Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198 www.elsevier.

com/locate/engstruct

Reliability analysis of direct shear and exural failure modes of RC slabs under explosive loading
Hsin Yu Low, Hong Hao
*

School of Civil and Structural Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Ave., Singapore 639798 Received 12 February 2001; received in revised form 3 September 2001; accepted 3 September 2001

Abstract Two loosely coupled SDOF systems are used to model the exural and direct shear responses of one-way reinforced concrete slabs subjected to explosive loading. Incorporating the effects of random variations of the structural and blast loading properties, as well as the strain rate effect caused by rapid load application, failure probabilities of the two failure modes are analyzed. The model is capable of predicting the failure probability of the slab with random material and geometrical parameters and subjected to random blast loading. Considering the random variations of structural properties and blast loading, the failure probabilities of one-way RC slab designed according to BS 8110 (Stuctural use of concrete, parts 1 and 2 (1985)) are calculated. The effect of span length of the slab on its failure probability to blast loading is also investigated. Based on numerical results, a semi analytical boundary that separates the slabs exural and shear failure modes is derived as a function of peak reected pressure and duration of blasting wave. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Reliability; Flexural; Direct shear; Blast loading; SDOF

1. Introduction Inherent in every structure are the uncertainties in its material and dimensions. As parameters related to structural materials and geometry, as well as loading on a structure, cannot be completely certain, it is an oversimplication to perform only deterministic structural analysis although the deterministic limit state design implicitly includes the uncertainty effects by applying safety factors to both structural material and applied load. A challenging task in non-deterministic structural analysis is to more accurately account for the randomness in a given problem with the use of proven numerical algorithm. The result from such an analysis would be in the form of statistical quantities describing the response. Many efforts have been focused on the development of reliability methods and algorithms in recent years. With these algorithms, reliability problems are solved more readily. Many researchers have also studied the random variations of RC structural material

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +65-791-5278; fax: +65-791-0676. E-mail address: chhao@ntu.edu.sg (H. Hao).

and dimensional properties. These will be briey reviewed and used in the present study. The analysis of the dynamic response of reinforced concrete slabs subjected to blast loading is complicated because the impulsive load caused by the explosion is highly nonlinear and occurs in an extremely short duration. An experimental phenomenon observed by many researchers indicated that reinforced concrete structures subjected to distributed load of short duration may not behave plastically at mid-span and fail there. Some of the beams might fail at positions very close to the support owing to direct shear failure, i.e., failure is not necessarily caused by its exural mode [25]. Although it is generally agreed that a large loading with short duration is more likely to cause a slab to fail by its shear failure mode while a relatively small amplitude load with longer duration will result in exural failure, this phenomenon is not well understood, and a lot of models have been proposed to account for this problem. There have been studies of structural element response in assessing the dynamic elastoplastic deformation of plates both analytically as presented, for example, by Yankelevsky [6] and experimentally by, for example, Gu rke and Bu cking [7]. A Timoshenko beam model was

0141-0296/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 4 1 - 0 2 9 6 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 8 7 - 6

190

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

also used to model the direct shear failure by Ross [8], Karthaus and Leussink [2] and by Krauthammer et al. [9]. However, the simplest approximation is by a SDOF simplication. As commented in conwep [10], problems that involve non-oscillatory loads such as blast load, when only the peak response is required, many structural systems may be sufciently analyzed using only the rst mode. Works in this area include the references [4,5,11 15]. The behavioral prediction by the more advanced Timoshenko beam theory has been shown by Krauthammer et al. [16] to be exactly the same as those derived by the SDOF approach. In all these studies, the two failure modes of a slab to blast load, namely the direct shear failure and exural failure, are modelled independently. This is usually acceptable because the two failure modes normally do not occur at the same time. A slab will enter the exural response mode only if it has survived the direct shear force. The decoupling of the exural and direct shear responses in SDOF analysis was also justied in Krauthammer et al. [16]. In this study, parametric reliability analysis is carried out to estimate the failure probabilities of RC slabs subjected to blast loading. Two loosely coupled SDOF systems are used to model the direct shear and exural failure modes. The random variations of the RC material properties and structural dimensions suggested by other researchers as well as the random variations of blasting load proposed by the authors [17], based on a literature survey of the various available empirical formulae, are used in the analysis. Failure probabilities of slabs with different dimensions subjected to blast pressures of various amplitudes and duration are estimated by the Firstorder reliability method (FORM). Based on the numerical results obtained, a boundary, which is a function of blast pressure amplitude, duration and the aspect ratio of slab, is derived to separate the direct shear and exural failure modes. This boundary can be easily used to determine the failure mode of a given slab under a known blast pressure history.

2.1. Concrete strength Random variations of concrete properties have been studied by many researchers. It was found that the concrete cube strength is normally distributed with coefcient of variation (COV) of 0.07 if construction quality is well controlled [18]. Analyzing data obtained from a number of published sources, the same reference proposed the following equation for the COV of concretes in-situ strength COV(insitu strength)[COV(cylinder strength)2 0.0084]
1/2

(1)

Assuming the COV of cylinder strength is the same as that of cube strength, the COV of in-situ concrete strength is estimated to be approximately 0.11 from the above equation. The mean strength of concrete is often related to its characteristic strength. Specically, BS 8110 [1] denes the characteristic strength of concrete as that value of the cube strength below which not more than 5% of the test results may be expected to fall. Hence, the relationship between the characteristic strength (fcu)k and the mean strength (fcu)m can be written as (fcu)k(fcu)m1.64sfcu MPa (2)

where sfcu is the standard deviation, and subscripts k and m denote characteristic and mean values. Using the above relation, the mean strength of grade 30 concrete ((fcu)k=30 MPa) is estimated to be 36.56 MPa and standard deviation s=COV(fcu)m=0.1136.56=4 MPa. Many codes and researchers suggest slightly different approaches to estimate the Youngs modulus of concrete according to the weight, compressive strength and density [19,20]. However, BS 8110s recommendation is adopted here for purpose of consistency, which treats the Youngs modulus as normally distributed with a COV of 0.1. The mean static value of Youngs modulus for Grade 30 concrete is 26 GPa. 2.2. Reinforcement strength A few statistical distribution types for yielding strength of reinforcement have been proposed such as normal, log-normal and beta distributions [21], or normal distribution [22]. In the latter study, it was proven that normal distribution is more appropriate for reinforcement yield strength at the 95% condence level. In the present study, normal distribution is adopted. The mean yield strength of high-strength deformed bar is related to characteristic yield strength through the equation [23] below fym fyk and COV0.08 11.64COV (3)

2. Random variables To account for the random variation of basic parameters in structural analysis, statistical descriptions of the variability of loads and material properties of reinforced concrete (RC) members are required. The exural and direct shear strengths and stiffness of RC members may vary from the expected values due to variations in material properties and dimensions of the member, as well as uncertainties inherent in the models used to compute them. The explosive loading parameters like pressure, rise time and duration might also vary from their expected values owing to its highly nonlinear nature and short duration. In fact, it is well known that such parameters are very difcult to measure.

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

191

where fyk is the characteristic yield strength and COV is the coefcient of variation of the yield strength. Using this relation, it can be estimated that the mean yield strength of reinforcement steel is 530 MPa if its characteristic yield strength is 460 MPa. Many studies indicated that the variation of Youngs modulus of reinforcement steel is minimal [24]. Hence, it is taken as deterministic with a value of 200 GPa in this study. 2.3. Structural dimensions

d/e s)1.026a e d30s1 sd/ss=(e d)1/3 sd/ss=g(e d30s1 e

(4) (5) (6)

d/e s)0.026 Ed/Es(e d/e s)0.020 e0,d/e0,s(e

s=30106s1 and a=(5+3fcu/4)1, where e logg=6.156a0.492, and subscripts d and s represent dynamic and static conditions respectively. 3.2. Steel

Dimension is another parameter that will affect the strength and stiffness of a structure. Geometric imperfection in RC elements is caused by deviations from the specic values of the cross-sectional shape and dimensions, the position of reinforcing bars, ties and stirrups, the horizontality and verticality of the concrete lines, and the alignment of columns and beams. Most researchers recommended the use of normal distribution to model the statistical variation of dimensions of structural members [25,26]. Mirza and MacGregor [26] also analyzed the variations of dimensions of cast in situ slabs. Based on the above information on variability in structures dimensions, a COV of 0.03 is adopted for all dimensions (slab height, h; effective depth, d; length, L; breadth, b), and the designed dimensions are taken as the mean values and their variations are assumed following normal distributions.

The steels dynamic enhancement is based on the model proposed by Liu and Owen [30], which suggests e fyd l log10 1 fys es

(7)

s for steel is in which the parameter l is 0.03 and e approximately 102/s. Coupled with the strain rate effect, the statistical variations of the basic random variables considered are tabulated in Table 1. From these basic random variables of material strengths, the exural and direct shear strengths can be obtained from the following models.

4. Structural resistances 4.1. Flexural resistance

3. Strain rate effect on strengths As mentioned in Bischoff and Perry [27], properties of the materials used in reinforced concrete structures are almost all strain rate dependent. It is also pointed out in the same reference that the expected magnitude of strain rate for blast loading ranges from 100 to 1000/s. However, owing to the difculty in carrying out concrete material tests at high loading rate, knowledge on concrete material property enhancement is limited to strain rates of 100/s. Moreover, during the blast loading process, a slab will experience varying strain rates. For these reasons, in the present study, a constant strain rate of 100/s is used in the analysis. This is acceptable as shown by Krauthammer and his co-authors [28] that a constant strain rate with a reasonable order of magnitude is sufcient to yield good results. 3.1. Concrete The strain rate enhancement formulae for concretes uniaxial compressive strength (s), Youngs modulus (E) and critical axial strain (e0) from the CEB [29] recommendation shown below are adopted in the present study.

The exural resistance of the structure analyzed is obtained rst by computing the momentcurvature relation of the section. Then, by considering the support conditions, the deection of the structure under uniformly distributed loading is calculated from the onset of loading to failure. The incremental procedure for obtaining the static load-deection relationship of the structural element is shown in Fig. 1. In the analysis, it was assumed that strains had a linear distribution over the beam cross section and that tensile behavior of concrete located below the neutral axis is neglected. An iterative process is utilized to satisfy the force equilibrium condition of the section. The entire procedure is repeated for incremental values of strain in tensile reinforcement until failure of the cross section is reached. Here, since ultimate failure is of concern, it implies a severe deformation of the steel bars (when reinforcement strain reached esu where esu=10 esy) or crushing of the concrete (when concrete strain reaches ecu). The section analyzed is designed according to BS 8110 [1] without considering the severe blast load. The elastic limit of the momentcurvature relation thus corresponds to the point of the rst yielding of the reinforcement. The stressstrain relationship employed for the con-

192

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

Table 1 Basic structural variables adopted (dynamically enhanced) Variable fcu Ec fy Es ecu Dimensions mass Prmax a Mean (strain rate enhanced) 84.088 MPa 38.5 GPa 594 MPa 200 GPa 0.0054 as designed 2446.5 kg/m3*Volume As recommended As recommended Enhancement factor 2.3 1.48 1.12 1 1.35 COV 0.11 0.1 0.08 Deterministic Deterministic 0.03 0.05 0.3227 0.13 Distribution Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal

rate effect on exural resistance is accounted for by the use of dynamically enhanced material strengths as discussed above. 4.2. Direct shear resistance The direct shear resistance function of RC structures is not well developed and thus is more empirical. The model used, as shown in Fig. 2, is based originally on Krauthammer et als work [5]. It consists of ve straight line segments, namely the elastic response segment OA, hardening segment AB, plastic ow segment BC, softening segment CD and nal yielding segment DE. The model was developed by modifying a few existing shear stressslip models. The elastic resistance (segment OA) is modelled by equation te given in the gure, for which the shear slip is up to 0.1 mm. The segment AB starts from a shear slip of 0.1 mm to 0.3 mm and its resistance is represented by tm as indicated in the gure. In the third segment BC, the shear strength remains a constant, and the point C corresponds to a shear slip of 0.6 mm. In actual application, Krauthammer et al. [9] did not consider the softening region, and the model used was a trilinear one. In the present study, the tri-linear model is further simplied to a bi-linear one for use in the

Fig. 1.

Flow chart of exural resistance computation.

crete material is the idealized stressstrain curve of concrete under uniaxial compression proposed by Hognestad [31]. The problems of concrete connement and possible bond slip between concrete and reinforcement are not considered. The support conditions are taken as ideal and symmetrical, where differential settlement and second order effect (P- effect) are not considered. The strain

Fig. 2.

Direct shear resistance model.

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

193

dynamic analysis (Fig. 2). The simplication is based on the justication that as long as the area under the stress displacement curve remains constant, the energy absorbed by the system would be the same, and thus the displacement calculated would be the same as well [32]. The yielding and the maximum allowable shear slip are taken as 0.1 mm and 0.6 mm, respectively as shown in Fig. 2. An enhancement factor of 2 is multiplied to the direct shear strength, as done in Krauthammer et al. [5] to account for the rapid loading rate. This factor is indeed obtained from tests by Chung [33]. In a series of push-off tests for investigating the shear strength enhancement under dynamic load, Chung [33] reported dynamic increase factors for shear strength from 1.80 to 2.02, under a stressing rate of 10,000 to 12,800 N/mm2/s.

6. Equivalent SDOF systems Two coupled SDOF systems with bilinear resistance functions are used to represent the shear and exural response mode of the slab. The rst system is used for modelling the exural response at the point of maximum displacement along the span of the structure (ie. at midspan as the loading and structure are symmetrical), and the second is for monitoring the direct shear response at the support. The SDOF system for modelling the exural response is based on Biggs [32] where the deected shape of the structure is assumed to be the same as that resulting from the static application of the dynamic load. The equivalent mass and stiffness parameters are derived based on the mass density, Youngs modulus, moment inertia, span length and boundary condition of the slab, as well as the deection shape of the slab under distributed static load. More details can be found in Biggs [32]. The accuracy of using a SDOF system to model the slab response to blast loads was proven by Krauthammer and his coauthors [5]. This simplication for exural response has been widely accepted and recommended, for instance, by the US Air Force Manual AFM 8822 [35] and US Department of Army [36]. The second SDOF system is used to model the direct shear response of the slab. Since the direct shear mode is expected to occur within a very short duration after the initiation of the explosive loading, the structure would not have any signicant deformation at that time, and because the failure plane occurs very near to the support, the phenomenon is very much like a sudden collapse of the entire beam. This implies that the shape function of the structure can be taken as unity with negligible deection. The transformation factors for the shear mass, direct shear stiffness as well as the loading are taken as unity too [11].

5. Blast loading The blast load pressure time history on a structure is usually simplied to an exponential or triangular shape as P(t)Prmaxeat or Prmax 1

t to

(8)

where Prmax is the peak reected pressure of the blast wave, a is the decaying rate for exponential representation and to the duration for triangular loading simplication. The peak reected pressure Prmax can be easily estimated by Mills [34] in the following equation. Prmax 2Pmax(710+4Pmax) KPa 710+Pmax (9)

in which Pmax is the peak pressure of the blast wave in free air. Many empirical formulae and charts are available to estimate Pmax and duration to. From a statistical analysis of eight available publications carried out by the author [17], it was found that the mean value of the peak reected pressure at various scaled distances Z=R/w1/3 (R and w are the stand-off distance in metres and equivalent TNT charge weight in kg) can be estimated by Prmax 154.67 617.19 3069.3 2 3 1.2024 kPa Z Z Z (10)

7. Performance function formulation The exponentially decaying function in Eq. (8) is selected to represent the explosive pressures time history. Upon transforming the structural slab into its equivalent exural SDOF system, the post-yielding response of the equivalent system is given by zy(KyKn) at z w 2 yzAe my (11)

and the average COV at each Z is 0.3227. The statistical analysis also revealed that the average COV of loading duration is about 0.13. From the principle of conservation of impulse, the decaying rate a is found to be related to duration to through the relation a=2/to. Since the decay rate and loading duration are inversely related, it is reasonable to assume that they share the same COV.

in which z=mid-span displacement; wy=post-yielding frequency; A=equivalent explosive force per unit mass; zy=yield displacement; Kn, Ky=pre- and post-yielding exural stiffness, and my=post-yielding mass. The motion equation of the equivalent direct shear SDOF system is

194

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

ta y 0.5KLmsz w2 (t)] 1y1/ms[0.5 PrmaxbLe

(12)

8. Assessment of the two failure modes To the authors knowledge, there is no denition yet in the available literature to dene the conditions under which the exural or direct shear failure occurs. Ross [8] has come up with failure curves that divide the peak pressurerise time diagram into two parts; for loading conditions above the failure curve, direct shear failure is expected, and for the rest of the region, exural failure or no failure can be anticipated. He compared the demand and supply of exural and direct shear strengths of the slab in each time increment. The mode in which the strength demand reaches its capacity rst is the failure mode. However, no information is given on the probability of such damage to the structure. Krauthammer et al. [5,9,16] used SDOF and Timoshenko beam theory to model the structural behavior of slabs under blast. Although their numerical results compare well with the test data, no prediction is given as to when one failure mode happens instead of the other. Fig. 3(a)(c) show the failure probabilities of the two failure modes of a one-way simply supported RC slab, of dimensions 1*3*0.17 m3 with 1% tension reinforcement and nominal top reinforcement. Detailed information of the slab used is given in Table 2. The peak reected pressure is 1.5 and 2 MPa, with varying loading duration on the horizontal axis. The results are calculated by using calrel [38] with the above two performance functions and the statistical properties of structural parameters dened in Table 1. From the gure, a few important characteristics can be observed: 1. When the peak pressure increases, failure probabilities of both modes increase at the same loading duration, as expected. 2. For a low enough peak reected pressure (Fig. 3(a)), exural failure mode dominates the whole range of loading duration considered. 3. When the peak reected pressure increases, the intermediate behavior occurs, where both modes are active within the probability of failure range of zero and one. In this case, as demonstrated in Fig. 3(b), the direct shear mode dominates in the shorter loading duration, and the exural mode is important for longer loading duration. 4. If the peak reected pressure further increases, failure is dominated solely by the direct shear mode in the loading duration range considered, as shown in Fig. 3(c). If the dominating failure probabilities for some particular values are of concern, say 0.1, 0.5 and 0.8, then the peak reected pressure and the corresponding loading duration that give these failure probabilities can be extracted, as shown in Fig. 4. In this gure, each contour

where y=shear slip at support; w1=pre-yielding direct shear stiffness; L,b=length and breadth of slab; KL=load factor, and ms=shear mass. On the right hand side is the applied shear force at the support, where the rst term is contributed by the pressure loading and the second term from the inertia force of the structure. The two SDOF systems are loosely coupled through the acceleration of the exural response that appears in the direct shear equation as inertia force. Their maximum responses can be derived as follows. z(tmax,f)C1sinwytmax,fC2coswytmax,f A t a zy(KyKn) e max,f a +w2 w2 y ymy
2

(13)

y(tmax,ds)H1sinw2tmax,dsH2cosw2tmax,ds 0.5KLz 0.5 PrmaxbL t (tmax,ds) y1(K2K1) e max,dsa 2 2 ms(a +w2) w2 w2 2 2ms

(14)

where z(tmax,f) and y(tmax,ds) are the maximum responses of the exural and direct shear modes respectively where w2=post-yielding direct shear frequency, C1, C2, H1 and H2 are constants dependent on initial conditions. The performance functions of both the exural and direct shear modes relate the maximum responses to the ultimate limits. This is done by dividing the maximum displacement reached under the blast loading by the ultimate displacement; if the value is greater than one, failure is initiated. Therefore, the performance functions of the two modes are shown as follows. gf1 zmax zu (15)

ymax gds1 y2

(16)

where zu and y2 are the ultimate displacement of the structure at the mid-span and the ultimate direct shear slip at the support corresponding to the exural and direct shear responses respectively. zu needs be calculated iteratively as indicated in the owchart given in Fig. 1. The description of the procedure for calculating zu is given in Section 4.1. The ultimate shear slip, y2, is chosen as 0.6 mm as discussed in Section 4.2. With the performance functions of both the exural and direct shear modes dened, the corresponding failure probabilities of them can be computed by the rst-order reliability method (FORM). The standard reliability method is used in the present study [37]. The numerical calculation is performed by using a computer software calrel [38].

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

195

Fig. 4.

Failure contours of 0.1, 0.5 and 0.8.

Fig. 3.

Failure probabilities of two modes.

indicates the same failure probability and here, failure probability refers to the one with the higher value of the two failure modes under that particular loading. The two modes are differentiated by their symbols in the gure. It can be seen that generally each failure contour in Fig. 4 is an exponential curve with the peak reected pressure Prmax causing failure decaying with increase of loading duration to. This indicates that the higher the peak reected pressure, the shorter the loading duration that a structure can sustain. Also, with higher peak reected pressure and shorter loading duration, which means higher loading intensity, the direct shear mode is the dominating failure mode. The exural mode dominates in the region with relatively lower peak reected pressure and longer loading duration. In order to obtain the transition between the two modes in each failure contour, more data points are computed to ensure that the difference in peak reected pressure between two consecutive points that fail by different failure modes do not exceed 0.05 MPa. A straight line can be tted through these transition points in the peak reected pressure loading duration diagram as shown in Fig. 5. The diagram can be used to predict the failure probability and

Table 2 Standard values adopted in analysis Slab parameters Slab dimensions L B h d m r Kn Ky K1 K2 zy zu y1 y2 Mean value 3m 1m 0.17 m 0.145 m 1.24*103 kg 1% 1.11*107 N/m 1.07*106 N/m 2.05*1010 N/m 2.10*109 N/m 0.027 m 0.1713 m 0.1 mm 0.6 mm COV 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 Deterministic 0.13 0.13 0.1 0.22 0.11 0.13 Deterministic Deterministic

Slabs strengths

196

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

Fig. 5.

Failure contours with failure mode transition.

failure mode for the slab with a given peak reected pressure and loading duration. 8.1. Effect of span length A series of simulations is run for slabs with different span lengths. It should be noted that in all the cases, the two shorter sides of the slabs are simply supported, and the other two sides are free. To ensure that the total force acting on the slabs under the same pressure loading is approximately the same, the area of the slab is maintained at around 10 m2. Hence, the slab width b also varies with its span length L. The actual dimensions of each slab used in the simulation are given in Table 3. Other parameters of the slab such as the thickness, effective depth and reinforcement ratio, remain the same as in Table 2. It should be noted that although the L/b ratio in some cases is less than 2.0, the slabs are designed as one-way slabs and analyzed by the beam theory described above. Since the exural rigidity of a beam depends on I/L3, in which I is the moment inertia of the cross section, increasing L and reducing b results in a smaller exural rigidity and a larger allowable deection. On the other hand, it reduces its strength capacity as the cross sectional area decreases. Hence, for slabs with the same surface area, the larger the span length is, the better is its capacity to resist blast loading in exural mode, but lower is its capacity in direct shear failure mode.
Table 3 Slabs of different span lengths L (m) 5.4 5 4.4 3.9 3.2 B (m) 1.8 2 2.2 2.6 3.2 A (m2) 9.72 10 9.68 10.14 10.24

This is demonstrated in the contour of failure probability of 0.1, corresponding to different span lengths in Fig. 6 with the failure modes differentiated by symbol. To present a clearer picture, only three span lengths studied are shown in this gure. It shows that the load resistance of the slab in the direct shear mode is higher as the span length L decreases. However, when the peak pressure is small and the dominating failure mode is exural, the reverse is true. This can be seen from the points corresponding to the peak reected pressures of 0.5 and 0.7 MPa in the gure. It is clear that the order swapped as the failure mode changed from direct shear to exural. The above observations indicate that as the slab approaches a square shape, it tends to fail in exural mode. In other words, if a structure does not fail in direct shear mode during the earlier stage when subject to an explosion, a rectangular slab stands a better chance of surviving the exural failure mode than a square one with the same surface area. Fig. 7 demonstrates the failure mode transitions for slabs with different L, with their equations shown against the transitions. As loading points above a transition is more likely to initiate a direct shear failure and the ones below in exural failure, a slab with a smaller span length has less chance of failing in direct shear mode.

Fig. 6. Failure contours of 0.1 for slabs with different span lengths.

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

197

Fig. 7.

Failure transitions of slabs with different span lengths.

It is more likely to fail in exural mode. The opposite is true for the slab with a larger span length. If the same information is tted in a three-dimensional space, as shown in Fig. 8, a function is found relating the peak reected pressure, loading duration and span length L as given below. Prmax

effects on material strengths were also accounted in the analysis. The numerical results of parametric calculation indicate that a slab tends to fail in a direct shear mode if the blast load amplitude is high but of short duration. It tends to fail in exural failure mode if load amplitude is relatively low and duration is relatively long. In addition, the span length effect of the RC slab with the same surface area has also been analyzed. Results indicate that a slab tends to fail in direct shear mode when it is relatively stiffer with a smaller span length. When it is relatively exible with a larger span length, its chance of survival of the direct shear failure mode increases. A semi-analytical boundary has been derived to predict the failure mode of a slab in terms of its span length L, surface area A, and the peak reected pressure and pressure loading duration.

L2 16.3847 107.1571to A

References (17)
[1] BS 8110: Structural use of concrete Part 1: code of practice for design and construction. Part 2: code of practice for special circumstances. London: British Standard Institution, 1985. [2] Karthaus W, Leussink JW. Dynamic loading: more than just a dynamic load factor. Proceedings of Symposium on the Interaction of Non-Nuclear Munitions With Structures, Colorado, USA, 1983:151154. [3] Veen CVD, Blaauwendraad J. Structural response of RC-members in case of impulsive loading-failure analysis in bending and shear. Proceedings of Symposium on the Interaction of NonNuclear Munitions With Structures, Colorado, USA, 1983:182 187. [4] Krauthammer T. Shallow-buried RC box-typed structures. J Struct Engng ASCE 1984;110(3):63751. [5] Krauthammer T, Bazeos N, Holmquist TJ. Modied SDOF analysis of RC box-type structures. J Struct Engng ASCE 1986;112(4):72644. [6] Yankelevsky DZ. Elastoplastic blast response of rectangular plates. Int J Impact Engng 1985;3(2):10719. [7] Gu rke G, Bu cking P. Elastoplastic response of steel plates to blast loads. Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Military Application of Bast Simulation. Federal Republic of Germany: Bad Reichenhall, 1987:382394. [8] Ross TJ. Direct shear failure in reinforced concrete beams under impulsive loading. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1983. [9] Krauthammer T, Assadi-Lamouki A, Shanaa HM. Analysis of impulsive loaded reinforced concrete structural elements. I: Theory Comput Struct 1993;48(5):85160. [10] Hyde DW. Users guide for microcomputer program conwep, application of TM5-855-1, fundamental of protective design for conventional weapons. Instruction Report SL-88-1, Structures Laboratory, US Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1992. [11] Krauthammer T, Shahriar S, Shanaa HM. Response of reinforced concrete elements to severe impulsive loads. J Struct Engng 1990;116(4):106179. [12] Luckyram J, Stewart BM, Zintilis GM. Blast loaded R.C. slabs: a binary response model for shear and exure interaction. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Structures under Shock and Impact, Portsmouth, UK, 1992:177188. [13] Crouch RS, Chrisp TM. The response of reinforced concrete slabs to non-nuclear blast loading. Proceedings of the First Inter-

where A is the surface are of the slab. Again, any point of combinations of Prmax, to and span length L at a given surface area A that is lying above the plane is expected to fail in direct shear mode, while those below in exural mode.

9. Conclusion Using two loosely coupled SDOF systems to represent the exural and direct shear failure modes, the failure probabilities of RC slabs designed to BS 8110 under blast loading have been computed by the rst-order reliability method. Statistical variations of material strengths, structural dimensions and parameters of the explosive loading were considered. Rapid strain rate

Fig. 8.

Failure contours of slabs with different span lengths.

198

H.Y. Low, H. Hao / Engineering Structures 24 (2002) 189198

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17] [18]

[19]

[20] [21]

[22] [23]

[24] [25]

national Conference on Structures Under Shock and Impact, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 1989. Kiger SA, Hyde DW, Guice LK. Flexural response of reinforced concrete structures to conventional weapons. Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Conventional Munitions With Protective Structures, Federal Republic of Germany: Manheim, 1987:N42N53. Baker WE, Spivey KH. BIGGS Simplied elasticplastic dynamic response. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Structures Under Shock and Impact, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 1989. Krauthammer T, Assadi-Lamouki A, Shanaa HM. Analysis of impulsive loaded reinforced concrete structural elements. II: Implementation. Comput Struct 1993;48(5):86171. Low HY. Reliability analysis of structures under explosive loading. Masters thesis, Nanyang Technological University, 2000. Mirza SA, Hatzinikolas M, MacGregor JG. Statistical descriptions of strength of concrete. J Struct Div ASCE 1979;105(6):102137. ACI Committee 318 building code requirements for reinforced concrete and commentary. Detroit: American Concrete Institute, 1995. Australian Standard 3600. Concrete structures. North Sydney: Standards Association of Australia, 1988. MacGregor JG, Mirza SA, Elingwood B. Statistical analysis of resistance of reinforced and prestressed concrete members. ACI J 1983;80:16776. Arafah AM. Statistics for concrete and steel quality in Saudi Arabia. Mag Concrete Res 1997;49(180):18593. Val DV, Bljuger F, Yankelevsky DZ. Reliability assessment of damaged RC framed structures. J Struct Engng 1997;123(7):88995. Mirza SA, MacGregor JG. Variability of mechanical properties of reinforcing bars. J Struct Div ASCE 1979;105:92137. Connolly JP. Construction tolerances in reinforced concrete.

[26] [27] [28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32] [33] [34]

[35] [36] [37] [38]

Research Report Submitted to ACI Committee 117: Tolerances, Auburn, Ala.: Auburn University, 1975. Mirza SA, MacGregor JG. Variations in dimensions of reinforced concrete members. J Struct Div 1979;105(ST4):75166. Bischoff PH, Perry SH. Compressive behavior of concrete at high riaux et Construct 1991;24:42550. strain rates. Mat Struct/Mate Krauthammer T. Workshop on structural concrete slabs under impulsive loads. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Structures under Shock and Impact, Spain: Madrid, 1994:99106. CEB. Concrete structures under impact and impulsive loading. Synthesis Report, Bulletin dInformation No. 187. Lausanne: Euro-International du Be ton, 1988. Comite Liu GQ, Owen DRJ. Ultimate load behavior of reinforced concrete plates and shells under dynamic transient loading. Int J Numer Meth Engng 1986;22:189208. Hognestad E. A study of combined bending and axial load in reinforced concrete members. University of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station, Bulletin Series No. 399, 1951:128. Biggs JM. Introduction to structural dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964. Chung HW. Shear strength of concrete joints under dynamic loads. J Concrete Soc 1978;12(3):279. Mills CA. The design of concrete structures to resist explosions and weapon effects. Proceedings of 1st International conference for hazard protection, Edinburgh, 1987. Structures to resist the effects of accidental explosion. Air Force Manual AFM 88-22, UNCL, 1969. Fundamentals of protective design for conventional weapons. Technical Manual TM5-855-1, US Department. Melchers RE. Structural reliability analysis and prediction. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1987. Liu PL, Lin HZ, Der Kiureghian A. calrel User Manual, Report No. UCB/SEMM-89/18, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, 1989.