Volume 5, Issue 1 (9-2020)                   NMCE 2020, 5(1): 29-39 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ahmadi M, Masaeli H. Stability Analysis of Rocking Soil-Structure Systems Subjected to Near-Fault Pulses. NMCE 2020; 5 (1) :29-39
URL: http://nmce.kntu.ac.ir/article-1-290-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Ayatollah Boroujerdi University, Boroujerd, Iran. , masoud.ahmadi@abru.ac.ir
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Ayatollah Boroujerdi University, Boroujerd, Iran.
Abstract:   (818 Views)
The overturning potential of rocking soil-structure systems subjected to near-fault pulses is investigated in this paper. An extensive parametric study is conducted, including medium-to-high-rise buildings with different aspect ratios based on shallow raft foundation allowed to uplift considering the eects of nonlinear soil-structure interaction.  The considered parameters are (i) ground motion characteristics, (ii) structural properties of the superstructure, and (iii) foundation design parameters. Mathematical directivity and fling pulses are used as input ground motion. The superstructure is assumed to predominantly showcase first-mode characteristics. Two-dimensional overturning spectra of buildings of various geometrical, as well as dynamic characteristics, are derived. Evidently, the prevalent pulse period (Tp) is a key parameter governing the rocking response of the system. It is also observed that fling pulses are more destructive than directivity pulses of the same magnitude with respect to overturning potential. On the other hand, the lower frequency parameter (p) of the more large-size buildings is a quantity that indicates higher safety margins against toppling with respect to small-size buildings of the same aspect ratio.
Full-Text [PDF 1103 kb]   (489 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2020/06/20 | Revised: 2020/08/20 | Accepted: 2020/09/20

1. [1] Somerville P. Seismic hazard evaluation. Bull New Zeal Soc Earthq Eng 2000;33:371-86. [DOI:10.5459/bnzsee.33.3.371-386]
2. [2] Abrahamson N. Incorporating effects of near fault tectonic deformation into design ground motions. A Present Spons by EERI Visit Prof Program, Hosted by Univ Buffalo 2001.
3. [3] Chen X, Liu Y, Zhou B, Yang D. Seismic response analysis of intake tower structure under near-fault ground motions with forward-directivity and fling-step effects. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2020;132:106098. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106098]
4. [4] Bertero V V, Herrera RA, Mahin SA. Establishment of design earthquakes-Evaluation of present methods. Proc., Int. Symp. Earthq. Struct. Eng., vol. 1, Univ. of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, Mo.; 1976, p. 551-80.
5. [5] Iwan WD, Huang C-T, Guyader AC. Important features of the response of inelastic structures to near-field ground motion. Proc. 12th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2000.
6. [6] Masaeli H, Khoshnoudian F, Ziaei R. Rocking soil-structure systems subjected to near-fault pulses. J Earthq Eng 2015;19:461-79. [DOI:10.1080/13632469.2014.990652]
7. [7] Jangid RS, Kelly JM. Base isolation for near‐fault motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2001;30:691-707. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.31]
8. [8] Pavlou EA, Constantinou MC. Response of elastic and inelastic structures with damping systems to near-field and soft-soil ground motions. Eng Struct 2004;26:1217-30. [DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.04.001]
9. [9] Mavroeidis GP, Dong G, Papageorgiou AS. Near‐fault ground motions, and the response of elastic and inelastic single‐degree‐of‐freedom (SDOF) systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2004;33:1023-49. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.391]
10. [10] Kalkan E, Kunnath SK. Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings. Earthq Spectra 2006;22:367-90. [DOI:10.1193/1.2192560]
11. [11] Zhai C, Li S, Xie L, Sun Y. Study on inelastic displacement ratio spectra for near-fault pulse-type ground motions. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 2007;6:351-5. [DOI:10.1007/s11803-007-0755-x]
12. [12] Yalcin OF, Dicleli M. Effect of the high frequency components of near-fault ground motions on the response of linear and nonlinear SDOF systems: a moving average filtering approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2020;129:105922. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105922]
13. [13] Lu Y, Hajirasouliha I, Marshall AM. Direct displacement-based seismic design of flexible-base structures subjected to pulse-like ground motions. Eng Struct 2018;168:276-89. [DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.04.079]
14. [14] Spyrakos CC, Nikolettos GS. Overturning stability criteria for flexible structures to earthquakes. J Eng Mech 2005;131:349-58. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2005)131:4(349)]
15. [15] Zhang J, Tang Y. Dimensional analysis of structures with translating and rocking foundations under near-fault ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2009;29:1330-46. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.04.002]
16. [16] Acikgoz S, DeJong MJ. The interaction of elasticity and rocking in flexible structures allowed to uplift. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2012;41:2177-94. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.2181]
17. [17] Peng W, Zhao H, Dai F, Taciroglu E. Analytical method for overturning limit analysis of single-column pier bridges. J Perform Constr Facil 2017;31:4017007. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000999]
18. [18] Haeri SM, Fathi A. Numerical modeling of rocking of shallow foundations subjected to slow cyclic loading with consideration of soil-structure interaction. ArXiv Prepr ArXiv180804492 2018.
19. [19] Jia C, Huang Q, Wang G. Stability analysis of blocky structure system using discontinuity layout optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2020;121:5766-83. [DOI:10.1002/nme.6523]
20. [20] Ishiyama Y. Review and discussion on overturning of bodies by earthquake motions 1980.
21. [21] Koh A-S, Spanos PD, Roesset JM. Harmonic rocking of rigid block on flexible foundation. J Eng Mech 1986;112:1165-80. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1986)112:11(1165)]
22. [22] Psycharis IN, Jennings PC. Rocking of slender rigid bodies allowed to uplift. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1983;11:57-76. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.4290110106]
23. [23] Makris N, Roussos YS. Rocking response of rigid blocks under near-source ground motions. Geotechnique 2000;50:243-62. [DOI:10.1680/geot.2000.50.3.243]
24. [24] Gerolymos N, Apostolou M, Gazetas G. Neural network analysis of overturning response under near-fault type excitation. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 2005;4:213. [DOI:10.1007/s11803-005-0004-0]
25. [25] Gelagoti F, Kourkoulis R, Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G. Rocking-isolated frame structures: Margins of safety against toppling collapse and simplified design approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2012;32:87-102. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.08.008]
26. [26] Bielak J. Base moment for a class of linear systems. J Eng Mech Div 1969;95:1053-62. [DOI:10.1061/JMCEA3.0001163]
27. [27] Bray JD, Rodriguez-Marek A. Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2004;24:815-28. [DOI:10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.05.001]
28. [28] Alavi B, Krawinkler H. Consideration of near-fault ground motion effects in seismic design. Proc. 12th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., vol. 8, 2000.
29. [29] Sasani M, Bertero V V. Importance of Severe Pulse-Type Ground Motions in Performance-Based Engineering: Historical and Critical. Proc. 12th World Conf. Earthq. Eng. New Zeal. Soc. Earthq. Eng. Up. Hutt, New Zeal., 2000.
30. [30] He W-L, Agrawal AK. Analytical model of ground motion pulses for the design and assessment of seismic protective systems. J Struct Eng 2008;134:1177-88. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:7(1177)]
31. [31] Xin L, Li X, Zhang Z, Zhao L. Seismic behavior of long-span concrete-filled steel tubular arch bridge subjected to near-fault fling-step motions. Eng Struct 2019;180:148-59. [DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.11.006]
32. [32] Zengin E, Abrahamson NA. A vector‐valued intensity measure for near‐fault ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2020;49:716-34. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.3261]
33. [33] Howard JK, Tracy CA, Burns RG. Comparing observed and predicted directivity in near-source ground motion. Earthq Spectra 2005;21:1063-92. [DOI:10.1193/1.2044827]
34. [34] Mavroeidis GP, Papageorgiou AS. A mathematical representation of near-fault ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 2003;93:1099-131. [DOI:10.1785/0120020100]
35. [35] Li X, Zhu X. Study on equivalent velocity pulse of nearfault ground motions. Acta Seismol Sin 2004;17:697-706. [DOI:10.1007/s11589-004-0009-1]
36. [36] International Code Council. International building code. 2018.
37. [37] Jennings PC, Bielak J. Dynamics of building-soil interaction. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1973;63:9-48.
38. [38] Federal Emergency Management Agency. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions: Design Examples 2012.
39. [39] American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures: second Printing (ASCE/SEI 7). 2010.
40. [40] Roussis PC, Odysseos S. Dynamic response of seismically isolated rigid blocks under near-fault ground motions. Proc. 15th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2012.
41. [41] Clough RW, Penzien J. Dynamics of structures. Berkeley. CA Comput Struct 2003.
42. [42] The MathWorks. MATLAB & Statistics Toolbox Release 2012.
43. [43] Housner GW. The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1963;53:403-17.
44. [44] Gelagoti F, Kourkoulis R, Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G. Rocking isolation of low‐rise frame structures founded on isolated footings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2012;41:1177-97. [DOI:10.1002/eqe.1182]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author