Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.

com, ISSN 1743-3509

Embedded suction anchors for floating

breakwaters
S. ~ a r g ' Y. ~ J.
, cho2, Y. S. ~ i r nD. , ICwag2 & T. H. ~ e e ~
I
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, USA.
2
Daewoo Engineering & Construction, Korea.

Abstract
Embedded suction anchors were used to provide necessary resistance for
mooring a floating breakwater system. The embedded suction anchors and the
mooring lines were designed using the methods developed by the US Navy. The
validity of the mooring line design method was previously made through
experimental field and centrifuge model tests. The validity of the design method
for the embedded suction anchor resistance was made through centrifuge model
tests as part of this study.

1 Introduction
The embedded suction anchor (ESA) is a type of permanent offshore foundation
that is installed by a suction pile. The cross-sectional shape of the ESA is
circular with its diameter being same as that of the suction pile that is used to
drive it into the seafloor. It has an advantage over conventional plate anchors,
since stability is maintained during deployment due to its geometric symmetry.
To increase the loading capacity against pullout, three wings (vertical flanges)
are attached along the circumference at 120 degrees apart. Figures 1 and 2 show
diagrams and photo of ESA model anchors used for the centrifuge model tests.
During installation, the ESA is attached at the tip of the suction pile and then
driven as a unit with the suction pile by the applied reduced pressure inside the
suction pile. Once the ESA reaches the desired depth, the suction pile is
retrieved by applying a positive pressure, leaving the ESA permanently in the
seafloor soil. Afterward, the ESA is pulled with preset tension to be deployed at
its final, permanent position within the seafloor.
 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

470 Coastal Engineering V1

Figure 1: Schematic diagrams of embedded suction anchor model

Figure 2: Photo of embedded suction anchor models

 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

Coastal Engineering V1 47 1
The ESAs were chosen to provide necessary resistance for a floating
breakwater system to be built in southern Korea. Originally, the breakwater
system utilized a series of tandem deadweight concrete blocks to provide
necessary anchorage. However, the total number and volume of concrete blocks
were too significant to be economical. The ESAs were therefore conceived and
selected as an alternative underwater anchor system.
Since ESAs can be easily placed at deeper depths with large dimensions
through the use of a suction pile, they can replace conventional underwater
anchor systems with fewer numbers, resulting in substantial savings for the
underwater anchor construction. This paper describes the design of mooring
lines connecting the ESAs with the floating breakwater; and the determination of
the pullout capacity of the ESA by an analytical solution and the validation of
the design method through centrifige model tests. The installation of ESAs
through the use of a suction pile is not included in this paper. References (Bang
& Cho [2], Bang, et al. [4, 5, 8, 121, Preber et al. [15]) describe complete details
of the design and analysis of suction pile installation in various types of seafloor
soils.

2 Description of floating breakwater system

Figure 3 shows the original floating breakwater design that utilized 28 sets of
tandem deadweight concrete blocks. As explained previously, these concrete
blocks were replaced with 10 ESAs with five on each side of the breakwater, as
shown in Figure 4. Since ESAs can be designed to resist against very large
forces, the interior ESAs were designed so that they could provide necessary
resistance for two mooring lines.
The maximum horizontal force that would be expected to develop at the
breakwater, i.e., the mooring line tension at the breakwater, was determined
through a series of laboratory model tests, considering the geographical and
wave conditions of the site. It was determined that the maximum tension would
be 20 tons per mooring line.
The floating breakwater consists of four identical units that have
dimensions of 60 m X 7.5 m with a separating distance of 4.3 meters between the
units. They are not physically connected one another and therefore to ensure
safe and proper functioning each unit has maximum allowable horizontal
movement of 2.4 meters, which must be considered in the design of the mooring
lines and maintained during normal operation.

3 Design of mooring lines and anchor force

The maximum horizontal force at the breakwater obtained from the model test
was used to design the mooring lines and to determine the depth of and force at
ESAs. For this purpose, an analytical solution developed by the author for the
US Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center was used. This analytical
solution method can analyze offshore and deep water mooring lines associated
with embedded drag and fixed anchors. Mooring lines may be comprised of
 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

472 Coastal Engineering V1

Figure 3 : Floating breakwater with deadweight concrete anchors

Figure 4: Floating breakwater with embedded suction anchors

multi-segments with different material and/or geometric properties and

embedded in a general seafloor soil having either cohesion or friction or both.
Any number of sinkers can also be added to the suspended portion of the
mooring line within the water. Solutions can be obtained with a fixed total
length of the m o o ~ gline, a fixed horizontal length of the mooring line, or a
fixed exit angle of the mooring line at the seafloor surface. The solution has
been validated through various field and centrifuge model tests (Bang, et al. [6,
7, 91). The details of the analytical solution can be found in reference (Bang
[l]>.
 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

Coastal Engineering V1 473

For the mooring line, studded chain links with nominal diameter of 64
mm and underwater weight of 0.768 kNlm were chosen. The field investigation
indicated that the soil condition at the site was predominantly cohesive clay with
an average undrained shear strength varying fiom 4.4 kPa at the depth of 1 meter
to 6.8 kPa at the depth of 5 meters. The horizontal distances between the
breakwater and ESAs were decided to be 78 meters and 88 meters for interior
and exterior ESAs, respectively. Each interior ESA has two mooring lines
attached with an angle of 95 degrees between them. Exterior ESAs were
designed based on the same tension, since they would have the same dimensions
as the interior anchors. In addition, 2.73 ton deadweight sinkers were added to
each mooring line in the middle of the catenary portion within the water to
reduce the force at the anchor and to minimize the expected horizontal
movement of the breakwater at maximum tension. The results of the analysis of
mooring lines are included in Table 1.

4 Design of embedded suction anchors

The following parameters were used for the design of ESAs in addition to the
general design parameters described previously.

Depth of the mooring line attachment to ESA: 6 meters

Maximum chain tension at ESA: 12.50 tons (fiom Table 1)
Minimum factor of safety for ESA: 2.0

The design procedures adopted by the US Navy for the determination of

the holding capacity of plate anchors (Beard [10], Douglas [13], Herrmann [14])
were used to estimate the pullout resistance of ESAs. They include two separate
requirements for the static holding capacity determination: Short term and long
term. In addition, dynamic holding capacities against the impulse and cyclic
loading need to be considered. The following describes briefly the static and
impulse loading capacities in cohesive seafloor. The loading capacity against
the cyclic loading however is not described in this paper.
The short-term static holding capacity in cohesive soil is calculated fiom

F, = A N, S,, f (0.84 + 0.16 BL)

where A is the projectional area of the anchor, N, is the soil bearing capacity
factor, S, is the undrained shear strength of the seafloor soil, f is the factor
accounting for soil disturbance, B is the width of the anchor, and L is the length
of the anchor.
The long-term static capacity is calculated fiom

F,, =A (c' N: + yb D N4)(0.84+ 0. I6 BL)

 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

474 Coastal Engineering V1

Table 1: Mooring Line Analysis Summary

Exterior Piles Interior Piles

Total chain length 92.7 m 82.6 m
Chain length between ESA and 64.0 m 53.3 m
sinker
Initial horizontal deployment 13.58 tons 13.81 tons
chain load at breakwater
Maximum ESA tension 12.24 tons 12.50 tons

where c' is the effective soil cohesion, N: and Nq are the effective bearing
capacity factors, and yb is the buoyant soil unit weight.
The impulse loading holding capacity is determined fiom

where I is the influence factor for adjusting the soil strength, R, is the reduction
factor for the determination of cyclic loading holding capacity, Ri is the
reduction factor for repeated impulses, and If is the inertial factor for capacity
increase under very rapid loading.
The determination of minimum ESA dimensions was based on meeting
the design force at the anchor under all conditions with the minimum factor of
safety specified. This resulted in the ESA width of 2 meters including the flange
width and the ESA length of 2 meters. The resulting factors of safety were 2.66,
3.78 and 4.52 against the short-term static, long-term static, and impulse loading,
respectively.

5 Validation of design method

The Daewoo Institute of Construction Technology (DICT) in Suwon, Korea,
performed the centrifuge model tests to provide validation of the design method
against the short-term static loading, since it produced the smallest factor of
safety. The centrifuge has nominal radius of 2.7 meters with maximum
acceleration of 100 g's. Figure 5 shows a photograph of the centrifuge.
Figures 1 and 2 show model ESAs used for the centrifuge model tests. It
has a cylinder diameter of 3 cm, cylinder length of 5 cm, and the flange width of
1 cm. With 120-degree angle separating the flanges, the projectional width of
the ESA becomes 4.33 cm. The model ESA was tested under an elevated
acceleration of 50 g's, i.e., 50 times the gravitational acceleration. Therefore the
equivalent prototype ESA has width of 2.165 meters and length of 2.5 meters.
Figure 6 shows the ESA test assembly inside the centrifuge. The ESA was
embedded at a depth of 12 cm to the top of the pile. Four tests were run with
different points of the lateral load application. The lateral load was applied at an
Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

Coastal Engineering V1 475

Figure 5: Centrifuge at DICT

Figure 6 : Embedded suction anchor test assembly

 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

476 Coastal Engineering V1

angle of approximately 20 degrees to the horizontal. This inclined lateral load
might have introduced a slight uplift force. However, at such low inclination
angles, the measured ultimate resistance is approximately same as that under
perfectly horizontal load (Cho & Bang [ l l]).
The test result with the lateral load applied near the mid-height of the
ESA (65.8 tons equivalent to the field load) was used for the validation purposes,
since it produced more or less translational movement of the ESA and the deign
equations were developed for such type of movement. When the lateral load is
applied near the top or the bottom of the anchor, the anchor experiences
rotational as well as translational movement and therefore the resulting ultimate
resistance is significantly influenced. The details on the reduction in ultimate
resistance due to the change in the point of lateral load application are well
described by Bang & Cho [3].
Completely saturated Kaolinite was used for the model tests to simulate
the seafloor material. It had average undrained shear strength of 5 tons/m2. The
soil and ESA geometric properties together with 0.25 for the value of "f' to
account for the soil disturbance caused by the installation of the ESA were used
in eqn (1) to estimate the short term holding capacity of the model ESA of 79.45
tons. When compared to the measured resistance of 65.8 tons fiom the
centrifbge model test, this results in a difference of about 13.5 % between the
measured and calculated short term holding capacities of the model ESA.

6 Conclusions
Embedded suction anchor conceived to replace the conventional
deadweight concrete anchors for floating breakwater system is described.
Designs of mooring lines and embedded suction anchors necessary to provide
resistance for the floating breakwater are also included. Results indicate that the
minimum factor of safety occurs with the short-term static loading. Therefore,
centrikge model tests have been run to partially validate the use of the design
method, i.e., against the short-term static load. Reasonably satisfactory results
have been obtained between the measured and estimated resistances of the model
embedded suction anchors.

References
[l] Bang, S., Anchor Mooring Line Computer Program User Manual, Contract
Report CR - 6020 - OCN, Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center, 1996.
[2] Bang, S. & Cho, Y., Use of Suction Piles for Mooring of Mobile gtj'shore
Bases, Task 6 Completion Report - Centrifuge Model Tests, Report
submitted to the Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center, 200 1.
[3] Bang, S. & Cho, Y., Ultimate Horizontal Loading Capacity of Suction Piles,
International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.
56-63,2002.
 Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509

Coastal Engineering V1 477

[4] Bang, S., Cho, Y., Karnoski, S. & Taylor, R J., Field Verification of Suction
Pile Installation in Sand, International Symposium on Coastal Geotechnical
Engineering in Practice, Yokoharna, Japan, Vol. 1, pp. 249-254,2000.
[5] Bang, S., Cho, Y. & Kirn, S. S., Calibration of Suction Pile Installation
Design with Centrifbge Model Tests, Paper No. OSU-5023,20fiInternational
Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil, 200 1.
[6] Bang, S., Han, H. & Taylor, R. J., Calibration of Analytical Solution Using
Centrifbge Model Tests on Mooring Lines, International Journal of Offshore
and Polar Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 236-240,2000.
[7] Bang, S., Han, H. & Taylor, R J., Development and Validation of Mooring
Line Analysis in Cohesive Seafloor, International Journal of Offshore and
Polar Engineering, Vol. l l, No. 2, pp. 141-146,2001.
[S] Bang, S., Preber, T., Cho, Y., Thomason, J., Karnoski, S. R. & Taylor, R. J.,
Suction Piles for Mooring of Mobile Offshore Bases, Journal of Marine
Structures, Vol. 13, pp. 367-382,2000.
[9] Bang, S., Taylor, R. J., Jie, Y. & Kim, H. T., Analysis of Anchor Mooring
Line in Cohesive Seafloor, Transportation Research Record, No. 1526, pp
47-56, 1996.
[l01 Beard, R. M., Holding Capacity of Plate Anchors, Technical Report No.
R882, Naval Construction Battalion Center, Port Hueneme, CA, 1980.
[ l 11 Cho, Y. & Bang, S., Inclined Loading Capacity of Suction Piles,
International Conference on Offshore and Polar Engineering, Paper No.
2002-PCW-0 1,2002.
[l21 Cho, Y., Bang, S. & Preber, T., Transition of Soil Friction During Suction
Pile Installation, Accepted for publication in Canadian Geotechnical Journal.
1131 Douglas, B. J., Effects of Rapid Loading Rates on the Holding Capacity of
Direct Embedment Anchors, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, PO No. M-
R420, 1978.
[l41 Herrmann, H. G., Design Procedures for Embedment Anchors Subject to
Dynamic Loading Conditions, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory,
Technical Report, 1980.
[l51 Preber, T., Bang, S., Boyle, S., Cho, Y., Gould, J. & Park, K., Laboratory
Model Testing and Calibration of Suction Pile Installation in Sand,
International Conference for Ocean and Offshore Structures, Singapore, pp.
91-98,2001.
Transactions on the Built Environment vol 70, © 2003 WIT Press, www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3509