Numerical study proposes alternative bridge foundation design to reduce seismic damage in liquefiable soils, indicating improved stability.
Ground failure during major seismic events associated with soil liquefaction can lead to major structural damage to both the columns and the bridge upper deck due to large seismic-induced displacements in the support foundation. Liquefaction-driven ground motion incoherence during the dynamic event and permanent soil deformations are key variables in the observed damage. This paper summarizes a numerical study of an alternative bridge foundation design proposed to reduce support displacements and bearing capacity failure during and after an earthquake, as well as relative settlement associated with partial loss of bearing capacity when the bridge column is founded on a potential liquefiable layer. Three-dimensional numerical models were developed using FLAC3D. The seismic environment was characterized by a uniform hazard spectrum, UHS, for intraplate and interplate earthquakes, as presented in the current construction Mexico City regulations. Initially, a one-dimensional analysis was performed using SHAKE to evaluate liquefaction susceptibility. Results show that the structured cell foundation reduces excess pore-pressure generation by up to 42% compared to shallow foundations and 25% compared to pile systems. This improvement is associated with (i) restriction of cyclic shear strain, (ii) modification of deformation patterns, (iii) partial confinement of pore-pressure development within the enclosed soil mass, and (iv) preservation of effective stresses during shaking. Additionally, the system reduces shear strain localization and decreases acceleration transmitted to the superstructure by up to 14–33%. The findings demonstrate that structured confinement systems can significantly influence the mechanisms governing liquefaction, offering a promising alternative for bridge foundations in seismic regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olivera et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: