SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic response assessment of building structures with underground stories: a state-of-the-art review

  • State-of-the-art Paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The dynamic response of building structures built on compliant soil can be influenced by the intricate seismic soil-structure interaction (SSI). This complex mechanism often arises from inertial and kinematic interaction, which is due to inertia-driven forces and the presence of stiff subterranean components on or in soil, respectively. Studies of the seismic SSI response analysis of structures demonstrate that incorporation of the interdependent SSI effects plays a noteworthy part in the seismic force demand and dynamic characteristics of the superstructure. In this direction, numerous researchers have paid significant consideration to seismic SSI effects, but most of the studies were confined to shallow and deep foundations. According to the present review, very few studies have been carried out on building structures featuring embedded basement stories. This paper intends to provide a brief state-of-the-art review of seismic SSI studies related to building with subterranean levels resting on different types of foundations. A comprehensive review of various alternative foundation-soil modelling approaches, seismic response analysis methods of buildings with subterranean levels available in the literature, and requirements specified in well-known seismic resistance design codes and their SSI guidelines have been addressed. A review of recent studies from the last few decades in the present paper targeted area has also been attempted to provide. Finally, the fissures that have not received adequate consideration in previous studies have been emphasized at the end. Furthermore, other related research that is deemed relevant and integral in SSI studies has been discussed regardless of the structure type.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bolisetti C, Whittaker AS, Mason HB, Almufti I, Willford M (2014) Equivalent linear and nonlinear site response analysis for design and risk assessment of safety-related nuclear structures. Nucl Eng Des 275:107–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2014.04.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bolisetti C, Whittaker AS (2015) Site response, soil-structure interaction and structure-soil-structure interaction for performance assessment of buildings and nuclear structures,” Univ. Buffalo, State Univ. New York 212 Ketter Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260, p. 388

  3. Bolisetti C, Whittaker AS, Coleman JL (2018) Linear and nonlinear soil-structure interaction analysis of buildings and safety-related nuclear structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 107:218–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.01.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Van Nguyen D, Kim D, Nguyen DD (2020) Nonlinear seismic soil-structure interaction analysis of nuclear reactor building considering the effect of earthquake frequency content. Structures 26:901–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bridges C, Betti R (1993) Kinematic Soil-Structure Interaction for Long-Span. Earthq Eng & Struct Dyn 22:415–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Soyluk K, Sicacik EA (2012) Soil-structure interaction analysis of cable-stayed bridges for spatially varying ground motion components. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 35:80–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hokmabadi AS, Fatahi B, Samali B (2014) Assessment of soil-pile-structure interaction influencing seismic response of mid-rise buildings sitting on floating pile foundations. Comput Geotech 55:172–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2013.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Torabi H, Rayhani MT (2014) Three dimensional Finite Element modeling of seismic soil-structure interaction in soft soil. Comput Geotech 60:9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2014.03.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Amorosi A, Boldini D, di Lernia A (2017) Dynamic soil-structure interaction: A three-dimensional numerical approach and its application to the Lotung case study. Comput Geotech 90:34–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2017.05.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. de Silva F, Pitilakis D, Ceroni F, Sica S, Silvestri F (2018) Experimental and numerical dynamic identification of a historic masonry bell tower accounting for different types of interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 109:235–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yamahara H (1970) Ground motions during earthquakes and the input loss of earthquake power to an excitation of buildings. Soils Found 10(2):145–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Luco JE, Trifunac MD, Wong HL (1988) Isolation of soil-structure interaction effects by full-scale forced vibration tests. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 16(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290160102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wei H, Zhang Z, Qin X (2017) Experimental study on dam** characteristics of soil-structure interaction system based on shaking table test. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 98:183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tileylioglu S, Stewart JP, Nigbor RL (2011) Dynamic stiffness and dam** of a shallow foundation from forced vibration of a field test structure. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 137(4):344–353. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0000430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Amendola C, de Silva F, Vratsikidis A, Pitilakis D, Anastasiadis A, Silvestri F (2021) Foundation impedance functions from full-scale soil-structure interaction tests. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 141:106523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Celebi M, Safak E (1991) Seismic response of transamerica building. I: data and preliminary analysis. J Struct Eng 117(8):2389–2404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Meli R, Faccioli E, Muria-Vila D, Quaas R, Paolucci R (1998) A study of site effects and seismic response of an instrumented building in mexico city. J Earthq Eng 2(1):89–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469809350315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. D. Murià-Vila R, Taborda-Rios, Zapata-Escobar A (2004) Soil-structure interaction effects in two instrumented tall buildings. In: 13th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., p. 1911

  19. Gueguen P, Bard PY (2005) Soil-structure and soil-structure-soil interaction: experimental evidence at the volvt test site. J Earthq Eng 9(5):657–693. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460509350561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jakrapiyanun W (2002) Physical modeling of dynamic soil-foundation-structure-interaction using a lammar container. University of California Sandiego, US

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rayhani MHT, El Naggar MH (2007) Centrifuge modeling of seismic response of layered soft clay. Bull Earthq Eng 5(4):571–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-007-9047-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sawada K, Takemura J (2014) Centrifuge model tests on piled raft foundation in sand subjected to lateral and moment loads. Soils Found 54(2):126–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.02.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim D-S, Ha JG, Lee S-H, Choo YW (2014) Simulation of soil-foundation-structure interaction of Hualien large-scale seismic test using dynamic centrifuge test. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 61–62:176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Veletsos AS, Meek JW (1974) Dynamic behaviour of building-foundation systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 3(2):121–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290030203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Maravas A, Mylonakis G, Karabalis DL (2014) Simplified discrete systems for dynamic analysis of structures on footings and piles. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 61–62:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.01.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Triantafyllidis T (1986) Dynamic stiffness of rigid rectangular foundations on the half-space. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 14:391–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290140307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stewart JP, Fenves GL, Seed RB (1999) Seismic soil-structure interaction in buildings. I: analytical methods. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 125(1):26–37. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(1999)125:1(26)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Vrettos C (1999) Vertical and rocking impedances for rigid rectangular foundations on soils with bounded non-homogeneity. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(12):1525–1540. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199912)28:12%3c1525::AID-EQE879%3e3.0.CO;2-S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Casciati S, Borja RI (2004) Dynamic FE analysis of South Memnon Colossus including 3D soil-foundation-structure interaction. Comput Struct 82(20–21):1719–1736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2004.02.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rayhani MH, El Naggar MH (2008) Numerical Modeling of Seismic Response of Rigid Foundation on Soft Soil. Int J Geomech 8(6):336–346. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1532-3641(2008)8:6(336)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tabatabaiefar HR, Massumi A (2010) A simplified method to determine seismic responses of reinforced concrete moment resisting building frames under influence of soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(11):1259–1267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Güllü H, Jaf HS (2016) Full 3D nonlinear time history analysis of dynamic soil–structure interaction for a historical masonry arch bridge. Earth Sci Environ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6230-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Nguyen Q, Fatahi B, Hokmabadi AS (2017) Influence of size and load-bearing mechanism of piles on seismic performance of buildings considering soil–pile–structure interaction. Int J Geomech 17(7):04017007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0000869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. RezaTabatabaiefar SH, Fatahia B, Samali B (2013) Lateral seismic response of building frames considering dynamic soil-structure interaction effects. Struct Eng Mech 45(3):307–317. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2013.45.3.311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bilotta E, De Sanctis L, Di Laora R, D’Onofrio A, Silvestri F (2015) Importance of seismic site response and soil-structure interaction in the dynamic behaviour of a tall building founded on piles. Geotech Earthq Eng - Geotech Symp Print 2015(5):125–134. https://doi.org/10.1680/gee.61491.125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Visuvasam J, Chandrasekaran SS (2019) Effect of soil–pile–structure interaction on seismic behaviour of RC building frames. Innov Infrastruct Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-019-0233-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Scarfone R, Morigi M, Conti R (2020) Assessment of dynamic soil-structure interaction effects for tall buildings: A 3D numerical approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 128:105864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. J. P. Wolf, “Dynamic soil-structure interaction.,” Dynamic soil-structure interaction. 1985.

  39. Krawinkler H, Medina R, Alavi B (2003) Seismic drift and ductility demands and their dependence on ground motions. Eng Struct 25(5):637–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00174-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tabatabaiefar S, Fatahi B, Samali B (2014) Numerical and experimental investigations on seismic response of building frames under influence of soil-structure interaction. Adv Struct Eng 17(1):109–130. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.17.1.109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Anwar N, Uthayakumar A, Najam FA (2019) Significance of Soil-Structure Interaction in Seismic Response of Buildings. NED Univ J Res 1:43–54. https://doi.org/10.35453/nedjr-stmech-2019-0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. EN 1998–5, “Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance-Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects.,” vol. 1, no. 2005, 2004

  43. IS 1893 (Part 1), “Criteria for Earthquake resistant design of structures,Part 1:General Provisions and buildings,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, vol. 1893, pp. 1–44, 2016

  44. IS 1893 (Part 2), “Criteria for Earthquake Resistance Design of Structures, Part 2: Liquid Retaining Tanks,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, p. 22, 2014

  45. Dutta SC, Bhattacharya K, Roy R (2004) Response of low-rise buildings under seismic ground excitation incorporating soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24(12):893–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Fatahi B, Van Nguyen Q, Hokmabadi AS (2016) The effects of foundation size on the seismic performance of buildings considering the soil-foundation-structure interaction. Struct Eng Mech 58(6):1045–1075. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2016.58.6.1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Yeganeh N, Fatahi B (2019) Effects of choice of soil constitutive model on seismic performance of moment-resisting frames experiencing foundation rocking subjected to near-field earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 121:442–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.03.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Cai YX, Gould PL, Desai CS (2000) Nonlinear analysis of 3D seismic interaction of soil-pile-structure systems and application. Eng Struct 22(2):191–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00108-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lu X, Chen B, Li P, Chen Y (2004) Numerical analysis of tall buildings considering dynamic soil-structure interaction. J Earthq Eng Eng Vib 24(3):130–138

    Google Scholar 

  50. Maheshwari BK, Truman KZ, El Naggar MH, Gould PL (2004) Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis for seismic soil-pile-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24(4):343–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ghandil M, Behnamfar F (2015) The near-field method for dynamic analysis of structures on soft soils including inelastic soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 75:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.03.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Fatahi B, Hokmabadi AS, Samali B (2015) Physical modeling of seismic soil-pile-structure interaction for buildings on soft soils. Int J Geomech 15(2):04014046. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0000396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Lee J, Park D, Park D (2016) Analyzing load response and load sharing behavior of piled rafts installed with driven piles in sands. Comput Geotech 78:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2016.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Raychowdhury P (2011) Seismic response of low-rise steel moment-resisting frame (SMRF) buildings incorporating nonlinear soil-structure interaction (SSI). Eng Struct 33(3):958–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.12.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Dutta SC, Roy R (2002) A critical review on idealization and modeling for interaction among soil-foundation-structure system. Comput Struct 80(20–21):1579–1594. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00115-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Bowles JE (1997) Foundation Analysis and Design

  57. Hetényi M, Hetbenyi MI (1946) Beams on elastic foundation: theory with applications in the fields of civil and mechanical engineering. Univ Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI

    Google Scholar 

  58. Kerr AD (1965) A study of a new foundation model. Acta Mech 1(2):135–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Gorbunov-Pasadov MI (1949) Beams and plates on an elastic base

  60. Horvath JS (1993) Beam-column-analogy model for soil-structure interaction analysis. J Geotech Eng 119(2):358–364. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:2(358)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Baker ALL (1957) Raft foundations: the soil-line method of design. Concrete Publications

  62. Colasanti RJ, Horvath JS (2010) Practical subgrade model for improved soil-structure interaction analysis : software implementation. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 15(4):278–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Horvath JS, Regis PE, Colasanti J (2011) Practical subgrade model for improved soil-structure interaction analysis : model development. Int J Geomech 11(1):59–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Vesic AB (1961) Bending of beams resting on isotropic elastic solid. J Eng Mech 87:35–54

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kramrisch F, Rogers P (1961) Simplified design of combined footings. J Soil Mech Found Div 87:19–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Brown CB, Laurent JM, Tilton JR (1977) Beam-plate system on Winkler foundation. J Eng Mech Div 103:589–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Crouse CB, Hushmand B, Martin GR (1987) Dynamic soil-structure interaction of a single-span bridge. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 15:711–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Gerolymos N, Gazetas G (2006) Winkler model for lateral response of rigid caisson foundations in linear soil. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 26:347–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Varun, Assimaki D, Gazetas G (2009) A simplified model for lateral response of large diameter caisson foundations—linear elastic formulation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29:268–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Tahghighi H, Mohammadi A (2020) Numerical evaluation of soil–structure interaction effects on the seismic performance and vulnerability of reinforced concrete buildings. Int J Geomech 20(6):04020072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Wolf JP (1994) Foundation vibration analysis using simple physical models. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  72. Far H (2019) Advanced computation methods for soil-structure interaction analysis of structures resting on soft soils. Int J Geotech Eng 13(4):352–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Wolf JP, Paronesso A (1991) Errata: Consistent Lumped-Parameter Models for Unbounded Soil. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 20:597–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Wolf JP (1991) Consistent lumped-parameter models for unbounded soil: Frequency-independent stiffness, dam** and mass matrices. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 20(1):33–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290200104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Wolf JP (1991) Consistent lumped-parameter models for unbounded soil: physical representation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 20(1):11–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290200103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Wolf JP, Paronesso A (1992) Lumped-parameter model for a rigid cylindrical foundation embedded in a soil layer on rigid rock. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 21(12):1021–1038. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290211201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wolf JP (1997) Spring-dashpot-mass models for foundation vibrations. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 26(9):931–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199709)26:9%3c931::AID-EQE686%3e3.0.CO;2-M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Wu WH, Chen CY (2001) Simple lumped-parameter models of foundation using mass-spring-dashpot oscillators. J Chinese Inst Eng Trans Chinese Inst Eng A/Chung-kuo K Ch’eng Hsuch K’an 24(6):681–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/02533839.2001.9670665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Wu WH, Lee WH (2002) Systematic lumped-parameter models for foundations based on polynomial-fraction approximation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(7):1383–1412. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Wu WH, Lee WH (2004) Nested lumped-parameter models for foundation vibrations. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33(9):1051–1058. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Lysmer J (1965) Vertical motion of rigid footings. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  82. Gazetas G 1991 “Foundation vibrations,” Found. Eng. Handb, 553–593

  83. Mohasseb S, Abdollahi B (2004) Soil-structure interaction analyses using cone models. 10(4), [Online]. Available: http://www.iiees.ac.ir/jsee.

  84. Izzuddin BA, Jahromi HZ, Zdravkovic L (2007) Partitioned analysis of nonlinear soil-structure interaction using iterative coupling. Interact Multiscale Mech 1(1):33–51

    Google Scholar 

  85. Brandenberg SJ, Mylonakis G, Stewart JP (2015) Kinematic Framework for Evaluating Seismic Earth Pressures on Retaining Walls. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 141(7):04015031. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Harr ME (1966) Foundation of theoretical soil mechanics. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  87. Filonenko BM (1940) Some Approximate Theories of Elastic Foundation. Uchenyie Zap Mosk Gos Univ Mekhanica 46:3–18

    Google Scholar 

  88. Desai CS, Abel JF (1971) Introduction to the finite element method: a numerical method for engineering analysis. Van Nostrand Reinhold

  89. Cook RD, Malkus DS, Plesha ME (1989) Concepts and applications of finite element analysis. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  90. Matinmanesh H, Asheghabadi MS (2011) Seismic analysis on soil-structure interaction of buildings over sandy soil. Procedia Eng 14:1737–1743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Tabatabaiefar HR, Fatahi B, Ghabraie K, Zhou WH (2015) Evaluation of numerical procedures to determine seismic response of structures under influence of soil-structure interaction. Struct Eng Mech 56(1):27–47. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2015.56.1.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Reza Tabatabaiefar SH, Fatahi B, Samali B (2013) Seismic behavior of building frames considering dynamic soil-structure interaction. Int J Geomech 13(4):409–420. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0000231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Stevens DJ, Krauthammer T (1988) A finite difference/finite element approach to dynamic soil-structure interaction modelling. Comput Struct 29(2):199–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. **gbo L, Yandong L (1998) A direct method for analysis of dynamic soil-structure interaction based on interface idea. Dev Geotech Eng Elsevier 83:261–276

    Google Scholar 

  95. Wolf JP, Darbre GR (1984) Dynamic-Stiffness Matrix of Soil by the Boundary-Element Method: Conceptual Aspects. Earthq Eng & Struct Dyn 12:385–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Eilouch MNA, Sandhu RS (1986) A mixed method for transient analysis of soil–structure interaction under SH-motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 14(4):499–516. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290140402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Vasilev G, Parvanova S, Dineva P, Wuttke F (2015) Soil-structure interaction using BEM-FEM coupling through ANSYS software package. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 70:104–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Wang S (1992) Coupled boundary and finite elements for dynamic structure (3D)-foundation-soil interaction. Comput Struct 44(4):807–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(92)90465-C

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Capuani D, Klein R, Antes H, Tralli A (1995) Dynamic soil–structure interaction of coupled shear walls by boundary element method. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 24(6):861–879. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290240606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Khalili N, Yazdchi M, Valliappan S (1999) Dynamic soil-structure interaction analysis via coupled finite-element-boundary-element method. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 18(7):499–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(99)00019-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Pak RYS, Guzina BB (1999) Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis by direct boundary element methods. Int J Solids Struct 36(31–32):4743–4766. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7683(98)00263-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Spyrakos CC, Xu C (2003) Seismic soil-structure interaction of massive flexible strip-foundations embedded in layered soils by hybrid BEM-FEM. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23(5):383–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(03)00019-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Çelebi E, Firat S, Çankaya I (2006) The evaluation of impedance functions in the analysis of foundations vibrations using boundary element method. Appl Math Comput 173(1):636–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2005.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Padrón LA, Aznárez JJ, Maeso O (2009) Dynamic structure-soil-structure interaction between nearby piled buildings under seismic excitation by BEM-FEM model. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(6):1084–1096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Galvín P, Romero A, Domínguez J (2013) 3D non-linear time domain FEM-BEM approach to soil-structure interaction problems. Eng Anal Bound Elem 37(3):501–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2013.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Katsikadelis JT (2002) Boundary elements: theory and applications. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1201/b14924-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Stewart JP, Tileylioglu S (2007) Input ground motions for tall buildings with subterranean levels. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 16(5):543–557. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Naeim F, Tileylioglu S, Alimoradi A, Stewart JP (2008) Impact of foundation modeling on the accuracy of response analysis for a tall building. Semin. Util. Strong Motion Data, pp. 19–55

  109. Todorovska MI (2002) Full-scale experimental studies of soil-structure interaction. ISET J Earthq Technol 39(3):139–165

    Google Scholar 

  110. Turan A, Hinchberger SD, El Naggar MH (2013) Seismic soil-structure interaction in buildings on stiff clay with embedded basement stories. Can Geotech J 50(8):858–873. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2011-0083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Mason HB, Trombetta NW, Chen Z, Bray JD, Hutchinson TC, Kutter BL (2013) Seismic soil – foundation – structure interaction observed in geotechnical centrifuge experiments. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 48:162–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.01.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Takewaki I, Takeda N, Uetani K (2003) Fast practical evaluation of soil-structure interaction of embedded structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23(3):195–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00225-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Ghannad MA, Mahsuli M (2009) The effect of foundation embedment on inelastic response of structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:423–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Jahankhah H, Ghannad MA, Rahmani MT (2013) Alternative solution for kinematic interaction problem of soil–structure systems with embedded foundation. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 22(3):251–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. FEMA 450, “NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures,” Part 1, p. 338, 2003.

  116. Steven L. Kramer (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics Series. University of Washington, Washington

  117. Kutanis M, Elmas M (2001) Non-linear seismic soil-structure interaction analysis based on sismik Y ¨ sımı C. Turk J Engin Env Sci 25:617–626

    Google Scholar 

  118. Yang XM, Chen Y, Yang BP (2008) Three-dimension dynamic soil-structure interaction analysis using the substructure method in the time domain, In: 14th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., 2008

  119. Leoni G, Carbonari S, Dezi F (2012) Nonlinear seismic behaviour of wall-frame dual systems accounting for soil–structure interaction. Earthq Eng & Struct Dyn 41:1651–1672. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Elsabee F, Morray JP (1977) Dynamic behavior of embedded foundations. Massachusetts Inst. Technol. Dep. Civ. Eng. Constr. Facil. Div

  121. FEMA 440, “Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures,” Fed. Emerg. Manag. Agency, Washingt. DC, vol. 440, p. 392, 2005.

  122. Mylonakis G, Nikolaou S, Gazetas G (2006) Footings under seismic loading: Analysis and design issues with emphasis on bridge foundations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 26(9):824–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2005.12.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Day SM (1978) Seismic response of embedded foundations. American Society of Civil Engineers

  124. Dominguez J, Roesset JM (1978) Response of embedded foundations to travelling waves. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering, Constructed Facilities Division

  125. Karabalis DL, Beskos DE (1986) Dynamic response of 3-D embedded foundations by the boundary element method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 56(1):91–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(86)90138-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Luco JE, Wong HL (1987) Seismic response of foundations embedded in a layered half-space. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 15(2):233–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290150206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Mita A, Luco JE (1989) Impedance functions and input motions for embedded square foundations. J Geotech Eng 115(4):491–503. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1989)115:4(491)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Mikami A, Stewart JP, Kamiyama M (2008) Effects of time series analysis protocols on transfer functions calculated from earthquake accelerograms. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28(9):695–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.10.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. NIST, “Soil-Structure Interaction for Building Structures,” 2012

  130. Conti R, Morigi M, Viggiani GMB (2017) Filtering effect induced by rigid massless embedded foundations. Bull Earthq Eng 15(3):1019–1035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9983-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Conti R, Morigi M, Rovithis E, Theodoulidis N, Karakostas C (2018) Filtering action of embedded massive foundations: New analytical expressions and evidence from 2 instrumented buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 47(5):1229–1249. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Pais A, Kausel E (1988) Approximate formulas for dynamic stiffnesses of rigid foundations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 7(4):213–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(88)80005-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Cook RD, Malkus DS, Plesha ME, Witt RJ (1989) Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis. John Wiley Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  134. Schweiger HF, Fabris C, Ausweger G, Hauser L (2019) Examples of successful numerical modelling of complex geotechnical problems. Innov Infrastruct Solut 4(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-018-0189-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Tehranizadeh M, Barkhordari MS (2018) Effect of Peripheral Wall Openings in Basement and Number of Basement Floors on the Base level of Braced Framed Tube System. Int J Civ Eng 16(9):1157–1173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0270-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. IS 1893 (Part 3), “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant for Design of Structures, Part 3: Bridges and Retaining Walls,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, 2014

  137. IS 1893 (Part 4), “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures, Part 4: Industrial Structures Including Stack-Like Structures,” Bur. Indian Stand. New Delhi, 2015

  138. JSCE 15, “Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures - design JSCE 15. Tokyo: Japan Society of Civil Engineers,” 2007

  139. MCBC, “Complementary Technical Norms for Earthquake Resistant Design,” Mex. City Build. Code, Mex. City, Mex., 2004

  140. FEMA 356, “Prestandard and Commentary the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,” Fed. Emerg. Manag. Agency, Washington, DC, USA, 2000

  141. ASCE/SEI 7–10, “Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures,” American Society of Civil Engineers, Virginia. 2010

  142. ASCE/SEI 7–10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. 2010.

  143. ASCE/SEI 7–16, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. 2018

  144. PEER, “Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings (PEER Report No. 2017/06),” Pacific Earthq. Eng. Cent. Hqrs. Univ. California, Berkeley, 2017

  145. ATC 40, “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings (Report No. ATC-40),” Appl. Technol. Counc. Redw. City, California, USA, 1996

  146. El Ganainy H, El Naggar MH (2009) Seismic performance of three-dimensional frame structures with underground stories. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(9):1249–1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. G. Saad, F. Saddik, and S. Najjar, “Impact of Soil Structure Interaction on the Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings with Underground Stories,” Proc. Fifthteenth World Conf. Earthq. Eng., p. 4935, 2012.

  148. Vega J et al (2013) On soil-structure interaction in large non-slender. Bull Earthq Eng 11:1403–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9433-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Piro A, de Silva F, Parisi F, Scotto di Santolo A, Silvestri F (2020) Effects of soil-foundation-structure interaction on fundamental frequency and radiation dam** ratio of historical masonry building sub-structures. Bull Earthq Eng 18(4):1187–1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00748-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Stewart JP (2000) Variation between foundation-level and free-field earthquake ground motions. Earthq Spectra 16(2):511–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Sotiriadis D, Klimis N, Margaris B, Sextos A (2019) Influence of structure – foundation – soil interaction on ground motions recorded within buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 17(11):5867–5895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00700-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  152. Sotiriadis D, Klimis N, Margaris B, Sextos A (2020) Analytical expressions relating free-field and foundation ground motions in buildings with basement, considering soil-structure interaction. Eng Struct 216:110757

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and resources provided by the Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Warangal, and Ministry of Human Resources and Development (MHRD), Govt. of India.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Warangal, Telangana, 506004, India

    Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse & Hari Krishna Padavala

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Vardhaman College of Engineering, Hyderabad, Telangana, 501218, India

    Venkata R. P. Koteswara

  3. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Arba Minch Institute of Technology, Arba Minch, SNNPR, Ethiopia

    Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse

Authors
  1. Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hari Krishna Padavala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Venkata R. P. Koteswara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tadesse, Z.L., Padavala, H.K. & Koteswara, V.R.P. Seismic response assessment of building structures with underground stories: a state-of-the-art review. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 7, 336 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00942-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00942-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation