& SfrucruresVol. 51, No. 5, pp. 59746.

1994
Compurers
Copyright0 1994 Ekvier ScienceLtd
Pergamon Printedin Great Britain.All rightsreserved
0045-7949(93)EOO44-0 00457949/94 s7.00 + 0.00

MODELLING OF BLAST LOADING ON ABOVEGROUND

STRUCTURES-II. INTERNAL BLAST AND GROUND
SHOCK

F. B. A. BESHARA
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering of Shoubra, Zagazig University, Egypt

(Received 30 March 1992)

Abstract-Recent studies of the nature and structural effects of confined explosions, contact blast and
explosion-induced ground shock are presented. High explosive blast is distinguished from that due to a
gaseous deflagration. The effects of confinement and venting are considered in the evaluation of dynamic
loads. Maxima for the initial internal blast pressure can be estimated from the scaled blast data or
theoretical analyses of normal blast wave reflection from a rigid wall. Semi-empirical relations and
prediction methods for gas pressures for many types of internal explosions including high explosives, gas
mixtures and dust suspensions are given on the basis of pseudo-static character. The loading of a contact
explosion and the associated effects on a concrete target are determined as functions of charge weight,
concrete strength and member thickness. In the final part, the evaluation of both airblast-induced ground
shock and directly transmitted motion are included in simple form without considering the soil-structure
interaction.

1. INTRODUfXORY BACKGROUND can impose significant mechanical loads on the confi-

A confined or partially confined explosion in a struc-
ture may cause severe damage to the structural
members and the inhabitants if the explosion orig-
inates from a high explosive source such as an aerial
bomb, artillery shell or terrorist charge. The loading
from an explosive charge detonated within a structure
consists of several pulses of very complex waveform.
The waveform is complex because of the compli-
cation of the shock waves, the reflection process
within the structure, as well as the irreversible thermo-
dynamic process of accumulated hot gases. The
mechanism of pressure build up in either vented or
unvented structures has been recognized for some-
time; research on the effects of bombing and explod-
ing detonations within enclosures dates from World
War II. However, the resulting data were few and
qualitative in nature. No attempt was made to under-
stand or relate the physical process until 1968 when
Weibull [l] correlated peak quasi-static pressure ver-
sus the charge weight for a series of TNT charges
detonated within a vented chamber. Since then many
studies have been reported [2-lo] following the inter-
est in design of vented or unvented explosion contain-
ment structures for manufacture and storage of high
explosives.
Internal blast can also result from the rapid com-
bustion of fuel dispersed within a confined volume of
air. Examples include destruction of grain elevators
by dust explosions and damage to buildings and
plants as a result of leakage of flammable gases and
active chemical liquids. The resulting overpressures
ning structure. However, until late 1960s little explicit
attention has been paid to the risks of damage by
internal blast due to low explosives. The reason was
probably two-fold [ 111: the comparative rarity of
blast loading of sufficient magnitude to cause even
local structural damage, and the remarkable ability of
well-designed reinforced concrete and steel structures
to bridge over local damage. However, in 1968 major
structural collapse following an internal gas ex-
plosion in a 22-storey block of flats (Ronan Point) in
east London showed the severity of the pressure build
up and the associated damage due to a limited
explosion source. The lesson has been underlined by
several collapses in buildings and plants. Both the
possibility of limiting the peak pressures by means of
venting and the design of structural elements to resist
the blast have been later considered in many exper-
imental and analytical studies [1 l-271.
If an explosion occurs, two different types of
ground shock problems can arise. In addition to
air-induced ground motions, directly transmitted
ground shock is possible; especially for large detona-
tions such as those associated with nuclear weapons
or the equivalent energy releases. However, less com-
prehensive work has been done on ground shock
effects to structures. No overall concise criteria have
arisen [28]. Each of the various researches reported
since the early 1940s has been constrained to a
particular problem. In addition, there has been a
tendency to mix sinusoidal or cyclic oscillations from
machinery, traffic and railways with impulsive single
pulse sources such as explosions. In the cases of

597
598 F. B. A. BESHARA

airblast, imposed external loads are fairly independent 2. INTERNAL AIRBLAST LOADING DUE TO HIGH
of structure motions and reasonable load estimates EXPLOSIVE SOURCE

are possible in a relatively straightforward manner. In

An explosion which occurs within a structure
the case of ground shock, however, external loads and
normally develops a very complex pressure-time
structure motions are interdependent. As a result, the
history at any position inside the structure. Although
response may be predicted by considering the struc-
this complex loading cannot be predicted exactly,
ture-medium interaction. Such an interaction is im-
approximations and modal relationships have been
portant for aboveground structures which experience
developed [2-91 which can be used to define blast loads
ground shock loads on their foundations. An under-
with a degree of confidence.
standing of structure-soil interaction phenomena in-
corporating multidimensional effects and inelastic
material behaviour under blast loading conditions are
still awaiting solutions for many relevant problems. 2.1. Effects of conjinement and venting
The common methods reported in the litera- The loading from an explosive charge detonated
ture [28-331 are based on one-dimensional models in within a vented or unvented structure essentially
which the Rankine-Hugoniot relations for conserva- consists of two distinct phases [2,4,9], as shown in
tion of mass and momentum are used to derive the Fig. l(a). The first phase is a dynamic pressure from
relationship between the ground motion and airblast the initial and reflected shock waves. This consists of
loads. It is assumed that the soil beneath the structure an initial high pressure (free-air pressure) short dur-
is elastic and uniaxially loaded. ation reflected wave, plus perhaps several reflected
As a part of a comprehensive mathematical mode1 pulses arriving later at times closely approximated by
developed in [34] for the non-linear finite element twice the average time of arrival of first pulse at the
dynamic analysis of blast-loaded reinforced concrete structure walls. These later pulses are usually attenu-
structures, the modelling of loads induced by ex- ated in amplitude because of an irreversible thermo-
plosions was necessary. In a companion paper [35] the dynamic process and are very complex in waveforms
modelling of external blast loads due to unconfined as a result of the nature of the reflection process within
explosions is given. The present paper describes the structure whether vented or unvented. The second
methods of modelling of airblast loading histories on loading phase is a quasi-static gas pressure pulse
aboveground structures due to confined explosions associated with the accumulation of the gaseous
and contact blast. The evaluation of explosion-in- products and temperature of the chemical process
duced ground shocks is included in a simplified form. involved in the explosion. The gas pressure build up

Reflected shocks

pproximate quasi-static pressure

Time t
tb
a. Typical actual pressure-time history (electronically filtered)

Time

b. Idealized pressure-time history

Fig. 1. Internal pressure loading at inner surface of a structure [9].

 Modelling of blast loading on aboveground structures-II
will not begin until sometime after the onset of the
shock pressures. Furthermore, it takes a finite length
of time after the onset of gas pressure to reach its
maximum value. However, these rise times are very
small and for analysis and design purposes, the time
rise is treated as instantaneous [2, 7,9]. The ampli-
tude of the quasi-static gas pressure depends on the
specific energy and weight of the high explosive as
well as the volume of the confinement. Typically for
the confined explosion the gas pressure will remain
after the dissipation of the reflected shock waves.
Depending on the degree of confinement, the effects
of these pressures may cause severe damage to the
structure unless it is designed to sustain the effects of
internal pressures. Provisions for explosion venting
will reduce the magnitude and duration of the applied
pressures. The use of structures with one or more
surfaces, either sufficiently fragile or open to the
atmosphere will provide some degree of venting
depending on the opening size. The fragile elements
of structure fail and thus reduce the confinement of
the explosive gases and hence the amplification of the
shock pressures.
As a result of the close-in effects of the explosion
and the amplification of the pressures due to reflec-
tions within the structure, the distribution of the
dynamic loads on any surface will be non-uniform
with the structural surface closest to the explosion
being subjected to the maximum load. In the litera-
ture, semi-empirical methods for the calculation
of the two phases of internal loading have been
proposed.
2.2. Shock wave loading
The air shock loading on the interior surfaces of
structure is quite complex for all real structural
geometries. However, approximate loading predic-
tions have been made [2, 7,9] with the aid of simpli-
fying assumptions. First, it is assumed that the initial
reflected parameters can be taken as the ideal nor-
mally reflected parameters, even for oblique reflec-
tions from the structure walls. This assumption is
reasonably valid for strong shock waves up to an
angle of incidence of about 40” and for weak shock
waves up to about 70”, provided that the slant range
is used as the distance from charge centre to the point
of interest. The second simplifying approximation is
that the incident and reflected blast pulses (P,, P,) are
triangular with abrupt rises, i.e.
P,(t) = P, 1 - f , O,<t<T,
( s>
P,(t) = 0, t 2 T,
P,(t)=P, 1-G , O<t<T,
( I>
P,(t) = 0, t 2 T,.
599
The durations of these pulses (T:, T,), are not the
same as the actual blast wave durations, but instead
are adjusted to preserve the magnitude of impulses,
i.e.
T, = 2&/P, (3)
T, = 2&/P,. (4)
As a third assumption, the re-reflected pressure waves
after shocks are ignored in estimating blast loading
because the pressures and impulses are then much
lower than in the initial pulse. For more exact
predictions it is suggested [2] that the combined loads
from all the successive reflected shocks could be
assumed to be 1.75 times those from the initial pulse.
Thus, the duration T, calculated by eqn (4) is to be
multiplied by 1.75.
Following the above assumptions the maxima for
the initial phase of internal blast loads on a structure
can be estimated from the analytical relations of the
parameters relevant to normal blast wave reflection
from a rigid wall for a free air burst of spherical TNT,
presented in [2,7, 351. The actual time history is ideal-
ized to the triangle pulse (P, - T,) as depicted in
Fig. l(b).
2.3. Quasi-static gas pressure
When an explosion from a high explosive occurs
within a confined area, gaseous products will ac-
cumulate and the temperature within the structure
will rise, thereby forming a blast pressure whose
magnitude is generally less than that of the shock
pressure but whose duration is significantly longer.
The magnitude of the gas pressure, which eventually
settles to a slowly decaying level, is a function of the
volume and vent area of the structure. The smaller
the venting area, the longer the duration of the
pressure.
Concurrent with experimental work which precede
applications to blast-resistant structures, Baker
et al. [2,9] have suggested a simplified quasi-static gas
pressure form shown in Fig. l(b) in which the gas
venting pressure is assumed to follow a linear curve
with zero time rise. The two parameters of interest for
the construction of the quasi-static portion of the
idealized loading function are, the peak quasi-static
pressure, Pqs, and the time, tb, at which the pressure
returns to ambient. Such time is often referred to as
the blow-down time [2-4,7]. The maximum value for
(la) the overpressure, Pqs, in the gas venting phase is the
pressure rise which would occur in an unvented
enclosure before heat transfer effects attenuate it.
(lb) From data and analyses in several references, the
curve of Fig. 2 has been proved [24,9] to yield good
(2a)
predictions of Pqs if the quantity of explosive Wand
the internal volume of the structure V are known. To
evaluate the duration tb of the gas pressure, Baker
(2b) et al. [2,9] defined the following scaled quantities: the
600 F. B. A. BESHARA

8r

Ambient pressure
I I I I I
0 loo ma 300 400 500
W/V tkg/m3) Time (msec)
Fig. 2. Peak quasi-static pressure for TNT explosion in a Fig. 4. Pressure-time plot for a typical internal deflagrative
structure [2]. explosion [ 121.

scaled initial gas pressure J?, and the scaled
down time, f. These quantities are given by
in which a,, is the speed of sound at standard sea level,
P, is the ambient pressure, A, is the internal surface
area of the structure, CI,is the vent area ratio and V
is the internal volume of the structure. The vent area
ratio for a vented roof or wall of structure is given as
blow- In [7], the terms partially vented and fully vented are
defined according to values of the scaled vent area
ratio A,/V213. If this parameter is greater than 0.60,
gas venting times should be less than initial shock
load durations, and the structure is considered fully
vented, i.e. gas pressure parameters can be ignored.
But, if it is less than or equal to 0.60, the structure is
partially vented, and gas pressure parameters must be
considered. Figures 2 and 3 give upper limit predic-
tions compared with the data represented in several
graphs of [7].
3. INTERNAL BLAST LOADING DUE TO COMBUSTIBLE
GAS OR DUST MIXTURES WITH AIR

a, = A,IA,, (7) 3.1. Explosion mechanism

Internal blast also results from a combustion of
where A, and A, are the vent area and wall area gaseous fuel or flammable dusts which causes an
respectively. Figure 3 gives the scaled duration of gas increase in temperature of confined air. By the gas
overpressure as function of scaled maximum press- laws this leads to pressure rise over the ambient
ure. Thus, eqn (6) leads to the corresponding dimen- conditions. Pressures generated in confined gas-phase
sional quantity as explosions are not high compared with ordinary
detonation pressures. However, durations can be
comparatively long, perhaps of the order of seconds
versus milliseconds for a conventional external blast
wave. The mechanism of the propagation of the
explosion reaction is considered in most cases to be
of the deflagrative type [ 1 l-l 51.
6 A pressure-time trace for a typical internal ex-
4 plosion is shown in Fig. 4. This figure shows three
distinct pressure regions [12]. First of these, indicated
by (a), is an initial pressure rise that occurs at a rate
set by the chemical kinetics of the combustion reac-
tion. The high pressure region, marked by (b), occurs
at the central portion of the trace where pressures are
6
limited by heat sinks of chemical dissociation. The
third region, part (c), is that of pressure decay which
results from the cooling effects of the confining walls,
plus pressure relief effects as gases escape through
leaks or vents.
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
? 3.2. Blast pressure loading

Fig. 3. Scaled blow-down duration vs scaled maximum Accidental explosions within structures are much
pressure for TNT explosion in a structure [2]. more likely to occur with combustible gases or dust
 Modelling of blast loading on aboveground structures-II
suspended in the air. As a result, there is a large
volume of literature dealing with internal
gaseous [I I-211 and dust explosions [21-271 and the
effects of venting on pressures generated. Parameters
assumed to be important in these studies are geo-
metric ones such as shape and volume of the enclo-
sure, the vent area, heat of combustion of the dust or
gaseous fuel and the ratio of the actual fuel supply to
that of idealized combustion. These parameters deter-
mine the maximum pressure P,,,, maximum rate of
pressure rise P, and the rate of pressure relief by
venting, P,,, which in turn are employed to establish
the pressure-time curve according to the explosion
mechanism described in Fig. 4.
A variety of relationships have been de-
rived [13, 161 to predict maximum internal pressure
rise P,,, that can be generated by the ignition of a
gas-air mixture in a vented enclosure. Ras-
bash [17, 181 has correlated the results of various
workers and from studies conducted on small enclo-
sures [ 171, derived the empirical equation
P, = AgasP, + B,,, K, > (9)
where P, is the pressure at which the vent is created,
Kg is the ratio of the smallest cross-sectional area of
the enclosure in which the explosion occurs to the
area of vent, Agas and BgaS are constants given as
I.2 kN/m2 and 2.8 kN/m2 for natural gas and about
three times these values for town gas [13]. The limi-
tations of eqn (9) are listed as
I. The ratio of maximum and minimum dimensions
of the enclosure is less than 3.
2. The vent area factor k, is between 1 and 5.
3. The weight of the covering on the vent does not
exceed 24 kg/m2.
4. The pressure P, does not exceed 7 kN/m2.
On the basis of tests carried out by the Dutch
Institute, TNO, Dragosavic [20] has derived the maxi-
mum internal pressure as the greater of the following
two values
Pm= AgasPu+G NO
ti’
P,=P,+Cg,,, UW
where
$ = AJ’.
(1Oc)
The suggested values of the constants AgaS, B,,,,
C,,, for natural gas are 0.5, 0.4 and 3.0 kN/m2
respectively.
CAS
51,SJ
601
For dust explosions, the following semi-empirical
relationship has been given[22] for calculating the
maximum pressure as
(11)
where (dP/dt),, is the maximum rate of pressure
rise, Pad is the theorectical limiting adiabatic pressure,
and V, is the volume of enclosure. The constant C,,,,,
is an empirical constant which depends on the ratio
of specific heat of dust and the denstiy of unburnt
dust suspension at ambient condition. The maximum
rate of pressure rise can be evaluated [24] from
V”’ - K . (12)
c - g
The flame front travels a considerable distance from
the point of ignition before most of the fuel or dust
is burnt out. The rate at which the combustible
material becomes engulfed is proportional to the
internal surface area of the confining volume. Fur-
thermore, pressure increase is inversely proportional
to this volume. These considerations provide the
following expression for the rate of pressure rise, P,,
in a confined explosion [12] as
0
pc=cr +c Cp- phi) (pod- pads), (13)
where C, is a coefficient, S, is the total internal surface
area of confining volume V,, and Pindis the induction
pressure; about 0.92 of the initial pressure. The
coefficient of pressure rise rate has been defined [12]
in terms of flame front laminar burning velocity
V, (m/set)
c, = 30 u,. (14)
By considering the second law of thermodynamics,
the rate of pressure relief due to venting of gases
retained within a volume V,, is suggested [12] as
P”&.
= -375 + P&, for P > 1.75 bar (Isa)
0 e
put = -875 $ (PabS- P,,), for P < 1.75 bar
0 e
(15b)
in which PabSis the absolute pressure at a given time.
There is still a considerable amount of research to
be done in order to reasonably predict the loading
function for gas and dust cloud explosions. For
gaseous deflagrations it has been suggested [22,23]
that the pressure-time history can be represented by
a triangular pulse of time rise of 0.1-0.15 set, dur-
ation of 0.3 set and a peak pressure of 25-50 kN/m2.
For design purposes a value of 34 kN/mZ uniformly
602 F-3. A. BESHARA
applied pressure has been recommended {26]. A more
realistic estimate for the maximum pressure, based on
the volume of closure, vent area, and relief pressure
P,,, has been given in [27]. Based on the volume of
co~tainment~ V, the duration of the idealized triangu-
lar pulse, td is detined in seconds as follows [35]:
I, = 0.2-0.3, for V < 100.0 m3 C16a)
td = 0.4-0.5, for 100.0 < V < 1000.0 m3 (16b)
td = U-0.8, for Y 2 1ooO.0m3, EIk)
The time rise, t,, of the pressure in the idealized pulse
is given by
t, = ost,, for $ 2 Vd2j3 (17a)
t, = tJ3, for * < V-2/3, U7b)
where $ is the vent factor and expressed by eqn (10~).
4. CONTACT BLAST
A contact blast is the loading that arises from the
explosion of a conventional weapon either directly
on, or in the near vicinity of, a structure. In free air
the region of contact blast corresponds to a proximity
factor of less than 0.4 m/kgli3. The blast loading, P,,
on a concrete slab is defined [37] as a function of the
concrete cube strength as
P, = 8OOOrrf,,
kN/m*, 08)
where CL,,is the characteristic cube strength of con-
crete in N/mm2. This loading is assumed to apply
over circular area of radius r, given in metres by
rb = 1.08( I+‘/D:~)“~
09)
in which W is the equivalent charge weight measured
in kilograms of TNT.
In addition to considering the loading of a contact
explosion, local effects need to be considered. The
thickness of the structural member will be generally
determined by consideration of blast local effects. A
weapon striking or exploding against the external
face of a concrete slab results in compressive stresses
on the external face sufficiently large to cause plastic
flow and cratering of the surface. The resulting
compressive shock wave in concrete travels to the
interior face of the slab where it is reflected with a
change of sign. This means that the compressive
stresses are converted to tensile stresses. As the tensile
strength of concrete is much less than its compressive
strength, tensile fracturing on the interior face of
the slab occurs with the result that spalling of con-
crete occurs at the interior of the structure with
concrete particles being projected at considerable
velocities,
The compressive plastic deformation of the slab
under blast loading may be sufficiently large and
rapid to cause lumps of concrete to ditch from the
interior slab face in a similar way to spalling. This
effect is termed as scabbing 17,373. To ensure that
spalling is either limited or prevented, 1371 makes
recommendations for the minimum thickness of con-
crete slab as follows:
(a) thickness to resist spalling 0.32 W’j3 m;
(b) thickness at which slight spalling occurs
0.27 W l/3rnw
(c) thickness it which heavy damage occurs
0.23 W”3 m.
Frequently, metal spall piates are attached to the
interior face of a concrete slab to prevent spa11being
projected into the interior. In this case the slab
thickness used may be in the range of thickness from
slight spailing to heavy damage.
5. MODELING OF GROUND SHOCK LOADS
When an explosion occurs at or near the ground
surface, ground shock results from the energy im-
parted to the ground by the explosion and transmit-
ted through the point of interest. Air-induced ground
shock results when the airblast shock wave com-
presses the ground surface and sends a stress pulse
into the underlying media, Generally, the air-induced
ground motions are maximum at the ground surface
and attenuate with depth [28-331. Direct ground
shock results from the explosive energy being trans-
mitted directly through the ground, This motion
includes both the true explosion-induced motion and
cratering-induced motion. The resulting motions
have a longer duration than the air-induced ground
shock and the waveform tends to be sinusoidal.
The prediction methods found in the literature
combine nuclear and high explosive test data with
relationships from theoretical studies. The main as-
sumption cited in these methods is the free-field
ground shock phenomenon [28-331. The complicated
interaction of ground stress curves with the structure
is not included.
5.1. Airblast-induced gmund shock
The prediction of actual ground motion is quite
complicated. However, conservative results to esti-
mate &blast-induced ground shock from nuclear
explosion were presented by Newmark [3O]based on
one-dimensional wave propagation theory and exper-
imental data. The same approach has been
adopted t?] for conventional high explosives, The
peak displacement, velocity and acceleration are
found in terms of overpressure, charge yield, rise time
and density and seismic velocity of the soil. Since the
range of seismic velocities of soils is so large it is
recommended that the lower bound value of the
 Modelling of blast loading on aboveground structures-II 403

velocity be used to produce a conservative estimate of
the induced motion.
For a surface structure located on ground media
having uniform properties, the maximum vertical
velocity at the ground surface, V,, can be ex-
pressed [28-321 in terms of the peak overpressure at
the point of interest as
The maximum horizontal ground motions are ex-
pressed in terms of the maximum vertical motions,
the seismic velocity of soil and the shock wave
velocity 17,321, so that
D,, = D, tan[sin-‘(C,/U,)] (26)

v,=-, PS V, = V, tan[sin-‘(CJU,)] (27)

PPCP

where pp and C, are, respectively, mass density of the

A, = A, tan[sin-‘(C,fU,)]. (28)
soil and the compression wave seismic velocity of the
soil. The impedance (p,C,) in eqn (20) is approxi-
mately 6.67 x 10’ kg/m2 sec. The following relation- For (C,/U,) greater than unity, it is recommended
ship applies for the mean value [29] that the horizontal motion be set equal to the calcu-
lated velocity motion [7,28,29,32]. The mean value
V, = I .Sp, m/set. (21) of the horizontal velocity [29] is expressed in terms of
the peak overpressure (in megapascals) as
The maximum airblast-induced vertical displacement
near the earth’s surface is obtained by integrating
eqn (21) with respect to time [30-321. The time inte-
gral of the overpressure is simply the total positive V,=lO 5 (29)
J P,
phase impulse per unit area so that

5.2. Directly transmitted ground motion

(23
To consider the effect of soil layering, an empirical
relation 1291is considered to calculate D0 in metres as
D” = 0.09 W”6(H/50)0.V;” (23)
Present knowledge of directly transmitted earth
shock is substantially less extensive than that of
induced effects. Empirical equations have been devel-
oped to predict the resulting ground motion [28-331.
The equations apply for TNT detonations at or near
ground surface where the ground shock parameters
are expressed in terms of the charge weight, the
ground range and scaled distance from the explosion.
The maximum vertical displacement, d,, of the
ground surface are given as

in which W is the explosion yield in megatonnes and

0 02SR1~3W”3
H is the depth of the reflecting soil layer in metres. d”== * 21.3 , for rock (30a)
The peak vertical acceleration is a function of the
shape and duration of the rise curve of the peak
velocity. Based on the assumtion of a linear rise of
d _0.17R”3W”3
surface pressure and particle velocity [28,3&33J, the u- zi.3
, for soil (30b)
maximum vertical acceleration A,, can be expressed
as
dh = OSd”, for rock (31a)
Au,= VA (24)

where t, is the rise time to the peak velocity. At the $ = d, , for soil. (31b)
surface this is equal to the rise time of the airblast. It
is suggested [7,32] that an airblast rise time of
0.001 set can be used and results are increased by For all ground media, the maximum vertical velocity,
about 20% to account for non-linearity of the rise. In Vudrand the maximum horizontal component, V,, are
terms of peak overpressure, the mean value of the expressed by
peak vertical acceleration induced by airblast 1291is

A “1= ISOP,g (25) (32)

in which P, is in megapascals and g is acceleration due

to gravity. v, = V&. (33)
604 F. B. A. BESHARA

Finally, the maximum acceleration components are 6. CONCLUDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR MODELLING
given by OF INTERNAL AND CONTACT BLAST LOADS
AND GROUND SHOCK

10,000 The procedure presented in this paper for the

a,. = w1’8z2 (34)
analytical modelling of blast loads arising from
confined explosions and explosion-induced ground
a, = O.Sa,. , for dry soil shocks, is applicable to aboveground rigid structures.
(35a)
The response of structures located at comparatively
close distances to an explosion that is, contact blast,
a,, = a,. , for rock and wet soil. (35b) may be determined. However, local effects associated
with these conditions must be considered in the
5.3. Net ground shock loads on structures determination of dynamic response.
The net ground shock associated with an explosion The internal blast loads that can be caused by a
is a combination of the air-induced and direct ground confined explosion are described as:
shocks. Since the methods of analysis described in
this paper are applicable to rigid structures located at l shock wave loading (for high explosives only);
some distance from an explosion, the structural l quasic-static gas venting pressure (for high and low
motions are taken equal to ground motions in the explosives).
vicinity of the structure. Similar assumptions have
been made elsewhere [7,28, 30, 321. The time at which The modelling procedure and the necessary mathmat-
the shock is felt at adjacent structures and the ical relations are explained in Sets 2 and 3 for the
magnitude and duration of the motion is a function prediction of the loading-time histories. The effects of
of the quantity of explosive detonating, the ground explosion containment and venting processes are
range and the soil media. As the air-induced ground included in such relationships. Considering the ideal
shock is a function of the airblast, the arrival time gas assumption in the derivation of the governing
and duration of the ground shock may be taken equal equations, as well as the possible delays in the venting
to the arrival time t, and duration t, of the airblast process, idealized representations of the time history
given in [34, 351. The arrival time of the direct ground of blast loads are based on a linear approximation.
shock, tag, is derived as a function of the seismic The initial internal blast pressure due to a high
velocity of soil and the distance from the ex- explosive is evaluated from the analytical studies of
plosion [30] such that normal blast wave reflection from a rigid surface.
Based on the similitude analysis, dimensionless en-
ergy-scaled parameters of quasi-static gas pressure
12,OOOR
tog= ~ (36) and blowdown duration for blast loading within
CP structures are described. Prediction of the blast
pressure caused by gas and dust explosions are given
The actual duration of the direct shock load is not by semi-empirical relations on the basis of deflagra-
readily available. However, it is sufficient to realise tive idealization of the explosion mechanism. The
that the duration is long, that is, many times longer loading that arises from contact explosions on a
than the duration of the air-induced ground structure and the minimum thickness of concrete
shock [30]. required to resist spalling are described in Sec. 4 as
The net ground shock is obtained from a consider- functions of the charge weight and concrete compres-
ation of the arrival time and duration of each type of sive strength.
induced shock. If (to + t,) is less than tag,the structure For dynamic analysis of blast-loaded structures
is subjected to superseismic ground shock [29, 30,321, due to external explosions which are caused either by
where the air-induced shock arrives at the structure nuclear weapons or conventional high explosive, two
first and is dissipated by the time the direct shock distinct types of shock loads, air shock and ground
arrives. If t, is greater than tag, the structure is shock, have to be considered. The modelling of blast
subjected to an overtaking ground shock. The direct- loads associated with air shock which acts on the
induced ground shock arrives at the structure first, superstructure of the system has been presented in a
and since its duration is long, the air-induced ground companion paper [35]. The procedures for calculating
shock will arrive at the structure while the directly the displacements, velocities and accelerations in-
transmitted shock is still acting. The structure re- duced by the ground shock at the base of the
ceives the combined effects of the induced shock. If structure are given in Sec. 5 along with their practical
t, is slightly less than t, and (t, + t,) is greater than limitations. Airblast-induced ground motions are dis-
t~~,the combined-induced ground shocks have to be tinguished from directly transmitted ground shock.
considered. In practice, the effect due to directly All these loads may act independently or they may
transmitted ground motion is negligible compared to occur in combination, depending upon the nature of
air-induced earth motion due to the fact that soil is the exploding material and the position of the struc-
not able to transmit high frequency motion [33]. ture relative to the explosion source. For predicting
 Modelling of blast loading on aboveground structures-II 605

the maximum structural response the following 13. R. J. Mainstone, Internal Blast 2, Proceedings of Int.
Conf. on rhe Planning and Design of High Buildings,
guidelines may be considered in the modelling of
Lehigh University, Vol. Ib, pp. 643660 (1972).
these loads on aboveground structures: 14. R. J. Mainstone, The response of buildings to accidental
explosions. Building Research Establishment, Current
The most severe loading case is due to the com- Paper CP/24/76, Garston, Watford (1976).
15. R. J. Mainstone, H. G. Nicholson and S. J. Alexander,
bined effects of air shock and airblast-induced
Structural damage in buildings caused by gaseous ex-
ground shock. These dynamic excitations, being plosions and other accidental loadings 1971-1977.
caused by the same source, namely airblast, are Building Research Establishment, Garston, Watford
treated to be in phase. (1978).
since the vertical motion of a rigid structure is 16. P. A. Cubbage and M. R. Marshall, Pressures
generated in combustion chambers by the ignition of
restricted by the ground, which is already com-
air-gas mixtures. I. Chem. E. Symposium, Series No. 33,
pressed due to the dead load of the structure and Institution of Chemical Engineers, London pp. 2431
its contents, explosion-induced vertical ground (1972).
motion must necessarily be small and may be 17. D. J. Rasbash, The relief of gas and vapour explosions
in domestic structures. The Structural Engineer 47,
ignored in the analysis.
404411 (1969).
Xven the expected difference in the time arrival of 18. D. J. Rasbash, K. N. Palmer, Z. W. Rogwski and
the various shocks to the structure and considering S. Ames, Gas explosions in multiple compartments.
the many uncertainties involved in the interaction JERO Fire Reasearch Note No. 847 (1970).
processes between the blast wave, the structure and 19. S. J. Alexander and E. C. Hambly, The design of
structures to withstand gaseous explosions. Concrete 4,
the soil, the directly transmitted ground shock may
62-65; 107-l 16 (1970).
be safely neglected. 20. M. Dragosavic, Structural measures against explosions
of natural gas in multi-storey residential buildings.
REFERENCES Report No. BI-72-6/04.3.02.520, Institut TN0 voor
Bouwmaterialen en Bouwconstructies (1972).
1 H. R. W. Weibull, Pressures recorded in partially closed 21. D. Bradley and A. Mitcheson, The venting of gaseous
chambers at explosion of TNT charges. Ann. N. Y. explosions in spherical vessels. Combustion and Flame
Acad. Sci. 152, 256-361 (1968). 32, 221-236; 237-255 (1978).
2 W. E. Baker, P. A. Cox, P. S. Westine, J. J. Kulesz and 22. K. N. Palmer, Dust Explosions and Fires. Chapman &
R. A. Strehlow, Explosion Hazards and Evaluation. Hall, London (1973).
Elsevier, Amsterdam (1983). 23. J. Cross and D. Farrer, Dust Explosions. Plenum Press,
3 W. E. Baker, J. C. Hokanson, E. D. Esparza and N. R. New York (1982).
Sandoval, Gas pressure loads from explosions within 24. W. Bartknecht, Gas, vapour and dust explosions-fun-
vented and unvented structures. Proceedings of the damentals, prevention, control. Im. Symp. on Grain
Interaction of Non-nuclear Munitions with Strucmres. Elevator Explosions, U.S. National Research Council
U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Snrinas. CO (19831. (1978).
4 W. E. Baker, C. E. Anderson Jr, B. L.-MO% and D. I& 25. N. Gibson and G. F. P. Harris, The calculation of dust
Wauters, Quasi-static pressure, duration and impulse explosion vents. Chemical Engng Progress 6267 (1976),
for explosions in structures. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 25, 26. J. Morton, Accidental damage-robustness and stab-
425464 (1983) ility. Prepared for BS5628: The Structural Use of Ma-
5. C. N. Kingery, R. Schumacher and W. 0. Ewing, Jr, sonry, Part 1: Unreinforced Masonry (1985).
Internal pressure from explosions in suppressive struc- 27. F. B. Lees, Loss Prevention in the Process Industries-
tures. Memorandum Report ARBRL-MR-02848, U.S. Hazard IdentiJication, Assessment and Control, Vol 2.
Army Ballistic Research Laroratory, Aberdeen Proving Butterworths, London (1980).
Ground, MD (1978). 28. R. E. Crawford, C. J. Higgins and E. H. Bultman, The
6. E. D. Esparza, W. E. Baker and G. A. Oldham, Blast air force manual for design and analysis of hardened
pressures inside and outside suppressive structures. structures. AFWL-TR-74-102, Air Force Weapons
Report EM-CR-76042, Edgewood-Arsenal, Aberdeen Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM (1974).
Proving Ground, MD (19751. 29. M. S. Agbabian, Design of structures to resist nuclear
7. TM5 1200, Structures to resist the effects of accidental weapon effects. ASCE Manual on Engineering Practice,
explosions. U.S. Departments of the Army, Navy and No. 42. ASCE, New York (1985).
Air Force (1969). 30. N. M. Newmark, Design of structures for dynamic
8. J. E. Trancreto and E. S. Helseth, Effects of frangible loads including the effects of vibration and ground
panels on internal gas pressures. Minutes of the Twenty shock. In Symposium on Scientific Problems of Protec-
First Explosives Safety Seminar, Vol. 1, pp. 365-394, TX rive Construction, pp. 148-248. -Swiss Federal” Institute
(1984). of Technology, Zurich (1963).
9. HNDM-1110-I-2, Suppressive shields-structural de- 31. J. I. Merritt-and N. M. Newmark, Design of under-
sign and analysis handbook. U.S. Army Corps of ground structures to resist nuclear blast. SR 549, De-
Engineers, Huntsville, AL (1977). partment of Civil Engineering University of Illinois,
10. W. A. Keenan and J. E. Trancreto, Blast environment Urbana, IL (1962).
from fully and partially vented explosions in cubicles. 32. N. M. Newmark and J. D. Haltiwanger, Air force
Technical Report TR-828, Army MIPR 51-027, Civil design manual: principles and practices for design of
Engneering Laboratory, Naval Construction Battulin hardened structures. -SWL TDR-62-138, Air Force
Center, Port Hueneme, CA (1975). Special Weapons Centre, Kirtland. Air Force Base. NM
11. R. J. Mainstone, The hazard of internal blast in build- (i962). -
ings. Building Research Establishment, Current Paper 33. S. T. Wu, B. P. Jain and R. Srinivasan, Blast effects on
CP/26/71, Garston, Watford (1971). safety related structures. Proceedings of ASCE Spec.
1,
IL. G. F. Kinney and K. J. Graham, Explosive Shocks in Conf on Strucr. Design of Nuclear Plant Facilities, New
Air. Springer, New York (1985). Orleans (1975).
606 F. B. A. BE.SHARA

34. F. B. A. Beshara, Nonlinear finite element analysis of
reinforced concrete structures subjected to blast load-
ing. Ph.D. thesis, City University,. London (1991).
35. F. B. A. Beshara. Modellina of blast loading on above-
ground structures--I. General phenomenol&y and ex-
temal blast. Compu?. SIrucr. 51, 585-596 (1994).
36. G. Bela, Design of Buildings to Withstand Abnormal
Loading. Butterworths (1990).
37. C. A. Mills, The design of concrete structures to resist
explosions and weapons effects. Proceedings of 1st Int.
CkjI on Concrete for Hazard Protection, Edinburgh,
pp. 61-73 (1987).