1 / 39

Structural Concrete Innovations: A Focus on Blast Resistance

Hershey Lodge Preconference Symposium 17 March 2008. Structural Concrete Innovations: A Focus on Blast Resistance. Blast Overview. Blast can effect structure in multiple way Air blast Drag Ground shock Primary and secondary fragmentation Fire. Blast Loading.

Lucy
Download Presentation

Structural Concrete Innovations: A Focus on Blast Resistance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hershey Lodge Preconference Symposium 17 March 2008 Structural Concrete Innovations: A Focus on Blast Resistance

  2. Blast Overview • Blast can effect structure in multiple way • Air blast • Drag • Ground shock • Primary and secondary fragmentation • Fire

  3. Blast Loading • Air blast design can be governed by max pressure, impulse, or combination • Function of size of explosive, standoff distance, and structure

  4. Air Blast Loads • Properties of the air blast load a function of the: • Size and shape of explosive • Distance to explosive • Orientation of specimen • Type of blast • Free air burst • Ground burst • Contained burst

  5. Scaled Distance • Convert explosive to equivalent weight of TNT • Determine scaled distance using Z = D / W^(1/3) where Z = scaled distance W= equivalent TNT weight D = distance between specimen and explosive • Use figures in references (TM5-1300): “Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions” • determine the expected peak pressure and impulse for determined scaled distance

  6. Scaled DistanceFigure 2-7 TM5-1300

  7. Types of Cross Sections • TM5-1300: 3 types of cross sections • Type I: • Concrete is sufficient to resist compressive component of moment • Cover remains undamaged • Type II: • Concrete is no longer effective at resisting moment • Equal top and bottom reinforcement • Cover remains in tact • Single leg stirrups used to resist shear • Type III: • Equal top and bottom reinforcement • Cover disengages • Lacing used to resist shear

  8. Example Type II Cross-Section

  9. Motivation for Innovation in Blast Resistant Concrete • Increased demand for impact and blast-resistant building materials • Need for practical, constructible options • Need for reduction in secondary fragmentation

  10. Innovation • Long (3”) fibers • Increased bond with concrete matrix • Length provides crack bridging, spalling resistance, increased ductility, energy absorption (through long-fiber pull-out) • Coated “tape” • Mix retains workability (no balling, etc) • Can be used with aggregate • Potentially economical • Carbon fiber yarn is waste product from the aerospace industry • No special mixers required • Lightweight “additive” reinforcement • Precast or cast-in-place • Molds to any shape

  11. Experimental Program • Mix design development • Workability • Static flexural strength • Small and large scale • Ductility • Impact testing • Small beams • Panels • Blast Testing • Finite Element Modeling

  12. Experimental Program • Mix design development • 1.5% to 2.5% fiber content (by volume) • Various admixture combinations • Pozzolans (interground SF + GGBFS)

  13. Preliminary Testing • Mixture Design • Avoid balling • Increase workability • Increase fines and cement in mixture • Preliminary Static Tests • 6” X 6” X 18” beams loaded at third points • Flexural Strength = 2112 psi

  14. Slab Strips • 4” X 12” X 10’ slab strips loaded at midspan • Specimens: • 2 control specimens with reinforcing mesh • 2 fiber reinforced concrete specimens • 2 fiber reinforced concrete specimens with mesh • Used to obtain load vs. deflection plot • Useful for obtaining toughness

  15. Slab Strip Results

  16. Impact Test Setup • 15 ft maximum drop height • 50# weight • Panels 2’x2’x2”

  17. Impact Testing: Panels Drop Height at failure

  18. Impact Testing: Panels Drop Height at first cracking (top side)

  19. Impact Testing: Panels(No Steel Reinforcement) • Fiber addition controlled spalling • Failure in fiber specimens along weak plane due to fiber orientation Fiber panel Plain panel

  20. Impact Testing: Panels(Steel Reinforcement) • Fiber panel with steel reinforcement did not fail after repeated blows at top drop height Plain panel Fiber panel

  21. Blast Testing • 6’ x 6’ x 6.5” • Heavily reinforced (as per TM5-1300) • resist shear failure at supports • evaluate comparison of materials under full blast design • Identical reinforcement in all specimens • Clear cover ¾” to ties

  22. Test Setup • Slabs were simply supported on all four sides • Restraint provided along two sides to prevent rebound

  23. Test Setup • TNT suspended at desired height • Pressure gages record reflected pressure and incident pressure

  24. Hit 1: 75# at 6’ (scaled range 1.4) Extensive cracking, some spalling A few hairline cracks SafeTcrete Standard Concrete

  25. Hit 2: 75# at 3.2’ (scaled range 0.76) SafeTcrete Standard Concrete

  26. Hit 2: 75# at 3.2’ (scaled range 0.76) Concrete rubble within steel cage Some concrete loss due to pop out where reinforcement buckled (3/4” cover) Standard Concrete SafeTcrete

  27. Hit 2: 75# at 3.2’ (scaled range 0.76) Standard Concrete SafeTcrete

  28. Summary of Impact & Blast Testing • Much improved workability and dispersion of coated tape fibers • Increased ductility over plain concrete and further improved combined with standard reinforcement • Significantly increased flexural strength under both static and impact loads • Complete control of spalling in panels under impact load • Excellent performance in blast testing

  29. Potential • Low cost fiber alternative • Applications requiring impact and blast resistance • Protective cladding panels • Structural components: columns, walls • Barriers • Bridge piers • May be used as a replacement for, or in combination with standard reinforcement depending on application

  30. Material Properties • Stress-strain curves for material in both compression and tension needed for modeling • Compression: standard 6” diameter cylinders • Tension: dogbone specimens will be utilized • Varied load rates and fiber orientation

  31. Tensile Properties • New test method for tension in fiber concrete • Difficulties with direct tension • Size-effect with long-fibers • Dogbone specimens 32” high, 8” neck width, 16” top width

  32. Concrete Dogbone • Mechanical anchorages were used to load specimen • Anchorage consisted of 5/8”, 125 ksi threaded prestressing rod • LVDTs for displacement • Failure occurred in desired region

  33. Tensile Properties • Increase in energy dissipation • Testing will determine if cracking stress is affected by the addition of fibers

  34. Finite Element Modeling • Material model developed from testing • Comparison to field blast test and instrumented impact testing • Loading • CONWEP (built into LS Dyna) • Gas dynamics model (Lyle Long, AE) • Field data

  35. Current Work • Continued model refinement • Material model • Incorporation of fracture mechanics • Contact charges • Application specific testing • Durability • Reinforcement and fiber content variations • Specification development

  36. Barrier Application Testing • Use of fibers & polyurea for barriers • Large volume of concrete with small reinforcement percentage • Reduction in secondary fragmentation needed

  37. Wall Testing: Spec Development

  38. Hershey Lodge Preconference Symposium 17 March 2008 Questions?

More Related