Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering

Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering

Investigating the effect of soil-structure interaction on the seismic performance of buildings having medium flexural frame with mass irregularity

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Houshyar Eimani kalehsar 1
Maryam Kiani 2
1 Associate professor, Department of civil Engineering, Faculty of Technical and Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
2 Graduate student, Department of civil Engineering, Faculty of Technical and Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
10.22065/jsce.2023.404764.3162
Abstract
The present paper investigates the seismic performance of mid-range steel bending frame structures that are designed according to Iranian code and valid foreign regulations. For this purpose, 6- and 9-story structures on C-type soil have been designed for Tehran region, which has a very high earthquake risk zone. Assuming that the investigated systems were implemented on soil type C or wrongly on soil type D, the time history analyses under 22 records far from the fault in terms of soil-structure interaction and mass irregularity in height at two earthquake levels DBE and MCE is considered. These structures have been simulated in OpenSees finite element software. In the desired structural models, the nonlinear behaviour of geometry and materials is considered. The results showed that considering the effects of soil-structure interaction in the 6-story structure did not have a significant effect on the responses of the structure, while these effects are evident in the 9-story structure, and by changing the type of soil from state C to state D, more responses were created in the structure. The effects of mass irregularity can greatly increase the values of structural responses in two 6- and 9-story structures. In general, considering the type of local soil (type D instead of C), the values of relative displacements, acceleration and shear of the floors have increased by 1.5 times and sometimes with the increase in the number of floors of the structure and the creation of flexibility effects in the foundation, it increases up to 2 times.
Keywords
Seismic performance
Soil-structure interaction
Steel bending frame systems
Mass irregularity
Nonlinear dynamic analysis

Subjects

[1]        Naeim, F. (1989). The seismic design handbook. Springer Science & Business Media.
[2]        Scawthorn, C. and Chen, W.-F. (2002). Earthquake engineering handbook. CRC press.
[3]        IBC Standard, (2013). Iranian Building Codes And Standards, Iranian Code Of Practice For Seismic Resistant Design Of Buildings, Standard No.2800, 4th Edition.
[4]        Al-Ali, A. A. K. (1999). Effects of vertical irregularities on seismic behavior of building structures. Stanford University.
[5]        Michalis, F. Dimitrios,V. and Manolis, P. (2006). Evaluation of the influence of vertical irregularities on the seismic performance of a nine‐storey steel frame. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 1489–1509.
[6]        Le‐Trung, K. Lee, K. Lee, J. and Lee, D. H. (2012). Evaluation of seismic behaviour of steel special moment frame buildings with vertical irregularities. Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 215–232.
[7]        Pirizadeh, M. and Shakib, H. (2013). Probabilistic seismic performance evaluation of non-geometric vertically irregular steel buildings. J. Constr. Steel Res., vol. 82, pp. 88–98.
[8]        Gazetas, G. (1998). Seismic soil-structure interaction: New evidence and emerging issues State of the Art Paper. In Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics Geo-Institute ASCE Conference.
[9]        Gazetas, G. and Apostolou, M. (2004). Nonlinear soil–structure interaction: foundation uplifting and soil yielding. In Proceedings Third UJNR Workshop on Soil-Structure Interaction, pp. 29–30.
[10]      El Ganainy, H. and El Naggar, M. H. (2009). Seismic performance of three-dimensional frame structures with underground stories. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 1249–1261.
[11]      Sameti, A. R. and Ghannad, M. A. (2016). Equivalent linear model for existing soil-structure systems. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 16, no. 02, p. 1450099.
[12]      Chen, L. (2016). Dynamic interaction between rigid surface foundations on multi-layered half space. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 16, no. 05, p. 1550004.
[13]      Sbartai, B. (2016). Dynamic interaction of two adjacent foundations embedded in a viscoelastic soil. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 16, no. 03, p. 1450110.
[14]      Havaei, G. and Mobedi, E. (2015). Effect of Interaction and Rocking Motion on The Earthquake Response of Buildings. J. Struct. Constr. Eng., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 39–49, doi: 10.22065/jsce.2015.38598.
[15]      Gholhaki, M. (Sep. 2019). Study of Thin Steel Plate Shear Wall System by Considering Soil - Structure Interaction under Near and Far Field Earthquakes. Sharif J. Civ. Eng., doi: 10.24200/j30.2018.2183.2127.
[16]      Havaei, G. and Izadparast, S. M. (2021). Effect of soil block thickness modeling on soil-structure interaction in dynamic responses of 15-storey high-rise buildings. J. Struct. Constr. Eng., vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 301–316.
[17]      Sabouniaghdam, M. Mohammadi Dehcheshmeh, E. Safari, P. and Broujerdian, V. (2022). Probabilistic collapse assessment of steel frame structures considering the effects of soil-structure interaction and height. Sci. Iran.
[18]      Broujerdian,V. Mohammadi Dehcheshmeh, E. and Safari, P. (2023). Seismic performance assessment of intermediate moment-resisting steel frames designed based on misidentified site soil classes. Sci. Iran.
[19]      Kazemi, F. Asgarkhani, N. and Jankowski, R. (2023). Probabilistic assessment of SMRFs with infill masonry walls incorporating nonlinear soil-structure interaction. Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 503–534.
[20]      Kazemi, F. and Jankowski, R. (2023). Machine learning-based prediction of seismic limit-state capacity of steel moment-resisting frames considering soil-structure interaction. Comput. Struct., vol. 274, p. 106886.
[21]      Kazemi, F. and Jankowski, R. (2023). Enhancing seismic performance of rigid and semi-rigid connections equipped with SMA bolts incorporating nonlinear soil-structure interaction. Eng. Struct., vol. 274, p. 114896.
[22]      ASCE7-10 Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, (2010). Asce7-10.
[23]      INBC Part 6th, (2013). Iranian National Building Code, Part 6th , Design Loads for Buildings.
[24]      FEMA, (2009). FEMA P695: Quantification of building seismic performance factors. US Department of Homeland Security, FEMA.
[25]      Mehdizadeh, K. and Karamodin, A. (2017). Probabilistic assessment of steel moment frames incremental collapse (ordinary, intermediate and special) under earthquake. J. Struct. Constr. Eng., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 129–147.
[26]      M. Dehcheshmeh, E. Rashed, P. Broujerdian, V. Shakouri, A. and Aslani, F. (2023). Predicting Seismic Collapse Safety of Post-Fire Steel Moment Frames. Buildings, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 1091.
[27]      Gajan,S. Hutchinson, T. C. Kutter, B. L. Raychowdhury, P. Ugalde, J. A. and Stewart, J. P. (2008). Numerical models for analysis and performance-based design of shallow foundations subjected to seismic loading. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
[28]      Raychowdhury, P. (2008). Nonlinear winkler-based shallow foundation model for performance assessment of seismically loaded structures. UC San Diego.
[29]      Suita, K. Yamada, S. Tada, M. Kasai, K. Matsuoka, Y. and Shimada, Y. (2008). Collapse experiment on 4-story steel moment frame: Part 2 detail of collapse behavior. In Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China, vol. 1217.

  • Receive Date 07 July 2023
  • Revise Date 22 August 2023
  • Accept Date 03 September 2023