Youssef Hashash

Associate Professor

In collaboration with Duhee Park

Post-Doctoral Research Assistant

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

PEER 2G02 First Meeting

September 21, 2004
DEEPSOIL

1-D Site response analysis code

Nonlinear / Equivalent linear analysis

User interface

2 Hashash and Park

Motivation for Development
Thick soil deposits such as those encountered in the
Mississippi Embayment in Mid-America

Sponsored in part by Mid-America Earthquake Center

References:
Park, D. and Y. M. A. Hashash (2004). "Soil damping formulation in nonlinear time
domain site response analysis." Journal of Earthquake Engineering 8(2): 249-274.
Hashash, Y. M. A., and Park, D. (2002). "Viscous damping formulation and high
frequency motion propagation in nonlinear site response analysis." Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering, 22(7), pp. 611-624.
Hashash, Y. M. A., and Park, D. (2001). "Non-linear one-dimensional seismic ground
motion propagation in the Mississippi embayment." Engineering Geology, 62(1-3), 185-
206.
Park, D. (2003). ESTIMATION OF NON-LINEAR SEISMIC SITE EFFECTS FOR DEEP
DEPOSITS OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT. Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering. Urbana, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: 337 p.

3 Hashash and Park

Outline
Features of DEEPSOIL
Nonlinear
Numerical Model

User Interface

Equivalent Linear
Numerical Model

User Interface

Additional Features of the User Interface

4 Hashash and Park

Nonlinear (NL) Features

Soil Model
Viscous Damping Formulation
Dynamic Integration Scheme
Increased Numerical Accuracy
User Interface

5 Hashash and Park

NL Feature Soil Model
Extended Modified Hyperbolic Model
Based on Modified Hyperbolic Model (Matasovic, 1993)
Confining pressure dependent

G G
Modified Hyperbolic Model sec1 sec2

Gmo Gmo
s
s

G Initial
1 mo 1 Loading
mo r Curve

Backbone Subsequent
b Curve
' Loading & Unloading Curves

r a

ref

6 Hashash and Park

 0.9

0.8

0.7

NL Feature Soil Model 0.6

0.5
10.9
1

0.4
0.8 8
0.90.30.0001 Laird & Stoke (Measured)
G / Gmax 0.7
0.001
Confining Pressure
0.01 0.1
Non-Linear Pressur e Dependent Model 7
& Confinement 0.80.6 27.6 kPa
55.2 kPa 6
110 kPa 5
0.70.5

max
221 kPa
3 4
b

G/G
0.4 442 kPa

' 0.6
0.3
883 kPa
10.1 2
r a
1776 kPa
0.0001 0.001 0.01

0.5 Non-Linear Pressure Dependent Model

ref
27.6 kPa
1=27.6 kPa 2=55.2 kPa 3=110 kPa 4=221 kPa
0.4 55.2 kPa
5=442 kPa 6=883 kPa 7=1776 kPa 8=10 MPa
110 kPa
221 kPa
0.3 442 kPa
0.0001 883 kPa
0.001 Shear Strain, 0.01 0.1
1776 kPa
0
Damping 0.12 Confining Pressure (kPa)

& Confinement 0.1

2000
Damping Ratio (-)

4000
0.08
6000

c 0.06 Laird & Stokoe

1 3

8000 Proposed 2 4 5
Equation

'
0.04 6
d 10000
0.1 Damping Ratio (%) 1
7
at zero shear strain
0.02
8
0
0.0001 0.001 Shear Strain, 0.01 0.1

7 Hashash and Park

NL Feature Viscous Damping
Formulation
Viscous damping formulation [C]
Simplified Rayleigh damping formulation
Full Rayleigh damping formulation
Conventional Selection of Frequencies/Modes (CRF)
Proposed Selection (RF)
Extended Rayleigh damping formulation (ERF)

M u K u C u M I ug

C R M R K
8 Hashash and Park
 Feature 2 Viscous Damping
Formulation
2
Simplified Rayleigh damping
Effective damping ratio, (%)

Target
1 Damping
Ratio

0
f

C R M R K
m Frequency (Hz)

Fig 3-1 Page 68 9 Hashash and Park

 Feature 2 Viscous Damping Formulation
2
Full Rayleigh damping
(CRF & RF)
Effective damping ratio, (%)

Target
1 Damping
Ratio

Simplified RF

0
f f
m n
Frequency (Hz)
Selection of frequencies/modes for Full Rayleigh damping formulation
CRF (Conventional RF) : fm = 1st mode of soil column, fn=dominant period of input motion
RF (Proposed RF) : fm and fn chosen from transfer function of soil column and frequency content of
input motion An iterative process
10 Hashash and Park
 NL Feature Viscous Damping
Formulation
2
Extended Rayleigh
damping (ERF)
Effective damping ratio, (%)

Simplified RF Full RF
Target
1 Damping
Ratio

0
f f f f
m n o p
Frequency (Hz)

11 Hashash and Park

Numerical Implementation

Cyclic soil response

model

Input ground motion

Multi-degree of freedom
lumped parameter model

12 Hashash and Park

Nonlinear (NL) Integration
Scheme
M u K u C u M I u g

Newmark Beta Method

u i 1 u i 1 t ui t ui 1

u i 1 u i t u i 0.5 t ui t ui 1
2 2

(Average acceleration method: =1/4, =1/2

Implicit Method

Unconditionally stable

No numerical damping

13 Hashash and Park

 NL Feature Viscous Damping
Formulation 8
(a)
Fourier spectrum ratio (-)
Fourier Amplitude (g sec)

4 RF Conventional Approach
2
Use first mode of soil column and
0 a higher mode or predominant
5
period of ground motion
Effective damping ratio, (%)

(b)
4

1
Target damping ratio, = 1.8%
0
10 1 0.1
Frequency (Hz)
0.4
(c) Frequency domain
Spectral acceleration (g)

solution
CRF (1.1, 4 Hz
= Mode: 1, 2)
0.2

0
0.1 1 10
Period (sec)

14 Hashash and Park

 NL Feature Viscous Damping 8

Formulation
(a)
Fourier spectrum ratio (-)
Fourier Amplitude (g sec)

4 RF/ERF
Proposed Guideline
2 Use iterative procedure to obtain best match with frequency domain solution
Dependent on soil column
Dependent on input motion
0
5
(b) ERF: Computationally expensive
Effective damping ratio, (%)

1
Target damping ratio, = 1.8%
0
10 1 0.1
Frequency (Hz)
0.4
(c) Frequency domain
Spectral acceleration (g)

solution
CRF (1.1, 4 Hz
= Mode: 1, 2)
RF (2, 10 Hz
0.2
= Mode: 2, 5)
ERF (2, 10, 35, 45 Hz
= Mode: 2, 5, 16, 21)

0
0.1 1 10
Period (sec)

15 Hashash and Park

 NL Feature Viscous Damping
Formulation
Variable [C] Matrix
Updates stiffness in the RF
formulation
C R M R K
1
1000 m column
Fourier Amplitude (g sec)

0.1 M=7, R=20km

0.01

0.001
Updated [C] matrix
0.0001
Constant [C] matrix
-5
10
1 10
Frequency (Hz)

16 Hashash and Park

 NL Feature Increased Numerical
Accuracy
Fixed Sub-incrementation Scheme: Independent of strain level
Flexible Sub-incrementation Scheme: depends on strain level

30,000
N = 1 Fixed

Number of Incremental Solution Steps

N = 5 Fixed
3 = 0.01% Flexible 25,000

Flexible Time Increments, Max.

Shear Strain Increment=0.05 %
Flexible Time Increments, Max.
Number of Substeps, N=1

Shear Strain Increment=0.01 %

max
= 0.05% Flexible

Fixed Time Increments

Spectral Acceleration (g)

max
20,000

Number of Substeps, N=5

Fixed Time Increments
2
15,000

10,000

1000 m Column 5,000

1
0.9
0.1 1 0
Period (sec)
Input Motion
Station JMA NS Kobe Earthquake, PGA = 0.82g

17 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Input Soil Profile

18 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Input Soil Profile

19 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Soil Model
Parameter Selection

20 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Viscous Damping
Formulation

300 m
ME Profile

M=8,R=32km Motion

21 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Viscous Damping
Formulation

22 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Viscous Damping
Formulation

23 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Viscous Damping
Formulation

24 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Numerical
Accuracy Control

25 Hashash and Park

NL User Interface Output

26 Hashash and Park

Equivalent linear (EQL) Features
3 Types of Complex shear modulus
Frequency independent (Kramer, 1996)

G* G 1 2i
Frequency dependent (Udaka, 1975)

Simplified (Kramer, 1996)

G* G 1 2 2 2i 1 2
No limitation on

number of layers

G* G 1 2i
number of materials 2
number of motion data points

27 Hashash and Park

EQL Features

(SHAKE, use with care)

28 Hashash and Park

Additional Features

29 Hashash and Park

Verification of DEEPSOIL
Loma Prieta Earthquake, M = 7.1, October 19, 1989
-Significance of viscous damping in DEEPSOIL (Strong Motion & non-linear material)
-Soil column: ~88 m

30 Hashash and Park

 Verification of DEEPSOIL
0.8

E-W
Spectral acceleration (g)

0.4

0
0 1 2 33
Period (sec)
Yerba Buena Recording (Input)
Treasure Island (Recorded motion) 0.4
Conventional Nonlinear analysis
(Simplified Rayleigh Damping) N-S
Spectral acceleration (g)
DEEPSOIL
(Full Rayleigh Damping)

0.2

0
0 1 2 3
Period (sec)

31 Hashash and Park

Nonlinear Soil Model Parameters

No Fixed Parameter
Selected to match various reference
dynamic curves (G/Gmax and
damping curves)

32 Hashash and Park

 1
NL Soil Model Parameters Mississippi
Embayment (ME) 8
0.9
7
0.8
5 6 ME study
0.7
max

3 4
G/G

0.6 ME EPRI
1 2
0.5
1.4 0.85
0.4 s 0.8 0.9
0.3 (a)
0.0001 0.001 Shear Strain, 0.01 0.1 Referenc
e strain @
0.12 ref 0.163 0.07
0.1 ref 0.18 0.18
Damping Ratio (-)

0.08 b 0.63 0.4

0.06 1 3
2 4 5
0.04 6 c Varies with depth
7 d 0 0
0.02
8
0
0.0001 0.001 Shear Strain, 0.01 0.1

33 Hashash and Park

NL Soil Model Parameters - EPRI
ME study

ME EPRI

1.4 0.85
s 0.8 0.9

(a)
Reference
strain
@
ref 0.163 0.07
ref 0.18 0.18
b 0.63 0.4

c Varies with depth

d 0 0

34 Hashash and Park

NL Soil Model Parameters-
Treasure Island
Treasure Island

Old
Young
Bay
Bay Mud
Mud
0.8 0.9
s 0.8 0.7

(a)
Referenc
e strain
@ ref 0.17 0.065
ref N/A N/A
b 0.0 0.0

c 1.5 1.5
d 0 0.0

35 Hashash and Park

NL Soil Model Parameters-
Anchorage

Bootlegger
clay

0.7
s 0.7
Reference
strain 0.05
ref N/A
b 0.0

c 1.0
d 0.0

36 Hashash and Park

Limitations

No Pore pressure generation model

Currently under development

Implementation of a NN based
constitutive model

37 Hashash and Park

Questions?

38 Hashash and Park

Backup Slides
2

Stiffness proportional
damping
Damping ratio, (%)

Mass proportional
damping
Simplified Rayleigh Damping
Full Rayleigh Damping
Extended Rayleigh

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Frequency (Hz)

39 Hashash and Park

Backup Slides

40 Hashash and Park