Alexandria Engineering Journal (2019) 58, 1327–1338

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Assessment of structural response of an existing

structure under blast load using finite element
analysis
Yasser E. Ibrahim a,b,*, Marwa Nabil b
a
Engineering Management Department, Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
b
Structural Engineering Department, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

Received 10 September 2018; revised 9 December 2018; accepted 5 November 2019

Available online 25 November 2019

KEYWORDS Abstract In this research, a detailed 3-D finite element model is developed by ABAQUS package
Blast loading; for an existing six-story reinforced concrete framed structure in Saudi Arabia to study its response
Dynamic; under blast loads. The building is office building designed for dead, live, wind and seismic loads. The
Reinforced concrete; design wind speed is 161 km/h while the mapped maximum considered earthquake spectral response
ABAQUS; acceleration at a short period and at a period of 1-second are 0.12 g and 0.034 g, respectively. Con-
3-D finite element; crete damage plasticity model was used to model the concrete elements. The ‘brittle cracking’ con-
Composite crete model was used to represent column removal in front of the explosion. The metal plasticity
model was used to represent the steel. The model is exposed to blast loading with a 1.0 ton
(2204.623 lb) of TNT at a distance of 5 m from the building. Another scenario was considered if
the blast load is 10 m from the building to investigate the effect of the standoff distance. The struc-
tural vulnerability is assessed and compared. Alternative uncommon structural design of external
columns is considered using composite cross section, which uses steel casing around concrete section.
This uncommon design gave better results in terms of mitigating blast load effects on structures.
Ó 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction terrorist attacks on buildings occurred using cars due to the

difficulty of carrying heavy explosive materials. A successful
Recent terrorist attacks on many buildings around the world vehicle access system can stop any unscreened vehicle from
have caused loss of lives as well as severe damage of these reaching a point that can destroy the building. There are many
buildings. Preventing such events has been of great importance techniques and systems that can be used in this regard, such as
to many owners, designers and researchers. Most of major walls, bollards, active wedges and beam barriers [1]. These sys-
tems can determine the standoff distance that can be specified
* Corresponding author at: Engineering Management Department, for each building according to its importance and susceptibility
Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
of terrorist attacks.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Y.E. Ibrahim). Many features of seismic design of structures for high seis-
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria mic zones, such as the ductility of structural elements, well-
University. designed ductile connections and providing redundancy, are
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2019.11.004
1110-0168 Ó 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1328 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

equally desirable and recommended in blast design. However, et al. [14] examined the blast resistance and residual strength of
other features of seismic and blast design may have opposite concrete filled square and circular steel tube columns. It was
effects. For example, hardening the columns in lower floors found that these columns were still able to keep most of their
adds strength to the blast design; however, it may result in ver- axial load capacities even after being subjected to blast loads.
tical irregularities, which is not recommended for seismic Choi et al. [15] conducted experimental tests on reinforced
design [2]. The nature of blast load is different from seismic concrete, prestressed concrete without rebar, prestressed con-
loads. Blast loading has very high intensity, its effect is local- crete with rebar specimens with the dimensions of
ized and it lasts only milliseconds. On the other hand, seismic 1400
1000
300 mm using blast load generated by detonat-
loading has smaller intensity, distributed throughout the entire ing 25 kg ANFO explosive charge at 1 m standoff distance.
structure, and lasts from a number of seconds to over a min- According to the experimental tests and the finite element anal-
ute. In order to compare the effect of design seismic codes ysis using LS-DYNA, it was observed that the blast resistance
and moderate blast load, Nourzadeh et al. [3] conducted of prestressed concrete with rebar is better than prestressed
nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis for a benchmark concrete without rebar specimen. They noticed that the dam-
10-story building designed according to the uniform hazard age from explosions is increased with the increase of standoff
spectra for selected sites in the eastern and western regions distance and the resistance to blast load is enhanced by
of Canada. It was observed that the inter-story drifts resulted increasing the concrete compressive strength. Ritchie et al.
from blast loads are significantly higher than those from [16] conducted experimental tests on concrete-filled rectangular
earthquakes. hollow sections members under full-scale air-blast loading.
The severe damage of structures occurred due to the terror- Compared to unfilled counterparts, these sections performed
ist attacks has increased the need for better assessment of very well. No local failure was experienced in spite of the large
structural response under blast loads. Devastating dynamic deformations occurred. They developed finite element as well
loads arise from the pressure waves generated from such explo- as SDOF models. The accuracy of finite element model was
sions on buildings. Conducting experimental tests on struc- much better in terms of period of oscillation, maximum dis-
tures under blast loading is not always feasible and its cost is placement, and residual displacement. No significant effect
high. Alternatively, many researchers conducted finite element was noticed for the concrete compressive strength on the blast
analysis of structures using software packages such as LS- load response. It was observed that increasing the wall thick-
DYNA [4] and ABAQUS package [5] to model the inelastic ness (steel-to-concrete ratio) improved both the ductility ratio
behaviour of structures under blast loads including the effect and displacement response, for a given section width. Hadian-
of high strain rates and time-dependent deformations. Ismail fard et al. [17] improved a methodology to determine the dam-
et al. [6] conducted finite element analysis to investigate the age probability of steel columns under blast load through the
response of a 4-story structure under blast load. The structure reliability theory and considering uncertainties associated with
was originally designed for vertical loads only. Jayasooriya material properties and blast loading. They determined the
et al. [7] carried out finite element analysis on a composite col- damage based on a damage index according to the axial load
umn as a key element in structural systems to study its capacity. They found that fixed supports have smaller damage
response and accordingly to evaluate the safety of main struc- probability compared to pinned ones, considering the flexural
tural elements of multistory structures under blast loads. Fu [8] mode. Also, they concluded that peak reflected pressure is the
performed a 3-D finite element analysis on a 20-storey building most effective random parameter in determining the structural
using ABAQUS package to study its behaviour under blast damage.
loading. Detonation of a typical package bomb charge of In this research, a detailed finite element analysis using
15 kg was simulated on the 12th floor. The blast loading effect ABAQUS package is developed for a real 3-D model of an
was considered through a sudden removal of certain columns, existing six story reinforced concrete structure of an office
ignoring the duration of the blast load affecting the structures. building. The objective of the research is to investigate the
He concluded that, a small-scale blast such as the package structural response of a multistory structure, designed in Saudi
bomb can hardly trigger the collapse of the whole building if Arabia for vertical and lateral loads, to blast loads. The
designed using current design guidance. Other researchers used research aims to investigate the effect of adjusting the design
LS-DYNA to study the progressive collapse of multistory steel minimum standoff distance on enhancing the structural
framed building [9]. response under blast loads. Finally, the research aims to con-
Enhancing structural response under blast loading was con- sider another uncommon design of exterior columns and
sidered by many researchers. It was observed that the struc- how this design can affect the structural response when sub-
tural capacity of columns can be enhanced by using jected to blast loading.
composite sections; central steel core surrounded by reinforced
concrete section [7]. Elsanadedy et al. [9] observed that a pro-
gressive collapse can occur with a charge weight of 500 kg. 2. Details of the 3-D studied structure
They recommended strengthening the outer exposed ground
floor columns by concrete encasement or addition of steel One existing reinforced concrete structure in Al-Jouf, Saudi
plates. If not possible, adding steel braces or shear walls may Arabia is selected for analysis. The structure is an office build-
enhance the structural response under such loads. Using ing consisting of a ground and five floors. The structural system
uncommon design of external columns can enhance structural for lateral load is ordinary moment-resisting frames. No shear
response under blast loads such as ultra-high performance con- walls are used. The building was designed in 2008 for dead load,
crete (UHPC) filled double skin tube columns [10–12], ultra- live load and wind load. The vertical and lateral loads were
high performance fibre reinforced concrete, UHPFRC, or calculated according to ASCE/SEI 7-05 [18]. The design wind
high-strength reinforced concrete (HSRC) columns [13]. Wang speed was 100 mph (161 km/h). The mapped maximum
Assessment of structural response of an existing structure 1329

considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at a short

Table 1 Schedule of dropped beams.
period and at a period of 1 s are 0.12 g and 0.034 g, respectively,
for this area. The designers considered the wind load is the Beam Dimensions Bottom Top
dominant load for lateral loads on the structure. model (mm) reinforcement reinforcement
The plan of a typical floor is shown in Fig. 1. The building DB1 200
500 4 /14 4 /14
has a total area of 2000 m2 approximately (53 m
37.8 m). DB3 300
700 10 /16 6 /16
There are two expansion joints in the Y-direction that split DB4 300
700 12 /16 8 /16
the building into three parts. Only the left part is considered DB5 200
700 20 /16 10 /16
in this study with an area of 661.2 m2 (17.4 m
38 m). The
pounding of these three parts are not considered in this study.
The floor is one-way ribbed reinforced concrete slab with a
slab thickness of 7 cm and hollow blocks between the ribs.
Table 2 Schedule of hidden beams.
The ribs have width of 15 cm and spaced 50 cm apart. An
equivalent 15-cm thick slab is assumed for the finite element Beam Dimensions Bottom Top
model for the simplicity. Details of the various structural ele- model (mm) reinforcement reinforcement
ments of the structure are presented in Tables 1–3. The floor HB2 800
370 16 /16 8 /16
structural system showing the arrangement of hidden, dropped HB3 1100
370 20 /16 10 /16
beams and column models is shown in Fig. 2. HB4 800
430 20 /18 10 /18
HB9 600
430 28 /18 14 /18
3. Finite element modelling

ABAQUS package was used to analyse the behaviour of the used for the concrete material. This model uses the concept
3-D structure. The concrete parts were modelled using of isotropic damaged elasticity in combination with isotropic
C3D8/C3D8R elements, which are 8-node solid elements with tensile and compressive plasticity to model the inelastic beha-
reduced integration. The rebars in the columns were modelled viour of concrete. The stress-strain curves used for the concrete
as truss elements of only axial capacity. ABAQUS package damaged plasticity model are obtained from Martin [19]. The
constrains the nodes of the truss elements kinematically to stress-strain curves are based on the material properties of
the nodes of the contacting solid elements via a fully embedded Chopra and Chakrabarti [20], which are designed to model
region algorithm. The concrete damage plasticity model was the behaviour of concrete structures under seismic loading.

Part under consideration 17.4m x 38m (661.2 m2)

Fig. 1 Typical floor plan of the structure.

1330 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

building is adequate. The explosive charge was assumed to be

Table 3 Schedule of columns.
at 1 m height from the ground.
Column model Dimensions Reinforcement To model the complex pressure-time history resulting from
C1 400
500 12 /16 the applied explosion, the idealization depicted in Fig. 5 was
C2 500
500 12 /16 made. It simulates the chain of high magnitude shock fronts
C3 500
700 14 /16 that become magnified by reflective waves off the building sur-
C4 500
90 cm 16 /16 face. Different positive shock wave parameters for a hemi-
C5 500
1000 18 /16 spherical TNT explosion in free air on the surface at sea
C6 500
1100 20 /16 level were used through the chart developed by UFC 3-340-
C7 500
1500 30 /16
02 [22]. First the distance from the blast charge to the point
C8 500
1800 34 /16
under consideration (R) is calculated. Considering the TNT
charge (W) and based on the scaled distance Z = R/W⅓, dif-
ferent parameters are calculated including the reflected pres-
sure (Pr), duration of positive shock wave (tS) and the
The concrete strain at maximum stress is 0.002 while the max- arrival time of wave (ta). These parameters are used to input
imum strain at failure is 0.004. the dynamic impulsive load on all exterior columns in front
In order to include plasticity within ABAQUS Package, the of the blast load, at each floor level.
stress-strain points past yield, must be input in the form of true ABAQUS/Explicit was used in the analysis. ABAQUS/
stress and logarithmic plastic strain. The logarithmic plastic Explicit finds the solution without the need to do iterations.
strain required by ABAQUS Package can be calculated with An Explicit finite element model analysis does the incremental
the equation given below: procedure and at the end of each increment it updates the stiff-
rtrue ness matrix based on geometry changes and material changes,
eplastic
ln ¼ lnð1 þ eeng Þ  ð1Þ if any. The default time incrementation scheme in ABAQUS/
E
Explicit is fully automatic and no user intervention is needed.
where

3.2. Verification of the model
The total true strain is equal to ln 1 þ eeng
The elastic strain is equal to rtrue
E To verify the finite element model, a comparison was made
E is the modulus of elasticity with the experimental results of UHPC slab with reinforcing
bars subjected to blast load [23]. The slab has dimensions of
In the case where the column exposed to the simulated 2000 mm
1000 mm with a thickness of 100 mm. The slab
explosion was assumed to be fully damaged (as per GSA is supported on its short sides. The stress strain curve of the
guidelines [21]), the ‘brittle cracking’ concrete model in ABA- UHPC was used. The reinforcing steel was modelled as elasto-
QUS package was used to represent column removal. The plastic with maximum stress of 300 MPa. The comparison
material parameters of the brittle cracking models were used between experimental, previous finite element results [23] and
such that the external columns of the ground floor in the vicin- the results obtained by the developed finite element model by
ity of the detonation point were removed immediately once the ABAQUS package is shown in Fig. 6. The results of developed
peak wave front reaches the columns after the blast. This treat- finite element model show a very good agreement with the
ment was deemed necessary to avoid unrealistic behaviour and experimental and numerical results.
excessive distortion of the columns, while enabling reliable
assessment of the structure’s damage. 3.3. Cases under consideration
The steel used in the model is grade 60 with a yield stress of
420 MPa and an ultimate strength of 700 MPa. The metal plas- Three cases are studied for the structure under consideration,
ticity model was used to represent the steel, as shown in Fig. 3. as follows:
Blast loading is always associated with high strain rates that
can be several orders of magnitude above those resulting from  Case 1: Original structural design with a blast load of 1.0
monotonic loading. This rate effect was considered in the cur- ton (2204.623 lb) of TNT at a distance 5 m from the
rent study by multiplying the yield strength by 1.5 for both building
concrete in compression and steel and by 2 for concrete in ten-  Case 2: Original structural design with a blast load of 1.0
sion. The finite element model of the 3-D structure is shown in ton (2204.623 lb) of TNT at a distance 10 m from the
Fig. 4. building
 Case 3: Original structural design with alternative cross sec-
3.1. Simulation of blast loading tions for external columns in front of the blast load for col-
umn models C2 and C7 (6 columns on the left edge of the
Various methods of interpretation and conversion of explo- building). The model C2 is replaced by a concrete filled steel
sions into equivalent blast loads with time history are well tube of 400 mm
400 mm dimensions and 4.6 mm thick-
established in the literature [22]. For the purpose of this ness. Column model C7 is replaced by a concrete filled steel
research, the intention was to apply a blast load that can pur- tube of tube of 400 mm
1200 mm dimensions and 6.5 mm
posefully inflict damage to the 3-D structure of the base case. thickness. It is worth mentioning that the original and pro-
To this end, a separate parametric study proved that an arbi- posed cross sections have similar axial capacity for column
trary 1.0 ton (2204 lb) of TNT at a distance 5 m away from the models of C2 and C7.
Assessment of structural response of an existing structure 1331

Blast

Fig. 2 Structural system of floor plan (dimensions in mms).

1332 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

800 4. Results
700
Figs. 7 and 8 show the structural response of Case 1, where the
600
True Stress (MPa)

blast load was at 5 m away from the structure and the structure
500 has the original conventional design. Figs. 9 and 10 show the
400 structural response of the structure when the blast is 10 m
away from the structure (Case 2). Figs. 11 and 12 show the
300 enhancement in structural response when the exterior columns
200 in front of the blast have alternative design using concrete sec-
tion encased in steel tube (Case 3). The blast load in this case is
100
like Case 1; 5 m away from the structure.
0 The configurations of the hypothetical blast loading were
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 chosen to ensure that the original structure (Case 1) undergoes
True Strain significant damage, especially in structural elements that are in
the vicinity of the detonation point. This scenario is actually
Fig. 3 True stress strain curve for grade 60 steel.
useful to highlight the benefits that may be imparted by the
revised design in which the external concrete columns were
replaced by a composite section consisting of a concrete core
and a thin steel casing. However, it should be noted that, even
with the latter design, the revised columns were intentionally
destroyed in the ground floor to eliminate the load path that
originally incorporated them. Accordingly, the analysis pre-
sented below will focus primarily on the role of the revised
external columns.
As can be seen from Figs. 7 and 8, under the applied blast
load, the original structure indeed experienced high damage
and large deformations, which are a precursor to progressive
collapse. Although the structure was initially designed accord-
ing to wind load (critical load case compared to seismic load in
this area) resulted from a wind speed of 161 km/h, the structure
couldn’t withstand blast load of 1.0 ton of TNT with a standoff
distance of 5 m, which can be carried by a van [8]. This shows
that the wind and seismic design is not sufficient to withstand
blast attack with such amount of TNT charge at small standoff
distance (5 m). As expected, the largest deformation and dam-
age occurred in the exterior columns facing the explosion and
within the slab regions behind these columns (refer to Fig. 7).
Fig. 4 Finite element model of the structure analyzed in The progressive nature of the damage was confirmed by analys-
ABAQUS Package. ing the successive frames obtained between time intervals 0 and
200 ms of the output. In the original case (Case 1), the size of
the damaged zone after 200 ms is substantial with a residual
deformation as high as 345 mm in the first floor, rendering mit-
igation measures inevitable for the chosen blast load.
According to the results obtained from Figs. 7–10, it was
observed that the standoff distance has a considerable effect
on the structural response under blast loads. Larger standoff
is considered a major precaution to mitigate the risk of blast
load on structures. The maximum lateral residual deformation
Used for Analysis was reduced from 345 mm, where the standoff distance was
5 m (Case 1), to 85 mm, where the standoff distance was
10 m (Case 2). This makes a 75% reduction in the maximum
lateral residual deformation upon doubling the standoff dis-
tance from 5 m to 10 m. Also, more distribution of moderate
damage over large portions of the structure was experienced
due to the increase of the standoff distance compared to severe
local damage in the original case with a smaller standoff
distance.
The efficacy of the design modifications (i.e. the steel casing
around the concrete core) made to the external columns facing
the explosion (e.g. Case 3) is evident by inspecting the
Fig. 5 Incident and reflected over pressure time histories [22]. magnitude and extension of the damage index at 200 ms, as
Assessment of structural response of an existing structure 1333

Experimental Numerical ABAQUS

100

Deformation (mm)
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Time (sec)

a) FE Model b) Mid-span deflection

Fig. 6 Verification of finite element model.

Fig. 7 Compression damage index for Case 1.

shown in Figs. 11 and 12 versus Figs. 7 and 8. The significant sion in Case 1 increase monotonically from the commencement
damage that was experienced by both the external columns of the blast loading to the 200 ms interval, the pattern changed
above the ground columns and the concrete slabs just behind in Case 3 with the deformation reversing direction after about
them is significantly reduced due to the composite effect of the 5 ms (refer to Fig. 12 for the loading history of the blast for ref-
steel tube, which provides more ductile behaviour to these erence). The progressive nature of the damage was confirmed
columns. by analysing the successive frames obtained between time inter-
It is now useful to note how the modified design affected the vals 0 and 200 ms of the output, and this was also confirmed by
deformation pattern of the structure (compare Figs. 11 and 7). Ibrahim et al. [24] for 2-D concrete frames.
It is interesting that introduction of the steel casing has changed There is no much difference in the initial lateral stiffness
the mode of deformation dramatically. Specifically, while the between Case 1 and Case 3, since the change in cross section
deformations of points on the external column facing the explo- was based on seeking equivalent cross section with similar
1334 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

Fig. 8 Horizontal displacement at certain points for Case 1.

Fig. 9 Compression damage index for Case 2.

axial stiffness. However, the big enhancement of the structural in Case 1 and Case 3 (around 150 mm at 20 ms). However, due
response under blast load was attributed to the ductile beha- to the ductility of exterior composite columns in Case 3, there
viour of the uncommon design of structural design of exterior was a control on the structural response and no progressive
columns. Providing steel casing around the concrete core collapse was developed and the deformations were kept
enhanced the ductility of the columns, which was evidenced around 110 mm at 200 ms. In Case 1, the failure was brittle
by the spread of the damage in compression (Figs. 7 and 11) and progressive collapse was experienced and the maximum
and in tension (Figs. 13 and 14) and accordingly the deforma- lateral residual deformations reached 340 mm at 200 ms. So,
tions. From Figs. 8 and 12, it is shown that the initial lateral the uncommon design of external columns resulted in a 68%
deformations of columns in front of blast load were very close reduction in the maximum lateral residual deformation.
Assessment of structural response of an existing structure 1335

Fig. 10 Horizontal displacement at certain points for Case 2.

Fig. 11 Compression damage index for Case 3.

5. Conclusions spectral response acceleration at a short period and at a period

of 1-sec are 0.12g and 0.034g, respectively. The structure is a 6-
A series of 3-D finite element analyses using ABAQUS pack- storey reinforced concrete office building, consisting of hollow-
age was conducted on a real structure considering blast loads block floor slabs and columns. The analyses focused on pro-
resulting from 1.0 ton (2204.623 lb) of TNT at a distance of viding insight into the behaviour of the original structure
5 m and 10 m from the building. The structure was originally before examining the benefit of using an alternative design
designed to resist gravity loads, including dead and live loads, by using composite section (concrete section encased in a steel
as well as wind and seismic loads. The design wind speed is tube). The following conclusions are obtained from the results
161 km/h while the mapped maximum considered earthquake and analysis made in this study:
1336 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

Fig. 12 Horizontal displacement at certain points for Case 3.

Fig. 13 Tension damage index for Case 1.

1. The largest possible standoff distance should be selected residual deformation was around 67% upon using external
when designing structures requiring blast resistance. columns with this uncommon design. The enhancement in
Increasing the standoff distance from 5 m to 10 m resulted the structural response upon using the uncommon design
in much enhancement in structural response. The maximum includes the extent of damage and the damage distribution
lateral residual deformation was reduced by 75%. No within the structure.
severe local damage was experienced in the case of bigger 3. When a better blast-resistance structural design is targeted,
standoff distance. structural design to resist lateral loads such as wind or
2. Exterior columns are better designed to have uncommon earthquakes may give satisfactory results. However, this
design with more ductility, such as concrete cross sections design may not be sufficient to withstand blast attack with
encased in steel tubes. The reduction in maximum lateral large explosive charge at small standoff distance.
Assessment of structural response of an existing structure 1337

Fig. 14 Tension damage index for Case 3.

Acknowledgements steel building due to blast attacks, J. Constr. Steel Res. 101
(2014) 143–157.
[10] F. Zhang, C. Wu, X.L. Zhao, H. Xiang, Z.X. Li, Q. Fang, Z.X.
This study is part of the funded research project: Grant No.
Liu, Y. Zhang, A. Heidarpour, J.A. Packer, Experimental study
35-290 for the academic year 2015/2016 provided by King
of CFDST columns infilled with UHPC under close-range blast
AbdulAziz City for Science and Technology, KACST. The loading, Int. J. Impact Eng. 93 (2016) 184–195.
authors would like to express their thanks to KACST and [11] F. Zhang, C. Wu, X.L. Zhao, A. Heidarpour, Z. Li,
Prince Sultan University for supporting the research. Experimental and numerical study of blast resistance of square
CFDST columns with steel-fibre reinforced concrete, Eng.
References Struct. 149 (2017) 50–63.
[12] F. Zhang, C. Wu, H. Wang, Y. Zhou, Numerical simulation of
[1] D.O. Dusenberry, Handbook of Blast-Resistant Design of concrete filled steel tube columns against blast loads, Thin-
Buildings, John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2010. Walled Struct. 92 (2015) 82–92.
[2] FEMA 426: Reference Manual to Mitigate Potential Terrorist [13] J. Xu, C. Wu, H. Xiang, Y. Su, Z.X. Li, Q. Fang, H. Hao, Z.
Attacks against Buildings, US Department of Homeland Liu, Y. Zhang, J. Li, Behaviour of ultrahigh performance fibre
Security, 2003. reinforced concrete columns subjected to blast loading, Eng.
[3] D. Nourzadeh, J. Humar, A. Braimah, Comparison of response Struct. 118 (2016) 97–107.
of building structures to blast loading and seismic excitations, [14] H. Wang, C. Wu, F. Zhang, Q. Fang, H. Xiang, P. Li, Z. Li, L.
Procedia Eng. 210 (2017) 320–325. Zhou, Y. Zhang, J. Li, Experimental study of large-sized
[4] LS-DYNA User’s Manual, Livermore Software Technology concrete filled steel tube columns under blast load, Constr.
Corporation, 2009. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 131–141.
[5] ABAQUS 6.14 User Documentation, Dessault Systems, 2014. [15] J. Choi, S. Choi, J.J. Kim, K. Hong, Evaluation of blast
[6] M. Ismail, Y. Ibrahim, M. Nabil, M.M. Ismail, Response of A resistance and failure behaviour of prestressed concrete under
3-D reinforced concrete structure to blast loading, Int. J. Adv. blast loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 173 (2018) 550–572.
Appl. Sci. 4 (10) (2017) 46–53. [16] C.B. Ritchie, J.A. Packer, M.V. Seica, X. Zhao, Behaviour and
[7] R. Jayasooriya, D.P. Thambiratnam, N.J. Perera, Blast response analysis of concrete-filled rectangular hollow sections subject to
and safety evaluation of a composite column for use as key blast loading, J. Constr. Steel Res. 147 (2018) 340–359.
element in structural systems, Eng. Struct. 61 (1) (2014) 31–43. [17] M.A. Hadianfard, S. Malekpour, M. Momeni, Reliability
[8] F. Fu, Dynamic response and robustness of tall buildings under analysis of H-section steel columns under blast loading, Struct.
blast loading, J. Constr. Steel Res. 80 (2013) 299–307. Saf. 75 (2018) 45–56.
[9] H.M. Elsanadedy, T.H. Almusallam, Y.R. Alharbi, Y.A. Al- [18] ASCE/SEI 7-05: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other
Salloum, H. Abbas, Progressive collapse potential of a typical Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, USA, 2006.
1338 Y.E. Ibrahim, M. Nabil

[19] O. Martin, Comparison of different constitutive models for [22] UFC 3-340-02, Unified Facilities Criteria, Structures to resist the
concrete in ABAQUS/explicit for missile impact analyses, JRC effects of accidental explosions, Department of Defense, USA,
Scientific and Technical Reports. EUR 24151, European 2002J. Li, C. Wu and H. Hao. An experimental and numerical
Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Energy, 2010. study of reinforced ultra-high performance concrete slabs under
[20] A.K. Chopra, P. Chakrabarti, The Koyna earthquake and the blast loads, Materials & Design, 82 (2015) 64–76.
damage to the Koyna Dam, Bull. Seismological Soc. Am. 63 (2) [23] J. Li, C. Wu, H. Hao, An experimental and numerical study of
(1973) 381–397. reinforced ultra-high performance concrete slabs under blast
[21] GSA, Progressive collapse analysis and design guidelines loads, Mater. Des. 82 (2015) 64–76.
for new federal office buildings and major modernization [24] Y.E. Ibrahim, M.A. Ismail, M.A. Nabil, Response of reinforced
projects, U.S. General Services Administration, Washington, concrete frame structures under blast loading, Procedia Eng. 171
D.C, 2003. (2017) 890–898.