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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Geotechnical and geological engineering 2019-06, Vol.37 (3), p.1957-1975 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & 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 |