4.7 Article

Experimental and numerical study of steel wire mesh reinforced G-HPC slab protected by UHMWPE FRC under multiple blast loadings

期刊

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
卷 275, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115224

关键词

SWM reinforced G-HPC slab; Blast resistance; Multiple blast loading; UHMWPE FRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the multiple blast resistance of SWM reinforced G-HPC slabs protected by UHMWPE FRC through experimental and numerical studies. The results showed that the SWM reinforced G-HPC slab exhibited superior resistance against multiple blast loadings compared to plain G-HPC slab. The UHMWPE FRC effectively mitigated the blast loading and reduced the damage to the slab.
Engineering structures may experience multiple blast loadings owing to accidental explosions and terrorist attacks, however, few studies focused on the multiple blast loading effect on the structures. In this study, the multiple blast resistance of the steel wire mesh (SWM) reinforced geopolymer based high performance concrete (G-HPC) slabs protected by ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) fiber reinforced cloth (FRC) were investigated by experimental and numerical studies. The effects of the thickness and location of UHMWPE FRC on the multiple blast behavior of the SWM reinforced G-HPC slab were examined by parametric analysis. The failure modes and the blast-resistant mechanism of the slabs were revealed. The experimental results indicated that the SWM reinforced G-HPC slab exhibited superior resistance against multiple blast loadings as compared to the plain G-HPC slab. The SWM reinforced G-HPC slab protected by UHMWPE FRC has better multiple blast resistance, and the UHMWPE FRC effectively mitigated the blast loading and further reduced the damage to the slab. In addition, the findings of the parametric analysis revealed that UHMWPE FRC was more effective to enhance the blast resistance of a slab as it was placed on the bottom surface.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据