Transactions, SMiRT-23

Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015

Division VII

Missile Impact on Reinforced Concrete Barrier Slab Using Various Failures

Models
Mrigendra Nath Ray1 ,Thiru Venkata Babuji2

1
Consultant (Nuclear) ,Larsen&Toubro Technology Services ,Vadodara, India
2
Executive Engineer, Larsen&Toubro Technology Services ,Vadodara, India.

ABSTRACT
This paper aims at examining the effect of Impact of a Steel semi rigid Missile on Concrete Barrier which
resembles the Safety cover on important safety systems in a Nuclear Plant. In general, rigid missiles are
ejecting out of various rotating machinery, high pressure valves installed in plant working area. Though
these missiles eject on an angular path but for simplicity we will consider that these will hit the barrier at
perpendicular to the plane of the barrier. Reinforced Concrete had been used as barrier considering its
structural stiffness and ductility for absorbing Impact Energy. Two different concrete barriers will be
modelled in Finite Element Programme ABAQUS vers6.12 in explicit domain with reinforcement and
without reinforcement and critical depth of barrier will be assessed based on the computer stress output on
the impact zone based on two failure models ,Brittle cracking Model and Concrete Damaged Plasticity
Model. In addition, Empirical formulae will be used to verify Finite Element Results.

INTRODUCTION
Reinforced concrete had become an excellent material for barrier against missile hit..The
Missile in this paper is limited to missile made of carbon steel element cylindrical in shape and
Hitting the target with a very high velocity. This paper examines the material behaviour of plain and
reinforced concrete barrier with and without reinforcement. Computer programme ABAQUS vers6.12 is
used to model the problem in explicit domain for two different failure model of concrete
Namely Brittle Cracking model and Concrete Damage Plasticity model.

Physics of Stress Strain Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete

Two main failure mechanisms of concrete are Crushing of Concrete due to Compression and Cracking
under Tension. Here in this paper we presume only Uniaxial State of Stress for Concrete as it matches the
main theme of study that is Impact of Missile on Concrete.

Fig-1 :Compressive Stress-Strain Relationship for ABAQUS

 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII

Fig-2: Tensile Stress-Strain Diagram for Concrete

The Compressive Stress Strain Diagram in Fig-1 has two zones namely Elastic zone which is assumed to
σ
be in the range of 0 to 0.5σcu in the ascending curve and Inelastic Zone from 0.5 cu in the ascending curve
to 0.3σcu in the descending curve where σcu is the characteristic strength (maximum cube strength) of
concrete in a compression test. Fig-1 is developed by Hsu and Hsu in 1994 [1] after carrying out laboratory
tests and verified with numerical results. To define Stress Strain relationship in Compression zone we have
to input Compressive stress σc and corresponding inelastic strain εin by deducting elastic strain εel from
the total strain εc marked in Fig-1 .In addition, a parameter dc which is designated as damage parameter in
compression and is calculated as equal to the ratio of inelastic strain /total strain. Here the total strain is
obtained from the graph and elastic strain is calculated by the ratio of Compressive stress σc and Initial
tangent Modulus of Concrete EO.
Similar exercise is done for processing the Tensile Stress Strain Data plotted in fig-2 in which fct is max
tensile stress obtained in a tensile test of concrete and corresponding strain is designated as total strain εt.
Now input for Tensile stress behaviour and Tensile damage is similarly to be derived from the Test data
and a parameter Tensile Cracking Strain εck is calculated as the difference between total tensile strain εt.
Minus elastic tensile strain εet for the undamaged concrete. Similarly tensile damage parameter is calculated
as ratio of cracking strain by total tensile strain. For all the cases of parametric study, we have used Concrete
Grade M50 as per Indian Standard for Plain & Reinforced Concrete IS 456-2000 [3]. As regards Stress
Strain profile of Steel used in this paper, we have used only one type of Carbon Steel Material of Grade
ASTM Grade A36.
Stress strain data used in the analysis.
The Best option would be to generate lab test data for Concrete as well as Steel but as our
principal aim in this paper is to analyze Impact of Missile on Concrete Barrier, therefore data for
both Concrete and Steel was taken from literature [2] mostly from Research paper. Effort was
made to generate Stress Strain data for Concrete in Uniaxial Compression and Tension using
approach by Hsu and Hsu(1994) [1].
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
Brittle Cracking Model For Concrete.

B.C Model is considered for applications in which the behaviour of concrete is dominated by Tensile
cracking. It is most accurate in applications where brittle behaviour dominates such that the assumptions,
that the material is linear elastic in compression, is adequate. It is generally accepted that Concrete
exhibits two primary modes of behaviour,
A brittle mode in which micro cracks gradually transforms to macro crack with highly localised
deformation And
A ductile mode where micro cracks develops uniformly through the specimen leading to Non localised
deformation. This model allows removal of material based on brittle failure criteria.

Concrete Damaged Plasticity Model

The concrete damaged plasticity model is primarily intended to provide a general capability for
the analysis of concrete structures under cyclic and/or dynamic loading. The model is also suitable
for the analysis of other quasi-brittle materials, such as rock, mortar and ceramics; but it is the
behavior of concrete that is used in this model to motivate different aspects of the constitutive
theory. Under low confining pressures, concrete behaves in a brittle manner; the main failure
mechanisms are cracking in tension and crushing in compression. The brittle behavior of concrete
disappears when the confining pressure is sufficiently large to prevent crack propagation. In these
circumstances failure is driven by the consolidation and collapse of the concrete micro porous
microstructure, leading to a macroscopic response that resembles that of a ductile material with
work hardening. Modeling the behavior of concrete under large hydrostatic pressures is out of the
scope of the plastic-damage model considered here. The constitutive theory in this section aims to
capture the effects of irreversible damage associated with the failure mechanisms that occur in
concrete and other quasi-brittle materials under fairly low confining pressures (less than four or
five times the ultimate compressive stress in uniaxial compression loading). These effects manifest
themselves in the following macroscopic properties:
Different yield strengths in tension and compression, with the initial yield stress in compression
being a factor of 10 or higher than the initial yield stress in tension;
Softening behavior in tension as opposed to initial hardening followed by softening in
compression;
Different degradation of the elastic stiffness in tension and compression;
Stiffness recovery effects during cyclic loading.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM DISCUSSED IN THIS PAPER.

Case-1: Brittle Shear Crack failure Mode.
Case-1(a) Plain Concrete Plate Impacted By Steel Cylinder shaped Missile.

To understand the effect of Impact on Concrete Barrier, we have taken a simple square plate of size 5 meter
made of Plain concrete of thickness 20 cm and a Carbon steel solid cylinder of length 0.5 meter and
diameter 0.4 meter as shown in fig-3.The Concrete Plate was fixed at the 4 edges. Now this steel cylinder
is made of Carbon steel with Modulus of Elasticity as 206Gpa and Poisons Ratio 0.3 , Grade of Concrete
was M50 implying Max Characteristic Strength under compression as 50 Mpa. Both the parts were modeled
in ABAQUS 6.12 in explicit domain
In this model, Concrete Plate was having 400 Linear Hex elements C3D8R type and Steel Cylinder
Having 135 Linear Hex element C3D8R.This plate was impacted by the steel cylinder having an Impact
velocity 150m/sec considering damage model as Brittle Shear Crack Model . Though total time of Impact
was input as 0.2 sec but we could see penetration of the plate in the first time step itself which was
0.02sec.Penetration was a clear Punching Shear Type as the Von Misses Stress on Concrete elements
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
away from the boundary of the impact zone was within allowable tensile stress of concrete of grade M50
which is 0.7√fck where fck =Characteristics strength on Concrete which is 50Mpa in this case.
Case-1(b) Reinforeced Concrete Plate Impacted by Steel Cylinder shaped missile.
In this case, all material parameter and the Geometry of the RC Plate excepting the thickness which is
increased to 30cm and Steel Cylinder remains as same and the Impact velocity also is unchanged. But
the number of Hex elements for Concrete M50 is increased to 59225 and the same for Rebar ASTM A-
36 is counted as 18250 whereas total number of element for Steel Missile ASTM A-36 is increased to
47300.These differences are caused due to placement of Rebar of diameter 20mm at mid depth at regular
interval of 40mm center to center. While defining contact of Steel Missile with Concrete and Steel Rebar
Surface to surface contact was considered between missile and concrete and between rebar and concrete.
Fig-3 ,4 and 5 shows the screenshots of Von Misses Stress contours of Brittle Shear Crack Model on
Reinforced Concrete Plate. Total time of impact was considered as 5 millisecond.

Fig-3. Brittle Shear Crack Model on UnReinforced Concrete Plate

Fig-4 Brittle Shear Crack Model on Reinforced Concrete Plate.

 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII

Fig-5 Von Mises Stress Mapping on Rebar for Brittle Cracking Model.

Fig-6 Concrete Damaged Plasticity Model on Reinforced Concrete Plate.

 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII

Fig-7 Von Mises Stress mapping on Rebar and Cylinder for Concrete Damaged Plasticity
Model.

Fig-8 Von Mises Stress Mapping on elements just around depression for CDP Model
without Rebar.
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
Case-2 .Concrete Damaged Plasticity(CDP) Model.

Case-2(a) Plain Concrete Plate Impacted By Steel Cylinder shaped Missile.

Here the plate geometry, Projectile are unchanged with some increase in total plate element from the
Unreinforced Brittle Shear Model in case 1(a) .Total concrete element is now 867 and the same for Steel
Missile is 170. Fig-8 shows the feature of the model taken as screen shot of the CDP Model without Rebar.

Case 2(b) Reinforeced Concrete Plate Impacted by Steel Cylinder shaped missile.

Here the plate geometry, Projectile are not changed so as to observe any changes in results in respect of
total deformation and stresses in both Rebar and Concrete element and compare with that of Reinforced
case of Brittle Crack Model in Case 1(b). Material data for Concrete and Steel remained same as M50 for
concrete and ASTM A-36 for steel for both Rebar as well as Missile. Fig-6&7 shows the screenshots of
Von Mises Stress Mapping for Concrete Plate and Steel Rebar.Total elements considered in this model
compared to the model in case-1(b) is unchanged and is 59225 for concrete plate element ,18225 for rebar
and 47300 for steel cylinder.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS BETWEEN CASES.

It is principally justified if comparison is made between similar cases. In this paper authors have tried to
compare results of Plain Concrete Target being hit by Steel missile for both the cases of Brittle Crack
Model(BC) and Concrete Damaged Platicity Model(CDP).These are designated as Case 1(a) and
Case2(a).Similarly Case1(b) and Case 2(b) are compared for B.C Model as well as CDP Model wherein
Reinforced Concrete Plate is hit by Steel Missile.
Case 1(a) and 2(a)
Unreinforced BC model (case 1a) shows that under the effect of Impact, degradation of material starts in
the impact zone and in close vicinity of contact area when strain in the concrete elements reaches beyond
yield strain or precisely in ABAQUS terms cracking strain. But all elements outside these impact zone does
not fail which is practically an indication of shear failure and so is name of this model designated in
ABAQUS as Brittle Shear Crack Model. Degradation of Concrete Starts at 5 millisecond on case
1(a),Whereas as CDP Model (case 2a) does not show any material degradation but the plate deforms
beyond elastic limit in the Impact zone and its vicinity. The Condition of front end of the Missile which
remained in contact with Concrete is found to be gone to a state of yield at 5 millisecond.
Case 1(b) and 2(b)
Reinforced BC model ( case 2a) shows clear degradation of concrete and few Steel rebar in the impact
zone completely bent down and stress mapping in these rebar show it had already accumulated Tensile
stresses beyond yield. Time of Impact was limited to 5 millisecond .Here the entire Steel Missile has gone
a state of yield. Concrete in the Impact zone and at support in some places have failed completely within
this time of 5milisec.
Whereas the Reinforced CDP Model in case 2(b) shows similar state of stresses only in the Impact zone
and its vicinity where concrete and Rebar have failed completely and Steel rebar has bent down
considerably but in different shape that of reinforced B.C Model. Lower part of the steel missile also gone
into yield.

EMPERICAL METHODS TO DESIGN CONCRETE BARRIER.

We have taken the Empirical formulae for missile protection from General Design Criterion 4 of Appendix
A to 10 CFR 50 which requires that structures systems and components important to safety be protected
from the effects of missiles.
Missile barriers and protective structures are designed to withstand and absorb missile impact
loads to prevent damage to safety-related components.
Formulae used for missile penetration calculations into steel or concrete barriers are from the National
Defense Research Committee (NDRC) modified formula for concrete and for steel.
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
Concrete (Modified NDRC Formula)
𝑉 1.8 0.5
X = [4KNWd
(
1000𝑑
) ] --------------- (1a) for x/d <2.0
𝑉 1.8
X=
KNWd
(
1000𝑑
)
+d ----------------------------(1b) for x/d>2.0

Where X= Penetration Depth (in), K= Experimentally obtained material coefficient =180/√𝑓𝑐

fc =Concrete Compressive Strength in kips/sqinch
N =Missile Shape factor =0.72 (min value) W = Missile Weight in lbs d = diameter of
missile in inch
V= Missile velocity in feet/sec.
If we put all the values of our example cases in equation 1(a) considering x/d =8/16=0.5
, V= 150m/sec =150X3.28 ft/sec = 492ft/sec
d =40cm =40/2.54 = 16 in fc =50 N/mm2 /0.006894 =7353psi ρ =7850kg/m3 =7850x2.28lbs/m3
K = 180/85.75= 2.1 W =( π/4)*(d)2 * L* ρ =(3.14*0.16*0.5*7850*2.28)/4 =1124 lbs

X is Calculated as 14.16 Inch where as Our Plate Thickness in the example case is 8inch For
Unreinforced Concrete And For Reinforced Plate Plate Thickness Assumed As 12 Inch.
From Empirical formula, calculated penetration depth with above missile data works out to be
14.16 inch.
Scabbing Thickness ts and perforation thickness tp is given by the following equations
ts =d*[2.12+1.36(x/d)] for 0.65 <x/d <11.75 and ts =d*[7.91(x/d) -5.06(x/d)2] for x/d <0.65
---- ---------(2a) --------------------2(b)
tp =d*[1.32+1.24(x/d)] for1.35<x/d<13.5 and tp = d*[3.19(x/d) – 0.718(x/d)2 ] for x/d<1.35
--------------(3a) ------------------3(b)
Based on the example data we have taken above, the value of x/d =14.16/16 =0.885 so
equation 2(a) and equation 3(b) will be applicable.

So Min Plate Thickness required not to have any perforation is calculated as

tp = 16*[3.19*0.885-0.718*(0.885)2] = 36.177 inch.
Similarly, Min Plate Thickness required not to have any scabbing is calculated as
ts = 16*[2.12+1.36*0.885] = 34.93 inch

A new equation for finding out Critical Impact Energy required for penetration has been developed by
Imran Latif Ismail Abdul Rahman , Ahmad Mujahid Ahmad Zaidi of Malaysia (4) by solving a
polynomial equation of 3rd degree
Ecp/ fcd3 = a(H/d)3 + b(H/d)2 + c(H/d) + d ---------------(4)
Where Ecp is required critical impact kinetic energy of missile for perforation of concrete target, fc is
unconfined compressive stress of concrete, d is (cylindrical) projectile shank diameter, and H is total
thickness of concrete target.
Based on equation (4) the critical impact kinetic energy required for perforation of concrete target is:
Ecp/ fcd3 = 0.174(H/d)3 + 0.169(H/d)2 + 0.0577(H/d) + 0.2969 for (0.69 ≤ H/d ≤ 14.86)
Now in our example case, H = 10in d =16 in and taking the Uniaxial Compressive stress of
concrete as equal to 50e+06 N/m2 Ecp works out to 653396 N-m.
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
Q.M. Li, S.R. Reid and A.M Ahmad Zaidi (2006) [5] further modified the NDRC formulae in
terms of critical energies required to scab and perforate the concrete targets for flat nose hard
missile impact. According to them critical impact energy for scabbing in S.I units:

Here H = Thickness of Concrete Plug =Thickness of Plate =300mm Vo =150m/sec

d =diameter of the projectile in metre. =0.4

As per ABAQUS user Manual Energy output is particularly important in checking the accuracy
of the solution in an explicit dynamic analysis. In general, the total energy (ETOTAL) should be
a constant or close to a constant; the “artificial” energies, such as the artificial strain energy
(ALLAE), the damping dissipation (ALLVD), and the mass scaling work (ALLMW) should be
negligible compared to “real” energies such as the strain energy (ALLSE) and the kinetic energy
(ALLKE).After going through the result history file from ABAQUS output it is seen that the
total energy for all the 4 cases discussed in the case study in earlier chapters is almost constant
throughout the time interval of 5 millisecond and is much above the Critical Energy required
for perforation of Concrete in these test cases.
Taking the case of Reinforced Concrete Plate of thickness 0.30m and keeping the dimension of
Steel Cylinder as same 0.4m diameter and 0.5meter long, and its striking velocity as 150m/sec
 23rd Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division VII
we calculate Critical Energy required for perforation Ecp from the forth equation of modified
NDRC Formula above. The calculated value comes to be Ecp= 452736N.m.Though the second
value as per [5] differs from the 1st value calculated as per [4] but both are exceeded by the total
energy calculated numerically using Program ABAQUS which comes to 5.53e+06Joules.

CONCLUSION.

One of the purpose of taking up four cases for studying the effect of Impact is also to explore what is the
contribution of reinforcement in the design of barrier.This objective is actually a derivative to the main
study regarding the physics of material behavior leading to a geometry based projection of failures of
concrete plate ,failures of impact zone reinforcement etc.
One understanding is that reinforcement alone cannot stop perforation until a minimum concrete thickness
is provided.
Another revelation is that if the Rebar is placed in the facing layer ,it is not helping to stop perforation,
rather authors feels that by putting reinforcement in the outside face of the wall which is never going to
face the impact, a better result could be achieved. In both the cases 1(b) and 2(b) Rebar was placed in the
middle layer even then the Rebar in the impact zone got yielded. Of course Minimum reinforcement is to
be put in both layers as per Standard Codal practice to take care of the requirement of shrinkage and
temperature stress.
More work is needed in developing multilayer barrier so that the concrete thickness can be optimized to a
great extent.

REFERENCES

1. Hsu, L.S&Hsu,C-T.T(1994).Complete stress-strain behaviour of high–strength concrete under

compression. Magazine of Concrete Research, 46(169),page no 301-312.
2. Computational Analysis of Reinforced Slabs subjected to Impact Loads Sharul Niza
Mokhatar,Redzuan Abdullah University Tun Hussein OnnMalaya
3. Bureau of Indian Standard -456 Plain &Reinforced Concrete.
4. Development of Empirical formula Prediction on Critical Impact Energy for Perforation
Phenomena on Concrete Structures by Qadir Bux alias Imran Latif and Ismail Abdul Rahman
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
(UTHM).
5. Review on Empirical Studies of Local Impact Effects of Hard Missile on Concrete
Structures(International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering & Technology)
Ismail Abdul Rahman*1, Ahmad Mujahid Ahmad Zaidi2, Qadir Bux alias Imran Latif1.