Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70

www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn

Time-domain representation of frequency-dependent

foundation impedance functions
Erdal Şafak *
US Geological Survey, Pasadena, CA, USA
Accepted 14 August 2005

Abstract

Foundation impedance functions provide a simple means to account for soil–structure interaction (SSI) when studying seismic response of
structures. Impedance functions represent the dynamic stiffness of the soil media surrounding the foundation. The fact that impedance functions
are frequency dependent makes it difficult to incorporate SSI in standard time-history analysis software. This paper introduces a simple method to
convert frequency-dependent impedance functions into time-domain filters. The method is based on the least-squares approximation of impedance
functions by ratios of two complex polynomials. Such ratios are equivalent, in the time-domain, to discrete-time recursive filters, which are simple
finite-difference equations giving the relationship between foundation forces and displacements. These filters can easily be incorporated into
standard time-history analysis programs. Three examples are presented to show the applications of the method.
Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Soil–structure interaction; Foundation impedance functions; Seismic response; Discrete–time filters

1. Introduction in standard time-domain dynamic analysis programs, because

It is well known that soil–structure interaction (SSI) is a
critical factor influencing response and damage in structures
during earthquakes. The primary effects of SSI on response are
that SSI decreases the dominant frequency of the structure’s
vibrations, filters the high frequencies in the excitation, and
increases damping [1]. Depending on the frequency content of
the ground shaking, SSI can be detrimental or beneficial for
structures. SSI becomes detrimental if, because of SSI, the
dominant frequency of vibrations becomes closer to the
dominant frequency of ground shaking. For structures
susceptible to SSI (e.g. heavy structures founded on soft
soil), it is important that seismic forces and displacements are
calculated by considering the effects of SSI, because these
quantities are proportional to the square of natural frequency.
A simple way to incorporate SSI in seismic analysis is to
model the stiffness and the damping of the soil around the
foundation by using springs and dashpots. The springs and
dashpots represent the foundation impedance functions, and
are frequency dependent. This makes it hard to incorporate SSI
* Tel.: C1 626 583 7223; fax: C1 626 583 7827.
E-mail address: safak@usgs.gov.
they cannot account for the frequency-dependent springs and
dashpots.
This paper presents a simple method to incorporate SSI in
standard time-history analysis. The method is based on the
approximation of impedance functions by ratios of complex
polynomials. Such ratios correspond to transfer functions of
discrete-time recursive filters, which are simple time-domain
finite-difference equations representing the relationship
between foundation forces and displacements.
2. Foundation impedance functions
Foundation impedance functions represent the dynamic
stiffness of the soil medium surrounding the foundation. They
are defined as the ratio of a harmonic force (or a moment)
applied on the foundation–soil interface to the corresponding
harmonic displacement (or rotation), without the effects of
foundation mass. Impedance functions are dependent not only
on the frequency of the excitation, but also on the foundation
geometry and the dynamic characteristics of soil media.
The general form of foundation impedance functions can be
described by the following equation
KðuÞ Z K0 ½K1 ðuÞ C iK2 ðuÞ (1)

0267-7261/$ - see front matter Published by Elsevier Ltd. K0 is a constant representing the static component of the soil
doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2005.08.004 resistance. K1(u) and K2(u) are the frequency-dependent
66 E. Şafak / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70
stiffness and damping factors, respectively, accounting for the
dynamic components of soil resistance. If the foundation
moves by an amount u(t) relative to the surrounding soil, the
force, F(t,u), exerted on the foundation by the soil can
symbolically be represented as
Fðt; uÞ Z KðuÞuðtÞ (2)
K(u) can be considered as a filter that converts u(t) into F(t,u).
For certain foundation types, analytical expressions for K(u)
have been derived and available in the literature. The handbook
by Sieffert and Cevaer [2] gives a comprehensive summary of
all impedance functions published in the relevant literature.
3. Discrete-time recursive filters
Discrete-time recursive filters are simple finite-difference
equations that convert a given time series (i.e. input) into
another time series (i.e. output). A discrete-time recursive filter
is defined by the following equation
yðtÞ ZKa1 yðtK1ÞKa2 yðtK2ÞK/Kam yðtKmÞ C b0 xðtÞ
C b1 xðtK1Þ C b2 xðtK2Þ C/C bn xðtKnÞ (3)
where x(t) and y(t) are the original (i.e. input) and the filtered
(i.e. output) signals, respectively, aj and bj denote the filter
coefficients, and m and n are the filter orders. For simplicity, the
parameter t in Eq. (3) is used to denote time, as well as the time
index (i.e. thtD, where D is the sampling interval which is
assumed to be one). If the filter parameters aj and bj are
constant values, the filter is said to be a time-invariant filter; if
they change with time the filter is called a time-varying filter.
Time-varying filters can be used to represent nonlinear
systems.
By using the definitions of Fourier and inverse Fourier
transforms for discrete signals, we can show that
X
N vak
1
If F½xðtÞ Z XðuÞ Z pffiffiffiffi xðtÞeKiut
N for k Z 1; .; m and l Z 1; .; n
tZ1 (4)
then F½xðtKkDÞ Z eKiukD XðuÞ
where F[x(t)] and X(u) both denote the Fourier transform of
x(t), and N is the number of points in x(t). By taking the Fourier
transform of both sides in Eq. (3), and using Eq. (4), we can
write the following
½1 C a1 eKiuD C a2 eK2iuD C/C am eKmiuD YðuÞ
Z ½b0 C b1 eKiuD C/C bn eKniuD XðuÞ (5)
or, by defining H(u)ZY(u)/X(u) and
AðzÞ Z 1 C a1 zK1 C a2 zK2 C/C am zKm
(6)
BðzÞ Z b0 C b1 zK1 C/C bn zKn with z Z eiuD
Eq. (5) becomes
YðuÞ b0 C b1 zK1 C/C bn zKn
HðuÞ Z Z
XðuÞ 1 C a1 zK1 C a2 zK2 C/C am zKm
BðzÞ
Z (7)
AðzÞ
H(u) denotes the complex transfer function of the filter. In
order to have a stable filter (i.e. bounded filter output for
bounded input), the roots pk of the denominator polynomial
1 C a1 p C a2 p2 C/C am pm Z 0 (8)
should be inside a unit circle in the complex plane. These roots
are known as the poles of the filter, and for stable systems
(i.e. no negative damping) they are in complex-conjugate pairs.
4. Matching impedance functions by discrete-time filters
The foregoing discussions suggest that if we can approxi-
mate the impedance function K(u) as a ratio of two complex
polynomials, i.e. similar to H(u) in Eq. (7), we can then write
the relationship between u and F (Eq. (2)) by a discrete-time
recursive filter in a form similar to that given by Eq. (3). This
can be accomplished by using the least-squares approximation
technique. We determine the parameters aj and bj of the
discrete-time transfer function H(u) such that it is as close to
K(u) as possible. This requires the minimization of the
following error function, V
X
VZ WðuÞ½HðuÞKKðuÞ2 (9)
u
where W(u) is the weighting function. The use of weighting
function gives the flexibility of adjusting the precision of the
match between H(u) and K(u) at selected frequencies. The
filter parameters are determined by making
vV vV
Z 0 and Z0
vbl (10)
The resulting equations for ak and bl are nonlinear and not
easy to solve, because H(u) is a nonlinear function (i.e. ratio)
of ak and bl. Eq. (9) can be modified such that ak and bl are
obtained iteratively by solving a linear set of equations. The
modified iterative version of Eq. (9) is given by the following
equation
X WðuÞ
Vi Z ½Bi ðuÞKAi ðuÞKðuÞ2 (11)
u
A iK1 ðuÞ
where the subscript i denotes the iteration number. The
coefficients ak and bl are determined iteratively as outlined
below:
1. To start the iteration, assume an initial value for the
coefficients ak (e.g. all equal to 0.5).
2. Determine ak and bl for step i by minimizing Vi (use the ak
values from the previous step to calculate AiK1).
 E. Şafak / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70 67

3. Repeat Step 2 until ak and bl coefficients do not change

significantly in successive steps.
The iteration converges rapidly. More detail on the
procedure can be found in [3–5]. In system identification
theory, these types of problems are known as parametric
identification of transfer functions in the frequency domain.
The paper by Pintelon et al. [6] provides a summary of methods
available for such identifications.
Once the parameters of the discrete-time filter for K(u) is
determined, the spring force F(t), at time step t, simply
becomes

FðtÞ ZKa1 FðtK1ÞKa2 FðtK2ÞK/Kam FðtKmÞ C b0 uðtÞ

C b1 uðtK1Þ C b2 uðtK2Þ C/C bn uðtKnÞ ð12Þ

Note that this expression is completely in the time domain. Fig. 2. Gaussian weighting functions applied to impedance functions when
The key point for applications is that, in order to calculate F(t), determining recursive filter coefficients.
we need to save the past m values of F(t) and past n values of
u(t) at every time step. This requires a simple modification in higher frequencies. A Gaussian type weighting function, as
standard time-history analysis routines. shown in Fig. 2, have resulted in satisfactory matches for all the
A practical problem during applications is the selection of examples given in the paper.
filter orders, m and n. Generally, the term filter order refers to
the parameter m only, because the results are less sensitive to n.
There are no clear-cut rules for the selection of m. The higher 5. Numerical examples
the filter order, the better the match. However, too high m
values may result in unstable filters. A simple procedure for We will present three examples to show the applications of
determining the optimal m value is to plot the variation of the methodology.
estimation error (parameter V in Eq. (9)) with increasing values Example 1: circular surface foundation on homogenous soil
of m. Typically, V would show a sharp initial decay with media
increasing m, and then level off, as schematically shown in The first example is the horizontal impedance of a circular
Fig. 1. The leveling off in V suggests that further increases in m foundation on the surface of a homogenous soil media (uniform
do not provide any more improvements in the match, and half-space) as shown in Fig. 3. The horizontal impedance
therefore the m value at which V starts to level off can be function for this foundation is given by the following
considered as the optimal m value.
Numerical tests on the methodology have shown that for
uniform, or close to uniform, weighting functions W(u), the
identified filter tends strongly to match the higher frequencies
of K(u), but not the lower frequencies. Thus, it was found
necessary to use a weighting function that de-emphasizes

Fig. 1. Estimation of optimal model order m by observing the decay of Fig. 3. Circular foundation on a homogenous medium, and the components of
matching error with increasing model order. impedance function for horizontal motions.
68 E. Şafak / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70
equation ([7])
KðuÞ Z K0 ½Rða0 Þ C ia0 Cða0 Þ
ur 8Gr (13)
where a0 Z and K0 Z
Vs 2Kn
K0 is the static stiffness; G, Vs, and n are, respectively, the shear
modulus, shear wave velocity, and Poisson’s ratio of the soil;
and r denotes the radius of the circular foundation. For the
numerical values: rZ10 m, VsZ400 m/s, and nZ0.3, the
variations of R(a0) and C(a0) with the non-dimensional
frequency a0Zur/Vs are plotted in Fig. 3.
By observing the decay of filter error with increasing m, the
optimal filter orders were found to be mZ2 and nZ1. Using
the least-squares criterion and a Gaussian weighting function
the filter parameters were determined to be a1Z0.3097,
a2Z0.4479, b0Z11.2140, and b1ZK9.4717. Therefore, the
discrete-time transfer function that matches the foundation
impedance is:
11:2140K9:4717zK1
HðuÞ Z K0 (14)
1 C 0:3097zK1 C 0:4479zK2
The comparisons of the amplitude and phase spectra of
H(u) and K(u) are given in Fig. 4. Note that the horizontal axis
denotes the frequency in radians, not the dimensionless
frequency. Although only a second-order filter is used the
match is very good. A more complex impedance function
would have required a higher-order filter. With the filter
identified, we can now calculate the soil reaction, F(t), on the
foundation due to any foundation displacement relative to the
soil, u(t), as
FðtÞ ZK0:3097FðtK1ÞK0:4479FðtK2Þ
C K0 ½11:2140uðtÞK9:4717uðtK1Þ (15)
Fig. 4. Comparison of frequency and time-domain horizontal impedance
functions for a circular foundation on a homogenous medium, assuming a
second-order discrete time filter (mZ2, nZ1), and the calculated filter
coefficients.
Such an expression can easily be incorporated in structural
time-history analysis programs to account for SSI.
Example 2: rectangular foundation embedded in hom-
ogenous soil media
The second example involves the rocking impedance of a
rectangular foundation embedded in homogenous soil media,
as schematically shown in Fig. 5. The impedance function is
given in [8], and can be expressed similarly as in the previous
example ([2]):
uB
KðuÞZ K0 ½Rða0 Þ C ia0 Cða0 Þ with a0 Z (16)
Vs
For square footings with D/B%2, the static stiffness for
rocking is
  2 
GB3 D D
K0 Z 4:38 1 C 0:98 C 1:13 (17)
1Kn B B
The dynamic stiffness factors R(a0) and C(a0) are plotted in
Fig. 5 against the non-dimensional frequency a0ZuB/Vs,
assuming BZ15 m, DZ10 m, LZ30 m, VsZ400 m/s, and
nZ1/3.
The optimal filter orders were found to be mZ6, nZ5, and
again a Gaussian weighting function was used to determine the
filter parameters by least-squares minimization. The identified
filter parameters are given in Fig. 6, along with the plots that
show the comparisons of the amplitude and phase spectra of
H(u) and K(u). The identified discrete-time filter model
compares very well with the original frequency-domain model.
Fig. 5. Rectangular foundation embedded in a homogenous medium, and the
components of the impedance function for rocking motions.
 E. Şafak / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70
Fig. 6. Comparison of frequency and time-domain rocking impedance functions
for a rectangular foundation embedded in a homogenous medium, assuming a
sixth-order discrete time filter (mZ6, nZ5), and the calculated filter
coefficients.
Example 3: circular foundation on the surface of layered soil
media
The third example presents the horizontal impedance of a
circular foundation on the surface of a soil layer over bedrock,
as schematically shown in Fig. 7. The impedance function for
this case is given in [9,10], and can be expressed in the
following form ([2])
Kðu; xÞZ K0 ½Rða0 ; xÞ C ia0 Cða0 ; xÞð1 C 2ixÞ
ur (18)
with a0 Z
Vs
Fig. 7. Circular foundation on a layered medium, and the components of
impedance function for horizontal motions.
69
Fig. 8. Comparison of frequency and time-domain horizontal impedance
functions for a circular foundation on a layered medium, assuming a fourth-
order discrete time filter (mZ4, nZ3), and the calculated filter coefficients.
where x denotes the damping ratio in the soil layer. The static
stiffness is given as
8Gr  r 
K0 Z 1C (19)
2Kn 2H
The dynamic stiffness factors R(a0) and C(a0) are plotted
in Fig. 7 for xZ0.05 against the non-dimensional frequency
a0Zur/Vs, assuming H/rZ2, rZ10 m, VsZ100 m/s, and
nZ1/3.
The variation of filter prediction error with filter parameters
showed two possible sets of optimal model orders: mZ4, nZ3,
and mZ8, nZ7. Again, using a Gaussian weighting function,
the filter parameters were identified for both sets. The
comparisons of the amplitude and phase spectra of H(u) and
K(u) for each set of model orders, along with the numerical
values of the filter parameters are given in Figs. 8 and 9.
Fig. 9. Comparison of frequency and time-domain horizontal impedance
functions for a circular foundation on a layered medium, assuming an eighth-
order discrete time filter (mZ8, nZ7), and the calculated filter coefficients.
70 E. Şafak / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 26 (2006) 65–70
The figures indicate that the higher order model (mZ8, nZ7)
gives a much better fit to the impedance function.
6. Conclusions
The frequency dependency of foundation impedance
functions makes it difficult to incorporate soil–structure
interaction in standard time-history analysis, when studying
seismic response of structures. This difficulty can be eliminated
by representing impedance functions as a ratio of two complex
polynomials with unknown coefficients. The coefficients are
determined by minimizing the difference between the filter
transfer function and the target impedance function via least-
squares approximation. The ratio of two complex polynomials
is equivalent, in the time-domain, to a discrete-time recursive
filter, which is a simple finite-difference equation representing
the relationship between foundation forces and displacements.
With the discrete-time approximation, impedance functions
become frequency independent, and can easily be incorporated
in standard time-history analysis to account for SSI.
References
[1] Safak E. Detection and identification of soil-structure interaction in
buildings from vibration recordings. ASCE J Struct Eng 1995;121(5):
899–906.
[2] Sieffert J-G, Cevaer F. Handbook of impedance functions. Nantes,
France: Quest Editions, Presses Academiques; 1991.
[3] Levi EC. Complex curve fitting. IEEE Trans Automat Control 1959;AC-
4:37–44.
[4] Sanathanan CK, Koerner J. Transfer function synthesis as a ratio of two
complex polynomials. IEEE Trans Automat Control 1963;AC-8:56–8.
[5] Vargas RA, Burrus CD. On the design of Lp IIR filters with arbitrary
frequency band Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustic
and Speech Signal Processing (ICASSP) 2001. vol. 6 2001 p. 3829–3832.
[6] Pintelon R, Guillaume P, Rolain Y, Schoukens J, Van Hamme H.
Parametric identification of transfer functions in the frequency domain—a
survey. IEEE Trans Automat Control 1994;39(11):2245–60.
[7] Veletsos AS, Wei YT. Lateral and rocking vibrations of footings. ASCE
J Soil Mech Found Div 1971;97(SM 9):1227–48.
[8] Dominguez J, Roesset, JM. Dynamics stiffness of rectangular foun-
dations. MIT Research Report R 78-20 1978.
[9] Luco JE, Westmann RA. Dynamic response of circular footing. ASCE
J Eng Mech Div 1971;97(EM 5):1381.
[10] Kausel, E. Forced vibrations of circular foundations on layered media.
MIT Research Report R 74-11 1974.