Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
Analysis Experimental and Numerical of Pounding Between Two
Adjacent Structures with Unequal Highs
Zahraa Kadhim Rashid1 , Ali Laftah Abbas2
1,2
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Diyala, Diyala, Iraq,
32001
zahrakadhim43@gmail.com1, Alilaftast@uodiyala.edu.iq2
Abstract
Buildings nearby with different mass and heights, making it dangerous, cause the pounding to happen when
two structures collide as a result of lateral movements caused by external forces. The results of an
experimental and numerical analysis of pounding between two adjacent buildings are presented in this paper.
To investigate two neighboring steel models, five-story and eight-story models, with different gap distances
(zero-2-3) centimeters between the two steel models under ground motion during the El-Centro earthquake.
To investigate how the buildings respond to pounding in experimental work using a shaking table and
numerical analysis by using ABAQUS's finite element modeling software. The experimental study's findings
suggest that pounding may affect a structure's response to an earthquake, especially at zero-gap. Display the
results of the maximum displacement and acceleration for various gap distance reductions in value at (2-3)
cm there’s no pounding. The difference in displacement and acceleration outcomes between theory and
experiment El-Centro earthquake at zero-gap, that’s displacement, and acceleration at five-story for the five-
story model is about (1%, 14%), and for the eight-story model is about (3%, 4%).
Keywords: Pounding, Earthquake, Experimental, Numerical, Shaking table, Gap, Steel model.
Article history: Received: 24 Sept 2024; Accepted: 24 Oct 2024; Published: 15 Mar 2025
This article is open-access under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
collapse, according to observations made during
1. Introduction
multiple post-earthquake studies [5].
Many instances of damage resulting from nearby
structures colliding during earthquakes have been A similar phenomenon was noted in Nepal
recorded. For example, after the Athens earthquake, following the 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Several
significant damage and roof parapet collapse were groups and organizations conducted the
noted because of the collision between the reconnaissance survey [6-9], but none of these reports
educational [1]. Following the earthquakes in Mexico gave pounding incidences much attention; instead,
City and San Fernando, there have been multiple they were mentioned in passing. At 11:56 a.m. local
reports of collisions between nearby structures [2] and time on April 25, 2015, a catastrophic earthquake
[3]. Furthermore, following the Loma Prieta struck central Nepal. Numerous powerful aftershocks,
earthquake, more than 200 collisions were found to including the moment magnitude (MW)= 7.3
have impacted 500 buildings within a 90-kilometer aftershocks on May 12, 2015, occurred shortly after
radius of the epicenter [4]. Small distances between the initial earthquake shock. Almost 9,000 individuals
nearby structures can cause little damage or even lost their lives because of these earthquakes in Nepal
and the surrounding nations. During the earthquake,
Corresponding Author: zahrakadhim43@gmail.com
52
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
almost 800,000 houses suffered significant damage or A typical example of a collapsing building
collapsed entirely [10]. colliding with an adjacent building is depicted in Fig.
Buildings are constructed with little space between 1. As can be seen, the floor diaphragm of the
them because they are erected so near to one another. collapsed building struck the nearby RC structure
Because of the ground motions brought on by during the second-story column, causing damage to
earthquakes, these buildings start to vibrate and may the building that was comparable to mid-column
eventually collapse. These collision phenomena are pounding. The damage caused by the collision of the
referred to as "pounding". "A behavior known as collapsed adjacent structure could not have been
pounding happens when two structures collide as a avoided, not even with a considerable gap between
result of lateral movements caused by external [11]. the buildings [12].
(A) Impact from a collapsing building (B) Damage detail
Fig. 1 The damage caused by the collision of the collapsed adjacent structure [12].
The pounding occurred due to a different mass force stress states and bending moment states [14].
and highs between adjacent buildings. To throughout the investigation. Non-linear ground
investigate the pounding in nearby structures by motion analysis has been carried out on the
using shaking table tests on two scaled building buildings in the SAP2000 numerical platform in the
models, this study examines the pounding aftermath of the Uttarkashi earthquake of 1991,
phenomenon, It is found that the peak This phenomenon has the potential to cause damage
displacements in the adjacent state are lower than to the buildings in various forms, such as collapse
those in the separate state by 4.27% for Model-1 or cracks [15]. Also, to investigate the impact of
and 22.57% for Model-2. In the time domain, a neighboring structure collisions during an
significant decrease in displacements is also seen in earthquake (EL-Centro), the investigation was
addition to the peaks. [13]. two multistory buildings conducted with varied nearby structure heights
having 15 stories and 10 stories are considered by (4,6,10) and gap sizes (1-2) cm, finding the
ETABS, Both the buildings are having regular pounding results in a significant increase due to a
geometry dimensions of 12m X 12m. A 50mm difference between buildings [16]. A study
seismic gap was used between the buildings. The involving 3-, 5-, and 9-story adjacent, the pounding
maximum response decreases in shorter buildings, finding decrease when increase the gaps [17].
while it increases in taller ones. Significant Seismic pounding causes the building to
pounding effects between two buildings are experience acceleration of up to 30% and an
revealed by the investigation, which results in axial increase in story displacement of up to 80% [18].
53
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
So, in previous studies, take just a numerical and
with a few experimental studies with a single panel
and a little height.
In this study, experimental and numerical
analyses of pounding of two adjacent steel models
with different mass, highs, and gaps are performed
on a shaking table (1x1.4) m at the University of
Diyala College of Engineering, subjected to
earthquake ground motion (El-Centro 1945).
2. The experimental model properties and
setup
Scale-down 1/15 five-story and eight-story steel Fig. 3 Two steel models, five-story and eight-
replicas were built specifically for the experiment story, on a shaking table at zero-gap.
and utilized as test subjects, as shown in Fig. 2, at
two different heights of 1500 and 2400 mm. They
were all built with four floors per story, each
measuring 300 mm by 300 mm overall and having
a 1 mm thickness, connecting bolts for the beams
and columns. The columns were placed 300 mm
apart in a rectangular configuration around the
shaking table. Each story rises 300 mm, and the
beam column has a square cross section (20 x 20)
mm with a length of 300 mm. Ceramic tiles
measuring 300 by 300 mm were attached to the
steel of each floor, with a thickness of 12 mm, to
Fig. 4 A accelerometers GY61W and a linear
replicate the mass of the models. And was used
variation displacement transducer (LVDT) with
weight W=5kg a thickness t=10 mm, with a
220 mm.
dimension of 265 x 265 mm. as shown in Fig. 3.
2.1 Testing of Models
Following the experimental models' placement on
the shaking table at zero gaps, the displacement
transducer (LVDT) and the accelerometer sensors
(GY-61W) are displayed in Fig. 4. The five-story
and eight-story adjacent steel models have varying
highs and gaps (0-2-3) cm. The sensors were placed
in the manner shown in Fig.3; On the third
and eighth, of the right and left models, type a)
accelerometers GY61W and a linear variation
displacement transducer (LVDT) with a 220 mm
variety were mounted. On the base of the shaking
table depicted in Fig. 5 (a, b), one type of GY-61W
accelerometer and one LVDT with a 500 mm
variety were mounted.
Fig. 2 The Flow chart of experimental work.
54
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
2.2 Earthquake test first, starting the servo motor to begin simulating an
earthquake. The results are then archived and
Under the El-Centro earthquake of 1945, shaking
scrutinized.
table tests were conducted using earthquake ground
Included tests of two five-story adjacent steel
motions Fig. 6. The model is then set up for
models with different masses and gaps. Two model
inspection by being placed on the vibration table.
structures were placed on the shaking table to
Next, the sensor device that gathers and stores the
record the dynamic response of displacement and
data from the inspection is turned on, and the
acceleration. There is enough space between the test
earthquake ground data is uploaded to the device
structures to record the dynamic reaction. The
program. Subsequently, the device program
separation distance between the two models is (0-2-
receives an operating command, which transforms
3) cm.
the tremor data into commands. The table moves
(A) The displacement sensors (LVDT) (with a range (B) accelerometer sensors.
of 500 mm).
Fig. 5 The displacement sensors and accelerometer sensors.
Fig. 6 Time history of earthquakes
created. The simulation was performed in close
3. Finite Element Analysis
proximity to the prototypes. By employing a finite
In the second phase of the investigation, a numerical element as a shell element on each side of the tube,
analysis was conducted using finite element the beam-column was represented as a tube. Ceramic
modeling by software in (ABAQUS). Along the axis was used to replicate the mass of the models and was
is (U1) unconstrained in three-dimensional (3D) affixed to the steel plate diaphragm of each floor. The
dynamic contact analysis, with six degrees of element's dimensions are identical to those of the
freedom per node. All supports were considered to be experimental model.
fixed, and finite element models of the frames' Fig. 7, the material of all parts is steel, just
underground motion during earthquakes were ceramic as mass like concrete illustrates the material
55
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
parameters of all steel elements, which include a This section shows the results achieved from the
mass density of 7.85E-09 N/mm, a poison's ratio of laboratory work and finite element model by using
0.3, and a Young's modulus of 200,000 N/mm. With (ABAQUS) software. As shown in Fig. 8, the
a mass density of 2.7*E-9 N/mm, a poison's ratio of displacement and acceleration that were attained by
0.2, and Young's modulus of 23900 N/mm, the mass shaking table, and in Fig. 9, the displacement and
is representative of a ceramic. acceleration that were attained from the finite
element model in (ABAQUS) software, for different
4. Results and Discussion
gaps under the ground motion excitation utilized, are
El-Centro 1945.
Fig. 7 Finite element model in (ABAQUS) software.
a) Displacement
b) Displacement
56
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
c) Displacement
d) Acceleration
e) Acceleration
Fig. 8 The displacement and acceleration at story three, story eight-right (B5) model, and at story five-left(B1)
model, under El-Centro earthquake.
a) Displacement
57
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
b) Displacement
c) Displacement
d) Acceleration
e) Acceleration
Fig. 9 The acceleration at stories (three, five, and eight) under El-Centro earthquake.
The results of a comparison between earthquakes. Table (1) displays the experimental
experimental and numerical research show that and numerical results of the maximum
pounding affects a structure's responsiveness to displacement and acceleration for different gap
58
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
distances. The pounding causes displacement 3- In the experiment, the peak displacement at
responses and acceleration at different story levels story eight was reduced by 9%, and the
in the case of zero gap distances that are greater than acceleration at story eight right model
those from the separation distances (3-2) cm and was reduced by 48%.
pounding occurred at zero gaps. The value started 4- Theoretically, the peak displacement at story
to decrease with the increased distance between the eight was reduced by 9%, and the acceleration
two models. The results were the following: was reduced by 57%
1- In the experiment, the peak displacement at story 5- In the experiment, the peak displacement at story
three was reduced by 10%. five was reduced by 16%, and the acceleration at
2- Theoretically, the peak displacement at story story five reduction 37%.
three was reduced by 13%, and acceleration at 6- In theory, the peak displacement at story five
story three was reduced by 5%. was reduced by 14%, and the acceleration
reduction by 14%.
Table 1: Peak displacement and acceleration for two models under El-Centro earthquake.
a) Displacement-mm (B1+B5)
Zero-gap Gap=2cm Gap=3cm
Experimental Theoretical Experimental Theoretical Experimental Theoretical
Storey-8-
34 34 31 31 31 31
right
Storey-5-
14 14 12 12 11.7 12
left
Storey-3-
14.5 15 13.5 14 13 14
right
b) Acceleration-m/s2 (B1+B5)
Zero-gap Gap=2cm Gap=3cm
Experimental Theoretical Experimental Theoretical Experimental Theoretical
Storey-8-
1.25 1.3 0.52 0.56 0.52 0.56
right
Storey-5-
0.7 0.51 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44
left
Pounding might result in considerable earthquake, were used in this paper's five-story and
overstresses in the building with the smaller mass if eight-story analyses. For searching at the reactions
there are significant mass differences. Because of of the buildings to earthquakes due to pounding.
the potentially significant disparities in total mass According to the results of the experimental
and periods, pounding can cause major issues when investigation, pounding could have an impact on a
there are neighboring buildings that are not of structure's reaction to an earthquake. Display the
comparable height. El-Centro showed a reduction maximum displacement and acceleration results for
in collisions between the two models at 2-3 cm and various gap distances. When there is no gap in the
a decrease in value as the distance between the two space between two buildings.
buildings increased without any pounding. A collision has occurred between the two
nearby buildings. Both acceleration and
5. Conclusion
displacement increase because of the pounding;
Two steel models, with a distinct gap under the therefore, the pounding occurred due to a different
ground motion excitation in the El-Centro 1945 mass, and highs between two adjacent models
59
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
caused the model to vibrate out of phase in a [7] Sharma, K., Deng, L., and Noguez, C. C.
different direction, causing collisions between the (2016). “Field investigation on the
models. But no pounding occurred at gaps (2-3) cm. performance of building structures during the
It may be shown that finite element analysis agrees April 25, 2015, Gorkha earthquake in Nepal.”
with experiment results and provides Eng. Struct., 121, 61–74
approximations for experimental analysis. The [8] Shrestha, B. (2015). “Reconnaissance
difference in displacement and acceleration investigation on the damages of the 2015
outcomes between theory and experiment El- Gorkha earthquake, Nepal, Australian
Centro earthquake at zero-gap, that’s displacement, Earthquake Engineering Society.”
and acceleration at five-story for B1 is about (1%, 〈http://www.aees.org.au/nepal-earthquake-
14%), and for B5 is about (3%, 4%). report/〉 (Apr. 20, 2017).
Conflict of Interest [9] Shakya, M., and Kawan, C. K. (2016).
“Reconnaissance based damage survey of
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of buildings in Kathmandu Valley: An aftermath
interest regarding the publication of this of 7.8 Mw, 25 April 2015 Gorkha (Nepal)
manuscript. earthquake.” Eng. Fail. Anal., 59, 161–184.
Reference [10] Dizhur, D., Dhakal, R. P., Bothara, J., and
Ingham, J. M. (2016). “Building typologies
[1] Vasiliadis, L. and Elenas, A. (2002),
and failure modes observed in the 2015
“Performance of school buildings during the
Gorkha (Nepal) earthquake.” Bull. N. Z. Soc.
Athens earthquake of 7 September 1999”, 12th
Earthquake Eng., 49(2), 211–232.
European Conference on Earthquake
[11] Raheem, Shehata E. Abdel. (2013)
Engineering, September
"Evaluation and mitigation of earthquake
[2] Rosenbluth, E. and Meli, R. (1986), “The 1985
induced pounding effects on adjacent
earthquake: Causes and effects in Mexico
buildings performance." Proceedings of
City”, Concrete Int., 8(5),23-34.
Advances in structural engineering and
[3] Bertero, V.V. and Collins, R.G. (1973),
mechanics (ASEM13), Jeju, Korea: 8-12.
“Investigation of the failures of the Olive
[12] Shrestha, Bipin, and Hong Hao.(2018)
View stair towers during the San Fernando
"Building pounding damages observed during
earthquake and their implications on seismic
the 2015 Gorkha earthquake." Journal of
design”, EERC Report No. 73-26, Earthquake
Performance of Constructed Facilities 32.2:
Engineering Research Center, University of
04018006.
California, Berkeley
[13] Şekerci, Çağla, and Erdem Damcı.
[4] Kasai, K. and Maison, B.F. (1997), “Building
"Investigation of Pounding between Two
pounding damage during the 1989 Loma
Adjacent Building Models with Experimental
Prieta earthquake”, Eng. Struct., 19(3), 195-
Methods." Turkish Journal of Civil
207.
Engineering 34.4 (2023): 1-26
[5] Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (1988), “Pounding of
[14] Karamadi, A. B., & Togarsi, R. (2017).
buildings in series during earthquakes”,
Analysis of seismic pounding between
Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 16(3), 443-456.
adjacent buildings. Int Res J Eng
https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290160311.
Technol, 4(5), 2801-2807.
[6] Lizundia, B., et al. (2016). “EERI earthquake
[15] Thamizhinian, B., Ghosh, D., Gupta, H., &
reconnaissance team report: M7. 8 Gorkha,
Mittal, A. K. (2018). Seismic pounding effect
Nepal earthquake on April 25, 2015 and its
on buildings and its control. In Proceedings of
aftershocks.” Earthquake Engineering
the sixteenth symposium on earthquake
Research Institute, Oakland, CA
engineering, IIT Roorkee, India. Paper (No.
335).
60
Bilad Alrafidain Journal for Engineering Science and Technology ISSN: 2073-9524
https://doi.org/10.56990/bajest/2025.040105 Pages:52-61
[16] Adel, M., Elsabbagh, A., & Elghandour, M.
Analysis of Pounding between Two Adjacent
Buildings during an Earthquake.
[17] Kazemi, F., Mahmoud Miari, and Robert
Jankowski (2021) "Investigating the effects of
structural pounding on the seismic
performance of adjacent RC and steel MRFs."
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 19.1: 317-
343.
[18] Thamizhinian, B., et al. (2018) "Seismic
pounding effect on buildings and its control."
Proceedings of the sixteenth symposium on
earthquake engineering, IIT Roorkee, India.
Paper. No. 335.
61
