Wall Material Stiffness Shapes Building Response to Mining Tremors

The influence of the stiffness of load-bearing wall materials on the dynamic response of low-rise buildings exposed to mining-induced ground vibrations has been investigated in a recent study. The work, published in Materials, provides practical insights that could support material selection and structural design for buildings in mining-affected regions.

Colorado
Study: Influence of Construction Material Type on the Dynamic Response of Low-Rise Buildings. Image Credit: Zane Lewsi/Shutterstock.com

The researchers compared seven commonly used wall materials to evaluate their effects on structural displacement and acceleration. The findings show that wall stiffness plays a critical role in vibration response, with stiffer materials generally reducing dynamic effects.

Why Wall Materials Matter in Mining-Affected Buildings

Mining-induced tremors present a distinct challenge for buildings located near active underground operations. Unlike tectonic earthquakes, these events are often localized, repetitive, and characterized by different frequencies, durations, and energy levels. Even relatively low-magnitude tremors can affect building serviceability and contribute to long-term structural deterioration.

Low-rise buildings account for a large proportion of the built environment in many mining regions, yet most previous studies have focused on their behavior during natural earthquakes. As a result, conventional seismic assessment methods may not fully capture how these structures respond to mine-generated ground vibrations.

Download a free PDF copy of this news story for later!

The mechanical properties of load-bearing wall materials further influence structural behavior. Wall stiffness and density affect how vibration energy travels through a building, altering both displacement and acceleration responses.

To address this, the researchers analyzed a representative two-story building subjected to recorded mining tremors. They compared seven load-bearing wall materials and evaluated their effects on structural displacement, acceleration, and vibration frequencies while also investigating how different assessment locations influenced the predicted response.

Modeling Seven Building Material Configurations

The study examined a representative two-story office building typical of low-rise construction in mining regions. The structure incorporated concrete strip foundations, reinforced-concrete floor slabs, and a mixed transverse-longitudinal load-bearing wall system.

To study the influence of wall stiffness, the researchers maintained the same building geometry throughout the analysis and changed only the wall material.

The comparison included seven commonly used construction materials: standard reinforced concrete; oil palm shell lightweight reinforced concrete; cellular concrete; conventional brick; and three sand-lime brick variants. Their elastic moduli ranged from 1.80 GPa for cellular concrete to 31.0 GPa for standard reinforced concrete, allowing the researchers to evaluate structural behavior across a broad stiffness range.

The team developed a detailed three-dimensional finite element model in ANSYS Mechanical that represented walls, slabs, foundations, stairs, roof elements, and structural ties. Spring-damper elements simulated soil flexibility and energy dissipation, while previous field measurements from the actual brick building validated the numerical model.

To simulate realistic operating conditions, the researchers applied three mining tremors recorded in Poland's Upper Silesian Coalfield as horizontal ground-motion inputs. They then evaluated displacement and acceleration histories, peak responses, resultant vibrations, and Fourier spectra at six locations on the second floor for every material and tremor combination.

Cellular Concrete Produced the Largest Dynamic Response

The simulations revealed a strong relationship between wall stiffness and structural behavior. Cellular concrete consistently generated the largest displacements and accelerations, whereas reinforced concrete and several sand-lime brick configurations produced comparatively lower responses.

Under the strongest tremor, RB1, cellular concrete increased average displacement by approximately 20% in the transverse direction and 63% in the longitudinal direction compared to standard reinforced concrete. Even under the weakest tremor, RB3, longitudinal displacement remained about 75% higher, indicating that wall stiffness strongly influenced structural response regardless of excitation intensity.

During RB1, cellular concrete produced peak accelerations of up to 2.432 m/s2 in the transverse direction and 3.165 m/s2 in the longitudinal direction. Across all six measurement locations, average accelerations exceeded those of reinforced concrete by roughly 30% in both directions, while transverse acceleration under RB2 increased by as much as 41%.

Although the strongest tremor generated the greatest overall response, vibration intensity alone did not determine structural behavior. The frequency content of the ground motion and its interaction with the building's natural dynamic characteristics also influenced the results, with dominant response frequencies generally remaining between 4.5 and 6.0 Hz.

The study also showed that the choice of assessment location can substantially affect predicted vibration levels. Displacements varied considerably among the six second-floor evaluation points, with some longitudinal values less than half those at more responsive locations.

Displacement contour maps further illustrated this spatial variability, showing that different regions of the load-bearing walls experienced markedly different vibration levels during the same mining event. These findings suggest that selecting arbitrary monitoring or numerical evaluation points could underestimate structural demand.

Implications for Vibration-Resistant Building Design

The study demonstrates that load-bearing wall material plays an important role in determining how low-rise buildings respond to mining-induced ground vibrations. Wall stiffness influences both the magnitude of structural motion and the way buildings interact with the frequency content of ground motion.

These results highlight the importance of considering material properties alongside structural configuration and site conditions when designing buildings in mining regions. The study also identifies assessment location as an important consideration during structural evaluation.

The authors note that the numerical model assumed linear-elastic material behavior and did not account for cracking or plastic deformation. Incorporating nonlinear material behavior and repeated cyclic loading would provide a more realistic representation of long-term structural performance under continued mining activity.

Overall, the study demonstrates how validated numerical modeling combined with real mining tremor records can guide material selection, structural assessment, and vibration mitigation strategies. These insights provide a practical framework that could be used to help improve the resilience of low-rise buildings constructed in mining-affected regions.

Journal Reference

Zajac, M., Kuzniar, K., Tatara, T. (2026). Influence of Construction Material Type on the Dynamic Response of Low-Rise Buildings. Materials. 19. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/19/14/3125.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.

Akshatha Chandrashekar

Written by

Akshatha Chandrashekar

Dr. Akshatha Chandrashekar is a scientific writer and materials science researcher based in Bengaluru, India. She completed her PhD in Chemistry in 2025 at Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences, and has a BSc from Mount Carmel College and an MSc in Analytical Chemistry. Akshatha’s doctoral research focused on multifunctional, thermally conductive silicone–carbon hybrid nanocomposites for advanced electronic applications. Her expertise spans nanocomposites, polymers, wastewater management, and thermal management systems. As a Junior and Senior Research Fellow on a DRDO-funded project, she helped develop elastomeric composites for wearable cooling garments, improving material performance and supporting successful technology transfer for defense applications. Akshatha has authored peer-reviewed journal articles, contributed to book chapters, and presented at national and international conferences. Her achievements include the Best Poster Award at APA Nanoforum 2022, the Best Student Paper Award at the 13th National Women Science Congress in 2021, and the Best Dissertation Award for her Master’s research. She was also a finalist in the “Spin Your Science” contest at the India Science Festival 2024, with her work archived in the Lunar Codex Project.

Citations

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

  • APA

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. (2026, July 31). Wall Material Stiffness Shapes Building Response to Mining Tremors. AZoBuild. Retrieved on July 31, 2026 from https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24121.

  • MLA

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. "Wall Material Stiffness Shapes Building Response to Mining Tremors". AZoBuild. 31 July 2026. <https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24121>.

  • Chicago

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. "Wall Material Stiffness Shapes Building Response to Mining Tremors". AZoBuild. https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24121. (accessed July 31, 2026).

  • Harvard

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. 2026. Wall Material Stiffness Shapes Building Response to Mining Tremors. AZoBuild, viewed 31 July 2026, https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24121.

Tell Us What You Think

Do you have a review, update or anything you would like to add to this news story?

Leave your feedback
Your comment type
Submit

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.