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

net/publication/269146569

Comparison of Underwater MASW, Seismic CPT, and Downhole Methods:

Offshore Croatia

Conference Paper · February 2010

DOI: 10.1061/41095(365)109

CITATIONS READS

0 268

3 authors, including:

Edouard Mouton
SismOcean
12 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

The application of the processing developped for the land geological anomalies detection called DCOS (like karsts, cavities) for a marine application. View project

Marine surface wave (Scholte) measurement and processing using a Scholte wave numerical model for the inversion View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Edouard Mouton on 22 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Comparison of Underwater MASW, Seismic CPT and Downhole Methods
Offshore Croatia

L. Paoletti1, E. Mouton2 and I. Liposcak3

1
D’Appolonia S.p.A., Via San Nazaro 19, 16145 Genova, Italy
2
SismOcean, 132 rue Pauline Ramart, 34070 Montpellier, France
3
Crosco, Naftni Servisi d.o.o., Ulica Grada Vukovara 18, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

ABSTRACT
Shear wave velocity (Vs) is a key parameter for seismic amplification analyses, and
for assessment of liquefaction potential of loose offshore sands. A number of
methods are available to measure Vs offshore, including seismic Cone Penetration
Testing (CPT), Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves, and Downhole methods.
A marine investigation was carried out offshore Croatia for a new bridge connecting
the Croatian mainland to the Peljesac peninsula. During the investigation, direct Vs
measurements were taken with the three methods outlined above. This paper
presents the data acquisition, processing and results. Advantages and limitations of
the three methods used for the survey are discussed.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Dalmatia, the southern region of Croatia, is presently divided by the rest of
the country by a narrow strip of land of Bosnia Herzegovina. This border makes
road transportation quite inefficient, and the Government of Croatia is planning to
construct a 2.3 km long bridge to bypass the Bosnian border. The indicative position
of the proposed bridge is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Site location map

Description of the investigation
The bridge abutments rest on sound rock, while the central part of the bridge
crosses the Mali Ston bay in approximately 28 m water depth. A thick sequence of
clays is present in the bay. A proper characterization of the site was a fundamental
requirement for bridge design. D’Appolonia was contracted by Crosco to carry out
a site investigation along the proposed bridge (D’Appolonia 2005). The
investigation was finalized to the delineation of the site stratigraphy and the
measurement of in-situ shear wave velocity. The scope of work comprised a surface
wave survey along two main lines and three cross-lines, six boreholes to maximum
106 m penetration with undisturbed sampling and seismic CPT, four seabed CPT to
30 m and the installation of a HDPE liner in borehole BH4 for downhole seismic
testing.
The site stratigraphy is shown in Figure 2. The stratigraphy comprises 6 m
of soft clay (light yellow) followed a sequence of medium stiff to stiff high plasticity
clays to 60 m (dark yellow). Below that depth, very stiff to hard clays (brown) were
encountered overlaying the limestone bedrock (green).

Figure 2. Site stratigraphy (at borehole BH4)

The following chapters briefly describe the methodology utilized for the
measurement of shear wave velocity.

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS

Surface waves survey

The theory of elasticity provides three solutions for the equation of motion in a half-
space. These solutions correspond to the body waves, i.e. dilatation (Pwaves) and
distortion (S-waves), and to waves traveling near to the boundary of the half-space,
i.e. the surface waves (R-waves).
Considering a seismic source located on the boundary of a half-space, the theory
predicts that surface waves carry about 2/3 of the total input energy and propagate
radially outwards along a cylindrical front with a geometrical damping of r -1/2,
where r is the distance from the source (e.g., Richart et al., 1970; Achenbach, 1984).
The velocity of the surface waves is correlated to the shear wave velocity and the
Poisson ratio, and is independent of its frequency. These properties make the
surface waves of primary interest for shallow surveys.
An early study for the characterization of marine sediments by means of the
surface waves is provided in Guilbot (1994). The following paragraphs deal with
the acquisition and processing of surface waves along the proposed bridge in Croatia
(D’Appolonia, 2005).
The equipment utilized for the underwater surface waves survey is shown in
Figure 3. Equipment included two airguns (20 to 40 in3), an air compressor with
capacity of 12 m3/h at 120 bars, and a streamer of 24 low frequency hydrophones at
5 m spacing. The S/V Hidra of the Hydrographic Institute of Croatia was utilized
for the survey. The seismic source and the streamer were dragged on the seafloor
at a constant speed of about 2 knots. Shots were executed at about 15 to 20 m
spacing.

Figure 3. Surface wave survey set-up

The survey was carried out in one day. Example results are provided below.

Seismic signal, shot No. 260 Dispersion curve

Figure 4. Example surface wave survey data
 The left box of Figure 4 shows the filtered seismic data. The surface waves
trains are clearly visible between 500 and 3000+ ms. The right box shows the
corresponding dispersion curve. A slant stack transform and a fast Fourier
transform were used to develop plots of phase velocity versus frequency. The
dispersion curves were obtained by a ridge analysis of these data. Numerical
inversion was used to derive the shear wave velocity profile below seafloor. The
stratigraphy was modeled with 7 layers and a substrate. The depth of the layers was
set at 3, 7, 11, 17, 24, 33, and 43 meters below seabed. Surface waves propagation
in layered media is characterized by the existence of several modes of propagation.
This can be explained by the presence of constructive interference between curved
ray-paths for continuously varying heterogeneous media between transmitted and
reflected waves for layered media (Guilbot, 1994). This phenomena was locally
visible in the geophysical data. The fundamental mode was considered in data
processing.
The results of surface wave survey are shown in Figure 5. The contours
were obtained processing the full data set projected on the bridge centerline using
the Kriging technique. The contouring options were chosen to best represent the
anisotropy of the data without loosing accuracy in the identification of spikes. Two
distinct zones are clearly visible: left and central portion of Figure 5: from the
mainland to about 1.6 km offshore, characterized by Vs typical of soft to stiff soils;
right side of Figure 5, from 1.6 km to the Peljesac peninsula, showing Vs typical of
soft to hard soils, and rock. Results are in good agreement with the site stratigraphy
disclosed by the boreholes.

Figure 5. Summary of surface wave survey results around BH4

SEISMIC CONE
A series of shear wave velocity measurements were performed in five
boreholes drilled from a geotechnical vessel (Figure 6). The seismic piezo-cone
penetrometer had a three geophone array and 28 Hz natural frequency. The seismic
source was a sledge hammer horizontally striking on a steel beam fitted with vertical
fins to improve beam/soil contact. Testing procedure was the following: the cone
penetrometer was advanced to the test depth; subsequently, body waves were
generated by the hammer. The travel times of body waves propagating between the
wave source and the geophones was measured. The wave velocity in the interval
between two consecutive measurements was computed from the difference in travel
time between the tests. The seismic SCPT were performed from the mudline to the
maximum depth of signal penetration, approximately 25 m. The distance between
the underwater source and the cone in the seismic CPT can be taken as the test
penetration. Energy losses in the shallow peat lenses contributed to signal
degradation. Tests were stopped when the signalto-noise ratio was less than about
two. Filtering frequency between 10 and 100 Hz was utilized depending on noise
conditions.

Figure 6. Schematic of Seismic Cone Measurement,

and Data of Borehole BH4

Downhole Method
A three inch high density polyethylene (HDPE) logging standpipe was
installed in BH4 to a depth of approximately 100 m below seafloor. Operations
were carried out from the geotechnical vessel. The pipe was fitted with a steel
anchor at the base. A downhole seismic testing was subsequently carried out by
divers. Testing procedure was as follows: a shot gun striking on a steel plate was
positioned on the seafloor at 20 m distance from the standpipe. The receiver was
deployed with the assistance of divers at selected depths as shown in the left box
of Figure 7. The survey was completed in five days.

DEPTH OF GEOPHONE (m)

15 27 35 48 60
0

20 m
50
SHOT GUN
STANDPIPE 70 80
BH4 SEAFLOOR 100

150

15 m
200

27 m 250

35 m
300

48 m 350

400
60 m

450
70 m

500
80 m

Figure 7. Downhole seismic survey set-up

COMPARISON OF SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY DATA

The summary of shear wave velocity data obtained with the three methods
utilized for the survey is presented in Figure 8 for each borehole location. The
following data is provided:

i) gray shaded range, showing the envelope of the Vs profiles obtained from
the surface wave survey, considering the 4 shots nearest to the borehole;
ii) red line, showing the results of seismic cone acquisition;
iii) blue line (BH4 only): showing the result of the underwater seismic
downhole measurements.

The horizontal lines show stratigraphic changes between the clay units. The
double line indicates the end of borehole.
 Figure 8. Summary of shear wave velocity data, location BH4

From available data, the following observations can be made:

o the three methods employed provided a similar range;

o surface wave penetration was sufficient to properly characterize the first
30+ m of the stratigraphy. A near-continuous profiling of Vs was obtained
with the method employed;
o seismic cone was able to capture local variability in soil stiffness. It
suffered of considerable energy losses in the shallow soft clay and peat
lenses: the maximum signal penetration was about 15 m at borehole BH4;
o the underwater downhole seismic reached 80 m penetration. Details in the
shallow part were lost as first reading was taken at 15 m. The use of divers
made operations quite difficult and HSE sensitive.

From the operational point of view, the seismic cone and the downhole
seismic were the most demanding operations. Underwater surface wave survey
was considerably the most effective survey method to obtain shear wave velocity.

CONCLUSION
This paper presents the results of underwater measurement of shear wave
measurements at a site offshore Croatia. Three different methods were utilized:
surface waves, seismic CPT and downhole seismic. The spectral analyses of surface
 waves proved to be the most cost effective method as far as simple stratigraphy was
encountered. In more complex areas, direct measurements or correlation with
geotechnical data are still required for the finalization of the geotechnical design
parameters. The results presented in this paper in conjunction with a careful
evaluation of the expected site conditions may help in the selection of the most
suitable method to obtain shear wave data for design.

REFERENCES
Achenbach, J. D. (1984). "Wave Propagation in Elastic Solids", North-Holland
Amsterdam, Netherlands.

D’Appolonia (2005). "Geotechnical Investigation, Peljesac Bridge, Offshore

Croatia", Doc. No. 04-900-H4 Rev. 0, March.

Guilbot, J. (1994). "Caractérisation acoustique de fonds sédimentaires marins par

étude de la dispersion de célérité des ondes d’interface de type
StoneleyScholte. PhD Dissertation", The Science University of Lyon,
France.

Richart, F. E., Woods, R. D. and Hall J. R. (1970). "Vibration of Soils and

Foundations, Prentice-Hall".

View publication stats