To investigate the seismic responses of a large, isolated aqueduct, a three-dimensional fluid–structure–soil interaction model was established using the arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) method and the dynamic Winkler foundation model. Frictional pendulum bearings were modelled using a simplified model consisting of a simple pendulum and a non-linear spring. In addition, the uniform and non-uniform seismic excitation models without considering pile–soil dynamic interactions were established to analyse the effects of pile–soil dynamic interactions and the seismic input method on the seismic response analysis of the large-scale aqueduct. The feasibility of the numerical approaches used in this study was verified by examples. The isolation effect and deformation of the frictional pendulum bearings, the stress distribution of the piers, and water sloshing were then analysed. The simulation results showed that the frictional pendulum bearings provided a good seismic isolation effect and that it is necessary to consider the dynamic interactions of pile–soil–aqueduct structures in the seismic analysis of large-scale aqueducts.
ChenLKJiangLZTaoL, et al. (2012) Seismic response analysis of high-speed vehicle-bridge considering soil-structure interaction. Rock and Soil Mechanics33(10): 3162–3170, (in Chinese).
GazetasGMakrisN (1991) Dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction. Part I: analysis of axial vibration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics20(2): 115–132.
4.
GazetasGFanKKayniaA (1993) Dynamic response of pile groups with different configurations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering12(4): 239–257.
5.
GB51247-2018 (2018) Standard for Seismic Design of Hydraulic Structures. Beijing: China Planning Press. (in Chinese).
6.
HirtCWAmsdenAACookJL (1974) An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian computing method for all flow speeds. Journal of Computational Physics14: 227–253.
7.
HousnerGW (1957) Dynamic pressures on accelerated fluid containers. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America47(1): 15–35.
8.
JTG D63-2007 (2007) Specifications for Design of Ground Base and Foundation of Highway Bridges and Culverts. Beijing: China Communication Press. (in Chinese).
9.
KildashtiKM DolatshahiKMirghaderiR (2016) A case study on the soil–pile–structure interaction of a long span arched structure. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering12(12): 1614–1633.
10.
KimJMChangSHYunCB (2002) Fluid-structure-soil interaction analysis of cylindrical liquid storage tanks subjected to horizontal earthquake loading. Structural Engineering and Mechanics13(6): 615–638.
11.
LiYLouMPanD (2003) Evaluation of vertical seismic response for a large-scale beam‐supported aqueduct. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics32(1): 1–14.
12.
LiXYWanJHZhaoHP, et al. (2021) Three-Dimensional analysis of nonlinear pile-soil interaction responses using 3D pile element model. International Journal of Geomechanics21(8): 04021129.
13.
LiuJDuYDuX, et al. (2006) 3D viscous-spring artificial boundary in time domain. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration5(1): 93–102.
14.
LuoCYangXZhanC, et al. (2016) Nonlinear 3D finite element analysis of soil-pile-structure interaction system subjected to horizontal earthquake excitation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering84: 145–156.
15.
MaheshwariBKTrumanKZEl NaggarMH, et al. (2004) Three-dimensional nonlinear analysis for seismic soil–pile-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering24(4): 343–356.
16.
MakrisNGazetasG (1992) Dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction. Part II: lateral and seismic response. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic21(2): 145–162.
17.
MartinPPSeedHB (1982) One-dimensional dynamic ground response analyses. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division108(7): 935–952.
18.
NakayamaTWashizuK (1981) The boundary element method applied to the analysis of two-dimensional non-linear sloshing problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering17(11): 1631–1646.
19.
NovakM (1974) Dynamic stiffness and damping of piles. Journal of Canadian Geotechnical11(4): 574–598.
20.
NovakMAboul-EllaFNogamiT (1978) Dynamic soil reactions for plane strain case. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division104(4): 953–959.
21.
ReeseLC (1965) Non-dimensional solution for laterally loaded piles with soil modulus assumed proportional to depth. Austin, TX, USA: The University of Texas.
22.
SonejiBBJangidRS (2008) Influence of soil–structure interaction on the response of seismically isolated cable-stayed bridge. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering28(4): 245–257.
23.
SongJYangYJiaK, et al. (2023) Seismic response and instability analysis of the liquefiable soil-piles-superstructure interaction system. Structures54: 134–152.
24.
ValetiBRay-ChaudhuriSRaychowdhuryP (2016) Seismic response of an elevated aqueduct considering hydrodynamic and soil-structure interactions. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering8: 53–71.
25.
WangYHFengYWuJ (2018) A simplified simulation method of friction pendulum bearings. Journal of Southeast University34(4): 480–487.
26.
WestergarrdHM (1933) Water pressures on dams during earthquakes. Transactions of American Society of Civil Engineering98: 418–433.
27.
WuCXuJZhangC, et al. (2023) Overall seismic reliability analysis of aqueduct structure based on different levels under random earthquake. Structures58: 105469.
28.
XiaoJLYangYZhuangLD, et al. (2021) A numerical and theoretical analysis of the structural performance for a new type of steel-concrete composite aqueduct. Engineering Structures245: 112839.
29.
XuXLiuXJiangL, et al. (2021) Dynamic damage mechanism and seismic fragility analysis of an aqueduct structure. Applied Sciences11(24): 11709.
30.
ZayasVAMahinSA (1987) The FPS Earthquake Resisting System Experimental Report. Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
31.
ZhangHSunHLiuL, et al. (2013a) Resonance mechanism of wind-induced isolated aqueduct-water coupling system. Engineering Structures57: 73–86.
32.
ZhangHLiuLDongM, et al. (2013b) Analysis of wind-induced vibration of fluid–structure interaction system for isolated aqueduct bridge. Engineering Structures46: 28–37.
33.
ZhangCXuJQianY, et al. (2022a) Seismic reliability analysis of random parameter aqueduct structure under random earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering153: 107083.
34.
ZhangSDuMWangC, et al. (2022b) Fragility analysis of high-span aqueduct structure under near-fault and far-field ground motions. Structures46: 681–697.
35.
ZhuangHYChenGXLiangYX, et al. (2007) A developed dynamic viscoelastic constitutive relations of soil and implemented by ABAQUS software. Rock and Soil Mechanics28(3): 436–442, (in Chinese).
