See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/284547117
Neighborhood structure effects on the Dynamic response of soil-structure
interaction by harmonic analysis
Article in MATEC Web of Conferences · January 2015
DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/20153113005
CITATIONS READS
0 38
2 authors, including:
Dan-Guang Pan
University of Science and Technology Beijing
38 PUBLICATIONS 142 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
stability of tunnel View project
A constrained optimal Rayleigh damping coefficients for structures with closely spaced natural frequencies in seismic analysis View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Dan-Guang Pan on 11 February 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
MATEC Web of Conferences 31 , 13 0 0 5 (2015)
DOI: 10.1051/ m atec conf/ 201 5 3 113 0 0 5
C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2015
Neighborhood structure effects on the Dynamic response of soil-structure
interaction by harmonic analysis
1,a 1
Dan-guang Pan , Xin Yu
1
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, 100083, China
Abstract. For realizing the variation of structural dynamic characteristics due to neighbor structure in buildings group,
the surface structure is idealized as an equivalent single degree of freedom system with rigid base whose site consists
of a single homogeneous layer. Based on the model, a equivalent method on the equivalent seismic excitation is
proposed. Then, the differences of seismic response and equivalent seismic input between soil - structure interaction
(SSI) system and structure -soil-structure interaction (SSSI) system are investigated by harmonic analysis. The
numerical results show that dynamic responses would be underestimated in SSSI system when the forcing frequencies
are close to the Natural frequency if the effects of neighborhood structure were ignored. Neighborhood structure
would make the translational displacement increase and rocking vibration decrease. When establishing an effective
seismic input, it is necessary to consider the impact of inertia interaction.
1 INTRODUCTION structures separated by 1.6m. The results of the analysis
point that neighborhood structure exist structure - soil -
From the opinion of seismic structure response, structural structure interaction, ground motion is smaller than the
dynamic seismic response caused by soil-structure free-field movement in the structure of the basement.
interaction(SSI) may be enlarged or reduced, this is Karabalis and Mohammadi[8] studied the interaction of
mainly related to structural rigidity, soil characteristics vibration on the basis of a plurality of rigid layered
and other factors. Balenda and Heidebrecht [1], and viscoelastic soil by using boundary element method, from
Veletsos and Prasad[2] have shown that SSDI have a the results on the single soil rock rigidity can be seen, a
significant impact on smaller natural vibration period of vibrating base will have a huge impact on the vibration of
structures. But when Aviles and Perez- another foundation, besides there exist resonance
Rocha[3]researched Mexico earthquake site response in phenomenon. When other conditions remain unchanged,
1985 and SSDI phenomenon, they found that the long - with the change of soil depth, resonant frequency drift
period buildings which built in soft soil foundation phenomenon has occurred, the thinner the soil, the greater
damaged significantly, however, the structural SSDI the reaction, and the smaller the distance between the
phenomenon of smaller Natural vibration period was not base, the greater the impact. In 1987, Bi-de Tian and Zai-
obvious. Kim and Roesset[4] considered soil nonlinear by dao Yu[9] found that the structural top displacement
using equivalent linearization, and they analyzed seismic under earthquake action affected by changing the relative
reactions of different heights in structural SSDI. The distance between the two structures and structural form.
numerical results show that non-linear soil has a great Xin-liang Jiang[10]and others had an in-depth discussion
influence on the structure, SSDI of flexible structures has on the interaction between neighborhood structures, and
a little effect on the rigid foundation, on the contrary, they proposed specific impact on the structures by
SSDI of rigid structures on the soft foundation has a great changing the relative distance of structures.
influence. Analysis of interaction of podium buildings For quantitative research on neighborhood structure
under earthquake, in addition to considering SSI effects influence on soil - structure interaction, the upper
of single building, it also need to consider the impact of structure is simplified to single degree of freedom system,
adjacent buildings. Wolf[5]analyzed seismic reflection then it need to analyze seismic response of difference
that included reactor building, the reactor chamber and between SSI and SSSI on the surface rigid foundation. It
the auxiliary fuel processing chamber combined structure. contributes to the research on earthquake disaster and
The results show that due to the presence of coupling reveal the essence of SSI.
effects, reactor displacement, acceleration and the base
shear all have significantly increased. According to the
United States in 1987 Whittier earthquake, Cdlebi[6,7] 2 Calculation model and the basic
analyzed strong motion observation data of two steel bent theory
a
Corresponding author:
[email protected]This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits XQUHVWULFWHGXVH
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article available at http://www.matec-conferences.org or http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20153113005
MATEC Web of Conferences
Fig.1 shows the single degree of freedom systems 1
considering soil-structure interaction and simplified A( ) ug (t )exp(
))e p i t )d . The reaction of the
)exp
2
calculation of SSI model. The focused mass is connected complex relative displacement of node can be obtained
by massless beam and massless rigid foundation, rigid by solving the formula (2) at each frequency. This paper
foundation places the surface of uniform horizontal soil mainly studies the difference in the case of structural
layer. The distance between the two buildings is 0.5 times seismic response when there exist neighborhood structure,
the width of the foundation. In order to eliminate the apparently, the impact of different frequency components
impact of artificial boundary, the distance between of the seismic wave on the structure is different, for this
artificial boundaries of finite element model and reason, in order to understand the impact of the main
foundation takes eight times the width of the foundation, frequency range of neighborhood structure, A( ) 1 .
the depth of soil takes three times the width of the
From the point of upper structure, it takes structure 1 as
foundation[11]. In the calculation, the finite element
isolation body, as shown in Fig.2.
model parameter is as follows: the range of soil’s
calculation is 296m×80m(length × width),the thickness is
16m, and the elastic modulus of the soil is
8.0×107Pa,Poisson's ratio is 0.3,density is 1600kg/m3,
rigid foundation size is 16m×16m,the distance between
the two structures is 24m.Concentrated mass of the upper
structure is 1.5×106kg,massless beam height and lateral
stiffness are 3m and 1.847 × 106kN/m respectively, SSI
system base frequency is 1.66Hz,SSSI system and
correspondingly twin frequencies are 1.64Hz and 1.68Hz
respectively.
(a) model (b) the isolation body
Fig.2. Calculation diagram of upper structure
Displacement of the structure can be expressed as:
u1 v u2 h2 (3)
The relative motion equation of structure 1 is as follows:
mvv (1 is )kv1 m(h2 u2 ) mueff (4)
Formula (3) is as Fourier transform, the equations of
motion can be obtained in the frequency domain:
(a) SSI (b) SSSI
Fig.1. Sketch-map of Calculation models 2
m (1 is )k V1 m 2
(h2 U 2 ) mAeff
After meshing the soil and structural finite element, the (5)
equation of motion is as follows:
m and k are concentrated mass and lateral stiffness of the
M u( ( i ) K u(t ) M I ug (t )
u(t ) (1 (1) beam respectively, s is structural viscous damping, v is
the displacement of Structure as opposed to rigid
[M] and [K] are the mass matrix and stiffness matrix foundation, 2 and u2 are the rigid foundation of rotational
respectively. is hysteresis damping. u (t ) is the total displacement and translational
displacement of each node, ug (t ) is the input earthquake movement. 2 , U 2 and Aeff are the Fourier transform of
acceleration. 2 , u2 and ueff . For SSI system and SSSI system,
Under zero initial conditions, equation (1) is as Fourier structural mechanics parameter is same, therefore, the
transform, equations of motion can be obtained in the difference caused by the structural dynamic response is
frequency domain: due to the change of ueff when there exist neighborhood
structure. The following mainly analyzes the changes of
[ 2
M (1 i2 ) K ]U ( ) M I A( ) 2 , U 2 and Aeff in SSI system and SSSI system under
(2) different excitation frequencies.
A( ) and ug (t ) is as Fourier transform, that is:
13005-p.2
ICMEE 2015
3 The results of the analysis displacement of rigid foundation, because the
fundamental frequency of soil - structure is structural
In the x direction of the seismic input action, numerical vibration mode, and the third frequency is mainly
results of amplitude in SSI and SSSI system is as shown vibration mode of soil. But for the upper structure, the
in Fig.3 (a). If SSSI system is as exact solution to reaction of soil vibration modes is relatively
structural dynamic response, the error of structural small;(2)With respect to the SSI system, in the vicinity of
displacement response derived from SSI system can be the structural fundamental frequency the horizontal
expressed as follows: displacement of increases while the swing shift reduces in
SSSI system, due to the equivalent seismic input is
U1 SSI U1 SSSI mainly controlled by the translational movement,
U1 100% (6)
therefore, SSI system will underestimate the equivalent
U1 SSSI
seismic input nearby the structural fundamental
frequency;(3) If there is no upper structure, the seismic
The error of SSI system under forced vibration response of soil free field will have only the second peak,
frequency is as shown in Fig.3 (b) The numerical results this suggests that due to the adverse effects of the
show that:(1)The existence of the neighborhood structure structure to soil, it forms the interaction, there exist the
only have significant impact on accessories resonance peaks related to the structural natural frequencies in
analysis results of natural frequency of vibration in SSI equivalent earthquake input, this is the embodiment of
system ,this is due to the natural frequency of vibration of the inertial interaction in the soil-structure system.
the SSSI and the SSI system is similar; (2) The existence
of neighborhood structure make the SSI system
0.06
antisymmetric frequency decrease, at this point, if
SSSI
ignoring the impact of neighborhood structure, SSI SSI
system self-powered vibration frequency response will be 0.04
smaller and soil - structure system natural frequency |Ueff|
dynamic response will get larger.
0.02
0.5 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5
SSSI Forcing frequency/Hz
0.4 SSI
0.3 (a)horizontal displacement
|U1|
0.2
0.003
0.1 SSSI
SSI
0.0 0.002
0 1 2 3 4 5
| 2 |
Forcing frequency/Hz
0.001
amplitudes
30 0.000
0 1 2 3 4 5
Forcing frequency/Hz
20
10 (b) rocking
U1/%
0 Fig.4. Displacement response of Rigid foundation
-10
0.06
-20
0 1 2 3 4 5 SSSI
Forcing frequency/Hz SSI
0.04
|U2|
relative errors
Fig.3. Horizontal displacement of Structure 1 0.02
For more clear understanding the reason of dynamic
response difference between SSI and SSSI system, Fig.4 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5
and Fig.5 are the horizontal displacement of rigid Forcing frequency/Hz
foundation, swing shift and thereby forming the
equivalent seismic input in the two systems respectively. Fig.5. Equivalent seismic excitations
(1) There are two obvious peaks in the translational
13005-p.3
MATEC Web of Conferences
4 Conclusions 7. Celebi M. Seismic response of two adjacent
buildings, II: interaction[J].Journal of Structure
Under the seismic excitations, the building group will Engineering, ASCE,1993,119(8):2477-2492.
affect the dynamic responses each other by the site soil. 8. Karabalis D L, Mohammadi M. 3-D dynamic
This paper adopts the harmonic analysis method to foundation-soil-foundation interaction on layered
comparative analyze structural seismic response of SSI soil[J].Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,
system and SSSI system and the difference between 1998, 17(3): 139-152.
equivalent earthquake input, through the calculation 9. Bi-de Tian, Zai-dao Yu. Dynamic analysis of
results, we can draw the following conclusion: structure-soil-structure interaction[J]. Journal of
(1) Compared with the soil - structure interaction of Tongji University (Natural Science), 1987,15(2):16-
seismic response, the existence of the neighborhood 27.(In Chinese)
structure have only a significant impact on resonance 10. Xin-liang Jiang, Zong-da Yan, Zhi-Jin Wu. Research
analysis results of natural frequency of vibration on practical method of branched mode for
accessories in SSI system, because the characteristics of neighboring structures foundation soil interaction
neighborhood structure make the system have a small system[J]. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and
decline; Engineering Vibration, 1998, 18(3):9-14. (In Chinese)
(2) With respect to the SSI system, the horizontal 11. Dan-guang Pan, Meng-lin Lou, Cong Dong. Seismic
displacement near the structural fundamental frequency response analysis of soil layer under uniform
in SSSI system increases, however the swing excitation[J]. Chinese Journal of Computational
displacement decreases. The equivalent seismic input is Mechanics, 2005, 22(5):562-567. (In Chinese)
mainly controlled by the translational movement,
therefore, dynamic responses would be underestimated in
SSSI system when the forcing frequencies are close to the
Natural frequency if the effects of neighborhood structure
were ignored.
(3) From the perspective of equivalent seismic input, we
not only consider the seismic wave amplification effect of
soil on bedrock input, but also consider the changes of
the seismic wave input caused by inertial interaction.
5 Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China through Grants 51078032. These
supports are gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. Balenda T,Heidebrecht A. Influence of different sites
on seismic base shear of buildings[J]. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 1986,2 (14):
623-642.
2. Veletsos S,Prasad A.Seismic interaction of structures
and soils: Stochastic approach[J]. Journal of
Structural Engineering,1989,115(4):935-956.
3. Aviles J, Perez-Rocha L. Site effects and soil-
structure interaction in the valley of Mexico[J]. Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 1997,11(17):
29-39.
4. Kim S, Roesset J. Effect of nonlinear soil behavior
on inelastic seismic response of a structure[J].
International Journal of Geomechanics, 2004, 4(2):
104-114.
5. Wolf J P. Dynamic soil-structure interaction[J].
Englewood CliffsN. J. Prentice-Hall, 1985, 22(3):
187-195.
6. Celebi M. Seismic response of two adjacent
buildings, I: data and analysis[J]. Journal of Structure
Engineering, ASCE, 1993,119(8):2461-2476.
13005-p.4
View publication stats
