Mechanical Modelling of Friction Pendulum Isolation Devices

  • V. BiancoEmail author
  • G. Monti
  • N. P. Belfiore
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 10)


Even though different versions of the Friction Pendulum Devices (FPD) can be found on the market and their effectiveness has been extensively proven by means of numerous experimental campaigns carried out worldwide, many aspects concerning their mechanical behaviour still need to be clarified. These aspects concern, among others: (1) the sequence of sliding on the several concave surfaces, (2) the influence of temperature on the frictional properties of the coupling surfaces, (3) the possibility of the stick-slip phenomenon, (4) the possibility of impact-induced failure of some components, (5) the geometric compatibility, and so on. These aspects are less clear the larger the number of concave surfaces of which the device is composed. This paper presents a new way of modelling the mechanical behaviour of the FPDs, by fulfilling: (1) geometric compatibility, (2) kinematical compatibility, (3) dynamical equilibrium, and (4) thermo-mechanical coupling.


Base isolators Friction pendulum devices Kinematics Dynamical equilibrium 


  1. American Society for Metals (1992) Friction, lubrication, and wear technology, vol. 18. ASM Handbook, Metals Park, OhioGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker TC, Mahin SA (2012) Experimental and analytical study of the bi-directional behavior of the triple friction pendulum isolator. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 41(3):355–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker TC, Mahin SA (2013) Correct treatment of rotation of sliding surfaces in a kinematic model of the triple friction pendulum bearing. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 42(2):311–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belfiore NP, Di Benedetto A, Pennestrì E (2000) Fondamenti di meccanica applicata alle macchine. Casa Editrice Ambrosiana, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowden FP, Tabor D (1973) Friction; an introduction to tribology. Heinemann, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Constantinou MC, Tsopelas P, Kasalanati A, Wolff ED (1999) Property modification factors for seismic isolation bearings. Technical Report MCEER-99-0012, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NYGoogle Scholar
  7. Constantinou MC (2004) Friction pendulum double concave bearing. NEES Report.
  8. Constantinou MC, Whittaker AS, Kalpakidis Y, Fenz DM, Warn GP (2007) Performance of seismic isolation hardware under service and seismic loading. Technical Report MCEER-07-0012, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NYGoogle Scholar
  9. Earthquake Protection Systems (EPS), Inc. (2003) Technical characteristics of friction pendulum bearings. Technical Report, Vallejo, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  10. Fenz DM, Constantinou MC (2006) Behaviour of the double concave friction pendulum bearing. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 35:1403–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fenz DM, Constantinou MC (2008) Spherical sliding isolation bearings with adaptive behavior: experimental verification. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 37:185–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Italian Technical Regulations (2008) Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, NTC, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  13. Kelly JM (1997) Earthquake-resistant design with rubber, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mellon D, Post T (1998) Caltrans bridge research and applications of new technologies. In: Proceedings of U.S.-Italy workshop on seismic protective systems for bridges, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NYGoogle Scholar
  15. Mokha A, Constantinou MC, Reinhorn AM (1990) Experimental study and analytical prediction of earthquake response of sliding isolation system with spherical surface. Technical Report NCEER-90-0020, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, University at Buffalo, SUNY, BuffaloGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagarajaiah S, Reinhorn AM, Constantinou MC (1991) Nonlinear dynamic analysis of 3D base isolated structures. ASCE J Struct Eng 117(7):2035–2054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Popov V (2010) Contact mechanics and friction – physical principles and applications. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ray T, Sarlis AA, Reinhorn AM, Constantinou MC (2013) Hysteretic models for sliding bearings with varying frictional force. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 42(15):2341–2360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Scotto Lavina G (1990) Riassunto delle Lezioni di Meccanica Applicata alle Macchine. Edizioni Scientifiche Siderea, RomaGoogle Scholar
  20. Shabana AA (2001) Computational dynamics. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Taniwangsa W, Kelly JM (1996) Experimental and analytical studies of base isolation applications for low-cost housing, UCB/EERC-96/04. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  22. Tsai CS, Lin YC, Su HC (2010) Characterization and modeling of multiple friction pendulum system with numerous sliding interfaces. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 39(13):1463–1491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zayas VA, Low SS, Mahin SA (1987) The FPS earthquake resisting system, Report No. 87-01, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkley, CAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural Engineering and GeotechnicsSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations