacity analysis are discussed below.

2.2.1 BEARING CAPACITY IN UNIFORM CLAY The ultimate vertical bearing capacity of a Spudcan foundation in clay at a specific depth can be expressed by (SNAME, 1997) v A

qu = Ncsu + po + Where

(2.1)

Po = effective overburden pressure due to backfill. V = combined volume of embedded spudcan A = cross-sectional area of the spudcan

13

2.2.2 BEARING CAPACITY IN SAND OVERLYING SOFT CLAY

A number of analytical procedures are available in the literature to evaluate the margin of safety against a punch-through failure for two-layered soil systems. One simplified procedure involves the projected area method, in which

P = p1A1 = p2A2
Factor of safety against punch-through = q2/p2 Where p1 = bearing stress under the footing; A1 = area over which p2 is distributed; P = total load of footing; q2 = ultimate bearing capacity of soft layer;

(2.2)

(2.3)

This method assumes that the footing loads applied to a strong layer are distributed downward through the layer. An equivalent footing, with effective dimensions that are increased at a rate of 3- vertical to 1- horizontal through the strong layer, is placed at the top of the weaker layer. When the pressure on the equivalent footing equals the bearing capacity of the underlying layer, then the computed factor of safety will be unity In the projected area method the idealized foundation is assumed to act at the interface between upper and lower strata, with dimensions larger than those of true (higher) foundation. Various authors have recommended angle of projection which

14

diverge towards, = , tan-1 (1/2), tan-1 (1/3). Such analysis take no direct account of the strength of the sand itself and only few take any indirect account by considering = f() (Jacobsen et al. 1977). Hanna and Meyerhof (1980) method is commonly used for the analysis of the punch-through case. This method is generally preferred by the offshore industry. This method proposed an analysis on the assumption of a truncated cone of soil in the upper layer being pushed down into the lower layer.

qu = 6 SUB + 2 H 2 1 + 2 D

K tan H) B
s

+v

(2.4)

Where qu = Ultimate bearing capacity, Ks = Punching shear co-efficient, Sub= Undrained shear strength of the lower stratum.

' = Effective unit weight of granular stratum,

H= Thickness of upper layer in two layer system, D= Depth of the widest cross-sectional area, V= Volume of soil displaced by spudcan. Craig and Chua (1990) conducted series of centrifugal tests on sand and clay using spudcan (circular footing) model diameter of 140 mm. They have suggested procedure for calculating the spudcan bearing capacity in uniform clay, sand, and sand overlying clay. They observed that while the assumed mechanism of the Hanna and Meyerhof (1980) type of analysis of potential punch-through (which ignore any distortion of the sand/clay interface and assume removal of the displaced soil) may be appropriate at small penetrations. An alternative calculation which is able to accommodate the observed mechanisms associated with gross displacement is needed.

15

Teh et al. (2005) conducted a series of centrifuge tests on sand overlying clay and suggested that the load spread angle is not a constant, as commonly assumed in conventional bearing capacity theories in layered soils, but increases with qsand/qclay and decreases with H/B where qsand, qclay, H and B are bearing strength of sand, bearing strength of clay, depth of penetration and diameter of spudcan, respectively. Hossain et al. (2006) presented a new approach that is based on soil failure mechanism, including cavity formation and eventual back-flow of soil over the spudcan, which was observed in drum centrifuge tests and in large deformation finite element analysis. The centrifuge model tests included half-spudcan penetration tests, in which the half section that coincides the side Perspex wall is allowed to penetrate. During the penetration, the soil deformation was monitored using PIV analysis. When the soil starts to flow back into the top of the spudcan, the existing open cavity remains stable with no further change in depth. No evidence of cavity wall collapse, as would be indicated by inward and downward soil movements into the open cavity, was observed in either the model tests or the numerical analysis. Condition for back-flow, and the limiting cavity depth, H, may be expressed simply as a relationship between H/D and the non-homogeneity ratio suH/ D, where suH is the shear strength at depth H. This relationship appears extremely robust over a wide range of soil strengths and foundation diameters.

2.3 PUNCH-THROUGH FAILURE:

16

The Spudcan footing is normally installed by preloading processes. During the preloading process, the load applied to a spudcan has to be reached by the bearing resistance from the soil in order to maintain static equilibrium. In soil condition showing increasing bearing resistance with depth, this process sets the spudcan deeper at a rate controlled by the load increments. On the other hand, in conditions consisting of a strong soil layer overlying a weaker layer, the bearing resistance may decreases with depth at some point during the process, leading to temporary lose of static equilibrium. This results in rapid uncontrolled spudcan penetration, or punch-through, before resting at a final depth where the bearing resistance is sufficient to overcome the preload. Punch-through may also occasionally occur due to storm overload (McClelland et al., 1981; Baglioni et al., 1982). Most punch-through failures happen during the preloading in stratified soil profiles with a relatively thin layer of sand or strong clay overlying a weaker layer (Baglioni et al. 1982, McClelland et al.1981, Young et al.1984, Craig et al.1985). Punch-trough also can occur in normally consolidated or lightly overconsolidated clays and silts due to partial consolidation occurring during any delay in preloading, and the development of a localized strong crust of soil just beneath the spudcan (McClelland et al.1981, Young et al.1984). Craig and Chua (1990) presented the results of a series of centrifuge tests on model spudcans (14m in prototype diameter) installed in dense sand (with friction angle of 38) overlying a stiff clay layer with uniform undrained shear strength cu of 41 to 45 kPa). The results of three tests with different sand thickness showed that for the case with 2.6 m prototype sand thickness no distinctive punch-through failure was observed,

17

whereas for the case of 7 m and 9.5 m sand thickness, punch-through failures occurred within the first 2 m of penetration. Tjahyono et al., (2009) conducted a series of full-spudcan and half-spudcan centrifuge tests on thin upper strong layer overlying soft clay with normalised upper layer thickness H/B ranging from 0.16 to 0.71, where H and B are penetration depth and spudcan diameter, respectively. The strength ratio of lower-to-upper soil layers used in this study is 0.2. The measured spudcan load-penetration response shows a change of profile from a monotonously increasing trend for the thinner upper layers (H/B 0.31) to a post-peak softening trend for the thicker upper layers, thereby suggesting that the likelihood for punch-through decreases with thinner crust layer. The observed soil deformation for the case of H/B equal to 0.4 reveals punching-shear failure in the upper layer initiated at shallow penetration depth (D/B less than 10%), followed by the formation of a rigid crust block beneath the spudcan, which gets carried downward by the advancing spudcan deep into the lower layer. The effects of the crust block on the spudcan bearing resistance in the soft clay should be taken into account in practical analysis. Teh et al., (2005) conducted series of centrifuge (100g) test on sand overlying clay with spudcan diameter of 100 mm. Four tests with prototype sand layer thickness of 5 m, 7 m, 7.7 m, and 10.5 m were performed. The result shows that the bearing stress increases with thickness of the overlying sand layer and Punch-through failure takes place within a narrow range of 10% to 12% of spudcan diameter beneath the sand surface (Fig 2.1).

18

800

600 q (kPa) B=10 m

case 1 (H=5m)

400

200

case 2 (H=7m)

Punch-through

case3 (H=7.7m) case 5 (10.5m)

0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 D/B Figure. 2.1 Punch-through failure (Teh et al. 2005) Hosssain et al. (2005) carried out centrifuge model tests to study the Punchthrough failure of Spudcan penetrating through strong clay overlying softer clay. HalfSpudcan models were used to examine the deformation mechanisms using PIV image analysis. Full Spudcan tests were used to obtain profile of penetration analysis. The soil strength ratio was Sub/Sut = 0.44 where Sub, Sut are undrained shear strength of bottom and top layers and the top layer thickness (H/Dhalf) varied from 0.3 to 1.1 for the half Spudcan, with H/Dfull values of 0.6 to 2.2 for the full Spudcan. Punch-through failure occurs when a peak in the penetration resistance is reached. This is triggered by the transition to a failure mechanism with shear zone extending from the Spudcan shoulder to the base of the strong layer. A soil plug with the shape of a truncated cone forms in the upper layer below the Spudcan and moves down as the Spudcan penetrates further. A transition shear zone surrounding the soil plug disappears during further penetration, and is not evident once the Spudcan is fully embedded in the soft layer. The soil plug has a depth of ~80% of the initial thickness of the top layer. 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

19

2.4 SWISS CHEESE TECHNIQUE: Punch-through failure leads to serious accidents during the preloading stages. Several such cases are reported in the literature. Usually punch-through failure occurs when the thickness of hard layer is about D/2 to D/4, where D is the diameter of the spudcans. In such situations, the hard layer is often weakened before installation of the spudcan. One such practice in the industries, known as Swiss cheese drilling is often used to weaken or degrade the thin sand or hard clay layer and allow controlled penetration in multi layer soil conditions. Swiss cheese drilling typically consists of drilling 30 to 40 holes, each having 600 mm to 900 mm diameter through the hard layer in each planned spudcan footprint (Kosterlnik and Guerra 2007). This technique has been recently used to reinstall jack-ups without incident of failure at several locations in Southeast Asia, where severe punch-through failures occurred during the first attempt of preloading through layered clays (Maung and Ahmad,2000; Brennan et al., 2006; Kostelnik et al., 2007). Maung et al., (2000) reported a case history at Anding, of the Malaysian peninsulas west coast, where the bow leg of the Harvey H. ward jack-up punched through a stiff clay layer at 11m depth. Following this incident, additional soil borings were undertaken which indicated the presence of a stiff layer between 11 to 13.5 m embedment (Fig.2.2). In order to eliminate the punch-through of this layer, a Swiss cheese operation was carried out by drilling 0.66m diameter holes to a depth of 16 m. The drilling depth was 2.5 m below the first stiff layer reaching the top of another underlying stiff layer. A total of 32 and 43 holes were drilled within each spudcan footprint. In total this is equivalent to 18 to 25% of the spudcan footprint area. Five and

20

a half days were required to complete this Swiss cheese drilling and the preloading operations. Brennan et al. (2006) described reinstallation of a KFELS B class jack-up in the Natuna Sea. The method selected was to drill 0.065D diameter holes (0.914 m) on equivalent triangular grid with a spacing of 0.109D to 0.131D. Most of the holes were drilled directly underneath the spudcan to a depth of 25 to 30 m. This depth corresponds to 12 to 17 m below the stiff layer, with the different heights reflecting the different layering at each spudcan location. The total area of holes within the perimeter of the spudcan was approximately 21 to 31% at shallow penetration depths and 15 to 18% at deep penetrations. Kostellnik et al., (2007) presented two case histories in Malaysia on safe jackup rig installation: the first case was at Raya where a total of 43 to 73 holes, each with diameter of 0.66 m, were drilled on equilateral grid with a spacing of 0.124D to 0.15D. The second case was at Tapis were a large number of holes were drilled (reported to be 105). This was due to higher shear strengths of the stiff layer and 0.065D diameter holes were opened using a holes opener. The holes were drilled outside the perimeter of spudcans, and the area removed from inside of spudcans periphery was about 11 to 18%.

21

PLAN VIEW

MLS 74.50 M SEA BED 6.6M INITIAL SPUDCAN PENETRATION DURING FAILED RIG PRELOADING ATTEMPT 11.0 M 13.5 M 2.5 M HARD THIN CLAY LAYER

26 PILOT HOLES (43 NUMBERS) LAYER

18 M REQUIRED SPUDCAN PENETRATION FOR ALL THE THREE LEGS SIDE WAY VIEW

Figure. 2.2. Conventional pattern of Swiss cheese drilling (after Maung et al. 2000) Hossain et al., (2008) conducted a series of model tests of a 40 mm diameter (D) spucan footing vertically installed in stiff-over soft clay deposit. In this preliminary study, the effectiveness of Swiss cheese drilling was investigated by drilling holes of different spacing, depth and distribution both underneath and outside the immediate perimeter of the penetration spudcan as shown in Fig. 2.3 (a). The method of producing

22

the holes, through drilling and coring, were also investigated. Results (Fig. 2.3b) showed that punch-through was mitigated when the layered deposit was punctured in a zone of 0.25D immediately outside the spudcan periphery by coring holes of 0.05D diameter on an equilateral triangular grid of 0.1D and to a depth of twice the thickness of the stiff layer.

Figure. 2.3(a). Spudcan penetration on sample without drilling (Hossain et al. 2008).

Figure: 2.3 (b). Effect of extension of drilling adjacent to the perimeter of the spudcan perimeter (Hossain et al., 2008)

23

2.5 SUMMARY The above review reveals that the Swiss-cheese technique may be safely adapted to mitigate the punch-through failure of spudcan. The area reduction adapted due to drilling in the field is in the range of 11 % to 25% of footprint area of spudcan. While many case histories are reported in the literature, optimum drill hole pattern, that leads to least resistance to penetration is not studied in detail. The present investigation attempts to find out the optimum bore-hole pattern, that gives least resistance to penetration.

24