EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL.

11, 355-366 (1983)

RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES TO HARMONIC

SUPPORT MOTION

N. MOSTAGHEL,* M. HEJAZIt AND J. TANBAKUCHIt

Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Utah, U.S.A.

SUMMARY
The problem of response of a single degree of freedom structure supported on a sliding foundation and subjected to
harmonic support motions is considered. The non-linear governing equations of motion are derived. It turns out that
these equations are linear in each sliding and non-sliding phase and can be solved in closed forms in each phase. The
equations for evaluation of the beginning and ending times of different phases are also formulated and solved
numerically. The response for different coefficients of friction and various levels of excitation is evaluated and presented
graphically. It is concluded that sliding supports can be quite effective in isolating structures from support excitations.

INTRODUCTION
The isolation of structures from support motion is a practical engineering problem. Besides the classical
spring-mass system' which is developed based on harmonic excitations, there are many suggestions to isolate
structures from damaging effects of earthquakes. The flexible first storey and the soft storey
concept,' due to consequential instability and P-A effects, are not practical schemes6 Also the use of
specially shaped rollers' or ball-bearings* under the structures has not been implemented. Considerable
work has been done to show the effectiveness of steel plate laminated rubber bearingsg-I3 as an effective base
isolator system. The use of a friction plate on top of steel plate laminated rubber bearings has also been
considered.'4-'5 One problem with these types of isolators is that their performance could be adversely
affected if the predomiqant frequency of excitations is close to the natural frequency of the system.
Sliding structures whose response to harmonic base excitations is the topic of this paper are structures
which can slide on their supports. The maximum ground accelerations that can be transmitted to the super-
structures are controlled by the coefficient of sliding friction at their supports (see Figure 1). Although, due to
rigid-plastic behaviour of the sliding support, the system is non-linear, in each sliding and non-sliding phase
the system's behaviour is linear. The conditions for the determination of the transition point between any two
phases are presented. These points are obtained as the solution process progresses. The responses at the end
of each phase are used as initial conditions for the next phase. Through this matching technique, the non-
linear problem is transformed to linear ones which are solved analytically for each phase.
Parametric studies have been carried out to show the effects of different coefficients of friction, mass ratios
and amplitudes of harmonic support excitations on the absolute acceleration and sliding displacement
responses. Non-dimensionalized response spectra (non-dimensionalized with respect to the corresponding
peaks of the input excitations) are calculated and plotted for absolute accelerations and sliding displacements
for coefficients of friction p = 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, for excitation amplitudes a = 0.3g, 0.5s (where g is the
acceleration of gravity) and for three mass ratios o! = m/(m+ M ) = 0.75, 0.50, 0.25 (implying m/M = 3, 1
and f) where m is the mass of the structure and M is the mass of the foundation raft. In all cases the damping
ratio is assumed to be 5 per cent of the critical damping. As expected, these plots show that absolute

* Professor of Civil Engineering.

t Research Associate.
$ Research Assistant.
0098-8847/83/030355-12$01.20 Received 18 May 1982
@ 1983 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 3 September 1982
356 N. MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI AND J. TANBAKUCHI

acceleration of the super-structure is smaller for smaller coefficients of friction, while the sliding displacement
is larger for smaller coefficients of friction.
By comparing different plots, it is concluded that for larger mass ratios, the level of absolute acceleration
response is independent of the period of the input excitations and depends only on the base’s coefficient of
friction. It is also found that the level of sliding displacements for input frequencies lower than the resonant
frequency is not affected significantly by changes in mass ratio. Overall, the larger the level of input
acceleration and the larger the mass ratio, the more effective the sliding supports in cutting down the level of
absolute acceleration response. In the following sections the details of formulation, solutions and results are
presented.

FORMULATION
A single degree of freedom structure of mass m, damping c and stiffness k supported by a foundation raft that
can slide horizontally is shown in Figure 1. The coefficient of sliding friction is p. If the ground moves with an
acceleration xo = a sin at the system moves, and applications of Newton’s second law yield the equations of
dynamic equilibrium, which are
mji + c i , + kxr = 0
MX =F-mi

where x is the total displacement of mass m in an absolute frame, xr is the displacement of the mass m relative
to the foundation raft, X is the total displacement of the foundation raft in the absolute frame and F is the
interface force between the foundation raft and its support. The maximum value of F which occurs when the
system is in a sliding phase is given by
F = pg(m+M)& 13)
where p is the coefficient of sliding friction and

X , is the sliding displacement, Xsis the sliding velocity and u is the mass ratio defined by expression (10). As is
noted from the above expression, E can only be + 1 and - 1.

I
Foundation R a f t
C

s1~ f d i n gElement, p M

-
I
Foundatlon Block
x,

Figure 1. Single degree of freedom structure on sliding support

 RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES 357

Also from Figure 1,

Substitutions of the above relations into equilibrium equations (1) and (2) yield
x, +2twkr+ w2 Xr = -xs-xo
X, = Epg-atlji,--X,

where 5 is the percentage of critical damping, w = J(k/m) and

m
u=-
m+M
It should be noted that expression (9) is valid only in sliding phases.

Solution
The solution of equations (8)and (9), for X,(t) = a sin Rt, in general involves two sets of phases, non-sliding
and sliding.
(i) Non-sliding phases, ti<t<ti+,, i = 1,3,5, ..., tl = 0.
In these phases xs = ys= 0, therefore equation (8) can be written as

j, + 2twkr +w2 xr = -a sin at (11)

for the non-sliding time intervals
t i < t c t i + l , i = 1,3,5,..., t , = 0 (12)
The solution of equation (11) may be represented by
+
x,(t) = p sin (nt- e) e - SW'[Ai
sin wd t + Bi cos a d t]

f,(t) = Rp cos (Rt - e)+e-c"'[ - <w(Aisin wd t + Bi cos a d t) + wd(Ai cos t - Bi sin a d t)]
j,(t) = - R2 p sin (at- 8)- e-CW'[w2(1 - 2t2)( Asin
~a d t + B~cos wd t )+ 2<wwd(Aicos wd t - B, sin wdt)]
where

and w,, = wJ(1 -t2) is the damped frequency. The values of A i and Bi in expression (13), for each non-
sliding phase, are evaluated by the introduction of the corresponding initial conditions at the beginning of
the phase. Let
Xr(ti) = Xri, kr(ti) = k r i (15)
represent the initial relative displacement and the initial relative velocity at the beginning of the non-sliding
phase i.Introducing these initial conditions into expression (13) and its first derivative yields
358 N. MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI AND J. TANBAKUCHI

Since the system is initially at rest, xrl = krl = 0.

,,
(ii) Sliding phases, ti < t < ti + i = 2,4,6, ... .
To obtain xr(t) and X,(t), equations (8) and (9) should be solved simultaneously. To this end Xs,as given by
equation (9), is substituted into equation (8) to yield

-E M
jir+251 w1 ji,+w: xr = -
1-ff
where
w,=-
w
tl =- 5
J(1-a)' JCl -4
The solution of equation (18) in each sliding phase may be represented by

xr(t) = vR,(t)+L(t), ti<t<ti+l, i = 2,4,6,... (20)

where

and O l d = w1 J(1 -5:).

It should be noted that j&) and xr(ti) are the relative velocity and the relative displacement at the
beginning of sliding phase i and that Yt)represents the effects of the initial conditions at the beginning of
each sliding phase.
Differentiating x,(t) as given by expression (20) twice and substituting the result into expression (9) yields
the sliding acceleration

where

at)= -( 1 - 25;) 0;Yt)- 25, W l d w , exp [ - 5 1 o,(t - t i ) ]

Integrating the sliding acceleration Xs,as given by expression (9), and noting that at the beginning of any
sliding phase i, the sliding velocity is
 RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES 3 59

at)= -cl w1 L(ti)+wldexp[-5, w l ( t - t i ) ]

[ir(ti)+clO1
1
xr(ti)cosold(t-ti)-~r(ti)sinold(t-ti) (32)

The sliding displacement X,,which is obtained by integrating the sliding velocity, is given by

where
X,(t) = - [Xo(t)- t X O ( t i ) ] - a[x,(t) - ti,(ti)]
G
+ &pg -- tti) + ci (33)

(iii) The starting times of sliding phases, ti, i = 2,4,6, ... .

Substituting for x and X from equations (5) and (6), and for F from equation (3) into the equilibrium
equation (2), it can be shown that during any sliding phase
pg-Iair+xx,+x,l = 0 (35)
where CI is defined by relation (10). In any non-sliding phase xs
= 0 and the magnitude of the interface force
I F I < (m+ M ) pg. Considering these facts, it can be shown that during any non-sliding phase, the equilibrium
equation (2) may be replaced by the following inequality:
p g - I air + x o I > O (36)
If t i is the time of initiation of sliding phase i, then ,ti which is infinitesimally less than ti, is the end time of the
preceding non-sliding phase. Therefore, according to expression ( 3 9 , the end times of non-sliding phases are
the roots of
pg-~atljir+X0I = 0 (37)
which are obtained as the solution process progresses.
(iv) The end times of sliding phases, t i + l , i = 2,4,6, ... .
These times are the times for which the sliding velocity X sbecomes equal to zero. Considering relation (29),
these times are the roots of
Cyo(t)- Xo(ti)I + aC(ir(t)- i r ( t i ) I -&pg(t - ti) = 0 (38)
which are obtained as the solution process progresses.

EVALUATION OF RESPONSE
Starting at t = tl = 0 with initial conditions ~ ~ (=0i,(O) ) = 0, the non-sliding relative displacement xr and
relative acceleration 2, are evaluated from expression (13)for a damping ratio of 5 = 5 per cent, a mass ratio
a = 0.75, which according to expression (10) implies m/M = 3.0, an input acceleration amplitude a = 0.59
and four coefficients of friction a = 0.05,0.10, 0.15, 0.20. The quantity pg -1 a%,+ xoI, which is the left-hand
side of inequality (36), is also evaluated. As long as this quantity is positive the system is responding in the
non-sliding phase. Equation (37) yields t 2 , the starting time of the first sliding phase. This time, t,, is
substituted into relations (13) to obtain xr(tZ)and ir(t,). These initial values are substituted into relations (20)
to (34),and the relative displacement x,, relative acceleration i,,the sliding acceleration x,, sliding velocity &
and sliding displacement X , are determined as functions of time. The relative velocity irand the support
velocity Xo(t),which is known a priori since the support acceleration a sinQ t is known, are substituted into
equation (38), and time t 3 , the time of the start of the second non-sliding phase, is calculated. In all cases the
value Df E is calculated from the right-hand side of equation (4) at the end times of non-sliding phases. The
process is continued over the total duration t d of support acceleration, and the maxima of xr, 2 and X, are
360 N. MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI AND J. TANBAKUCHI

determined for the structural period from T = 0.05 to T = 1.0 s at period intervals of 0.05 s and for a single
value of excitation period Tg= 2a/R = 0-5s. The duration of excitation t, is taken to be 10 times the
excitation period q, i.e.
t , = lor, (39)
Assuming the period of excitation, q, to be 0.5 s, this yields an excitation duration of 5.0 s. This duration is
used in all calculations. The non-dimensionalized responses are defined by
j!(T 6, P)
Absolute Acceleration = ____
a

Relative Displacement = L(T 5, PI

D
Sliding Displacement = XS(T 6 9 P)
(42)
D
where

D = a/R2 is the steady-state peak ground displacement and a is the peak ground acceleration.
To display the effectiveness of sliding supports in reducing the maximum level of response acceleration,
and to show the variations of the maximum sliding displacements, the normalized absolute acceleration
response (normalized with respect to a, the peak excitation acceleration) and the normalized sliding
displacement response (normalized with respect to D, the steady-state peak excitation displacement) are
plotted against the frequency ratio, p, where

in Figures 2 and 3. To study the effects of mass ratio a on the response maxima, a is set equal to 0.5 (meaning
m/M = 1.0) and 0.25 (meaning m/M = $), while the amplitude of input acceleration is 0.59. The normalized
maxima of acceleration and sliding displacement are calculated as before and the results are presented in
Figures 4 to 7. To study the effects of the amplitude of input acceleration on the response maxima, the input
acceleration amplitude is set equal to 0.39 and the responses are evaluated as before. The results are
presented in Figures 8 and 9.
The absolute acceleration responses for a rigid structure (zero frequency ratio) as presented in Figures 2,4,
5 and 8 are calculated by considering the fact that for a rigid structure the maximum response acceleration is
equal to pg, i.e. the base’s coefficient of friction times the gravitational acceleration.
Although closed form analytical solutions are available in each phase, the values of the response maxima
and the times of the starts and ends of sliding and non-sliding phases can be considerably affected if the time
interval At used in their evaluations is too long. It turns out that these sensitivities can be removed if At is
chosen such that

Atgmin 3
[209 20’
0.02
] (47)

where T and Tgare assumed to be larger than 002s. The response quantities are also very sensitive to the
exact times of starts and ends of sliding phases defined by the roots of equations (37) and (38) respectively. It
was found that the response quantitities can be obtained with sufficient accuracy either if the roots of these
 RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES 36 1

?
m .

?
m.

';?
:s h
-
2 0
Z G- = 0.75 4 n 1 = 3M
c
c
E?
- 1 Y ) .
W
0
2 9
w * -
c
3
-,?
z n -
m
c
3
N.

?
C r

- = 0.20
I
p = 0.15 p = 0.10

L
/
b
0 I
:20 :40 :60 :80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1-60 1-80 2-00

FREQUENCY RATIO
Figure 2. Variations of acceleration with frequency ratio

equations are evaluated with an accuracy of the order k(1OP6)sor if the absolute values of the left-hand
sides of these equations are less than
As t o the adequacy of the durations of excitations, defined by expression (391, it was found after many trials
that the duration utilized is satisfactory.

5 = 5%

G = 0.75 =+.m = 3M
A = 0.59; T = 0.5 see.
9

W
E ?
0 0
<
-1'
c.

0
E ?
0 m.
0
z
- 9
z
J
v ) O
--- p = 0.10

4 .4
p = 0.15

9 p = 0.20
cy.-

0
I
-00 .20 -40 *60 *80 1-00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

FREOUENCY RATIO
Figure 3. Variations of sliding displacement with frequency ratio
3 62 N . MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI A N D J. TANBAKUCHI

9
Q,.

9
m.

2
\
9
'15 h .
-9
z
0
I-
<
VI.

a 0 G = 0.5=Sm = M
W
Y).
li
0
0
< 4
v -
c
W
3
0
-1 9
v) ra-
m
< 0
N.

9
c

9 .OO :20 :40 :60 -80 1-00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1-80 2.00

FREWENCY RATIO
Figure 4. Variations of acceleration with frequency ratio

FREQUENCY RATIO
Figure 5. Variations of acceleration with frequency ratio
 RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES 363

0
W
c.

-e ?f II = 0.05

E - -
v)N

& ?
s c
w o _

w
0
<
L ?
v) m.
w
n
0 O u = 0.10
z
O
d.
w
-I
W ?
t.

9
N.
II = 0.20

9, I
-00 -20 -40 -60 .80 1-00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2 - 00

FREQUENCY RATIO
Figure 6. Variations of sliding displacement with frequency ratio

p 0.05

5 = 5%

o = 0.25 =+m = M/3

A = 0.59; T = 0.5 sec.

9

I
0 -20 -40 .60 -80 1-00 1-20 1.40 1-60 1.80 2.00

FREQUENCY RATIO
Figure 7. Variations of sliding displacement with frequency ratio
364 N. MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI AND J. TANBAKUCHI

-
11 = 0.20 A! = 0.15 p=O.lO p = 0.
/ /
I / /
/
f /
9’ 1

.OO .20 .40 .60 -80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1-60 2.00

FREQUENCY RATIO
Figure 8. Variations of acceleration with frequency ratio

f. = 5%
a = 0.75-111 = 3M
A = 0.39; T = 0.5 s e c .
9

- 10.
m +

9
(Y

0
1
.oo .20
‘.40 :60 -80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1-60 1-80 2
- 00

.FREOUENCY R A T I O
Figure 9. Variations of sliding displacement with frequency ratio
 RESPONSE OF SLIDING STRUCTURES 365

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Figure 2 represents the normalized acceleration spectrum for structures in which the mass of the structure is 3
times the mass of the foundation raft and the peak support acceleration is 0.5g. It is observed that:
(i) the spectral response of isolated structures appears to be independent of frequency;
(ii) the level of response depends only on the base’s coefficient of friction. As expected the smaller the
coefficient of friction the lower the response;
(iii) the level of response of isolated structures is considerably lower than the level of response of
corresponding fixed base structures.
Figure 8 represents the spectral response as in Figure 2 except that the level of support acceleration is
reduced to 039. Observations identical to the ones made above can be made from this figure as well.
Comparing Figures 2 and 8, it may be concluded that the higher the level of input excitation, the more
effective is the sliding support in reducing the normalized acceleration response. Figures 4 and 5 are also
acceleration response spectra. The level of support acceleration is 0.59, as for the spectrum of Figure 2.
However, the mass of the structure is the same as that of the foundation raft for Figure 4 and is one-third of
the mass of the foundation raft for Figure 5. The observations made for Figure 2 hold except that the
response becomes somewhat frequency dependent for frequency ratios above 1.0, especially for large friction
coefficients. Comparing Figures 2, 4 and 5, it may be concluded that the larger the mass of the structure as
compared to the mass of the foundation raft, the lower the level of acceleration response.
Figure 3 represents the normalized sliding displacement spectrum for structures in which the mass of the
structure is 3 times the mass of the foundation raft and the peak support acceleration is 0.5g. As expected the
sliding displacement response is larger for smaller coefficients of friction. Further, it may be observed that for
frequency ratios less than unity, especially for lower friction coefficients, the levels of sliding displacement
response do not significantly vary with frequency ratio. Figures 6 and 7 are also sliding displacement spectra
for a peak support acceleration of 0.59 except that the mass of the structure is equal to the mass of the
foundation raft for Figure 6 and is equal to one-third of the mass of the foundation raft for Figure 7.
Comparing Figures 3 , 6 and 7 it may be concluded that, for the same frequency ratio, variations in mass ratio
do not affect the level of sliding displacement significantly. Also, as expected, the lower the mass ratio, the less
variation in sliding displacement with frequency ratio. Figure 9 represents a spectral response as in Figure 3
except that the level of support acceleration is reduced to 0.39. By comparing Figures 3 and 9, it is concluded
that reduction in the level of support acceleration, as expected, reduces the sliding displacement response.
However, this reduction is not uniform over the frequencies considered.

CONCLUSIONS
Through the study of response of sliding structures to harmonic support motion, it has been established that
sliding supports can be quite effective in controlling the level of acceleration response of structures.
Furthermore, for large mass ratio and large level of ground excitations, which are the cases of practical
interest, the acceleration response is independent of the frequency of excitations. This implies that sliding
supports can be effectively used for all kinds of sites, whether hard or soft soil, whether close or far from
causative faults.
The problem of evaluation of the response of sliding structures to earthquake type excitations is under
consideration, and the results will be reported later on. The harmonic input was utilized here to display the
extent of dependence of the response on parameters such as mass ratio, friction coefficient and frequency of
input excitations. Also, since for this kind of input the closed-form solutions for sliding and non-sliding
phases are available, harmonic input can be used to verify the numerical routine which is being developed to
estimate the response for earthquake type excitations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The support of the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. CEE-8112580 is gratefully
acknowledged.
366 N. MOSTAGHEL, M. HEJAZI A N D J. TANBAKUCHI

REFERENCES
1. R. W. Clough and J. Penzien, Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975.
2. R. R. Martel, ‘The effect of earthquake on buildings with a flexible first story’, Bull. seism. SOC. Am. 19 (1929).
3. N. B. Green, ‘Flexible “first story” construction for earthquake resistance’, Trans. ASCE 100, 645-652 (1935).
4. L. S. Jacobsen, ‘Effect of flexible first story in a building located on vibrating grounds’, S . Timoshenko 60th Anniversary Volume,
Macmillan, New York, 1938.
5. M. Fintel and F. R. Khan, ‘Shock-absorbing soft-story concept for multistory earthquake structures’, J . Am. concrete inst. 66,
381-390 (1969).
6. A. K. Chopra, D. P. Clough and R. W. Clough, ‘Earthquake resistance of buildings with a soft first storey’, Earthquake eny. struct.
dyn. 1, 347-355 (1973).
7 . K. Matsushita and M. Izumi, ‘Studies on mechanisms to decrease earthquake forces applied to buildings’, Proc. 4th world conf:
earthquake eny., Santiago de Chile I(1969).
8. M. S. Caspe, ‘Earthquake isolation of multistory concrete structures’, J. Am. concrete inst. 67, 923-933 (1970).
9. J. M. Kelly, J . M. Eidinger and C. J. Derham, ‘A practical soft story isolation system’, Report No. UCB/EERC-77/27, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1977.
10. J M. Kelly and D. E. Chitty, ‘Control of seismic response of piping systems and components in power plants by base isolation’,
Proc. ASME pressure vessels piping conj, 79-PVPSS, San Francisco (1979).
11. C. J . Derham, A. G. Thomas and J. M. Kelly, ‘A rubber bearing system for seismic protection of structures’. In “Engineering
Design for Earthquake Environments”, I . Mech. E . Con$ Puhl., 1978-12, pp. 53-58 (1978).
12. R. I. Skinner, J. M. Kelly and A. J. Heine, ‘Hysteretic dampers for earthquake-resistant structures’, Earthquake eng. ,struct. dyn. 3,
287-296 (1975).
13. J. M. Kelly, ‘Control devices for eathquake-resistant structural design’, ed. H. H. E. Leipholz in Structural Control, North-Holland
& SM Publications, 1980, pp. 391413.
14. J. H. Williams, Jr., ‘Designing earthquake-resistant structures’, Techn. reo. 76, 3 7 4 3 (1973).
15. C. Plichon and F. Jolivet, ‘Aseismic foundation systems for nuclear power plants’, Proc. S.M.I.R.T. conf:, London, England, Paper
N o . C 19011978 (1978).