computation

Article
Seismic Response of Adjacent Unequal Buildings
Subjected to Double Pounding Considering
Soil-Structure Interaction
Denise-Penelope N. Kontoni 1, * and Ahmed Abdelraheem Farghaly 2, *
1 Department of Civil Engineering, Technological Educational Institute of Western Greece,
GR-26334 Patras, Greece
2 Department of Civil and Architectural Constructions, Faculty of Industrial Education,
Sohag University Sohag 82524, Egypt
* Correspondence: kontoni@teiwest.gr (D.-P.N.K.); farghaly@techedu.sohag.edu.eg (A.A.F.);
Tel.: +30-2610-369031 (D.-P.N.K.); +20-93-2330630 (A.A.F.)

Received: 31 December 2017; Accepted: 30 January 2018; Published: 1 February 2018

Abstract: Various cases of two adjacent multi-story buildings with different numbers of floors
and equal or unequal foundation levels under earthquake loading and considering soil-structure
interaction (SSI) are investigated. A two-dimensional model for each case of the two adjacent unequal
buildings without separation distance is used and a special arrangement of contact elements in the
contact zone is employed to fulfil all possible deformation contact modes which take place under
seismic loading. The soil is modelled by two-dimensional 4-node elements which are in contact
with the foundations of the two adjacent buildings. This paper studies the earthquake-induced
double pounding that takes place between the two adjacent unequal height buildings in some upper
points at superstructure in the contact zone and also at foundation level, considering soil-structure
interaction (SSI). The double pounding and the soil-structure interaction (SSI) effects should be taken
into consideration in the seismic analysis of adjacent buildings especially those with different heights
and different foundation levels.

Keywords: seismic response; adjacent buildings; pounding; foundation collision; soil-structure

interaction; FEM

1. Introduction
Impacts due to earthquake-induced pounding transmit short duration, high amplitude forces to
the impacting structures and may occur at any level of the colliding structures and at any location
along the impacting levels (in the case of different story heights of the adjacent buildings resulting in
slab-column impacts) or collision at the foundation level.
Herein double pounding denotes the pounding which may take place between superstructure
levels and foundation levels of the two adjacent buildings.
Pounding between adjacent buildings during earthquakes has attracted considerable interest,
see, for example: Anagnostopoulos [1,2], Anagnostopoulos and Spiliopoulos [3], Karayannis and
Favvata [4,5], Anagnostopoulos and Karamaneas [6], Efraimiadou et al. [7,8]. Investigation on the
effects of the mass distribution on pounding structures (Cole et al. [9]), pounding of seismically isolated
buildings (Polycarpou and Komodromos [10]), 3D pounding of buildings (Polycarpou et al. [11,12]),
torsional building pounding (Wang et al. [13]), pounding of buildings with different dynamic properties
(Jankowski [14]), mid-column building pounding and corner building pounding (Papadrakakis et al. [15])
are also some important examples. However, the above significant studies, they did not account for the
influence of the underlying soil on building pounding.

Computation 2018, 6, 10; doi:10.3390/computation6010010 www.mdpi.com/journal/computation

Computation 2018, 6, 10 2 of 18

Hao et al. [16] and Hao and Gong [17] investigated the seismic responses of the adjacent
buildings subjected to pounding due to spatially varying earthquakes. Rahman et al. [18] studied the
effects of foundation compliance of the conventional structures and the importance of soil flexibility
has been highlighted. Shakya and Wijeyewickrema [19] analysed unequal story height buildings
considering the underlying soil effects to study the mid-column pounding of the adjacent buildings.
Naserkhaki and Pourmohammad [20] presented a numerical study of soil-structure interaction (SSI) and
structure-soil-structure interaction (SSSI) effects on the response of twin buildings during earthquake
excitations using the discrete model concept. Naserkhaki et al. [21] concluded that the underlying
soil (SSSI) increases the displacements and story shears produced in both buildings due to pounding
compared to those seen under the fixed-base condition. Mahmoud et al. [22] investigated the coupled
effect of the supporting soil flexibility and pounding between neighbouring, insufficiently separated
equal height buildings under earthquake excitation. Qin and Chouw [23] presented a numerical
investigation of the seismic gap between adjacent structures with structure-foundation-soil interaction
(SFSI). Naserkhaki et al. [24] investigated the earthquake induced building pounding problem for
various separation gaps and for two foundation conditions, fixed-based and structure-soil-structure
interaction (SSSI). Behnamfar and Madani [25] studied the effects of mutual cross interaction and
pounding on the nonlinear seismic response of adjacent sample buildings. Alam and Kim [26] studied
the spatially varying ground motion effects on the seismic response of adjacent structures considering
soil-structure interaction (SSI). Pawar and Murnal [27] concluded that consideration of soil-structure
interaction (SSI) increases the number of impacts at impact level, floor to column impact is more
vulnerable than floor to floor impact and SSI phenomenon may be sometimes responsible for pounding
phenomenon due to increase in displacement. Madani et al. [28] studied the effects of pounding and
structure-soil-structure interaction on the nonlinear dynamic behaviour of selected adjacent structures.
Ghandil et al. [29] studied the dynamic responses of structure-soil-structure systems with an extension
of the equivalent linear soil modelling and investigated the problem of cross interaction of two adjacent
buildings through the underlying soil.
Recently, Farghaly [30] studied the double pounding of two specific adjacent buildings under
seismic load considering SSI. Kharazian and Lopez-Almansa [31] presented an overview of research
on seismic pounding between buildings with aligned slabs. Ghandil and Aldaikh [32] investigated the
probable seismic pounding effects on the response of adjacent symmetric buildings considering
inelastic structure-soil-structure interaction. Li et al. [33] investigated pounding phenomena
considering structure-soil-structure interaction (SSSI) under seismic loads and found that pounding and
SSSI effects worsen the adjacent buildings’ conditions because their acceleration and shear responses
are amplified after pounding considering SSSI.
This paper studies the seismic response of various cases of two adjacent buildings with different
numbers of floors and equal or unequal foundation levels subjected to double pounding and considering
soil-structure interaction (SSI). FEM 2D models were created for the soil and the two adjacent buildings
of different heights and foundation levels without separation distance in order to study the phenomena
of double pounding, which may take place in some upper points at superstructure in the contact zone
and also at foundation levels, between the two buildings subjected to earthquake and considering SSI.

2. Impact Elements
Impacts between two colliding structures are simulated using special purpose contact elements
that become active when the corresponding nodes come into contact. In this work, the adjacent
buildings were connected by a combination of the gap element and the Kelvin-Voigt model. Figure 1
shows the impact element for each point between the two adjacent buildings, from foundation level to
top point of the lower adjacent building.
To model impact between the two colliding buildings, the linear spring-damper (Kelvin-Voigt model)
element is mostly used, where KL is the stiffness and CL is the damping coefficient (Anagnostopoulos [1],
Shakya and Wijeyewickrema [19]). Numerical simulation performed by Jankowski [34] showed that
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 18

Jankowski [34] showed that for concrete to concrete impact, KL = 9350 t/m provides good correlation
Computation
Computation
between 2018,
2018,6,6,x10
FOR PEER
experimental REVIEW
results 33 of
provided by Van Mier et al. [35] and theoretical results. In the present of 18
18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 18
study, the same value of KL is used.
Jankowski [34] showed that for concrete to concrete impact, KL = 9350 t/m provides good correlation
Jankowski
for concrete[34] showedimpact,
to concrete that forKconcrete to concrete impact, correlation
KL = 9350 t/m provides good correlation
between experimental L = 9350by
results provided t/mVanprovides
Mier etKgood
al.
L
between
[35] and theoretical experimental
results. results
In the present
between
provided experimental
by Van Mier etresults
al. [35]provided
and by Van
theoretical KMier
results. et
In al.
the [35] and
present theoretical
study, the results.
same valueInofthe
K present
is used.
study, the same value of KL is used. G L
study, the same value of KL is used.
gap
K
C L
KL KG L
KaG gap element and a Kelvin-Voigt element.
Figure 1. Impact element composed of
gap
gap
The stiffness of gap element KG is considered as C 100
L KL to avoid errors in convergence and to
CL
ensure that it works as nearly rigidly when the gap is closed.
Figure
Figure 1.
1. Impact
Impact element
element composed
composed of
of aa gap
gap element
element and
and aa Kelvin-Voigt
Kelvin-Voigt element.
element.
Figure 1. Impact element composed of a gap element and a Kelvin-Voigt element.
3. Model Description
The stiffness of gap element KG is considered as 100 KL to avoid errors in convergence and to
TheThe
stiffness of gap
gap element
element K is considered
KG was as 100 Kearthquake
L to avoidaccelerogram
errors in convergence and to
ensure that itused earthquake
works as nearly rigidlyG when
excitation the 1940
the gapElis
Centro
closed. (Figure 2) with
ensure
ensure that
peakthat it works
it works
ground as nearly
as nearly
acceleration rigidly
rigidly
(PGA) when
of when the
0.50 g the gap
andgap is closed.
theistime
closed.
history analysis was about 40-s duration
3. consisting
Model of 4000 steps.
Description
3.
3. Model
Model Description
Description
The
The used earthquake excitation was the 1940 El Centro earthquake accelerogram (Figure 2) with
The used
used earthquake
earthquake excitation
excitation was
was the
the 1940
1940 El
El Centro
Centro earthquake
earthquake accelerogram
accelerogram (Figure
(Figure 2)
2) with
with
peak
peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.50 g and the time history analysis was about 40-s duration
peak ground
ground acceleration
acceleration (PGA)
(PGA) ofof 0.50
0.50 gg and
and the
the time
time history
history analysis
analysis was
was about
about 40-s
40-s duration
duration
consisting
consisting of 4000 steps.
consisting of
of 4000
4000 steps.
steps.

Figure 2. The El Centro earthquake accelerogram.

Herein the SAP2000 (Computers and Structures, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA, USA) [36] software
was used to model the adjacent buildings and the underlying soil. The model of the two adjacent
buildings with contact elements in the contact zone and the underlying soil is shown in Figure 3.
This model incorporatesFigure
the2. The Elbuildings
Centro earthquake accelerogram.
Figure
Figure 2. main
2. The El
The El Centro (modelled
Centro earthquake
earthquake using beam and slab elements), the
accelerogram.
accelerogram.
foundations (modelled as single footings) and the soil mesh which is of quadrilateral shape. All
Herein the were
foundations SAP2000 (Computers
designed and Structures,
as rigid surface foundationsInc.,since
Walnut Creek, CA,
the required USA) [36]
embedment software
depth is
Herein the SAP2000 (Computers and Structures, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA, USA) [36] software
wasconsidered
used tothe
Herein model the adjacent
SAP2000
negligible in buildings
(Computers
comparison and and
thethe
Structures,
with underlying
layerInc., Walnut
thickness. soil. Thebond
Creek,
Perfect model
CA, is of
USA) the two
[36]
assumed to adjacent
software
existwas
was used to model the adjacent buildings and the underlying soil. The model of the two adjacent
buildings
usedbetweenwith
to modelthecontact
the elements
adjacent
footings in the
buildings
and the contact
and zone and soil.
theofunderlying
surface the underlying
the supporting The model
soil. soil isthe
of the
Herein, shown
twosoil in
is Figure
adjacent 3.
buildings
assumed
buildings with contact elements in the contact zone and the underlying soil is shown in Figure 3.
This model
withhomogeneous incorporates
contact elements the
inproperties
and its the contact main
arezone buildings
and the
as shown (modelled
underlying
in Table 1. using beam and slab
soil is shown in Figure 3. elements), the
This model incorporates the main buildings (modelled using beam and slab elements), the
foundations (modelled as single footings) and the soil mesh which is of quadrilateral shape. All
foundations (modelled as single footings) and5the
5 soil mesh which is of quadrilateral shape. All
foundations were designed as rigid surface foundations since the required embedment depth is
5 35 3333333333333333333333 35 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

foundations were designed as rigid surface foundations since the required embedment depth is
considered negligible in comparison with the layer thickness. Perfect bond is assumed to exist
considered negligible in comparison with the layer thickness. Perfect bond is assumed to exist
between the footings and the surface of the supporting
5 5 soil. Herein, the soil is assumed
between the footings and the surface of the supporting soil. Herein, the soil is assumed
3333333

homogeneous and its properties are as shown in Table 1.

homogeneous and its properties are as shown in Table 1.
5 5
5 5
Roller support

Roller support

One soil 5 5
layer
5 5 division
intensify finite element
50

3 333333333333 3

under and around buildings

Bedrock layer 100 Hinged support

support

support

X One soil layer

support

support

intensify One
finite element
soil
(a) layer division
5050

under and
intensify around
finite buildings
element division
Roller

Roller

under and around buildings

Roller

Roller

Figure 3. Cont.
Z
Z
Bedrock layer 100 Hinged support
Bedrock layer 100 Hinged support
X
X
(a)
(a)
Computation 2018, 6, 10 4 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 18

5 5

5 333333333333
5 5

3333333
Roller support

Roller support
Roller support

Roller support
One soil layer
One soil layer intensify finite element division

50
intensify finite element division under and around buildings
50

under and around buildings

Bedrock layer Hinged support

Bedrock layer 100 Hinged support 100
(b) (c)

Figure 3. The buildings with soil mesh of modelled representation. (a) The two adjacent buildings
Figure 3. The buildings with soil mesh of modelled representation. (a) The two adjacent buildings with
with unequal foundation levels; (b) Single 12-floor building (with foundation at −5 m); (c) Single
unequal foundation levels; (b) Single 12-floor building (with foundation at −5 m); (c) Single 6-floor
6-floor building (with foundation at −3 m).
building (with foundation at −3 m).
Table 1. Soil Properties.
This model incorporates the main buildings (modelled using beam and slab elements),
Elastic Modulus, E (KN/m2) 30,000
the foundations (modelled as single footings) and the soil2 mesh which is of quadrilateral shape.
Soil shear modulus, G (KN/m ) 14,350
All foundations were designed as rigidPoisson’s
surface ratio,
foundations
ν since 0.40
the required embedment depth is
considered negligible in comparison with the layer thickness.
Weight per unit volume, γ (KN/m3) Perfect bond is assumed to exist between
16
the footings and the surface of the supporting soil. Herein, the soil is assumed homogeneous and its
properties
Asare as shown
shown in Table
in Figure 1.
3, the dimensions of the soil medium were taken to be 50 m × 100 m, the soil
under the buildings consists of one layer with 50 m thickness and this medium was divided into
small (fine) grids (under the buildings) Table 1. Soil
which wereProperties.
proven to be small enough to transmit all the
frequency components of the input motions.
2) 30,000
The shown (in Figure 3) buildings are of 12Efloors
Elastic Modulus, (KN/m with basement floor (5 m from ground level)
Soil shear modulus, G (KN/m 2) 14,350
and of 6 floors with shallow (3 m from ground level) foundation, with 3 m height of each floor. The
gap size between the two buildings isPoisson’s ratio, ν
zero. Columns and beams are0.40 modelled as frame elements and
Weight per unit volume, γ (KN/m3 ) 16
vertical distributed total (dead and live) load acting on beams of each floor is assumed 2.5 t/m. The
foundations (single footings) are also modelled using frame elements. In this paper, the Egyptian
As shown
Codes in Figure
of Practice 3, the dimensions
(ECP-203, of the
ECP-201) [37,38] soilused.
were medium The were
soil istaken to beby
modelled 502Dm× 100elements
shell m, the soil
with
under thedefinition
buildingsofconsists
the curveof of soil
one under
layer cyclic
with 50 m load taking in
thickness andconsideration
this medium thewas
nonlinearity of soil
divided into small
during
(fine) gridsearthquake
(under the in SAP2000 which
buildings) v.17 computer program
were proven [36].
to be Herein,
small the fine
enough mesh option
to transmit was
all the used;
frequency
furthermore,
components of thesome other
input techniques in modelling have been developed as those by Nascimbene
motions.
[39,40] to effectively solve
The shown (in Figure 3) buildingsproblems arelike of
locking phenomena
12 floors with basementthat may appear
floor (5 m in
frommeshing.
groundThelevel)
and of 6 floors with shallow (3 m from ground level) foundation, with 3 m height of each in
assumption of constant damping (5% for all modes) for the numerical model is incorporated floor.
SAP2000 [36].
The gap size between the two buildings is zero. Columns and beams are modelled as frame elements
The sub-grade is modelled with plane strain elements with nonlinear elastic isotropic material.
and vertical distributed total (dead and live) load acting on beams of each floor is assumed 2.5 t/m.
The interaction between the superstructure and the sub-grade is modelled with friction in tangential
The foundations (single footings) are also modelled using frame elements. In this paper, the Egyptian
direction and compression capacity in vertical direction. The bottom surface of the sub-grade is
Codes of Practice
restricted in the(ECP-203,
vertical andECP-201) [37,38]
tangential were Infinite
direction. used. The soil isare
elements modelled
applied by
on 2Dthe shell
sides elements
of the
withsub-grade,
definitionrepresenting
of the curve of soil under cyclic
endless soil propagation. load taking in consideration the nonlinearity of soil
during earthquake in SAP2000 v.17 computer program [36]. Herein, the fine mesh option was used;
furthermore,
4. Resultssome other techniques in modelling have been developed as those by Nascimbene [39,40]
and Discussion
to effectively
Tablesolve problems
2 shows like locking
the definition of the phenomena
symbols usedthat may
in the appear Figures.
following in meshing. The assumption of
constant damping (5% for all modes) for the numerical model is incorporated in SAP2000 [36].
The sub-grade is modelled with plane strain elements with nonlinear elastic isotropic material.
The interaction between the superstructure and the sub-grade is modelled with friction in tangential
direction and compression capacity in vertical direction. The bottom surface of the sub-grade is
restricted in the vertical and tangential direction. Infinite elements are applied on the sides of the
sub-grade, representing endless soil propagation.
Computation 2018, 6, 10 5 of 18

4. Results and Discussion

Table 2 shows the definition of the symbols used in the following Figures.

Table 2. Symbol definitions.

Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 18

Symbol Definition Symbol Definition

Table 2. Symbol definitions.
F.L. Foundation Level. s Building considering SSI.
G.L. Ground Level.
Symbol Definition SymbolS SingleDefinition
building considering SSI.
12-12 Two adjacent
F.L. buildings:
Foundation Level. both with 12 floors. s f Building Fixed base building.
considering SSI.
12-10 Computation
G.L.
2018,
Two adjacent 6, x FOR
Groundbuildings:
Level.
PEER REVIEW
one with 12 floors and the other with 10 floors. S F Single Fixed
building base 5SSI.
of 18
single building.
considering
12-8 Two adjacent
12-12 buildings:
Two adjacent one both
buildings: withwith
12 floors and the other with 8 floors.
12 floors. f U Fixed base
Displacement.
building.
12-6 Two adjacent
12-10 buildings:
Two adjacent one one
buildings: with 12 12
with floorsTable
floorsand 2.the
andthe Symbol
other definitions.
with
other with 106 floors.
floors. F a Fixed baseAcceleration.
single building.
12-4 12-8 Two adjacent
Two adjacent buildings:
buildings: one one
withwith
12 12 floorsand
floors andthe
the other
other with
with84floors.
floors. U Q Displacement.
Base shear force.
SymbolTwo adjacent buildings: one withDefinition
12-2 12-6Two adjacent buildings: one with 12 12 floorsand
floors andthe
the other
other with floors. Symbol
with62floors. a M Acceleration.
Base Definition
bending moment.
12-4 F.L. TwoFoundation Level.
adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 4 floors. sQ Building considering SSI.
h High (tall) building with 12 floors. N Base shear
Baseforce.
normal force.
G.L. Ground Level. S Single building considering SSI.
s 12-2Short Two adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 2 floors. M Sx Base bending moment.
12-12(low)Two
building.
adjacent buildings: both with 12 floors. f Lateral
Fixed base soil stress.
building.
alone hSingle building.
High (tall) building with 12 floors. N Sz Base normal
Verticalforce.
soil stress.
12-10 Two adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 10 floors. F Fixed base single building.
SSI sSoil Structure
Short (low) building. effect. Sx LateralLateral
soil stress.
12-8 Two Interaction
adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 8 floors. U NL Displacement. normal force at foundation.
alone12-6 Single building.
Two adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 6 floors.
Sz
a
Vertical soil stress.
Acceleration.
SSI 12-4 Soil Two
Structure Interaction
adjacent buildings:effect.
one with 12 floors and the other with 4 floors. QNL Lateral
Base shearnormal
force. force at foundation.
12-2 Two adjacent buildings: one with 12 floors and the other with 2 floors. M Base bending moment.
4.1. Adjacent Buildings
h
with Equal Foundation Levels
High (tall) building with 12 floors. N Base normal force.
4.1. Adjacent
s
Buildings with Equal Foundation Levels
Short (low) building. Sx Lateral soil stress.
Figure 4alone
shows the
Single distribution of the soil points around the foundation of the single and the
building. Sz Vertical soil stress.
Figure
SSI 4 shows theInteraction
Soil Structure distribution
effect. of the soil points around the
N L foundation
Lateral normal offorce
theat single and the
foundation.
two adjacent buildings, where
two adjacent buildings, where thethesoil soil stresses
stresses ininthe
the x (horizontal)
x (horizontal) and zand z (vertical)
(vertical) directions
directions will be will
be calculated.
4.1. Adjacent
calculated. Buildings with Equal Foundation Levels
Figure 4 shows the distribution of the soil points around the foundation of the single and the
two adjacent buildings, whereG.L.
the soil stresses in the x (horizontal) and z (vertical) directions will be
G.L.
calculated. 1 5 1 Building (2) 7
Building (1)
F.L.(-5.00) F.L.(-5.00)
2 3 4 G.L. 2 3 4 5 6G.L.
1 5 1 Building (2) 7
(a) Single building. (b) Two
Building (1) adjacent buildings.
F.L.(-5.00) F.L.(-5.00)
2
Figure 4. Points
3 distributed around the foundations of the single and two adjacent buildings.
4 2
Figure 4. Points distributed around the foundations 6
3 of the4 single5 and two adjacent buildings.
(a) Single building. (b) Two adjacent buildings.
Figure 5 shows the top lateral displacements of the two adjacent buildings with and without SSI
Figure 4. Points distributed around the foundations of the single and two adjacent buildings.
and the
Figure single
5 shows buildings
the top with
lateralSSIdisplacements
and without SSI of (with
thedash twolines).
adjacentThe top displacements
buildings with andof thewithout
adjacent
SSI and the single short (low) buildings and single buildings in the SSI case are nearly similar; the top
Figurebuildings with
5 shows the top SSIdisplacements
lateral and without SSItwo
of the (with dash
adjacent lines).with
buildings Theand top displacements
without SSI of
displacements
and the of buildings
single the tall building
with SSI are
and nearly
without constant,
SSI (withindash
contrary
lines).toThe
thetop
gradually lower of
displacements adjacent
the
the adjacent short (low) buildings and single buildings in the SSI case are nearly similar; the top
building in which
adjacent the top
short (low) displacements
buildings and single arebuildings
graduallyindecreasing
the SSI case as are
its height is decreasing.
nearly similar; the topThe
displacements
lateral topofdisplacements
the tall building
in the are
cases nearly
of fixed constant,
adjacent in
buildingscontrary
are to the
smaller gradually
than the lower adjacent
corresponding
displacements of the tall building are nearly constant, in contrary to the gradually lower adjacent
building inbuilding
values which
taking the
in intotop
which displacements
consideration are gradually
the effect
the top displacements of SSI.
are Fordecreasing
gradually the asas its
its height
single buildings
decreasing withisisSSI,
height decreasing. TheThe
the lateral
decreasing. top lateral
top displacements
displacements inarethe caseswith
smaller
lateral top displacements ofthe
in fixed
casesadjacent
respect ofto buildings
theadjacent
fixed corresponding arevalues
buildings smaller than
of the
are smaller two
than the corresponding
adjacent
the buildings values
corresponding
withvalues
taking into SSI effect.
taking intothe
consideration consideration
effect of SSI.the effect
For theof SSI. For buildings
single the single buildings
with SSI, with
theSSI, the lateral
lateral top
top displacements
are smallerdisplacements
with respectare smaller with respect to the corresponding values of the two adjacent buildings
to the corresponding values of the two adjacent buildings with SSI effect.
with SSI effect. 600

500600
Lateral Displacments (mm)

400500
Lateral Displacments (mm)

400
300

300
200
200
100
100
0
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
0
12-12 12-10 Building cases
12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
Uhs Uss Building
Uhf cases
Usf UF US
Uhs Uss Uhf Usf UF US
Figure 5. Top lateral displacements in buildings with different configurations.
Figure 5. Top lateral displacements in buildings with different configurations.
Figure 5. Top lateral displacements in buildings with different configurations.
Computation 2018, 6, 10 6 of 18

Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 18

Figure 6 shows the top acceleration in the x direction (top lateral acceleration) of the buildings in
Figure 6 shows the top acceleration in the x direction (top lateral acceleration) of the buildings
different cases. The maximum
in different values of
cases. The maximum the of
values toptheacceleration were
top acceleration werefound
found in thecase
in the caseofof fixed
fixed basebase single
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 18
buildings, single
the values of accelerations
buildings, of the single
the values of accelerations of thebuildings withwith
single buildings the effect ofofSSI
the effect SSIwere smaller than the
were smaller
than the
corresponding corresponding
values of values of with
acceleration acceleration
fixed with
base fixed
and base
the and
topthe top acceleration
acceleration of of the
the adjacent buildings
adjacent
Figure 6 shows the top acceleration in the x direction (top lateral acceleration) of the buildings
buildings with fixed base shows the smallest values with respect to the corresponding values of the
with fixedinbase shows
different theThe
cases. smallest
maximum values
valueswith
of therespect to the corresponding
top acceleration were found in the values of the
case of fixed base other cases.
other cases.
single buildings, the values of accelerations of the single buildings with the effect of SSI were smaller
than the corresponding values of acceleration with fixed base and the top acceleration of the adjacent
90
buildings with fixed base shows the smallest values with respect to the corresponding values of the
80
(mm/sec2)
other cases.
70
90
60
Acceleration

80
2)

50
Top Lateral(mm/sec

70
40
60
30
Top Lateral Acceleration

50
20
40
10
30
0
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
20
Building cases
10 ahs ass ahf asf aF aS
0
12-12
Figure 6. Top 12-10
acceleration 12-8 in buildings
in x direction 12-6 with different
12-4 12-2
configurations.
Figure 6. Top acceleration in x direction in buildings
Building cases with different configurations.
Figure 7 shows the base shearahs forceass ahfbuildings
of the asf aF
with aS
and without SSI, taking also into
consideration the pounding effect between the two adjacent buildings with different heights. The
Figure 7 showsFigure the6.base shear force
Top acceleration of the
in x direction buildings
in buildings with configurations.
with different and without SSI, taking also
maximum values of base shear force, for all the different configuration cases of the buildings, were
into consideration the pounding
found as constant effect
values for the singlebetween the SSI,
buildings with twowhile
adjacent buildings
the lowest withshear
values of base different
force heights.
Figure 7 shows the base shear force of the buildings with and without SSI, taking also into
The maximum
consideration the pounding effect between the two adjacent buildings with different heights.the
values
were found of
in the base
fixed shear
base for force, for
single and all the
adjacent different
building configuration
cases. The poundingcaseseffect of
The buildings,
appears
were foundwith
as SSI in the cases
constant of adjacent
values for thebuildings
single with 12 and 8,
buildings 12 and
with 4 and
SSI, 12 and
while the 2 lowest
floors. values of base shear
maximum values of base shear force, for all the different configuration cases of the buildings, were
force werefound
found as in
constant valuesbase
the fixed4500
for the
forsingle
singlebuildings with SSI, while
and adjacent the lowest
building values
cases. Theofpounding
base shear force
effect appears
were found in the fixed base for single and adjacent building cases. The pounding effect appears
with SSI in the cases of adjacent buildings with 12 and 8, 12 and 4 and 12 and 2 floors.
with SSI in the cases 4000
of adjacent buildings with 12 and 8, 12 and 4 and 12 and 2 floors.
3500
Shear force (KN)

4500
3000
4000
2500
3500
2000
Base(KN)

3000
1500
Base Shear force

2500
1000
2000
500
1500
0
100012-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
Building cases
500
Qhs Qss Qhf Qsf QF QS
0
12-12
Figure 12-10force in buildings
7. Base shear 12-8 12-6different 12-4
with 12-2
configurations.
Building cases
Qhs
Figure 8 shows the base bending Qss
moment Qhf
of theQsf QF with
buildings QS and without SSI, taking also
into consideration the pounding effect between the two adjacent buildings with different heights.
Figure 7. Base shear force in buildings with different configurations.
The maximum values
Figure of base
7. Base shearbending moment,
force in for with
buildings all the differentconfigurations.
different configuration cases of the
buildings, were found for the single buildings with SSI, while the lowest values of base bending
Figure 8 shows the base bending moment of the buildings with and without SSI, taking also
into consideration the pounding effect between the two adjacent buildings with different heights.
Figure
The8 maximum
shows the baseofbending
values base bendingmoment
moment, of for
theall
buildings with
the different and without
configuration cases SSI, taking also
of the
into consideration
buildings, were found for the single buildings with SSI, while the lowest values of base bending heights.
the pounding effect between the two adjacent buildings with different
The maximum values of base bending moment, for all the different configuration cases of the buildings,
were found for the single buildings with SSI, while the lowest values of base bending moment were
found in the fixed base for single and adjacent building cases. The pounding effect at foundation level
appears with the effect of SSI in the adjacent building cases of 12 and 8, 12 and 6 and 12 and 2 floors.
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18

moment were found in the fixed base for single and adjacent building cases. The pounding effect at
Computation 2018, 6, 10 7 of 18
foundation level appears with the effect of SSI in the adjacent building cases of 12 and 8, 12 and 6
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18
and 12 and 2 floors.
moment were found in the fixed base for single and adjacent building cases. The pounding effect at
4000
foundation level appears with the effect of SSI in the adjacent building cases of 12 and 8, 12 and 6
3500
and 12 and 2 floors.

Moments (KN.m)
3000
4000
2500
3500
2000

(KN.m)
3000

Base Bending
1500

Base Bending Moments

2500
1000
2000
500
1500
0
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
1000
Building cases
500 Mhs Mss Mhf Msf MF MS

0
Figure 8. Base bending12-10
12-12 moment in12-8
buildings12-6
with different
12-4 configurations.
12-2
Figure 8. Base bending moment in Building
buildings
cases with different configurations.
Figure 9 presents the base normal Mhs force
Mss of Mhf
the buildings
Msf MF with
MS and without SSI. The base normal
force is decreased with the decrease of the building height for the short building in the adjacent
Figure 9 presents the base
Figure normal
8. Base bendingforce
moment ofinthe buildings
buildings with configurations.
with different and without SSI. The base normal
buildings with SSI but it is constant in the high building with and without SSI. The base normal force
force is decreased with
in the case of the decrease
the single building with ofSSI
the building
effect height
is decreased for the
gradually withshort building
the decrease in the adjacent
the building
Figure 9 presents the base normal force of the buildings with and without SSI. The base normal
buildings force
withisSSI
height. Thebut
baseit normal
is constant in the
force appears high
to havebuilding with
nearly constant and without
values SSI.
in the high The base
building
decreased with the decrease of the building height for the short building in the adjacent
of normal
the force
adjacent
of the buildings
in the casebuildings single with and with
building without theeffect
SSI effect is
of SSI.
decreased gradually with the decrease the building
with SSI but it is constant in the high building with and without SSI. The base normal force
height. Thein the casenormal
base of the single building
force with SSI effect is decreased gradually with the decrease the building
12000appears to have nearly constant values in the high building of the
height. The base normal force appears to have nearly constant values in the high building of the
adjacent buildings with and without the effect of SSI.
adjacent buildings with 10000
and without the effect of SSI.
normal force (KN)

12000
8000

10000
6000
Base(KN)

8000
4000
Base normal force

6000
2000

40000
case 12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4
Building case
2000
Nhs Nss Nhf Nsf NF NS

0
Figure 9. Base
case normal force in buildings
12-12 12-10 with
12-8 different configurations.
12-6 12-4
Building case
Figure 10 represents the stress Nhsin the
Nss soilNhf
aroundNsf theNFfoundation
NS of the single and the two
adjacent buildings in the lateral direction (at the shown in Figure 4 contact points between the soil
Figure 9. Base normal force in buildings with different configurations.
and the buildings).
Figure 9.Figure
Base10a showsforce
normal the stress in the soilwith
in buildings around the foundation
different in x direction for a
configurations.
single building with different heights, where all points are subjected to tensile stress in the soil
Figure 10 represents the stress in the soil around the foundation of the single and the two
around the foundation of the single building for all heights but the point 3 (under the building) is
adjacent buildings in the lateral direction (at the shown in Figure 4 contact points between the soil
Figure 10 represents
subjected the stress
to compressive stressininthe
thesoil
soil.around
Figure 10bthe represents
foundation the of the in
stress single
soil inand
and the buildings). Figure 10a shows the stress in the soil around the foundation in x direction for a
the two adjacent
x direction
around
buildings single the
in thebuildingfoundation
lateralwith of
direction the two adjacent buildings, where all stresses are tensile around the
different(at the shown
heights, where all in points
Figureare4 subjected
contact points
to tensilebetween thesoil
stress in the soil and the
buildings except for the point 5 (under the building) and the maximum tensile stress was found at
buildings).around
Figurethe 10a showsofthe
foundation the stress in the soil
single building around
for all thethe
heights but foundation
point 3 (underin xthedirection
building) is for a single
point 4; the stresses are decreased in the case of two adjacent buildings especially for points 1, 2, 3, 6
subjected
building with to compressive
different heights,stress
where in the
all soil.
pointsFigure
are10b represents
subjected tothe stress stress
tensile in soil inin xthe
direction
soil around the
around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings, where all stresses are tensile around the
foundation of the single building for all heights but the point 3 (under the building) is subjected
buildings except for the point 5 (under the building) and the maximum tensile stress was found at
to compressive
point 4; stress in the
the stresses soil. Figure
are decreased in the10b
case represents
of two adjacent the in soil inforxpoints
stress especially
buildings direction
1, 2, 3, around
6 the
foundation of the two adjacent buildings, where all stresses are tensile around the buildings except for
the point 5 (under the building) and the maximum tensile stress was found at point 4; the stresses are
decreased in the case of two adjacent buildings especially for points 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 having positive
values (i.e. tensile stresses in the soil) but point 5 is subjected to compressive stress. The pounding
effect, especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around the foundation
of the two adjacent buildings with respect to the single building case.
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18

and 7 having positive values (i.e. tensile stresses in the soil) but point 5 is subjected to compressive
and 7 having
Computation
stress. 2018,
The 6,positive
10
pounding values especially
effect, (i.e. tensilethe
stresses in the pounding,
foundation soil) but point 5 isthe
affects subjected
values to
of compressive
8 of 18
stress in the
stress. The pounding
soil around effect,ofespecially
the foundation the foundation
the two adjacent pounding,
buildings affects
with respect thesingle
to the values of stress
building in the
case.
soil around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings with respect to the single building case.
350 600
350 600
550
300
) 550
500
300
2) 2
(KN/m

)
250 500
450

2) 2
(KN/m
(KN/m

250 400
450

(KN/m
200
x direction

400
350

x direction
200
direction

150 350
300

direction
150 300
250
100
in xin

250
200
100

in xin
Stress

50 200
150

Stress
Stress

50 100
150

Stress
0
100
50
0
-50 500
Sx12 Sx10 Sx8 Sx6 Sx4 Sx2 Sx12-12 Sx12-10 Sx12-8 Sx12-6 Sx12-4 Sx12-2
-50 0
-50
Sx12 Sx10 Building cases
Sx8 Sx6 Sx4 Sx2 Sx12-12 Sx12-10 Buiding cases
Sx12-8 Sx12-6 Sx12-4 Sx12-2
-50
1 2Building
3 cases
4 5 1 2 Buiding
3 4 cases5 6 7
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(a) Single building with different heights. (b) Two adjacent buildings with different heights.
(a) Single building with different heights. (b) Two adjacent buildings with different heights.
Figure 10. Stress in the soil in x direction around the foundation of the single and adjacent buildings.
Figure 10. Stress
Figure in the
10. Stress soilsoil
in the x xdirection
inin directionaround the foundation
around the foundationofof the
the single
single andand adjacent
adjacent buildings.
buildings.
Figure 11 shows the vertical stress in the soil around and under the buildings (at the shown in
FigureFigure
Figure 1111shows
4 contact shows thebetween
the
points verticalstress
vertical stress
the soil inand
in the soil
the soil buildings)
the around and
around andforunder
under the
different thebuildings
buildings (at(at
configurations. thetheshown
shown
Figure in in
11a
Figure
Figure
shows 4 contact
4 contact
the vertical points
points
stress between
between
in the soil the
thefor soil
soilthe and
and the buildings)
the buildings)
single building case for different
forwith
different
differentconfigurations.
configurations. Figure
heights, whereFigure 11a
11a
vertical
shows
shows thethe vertical
vertical stress
stress inin the
the soil
soil for
for the
the single
single building
building case
case with
with different
different
stresses are tensile in points 1, 2 and 5 when the building is subjected to earthquake but points 3 and 4 heights,
heights, where
where vertical
vertical
stresses
stresses
show are are tensileininpoints
tensile
compressive points1,in
stress 1,22and
andsoil.
the 55when
when the building
the
Figure building
11b shows is
issubjected
subjected totoearthquake
the vertical stress inbut
earthquake but
soilpoints
points
around 3 and 4 4
3 and
the
show compressive
foundations of the stress
twoin in
adjacent the soil. Figure 11b shows the vertical stress in soil around the
show compressive stress the soil.buildings,
Figure 11b where
shows thethe
points 2, 3,stress
vertical 5 andin6 soil(the around
points on thefoundation
foundations
foundations of the two adjacenttobuildings, where the points 2, 3, 5 1,
and 6 (the points on foundation
of level
the twoat one line)
adjacent are subjected
buildings, where compressive
the points stress
2, 3,but the 6points
5 and 4 and
(the points on7 are subjected
foundation to tensile
level at one
level
stress atinone theline)
soil are subjected
around the to compressive
basement floors stress
of buttwo
the the buildings.
points 1, 4 The and 7maximum
are subjected to tensile
tensile stress
line) are subjected to compressive stress but the points 1, 4 and 7 are subjected to tensile stress in the
stress in in thepoint
soil 4around the basement floors of the two buildings.
buildings)The andmaximum tensile stress
soilappears
around the basement(i.e. the
floors pointof between the two
the two buildings. adjacent
The maximum tensile this stress
stress is increased
appears in point
appears
gradually in with
pointthe 4 (i.e. the point between
decreasing theoftwo
theadjacent buildings) by and2 this stress is time;
increased
4 (i.e. the point between the twoof the height
adjacent buildings) adjacent
and thisbuilding
stress is increased floors every
gradually thatthe
with
gradually
means the with the
decreasing decreasing
of the of the
height height
of the of the
adjacent adjacent
building building
will by
subject2 floors
the every
short time;
building that
to
decreasing
means theof decreasing
the height of of thetheadjacent
height building
of the by 2 floors
adjacent every
building time;
will that means
subject the the building
short decreasing to of
overturning
theoverturning
height of the under earthquake
adjacent building load. The points 1 and 7 are nearly similar
will subject the short building to overturning under earthquake to the corresponding
values in single under earthquake
building case. load. The points 1 and 7 are nearly similar to the corresponding
load. Theinpoints
values single1building
and 7 are nearly similar to the corresponding values in single building case.
case.
150 250
150 250
)
)

2) 2
2) 2

200
(KN/m
(KN/m

200
(KN/m
(KN/m

100
100 150
direction
direction

150
direction
direction

50 100
in vertical
in vertical

50 100
in vertical
in vertical

50
0 50
Stress
Stress

0 0
Stress
Stress

0
-50 -50
Sz12 Sz10 Sz8 Sz6 Sz4 Sz2 Sz12-12 Sz12-10 Sz12-8 Sz12-6 Sz12-4 Sz12-2
-50 -50
Sz12 Sz10 Building cases
Sz8 Sz6 Sz4 Sz2 Sz12-12 Sz12-10 Building Cases
Sz12-8 Sz12-6 Sz12-4 Sz12-2
1 2Building
3 cases
4 5 1 2 Building
3 4 Cases5 6 7
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(a) Single building with different heights. (b) Two adjacent buildings with different heights.
(a) Single building with different heights. (b) Two adjacent buildings with different heights.
Figure 11. Stress in the soil in z direction around the foundation of the single and adjacent buildings.
Figure 11. Stress in the soil in z direction around the foundation of the single and adjacent buildings.
Figure 11. Stress in the soil in z direction around the foundation of the single and adjacent buildings.
Figure 12 represents the lateral normal force at the foundation for different configurations of
FigureThe
buildings. 12 represents the force
lateral normal lateralatnormal force at was
the foundation the foundation
created as afor different
result of the configurations
earth pressure on of
Figure 12
buildings. The represents
lateral the lateral
normal force atnormal
the force atwas
foundation the created
foundation as a for different
result of the configurations
earth pressure on of
the basement floor at foundation level. Two cases were studied: the first case was the single building
buildings.
the The lateral
basement floor atnormal forcelevel.
foundation at the
Twofoundation
cases werewas created
studied: the as a result
first case of the
was theearth
single pressure
building on
(alone) with the SSI effect and the second case was the two adjacent buildings with the SSI effect. The
the(alone)
basement
values with
of floor
lateral at effect
the SSI foundation
normal and the
forces atlevel.
second
the Twocasecases
foundation wasinwere
the studied:
thetwo
case of thethe
adjacent firstbuilding
casewith
buildings
single waswere
theSSI
the single building
effect.
constant The
(less
values
(alone) of
with lateral
the normal
SSI effectforces
and at
thethe foundation
second case in
was the case
the twoof the single
adjacent building
buildings
than 3000 KN) for all height levels of the building (12, 10, 8, 6, 4 and 2 floors). The lateral normal were
withconstant
the SSI (less
effect.
Thethan 3000
values ofKN) for
lateral all height
normal levels
forces atof the
the building
foundation (12,
in 10,
the 8,
case6, 4
ofand
the 2 floors).
single
forces at the foundation for the two adjacent buildings were computed and the low height building The
buildinglateral
were normal
constant
forces
(less thanat3000
the foundation
KN) for all for the two
height adjacent
levels buildings(12,
of the building were 10,computed
8, 6, 4 and and the lowThe
2 floors). height building
lateral normal
forces at the foundation for the two adjacent buildings were computed and the low height building
shows high values of lateral normal forces by nearly 2.7 times more than the single building and
the tall building lateral normal force values increased by nearly 1.5 times than the single building
Computation 2018, 6, 10 9 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18

shows high values of lateral normal forces by nearly 2.7 times more than the single building and the
case with tall
different
buildingheights. The force
lateral normal lateral normal
values force
increased byvalues intimes
nearly 1.5 the short
than thebuilding in thecase
single building two adjacent
buildings increased by nearly 1.66 times than the corresponding values in the tall
with different heights. The lateral normal force values in the short building in the two adjacent building and the high
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18
buildings increased by nearly 1.66 times than the corresponding values in the tall
value of the pushing forces of the tall building on the short building increased the value of the lateral building and the
high value of the pushing forces of the tall building on the short building increased the value of the
normal forces
showsathigh
thevalues
foundation
of lateralof the short
normal forces building,
by nearly 2.7which is anthan
times more evidence
the singleofbuilding
pounding between the
and the
lateral normal forces at the foundation of the short building, which is an evidence of pounding
tall building lateral normal force values increased by nearly 1.5 times than the single building case
two foundations.
between the two foundations.
with different heights. The lateral normal force values in the short building in the two adjacent
buildings increased by nearly
8000 1.66 times than the corresponding values in the tall building and the
high value of the pushing forces of the tall building on the short building increased the value of the
7000foundation of the short building, which is an evidence of pounding
lateral normal forces at the

(KN) Normal Force (KN)

between the two foundations.
6000

8000
5000

7000
4000
Lateral

6000
Lateral Normal Force

3000

5000
2000
12-12 10-12 8-12 6-12 4-12 2-12
4000 Building cases
NLs NLh N L alone
3000
Figure 12. Lateral normal force at the foundation for the two adjacent and single buildings with SSI.
Figure 12. Lateral normal force
2000 at the foundation for the two adjacent and single buildings with SSI.
12-12 10-12 8-12 6-12 4-12 2-12
Figure 13 shows the shear forces in the columns ofcases
Building the tall building of 12 floors in the case of the
two adjacent buildings with different heights N L s forN Lthe short building. The maximum shear force in
Figure 13 shows the shear forces in the columns Nof h L alone
the tall building of 12 floors in the case of
column occurred at basement floor (indicated by 0). For the two adjacent buildings with the same
the two adjacent
height, buildings
Figure
the shear forcewith
12. Lateral normal different
force
at basement heights
at the foundation
floor decreased for
for thethe
1.6 short
by two adjacentbuilding.
and 1.88and thanThe
the maximum
single buildings
times with SSI.
corresponding shear force
in columnvalues
occurred
in theatcases
basement floor
of the two (indicated
adjacent by 0).
buildings withFor 12 theand two adjacent
2 floors and thebuildings with the same
single building
Figure 13 shows the shear forces in the columns of the tall building of 12 floors in the case of the
respectively.
height, thetwo
shear force Theat shear force floor
basement at basement floor increased
decreased by 1.6 and with thetimes
1.88 decrease
than of the
the corresponding
height of the values
adjacent buildings with different heights for the short building. The maximum shear force in
adjacent building (this means that the foundation pounding increases the shear force gradually as
in the cases of the
column two adjacent
occurred at basement buildings with by
floor (indicated 120).andFor2the floors and the
two adjacent single with
buildings building
the samerespectively.
the adjacent building height decreases). The pounding with the top of the adjacent short buildings
height,
The shearincreases thebasement
force at shear force at basement floor decreasedtheby 1.6 and 1.88 the times than theof corresponding
the shear forcefloor
in thatincreased
top level and with
whatever decrease
the height of height
of the adjacent the is,
building adjacent
the tall building
values in the cases of the two adjacent buildings with 12 and 2 floors and the single building
(this means that the
building withfoundation pounding
12 floors height shows anincreases
increase intheshear shear
force,force gradually
e.g. for as thebuildings
the two adjacent adjacent building
respectively. The shear force at basement floor increased with the decrease of the height of the
with 12 and
height decreases). The2 floors, the shear forcethe
pounding in column
top ofincreased by 2 times than the single increases
building case.
adjacent building (this meanswiththat the foundation thepounding
adjacent short
increases buildings
the shear force graduallytheasshear force
in that topthe
level andbuilding
adjacent whatever the
height
12 height of
decreases). Thethe adjacent
pounding with building
the top ofis,
thethe tall building
adjacent with 12 floors
short buildings
increases
height shows an the shear force
increase in11that top
in shear levele.g.
force, and whatever
for the the two height of the adjacent
adjacent buildingsbuilding
with is, 12
the tall
and 2 floors,
building with 12 floors height10 shows an increase in shear force, e.g. for the two adjacent buildings
the shear force in column increased 9 by 2 times than the single building case.
with 12 and 2 floors, the shear force in column increased by 2 times than the single building case.
8
Height (Floors)

7
12
6
11
5
10
4
9
3
8
Height (Floors)

2
7
1
6
0
5 0 200 400 600 800 1000
4 Shear force (KN)
3 12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2 12 alone SSI
2
1 in the tall building in the case of the two adjacent buildings with SSI.
Figure 13. Shear force
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Shear force (KN)
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2 12 alone SSI

Figure 13. Shear force in the tall building in the case of the two adjacent buildings with SSI.
Figure 13. Shear force in the tall building in the case of the two adjacent buildings with SSI.

4.2. Adjacent Buildings with Unequal Foundation Levels

In order to confirm and extend the concept of the dual collision of the buildings, another case is
also tested, which is the case of two adjacent buildings but with different (i.e. unequal) foundation
levels. Figure 14b shows the difference in foundation levels between the two buildings. The points
from 1 to 5 will be checked for soil stresses around and under the single building (with basement floor)
(Figure 14a), while for the case of the two adjacent buildings, the points from 1 to 8 will be checked
 In order to confirm and extend the concept of the dual collision of the buildings, another case is
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18
also tested, which is the case of two adjacent buildings but with different (i.e. unequal) foundation
levels.
4.2.Figure 14b
Adjacent shows with
Buildings the Unequal
difference in foundation
Foundation Levels levels between the two buildings. The points
from 1 to 5 will
ComputationIn2018,
be
6, 10
checked for soil stresses around and under the single building (with basement 10 of 18
order to confirm and extend the concept of the dual collision of the buildings, another case is
floor) (Figure 14a), while for the case of the two adjacent buildings, the points from 1 to 8 will be
also tested, which is the case of two adjacent buildings but with different (i.e. unequal) foundation
checked (Figure
levels. Figure14b). In Figure
14b shows 14b, the building
the difference (1) indicates
in foundation the tall
levels between thebuilding (with basement
two buildings. The points floor
(Figure
shallow 14b). In Figure
foundation) 14b,
which the
has building
a constant (1) indicates
height of the
12 tall
floors building
in all (with
the casesbasement
of
from 1 to 5 will be checked for soil stresses around and under the single building (with basement floorwhile
analysis, shallowthe
foundation)
building
floor)(2) which
indicates
(Figure has a
14a),the constant
short
while height
for building
the case ofof 12
(with floors
shallow
the two in all the cases
foundation)
adjacent of analysis,
buildings, which while
is shortened
the points the
from 1 to bybuilding
twobefloors
8 will (2)
indicates
time.the (Figure
each checked short building (with 14b,
14b). In Figure shallow foundation)
the building which the
(1) indicates is shortened by(with
tall building two basement
floors each time.
floor
shallow foundation) which has a constant height of 12 floors in all the cases of analysis, while the
building (2) indicates the short building (with shallow foundation) which is shortened by two floors
G.L.
each time. G.L.
1 5 1 Building (2) 8
Building (1) F.L.(-3.00)
F.L. (-5.00)
G.L. (-5.00) 5 6 7
2 1 F.L. G.L.
3 4 5 12 3 4 Building (2) 8
Building (1) F.L.(-3.00)
(a) F.L. (-5.00) 5(b) 6 7
2 F.L.(-5.00)
3 2 4
3 single4 building and the two adjacent
Figure 14. Points distributed around the foundations of the
Figure 14. Points distributed
(a) around the foundations of the single (b) building and the two adjacent
buildings with unequal foundation levels. (a) Single building basement foundation; (b) The
buildings with unequal foundation levels. (a) Single building basement foundation; (b) The foundations
foundations with
Figure 14. unequal
Points levelsaround
distributed of the two adjacent buildings.
the foundations of the single building and the two adjacent
with unequal levels of the two adjacent buildings.
buildings with unequal foundation levels. (a) Single building basement foundation; (b) The
foundations
Figure 15 shows with unequal
the levels ofdisplacements
top lateral the two adjacent buildings.
and accelerations of the two adjacent buildings
Figure
founded on 15
soilshows
with the top lateral
unequal displacements
foundations and accelerations
levels. Figure 15a shows the of lateral
the twotop adjacent buildings
displacement of
founded Figure
on soil 15 shows
with the topfoundations
unequal lateral displacements
levels. and accelerations
Figure 15a shows ofthe
thelateral
two adjacent
top buildings
displacement of
the two adjacent buildings and single buildings with SSI, where the displacement increased in the
the founded on soil with unequal foundations levels. Figure 15a shows the lateral top displacement in of
tall two adjacent
building more buildings
the two adjacent than theand
buildings
single buildings
corresponding with
values
and single buildings inSSI,
with thewhere
SSI, case
theequal
whereofthe
displacement
foundation
displacement
increased
level but
increased
the
for tall
in the the
building
shorttall more
building than the corresponding values in the case of equal foundation level but for the short
building more than the corresponding values in the case of equal foundation level but for the the
cases the values were similar. Figure 15b shows the lateral top acceleration for
building
singleshort
andcases
the the
twovalues
adjacentwere similar. Figure 15b shows the lateral top acceleration for the single and
buildings.
building cases the values were similar. Figure 15b shows the lateral top acceleration for the
the two adjacent buildings.
single and the two adjacent buildings.
700 25
700 25
600
20
600
Lateral displacement (mm)

)
2) 2

500 20
(mm/sec
Lateral displacement (mm)

500
(mm/sec

15
400
15
400
Acceleration
Acceleration

300
300 10
10
200
200
55
100 100

0 0 00
12-12 12-12 12-10 12-10 12-8 12-8 12-612-6 12-4
12-4 12-2
12-2 12-12
12-12 12-10
12-10 12-812-8 12-6 12-6 12-4 12-4 12-2 12-2
Building
Building casecase building case case
building
Uhs UhsUss UssUS US ahs ahsass ass
aS aS
(a) Lateral
(a) Lateral toptop displacement.
displacement. (b) Lateral
(b) toptop
Lateral acceleration.
acceleration.
Figure 15. Comparison for top displacement and acceleration between the single and the two
Figure 15.
15.Comparison
Comparisonforfor toptop displacement
displacement and and acceleration
acceleration between
between the and
the single single
theand the two
two adjacent
adjacent buildings with unequal foundation levels and SSI.
adjacent buildings
buildings with foundation
with unequal unequal foundation
levels andlevels
SSI. and SSI.
Figure 16 represents the straining actions in the single and the two adjacent buildings with the
Figure 16
effect of16 represents
SSIrepresents
under seismic the straining actions in the single and the two adjacent buildings with the
Figure theload. Figureactions
straining 16a shows the single
in the base bending
and the moment in the two
two adjacent adjacent and
buildings with the
effectsingle
of SSIbuildings,
under seismic load.
where load. Figure
the base moment16a shows the
in the short base bending
building moment
is smaller in
than in the
thethe two
talltwo adjacent
building and
by and
effect of SSI under seismic Figure 16a shows the base bending moment adjacent
singlenearly
buildings,
1.6 timeswhere the single
and the base moment in the short
building bending momentbuilding
increasedis smaller
by 2.3 andthan1.4the
timestallthan
building
the by
single buildings, where the base moment in the short building is smaller than the tall building by
nearlyshort
1.6 and
timestalland
of the
thetwo adjacent
single buildings
building respectively.
bending moment The base bending
increased by 2.3moment
and 1.4in the
timescasethan
of the
nearly 1.6 times and the single building bending moment increased by 2.3 and 1.4 times than the short
shortequal foundation
and tall level adjacent
of the two in the short buildingrespectively.
buildings is bigger than Thethe corresponding
base bendingvalues moment in the
in case of
the case of
and tall of the
unequal two adjacent
foundations levels.buildings
Figure respectively.
16b shows the Theshear
base base force
bending
in moment
the two in theand
adjacent case of equal
single
equal foundation level in the short building is bigger than the corresponding values in the case of
foundation level
buildings, in the
where theshort
base building
shear forceis in
bigger thanbuilding
the short the corresponding
is smaller thanvalues in the
the tall case of
building by unequal
1.4
unequal foundations levels. Figure 16b shows the base shear force in the two adjacent and single
foundations
times andlevels. Figure
by 2.3 times than16bthe
shows the base
base shear forceshear
in the force
single in the two
building. adjacent
Figure and single
16c represents thebuildings,
base
buildings, where the base shear force in the short building is smaller than the tall building by 1.4
where the base shear force in the short building is smaller than the tall building by 1.4 times and by
times and by 2.3 times than the base shear force in the single building. Figure 16c represents the base
2.3 times than the base shear force in the single building. Figure 16c represents the base normal force
in the single and two adjacent buildings, where the base normal force in the short building of the two
adjacent buildings decreased with the decreasing of its height.
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, 10 11 of 18
normal force in the single and two adjacent buildings, where the base normal force in the short
building of the two adjacent buildings decreased with the decreasing of its height.
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18
4500 4500

4000 4000
normal force in the single and two adjacent buildings, where the base normal force in the short

bending moment (KN.m)

3500 3500
building
3000
of the two adjacent buildings decreased with 3000
the decreasing of its height.

Base shear (KN)

2500
4500 2500
4500

2000
4000 2000
4000
(KN.m)

1500
3500 1500
3500
Base

1000
3000 1000
3000

Base shear (KN)

Base bending moment

500
2500 500
2500

20000 20000
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2 12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
1500 Building case 1500 Building case

1000 Mhs Mss MS 1000 Qhs Qss QS

500 (a) Base bending moment. 500 (b) Base shear force.
0 12000 0
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2 12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
Building case Building case
10000
Mhs Mss MS Qhs Qss QS
Base normal force (KN)

8000
(a) Base bending moment. (b) Base shear force.
12000
6000

10000
4000
Base normal force (KN)

8000
2000

6000
0
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
4000 Building case
Nhs Nss NS
2000
(c) Base normal force.
0
Figure 16. Straining actions at12-12
the base of the 12-8
12-10 single and
12-6 the two
12-4 adjacent
12-2 buildings with unequal
Straininglevels
Figure 16.foundation actions at the base of the single
and SSI.
and the two adjacent buildings with unequal
Building case
Nhs Nss NS
foundation levels and SSI.
(c) Base normal force.
Figure 17 represents the lateral and vertical stresses in the soil around the foundation of the two
Figure
adjacent 16. Straining
buildings actions
at the shownat thein base
Figureof the
14bsingle andpoints
contact the twobetween
adjacent the
buildings withthe
soil and unequal
buildings.
Figure 17foundation
represents
Positive stress levels
the
valuesand
lateral
SSI.
denote
and vertical stresses in the soil around the foundation of the
tension while negative stress values denote compression. Figure 17a
two adjacent buildings
represents at the
the stress shown
in the soil inin Figure 14b
x direction aroundcontact points between
the foundation of the two the soil buildings.
adjacent and the buildings.
Positive stress Figure
Figure values 17 represents
17b shows denote the lateral
tension
the vertical and
stresswhile vertical
in the stresses
negative
soil around infoundations
stress
the the soil around
values thetwo
ofdenote
the foundation
adjacent of
compression.the twoFigure 17a
buildings.
adjacent
As shown buildings
in Figure at the shown in Figure 14b contact points between the soil and the buildings.
representsPositive
the stress
stress
in the17b,
soiltheinpoints
values denote tension
1, 4, 5, 7 around
x direction
while
and 8 are the
negativeThe
subjected
stress
to tensileof
foundation
values denote
vertical stressadjacent
the two
compression.
in the soil buildings.
around the basement floors of the two buildings. pounding effect, especially the Figure 17a
foundation
Figure 17brepresents
shows the
pounding, the
vertical
stress
affects
stress
theinvalues
the soil ininx the
of stress
soil around
direction around
in the soil aroundthe
the foundations
thefoundation
foundationofofthe
of
thetwo
the two adjacent
twoadjacent
adjacentbuildings.
buildings.
buildings.
As shownFigure
in Figure
17b shows17b,thethe points
vertical 1, in
stress 4,the
5, soil
7 and 8 are
around thesubjected
foundationsto tensile
of the vertical
two adjacent stress in the soil
buildings.
around theAs basement
shown
250 in Figure
floors17b,ofthethe
points
two1, buildings.
4, 5, 7 and 8 are subjected
100
The poundingto tensile vertical
effect, stress in the
especially thesoilfoundation
vertical) direction (KN/m2)

around the basement floors of the two buildings. The80 pounding effect, especially the foundation
pounding,pounding,
affects the values of stress in the soil aroundthe the foundation of the two adjacent buildings.
in x) direction (KN/m2)

200
affects the values of stress in the soil around 60 foundation of the two adjacent buildings.
150
40
250 100
100 20
2
stress in(KN/m

80
200
(KN/m 2

0
50 60
soil stress

direction

150 -20
soil stress in x direction

40
0
-40
Soil

100 20
Soil stress in vertical

-50 -60
Sx12-12 Sx12-10 Sx12-8 Sx12-6 Sx12-4 Sx12-2 0
Sz12-12 Sz12-10 Sz12-8 Sz12-6 Sz12-4 Sz12-2
50
Building cases Building cases
-20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0
-40
(i) Soil stress in x direction. (ii) Soil stress in z direction.
-50 -60
Sx12-12 Sx12-10 Sx12-8
Figure 17. StressesSx12-6 Sx12-4around
in the soil Sx12-2
the Sz12-12 of Sz12-10
foundation Sz12-8
the two adjacent Sz12-6 Sz12-4
buildings. Sz12-2
Building cases Building cases
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

(i) Soil stress in x direction. (ii) Soil stress in z direction.

Figure 17. Stresses in the soil around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings.
Figure 17. Stresses in the soil around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings.

Figure 18 shows the lateral normal force at the foundation of the single and the two adjacent
buildings. The lateral normal force at the foundation, in general, is less than the corresponding value
in the case of equal foundation levels. The lateral normal force in the short building in the unequal
foundation level case is less than the corresponding value in the equal foundation level case by nearly
1.3 times and also the lateral normal force in the tall building in the unequal foundation level case is
less than that in the equal foundation level case by nearly 1.5 times.
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18

Figure 18 shows the lateral normal force at the foundation of the single and the two adjacent
buildings. The lateral normal force at the foundation, in general, is less than the corresponding value
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18
in the case of equal foundation levels. The lateral normal force in the short building in the unequal
foundation level case is less than the corresponding value in the equal foundation level case by
Computation 2018,Figure
6, 10 18 shows the lateral normal force at the foundation of the single and the two adjacent 12 of 18
nearly 1.3 times and also the lateral normal force in the tall building in the unequal foundation level
buildings. The lateral normal force at the foundation, in general, is less than the corresponding value
case is less than that in the equal foundation level case by nearly 1.5 times.
in the case of equal foundation levels. The lateral normal force in the short building in the unequal
foundation level case is less 4000
than the corresponding value in the equal foundation level case by
nearly 1.3 times and also the lateral normal force in the tall building in the unequal foundation level
case is less than that in the equal foundation level case by nearly 1.5 times.

(KN)Normal force (KN)

3500
4000

Lateral
3000
3500

Lateral Normal force

2500
300012-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
Building case
NLh NLs NL alone

Figure 18. Lateral normal2500

force at the foundation of the single and the two adjacent buildings with
12-12 12-10 12-8 12-6 12-4 12-2
Lateralfoundation
Figure 18.unequal normal levels
forceand
at the
SSI. foundation of the
Building case single and the two adjacent buildings with

unequal foundation levels and SSI. NLh NLs NL alone

Figure 19 shows the shear force over the height of the tall building in the two adjacent buildings
Figure 18. Lateral normal force at the foundation of the single and the two adjacent buildings with
with unequal foundation levels. The shear force along the height of the building shows high values
Figure unequal foundation levels and SSI.
in the shows
19 thebasement
level of the shear force
of theover the height
tall building ofshort
(as the the tall building
building hits thein the twocolumn
basement adjacent
and buildings
with unequal foundation
so pounding
Figure
occurs)levels.
19 shows
resulting
the shearThein anshear
force over force
increase along
of the
the height
shearthe
of the tallheight
buildingofinthe
force much greater building
than
the two adjacentshows high values
the corresponding
buildings
values
in the level in the
of unequal
the case of equal
basement foundation
of levels.
the tall levels. (as the short building hits the basement column and
building
with foundation The shear force along the height of the building shows high values
so poundingin the level of resulting
occurs) the basement in12ofantheincrease
tall building (as the
of the shortforce
shear building
muchhits greater
the basement
thancolumn and
the corresponding
so pounding occurs) resulting in an increase of the shear force much greater than the corresponding
values in the case of equal foundation 10
levels.
values in the case of equal foundation levels.
8
height (floors)

12

6
10

4
8
height (floors)

2
6

0
4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Shear force (KN)
2 Q12-12 Q12-10 Q12-8 Q12-6 Q12-4 Q12-2

Figure 19. Shear force over0the height of the tall building in the two adjacent buildings with unequal
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
foundation levels and SSI. Shear force (KN)
Q12-12 Q12-10 Q12-8 Q12-6 Q12-4 Q12-2

4.3. Soil Response

Figure 19. Shear force over the height of the tall building in the two adjacent buildings with unequal
Shear force
Figure 19.Figures andover
20 levels
foundation 21 the
SSI. height
show
and of the
the stresses intall
the building
lateral andinvertical
the two adjacent
direction buildingsinwith
respectively unequal
the soil
foundation levelsthe
underneath and SSI.
two adjacent buildings with equal foundation levels. Figure 20a–f represents the
4.3. Soilstresses
lateral Responsein soil under and around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings with equal
foundation levels, where lateral stresses increased in the side of the short building in the opposite
Figures 20 and 21 show the stresses in the lateral and vertical direction respectively in the soil
4.3. Soil Response
direction of the earthquake. Figure 21a–f represents the vertical soil stresses underneath and around
underneath the two adjacent buildings with equal foundation levels. Figure 20a–f represents the
the 20
Figures equal
and foundation
21inshow ofthe
the two adjacent
stresses buildings;
in the
the when
lateral andthe two buildings
vertical are close
direction or equal in in the soil
respectively
lateral stresses soil under and around foundation of the two adjacent buildings with equal
height, the vertical stresses under the buildings are nearly normally distributed. The pounding
underneath foundation
the twolevels, where buildings
adjacent lateral stresses increased
with equalinfoundation
the side of thelevels.
short building
Figurein 20a–f
the opposite
represents the
direction of the earthquake. Figure 21a–f represents the vertical soil stresses underneath and around
lateral stresses in soil under and around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings with equal
the equal foundation of the two adjacent buildings; when the two buildings are close or equal in
foundation levels,
height, the where
vertical lateral
stresses stresses
under theincreased in nearly
buildings are the side of thedistributed.
normally short building in the opposite
The pounding
direction of the earthquake. Figure 21a–f represents the vertical soil stresses underneath and around
the equal foundation of the two adjacent buildings; when the two buildings are close or equal in
height, the vertical stresses under the buildings are nearly normally distributed. The pounding effect,
especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around the foundation of the
two adjacent buildings.
 Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, 10 13 of 18
effect, especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around the
effect, especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around the
foundation of the two adjacent buildings.
foundation of the two adjacent buildings.

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12
Figure 20. Lateral soil stresses (KN/m22) for the two adjacent buildings with equal foundation levels.
Figure 20. Lateral
Figure soil soil
20. Lateral stresses (KN/m
stresses (KN/m)2)for
for the two adjacent
the two adjacentbuildings
buildings with
with equal
equal foundation
foundation levels.
levels.

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

Figure 21. Cont.

Computation 2018, 6, 10 14 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18

Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12

Figure 21. Vertical soil stresses (KN/m2) for the two adjacent buildings with equal foundation levels.
Figure 21. Vertical soil stresses (KN/m2 ) for the two adjacent buildings with equal foundation levels.
(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12
Figures 22 and 23 show the stresses in the lateral and vertical direction respectively in the soil
Figure 21. Vertical soil stresses (KN/m2)with
for the two adjacent
underneath
Figures 22 the
and two adjacent
23 show thebuildings
stresses in unequal
the andbuildings
lateralfoundation
vertical with Figure
levels. equal foundation
direction 22a–f levels. the
represents
respectively in the soil
lateral
underneath stresses
the 22
twoin the soil
adjacent under and around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings with
Figures and 23 showbuildings
the stresseswith
in theunequal
lateral foundation levels. Figure
and vertical direction 22a–f in
respectively represents
the soil the
unequal
lateral foundation
stresses inthethe soillevels, where
under buildingsthe
and aroundlateralthestresses increased
foundation in the
of thelevels.side of
two adjacent the short building
buildings in the
with the
unequal
underneath two adjacent with unequal foundation Figure 22a–f represents
opposite direction of the earthquake. Figure 23a–f represents the vertical soil stresses underneath
foundation levels, where the lateral stresses increased in the side of the short
lateral stresses in the soil under and around the foundation of the two adjacent buildings with building in the opposite
and around the unequal foundation of the two adjacent buildings; when the two buildings are close
direction
unequalof the earthquake.
foundation levels,Figure 23a–f
where the represents
lateral the vertical
stresses increased soilside
in the stresses underneath
of the short buildingand around
in the
or equal in height, the vertical stresses under the buildings are nearly normally distributed. The
opposite foundation
the unequal direction of the
of earthquake.
the two Figurebuildings;
adjacent 23a–f represents
when the vertical
the two soil stresses
buildings are underneath
close or equal in
pounding effect, especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around
and
height, around the unequal foundation of the two adjacent buildings; when the two buildings are close
thethe vertical of
foundation stresses
the twounder thebuildings.
adjacent buildings are nearly normally distributed. The pounding effect,
or equal
especially theinfoundation
height, thepounding,
vertical stresses
affectsunder the buildings
the values of stressare nearly
in the soilnormally
around the distributed.
foundation Theof the
pounding effect, especially the foundation pounding, affects the values of stress in the soil around
two adjacent buildings.
the foundation of the two adjacent buildings.

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

Figure 22. Cont.

Computation 2018, 6, 10 15 of 18

Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 18

Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 18

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12
Figure 22. Lateral soil stresses (KN/m 2 ) for the two adjacent buildings with unequal foundation
Figure 22. Lateral soil stresses (KN/m2 ) for
Figure 2 the two adjacent buildings with unequal foundation levels.
levels. 22. Lateral soil stresses (KN/m ) for the two adjacent buildings with unequal foundation
levels.

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(a) 12-2 (b) 12-4

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

(c) 12-6 (d) 12-8

Figure 23. Cont.

Computation 2018, 6, 10 16 of 18
Computation 2018, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 18

(e) 12-10 (f) 12-12

Figure 23. Vertical soil stresses (KN/m ) for the two adjacent buildings with unequal foundation
2
Figure 23. Vertical soil stresses (KN/m2 ) for the two adjacent buildings with unequal foundation levels.
levels.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
Various
Various casescases of two
of two adjacent
adjacent buildingswith
buildings with different
different numbers
numbers ofof
floors andand
floors equal or unequal
equal or unequal
foundation levels under earthquake loading were tested with and without the
foundation levels under earthquake loading were tested with and without the SSI effect to demonstrate SSI effect to
demonstrate the pounding at the top level of the low building and the pounding at foundation
the pounding at the top level of the low building and the pounding at foundation level. FEM 2D models level.
FEM 2D models were created for the soil and the buildings in order to study the phenomena of
were created for the soil and the buildings in order to study the phenomena of double pounding (at the
double pounding (at the top of the low building and at foundation level) which occurred in the two
top of the low building and at foundation level) which occurred in the two adjacent buildings subjected
adjacent buildings subjected to earthquake. Top displacement and acceleration, base normal force,
to earthquake.
base shear Top displacement
force, base moment and
andacceleration, base
lateral normal normal
force at theforce, base shear
foundation wereforce, base moment
calculated for
and lateral normal
different force at the
configurations of foundation
the buildingswere calculated
under for different
earthquake load and configurations of themade
comparisons were buildings
underbetween
earthquake load
the two and comparisons
adjacent buildings andwere madebuildings
the single betweenwiththe two
and adjacent buildings
without the effect of and the single
SSI. From
buildings withcomparisons,
the above and withoutthe thefollowing
effect ofconclusions
SSI. From the above
can be comparisons, the following conclusions
drawn:
can be
• drawn:
The top lateral displacement in the single and the two adjacent buildings is bigger in the SSI
effect case than in the fixed base case.
• The
•
top lateral displacement in the single and the two adjacent buildings is bigger in the SSI effect
When considering the SSI effect, the top acceleration of the short building in the two adjacent
case buildings
than in the fixed base
decreases withcase.
the decrease of its height, while the top acceleration in the tall building
• When considering
is not the SSIbyeffect,
strongly affected the top
the height acceleration
of the short building.of the short building in the two adjacent
•
buildings decreases
The base with the
shear forces, the decrease of its height,
bending moments and while
the base thenormal
top acceleration
forces in theintwo
the adjacent
tall building
is notbuildings
stronglyare bigger by
affected whentheconsidering
height of thethe short
SSI effect than in the fixed base case.
building.
• •
The The shear
base shearforce in the
forces, thecolumn
bendingin the basement
moments level
and theis base
bigger than inforces
normal the floor levels
in the twoforadjacent
the
different heights of the two adjacent buildings.
buildings are bigger when considering the SSI effect than in the fixed base case.
• The results of the straining actions on the two adjacent buildings subjected to earthquake
• The shear force in the column in the basement level is bigger than in the floor levels for the
considering SSI reveal the double pounding at top of the low building and at foundation level.
different
• heights
The importance of the two foundation
of equal adjacent buildings.
levels should be considered for adjacent buildings even if
• The they
results
haveofnot
thethestraining
same numberactions on the two adjacent buildings subjected to earthquake
of floors.
• The soil-structure
considering SSI reveal interaction
the double(SSI) and the
pounding at double pounding
top of the effects and
low building should be taken into
at foundation level.
• consideration in the building design and the seismic analysis of adjacent
The importance of equal foundation levels should be considered for adjacent buildings even if buildings especially
they those
have with different
not the sameheights
number and
ofdifferent
floors. foundation levels.
• The
Authorsoil-structure
Contributions: interaction
D.-P.N.K. and (SSI) and contributed
A.A.F. both the double pounding
to the effects
organizing of should
the research and be taken into
the writing
consideration
of this paper. in the building design and the seismic analysis of adjacent buildings especially
those with
Conflicts different
of Interest: Theheights
authors and different
declare foundation
no conflict of interest. levels.

References
Author Contributions: D.-P.N.K. and A.A.F. both contributed to the organizing of the research and the writing of
this paper.
1. Anagnostopoulos, S.A. Pounding of Buildings in Series during Earthquakes. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 1988,
16,Interest:
Conflicts of 443–456, The
doi:10.1002/eqe.4290160311.
authors declare no conflict of interest.
Computation 2018, 6, 10 17 of 18

References
1. Anagnostopoulos, S.A. Pounding of Buildings in Series during Earthquakes. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 1988,
16, 443–456. [CrossRef]
2. Anagnostopoulos, S.A. Equivalent viscous damping for modeling inelastic impacts in earthquake pounding
problems. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2004, 33, 897–902. [CrossRef]
3. Anagnostopoulos, S.A.; Spiliopoulos, K.V. An investigation of earthquake induced pounding between
adjacent buildings. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 1992, 21, 289–302. [CrossRef]
4. Karayannis, C.G.; Favvata, M.J. Earthquake-induced interaction between adjacent reinforced concrete
structures with non-equal heights. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2005, 34, 1–20. [CrossRef]
5. Karayannis, C.G.; Favvata, M.J. Inter-story pounding between multistory reinforced concrete structures.
Struct. Eng. Mech. 2005, 20, 505–526. [CrossRef]
6. Anagnostopoulos, S.A.; Karamaneas, C.E. Use of collision shear walls to minimize seismic separation and to
protect adjacent buildings from collapse due to earthquake-induced pounding. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn.
2008, 37, 1371–1388. [CrossRef]
7. Efraimiadou, S.; Hatzigeorgiou, G.D.; Beskos, D.E. Structural pounding between adjacent buildings subjected
to strong ground motions. Part I: The effect of different structures arrangement. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn.
2013, 42, 1509–1528. [CrossRef]
8. Efraimiadou, S.; Hatzigeorgiou, G.D.; Beskos, D.E. Structural pounding between adjacent buildings subjected
to strong ground motions. Part II: The effect of multiple earthquakes. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2013, 42,
1529–1545. [CrossRef]
9. Cole, G.; Dhakal, R.; Carr, A.; Bull, D. An Investigation of the Effects of Mass Distribution on Pounding
Structures. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2011, 40, 641–659. [CrossRef]
10. Polycarpou, P.C.; Komodromos, P. Earthquake-induced poundings of a seismically isolated building with
adjacent structures. Eng. Struct. 2010, 32, 1937–1951. [CrossRef]
11. Polycarpou, P.C.; Papaloizou, L.; Komodromos, P. An efficient methodology for simulating earthquake-
induced 3D pounding of buildings. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2014, 43, 985–1003. [CrossRef]
12. Polycarpou, P.C.; Papaloizou, L.; Komodromos, P.; Charmpis, D.C. Effect of the seismic excitation angle on
the dynamic response of adjacent buildings during pounding. Earthq. Struct. 2015, 8, 1127–1146. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, L.X.; Chau, K.T.; Wei, X.X. Numerical Simulations of Nonlinear Seismic Torsional Pounding between
Two Single-Story Structures. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2009, 12, 87–101. [CrossRef]
14. Jankowski, R. Earthquake-Induced Pounding between Equal Height Buildings with substantially different
dynamic properties. Eng. Struct. 2008, 30, 2818–2829. [CrossRef]
15. Papadrakakis, M.; Apostopoulou, C.; Zacharopoulos, A.; Bitzarakis, S. Three Dimensional Simulation of
Structural Pounding during Earthquakes. J. Eng. Mech. 1996, 122, 423–431. [CrossRef]
16. Hao, H.; Liu, X.Y.; Shen, J. Pounding Response of Adjacent Buildings Subjected to Spatial Earthquake Ground
Excitations. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2000, 3, 145–162. [CrossRef]
17. Hao, H.; Gong, L. Analysis of Coupled Lateral-Torsional-Pounding Responses of One-Storey Asymmetric
Adjacent Structures Subjected to Bidirectional Ground Motions, Part II: Spatially Varying Ground Motion
Input. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2005, 8, 481–496. [CrossRef]
18. Rahman, A.M.; Carr, A.J.; Moss, P.J. Seismic pounding of a case of adjacent multiple-story buildings of
different total heights considering soil flexibility effects. Bull. N. Z. Soc. Earthq. Eng. 2001, 34, 40–59.
19. Shakya, K.; Wijeyewickrema, A.C. Mid column Pounding of Multi-Story Reinforced Concrete Buildings
considering Soil Effects. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2009, 12, 71–85. [CrossRef]
20. Naserkhaki, S.; Pourmohammad, H. SSI and SSSI effects in seismic analysis of twin buildings: Discrete model
concept. J. Civil Eng. Manag. 2012, 18, 890–898. [CrossRef]
21. Naserkhaki, S.; Abdul Aziz Farah, N.A.; Pourmohammad, H. Earthquake induced pounding between
adjacent buildings considering soil-structure interaction. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 2012, 11, 343–358. [CrossRef]
22. Mahmoud, S.; Abd-Elhamed, A.; Jankowski, R. Earthquake-induced pounding between equal heights
multi-storey buildings considering soil-structure interaction. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2013, 11, 1021–1048. [CrossRef]
23. Qin, X.; Chouw, N. Numerical investigation of seismic gap between adjacent structures with SFSI.
In Proceedings of the 2013 World Congress on Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics (ASEM13),
ICC-Jeju, Jeju, Korea, 8–12 September 2013; pp. 4179–4189.
Computation 2018, 6, 10 18 of 18

24. Naserkhaki, S.; El-Richa, M.; Abdul Aziz, F.N.A.; Pourmohammad, H. Separation Gap, A Critical Factor in
Earthquake Induced Pounding between Adjacent Buildings. Asian J. Civil Eng. 2013, 14, 881–898.
25. Behnamfar, F.; Madani, B. Effects of mutual cross interaction and pounding on nonlinear seismic response
of adjacent buildings. In Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and
Seismology, Istanbul, Turkey, 25–29 August 2014; pp. 1–10.
26. Alam, M.I.; Kim, D. Spatially Varying Ground Motion Effects on Seismic Response of Adjacent Structures
considering Soil Structure Interaction. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2014, 17, 131–142. [CrossRef]
27. Pawar, P.D.; Murnal, P.B. Effect of Seismic Pounding on Adjacent Blocks of Unsymmetrical Buildings
Considering Soil-Structure Interaction. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 2014, 4, 391–395.
28. Madani, B.; Behnamfar, F.; Tajmir Riahi, H. Dynamic response of structures subjected to pounding and
structure-soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2015, 78, 46–60. [CrossRef]
29. Ghandil, M.; Behnamfar, F.; Vafaeian, M. Dynamic responses of structure-soil-structure systems with
an extension of the equivalent linear soil modelling. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2016, 80, 149–162. [CrossRef]
30. Farghaly, A.A. Seismic analysis of adjacent buildings subjected to double pounding considering soil–structure
interaction. Int. J. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2017, 9, 51–62. [CrossRef]
31. Kharazian, A.; Lopez-Almansa, F. State-of-the-Art of Research on Seismic Pounding Between Buildings with
Aligned Slabs. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2017, 1–19. [CrossRef]
32. Ghandil, M.; Aldaikh, H. Damage-based seismic planar pounding analysis of adjacent symmetric buildings
considering inelastic structure–soil–structure interaction. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2017, 46, 1141–1159.
[CrossRef]
33. Li, P.; Liu, S.; Lu, Z. Studies on Pounding Response Considering Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction under
Seismic Loads. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2219. [CrossRef]
34. Jankowski, R. Non-linear viscoelastic modelling of earthquake-induced structural pounding. Earthq. Eng.
Struct. Dyn. 2005, 34, 595–611. [CrossRef]
35. Van Mier, J.G.M.; Preuijssers, A.F.; Reinhardt, H.W.; Monnier, T. Load-Time Response of Colliding Concrete
Bodies. J. Struct. Eng. 1991, 117, 354–374. [CrossRef]
36. SAP2000®Version 17. Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and Design, Computers and Structures, Inc.:
Walnut Creek, CA, USA; New York, NY, USA, 2015.
37. Egyptian Code of Practice for Reinforced Concrete (ECP-203). In Egyptian Code for Design and
Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures, ECPCS-203; Housing and Building National Research Center,
Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Planning: Cairo, Egypt, 2007.
38. Egyptian Code of Practice for loading (ECP-201). In Egyptian Code for Calculating Loads and Forces in
Structural Work and Masonry, ECP-201; Housing and Building National Research Center, Ministry of Housing,
Utilities and Urban Planning: Cairo, Egypt, 2008.
39. Nascimbene, R. An Arbitrary Cross Section, Locking Free Shear-flexible Curved Beam Finite Element. Int. J.
Comput. Methods Eng. Sci. Mech. 2013, 14, 90–103. [CrossRef]
40. Nascimbene, R. Towards Non-Standard Numerical Modeling of Thin-Shell Structures: Geometrically Linear
Formulation. Int. J. Comput. Methods Eng. Sci. Mech. 2014, 15, 126–141. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).