DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF A BUILDING UNDER

BLAST LOADS: A PARAMETRIC STUDY

A Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirement for the Degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
CIVIL ENGINEERING
By

A VENKATA SUDHA (16091A01A8)

T VENKATESH (17095A0153)
K SEKHAR (17095A0136)
I SAINATH REDDY (17095A0134)
K SUBBU SATYA NARAYANA (16091A0194)
Under the Esteemed Guidance of
Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM Ph.D

Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

R. G. M College of Engineering and Technology
(Autonomous),
Nandyal 518 501, A. P., INDIA
(Affiliated to J. N. T. University Anantapur, Ananthapuram, A. P., INDIA)
(Approved by AICTE, Accredited by N.B.A, NewDelhi, NAAC-A+ Grade)

2016 - 2020
 R. G. M College of Engineering and Technology
(Autonomous),
Nandyal 518 501, A. P., INDIA
(Affiliated to J. N. T. University Anantapur, Ananthapuram, A. P., INDIA)
(Approved by AICTE, Accredited by N.B.A, NewDelhi, NAAC-A+ Grade)

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Project Report entitled ”DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF A BUILD-
ING UNDER BLAST LOADS: A PARAMETRIC STUDY” that is being submitted by

A VENKATA SUDHA (16091A01A8)

T VENKATESH (17095A0153)
K SEKHAR (17095A0136)
I SAINATH REDDY (17095A0134)
K SUBBU SATYA NARAYANA (16091A0194)
in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of B.Tech in Civil Engineering in the
RAJEEV GANDHI MEMORIAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECH-
NOLOGY,Nandyal (Affiliated to J.N.T University, Anantapur) is a bonafide record of confide
work carried out by them under our guidance and supervision. The results embodied in this
technical report have not been submitted to any other university or institute for the award of
any Degree.

Signature of the Project Guide Signature of HSCE

Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM Ph.D Dr. G. SREENIVASULU Ph.D (IISC)
Assistant Professor Professor and HOD
Examiner:
Date:

i
Dedicated to my beloved parents, and teachers who have worked hard throughout my education.

ii
 Acknowledgements

We express deep gratitude to our guide Dr. CHENNA RAJARAM Assistant Professor of
Civil Engineering Department, RGM College of Engineering and Technology, Nandyal for his continu-
ous support, guidance, scholarly advice, imparting illuminating ideas, benevolent attitude, a perennial
source of inspiration. He also taught us the time sense, discipline and punctuality, which indeed made
us to accomplish this piece of work effectively, efficiently and on time. For all these, we owe them
profusely forever.

We privilege to express our thanks to the Head of the Department Dr.G.SREENIVASULU

Ph.D(IISC), for his continuous help and encouragement.

We are highly grateful to Dr.T.JAYACHANDRAPRASAD,Principal, R.G.M. College of

Engineering and Technology, for his encouragement and inspiration at various points of time in the
successful accomplishment of the project.

We shall remain grateful to Dr.M.SHANTHIRAMUDU,Chairman, R.G.M. College of En-

gineering and technology who has been a constant source of inspiration throughout the project work
and we also seek his blessings for a bright future.

We shall remain grateful to Sri M.SHIVARAM,M.D, R.G.M. College of Engineering and

technology who has been a constant source of inspiration throughout the project work and we also
seek his blessings for a bright future.

We would like to thank our PARENTS whose blessings are always there with us for the
completetion of this project. Last but not least, our thanks to all who helped us in the completion of
this project report.

Sudha
Venkatesh
Sekhar
Sainath
Satya

iii
 Abstract
This study investigates effects of blast loads on multistory buildings due to increasing terrorist attacks.
Blast loads cause huge damage to the structure and decrease the strength and durability of structure.
A bomb explosion can cause internal and external damage to the structure. Due to this damage from
such extreme load conditions, efforts have been made to improve methods of structural analysis and
design to resist the blast loads.

For the purpose of a parametric study, on a multistoried (G+2, G+5, G+7, G+10 and G+15)
building is done to find out the dynamic response of building due to blast load. The building is mod-
elled in SAP2000 software. The results are represented in terms of time histories for different Charge
weights 10 kg, 20 kg and 30 kg and different standoff distance 10 m, 20 m, 30 m, 40 m and 50 m. At the
end, retrofitting measures can be done to minimize the dynamic effect of a building due to blast loading.

Keywords: blast loading, multistoried building,retrofitting measures, and SAP2000 software.

iv
Contents

Abstract iv

1 Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Past blastings in india . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

2 Literature review 5
2.1 International Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 National Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.1 The Gap areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3 Numerical modelling 9
3.1 Blast loads on structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 Geometry details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Material properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Procedure for blast load calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4 Nonlinear dynamic Responses of frames under blast loads 18

4.1 Nonlinear dynamic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2 Case I: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 2 storey structure . . . . . . . . . 19
4.3 Case II:Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 5 storey structure . . . . . . . . . 20
4.4 Case III: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 7 storey structure . . . . . . . . 21
4.5 Case IV: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 10 storey structure . . . . . . . 22
4.6 Case V: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 15 storey structure . . . . . . . . 23

5 Retrofitting measures 25
5.1 Introduction to retrofitting measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

v
 5.1.1 Local jacketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.1.2 Bracings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

6 Conclusions 29

7 Appendix 32
7.1 Procedure for analysis of blast load for multistory building by using SAP2000 . 32
7.2 Blast load calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

vi
List of Figures

1.1 Collapse of buildings due to blast loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Number of blasts in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Number of deaths in India due to blast explosions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.1 Idealized pressure-time variation curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.2 Plan for G + 2, G + 5, G + 7, G + 10, and G + 15 building . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.3 Reinforcement for beams and columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Load distribution for G + 7 building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.5 Load distribution for G + 7 building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

4.1 G + 7 3D model developed in SAP2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

4.2 Maximum displacement values for G + 2 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.3 Maximum displacement values for G + 5 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.4 Maximum displacement values for G + 7 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.5 Maximum displacement values for G + 10 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.6 Maximum displacement values for G + 15 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5.1 Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing local jacketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.2 G + 7 after providing single diagonal bracings 3D model developed in SAP2000 26
5.3 Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing single diagonal bracings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.4 G + 7 after providing double diagonal bracings 3D model developed in SAP2000 27

vii
5.5 Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing double diagonal bracings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

viii
List of Tables

3.1 Height of structure,No.of beams and columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.2 Blast load for G + 7 (Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 10m) . . . . . . . . . . 13

7.1 Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 10m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

7.2 Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 20m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.3 Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 30m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.4 Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 40m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.5 Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 50m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.6 Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 10m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.7 Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 20m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.8 Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 30m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.9 Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 40m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.10 Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 50m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.11 Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 10m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.12 Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 20m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.13 Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 30m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.14 Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 40m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.15 Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 50m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

ix
Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Introduction
Terrorism is one of the major problems in many countries nowadays. It is very difficult to
identify such problems. Manmade disasters are different from Natural disasters such as earth-
quakes, floods, hurricanes etc. Major terrorist activities are with explosive materials. These
explosive materials can damage and destroy the internal and exterior of the building. The
severity of the damage depends on the layout of building, material used and charge weight. If
the structures are properly designed for these abnormal loads, damage of the building can be
minimized. Additionally, in order to ensure safety of existing structures against such events,
retrofitting of building is needed. Major part of the casualties in the explosions is due to the
structural damage of buildings. Following are few damage to buildings due to blast loading
worldwide.

A gas leak caused an explosion in an Ronan Point apartment of the 18th floor of one of
the buildings in London in 1968. The loss of an exterior wall triggered the collapse of the
upper floors followed by the collapse of the floors below due to the impact of the falling upper
floors. In 1995, Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City was blasted by a truck bomb of
high explosives located 3-5 m from the north face of the building (Figure 1.1a). The explosion
which created a crater of 17 m in diameter and 5 m deep destroyed the facade wall of the
Khobar Towers building in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia in 1996. In addition, the explosion seriously
damaged other nearby buildings, and caused widespread glass damage in the building (Figure
1.1b). On September 11, 2001, it was in the path of the shower of debris that fell when the
twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed. The building sustained a severe gash that

1
destroyed significant structural framing in its north face. However, collapse did not spread, and
the building remained standing.

Figure 1.1: Collapse of buildings due to blast loading

The structural engineering research departments forced to direct their research towards pro-
gressive collapse of buildings due to blast loads, after collapse of the Ronan Point apartment,
England in 1968. Though guidelines, standards, criteria are available across the world, it is
necessary to understand the progressive collapse of the building under blast loads. The main
objective of this project is to study the structural collapse behavior of building due to blast
loads. It helps us to know about mode of collapse of building, possibility of repairs in case of
partial collapse.

1.2 Past blastings in india

India had the highest number of bomb blasts in the world in the past two years, according to the
National Bomb Data Centre (NBDC), which functions within India’s primary counter-terror
force, the National Security Guard (NSG). India’s number is even higher than that of Iraq and
Pakistan. The figure 1.2 and figure 1.3 represents the number of blasts and deaths causes due
to blasting in India.

2
Figure 1.2: Number of blasts in India

3
Figure 1.3: Number of deaths in India due to blast explosions

4
Chapter 2

Literature review

2.1 International Status

The performance acceptance criteria was proposed and recommended the direct design method,
damage control method, or a combination of the two methods (Ellingwood and Leyendecker,
1978). A series of recommendations were proposed for mitigation of progressive collapse in
new and existing buildings in the event of a catastrophic loading. Some of the recommenda-
tions include the use of compartmentalization of structural units, moment-resisting frames, and
dual systems with special moment frames (Corley et al., 1998). A progressive collapse anal-
ysis and damage assessment methodology were developed for blast loadings (Kauthammer et
al., 2002). The dynamic analysis of planar frames during progressive collapse was performed,
which includes both material and geometry nonlinearities. Geometric nonlinearity (P-delta)
is accounted for by the geometric stiffness matrix. Material nonlinearity is accounted for, by
using a lumped plasticity model for beam-column elements. The program employs a damage
index whose value is between 0 and 1, to predict member failure. A damage model is uti-
lized to account for stiffness and strength degradation during cyclic loading (Kaewkulchai and
Williamson, 2002). The methods for predicting bomb blast effects on buildings were studied.
Simplified analytical techniques used for obtaining conservative estimates of the blast effects
on buildings. Numerical techniques including Lagrangian, Eulerian, Euler-FCT, ALE, and fi-
nite element modelling used for accurate prediction of blast loads on commercial and public
buildings (Alexander, 2003).

A vulnerability/survivability assessment procedure was presented on a typical tall building

in Australia. The structural stability and integrity of the building was assessed. The authors

5
suggest some methods to improve the impact resistance of the concrete walls and slabs, as well
as the rotation capacity of the beams, columns and joints which have been found from this
study of crucial importance for collapse prevention (Mendis and Ngo, 2003). The progressive
collapse of building from a structural engineering perspective was explained. Also discussed
progressive collapse provisions in ASCE 7, ACI 318, GSA (2003), DoD (2005), and Canadian
and British building codes (Osama, 2006).

A progressive collapse analysis was performed on a nine-story steel moment-resistant frame

building. It was concluded that dynamic analysis procedures not only yield more accurate
results, but are also easy to perform for progressive collapse determination (Shalva and Elize-
beth, 2006). A framework was provided for addressing issues related to low probability, high
consequence events in building practice, summarizes strategies for progressive collapse risk mit-
igation, and identifies challenges for implementing general provisions in ASCE 7 (Bruce, 2006).
It is essential for structural engineers to understand the technical issues involved in dealing with
low probability, high-consequence events, and to communicate these consequences to building
developers, architects, and owners at the conceptual project design stage.

The overview of current progressive collapse analysis methods (direct simulation method,
and alternative load path method) were presented. The direct method yields reliable predic-
tions of structural collapse to blast loads, but it is extremely time consuming, and requires a
profound knowledge of structural dynamics, damage mechanics, dynamic material properties
and computational skills. Another method is relatively easy to be used but at the cost of
low accuracy. A new method was proposed to overcome the disadvantages of the above meth-
ods. The proposed method gives more reliable predictions of the structural progressive collapse
than the alternative load path method, which neglects non-zero structural conditions and dam-
age in the structural members when progressive collapse starts (Zhongxian and Yanchao, 2008).

Two reinforced concrete buildings were investigated and clearly demonstrated the vulnera-
bility of buildings to blast loads. The vulnerability, however, decreases with the implementation
of seismic design and detailing requirements of current building and standards. Also, the au-
thors studied the resistance of the seismic designed structures under blast loads (Murat et al.,
2009).

6
2.2 National Status
The effects of an external explosion were studied on the outer reinforced concrete shell of a typ-
ical nuclear containment structure. The analysis has been made using appropriate non-linear
material models till the ultimate stages. An analytical procedure for non-linear analysis by
adopting the above model has been implemented into a finite element code DYNAIB (Pandey
et al., 2006). The Ronan Point, the Murrah Building, WTC 1 and 2, and WTC 7 were studied
by considering redundancy, local resistance, or interconnection. It was concluded that redun-
dancy is only one of the ways of reducing susceptibility to disproportionate collapse of building
(Shankar, 2006).

A fully fixed stiffened plates under the effect of blast loads were studied to determine the
dynamic response of the plates with different stiffener configurations and considered the effect
of mesh density, time duration and strain rate sensitivity. Finite element method and the cen-
tral difference method for the time integration of the nonlinear equations of motion was used
to obtain numerical solutions (Khadid et al., 2007).

A complete Finite Element Analysis of a 2D RC frame with line and solid elements was
used to investigate the blast influence along the height of a building and the direction of wave
propagation using LS DYNA. Maximum displacement in vertical and horizontal directions and
stress, strain propagation were investigated as response parameters in the analysis. The inves-
tigation concluded that the direct blast pressure will have an adverse impact mainly on the
lower levels of a building which is proportionate with the charge weight and standoff distance
of the external blast event (Jayasooriya et al., 2009).

A study has been conducted on the structural collapse behaviour using Applied Element
Method. Different frames have been analyzed for earthquake ground motion and blast loading
(Harinath, 2011).

2.2.1 The Gap areas

1. The earlier research was done on framed structures subjected to blast loads and few
research was on complete 3D building. Study of progressive collapse of a 3D RC high-rise
building is needed to understand the behaviour of building for blast loads. During blast

7
 loading, failure of non-structural elements also occur. Progressive collapse of building 3D
RC building with non-structural elements needs to be done. Study of progressive collapse
for impact load at different locations and heights of high rise buildings.

2. The blast may occur either internal or external environment. This needs to be included
in progressive collapse of building. Temperature stresses also needs to be included.

3. The above literature was limited to near field blast events. Similar study can be done
for far field blast events to identify the vulnerability of RC framed building structures.
The performance of composite RC columns with structural steel core when subjected to
stand-off distance blast events where the blast pressure is uniform along the height of the
column.

4. The temperature caused by the explosion was not considered in the analysis. An investi-
gation is required to identify the influence of temperature on the structural response of
the RC buildings. The blast loads on the front face were only applied to the RC frames
in the literature. However, blast pressure may enter into the building and may affect to
the structural and non-structural components. Therefore, a combined effect is necessary
to identify the wave propagation in to the building and their effect.

2.3 Objective
In this project, a 2,5,7,10 and 15 storey 4 x 4 bay buildings with walls on one side is modelled
in Finite Element Method. The building is designed as per Indian Standard Codes. The blast
loads are calculated as per Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC 3-340-02). The blast load is applied
along the height of the building by varying stand-off distances, and charge weights. The same
analysis is done for three dimensional building. At the end, displacements is found out for the
structure and retrofitting measures are done to minimize the dynamic effect of a building due
to blast loading.

8
Chapter 3

Numerical modelling

3.1 Blast loads on structures

At any point away from the burst, the pressure disturbance has the shape shown in Figure 3.1.
The shock front arrives at a given location at time ta and, after the rise to the peak value Ps the
incident pressure decays to the ambient value in time to which is the positive phase duration
−
td.This is followed by a negative phase with a duration td that is usually much longer than
the positive phase and characterized by a negative pressure (below ambient pressure) having a
−
maximum value of Ps as well as a reversal of the particle flow. The negative phase is usually
−
less important in the design than the positive phase, and its amplitude Ps must, in all cases,
be less than ambient atmosphere pressure P0 . The incident impulse density associated with
the blast wave is the integrated area under the pressure-time curve and is denoted as is for the
−
positive phase and is for the negative phase.

9
 Figure 3.1: Idealized pressure-time variation curve

3.2 Geometry details

The geometry details of the multi-storied buildings (G + 2, G + 5, G + 7, G + 10, and G +
15) are represented as follows:

1. Plan dimensions - 20 m ×20 m (4 ×4 Bay of size 5 m ×5 m)

2. Thickness if slab - 0.15 m

3. Beam size - 0.25 m ×0.4 m

4. Column size - 0.4 m ×0.4 m

5. Height of the column - 3.0 m for ground floor and for above floors

Table 3.1: Height of structure,No.of beams and columns

Number of Height of the Number of Number of

stories structure (m) Beams Columns
G+2 9 120 75
G+5 18 240 150
G+7 24 320 200
G+10 33 440 275
G+15 48 640 400

10
 Figure 3.2: Plan for G + 2, G + 5, G + 7, G + 10, and G + 15 building

3.3 Material properties

A M20 grade of concrete, a grade of steel Fe415 and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.2 are used in the
analysis. The reinforcement details provided for building as shown in figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3: Reinforcement for beams and columns

3.4 Procedure for blast load calculation

Step 1: Calculate RG (Distance from Blast to the point of interest)
It is the distance from blast to the point of interest (top of floor) and expressed in m.

√
RG = R2 + H 2 (3.1)

11
Step 2: Calculate (Z) Scaled Distance (Aleem Ullah et al. (2016))
The scaled distance or the proximity factor (Z) in m/kg 1/3 is defined as

RG
Z= (3.2)
W 1/3
Where RG is the distance from blast to the point of interest in meters (m), and W is the charge
mass expressed in kilograms (kg).
Step 3: Calculate peak overpressure (Ps ) (Aleem Ullah et al. (2016))
For hemispherical surface bursts, the empirical formulae for the peak overpressure proposed
by different researchers is given below. The equations have been modified to have the unit of
kilopascals (kPa).
s
W W
Ps = 678.4 3 + 294 3
(3.3)
RG RG

Step 4: Calculate coefficient of the reflected over-pressure (Cr ) (Nelson Lam et al. (2004))

Cr = 3Ps1/4 (3.4)

where Ps is in units of bars

Step 5: Calculate reflected over-pressure (Pr )
Reflected overpressure is expressed in (kPa)

Pr = C r Ps (3.5)

Step 6: Calculate arrival time (ta ) (Aleem Ullah et al. (2016))

For a surface burst, the arrival time (ta) is expressed in (ms)

8534( WR1/3
G
)−0.996
ta = (3.6)
a0
where ao is the speed of sound in air 340 m/s
Step 7: Calculate positive phase duration (td ) (Nelson Lam et al. (2004))
The duration of a blast wave might be defined as the time difference between the passing of
the shock front and the passing of the end of the positive pressure phase .For a surface burst,
the total positive phase duration is expressed in milliseconds (ms).

td = 10W 1/3 (3.7)

12
Step 8: Calculate blast Load
Blast load is expressed in (kN)

BlastLoad = Pr (Surf aceAreaof W all) (3.8)

Blast Load = Pr ×(B×H)

Table 3.2: Blast load for G + 7 (Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 10m)

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3 (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
Ground 10 10 20 3 10.440 4.846 33.521 2.283 76.519 5.2 21.5 4591.165
1 10 10 20 6 11.662 5.413 27.622 2.175 60.075 4.7 21.5 3604.525
2 10 10 20 9 13.454 6.245 21.626 2.046 44.243 4.0 21.5 2654.598
3 10 10 20 12 15.620 7.250 16.839 1.922 32.361 3.5 21.5 1941.669
4 10 10 20 15 18.028 8.368 13.304 1.812 24.104 3.0 21.5 1446.262
5 10 10 20 18 20.591 9.558 10.727 1.717 18.417 2.6 21.5 1105.024
6 10 10 20 21 23.259 10.796 8.827 1.635 14.434 2.3 21.5 866.056
7 10 10 20 24 26.000 12.068 7.399 1.565 11.576 2.1 21.5 694.573

13
Figure 3.4: Load distribution for G + 7 building

14
15
16
Figure 3.5: Load distribution for G + 7 building

17
Chapter 4

Nonlinear dynamic Responses of

frames under blast loads

4.1 Nonlinear dynamic analysis

Nonlinear analysis methods are best applied when either geometric or material nonlinearity is
considered during structural modelling and analysis. We done a nonlinear dynamic analysis
for G+2, G+5, G+7, G+10 and G+15 building. Figure 8 is a G + 7 building modelled in
SAP2000.

Figure 4.1: G + 7 3D model developed in SAP2000

18
4.2 Case I: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 2
storey structure

Figure 4.2: Maximum displacement values for G + 2 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances

Figure 4.2 shows the response of two storey 4 x 4 bay structure subjected to 10 kg ,20 kg
and 30 kg charge weight and standoff distances 10 m ,20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m. As we
increase standoff distance from 10 m to 20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m with respect to standoff
distance for charge weight 10 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to sixty
eight percent ,eighty four percent , ninety percent and ninety four percent ,for charge weight 20
kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to sixty nine percent ,eighty five percent
,ninety percent and ninety four percent and for charge weight 30 kg the maximum displacement

19
at top floor is reduced to seventy percent ,eighty six percent ,ninety one percent and ninety five
percent.

4.3 Case II:Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 5

storey structure

Figure 4.3: Maximum displacement values for G + 5 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances

Figure 4.3 shows the response of five storey 4 x 4 bay structure subjected to 10 kg ,20 kg
and 30 kg charge weight and standoff distances 10 m ,20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m. As we
increase standoff distance from 10 m to 20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m with respect to standoff
distance for charge weight 10 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty

20
seven percent ,seventy seven percent ,eighty five percent and ninety percent ,for charge weight
20 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty eight percent ,seventy seven
percent ,eighty six percent and ninety one percent and for charge weight 30 kg the maximum
displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty nine percent , seventy eight percent, eighty seven
percent and ninety one percent.

4.4 Case III: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 7

storey structure

Figure 4.4: Maximum displacement values for G + 7 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances

Figure 4.4 shows the response of seven storey 4 x 4 bay structure subjected to 10 kg ,20
kg and 30 kg charge weight and standoff distances 10 m ,20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m. As we

21
increase standoff distance from 10 m to 20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m with respect to standoff
distance for charge weight 10 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty one
percent ,seventy two percent , eighty two percent and eighty seven percent ,for charge weight 20
kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty two percent ,seventy two percent
, eighty three percent and eighty eight percent and for charge weight 30 kg the maximum
displacement at top floor is reduced to fifty three percent ,seventy three percent ,eighty three
percent and eighty eight percent.

4.5 Case IV: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 10

storey structure

22
Figure 4.5: Maximum displacement values for G + 10 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances

Figure 4.5 shows the response of ten storey 4 x 4 bay structure subjected to 10 kg ,20 kg and
30 kg charge weight and standoff distances 10 m ,20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m. As we increase
standoff distance from 10 m to 20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m with respect to standoff distance
for charge weight 10 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to forty five percent
,sixty five percent ,seventy six percent and eighty three percent ,for charge weight 20 kg the
maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to forty six percent ,sixty seven percent ,seventy
eight percent and eighty four percent and for charge weight 30 kg the maximum displacement
at top floor is reduced to forty seven percent ,sixty seven percent , seventy eight percent and
eighty four percent.

4.6 Case V: Nonlinear dynamic Responses for G + 15

storey structure

23
Figure 4.6: Maximum displacement values for G + 15 structure under different charge weights
and standoff distances

Figure 4.6 shows the response of fifteen storey 4 x 4 bay structure subjected to 10 kg ,20 kg
and 30 kg charge weight and standoff distances 10 m ,20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m. As we increase
standoff distance from 10 m to 20 m ,30 m ,40 m and 50 m with respect to standoff distance for
charge weight 10 kg the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to thirty eight percent
,fifty seven percent ,sixty nine percent and seventy seven percent ,for charge weight 20 kg the
maximum displacement at top floor is reduced to thirty nine percent ,fifty eight percent ,seventy
percent and seventy eight percent and for charge weight 30 kg the maximum displacement at
top floor is reduced to thirty nine percent ,fifty eight percent ,seventy percent and seventy eight.

24
Chapter 5

Retrofitting measures

5.1 Introduction to retrofitting measures

The aftermath of terrorist attack or blast explosion striking extensive damage to innumerable
buildings varying degree i.e. either full or partial or slight. This damage to structures in its
turn causes irreparable loss of life with a large number of casualties. As a result frightened
occupants may refuse to enter the building unless assured of the safety of the building from
future terrorist attack or blast explosion. We provided a solution that majority of such blast
damaged buildings may be safely reused, if they converted into blast resistance structures by
employing a few retrofitting measures.

5.1.1 Local jacketing

The main of this study is to reduce the displacement of structure by increasing the size of the
columns through retrofitting techniques. Jacketing is one of the most frequently and popularly
used techniques to strengthen reinforced concrete (RC) columns. Jacketing of columns consists
of added concrete with longitudinal and transverse reinforcement around the existing columns.
This type of strengthening improves the axial and shear strength of columns while the flexural
strength of column and strength of the beam-column joints remain the same.

The figure 5.1 shows the nonlinear response of G + 7 building with charge weight 30 kg and
standoff distance 20 m. we observed that after increasing the size of column as 0.5 m ×0.5 m
and 0.6 m ×0.6 m the maximum displacement at top floor is reduced twenty nine percent and
forty percent respectively.

25
Figure 5.1: Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing local jacketing

5.1.2 Bracings

Single diagonal bracings

Figure 5.2: G + 7 after providing single diagonal bracings 3D model developed in SAP2000

The lateral deflection of a tall building subjected to lateral loads can be decomposed into
shear and bending components. Properly oriented single diagonal bracings are introduced in
order to bring advantageous interactions between these two modes of deflection resulting in a
reduction of the overall lateral deflection of the frame.

26
 The figure 5.3 shows the nonlinear response of G + 7 building with charge weight 30 kg and

Figure 5.3: Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing single diagonal bracings

standoff distance 20 m. we observed that after providing single diagonal bracings of size 0.1 m
×0.1 m, 0.2 m ×0.2 m and 0.3 m ×0.3 m on blast effected phase at ground floor the maximum
displacement at top floor is reduced 0.04%, 0.12% and 0.26% respectively. As compared to
local jacketing the reduced displacement in single diagonal bracings is very less.

Double diagonal bracings

Figure 5.4: G + 7 after providing double diagonal bracings 3D model developed in SAP2000

27
Figure 5.5: Maximum displacements with respect height of floor for G + 7 structure before
and after providing double diagonal bracings

The figure 5.4 shows the nonlinear response of G + 7 building with charge weight 30 kg and
standoff distance 20 m. we observed that after providing double diagonal bracings of size 0.1 m
×0.1 m, 0.2 m ×0.2 m and 0.3 m ×0.3 m on blast effected phase at ground floor the maximum
displacement at top floor is reduced 0.03%, 0.11% and 0.4% respectively. As compared to local
jacketing and single diagonal bracings the reduced displacement in double diagonal bracings is
very less.

28
Chapter 6

Conclusions

The explosion near structure can cause damage to the structure. Injuries and deaths can be
caused by exposure to explosion wave front, collapse of the structure, impact of parts, fire and
smoke. Blast load for surface explosion was determined and simulated on a model building using
SAP2000, the conventional software for the dynamic analysis of structures. Loading was defined
as a record of blast load over time (blast load- time history) with the parameters calculated by
the available literature. The maximum displacements at particular joints for different buildings
( G + 2,G + 5,G + 7,G + 10 and G + 15 buildings) having different charge weights 10 kg, 20
kg and 30 kg and different standoff distances 10 m, 20 m, 30 m, 40 m and 50 m are calculated
by using non-linear dynamic analysis in SAP2000. We observed that maximum displacement is
decreased gradually with increase in standoff distance. After providing retrofitting techniques
i) Local jacketing and ii) Bracings (single diagonal and double diagonal bracings) for G +
7 building with charge weight 30 kg and standoff distance 20 m the maximum displacement
values are reduced. Compared to bracings the displacement in local jacketting very less. So
local jacketing provides safety against the surface explosions or blasts.

29
References

1. Aleem Ullah, Furqan Ahmad, Heung-Woon Jang, Sung-Wook Kim, and Jung-Wuk Hong
”Review of Analytical and Empirical Estimations for Incident Blast Pressure” Received
May 14, 2015/Revised August 9, 2016/Accepted October 30, 2016/Published Online De-
cember 12, 2016

2. Alex M. Remennikov(2003) ”A Review of Methods for Predicting Bomb Blast Effects on

Buildings”. JOURNAL OF BATTLEFIELD TECHNOLOGY, VOL 6, NO 3, 2003.

3. Assal T. Hussein ”Non-Linear Analysis of SDOF System under Blast Load”.European

Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.45 No.3 (2010), pp.430-437

4. Eric L. Sammarco, P.E., M. ASCE, Cliff A. Jones, P.E., M. ASCE, Eric B. Williamson,
Ph.D., P.E., M. ASCE and Harold O. Sprague, P.E., F. ASCE In Articles,(2012) ”Struc-
tural Design for Blast and Seismic: Acknowledging Differences and Leveraging Synergies”.
ASCE 59-11 Blast Protection of Buildings, UFC 4-010-01 DoD Minimum Anti-Terrorist
Standards for Buildings, the compilation text entitled Handbook for Blast-Resistant De-
sign of Buildings, and FEMA 427 Primer for Design of Commercial Buildings to Mitigate
Terrorist Attacks.

5. Harinath babu,(2013)”Estimation of blast loads, response and behaviour of the struc-

tures”. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:
2395-0056 Volume: 05 Issue: 01 — Jan-2018 p-ISSN: 2395-0072

6. H. Dragani, V. Sigmund (2010) ”Blast loading on structures” ISSN 1330-3651 UDC/UDK

624.01.04:662.15 Hrvoje Dragani?, Vladimir Sigmund.

7. Mohammad M. Abdallah, Bashir H. Osman Numerical Analysis of Steel Building Under

blast Loading,International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT)
IJERT ISSN: 2278-0181 IJERTV3IS110846, Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014.

30
 8. M.D. Goel (2001) ”Blast: Characteristics, Loading and Computation-An Overview”
CSIR-Advanced Materials and Processes Research Institute (AMPRI), Bhopal 462026,
India

9. Mircea D. Botez, (2015) Lucian Bredean IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering ”Numerical Study of a RC Slab Subjected to Blast: A Coupled Eulerian-
Lagrangian Approach”. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol-
ume 471, Issue 5

10. Ngo, T.; Mendis, P.; Gupta, A.; Ramsay, J. Blast Loading and Blast Effects on Structures
- An Overview.EJSE Special Issue: Loading on Structures (2007).

11. Nelson Lam, Priyan Mendis, Tuan Ngo (2004) ”Response Spectrum Solutions for Blast
Loading” Advanced Protective Technology for Engineering Structures (APTES) Research
Group Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Melbourne
Parkville 3010, Victoria, Australia.

12. Remennikov, AM, ”A Review of Methods for Predicting Bomb Blast Effects on Buildings”
Journal of Battlefield Technology, 2003, 6(3) 5-10. Published by Argos Press Pty Ltd.

13. Suryakant S. Birajdar1, Prof. Jawalkar G. C. ”Effect of Blast Loading on Steel Columns”.
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Research (IJSER) ISSN (Online):
2347-3878 Index Copernicus Value (2015): 62.86 — Impact Factor (2015): 3.791 UNI-
FIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC); ”Design of buildings to resist progressive collapse”
UFC 4-023-03 14 July 2009 Change 3, 1 November 2016.

14. Syed, Z. I., Mohamed, O. A., Murad, K., and Kewalramani, M. (2017). Performance
of Earthquake-resistant RCC Frame Structures under Blast Explosions. Procedia En-
gineering, 180, 82-90Shalva Marjanishvili, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE; and Elizabeth Agnew,
M.ASCE ”Comparison of Various Procedures for Progressive Collapse Analysis”. Hinman
Consulting Engineers, Inc., One Bush Street, Suite 510, San Francisco, CA 94104.

15. Vasilis KARLOS George SOLOMOS (2013) ”Calculation of Blast Loads for Application
to Structural Components” Administrative Arrangement No JRC 32253-2011 with DG-
HOME Activity A5 - Blast Simulation Technology Development.

16. Yanchaoshi, Zhong-XianLi, HongHao (2008) ”A new method for progressive collapse anal-
ysis of RC frames under blast loading”. Article in Engineering Structures 32(6):1691-1703
June 2010

31
Chapter 7

Appendix

7.1 Procedure for analysis of blast load for multistory

building by using SAP2000
1. File –> new model –> kN , m , C –> 3D frames –> No. of stories-8 –> story height =
3 m –> no. of bays , x = 4 –> bay width , x = 5 m –> no. of bays,y = 4 –> bay width
, y = 5 m –> untick restraints –> ok.

2. Select nodes at ground floor –> assign –> joint –> restraints –> fixed –> ok.

3. Define –> materials –> concrete –> switch to advanced property display –> material
name: concrete –> material type: concrete –> modify/show material properties –>
modal damping: damping ratio = 0.05 –> ok –> ok –> ok.

4. Define –> section properties –> frame section –> add new property –> concrete –>
rectangular –> section name: beam –> depth (t3) = 0.4 m –> width (t2) = 0.25 m –>
concrete reinforcement –> beam(M3 design only) –> cover top and bottom = 0.025 m
–> ok –> ok.
Select –> select line parallel to –> coordinate axes (or) plane –> select x and y axes –>
ok.
Assign –> frame –> frame sections beam –> ok.

5. Define –> section properties –> frame section –> add new property –> concrete –>
rectangular –> section name: column –> depth (t3) = 0.4 m –> width (t2) = 0.4 m –>
concrete reinforcement –> cover top and bottom = 0.025 m –> ok –> ok.
Select –> select line parallel to –> coordinate axes (or) plane –> z axes –> ok. Assign

32
 –> frame –> frame sections –> column –> ok.

6. Define –> section properties –> area sections –> add new section –> section name: slab
–> thickness: membrane = 0.150 m, bending = 0.150 m –> ok.
Define –> section properties –> area sections –> add new section –> section name: wall
–> thickness: membrane = 0.230 m, bending = 0.230 m –> ok.

7. View –> set 2D view –> x-y plane, z = 24 m –> ok.

Draw –> quick draw area –> section : slab –> select all panels –> esc –> again select
all panels –> ctrl + R (replicate) dx = 0 , dy = 0 , dz = -3 m –> number = 7 –> ok.
View –> set 2D view –> x-z plane, z = -10 m –> ok.
Draw –> quick draw area –> section : wall –> select all panels –> esc –> again select
all panels –> ctrl + R (replicate) dx = 0 , dy = 0 , dz = 0 m –> number = 1 –> ok.

8. Define –> load pattern –> load pattern name: dead , load type: dead –> self weight
multiplier: 1 –> ok.
Select –> select line parallel to –> coordinate axes or plane , select x, y and z axes –>
ok.
Assign –> frame loads –> gravity –> global z = -1 –> ok.

9. Define –> load pattern –> load pattern name : blast –> type: impact –> self weight
multiplier -1 –> add new load pattern –> ok.

10. Define –> load cases –> select blast –> add new load case –> load care name: TH –>
load case type: Time History –> analysis type: non-linear –> load pattern: blast –> add
–> dead –> add ok –> ok –> ok.

11. View –> set 2D view –> x-z plane , y = -10 –> select nodes at ground floor. Assign –>
joint loads –> force –> select load pattern name: blast –> force global y- 4591.165 kN
–> ok.
Repeat this step for remaining floors.

12. Define –> functions –> Time history –> choose function type to add : triangular –> add
new function –> function name: func1 –> convert to user define –> time and values :
initial (0,0) –> add –> delete existing values –> enter time and values (for ground floor
ta = 5.2 ms , blast load 76.519 kPa kN –> add –> (ta + td) = 26.7 ms ,blast load = 0
kN –> add) –> add remaining floor values –> ok.

33
 13. File –> save as –> file name:case-1 –> analyze –> run now –> close.

14. Display –> show plot functions –> define plot functions –> choose function type add –>
add joint disps /force –> add plot function –> joint ID 2 (ground floor) –> ok (Repeat
this step for different floor joints) ? add list of functions: joint 2, - - - - - - - - - - –>
horizontal: time , vertical: Displacement –> display –> file –> point table to file –> file
name: time history data –> save.

7.2 Blast load calculations

Considered blast load of 10 kg of TNT at a distance of 10m from the wall panel of size 20 m×3
m
Step 1: Data
Charge Weight (W) = 10 kg
Standoff distance (R) = 10 m
Width (B) = 20 m
Height (H) = 3 m
Step 2: Calculate RG (Distance from Blast to the point of interest)

√
RG = R2 + H 2 (7.1)

RG = 10.440 m
Step 3: Calculate Z (Scaled Distance)

RG
Z= (7.2)
W 1/3
Z = 4.846 m/kg 1/3
Step 4: Calculate peak overpressure (Ps )
s
W W
Ps = 678.4 3
+ 294 3
(7.3)
RG RG

Ps = 33.521 kPa
Step 5: Calculate coefficient of the reflected over-pressure (Cr )

Cr = 3Ps1/4 (7.4)

34
where Ps is in units of bars
Ps = 0.3352 bars
Cr = 3×0.33521/4
Cr = 2.283
Step 6: Calculate reflected over-pressure (Pr )

Pr = C r Ps (7.5)

Pr = 2.283×1231.744
Pr = 76.519 kPa
Step 7: Calculate arrival time (ta )

8534( WR1/3
G
)−0.996
ta = (7.6)
a0
where ao is the speed of sound in air 340 m/s
ta = 5.2 ms
Step 8: Calculate positive phase duration (td )

td = 10W 1/3 (7.7)

td = 21.5 ms
Step 9: Calculate blast Load

BlastLoad = Pr (Surf aceAreaof W all) (7.8)

Blast Load = Pr ×(B×H)

Blast Load = 76.519 kPa×(20×3)
Blast Load = 4591.165 kN

35
 Table 7.1: Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 10m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 10 10 20 3 10.440 4.846 33.521 2.283 76.519 5.2 21.5 4591.165
1 10 10 20 6 11.662 5.413 27.622 2.175 60.075 4.7 21.5 3604.525
2 10 10 20 9 13.454 6.245 21.626 2.046 44.243 4.0 21.5 2654.598
3 10 10 20 12 15.620 7.250 16.839 1.922 32.361 3.5 21.5 1941.669
4 10 10 20 15 18.028 8.368 13.304 1.812 24.104 3.0 21.5 1446.262
5 10 10 20 18 20.591 9.558 10.727 1.717 18.417 2.6 21.5 1105.024
6 10 10 20 21 23.259 10.796 8.827 1.635 14.434 2.3 21.5 866.056
7 10 10 20 24 26.000 12.068 7.399 1.565 11.576 2.1 21.5 694.573
8 10 10 20 27 28.792 13.364 6.302 1.503 9.472 1.9 21.5 568.348
9 10 10 20 30 31.623 14.678 5.443 1.449 7.887 1.7 21.5 473.192
10 10 10 20 33 34.482 16.005 4.757 1.401 6.665 1.6 21.5 399.892
11 10 10 20 36 37.363 17.342 4.201 1.358 5.706 1.5 21.5 342.334
12 10 10 20 39 40.262 18.688 3.743 1.320 4.939 1.4 21.5 296.363
13 10 10 20 42 43.174 20.040 3.362 1.285 4.318 1.3 21.5 259.090
14 10 10 20 45 46.098 21.397 3.040 1.253 3.808 1.2 21.5 228.465
15 10 10 20 48 49.031 22.758 2.766 1.223 3.383 1.1 21.5 203.001

Table 7.2: Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 20m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 10 20 20 3 20.224 9.387 11.043 1.729 19.097 2.7 21.5 1145.809
1 10 20 20 6 20.881 9.692 10.489 1.707 17.908 2.6 21.5 1074.468
2 10 20 20 9 21.932 10.180 9.695 1.674 16.229 2.5 21.5 973.767
3 10 20 20 12 23.324 10.826 8.788 1.633 14.355 2.3 21.5 861.306
4 10 20 20 15 25.000 11.604 7.872 1.589 12.509 2.2 21.5 750.531
5 10 20 20 18 26.907 12.489 7.009 1.544 10.820 2.0 21.5 649.181
6 10 20 20 21 29.000 13.461 6.231 1.499 9.340 1.9 21.5 560.403
7 10 20 20 24 31.241 14.501 5.547 1.456 8.076 1.7 21.5 484.531
8 10 20 20 27 33.601 15.596 4.952 1.415 7.008 1.6 21.5 420.506
9 10 20 20 30 36.056 16.735 4.439 1.377 6.113 1.5 21.5 366.758
10 10 20 20 33 38.588 17.911 3.997 1.341 5.361 1.4 21.5 321.660
11 10 20 20 36 41.183 19.115 3.615 1.308 4.729 1.3 21.5 283.730
12 10 20 20 39 43.829 20.344 3.285 1.277 4.195 1.2 21.5 251.700
13 10 20 20 42 46.519 21.592 2.998 1.248 3.742 1.2 21.5 224.516
14 10 20 20 45 49.244 22.857 2.747 1.221 3.355 1.1 21.5 201.318
15 10 20 20 48 52.000 24.136 2.528 1.196 3.024 1.1 21.5 181.411

36
 Table 7.3: Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 30m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 10 30 20 3 30.150 13.994 5.864 1.476 8.656 1.8 21.5 519.360
1 10 30 20 6 30.594 14.201 5.731 1.468 8.412 1.8 21.5 504.724
2 10 30 20 9 31.321 14.538 5.525 1.454 8.035 1.7 21.5 482.123
3 10 30 20 12 32.311 14.997 5.263 1.437 7.563 1.7 21.5 453.759
4 10 30 20 15 33.541 15.568 4.966 1.416 7.033 1.6 21.5 421.959
5 10 30 20 18 34.986 16.239 4.651 1.393 6.480 1.6 21.5 388.798
6 10 30 20 21 36.620 16.997 4.334 1.369 5.932 1.5 21.5 355.901
7 10 30 20 24 38.419 17.832 4.024 1.344 5.407 1.4 21.5 324.394
8 10 30 20 27 40.361 18.734 3.729 1.318 4.916 1.4 21.5 294.960
9 10 30 20 30 42.426 19.693 3.453 1.293 4.466 1.3 21.5 267.940
10 10 30 20 33 44.598 20.701 3.198 1.269 4.057 1.2 21.5 243.431
11 10 30 20 36 46.861 21.751 2.964 1.245 3.690 1.2 21.5 221.379
12 10 30 20 39 49.204 22.838 2.751 1.222 3.361 1.1 21.5 201.636
13 10 30 20 42 51.614 23.957 2.557 1.200 3.067 1.1 21.5 184.012
14 10 30 20 45 54.083 25.103 2.380 1.178 2.805 1.0 21.5 168.300
15 10 30 20 48 56.604 26.273 2.221 1.158 2.572 1.0 21.5 154.292

Table 7.4: Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 40m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 10 40 20 3 40.112 18.618 3.765 1.321 4.975 1.4 21.5 298.492
1 10 40 20 6 40.447 18.774 3.717 1.317 4.896 1.4 21.5 293.744
2 10 40 20 9 41.000 19.031 3.640 1.310 4.769 1.3 21.5 286.167
3 10 40 20 12 41.761 19.384 3.538 1.301 4.604 1.3 21.5 276.210
4 10 40 20 15 42.720 19.829 3.417 1.290 4.407 1.3 21.5 264.410
5 10 40 20 18 43.863 20.360 3.281 1.277 4.189 1.2 21.5 251.323
6 10 40 20 21 45.177 20.970 3.135 1.262 3.958 1.2 21.5 237.476
7 10 40 20 24 46.648 21.652 2.985 1.247 3.722 1.2 21.5 223.329
8 10 40 20 27 48.260 22.400 2.833 1.231 3.488 1.1 21.5 209.254
9 10 40 20 30 50.000 23.208 2.684 1.214 3.259 1.1 21.5 195.537
10 10 40 20 33 51.856 24.069 2.538 1.197 3.040 1.1 21.5 182.377
11 10 40 20 36 53.814 24.978 2.399 1.181 2.832 1.0 21.5 169.908
12 10 40 20 39 55.866 25.931 2.265 1.164 2.637 1.0 21.5 158.202
13 10 40 20 42 58.000 26.921 2.140 1.147 2.455 0.9 21.5 147.290
14 10 40 20 45 60.208 27.946 2.021 1.131 2.286 0.9 21.5 137.173
15 10 40 20 48 62.482 29.002 1.910 1.115 2.130 0.9 21.5 127.829

37
 Table 7.5: Charge Weight 10 kg at a distance 50m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 10 50 20 3 50.090 23.250 2.677 1.213 3.248 1.1 21.5 194.866
1 10 50 20 6 50.359 23.374 2.655 1.211 3.215 1.1 21.5 192.881
2 10 50 20 9 50.804 23.581 2.619 1.207 3.161 1.1 21.5 189.664
3 10 50 20 12 51.420 23.867 2.571 1.201 3.089 1.1 21.5 185.342
4 10 50 20 15 52.202 24.230 2.513 1.194 3.001 1.0 21.5 180.075
5 10 50 20 18 53.141 24.666 2.445 1.186 2.901 1.0 21.5 174.041
6 10 50 20 21 54.231 25.172 2.370 1.177 2.790 1.0 21.5 167.426
7 10 50 20 24 55.462 25.743 2.291 1.167 2.673 1.0 21.5 160.408
8 10 50 20 27 56.824 26.375 2.207 1.156 2.553 1.0 21.5 153.153
9 10 50 20 30 58.310 27.065 2.122 1.145 2.430 0.9 21.5 145.804
10 10 50 20 33 59.908 27.807 2.037 1.133 2.308 0.9 21.5 138.483
11 10 50 20 36 61.612 28.598 1.951 1.121 2.188 0.9 21.5 131.286
12 10 50 20 39 63.411 29.433 1.868 1.109 2.071 0.9 21.5 124.289
13 10 50 20 42 65.299 30.309 1.786 1.097 1.959 0.8 21.5 117.546
14 10 50 20 45 67.268 31.223 1.707 1.084 1.852 0.8 21.5 111.096
15 10 50 20 48 69.311 32.171 1.632 1.072 1.749 0.8 21.5 104.960

Table 7.6: Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 10m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 20 10 20 3 10.440 3.846 50.898 2.534 128.973 6.6 27.1 7738.409
1 20 10 20 6 11.662 4.296 41.570 2.409 100.136 5.9 27.1 6008.156
2 20 10 20 9 13.454 4.956 32.216 2.260 72.814 5.1 27.1 4368.811
3 20 10 20 12 15.620 5.755 24.857 2.118 52.654 4.4 27.1 3159.233
4 20 10 20 15 18.028 6.641 19.493 1.993 38.857 3.8 27.1 2331.398
5 20 10 20 18 20.591 7.586 15.625 1.886 29.472 3.3 27.1 1768.333
6 20 10 20 21 23.259 8.569 12.799 1.794 22.967 3.0 27.1 1378.012
7 20 10 20 24 26.000 9.578 10.689 1.715 18.336 2.6 27.1 1100.189
8 20 10 20 27 28.792 10.607 9.079 1.647 14.950 2.4 27.1 897.029
9 20 10 20 30 31.623 11.650 7.823 1.587 12.411 2.2 27.1 744.686
10 20 10 20 33 34.482 12.703 6.824 1.533 10.464 2.0 27.1 627.845
11 20 10 20 36 37.363 13.765 6.017 1.486 8.940 1.8 27.1 536.428
12 20 10 20 39 40.262 14.833 5.355 1.443 7.727 1.7 27.1 463.635
13 20 10 20 42 43.174 15.905 4.803 1.404 6.746 1.6 27.1 404.766
14 20 10 20 45 46.098 16.983 4.339 1.369 5.942 1.5 27.1 356.502
15 20 10 20 48 49.031 18.063 3.945 1.337 5.274 1.4 27.1 316.447

38
 Table 7.7: Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 20m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 20 20 20 3 20.224 7.450 16.097 1.900 30.588 3.4 27.1 1835.293
1 20 20 20 6 20.881 7.692 15.270 1.875 28.637 3.3 27.1 1718.231
2 20 20 20 9 21.932 8.080 14.087 1.838 25.892 3.1 27.1 1553.507
3 20 20 20 12 23.324 8.593 12.742 1.792 22.838 2.9 27.1 1370.289
4 20 20 20 15 25.000 9.210 11.387 1.743 19.844 2.7 27.1 1190.626
5 20 20 20 18 26.907 9.913 10.117 1.692 17.117 2.6 27.1 1026.994
6 20 20 20 21 29.000 10.684 8.975 1.642 14.738 2.4 27.1 884.281
7 20 20 20 24 31.241 11.509 7.975 1.594 12.713 2.2 27.1 762.800
8 20 20 20 27 33.601 12.379 7.108 1.549 11.011 2.0 27.1 660.657
9 20 20 20 30 36.056 13.283 6.362 1.507 9.586 1.9 27.1 575.183
10 20 20 20 33 38.588 14.216 5.721 1.467 8.394 1.8 27.1 503.667
11 20 20 20 36 41.183 15.172 5.169 1.430 7.394 1.7 27.1 443.667
12 20 20 20 39 43.829 16.147 4.692 1.396 6.552 1.6 27.1 393.110
13 20 20 20 42 46.519 17.138 4.279 1.364 5.838 1.5 27.1 350.286
14 20 20 20 45 49.244 18.142 3.918 1.335 5.230 1.4 27.1 313.803
15 20 20 20 48 52.000 19.157 3.603 1.307 4.709 1.3 27.1 282.541

Table 7.8: Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 30m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 20 30 20 3 30.150 11.107 8.437 1.617 13.642 2.3 27.1 818.509
1 20 30 20 6 30.594 11.271 8.244 1.607 13.251 2.2 27.1 795.086
2 20 30 20 9 31.321 11.539 7.942 1.593 12.649 2.2 27.1 758.952
3 20 30 20 12 32.311 11.903 7.561 1.573 11.894 2.1 27.1 713.665
4 20 30 20 15 33.541 12.357 7.128 1.550 11.050 2.1 27.1 662.971
5 20 30 20 18 34.986 12.889 6.671 1.525 10.170 2.0 27.1 610.202
6 20 30 20 21 36.620 13.491 6.210 1.498 9.299 1.9 27.1 557.950
7 20 30 20 24 38.419 14.154 5.761 1.470 8.467 1.8 27.1 507.998
8 20 30 20 27 40.361 14.869 5.334 1.442 7.690 1.7 27.1 461.417
9 20 30 20 30 42.426 15.630 4.935 1.414 6.979 1.6 27.1 418.731
10 20 30 20 33 44.598 16.430 4.568 1.387 6.335 1.5 27.1 380.077
11 20 30 20 36 46.861 17.264 4.230 1.361 5.756 1.5 27.1 345.349
12 20 30 20 39 49.204 18.127 3.923 1.335 5.238 1.4 27.1 314.303
13 20 30 20 42 51.614 19.015 3.644 1.311 4.777 1.3 27.1 286.625
14 20 30 20 45 54.083 19.924 3.392 1.287 4.366 1.3 27.1 261.977
15 20 30 20 48 56.604 20.853 3.162 1.265 4.000 1.2 27.1 240.028

39
 Table 7.9: Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 40m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 20 40 20 3 40.112 14.778 5.386 1.445 7.783 1.7 27.1 467.002
1 20 40 20 6 40.447 14.901 5.316 1.441 7.658 1.7 27.1 459.495
2 20 40 20 9 41.000 15.105 5.205 1.433 7.459 1.7 27.1 447.518
3 20 40 20 12 41.761 15.385 5.058 1.423 7.196 1.6 27.1 431.789
4 20 40 20 15 42.720 15.738 4.883 1.410 6.886 1.6 27.1 413.160
5 20 40 20 18 43.863 16.159 4.687 1.396 6.542 1.6 27.1 392.516
6 20 40 20 21 45.177 16.644 4.477 1.380 6.178 1.5 27.1 370.693
7 20 40 20 24 46.648 17.185 4.261 1.363 5.807 1.5 27.1 348.417
8 20 40 20 27 48.260 17.779 4.043 1.345 5.438 1.4 27.1 326.277
9 20 40 20 30 50.000 18.420 3.827 1.327 5.079 1.4 27.1 304.719
10 20 40 20 33 51.856 19.104 3.618 1.308 4.734 1.3 27.1 284.058
11 20 40 20 36 53.814 19.825 3.418 1.290 4.408 1.3 27.1 264.498
12 20 40 20 39 55.866 20.581 3.227 1.271 4.103 1.2 27.1 246.152
13 20 40 20 42 58.000 21.367 3.046 1.253 3.818 1.2 27.1 229.065
14 20 40 20 45 60.208 22.181 2.877 1.235 3.554 1.1 27.1 213.236
15 20 40 20 48 62.482 23.019 2.718 1.218 3.310 1.1 27.1 198.626

Table 7.10: Charge Weight 20 kg at a distance 50m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 20 50 20 3 50.090 18.453 3.817 1.326 5.061 1.4 27.1 303.665
1 20 50 20 6 50.359 18.552 3.785 1.323 5.009 1.4 27.1 300.548
2 20 50 20 9 50.804 18.716 3.734 1.319 4.925 1.4 27.1 295.497
3 20 50 20 12 51.420 18.943 3.666 1.313 4.812 1.3 27.1 288.712
4 20 50 20 15 52.202 19.231 3.581 1.305 4.674 1.3 27.1 280.445
5 20 50 20 18 53.141 19.577 3.484 1.296 4.516 1.3 27.1 270.980
6 20 50 20 21 54.231 19.979 3.377 1.286 4.343 1.3 27.1 260.607
7 20 50 20 24 55.462 20.432 3.263 1.275 4.160 1.2 27.1 249.609
8 20 50 20 27 56.824 20.934 3.143 1.263 3.971 1.2 27.1 238.244
9 20 50 20 30 58.310 21.481 3.021 1.251 3.779 1.2 27.1 226.739
10 20 50 20 33 59.908 22.070 2.899 1.238 3.588 1.2 27.1 215.284
11 20 50 20 36 61.612 22.698 2.777 1.225 3.401 1.1 27.1 204.030
12 20 50 20 39 63.411 23.361 2.657 1.211 3.218 1.1 27.1 193.094
13 20 50 20 42 65.299 24.056 2.540 1.198 3.043 1.1 27.1 182.562
14 20 50 20 45 67.268 24.782 2.428 1.184 2.875 1.0 27.1 172.492
15 20 50 20 48 69.311 25.534 2.319 1.171 2.715 1.0 27.1 162.918

40
 Table 7.11: Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 10m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 30 10 20 3 10.440 3.360 65.619 2.700 177.178 7.5 31.1 10630.691
1 30 10 20 6 11.662 3.753 53.267 2.563 136.519 6.7 31.1 8191.117
2 30 10 20 9 13.454 4.330 40.990 2.400 98.394 5.8 31.1 5903.667
3 30 10 20 12 15.620 5.027 31.423 2.246 70.581 5.0 31.1 4234.834
4 30 10 20 15 18.028 5.802 24.511 2.111 51.740 4.4 31.1 3104.401
5 30 10 20 18 20.591 6.627 19.565 1.995 39.036 3.8 31.1 2342.189
6 30 10 20 21 23.259 7.486 15.973 1.897 30.293 3.4 31.1 1817.574
7 30 10 20 24 26.000 8.368 13.304 1.812 24.105 3.0 31.1 1446.321
8 30 10 20 27 28.792 9.266 11.276 1.738 19.602 2.7 31.1 1176.113
9 30 10 20 30 31.623 10.177 9.699 1.674 16.238 2.5 31.1 974.273
10 30 10 20 33 34.482 11.097 8.449 1.617 13.666 2.3 31.1 819.962
11 30 10 20 36 37.363 12.025 7.441 1.567 11.659 2.1 31.1 699.548
12 30 10 20 39 40.262 12.957 6.615 1.521 10.065 2.0 31.1 603.879
13 30 10 20 42 43.174 13.895 5.929 1.480 8.778 1.8 31.1 526.656
14 30 10 20 45 46.098 14.836 5.353 1.443 7.724 1.7 31.1 463.446
15 30 10 20 48 49.031 15.780 4.863 1.409 6.851 1.6 31.1 411.062

Table 7.12: Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 20m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 30 20 20 3 20.224 6.509 20.166 2.010 40.542 3.9 31.1 2432.512
1 30 20 20 6 20.881 6.720 19.112 1.984 37.911 3.8 31.1 2274.665
2 30 20 20 9 21.932 7.058 17.608 1.943 34.217 3.6 31.1 2053.036
3 30 20 20 12 23.324 7.506 15.900 1.894 30.120 3.4 31.1 1807.228
4 30 20 20 15 25.000 8.046 14.185 1.841 26.116 3.1 31.1 1566.959
5 30 20 20 18 26.907 8.660 12.582 1.787 22.481 2.9 31.1 1348.839
6 30 20 20 21 29.000 9.333 11.146 1.733 19.320 2.7 31.1 1159.198
7 30 20 20 24 31.241 10.054 9.889 1.682 16.637 2.5 31.1 998.237
8 30 20 20 27 33.601 10.814 8.804 1.634 14.388 2.3 31.1 863.253
9 30 20 20 30 36.056 11.604 7.872 1.589 12.509 2.2 31.1 750.561
10 30 20 20 33 38.588 12.419 7.072 1.547 10.941 2.0 31.1 656.467
11 30 20 20 36 41.183 13.254 6.384 1.508 9.628 1.9 31.1 577.671
12 30 20 20 39 43.829 14.106 5.791 1.472 8.523 1.8 31.1 511.382
13 30 20 20 42 46.519 14.971 5.278 1.438 7.589 1.7 31.1 455.312
14 30 20 20 45 49.244 15.848 4.830 1.406 6.793 1.6 31.1 407.606
15 30 20 20 48 52.000 16.735 4.439 1.377 6.113 1.5 31.1 366.773

41
 Table 7.13: Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 30m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
1/3
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg (kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 30 30 20 3 30.150 9.703 10.470 1.706 17.867 2.6 31.1 1071.995
1 30 30 20 6 30.594 9.846 10.227 1.697 17.350 2.6 31.1 1040.971
2 30 30 20 9 31.321 10.080 9.849 1.681 16.552 2.5 31.1 993.146
3 30 30 20 12 32.311 10.399 9.371 1.660 15.554 2.4 31.1 933.261
4 30 30 20 15 33.541 10.794 8.829 1.635 14.438 2.3 31.1 866.306
5 30 30 20 18 34.986 11.259 8.257 1.608 13.278 2.3 31.1 796.700
6 30 30 20 21 36.620 11.785 7.681 1.579 12.131 2.2 31.1 727.870
7 30 30 20 24 38.419 12.364 7.121 1.550 11.036 2.1 31.1 662.160
8 30 30 20 27 40.361 12.989 6.590 1.520 10.016 2.0 31.1 600.967
9 30 30 20 30 42.426 13.654 6.094 1.491 9.083 1.9 31.1 544.962
10 30 30 20 33 44.598 14.353 5.636 1.462 8.238 1.8 31.1 494.309
11 30 30 20 36 46.861 15.081 5.218 1.434 7.481 1.7 31.1 448.853
12 30 30 20 39 49.204 15.835 4.836 1.407 6.804 1.6 31.1 408.259
13 30 30 20 42 51.614 16.611 4.491 1.381 6.202 31.5 1.1 372.104
14 30 30 20 45 54.083 17.406 4.177 1.356 5.666 1.5 31.1 339.935
15 30 30 20 48 56.604 18.217 3.893 1.333 5.189 1.4 31.1 311.313

Table 7.14: Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 40m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 30 40 20 3 40.112 12.909 6.654 1.524 10.138 2.0 31.1 608.300
1 30 40 20 6 40.447 13.017 6.568 1.519 9.974 1.9 31.1 598.443
2 30 40 20 9 41.000 13.195 6.429 1.511 9.712 1.9 31.1 582.724
3 30 40 20 12 41.761 13.440 6.246 1.500 9.368 1.9 31.1 562.087
4 30 40 20 15 42.720 13.749 6.028 1.487 8.961 1.8 31.1 537.658
5 30 40 20 18 43.863 14.117 5.784 1.471 8.510 1.8 31.1 510.603
6 30 40 20 21 45.177 14.539 5.524 1.454 8.034 1.7 31.1 482.022
7 30 40 20 24 46.648 15.013 5.255 1.436 7.548 1.7 31.1 452.868
8 30 40 20 27 48.260 15.531 4.984 1.417 7.065 1.6 31.1 423.911
9 30 40 20 30 50.000 16.091 4.717 1.398 6.596 1.6 31.1 395.736
10 30 40 20 33 51.856 16.689 4.458 1.379 6.146 1.5 31.1 368.753
11 30 40 20 36 53.814 17.319 4.210 1.359 5.720 1.5 31.1 343.225
12 30 40 20 39 55.866 17.979 3.973 1.339 5.322 1.4 31.1 319.297
13 30 40 20 42 58.000 18.666 3.750 1.320 4.950 1.4 31.1 297.026
14 30 40 20 45 60.208 19.377 3.540 1.301 4.607 1.3 31.1 276.406
15 30 40 20 48 62.482 20.109 3.344 1.283 4.290 1.3 31.1 257.386

42
 Table 7.15: Charge Weight 30 kg at a distance 50m

Floor W R B H RG Z Ps Cr Pr ta td Blast
(kg) (m) (m) (m) (m) m/kg 1/3(kPa) (kPa) (ms) (ms) load
(kN)
0 30 50 20 3 50.090 16.120 4.704 1.397 6.573 1.6 31.1 394.360
1 30 50 20 6 50.359 16.207 4.665 1.394 6.505 1.6 31.1 390.288
2 30 50 20 9 50.804 16.350 4.602 1.390 6.395 1.6 31.1 383.690
3 30 50 20 12 51.420 16.548 4.517 1.383 6.247 1.5 31.1 374.829
4 30 50 20 15 52.202 16.800 4.413 1.375 6.067 1.5 31.1 364.036
5 30 50 20 18 53.141 17.102 4.292 1.366 5.861 1.5 31.1 351.682
6 30 50 20 21 54.231 17.453 4.160 1.355 5.636 1.5 31.1 338.148
7 30 50 20 24 55.462 17.849 4.018 1.343 5.397 1.4 31.1 323.804
8 30 50 20 27 56.824 18.288 3.870 1.331 5.150 1.4 31.1 308.988
9 30 50 20 30 58.310 18.766 3.719 1.317 4.900 1.4 31.1 293.995
10 30 50 20 33 59.908 19.280 3.567 1.304 4.651 1.3 31.1 279.073
11 30 50 20 36 61.612 19.828 3.417 1.290 4.407 1.3 31.1 264.420
12 30 50 20 39 63.411 20.408 3.269 1.276 4.170 1.2 31.1 250.187
13 30 50 20 42 65.299 21.015 3.125 1.261 3.941 1.2 31.1 236.485
14 30 50 20 45 67.268 21.649 2.986 1.247 3.723 1.2 31.1 223.388
15 30 50 20 48 69.311 22.306 2.852 1.233 3.516 1.1 31.1 210.944

43