Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading-Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

International Journal of JOURNAL
Civil EngineeringOF
and CIVIL
Technology
(IJCIET), ISSN 0976 AND
6308
INTERNATIONAL
ENGINEERING
(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
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
(1)
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

, < 70 !"
(2)
, 70 !"
(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
PsoN
Pso2
R1
R0
Pso1
h1
W
Fig.4. Peak overpressure and stand-off distance
331
h2
hN
$% = &'$ ( + % ( *
(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
,+

,+
, < 70 !"
(6)
, 70 !"
(7)
Table 1. Blast load data

R0
(m)
(kg)
1000
hi
Ri
(m)
(m)
4.472
8568
2.244
8.246
1603
2.555
12
12.166
595.958
4.191
16
16.125
305.45
5.853
20
20.1
186.748
7.486
24
24.083
127.256
9.069
332
Psoi
-.
/0
ti
(s)
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
B using STAAD Pro software top

software
Determine the top building displacement
No
Next height
Last building height?
Yes
Last blast load?
No
No
Next blast load
Yes
Last stand-off
distance?
No
Next stand-off
distance
Yes
DeDetermine the coefficient 1234 !56 7234 of the top displacement fitting power curve
rmine the coefficients (x) and (x)of
thetop
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:
1234 = 5.4481 + 0.56863 0.10773 ( + 0.00523 :
( x) =
(9)
(10)
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
BuildingsTop Drift (mm)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
200
400
600
800
Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

Fig.7. Building response to blast loading
336
1000
1200
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
100
1000
500
1000
10
100
500
1000
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
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)
Seismic Factors (Z)
Hard Rock (S1)
0.075 gravitational acceleration (Z1)
Rock (S2)
Very dense soil and soft rock (S3)
Stiff soil ( S4)
Soft soil (S5)
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
(12)
1 (h) = - 1.5484 + 0.1537 h - 0.0021h 2 + 8.2750.10 -6 h 3
(13)
Where h = building height.

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
Last earthquake zone?
No
No
Next earthquake
zone
Yes
Yes
Determine the coefficients 11234 !56 71234 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
6 Story
8 Story
10 Story
12 Story
14 Story
16 Story
18 Story
20 Story
140
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:
?234 = 1.1803 + 0.09343 0.01243 ( + 0.00063 :
(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
2 m Standing - Off
10 m Standing - Off
150
100
50
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. 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
2
4
6
10
40000
m
m
m
m
Range
Range
Range
Range
30000
20000
10000
0
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-Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

Uploaded by

Document Information

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-Building Response To Blast and Earthquake Loading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of JOURNAL

ISSN 0976 6308 (Print)

BUILDING RESPONSE TO BLAST AND EARTHQUAKE

external, if internal; whether at the basement or higher levels, proximity to structural

Fig. 1. Blast loading on a building

Fig. 2. Standard pressure versus time

Fig. 3. Comparison between blast exerted pressures and seismic activities

Where Pso = peak overpressure, W = total charge in TNT (tons),

, < 70 !"

Where t= blast duration in seconds.

Where Ri = stand-off distance to the designated floor, Ro = stand-off distance to the

, < 70 !"

Table 1. Blast load data

Fig.5. 20-Story building plan &elevation

S Select a stand-off distance elect

B using STAAD Pro software top

Determine the top building displacement

Last building height?

Next blast load

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

BUILDING RESPONSE TO BLAST LOADINGS

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

Where x = stand-off distance

BuildingsTop Drift (mm)

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

Table 2. Blast loads and stand - off distances

BUILDING RESPONSE TO EARTHQUAKE LOADINGS

Table 3. Soil profile and seismic factors

Seismic Factors (Z)

Hard Rock (S1)

0.075 gravitational acceleration (Z1)

0.150 gravitational acceleration (Z2)

Very dense soil and soft rock (S3)

0.20 gravitational acceleration (Z3)

Stiff soil ( S4)

0.30 gravitational acceleration (Z4)

Soft soil (S5)

0.40gravitational acceleration (Z5)

5. If no more building heights can be selected, go to STEP 6. Otherwise, select

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.

Select earthquake zone

Select soil type

S Select a building height

Last building height?

Last soil type?

Next soil type

Last earthquake zone?

(x) of the top displacement fitting power curve

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

Earthquake Zones and Soil Profiles

(x) is given by the following equation:

?234 = 1.1803 + 0.09343 0.01243 ( + 0.00063 :

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

Earthquake Zones and Soil Profiles

Charge Weight in TNT (kg)

Earthquake Gravitational Acceleration

2. Substituting the values of x, h, , 1, 1, and into Eq. 15 yields the

Fig. 12.Murrah building interaction curve