Paper Title

Analysis of the Screening Effectiveness of Open Trench with Wall Barrier by Tsai and Chang
1
Paper title: Effects of Open Trench Siding on Vibration Screening Effectiveness
Using Two-Dimensional Boundary Element Method

Abbreviated title: Analysis of the Screening Effectiveness of Open Trench with
Wall Barrier

P.H. Tsai*, T.S. Chang

Department of Construction Engineering, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung, 413, Taiwan

*
Correspondence to: Prof. P.H. Tsai, Construction Engineering, Chaoyang University
of Technology, 168 Jifong E. Rd., Wufong Township Taichung County, 41349,
Taiwan

E-mail: phtsai@cyut.edu.tw

Tel: 886-4-23323000 Ext. 4425
Fax: 886-4-23742325


2
Abstract
2D boundary element method in frequency domain is used to investigate the screening
effectiveness of open trench-wall barrier system on reducing vibration generated by a footing.
Sheet piles or diaphragm walls are on both sides of open trench as a vibration barrier in this study.
The results showed that screening effectiveness of open trench without siding is greater than that
of open trench-wall barrier system which is essential for stabilizing the excavation surface in
practice. The trench depth of the barrier system appears to govern the screening efficiency of
barrier, and increase in depth results in better vibration screening effectiveness. The influence of
open trench width, the embedded length of trench wall and the distance between vibration source
and the barrier are proven to be insignificant. The screening effectiveness of an open trench barrier
with walls increases with the frequency of the vibration.
Key Words: boundary element method, open trench, isolation vibration.


3
1. Introduction
Machine foundations, traffics, and construction activities may result in ground vibration,
causing disturbances to adjacent structures and disrupting the operation of nearby sensitive
equipment. To isolate vibration and reduce affecting nearby structures has been an important issue
in practice. Among the various isolation methods, installation of barriers between vibration source
and the structures is deemed one of the best solutions. Open trench, in-filled trench, sheet pile wall,
or even rows of pile have been proven an effective vibration screening barrier. Because of the
impedance between different medium and topography using trenches, it will reduce the amplitude
of the surface vibration which generated by the footing through reflection, scattering and
diffraction of wave propagation. Open trench is often used as a wave barrier; however, there is an
instability limitation in practice. In order to maintain an open trench at a considerable depth, in
practice engineers need to use sheet piles or diaphragm walls on both sides of open trench to
provide adequate stability of the open trench as a barrier.
A number of researches, both experimental and numerical, have been carried out in the last
few decades to study the vibration-screening problem. In an experimental approach, Barkan [1]
and McNeill et al. [2] used sheet piles and open trenches to evaluate vibration isolation at selected
locations from the source. Woods [3], [4] performed a series of field experiments on vibration
screening by installing open trenches. He defined the amplitude reduction ratio and suggested that
the average amplitude reduction ratio should be smaller or equal to 0.25 for efficiency of vibration
reduction mechanism. Liao and Sangrey [5] and Haupt [6] performed some model tests in the
laboratory for analyses of vibration reduction using man-made mechanism such as pile and others.
While full-scale model test results are often difficult to extrapolate to prototype situations,
numerical technique can be an effective alternative for thoroughly investigating the vibration
isolation phenomena. Vibration isolation problems can be solved efficiently by numerical methods,
such as finite difference method (FDM), finite element method (FEM) and boundary element
method (BEM). Aboudi [7] and Fuyuki and Matsumoto [8] adopted the FDM with a special
treatment of external boundaries to calculate vibration response on the ground surface. The FEM
has been used for two-dimensional cases of vibration isolation by trenches, usually in conjunction
with special non-reflecting boundaries. Some studies used finite element method to study the
influence of barriers on vibration, such as Wass [9], Haupt [10], Segol et al. [11], May and Bolt
[12]. The BEM can be one of the ideal methods for vibration isolation problem since it requires
only surface discretization and automatically satisfies the radiation conditions at infinite boundary.
Emad and Manolis [13], Beskos et al. [14], Dasgupt et al. [15], [16] and Ahmad and Al-Hussaini
[17] utilized boundary element method (BEM) to study efficiency of vibration reduction using
open or in-filled trenches.

4
From the above review, researches for vibration reduction have mainly focused on
open-trench and in-filled trench in the past. These studies exhibit significant wave isolation
effectiveness for trenches with sufficient depth. However, these deep trenches could be unstable.
In practical experience, open trenches with sheet pile or diaphragm wall were used sometimes as a
vibration barrier which maintain adequate stability. However, the isolation efficiency of these
trenches could be different from those with no side support, i.e., pure open trenches. Therefore,
research results from previous studies on pure open trench can not be used to estimate screening
effectiveness of these barriers with side support in practice. For vibration isolation using open
trench with sheet piles, it only had been studied by Barkan [1] and McNeill et al. [2]. They used
full-scale model test to study the isolation effectiveness of open trench with sheet pile. Experience
about reducing vibration using open trench with side support barrier system is rare. Therefore, this
study focuses on the vibration isolation effectiveness using open trench-wall made of steel or
concrete barrier system. In this study two wall types, sheet piles and diaphragm walls, are installed
on both sides of the open trench. In addition, a pure open trench with no side support was also
analyzed for comparison.
Parametric studies were performed by varying dimensions and layouts of open trench-wall
barrier, including width, distance and depth of the trench, the source distance from the trench to
the center of vibration source, properties of the trench wall and surrounding soil, and exciting
frequency of the vibration footing.

2. Numerical method for the study
The study utilized 2-D frequency domain boundary element method to evaluate isolation
effectiveness of the trench-wall barriers. The boundary integral equation is developed based on the
2-D fundamental solution [18] of steady state elastodynamic in infinite medium domain and
Bettis reciprocal theorem. Using the correspondence principle, material damping of soil can be
taken into account by defining the wave velocity in complex form [19].
In order to satisfy the Sommerfeld radiation condition [18], the value of the integration equals
zero at infinite boundary, the integral equation can be expressed as the following:
}
c
e = I e e e e
D
i ij i ij ij i
) , y ( u C d )] , x ( u ) , y , x ( T ) , y , x ( U ) , x ( t [ (1)
in which ) , x ( t ), , x ( u
i i
e e are the amplitudes of the displacement and traction of barrier reducing
vibration system, respectively.
) , y , x ( U
ij
e
and
) , y , x ( T
ij
e
are the displacement and traction
fundamental solutions, respectively. C
ij
can be computed by concept of Cauchy principal value
[20]. If boundary cS is smooth in the neighborhood of y, C
ij
can be computed as:

5
C
ij
=
ij
2
1
o (2)
For simplification without sacrificing accuracy, the boundary D c of domain in Eq. (1) is
divided into n constant boundary elements with constant stress and displacement vectors, and Eq.
(1) can be simplified to:

= =
=
n
1 j
j ij
n
1 j
j ij
t G u H
(3)
Then Eq. (3) can be expressed as a matrix form:
} t { ] G [ } u { ] H [ =
(4)
In addition to the surrounding soils, the configurations of open trench-wall barrier system also
include walls, such as sheet pile or diaphragm wall on both sides of the trench. Therefore, 3 media
were used in the numerical model as shown in Fig. 1. The boundary element equations for these 3
media can also be expressed as matrix form as followed:
(i) Soil layer regarded as an elastic material:
| | | |
5
4
J
3
2
I
1
5 4
J
3 2
I
1
5
4
J
3
2
I
1
5 4
J
3 2
I
1
t
t
t
t
t
G G G G G
u
u
u
u
u
H H H H H (5)
(ii) Left side support of the trench regarded as an elastic material:
| | | |
)
`
=
)
`
7
6
I 7 6
I
7
6
I 7 6
I
t
t
G G
u
u
H H (6)
(iii) Right side support of the trench regarded as an elastic material:

| | | |
)
`
=
)
`
9
8
J 9 8
J
9
8
J 9 8
J
t
t
G G
u
u
H H (7)
The displacement and traction of boundary elements on contact face should fulfill the
conditions of compatibility and equilibrium, respectively. That is to say,
I
6
I
2
I
u u u = =
J
8
J
4
J
u u u = =
I
6
I
2
I
t t t = =
J
8
J
4
J
t t t = = (8)
To arrange Eq. (5), Eq. (6), Eq. (7), and Eq. (8), then Eq. (9) can be obtained.

6
=
(
(
(
9
7
5
J
3
I
1
9 8
J
7 6
I
5 4
J
3 2
I
1
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
H 0 0 H 0 0 0
0 H 0 0 0 H 0
0 0 H H H H H
(
(
(
9
7
5
J
3
I
1
9 8
J
7 6
I
5 4
J
3 2
I
1
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
G 0 0 G 0 0 0
0 G 0 0 0 G 0
0 0 G G G G G
(9)
To move the term of t
I
and t
J
on the right side of Eq. (9) to left side, we get Eq. (10).
=
(
(
(

9
J
7
I
5
J
3
I
1
9 8
J
8
J
7 6
I
6
I
4
J
2
I
5 4
J
3 2
I
1
u
t
u
t
u
u
u
u
u
H G 0 0 0 H 0 0 0
0 0 H G 0 0 0 H 0
0 G 0 G H H H H H
(
(
(
9
7
5
3
1
9
7
5 3 1
t
t
t
t
t
G 0 0 0 0
0 G 0 0 0
0 0 G G G
(10)
By substituting the boundary condition into Eq. (10), the following governing equation can
be obtained.
} F { } X { ] A [ =
(11)
The unknown vector {X} in Eq. (11) can be solved by using Gaussian elimination method.
The displacement and traction of all boundary elements can be obtained subsequently.

3. Numerical Model for the Study
The main objective of this paper is to study screening effectiveness of the open trench-wall
barrier for isolating the vibration induced by a rigid massless strip footing subjected to vertical
harmonic loadings. In order to understand the optimum configuration of the open trench-wall
barrier, the parameters used in the study include soil property, types of wall, vibration frequency
and the distance between the source and the barrier. In the numerical analysis, the trench wall and
the soil were assumed to be isotropic, viscoelastic, and homogeneous. That is, the authors assumed
that all of the displacements are in elastic stage.
3.1 Barrier Configuration
As shown in Fig. 2, a trench of depth d and width w is located at a distance l from a rigid
surface footing subjected to a vertical time-harmonic load. Since vibration isolation by a trench is
primarily achieved by screening of surface (Rayleigh) waves, the trench depth, embedded length,

7
width, and distance of the trench are normalized with respect to the Rayleigh wave length (D =
d/
R
L , D
E
= d
e
/
R
L , W = w/
R
L , L = l/
R
L ; where
R
L = Rayleigh wave length). In the study a
fixed footing width of 2.5m was used for the strip vibration source footing which produces
harmonic vibrations. Except for the influence analysis of frequency on vibration reducing, the
harmonic vibration frequency will be fixed at 50Hz. In order to estimate vibration reducing
effectiveness of open trench-wall barrier, five depths (D=0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2), three widths
(W=0.2, 0.4 and 0.6), and four distances (L=2, 4, 6 and 8) were assumed. The types of walls were
chosen as sheet piles and diaphragm walls which were on both sides of open trench in order to
stabilize the excavation surface. The material of sheet piles and diaphragm walls are steel and
concrete, and the thickness of sheet piles and diaphragm walls were fixed at 0.05m and 0.5m,
respectively. In order to have stability of walls, the walls can be extended below the bottom of the
trench. The embedded wall length is assumed to be equal to open trench depth except for the
influence analysis of embedded wall length on screening effectiveness, in which five embedded
lengths of wall (D
E
=0, 0.25D, 0.5D, 0.75D, and D) were used.
3.2 Material Characteristics of the Barrier and Wave Propagation Media
For the numerical analysis, the material parameters were used according to the characteristics
of the vibrations and wave propagation as the following:
The soil was assumed as Rayleigh wave velocity V
R
=250m/sec, unit weight =19.6 kN/m
3
,
Poisson ratio v=0.45, and material damping ratio |=0.03. Please notice at f = 50Hz, the Rayleigh
wave length
R
L = 5m is used to normalize the geometrical data of the trench configuration. For
the case of open trench-wall barrier, the properties of steel were chosen as: shear modulus G
s
=
78000MN/m
2
, Poisson ratio v
s
=0.3, unit weight
s
=77 kN/m
3
, and material damping ratio |
s

=0.03, while the properties of concrete were chosen as: shear modulus G
c
= 4526MN/m
2
, Poisson
ratio v
c
=0.25, unit weight
c
=23.5 kN/m
3
, and material damping ratio |
c
=0.03.
3.3 Boundary Element Mesh
The numerical program used in this study is coded according to two-dimensional boundary

8
element theory using FORTRAN language. A typical mesh for the domain is discretized by 719
constant boundary elements, as shown in Fig. 2. There are two displacement directions for each
element. Therefore, there are totally 1438 degrees of freedom in the numerical system. And all of
the variables, displacement and traction, are in complex form, because of the form of fundamental
solution of elastodynamics problem and the correspondence principle [19].
Fig. 2 is a boundary element mesh used in this study. The finest element size was used (about
R
L /40 in size) on the surface of barrier. Its noticeable that in the areas of ground surface near to
barrier, the element mesh is composed of much finer boundary elements (about
R
L /30 in size) to
accommodate the much more complex wave propagation behavior in the area. The ground surface
between the barrier and vibration source can be a complicated wave transmission zone, so it was
discretized by the size of
R
L /30 boundary element. On the ground surface at a distance behind the
barrier, the boundary element sizes were set as
R
L /20 for economic consideration in computer
storage and calculation time.
In frequency analysis of this study, the sizes of boundary element were still set at
L
R
/20~L
R
/40, even though the vibration frequency approached 100Hz which has a Rayleigh wave
length of 2.5 meter. According to previous study [21], the element size of the mesh should be
suitable.
The result of analysis by Beskos [14] showed that the error of using a massless vibration
footing as the vibration source is only about 1.5 %, which is acceptable for this study. This study
assumed the surface between soil and the vibration footing is perfectly smoothly contacted. This
means that the footing remains in contact with the ground while vibrating; and the displacement of
the soil under footing is the same as that of the footing. All of elements in the rigid footing should
have the same vertical displacement amplitude. For those elements on the ground surface, zero
traction is assumed (traction free). Meanwhile, for the elements of walls except for wall-soil
contact surface and those on the bottom side of open trench, the tractions are also assumed zero.
The elements on both sides of wall-soil contact surface have to fulfill the conditions of
compatibility and equilibrium.
3.4 Average Amplitude Reduction Ratio
In order to evaluate the screening effectiveness of barrier, the averaged vertical amplitude
reduction ratio will be adopted in this study. The BEM was used to calculate vertical vibration
amplitudes behind the barrier and average amplitude reduction ratio was determined based on the
amplitudes with and without the barrier. Woods [3] proposed an average vertical amplitude
reduction ratio,
ry
A , for evaluation of wave screening effectiveness. He considered the averaged
vertical amplitude reduction ratio should be smaller or equal to 0.25 for an effective isolation

9
mechanism. The vertical amplitude reduction ratio,
ry
A -value is computed using Eq. (12).
barrier wave the without surface ground of amplitude Vertical
barrier wave the with surface ground of amplitude Vertical
A
ry
=
(12)
To evaluate the screening effectiveness of the wave barrier system on the ground surface
behind the wave barrier system, the averaged vertical amplitude reduction ratio,
ry
A , is calculated
by using Eq. (13) as follow:
dx A
L
1
A
ry ry }
=
(13)
For the determination of the extension area behind the barrier to calculate the average vertical
amplitude reduction ratio, it was calculated within by various extensive length, x, from 5m to 50m
behind the barrier to analyze the averaged vertical amplitude reduction ratio. As results of the
analysis,
ry
A will converge at X20m, as showed in Fig. 3. In this study, this implies that the
average vertical amplitude reduction ratio will converge as the distance behind the barrier is
greater than 20m. In order to lead to results of higher accuracy, the authors decided that the ground
vibration amplitudes were calculated within an extended length of 50m behind the barrier in this
study.

4. Results of the Numerical Analysis
4.1 Influence of existence of walls on screening effectiveness
In order to stabilize the surface of the trench excavation, sheet piles or diaphragm walls are
usually installed on both sides of the open trench to reduce the vibration amplitude. The screening
effectiveness of the open trench-wall barrier system is proven significantly different from that of
open trench without wall, as shown in Fig. 4. Therefore, it firstly studied the existence of walls on
screening effectiveness for footing induced vibration. It can be observed from Fig. 4 that the
screening effectiveness of open trench-wall barrier system is different and ineffective to that of
open trench. The difference appears to become more insignificant as the distance behind the
barrier increases. As shown in the Fig. 4, the results indicated that trench-sheet pile and
trench-diaphragm wall are about 8 and 2 times
ry
A -value of pure open trench within a distance of
10L
R
, respectively. But it still can not be ignored the existence of walls in numerical analysis, in
spite of it could be neglected in the past.
4.2 Influence of soil Poissons ratio on screening effectiveness
Soil Poissons ratio of 0.25, 0.35 and 0.45 affecting screening effectiveness was studied, and
the results can be observed from Fig. 5. It seems little influence of soil Poissons ratio on vibration

10
reducing in this study. This reason is because the vibration isolation by a trench is primarily
achieved by screening of Rayleigh waves rather than P waves. However, P wave velocity can be
varied with Poisson ratio as the Rayleigh wave velocity is still fixed as 250m/sec.
4.3 Influence of barrier dimensions and layout on screening effectiveness
To study the influence of barrier dimensions and layout on vibration reduction, the authors
assumed that vibration frequency of footing f=50Hz, the open trench-wall barrier system geometry
parameters used in the calculations are listed in Table 1. From Figs. 6, 7 and 8, it can be seen that
an increases in the depth of open trench results in better performance of the screening effectiveness
by the trench. Results also indicate if the trench depth exceed 1.5
R
L in open trench- diaphragm
wall barrier system, the screening effectiveness will reach that suggested by Woods [3], i.e.,
ry
A <0.25. If depth of open trench is around 1
R
L ,
ry
A is greater than 1 which represents that the
ground amplitudes with the existence of sheet piles is greater than that of no barrier. This can be
explained by the experiment results by Barkan [1] using sheet piles and open trench as wave
barrier. However, results of this study prove that barriers with trench depths greater than 1.5
R
L
will result in a vibration reduction ratio
ry
A <0.1 which satisfies the criteria for a successful
vibration isolation design by Woods [3]. In addition, the screening effectiveness of barrier by using
open trench-diaphragm wall barrier system is much more significant than that of open trench-sheet
piles barrier system in shallow trench (D<1.5
R
L ).
It also can be observed from Fig. 6, the screening effectiveness of open trench width is
insignificant except for open trench-sheet pile barrier in some cases. And as shown in Fig. 7, the
influence of barrier location on reducing vibration is also insignificant except for trench near
vibration footing (L=2). Fig. 8 shows the screening effectiveness increases slightly due to the
reduction of diaphragm wall embedded length. This implies that the embedded length of trench
wall is not a critical parameter in the design of vibration barrier. In general, the open trench depth
is main influential parameter of screening effectiveness, and for trench deeper than 1.5
R
L its
screening effectiveness is much more significant.
4.4 Influence of vibration frequency on screening effectiveness
In order to study the influence of vibration frequency on screening effectiveness, the
dimension of the open trench of the barrier will be fixed at w=1m and l=20m, with the vibration
frequency of footing varying from 20Hz to 100Hz. As can be seen in Figs. 9 and 10, the
effectiveness of reducing vibration amplitude using barrier systems in this study increases with
increasing vibration frequency. For lower frequency vibration situation, which has longer wave
length, the screening effectiveness is significantly reduced for both sheet pile and diaphragm
barriers because of the longer wave length and much deeper trench is required to achieve an

11
acceptable screening effectiveness.
4.5 Discussion of Practical Design Using Open-trench Barrier
A successful vibration isolation design is often defined to be that
ry
A 0.25 [3]; i.e., a barrier
reduces the displacement amplitude to 25% of that without any barrier. A design example is
presented to show how the results in this paper can be applied. The screening effectiveness of
diaphragm walls or sheet piles on both sides of open trench as a barrier for ground-transmitted
waves produced by a vertical vibration of a massless rigid strip footing is illustrated as the
following.
We assumed that the material properties of soil, concrete and steel are the same as previously
described in 3.2. The amplitude of harmonic force P
0
is 1kN and the vibration frequency is 50Hz
and L
R
= 5 m. The source distance is 20m. The embedded wall length is equal to open trench depth.
The thickness of sheet piles and diaphragm walls were fixed at 5cm and 50cm, respectively. The
depth of open trench will be decided for a successful vibration isolation design (
ry
A 0.25).
The dimension of open trench-wall barriers is shown in Table 2 with
ry
A -values in Fig. 6. In
the table, the NG will be noted for those
ry
A >0.25 which are regarded as ineffective barriers. It
is observed from Table 2, there are some circumstances of open trench-wall barrier system that
fulfill the requirement of
ry
A 0.25. The final decision of the dimension of an effective open
trench is up to the designer. A suitable selection of the design is suggested here by using open
trench depth of 1.5
R
L (d=7.5m) adding sheet piles with thickness of 0.01
R
L (5cm), embedded
length is equal to trench depth, on both sides of open trench to achieve an
ry
A = 0.04 (W=0.4),
0.08 (W=0.6) for economic and feasible screening effective considerations. When diaphragm walls
with thickness of 50cm are used in the barrier system, it is found that
ry
A 0.21 at the depth of
open trench greater than 2
R
L (d=10m), therefore the open trench depth of 2
R
L (d=10m) will be
recommended.
Although the conditions are somewhat different and for comparison reason, if we would like
to check the design of open trench-sheet piles barrier with a pure open trench barrier, we can
utilize the experimental formula by Ahmad and Al-Hussaini [17],
07 . 1
y r
) D ( 6 1 A

~
, for pure open
trench barrier. If
ry
A = 0.25 is used, the required trench depth is 0.7
R
L (d=3.5m). If
ry
A = 0.04
is used, the required pure open trench depth is 3.8
R
L (d=19m), while only 1.5
R
L (d=7.5m) is
required for open trench-sheet piles barrier system. The comparison implies that open trench-sheet
piles barrier system provides much better screening effectiveness than a pure open trench barrier

12
system, in addition to the stability of an open trench provided by the sidings.

5. CONCLUSIONS
For practical applications, using the trench wall sidings will make the trench barriers much more
stable and feasible. Thus, the 2D boundary element method is used to study the effectiveness of
trench wall sidings, sheet piles or diaphragm walls, on the vibration screening. Some of the results
can be summarized as below:
1. The screening effectiveness of the open trench-wall barrier systems is significantly different
from that of pure open trench. Trench wall with both diaphragm wall or sheet pile sidings
exhibits greater vibration amplitudes (less effective in vibration screening) than that of the pure
open trench.
2. For shallow depth cases (D < 1.5 L
R
), barrier trenches with diaphragm wall exhibit much better
screening effects (about 4 times better in vibration amplitude reduction) than that with sheet
pile.
3. For D > 1.5 L
R
, the open trenches with sheet pile exhibit the most significant screening
effectiveness,
ry
A <0.1, than that of the other two types of trench barrier.
4. The results of the study implies that the Poissons ratio, the embedded length of trench wall
siding, the distance from vibration footing to barrier and width of open trench are insignificant
parameters on screening effectiveness using open trench with sidings in the study.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the National Center for High-Performance Computing of Taiwan to
provide the high speed computer for the computations in this study.

REFERENCES
1. Barkan DD. Dynamics of Bases and Foundations. Translated from Russian by Drashevska
L and translation edited by Tschebotarioff, GP. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
2. McNeill RL, Margason BE, Babcock FM. The Role of Soil Dynamics in the Design of
Stable Test Pads. In: Proceedings of Guidance and Control Conference. Minneapolis,
Minnesota, 16-18 August, 1965:366-375.
3. Woods RD. Screening of Surface Waves in Soil. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering (ASCE) 1968; 94(SM4):951-979.
4. Woods RD, Barnett NE, Sagesser R. Holography, a New Tool for Soil Dynamics. Journal of

13
Geotechnical Engineering (ASCE) 1974; 100(11):1231-1247.
5. Liao S, Sangrey DA. Use of Piles as Isolation Barriers. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering (ASCE) 1978; 104(9):1139-1152.
6. Haupt WA. Model Test on Screening of Surface Waves. In: Proceedings of the 10th Int.
Conf. Soil Mech. and Found. Engineering. Stockholm, 1981; 3:215-222.
7. Aboudi J. Elastic Waves in Half-Space with Thin Barrier. Journal of Engineering
Mechanics (ASCE) 1973; 99(1):69-83.
8. Fuyski M, Matsumoto Y. Finite Difference Analysis of Rayleigh Wave Scattering at a
Trench. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1980; 70:2051-2069.
9. Wass G. Linear Two-Dimensional Analysis of Soil Dynamics Problem in Semi-Infinite
Layered Media. PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley; 1972.
10. Haupt WA. Surface Waves in Nonhomogeneous Half-Space. Dynamic Methods in Soil and
Rock Mechanics. Prange, B (ed). Balkema: Rotterdam, 1977; 335-367.
11. Segol GP, Lee CY, Abel JE. Amplitude Reduction of Surface Wave by Trenches. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 1978; 104(3): 621-641.
12. May TW, Bolt BA. The Effectiveness of Trench in Reducing Seismic Motion. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics 1982; 10:195-210.
13. Emad K, Manolis GD. Shallow Trenches and Propagation of Surface Waves. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 1985; 111(2):279-282.
14. Beskos DE, Dasgupta B, Vardoulakis IG. Vibration Isolation Using Open or Filled Trench.
Part 1: 2-D Homogeneous. Computational Mechanics 1986; 1 (1):43-63.
15. Dasgupta B, Beskos DE, Vordouclakis IG. 3-D Vibration Isolation Using Open Trenches.
Innovative 1986; Spring-Verlag: Berlin; 385-392.
16. Dasgupta B, Beskos DE, Vordouclakis IG. Vibration Isolation Using Open or Filled
Trenches. Part 2: 3-D Homogeneous Soil. Computational Mechanics 1990; 6: 129-142.
17. Ahmad S, Al-Hussaini TM. Simplified Design for Open and In-Filled Trenches. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering (ASCE) 1991; 117(1):67-88.
18. Kitahara M. Boundary Integral Equation Methods in Eigenvalue Problem of
Elastodynamics and Thin Plates. Elsevier Science Publishers, BV, 1985.
19. Lysmer J. Foundation Vibrations with Soil Damping. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ASCE
Conference on Civil Engineering and Nuclear Power. Knoxville Tennessee, 1980, Vol. II.
20. Zabreyko PP et al. Integral EquationsA Reference Text. Amsterdam: Noordhoff, 1975.
21. Israil ASM, Ahmad S. Dynamic Vertical Compliance of Strip Foundation in Layered Soils.

14
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 1989; 18: 933-950.

15

Table 1 Parameters used in the numerical study
Note:
f : vibration frequency
d : trench depth
d
e
: embedded length of trench wall
w : trench width
l : distance between trench and vibration footing
D : normalized depth with respect to the Rayleigh wave length
D
E
: normalized embedded length with respect to the Rayleigh wave length
W : normalized width with respect to the Rayleigh wave length
L : normalized distance with respect to the Rayleigh wave length
t : thickness of trench siding
v
: soil Poisson ratio

Purpose of
analyses
Fixed parameters Varying parameters
Influence
of existence
of walls
f
(Hz)
D D
E
W L sheet pile t (cm) diaphragm wall t (cm)
50 1 1 0.2 4 0, 5 0, 50
Influence
of soil
Poissons
ratio
f
(Hz)
t (cm) W L
v = 0.25, 0.35, 0.45
D = 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2
D
E
= D
50 5(sheet pile),
50(diaphragm
wall)
0.2 4
Influence
of barrier
dimensions
and layout
f
(Hz)
t (cm) D D
E
W L
50 5 ( sheet pile),
50( diaphragm wall)
0.25,
0.5, 1,
1.5, 2.0
0, 0.25D,
0.5D,
0.75D, D
0.2, 0.4,
0.6
2, 4, 6,
8
Influence
of vibration
frequency
t (cm) f (Hz)
5 ( sheet pile)
50( diaphragm wall)
20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100
d (m) w (m) d
e
(m) l (m)
5 1 5 20

16
Table 2 Dimensions of open trench-wall barrier and
ry
A values
Dimension
ry
A
Depth parameter
of open trench, D
(D)
Width Parameter
of open trench, W
(W)
Open trench- sheet
pile barrier system
Open trench- diaphragm
wall barrier system
2 0.2 0.04 0.15
2 0.4 0.04 0.21
2 0.6 0.04 0.16
1.5 0.2 0.04 0.25
1.5 0.4 0.04 0.27(N.G.)
1.5 0.6 0.08 0.28(N.G.)
1 0.2 1.09(N.G.) 0.43 (N.G.)
1 0.4 0.71(N.G.) 0.4 (N.G.)
1 0.6 1.35 (N.G.) 0.45(N.G.)
0.5 0.2 0.7 (N.G.) 0.49 (N.G.)
0.5 0.4 0.66(N.G.) 0.47(N.G.)
0.5 0.6 0.75(N.G.) 0.55(N.G.)
Vibration frequency f=50Hz; Rayleigh wave length L
R
= 5 mL=4D
E
=D
N.G. if
ry
A >0.25


17

1 1
,t u
2 2
,
I I
t u
2 2
,
I I
t u
2 2
,
I I
t u
3 3
,t u
4 4
,
J J
t u
4 4
,
J J
t u
9 9
,t u
5 5
,t u
7 7
,t u
6 6
,
I I
t u
8 8
,
J J
t u
4 4
,
J J
t u

Fig. 1 Domain divided into three sub-regions

18

Fig. 2 Typical boundary element mesh for the study

19
0 10 20 30 40 50
X (m)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
A
ry
open trench with diaphragm walls
d=5m, w=1m, l=20m
f=20Hz
f=30Hz
f=40Hz
f=50Hz
f=60Hz
f=70Hz
f=80Hz
f=90Hz
f=100Hz

Fig. 3 Results of mesh study for decision of the boundary behind an open trench with diaphragm
wall barrier


20
4 6 8 10 12 14
X/L
R
0x10
0
1x10
-4
2x10
-4
3x10
-4
U
y
(m)
u
o
=10
-3
m, v=0.45, f=50Hz
D=1, W=0.2, L=4
pure open trench
open trench with sheet pile
open trench with diaphragm wall
without barrier

(a) The amplitude of ground vibration behind the barriers

4 6 8 10 12 14
X/L
R
1
10
1x10
2
1x10
3

A
r
y
(
w
i
t
h

w
a
l
l

b
a
r
r
i
e
r
)
A
r
y
(
w
i
t
h
o
u
t

w
a
l
l

b
a
r
r
i
e
r
)
v=0.45, f=50Hz
D=1, W=0.2, L=4
sheet pile
diaphragm wall

(b) The ratio of A
ry
was based on the amplitude with and without the walls
Fig.4 The comparison of screening effectiveness between the open trench barriers


21
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2

A
ry
sheet pile
W=0.2; L=4
v=0.45
v=0.35
v=0.25

(a) Open trench with sheet pile barrier

0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2

A
ry
diaphragm wall
W=0.2; L=4
v=0.45
v=0.35
v=0.25

(b) Open trench with diaphragm wall barrier
Fig.5 Influence of soil Poissons ratio on
ry
A

22
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
A
ry
sheet pile ; L = 4
W=0.2
W=0.4
W=0.6


0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
A
ry
diaphragm wall ; L = 4
W=0.2
W=0.4
W=0.6

Fig.6 Influence of width parameter, W, on
ry
A

23
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
A
ry
sheet pile ; W = 0.2
L=2
L=4
L=6
L=8

0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
A
ry
diaphragm wall ; W = 0.2
L=2
L=4
L=6
L=8

Fig.7 Influence of distance parameter, L, on
ry
A

24
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
D
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
A
ry
open trench with diaphragm walls
L=4, W=0.2
D
E
=1.00D
D
E
=0.75D
D
E
=0.50D
D
E
=0.25D
D
E
=0

Fig.8 Influence of embedded length on
ry
A - open trench with diaphragm wall (L=4, w=0.2)

25
20 40 60 80 100
f (Hz)
0
1
2
3
4
A
ry
sheet pile
l=20m ; w=1m ; d=5m
v=0.25
v=0.35
v=0.45

20 40 60 80 100
f (Hz)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
A
ry
diaphragm wall
l=20m ; w=1m ; d=5m
v=0.25
v=0.35
v=0.45

Fig.9 Influence of Poissons ratio on
ry
A (l=20m, w=1m, d=5m)

26
20 40 60 80 100
f (Hz)
0
1
2
3
4
A
ry
sheet pile
l=20m ; w=1m ; v=0.45
d=2.5m
d=5m
d=7.5m
d=10m


20 40 60 80 100
f (Hz)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
A
ry
open trench with diaphragm wall
l=20m ; w=1m ; v=0.45
d=2.5m
d=5m
d=7.5m
d=10m
Fig10 Influence of vibration frequency on
ry
A (l=20m, w=1m)

Paper Title

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Paper Title

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Analysis of the Screening Effectiveness of Open Trench with Wall Barrier by Tsai and Chang

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen