Dynamic Response of Concrete Frame

Structure under a Blasting Demolition

Environment
Xuansheng Cheng, Wei Jing, Jiexuan Ma
School of Civil Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050,
China

e-mail: chengxuansheng@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Different simulation blasting vibration waves are obtained using MATLAB software to examine
the dynamic response of concrete frame structure under a blasting demolition environment, avoid
impact on surrounding buildings, and prevent the vibration damage of blasting demolition to
buildings. Structural displacement and acceleration response of a concrete frame structure with
different explosive energy and blasting center distance are discussed using SAP2000. Results show
that (1) vibration response on top of the concrete frame structure reaches maximum under the
blasting vibration wave; (2) the larger the explosive distance, the smaller the explosive vibration
response, and (3) explosive vibration response increases with the increase of explosive energy.
Therefore, moderate explosive energy should be used in demolition engineering to decrease the
influence on surrounding buildings. Weak parts on top of concrete frame structures should also be
strengthened further in structure design.

KEYWORDS: blasting vibration; demolition; concrete; frame structure; dynamic response

INTRODUCTION
Blasting produces vibration waves that can cause vibration damage. Thus, strengthening
the safety design of building structures in the surrounding environment of a blasting demolition
environment is very important to minimize the degree of building damage and to prolong the
service life of the structure. Figures 1 and 2 show that the windows and structure of buildings near
a blasting site have different degrees of damage because of the vibration caused by blasting.

Local and foreign scholars have carried out long and arduous research and exploration for
nearly a decade to prevent the structural damage of buildings under an explosive demolition
environ-ment. Hao et al. [1] conducted damage assessment of a reinforced concrete frame structure
with masonry infill walls under a blasting vibration environment. Dhakal and Pan [2] studied the
dynamic response of a ground structure induced by blasting. Gad et al. [3] studied the damage to a
building adjacent to a blasting environment and presented a simplified method to estimate the
ground PPV possible cracking position. Luccioni et al. [4] mainly studied the explosive blasting

- 17823 -
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17824

and propagation processes of shock wave after explosion using FEM dynamic analysis and
presented effective measures to enhance the anti-detonation ability of a building. Zhang
and Zhang [5] used finite element analysis software to study the dynamic response of anti-blast
walls made of reinforced concrete by changing variables such as reinforcement ratio, height–span
ratio, and thickness. Fang and Liu [6] conducted finite element analysis on the failure pattern of
reinforced concrete beam under explosion load. Zhang and Wang [7] adopted "double support”
directional control blasting technology and demolished the single staff dormitory and original
office building of the Public Security Bureau in Jiuquan Steel Corp. You and Wang [8] adopted the
unidirectional folding blasting demolition scheme to reduce dashing distance, and then conducted
control blasting demolition of a 14-story frame structure office building in Lin Qi City, Shandong
Province. Tan and Yu [9] conducted in-site blasting vibration test of an open-pit slope near a slope
shoulder of a 13-story frame structure building. Liu and Chen [10] simulated the dynamic response
produced by surface and soil explosions and conducted a comparative analysis using ANSYS/LS-
DYNA. Shen [11] simulated the dynamic characteristic of a 2-story frame structure under blast
shock wave and obtained the time–history curves of pressure and acceleration at different points
through the explosion test of a structure model. In recent years, research groups [12–13] studied
the dynamic response of soil tunnel structure under explosion action.

Figure 1: Windows crushed under blasting vibration

 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17825

Figure 2: Structure destroyed under blasting vibration

Therefore, if we can determine the dynamic response of a building with concrete frame
structure under the action of blasting the surrounding environment, we can further guarantee
structural safety and reliability, as well as avoid accidents and property loss. In this paper,
different artificial simulation blasting vibration waves are obtained through MATLAB analysis
software, and the influences of change rules on explosive distance and quantity on peak
acceleration of the blasting vibration are summarized. The dynamic response of a 7-story
concrete frame structure is analyzed under the blasting vibration wave of different explosive
distances and quantities using finite element software SAP2000. Moreover, the dynamic response
rules of concrete structure buildings under blasting vibration waves are discussed.

BLASTING VIBRATION WAVE

According to random vibration theory, the non-stationary random process is expressed as
follows.

A(t ) = g (t )ϕ (t ) (1)

where A (t) is the time history of explosion vibration acceleration, g (t) is a modulation function,
and ϕ (t ) is a stationary random process.

Blast wave has a close relationship with explosive distance and quantity, and the effects of
explosion vibration produced by different explosive quantities and explosion distances are
completely different. Hence, the calculation of amplitude envelope and density spectrum of a
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17826

blast wave should be considered when an artificial simulation blast wave is carried out using
MATLAB. A previous study on measured data for blast vibration shows that vibration intensity is
closely related to explosive quantity and explosion distance. Therefore, an empirical relation is
obtained as follows [14]:

amax = mr − n (2)

where amax is the maximum acceleration caused by the explosion vibration, r is the
explosion distance ratio ( r = R 3 Q ), Q is the current explosive quantity, R is the explosive
distance, and m and n are undetermined constants.

Through numerous tests, Lin [15] discovered that the acceleration amplitude envelope of
explosion vibration can satisfy the exponential function under fixed-point blast load and satisfy
the power function relationship between time and wave propagation in rock by comparing
explosion shock wave. If the vibration reaches the peak, then the amplitude attenuation
acceleration envelope function is summed up by the following equation.

g (t ) = g 0 (t t0 ) − a e − b ( t −t0 ) ...(a ≥ 0, t ≥ t0 ) (3)

where g0, a, and b are the undetermined constants; t is the time; and t0 is the delay time.

By substituting the amax in Eq. (2) into g0 in Eq. (3), which means that the influence of two
important factors (i.e., explosive distance and quantity) is considered in the amplitude
envelope, we obtain the new envelope function as

g (t ) = mr − n (t t0 ) − a e −b (t −t0 ) ...(a ≥ 0, t ≥ t0 , b ≥ 0) (4)

The acceleration power spectrum is derived according to the existing literature [16] as
follows:

S0ω 4  − ksω 2 r 4S0 F0ω 4 F0 

S (r,ω )
= ω e + 2 2 (5)
r  π r (ω − ω0 ) + 4ξ0 ω0 ω 
2 2 2 2

where S0, ks, and F0 are constants generally determined by the experiment; r is the distance away
from the explosive center; ω0 is the characteristic frequency; and ξ 0 is the damping coefficient.

Therefore, the explosion process of vibration wave can be simulated by considering the effect
of explosive quantity and distance based on the amplitude envelope function Eq. (4) and
the spectral density function Eq. (5).

We can determine the parameters that are needed in the simulation, namely, m = 448.53, n =
2.03, c = 665.4, ω0 = 100, a = 60, b = 80, S0 = 7.5 × 10-8, ks = 4.35 × 10-5, and F0 = 9.1 × 10-6,
according to the test and its results, which are available in literature [15, 17]. The curves (Figs.
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17827

3 and 4) of acceleration–time of explosive vibrations are obtained in the cases of explosive

quantities of 30 and 60 kg and of blasting distances of 10, 12.5, and 15 m.

0.6

Acceleration/(m/s2)
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
0 0 (a)1 10m0 2 0 3 0 4
cceleration/(m/s2)

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
(b) 12.5m

0.2
Acceleration/(m/s2)

-0.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
(c) 15m

Figure 3: Blasting vibration waves with a 30 kg quantity of explosives at different

distances
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17828

Acceleration/(m/s2)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Time/s

(a)10m
0.4
Acceleration/(m/s2)

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Time/s

(b)12.5m

0.2
Acceleration/(m/s2)

-0.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Time/s
(c)15m

Figure 4: Blasting vibration waves with a 60 kg quantity of explosives at different

distances

ANALYSIS MODEL
In this paper, we use the finite element software SAP2000 and take a 7-storey reinforced
concrete frame structure office building as an example. The building measurements are as
follows: the North–South total width is 18 m, the East–West total length is 36 m, the North–
South and East–West spacing is 6 m, the layer height of the first floor is 3.9 m, and the layer
heights of the remaining stories are all 3.0 m. The standard layer structure is shown in Figure 5.
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17829

Figure 5: Standard floor layout

The concrete strength is 30 MPa, elastic modulus E is 30 GPa, and Poisson's ratio is 0.2. The
thickness of the concrete slab is 120 mm. The column section is 600 mm × 600 mm, and the beam
section is 550 mm ×300 mm. The dead load of the floor is 2.50 kN/m2 (not including the
component weight), live load is 2.00 kN/m2, and live load on the roof is 0.5 kN/m2. The degree
of engineering seismic fortification is VIII, the classification of earthquake design is the second
group, and site classification is II.

DEFORMATION GRAPH AND MODAL PARTICIPATION

COEFFICIENT
The deformation of the whole structure diagram is shown in Table 1. The mass participation
coefficients and the cycle of the former six modes are listed in Tables 2 and 3
respectively (UX, UY, and UZ are the mass participation coefficients in the X, Y, and
Z directions, respectively. SumUY, SumUX, and SumUZ are the accumulated values of mass
participation coefficients in the X, Y, and Z directions, respectively. RX, RY, and RZ are the
mass participation coefficients around X, Y, and Z, respectively.
Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17830

Table 1: Deformation of structure

Distance
Explosive from the
quantity /kg blasting Deformation diagram
center/m

10

30 12.5

15

10

60 12.5

15
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17831

Table 2: Mass participation coefficient of concrete frame structure with the blasting
vibration wave of 30 kg explosive
Distance
from the Order
blasting number Cycle UX UY UZ Sum UX Sum UY Sum UZ RX RY RZ
center /m

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10
10
4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

6 0.10 0 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.002 0.06
12.5
4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
15
4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

6 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

Table 3: Mass participation factor of concrete frame structure with the blasting vibration
wave of 60 kg explosive
Distance
from the Order
blasting number Cycle UX UY UZ Sum UX Sum UY Sum UZ RX RY RZ
center /m

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
10
4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

6 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

12.5 3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06

4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

6 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17832

1 0.57 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.46

2 0.53 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12

3 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06
15
4 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

5 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

6 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Displacement

Floor displacement and story drift are two important indexes to measure the degree of
structural damage. Their size reflects the extent of the damage. Floor displacement and story drift
of the concrete frame under blasting vibration with explosive quantities of 30 and 60 kg are
shown in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4: Floor displacement and story drift of concrete frame structure with blasting
vibration wave of 30 kg explosives
Distance from the Floor
displacement story drift /mm
blasting center /m Floor

1 0.002410 0.002410

2 0.004776 0.002366

3 0.006811 0.002035

10m 4 0.008409 0.001598

5 0.009590 0.001181

6 0.010420 0.00830

7 0.010910 0.000490

1 0.000429 0.000041

2 0.000854 0.000039

3 0.001039 0.000051

12.5m 4 0.001156 0.000063

5 0.001207 0.000239

6 0.001246 0.000425

7 0.001287 0.000429

1 0.000271 0.000271

2 0.000699 0.000428
15m
3 0.000985 0.000286

4 0.001280 0.000295
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17833

5 0.001515 0.000235

6 0.001677 0.000162

7 0.001769 0.000092

Table 5 Floor displacement and story drift of concrete frame structure with blasting vibration wave of 60 kg
explosives
Distance
from the Floor Floor displacement story drift /mm

1 0.00249 0.00249

2 0.00546 0.00297

3 0.00751 0.00205

10m 4 0.00893 0.00142

5 0.00996 0.00103

6 0.01072 0.00076

7 0.01119 0.00047

1 0.000770 0.000770

2 0.001670 0.000900

3 0.001973 0.000303

12.5m 4 0.002175 0.000202

5 0.002271 0.000096

6 0.002393 0.000122

7 0.002436 0.000043

1 0.000605 0.000605

2 0.001396 0.000791

3 0.001776 0.000380

15m 4 0.002240 0.000464

5 0.002535 0.000295

6 0.002722 0.000187

7 0.002835 0.000113

The floor displacements of frame structure under blasting vibration with explosive quantities
of 30 and 60 kg at different distances are shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17834

10m
0.012

Floor displacement/mm
12.5m
0.01
15m
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0
Figure 6: Floor displacement change of frame structure with 30 kg explosives at different
distances

0.012
Floor displacement/mm

10m
0.01 12.5m
0.008 15m

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Floor

Figure 7: Floor displacement change of frame structure with 60 kg explosives at different

distances

Maximum vibration response on the concrete frame structure under the action of blasting
vibration wave is at the top, as shown in Figs. 6 and 7. The influence of blasting vibration
gradually reduces with the increase in explosive distance. The response of blasting
vibration increases with the increase in explosive quantity. The floor displacement of a concrete
frame structure at 10 m distance is larger than that at 12.5 and 15 m distances in the case of 30
and 60 kg explosive quantities. Therefore, blasting dynamic response at 10 m distance is
larger, and floor displacement cannot be ignored at the 12.5 and 15 m distances. Structural design
must be paid attention to at the weak parts of the top story in the actual project, and the roof room
and parapet should be especially strengthened in the seismic design.

Acceleration

The time–history curves of the structure acceleration response at the top are shown in Figs.
8 and 9 under different blasting vibration waves.
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17835

10m
0.6

Acceleration/(m/s2)
12.5m
0.4
15m
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
0 0.2 0.4
Time/s

Figure 8: Acceleration response curves with the 30 kg explosives at the top of the
concrete frame structure

10m
1
0.8 12.5m
Acceleration/(m/s2)

0.6
0.4 15m
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
0 0.2 0.4

Time/s

Figure 9: Acceleration response curves with the 60 kg explosives at the top of the
concrete frame structure
Figs. 8 and 9 show that the acceleration of the concrete frame structure at the top is at its
maximum at 10 m distance in the case of 30 and 60 kg explosive quantities. Acceleration of the
top structure reaches its maximum at 0.1 s under different blasting
vibration waves and becomes zero eventually. Structure acceleration amplitude in the case of 60
kg explosive quantity is significantly greater than that in the case of 30
kg explosive quantity. Explosive quantity has a great impact on structural damage, and thus
the use of sublevel millisecond blasting of small explosive quantity is suggested when buildings
are demolished through explosives.

CONCLUSIONS
This study obtained blasting vibration waves by using MATLAB software and SAP2000
finite element software. The dynamic response of concrete frame structure is discussed under
different explosive quantities and center blasting distances. The conclusions are as follows:
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17836

(1) Structural design should pay special attention to the weak parts and strengthen the roof
room and parapet design because the vibration response of concrete frame structure is maximum
at the top under blasting vibration wave.

(2) The larger the explosive distance, the smaller the vibration response of
explosive blasting; the larger the blasting vibration response, the greater the vibration response of
explosive blasting. Therefore, in demolition engineering, blasting explosive quantities should
be reasonably selected according to the blasting distance to avoid blasting effect to the
surrounding buildings.

(3) Acceleration amplitude structure is significantly higher in the case of a 60 kg explosive

quantity than in the case of a 30 kg explosive quantity. Therefore, explosive quantity has a
direct impact on structural damage.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this
paper.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper is a part of the national natural science foundation of China (Grant number:
51368039 and 51478212), and a part of the education ministry doctoral tutor foundation of China
(Grant number: 20136201110003), and a part of the plan project of science and technology in
Gansu province (Grant number: 144GKCA032), and a part of the plan project of science and
technology in Lanzhou city (Grant number: 2014-4-94), and a part of the plan project of science
and technology in Gansu province (Grant number: JK2013-12)

REFERENCES
[1] Hao H., Ma G.W., Lu Y.. Damage assessment of masonry in filled RC frames subjected to blasting
induced ground excitations. Engineering Structures, 2002, 24(6):799–209.

[2] Dhakal R.P. and Pan T.C.. Response characteristics of structures subjected to blasting-induced ground
motion. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2003, 28: 813–828.

[3] Gad E F, Wilson J L, Moore A J, Effects of mine blasting on residential structures. Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2005, 19(3): 222–228

[4] Luccioni B.M, Ambrosini R.D, Danesi R.F. Analysis of building collapse under blast loads.
Engineering Structures. 2004, 26:63–71.

[5] Zhang L., Zhang L.J.. Dynamic response of reinforced concrete explosion-proof wall under explosion
loading. China Safety Science Journal, 2008, 18(9):99–105. (In Chinese)

[6] Fang Q., Liu J.C., Zhang Y.D.. Finite element analysis of failure modes of blast-loaded RC beams.
Engineering Mechanics, 2001, (2):1–8.
 Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. Z7 17837

[7] Zhang W.S., Wang Y.R.. Demolition of multi-storied buildings by directional controlled blasting with
two pivots. Engineering Blasting, 2003, 9(1):82–84.

[8] You R.H., Wang Z.Q.. Blasting demolition of office building in frame structure with 14 stories.
Engineering Blasting, 2005, 11(4):61–63.

[9] Tan W.H., Yu M., Zhang P.F.. Influence of frequent blasting vibration on the performance of a frame
structure [J]. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology, 2010, 32(9):252–256.

[10] Liu J.M., Chen W.T.. Dynamic response study of buried pipeline subjected to blast loads. Engineering
Blasting, 2008, 14(2):20–25.

[11] Shen Z.W., Gong M., Wang T.Y. Numerical simulation and experimental study on dynamic response
of the buildings structure under blast shock wave. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology, 2009,
31(2):104–106.

[12] Cheng X.S., Su J.X.. Dynamic response of soil tunnel lining structure under explosion. Chinese Journal
of Applied Mechanics, 2012, 29(1):104–108. (In Chinese)

[13] Cheng X.S., Wang J.H., Su J.X.. Explosion dynamic response of soil surrounding tunnel with curve
wall. Journal of Chongqing University, 2013, 36(4):142–08.

[14] Zhang X.L., Huang S.T.. The blasting seismic effect. Beijing: Seismological Press, 1981:105–110. (In
Chinese)

[15] Lin D.C.. Research on the theory and application of ground vibration random evolution explosion
(PhD thesis). Beijing: Beijing Institute of Technology, 2001.

[16] Guo S.B., Pan Y.F., Gao P.Z, Numerical simulation of explosion seismic waves. Explosion and
Shock Waves, 2005, 04:335–340.

[17] Huang Y.L.. Blasting seismic wave and its propagation (PhD thesis). Beijing: China University of
Mining and Technology (Beijing campus), 2000.

© 2014 ejge