Soil-structureinteraction

effectson an instrumented
building in Mexico City

R o b e r t oP a o l u c c i *

SUMMARY Soil-strut.ture iiltcrd(.tion cjfccts ur.csttrtlied.l.or u

slructures they tend to be beneficial since they reduce
l 1-storey rc i n.f'.t.tatl (on(r(tc bui ltti ng itt M e.rit.o
C i tt, bused .n t h e i n t e r n a l a c t i o n s i n t h e m e m b e r so f t h e s u p e r s t r u c _
'saisntic u.cclcruti,tt t ct'ortring.s .btained during
u t)to(rcr(tr(, ture. However, structuresfounded on very soti grounil,
c t ' c t t t i r t M u t ' 1 9 9 . 1. T h t ' a n a l t ' s i . s i s p c t J b r n r t , d h t , r t r c u r t s
of u s u c h a s t h e w e l l k n o w n l a c u s t r i n ec l a y d e p o s i t so f
'sintple -1 tlc,qrcc.stl .ficedon nrotlcl taking inro (t((.()u,r
tha lut- the
aru/ uttd nttuti.nul .f!e.ribititt'rt rhc soir. Dillcrettt M e x i c o C i t y a r e a . r ' n a y s u l , f - ehr i g h l e v e l s o f s e i s m i c
,.rucs .f rrrt,
d.t'nuntit soil inpctlurtt cs ure cottsitjcretl, irtcltrditt,q motion due to SSI. The el-f'ectof a very soli soil clepos_
tho.sc or.c
s c r i b c d b y t h c M c _ r i c o C i t t . s c i s n t i t . < . o t l c .t o a c ( o u n t it is in facr rwofbld, in that it strongly amplifres
.f,,,.,,,,,r.r.,. the
tuirttics itt thc dcscriptiott rf'the soit pntilc r n c o n t i n gs e i s n r i cw a v e s a t f r e q u e n c i e sn e a r i t s f u n d a _
und tht, .soil_.fitttrttlu_
tiott intcrt'uce. Both inertiol untl kincnutit,interut.tiott
t,ffct.t.s.ttrt,
nrental frequency and it interacts with the structure
t ti l rI I . \ . \ ( J u t t rI t l i t t .t t t . t t t l r n o d i f y i n g i t s f u n d a m e n t a lp e r i o d o f v i b r a t i o n . I f t h e
fundamentalperiod of the interacting system decreases
KEYWORDS: Seisnic instrumcntution, S S I a . f . f ' c c t s1,t i I t , g t . o u l t during the ground motion and approaihes that of the
i ntpaduttces. s o i l , t h e a m p l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s e i s m i c r e s p o n s eo f t h e
s t r u c t u r em a y a t t a i n d r a m a t i c l e v e l s .
SSI effects on buildings fbunded on very soft soils
Introduction are explicitely taken inro account by the Technical
for earthquake resistant design in the Federal
fgrms
I t i s k n o w n t h a t t h e s e i s m i cr e s p o n s eo f a s t r u c t u r e D i s t r i c t o f M e x i c o ( R o s e n b l u e t ha n d R e s e n d i z .l g g g ) .
founded on deformable grouncl miy differ considerar_ and it also should be mentioned that the draft of Euroc_
bly from fhat of the same structureon firm ground. odelJ-Part-5 recommend that SSI be considered in the
due to the different stiffness of the structure ancl seismic design of structures supported on very soft
the
l o u n d a t i o ns o i l . T h e d y n a m i c s o i l - s t r u c t u r ei n t e r a c t i o n s o i l s , d e f i n e d b y a n a v e r a g es h e a r w a v e v e l o c i i y l e s s
( , S S l )e . f f e c t sm a i n l y m a n i f e s t t h e m s e l v e s than 100 m/s (Faccioli, 1993).
through: a)
the reduction of the fundamental frequency of tne A cornprehensivestudy of SSI effects needs a care_
s t r u c t u r ea n d t h e c h a n g e s o f t h e m o d a l s h a p e s l'ul instrumentationof the buildin-e,including free_field
and
m . o { a l p a r t i c i p a r i o nf a c o r s ; b ) t h e d i s s i p a r i o no f p a r r and possibly also underground accele.og.uphr. This is
of the vibrationalenergy of the building by wave the main reason why relatively few we'il documented
ra_
c l i a t i o ni n t o t h e f o u n d a t i o n m e d i u m a n d - i n t e r n a l analyses ol SSI fiom earthquake records have been
fric_
tlon -qeneratea d t t h e s o i l _ f b u n d a t i o ni n t e r f a c e ; c ) t h e p u b l i s h e c(l F e n v e sa n d S e r i n o , 1 9 9 0 ; p a p a g e o r g i o u
and
filtering of high-frequency components of grounil L i u , l 9 9 l ; B a r d , l 9 9 l ; K a g a w a a n d A l _ K " h a r i b1, 9 9 3 )
m o t i o n a t t h e b a s e o f t h e s t r u c t u r ew i t h r e s p e c tt o afier the classicalsrudiesof Jenningsand Bielak (1g13)
the
free-field; d) the increment of the rocking ntotion a n d C r o u s ea n d J e n n i n g s( t 9 7 - 5 ) .I i i s w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t
of
the structure. a l l t h e c i t e d s t u d i e sr e l - e rt o b u i l c l i n g sl o c a t e d i n C a l i _
S S I e f f e c t s a r e g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e dt o b e o l . l i t t l e fbrnia.
p r a c t i c a l i m p o r t a n c e ,a n c l l b r t h e m a j o r i t y o f b u i l c l i n g I n t h i s p a p e r S S I e f l ' e c t sw i l l b e a n a l y s e do n a 1 4
s t o r y r e i n t b r c e dc o n c r e t eb u i l c l i n g i n M e i i c o C i t y ,
'i'Dcpartntcnt re_
of Structural Engineering. l-cchnicll Unlvcrsrty of Mi cently instrumented under a project sponsored by
lirn. the
C o r n m i s s i o n E u r o p e a nC o i n r n u n i t i e s ,i n v o l v i n g
Rcccveid. October I 9tl-3. _of the
Institr-rto d e I n g e n i e r i a .o f t h e N a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i i v o f

EUROPEAN
'JEii1li,frE
3, 1ee3
33

*r--
 .
t-

M e x i c o ( U N A M ) , a n c l t l - r cT e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y ( p o _
ul the traltsversalclirection.This ntodel will be rel-en.ecl
liticnico) of Milan, Italy.
1o in the fbllowing as 1he.rtr.lrt.1
ttt.ulnrtxlt,l ol'the builcl_
ln-9.
B a s e c lo n t l r c r c s u l t so f t w o s t a t i c c o n e p e n e t r . a t i o n
Seismicinstrumentation of the building ancl recorcl_
tesls, one at sorne-50r-nf'rom the builcline ancl the sec_
ing of earthquake data
o n c l b e n e a t ht l r e f b u n c h t i u n ,a s h c u r w a v e v e l o c i t y p r o _
f i l e o 1 ' t h ef b u n c l a ( i o sn i t e w a s o b t a i n e c (l O v a n c l o . - 1 0 9 3 )
T l e b u i l c l i n g( r e l ' e r e n c e ci rl r t h e l b l l o w i r - t gu s . l a l t r p u
. g i v i n g a n e s t i r t r a tcel a v e r a g ev a l u e o l ' 6 8 m / s ( F i g . 3 ) .
b u i l t l i n g ) w a s i n s t r u n t e n t c ciln I a t c 1 9 9 2 ( M c - l i e t
ril.. T h e s e i s n t i ci n s t r u l n e n t a t i o(nM e l i e t a l . , I 9 9 3 ) h a s
1 9 9 3 ) .I t i s a l 4 s t o r y r . c . s t r L t c t u r . rea, t h e rr . e - 9 r " rbl acrl t l . r
b e e n d e s i . q n e ct ol p r o v i c l ea c l e t a i l e ccl l e s c r i p t i o no f t h e
i n p l a n a n c l e l e v a t i c i n( F ' i - q .l ) , l o c a t e c li n r l r e c e n ( r a l
r n o t i o n o l ' t h e b u i l d i n g ,i n c l u d i n g h i - q h e rm o c l e sa s w e l l
a r e ao l ' M e x i c o C i t y . T h i s w a s o n e o 1 ' t h eh e a v i e s tc l i u l _
as tl'rer<tckingand translnlionof the base relative to tlrc
a g e d .z o n e s d u r i n g t h e l 9 1 3 -c5a r t h c l u a k ea n c lt h e J a l a p a
g r o u n d l b r i n v e s t i g a l i o n so n S S I : i t c o n s i s t s o l . t w o
b u i l c l i n g i t s c l f s u l ' f ' e r e crln o d e r a t es t r u c t u r a l a n c l n o i _
borchole instruments located at 20 rn ancl .{-5r.n clentl.t
s l r u c t u r a l d a n t a g e . M o s t o 1 ' t h e r . n a s o n r yw a l l s w e r e
u r r r l re. e u r h t h e h u i l d i r r s . r r e i n s t ' r r r n e n. [l l r l ' r e e - r i c l d
c r a c k e cal s w e l l a s n a n y c o l u r r " r n se ,s p e c i i i l l ya b o v c
thc s i l e i n t h e n e i g h b o u r h o o do f t h e b u i l c l i n g ,a n c le l e v e n
s e v e n t hs t o r y ( M u r i h a n c l M o r e n o . 1 9 9 3 ) T h e b u i l c l i n g
i n s t r u r n e n t sa t d i f l ' e r e n tl e v e l s o f t h e s t r u i t u r e , i n c l u d _
was later strengthenedby the inserlion o1-shearr,,,alls
iu i n g t h e b a s e m e na t n c lt h e r o o l ' ( F i g . I ) . A l l i n s t r u m e n r s
tlre longitudinal direction ancl by incr.easingthe sectiolts
arc tliclirectionalsolid state digital accelero-qraphs Terra
o 1 ' t l ' r ec o l u r n n s .I n s p i l c o f t h i s . a s w i l l b e - s l . r o w n laler, Tcchtrolo-eyDCA-333R with a cornnton tirie ref-erence.
t h e r e a r e i n d i c a t i o n st h a t t h e s l r l t c t L l r et c n c l st o h e l t a v c
The instruure n l s f i r s l t r i g e e r e c lo n M a y I - 5 , 1 9 9 3 ,
n o n - l i n e a r l ye v e n I ' o r s r r a l l e x c i l a t i o nl e v e l s .
c l u r i n g a M , = 6 . I e v e r r to r i - t i n a t i n g i n r h e s u b d u c t i o r r
T h e l o u n d a t i o no 1 ' t l r c b u i l d i n - qi s r a t h e rt y p i c a l o l .
z o n e o f t h e P a c i f ' i cC o a s t , a t s o m e 3 2 0 K m f r o m M e x _
M e x i c o C i t y , i n t h a t i t c o n s i s t so f n b u ^ r e s t i i r uo n
a i c o C i t 1 , .T w o s h o c k s w e r e r e c o r c l e da, t a 3 m i n u t e i r . r _
- u r o u po 1 ' - 5 4f i i c t i o n p i l e s c l r i v c ni n t o t h e f i r s t c l l i v l a v _ t e r v a l l l ' o n t o n c a n o f h e r .F i g . 4 s h o w s t h e a c c e l e r a t i o n Fi
e ' r .a n c l I 0 o v e r l a p p i n gp i l e s . n o t c l i r c c r l yc u , " , n . c i . cil, ,
t i m e l r i s l o r i e si n f i c e - f ' i e l c -t|h. e c e n t r e o l ' t h e b a s e r n e n t
t h e b o x ( F i - c .2 ) .
anclthe rool'. togelher with the rocking motion. The
A preliminar model ol' the builcling was obtainecl.
lattel was calculateclas dilf-erenceberwe-enthe vertical
b a s e do n t h e a s s u m p t i o no l ' l i n e a r .e l i s r i c b c h a v i o u r .
c o r n p o n e n t sa t t h e c o r n e r s n l ' t h e b a s e r n e n t( E J S N _
T h e f u n c l a r n e n t apl e r i o d so l ' v i b r a t i o n w e r e l o u n c ll o b c
EJSE lbr rocking arouncltlre transversal,or T, clirection
T = 0 . 6 3 s i n t h e l o n g i t L r c l i n ac l i r e c t i o na n c lT = I . 2 l l
s ancl EJSW - EJSN lor ritckir-t1t arounclthe longituclinal.

I JAw
"f, fJSw
PI,AN VIEW .,,l tJ JW
tJsW

--
' \ -
o

;?,
J--:! stai rs
i,;; : tJAc \
EJ^E 3

lift

tJCL -
!-isil

tJCL

Iree-tteld
\ORTH T

SEISMIC INSTRUMENTATION \ \ E:Sw

0F JALAPA tsUILDING
lnsrituto de Ingenieria.L,N.A,l\I EJSN
EJPI
O c t o b e r ,1 9 9 2 20 rn
ELEVATION
.friaxial
- accelerograph North side

Fi,'
l tg. I I ) l l r r ri r n t l e l c r l r l i o l o l l l r c . l r r l t L p b
i ru i l t l i n - gl r r t l l o t . l l i o l o l s c i s r l i t
con(
II) SI ILI lilC l) I\.
an c €

E UR A P E A N EUR
-1+ EARTHQUAKE EAR
ENG
ENG/NEER/NG 3, 1993
red o r L , d i r e c t i o n ,s e e F i g . l ) , d i v i c l e db y t h e c o r r e s p o n d _
ld- i n g s p a t i a ld i s t a n c ea n c ir n u l t i p l i e cbl y t h e h e i g h r o f t h e
b u i l d i n g . N o a p p r e c i a b l e t o r s i o n a l e l ' f ' e c t sw e r e o b _
on served.
T h e F o u r i e r s p e c t r u m o f t h e f i e e - l ' i e l da c c e l e r a t i o n
t()- ( F i g . - 5 )i s t y p i c a l f b r s e i s r n i ce x c i r a r i o ni n t h e M e x i c o
)3) C i t y V a l l e y , w i t h a n a r r o w b a n d e n e r g y c o n t e n tp e a k _
i). ing at about 0.-5Hz; the same frequeniy was observed
tas d u r i n g p r e v i o u s s m a l l e a r t h q u a k e sr e c o r d e d a t a c c e l _
he erograph stations not far from the Jalapa building and
ell corresponds to the fundamental peak of the transf-er
he f u n c t i o n c a l c u l a t e df r o m a t D m o d e l o f r h e l o c a l s o i l
VO p r o fi l e .
rth The spectral ratios of the roof motion and the free_
rld field were calculated fbr the horizontal components of
9n b o t h e v e n t s c o n s i d e r i n gt h e w h o l e d u r a t i o n o f t h e a c _
)
tt- c e l e r o g r a m s( F i g . 6 ) . I n s p i t e o f t h e s m a l l l e v e l s o l -
rts g r o u n d a c c e l e r a t i o nr e c o r d e dd u r i n g t h e t w o s h o c k s ,a
ra decreasein the fundamental frequency of the structure_
e. f o u n d a t i o ns y s t e ma n d i n t h e a m p l i f i c a t i o n l e v e l s c a n
3. b e o b s e r v e d . T h i s s u g g e s t st h a t t h e s y s t e m b e h a v e s
)n n o n - l i n e a r l ye v e n f b r t h e s m a l l e x c i t a r i o nl e v e l s u n d e r
c o n s i d e r a t i o na, s i s a l s o c o n f i r m e d ( s e eT a b . I ) b v t h e
1- c o m p a r i s o nw i t h t h e f u n d a m e n t a lp e r i o d se v a l u a t e db y
F i g .J
)n ambient vibration tests carried out befbre the two
'tt
e v e n t s( M u r i d a n d M o r e n o . 1 9 9 3 ) .

rl
T a b . | - F u r r c l a r n e n tpacl r i o t l s( i n s ) o f t h c i n t c r a c t i n { sr v s t c n )
observcd
i t t t l t c J : r l i r p :hru i l t l i r r r

A r n h i r - l r tv i h l r t i L r n s l s t ev e n t 2nd cvenl
L t.3l r.59 t.l2
T 2.21 2.10 2.tt6

I t i s d i f f i c u l t i n r h i s p r e l i m i n a r s r a g eo f t h e a n a l y s i s
t o a s s e s sw h e t h e r t h e n o n - l i n e a r i t y i s c a u s e d b y t h e
1 1 1 y 9 t u r adla m a g e ss u f f e r e db y t h e b u i l d i n g d u r i n g t h e
1 9 8 - 5M i c h o a c d n e a r t h q u a k eo r b y t h e n o n _ l i n e a rb e _
h a v i o u r o f t h e s o i l - f o u n d a t i o ni n t e r f a c e .S o m e i n d i c a _
t i o n s o f n o n - l i n e a rb e h a v i o u ro f p i l e s u n d e r s n t a l l l e v _
els of excitation are reported by Bouwkarnp et al.
( 1 9 8 0 ) a n d b y N o v a k ( l 9 9 l ) , a n d a r e g e n e r a l l yc l u er o
p i l e g a p p i n g o r s l i p p a g e .H o w e v e r . e x p e r i n t e n t a sl t u c l _
on the dynan-ricbehaviour of fricfion piles in the
!e,.s
M e x i c o C i t y c l a y ( J a i m ee r a l . , 1 9 9 0 ) h a v e s h o w n t h a r
u n d e r _v e r t i c a l c y c l i c l o a d i n g t h e p i l e s b e h a v e l i n e a r l y
p r o b a b l y u p t o t h e i r u l t i r n a t ec y c l i c l o a d i n - {c l p a c i t y .
This is also in agreementwith the nearly ela.sticbehau_
i o u r o f t h e M e x i c o C i t y c l a y l b r v e r y h l g h s h e a rs t r a i n
levels,up to 0.3% approxirnately.

Interpretation of the data bv a sintple model

2C 40 50 80 100 t20 t40 160 l8o

T h e e v a l u a t i o n o l ' S S I e f f e c t s r e q u i r e st h a t t h e s o i l
V s( m / s )
p r o p e r t i e sb e a c c u r a t e l yk n c l w r r .a s w e l l a s t h o s eo f t h e
Fig. -l S l r c ; r ru a r e r c l o c i l t p r t r l i l c t \ . t r . r l c l t t l r( l i . l r o n l
clcctric b u i l d i n g , i n c l u d i n g t h e f o u n d a t i o na n c lt h e s o i l _ f b u n d a _
c.ne pcactratior tcst Lrr(rc'.c,th thc tirurrtlrLtio..Thc
corc I)o')t rc\lst t i o n i n t e r f a c e ;t h e n a t u r e o f t h e i n c o m i n g e a r t h q u a k e
r u n c cq . i s i r r d i c a t c d b y a r h i n l i n c . F r o n r O v a n d o , 1 9 9 j .
motron shouldalso be known. Some simplilying as-

Eff"iiS!!,f,E
3, 1ee3
3-5
 Roof-T-lstevent

q _ l
l0 20 J0 40 50 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

R o c k i n go r o u n dL - o x i s R o c k i n go r o u n dT - o x i s
I I
4 4
0 0
-4
-8 -8
10 20 J0 40 50

Bosemeni
8E 8
4F +
o 0
-8F , , , ,
10 J0 40 20 J0 40 50 60 70

Free field Free field

F i g . . { a A c c e l e r a t i o nt i m e h i s t o r i c s o f t h e
^ A I
a
o
;
:
first cvent at the roof and bascmcntlevels and
0 at the fiee-field fbr the two horizontal compo
-4
o _ 8 -8 n e n t s .T h e r o c k i n - ea c c c l c r a t i o nm
. u l t i p l i e db y
30 40 50 10 20 JO 40 50 60 70 thc heightof the building. is also shown.
t (s)

Rool-T-2ndevent Roof-L-2ndevent

20 J0 40 50

R o c k i n go r o u n dT - o x i s
20 Fio
10
0 and

-20
20 J0 40 50 60 70
su
Bosement pli
20 20
10 10 de
0 0
-10 -10
-20 -20 sp
lle
Fi,rr..lb -'fhe same as Fig. 4a but for the sec- dit
^ 2 0 20 ond event.
l4 10 10
o ^
@ U 0 slip
i --20
'o -10
-24 bui
?o l0 40
i (s)
blu
oft
neI

nat
nin
Fourier spectrum - Free-field - T Fourier spectrum - Free-field - L
inc
- - - . - - . - - - - i , : :'. : . : . :' '.: . . . . : . . '
'I -:-.. i L.
:
- - . , , - . . _ _ - ? - : ! l

1 inp
I A t - t : : : : : ' : : : :
- - - - - - - - J - l . L .
: sys
,,: - _ - _ - _ i - - 1 - ' \ '
' - - - - ' - - - l
t 1 { \ : : : i : : :

--i'-'i:---l-1'r l
l:__; r'i-- i,+':,-' .
': ver
,
---J-/.--\r-.-,
t . / 1 )
'
1':'
' i ' : Y: : .:1i. "
' lnl
" I r '
\'
' i !
: I ! '
par
: t i
:: :: -::t 't .. l,lt-i .i :, -: :. ': ..-:l:.t :: , :' :.:r:r:i:
Cit
: : A
:t7'.'.'.':::,::|:I
. ,\.tr l .: i' .: .:: ;i
','i
.','
. . . . . . ; . . 'Ai. Fig. 5 F o u r i e r a c c e l e r a t i o ns p e c t r at b r t h e
lv
..
r. t -t::: two horizontal componcntsof the first lcor.rti-
-1---':'--i-l':
. t
':
j-
t
.:.i.:-:- -.-...:... n o u s l i n c ) a n d s c c o n d ( d a s h e dl i n e ) e v c n t s .
\
l i1 I O
T h e s i g n a l s w e r c b a n d - p a s sf i l t e r e d b e t w e e n
1oo 0 . 1 5 a n d 5 H z a n d t h e s p e c t r ac o m p u t c d o n in s
frequency (Hz) frequency (Hz) t h e w h o l c d u r a t i o no f t h e r e c o r d i n g . ofl

'J8ii:13!i,ftE
EUROPEAN
3, 1se3
EURC
EART
ENGI
 Roof/Free-field - L component
18 17
/_
to
1s t e v e n t f % -+hd
t4
2nd evenl
12
10
I
o

10-r .l
oo

v
Roof/Free-{ield - T component
18
he to
1s t e v e n t F i g . 7 l - h c . l d c g r c c so l f l c c d o n t n t o t l c l t l r t h c s i r r r I i i l i c dr n r l l s i s t r f
nd
14
r0- s o i l s t r u c l u r ei n t e r a c t i 0 n .
2nd evenl
Dy 12
1C
E v e s t i g a t eS S I e f l e c t si n p r e v i o u ss t u d i e s( J e n n i n g sa n d
6 B i e l a k , 1 9 7 3 ;W o l f , 1 9 8 5 ) .W e r e c a l l t h e e q u a t i o n o f
motlon:

2
Mi+Ci+Kx:-p"t* (la)
10 - r 100
frequency (Hz) where:

Fig.6 O b s c r v c d s p c c t r i r lr i r l i o s b c t s e c l l t l ) c t ( ) l a l r r r o t i o n o l t h c r o o l
antl tlrc llec Iicld nrotion.
-- L .
l-1 ' 'r,,@J' (lb)

- t , , , nt,, Olt (lc)

,
s u m p t i o n sa r e u s u a l l y m a d e f o r c l e a l i n _wei t h t h i s c o m -
p l i c a t e d p r o b l e n t a n c lp r o v i d e p r a c t i c a l i n d i c a t i o n sf o r
c l e s i g np u r p o s e s :
1", o '1
- t h e l o u n d a t i o n s o i l i s a p p r o x i m a t e db y d i s c r e t e *:l , nt,,0l
s p r i n g sa n d c l i r s h p o t tsh a t c a n b e e v a l u a t e di n a s i m p l i -
(ld)
fiecl way l'ol cliftererrtsoil-profiles and foundation con- l0 0 .r)
c l i t i o n s s, e e e . g . G a z e t a s( 1 9 9l ) .
- The foundation moves as a rigid body, without
[ ,, -('r _ . c , hI
s l i p p a g eb e t w e e nt h e b a s ea n d t h e s o i l . F o r t h e c a s eo f '
b u i l d i n g s o n t h e c l a y d e p o s i t so f M e x i c o C i t y , R o s e n - C - l - , , { , * { , ,r ' , / r * t , , , f" ,
b l u e t h a n d R e s e n d i z( c i t . ) s u g g e s tt h a t t h e c o n l r i b u t i o n t,lrlr',,
I
l-t',lt r',iir+r,l
of the vertical and torsional motions of the structureare
n e g l i g i b l e w i t h r e s p e c tt o t h e t r a n s l a t i o na n d r o c k i n g .
- SSI effects are negligible fbr the mode shapesand
I r, _ k, _ k,ltI
n a t u r a l f r e q u e n c i e so t h e r t h a n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l ( J e n -
nings and Bielak, 1913). *=l-^ l ,+ t , , r l r + r , ,
- The foundation does not aff-ect appreciably the k , l r+ 4 , , ( , / r r+
1 (lf)
L-t,l i, l
i n c i d e n t w a v e - f i e l d , i . e . k i n e m a t i c i n t e r a c t i o ne f f e c t s
are negligible; the fiee-field rnotion can thus be used as
input in a dynarnic analysis of the structure-fbundation I n e q . ( l ) t h e f o l l o w i n g n o t a t i o n sa r e u s e d ( s e eF i g . 7 ) :
system. . r r , . \ , = d i s p l a c e m e n to f t h e s t r u c t u r ea n d o f t h e b a s e -
- The wave motion is vertically incident, and the n r e n t ,r e s p e c t i v e l y ,r e l a t i v e t o t h e s o i l ;
vertical componentof ground motion is ne-eligiblecorn- . t . = h o r i z o n t a lg r o u n d a c c e l e r a t i o n ;
p a r e c lt o t h e h o r i z o n t a l , w h i c h i s t h e c a s e i n M e x i c o d; = rocking motion of the basement;
C i t y , e s p e c i a l l yi n t h e l o w f r e q u e n c yr a n g e ( i n d i c a t i v e - rl, - efl'ective mass of the first mocle of vibration;
the
l y 0 . 2 - 0 . 8H z ) . riro= mass of the fbundation;
nti-
nts.
W i t h t h e s e s i m p l i f i e d a s s u m p t i o n s t, h e e a s i e s tw a y ./ = sum of the centroidal moments of inertia of the
een to deal with the SSI problem and have a satisfactory building and the fbundation;
on insight on its main f-eaturesis to consider the 3 degrees /r = effective height of the first mode of vibration;
o f f r e e d o r n( c l o f ) s y s t e m o l ' F r g . 7 , w i d e l y u s e d t o i n - A ' , ,r ' , = e l a s t i c s t i f f n e s sa n d d a r n p i n gc o r r e s p o n d i n gt o

EUROPEAN
193 Etriii8ld,f,Z
3. 1es3 31

r----4-
 First event L Component Second event -
2A L Component
20

16 0 6 3. a.76 16

12 12

I0-1
0
100 10 - r 100
frequency (Hz) f r e q u e n c y( H z )

First.event - T component Second event - T Component

16
0.37
t o 0.J5
rrt/pot, h"91
12 \
12 0.J9
F i g - t t - O b s e r v c ds p c c t r a l r a t i o s b e
twecn thc total motiol.l of the roof and
t h c f r e e f i e l d r n o t i o n ( c o n t i n o u sl i n c l
c o m p a r e dw i t h t h e o b s e r v e dr c s p o n s e
l ' u n c t i o ng i v c n b y e q . ( 2 ) i n t l t e t c x t
0 ( d a s h c dl i n c ) . T h c f r e q u e n c i e sw h i c h
10 - l 100 IO-1 100 corrcspondto the peak valucs arc indi
frequency (Hz) frequency (Hz) catcd.

the first mode of vibration ol'the building; T h e c o m p a r i s o nb e t w e e n t h e s p e c t r a lr a t i o s r f / . r , ,

i ' , , ,{ , , = e q u i v a l e n t s p r i n g a n d c l a s h p o tc o e f f i c i e n t so f a n d , r i l ( r i \ + h O ) , w h i c h e v a l u a r er e s p e c r i v e l yt h e f u n _
the soil-lbundation system for the translationalmode of damental frequency of the interacting system and that
v i b r a t i o n ( l o n e i t u d i n a lo r t r a n s v e r s a l ) ; o f t h e f i x e d - b a s eb u i l d i n g , i s s h o w n i n F i g . 8 f o r t h e
k , , c , = e q u i v a l e n t s p r i n g a n c l c l a s h p o tc o e f f i c i e n t so f horizontal componentsof the two events.The decrease
t h e s o i l - f b u n d a t i o ns y s t e m f b r t h e r o c k i n g m o d e o f v i _ in the fundamentalfiequency is apparent,especiallyfor
b r a ti o n : the L component where the relative stif'fness oi the
i ' , . , , , . , f , , , , (, . , , =
, e q u i v a l e n t s p r i n g a n d d a s h p o tc o e f f i _ b u i l d i n - ew i t h r e s p e d t o t h e s o i l i s h i g h e r a n d S S I e f _
c i e n t s o f t h e s o i l - f o u n d a t i o ns y s t e m f b r t h e c o u p l e d fectsare lhen more pronounced.
t r a n s l a t i o n a l - r o c k i n gm o d e o f v i b r a t i o n ; f b r t h e r e c i _ The fixed-base fundamental periods can be com_
procity theorem l',, = A',,,(.,, = (',,.These tern,rsare usu_ p a r e d w i t h t h o s e e s t i m a t e db y t h e s i m p l e l b r m u l a
a l l y c o n s i d e r e dt o h a v e a n e g l i g i b l e i n f l u e n c e f b r s u r _
f a c e f o u n d a t i o n s ,b u t t h e y s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e di n t h e
T,r=a.H! (3)
case of deep lbundations where the coupling eff'ect
c o u l d b e i m p o r r a n r( G a z e r a s ,l 9 9 l ) . where H is the height of the building and the parame_
Befbre calculating the spring an<1dashpot coeffi_ ters a and B depend on its structural characteristics
c i e n t s o f t h e s o i l - f o u n d a t i o n ss y s t e m a n d e v a l u a t i n g (Frg 9). According ro rhe Uniform Building Code
their etfbct on the motion of the structure, a simple (UBC) a = 0.0'/3 fbr reinforced concrete momenr re-
property of the system(l) will be used to roughly es_ sisting frames (class B,) and a = 0.049 for a wide
timate frorn the earthquake records the period that the structural class of buildings, including shear-walls
s t r u c t u r ew o u l d h a v e i f i r w e r e r i e i d l v f b u n d e d . buildings (class B,); F = 0.15 for all classes.According
L e t . v i: , \ r + , r ! b e t h e t o t a l m o i i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e , t o B a r d e t a l . ( 1 9 9 1 ) , f r o m a n a n a l y s i sb a s e do n e a r t h -
a t t h e r o o f l e v e l , a n d , \ , '=, _ r ' ,+, . r , , t h e t o t a l m o t i o n o f q u a k e r e c o r d s o n s e v e r a lb u i l d i n g s i n C a l i l b r n i a , a =
the basernent.For the 3 dof rnocleiit can be shown that 0 . 0 3 6 a n d F = I f b r b u i l d i n g c l a s s8 , . a = 0 . 0 8 1 a n d
t h e r e s p o n s ef u n c t i o n B
= 0 . - 5 f o r b u i l d i n g c l a s s 8 , . l t w a s a s s u m e dt h a t t h e
f u n d a m e n t a lv i b r a t i o n so f t h e J a l a p ab u i l d i n g a r e o f B ,
. -tl t y p e i n T d i r e c t i o na n d o f B . t y p e i n L d i r e c t i o n ,s i n c e
'' (l) t h e s h e u rw a l l s a r e L d i r e c t e d .
,'*n,J,
In Fig. 9 the fundamentalperiod estintatedby earth_
q u a k e r e c o r d s a n d t h a t c a l c L r l a t e df r o m t h e s t r u c t u r a l
has a fundarnentitlresonant frequency o2 : kt mr rlrodel o1 the building are indicated and compared with
I
which coincicleswith the l'undamentalfrequency oi the eq. (3): it is apparentthe discrepancybetween the dif-
f i x e d - b a s es t r u c t u r e . 1 ' e r e net v a l u a t i o n s .B e s i d e s ,t h e o b s e r v e cflu n d a r n e n t a l

3u EUROPEAN
EnlilSli,f,E
3, 1se3
 fromes between the wave fields -eeneratedby the vibrating
p i l e s : t h i s i m p l i e s t h e d y n a m i c i m p e d a n c e so f t h e p i l e
Bord et ol. (1991)
-
A group be strongly dependenton fiequency and on pile
!
o spacing.
'!

0
o
^
lOU
- UBC

I
ta a
However, the applicationol' the method of Dobry
E and Gazetasto the Jalapabuilding foundation (Paolucci
C
o a
I and Faccioli, 1992) showed that in the low-frequency
E , r a n g e o f i n t e r e s tf o r t a l l b u i l d i n g s i n M e x i c o C i t y 1 1<
o .2
!
C 1 . 5 H z a p p r o x i m a t e l y ) .t h e d e p e n d e n c eo f t h e S S I p a -
f
L rameters on frequency can be disregarded.
10t I t w a s a l s o s h o w n t h a t t h e s o i l h e t e r o g e n e i t yi n t h e
Height (m) first few meters from the surface, nray introduce impor-
tant variationson the evaluationof the static impedanc-
S h e or - w o l l s e s o f t h e p i l e g r o u p . T w o e x t r e m e s i t u a t i o l l sm a y b e
imagined at the surf-ace:the pile may be separatedfiom
- Bord et ol. (1991)
the soil Qtile gopltittq), or there could be a perfect con-
r5
' oa - UBC
tact between the pile. the basementand a ri-qidsoil lay-
0 ^
A er. The first case may lead to a strong reduction of the
o 10u
E a
p i l e s t i f f n e s sa n d d a m p i n g ( N o v a k , 1 9 9 1 ) , a n d c a n b e
c approximately taken into account through a substantial
o
E recluctionof the shear wave velocity of the soil profile;
o
!
C
the second case will lead to a strong stiff'ening eff'ect
L
l
o n t h e t o u n d a t i o n ,a s o b s e r v e db y M u r i h e t a l . ( 1 9 9 3 )
Io-r o n a t h r e e s t o r y b u i l d i n - qi n M e x i c o C i t y .
1oo 101 lo2
Helqht (m) Tab. 2 shows the spring and dashpot coefficients for
horizontal and rocking motion calculatedfor the Jalapa
F i g .t ) - t t ' . t . t p , " ' , erde l a t i o nb e t w e e nt h e f u n t l a m e l l t apl c r i o d o f v i b r a t i o n
building foundation by the program DYNA2 (Noverket
a n dt h e h c i g h t o f m o m e n t r e s i s t i n gf i a n l e s a n d s h c a r - w a l l sb u i l d i n g s ' a l . , 1 9 8 3 )t o r t h r e e c a s e s :t h e s o i l p r o f i l e o f F i g . 3 w i t h
T h et h i c k l i n c r e t ' c r st o t h e p a r a m e t e r sp r o p t l s e dh y B a r d e t a l ( 1 9 9 1 ) a weak surface layer 5 m thick and having a shear
a n t l t h e t h i n l i n e t o t h e p a r a m c t c r so f t h e U n i f o r m B u i l d i n g C o d c ' wave velocity V, = 40 m/s (case Dl); tl-resarneprol'ile
D a s h e dI i n c s i n d i c a t et h e c o n f i d e n c cl i r n i t s o f B a r d ' s t i r r r n u l a T h c f u n -
l o d e l o f t h e J a l a p ab u i l d i n g
with a rlgirl surfacelayer having V. = 100 m/s (D2): an
d a m e n t aple r i o d se v a l u a t e db y t h c s t r u c t u r am
a r ei n d i c u t e i bl y a t l o t . w h e r e a st h o s c e s t i m a t e df r o r n t h e r e c t l r d so f t h e e q u i v a l e n th o m o g e n e o u ss o i l p r o f i l e w i t h V . = 6 8 m { l
t w o e v c n t sl l r c i n d i c a t e db y a t r i a n g l e . (n:). fne strong influence of the choice of the soil
profile in the first few meters is apparent.
In Tab. 2 the subscriptsL and I refer to the horizon-
neriodlies outside the confidenceinterval of the Bard's tal motion in the longitudinal and transversaldirection,
iormula for both events, particularly in the L direction' the subscripts RL and RI to the rocking around the
There are two pctssiblereasons for explaining this correspondingaxes. The damping values approximately
discrepancy:either the structural model is not suitable correspond to 80% of critical for lateral vibration and
for an accuratedescriptionof the dynamic behaviour of 4 0 a / ol o r r o c k i n g v i b r a t i o n .
thebuilding, possibly becauseof inadequatestrengthen- The values prescribed by the Technical Norms for
ing afier the 1985 earthquake;or the evaluation of the e a r t h q u a k er e s i s t a n td e s i g n i n t h e F e d e r a l D i s t r i c t o f
fundamental period of the fixed-base structure as Mexico are also shown in Tab. 2 (TN). The prescrip-
shownin this section is not accurate.In the latter case, tions derive from the simplifying assumption that the
spectacularSSI effects should be observed to justify lateral stiffness of the toundation with the pile group
the dramatic shifting of the fundamental period of the equals that of the same foundation without the pile
s t r u c t u r ef.r o m t h e v a l u e s T = 1 . 2 8 s a n d T = 0 . 6 3 s g r o u p , o w i n g t o t h e g r e a t l a t e r a ll l e x i b i l i t y o f t h e p i l e
yieldedby the structural model, respectively for the T iyttelt-t with respect to that of the soil; tor rocking vi-
a n d L d i r e c t i o n s .t o t h e v a l u e s l i s t e d i n T a b . l . bration the effect of friction pile groups was assumed
to increase the stiffness by 25aL with respect to the
same founclation without piles (Rosenblueth and Re-
Evaluation of the pile group impedances sendiz, cit.). No specific indications are given for
d a m p i n g c o e f f i c i e n t s .T h e v a l t r e s i n d i c a t e c li n T a b . 2
T h e a n a l y s i so f t h e d y n a m i c b e h a v i o u r o f a l a r g e
pile group is a conrplicated task, due to the complex
natureof the pile-soil-pile interaction.A comprehensive T a b . 2 - S p r i n g a n d c l n s h p o tc o c f f i c i e n t s f b r t h c J a l a p a b u i l d i n g p t l e
[roup lbundation(Sl units)
state-of-the-art with a review of the existing methods to
c o p ew i t h t h i s r o b l e m c a n b e f b u n d i n N o v a k ( 1 9 9 1 ) '
p k1 k, L^, ku, (, (r (rr |,t
D o b r y a n c lG a z e t a s( 1 9 8 8 ) d e m o n s t r a t e db. y a s i m p l e DI '+.63E1J. l . 7 7 E t t l . . 3 l E l l l . 0 3 E l l 1 . 2 5 E 7 1 . 2 3 E 7 5 . : 1 5 E 9 l . 2 l E l 0
l o d e l , t h a t t h e m a i n a s p e c t so f t h e p i l e - s o i l -
p h y s i c am D2 l . t t 0 E 9 1 . 8 5 E 92 . l 7 E i l . 1 . 9 . 3 E 1 17 . . + t t E 7 1 . 3 4 E 1 7 . l l E 9 l 6 7 E l 0
D3 1.03E9 1 . 0 6 E 9 l . l l O E l l , 1 . 0 9 E 1 1 l t . l l E 7 7 7 6 E 7 9 . l l E 9 2 . 2 9 E 1 0
pile interactionunder dynamic loads can be explained -
TN 7 . 0 8 E n 7 . O n E l ll . . 1 6 E l 4 . l u E l l
in terms of the constructive and destructive interf-erence

Eu"Egff!,ry,.- 39
Efiti,{iE"fiiZ 3. 1993

-5.-..
refer to a constant V = 68 m/s, ancl are rather close to are not reported here lbr sake of brevity. Four spectral
those of case D3, except for an unclerestirnationof the r a t i o s a r e i l l u s t r a t e di n e a c h f i g u r e : ( a ) r i l . r " . ( b )
lateralstitfnesses. , h 4 ' ) , ( c ) h c bl ( . r ' r- . r [ ,- l t $ y . ( d ) v 1/,. r . . T h e
. r i / ( . v i+
following remarksare in order:
- The spectralratio (b) is intlcpcntlentof sg purunt-
Parameter study of the dynamic behaviour of the (lars.
simple model - T h e s p e c t r a lr a t i o ( c ) m e a s u r e st h e r e l a t i v e i m p o r -
t a n c e o l - r o c k i n - em o t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p u r e l y
T h e r e s p o n s eo f t h e 3 d o f s y s t e m o f F i - e .7 w a s c a l - s t r u c t u r a lm o t i o n , t h u s i n d i c a t i n - ut h e i n f l u e n c e o l ' S S I
culated in the fiequency domain considering the difter- eff-ects.It rnay be easily shown by eq. ( l), assumingfbr
ent parametersets of Tab. 2. The coupleclterms {-, ancl sirlplicity t,, - 0 and no damping, that in the frequency
( ' , \ w e r e f b u n d t o h a v e l i t t l e i n f l u e n c eo n t h e r e s u l t s ,a s c l o m a i nt h i s r a t i o e q u a l sk , h . l G o . . l + t ) , a n d i t s v a l u e
well as the dependenceon fiequency of the SSI param- l b r z e r o f r e q u e n c yi s k , l t ) 1 k ,T. h u s . i f t h e s o i l i s r i g i d
e t e r s .B a s e do n t h e s t r u c t u r a lm o d e l o f t h e b u i l d i n - qt h e
valueslisted in Tab. 3 were considered.
'l-ab.
The el'f'ectivemass ,lr representsthe 837c and J6c/c - 1- E f f l c t i v e r r a s s ( r r , ) . n t a s sl o u n t l a t i o n( / 7 ? . .s) u , m of ccntroidal
o f t h e t o t a l m a s s o f t h e b u i l d i n g i n t h e L a n c lT d i r e c - n r o r ] r e n tosf i n e r t i a( . / ) u n d c l f c t t i r r . h c i . . ' 1tl irrtt , ' f t l r t . l a l a p ah r r i l r l i n s

t i o n , r e s p e c t i v e l yT. h e s t r u c t u r a ls t i l l h e s sA ' ,a n c ls t r u c -
l r , (K g ) ir,,(Kg) ./ (Kg.mr) / ? ( r n)
tural damping ratio { were chosen to give the sarne L 5.9786 L lllE6 6.5.1E11 I 1..10
l ' u r r d a m e n t af lr e c l u e n c ya n d a m p l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e f i x e c l - T 5.'+-3E6 L lEE6 3.70Eu 32 . 5 . 1
base system as estillated from earthquake recorcls;i.e.
difl'erent sets of A', ancl ( values were chosen tbr the
t w o e v e n t s a n d t h e t w o c o m p o n e n t sa c c o r d i n s t o t h e
clasheclcurves of Fig. tt. The values consiclerecl are list- 'lab.,l
Stluclural stil'lltcss /, (N/nr) and tlunrpine ratio ( for thc 3 dol'
eri in Tab. 4. ntotlcl ol the Jalapl building
T h e c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n o b s e r v a t i o n sa n c l p r e c l i c -
t i o n s b y t h e 3 c l o l ' m o c l e lw i t h t h e t h r e e s e t s o f t h e i n - tjlRS'f trvIrNl' Sti('Ol'lt) Ir\1frNT

t e r a c t i o np a r a l n e t e r sa r e s h o w n i n F i g g . l 0 a n d I I f ' o r r ( [' (
t h e T a n d L d i r e c t i o n r e s p e c t i v e l ya n d t h e l ' i r s t e v e r r t . L L,1788 0.04 l.22E,l.i 0.06
S i r n i l a r r e s u l t sw e r e o b t a i n e c fl b r t h e s e c o n de v e n t . b u t I 3.69E7 0.04 3.2-5E,7 0.0.s

First event - T - hq/(x,--xo-hq) Firstevent-T_xot/xn

2.O 2.5
1.8
1.6 2.O
1.4
1.2 1.5
1.0
.8 1.0
.6
_4
.2
.0
J 4 5 6 7 A 2 J 4 5 6 7 a 9
1oo
lrequency (Hz) frequency (Hz)

Firstevent-T-x.,t/y First event - t - *tt/("or,hp)

20 20
t8 18
to 16
t4
irl\ D2
12 12
l , l l D1
t0 10
8 8
6 6
4
2 2
c c
5 6 7 a e 1Oo 2 J 4 5 6 i S 9 1OO
frequency (Hz) trcquency (Hz)

3 n n c l: 1 a n d t h e i n t c r a c t i o np a r a r . n e t e rosf - l ' a b .2 . T h e f i r s t c v e n t a n d t r a n s v e r s acl o m D o n c n ti s c o n s i t l e r e d .

EUROPEAN
40 Effiii9!fif,,.3, 1ss3

t-
 First event - L - h9/Q,-xo-hcp) f.rst event - L - rO,/"q
2.O 2.5
1.8
1.6 2.O
1.4
1.2 1.5
1.O
.8 1.O
.6
.4 .5
_2
.0 .0
+ 5 6 7 I s 100 4 5 6 1 8 I 100
lrequency (Hz) frequency (Hz)

Firstevent-L-x,7xn First event - L - xrt,(ot*hp)

20 2Q
tb 1B
e x p e r i m e nIt o
t o 16
D3
14
D2
12 12
D1
10 10
8 8
6 6
4 4 /'/
2 2
0 0
2 f , 4 5 6 7 4 9 100 3 4 s 6 7 I 9 100
'frequency (Hz) frequency (Hz)

S a n r ca s F i g l 0 f o r t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l c o n t p o n c n t

n o - I
.15 .15

.10 .10

.o5 .05

E n n E

\l
_.10

0 10 15 20 25 0 t0 15 20 25 J0

Roof displocement- I Roo{ displocoment- L

1.5 1.5

1.O 1.0

.5 .5

E n E n

_1.0

0 20 15 20 25
3ec 3ec

t d a s h e dl i n e ) .

w i t h r e s p e c tt o t h e s t r u c t u r e ( t , > > k , l f \ , t h e s p e c t r a l duction of damping would give a better agreementfor

ratio (c) approacheszero and SSI effects are negligible. spectral ratio (a) but it would make the agreement
The soil parametersconsidered generally overestimate worse fbr spectralratio (d). The parameterset Dl, rep-
t h i s r a t i o , e s p e c i a l l yt h e D l s e t . resenting the soil column with a weak surface layer,
- The parameter sets D2 and D3 give results that g e n e r a l l yg i v e s u n s a t i s f a c t o r yr e s u l t s .
are generally in good agreement with the observed The observed displacement time-history of the first
d a t a ,e s p e c i a l l yi n t h e T d i r e c t i o n .T h e S S I d a m p i n g i s event and that predicted by the 3 dof model with the
probably too high in the L direction; however, the re- D 2 o a r a m e t e rs e t a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i e . 1 2 : n o t e t h e

EUROPEAN
'{Ei#8!i,nZ3. 1se3 4l
s i n r i l a r i t yb e t w e e nt h e o b s e r v e dr o o l ' d i s p l a c e m e n ta n d
F ixed-Ha.d Pilaa
r o c k i n g o l ' t h e b a s e .R a t h e rg o o d a g r e e m e n ti s o b t a i n e c l a .ingls 9il.

i n t h e T c l i r e c t i o na l s o l b r t h e r o c k i n g v i b r a t i o n l r o d e : A l'2 Pitrl

in the L direction the rool' motion is clearly over- O ..a Fl.|

c l a r n p e cal .s a l r e a c l yi n c l i c a t e cbl y F i g . l l a , b u t t h e p r e - O 6'6 cilo

c l i c l i o no f t h e r o c k i n g m o t i o n i s s a t i s f a c t o r y .
Thus, a sirnple 3 clof moclel using SSI pararneters
that are calculated indepenclentlyof earthquakerecorcls
c a n p r o v i d e a s a t i s f a c t o r yp r e d i c t i o n o f m o d e r a t eS S I
e f f e c t s .N o t e h o w e v e r t h a t , o w i n g t o t h e l a c k o l - a s a t - 0-o
i s f a c t o r ys t r u c t u r a lm o d e l o f t h e b u i l d i n g , t h e s t r u c t u r a l
stiffness and darnping were estimated l'rom the ob- 0,lo

servecldata. If l' is derived from the structural model

o f t h e b u i l d i n g . S S I e f t e c t s b e c o m e e n o r m o u s ,w i t h a b o.ou
clecreasein the fundamentalfiequency of the system up
t o 1 0 0 7 oi n t h e s t i f f - e r( L ) d i r e c t i o n . f o r t h e s e t D l . A 0.c6

very important rocking motion would be also observed,

0.o'
with the spectral ratio (c) sreater than one even tor D2
s e t . S t r o n g d i s a g r e e m e n tw i t h o b s e r v a t i o n sw o u l d b e
0.02
a l s o o b t a i n e d w i t h o t h e r S S I p a r a m e l e rs e t s .

0.0 0.r o.z o.l o-. 0-5

Kinematic interaction effects ud
" V,(L)
Up to this point only inertial SSI effectswere con-
sidereca 'lnd the incident seismicmotion was assumed F i g . l : 1 K i n c n r a t i c r c s p o n s cl u n c t i o r r so I N J N r c l a t i v c l l r i - t i d f i x e d -
t o b e u n a f f e c t e d b y t h e p r e s e n c eo f t h e f o u n d a t i o n . h e a d p i l e g r o u p si n n o n - h o r r r o g e n e o su os i l . l ' h e s p a c i n gb e t w e e np i l e s i s
c o n s t a n tl i x a l l g r o u p sc o n s i d e r e da. ) H o r i z o n t a ln r o t i o l to l ' t h c p i l c ' sc a p ;
However, dependin-eon the shapeof the fbundation,on
b ) r o c k i n - en r o t i o n o f t h e c a p m u l t i p l i e d b y t h e t l i t r n c t c r o f t l r c s i n g l c
t h e c l o m i n a n tw a v e l e n g t h so f t h e i n c i d e n t s e i s m i c m o - p i l e .F r o n rK e F a nc t u l . . 1 9 9 1 .
tion and on its direction of propagation.this assunrption
may be misleading and significant kinematic intenrction
eff'ects may occur. These are due to the scattering of Rncpmpnl /trrep-(iall,

t h e i n c i d e n t w a v e m o t i o n i n t h e p r e s e n c eo f t h e f o u n -
d a t i o n a n d r e s u l t i n a v a r i a t i o n o l ' t h e e x c i t a t i o na t t h e
base of the structure with respect to the free-field.
Generally, the smaller incident wavelenghtsare filtered
a n d a r o t a t i o n a l c o m p o n e n to f m o t i o n i s i n t r o d u c e d .
For surface foundations,kinematic effbcts are gener-
a l l y n e g l i g i b l e l b r v e r t i c a l i n c i d e n c e ,w h e r e a sf o r o b -
l i q u e l y p r o p a g a t i n - qw a v e s t h e f i l t e r i n g m a y t y p i c a l l y
arise for wavelenghts smaller than the length of the
I'oundationa , s i l l u s t r a t e di n F i g . 1 3 . F o r p i l e f o u n d a -
tions, the relative rigidity of the single pile with respect
to the soil may induce kinematic interaction effbcts
even for vertically incident waves, in that the flexural
rigidity of the pile will tend to filter the high frequency

10-2 10 -
oO

F i g . l 5 - O b s e r v e ds p e c t r i l lr a t i o s b e t w e c nt h e t o t l r l n r o t i o no f t h c b l s c -
r n c n t a n d t h c f r c c - f i e l d m o t i o n f o r t h c l w o h o r i z o n t a l c o m p o n e n t sa n d
the two events.

m o t i o n o f t h e s o i l . K e F a n e t a l . ( 1 9 9 1 ) o b s e r v e dt h a t
the kinematic response of a pile group subjected to
seismic motion is mainly affected by the soil profile
direction of trovel a n d t h e r e l a t i v er i g i d i t y o f t h e s o i l a n d t h e s i n g l e p i l e s
\ direction oi porticle mctrod fbrming the -qroup;the piles configuration, in terms of
number and spacing, may have significant efl-ectsonly
F i g . l . l - F i l t el i n g b r r l i r u n t i a l i o n o l a p l r n c h r r n r o n i c u u l c inciclcnt al
on the rotation of the cap, whereas its influence on the
an arrglc a. Fxrnr Cnrusc antl Jcnnings. 1975
h o r i z o n t a lm o t i o n i s g e n e r a l l yl e s s i m p o r t a n t( F i g . l 4 ) .

EUROPEAN
,11 '1Eil1!i,f,Z3, 1ss3
T h e y a l s o p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e c o r n e r f r e q u e n c y ,b e - quencies above - 2 Hz, which correspondsto non-di-
yond which the horiz-ontalkinematic response of the mensional fiequency 4 - 0.08, in agreement with pub-
pile group begins to decay. strongly dependson the soil lished results for irregular soil profiles.
p r o f i l e : t h e y i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e n o n - d i m e n s i o n a lc o r n e r
frequency au: atl lV., ar being the circular frequency, Acknowledgements
d t h e d i a m e t e ro f t h e p i l e , V . t h e s h e a r w a v e v e l o c i t y
of the soil at the end of the pile, may vary from 0.05 This study was supported by the Commission of the
f o r s t r o n g l y i n h o m o g e n e o u ss o i l s t o 0 . 2 - 0 . 3 f o r a h o - E u r o p e a nC o m m u n i t i e s u n d e r g r a n t C I I - 0 6 7 4 - 1 .
m o g e n e o u sl a y e r . The author would like to express his gratitude to
Theseindications were verified on the observeddata Roberto Meli who kindly invited him at the UNAM as
from the Jalapa building. The spectral ratios of the well as to David Muri6 Vila and Ricardo Gonzales
b a s e m e nm t otion relative to the free-field were calcu- Alcorta who friendly collaborated during this project.
latedas a function of a . with cl = 0.44 m and V = 6tJ He is also especiallyindebtedto Mario Ordaz fbr many
m/s,tor the two events ilnd the two horizontal cdmpo- valuable suggestionsduring the analysisof the data and
n e n t s( F i g . l 5 ) : a c o r n e r f r e q u e n c y 4 - 0 . 0 8 c a n b e to Ezio Faccioli for his generous support during the
observed,close to the value suggestedfor inhomogene- whole project and the critical revision of the manu-
o u ss o i l c o n d i t i o n s . script.
N o t e t h a t , o w i n g t o t h e r e a s o n a b l ea s s u m p t i o n o f
v e r t i c a li n c i d e n c eo f s e i s m i c m o t i o n , t h e k i n e m a t i c i n -
teractionis probably affected mainly by pile group ef- References
fectsrather than wave-passageeff-ects.This is also sug-
gestedby the observation that approximately the same Bard P.Y., H. Afra and P. Argoul (1991),<Seismic
d-r)value is folrncl for both horizontal components: if responseof buildings during earthquakes:experi-
t h e k i n e m a t i c i n t e r a c t i o nw e r e d u e t o o b l i q u e l y p r o p a - mental results from strong motion data>, Proc. Int.
gatin-qwaves, difftrent a-,,woulcl be generally observed Workshop on Seismology and Earthquake Engi-
in the two directions. n e e r i n g ,A p r t l 2 2 - 2 6 , 1 9 9 1 ,C E N A P R E D , M e x i c o
City.
Bouwkamp, J.G., J.P. Kollegger and R.M. Stephen
Conclusions (1980), <Dynamic propertiesof a twelve-story pre-
fabricatedpanel building", Rep. n. UCB/EERC-S0/
Despite the strengtheningundertakenafter moderate 29 Earthq.Engng. Res. Cen., University of Cali-
structural damage suff'eleclcluring the 198-5Michoac6n fornia, Berkeley.
earthquake,the Jalapa building appearsto display non- C r o u s e C . B . a n d P . C . J e n n i n g s( 1 9 7 5 ) , < S o i l - s t r u c t u r e
l i n e a r b e h a v i o u r a t r a t h e r s n . r a l le x c i t a t i o n l e v e l s . t o - interaction during the San Fernando earthquake>,
gether with a degradation of its dynamic properties B u l l . S e i s m .S o c . A m . , V o l . 6 5 , p p . l 3 - 3 6 .
w i t h r e s p e c tt o t h o s e c a l c u l a t e db y a c o n v e n t i o n a la p - D o b r y R . a n d G . G a z e t a s( 1 9 8 8 ) , < S i m p l e m e t h o d f o r
proach. Due to the uncertaintiesin the determinationof dynamic stilfness and damping of floating pile
t h e d y n a m i c p r o p e r t i e so f t h e b u i l d i n g , t h e s e w e r e e s - groups>,G6otechnique,Vol. 38, n. 4, pp. 557-574.
timated in a simple way from the earthquakerecords; a F a c c i o l i E . ( 1 9 9 3 ) . P e r s o n a lc o m m u n i c a t i o n .
more complete identification analysis of the structural F e n v e sG . L . a n d G . S e r i n o ( 1 9 9 0 ) , < S o i l - s t r u c t u r ei n -
properties is currently carried on by the Mexican team teraction in buildings from earthquake records>,
involved on this project. E a r t h q . S p e c t r a ,V o l . 6 , p p . 6 4 1 - 6 5 5 .
Becauseof the flexibility of the building, SSI effects G a z e t a sG . ( 1 9 9 1 ) , < F o u n d a t i o nv i b r a t i o n s > , i n H . Y .
were not as important as could be expectedtor the soil Fang ed.: Foundation Engineering Handbook, 2"r
conditions in Mexico City: the increment of the funda- e d i t i o n , C h a p t e r 1 5 , V a n N o s t r a n dR e i n h o l d .
mental period of the interactingsystem was found to be Jaime A., M.P. Romo and D. Res6ndiz(1990), <Behav-
approximately lOCk in the T direction and 25o/oin the ior of friction piles in Mexico City clay>, ASCE J.
s t i l l b r L d i r e c t i o n . A s a c o n s e q u e n c et,h e a c c u r a c yi n G e o t e c h .E n g n g . ,V o l . 1 1 6 , n . 6 , p p . 9 1 5 - 9 3 1 .
the evaluation o1'SSI parameterswas found to have a Jennings P.C. and J. Bielak (1973), <Dynamics of
significant influence only on the L direction. Better building-soil interaction",Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.,
agreement is found for the soil profile with a stiffer Vol. 63, pp. 9-48.
surfacelayer, even if the radiation damping is probably Kagawa, T. and M.A. Al-Khatib (1993), <Earthquake
overestimated. response of a 3O-story building during the Loma
For the building at study, the prescriptions of the Prieta earthquake>, Proc. 3'u Int. Conf. on Case
M e x i c o C i t y s e i s m i cc o d e i n t e r m s 0 1 ' e v a l u a t i o no f S S I . H i s t . i n G e o t e c h .E n g n g . , V o l . I , p p . 5 4 7 - 5 5 3 .
parameterswere found to be in rather good agreement K e F a n , G . G a z e t a s ,A . K a y n i a , E . K a u s e l a n d S . A h -
with the calculationsl'ronr more sophisticatedmethods. m a d ( 1 9 9 1 ) ,< K i n e m a t i cs e i s m i cr e s p o n s eo f s i n g l e
However, neglectingthe lateral stitfnesso1'the piles, as p i l e s a n d p i l e g r o u p s > ,A S C E J . G e o t e c h .E n g n g . ,
i t i s a s s u m e cb l y the code, on the evaluationof the V o l . l l ' 7, n . 1 2 . p p . 1 8 6 0 -l 8 7 9 .
d y n a m i c i m p e d a n c eo 1 ' t h e l b u n d a t i o n l e a d s t o s o m e M e l i R . , D . M u r i 6 a n d R . Q u a a s( 1 9 9 3 ) , < S t u d y o f s i t e
d i s a g r e e m e no t n the valuesol-horizontal stiffness. effects and building responsein Mexico City dur-
Kinematic interaction el'l'ectsare apparent fbr fre- ing earthquakes>,Technical Report for the Com-

'4,Zii3!i,f,E
EUROPEAN
3. 1ss3 43
l

mission of the EuropeanCommunities,

Instituto de O v a n d o E . ( 1 9 9 3 ) , < D e t e r m i n a c i 6 np r e l i m t n a r
I n g e n i e r i a ,U N A M , M e x i c o C i t v . de las
M u r i i i D . a n d S . M o r e n o ( 1 9 9 3 ) ,. , D j e r m i n a c i o n propiedadesdiniimicasdel subsueiobajo
el ediflcio
de las J a l a p a > ,I n t e r n a l R e p o r t , I n s t i t u t o d e I n g e n i e r i a ,
propiedadesdiniimicas y los efectos
de interacci6n UNAM, Mexico.
s u e l o - e s t r u c t u rdae u n e d i f i c i o c l e l 4
n i v e l e s > ,I n _ PaolucciR. and E. Faccioli (1992), <Study
ternal Report, Instituto de Ingenieria, of site ef_
UNAM, f'ectsand building responsein Mexico City
Mexico. during
Muriii D., R. Gonziiles ancl J.M. E,spinosa earthquakes>,Technical Report for the Commisl
(1993), uf rhe E,uropeanCommunities, politecnico
< E l - e c t o sd e i n t e r a c c i 6 ns u e l o _ e s t r u a t u r u :i,91 di
en Ia re_ Milano, Italy.
spuesta sismica de un edificio instrumentado>,
P a p a g e o r - q i oAu. S . a n d B . C . L i n ( 1 9 9 1 ) , < A n a l y s i s
S e r i e sd e l I n s t i t u t o d e I n g e n i e r i a ,n . of
5 5 - 5 ,U N A M , recorded earthquakeresponseand identification
Mexico. of
N o v a k M . , M . S h e r a ,B . E l S h a r n o u b y a multi-story structure accounting for foundation
and L. Et Hif_ interaoion effects>, Int. Journ. Silt lyn.
n a w y ( 1 9 U 3 ) ,< D y N A 2 _ A c o m p u r e r Earthq.
p r o g r a mf b r Engng, pp. 5-5-64.
c a l c u l a t i o n o f r e s p o n s eo f r i g i d f o u n d a t i o n s
to R o s e n b l u e t hE . a n d D . R e s 6 n d i z( l 9 g g ) , < D i s p o s i c i o n e s
d y n a m i c l o a d s > ,R e v i s e d u " r r i - o n l 9 g g ,
Report n. Reglamentariasde l9g7 para Tener en Cuenta
t t 3 - l - 5 ,S A C D A I n c . , L o n d o n , O n r a r i o , In_
Canada. teracci6n Diniimica Suelo_Estructura>,
Novak M. (1991), <piles under dynamic Series of
i o a a s o ,p r o c . the Institute of Engineering, Universidad Nacional
2"'r Int. Conf. on Recent Aivances in
Geotech. Aur6noma de M6xico, n. 5Og.
Engn-qa . nd Soil Dyn., St. Louis, Missouri,
March W o l f J . P . ( 1 9 8 _ - 5<) D, y n a m i c s o i l _ s t r u c t u r ien t e r a c t i o n > ,
1 9 9 1 ,V o l . I I I , p p . 2 4 3 3 _ 2 4 5 6 .
P r e n l i c e - H a lIl n c .

44
"#iilpl,nz
3,1es3