A comparison of two models for the vibration response of piled foundations to inertial and underground-railway-induced loadings

The vibration response of piled foundations due to ground-borne vibration produced by an underground railway is a largely-neglected area in the field of structural dynamics. However, this continues to be an important aspect of research as it is expected that the presence of piled foundations can have a significant influence on the propagation and transmission of the wavefield produced by the underground railway. This paper presents a comparison of two methods that can be employed in calculating the vibration response of a piled foundation: an efficient semi-analytical model, and a Boundary Element model. The semi-analytical model uses a column or an Euler beam to model the pile, and the soil is modelled as a linear, elastic continuum that has the geometry of a thick-walled cylinder with an infinite outer radius and an inner radius equal to the radius of the pile. The boundary element model uses a constant-element BEM formulation for the halfspace, and a rectangular discretisation of the circular pile-soil interface. The piles are modelled as Timoshenko beams. Pile-soil-pile interactions are inherently accounted for in the BEM equations, whereas in the semi-analytical model these are quantified using the superposition of interaction factors. Both models use the method of joining subsystems to incorporate the incident wavefield generated by the underground railway into the pile model. Results are computed for a single pile subject to an inertial loading, pile-soil-pile interactions, and a pile group subjected to excitation from an underground railway. The two models are compared in terms of accuracy, computation time, versatility and applicability, and guidelines for future vibration prediction models involving piled foundations are proposed.

Enterprise resource planning: Analysing the impact

Describes a study that set out to evaluate the performance impact of a SAP R3 implementation. The SAP system was implemented by a major multinational business in four of its European plants. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected over a two-year period, through surveys and interviews with systems users and by accessing company records. While users were able to identify the operational benefits of SAP, they were still doubtful at the end of the evaluation process whether the system had resulted in any significant positive financial benefits for the business. Two themes related to this observation are explored. First the time lag between operational improvements and subsequent financial impact. Second the importance of learning as a means of reducing the time lag. Learning in this context is a multi-dimensional concept and covers learning how to use the system, learning how to improve the system and learning how to improve the implementation process.