Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Feasibility of modelling large-scale realistic seismic soil–pile interaction problems without supercomputing resources

  • Published:
International Journal of Advances in Engineering Sciences and Applied Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the feasibility of conducting three-dimensional, large-scale realistic seismic-soil–pile interaction analyses, using a high-speed connected PC cluster. The study was conducted in the Department of Civil Engineering at National University of Singapore. The system which was developed consisted of a grid of quad-core personal computers linked by a 10GbE data network. Parallelization was achieved through domain decomposition at computer as well as core level. The dynamic equations were solved using an element-by-element preconditioned conjugate gradient method with Jacobi preconditioner. This obviates assembly of the global matrix and facilitates parallelization. Data communication and synchronization were conducted using Message Passing Interface (MPI) protocol. Such a computing grid can potentially enable departments and design offices to set-up the hardware required for such analyses with relatively modest outlays. An example involving a multi-storey building supported on pile foundations in a thick, soft clay layer was used to illustrate the viability of this concept. The results indicate that seismic soil–pile interaction analyses are feasible and possibly competitive with such a system. Moreover, proper consideration of seismic soil–pile–structure interaction is necessary for reliable evaluation of structural response. Uncoupled approaches such as using ground response analysis results as inputs to a structural analysis may give rise to significant errors.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. En, B.S.: (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance. British Standards Institution, London (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. IBC (2021) 2021 International building code–Chapter 18, International Code Council.

  3. Dash SR, Bhattacharya S, Blakeborough A and Hyodo M (2008) P-y curve to model lateral response of pile foundations in liquefied soils, In: Proceedings 14th World conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China.

  4. Souri M, Khosravifar A, Schlechter S, McCullough N, & Dickenson S (2019). Experimental PY curves from centrifuge tests on pile foundations subjected to liquefaction and lateral spreading. In: 2019 44th annual conference on deep foundations, Chicago, Illinois, pp 685694

  5. Romo, M.P., Ovando-Shelley, E.: P-Y Curves for piles under seismic lateral loads. Geotech Geol Eng 16, 251–272 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Saha, R., Dutta, S.C., Haldar, S.: Seismic response of soil-pile raft-structure system. J Civ Eng Manag 21(2), 144–164 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Banerjee, S., Goh, S.H., Lee, F.H.: Response of soft clay strata and clay-pile-raft systems to seismic shaking. J Earthq Tsunami 1(03), 233–255 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Banerjee, S., Goh, S.H., Lee, F.H.: Earthquake-induced bending moment in fixed-head piles in soft clay. Geotechnique 64(6), 431–446 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu HS and Chen KJ (1991) Test on behavior of pile foundation in liquefiable soils, In: Proceedings 2nd international conference recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and Soil Dynamics, St. Louis, Missouri, Paper No, 2.15, pp 233–235

  10. Meymand, P.J.: Shaking table scale model tests of nonlinear soil-pile-superstructure interaction in soft clay. University of California, Berkeley (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Garala, T.K., Madabhushi, G.S.P., Di Laora, R.: Experimental investigation of kinematic pile bending in layered soils using dynamic centrifuge modelling. Geotechnique (2020). https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.19.P.185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Garala, T.K., Madabhushi, G.S.P.: Role of pile spacing on dynamic behavior of pile groups in layered soils. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng (2021). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang, L., Goh, S.H., Liu, H.: Seismic response of pile-raft-clay system subjected to a long-duration earthquake: centrifuge test and finite element analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 92, 488–502 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shiming, W., Gang, G.: Dynamic soil-structure interaction for high-rise buildings. In: Developments in Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 203–216. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dongmei CHU & Truman KZ (2004). Effects of pile foundation configurations in seismic soil-pile-structure interaction, In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering vancouver, BC, Canada.

  16. Hokmabadi, A.S., Fatahi, B., Samali, B.: Assessment of soil-pile-structure interaction influencing seismic response of mid-rise buildings sitting on floating pile foundations. Comput Geotech 55, 172–186 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bagheri, M., Jamkhaneh, M.E., Samali, B.: Effect of seismic soil–pile–structure interaction on mid- and high-rise steel buildings resting on a group of pile foundations. Int J Geomech (2018). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ishihara, K.: Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Saxena R (2020) Multithreading–from a programmer’s perspective, A step by step practical programming guide, ISBN-13: 979–8643967743.

  20. Kashiyama, K., Tanaka, S., Sakuraba, M.: PC cluster parallel finite element analysis of sloshing problem by earthquake using different network environments. Commun Numer Methods Eng 18, 681–690 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.527

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Komatitsch D and Tromp J (2001) Modeling seismic wave propagation on a 156GB PC Cluster, http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/4671

  22. Komatitsch D, Tsuboi S, Ji C, & Tromp J (2003) A 14.6 billion degrees of freedom, 5 teraflops, 2.5 terabyte earthquake simulation on the Earth Simulator. In SC'03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM/IEEE conference on supercomputing, IEEE, pp 4-4

  23. Noh, G., Bathe, K.J.: An explicit time integration scheme for the analysis of wave propagations. Comput. Struct. 129, 178–193 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Guin, J., Banerjee, P.K.: Coupled soil-pile-structure interaction analysis under seismic excitation. J. Struct. Eng. 124, 434–444 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yang D (1992) Dynamic properties of beaufort sea soils, MEng thesis, in Memorial University of Newfoundland.

  26. OpenSees (2021) https://opensees.berkeley.edu/

  27. Belytschko T, & Mullen R (1976) Mesh partitions of explicit-implicit time integration. Formulations and computational algorithms in finite element analysis, MIT Press, New York, p 673-690

  28. Belytschko, T., Mullen, R.: Stability of explicit-implicit mesh partitions in time integration. Int J Numerical Meth Eng 12(10), 1575–1586 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620121008

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. ABAQUS (2021) Abaqus analysis user's guide. https://www.3ds.com/products-services/simulia/services-support/support/documentation/

  30. Ding, C., Zhong, Y.: Reuse distance analysis, technical report UR-CS-TR-741. University of Rochester, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Peng, J., Lu, J., Law, K.H., Elgamal, A.: ParCYCLIC: Finite element modelling of earthquake liquefaction response on parallel computers. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 28, 1207–1232 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Lu J (2006) Parallel finite element modeling of earthquake ground response and liquefaction, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, San Diego.

  33. Elgamal A, Lu J, and Yan L (2008) Large scale computational simulation in geotechnical earthquake engineering. In: Proceedings 12th international conference of international association for computer methods and advances in geomechanics (IACMAG), Goa, India, p 2782-2791

  34. Amdahl GM (1967) The validity of the single-processor approach to achieving largescale computing capabilities, In: Proceedings of AFIPS spring joint computer conference, p 385–483

  35. Zhao, B., Liu, Y., Goh, S.H., Lee, F.H.: Parallel finite element analysis of seismic soil structure interaction using a PC cluster. Comput Geotech 80, 167–177 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kim SJ, Lee CS, Kim JH, Joh M and Lee S (2003) IPSAP: A high-performance parallel finite element code for large-scale structural analysis based on domain-wise multifrontal technique. In: Proceedings ACM/IEEE SC2003 conference on high performance networking and computing, Phoenix, AZ, USA, p 15–21

  37. HPC (2009) Abaqus performance benchmark and profiling. HPC advisory council. https://www.hpcadvisorycouncil.com/pdf/Abaqus%20Performance%20Analysis_.pdf

  38. Saad, Y.: Iterative method for sparse linear systems. PWS Publishing Company, Boston (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Smith, I.M.: A general-purpose system for finite element analyses in parallel. Eng Comput 17, 75–91 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Chan, S.H., Phoon, K.K., Lee, F.H.: A modified Jacobi preconditioner for solving ill-conditioned Biot’s consolidation equations using symmetric quasi-minimal residual method. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 25, 1001–1025 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Hughes, T.J.R., Ferencz, R.M., Hallquist, J.O.: Large-scale vectorised implicit calculations in solid mechanics on Cray X-MP/48 utilizing EBE preconditioned conjugate gradients. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 61, 215–248 (1987)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Lee, F.H., Phoon, K.K., Lim, K.C., Chan, S.H.: Performance of Jacobi preconditioning in Krylov subspace solution of finite element equations. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 26, 341–372 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.204

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Deng, Q.: An optimal parallel non-overlapping domain decomposition iterative procedure. SIAM J Numer Anal 41, 964–982 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1137/s0036142902401281

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Kumar, S., Adeli, H.: distributed finite-element analysis on network of workstations–implementation and applications. J Struct Eng 121, 1456–1462 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Laemmer L, Meissner UF, & Ruben J (2003) Finite element modelling of soil-structure systems in workstation clusters. In: Computational fluid and solid mechanics 2003, Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, p 2312-2316

  46. Wang, B., Shu, J., Zheng, W., Wang, J., Chen, M.: Hybrid decomposition method in parallel molecular dynamics simulation based on smp cluster architecture. Tsinghua Sci Technol 10, 183–188 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/s1007-0214(05)70052-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gullerud, A.S., Dodds, R.H.: MPI-based implementation of a PCG solver using an EBE architecture and preconditioner for implicit, 3-D finite element analysis. Comput Struct 79, 553–575 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Liu, Y., Zhou, W., Yang, Q.: A distributed memory parallel element-by-element scheme based on Jacobi-conditioned conjugate gradient for 3D finite element analysis. Finite Elem Anal Design 43, 494–503 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Duff, I.S., Erisman, A.M., Reid, J.K.: Direct methods for sparse matrices. Oxford University Press, USA (1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Chen YK, Li W and Tong X (2008) Parallelization of AdaBoost algorithm on multi-core processors. In: Proceedings 2008 IEEE workshop on signal processing systems, IEEE, p 275–280

  51. Rescale (2015) The real cost of high performance computing, https://rescale.com/blog/the-real-cost-of-high-performance-computing/, Rescale Inc

  52. Sabalcore (2022) Sabalcore HPC cloud pricing, https://www.sabalcore.com/services/pricing/, Sabalcore Computing Inc

  53. RTU HPC (2022) HPC service price list, https://hpc.rtu.lv/hpc/hpc-services/price-list/?lang=en, Riga Technical University HPC Center.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges the National University of Singapore Research Scholarship, which enabled him to conduct the above study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. COWI A/S, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

    Ben Zhao

  2. National University of Singapore-Kent Ridge Campus: National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Fook-Hou Lee

Authors
  1. Ben Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fook-Hou Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fook-Hou Lee.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, B., Lee, FH. Feasibility of modelling large-scale realistic seismic soil–pile interaction problems without supercomputing resources. Int J Adv Eng Sci Appl Math 14, 1–14 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12572-022-00316-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12572-022-00316-1

Search

Navigation