conference & convention enabling the next generation of networks & services

“THE LIGHTS GO OUT”

The Ultimate Protection Technology for Protecting Submarine Cables
Rene van Kessel, Cor-Jan Stam (Van Oord Offshore)

Email: <rke@vanoord.com>

Van Oord Offshore, 2 Jan Blankenweg, 4207HN Gorinchem, the Netherlands

Abstract: The protection of submarine cables is of utmost importance to ensure that the laser
lights in an optical telecom cable or lights powered by an electrical cable do not go out due to
external hazards and that the integrity of cable systems is maintained at all times. This paper
will address the “ultimate” protection of these cables by means of the installation of rock
berms and the technical issues and challenges related hereto.

1. INTRODUCTION freely and will be subjected to dynamic

loads, such as vortex shedding and
The world is traversed by numerous subsea
severe bending at freespan locations.
cables whose routes cross areas used by
vessels and other seabed users. All subsea
telecom and power cables will thus have to
be designed to withstand external hazards
– both environmental and man-induced.

Although the traditional burial of cables is

the generally preferred option, there will
always be a number of occasions where the
burial option cannot be utilized; due to
unfavourable seabed conditions or when
crossing other cables/pipelines.
This paper will provide an overview of the
hazards and the ultimate protection of the
submarine cables that can be obtained by
the installation of rock berms, together
with the design aspects relevant hereto.
• Morphological Changes
Many seabed areas can be characterised
by movable sandy seabeds. Current and
waves maintain a constant transport of
seabed material and the bathymetry of
the seabed changes continuously. Due
to, for example, migrating sand waves,
an adequately buried cable may
become exposed over time and would
be again subjected to hydraulic forces.

2. EXTERNAL HAZARDS
There are two different types of external
hazards that can or will affect the integrity
of the submarine cables:
Environmental Hazards
• Waves & currents
Subsea plant is fully exposed by the
hydraulic forces induced by normally
occurring currents and waves or caused
by more dramatic events such as
typhoons and tsunamis. Without
adequate protection cables can move
Man Made Hazards
• Shipping, Fishing & Dropped Objects
Many cables are installed in areas
where shipping, fishing and/or other
marine activities occur. These cables,
when not adequately protected, are
prone to being damaged by accidentally
released anchors, dragged fishing gear
or dropped objects.

Copyright © 2010 SubOptic Page 1 of 7

 conference & convention
3. DESIGN ASPECTS ROCK
INSTALLATION
The use of rock materials to protect shores,
coasts, cables and structures against
adverse environmental conditions has been
practised for ages. Years of research into
the science of hydraulic engineering has
yielded great insight in the possibilities and
practicalities of graded rock protections.
There are a number of design issues that
should be addressed to ensure that, when
using rock berms, they are; providing the
ultimate protection for cables against the
identified external hazards, are also stable
in the prevailing environmental conditions
and that these rocks will not damage the
cable during the rock installation process.
The following aspects will be described in
more detail in the following paragraphs:
• Required design data
• Hydraulic stability calculations
• Impact energy of rock materials
• Trawler board protection
• Shipping anchor protection
4. REQUIRED DESIGN DATA
In order to design a rock berm a number of
input data is required, which can be found
in prevailing environmental circumstances,
comprising:
• water depths
• wind and wave statistics (heights,
periods, directions)
• tidal range and currents
• seabed soil conditions
Copyright © 2010 SubOptic
enabling the next generation of networks & services
Some of the data are easily obtained,
whilst others require quite some research
and interpretation; especially when
extreme circumstances can be expected.
5. HYDRAULIC STABILITY
The stability of loose rock materials that
are subjected to a combination of steady
state currents and wave induced orbital
velocities, can be analysed using formulae
developed by Bijker/Shields [Ref. 1].
According to Shields the critical shear
stress for rock materials characterised by
its D50 is expressed as:
τ cr = ( ρ r - ρ w ).g. D 50 .ψ cr (eq. 1)
with:
• τcr = critical shear stress [N/m2]
• ρr = specific density rock [kg/m3]
• ρw = specific density water [kg/m3]
• g = gravitational acceleration [m/s2]
• D50 = median grain size [m]
• ψcr = Shields parameter [-]
According to Bijker the combined shear
stress induced by currents and wave action
is defined as:
⎛ ϕ w ⋅ π ⎞ (eq. 2)
τ cw = τ w + τ c + 2 ⋅ τ w • τ c ⋅ cos⎜ ⎟
⎝ 180 ⎠
in which:
τ w = 0.5.ρ w . f w .(k w .U b ) 2 (eq. 3)
2
⎛ k c .Vavg ⎞ (eq. 4)
τ c = ρ w ⋅ g ⋅ ⎜⎜ . ⎟⎟
⎝ C ⎠
with:
• τcw = combined shear stress induced
by current and wave action [N/m2]
• fw = wave friction factor = exp[-6.0 +
5.2(Ab/ks)-0.19], maximum of 0.3 [-]
• Ab = amplitude of horizontal water
displacement at bottom [m]
• ks = bottom roughness [m]
• Vavg = depth-mean steady current
velocity [m/s]
• Ub = amplitude of horizontal water
velocity at bottom [m/s]
• C = Chezy parameter [m½/s]
• h = water depth [m]
Page 2 of 7
 conference & convention
• kw, kc = turbulence factors for
respectively waves and current [-]
• ϕ = angle between wave and current
direction [°]
The formula has been derived for regular
waves but can also be used in case of
random waves by using the significant
wave height Hs in combination with the
peak wave period Tp. When applying a
Shields-value of 0.056, a statically stable
situation for the rock is analysed.
As an example the stability of the rock is
checked in various water depths for:
• 3 knots maximum current velocity
• 7 to 8 m significant wave height
• parallel currents and waves
• waves/currents perpendicular to berm
This will result in indications of required
rock size per water depth (Table 1).
Water Depth D50,min
40 m 100 mm
50 m 75 mm
60 m 50 mm
70 m 40 mm
80 m 30 mm
100 m 20 mm
140 m 20 mm
Table 1 – Hydraulic stability – D50
A standard rock grading of 2-8 inch, with a
median rock size D50 varying between 100
and 150 mm satisfies the above minimum
requirements for all water depths.
6. IMPACT ENERGY
The impact energy of a free falling object
when hitting the bottom or another object
such as a submarine cable can be expressed
as:
E kin = 12 ⋅ m ⋅ (1 + C a ) ⋅ v 2 (eq. 5)
with:
• Ekin = (kinetic) impact energy [Nm or
J]
• m = mass of the falling object [kg]
• Ca = added mass coefficient [-]
• v = velocity of the object when
hitting the bottom [m/s]
Copyright © 2010 SubOptic
enabling the next generation of networks & services
The added mass coefficient represents the
volume of water that is dragged along with
the moving object. When this object is
brought to a sudden stop, this volume of
water also has to be decelerated. It
therefore increases the impact energy. A
value of 1.0 is normally used for rocks.
A single rock falling through water will
accelerate or decelerate from any initial
velocity until an equilibrium velocity is
reached. This equilibrium velocity is the
velocity where all forces acting on the
falling rock are balanced, so that the
resulting accelerating force is zero.
The forces working on the falling rock
comprise the gravitational force working
downwards and the drag force working
upwards, which taken together gives the
formula of the equilibrium fall velocity in
stagnant water:
4 Δ⋅g⋅D
veq =
3 Cd (eq. 6)
with:
veq = equivalent fall velocity [m/s]
g = acceleration of gravity [m/s²]
∆ = relative stone density [-]
D = stone diameter [m]
Cd = drag coefficient [-], 1.0 for angular
material
The dumping process in a semi-closed
flexible fall pipe is different. The rock is
falling with the equilibrium fall velocity
through the water inside the fall pipe.
However, due to the higher average density
of the water-rock mixture, the water inside
the fall pipe is also flowing downward.
Measurements to the flexible fall pipe
system have shown that the combined fall
velocity is approximately 4 times the
equilibrium fall velocity. However as the
bottom of the fall pipe (the ROV) remains
approximately 5 to 8 metre above the rock
berm, the fall velocity reduces significantly
again before hitting the seabed.
Page 3 of 7
 conference & convention enabling the next generation of networks & services

As a conservative approach, it is assumed

that the fall velocity reduces by fifty
percent below the fall-pipe. The rock when
dumped with a semi-closed fall pipe, thus
reaches the seabed with a velocity
approximately twice that of the calculated
equilibrium fall velocity in stagnant water. The average total weight of a trawler board
is approximately 500 to 2000 kg and the
Table 2 presents the results of the fall trawl speed is usually 3 to 5 knots. This
velocity and impact calculations for rock corresponds with an impact energy varying
materials being installed with the semi- between 0.5 and 6 kNm. The slope of a
closed flexible fall pipe system. rock berm will deflect the trawler board so
that only part of this energy has to be
Rock Mass Fall Impact Equivalent absorbed. The penetration into the rock
Size Velocity Fall Height berm will then also be negligible.
In Air
[mm] [kg] [m/s] [Nm] [m]
Practice has shown that a rock cover of
25 0.03 1.45 0.05 0.107
51 0.21 2.05 0.87 0.215
0.50 m is sufficient to provide adequate
76 0.69 2.51 4.39 0.322 protection from dragging fishing gear in all
102 1.65 2.90 14 0.430 cases (see also [Ref.1]) and is also
127 3.22 3.25 34 0.537 sufficient cover to avoid damage to the
152 5.56 3.56 70 0.644 cable due to the penetration of the trawler
203 13.18 4.11 222 0.859 board, which will be less than 0.30 m.
254 25.74 4.59 542 1.074

Table 2 – Fall velocity & impact energy rock 8. ANCHOR PROTECTION

materials
The largest rock in a 2”-8” rock gradation
will not exceed 250 mm with a weight of
approximately 26 kg. It’s equilibrium fall
velocity will be approximately 4.6 m/s for
a semi closed fall pipe system with an
impact energy of approximately 500 Nm
(0.5 kJ). This will in general not cause any
damage to any well armoured subsea cable.
7. TRAWLER GEAR PROTECTION
The use of rock berms is common practice
to protect cables against the impact from
fishing gear such as trawl boards and trawl
beams.
In the past a number of tests have been
executed on the behaviour of dragging
anchors approaching a rock berm. From
these tests it appeared that the rock berm
initiates an outbalancing force on the
anchor wire, which will eventually result in
the breakout of the anchor. The behaviour
of the anchor in the presence of a rock
berm is being governed by the following
factors:
• Anchor type
• Soil characteristics
• Original anchor penetration depth
• Height and width rock berm
• Type of rock within the rock berm

The rock berm should be able to withstand The movement of an anchor approaching a
the horizontal impact loads, which depends rock berm can be described in two phases:
mainly on the following: • The anchor is dragged from maximum
• Shape and mass of trawl board penetration depth towards the toe of the
• Trawling speed rock berm at seabed level (anchor chain
• Direction of pull tries to cut into the rock berm)
• Seabed conditions • The anchor leaves the seabed and
travels across the rock berm

Copyright © 2010 SubOptic Page 4 of 7

 conference & convention enabling the next generation of networks & services

Rules of Thumb
Rules of thumb for the design of a suitable
protection against dragging anchors have
been derived from tests performed over a
period of 20 years and are primarily used
with respect to the following rock berm
parameters:
Figure 1 – Two phases of anchor crossing • Armour rock size (D50)
• Armour layer thickness
Practice has demonstrated that generally • Filter layer thickness (if applicable)
the penetration of an anchor depends on • Minimum top width of rock berm
the particle size of the subsoil. As the soil • Minimum bottom width of rock berm
becomes coarser, the penetration depth of
the anchor decreases. The depth of anchor Rock Berm Rule of Thumb
penetration influences the drag length Dimensions (largest of requirements)
required to bring the anchor up to the D50, armour • Chain pitch (4*chain diameter)
seabed. With a higher rock berm, the Hmin, armour • Fluke length * sin (45°)
anchor chain direction will be influenced at • 3* D50, armour
an earlier point, which reduces the total Hmin, filter • 1.5* D50, armour
required width of the berm. • 0.3 m
Bmin, top • 2* anchor width
• 2* shank length (centred)
Before the anchor crosses the rock berm, Bmin, bottom • ODcable + 2* 5 * fluke length
the rock berm has to support the anchor • Bmin, top + 2 * slope * [Htotal + ODcable]
chain and prevent it from cutting into the
berm. Larger rock sizes are better suited to Table 3 – Rules of Thumb
prevent the cutting-in of the anchor chain. with:
As the anchor chain size is defined by the • ODcable = outer diameter cable
type and size of anchor, the rock size is • Htotal = Hmin, armour + Hmin, filter
also a function therefore.
Dimensions Stockless Anchor
A typical 3-tonnes stockless anchor, which
uses a 32 - 36 mm stud link chain, has in
principle the following dimensions:
Figure 2 – Anchor chain cutting rock berm
Description 3mT
Anchor
Various projects have been designed and A Shank length 1.45 m
executed where cables/pipelines needed to E
B Crown width 2.05 m
be protected against damage induced by C Crown width 2.51 m
heavy dragging ship anchors. Model tests D Fluke length 2.90 m
have been carried out to show the E Fluke width 4.59 m
effectiveness of a protective rock berm and Table 4/Figure 3 – Dimension Anchor
to identify with dimensions for both the
rock materials and the berm. As a result,
rules of thumb have been determined to Rock Berm Dimensions
come up with a preliminary rock berm Based on the above rules of thumb, the
design suitable for providing dragging following indicative dimensions of the
anchor protection. It is however always rock berm will be required in order to
advised to perform model tests in order to provide adequate protection against
ensure that an adequate rock berm is dragging anchors:
designed for each specific situation.

Copyright © 2010 SubOptic Page 5 of 7

 conference & convention enabling the next generation of networks & services

Rock Berm Rule of Thumb The requirement of a filter layer is mainly

Dimensions dependent on the likelihood of erosion of
D50, armour • 4 * 35 mm = 0.14 m (6-inch) the seabed at the rock berm location. When
Hmin, armour • 1.47 m * sin (45°) = 1.04 m no erosion is expected and the subsea
• 3* 0.14 m = 0.42 m
cables can withstand the impact of the
Hmin, filter • 1.5* 0.14 m = 0.21 m
• 0.3 m
required armour material gradation then
Bmin, top • 2* 1.61 m = 3.22 m the filter layer is not required. It should be
• 2* 2.20 m = 4.40 m noted that the overall height of the rock
Bmin, bottom • 0.10 m + 2* 5 * 1.47 m = 14.8 m berm shall remain as mentioned in Table 5.
• 4.40 m + 2* 2.5 * [1.34 + 0.1 m]
= 11.6 m 9. ROCK BERM INSTALLATION
Table 5– Indicative rock and rock berm What began as straightforward “rock
dimensions using the rules of thumb dumping” has developed significantly over
Rock Berm as Anchor Protection the last decades into the “gentle” art of
A rock berm designed for the protection of “rock installation”.
a subsea cable against a dragging anchor
can be quite large as can be seen from the
above preliminary calculation results.
Therefore such a rock berm should only be
applied at those locations where such
incidents are likely to occur, i.e. in and
near shipping lanes and fishing grounds.

Furthermore, the design of the protective

rock berm takes into consideration that the Rock dumping has developed into high
anchor has penetrated into the seabed and accuracy rock installation with dedicated
must re-surface before crossing the berm. DP2 Flexible Fall Pipe Vessels. These
Therefore if soil conditions are such that vessels are able to work in almost
penetration is not likely, e.g. in hard or unlimited water depths as well as in severe
rocky soils, the berm dimensions can be environmental conditions as can be found
reduced significantly. for example, in the Strait of Gibraltar or
between the Indonesian Islands of Java and
When rock berms are installed in areas Bali.
where penetration of dragging anchors is
minimal, it is advised to only reduce the
width of the berm as the berm width
largely defines the capacity of the berm to
force the anchor to re-surface. The cover
on top of the cable is required to provide a
safety margin against the penetration of the
anchor flukes while the anchor is travelling
over the berm.

As a minimum berm cross profile it is

recommended to reduce the berm crest
width not below one shank length (i.e.
2.20 m) and to base the bottom width on
the minimum cover height and the
practical slope angle (i.e. 2.20 m + 2 * 2.5
* [1.34 m + 0.10 m] = 9.40 m).

Copyright © 2010 SubOptic Page 6 of 7

 conference & convention
10. CONCLUSIONS
It is clear that submarine cables require
protection against quite a number of
external hazards. If subsea cables are not
properly protected it might well be that
“The Lights go Out” – sometimes with
power cables even literally.
Common burial methods, such as trenching
and ploughing will be the most favourable
solutions, but can not always be used to
achieve the required results. Rock berms
can as such provide the ultimate protection
and these berms can be designed to protect
cables almost against all external hazards.
In addition to being the ultimate solution
for cable protection, the method should
also be acceptable to environmental
organisations (rocks are natural materials)
and to seabed users such as fisheries, as
rock berms will form artificial reefs that
attract fish and with a properly designed
berm there will also be no threat to fishing
nets.
Copyright © 2010 SubOptic
enabling the next generation of networks & services
11. FINANCIALS
The costs of the installation of rock berms
are mainly generated by using specialised
vessels, quantities of rock materials
required, availability of suitable quarries
and ports of loading near the project sites.
When taking the above into account the
normally used cable protection methods
such as jetting and ploughing will at all
times be much more cost effective than the
installation of rock berms. However, when
these other methods can not provide the
minimum cover and protection to the
cables then the installation of rock berms
will be the ultimate solution. In the 25
years that rock installation has been used
for cable protection, no cable fault due to
external hazards has ever been reported.
12. REFERENCES
[1] The Rock Manual. The Use of Rock in
Hydraulic Engineering (2nd edition),
CIRIA 683, London, United Kingdom,
2007
[2] W. Opdenvelde, "Back to the Stone
Age – Protection of Cables against
External Hazards”, Submarine
Communications, Cannes France,
November 1999
[3] C.J.M Stam, "The Use of Graded Rock
as a Method for Protecting Submarine
Cables against External Hazards”, Asia
Pacific Submarine Communications,
Tokyo Japan, May 2000
[4] L. van Elsen, "Back to the Stone Age –
Impact of Rock Berms on the Environment
& Fisheries", SubOptic 2001, Kyoto Japan
[5] L. van Elsen, "Positive and Negative
Trenching – An Average Approach”,
Submarine Communications, Rome Italy,
November 2001
Page 7 of 7