Advanced SDOF Model For Steel Members Subject To Explosion Loading

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 35

FIRE AND BLAST INFORMATION GROUP

TECHNICAL NOTE

An Advanced SDOF Model for


Steel Members Subject to
Explosion Loading: Material Rate
Sensitivity

Technical Note 10

• This document is a deliverable of the Fire and Blast Information Group (FABIG)
• FABIG would like to encourage comment and feedback from its membership. If you have any
comments on this Technical Note or any other FABIG activities please address them to the FABIG
Project Manager at The Steel Construction Institute

© 2002 The Steel Construction Institute


Neither this publication nor any part thereof may be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by
any means – electronic, photocopy or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the Steel
Construction Institute. Illustrations and tables may not be copied in part or in whole.

This publication is provided for use by FABIG members and shall not be lent, re-sold, hired out or
otherwise circulated without the prior written consent of the publishers.

Although care has been taken to ensure, to the best of our knowledge, that all data and information
contained herein are accurate to the extent that they relate to either matters of fact or accepted practice or
matters of opinion at the time of publication, the Steel Construction Institute, the authors and the reviewers
assume no responsibility for any errors in or misinterpretations of such data and/or information or any loss
or damage arising from or related to their use.

This publication is supplied to the members of the Fire and Blast Information Group

The Steel Construction Institute, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7QN, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1344 636525, Fax: +44 (0) 1344 6636570
Email: [email protected], Website: www.fabig.com
May 2007
An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

FOREWORD

This Technical Note has been prepared as one of the FABIG deliverables to FABIG members.

The single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) model in this document extends the SDOF model previously
developed in FABIG Technical 7 to include strain rate effects and to provide more rational ductility
measures than those based on the rate-insensitive model.

This Technical Note was compiled by Dr Viken Chinien of the Steel Construction Institute. It is based on
the work that was carried out by Professor Bassam A Izzuddin, Professor of Computational Structural
Mechanics at Imperial College, under contract to the Steel Construction Institute.

FABIG Technical Note 10 iii


FABIG Human Factors Guide

Contents

FOREWORD v
GLOSSARY OF HUMAN FACTORS TERMS vii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. OBJECTIVE 3
3. BENEFITS FROM THE APPLICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMAN FACTORS 5
3.1 General issues 5
3.1.1 Introduction 5
3.1.2 Compliance with standards and expectations 5
3.1.3 Benefits to safety & health 5
3.1.4 Benefits to operability 5
3.2 Cost-Benefit Analysis 6
4. APPLICATION OF HUMAN FACTORS STUDIES 7
5. TOOLS AND METHODOLOGIES 11
5.1 Currently available tools and methodologies 11
5.1.1 Allocation of Function 12
5.1.2 Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) 12
5.1.3 Human Error Analysis (HEA) 14
5.1.4 Human Reliability Analysis 15
5.1.5 Link Analysis 16
5.1.6 Distributed Cognition 17
5.2 Developing approaches 17
5.3 Integration of Human Factors tools and methodologies 18

Appendix A APPLICATION AND EFFECTS OF HUMAN FACTORS ON DEVELOPMENT


STAKEHOLDERS THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT LIFECYCLE 20
Appendix B ADDITIONAL HUMAN FACTOR RELATED GUIDEWORDS TO BE USED IN
HAZOP/HAZID TYPE REVIEWS 45
Appendix C HUMAN FACTOR BENEFITS AND EXAMPLE MEASURES 54
Appendix D BIBLIOGRAPHY OF REFERENCES AND STANDARDS 62

FABIG Technical Note 9 iii


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

CONTENTS

Page
FOREWORD iii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. PROBLEM CHARACTERISTICS AND ASSUMPTIONS 3
3. FORMULATION METHOD 5
3.1 Cross-sectional Response 5
3.2 Bending Stage 6
3.3 Catenary Stage 7
4. CROSS-SECTIONAL RESPONSE 9
4.1 Major-Axis Bending 9
4.2 Minor-Axis Bending 9
5. DYNAMIC STRENGTH 11
5.1 Bending Stage 11
5.2 Catenary Stage 11
5.3 Evaluation of Model Parameters 12
6. DUCTILITY MEASURES 13
7. MODEL SOLUTION PROCEDURE 15
8. EXAMPLES AND VERIFICATION 17
8.1 Cross-section Response 17
8.2 UDL Blast loading 17
9. CONCLUSION 23
REFERENCES 25
APPENDIX A NOTATION 27
APPENDIX B FIGURES 31
APPENDIX C TABLES 37

FABIG Technical Note 10 v


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

1. INTRODUCTION as the formulation method used in developing


the new SDOF model, where consideration is
given to material rate sensitivity in accordance
This Technical Note describes an extension to a with the Cowper-Symonds model [2]. The
sophisticated SDOF model for steel members details of the overall model are then provided,
subject to explosion loading [1]. mainly in the form of parametric tables,
covering both the bending and catenary stages of
The previous model [1] accounted for: the plastic rate-sensitive member response.
i) generalised support conditions for bending Finally, several verification and application
and axial actions; and ii) the catenary effect in examples are provided, with particular emphasis
axially-restrained members, under uniformly given to the new developments, where
distributed (UDL), blast loading. However, that comparisons are made against the nonlinear
model did not incorporate material rate finite element analysis program ADAPTIC [3].
sensitivity, which has considerable influence on These examples demonstrate the calculation
the blast response of steel members. The present process involved in applying the new SDOF
work extends the previous model to deal with model, and illustrate the very good accuracy
the strain-rate effect, and to provide more which the new model achieves.
rational ductility measures than possible with
rate-insensitive modelling.

The Technical Note proceeds by providing an


overview of the problem characteristics as well

FABIG Technical Note 10 1


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

2. PROBLEM CHARACTERISTICS AND ASSUMPTIONS

A simplified SDOF model was previously The model is now extended here to account for
formulated [1] for a steel beam under dynamic the strain-rate effect, where the following
loading, where the problem characteristics were additional assumptions are made:
as follows:
• Material strain-rate sensitivity is governed by
• The member has uniform cross-sectional the Cowper-Symonds model.
properties along its length. • The cross-sectional response under a constant
• The cross-sectional response is deformation rate is elastic/perfectly plastic,
elastic/perfectly plastic (i.e. no strain with an enhanced dynamic plastic strength
hardening). that is determined from rigid/plastic theory as
a function of the deformation rate.
• The member has two end supports where
transverse displacements are restrained • The plastic curvature rate decreases rapidly
(Figure B.1). along the member away from the point of
maximum bending moment, justifying the
• Arbitrary elastic/perfectly plastic conditions
related assumption of lumped plastic-hinge
are considered for the two end supports for
rotation.
both rotational and axial deformations
(Figure B.1). • The dynamic strength of a plastic hinge
remains constant over the response duration,
• The strain-rate effect is ignored.
and is determined from a deformation rate
• The dynamic blast loading is UDL. associated with a plastic collapse mechanism
• The initial static loading is UDL. and an average displacement rate,
accounting, where appropriate, for the
• The mass is uniformly distributed along the plastic-hinge length.
member length.
• Where the static plastic capacity of a support
• Both bending and catenary actions are is less than that of the beam, the plastic hinge
considered. is completely in the support (i.e. outside the
The following assumptions were made to beam), and the corresponding dynamic
facilitate the formulation of a relatively strength is obtained directly in terms of the
uncomplicated model which should nevertheless support deformation rate.
capture the essential problem characteristics: • The shape of the plastic bending moment
diagram is governed by the blast load
• The member response under initial static configuration.
loading is elastic.
• The location of the internal plastic hinge is Full details of the notation employed throughout
governed by the blast load configuration. this work are provided in Appendix A.
• The interaction between the plastic bending
moment and axial force is linear (Figure B.2).

FABIG Technical Note 10 3


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

3. FORMULATION METHOD

This work extends the previous SDOF model [1] consideration of the plastic stress distributions
to deal with the influence of material rate under constant κ& p and ε& cp , respectively:
sensitivity on the blast response of steel
members. With the strain-rate effect defined on ⎛ ⎛ ± yκ& p ⎞
1/ n ⎞
the material level, according to the Cowper- ∫
M d = − σ d ydA = ∫ ± σ⎜1 + ⎜⎜ ⎟

⎟ydA
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠
D
Symonds model [2], its influence is first
(3): ⎠
considered on the cross-sectional response and ⎛ ⎛ κ& ⎞ ⎞⎟
1/ n
subsequently on the overall member response. = M p ⎜1 + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎜ ⎝ Dκ ⎠ ⎟⎠

3.1 Cross-sectional Response
⎛ ⎛ ε& cp ⎞
1/ n ⎞
The material response under a constant strain Fd = ∫ σ d dA = σ y ⎜1 + ⎜⎜
∫ ⎟

⎟dA
⎜ ⎟
rate ( ε& ) can be idealised, in the absence of strain ⎝ ⎝ D ⎠ ⎠
(4):
hardening, as elastic/perfectly plastic with an ⎛ ⎛ ε& cp ⎞
1/ n ⎞
enhanced dynamic yield strength (σd) = F p ⎜1 + ⎜⎜ ⎟


⎜ ⎟
(Figure B.3). According to the Cowper-Symonds ⎝ ⎝ D ⎠ ⎠
model:
where κ& p and ε& cp are considered in absolute
⎛ 1n ⎞ value, Mp and Fp are the static plastic bending
⎛ ε& ⎞
(1): σd = σ y ⎜ 1 + ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ moment and axial force capacities, respectively,
⎜ ⎝D⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ and Dκ is a rate-sensitivity parameter for plastic
bending that depends on the cross-section shape,
where n and D are material rate-sensitivity
as determined in Section 4.
parameters, and σ y is the static yield strength.
For mild steel (n = 5) and (D = 40 sec–1), though It is noted that (3) assumes that the position of
the extended SDOF model is formulated for the neutral axis is not influenced by material rate
generic n and D parameters, and is therefore also sensitivity, which is valid for bending about an
applicable to other materials provided (n ≥ 4). axis of symmetry. Although for asymmetric
cross-sections the position of the neutral axis can
The cross-sectional response under a constant vary with the plastic curvature rate, the influence
deformation rate can also be idealised as of such variation on dynamic magnification of
elastic/perfectly plastic. The enhanced dynamic the plastic moment capacity can be realistically
plastic strength can be obtained from first neglected, and hence (3) is also applicable to
relating the material strain rates to the moderately asymmetric cross-sections.
generalised cross-section plastic strain rates
(Figure B.4): Finally, the interaction between the dynamic
plastic moment and axial force is realistically
(2): ε& = ε& p = ε& cp − y κ& p assumed to have the same shape as the static
where is the centroidal axial plastic strain rate, interaction curve (Figure B.5), where the
κ& p is the plastic curvature rate, and y is the transition between full plastic bending and
plastic axial resistance is governed by:
distance of a material fibre from the reference
centroidal line. The material plastic strain rate ⎛ ε& cp < rp κ& p ⇒ M = M d
( ε& p ) is identical to ε& in the plastic range, since (5): ⎜
⎜ ε& cp = rp κ& p ⇒ M + rp F = M d
material strain hardening is ignored. ⎝
with,
The dynamic plastic moment and axial force Mp
capacities can then be determined from (6): rp =
Fp

FABIG Technical Note 10 5


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

In view of the above, the principles used for ⎛ M1 ⎞


& l ⎜ ⎟
formulating the previous rate-insensitive SDOF (8.b): M 1p < M p ⇒ θp = Θ p
1 d
⎜ M1 ⎟
model [1] remain valid, provided the static ⎝ p ⎠
cross-section capacities, Mp and Fp, are replaced
Similarly, for the plastic hinge at the right end,
by their dynamic equivalents, Md and Fd, taking
the determination of the rotation rate depends on
into account the deformation rate. whether the plastic hinge is inside the beam:

3.2 Bending Stage (9.a):


n
The dynamic moment capacities at the member ⎛ M ⎞
plastic hinges are obtained as the steady-state
M rp = M p ⇒ θ& rp = ∫ κ& rp dx = ∫ D κ ⎜⎜
⎝ Mp
− 1⎟⎟ dx

h rp h rp
solution associated with a collapse mechanism
subject to an average displacement rate. A ⎛ Mr ⎞
= Θ rp ⎜ dr , h rp ⎟
number of cases arise depending on whether the ⎜ Mp ⎟
⎝ ⎠
plastic hinge at a member end is in the beam or
or in the support (Figure B.6):
in the support, as determined by the relative
static plastic bending capacities of the support to ⎛ Mr ⎞
(9.b): M rp < M p ⇒ θ& rp = Θ rp ⎜ dr ⎟
that of the beam. The case of a plastic hinge in ⎜ Mp ⎟
⎝ ⎠
the beam at the left end but in the support at the
right end is illustrated in Figure B.6. For a given In the above expressions, h 1p , hp and h rp are the
dynamic plastic bending moment diagram, the plastic-hinge lengths corresponding to the zones
plastic-hinge lengths in the beam can be of the member over which the static plastic
determined where appropriate, and the rotation bending moment capacity (Mp) is exceeded
rate of these plastic hinges can be obtained. (Figure B.6), and therefore these depend on the
dynamic bending moment diagram as defined by
Considering first the internal plastic hinge
M 1d , Md, and M rd . Furthermore, Θ lp Θ p , and
(Figure B.6), the rotation rate is determined as
the integral of the plastic curvature rate over the Θ rp are highly nonlinear functions which
plastic-hinge length: depend on the variation of the bending moment
over the corresponding plastic-hinge length.
(7)
n With each of θ& 1p , θ& p and θ& rp related to the
⎛ M ⎞ ⎛M ⎞
θ& p = ∫ ∫
κ& p dx = D κ ⎜⎜
⎝ Mp
− 1⎟⎟ dx = Θ p ⎜⎜ d , h p ⎟⎟
⎠ ⎝ Mp ⎠
member displacement rate ( v& m ), the nonlinear
hp hp equations (7) to (9) can be solved for M 1d , Md
and M rd in terms of v& m , though an exact
For the plastic hinge at the left end, the
determination of the rotation rate depends on solution can be very demanding, if not
whether the plastic hinge is inside the beam impossible. However, good solution accuracy
(Figure B.6): can be achieved through appropriate
(8.a): simplifications, particularly with regard to
n relating the plastic-hinge lengths to the dynamic
⎛ M ⎞
M 1p = M p ⇒ θ& 1p = ∫ κ& 1p = ∫ D κ ⎜⎜
⎝ Mp
− 1 ⎟⎟ dx

bending moments. Consequently, equations (7)
to (9) can be expressed in the following general
h1 h1p
p
form:
⎛ M1 ⎞
= Θ p ⎜ 1d , h 1p ⎟
⎜M ⎟ ⎛ l ⎞
n lm
⎝ p ⎠ & l Md
(10): θp = Dθ ⎜ l − 1⎟
l
or in the support, in which case the rotation rate ⎜ Mp ⎟
is directly related to the dynamic plastic ⎝ ⎠
moment as determined by the support nm
⎛M ⎞
characteristics: (11): θ& p = Dθ ⎜ d − 1⎟
⎜ Mp ⎟
⎝ ⎠

6 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

n rm functions of the static bending and axial


⎛ Mr ⎞
(12): θ& rp = D θr ⎜ dr − 1⎟ capacities of the beam and supports.
⎜ Mp ⎟
⎝ ⎠ For a given dynamic magnification of the static
where ( D 1θ , n 1m ), ( D θ , n m ) and ( D rθ , n rm ) are bending strength, as determined in accordance
parameters that are either given (for an end with Section 3.2, the development of an axial
plastic hinge in the support) or derived (for a force during the first catenary stage leads to a
plastic hinge in the beam). reduction in the bending moments but to an
increase in the plastic-hinge lengths. This latter
With θ& 1p , θ& p and θ& rp depending on v& m increase would be associated with an increased
deformation rate, and hence, for a constant
according to the plastic collapse mechanism, the
deformation rate, as assumed by the extended
dynamic plastic moment capacities can be
SDOF model, the dynamic magnification of the
determined from (10) to (12), as presented in
static strength should be reduced in the first
Section 5.
catenary stage. However, this effect is
Finally, it should be noted that for the case considered to be negligible, and the complexities
where an end plastic hinge is in the support associated with its modelling are therefore not
( M 1p < Mp or M rp < Mp), it is possible for the justified, particularly in view of the transient
nature of the first catenary stage.
corresponding dynamic plastic bending moment
( M 1p or M rd ) to exceed the static plastic bending The transition between the first and second
moment of the beam. Although in such a case, catenary stages is defined by a dynamic axial
plastic deformation is also induced in the beam force capacity ( Fdm ), dependent on the overall
at the corresponding end, this would normally be plastic axial deformation rate ( Δ& tp ) and whether
small in comparison with the plastic deformation
the axial plastic deformation is concentrated in
induced in the support, and is therefore
any of the supports or spread over the length of
neglected in the extended rate-sensitive SDOF
the beam. Four cases can be identified as
model so as to maintain simplicity without
follows:
significant compromise to accuracy.
Fp1 < Fpr ≤ Fp ⇒ Δ& tp − rp θ& p − rpr θ& rp
3.3 Catenary Stage
n1f
With the assumed interaction between the (15.a): ⎛ Fm ⎞
= D1Δ ⎜ d1 − 1 ⎟
dynamic plastic bending moment and axial ⎜ Fp ⎟
⎝ ⎠
force, as discussed in Section 3.1, the first
catenary stage is initiated as for the rate- (15.b):
n lf
insensitive model when: ⎛ Fm ⎞
Fpl = Fpr < Fp ⇒ Δ& pt − rp θ& p = 2 DlΔ ⎜ dl − 1⎟
(13): ⎜ Fp ⎟
⎝ ⎠
(
v m = rpt − v0m = cl rpl + rp + c r rpr − v0m )
with, Fpr < Fp1 ≤ Fp ⇒ Δ& tp − rp1θ& 1p − rp θ& p
n rf
(15.c): ⎛ Fm ⎞
M lp Mp M pr = D rΔ ⎜ dr − 1 ⎟
(14): rpl = ; rp = ; rpr = ⎜ Fp ⎟
Fpl Fp Fpr ⎝ ⎠
n
where c1 and cr are weighting parameters that ⎛ m ⎞
& t = L D ⎜ Fd − 1⎟
(15.d): Fpl = Fpr = Fp ⇒ Δ
depend on the location of the internal plastic p ⎜ Fp ⎟
⎝ ⎠
hinge [1], and v 0m is the reference displacement
due to initial static loading. It is noted that,
according to (14), the plastic radii are only

FABIG Technical Note 10 7


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

where ( D 1Δ , n 1f ) and ( D rΔ , n rf ) represent axial response characteristics for the left and right
rate-sensitivity parameters for the left and right supports, and hence axial plasticity is equally
supports, respectively. shared between the two supports. Furthermore,
as for bending plasticity, the above expressions
With Δ& tp , θ& 1p , θ& p and θ& rp related to the reference assume that the localisation of axial plasticity is
related to the static rather than the dynamic
displacement rate ( v& m ), depending on the
relative axial capacities of the supports and the
plastic collapse mechanism, the dynamic plastic
beam. This is considered to be a realistic
axial capacity can be obtained from one of the
assumption, which avoids major complications
applicable equations in (15), as presented for the
without significant compromise to accuracy in
individual blast loading configurations in m
Sections 5 to 7. the determination of Fd .

It is noted that the second case represented by


(15.b) corresponds to identical plastic axial

8 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

4. CROSS-SECTIONAL RESPONSE

According to [3], the determination of the dynamic where de represents an effective distance from the
plastic bending moment capacity requires a rate- neutral axis.
sensitivity parameter (D κ) that depends on the
cross-sectional shape and the axis of bending. In Two cross-sectional configurations are
general, this can be related to the material rate- considered for the enhanced SDOF model, as
sensitivity parameter (D) by: depicted in Figure B.7, with bending about both
the major and minor axes considered for the
D
(16): D κ = I-section.
de

4.1 Major-Axis Bending


With reference to Figure B.7a, for an asymmetric I-section subject to major-axis bending, de can be
expressed as:
n
⎡ ⎛ n +1 ⎞ ⎛ n +1 ⎞ ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎛ nw − ( n + 1)δ + 1 ⎞⎛1 + δ ⎞ ⎝ n ⎠ + ⎛ nw + ( n + 1)δ + 1⎞⎛1 − δ ⎞ ⎝ n ⎠ ⎥
⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎥
d w ⎢⎝ 2n + 1 ⎠⎝ w⎠ ⎝ 2n + 1 ⎠⎝ w⎠
d = ⎢ ⎥
(17): δ ⎞⎛ δ⎞
e
2 ⎢ ⎛ ⎥
w⎜1 + ⎟⎜1 − ⎟ + 2
⎢ ⎝ w ⎠⎝ 2⎠ ⎥
⎣⎢ ⎦⎥
where,
Aw A fb − A ft
(18): w = ; δ=
A fb + A ft A fb + A ft
with ( δ ≤ w ) indicating a moderately asymmetric I-section with the neutral axis in the web.

The same expressions (17) and (18) can also be used for the out-of-plane one-way bending of a
corrugated wall section (Figure B.7b).

For a symmetric I-section subject to major-axis bending, the above expression for de simplifies to:
n
d ⎡ w ⎤
(19): d e = w ⎢1 − (2 n + 1) (w + 2) ⎥ such a cross-section being characterised with ( δ = 0 ).
2 ⎣ ⎦

4.2 Minor-Axis Bending


With reference to Figure B.7a, for an asymmetric For a symmetric I-section subject to minor-axis
I-section subject to minor-axis bending, d e can bending, the above expression for d e simplifies
be expressed as: to:
n
(20): b ⎡ 2n ⎤
n (22): d e = f ⎢ ⎥
1 ⎡ 2n ⎤ 2 ⎣ 2 n + 1⎦
de = ⎢
2 ⎣2n +1
(
β (bfb )1/ n + (1 − β) (bft )1/ n ⎥

) with bf representing the flange width
where, ( bf = bfb = b bt ).
A fb bfb
(21): β =
A fb bfb + A ft bft

FABIG Technical Note 10 9


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

5. DYNAMIC STRENGTH The parameters for the plastic hinges depend on


the static bending moment distribution in the
plastic collapse mechanism, as expressed by the
This section describes the evaluation of the non-dimensional entities ( m 1p , m rp ), the material
dynamic strength characteristics associated with rate parameter (n), and the cross-sectional rate
blast UDL, for both the bending and catenary parameter (Dκ) provided in Section 4.
stages. This covers the determination of the
dynamic plastic bending moments at the plastic Finally, the plastic-hinge rotation rates
hinges, which are generally related to the ( θ& 1p , θ& p , θ& rp ) that determine the specific values
plastic-hinge rotation rates according to of the dynamic bending strength
Table C.1 in Appendix C, as well as the overall
( M 1d , M d , M rd ), according to Table C.1 in
dynamic axial strength, which is generally
related to an equivalent plastic axial deformation Appendix C, are obtained from the reference
rate according to Table C.2 in Appendix C. The displacement rate ( v& m ) according to the plastic
evaluation of these entities for blast UDL and collapse mechanism, as given in Table C.4 in
their use in rate-sensitive dynamic analysis are Appendix C.
discussed hereafter.
5.2 Catenary Stage
5.1 Bending Stage The overall dynamic axial strength ( Fdm ) is
The bending rate-sensitivity parameters obtained from Table 2, depending on whether
( D 1θ , D θ , D rθ ) and ( n 1m , n m , n rm ), that are full axial plasticity is concentrated in the
required in Table C.1 in Appendix Cfor the supports or spread over the member, as
evaluation of the dynamic plastic bending governed by the relative values of the static axial
moments ( M 1d , M d , M rd ) at the three respective strengths ( F p1 , F p , F pr ). For this purpose, axial
plastic hinges, are provided in Table C.3 in rate parameters ( D m m
Δ ) and ( n f ) are first
Appendix C. determined, either in terms of corresponding
known entities when axial plasticity is localised
It is important to note that the dynamic bending
in the supports, or in terms of the member
strength at a support, M 1d or M rd , is determined material rate-sensitivity parameters (D) and (n)
from the provided tables only if the when axial plasticity is distributed over the
corresponding plastic hinge is in the member, as member. Finally, a local axial deformation rate
expressed by the condition on the static plastic ( Δ& mp ) is obtained in terms of the overall axial
bending moments ( M 1p = M p ) or ( M rp = M p );
deformation rate ( Δ& tp ) and the plastic-hinge
otherwise, the plastic hinge is in the support, and
rotation rates ( θ& 1p , θ& p , θ& rp ), which are in turn
the dynamic bending strength is assumed to be
given directly in terms of the corresponding determined from the reference displacement rate
plastic rotation rate. For the dynamic bending ( v& m ) according to Table C.4 in Appendix C.
strength at the internal plastic hinge, a rate
parameter (α) reflecting the material rate
sensitivity and the quadratic bending moment
distribution is also required, which is given by:
2 × 4 × ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ × 2n
α=
3 × 5 × ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ × (2 n + 1)
(23): n
(
2 n n! )2


2j
= =
j=1 2 j + 1 (2 n + 1)!

FABIG Technical Note 10 11


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

5.3 Evaluation of Model governed by the respective conditions


Parameters ( Fpl < Fpr ≤ Fp , Fpl = Fpr < Fp , Fpr < Fpl ≤ Fp ,
The following steps should be considered for Fpl = Fpr = Fp ).
evaluating the dynamic strength characteristics
of the SDOF model: Dynamic strengths.
Establish the dynamic bending and catenary
Geometric and structural properties.
strengths for a given reference displacement rate
Establish ( v& m ).
A fb , bfb , A ft , bft , A w , d w , L , M p , Fp ,
For the dynamic bending strengths, obtain the
M lp , Fpl , M rp , Fpr , D, n.
plastic-hinge rotation rates ( θ& 1p , θ& p , θ& rp ) from
For bending and/or axial plastic hinges in the Table C.4 in Appendix C, and establish the
support, ( M 1p < M p , M rp < M p , F p1 < F p and/or dynamic bending moment strengths
( M 1d , M d , M rd ) from Table C.1 in Appendix C.
F pr < F p ), establish the respective rate-
sensitivity parameters ([ D 1θ , n 1m ],[ D θr , n rm ], For the dynamic axial strength, obtain the
[ D 1Δ , n 1f ] and/or [ D rΔ , n rf ]) from the support overall axial deformation rate ( Δ& tp ) from
characteristics. Table C.4 in Appendix C, and determine the
corresponding local deformation rate ( Δ& mp ) and
Cross-sectional bending rate sensitivity.
the resulting dynamic axial strength ( Fdm ) from
Determine Dκ from (17), (19) or (20), depending
Table C.2 in Appendix C.
on the cross-section shape and axis of bending,
and establish Dκ from (16). SDOF model resistance.

Member rate sensitivity. Replace the static strengths ( M 1p , M p , M rp , F pm )


Establish the member rate-sensitivity parameters in the previously developed SDOF model [2]
for the bending and catenary response. with the above dynamic strengths
( M 1d , M d , M rd , Fdm ), and apply the model in the
For the bending response, determine [ D 1θ , n 1m ], normal way.
[ D θ , n m ] and [ D θr , n rm ] from Table C.3 in
All SDOF model parameters which depend on
Appendix C. The support parameters ([ D 1θ , n 1m ]
the static strengths ( M 1p , M p , M rp , F pm ) should
and/or [ D θr , n rm ]) are established here only if the be re-evaluated for the new dynamic values,
corresponding plastic hinge is in the member except for the plastic interaction radii ( r p1 , r p , r pr )
according to ( M 1p = M p and/or M rp = M p ); which should be kept unchanged.
otherwise, they are given in step 1.

For the catenary response, determine [ D m m


Δ , nf ]

from Table C.2 in Appendix C, depending on


whether axial plasticity is localised in one or
both support, or is spread over the member, as

12 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

6. DUCTILITY MEASURES spread over the member is excluded in the


evaluation of plastic strains.
• The range of midspan displacements v m
Plastic strains represent the most commonly considered is that following the initiation of
applied measure of ductility for steel members. full bending plasticity (i.e. following the end
In the presence of material rate sensitivity, the of the second elasto plastic stage:
plastic hinges become finite in length, where the vm ≥ vm , ep( 2 )
max ).
plastic hinge region is defined as that over which • The expressions for the plastic strains at a
the static plastic bending moment capacity is hinge are determined by the plastic extension,
exceeded under dynamic loading. Accordingly, plastic rotation, hinge length, distance to
plastic strains can be determined from extreme fibre, and a strain concentration
knowledge of the plastic rotation and extension factor that depends on the material rate
of a plastic hinge, accounting for concentration parameter n.
effects due to the variation of bending moments • The plastic hinge lengths are determined by
over the plastic hinge. An improved method is the member length and the normalised
proposed here that replaces the previous dynamic bending strengths.
approximate approach, which did not account The hinge lengths are taken to be those
for rate sensitivity. In the improved method, the associated with the bending collapse
plastic strains developed in the member can be mechanism, covering the regions over
evaluated at various stages of the response which the dynamic bending moments
according to Table C.3 in Appendix C. exceed the static yield limit. The use of
the yield instead of the plastic moment in
The following points should be considered when the evaluation of plastic-hinge lengths is
applying the table: an empirical device that allows the current
ductility model to be applied for low as
• Plastic strains are assumed to be induced in well as high displacement rates, thus
the member at its ends only if the plastic subsuming the previous rate-insensitive
moment capacities of the supports are equal ductility model.
(not less) than the static member moment The variation in the hinge lengths due to
capacity Mp, such conditions being catenary action is ignored. Allowing for
considered statically. Therefore, the table is such a variation would increase the
naturally intended for plastic-strain complexity of the procedure without a
evaluation in the member plastic hinges, and commensurate improvement in the
not for those which lie in the supports. estimation of plastic strains.
• Axial extension at a plastic hinge is The normalised dynamic bending strength
considered subject to a further static is defined as the ratio of the dynamic
condition that the axial resistance of the capacity to the member static bending
hinge exceeds the overall axial resistance moment capacity:
( F pm ). For a plastic hinge at the member
(25):
ends, the violation of this condition implies M 1d M Mr
that axial plasticity is mainly concentrated in m 1d = , m d = d , m rd = d ,
My My My
the support rather than in the member. For an
internal plastic hinge, this condition is m dt (m d )(
+ m 1d m d + m rd )
typically satisfied due to lower axial strength
of the supports. However, in rare cases it may where My is the static yield moment
be violated, and hence axial plasticity could capacity.
spread over the full length of the member, • The plastic hinge rotations are determined
though the flexibility of the supports would accounting for the overall and elastic member
normally delay the onset of full axial deformations. In evaluating these rotations,
plasticity. Due to such considerations, and the reduced plastic bending strengths should
with the intent of avoiding excessive model be based on the dynamic rather than the static
complexity, the case of full axial plasticity values:

FABIG Technical Note 10 13


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

M 1ps = M 1d − M 10 , M ps = M d − M 0 , M rps empirical use of My instead of Mp in evaluating


(27):
= M rd − M r0 the plastic-hinge lengths enables the current
model to be used for both the rate-sensitive and
• The plastic hinge extensions are directly rate-insensitive responses, though in the latter
related to the full member extension prior to case the current model predicts higher
the catenary stages, where the axial force is strain-concentrations than the previous
zero, and are related to the increments of rate-insensitive model, which adopted constant
plastic hinge rotations in the catenary stages.
strain-concentration factors of 1 and 2 for the
The proposed method for plastic strain axial and bending plastic strains, respectively.
evaluation provides a more realistic assessment
than the previous method, which ignored rate
sensitivity [1]. As mentioned before, the

14 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

7. MODEL SOLUTION PROCEDURE

The new rate-sensitive SDOF model estimates according to Section {5, 6 or 7}, as
the dynamic strength based on a constant appropriate to the blast load configuration.
displacement rate, which can be taken as the iii. Apply the previously developed SDOF model
average or maximum value from dynamic [1] with the static strengths
analysis. For typical rate-sensitive materials ( M 1p , M p , M rp , F pm ) replaced by the dynamic
based on the Cowper-Symonds model [2], the values ( M 1d , M d , M rd , Fdm ). Determine all
order of the strain rate is more significant than its
parameters of the SDOF model using the new
exact value in determining the dynamic strength. dynamic strengths, except for the plastic
This has a similar implication on the member
interaction radii ( r p1 , r p , r pr ), which remain
level, where considering a steel beam with
( n = 5 ) subject to PT load, increasing the unchanged.
m iv. Perform dynamic analysis according to the
displacement rate ( v& ) by 50% increases the
solution procedure described previously [1].
over-strength by only 7%. Therefore, if the
m v. Estimate the new displacement rate ( v& m ),
dynamic strength at v& is, say, 1.25 times the
and repeat from step (ii) if it is significantly
static strength, the dynamic strength at 1.5 v& m is different from the previously assumed value.
changed to only 1.267 times that the static With regard to step (iv), it was previously
capacity, an overall change of only 1.4%. Given suggested that conservation of kinetic energy
this fact, it is only necessary to estimate the may be used to adjust the velocity at the
displacement rate, either from an expectation of transition between two adjacent resistance
the maximum displacement over the duration of stages. This normally leads to over-conservative
the blast, or from a prior rate-insensitive results, and should therefore be used only as a
analysis. means for bracketing the maximum displacement
response. The alternative approach is to consider
The following procedure describes the steps the reference velocity to be continuous over the
involved in the application of the proposed full range of the response, and is the one used in
rate-sensitive SDOF model: the verification examples of the following
section.
i. Estimate the displacement rate ( v& m ), either
from a prior rate-insensitive analysis or from
a rule of thumb (e.g. v& m = L/[20 × (blast
duration)])).
ii. Determine the dynamic bending strengths
( M 1d , M d , M rd , Fdm ) corresponding to v& m ,

FABIG Technical Note 10 15


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

8. EXAMPLES AND VERIFICATION

The enhancement of the previous SDOF model 8.2 UDL Blast loading
[1] to account for material rate-sensitivity is
Two examples are provided here to verify the
verified here through comparisons with the
rate-sensitive dynamic response for UDL blast
nonlinear finite element analysis program
loading, where comparisons are made against
ADAPTIC [3]. With the details of determining
ADAPTIC [3]. The UB of Section 10.1 is used,
the SDOF model characteristics in terms of the
and the member length L is taken as 5 m. The
static bending and axial strengths discussed in
beam is assumed to have a uniformly distributed
previous Technical Note [1], focus is given here
mass with a total value mL of 104 kg, and is
to the determination of the dynamic bending and
subjected to a triangular loading pulse with a
axial strengths, which then simply replace the
rise time and duration of 10 msec and 100 msec,
corresponding static strengths in the original
respectively, where the peak value of the total
SDOF models. Several dynamic analysis
load Pmax is varied for the particular problem.
examples are provided for a beam under
Two sets of support conditions, used previously
different boundary conditions and subject to
for verifying the original rate-insensitive model
UDL blast loading.
[1], are considered hereafter. It is noted that in
8.1 Cross-section Response all cases, no adjustment is made to the reference
velocity at the transition between different
In the following examples, a Grade 50 resistance stages (Section 9).
UB 356 × 171 × 57 is used for which the
following properties apply: Support conditions: set (3)
This case ignores the catenary stage. The
Flanges :172.1 × 13mm 2 , Web :332.6 × 8 mm 2 support boundary conditions are as follows:
EI = 3.3223 × 107 N.m 2 , EA = 1.4984 × 109 N
K lm = 7.9734 × 107 N.m , K m
r
= 1.9934 × 107 N.m
M p = 3.5303 × 10 N.m,
5
Fp = 2.5331 × 10 N
6
M lp = 1.7652 × 105 N.m, M pr = 3.5303 × 105 N.m
−1
D = 40sec , n=5
leading to the intermediate parameters:
Considering bending about the major axis, and
k lm = 12 , k rm = 3
taking dw as the centre-to-centre distance
between the flanges (dw = 03456 m), de and Dκ Considering first the rate-insensitive response,
are determined from (19) and (16) as: generic bending case B2 is applicable, where the
resulting response characteristics are shown in
d e = 0.1555 m, D κ = 257.2 m−1s ec−1 Table 8.1.

The above values of de and Dκ are used for the


following examples.

FABIG Technical Note 10 17


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table 8.1 Rate-insensitive response parameters for set (3) support conditions
Elastic Elasto-plastic(1) Elasto-plastic(2) Plastic
k ( N / m) 5.1030 × 10 7
2.9160 × 10 7
4.4374 × 10 6 0
R max ( N) 4.2364 × 10 5 8.9435 × 105 9.8849 × 10 5 9.8849 × 10 5
vm
max ( m) 8.3017 × 10 −3 2.4444 × 10 −2 4.5660 × 10 −2 -

K LM 0.7760 0.7850 0.6623 0.6667


0.350 R + L 0.1264 R + L
0.4139 R + L 0.125 P + L
V l ( N) 0.0875 P + L 0.1236P + L
0.1277 P 3.3528 × 105
4.4129 × 104 2.1182 × 105
0.4507 R + L 0.6089 R + L
0.3592 R + L 0.125 P + L
V r ( N) 0.1118 P − L 0.1411P − L
0.0991P 4.0599 × 105
4.4129 × 104 2.1182 × 105

Under a peak total load Pmax of 2 × 106 N, the Re-applying the SDOF model with
rate-insensitive response is depicted in ( M 1p , M p , M rp ) replaced by ( M 1d , M d , M rd ),
Figure B.8, where very good comparison is generic bending case B2 is still applicable, and
observed against the results of ADAPTIC. The the rate-sensitive response characteristics
average displacement rate up to the peak obtained are shown in Table 8.2.
deflection is around 4 m/sec, but allowing for a
reduction in the response due to high strain-rate, Using the modified SDOF model characteristics,
a reduced value ( v& m = 2 m/sec) is assumed next the predicted rate-sensitive response is shown in
for the rate-sensitive response. Figure B.8, where excellent comparison is
obtained against the results of ADAPTIC, with
With ( M 1p < M p ), the left plastic hinge is in the rate sensitivity shown to lead to over 50%
support, and hence the corresponding reduction in the maximum achieved
rate-sensitivity parameters are assumed to be displacement. Favourable comparison is also
given as: demonstrated for the reactions in Figure B.9, with
the small discrepancies attributed to high
Dlθ = 53.58sec−1 , n lm = 6 frequency components that are not typically
reflected by a SDOF model.
Considering Table C.3 in Appendix C for the
remaining plastic hinges, the following The plastic strains are evaluated for the plastic
parameters are obtained: hinges within the member, at midspan and at the
right end, according to Table C.7 in Appendix C,
α = 0.3694 where the following intermediate parameters are
m lp = 0.5, m pr = 1.0 obtained:
Dθ = 360.0sec −1 , Dθr = 28.91sec−1
M y = 3.1323 × 105 N.m, y = 0.1793m
n m = 5.5, r
nm =6
m ld = 0.8432, md = 1.5481
which in combination with Table C.4 and
m dr = 1.7469, mdt = 2.8070
Table C.1 in Appendix C, leads to the dynamic
bending strengths: In the range of displacements relevant to this

θ& 1p = 0. 8 sec −1 M1d = 2. 641 × 10 N. m


5
(
example v m ∈ v m [
, ep ( 2 )
max ])
→ r pt , the plastic
strains are obtained as shown in
θ& p = 1. 6 sec −1 M d = 4. 849 × 10 5 N. m Table 8.3.
θ& rp = 0. 8 sec −1 M rd = 5. 472 × 10 5 N. m

18 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table 8.2 Rate-sensitive response parameters for set (3) support conditions
Elastic Elasto-plastic(1) Elasto-plastic(2) Plastic
k ( N / m) 5.1030 × 107
2.9160 × 10 7
4.4374 × 10 6 0
R max ( N) 6.3386 × 105 1.2457 × 106 1.4249 × 106 1.4249 × 106
vm
max ( m) 1.2421 × 10−2 3.3405 × 10−2 7.3776 × 10−2 -

K LM 0.7760 0.7850 0.6623 0.6667


0.350 R + L 0.1264 R + L
0.4139 R + L 0.125 P + L
V l ( N) 0.0875 P + L 0.1236 P + L
0.1277 P 4.7771 × 105
6.6027 × 104 2.9960 × 105
0.4507 R + L 0.6089 R + L
0.3592 R + L 0.125 P + L
V r ( N) 0.1118 P − L 0.1411P − L
0.0991P 5.9095 × 105
6.6027 × 104 2.9960 × 105

Table 8.3 Plastic strains for set (3) support conditions


Internal plastic hinge Right plastic hinge
Plastic-hinge rotation (rad)
θp , θrp −0.02532 + 0.8 v m −0.02951 + 0.4 v m
Plastic-hinge extension (m)
Δ p , Δ pr 0.22857 (v m ) 2 0.11429 (v m ) 2
Plastic-hinge length (m)
h p , h pr 2.2023 0.3257

Plastic strain −0.00558 + 0.17631v m + L −0.09748 + 1.3214 v m + L


εp , εpr 0.28096 (v m ) 2 2.1056 (v m ) 2

The following table compares the maximum leads to lower strain concentrations. It should
plastic strains from the new model with those also be noted that much lower plastic strains
predicted by ADAPTIC at a specific would be achieved if a small amount of material
displacement (vm = 0.1768 m): strain hardening is included, though this was
outside the scope of the current SDOF model
Internal Right plastic development. Considering a bi-linear stress-
plastic hinge hinge
Plastic strain strain model for steel with a post-yield strain-
(SDOF model) hardening slope of 2% of the elastic modulus
0.03436 0.20187
εp , εpr (E), much reduced plastic strains are achieved
Plastic strain
with ADAPTIC at a maximum displacement
(ADAPTIC) (vm = 0.1483 m); these strains compare as
0.03146 0.14466
εp , εpr follows with the predictions of the SDOF model:

Internal Right plastic


Reasonable comparison is observed in the above plastic hinge hinge
table between the plastic-strain predictions of Plastic strain
the SDOF model and those of ADAPTIC. The (SDOF model) 0.02675 0.14478
discrepancy in the large plastic strain at the right εp , εpr
support is mainly attributed to the use of a 3- Plastic strain
parameter rate-sensitive material model Error! (ADAPTIC) 0.02152 0.04629
Reference source not found. in ADAPTIC, εp , εpr
which provides a very good overall fit of the
Cowper-Symonds model, but which typically

FABIG Technical Note 10 19


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Δ = D Δ = 50 m / sec, n f = n f = 5
Dm
Clearly, therefore, a more realistic assessment of l m l
plastic strains with the SDOF model requires its
further extension to account for material strain Noting that the bending-rate parameters for the
hardening. support plastic hinges are not required, since
their static bending strengths are zero, the
Support conditions: set (4) parameters associated with the internal plastic
This case accounts for the catenary response, hinge are obtained from Table C.3 in
where the following rotational and axial support Appendix C as:
stiffnesses are assumed:
α = 0.3694
K lm = K rm = 0 N.m , M lp = M rp = 0 N.m m lp = 0, m rp = 0
K lf = 1.4984 × 108 N / m , K fr = 1.4984 × 108 N / m D θ = 475.0sec −1 , n m = 5.5
Fpl = 1.2666 × 106 N , Fpr = 2.5331 × 106 N which in combination with Table C.4, C.1 and
C.2 (Appendix C) leads to the following
dynamic strengths:
leading to the following intermediate
parameters:
θ& p = 3. 2 sec −1 M1d = M rd = 0 N. m
k lm = k m
r
=0 , rpl = rpr = 0 m Δ& tp = 1. 1815m / sec M d = 4. 9526 × 10 5 N. m
rp = rpt = 0.13937 m , K fe = 5.9937 × 107 N / m Δ& mp = 0. 7355m / sec Fdm = 1. 8112 × 10 6 N

Fpm = 1.2666 × 106 N , d m


p = 0.45969 m
Re-applying the SDOF model with
Considering first the rate-insensitive response, ( M 1p , M p , M rp , F pm ) replaced by
generic bending case B3 is applicable, where the ( M 1d , M d , M rd , Fdm ), generic bending case B3 is
last two elasto-plastic bending stages are ignored
still applicable, and d m
p is recalculated as:
since the corresponding support rotational
stiffnesses are zero. The resulting response
characteristics, accounting for the bending and dm
p =0.54971 m

catenary stages with the nonlinear catenary The resulting SDOF response characteristics are
model, are obtained as shown in Table 8.4. shown in Table 8.5.

The beam is analysed with the SDOF model, for Using the modified SDOF model characteristics,
a peak load Pmax of 2 × 106 N, where the the predicted rate-sensitive response is shown in
predicted rate-insensitive response is compared Figure B.10, where good comparison is obtained
favourably to the ADAPTIC results in against the results of ADAPTIC, again
Figure B.10. The average displacement rate up demonstrating the significance of the strain-rate
to the peak deflection is around 6 m / sec, but effect. Favourable comparison is also shown for
allowing for a reduction in the response due to the reactions in Figure B.11, where the small
high strain-rate, a reduced value ( v& m = 4 m/sec) discrepancies are again attributed to high
is assumed for the rate-sensitive response. frequency components that are not typically
reflected by a SDOF model.
With ( Fpl < Fpr = Fp ), full axial plasticity is
concentrated in the left support, for which the
rate-sensitivity parameters are assumed to be
given, leading to the following axial parameters
according to Table C.2 in Appendix C:

20 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table 8.4 Rate-insensitive response parameters for set (4) support conditions

Elastic Plastic Catenary (1) Catenary (2)


k (N / m)
2. 0412 × 10 7 0 3. 8360 × 10 7 ( v m − 0. 13937 ) 2 2. 0265 × 10 6
k s (N / m)
R max ( N ) 5. 6485 × 10 5 5. 6485 × 10 5 1. 0306 × 10 6 -
vm
max ( m ) 2. 7673 × 10 −2 0. 13937 0. 36921 -
K LM 0. 7873 0. 6667 0. 6667 0. 6667
0.4065 R + L 0.1250 P + L 0.3750 R + L 0.3750 R + L
V l & Vr ( N ) 0.0935 P 2.1182 × 105 0.1250 P 0.1250 P

Table 8.5 Rate sensitive response parameters for set (4) support conditions
Elastic Plastic Catenary (1) Catenary (2)
k (N / m)
2. 0412 × 10 7 0 3.8360 × 10 7 ( v m − 0.13937 ) 2 2.8979 × 106
k s (N / m)
R max ( N ) 7.9242 × 105 7.9242 × 105 1.5889 × 106 -

vm
max ( m ) 3.8822 × 10−2 0.13937 0.41423 -

K LM 0.7873 0.6667 0.6667 0.6667


0.4065 R + L 0.1250 P + L 0.3750 R + L 0.3750 R + L
V l & Vr ( N )
0.0935 P 2.9716 × 105 0.1250 P 0.1250 P

FABIG Technical Note 10 21


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

9. CONCLUSION

This Technical Note presents the second-stage minor axis, and for a corrugated wall section.
extension of a recently developed SDOF model Subsequently, the implications of material rate
[1] for steel members subject to explosion sensitivity are addressed on a member level,
loading, which was shown to provide significant where the dynamic strengths are established for
improvements over other existing models. The both the bending and catenary stages in terms of
proposed model [1] considered i) general the reference displacement rate.
support conditions both in terms of flexibility
and strength, and ii) catenary action resulting The application of the extended SDOF model is
from axial restraint at the supports, under illustrated through an example, where
uniformly distributed (UDL), blast loading. comparison is made against the predictions of
However, the model neglected the effect of the nonlinear finite element analysis program
material rate-sensitivity, which is very important ADAPTIC [3]. In general, it is shown that the
for steel members subject to blast loading. The proposed model provides very good accuracy in
aim of this second-stage of model extension is to comparison with ADAPTIC, and demonstrates
address this shortcoming, and to provide more that the strain-rate effect for steel members
rational ductility measures than provided with subject to blast can reduce the maximum
the previous rate-insensitive model. deflection by well over 50%. Importantly, the
model enhancement and accuracy are achieved
This Technical Note presents an overview of the through a reasonably simple formulation, which
problem characteristics, and outlines the is very well suited for practical application.
formulation method employed in developing the
advanced SDOF model for dealing with material Finally, through the major enhancements
rate sensitivity. Firstly, the strain-rate effect is incorporated in the proposed SDOF model, a
dealt with on a cross-sectional level, where more realistic assessment of steel members
relevant parameters are established for a general subject to explosion loading is now possible
I-section, subject to bending about the major or using simplified analysis, and accounting for the
important effect of the strain-rate.

FABIG Technical Note 10 23


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

REFERENCES

[1] FABIG Technical Note 7, SCI, 2002.

[2] Interim Guidance Notes for the design and protection of topside structures against explosion and
fire, SCI, 1992.

[3] B.A. Izzuddin, 1991, ‘Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Framed Structures’, PhD Thesis,
Department of Civil Engineering, Imperial College, University of London.

FABIG Technical Note 10 25


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

APPENDIX A NOTATION

A fb : Bottom flange area for I-section. Δt : Total extension over the member
and supports.
A ft : Top flange area for I-section. Elastic axial rigidity of beam.
EA :
Aw : Web area for I-section. EI : Elastic bending rigidity of beam.

α: Member rate parameter for UDL ε& : Strain rate.


blast. ε& cp : Centroidal plastic strain rate.
bfb : Bottom flange width for I-section.
εp : Extreme fibre plastic strain at
internal hinge.
bft : Top flange width for I-section.
ε& p : Plastic strain rate.
de : Effective distance from neutral axis
for the cross-section rate-sensitive ε lp : Extreme fibre plastic strain at left
response. support.

dm
p :
Catenary extension entity. ε rp : Extreme fibre plastic strain at right
support.
dw : Web depth (centre-to-centre of F: Axial force.
flanges).
Fd : Dynamic plastic axial force
D: Material rate parameter. capacity of beam.
Dκ : Cross-sectional bending rate Overall dynamic plastic axial
parameter. Fdm :
capacity.
DlΔ : Axial rate parameter for left Fp : Static plastic axial force capacity
support plastic hinge. of beam.
Dm Overall member axial rate Static plastic axial force capacity
Δ : Fpl :
parameter. of left support (≤ Fp).
D rΔ : Axial rate parameter for right Overall static plastic axial capacity
support plastic hinge. Fpm :
(minimum of Fpl , Fp and Fpr ).
Dθ : Bending member rate parameter
for internal plastic hinge. Fpr : Static plastic axial force capacity
Bending rate parameter for left of right support (≤ Fp ).
Dlθ :
plastic hinge. Internal plastic hinge length.
hp :
Dθr : Bending rate parameter for right
plastic hinge. h lp : Plastic hinge length at left support.
Δp : Plastic extension at internal hinge.
Plastic hinge length at right
h rp :
support.
Δlp : Plastic extension at left hinge.
k: Stiffness of piecewise linear
Δ& m
p : Local axial extension rate. response segment.

k lm : Normalised elastic rotational


Δrp : Plastic extension at right hinge. stiffness of left support
( K lm /(EI / L) ).
Δtp : Total plastic extension over the
member and supports. Normalised elastic rotational
k rm :
stiffness of right support
Δ& pt : Total plastic extension rate over
the member and supports. ( K rm /(EI / L) ).

FABIG Technical Note 10 27


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

ks : Secant stiffness for nonlinear Md : Dynamic plastic bending moment


catenary model. capacity of beam.

K ef : Overall elastic axial stiffness Mp : Static plastic bending moment


(depends on EA/L, K lf and K fr ). capacity of beam.
M ps : Reduced bending moment capacity
K lf : Elastic axial stiffness of left
support. of beam ( M p − M 0 ).

K fr : Elastic axial stiffness of right M lp : Static plastic bending moment


support. capacity of left support (≤ M p ).
K LM : Load-mass transformation factor
M lps : Reduced bending moment capacity
associated with uniformly
distributed mass. of left support ( M lp − M l0 ).

K lm : Elastic rotational stiffness of left Static plastic bending moment


M rp :
support. capacity of right support (≤ M p ).
K rm : Elastic rotational stiffness of right
support. M rps : Reduced bending moment capacity
of right support ( M rp − M 0r ).
κ& p : Plastic curvature rate.
My : Static yield moment capacity of
L: Length of beam.
beam ( M p / s ).
m: Uniformly distributed mass per
unit length. n: Material rate parameter.

md : Normalised dynamic plastic n lf : Axial rate parameter for left


moment capacity of internal hinge support plastic hinge.
( M d / M p ). n fm : Overall member axial rate
parameter.
m ld : Normalised dynamic plastic
moment capacity of left support n fr : Axial rate parameter for right
support plastic hinge.
( M ld / M p ).
nm : Member bending rate parameter for
m dr : Normalised dynamic plastic internal plastic hinge.
moment capacity of left support
n lm : Bending rate parameter for left
( M dr / M p ). plastic hinge.

m dt : Normalised dynamic plastic n rm : Bending rate parameter for right


moment entity for UDL blast. plastic hinge.

m lp : Normalised static plastic moment P0 : Initial static load.


capacity of left support
Pmax : Peak value of total load.
( M lp / M p ).

Normalised static plastic moment θp : Plastic rotation at internal hinge.


m rp :
capacity of right support
θ& p : Plastic rotation rate at internal
( M rp / M p ). hinge.
M: Bending moment. θ lp : Plastic rotation at left hinge.

M0: Internal bending moment due to


initial static load. θ& lp : Plastic rotation rate at left hinge.

M l0 : Left support bending moment due θ rp : Plastic rotation at right hinge.


to initial static loading.

M 0r : Right support bending moment due θ& rp : Plastic rotation rate at right hinge.
to initial static loading.

28 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

rp : Plastic interaction radius for beam vm ,ep ( 2 )


: Maximum reference displacement
max
( M p / Fp ). at the end of the final elasto-plastic
stage.
rpl : Plastic interaction radius for left
V0l : Reaction at left support due to
support ( M lp / Fpl ). initial static loading.
Plastic interaction radius for right V0r : Reaction at right support due to
rpr :
initial static loading.
support ( M rp / Fpr ).
Vl : Reaction at left support beyond
rpt : Overall plastic interaction radius.
initial static value ( Vsl + Vdl ).
R: Static resistance beyond Vr : Reaction at right support beyond
requirement of initial static load. initial static value ( Vsr + Vdr ).
R max : Resistance limit for piecewise
response segment. Vsl : Quasi-static reaction at left support
beyond initial static value.
s: Section shape factor ( Sx / Z x ).
Vsr : Quasi-static reaction at right
Sx : Section plastic modulus. support beyond initial static value.

Vdl : Dynamic reaction component at


σd : Dynamic yield strength. left support beyond initial static
value.
σy : Static yield strength.
Vdr : Dynamic reaction component at
t: Time. right support beyond initial static
value.
vm : Reference transverse displacement
beyond initial static value. x PT : Location of internal bending hinge,
expressed as an x-coordinate.
v& m : Reference displacement rate.
y: Distance of material fibre from
v 0m : Reference transverse displacement centroidal reference axis; refers to
due to initial static loading. extreme fibre for plastic-strain
Reference displacement limit for evaluation.
vm
max :
piecewise response segment. Zx : Section elastic modulus.

FABIG Technical Note 10 29


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

APPENDIX B FIGURES

K lf , Fpl K fr , Fpr
K lm , M lp K rm , M rp

EA, Fp
EI, M p

L/2 L/2

Figure B.1 Geometric configuration, boundary conditions and loading configurations

M lp , M p , M rp

Fpl , Fp , Fpr F

Figure B.2 Plastic interaction between axial force and bending moment

FABIG Technical Note 10 31


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

σ σd
dynamic yield strength
σd overstress
( σd − σ y )
σy σy
static yield strength

ε ε
(a) Stress/strain relationship (b) Overstress/strain-rate relationship

Figure B.3 Material response under constant strain rate

σd σ y

κp
y
ε cp

σ y σd

Figure B.4 Cross-sectional plastic stress distribution

M
εcp < rp κp
Md

Mp εcp = rp κp

Mp
rp =
Fp

Fp F

Figure B.5 Rate-sensitive interaction between plastic bending moment and axial force

32 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

θlp θ rp

θp
(a) Plastic-hinge rotation rates

Md

Mp

M rp < M p

(b) Bending moment diagram M dr


Mlp = Mp
M ld
κp

h lp

hp

(c) Plastic curvature rates

κ lp

Figure B.6 Rotation and curvature rates in plastic bending response

b ft

A ft

Aw
A ft Aw
dw dw A fb
A fb

b bf

(a) Asymmetric I-section (b) Corrugated wall section

Figure B.7 Cross-sectional configurations

FABIG Technical Note 10 33


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

0.50
ADAPTIC: no strain-rate SDOF model: no strain-rate

ADAPTIC: strain-rate SDOF: strain-rate


0.40
Displacement (m)

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Time (sec)
Figure B.8 Dynamic response for UDL blast loading: set (3) support conditions

1000
ADAPTIC: left SDOF model: left
800 ADAPTIC: right SDOF model: right

600
Reaction (kN)

400

200

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
-200
Time (sec)
-400

-600

Figure B.9 Rate-sensitive reactions for UDL blast loading: set (3) support conditions

34 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

0.70 ADAPTIC: no strain-rate SDOF model: no strain-rate

ADAPTIC: strain-rate SDOF: strain-rate


0.60
Displacement (m)

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Time (sec)
Figure B.10 Dynamic response for UDL blast loading: set (4) support conditions

800

600

400
Reaction (kN)

200
Time (sec)
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
-200

ADAPTIC: left/right
-400
SDOF model: left/right
-600

-800

Figure B.11 Rate-sensitive reactions for UDL blast loading: set (4) support conditions

FABIG Technical Note 10 35


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

APPENDIX C TABLES

Table C.1 Dynamic bending strengths

Left plastic hinge Internal plastic hinge Right plastic hinge


M ld Md M dr

⎛ ⎛ &l 1/ n lm
⎞ ⎞ ⎛ ⎛ θ& 1/ n m ⎞ ⎛ ⎛ &r ⎞
1/ n rm ⎞
⎜ ⎜ θp ⎟ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ θp ⎟
⎟ ⎜
Mp 1 + ⎜
p
⎟ ⎟ ⎟
M lp ⎜1 + ⎜ l ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎜D ⎟ ⎟
M rp ⎜1 + ⎜ r ⎟ ⎟
⎜ ⎝ Dθ ⎠ ⎟ ⎜ ⎝ θ ⎠ ⎟ ⎜ ⎝ Dθ ⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠

Table C.2 Overall dynamic axial strenght

Location of axial Left support Both supports Right support Member


plasticity Fpl < Fpr ≤ Fp Fpl = Fpr < Fp Fpr < Fpl ≤ Fp Fpl = Fpr = Fp

Rate parameter
DlΔ 2 DlΔ D rΔ DL
Dm
Δ

Power parameter
n lf n lf n fr n
n fm

Local axial rate


Δ& pt − rp θ& p − rpr θ& pr Δ& pt − rp θ& p Δ& pt − rpl θ& lp − rp θ& p Δ& pt
Δ& m p

⎛ ⎛ &m 1/ n fm
⎞ ⎞
Axial strength ⎜ Δp ⎟
Fpm ⎜ 1 + ⎜ m ⎟ ⎟
⎜ ⎜⎝ D Δ ⎟
Fdm
⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠

FABIG Technical Note 10 37


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table C.3 Bending rate-sensitivity parameters (UDL)

Left plastic hinge Internal plastic hinge Right plastic hinge


(Condition: M lp = Mp ) (Condition: M rp = M p )

Rate parameter Dκ L 2 α Dκ L Dκ L
Dlθ , Dθ , Dθr (n + 1) (
1.172 m rp + 6.828 ) m lp + m pr + 2 + 2 (m lp + 1) (m pr + 1) (
(n + 1) 1.172 mlp + 6.828 )
Power parameter 1
n +1 n+ n +1
n lm , n m , n rm 2

Table C.4 Plastic deformation rates (UDL)

Left hinge rotation Internal hinge rotation Right hinge rotation Axial deformation
θ& lp θ& p θ& rp Δ& pt

⎛ d m ⎞ 4 v& m
2 v& m 4 v& m 2 v& m ⎜ rpt + p ⎟
L L L ⎜ 2 ⎟ L
⎝ ⎠

38 FABIG Technical Note 10


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table C.5 Effect of initial static loads on end moments and reaction forces

Entity Initial bending moment Initial bending moment Initial reaction Initial reaction
Static load M l0 M 0r V0l V0r

P0 L ⎡ k lm (k rm + 6) ⎤ P0 L ⎡ k rm (k lm + 6) ⎤ P0 ⎡ k lm k rm + 5 k lm + 3 k rm + 12 ⎤ P0 ⎡ k lm k rm + 3 k lm + 5 k rm + 12 ⎤
UDL ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
12 ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k lm + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦ 12 ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k lm + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦ 2 ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k lm + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦ 2 ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k lm + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦

Table C.6 Effect of initial static loads on midspan bending moment and reference displacement (UDL)

Entity Initial bending moment Initial displacement


Static load M0 v 0m

P0 L ⎡ k lm k rm + 6 k lm + 6 k rm + 36 ⎤ P0 L3 ⎡ k lm k rm + 8 k lm + 8 k rm + 60 ⎤
UDL ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
24 ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k lm + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦ 384 EI ⎢⎣ k lm k rm + 4 k m + 4 k rm + 12 ⎥⎦
l

FABIG Technical Note 10 39


An Advanced SDOF Model for Steel Members Subject to Explosion Loading: Material Rate Sensitivity

Table C.7 Approximation of plastic strains at hinge locations (UDL)

Range v m Left plastic hinge Internal plastic hinge Right plastic hinge

Plastic strain ⎛ Δ lp + y θlp ⎞ 1 ⎛ Δ p + y θp ⎞ ⎛ Δ rp + y θpr ⎞


[v m ,ep( 2)
→[ ( )⎜
n + 1 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ( ) ⎜⎜
n + 1 ⎟
εlp , ε p , ε pr max
h lp ⎟ α ⎜⎝ hp ⎟
⎠ h rp ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ (md + md ) + md − L ⎜ (md + md ) + md − L
l t r t
⎟ ⎟
(m )
2
Plastic-hinge length ⎜ ⎟ − 1 + mdt − (mdl + 1)(mdr + 1) ⎜ ⎟
→[ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
[v m
( ) ( )
,ep( 2) 2 d 2
h lp , h p , h pr max
⎜ md + 1 + md − (md − 1)(m d − 1) ⎟
t l r 2L ⎜ md + 1 + md − (md − 1)(m d − 1) ⎟
t l r
⎝ ⎠ (m d + m dl ) + (md + mdr ) + 2mdt ⎝ ⎠
L L
(m d + md ) + (md + md ) + 2 md
l r t
(m d + md ) + (m d + m d ) + 2 md
l r t

⎧⎪ ⎫⎪ 2 v m ⎧⎪ 7 k rm + 48 r ⎫⎪ 2 v m
Plastic-hinge rotation
θlp , θp , θpr [v m ,ep( 2)
max →[
L
⎨6 M ps −
7 k lm + 48 l
M ps + M rps ⎬ +
L
{− 10 M ps + M lps + M rps + } 4 vm L
⎨6 M ps + M ps −
l
M ps ⎬ +
48 EI ⎪⎩ k lm ⎪⎭ L 24 EI L 48 EI ⎪⎩ k rm ⎪⎭ L
Static condition [v m ,ep( 2)
max →[ M lp = M p - M rp = M p

rp ( v m + v 0m ) 2 2 rp ( v m + v 0m ) 2 rp ( v m + v 0m ) 2
m ,ep ( 2)
[ v max → rpt − v 0m ]
Plastic-hinge extension rpt L rpt L rpt L
Δ lp , Δ p , Δ pr
rp (2 v m + 2v 0m − rpt ) 2 rp (2 v m + 2 v 0m − rpt ) rp (2 v m + 2v 0m − rpt )
[rpt − v 0m → [
L L L
Static condition [v m ,ep( 2)
max →[ M lp = M p & Fpl > Fpm Fp > Fpm M rp = M p & Fpr > Fpm

40 FABIG Technical Note 10

You might also like