Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System

One basic factor influencing the seismic design of new structures, as well as the retrofitting and/or improvement of existing ones, is the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. An accurate investigation of the structure and surrounding soil is the first fundamental step...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Geotechnical and geological engineering 2019-06, Vol.37 (3), p.1957-1975
Hauptverfasser: Massimino, M. R., Abate, G., Corsico, S., Louarn, R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1975
container_issue 3
container_start_page 1957
container_title Geotechnical and geological engineering
container_volume 37
creator Massimino, M. R.
Abate, G.
Corsico, S.
Louarn, R.
description One basic factor influencing the seismic design of new structures, as well as the retrofitting and/or improvement of existing ones, is the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. An accurate investigation of the structure and surrounding soil is the first fundamental step in a realistic evaluation of the seismic performance of the coupled soil–structure system. The present paper deals with the dynamic behaviour of a coupled soil–structure system, i.e. a school building in Catania, characterized by a high seismic hazard. The soil properties were carefully defined by means of in situ and laboratory tests. Different 2D numerical analyses were performed, considering both free-field conditions and the soil–structure interaction (SSI), in order to evaluate quantitatively the known differences between the two types of condition. Seven accelerograms scaled at the same PHA, regarding the estimated seismicity of Catania, were adopted. Two different approaches were used to study soil-nonlinearity, which is extremely important in soil mechanics: firstly, adopting constant degraded shear modula G and increased soil damping ratios D , in line with EC8—Part 5 (2003); secondly, choosing G and D according to the effective strain levels obtained for each different input. The main goals of the paper are: (1) to highlight the importance of considering and not considering the dynamic SSI in terms of: acceleration profiles and soil filtering effect; (2) to evaluate the influence of different modelling of soil non-linearity on the dynamic response of the system; (3) to compare the response spectra obtained with that given by the Italian technical code (NTC in New technical standards for buildings, 2008 ).
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2214142470</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2214142470</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-9821e054767f94af08ec408fc351695de5ad9d22029256d6b0937498608479823</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwAHaWWBvGzo_jZanKj9TComVtmWTSpkrjYCdUlVhwB27ISXBVJFasRqP53puZR8glh2sOIG88BwkpA54xkJFkuyMy4ImMGE-EOiYDUCmwiGfilJx5vwYAkQIfkI-x3bTGVd429Ba7LWJDF1tLR23rrMlX6GlpHX2yDaurBo2jd5MZndkC69AvqS1pt0I6x8pvqjxYrMx7ZXu3Hxg6tn1bY0Hntqq_P7_mnevzrneB3_kON-fkpDS1x4vfOiQvd5PF-IFNn-8fx6MpM1GkOqYywRGSWKayVLEpIcM8hqzMo4SnKikwMYUqhAChRJIW6SuoSMYqSyGLZRBHQ3J18A0_vfXoO70OJzZhpRaCxzwWsYRA8QOVO-u9w1K3rtoYt9Mc9D5kfQhZh5D1PmS9Cxpx0PjANkt0f87_i34Afa5_0Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2214142470</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Massimino, M. R. ; Abate, G. ; Corsico, S. ; Louarn, R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Massimino, M. R. ; Abate, G. ; Corsico, S. ; Louarn, R.</creatorcontrib><description>One basic factor influencing the seismic design of new structures, as well as the retrofitting and/or improvement of existing ones, is the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. An accurate investigation of the structure and surrounding soil is the first fundamental step in a realistic evaluation of the seismic performance of the coupled soil–structure system. The present paper deals with the dynamic behaviour of a coupled soil–structure system, i.e. a school building in Catania, characterized by a high seismic hazard. The soil properties were carefully defined by means of in situ and laboratory tests. Different 2D numerical analyses were performed, considering both free-field conditions and the soil–structure interaction (SSI), in order to evaluate quantitatively the known differences between the two types of condition. Seven accelerograms scaled at the same PHA, regarding the estimated seismicity of Catania, were adopted. Two different approaches were used to study soil-nonlinearity, which is extremely important in soil mechanics: firstly, adopting constant degraded shear modula G and increased soil damping ratios D , in line with EC8—Part 5 (2003); secondly, choosing G and D according to the effective strain levels obtained for each different input. The main goals of the paper are: (1) to highlight the importance of considering and not considering the dynamic SSI in terms of: acceleration profiles and soil filtering effect; (2) to evaluate the influence of different modelling of soil non-linearity on the dynamic response of the system; (3) to compare the response spectra obtained with that given by the Italian technical code (NTC in New technical standards for buildings, 2008 ).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-3182</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1529</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Acceleration ; Aseismic buildings ; Civil Engineering ; Damping ; Damping ratio ; Dynamic response ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Earthquake accelerograms ; Evaluation ; Finite element method ; Geological hazards ; Geotechnical Engineering &amp; Applied Earth Sciences ; Hydrogeology ; Laboratory tests ; Linearity ; Mathematical models ; Modelling ; Nonlinear systems ; Nonlinearity ; Original Paper ; Profiles ; Ratios ; Retrofitting ; School buildings ; Seismic activity ; Seismic design ; Seismic engineering ; Seismic hazard ; Seismic response ; Seismicity ; Soil ; Soil conditions ; Soil dynamics ; Soil filters ; Soil investigations ; Soil mechanics ; Soil properties ; Soil-structure interaction ; Terrestrial Pollution ; Two dimensional analysis ; Waste Management/Waste Technology</subject><ispartof>Geotechnical and geological engineering, 2019-06, Vol.37 (3), p.1957-1975</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-9821e054767f94af08ec408fc351695de5ad9d22029256d6b0937498608479823</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-9821e054767f94af08ec408fc351695de5ad9d22029256d6b0937498608479823</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6711-7690</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Massimino, M. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abate, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corsico, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Louarn, R.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System</title><title>Geotechnical and geological engineering</title><addtitle>Geotech Geol Eng</addtitle><description>One basic factor influencing the seismic design of new structures, as well as the retrofitting and/or improvement of existing ones, is the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. An accurate investigation of the structure and surrounding soil is the first fundamental step in a realistic evaluation of the seismic performance of the coupled soil–structure system. The present paper deals with the dynamic behaviour of a coupled soil–structure system, i.e. a school building in Catania, characterized by a high seismic hazard. The soil properties were carefully defined by means of in situ and laboratory tests. Different 2D numerical analyses were performed, considering both free-field conditions and the soil–structure interaction (SSI), in order to evaluate quantitatively the known differences between the two types of condition. Seven accelerograms scaled at the same PHA, regarding the estimated seismicity of Catania, were adopted. Two different approaches were used to study soil-nonlinearity, which is extremely important in soil mechanics: firstly, adopting constant degraded shear modula G and increased soil damping ratios D , in line with EC8—Part 5 (2003); secondly, choosing G and D according to the effective strain levels obtained for each different input. The main goals of the paper are: (1) to highlight the importance of considering and not considering the dynamic SSI in terms of: acceleration profiles and soil filtering effect; (2) to evaluate the influence of different modelling of soil non-linearity on the dynamic response of the system; (3) to compare the response spectra obtained with that given by the Italian technical code (NTC in New technical standards for buildings, 2008 ).</description><subject>Acceleration</subject><subject>Aseismic buildings</subject><subject>Civil Engineering</subject><subject>Damping</subject><subject>Damping ratio</subject><subject>Dynamic response</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Earthquake accelerograms</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Finite element method</subject><subject>Geological hazards</subject><subject>Geotechnical Engineering &amp; Applied Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Laboratory tests</subject><subject>Linearity</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Nonlinear systems</subject><subject>Nonlinearity</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Profiles</subject><subject>Ratios</subject><subject>Retrofitting</subject><subject>School buildings</subject><subject>Seismic activity</subject><subject>Seismic design</subject><subject>Seismic engineering</subject><subject>Seismic hazard</subject><subject>Seismic response</subject><subject>Seismicity</subject><subject>Soil</subject><subject>Soil conditions</subject><subject>Soil dynamics</subject><subject>Soil filters</subject><subject>Soil investigations</subject><subject>Soil mechanics</subject><subject>Soil properties</subject><subject>Soil-structure interaction</subject><subject>Terrestrial Pollution</subject><subject>Two dimensional analysis</subject><subject>Waste Management/Waste Technology</subject><issn>0960-3182</issn><issn>1573-1529</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwAHaWWBvGzo_jZanKj9TComVtmWTSpkrjYCdUlVhwB27ISXBVJFasRqP53puZR8glh2sOIG88BwkpA54xkJFkuyMy4ImMGE-EOiYDUCmwiGfilJx5vwYAkQIfkI-x3bTGVd429Ba7LWJDF1tLR23rrMlX6GlpHX2yDaurBo2jd5MZndkC69AvqS1pt0I6x8pvqjxYrMx7ZXu3Hxg6tn1bY0Hntqq_P7_mnevzrneB3_kON-fkpDS1x4vfOiQvd5PF-IFNn-8fx6MpM1GkOqYywRGSWKayVLEpIcM8hqzMo4SnKikwMYUqhAChRJIW6SuoSMYqSyGLZRBHQ3J18A0_vfXoO70OJzZhpRaCxzwWsYRA8QOVO-u9w1K3rtoYt9Mc9D5kfQhZh5D1PmS9Cxpx0PjANkt0f87_i34Afa5_0Q</recordid><startdate>20190601</startdate><enddate>20190601</enddate><creator>Massimino, M. R.</creator><creator>Abate, G.</creator><creator>Corsico, S.</creator><creator>Louarn, R.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6711-7690</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190601</creationdate><title>Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System</title><author>Massimino, M. R. ; Abate, G. ; Corsico, S. ; Louarn, R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-9821e054767f94af08ec408fc351695de5ad9d22029256d6b0937498608479823</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Acceleration</topic><topic>Aseismic buildings</topic><topic>Civil Engineering</topic><topic>Damping</topic><topic>Damping ratio</topic><topic>Dynamic response</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Earthquake accelerograms</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Finite element method</topic><topic>Geological hazards</topic><topic>Geotechnical Engineering &amp; Applied Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Laboratory tests</topic><topic>Linearity</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Nonlinear systems</topic><topic>Nonlinearity</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Profiles</topic><topic>Ratios</topic><topic>Retrofitting</topic><topic>School buildings</topic><topic>Seismic activity</topic><topic>Seismic design</topic><topic>Seismic engineering</topic><topic>Seismic hazard</topic><topic>Seismic response</topic><topic>Seismicity</topic><topic>Soil</topic><topic>Soil conditions</topic><topic>Soil dynamics</topic><topic>Soil filters</topic><topic>Soil investigations</topic><topic>Soil mechanics</topic><topic>Soil properties</topic><topic>Soil-structure interaction</topic><topic>Terrestrial Pollution</topic><topic>Two dimensional analysis</topic><topic>Waste Management/Waste Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Massimino, M. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abate, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corsico, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Louarn, R.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Geotechnical and geological engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Massimino, M. R.</au><au>Abate, G.</au><au>Corsico, S.</au><au>Louarn, R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System</atitle><jtitle>Geotechnical and geological engineering</jtitle><stitle>Geotech Geol Eng</stitle><date>2019-06-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1957</spage><epage>1975</epage><pages>1957-1975</pages><issn>0960-3182</issn><eissn>1573-1529</eissn><abstract>One basic factor influencing the seismic design of new structures, as well as the retrofitting and/or improvement of existing ones, is the dynamic interaction between the foundation soil and the structure. An accurate investigation of the structure and surrounding soil is the first fundamental step in a realistic evaluation of the seismic performance of the coupled soil–structure system. The present paper deals with the dynamic behaviour of a coupled soil–structure system, i.e. a school building in Catania, characterized by a high seismic hazard. The soil properties were carefully defined by means of in situ and laboratory tests. Different 2D numerical analyses were performed, considering both free-field conditions and the soil–structure interaction (SSI), in order to evaluate quantitatively the known differences between the two types of condition. Seven accelerograms scaled at the same PHA, regarding the estimated seismicity of Catania, were adopted. Two different approaches were used to study soil-nonlinearity, which is extremely important in soil mechanics: firstly, adopting constant degraded shear modula G and increased soil damping ratios D , in line with EC8—Part 5 (2003); secondly, choosing G and D according to the effective strain levels obtained for each different input. The main goals of the paper are: (1) to highlight the importance of considering and not considering the dynamic SSI in terms of: acceleration profiles and soil filtering effect; (2) to evaluate the influence of different modelling of soil non-linearity on the dynamic response of the system; (3) to compare the response spectra obtained with that given by the Italian technical code (NTC in New technical standards for buildings, 2008 ).</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y</doi><tpages>19</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6711-7690</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0960-3182
ispartof Geotechnical and geological engineering, 2019-06, Vol.37 (3), p.1957-1975
issn 0960-3182
1573-1529
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2214142470
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Acceleration
Aseismic buildings
Civil Engineering
Damping
Damping ratio
Dynamic response
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Earthquake accelerograms
Evaluation
Finite element method
Geological hazards
Geotechnical Engineering & Applied Earth Sciences
Hydrogeology
Laboratory tests
Linearity
Mathematical models
Modelling
Nonlinear systems
Nonlinearity
Original Paper
Profiles
Ratios
Retrofitting
School buildings
Seismic activity
Seismic design
Seismic engineering
Seismic hazard
Seismic response
Seismicity
Soil
Soil conditions
Soil dynamics
Soil filters
Soil investigations
Soil mechanics
Soil properties
Soil-structure interaction
Terrestrial Pollution
Two dimensional analysis
Waste Management/Waste Technology
title Comparison Between Two Approaches for Non-linear FEM Modelling of the Seismic Behaviour of a Coupled Soil–Structure System
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T03%3A57%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20Between%20Two%20Approaches%20for%20Non-linear%20FEM%20Modelling%20of%20the%20Seismic%20Behaviour%20of%20a%20Coupled%20Soil%E2%80%93Structure%20System&rft.jtitle=Geotechnical%20and%20geological%20engineering&rft.au=Massimino,%20M.%20R.&rft.date=2019-06-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1957&rft.epage=1975&rft.pages=1957-1975&rft.issn=0960-3182&rft.eissn=1573-1529&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2214142470%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2214142470&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true