EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL. 26, 931—949 (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 coeﬃcients. For the two limiting cases of a site, the homogeneous halfspace and the homogeneous layer ﬁxed at its base, the coeﬃcients are speciﬁed in tables for varying parameters such as ratios of dimensions and Poisson’s ratio. Rigid foundations on the surface and with embedment are considered for all translational and rotational motions. In a practical analysis of soil—structure 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, 931—949 (1997)
No. of Figures: 18.
No. of Tables: 7.
No. of References: 17.
KEY WORDS: dynamic stiﬀness; foundation vibration; soil—structure interaction; springdashpotmass model
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Statement of problem The fundamental objective of a dynamic unbounded soil—structureinteraction analysis is illustrated in Figure 1. A structure with ﬁnite dimensions is embedded in deformable soil of inﬁnite dimensions. Often the structure—soil 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 ﬁniteelement method is used, which with a ﬁnite 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, diﬃculties exist in modelling the foundation on linear soil. Its deformability and the radiation of energy towards inﬁnity 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 inﬁnitesimal ﬁnite element cell method are available. Due to the considerable manpower and computational eﬀort required to apply these rigorous methods, it is diﬃcult 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
* Correspondence to: J. P. Wolf, Institute of Hydraulics and Energy, Department of Civil Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne, CH1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
CCC 0098—8847/97/090931—19$17·50
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 8 August 1996 Revised 28 January 1997
932
J. P. WOLF
Figure 1. Objective of dynamic unbounded soil—structure interaction analysis
coeﬃcients 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 soil—structureinteraction 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 eﬃciently in the time domain.
1.2. Strengthofmaterials approach to foundation dynamics The springdashpotmass models can be regarded as a ﬁrst 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 semiinﬁnite 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 freedom also 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 diﬀerential equations of threedimensional elastodynamics. As next step, without changing the arrangement, the coeﬃcients of the springdashpotmass model can be determined applying curve ﬁtting instead of using those of the truncated cone. This permits—for a certain frequency range—to minimize the deviation (deﬁned as the sum of the squares) of the approximate solution of the springdashpotmass model from the rigorous result of the boundaryelement method, the consistent inﬁnitesimal ﬁniteelement 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 ﬁtting leading to a rational function in frequency of the dynamicstiﬀness coeﬃcients, no further approximation is introduced. This permits foundations on the surface of or embedded in a homogeneous soil layer ﬁxed at its base to be modelled. The coeﬃcients of the springs, dashpots and masses are listed in tables for all degrees of freedom for varying parameters such as ratios of dimensions and
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
933
Poisson’s 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 speciﬁc wave pattern in the horizontal plane with the corresponding displace ments also belong to the strengthofmaterials theory of foundations. This permits Green’s function to calculate irregular surface foundations and dynamicinteraction factors to consider pile group eﬀects to be determined. The three types of simple physical models—the truncated cones, the springdashpotmass models and the methods with a prescribed wave pattern in the horizontal plane—are 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 suﬃcient generality (shape of foundation, soil proﬁle, embedment) and lead to suﬃcient engineering accuracy. They can thus be applied for everyday practical foundationvibration analyses in a design oﬃce. In addition, the simple physical models can be used to check the results of rigorous methods such as the boundaryelement procedure or the consistent inﬁnitesimal ﬁniteelement 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 ﬁxed at its base of depth d and Poisson’s ratio is investigated (Figure 10). This is a very stringent test as this dynamic system is dispersive and exhibits a cutoﬀ 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 coeﬃcients 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 inﬁnite frequency, only six coeﬃcients are independent. For harmonic excitation of frequency the dynamicstiﬀness coeﬃcient deﬁned 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 _{} ). In this complexvariable notation K represents the staticstiﬀness coeﬃcient, k(a _{} ) the dimensionless spring coeﬃcient and c(a _{} ) the corres ponding damping coeﬃcient. From the comparison of k(a _{} ) and c(a _{} ) calculated with the springdashpot mass model shown as a thick line in Figure 2 with the rigorous solution denoted as exact of elastocynamics it follows that the agreement is good. In particular, the springdashpotmass model can represent accurately the vanishing c(a _{} ) below the cutoﬀ frequency, where no radiation of energy occurs. As an example of a dynamic analysis in the time domain the vertical displacement u _{} (t) is calculated caused by a load applied as a unit impulse at t"0 (Figure 3). Again, the deviations from the exact solution are small. A very large number of comparisons of results determined using the simple physical models with rigorous solutions is described in Reference 13.
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
934
J. P. WOLF
Figure 2. Vertical dynamic—stiﬀness coeﬃcient of disk on surface of layer
Figure 3. Vertical displacement caused by unitimpulse force acting on disk on surface of layer
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
935
1.4. Overview of tables with coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass models for dynamicstiﬀness coeﬃcients of
foundations In the following sections, the data required to construct the springdashpotmass models of foundations for the two limiting cases of a site, the homogeneous halfspace and the homogeneous layer ﬁxed at its base, are presented. The springdashpotmass models are also called lumpedparameter models. Massless rigid foundations on the surface of and embedded in the soil are addressed, varying the parameters extensively. The data listed in the tables consist, in general, of the dimensionless coeﬃcients of the springs, dashpots and masses, the staticstiﬀness coeﬃcients and eccentricities, if applicable. Some of the coeﬃcients will be negative, but real. Springs, dashpots and masses with negative coeﬃcients do not exist in reality. It is thus actually not possible to build this model mechanically; but to handle such as a model mathematically is, of course, no problem. Direct integration is recommended to solve the equations of motion. As already mentioned, the springdashpotmass model of the foundation with a few internal degrees of freedom can be attached directly to the node at the base of the dynamic model of the structure, and the coupled dynamic system can be analysed directly with a standard structural dynamics program. This procedure permits consideration of dynamic unbounded soil—structure interaction with a computational eﬀort which is hardly larger than when the structure only is analysed. In the following, only those aspects required for a practical dynamic analysis are addressed. As an example, a hammer foundation with nonlinear behaviour is calculated. The derivations, assumptions and further examples are described in the cited references and extensively in the book. It is assumed that the dynamic loads act directly on the structure. For earthquakes and other excitations introduced into the dynamic system via the soil, the springdashpotmass models can also be used. In this case the socalled eﬀective foundation input motion is enforced in a ﬁrst step at the foundation (base) node (where the structure will later be connected) of the springdashpotmass model of the foundation, leading to the reaction forces. (The eﬀective foundation input motion can also be determined using simple physical models, starting from the seismic freeﬁeld response). The reaction forces are then applied in a second step as an exterior load acting in the base node of the coupled dynamic system, yielding the dynamic response. This procedure is described in Section 6.5 of Reference 13. As an example of an extension, springdashpotmass models can also be constructed to determine the dynamic soil pressure acting on a vertical rigid wall retaining a semiinﬁnite uniform soil layer for horizontal seismic excitation.
2. DISK ON SURFACE HALFSPACE
Three possibilities to model a rigid massless disk on the surface of a homogeneous halfspace (Figure 4) for all components of motion (horizontal, vertical, rocking, torsional) are discussed. They diﬀer in the assumptions, number of degrees of freedom and thus computational eﬀort and in the accuracy.
2.1. ¹runcated cone model
For all components of motion a rigid massless foundation with area A _{} and (polar) moment of inertia I _{} on the surface of a homogeneous halfspace with Poisson’s ratio , mass density , shearwave velocity c _{} , dilatationalwave velocity c _{} can be modelled as a truncated cone (Figure 5a and Table I) of equivalent radius
r _{} , apex height z _{} and wave velocity c (c _{} " G/ , c _{} " E _{} / with shear modulus G and constrained modulus E _{} "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 _{} . For the vertical and rocking motions resulting in axial strains c equals c _{} for )1/3 and c"2c _{} for 1/3( )1/2. The translational cone for the displacement u _{} and the force P _{} is dynamically equivalent to the springdasphot model (Figure 5(b)). The rotational cone for the rotation _{} _{} and the moment M _{} corresponds exactly to the springdashpotmass model with one internal degree of freedom _{} _{} (Figure 5(c)), of which two possibilities are shown. In the model
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
936
J. P. WOLF
Figure 4. Rigid disk on homogeneous halfspace
Figure 5. Cone model and equivalent springdashpotmass model: (a) truncated semiinﬁnite cone; (b) springdashpotmass model for translation; (c) springdashpotmass models for rotation
without the mass moment of inertia M _{} two of the coeﬃcients are negative. All coeﬃcients (Table I) of the springdashpotmass models, denoted as discreteelement models, are frequency independent. For the vertical and rocking motions for 1/3( )1/2 an additional trapped mass M and mass moment of inertia M _{} are present which are assigned to the disk’s node. This springdashpotmass model corresponds exactly (without any curve ﬁtting) to the physical assump tion of replacing the threedimensional halfspace below the disk by a onedimensional truncated semiinﬁnite cone.
2.2. Springdashpotmass model without internal degree of freedom This simple arrangement corresponding to Figure 5(b) is shown for the translational and rotational motions in Figures 6(a) and 6(b) with the data listed in Table II. Besides a spring with the staticstiﬀness coeﬃcient K, a dashpot C and a mass M (mass moment of inertia for rotation) are present with the coeﬃcients
(2a,b)
c 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).
C" ^{r} K,
^{c}
M" ^{r}
K
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
937
Table I. Geometry and wave velocity of cone model and coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 5 for disk on halfspace
Motion
Horizontal
Vertical
Rocking
Torsional
Equivalent radius r _{}
Aspect ratio ^{z} 

^{r} 

Poisson’s ratio 

Wave velocity c 

Trapped mass M M _{} 
Discrete
element
model
^{A}
A ^{}
8
(2! )
All
c _{}
0
^{} (1! ) _{}
4
1 1
c
c
)
3 _{3}
( (
1
2
c _{}
0
2c _{}
2·4 _{} ! _{3} _{} A _{} r _{}
1
K" c A _{} /z _{} C" cA _{}
_{} 4I _{}
(1! ) _{}
9
32
1
^{)} 3
c
c
1
_{2}
1
_{3} ( )
_{} 2I _{}
9
32
All
c _{}
2c _{}
0 1·2 _{} ! _{3} _{} I _{} r _{}
1
K _{} "3 c I _{} /z _{} C _{} " cI _{} M _{} " I _{} z _{}
c _{}
0
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 coeﬃcients 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 staticstiﬀness coeﬃcient 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
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
938
J. P. WOLF
Table II. Staticstiﬀness and dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdash potmass model of Figure 6 for disk on halfspace
Dimensionless coeﬃcients of
Static stiﬀness K 
Dashpot 
Mass 

Horizontal 
^{8}^{G}^{r} _{} 2! 
0·58 
0·095 

Vertical 
^{4}^{G}^{r} _{} 1! 
0·85 
0·27 

Rocking 
8Gr 
0·3 
0·24 

3(1! ) 
_{1}_{#} 3(1! )m 

8r ^{} 

Torsional 
^{1}^{6}^{G}^{r} ^{} 
0·433 
m 
0·045 

3 
1# 
2m 

_{r} 
_{} _{} 
r ^{}
Table III. Staticstiﬀness and dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 7 for disk on halfspace
Dimensionless coeﬃcients of
Static stiﬀness
Dashpots
Masses
K 
_{} 
_{} 
_{} 
_{} 
0·78—0·4 
— 
—— 
Horizontal
Vertical
Rocking
Torsional
^{8}^{G}^{r} _{}
2!
4Gr _{}
1! _{}
8Gr
3(1! _{} _{)}
^{1}^{6}^{G}^{r} ^{}
0·8 
0·34—4·3 
— 

0·42—0·3 
0·017
0·291
1
(
3
1
' _{3}
(
'
1
3
1
_{3}
^{0}
0·9 _{} !
^{0}
0·16 _{} !
—
3
1
3
1
0·4—4
0·34—0·2
0·171
3
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
939
Figure 7. Springdashpotmass model with internal degree of freedom
internal degree of freedom u _{} with its own mass M _{} (mass moment of inertia for rotation) is introduced. The latter is attached by a dashpot C _{} to the disk. The coeﬃcients are calculated as
C _{} " ^{r} _{} K
M _{} " ^{r}
c
the dimensionless coeﬃcients _{} , _{} , _{} , _{} are derived
C _{} " ^{r} _{} K,
M
_{} " c ^{r}
^{c}
_{} K,
^{c}
(3a,b)
(3c,d)
_{} K
with curve ﬁtting
using the discrete values for various v speciﬁed in Reference 15 for the translational and rocking motions.
This model is thus more accurate than those described in Tables I and II. It is of interest to perform
a comparison with the springdashpotmass model of the cone without any curve ﬁtting. Equating the
coeﬃcients of the discreteelement model of Table I to the corresponding values in equation (3) leads to the
dimensionless coeﬃcients _{} , _{} , _{} , _{} which are listed in Table IV.
In this springdashpotmass model
3. CYLINDER EMBEDDED IN HALFSPACE
A rigid massless cylinder embedded with depth e in a homogeneous halfspace is addressed (Figure 8). For
the vertical and torsional motions the springdashpotmass model with one internal degree of freedom of Figure 7 with M _{} "0 is constructed using the data of Table V and equation (3) [9]. To represent the coupling of the horizontal motion u _{} with the force P _{} and the rocking motion _{} _{} with the
moment M _{} (Figure 9), the springdashpot model for the horizontal motion u _{} corresponding to Figure 5(b)
is connected to the centre of the cylinder’s base with the eccentricities
f _{} "0·25e,
f _{} "0·32e#0·03e _{}
_{} ^{}
e
r
(4a, b)
The spring K _{} with the staticstiﬀness coeﬃcient K and the dimensionless coeﬃcient _{} of the dashpot are speciﬁed in Table V with
(5)
^{c} For the rocking motion _{} _{} the springdashpotmass model with one internal degree of freedom of Figure 7 with M _{}_{} "0 is used. Note that the corresponding coeﬃcients are deﬁned with respect to K _{} (and not K _{}_{} ), although K _{}_{} is the coeﬃcient of the spring which is attached to the rigid support:
^{C}
^{"} r ^{}
_{} K
^{C}
^{"} r ^{}
^{c}
_{} K _{} ,
^{C}
_{}_{} ^{"} ^{r} ^{}
^{c}
_{} K _{} ,
M _{}_{} " ^{r}
c
_{} K _{}
(6a—c)
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
940
J. P. WOLF
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table IV. Staticstiﬀness and dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 7 for disk on halfspace represented as cone model of Figure 5
Dimensionless coeﬃcients of
Static stiﬀness
K
Dashpots
_{}
_{}
Masses
_{}
_{}
Horizontal
Vertical
Rocking
Torsional
^{8}^{G}^{r} _{}
2!
4Gr _{}
1!
8Gr
3(1! )
^{1}^{6}^{G}^{r} ^{}
3
1
( _{3}
1
' _{3}
1
( _{3}
1
' _{3}
0.79—0.39
1·11 (1! ) /(1!2 )
1·57(1! )
^{—}
—
———
^{—}
0·42 (1! ) /(1!2 )
0·59(1! )
0·29
—
1·88 _{} ! _{3} _{} (1! )
1
—
0·35 _{} ! _{3} _{} (1! )
1
—
^{—}
0·52(1! ) /(1!2 )
1·04(1! )
0·26
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
941
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 ﬁxed 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 _{} , three dashpots C _{} and one mass
M with the data speciﬁed in Table VI. The ratio of the radius to the depth r _{} /d and Poisson’s ratio are
varied. For the translational motions the coeﬃcients equal (shear modulus G)
K _{} "k _{} Gr _{} , 
i"1, _{2} , 4 
(7a) 

C _{} "c _{} G ^{r} 

, i"1, _{2} , 3 
(7b) 

^{c} 


M"mG ^{r} c 



(7c) 
For the rotational motions the righthand side of equation (7) is multiplied by an additional r _{} , e.g.
K _{} "k _{} Gr ^{.}
5. CYLINDER EMBEDDED IN LAYER
A rigid massless cylinder embedded in a homogeneous layer with Poisson’s ratio "1/3 ﬁxed 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
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
942
J. P. WOLF
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table V. Staticstiﬀness and dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figures 7 and 9 for cylinder embedded in halfspace
Dimensionless coeﬃcients of
Dashpots
Mass 

Static stiﬀness K 
_{} 
_{} 
_{} 

Horizontal 
^{8}^{G}^{r} _{} _{} 1# ^{e} 2! r _{} 
0·68#0·57 _{} e
^{r} 
— 
e 
— 

Vertical 
^{4}^{G}^{r} _{} _{} 1#0·54 ^{e} _{} 1! r 
0·80#0·35 ^{e} r 
0·32—0·01 _{} 
r _{} ^{} 
0·38 

8Gr _{} _{)} _{} 1#2·3 ^{e} #0·58 _{} 
_{} ^{} e r ^{} e r 
0·15631 ^{e} 

Rocking 
_{K} _{"} 3(1! r 2(2! ) _{} ^{1}^{#} e Gr
_{} 
^{r}
!0·08906 _{} !0·00874 _{} e r e r 
^{} ^{} 
0·40#0·03 _{} 
_{} ^{} e r 
0·33#0·10 _{} 
^{} e r 

K _{}_{} "K _{} ! 
r 

Torsional 
^{1}^{6}^{G}^{r} ^{} _{} 1#2·67 ^{e} _{} 
e 0·29#0·09 _{} r 
0·20#0·25 _{} e
^{r} 

3 r 
— 
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
943
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 _{} /e are varied. To represent the coupling of the horizontal motion u _{} and the rocking motion _{} _{} , in addition to the models of these two motions, another springdashpotmass model with the eccentricity equal to the embedded depth e is introduced. This springdashpotmass model is denoted with the word Coupling in Figure 13 and Table VII.
6. HAMMER FOUNDATION WITH PARTIAL UPLIFT OF ANVIL
As a practical example of a nonlinear unbounded soil—structure interaction analysis the vibration of a hammer foundation with an eccentrically mounted anvil is examined (Figure 14). The head impacts against the anvil which is a massive steel block. The anvil is supported by a viscoelastic suspension (pads) on a block of concrete which is embedded in a soil layer on rigid rock. As a tensionresistant connection is not provided for the pads, the anvil will partially uplift from the block when the dynamic stress (tension) exceeds the static stress (compression). A nonlinear dynamic system thus occurs.
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
944
Ratio of Radius to Depth r _{} /d
J. P. WOLF
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table VI. Dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figure 11 for disk on layer
Horizontal
0
1/3
0·45
Vertical Poisson’s ratio
0
1/3
0·45
Rocking
0
1/3
0·45
Torsional
1·00 
k1 
!0·109636E#02 !0·125658E#02 !0·107091E#02 !0·185216E#02 !0·312572E#02 !0·585650E#02 !0·538137E#01 !0·127100E#02 !0·125057E#02 !0·920277E#01 
k2 
!0·199616E#02 !0·100143E#02 !0·277613E#02 !0·689058E#02 #0·564651E#01 #0·533868E#02 !0·118019E#02 !0·127000E#01 !0·102097E#02 !0·488643E#01 

k3 
!0·596293E#03 !0·236814E#03 !0·837270E#03 !0·803915E#04 !0·297570E#04 !0·972054E#05 !0·370561E#03 !0·106411E#03 !0·114401E#05 !0·762034E#02 

k4 
#0·262006E#02 #0·172890E#02 #0·350886E#02 #0·781698E#02 #0·101028E#02 !0·297301E#02 #0·152717E#02 #0·665102E#01 #0·171002E#02 #0·104850E#02 

c1 
!0·423955E#01 !0·391585E#01 !0·443420E#01 !0·564579E#01 !0·620122E#01 !0·533597E#01 !0·152562E#01 !0·168764E#01 !0·159579E#01 !0·209847E#01 

c2 
!0·144980E#02 !0·969345E#01 !0·164981E#02 !0·573623E#02 !0·372925E#02 !0·162817E#03 !0·511671E#01 !0·464871E#01 !0·205038E#02 !0·424955E#01 

c3 
#0·176380E#02 #0·128349E#02 #0·196381E#02 #0·618023E#02 #0·435725E#02 #0·173237E#03 #0·622671E#01 #0·621871E#01 #0·231038E#02 #0·581955E#01 

m 
!0·444888E#02 !0·177585E#02 !0·804875E#02 !0·355432E#03 !0·896786E#02 !0·759400E#03 !0·136958E#02 !0·294864E#01 !0·748688E#02 !0·501042E#01 

0·50 
k1 
!0·101741E#02 !0·756096E#01 !0·103098E#02 !0·869429E#01 !0·178038E#02 !0·211241E#02 !0·558202E#01 !0·315920E#01 !0·544861E#01 !0·584813E#01 
k2 
!0·711128E#01 #0·221036E#01 #0·353643E#00 !0·211429E#02 #0·869558E#01 #0·237930E#02 !0·260867E#01 #0·429528E#00 #0·544528E#01 #0·779373E#00 

k3 
!0·376551E#02 !0·183990E#02 !0·386290E#02 !0·301954E#03 !0·648930E#02 !0·574768E#04 !0·120186E#02 !0·563639E#00 !0·495529E#02 !0·267204E#01 

k4 
#0·114651E#02 #0·370791E#01 #0·631911E#01 #0·266455E#02 #0·167960E#00 !0·104560E#02 #0·553603E#01 #0·268680E#01 !0·714571E#00 #0·448746E#01 

c1 
!0·563146E#01 !0·169515E#01 !0·312323E#01 !0·635435E#01 !0·300736E#01 !0·885920E#01 !0·180105E#01 !0·217449E#00 !0·226588E#01 !0·873265E#00 

c2 
!0·853329E#01 !0·484337E#01 !0·900332E#01 !0·118278E#02 !0·967485E#01 !0·348879E#02 !0·209944E#01 !0·485884E!01 !0·872006E#00 !0·664093E#00 

c3 
#0·116733E#02 #0·798337E#01 #0·121433E#02 #0·162678E#02 #0·159548E#02 #0·453079E#02 #0·320944E#01 #0·161859E#01 #0·347201E#01 #0·223409E#01 

m 
!0·125108E#02 !0·142805E#02 !0·222875E#02 !0·438319E#02 !0·104698E#02 !0·156304E#03 !0·166034E#01 !0·550887E!01 !0·105920E#01 !0·758683E#00 

0·25 
k1 
!0·500393E#01 !0·569922E#01 !0·635602E#01 !0·650348E#01 !0·866267E#01 !0·939217E#01 !0·197103E#01 !0·131566E#01 !0·185845E#01 !0·317223E#01 
k2 
#0·117908E#01 #0·113372E#01 #0·126563E#01 #0·212837E#01 #0·360033E#01 #0·591506E#01 !0·908392E#00 !0·159178E#01 #0·140842E#01 !0·110204E#02 

k3 
!0·531658E#01 !0·627809E#01 !0·861155E#01 !0·111486E#02 !0·206851E#02 !0·294639E#02 #0·320667E#00 #0·889908E#00 !0·198123E#01 !0·272014E#02 

k4 
#0·330564E#01 #0·414181E#01 #0·444955E#01 #0·290606E#01 #0·353509E#01 #0·239510E#01 #0·280516E#01 #0·228996E#01 #0·228257E#00 #0·133791E#02 

c1 
!0·753687E#00 !0·123420E#01 !0·118324E#01 !0·147587E#01 !0·301652E#01 !0·652332E#01 !0·111891E#01 !0·117566E#01 !0·166191E#01 !0·175255E#01 

c2 
!0·320391E#01 !0·343160E#01 !0·476257E#01 !0·545496E#01 !0·633133E#01 !0·153512E#01 !0·192001E!01 !0·120420E#00 !0·608065E!01 !0·576183E#00 

c3 
#0·634391E#01 #0·657160E#01 #0·790257E#01 #0·989496E#01 #0·126113E#02 #0·119551E#02 #0·131920E#01 #0·199042E#01 #0·266081E#01 #0·214618E#01 

m 
!0·197705E#02 !0·277938E#02 !0·353939E#02 !0·202557E#02 !0·262470E#02 !0·217797E#01 !0·496405E!02 !0·234838E!01 !0·166728E!01 !0·408057E#00 

0·00 
k1 
!0·135004E#02 !0·388471E#01 !0·517262E#01 !0·196175E#01 !0·741830E#01 !0·174454E#02 !0·177328E#01 !0·371794E#01 !0·398695E#01 !0·347454E#01 
k2 
!0·953646E#01 !0·159784E#02 #0·239313E#00 !0·586095E#00 #0·149859E#01 #0·318590E#01 !0·825315E#01 !0·530262E#01 #0·488296E#01 #0·161189E#00 

k3 
!0·152937E#02 !0·214052E#02 !0·491200E#01 #0·418313E#00 !0·108130E#02 !0·145871E#03 !0·960129E#00 !0·456729E#01 !0·157465E#02 !0·175021E#00 

k4 
#0·100318E#02 #0·139890E#02 #0·491843E#01 #0·253876E#01 #0·426031E#01 #0·401297E#01 #0·363207E#01 #0·648378E#01 !0·222776E#01 #0·329151E#01 

c1 
!0·108173E#01 !0·406936E#00 !0·431719E!01 !0·540639E#00 !0·308148E#00 !0·287195E#01 !0·105544E#01 !0·150532E#01 !0·158356E#01 !0·257114E!01 

c2 
!0·164199E#01 !0·441082E#00 !0·433318E!01 !0·316451E!02 !0·760091E#00 !0·496738E#01 !0·396130E#00 !0·400894E#00 !0·408329E#00 !0·525606E!02 

c3 
#0·478349E#01 #0·358258E#01 #0·318483E#01 #0·470316E#01 #0·704009E#01 #0·153874E#02 #0·150613E#01 #0·197089E#01 #0·300833E#01 #0·157526E#01 

m 
!0·207315E#00 !0·331202E!01 !0·126178E#00 !0·110135E!02 !0·348161E#00 !0·240813E#01 !0·245402E!01 !0·633544E!01 !0·125199E#00 !0·126499E!02 
1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPRINGDASHPOTMASS MODELS FOR FOUNDATION VIBRATIONS
Ratio of Radius to Depth r _{} /d
Contact ratio e _{} /e
Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 26, 931—949 (1997)
945
Table VII. Dimensionless coeﬃcients of springdashpotmass model of Figures 11 and 13 for cylinder embedded in layer (Poisson’s ratio "1/3 and embedment ratio e/r _{} "1)
Vertical
Horizontal
Rocking
Coupling
Torsional
1/2
1/3
k1 
!0·203759E#02 
!0·124401E#02 
!0·125229E#02 
!0·618776E#01 
!0·139252E#02 

k2 
#0·339543E#01 
#0·286199E#01 
!0·583152E#00 
#0·202777E#01 
!0·275441E#01 

k3 
!0·617014E#01 
!0·208541E#02 
!0·814822E!01 
!0·141784E#02 
#0·178780E#01 

1·0 
k4 
#0·166202E#02 
#0·794575E#01 
#0·130945E#02 
#0·337083E#01 
#0·161164E#02 
c1 
!0·918456E#01 
!0·590158E#01 
!0·315268E#01 
!0·333135E#01 
!0·774712E!02 

c2 
!0·596381E#00 
!0·516028E#01 
!0·885823E!01 
!0·340080E#01 
!0·736101E#00 

c3 
#0·131164E#02 
#0·130103E#02 
#0·322858E#01 
#0·811310E#01 
#0·858610E#01 

m 
!0·987169E#00 
!0·163126E#02 
!0·680666E#00 
!0·146553E#02 
!0·962102E#00 

k1 
!0·190169E#02 
!0·123585E#02 
!0·918010E#01 
!0·311508E#01 
!0·150459E#02 

k2 
#0·102770E#02 
#0·382788E#01 
#0·934512E#00 
#0·786487E#00 
#0·149201E#01 

k3 
!0·256293E#02 
!0·116229E#02 
!0·466308E#01 
!0·869559E#01 
!0·230599E#01 

0·5 
k4 
#0·480379E#01 
#0·697738E#01 
#0·821627E#01 
#0·184030E#01 
#0·132374E#02 
c1 
!0·803919E#00 
!0·129978E#01 
!0·212247E#01 
!0·715314E#00 
!0·513171E#00 

c2 
!0·378972E#01 
!0·357027E#01 
!0·316747E#00 
!0·208337E#01 
!0·403901E#00 

c3 
#0·131677E#02 
#0·102413E#02 
#0·266675E#01 
#0·326137E#01 
#0·511390E#01 

m 
!0·364874E#01 
!0·820645E#01 
!0·342125E#01 
!0·888905E#01 
!0·515523E#00 

k1 
!0·199866E#02 
!0·113528E#02 
!0·801960E#01 
— 
!0·820959E#01 

k2 
#0·324059E#01 
#0·187819E#01 
#0·103933E#01 
— 
#0·236828E#00 

k3 
!0·138239E#03 
!0·141228E#02 
!0·800817E#01 
— 
!0·295213E#00 

k4 
#0·151110E#02 
#0·837372E#01 
#0·584466E#01 
— 
#0·794727E#01 

0·0 
c1 
!0·577181E#01 
!0·169786E#01 
!0·101867E#01 
— 
!0·288545E#00 
c2 
!0·891247E#01 
!0·396633E#01 
!0·157192E#01 
— 
!0·308176E!01 

c3 
#0·151425E#02 
#0·710633E#01 
#0·313092E#01 
— 
#0·160082E#01 

m 
!0·485815E#02 
!0·142894E#02 
!0·217586E#01 
— 
!0·372596E!01 

k1 
!0·215677E#02 
!0·800686E#01 
!0·112339E#02 
!0·531331E#01 
!0·158881E#02 

k2 
#0·995664E#01 
#0·248098E#01 
#0·271244E#01 
#0·128879E#01 
!0·216892E#01 

k3 
!0·299529E#02 
!0·530555E#01 
!0·112792E#02 
!0·117090E#02 
#0·122884E#01 

1·0 
k4 
#0·122789E#01 
#0·460883E#01 
#0·830774E#01 
#0·314281E#01 
#0·175253E#02 
c1 
!0·214856E#01 
!0·638370E!01 
!0·185381E#01 
!0·345899E#01 
!0·770582E#00 

c2 
!0·703468E#01 
!0·234186E#01 
!0·147482E#01 
!0·442673E#01 
!0·114118E#01 

c3 
#0·195563E#02 
#0·101919E#02 
#0·461482E#01 
#0·913903E#01 
#0·899118E#01 

m 
!0·476605E#01 
!0·598035E#01 
!0·101760E#02 
!0·222249E#02 
!0·244900E#01 

k1 
!0·263609E#02 
!0·105510E#02 
!0·812675E#01 
!0·258694E#01 
!0·164865E#02 

k2 
#0·106994E#02 
#0·323771E#01 
#0·327590E#01 
#0·487010E#00 
#0·162631E#01 

k3 
!0·415582E#02 
!0·101866E#02 
!0·183711E#02 
!0·708382E#01 
!0·359665E#01 

0·5 
k4 
#0·391023E#00 
#0·579774E#01 
#0·434718E#01 
#0·155304E#01 
#0·138158E#02 
c1 
!0·734715E!02 
!0·691681E!01 
!0·831614E#00 
!0·752538E#00 
!0·786309E#00 

c2 
!0·101472E#02 
!0·475156E#01 
!0·272228E#01 
!0·265221E#01 
!0·129218E#01 

c3 
#0·195330E#02 
#0·114226E#02 
#0·507228E#01 
#0·383021E#01 
#0·600218E#01 

m 
!0·674277E#01 
!0·148975E#02 
!0·147137E#02 
!0·128622E#02 
!0·159889E#01 

k1 
!0·147108E#02 
!0·922525E#01 
!0·736535E#01 
— 
!0·790274E#01 

k2 
#0·600489E#01 
#0·187933E#01 
!0·907967E#00 
— 
#0·176502E!01 

k3 
! 
Much more than documents.
Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.
Cancel anytime.