Occurrence of liquefaction in saturated sandy deposits under structure foundation can cause a wide range of structural damages from minor settlement to general failure because of bearing capacity loss. By comparing traditional foundations for offshore wind turbines, the soil inside and underneath the composite bucket foundation is subjected to the overburden pressure from the foundation self-weight and constrained by a half-closed bucket skirt. The objective of this paper is to clarify the effects of the soil-foundation interaction on the soil liquefaction resistance around the skirt and under the foundation. The dynamic response of the composite bucket foundation during earthquake, including coupled soil mode of porous media, is calculated using the ADINA finite-element program. A typical configuration of composite bucket foundation is used for the analysis, and two earthquake waves (peak ground accelerations of 0.035 g and 0.22 g) are applied as the base acceleration. The results show that the composite bucket foundation exhibited good resistance to seismic action by improving the anti-liquefaction capacity of the soil inside and under the foundation because of the overburden pressure of the self-weight and the constraint effect of the skirt.

1.
F. A.
Villalobos
,
B. W.
Byrne
, and
G. T.
Houlsby
, “
Drained capacity of suction caissons under monotonic loading for offshore applications
,”
Soils Found.
49
(
3
),
477
488
(
2009
).
2.
G. T.
Houlsby
,
R. B.
Kelly
,
J.
Huxtable
, and
B. W.
Byrne
, “
Field trials of suction caissons in clay for offshore wind turbine foundations
,”
Géotechnique
55
(
4
),
287
296
(
2005
).
3.
G. T.
Houlsby
,
R. B.
Kelly
,
J.
Huxtable
, and
B. W.
Byrne
, “
Field trials of suction caissons in sand for offshore wind turbine foundations
,”
Géotechnique
56
(
1
),
3
10
(
2006
).
4.
B. W.
Byrne
,
G. T.
Houlsby
,
C. M.
Martin
, and
P. M.
Fish
, “
Suction caisson foundations for offshore wind turbines
,”
Wind Eng.
26
(
3
),
145
155
(
2002
).
5.
G. T.
Houlsby
and
B. W.
Byrne
, “
Suction caisson foundations for offshore wind turbines and anemometer masts
,”
Wind Eng.
24
(
4
),
249
255
(
2000
).
6.
H. Y.
Ding
,
J. J.
Lian
,
A. D.
Li
, and
P. Y.
Zhang
, “
One-step-installation of offshore wind turbine on large-scale bucket-top-bearing bucket foundation
,”
Trans. Tianjin Univ.
19
(
3
),
188
194
(
2013
).
7.
J. J.
Lian
,
H. Y.
Ding
,
P. Y.
Zhang
, and
R.
Yu
, “
Design of large-scale prestressing bucket foundation for offshore wind turbines
,”
Trans. Tianjin Univ.
18
(
2
),
79
184
(
2012
).
8.
J. J.
Lian
,
L. Q.
Sun
,
J. F.
Zhang
, and
H. J.
Wang
, “
Bearing capacity and technical advantages of composite bucket foundation of offshore wind turbines
,”
Trans. Tianjin Univ.
17
(
2
),
132
137
(
2011
).
9.
P. Y.
Zhang
,
H. Y.
Ding
, and
C. H.
Le
, “
Motion analysis on integrated transportation technique for offshore wind turbines
,”
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy
5
(
5
),
053117
(
2013
).
10.
P. Y.
Zhang
,
H. Y.
Ding
, and
C. H.
Le
, “
Hydrodynamic motion of a large prestressed concrete bucket foundation for offshore wind turbines
,”
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy
5
(
6
),
063126
(
2013
).
11.
P. Y.
Zhang
,
H. Y.
Ding
, and
C. H.
Le
, “
Seismic response of large-scale prestressed concrete bucket foundation for offshore wind turbines
,”
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy
6
(
1
),
013127
(
2014
).
12.
X. B.
Lu
,
Y. R.
Wu
,
B. T.
Jiao
, and
S. Y.
Wang
, “
Centrifugal experimental study of suction bucket foundations under dynamic loading
,”
Acta Mech. Sin.
23
,
689
698
(
2007
).
13.
Y. H.
Wang
,
X. B.
Lu
,
S. Y.
Wang
, and
Z. M.
Shi
, “
The response of bucket foundation under horizontal dynamic loading
,”
Ocean Eng.
33
(
7
),
964
973
(
2006
).
14.
H.
Yu
,
X. W.
Zeng
, and
X. F.
Wang
, “
Seismic centrifuge modelling of offshore wind turbine with tripod foundation
,” in
IEEE Energytech
,
Cleveland
,
OH
(
2013
), pp.
1
5
.
15.
D.
Potts
and
L.
Zdravkovic
,
Finite Element Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering
(
Thomas Telford
,
1999
).
16.
A.
Arablouei
,
A. R. M.
Gharabaghi
,
A.
Ghalandarzadeh
,
K.
Abedi
, and
I.
Ishibashi
, “
Effects of seawater–structure–soil interaction on seismic performance of caisson-type quay wall
,”
Comput. Struct.
89
,
2439
2459
(
2011
).
17.
ADINA R&D, Inc., “Theory and modeling guide,” Report ARD 10-7, 2010, Vol. I.
18.
MOHURD (Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People's Republic of China),
Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB 50011-2010)
(China Building Industry Press,
Beijing
,
2010
).
19.
S. L.
Kramer
,
Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering
(
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
,
NJ
,
1996
).
20.
J. P.
Wolf
,
Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction in Time Domain
(
Prentice-Hall
,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
,
1988
).
21.
H. B.
Seed
and
I. M.
Idriss
,
Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes
, EERI Monograph Series (
University of California
,
Berkeley, CA
,
1982
).
22.
H. B.
Seed
,
I. M.
Idriss
, and
I.
Arango
, “
Evaluation of liquefaction potential using field performance data
,”
J. Geotech. Eng.
109
(
3
),
458
482
(
1983
).
23.
PIANC
,
Seismic Design Guidelines for Port Structures
(
Balkema
,
Rotterdam
,
2001
).
24.
H.
Shahir
and
A.
Pak
, “
Estimating liquefaction-induced settlement of shallow foundations by numerical approach
,”
Comput. Geotech.
37
(
3
),
267
279
(
2010
).
25.
R.
Boulanger
, “
High overburden stress effects in liquefaction analyses
,”
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
129
(
12
),
1071
1082
(
2003
).
26.
V. S.
Pillai
and
P. M.
Byrne
, “
Effect of overburden pressure on liquefaction resistance of sand
,”
Can. Geotech. J.
31
(
1
),
53
60
(
1994
).
You do not currently have access to this content.