Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 1157–1176 | Cite as

The role of non-linear dynamic soil-foundation interaction on the seismic response of structures

  • Alain Pecker
  • Roberto Paolucci
  • Charisis Chatzigogos
  • António A. Correia
  • Raffaele Figini
Original Research Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this paper we provide an overview of recent research work that contributes to clarify the effects of non-linear dynamic interaction on the seismic response of soil-foundation-superstructure systems. Such work includes experimental results of seismically loaded structures on shallow foundations, theoretical advancements based on improved macro-element modeling of the soil-foundation system, examples of seismic design of bridge piers considering non-linear soil-foundation interaction effects, and numerical results of incremental non-linear dynamic analyses. The objective of this paper is to support the concept of a controlled share of ductility demand between the superstructure and the foundation as a key ingredient for a rational and integrated approach to seismic design of foundations and structures.

Keywords

Non-linear dynamic soil-structure interaction Seismic foundation response Experimental testing Non-linear macro-element Displacement-based seismic design Incremental dynamic analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The Authors wish to deeply thank I. Anastasopoulos of NTUA Athens, T.C. Hutchinson of UC San Diego and B.L. Kutter of UC Davis, as well as their co-workers and students, for kindly providing the synthesis of their experimental results, reported in Table 2. This work was partly funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under Grant agreement no. 227887, SERIES. The second author (RP) acknowledges financial support by the DPC-RELUIS 2009–12 Research Programme on Displacement-based Seismic Assessment. The fourth author (AAC) gratefully acknowledges the financial support by the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT) through the Human Potential Operational Programme (POPH).

References

  1. Allmond J, Deng L, Kutter BL (2011) Centrifuge testing of rocking foundations on saturated and submerged sand. In: Proceedings of 8th international conference on urban earthquake engineering, Tokyo, Japan, pp 467–472Google Scholar
  2. Anastasopoulos IM, Loli Georgarakos T, Drosos V (2013) Shaking table testing of rocking-isolated bridge pier on sand. J Earthq Eng 17:1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Calvi GM, Cecconi M, Paolucci R (2012) Seismic displacement-based design of structures: relevance of soil-structure interaction. In: State-of-the-Art Paper, Proceedings of 2nd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering. Taormina, Italy, May 28–30Google Scholar
  4. CEN—Comité Européen de Normalisation (2004a) Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  5. CEN—Comité Européen de Normalisation (2004b) Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design—Part 1: General rules. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang BJ, Raychowdhury P, Hutchinson TC, Thomas JM, Gajan S, Kutter BL (2007) Evaluation of the seismic performance of combined frame-wall-foundation structural systems through centrifuge testing. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering. Thessaloniki, Greece, Paper No. 1497, June 25–28Google Scholar
  7. Chatzigogos CT, Pecker A, Salençon J (2009) Displacement-based design of shallow foundations with macroelement. Soils Found 29(5):853–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chatzigogos CT, Figini R, Pecker A, Salençon J (2011) A macroelement formulation for shallow foundations on cohesive and frictional soils. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 35(8):902–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Combescure D, Chaudat T (2000) ICONS European program seismic tests on R/C walls with uplift; CAMUS IV specimen. ICONS Project, CEA/DRN/DMT, Report SEMT/EMSI/RT/00-27/4Google Scholar
  10. Correia AA (2011) A pile-head macro-element approach to seismic design of monoshaft-supported bridges, PhD Thesis, ROSE School, IUSS Pavia, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  11. Correia AA, Pecker A, Kramer SL, Pinho R (2012) A pile-head macro-element approach to seismic design of extended pile-shaft-supported bridges. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering. Taormina, Italy, Paper No. 7.03, May 28–30Google Scholar
  12. Cremer C, Pecker A, Davenne L (2001) Cyclic macro-element for soil-structure interaction: material and geometrical non-linearities. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 25(13):1257–1284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cremer C, Pecker A, Davenne L (2002) Modelling of nonlinear dynamic behaviour of a shallow strip foundation with macro-element. J Earthq Eng 6(2):175–211Google Scholar
  14. Dafalias YF, Hermann LR (1982) Bounding surface formulation of soil plasticity. In: Pande GN, Zienkiewicz OC (eds) Soil mechanics: transient and cyclic loads. Wiley, New York, pp 173–218Google Scholar
  15. Deng L, Kutter BL, Kunnath S (2012) Centrifuge modeling of bridge systems designed for rocking foundations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 138:335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. di Prisco C, Massimino M, Maugeri M, Nicolosi M, Nova R (2006) Cyclic numerical analyses of Noto Cathedral: soil-structure interaction modelling. Ital Geotech J 40:49–64Google Scholar
  17. Drosos V, Georgarakos T, Loli M, Anastasopoulos I, Zarzouras O, Gazetas G (2012) Soil-foundation-structure interaction with mobilization of bearing capacity: an experimental study on sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 138:1369–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Faccioli E, Paolucci R, Vivero G (2001) Investigation of seismic soil-footing interaction by large scale cyclic tests and analytical models. In: Special presentation lecture SPL-05, proceedings of the 4th international conference on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics. San Diego, USA, March 26–31Google Scholar
  19. Figini R (2010) Non-linear dynamic soil-structure interaction: application to the seismic analysis and design of structures on shallow foundations, PhD thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  20. Figini R, Paolucci R, Chatzigogos CT (2012) A macro-element model for non-linear soil-shallow foundation-structure interaction under seismic loads: theoretical development and experimental validation on large scale tests. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41(3):475–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Godoy A, Chatzigogos CT, Pecker A (2012) Safety margins in structural design of a bridge pylon: assessment of dynamic response through incremental dynamic analyses. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering. Taormina, Italy, May 28–30Google Scholar
  22. Grange S, Kotronis P, Mazars J (2008) A macro-element for a shallow foundation to simulate soil-structure interaction considering uplift. Comptes Rendus Mécanique 336:856–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakhamaneshi M, Kutter BL, Deng L, Hutchinson TC, Liu W (2012) New findings from centrifuge modeling of rocking shallow foundations in clayey ground. In: Proceedings of ASCE 2012 geo-congress, Oakland, USA, March 25–29Google Scholar
  24. Heron C, Cilingir U, Haigh S, Madabhushi G, Escoffier S, Chazelas JL (2012) Dynamic soil-structure interaction using centrifuge modelling. Deliverable 14.3 of Work Package JRA3.2. Jointly prepared at University of Cambridge and at Institute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Networks (IFSTTAR, Nantes) in the framework of SERIES EC funded ProjectGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu W, Hutchinson TC, Kutter BL, Hakhamaneshi M, Aschheim M, Kunnath S (2012) Demonstration of compatible yielding between soil-foundation and superstructure components. Accepted for publication in Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCEGoogle Scholar
  26. Mandel J (1965) Généralisation de la théorie de plasticité de WT Koiter. Int J Solids Struct 1(3):273–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Massimino MR, Maugeri M (2013) Physical modelling of shaking table tests on dynamic soil-foundation interaction and numerical and analytical simulation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 49:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Muir Wood D (2007) Modelling of dynamic soil problems. In: Pitilakis KD (ed) Earthquake geotechnical engineering, Series of geotechnical, geological, and earthquake engineering, vol. 6. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 131–149Google Scholar
  29. Negro P, Paolucci R, Pedretti S, Faccioli E (2000) Large-scale soil-structure interaction experiments on sand under cyclic loading. In: Proceedings of the 12th world conference on earthquake engineering. Auckland, New Zealand, CD-Rom, Paper No. 1191, January 30–February 4Google Scholar
  30. Nova R, Montrasio L (1991) Settlements of shallow foundations on sand. Géotechnique 41(2):243–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paolucci R (1997) Simplified evaluation of earthquake induced permanent displacements of shallow foundations. J Earthq Eng 1(3):563–579Google Scholar
  32. Paolucci R, Pecker A (1997) Seismic bearing capacity of shallow strip foundations on dry soils. Soils Found 37(3):95–105Google Scholar
  33. Paolucci R, Shirato M, Yilmaz MT (2008) Seismic behaviour of shallow foundations: shaking table experiments vs. numerical modelling. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37(4):577–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paolucci R, di Prisco C, Figini R, Petrini L, Vecchiotti M (2009) Interazione dinamica non lineare terreno-struttura nell’ambito della progettazione sismica agli spostamenti. Progettazione Sismica 1(2):83–103Google Scholar
  35. Paolucci R, Figini R, Petrini L (2013) Introducing dynamic non-linear soil-foundation-structure interaction effects in displacement-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra, in pressGoogle Scholar
  36. Pecker A, Chatzigogos CT (2010) Non-linear soil-structure interaction: impact on the seismic response of structures. In: Garevski M, Ansal A (eds) Earthquake engineering on Europe. Springer, New York, pp 79–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pedretti S (1998) Nonlinear seismic soil-foundation interaction: analysis and modeling method, PhD thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  38. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalski MJ (2007) Displacement-based seismic design of structures. IUSS Press, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  39. Salençon J (1990) An introduction to the yield design theory and its application to soil mechanics. Eur J Mech A/Solids 9(5):477–500Google Scholar
  40. Seismosoft (2011) SeismoStruct 5.2.1: A computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis of framed structures, available online from http://www.seismosoft.com, Pavia, Italy
  41. Shirato M, Kuono T, Asai R, Nakatani S, Fukui J, Paolucci R (2008) Large-scale experiments on nonlinear behavior of shallow foundations subjected to strong earthquakes. Soils Found 48(5):673–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ugalde JA, Kutter BL, Jeremic B, Gajan S (2007) Centrifuge modeling of rocking behavior of bridges on shallow foundations. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference earthquake geotechnical engineering. Thessaloniki, Greece, Paper No. 1484, June 25–28Google Scholar
  43. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):491–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain Pecker
    • 1
    • 2
  • Roberto Paolucci
    • 3
  • Charisis Chatzigogos
    • 1
  • António A. Correia
    • 4
  • Raffaele Figini
    • 5
  1. 1.Géodynamique et StructureBagneuxFrance
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringEcole des Ponts ParisTechParisFrance
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly
  4. 4.ROSE SchoolIUSS PaviaPaviaItaly
  5. 5.ENELIngegneria Civile e IdraulicaSesto San GiovanniItaly

Personalised recommendations