›
40 TheStructuralEngineer Technical
August 2014
Brakes for buildings: the new
frontier of friction dampers
W. Wild MEng (Hons) Arup Leeds
Synopsis
By providing an overview of the development of modern
friction dampers, this article aims to raise awareness
and explore the state-of-the-art in the field of seismic
structural control. This includes a look at how friction
brakes can be regulated during an earthquake to best
control structural responses. Only now is the technology
becoming available to do this at high speed and low cost.
After examining the passive use of friction dampers, the
ability to incorporate semi-active control is explored, with
a particular focus on the control algorithms used within
the dampers. Here, the need for further comparison
between proposed algorithms is highlighted. The article
also pays attention to the practical considerations
involved in the use of semi-active friction dampers in
practice, before concluding that seismic engineers
should expect to see the use of semi-actively controlled
devices coming into play within the next twenty years.
Introduction
Since the 1980s, damage caused by earthquakes (and the resulting
hazards) has driven engineers worldwide to expand their design
objectives beyond reducing loss of life, to encompass minimising
structural damage. In particular, the damage caused by the
Northridge 1994 and Kobe 1995 earthquakes were key drivers for
this change. Notable findings from these earthquakes highlighted
the importance that municipal buildings play in post disaster
support. The ability for commercial structures to return to near
normal operation has significant economic implications (c.30%
of California’s manufacturing base was within 40 miles of the
Northridge epicentre1). One such approach to minimising structural
damage involves increasing the energy dissipated within a structure
during an earthquake. Historically, this has been achieved through
the inelastic yielding of elements within the structure. More recently
however, special devices have been developed for this purpose;
friction dampers are one such device.
What are friction dampers?
Often situated between the brace and beam elements in centrally
braced frames (Figure 1), friction dampers operate under the same
premise as conventional car brakes; dissipating energy through the
TSE32_40-42 Brakes Building v2.indd 40
Brakes for buildings
friction between two surfaces. Friction dampers commonly comprise
two steel plates sandwiching a brass sliding-plate, with multiple bolts
providing a clamping force between these plates (Figure 2). This
configuration is commonly known as a slotted bolt connection (SBC).
Friction dampers only dissipate energy when a sufficient lateral force
exceeds the friction between the plates, causing them to slip past
one another. This load is known as the 'slip-force'. These friction
dampers are considered as a passive control technique because the
slip-force is defined prior to an earthquake and remains constant
throughout.
Determining an optimum slip-force
Since the development of passive friction dampers, researchers
have questioned whether an optimum 'slip-force' exists2. If the
slip-force is too high it may not be reached in small or moderate
earthquakes and hence no energy will be dissipated through
the dampers3 (Figure 3). Even in strong earthquakes, the energy
dissipation would be low if the slip-force is not reached in most
loading cycles. Furthermore, the increased stiffness of a relatively
high slip-force will reduce inter-storey drift4. However, care must
be taken to ensure the damper slips before the brace elements
buckle (potentially leading to a rapid brittle failure). As the slip-force
is lowered, the frame approximates an unbraced structure (Fig. 3)
with excessive displacements in strong earthquakes3, but the added
flexibility of a lower slip-force reduces the structure’s acceleration
response4. Hence, the optimal slip-force level would balance
deformations, accelerations, energy dissipation and forces within the
structure. This is not a simple task, particularly when the structure is
subject to a variety of seismic inputs, with different characteristics.
The effective determination of an optimum slip-force requires many
simulations and prior knowledge of the earthquake properties.
As this is not achievable in reality, the optimum control of passive
friction dampers is not currently possible.
Semi-active friction dampers
The difficulties associated with determining an optimum slip-force
has led researchers to question whether the slip-force could
be adjusted during an earthquake to best control the structural
response — therefore eliminating the need for a fixed optimum
slip-force. In other words, by adjusting the tightness of the bolts,
the clamping force (and hence the slip-force) may be regulated
throughout the duration of the earthquake. The concept of
varying the slip-force is not a new one — researchers have been
investigating the field since the late 1990s.
This type of structural control is known as 'semi-active'. Semi-
active control systems are often likened to controllable passive
systems, offering the adaptability of active control without the
need for a large power supply or continuous control action. Active
24/07/2014 11:45
 www.thestructuralengineer.org

41

Slotted bolt connection (SBC)

provide effective control in nonlinear structures and have been
simplified to meet the high operating speed demands3. Little work
Bracing has been done to compare the performance of multiple control
algorithms against benchmark criteria, but this will be required
before a suitable control algorithm can be used in practice.

Practical implementation
Several passive friction dampers have been successfully
implemented in Japan, India, USA and Greece. However, at the time
of writing, no semi-actively controlled friction damper has been
installed in practice. One of the barriers limiting the use of semi-
active friction dampers is the development of an effective actuator
to clamp the friction plates. As described previously, the clamping
force in passive friction dampers is applied through prestressed
bolts. Semi-active actuators that attempt to continually adjust the
tightness of the bolts incur large time delays in achieving the desired
force, making them unsuitable in seismic control. Researchers are
looking into the potential of using faster hydraulic and piezoelectric
friction dampers to eliminate these delays5. Peizoelectric dampers
develop the clamping force through the application of a voltage
through the piezoelectric material. This causes the material to
expand, applying a clamping force to the friction plates proportional
to the voltage6.

Until relatively recently, it was not possible to find a computer

 Figure 1
Cross-section of four storey structure with friction dampers
control devices directly introduce new forces into the structure and
therefore require a significant energy supply. On the other hand,
semi-active control devices adjust the characteristics of the damper
at appropriate times (in the case of friction dampers, the slip-force
is the regulated characteristic) and therefore a substantially smaller
energy supply will suffice. Semi-active systems instil an element
of redundancy not available in active systems. If the energy supply
for the damper was severed during an earthquake, the device will
continue to act passively, with a fixed slip-force.
capable of running the control algorithm in situ on the damper.
With the release of the credit card sized Raspberry Pi controller in
2012 this has now been made possible. The device not only has the
processing power required but is small enough to fit onto the friction
damper at a relatively low cost7.
The majority of the algorithms used to control the slip-force require
inter-storey drift and inter-storey velocity inputs in their operation.
Monitoring the inter-storey velocity of structures can be achieved
relatively easily through the placement of seismometers on each

Control algorithms
The ability to control the slip-force at specific moments in time,
requires a predetermined control algorithm to feedback appropriate
adjustments to the friction damper based on measured structural
responses. The effectiveness of the control system is heavily
dependent on the algorithm employed. This is where research efforts
in the field have been primarily focused over the last two decades
— with many different control algorithms having been proposed.
Some algorithms are completely decentralised, considering only
local measurements (typically, inter-storey drift and velocity) in their
feedback. On the other hand, distributed algorithms are such that
the global response of the structure is used for feeding back to the
devices.

In general, the algorithms proposed are relatively simple; if the

algorithm were too complex (taking multiple seconds to operate),
the feedback would be unsuitable. This is because in seismic control
the system changes rapidly with each passing second and a delayed
feedback will lead to undesirable control, potentially doing more
harm to the structural response. Due to the magnitude of seismic
forces, structures often exhibit nonlinear deformations. As such,
algorithms must not assume structures will remain linear. This is a
problem with several algorithms that consider the structure’s rest
position to remain constant throughout. Alternatively, algorithms
which focus on maximising the energy dissipated within the damper,  Figure 2
Schematic of friction damper

TSE32_40-42 Brakes Building v2.indd 41 24/07/2014 11:45

 ›
42 TheStructuralEngineer Technical
August 2014 Brakes for buildings

floor. However, monitoring the inter-

storey drift within structures has been References
proven to be less straightforward. Various
methods have been suggested over the
N Figure 3
Variation of slip-
force on structural E1 Olshansky R., Johnson L. A., Topping K. C. et al. (2005)
behaviour
past decade, including the use of a Linear Opportunity in Chaos: Rebuilding After the 1994 Northridge
Voltage Transducer (LVT) to measure the and 1995 Kobe Earthquakes [Online] Available at: www.urban.
distance between two bar elements — illinois.edu/faculty/olshansky/chaos/chaos.html (Accessed:
one extending down from the ceiling and July 2014)
the other upwards from the floor.
The main disadvantages with LVT E2 Lee S.-H., Park J- H., Lee S.-K. and Min K.-W. (2007) ‘Allocation
systems concern the space required and slip load of friction dampers for seismically excited building
to install the device, often impacting structure based on storey shear force distribution’, Engineering
occupants and partition walls. This has led Structures, 30 (4), pp. 930–940
to research of contactless devices. One
such device requires the installation of a E3 Nishitani A., Nitta Y. and Ikeda Y. (2003) ‘Semiactive Structural-
light emitting diode array on the ceiling Control Based on Variable Slip-Force Level Dampers’, Journal
and a position-sensitive detector element of Structural Engineering, 129 (7), pp. 933–945
on the floor. This setup is currently
employed within two buildings in Japan8. E4 Ng C. L. and Xu Y. L. (2007) ‘Semi-active control of a building
complex with variable friction dampers’, Engineering Structures,
Summary 29 (6), pp. 1209–1225
During the 1980s and early 1990s, efforts
focused on passive friction dampers with E5 Zhao D. and Hongan L. (2010) ‘Shaking table tests and analyses
a fixed slip-force. Researchers concluded of semi-active fuzzy control for seismic reduction with a
that optimum performance could not piezoelecric variable-friction damper’, Smart Materials and
be achieved in practice without prior Structures, 19 (10), pp. 1–9
knowledge of the earthquake and was
therefore unattainable. Research then E6 Unsal M., Niezrecki C. and Crane C., III (2004) ‘Two semi-active
turned to semi-active control, in which approaches for vibration isolation: piezoelectric friction damper
the slip-force may be varied during the and magnetorheological damper’, Mechatronics 2004 (ICM’04),
earthquake, based on feedback from a IEEE International Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June 3–5,
controller. The state-of-the-art technique 2004, pp. 60–65
of using clamping force actuators involves
the use of piezoelectric materials to E7 Raspberry Pi Foundation (2014) What is a Raspberry Pi [Online]
apply the force to the friction plates. Available at: www.raspberrypi.org (Accessed: July 2014)
Only in the last few years have the tools
been available to monitor the required E8 Matsui C., Nishitani A., Nitta Y. et al. (2012) ‘Structural
algorithm inputs, and provide a computer Monitoring Scheme Based on Directly Measured Inter-
small enough to fit on the device. As story Drift Displacement Response Information’, 15th World
the barriers to practical installation are Conference on Earthquake Engineering (15WCEE), Lisbon,
overcome, semi-active control will be Portugal, September 24–28, 2012
the tool of choice for regulating seismic
structural responses in the coming
decades.

TSE32_40-42 Brakes Building v2.indd 42 24/07/2014 11:45