Reply to “Comment on ‘Domain Reduction Method for Three-Dimensional Earthquake Modeling i.pdfVIP

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 95, No. 2, pp. 770–773, April 2005, doi: 10.1785/0120040106 Reply to “Comment on ‘Domain Reduction Method for Three-Dimensional Earthquake Modeling in Localized Regions, Part I: Theory,’ by J. Bielak, K. Loukakis, Y. Hisada, and C. Yoshimura, and ‘Part II: Verification and Applications,’ by C. Yoshimura, J. Bielak, Y. Hisada, and A. Ferna´ndez,” by E. Faccioli, M. Vanini, R. Paolucci, and M. Stupazzini by Jacobo Bielak We thank Faccioli, Vanini, Paolucci, and Stupazzini for having in mind 2D problems in an elastic halfspace, derived their interest in our articles (Bielak et al., 2003; Yoshimura an expression for an effective force applied at the interface et al., 2003; hereafter I and II). We will refer to their com- between the soil and the structure, which incorporated cor- ments (Faccioli et al., 2004) as FVPS. The primary aim of rectly the effect of the seismic excitation. Illustrative 2D FVPS is (1) to illustrate the implementation by FVPS of the examples of this methodology were later presented in Cre- domain reduction method (DRM) described in I and II for monini et al. (1988). To evaluate the effective force using the hybrid finite-element–spectral-element (FE–SE) method, this formulation, however, it is necessary to determine the and (2) to show that the use of SEs can lead to dramatic distribution of the free-field tractions on the interface be- reduction in computer processing unit (CPU) time and stor- tween the soil and the structure, in addition to the displace- age requirements, without loss of accuracy, with respect to ments (velocities and accelerations). Loukakis