SPE

7239i

Analysis of Gravity Offshore Structure Foundations

Jean W Pr&ost, PrincetonU. . Thomas J.R. Hughes, GiifcmniaInst, of Technology Martin F. Cohen, CaliforniaInst. of Technology
~. ,6

Introduction
Offshore structures must be designed for the worst expected environmental conditions, including a 100year wave that may be as high as 30 m (98 ft). Under such extreme loading conditions a structure exerts enormous forces on its foundation. Howevel, it is not sufficient to check its staoility for the maximum fr-. ,,~sintroduced by the largestpossible wave acting ASa static load. One also must consider that when this largest wave occurs, the structure aheady has been ~ubjected to a large number of other, lighter waves causing cyclic loading of its soil foundation. Under such cyclic loading conditions, soils exhibit very significant dissipative and softening characteristics. Thus, the effect of cyclic wave forces on soil foundations is a type of fatigue problem, and it is important to determine to what extent the behavior of soils under cyclic loadin~ may influence the safety of offshore structures. For the foundation design to be sound, the interaction between the structure and its soil foundation when subjected to both monotonic and cyclic, inclined, and eccentric force loading conditions must be analyzed. This set of circumstances is relatively new to geotechnical detigners, Trad;.ional methods of analysis no longer are applicable, and new techniques need to be developed. The complexity of the problem dictates that the method of analysis be numerical in nature. However, to make accurate and reliable predictions, a realistic three-dimensional analytical model of soil stressstrain-strength behavior is essential. Indeed, it must be emphasized that the solution provhied by even the fanciest finite element program will never be better or more realistic than the .constitutive equations adopted to modeI soil behavior. Because the cyclic wave forces subject the foundation materials to complicated three-dimensional stress-strain histories involving cycles of loading, unloading, and subsequent reloading, the dependence of the constitutive eq~ations on their stress-strain history musi be taken into account for the analysis of the wave/structure/foundation interaction to be realistic. The general analytic~soil model recently proposed by Pr&wost1S2f m cope adequately with such complex cyclic histories. The model formulation is general and incorporates bo:h drained and undrained loading situations. It describes the anjsotropic, elastoplastic, path-dependent, nonlinear stressstrain-strength properties of inviscid saturated soik subjected to complicated, and in particular to cyclic, three-dimensional loading paths. The model has been coded and incorporated into a finite element program. 3 The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the use of the formulation in analyzing offshore soil/structure/wave interaction problems. A brief summary of the models basic principles is

014%21 WIMIW2.7237W.26 @19780ff8110re Technology

Conference

This paper shows that the interaction of an offshore structure with its soil foundatio~ when subjected to complicated wave loading paths can be ana!~zedin a rigorous manner by taking into account the real three-dimensional, nonlinear, anisotropic, elastoplastic, path-dependent, stress-strain-strength properties of the material.
FEBRUARY1980 . -. 199 )

presented, along with an outline of its main features and capabilities. The models extreme versatility am! accuracy are demonstrated by applying it to represent the behavior of a particular soil under both monotonic and cyclic loading conditions. TImeafter, the capabilities of the formulation are demonstrated by applying it to analyze the interaction of an offshore gravity structure with its soil foundation when subjected to both static and cyclic wave forces. For the purpose of illustration, attention is concentrated on the behavior of fully saturated clay foundations for which the repeated loading caused by wave forces during one particular storm is assumed to occur with no volume change.

Proposed Soil Mock]

Soils in general simult~~eously undergo both elastic and plastic deformations upon shearing. To separate the contributions of the elastic and plastic properties in the total deformations, it is assumed that the elasticity of the material is linear and isotropic and that noii;inearity and anisotropy result from its plasticity. To account for the effects of unloading/reloading events on the material behavior, the model combines properties of isotropic4 and kinematics plasticity by allowing the yield surface to be translated in stress space by the stress point and to change in size simultaneously. Also, to allow for the adjustment of the plastic hardening rule to any kind of experimental nonlinear hardening law obtained in triaxial or simple shear soil tests, a collection of nested yield surfaces is used. For undrained loading conditions, the yield surfaces are represented by equations of the following form;l

change in size while they are translated. Their associated plastic moduli also are allowed to vary, and in general both k(m) and H~ are functions of the plastic strain history. This is discussed further in Refs. 2 and 6. Complete specifications of the model parameters requires the determination of(1) the inhial positions ana sizes of the yield surfaces together with their associated plastic moduli, (2) their sizes and/or plastic moduli changes as loading proceeds, and (3) the elastic moduli. As explained in Ref. 1, the model parameters required to characterize the behavior of any given soil can be derived entirely from the results of conventional soil tests. The actual number of yield surfaces to be used is a function of the desired degree of accuracy to be ach;:;ved in the material behavior representation.

Model Evaluation
The models versatility and accuracy are demonstrated by applying it to represent the behavior of a particular soil under both monotonic and cyclic loading conditions. For that purpose, Drammen clay has been selected because it is the only soil for which a complete set of test results is readily available. Furthermore, for simplicity, @tention is concentrated solely on the undrained behavior of this clay at an overconsolidation ratio o! 4. The Drammen clay has an in-situ water content of 520/0 and a plasticity index of 29070. As expiained in Ref. 6, the initial positions and sizes of the yield surfaces, together with their associated plastic moduli, and the elastic shear modulus are determined based solely on the experimental behavior of the clay measured in triaxial soil tests. Fig. 1a shows the experimental triaxial stre#b#rain curves obtained for Drammen clay (U;C= vertical effective consolidation stress). Note that the curves obtained in compression and extension are very different because the clay is anisotropic. Fourteen yield surfaces were used to fit the experimental triaxial stress-strain curves closely.6 To evaluate model accuracy, it was applied thereafter to predicf the results of a simple shear test performed on the same clay.b Fig. lb shows a comparison of the stress-strain behavior calculated using the proposed model with that measured in the simple shear test. In Fig. lb ~h and (aV-a& denote the average stresses ) measured in the test. They agree very well with the experimental curves. Thus, these results demonstrate the ability of the model to account for the behavior of the clay upon shearing with rotation of the principal stress axes. In the course of cyclic loading the yield surfaces all decrease in size until they reach their ultimate limiting sizes. Their associated plastic moduli then stat to vary. This i$ discussed further and explained in Refs. 1 and 2. As shown in Ref. 2, for Drammen clay, the change in size of the yield surfaces, their ultimate limiting sizes, and the change in their plastic moduli as cyclic loading proceeds are determined by using solely the experimental results from cyclic strain-controlled simple shear tests. Fig. 2a shows a comparison of the calculated decrease in shear stress
JOURNALOFPETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY

for all m, where k(m) and au (m) represent the size and the center coordinates of the yield surface~m in the deviatoric stress subspace, respectively. In Eq. 1, so= u~ - ukk6U/3 and denotes the components of the deviatoric stress tensor. Because the aU (m) are not necessarily all equal to zero, the yielding of the material is anisotropic. Therefore, direction is of great importance, and the physical reference axes (x, y, z) are fixed with respect to the soil element and specified to coincide with the principal axes of the material past consolidation. The initial positions and sizes of the yield surfaces reflect the past stress-strain history of the material element, and, in particular, their translations are a direct expressicm of the materia!s memory of its past loading histo~y as it is associated with the directien of Ioadin as sho,wn in Refs. 2 and & In the follo~ ing, :X. ?) =aYz (m) (m) =0 for all rn Initially, and =:Z (m) (m) /2, ;% A plastlc mo;u;?~~ is associated with each of the yield surfaces, and the associated flow rule4 is used to compute the plastic strain rate tensor components. The total strain rate is set equal to the sum of the elastic and plastic strain rates. All yield surfaces may be translated in stress space by the stress point, and they consecutively touch and push each other but cannot intersect. They are allowed to
200

2.0
.

1.0
.8
Compression

1.6

.6

.4

.2 1
I , I

-pll
% ylqc

T~/q/c ---- -k ..
/
e

---

-1
A

t/

//

-.-0.

00 *

0000

J
I 1

(V -

h)/ aVC

wy -

Ux)/u;c

o
-.4

FYI

YI
q ~ ()

2 SHEAR
Th

4 6 STRAIN
b

8 /o
Predict ed e G Measllred

Extension -. 8 I
01 -, VERTICAL .~p

Vi

. u~

Legend
[

I 23 a

I STRAIN 4 ib

Fig. 1- Calculated

and measured Drwnmen clay.

stress-strain ,

behavior for monotonic

(a) trlaxlal

te+a

and (b) simple shear teats for

amplitude using the proposed model with that *measured experimentally in the cyclic straincontrolled simple shear tests. They agree very well. The models accuracy was tested thereafter by applying it to predict the results of other tests performed on the same clay, including cyclic stressccmtrolled simple shear tests and cyclic stress- and strain-controlled triaxial tests. The model predictions are shown in Fig. 2 (with solid lines) and are found to agree very well with the experimental test results (shown with dots and dotted lines) for all cases.

Application
The model has been coded and incorporated in a finite element program. 3 The use of the formulation in solving boundary-vaIue problems is illustrated by applying it to analyze the interaction of an offshore gravity structure with its soil foundation when subjected to wave forces. In order to make thi study quite specific, attention is concentrated on the behavior of a fully saturated clay foundation for which the repeated loading caused by wave forces during one particular storm is assumed to occur with no volume change. In this aspect, it should be mentioned that the finite element program also incorporates novel features such as penalty function and reduced integration techniques that allow a simple and effective im lamentation of the incompressibility constraint. l? The foundation material is assumed to consist of a homogeneous deposit of Drammen clay.
FEBRUARY 1980

Because of the necessity of working within limited computation budgets, the problem geometry is transposed into two dimensions by assuming that it is of plane strain, and its two-dimensional finite element representation is shown in Fig. 3. The grid consists of 632 bilinear isoparametric rectangular elements.3 The structures foundation is represented by a strip footing consisting of a thin layer of elements 1,000 times stiffer than the supporting soil. Fig. 4 shows the load system and notation. In addition to the static load W resulting from the dead weight of the structure, the foundation (width= 2B) also is subjected to the cyclic inclined eccentric load F due to the wave forces. The load F is identified conveniently by means of its vertical component V acting with the eccentricity e, giving rise to the moment M= Ve, and its horizontal component H acting at the foundation level shown in Fig. 4. The stress distributions, on top of the footing corresponding to (W+ V), H, and Mare assumed to be uniform, parabolic, and linear, respectively, as shown in Fig. 4. Static FailureModes of the Foundation It is common practice in geotechnical engineering to design structure foundations with an adequate factor of safety against failure, which in a gefieral sense must be interpreted as the structures loss of static equilibrium with uncontrolled displacements. For the case of centered vertical loading only (i.e., e= H= O), the foundation fails in *bearing. When the load F
201

increases monotonically, the structure settles uniformly, and 6 denotes its vertical settlement. Fig, 5a shows the computed load-displacement curve (t?= e= O).When (W+ V)reaches the critical intensity (from Fig. 5a), (W+ V)/ACu=l.06(2+@, . . . . . . . . . ...(2) failure occurs. In Eq. 2, Cu = 0.584 Ujc and denotes the static (unsoftened) undrained simple shear strength of the clay, and A is the footing area. Note that the failure load is almost the same as for an iso~ropic depositg because both the principal axis of the Drammen clays anisotropy and the direction of the loading are vertical. Fig, 6a shows the computed velocity field at failure. It is almest identical to the one obtained for an isotropic deposit (shown with dotted lines in Fig. 6a) although it is somewhat stretched in the horizontal dkection, which corresponds to-the wqak anisotropic direction of the Drammen clay. Under inclined and/or eccentric loading conditions three modes of foundation failure are possible:

bearing,i-#sliding, or rocking. In order to investigate these failure modes, the load W is assumed to increase from zero to its final value and to remain constant thereafter as shown by the Load Pa~.~OA in the interaction diagram of Fig. 7. A safetj factor of three in static bearing is adopted, and unless otherwise specified, W/A Cu=(2+Ir)/3=1.71, ,..,.., . . . ...(3) The foundation footing is subjected thereafter to the inclined eccentric force F whose magnitude increases monotonically, as shown by the Load Path AB in Fig. 7. Before the force F was applied, the footing had settled uniformly under the load W by the amount fiW/2B= O.18?70. hen F is applied, it settles W even further and slides and tilts as shown in Fig, 8. Its center is displaced by the amount 8 and d in the vertical and horizontal directions, respectively. The tilt is measured by the angle of rotation a of the slab. The computed load-displacement curves for the various deformation medes for various iltclinations and eccentricities of the wave force are shown in kig.
LI Experimental Strain strain Amplitude , V. /0

k
1.OF
, \ --- Experiment Predicted 0 R redicted contours,

.8
-. 6

w= g .4
2
.0

. %
?2 y
m 1,%

.2 t

f, .75 % J 7..5*A / 101

102 103 CYCLES N

L+_+_+-o,
1 NUMBER
OF
(a:

CYCLES

NuMBER

OF
(b)

.. . .

Experiment Predicted

Experimental Predicted

Strain Streln

Amplitude Contours ,

,
C/O

.s .4.2 -

\\ \ \

Jb-==-8
I

&

..1 1.

b -a

I0
~ ,2 s
q

riv8-.51.

CV*-l.I.

..4
.

~o, i
NUMBER OF
c CYCLES N

-,6 1

101 NUMBER OF CYCLES N

d for c CIIC (a) atraln.controlled slm Ie ehear teets, (b) stress. trlax ral teete, and (d) stress.contro iled trlaxlal teete for Dram-

Fig. 2-Calculated controlled men clay. 202

and measured atrese-strain behavior Blmple ehear teste, (c) stra!n-controlled

JOURNALOF PETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY ,>

w /._ - ..?2$ ----l

FYfl

l\Fe
) =

II C#J I@
w
AS2BR1

L-=4

L---

1/..4 B --

----J

W*V

RB: REFLECTED

BOJNDARY

T
Fig. 4-Foundation footing loading conditions.

Fig. 3-Problem Ideallzatlon

- flnlte element mesh.

S. It is of importance to note that when failure occurs, it usually involves all three failure modes. Even when 0=90, failure involves sliding as weII as sinking and tilting of the footing. This is illustrated by the plot in Fig. 6b which shows the computed velocity field at failure (UB = 0.3!70; u= O.10). As an illustration, Fig. 6 also shows the computed velocity fields at failure fo~,a wave force inclined at 20 and positioned at various eccentricities. Note again that at failure the footing does not move in the direction of the applied wave force, but rather that the direction of the flow is more horizontal as previously explained and is consistent with the anisotropy of the deposit. Also note that even though both the load-displacement cwves (Fig. 5) and the failure load for a given 0 are the same whether the eccentricity is positive or negative, the velocity fields at failure are very different as illustrated by the plots a in Figs. dc and 6e. From Fig. 6 it is apparent that for each load case a very distinct discontinuity occurs in the velocity magnitude, wldch reveals the existence of a failure surface. Its trace is obtained easily from the plots in Fig. 6. Note that for e<O, the failure surface is rounded and convex, whereas for e >0 it is deeper, concave near the trailing end of the footing, and convex on its remaining part. Therefore, the type of information contained in velocity plots such as the one in Fig. 6 can be useful to check the foundation stability by using upper bound techniques, 10 since the latter require the determination of the failure w surfaces trace. In the (PV+ V, H, e)-space the various states of loading conditions at failure describe a surface that plays the role of a failure surface for the soil-footing interacting system. Its intersections with planes e/213= constant are shown in the interaction diagram of Fig. 7 by their projections onto the plane e= O. Note that although the safety against failure is reduced by the inclination and eccentricity of the applied load, the reduction is not very substantial when 0 is less than 20. Note also that for all 0, the
FEBRUARY19S0

calculated reduction in safety is much lower than the one predicted by the a proximate solutions of Hansen~* and Meyerhof. ]? The failure state is independent of the loading path followed to reach failure. This point is illustrated best by an example. Consider a fodii~g for which the load Fwith eccentricity e/2A3=0.122 is applied in two stages such that (1) O=O until V/A CM=2.57 (Path AA in Fig. 7), then (2) 6= 90 until failure occurs (Path A B in Fig. 7). It is found that failure, when it takes place, occurs when the state point reaches the failure surface e/2B= 0.122 at B and H/A Cu = 0.94 as obtained by directly following the Path AB from A (0=200). Furthermore, the velocity field at failure is found to be identical to one obtained for 0=20 (Fig. 6e). Deformations of the Foundation When Subjected to Cyclic Wave Forces Because the behavior of the foundation material is strongly path dependent, the loading applied onto the structure must follow the real wave loading history. To make this study quite specific, a CONDEEP gravity structure is chosen as the example problem. The structure consists of 19 interconnected cylinders, three of which are extended upward as towers to support the deck as shown in Fig. 9a. The results of wave loading calculations for this particular structure have been reported in Ref. 13, and Fig. 9b shows the time histories for V, H, and Mover a complete cycle of loading for a wave whose height is 25 m (82 ft), the period T= 15.5 seconds, and the water depth is 120 m (394 ft). The effect of wave forces is simulated by using sinusoidal forcing functions for V, H, and M, respectively, which follow the real wave Ioading history shown in Fig. 9b. The results of calculations pertaining to other cyclic wave loading time histories have been reported. The amplitude of the cyclic wave force is assumed to remain constant, and for the purpose of illustration, W/A Cu=2(2+@/3=3.42. . . . . . . . . . . ...(4)
203

(W+ V)/ACu
/.

3 A -. ._ .. r

[2*lr} .. ._ L / d

V/ACu

y~ 2

0.00 O.lzz
0.25

e/2B:

$=00

6 /26(%)

o .0
.6 ~ 0.25

W
~

0.10

a 1.0
~)

~/2B (%)
1.5 2.0

M/AclJ/2B

.tpAcuw~-

I
t/ k : f .2 ./ / / & ,Afi:=o

l..=- = 00
b
I

.0 o
1.!

I 1

I
2

a (dg)
3

.0 b

a (dg )
1

J 3

1.C

H/ACu

0,00 : O.lzz
:0,25

e/2B

1
9.10

G ..

~~a

E & .0 I
.5

I
1.0

I
1.5

d/2B(%) I
2.0 0

F .5

c 1,0

d/2B(%)
1.5

Fig. 5- Armlysls of the foundation movemente when Sub ected to an Incllned eccentric force of monotonically Increaein ma nitudtx (a) camputed vertical settlements, (1)) computed rocking movements, and (c) computed horizonta I sll d ng.

204

JOURNALOF PETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY

VIACU.
2

2 0.25 0.122 0.00 1

e12B

VIACU .~ 0.00
1

$.20

0.122 1

e120 o= 40

Z0,25

F- a
(
I I 1

ti/2B
1.0
1,5

(%)
I 2.0

W2B(70)
c

.5

.6-

MIACU12B

.k

.2 -

,2

.0

.&-+---+2
0 1
1.51-

+ . F
M/Acu/2B ,,

a (dg)

H/ACU

1.0

1.0 -

H /Acu
8 =40 .5 .5 -

.0

.0 0 .5 1.0 1.5

.5

1.0

1.5

Fig. 6-continued.

20s

.
&

-r
.
. . . .
-. ........ks:.2.* . ,-----

S*di*12B.O.O ,, /, ,/ ,, /, ,, ,. ,. .. .
. . ------

I 9.90 ---~-----.-.*..*.., ,*.

......,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. ..% .. ... . . . . . ... . . . . . y,-.. . . . ~---. . . . ..s --z

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -

. . . . . . . ---- ., /,;;; .. .. .. .. .,,, . . . .,,

;; ,...------,,,. .. .. .. . . . .

:--pza..inln

I
,,,.

p*/28.0122 WIACU,l.71

. . \ \\\-.----/////, \\\\\----~~0 . ., . ., .,.-,----

., . ; . .-------

.,

.......... . . . . . ..----, .,.. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

-~~.z......

. , , ,

-==Rv%-:h\%:;;2
.,

-,-0-///

/ /

.........

-- fi .,.., . . . i;\\\\\\<. . . ,,, --. . . . .,, l,;;\\.- ,,, -------- ..,., ,, ,, . . . . . !, . . --------,
!,, .,.

~\\\\\ l\\\\\ .,

\\\\ . . .\\\\-,,

; ,., ,,
. .

//,

,, ,, ... ,., ., ,,,

,4 . . .

.- ./,./, . . . .\ \\\\\ .,, \\\\----.,, . . . !,~w,----. ,, ., ! !,, ,------.

... , 01, . . . . . .,, .,, . . . . ,,, .,,

,. . . . ---.-e., . . ..-------. . . . . . . . . . . .

. ..., ,,. . . . . . ,, . ........ . ..... .. . ........

,.. .. .. .. .

... .... .... .. . .

. . . .

.. .. .. ., ..

Fig. 6- Computed veloclt field at failure: (a vertical Ioadln 0= O, e/2B = O; (b) horizontal loading 6=90; (c) Incllned e/~B= -0.124 (d) Inclked loading 0= ~O,e/B=O,Qand(e] lncllnedloadlng 19=20,e/2f3=0.122. loadlng0=20,

A- The computed displacement-time histories and loaddispIacement curves for the first five cycles of Ioading are shown in Figs. 10 through 12 from which the progress of the various deformations can be traced easily. From Fig. 10a it is apparent that upon cycling the wave force the structure accumulates permanent vertical displacements and that the rate of settlement decreases as the number of cycles of loading increases. After two cycles of loading further deterioration does not seem to take place in this mode (for this load level, at least), and the structure describ~s stable hysteresis loops as shown in Fig. 1la. This I nenomenon is referred to as a shakedown phenomenon in plasticity terminology. Similar resuhs are found for the rocking movements (Figs. IOc and 1lc), and the structure progressively accumulates a slight permanent tilt (O.16) toward the right. On the other hand, it is apparent from Figs. 10b and 1lb that there is no buildup of permanent lateral displacements, but rather that their mean value oscillates around its initial equilibrium position. Fig. 12 shows the footing position at various instants of time. (Note that the displacement scale is 200 times larger than the length scale in Fig. 12,) Finally, Fig. 13 shows the distorted configuration of the soil foundation and the direction of its flow at various instants of time during the fifth cycle of loading. It is of interest to note that the foundation material does not move is. phas, !, either with the footing or with the applkc~ Icdds. For

6T (2+ IT)

(W* V)/ACU

1
~ I .8 I
I

e/2B

F19. 8-Foundation

movements-notation

deflnltlon.

I .0

I
.4

HIACU I
1+

1.2

1.6

Fig. 7- Interaction

diagram-failure

envelopes.

206

I
a

V/ACu .6

M/Acu/2f3

-#

E .0 u
-.4
-..6

\l+/ACU
~ .* / Wave Height Period T= = 25m, 15.5s.

b
a

. .

FIQ. 9-Cyclic wave force Ioadlng condltlorrs on a 20-m (S&ft) CONDEEP platform; (a) CONDEEP platform, (b) wave loadtlrne functions.

= =

example, when the applied wave force is vertical (t =4T, 4TI- T/2, 51% the material is flowing laterally as shown in Figs. 13a, 13c and 13e. This information is important in designing underground pipes and their connections to offshore structures. Finally, it must be emphasized that analytical results presented in this paper are consistent with experimental test results obtained by Rowels in his centrifuge.

analyze any other particular teracting system of interest.

soiVstructure

in-

Nomenclature A = footing area

2B = footing width CM=static (unsoftened) simple shear strength k= yield surface size
0.9I ,

Summary and Conclusions

This paper shows that the interaction of an offshore structure with its soil foundation when subjected to complicated wave loading paths can be analyzed in a rigorous manner by taking into accoun. the real anisotropic, nonlinear, three-dimensional, elastoplastic, path-dependent, stress-strain-strength properties of the material. For the particular geometry considered, the computations provided necessary design information concerning (1) the (forceoverall response of the foundation displacement and moment-rotation relationships) when the structure is subjected to monotonically increasing inclined and eccentric forces at various angles of inclinations, (2) its various possible failure modes (bearing, sliding, and tilting) and the trace of the failure surface for each case, and (3) the overall response of the foundation when the structure is subjected to cyclic wave forces. Finally, h must be emphasized that the formulation is general and, therefore, can be used to
FEBRUARY19S0

1.1 1.2 L Y/vv~

Fig. 1O-C

CIIC wave loading conditions-computed d~placement4fme hlstorles: (a) vertical set. tlement, b) horizontal slldlng, and (c) rocking movemen \ .

207

-l VIACV
,6 ..4 .2 ,0 -. 2 -.4

n.-

!0

T 3721

.3

,2

.1

.*8L .8-)HIACU

-. .4

A -.8 Fig. 11 -C clic wave loading conditions-computed SIYding, and(c) rocking movement. ioad-displacement curves: (a) vertical settlement, (b) horizontal

e= wave force eccentricity y F= cyclic wave foice E/= cyclic horizontal force ikf= cyclic moment V= cyclic vertical force W= static dead weight au= yield surface center coordinates fr~= stress tensor components U;C= vertical effective consolidation stress
Uy(=uu), u% ( = ah

Program and the support Martin F. Cohen wa~ provided by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. ATA74-19135. .,.

References
1. Pr&ost, J,H,: Plasticity Theory for Soil Stress-Strain Behavior, J. of Engineering Mechanics Div., ASCE (Oct. 1978)104,No, EMS,1177-1194, 2. Pr&ost, J.H,: MathematicalModelingof Monotonicand CycIicUndrainedCIWBehavior, Intl. J, for Mm?erfcaland
Analytical Methods in Geomechanics(1977) 1, No. 2, 195216.

vertical and horizontal normal stresses ~h= average horizontal shear test measured in simple shear soil tests TM= horizontal shear stress at failure
) =

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge funds provided by the California Inst. c! Technology Energy Research

J 3. Hughes,T.J.R. and Pr&vost, , H.: DIRT, A FiniteElement Program for the Static Analysisof Nonlinear Anisotropic ElastoplasticHystereticContinua Subjectedto Complicated LoadingPaths, CaliforniaInst. of Technology(May 1977), 4, Hill. R.: The Mathematical Theory of Pia.wicity, Oxford U, Pres%, ondon(1950). L s. Prager, W.: The Theory of Plasticity:A Surveyof Recent E Achievement,Proc., Inst. of Mechanical ngineers,London (1955)169,41-S7. 6. Pr&ost, J.H.: Anisotropic Undrained Stress-Strain Behavior of Clays, J. of Geotechnical Engineering Div., ASCE(Aug. 1978)104,No. GT8, 1075-1090. 7. Anderson,K.H,: Beh?/ior of Clay Subjectedto Undrained Cyclic Loading, Pro,?., Boss 76 Conference, Tronheim, Norway(1976)1, 392-4t3. r?. Malkus, D.S. and liugl,es, T.J.R.: Mixed Finite Element Methods- Reducedand SeiNtiveIntegration Techniques:A Unification of Concepts; Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanicsando&ngineering (1978)15, No,l, 63-81,

9. Prandtf, L.: Uber die HiirtePlastischerK&per, Goettinger Math. Phys. Ki, (1920)74-85. 10,Murff, J.D. and Miller, T.W.: Foundation Stability on NonhomogeneousClays, J, of Geotechnical Engineering Div., ASCE(Oct. 1977)103, No. C3TI0,1083-1095. 11. Hansen,J.B.: A Revisedand ExtendedFormulafor Bearing Capacity, Publication No. 28, Danish GeotechnicalInst., Copenhagen(1970). 12. Meyerhof, G.G.: Some Recent Research in the Bearing JOURNALOF PETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY

t.bl
. ...*

t.bl
i

a:::::::::;;;;;;;;:::: ... ... .. . . . . . . . .... ... ...:. . . . .... .. . . . . . . . .. .

t *473t14 b tsir+tlh
I
. ..., ... ,11 l\,\\\\ . . . . . . . . . . . ~ I . ..-.

b~~l~~!\i:{i\\il:::::: . ..,,,,,,,,, . ...,,,,,, . ,.,. . .. . . . . . .. . ...,,,,, . . .,.... . . . . . . .. ,.,.,,,,,, . , . . .. .. . . ... ,,, , .. . . . .. . . . .. ,.,
t.& T*T12 tsq.lfz tspt

d~~;;~\~[~;;;;~~:;:~::: 1!,,,,,,}.:. . . . :,0,,,,,,, . . . . . . . . . ,,, ,,, . . . . . . . .... ,,, , ,,, ,,, ,,, . . ,:,. . . . .,, !,, , ,. , . ,,,
t yl

i. ....< ..-_.. ........ _./ /0::::: c::::::--:::;;;;::: ..... .. :: ::,,. .. .

I *

.... .. .. . . . .. . ... . . .. ..... .. . . . .. . ..... . . . .. .... .. . .

e~~;;:;;~~j;;;~f~~::;~ . ::... .. .. ... . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ... . . . . . . . :,:: . . .. . . .. . .. . :: . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . ... . . . :. :... .. . . . .

and velocit field at various Instants of time Fig. 13- Cycllc wave loading conditions - computed dmtorted configuration =4T+ T/2,(d) #=4T+3T/4, (e)t =5K during the fifth cycle of wave loading(a) t =4T, (b) t =4T+ T/4, (c)t

Capacityof Foundations, Canadian Geotechnical J. (19s53)

1, No. 1,1646.

13. Garrison. C.J..o Hydrodyrt8micLoading of Large Offshore Structur&, Three-Dimensional Source Distribution Methods, Numericai Methoa3 in Offshow Engineering, O.C. Zicnkicwicz,R.W. Lewis,and K.G. Stass (tds.), John
WiIcy& Sons, Ncw York City (1978)87-140.
14.

Offshore (lravky Plstforms Founded on Clay, Proc., Offshore Europe 75Cortfcrcncc, Abcrdccn, Scotland (Sept. 197S) E-75,218.1-218.16. O

S1 Metric Conversion Factor

ft %onvorslon Orlglnd

x 3.048 E-01

= m

Pr&ost, J.H. and Hugkcs, T.J.R.: Analysis of Gravity OffsiwsrcStructure Foundations Subjcctcd to Cyclic Wave Loading, Proc., OffshoreTechnologyConfcrcncc,Houston
(May

factor 18 q xact.

1978) 1,1809-1818.

15.

ROWC,

R.W.: Dkphwcmcnt and Faihsrc Modes of Model

manuscript recolvoct [n Sc%lety of Petroleum En!@er80fflce Fob. 9, mmrscrlpt received MaY 25, 1979. paPer q ccePt@d for publlcatlcn Z 1970, SPE 7239 (OTC 3281) first prcwted qt the 10th Nov, Paper Annusl Offshcrelechnclogy Cwtference, held In Houston, May WI, 1978.

ma

Revlmd

,
1

FEBRUARY 1980

209.