0 views

Uploaded by aravindtank

Column Blast Analysis

Column Blast Analysis

© All Rights Reserved

- References
- Extended Section Properties AISC-Steel-Design
- Welding 02
- FiRE2
- Blockwork Wall Rev Final
- lec1
- Base Ring Design
- BUILT-UP
- SRS-429
- Unit emm
- Seafastening Design Calculations
- BP2
- Normal, Bending and Transverse Shear Stress and Strains_kuli
- 01_Connessione Beam to Beam
- 1-s2.0-S1350630713002768-main
- IRJET-Load Carrying Capacity Of Corrugated Web Beam
- Mirambell, Real, Bordallo, -2015- Torsion and its interaction with other internal forces.pdf
- mjk vfgr vrfrg
- hyugt frtge hyutg
- mos

You are on page 1of 16

1.1 Introduction

This report presents the analysis of blast loading of a steel column. Finite element analysis in LS-

Dyna was used to estimate the response of a column due to blast loading. Results obtained from

finite element analysis were compared with analytical solution. Implicit modal analysis and

explicit static analysis were done to assess the robustness of numerical model prepared in LS-

Dyna. Elastic and elasto-plastic material models in LS-Dyna were used for steel column. Column

was subjected to varying duration of blast loads (1 ms, 10 ms, and 50 ms) to estimate the change

in response. Finally, results of finite element analyses were compared with results of SDOF blast

analysis using Biggs chart.

A W14257 steel column section was used for the analysis. Additional details of column are

presented in Table 1.

Cross-sectional area A 0.04855 m2

Moment of inertia about strong axis I 1.41510-3 m4

Mass per unit length m 382.48 Kg/m

Modulus of elasticity E 2.071011 N/m2

Length L 5m

Mass density 7830 Kg/m3

1.3.1 General

Finite element models of column were prepared in LS-Dyna for two boundary conditions-

1)Fixed-fixed, and 2) Pin-roller. Eigenvalues obtained from FE analysis and analytical

calculations were compared to check the robustness of the numerical. Implicit eigensolver was

used for modal analysis in LS-Dyna. As column is primarily loaded along the strong axis,

eigenvalues corresponding to vibration about the strong axis were compared for the sake of

1

convenience. To further assess the robustness of the model static analyses were done for the two

boundary conditions, and results were compared with analytical solution.

Fundamental frequencies of steel column for vibration about strong axis were calculated for the

two boundary conditions. Analytical expression for the fundamental frequency of column fixed

at both ends is given by:

2

EI

(1)

L m

Fundamental frequency for the pin-roller support boundary condition is given by:

1.5

2

EI

(2)

L m

Frequencies ( f ) obtained from these analytical expressions and FE analyses are presented in

Table 2. Comparison of support reactions is presented in Table 3.

Fixed-fixed 125 97

Pin-roller 55 50

2

Table 3: Comparison of support reactions

Fixed-fixed 50 50.77

Pin-roller 50 50.36

To further assess the robustness of numerical model created in LS-Dyna, static analysis with

explicit solver was used and results were compared with analytical solution. A point load of 100

kN was applied as a ramp load at the mid-height of the column. 100 kN load was distributed

along the width of the flange as point loads on 55 nodes as shown in Figure 2. Duration of ramp

loading used was 100 ms (>5Tn) to reproduce the quasi-static behavior of loading. Loading curve

used for analysis is shown in Figure 3. Where M is the bending moment at the section and y is

the distance from neutral axis. Flexural stress was calculated at support and at quarter length of

column. Comparison of results is presented in Table 4. Results show good agreement at quarter

length of column; however, difference grows larger at the support. Values of stresses and strain

at the support are dependent on how the boundary conditions are applied. Also, decreasing the

mesh size gives consistent results, but with higher cost of computations..

3

Figure 3: Ramp loading applied on 55 nodes of top flange

Distribution of flexural stress along the depth of section is given by the expression:

My

zz (3)

I

Where M is the bending moment at the section and y is the distance from neutral axis. Flexural

stress was calculated at support and at quarter length of column. Comparison of results is

presented in Table 4. Results show good agreement at quarter length of column; however,

difference grows larger at the support. Values of stresses and strain at the support are dependent

on how the boundary conditions are applied. Also, decreasing the mesh size gives consistent

results, but with higher cost of computations.

zz

Support Condition Location Bottom (MPa) Quarter (MPa)

Analytical LS-Dyna Analytical LS-Dyna

Top flange 0 0.12 -9.2 -9.2

Pin-roller Neutral axis 0 0.20 0 0

Bottom flange 0 6.40 9.2 9.2

Top flange 9.2 12.0 0 -0.53

Fixed-fixed Neutral axis 0 0 0 0

Bottom flange -9.2 -12.1 0 0.48

4

Distribution of shear strain along section-depth of the column was also evaluated. Analytical

expression for shear strain is given by:

1 VQ

yz (4)

G Ib

where V is the shear force at particular section, Q is first moment of area above the considered

point about neutral axis, I is moment of inertia about bending axis, b is the width of the section,

and G is the shear modulus. Variation of shear strain along depth of section obtained from LS-

Dyna for fixed-fixed boundary condition at the support is presented in Figure 4.

0.4

0.35

0.3

Height (m)

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

0.00E+00 5.00E-06 1.00E-05 1.50E-05 2.00E-05

Shear strain

Figure 4: Shear strain variation obtained from LS-Dyna for fixed-fixed boundary condition

Shear strain used above is true or logarithmic strain. Strain values calculated from Eqn. (4)

shows obvious deviation from logarithmic strain values obtained from LS-Dyna. However, if

strain is calculated as shear stress obtained LS-Dyna divided by shear modulus, obtained values

show good agreement with Eqn. (4).

5

1.4 Blast Loading of Column

1.4.1 General

Step loading of three different durations were applied to column with pin and roller support. In

order to avoid any computational error due to sudden drop of step loading, drop was

approximated with a slope slightly less than 90 degrees. Fundamental period of column was 18

ms. Accordingly, total time of analysis was chosen as 100 ms to capture the response. 10 MN

load was distributed between 855 nodes at mid-span as shown in Figure 5. Elastic and elasto-

plastic models of material were used for analysis. For elasto-plastic analysis, post-yield tangent

modulus was taken as 2% of elastic modulus. Yield stress of steel was assumed as 350 MPa.

Analyses were performed in LS-Dyna with elastic material for load durations of 1 ms, 10 ms,

and 50 ms. Values obtained from LS-Dyna were compared with SDOF calculations using Biggs

chart(Biggs, 1964).

Fundamental period of vibration was T =0.0182 secs. Elastic stiffness of equivalent single

degree of freedom system for pin-roller supported column is given by expression:

48EI

K 1.121108 N / m (5)

L3

6

Static displacement for applied force of 10 MN is given by:

F0

ust 0.089m (6)

K

td t

Based on different values of , different responses were obtained. If d <<1 (as in the case of 1

T T

ms load duration), loading is considered impulsive and maximum response was obtained using

td

initial conditions. For higher values of , Biggs charts was used to obtain dynamic load factor

T

(DLF) and is multiplied by the static response calculated above to obtain the maximum response.

ir

u (t ) sin t 0cos t (7)

m

ir

umax (8)

m

Impulse is calculated as: ir F0td 104 N s . Here the mass would be half of the total mass that

is lumped at the middle for SDOF analysis. Substituting the values in Eq. (8), umax 0.031 m.

Values of maximum displacement obtained for different duration of loading obtained from Biggs

chart and LS-Dyna analyses are presented in Table 5.

td (ms) DLF

T Biggs chart LS-Dyna LS-Dyna

1 0.055 0.35 0.033 0.036 1.5

10 0.550 2 0.178 0.215 3.7

50 2.750 2 0.178 0.217 3.9

Dynamic reactions at supports and arrival of shear force at quarter length and supports are

reported in Table 6.

7

Table 6: Reaction forces and time of arrival for elastic case

(MN) Quarter (ms) Support (ms)

1 7.6 0.3 0.4

10 12.1 0.3 0.4

50 13.54 0.3 0.4

Displacement histories and support reaction histories for different load durations are presented in

Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 11, and Figure 12. Response obtained from LS-

Dyna is consistent with anticipated results from excitation of a SDOF system subjected to step

loading (Chopra, 2007).

Ideally for free vibration of an elastic SDOF system, amplitude of motion should be constant;

however, numerical methods used to solve equation of motions introduce numerical damping.

No inherent or viscous damping was assigned to model in LS-Dyna. Response histories obtained

from LS-Dyna show presence of numerical damping leading to reduction in amplitude of motion.

8

Figure 7: Displacement history at the mid-length of column for 1 ms load

9

Figure 9: Displacement history at the mid-length of column for 10 ms load

10

Figure 11: Displacement history at the mid-length of column for 50 ms load

11

1.4.3 Elasto-plastic Behavior

For elasto-plastic behavior of steel, maximum resistance of column section was determined using

plastic analysis:

4M P 4 Z f y

Rm 2.22 106 N (9)

L 5

Rm

R 1.95 106 N (10)

( shapefactor 1.14)

R

yel 0.0174m (11)

K

td

It should be noted that values of for load durations specified in this problem, the ductility

T

response from Biggs chart is out of bound. For 10 ms and 50 ms load duration, ductility values

go beyond 200, which is physically not possible. Most of the materials have ductility failure

limits much lower than obtained here. It can be assumed for all practical purposes that material

has failed for durations of 10 ms and 50 ms in case of elasto-plastic case. Response obtained

from analyses in LS-Dyna is summarized in Table 7.

(MN) Quarter (ms) Support (ms)

1 1.774 0.3 0.4

10 4.4 0.3 0.4

50 12.52 0.3 0.4

12

Displacement histories and support reaction histories for different load durations are presented in

Figure 14, Figure 13, Figure 15, Figure 16, Figure 17, and Figure 18.

13

Figure 15: Displacement history at the mid-length of column for 10 ms load

14

Figure 17: Displacement history at the mid-length of column for 50 ms load

15

References

engineering." Prentice Hall, NJ, USA.

Whittaker, A. S., and Aref, A. (2010). "CIE 500B, Blast engineering class notes."

16

- ReferencesUploaded byyesuppu56
- Extended Section Properties AISC-Steel-DesignUploaded bytimsyki
- Welding 02Uploaded bycutefrenzy
- FiRE2Uploaded byvedran
- Blockwork Wall Rev FinalUploaded byrameshkaa
- lec1Uploaded bytamizhan
- Base Ring DesignUploaded bytrisha1234567
- BUILT-UPUploaded bymehdihasan
- SRS-429Uploaded byValdemir Colares
- Unit emmUploaded bysmikedane
- Seafastening Design CalculationsUploaded byInhake Autechre
- BP2Uploaded byVenkatesha Hebbar
- Normal, Bending and Transverse Shear Stress and Strains_kuliUploaded byHantu Po Ker
- 01_Connessione Beam to BeamUploaded byGino
- 1-s2.0-S1350630713002768-mainUploaded byJithin Payyanur
- IRJET-Load Carrying Capacity Of Corrugated Web BeamUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Mirambell, Real, Bordallo, -2015- Torsion and its interaction with other internal forces.pdfUploaded bypvecci
- mjk vfgr vrfrgUploaded bytrisha1234567
- hyugt frtge hyutgUploaded bytrisha1234567
- mosUploaded byapi-296698256
- _2f66987f3f215eeb76ea39e9a8d1d6e4_MOM-III---Module-34Uploaded byHatnusen
- Seismic Vulnerability of RC Bridge PiersUploaded byAWAKSEORANG
- Back mUploaded byAlessandro Signori
- Analysis of Moment Resisting ConnectionsUploaded byOkondu Chiedu
- Tipe ElemenUploaded byNovi Riyantiarno
- IntroductionUploaded byAnonymous 8mVeTxtC
- juy frt derUploaded bytrisha1234567
- hyt fgtr fgtryUploaded bytrisha1234567
- Rep 2083Uploaded byAndy
- Final Design of 35 SkewUploaded bySandeep Dagar

- Seismic Design of Concentrically Braced FramesUploaded byErick Varela
- Hadzor ThesisUploaded byaravindtank
- Bracing for StabilityUploaded byaravindtank
- Structural Analysis tUploaded byneeraj856
- EVENT MGMT AND EVENT TOURISMText.pdfUploaded byaravindtank
- CW ManualUploaded byaravindtank
- Qcon Manual.pdfUploaded byaravindtank
- 91-M45Uploaded byaravindtank
- Pushover PaperUploaded byruwan755393
- NONLIN Users ManualUploaded byAnonymous PDEpTC4
- Raphael - Tensile Strength of ConcreteUploaded byaravindtank
- Aldred James Talk On Mass ConcreteUploaded byaravindtank
- Mathcad prestressed concrete Jefferson ExampleUploaded byaravindtank
- [Journal of KONBiN] Risk Assessment of Extreme Weather Conditions for Nuclear Power Plants at Tidal RiversUploaded byaravindtank
- LRFD_Design_Example -Leap ConspanUploaded byaraml001
- Probabilistic Three-Dimensional Model of an Offshore MonopileUploaded byaravindtank
- Plasticity Tutorial Ver 611Uploaded byTimmy Vo

- Disaster Preparedness in Urban Immigrant Communities:Uploaded byGustavBlitz
- EOTA Technical Report TR045Uploaded byAmir Yasso
- CQC.pdfUploaded byEstructurApps
- SteadWolter2015_structuralgeologyUploaded bybufalote
- Pushover Adattivo 2005Uploaded byAnonymous kBodCGQ79
- EarthquakesUploaded byاسد علی
- How to Write a Geotechnical Investigation Report_ - CivilblogUploaded byOladunni Afolabi
- ray theoryUploaded byonlyshrey
- Emergency and Disaster Management JournalUploaded byNiks
- Natural Disaster Management in IndiaUploaded byomsingh786
- ATR Seismic Engineering Oct08 FinalUploaded bymariostructural2010
- Vibration TerminologyUploaded byMoe Thiri Zun
- California Earthquake DreamUploaded byAubie Neshar Maope
- [M _Madaway]_Principles of Seismic Data InterpretationUploaded byAl Martin
- Cover LetterUploaded byMuhammad Hassan
- 2016 Warman CompetitionUploaded byAndrew Walley
- Hazards and Disasters Case StudiesUploaded bypranday
- Khalili Emergency ShelterUploaded byArtefakt Novi Sad
- Observations From the 27 de Febrero 2010, Terremoto en ChileUploaded byAlan021986
- T.Building Exam UaeUploaded byAbderrahmane Said
- SEISMIC-Steel_Column_Tree_Mom_Resisting_Frames.pdfUploaded byUtsav Koshti
- Child Centred DDRUploaded byNadhira Afifa
- EW Resistant Coupling BeamsUploaded bycadel
- Password for Archive - WindowsUploaded byThan Ratha
- description of englishUploaded byizti_azrah4981
- Geophysical modeling of the Long Valley caldera: determining the presence of a partially molten magma chamber, its size and its depthUploaded byCharlie Kenzie
- Lateral Stability of High Rise Steel Buildings using E TABSUploaded byIRJET Journal
- 6) Geology SyllabusUploaded byH.V. Patil
- IRJET-Fatigue Analysis of Offshore Steel StructuresUploaded byIRJET Journal
- nepals earthquakeUploaded byapi-345211290