Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 827–840 | Cite as

Polynomial friction pendulum isolators (PFPIs) for seismic performance control of benchmark highway bridge

  • Arijit Saha
  • Purnachandra Saha
  • Sanjaya Kumar Patro
Technical Papers


The seismic response of a benchmark highway bridge isolated with passive polynomial friction pendulum isolators (PFPIs) is investigated and subjected to six bidirectional ground motion records. The benchmark study is based on a lumped mass finite-element model of the 91/5 highway overcrossing located in Southern California. The PFPI system possesses two important parameters; one is horizontal flexibility and the other is energy absorbing capacity through friction. The evaluation criteria of the benchmark bridge are analyzed considering two parameters, time period of the isolator and coefficient of friction of the isolation surface. The results of the numerical study are compared with those obtained from the traditional friction pendulum system (FPS). Dual design performance of the PFPI system suppressed the displacement and acceleration response of the benchmark highway bridge. The dual design hysteresis loop of the PFPI system is the main advantage over the linear hysteresis loop of the FPS. The numerical result indicates that the seismic performance of the PFPI system is better than that of the traditional FPS isolated system. Further, it is observed that variations of the isolation time period and coefficient of friction of the FPS and PFPI systems have a significant effect on the peak responses of the benchmark highway bridge.


benchmark highway bridge seismic isolation FPS PFPI evaluation criteria 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agrawal AK, et al. (2005), “Benchmark Structural Control Problem For a Seismically Excited Bridge, Part I; Problem Definition,” Available from: http://www-ce., 2005 [Accessed 21 October 2014].Google Scholar
  2. Agrawal AK, et al. (2009), “Benchmark Structural Control Problem for a Seismically Excited Highway Bridge—Part I: Phase I Problem definition,” Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 16: 509–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ates S, Dumanoglu AA and Bayraktar A (2005), “Stochastic Response of Seismically Isolated Highway Bridges With Friction Pendulum Systems to Spatially Varying Earthquake Ground Motions,” Engineering Structures, 27: 1843–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Constantinou MC and Tadjbakhsh IG (1985), “Hysteretic Dampers in Base Isolation: Random Approach,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 111: 705–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Constantinou MC, Mokha A and Reinhorn AM (1990), “Teflon Bearings in Base Isolation II: Modelling,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 116: 455–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jangid RS (2005), “Optimum Friction Pendulum System for Near-fault Motions,” Engineering Structures, 27: 349–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lu LY, Lee TY, Juang SY and Yeh SW (2013), “Polynomial Friction Pendulum Isolators (PFPIs) For Building Floor Isolation: An Experimental and Theoretical Study,” Engineering Structures, 56: 970–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lu LY and Hsu CC (2013), “Experimental Study of Variable-Frequency Rocking Bearings for Near Fault Seismic Isolation,” Engineering Structures, 46: 116–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Madhekar SN and Jangid RS (2012), “Use of Pseudo-Negative Stiffness Dampers for Reducing the Seismic Responses of Bridges: A Benchmark Study,” Bull. Earthquake Engineering, 10: 1561–1583. doi: 10.1007/s10518-012-9357-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maddaloni G, Caterino N and Occhiuzzi A (2011), “Semi Active Control of the Benchmark Highway Bridge Based on Seismic Early Warning Systems,” Bull. Earthquake Eng., 9: 1703–1715. doi 10.1007/s10518-011-9259-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mosqueda G, Whittaker AS and Fenves GL (2004), “Characterization and Modelling of Friction Pendulum Bearing Subjected to Multiple Component of Excitation,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(3): 433–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mitchell R, Cha YJ, Kim Y and Mahajan AA (2015), “Active control of highway bridges subjected to a variety of earthquakes load,” Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 14: 253–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pranesh M and Sinha R (2000), “VFPI: An Isolation Device For Aseismic Design,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 29: 603–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Saha A, Saha P and Patro SK (2015), “Seismic Response Control of Benchmark Highway Bridge Using Nonlinear FV Spring Damper,” The IES Journal Part A: Civil & Structural Engineering, 8(4): 240–250.Google Scholar
  15. Saha P and Jangid RS (2008), “Comparative Performance of Isolation Systems for Benchmark Cable-stayed Bridge,” International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, 6(2): 111–139.Google Scholar
  16. Tsai CS, Chiang TC and Chen BJ (2003), “Finite Element Formulations and Theoretical Study for Variable Curvature Friction Pendulum System,” Engineering Structures, 25: 1719–1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wen YK (1976), “Method for Random Vibration of Hysteretic Systems,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 102: 249–263.Google Scholar
  18. Yurchenko D (2015), “Tuned Mass and Parametric Pendulum Dampers under Seismic Vibrations,” Encyclopedia of Earthquake Engineering (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg).Google Scholar
  19. Zayas VA, Low SS and Mahin SA (1990), “A Simple Pendulum Technique for Achieving Seismic Isolation,” Earthquake Spectra, 6: 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arijit Saha
    • 1
  • Purnachandra Saha
    • 1
  • Sanjaya Kumar Patro
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Civil EngineeringKIIT UniversityBhubaneswarIndia

Personalised recommendations