Top

Innovative Infrastructure Solutions

Published in:

01-12-2022 | State-of-the-art Paper

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

Authors: Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse, Hari Krishna Padavala, Venkata R. P. Koteswara

Published in: Innovative Infrastructure Solutions | Issue 6/2022

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

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.

previous article Utilization of recycled almond wastes as additives in unfired clay bricks

next article Seismic performance of deficient reinforced concrete frames retrofitted with eccentric steel braces

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

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.2014.04.033CrossRef

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

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.2018.01.026CrossRef

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.2020.05.013CrossRef

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

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.2011.11.003CrossRef

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.2013.08.011CrossRef

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.2014.03.014CrossRef

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.2017.05.016CrossRef

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.2018.03.012CrossRef

11.

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

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.4290160102CrossRef

13.

Wei H, Zhang Z, Qin X (2017) Experimental study on damping 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.2017.04.002CrossRef

14.

Tileylioglu S, Stewart JP, Nigbor RL (2011) Dynamic stiffness and damping 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.1943-5606.0000430CrossRef

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.2020.106523CrossRef

16.

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

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/10.1080/13632469809350315CrossRef

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/10.1080/13632460509350561CrossRef

20.

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

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/s10518-007-9047-0CrossRef

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.2014.02.005CrossRef

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.2014.01.008CrossRef

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.4290030203CrossRef

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.2014.01.016CrossRef

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.4290140307CrossRef

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)CrossRef

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-SCrossRef

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.2004.02.026CrossRef

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)CrossRef

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.2010.05.008CrossRef

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/s12665-016-6230-0CrossRef

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.1943-5622.0000869CrossRef

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.2013.45.3.311CrossRef

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.61491.125CrossRef

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/s41062-019-0233-0CrossRef

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.2019.105864CrossRef

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)00174-8CrossRef

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/10.1260/1369-4332.17.1.109CrossRef

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-2019-0004CrossRef

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.2004.07.001CrossRef

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.2016.58.6.1045CrossRef

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.2019.03.027CrossRef

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)00108-4CrossRef

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

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.2004.01.001CrossRef

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.2015.03.018CrossRef

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.1943-5622.0000396CrossRef

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.2016.05.008CrossRef

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.2010.12.017CrossRef

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)00115-3CrossRef

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

58.

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

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)CrossRef

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):278–286CrossRef

63.

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

64.

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

65.

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

66.

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

67.

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

68.

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

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 29:268–291CrossRef

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):04020072CrossRef

71.

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

72.

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

73.

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

74.

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

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.4290200103CrossRef

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.4290211201CrossRef

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-MCrossRef

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/10.1080/02533839.2001.9670665CrossRef

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.168CrossRef

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.382CrossRef

81.

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

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

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.1943-5606.0001312CrossRef

86.

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

87.

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

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

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.2011.07.218CrossRef

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.2015.56.1.027CrossRef

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.1943-5622.0000231CrossRef

93.

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

94.

Jingbo 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

95.

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

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.4290140402CrossRef

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.2014.12.007CrossRef

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-CCrossRef

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.4290240606CrossRef

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)00019-6CrossRef

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)00263-7CrossRef

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)00019-8CrossRef

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.2005.04.006CrossRef

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.2009.01.001CrossRef

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.2013.01.001CrossRef

106.

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

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.429CrossRef

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

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-2011-0083CrossRef

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.2013.01.014CrossRef

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)00225-7CrossRef

113.

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

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):251–266CrossRef

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

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.1195CrossRef

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.2005.12.005CrossRef

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)90138-6CrossRef

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.4290150206CrossRef

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)CrossRef

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.2007.10.018CrossRef

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/s10518-016-9983-7CrossRef

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.3014CrossRef

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)80005-8CrossRef

133.

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

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/s41062-018-0189-5CrossRef

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-zCrossRef

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.2009.02.003CrossRef

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/s10518-013-9433-8CrossRef

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 damping ratio of historical masonry building sub-structures. Bull Earthq Eng 18(4):1187–1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00748-4CrossRef

150.

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

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/s10518-019-00700-6CrossRef

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 216:110757CrossRef

Title: Seismic response assessment of building structures with underground stories: a state-of-the-art review
Authors: Zeleke Lulayehu Tadesse
Hari Krishna Padavala
Venkata R. P. Koteswara
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Innovative Infrastructure Solutions / Issue 6/2022
Print ISSN: 2364-4176
Electronic ISSN: 2364-4184
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00942-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 6/2022

Effect of mineral admixtures on mechanical and thermal properties of geopolymer mortar at elevated temperature

Impact of vehicle type on stopping sight distance at signal-controlled intersections in heterogeneous traffic conditions

Investigating the optimal combination for gravel and granite in blended palm oil fuel ash concrete

Examining the Effect of COVID-19 on rail freight volume and revenue using the ARIMA forecasting model and assessing the resilience of Indian railways during the pandemic

Liquefaction resistance of polypropylene strips reinforced sand-fly ash blend under strain-controlled cyclic triaxial test

Different types of outrigger system in high-rise buildings: a preliminary comparative seismic analysis in a 40-story RC building