Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nonlinear Analysis of Building Structures Resting on Soft Soil Considering Soil–Structure Interaction and Structure–Soil–Structure Interaction

  • BRIEF COMMUNICATION
  • Published:
Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the decades, various researchers have suggested that considering a structure fixed at the base predicts erroneous results in estimating the seismic response of soil–structure systems due to earthquake motions, potentially leading to faulty system designs. The magnitude of these errors may be attributed to variables such as soil type and modeling techniques. Improper modeling techniques are major factors contributing to erroneous responses of soil–structure systems. Selecting and implementing wave-transmitting boundaries are challenging tasks in finite element modeling techniques to simulate the infinite extent of soil and account for radiation damping in soil for solving soil–structure interaction (SSI) problems. This paper studies the effects of SSI and soil–structure–soil interaction (SSSI) on a four-storey steel structure with a raft foundation resting on soft semi-infinite soil. Here, the infinite domain of soil is simulated through an infinite element as a boundary condition after validating the modeling technique with experimental results found in the literature. The new modeling method, using ABAQUS, effectively handles soil–structure interaction (SSI) problems with acceptable accuracy, facilitating simulation of both SSI and SSSI scenarios for a four-storey steel structure. Using an infinite element (CIN3D8) in finite element method (FEM) analysis proves viable for SSI and SSSI simulations. Results show reduced storey drifts but varied floor shear forces across soil types (S1: a uniform soil system and S2: a two-layer soil system) compared to fixed base conditions. In SSSI analysis, higher storey levels experience increased drifts, while lower levels have decreased drifts compared to SSI scenarios. Base shear forces are consistently higher in SSSI analysis across all soil profiles, resulting in overall higher total floor displacements in both SSI and SSSI conditions compared to fixed base conditions.

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

References

  1. H. Dou, P.M. Byrne, Dynamic response of single piles and soil pile interaction. Can. Geotech. J. 33, 80–96 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. H. Far, Advanced computation methods for soil-structure interaction analysis of structures resting on soft soils. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 1–8 (2017)

  3. S. Ghosh, E.L. Wilson, Dynamic stress analysis of axisymmetric structures under arbitrary loading. Report No. EERC 69–10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center (University of California, Berkeley, California, 1971)

  4. A. Hadjian, D. Anderson, W. Tseng, N. Tsai, C. Chang, Y. Tang, H. Tang, J. Stepp, The learning from the large scale Lotung soil-structure interaction experiments. Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics (Univ. of Missouri at Rolla, 1991).

  5. A.M. Halabian, M.H.E. Naggar, Effect of foundation flexibility on seismic response of reinforced concrete TV-towers. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 28, 465–481 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Hideto, Study on nonlinear dynamic analysis method of pile subjected to ground motion. Part 2: Comparison between theory and experiment. Proc. 11 WCEE (1996)

  7. N. Hosseinzadeh, F. Nateghi, Shake table study of soil-structure interaction effects on seismic response of single and adjacent buildings. In Proceedings of the13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1918 (2004)

  8. IBC (2006). International building code. International Code Council, Inc.(formerly BOCA, ICBO and SBCCI), 4051, 60478–5795.

  9. A. Imamura, T. Watanabe, M. Ishizaki, M. Motosaka, Seismic response characteristics of embedded structures considering cross interaction. In Proceeding of the tenth world conference on earthquake engineering (Rotterdam, Balkema, 1992), pp. 1719–24.

  10. IS-1893 (2002). Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Beuro of Indian Standards New Delhi.

  11. L. Kant, A. Samanta, A review and comparative study of boundary conditions used for wave transmission in soil with application in free field response. Jordan J. Civ. Eng. 14(4) (2020)

  12. A. K-Karamodin, H. H-Kazemi, Semi-active control of structures using neuro-predictive algorithm for MR dampers. Struct. Control Health Monit. Off. J. Int. Assoc. Struct. Control Monit. Eur. Assoc. Control Struct. 17, 237–253 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. S.L. Kramer, Geotechnical earthquake engineering. In Prentice–Hall International Series in Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1996)

  14. R.L. Kuhlemeyer, J. Lysmer, Finite element method accuracy for wave propagation problems. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 99 (1973)

  15. J. Luco, H. Wong, Response of a rigid foundation to a spatially random ground motion. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 14, 891–908 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. J. Lysmer, R.L. Kuhlemeyer, Finite dynamic model for infinite media. J .Eng. Mech. Div. 95, 859–878 (1969)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. B. Maheshwari, K. Truman, M. El Naggar, P. Gould, Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis for seismic soil–pile-structure interaction. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 24, 343–356 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. P. Meymand, Shake table tests: seismic soil-pile-superstructure interaction. PEER Cent. News 1, 1–4 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Q.V. Nguyen, B. Fatahi, A.S. Hokmabadi, The effects of foundation size on the seismic performance of buildings considering the soil-foundation-structure interaction. Struct. Eng. Mech. 58(6), 1045–1075 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. C.-M. Nilsson, C.J. Jones, Theory manual for WANDS 2.1 wave number domain FE-BE software for structures and fluids (2007)

  21. M. Novák, Y.O. Beredugo, Vertical vibration of embedded footings. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 98 (1972)

  22. R. Park, D.C. Kent, R.A. Sampson, Reinforced concrete members with cyclic loading. J. Struct. Div. 98 (1972).

  23. R.A. Parmelee, D.S. Perelman, S.-L. Lee, L.M. Keer, Seismic response of structure-foundation systems. J .Eng. Mech. Div. 94, 1295–1316 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. PEER, N. Database. The pacific earthquake engineering research center (University of California at Berkeley, 2014)

  25. M. Rayhani, M.H. El Naggar, Numerical modeling of seismic response of rigid foundation on soft soil. Int. J. Geomech. 8, 336–346 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. J.M. Roesset, R.V. Whitman, R. Dobry, Modal analysis for structures with foundation interaction. J. Struct. Div. 99, 399–416 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. E. Şafak, Detection and identification of soil-structure interaction in buildings from vibration recordings. J. Struct. Eng. 121, 899–906 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. R. Seed, S. Dickenson, C. Mok, Recent lessons regarding seismic response analysis of soft and deep clay sites. Technical Report NCEER (US National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER), 1992).

  29. STAADPro, Structural analysis and design software (2012)

  30. N. Stromblad, Modeling of Soil and Structure Interaction Subsea. Master’s thesis in Applied Mechanics (Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, 2014)

  31. S. Tabatabaiefar, Determining seismic response of mid-rise building frames considering dynamic soil-structure interaction. PhD Thesis (University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Australia, 2012).

  32. S. Tabatabaiefar, B. Fatahi, B. Samali, An empirical relationship to determine lateral seismic response of mid-rise building frames under influence of soil–structure interaction. Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 23, 526–548 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. S.H.R. Tabatabaiefar, Detail design and construction procedure of laminar soil containers for experimental shaking table tests. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 10, 328–336 (2016)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. A. Veletsos, A. Prasad, W. Wu, Transfer functions for rigid rectangular foundations. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 26, 5–17 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. S. Wang, G. Schmid, Dynamic structure-soil-structure interaction by FEM and BEM. Comput. Mech. 9, 347–357 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. X. Yang, Y. Chen, B. Yang, Three-dimension dynamic soil–structure interaction analysis using the substructure method in the time domain. In Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 12–17 (2008).

Download references

Funding

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and funding for the doctoral research work of the first author by Indian Institute of Technology Patna, India.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, RRSD Collage of Engineering, Begusarai, Bihar, India

    Lakshmi Kant

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Patna, Bihar, 801106, India

    Lakshmi Kant & Avik Samanta

Authors
  1. Lakshmi Kant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Avik Samanta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Lakshmi Kant and Avik Samanta. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Lakshmi Kant, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Avik Samanta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships with other people or organizations that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kant, L., Samanta, A. Nonlinear Analysis of Building Structures Resting on Soft Soil Considering Soil–Structure Interaction and Structure–Soil–Structure Interaction. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-024-00788-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-024-00788-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation