Volume 87, Issue 10 (2026), Pages: 87-108;
Received: 16 August 2026 / Revised: 16 October 2026/ Accepted: 20 October 2026 / Published:29 October 2026
Research article
Shubhendu Amit1, Farukh Ali2, Rajat Pandey2, Shashi Kumar3, Navdeep Raj4, Purushottam kumar3, Mukesh Kumar5, Niraj Kumar Nirala5, Akash Sharma6, *
1Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College, Nawada, DSTTE Bihar, India.
2Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College Kaimur, DSTTE Bihar, India.
3Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College Jehanabad, DSTTE Bihar, India.
4Assistant Professor, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College Lakhisarai, DSTTE Bihar, India.
5Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College, Kishanganj, DSTTE Bihar, India
6Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
Abstract: This paper introduces a comprehensive seismic displacement diagnostics framework for multi-story steel moment-resisting frames equipped with supplemental friction dampers, explicitly accounting for subgrade compliance. Traditional seismic assessments frequently implement an idealized fixed-base assumption, which overlooks key physical phenomena introduced by soil-structure interaction (SSI). By formulating a coupled nonlinear dynamic system solved via the Newmark average-acceleration scheme, this research isolates the individual contributions of structural deformation, damper slip, and foundation compliance to the global displacement fields. Parametric simulations systematically vary the friction coefficient (µ) and foundation flexibility index (ƞf) across multiple structural heights and earthquake intensities. The numerical results reveal a critical engineering paradox: while friction dampers effectively mitigate relative inter-story drift ratios, substantial subgrade compliance induces rigid-body foundation translation and rocking, which significantly amplifies absolute floor displacements and permanent residual drifts. Furthermore, excessive foundation tilting can suppress intended damper slip actions by shifting the operational period along the response spectrum. Ultimately, this research provides a multi-parameter performance-based tool demonstrating that optimal seismic performance demands a unified superstructure–damper–foundation model to prevent unsafe engineering design conclusions.
Keywords: Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI), Friction dampers, Steel moment-resisting frames (SMRFs), Subgrade
compliance / Foundation flexibility, Seismic displacement diagnostics.
* Corresponding Author.
Email address: ds19ce006@students.vnit.ac.in
Doi (Journal): 10.1045/2026.Bauingenieur/108805-VDI_016
[1] Priestley, M. J. N., Calvi, G. M., & Kowalsky, M. J. (2007). Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy.
[2] FEMA. (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 356). Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
[3] ATC. (1996). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings (ATC-40). Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
[4] Moehle, J. P. (1992). Displacement-based design of RC structures subjected to earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra, 8(3), 403–428.
[5] Hamburger, R. O., Foutch, D. A., & Cornell, C. A. (2003). Performance-based seismic design in the United States: History, research, and future directions. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 59(12), 1437–1453.
[6] Ghobarah, A. (2001). Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: State of development. Engineering Structures, 23(8), 878–884.
[7] Pall, A. S., & Marsh, C. (1982). Response of friction damped braced frames. Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 108(6), 1311–1323.
[8] Constantinou, M. C., Mokha, A., & Reinhorn, A. M. (1990). Teflon bearings in base isolation II: Modeling. Journal of Structural Engineering, 116(2), 455–474.
[9] Soong, T. T., & Dargush, G. F. (1997). Passive Energy Dissipation Systems in Structural Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
[10] Aiken, I. D., Kelly, J. M., & Pall, A. S. (1988). Seismic response of a nine-story steel frame with friction damped cross-bracing. Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan, Vol. V, 79–84.
[11] Filiatrault, A., & Cherry, S. (1990). Seismic design spectra for friction-damped structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 116(5), 1334–1355.
[12] Mualla, I. H., & Belev, B. (2002). Performance of new friction damper for seismic protection of structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 58(2), 209–234.
[13] Vafaei, M., & Alih, S. S. (2018). Seismic performance of structures retrofitted with various types of friction dampers. Structures, 15, 252–267.
[14] Kausel, E. (2010). Early history of soil-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30(9), 822–832.
[15] Gazetas, G. (1991). Formulas and charts for impedances of surface and embedded foundations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117(9), 1362–1381.
[16] Wolf, J. P. (1985). Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[17] Stewart, J. P., Fenves, G. L., & Seed, R. B. (1999). Seismic soil-structure interaction in buildings. I: Analytical methods. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 125(1), 26–37.
[18] Mylonakis, G., & Gazetas, G. (2000). Seismic soil-structure interaction: Beneficial or detrimental, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 4(3), 277–301.
[19] Bielak, J., Loukakis, K., Hisada, Y., & Yoshimura, C. (2003). Domain reduction method for three-dimensional earthquake modeling in localized regions, Part I: Theory. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93(2), 817–824.
[20] Datta, T. K. (2010). Seismic Analysis of Structures. John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, Singapore. (Focuses on coupled structural systems).
[21] Constantinou, M. C., & Kneifati, M. C. (1988). Dynamics of soil-base isolated structure systems. Journal of Structural Engineering, 114(1), 211–221.
[22] Naserkhaki, K., Pourmohammad, H., & El-Rich, M. (2012). Assessment of seismic soil structure interaction on buildings equipped with passive dampers. Earthquakes and Structures, 3(6), 843–862.
[23] Chayan, M., & Ray-Chaudhuri, T. (2019). Impact of subgrade compliance on the performance of hysteretic energy-dissipating dampers in steel moment frames. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 124, 102–115.
[24] Chopra, A. K. (2020). Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering (5th ed.). Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ. (Grounds the Newmark average acceleration algorithms).
[25] Newmark, N. M. (1959). A method of computation for structural dynamics. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, 85(3), 67–94.