Ambient Science: Click the Volume and issue number for Complete Article

Location where to get the Complete Article --> Vol 4, No 1 (2017): 27-32

ISSN- 2348-5191 (Print version); 2348-8980 (Online)

Soil- structure Interaction of a Nuclear Reactor

Reza Saberi, Kamran Sepanloo, Ali Mozaffari, Hadi Nasiri


Soil – structure interaction is one of the most important issues in seismic designs. It is assumed that the soil under the foundation is solid and separation doesn’t occur between foundation and earth. While the soil has limited hardness and foundation is on the earth on the basis of gravity. If the collapsed anchor exceeds the resistant anchor resulted from gravity loads, the foundation would lift. The issues such as earth softness and the foundation lifting are some of the causes which affect significantly the analysis and designing the different structures. The current study investigates the soil – structure interaction effects on the nuclear structures dual frame nonlinear responses. Here, we examine the soil – structure interaction and clamped state with different records, considering the structure history analysis. The results show that soil – structure interaction influences the structure analysis and reduces the structure costs, considerably.


  • Allotey, N. & Naggar, M.H.E. (2007): An investigation into the Winkler modeling of the cyclic response of rigid footings. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 28:44–57.
  • ASCE/SEI 43-03 (2005). Evaluation of the Seismic Design Criteria Application to Nuclear Power Water Reactor. Prepared by: 1Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, Prepared for: Division of Fuel, Engineering, and Radiological Research Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
  • Aslam, M., Scalise, D.T., & Godden, W.G. (1980): Earthquake Rocking Response of Rigid Bodies. J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(2): 377-392.
  • ATC 40, (1996): The Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings. 2 Volumes. The Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, Ca.
  • CSA-A23.3. (2005): Design of Concrete Structures. National Building Code of Canada.
  • FEMA 274 (1997): NEHRP Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Building. Federal Emergency Management Agency, October.
  • FEMA 440. (2005): Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures. Prepared by: Applied Technology Council (ATC-55 Project), for: Federal Emergency, Washington, D.C.
  • FEMA 450, (2004): NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. Prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council. For the Fedral Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C.
  • Harden, C.W. & Hutchinson, T.C. (2009): Beam–on– nonlinear–Winkler-foundation modeling of shallow, rocking-dominated footings. Earthq. Spectra, 25(2):277-300.
  • Housner, G.W. (1963): The Behavior of Inverted Pendulum Structures During Earthquakes. Bull. Seismological Soc. Am., 53(2): 404-417.
  • Jeong, M.Y., Suzuki, K. & Yim, C.S. (2003): Chaotic Rocking Behavior of Freestanding Objects with Sliding Motion. J. Sound Vib., 262: 1091- 1112.
  • Makris, N. & Konstantinidis, D. (2002): The Rocking Spectrum and the Limitation of Design Methodologies. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32 (2):265-289.
  • Psycharis, L.N. (1983): Dynamic Behavior Of Rocking Structures Allowed to Uplift. Report No. EERL, 02- 81Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, ca, Au, Also See Earthquake Engineering And Structural Dynamics,Vol.11, pp 57-56.
  • Qin, X. & Chouw, N. (2010): Experimental investigation of uplift effect on structures in earthquakes. In: NZSEE Conference, Paper No. 14.
  • Raychowdhury, P. & Hutchinson, T.C. (2009): Performance evaluation of a nonlinear Winkler-based shallow foundation model using centrifuge test results. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 38 (5):679–698.
  • Raychowdhury, P. & Hutchinson, T.C. (2010): Sensitivity of shallow foundation response to model input parameters. ASCE J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 136(3):538–541.
  • Raychowdhury, P. & Hutchinson, T.C. (2011): Performance of seismically loaded shear-walls on nonlinear shallow foundations. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Met. Geomechan., 35(7), 846–858.
  • Saxena, N, Paul, D.K. & Kumar, R. (2011): Effects of slip and separation on seismic SSI response of nuclear reactor building. Int. J. Nuc. Eng. Des.,24:112-117.
  • Saxena, N., Paul, D.K. & Kumar, R. (2012): Effects of embedment including slip and separation on seismic SSI response of a nuclear reactor building. Int. J. Nuc. Eng. Des. 247:23–33.
  • Stewart, J.P., Kim, S., Bielak, J., Dobry, R. & Power, M.S. (2003): “Revisions to soil-structure interaction procedures in NEHRP design provisions. Earthqu. Spectra 19 (3), 677–696.
  • Tang, Y. & Zhang, J. (2011): Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of a slender RC shear-wall considering soil structure interaction effects. Eng. Struc., 33(1):218-229.
  • Wen, Z.P., Hu, Y.X. & Chau, K.T. (2002): Site effect on vulnerability of high-rise shear wall buildings under near and far field earthquakes. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 22(9-12):1175–1182.
  • Yim, S.C.S. & Chopra, A.K. (1984a): Earthquake Response of Structures with Partial Uplift on Winkler Foundation. Earthq. Eng. Struc. Dyn., 12:263-281.
  • Yim, S.C.S., & Chopra, A.K. (1984b): Dynamics of Structures on Two-Spring Foundation Allowed to Uplift. J. Eng. Mech., ASCE, 110(7):1124-1146.

  • DOI:10.21276/ambi.2017.04.1.ta01

    Creative Commons License

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
    Published by: National Cave Research and Protection Organization, India

    <Environmental Science+Zoology+Geology+Cave Science>AMBIENT SCIENCE