
 Tuesday, January 1, 2008
 Three Dimensional Response Spectrum Soil Structure Modeling Versus Conceptual Understanding To Illustrate Seismic Response Of Structures
 Published at:Not Found
Present methods of analysis and mathematical modeling contain so many assumptions that separate them from reality and thus represent a defect in design which makes it difficult to analyze reasons of failure. Three dimensional (3D) modeling is so superior to 1D or 2D modeling, static analysis deviates from the true nature of earthquake load which is ``a dynamic punch'', and conflicting assumptions exist between structural engineers (who assume flexible structures on rigid block foundations) and geotechnical engineers (who assume flexible foundations supporting rigid structures). Thus a 3D dynamic soilstructure interaction is a step that removes many of the assumptions and thus clears reality to a greater extent. However such a model cannot be analytically analyzed. We need to anatomize and analogize it. The paper will represent a conceptual (analogical) 1D model for soil structure interaction and clarifies it by comparing its outcome with 3D dynamic soilstructure finite element analysis of two structures. The aim is to focus on how to calculate the period of the structure and to investigate effect of variation of stiffness on soilstructure interaction.
2008 SEISMIC ENGINEERING CONFERENCE: Commemorating the 1908 Messina and Reggio Calabria Earthquake. AIP Conference Proceedings, Volume 1020, pp. 11431150 (2008).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2963734
