11.5 Summary
393
Table 11.9 Comparisons of experimental and predicted maximum and residual mid-span
deflections
Specimen Maximal mid-span deflection (mm)
Residual mid-span deflection (mm)
Test ALE (%) Velocity (%) SDOF (%) Test ALE (%) Velocity (%) SDOF (%)
C5
–
–
–
–
153 141(−8) 135(−12)
154(1)
S1A
41
43(5)
49(20)
29(−29)
16
20(25)
25(56)
10(−38)
S1B
49
60(22)
81(65)
46(−6)
22
41(86)
53(141)
27(23)
S2A
36
41(14)
25(−31)
30(−17)
8
21(163) 18(125)
12(50)
S2B
–
–
–
–
14
28(100) 42(200)
32(129)
S3A
41
57(39)
41(0)
50(22)
8
29(263) 25(213)
32(300)
S3B
50
50(0)
54(8)
83(66)
10
23(130) 35(250)
74(640)
C1A
98
51(−48) 53(−46)
48(−51)
65
29(−55) 30(−54)
20(−69)
C1B
50
56(12)
39(−22)
50(0)
20
32(60)
31(55)
22(10)
C2A
–
–
–
–
39
30(−23) 16(−60)
25(−36)
C2B
35
39(11)
17(−51)
19(−46)
12
18(50)
6(−50)
0(−100)
C3A
91
76(−16) 60(−34)
88(−3)
52
53(2)
41(21)
67(29)
C3B
83
73(−12) 59(−29)
104(25)
43
51(19)
42(−2)
90(109)
SC-3
–
–
–
–
93
90(-3)
90(−3)
91(−2)
HC-1
–
–
–
–
193 151(-22) 185(−4)
247(28)
(2) Three common methods were applied to analyze the global dynamic responses
of CFST columns under close-range explosion, i.e., ALE method, velocity
method and SDOF method. By comparing with the present and existing explosion test on total nineteen CFST columns with 0.14 ≤ Z≤0.58 m/kg
1/3 , the superiority of the velocity method is validated with considering both the accuracy
and efficiency of computation.
References
CHENG D S, HUNG C W, PI S J. Numerical simulation of near-field explosion[J]. Journal of
Applied Science and Engineering, 2013, 16(1): 61–67.
CUI Y, ZHAO J, ZHANG C, SUN S, CHEN B. Explosion-resistance behavior and damage assessment of a duplex hollow CFST column subjected to blast loading[J]. Journal of Vibration and
Shock, 2015, 21: 188–193. (in Chinese).
Department of Defence. Unified facilities criteria (UFC) 3-340-02: Structures to Resist the Effects
of Accidental Explosions[S]. Washington, D C, 2008.
FUJIKURA S, BRUNEAU M, LOPEZ-GARCIA D. Experimental investigation of multihazard
resistant bridge piers having concrete-filled steel tube under blast loading[J]. Journal of Bridge
Engineering, 2008, 13(6): 586–594.
GB 50936-2014. Specification for design and construction of concrete-filled steel tubular structures[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2014. (in Chinese).
393
Table 11.9 Comparisons of experimental and predicted maximum and residual mid-span
deflections
Specimen Maximal mid-span deflection (mm)
Residual mid-span deflection (mm)
Test ALE (%) Velocity (%) SDOF (%) Test ALE (%) Velocity (%) SDOF (%)
C5
–
–
–
–
153 141(−8) 135(−12)
154(1)
S1A
41
43(5)
49(20)
29(−29)
16
20(25)
25(56)
10(−38)
S1B
49
60(22)
81(65)
46(−6)
22
41(86)
53(141)
27(23)
S2A
36
41(14)
25(−31)
30(−17)
8
21(163) 18(125)
12(50)
S2B
–
–
–
–
14
28(100) 42(200)
32(129)
S3A
41
57(39)
41(0)
50(22)
8
29(263) 25(213)
32(300)
S3B
50
50(0)
54(8)
83(66)
10
23(130) 35(250)
74(640)
C1A
98
51(−48) 53(−46)
48(−51)
65
29(−55) 30(−54)
20(−69)
C1B
50
56(12)
39(−22)
50(0)
20
32(60)
31(55)
22(10)
C2A
–
–
–
–
39
30(−23) 16(−60)
25(−36)
C2B
35
39(11)
17(−51)
19(−46)
12
18(50)
6(−50)
0(−100)
C3A
91
76(−16) 60(−34)
88(−3)
52
53(2)
41(21)
67(29)
C3B
83
73(−12) 59(−29)
104(25)
43
51(19)
42(−2)
90(109)
SC-3
–
–
–
–
93
90(-3)
90(−3)
91(−2)
HC-1
–
–
–
–
193 151(-22) 185(−4)
247(28)
(2) Three common methods were applied to analyze the global dynamic responses
of CFST columns under close-range explosion, i.e., ALE method, velocity
method and SDOF method. By comparing with the present and existing explosion test on total nineteen CFST columns with 0.14 ≤ Z≤0.58 m/kg
1/3 , the superiority of the velocity method is validated with considering both the accuracy
and efficiency of computation.
References
CHENG D S, HUNG C W, PI S J. Numerical simulation of near-field explosion[J]. Journal of
Applied Science and Engineering, 2013, 16(1): 61–67.
CUI Y, ZHAO J, ZHANG C, SUN S, CHEN B. Explosion-resistance behavior and damage assessment of a duplex hollow CFST column subjected to blast loading[J]. Journal of Vibration and
Shock, 2015, 21: 188–193. (in Chinese).
Department of Defence. Unified facilities criteria (UFC) 3-340-02: Structures to Resist the Effects
of Accidental Explosions[S]. Washington, D C, 2008.
FUJIKURA S, BRUNEAU M, LOPEZ-GARCIA D. Experimental investigation of multihazard
resistant bridge piers having concrete-filled steel tube under blast loading[J]. Journal of Bridge
Engineering, 2008, 13(6): 586–594.
GB 50936-2014. Specification for design and construction of concrete-filled steel tubular structures[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2014. (in Chinese).