Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ground Response Analysis: Comparison of 1D, 2D and 3D Approach

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the Indian Geotechnical Conference 2019

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 138))

Abstract

Generally, one-dimensional (1D) wave propagation or ground response analysis (GRA) is preferred to evaluate the effect of local site conditions subjected to an earthquake ground motion [1]. For a site with complex and irregular stratigraphy, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) ground response is preferred over 1D wave propagation for more realistic evaluation of ground response under seismic load. In present study, 1D, 2D (plane strain) and 3D (solid) finite element (FE) models are developed using Abaqus [2] considering two different soil profiles (with multilayer linear viscoelastic materials) of different dynamic characteristics. The kinematic constraints are used along the lateral boundaries of FE models, whereas the base is considered to be fixed in vertical direction. The maximum size of used elements is selected according to the recommendation of ASCE/SEI 4-98 [3] and ASCE/SEI 4–16 [4], for wavelength corresponding to 10 Hz. A recorded ground motion is applied at base of FE models (1D/ 2D/ 3D) and 1D wave propagation model developed in SHAKE2000. The simulated ground motions are compared in terms of transfer functions. On the other hand, a recorded ground motion is de-convoluted through the considered soil profiles using SHAKE2000 [5] separately and then de-convoluted ground motion is applied at the base of FE models. Again, the simulated ground motions (in terms of response spectra and acceleration time history) of different FE models are compared with the recorded one. The results are found to be in excellent agreement for all the considered cases.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kramer, S.L.: Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abaqus: ABAQUS Documentation, Dassault Systèmes. Providence, RI, USA (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. ASCE/SEI 4-98: Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  4. ASCE/SEI 4-16: Seismic Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear Structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ordonez, G.: A: SHAKE2000: A Computer Program for the 1D Analysis of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems. Geomotions, Lacey Washington, USA (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kaynia, A.M.: QUIVER_site-Numerical Code for Nonlinear Seismic Site Response Analyses. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Norway (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Idriss, I., Seed, H.B.: Response of horizontal soil layers during earthquakes. Soil Mechanics and Bituminous Materials Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yoshida, N.: Seismic Ground Response Analysis, vol. 36. Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht, Netherlands (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J., Seed, H.B.: SHAKE: A Computer Program for Earthquake Ground Response Analysis for Horizontally Layered Sites. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Assimaki, D., Kausel, E., Whittle, A.: Model for dynamic shear modulus and damping for granular soils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 126(10), 859–869 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yoshida, N., Kobayashi, S., Suetomi, I., Miura, K.: Equivalent linear method considering frequency dependent characteristics of stiffness and damping. Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 22(3), 205–222 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hashash, Y.M., Park, D.: Nonlinear one-dimensional seismic ground motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment. Eng. Geol. 62(1–3), 185–206 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kwok, A.O., Stewart, J.P., Hashash, Y.M.: Nonlinear ground response analysis of turkey flat shallow stiff soil site to strong ground motion. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98(1), 331–343 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Phillips, C., Hashash, Y.M.: Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses. Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 29(7), 1143–1158 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hashash, Y., Phillips, C., Groholski, D.R.: Recent advances in non-linear site response analysis. In: International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, California (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Tsai, C.-C., Chen, C.-W.: A comparison of site response analysis method and its impact on earthquake engineering practice. In: 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul, Turkey (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Régnier, J., Bonilla, L., Bard, P.-Y., Bertrand, E., Hollender, F., Kawase, H., Sicilia, D., Arduino, P., Amorosi, A., Asimaki, D., Boldini, D., Chen, L., Chiaradonna, A., De Martin, F., Elgamal, A.-W., Falcone, G., Foerster, E., Foti, S., Garini, E., Verrucci, L.: PRENOLIN: international benchmark on 1D nonlinear site-response analysis-validation phase exercise. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 108(2), 876–900 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kwok, A.O., Stewart, J.P., Hashash, Y.M., Matasovic, N., Pyke, R., Wang, Z., Yang, Z.: Use of exact solutions of wave propagation problems to guide implementation of nonlinear seismic ground response analysis procedures. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 133(11), 1385–1398 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mejia, L., Dawson, E.: Earthquake deconvolution for FLAC. In: Proceedings of the 4th International FLAC Symposium on Numerical Modeling in Geomechanics, Madrid, Spain (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. ASCE/SEI 7-16: Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sextos, A.G., Manolis, G.D., Athanasiou, A., Ioannidis, N.: Seismically induced uplift effects on nuclear power plants. Part 1: Containment building rocking spectra. Nucl. Eng. Des. 318, 276–287 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  22. EPRI: Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motion; Vol. 2: APENDIX 7.A Modeling of Dynamic Soil Properties In, vol. 2 Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California, USA (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Arya, A.S., Chandrasekaran, A.R., Thakkar, S.K., Paul, D.K., Pandey, A.D.: Seismic analysis of reactor containment of Narora atomic power plant under horizontal ground motion including flexibility of internals, EQ 77–1. In., vol. E.Q. 77–1. School of Research and Training in EQ, Engineering University of Roorkee, Roorkee, India (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Visone, C., Bilotta, E., Santucci de Magistris, F.: One-dimensional ground response as a preliminary tool for dynamic analyses in geotechnical earthquake engineering. J. Earthquake Eng. 14(1), 131–162 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, 247667, India

    Praveen Nautiyal, Dhiraj Raj, M. Bharathi & Ramanand Dubey

Authors
  1. Praveen Nautiyal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dhiraj Raj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Bharathi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ramanand Dubey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dhiraj Raj .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat, India

    Satyajit Patel

  2. Department of Applied Mechanics, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat, India

    C. H. Solanki

  3. Department of Civil and Materials Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Krishna R. Reddy

  4. Department of Civil Engineering, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia

    Sanjay Kumar Shukla

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Nautiyal, P., Raj, D., Bharathi, M., Dubey, R. (2021). Ground Response Analysis: Comparison of 1D, 2D and 3D Approach. In: Patel, S., Solanki, C.H., Reddy, K.R., Shukla, S.K. (eds) Proceedings of the Indian Geotechnical Conference 2019. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 138. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6564-3_51

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6564-3_51

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-33-6563-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-33-6564-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation