A three-level procedure for assessing jack-up foundation stability for more or less homogenous soils is described. The objective is to provide a rational framework for these assessments that ensures their safe operation in extended year-round operations and enables their use in deeper waters than at present.
The three levels of the procedure have to be entered successively as long as foundation stability cannot be proven. The first level is a screening exercise and essentially replaces the well-known preload check. The second level compares factored foundation loads resulting from a structural analysis with foundation capacities obtained with ultimate bearing capacity formulae. The most refined third level assesses whether the displacements associated with these loads lead to an acceptable situation, i.e. capacity increase and/or load redistribution that does not result in collapse of the jack-up unit.
Since, for maximum benefit, this third-stage analysis requires a non-linear foundation model to be linked with the structural package used: such a tool is provided in the paper. Examples are given to demonstrate the impact of the assessment procedure.
This procedure forms part of the overall in-house approach to the assessment of jack-ups and has already been offered to the jack-up industry as part of the continuing efforts towards establishing common and accepted standards for jack-up assessments. Further developments have been identified and will be pursued. 相似文献
In this paper, towing tank experiments are conducted to study the behavior of flow on a model of the underwater vehicle with various shapes of bows, i.e. tango and standard bows in free surface motion ... 相似文献
Fuel-switching personal transportation from gasoline to electricity offers many advantages, including lower noise, zero local air pollution, and petroleum-independence. But alleviations of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are more nuanced, due to many factors, including the car’s battery range. We use GPS-based trip data to determine use type-specific, GHG-optimized ranges. The dataset comprises 412 cars and 384,869 individual trips in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. We use previously developed algorithms to determine driver types, such as using the car to commute or not. Calibrating an existing life cycle GHG model to a forecast, low-carbon grid for Ann Arbor, we find that the optimum range varies not only with the drive train architecture (plugin-hybrid versus battery-only) and charging technology (fast versus slow) but also with the driver type. Across the 108 scenarios we investigated, the range that yields lowest GHG varies from 65 km (55+ year old drivers, ultrafast charging, plugin-hybrid) to 158 km (16–34 year old drivers, overnight charging, battery-only). The optimum GHG reduction that electric cars offer – here conservatively measured versus gasoline-only hybrid cars – is fairly stable, between 29% (16–34 year old drivers, overnight charging, battery-only) and 46% (commuters, ultrafast charging, plugin-hybrid). The electrification of total distances is between 66% and 86%. However, if cars do not have the optimum range, these metrics drop substantially. We conclude that matching the range to drivers’ typical trip distances, charging technology, and drivetrain is a crucial pre-requisite for electric vehicles to achieve their highest potential to reduce GHG emissions in personal transportation. 相似文献
A rising trend in state and federal transportation finance is to invest capital dollars into projects which reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, a key metric for comparing projects, the cost-effectiveness of GHG emissions reductions, is highly dependent on the cost-benefit methodology employed in the analysis. Our analysis comparing California High-Speed Rail and three urban transportation projects shows how four different accounting framings bring wide variations in cost per metric tonne of GHG emissions reduced. In our analysis, life-cycle GHG emissions are joined with full cost accounting to better understand the benefits of cap-and-trade investments. Considering only public subsidy for capital, none of the projects appear to be a cost-effective means to reduce GHG emissions (i.e., relative to the current price of GHG emissions in California’s cap-and-trade program at $12.21 per tonne). However, after adjusting for the change in private costs users incur when switching from the counterfactual mode (automobile or aircraft) to the mode enabled by the project, all investments appear to reduce GHG emissions at a net savings to the public. Policy and decision-makers who consider only the capital cost of new transportation projects can be expected to incorrectly assess alternatives and indirect benefits (i.e., how travelers adapt to the new mass transit alternative) should be included in decision-making processes. 相似文献