Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

International Journal of JOURNAL Civil Engineering and CIVIL Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 AND 6308 INTERNATIONAL OF ENGINEERING
G (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)
ISSN 0976 6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), pp. 327-346 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp Journal Impact Factor (2012): 3.1861 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com
IJCIET
IAEME
BUILDING RESPONSE TO BLAST AND EARTHQUAKE LOADING

Mohammed S. Al-Ansari Civil and Architectural Engineering Department QatarUniversity P.O.Box 2713 Doha Qatar Email: m.alansari@qu.edu.qa ABSTRACT Nowadays, structural engineers need to consider blast loading in their designs more frequently. To assist them in this task, this paper compares between the response of buildings to blast and earthquake loadings for the purpose of deriving a relationship in a form of formulae and charts between blast and earthquake loads. These relationships can be used for the blast design of structural buildings using seismic design code specifications. The numerical data was obtained using several structural models with different dimensions, shapes, and material and subjected to different blast loadings, and earthquake loads in different zones. An illustrative example is used to demonstrate the use of the method and to show its capabilities in the blast design of structural buildings. Keywords: Blast, Drift, TNT equivalent, Building, Simulation, Earthquake. INTRODUCTION The number and intensity of domestic and international terrorist activities, including September 11, 2001 attack on World Trade Center towers in New York, have heightened concerns towards the safety of our infrastructure systems. Terrorist attack targets where human casualties and economic consequences are likely to be substantial. Structural buildings have been considered attractive targets because of their accessibility and potential impacts on human lives and economic activity. The effects of a bomb explosion depend on many factors including: 1) the type and size of bomb; 2) the location of the explosion relative to building (i.e., internal or
327
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), IAEME
external, if internal; whether at the basement or higher levels, proximity to structural elements, for example, walls and columns, etc.); 3) the distance between the explosion center and the structure (standing-off distance); 4) the type of structure (reinforced concrete, steel, reinforced or unreinforced masonry, timber,..); 5) the type of structural system (moment resisting frames, braced frames, shear walls or combined frame-shear wall interactive systems, bearing wall systems, etc.); 6) the height of the structure; and7) the original design considerations and (or) the strengthening for blast and (or) other dynamic effects (blast and earthquake loading).A bomb explosion in or near a building may have catastrophic effects, destroying or severely damaging portions of the exterior and interior structural framework of the building, damaging walls, blowing out large pieces of windows, and shutting down critical fire-and-life-safety systems; such as those for fire detection and suppression, ventilation, light, water, sewage, and power. Nowadays, structural engineers must consider blast loading in their designs more frequently. To assist them in this task, the paper compares between the response of buildings to blast and earthquake loadings for the purpose of deriving a relationship in a form of formulae and charts between blast and earthquake loads. These relationships can be used for the blast design of structural buildings using seismic design code specifications. The numerical data was obtained using several structural models with different dimensions, shapes, and material and subjected to different blast loadings, and earthquake loads in different zones [1, 9, 13, 16, 24]. BLAST LOADING MODELING An explosion is a very rapid release of stored energy characterized by an audible blast. One part of the energy is released as a thermal radiation while the other part is coupled into the air as an air-blast and into the soil as a ground-shock. Air-blast, which presents the principal damage source, occurs within milliseconds. The local effects of the blast are often over before the structure can globally react to the effects of the blast. Also, the initial peak pressure intensity, which is referred to as overpressure, may be several orders of magnitude higher than the ambient atmospheric pressure. The overpressure, which radiates from the point of detention, decays exponentially with its distance from the source and time and eventually becomes negative (i.e., outward-rushing force) and by consequent subjecting the tall building to a suction force due to the creation of a vacuum by the shock wave as shown in Fig. 1[6,10,11,23].
328
Fig. 1. Blast loading on a building The air pressure overtime at a specific point in the path of an explosion follows the same general pattern, as long as there isnt any reflection from nearby objects. This pattern, which is also called an overpressure curve, is shown in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Standard pressure versus time

329
The main components of the overpressure curve are: (1) detonation; (2) arrival time; (3) peak pressure, and (4) time duration. The detonation can be considered as time zero while the arrival time is the time it takes for the pressure wave to reach the point of interest. Once its peak is reached, the pressure immediately starts to decay. The time the pressure takes to return to normal is called the time duration. As it expands outward due to the blast wave, the material can leave a void that creates a region with pressure lower than the normal atmospheric pressure. The size, shape, and material of the charge, as well as the stand-off distance will determine the magnitude and shape of this curve. In addition to the above factors, the blast wave and the generated pressure can reflect off surfaces in various directions, and can cause further fluctuations in pressure at a single point [4, 5, 8, 12].
Fig. 3. Comparison between blast exerted pressures and seismic activities The extent of damage depends on the yield or charge weight, which is measured in equivalent kg of TNT, the relative position of the explosive device, and the design details. The shock waves compress air molecules in its path, producing overpressure. When they encounter the building surface, the shock waves are reflected, amplifying
330
the overpressure so that it is higher than the initial peak pressure. These blast load pressures can greatly exceed wind and seismic design loads. Fig. 3 depicts the difference between the waves produced by seismic loading and those produced by blast loading [2, 3, 17, 18, 19, 21]. The dynamic blast load acting on the front face of a building can be modeled as the following peak over pressure [20]: = 6784 + 93 Where Pso = peak overpressure, W = total charge in TNT (tons), TNT= Trinitrotoluene explosive material, R= stand-off distance in meters. The time duration of the blast load is given by the following equation [6] : = 10.23 = 20.77
(1)
, < 70 , 70
(2)
(3)
Where t= blast duration in seconds. For any building, the peak over pressure at each floor is computed by determining the stand-off distance to each floor as shown in Fig.4:
RN R2 R1 R0 W
PsoN
Pso2 h1 h2 hN
Pso1
Fig.4. Peak overpressure and stand-off distance
331
= +
(4)
Where Ri = stand-off distance to the designated floor, Ro = stand-off distance to the ground floor, hi = height to the designated floor, i= designated floor number, and N= total number of floors. Once the stand-off distances for all floors are determined, the peak over pressure at each floor can be computed using the following equation:
= 6784 + 93
(5)
On the other hand, the time duration of the peak over pressure is given by the following equations: = 10.23 = 20.77 Table 1. Blast load data R0 (m) W i hi (m) Ri (m) Psoi 8568 1603 595.958 305.45 186.748 127.256 ti (s)

, < 70 , 70
(6)
(7)
(kg)
1000
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 8 12 16 20 24
4.472 8.246 12.166 16.125 20.1 24.083
2.244 2.555 4.191 5.853 7.486 9.069
332
Table 1 summarizes the computations of the peak over pressure and blast time duration for a six story building with a 4-meter constant floor height that is subjected to a blast loading with a charge weight of 1000 kg of TNT at a stand-off distance of 2 meters.
Fig.5. 20-Story building plan &elevation

333
S Select a stand-off distance elect Standing-off Distance Select a blast load ect Blast Load TNT S Select a building height elect building height Determine blast peak over-pressure Pso and time duration t
Enter the building structural model and blast loading data into STAAD Pro software
Determine the top building displacement
B using STAAD Pro software top software
No Next height
Last building height?
Yes Last blast load? No No
Next blast load
Yes Next stand-off distance
Last stand-off distance?
No
Yes DeDetermine the coefficient of the top displacement fitting power curve rmine the coefficients (x) and (x)of the top Tdisplacement fitting po wer curve (B B = =T
Fig.6. Computational Flowchart of building response to blast loading
334
BUILDING RESPONSE TO BLAST LOADINGS A closed-form equation that relates the top displacements of structural buildings under blast loadings to their heights is developed herein. Several reinforced concrete buildings with shear walls (Fig. 5) were subjected to blast loadings with a charge weight of 1.0 to 1000 kg of TNT. The responses of these buildings to blast loadings were determined using the following computational steps (Fig. 6). 1. Select a stand-off distance (e.g., 2m). 2. Select a blast load form (e.g.., 50 kg of TNT) 3. Select a building height (e.g.,24 m) 4. Determine the peak over pressure Pso using Eq. 5 and time duration using Eqs.6 or 7. 5. Determine the top building displacement B using the finite element software STAAD Pro [7]. 6. If no more building heights can be selected, go to STEP 7. Otherwise, select next building height from the height list and go back to STEP 4. 7. If no more blast loads can be selected, go to STEP 8. Otherwise, select next blast load from the load list and go back to STEP 3. 8. If no more stand-off distances can be selected, go to STEP 9. Otherwise, select next stand-off distance from the stand-off distance list and go back to STEP 2. 9. Determine a power best fit curve that represents the relationship between building top displacements B and blast loadings T using the following equation:
335
B = T
(8)
10. The coefficients and are determined from the power best fit regression equation. The coefficients and are given by the following equations: = 5.4481 + 0.5686 0.1077 + 0.0052 (9)
(10)
( x) =
1 1.1803 + 0.0934 x - 0.0124 x 2 + 0.0006 x 3
Where x = stand-off distance The blast response of the building models showed that the blast impact on buildings is stronger at the lower floors and almost negligible beyond a height of 24 meters. The stand-off distances make a difference in the buildings responses yet the buildings responses of the same stand-off distance is close to each other, as shown in Table 2 and Fig. 7.
1200 1000
BuildingsTop Drift (mm)
800 600 400 200 0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Charge Weight in TNT (kg) Fig.7. Building response to blast loading

336
Table 2. Blast loads and stand - off distances Stand Off Distance (m) 2 Blast Load TNT kg 50 Building Height (m) 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 24 40 48 56 64 24 32 48 56 64 24 32 40 48 24 32 72 80 56 64 Top Drift (mm) 104 115 120 193 194 194 1038 917 1041 11.5 11.6 11.6 389 432 464 788 789 675 74 78 81 288 322 359 592 583 587
100
1000
500
1000
10
100
500
1000
As shown in Fig. 7, the responses of the building models with different heights to blast loading at a certain standing-off distance are very close to each other. For example, the responses of the six and twenty-story building models at a standing-off distance of 2 meters when subjected to a blast load with a charge weight of 1000 kg
337
of TNT are 1029 mm and 917 mm, respectively. The height impact is small and produces a maximum increase of 1.3% in building response to blast load. This is also true for other models with different heights, stand-off distances, and blast loads as shown in Table 2.
BUILDING RESPONSE TO EARTHQUAKE LOADINGS

The simulated models were also subjected to earthquake loading in different zones and soil profiles as summarized in Table 3 [14, 15].
Table 3. Soil profile and seismic factors Soil Type (S)

Hard Rock (S1) Rock (S2) Very dense soil and soft rock (S3) Stiff soil ( S4) Soft soil (S5)
Seismic Factors (Z)

0.075 gravitational acceleration (Z1) 0.150 gravitational acceleration (Z2) 0.20 gravitational acceleration (Z3) 0.30 gravitational acceleration (Z4) 0.40gravitational acceleration (Z5)
The responses of the simulated models under static equivalent earthquake loads for different zones and soil profiles were obtained using STAAD Pro. The response of these building models to earthquake loadings was determined using the following computational steps (Fig. 8). 1. Select the first earthquake zone (i.e., Z=1). 2. Select the first soil type(i.e., S=1). 3. Select the first building height (i.e., 24 m). 4. Determine the top building displacement EQ using the finite element software STAAD Pro.
338
5. If no more building heights can be selected, go to STEP 6. Otherwise, select next building height from the height list and go back to STEP 4. 6. If no more soil types can be selected, go to STEP 7. Otherwise, select next soil type from the soil type list and go back to STEP 3. 7. If no more earthquake zones can be selected, go to STEP 9. Otherwise, select next earthquake zone from the earthquake zone list and go back to STEP 2. 8. Determine a power best fit curve that represents the relationship between building top displacements EQ and earthquake load E using the following equation: EQ= 1E1 (11)
9. The coefficients 1 and 1 are determined from the power best fit regression equation. The coefficients 1 and 1can be computed using the following equations:
1 (h) = - 0.6596 + 0.1954 h - 0.0064h 2 + 6.42855.10 -5 h 3 1 (h) = - 1.5484 + 0.1537 h - 0.0021h 2 + 8.2750.10 -6 h 3
Where h = building height.
(12) (13)
The earthquake building responses showed that the building height has a big impact on the building response to earthquake loading, as shown in Fig. 9. For example, the responses of the twenty and six- story building models in zone 5 with soil profile 5 are 139 mm and 11.693 mm, respectively.
339
Select earthquake zone
Select soil type
S Select a building height Selectelect building height Enter the building structural model and earthquake loading into STAAD Pro software uctural model and earthquake loading data into STAAD Pro software Determine the Building top displacement EQ using STAAD Pro software
Next height
No
Last building height?
Yes No No
Last soil type?
Next soil type
Yes No No
Last earthquake zone?
Next earthquake zone
Yes Yes Determine the coefficients 1 1 of the top displacement fitting a power curve
EQ= 1E1
mine the coefficients (x) and (x) of the top displacement fitting power curve = T
Fig.8. Computational Flowchart of building response to earthquake loading
340
160 140
6 Story 8 Story 10 Story 12 Story 14 Story 16 Story 18 Story 20 Story
Charge Weight in TNT (kg)
120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Z1/S1 Z1/S2 Z1/S3 Z1/S4 Z1/S5 Z2/S4 Z2/S5
Z3/S5 Z4/S5 Z5/S5
Earthquake Zones and Soil Profiles Fig. 9. Building response to earthquake loading RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BLAST AND EARTHQUAKE BUILDING RESPONSES
A relationship between blast and earthquake responses of a building can be developed by equating the building response due to blast loading with that due to earthquake loading as follows.
(14)
The blast load T can be written as a function of the earthquake load E, the standingoff distance x, and the building height h by combining Equations 8 and 11 as follows.
E 1 T ( x,h ) = 1
341
(15)
(x) is given by the following equation:
= 1.1803 + 0.0934 0.0124 + 0.0006
(16)
Relating blast to earthquake loads in a specific zone with a soil profile is presented in Fig. 10. For example, a twenty- story building, which is subjected to earthquake load in zone 5 (0.4 gravitational acceleration) with a soil profile 5, will have the same response as if it is blasted with 128 kg of TNT at a 2m stand-off distance or 261 kg of TNT at a 10 m stand-off distance.
300
250 200 150 100 50 0 2 m Standing - Off 10 m Standing - Off
Z1/S1 Z1/S2 Z1/S3 Z1/S4 Z1/S5 Z2/S4 Z2/S5 Z3/S5 Z4/S5 Z5/S5
Earthquake Zones and Soil Profiles Fig. 10.Twenty-story building blast load versus earthquake loads
Codes of design such as UBC and IBC are limited to zone 5 that is 0.4 gravitational acceleration of the ground with soil profile 5 to produce a maximum earthquake load for building design. Eq. 15 can be used to compute the earthquake load up to any desired gravitational acceleration of the ground and consequently the equivalent blast load could be determined for the 20 story building, Fig 11.
342
60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 2 4 6 10 m m m m Range Range Range Range
0.0g
0.8g
1.6g
2.4g
3.2g
4.0g
Earthquake Gravitational Acceleration Fig. 11.Twenty-story building interaction curves ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
The nine-story and 34-meter high Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was hit by a strong blast equivalent to 1800 kg of TNT at a standing-off distance of 4 meters [13, 22]. To resist the blast, the Murrah Federal building had to be designed for an earthquake ground acceleration of 3.7g as shown in the interaction curve of Fig.12. The Murrah federal building interaction curve (T-E curve) is obtained by plotting the blast load T as a function of the earthquake load E using Eq. 15. In order to develop this curve, the following computational steps are followed: 1. Compute the values of , 1, 1, and using Esq. 9, 12, 13, and 16, respectively. It is worth noting that the value of x (stand-off distance) is equal to 4 meters while the value of h (building height) is equal to 34 meters.
343
2. Substituting the values of x, h, , 1, 1, and into Eq. 15 yields the following equation:
1.394
1.112 E1.575 T(4,34) = 6 . 332
(17)
3. Plot the T-E interaction curve for the Murrah federal building by varying the earthquake ground acceleration from zero to 4g using an increment of 0.04g. 4. Determine the earthquake ground acceleration that corresponds to a blast charge weight of 1800 kg of TNT as shown in Fig. 12. Once the earthquake ground acceleration is known, the codes of design methodology could be used to determine the lateral forces and to design the building accordingly.
Fig. 12.Murrah building interaction curve

344
CONCLUSIONS
This paper studies and analyzes the response of buildings to blast load and compare it with the building response to earthquake load to derive a relationship between blast and earthquake loads that is represented by formulas and charts, so the building could be designed and detail for blast loads using code of design specifications for earthquake design. The responses of the simulated models with different heights, and standing off distances to blast loading shows that the responses of building models to blast loads at the same standing-off distance are very close to each other. The building height was found to have a small impact in structure responses to blast load. However, it has a strong impact on building responses due to earthquake load. The derived relationship between blast and earthquake loads can be used to compute equivalent earthquake ground acceleration to a blast load on any building given the intensity of the blast, the stand-off distance, and the building height. Once the earthquake ground acceleration is known, the codes of design methodology could be easily used to determine the lateral forces and design the building members accordingly. This new capability should prove useful to structural designers and is expected to advance existing structural design practices for blast loading. Acknowledgment This research work is supported by Qatar University Internal Grant QUUG-CENG-CA-09/10-2.
REFERENCES 1. A.K.M. AnwarulIslam; NurYazdani; (2008). Performance AASHTO girder bridges under blast loadingJournal of Engineering Structures, ELSEVIER, Vol. 30, pp.1922-1937. 2. Al-Ansari, M. S., (2009). Drift Optimization of High-Rise Buildings in Earthquake Zones Journal of tall and special building, Vol. 2, pp.291-307. 3. Al-Ansari, M. S. ; Kirkley,O. M.; and Gillete, G. (1996) Earthquake Response of Structures by Structural Mixture Theory, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 122, No. 10, pp. 1198-1207. 4. ASCE Committee; (2011). Blast Protection of buildings, ASCE Press, New York. 5. Bangash, M.Y.; (2009). Shock, Impact and Explosion, Springer, German. 6. Bangash, M.Y.; Bangash, T.; (2006). Explosion Resistant Buildings, Springer, German. 7. Bentley System Inc. (2009). STAAD PRO V8i. Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures, 22700 Savi Ranch Pkwy, Yorba Linda, CA 92887- 4608. 8. Cormie,D. ; Mays, G. ; Smith, P. (2009). Blast effects on buildings, Thomas Telford., Great Britain. 9. Corley, W. G. (2002). Applicability of Seismic Design in Mitigating Progressive Collapse, NIST, pp.1-13. 10. Crawford, J. E., and Lan, S. (2005). Design And Implementation Of Protective Technologies for Improving Blast Resistance Of Buildings, Seminar, K&C, pp.01-27.
345
11. Crawford, J. E., Malvar, L. J.,Morrill, J. M,and Ferritto, J. M. (2001). Composite Retrofits to Increase The Blast Resistance of reinforced Concrete Buildings, International Symposium, K&C, pp.01-23. 12. Dusenberry, D.O.; (2010). Blast Resistant Design of Buildings, Wiley., New Jersey. 13. Hayes, J., R., Woodson, S., C., Pekelnicky, R., G., Poland, C., D., Corley, W., G., and Mete, S. (2005). Can Strengthening for Earthquake Improve Blast and Progressive Collapse Resistance?, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.13 (8), pp.1157-1177. 14. International Code Council (2009). International Building Code. Illinois, U.S.A. 15. International Conference of Building Officials (1997). Uniform Building Code. Whittier, California, U.S.A. 16. Jan, S.F.; Gurbuz, O.; (2008). Dynamic Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Blast Resistant Concrete Building in Petrochemical Facilities Conference Proceeding Paper. 17. Lam, N., Mendis, P, and Ngo, T. (2004). Response Spectrum Solution for Blast Loading, Journal of Electronic Structural Engineering, pp.28-44. 18. Luccioni, B. M., Ambrosini, R. D., and Danesi, R. F. (2005). Assessment of blast loads on structure, Transactions on Engineering Sciences, WIT, Vol.49, pp.347-358. 19. Mlaker, P., E., Dusenberry, D., O., Harris, J., R., Iaynes, G., I., Phan, L., T., and Sozen, M. A. (2003). The Pentagon Building Performance Report, ASCE, Virginia. 20. Newmark, N.M. and Hansen, R.J. (1961). Design of blast resistant structures Shock and Vibration Handbook, Vol.3Eds. Harris and Crede. McGraw Hill, New York. 21. Ngo, T., Mendis, P, Gupta, A and Ramsay J. (2007). Blast Loading and Blast Effects on Structures An Overview, Journal of Electronic Structural Engineering, pp.76-91. 22. Osteraas, John D; (2006). Murrah Building Bombing Revisited: A Qualitative Assessment of Blast Damage and Collapse Patterns, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, ASCE, Vol.20 (4), pp.330-335. 23. Smith, P.,D. ; Hetherington, J.G.(2003). Blast and Ballistic Loading of Structures, B.H., New York. 24. Williams, G., D., and Williamson, E.,B. (2011). Response of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Columns subjected to Blast Loads, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.137 (9), pp.903-913.
346

Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of JOURNAL Civil Engineering and CIVIL Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 AND 6308 INTERNATIONAL OF ENGINEERING

BUILDING RESPONSE TO BLAST AND EARTHQUAKE LOADING

Fig. 2. Standard pressure versus time

Fig.4. Peak overpressure and stand-off distance

4.472 8.246 12.166 16.125 20.1 24.083

2.244 2.555 4.191 5.853 7.486 9.069

Fig.5. 20-Story building plan &elevation

Determine the top building displacement

B using STAAD Pro software top software

Last building height?

Yes Last blast load? No No

Next blast load

Yes Next stand-off distance

Last stand-off distance?

Fig.6. Computational Flowchart of building response to blast loading

1 1.1803 + 0.0934 x - 0.0124 x 2 + 0.0006 x 3

BuildingsTop Drift (mm)

800 600 400 200 0

Charge Weight in TNT (kg) Fig.7. Building response to blast loading

BUILDING RESPONSE TO EARTHQUAKE LOADINGS

Table 3. Soil profile and seismic factors Soil Type (S)

Seismic Factors (Z)

Select earthquake zone

Select soil type

Last building height?

Last soil type?

Next soil type

Last earthquake zone?

Next earthquake zone

Fig.8. Computational Flowchart of building response to earthquake loading

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

Z1/S1 Z1/S2 Z1/S3 Z1/S4 Z1/S5 Z2/S4 Z2/S5

Z3/S5 Z4/S5 Z5/S5

(x) is given by the following equation:

= 1.1803 + 0.0934 0.0124 + 0.0006

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

250 200 150 100 50 0 2 m Standing - Off 10 m Standing - Off

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

1.112 E1.575 T(4,34) = 6 . 332

Fig. 12.Murrah building interaction curve

You might also like