Study of the Effect of Soil-Pile-Structure Interaction on the Seismic Response of Steel Diagonal Grid Structures with Emphasis on Soil Liquefaction Phenomenon

Document Type : Regular Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Civil Engineering, CT.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, CT.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

10.22075/jrce.2025.2363

Abstract

The transition from internal frame structures to external systems like diagonal grids has enhanced both shear resistance and aesthetic value in tall buildings. These external systems effectively distribute load-bearing elements around the perimeter, utilizing triangular grid networks to optimize structural and architectural performance. However, a significant challenge in seismic regions is the liquefaction of loose sandy soils, which can cause severe settlement and lateral displacement. This research examines steel diagonal grid structures, focusing on soil-pile-structure interaction and liquefaction effects. A symmetric four-story model was developed using SAP2000 and modeled nonlinearly in OpenSees, incorporating near-field and far-field soil domains, piles, and structural elements. Results indicate that longer piles (28-30 meters) with diameters over 1.2 meters reduce roof displacement by up to 42%, while increasing shear forces and bending moments within the piles, maintaining foundation rotation within acceptable limits (less than 0.002 radians). In contrast, shorter piles (12 meters) decrease shear and axial forces but lead to increased roof displacement and inter-story drift, with increases up to 43%. Notably, under liquefaction, these shorter piles show a relative drift reduction of up to 62%. The findings stress the importance of a balanced design approach that considers both structural displacements and internal stresses, advocating for the integration of geotechnical and structural factors in seismic design for innovative systems like diagrids. Recommendations include refining design codes to impose specific limitations on pile dimensions to address nonlinear liquefaction effects.

Highlights

  • Liquefaction increases lateral displacement and pile bending stress in diagrid structures.
  • Deep piles reduce roof drift by 42% but raise shear force and bending moments.
  • Short piles reduce internal forces but increase displacement and inter-story drift.
  • First-time FEM analysis of liquefaction impact on diagrid structures' seismic behavior.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1]      Motamed R, Sesov V, Towhata I, Anh NT. Experimental Modeling of Large Pile Groups in Sloping Ground Subjected to Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Flow: 1-G Shaking Table Tests. Soils Found 2010;50:261–79. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.50.261.
[2]      Haeri SM, Kavand A, Rahmani I, Torabi H. Response of a group of piles to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading by large scale shake table testing. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2012;38:25–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.02.002.
[3]      Bagheri M, Jamkhaneh ME, Samali B. Effect of Seismic Soil–Pile–Structure Interaction on Mid- and High-Rise Steel Buildings Resting on a Group of Pile Foundations. Int J Geomech 2018;18. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001222.
[4]      López Jiménez GA, Dias D, Jenck O. Effect of the soil–pile–structure interaction in seismic analysis: case of liquefiable soils. Acta Geotech 2019;14:1509–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-018-0746-2.
[5]      Brandis A, Kraus I, Petrovčič S. Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis and Its Application to Shallow Founded Buildings with Soil-Structure Interaction. Buildings 2022;12:2014. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12112014.
[6]      Mohasseb S, Ghazanfari N, Rostami M, Rostami S. Effect of Soil–Pile–Structure Interaction on Seismic Design of Tall and Massive Buildings Through Case Studies. Transp Infrastruct Geotechnol 2020;7:13–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-019-00086-7.
[7]      Conto Quispe KF. Contributions to dynamic pile-soil interaction modelling. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 2024. https://doi.org/10.5821/dissertation-2117-421132.
[8]      Karafagka S, Fotopoulou S, Pitilakis D. The Effect of Soil Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading to the Seismic Vulnerability of RC Frame Buildings Considering SSI. J Earthq Eng 2023;27:4786–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2023.2193658.
[9]      Castelli F, Grasso S, Lentini V, Sammito MSV. Assessment of liquefaction effects on dynamic soil-structure interaction for the 1908 Messina and Reggio Calabria scenario earthquake. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2024;178:108445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108445.
[10]     Hwang Y-W, Dashti S, Tiznado JC. Seismic Interactions Among Multiple Structures on Liquefiable Soils Improved with Ground Densification, 2022, p. 1111–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11898-2_89.
[11]     Vicencio F, Alexander NA, Málaga‐Chuquitaype C. Seismic Structure‐Soil‐Structure Interaction between inelastic structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2024;53:1446–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4076.
[12]     Tsutsumi S, Morikiyo N, Tanuma T, Nagano M. Effect Of Dynamic Soil-Pile-Structure-Interaction On Nonlinear Responses Of Super High-Rise Rc Buildings To Pulse-Like Ground Motions. J Struct Constr Eng (Transactions AIJ) 2023;88:722–33. https://doi.org/10.3130/aijs.88.722.
[13]     Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL. OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthq Eng Res Cent 2006;264:137–58.
[14]     Prevost JH. A simple plasticity theory for frictional cohesionless soils. Int J Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 1985;4:9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-7277(85)90030-0.
[15]     Elgamal A, Yang Z, Parra E. Computational modeling of cyclic mobility and post-liquefaction site response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 2002;22:259–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00022-2.
[16]     Elgamal A, Yang Z, Parra E, Ragheb A. Modeling of cyclic mobility in saturated cohesionless soils. Int J Plast 2003;19:883–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-6419(02)00010-4.
[17]     Khosravifar A, Boulanger RW, Kunnath SK. Effects of Liquefaction on Inelastic Demands on Extended Pile Shafts. Earthq Spectra 2014;30:1749–73. https://doi.org/10.1193/032412EQS105M.
[18]     Wilson DW. Soil-pile-superstructure interaction in liquefying sand and soft clay. vol. 1998. University of California, Davis America; 1998.
[19]     Institute AP. API RP 2A-WSD: Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms — Working Stress Design. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute (API Publishing Services); 2000.
[20]     Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation user command-language manual—OpenSees version 2.0. Pacific Earthq Eng Res Center, Univ California, Berkeley, CA 2009.
[21]     GiD the personal pre/postprocessor user’s manual. Int Cent Numer Methods Eng (CIMNE),Version 11 ⟨http//GidCimneUpcEs⟩ 2013.
[22]     Ilankatharan M, Kutter B. Modeling Input Motion Boundary Conditions for Simulations of Geotechnical Shaking Table Tests. Earthq Spectra 2010;26:349–69. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3383214.
[23]     Khosravifar A, Boulanger RW. Inelastic Response of Extended Pile Shafts in Laterally Spreading Ground during Earthquakes (Student Paper Competition 2010). DFI J - J Deep Found Inst 2010;4:41–53. https://doi.org/10.1179/dfi.2010.009.
[24]     Shin H, Arduino P, Kramer SL. Performance-Based Evaluation of Bridges on Liquefiable Soils. Struct. Eng. Res. Front., Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2007, p. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1061/40944(249)41.
[25]     Chiaramonte MM, Arduino P, Lehman DE, Roeder CW. Seismic analyses of conventional and improved marginal wharves. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2013;42:1435–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2280.
[26]     Wair BR, DeJong JT, Shantz T. Guidelines for estimation of shear wave velocity profiles. PEER Report 2012/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. Univ California, Berkeley, USA 2012.
[27]     Romney KT. Soil-bridge interaction during long-duration earthquake motions 2013.
[28]     Heshmati M, Aghakouchak AA. Quantification of seismic performance factors of steel diagrid system. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 2019;28. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1572.
[29]     Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784414248.
[30]     AISC 341-10 - American Institute of Steel Construction. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 2010.
[31]     Construction AI of S. Specification for structural steel buildings. ANSI/AISC 2005;36010.
[32]     BHRC Publication. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings (Standard No. 2800). 2016.
[33]     Fox PJ. State of the Journal. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 2015;141. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001367.
Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering
Volume 14, Issue 2 - Serial Number 42
In Progress
May 2026 Article ID:2363

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 June 2025
  • Revise Date: 29 July 2025
  • Accept Date: 17 August 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics