7KHQG,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRI%XLOGLQJV&RQVWUXFWLRQDQG(QYLURQPHQWDO(QJLQHHULQJ %&(( B
Analysis of Machine Foundation Surrounded by
Diaphragm Wall Using OpenSees Program
Ahmed Sameer Abdulrasool
Abstract— Machine foundations require special attention of a
foundation engineer. In some cases, if changes in size of the
foundation and mass do not lead to a satisfactory design, a
machine foundation surrounded by diaphragm walls may be used.
The Finite element method is one of the most popular numerical
methods used for obtaining an approximate solution for complex
problems in various fields of engineering.
In this paper, 3D finite element model is used to investigate
displacement response and acceleration of machine foundation to
resting on cohesionless soils and surrounded by diaphragm walls.
The effective distance of diaphragm wall to width foundation, on
the displacement response of machine foundation is calculated.
Many tests are conducted to determine vertical and horizontal
displacement and acceleration of machine foundation surrounded
by diaphragm wall within different diaphragm walls depth (D/B)
ratio (diaphragm walls depth to foundation width) ranged
between (0.0-3.0). The analysis of machine foundation is
performed for foundation rests on finite isotropic elastic
homogenous soil. The results indicate that, the dynamic response
(displacement and acceleration) generally decreases with
increasing of diaphragm walls depth .In addition, the increase in
distances between diaphragm wall and width of foundation will
lead to decrease in the vertical displacement and vertical
acceleration, but the horizontal displacement and horizontal
acceleration will be increased in same case. The maximum
amplitude of displacement and acceleration of foundation under
dynamic loads can be occurred in loose sand in comparison with
the other types of sand.
Index Terms— dynamic analysis; finite element method;
diaphragm wall; machine foundation surrounded by diaphragm
wall; skirted foundation, send a blank e-mail to
ahmeedsameerabd@gmail.com
I. INTRODUCTION
M achine foundations are one of the most important
features of industrial structures. Industrial facilities like
power plants, steel plants, petrochemical complexes, fertilizer
plants etc., consist of a number of centrifugal and reciprocating
machines and these play an important role to ensure smooth
operation of the process and that the output product is of right
quality. If any of these equipments starts malfunctioning or
breaks down due to excessive vibration or settlement of the
foundations, cascading effect on the overall performance on
engineering could be catastrophic at times [7].
Ahmed Sameer Abdulrasool is with Building and Construction
Engineering Department, University of Technology, Bagdad, Iraq
(e-mail: ahmeedsameerabd@gmail.com).

Several methods used to decrease the displacements of
foundation have been proposed. One of these methods is used
diaphragm walls.
Diaphragm walls provide rigid, cost effective solutions for
permanent retaining walls and shafts, with less construction
joints than bored pile walls. Compared to other wall types,
diaphragm walls are considered to be very stiff with respect to
ground movement control [8].
In general, solving this problem by classical analytical
methods is very difficult. The finite element method (FEM) is
a numerical approach by which these partial differential
equations can be solved approximately. This paper examines
the effect of diaphragm walls on machine foundations using
3D finite element modeling by Open System for Earthquake
Engineering Simulation (OpenSees). The program is using a
Tool command language (Tcl). This program is originally
produced by University of California. The mandal and
Roychowdhury [14] presented the central response of the
square raft under the step loading of 100 kN for different depth
to width ratios. It was observed that the increase in the depth
of embedment yields response of lesser amplitude and higher
frequency.
Makhmalbaf et al. [13] considered two cases to investigate the
effect of foundation embedment. First, the structure was
considered as a model with surface foundation (i.e., without
embedment) which was influenced by the excitation with
different frequencies and then foundation was considered as
completely embedded. In the second case, just the foundation
was embedded in the soil. It was concluded that the foundation
embedment is a positive feature, because it can decrease the
roof displacements in all frequencies of incident motion and
also have a similar behavior in lower frequencies for
displacements beneath the foundation. In higher excitation
frequencies, embedding the foundation increase the
displacements. This reveals that the filtering effect of SSI is
not resulted from foundation embedment and therefore it is
influenced by other factors of kinematic interaction.
II. FINITE ELEMENT METHOD
The finite element method is used to solve the physical
problems. The general formulations of the finite element
method consist of [6]:
B$QDO\VLVRI0DFKLQH)RXQGDWLRQ6XUURXQGHGE\'LDSKUDJP:DOO8VLQJ2SHQ6HHV3URJUDP

I. Element Discretization, TABLE I I

MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF THE FOUNDATION
II. Primary variable approximation
III. Formulation of element equations, PROPERTIES VALUE UNITS

IV. Assembly of the global equation, and Young’s modulus 29725410 kN/m2
V. Solution of the global equations.
PoiVVRQ¶VUDWLRȣ 0.2 -
The equations of equilibrium governing the linear dynamic
response of a system of finite elements can be expressed as compression strength of 40 Mpa
[4]: concrete (ƒcƍ
[M] +[C]. +[K]. =R 1
Unit weight of concrete 24 kN/m3
where: [M] = mass matrix,
[C] = damping matrix, TABLE I I I
[K] = stiffness matrix, MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF THE DIAPHRAGM WALLS
R = vector of loads, PROPERTIES VALUE UNITS
= vector of nodal accelerations,
Young’s modulus 27405473 kN/m2
= vector of nodal velocities, and
= vector of nodal displacements. 3RLVVRQ¶VUDWLRȣ 0.2 -

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM compression strength of 34 Mpa

The aim of this work is to investigate the effect of
diaphragm wall depth to width ratio on the dynamic response
of foundation, In addition to the distance between diaphragm
walls.
The soil profile consists of a dry sand stratum at a depth of 65
m from the ground surface. The problem represents a
homogeneous layer of a natural deposit over bedrock. The
properties of the soil are considered to be uniform throughout
the depth of the layer which is a common assumption in soil
dynamics. The analysis of machine foundation is performed
for foundation rests on finite isotropic elastic homogenous soil
as the machines may cause only small amplitudes of
vibrations.
The value of Poisson's ratio and values for the static stress-
strain modulus, E S are adopted from (Das [10]).The properties
of soil are listed in Table 1.
TABLE I
PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL
PROPERTIES VALUE UNITS
Modulus of elasticity, E 26000 kN/m2
3RLVVRQ¶VUDWLRȣ 0.28 - soil is assumed to be fixed and the constraint on displacement
Unit weight of dry sand, ܵ 16 kN/m3
The geometry consists of flexible square foundation of
dimensions 5m x 5m x 0.4m founded on the ground surface of
dry sand. The Code of Practice for Foundation [9], recommend
that the diaphragm wall should not be less than 0.6 m width
.So, the diaphragm wall width is taken 0.6 m.
The concrete foundation is assumed as a linear elastic material
with parameters shown in Table 2, and diaphragm wall
properties are shown in and Table 3.
concrete (ƒcƍ
Unit weight of concrete 24 kN/m3
IV. THREE-DIMENSIONAL DYNAMIC ANALYSES OF
FOUNDATIONS
For some problems, it is necessary to perform three-
dimensional analysis. Finite element method is found to be an
effective numerical technique to perform this type of analysis
[17]. Such problems may include machine foundations resting
on soil. Machine foundations are usually rectangular in shape
and in some cases where the ratio of the length to width is
more than six; a two dimensional idealization of the actual
situation is made [11].
Three-dimensional finite element model of 8-noded brick
elements are used in the dynamic analysis. The brick element
has eight nodes at the corners with three degrees of freedom at
each node; the first, second and third degrees of freedom are
for displacements and acceleration. The elementary boundaries
with conditions of zero-displacement are used at the boundary.
The boundary conditions are applied so that, the bottom of the
in X and Y directions is applied on the nodes at the boundary
in Y-Z and X-Z planes, respectively. The three- dimensional
finite element model and a cross-section in the model are
shown in Figs 1 and 2, respectively. The foundation is
subjected to a steady state load of sinusoidal function of the
form F  )R VLQ ȦW  ZLWK DPSOLWXGH RI IRUFH  N1 DQG
FLUFXODUIUHTXHQF\ȦRIUDGVHF,WVKRXOGEHQRWHGWKDW
in this analysis, a vertical vibration is applied and the
displacements and acceleration are measured at the top central
point of the foundation (node A in Fig 1). It is important to
mention here that all cases are analyzed for duration of
 VHF  ZLWK WLPH VWHS WDNHQ DV ǻW   VHF  7KH
program uses the finite element method. The time integration
is done with the generalized Newmark method [12].


7KHQG,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRI%XLOGLQJV&RQVWUXFWLRQDQG(QYLURQPHQWDO(QJLQHHULQJ %&(( B

V. RESULTS OF TESTS

THE EFFECTIVE DIAPHRAGM WALL DEPTH ON MACHINE

FOUNDATION
In this section, the test is carried out to assess the effect of
existence of wall at different depth. The diaphragm walls depth
to foundation width (D/B) ratio are considered (0.5, 1, 2, and
3). The diaphragm wall depths are shown in Table 4. The
dynamic response of machine foundations is also measured
without diaphragm wall. The diaphragm wall width for all
cases in this application is constant (0.6 m) and the distances
between diaphragm wall and width of foundation are
considered equal 0 m. The results of the vertical and
horizontal displacement and acceleration of machine
foundation are shown in Fig 3.
Fig. 1 Three-dimensional finite element model.

TABLE I V.
THE DIAPHRAGM WALLS DEPTH TO FOUNDATION WIDTH

Diaphragm walls depth Foundation width D/B

2.5 5 0.5

5 5 1

10 5 2

15 5 3

Fig. 2 Cross-section A-A two-dimensional model.

A B

C D

Fig 3. Predicted displacement and acceleration at point A on foundation with different diaphragm wall depth :( A) vertical displacement ; (B) horizontal
displacement; (C) vertical acceleration ; (D) horizontal acceleration.


B$QDO\VLVRI0DFKLQH)RXQGDWLRQ6XUURXQGHGE\'LDSKUDJP:DOO8VLQJ2SHQ6HHV3URJUDP

From Fig 3, it can be noted that maximum displacement and EFFECT OF DISTANCES BETWEEN DIAPHRAGM WALL
acceleration can be occurred in foundation without diaphragm AND WIDTH OF FOUNDATION
wall. The displacement and acceleration will be decreased with This study is carried out to assess the effect of existence of
the increase in depth of the wall due to an increase confined wall at different distances. The distances between diaphragm
soil underneath the foundation. This means that the stiffness is wall and width of foundation are considered (0m, 0.6m, 1.2m,
increased. In addition, the walls are start to increases the and 1.8m). The diaphragm wall width for all cases in this
resistance of lateral displacement of soil particles. The application is constant (0.6m) and the diaphragm walls depth
maximum displacement responses and acceleration of the to foundation width (D/B) is 2 for all cases. The soil
machine foundation due to change of wall depth are shown in properties and the properties of concrete and the dynamic load
Table 5. which is applied at the surface of the foundation have been
explained in the description of the problem. The results of the
TABLE V displacement and acceleration response are shown in
MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF THE DIAPHRAGM WALLS
Displacement (mm) Acceleration (mm/sec2)
Fig 4.
(D/B) From Fig (4-A) and (4-B), It is obvious that the vertical
Vertical Horizontal Vertical Horizontal
0 0.0375 0.0025 2.32 0.08 displacement and acceleration will be decreased with the
increasing the distances between diaphragm wall and width of
0.5 0.0158 0.0022 0.92 0.07 foundation under the same applied loads, where the increase in
distances, this leads to the amount of soil under foundation is
1 0.0103 0.0020 0.61 0.06
increased, this lead to increase absorb impinging waves, which
2 0.0060 0.0014 results in decrease in vertical displacement and acceleration in
0.37 0.04
the foundation.
3 0.0040 0.0007
But From Fig (4-C) and (4-D), it can be seen that, when the
0.23 0.02
distances between wall and foundation decrease this will lead
to decrease in the amplitude of horizontal displacement and
acceleration due to the wall penetrate the soil vertically and
thus constrain its lateral movement beneath the foundation.

A B

C D

Fig 4. Predicted displacement and acceleration at point A on foundation with different distances between diaphragm wall :( A) vertical displacement ;
(B) horizontal displacement; (C) vertical acceleration ; (D) horizontal acceleration.


7KHQG,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRI%XLOGLQJV&RQVWUXFWLRQDQG(QYLURQPHQWDO(QJLQHHULQJ %&(( B

The maximum results of displacement responses and TABLE VII

acceleration of the machine foundation due to change of PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL
distances between diaphragm wall and width of foundation are Medium
Material Properties Loose sand Dense sand
shown in Table 6. sand
Modulus of elasticity, E 19000 26000 36000
TABLE VI (kN/m2)
MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF THE DIAPHRAGM WALLS 3RLVVRQ¶VUDWLRȣ 0.31 0.28 0.26
8QLWZHLJKWRIGU\VDQGܵ 14 16 18
distances between 2
displacement (mm) acceleration (mm/sec ) (kN/m3)
diaphragm wall
and width of vertical horizontal vertical horizontal
foundation From Fig 5, it can be seen that the maximum amplitude of
0 0.0060 0.0014 0.377 0.041
displacement of pile foundation under dynamic loads occurred
0.6 0.0052 0.0028 0.333 0.077 in the case of loose sand. This behavior can be attributing to
the reduction in the stiffness of loose sand representative by
1.2 0.0048 0.0036 0.297 0.124 the reduction in modulus of elasticity.
The maximum results of displacement responses and
1.8 0.0045 0.0049 0.267 0.195 acceleration of the machine foundation due to change of soil
Types are shown in Table 8.

EFFECT OF SOIL PROPERTIES ON MACHINE TABLE VIII

FOUNDATION THE MAXIMUM RESULTS OF DISPLACEMENT RESPONSES AND ACCELERATION
OF THE MACHINE FOUNDATION
Three states of sandy soil are used in this parametric study
Displacement (mm) Acceleration (mm/sec2)
which are: loose, medium and dense sand, with parameters Type of soil
vertical horizontal vertical horizontal
adopted from Das [10]. The parameters of each type of soil are Loose sand 0.0071 0.00167 0.451 0.053
shown in Table 7. The diaphragm wall width for all cases in
this application is constant (0.6 m). The diaphragm walls depth Medium sand 0.0060 0.0014 0.377 0.041

to foundation width (D/B) is 2 for all cases and the distances

between diaphragm wall and width of foundation are Dense sand 0.0047 0.00089 0.315 0.031

considered equal 0 m. The dynamic response of the foundation

is shown in Fig 5.

A B

D
C

Fig 5. Predicted displacement and acceleration at point A on foundation with different soil properties :( A) vertical displacement; (B) horizontal displacement;
(C) vertical acceleration ; (D) horizontal acceleration.


B$QDO\VLVRI0DFKLQH)RXQGDWLRQ6XUURXQGHGE\'LDSKUDJP:DOO8VLQJ2SHQ6HHV3URJUDP

VI. CONCLUSIONS
1. Diaphragm wall will be lead to increase the stiffness of the
foundation-soil system due to constrain its vertical and lateral
movement beneath the foundation.
2. When the diaphragm wall depth increase this will lead to
decrease in the amplitude of displacement due to an increase
confined soil underneath the foundation. This means that the
stiffness is increased. In addition, the walls are worked to
increases the resistance of lateral displacement of soil
particles.
3. The acceleration decreases as the diaphragm wall depths
increases, this behavior can be occurred because the increase
confined soil under foundation, Thereby increase the mass of
soil-foundation system.
4. the vertical displacement and acceleration will be decreased
with the increasing the distances between diaphragm wall and
width of foundation under the same applied loads, where the
increase in distances leads to the gradual increase of soil -
foundation system rigidity due to increase of mass of this
system.
5. The horizontal displacement and horizontal acceleration of
the machine foundation will be increased with the increasing in
distances between diaphragm wall and width of foundation due
to the excess of lateral movement beneath the foundation.
6. The maximum amplitude of displacement of foundation
under dynamic loads can occur in soil of loose sand. This
behavior can be attributed to the reduction in the stiffness of
loose sand which is represented by the reduction in modulus of
elasticity.
[13] Makhmalbaf, M. O., Alitalesh, M., Samani, M. Z., and Tutunchian, M.
A, “Parametric Study on Displacements of Buildings Considering the
Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction Effects,” Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, EJGE, 16, Bund .M, pp. 1617-1628, 2011.
[14] Mandal, J. J., and Roychowdhury, S, “Response of Rectangular Raft
Foundations under Transient Loading,” Proceedings, 12th International
Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and
Advanced in Geomechanis (IACMAG), India, pp. 524-530, 2008.
[15] Mindlin, R. D, “Force at a point in the interior of a semi-infinite solid,”
pp. 195-202, 1936.
[16] OpenSees Manual, 2005.
[17] Phan, H. V., Desai, C. S., Sture, S. and Perumpral, J, “Three-
Dimensional Geometric and Material Nonlinearities Analysis of Some
Problems in Geomechanics,” Proceedings of the Third International
Conference on Numerical Methods in Geomechanics, Aachen, 2-6 April, pp.
67-75, 1979.
[18] Prakash, S. and Puri, V, “ Foundations for Vibrating Machines,”
Journal of Structural Engineering, SERC, Madras, India, pp. 1-38, 2006.
[19] Scott, R.F, “Foundation Analysis,” Prentice Hall. 1981.
[20] Zienkiewicz, O.C. and Taylor, R.L, “The Finite Element Method,”
McGraw-Hill, London, UK, 2005.

VII. REFERENCES

[1] Al-Wakel, S. F., Fattah, M. and Karim, H. H,“Dynamic Analysis of

Foundations on Saturated Clay Using an Energy Absorbing Layer,”
Engineering & Technology Journal, vol. 29, no.11, pp. 2189-2201, 2011.
[2]ACI Committee 351, “Foundation for Dynamic Equipment”, American
Concrete Institute, 2004.
[3]Banerjee, P. K. and Butterfield, R, “Dynamic Behavior of Foundations and
Buried Structures,” p. 270, 1987.
[4]Bathe K.J, “Finite Element Procedures. Prentice Hall,” NewJersey,1996
[5]Bowles, J. E, “Foundation Analysis and Design,” 5th ed, McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc., 1996, pp. 1175.
[6]Braess, D, “Finite Elements; Theory, Fast Solvers and Application in Solid
Mechanics,” 3rd ed, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom, 2007,
pp. 365.
[7]Chowdhury, I. and Dasgupta, S, “Dynamics of Structure and Foundation –
A Unified Approach,” CRC Press-Balkema, London, 2009.
[8]Clough, W.G. and O'Rourke, T.D, “Construction induced movements of
in-situ walls,” Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, ASCE,
GSP No.25, 1990, pp. 439 - 470.
[9]Code of Practice for Foundation, Hong Kong, 2004.
[10] Das, B. M, “Shallow Foundations Bearing Capacity and Settlement,”
2nd ed. New York, Boca Raton, London, 2009.
[11] Dasgupta, S. P. and Rao, N. S, “Dynamics of Rectangular Footings by
Finite Elements,” Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,
vol. 104, No. GT5, pp. 621-637, 1978.
[12] Katona, M.G. and Zienkiewicz, O.C, “ A Unified Set of Single Step
Algorithms Part 3: The Betam Method, a Generalization of the Newmark
Scheme,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol.
21, pp. 1345-1359, 1985.