Engineering MECHANICS, Vol. 21, 2014, No. 1, p.

11–18 11

BLAST LOAD OF BUILDING STRUCTURE

Daniel Makovička*, Daniel Makovička**

The paper follows from the theory of explosion and interaction of an impact wave
formed by the explosion and a structure. As a rule, a number of simplifying as-
sumptions must be applied as regards the characteristics of the explosion and of the
threatened structure to analyze the structure. An example of dynamic analysis of
a new reinforced concrete structure, loaded with a blast wave was used to apply the
principles of simplified engineering analysis of an explosion-loaded structure. The way
of structure failure was analyzed based on time courses of calculated internal forces
and displacements of individual structure elements. The criteria of structural ele-
ments failure due to explosion load effects were determined as a part of the dynamic
structure response assessment.
Keywords : explosion, blast wave, building, dynamic response, assessment

1. Introduction
When a small charge explodes in the external space of a building, a pressure wave is
formed by the explosion that applies a load on the surrounding building. The blast wave
starts propagate from the point of explosion approximately in spherical wave fronts, and
upon hitting the surface of a building structure (walls, ceilings, floors, equipment, etc.) or
terrain, the wave front is reflected and modified. If the blasting charge explodes in an open
area, the action of the pressure of the shock wave on a barrier depends on how the structure
is situated with respect to the focus of the explosion, on the path from the explosion to the
structure, on the characteristics of the loaded structure, and on the shock wave parameters
on contact with the building. During an actual event, the specific course of action of the load
depends on the whirl bypass of the surface of the structure, on the atmospheric pressure,
on the temperature conditions and other factors which are usually neglected for a simplified
analysis. The structure response to explosion load can be estimated, either more accurately
by a calculation or approximately based on empiric formulas and criteria [4, 5]. In particular,
this applies to the type and location of the pressure wave source compared to the structure
under evaluation, characteristics of the pressure wave at the source, and especially the course
of explosion pressure in time.
Properties of the structure as a unit or of its parts and its materials are decisive for
the magnitude and nature of the response of any explosion-loaded structure. These include
particularly mechanical characteristics of the material (especially its strength, way of failure,
stress-strain diagram, behaviour beyond the elasticity limit, etc.), and distribution of masses
and structure rigidity with corresponding frequency tuning of the structure, characteristics of
surfaces loaded by the impact blast wave, structure geometry compared to explosion wave
* doc. Ing. D. Makovička, DrSc., Klokner Institute, Czech Technical University in Prague, Šolı́nova 7, 166 08
Prague 6, CZ
** Ing. D. Makovička, Jr., Static and Dynamic Consulting, Šultysova 170, 284 01 Kutná Hora, CZ
12 Makovička D. et al.: Blast Load of Building Structure

characteristics, any previous failures of the structure, including changes in the structure
material properties in the course of time for existing structures, etc.
In our specific case, the explosion load effect is applied to the analysis of a control,
single-storey building (porter’s lodge) within the threatened premises. It is a reinforced
concrete monolithic structure that should be resistant, based on the user’s requirements,
against external explosion charge.

2. Design principles
As a rule, failure of a limited part of the structure may be admitted in the structure design
process providing that no crucial elements are included in such a part on which the stability
of the entire structure depends. When calculating building or technological structures, two
procedures can be applied in principle. Either maximum possible simplifications are used
in the structure analysis in terms of explosion effects, both as regards the load itself and
the analyzed structure, or the structure is analyzed in a way so that this analysis describes
with the highest accuracy possible the actual state of the structure and its explosion load.
Requirement to exclude an accident :
– The structure must tolerate design-based explosion load without collapsing, as a whole
or in part, so that it maintains its structural integrity and residual bearing capacity
after the explosion.
– The design-based explosion load, corresponding to the simplified course of load in
time, is normally given by intensity of maximum overpressure and underpressure val-
ues of the impact wave and by the duration of both phases, and/or dynamic pressure
and its duration. The load parameters should be considered based on the probability
of explosion occurrence in the given locality, based on the structure, operation, etc.
Requirement of limited damage :
– The structure should resist any (higher) explosion load of higher occurrence probabi-
lity than the design-based explosion load, with no damage and without any associated
restrictions of operation, such that their price would be disproportionately high com-
pared to the price of the construction.
– The resulting reliability against collapse and against limited damage is normally de-
termined by national authorities for various types of buildings and engineering con-
structions according to the consequences of damage, or they are determined based on
risk analyses for the appropriate operation, structure, etc.

3. Explosion load
The explosion load is very often substituted as follows to achieve simplification [2, 3] :
a) Triangle-shaped development of the load in time with the maximum intensity corre-
sponding to the sum of the pressures of the impacting and reflected wave and the
duration of the action, usually corresponding only to the duration of the action of the
overpressure phase of the shock wave;
b) The shock wave can be considered as having a flat front, meaning that the rise time
to maximum intensity is neglected, and additionally that the load starts to act on the
entire structure at one moment; the phase shift of the start of the action of the load
at individual structure points is thus neglected;
Engineering MECHANICS 13

c) It is usually assumed that the load acts on the building structure (walls, ceiling,
windows, etc.), determined on the basis of shock wave propagation round the struc-
ture [2, 3], in a continuous and naturally simplified manner (any local effect of the
focused load is neglected);
d) The response of the structure is usually considered on the basis of the superimposition
of two triangular loads, which correspond to the overpressure phase and subsequently
the underpressure phase of the shock wave.
The authors used empirical formulas [4, 5, 6] applicable to an explosive charge in an
open area to calculate the dynamic load; the formulas were derived from tests using small
explosive charges; then the overpressure value p+ at the front of the aerial shock wave and
its duration τ+ are as follows :
1.07 1/3
p+ = − 0.1 [MPa] for R̄ ≤ 1 m/kg , (1a)
R̄3
0.0932 0.383 1.275 1/3
p+ = + + [MPa] for 1 < R̄ ≤ 15 m/kg , (1b)
R̄ R̄2 R̄3
0.035
p− = [MPa] , (2)
R̄  √
τ+ = 1.6×10−3 6 Cw R [s] , (3)

τ− = 1.6×10−2 3 Cw [s] , (4)

where values of the pressure intensity p− and its duration τ− are the parameters of the
underpressure phase of the shock wave.
For reduced distance
R
R̄ = √
3
[m/kg1/3 ] (5)
Cw
where R̄ is the reduced distance from the epicentre of the explosion, R is the distance from
the explosion epicentre [m], and Cw is the equivalent mass of the explosive charge [kg TNT].
The wave motion from the explosion focus propagates in spherical wave fronts. In the
event of a ground explosion (at the contact with the ground), the explosion energy value is
about double, given that when there is complete reflection from the ground surface the shock
wave propagates in semi-spherical wave fronts. For a ground explosion, this effect can be
taken into account by substituting twice the magnitude of the actually used mass of charge
C for the equivalent mass of charge Cw in formula (5). For an above-ground explosion at
a height of more than 20 m above ground, the mass of the charge C is substituted directly
(without any increase in its value) for the equivalent mass of the charge. For a charge placed
between the ground level (zero height) and 20 m above the ground, linear interpolation can
be used to determine the equivalent mass of the charge; in this case, the equivalent mass of
the charge substituted to the formulas above will range between

Cw = (1 to 2) C . (6)

When there is a normal (perpendicular) impact of the explosion wave against a solid
barrier, a reflected wave is formed with the reflection overpressure pref+ , which loads the
building structure from the front side. The overpressure value in the reflected wave corre-
sponds to approximately twice the overpressure for low overpressure values p+ approximately
up to 5 MPa (up to eight times the value for high overpressures of several tens of MPa) in
14 Makovička D. et al.: Blast Load of Building Structure

the impact wave for the given distance R. The duration of the action of the overpressure tD
is about the same as the duration of shock wave τ+
pref+ ≈ 2 p+ , (7)
tD ≈ τ . (8)

4. Evaluation of the structure response

The magnitudes of the internal forces in the structure are considered as a part of the
evaluation of the limit bearing capacity conditions, based on load combinations when they
are reduced using ductility factor q ([5, 6] and [1]). The dynamic response to the effects of
the load due to an explosion must be superimposed on the effects due to static loads. The
resulting internal forces are then evaluated on the basis of Eurocode design standards for
the appropriate structure material type, or as a variant, also according stress-strain ratio.
These are usual procedures, but it should be noted that when the structure is loaded due to
an explosion, inelastic deformations occur at a number of sections, causing damage to the
structure by crack formation. However, this procedure entails two important uncertainties in
the case of bent structures, i.e. a suitable choice of plastic reserves, on the one hand, and the
material strengthening factor, on the other. During very rapid reshaping of the structure,
which is typical for explosion loads, both factors may achieve numeric values of the order
of tens, and not only of units, as mentioned above. Thus they may lead to considerable
overdesigning of the structure.
Evaluations of structures loaded by an explosion based on dynamic displacement and
rotation round the central line of plate, wall or beam systems during the action of a dynamic
load of this type have been of very topical interest in recent times, as regards the process
of evaluating the effects of an explosion on a structure. In earlier publications [4, 5, 6], the
authors applied this procedure to various types of materials and structure systems, and on
the basis of an experimental comparison they determined the failure angle ψmax , i.e. the
angle where damage is caused to the structure by breaking. The stability of the structure
with the cracks should be assessed in order to prevent any collapse of the structure due to
the formation of plastic joints and cracks.
The dynamic rotation round the central line of an appropriate structure element is there-
fore the criterion used to evaluate the response occurring at the following angle
ψ = arctg(xm /(0.5hspan)) , (9)
where xm is the maximum achieved dynamic displacement caused by the explosion load and
hspan is the span of the plate ceiling structure or the height of the wall structure within one
storey, or the span of any beam, the height of a column, etc.

Type Structure material ψmax [◦ ]

1 Concrete C16/20 to C40/50 6.5
2 Masonry, full bricks 10, mortar 4 or mortar 10 5.0
3 Masonry, cement bricks, mortar 4 4.5
4 Masonry, cellular concrete or perforated precise blocks, mortar 4 4.0
5 Steel S235 10.5
6 Wood, hard and soft 12
7 Window glass, thickness 3 mm 6
Tab.1: Limit failure angle ψmax [◦ ] upon breaking of the material [4]
Engineering MECHANICS 15

Structure Expected damage to elements

Mean High Hazardous
Reinforced concrete structures, plates and beams with 2 5 10
one-sided reinforcement
Reinforced concrete structures, plates and beams with 4 6 10
two-sided reinforcement and with web reinforcement
Prestressed concrete, beams and plates 1 1.5 2
Masonry, common, non-reinforced 1.5 4 8
Masonry, reinforced 2 8 15
Steel bars 3 10 20
Tab.2: Angle ψ [◦ ] of the expected damage to bent elements ([4] in comparison with [7, 8])

The approximate failure angle value on reaching the rupture limit value is shown in
Tab. 1. More conservative limit values of angle ψ were derived according to [7, 8], which
correspond to the chosen structure rupture risk. These values have been adapted and are
shown in Tab. 2. However, hazardous occurrence of damage approaches emergency level
damage, and its failure angle is found at the lower limit, below the maximum failure angle
value ψmax , in the Tab. 1.

5. Description of the threatened structure and its computational model

The reinforced concrete wall structure of the building was made of concrete C25/30,
wall in thickness 200 mm, ceiling and floor slab in thickness 250 mm, and it was sufficiently
reinforced using classic reinforcement in both directions (crosswise) along both surfaces.
Window and door openings of such a building are usually fitted with special windows and
doors resistant against explosion given that regular window glasses do not transfer the
effects. The subsoil of the building is of gravel-sand nature and was modelled using the
Winkler-Pasternak two-parametric subsoil model. The computational model for the building
structure response analysis is shown in Fig. 1. The particular dimensions of individual
structure parts were respected in order to obtain the true model of the building’s mass and
rigidity. Besides structure dead load, the permanent component of the variable load was
included in the structure mass.
During an explosion, the specific course of load also depends on vortex flow around the
structure surface, atmospheric pressure, temperature conditions and other factors that are

Fig.1: Calculation model of the whole structure (North-West view) and

dynamic forces in selected points of above-ground parts
16 Makovička D. et al.: Blast Load of Building Structure

usually neglected in the simplified analysis. In our case, only simplified flow [2, 3] around
the building was considered. Explosion load parameters were determined based on average
values; the formulas used to calculate the load are empirical and operate with mean (proba-
ble) values of the coefficients. Thus the structure calculations for the impact wave effects are
burdened significantly by these inaccuracies of input quantities of the whole phenomenon,
as well [6].
The incident shock wave (p+ = 160 kPa, t+ = 14 ms) exerted on circumferential wall
surfaces and on ceiling structures was considered as uniform, effected simplified step by step
in three zones in terms of intensity as well as the initial moment of action of the reflective
overpressure – dynamic load, as a function of the velocity of impact wave propagation :
– Zone 1, the whole west frontal wall (start of dynamic load on structure face t∗ = 0 ms);
– Zone 2, perpendicular to the blast wave propagation, frontal parts of the north and
south walls, frontal part of the roof (t∗ = +4 ms);
– Zone 3, perpendicular to the blast wave propagation, rear parts of the north and
south walls, rear part of the roof (t∗ = +9 ms).

Fig.2: Time history of vibration (a) in selected points (b) of front wall

6. Forced vibration
The decomposition of dynamic load history to the natural modes of vibration is used
for the forced vibration analysis by means of Scia Engineer program. The damping of the
structure of the building has been set as a logarithmic decrement 0.314. For higher natural
Engineering MECHANICS 17

frequencies the damping is usually higher, but the computer program does not allow setting
a different damping for higher frequencies. The calculation of forced vibration has been
made with 300 time steps of 0.001 s and alternatively with 600 time steps of 0.002 s. The
dynamic response is calculated respectively for each time step. The size of time step was
chosen as a compromise [7] between the range of blast wave duration (14 ms) and dominant
natural periods of vibration (from 0.2 s).
The calculated rotations (angles ψ) of the central line of structural elements were used
for structure assessment. The maximal angle of rotation in the west wall was 0.24 degrees
round vertical axis z and 0.17 degrees round horizontal axis x. In the north and south walls
the maximal angle was 0.11 degrees round vertical axis z. Maximal rotation of the roof
plate was 0.18 degrees round horizontal axis x. From all these rotations it is clear that the
concrete values are smaller than the limit value 4 degrees. The concrete structure is therefore
safe enough and responds to the structure hazard smaller then the moderate hazard.

7. Conclusion
The example of a specific building was used to address the problem of explosion and
threatened safety of the building upon an explosion of a rather large explosion charge located
in a car and detonated near the building, on circumferential roads. Considering uncertainties
associated with the determining of all parameters of the explosion load, methodology derived
by the authors [4, 5] based on the experimental results of small charge explosions has been
used for an engineering estimate of the probable explosion load, especially the time course
of the impacting shock wave and its interaction with the structure itself. This simplified
methodology lends itself to determination of load characteristics and to assess the building
structure dynamic response with the sufficient accuracy.
The structure response was assessed based on the results of a 3D dynamic computation
according to the magnitude of internal forces and displacements, and partial rotation of
the central line of beam or slab cross-sections of the structure. Currently, structure assess-
ment methodology based on partial rotation of the cross-sections has been in the process
of development; it corresponds to the most recent research trends. The authors used limit
values determined experimentally upon explosion load of brick-layered, reinforced concrete
and window glass boards based on comparing their own [4] and other published results [2, 7].
A reinforced concrete administrative building has been used as an example for determin-
ing and documenting the load due to a terrorist explosion. The results for the response of
the building to this blast load are presented in parts, together with the principles for evalu-
ating the structure according to the structure displacements an failure angles corresponding
to the given explosion load.

8. Acknowledgement
This research was supported as a part of the research projects in GAČR P105/11/1580
Transient response of structure under short-term dynamic or impact load due to seismic
effects and explosions, for which the authors would like to thank the Agency.
18 Makovička D. et al.: Blast Load of Building Structure

References
[1] ČSN EN 1998-1 Eurocode 8, Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 1: General
rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, ČNI 2006, Praha
[2] Henrych J.: The dynamics of explosion and its use, Academia 1979, Prague
[3] Koloušek V. a kol.: Stavebné konštrukcie namáhané dynamickými účinkami, SVTL 1967,
Bratislava
[4] Makovička D., Janovský B.: Přı́ručka protivýbuchové ochrany staveb, Česká technika – nakla-
datelstvı́ ČVUT v Praze, 2008
[5] Makovička D., Makovička D.: Simplified evaluation of a building impacted by a terrorist
explosion, In: Jones N., Brebbia C.A. (Ed.): Structures Under Shock and Impact XI, WIT
Press 2010, p. 93
[6] Makovička D., Makovička D.: Blast resistant design and limits of the response of a structure
to an external explosion, In: Schleyer G., Brebbia C.A (Eds.): Structures Under Shock and
Impact XII, WIT Press 2012, p. 229
[7] McCann D.M., Smith S.J.: Blast resistant design of reinforced concrete structures, STRUC-
TURE magazine, 2007, p. 22
[8] TM 5-1300: Structures to resist the effect of accidental explosions, U. S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers: Washington, D.C., 1990, (Navy NAVFAC P-397 or Air Force AFR 88-22)

Received in editor’s office : June 5, 2013

Approved for publishing : February 21, 2014