ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Calculating the Dynamic Impedances of Foundations and their Effect on the Seismic Response of Structures: Analytical and Numerical Study
1
LMGHU Laboratory, Department of Civil Engineering, University of 20 August 1955, Skikda, 21000, Algeria
Online publication date: 2021-06-28
Publication date: 2021-06-01
Civil and Environmental Engineering Reports 2021;31(2):178-217
KEYWORDS
soil-structure interactionfinite element methodsubstructure methodimpedance functionsCONANequivalent static methodsoil densification
ABSTRACT
This study evaluates the movement of a frame built on soft soil under seismic excitation taking into account soil-structure interaction. First, the study was evaluated using the finite element method, then, by using a substructure method which modelled the soil using springs and dampers in a linear and nonlinear study. Rheological models were determined using impedance functions, calculated using a numerical program CONAN. These dynamic impedances are shown in the displacement vector of a three-degrees-of-freedom frame, which was calculated on the basis of lateral forces distributed over the structure height using the equivalent static method. In this regard, two different calculation norms were chosen; RPA2003 and UBC97. Finally, a parametric study was carried out, based on the effects of soil densification and the foundation geometry on the response of the RC frame.
REFERENCES (44)
1.
Medina, C, Aznárez, JJ, Padrón, LA and Maeso, O 2013. Effects of soilstructure interaction on the dynamic properties and seismic response of piled structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 53, 160-175.
2.
Lamb, EH 1904. On the propagation of tremors over the surface of an elastic solid. Philosophical transactions of the royal society London, A, Vol. 203, Issue 359-371, 1-42.
3.
Reissner, E 1936. Stationary, axially symmetrical of a homogeneous elastic half-space excited by a shut-telling mass (Stationare, axialsymmetrische, durch eine shut-telnde masse erregte shwimgugen eines homogenen elastischen halbraumesn). Ing. Archives, 7 (381).
4.
Sung, TY 1953. Vibration in semi-infinite solid due to periodic surface loading. PhD thesis, University of Harvard, USA.
5.
Lysmer, J 1965. Vertical motions of rigid footings. PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Michigan, USA.
6.
Cevaer, F 1993. Soil-structure interaction. Modelling of Impedance functions (Interaction sol-structure. Modélisation des fonctions d’impédance). PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Nantes, France.
7.
Gazetas, G 1991. Formulas and charts for impedance of surface and embedded foundations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 117 (9), 1363-1381.
8.
Bratosin, D and Sireteanu, T 2002. Hysteretic damping modelling by nonlinear kelvin-voigt model. In Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, August, Publishing House of the Rumanian Academy, Series A, 3 (3), 1-6.
9.
Xianjian, Y and Bei, J 1998. Radiation Damping of Soil-Foundations Interaction Systems. In 4 th International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Missouri University, Rolla, USA, March, 8-15, 1120-1124.
10.
Aydin, E, Ozturk, B, Bogdanovic, A and Farsangi, EN 2020. Influence of soil-structure interaction (SSI) on optimal design of passive damping devices. Structures 28, 847-862.
11.
Hamidi, B, Nikraz, H and Varaksin, S 2009. A review of impact oriented ground improvement techniques. Australian Geomechanics Journal 44 (2), 17-24.
12.
Edip, K, Garevski, M, Sheshov, V and Bojadjieva, J 2017. Boundary effects in simulation of soil-structure interaction problems. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering 54 (4), 239-243.
13.
Jaber, L, Temsah, Y, Hage Chehade, F and El-Mossallamy, Y 2018. Effect of Soil-Structure Interaction Constitutive Models on Dynamic Response of Multi-Story Buildings. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review 11(3), 56-60.
14.
Ada, M and Ayvaz, Y 2019. The Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction Effects on the Response of the Neighbouring Frame Structures. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures 16 (8), 1-19.
15.
Edip, K, Bogdanovic, A, Stojmanovska, M, Poposka, A and Farsangi, EN 2020. A new approach in simulation of soil-structure interaction problems including damper effects. International Journal of Earthquake and Impact Engineering 3 (1), 1-14.
16.
Okyay, US, Billion, P, Daniel, D, Vandeputte, D and Courtois, A 2012. Impedance Functions of Slab Foundations with Rigid Piles. Journal of Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 30 (4), 1013-1024.
17.
Chung, IL and Liou, GS 2013 Calculation of impedances for axial symmetric foundation embedded in half-space medium using solutions for one layer stratum. Solids and Structures 10 (6), 1225-1241.
18.
Messioud, S, Dias, D, Okyay, US and Sbartai, B 2016. Dynamic Response of Pile Reinforced Soils and Piled Foundations. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 34 (3), 789-805.
19.
Jahangir, K, Azadeh, A and Mahredad, K 2017. Seismic evaluation of soil-foundation-structure: Direct and Cone model. Journal of Earthquakes and Structures 12 (2), 251-262.
20.
Karatzia, X, Mylonakis, G and Bouckovalas, G 2017. 3D dynamic impedances of surface footings on liquefiable soil: equivalent linear approach. In 16 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago, Chile, January, 09-13, 1-12.
21.
Wolf, JP and Deeks, AJ 2004. Foundation vibration analysis: a strength-of-materials approach. Oxford, UK, Elsevier, 215 pages.
22.
Hu, CY, Chen, QJ, Xiong, QQ and Xu, QY 2011. Simplified calculation method for impedance function of embedded block foundation. Vibration and Shock 30 (5), 252-256.
23.
Guellil, M 2013. Stochastic modeling of the dynamic soil-structure interaction (Modélisation stochastique de l’interaction dynamique solstructure). Journée d’étude sur la Dynamique des Sols et l’Interaction Sol-Structure, Chlef, Algeria, November, 07, 27-30.
24.
Aldimashki, MM, Brownjohn, J and Bhattacharya, S 2014. Experimental and analytical study of seismic soil pile structure interaction in layered soil half space. Earthquake Engineering 18 (5), 655-673.
25.
Najar, BA and Najar, IA 2016. Comparative Seismic Analysis of El Centro and Japan Earthquakes using Response Spectra Method. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology 6 (5), 1859-1864.
26.
Tabatabaiefar, HR and Clifton, T 2016. Significance of considering soil-structure interaction effects on seismic design of unbraced building frames resting on soft soils. Australian Geomechanics journal 51 (1), 55-64.
27.
Gu, Q, Liu, Y, Li, Y and Lin, C 2018. Finite element response sensitivity analysis of three-dimensional soil-foundation-structure interaction (SFSI) systems. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 17 (3), 555-566.
28.
Takabatake, H, Kitada, Y, Takewaki, I and Kishida, A 2019. Analysis Considering Soil Structure Interaction In: Simplified Dynamic Analysis of High-Rise Buildings, Chapter 8, Singapore, Springer, 211-239.
29.
Elias, S and Matsagar, V 2017. Effectiveness of tuned mass dampers in seismic response control of isolated bridges including soil-structure interaction. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures 14 (13), 2324-2341.
30.
Mendes, MV, Vieira Ribeiro, PM and Pedroso, LJ 2019. Effects of soil-structure interaction in seismic analysis of buildings with multiple pressurized tuned liquid column dampers. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures 16 (8), 1-21.
31.
Zhai, P, Zhao, P, Lu, L, Ye, C and Xiong, F 2019. Seismic Fragility Analysis of Buildings Based on Double-Parameter Damage Models considering Soil-Structure Interaction. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 2019, 1-13.
32.
Bolisetti, C and Whittaker, AS 2015. Site response, soil-structure interaction and structure-soil-structure interaction for performance assessment of buildings and nuclear structures. MCEER, University of Buffalo, New York, USA, 388 pages.
33.
Kuhlemeyer, RL and Lysmer, J 1973. Finite Element Method Accuracy for Wave Propagation Problems. Journal of the Soil Dynamics Division 99 (5), 421-427.
34.
Amorosi, A, Boldini, D and Di-Lernia, A 2017. Dynamic soil-structure interaction: a three dimensional numerical approach and its application to the Lotung case study. Computers and Geotechnics 90, 34-54.
35.
Hudson, M, Idriss, IM and Bekaie, M 1994. QUAD4M - A Computer Program to Evaluate the Seismic Response of Soil Structures Using Finite Element Procedures Incorporating a Compliant Base. Center for Geotechnical Modeling, University of California, USA, 72 pages.
36.
NEHRP 2015. Recommended Seismic Provisions for Seismic Regulation of Buildings and Other Structures. FEMA P –1051, prepared for FEMA by the Building Seismic Safety Council. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. USA.
37.
RPA 2003. The seismic code of Algeria. DTR B C 2 48, National Center for Applied Research in Earthquake Engineering, Algiers, Algeria.
38.
UBC 1997. Uniform Building Code. International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California, USA.
39.
Gibigaye, M, Yabi, C P, Alloba, E I, Farsangi, EN and Degan, G 2020. Hybrid DSC-T/ β -Newmark Method for Dynamic Response Analysis of Isotropic Thin Plates on Elastic Foundations. Journal of Applied Science and Engineering 23 (3), 439-452.
40.
Ghannad, MA and Jahankhah, H 2004. Strength reduction factors considering soil-structure interaction. In 13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, August, 1-6, 1-7.
41.
Fernandez-Sola, L and Galindo, GM 2015. Behavior of RC Frames with hysteretic damper considering dynamic soil structure interaction. In The 11 th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Victoria, BC, Canada, July, 21-24, publisher Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering, 1-10.
42.
Barabash, MS and Pikul, AV 2017. Material damping in dynamic analysis of structures. International Journal for Computational Civil and Structural Engineering 13 (3), 13-18.
43.
Roby, M 2017. Practice of soil-structure interaction under static and seismic stresses. Some aspects of nonlinear seismic SSI (Pratique de l’interaction sol-structure sous sollicitations statiques et sismiques. Quelques aspects de l’ISS sismique non linéaire). Journée technique du CFMS, France, December 05, 1-55.
44.
Brûlé, S and Duquesnoy, S 2016. Change of ground type by means of dynamic compaction: consequence on the calculation of seismic loadings. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions 1 (39), 1-7.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2450-8594 |
| ISSN: | 2080-5187 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
