Seismic Design of Subsea Spools per ISO: Part II- Seismic Requirements


Brunel University London


The ISO requires a two-level seismic qualification, namely Extreme Level Earthquake (ELE) and Accidental Level Earthquake (ALE) where damages that do not lead to leak is acceptable. ISO accepts both the response spectrum method and the time history approach.  Since the spool-soil system behaves non-linearly, the time domain analyses must be performed for both levels. ISO requires 7 real earthquakes scaled for the site to be used for each seismic level and the system must pass at least 50% of the cases. 
Best estimate soil models were developed to represent soil conditions at the manifolds locations in Part I. A set of 10 real earthquake time histories were propagated through the soil column for each location. The resulting ground motion at the surface was computed using a nonlinear model. The frequency-dependent ratio of spectra acceleration at the mudline to the stiff soil outcrop spectral acceleration (Spectral Amplification Ratio or SAR) was computed for each time history. The mean SAR was then used to modify the stiff soil hazard results from the PSHA to obtain design response spectra at the mudline.
This is the second part of three interlinked papers summarises the state of art for the benefit of practitioners of subsea engineering.


  1. Banon, H, Cornell, A., Marshal, P.W., Nadim, F., and Younan. H., (2001), ISO SEISMIC DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR OFFSHORE PLATFORMS, OMAE2001/S&R-2114, 20th Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Conference - OMAE 2001, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3rd - 8th June 2001
  2. Bommer, J. J., S. Akkar, and O. Kale, (2011), A Model for Vertical-to-Horizontal Response Spectral Ratios for Europe and the Middle East, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 101, No. 4, pp. 1783-1806. [DOI:10.1785/0120100285]
  3. Boore, D. M., and Smith, C.E., (1999), Analysis of Earthquake Recording Obtained from the Seafloor Earthquake Measurement System (SEMS) Instruments Deployed off the coast of Southern California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 260-274.
  4. Bozorgnia, Y. and Campbell, K.W., (2004), The Vertical-to-Horizontal Response Spectral Ratio and Tentative Procedures for Developing Simplified V/H and Vertical Design Spectra, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 175-207. [DOI:10.1080/13632460409350486]
  5. Cornell CA, Vanmarcke E.H., (1969), The major influences on seismic risk Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago, Chile.
  6. Cornell CA., (1968), Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 58(5):1583-1606.
  7. Cornell, CA, (1996), Reliability-based earthquake resistant design; the future, paper, No. 2166, 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering pp 1-11.
  8. Campbell, K. W., and Y. Bozorgnia, (2003), Updated near-source ground motion (attenuation) relations for the horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration and acceleration response spectra, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 93, pp. 314-331. [DOI:10.1785/0120020029]
  9. Darendeli, M. B., (2001), Development of a New Family of Normalized Modulus Reduction and Material Damping Curves, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin.
  10. Gülerce, Z., and N. A. Abrahamson, (2011), Site-Specific Design Spectra for Vertical Ground Motion, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 1023-1047 [DOI:10.1193/1.3651317]
  11. Hashash, Y .M. A., D. R. Groholski, C. A. Phillips and D. Park, (2009), DEEPSOIL V3.7beta, User Manual and Tutorial, 88 pp.
  12. Hashash, Y. M. A. and D. Park, (2001), Non-linear One-Dimensional Seismic Ground Motion Propagation in the Mississippi Embayment, Engineering Geology, Vol. 62, No. 1-3, pp. 185-206. [DOI:10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00061-8]
  13. Idriss, I.M., Dobry R., and R.D. Singh, (1978), Nonlinear Behaviour of Soft Clays During Cyclic Loading, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Div., ASCE, Vol. 104, No. 12, pp. 1427-1447.
  14. International Standard ISO 19901-2, (2004), Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Specific Requirements for Offshore Structures - Part 2: Seismic Design Procedures and Criteria, November.
  15. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 19901-4, (2002), Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Specific Requirements for Offshore Structures - Part 4: Geotechnical and Foundation Design Considerations.
  16. International Organization for Standardization: "ISO 19902:2007(E) Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Fixed Steel Offshore Structures," 2007.
  17. Ishibashi, I., and X. Zhang, (1993), Unified Dynamic Shear Moduli and Damping Ratios of Sand and Clay, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 182-191. [DOI:10.3208/sandf1972.33.182]
  18. Konder, R. L. and J. S. Zelasko, (1963), A Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Formulation of Sands, Proceedings of the 2nd Pan American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Sao Paulo, Brazil, pp. 289-324.
  19. Kramer, S. L., (1996), Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
  20. NEHRP (2005), Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Building Sand Other Structures (FEMA 450), Prepared for Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C. 4, pp. 1023-1047.
  21. Masing G., (1926), Eingenspannungen and verfertigung beim messing, Second International Congress on Applied Mechanism, Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 332-335.
  22. Matasovic, N. O. and Vucetic, M., (1993), Cyclic Characterization of Liquefiable Sands, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 119, No. 11, pp. 353-69. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:11(1805)]
  23. Matasovic, N. O. and M. Vucetic, (1995), Generalized Cyclic-Degradation-Pore-Pressure Generation Model for Clays, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 121, No. 1, pp. 33-42. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1995)121:1(33)]
  24. Park, D., and Hashash, Y.M.A., (2004), Soil Damping Formulation in Nonlinear Time Domain Site Response Analysis, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 249-274. [DOI:10.1080/13632460409350489]
  25. Phillips, C., and Hashash, Y.M.A., (2009), Damping Formulation for Non-Linear 1D Site Response Analyses, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 29, No. 7, pp 1143-1158. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.01.004]
  26. Sadigh, K., Chang, C.-Y., Egan, J. A., Makdisi, F., and Youngs, R. R., (1997), Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68 1, 180-189. [DOI:10.1785/gssrl.68.1.180]
  27. Seed, H. B., Idriss, I.M., Makdisi, F., and Banerjee, N., (1975), Representation of irregular stress time histories by equivalent uniform stress series in liquefaction analyses, EERC 75-29, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California; Berkeley.
  28. Seed, H. B., Wong, R. T., Idriss, I. M., and K. Tokimatsu, (1986), Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Analyses of Cohesionless Soils, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 11, pp. 1016-1032 [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:11(1016)]
  29. Scawthorn, Ch, and (Editor), Wai-Fah Chen, W.F., (2002) Earthquake Engineering Handbook CRC Press; 1 edition. [DOI:10.1201/9781420042443]
  30. Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R., (1991), "Effect of Soil Plasticity on Cyclic Response", Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No.1, pp. 89-107. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89)]
  31. Wells, D.L., Coppersmith, K.J, (1994), New Empirical relationship among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement, Bulletin of the seismological society of America, Vol, 84, No. 4 pp 974-1002, 1994.
  32. Yasseri, S, (2020), Seismic Design of Subsea Jumper per ISO: Part I- Preliminaries, IJCOE Vol.4/No. 1/Spring 2020 (31-43)
  33. Yasseri, S. (2020), Seismic Design of Subsea Spool per ISO: Part III- Analysis & Design, IJCOE Vol.4/No. 3/Autumn 2020