International Journal of Civil, Mechanical and Energy Science (IJCMES)

Infogain Publication (Infogainpublication.com)

[Vol-2, Issue-2, March-April, 2016]

ISSN : 2455-5304

Control of Structural Vibrations due to

Underground Blast using SMA dampers
Rohan Majumder
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Sir Padampat Singhania University, Udaipur, India.
Abstract Recently, several intensive research efforts
are made to exploit smart structure technologies in
controlling vibration of structures. The class of smart
materials which are most widely used are the Shape
Memory Alloys (SMAs). Previously, extensive research
activities have been carried out to control vibration of
structures subjected to ground motions resulting from
earthquakes but mitigation of structural vibration
subjected to underground blast load is still not welldeveloped. The ground motions caused by underground
blasts are mainly characterized by large amplitude waves
of high frequency behaving like an impulse load of an
immensely short duration of time. Thus the blast induced
ground motion (BIGM) is quite significantly different
from that of ground motions due to earthquake. In this
paper, first an overview of the several characteristics of
SMA and the nature of ground motion due to
underground blast is presented. Then a simulation study
of a standard two-storey steel frame installed with SMA
wires as bracings, taken from literature, is carried out in
standard finite element software. The framed structure is
subjected to ground acceleration due to underground
blast and the simulation studies were carried out for
various distances measured from the charge center. The
results are also compared with that of the conventional
steel bracing and the uncontrolled bare frame.
KeywordsShape Memory Alloy, Blast Induced
Ground Motion (BIGM), vibration control.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Civil structures which are situated in the close vicinity of
underground mines and construction activities are
vulnerable to underground blast loads. Even for designing
many facilities like ammunition storage, oil and water
storage caverns the effect of ground shock vibration due
to blast has to be taken into consideration. The engineers
in the field of mining and construction are also very much
concerned about such blasting effects. The damage to the
structure may range from severe to that of non-structural
components only, depending upon the intensity of
explosion, distance of site from the blasting source, soil
characteristics and the type of structure. The ground
motions caused by underground blasts are mainly
characterized by large amplitude waves of high frequency
www.ijcmes.com

behaving like an impulse load of an immensely short

duration of time. It is a complex function of dynamic
constitutive properties of soil media, detonation time and
also on the geometry of the explosion.
The shock due to underground blast includes two phases
of vibration i.e. the forced-vibration phase and the free
vibration phase. In the forced vibration phase higher
frequency modes with small displacement and large
acceleration is the response characteristic. It represents
very high inertial shear force. However, the response in
the free vibration phase is characterized by lower modes
of frequency with larger displacement but the acceleration
being smaller. When a structure is subjected to strong
ground motion due to underground blast it might
experience a sudden shear failure in the forced vibration
phase. Even if the structure is strong enough to resist this
sudden shear failure it may be damaged after the ground
shock in the free vibration phase due to larger
displacement and smaller acceleration caused by lower
modes of frequency. So both the initial acceleration as
well as the large displacement is needed to be controlled
to prevent structural collapse. Since the Blast Induced
Ground Motion (BIGM) behaves like an impulse load for
an extremely short period of time it is quite different from
that of the earthquake ground motions. Though there has
been extensive research on the vibration control of
structures subjected to ground motions resulting from
earthquakes, the study of vibration mitigation of
structures subjected to underground blast load is still not
well developed.
Recently, several intensive research efforts are being
made in the field of structural engineering to exploit smart
structure technologies to control the vibrations of
structures. When these smart materials are incorporated in
civil structures they serve the function of sensing,
actuation and also possess the capability of modifying and
adjusting the behavior of the structure when subjected to
an external shock. The most prominent class of smart
materials is known as Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs).
Uptill now many types of shape memory alloys have been
invented but among them owing to high thermomechanical and thermo-electrical properties, Nitinol is the
most popularly used SMA. Other variants are Cu-Al-Be
and Cu-Al-Mn. Development of ferrous SMA is in
Page | 36

International Journal of Civil, Mechanical and Energy Science (IJCMES)

Infogain Publication (Infogainpublication.com)
progress. SMAs exist in two main crystalline phases. One
is martensite and the other is austenite. The martensite is
stable at low temperature and high stresses whereas the
austenite is stable at high temperature and low stresses.
The two major properties of SMAs are the Shape Memory
Effect (SME) and super-elasticity. These properties
developed as a result of reversible phase transformation of
SMAs. SMA has the ability to recover its original shape
after being deformed through a thermal cycle. This
phenomenon is known as SME. Another phenomenon of
recovering large strain resulting from stress-induced
martensitic phase transformation at a constant temperature
is also exhibited by SMA which is known as superelasticity. An excellent re-centering capability is
possessed by SMA due to its hysteretic behavior. High
strength, good resistance to fatigue and corrosion, large
damping capacity are some of the other main
characteristics of SMAs. The applicability of SMAs in
civil engineering is still in the nascent phase and has
shown immense potential in the control of seismic
vibration of structures. However, there have been no
studies so far on the use of SMAs in controlling structural
response due to blast. The aim of this paper is to
investigate the effectiveness of SMA dampers in
mitigating the underground blast induced vibrations of
structures.
SHAPE MEMORY ALLOYS (SMAs)
SMAs possess several extraordinary properties. High
strength, good resistance to fatigue and corrosion, large
damping capacity are some of the main characteristics of
SMAs. They exist in two different crystalline phases. One
is called martensite which is stable at low temperatures
and high stresses and the other austenite, which is stable
at high temperatures and low stresses. Austenite, also
termed as the parent phase, exhibits a cubic crystal
structure whereas the martensite possesses a less-ordered
crystal structure. Based on the crystal orientation direction
martensite exist in two forms i.e the twinned (selfaccomodated) martensite or detwinned martensite. The
main characteristic of SMAs occurs as a result of
reversible phase transformations between the martensite
and austenite phases. The transformations might be
temperature-induced (shape memory effect) or stressinduced (super-elasticity). SMA material possesses the
capability of recovering its original shape after being
deformed through a thermal cycle. This phenomenon is
known as the shape memory effect. The phenomenon by
which the material is able to recover large strain as a
result of the stress-induced martensitic phase

www.ijcmes.com

[Vol-2, Issue-2, March-April, 2016]

ISSN : 2455-5304

transformation at a constant temperature is known as

super-elasticity.
II.
FORMULATION AND METHODOLOGY
A blast input model is considered in the time domain.
Blast Induced Ground Motion (BIGM) generated from the
underground blast is modeled as a standard exponential
function. An experimental structural frame installed with
both steel as well as SMA damper bracing, taken from
Han et al. 2003 is modeled in standard finite element
software. The frame is 2m high, 1m in length and 0.25m
wide with 8 SMA dampers installed as diagonal bracings.
It consists of solid steel columns of 8mm and 10mm
diameter. The framed structure is then subjected to
ground acceleration due to underground blast. The
empirical formulae given by Wu and Hao (2005) is used
to compute the ground motion generated from
underground blast. The average empirical attenuation
relation for peak particle velocity (PPVs) on the ground
surface is given below:PPVs=2.981f1s(R/Q(1/3))-1.3375
and f1s=0.121(Q/V)0.2872, where
f1s=decoupling factor for PPVs,
R=distance in meters measured from the charge centre,
Q=TNT charge wt. in kilogram and
V=volume of the charge chamber in cubic meter.
The blast induced ground acceleration given by Carvalho
and Battista (2003) is as follows:
(

(t) = - (1/ ) PP
Here, td=R/Cp=arrival time and Cp=Propagation velocity
of wave in the rock.
The ground acceleration time history of the BIGM is
obtained as a function of parameters such as distance
measured from the charge center (R), TNT charge weight
in kilogram (Q), propagation velocity of wave (Cp) and
volume of the charge chamber (V). The analysis is done
considering both the linear elastic as well as the nonlinear inelastic behavior of the SMA damper. The
simulation studies were carried out by varying the
distance measured from the charge center and then the
results were compared. The results are also compared
with that of the conventional steel bracing and the
uncontrolled bare frame. Steel bracings of 1mm & 0.8mm
diameter are considered and SMA damper of 0.8mm
diameter is taken. Linear elastic behavior of the SMA
damper leads to a gross approximation in the results. A
much better representation of the actual behavior is made
by considering the non-linear hysteretic model of the
SMA damper. Fig. 1 shown below illustrates the framed
structure subjected to underground BIGM.

Page | 37

International Journal of Civil, Mechanical and Energy Science (IJCMES)

Infogain Publication (Infogainpublication.com)

[Vol-2, Issue-2, March-April, 2016]

ISSN : 2455-5304

Fig. 1
The structure is subjected to two cases of BIGMs as described below:Case A: R=50 m.
Case B: R=100 m.
The values of the various parameters taken in this simulation study are as follows:
V=1000 cum.
Cp=5280 m/s,
Q=10 & 100 tons.
Fig. 2 shows the variation of input acceleration against time for cases A & B considering Q=10 tons.
Input acceleration (m/s2)

0
0

Time (sec)

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

-10

R=50m
R=100m

-20
-30
Fig. 2

The displacement time history data are obtained for the uncontrolled bare frame, frame with ordinary steel bracings and with
SMA dampers separately. Figs.3 & 4 illustrates the time history displacement for R=50m and Q=100 tons considering linear
elastic behaviour of the damper.
5
3

100
50

uncontr
olled

0
0
-50

Steel(0.8mm
)

4
Displacement (mm)

Displacement (mm)

uncontrolled

10

20

SMA

2
1
0
-1 0

Steel(1mm)
6

-2
-3

-100

-4
Time (sec)
Time (sec)
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
The results of the simulation study are tabulated below:-

www.ijcmes.com

Page | 38

International Journal of Civil, Mechanical and Energy Science (IJCMES)

Infogain Publication (Infogainpublication.com)
Peak displacement (mm)
Uncontrolled
Steel
SMA
bracing damper

Dist
(R)
(m)

Charge
(Q)
(tons)

50

10

17.37

0.82

0.011

100

10

6.42

0.19

0.0047

50

100

80.79

4.21

0.056

100

100

30.02

0.98

0.024

Hysteretic Behaviour of SMA

A one-dimensional tension only SMA material model was
developed. It was implemented in the ANSYS material
library and then used in the study to illustrate the
constitutive behaviour of the SMAs realistically as
referred in Sharabash et al. 2009. The model is capable
enough of describing the force deformation relationship
of superelastic SMAs at a constant temperature. A
schematic dig. of the force-deformation relation of the
SMA model used in this study is presented in Fig. 5. Six
parameters are used to define the model. These
parameters are austenite elastic stiffness KA,
transformation elastic stiffness KT (KA), martensite
elastic stiffness KM(KA), phase transformation starting
force FS, phase transformation finishing force FF and the
unloading force at the end of the reverse transformation
Fu(Fs). An idealized behaviour for the SMA devices is
represented by the SMA model. A complete recovery of
the original shape is obtained at the end of each cycle.
The values of strain at the start and the end of the phase
transformation were taken as 1% and 6% respectively in
this model as these values are typical for super-elastic
SMAs.

20

10

-0.5

0
-10

Displacement (m)

Displacement (m)

Fig.5
The values calculated for the hysteretic stress-strain
behaviour of SMA damper are as follows:FS=0.022504 N; FF=0.028129 N; FU=0.0090016 N
The structure is subjected to underground BIGM and the
analysis is carried out in ANSYS 14.0.The displacement
time history data are obtained for the uncontrolled bare
frame, frame with ordinary steel bracings and with SMA
dampers separately. Figs. 6 & 7 illustrates the time history
displacement for R=100m and Q=100 tons.

0.5

Uncontrolled

Uncontro
lled

2
Steel
SMA

-1.5
-2

-30

-2.5

Time (sec)

-1

-20

Time (sec)
Fig.6

www.ijcmes.com

[Vol-2, Issue-2, March-April, 2016]

ISSN : 2455-5304

Fig.7
Page | 39

International Journal of Civil, Mechanical and Energy Science (IJCMES)

Infogain Publication (Infogainpublication.com)

[Vol-2, Issue-2, March-April, 2016]

ISSN : 2455-5304

The results of the simulation study by varying the charge intensity Q and the distance R are tabulated as below considering
non-linear inelastic behaviour of the SMA damper.
Distance
(R)
(m)

Charge
(Q)
(tons)

50
100
50
100

10
10
100
100

Peak Displacement (mm)

Uncontrolled

III.
OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION
The structural response time histories with the Nitinol
SMA dampers indicate a very substantial vibration
mitigation when compared with that of the uncontrolled
frame and also significant improvement over the
conventional steel braced frame. Even though in this
small-scale example system the steel bracing is also
performing very well in mitigating the vibration of the
structure subjected to underground blast, the SMA
damper is practically making the structure vibrationproof. So it is definitely concluded that if the SMAs are
utilized in the right manner they have a great potential in
controlling the structural response due to blast.

13.8
4.28
67.5
24.2

Steel
Bracing
1.3
0.44
12.03
2.3

SMA
0.7
0.37
4.47
1.9

shape memory alloy damper, Earthquake

Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 2003; 32:
483-494
[2] G.Song, N.Ma, H.-N. Li (2006) Applications of
shape memory alloys in civil structures,
Engineering Structures 28(2006) 1266-1274.
[3] O.E. Ozbulut, S.Harlebaus and R. Desroches
Seismic Response Control using Shape Memory
Alloys: A Review. Journal of Intelligent materials
systems and structures 2011; 22:1531-1549.
[4] Alaa M. Sharabash, Bassem O. Andrews
Application of shape memory alloy dampers in the
seismic control of cable-stayed
bridges,
Engineering Structures 31(2009) 607-616.

REFERENCES
[1] Yu-Lin Han, Q.S. Li, Ai-Qun Li, A.Y.T. Leung and
Ping-Hua Lin.(2002) Structural vibration control by

www.ijcmes.com

Page | 40