BOSLAN Monopile Foundations
BOSLAN Monopile Foundations
BOSLAN Monopile Foundations
monopile foundations
for offshore wind turbines
Manufacturing, design and handling challenges
Offshore wind production has grown
exponentially over this century, but so far we
have just witnessed the tip of the iceberg.
With Climate Change pressing ever more and
decarbonization becoming a rising policy priority
in national and supranational agendas across
the globe, offshore wind power will play a vital
role in the transition to net zero. Before the end
of this decade, it is expected to experience a
7-fold increase. Besides, if we are to remain on
track with the Climate Neutrality target, by 2050,
we should multiply by fifty today´s offshore wind
installations.
2
THE URGE TO SCALE UP OFFSHORE WIND
The past decade has witnessed an exponential growth of the offshore wind
market across the globe, with a 14-fold increase in the cumulative wind capacity
installed worldwide, a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 22%, and a total
of 35GW installed by the end of 2020. This accounted for 5% of total global wind
capacity and 7% share of new wind installations.1
Figure 1. Cumulative Offshore Wind Capacity Installed Worldwide, 2000-2020. Source: IRENA (2021)
This is just the beginning, as offshore wind will be a crucial vector in the
global response to climate change. Following The Paris Agreement,2 more than
130 countries have now set or are considering a target of reducing emissions to
net zero by mid-century.3 In July 2021, the EU adopted a series of legislative
proposals that intend to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, including the
intermediate target of a 55% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by
2030.4 Offshore wind is becoming one of the pillars of these decarbonization
policies,5 and its share of new wind installations keeps growing.6
3
Offshore wind will maintain exponential growth in the coming decades. The GWEC foresees a
7-fold increase of installed offshore wind during this decade, expecting to reach 270 GW by 2030.
This organization expects the volume of new annual offshore installations to more than triple in five
years, from 6.1 GW/year in 2020 to more than 20 GW/year in 2025 (bringing its share of global new
installations from 6.5% to 20%) and to double again in the second half of this decade, reaching 40GW/
year by 2030.7
Noteworthy, the GWEC projections are insufficient to remain on track with the Net Zero
Emissions by 2050 Scenario, and we may need to go significantly further. The IEA is calling for
more substantial efforts, as it estimates that it is necessary to raise annual capacity additions to
80 GW/year of offshore wind by 2030.8 Likewise, IRENA’s analysis indicates that the world should
reach an offshore wind cumulative installed capacity of 380 GW by 2030 to achieve an energy
transition scenario aligned with the 1.5ºC Paris Agreement target. Overall, more than 2,000 GW should
be deployed globally by 2050.9
4
The political, administrative and technological challenge is enormous. On the political and
administrative side, the Covid-19 crisis may impact offshore wind deployment in the medium and
long term, as some pre-development work such as permitting and environmental approval is
being delayed.10 On the technical side, maintaining exponential growth of the offshore capacity will
require more and larger farms in deeper waters and further from the coast, with bigger and more
powerful turbines, and more complex, longer and heavier substructures and foundations. Fixed-
bottom structures shall drive the sector´s capacity surge over this decade, while floating foundation
technologies could drastically accelerate offshore deployment from 2030 onward.11
Figure 5. Offshore Wind Current and Projected Capacity in the 1.5ºC Scenario, 2020-2050. Source: IRENA (2021)
5
CITIUS, ALTIUS, FORTIUS
Offshore wind turbines keep growing in power and rotor size, reaching
milestones that were unbelievable not long ago. The world´s first offshore
turbine farm, installed 30 years ago at Vindeby (Denmark),12 had turbines of
only 450kW, with a rotor diameter of 35m.13 Both turbine power and rotor
sizes have increased dramatically since then: in 2020 the average turbine
rating for new installations in Europe reached 8.2 MW,14 while the average
power rating of ordered turbines reached 10.4MW and the world´s record was
in the hands of GE with its Haliade-X model, with 14MW and a 220m rotor. 15
Figure 6. Evolution of Wind Turbine Sizes over Time. Source: IRENA (2021)
6
And the race goes on, as Siemens Gamesa and Vesta have already announced models that reach 15
MW and shall be commercially available by 2024.16 The Chinese MingYang Smart Energy has gone one
step further with the recent presentation of the MySE 16.0-242 prototype, which has a 242m rotor
and reaches 16MW.17 Some experts predict that, “considering the increasing pressure for offshore
wind to reach grid parity in Europe and China ... the next generation offshore turbine technology could
probably be around 20 MW with a 275m rotor diameter by 2030”.18 This is equivalent to the length of
three football pitches.
In parallel, wind farms are growing and moving further offshore towards deeper waters, enabling
larger sea areas with more stable wind conditions, mitigating the visual impact on the coastline and
preventing unwanted side effects on other economic activities. But this also implies increasing the
construction and operation costs, as well as the technological challenges.19
There are already wind farms up to 100 km offshore and deeper than 100m, and a new generation of
wind farms, much further out, is in the pipeline.20 The evolution in the last few years is also remarkable:
the average water depth and distance to shore of offshore wind farms under construction in 2020
was 36 m and 44Km respectively,21 compared to 22m and 33Km in 2014, just six years before.22
Figure 8. Average Water Depth and Distance to Shore of all Offshore Wind Farms in Europe. The size of the bubble indicates the
overall capacity of the site. Source: WindEurope (2021a)
7
TRENDS IN FOUNDATION
STRUCTURES
Fixed foundations are the most common type of installation in offshore wind
farms, and by far the most mature technology. They are being routinely
deployed in water depths of up to 40m (in some cases up to 60m deep),
and at up to 80km from shore.23
8
Monopiles remain the most widely used foundation structure for offshore
wind turbines: by 2020, roughly 80% of all new and cumulative installations
in Europe had adopted this technology.25 It is a popular solution due to its
tubular structure, making it relatively easy to design and manufacture.26
However, the increasing size of turbines and deeper installation water
depths require ever-larger structures, challenging designers and
manufacturers alike.
Figure 11. Cumulative Number of Foundations Installed in Europe by the end of 2020, by Substructure Type.
Source: WindEurope (2021a)
Photo: NAVANTIA
9
BOSLAN, A KEY ENGINEERING PARTNER IN
FIXED OFFSHORE FOUNDATIONS
Over the last few years, Boslan has developed a unique experience on fixed
offshore wind turbine foundations, spanning various engineering disciplines
at different manufacturing stages, including Jacket and Substation Design
and Calculation, Civil and Electrical Works Supervision and Management,
QA&QC, Testing and Commissioning, and Health and Safety.
✓ East Anglia One (Start date in 2020) – Offshore wind farm with presence
in the UK (North Sea) with a capacity of 714 megawatts (MW). 102 jacket
type foundations were manufactured by Navantia (Fene, Spain), Lamprell
(UAE) and Harland & Wolff in Belfast (Ireland). Piles were manufactured by
Windar in Avilés (Spain).
10
Transition Piece
Load #12 of Jacket components to be transported from Navantia-Windar manufacturing facilities in Brest (France) for the final
assembly in the Navantia facilities in Fene (Spain). Successfully completed last 06.04.2022. Photo: NAVANTIA
11
MANUFACTURING, DESIGN
AND HANDLING CHALLENGES
OF XXL MONOPILES
Manufacturers are already offering the next generation of ultra-large monopiles, the so-called XXL
Monopiles, with lengths up to 120m, diameters of 10m and weights that reach 2,400 tonnes.27 The
evolution is striking. Merely ten years ago, monopiles were recommended just for water depths less
than 20-30m. An engineering paper on the monopiles published as recently as 2017 considered the
then-average diameters of pile of 4.8m (max. 7m), average lengths of 51m (max. 85m) and average
weights of 420t (max. 805t).28 In only five years those ranges have become totally outdated, as
there are monopiles already delivered that surpass 1,700t, 8m diameter and 90m length.29 And this
may be just the beginning, as factories are being adapted to be able to supply monopiles with an
outside diameter of 15m, 130m in length, and more than 3,500t of total weight.30
Photo: Alamy
The increasing size of monopile comes with huge practical challenges, as all the logistics become far
more complex. Component sourcing, piles handling throughout the fabrication stage, vessel fleet
lifting capacity and hammering equipment need to be adapted to the scale of the next generation
monopiles. This requires profound design and fabrication optimizations to ensure that monopiles rank
as the most economical structure foundation type.
12
The most sought optimization is weight reduction. This is currently achieved with higher-strength
steels; nonetheless, fatigue design aspects often prevent the general use of these materials. Besides,
in addition to any technological progress with raw materials, design standards and industry rules of
thumb need to be revised to keep up the pace for efficient and economical design at this grand scale.
The current D/t standards are no longer valid for XXL monopiles. Until recently, design standards and
engineering papers set the D/t ratio to values less than or equal to 100.32 Some more up-to-date
standards set the new reference ratio to 120.33 But even with the 120 ratio, monopiles with diameters
of 10m and above would become disproportionately heavy, given that any increase in the diameter
(ΔD) would translate into a relative increase of the weight close to the third power:
That is, if we hold the D/t ratio constant, a 25% increase of the monopile diameter (e.g. from 8m to
10m), would double its weight, and with a 50% increase in the diameter (e.g. from 8m to 12m) the
weight would triple. See footnote (*) This would not only be a massive waste of steel and money, but it would
also multiply the manufacturing, transport and installation challenges. Tubular steel piles are typically
shaped from plates using 3 or 4 rolls bending machines. Therefore, the main design parameters
that gauge current workshops’ capacity are the can diameter, plate thickness, pile section depth and
weight that workshops can handle. The handling and support of such heavy components throughout
fabrication, without overstressing the cans or ovalizing them too severely, becomes of critical concern.
Photo: Alamy
A 2019 study by Steelwind Nordenham suggests that monopiles with slenderness ratios up to 160 are
“realistically feasible and applicable for deep waters and large turbines”, with pile diameters up to 11m
and weights up to 2,000 tonnes.34 Its conclusions are somewhat controversial,35 and more research
will be needed as we push the boundaries further and further. In any case, the Steelwind Nordenham
study highlights a number of highly relevant considerations that need to be accounted for in the
fabrication stage regarding the supports, transport, and storage.
(*) Here we are assuming a linear approximation for the relationship between the diameter and the length of the monopile,
L=a*D+b where a and b are constant and b/D<<a,
Wo α Do * to * Lo → ΔW/Wo ≈ (ΔD/Do) * (Δt/to) * (ΔL/Lo) ≈ (ΔD/Do)3
The linear approximation for the L-D relationship with b/D<<a seems a reasonable estimate. See e.g. Negro (2017)
13
Figure 15. Maximum Deflection of Cans
or Sections on the Roller Supports at
Increasing Diameter and Slenderness.
Source: Steelwind Nordenham. Published
by Offshore WIND Magazine 4/2019
Supports
Supporting a 2,000-tonnes pile during the manufacturing process without damaging it is far from
easy. We must guarantee that the support points do not cause bending, plastic deformation or any
other type of damage to the can during the manufacturing process. More so given that XXL monopiles
may have D/t ratios significantly above 100, which increase local bending and hoop stresses. To prevent
plastic deformation on roller supports, the aforementioned study warns that their width and distance
from the edge of the can are two key parameters to monitor.36
Deformations can also occur due to dead load during the assembly process. This problem is aggravated
at high D/t ratios, as we increase the can slenderness. Consequently, additional supports and lateral
stiffeners may be required in XXL monopiles to keep the section´s round shape, as identified by the
Steelwind Nordenham publication.37
The support structure requires to be adapted in all the section assembly fabrication steps. Steelwind
Nordenham concludes that sections and monopiles beyond 1200 tonnes usually need to be supported at
three or more points and highlights that special consideration must be given for support points near conical
transitions since the stiffening effect of the cone shape may lead to higher stresses in these regions.39
Pre-production planning ahead of fabrication, transport and storage operations will be critical for
developing the next generation monopiles. Further investments are likely necessary to adapt current state-
of-the-art fabrication processes and workshops to handle ever bigger, heavier and slenderer monopiles.
14
BOSLAN´S PARTICIPATION
IN THE BALTIC EAGLE PROJECT
Photo: Iberdrola
The foundations are being carried out by Windar and German EEW SPC.
Boslan is supporting the manufacturing process in Avilés (Spain) for 50
transition pieces, as well as other parts in several locations.
The transition piece (TP) is made up out of a steel pipe construction and is
the second part of a Wind Turbine Generator foundation, which is directly
connected to the monopile foundation. The transition piece is secured to
the monopile through a bolted connection and reinforced with grout after
installation. It connects the wind turbine generator with the monopile and
provides means to correct any misalignment of the foundation that may
have occurred during installation, as the verticality of the monopile cannot
be guaranteed after hammering. The transition piece is painted in yellow
colour in order to improve visibility at sea after installation.
15
Boslan Working Sites and Manufacturing Partners – Baltic Eagle Project
WINDAR – Avilés (Spain):
- 50 TPs
Baltic Eagle Project. First Transition Piece Fully Assembled. Photo: Windar
16
ABOUT BOSLAN
In the last few years, Boslan has been in charge of the development of state-of-the-art offshore
wind farms across the globe, covering the construction project cycle in projects such as Wikinger,
Baltic Eagle, East Anglia One and Saint-Brieuc. Besides, Boslan has been working in Brazil for the
last 15 years, transferring the expertise acquired in European offshore sites to its Brazilian affiliate.
Boslan´s practical and technical know-how in the design, manufacturing, assembly and handling of
fixed foundation structures has made us a preferred partner for developers who need to confront
the technical challenges of the next generation monopile foundations.
17
REFERENCES
API (2007). Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design.
American Petroleum Institute (API), 21st Edition, December 2000. Errata and Supplement 3, August 2007.
Arany (2017). Design of monopiles for offshore wind turbines in 10 steps. Arany, Bhattacharya, Macdonald & Hogan. Soil Dynam-
ics and Earthquake Engineering, 92, 126–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.09.024
CompositesWorld (2021). MingYang Smart Energy launches MySE 16.0-242 offshore hybrid drive wind turbine. CompositesWorld
website, 25 August 2021. https://www.compositesworld.com/news/mingyang-smart-energy-launches-myse-160-242-offshore-
hybrid-drive-wind-turbine
European Commission (2020). Offshore Renewable Energy Strategy. European Commission, November 2020.
European Commission (n.d.). 2030 Climate Target Plan. European Commission (n.d.) https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/euro-
pean-green-deal/2030-climate-target-plan_en
EWEA (2016). The European offshore wind industry - key trends and statistics 2015. European Wind Energy Association (EWEA),
February 2016.
GE (n.d.). Haliade-X offshore wind turbine. GE Renewable Energy website (n.d.). https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-en-
ergy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine
GWEC (2021). Global Offshore Wind Report 2021. Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), September 2021.
IEA (2020). Tracking Offshore Wind 2020. International Energy Agency (IEA), June 2020. https://www.iea.org/reports/track-
ing-offshore-wind-2020
IEA (2021). Wind Power. International Energy Agency (IEA), November 2021. https://www.iea.org/reports/wind-power
IRENA (2021). Offshore Renewables: An action agenda for deployment. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), 2021.
Marson (2021). How far can we push D/T ratios? Alan Marson, empireengineering.co.uk website. Posted on July 20, 2021. https://
www.empireengineering.co.uk/how-far-can-we-push-d-t-ratios/
Negro (2017). Monopiles in offshore wind: Preliminary estimate of main dimensions. Negro, López-Gutiérrez et al. Universidad
Politécnica de Madrid, 2017
OffshoreWind (2022). Haizea to Deliver Monopiles for Ørsted’s Offshore Wind Project. OffshoreWIND.biz website, posted on
January 2022. https://www.offshorewind.biz/2022/01/24/haizea-to-deliver-monopiles-for-orsteds-offshore-wind-project/
Steelwind Nordenham (2019). Beyond XXL – Slim Monopiles for Deep-Water Wind Farms. Steelwind Nordenham, Offshore WIND
Magazine 4/2019. Posted by Offshore WIND on May 2020. Available on https://www.offshorewind.biz/2020/05/11/beyond-xxl-
slim-monopiles-for-deep-water-wind-farms/
TNO (n.d.). Design limitations for large monopiles. TNO website (n.d.) https://www.tno.nl/en/focus-areas/energy-transition/road-
maps/renewable-electricity/wind-energy/support-structure-wind-turbine/design-large-monopiles/
WindEurope (2021a). Offshore Wind in Europe: Key Trends and Statistics 2020. WindEurope, February 2021.
WindEurope (2021b). Wind Energy in Europe: 2020 Statistics and the Outlook for 2021-2025. WindEurope, February 2021.
18
NOTES
1
Source GWEC (2021)
2
Source UN (2015).
3
Source UN (n.d.)
4
Source European Commission (n.d.)
5
Source European Commission (2020)
6
Source GWEC (2021)
7
Ibid.
8
Source IEA (2021).
9
Source IRENA (2021)
10
Source IEA (2020)
11
Source GWEC (2021)
12
Source Wikipedia (n.d.)
13
Source WTM (n.d.).
14
Source WindEurope (2021b).
15
Source GE (n.d.).
16
Source GWEC (2021)
17
Source CompositesWorld (2021).
18
Source GWEC (2021)
19
Source WindEurope (2021a).
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid.
22
Source EWEA (2016).
23
Source IRENA (2021).
24
Ibid
25
Source WindEurope (2021a).
26
Source TNO (n.d.).
27
Source Steelwind Nordenham (s.d.).
28
Source Negro (2017).
29
Source Steelwind Nordenham (2019).
30
Source OffshoreWind (2022).
31
Source Marson (2021).
32
See API (2007), Arany (2017) and Negro (2017).
33
See Marson (2021), as well as DNV (n.d.)., ISO (n.d.).and Norsok (n.d.).
34
Steelwind Nordenham (2019).
35
Marson (2021).
36
Steelwind Nordenham (2019).
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
CONTRIBUTORS
- Bruno Maques, BOSLAN FOU Engineer.
- Alexandre Laíño, BOSLAN FOU - Fabrication Service Manager in St Brieuc OWF.
- Juan Francisco Martínez-Tebar, BOSLAN FOU Fabrication Service Manager in Baltic Eagle OWF.
- Fáktica Analytics
19
© BOSLAN 2022
BOSLAN Ingeniería y Consultoría S.A.
Autonomia 26 – 8º
48010 – Bilbao
Bizkaia, España
Tel: (+34) 94 470 01 18
Fax: (+34) 94 470 07 87
The information given in this document only contains general descriptions and/or performance
features that may not always specifically reflect those described, or which may undergo modification
in the course of further research and/or development of the products. The requested performance
features are binding only when they are expressly agreed upon in the concluded contract.