IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i3p1275-d731795.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Embedded Basement Stories on Seismic Response of Low-Rise Building Frames Considering SSI via Small Shaking Table Tests

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed El Hoseny

    (School of Human Settlements and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710054, China
    Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Cairo 11629, Egypt)

  • Jianxun Ma

    (School of Human Settlements and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Musanyufu Josephine

    (School of Human Settlements and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710054, China)

Abstract

The dynamic soil-structure interaction is a combination of phenomena caused by the flexibility of soil foundation in structure response. The structure response may be changed by embedded basement stories. Thus, this study seeks to assess the dynamic response of seven-story concrete frame type buildings without a basement, one basement story, and two basement stories, considering fixed and flexible bases. For this purpose, the experimental tests on the small shaking table were executed with a small scaling coefficient of 1:50. Consequently, three scaled models of steel skeleton structures with variable embedded depths have been constructed with fixed and flexible bases. These models are exposed to three seismic input motions: Northridge (1994), Kobe (1995), and Chi-Chi (1999) at the base of the structure as a fixed base and the bedrock level in the soil structure system as a flexible base. The finite element technique is carried out for scaled and real models. Both the scaled and real numerical models are in good agreement with the obtained experimental observations with reasonable accuracy. It is concluded that the lateral deflections are overestimated by excluding embedded depths of structural elements. In the flexible prototype model, the lateral deflections of the superstructure with embedded depths (3 m, 6 m) decrease compared with no embedded depth, in which the maximum reduction percentages of 7-story with embedded depths 3 m and 6 m at the roof floor level are 21% and 42% compared with no embedded depth, respectively, under Northridge earthquake. Otherwise, ignoring the SSI effects (fixed base case), the lateral displacements are underestimated compared with the flexible base. The maximum amplification percentages at the roof floor level between flexible and fixed bases models with variable embedded depths are 35%, 37%, and 65% under Northridge, Kobe, and Chi-Chi earthquakes, respectively. The amplification and reduction percentages may be high or low, mainly depending on soil condition (fixed, flexible), variable embedded depths, characteristics of seismic motion, travel pass, and source of seismic motion. These items are summarized as the frequency domain of the coupled system compared with the frequency domain of the earthquake motion.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed El Hoseny & Jianxun Ma & Musanyufu Josephine, 2022. "Effect of Embedded Basement Stories on Seismic Response of Low-Rise Building Frames Considering SSI via Small Shaking Table Tests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1275-:d:731795
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1275/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1275/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1275-:d:731795. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.