Significance of Interface Nonlinearity on the Seismic Response of a Well-Pier System in Cohesionless Soil

Interaction between a well foundation (caisson) and the surrounding soil during earthquake shaking involves complicated material and interface nonlinearities such as soil inelasticity, separation, sliding, and uplifting. It is often perceived that the interface nonlinearity has appreciable effects on the seismic response of the well foundation. This paper studies soil-well interface behavior during ground shaking and evaluates the significance of interface nonlinearity on the seismic response of the soil-well-pier (SWP) system. Seismic analysis of the soil-well-pier system was performed using the two-dimensional finite element model considering soil and interface nonlinearities, under both full- and partial-embedment conditions of the well foundation. Soil was assumed to be cohesionless and analyzed under both saturated undrained and dry conditions. Results of this model were compared with those of a model with perfectly-bonded interface. The design displacement and force resultants were found to be marginally overestimated and were on the conservative side in absence of nonlinear interface.

[1]  J. Lysmer,et al.  Finite Element Method Accuracy for Wave Propagation Problems , 1973 .

[2]  J. Lysmer,et al.  Finite Dynamic Model for Infinite Media , 1969 .

[3]  George Gazetas,et al.  Development of Winkler model for static and dynamic response of caisson foundations with soil and interface nonlinearities , 2006 .

[4]  Ender Jose Parra-Colmenares.  Numerical modeling of liquefaction and lateral ground deformation including cyclic mobility and dilation response in soil systems , 1996 .

[5]  Zenon Mróz,et al.  On the description of anisotropic workhardening , 1967 .

[6]  Kamal Kishore,et al.  Appraising the Brooklyn Bridge , 2009 .

[7]  Ahmed Elgamal,et al.  Dynamic Soil Properties, Seismic Downhole Arrays and Applications in Practice , 2001 .

[8]  Ketchum,et al.  Dynamic Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction Analysis of Large Caissons , 2000 .

[9]  G. Mondal,et al.  EFFECT OF NONLINEARITY IN PIER AND WELL FOUNDATION ON SEISMIC RESPONSE OF BRIDGES , 2008 .

[10]  Jean H. Prevost,et al.  A simple plasticity theory for frictional cohesionless soils , 1985 .

[11]  Wilfred D. Iwan,et al.  On a Class of Models for the Yielding Behavior of Continuous and Composite Systems , 1967 .

[12]  W. B. Joyner,et al.  Calculation of nonlinear ground response in earthquakes , 1975 .

[13]  G. Lanzo,et al.  Damping at Small Strains in Cyclic Simple Shear Test , 1998 .

[14]  I. Towhata.  Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering , 2008 .

[15]  Jinchi Lu,et al.  OpenSees Soil Models and Solid- Fluid Fully Coupled Elements User's Manual , 2008 .

[16]  George Gazetas,et al.  Static and dynamic response of massive caisson foundations with soil and interface nonlinearities—validation and results , 2006 .

[17]  L. Manevitz,et al.  Automatic Mesh Generation (for Finite Element Method) Using Self-Organizing Neural Networks* , 1995 .

[18]  J. Lysmer,et al.  FLUSH - a computer program for approximate 3-D analysis of soil-structure interaction problems , 1975 .