Geomechanics and Engineering

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Dynamic simulation models for seismic behavior of soil systems - Part I: Block diagrams

  • Received : 2014.04.23
  • Accepted : 2015.04.06
  • Published : 2015.08.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Digital simulation has recently become the preferred method for designing complex and dynamic systems. Simulation packages provide interactive, block-diagram environment for modeling and simulating dynamic models. The block diagrams in simulation models are flowcharts which describe the components of dynamic systems and their interaction. This paper is the first part of the study for determining the seismic behavior of soil systems. The aim of this part is to present the constructed block diagrams for discrete-time analysis of seismic site amplification in layered media for vertically propagating shear waves. Detailed block diagrams are constructed for single and multiple soil layers by considering wave propagation with and without damping, respectively. The block diagrams for recursive filter to model attenuation in discrete-time form are also constructed. Finite difference method is used for strain calculation. The block diagrams are developed by utilizing Simulink which is a software add-on to Matlab.

Keywords

References

  1. Aki, K. and Richards, P.G. (1980), Quantitative Seismology Theory and Methods, W.H. Freeman and Co. San Francisco, CA, USA.
  2. Bardet, J.P., Ichii, K. and Lin, C.H. (2000), "EERA: A computer program for equivalent-linear earthquake site response analyses of layered soil deposits", Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California.
  3. Boaga, J., Renzi, S., Vignoli, G., Deiana, R. and Cassiani, G. (2012), "From surface wave inversion to seismic site response prediction: Beyond the 1D approach", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 36, 38-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.01.001
  4. Bolisetti, C., Whittaker, A.S., Mason, H.B., Almufti, I. and Willford, M. (2014), "Equivalent linear and nonlinear site response analysis for design andrisk assessment of safety-related nuclear structures", Nucl. Eng. Des., 275, 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2014.04.033
  5. Borcherdt, R.D. (1970), "Effects of local geology on ground motion near San Francisco Bay", Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 60(1), 29-61.
  6. Borcherdt, R.D. (1994), "Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification)", Earthq. Spectra, 10, 617-654. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585791
  7. Cadzow, A.J. (1973), Discrete-Time Systems, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.
  8. Choudhury, D. and Savoikar, P. (2009), "Equivalent-linear seismic analyses of MSW landfills using DEEPSOIL", Eng. Geol., 107(3-4), 98-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.05.004
  9. Guttenberg, B. (1957), "Effects of ground on earthquake motion", Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 47(3), 221-250.
  10. Hashash, Y.M.A., Phillips, C. and Groholski, D. (2010), "Recent advances in non-linear site response analysis", Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, CA, USA, May, Paper No. OSP 4.
  11. Idriss, I.M. and Seed, H.B. (1968), "Seismic response of horizontal soil layers", J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. ASCE, 94(SM4), 1003-1031.
  12. Idriss, I.M. and Sun, J.I. (1992), "User's manual for SHAKE91", Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, University of California.
  13. Johari, A. and Momeni, M. (2015), "Stochastic analysis of ground response using non-recursive algorithm", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 69, 57-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.025
  14. Kaklamanos, J., Baise, L.G., Thompson, E.M. and Dorfmann, L. (2015), "Comparison of 1D linear, equivalentlinear, and nonlinear site response models at six KiK-net validation sites", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 69, 207-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.016
  15. Kanai, K. (1957), "Semi-empirical formula for the seismic characteristics of the ground", Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. - Tokyo Japan, 35(2), 308-325.
  16. Knopoff, L.Q. (1964), Reviews of Geophysics, Volume 2, pp. 625-660.
  17. MATLAB (2009), The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USA.
  18. O'Connell, R.J. and Budiansky, B. (1978), "Measures of dissipation in viscoelastic media", Geophys. Res. Lett., 5(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.1029/GL005i001p00005
  19. Philips, C. and Hashash, Y.M.A. (2009), "Damping formulation for nonlinear 1D site response analyses", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 29(7), 1143-1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.01.004
  20. Phillips, C., Kottke, A.R., Hashash, Y.M.A. and Rathje, E.M. (2012), "Significance of ground motion time step in one dimensional site response analysis", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 43, 202-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.07.005
  21. Robinson, D., Dhu, T. and Schneider, J. (2006), "SUA: A computer program to compute regolith siteresponse and estimate uncertainty for probabilistic seismic hazard analyses", Comput. Geosci., 32(1), 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2005.02.017
  22. Rota, M., Lai, C.G. and Strobbia, C.L. (2011), "Stochastic 1D site response analysis at a site in central Italy", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 31(4), 626-639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.11.009
  23. Roulle, A. and Bernardie, S. (2010), "Comparison of 1D non-linear simulations to strong-motion observations: A case study in a swampy site of French Antilles (Pointe-a-Pitre, Guadeloupe)", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 30(5), 286-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.12.002
  24. Safak, E. (1989), "Optimal-adaptive filters for modeling spectral shape, site amplification, and source scaling", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 8(2), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(89)80015-6
  25. Safak, E. (1995), "Discrete-time analysis of seismic site amplification", J. Eng. Mech., 121(7), 801-809. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1995)121:7(801)
  26. Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer, J. and Seed, H.B. (1972), "SHAKE: A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites", Report EERC 72-12; Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  27. Seed, H.B., Romo, M.P., Sun, J.I., Jaime, A. and Lysmer, L. (1988), "The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985: Relationships between soil conditions and earthquake ground motions", Earthq. Spectra, 4(4), 687-729. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585498
  28. SIMULINK - Dynamic System Simulation for MATLAB (2009), The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USA.
  29. Yang, J. and Yan, X.R. (2006), "PASS: A computer program for practical analysis of layered soil-rock systems", Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

Cited by

  1. Dynamic simulation models for seismic behavior of soil systems - Part II: Solution algorithm and numerical applications vol.9, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2015.9.2.169
  2. Development of integrated earthquake simulation system for Istanbul vol.68, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-016-0497-y
  3. Automatic 3D soil model generation for southern part of the European side of Istanbul based on GIS database vol.13, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2017.13.6.893
  4. Effect of site amplification on inelastic seismic response vol.18, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-019-0520-y