Effects of Entrance Shape and Blast Pocket on Internal Overpressure Mitigation for Protective Tunnels Exposed to External Detonation on the Ground
Source abstract
Abstract
This study presents a numerical analysis to reduce the overpressure inside protective tunnels for external detonations. A three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics model of a tunnel subjected to detonation for a hemispherical charge with a charge weight of 555 kg and a standoff distance of 7.6 m was established, based on a mesh sensitivity study to obtain an optimal element size, stability analysis of overpressure, and validation study to evaluate the accuracy of the numerical results based on Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 3-340-02. A parametric analysis was performed using the validated numerical model to investigate the effects of the entrance shape and blast pockets on the reduction in the maximum overpressure. The maximum overpressures were effectively reduced as the slope angle of the tunnel entrance decreased and the length of the blast pocket divided by the tunnel width decreased. An optimized shape of the tunnel was proposed based on the numerical results, where the peak overpressures were reduced by a maximum of 64.5%. This study aims to protect facilities, personnel, and equipment and further reduce construction costs by lowering the overpressure rating of blast valves in protective tunnels.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · Transportation Safety and Impact Analysis · Combustion and Detonation Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Architectural Engineering, Catholic Kwandong University, Gangneung-si 25601, Republic of Korea
Department of Architecture, Kyungmin University, Uijeongbu 11618, Republic of Korea
Department of ICT Integrated Ocean Smart Cities Engineering, Dong-A University, Busan 49304, Republic of Korea
Funding
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Evaluation of pressure effects on blast valves for facility protection of underground computing center
2. Blast overpressure evaluation for blast valves in protective tunnels with Rectangular-shaped tunnel entrances
3. Kinney, G.F. (1962). Explosive Shocks in Air, The Macmillan Company.
4. Kinney, G.F., and Graham, K.J. (1985). Explosive Shocks in Air, Springer. [2nd ed.].10.1007/978-3-642-86682-1 ↗
5. Smith, P.D., and Hetherington, J.G. (1994). Blast and Ballistic Loading of Structures, Butterworth-Heinemann.
6. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2003). Reference Manual to Mitigate Potential Terrorist Attacks Against Buildings (FEMA-426).
7. Krauthammer, T. (2008). Modern Protective Structures, CRC Press.10.1201/9781420015423 ↗
8. Dusenberry, D.O. (2010). Handbook for Blast-Resistant Design of Buildings, Wiley.10.1002/9780470549070 ↗
9. Blast wave clearing for detonations of high explosives10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002327 ↗
10. ASCE (1985). Design of Structures to Resist Nuclear Weapons Effects, Manual 42, American Society of Civil Engineers.
11. Mullin, M.J. (2002). Finite Element Modeling of Energy-Absorbing Materials in Blast-Loaded Structures. [Master’s Thesis, University of Nevada].
12. Yang, M., and Qiao, P. (2010). Blast Protection of Civil Infrastructures and Vehicles Using Composites, Elsevier.
13. Experimental and numerical study of the blast wave decrease using sandwich panel by granular materials core10.1016/j.dt.2020.09.004 ↗
14. Al-Rifaie, H., Studzinski, R., Gajewski, T., Malendowski, M., Sumelka, W., and Sielicki, P.W. (2021). A new blast absorbing sandwich panel with unconnected corrugated layers—Numerical study. Energies, 14.10.3390/en14010214 ↗
15. Hager, K., and Birnbaum, N. (1996, January 22–26). Calculation of the internal blast pressures for tunnel magazine tests. Proceedings of the 27th DoD Explosives Safety Seminar, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
16. Zhao, B.I., Cui, C.Y., Chen, J.P., and Wang, Y. (2014, January 29–31). Numerical simulation about the effect of tunnel expansion chamber on the shock wave attenuation. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer, Mechatronics, Control and Electronic Engineering (ICCMCEE 2015), Dordrecht, The Netherlands.10.2991/iccmcee-15.2015.106 ↗
17. Isaac, O.S., Alshammari, O.G., Pickering, E.G., Clarke, S.D., and Rigby, S.E. (2022). Blast wave interaction with structures-an overview. Int. J. Prot. Struct., 1–47.10.1177/20414196221118595 ↗
18. Stirling, C.G. (2021). Viper Blast User Manual and Examples for Version 1.20.0, Commercial in Confidence, Stirling Simulation Services Limited.
19. Numerical modeling of close-in detonations of high explosives10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.09.022 ↗
20. Cook, R.D. (2002). Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, Wiley. [4th ed.].
21. Department of Defense (DoD) (2008). Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC): Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions (UFC 3-340-02).
22. Kingery, C.N. (1966). Air Blast Parameters versus Distance for Hemispherical TNT Surface Bursts, Ballistic Research Laboratories. Report No. 1344.
23. Kingery, C.N., and Bulmash, G. (1984). Airblast Parameters from TNT Spherical Air Burst and Hemispherical Surface Burst, US Army Ballastic Research Laboratory. Report ARBRL-TR-02555.
24. Kingery, C.N., and Pannill, B.F. (1964). Peak Overpressure vs Scaled Distance for TNT Surface Bursts (Hemispherical Charges), Ballistic Research Laboratories. BRL Memorandum Report 1518.10.21236/AD0443102 ↗
25. US Army Training and Doctrine Command (2007). A Military Guide to Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century: U.S. Army TRADOC G2 Handbook No. 1 (Version 5.0), US Department of the Army.
26. Rose, T.A. (2001). An Approach to the Evaluation of Blast Loads on Finite and Semi-Infinite Structures. [Ph.D. Thesis, Cranfield University].
27. Wada, Y., and Liou, M.S. (1994, January 10–13). A Flux Splitting Scheme with High Resolution and Robustness for Discontinuities; NASA Technical Memorandum 106452; ICOMP-93-50; AIAA-94-0083. Proceedings of the 32nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA.10.2514/6.1994-83 ↗
28. ANSYS (2005). Remapping Tutorial, Revision 4.3, ANSYS Inc.
29. A numerical analysis for blast pressure and impulse from free-air burst10.7781/kjoss.2016.28.4.271 ↗
30. Design of frame type blast door reflecting explosion proof test10.7781/kjoss.2020.32.2.067 ↗
31. Fickett, W., and Davis, W.C. (1979). Detonation: Theory and Experiment, Dover Publications Inc.
32. Dobratz, B.M., and Crawford, P.C. (1985). LLNL Explosive Handbook: Properties of Chemical Explosives and Explosive Simulants, Report No.: UCRL-52997; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
33. Incident and normally reflected overpressure and impulse for detonations of spherical high explosives in free air10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001305 ↗
34. Numerical Study of Shock-Wave Diffraction in Variable-Section Channels in Gas Suspensions10.1007/s10573-008-0011-3 ↗
35. Shear layer behavior resulting from shock wave diffraction10.1007/s00348-011-1233-9 ↗
36. Departments of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force (1969). Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions (with Addenda), Army Technical Manual (TM 5-1300), Navy Publication (NAVFAC P-397), Air Force Manual (AFM 88-22).
37. Departments of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force (1990). Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions (with Addenda), Army Technical Manual (TM 5-1300), Navy Publication (NAVFAC P-397), Air Force Manual (AFM 88-22), Revision 1.
38. ASME (2006). Guide for Verification and Validation in Computational Solid Mechanics, American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
39. Shin, J., Whittaker, A.S., Cormie, D., and Aref, A.J. (2015, January 9–13). Verification and validation of a CFD code for modeling detonations of high explosives. Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium for the Interaction of the Effects of Munitions with Structures. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.