The blast resistance of structures used in buildings needs to be investigated due to the increased threat of a terrorist attack. The damage done by Composition B or Powergel to steel fibre reinforced reactive powder c...The blast resistance of structures used in buildings needs to be investigated due to the increased threat of a terrorist attack. The damage done by Composition B or Powergel to steel fibre reinforced reactive powder concrete （SFRPC） panels and ordinary reinforced concrete （RC） panels of equivalent static flexural strength is compared. A 0. 5 kg charge was detonated at a distance of 0. 1 m from the 1. 3 m × 1. 0 m × 0. 1 m （thick） panels, which were simply supported and spaning 1.3 m. Dynamic displacement measurements, high-speed video recording and visual examination of the panels for spall and breach were undertaken. The SFRPC panels withstood the bare charge blast better than the reinforced ordinary concrete panels. Neither type of panel was breached using a O. 5 kg charge, The RC panel exhibited more spalling when Composition B was used. Under successive Composition B loading conditions, the RC panel was breached. In comparison the SFRPC panel was not breached. Exposure to fragmenting charge loading conditions confirmed these performance differences between the SFRPC panel and the reinforced ordinary concrete panel.展开更多
文摘The blast resistance of structures used in buildings needs to be investigated due to the increased threat of a terrorist attack. The damage done by Composition B or Powergel to steel fibre reinforced reactive powder concrete （SFRPC） panels and ordinary reinforced concrete （RC） panels of equivalent static flexural strength is compared. A 0. 5 kg charge was detonated at a distance of 0. 1 m from the 1. 3 m × 1. 0 m × 0. 1 m （thick） panels, which were simply supported and spaning 1.3 m. Dynamic displacement measurements, high-speed video recording and visual examination of the panels for spall and breach were undertaken. The SFRPC panels withstood the bare charge blast better than the reinforced ordinary concrete panels. Neither type of panel was breached using a O. 5 kg charge, The RC panel exhibited more spalling when Composition B was used. Under successive Composition B loading conditions, the RC panel was breached. In comparison the SFRPC panel was not breached. Exposure to fragmenting charge loading conditions confirmed these performance differences between the SFRPC panel and the reinforced ordinary concrete panel.
