Structural Engineering & Statics
where the load goes
Concept

Restitution — where it appears

The ratio of angular velocity after an impact to the velocity before it, which for a rocking block follows from its proportions alone. It is the only mechanism by which such a block loses energy, so it decides whether the block settles back or goes over.

Named by 8 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

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 One pulse, two blocks of the same shape. Rotation as a fraction of the toppling angle, under a single 0.8 s sine pulse of 1.00 g, for two blocks of identical proportion whose sizes differ by a factor of 3. Both lift off at the same instant, because uplift depends on the shape alone. The small one reaches the toppling angle and goes over; the large one reaches 46%. The kinks are impacts: there is no dashpot anywhere in this model, and the only energy the block loses is lost when it lands on its other corner, at a velocity ratio of 0.926 per landing — 14% of the energy each time, decided by the block's shape and by nothing else.

The only damping is the landing

A rocking block has no dashpot in it. The only energy it ever loses is lost at the instant it lands on its other corner, and how much is a property of the block's proportions — 14 per cent for a slender one and 38 for a stocky one. That single number decides whether it settles or goes over, and a real base does not deliver the value the theory computes.

dynamics · Rocking Where two buildings touch, and what is there when they do. Closure between an 8-storey building 24 m tall and a 4-storey one 15 m tall, drawn against height, with the 50 mm gap between them. The two swaying out of phase close on each other more the higher up they are, so they first touch at 7.6 m and are in contact above it. The dots are the taller building's floors: its storeys are 3.00 m and the other's are 3.75, so two of them arrive part way up a column rather than at a slab. A blow at mid-height of a column asks it for a shear of half the impact and an end moment of Fh/8, neither of which is a demand any part of the design contains.

The floor that arrives at a column

The gap between two buildings is computed from their roof displacements, which is where each of them moves most. It is not where they touch, and it is not what is there when they do — a slab edge meeting a column part way up its height is a different event from two slabs meeting, and it is the one that appears in the photographs.

dynamics · Pounding The same pulse on a wall that is designed to rock. Rotation as a fraction of the toppling angle under one 0.8 s sine pulse of 1.00 g, for the same 2.0 × 8.0 m wall of 400 kN three ways. Bare, it lifts at 0.250 g; with a 600 kN tendon it lifts at 0.625 g. The bare wall reaches 79 per cent of its toppling angle with one landing; with the tendon it reaches 27 per cent of its toppling angle with eight landings; with tendon and bars it reaches 12 per cent of its toppling angle with 43 landings. With its bars it comes to rest upright. The landings are where the bare wall loses energy; the bars add a loss that does not wait for a landing.

A wall that is allowed to lift

A block that rocks inherits everything that decides whether it survives — a restoring moment set by its weight and shape that falls as it leans, and a loss of energy set by its proportions at each landing. Put a tendon through a wall and yielding bars across its base and both become design quantities, and the ratio between them decides whether the wall comes home.

dynamics · Rocking One collision, four contact laws, one impulse. Contact force against time for one collision between 500 t and 300 t closing at 1.94 m/s, under four contact laws sharing one contact constant of 2.8×10^9 N/m^1.5. The elastic linear spring peaks at 19.7 MN and lasts 58 ms; the Hertz law peaks at 22.0 MN over 61 ms. Set to a restitution of 0.65, the spring and dashpot peaks at 16.8 MN and ends pulling at 3.5 MN, a tension two faces in contact cannot carry, while the damped Hertz law peaks at 20.1 MN and returns a restitution of 0.77 instead. The areas under the curves are the impulses: 600 kN·s for the spring and dashpot, which is what momentum requires at 0.65, 646 for the damped Hertz law, and 727 for both elastic laws.

The force that belongs to the model

When two buildings meet, momentum decides what each of them feels, and no contact law can change it. What the contact law decides is the force, and the force it reports is the contact stiffness somebody assumed, raised to a power. Four laws and a hundredfold change of stiffness move the buildings by a few per cent and the force by a factor of eight.

dynamics · Pounding A filler sets the force, until it runs out of thickness. Contact force against the movement since first touch for one collision between 500 t and 300 t on a 40 mm filler crushing at 4 MPa over 5 m², 60 per cent of it crushable, at closing speeds of 1.00, 1.94 and 2.85 m/s. The filler loads elastically, then crushes at 20.0 MN for as long as it has thickness to give. At 1.00 m/s it crushes 4 mm and the force never passes 20.0 MN; at 1.94 m/s it crushes 17 mm and the force never passes 20.0 MN; at 2.85 m/s it crushes all 24 mm it can and the faces meet through it, peaking at 23.7 MN. Dashed, the bare contact at 2.85 m/s peaks at 35.0 MN.

The force a filler can promise

A crushable filler in the gap between two buildings replaces a contact stiffness nobody knows with a crush strength somebody chose, and the force of a collision becomes that strength — for as long as the filler has thickness left to crush. Energy decides how much thickness that has to be, and in a gap sized for buildings that were never meant to meet it is not much.

dynamics · Pounding What the soft layer costs the strong one. For a 40 mm filler whose outer 50 per cent is the soft layer, the least crush force its inner layer must have for the filler to stop a collision at 2.85 m/s — 761 kJ — without running out, against the soft layer's crush stress. The uniform filler that just does it crushes at 31.7 MN; every softer outer layer needs a stronger inner one, and at 1.5 MPa outside the inner layer needs 56.0 MN. The bare concrete's contact at that speed is 35.0 MN (dashed): only an outer layer of at least 5.7 MPa keeps the inner one below it.

The filler that cannot be gentle twice

A crushable filler in the gap between two buildings caps a collision at its crush force, but a filler soft enough to make the everyday contacts gentle runs out on the hardest one. Grade it — soft at the face, strong behind — and the soft layer takes the small contacts while the strong layer stops the large. The energy says otherwise. Every kilojoule the soft layer does not absorb, the strong layer must, in less depth: in a 40 mm filler, an outer half at 1.5 MPa needs an inner half at 56 MN, far above the 35 MN of the bare concrete it was meant to improve on.

dynamics · Pounding The forging is a pad nobody designed. For a 2.0 t tup at 7.0 m/s, 49 kJ, on the 150 t foundation with its 30 t anvil on a pad: the largest force through the anvil's pad (solid) against the forging's flow force (logarithmic), with the dies meeting at the right; dashed, the pad force if the same impulse arrived all at once, as a fixed-impulse calculation takes it. Through a forging flowing at 0.1 MN the pad carries 0.15 MN, against 3.70 for the same impulse delivered at once; at 1.5 MN, 2.32 against 3.93; with the dies meeting, 5.86 against 5.93.

The forging that cushions the blow

A forge hammer's foundation is usually designed for a blow treated as a fixed impulse: the tup's momentum, multiplied by a factor for its rebound. The blow is not fixed. Between the tup and the anvil lies a hot forging, a plastic body that flows under the tup, stretches the blow to 48 milliseconds and absorbs nearly all of its 49 kJ, so that the anvil's pad feels 0.46 MN. As the part cools it flows less, the blow shortens, the tup rebounds, and the pad force climbs to 5.86 MN when the dies meet with nothing between them. The foundation is designed by the blow that does no work.

dynamics · Vibration isolation

Named alongside it

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

ImpulseEnergy dissipationNon-linear responsePoundingDampingImpactOverturningRockingSeismic gapDetailingDuctility demandEquilibrium

All concepts