Concept

Base isolation — where it appears

Deliberately softening a structure at its base so that its period moves away from where the ground motion has energy. It reduces the force at the price of a displacement, and the displacement has to be provided for at every interface the building crosses.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The demand falls and the movement rises, by the same factor. One elastic spectrum read twice: as an acceleration on the left and as the displacement that goes with it on the right. A fixed-base building at 0.5 s sits on the plateau and is asked for 1.05 g. Put it on bearings soft enough to make its period 2.54 s and the demand falls to 0.103 g — a base shear 10.2 times smaller, bought with no strength whatever. The same shift on the right-hand plot goes the other way: displacement is S_a T²/4π², so the demand rises from 65 mm to 165. That number is the design. It is a gap all the way round the building, a moat every service has to cross, and a detail that a later contractor will fill in unless somebody says what it is for.

Made weaker on purpose

Everything else in this collection resists a load by being stiff or strong enough for it. A base-isolated building resists an earthquake by refusing to hear it — a layer of bearings under the whole structure with a lateral stiffness a twentieth of the frame's, bought with almost no strength at all.

dynamics · Base isolation
A restoring moment that gets smaller the further it leans. Restoring moment against rotation for a block 0.90 m wide and 4.20 m tall, both normalised — the moment by its value at first uplift, the rotation by the angle α = 12.1° at which the block topples. It is mgR·sin(α − θ), which is a weight times a geometry with no material property in it at all, and it has two features an elastic system does not. There is a jump at the origin: the moment is whatever the ground demands until uplift and then it is mgR sinα, so the law is discontinuous where a spring's is steepest. And the slope is negative — the further it leans the less it pushes back — so the equilibrium at θ = 0 is stable only because of that jump, and there is no stiffness to divide into a mass. The straight line is what a spring of the same first-uplift strength would have done.

The block that is safer for being bigger

A block resting on the ground lifts off at an acceleration that depends only on its shape and not at all on its size, and then falls over at one that depends strongly on its size. Two objects of identical proportion begin rocking at the same instant and only the smaller one topples — which is why the slender water towers stood in Chile and the squat tanks beside them did not.

dynamics · Rocking
The ground is a structure, and it has a period. The transfer function of 38 m of soil at 75 m/s over bedrock at 800 m/s: how much the surface moves for a given motion in the rock, at every frequency. It is a column fixed at the bottom and free at the top, so its resonances are the odd harmonics — the peaks stand at 1, 3, 5, 7 times the first, which is a fixed-free column and nothing else. The fundamental is at 0.493 Hz, a period of 2.03 s, and it is 4H/v_s exactly. The peak amplification is 7.5 against the bound 1/(α + πξ/2) = 7.5, which agrees to 0.2% — and the α in it is the impedance ratio, 0.0554 here. That is the term that keeps the answer finite: assume rigid bedrock and α is zero, the bound becomes 13 and the model is predicting an amplification set by damping alone. What limits the surface motion is that the energy can leave downward.

The ground has a period of its own

An earthquake is measured on rock and felt on soil, and between the two is a layer that behaves exactly like a structure — a column fixed at bedrock, free at the surface, with a fundamental period of four times its depth over its shear wave velocity and a set of odd harmonics above it. The motion a building receives is the rock motion through that filter, and the filter is sharp.

dynamics · Site response
The damping that stops helping. The storey drift's white-noise root-mean-square as the bearings' damping is raised from 2 to 50 per cent, each divided by the exact value at 2 per cent. The classical analysis promises that every increment helps, and at 50 per cent predicts 0.20 of the lightly damped drift. The exact analysis flattens: 0.34 at 20 per cent and 0.29 at 50, because the damping force at the bearings is transmitted into the superstructure's own mode, which the classical analysis has decoupled from it.

The damping that belongs to no mode

Give every mode its own damping ratio and throw the rest of the damping matrix away, and an isolated building's periods and damping come out right to within a fifth of a per cent. Its storey drift at the superstructure's frequency comes out six times too small. The bearings' dashpot pushes on both modes at once, and the more of it there is the less extra damping buys: the classical analysis promises the drift keeps falling, and it stops.

dynamics · Mode shapes
Bearing damping that shakes the roof harder. The roof's white-noise root-mean-square acceleration as the bearings' damping rises from 3 per cent to 58 per cent, exact and classical, both divided by the exact value at 3 per cent, for the six-storey building. The classical analysis falls all the way, to 0.33. The exact one falls to a minimum of 0.44 at about 28 per cent and then rises, to 0.50 at 58 per cent: past the minimum, every extra per cent of damping at the bearings shakes the top floor harder, while the classical analysis says it is still helping.

The top floor the bearings shake

On a building of several storeys, the damping at the isolation bearings is tied less tightly to each higher structural mode than to the one below. It still does more harm in each, because the ground barely reaches those modes on its own. The error the usual analysis throws away gathers in the upper storeys, and past about a third of critical damping at the bearings the roof shakes harder while the analysis says it is still helping. How much damping is best depends on how tall the building is.

dynamics · Mode shapes
The modes of five masses joined by springs and held by nothing. Five equal masses joined in a line by equal springs, with nothing holding them to the ground. The first four modes, at zero, 0.62, 1.18, 1.62 times the frequency of one mass on one spring. The first is every mass moving together with no spring stretched at all: a mode at exactly zero frequency, a real solution of the eigenvalue problem, which carries all of the mass and none of the strain. Every other mode has the ends moving against each other, and carries none of the mass under a uniform acceleration.

The modes at zero frequency

A structure held by nothing — a span being launched, a segment on a crane, a pontoon — has a mode in which it moves as one body and stretches nothing, at a frequency of exactly zero. That is a real mode, not a glitch in the stiffness matrix. It carries every kilogram of the structure under a uniform acceleration and leaves the flexible modes none at all. A load that is not uniform is a different matter: pushed suddenly from one end, the structure has no static answer to give, only an acceleration with a vibration riding on it.

dynamics · Mode shapes
Two formulas that agree until the shear is soft. The buckling load over the Euler load, by Engesser (dashed) and Haringx (solid), against the shear stiffness over the Euler load on a logarithmic scale. Marked: double lacing, 23.48: Engesser 0.959, Haringx 0.961; battens, 0.30: Engesser 0.232, Haringx 0.419; rubber bearing, 6.6e-4: Engesser 0.001, Haringx 0.025. They agree within 5 per cent while the shear stiffness is more than about 4 times the Euler load, and for a shear stiffness a thousandth of it Haringx's is 31 times Engesser's.

The bearing Engesser says has buckled

A member that is flexible in shear buckles below its Euler load, and there are two classical formulas for how far below. For a laced column they agree to a fraction of a per cent. For a battened column one gives nearly twice the other. For a laminated rubber bearing, Engesser's says it buckles at a fourteenth of the load it carries every day and Haringx's says it is safe by a factor of nearly three. They are not two theories. Put the axial load into Engesser's shear stiffness and it becomes Haringx's, exactly — so the whole disagreement is about which shear stiffness was measured.

stability · Built-up column

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Mode shapeDampingNatural periodDuctility demandModal massResonanceEigenvalueEnergy dissipationFree bodyFrequency responseModal analysisOrthogonality

All concepts