Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: It is interesting and important for researchers to understand the damage process in order to reliably
Received 12 February 2008 predict fragment distribution of concrete material under blast loading. In the present study, a mesoscale
Accepted 12 February 2009 concrete model is developed to simulate the dynamic failure process of a concrete slab under contact
Available online 27 May 2009
detonation. In the mesoscale model, the concrete material is assumed to consist of two phases, that is,
the high strength coarse aggregates and the low strength mortar matrix, randomly distributed in the
Keywords:
structure components. Each coarse aggregate is assumed to be circular with a random radius in a given
Blast loading
distribution range following the Fullers curve. The mesoscale model together with a dynamic plastic
Mesoscale model
Numerical simulation damage material model is incorporated into the hydrocode AUTODYN. The dynamic damage process of
Concrete the concrete slab under contact detonation is numerically simulated. Based on the numerical results, the
Fragment fragment size distribution is estimated by an image analysis program. Two different random aggregate
distributions are assumed in the present simulations. Numerical results from the two different cases are
compared, and the results from the mesoscale model are compared with that from the homogeneous
concrete material model. The fragment size distributions obtained from numerical simulations are also
compared with those from the empirical statistic formulae.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0734-743X/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.02.010
1316 X.Q. Zhou, H. Hao / International Journal of Impact Engineering 36 (2009) 13151326
also simply obtained by multiplying the static compressive, or 1.3. Concrete dynamic fragmentation
tensile strength, by the respective DIF in practice.
Some material models have been constructed to simulate the When an explosion occurs, secondary fragments and airborne
concrete behavior under dynamic loading conditions [1220]. In debris resulting from the damaged structural components may
1993, Johnson and Holmquist [12] developed a brittle damage cause serious injury and damage. Therefore, it is of interest to know
model for concrete [12]. Based on this model, RHT model [14], the fragmentation process of structural components and to predict
Gebbekens model [15], K&C model [16] and modied Drucker the size and velocity distribution of the fragments.
Prgager model [12,17] were developed. Recently, Leppanen [19] The processes of dynamic fragmentation within a concrete
modied the RHT model by using a different DIF for tension and member are very complicated since discontinuities such as cleavage
a bi-linear crack softening law. All the above-mentioned models cracks and defects with different shapes and orientations are
belong to the category of plastic damage model. In addition, some commonly encountered in concrete material and they have signi-
visco-plastic models were also developed for concrete, for example, cant inuence on the failure of concrete. The actual process of
Gatuingt and Pijaudier-Cabot [21] developed a damage visco- dynamic fragmentation is still not well understood, but some theo-
plastic model for concrete. They considered the interaction retical and experimental efforts have provided useful insight
between the spherical and deviatoric response. The constitutive regarding the distribution of fragments. Based on energy and
relation for concrete is based on visco-plasticity combined with the momentum balance principles, some models have been developed
rate-dependant continuum damage. The difference between the to predict average fragment size as a function of strain rate and
plastic damage model and the visco-plastic damage model is that material toughness [2931]. To determine the distribution of frag-
the time history effect is considered in the later model. Theoreti- ment in mass or size, some statistical approaches have been devel-
cally the visco-plastic damage model is more reasonable because it oped [32,33]. In those approaches, the intrinsic failure process
considers the time dependant plastic ow. However, the visco- leading to fragmentation is not modelled. To understand the
plastic behavior of concrete is very complicated and it is not well mechanisms of fragmentation, some theoretical models have been
understood yet. suggested to correlate the dynamic fracture and fragmentation
In those models, the concrete material is always assumed to be [34,35]. Recently, numerical modelling has been carried out to
isotropic, continuous and homogeneous. simulate the dynamic deformation in the fragmentation process
[3538]. There are mainly three different methods for fragmentation
simulation: 1) Interface elements were incorporated between stan-
1.2. Mesoscale modelling of concrete dard nite elements to serve as dynamic fracture paths [35]. The
primary drawback of this method is that it cannot give reliable
As is well known, concrete is a composite material, produced by predictions of the fragment size because the size and shape are
adding the appropriate portions of coarse and ne aggregates, determined by the pre-dened interface; 2) Damage material model
cement, water and some additives if necessary. Obviously the has been put into smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH method) to
concrete material is heterogeneous, and its heterogeneity makes simulate the fragmentation process [28,38]. The fragment distribu-
the behavior of concrete under blast loads rather complicated. tion was obtained by checking the radius of the fully damaged
Especially, the heterogeneity of concrete affects the crack pattern particles. 3) Standard nite element method together with damage
and the fragment size distribution when it is under blast loads. mechanics has been employed to model the dynamic deformation
To analyze the static heterogeneous behavior of concrete, some and to predict the fragment size [36,37]. The fragment size is pre-
mesoscale models for concrete have been developed [2226]. In dicted by either the energy balance principal or relating the full
most of these mesoscale models, the concrete is assumed con- damage to the fragmentation. All the previous models assumed
sisting of three phases, that is, the coarse aggregates, the mortar homogenous material properties. In the present study, the later
matrix with ne aggregate dissolved in it, and the interfacial method is adopted, however, the heterogeneous concrete material
transition zones (ITZ) between the aggregate and the mortar properties are considered. The mesoscale concrete model and
matrix. Based on the static experimental results, the behavior of AUTODYN [2] are rstly employed to model the dynamic deforma-
ITZ does affect the mechanical properties of concrete. However, it tion of a concrete slab under a contact detonation. The fragment size
is very difcult to obtain the mechanical parameters of ITZ. distributions and ejection velocities are then predicted by relating
Therefore including ITZ in the model introduces some uncer- the full damage to the fragmentation. Next, an image analysis
tainties. Moreover, considering ITZ in numerical model substan- program in MATLAB is used to estimate the fragment size distribu-
tially increases the computational time and computer memory tion by analyzing the numerical results based on the damage
requirement. For these reasons, in some models the ITZs are not mechanics theory and nite element model.
included in the numerical simulation [22,25], instead, the ideal
bond between the aggregates and the mortar matrix are assumed. 2. Generation of coarse aggregate particles
To perform the mesoscopic study of concrete material, both
discrete element methods, such as lattice model [26] and truss The mesoscale concrete model requires the generation of
model [27], and continuum nite element methods [2224] have a random aggregate structure in which the shape, size and distribu-
been used. So far, this kind of mesoscale models has mainly been tion of the coarse aggregates closely resemble the real concrete in the
applied in static numerical simulations. statistical sense [22]. The coarse aggregates generation method in
The present paper aims to construct a mesoscale heterogeneous the present study is the popular take-and-place method. Firstly, the
model for concrete material under blast loading. In the mesoscale size distribution of the coarse aggregate particles is determined by
model, the concrete material is assumed consisting of two phases, following a certain given grading curve; and then the aggregate
that is, the high strength coarse aggregate and the low strength particles are placed into the mortar matrix one by one at randomly
cement paste, randomly distributed in the structure components. determined locations in such a way that no overlapping with particles
Perfect bond between aggregates and cement paste is assumed. As already placed. The similar method was also employed in [22,23,27].
a numerical example, the dynamic damage process of a concrete Coarse aggregates are the particles whose diameters are greater
slab under blast loads studied by other researchers using a different than 4.75 mm. For most concrete, the coarse aggregates represent
approach [28] is analysed. 4050% of the concrete volume [22]. In the present study, it is
X.Q. Zhou, H. Hao / International Journal of Impact Engineering 36 (2009) 13151326 1317
Pd d=dmax n (1)
where P(d) is the cumulative percentage passing a sieve with
aperture diameter d, dmax is the maximum size of aggregate
particle and n is the exponent of the equation (n 0.450.70). In
practical concrete construction, the typical maximum size of Fig. 2. An example of a generated 2D aggregate distribution for an area of
300 300 mm2.
aggregate is about 32 mm to obtain high quality concrete mix.
Therefore, in the present study, dmax is assumed to be 32 mm, and
n is taken as 0.5.
From Fig. 1, it can be found that the percentage for the coarse the next simulated aggregate size and position is used. Once the
aggregates, i.e., aggregates with size larger than 4.75 mm, is about total area of the coarse aggregates in the size segment reaches the
61.5% of the total aggregates. The total volume of the coarse designed percentage, the iteration is stopped and the next grading
aggregates is assumed to be 40% of the whole concrete volume. segment is placed. An example of a generated 2D aggregate
The grading curve is divided into several segments. In the present particle distribution is shown in Fig. 2. Similar method can also be
study, three aggregate diameter ranges are selected, i.e., 4.75 used to construct a 3D mesoscale model. A 3D example is shown in
10 mm, 1020 mm and 2032 mm. According to Fullers curve, the Fig. 3.
percentages for the three aggregate ranges are 17.37%, 23.17%, and
20.96%, respectively, which correspond to 11.3%, 15.07% and 13.63%
of the total concrete volume. The aggregate distribution process
starts with the grading segment containing the largest size
particle, that is, 2032 mm. Firstly, random position for the centre
of the circular aggregate is determined; next the diameter within
the grading segment (2032 mm) is randomly decided; then
overlapping between any two aggregates and every aggregate with
the slab boundary are checked. If overlapping between two
aggregates or part of an aggregate is outside of the slab boundary,
1
0.9 Fuller's curve
0.8
Total percentage
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.125 0.25 0.5 1 2 4 8 16 32
Size (mm)
Fig. 3. An example of a generated 3D aggregate distribution for a volume of
Fig. 1. Fullers grading curve. 200 200 200 mm3.
1318 X.Q. Zhou, H. Hao / International Journal of Impact Engineering 36 (2009) 13151326
Table 1
Pressure P
Material parameters for mortar matrix.
Plastic compaction path
Initial densityr0M (kg/m3) 2.33 103
5
Solid density rsM (kg/m3) 2.450 103
4 Solid sound speed cs Initial sound speed C0M (m/s) 2.20 103
Solid sound speed Cs (m/s) 2.80 103
Initial sound speed Cinit 3 Initial compaction pressure peM (MPa) 24.0
2 Solid compaction pressure psM(MPa) 250
1 Shear modulus (GPa) 8.3
Damage parameters at, ac 0.5
Elastic unloading/loading paths
Tensile damage threshold 3st0M 3.0 104
0 s Density
Pmin Compressive damage threshold 3sc0M 3.0 103
Tensile strength ftM (MPa) 4
Compressive strength fcM (MPa) 48
Fig. 4. Pressure and density curve for piecewise linear porous equation of state.
Cut-off tensile strength ftttM (MPa) 2
Table 2
Material parameters for aggregate.
75
Rouabhi High explosive
Cho
4 Wang
Cai
Lok
3 Present model
320
2
1 1200
0
0.000001 0.0001 0.01 1 100 10000 Fig. 8. Test setup (mm).
_ t > 0; D
D At Dt Ac Dc ; D _ c > 0 and At Ac 1 (8)
permanent plastic strain. The details on the plastic ow treatment the weights At and Ac are dened by the following expressions [40],
in AUTODYN can be found in [2]. The damage scalar D is determined
by Mazars damage model [40]. X Hi 3 3 3 X Hi 3 3 3
i i i i i i
At ; Ac (9)
In the damage model, the two scalars, namely, Dt and Dc, which
i 1;3
~32 i 1;3
~32
correspond, respectively, to the damage in tension and compres-
q
P
sion of concrete, are dened as where ~3 2
i1;3 3i 3i is the effective strain. Hi[x] 0 when
Compressive DIF
5
Rouabhi Outflow boundary
LI
4 Cai
LI XB
Lok
3 Present model Euler-
Lagrange Outflow
2
interface Air boundary
Concrete
1 High explosive
0
0.0001 0.01 1 100 10000 Axis of symmetry
The CEB recommendation for the tensile DIF is [42], 3.2. Material model for coarse aggregate
1:016d
ftd 3_ d The aggregate is assumed to suffer brittle failure with
TDIF for 3_ d 30s1 (11a) a minimum deformation. Therefore the simplest linear equation of
fts 3_ ts
state is adopted to calculate the pressure
1=3
ftd 3_ p Km (12)
TDIF b d for 3_ d > 30s1 (11b)
fts 3_ ts
where p is the pressure, m (r/r0)1, and K is the material bulk
where ftd is the dynamic tensile strength at the strain rate 3_ d (in the modulus.
range of 3 106300 s1), fts is the static tensile strength at the Because rock behaves similarly as concrete under dynamic
strain rate 3_ ts 3_ ts 3 106 s1 , and log b 7:11d 2:33, in loading, the same strength criterion for the mortar matrix is
which d 1=10 6fc0 =fco 0 ; f 0 10MPa, f 0 is the static uniaxial
co c adopted here to model the aggregates, only the material constants
compressive strength (in MPa). are different. The parameters for the aggregates are given in Table 2.
The DIFs for the coarse aggregates are based on some test results from the AUTODYN material library are utilized, that is, the air
on rock materials. Some research works have been done to study the density r 1.225 kg/m3 and g 1.4. The air initial internal energy is
strain rate effect on both the tensile and the compressive strength of assumed to be 2.068 105 kJ/kg.
the rock material. Cho et al. [43] investigated the dynamic tensile
strength of Indian granite and Tage tuff, by using experimental
approach based on Hopkinsons effect combined with the spalling 4. Numerical simulation
phenomena. Wang et al. [44] used split Hopkinson pressure bar
(SHPB) to impact a attened Brazilian disc of marble for testing In this study, a concrete slab tested under blast loading by other
dynamic tensile strength of rock material. Cai et al. [45] conducted researchers [28] is modelled. In numerical simulation, the concrete
both the tensile and the compression SHPB tests to study the dynamic slab is modelled by a Lagrange subgrid, in which the coordinates
behavior of Meuse/HauteMarne argillite. Lok et al. [46] used a sha- move with the material; while the air and high explosive are
ped striker bar in a large diameter SHPB tests to obtain the dynamic
tensile and compression strength of granite. Li et al. [47] also reported
some compression test results by using the same equipment. Li et al.
[48] obtained the dynamic compressive strength for different rock
materials by using a rock dynamic testing system which is driven by
hydraulic and air. Based on the above-mentioned test results, the
tensile and compressive DIFs are obtained as follows,
2
TDIF 0:7325 log 3_ 1:235 log 3_ 1:6 0:1s1 3_ 50s1
(13b)
2
CDIF 0:2713 log 3_ 0:3563 log 3_
p g 1re (16)
modelled by Euler subgrid, in which the grid is xed and material equivalent charge weight was about 350 g. The inner cone con-
ows through it. At the Euler-Lagrange interface, interaction is sisted of TNT and the outer thin cone of composition B. The
considered. The Lagrange subgrid imposes a geometric constraint dimensions are shown in Fig. 8. This slab was tested by other
to the Euler subgrid while the Euler subgrid provides a pressure researchers [28]. It is employed here to validate the proposed
boundary to the Lagrange subgrid. numerical model.
The dimension of the tested slab was 1.2 1.2 0.32 m3 and the The slab is approximately modelled as axisymmetric in this
concrete had a static compressive strength of 48 MPa. This slab was study. It should be mentioned that the dynamic fragmentation
loaded by an explosive cone of TNT and Composition B, and the process may be affected by the 3D aggregate distribution. The 3D
Table 3
Comparison of the numerical results and the experimental results.
Fig. 15. Test results [28] (a) top view (b) bottom view.
1324 X.Q. Zhou, H. Hao / International Journal of Impact Engineering 36 (2009) 13151326
Fig. 16. Fragment distribution (estimated from the numerical results, bottom spalling crater) (a) case I (b) case II (c) homogeneous model.
From the numerical simulations, the ejecting velocity of the estimated as the square root of the fragment area. The size distri-
fragments can also be obtained. The highest ejecting velocities of butions for the different cases are shown in Fig. 18. In the gure, the
the fragments from the bottom surface of the concrete are 20.6, vertical axis corresponds to the mass percentage. In the mass
24.0 and 19.8 m/s, for case I, case II and the homogeneous model, calculation, it is assumed that the fragment size in the third
respectively. It should be noted that these ejecting velocities are direction is the same as that in the 2D plane, i.e., the square root of
associated with the fragments with size larger than 2 mm. For the the fragment area. From Fig. 18, it can be found that the homoge-
fragments smaller than 2 mm, the ejecting velocity might be neous model predicts more small size fragments than the meso-
higher, but as discussed above, the present numerical model is not scale model. It can also be found that the fragment size
capable of generating fragments smaller than 2 mm because of the distributions are different for the two aggregate distribution cases,
element size used in the model. The results from the numerical indicating again the inuence of the aggregate distribution on the
simulation also depend on the erosion criterion used. The erosion concrete slab damage to blast loads.
criterion used here is a combination of the effective strain and the According to a statistical approach [33], the cumulative mass of
damage value. If the tensile damage value is higher than 0.99 and fragments with mass less than or equal to m is,
the effective strain is higher than 0.2, or if the effective strain is
higher than 2.0, the element is assumed to be fully damaged and Mc m M 1 em=ma (17)
eroded from the model. The erosion criterion adopted here is
accordingly, the cumulative size of fragments with sizes less than or
partially based on ref [2], partially based on numerical trial. Nor-
equal to s is,
mally the erosion is mainly based on effective strain, only the highly
distorted elements are deleted to avoid numerical difculty, but in 3
Mc s M 1 es=sa (18)
the present study, tensile damage is also considered to model the
possible tensile cracks. where M is the total fragment mass, ma is the average fragment
The results from the numerical simulation in Figs. 13 and 14 are mass, and sa is the average fragment size.
then treated by an image analysis program (a toolbox in MATLAB) For comparison, the results based on statistical empirical
to predict the fragment size distribution. Fig. 16 shows the frag- formulae (Eq. (18)) are also shown in Fig. 18, in which Asize 30, 40, 50
ments from the bottom spalling (estimated from Figs. 13 and 14). It denote the average fragment size are 30, 40 and 50 mm, respectively.
should be mentioned that the fragments in the upper crater is not From this gure, it can be found that the numerical simulations
analysed in the present study because a large number of the predict that the average fragment size is in the range of 3050 mm,
elements are eroded due to large element distortion in this region. which is in the same order of the biggest coarse aggregate. It also
In the image analysis program, the gures are loaded rst by using indicates that the numerical results match the empirical statistical
the function imread, then the imcomplement function in MAT- predictions when the fragment size is smaller than the average
LAB is used to take the complement of the image; next, the fragment size, however, the numerical results and the statistical
bwmorph function is used to skeletonize the results, nally each predictions differ when the fragment size is larger than the average
fragment boundary is found and the fragment area is obtained. fragment size. Nonetheless the numerical results of fragment
After the treatment by the image analysis program, the fragment distribution are in the same range of the statistical prediction.
distributions can be seen more clearly in Fig. 17. This gure is then Unfortunately, no experimental result on fragment size distribution
used to extract the area distribution. For each fragment, the size is is available from the experimental test analysed in this study.
100 [8] Fu HC, Erki MA, Seckin M. Review of effects on loading rate on concrete in
compression. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1991;117(12):364559.
90 [9] Malvar LJ, Ross CA. Review of strain rate effects for concrete in tension. ACI
Materials Journal 1998;95(M73):7359.
80 [10] Eibl J, Schmidt-Hurtienne B. Strain-rate_sensitive constitutive law for
percentage passing (%)
[42] Comite Euro-International du Beton. CEBFIP model code 1990. Trowbridge, Conference on Shock & Impact Loads on Structures. November 1214, 2003,
Wiltshire, UK: Redwood Books; 1993. Changsha, Hunan, China: p. 27786.
[43] Cho SH, Ogata Y, Kaneko K. Strain-rate dependency of the dynamic tensile [47] Li XB, Lok TS, Zhao J. Dynamic characteristics of granite subjected to
strength of rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Science intermediate loading rate. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering
2003;40:76377. 2005;38(1):2139.
[44] Wang QZ, Li W, Song XL. A method for testing strength and elastic [48] Li HB, Zhao J, Li JR, Liu YQ and Zhou QC. Experimental studies on the strength
modulus of rock materials using SHPB. Pure and Applied Geophysics of different rock types under dynamic compression. International Journal of
2006;163:1091100. Rock Mechanics and Mining Science. 2004, 41(3). Paper 1A 12 SINOR-
[45] Cai M, Kaiser PK, Sourineni F, Su K. A study on the dynamic behaviour of the OCK2004 Symposium.
Meuse/HauteMarne argillite. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth [49] Rouabhi A, Tijani M, Moser P, Goetz D. Continuum modelling of dynamic
2007;32:90716. behaviour and fragmentation of quasi-brittle materials: application to rock
[46] Lok TS, Zhao PJ, Li XB and Lim CH. Dynamic stress-strain response of granite fragmentation by blasting. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical
from split Hopkinson Pressure Bar tests. In: Proceedings of the 5th Asia-Pacic Methods in Geomechanics 2005;29:72949.