Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Resonance of a structure with soil elastic waves released in non-linear hysteretic soil upon unloading Cover

Resonance of a structure with soil elastic waves released in non-linear hysteretic soil upon unloading

By: Piotr Kowalczyk  
Open Access
|Sep 2022

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Geometry of numerically modelled experimental setup with a single degree of freedom (SDOF) structure: a) long side view, b) plan (dimensions in mm).
Geometry of numerically modelled experimental setup with a single degree of freedom (SDOF) structure: a) long side view, b) plan (dimensions in mm).

Figure 2

Mesh discretisation used in the 3D finite element model.
Mesh discretisation used in the 3D finite element model.

Figure 3

Calibration of the hypoplastic sand constitutive model in terms of shear stiffness degradation G/G0 against shear strain.
Calibration of the hypoplastic sand constitutive model in terms of shear stiffness degradation G/G0 against shear strain.

Figure 4

Free field response computed for the soil column with the chosen calibration of the hypoplastic sand model (Table 1): a) horizontal accelerations, b) shear strains, c) spectral response for horizontal accelerations at the soil base, d) spectral response for horizontal accelerations at the soil top, e) stress–strain behaviour.
Free field response computed for the soil column with the chosen calibration of the hypoplastic sand model (Table 1): a) horizontal accelerations, b) shear strains, c) spectral response for horizontal accelerations at the soil base, d) spectral response for horizontal accelerations at the soil top, e) stress–strain behaviour.

Figure 5

Comparison of the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) in free field in the steady-state response: a) horizontal accelerations, b) evaluation of the spectral response of the computed horizontal accelerations, c) evaluation of the spectral response of the horizontal accelerations in the experiment.
Comparison of the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) in free field in the steady-state response: a) horizontal accelerations, b) evaluation of the spectral response of the computed horizontal accelerations, c) evaluation of the spectral response of the horizontal accelerations in the experiment.

Figure 6

Comparison of relative horizontal displacements between the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) obtained in free field in the steady-state response.
Comparison of relative horizontal displacements between the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) obtained in free field in the steady-state response.

Figure 7

Comparison of the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) obtained at the top of the structure in the steady-state response: a) horizontal accelerations, b) evaluation of the spectral response of the computed and measured horizontal accelerations.
Comparison of the computations and the experimental measurements (Durante, 2015) obtained at the top of the structure in the steady-state response: a) horizontal accelerations, b) evaluation of the spectral response of the computed and measured horizontal accelerations.

Figure A1

Comparison of a cyclic simple shear test simulated by the hypoplastic sand model and compared with experimental data from literature (Shahnazari & Towhata, 2002): a) stress–strain behaviour (simulation), b) stress–strain behaviour (experiment), c) volumetric response (simulation), d) volumetric response (experiment).
Comparison of a cyclic simple shear test simulated by the hypoplastic sand model and compared with experimental data from literature (Shahnazari & Towhata, 2002): a) stress–strain behaviour (simulation), b) stress–strain behaviour (experiment), c) volumetric response (simulation), d) volumetric response (experiment).

Calibration of the model parameters for the hypoplastic sand model_

ParameterDescriptionValue
Basic hypoplastictiyφcCritical friction angle33.0
hsGranular hardness (kPa)2.5 × 106
nStiffness exponent ruling pressure-sensitivity0.42
ed0Limiting minimum void ratio at p = 0 kPa0.613
ec0Limiting void ratio at p = 0 kPa1.01
ei0Limiting maximum void ratio at p = 0 kPa1.21
αExponent linking peak stress with critical stress0.13
βStiffness exponent scaling barotropy factor0.8
Intergranular strain conceptRElastic range0.00004
mRStiffness multiplier4.0
mTStiffness multiplier after 90° change in strain path2.0
βRControl of rate of evolution of intergranular strain0.8
χControl on interpolation between elastic and hypoplastic response0.5
ϑControl on strain accumulation5.0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2022-0015 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Language: English
Page range: 253 - 266
Submitted on: Oct 20, 2021
|
Accepted on: Apr 22, 2022
|
Published on: Sep 22, 2022
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2022 Piotr Kowalczyk, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.