<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

In this article, the dynamic response of suction caisson foundations is studied using a three-dimensional finite element model with an absorbing boundary. The adopted formulation is based on the substructuring method. This formulation has been applied to analyze the effect of soil–structure interaction on the dynamic response of the suction foundation as a function of the kind of load. The suction caisson foundations are embedded in viscoelastic homogenous soils and subjected to external harmonic forces. For each frequency, the dynamic impedance connects the applied forces to the resulting displacement. The constitutive elements of the system are modeled using the finite element volumes and shell elements. The numerical results for the dynamic response of the suction foundations are presented in terms of vertical and horizontal displacements as well as vertical and horizontal dynamic impedances. The results indicated that the overall dynamic response is highly affected by the suction caisson diameter, the soil stiffness variation, and the suction caisson length.
</abstract>

3SR Laboratory/Polytech Grenoble Alpes University

Vertical and horizontal dynamic response of suction caisson foundations

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

In this article, the effects of environmental acidity on the mechanical and volumetric properties of cement-stabilized clay soils have been investigated through various tests on experimental scale. In this study, a problematic clay was chemically stabilized by cement under three treatment conditions including short term, medium term, and long term with different conditions varying from acid to alkaline environments, which were tested by different methods to evaluate their mechanical and volumetric behavior and properties. Mechanical characteristics assessment tests in this study include compaction tests, and unconfined compressive strength, which was conducted on samples under different conditions in terms of acidity and treatment time. The results of the study indicated that soil improvement by cement increases the mechanical strength and decreases the rate of soil swelling over time and treatment duration. However, the degree of acidity of the environment affects the chemical reactions of soil and cement, especially cement hydration, which causes changes in soil strength and volume variation due to swelling.
</abstract>

Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University

Evaluating the Effect of Environment Acidity on Stabilized Expansive Clay

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Indonesia is located between the Eurasian, Pacific, Philippines, and Indo-Australian plates. Various tectonic processes in the world and collisions between large plates and several small plates trigger many earthquakes in Indonesia. This study aimed to evaluate the response of bored piles in the Auditorium Building of Brawijaya University toward seismic loads through analytical and numerical approaches based on finite elements with 2D (embedded beam row) and 3D (volume pile) modeling, where the analysis approach of pile deformation and lateral resistance with numerical methods will depend on idealization of the model used. In addition, the lateral resistance was compared based on combination lateral loads, pile stiffness, and soil stiffness when the values were different. The 2D finite element analysis reduces lateral resistance but overestimated the deflection on the pile surface. This is because in the 2D finite element modeling with an embedded beam row that the friction factor represented by the spring can reduces the stiffness and the pile–soil is tangent, so that there is no slipping against each other. In addition, the 3D finite element analysis with volume pile modeling increases soil stiffness at greater depths and the friction factor (interface) can improve the interaction between the soil and pile.
</abstract>

Comparative Analysis of Single Pile with Embedded Beam Row and Volume Pile Modeling under Seismic Load

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

In today's time, most seismic design codes are based on a linear elastic force-based approach that includes the nonlinear response (ductility and overstrength) of the structure through a reduction factor (named behavior factor <italic>q</italic> in Eurocode 8 [EC8]). However, the use of a prescribed <italic>q</italic>-factor that is constant for a given structural system may fail in providing structures with the same risk level. This paper focuses on the estimation of actual values of <italic>q</italic>-factor for X-braced steel frames (XBFs) designed according to the European codes and comparing these values to those suggested in EC8. For this purpose, a nonlinear pushover analysis has been performed. The effects of specific parameters, such as the stories number, the brace slenderness ratio, the local response of structural members, and the support type, are evaluated. The results show that the most important parameter that affects the <italic>q</italic>-factor is the brace slenderness ratio, while the support type has less effect on this factor. Furthermore, a local strength criterion has been proposed to implicitly ensure that the suggested value of the <italic>q</italic>-factor is conservative.
</abstract>

Djilali Bounaama University of Khemis Miliana

Overstrength and ductility factors of XBF structures with pinned and fixed supports

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

In this paper, the finite element method (FEM) is applied to calculate the bearing capacity of two footings having the aspect ratio L/B (where L and B are the length and width of the footing, respectively) equal to 1, 2 resting on one-layer and two-layer soil. Soil profile contains two soil types including sand and clay. The soil strip is 500mm × 500mm × 350mm; however, only a quarter of the model (250mm × 250mm × 350mm) is examined in the study. Two primary situations are investigated in this study. In the first situation, the one-layer system is supposed to be sandy soil with footing overlays on medium-dense sand. The soft clay/stabilized clayey layer is supposed to be on top of the sandy soil in the second condition, with the footing resting on top of the soft clay/stabilized clay. The influence of layer thickness, aspect ratio, and material property on the bearing capacity value and footing failure mechanism is studied for eight different combinations of layered soil. The bearing capacity for a one-layer case is also estimated, and it agrees well with Vesic (1973), Hansen (1970), and Terzaghi's (1943) equations. The bearing capacity of footings is observed to decline when the height of unstabilized clayey soil increases, and it increases when clayey soil is stabilized with molasses, waste foundry sand, and lime alone and in combination with each other.
</abstract>

Bearing Capacity Evaluation of Shallow Foundations on Stabilized Layered Soil using ABAQUS

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Due to urban sprawl, the demand for land has increased for the purpose of construction. It is unlikely that soil available at different construction sites will be suitable for designed structures. For improving the load-bearing capacity of the soil, different soil binders are used, which are present in distinct states. In this review, the authors have collected details about various binders, which are generally used in the soil stabilization, and their effect as a binding agent on the soil. In this article, the authors tried to review different traditional binders. After studying various research articles, the authors found that lime, ground-granulated blast slag (GGBS) polypropylene, polyurethane grouting, and asphalt mix are frequently used binders. However, the authors also gathered information about the negative environmental impact of these traditional soil binders, which led to the need for alternatives to these commonly used soil binders. To diminish this issue, different alternate hydraulic and non-hydraulic binders are discussed. The authors found alternatives to cement and lime with the alkali-activated material consisting of Na2O and silica modulus and belite-calcium sulfoaluminate ferrite, which is also known as “Aether™.” According to the research, both alternatives emit 20–30% less CO2 into the environment and also improve the compressive strength of the soil. The various studies promotes bitumen modification. Incorporating 20-mesh crumb rubber and bio-oil into the bitumen reduces its viscosity and improves its fatigue value. When waste oil is mixed with asphalt, it revitalizes the bitumen, improves fatigue resistance, and increases compressive strength. The soil particles treated by Eko soil are held together by enzymes, which give them the same strength as cement. Apart from that, low-carbon binders such as basic oxygen furnace slag, bamboo fiber, enzyme-based soil treatment, zebu manure for stabilization, and lignin-contained biofuels and coproducts are discussed. Replacing these traditional binders helps with energy savings. All waste products are recycled, and energy is saved by not manufacturing traditional binders. Additionally, energy is saved, which is required to avoid the detrimental effects of these conventional binders, making them energy-efficient alternate binders. The authors also summarize the methods used, impacts, and changes that occur in soil properties after using substitutes in place of traditional binders. From the review, the authors determined that different binders have various properties in terms of chemical and physical compositions, and they show different variations in terms of strength when added to soil with low bearing capacity or poor stability.
</abstract>

Comment On Energy-Efficient Alternative for Different Types of Traditional Soil Binders

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 46 (2024): Issue 1 (March 2024)

Volume 45 (2023): Issue 4 (December 2023)

Volume 45 (2023): Issue 3 (September 2023)

Volume 45 (2023): Issue s1 (December 2023) Special Issue 19th KKMGiIG

Volume 45 (2023): Issue 2 (June 2023)

Volume 45 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)

Volume 44 (2022): Issue 4 (December 2022)

Volume 44 (2022): Issue 3 (September 2022)

Volume 44 (2022): Issue 2 (June 2022)

Volume 44 (2022): Issue 1 (March 2022)

Volume 43 (2021): Issue 3 (September 2021)

Volume 43 (2021): Issue s1 (December 2021) Special Issue: Underground Infrastructure of Urban Areas

Volume 43 (2021): Issue 4 (December 2021)

Volume 43 (2021): Issue 2 (June 2021)

Volume 43 (2021): Issue 1 (April 2021)

Volume 42 (2020): Issue 4 (December 2020)

Volume 42 (2020): Issue 3 (September 2020)

Volume 42 (2020): Issue 2 (June 2020)

Volume 42 (2020): Issue 1 (April 2020)

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 2 (June 2019)

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 1 (April 2019)

Volume 40 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 40 (2018): Issue 3 (November 2018)

Volume 40 (2018): Issue 2 (October 2018)

Volume 40 (2018): Issue 1 (July 2018)

Volume 39 (2017): Issue 4 (December 2017)

Volume 39 (2017): Issue 3 (September 2017)

Volume 39 (2017): Issue 2 (June 2017)

Volume 39 (2017): Issue 1 (March 2017)

Volume 38 (2016): Issue 4 (December 2016)

Volume 38 (2016): Issue 3 (September 2016)

Volume 38 (2016): Issue 2 (June 2016)

Volume 38 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)

Volume 37 (2015): Issue 4 (December 2015)

Volume 37 (2015): Issue 3 (September 2015)

Volume 37 (2015): Issue 2 (June 2015)

Volume 37 (2015): Issue 1 (March 2015)

Volume 36 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 36 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 36 (2015): Issue 2 (February 2015)

Volume 36 (2014): Issue 1 (March 2014)

Volume 35 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)

Volume 35 (2013): Issue 3 (September 2013)

Volume 35 (2013): Issue 2 (June 2013)

Volume 35 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)

Volume 34 (2012): Issue 4 (October 2012)

Volume 34 (2012): Issue 3 (September 2012)

Volume 34 (2012): Issue 2 (October 2012)

Volume 34 (2012): Issue 1 (March 2012)

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica

 An international journal ‘Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica’ covers new developments in the broad areas of geomechanics as well as structural mechanics. The journal welcomes contributions dealing with original theoretical, numerical as well as experimental work. The following topics are of special interest:   Constitutive relations for geomaterials (soils, rocks, concrete, etc.)  Modeling of mechanical behaviour of heterogeneous materials at different scales  Analysis of coupled thermo-hydro-chemo-mechanical problems  Modeling of instabilities and localized deformation  Experimental investigations of material properties at different scales  Numerical algorithms: formulation and performance  Application of numerical techniques to analysis of problems involving foundations, underground structures, slopes and embankment  Risk and reliability analysis  Analysis of concrete and masonry structures  Modeling of case histories  Rejection Rate:   40%   Archiving Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.    The journal Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica, in years 2017-2018, received funding for the following tasks:   Increase of foreign reviewers participation in the evaluation of the published content of Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica journal - financed under the agreement no. 602/P-DUN/2017 from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education funds for the Activity for Popularising Science.  Raising the quality of the published content in Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica journal - financed under the agreement no. 602/P-DUN/2017 from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education funds for the Activity for Popularising Science.    