The Oklahoma City Bombing: Summary and Recommendations for Multihazard Mitigation

Corley, W. Gene; Mlakar, Paul F.; Sözen, Mete A.; Thornton, Charles H.

doi:10.1061/(asce)0887-3828(1998)12:3(100)

Cited by 165 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The forensic investigation of the Murrah Building showed that two perimeter columns failed by shear and the closest to the blast failed by brisance. The perimeter columns that failed by shear were found to have remained largely elastic along their lengths (Corley et al, 1998). Similar failures were observed during forensic investigations carried out on bomb-damaged buildings during World War II (Byfield, 2004(Byfield, , 2006Smith et al, 2010).…”

Section: Calculating the Dynamic Shear Force And Momentsupporting

confidence: 54%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Estimating safe scaled distances for columns subjected to blast

Byfield¹,

Paramasivam²

2014

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is concerned with determining the minimum stand-off distance required to prevent column failures in reinforced concrete framed buildings. This is of interest because column failures can initiate progressive collapse, resulting in mass casualties. A technique is developed to determine the critical range at which failure will occur for a given weight of explosives and thus provide a safe scaled distance. The method is used to carry out a parametric study of a range of reinforced concrete columns of variable dimensions and strengths. The corresponding data were used to predict safe scaled distances for columns (with and without clearing). These values can be used to estimate the minimum stand-off distance required to prevent progressive collapses of buildings that may be subjected to deliberate blast loading. Notation

show abstract

Section: Calculating the Dynamic Shear Force And Momentsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…(Corley et al, 1998). However, recent blast analysis of the building, in which the transfer girder was removed to allow all perimeter columns to continue down to ground floor level, has demonstrated that the VBIED detonated would still have created a 42 m wide collapsed section of the building (Byfield and Paramasivam, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating safe scaled distances for columns subjected to blast

Byfield¹,

Paramasivam²

2014

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This method is only appropriate for members that respond flexurally to explosive effects. Members located less than 30 meters from an explosion are more likely to fail in either shear or shattering (Corley 1999). Loadbearing masonry and other highly brittle material may require other considerations, such as the need to reduce material disintegration and fragmentation, while increasing load capacity.…”

Section: Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Effective Decision Making for Blast Mitigation

Princehorn

Laefer

2005

Structures Congress 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States (U.S.), there has been a marked increase in both public and private sector demand for increased blast-mitigation for existing buildings. To adequately address these new performance requirements, a rational and cost-oriented policy is needed to help building managers and owners make fiscally intelligent decisions regarding the retrofitting of existing structures. This paper presents a cost-rationalized approach to blast-mitigation retrofitting decision making, with respect to a building's criticality to the surrounding community. The proposed method addresses current approaches to blast assessment, typical blast-related vulnerabilities (structural and non-structural), and possible solutions for vulnerability mitigation. Special emphasis is given to non-gravity based loadings, post-incident functionality requirements, and transient versus permanent/semi-permanent loading.

show abstract

“…When the Oklahoma Building collapsed for instance, neither people were directly injured by the explosion or by the scattering debris of the column, nor did the initial damages involve a significant area of the structures (FEMA 277, 1996). Still, the indirect consequences of the initial damages resulted in a progressive collapse that involved a major part of the buildings and caused several human losses (Corley et al, 1998).…”

Section: Bottom-up and Top-down Methods For Structural Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural safety in case of extreme actions

Giuliani

2012

IJLCPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The behaviour of buildings and other constructions under critical events is widely recognised to be an important part of structural design. Still, the problem is often addressed in a qualitative way by many current codes and regulations and designers cannot refer to specific methodologies for the assessment or the achievement of the structural integrity of constructions. The term structural integrity is intended here as the ability of a construction to sustain extreme actions, which directly affect the structural system, without developing a major collapse.In this paper, two main methods are outlined for the achievement of structural integrity: a bottom-up approach, where the effects of element failures are investigated, disregarding the modelling of the specific action that could have triggered them; and a top-down approach, where the response of the structure to a particular accidental action is sought.The use of the first approach is proposed for assessing, by means of a set of non-linear static analyses, the robustness of structural systems, intended as the ability of a structure to sustain local failures (Starossek, 2009) without developing a major collapse.

show abstract

The Oklahoma City Bombing: Summary and Recommendations for Multihazard Mitigation

Cited by 165 publications

References 1 publication

Estimating safe scaled distances for columns subjected to blast

Estimating safe scaled distances for columns subjected to blast

Cost-Effective Decision Making for Blast Mitigation

Structural safety in case of extreme actions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About