17

CHAPTER THREE
DYNAMIC LOADING
3.1 Introduction
Structural design, whether for static or for dynamic loading, involves the
determination of the loads; the analysis (or computation) of the internal
gross forces (thrust, shear, and moment), stresses, deflections, and
reactions produced by the loads; and the proportioning and dimensioning
of the members and connections so as to resist adequately these effects
produced by the loads. Dynamic effect may be handled by the use of an
equivalent static load, or by an impact factor, or by a modification of the
factor of safety.
Specific situations where it may be necessary to consider more
precisely the response produced by dynamic loading are typified by the
following [16]:
1. When a structure must be designed to resist transient and / or steady
state vibration produced by operating machinery.
2.

When a structure must be designed to resist impact loads and

vibrations produced by traffic passing over the structure.

3. When a structure must be designed to resist impulsive loads produced

by blasts, wind gusts or water waves
4. When a structure must be designed to resist vibration developed by
oscillating motions of its supports, produced by earthquake shocks
5. When a protective structure must be designed to resist the impact of
projectile missiles.
In this chapter three types of dynamic loads are described. The blast
load, the impact load and the earthquake excitation. The characteristics
and the models (transition to the structure) of these loads are presented.

18

3.2 Blast Loading

When a bomb is exploded it produces high energy. This energy is very
efficient in producing a destructive blast air, which propagates through
the atmosphere to a great distance. This pressure (air burst) attacks the
surface structures with small loss of energy. Air burst also attacks buried
structures, which are vulnerable to the ground pressures induced by air
blast on the earths surface. In an underground burst, energy is absorbed
in cratering and melting of the ground, and energy is dissipated in overdestruction of the structure located in the immediate vicinity of the burst.
3.2.1 Effect of Air Burst above Ground (Surface) Structures
3.2.1.1 Blast Phenomenon
An explosion is a result of a very rapid release of large amount of energy
within a limited space, and within a very short time.
Almost immediately after the detonation occurs, the expansion of
the hot gases initiates a pressure wave in the surrounding air. As the
pressure wave is propagated away from the center of the explosion, the
following (or inner) part moves through a region, which has been
previously compressed and now heated by the leading (or outer) parts of
the wave. The wave front becomes steeper, and within a short time
becomes abrupt Figure(3.1-a). At the advancing front of the wave, called
shock front, there is a very sudden increase of the pressure and then
dropping in a very short distance Figure(3.1-b).
As the expansion proceeds, the pressure distribution in the region
behind the shock front drops continuously below the initial atmospheric
value. Thus a suction phase develops. The sequence of events just
described for increasing times

t1

to

t6

is depicted in figure(3.1-c). When

the negative over-pressure (suction phase) is well developed, the

overpressure in the shock wave resembles the heavily drawn curve in
Figure(3.1-c).

19

Distance from center of explosion

(a)

Shock Front

Distance from center of explosion

(b)
Overpressure

t1

t2

t3

t4

t5

Distance from center of explosion

(c)

Figure (3.1) Variation of overpressure with distance

t6

20

The maximum over-pressure occurs at the shock front called the

peak over-pressure ( PS 0 ), whereas behind the shock front, the
overpressure drops rapidly to about one half of the peak value and
remains almost uniform in the central region of the explosion.
Therefore the behavior of the shock wave can be considered in two
different ways; the first is the variation of the overpressure with time and
the second is the variation of the overpressure with distance. (Figure(3.2)
and Figure(3.3).
Figure(3.2) shows the variation of shock overpressure with distance
at a given time. The symbol

PS 0

represents the peak overpressure,

U0

is

the velocity of the shock, and the arrow adjacent to the curve shows the
direction of the movement of the mass air or blast wind. The peak
overpressure in the positive phase is higher than the maximum
overpressure in the negative phase.
Figure(3.3) shows the variation of the overpressure with time at a
given distance. The symbol

ta

is the time arrival, or the time in seconds

for the shock front to travel from the explosion to the given location,

t0

is the duration in seconds of the positive phase.

The overpressure

PS

at time t after the arrival of the shock front

is given by the expression [9,16]:

t
PS PS 0 1
t
0

e t t0

where e 2.7182 (the base of the natural logarithm)

(3.1)

21

Overpressure
Shock front
Pso

Blast wave

Negative phase

U0

Positive phase

Distance from the center of explosion

Figure (3.2) Variation of overpressure with distance at a given time

Overpressure

Ps 0

ta

t0

Time After Detonation

Figure (3.3) Variation of overpressure with time at a given location

22

3.2.1.2 Blast Loading Categories

The blast loading on structures can be divided into two main groups( (1)
and (2) as below) based upon the confinement of the explosive charge
(unconfined and partially confined explosions)[9]
(1)Unconfined air burst loads
(1) Free air burst. The load propagates away from the center of the
explosion striking the structure without intermediate amplification of
the initial shock wave, Figure(3.4-a).
(2) Air burst loads. The explosion is located at a distance away from and
above the structure so that ground reflection of initial wave occurs
before the blast wave reaches the structure, Figure(3.4-b).
(3) Surface burst loads. The explosion is located closer to or on the
ground so that the shock wave is amplified at the point of detonation
due to ground reflection, Figure (3.4-c).
(2) Partially confined explosions.
(1) Exterior or leakage-pressure. The detonation occurs near the ground
surface and behind the obstruction (barrier or without a cubicle) so
that the wave shock is interfered before reaching the structure.
(2) Interior or high-pressure loads. The detonation is located within or
immediately adjacent to a barrier-type structure and the blast pressure
is amplified due to their multiple reflection by the structure as the
result of the closeness of the structure to the explosion.
3.2.1.3 Blast Load Parameter
The blast loading on a structure caused by a high explosive detonation is
dependent upon several factors: (1) the magnitude of the explosion, (2)
the location of the detonation relative to the ground surface(3)the
geometrical configuration of the structure (4)the structure orientation with
respect to explosion.

Figure (3.4) Different categories of free blast loading

23

The loads on an above ground structure resulting from the air blast
produced by a bomb burst may be discussed under the general headings
of diffraction loading and drag loading.
Diffraction loading is the term given to the force applied on a
structure resulting from the direct reflected pressure associated with air
blast in the initial phases of envelopment of structure. The finite time
required for the air blast to surround the structure completely and the
presence of large pressure on only the front face, cause net lateral loads to
exit on the structure in the direction of travel of air blast.
Drag loading is the term given to the force on a structure resulting
from the high velocity of the air particle in the air blast acting as a high
velocity wind.
Thus blast parameters are the duration, and the pressure is
determined from the scaling law.[9,16]
This law states that similar blast waves are produced at identical
scaled distance when two explosive charges of similar geometry and the
same explosive material, but of different size, are detonated in the same
atmosphere. That means the properties of a blast wave can be predicted
based on known blast wave properties of reference explosive weights
such as 1 Kton of TNT or 1 Kg of TNT. According to this law, a scaled
distance is calculated from the following equation:
z bl d bl / Wbl

where

d bl

1/ 3

is the distance from the explosive source,

(3.2)
Wbl

is the

percentage of the reference to source weight of the total explosive and

z bl

is the distance from the reference axes. Then by using tables and

graphs the parameters of the wave are determined [9,16]

3.2.2 Air Burst on the Underground Structure

24

3.2.2.1 Air Blast Loading on the Ground

The displacement of the surface of the earth crust due to explosion is
caused by cratering and also due to the air blast loading. Immediately
below the center of explosion, a crater is formed due to the conversion of
thermal energy to mechanical energy. The center of the explosion is
called the ground zero. A knowledge of the stresses and displacements
caused by air blast loading at large distance from ground zero is required
for the design of underground protective structures.
3.2.2.2 Overpressure:
The nature of variation with distance of high air pressure caused by an
explosion is shown in Figure (3.5).
The front of the air pressure moves radially outward like a ring load
with a near vertical front with a peak value of

PSO

and decays in an

exponential manner. The pressure front moves with a velocity V as

shown in Figure (3.5). Under certain conditions, the overpressure
becomes negative after sometime. Figure (3.6) shows the variation of
PS 0

for various yields with distance.

It has been observed that there is a rise time ( t r ) of the

overpressure front as shown in Figure (3.7-a). The duration of the positive

overpressure is generally referred to as
phase of the over-pressure with

PS 0 for

. The duration of the positive

1-megaton yield is shown in

Figure (3.8).
Figure (3.7-b) shows a simple method for evaluating overpressuretime relation. In this method, empirical relation is used to determine
points on the curve.
The empirical relations between the weapon yield, peak
overpressure,
[8]

t i , t 0 , and .t 50

can be given as follows (U.S.Air Force 1962)

25

Figure (3.5) Air blast loading

Figure (3.6) Variation of peak overpressure with yield W and distance

from ground zero.

26

t i 0.37 (100 / PS 0 )1 / 2 W 1 / 3

for

2 PS 0 10,000lb / in 2

t 50 0.1(100 / PS 0 )1 / 2 W 1 / 3

for

2 PS 0 30lb / in 2

t 50 0.2(100 / PS 0 )1 / 2 W 1 / 3

for

30 PS 0 10,000lb / in 2

t 0 0.87(100 / PS 0 )1 / 2 W 1 / 3

for

t 0 0.37(100 / PS 0 )1 / 2 W 1 / 3

for

where

t i , t 0 , and .t 50

(3.3)

2 PS 0 30 Ib / in 2
30 PS 0 10,000lb / in 2

are in seconds,

PS 0

is in psi, and weapon yield is in

MT.
3.2.2.3 Decay of Overpressure at a Given Point
The decay of overpressure with time at a given point has been given by
Borde(1960) as[8]:

P PS 0 A1et B1e t C1 e t 1 t

(3.4)
where the value of non-dimensional terms A1,B1,C1, , , and . are given
in Table 3.1
Table(3.1) Values A1,B1,C1, , , and .
p S 0 (lb / in 2 )

100
200
300
500
1000

A1
0.59
0.43
0.34
0.26
0.15

B1
0.41
0.435
0.42
0.37
0.30

C1
0
0.135
0.24
0.37
0.55

1.9
2.5
2.5
2.6
2.9

11.3
19.0
19.5
20.5
21.5

81
90
103
130

3.3 Transition of Blast Load from Surface to the Buried Shell

When a buried reinforced concrete structure under blast load is analyzed
two different regions must be considered; the soil and the reinforced
concrete. When detonation occurs, the ground surface is subjected to the
blast pressure and then transmitted by soil to the reinforced concrete
underground structure. The magnitude of the transmitted pressure must be
known so as to predict the response of the buried structure. In such

Figure(3.7) Definition of : (a) Rise time of overpressure

at a point
Figure (3.8) Variation of t+ with peak over pressure P0
(b) Duration of positive phase of overpressure

27

Figure(3.7) Definition of : (a) Rise time of overpressure at a point

(b) Duration of positive phase of overpressure

Figure (3.8) Variation of t+ with peak over pressure

P0

28

problem and other problems associated with nonlinear transient analysis

for infinite media (under-ground structure under earthquake excitation)
the following consideration must be taken into account:
1. Suitable method for solving the set of equations associated with the
soil mesh and reasonable time step length to avoid spurious wave
reflection [1,4,7,14].
2. Adequate materials modeling must be used for both the soil and the
structure.
3. Compatibility between the soil mesh and the structure mesh.
A suitable method for solving the set of equations for soil must be
validated in order to predict the correct response of the soil to avoid
spurious oscillations. The presence of spurious oscillations, which result
from the spatial dicretization of the governing equations, is considered
one of the undesirable characteristics of linear transient finite element
solution.
Steven et al [20,21] developed a finite difference/finite element
approach (hybrid approach) to dynamic soil-structure interaction
modeling to avoid spurious oscillations. The hybrid approach combines
the finite difference for modeling the soil and the finite element method
for modeling the structure and the method is used in analyzing buried
reinforced concrete shells[21]. Finite difference is suitable for analyzing
wave propagation. Cap model is used for nonlinear modeling of soil.
Finite element is used with the non-local continuum damage model for
modeling the concrete. The use of the finite difference method with the
cap model for the nonlinear modeling of the soil made it possible to
transmit the pressure applied to the surface of the ground to the
underground structure and this is the purpose of using the finite deference
method combined with finite element method.

29

Kiger et al [11] analyzed a reinforced concrete buried shell using

two dimensional plane strain model subjected to blast load. The primary
objective of the analysis was to determine the appropriate dynamic test
environment ( dynamic peak overpressure) for the experiment. Cap model
was used to model the soil in nonlinear state. The time step was (.00015
sec) sufficiently small to ensure that the pressure wave travel could not
completely past any single element during one time step. Results past .
018(120x00015 second) were not be used because of unrealistic reflected
pressure waves distorting the calculation.
From the above discussion the transition processes of the surface
pressure to the underground structure can be predicted correctly if an
appropriate material and finite element modeling for the soil with a
suitable time step is selected.
In the present analysis, a brick element with different material
modeling for non-linear behavior of soil is used to transmit the pressure
to the reinforced concrete shell which is represented by the degenerated
shell elements. Cap model and conventional Drucker-Prager model are
used to model the nonlinear behavior of the soil. The combination
between the brick element and the shell element must be validated.
Overlap combination between the brick elements and degenerated shell
elements is formulated [2]. The contribution between the brick and the
shell elements is restricted only to the translation degrees of freedom
(u , v, w)

noting that the rotational degree ( , ) are retained for the shell

elements.
To check the present formulation of the shell elements combined to
the brick elements a beam under a step load is analyzed, Figure(3.9). This
problem was studied by Hinton [13] using the brick elements. Material
properties are shown in Table(3.2). In the present study, to ensure that the
connection process between the brick and the shell elements is adequate,

30

three different element descretizations are considered by shell elements,

brick elements, and a combination between shell elements and brick
elements, Figure (3.10). The geometry and loading are shown in
Figure(3.9). The depth of the beam as given Figure(3.9) is 11 inches. For
the third case the shell element thickness is 0.5 inches through the total
depth (11 inches) and the remain is represented by the brick element as
shown in Figure(3.10). From Figure (3.11), it can be seen that the
connection formulation gives good agreement when compared with shell
or brick descretization. This formulation is adopted for transmitting the
blast load through the soil.
50

P/2

36

P/2

50

11
P ( kips)

Time (sec)

Figure(3.9) Geometry and loading for the test beam

P/2

unit: inches

Figure(3.10) Finite element mesh for beam with different discretization

31

Table (3.2) Material properties of simply supported beam

Youngs modulus
Poissons ratio
Mass density

D is p la c m e n t ( in .)

0 .2 0

6100
0.2
0.217E-06

S h e ll E le m e n t

B ric k e le m e n t

c o m b in e d

0 .0 0

-0 .2 0

-0 .4 0
0 .0 0

0 .0 2
0 .0 4
T im e ( s e c o n d )

0 .0 6

Figure(3.11) Elastic dynamic analysis at the center of the beam.

3.4 Material Modeling of Soil
In the present modeling, the cap model is used to simulate the response of
sand for the analysis of the structure under blast load. This model was
originally proposed by DiMaggio and Sandler (1971)[10]which is based
on the theory of plasticity. This model consists of elastic-plastic yield
Failure envelop

surfaces with moving cap, intersecting the hydostatic loading line, whose
position is a function
of plastic volumetric strain. In Figure (3.12), a
J2
typical yield surface in Cap model is shown.
Tension
Cut off

Large Cap

Von Mises
Transition
Small Cap

L(k )

X (k )

32

I1

Figure(3.12) Typical yield surface in cap model

As shown by DiMaggio and Sandler, this model can fit laboratory
test data for McCormick Ranch sand from three standard tests, i.e,
uniaxial strain, triaxial compression, and proportional loading. This
model and other generalized cap models are coded for use in ground
shock effect from both nuclear and high explosive sources [19].
As mentioned previously the cap model falls within the framework
of the classical incremental theory of plasticity and it is based on a
loading function which serves as both a yield function and a plastic
potential.
Typically, the loading function is assumed to be isotropic and
consists of two parts: a modified Drucker-Prager yield condition denoted
by:
f ( I1 , J 2 ) 0

(3.5)

in which I 1 and J 2 are the first and second invariant of the stress and
deviatoric stress tensors, respectively, together with hardening cap
f ( I1 , J 2 , ) 0

(3.6)

which may expand or contract as the hardening parameter( ) increases

or decreases.
The complete cap failure surface consists of three parts
Figure(3.12) (Chen 1982[5], Chen 1985[6]):
1. Drucker-Prager type of yield surface for loading and failure [5,6,17]
f I 1 J 2 k
(3.7)

33

or the modified perfectly plastic Drucker-Prager yield surface (Sandler

1976 [19]):
f j 2 ( A Ce BI ) j 2 Q( I 1 ) 0
(3.8)
for the failure envelope A,B,C are material constants
2.Elliptic strain hardening cap:
f j 2 F ( I 1, k ) 0
(3.9)
1

1
X ( k ) L( k ) 2 I 1 L(k ) 2
R
X ( k1 ) andL( k 2 ). depend on hardening

F ( I1 , k )

p
kk

W (1.0 e

DX

0.5

(3.10)

function
(3.11)

W and D are material constants

3.Tension-cutoff plane
f I1 T 0

(3.12)
The fitting of stress-strain curves and the loading paths using a cap

model can be improved by introducing a nonlinear elastic component of

behavior. This has been done by replacing the constant bulk and shear
moduli in the nonlinear elastic stress increment-strain increment
equations
dI 1 3KdI 1

(3.13-a)

ds ij 2Gdeij

K K ( I1 )
G G( J 2 )

in which I 1 and J 2

(3.13-b)
(3.13-c)
(3.13-d)
are the first stress invariant and second deviatoric

stress invariant respectively. K and G are the bulk and shear modulus
respectively.
Additional flexibility in fitting experimental data can be introduced
into the model by generalizing the previous equations (3.13-a-d) to
K K ( I1 , )
G G( J 2 , )
in which k is

(3.14-a)
(3.14-b)

the hardening parameter.

The basic premise of elastic-perfectly plastic constitutive relation

assumption is that certain materials are capable of undergoing small

plastic (permanent) as well as elastic (recoverable) strain at each loading
increment.

34

d ij d ije d ijp
d ij

where

(3.15)

are the components of the total strain increment tensor,

d ije

p
are the components of the elastic strain increment tensor, and d ij are the

components of plastic strain increment tensor.

For isotropic elastic materials, the strain increment tensor take the
following form
d ije

dI 1
1
ij
dsij
9K
2G

(3.16)

where I 1 the first invariant of the stress tensor,

deviatoric stress tensor,

ij

s ij ij ( I 1 / 3) ij

is the Kroncker delta and

ij the

is the

normal stress

tensor.
A mathematical statement of the normality condition follows from
the recognition that both the plastic strain increment and the gradient of
the convex yield function are normal to the yield surface. Drucker ( 1951)
shows that for a perfectly plastic material the two must be
proportional[5,6]

d
p
ij

f
ij
0

f 0 df 0

f 0 df 0

(3.17)

where d is the positive scalar factor of proportionality which is nonzero

only when plastic deformation occurs and it is dependent on the particular
form of the loading function.
f ( ij , ijp ) 0

(3.18)

the elastic and plastic strains can be eliminated from equations (3.15 and
3.18) by differentiating equation(3.18)
f
df
d ij p d ijp 0
ij
ij

(3.19)

and substituting equations (3.16 and 3.17) into equations( 3.15 and 3.19)
to obtain

35

1
1
1
f

d ij d
d kk ij
2G
ij
9 K 6G

d ij

(3.20)

f
f f
d ij d
0
ij
ij pij

(3.21)

Multiplication of equation (3.20) by

ij

gives

f
d kk 3K d kk d
rs
rs

(3.22)

and substitution of equation (3.22) into equation (3.20) leads to

2G
df
f

d ij 2Gd ij K
rs 2Gd
ij d kk d
3
rs
ij

Taking the derivative of the yield surface

(3.23)

f ( ij , ijp )

sij
f
f I 1
1
f J 2
f
f

ij
ij I 1 ij 2 J 2 J 2 ij I 1
J2 2 J2

f
f vp
f

p ij
p
p
p
rs v rs v

(3.24)
(3.25)

Introducing equations (3.24) and (3.25) into equation (3.23) gives:

sij

f
f
2G deij d
d ij K ij d kk 3d

I 1
J2 2 J2

(3.26)

Introducing equations (3.24) and (3.25) into equation (3.23) and then to
equation (3.21) and solving for d gives:
3
d

s rs
f
f
Kd ij G
de rs
I 1
J2 J2

9 K
I 1

J
2

f f
3
I 1 vp

(3.27)

Although the previous formulation for the cap model [19,10] is

coded for use in dynamic analysis for using finite difference or finite
element code, it appears that considerable difficulties may occur
whenever changes are required in the model parameter and/or functional
forms.
Sandler and Rubin (mentioned in reference [6]) presented a new
cap model routine in an attempt to facilitate the general use of the cap

36

model in dynamic analysis, and to overcome the above mentioned

complexities. This method has been used in many research for the
analysis of blast loaded reinforced concrete structures and gave good
agreement when compared with experimental tests [21].
3.4.1 Numerical Implementation for Cap Model
This method is proposed by Sandler and Rubin [6] and later presented by
Chen in details [6]. This method makes use of equation(3.27), i.e,
the input quantities are the stress components ij , and
n

hardening parameter n ,and consequently

l (k n )

the

is obtained at the

end of nth time step which determines the trial position of the cap.
The components of the strain increment

d ijn 1

are obtained from

the equation(3.20). The output quantities are the new values of the
stress components ij and the updated cap parameters such as
n 1

n1
k n 1 , l ( k ) .

The first step of the numerical algorithm is to determine the

possible path resulting from the given strain, Figures (3.13 and 3.14). To
e
accomplish this, a set of elastic trial stresses ij is computed by means:

I 1e I 1n 3Kd kkn 1

(3.28)

and
sije sijn 2Gdeijn 1

(3.29)

These trial stresses are then tested first with respect to the failure

e
e
envelope h I 1 , J 2 , and second with respect to the hardening surface

H I 1e , J 2e , k n

If these trial stresses do not violate either the loading

function, the behavior of the material is truly elastic, the

hardening

37

J2

J2

n+1

n+1

I1

I1

(a) Elastic Path

(b) Elastic Perfectly

Plastic Path

J2

J2
n+1
n

n+1
n

I1

I1

(d) Elastic Perfectly

Plastic with a Corner
Path

(c) Elastic Work

Hardening Path.

Figure(3.13) Possible stress paths resulting from a strain increment

Input and

Elastic trial stresses are computed

Check stress
Path
3
Elastic Work
Hardening Path

2
Elastic Ideal
Plastic path
With corner

Without corner

Figure(3.14) Flow diagram of the algorithm of the model

1
Elastic
Path

Final

38
n
parameter and

l n (k )

remain unchanged, and the final stresses at

the (n+1)th time step are (Figure(3.14) path 1)

I 1n 1 I 1e
s

n 1
ij

(3.30)
(3.31)

e
ij

If the failure envelope is violated by the elastic trial stresses, i.e:

I 1e L( k n )
J

e
2

and

(3.32)
(3.33)

min Q ( I ), F ( L (k ), k )

e
1

(3.34)
then the stresses have to be corrected such that at the end of the (n+1)th
step they satisfy the following relation ( Figure(3.14) path 2 and
Figure(3.15))
h I 1e , J 1e 0
(3.35)
h I 1e , J 1e J 1e Q ( I 1e ) 0

This is accomplished by
I 1n 1 I 1e 3Kd kkp

(3.36)
Elastic-Perfectly Plastic Path
Without a Corner.

h( I e , J e )
n 1 n11 2 n
I 1 L(k )

J2

J2
I1

n 1

n 1

J2

I 1n 1

I1

L(k n )

e
e
J

Q
I
2
1 dQ
d kkp 3
2
dI
1
9 K dQ G

dI 1

I 1n 1 I 1e 3Kd kkp

s ijn 1

Q ( I 1n 1 ) e
s ij
Q ( I 1e )

Figure(3.15) Flow diagram showing correction procedure for stress path

violating the failure envelope

39

where kkp is the volumetric plastic strain and it is given by

d kkp 3d

Q
I 1

(3.37)

Sandler and Rubin made use of equation(3.27) and simplified it to the

form
d

J 2e Q ( I 1e )
Q

9 K
e
I 1

(3.38)

n
The work is not yet done, however, as the parameters and

l n (k ) must

also be updated; i.e, the cap must intersect the failure envelope (thereby
n 1
n 1
creating a corner) at this new value of I 1 . Therefore, the tentative I 1

value against

L (k n ) is

n 1
n
to be tested and if I 1 L(k ) , corner coding is

triggered, Figure(3.16)
L(k n 1 ) I 1n 1 l n

l
kkp

d kkp I 1e 3Kd kkp

l

l
kkp

l n 1 l ( k n 1 ) I 1n 1

I 1e 3Kl n

l
kkp

ln

3K
ln

(3.39)

Having now determined the final spherical (or hydrostatic )stress and
strain states I 1n 1 and k n 1 , the final values of the deviatoric stresses

s ijn 1

can easily be determined by simple proportional reduction in the trial

(elastic) deviatoric stresses (Figure(3.15) and Figure(3.16)). This
completes the correction process for the stress states violating the failure
envelope.
Proceeding to examine the case where the failure envelope is not
violated but the hardening surface is violated, Figure (3.17). The elastic
stresses are tested against the hardening surface ( the cap ), i.e, if:

H I 1e , J 2e , k n 0

I 1e X (k n ) or I 1e L( k n )

(3.40)
(3.41)

40

then the hardening surface computations are performed.

An iterative procedure is employed in which a value of k is
assumed, tested and refined as described in the following. For each
assumed k , the corresponding values of d kkp , X (k ) , L(k ) , and
I 1t I 1e 3Kd kkp

(3.42)
are computed. If I X (k ) a smaller value of k is tried, while if
e
1

I 1e L(k n ) a larger value of k tried, and the process is repeated until the

condition X (k t ) I 1t L(k t ) is met.

Elastic-Perfectly Plastic Path
With Corner.

h( I e , J e )
2
n 1 n 11

I 1 L(k n )

J2

n
J 2

I 1

n 1

n 1

J2

I 1n 1

I1

L(k n )

J 2 Q I 1e dQ

d 3
2
dI
1
9 K dQ G

dI 1

n 1
e
p
I 1 I 1 3Kd kk
e

p
kk

s ijn 1

Q( I 1n 1 ) e
s
Q( I 1e )

l
e
n
l

3
Kl
kkp n 1

3K
kkp n

l n 1 l1n 1

Figure(3.16) Flow diagram showing the correction procedure for

stress path violating the failure envelope with corner correction

41

If X (k t ) I 1e L(k n ) the quantity

J 2 F ( I 1t , k t )

(3.43)

is computed together with the derivative

d

F
I 1t

(3.44)

and as shown by Sandler and Rubin the desired value of l is the one for
which the equation
J 2t Gd kkp / 3d

(3.45)

J 2e

is satisfied to the required accuracy.

Elastic-Work Hardening Path

J2

H ( I1e , J 2e , k n ) 0
x(k n ) I1e L(k n )or x(k n )

L(k )

l1n

J n

n 1

x( k ) L(k n 1 ) X (k n )

l1n 1
n 1
J n

I1

Assume
Compute

If

No

c is very small number

Yes

Final

Figure(3.17) Flow diagram showing the correction procedure for stress path
violating the hardening surface

42

3.5 Impact Loading

Any time-dependent force, applied to a structure can be either cyclic and
represented by a continuous function such as sine wave function, or it can
be a suddenly applied force which may be called transient such as that
due to bomb blast or impact loading.
The term impulsive load refers to the complete force-time history
applied to the structure which is likely to be independent of the properties
of the structure as in the case of the bomb blast loading. This is not the
case for the impact load. The impact load applied to a structure depends
on the striker velocity, the structure and striker masses, the resulting
deformations and the materials properties of both bodies.
Some common examples of the types of impact loading are [3]
(1) vehicle impact with structure
(2) accident during construction
(3) airplanes crushing on nuclear plants
(4) ships collision
(5) collision between the structure and a mass which is flying away
accidentally from a rotating machinery inside the structure.
(6) Pile during driving
As was pointed out that the impact load depends on the mass,
velocity and materials properties of the impacting body in addition to the
mass and materials properties of the structure. So a time-load history of
the impact load can be expected. Numerical and analytical studies have
been concerned in computing the load-time relation for the impact load
and comparing with test results [3,22]. In some studies and codes, load
time-history is suggested for special cases such as the impact load
resulting from the impact of an air plane with important structures such as
a nuclear power plant [12] as shown in Figure (3.18).

43

Al-Azzawi [3] determined the impact force-time history applied to

the slab due to a falling mass by using a hypothetical sinusoidal impact
force-time history and compared with the test results. The derivation of
this relation was based on the value of the mass and on the magnitude of
the velocity of the falling mass and the pressure bar. The pressure bar is
located between the falling mass and the tested reinforced concrete slab.
Thabet and Haldane [22] determined the impact force-time history
applied to reinforced concrete beams and frames resulting from a driven
rod on a pressure bar.
For the reinforced concrete beams the pressure bar was located at
midspan of the concrete beams. The rod was driven towards the pressure
bar to achieve a certain velocity on contact (8.9 m/s), which is remained
constant over the duration of the impact event. The pressure bar reacted
with the rod and impacted the concrete beam. A static load was applied at
each end support before the initiation of the impact load, and remained
constant for the duration of the impact event. This was achieved using
dynamic relaxation solution procedure within the finite element program.
In the case of the reinforced concrete frames the rod was driven
towards the pressure bar to achieve a velocity of 15.75 m/s on contact.
The bar reacted with the rod and impacted the concrete beam at mid-span.
Static loads at the upper surface of the two columns were applied before
the initiation of the impact load and remained constant over the duration
of the impact event. This was also achieved using the dynamic relaxation
solution procedure available within the finite element program.
The numerical results obtained by Thabet [22] gave good
agreement with the measured results of the contact pressure. It should be
noted that material nonlinearity for the tested reinforced concrete
structure, the driven rod, and pressure bar were considered and coded in
the finite element program.

44

The impact concept is extended to a special load case of an aircraft

crash which is attributed to a design governing importance for nuclear
power plants built in particularly high risk areas. The underlying principle
is that the hazards presented by nuclear power plants for the environment
and the population should be not greater than the hazards presented by
other industrial installations. In Figure (3.18), a survey is given of the
aircraft impact loading functions proposed by various investigators [12].
The horizontal impact of an aircraft (Boeing 707-320) Figure(3.18),
on the shield building of a nuclear power plant has been studied by
References [13 and 18] and also in the present work.
In the present work, a force-time relation for impact load is
considered as input data for the finite element code.

Figure(3.18) Load-time function induced by different types of airplanes

45

3.6 Earthquake Excitation:

There are several causes of earthquakes, which depend on movement of
the earth crust at a certain area called the earthquake focus. From this
focus, seismic waves are transmitted through rock causing shaking in the
ground. These waves are similar in many ways to the familiar waves in
air and water. Three basic types of wave make up the shaking that are felt
and cause damage by the earthquake. Two of these propagate within the
body of the solid rock. The faster of the seismic waves is appropriately
called the primary or P-wave [15]. Its motion is the same as that of a
sound wave in fluid, in that, as it spreads out, it alternately pushes and
pulls the rock, Figure(3.19). These waves are able to travel through both
solid rocks and liquid materials.
The slower wave through the body of the rock is the secondary or
S-wave, Figure(3.20). As S-waves propagate, they shear the rocks
sideways, at right angles to the direction of travel. The S-wave cannot
propagate in liquid. In most earthquakes, the P-waves are felt first. Few
seconds later, the S-waves arrive with their significant components of
side to side motion, so the ground motion is in the form of shaking in
both horizontal and vertical directions.
The third general type of earthquake wave is the surface wave,
because its motion is restricted near the ground surface. Such waves
correspond to ripples of water that travel across lakes. Surface waves
travel more slowly than body waves (P and S waves).
When P and S waves reach the surface of the ground, most of their
energy is reflected back into the crust, so that the surface is affected
almost simultaneously by upward and downward moving waves. For this
reason considerable amplification of shaking typically occurs near the
surface sometimes doubling the amplitude of the upcoming waves.

46

When body waves of all types move through the rock layers in the
crust, they are reflected or refracted at the interface between the rock
types, as illustrated in Figure (3.21).

Figure (3.19) Ground motion near the ground surface due to P-waves.

Figure (3.20) Ground motion near the ground surface due to S-waves.

47

Figure (3.21) Reflection and refraction of body waves.

Seismic waves of all types are progressively damped as they travel
because of the inelastic properties of the rocks and soils. The attenuation
of S-wave is greater than that of the P-waves, but in both types,
attenuation increases as the wave frequency increases.
A final point about seismic waves is worth noting here. There is
considerable evidence, observation and theoretical studies, that
earthquake waves are affected by both soil conditions and topography.
Earthquake can damage structure in various ways, such as:
1. Inertial forces generated by severe ground shaking
2. Changes in the physical properties of the foundation soils( e.g
consolidation, settling, and liquifaction)
3. Direct fault displacement at the site of a structure
4. Damage by seismically induced water waves such as seismic sea waves
or fluid motions in reservoirs and lakes.

48

In the present study, when a structure is subjected to an earthquake

loading, the external applied forces are defined by[13,17,23].
f MId g (t )

(3.46)
where M is the mass matrix , I is a vector indicating the direction of the
earthquake excitation ( x, y or z-direction) , and

d g (t ) is

the input

acceleration.
The geometry of an illustrative example of a simply supported shell
subjected to an earthquake excitation in z-direction is shown in
Figure(3.22). This problem was solved by Weaver and Johnston[23] and
it is also solved in the present study.
One-forth of the structure is discretized with four degenerated shell
elements as shown in Figure(3.22). The external force is simply obtained
by using equation (3.46). In Table (3.3), materials properties of a simply
supported shell are shown.
Figure (3.24 and 3.25) show the displacement at point A in x and z
direction.
Table(3.3) Material properties of simply supported cylindrical shell
(N/mm)
Youngs modulus
Poissons ratio
Mass density

24820
0.15
0.217E-08

49

A c c e le ra tio n (m m /s e c 2 )

4000

-4 0 0 0
0 .0 0

0 .4 0
0 .8 0
T im e (s e c o n d )

Figure(3.22) Geometry and loading for the thin shell

Figure(3.23) Finite element mesh for thin shell

1 .2 0

50

6 0 .0 0

W eaver

P re se n t

D is p la c e m e n t (m m )

4 0 .0 0
2 0 .0 0
0 .0 0
-2 0 .0 0
-4 0 .0 0
-6 0 .0 0
0 .0 0

0 .5 0

1 .0 0

1 .5 0

T im e (s e c o n d )

Figure(3.24) Elastic dynamic response of thin shell in z-direction at

point A

D is p la c e m e n t (m m )

4 0 .0 0

W eaver

P re se n t

0 .0 0

-4 0 .0 0
0 .0 0

0 .5 0

1 .0 0

1 .5 0

T im e (s e c o n d )

Figure(3.25) Elastic dynamic response of thin shell in x-direction at

point A

51

References
1. Abdul-Jalil, Y. Q. (1988). " Analysis of wave propagation in multilayer continua." M.Sc. Thesis, Baghdad University, 134 pps.
2. Al-Azzawi, A. M. (2000). " Finite element analysis of thin and thick
reinforced concrete shell foundation." Ph.D. Thesis, Baghdad
University, Iraq, 128 pps.
3. Al-Azzawi, T.K (1984). "Impact resistance of reinforced concrete
slab." Ph.D. Thesis, Sheffield University, England, 93 pps.
4. Bazent, Z. P. (1978). "Spurious reflection of elastic waves in
nonuniform element grids." Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineering, Vol. 16, pp.91-100.
5. Chen W.F. (1982). "Plasticity in reinforced concrete." McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
6. Chen W.F. and Baladi G.Y (1985). "Soil plasticity, theory and
implementation. " Elsevier Company.
7. Daniel W. J. T. (1986). "A coupled finite element/one dimensional
wave model of stress wave propagation in shock tube." Computers and
structures, Vol. 22, No.4, pp583-587.
8. Das; B.M (1983). "Fundamental of soil dynamics." Elsevier
Company.
9. Department of Army (1969). "Structures to resist the effect of
accidental explosion." TM 5-1300, NAVFAC P-397, AFM 88-22.
10. DiMaggio F. L., Sandler I. S. (1971). "Material model for granular
soils." ASCE, Vol. 97, No. EM3.
11. Kiger S. A., Dalliruva F.D, and Hall R.L (1989). "Dynamic skin
friction effects on burried arches." ASCE, Vol. 115, No. 7.
12. Krutzik. N. J. (1980). "Anlaysis of aircraft impact problems." 337386. Advanced Structural Dynamics (edited by J. Donea) Applied
Science Publishers, London.

52

13. Hinton E, (1988). "Numerical methods and software for dynamic

analysis of plates and shells." Pineridge Press, Swansea U.K.
14. Holmes N. and Belytschko, T. (1976). " Post-processing of the finite
element transient response calculation by digital filters." Computers
and Structures, Vol. 6, pp. 211-216.
15. Naeim, F. (1989). " The seismic design handbook." Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company.
16. Norris, C. H., Hanssen, R. J., Holley, M. J., Bigs, J. M., Namyet, S.,
and Minami, J. K. (1959). "Structural design for dynamic loads." ,
McGraw-Hill Company.
17.

Owen, D. R. J. and Hinton, E. (1980). " Finite element in

plasticity." Pineridge Press, Swansea, U.K.

18. Rebora, B., Zimmermann, Th., and Wolf, J. P. (1976). "Dynamic
rupture analysis of reinforced concrete shells." Nuclear Engineering
Design, 37, 269 297.
19. Sandler, I.S, DiMaggio, F. L., and Baladi, G. Y. (1976).
"Generalized cap model for geological material. " ASCE, Vol. 102,
No. GT7.
20. Steven, D. J., Krauthammer, T. (1988). "A finite difference/finite
element approach to dynamic soil-structure interaction modeling."
Computers and Structures, Vo.29, No.2. pp. 199-205.
21. Steven, D. J., Krauthammer, T., and Chandra, D. (1991). " Analysis
of blast loaded buried RC arch response." Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, 117 (1), 213-234.
22. Thabit A. and Haldane D. (2000). " Three dimensional simulation
of nonlinear response of reinforced concrete members subjected to
impact loading." ACI Structural Journal, V.97, No.5, pp.689-702.
23. Weaver, W., and Johnston, P. R. (1987). "Structural dynamic by
finite elements." Prentice-Hall.