Volume 1, Issue 1 — Year 2024 — Article e100009

ISSN (Online): 3115-8129 Biannually

Seismic response analysis of tunnels using a coupled polygonal finite element method

Article Type: Research
Pages: e100009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22034/CGEL.1.1.e100009
Crossmark
Open Access
Authors
Affiliations
  1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz 5166616471, Iran
  2. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz 5166616471, Iran
Corresponding author
Email: hajialilue@tabrizu.ac.ir
ORCID: 0000-0003-2865-2492
Received: 10 July 2024 / Accepted: 22 July 2024 / Published: 25 August 2024
Abstract

Mesh generation in the pre-processing stage of a conventional finite element analysis, can be a time-consuming procedure. Different methods have been proposed to modify this drawback. One of the proposed methods is the polygonal finite element technology. The polygonal finite element method (PFEM) enhances the conventional finite element (FE) approach with two major modifications. First, using polygonal elements causes mesh generation significantly easier. Second, by incorporation of more nodes per element, interpolation can be done more precisely. Like the conventional finite element method (FEM), the PFEM cannot model solely radiation damping effect of an unbounded media. In this paper, for the first time, the PFEM is coupled with the scaled boundary finite element method (SBFEM) and the proposed method is employed to evaluate seismic soil-structure interaction problems. Two shaking table tests are designed and used to model seismic tunnel responses. Then by using the achieved experimental results, accuracy and efficiency of the PFEM-SBFEM are investigated. It is shown that the introduced numerical approach leads to results that are in excellent agreement with those of the designed shaking table tests.

Keywords

Scaled boundary method; Polygonal finite element method; Tunnel; Seismic analysis; Shaking table

Data availability statement

The data supporting the findings of this study are available within article. No publicly archived dataset was generated.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Highlights
  • PFEM simplifies mesh generation and improves interpolation
  • PFEM-SBFEM models seismic soil-structure interaction
  • Results match shaking table tests accurately
References
  1. Bazyar M.H., Basirat B. (2012). Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis under Seismic Loads Using the Scaled Boundary Finite-Element Method. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 14(1), 57-68.
  2. Bazyar M.H., Talebi A. (2015). Transient seepage analysis in zoned anisotropic soils based on the scaled boundary finite‐element method. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 39(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2291.
  3. Berenger J.P. (1994). A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. Journal of Computational Physics, 114(2), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1994.1159.
  4. Biabanaki S.O.R., Khoei A.R. (2012). A polygonal finite element method for modeling arbitrary interfaces in large deformation problems. Computational Mechanics, 50(1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-011-0668-4.
  5. Binesh S.M., Raei S. (2014). Upper bound limit analysis of cohesive soils using mesh-free method. Geomechanics and Geoengineering, 9(4), 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2014.887229.
  6. Bretas E.M., Lemos J.V., Lourenço P.B. (2016). Seismic analysis of masonry gravity dams using the discrete element method: implementation and application. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 20(2), 157-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2015.1085463.
  7. Celebi E., Göktepe F., Karahan N. (2012). Non-linear finite element analysis for prediction of seismic response of buildings considering soil-structure interaction. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12(11), 3495-3505. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-3495-2012.
  8. Chen Y.C.S., Rashed Y.F., Golberg M.A. (1998). A mesh-free method for linear diffusion equations. Numerical Heat Transfer-Part B, 33(4), 469-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407799808915044.
  9. Chew W.C., Liu Q.H. (1996). Perfectly matched layers for elastodynamics: a new absorbing boundary condition. Journal of Computational Acoustics, 4(4), 341-359. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218396X96000118.
  10. Chi H., Talischi C., Lopez‐Pamies O., Paulino G.H. (2015). Polygonal finite elements for finite elasticity. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 101(4), 305-328. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.4802.
  11. Deeks A.J., Wolf J.P. (2002). A virtual work derivation of the scaled boundary finite-element method for elastostatics. Computational Mechanics, 28(6), 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-002-0314-2.
  12. Duan W., Kirby R., Mudge P., Gan T.H. (2016). A one dimensional numerical approach for computing the eigenmodes of elastic waves in buried pipelines. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 384, 177-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.08.013.
  13. Fontara I.K., Schepers W., Savidis S., Rackwitza F. (2017). FE/PML numerical schemes for dynamic soil-structure interaction and seismic wave propagation analysis. Procedia Engineering, 199, 2348-2353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.222.
  14. Genes M.C., Kocak S. (2002). Seismic Analyses of Soil Structure Interaction Systems by Coupling the Finite Element and the Scaled Boundary Finite Element Methods. In: Proceedings of the ECA2002 International Symposium on Structural and Earthquake Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  15. Grigoriev M.M., Dargush G.F. (2004a). Efficiency and accuracy of higher-order boundary-element methods for steady convective heat diffusion. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals, 45(2), 109-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407790490253874.
  16. Grigoriev M.M., Dargush G.F. (2004b). A multilevel boundary-element method for two-dimensional steady heat diffusion. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals, 46(4), 329-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407790490475346.
  17. Hajialilue-Bonab M., Balazadeh B., Tohidvand H.R. (2015). The scaled boundary spectral element method for dynamics of unbounded media with nonhomogeneity in radial direction. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering. 16, 81-96.
  18. Hajialilue-Bonab M., Razavi S.K. (2015). A study of soil-nailed wall behavior at limit states. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, 169(1), 64-76. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgrim.14.00021.
  19. Hajialilue-Bonab M., Tohidvand H.R. (2015). A modified scaled boundary approach in frequency domain with diagonal coefficient matrices. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 50, 8-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2014.07.001.
  20. Hassanzadeh M., Tohidvand H.R., Hajialilue-Bonab M., Javadi A.A. (2018). Scaled boundary point interpolation method for seismic soil-tunnel interaction analysis. Computers and Geotechnics, 101, 208-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2018.05.007.
  21. Junyi Y., Feng J., Yanjie X., Guanglun W., Chuhan Z. (2003). A seismic free field input model for FE-SBFE coupling in time domain. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2(1), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02857538.
  22. Lehmann L. (2005). An effective finite element approach for soil-structure analysis in the time-domain. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 21(4), 437-450. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2005.21.4.437.
  23. Lin G., Zhang Y., Hu Z., Zhong H. (2014). Scaled boundary isogeometric analysis for 2D elastostatics. Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 57(2), 286-300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-013-5146-x.
  24. Meyer M., Barr A., Lee H., Desbrun M. (2002). Generalized barycentric coordinates on irregular polygons. Journal of Graphics Tools, 7(1), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10867651.2002.10487551.
  25. Nath U.K., Hazarika P.J. (2013). Parametric study of pile cap lateral resistance: finite element analysis. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 7(3), 273-281. https://doi.org/10.1179/1938636213Z.00000000039.
  26. Nguyen‐Xuan H. (2017a). A polytree‐based adaptive polygonal finite element method for topology optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 110(10), 972-1000. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.5448.
  27. Nguyen-Xuan H. (2017b). A polygonal finite element method for plate analysis. Computers & Structures, 188, 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2017.04.002.
  28. Nguyen-Xuan H., Nguyen-Hoang S., Rabczuk T., Hackl K. (2017). A polytree-based adaptive approach to limit analysis of cracked structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 313, 1006-1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.09.016.
  29. Pak R.Y.S., Guzina B.B. (1999). Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis by direct boundary element methods. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 36(31-32), 4743-4766. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7683(98)00263-7.
  30. Rafiezadeh K., Ataie-Ashtiani B. (2014). Transient free-surface seepage in three-dimensional general anisotropic media by BEM. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 46, 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2014.04.025.
  31. Rajagopal A., Kraus M., Steinmann P. (2018). Hyperelastic analysis based on a polygonal finite element method. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 25(11), 930-942. https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2017.1329463.
  32. Razavi S.K., Hajialilue Bonab M. (2017). Study of soil nailed wall under service loading condition. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, 170(2), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeen.16.00006.
  33. Ribeiro D.B., de Paiva J.B. (2014). A new BE formulation coupled to the FEM for simulating vertical pile groups. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 41, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2014.01.007.
  34. Seiphoori A., Haeri S.M., Karimi M. (2011). Three-dimensional nonlinear seismic analysis of concrete faced rockfill dams subjected to scattered P, SV, and SH waves considering the dam–foundation interaction effects. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31(5-6), 792-804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.01.003.
  35. Sukumar N., Tabarraei A. (2004). Conforming polygonal finite elements. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 61(12), 2045-2066. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1141.
  36. Tabarraei A., Sukumar N. (2006). Application of polygonal finite elements in linear elasticity. International Journal of Computational Methods, 3(04), 503-520. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021987620600117X.
  37. Talischi C., Pereira A., Paulino G.H., Menezes I.F., Carvalho M.S. (2014). Polygonal finite elements for incompressible fluid flow. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 74(2), 134-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.3843.
  38. Tohidvand H.R., Hajialilue-Bonab M. (2014). Seismic soil structure interaction analysis using an effective scaled boundary spectral element approach. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 15(4), 501-516.
  39. Von Estorff O., Firuziaan M. (2000). Coupled BEM/FEM approach for nonlinear soil/structure interaction. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 24(10), 715-725. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0955-7997(00)00054-0.
  40. Wachspress E.L. (1975). A rational finite element basis. Academic press, New York, USA.
  41. Wolf J.P., Song C. (1996). Finite-element modelling of unbounded media. Wiley, Chichester, England, UK.
  42. Xu L., Ye J. (2019). DEM algorithm for progressive collapse simulation of single-layer reticulated domes under multi-support excitation. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 23(1), 18-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1309606.
  43. Yang Y.B., Hung H.H. (1997). A parametric study of wave barriers for reduction of train‐induced vibrations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 40(20), 3729-3747. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19971030)40:20<3729::AID-NME236>3.0.CO;2-8.
  44. Yang Y.B., Hung H.H., Chang D.W. (2003). Train-induced wave propagation in layered soils using finite/infinite element simulation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 23(4), 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(03)00003-4.
  45. Yeong-bin Y., Hsiao-hui H. (2009). Wave propagation for train-induced vibrations: a finite/infinite element approach. World Scientific, https://doi.org/10.1142/7062.
  46. Zhou M.X., Wang J.T., Jin F., Gui Y., Zhu F. (2014). Real-Time Dynamic Hybrid Testing Coupling Finite Element and Shaking Table. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 18(4), 637-653. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2014.897276.
How to cite
Nikvand, V., & Bonab, M. H. (2024). Seismic response analysis of tunnels using a coupled polygonal finite element method. Civil and Geoengineering Letters, 1(1), e100009. https://doi.org/10.22034/CGEL.1.1.e100009
Note: Please verify the citation against your preferred style guide.
Share
X LinkedIn Facebook Email Mendeley
Article Metrics
1727 Readers
1109 Downloads
N/A Citations
PDF XML Back to Issue