XVIII CONVEGNO ANIDIS

L’ i ngegner i a si smi ca i n I t al i a
ASCOLI PI CEN O 2019
1 5 - 1 9 Set t emb r e

Heating phenomena at the sliding interface of double curved surface sliders

and resulting effects on the hysteretic behavior
Dario De Domenicoa, Giuseppe Ricciardia, Natale Maugeria, Paolo Longoa, Samuele Infantib, Gianmario Benzonic
a
Dipartimento di Ingegneria, Contrada di Dio, 98166, Messina, Italy
b
FIP Mec s.r.l., Padova, Italy
c
University of California San Diego, USA

Keywords: Curved surface sliders; heating phenomena; friction pendulum isolators; friction variation;
temperature measurements;

ABSTRACT
The tribological properties of the sliding materials employed in friction isolators strongly influence the hysteretic
behavior and the resulting energy dissipation capabilities of these devices. A wide number of experimental tests on
small-scale and full-scale prototypes of friction isolators with different sliding materials clearly reveals that the
friction coefficient is a complex function of vertical load, sliding velocity and temperature rise at the sliding
interface. In particular, the heating phenomena developing at the sliding interface produce a reduction of the local
friction coefficient due to a decrease in the hardness of the thin surface layer. In turn, this implies a variation of the
hysteretic properties of friction isolators producing a reduction of the energy dissipated per cycle with repetition of
cycles. Consequently, assuming a constant friction coefficient without accounting for the friction degradation due
to thermal effects may lead to an underestimation of the displacements induced by the earthquake excitation.
The goal of this contribution is to study the heating phenomena arising at the sliding interface of double curved
surface sliders (DCSS) via a set of full-scale experimental tests carried out at the laboratory CERISI, University of
Messina, Italy. Eight thermocouples are embedded in a prototype DCSS isolator in different locations in plan, in
order to explore not only the temperature values attained during the repetition of cycles, but also the distribution of
the temperature rise induced by the sliding motion. The probes of the thermocouples are positioned just in contact
with the stainless steel sheet so as to be representative of the temperature rise at the sliding interface. The
temperature rise and the resulting effects on the hysteretic behavior are critically analyzed for different values of
vertical load and sliding velocity that produce different heat fluxes. Based on the experimental results of the present
campaign, the influence of the temperature rise on the hysteretic behavior can be quantitatively assessed. Moreover,
thermo-mechanical coupled numerical models that simultaneously solve the thermal and mechanical problem in an
interconnected manner can be calibrated accordingly, which may be useful to reduce the need of expensive and
time-consuming testing activities.

and Polyammide (PA), in contact with stainless

1 INTRODUCTION
Curved surface sliders (CSS), which are also
known with the trademark name friction
pendulum isolators (Zayas et al. 1990), are
seismic isolation devices that are increasingly
being used in bridges, buildings and industrial
facilities. The success of this technology is
ascribed to the simple operating principle, based
on the pendulum mechanism, and the high
dissipation capability, related to the frictional
characteristics of the employed sliding materials.
Commonly used sliding materials include
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), Ultra High
Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE),
steel sheets (Mokha et al. 1990; Dolce et al.
2005).
A wide number of experimental tests on small-
scale and full-scale prototypes of friction isolators
with different sliding materials clearly reveals
that the friction coefficient is not constant (as
postulated by Coulomb frictional theory), but is a
complicated function of vertical load, sliding
velocity and temperature rise at the sliding
interface (Lomiento et al. 2013; Quaglini et al.
2014; De Domenico et al. 2018, 2019; Gandelli et
al. 2019; Furinghetti et al. 2019).
More in depth, the four main sources/effects of
variation of the friction coefficient are
summarized as follows:
 - breakaway effects occurring at the
beginning of motion and at each motion
reversal, which are caused by the gradual
transition between static and dynamic
friction coefficient, with the former being
higher than the latter (Gandelli et al. 2019);
- pressure effects, which become manifest
with a reduction of the friction coefficient
with the increase of pressure (Dolce et al.
2005);
- velocity effects, based on which the
friction coefficient decreases with
reduction of sliding velocity and increases
vice versa, and this trend is well captured
by an exponential law of the friction
coefficient with the sliding velocity
(Constantinou et al. 1990);
- cycling effects or temperature effects,
which cause a reduction of the friction
coefficient due to the heating phenomena
caused by the repetition of cycles
(Lomiento et al. 2013; De Domenico et al.
2019).
Among these variation effects, the most
prominent factor is related to the heating
phenomena at the sliding interface, which may
induce a reduction of the friction coefficient
during repetition of cycles and, consequently, a
reduction of the energy dissipation capability.
Neglecting these effects may lead to an
underestimation of the actual displacement
experienced by the isolator. These cycling effects
are mainly caused by a decrease of the hardness
of the thin surface layer with the increase of the
local temperature in the sliding contact area. It is,
therefore, of interest to quantitatively assess the
influence of the temperature rise on the hysteretic
behaviour of CSS through combined thermal and
mechanical measurements on full-scale
prototypes.
Based on this research line, this contribution
presents an experimental campaign carried out on
a full-scale double curved surface slider (DCSS)
prototype subjected to imposed displacement
waveform at the laboratory CERISI of the
University of Messina, Italy. The prototype
DCSS is equipped with eight thermocouples
embedded into the upper plate and with their
probes being in contact with the underlying
stainless steel sheet. The thermocouples allow the
measurements of the temperature rise at the
sliding interface in different positions in plan, and
make it possible to correlate the hysteretic
behaviour with the corresponding heating
phenomena arising at the sliding interface.
Different sliding velocities and contact pressures
that produce different heat fluxes are considered
in the experimental campaign.
2 EXPERIMENTAL CAMPAIGN
A full-scale prototype of DCSS has been
tested at the laboratory CERISI of the University
of Messina, Italy. The testing equipment is a
three-dimensional shake table with four
hydrostatic pads (ensuring a minimal friction
coefficient of less than 0.03%) to apply the
vertical load (with a maximum payload of
16000kN) and two pairs of actuators with a
maximum load capability of 3100 kN (pair of
actuators along the longitudinal axis) and 1400
kN (pair of actuators along the lateral axis). A
photograph of the testing equipment is shown in
Figure 1. The prototype isolator is a DCSS with
equivalent curvature radius of 3216 mm. The
sliding material is a particular type of UHMWPE
developed by the Italian manufacturing company
FIP Mec s.r.l. called Fip Friction Material type M
(medium friction, corresponding to a minimum
friction coefficient of 5.5%).
Figure 1. Three-dimensional testing equipment at the
laboratory CERISI, University of Messina, Italy
As a preliminary step, the upper plate of the
prototype DCSS is CNC (computer numerical
control) machined to realize a series of holes for
the installation of the eight thermocouples, as
depicted in the photograph reported in Figure 2.
Eight J-type thermocouples having dimensions
1/0.3 mm, tolerance as per IEC 584 Class 2 and
temperature range of [-60°,+350°C] are
embedded in the upper plate, whose labels are
indicated with a number from 0 to 7 in Figure 3.
The device is then mounted in the shake table
testing equipment and special care has been taken
in order to prevent breakage of the thermocouple
conductors when the upper plate is in contact
with the overlying girder steel beam, cf. Figure 4.

Figure 2. CNC machining of the prototype DCSS to realize
holes for the installation of the thermocouples
Figure 3. Preparation of the prototype DCSS with eight
thermocouples embedded in the upper plate
The testing protocol includes two contact
pressures, namely 15 and 30 MPa, and imposed
sinusoidal horizontal motion with displacement
amplitude of 300 mm (corresponding to the
design displacement of the DCSS) and five
maximum sliding velocities, namely 10, 40, 100,
200, 400 mm/s. The sliding velocities are chosen
in line with other studies from the literature
(Furinghetti et al. 2019; Gandelli et al. 2019). The
different testing conditions allow the evaluation
of different scenarios of heating phenomena due
to the direct influence of the contact pressure and
sliding velocity on the heat flux according to the
following formula (Lomiento et al. 2013; De
Domenico et al. 2018)
W v
q (1)
a 2
from which the heat flux linearly increases with
the vertical load W and the sliding velocity v.
Figure 4. Installation of the prototype DCSS in the three-
dimensional shake table testing equipment with
thermocouple conductors coming out from the two channels
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A partial set of results extracted from the
entire testing protocol are presented here in order
to compare the hysteretic behaviour for some
representative cases.
As an example, in Figure 5 the force-
displacement loops for two tests having
maximum sliding velocity equal to 40 mm/s and
contact pressure equal to 15 MPa (test #2) and 30
MPa (test #7) are illustrated. It can be seen that
the loops are basically overlapping with each
other, with a modest (not to say null) difference
observed with repetition of cycles. In fact, these
slow tests did not involve high temperature rise.
The corresponding temperature registrations
are shown in Figure 6: the maximum temperature
recorded during test #2 is around 35°C, while that
recorded during test #7 is around 42°C. The
higher temperature observed in test #7 in
comparison with test #2 is obviously due to a
higher (doubled) contact pressure, which is
responsible for a higher heat flux at the sliding
interface. However, it is worth noting that, since
the increase of temperature is responsible for a
reduction of the friction coefficient locally, there
is a mechanism of “thermal control of friction”
and the temperature rise is not scaled
proportionally to the heat flux (Ettles 1986). This
is why, despite the doubled contact pressure, the
maximu temperature is just around 20% higher in
test #7 compared to test #2.
Figure 5. Hysteretic loops of the DCSS prototype for test #2
(average contact pressure 15 MPa and maximum sliding
velocity 40 mm/s) and test #7 (average contact pressure 30
MPa and maximum sliding velocity 40 mm/s)
Figure 6. Temperature registrations of the eight
thermocouples during test #2 (average contact pressure 15
MPa and maximum sliding velocity 40 mm/s) and test #7
(average contact pressure 30 MPa and maximum sliding
velocity 40 mm/s)
The temperature registrations are fluctuating,
which reflects the short duration of the
temperature rise (flash temperature) induced by
the cyclic motion of the slider (Stachowiak and
Batchelor 2005). The thermocouple associated
with the highest temperature increase is CH #5.
There is a physical motivation for this result:
according to the installation scheme reported in
Figure 3, the thermocouple 5 is located near the
origin (where, due to a zero displacement, the
sliding velocity attains its maximum value in a
sinusoidal waveform) and near the perimeter of
the slider, where the maximum contact pressure is
typically identified, see e.g. the thermo-
mechanical coupled analysis reported in (De
Domenico et al., 2018) and the contact pressure
measurements reported in (Furinghetti et al.
2019) via pressure-sensitive films located
between the slider and the upper steel plate.
Therefore, the fact that the temperature value of
thermocouple 5 is the highest is physically
meaningful and provides validity to the
temperature registrations.
On the other hand, different friction variations
and temperature values are observed in more
severe testing scenarios. As an example, the
force-displacement loops of tests #5 (contact
pressure 15 MPa and maximum sliding velocity
400 mm/s) and test #8 (contact pressure 30 MPa
and maximum sliding velocity 100 mm/s) are
reported in Figure 7. It is clearly seen that in
these cases the cycles are narrower with repetition
of cycles, which is due to the friction degradation
induced by the heating phenomena at the sliding
interface.
Figure 7. Hysteretic loops of the DCSS prototype for test #5
(average contact pressure 15 MPa and maximum sliding
velocity 400 mm/s) and test #8 (average contact pressure 30
MPa and maximum sliding velocity 100 mm/s)
Figure 8. Temperature registrations of the eight
thermocouples during test #5 (average contact pressure 15
MPa and maximum sliding velocity 400 mm/s) and test #8
(average contact pressure 30 MPa and maximum sliding
velocity 100 mm/s)
The corresponding temperature registrations
for the two analysed tests are reported in Figure
8. It is noted that peak temperatures of up to 70°C
are observed in test #5 and of up 60°C in test #8.
The considered sliding material (UHMWPE)
seems to be moderately affected by temperature
values in this range. In particular, the maximum
temperature increase (compared to the starting
temperature) for the four tests is reported in Table
1. It can be noted that the temperature increase
for test 5 is around twice as that of test 7 and
more than doubled in comparison with test 2,
which confirms that the sliding velocity is a key
factor affecting the heat flux and, consequently,
the temperature rise arising at the sliding
interface.
Table 1. Maximum temperature increase measured by the
thermocouples during four considered tests
Test Maximum temperature increase [°C]
2 20.8
5 54.8
7 26.4
8 39.0
It is believed that the obtained experimental
results can be useful to calibrate analytical or
numerical models such as those presented by
(Lomiento et al. 2013; Quaglini et al. 2014; De
Domenico et al. 2018; Gandelli et al. 2019). A
specific subroutine implemented in a finite
element code could be useful to take into account
the pointwise and time-dependent variability of
the friction coefficient depending on the local
contact pressure and sliding velocity (Pantuso and
Bathe 2000; De Domenico et al. 2018).
The main implications of the temperature rise
on the hysteretic behaviour of the DCSS
prototype can be assessed in terms of energy
dissipated per cycle (EDC) or in terms of
dynamic friction coefficient ( dyn ) computed as
EDC
dyn  (2)
4Wuav
where the average maximum displacement is
calculated as uav  (umax  umin ) / 2 , umax and umin
denoting the maximum (positive) and minimum
(negative) extreme displacement in each cycle.
The values of dyn and the corresponding
variation with respect to the mean value of the
dynamic friction coefficient dyn computed as
average out of the three cycles, namely
dyn ,i  dyn ,mean
dyn  (3)
dyn ,mean
are listed in Table 2 for tests #5 and #8. The
temperature rise produces a friction reduction of
12.7% in test #5 and of 8.1% in test #8.
Moreover, the variation with respect to the mean
values are rather limited, in the range ±8%. It is
worth noting that these variations are not
significant if compared to the involved
uncertainties of the mechanical behaviour of the
DCSS, the manufacturers’ accuracy in identifying
a nominal friction coefficient, and the simplified
formulae used in the design seismic codes for
base-isolated structures. However, these results
are limited to the employed sliding material. In
fact, for a similar testing protocol applied to
another DCSS with PTFE as sliding material,
other authors (Furinghetti et al. 2019) reported
more considerable reductions of the friction
coefficient with repetition of cycles. By
inference, this means that different kinds of
sliding materials have a different sensitivity to
temperature increase at the sliding interface,
which is an aspects that deserves further
investigation.
Table 2. Variation of dynamic friction coefficient with
repetition of cycles for two tests
Test cycle dyn dyn
1 10.06 +7.84
5 2 9.15 -1.92
3 8.78 -5.92
1 6.42 +4.67
8 2 6.09 -0.83
3 5.90 -3.84
4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FUTURE
DEVELOPMENTS
This contribution has presented an
experimental investigation on the temperature
rise observed in a full-scale DCSS prototype due
to the repetition of cycles. After applying a
specified value of vertical load (corresponding to
two average contact pressures equal to 15 MPa
and 30 Mpa), a sinusoidal displacement
waveform is imposed with different sliding
velocities ranging from 10 mm/s up to 400 mm/s
in order to analyse different testing scenarios
corresponding to different heat fluxes.
The heating phenomena have been studied
through a series of temperature registrations
obtained by eight J-type thermocouples being
embedded in the upper sliding plate of the DCSS
prototype, in contact with the stainless steel sheet
such that their measurements are representative of
the temperature rise at the sliding interface.
The force-displacement curves and the
corresponding temperature measurements of the
present experimental campaign confirms the
influence of the temperature rise on the hysteretic
behaviour of DCSS isolators, but some critical
remarks can be made considering the obtained
results. In particular, for the sliding material used
in the present experimental campaign
(UHMWPE), temperature rise up to t = 45°C
does not produce a significant reduction of the
friction coefficient. Indeed, tests involving
temperature rise up to t = 45°C (typically, tests
involving slow velocities in combination with
small contact pressures) have shown force-
displacement loops that almost superimposed to
each other during repetition of cycles, with no
visible variation of the friction coefficient. On the
other hand, higher temperature increases induced
by a combination of higher contact pressures and
higher sliding velocities, have led to a certain
reduction of the force-displacement loops. The
tests discussed here have shown a maximum
reduction of the dynamic friction coefficient
(calculated based on the energy dissipated per
cycle) of a bit more than 12% when comparing
the third cycle with the first cycle for a test
involving around 70°C of local temperature at the
sliding interface. Doubtlessly, these variations are
modest if compared to the involved uncertainties
in defining the hysteretic behaviour of the device,
the approximated formulae used in the seismic
codes for base-isolated structures and the
manufacturers’ accuracy in identifying the
nominal friction coefficient. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the employed sliding material is
thermally stable in a rather wide range of
temperatures. It is worth noting that this
behaviour is limited to the sliding material of the
present experimental campaign. Other authors
(Furinghetti et al. 2019) reported more significant
friction variations for a comparable testing
protocol applied to a DCSS endowed with PTFE
(rather than UHMWPE) as sliding material.
The experimental campaign is still ongoing
and further tests are planned to expand the testing
protocol. In particular, more severe testing
scenarios involving higher contact pressures in
conjunction with higher sliding velocities are
underway. Moreover, a series of bidirectional
tests (e.g., cloverleaf tests introduced by the
European standards for anti-seismic devices EN
15129:2009) are also planned, which would allow
a comparison of the temperature rise between
bidirectional and corresponding monodirectional
excitations (represented by the single components
of the bidirectional orbits acting separately).
Finally, the punctual temperature measurements
obtained in this experimental campaign are useful
to calibrate thermo-mechanical coupled finite
element models incorporating a piecewise and
time-dependent friction model, so as to
investigate the thermo-mechanical behaviour of
DCSS isolators reducing the need of expensive
and time-consuming testing activities.
Stachowiak, G.W., Batchelor, A.W., 2005. Engineering
tribology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Elsevier Butteworth-
Heinemann.
Zayas, V., Low, S., Mahin, SA., 1990. A simple pendulum
technique for achieving seismic isolation, Earthq.
Spectra, 6, 317–333.

REFERENCES
CEN Comité Européen de normalisation TC 340, 2009.
European Code UNI EN 15129:2009 anti-seismic
devices. Brussels, Belgium: European Committee for
Standardization.
Constantinou, M., Mokha, A., Reinhorn, AR., 1990. Teflon
bearings in base isolation II: modeling, J. Struct. Eng.,
116(2), 455–474.
De Domenico, D., Falsone, G., Ricciardi, G., 2018.
Improved response-spectrum analysis of base-isolated
buildings: a substructure-based response spectrum
method. Eng. Struct., 162, 198-212.
De Domenico, D., Ricciardi, G., Benzoni, G., 2018.
Analytical and finite element investigation on the
thermo-mechanical coupled response of friction
isolators under bidirectional excitation, Soil Dyn.
Earthq. Eng., 106, 131-147.
De Domenico, D., Ricciardi, G., Infanti, S., Benzoni, G.,
2019. Frictional heating in double curved surface sliders
and its effects on the hysteretic behavior: An
experimental study. Frontiers in Built Environment, 5,
74, doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2019.00074.
De Domenico, D., Ricciardi, G., Takewaki, I., 2019. Design
strategies of viscous dampers for seismic protection of
building structures: a review. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng.,
118, 144-165.
Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Croatto, F., 2005. Frictional
behavior of steel-PTFE interfaces for seismic isolation.
Bull. Earthq. Eng., 3, 75–99.
Ettles, C.M.M., 1986. Polymer and elastomer friction in the
thermal control regime, ASME J. Tribol., 108, 98-104.
Furinghetti, M., Pavese, A., Quaglini, V., Dubini, P., 2019.
Experimental investigation of the cyclic response of
double curved surface sliders subjected to radial and
bidirectional sliding motions, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng.,
117, 190-202.
Gandelli, E., Penati, M., Quaglini, V., Lomiento, G.,
Miglio, E., Benzoni, G., 2019. A novel OpenSees
element for single curved surface sliding isolators. Soil
Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 119, 433-453.
Lomiento, G., Bonessio, N., Benzoni, G., 2013. Friction
model for sliding bearings under seismic excitation, J.
Earthq. Eng., 17, 1162-1191.
Mokha, A., Constantinou, M., Reinhorn, AR. 1990. Teflon
bearings in base isolation I: testing, J. Struct. Eng.,
116(2), 438–454.
Pantuso, D., Bathe, K.J., Bouzinov, P.A., 2000. A finite
element procedure for the analysis of thermo-
mechanical solids in contact, Comput. Struct., 75, 551-
573.
Quaglini, V., Bocciarelli, M., Gandelli, E., Dubini, P.,
2014. Numerical assessment of frictional heating in
sliding bearings for seismic isolation, J. Earthq. Eng.,
18, 1198-1216.

View publication stats