Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Geotechnics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compgeo

Efficiency of heavy mass technology in traffic vibration reduction:

Experimental and numerical investigation
Mohannad Mhanna a, Isam Shahrour a, Marwan Sadek a,⇑, Philippe Dunez b
a
Laboratory of Civil Engineering and geoEnvironment (LGCgE), University of Lille 1-Polytech-Lille, Villeneuve d’Ascq 59655, France
b
Laboratoire régional des ponts et chaussées, CETE Nord-Picardie, Loos, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Vibrations induced by traffic and construction activities cause serious environmental problems. The
Received 9 February 2013 reduction of the impact of these vibrations on the nearby environment constitutes an important chal-
Received in revised form 5 June 2013 lenge, mainly in urban area. This paper presents both experimental investigation and 3D numerical mod-
Accepted 4 August 2013
eling of the performance of heavy masses technology for scattering the ground vibrations. The efficiency
Available online 20 September 2013
of this method is compared to that of the trench barriers, largely studied in the literature. Analyses show
that the heavy mass constitutes an efficient technology for the attenuation of the traffic induced vibra-
Keywords:
tions. The performance of this method depends mainly on the mass weight. An amplitude reduction ratio
Vibration
Numerical modeling
up to 70% can be reached using this technology.
Traffic Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Urban
Trench barrier
Heavy masses

1. Introduction
Ground vibrations generated by trains and heavy trucks consti-
tute a serious environmental problem. These vibrations can cause
discomfort to residents, perturbation of sensitive equipment and
even damage to nearby structures. They could also have a detri-
mental effect on the railway safety, due to deterioration of the
embankment and fatigue effects on the rails support.
Several methods have been proposed to analyze the problem of
traffic induced vibrations. Both time domain analysis [1] and fre-
quency domain analysis [2–4] have been successfully used. Beskou
and Theodorakopoulos [5] have recently provided a comprehen-
sive review on the dynamic response of pavements to moving
loads and they have stressed the need of field data for the develop-
ment and calibration of numerical models.
Research studies have been conducted to analyze the ground
vibrations by different sources and the development of efficient
isolation system that could reduce the impact of these vibrations
on the nearby environment. Researches were mainly interested
in wave barriers that can reduce the ground motion by scattering,
interception and diffraction of the surface waves. The efficiency of
the open and in-filled trenches was investigated via field tests
[6,7], analytical solution [8,9], boundary element [10,11] and finite
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mohannad.mhanna@polytech-lille.net (M. Mhanna), isam.
shahrour@univ-lille1.fr (I. Shahrour), marwan.sadek@polytech-lille.fr (M. Sadek),
philippe.Dunez@developpement-durable.gouv.fr (P. Dunez).
element modeling [12]. Different filled materials were also evalu-
ated such as gas cushion and cement bentonite [13,14], rubber
modified asphalt and Expanded polystyrene (EPS) [15–17]. All of
these studies revealed that the most influential parameters are
the depth of trench, the frequency of vibration and the relative
stiffness of different filled materials. For example, a good isolation
(50–70%) could be reached with a trench depth higher than the half
of wavelength (kr). Soft barriers (gas cushions, empty trenches,
Geofoam, or soil–bentonite trenches) are more effective than stiff
wave barriers (concrete-infilled trenches); the trench width has lit-
tle influence on the efficiency of isolation.
Jones and Petyt [18] evoke an interesting method for vibration
screening using heavy masses on the ground surface (e.g. concrete
or stone blocks, specially designed brick walls, etc.). Krylov [19] at-
tempted to explain the principle of this method as follows: when
the heavy masses are shaken in both vertical and horizontal direc-
tion by the Rayleigh waves, waves are scattered into the ground
and at different directions on the surface, resulting in noticeable
attenuation of the transmitted waves. That’s why he suggested
using mass scatters with natural frequencies close to the frequency
range of the traffic-induced vibrations (generally between 5 and
50 Hz). This trenchless method seems to be interesting, in particu-
lar for monumental and urban buildings. The added mass may also
be used to enhance the visual appearance of the area or to provide
security functions. Fig. 1 shows an example of welded wire gabion
walls that improve the visual appearance of the area and could be
used to scatter the traffic induced vibration.

0266-352X/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2013.08.002
142 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149

Dynamic load

Incident waves Transmitted waves

Scattered waves
Reflected waves

Fig. 1. Trenchless isolation technology – welded wire gabion walls.

This paper concerns the analysis of the performance of the hea-
vy masses technology as isolating vibration system. The study is
based on full-scale experimental investigation followed by numer-
ical modeling. Numerical analysis is conducted using a 3D finite
difference modeling in the time domain.
2. Analysis of the performances of the heavy masses as isolation
technique
2.1. Experimental investigation
2.1.1. Site description
Tests were conducted at the city of Haubourdin in the north of
France in collaboration with IFSTTAR center. The properties of the
soil were determined using the Menard pressumeter together with
surface wave tests. The test is realized in situ by performing a
stress controlled loading on the wall of a borehole using a cylindri-
cal probe which can expand radially. From the test readings (vol-
ume variation based on controlled pressure), a stress–strain
curve can be obtained which yields the Menard Pressuremeter
modulus (Em). Fig. 2a shows the variations with depth of the pres-
suremeter modulus (Em). The multichannel analysis of surface
waves method (MASW) is adopted to establish the shear wave
velocity profile. In the MASW procedure, surface waves generated
by a seismic source are measured using a series of geophones. The
data processing involves establishing dispersion curves of the gen-
erated surface waves by plotting the frequency vs. phase velocity.
By inverting the dispersion curves, the variation of shear wave
velocity with depth is obtained [16]. The soil profile was evaluated
by previously conducted MASW at testing site and the adopted soil
shear wave profile is shown in Fig. 2b. It is composed of three lay-
ers: chalky silt, sandy silt and clayey silt. The shear wave velocity
(Vs) of the chalky silt is equal to 220 m/s, while that of the sandy
silt is equal to 150 m/s. In the clayey silt, it varies between 65
and 105 m/s.
Steel tanks (1.75 * 0.75 * 0.75 m) filled with water are used as
heavy masses. The mass of each filled tank is about 1000 kg. The
dynamic excitation is generated by the dynaplaque machine
shown in fig. 3a. It is composed of a falling mass on a spring dam-
per placed on a load’s plate. The deflection of the soil and the im-
pact force are measured by sensors embedded in the load’s plate
and immediately transferred to computer as depicted in Fig. 3b.
The resulting dynamic loading is equivalent to the impact of
13 tons axle load vehicle traveling at 60 km/h speed. The duration
of the impact is equal to15 ms ± 5 ms. The measured frequency of
the load fall within a wide range with a resonant peak at frequency
of about 45 Hz. Tanks filled by water are placed at a distance of 2 m
from the impact loading.
Vibrations measurements were carried out using uniaxial and
triaxial accelerometers. Tests were carried in free field and after
the installation of the heavy masses. Fig. 4 shows the general lay-
out of the field test. Six accelerometers are installed along a line
perpendicular to the centre of the load’s plate in order to record
the impact induced vibrations. The accelerometers are mounted
on a separate aluminum stake with a cruciform cross-section and
placed at a distance D = (1.5, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 15 m) from the load

(a) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 (b) 0 50 100 150 200 250

0 0

2 2

4 4

6 6
Depth (m)

Depth (m)

8 8

10 10

12 12

14 14

16 16
Em (Mpa) Vs (m/s)

Fig. 2. Field test: (a) pressuremeter modulus and (b) shear wave velocity profile.
 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149
Fig. 3. (a) Dynaplaque and water filled tanks used in the experimental tests and (b) recorded impact load.
Platform
D=0
1.5m 1.5m 2m
Blocks
D=2m
Fig. 4. General layout of the experimental field test.
impact. These sensors are PCB Piezoelectric accelerometer (Bruel &
Kjaer, type 4370) with high sensitivity of 100 mV/g; In addition,
note the presence of a referential triaxial piezoelectric accelerom-
eter (Bruel & Kjaer, type 4321) with three independent outputs for
simultaneous high-level measurements in three mutually perpen-
dicular directions providing a sensitivity of 10 mV/g. The acceler-
ometers are connected to a multi-channel seismic station of type
NEC OMNIAC 3600 provided by anti-aliasing filter and analog-
to-digital convertor. The sensitivity given in the calibration chart
is measured at 159.2 Hz and an acceleration of 10 g. For every
sequence of measurements, high speed data recording for 5 s on
6-channels with a 5 ms simultaneous sampling rate is registered;
thus each vertical soil particles acceleration (SPA) is registered in
5000 data points.
2.1.2. Field test results
Fig. 5 shows the time history of the recorded soil particle accel-
eration (SPA) in free field at different distances from the dynapl-
aque generator. The efficiency of the heavy masses in reducing
vibration is evaluated via the amplitude reduction ratio (Ar) that
compares the vibration amplitude with the isolation device (after)
and without it (before):
AzðafterÞ
Ar ¼
AzðbeforeÞ
Fig. 6 shows the attenuation curve of the ground vibrations
measured in the six measurement points. We note that the atten-
uation curve includes two parts. The first one extends over a
distance of the order of the length of the surface wave
(k = C/f  200/45  4.5 m). In this range, a rapid decrease in the
143
2m 3m 5m
vibrations amplitude is observed. The second part (distance > k)
shows a slow attenuation in the vibrations amplitude with the dis-
tance from the dynaplaque. Rayleigh waves, which are character-
ized by a lower attenuation compared to that of the bulk waves,
become dominant at this area.
After the installation of the filled steel tanks, it is observed that
the measured amplitudes of the ground vibrations are reduced sig-
nificantly. Fig. 7 shows a comparison between the measured
amplitude of the ground vibrations before and after the installation
of tanks at two distances from the dynaplaque (D = 3 and 7 m). The
in situ measurements show a remarkable reduction of the vibra-
tions. For example, the soil vibrations at a distance (D = 3 m) is de-
creased from 0.4 to 0.32 m/s2 (reduction 20%), while at a distance
(D = 7) it decreased from 0.078 to 0.06 m/s2 (reduction 23%).
Fig. 8 shows a comparison between the frequency content of the
ground vibrations measured at two distances from the dynaplaque
(D = 3 and 7 m) before and after placing the mitigation measure. It
is shown that the frequency content, before and after the installa-
tion of the steel tanks, has the same range of the transient signal
and the same shape. The peak acceleration is significantly reduced
after using the mitigation measure. The frequency content in both
cases is concentrated around the impact frequency of the dynapl-
aque (f = 45 Hz) and show another peaks (f = 30 and 60 Hz) which
may be attributed to the natural frequency of the stratified soil
ð1Þ
layers.
Fig. 9 shows the evolution of the amplitude reduction ratio with
the distance from the impact loading. It can be seen that the steel
tanks induced a reduction of 25% in the amplitude of vibration. The
variability of Ar with distance can be attributed to the variability of
the soil characteristics and to the wave’s reflections at the soil
144 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149

(a) 1.4 the use of independent dashpots in the normal and shear direc-
tions applied at the model boundaries. The formulation of viscous
1.2 D=1,5m boundary can be written as [20]:
D=3m
1
0.8
D=5m sn ¼ qVpv n ð2Þ
0.6
SPA (m/s 2 )

0.4
sn ¼ qVsv s
0.2 where sn is the normal stress at the model boundary, ss the shear
0 stress at the model boundary, q mass density, Vp the P-wave veloc-
-0.2 ity, Vs the shear wave velocity, mn the normal component of the
-0.4 velocity at the model boundary and ms is the shear component of
-0.6 the velocity at the model boundary. A Rayleigh damping of 5% is
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 used for all soil layers, which is defined by mass and stiffness coef-
Time (s) ficients calculated according to the applied exciting frequency [16].
Kuhlemeyer and Lysmer [21] show that, for an accurate model-
(b) 0.1 ing of wave transmission through a medium, the spatial element
D=7m
0.08 size Dl, must be smaller than approximately one-tenth to one-
D=10m
eighth of the wavelength associated with the highest frequency
0.06 D=15m
component of the input wave; thus the element size is fixed to
0.04 0.3  0.3  0.3. The numerical mesh is depicted in Fig. 10. It in-
SPA (m/s 2 )

cludes 94,662 elements (101,616 nodes). The base of the soil mass
0.02
is assumed to be rigid. The dynamic load of dynaplaque is de-
0 scribed using the Ricker pulse:
-0.02
FðtÞ ¼ ða2  1=2Þ expða2 Þ where a ¼ pðt  t s Þ=tp ð3Þ
-0.04
where tp is the characteristic period, ts is the time for which F(t)
-0.06
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 reaches its maximum. The main frequencies of this load are concen-
Time (s) trated around the characteristic frequency f = 1/tp. According to the
recorded impact load, the characteristic frequency of Ricker pulse is
Fig. 5. Recorded soil particles acceleration (SPA): (a) points at distance (D = 1.5, 3 equal to f = 45 Hz and its amplitude F = 65 KN. The water behaves as
and 5 m) and (b) points relatively far from the dynaplaque (D = 7, 10 and 15 m).
a medium with a very low shear strength and shear modulus of the
order of 106 Pa [22]. Thus, the steel tanks are modeled as massive
1.2 elements with 8 nodes having the density qw = 1000 kg/m3 with a
very low shear modulus. The contact between the steel tanks and
recorded amplitude in free field
1 the soil is modeled by shell elements with a thickness e = 5 cm, a
0.8 density q = 700 kg/m3, a Young modulus E = 200 GPa and a Poison’s
ratio m = 0.3. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the soil lay-
SPA (m/s 2)

0.6 ers including the thickness (d); the shear wave velocities (Vs); the
0.4 longitudinal wave velocities (Vp); Young’s modulus (E) and Pois-
son’s ratio (m).
0.2

0 2.2.2. Numerical results

0 2 4 6 8 10
X (m)
0 1 2 3
Fig. 6. Attenuation curve of ground vibrations recorded in free field.
layers interfaces. These records clearly emphasize the positive role
of heavy mass in reducing the induced soil vibration. In the sequel,
numerical parametric investigation is conducted to analyze the
efficiency of this method. Experimental results are used to validate
the numerical modeling.
2.2. Numerical modeling
2.2.1. Model description
Numerical modeling is carried out using the finite difference
scheme (FLAC3D program). Due to the low level of deformation,
the wave propagation problem can be correctly described using
an elastic model with Rayleigh damping. In order to prevent wave
reflections, viscous dashpots are used at lateral boundaries. Vis-
cous boundary operates in the time domain and was based on
12 14 16
Fig. 11 shows a comparison of the recorded and predicted SPA
X/λ in free field conditions at points (D = 3 and 10 m). It could be ob-
served that the numerical results reproduce correctly the trend
of the field measurements. The small discrepancy between the
numerical and experimental results could be attributed to the re-
bound of the falling mass of dynaplaque from the load’s plate,
which is neglected in this study. A satisfactory agreement is also
obtained between the recorded and predicted results after the
installation of the heavy masses as illustrated in Fig. 12.
Fig. 13 shows a comparison between the predicted reduction ra-
tio and field results. A good agreement is observed between these
results for small distance from the loading. On the other hand, the
measured amplitude reduction ratio changes randomly as the dis-
tance from the dynaplaque exceeds 10 m. This could be attributed
to two reasons. First, the reflected waves at the soil layers inter-
faces, which propagate in the soil in-phase or out-of-phase. Second,
the vibration amplitudes are negligible even without the mitiga-
tion measure, and any variation in the response represents a large
change in the ratio. This results shows the pertinence of the
numerical model for describing the wave propagation in the soil
media resulting from the dynaplaque impact taking into account
the effects of heavy blocks.
 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149 145

(a) 0.5 (b) 0.06

Free Field Free Field
0.4 0.04
with tanks with tanks
0.3 0.02

SPA (m/s 2)
SPA (m/s2 )
0.2 0

0.1 -0.02

0 -0.04

-0.1 -0.06

-0.2 -0.08

-0.3 -0.1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Time (s) Time (s)

Fig. 7. Recorded soil particles acceleration at a distance (a) 3 m and (b) 7 m before and after the installation of the heavy masses.

(a) 1.4E -03 (b) 1.0E -04

Free Field with tanks Free Field with tanks
1.2E -03
8.0E -05
1.0E -03
Fourier amplitude
Fourier amplitude

6.0E -05
8.0E -04

6.0E -04 4.0E -05

4.0E -04
2.0E -05
2.0E -04

0.0E+00 0.0E+00
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 8. Influence of the heavy mass on the vibration frequency: (a) D = 3 m and (b) D = 7 m.

1
rffiffiffiffiffi
0.9 1 K
Ar (measured)

f0 ¼ ð4Þ
2p M
0.8

0.7
0.6
D
0.5
0 2 4 6
D (m)
Fig. 9. Amplitude reduction ratio obtained with heavy masses.
2.3. Parametric study
2.3.1. Influence of mass weight
The parametric study was conducted using the numerical mod-
el described above but in assuming a homogeneous half space. The
following characteristics are adopted for the soil: Young’s modulus
E = 60 MPa, density q = 1900 kg/m3, Poisson’s ratio m = 0.3. The
block contact surface is equal to 1.5 * 1 m2; the distance between
two consecutive blocks is equal to 0.6 m; the weight of the block
varies between 1.8 and 7.2 tons placed at a 3 m from the impact
load. The Young’s modulus of the block is equal to 30 GPa with a
mass density q = 2400 kg/m3. The block frequency is estimated
using the following expression:
K represents the Winkler foundation stiffness and M the mass [23].
Fig. 14 shows the influence of the block weight on the vibration
reduction at the ground surface. It can be observed that the use of
8 10 12 14 16 heavy blocks results in a significant reduction which exceeds 70%
for higher weights. The increase in the block weight from 2 Tons
to 6 Tons results in considerable decrease in the reduction ratio.
Results obtained with 8 Tons are similar to 6 Tons. Note that the
block natural frequency calculated using Eq. (3) varies between
10 Hz (8 T) and 20 Hz (2 T), which is highly smaller than the dom-
inant frequency of the applied load (f = 45 Hz). The obtained results
does not support the explanation provided by Krylov [19] which
relates the scattering efficiency to a resonance effect of the mass
scatter in the vertical direction.
To confirm this observation, the frequency content of the vibra-
tion at several points is calculated by the Fourier transformation.
Fig. 15 shows the frequency content calculated at two points situ-
ated at two distances from the centre of the mass: (X = 2 and 6 m).
Fig. 16 shows the frequency content calculated at two points situ-
ated below the heavy masses (depth = 2 and 4 m). It is shown that
the soil response is dominated by the frequency of the applied dy-
namic load. The frequency content of the vibrations in free field is
mainly located around the characteristic frequency of the applied
146 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149

Contact mass-soil

15m

Fig. 10. 3D numerical mesh with adsorbing viscous boundaries (101,616 nodes) for the soil layers and heavy masses.

– The heavy masses represent stiff irregularities which perturb

Table 1
the propagation of the incident waves. A part of the wave
Field test – soil properties.
energy is reflected in front of the heavy mass increasing the
Soil layer d (m) E (MPa) m Vs (m/s) Vp (m/s) Ar factor at this zone (Ar > 1 when x < 0).
1 0.6 200 0.33 220 440
2 1.2 150 0.33 180 360 One should remember, however, that in the case of ground
3 4.2 25 0.33 65 130
vibrations generated by rail and road traffic, incident waves may
4 9 50 0.4 105 252
have much more complex distributions in space and time. There-
fore, special investigation would be needed to find out optimal
positions and mass distribution of individual scatterers in such
Ricker pulse (f = 45 Hz). The frequency content of the vibrations complex cases [19]. Moreover, the heavy mass technology is stud-
after the installation of the heavy masses is similar to that in free ied with the objective of reducing the amplitude of vibration be-
field although the amplitude of the spectrum is significantly lower. yond the blocks. One should not expect that increasing the
No resonance effect is observed after placing the heavy masses. overall footing weight of the structure necessarily leads to reduc-
Consequently, the explanation for the screening efficiency of the tion in the building vibration. The response of structural elements
heavy masses by the resonance phenomenon proposed by Krylov is more complicated and it is not treated in this study.
(2007) is not obvious.
The scattering effect can be attributed to the following: 2.3.2. Comparison with trench wave barriers
This section presents a comparison of the heavy mass method
– The relative motion between the block and the ground gener- with the well-known trench barrier method. A preliminary analy-
ates secondary waves which in turn superpose onto the ground sis is conducted in order to determine the optimal filling material
motion cancelling it if it is out of phase. of the trench barrier to be compared with the heavy mass.
– The heavy weight restricts the ground surface movements and The trench barrier is located at a distance D = 3 m from the load
prevents the propagation of the Rayleigh wave at the ground source. The impact load have the dominant frequency f = 45 Hz and
surface. a shear wave velocity Vs = 110 m/s; It corresponds to a wavelength

(a) 0.5 (b) 0.05

predicted predicted
0.4 0.04
recorded recorded
0.03
0.3
0.02
0.2
SPA (m/s2)
SPA (m/s2)

0.01
0.1
0
0
-0.01
-0.1 -0.02
-0.2 -0.03

-0.3 -0.04

-0.4 -0.05
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Time (s) Time (s)

Fig. 11. Time history of soil particles acceleration: (a) D = 3 m and (b) D = 10 m before the installation of heavy masses (prediction vs. records).
 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149 147

0.3 0.04
predicted predicted
0.03
0.2 recorded recorded
0.02
0.1
0.01

SPA (m/s 2 )
SPA (m/s 2)
0 0

-0.1 -0.01

-0.02
-0.2
-0.03
-0.3 -0.04

-0.4 -0.05
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Time (s) Time(s)

Fig. 12. Time history of soil particles acceleration: (a) D = 3 m and (b) D = 10 m after the installation of heavy masses (prediction vs. records).

1
k = 110/45 = 2.5 m. The depth of the trench is assumed equal to
0.8 1.5 m (0.6 k). The width of trench is equal to w = 0.3 m. Fig. 17
shows a schematic illustration of the wave barrier used in the
0.6
numerical modeling.
Ar

0.4 Analyses were conducted with filling materials of different stiff-

ness. The impedance ratio is used to characterize the filling
0.2 predicted material:
recorded
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 q2 V s2
IR ¼ ð5Þ
D (m) q1 V s1
Fig. 13. Predicted vs. recorded amplitude reduction ratio.
where q1 and q2 denote the mass density of the soil and the barrier,
respectively, Vs1 and Vs2 are the velocity of the shear waves in the
1.6 soil and the trench. El-Naggar and Chehab [13] showed that soft
2T
1.4 X 4T trench barriers are more effective than stiff ones. That’s why, only
1.2 6T soft barriers were considered. Fig. 18 shows the reduction factor ob-
8T
1 tained at the ground surface for three values of IR compared to an
open trench. Optimal results are obtained with (IR = 0.2), which in-
Ar

0.8
0.6 duces a reduction ratio of 70% which is comparable to that of an
0.4
open trench.
Fig. 19 shows the comparison between the efficiency of the iso-
0.2
lation using the heavy mass and the trench barriers. It can be seen
0
-3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 that heavy mass gives performances close to that of trench in the
X(m) reduction of ground vibrations (up to 70%). Therefore, the heavy
masses appear to be an efficient technology for the vibration
Fig. 14. Effect of the mass weight in reducing ground vibrations. reduction, with low expensive cost and ease in construction.

(a) 4.0E -03 (b) 4.00E -03

Free Field Free Field
3.5E -03 2T 3.50E -03 2T
3.0E -03 4T 4T
3.00E -03
Fourier amplitude

8T
Fourier amplitude

8T
2.5E -03 2.50E -03

2.0E -03 2.00E -03

1.5E -03 1.50E -03

1.0E -03 1.00E -03

5.0E -04 5.00E -04

0.0E+00 0.00E+00
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 15. Influence of the mass on the vibrations frequency at two distances from the centre of the mass: (a) X = 2 m; (b) X = 6 m.
148 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149

(a) 2.5E -03 (b) 8.0E -04

Free Field Free Field
2T 2T
2.0E -03 4T 4T
8T 6.0E -04

Fourier amplitude
8T

Fourier amplitude
1.5E -03

4.0E -04
1.0E -03

2.0E -04
5.0E -04

0.0E+00 0.0E+00
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 16. Influence of the mass on the vibrations frequency: (a) depth = 2 m; (b) depth = 4 m.

3. Conclusion

This paper included both experimental and numerical investi-

gation of the efficiency of heavy mass in reducing the traffic in-
duced ground vibrations. Numerical modeling is validated using
X field tests. Experimental records clearly show the positive role of
the heavy mass in reducing the ground vibrations. Numerical mod-
D= 3m eling shows that reduction factor of 70% could be reached. This
d=0.6λ=1.5m reduction is comparable to results obtained using the well-known
trench barrier method.
The solution of heavy mass is attractive by it low cost and ease
in construction. The numerical model can be used for analysis of
Fig. 17. Schematic illustration of the wave barrier. the traffic vibration reduction in the presence of superstructure
and soil stratification. Unfortunately, such a thorough parametric
investigation is beyond the limits of a single paper.

2
Open trench
1.8 X References
IR=0.2
1.6 IR=0.4
1.4 IR=0.6 [1] Mhanna M, Sadek M, Shahrour I. Numerical modeling of traffic-induced
1.2 ground vibration. J Comput Geotech 2012;39:116–23.
[2] Lombaert G, Degrand G. The experimental validation of a numerical model for
Ar

1
the prediction of the vibrations in the free field produced by road traffic. J
0.8
Sound Vib 2003;262:309–31.
0.6 [3] Lak MA, Degrande G, Lombaert G. The effect of road unevenness on the
0.4 dynamic vehicle response and ground-borne vibrations due to road traffic. J
0.2 Soil Dynam Earthq Eng 2011;31:1357–77.
0 [4] Lu JF, Xu B, Wang JH. Numerical analysis of isolation of the vibration due to
-3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 moving loads using pile rows. J Sound Vib 2009;319:940–62.
[5] Beskou ND, Theodorakopoulos DD. Dynamic effects of moving loads on road
X (m)
pavements: a review. J Soil Dynam Earthq Eng 2011;31(4):547–67.
[6] Woods RD. Screening of surface waves in soil. J Soil Mech Found Eng (ASCE)
Fig. 18. Influence of the impedance ratio (IR) on the vibration reduction (d = 1.5 m).
1968;94:951–79.
[7] Celebi E, Firat S, Beyhan G, Cankaya I, Vural I, Kirtel O. Field experiments on
wave propagation and vibration isolation by using wave barriers. J Soil Dynam
Earthq Eng 2009;29:824–33.
[8] Leung KL, Beskos DE, Vardoulakis IG. Vibration isolation by trenches in
continuously nonhomogeneous soil by the BEM. J Soil Dynam Earthq Eng
1991;10(3):172–9.
1 [9] Cao Z, Cai Y, Bostrom A, Zheng J. Semi-analytical analysis of the isolation to
0.9 Trench(IR=0.2)
moving-load induced ground vibrations by trenches on a poroelastic half-
0.8 Mass (6T)
X space. J Sound Vib 2012;331:947–61.
0.7 [10] Beskos DE, Dasgupta G, Vardoulakis IG. Vibration isolation using open or
0.6 filled trenches Part 1: 2-D homogeneous soil. Comput Mech 1986;1(1):
0.5 43–63.
Ar

0.4 [11] Ahmad S, Al-Hussaini TM, Fishman KL. Investigation on active isolation
0.3 of machine foundations by open trenches. J Geotech Eng 1996;122:
0.2 454–61.
[12] Adam M, Von Estorff O. Reduction of train-induced building vibrations by
0.1
using open and filled trenches. J Comput Struct 2005;83:11–24.
0 [13] El-Naggar M, Chehab A. Vibration barriers for shock-producing equipment.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Can Geotech J 2005;42:297–306.
X (m) [14] Massarsch KR. Ground vibration isolation using gas cushions. Proceedings of
the 2nd international conference on recent advances in geotechnical
Fig. 19. Comparison between heavy mass (6 T) and the trench barriers (IR = 0.2). earthquake engineering and soil, dynamics; March 1991. p. 1461–70.
 M. Mhanna et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 55 (2014) 141–149
[15] Murillo C, Thorel L, Caicedo B. Ground vibration isolation with
geofoam barriers: centrifuge modeling. J Geotext Geomem 2009;27:
423–34.
[16] Alzawi A, El-Naggar M. Full scale experimental study on vibration scattering
using open and in-filled (GeoFoam) wave barriers. J Soil Dynam Earthq Eng
2011;31:306–17.
[17] Alzawi A, El-Naggar M. Vibration scattering using GeoFoam material as
vibration wave barriers. Proceedings of 62nd Canadian geotechnical
conference, Halifax, NB, Canada; 2009. p. 997–1004.
[18] Jones DV, Petyt M. Ground borne vibrations from passing trains: the effect of
masses placed on the ground’s surface. ISVR Technical Memorandum,
University of Southampton, no. 671; 1986.
149
[19] Krylov VV. Control of traffic-induced ground vibrations by placing heavy
masses on the ground surface. J Low freq Noise, Vibration Active Control
2007;26(4):311–20.
[20] Lysmer J, Kuhlemeyer RL. Finite dynamic model for infinite media. J Eng Mech
Div ASCE 1969;95(4):859–77.
[21] Kuhlemeyer RL, Lysmer J. Finite element method accuracy for wave
propagation problems. J Soil Mech Found 1973;99(5):421–7.
[22] Apakashev RA, Pavlov VV. Determination of the shear strength and modulus of
water at low flow velocities. J Fluid Dynam 1997;32(1):1–4.
[23] Mylonakis G, Nikolaou S, Gazetas G. Footings under seismic loading: analysis
and design issues with emphasis on bridge foundations. J Soil Dynam Earthq
Eng 2006;26:824–53.