Estimation of the potential relevance of differential settlements in earthquake-induced liquefaction damage assessment

Gómez-Martínez, Fernando; Millen, Maxim; Costa, Pedro Alves; Romão, Xavier

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110232

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…( 10) The footing settlement is applied to the soil end of the soil springs, whereas the actual settlement differs due to load redistribution, and variations in spring stiffness and footing load. The application of displacements to the soil end is preferred, compared to direct application of differential settlements where loads and displacements do not account for the structural stiffness and can be unrealistic (Gómez-Martinez et al 2020).…”

Section: Estimation Of Settlementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, the building response and soil response can be completely decoupled. In this case, shaking and liquefaction damage are assessed independently and then combined through an interaction function (separate hazards approach), such as in the HAZUS methodology (FEMA 2003), the proposal by Bird et al (2006), or imposing ground deformations directly or indirectly to a building (Fotopoulou et al 2018;Gómez-Martinez et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Macromechanism Approach for Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings on Shallow Foundations in Liquefied Soils

Fonseca

Millen

Quintero

et al. 2023

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The damage caused by seismic shaking and liquefaction-induced permanent ground deformation has conventionally been assessed as two separate problems often by different engineers. However, the two problems are inherently linked, since ground shaking causes liquefaction, and liquefaction-induced soil softening affects ground shaking. Modelling both problems within a single numerical model is complex for both the engineer and the software, and most finite element software only have the capabilities to address one of them. To improve the estimates of the seismic performance of buildings on liquefiable soil, a new sub-structuring approach is proposed called the macro-mechanism approach. This approach allows the soil-liquefaction-foundation-structure interaction to be considered in a series of sub-models accounting for the major nonlinear mechanisms of the system at a macro level. The proposed approach was implemented in the open-source finite element software OpenSees and then applied to a case study of a building where significant liquefaction-and shaking-induced damage was observed after the 1999 Mw 7.4 Kocaeli Earthquake. The case study building was also simulated using two different commercial software programs, the finite difference software FLAC, and the finite element software PLAXIS, by two different research teams. A comparison between the results from the macromechanism approach compared to full numerical models shows that the macro-mechanism approach can capture the extent of the foundation deformation and provide more realistic estimates of the building damage than full approaches since the FLAC and PLAXIS models consider elastic elements for the building.

show abstract

Section: Estimation Of Settlementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Macromechanism Approach for Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings on Shallow Foundations in Liquefied Soils

Fonseca

Millen

Quintero

et al. 2023

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, if ∑M gc,i is negligible with respect to the moment of design and resistance, then each M gc,i and ∆|M gb | are negligible, too (see Equation ( 5)), so α y,b2 = ∑M Rb,j /ΣM db,j in Equation ( 8). Thus, the overstrength required in each column in order to not yield is expressed as in Equation (11), which is similar to the formulation suggested in the Italian code (Equation ( 2)), without accounting for γ R .…”

Section: Capacity Design Of Columns In Italian Seismic Code Ntcmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It suggests that the application of the alternative formulation of NTC is no necessarily more expensive in terms of material (related to the required resistance); i requires only a higher level of homogeneity between columns. However, sometimes ∑Mgc,i may not be negligible [11]. This is the case for exterio connections belonging to the penultimate storey-as capacity design is not required in the last storey-especially when the span of beams is large and the seismic design forces are reduced (due to low seismicity or to high values of the behaviour factor q).…”

Section: Capacity Design Of Columns In Italian Seismic Code Ntcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Different European Code Provisions for Capacity Design on the Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frames

Gómez-Martínez

Pérez-García

2023

Buildings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance-based seismic codes ensure proper inelastic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames through capacity design, among others. This strategy relies not only on avoiding brittle failures and providing ductility to plastic hinges but also in their distribution within the frame aimed at a greater number of storeys involved in the eventual collapse mechanism. Although codes are generally in agreement to some basic principles in order to ensure capacity design, they show some discrepancies regarding the specific strategies. In this paper, capacity design provisions proposed by some European current codes—Eurocode 8, Italian NTC, and Spanish NCSE-02—are compared, and their effectiveness is discussed. The alternative formulation proposed by Italian code for “strong column–weak beam” turns out to be not suitable under specific circumstances, such as with large gravity loads or significant cantilever deformation in lower storeys. Regarding the value of axial load in columns to be considered for the calculation of shear and moment capacities, provisions in the three codes could eventually cause unconservative design for perimeter columns. The Spanish whole set of provisions is proved to not be effective due to their different fundamentals—they are based on overstrength instead of capacity. For all the three cases, some alternative procedures are suggested in this work.

show abstract

“…Other analyses, such as the dynamic effects of vibrations and seismicity combined with soil-structure interaction in buildings (Papadopoulos et al, 2017;Amini et al, 2018;Gómez-Martínez et al, 2020) point to the idea that the SSI mechanisms play a considerable role on behavior of buildings, directly influencing the propagation of vibrations throughout the structural elements; therefore, the consideration of SSI is extremely important for controlling the performance of structures when subjected to these events.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil-structure interaction analysis in reinforced concrete structures on footing foundation

Santos¹,

Bello²,

Gusmão³

et al. 2021

S&R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil-structure interaction (SSI) evaluates how soil or rock deformability imposes on the structure a different load path in a hypothesis of fixed supports, altering the loads acting on the structural elements and the ground. This paper discusses the results of the SSI effects in two buildings with a reinforced concrete structure and shallow foundations in a rock mass. The settlements were monitored by field instrumentation in five stages of their construction, making it possible to estimate through interpolation curves the settlements values of some points. The numerical modeling and structural analysis of the buildings were obtained for two different cases of soil-structure interaction. The structure was considered having fixed supports (non-displaceable) and displaceable supports (with stiffness spring coefficients K). The results reveals the occurrence of SSI effects, with a load redistribution between the columns that occurred differently for the different construction stages. Structural modeling proved to be quite representative, pointing to higher vertical load values than the average values present in building edge zones, which contradicts the conventional idea that central columns are more loaded than the edge columns. The soil-structure interaction analyses resulted in different behaviors regarding both towers; pointing out that low settlements and building symmetry in plan minimize the effects of interaction, with no tendency of load redistribution between columns as the structure rigidity increases, as construction development.

show abstract

Estimation of the potential relevance of differential settlements in earthquake-induced liquefaction damage assessment

Cited by 12 publications

References 37 publications

Macromechanism Approach for Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings on Shallow Foundations in Liquefied Soils

Macromechanism Approach for Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings on Shallow Foundations in Liquefied Soils

Influence of Different European Code Provisions for Capacity Design on the Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frames

Soil-structure interaction analysis in reinforced concrete structures on footing foundation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About