Original Research

Advances in Structural Engineering

1–19
Performance of bi-directional elliptical Ó The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
rolling rods for base isolation of sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1369433217726896

buildings under near-fault earthquakes journals.sagepub.com/home/ase

Aruna Rawat, Naseef Ummer and Vasant Matsagar

Abstract
Rolling base isolation system provides effective isolation to the structures from seismic base excitations by virtue of its low frictional
resistance. Herein, dynamic analysis of flexible-shear type multi-storey building mounted on orthogonally placed elliptical rolling rod
base isolation systems subjected to bi-directional components of near-fault earthquake ground motions is presented. The orthogonally
placed rods would make it possible to resist the earthquake forces induced in the structure in both the horizontal directions. The
curved surface of these elliptical rods has a self-restoring capability due to which the magnitude of peak isolator displacement and resi-
dual displacement is reduced. The roughness of the tempered curved surface of the rollers dissipates energy in motion due to fric-
tional damping. The seismic performance of the multi-storey building mounted on the elliptical rolling rod base isolation system is
compared with that mounted on the sliding pure-friction and cylindrical rolling rod systems. Parametric studies are conducted to
examine the behavior of the building for different superstructure flexibilities, eccentricities of the elliptical rod, and coefficients of fric-
tion. It is concluded that the elliptical rolling rod base isolation system is effective in mitigation of damaging effects of the near-fault
earthquake ground motions in the multi-storey buildings. Even under the near-fault earthquake ground motions, the base-isolated
building mounted on the elliptical rolling rods shows considerable reduction in seismic response. The isolator displacement with the
elliptical rolling rod base isolation system is less in comparison to the pure-friction and cylindrical rolling rod systems.

Keywords
base isolation, bi-directional, building, elliptical rolling rods, near-fault

Introduction isolation systems effective under all intensities of earth-

quake, however consequently with unduly larger isola-
The technology of seismic isolation has been used from tion level displacements. Alternatively, a third type of
four decades to protect engineering structures from isolation system was introduced called rolling system,
seismic hazard. Presently, there are thousands of base- based on the concept of rolling friction. When one
isolated structures like buildings, bridges, liquid stor- body rolls over the surface of another body, the resis-
age tanks, and so on constructed across the world and tance mobilized at the interface to the motion is called
has resisted the real-time earthquakes and hence pro- rolling friction. The rolling friction is typically lower
ven the effectiveness of the seismic base isolation sys- than the sliding friction. Rolling base isolation system
tems. The base isolation systems introduced in
provides effective isolation to the structures from seis-
structures reduce the economic losses caused due to
mic base excitations by virtue of its low frictional resis-
damage of valuable structures during seismic hazards
tance. These isolation systems can completely decouple
apart from saving human lives. The main objective of
the structures from the seismic forces and hence reduce
isolation system is to completely decouple the structure
the seismic demand on structures. Bridge bearings and
from earthquake base excitations. For the purpose of
seismic isolation, elastomeric and sliding bearings are
commonly used, whereas rolling isolation systems are
relatively new. In all types of sliding systems, the per- Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT)
formance of the system depends on the value of coeffi- Delhi, New Delhi, India
cient of friction, velocity at the friction interface, and
Corresponding author:
the intensity of earthquake. Vasant Matsagar, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Several attempts have been made by the researchers Technology (IIT) Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110 016, India.
to use low value of coefficient of friction to make the Email: [email protected]
2 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

many mechanical bearings used in industries are based earthquake excitation was sensed. Calio et al. (2003)
on this concept where balls are used as rolling device. studied frequency domain behavior of the FPS with ball
Lin and Hone (1993) proposed two sets of ortho- system having restoring property for the use in multi-
gonally placed circular free rolling rods under the storey buildings. Lee and Liang (2003) studied sloped
basement and found them effective in reducing the rolling-type bearing (RTB), which utilizes the concept of
response of the structure, but it resulted in an uncon- a steel cylinder rolling on a V-shaped surface.
trolled residual displacement of base mass. The use of Butterworth (2006) proposed a rolling isolation system
various jacks can restore the structure back to its origi- consisting of rollers with non-concentric spherical upper
nal position after earthquake excitation. Lin et al. and lower surfaces.
(1995) further carried out experimental and analytical Tsai et al. (2006, 2007) have also used the RTB iso-
works on single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system lators in seismic isolation tests of a bridge model on
using rolling rod system and found it effective with a shaking table, to investigate the seismic behavior of a
re-centering force device help in reducing the residual scaled bridge model isolated by the RTBs. The test
isolator displacement. Jangid (1995) used orthogonally results showed the effective performance of the sloped
placed free circular rolling rods without any restoring RTB for seismic isolation of bridges. Chung et al.
force and found them effective in reducing the (2009) proposed an eccentric nonlinear rolling isolator
response of the structure as compared to the fixed-base which overcame the drawbacks of the resonance and
structure. These rolling rods were considered without large displacement response of the linear isolator hav-
any restoring force, resulted into more peak and resi- ing fixed vibration frequency when located near a
dual isolator displacements. Muhr et al. (1997) used fault. Kesti et al. (2010) carried out experimental work
isolation system consisting of steel balls rolling on rub- on ball-n-cone (BNC) bearing, consisting of a ball
ber tracks. The isolation system was effective in reduc- placed in between the two conical plates resulting in
ing the seismic response of the structures and further isolation of the structure. Ismail et al. (2010) developed
the experimental studies were also carried out by a roll-n-cage (RNC) isolator; the performance analysis
Guerreiro et al. (2007) later on to assess the rolling-ball of this isolator was verified for wide range of struc-
isolation system. tures and ground motion excitations. Ou et al. (2010)
Londhe and Jangid (1998, 1999) used elliptical roll- proposed roller seismic isolation bearings for highway
ing rods (ERRs) for a multi-storey building which bridges. Yang et al. (2012) proposed eccentric rolling
overcame large peak and residual isolator displace- isolation system (ERIS) considering friction damping
ments caused due to the circular shape of the rods and for energy dissipation. The performance of the ERIS
found them effective in reducing seismic responses. was found effective in reducing the response as com-
Zhou et al. (1998) combined the advantage of free roll- pared to the linear isolation system. Hosseini and
ing rod isolators and friction pendulum system (FPS), Soroor (2011, 2013) proposed a system called orthogo-
in which the steel balls were placed in between the two nal pairs of rollers on concave beds (OPRCB) for low
concave surfaces, at the superstructure and the foun- and medium rise buildings. Harvey and Gavin (2013)
dation interface. The numerical integration and har- proposed the model of a rolling isolation platform gen-
monic balance methods were used for obtaining erally used for protecting the objects from the hazards
analytical solution in evaluating the dynamic response. of horizontal excitations. Harvey et al. (2014) and
Shake table test was also conducted on a three-storey Harvey and Gavin (2015) studied the performances of
masonry model for studying the effective performance lightly and heavily damped rolling isolation systems
of the ball system with restoring property. It was con- (RISs) located within earthquake-excited structures
cluded that seismic response of the structure is reduced analytically and experimentally. Yet, hardly any works
considerably as compared to the fixed-base structure. reported in the literature wherein the seismic response
Jangid (2000) further carried out a stochastic study on of the base-isolated buildings with the rolling systems
the circular rolling rods placed orthogonally along under near-fault ground motions are studied when
with re-centering device in the form of a spring or can- subjected to bi-directional components of earthquake
tilever beam, for a flexible-shear type multi-storied ground motions. Wei et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2017) stud-
building subjected to non-stationary earthquake exci- ied the isolation performance of a spring-rolling isola-
tations. It was concluded that the rolling rods with tion system by considering that the rolling friction
re-centering device are quite effective in reducing seismic force gradually and linearly increases with the relative
response of the structure. Kaplan and Seireg (2001) used displacement between the isolator and the ground.
steel balls in concave surfaces with a spring-cam system. Near-fault earthquake ground motions such as
It was found that response of the structure was reduced Parkfield 1966, San Fernando 1971, Landers 1992,
by providing the cams, which gets compressed the spring Northridge 1994, Kobe 1995, and Chi-Chi 1999 have
under normal conditions and released when an caused huge damages to various civil structures. This
Rawat et al. 3

has motivated the seismological and engineering com- resulted in reduction in the base shear in the buildings
munities to study the effect of the near-fault earth- without much variation in the top floor absolute accel-
quakes on civil structures. The strong earthquake eration response. Providakis (2009) carried out a
ground motions in the immediate vicinity of a fault are numerical simulation for base-isolated building using
frequently characterized by an intense velocity pulse. the LRB and FPS in addition to the supplemented vis-
Also, these pulses transfer large amount of energy in cous dampers, in order to reduce the isolator displace-
the structures in its near vicinity. The forward directiv- ment under near-fault ground motions. Saha et al.
ity and/or permanent tectonic translation are the two (2015) reviewed the dynamic analysis of base-isolated
primary characteristics of the near-fault ground buildings, bridges, and cylindrical liquid storage tanks
motions. These characteristics make the near-fault under near-fault earthquakes and concluded on reten-
earthquakes distinctive as compared to the far-fault tion of the effectiveness of base isolation. Fathi et al.
ground motions. From the previous records of the (2015) studied the base-isolated frames along with the
near-fault ground motions, it was demonstrated that supplemental damping (viscous dampers) subjected to
the kinematic characteristics contain large displace- the near-fault and far-fault ground motions. It was
ment pulses, say about one or two pulses from 0.5 m observed that the isolator displacement decreases; how-
to more than 1.5 m with peak velocity of 0.5 m/s or ever, the relative displacement and acceleration in the
greater. Their time period is usually in the range of 1– storeys increased for near-fault motions. Limitation on
3 s; however, it can be as long as 6 s and such varia- excessive isolator displacement in base-isolated building
tion can be observed in acceleration history as well. was given due to consideration by Das et al. (2015) in
Such different pulses do not exist in the seismic ground optimizing the isolation systems. Lately, Zelleke et al.
motions recorded at locations away from the near- (2015) investigated the effectiveness of the supplemen-
fault region. When a near-fault ground motion time tal dampers in the base-isolated buildings to control
history is used for the seismic analysis of a structure at large isolator displacements under earthquake excita-
a particular site, the strike normal and parallel compo- tions and observed usefulness of the hybrid control
nents need to be oriented with respect to the strike of scheme for earthquake protection. Chakraborty et al.
the fault that dominates the seismic hazard of that site. (2016) proposed in their flat sliding base isolation sys-
Long-period flexible structures such as the base- tem effective mechanism for re-centering while limiting
isolated structures are required to be studied under the the peak bearing displacements. However, performance
near-fault earthquakes to assess the effectiveness of the of the rolling isolation systems used in structures sub-
passive control system. jected to bi-directional components of the near-fault
There have been several studies conducted for earthquakes requires an in-depth investigation as it has
understanding the seismic behavior of both base- not been adequately studied thus far.
isolated and fixed-base structures under near-fault The specific objectives of the present investigation
motion (Hall et al., 1995; Jangid and Kelly, 2001; are as follows: (1) to study the performance of the
Makris, 1997; Malhotra, 1999; Rao and Jangid, 2001). flexible-shear type multi-storey building mounted on
Matsagar and Jangid (2003) studied the seismic the orthogonally placed ERR base isolation systems
response of base-isolated structures during impact subjected to bi-directional (normal and parallel com-
under near-fault earthquakes. Sahasrabudhe and ponents of) near-fault earthquake ground motions, (2)
Nagarajaiah (2005) experimentally investigated base- to compare the seismic response of the ERR base-
isolated building with sliding bearing along with isolated building with the pure-friction sliding isolation
magneto-rheological dampers subjected to near-fault system and bi-directional cylindrical rolling rods in
earthquakes. It was concluded that additional dampers order to measure the effectiveness of the ERR, and (3)
help in reducing the isolator displacement; however, it to investigate the influence of important parameters on
increases the base shear and storey drift in the build- the response of the buildings isolated using the ERR
ings. Jangid (2005) investigated the optimum para- through a parametric study. The parameters consid-
meters of FPS used in multi-storey buildings and ered in the study are the coefficient of rolling friction,
bridges under near-fault ground motions. It was eccentricity of ERR, and fundamental time period of
observed that for lower values of the friction coeffi- the fixed-base building, which essentially govern the
cient, considerable sliding displacement occurs in the seismic response of structures.
FPS under the near-fault motions. Jangid (2007) inves-
tigated the optimum parameters of the lead rubber Modeling of base-isolated building
bearing (LRB) used in buildings and bridges subjected
mounted on ERR
to near-fault ground motions. Panchal and Jangid
(2008) studied the effect of near-fault earthquakes on Figure 1 shows a N-storey flexible-shear type building
variable friction pendulum system (VFPS), which mounted on the orthogonally placed ERR base
4 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

Figure 1. Mathematical model of flexible-shear type multi-storey building mounted on elliptical rolling rods (ERRs).

isolation system subjected to bi-directional components eccentricity of the ERR are the three design parameters
(fault-normal and fault-parallel) of near-fault earth- required to provide the desired isolation for the build-
quake ground motions. The ERR base isolation system ing from the near-fault earthquake ground motions.
is installed between the base slab of the building (also The coefficient of rolling friction is typically kept low
referred to as base mass) and the foundation support in order to transmit minimum earthquake force into
of the building. A conceptual three-dimensional (3D) the superstructure of the building. Generally, the coef-
drawing indicating the axis of rotation for the top and ficient of rolling friction is 1/10th that of the coefficient
bottom rollers is shown in Figure 2. The rollers have of sliding friction for the same interacting material.
grooves to protect against sliding longitudinally. The The eccentricity of the ERR that provides a nonlinear
grooves have a small size offset with same eccentricity. restoring force defines its geometry indicating the pro-
The major radius, coefficient of rolling friction, and portion of the major and minor radii. The following
Rawat et al. 5

Figure 2. Conceptual 3D views of the ERR with grooves.

z'
z, z '

cx u bx 2
Base mass A A'
A xb
z
u rzx θ rx
rθ A"
b
θ rx u rx 2 px
O x'
O a x, x '

B" x
B B' u bx 2 cx B

(a) (b)
Figure 3. Relationship between displacements of the base mass and ERR in x-z plane.

assumptions are made in the dynamic analysis of the level is considered zero; thus, torsional effects
ERR base-isolated building: are neglected.
7. Vertical component of earthquake ground
1. The floor diaphragms of each storey of the motion is ignored.
superstructure are rigid.
2. Constituent material of the eccentric rollers in Kinematics of an elliptical roller in the ERR base
the ERR base isolation system is rigid, that is,
rods themselves are undeformable.
isolation system
3. Law of dry coulomb friction is valid and the Figure 3(a) and (b) shows state of equilibrium and
coefficient of rolling friction between the ERR non-equilibrium position of a single roller in an ERR
base mass and ERR-foundation mass is con- base isolation system assembled below the base mass
stant, that is, non-velocity dependent. as shown in Figure 1. The sum of inertial, damping,
4. The superstructure is linear-elastic, which is and stiffness properties of the multiple rollers along
typically achieved by the base isolation. one direction is represented by an equivalent roller in
5. The superstructure is stable and it does not that direction. Hence, in a simplified form, the ERR
overturn during earthquake-induced shaking. base isolation system can be represented by two
6. Accidental eccentricity due to mismatch in cen- uncoupled rollers: (1) one roller rotating about the y-
ter of rigidity and center of mass at each storey axis and (2) second roller rotating on top of the first
6 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

roller about the x-axis. The bottom roller, at its center By equating the distances AA0 and AA00 in Figure
of mass, has 3 degrees of freedom (horizontal, vertical, 3(b), a relation between the angle ux and the isolator
and rotation) in x-z plane as illustrated in Figure 3(a), displacement ubx can be expressed as
and similarly, the top roller has 3 degrees of freedom
in the y-z plane. Figure 3 shows the elliptical geometry uðx
ubx pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
of an equivalent roller in the ERR base isolation sys- + cx = a 1  e2 cos2 j dj ð7Þ
2
tem with a major radius, a and a minor radius, b rest- 0
ing along the length of its major axis. This geometrical
configuration is maintained the same for both where cx = a sin ux cos urx  b cos ux sin urx is half the
the orthogonally placed top and bottom rollers in the horizontal distance between the upper and lower pole.
ERR base isolation system. The eccentricity of the The right-hand side of equation (7) contains a special
rods, e, is considered equal for both the top and bot- function called as elliptical integral of second kind. For
tom rollers and is given as the given values of the e and ux , ubx is determined using
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi numerical Gauss quadrature method.
a2  b2
e= ð1Þ
a2
Dynamical equations of motion for the ERR
The eccentricity of the rolling rods develops an
additional restoring force which brings the building Consider the equilibrium of forces acting on a roller
back to its original position after an earthquake event. rotating about y-axis in a state of displaced position as
As a special case, zero eccentricity (e = 0) implies an shown in Figure 3(b). There are three forces acting
isolation system with cylindrical rolling rod. Herein, tangentially at the two points of contact in the roller:
the kinematic relationships for bottom roller rotating (1) isolator inertial force, (2) isolator restoring force,
about y-axis are discussed. The kinematic relationships and (3) isolator rolling frictional force. These three
of the top roller can be derived in a similar way. The forces act for both the top and bottom rollers but in
relation between the displacement of the base mass their respective orthogonal directions. However, in this
and the ERR expressed in equations (2) to (4) in the x- study, the case is illustrated with Figure 3(b) for the
z plane are evaluated from Figure 3(a). If urx is the bottom roller rotating about the y-axis. The inertial
horizontal displacement of the center of mass of the force of the isolator, Fbx , acting tangentially along x-
roller relative to ground in x-direction; urzx is the verti- direction at the two points of contact of the bottom
cal displacement relative to the ground in z-direction; roller and for rotation angle 908 ł u ł 908 (as shown
urx is the rotation of the rolling rod about the y-axis; in Figure 4) can be expressed as
and ubx is the horizontal displacement of the base mass
1 € cx 1  
relative to the ground in x-direction then Fbx = Jr urx + mr €urzx + mr €urx + €ugx ð8Þ
2px px 2
ubx
urx = ð2Þ Likewise, the isolator force, Fby , of the top roller
2
rotating about x-axis and acting tangentially along y-
urzx = px  b ð3Þ direction can be expressed as
 
1 b 1 € cy 1  
urx = tan tan ux ð4Þ
a Fby = Jr ury + mr €urzy + mr €ury + €ugy ð9Þ
2py py 2
Furthermore, if px is half the vertical distance
Here, Jr and mr are the sum of mass moment of inertia
between the lower and upper pole points (A and B) as
shown in Figure 3(b) of the system in the x-z plane, and mass of the bottom rolling rods, respectively.
then Furthermore, €urzx and €urzy are the vertical acceleration
of the base mass due to the motion of rolling rods
px = a sin ux sin urx + b cos ux cos urx ð5Þ along the x- and y-directions, respectively.
The restoring force, Fsx1 , of the bottom roller, by
Here, ux is the eccentric angle such that the coordi- virtue of its elliptical shape, acting tangentially along
nates of the point A are ða sin ux , b cos ux Þ; hence, x-direction is given by
the distance between center of the roller and point of !
contact is expressed as X
N
cx
Fsx1 = mi + mb ðg + €ubzx Þ ð10Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi i=1
px
OA = a2 sin2 ux + b2 cos2 ux = a 1  e2 cos2 ux ð6Þ
Rawat et al. 7

   
Likewise, the isolator restoring force, Fsy1 , of the ½Mss  ½Msb  €us ½Css  ½Csb  u_ s
+
top roller rotating about x-axis acting tangentially ½Mbs  ½Mbb  €ub ½Cbs  ½Cbb  u_ b
along y-direction can be expressed as  
½Kss  ½Ksb  us O1 O1
! + + + ð14Þ
X
N ½Kbs  ½Kbb  ub Fs1 Fs2
cy " #
Fsy1 = mi + mb ðg + €
ubz Þ ð11Þ O1 ½Mss  ½O2  Iss €ugx
i=1
py + =
P Fb ½O2 T ½Mbb  Ibb €ugy
where ( Ni= 1 mi + mb ) is the total mass of the building
(including the base mass); €ubz = €ubzx + €ubzy is the abso- or, in concise form, equation (14) can be written as
lute vertical acceleration of the ERR base isolation sys-
tem; cx and cy are half the horizontal distance between ½ M f€ug + ½C fu_ g + ½ K fug + fFs1 g + fFs2 g + fFb g
the upper and lower pole for bottom and top roller, =  ½MG fI g €ug ð15Þ
respectively; px and py are half the vertical distance
between the lower and upper pole points for bottom where ½ M , ½C , and ½ K  each of order (2N + 2) 3
and top roller, respectively; and g is the acceleration (2N + 2) represent the mass, damping, and stiffness
due to gravity (9.81 m/s2). matrices for the base-isolated building, respectively;
The rolling frictional force is directly related to the ½Mss , ½Css , and ½Kss  each of order 2N 3 2N represent the
normal force acting at the contact points of the roller. mass, damping, and stiffness matrices for the fixed-base
This normal force is the sum of gravity force of the building, respectively; ½Iss  of order 2N 3 2 and ½Ibb  of
building mass and the vertical force due to the vertical order 2 3 2 are the influence coefficient matrices for the
acceleration of the building. The frictional force, thus superstructure and base mass, respectively; f€ug g = f€ugx ,
mobilized as a result of dry coulomb law, acts tangen- €ugy gT of order 2 3 1 is the earthquake ground accelera-
tially at the two points of contact in the roller and tion vector, where €ugx and €ugy are the ground acceleration
opposite to the direction of motion. The isolator rolling along x- and y-directions, respectively; fus g = fux1 , uy1 ,
frictional force for the bottom roller rotating about the ux2 , uy2 , . . . , uxN , uyN gT of order N 3 1 is the relative
y-axis along the x-direction is expressed as floor displacement vector with respect to the base mass;
! fub g = fubx , uby gT of order 2 3 1 is the relative base
X
N mass displacement vector with respect to the ground;
Fsx2 = mi + mb ðg + €
ubz ÞmR sgnðu_ bx Þ ð12Þ fFs1 g = fFsx1 , Fsy1 gT of order 2 3 1 is the isolator restor-
i=1
ing force vector, where Fsx1 and Fsy1 are the isolator
Likewise, the isolator rolling frictional force, Fsy2 , of restoring forces of the ERR by virtue of its geometry
the top roller rotating about x-axis acting tangentially along the x- and y-directions, respectively; fFs2 g = fFsx2 ,
along y-direction can be expressed as Fsy2 gT of order 2 3 1 is the isolator rolling frictional force
! vector, where Fsx2 and Fsy2 are the isolator rolling fric-
X
N   tional force along the x- and y-directions, respectively.
Fsy2 = mi + mb ðg + €
ubz ÞmR sgn u_ by ð13Þ The equations of motion for a fixed-base N-storey
i=1
shear type building subjected to bi-directional earth-
where mR is the coefficient of rolling friction between quake ground motion is reduced from equation (15)
the base mass and the rolling rods, sgn() denotes the and is expressed as
sign function, that is, sgn(u_ b ) = u_ b =ju_ b j.
½Mss f€us g + ½Css fu_ s g + ½Kss fus g =  ½Mss fIss g €
ug
Dynamical equations of motion for the base-isolated ð16Þ
building
For the fixed-base building, the damping matrix
For the present study, a five-storey regular and uni- ½Css  is obtained using Caughey’s damping by assum-
form building with zero eccentricity is considered ing all the modes to have a critical damping ratio of js .
mounted on an ERR base isolation system. The build- For a five-storey building, the various matrices in
ing and the ERR are symmetrical in the both the equations (15) and (16) are given in Appendix 2.
orthogonal directions and have uncoupled dynamic
properties along both x- and y-directions. Thus, there
Solution procedure
are no coupled interactions between the responses for
the structural system. The equations of motion of an The governing equations of motion for the ERR base-
N-storey shear type flexible ERR base-isolated build- isolated shear type building are nonlinear. Therefore,
ing subjected to bi-directional earthquake ground the equations of motion are solved in the incremental
motion can be expressed in the matrix form as form by numerical time integration.
8 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

c1u&1x + k1u1x

mb (u&&bx + u&&gx ) mb

Fsx + Fbx
z (a) Base mass
W

Fsx + Fbx A z'

J r &θ& rx
mr (u&&rx + u&&gx )
x
O

mr u&&rzx x'
Fsx + Fgx B
(b) Cross-section of rolling rods

Figure 4. Free-body diagram of the base mass and rolling rods along the x-direction: (a) base mass and (b) cross-section of rolling
rods.

Integration of equations of motion Conditions for rolling/non-rolling phase

Equations (14) and (16) can respectively be expressed The condition for rolling occurs when the velocity and
in their incremental form as acceleration of the base mass are zero (i.e.
u_ bx = €ubx = 0 and u_ by = €uby = 0), and in this condi-
½ M fD€
ug + ½C fDu_ g + ½ K fDug =  ½MG f I g D€ug  tion, the building does not roll on the ERR, that is,
fDFs1 g  fDFs2 g  fDFb g ð17Þ the frictional force between the rolling rods and the
base mass is greater than the base shear of the building
½Mss fD€
us g + ½Css fDu_ s g + ½Kss fDus g = at the base mass level. The ERRs start rolling along x-
½Mss fIss g D€
ug ð18Þ or/and y-directions when the base shear exceeds the
limiting value (i.e. jFx j.jFsx2 j and Fy . Fsy2 ) in the
The above equations are integrated using the respective directions. A detailed flowchart is given in
Newmark-b method considering linear variation of Figure 5 indicating the sequence of steps involved in
earthquake acceleration between the original data checking for rolling and non-rolling conditions.
points in the discrete time interval record. The choice The base shears in x- and y-directions are respec-
of equations (17) or (18) in each time step depends tively given by the following expressions
upon the rolling or non-rolling phase at the isolator
level. If the isolator is in the rolling phase, equation Fx = mb €ubx + €ugx  c1 u_ xN  k1 uxN + Fbx + Fsx1
(17) is integrated while if the isolator is in the non- ð19Þ
rolling phase, equation (18) is integrated. It is to be
noted that equation (17) requires the determination of Fy = mb €uby + €ugy  c1 u_ yN  k1 uyN + Fby + Fsy1
fDFs1 g, fDFs2 g, and fDFb g in the current time step. ð20Þ
This is achieved by a recursive formulation of equation
(17), wherein the time step iterations of the recursive The ERR base isolation system starts to roll in x-
formulations are performed by initially assuming each direction if
of the incremental quantities fDFs1 g, fDFs2 g, and
fDFb g as zero. In the present study, number of itera- jFx j.jFsx2 j ð21Þ
tions to solve recursive formulations is taken as 10.
and the ERR base isolation system starts to roll in y-
Upon balancing the equations of motion after succes-
direction if
sive iterations, the integration is carried out to the next
time step.
Fy . Fsy2 ð22Þ
Rawat et al. 9

Figure 5. Flowchart for rolling/non-rolling condition.

The checks for the rolling condition are phase or it remains fixed to the foundation (i.e. in stick
u_ bx 6¼ €
ubx 6¼ 0 and u_ by 6¼ €uby 6¼ 0. Whenever the relative condition). The check for zero relative velocity of the
velocity of the base mass becomes zero (i.e. u_ bx = 0 or base mass in the rolling phase due to numerical chal-
u_ by = 0) or reverses, the phase of rolling is required to lenges is obtained by dividing the data time interval
be checked to determine whether the ERR is in rolling into finer points. For the present study, each time
10 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

interval in the earthquake data record is divided fundamental time period of the superstructure (Ts),
equally into 100 divisions and intermediate data points damping ratio of the superstructure (js), number of
are obtained using linear interpolation. stories in the superstructure (N), the ratio of base mass
to the superstructure floor mass (mb/m), ratio of roll-
ing rod mass to the superstructure floor mass (mr/m),
Conditions for isolator stability coefficient of rolling friction (mR ), and eccentricity (e)
The isolator, if rotated beyond p=2 radians in either of of the ERRs. For the present study, the parameters
the horizontal direction, will result in a sudden shock namely, damping ratio of the superstructure, ratio of
and permanent displacement at the isolator level. the base mass to the superstructure floor mass, and
These two circumstances are undesirable from strength ratio of the rolling rod mass to the superstructure floor
and serviceability design point of view. An isolator mass are kept constant: js = 0.02, mb/m = 1, and mr/
must be structurally stable during its operation under m = 0.05. The mass of each floor is considered
all displacement levels and a fail-safe mechanism must 1000 kg and the major radius of the ERRs (a) is con-
be provided to mitigate the unlikely but possible occur- sidered to be 200 mm.
rence of a sudden shock and permanent displacement. The seismic response of the base-isolated structure
As a fail-safe mechanism, a maximum seismic gap is obtained under the fault-normal and fault-parallel
(moat width) is provided along the periphery of the components of six real near-fault earthquake ground
base slab such that the seismic gap distance is equal to motions. The peak ground acceleration in terms of g
the allowable maximum displacement for the isolator (acceleration due to gravity) of the selected earthquake
in the stable position. Any further movement will ground motions is shown in Table 1. The normal and
result in impact of the base slab with the lateral sup- parallel components of the near-fault motion are
ports, thus restricting the further movement of the iso- applied in the x- and y-directions of the base-isolated
lator. In the numerical study, the isolator rotation is building mounted on the ERR, respectively. The build-
checked for every time step. The simulation is termi- ing has a set of lateral displacements in each x-direc-
nated if jurx j ø p=2 or ury ø p=2 and the isolator tion (uxi) and y-direction (uyi) relative to q
the base ffimass;
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
design parameters are modified till the condition is hence, the resultant displacement, uR = u2x + u2y . For
satisfied. the base-isolated building, the seismic response quanti-
ties of interest are the top floor absolute acceleration
and the isolator displacement along x- and y-direc-
Numerical study
tions. The absolute acceleration is directly propor-
Seismic performance of the bi-directional ERRs for tional to the forces exerted in the superstructure due to
base isolation of buildings subjected to near-fault earth- the near-fault earthquake ground motions. On the
quakes is investigated. In the present study, the super- other hand, the relative isolator displacement is the
structure is assumed symmetrical with no eccentricity. fundamental parameter for the design of the ERR base
Therefore, a planar frame with equivalent dynamic isolation system. Among the two response quantities
properties is considered for a simplified analysis in both of interest, isolator displacement is of special interest
the orthogonal directions. For the frame, mass and due to the large velocity pulses prominent in the nor-
stiffness of each floor are kept equal along x- and y- mal component of the near-fault earthquakes.
directions (i.e. mi = m for i = 1, 2,., N and ki = k Figure 6 shows the bi-directional time history
for i = 1, 2,., N). The mass matrix of the superstruc- response of the top floor absolute acceleration and iso-
ture, ½Mss , is diagonal. The value of k is selected such lator displacement of the building mounted on an
as to provide the required fundamental time period for ERR when subjected to the Northridge, 1994 (Sylmar
the fixed-base superstructure (Ts). The damping matrix station) earthquake ground motion along x- and y-
of the superstructure, ½Css , is not known explicitly. It is directions. The fundamental time period of the super-
developed by assuming equal modal damping ratio in structure in both the directions is 0.5 s; the ERR base
all the modes of vibration. The rolling friction is typi- isolation system has an eccentricity, e = 0.5, and coef-
cally lower than the sliding friction, but in the present ficient of rolling friction, mr = 0.01, for both the top
study for the purpose of comparison the coefficient of and bottom rollers. In Figure 7, it is compared against
rolling friction (mR ) is taken equal to the coefficient of a pure-friction (P-F) base isolation system with coeffi-
sliding friction (ms ). Hence, in the further part of the cient of sliding friction, ms = 0.01, and a cylindrical
study coefficient of sliding friction (ms ) is equal to coef- rolling rod base isolation system with a coefficient of
ficient of rolling friction (mR ). rolling friction, mr = 0.01, along x- and y-directions.
The superstructure and the base mass of the isolated Although it is argued that base isolation is ineffec-
structural system under consideration can be com- tive under near-fault earthquakes due to excessive dis-
pletely characterized by the parameters, namely, the placements, it is evident from Figure 6 that even under
Rawat et al. 11

Table 1. Near-fault earthquake ground motions.

Sr. no. Earthquake ground motion Recording station Peak ground acceleration (g)
Normal component Parallel component
(along x-direction) (along y-direction)

1 Imperial Valley, California El Centro Array # 5 0.36 0.54

15 October 1979
2 Imperial Valley, California El Centro Array # 7 0.45 0.33
15 October 1979
3 Landers, California Lucerne Valley 0.71 0.64
28 June 1992
4 Northridge, California Newhall station 0.70 0.78
17 January 1994
5 Northridge, California Rinaldi 0.87 0.38
17 January 1994
6 Northridge, California Sylmar 0.72 0.58
17 January 1994

40 Alongy-direction
20 Alongx-direction
acceleration (m/sec2)
Top floor absolute

Non-isolated 20
10

0 0

-10 -20

-20

0.2
Base displacement (m)

1.0

0.5 0.1

0.0 0.0

-0.5 P-F system -0.1

Cylindrical rods (e = 0) Northridge 1994
-1.0 ERR (e = 0.5) Sylmar station
-0.2
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Figure 6. Time history response of the top floor absolute acceleration and base displacement under Northridge 1994 earthquake
(Ts = 0.5 s, e = 0.5, and m = 0.01).

the near-fault earthquakes the base-isolated building building are 16.68 m/s2 along the x-direction and
mounted on the ERR base isolation system shows sig- 31.32 m/s2 along the y-direction. The peak top floor
nificant reduction in the seismic response when com- absolute acceleration for the building mounted on the
pared with the non-isolated building. The peak ERR base isolation system along the x-direction is
absolute acceleration responses of the fixed-base 1.34 m/s2, while the value for the P-F and cylindrical
12 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

Alongx-direction Northridge 1994 0.5 Alongy-direction

θ (radians)
1.5 Sylmar station
0.0 0.0

-1.5 -0.5

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1
0.1 0.1
Fb/W

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1

1 1
Fs/W (10-2)

0 0
-1 -1
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Figure 7. Time history response of u, €ubz =g, Fb =W, Fs =W under Northridge 1994 earthquake (Ts = 0.5 s, e = 0.5, and m = 0.01).

rolling rod base isolation systems with same design respectively. Thereby, it signifies a considerable reduc-
parameters are 1.30 m/s2 (20.04 m/s2, 23.0%) and tion in the seismic base shear developed in the columns
1.32 m/s2 (20.02 m/s2, 21.5%), respectively. The val- and the advantage of base isolation using the ERRs
ues in the bracket indicates the change in value and the under near-fault earthquakes.
change in percentage with the corresponding response The peak isolator displacement for the building
of the building with the ERR base isolation system. mounted on the ERR base isolation system along the
Again, the peak top floor absolute acceleration along x-direction is 56.4 cm while for P-F and cylindrical
y-direction is 1.22 m/s2 for the building mounted on rolling rod base isolation systems are 91 cm (35 cm,
the ERR base isolation system while the responses + 61%) and 87 cm (31 cm, + 54%), respectively.
obtained for P-F and cylindrical rolling rod base isola- Again, for the building mounted on the ERR base
tion systems are 1.45 m/s2 (0.23 m/s2, + 18.8%) and isolation system, the peak displacement is 15 cm
1.42 m/s2 (0.20 m/s2, + 16.4%), respectively. It is along y-direction in comparison to 12 cm (3 cm,
noted that although the performance of the P-F and 220%) and 17 cm (22 cm, 213%) for the P-F and
cylindrical rolling rod against the ERR base isolation cylindrical rolling rod base isolation systems, respec-
systems has marginally improved in x-direction and tively. It is noted here that the performance of the
slightly worsened in y-direction (as indicated in the ERR base isolation system is superior to the P-F and
magnified graph appended in Figure 6), the magnitude cylindrical rolling base isolation system with signifi-
of change in comparison to the fixed-base response is cant reduction along x-direction. In the Northridge
still negligible. It is, however, worth noting that the top 1994 earthquake, the prominent velocity pulse arrives
floor absolute acceleration has reduced by almost 92% in x-direction and the ERR has been able to reduce
and 96% in the ERR base-isolated building as com- the isolator displacement with a considerable average
pared to the fixed-base building in x- and y-directions, magnitude of 33 cm.
Rawat et al. 13

For the Northridge 1994 earthquake, if the overall 0.15

response scenario is assessed with respect to the ERR
base isolation system, the top floor absolute accelera- 0.10
tion reduced by an average 94% and the isolator dis-
placement reduced by 58%. Also, the maximum 0.05

isolator displacement developed in the ERR base isola-

u&&bz / g
tion system based on the maximum rotational angle 0.00

(u = 6908) as per equation (7) is 60.586 m. Therefore,

-0.05
it shows that the peak isolator displacement response
under the Northridge, 1994 earthquake ground motion
-0.10
is within the permissible maximum design isolator dis-
0.13g Northridge 1994 Sylmar station
placement, 60.586 m. The satisfaction of this limit
-0.15
state indicates no occurrence of instability in the per- 0 5 10 15 20
Time (sec)
formance of the ERR base isolation system. Such
reduced isolator displacement response can be attrib- Figure 8. Time history response of sum of €ubz =g along x- and
uted to the restoring capability of the ERR base isola- y- directions under the Northridge 1994 earthquake
tion system. This proves the effectiveness of the ERR (Ts = 0.5 s, e = 0.5, and m = 0.01).
base isolation system against the P-F and circular roll-
ing rod base isolation systems when subjected to a typ-
case scenario, it may happen that reversal of member
ical near-fault earthquake ground motion
stresses may affect long-span member of the building;
Figure 7 shows the time history variations of the
seismic response quantities such as € ubz =g, ub , yet, the magnitude is quite low to inflict any significant
Fb =W , Fs =W for the five-storey building base-isolated damage for a regular well-designed building.
with the ERR base isolation system (Ts = 0.5 s, Again, Figure 7 shows the time history responses of
e = 0.5, and m = 0.01) subjected to the Northridge isolator frictional force Fsx2 and Fsy2 transmitted from
1994 earthquake ground motion along x- and y-direc- the rolling rods to the superstructure along the x- and
tions. From Figure 7, it can be observed that the varia- y-directions, respectively. The ratio of the maximum
tion of u is same as the isolator displacement in Figure force transmitted from the ground to the total weigh of
6, as per equation (7), which gives the relationship the structure is 0.01, which is the coefficient of rolling
between the rotation (u) and isolator displacement friction. Hence at any instant of time, the force trans-
(ub). However, it must be noted that it is not exactly a mitted to the structure is always less than or equal to
linear relationship and it is the slight nonlinearity that the limiting force. Thus, we can reduce further trans-
contributes to the restoring tendency of the ERR base mission of force if the design coefficient of rolling fric-
isolation system. Thus, the response is very sensitive to tion of the ERR base isolation system can be further
the eccentricity of the isolator. The maximum response reduced using any suitable material.
of rotation angle in rolling rods is 1.50 rad in x-direc- The time response variation of ratio of isolator iner-
tion and 0.43 rad in y-direction for the Northridge, tia force (Fb) transmitted to the base mass to the total
1994 earthquake ground motion, which is less than the weight (W) of the building is also shown in Figure 7.
maximum rotational angle of rolling rods, 61.57 rad The peak isolator inertial force transmitted to the foun-
(690°). Therefore, this indicates that rotational angle dation is around 8% of the weight of the structure,
of the ERRs is within the limit and hence satisfies the which is not very high and can be reduced using lower
isolator design criterion (i.e. maximum isolator design density material for the design of the ERR base isola-
displacement). tion system. These plots signify the effect of the hori-
The eccentricity of the ERR is responsible for the zontal forces on the horizontal balance of the overall
development of the undesirable vertical acceleration. base-isolated structure, which is one of the main fac-
Therefore, its variation with respect to time is plotted tors in the design of a stable ERR base isolation sys-
to check its magnitude and also to check its effect on tem. The time variation of Fs and Fb is less than the
the stability of the building. Figure 7 also shows the total weight of the building which shows the stability
individual plot of the vertical acceleration for the bot- of building against the lateral force induced during the
tom and top roller along x- and y-directions, respec- seismic activity.
tively. The peak vertical acceleration are 0.10 g and At any time instant, the absolute vertical accelera-
0.05 g for the rollers moving along x- and y-directions, tion developed in the base slab or the building is the
respectively, which is much lower than the acceleration sum of vertical acceleration due to the motion of bot-
due to the gravity. The building frames are in general tom and top rollers in x- and y-directions, respec-
designed to take gravity loads for 1.0 g. In the worst tively. The separate vertical acceleration of bottom
14 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

Top floor absolute acceleration (m/sec2) P-F system

1.6 Cylindrical rods (e = 0)
2.4
ERR (e = 0.25)
ERR (e = 0.5)

Base displacement (m)

1.4
2.0

1.2
1.6

1.0

1.2

0.8
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
TS (sec) TS (sec)

Figure 9. Effect of fundamental time period of superstructure on peak average top floor absolute acceleration and bearing
displacement of a five-storey base-isolated building (m = 0.01).

and top roller is shown along x- and y-directions in Thus, the eccentricity (e) of the ERR is a crucial design
Figure 7. The time variation response of absolute ver- parameter in controlling the peak top floor absolute
tical acceleration is shown in Figure 8. The maximum acceleration and isolator displacement. Tradeoff exists
value of absolute vertical acceleration in the base slab between the seismic forces induced and isolator displa-
is 0.13 g, which is much lower than the acceleration cement while choosing an appropriate eccentricity of
due to gravity. To increase the margin of safety of the the ERR base isolation system. The optimally designed
ERR base isolation system, the major radii or eccen- ERR would thereby be an effective isolation system
tricity of the isolator can be increased. However, this for near-fault ground motions to reduce seismic accel-
will be at the expense of higher top floor absolute eration induced in the buildings and to limit the isola-
acceleration. tion displacement, which otherwise is quite high that
Figure 9 shows the variation of the peak average utterly demands increased moat width and specialized
top floor absolute acceleration and isolator displace- peripheral services to render the building in a service-
ment with respect to the eccentricity of the ERR base able state while accommodating the large isolator dis-
isolation system, which are taken as e = 0.25 and 0.5. placements in the event of a near-fault type
It is compared against P-F and cylindrical rolling rod earthquake. Furthermore, the use of the supplemental
base isolation systems for various superstructure dampers in controlling the large isolator displacements
time periods of the five-storey building. The increased in case of the base-isolated buildings constructed in the
superstructure time period (Ts) signifies increased near-fault sites is not necessary if the ERR is designed
superstructure flexibility. A coefficient of friction accordingly.
m = 0.01 is adopted for this parametric study. It is Figure 10 shows the effect of coefficient of rolling
observed that the acceleration is marginally increased friction (mR ) of the ERR base isolation system on the
by increasing the eccentricity of the ERR, that is, with peak average top floor absolute acceleration and the
increased eccentricity the induced seismic forces are isolator displacement of a base-isolated building. It is
increased; however, the isolator displacement is compared with the P-F and cylindrical rolling rod base
reduced by increasing the eccentricity of the ERR to isolation system. The eccentricities, e = 0.25 and 0.5,
e = 0.5. The peak top floor absolute acceleration and are considered for the ERR. With lower coefficient of
bearing displacement are significantly reduced by the friction, the top floor absolute acceleration decreases,
ERR base isolation system in comparison with the P-F and hence shows the effectiveness of the ERR.
and cylindrical rolling rod base isolation systems. Nevertheless, an optimum value of the mR needs to be
Rawat et al. 15

1.25
Top floor absolute acceleration (m/sec2) P-F system
15.0 Cylindrical rods (e = 0)
1.00 ERR (e = 0.5)
12.5

Base displacement (m)

10.0 0.75

7.5
0.50

5.0
0.25
2.5

0.0 0.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
μ μ
Figure 10. Effect of coefficient of friction on peak average top floor absolute acceleration and bearing displacement of a five-storey
base-isolated building (Ts = 0.5 s).

evaluated for a base-isolated building with the ERR 1. The ERR base isolation system is effective in
base isolation system to achieve reduction in both mitigation of damaging effects of the near-fault
acceleration and displacement responses. earthquake ground motions in multi-storey
From Figures 9 and 10, it is observed that peak buildings. Even under the near-fault earthquake
average top floor acceleration typically increases with ground motions, the base-isolated building with
the increase in the superstructure flexibility whereas the the ERR showed considerable response reduc-
isolator displacement is unaffected with the increased tion. The ERRs are found effective than the
superstructure fundamental time period (Ts). It may be pure-friction (P-F) and cylindrical rolling rod
inferred from this observation that base isolation is systems.
more effective for the rigid superstructures as com- 2. Isolator displacements for an ERR base isola-
pared to the flexible superstructures; thereby, base iso- tion system is lower as compared to the pure-
lation is most attractive choice for low- to mid-rise friction (P-F) and cylindrical rolling rod base
buildings in making them earthquake resistant. isolation systems.
3. The top floor absolute acceleration increases
with increase in superstructure flexibility,
Conclusion whereas the isolator displacement is unaffected
with the increased time period of the building.
Multiple dynamic analyses are conducted with varied 4. The peak isolator displacement is reduced with
set of superstructure and isolator parameters to study the increasing value of the eccentricity of the
the behavior of a flexible-shear type multi-storey build- ERR; however, it has less effect on the absolute
ing mounted on ERR base isolation system subjected acceleration of the building.
to bi-directional components of near-fault earthquake 5. The effectiveness of the ERR increases with
ground motions. The effective isolation of the building reduced coefficient of friction, and in compari-
is achieved through judicious choice of the ERR base son with the pure-friction (P-F) and cylindrical
isolation system parameters: (1) maximum design isola- rolling rod base isolation system, it is most
tor displacement (indirectly related to the major radius effective when the coefficient of rolling friction
of the roller), (2) eccentricity, and (3) coefficient of roll- is in the range of 0.05–0.10.
ing friction. The parametric study is conducted to
investigate the effects of several important parameters Application of the ERR isolators for a building is a
such as eccentricity, coefficient of friction, superstruc- new development, and hence, it opens possibilities for
ture time period of the building, and different near- further research to enhance its viability and perfor-
fault earthquake ground motions. From the present mance in its application. The subsequent research
study, the following conclusions have been drawn: needs to address some of the following salient issues:
16 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

1. The ERR might exhibit skidding, which a finite Hall JF, Heaton TH, Halling MW, et al. (1995) Near-source
sliding friction model can assess the residual ground motion and its effects on flexible buildings. Earth-
displacement due to translational movements quake Spectra 11(4): 569–605.
due to the isolator inertial force. Harvey PS Jr and Gavin HP (2013) The nonholonomic and
2. The vertical component of earthquake chaotic nature of a rolling isolation system. Journal of
ground motion can be included to under- Sound and Vibration 332(14): 3535–3551.
Harvey PS Jr and Gavin HP (2015) Assessment of rolling iso-
stand the positive effects of the potential ver-
lation system using reduced order structural models. Engi-
tical flexibility which the ERR offers in its
neering Structures 99: 708–725.
non-equilibrium state. Harvey PS Jr, Zehil G and Gavin HP (2014) Experimental
3. 3D finite element analysis can be carried out to validation of a simplified model for rolling isolation sys-
understand the effect of deformations produced tem. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 43(7):
in the ERR on the seismic response. 1067–1088.
Hosseini M and Soroor A (2011) Using orthogonal pairs of
rollers on concave beds (OPRCB a base isolation
Declaration of Conflicting Interests system—part I: analytical, experimental and numerical
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with studies of OPRCB isolators. Structural Design of Tall and
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this Special Buildings 20(8): 928–950.
article. Hosseini M and Soroor A (2013) Using orthogonal pairs of
rollers on concave beds (OPRCB) as a base isolation
Funding system—part II: application to multi-storey and tall build-
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup- ings. Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 22(2):
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this 192–216.
article: This study was financially supported by the Science Ismail M, Rodellar J and Ikhouane F (2010) An innovative
and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of isolation device for aseismic design. Engineering Structures
Science and Technology (DST), Ministry of Science and 32(4): 1168–1183.
Technology, Government of India to Dr Vasant Matsagar Jangid RS (1995) Seismic response of structures isolated by free
for conducting the investigations on ‘‘Innovative Bi- rolling rods. European Earthquake Engineering 9: 3–11.
Directional Base Isolation System for Earthquake Protection Jangid RS (2000) Stochastic seismic response of structures
of Structures’’ vide SR/FTP/ETA-0076/2011. isolated by rolling rods. Engineering Structures 22(8):
937–946.
Jangid RS (2005) Optimum friction pendulum system for
References near-fault motions. Engineering Structures 27(3): 349–359.
Butterworth JW (2006) Seismic response of a non-concentric Jangid RS (2007) Optimum lead-rubber isolation bearings
rolling isolator system. Advances in Structural Engineering for near-fault motions. Engineering Structures 29(10):
9(1): 39–54. 2503–2513.
Calio I, Marletta M and Vinciprova F (2003) Seismic Jangid RS and Kelly JM (2001) Base isolation for near-fault
response of multi-storey buildings base-isolated by fric- motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
tion devices with restoring properties. Computers & Struc- 30(5): 691–707.
tures 81(28–29): 2589–2599. Kaplan H and Seireg A (2001) Optimal design of a base iso-
Chakraborty S, Roy K and Ray-Chaudhuri S (2016) Design lated system for high-rise steel structure. Earthquake Engi-
of re-centering spring for flat sliding base isolation system: neering & Structural Dynamics 30(2): 287–302.
theory and a numerical study. Engineering Structures 126: Kesti MG, Mowrtage W and Erdik M (2010) Earthquake
66–77. risk reduction of structures by a low-cost base isolation
Chung LL, Yang CY, Chen HM, et al. (2009) Dynamic beha- device: experimental study on BNC bearings. In: Proceed-
vior of nonlinear rolling isolation system. Structural Con- ing of the 14th European conference on earthquake engi-
trol & Health Monitoring 16(1): 32–54. neering (ECEE), Ohrid, Macedonia, 30 August - 3
Das S, Gur S, Mishra SK, et al. (2015) Optimal performance September.
of base isolated building considering limitation on exces- Lee GC and Liang Z (2003) A sloping surface roller bearing
sive isolator displacement. Structure and Infrastructure and its lateral stiffness measurement. In: Proceeding of the
Engineering 11(7): 904–917. 19th US-Japan bridge engineering workshop, Tsukuba,
Fathi M, Makhdoumi A and Parvizi M (2015) Effect of sup- Japan, 27–29 October.
plemental damping on seismic response of base-isolated Lin TW and Hone CC (1993) Base isolation by free rolling
frames under near and far field accelerations. KSCE Jour- rods under basement. Earthquake Engineering & Struc-
nal of Civil Engineering 19(5): 1359–1365. tural Dynamics 22(3): 261–273.
Guerreiro L, Azevedo J and Muhr AH (2007) Seismic tests Lin TW, Chern CC and Hone CC (1995) Experimental study
and numerical modeling of a rolling-ball isolation system. of base isolation by free rolling rods. Earthquake Engi-
Journal of Earthquake Engineering 11(1): 49–66. neering & Structural Dynamics 24(12): 1645–1650.
Rawat et al. 17

Londhe YB and Jangid RS (1998) Effectiveness of elliptical Wei B, Wang P, Yang M, et al. (2017) Seismic response of
rolling rods for base isolation. Journal of Structural Engi- rolling isolation systems with concave friction distribu-
neering 124(4): 469–472. tion. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 21(2): 325–342.
Londhe YB and Jangid RS (1999) Dynamic response of Yang CY, Hsieh CH, Chung LL, et al. (2012) Effectiveness
structures supported on elliptical rolling rods. Structural of an eccentric rolling isolation system with friction damp-
Mechanics & Earthquake Engineering 16(1): 11–20. ing. Journal of Vibration and Control 18(14): 2149–2163.
Makris N (1997) Rigidity-plasticity-viscosity: can electro- Zelleke DH, Elias S, Matsagar VA, et al. (2015) Supplemen-
rheological dampers protect base-isolated structures from tal dampers in base-isolated buildings to mitigate large
near source ground motions? Earthquake Engineering & isolator displacement under earthquake excitations. Bulle-
Structural Dynamics 26(5): 571–591. tin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering
Malhotra PK (1999) Response of buildings to near-field pulse 48(2): 100–117.
like ground motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Zhou Q, Lu X, Wang Q, et al. (1998) Dynamic analysis of
Dynamics 28(11): 1309–1326. structures base-isolated by a ball system with restoring
Matsagar VA and Jangid RS (2003) Response of base- property. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
isolated structures during impact to near-fault motions. 27(8): 773–791.
In: Proceeding of 4th international conference of earth-
quake engineering and seismology, Tehran, Iran, 12–14
May, pp. 1071–1078.
Appendix 1
Muhr AH, Sulong M and Thomas AG (1997) Rolling-ball Notation
rubber layer isolators. Journal of Natural Rubber Research
12(4): 199–214. a major radius of the ERR
Ou YC, Song J and Lee GC (2010) A parametric study of b minor radius of the ERR
seismic behavior of roller seismic isolation bearings for cx half of the horizontal distance
highway bridges. Earthquake Engineering & Structural between the upper and lower pole
Dynamics 39(5): 541–559. points (A and B)
Panchal VR and Jangid RS (2008) Variable friction pendu-
e eccentricity of the ERR
lum system for near-fault ground motions. Structural Con-
Fbx and Fby inertial force of the bottom and top
trol & Health Monitoring 15(4): 568–584.
Providakis CP (2009) Effect of supplemental damping on
rollers acting tangentially along
LRB and FPS seismic isolators under near-fault ground x- and y-directions, respectively, at
motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29(1): the two points of contact of the rods
80–90. Fsx1 and Fsy1 restoring force of the bottom and
Rao PB and Jangid RS (2001) Performance of sliding systems top rollers, by virtue of its elliptical
under near-fault motions. Nuclear Engineering and Design shape, acting tangentially along
203(2–3): 259–272. x- and y-directions, respectively
Saha SK, Matsagar VA and Jain AK (2015) Reviewing Fsx2 and Fsy2 isolator rolling frictional force for
dynamic analysis of base-isolated cylindrical liquid stor- the bottom and top rollers along the
age tanks under near-fault earthquakes. IES Journal Part x- and y-directions, respectively
A: Civil & Structural Engineering 8(1): 41–61. Fx and Fy base shears in x- and y-directions,
Sahasrabudhe S and Nagarajaiah S (2005) Experimental
respectively
study of sliding base-isolated buildings with magneto-
g acceleration due to gravity
rheological dampers in near-fault earthquakes. Journal of
Structural Engineering 131(7): 1025–1034. (9.81 m/s2)
Tsai MH, Chang KC and Wu SY (2006) Seismic isolation Jr sum of mass moment of inertia of
of a scaled bridge model using rolling-type bearings. In: the bottom rollers
Proceeding of 4th international conference on earthquake m superstructure floor mass
engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, 12–13 October, Paper no. mb base mass
181. mr sum of mass of the bottom rolling
Tsai MH, Wu SY, Chang KC, et al. (2007) Shaking table rods
tests of a scaled bridge model with rolling-type seismic N number of storey of the shear type
isolation bearings. Engineering Structures 29(5): 694–702. flexible building
Wei B, Wang P, He X, et al. (2016a) Seismic response of px half of the vertical distance between
spring-damper-rolling systems with concave friction dis-
the lower and upper pole points (A
tribution. Earthquakes and Structures 11(1): 25–43.
and B)
Wei B, Wang P, Weian L, et al. (2016b) Impact of the con-
cave distribution of rolling friction coefficient on the seis-
sgn() sign function, that is,
mic isolation performance of a spring-rolling system. sgn(u_ b ) = u_ b =ju_ b j
International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics 83(1): Ts fundamental time period of the
65–77. superstructure
18 Advances in Structural Engineering 00(0)

ubx and uby horizontal displacement of the base js critical damping ratio of the
mass relative to the ground in x- and superstructure
y-directions, respectively
u_ bx and u_ by horizontal velocity of the base mass Appendix 2
relative to the ground in x- and y-
directions, respectively If mxi and myi are the lumped masses at the floor level
ubx and €
€ uby horizontal acceleration of the base i = 1, 2,., 5 in x- and y-directions, respectively, and
mass relative to the ground in x- and kxi and kyi are the stiffness in storey i = 1, 2,., 5 in x-
y-directions, respectively and y-directions, respectively; Css (i, j) is a value in ith
ugx and €
€ ugy ground acceleration along x- and y- row and jth column of the superstructure damping
directions, respectively matrix then
uR resultant displacement
fO 1 g = f 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 gT ð23Þ
urx horizontal displacement of the
center of mass of the roller relative  T
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
to ground in x-direction ½O 2  = ð24Þ
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
urzx vertical displacement relative to the
ground in z-direction ½Mss  =
2 3
urzx and €
€ urzy vertical acceleration of the base mass mx1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
due to the motion of rollers along 6 0 my1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
the x- and y-directions, respectively 6 0 0 mx2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
½C damping matrix of order 6 0 0 0 my2 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 mx3 0 0 0 0 0 7
(2N + 2) 3 (2N + 2) for the base- 6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 my3 0 0 0 0 7
isolated building 6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 mx4 0 0 0 7
½Css  damping matrix of order 2N 3 2N 6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 my4 0 0 7
for the fixed-base building 6 7
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mx5 0 5
½Ibb  influence coefficient matrix for the 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 my5
base mass of order 2 3 2
ð25Þ
½Iss  influence coefficient matrix for the
 
superstructure of order 2N 3 2 mbx 0
½K stiffness matrix of order ½Mbb  = ð26Þ
0 mby
(2N + 2) 3 (2N + 2) for the base-
isolated building ½Msb  =
 T
½Kss  stiffness matrix of order 2N 3 2N mx1 0 mx2 0 mx3 0 mx4 0 mx5 0
for the fixed-base building 0 my1 0 my2 0 my3 0 my4 0 my5
½M mass matrix of order ð27Þ
(2N + 2) 3 (2N + 2) for the base-
isolated building ½Mbs  = ½O2 T ð28Þ
½Mss  mass matrix of order 2N 3 2N for  
the fixed-base building 0 0
½Cbb  = ð29Þ
fub g relative base mass displacement 0 0
vector with respect to the ground of ½Csb  = ½O2  ð30Þ
order 2 3 1  
fus g relative floor displacement vector 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cx0 0
½Cbs  =
with respect to the base mass of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cy0
order N 3 1 ð31Þ
urx rotation of the rolling rod about y- where
axis
ux eccentric angle of the ERR ( )
Cx0 Css ð2N  1, 2N  1Þ + Css ð2N  3Þ
mR coefficient of rolling friction between =
Cy0 Css ð2N , 2N Þ + Css ð2N , 2N  2Þ
the base mass and the rolling rods
ms coefficient of sliding friction ð32Þ
Rawat et al. 19

2 3
kx1 0 kx1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 ky1 0 ky1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 kx1 0 kx1 + kx2 0 kx2 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 ky1 0 ky1 + ky2 0 ky2 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 kx2 0 kx2 + kx3 0 kx3 0 0 0 7
½Kss  = 6
6 0
7
7
6 0 0 ky2 0 ky2 + ky3 0 ky3 0 0 7
6 0 0 0 0 kx3 0 kx3 + kx4 0 kx4 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 ky3 0 ky3 + ky4 0 ky4 7
6 7
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 kx4 0 kx4 + kx5 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ky4 0 ky1 + ky2
ð33Þ
 
0 0
½Kbb  = ð34Þ
0 0

½Ksb  = ½O2  ð35Þ

 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 kx5 0
½Kbs  = ð36Þ
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ky5
 T
1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
½Iss  = ð37Þ
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
 
1 0
½Isb  = ð38Þ
0 1