Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No.

2, February, 127–136
doi: 10.1680/macr.2008.62.2.127

Air-blast-loaded, high-strength concrete beams.

Part I: Experimental investigation
J. Magnusson*, M. Hallgreny and A. Ansell*

Royal Institute of Technology; Tyréns AB

The structural behaviour of concrete beams subjected to air blast loading was investigated. Beams of both high-
strength concrete (HSC) and normal-strength concrete (NSC) were subjected to air blasts from explosives in a shock
tube and for reference were also loaded statically. Concrete with nominal compressive strengths of 40, 100, 140,
150 and 200 MPa were used and a few beams also contained steel fibres. Furthermore, beams with two concrete
layers of different strength were tested. All beams subjected to static loading failed in flexure. For some beam types,
the failure mode in the dynamic tests differed from the failure mode in the corresponding static tests. In these cases,
the failure mode changed from a ductile flexural failure in the static tests to a brittle shear failure in the dynamic
tests. Beams without fibres and with high ratio of reinforcement exhibited shear failures in the dynamic tests. It was
observed that the inclusion of steel fibres increased the shear strength and the ductility of the beams. The
investigation indicates that beams subjected to air blast loading obtain an increased load capacity when compared
with the corresponding beams subjected to static loading.

Notation øbal balanced mechanical reinforcement ratio

øs mechanical reinforcement ratio
As area of tensile reinforcement
b beam width
d effective depth of beam Introduction
Es elastic modulus of steel reinforcement
F total load Bombs or accidental explosions often result in ex-
Ftot,u total support reaction treme loading conditions on buildings and protective
fcc compressive cylinder strength of concrete structures. The effects of such explosions are blast
fsy yield strength of steel reinforcement overpressures, fragments generated by the explosion
i impulse density and ground shock loads produced by the shock wave
pr reflected pressure imparted to the ground. In the design of a building to
Q mass of explosive charge resist the effects of air blast loading it is not economic-
t time al to consider a structural response in the elastic range
only. Structural elements with large plastic deformation
capacities are desirable, preventing partial or total col-
Greek symbols
lapse of a structure due to locally failed elements.

deflection
Reinforced concrete structural elements fulfil this cri-

u ultimate deflection
terion, having large load-carrying and plastic deforma-

y yield deflection
tion capacities. A ductile failure mode is the result of
cu ultimate concrete strain
concrete crushing in the compression zone and yielding
sy yield stress of the reinforcement
of the tensile reinforcement. High-strength concrete
(HSC), with an unconfined compressive strength ex-
ceeding 80 MPa, may be suitable for protective struc-
* Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Royal Institute tures as its mechanical properties are usually better
of Technology (KTH), SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
than those of normal-strength concrete (NSC). An ex-
† Tyréns AB, SE-118 86 Stockholm, Sweden
ception is that HSC is more brittle than NSC, but the
(MACR 800166) Paper received 24 September 2008; last revised 18 introduction of steel fibres can increase the ductility of
February 2009; accepted 13 March 2009 the HSC.
127

www.concrete-research.com 1751-763X (Online) 0024-9831 (Print) # 2010 Thomas Telford Ltd

Magnusson et al.
More research is, however, needed regarding the
behaviour of such structural elements in order to design
reliable protective structures of HSC subjected to
severe dynamic loading. A number of series of experi-
mental tests that focus upon studying the load and
deflection capacity of reinforced HSC beams have
therefore been initiated in Sweden. Initial tests on plain
and fibre-reinforced HSC beams were performed by
Balazs and Hallgren (1996, 1997). These dynamic tests
were performed with the use of servo-hydraulic actua-
tors. This was followed by a larger series of tests, using
air blasts from high explosives as dynamic loads on
beams containing steel rebar tensile reinforcement
(Magnusson and Hallgren, 2000, 2003). The present
paper gives a summary of these tests, also contributing
to the evaluation of the results. Parts of the test series
have also been presented in two conference papers
(Magnusson and Hallgren, 2002, 2004). In connection
with the testing of bar-reinforced beams, HSC beams
containing only steel fibre reinforcement were also
tested. The air blasts in these tests were of smaller
magnitudes than for the bar-reinforced beams and those
results are therefore presented and evaluated separately
(Magnusson, 1998, 2006). The present paper is accom-
panied by a paper on numerical dynamic non-linear
modelling of the test results (Magnusson et al., 2009),
and there has also been a separate investigation on how
to predict support reactions for the concrete beams
subjected to air blast loading (Magnusson, 2007).
Previous research
Previous experimental research into the dynamic be-
haviour of reinforced concrete beams and slabs has, in
many cases, involved blast loads from high explosives
or impact loads from a mass striking the test specimen.
To the knowledge of the authors of the current paper,
the highest concrete grade used in air blast tests with
the same configuration and prior to the present investi-
gation has been in the range of 40 MPa. Palm (1989)
completed a literature survey on reinforced concrete
structures under dynamic loading conditions. The sur-
vey showed that the dynamic loading may cause shear
failures, while beams containing a smaller amount of
reinforcement failed in flexure. This behaviour was also
observed by Hughes and Beeby (1982) and Niklasson
(1994). These two latter investigations utilised a mass
impacting the concrete beams at mid-span.
Rouqand et al. (2003) conducted experiments on
reinforced concrete slabs subjected to blasts. The slabs
were placed horizontally with the high explosive charge
positioned above the centre of the slab, a configuration
also used in experiments performed by Kaldheim
(1999). Weerheijm et al. (2007) conducted blast tests
on reinforced concrete slabs in a blast simulator. The
slabs were simply supported along all edges. The re-
sults from the above investigations of blast loaded slabs
128
all show similar damage patterns. Lan et al. (2005)
performed explosive tests on steel fibre-reinforced con-
crete slabs placed vertically. For slabs with the same
fibre contents, the results show that slabs containing
longer steel fibres were stronger than slabs containing
shorter fibres.
Edin and Forsén (1991) and Browning et al. (2007)
performed blast tests on vertically placed reinforced
concrete wall panels. The former authors also included
the effects of in-plane compressive forces in the panels
owing to the mass from storeys above in a real build-
ing.
Experimental procedures
Test specimens
The test series consisted of 49 reinforced concrete
beams with a length of 1720 mm, of which 38 beams
were subjected to air blast loading while the remaining
beams were tested statically for reference. The test
programmes consisted of 11 different beam types, each
type having individual concrete grade and amount of
reinforcement. In the air blast tests, each beam type
consisted of at least three tested beams. Concrete
(HSC) with nominal compressive cube strengths of
100, 140, 150 and 200 MPa were tested and for refer-
ence also NSC with 40 MPa strength. In addition, the
test series also contained beams with two equally thick
concrete layers of different strengths. The tension zone
consisted of concrete grade 40 MPa and the compres-
sion zone of grade 140 or 200 MPa, respectively.
The reinforcement was Swedish rebars of grade
B500BT with a nominal yield strength of 500 MPa. The
dimensions and reinforcement of the beams are shown
in Figure 1 and the properties of the different types of
beams are given in Table 1. The amount of reinforce-
ment was varied in order to study the structural behav-
iour of the HSC beams with the same mechanical ratio
of reinforcement while also varying the concrete
strength. Note that the mechanical reinforcement ratio
was not the same for the statically and the dynamically
tested beams of type B200F. A few beams also con-
tained steel fibres that were 12.5 mm long, with a
diameter of 0.4 mm and without end-hooks. The
amounts of added steel fibres were either 1.0 or 2.4
vol-%. The mechanical ratio of tensile reinforcement
was determined according to
As f sy
øs ¼ (1)
bdf cc
where As is the area of tensile reinforcement, b is the
beam width and d the effective depth of the beam. The
compressive cylinder strength of concrete is fcc , refer-
ring to the concrete compressive strength of
150 3 300 mm cylinders, and the yield strength of
rebars is fsy . The balanced mechanical reinforcement
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
 Air-blast-loaded, high-strength concrete beams. Part I: experimental investigation
110 110
where Es is the elastic modulus of the steel reinforce-
75 ment.
150 300
75 Static tests
(a) One beam of each type in Table 1, that is a total of
11 beams, was tested with a quasi-static displacement
160 velocity of 0.5 to 1 mm/min. The beams were simply
supported with a span of 1500 mm and subjected to
1500 four point loads as shown in Figure 2. The position of
1720
each point load was determined so that the bending
Stirrups φ8 B500BT s200 moment distribution along the beam resembled that of
a uniformly distributed load, which was the load case
(b)
in the air blast tests. The instrumentation is also shown
2 φ10 B500BT Stirrups φ8 B500BT s200
in Figure 2. A toughness index was used for the evalua-
tion of the test results, defined as the ratio between the
ultimate and yield deflection. The yield deflection
y
was determined as the mid-span deflection
when
160
yielding of the reinforcement commences. The ultimate
Cover ⫽ 25 deflection
u was determined at the same load as yield-
5 φ16 B500BT ing occurred but on the descending branch of the load–
300
deflection curve. In a case where the load–deflection
(c) curve did not descend to the yield load, the ultimate
deflection was determined at the load where the beam
Figure 1. Nominal dimensions and reinforcement of the failed by concrete crushing.
concrete beams: (a) plane; (b) elevation; (c) cross-section.
The amount of tensile reinforcement varied between different Air blast tests
beam types
The air blast tests were conducted in a shock tube at
the testing ground of the Swedish Defence Research
ratio is also used for comparison when evaluating the Agency (FOI) in Märsta. The shock tube is designed to
ductility of the beams, and here defined as simulate shock waves originating from an air blast and
has an internal rectangular cross-section measuring
0:8cu 1.2 m by 1.6 m in the vicinity of the test area. The
øbal ¼ (2)
cu þ sy concrete beams were assembled in a test rig positioned
where cu is the ultimate concrete strain and sy the in the test area of the tube, as shown in Figure 3. The
yield strain of the steel reinforcement, respectively. An explosive charge consisted of plastic explosive and
ultimate concrete strain of 3.5‰ was used for all con- TNT (trinitrotoluene), shaped as a sphere and posi-
crete strengths, and the steel yield strain was defined as tioned in the centre of the tube’s cross section and at a
distance of 10 m from the concrete beam. At this dis-
f sy tance and with the used amounts of explosives, the
sy ¼ (3)
Es beams can be considered as loaded by a plane wave

Table 1. Properties of the tested types of beams

Beam type Compressive Tensile Mechanical reinforcement Reinforcement yield Remarks

strength, fcc : MPa reinforcement ratio, øs stress, fsy : MPa

B40 43 516 mm 0.34 604 —

B100(16) 109 516 mm 0.14 604 —
B100(12) 81 412 mm 0.081 555 —
B140 92 612 mm 0.10 544 —
B140F 90 612 mm 0.10 544 Steel fibres (1.0 vol-%)
B140F/40 113/46 612 mm 0.083 544 Two concrete layers, steel
fibres (1.0 vol-%) in the HSC
B150 133 612 mm 0.075 555 —
B200 173 516 mm 0.082 555 —
B200F 205 516 mm 0.072 static test 604 Steel fibres (2.4 vol-%)
0.078 dynamic test 555 Steel fibres (2.4 vol-%)
B200/40 173/54 516 mm 0.082 555 Two concrete layers
B200F/40 167/48 516 mm 0.098 597 Two concrete layers, steel
fibres (2.4 vol-%) in the HSC

Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2 129

Magnusson et al.

1 1 Two hydraulic jacks

2 Steel beam
2
3 Two load cells

3 3 4 Steel beam

5 Deflection gauge
4
6 Strain gauge on concrete
4 5

7 Strain gauge on one rebar

6
7 8
8 Test beam

9
9 Deflection gauge

110 187·5 375 375 375 187·5 110

1720

Figure 2. Experimental set-up of the static tests. Dimensions in mm

1 Explosive charge pressures pr of 1.2 to 3.2 MPa. The instrumentation of

2 Concrete beam these tests consisted of pressure gauges measuring the
reflected pressure, load cells at the supports, deflection
1·6 m

3 Shock tube
1·5 m 2
1
4 Test rig gauges and an accelerometer at mid-span of the beam,
as shown in Figure 4. A typical pressure registration is
shown in Figure 5. This blast wave profile does not
3 10 m 4 exhibit the negative pressure phase usually obtained in
a free-field explosion where the wave can propagate
Figure 3. Experimental set-up of the air blast tests spherically in all directions. The geometry of the shock
tube prohibits spherical expansion beyond the walls and
front along the entire beam length. This is not the case the wave will therefore after some distance propagate
if the charge is placed at a shorter distance to the beam. parallel to the tube axis. Because of this, the negative
The mass of the explosive charge Q was varied and phase is in many cases not present in shock tube test-
ranged between 2.5 and 6.0 kg, resulting in reflected ing. Strain gauges on the concrete surface, that is in the

A
1 Concrete beam
2 Steel plates
1 3 Pressure gauge
5 4 Strain gauge on
2
concrete surface
3 4 3 5 Two load cells
7
6 6 Strain gauge on
1600 1500 one rebar
200 7 Accelerometer
8 8 Deflection
750 gauge
800
5

A
A–A
1200

Figure 4. Instrumentation of the air blast tests. Dimensions in mm

130 Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
 Air-blast-loaded, high-strength concrete beams. Part I: experimental investigation
2200 500
2000 450
B100(16)
Reflected pressure, pr: kPa

1800
400
1600

Applied load, F: kN
350 B40
1400
300 B140F
1200
1000 250
800 200
600 B140
150
400 B100(12)
100
200
50
0
⫺200 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
0 0·005 0·010 0·015 0·020 0·025 0·030 0·035 0·040
Time, t : s 500
450 B200F
Figure 5. Reflected pressure registration inside the shock 400
tube from a 3.0 kg plastic explosive charge B200F/40

Applied load, F: kN
350
B200
300
B200/40
250
compression zone of the beam, and on one rebar were
200
also used in some tests. The blast load is of too short B40
duration for the high temperatures affecting the con- 150

crete strength parameters. The temperatures were there- 100

fore not measured. For evaluation of the results, the 50

impulse densities i were determined by integration of 0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
the measured pressure–time curves as Deflection, δ: mm
ð
i ¼ pr (t)dt (4) Figure 6. Load–deflection curves of beams subjected to static
loading

Test results 7 B40 B100(16)

B100(12) B140
Static tests 6 B140F B140F/40
B150 B200
The beams subjected to static loading failed in flex-
Toughness index: δu /δy

B200F B200/40
5
ure with concrete crushing in the compression zone and B200F/40

yielding of the rebars. However, for beam B200F also 4

containing steel fibres the failure was caused by tensile
3
failure of the rebars. The load–deflection curves in
Figure 6 refer to the applied total load and the deflec- 2
tion at mid-span. The test results for beams B140F/40
and B150 are omitted in this figure, for clarity and 1
because their responses were similar to the response of
0
beam B140F (Magnusson and Hallgren, 2003). The 0·0 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7 0·8
results show that the load capacity and the stiffness Mechanical reinforcement ratio: ωs /ωbal
increased with increasing concrete strength. This ap-
plies to beams with the same amount of reinforcement, Figure 7. Toughness index plotted against mechanical ratio
that is beams of type B40, B100(16), B200 and B200F. of tensile reinforcement
The two-layered beams of types B200/40 and B200F/
40 exhibited a reduced stiffness owing to the weaker Air blast tests
concrete strength in the tension zone. There were no Typical damage and crack patterns of the beams
observed cracks between the two concrete layers for subjected to air blast loading are shown in Figure 8.
beams of type B200/40 and B140F/40. Some horizontal The tested beams exhibited different failure modes.
cracks did, however, appear at the interface of beam Beams with high values of øs and not containing steel
type B200F/40. The ductility of the beams was evalu- fibres failed in shear, whereas beams with lower values
ated by determining the toughness index, illustrated in of øs failed in flexure, caused by concrete crushing in
Figure 7 as a function of the mechanical ratio of rein- the compression zone. Fibre-reinforced beams of type
forcement and normalised to the balanced reinforce- B200F failed in flexure, while beams of type B200
ment ratio according to Equations (1) and (2). For the failed in shear. The beam of type B200/40 with two
two-layered beams, the concrete strength of the HSC concrete layers also exhibited flexural failure, although
was used in Equation (1). shear cracks had developed as well. Minor shear cracks
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2 131
Magnusson et al.
B40
curves and load–deflection curves are shown in Figures
9 and 10. These curves are based on the mid-span
deflection and the load cell registrations at the supports.
The registered support reactions consisted of oscilla-
B100(16)
tions due to beam vibrations and these registrations
were therefore filtered to obtain smoother reactions.
Thus, the values of the support reactions in Table 2 and
Figure 10 are based on the filtered registrations. Exam-
B100(12) ples both of beams that failed in shear and beams that
failed in flexure were chosen in Figure 10. The curves
in Figure 9 were chosen as examples of the time span
for maximum deflections. Numerical simulations have
B140 also been performed on the beams in this figure
(Magnusson et al., 2009). The reflected pressures and
impulse densities obtained in the air blast tests are
presented in Figure 11.
B140F

Evaluation of results
Static tests
B140F/40
It appears that the ductility of the beams increases as
the mechanical ratio of reinforcement decreases, see
Figure 7. The tests also indicate that the beam tough-
ness is independent of concrete strength at the same
B150 øs , which is in agreement with other investigations by
Hallgren (1994) and by Fransson (1997). Beams con-
taining steel fibres appear to be more ductile than
beams without fibres with the exception of beam B150.
B200 It is likely that the presence of steel fibres provided for
a certain degree of confinement of the compression
zone during the deflection event. The flexural failure of
the beams containing fibres was more ductile and the
B200F
observed sudden drop in load capacity caused by con-
crete crushing was thereby prevented, see beams B140
and B140F in Figure 6. Also, beam B200F failed by
tensile failure of the rebars. Thus, a softening and
redistribution of stresses in the compression zone oc-
B200/40
curred without failure by concrete crushing.
The introduction of a weaker concrete layer in the
two-layered beams of type B200/40 and B200F/40 re-
sulted in reduced beam stiffness. The relatively large
B200F/40 differences in load capacity between beams of concrete
grade 200 are attributable to differences in concrete
strength, variations in effective depth and variations in
steel yield strength. The yield strength may vary signif-
icantly between different batches of delivered rebars.
Figure 8. Damage on tested beams. From top to bottom: B40, Furthermore, some horizontal cracks appeared at the
B100(16), B100(12), B140, B140F, B140F/40, B150, B200, interface between the two concrete layers for beams of
B200F, B200/40 and B200F/40 type B200F/40, which is probably due to the enhanced
tensile strength of the fibre-reinforced HSC beams.
also appeared in the B200F/40 beam type but these Similar cracks did not, however, appear in the case for
cracks were limited to the weaker concrete layer. In a beams of types B200/40 and B140F/40.
similar way to the static tests, horizontal cracks ap-
peared at the interface between the two concrete layers Air blast tests
for beam type B200F/40. The results show that special attention needs to be
The results from the air blast tests are summarised in paid to HSC beams with large amounts of reinforce-
Table 2 and examples of corresponding deflection–time ment to avoid the risk of brittle shear failure. However,
132 Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
 Air-blast-loaded, high-strength concrete beams. Part I: experimental investigation

Table 2. Results from the air blast tests

Beam type Explosive Reflecting pressure Impulse density, Total support reaction Ultimate deflection Failure type
charge, (max.), i: kPa s (max.), at mid-span,
Q: kg pr : kPa Ftot,u : kN
u : mm

B40 2.5 1249
80 6.38
0 348 17.5 Shear

B100(16) 3.5 1675
58 6.74
0.40 521 23.6 Shear
B100(12) 3.0 1946
15 9.58 324 44.6 Flexural
B140 2.5 1558
7 8.34 384 38.9 Flexural
B140F 3.0 1748
72 9.33
0.04 362 42.1 Flexural
B140F/40 3.0 1844
14 8.67
0.14 367 58.6 Flexural
B150 3.0 1907
3 9.50
0.37 392 26.6 Shear
B200 4.0 1906
84 11.54 500 22.6 Shear
B200F 6.0 3078
156 11.13
0.50 624 37.7 Flexural
B200/40 4.0 2489
132 9.34
0.38 541 45.3 Flexural
B200F/40 4.0 2369 10.48 455 38.0 Flexural

60 4000
B40
3500 B100(16)
Reflected pressure, pr: kPa
50 B100(12)
B140F/40 3000 B140
Deflection, δ: mm

40 B140F
2500 B140F/40
B100(16)
2000 B150
30 B200
1500 B200F
20 B200/40
1000 B200F/40
B200
10 500
B40
0
0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Impulse density, i : kPa s
Time, t : ms

Figure 9. Examples of load–time curves of beams subjected Figure 11. Reflected pressures and impulse densities obtained
to air blast loading in the air blast tests

700 and B100(12). A less stiff beam is not able to develop

B200F f.f. ⫽ flexural failure
Total support reaction, Ftot,u: kN

600 s.f. ⫽ shear failure

B200
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10
Figure 10. Examples of support reaction–deflection curves of
beams subjected to air blast loading
adding steel fibres to the concrete can enhance the
shear strength and the ductility of the beams consider-
ably. The risk of rebar failure in HSC beams needs also
to be considered.
Beams that failed in shear exhibited limited deflec-
tions compared to beams that failed in flexure, see
Figures 9 and 10. The shear failure was prevented for
beams of similar concrete grades by reducing the ten-
sile reinforcement, for example see beams B100(16)
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
the same amount of strain energy as a stiffer counter-
B200/40
part at the same deformations. This contributes to re-
duced shear forces in the less stiff beam, which instead
B100(12) will carry the dynamic load by deflecting more readily.
A reduced stiffness was also obtained in beams with
B100(16) two concrete layers owing to lower concrete tensile
f.f.
f.f. f.f. strength and lower concrete-reinforcement bond
s.f. strength. These beams also exhibited flexural failures,
s.f. although shear cracks had developed in some cases. In
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 a similar way to the static tests, horizontal cracks
Deflection, δ: mm
appeared at the interface between the two concrete
layers for beam type B200F/40. The interfacial crack-
ing was, however, more pronounced compared to the
corresponding beams loaded statically. These cracks are
possibly caused by the introduction of steel fibres to
the HSC matrix.
Furthermore, it was observed that the introduction of
steel fibres prevented shear cracks from developing,
thus increasing the shear strength of the beams and
resulting in a more ductile failure. This applies to beam
type B200F, which failed in flexure, in comparison with
beam type B200, which failed in shear. These results
agree with other research (Gustafsson and Noghabai,
1999).
133
Magnusson et al.

Comparisons between static and air blast tests Conclusions

One important difference between the results from
the static tests and the air blast tests is in some cases
the failure mode. The tests show that the same type of
beam that failed in flexure when loaded statically could
fail in shear when exposed to blast loading. This behav-
iour has also been observed in other investigations (e.g.
Hughes and Beeby, 1982; Niklasson, 1994; Ansell,
2007). The failure mode of a reinforced concrete beam
may depend on the number of vibration modes that are
excited in the beam. A structural element subjected to
transient dynamic loading will experience higher
modes of vibration. This will in turn give rise to larger
shear forces compared with the shear forces in a corres-
ponding static loading case as shown by Hughes and
Beeby (1982). The magnitude of the shear forces that
develop will also depend on the stiffness of the ele-
ment. A stiffer element will respond to a dynamic load
by building up large internal resistance at small defor-
mations, which gives rise to large shear forces. This
influence of the beam stiffness was observed in the air
blast tests. Beams of larger stiffness were more suscep-
tible to shear failures compared to a corresponding
beam of reduced stiffness.
The results also show that the dynamic load capacity
was larger compared to the static load capacity, see
Figure 12. This figure illustrates the static ultimate load
and the lowest dynamic ultimate load that caused fail-
ure. Here, the filtered load cell registrations are used.
The numerals above the bars in Figure 12 indicate the
dynamic to static load capacity ratio. For beams of type
B40 the lowest dynamic ultimate load was just slightly
larger than the static ultimate load, which is mainly
attributable to the shear strength of these beams being
very close to their static flexural strength.
700
Static tests
Dynamic tests
600
s.f.
⫹1·33
500
Support reaction, Ftot,u: kN
The static tests verified that load capacity, stiffness
and deformation capacity increase with an increasing
concrete strength for beams with the same amount of
reinforcement. An increase in deformation capacity
was observed as the mechanical ratio of reinforcement
was reduced. The air blast tests showed that the dy-
namic load capacity was larger for beams of all con-
crete grades compared with the corresponding static
load capacity. The results also showed that special
attention needs to be paid to HSC beams with large
amounts of reinforcement to avoid the risk of brittle
shear failure.
Concrete structures designed to fail in flexure may fail
in a shear mode when loaded dynamically. In some cases
and for the same beam type, the failure mode changed
from a flexural failure in the static tests into a shear
failure in the air blast tests. Beams with a high reinforce-
ment ratio and not containing steel fibres were suscepti-
ble to shear failures, whereas beams with a lower ratio of
reinforcement failed in flexure. The introduction of steel
fibres increased the shear strength of the beams thereby
preventing shear cracks from developing. The specially
designed beams of two concrete layers failed in flexure
because the weaker bottom layer with conventional con-
crete contributed to a reduced flexural stiffness and pre-
vented the occurrence of a shear failure. This method of
combining HSC and NSC may be an economical way to
achieve effective protective concrete elements.
Besides enhancements of concrete ductility in ten-
sion, steel fibres also contribute to an enhanced ducti-
lity as concrete is loaded in compression. Thus, steel
fibres contribute to a ductile failure process as the
beam fails in flexure by concrete crushing in the com-
pression zone.
s.f. ⫽ shear failure
⫹1·35
⫹1·47
s.f.
⫹1·30

⫹1·15
s.f.
400 ⫹1·35 ⫹1·43
s.f. ⫹1·28
⫹1·25
⫹1·04
⫹1·81
300

200

100

0
6)

2)

F
0

40

40

50

00

40
B4

/4
40

00
(1

(1

B1

F/

B1

B2

F/
00
00

00

B1

B2
40

00
B2
B1

B1

B1

B2

Figure 12. Comparisons between ultimate static load and ultimate dynamic load. The numerals above the bars indicate the
dynamic to static load capacity ratio
134 Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
 Air-blast-loaded, high-strength concrete beams. Part I: experimental investigation
The results presented here may be useful in the
development of future design methods for blast-resis-
tant structures consisting of HSC structural members.
Future blast-resistant structures may benefit from
knowledge on how to combine NSC with HSC of
various strengths and with optimised reinforcement
contents, with or without fibres.
Further research
Interesting issues to investigate further are reinforced
concrete beams containing steel fibres of different
types in order to study the effect on the shear strength
when subjected to dynamic loading. This would include
all types of beams in this investigation, which failed in
shear, and also the beams with two concrete layers.
A study of the changes from flexural to shear failure
in dynamically loaded concrete beams has been sug-
gested by Ansell (2007). Of special interest is to find
the relations between load characteristics and structural
properties that will lead to changes in the failure mode.
The present tests indicated an increased risk of ten-
sile failure of deformed rebars in HSC with steel fibres.
Research on beams of two concrete layers, that is NSC
in the tension zone and HSC in the compression zone,
should be continued. It is of further interest to study
the behaviour of these beams with respect to failure
modes and energy absorption.
The beams studied herein have a relatively small
depth to width ratio. It is well known that the formal
shear strength of a reinforced concrete beam is reduced
with an increased beam height, commonly referred to
as a size effect. Hillerborg (1978) states that the flexur-
al failure with concrete crushing in the compressive
zone is also size dependent. It is therefore of interest to
include studies on the dynamic capacity of HSC beams
with a larger depth to width ratio at constant span in
future research.
Air blast tests may be expensive to perform and in
these cases it is of interest to use alternative methods
of achieving similar dynamic loads on concrete beams.
Results from tests with falling weights impacting con-
crete beams, for example the test series by Ansell and
Svedbjörk (2003), should be evaluated and compared
with the air blast results presented here. The aim is in
this case to determine when a test with impacting
weights will give a sufficient result and when a more
expensive air blast test must be performed. The numer-
ical tools that could be used for such a comparison are
presented in the companion paper (Magnusson et al.,
2009).
Detonating bombs would subject structures to both
steel fragments and blast waves and the combined
effect of reinforced HSC beams subjected to such loads
is therefore important to investigate. Some work has
been performed on fragment impact (Leppänen, 2004)
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
and the combined effect of fragments and blast waves
(Nyström, 2008), but these may need to be extended.
Acknowledgements
The air blast tests were carried out at the facilities of
the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI) in Mär-
sta. The project was supported by the Swedish Armed
Forces Headquarters and FOI with contributions from
the Division of Concrete Structures at the Department
of Civil and Architectural Engineering at the Royal
Institute of Technology (KTH), Tyréns AB and the
Swedish Blasting Research Centre, which are hereby
gratefully acknowledged. The authors thank all those
who have contributed to the project.
References
Ansell A (2007) The dynamic shear capacity of concrete structures.
Structural Concrete 8(3): 147–154.
Ansell A and Svedbjörk G (2003) Static and Dynamic Testing of
Simply Supported Concrete Strips with Varying Concrete Quality
and Reinforcement. Royal Institute of Technology, Department of
Structural Engineering, Stockholm. Technical report 2003:8 (in
Swedish).
Balazs P and Hallgren M (1996) High Strength Concrete Beams
Subjected to Impulse Load. Defence Research Establishment
(FOA), Stockholm. Report R-96-00252-6.0-SE (in Swedish with
English summary).
Balazs P and Hallgren M (1997) Fracture Mechanics Tests on Beams
of Ballistocrete, Densit and Reactive Powder Concrete, with Im-
pulse Load and Static Load. Defence Research Establishment
(FOA), Stockholm, 1997. Report R-97-00640-311-SE (in Swedish
with English summary).
Browning RS, Davidson S, Bewick BT, Fisher JW and Dinan RJ
(2007) Resistance of slender precast concrete wall panels to blast
loads. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Inter-
action of the Effects of Munitions with Structures, Orlando.
Edin K and Forsén R (1991) Weapon Effects on a Concrete Multi-
storey Building II. Swedish Defence Research Establishment
(FOA), Stockholm. Report C 20859-2.3.
Fransson H (1997) Rotation Capacity of Reinforced High Strength
Concrete Beams. Licentiate thesis, Bulletin 32, Royal Institute of
Technology, Stockholm.
Gustafsson J and Noghabai K (1999) Steel fibres as shear reinforce-
ment in high strength concrete beams. Nordic Concrete Research
22(1): 35–52.
Hallgren M (1994) Flexural and Shear Capacity of Reinforced High
Strength Concrete Beams without Stirrups. Licentiate thesis, Bulle-
tin 9, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
Hillerborg A (1978) Brottmekanik tillämpad på betong (Fracture
mechanics applied to concrete). Nordisk betong 22(6): 5–12 (in
Swedish).
Hughes G and Beeby AW (1982) Investigation of the effects of
impact loading on concrete beams. The Structural Engineer
60B(3): 45–52.
Kaldheim O (1999) Blast Experiments on Concrete Plates. Norwegian
Defence Research Establishment (FFI), Kjeller. Report 95/02636.
Lan S, Lok TS and Heng L (2005) Composite structural panels
subjected to explosive loading. Construction and Building Mater-
ials 19: 387–395.
Leppänen J (2004) Concrete Structures Subjected to Fragment Im-
pacts: Dynamic Behaviour and Material Modelling. PhD thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
135
Magnusson et al.
Magnusson J (1998) Fibre Reinforced Concrete Beams Subjected to
Transient Load. Defence Research Establishment (FOA), Stock-
holm. Report R-98-00808-311-SE (in Swedish with English sum-
mary).
Magnusson J (2006) Fibre reinforced concrete beams subjected to air
blast loading. Nordic Concrete Research 35(1–2): 18–34.
Magnusson J (2007) Structural Concrete Elements Subjected to Air
Blast Loading. Licentiate thesis, Bulletin 92, Royal Institute of
Technology, Stockholm.
Magnusson J and Hallgren M (2000) High Performance Concrete
Beams Subjected to Shock Waves from Air Blast. Defence Research
Establishment (FOA), Tumba. Report R-00-01586-311-SE.
Magnusson J and Hallgren M (2002) High strength concrete beams
subjected to shock waves from air blast. Proceedings of the 6th
International Symposium on Utilization of High Strength/High Per-
formance Concrete, Leipzig, 2, 355–368.
Magnusson J and Hallgren M (2003) High Performance Concrete
Beams Subjected to Shock Waves from Air Blast, Part 2. Swedish
Defence Research Agency (FOI), Tumba. Report R-1116-SE.
Magnusson J and Hallgren M (2004) Reinforced high strength con-
crete beams subjected to air blast loading. Proceedings of the 8th
International Symposium on Structures under Shock and Impact,
Crete, 53–62.
Magnusson J, Ansell A and Hansson H (2009) Air blast loaded high-
136
strength concrete beams. Part II: Numerical non-linear analysis.
Magazine of Concrete Research, in press.
Niklasson G (1994) Shear Failure in Reinforced Concrete Beams: An
Experimental Investigation. Defence Research Establishment
(FOA), Sundbyberg. Report D 20241-2.6 (in Swedish with English
summary).
Nyström U (2008) Concrete Structures Subjected to Blast and Frag-
ment Impacts: Numerical Simulations of Reinforced and Fibre-
Reinforced Concrete. Licentiate thesis, Chalmers University of
Technology, Gothenburg.
Palm J (1989) On Concrete Structures Subjected to Dynamic Loading.
Fortifikations-förvaltningen, Eskilstuna. Report A4:89.
Rouqand R, Laurensou J and Cremoux L (2003) Behavior of concrete
panels to HE charges and evaluation of the simplified method
MAXDALLE. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on
Interaction of the Effects of Munitions with Structures, Mannheim.
Weerheijm J, Mediavilla J and Van Doormaal JCAM (2007) Damage
and residual strength blast prediction of blast loaded panels. Pro-
ceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Interaction of the
Effects of Munitions with Structures, Orlando, 2007.
Discussion contributions on this paper should reach the editor by
1 August 2010
Magazine of Concrete Research, 2010, 62, No. 2
Copyright of Magazine of Concrete Research is the property of Thomas Telford Ltd and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.