Impact of initial stress field heterogeneity in dynamic soil–structure interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article covers the impact of soil initial stress field heterogeneity (ISFH) in wave‐passage analysis and in prescribed structural acceleration in the context of dynamic soil–structure interaction (DSSI) analysis. ISFH is directly related to the natural behavior of soil where a significant increase in net effective confinement, as is the case in the foundation soil under a building, tends to increase the soil's modulus and strain. This creates a heterogeneous stress field in the vicinity of the foundation elements, which results in a modification of the dynamic behavior of the soil–structure system. A simple method for considering the impact of ISFH on the value of the soil's modulus and strain was developed using the direct DSSI approach. The method was used to analyze numerical artifacts and its impact on the surface acceleration values of a nonlinear two‐dimensional (2D) numerical soil deposit under transient loading. This analysis was followed by a sample application for a three‐story, three‐bay concrete moment‐resisting frame structure erected on a deep soil deposit. Floor acceleration and relative displacement were used for comparison. The soil deposit was modeled using the typical geotechnical properties of fine‐grained, post‐glacial soil samples obtained in Eastern Canada from in situ geotechnical borehole drilling, geophysical surveys, and laboratory testing. Ground motion was based on eastern calibrated seismic signals. The results of the soil deposit analysis show that ISFH had a significant impact on surface acceleration values. The effect was found to be period‐dependent and to have a direct impact on prescribed acceleration values at the base of structure. Thus, failure to take the effects of ISFH into consideration can lead to errors in calculating prescribed structural accelerations (i.e. over‐ or underestimation).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".