What question did this study set out to answer?

To re-evaluate conventional assumptions regarding the universally beneficial nature of soil-structure interaction (SSI) in seismic structural design and assessment.

July 1, 2000Journal of Earthquake EngineeringOpen Access

Seismic Soil-Structure Interaction: Beneficial or Detrimental?

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

GMGeorge MylonakisNational Technical University of Athens GGGeorge GazetasBuffalo State University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Numerical modeling reveals detrimental soil-structure interaction effects on seismic demand in flexible structures, indicating conventional design codes may underestimate structural damage.

Key Points

To re-evaluate conventional assumptions regarding the universally beneficial nature of soil-structure interaction (SSI) in seismic structural design and assessment.
Evaluated current seismic design code provisions and idealized response spectra against recorded earthquake ground motions.
Conducted theoretical evaluations and rigorous numerical modeling of inelastic bridge piers to assess standard ductility and geometric assumptions.
Demonstrates that natural period elongation caused by soil-structure interaction can amplify rather than decrease seismic demand under specific soil and ground motion conditions.
Shows that standard ductility concepts and simplified geometric relations in bridge pier models can yield erroneous conclusions regarding seismic safety.

Cite This Study

Mylonakis et al. (2000) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1d970b33e2df9c962fc009 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460009350372

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

July 1, 2000Journal of Earthquake EngineeringOpen Access

Seismic Soil-Structure Interaction: Beneficial or Detrimental?

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

GMGeorge MylonakisNational Technical University of Athens GGGeorge GazetasBuffalo State University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Numerical modeling reveals detrimental soil-structure interaction effects on seismic demand in flexible structures, indicating conventional design codes may underestimate structural damage.

Key Points

To re-evaluate conventional assumptions regarding the universally beneficial nature of soil-structure interaction (SSI) in seismic structural design and assessment.
Evaluated current seismic design code provisions and idealized response spectra against recorded earthquake ground motions.
Conducted theoretical evaluations and rigorous numerical modeling of inelastic bridge piers to assess standard ductility and geometric assumptions.
Demonstrates that natural period elongation caused by soil-structure interaction can amplify rather than decrease seismic demand under specific soil and ground motion conditions.
Shows that standard ductility concepts and simplified geometric relations in bridge pier models can yield erroneous conclusions regarding seismic safety.

Cite This Study

Mylonakis et al. (2000) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1d970b33e2df9c962fc009 https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460009350372

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark