See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/29460718

Wave-induced pore pressure and effective stresses in a porous seabed of finite

thickness

Article
Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS

26 112

2 authors:

Dong-Sheng Jeng M. S. Rahman

Griffith University North Carolina State University
372 PUBLICATIONS 8,008 CITATIONS 66 PUBLICATIONS 1,763 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Two-Dimensional Plaxis Model for Seabed Instablity Around Offshore Pipelines Under Hydrodynamic Loading View project

Rainfall -induced landslides View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dong-Sheng Jeng on 22 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

WAVE-INDUCED PORE PRESSURE AND EFFECTIVE STRESSES
IN A POROUS SEABED OF FINITE THICKNESS: EFFECTS OF
INERTIA FORCES

D. S. Jeng1 and M. S. Rahman2

ABSTRACT

The analysis of wave-induced pore pressure and effective stresses is an important factor in the design of
offshore installations. However, to simplify the complicated problem, most previous investigations have
ignored the effects of inertia forces. This paper presents an analytical solution to the equations governing the
wave-induced seabed response, including inertia terms in the whole problem. The numerical results show
that the inertia forces cannot always be ignored. The relative difference of pore pressure between the present
solution (with inertia items) and the previous solution (without inertia items) may reach 17 % of p o under
certain combinations of wave and soil conditions.

INTRODUCTION

Recently, the phenomenon of wave-seabed interaction has been extensively studied by geotechnical and
coastal engineers. The major reason for the growing interests in this problem is that many offshore
installations (such as breakwaters, pipelines and platforms, etc) have been reported to be damaged by the
wave-induced seabed instability in the vicinity of structures, rather than from construction causes.
When ocean waves propagate over the ocean, they induce dynamic pressure fluctuations on the sea floor.
These fluctuations further generate excess pore pressures and effective stresses, which have been recognized
as dominant factors in causing the instability of a seabed (Rahman, 1997). Thus, an evaluation of the wave-
induced soil response (including pore pressure, effective stresses and soil displacements) is of significant
importance to marine geotechnical and coastal engineers involved in the design of foundations for offshore
installations.
Based on Biot's theory (Biot, 1941), numerous theories of the wave-induced soil response have been
developed since early 1940's. Among these, Yamamoto et al. (1978) considered two-dimensional
progressive waves over an isotropic and homogeneous seabed of infinite thickness. This model has been
further extended to a seabed of finite thickness as well as a layered seabed (Jeng, 1997). In past few years,
some advances have been made by including anisotropic soil behaviour and non-homogeneity (Jeng, 1997).
However, all these investigations have not considered the effects of inertia forces on the wave—induced
seabed response.
The aim of this study is to examine the influence of inertia forces on the wave-induced seabed response.
To do so, the inertia terms are included in the governing equations. Based on the theory proposed by
Yamamoto et al. (1978), a new analytical solution for such a condition is derived in this paper. To simplify
the complicated problem, the porous seabed is considered to be isotropic homogeneous medium of finite
thickness. Based on the newly derived solution, the influences of inertia forces on the wave-induced seabed
response will be examined.

BOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEM

Consider a progressive wave propagating over a porous seabed of finite thickness is depicted in Figure 1.
The wave crests are assumed to propagate in the positive x-direction, while the z-direction is measured
positive upward from the seabed surface.

1
Lecturer, School of Engineering, Griffith University, PMB 50 Gold Coast Mail Centre, QLD 9726, Australia
2
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, North Carolina State University, NC27695-7908, USA
 z

free surface

SWL

seabed surface Water

O
Soil
h
porous seabed

rigid impermeable bottom

Figure 1: Definition of wave-seabed interaction

For a two-dimensional wave-seabed interaction problem and treating the porous seabed as hydraulically
isotropic with the same permeability, the consolidation equation (Biot, 1941) can be expressed as
K 2 &r&) = ∇ ⋅ ur& ,
∇ p − nβ p& + ρ f (∇ ⋅ u (1)
γw
r
where u ≡ (u, w) is the vector of soil displacements, γ w is the unit weight of pore water, n is soil porosity, p
is pore pressure, t is the time and ρ f is the density of the pore fluid. In equation (1), the compressibility of
pore fluid (β) is defined by β = 1 / K w + (1 − S ) Pwo (Kw is the true bulk modulus of elasticity of water (taken
as 2 X 109 N/m2, Yamamoto et al., 1978), Pwo is the absolute water pressure, S is the degree of saturation.
Under the conditions of plane strain, the relationship between incremental effective stresses and soil
displacements can be expressed as
 ∂u µ   ∂w µ   ∂u ∂w 
σ ′x = 2G + ε  , σ ′z = 2G + ε  , τ xz = G  + , (2)
 ∂x 1 − 2µ   ∂z 1 − 2µ   ∂z ∂x 
where G is the shear modulus of the soil, and the shear stresses are expressed in double subscripts, τxz,
denoting the stress in the z-direction on a plane perpendicular to the x-axis. It is noted that a positive sign is
taken for a tension normal stress in this study.
Based on the concept of effective stresses, the force equilibrium in the absence of body force within the
soil skeleton can be written in terms of pore pressure and soil displacements as
r G r &r& ,
G∇ 2 u + ∇∇ ⋅ u = ∇p + ρ∇u (3)
1 − 2µ
where ρ (=(1-n) ρs +n ρf, ρs is solid density and ρf is pore fluid density) is the density of soil. It is noted that
the second term on the right-hand-side of equations (3) are inertia forces, which have been ignored in most
previous works (Yamamoto et al., 1978; Jeng, 1997).
For a porous seabed of finite thickness, as shown in Figure 1, the evaluation of the wave-induced seabed
response requires the solution of (1) and (3), together with appropriate boundary conditions. At bottom of
the seabed, zero displacements and no vertical flow occurs, i.e.,
r ∂p
u= = 0 as z=-h (4)
∂z
We have assumed that the bottom frictional stress is small and negligible. At the seabed surface, the vertical
effective normal stress and shear stress are zero and pore pressure is equal to the wave pressure, i.e.,
σ ′z = τ xz = 0 , p =
γ wH
2 cosh kd
[ ]
cos (kx − ωt ) = p o Re e i (kx −ωt ) , (5)

where po is the amplitude of wave pressure at seabed surface. In equation (5), Re represents the real part of
function in the brackets.

GENERAL SOLUTION
 Since the wave-induced oscillatory soil response basically fluctuate periodically, the wave-induced pore
pressure and soil displacements can be expressed as
u  U ( z ) 
    i (kx −ωt )
 w = p o W ( z ) e . (6)
 p  P( z ) 
   
Substituting (6) into (1) and (3), the governing equations can be re-written as

U ′ − ikW = a1 e λ1z + a 2 e λ1z , (8)

 ∂ 2  ∂ 2  2

 2 − k  2 − k + α 1  + α 2 U ( z ) =
2 2 2 Gkα 3 λ1
− µ
(
a1 e λ1z − a 2 e λ1z , ) (9)
 ∂z  ∂z   2 (1 )

ikP =
2G (1 − µ )
1 − 2µ
(U ′′ − k 2U ) + ρω 2U −
Gλ1
1 − 2µ
(
a1e λ1z − a 2 e λ1z , ) (10)

where the αi coefficients and λ1 are given in Appendix.

Based on equations (8)—(10), the wave-induced soil displacements and pore pressure can be expressed as

( )( )( )
U ( z ) = α 4 a1 e λ1z + a 2 e − λ1z + b1 e λ2 z + b2 e − λ2 z + c1 e λ3 z + c 2 e − λ3 z , (11)

k
i
{ ( ) ( ) (
W ( z ) = − (λ1α 4 − 1)a1 e λ1z + a 2 e −λ1z + λ 2 b1e λ2 z + b2 e −λ2 z + λ 3 c1 e λ3 z + c 2 e −λ3 z , )} (12)

P( z ) = −
2iG (1 − µ )
k (1 − 2µ )
{( ) ( ) ( )}
δ 1 a1e λ1z + a 2 e −λ1z + δ 2 b1e λ2 z + b2 e −λ2 z + δ 3 c1 e λ3 z + c 2 e −λ3 z , (13)

in which the λi, α4, δi coefficients are given in Appendix.

In equation (11)—(13), the six unknown coefficients, ai, bi and ci (i=1, 2), can be solved numerically with
the boundary conditions (4) and (5). Once the coefficients (ai, bi and ci) are obtained, the wave-induced soil
response can be further computed.

NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The aim of this paper is to investigate the effects of inertia force on the wave--induced pore pressure,
effective stresses and soil displacements, that is, the relative differences between the present solution with
inertia forces and the previous solution without inertia forces (Jeng, 1997). In fact, the influence of inertia
force also depends on other soil and wave parameters (such as seabed thickness, degree of saturation etc.).
To have a basic understanding the influence of inertia forces on soil response, we discuss inertia effects
through a parametric study in the following sections.

Effects of Seabed Thickness

Figures 2 illustrate the vertical distribution of the maximum amplitudes of the wave-induced soil response
(including pore pressure and vertical effective normal stresses) versus the relative soil depth (z/L) for various
values of seabed thickness in coarse and fine sandy seabed. In the figures, the solid lines represent the
results of the present theory with inertia forces, and the dashed lines are the results of previous analytical
solution without inertia forces.
As seen in the figures, it is observed that effects of inertia forces on the wave-induced pore pressure
( / p o ) and vertical effective normal stress ( σ ′z / p o ) are only significantly affected by the inertia forces in
p
a coarse sand (K=10-2 m/s), not in a fine sand (K=10-4 m/s). The figures clearly indicate that the maximum
relative difference of pore pressure between two solutions occurs near the seabed bottom in a coarse sand,
while it occurs near the seabed surface in a fine sand.
It is worthwhile pointing out that the inertia forces reduce the amplitude of the wave-induced pore
pressure (Figure 2). This implies that the excess pore pressure ( p / p o ) will become larger under wave
troughs, and lead to a larger liquefaction depth near the wave troughs.
 (a) Coarse Sand (b) Fine Sand
0 0

-0.1 -0.1
h/L=0.1 h/L=0.1

0.2
-0.2
0.2 -0.2
T=12.5 sec T=12.5 sec
L

L
/ z

/ z
d=20 m 0.3 d=20 m
L=159.95 m L=159.95 m
-0.3 -0.3
0.3 µ =0.4 µ =0.4
n=0.333 n=0.333
K=10 -2 m/s K=10 -4 m/s
-0.4 G=10 7 N/m2 -0.4 G=10 7 N/m2
S=100% S=100%
various h/L 0.5 various h/L
0.5
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
 p  /po  p  /po

Coarse Sand Fine Sand

0 0

-0.1 -0.1
h/L=0.1 h/L=0.1

-0.2 -0.2
0.2 0.2
T=12.5 sec T=12.5 sec
L
/ z

L
/ z

d=20 m d=20 m
-0.3 L=159.95 m -0.3
L=159.95 m
0.3 µ =0.4 0.3 µ =0.4
n=0.333 n=0.333
0.5 K=10 -2 m/s K=10 -4 m/s
-0.4 G=10 7 N/m2 -0.4 0.5 G=10 7 N/m2
S=100% S=100%
various h/L various h/L
-0.5 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
 σz ′  /po  σz ′  / po

Figure 2: Vertical distribution of the maximum amplitude of pore pressure and vertical effective normal
stresses versus z/L for various seabed thickness (h/L) in (a) coarse sand and (b) fine sand. “—” is the present
theory, and “- -“ is the results from Jeng (1997).

Effects of the Degree of Saturation

It is common to find air/gas within marine sediments. It is believed that most marine sediments have
degrees of saturation very close to unity, implying nearly full saturation (Pietruszczak and Pande, 1996). It
has been reported that the degree of saturation has played an important role in the analysis of the wave-
induced seabed response. Thus, it is of interest to investigate the effects of inertia forces on the seabed
response for various value of degree of saturation.
Figure 3 illustrates the wave-induced pore pressure ( p / p o ) versus the relative soil depth (z/h) for
various degrees of saturation in coarse sand. It can be found that the effects of saturation of the pore
pressure with inertia forces (solid lines) may not be as important as that in the previous solution without
inertia forces (dashed lines), especially in a nearly saturated seabed.

When Should Inertia Forces Be Considered?

In engineering practice, it is important to find the relative differences of the wave-induced seabed
response between two solutions (the present solution with inertia forces and previous solution without inertia
forces) and when we shall consider inertia forces in the evaluation of the wave-induced seabed response.
 0
Coasr Sand

-0.2

S=100%
-0.4 99%
95%
h/ z

T=12.5 sec
-0.6 d=20 m
98% L=159.95 m
98% 99% µ=0.4
Figure 3: Vertical distribution of the maximum
n′=0.333
-0.8 95% amplitude of pore pressure and vertical effective
h=20 m
K=10 -2 m/s
100% normal stresses versus z/h in coarse sand for various
G=10 7 N/m2
-1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
values of the degree of saturation. “—” is the
p/p o
present theory, and “- -“ is the results from Jeng
(1997).
Figure 4 presents the distribution of the relative differences of pore pressure ( ∆p / p o = p in − p no −in / p o )
versus the relative water depth (d/L) for various values of relative seabed thickness (h/L) in both coarse and
fine sands.

20 25
7 2
(a) Coarse Sand T=12.5 sec G=10 -2N/m (b) Fine Sand T=12.5 sec G=10 7 N/m2
µ=0.4 µ=0.4
-4
K=10 m/s K=10 m/s
n′=0.333 S=100% 20 n′=0.333 S=100%
15
0.5 0.2
) %

) %

15
0.2
( /p P ∆

( /p P ∆
o

10 h/L=0.1

10

5 h/L=0.1
5 0.5

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
d/L d/L

Figure 4: Distribution of the relative difference of wave-induced pore pressures (∆p/po) versus d/L for
various seabed thickness (h/L) in (a) coarse sand and (b) fine sand.

For a coarse sand [Figure 4(a)], the relative differences of pore pressure between two solutions ( ∆p / p o )
increases as d/L increases, as well as relative seabed thickness (h/L) increases. This implies that the inertia
forces will becomes more important in the evaluation of the pore pressure in deep water for coarse sand.
This phenomenon becomes more obvious as h/L increases.
For a fine sand [Figure 4(b)], the trends of ∆p / p o are different from those in coarse sand. The
maximum value of ∆p / p o occurs in shallow water (near d/L=0.1), and becomes almost a constant in middle
and deep waters (d/L >0.2). It also noted that the relative difference of pore pressure ∆p / p o does not
always increases as h/L increases. The maximum value occurs at the relative soil depth h/L=0.2. The
possible explanation for the different trends between coarse and fine sands in Figure 4 could be that the
maximum value of ∆p / p o occurs near the seabed bottom [as seen in Figure 2(a)], and it occurs near the
seabed surface [as seen in Figure 2(a)]. It is also noted that the maximum value of ∆p / p o reaches 17% of
po in fine sand [Figure 2(b)]. This implies that the inertia forces cannot always be ignored at particular
values of seabed thickness.
 CONCLUSIONS

In this study, inertia forces are included in the poro-elastic model for the wave-induced seabed response in a
porous seabed of finite thickness. A new semi-analytical solution was derived here, while the closed-form
solution for the simplified case of an infinite seabed was also presented in this paper. Based on the numerical
results presented, the following conclusions can be drawn:
(1) Generally speaking, the effects of inertia forces on pore pressure and vertical effective stresses is
significant under a certain combination of wave and soil conditions. The maximum value of the
relative differences of pore pressure ( ∆p / p o ) may reach 17% of po.
(2) The influences of the degree of saturation on the wave-induced seabed response will be reduced, if the
inertia forces are included in the wave-seabed interaction model.
(3) According to Figure 4, it is found that the inertia forces may be more important in deeper water with
larger seabed thickness in a coarse sand. However, the inertia forces will be more important in shallow
water with h/L=0.2 in a fine sand.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work described here forms part of the activities of the Special Research Centre for Offshore Foundation
Systems, The University of Western Australia, established and funded through the Australian Research
Council's Special Centres Program. This study was initially established when the second author visited
COFS/UWA in July 1998.

REFERENCES

Biot, M. A. (1941). “General theory of three-dimensional consolidation”. Journal of Applied Physics, Vol.
12, pp.155-164.
Jeng, D. S. (1997). Wave-Induced Seabed Response in Front of a Breakwater. PhD Thesis. The University of
Western Australia, Australia, 297pp.
Pietruszczak, S. and Pande, G. N. (1996). “Constitutive relations for partially saturated soils containing gas
inclusions”. Journals of Geotechnical Engineering, A.S.C.E., Vol. 122, pp.50-59.
Rahman, M. S. (1997). “Instability and movement of oceanfloor sediments: A review”. International Journal
of Offshore and Polar Engineering. Vol. 7, pp.220-225.
Yamamoto, T., Koning, H. L., Sellmeiher, H. and van Hijum, E. V. (1978). “On the response of a poro-
elastic bed to water waves”. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 87, pp.193-206.

APPENDIX
Coefficients in equations (8)—(13) are listed here.
ρω 2 1 2 1 2
, λ 2 =  − α 1 − α 1 − 4α 2 + 2k  , λ3 =  − α 1 + α 1 − 4α 2 + 2k  ,
2 2 4 2 2 2 4 2
λ1 = k 2 − (14)
G 2  2 
iωγ w  1 − 2µ  (k − λ1 )(1 − 2µ )
2 2
, α 22 = iωγ w nβ (1 − 2 µ )(k − λ1 ) ,
2 2
α 12 =  nβ +  + (15)
K  2G (1 − µ )  2(1 − µ ) 2 K (1 − µ )
iωγ w nβ iω (1 − 2µ ) λ1α 3
α 3 = (λ1 − k ) +
2 2
− (γ w + iρ f ωK ) , α = , (16)
K GK 4
2(1 − µ )[(λ12 − k 2 )(λ12 − k 2 + α 12 ) + α 22 ]
− 2iG (1 − µ )(λ12 − k 2 ) / k (1 − 2µ ) − λ1 , (k 2 − λ12 )(1 − 2µ ) ,
δ1 = δ 2 = λ22 − k 2 + (17)
2(1 − µ ) 2(1 − µ )
(k 2 − λ12 )(1 − 2µ ) ,
δ 3 = λ23 − k 2 + (18)
2(1 − µ )

View publication stats