Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
SRef-ID: 1684-9981/nhess/2006-6-97
European Geosciences Union
2006 Author(s). This work is licensed
under a Creative Commons License.
Natural Hazards
and Earth
System Sciences
A&M University, Department of Civil Engineering, TAMU 3136, College Station, TX 77843-3136, USA
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 421 Davis Hall, University of California, 94720-1710 Berkeley, USA
2 Department
Received: 26 May 2005 Revised: 1 August 2005 Accepted: 1 November 2005 Published: 20 January 2006
Part of Special Issue Tsunami hazard from slope instability
Abstract. The response of submerged slopes on the continental shelf to seismic or storm loading has become an
important element in the risk assessment for offshore structures and local tsunami hazards worldwide. The geological profile of these slopes typically includes normally consolidated to lightly overconsolidated soft cohesive soils with
layer thickness ranging from a few meters to hundreds of meters. The factor of safety obtained from pseudo-static analyses is not always a useful measure for evaluating the slope
response, since values less than one do not necessarily imply
slope failure with large movements of the soil mass.
This paper addresses the relative importance of different
factors affecting the response of submerged slopes during
seismic loading. The analyses use a dynamic finite element code which includes a constitutive law describing the
anisotropic stress-strain-strength behavior of normally consolidated to lightly overconsolidated clays. The model also
incorporates anisotropic hardening to describe the effect of
different shear strain and stress histories as well as bounding surface principles to provide realistic descriptions of the
accumulation of the plastic strains and excess pore pressure
during successive loading cycles. The paper presents results
from parametric site response analyses on slope geometry
and layering, soil material parameters, and input ground motion characteristics. The predicted maximum shear strains,
permanent deformations, displacement time histories and
maximum excess pore pressure development provide insight
of slope performance during a seismic event.
1 Introduction
Submarine slides are a major threat to the integrity of offshore structures and related infrastructure because of the
large displacements and forces associated with such failures.
In addition, submarine slides may cause local tsunamis
that adversely impact the safety of coastal communities. ReCorrespondence to: G. Biscontin
(gbiscontin@tamu.edu)
cently, large research efforts have been undertaken worldwide to understand the rapid and transient changes in the continental slope stability, as exemplified by the COSTA project
financed by the European Commission from 2000 to 2004
(Mienert, 2004). There is a need for suitable methods to evaluate the risk posed by submarine slides for the purpose of
identifying potentially unstable areas and evaluating permanent displacements, as well as future performance (i.e. catastrophic failure versus soil slumping). Among the numerous
triggering mechanisms that can cause slope instabilities (e.g.
Locat and Lee, 2002), this paper focuses mainly on the performance during seismic loading.
Submarine slope failures offshore are characterized by
their large size, up to kilometers both in length and width,
with depths ranging from a few meters to hundreds of meters.
The ratio between the failure depth and other dimensions is
often small enough that edge effects can be safely ignored
and the infinite slope assumption can be employed. This is
in contrast to near shore submarine slope failures where 2D geometry is an important element of the analysis. For an
infinite slope, when only gravity loads are acting, a generic
soil element is subjected to a stress in the direction normal
to the slope, represented by the effective normal stress (n0 ),
and a stress in the plane of the slope, parallel to the dip, represented by the consolidation shear stress (c ), as shown in
Fig. 1. For mathematical simplicity, the earthquake motion
is assumed to consist of polarized shear waves propagating in
the direction perpendicular to the slope. As a result, an additional cyclic shear stress will act on the plane of the slope in
a direction oriented at some angle with that of the consolidation shear stress (i.e. multidirectional shaking). The current
State-of-the-Practice analyses assume that the critical loading direction is along the dip of the slope (i.e. direction of
shaking and consolidation shear stress coincide), even if in
reality the seismic shear stress changes direction. The stress
state in this case is the same as that developed in the simple shear test, which has been recognized as a good tool for
investigating the problem of submerged landslides (Bjerrum
and Landva, 1966; Andresen et al., 1979).
98
AMPLE2000
(1)
where [M], [C] and [K] are the global mass, damping and
stiffness matrices; u,
u and u are the vectors of nodal acceleration, velocity and displacement and P (t) is the load vector (i.e. earthquake ground motion). The global mass matrix
is assembled from elemental mass matrices using the input
density profile with depth. The global damping matrix is assembled from element damping matrices based on a scheme
proposed by Hudson et al. (1994) to describe the small strain
damping. The global stiffness matrix contains the instantaneous stiffness of the system and it is calculated as a function
of the strain history given the constitutive law used.
The SIMPLE DSS model (Pestana et al., 2000) is implemented in the program, along with several other material
models. One of the advantages of the SIMPLE DSS model
is its ability to predict both the generation of excess pore
pressure and the strain accumulation during cyclic shearing. A separate module in AMPLE2000 simulates the onedimensional dissipation/redistribution of pore pressure with
time. This tool has been used as a simplified screening tool
to evaluate slope performance after an earthquake (Biscontin
et al., 2004).
Since AMPLE2000 was specifically designed to describe
the response of submerged slopes to dynamic loading, the inclination of the soil layers is an input value describing the geometry and is automatically accounted for by the program as
a state variable. This allows the SIMPLE DSS model to predict different soil response based on the initial shear stresses
99
Much of the information on the properties of deep submarine sediments has been proprietary and not readily available.
However, the results of a number of comprehensive research
projects are being published (i.e. Mienert, 2004) and more
will be available in the future. Vertical arrays of seismographs in deep soft clay profiles are also very rare. For these
reasons, in the case of submarine slopes it is difficult to compare model predictions directly to actual field data obtained
from real soil profiles and recorded motions, in contrast to
the currents State-of-the-art practice for onshore sites (e.g.
Lotung array, Elgamal et al., 1996). The study presented in
this paper investigates how different factors affect the seismic
response of submarine slopes through a series of parametric
site response analyses. Discussion of triggering mechanisms
for offshore slope failures has received significant attention
in recent years (e.g. Sultan et al., 2004; Biscontin et al., 2004)
and it is outside the scope of this work. Slope performance
due to pore pressure redistribution after an earthquake is also
an important issue and has been discussed by Biscontin et al.
(2004). Although some of the choices for model parameters
are within realistic ranges for soft clays of medium plasticity, the analyses presented here are only intended to provide
qualitative information. Extreme care should be exercised
when extrapolating these results to real-case scenarios. In
Value
Gn
Gp
0.30
1.4
28
variable*
10
34
20
5% Damping
/p
max
2000
4000
6000
500
1000
1500
Distance
(km)
79.7
47.0
11.0
0.1
10
Period, T (s)
at
8000
0
* from Fig. 2 Gn = Gmax /vc
0
0
PGA
(g)
Rincon Hill 090 0.092
CHY 006N
0.345
Gilroy #1 090
0.473
Test type
100
2000
2500
Fig. 3. Acceleration spectra for selected ground motions: Rincon Hill (PGA=0.092 g) and Gilroy (PGA=0.473 g) records from
the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, and CHY 006N (PGA=0.345 g)
record from the 1999 Chi Chi earthquake.
20 m Thick Slope
G = 33 MPa
max
100
100
200
200
300
300
Depth (m)
400
20
100
500
Elastic Natural
Site Period (s)
0.70
1.57
3.51
400
max
500
0
200
400
600
Shear Stiffness, G
max
800
(MPa)
500
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Fig. 2. Profile of initial shear stiffness, Gmax and shear wave velocity, Vs .
Elastic Natural
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
0.25
0.50
BEDROCK
0.20
1.00 m
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
1
a bedrock
Elastic Natural
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
BEDROCK
0.80
1.00 m
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.1
10
0.1
Elastic Natural
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
Elastic Natural
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
n
0.1
10
BEDROCK
1.50
1.00 m
1.00
0.50
20
20
40
40
60
60
0.00
0.1
10
Period, T (s)
2.00
10
Period, T (s)
Elastic Natural
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
0.10
0.00
10
1.20
1.00
0.20
0.1
0.30
101
80
100
0
50
100
150
200
250
80
Slope 5
Rincon Hill
CHY 006N
Gilroy #1 090
300
100
0
Slope 5
Rincon Hill
CHY 006N
Gilroy #1 090
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
excess
0.7
/'
record combines both characteristics with a large spectral acceleration (1.08 g) over a wide range of periods. Since the
fundamental period of a soil profile depends on the thickness
and the shear wave velocity of the soil layers, each soil profile will respond differently, but will tend to amplify those
frequencies closer its fundamental frequency. The effect of
local site conditions on the surface motion is widely recognized as a fundamental issue in earthquake engineering. As
the motion is propagating through the soil it is modified both
in amplitude and frequency content.
102
Acceleration (g)
0.4
Thickness100m, slope 5
0.2
Thickness100m, slope 5
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.4
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
1m depth
-0.2
10
15
20
25
30
35
-0.4
Bedrock
0
Thickness100m, slope 5
0.2
0.0
Bedrock
0.4
0.0
-0.4
Acceleration (g)
0.4
Bedrock
0
10
15
20
25
30
10
15
20
25
30
1m depth
-0.2
40
20
40
60
Time (s)
80
100
120
140
35
40
1m depth
160
-0.2
Time (s)
35
40
Time (s)
Fig. 7. Measured acceleration time histories at bedrock and predicted acceleration time histories at 1 m depth for a 100 m thick deposit and
a 5 slope.
0
20
40
60
80
100
-10
10
20
30
40
50
60
Comparing the spectra also helps explaining the differences in the estimate of displacements and pore pressure ratio (1uexcess /n0 ) vs. depth in Fig. 6. The prediction shows
that the slope accumulates far larger permanent displacements and excess pore pressure when subjected to the CHY
006N record than to either of the Loma Prieta records. As
noted earlier, the CHY 006N record is characterized by a
sustained level of acceleration with frequencies around the
range of the fundamental frequency of the slope. The duration of the record is also much longer, as shown in Fig. 7,
which compares the acceleration time history at the bedrock
(as recorded) and the prediction by AMPLE2000 at the depth
of 1 m, for the Rincon Hill, Gilroy, and CHY 006N motions.
Since the shaking is much longer for the last record, its ef-
20
o
180 Motion
-20
20
20
40
40
5 Slope 0 Motion
60
103
60
80
60
80
2.5 Slope
2.5 Slope
20
40
60
80
100
120
5 Slope
140
5 Slope
o
10 Slope
10 Slope
Time (s)
100
100
200
300
400
500
600
100
-5
10
15
20
25
30
104
0.3
20
Level Ground
o
5 Slope
o
0.2
Natural Elastic
Site Period, T = 1.57 s
0.4
0.5
10 Slope
0.1
40
40
60
Lower G
max
80
Lower G
max
Faster accumulation
of pore pressure
10
1.2
1.0
Uniform Profile
Lower G
max
0.0
1
60
Uniform Profile
Lower G
80
0.1
Thin Layer
20
Thin Layer
100
0
Bedrock
50
100
0
0.8
max
Faster accumulation
of pore pressure
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
excess
0.6
/'
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.1
Period, T (s)
10
This soil was assigned a lower monotonic strength, simulated by a lower large strain failure envelope angle (=23 ),
and a lower stiffness (22.5 MPa instead of 40 MPa). When
the modified soil column is subjected to the Chi Chi earthquake, small concentrated displacements are predicted at the
interface. However, increasing the parameter describing the
accumulation of excess pore pressure during cyclic loading,
(e.g. simulating a coarser siltier/ sandier material) ( =10),
increases the concentrated displacements at the interface significantly. In this case the global deformations, as well as the
localized slip, are quite large.
A similar response has been reported by other researchers,
albeit for entirely different reasons (e.g. Yang and Elgamal,
2002). For coarser materials (i.e. sandy soils) the pore pressure generated during the earthquake can migrate within the
soil profile in the same time scale of the earthquake excitation and it is trapped by low hydraulic conductivity deposit
causing a local reduction in effective stress and thus in stiffness and strength. This results in larger deformations at the
interface that otherwise will not be present. The pore pressure development for cohesive soils is relative small and the
hydraulic conductivity is so small that redistribution of pore
pressures may take a very long time (months to years, Biscontin et al., 2004). The presence of coarser grained materials, such as siltier or sandier soils, can cause an accumulation
of excess pore pressure that can not be dissipated during the
earthquake, and can thus potentially cause a significant reduction in stiffness and strength, leading to large permanent
deformations. These materials are characterized by a lower
( ) parameter leading to a faster pore pressure generation and
a faster accumulation of strains.
If their magnitude were not sufficient to trigger a catastrophic failure, the increased pore pressure ratio in the
weak layer may trigger a delayed failure. As shown by
Biscontin et al. (2004), an additional increase in excess pore
pressure may occur when the dissipation of the excess pore
pressure after the end of shaking is slowed at the interface
with layers of lower coefficient of consolidation. In some
cases, when these layers are present towards the top of the
slope, the heightened pore pressure may be sufficient to bring
the soil into an unstable condition causing failure at a later
time.
105
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.6
5 Slope
20 m
100 m
500 m
0.8
100
200
300
400
0.8
500
600
1
0
10
15
20
25
20 m
100 m
500 m
0.8
20 m
100 m
500 m
30
1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
excess
0.7
/'
vc
Fig. 13. Effect of thickness on predicted displacements, strains and pore pressure ratio for CHY 006N record (PGA=0.345 g), 5 slope.
8 Conclusions
A series of analyses were carried out to investigate the influence of slope inclination, soil thickness and ground motion
parameters on the predicted response of offshore submarine
slopes. The program AMPLE2000 was used in combination
with a simplified constitutive model, SIMPLE DSS, to predict the behavior of clayey soil deposits subjected to seismic loading. Material model parameters representative of a
medium plasticity soft clay, such as the ones observed in the
North Sea, were used as a basis for all subsequent analyses.
Small strain shear stiffness and undrained strength increased
linearly with depth, and they are compatible with the observation of nearly normally consolidated soils corresponding
to low accretion rate prevalent in offshore environments.
Predicted slope performance for the baseline case, corresponding to a 5 slope with a thickness of 100 m, subjected
to three recorded motions, shows the importance of selecting
representative ground motions that include realistic combinations of distance, maximum horizontal acceleration and duration. Deep soft soil deposits filter out (i.e. deamplify) high
frequency content while they amplify the response at larger
periods, particularly near the elastic and degraded natural
period of the slope. In general, earthquake ground motions
with a low frequency content, such as those obtained from
far away events, tend to be more detrimental and cause more
significant excess pore pressure and larger permanent deformations. Earthquake duration appears to have a very significant effect, as demonstrated by the analysis with the ground
motion from the Chi Chi earthquake. This is a combined effect of the much longer duration of the earthquake, and the
sustained spectral acceleration level over a large range of frequencies, including those around the fundamental frequency
of the slope.
The predictions show that the inclination of the slope cannot be disregarded, even for angles lower than 5 , because
they affect the accumulation of strains and the amount of permanent displacement at the end-of-shaking. Level ground
predictions will estimate permanent displacements at the
end-of-shaking that are only a fraction of the maximum displacement experienced during the earthquake. On the other
hand, even very gentle slopes of 2.5 show accumulation
of displacements in the downhill direction. The displacements keep accumulating during the earthquake with only
minor reversals for accelerations in the uphill direction. The
maximum deformations are therefore reached at the end-ofshaking or very close to it. The strains are larger for steeper
slope angles. Since earthquakes are not symmetrical, the
direction in which the motion is applied is also critical for
the prediction of the slope response when performing onedimensional analyses.
The thickness of the soil deposits plays a part in the response of the slope. Deeper deposits are better able to
106
0.5
0.5
3.51 s
Natural Elastic
Site Period, T
n
1m Depth
20 m
100 m
500 m
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.4
0.2
1
10
a bedrock
0.1
1.0
20 m
100 m
500 m
0
0.1
10
10
10
Bedrock
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.1
3.5
Slope 5
2.0
1.5
20 m
100 m
500 m
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.1
Period, T (s)
Fig. 14. Effect of thickness on acceleration spectra, and normalized acceleration spectra for CHY 006N record (PGA=0.345 g,
5 slope), at 1 m depth.
10
0.8
1m Depth
1.2
Bedrock
0.0
0.1
a bedrock
10
0.8
20 m
100 m
500 m
0.3
5% Damping
1
1.2
3.51 s
Natural Elastic
Site Period, T
0.0
0.1
1.57 s
5% Damping
0.0
1.0
0.70 s
Slope 5
1.57 s
0.4
0.70 s
Period, T (s)
Fig. 15. Effect of thickness on acceleration spectra, and normalized acceleration spectra for CHY 006N record (PGA=0.345 g,
5 slope), at depth ratio of 0.05.
References
Andresen, A., Berre, T., Kleven, A., and Lunne, T.: Procedures used
to obtain soil parameters for foundation engineering in the North
Sea, Marine Geotechnology, 3, 201266, 1979.
Biscontin, G., Pestana, J. M., Nadim, F., and Andersen, K. H.: Seismic response of normally consolidated cohesive soils in gently
inclined submerged slopes, Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, California, San Diego,
California, 2001.
107
Locat, J. and Lee, H.: Submarine landslides: advances and challenges, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39, 193212, 2002.
Malek, A. M., Azzouz, A. S., Baligh, M. M., and Germaine,
J. T.: Behavior of foundation clays supporting compliant offshore structures, J. Geotech. Engrg., 115, 615636, 1989.
Martin, G. R. and Seed, H. B.: MASH: a computer program for
the nonlinear analysis of vertically propagating shear waves in
horizontally layered soil deposits, Tech. Rep. UCB/EERC-8/23,
University of California, 1978.
Mienert, J.: COSTA continental slope stability: major aims and
topics, Marine Geology, 213, 17, 2004.
Morgenstern, N.: Submarine slumping and the initiation of turbidity currents, in: Marine Geotechnique, edited by: Richards, A.,
University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill., 189210, 1967.
Pestana, J. M. and Nadim, F.: Nonlinear site response analysis of
submerged slopes, Tech. Rep. UCB/GT/2000-04, Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2000.
Pestana, J. M. and Whittle, A. J.: Formulation of a unified constitutive model for clay and sand, International Journal for Numerical
and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 23, 12151243, 1999.
Pestana, J. M., Biscontin, G., Nadim, F., and Andersen, K. H.: Modeling cyclic behavior of lightly overconsolidated clays in simple
shear, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 19, 501519,
2000.
Prior, D. B. and Coleman, J. M.: Disintegrating retrogressive landslide on very-low-angle subaqueous slopes, Mississippi Delta,
Marine Geotechnology, 3, 3760, 1978.
Schnabel, P. B., Lysmer, J., and Seed, H. B.: SHAKE: A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally
layered sites, Tech. Rep. UCB/EERC-71/12, University of California, 1972.
Streeter, V. L., Wylie, E. B., and Richart, F. E.: Soil motion computetion by characteristic method, Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division, 100, 247263, 1974.
Sultan, N., Cochonat, P., Canals, A., Cattaneo, A., Dennielou, B.,
Haflidason, H., Laberg, J., Long, D., Mienert, J., Trincardi, F.,
Urgeles, R., Vorren, T., and Wilson, C.: Triggering mechanisms
of slope instablity processes and sediment failures on continental
margins: a geotechnical approach, Marine Geology, 213, 291
321, 2004.
Yang, Z. and Elgamal, A. W.: Influence of Permeability on
Liquefaction-Induced Shear Deformation, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 128, 720729, 2002.