13.2 Review of the Existing Work
433
one-way support boundary condition. By assessing the spalling and cratering damage
quantitatively, it was concluded that UHPC panels displayed significantly improved
blast-resistant performance than NSC panels, and increasing the slab thickness and
reinforcement ratio is beneficial to enhancing the blast-resistant behavior of UHPC
slabs. Foglar et al. (2017) conducted the field blast test on full-scale reinforced UHPC
bridge decks with the dimension of 6 m × 1.5 m × 0.3 m, in which the test slabs
were placed on fixed timber posts and subjected to blast loadings with the scaled
distance of 0.154 m/kg
1/3 . The dimensions of the front spalling and rear scabbing
craters were quantified, and the permanent deflections of the post-blast slabs were
derived. It was derived that increasing the fiber content and compressive strength
could improve the blast-resistant performance of decks. Kuznetsov et al. (2006)
presented an experimental study of one-way spanning reinforced NSC and UHPC
panels tested under the detonations of 0.5 kg Composition B and Powergel charges at
a distance of 0.125 m, in which the specimens with the dimension of 1.3 m × 1.0 m
× 0.1 m were placed on a holding frame and clamped using steel angles and wood
strips along the short edge. The scabbing damage on the rear face of the panels was
examined, and it was derived that the reinforced panels suffer more severe damage
when the pressure and impulse generated from the explosive are more intensive,
and UHPC panels performed better than NSC panels. Mao et al. (2015) focused on
the influence of fiber content and fiber type on the blast-resistant performance of
small-scaled UHPC panels. Nineteen two-way fixed UHPC slabs with dimensions
of 0.66 m × 0.66 m × 0.025 m were tested under blast loadings induced from 0.20 ~
1.10 kg PE4 charge at the standoff distance of 0.5 m. By examining the peak 1/4 span
deflections and slab cracks, it was indicated that increasing fiber content is effective
in improving the blast-resistance of UHPC panels, while the effect of the adopted
two typical steel fibers (straight and hooked) seemed to have slight differences.
Wu et al. (2009) conducted the explosive test on eight slabs including plain and
reinforced UHPC slabs, reinforced NSC slabs, and reinforced NSC slabs externally
retrofitted with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) plates (0.37 ≤ Z≤3 m/kg
1/3 ), and the
test boundary constraints of slabs were identical with that reported by Kuznetsov
et al. (2006). By recording and examining the reflected overpressure- and mid-span
deflection-time histories, it was proved that the blast-resistance of reinforced UHPC
slab was superior to all the other tested slabs. Li et al. (2015a) conducted blast test on
five 2 m × 1 m × 0.1 m one-way spanning panels including one control NSC slab and
four UHPC panels reinforced with different reinforcement ratios (0.8% and 1.4%),
yielding strength of reinforcing steel rebars (300 ~ 1750 MPa), and scaled distances
(0.41 ~ 3.05 m/kg
1/3 ), respectively. The flexural failure in UHPC slab and brittle
shear failure in NSC slab are observed, which further verifies the effectiveness of
reinforced UHPC slabs against blast loadings. Ellis et al. (2014) performed the planar
blast loading test on four UHPC panels by using the blast load simulator, in which
the specimens with dimensions of 1.626 m × 0.864 m × 0.051 m were tested under
approximate simply-supported boundary condition. By recording the blast impulse
and examining the fracture patterns of slabs, the upper and lower bounds to the blast
resistance of UHPC panels were assessed. Yi et al. (2012) carried out the explosion
test on two control NSC slabs and four UHPC panels. The slab specimens with the
433
one-way support boundary condition. By assessing the spalling and cratering damage
quantitatively, it was concluded that UHPC panels displayed significantly improved
blast-resistant performance than NSC panels, and increasing the slab thickness and
reinforcement ratio is beneficial to enhancing the blast-resistant behavior of UHPC
slabs. Foglar et al. (2017) conducted the field blast test on full-scale reinforced UHPC
bridge decks with the dimension of 6 m × 1.5 m × 0.3 m, in which the test slabs
were placed on fixed timber posts and subjected to blast loadings with the scaled
distance of 0.154 m/kg
1/3 . The dimensions of the front spalling and rear scabbing
craters were quantified, and the permanent deflections of the post-blast slabs were
derived. It was derived that increasing the fiber content and compressive strength
could improve the blast-resistant performance of decks. Kuznetsov et al. (2006)
presented an experimental study of one-way spanning reinforced NSC and UHPC
panels tested under the detonations of 0.5 kg Composition B and Powergel charges at
a distance of 0.125 m, in which the specimens with the dimension of 1.3 m × 1.0 m
× 0.1 m were placed on a holding frame and clamped using steel angles and wood
strips along the short edge. The scabbing damage on the rear face of the panels was
examined, and it was derived that the reinforced panels suffer more severe damage
when the pressure and impulse generated from the explosive are more intensive,
and UHPC panels performed better than NSC panels. Mao et al. (2015) focused on
the influence of fiber content and fiber type on the blast-resistant performance of
small-scaled UHPC panels. Nineteen two-way fixed UHPC slabs with dimensions
of 0.66 m × 0.66 m × 0.025 m were tested under blast loadings induced from 0.20 ~
1.10 kg PE4 charge at the standoff distance of 0.5 m. By examining the peak 1/4 span
deflections and slab cracks, it was indicated that increasing fiber content is effective
in improving the blast-resistance of UHPC panels, while the effect of the adopted
two typical steel fibers (straight and hooked) seemed to have slight differences.
Wu et al. (2009) conducted the explosive test on eight slabs including plain and
reinforced UHPC slabs, reinforced NSC slabs, and reinforced NSC slabs externally
retrofitted with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) plates (0.37 ≤ Z≤3 m/kg
1/3 ), and the
test boundary constraints of slabs were identical with that reported by Kuznetsov
et al. (2006). By recording and examining the reflected overpressure- and mid-span
deflection-time histories, it was proved that the blast-resistance of reinforced UHPC
slab was superior to all the other tested slabs. Li et al. (2015a) conducted blast test on
five 2 m × 1 m × 0.1 m one-way spanning panels including one control NSC slab and
four UHPC panels reinforced with different reinforcement ratios (0.8% and 1.4%),
yielding strength of reinforcing steel rebars (300 ~ 1750 MPa), and scaled distances
(0.41 ~ 3.05 m/kg
1/3 ), respectively. The flexural failure in UHPC slab and brittle
shear failure in NSC slab are observed, which further verifies the effectiveness of
reinforced UHPC slabs against blast loadings. Ellis et al. (2014) performed the planar
blast loading test on four UHPC panels by using the blast load simulator, in which
the specimens with dimensions of 1.626 m × 0.864 m × 0.051 m were tested under
approximate simply-supported boundary condition. By recording the blast impulse
and examining the fracture patterns of slabs, the upper and lower bounds to the blast
resistance of UHPC panels were assessed. Yi et al. (2012) carried out the explosion
test on two control NSC slabs and four UHPC panels. The slab specimens with the