Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
DOI 10.1007/s11012-015-0167-3
New findings in the rocking instability of one and two rigid
block systems under ground motion
Anthony N. Kounadis
Received: 14 January 2015 / Accepted: 23 March 2015 / Published online: 18 April 2015
Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015
Abstract The rocking (overturning) instability of
one and two rigid—block assemblies underground
motion of sinus and cosinus pulses is reconsidered.
The Housner effect according to which between two
geometrically similar (rectangular) rigid blocks, the
taller is more stable (than the lower one) is extended to
the case where between two rigid blocks having the
same width, the taller is generally more stable. It was
also found that overturning for one rigid block (1-
DOF) system without or after one impact occurs
through an unstable equilibrium (saddle) point via an
escaped motion (inflection point in the curve relating
the unknown rotation to the time). Such a critical state
happens always during a free motion regime regard-
less of whether impact occurs before or after the
external excitation expires. The condition of over-
turning after one impact (occurring after the external
excitation expires) was established through one
elegant equation which relates directly the minimum
amplitude ground excitation to the external frequency.
For a two-rigid block (2-DOF) system overturning
without or after impact (associated with a minimum
amplitude ground excitation) occurs in the upper rigid
block according to the aforementioned inflection point
criterion. All linearized results were also verified via
A. N. Kounadis (&)
Office of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, The
Academy of Athens, Soranou Efessiou 4, 115-27 Athens,
Greece
e-mail: kounadis@bioacademy.gr
non-linear numerical analysis, properly adjusted to
include the rotational friction of the block pivot axis at
the rocking initiation.
Keywords Rocking  One/two blocks  Instability
criteria  Block width  Energy loss  Impact 
Rotational friction  Overturning patterns
1 Introduction
In the last decades an increasing research interest was
focused on the highly complex rocking response under
ground motion of free-standing large statues supported
by multispondyle columns. The motivation of this
research lies in the fact that due to such a challenging
structural system many ancient multispondyle col-
umns carrying atop free standing statues or epistyles
have survived although suffered from strong earth-
quakes in the past. An interesting example was the
ancient multispondyle columns at the Zeus Temple at
Nemea [1] which have been standing since their
construction (330 B.C.)
As was shown an exact analysis of this multi-
spondyle column-statue structural system is extremely
difficult—unless impossible—to be established [2].
This is mainly due to the large number of differential
equations of motion in connection with the impossi-
bility to determine the exact amount of the energy
loss between spondyles varying also along the column
height.
123
2220
The above insuperable computational difficulties
have turned the research interest towards ap-
proximate dynamic analyses for determining such
complex rocking response of the free-standing statues
atop multispondyle columns. To this end a lot of
attempts have been made the last 50 years to ap-
proximate this highly complex problem of multi-
spondyle column—statue system by using 1-DOF,
2-DOF, 3-DOF models [3, 4] without, however,
obtaining reliable results.
Very recently a viscoelastic monolithic cantilever
with loss of energy (obtained experimentally) equiva-
lent to that of a multispondyle cantilever carrying atop
a free-standing statue, was proposed [2, 5]. Such an
analysis is considered as the best approximate but
quite reliable solution which can be achieved for the
above highly complex rocking instability problem.
The rocking stability of the free-standing statue atop
the cantilever is established as 1-DOF system with
time-dependent initial conditions related to the corre-
sponding conditions at the tip of the cantilever.
In spite of the large number of studies [6–11] for the
rocking response of single DOF rigid blocks freely
supported by the ground, non of these studies includes
the (rotational) friction effect of the pivot axes
(passing through the block corner points) during
rotation. This effect is smaller than the loss of energy
due to the plastic impact effect either between the
blocks or the lower block and the ground. There are
also other rocking instability phenomena for 1-DOF
and 2-DOF [12, 13] systems, the Housner’s finding
(1963) and other phenomena which need further
investigation. Interesting analyses on the dynamic
response of rigid blocks of 1-DOF, 2-DOF and 3-DOF
Fig. 1 Two rigid blocks of
the same width 2b but
different heights (2h1 and
2h0 respectively) under
ground motion
θ
2h1
Direcon of moon
123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
assemblies including the effect of slipping-uplifting
and slipping-bouncing have been reported in [14] and
Andreaus and Casini [15, 16]. One should also
mention the studies on lower and upper bounds for
overturning of rocking blocks under horizontal har-
monic ground excitation [17], on the rocking block
response under an idealized full-cycle rectangular
pulse [18] and on the rocking response of rigid blocks
including the effect of sliding [19, 20].
In the subsequent Sects. 2, 3 and 4 new findings for
1-DOF and 2-DOF systems related to rocking instability
phenomena are comprehensively presented. This is the
main objective of this work together with the presen-
tation of comparative analyses of existing relative
studies. Finally, it is worth noticing that these findings
are in good agreement with existing experimental data
for single DOF [21] and multi DOF systems [22].
2 One-DOF system findings
Consider the two rectangular rigid blocks of Fig. 1
having the same width 2b but different heights 2h1 and
2h0, respectively, whose ratio g = h1/h0 is greater tha
one; i.e. g = h1/h0 = tana0/tana1 [ 1, where a0 and
a1 are the angles between the sides and semi-diagonals
of the shorter and taller block, respectively. Both
blocks are acted upon by the same horizontal ground
motion, usually under the form of ground acceleration
u€ðtÞ. In as much as a1 \ a0 rocking will be initiated
from the taller block, according to the condition of
rocking initiation
u€g ð0Þ  g tan a1 ð1Þ
2b
2R1 2b
m1 C1
2R0
m1g m0 C
α1 0
θ
2h0 α0 m0g
O΄ O΄
θ θ
O O
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
obtained through static equilibrium excluding slipping
[9, 10].
At a later very short time the rocking initiation of
the shorter block will follow, although in both blocks
initiation of ground excitation occurs at the same time
t = 0. Clearly, such a difference in time regarding the
rocking initiation between the two blocks is extremely
small compared to the duration of time needed for
overturning of either one of blocks.
The question which now arises is which between
these two blocks will overturn firstly; the taller or the
shorter one? With the aid of Fig. 1 one can write
m1 2b  2h1  q h1
¼ ¼ ¼ g [ 1;
m0 2b  2h0  q h0 ð2Þ
R1 sin a0
¼ ð a0 [ a1 Þ
R0 sin a1
where m1, R1 and m0,R0 are the masses and semi-
diagonals of the taller and shorter block, respectively,
whereas q is the material density of both blocks.
The restoring bending moments M1 and M0
(associated with the block weights m1g and m0g)
resisting to the rocking initiation of the taller and
shorter block respectively are, M1 = m1gR1sina1,
M0 = m0gR0sina0 or due to relation (2)
M1 m1 R1 sin a1
¼ ¼ g[1 ð3Þ
M0 m0 R0 sin a0
If tin is the very small time in the rocking initiation
between the two blocks and tov the duration of time for
overturning (of either of the blocks), then tin  tov.
This implies a slight reduction in the ratio M1/M0 = g
up to the instant of the rocking initiation of the shorter
block which follows that of the taller block (i.e. g
becomes slightly less than unity).
At the rocking initiation in both blocks there is a
hysteresis of inertia forces due to the delay of
propagation of the wave excitation stemming from
the ground and heading along the blocks towards their
center of masses C1 and C0. There follows a gradual
increase in the action of the inertia forces up to
overturning when eventually reaching their critical
values (related to overturning).
In case of the shorter block the critical state is
attained prior to that of the taller block. Namely, if the
ground excitation reaches the center C0 of the shorter
block at time t0 and of the taller block C1 at time t1,
then
2221
t0 ¼ t1 =gðg [ 1Þ ð4Þ
This shows that the ground excitation wave reaches
first the center of the shorter block C0 which therefore
will also first overturn. The fact that the restoring
bending moment of the taller block M1 becomes
slightly smaller than that of the shorter block M0 (at its
rocking initiation which almost simultaneously fol-
lows that of the taller block, tin  tov) has a very small
effect counteracted in view of relation (4).
Hence, between two rigid rectangular blocks of
the same width, the taller block is more stable than
the shorter one (related to a smaller amplitude of
ground acceleration than that of the taller block).-
Certainly extreme situations as e.g. cases with very
short period of excitation (shocks) must be excluded.
In this case (shocks) the resisting forces (including
inertia) do not have enough time to react and the
taller block becomes less stable than the shorter one
(when overturning occurs without impact). This is
also true for very small xg corresponding to ‘‘static’’
excitation.
The proof of this finding is an extention of the proof
of Housner’s effect [2], valid for two geometrically
similar (but with different heights) blocks to two
blocks with the same width (and different heights).
Clearly, the requirement of having the same width
both blocks, the tall and the short one, is weaker than
that of the geometric similarity of the two blocks
implying greater stability against overturning.
The above finding that between two rectangular
rigid blocks of the same width, the taller is more stable
than the shorter (being an extension of Housner’s
effect) can be readily perceived on the basis of existing
results. For instance consider an one sine wave
(ground horizontal) acceleration
u€g ðtÞ ¼ ag sinðxg t þ wÞ; w=xg  t  ð2p  wÞ=xg
otherwise u€g ðt) ¼ 0 ð5Þ
where ag is the amplitude, xg the external circular
frequency, w the phase angle, while the period of
acceleration T = (2p - w)/xg [10, 11].
The rocking response up to overturning of any
rectangular rigid block can be established through the
relationship providing the minimum amplitude ground
acceleration, ag/gtana = 1/sinw, as function of xg/p,
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
where p = 3g=4R is a dynamic characteristic of the
block [9–11]. Clearly, the relationship 1/sinw versus
123
2222 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

xg/p (providing the minimum amplitude ground
acceleration leading to overturning) corresponds to
an increasing curve. This is so, since as xg/p increases
the period of acceleration Tex diminishes and the
dynamic character of excitation becomes more pro-
nounced. Apparently the external excitation (due to its
shorter period of action) has not enough time to
overcome the resisting forces of the block which
implies a greater excitation magnitude for overturning.
Considering the relationships of the shorter and taller
blocks, 1/sinw0 versus xg/p0 and 1/sinw1 versus xg/p1
respectively, one can write with the aid of relation (2)
rffiffiffiffiffiffi rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
xg xg R1 xg sin a0 xg
¼ ¼ [ tion or before the ground acceleration expires (i.e.
p1 p0 R0 p0 sin a1 p0 ð6Þ
ðsin a0 [ sin a1 Þ
rocking (overturning) instability which at a certain time
t* leads through an unstable critical point to an escaped
motion [continuously increasing h(t)]. Such an unstable
critical state is an inflection point of the curve h(t)
versus t satisfying the instability criteria [2, 5].
_  Þ ¼ hðt
€ Þ ¼ 0
hðt Þ ¼ a; hðt ð9Þ
For a slightly smaller amplitude (than that corre-
sponding to the minimum one) the angle of rotation
h(t) reverses direction (forcing the block to return to its
initial stable position. Instability criteria (9) hold for
both modes of overturning (i.e. with or without
impact) either after the expiration of ground excita-
during the negative part of the sinus pulse).

Since xg/p1 [ xg/p0 the curve 1/sinw1 versus xg/p1 of 2.2 Equation of motion
the taller block is above that (1/sinw0 vs xg/p0) of the
shorter block which shows that the taller block is more The differential equation of the rocking motion of the
stable than the shorter one (which will overturn first). rigid block (Fig. 2) can be derived using the station-
The same result is obtained from the condition ary-value principle of Hamilton via the variational
equation
1 ag ag  g g
¼ ¼ ¼ ð g [ 1Þ ð7Þ Zt2 Zt2
sin w1 gtana1 gtana0 sin w0
d Ldt ¼ dLdt ¼ 0 ð10Þ
That is for g [ 1
t1 t1
1 g 1 where L = K-X Is the Lagrangian functional, while K
¼ [ ð8Þ
sin w1 sin w0 sin w0 and X are the kinetic energy and potential energy of
which shows that the curve 1/sinw1 versus xg/p1 of the external (gravity) force, respectively.
taller block is above the curve 1/sinw0 versus xg/p0 of For the rigid block with dimensions 2h 9 2b, mass
the shorter block (being less stable than the taller m, semi-diagonal R and angle a (Fig. 2a) one can
block). write for h = h(t) \ 0
The above findings hold regardless of whether )
1 2 1
overturning occurs after or without impact. K ¼ h_ þ u_ 2 þ mRu_ hcosða
_ þ hÞ ð11Þ
2 2
In summary from the above qualitative analysis two X ¼ mgR½cosða þ hÞ  cosa

important conclusions can be drawn: (a) The smaller

where the dot denotes differentiation with respect to t;
the period of external excitation, the greater the
h = h(t) is the unknown angle of rotation and u_ ¼ uðtÞ
_
magnitude of the minimum amplitude ground accel-
is the velocity related to the external ground accel-
eration required for overturning, (b) between two
eration given by
rectangular rigid blocks having the same width the
taller is more stable than the shorter one (which w 2p  w
u€ðtÞ ¼ ag sinðxg t þ wÞ; t ;
overturns at a smaller minimum amplitude ground xg xg ð12Þ
acceleration than that of the taller block). otherwise u€ðtÞ ¼ 0

2.1 Criteria for rocking instability
For a given external horizontal ground acceleration
attention is focused on its minimum amplitude to
where ag is the amplitude, xg = 2p/T is the circular
frequence and w the (initial) phase angle.
Accordingly due to relations (11) and (12) L ¼
_ and hence
Lðt; h; hÞ

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2223

Fig. 2 a Rigid-body block

displacement uc(t) of its
center C under ground
excitation ug(t) with
negative rotation h(t) \ 0.
b Rigid-body block
displacement uc(t) of its
center C under ground
excitation ug(t) with positive
rotation h(t) [ 0

oL oL _ € þ t€ðsÞ cos½a þ hðsÞ

 sin½a þ hðsÞ
¼ 0
hðsÞ
dL ¼ dh þ dh ð13Þ ð18Þ
oh oh_ ½hðsÞ\0

After introducing relation (13) into Eq. (10) and This is the Euler–Lagrange differential equation of
integrating by parts one gets motion for determining the curve h = h(t). Given that
  d2L = J0 [ 0 (Legendre condition) the curve h(t)
d oL oL
 ¼ 0 satisfies (in addition to the Euler–Lagrange equation)
dt oh_ oh
the necessary condition for the minimum of the
or due to L = K - X Rt2
_
functional Lðt; h; hÞdt.
  t1
d oK oK oX
 þ ¼ 0 ð14Þ For the case of Fig. 2b the corresponding equation
dt oh_ oh oh
of motion is written as follows
By virtue of relation (11) the last equation gives [2, 10]
€ þ t€ðsÞ cos½a  hðsÞ
þ sin½a  hðsÞ
¼ 0
hðsÞ
J0 h€ þ mR€
u cosða þ hÞ  mgR sinða þ hÞ ¼ 0 ð15Þ ½hðsÞ [ 0

ð19Þ

The corresponding initial conditions (t = 0) are Subsequently, closed form solutions for overturn-
hð0Þ ¼ h0 ; _
hð0Þ ¼ h_ 0 ð16Þ ing (rocking) instability with h(s) \ 0 (Fig. 2a) and
h(s) [ 0 (Fig. 2b) without impact (Mode1) and after
After introducing one impact (Mode 2) under one sine-wave pulse and
4 u€  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi one cosine-wave pulse are discussed in detail includ-
J0 ¼ mR2 ; t€ ¼ ; s ¼ pt p ¼ 3g=4R ð17Þ ing the two cases in Mode 2 regarding the impact time
3 g
si : Case 1 for si \ sex and Case 2 for si [ sex, where
Equation (15) becomes sex is the one wave excitation period.

123
2224 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

2.3 Mode 1: Sine pulse (no impact) whose the first integral is:
1 _2
For slender blocks with a \ 0.25 rad Eqs. (18) and h ðsÞ þ cos½a þ hðsÞ
þ C ¼ 0 ð26Þ
2
(19) can be linearized. In this case Eq. (18) becomes
At the instant s = s* of escaped motion due to
€  hðsÞ ¼ a  t€ðsÞ
hðsÞ ½hðsÞ\0
ð20Þ _  Þ ¼ 0; one gets
conditions (9), hðs Þ ¼ a&hðs
C = -1 and therefore Eq. (26) becomes
whose the general (complementary and particular)
solution is given by 1 _2
h ðsÞ þ cos½a þ hðsÞ
 1 ¼ 0 ð27Þ
2
hðsÞ ¼ h_ 0 sinh s þ ðh0 þ aÞ cosh s
Zs which for s ¼ sex ¼ ð2p  wÞ=x
g yields
 sinhðs  s0 Þ€ tðs0 Þds0  a ð21Þ
1 _2 ½a þ hðsex Þ

0 h ðsex Þ ¼ 1  cos½a þ hðsÞ

¼ 2 sin2
 2 2
where t€ðsÞ ¼ ag sinðxg s þ wÞ with ag ¼ ag g and ½a þ hðsex Þ
2
 ffi
 g ¼ xg p:
x 2
The above integral after integration by parts gives or
Zs _ ex Þ ffi ½a þ hðsex Þ

hðs ð28Þ
ag sinhðs  s0 Þ  sinðx
g s0 þ wÞds0
0 Since the curve f(s) = a ? h(s) [ 0 up to rocking
ag instability is clearly a continuously decreasing func-
¼ ½x
 g cos w sinh s  sinðx
g s þ wÞ
1þx  2g _ is (in this internal of time)
tion of s, its derivative fðsÞ
þ sin w cosh s
ð22Þ _
non positive, fðsÞ  0 and hence
and thus Eq. (21) yields _ ex Þ ¼  ½a þ hðsex Þ

hðs ð29Þ
ag
hðsÞ ¼ C1 sinh s þ C2 cosh s þ  g s þ wÞ
sinðx By virtue of Eqs. (23) and (24) evaluated at s = sex
1þx 2g relation (29) leads to
 a; ag
hðsÞ\0 ðC1 þ C2 Þðsinh sex þ cosh sex Þ þ g ¼ 0
x
1þx 2g
ð23Þ
ð30Þ
and
Equation (30) after introducing the expressions of C1
_ ag x
g and C2 and ag ¼ a=sin w yields
hðsÞ ¼ C1 cosh s þ C2 sinh s þ g s þ wÞ;
cosðx   
1þx 2g 1 1
hðsÞ\0 cos w  x  g þ ðh_ 0 þ h0 Þ xg þ sin w
a g
x
ð31Þ
ð24Þ ¼ esex ;
ðhðsÞ\0Þ
where
which was also reported in [2] using a more compli-
ag
C1 ¼ h_ 0  xg cos w; cated procedure. Equation (31) gives the minimum
1þx 2g 
amplitude ground acceleration, ag a ¼ 1= sin w
ag
C 2 ¼ h0 þ a  sin w versus xg , which leads to rocking (overturning)
1þx 2g instability.
 For h(s) [ 0, following the above procedure,
Equations (23) and (24) hold for w x g  s 
 Eq. (19) after linearization gives
ð2p  wÞ x  g ; while Eq. (18) valid for s  ð2p 
wÞ=xg (free vibrations) due to relation (12) becomes €  hðsÞ ¼ a  t€ðsÞ
hðsÞ ð32Þ
€  sin½a þ hðsÞ
¼ 0
hðsÞ ð25Þ which yields

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2225

  
1 sinh s þ C
2 cosh s þ ag 2 1 1
hðsÞ ¼ C  g s þ wÞ
sinðx cos w þ  g  ðh_ 0 þ hÞ x
þx g þ sin w
1þx 2g g
x a g
x
þa ¼ esex ; ðhðsÞ [ 0Þ ð8Þ
ð33Þ

2.4 Mode 2 (one impact)

_
hðsÞ ¼C 2 sinh s þ ag x
1 cosh s þ C g
g s þ wÞ
cosðx
1þx 2g
Two cases are examined depending on whether
ð34Þ
impact occurs before (case 1: si \ sex) or after the
where excitation expires (case 2: si [ sex). As shown below
in both cases the rocking instability criteria (9) related
1 ¼ h_ 0  ag x
C
g
cos w; to free vibration regime are also valid since even in
1þx 2g
case si \ sex the escaped motion will occur via
2 ¼ h0  a  ag sin w
C h(s*) = a at s* [ sex; hence condition (37) is also
1þx  2g
valid.
 
The above Eqs. (32, 33, 34) hold w x g  s  ð2p  Case 1: si \ sex For si  s  sex ¼ ð2p  wÞ x  g the

wÞxg while for s [ ð2p  wÞ x g Equation (19), after block after impact at s = si is rotating with h(s) [ 0.
setting t€ðsÞ ¼ 0 and integration, leads to For 0 B s B si Eq. (23) and (24) at s = si give
1 _2
h ðsÞ þ cos½a  hðsÞ
 1 ¼ 0 ð35Þ hðsi Þ ¼ 0 ¼ C1 sinh si þ C2 cosh si
2
ag ð39Þ
or þ g si þ wÞ  a
sinðx
1þx 2g
1 _2 ½a  hðsÞ

h ðsÞ ¼ 1  cos½a  hðsÞ

¼ 2 sin2 _ i Þ ¼ h_ before ðsi Þ ¼ C1 cosh si þ C2 sinh si
2 2 hðs
½a  hðsÞ
2 ag x
g ð40Þ
’ þ g si þ wÞ
cosðx
2 1þx 2g
and
where C1 and C2 are given in relation (24).
_
hðsÞ ffi ½a  hðsÞ
ð36Þ Equation (39), after setting ag ¼ a= sin w and in-
troducing the expressions of C1 and C2, yields
Since the curve g(s) = a - h(s) [ 0 up to rocking
! !
instability is a continuously decreasing function of s, g 2g
ax
_
its derivative gðsÞ is (in this interval of time) non _h0  ax cot w sinh si þ h0 þ cosh si
1þx  2g 1þx 2g
_
positive, gðsÞ B 0, and hence
a ðx
g si þ wÞ
_ ex Þ ffi þ½a  hðsex Þ

hðs ð37Þ þ 2
sin a¼0
1 þ xg
 sin w
Using Eqs. (33) and (34) evaluated at s = sex, relation
(37) given that ag ¼ a= sin w yields [2] or

 g si  x
sin x g sinh si
tan w ¼   h   h_ ð41Þ
0 0
2g  cos x
1þx  2g þ 1 þ x
 g si  x 2g 2g
cosh si  1 þ x sinh si
a a

123
2226 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

A second equation in w and si is established via the which at s = s*, according to the instability criterion
relationship (9), lead to
after
h_ ðsi Þ ¼ eh_ before ðsi Þ ð42Þ _ ex Þ sinhðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ  a

hðs Þ ¼ a ¼ hðs
before  coshðs  sex Þ þ a ð47a)
where h_ ðsi Þ is taken from relation (40), e is the
after
coefficient of restitution and h_ ðsi Þis obtained as _  Þ ¼ 0 ¼ hðs
hðs _ ex Þ coshðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ  a

follows. For si B s B sex the block is rotating with

 sinhðs  sex Þ ð47b)
hðsÞ [ 0, and hence
After adding the above equations, one gets
hðsÞ ¼ C3 sinhðs  si Þ þ C4 coshðs  si Þ h i
ag _ ex Þ þ hðsex Þ  a es sex ¼ 0
þ g s þ wÞ þ a
sinðx ð43aÞ hðs
1þx 2g

which (since es sex 6¼ 0) yields the instability condi-
_
hðsÞ ¼ C3 coshðs  si Þ þ C4 sinhðs  si Þ tion (37), and then via Eq (45a, 45b) one obtains
ag
þ g s þ wÞ
 g cosðx
x ð43bÞ ag x
g
1þx 2g ðC3 þ C4 Þesex si ¼  ð48Þ
1þx 2g
which at s ¼ si hðsi Þ ¼ 0 and thus
give
9 Note also that Eqs. (47a, 47b) due to condition (37)
ag > yield tanh(s* - sex) = 1.
C4 ¼ a  sinð 
x s
g i þ wÞ; >
=
1þx 2 g By means of relations (44) and (45a, 45b), after
ag x
g ð44Þ
g si þ wÞ >
after setting ag ¼ a= sin w, Eq. (48) gives
C3 ¼ h_ ðsi Þ  cosðx >
;
1þx 2g
e before
2g Þ½1  h_
ð1 þ x ðsi Þ
sin w þ x  g si þ wÞ
g cosðx
after a
where h_ ðsi Þ is given by relation (42).Equa-
þ sinðx g si þ wÞ ¼ x g esex þsi ð49Þ
tions (43a, 43b) at s ¼ sex yield
before
where h_ ðsi Þ is given in relation (40).
hðsex Þ ¼ C3 sinhðsex  si Þ þ C4 coshðsex  si Þ þ a
The minimum amplitude ag/ga = 1/ sin w can be
ð45aÞ obtained by solving Eqs. (41) and (49) with respect to
w and si.
_ ex Þ ¼ C3 coshðsex  si Þ þ C4 sinhðsex  si Þ
hðs
ag x
g Case 2: si [ sex For si  s  sex ¼ ð2p  wÞ=xg
þ ð45b) (valid for h(s) \ 0) one can write the following
1þx  2g
equations
It is worth noticing that an escaped motion (inflection
_ ex Þ sinhðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ þ a

hðsÞ ¼ hðs
point in the curve h(s) vs s) is not possible to occur as ð50Þ
long as the excitation is still acting (i.e. during the  coshðs  sex Þ  a
interval of time si \ s \ sex valid for small to moderate
before
values of xg ). Hence, in this case (where si \ sex) an h_ _ ex Þ coshðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ þ a

ðsÞ ¼ hðs
escaped motion may happen at a certain time s* C sex  sinhðs  sex Þ ð51Þ
(with h(s) [ 0); namely after the excitation expires
(free motion regime). Then the corresponding equa- _ ex Þ and h(sex)are evaluated from Eqs. (23)
where hðs
tions of free motion (for sex B s B s*) are given by and (24) at s ¼ sex , after setting x  g ¼ a= sin w, as
_ ex Þ sinhðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ  a
follows
hðsÞ ¼ hðs !
ð46aÞ axg cot w
 coshðs  sex Þ þ a _
hðsex Þ ¼ h0  sinh sex
1þx 2g
!
_ ¼ hðs
hðsÞ _ ex Þ coshðs  sex Þ þ ½hðsex Þ  a
sinhðs  sex Þ ax2g
þ h0 þ cosh sex  a ð52Þ
ð46bÞ 1þx  2g

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2227

! after before
_ ex Þ ¼ h_ 0  a 
x g cot w h_ ðsi Þ ¼ eh_ ðsi Þ ¼ a ð60Þ
hðs cosh sex
1þx 2g
! Equation (55) due to relation (60) gives
2g
ax g
ax 1 ! !
þ h0 þ 2
sinh sex þ 2 h_ 0 xg h0  2g
x
1þx g 1þx  g sin w  cot w cosh si þ þ
a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g
ð53Þ
 g coshðsi  sex Þ 1
x
At the time of impact s ¼ si implying hðsi Þ ¼ 0 sinh si þ ¼ ð61Þ
1þx 2g sin w e
after before
and h_ ðsi Þ ¼ eh_ ðsi Þ Eqs. (50) and (51), after
some manipulations, become Solving Eqs. (54) and (61) with respect to si and w
one can obtain the minimum amplitude ground
! !
h_ 0 x g cot w h0 x2g acceleration ag =a ¼ 1= sin w as function of x
 g which
 sinh si þ þ cosh si leads to overturning.
a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g
Adding Eqs. (54) and (61) and then substracting
g sinhðsi  sex Þ
x Eq. (54) from Eq. (61) one gets respectively
þ ¼1 ð54Þ
1þx2g sin w  
h_ 0 þ h0 g
x esex  cos w
! þ x g þ
h_
before
ðsi Þ h_ 0 x  g cot w a 1þx 2 sin w
  g
¼  cosh si 1 þ e si
a a 1þx  2g ¼ e ð62Þ
! e
h0 x2g
þ þ sinh si  
a 1þx 2g h_ 0  h0 g
x cos w  esex
 xg þ
xg coshðsi  sex Þ a 1þx 2 sin w
þ ð55Þ   g
1þx 2g sin w 1  e si
¼ e ð63Þ
e
For s [ si [ sex the equation of free motion with
h(s) [ 0 is given by Equations (62) and (63), much simpler than Eqs. (54)
and (61), can be solved with respect to si and w and
€ þ sin½a  hðsÞ
¼ 0
hðsÞ ð56Þ then to provide the minimum amplitude ground
which after one integration yields acceleration ag =a ¼ 1= sin w versus x g .
Note that one can eliminate the time si after
1 _2 multiplication of Eqs. (62) and (63) which yields
h ðsÞ þ cos½a  hðsÞ
þ C ¼ 0 ð57Þ "
2  #
h_ 0 þ h0 g
x esex  cos w
At the instant s = s*of overturning due to insta- þ xg þ
a 1þx 2g sin w
bility conditions (9), hðs Þ ¼ a and hðs _  Þ ¼ 0; "  #
Eq. (57) gives C = -1. Accordingly Eq. (57) at h_ 0  h0 xg cos w  esex 1  e2
  x g þ ¼
s = si becomes a 1þx 2g sin w e2

1 _2 a ð64Þ
h ðsi Þ ¼ 1  cos a ¼ 2 sin2 ð58Þ
2 2 Clearly, from Eq. (64) one can determine w as
from which one obtains function of x g (for given values of the parameters
_h0 ; h0 and a),and then the time of impact si from either
_ i Þ ¼ 2 sin a ’ a
hðs ð59Þ Eq. (62) or Eq. (63). Such a relationship w versus xg
2
was established in previous analyses by solving two
Since the function g(s) = a - h(s) [ 0 up to over- highly non linear equations [9, 10]. It is remarkable
_
turning is continuously decreasing, its derivative, gðsÞ that Eq. (64), presented for the first time in the
_  0 and from
in this internal is non positive, gðsÞ literature, in case of trivial initial conditions,
after
_
Eq. (59) it follows that h ðsi Þ ¼ a, and therefore ho ¼ h_ 0 ¼ 0, is simplified as follows:

123
2228 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

!2    2.6 Mode 2: Cosine pulse (one impact)

g
x esex  cosw cosw  esex
 g þ
x xg þ
1þx2g sinw sinw In case of one impact the following equations are
2 valid
1 e
¼ ð65Þ
e2 Case 1: si \sex with h(s) [ 0 for si  s  sex
where sex ¼ ð2p  wÞ=x g .Note also that although (Fig. 2b)
Eq. (65) is independent of the angle (stockiness ! !
g 2g
ax
parameter) a, however this parameter relates w to _h0 ðsi Þ þ ax tan w sinh si þ h0 þ
ag/ga through the formula ag/ga = 1/ sin w which 1þx 2g 1þx 2g
 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
depends on x g p, where p ¼ 3g=4R).
g (=x g si þ wÞ
a cosðx
 cosh si þ 2
¼a ð69Þ
1 þ xg
 cos w
2.5 Mode 1: Cosine pulse (no impact)
" #
  eh_ before ðs Þ
i
In case of a cosine pulse ground acceleration 1þ 2g
x  1 cos w þ x g si þ wÞ
g sinðx
a


u€g ðtÞ ¼ ag cos xg t þ w ; ðw þ p=2Þ=xg g esi sex
ð66Þ  g si þ wÞ ¼ x
 cosðx ð70Þ
 t ð3p=2  wÞ=xg ; otherwise u€g ðtÞ ¼ 0
before
following the above procedure (of a sine pulse) the where h_ ðsi Þ is obtained from
corresponding to Eqs. (31) and (38) formulas for before
h_ ðsi Þ ¼ A1 cosh si þ
A2 sinh si 
overturning instability (of no impact) become for
g sin x
ax  g si þ w
h(s) \ 0 (Fig. 2a)  ð71Þ
   1þx 2g cos w
1 _ 1
g þ ðh0 þ h0 Þ
x þxg cos w þ sin w with A1 and A2 given by
a g
x
sex
¼ e ð67Þ 2g
ax
g
x
A1 ¼ h_ 0 þ a tan w; A2 ¼ h0 þ
for h(s) [ 0 (Fig. 2b) 1þx2g 1þx 2g
  
2 1 1 Solving Eqs. (69, 70) with respect to si and w [in
þx g  ðh0 þ h_ 0 Þ þx
g cos w
g
x a g
x ð68Þ connection with Eq. (71)], one can determine the

 sin w ¼ e sex minimum amplitude ground acceleration, ag ga ¼
g (=xg/p).
1=cos w as function of x
Equations (67) and (68) allow one to establish the
 g (= xg/p) for given
relation 1/sinw as function of x Case 2: si [ sex with h(s) \ 0 for si  s  sex
initial conditions. (Fig. 2a)

" ! ! #
h_ 0 g
x h0 2g
x g
x 1
þ tan w cosh sex þ þ sinh sex þ sinhðsi  sex Þ
a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g 1þx  2g cos w
" ! ! # ð72Þ
h_ 0 g
x h0 x2g
þ þ tan w sinh sex þ þ cosh sex coshðsi  sex Þ ¼ 1
a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g

before
" ! ! #
h_ ðsÞ h_ 0 g
x h0 x 2g xg 1
¼ þ tan w cosh sex þ þ sinh sex þ coshðsi  sex Þ
a a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g 1þx 2g cos w
" ! ! # ð73Þ
h_ 0 g
x h0 x2g
þ þ tan w sinh sex þ þ cosh sex sinhðsi  sex Þ
a 1þx 2g a 1þx 2g

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2229

where 3 Two-DOF system findings

before
h_ ðsi Þ ¼ a=e ð74Þ The analytical expression of equations of motion of a
Solving Eqs. (72) and (73) with respect to w and si [in 2-DOF system presented in [3] and [2], are related to
connection with Eq. (74)] one can obtain the minimum the number N of possible configuration patterns
amplitude ground acceleration for overturning insta- which may lead to overturning. According to the
bility, i.e. ag/ag = 1/cosw as function of x g . formula derived in [2] N = 3n - 1, where n is the
Equations (62) and (63) valid for the case of one- number of the rigid blocks of the assembly, whereas
sine pulse, in case of a one-cosine pulse become the number of differential equations is equal to: Nn.
  Hence, for an assembly with n = 2 blocks, N = 8
h_ 0 þ h0 xg sin w þ esex 1 þ e si (configuration patterns) with total number of differ-
þ xg þ ¼ e
a 1þx 2g cos w e ential equations Nn = 8 9 2 = 16. More specifical-
ð75Þ ly the corresponding to the configuration patterns of
Fig. 3a, b equations are:For h1(s) \ 0 and h2(s) \ 0
  (Fig. 3a)
h_ 0  h0 g
x sin w þ esex 1 þ e si
 x g  ¼ e

a 1þx2g cos w e 1þ 3m2 cos2 a1 h€1 þ ½cosða1 þ h1 Þ þ 2m2 cosa1 cosh1

ð76Þ u€g 3
 þ m2 R2 cosa1
g 2
After multiplication of Eqs. (75) and (76) one gets h 2
i
"  #  h€2 cosða2 þ h2  h1 Þ h_ sinða2 þ h2  h1 Þ
2
h_ 0 þ h0 g
x sin w þ esex
þ xg þ  sinða1 þ h1 Þ 2m2 cosa1 sinh1 ¼ 0 ð79a)
a 1þx 2g cos w
"  #
h_ 0 þ h0 xg sin w þ esex u€g 3 cos a1
 g 
x R2 h€2 þ cosða2 þ h2 Þ þ
a 1þx  2g cos w g 2
h 2
i
€ _
 h2 cosða2 þ h2  h1 Þ  h1 sinða2 þ h2  h1 Þ
1  e2
¼ ð77Þ
e2  sinða2 þ h2 Þ ¼ 0 ð79b)
In case of h0 ¼ h_ 0 ¼ 0 Eq. (77) becomes where m2 ¼ m2 =m1 , R2 ¼ R2 =R1 , s = tp1 with
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
!2    p1 ¼ 3g=4R1 .
xg sinwþesex sinwþesex
 g þ
x g 
x For h1(s) [ 0 and h2(s) [ 0 (Fig. 3b)
1þ x 2g cosw cosw

1 þ 3m2 cos2 a1 h€1 þ ½cosða1  h1 Þ þ 2m2 cosa1 cosh1

1e2
¼ ð78Þ u€g 3
e2  þ m2 R2 cosa1
g 2
where sex ¼ ð2p  wÞ=x g .Equation (78) is indepen- h 2
i
dent of a although w is related to a via the relation ag/  h€2 cosða2  h2 þ h1 Þ þ h_ sinða2  h2 þ h1 Þ
2
ga = 1/ sin w which is a function of xg (= xg/p, where þ sinða1  h1 Þ  2m2 cosa1 sinh1 ¼ 0 ð80a)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p ¼ 3g=4R).
u€g 3 cos a1
An important issue, worth discussing, is whether a R2 h€2 þ cosða2  h2 Þ þ
g 2
single block under the above harmonic excitations is h 2
i
more stable when it is resting directly on the ground  h2 cosða2  h2 þ h1 Þ  h_ 1 sinða2  h2 þ h1 Þ
€
or when it is supported by another (either mono- þ sinða2  h2 Þ ¼ 0 ð80bÞ
lithically or freely standing) rigid block which is
supported directly by the ground. To this end dynamic The equations of motion corresponding to the
analyses of 2-DOF block systems are necessary to be configuration patterns of Fig. 4a, b are:
established as addressed below. For h1(s) \ 0 and h2(s) [ 0 (Fig. 4a)

123
2230 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

Fig. 3 a Rigid body block

displacement with hi(t) \ 0
(i = 1,2) under ground
horizontal excitation ug(t).
b Rigid body block
displacement with hi(t) [ 0
(i = 1,2) under ground
horizontal excitation ug(t)

   
1 1 þ 2m2 u€g
þm  2 h€1 þ h€2 þ cosða2  h2 Þ þ sinða2  h2 Þ
3 3 g

u€g 3 h ð81bÞ
 cosða1 þ h1 Þ  sinða1 þ h1 Þ þ  h€1 cosða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ
g 2R2
i
h 2
1 2 h€2 cosða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ  h_ 1 sinða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ ¼ 0
þ m 2R
2 i
2 For h1(s) [ 0 and h2(s) \ 0 (Fig. 4b)
 h_ sinða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ ¼ 0
2 ð81aÞ

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2231

Fig. 4 a Rigid body block

displacement with h1(t) \ 0
and h2(t) [ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t). b Rigid body block
displacement with h1(t) \ 0
and h2(t) [ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t)

   
1 € 1 þ 2m2 u€g
þm  2 h1 þ h€2 þ cosða2 þ h2 Þ  sinða2 þ h2 Þ
3 3 g

u€g
3 h
 cosða1  h1 Þ þ sinða1  h1 Þ þ  h€1 cosða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ
g 2R 2 i
2
1 h þ h_ 1 sinða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ ¼ 0 ð82bÞ
þ m 2R2 h€2 cosða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ
2 i
2
 h_ sinða1 þ a2 þ h2  h1 Þ ¼ 0
2 ð82a)

123
2232 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

Fig. 5 a Rigid body block

displacement with
h1(t) = h2(t) \ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t). b. Rigid body block
displacement with
h1(t) = h2(t) [ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t)

 
The equations of motion corresponding to the  2 cos2 a1 þ m
1 þ 3m 2 þ 3m
 2R  2
2 cos a1 cos a2  h€
R
2
configurations patterns of Fig. 5a, b, after setting u€g
h1(s) = h2(s) = h(s), are:For h(s) \ 0 (Fig. 5a) þ ½cosða1 þ hÞ þ m 2 ða2 þ hÞ þ 2m
 2R  2 cos a1 cos h

g
2 sinða2 þ hÞ þ 2 cos a1 sin h
m
 sinða1 þ hÞ  ½R 2
¼0 ð83a)

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238 2233

Fig. 6 a Rigid body block

displacement with h1(t) = 0
and h2(t) \ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t). b Rigid body block
displacement with h1(t) = 0
and h2(t) [ 0 under
horizontal ground excitation
ug(t)

For h(s) [ 0 (Fig. 5b) Finally, the equations of motion corresponding to

  the configuration patterns of Fig. 6a, b, after setting
 2 cos2 a1 þ m
1 þ 3m 2 þ 3m
 2R 2 cos a1 cos a2  h€
 2R h1(s) = 0 and h2(s) = h2, are:
2

u€g For h (s) \ 0 (Fig. 6a):

þ ½cosða1  hÞ þ m 2 ða2  hÞ þ 2m
 2R  2 cos a1 cos h

g
u€g
2 sinða2  hÞ  2 cos a1 sin h
m
þ sinða1  hÞ þ ½R 2 h€2 þ cosða2 þ h2 Þ  sinða2 þ h2 Þ ¼ 0 ð84aÞ
g
¼0 ð83b)

123
2234 Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238

For h(s) [ 0 (Fig. 6b):

u€g
h€2 þ cosða2  h2 Þ þ sinða2  h2 Þ ¼ 0: ð84bÞ
g

4 Numerical results and discussion

4.1 Single DOF System

Rocking (overturning) instability occurring through

an unstable equilibrium point at a certain time t = t*
regardless of the kind (sinus or cosinus pulse) of
excitation is always associated with an escaped motion
via an inflection point in the curve h(t) versus t; i.e.
such a critical state happens when h(t*) = ±
_  Þ ¼ hðt
a, hðt €  Þ ¼ 0. These instability conditions
are valid regardless of whether or not overturning
occurs without or after impact. Namely, overturning
is always associated with an escaped motion during
the free motion regime (i.e. after the expiration of the
ground excitation at t* [ tex), regardless of whether
the time of impact, t = ti, is smaller than the period of
excitation tex (i.e. ti \ tex).
For the first time overturning instability after one
impact for the (practically important) case ti [ tex was
presented (after eliminating ti) in one transcendental
equation relating directly ag/ga to xg, for both sinus
and cosinus excitation pulses including the effects of
initial phase angle w as well as of the initial
conditions (being beneficial or detrimental depending
on their sign).
From Eq. (65), referring to the case of one-sine
pulse, one can establish the relationship 1/sinw versus
xg ð¼ px g Þ, and then to determine the minimum
amplitude of the external ground acceleration
ag =a ¼ 1= sin w, where ag ¼ ag =g and a (angle) the
stockiness parameter. Note that any curve obtained
from Eq. (65) which does not satisfy the condition of
dimensionless impact time si [ sex (si = pti and
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
sex = ptex, where p ¼ 3g=4R) is physically unac-
ceptable, and thus rejected.
Clearly, for a rigid block with given semi-diagonal
R, through the relation ag =a ¼ 1= sin w versus x g ¼
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
xg =p (where p ¼ 3g=4R) one can find via Eq. (65)
ag ¼ a= sin w. Namely (keeping constant e and R or
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
xg via p ¼ 3g=4R) as the angle a decreases the
minimum amplitude ag (leading to overturning) also
decreases. This means that between two rigid blocks
Fig. 7 Minimum amplitude ground acceleration, ag/ga versus
xg (where a = 0.25 rad and e = 0.90) for overturning insta-
bility for a single block 2h0 9 2b and double block 4h0 9 2b
respectively (having the same width 2b)
with the same semi-diagonal R (or equivalently x g )
the taller block (with smaller a) is less stable than the
lower one. The above results hold also for the case of a
one-cosine pulse related to Eq. (78).
Figure 7 allows us to compare the stability (under
one-sine pulse) of two rigid blocks having the same
width 2b but different heights with the double block
being twice higher than the single block. The double
block consisting of two (same) single blocks mono-
lithically connected is also a 1-DOF system as the
single one. Indeed from Fig. 7 it is clear that the
double block is less stable than the single one for
values of the external excitation frequency xg slightly
smaller than 6.3 s-1 which correspond practically to
statically applied loading. On the contrary, for values
xg [ 6.3 s-1 up to xg = 16 s-1 (cases of ‘‘dynamic’’
excitation) the double block is more stable than the
single one (under one—sine pulse). Clearly, as stated
above, cases for xg [ 16 (corresponding to shocks)
are excluded.
These results hold for overturning occurring with-
out or after one impact. Note that the comparison (with
the aid of Fig. 7] of the minima amplitudes corre-
sponding to the double and singe block (both 1-DOF
systems) has taken into account that tana0 = 2tana1,
where a0 and a1 the stockiness parameters of the single
and double block, respectively. Note also that the
results of Fig. 7 coincide with existing results [9, 10]

123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
which are based on the assumption that the friction is
sufficiently large to exclude sliding (between block
and the ground) and loss of energy due to the
rotational friction of the block pivot axis during
rotation (about O or O0 ). One can show that the
stability criteria (9) are also valid when both these
effects are included.
It is worth noticing that the above finding shown in
Fig. 7 extends the Housner’s [13] observation holding
for two geometrically similar rigid blocks to the case of
two rigid blocks having the same width, among which
the taller is more stable than the lower one for values of
the external excitation frequencies of practical impor-
tance (related to dynamic excitation). Finally, it is also
noteworthy that with the aid of the single block red
curve one can also readily establish the relation ap/ga
versus Tex (period of excitation) and then to compare it
with existing regional acceleration spectra [10].
Subsequently the case of a system with two rigid
blocks of the same dimensions freely supported
between them with the lower one also freely supported
by the ground, is thoroughly discussed.
4.2 Two-DOF system
Figure 8 shows (as Fig. 7) the important finding that a
rigid block supported by the ground (under one-sine
pulse) becomes more stable when it is placed on
another block (interconnected monolithically with it)
than when supported directly by the ground. It was
also found that the double (1-DOF) rigid block
becomes more stable when divided into two (same)
rigid blocks so that the upper block to be freely
supported by the lower one. This is shown by the red
line of Fig. 8 [2] referring to the rocking response
analysis of a two rigid block (2-DOF) system.
It is worth noticing that the derivation of this red
line in Fig. 8 was based on the assumption that the
friction between the surfaces of the two rigid blocks as
well as between the bottom surface of the lower block
and the ground is sufficiently large to exclude both :
sliding and loss of energy at the block pivot axis after
rocking initiation. Clearly, the block pivot axis does
not pass through the corner point (O or O0 ) (as
considered in all existing analyses) but through
another interior point infinitesimally close to the
(theoretical) corner point. Then, a small surface of the
pivot axis coming in contact with the ground, causes
loss of energy (related to small damages around the
2235
Fig. 8 Stability under a one-sine pulse of a drum (block) freely
supported by another drum (case 1), freely supported by the
ground (case 2) and supported by another drum monolithically
connected with it (case 3)
corner point) at the rocking initiation. For example,
neglecting both these effects in case of a 2-DOF
system (under one-sine pulse) for the value of
xg = 12 s-1 it was found that overturning occurs at
ag = 10.989 ga [3]. However ag increases when the
above rotational friction effect of the block pivot axis
has been taken into account in the non-linear nu-
merical scheme employed herewith based on Math-
ematica [23]. This is achieved via introducing a loss
of energy coefficient. The numerical scheme in
question also excludes penetration during rocking
of the upper block into the lower one as well as
penetration of the lower block into the ground (after
impact either between the two blocks or impact of the
lower block with the ground). Indeed, using this non-
linear numerical scheme for solving the aforemen-
tioned 2-DOF system (under one-sine pulse) it was
found that for xg = 12 s-1 overturning occurs at
ag = 13.333 ga ([10.898 ga mentioned above) when
the axis rotational friction effect (increasing the
minimum amplitude of ground excitation) was taken
into account [4]. It is noticeable that this value,
ag = 13.333 ga, will further increase after inclusion
of the effect of loss of energy due to sliding (between
the two blocks (mainly) as well as between the lower
block and the ground). Such an effect for the case of
the single block is presented in [24].
The graphical representation of the above case of
overturning instability (i.e. ag/ga = 13.333 for
xg = 12 s-1) is shown in Fig. 9 from which one can
123
2236
Fig. 9 Time series u1(s) : - h1(s) and u2(s) : - h2(s)
versus s of a 2-DOF system exhibiting for xg = 12 s-1
overturning instability at ag/ga = 13.333 via an inflection
point: h_2 ðs Þ ¼ h€2 ðs Þ ¼ 0 at s* = 1.9
see (from the onset of excitation) the variation of both
angles of rotation u1(s) : -h1(s) and u2(s) : -h2(s)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
versus dimensionless time s = pt (p ¼ 3g=4R1 ).
Clearly, from Fig. 9 the 2-DOF system rotates (from
the onset of excitation) as a single DOF system with
u1(s) = u2(s) up to u1(s) = u2(s) = 0.12 rad and
after that the two blocks are separated to each other
with u2(s) increasing and u1(t) decreasing. At a later
time overturning occurs at ag/ga = 13.333 (for
xg = 12 s-1) through an escaped motion via an
inflection point at a time s = s* = 1.9, where
/_ 2 ðs Þ ¼ /
€ ðs Þ ¼ 0. For a slightly smaller value of
2
ag/ga (at xg = 12 s-1) the angle of rotation u2(s)
gradually decreases and the 2-DOF system returns
after several impacts to its initial (stable) position.
This is clearly illustrated in the typical graphical
representation of Fig. 10. It is remarkable that the
above inflection point instability criteria seems to be
valid if the effect of the rotational friction at the pivot
axis from the initiation of rocking is included. For a 2-
DOF system a further discussion would be useful.
Note also that an increase of the amount of rotational
friction results in an increase of the minimum
amplitude ground acceleration ag/ga. Moreover, it
should be clarified that the cusp points in the plot u2(s)
versus s (i.e. discontinuities of derivatives /_ 2 ðsÞ)
correspond to impact in the lower block (when
u1(s) = 0).
Furthermore, it should be also pointed out that the
above value of minimum amplitude ag/ga = 13.333 is
on the safety side, since the effect of initial sliding
(being always present to a certain degree) was ignored.
123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
Fig. 10 Time series u1(s) : -h1(s) and u2(s) : -h2(s)
versus s of a 2-DOF system exhibiting for xg = 12 s-1 and
ag/ga \ 13.333 asymptotic stability (i.e. the system returns to
each initial stable position after several impacts)
This effect occurring prior to the initiation of rocking
may be significant.
Finally, it is worth noticing that although the
aforementioned 8 configuration patterns (Figs. 3a, b,
4a, b, 5a, b, 6a, b) are independent of each other,
overturning does not occur via one of these patterns
(remaining the same from the onset of excitation up to
overturning). Indeed, from the onset of excitation up to
overturning the rocking response of the 2-DOF system
is governed by more than one configuration patterns
described by the corresponding equations of motion.
The determination of the sequence of patterns through-
out of such a rocking response can be safely obtained by
establishing via a non linear numerical analysis based
on Mathematica [23] the system response from the
beginning of rocking up to overturning through a
stepwise increasing time s. More details about the
employed numerical scheme are given in Ref. [3].
5 Conclusions
The most important conclusions for single and two-
DOF rigid rectangular block systems are the
following.
5.1 Single rigid block system
1. Via a theoretical (qualitative) analysis (supple-
mented by numerical results for one-sine pulse) it
was found that between two rigid blocks having
the same width the more slender (taller) is more
stable than the other one for moderate to large
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
values of external excitation frequencies which
are of practical importance. This extends the
Housner’s effect (holding for geometrically
similar rigid blocks) to the wider class of rigid
blocks having only the same width (instead of
geometrical similarity).
2. The differential equation of rocking motion was
properly derived through a variational approach
using the Hamilton’s stationary principle. The 1st
integral of the differential equation of motion
leads (for the case of slender blocks with
a \ 0.25 rad) to the condition of overturning related
to a free vibration regime, regardless of whether
overturning occurs without or after one impact.
3. Rocking (overturning) instability criteria for the
cases of one-sine and one-cosine external excita-
tions pulses were comprehensibly established
related to an escaped motion via an inflection
point regardless of whether overturning occurs:
(a) without or after one impact and (b) with time of
impact greater or smaller of the time of expiration
of the external excitation sex.
4. The above findings have been illustrated by means
of numerical examples based on linearized
analyses the results of which are in excellent
agreement with existing ones in the literature.
5. For the first time overturning after one impact for
the important in practice case with impact time
si [ sex (referring to moderate up to large values
of external excitation frequencies) was estab-
lished in one (instead of two) transcendental
equation relating directly the minimum amplitude
ag/ga to the external excitation frequency xg for
both sinus and cosinus pulses including the effects
of the initial phase angle w as well as of the initial
conditions (which may be beneficial or detemen-
tral depending on their sign).
5.2 2-DOF system
1. The employed non linear numerical scheme based
on mathematica [23] was properly adjusted so
that: (a) to include the loss of energy due to
rotational friction about the pivot axis during the
rocking initiation and (b) to exclude penetration
of the upper block to the lower one, as well as of
the lower one into the ground.
2237
2. It was found that from the onset of excitation the
rocking response up to overturning is governed by
more than one configuration patterns which
implies evaluation of the rocking response from
the initiation of rocking by stepwise increasing the
time s. At the very beginning of the rocking the
2-DOF system behaves as a single DOF system
[i.e. h1(s) = h2(s)] subjected to a small energy
loss due to rotational friction at the pivot axis
(acting between the system and the ground). This
1-DOF system response continues until a certain
time ss at which the upper block is separated from
the lower one accompanied (at the same time) by a
further small energy loss due to the rotational
friction at the pivot axis (acting between the upper
and lower block). Then, a new set of differential
equations of motion should be applied with initial
conditions the end conditions of the previous stage.
Such a step by step numerical evaluation of the
rocking response continues in the same way
including also the effect of viscous damping
(5–10 %) due to impact occurring either between
the lower block and the ground or between the two
blocks. This procedure is followed until overturning.
3. Criteria for rocking (overturning) instability
(with or without impact) being (usually) initiating
from the upper block associated with an escaped
motion occurring via an inflection point of the
curve h2(s) versus s (of the upper block) may be
valid if the rotational friction effect at the pivot
axis is included. A further discussion is needed.
The minimum amplitude ground acceleration
corresponds to this critical case; namely for a
slightly smaller value of this amplitude the 2-DOF
system after several impacts returns to each initial
(stable) position.
4. Dividing a slender 1-DOF rigid block into two
pieces it is drawn the important conclusion that
strangely enough the resulting 2-DOF system is
more stable (as being associated with greater
energy loss) than the initial monolithic block. It is
also found that the above systems are more stable
than a single block (coinciding with one of the
(same) two blocks of the 2-DOF) system support-
ed directly by the ground.
5. The comparison of the relation of the minimum
amplitude ground acceleration versus the external
excitation period sex with the regional earthquake
123
2238
acceleration spectra is very useful for structural
design purposes.
References
1. Konstantinidis D, Makris N (2005) Seismic response ana-
lysis of multidrum classical columns. Earthq Eng Struct
Dyn 34:1243–1270
2. Kounadis AN (2015) On the rocking complex response of
ancient multispondyle columns: a genious and challenging
structural system requiring reliable solution. Meccanica
50:261–292
3. Kounadis AN, Papadopoulos GJ, Cotsovos DM (2012)
Overturning instability of a two rigid block system under
ground excitation. ZAMM Z Angew Math Mech 92(7):
536–557
4. Kounadis AN, Papadopoulos GJ (2016) On the rocking in-
stability of a three—rigid block system under ground ex-
citation (to be submitted)
5. Kounadis AN (2014) Rocking instability of free-standing
statues atop slender viscoelastic columns under ground
motion. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 63:83–91
6. Spanos PD, Koh A-S (1984) Rocking of rigid blocks due to
harmonic shaking. J Eng Mech ASCE 110(11):1627–1642
7. Shenton HW (1996) Criteria for initiation of slide, rock, and
slide-rock rigid-body modes. J Eng Mech ASCE 122(7):
690–693
8. Allen RH, Oppenheim IJ, Parker AR, Bielak J (1986) On the
dynamic response of rigid body assemblies. Earthq Eng
Struct Dyn 14:861–876
9. Zhang J, Makris N (2001) Rocking response of free-stand-
ing blocks under cycloid pulses. J Eng Mech ASCE
127:473–483
10. Kounadis AN (2010) On the overturning instability of a
rectangular rigid block under ground excitation. Open Mech
J 4:43–57
11. Kounadis AN (2013) Parametric study in rocking instability
of a rigid block under harmonic ground pulse: a unified
approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 45:125–143
12. Psycharis IM (1990) Dynamic behaviour of rocking two-
block assemblies. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 19(4):555–575
123
Meccanica (2015) 50:2219–2238
13. Housner GW (1963) The behavior of inverted pendulum
structure during earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am
53(2):403–417
14. Andreaus U (1990) Sliding-uplifting response of rigid
blocks to base excitation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 19(8):
1181–1196
15. Andreaus U, Casini P (1999) Dynamics of three rigid block
assemblies with unilateral deformable contacts. Part 1:
contact modelling. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(12):
1621–1636
16. Andreaus U, Casini P (1999) Dynamics of three rigid block
assemblies with unilateral deformable contacts. Part 2:
sample application. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(12):
1637–1649
17. Lenci S, Rega G (2006) A dynamical systems approach to
the overturning of rocking blocks. Chaos Solitons Fractals
28(2):527–542
18. Voyagaki E, Psycharis IN, Mylonakis G (2014) Complex
response of a rocking block to a full-cycle pulse. J Eng Mech
140(6):1–15
19. Chatzis MN, Smyth AW (2011) Robust modeling of the
rocking problem. J Eng Mech 138(3):247–262
20. Zhang H, Brogliato B, Liu C (2014) Dynamics of planar
rocking-blocks with Coulomb friction and unilateral con-
straints: comparisons between experimental and numerical
data. Multibody Sys Dyn 32(1):1–25
21. Konstadinidis D, Makris N (2005) Experimental and ana-
lytical studies on the seismic response of free-standing and
anchored laboratory equipment, Pacific Earthquake. Engi-
neering Research Centre, PEER REPRT 2005/07, January
2005, College of Engineering. University of California,
Berkeley
22. Drosos V, Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G (2012) Seismic
behaviour of classical columns: an experimental study,
Laboratory of Soil Mechanics Research Report: LSM.
NTUA.-12-01
23. Wolfram S (2003) The mathematica book, 5th edn. Wol-
fram Media, Champaign, IL
24. Kounadis AN (2015) On the rocking-sliding instability of
rigid blocks under ground excitation: some new findings.
Soil Dyn Earthq Eng (accepted)