2018 Scienceline Publication

Journal of Civil Engineering and Urbanism

Volume 8, Issue 2: 17-24; Mar 25, 2018

ISSN-2252-

0430

Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in

the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against

Explosion Force

Mehdi Mirzaee1, Mostafa Vaezi2, Saeid Mamandi3 and Omid Abdolrahman3

1Faculty of Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

2Department of Maritime Engineering, Amir Kabir University, Tehran, Iran

3Faculty of Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Mahabad Branch, Iran

Corresponding author’s Email: mvaezi7067eng@aut.ac.ir

ABSTRACT: Nowadays, due to the development of missiles with high power of destruction and accuracy as well as the increase in terrorist attacks, it is better to keep military equipment in the depth of the ground. Using the underground structures (US) has been interested in shelters and ammunition depots for many years. But these structures should also be resistant to surface explosions. For this purpose, the structure must be constructed at high depths or the structure protected by the specific coating. The aim of this study was introduced and evaluates the O

performance of a combined coating containing crumb rubber cement (CRC) to prevent the transmission of P

R

II

A

R

:

I

compression waves. Hence, to check the effectiveness of this coating by modeling a buried structure in ANSYS LS-R

c

e

S

G

c

e

c

e

v

2

DYNA at a depth of 5 meters from the ground surface and placing crumb rubber cement CRC at a depth of 2 meters e

p

is i 2

I

t

v

e

5

N

e

d

e

from the ground surface and above the structure, the model was subjected to an explosion equivalent to 100 kilograms 2

d

d

A

0

2

0

0

5

4

L

of TNT was analyzed for 25 milliseconds. The results showed that by inserting crumb rubber cement CRC, because of 1

7

3

F

M

F

0

A

e

a

b

e

1

high elasticity with large deformations of crumb rubber (CR), adding it into concrete can absorb energy and reduce its b

r

.

8

R

.

.

2

0

2

2

0

0

T

transfer to the Layers down, and therefore lead to a reduction in the amount of failure and pressure which applies to 0

0

1

0

1

1

I

8

8

8

0

C

the structure. To investigating the effect of the thickness of the CR layer, the pressure, and failure rate of the structure 4-L

8

was analyzed for 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 m thickness layers. The results indicated that by increasing the thickness of the E

CR from 0.1 m to 0.5 m, the pressure and failure rate is reduced. But the intensity of this decrease of 0.4 meters later is very low so that it can be ignored. It is concluded that, CR with a thickness of 0.4m with concrete cover can be considered as a recommended optimal design and an applicable strategy in the construction of buried structures on the ground against the explosion forces.

Keywords: Ammunition depots, Crumb rubber, Concrete cover, Explosion, TNT

INTRODUCTION

Conducting passive defense measures in

today's wars to confront enemy invasions and

Various structures ranging from coastal

mitigate the damage caused by land, air, and

structures to buried concrete depots, as one of

naval attacks is a fundamental issue that

the strategic structures, play a significant role in

broadly covers all key infras-tructures, vital and

the military and economic purposes of a

important military and civilian centers in the

country, which should be given special attention

country (Amir et al., 2017).

to their reinforcement. Accordingly, the opti-

Passive defense is one of the most

mum design of structures such as coastal

effective and stable defense against threats has

structures, concrete structures have been among

always been the focus of most countries in the

the main concerns of many researchers

world. These structures should also be resistant

(Pourzangbar et al., 2016, 2017a, 2017b;

to surface explosions. Therefore, it is important

Pourzangbar, 2012; Yeganeh-Bakhtiary et al.,

to identify and investigate the parameters that

2015; Vaezi et al., 2016a, b).

affect the performance of these structures and

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 17

increase the safety of these structures (Feldgun

dimensions of modeling is presented. In the

et al., 2011). A lot of research has been carried

end, the results will be examined.

out on this subject, that in the below some of

them being mentioned. Feldgun et al. (2011)

Explosion

presented a comprehensive approach to

The explosion is characterized by the

simulating the distribution of explosive pressure

sudden and rapid release of sound a large

on a flexible or hard flat barrier in porous soils.

amount of energy, producing light, heat, sound,

Yang and Wang (2006) investigated the effect

and wave at speeds around the speed of sound

of air blast on surface structures with regard to

(Ngo et al., 2007).

When an explosion occurs, the energy is

Shock in the soil. In this research, he also used

released suddenly in a very short time (several

the LS-DAYNA finite element software and

milliseconds), and the effect of this energy

modeled the soil into a three-phase mode

release is seen in the form of thermal radiation

equation. Lu and Wang (2006) presented a

and the propagation of compressive waves in

model for nonlinear dynamical analysis of

space.

explosion and distribution of pressure of it in

As a result of the explosion, the gas

the soil. They have modeled by using non-linear

pressure is formed, which increases with the

analysis of LS-DYNA software and an

release of the explosion source and increases to

appropriate state equation and behavioral model

a maximum positive PSO+ pressure, and then

for materials, soil, explosives, and structures in

decreases to an ambient pressure Which this

an environment. Naghizadeh et al. (2010)

phase is called positive phase. As a result of the

performed numerical modeling of the effect of

wave propagation, the gases produced by the

the surface explosion on buried structures. They

explosion are cooled down and pressures are

also used a model similar to the model provided

slightly less than atmospheric pressure. Because

by Lu and Wang for modeling of geometry.

of this pressure difference, it is reversed to the

Gholizadeh and Rajabi (2013) in addition to

center of the explosion. The result will be a

studied the effects of surface and subsurface

reduction in pressure or suction which is called

blast on buried structures and their modeling,

a negative phase. The negative phase suction is

they have also predicted strategies for

relatively small and gradual so that it is often

improving the safety of these structures and

neglected to design explosion-resistant

their efficiency.

structures. The maximum pressure from the

In this study, to prevent the transmission

explosion) PSO+ (significantly decreases when

of pressure waves from the explosion through

it is away from the explosion center

the soil, and consequently, to reduce the

(Corresponding to the third power to the

damage of buried ammunition depots, a special

explosion center), but contrary to that, the

cover CRC is evaluated. The reason for using

loading period (the time of the load caused by

this coating is the high elasticity of the rubber

the explosion on the structure) increases with

in absorption and damping the energy of

the increasing distance from the explosion

surface explosions. We will study first the

center (Figure 1) (UFC, 2008).

modeling of the LS-DYNA finite element

The TNT element was used to model the

software, and then introduce the geometric

explosion by using the Jones-Wilkins-Lee

shape of the model and finally, the results of the

(JWL) equation. This model is widely used that

research are discussed.

in which the pressure caused by the explosion is

defined by (

0



 R

Eq. 1) (Wang et al., 2005

0

R

).2

(

)

(

)

MATERIAL AND METHODS

w

1

w





2

w





P  A (

�1 

) e

�

 B (

�1 

) e

�



Em 0

1

R 0

R 20

0

Numerical modeling in LS-DYNA

software

In this study, the LS-DYNA software was

used to model, analyze and evaluate the results.

This software uses the finite element method. In

this study, the structure and surrounding soil are

modeled in 2-D. In the following, the equations

of the states and the properties of the materials

used to model the soil, structure, air and

explosion phenomenon will be investigated,

and then the geometric of the model with

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 18

Table 2. Parameters of the dense state equation -linear

D

ensity parameter g/cm3

(

)

















1



2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1



9

0

Value

1.674

1.740

1.847

1.997

2.144

2.25

2.38

2.485

2.585

2.6713

Pressure parameter (MPa)

10

P

9

P

8

P

7

P

6

P

5

P

4

P

3

P

2

P

1

P

Value

0

4.577

14.98

29.1

59.1

98.1

179.4

290

450.2

650.7

D

ensity parameter g/cm3

(

)

















1



2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1



9

0

Value

1.674

1.746

2.086

2.15

2.3

2.57

2.598

2.635

2.641

2.8

Sound speed (m/s)

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

1

v

2

3

4

5

6

8

v

7

10

v

9

Value

265.2

852.1

1721.7

1875.5

2264.8

2956

3112

4600

4634

4634

Table 3. Parameters of strength model - MO Granular

Pressure parameter (MPa)

















1



2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10



9

Value

0

3.4

35

101.3

184

500

0

0

0

0

Yield stress (MPa)





















Y 1

Y 2

Y 3

Y 4

Y 5

Y 6

Y 7

Y 8

Y 9

Y 10

Value

0

4.23

44.6

124

226

226

0

0

0

0

Density parameter (g/cm3)

















1



2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10



9

Value

1.674

1.74

2.086

2.15

2.3

2.57

2.598

2.635

2.641

2.8

Shear modulus (MPa)

G

G

G

1

G

3

G

2

7

G

6

G

5

G

4

1

G

9

G

8

0

Value

76.9

869

4030

4900

7770

14.8e3

16.5e3

36.7e3

37.3e3

37.3e3

Wave propagation in the soil

crushed material. Usually, there is a cap on the elastic

The propagation of the waves caused by the

strength surface.

explosion in the soil in two forms: the volumetric

(pressure) and the surface wave (Riley), which the most

destructive of these is the pressure wave for a buried

structure close to the explosion site. The propagation of

this wave in continuous and free environments can be

calculated by (Eq. 2, Eq. 3) (Lu et al. 2005):

2.52

 n

 160

(

R

u

f

)

c

1

(2)

3

w

p  . C.

g

u

(3)

Where fc is the coefficient of connection between

the ground and explosive, w is the explosive mass to Kg,

R is the distance from the explosion to meter, C is the

Figure 2. Three strength surfaces for concrete (Lu et al.,

velocity of the explosion wave in meters per second, P

2005)

Following the hardening phase, additional plastic

pressure in soil to kg / m2,  is the density Soil to

straining of the material leads to damage and strength

kg/m3and n is the soil parameters that can be calculated

reduction. Damage is accumulated by (Eq. 4, Eq. 5).

from TM5-855-1 (Wang et al. 2005).





Concrete

pl

D  � failure

)

4

(

For concrete modeling, the P-alpha equation

 p

(Herrmann, 1969) and RHT resistance model are used to

failure

*

*

2

D

min

describe the deviation results of concrete. The P-alpha



 D ( p  p

)

pd

1

spall



� f

)

5

(

equation is suitable for explicit dynamic analysis and

min



provides accurate behavior of materials in high stresses.

Where D1 and D2 are damage constants, f

is

The RHT model is an advanced model for plastic



material behavior that is designed for brittle materials by

the minimum strain to reach failure, pl and p* is the

Riddle et al (1999). This model is especially useful for

*

*

p

 p ( f f )

pressure normalized by fc , and spall

t

c where

modeling concrete with dynamic loading. This model is

also suitable for modeling brittle materials such as rocks

ft and fc are tensile and compressive strength,

and ceramics. The strength model uses three strength

respectively. Tables 4 and 5 shows the parameters used

surfaces (Figure 2) an elastic limit surface, a failure

surface and the remaining strength surface for the

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 19

for the P-Alpha equation and the RHT resistance model

Respectively:

Table 4. Parameters of the state equation- P-Alpha

Porous dens

Ref. dens

Porous sound speed

I

. nit. Com. pr

Sol. Com. Pr.

Parameter

(g/cm3)

(g/cm3)

(m/s)

(KPa)

(KPa)

Value

2.314

2.75

2.92e3

23.3e3

6e6

n

A1

A2

A3

B1,B2

Parameter

-

MPa

MPa

MPa

-

Value

3

35.27e3

39.58e3

904e4

1.22

Table 5. Parameters of strength model - RHT

S

. hear modul

fc

ft/fc

fs/fc

A

Parameter

M

( pa)

M

( pa)

-

-

-

Value

16.7e3

35

0.1

0.18

1.6

Parameter

N

Q

B

. rit. To Duc. Trans

Gelas/Gplas

Elas. Stre./ft

Value

0.61

0.68

0.0105

2

0.7

Parameter

Elas. Stre./fc

B

M

Com. Stre. Exp

T

. ens. Stre. Exp

Value

0.53

1.6

0.61

0.032

0.036

Parameter

D1

D2

 f ,min

-

-

Value

0.04

1

0.01

-

-

Reinforcement steel bar

Where  ,  and e Are adiabatic exponent,

The steel 1006, with a linear equation and the

density and special air temperature. The parameters of

Johnson-Cook resistance model, were used with regard

(Eq.7) are given in Table 7.

to the failure due to the strain of the plastic (Autodyn

help, 2005). The Johnson-Cook model is a rate

Table 6. Linear Equation and Johnson-Cook Resistance

dependent, elastic-plastic model. The model defines the

Model

yield stress Y by (Eq. 6) (Autodyn help, 2005).

Shear

Yield

Hard.

Hard.

Stra.Rat.

Parameter

yield

Stre.

Cons

Exp.

Cons.

n

*

m

Y  [

(Mpa)

(Mpa)

-

-

-

0

Y  B. ][1  C log  ][1  T ]

P

p

H

)

6

(



Value

81.7e3

350

275

0.36

0.022

Where Y0 is the initial yield strength, p is the

Ref. Stra.

Ultimate Plastic Strain

-

*



Parameter

Rat.

effective plastic strain, p is the normalized effective

-

-

-

Value

1

0.2

-

plastic strain rate, B,C,n, m are material constants. H

T is

homologous

temperature,

Table 7. Parameters of the ideal gas state equation

T  ( T  T

) ( T

 T

)

H

room

melt

room with T



melt being the

Ref. Dens.

Ref. Temp.

melting temperature and T

Parameter

room the ambient temperature.

-

(g/cm3)

(K)

The parameters of the linear equation and the reinforcing

Value

1.4

1.225e-3

288.2

resistance model are given in (Table 6).

Crumb rubber (CR)

Atmosphere

For CR modeling, rubber element with

mechanical properties of NBR rubber was used with

Ideal gas state equation was used to model the air

state equation and hyperelastic resistance model

around the model. This equation is one of the simplest

(Autodyn help, 2005, Pornprasit et al., 2016). This

state equations for ideal gases, which has been used in

equation is suitable for modeling materials with high

many applications that include gas movement. This

strain range. There are several models in the hyperelastic

equation is defined as (Eq. 7).

resistivity model for solving the problem. In this study,

P  ( 1). e

we used the Ogden model. The Ogden model is suitable

(7)

for materials with a range of strain energy potentials of

over 700% (Autodyn help, 2005). Due to the high rubber

capability in energy absorption, this model is suitable.

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 20

The strain energy potential of the Ogden model is

defined as Eq. (8): (Autodyn help, 2005):

1

1



1



1



 

(

 

 



1

2

3

3)

1

2 2

2

2



(

 

 



1

2

3

3)

2

)

8

(

3 3

3

3



(

 

 



1

2

3

3)

3

1

2

1

4

1

6



( J  1) 

( J  1) 

( J  1)

1

d

d 2

d 3



Where  strain energy potential p and J are

deviatoric principal stretches of the left–Cauch -Green

tensor

and

determinant of the

Figure 3. Modeling geometry in the software





elastic deformation gradient respectively. p , p and

Sensitivity analysis

d p

To test the sensitivity of the results to the size of

are material constants. In (Tables 8 and 9), the

mesh, the pressure output at a depth of 3 meters from the

parameters used for the Hyperelastic state equation and

soil surface was compared for different sizes of the mesh

Hyperelastic-Ogden 3rd Order strength model are

(Figure 4). As shown in Figure 4, with a reduction in the

expressed.

size of the elements from 0.5 m to 0. 1 m, significant

Table 8. Parameters of Hyperelastic state equation

changes are made to the results. On the other hand, by

reducing the size of the elements from 0.125 meters

Ref. Dens.

Parameter

(g/cm3)

later, the output pressure is very small and can be

Value

1

ignored. So the mesh size of 0.125 m was chosen as the

optimal mesh.

Table 9. Parameters of Hyperelastic-Ogden 3rd Order

strength model

4

element size=0.1(m)

Paramete

Mu1

Alpha1

d1

Mu2

Alpha2

3.5

element size=0.125(m)

r

(Kpa)

-

(1/Kpa)

(Kpa)

-

3

element size=0.25(m)

Value

5

1.18

4.82e-6

1.3

618.03

2.5

element size=0.5 (m)

pa)

Paramete

d2

Mu3

Alpha3

d3

-

2

r

(1/Kpa)

(Kpa)

-

(1/Kpa)

-

Value

0

-9.81

-2

0

-

1.5

reesure (mP

1

Boundary condition of the model

0.5

In this study, the flow-out and transmission

0

elements were used to create a semi-infinite environment

-1

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

and to prevent the return of the explosive pressure

Time (ms)

waves. These elements provide the pass of flow and

materials from the boundaries of the model. The flow out

Figure 4. Variations of Pressure vs. time for different

element was used at the boundaries of the space around

sizes of elements

the model to transmit air pressure and the transmission

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

element was used around the soil environment.

Distribution of wave explosion in the soil

Geometric of the model

To investigate the propagation of the wave

For modeling of concrete structures, soil,

explosion in the soil and the pressure at different depths,

explosives, and air were used from Lagrangian, ALE and

gauges were placed at depths of one meter at a distance.

Eulerian, respectively. The model used consists of three

Figure 5 shows the pressure against time at depths of 1

parts: structure, soil, air. The explosive is equivalent to

and 2 meters from the soil surface for 25 milliseconds of

100 kilograms of TNT. Figure 3 shows a graphical

analysis.

representation of the modeling geometry in the software.

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 21

Figure 5 showed that the intensity of the pressure

caused by the explosion has been reduced by increasing

the distance from the soil surface (the explosion site).

A

A

B

B

Figure 5. Pressure diagrams in soil A: At a depth of 1

meter from the ground B: At a depth of 2 meters from

the ground

C

Impact of crumb rubber cement (CRC) on

Figure 6. Graphical pattern of failure in model A: in the

results

absence of concrete cushions and rubber substrates; B: in

In order to investigate the effect of CRC on the

the presence of concrete cushions and no substratum; C:

results, by modeling concrete cover and CR at a depth of

in the presence of rubber substrates and concrete

2 m from the ground surface and by comparing the

cushions

results of pressure at a depth of 3 m (under the sub-layer

of CR in the presence and absence of these layers effect

Also, to investigate the effect of the protective

these layers were examined. Figure 6 illustrated the

layer CRC pressure and failure at a depth of 3 m below

graphic failure of the structure in the presence and

the protective layer were measured at gauge No. 3 at

absence of CR and concrete cover.

different times. The pressure and failure variations

diagram at a depth of 3 meters and above the structure

are showen in Figures 7 and 8 for different states of the

CR substrate.

As shown in Figures 7 and 8, the presence of a

single concrete cover only has a very small effect on the

results. While modeling of CR has achieved significant

changes in the number of results. On the other hand, the

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 22

amount of pressure and damage decreases with the

)

)

)

)

Kg/m)

increase in the thickness of the CR layer. Also, according

e

-

Kg

m

-

-

m/s

Mpa

2

(

(

(

(

(

to the results, it can be seen that the reduction of

San

pressure and damage is a slight decrease after 0.4 m

d

10

2.

0.4

3

0.4

1670

549

4.53

cla

0

4

thickness. Therefore, the thickness of 0.4 m can be

y

determined as optimal thickness.

CONCLUSION

In order to check the accuracy of maximum

explosion pressure, using the (Eq. 2, Eq. 3) and also the

In this study, the effect of crumb rubber cement

parameters of Table 10 (TM5-855-1, 1984), the

(CRC) on reducing the amount of failure and pressure

maximum value of the pressure from the results of the

caused by the explosion phenomenon was investigated.

software is compared with the experimental results as

Therefore, the geometric model of the structure and its

follows.

surrounding soil, as well as the explosion phenomenon,

As can be seen in table 10, the maximum value of

was analyzed in the LS-DYNA finite element software.

the pressure from the experimental relation is

The results showed that despite the CR and with an

conservative, which can be due to the linearity of the

increase in the thickness of the CR layer, the amount of

equation.

the failure and pressure applied to the structure caused

by the explosion wave is greatly reduced. But this

4.5

Without concrete cover and rubber crumb

reduction is very small and can be ignored after 0.4

With concrete cover and without rubber

4

crumb

meters in thickness. Therefore, 0.4 m thickness of the

)

3.5

with concrete cover and rubber crumb=0.1(m)

aP

CR was selected as the optimum thickness of the CR

3

with concrete cover and rubber crumb=0.2(m)

with concrete cover and rubber crumb=0.3(m)

2.5

layer to control the failure and pressure.

(M

with concrete cover and rubber crumb=0.4(m)

re

2

with concrete cover and rubber crumb=0.5(m)

According to the results of this research, it can be

us 1.5

seen that the reason for the high performance of the

e

1

re

crumb rubber in absorption and damping of energy is its

P

0.5

0

high elasticity. Therefore, high- elasticity polymeric

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

materials can be used to absorb more energy.

Time (ms)

DECLARATIONS

Figure 7. Pressure changes vs. time in different modes of

existence and absence of (CR) and concrete cover at a depth of 3

Authors’ contribution

meters

All authors contributed equally to this work.

0.35

Without concrete cover and crumb

Competing interests

rubber

With concrete cover and without crumb

The authors declare that they have no competing

0.3

rubber

with concrete cover and crumb

interests.

rubber=0.1(m)

0.25

with concrete cover and crumb

rubber=0.2(m)

REFERENCES

0.2

eg

Amir SD, sahman S, hesam K. (2017). A modal

am

nonlinear static analysis method for assessment of

a

0.15

D

structures under blast loading. Journal of Vibration

and Control, 64: 124-137.

0.1

Feldgun V.R, Karinski Y.S, Yankelevsky D.Z.z. (2011).

Blast Pressure Distribution on a Buried Obstacle in

0.05

a Porous Wet Soil. Journal of Vibration and

Control, 2: 45-69.

00

5

10

15

20

25

30

Lu Y, Wang Z. (2006). Characterization of Structural

Time (ms)

Effects from Above-Ground Explosion Using

Coupled Numerical Simulation. Comput. Struct,

84: 1729- 1742.

Figure 8. Failure diagram vs. time in different modes of

existence and absence of CR and concrete cover on top

Lu Y, Wang Z, Chong K. (2005). A comparative study of

buried structure in soil subjected to blast load using

of the structure

2D and 3D numerical simulations. Soil Dynamics

and Earthquake Engineering, 25: 275–288.

Table 10. The experimental parameters of the TM-5-

Nagy N, Mohamed M, Boot J. C. (2010). Nonlinear

855-1 instructions to calculate the pressure caused by the

Numerical Modeling for the Effects of Surface

explosion at a distance of 3 meters

Explosions on Buried Reinforced Concrete

Soi

Connecti

W

R

Scaled

n

ρ

C

Pmax

Structures. Geomechanics and Eng., an Int. J.

l

on factor

distan

typ

ce

Techn, 2: 1- 18.

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 23

Amin G, Mohsen R. (2013). Secure concrete structures

Vaezi M, Pourzangbar A, Fadavi M, Rahbar Rangi A.

buried against the explosive load. Scientific Journal

(2016). Configuration effects on the performance of

of Passive Defense Science and Technology, 3:

viscous dampers (Text in Persian). 4th International

167-179.

Congress on Civil Engineering Architecture and

Ngo T, Mendis P, Gupta A. (2007). Blast loading and

Urban Development 27-29 December 2016, Shahid

blast effects on structures–an overview

Beheshti University. Tehran. Iran (Oral

.

presentation).

Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, 7:

76–91.

Vaezi M, Pourzangbar A, Fadavi M, Rahbar Rangi A.

(2016). Impact of different configurations and

Department of Defense, Unified facilities criteria. 2008.

increasing difficulty bracing elements in viscous

Structures to resist the effects of accidental

damper performance. The 18th Marine Industries

explosions, UFC, 3: 340-02.

Conference (MIC2016). Kish Island. Iran (Oral

Wang Z.Q, Lu Y, Hao H, Chong K. (2005). A full

presentation).

coupled numerical analysis approach for buried

TM5-855-1. 1984. Fundamental of protective design for

structures subjected to subsurface blast. Comput.

conventional weapons. US Army Engineer

Struct, 83(4-5): 339-356.

Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg.

Fiserova D. (2005-2006). Numerical Analyses of Buried

Yeganeh-Bakhtiary A, Pourzangbar A, Hajivalie F.

Mine Explosions with Emphasis on Effect of Soil

(2015). Genetic Programming to predict scour

Properties on Loading. Cranfield University.

depth at coastal structures. Journal of Civil and

Leong E.C, Anand S, Cheong H.K, Lim C.H. (2007).

Environmental Engineering, 45(78): 115-122.

Re-examination of peak stress scaled distance due

to ground shock. International Journal of Impact

Engineering, 34: 1487-1499.

Herrmann W. (1969). Constitutive Equation for the

Dynamic Compaction of Ductile Porous Materials,

J. Appl. Phys, 40 (6): 2490-2499.

Riedel W, Thoma K, Hiermaier S, Schmolinske E.

(1999). Penetration of Reinforced Concrete by

BETA-B-500, Numerical Analysis using a New

Macroscopic Concrete Model for Hydrocodes.

Internationales Symposium, Interaction of the

Effects of Munitions with Structures, Berlin

Strausberg, 03.-07: 315 – 322.

Autodyn help. (2005). Theory Manual. Century

Dynamics INS: Revision.

Pornprasit R, Pornprasit P, Boonma P, Natwichai J.

(2016). Determination of the Mechanical Properties

of Rubber by FT-NIR, Journal of Spectroscopy.

247-255.

Pourzangbar A. (2012). Determination the most effective

parameters on scour depth at seawalls using genetic

programming (GP). The 10th international

conference on coasts. Ports and marine structures

(ICOPMASS 2012). Tehran. Iran (Oral

presentation).

Pourzangbar A, Saber A, Yeganeh-Bakhtiary A, Rasoul

Ahari L. (2016). Predicting Scour Depth at

Seawalls using GP and ANNs. Journal of

Hydroinformatics, 19(2).

Pourzangbar A, Brocchini M, Saber A, Mahjoobi J,

Mirzaaghasi M, Barzegar M. (2017). Prediction of

scour depth at breakwaters due to non-breaking

waves using machine learning approaches. Journal

of Applied Ocean Research, 68: 120-128.

Pourzangbar A, Losada M.A, Saber A, Rasoul Ahari L,

Larroudé F, Vaezi M, Brocchini M. (2017).

Prediction of non-breaking wave-induced scour

depth at the trunk section of breakwaters using

Genetic Programming and Artificial Neural

Networks. Journal of Coastal Engineering, 121:

107-118.

To cite this paper: Mirzaee M, Vaezi M and Mamandi S and Abdolrahman O (2018). Reduction of Damage of Buried Ammunition Depots in the Ground by Crumb Rubber Cement against Explosion Force. J. Civil Eng. Urban., 8 (2): 17-24. www.ojceu.ir 24