Response of masonry systems against blast loading

Badshah, Eid; Naseer, Amjad; Ashraf, Mohammad; Ahmad, Tauseef

doi:10.1016/j.dt.2020.07.003

Cited by 17 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Defining mesh, a delicate task, is carried out through a sensitivity analysis conducted with the numerical model of the URM braced wall. Outcomes of the finite element analysis (ABAQUS/ Explicit) are verified with the experimental ones reported by Badshah et al (2021).…”

Section: Mesh Definition and Model Validationsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…Referring to Figures 12 and 13, the damage patterns obtained using the CDP model of brickwork are found very much similar to the available experimental ones and therefore justify the application of the employed software to predict the dynamic response of the wall. It is worth mentioning that the workmanship and quality of construction of the walls tested experimentally by Badshah et al (2021) are questionable and this is why the wall performed very poorly.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 7(a) shows the estimated reflected pressure time history for the two considered scaled distances (i.e., 2.19 m/kg 1/3 and 1.83 m/kg 1/3 ). Note that these histories are obtained using the experimental data reported in Badshah et al, 2021. ConWep pressure distribution on the main wall surface at 2.19 m/kg 1/3 is shown in Figure 7(b). ConWep predicts maximum pressure of 0.52 MPa (at t = 47.10 ms) which is slightly higher than the estimated one by Wu and Hao (2005) blast empirical model.…”

Section: Solving Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mesh sensitivity analysis is conducted with a URM braced wall subjected to 4.34 kgTNT load at a scaled distance of 2.19 m/kg 1/3 , as per Figure 2(b), and mesh sizes ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm. The damage profiles and average depth of thorough vertical crack at the center of the exposed braced wall reported in Badshah et al, 2021 are considered for the model validation. Table 6 presents the results from the mesh sensitivity analysis and shows the computed crack depth, approximate computational times, and computer memory requirements for the different element sizes while Figure 11 presents the damage response of the wall with the different mesh sizes.…”

Section: Mesh Definition and Model Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The modeling method suggested in this study has been applied to mimic the experimental outcomes of the live explosion tests carried out by Badshah et al (2021) on the braced unreinforced masonry walls. The finite element model has been implemented in ABAQUS version 6.15 (ABAQUS/Explicit finite element software package, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Modeling of crashworthy foam mounted braced unreinforced brick masonry wall and prediction of anti-blast performance

Anas

Shariq

Alam

et al. 2023

International Journal of Protective Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Explosions are continually occurring in many parts of the world endangering human lives and seriously affecting the health of infrastructures and facilities. Low-rise buildings having a height of fewer than 13 m are load-bearing structures generally made of unreinforced masonry (URM), particularly in semi-urban areas, villages, and war-prone border areas. Many structures of importance including buildings constructed in the pre- and post-independence era of courts, monuments, etc., are masonry load-bearing structures. URM is also used as non–load-bearing partition walls and compound/boundary walls. Such walls are susceptible to out-of-plane blast loading. Under such loadings, these walls fail to survive and thus either get severely damaged or collapsed, jeopardizing the stability of the entire structure. Resistance of masonry walls against blast loading is vital for the safety of the building and its users as injuries sustained and casualties are generally not caused due to explosion, but by the brittle dynamic fracture and fragments of masonry walls, window glass panes shattering, and other secondary objects propelled as missiles by the blasts. In general, buildings are not designed for blast loading. For the safety of the building users, it is imperative that the walls must withstand such short-duration high-magnitude extreme loadings without not only undergoing catastrophic collapse but also not producing deadly fragments which could cause grievous injuries to the users. To protect URM walls from high-intensity blast waves, an out-of-box wall protecting technique using foams of polymer (e.g., polyurethane) and metals namely; aluminum and titanium, is considered on the face of the wall exposed to the blast pressure. This study describes a numerical technique implemented in ABAQUS/Explicit software to predict the overall anti-blast performance of URM wall strengthened externally with the above three different crashworthy foams. For this purpose, a braced URM wall made of clay bricks, with two transverse bracing walls one at each end on the same side, tested experimentally by Badshah et al. in the year 2021 under the chemical explosive loads of 4.34 kg and 7.39 kg-TNT, respectively, at scaled distances 2.19 m/kg1/3 and 1.83 m/kg1/3 is considered as the reference model and is validated against the test observations. Explosion load is modeled with ABAQUS built-in ConWep simulation program to simulate the wall-explosion wave interactions in the free field. Material nonlinearities of the brickwork have been attributed to bricks, joint-mortar, and brick-mortar interfaces through constitutive laws considering strain-rate effects. The foams are modeled using ABAQUS’s inbuilt Crushable Foam Plasticity Hardening model considering foam hardening and rate-dependent schemes. Results show that the higher Young’s modulus and inelastic stiffness of the foams contribute to dissipating more explosion energy and improve the resistance of the walls from savage explosions.

show abstract

Section: Mesh Definition and Model Validationsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Solving Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mesh Definition and Model Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations