What does this research mean for the field?

In dynamic soil-structure interaction of pile-supported structures, soil constitutive models primarily govern transmitted motion and pile forces, while interface kinematics govern structural material demand and global stability. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To isolate and evaluate the independent and interactive effects of soil constitutive behavior and soil–foundation interface kinematics on the seismic response of pile-supported structures.

August 30, 2026Soil Dynamics and Earthquake EngineeringOpen Access

Dynamic soil–structure interaction of pile-supported structures: Separating soil constitutive and interface effects in 3D analysis

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

JSJosé Manuel Torres SerranoArup Group (United States)SASandro AndrésUniversidad Politécnica de Madrid RJRafael JiménezEcopetrol (Colombia)

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Numerical simulation reveals that soil nonlinearity and interface kinematics govern distinct seismic responses in pile-supported towers, indicating simplified models misjudge structural stability.

Key Points

To isolate and evaluate the independent and interactive effects of soil constitutive behavior and soil–foundation interface kinematics on the seismic response of pile-supported structures.
Simulated a pile-supported reinforced-concrete tower using a verified direct three-dimensional finite-element model.
Evaluated four modeling configurations (equivalent-linear tied, equivalent-linear frictional, nonlinear tied, and nonlinear frictional) subjected to bidirectional moderate and strong ground motions.
The soil constitutive formulation primarily governed transmitted ground motions, pile-cap accelerations, foundation kinematics, and pile internal forces, with equivalent-linear models producing higher internal forces and demand envelopes than nonlinear models.
Interface kinematics primarily dictated structural material demand and overall stability, where tied interfaces concentrated flexural strain and reinforcement stresses at the tower base.
Under strong shaking conditions, only the nonlinear frictional configuration preserved global stability, while all tied configurations and the equivalent-linear frictional configuration experienced a loss of global stability.

Cite This Study

Serrano et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a93f1736c1a8fb52e79e5ef https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2026.110655

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Numerical simulation reveals that soil nonlinearity and interface kinematics govern distinct seismic responses in pile-supported towers, indicating simplified models misjudge structural stability.

Dynamic soil–structure interaction of pile-supported structures: Separating soil constitutive and interface effects in 3D analysis

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Dynamic soil–structure interaction of pile-supported structures: Separating soil constitutive and interface effects in 3D analysis

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider