A Study of Blast–Induced Vibration on Oil Pipelines based on Numerical and Field Analysis

Determination of Blast Impact Range and Safe Distance for a Reinforced Concrete Pile Under Blast Loading

“…The dimensions considered were 30 × 30 × 30 m to prevent boundary effects. The stress-strain response of sandy soil has been modeled using the Drucker-Prager plastic model [10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Because there is no time for drainage to occur under impact blast loading, the soil mass can be considered as a single-phase material under these conditions and total stress analysis can be carried out.…”

“…Table 6 lists the safe distance values for tensile and compressive damage at different distances for masses of 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 kg of TNT at the surface and at depths of 1 to 6 m. The safe distance for 50 kg of TNT was 1 m, which means that the pile was not damaged at the minimum distance. The safe distance for the RC pile for 100 kg of TNT was 2 m in clayey soil, but under such conditions, the sandy soil had a safe distance of 1 m, which means that the pile lost efficiency at a distance of 1 m. This suggests that a change in soil type from clay to sand will reduce the safe distance to about 1 m. The reason could be the lower density, lower Poisson's ratio and lower modulus of elasticity of sandy soil compared to clay soil, which better controlled the blast wave and reduced damage [13]. It can be stated that soil type plays a significant role in controlling damage and reducing the safe distance.…”

“…It can be seen in Table 7 that the blast impact range decreased in sandy soil in comparison with clayey soil. This is due to the lower density, lower Poisson's ratio and lower modulus of elasticity of sandy soil compared to clay soil, which caused the generated wave to travel a shorter distance in sandy soil and caused less stress in the soil [13,20]. Chakraborty [10] also has stated that the most influential soil parameters for blast loading are the internal friction angle and soil density.…”

“…Ibrahim and Nabil [13] evaluated the risk of a surface blast load on pile foundations. They reported that wall barriers containing expanded polystyrene between the pile and blast load reduced the blast effect better than other types of wall barriers.…”