Earthquake input for finite element analysis of soil-structure interaction on rigid bedrock

被引:46
作者
Li, Yang [1 ]
Zhao, Mi [1 ]
Xu, Cheng-shun [1 ]
Du, Xiu-li [1 ]
Li, Zheng [1 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Univ Technol, Key Lab Urban Secur & Disaster Engn, Minist Educ, Beijing 100124, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Seismic soil-structure interaction; Finite element method; Rigid bedrock; Viscous-spring boundary; Free-field loading; TIME-DOMAIN; TRANSMITTING BOUNDARY; SEISMIC RESPONSE; WAVE-PROPAGATION; LAYERED SOIL; TUNNELS; COLLAPSE; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.tust.2018.05.008
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
When using the finite element method to analyze seismic soil-structure interaction (SSI) problem on rigid bedrock, several methods have been developed to input earthquake on the lateral boundary of finite element model. These boundary conditions include the free boundary, the viscous-spring (VS) boundary, the tied degrees of freedom (TDOF) boundary and the free-field loading combined viscous-spring (FFL-VS) boundary. Their accuracy and location should be investigated. In this paper, the formulations and ABAQUS implementations of these boundaries are given. The accuracy properties of these boundaries are then compared by numerical examples including the free-field and SSI problems. The comparison studies indicate that the free and VS boundaries failed to reproduce the free-field and SSI responses when a relatively small size SSI model is employed. The TDOF and FFL-VS boundaries can simulate the exact free-field response and have good performances in seismic SSI analyses. The FFL-VS boundary is more accurate than the TDOF boundary. The appropriate locations for the TDOF and FFL-VS boundaries depend on the SSI model. A simplified approach is developed for appropriate boundary location. This approach is applicable to the FFL-VS boundary but not to the TDOF boundary due to the former more accurate than the latter.
引用
收藏
页码:250 / 262
页数:13
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Numerical modelling of the transverse dynamic behaviour of circular tunnels in clayey soils [J].
Amorosi, A. ;
Boldini, D. .
SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2009, 29 (06) :1059-1072
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2006, ABAQUS US C
[3]   Finite Element Seismic Analysis of Cylindrical Tunnel in Sandy Soils with Consideration of Soil-Tunnel Interaction [J].
Asheghabadi, M. Saleh ;
Matinmanesh, H. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWELFTH EAST ASIA-PACIFIC CONFERENCE ON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION (EASEC12), 2011, 14
[4]  
Bardet J.P., 2000, EERA COMPUTER PROGRA
[5]   A PERFECTLY MATCHED LAYER FOR THE ABSORPTION OF ELECTROMAGNETIC-WAVES [J].
BERENGER, JP .
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL PHYSICS, 1994, 114 (02) :185-200
[6]   A modified scaled boundary finite element method for three-dimensional dynamic soil-structure interaction in layered soil [J].
Birk, C. ;
Behnke, R. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING, 2012, 89 (03) :371-402
[7]   Time-domain analysis of wave propagation in 3-D unbounded domains by the scaled boundary finite element method [J].
Chen, Xiaojun ;
Birk, Carolin ;
Song, Chongmin .
SOIL DYNAMICS AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING, 2015, 75 :171-182
[8]   AXISYMMETRICAL TIME-DOMAIN TRANSMITTING BOUNDARIES [J].
DEEKS, AJ ;
RANDOLPH, MF .
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS-ASCE, 1994, 120 (01) :25-42
[9]  
Du X.-L., 2009, Theories and Methods of Wave Motion for Engineering
[10]  
DU Xiu-li, 2006, CHINESE J THEORETICA, V38, P49, DOI DOI 10.3321/J.ISSN:0459-1879.2006.01.007