Skip to main content
Log in

Modeling of soil heterogeneity and its effects on seismic response of multi-support structures

  • Published:
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper addresses the analytical evaluation of soil lateral heterogeneity effects, especially the random fluctuations of the soil layer’s predominant frequency, on the spatial coherency of ground motion and the seismic response of multi-support structures. A coherency probabilistic model is proposed. In this model, the spatial variation of motion is attributed to wave passage effects, effects of loss of coherence in the bedrock motion and particularly site response effects (based on the assumption of vertically propagating shear-waves through a horizontal layer with random characteristics). The results indicate that soil lateral heterogeneity effects tend to cause diminution of the values of the total coherency function. This diminution is not limited to the vicinity of the mean resonant frequency of the layer, but reaches considerably high frequencies even for relatively low values of coefficient of variation (CV of 5 to 15%). Therefore, the trend of the total coherency function (exponential decay) can be influenced significantly by site effects. Finally, the proposed coherency model is applied for two different support seismic excitations. Study results indicate that the greater the soil heterogeneity, the larger are the dynamic displacements and shear forces in the columns of the oscillator (i.e., support structure). Furthermore, these two components of the response are influenced differently by soil heterogeneity effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrahamson N, Schneider JF and Stepp JC (1991), “Empirical Spatial Coherency Functions for Applications to Soil-structure Interaction Analyses,” Earthquake Spectra, 7(1): 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastasios GS, Kyriazis DP and Andreas JK (2003), “Inelastic Dynamic Analysis of RC Bridges Accounting for Spatial Variability of Ground Motion, Site Effects and Soil–structure Interaction Phenomena, Part 1: Methodology and Analytical Tools,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 32: 607–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assimaki D, Pecker A, Popescu R and Prevost J (2003), “Effect of Spatial Variability of Soil Properties on Surface Ground Motion,” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 7, Special Issue 1:1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough R and Penzien J (1993), Dynamics of Structures, 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranswick E (1988), “The Information Content of High- Frequency Seismograms and the Near Surface Geologic Structure of Hard Rock Recording Sites,” Pure and Applied Geophysics, 128: 333–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Der Kiureghian A (1996), “A Coherency Model for Spatially Varying Ground Motions,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 25: 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Der Kiureghian A and Neuenhofer A (1992), “Response Spectrum Method for Multiple-Support Seismic Excitation,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 21(8): 713–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding HP, Liu QF, Jin X and Yuan YF (2004), “A Coherency Function Model of Ground Motion at Base Rock Corresponding to Strike-Slip Fault,” Acta Seismologica Sinica, 17(1): 64–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng Q and Hu Y (1981), “Spatial Correlation Model of Ground Motion,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 1(2): 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadid M and Afra H (2000), “Sensitivity Analysis of Site Effects on Response Spectra of Pipelines,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 20: 249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hao H, Oliveira CS and Penzien J (1989), “Multiple- Station Ground Motion Processing and Simulation Based on SMART-I Array Data,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, 111: 293–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harichandran RS and Vanmarcke EH (1986), “Stochastic Variation of Earthquake Ground Motion in Space and Time,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 112 (2):154–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindy A and Novak M (1980), “Response of Pipelines to Random Ground Motion,” Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, 106(2): 339–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanai K (1957), “Semi Empirical Formula for The Seismic Characteristics of The Ground,” Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institut, 35, Tokyo, University of Tokyo: 309–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanda K (2000), “Seismic Responses of Structures Subjected to Incident Incoherent Waves Considering a Layered Media with Irregular Interfaces,” Proceedings of 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, August, paper no. 649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laouami N and Labbe P (2001), “Analytical Approach for Evaluation of Seismic Ground Motion Coherency Function,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 21: 727–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laouami N, Labbé P and Bahar R (2005), “Stochastic Model of Seismic Torsional Ground Motion: Application to Lotung Soft Site,” Journal of Seismology, 9: 463–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao S (2006), “Physical Characterization of Seismic Ground Motion Spatial Variation and Conditional Simulation for Performance-based Design,” Ph.D Thesis, Drexel University, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao S and Li J (2002), “A Stochastic Approach to Site-response Component in Seismic Ground Motion Coherency Model,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 22: 813–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loh CH (1985), “Analysis of the Spatial Variation of Seismic Waves and Ground Movements from SMART I Data,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 13: 561–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loh CH and Lin SG (1990), “Directionality and Simulation in Spatial Variation of Seismic Waves,” Engineering Structures, 12(4): 134–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loh CH and Yeh YT (1988), “Spatial Variation and Stochastic Modelling of Seismic Differential Ground Movement,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 16(4): 583–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luco JE and Wong HL (1986), “Response of a Rigid Foundation to a Spatially Random Ground Motion,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 14: 891–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumb P and Holt JK (1968), “The Undrained Shear Strength of a Soft Marine Clay from Hong Kong,” Géotechnique, 18: 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menke W, Lerner-Lam AL, Dubendorff B and Pacheco J (1990), “Polarization and Coherence of 5 to 30 Hz Seismic Wave Fields at a Hard-rock Site and Their Relevance to Velocity Heterogeneities in the Crust,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 80: 430–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirzabozorg H, Akbari M and Hariri Ardebili MA (2012), “Wave Passage and Incoherency Effects on Seismic Response of High Arch Dams,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 11(4): 567–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura H and Yamazaki F (1995), “Spatial Variation of Earthquake Ground Motion Based on Dense Array Records,” Transaction of the 13th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, 3, August, pp.19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nour A, Slimani A and Laouami N (2002), “Foundation Settlement Statistics via Finite Element Analysis,” Computers and Geotechnics, 29: 641–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak M and Hindy A (1979), “Seismic Response of Buried Pipelines,” 3rd Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Montreal, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riepl J (1997), “Effets de Site: Evaluation Experimentale et Modelisations Multidimensionnelles. Application au Site Test EURO-SEISTEST (Grèce),” Ph.D thesis, Université Joseph-Fourier - Grenoble I, Grenoble, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider JF, Stepp JC and Abrahamson NA (1992), “The Spatial Variation of Earthquake Ground Motion and Effects of Local Site Conditions,” Proceedings of the Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semblat JF, Kham M, Parara E, Bard PY, Pitilakis K, Makra K and Raptakis D (2005), “Seismic Wave Amplification: Basin Geometry vs Soil Layering,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 25: 529–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somerville PG, McLaren JP, Saikia CK and Helmberger DV (1988), “Site-specific Estimation of Spatial Incoherence of Strong Ground Motion,” Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II Conference ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication no. 20, J. Lawrence Von Thun, Ed., 188–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamura K, Winterstein SR and Shah HC (1992), “Random Field Models of Spatially Varying Ground Motions and the Estimation of Differential Ground Motions,” Proceedings of the Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rotterdam, pp. 863–866.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toksoz MN, Dainty AM and Charrette III EE (1991), “Spatial Variation of Ground Motion due to Lateral Heterogeneity,” Structural Safety, 10: 53–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JJ and Chen H (2007), “A New Spatial Coherence Model and Analytical Coefficients for Multi-support Response Spectrum Combination,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 6(3): 225–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S and Hao H (2002), “Effects of Random Variations of Soil Properties on Site Amplification of Seismic Ground Motions,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 22: 551–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Q, Saiidi M, Wang H and Itani A (2002), “Influence of Earthquake Ground Motion Incoherency on Multi-Support Structures,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 1(2): 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye J, Pan J and Liu X (2011), “Vertical Coherency Function Model of Spatial Ground Motion,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 10(3): 403–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zembaty Z and Rutenberg A (2002), “Spatial Response Spectra and Site Amplification Effects,” Engineering Structures, 24: 1485–1496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A (1990), “Response of Multi-span Beams to Spatially Incoherent Seismic Ground Motions,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 19: 819–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A (1992), “Spatial Incoherence Effects on Seismic Ground Strains,” Probabilistic Engineering Mechanic, 7: 217–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A (2009), Spatial Variation of Seismic Ground Motions: Modeling and Engineering Applications, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, LLC., USA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A and Harada T (1997), “Effect of Surface Layer Stochasticity on Seismic Ground Motion Coherence and Strain Estimates,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 16: 445–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerva A and Zervas V (2002), “Spatial Variation of Seismic Ground Motions: an Overview,” Applied Mechanics Review, 55(3): 271–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Laib.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laib, A., Laouami, N. & Slimani, A. Modeling of soil heterogeneity and its effects on seismic response of multi-support structures. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 14, 423–437 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-015-0034-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-015-0034-1

Keywords

Navigation