SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of soil small strain nonlinearity on the dynamic behavior of floating column structures considering soil-structure interaction

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Past seismic events reveal that soil and structural responses are interdependent, not independent. The seismic behavior of irregular structures, considering soil-structure interaction (SSI) effects, significantly increases the structural vulnerability compared to traditional fixed-base structures. The study on the impact of SSI on irregular structures, especially those with floating columns, is currently limited. Hence, this study primarily examines the influence of nonlinear soil structure interactions on the dynamic response of mid-rise reinforced floating column structures resting on different soil mediums. A three-dimensional finite element programming tool is used to simulate the seismic response of structures with and without floating columns. This study explores the use of elastoplastic hinges to study the inelastic behavior of structural components. The isotropic hardening elastoplastic hysteretic soil model is used to account for the nonlinear behavior of the soil. The nonlinear time history analysis is used to perform and evaluate structural demand parameters subjected to selected ground motions. Moreover, the seismic structural response parameters, such as storey displacement, peak storey drift, peak horizontal acceleration, base shear, and member forces, are compared for both fixed and SSI bases. The analysis results show that the presence of floating columns in structures significantly alters the dynamic response of buildings compared to those without floating column structures. The incorporation of SSI effects increases the flexibility of the foundation and increases the seismic structural response of storey displacement and inter-storey drift ratio while reducing the base shear value.

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 (France)

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
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Pearson Education India

    Google Scholar 

  2. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria For Buildings and Other Structures (2016) ASCE/SEI 7, Restonted

  3. FEMA P-1050 (2015) NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures. Washington

  4. IS: 1893 (Part I) (2002) Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, fifth revision, Part-1. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

  5. Stewart JP, Seed RB, Fenves GL (1999) Seismic soil-structure interaction in buildings. II: Empirical findings. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 125(1):38–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Galal K, Naimi M (2008) Effect of soil conditions on the response of reinforced concrete tall structures to near-fault earthquakes. Struct Des Tall Special Build 17(3):541–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Veletsos AS, Meek JW (1974) Dynamic behaviour of building-foundation systems. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 3(2):121–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jennings PC, Bielak J (1973) Dynamics of building-soil interaction. Bull Seismol Soc Am 63(1):9–48. https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0630010009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bhattacharya K, Dutta SC, Dasgupta S (2004) Effect of soil-flexibility on dynamic behaviour of building frames on raft foundation. J Sound Vib 274(1–2):111–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Abdel Raheem SE, Ahmed MM, Alazrak TM (2014) Soil-raft foundation-structure interaction effects on seismic performance of multi-story MRF buildings. Eng Struct Technol 6(2):43–61

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kant R, Al Agha W, Almorad WA, Thakur MS, Umamaheswari N (2022) Study on seismic performance of reinforced concrete multi-storey building considering soil-structure interaction effect. Mater Today: Proc 56:2158–2166

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 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 

  13. Jaber L, Temsah Y, HageChehade F, El-Mossallamy Y (2018) Effect of soil-structure interaction constitutive models on dynamic response of multi-story buildings. J Eng Sci Technol Rev 11(3):56–60

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gouasmia A, Djeghaba K (2006) Effects of nonlinear dynamic soil-structure interaction on the response of buildings. Res J Appl Sci 1(1–4):110–115

    Google Scholar 

  15. 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 

  16. Uniform Building Code (1997) In Uniform building code. International Conference of Building Officials

  17. FEMA: 450 (Part I) (2003) NEHRP Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures

  18. Eurocode 8 (2005) Design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions, and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization

  19. Moehle JP (1984) Seismic response of vertically irregular structures. J Struct Eng (NY) 110(9):2002–2014. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1984)110:9(2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Athanassiadou CJ (2008) Seismic performance of R/C plane frames irregular in elevation. Eng Struct 30(5):1250–1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ravikumar CM, Babu Narayan KS, Sujith BV, Venkat Reddy D (2012) Effect of irregular configurations on seismic vulnerability of RC buildings. Archit Res 2(3):20–26

    Google Scholar 

  22. Asadi Ghoozhdi H, Attarnejad R, Masoodi AR, Majlesi A (2022) Seismic assessment of irregular RC frames with tall ground story incorporating nonlinear soil–structure interaction. Structures 41:159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sabari S, Praveen JV (2014) Seismic analysis of multistorey building with floating column. Int J Civil Struct Eng Res 2(2):12–23

    Google Scholar 

  24. Singla S, Rahman A (2015) Effect of floating columns on seismic response of multi-storeyed RC framed buildings. Int J Eng Res Technol 4:1131–1136

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pardhi A, Shah P, Satishyadav PS, Jha AK (2016) Seismic analysis of rcc building with and without floating columns. Int J Adv Technol Eng Sci 4(3):615–621

    Google Scholar 

  26. Prasannan P, Mathew A (2017) Seismic performance of RC floating column considering different configurations. Int J Eng Res Technol 6(5):100–108

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pawar N, Dabhekar K, Patil P, Khedikar I, Jaju S (2021) Effect of floating columns on buildings subjected to seismic forces. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 1197(1):012018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ibrahim A, Askar H (2021) Dynamic analysis of a multistory frame RC building with and without floating columns. Am J Civ Eng 9(6):177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rangwala MA, Singh SK (2018) Seismic analysis of multistorey frame with and without floating columns. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 7(5):5262–5272

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nanabala SG, Ramancharla PK, Arunakanthi E (2014) Seismic analysis of a normal building and floating column building. Int J Eng Res Technol 3(9):981–987

    Google Scholar 

  31. Jagan P, Visuvasam JA (2022) Inelastic seismic behaviour of RC buildings with floating columns considering soil-structure interaction. Symp Earthq Eng Springer Nat 2:313–324

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bhosale AS, Davis R, Sarkar P (2017) Vertical irregularity of buildings: Regularity index versus seismic risk. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part A: Civil Eng 3(3):04017001. https://doi.org/10.1061/ajrua6.0000900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shashikumar NS, Gowda MR, Ashwini BT, Kumar YMV (2018) Seismic performance of braced framed structure with floating column. Int J Sci Dev Res 3(6):388–405

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kapase R, Pawar M, Deshmukh MM, Talavara SB (2017) Effect of seismic retrofitting on RC building with soft storey and floating column. Int J Eng Trends Technol 46(7):367–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kumbhar G, Banhatti A (2016) Seismic retrofitting of building with soft storey and floating column. Int Res J Eng Technol 3(7):1917–1921

    Google Scholar 

  36. Singh N, Kashyap V (2016) Seismic retrofitting of dormitory buildings with soft storey and floating columns. Int Res J Eng Technol 5(12):102–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Saeed A, Najm HM, Hassan A, Qaidi S, Sabri MMS, Mashaan NS (2022) A comprehensive study on the effect of regular and staggered openings on the seismic performance of shear walls. Buildings 12(9):1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ozkılıc YO, Karalar M, Aksoylu C, Beskopylny AN, Stelmakh SA, Shcherban EM, Azevedo AR (2023) Shear performance of reinforced expansive concrete beams utilizing aluminium waste. J Market Res 24:5433–5448

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tayeh BA, Akeed MH, Qaidi S, Bakar BA (2022) Influence of the proportion of materials on the rheology and mechanical strength of ultrahigh-performance concrete. Case Stud Constr Mater 17:e01433

    Google Scholar 

  40. IS: 456 (2000) Plain and reinforcement concrete code of practice.Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India

  41. IS: 875 (Part 2) (1987) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures–imposed loads

  42. Roy T, Saito T, Matsagar V (2021) Multihazard framework for investigating high-rise base-isolated buildings under earthquakes and long-duration winds. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 50(5):1334–1357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Shabani MJ, Shamsi M, Ghanbari A (2021) Seismic response of RC moment frame including topography–soil–structure interaction. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 26(4):04021046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. IS: 1893 (Part I) (2016) Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, fifth revision, Part-1. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

  45. Sap 2000 (Version 8) (2002) Integrated software for structural analysis and design. Computers and Structures Inc.

  46. Kumar M, Mishra SS (2016) Study of seismic response characteristics of building frame models using shake table test and considering soil structure interaction. Asian J Civil Eng 20(3):409–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Visuvasam J, Chandrasekaran SS (2019) Effect of soil–pile–structure interaction on seismic behaviour of RC building frames. Innov Infrastruct Solut 4(1):45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. International Building Code (2008) International Code Council, USA

  49. Uma Maheswari R, Boominathan A, Dodagoudar GR (2010) Use of surface waves in statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration resistance of Chennai soils. Geotech Geol Eng 28(2):119–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-009-9285-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Bowles J.E (1996) Foundation analysis and design, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill Education (ISE Editions)

  51. Peck RB, Hanson WE, Thornburn TH (1974) Foundation engineering, 2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons

  52. Schanz T, Vermeer PA, Boonnier PG (1999) The hardening soil model: formulation and verificaction, beyond 2000 in compuatational geotechnics, 1: 281–296

  53. Plaxis BV (2022) Plaxis material models manual, The Netherlands

  54. Hejazi Y, Dias D, Kastner R (2008) Impact of constitutive models on the numerical analysis of underground constructions. Acta Geotech 3(4):251–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-008-0056-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972) Shear modulus and dam** in soils: Design equations and curves. J Soil Mech Found Div 98(7):667–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Cerfontaine B, Knappett JA, Brown MJ, Bradshaw AS (2019) Effect of soil deformability on the failure mechanism of shallow plate or screw anchors in sand. Comput Geotech 109:34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Daredndeli (2001) Development of a new family of normalized modulus reduction and material dam** curves, Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas

  58. Amorosi A, Boldini D, Di Lernia A (2016) Seismic ground response at Lotung: hysteretic elasto-plastic-based 3D analyses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 85:44–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Fatahi B, Huang B, Yeganeh N, Terzaghi S, Banerjee S (2020) Three-dimensional simulation of seismic slope–foundation–structure interaction for buildings near shallow slopes. Int J Geomech 20(1):04019140. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0001529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Rizzitano S, Cascone E, Biondi G (2014) Coupling of topographic and stratigraphic effects on seismic response of slopes through 2D linear and equivalent linear analyses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 67:66–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Hashash YMA, Musgrove MI, Harmon JA (2018) Nonlinear and equivalent linear seismic site response of one-dimensional soil columns. User Manual v7. 0, Deepsoil Software 12(10)

  62. Seed H, Wong RT, Idriss IM, Tokimatsu K (1986) Moduli and dam** factors for dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. J Geotech Eng 112(11):1016–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Plaxis BV (2022) Plaxis reference manual. The Netherlands

  64. Lysmer J, Kuhlemeyer RL (1969) Finite dynamic model for infinite media. J Eng Mech Div 95(4):859–877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Brinkgreve R, Swolfs WM, Engine E (2010) PLAXIS 2D dynamic version

  66. Fema: 273 (1997) NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency

  67. Belinchon P, Sorensen KK, Christensen R (2016) A case study of the interaction between a pile and soft soil focusing on negative skin friction using finite element analysis. In: Proc 17th Nord Geotech Meet, pp 513–522

  68. Mat Nor AH, Yahuda AH, Pakir F (2014) Analysis of lightweight concrete “CakarAyam” foundation for road construction using Plaxis 3D foundation software. Appl Mech Mater 695:729–733. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.695.729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Kim YS, Roesset JM (2004) Effect of nonlinear soil behavior on inelastic seismic response of a structure. Int J Geomech 4(2):104–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Fatahi B, Tabatabaiefar SHR (2014) Fully nonlinear versus equivalent linear computation method for seismic analysis of midrise buildings on soft soils. Int J Geomech 14(4):04014016. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0000354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Kamal M, Inel M, Cayci BT (2022) Seismic behavior of mid-rise reinforced concrete adjacent buildings considering soil-structure interaction. J Build Eng 51:104296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. American Society of Civil Engineers (2017) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineer

  73. Chopra AK (1995) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering, Pearson

  74. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) (2015) NGA-East: Median ground-motion models for the Central and Eastern North America region. PEER Report No. 2014/05

  75. Seismosoft, Seismomatch software (2016) A Computer Program for Spectrum Matching of Earthquake Records. http://www.seismosoft.com.

  76. Bolt BA (1973) Duration of strong ground motions. In: Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol 1, pp 1304–1313

  77. El Hoseny M, Ma J, Josephine M (2022) Effect of embedded basement stories on seismic response of low-rise building frames considering SSI via small shaking table tests. Sustainability 14(3):1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Wani FM, Vemuri J, Rajaram C (2022) Effect of soil structure interaction on the dynamic response of reinforced concrete structures. Natural Hazards Research 2(4):304–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Standards Australia (2007) Structural design action—Earthquake actions in Australia, AS1170.4, Sydney, Australia

  80. Akhtarpour A, Mortezaee M (2019) Dynamic response of a tall building next to deep excavation considering soil structure interaction. Asian J Civil Eng 20(4):479–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Yeganeh N, Bazaz JB, Akhtarpour A (2015) Seismic analysis of the soil-structure interaction for a high-rise building adjacent to deep excavation. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 79:149–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, 632014, India

    Palani Jagan & Joseph Antony Visuvasam

Authors
  1. Palani Jagan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph Antony Visuvasam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

PJ: conceptualization, methodology, numerical investigation, validation, writing, and original draft preparation JAV: conceptualization, supervision, writing, reviewing, and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Antony Visuvasam.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, no informed consent is required.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) 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

Jagan, P., Visuvasam, J.A. Effects of soil small strain nonlinearity on the dynamic behavior of floating column structures considering soil-structure interaction. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 9, 228 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-024-01523-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-024-01523-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation