Wolf, Institute of Hydraulics and Energy, Department of Civil Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology Lausanne, CH1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
CCC 00988847/97/09093119$1750 Received 8 August 1996
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 28 January 1997
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL. 26, 931949 (1997)
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION
VIBRATIONS
JOHN P. WOLF*
Institute of Hydraulics and Energy, Department of Civil Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne, CH1015 Lausanne,
Switzerland
SUMMARY
The foundation on deformable soil, which, in general, radiates energy, can be represented in structural dynamics as
a simple springdashpotmass model with frequencyindependent coecients. For the two limiting cases of a site, the
homogeneous halfspace and the homogeneous layer xed at its base, the coecients are specied in tables for varying
parameters such as ratios of dimensions and Poissons ratio. Rigid foundations on the surface and with embedment are
considered for all translational and rotational motions. In a practical analysis of soilstructure interaction this dynamic
model of the foundation is coupled directly to that of the structure, whereby a standard dynamics program is used.
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997)
No. of Figures: 18. No. of Tables: 7. No. of References: 17.
KEY WORDS: dynamic stiness; foundation vibration; soilstructure interaction; springdashpotmass model
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Statement of problem
The fundamental objective of a dynamic unbounded soilstructureinteraction analysis is illustrated in
Figure 1. A structure with nite dimensions is embedded in deformable soil of innite dimensions. Often the
structuresoil interface, called the foundation in the following, can be regarded as rigid. The timedependent
load can either act directly on the structure, arising for instance from rotating machines or be introduced into
the dynamic system via incident waves as from earthquakes. The dynamic response of the structure
interacting with the soil is to be determined.
The modelling of the structure, which can also exhibit nonlinear behaviour, is well developed. The
niteelement method is used, which with a nite number of degrees of freedom can be interpreted physically
as consisting of generalised springs, dashpots and masses. Powerful and userfriendly computer programs for
the dynamic analysis of structures are available. In contrast, diculties exist in modelling the foundation on
linear soil. Its deformability and the radiation of energy towards innity must be considered. For large
projects of critical facilities such as the seismic analysis of nuclear power plants, rigorous procedures based on
threedimensional elastodynamics as the boundaryelement method or the consistent innitesimal nite
element cell method are available. Due to the considerable manpower and computational eort required to
apply these rigorous methods, it is dicult to perform the necessary parametric studies and to investigate
alternative design schemes. They obscure physical insight and belong with their mathematical complexity
more to the discipline of applied computational mechanics than to civil engineering.
For everyday practical foundationvibration analyses, the majority, simple physical models can be used with
a small number of degrees of freedom and a few springs, dashpots and masses whose frequencyindependent
Figure 1. Objective of dynamic unbounded soilstructure interaction analysis
coecients follow directly for the important cases from tables. The modelling of the foundation on
deformable soil is thus performed in the same way as that of the structure. It is also possible to couple the
models of the structure and of the soil and to perform a dynamic unbounded soilstructureinteraction
analysis using a standard structural dynamics program directly in the time domain. This natural approach
considers the sequence of developments from one time step to the next and also permits the structure to
exhibit nonlinear behaviour, which can only be analysed eciently in the time domain.
1.2. Strengthofmaterials approach to foundation dynamics
The springdashpotmass models can be regarded as a rst step towards developing a strengthofmaterials
approach to foundation dynamics, analogous to beam theory in structural analysis with a restricted deforma
tion behaviour ( plane sections remain plane). In this strengthofmaterials theory for soil the threedimen
sional homogeneous halfspace is replaced by a onedimensional truncated semiinnite cone (rod, bar) as
described in References 1 and 2. It is important to note that this truncated cone modelling a circular
foundation on the surface of a homogeneous soil halfspace corresponds exactly to a springdashpot system
(and for the rotational degrees of freedomalso to a mass moment of inertia with its own degree of freedom) as
developed in the pioneering paper` and illustrated in Reference 4. A thorough discussion is found in
References 5 and 6. The only approximation thus consists of replacing the halfspace by a truncated cone
model, which the engineer can comprehend physically. Such an approach with physical insight is better than
a mathematical approximation, which could for instance consist of neglecting certain terms with higher
derivatives in the dierential equations of threedimensional elastodynamics.
As next step, without changing the arrangement, the coecients of the springdashpotmass model can be
determined applying curve tting instead of using those of the truncated cone. This permitsfor a certain
frequency rangeto minimize the deviation (dened as the sum of the squares) of the approximate solution of
the springdashpotmass model from the rigorous result of the boundaryelement method, the consistent
innitesimal niteelement cell method or the analytical expression, when available, taken from the literature.
The simple models`
" used often in practice for a foundation on the surface of or embedded in a homogene
ous soil halfspace can be derived using this procedure. As a generalization, a systematic method has been
developed" to construct springdashpotmass models by placing the basic arrangement of the truncated
cone in parallel. After the curve tting leading to a rational function in frequency of the dynamicstiness
coecients, no further approximation is introduced. This permits foundations on the surface of or embedded
in a homogeneous soil layer xed at its base to be modelled. The coecients of the springs, dashpots and
masses are listed in tables for all degrees of freedom for varying parameters such as ratios of dimensions and
932 J. P. WOLF
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Poissons ratio. Material damping of the soil can be introduced directly in the algorithm of the spring
dashpotmass model.`
Over the years, several authors have developed other springdashpotmass models to represent a founda
tion on deformable soil. The results are only available for special cases. They are thus not listed in this
handbook type summary paper to be used directly by the practicing engineer for a broad class of everyday
foundation vibration analyses.
In passing, it is worth mentioning that by using directly truncated cones, a strengthofmaterials theory for
most cases of foundation dynamics has been developed, covering surface and embedded foundations and
piles, even in a layered halfspace.
Methods which postulate a specic wave pattern in the horizontal plane with the corresponding displace
ments also belong to the strengthofmaterials theory of foundations. This permits Greens function to
calculate irregular surface foundations and dynamicinteraction factors to consider pile group eects to be
determined.
The three types of simple physical modelsthe truncated cones, the springdashpotmass models and the
methods with a prescribed wave pattern in the horizontal planeare examined in great detail in a book`
published recently. Simple physically motivated derivations, many examples and practical applications are
addressed. Use of these simple physical models leads to some loss of precision, but this is more than
compensated for by their many advantages. The simple physical models provide physical insight and
conceptual clarity, are simple to apply (in many cases on the back of the famous envelope), exhibit sucient
generality (shape of foundation, soil prole, embedment) and lead to sucient engineering accuracy. They can
thus be applied for everyday practical foundationvibration analyses in a design oce. In addition, the simple
physical models can be used to check the results of rigorous methods such as the boundaryelement
procedure or the consistent innitesimal niteelement cell method.
1.3. Accuracy
To demonstrate the obtainable accuracy, the vertical degree of freedom of a circular rigid massless disk of
radius r
"
on the surface of a homogeneous layer xed at its base of depth d and Poissons ratio is
investigated (Figure 10). This is a very stringent test as this dynamic system is dispersive and exhibits a cuto
frequency. The following values are selected: r
"
"d and "1/3. The springdashpotmass model (Figure 11)
has, besides the degree of freedom of the foundation u
"
, also two internal degrees u
and u
`
. Four springs,
three dashpots and one mass are present with frequencyindependent coecients determined for vertical
translation, r
"
/d"1 and "1/3 from Table VI. As the springdashpotmass system is exact for statics and
the limit of innite frequency, only six coecients are independent.
For harmonic excitation of frequency the dynamicstiness coecient dened as the ratio of the
amplitude of the applied load P
"
(a
"
) to that the resulting displacement u
"
(a
"
) is written as
S(a
"
)"K[k(a
"
)#ia
"
c(a
"
) ] (1)
with the dimensionless frequency a
"
"r
"
/c
(shearwave velocity c
,
dilatationalwave velocity c
"(G/, c
"(E
A
/ with shear modulus G and constrained
modulus E
A
"G2(1!) /(1!2)). The aspect ratio z
"
/r
"
is a function of . For the horizontal and torsional
motions leading to shear strains the wave velocity c equals c
K, M"
r`
"
c`
K (2a,b)
Note that and for the rotational motions are also a function of the mass moment of inertia m of the
structure (that part which rotates as a rigid body in phase with the foundation).
936 J. P. WOLF
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table I. Geometry and wave velocity of cone model and coecients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 5 for
disk on halfspace
Motion Horizontal Vertical Rocking Torsional
Equivalent radius r
"
A
"
A
"
"
4I
"
"
2I
"
Aspect ratio
z
"
r
"
8
(2!)
4
(1!)
c
c
` 9
32
(1!)
c
c
` 9
32
Poissons ratio All )
1
3
1
3
((
1
2
)
1
3
1
3
()
1
2
All
Wave velocity c c
c
N
2c
c
N
2c
Trapped mass 0 0 24
!
1
3
A
"
r
"
0 12
!
1
3
I
"
r
"
0
MM
"3c`I
"
/z
"
Discrete K"c`A
"
/z
"
C
"cI
"
element C"cA
"
M
"I
"
z
"
model
Figure 6. Springdashpotmass model without internal degree of freedom for: (a) translation; (b) rotation
In this springdashpotmass model only the degrees of freedom of the foundation node are present. The
coecients and are selected to reproduce as closely as possible the actual response of the coupled dynamic
system (including the structure regarded as a rigid block with mass connected to the disk) in the low and
mediumfrequency ranges.
2.3. Springdashpotmass model with internal degree of freedom
This arrangement corresponding to the lower part of Figure 5(c) is shown for the motion u
"
and force P
"
in
Figure 7 with the data listed in Table III. Besides a spring with the staticstiness coecient K and a dashpot
C
"
, which connect the disk with its own mass M
"
(mass moment of inertia for rotation) to a rigid support, an
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS 937
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997)
Table II. Staticstiness and dimensionless coecients of springdash
potmass model of Figure 6 for disk on halfspace
Dimensionless coecients of
Static stiness K Dashpot Mass
Horizontal
8Gr
"
2!
058 0095
Vertical
4Gr
"
1!
085 027
Rocking
8Gr`
"
3(1!)
03
1#
3(1!)m
8r`
"
024
Torsional
16Gr`
"
3
0433
1#
2m
r`
"
m
r`
"
0045
Table III. Staticstiness and dimensionless coecients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 7 for
disk on halfspace
Dimensionless coecients of
Dashpots Masses
Static stiness
K
"
"
Horizontal
8Gr
"
2!
07804
Vertical (
1
3
0
4Gr
"
1!
08 03443"
'
1
3
09
!
1
3
044"
Rocking (
1
3
0
8Gr`
"
3(1!)
04203`
'
1
3
016
!
1
3
03402`
Torsional
16Gr`
"
3
0017 0291 0171
938 J. P. WOLF
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Figure 7. Springdashpotmass model with internal degree of freedom
internal degree of freedom u
"
K, C
"
r
"
c
K (3a,b)
M
"
"
r`
"
c`
"
K, M
"
r`
"
c`
K (3c,d)
In this springdashpotmass model the dimensionless coecients
"
,
,
"
,
,
"
,
e
r
"
`
(4a, b)
The spring K
F
with the staticstiness coecient K and the dimensionless coecient
"
of the dashpot are
specied in Table V with
C
"F
"
r
"
c
"
K (5)
For the rocking motion
"
the springdashpotmass model with one internal degree of freedom of Figure 7
with M
"P
"0 is used. Note that the corresponding coecients are dened with respect to K
P
(and not K
"P
),
although K
"P
is the coecient of the spring which is attached to the rigid support:`
C
"P
"
r
"
c
"
K
P
, C
P
"
r
"
c
K
P
, M
P
"
r`
"
c`
K
P
(6ac)
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS 939
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997)
Table IV. Staticstiness and dimensionless coecients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 7 for disk on halfspace represented
as cone model of Figure 5
Dimensionless coecients of
Dashpots Masses
Static stiness
K
"
"
Horizontal
8Gr
"
2!
0.790.39
(
1
3
111 ((1!)`/(1!2)
Vertical
4Gr
"
1!
'
1
3
157(1!) 188
!
1
3
(1!)
(
1
3
042 ((1!)`/(1!2) 052(1!)`/(1!2)
Rocking
8Gr`
"
3(1!)
'
1
3
059(1!) 035
!
1
3
(1!) 104(1!)`
Torsional
16Gr`
"
3
029 026
9
4
0
J
.
P
.
W
O
L
F
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
E
n
g
n
g
.
S
t
r
u
c
t
.
D
y
n
.
,
2
6
,
9
3
1
9
4
9
(
1
9
9
7
)
1
9
9
7
b
y
J
o
h
n
W
i
l
e
y
&
S
o
n
s
,
L
t
d
.
Figure 8. Rigid cylinder embedded in homogeneous halfspace
Figure 9. Springdashpotmass model for cylinder embedded in halfspace with coupling of horizontal and rocking motions
4. DISK ON SURFACE OF LAYER
A rigid massless disk on the surface of a homogeneous layer xed at its base of depth d is discussed
(Figure 10). For each motion u
"
with the force P
"
the springdashpotmass model with two internal degrees
of freedom u
, u
`
shown in Figure 11 is ussed. It consists of four springs K
G
, three dashpots C
G
and one mass
M with the data specied in Table VI. The ratio of the radius to the depth r
"
/d and Poissons ratio are
varied. For the translational motions the coecients equal (shear modulus G)
K
G
"k
G
Gr
"
, i"1,
2
, 4 (7a)
C
G
"c
G
G
r`
"
c
, i"1,
2
, 3 (7b)
M"mG
r`
"
c`
(7c)
For the rotational motions the righthand side of equation (7) is multiplied by an additional r`
"
, e.g.
K
G
"k
G
Gr`
"
.
5. CYLINDER EMBEDDED IN LAYER
A rigid massless cylinder embedded in a homogeneous layer with Poissons ratio "1/3 xed at its base is
discussed (Figure 12). The cylinder is laterally in contact with the neighbouring soil over the height e
. The
embedment ratio e/r
"
equals 1. For the vertical and torsional motions the springdashpotmass model with
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS 941
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997)
Table V. Staticstiness and dimensionless coecients of springdashpotmass model of Figures 7 and 9 for cylinder embedded in
halfspace
Dimensionless coecients of
Dashpots
Mass
Static stiness K
"
Horizontal
8Gr
"
2!
1#
e
r
"
068#057
e
r
"
Vertical
4Gr
"
1!
1#054
e
r
"
080#035
e
r
"
032001
e
r
"
"
038
K
P
"
8Gr`
"
3(1!)
1#23
e
r
"
#058
e
r
"
015631
e
r
"
Rocking K
"P
"K
P
!
Gr`
"
2(2!)
1#
e
r
"
e
r
"
`
!008906
e
r
"
`
040#003
e
r
"
`
033#010
e
r
"
`
!000874
e
r
"
`
Torsional
16Gr`
"
3
1#267
e
r
"
029#009
e
r
"
020#025
e
r
"
9
4
2
J
.
P
.
W
O
L
F
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
E
n
g
n
g
.
S
t
r
u
c
t
.
D
y
n
.
,
2
6
,
9
3
1
9
4
9
(
1
9
9
7
)
1
9
9
7
b
y
J
o
h
n
W
i
l
e
y
&
S
o
n
s
,
L
t
d
.
Figure 10. Rigid disk on homogeneous layer
Figure 11. Springdashpotmass model with two internal degrees of freedom
Figure 12. Rigid cylinder embedded in homogeneous layer
two internal degrees of freedom of Figure 11 is applied with the data listed in Table VII and using equation
(7). The ratios of the radius to depth r
"
/d and the contact ratio e
9
4
9
(
1
9
9
7
)
1
9
9
7
b
y
J
o
h
n
W
i
l
e
y
&
S
o
n
s
,
L
t
d
.
Table VII. Dimensionless coecients of springdashpotmass model of Figures 11 and 13 for cylinder embedded in layer (Poissons ratio
"1/3 and embedment ratio e/r
"
"1)
Vertical Horizontal Rocking Coupling Torsional
k1 !0203759 E#02 !0124401 E#02 !0125229 E#02 !0618776 E#01 !0139252 E#02
k2 #0339543 E#01 #0286199 E#01 !0583152 E#00 #0202777 E#01 !0275441 E#01
k3 !0617014 E#01 !0208541 E#02 !0814822 E!01 !0141784 E#02 #0178780 E#01
10 k4 #0166202 E#02 #0794575 E#01 #0130945 E#02 #0337083 E#01 #0161164 E#02
c1 !0918456 E#01 !0590158 E#01 !0315268 E#01 !0333135 E#01 !0774712 E!02
c2 !0596381 E#00 !0516028 E#01 !0885823 E!01 !0340080 E#01 !0736101 E#00
c3 #0131164 E#02 #0130103 E#02 #0322858 E#01 #0811310 E#01 #0858610 E#01
m !0987169 E#00 !0163126 E#02 !0680666 E#00 !0146553 E#02 !0962102 E#00
k1 !0190169 E#02 !0123585 E#02 !0918010 E#01 !0311508 E#01 !0150459 E#02
k2 #0102770 E#02 #0382788 E#01 #0934512 E#00 #0786487 E#00 #0149201 E#01
k3 !0256293 E#02 !0116229 E#02 !0466308 E#01 !0869559 E#01 !0230599 E#01
1/2 05 k4 #0480379 E#01 #0697738 E#01 #0821627 E#01 #0184030 E#01 #0132374 E#02
c1 !0803919 E#00 !0129978 E#01 !0212247 E#01 !0715314 E#00 !0513171 E#00
c2 !0378972 E#01 !0357027 E#01 !0316747 E#00 !0208337 E#01 !0403901 E#00
c3 #0131677 E#02 #0102413 E#02 #0266675 E#01 #0326137 E#01 #0511390 E#01
m !0364874 E#01 !0820645 E#01 !0342125 E#01 !0888905 E#01 !0515523 E#00
k1 !0199866 E#02 !0113528 E#02 !0801960 E#01 !0820959 E#01
k2 #0324059 E#01 #0187819 E#01 #0103933 E#01 #0236828 E#00
k3 !0138239 E#03 !0141228 E#02 !0800817 E#01 !0295213 E#00
k4 #0151110 E#02 #0837372 E#01 #0584466 E#01 #0794727 E#01
00 c1 !0577181 E#01 !0169786 E#01 !0101867 E#01 !0288545 E#00
c2 !0891247 E#01 !0396633 E#01 !0157192 E#01 !0308176 E!01
c3 #0151425 E#02 #0710633 E#01 #0313092 E#01 #0160082 E#01
m !0485815 E#02 !0142894 E#02 !0217586 E#01 !0372596 E!01
k1 !0215677 E#02 !0800686 E#01 !0112339 E#02 !0531331 E#01 !0158881 E#02
k2 #0995664 E#01 #0248098 E#01 #0271244 E#01 #0128879 E#01 !0216892 E#01
k3 !0299529 E#02 !0530555 E#01 !0112792 E#02 !0117090 E#02 #0122884 E#01
10 k4 #0122789 E#01 #0460883 E#01 #0830774 E#01 #0314281 E#01 #0175253 E#02
c1 !0214856 E#01 !0638370 E!01 !0185381 E#01 !0345899 E#01 !0770582 E#00
c2 !0703468 E#01 !0234186 E#01 !0147482 E#01 !0442673 E#01 !0114118 E#01
c3 #0195563 E#02 #0101919 E#02 #0461482 E#01 #0913903 E#01 #0899118 E#01
m !0476605 E#01 !0598035 E#01 !0101760 E#02 !0222249 E#02 !0244900 E#01
k1 !0263609 E#02 !0105510 E#02 !0812675 E#01 !0258694 E#01 !0164865 E#02
k2 #0106994 E#02 #0323771 E#01 #0327590 E#01 #0487010 E#00 #0162631 E#01
k3 !0415582 E#02 !0101866 E#02 !0183711 E#02 !0708382 E#01 !0359665 E#01
05 k4 #0391023 E#00 #0579774 E#01 #0434718 E#01 #0155304 E#01 #0138158 E#02
1/3 c1 !0734715 E!02 !0691681 E!01 !0831614 E#00 !0752538 E#00 !0786309 E#00
c2 !0101472 E#02 !0475156 E#01 !0272228 E#01 !0265221 E#01 !0129218 E#01
c3 #0195330 E#02 #0114226 E#02 #0507228 E#01 #0383021 E#01 #0600218 E#01
m !0674277 E#01 !0148975 E#02 !0147137 E#02 !0128622 E#02 !0159889 E#01
k1 !0147108 E#02 !0922525 E#01 !0736535 E#01 !0790274 E#01
k2 #0600489 E#01 #0187933 E#01 !0907967 E#00 #0176502 E!01
k3 !0355109 E#02 !0788239 E#01 !0157724 E#03 !0179897 E!01
00 k4 #0527313 E#01 #0637232 E#01 #0684877 E#01 #0788488 E#01
c1 !0203850 E#01 !0425306 E!01 !0168579 E#01 !0128670 E#00
c2 !0830045 E#01 !0368700 E#01 !0114538 E#02 !0263292 E!03
c3 #0145304 E#02 #0682700 E#01 #0130128 E#02 #0157125 E#01
m !0200705 E#02 !0139626 E#02 !0920928 E#02 !0331649 E!03
R
a
t
i
o
o
f
R
a
d
i
u
s
t
o
D
e
p
t
h
r
"
/
d
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
r
a
t
i
o
e
A
/
e
S
P
R
I
N
G

D
A
S
H
P
O
T

M
A
S
S
M
O
D
E
L
S
F
O
R
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
V
I
B
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
9
4
5
1
9
9
7
b
y
J
o
h
n
W
i
l
e
y
&
S
o
n
s
,
L
t
d
.
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
E
n
g
n
g
.
S
t
r
u
c
t
.
D
y
n
.
,
2
6
,
9
3
1
9
4
9
(
1
9
9
7
)
Figure 13. Springdashpotmass model for cylinder embedded in layer with coupling of horizontal and rocking motions
Figure 14. Hammer foundation with inertial block embedded in soil layer on rigid rock (all dimensions in meters)
The coecients of the springdashpotmass models of a cylinder embedded in a layer xed at its base
follow for the vertical, horizontal and rocking motions and for the coupling term r
"
/d"1 and e
/e"1 from
Table VII (Figure 15). In the linear case, that is without uplift, there are 4;2 degrees of freedom for the
springdashpotmass models of the soil and 2;3 rigidbody degrees of freedom for the anvil and the block.
The dynamic systems responsea free vibrationis triggered by the initial velocity of the anvil in the
vertical direction.
The coupled dynamic model of Figure 15 can straightforwardly be analysed with a structural dynamics
program permitting local nonlinearities to occur. As expected, the uplift of the anvil increases signicantly
the vertical displacement w
of the anvil when compared with the result of a linear analysis (Figure 16).
7. SOIL PRESSURE ON VERTICAL WALL FOR SEISMIC EXCITATION
Springdashpotmass models with frequencyindependent coecients and with a few internal degrees of
freedom can be constructed for practical use in many other cases. As an example, a springdashpotmass
946 J. P. WOLF
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Figure 15. Dynamic model of hammer foundation with springdashpotmass model
Figure 16. Vertical displacement of centre of anvil
model to calculate the dynamic pressure on a vertical rigid wall retaining a semiinnite soil layer on rigid
rock caused by a horizontal earthquake (Figure 17) is addressed.'
The model to perform a seismic analysis directly in the time domain is shown in Figure 18. On the mass
mwith its degree of freedom u
"
acts the load !mu E(t) with the known seismic acceleration time history of the
rocks interface u E(t). The springdashpot part has three internal degrees of freedom u
, u
`
, u
`
. The coe
cients of the mass, the 4 springs and 4 dashpots are equal to
m"0543
2
((1!) (2!)
h` (8a)
K
"!0682`
m (8b)
K
`
"!0318`
m (8c)
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS 947
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931949 (1997)
Figure 17. Vertical rigid wall retaining a semiinnite soil layer on rigid rock with prescribed horizontal seismic motion at its base
Figure 18. Springdashpotmass model to calculate resultant pressure on vertical rigid wall
K
`
"0273`
m (8d)
K
"
"2`
m (8e)
C
"!0658
m (8f )
C
`
"!0344
m (8g)
C
`
"0232
m (8h)
C
"
"
m (8i)
with Poissons ratio , mass density and layer thickness d.