Earthquake-resistant Foundations and

Materials
PREV NEXT
If the structures are constructed over the soft or difficult soil, during earthquake the whole
structure can fail regardless of improvement techniques. The disastrous effect may be influenced
by the dynamic soil characteristics of the area. Soil becomes highly instable due to the damage,
which results in large ground movements, association of the damage with the local soil
conditions is readily apparent. Thus, for example, deposits of loose granular soils may be
compacted by the ground vibrations induced by the earthquake, resulting in large settlements and
differential settlements of the ground surface. Typical examples of damage due to this cause are
shown in Figures 16.1 and 16.2. Figure 16.1 shows an island near Valdivia, Chile, which was
partially submerged as a result of the combined effects of tectonic land movements and ground
settlement due to compaction in the Chilean earthquake of 1960. Figure 16.2 shows differential
settlement of the backfill of a bridge in the Niigata earthquake of 1964.
For example, earthquakes often knock buildings from their foundations. One solution involves
tying the foundation to the building so the whole structure moves as a unit.

Another solution -- known as base isolation -- involves floating a building

above its foundation on a system of bearings, springs or padded cylinders.
Engineers use a variety of bearing pad designs, but they often choose
lead-rubber bearings, which contain a solid lead core wrapped in
alternating layers of rubber and steel. The lead core makes the bearing stiff
and strong in the vertical direction, while the rubber and steel bands make
the bearing flexible in the horizontal direction. Bearings attach to the
building and foundation via steel plates and then, when an earthquake hits,
allow the foundation to move without moving the structure above it. As a
result, the building's horizontal acceleration is reduced and suffers far less
deformation and damage.
Even with a base-isolation system in place, a building still receives a
certain amount of vibrational energy during an earthquake. The building
itself can dissipate, or damp, this energy to some extent, although its
capacity to do this is directly related to the ductility of the material used in
the construction. Ductility refers to the ability of the material to undergo

large plastic deformations. Brick and concrete buildings have low ductility
and therefore absorb very little energy. This makes them especially
vulnerable in even minor earthquakes. Buildings constructed of steelreinforced concrete, on the other hand, perform much better because the
embedded steel increases the ductility of the material. And buildings made
of structural steel -- steel components that come in a variety of preformed
shapes, such as beams, angles and plates -- offer the highest ductility,
allowing buildings to bend considerably without breaking.
Ideally, engineers don't have to rely solely on a structure's inherent ability to
dissipate energy. In increasingly more earthquake-resistant buildings,
designers are installing damping systems. Active mass damping, for
example, relies on a heavy mass mounted to the top of a building and
connected to viscous dampers that act like shock absorbers. When the
building begins to oscillate, the mass moves in the opposite direction,
which reduces the amplitude of mechanical vibrations. It's also possible to
use smaller damping devices in a building's brace system.
Even with extensive testing on laboratory shake tables, any seismic
engineering design concept remains a prototype until it experiences an
actual earthquake. Only then can the larger scientific community evaluate
its performance and use what it learns to drive innovation. In the next
section, we'll examine some of those innovations, as well as what the future
may hold for seismic engineering.

Case Study: Taipei 101 in Taiwan

Taipei 101 stood as the world's tallest skyscraper until the Burj Dubai
opened its doors in 2010. And yet the massive, 1667-foot (508-meter)
tower still represents a marvel of design innovation. One of its most
impressive features is a 730-ton (662-metric-ton) active mass damper that
resides at the top of the building, between the 88th and 92nd floors. The
huge sphere sits in a cradle formed by eight steel cables and connects to
eight viscous dampers. If the building begins to sway, the damper
counteracts the motion, reducing vibrations that could make inhabitants
uncomfortable and could cause stress on the structure.
ake a look at recent seismic activity, and you might get the impression that
Earth, perhaps a bit too overcaffeinated, has a bad case of the

shakes. Earthquakes rattled Chile on and off during 2010-11, beginning

with a magnitude-8.8 temblor (or earthquake) that struck just off the coast
near Concepcion in February 2010. Then, in March 2011, a magnitude-9.0
quake rocked Japan, triggering a tsunami that killed an estimated 29,000
people and damaged nuclear reactors [source: Amazing Planet]. And
finally, in August 2011, a magnitude-5.8 quake centered near Mineral, Va.,
spooked residents up and down the Atlantic seaboard and damaged the
Washington Monument.
While those events seem to suggest an ominous future with a shaking,
quivering crust, earthquakes have always been common, as has the
human resolve to survive them. Over the centuries, engineers have come
to know one thing with growing certainty: Earthquakes don't kill people;
buildings do. This is a gross oversimplification, of course, because
tsunamis also take many lives, but not all earthquakes generate tsunamis.
They do, however, cause buildings, bridges and other structures to
experience sudden lateral accelerations. All of which leads to a logical
question: Is it possible to keep buildings upright and intact during
catastrophic earthquakes like those that shook Chile in February 2010
and Japan in March 2011?

Many engineers and architects now believe it's possible to build

an earthquake-proof building -- one that would ride the waves of the
most fearsome temblor and remain as good as new once the shaking had
stopped. The cost of such a building, however, would be staggering.
Instead, construction experts strive for something slightly less ambitious
-- earthquake-resistant buildings, which are designed to prevent total
collapse and preserve life, as well as construction budgets.
In recent years, the science of building earthquake-resistant structures has
advanced tremendously, but it's not an entirely new subject. In fact, a few
ancient buildings still stand today despite their location in active seismic
zones. One of the most notable is the Hagia Sophia, a domed church (now
museum) built in Istanbul, Turkey, in A.D. 537. About 20 years after it was
completed, the massive dome collapsed after a quake shook the area.
Engineers evaluated the situation and decided to rebuild the dome, but on

a smaller scale. They also reinforced the whole church from the outside
[source: PBS].
Today, the techniques are a bit different, but the basic principles are the
same. Before we delve into the nuts and bolts of building earthquakeresistant structures, let's review some basics, namely, what forces are
generated during an earthquake and how they affect man-made structures.

The damage resulting from earthquakes may be influenced in a number of ways by the characteristics of
the soils in the affected area. Where the damage is related to a gross instability of the soil, resulting in
large permanent movements of the ground surface, association of the damage with the local soil
conditions is readily apparent. Thus, for example, deposits of loose granular soils may be compacted by
the ground vibrations induced by the earthquake, resulting in large settlements and differential
settlements of the ground surface. Typical examples of damage due to this cause are shown in Figures
Figure 16.1 and Figure 16.2 Figure Figure 16.1 shows an island near Valdivia, Chile, which was partially
submerged as a result of the combined effects of tectonic land movements and ground settlement due to
compaction in the Chilean earthquake of 1960. Figure Figure 16.2 shows differential settlement of the
backfill of a bridge in the Niigata earthquake of 1964.

As we know,shaking due to seismic waves causes damage to buildings. The damage

maybe influenced by the characteristics of soil in the affected area.The objective of
the paper is to show the effect of the earthquake on different types of foundations
such as shallow, mat/raft, pile and structures like gravity dam, arch dam etc. The
reaction of soil to the loading of the building when a building undergoes an
earthquake disturbance as a behaviour of deflection is known as the soil structure
interaction. The movement of ground during theearthquake induces kinematic and
inertial loading which decreases the bearing capacity and increments the
settlement of shallow foundations. In seismic regions, where kinematic interactions
have been observed, the mat foundations experiences overturning moments. Pile
foundations are influenced by both kinematic and inertial interactions which causes
many failures. The convoluted oscillating arrangement of acceleration and ground
motion in a gravity dam,developing ephemeral dynamic loads because of inertia of
dam and confined water is the seismic activity generated in these dams. The arch

dam foundations undergoes effects of inertia and flexibility due to the propagation
of seismicwaves.