# A Designer’s Approach for Estimation of Nuclear-Air-Blast-Induced Ground Motion

Authors: Shashank Pathak; G. V. Ramana
Journal: Advances in Civil Engineering
 (2018)

---

## Abstract

A reliable estimate of free-field ground displacement induced by nuclear-air-blast is required for design of underground strategic structures. A generalized pseudostatic formulation is proposed to estimate nuclear-air-blast-induced ground displacement that takes into account nonlinear stress-strain behaviour of geomaterials, stress-dependent wave propagation velocity, and stress wave attenuation. This proposed formulation is utilized to develop a closed-form solution for linearly decaying blast load applied on a layered ground medium with bilinear hysteretic behaviour. Parametric studies of closed-form solution indicated that selection of appropriate constrained modulus consistent with the overpressure is necessary for an accurate estimation of peak ground displacement. Stress wave attenuation affects the computed displacement under low overpressure, and stress-dependent wave velocity affects mainly the occurrence time of peak displacement and not its magnitude. Further, peak displacements are estimated using the proposed model as well as the UFC manual and compared against the field data of atmospheric nuclear test carried out at Nevada test site. It is found that the proposed model is in good agreement with field data, whereas the UFC manual significantly underestimates the peak ground displacements under higher overpressures.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Underground siting of strategic structures [1] is an option to enhance the safety against nuclear-air-blast [2]. Nuclear explosions generate rapidly moving air-overpressures capable of producing significant ground displacements [3]. Most severe loading occurs within a close vicinity around the ground zero (GZ) known as superseismic zone. This zone is subjected to significantly high overpressures. The velocity of moving air-overpressure fronts is also more than the P-wave velocity of the ground [3–6]. Hence, a reliable estimate of nuclear-air-blast-induced ground displacement is required for design in superseismic zone [5, 7, 8]. Several studies using numerical approaches that account for realistic stress-strain behaviour and boundary conditions are reported for calculating the free-field response [9–16]. Such studies require specialized expertise in numerical tools and are unattractive to practicing engineers. Before the advent of computational tools, Wilson and Sibley [17] conceptualized a one-dimensional pseudostatic approach to estimate air-blast-induced ground displacement. Whitman [4] and Baron et al. [18] have also shown that air-blast-induced ground motion is predominantly one-dimensional and vertical in superseismic zone. In the present work, a generalized one-dimensional pseudostatic formulation is developed to estimate nuclear-air-blast-induced vertical ground displacement that accounts for (i) nonlinear stress-strain behaviour [e.g., 19, 20], (ii) stress-dependent wave propagation velocity, and (iii) stress wave attenuation. Using the proposed formulation, a closed-form solution is developed for linearly decaying blast load with negligible rise-time applied on a layered ground medium with bilinear hysteretic stress-strain behaviour. The proposed model is validated against the field data of an atmospheric nuclear test conducted at Nevada test site [21], and various parametric studies are carried out. In addition, performance of the closed-form solution is also compared with the model given in UFC [22].


## 2. Generalized Formulation

The developed formulation is explained in detail below.


### 2.1. Determination of Overstress Distribution (due to Air-Blast) in the Ground

Air-overpressure generated due to nuclear-air-blast consists of an initial rising portion followed by a decaying portion (Figure1). Overpressure time-history can be visualized as consisting of multiple overpressure fronts. These overpressure fronts are transferred to the ground as P-waves. On arrival of an air-shock front at the point of interest, an initial pulse travels with seismic P-wave velocity and reaches a depth Z0i at time ti. Subsequently, other fronts arrive and penetrate into the ground. If the location of peak overpressure front at time ti is given as Zpi, then, the ground above the depth Zpi experiences compressive stresses lower than those caused by the peak overpressure front at that depth. Therefore, the depths above Zpi are referred to as “unloading zone.” However, the peak overpressure front is yet to reach at locations deeper than Zpi, and therefore, the zone lying beneath the depth Zpi is denoted as “loading zone” (Figure 1). It is noted that “unloading zone” corresponds to the “decay portion” of overpressure, whereas “loading zone” corresponds to the “rising portion.” Therefore, at times earlier than the rise-time, there does not exist any unloading zone as overpressure fronts from the decay portion do not arrive before the end of rise-time.Figure 1
Schematic representation of dilatational stress distribution in ground at timeti.To determine the stress distribution in the ground at timeti, contribution from all stress fronts arrived before time ti is considered. If the kth overpressure front arrives at the point of interest on ground surface at time tk such that tk≤ti, then the kth overpressure front reaches at depth Zki at time ti. Stress fronts propagating through ground are affected by attenuation (caused by hysteresis losses, viscosity of ground materials, and dispersion of energy in 3-dimensional space) and interference with reflected wave fronts (generated due to impedance variation with depth). In the present study, stress wave attenuation is taken into account through a geometrical attenuation parameter, whereas interference of incident and reflected stress waves is ignored. If the attenuation coefficient at depth Zki is given as αZki, then the stress generated at depth Zki can be written as αZki×Ptk, where Ptk is the magnitude of the kth overpressure front. Depth of the penetration Zki depends upon wave propagation velocity of the stress front, which in turn depends upon the tangential modulus of the geomaterial at the stress level at the depth of interest. If wave velocity of the kth stress front is denoted as Vkz (a function of depth “z”), then (1) can be solved to obtain Zki as a function of ti, tk, and Vkz (2),(1)∫0ZkidzVkz=ti−tk,(2)Zki=gti−tk,Vkz=φtk,where g is the function obtained by solving (1). It is noted that for a given ti, Zki is effectively a function φ of tk only because Vkz is also a function of tk. As soon as the air-blast slaps the ground surface, ground deforms elastically and an elastic wave is generated which propagates with seismic P-wave velocity. Upon subsequent arrival of higher overpressure fronts, inelastic waves propagate at velocities smaller than P-wave velocity. If the ratio of P-wave velocity to wave velocity corresponding to the kth overpressure front at depth “z” is denoted as fkz=Vpz/Vkz, then at initial stress levels fkz is equal to one. With increasing stress level, Vkz decreases [17, 23]; hence, it is logical to assume that fkz increases with increasing stress level and the maximum value is attained at a peak stress level corresponding to the peak overpressure front. Therefore, a simplest choice is to assume a linearly increasing fkz in direct proportion to overpressure (3). Overpressure fronts from the decay portion propagate through the media which is already stressed in a nonlinear range due to passage of the peak overpressure front. Therefore, it is assumed that wave velocity of overpressure fronts in the decay portion is the same as the peak overpressure front, and hence fkz is the same as frz:(3)fkz=frz−1PtkPo+1≈frz−1tktr+1,0≤tk≤tr:rising  portionfrz,tr≤tk≤tp:decay  portion,where subscript “z” represents the depth coordinate. Using the average loading rate as Po/tr, Ptk/Po can be approximated as tk/tr (3). As wave propagation velocity through ground media is proportional to the square root of the tangential modulus [24], frz is given by the following equation:(4)frz=∂σz/∂εzσ=0∂σz/∂εzσrz,where ∂σz/∂εzσ=0 is the tangential modulus at initial stress level at depth “z” and ∂σz/∂εzσrz is the tangential modulus at peak stress level at depth “z.”It should be noted that the ground is in equilibrium under geostatic stresses and at rest before nuclear explosion and only the overstresses caused by nuclear-air-blast causes the ground displacement.


### 2.2. Determination of Strain Distribution in Ground

Strain distribution with depthεiz can be determined using stress distribution σiz and an appropriate stress-strain relationship [e.g., 25–27] as given in the following equation:(5)εiZ=fLz,σiz:loadingfUz,σiz:unloading,where functions fL and fU denote the loading and unloading branches of the stress-strain curve, respectively (Figure 2).Figure 2
Schematic diagram for stress-strain relation at a depth “z.”


### 2.3. Integration of Strains

To obtain the vertical ground displacementui at time instant ti, the strain distribution is integrated (6) from the ground surface to the penetrated wavelength in the ground up to time tiZ0i,(6)ui=∫0Z0iεizdz=∫0ZrifUz,σdz+∫ZriZ0ifLz,σdz.SubstitutingZ=φtk in (6) leads to the following equation:(7)ui=∫ti0fLφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk,0≤ti≤tr:loading∫tr0fLφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk+∫titrfUφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk,tr≤ti≤tp:unloading.Thus, the displacement time-history can be estimated using (7).


## 2.1. Determination of Overstress Distribution (due to Air-Blast) in the Ground

Air-overpressure generated due to nuclear-air-blast consists of an initial rising portion followed by a decaying portion (Figure1). Overpressure time-history can be visualized as consisting of multiple overpressure fronts. These overpressure fronts are transferred to the ground as P-waves. On arrival of an air-shock front at the point of interest, an initial pulse travels with seismic P-wave velocity and reaches a depth Z0i at time ti. Subsequently, other fronts arrive and penetrate into the ground. If the location of peak overpressure front at time ti is given as Zpi, then, the ground above the depth Zpi experiences compressive stresses lower than those caused by the peak overpressure front at that depth. Therefore, the depths above Zpi are referred to as “unloading zone.” However, the peak overpressure front is yet to reach at locations deeper than Zpi, and therefore, the zone lying beneath the depth Zpi is denoted as “loading zone” (Figure 1). It is noted that “unloading zone” corresponds to the “decay portion” of overpressure, whereas “loading zone” corresponds to the “rising portion.” Therefore, at times earlier than the rise-time, there does not exist any unloading zone as overpressure fronts from the decay portion do not arrive before the end of rise-time.Figure 1
Schematic representation of dilatational stress distribution in ground at timeti.To determine the stress distribution in the ground at timeti, contribution from all stress fronts arrived before time ti is considered. If the kth overpressure front arrives at the point of interest on ground surface at time tk such that tk≤ti, then the kth overpressure front reaches at depth Zki at time ti. Stress fronts propagating through ground are affected by attenuation (caused by hysteresis losses, viscosity of ground materials, and dispersion of energy in 3-dimensional space) and interference with reflected wave fronts (generated due to impedance variation with depth). In the present study, stress wave attenuation is taken into account through a geometrical attenuation parameter, whereas interference of incident and reflected stress waves is ignored. If the attenuation coefficient at depth Zki is given as αZki, then the stress generated at depth Zki can be written as αZki×Ptk, where Ptk is the magnitude of the kth overpressure front. Depth of the penetration Zki depends upon wave propagation velocity of the stress front, which in turn depends upon the tangential modulus of the geomaterial at the stress level at the depth of interest. If wave velocity of the kth stress front is denoted as Vkz (a function of depth “z”), then (1) can be solved to obtain Zki as a function of ti, tk, and Vkz (2),(1)∫0ZkidzVkz=ti−tk,(2)Zki=gti−tk,Vkz=φtk,where g is the function obtained by solving (1). It is noted that for a given ti, Zki is effectively a function φ of tk only because Vkz is also a function of tk. As soon as the air-blast slaps the ground surface, ground deforms elastically and an elastic wave is generated which propagates with seismic P-wave velocity. Upon subsequent arrival of higher overpressure fronts, inelastic waves propagate at velocities smaller than P-wave velocity. If the ratio of P-wave velocity to wave velocity corresponding to the kth overpressure front at depth “z” is denoted as fkz=Vpz/Vkz, then at initial stress levels fkz is equal to one. With increasing stress level, Vkz decreases [17, 23]; hence, it is logical to assume that fkz increases with increasing stress level and the maximum value is attained at a peak stress level corresponding to the peak overpressure front. Therefore, a simplest choice is to assume a linearly increasing fkz in direct proportion to overpressure (3). Overpressure fronts from the decay portion propagate through the media which is already stressed in a nonlinear range due to passage of the peak overpressure front. Therefore, it is assumed that wave velocity of overpressure fronts in the decay portion is the same as the peak overpressure front, and hence fkz is the same as frz:(3)fkz=frz−1PtkPo+1≈frz−1tktr+1,0≤tk≤tr:rising  portionfrz,tr≤tk≤tp:decay  portion,where subscript “z” represents the depth coordinate. Using the average loading rate as Po/tr, Ptk/Po can be approximated as tk/tr (3). As wave propagation velocity through ground media is proportional to the square root of the tangential modulus [24], frz is given by the following equation:(4)frz=∂σz/∂εzσ=0∂σz/∂εzσrz,where ∂σz/∂εzσ=0 is the tangential modulus at initial stress level at depth “z” and ∂σz/∂εzσrz is the tangential modulus at peak stress level at depth “z.”It should be noted that the ground is in equilibrium under geostatic stresses and at rest before nuclear explosion and only the overstresses caused by nuclear-air-blast causes the ground displacement.


## 2.2. Determination of Strain Distribution in Ground

Strain distribution with depthεiz can be determined using stress distribution σiz and an appropriate stress-strain relationship [e.g., 25–27] as given in the following equation:(5)εiZ=fLz,σiz:loadingfUz,σiz:unloading,where functions fL and fU denote the loading and unloading branches of the stress-strain curve, respectively (Figure 2).Figure 2
Schematic diagram for stress-strain relation at a depth “z.”


## 2.3. Integration of Strains

To obtain the vertical ground displacementui at time instant ti, the strain distribution is integrated (6) from the ground surface to the penetrated wavelength in the ground up to time tiZ0i,(6)ui=∫0Z0iεizdz=∫0ZrifUz,σdz+∫ZriZ0ifLz,σdz.SubstitutingZ=φtk in (6) leads to the following equation:(7)ui=∫ti0fLφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk,0≤ti≤tr:loading∫tr0fLφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk+∫titrfUφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk,tr≤ti≤tp:unloading.Thus, the displacement time-history can be estimated using (7).


## 3. Closed-Form Solution

Using (7), closed-form solutions can be obtained for several simplified cases [28]. In this article, a closed-form approximation is developed for the following simplifications:(a)
Linearly decaying overpressure time-history with zero rise-time (Figure3, (8)),(8)Ptk=Po1−tkteq,where Po and teq are peak overpressure and equivalent positive phase duration, respectively. The reason behind choosing the special case with zero rise-time is the popularity of approximating the actual decay of the incidental pressure by an equivalent triangular pressure pulse among practicing engineers [8, 22]. It is to mention that design charts and empirical relations between the weapon yield, peak overpressure, and the equivalent positive phase durations are also available for equivalent triangular pulses with zero rise-time [5, 8, 29]. Thus, for practicing engineers, a linear decay model with zero rise-time is more useful.(b)
Bilinear hysteretic stress-strain model [8] with the loading secant modulus (ML) and strain recovery ratio (r) as parameters (Figure 2).(c)
Attenuation coefficientα is given by the following equation [8, 30]:(9)leftα=1+zLw−1,whereLw=0.971×W1/3×Po−1/2×VL,where W is the yield of the explosion in kiloton and VL is the wave propagation velocity of the peak overpressure front.(d)
Using (4), frz is determined as 1 for the bilinear stress-strain model. However, due to nonlinear stress-strain behaviour, frz is usually greater than 1. Wilson and Sibley [17] and Batdorf [23] recommended a range of 1.5 to 2. Hereafter, frz is denoted as f and assumed to be constant with depth.(e)
A constant but representative P-wave velocityVp of ground media is assumed.Figure 3
Scaling of equivalent ground media.Using assumptions (a)–(e), integral for loading fronts in (7) (with tr→0) between general time instants tx and tx+1 is written as Limtr→0∫txtx+1fLφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk=Po/ML×Limtr→0Ltx→tx+1, where Ltx→tx+1 can be shown to be given by the following equation:(10)Ltx⟶tx+1=f−1ti+trf−1Lw−trVp×LwVpf−1lnf−1tx+1+trf−1tx+tr+LwLw+Vptitr+fti−ti×lnfLw−Lw−trVptx+1+trLw+VptifLw−Lw−trVptx+trLw+Vpti×f−1tx+trf−1tx+1+tr.It is to clarify that the overpressure time-history defined by the piecewise functionPtk such that Ptk=Potk/tr for tk≤tr and Ptk=Po1−tk−tr/teq−tr for tr≤tk≤teq converges to (8) in the limiting case when tr→0. Therefore, the expression Ltx→tx+1 in (10) is first obtained for a case of finite tr and then it is evaluated for the case when tr→0 to determine the solution for overpressure time-history of (8). Similarly, the integral for unloading fronts in (7) (with tr→0) between general time instants tx and tx+1 can be written as ∫tx+1txfUφtk,σφtk×φ′tkdtk=P0/ML×Utx→tx+1, where Utx→tx+1 can be shown to be given by the following equation:(11)Utx⟶tx+1=Lw1−rfLwtpVp−rtitplnfLw+Vpti−VptxfLw+Vpti−Vptx+1+rLwtx+1−txtp.By setting the appropriate values oftx and tx+1 in (10) and (11), the closed-form integrals between desired time instants can easily be evaluated. Thus, the closed-form solution is given by the following equation:(12)ui=PoMLLimtr→0L0⟶tr+Utr⟶ti.The closed-form solution is further extended to accommodate multiple ground layers. This requires the determination of time instantstx and tx+1 during which the wave fronts pass through a particular layer. For illustration, a layered ground medium with an interface at depth H with the modulus of top layer as M1 and modulus of bottom layer as M2 is considered as shown in Figure 3. This leads to the three cases (Table 1) and corresponding displacement solutions (shown in Table 1).Table 1
Displacement solutions for the double-layered media.
Case
Explanation
Displacement equation
1
When all loading and unloading fronts are in layer-1ti≤H/Vp.
u
i
=
P
o
Lim
t
r
→
0
L
0
→
t
r
M
1
+
U
t
r
→
t
i
M
1
2
When some loading fronts have crossed layer-1 and remaining loading fronts along with all unloading fronts are in layer-1H/Vp<ti≤fH/Vp. Here, the first task is to determine those loading fronts which have crossed layer-1. This can be obtained by equating loading front velocity multiplied with travel time with the depth of layer. The loading front velocity of the kth front can be written using (3) as Vp/f−1tk/tr+1, and travel time is ti−tk. Thus, the last loading front to reach at depth H by the time ti would be given by tkH=trVpti−H/Hf−1+Vptr.
u
i
=
P
o
Lim
t
r
→
0
L
0
→
t
k
H
M
2
+
L
t
k
H
→
t
r
M
1
+
U
t
r
→
t
i
M
1
3
When all loading fronts are in layer-2 and some unloading fronts have crossed layer-1fH/Vp<ti. Similar to case 2, the last unloading front to reach at depth H by the time ti would be given by tkH=ti−fH/Vp.
u
i
=
P
o
Lim
t
r
→
0
L
0
→
t
r
M
2
+
U
t
r
→
t
i
−
f
H
/
V
p
M
2
+
U
t
i
−
f
H
/
V
p
→
t
i
M
1


## 4. Validation

The proposed closed-form solution is validated against the field data from an atmospheric nuclear test conducted at Frenchman Flat (Nevada). Perret [21] presented the measured overpressure time-histories (Figure 4) along with corresponding peak ground displacements at different distances from GZ (Table 2) for a 37 kt nuclear explosion at a height of 214 m. Model input parameters for above mentioned nuclear test are determined as follows.Figure 4
Measured and equivalent (linear) overpressure time-histories for shot Priscilla at stations (a) P1, (b) P2, (c) P3, and (d) P4 (measured overpressure time-histories [21]).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)Table 2
Details of recording stations.
Station designation
Range (m)
Peak overpressure (kPa)
Positive phase duration (sec)
Positive phase impulse (kPa-sec)
Equivalent duration (sec)
Scale factor (SF)
P1
198
1863
0.196
88.32
0.0948
2.07
P2
259
1290
0.179
62.18
0.0964
1.86
P3
320
828
0.307
50.54
0.1221
2.51
P4
411
408
0.442
48.34
0.2371
1.86The recorded overpressure time-histories are converted to equivalent linearly decaying overpressure time-histories (Figure4). Equivalent overpressure time-histories are given by (8) such that the peak overpressure Po is equal to the recorded peak overpressure, and equivalent positive phase duration teq is given by the following equation:(13)teq=2IpPo,where Ip is the positive phase impulse (area under the recorded overpressure time-history). It is worth mentioning, though the rise-time is taken to be zero in the equivalent overpressure time-history in (8), that the effect of non-zero rising time has been accounted for by considering the total positive phase impulse (in (13)) which includes the area under the rising and decaying portions of actual overpressure time-history. Therefore, it is expected that setting the rise-time as zero in (8) would have a negligible impact on the magnitude of peak displacement. Furthermore, the ratios of length of rise-time to total positive phase duration for the four cases (P1, P2, P3, and P4) are 0.10, 0.21, 0.23, and 0.27, respectively. This indicates that rise-time is reasonably small near ground zero; however, the relative length of rise-time increases with increasing distance from ground zero. Thus, it is expected that the errors (if any) due to setting rise-time to zero would be more pronounced only at distances far away from ground zero. Even in such cases, a closed-form solution can be developed using (7) by setting a finite rise-time. However, it is worth noting that at far away distances (from ground zero), other important factors related to outrunning ground motion would start governing [31].The initial pulse moving at seismic P-wave velocityVp penetrates to a depth of Vpteq for equivalent case, whereas for actual case, it penetrates to a depth of Vptp. It is noted that the depth of the stressed zone in the equivalent case is smaller compared to the actual case as equivalent duration teq is smaller than the actual positive phase duration tp (Figure 4). Thus, all depth-dependent parameters are scaled by a factor SF=tp/teq, such that the total depth of the stressed zone becomes SF×Vpteq=Vptp with the depth of the top layer being H/SF, and with a characteristic attenuation length of Lw/SF. Based on the variation of P-wave velocity with depth at Frenchman Flat (Figure 5), the average P-wave velocity Vp is estimated as 658.69 m/s. Whitman [4] presented the representative constrained modulus for Frenchman Flat interpreted from different experimental techniques (Table 3). Whitman [4] also emphasized that all aspects of stress-strain behaviour of geomaterials under blast loading are not captured by a single test and advocated to choose the modulus judiciously. The stress attenuation coefficient is calculated using (9) with scaled Lw (Table 4). Using the closed-form solution (shown in Table 1), parametric variations are studied (Table 5) and peak displacements (Table 6) are estimated.Figure 5
P-wave velocity and geomaterial density profile at Frenchman Flat, NTS [21].Figure 6
Variation of error in estimated peak displacement using constrained modulus determined from different experimental techniques: (a) T3 and T4 and (b) T1, T2, T5, and T6. T1: deduced from observed ground motion; T2: calculated from seismic velocity; T3: triaxial tests: initial loading; T4: dynamic 1-D compression test: initial loading; T5: triaxial tests: reloading; T6: resonant column test.
(a)
(b)Figure 7
Variation of peak ground displacement with attenuation characteristic lengthLw.Figure 8
Effect of (a) attenuation; (b) strain recovery ratio; (c) velocity ratio on estimated ground displacement; (d) velocity ratio on time of occurrence of peak displacement.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)Table 3
Constrained modulus of playa silt at Frenchman Flat [4].
Method
Notation
Constrained modulus (MPa)
For depths less than 18 m
For depths more than 18 m
Deduced from observed ground motion
T1
96.6
552
Calculated from seismic velocity
T2
242
1035
Triaxial tests: initial loading
T3
55.2
103.5
Dynamic 1-D compression test: initial loading
T4
69
138
Triaxial tests: reloading
T5
276
448.5
Resonant column test
T6
276
759Table 4
Scaling of attenuation characteristic length (Lw).
Station designation
W(kt)
P
o (kPa)
V
p (m/s)
L
w (m)
ScaledLw (m)
P1
37
1863
658.69
48.58
23.47
P2
1290
658.69
58.38
31.44
P3
828
658.69
72.88
28.98
P4
408
658.69
103.84
55.70Table 5
Parametric studies carried out on the proposed closed-form solution.
Parameter
Parametric study
Observation
Recommended value
M
1 and M2
ParametersM1 and M2 based on six different methods are adopted from Table 3.
Peak ground displacements are very sensitive to the constrained modulus value.
Observed results are consistent with the observations of Wilson and Sibley [17].
Other parameters kept constant atr = 0.6; f = 2; Lw adopted from Table 4.
Average coefficient of variation in peak displacement estimates = 83%.
(1) Shallow ground layers are likely to have modulus values determined by unconfined or triaxial compression test, and deep ground layers are likely to have modulus values computed from seismic velocity test or resonant column test. The justification to this variation in selection of modulus values can be attributed to the small strains associated with deeper layers and higher strains at shallow depths.
Variation of absolute percentage errors in estimated peak ground displacements is plotted against peak overpressures in Figures6(a) and 6(b).
Estimates are close to measured values if higher modulus values are used for smaller overpressures.
(2) Constrained modulus increases with decreasing ratio of applied stress to overburden. For higher overpressures, the overstress ratio would be higher and therefore modulus value will be lower compared to lower overpressures. An optimal choice of constrained modulus values is adopted as shown in Table6. The computed displacements are found to be in good agreement with measured displacements (Table 6).
L
w
L
w is varied from 10 m to 250 m.
AsLw increases (or α decreases), peak displacement increases.
Attenuation has to be taken into account under low overpressures, and it can be ignored under high overpressures.
Other parameters kept fixed atM1 and M2 adopted from Table 6; f = 2; r = 0.6.
Estimated peak displacements are plotted againstLw as shown in Figure 7.
BeyondLw of 250 m, the peak ground displacement does not increase, and Lw ≥ 250 is considered as the non-attenuating medium.
Errors in estimated peak displacements for the attenuating medium and non- attenuating medium are also plotted against peak overpressure in Figure8(a).
r
Two cases are considered: (i) full strain recoveryr = 1 and (ii) partial strain recovery r = 0.6.
Assumption of full strain recovery gives less errors as compared to partial strain recovery under low overpressures.
Under low overpressure, ground is not stressed beyond its elastic limit, and hence full strain recovery is a better representation of actual conditions in low overpressure zones.
Other parameters fixed atM1 and M2 adopted from Table 6; f = 2; Lw adopted from Table 4.
A lower strain recovery causes higher permanent deformations and increases peak ground displacement compared to elastic case (i.e., unit strain recovery ratio). Under higher overpressures, the ground is stressed beyond its elastic limit and the assumption of partial strain recovery is recommended.
Errors in estimated peak displacement for the two cases are plotted as shown in Figure8(b).
f
f is varied from 1.0 to 2.2.
Under high overpressure (P1 and P2), error in occurrence time of peak displacement reduces significantly with increasingf.
f has insignificant effect on magnitude of estimated peak displacements. However, as the velocity ratio increases, the rise-time of overstress pulse with depth also increases and affects the occurrence time of the peak displacement.
Other parameters fixed atM1 and M2 adopted from Table 6; r = 0.6; Lw adopted from Table 4.
Error increases marginally under lower overpressures as the velocity ratio is close to 1 under lower stress (in (3) when tk→0).
Estimated peak displacements are plotted againstf (Figure 8(c)).
Error in occurrence time of peak displacement are also plotted againstf (Figure 8(d)).Table 6
Suggested combination of modulus values and corresponding estimated peak displacements.
Station designation
M
1 (MPa) (depths less than 18 m)
M
2 (MPa) (depths more than 18 m)
Estimated peak displacement (mm)
Experimental records (mm)
% error
P1
55.2 triaxial tests: initial loading
552 deduced from observed ground motion
235.59
250.95
6.12
P2
69 dynamic 1-D compression test: initial loading
759 resonant column test
147.68
157.56
6.27
P3
69 dynamic 1-D compression test: initial loading
759 resonant column test
74.79
68.75
8.79
P4
96.6 deduced from observed ground motion
1035 calculated from seismic velocity
38.49
33.95
13.37The parametric studies (Table5) highlight that the proposed model is most sensitive to the constrained modulus compared to other parameters and choice of the modulus is also subjective for engineers. However, based on the parametric studies, the last column “Recommended Value” of Table 5 provides some guidelines to select the constrained modulus. With increasing availability of similar case studies, these guidelines can further be refined.


## 5. Comparison with UFC Model

The UFC manual [22] provides an expression for air-blast-induced peak vertical displacement based on one-dimensional elastic wave propagation: (14)uimax=IpρVp,where ρ is the bulk density of geomaterials. To estimate peak displacements using (14), positive phase impulse Ip is taken from Table 2. Representative P-wave velocity Vp and density ρ are taken as 658.69 m/s and 1331 kg/m3, respectively, taking into account the variation with depth (Figure 5). Computed peak displacements using the proposed model and UFC model are shown in Figure 9 along with the measured field values. It can be clearly seen that the predicted values of the proposed model are in good agreement with the measured values and the UFC model significantly underestimates the peak displacements under high overpressures (with increasing war head capacity).Figure 9
Comparison between measured and estimated peak ground displacements.


## 6. Conclusions

A closed-form expression is developed to estimate nuclear-air-blast-induced free-field ground displacement that takes into account peak overpressure, positive phase impulse, depth of layer interface, representative constrained modulus of each layer, strain recovery, stress attenuation, P-wave velocity, and velocity ratio. The solution is validated against a nuclear test conducted at Frenchman Flat (Nevada) and the following conclusions are arrived at:(i)
Peak ground displacement estimates are quite sensitive to the constrained modulus, and a judicious selection of appropriate constrained modulus based on the magnitude of applied overpressure is recommended.(ii)
Based on the presented case study, two guidelines are recommended to select the appropriate modulus: (a) shallow ground layers are likely to have modulus values determined by unconfined or triaxial compression test and deep ground layers are likely to have modulus values computed from seismic velocity test, and (b) constrained modulus increases with decreasing ratio of applied stress to overburden.(iii)
Effect of attenuation should be accounted for low overpressures and may be neglected at higher overpressures (or high war head capacities).(iv)
The velocity ratio affects mainly the time of occurrence of peak ground displacement and not the magnitude under higher overpressures. Therefore, the velocity ratio becomes important when design calculations utilize the complete displacement time-history such as in case of shock spectra.(v)
A complete strain recovery is a better representation of actual conditions under low overpressure zones, and under higher overpressures, a partial strain recovery is recommended.(vi)
The proposed model closely estimates the experimental values at all overpressures, whereas the UFC model significantly underestimates the peak ground displacements at high overpressures.



---

*Source: 3029837-2018-03-08.xml*