Advertisement

Geo-Marine Letters

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 182–188 | Cite as

Fundamental response of pore-water pressure to microfabric and permeability characteristics: Eckernförde Bay

  • R. H. Bennett
  • M. H. Hulbert
  • M. M. Meyer
  • D. M. Lavoie
  • K. B. Briggs
  • D. L. Lavoie
  • R. J. Baerwald
  • W. A. Chiou
Article

Abstract

Ambient and dynamic in situ pore pressures were measured, and microfabric was examined in finegrained, shallow-water sediment in Eckernförde Bay, Germany. In situ permeabilities were calculated from piezometer data. Pore-water pressure decay times in sediments 0.5–1.0 m subbottom are indicative of clayey materials. Shallower sediments, although of similar classical grain size as the deeper sediments, have quicker decay times typical of silty marine sediment. Pore pressure response is a function of the microfabric, porometry, and sediment permeability. Aggregates (composed of fine-grained material, biota, and extracellular polymers) produce large pores and complex microstructure, resulting in effective permeabilities characteristic of silts.

Keywords

Permeability Pore Pressure Decay Time Effective Permeability Deep Sediment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen GR, Bennett RH, Barber ME, Todorovski L and Maynard GL, in press, ASTM Geotechnical Testing JournalGoogle Scholar
  2. Baerwald RJ, Burkett PJ, and Bennett RH (1991) Techniques for the preparation of submarine sediments from Electron Microscopy. In: microstructure of fine-grained sediments from mud to shale, Berlin-Springer-Verlag. pp. 309–320Google Scholar
  3. Bea RG, Wright SG, Sincar P, and Niedoroda AW (1980) Waveinduced slides in south pass block 70. Mississippi Delta. Proceedings from the American Society of Civil Engineers Convention and Exposition, Florida, 27–31 October 1980, preprint 80–506Google Scholar
  4. Bennett RH, JT Burns, TL Clarke, JR Faris, EB Forde, and AF Richards (1982) Piezometer probes for assessing effective stress and stability in submarine sediments. In: Saxov S and Nieuwenhuis JK (Eds.), Marine Slides and Other Mass Movements. New York: Plenum PublishingGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett RH, H Li, Valent PJ, Lipkin J, and Esrig MI (1986) In situ undrained shear strengths and permeabilities derived from piezometer measurements. In: Special Technical Publication 883. American Society for Testing and Materials. Eds. Chancy RC and Demars KRGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennett RH, H Li, JT Burns, CM Percival, and J Lipkin (1989) Application of piezometer probes to determine engineering properties and geological processes in marine sediments. Journal of Applied Clay Science 4:337–355Google Scholar
  7. Bennett RH, O'Brien NR, and Hulbert MH (1991) Determinants of clay and shale microfabric signatures: Processes and mechanisms. In: Microstructure of Fine Grained Sediments from Mud to Shale. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp 5–32. Eds. Bennett RH, Bryant WR and Halbert MHGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiou WA (1980) A new technique in preparing in situ marine sediments for clay fabric study. In: Bailey GW (Ed.), 38th Annual Proceedings of Microscopy Society of America. pp 204–205Google Scholar
  9. Esrig MI, Kirby RC, and Bea RG (1977) Initial development of a general effective stress method for the prediction of axial capacity for driven piles in clay. 9th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2943, Houston, Texas, 2–5 May 1977. pp 495–501Google Scholar
  10. Hirst TJ and Richards AF (1976) Excess pore pressure in Mississippi Delta front sediments: Initial report. Marine Geotechnology 1 (N 4):337–344Google Scholar
  11. Li H, Wang MC, and Bennett RH (1992) Significance of pore pressure in marine sediments: Measurements and derived properties. In: CRC Handbook of Geophysical Exploration at Sea, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp 339–381Google Scholar
  12. Lavoie DM, Levoie DL, Pittenger A, and Bennett RH (1996) Bulk Sediment Properties Interpreted in Lighting Quantitative and Quantitative Microfabric Analysis Jour: Geo-Marine Letters 16:226–231Google Scholar
  13. Litman EH (1992) Seafloor lander and piezometer instrumentation. Internal Technical Report, Planning Systems Incorporated. DecemberGoogle Scholar
  14. Randolph MF, Carter JP, and Wroth CP (1979) Driven piles in clay—the effects of installation and subsequent consolidation. Geotechnique 29(4):361Google Scholar
  15. Silva AJ, Sadd MH, Veyera GE, and Brandes H (1993) Variability of seabed sediment microstructure and stress—strain behavior in relation to acoustic characteristics. CBBL/SRP Annual Report, College of Engineering, Marine Geomechanics Laboratory, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island. OctoberGoogle Scholar
  16. Wroth CP, Carter JP, and Randolph MF (1979) Stress changes around a pile driven into cohesive soil. In: Recent Developments in the Design and Construction of Piles. Institution of Electrical Engineers. pp 255–264. Savay Place, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. H. Bennett
    • 1
  • M. H. Hulbert
    • 2
  • M. M. Meyer
    • 1
  • D. M. Lavoie
    • 3
  • K. B. Briggs
    • 1
  • D. L. Lavoie
    • 1
  • R. J. Baerwald
    • 4
  • W. A. Chiou
    • 5
  1. 1.Marine Geosciences DivisionNaval Research Laboratory, Stennis Space CenterUSA
  2. 2.Resource DynamicsGrayslakeUSA
  3. 3.Oceanography DivisionNaval Research Laboratory, Stennis Space CenterUSA
  4. 4.Department of BiologyUniversity of New OrleansNew OrleansUSA
  5. 5.Department of Material ScienceNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations