T illililt lil illil lltil till tltil illil lltil til lill

10009006
J SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTlTUTE
Post Off ice Drawer 28510, 6220 Culebra Road
San Antonio, Texas 78284
J

t PIPELINE RESPONSE TO BURIED

I EXPLOSIVE DETONATIONS
t VOLUME I - SUMMARY REPORT

I by
Edward D. Esparza

I Peter S. Westine
Alex B. Wenzel

T
I FINAL REPORT
A.G.A. Project PR- I 5-109
SwRI Project 02-5567

l
l for
THE PIPELINE RESEARCH COMMITTEE
AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION
T
I August l98l

I Approved:

t/ l^-
:
//-
H. Norman Abramson, Vice President

I Engineering Sciences

I
 SUMMARY

This report describes a blasting research program

conducted to develop simple pro-
cedures for predicting the maximum stresses
in steel pipelines induced by nearby, buried,
plosive detonations. This extensive experimental ex-
and analytical study was funded by the
Pipeline Research committee of the American
Gas Association and performed by
Southwest Research Institute from 1975 to l gg l .
In this program' the general problem of a buried explosive
detonating near a pipeline
was divided into two parts. In the first part,
similitude theory, empirical analyses and test
data were used to derive equations for estimating
maximum ground displacement and parti-
cle velocity' The ground motions provided the forcing
function imparted to a buried
pipeline' In the second part, similitude theory,
conservation of rnass and momentum, and
approximate energy methods were used to derive functional
relationships for the maximum
pipe strains and stresses. Erperimental data from
more than 60 tests, primarily in model
scale' were then used to develop equations for
estimating maximum pipe stresses induced by
point and parallel line explosive sources buried
in a homogeneous soil media. The large
amount of data used and the wide range of these
data make the solr-rtion, uppli.uur. to most
soil blastingsituations near pipelines.
subsequently' the applicability of these prediction
equations was extended to estimate
pipe stresses from other more complex geometries.
Test data were obtained from 3g model
scale experiments using angled-line, parallei grid,
and angled-grid explosive sources also

r
buried in soil' These data were then used to develop
empirical methods by which cornplex
explosive geometries cor:ld be sirnplified into
equivalent point or parallel line sources,
depending on their proximity to the pipeiine.
using the sirnplifying methods developed, the
test data from the eornpleN geometry source
cornpared quite well with the point and parallel

l| line source equations"

As part cf the btrasting research prograrn, three other

forrned' In the first, a correction factor to the point
limited tasks were also per-

I souree' in this case, the lack of earth behind the pipe

souree solution was derived empirically
for situations in which a pipeline is between a relatively
near free surface and the explosive
enhances the pipe stresses because of

t the iack of inertial resistance. In the second limited task, a riterature study was
determine the effects of barriers between an
measurements from one specific set of field
conducted to
explosive source and a pipeline. Strain
tests were used to develop an equation to predict

I
the effeets of a trench on strain levels on pipe
a as a function of scaled distances. Because
the lirnited data base, this equation should of
be valid only within the range of the dimen-
sionless parameters invoived. Finaily, four
model expe.iments were also conducted in a

I
study to deterrnine the feasibility of simulating
the problrrn of blasting in a rock rnass adja-
cent to a pipeline buried in soil. The pipe stress
and ground motion data from these ex-
periments were used to develop an
equation fo. computing an effective standoff
distance so

I that the point source soil equations could be used

to approximate the pipe response.

I
I
I
J
Because no test data were obtained in rock/soil media, application of the effective standoff
equation is tentative at this time.
J This final engineering report was prepared in two volumes' Volume I is a
summary of
parameters and symbols
the prediction equations and methods developed. Definitions of
I are included, as well as application information. Volume II is
a complete technical report
which describes in detail the background of this research effort, the experimental
program
the use of
and results, the development of the ground motion and pipe stress solutions'
I some of these equations and methods in example problems,
and the three smaller tasks per-
formed. In addition, discussions are presented on assumptions and limitations
of the solu-

t
alternative
tions developed, the sensitivity of the point and parallel line stress equations,
yield theories' factors of
forms for these equations, the total state of stress on a pipe and
have been used to limit
safety, and other procedures which are in some blasting codes and

t blasting near piPelines.

t
I
I
I
t
t
I
t
t
I
t lll

I
I TABLE OF CONTENTS

l Page

I Section

I INTRODUCTION
FOR POINT EXPLOSIVE
II PREDICTION EQUATIONS J
a
J
SOURCE
Radial Ground Motions 4
Pipe Stresses " "

EQUATIONS FOR PARALLEL LINE nI

III PREDICTION
I
EXPLOSIVE SOURCE
Radial Ground Motions 8

PiPeStresses'''

METHODS FOR COMPLEX

1l
IV PREDICTION
EXPLOSIVE SOURCE " ' 11

General 1l
Angled-Line Source' t2
ParallelGrid Source'''' l4
Angled-Grid Source l7
e*J.pii""t to Simplifving Methods'' "''''
18
STUDIES
v RESULTS OF OTHER 18
Surface
PiPeline Near A Free 20
StudY
Pipeline Shielding 20
Two-Media Problem

Vtr CLOSURE
23

APPENDIXA ILLUSTRATIVEPROBLEMS''''''''
- 24
Ground Motions 26
PiPe Stresses " "
32

APPENDIX B - LIST OF
PARAMETERS'''' 33
English SYmbols 34
Greek SYmbols

vll
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

I Methodology for Estimating Pipe

Stresses from Parallel
10
-r
LineExPlosive Sources''''' t

Estimating Pipe Stresses from an

I
2 Methodology for 13 I
Angled-Line ExPlosive Source t''
i\
l
I
ll

for Estimating Pipe Stresses from a it

3 Methodology t5 I
Parallel Grid ExPlosive Source I

4 Methodology for Estimating Pipe

Stresses from an
L
Angled-Grid ExPlosive Source'

Free Surface
Examples of a Pipeline Near a
 t
E

I. INTRODUCTION

which.descr::::"i:
This summary report is Volume
I of the final engineering report
predicting the stresses ln
program conducted.to devetop procedures for
errensive research performed
u"1.J J.ronuiiot's' The research effort was
buried pipelines ."r;;;-;
nearby
Institute (SwRI) for the
period igis it.ough 1980 fy Southwest Research
during the American Gas Association
(A'G'A')'
pipeline Research comrnittee (Pncl or ti.

PriortolgT5,novalidcriteriaexistedfordeterminingthecharge-distancelimitsin timitations
n.u, uuri.o pipelines. In many instances, ground motion
blasting situations to underground gas
ground structures have been and are still applied
applicable for above used to
Battelle [uations, published in 1964' have been
pipelines. tn ottrer Jur.r, the pipe
without the benefit of experimental
estimate pipe stresse,. tt,.," equations, developed
responsedutu,*",.,.commendearo,.,,.onlyforexplosive-to-pipedistancesgreaterthan
i00 feet.

at close disrances' within 100

BecauseofthelimitationsonsurfacegroundmotioncriteriaandtheBattelleequatlons'
prediction *"iioa. were needei tl nurrore blastings purpose
better
it in"' the PRC initiatea.a ttt.:"i:l^lt-:gram with SwRI for the
feet, to pipelines' by nearby buried explosive
fo, predicting pipeline stresses.ind-uced
of developinu o,o."o.',.,
detonations,particularlythosewithinl,00feet.TheBlastingResearchSupervisoryCom.
monitor this research program'
mittee *u, tor*"d-ivln. pRC to guide and
TwoconsecutiveprojectswerefundedbythePRc.Inthefirstprojectbeguninl9T5'
and developed functional
relationships
project No" pR_r5-ils**r r.ui.*.oti.literature
usingsimilitudetheoryfortheforcingfunctionandpiper.rporrr"'Then,43modelandfull-
soil' A complete engineer-
scaletestswereconductedtoobtainthedatanecessarytodevelopthestresssolutionsfor
ti
point and paraltel line explosiut'o"""'lYtt9 "^::T::tnto"t
was presented to acquaint
ingreportwaspreparedandpublished.Thatreportisreplacedbythisoneandshouldno the gas
on blasting effects
ionger be used. In 1978, a
seminar
pipelineindustrywiththebackground,development,'',,e,andlimitationsofthenewly
clevelopedpipestressequations.Later,avideotapereportwhichsummarizedthefirst
sponsors'
research project was made
available to the

In1979,afollow-onproject,ProjectNo.PR-15-l0g,wasinitiatedtoexpandthe
and analytically' seventy
applicationortt,.,otutionstootherexplosiyellletriesandfieldsituations.Five
investigated experimentally
were
different blasting conditions
to the pipe' grid sources oriented
modelscaletestswereconductedtoobtaindanfrompointexplosivesourcesburieddeeper
o'i"ttttJ"u'i"i"T
than the pipe, line sources 1:l;;
between an explosive
parallelandangledtothepipeline,andpointSourcesinatwo-medialayout.Inaddition'a
conducted ,o J.i.r,,'ine the effects of barriers
literature sttldy was
this extensive research
project, improved prediction
pipeline. As a result of parallel line explosive
source and a
pipe stresses from point and
equations *.r. i.riu.d for estimating
sources detonated in soil. Not only are these new equations more accurate than
those
developed in the earlier project, but they are also considerably simpler to use. In addition,
methods were developed for simplifying the more complex explosive geometiies into
equivalent parallel line or point sources.
The purpose of Volume I is to provide the user with a summary of the prediction
equations and methods he or she can refer to quickly to look up a particular estimating
procedure and corresponding definitions. However, before applying any procedure, the
user must first be familiar with the contents of Volume II and understand the assumptions,
approximations, and limitations applicable to the various equations and methods. Volume
I is organized into six sections and two appendices. In Section II, the equations for
estimating radial ground motions and pipe stresses induced by point explosive sources
buried in soil are presented. In Section III a similar set of equations for parallel line sources
is presented. In Section IV, simplifying methods are summarized for handling angled-line,
parallel grid and angled-grid sources. Section V includes the results of three very limited
studies concerning the case of a pipeline relatively near a free surface, use of trenches
to
reduce pipe stresses, and the feasibility of using concrete/soil model tests to obtain
two-
media data. In Section VI, some general comments are made regarding the total state of
stress on the pipe and the use of yield theories. Finally, in the appendices, some
additional
information is included to assist the reader in applying the prediction equations and
methods. The appendices also contain some simple example problems and a consolidated
list of the parameters used in this volume.
 l-

il. PREDICTION EQUATIONS FOR POINT EXPLOSIYE SOURCE

Radial Ground Motions

From an extensive collection of data from the literature and this research program, new
empirical relationships were developed for predicting peak ra{ial ground displacement and
particle velocity'when buried explosive charges are detonated in a homogeneous ground
media such as soil or rock. These relationships define the forcing function applied to a
buried pipe from blasting and are as follows:

o.o4r4(#)"'
i(#)": tanhr5[trr(#)""]

/ w \ 0'852
0.006171 .. - |
\ pc'R' /
:(#)": tunn[zo.o(#)"']
where X : peak radial ground displacement (ft)
U : peak radial ground particle velocity (ftlsec)
R = standoff distance (ft)
w'e = explosive energy release (ft-lb)
p : mass density of the soil or rock (lb-sec'/f.to1
a : seismic P-wave velocity in the soil or rock (ftlsec)
po : atmospheric pressure (lb/f()
Note that any consistent set of units can be used in these equations and that each term in
these relationships is nondimensional.

Major differences separate these empirical equations from others that predict ground
motions. The new equations are not log linear; test results cover more orders of magnitude,
and a coupling term (pcz /po)o's is divided into the scaled displacement and velocity. The
presence of atmospheric pressure in the prediction relationships does not mean atmospheric
pressure is a physical phenomenon influencing the results. The quantity pc'is a measure of
the compressibility of the shock propagation media. Hence, the quantitY Po is a reference
standard (compressibility of air) and empirically introduces relative compressibilities for
different media such as soil and rock. This point, as well as how these equations were de-
rived, is elaborated on in Volume II. The test data used in fitting the curves and substan-
tiating the validity of these equations cover almost ten orders of magnitude in scaled energy
- tt < w pc'R3 < 10-t '
,elease, W"/pc2R3, a range of l0
"/
The ground motion data obtained by SwRI in the model and full-scale experiments
were for values of W"/pc2R3 greater than 6.4 x l0-5. For this range of scaled charge
were fit-
weights typically .rr.orrnt"r.d in blasting situations near pipelines, log-linear curves
particle
ted to all of the SwRI point source data. The resulting radial soil displacement and
velocity equations for point explosive sources are:

i(#)' :00373( t.)'*' (3)

:(#) :ooo48r( t,)"" (4)

for6x lo-s <w./pc2R3 <6x 1o-2

As was the case with the general equations, each parameter group is dimensionless and'
therefore, 41rJ3*o-4$q19g!--q*qt--o,-f--qp-l$-.-c-?-11-be'gsed' These simplified
point source equations'
as well as the g.tt.tui .qnations, predict the radial ground motions at a point below the
ground surface corresponding to the depth for the center of the pipe' tn our tests, this depth
was usually two pipe diameters. The equations should be applicable over
reasonable range
give essentially
in scaled depths up to almost the ground surface. These simplified equations
(1) and
the same predictions for radial ground motions as the more general ones, Equations
ground mo-
(2). Therefore, the simpler.Equations (3) and (4) are recommended to estimate
tions from point sources in soil within the applicable range. An example using Equations
(3) and (4) is included in Appendix A.

Fipe Stresses

Functional relationships were developed for the maximum strain and stresses on a
momen-
buried pipeline using similitude theory, relationships for conservation of mass and
tunn, and approximate energy methods. Subsequently, these functions were
defined em-
pirically from the point source test data obtained in the model and full-scale experiments.
point
The resulting equations for predicting the maximum elastic pipe strains from a
pipe are:
source detonated in soil and buried to about the same depth as the
 (5)
€cir=4.78( "* )o'tot
'JEh Rt't '
-\ ,. _,

and

(6)
€,ong= ,.n, (#=)0"'
vEh R"''

equatlons
For these strain prediction
strain (in'lin')
r' €"i, : maximum circumferential
c = *u"i-"'n longitudinal strain (in'lin')
'long
n:;;;;;tnt-'gvrelease(nondimensional)
point source (lb)
W : totut tt'a'gt weight of
E : modulus of elasticitY (Psi)
h = PiPe wall thickness.(in')
R : distance between pipe and charge (ft)
cover
to 1500 v'in'/in' This range should
Intheseequations,theparametersmustbeenteredwiththeunitsshown.Thestraindata
ranged;;10
used to develop rn.r. rorrr,ions gas pipelines. The estimate
situations using point ,ou,.es buried in soil near 44 and 3690 for
most blasting
the strain a"tu ui"r, the two solution t"'ut' was
of the standard .rro, or
respectively'
the circumferential and
rongitudinal strains,

Equations (5) and (6)

AstheseStrainsolutionsevolvedinthisresearchprogram'theyprovidedrealistic
test series. For similar apprications,
estirnates of strain for subsequent strains need to
in pipeline situations the estimated blast
fi"riirt
are most useful. uo*.u.r,
beconvertedtostressessotheycanbe.o,.ti,,.owithotherstressesonthepipetodetermine
thetotalstateofStress.Thisconve,,i*p,o..duremaybedictatedbycompanypolicyorbe
in charge'
, JeciOeO upon by the engineer 'mum biaxial
strains t" bv the user' maxr
To eliminate the step of converting- each test:t:t^::ttusing the maximum measured
strains
in this program for
stresses were computed assumes that the max-
.orri"rrio., procedure. This conversion conservatively
and a biaxial
imumpeakstrainsoccuratthe,u,n.ooi,,,onthepipe,areofthesamealgebraicsign,and
peaksimul.un"o.'utn.Additionalo"tuir,onthisprocedurearefoundinVolumell.Using equations were
similar datalnalyses as used on the strain data'
the biaxial ,rr.rr., urrd
stress., almost coincided with each
and longitudinal
derived for circumferential ^*tti.tt were used to derive a
a* of the stress a-uiu, ,.gurdless of orientation'
other. Therefore, in both the circumferen-
This prediction procedure makes the stresses equar
single function.
tial and longitudinal direction'
 pipe stresses for a point
explosive
for predicting the maximum
The resulting equation ri '
source detonated in soil is
1o'77
/ nw n'
o.i,:orons -- 4'44 t \=; )
VEh R'

stress (psi)
where ocir : maximum circumferential
lonsitulr^nal stress
(psi)
orong : ;;;i;"-
(nondimensional)*
n equivalent energy release
or line (lb)
w : iJof tnutge weight of point
(Psi)
E = modulus of elasticity
h : wall thickness (in'). and charge (ft)
R : distance between prpe range in line
be entered with the units shown' The
must most soil
In this equation, the parameters ,h;;.1; do*n': U* psi' This range covers
pipe stress au,u uiri.ilr,
.*..r, "f error of the stress data
was
rhe estimate of the standard points were within
blasting ,ituatiorrJrri].pip.rin.s. no.i-.ui iistriuution' ogqo of the data
assumir* u The applica-
34g0. This implies that, points were within * 68vo '
curve and 95;;-;i the data
+34o/oof the or"Ji.rio' than 2 pipe diameters'
(7) is also limited to dltances R greater
tion of Equation
included in the ap-
;;; J-*pr. e*ampt. problem are
ToillustratehowEquation(7)canbeappliedtopointexplosivesourceblastingsitua.
tions, some additional
informatio,
p.nai*T:i*::i:,ilff ,fJ',Hf 1*i:lig*X*:$::l"f:i:"i':'iil:""-iilT'
and the determr:
rePort.

*n : 1.0 for ANFO

t
 FOR PARALLEL
LINE
III. PREDICTION EQU4I9IS
-nirlbslvE souRcn

Radial Ground Motions

those for a
generated differ from
Whenanumberofequally,pT".dexplosivecharges-oj.o.sameweightareinlineand
motions
,uai* g'ouna
detonated simuttaneo-u^rili:,t.
n;i*,"'il.y::,,:i;l.1ff
shiPs were denveo il1*fi1Til-1*i"f ffi ,',:l'H,1[:iiil:'J::t:11;
a pa'aneitine source
when a transducer
sources. A series oipoint
tll's::-:1".i;;;J;; line' the charge spacing
is
smalter ttun tiJ;;;;.J;: TF; is perpendicular to
the ex-
has a standoff distance it transducer ,.nsirrg axis
ano log-linear
smalier than the **u"ri-Jir,urr.. "ihese requirements were used to curve fit
,.r, o"r" -..ring lines'
plosive line. All velocities for para'el explosive
"i"i, soit aisptace#n't,;;;;i.ie line source are:
equations to, "rrr*jJng motion near a parallel
ground
The equations for il;;t*
(8)

t(#)" -oo'ou(*#)'''
(e)
:ooo46'({#)
*(#)'
t"illltLlltement (ft)
where X = peak radial
raOiat soil particle
velocity (ftlsec)
U : peaf (ft)
R = standoff distancet"tt:utt (ft-lb)
w. : t*pio'int energy (See Appendix B)
I L :
p :
efiective length "f .:"el"';l;
mass density of soil
}fJt
(lb-sec'/ tt ' )
(ftlsec)
;:ilic;-w;ve velocitY in soil
t Po : atmosPheric
R 3 L
Pressure
(lblft'z)

I
rtheseequa-
,{nyconsistentSetofunitscanbeusedtoevaluateeachnondimensionaltermrr

t
tions.
Ideally'
tne g"ne'ul oot"i toutte:qu11?ns'(different
Therangeofthetestdataonwhichtheseparallellinesourceequationsarebasedis
srnalter than that oi
,t. dataused,"'i.'J" weights u"i i'o* several test sites
*il., ,""*e in scaled "t'u'g" pq"utt*t iti *o (9)- These parallel line

I more data over a

ground media) would increase
prediction
tt. .oiriottJt ot
relationships, are not
as ,.;;;i; tne iquatio"t (t) and (2) for point sources'

I
t
t
However, in a soil environment similar to that in the SwRI model tests, Equations (8) and
(9) should provide reasonable ground motion predictions for scaled charge densities within
the range of

lo-4 < w./L/pczR'< lo-'

Pipe Stresses

Functional relationships for the maximum strain and stresses on a buried pipeline were
also developed empirically from model test data for parallel line sources. The resulting
equations for predicting the maximum circumferential and longitudinal elastic pipe strains
from a parallel line source detonated in soil and buried to about the same depth as the pipe
are:

e,,,: 4.78 ( t 'ln wzl- )o'8os (10)

'vEh R't '

and

l.3n w/L t"

6rong : 1.98 ( (l l)
)o
VEh Rt'5

where €.i, : maximum circumferential strain (in./in.)

€rong : maximum longitudinal strain (in./in.)
n : equivalent energy release (nondimensional)
W - total charge weight of line source (lb)
E : modulus of elasticity (psi)
h : pipe wall thickness (in.)
R : distance between pipe and explosive line (ft)
L total length of explosive line (ft) (See Appendix B)
The range of the maximum measured strains from parallel line sources was 43 to 1,780
p"in./in., making these solutions valid for most parallel line source blasting in soil near gas
pipelines. The estimate of the standard error applicable to Equations (10) and (11) is 44 and
3690, respectively.

The measured pipe strains for parallel line sources were used to compute conservative
biaxial pipe stresses in the same manner as was done for the point source data. Because the
parallel line and point source pipe response data were curve fit together, one stress equation
also resulted for estimating parallel line circumferential and
longitudinal stresses' The
resulting circumferential and longitudinal stress equation is:

o.i, =orong : 4.44 n ( r'+n wzr-;o'tt (r2)

'.vG; R'.t '

where o"i, : maximum circumferential stress (psi)

olong = maximum longitudinal stress (psi)
n= equivalent energy release (nondimensional)
W= total charge weight of line (lb) i

E: modulus of elasticitY (Psi)

h: wall thickness (in.)
R: distance between pipe and explosive line (ft)
L total length of explosive line (ft) (See Appendix B)
program ranged from 1828 psi up
The maximum blasting pipe stresses measured in this
to stress values larger than the specified minimum yield stress of most
pipeline steels'
values' The range is
Therefore, use of Equation (12) should be limited to this range of stress
parallel line sources near
broad enough to be useable for most soil blasting situations using
gas pipelines. The estimate of the standard error for this equation is 3490 '
All of the parallel line sources which generated the data used in developing Equation
charges was
(12) were treated as continuous explosive lines because the spacing between
smaller than the length of the
smaller than the standoff distance, the standoff distance was
simultaneously' If the
explosive line, and all the charges making up the line were detonated
charge should also be
spacing between charges is larger than the standoff distance, each
the pipe and the explosive
analyzed as a point source. And' if the standoff distance between
entire explosive array can be
line source is greater than the length of the explosive line, the
approximated bY a Point source.
The prediction equations for a point source and for a
parallel line indicate that the tran-
sition point between a line and a point source occurs at a value of standoff
distance R
somewhat smaller than the explosive line length L. However, for
simplicity in application
to L recommended' This value is
of the predictive equations, a transition value of R equal is
values of R/L < l '0' a series of
conservative, yet accurate dfi'd easy to remember. Thus, for
equal charges in a straight line parallel to a pipe is treated as
a parallel explosive line to
estimate the pipe stresses. For values of R/L > 1.0, the explosive
line is treated as an
pipe stresses from parallel
equivalent point source. Figure I summarizes how to estimate
line explosive sources.
other
For additional details on the derivations of the parallel line source equations,
limitations, application information, and discussions on the total state
of stress on a
pipeline exposed to blasting, please refer to volume II of this final report'
 r
I
I
I
Nl = number of charges
in explosive line
l,Jl = wei ght of each
charge in line
L
L = (Nl)(Ll)
[J = (Nt )(t^ll )
l,l I
ChargeDens'ity=f=
LI

Use Equation (12)

TT

(a) Explosive Line Parallelto Pipeline for R <L

hJ - (Nl )(l,Jl )

_j Use Equation (7)

(b) Parallel Line as Equivalent Point Source for R >L

Figure l. Methodology for Estimating Pipe Stresses

from Parallel Line Explosive Sources

l0
 ------:-T

Iv. PREDICTION METHODS FOR COMPLEX

EXPLOSIVE SOURCES

General

In addition to the point and parallel line source equations presented in the
two
preceding sections, methods were developed by which
angled-line, parallel grid and angled-
grid sources could be simplified into equivalent parallel
line or point sources. Thus, the ap-
propriate point or parallel line equation could then be
applied to obtain reasonable stress
estimates from these complex explosive geometries.

Angled-Line Source

In general, an angled-line source is simplified into an equivalent parallel

line source if
R, its equivalent standoff distance, is equal to or less than L,
the effective length of the line.
The equivalent value of R is defined as follows:

R : Rr", /cosB (line) (l 3)

where

R*"1 :A* (Nl - l)Ll sinB

(14)

The effective explosive line length is:

L : (NlXLl) (l 5)

For these equations

Rr"r : distance between the geometric center of the explosive line
and a pipeline
(ft)
A : distance of nearest charge (ft)
B : angle between pipe and explosive line

ll
 Nl : number of charges in explosive line
Ll = sPacing of charges (ft)
parallel line is
The explosive density of the equivalent

w_(Nlxwl):Wl (16)
L (Nlxll) Ll

making up the angledJine

where Wl is the explosive weight (lb) of one of the point charges (13)
and (16)' the stresses
source. with the values of R and w/L as defined
byEquations
are estimated using the parallel line source
solution, Equation (12)'
source is collapsed
If R, as defined by Equation (13), is greater than L, the angled.line
intoanequivalentpointsource.Theequivalentchargeweightthenbecomes

(17)
w:(Nl)(wl)

of the angled-line, namely

and its location becomes the geometric center

(point) (l 8)
R: Rr.r

estimated using the point source solu-

With these values for W and R, the pipe stresses are
methods for an angled-line source'
tion, Equation (7). Figure 2 summarizes the simplifying

Parallel Grid Source

a rectangular grid of ex-
An empirical method was also developed for simplifying
plosives buried in soil into an equivalent paiallel
line or point source' Analyses of the test
and
parallel line equivalent in location' length
data indicated that the grid can be treated as a
up the arcay. Because of this observation,
charge density as the first explosive row making
thestandoffdistanceR,lengthoftheequivalentparallellinesourceL'andequivalent
for a parallel line' namely:
charge density w /L aredefined for a paraliel grid similar to that

(line) (le)
R:A

l2
 t1
LI
I
o

d
I A
Nl =
= distance to nearest
cha rge
number
in
of
explosi ve I i ne
Wl = weight of each charge
charges

I
in line
I

T
L
| = (Nl)(Ll)
l^J = (Nl)(l,Jl)
B = angle between pipe and
expl osi ve I j ne

Charge Density = [=
L !d!
I LI
- Rgcl. /cosB J Use Equation (12)

(a) Angled-Line as Equivalent Parallel Line for R <L

hl = (Nl )(hJl )

K=
" I{
''^^1 Use Equat'ion (7
yLl )

(b) Angled-Line as Equivalent point Source for R >L

Figure 2. Methodology for Estimating pipe Stresses

from an Angled-Line Explosive Source

l3
 (20)
L: (Nl)(Lr)

wwl (2r\
LLI
-:-

where A
front row
Nl : number of equally spaced charges in the
(ft)
Ll : spacing of charges in the front row
grid (lb)
Wl : explosive weight of one charge in
with
Analyses of the data indicated that as
long as R < 1.5L, good agreement occurred
for these values of R' Equation (12) is used to
the parallel line source solution. Therefore,
estimate the pipe stresses from a
grid source simplified into an equivalent parallel line
source.
by a
R greater than l '5L' the grid is approximated
As indicated in Figure 3, at values of
in the array and located at the geometric center of
single charge equal in ieight to that "*i"
thegrid.Inotherwords,whenthefrontrowofthegridwaslocatedatdistancegreaterthan
1.5L. R and W were defined as:

. (N2-t) L2
R:Rr"g:A+- (22)

(23)
w: (NlXN2XW1)

where N2 is the number of equally spaced rows making

up a grid' with these values for the
(7) is used to estimate the pipe stresses from
standoff distance and charge weight, Equation
point charge'
a grid explosive source simplified into an equivalent

Angled-Grid Source
arrays located at an angle
The method developed for simplifying rectangular explosive
parallel grid and angled-line sources' As in-
to a pipeline combines lhe procedures for the
dicated in Figure 4a, the front row of the angled-grid
first becomes an equivalent angled-
located a distance Rr"1 awaY from
line. This equivalent angled-line, with its geometric center
parallel line if R : Rr"1/cos B js
the pipe centerline, is further simplified into an equivalent
less than or equal to 1.5 times the length L of the
equivalent angled-line (the first row mak-
ing up the grid). As was the case with a parallel
grid, the charge density w/L becomes that

t4
 WI = we'ight of each
charge 'in grid
A = d'istance nearest
_T NI
cha rge
= no. of charges in
LI front row of grid
.l N2 = no. of rows making
up gri d
L = (Nr)(Lr)
t^J = (Nl )(l^ll )
Geometri c Cen te r
of Gri d
a

charse Density = I = [+
Use Equation (lZ1

(a) Parallel Grid as Equivalent Parallel Line for R < 1.5 L

l^J = (Nr )(N2)(hJl )

Use Equation (7)

(b) Parailel Grid as Equivalent Point Source for R > 1.5 L

Figure 3. Methodology for Estimating Pipe Stresses

from a Parallel Grid Explosive Source
r

:
l5
i
?

t
j
 t^lI = vveight of each charge

-A -l tl6, A

NI

N2
in grid
= di stance nearest
charge
= no. of charges in
front row of grid
= no. of rows making
up gri

ffliir:ii.\N
d
L = (Nt)(Lt)
l^J = 1N1)(l^lt)
lt.l \ = angle between
B pr pe
and grid
t\l o Geometri c Center of Grid
Rgcl 4 Jt.
R = Rs.t/cose-l Charse Densi., = [= fl
Use Equation (12)

(a) Angied-Grid as Equivalent Parallel Line for R < 1.5 L

l^l-(Nr)(N2)(t^lr)

R=R Use Equation (7)

(b) Angled-Grid as Equivalent Point Source for R > 1.5 L

Figure 4. Methodology for Estimating Pipe Stresses

from an Angled-Grid Explosive Source

t6
 for an angled-grid
of the first row of the grid. with R and w/L defined, the pipe stresses
(12)'
can be estimated using the parallel line solution, Equation
by Equation
As was the case for the parallel grid, if the standoff distance Ias defined
(13)l of the equivalent parallel line representing an angled-grid is such that R : R*r/co1 B
> 1.5L, the grid is collapsed into an equivalent point source. As indicated in Figure 4(b)'
the equivalent point charge w would equal the total explosive
weight of the angled-grid and
its standoff distance would be Re.g, the distance between the pipe centerline and
the
geometric center of the angled-grid.- ttrls distance can be computed as follows:

^ (Nl - l)Ll Sin B + (N2 - 1)L2 cos B (24)

R:Rg.g:A+-

Note that this equation can be used not only for calculating the standoff distance
of the
point source for any
equivalent point charge for an angled-grid, but also for the equivalent
grid or line source, parallel or at an angle to a pipe'
With W and R as defined in Figure 4b, the pipe stresses can be estimated using Equa-
point source'
tion (7) for any angled-grid that has been simplified into an equivalent

Exceptions to Simplifying Methods

Two significant exceptions to the simplifying methods for the complex explosive
geometries were observed in analyzing the experimental data. The first one concerns
angled-
pipeline is 90" ' At
line sources. The largest angle possible between an explosive line and a
with weight equal
this angle, such an angled-line source is treated as a point source a charge
to the total weight in the line and located at the geometric center.
The second exception to the general procedures is in reality an additional step that
grid sources. It
should be included whenever stress estimates are made on explosive line and
location
is possible for one of these complex geometries to have a charge spacing and
making up the line or grid when
relative to a pipeline such that the nearest individual charge
predictions than if the total
analyzed by itself as a point source would result in higher stress
array is analyzed as an equivalent point or parallel line source. Therefore,
in estimating
pipe stresses for a particular field situation in which an explosive line or grid is to be used,
the stress magnitudes should be checked for the closest single charge. If the
single charge
estimates should be
values are higher than those from the total geometry, those higher stress
the ones used in deciding whether a blasting situation will be
permitted without modifica-
tions to charge weights or standoff distances'
presented in
To assist the reader in the mechanics of applying the simplifying methods
in the Ap-
this section, some additional information and an example problem are included
pendix. Additional details on these methods, their limitations and additional application in-
formation are included in Volume II of this final report'

t'l
 V. RESULTS OF OTHER STUDIES

Pipeline Near A Free Surface

From a very limited data base, a correction factor was derived for the point source
stress prediction equation for cases in which a pipeline is buried relatively close to a free sur-
f ace as shown in Figure 5. In such cases, the amount of soil backing the pipe can be so small

that higher stresses result than would be predicted by the point source equation. To account
for the missing inertial resistance, the point source solution is modified by introducing the
following expression for a correction factor F:

.:[*.H] (2s)

where H : effective thickness of soil backing up the pipeline (ft)

R = distance between centers of pipe and charge (ft)
h : pipe wall thickness (ft)
ps : soil mass density 1lb-sec2/ft4)
pp : pipe material density (lb-sec2/fta

Equation (25) is dimensionless and any self-consistent set of units can be used to compute a
numerical value for F.
From a limited amount of data, we determined that the correction factor defined by
Equation (25) should be used whenever the ratio of R/H exceeds a value of 4. Thus, for
situations in which very deep charges are used or the pipeline is relatively close to a free sur-
face, the point source solutions should be modified by the correction factor F as follows:

q nw
4.44 ( (261
E 'vEhF )o"
R2'5

where F : I forR/H < 4

F : Equation (25) for R/H > 4
Note that this equation was derived empirically from only a few data points and the largest
stress measured was only 3,452 psi. However, use of the correction factor F as defined in
Equation (25) for larger stress values will result in conservative stress estimates.

18
(lJ q)
c o
+r
|-i
o aq)
c.)
H

9
(.)
zC)

C)

a
()
d

X
frl

n
0.)
t<
b0
rr

(u

l9
Pipeline Shielding StudY
open trench between a pipeline and an ex-
From the literature study on the effect of an
plosive charge, we concluded that given the right
conditions a trench can certainly reduce
theblasteffectsonapipe.Mostoftheinformationavailableontrencheffectsconcernsthe
For low frequency vibrations with cor-
transmission of waves from vibrating sources.
respondinglongwavelengths,thedataintheliteratureindicatethatatrenchwouldhaveto
explosive detonations' although not vibratory
be very deep to be very effective. Buried
which are relatively long' thus indicating that very
sources, normally produce seismic waves
deep trenches are needed to shield a section
of a pipeline from a buried detonation effectively'
buried detona-
However, unpublished test data from a limited number of small charge
pipe strains under certain trench conditions' A func-
tions indicate significant reductions in
reduction in pipe strain due to a trench' This
tion was developed in this study to relate the
distance' depth of the trench' strain
function relates the strain reduction to the standoff
magnitude without a trench, the location
of a pipe behind a trench' and the length of the
trench.
Analysisofthetestdatashowedthatthestrainreductionratiowasafunctionprimarily
were of secondary importance in
of the scaled standoff distance and that the other terms ratio versus scaled standoff
the strain reduction
this case. An equation was curve fitted to
equation and its limitations are only
distance. Because of the lirnited data base, this
presented in Section X of Volume II'

Two-Media Problem
concerned pipeline response and
All of the results presented earlier in this volume
radiaigroundrnotionsfromexplosivechargesburiedinsoil'Becauseblastingisoftenused
pipelines which are buried in soil, a very limited
to excavate or fracture rock masses near
model test layout to observe what happens
study was conducted using a concrete block/soil
whenttiechargeiSdetonatedinahardmediumandtheseismicwavesgeneratedthenloada
pipe buried in a softer medium'
approximate equation for computing
From the four concrete'/soil tests performed' an
from the ground motion and pipe
an effective standoff distance for soii was developed prediction
distance permits the soil point source
stress data recorded" This effective standoff
situation'
equations to be used to estimate pipe stress in this two-media blasting
standoff distances for the con-
The resulting equation for estimating the effective
cretelsoil tests is:

y:o,ou(#il)'''(#)"" (27',)

20
 (ft)
where R.rr : effective standoff distance in soil
R = standoff distance (ft)
w. : explosive energy release (ft-lb)
P, : mass densitY of soil Qb-sec2/ft4;
cs : seismic velocity of soil (ftlsec)
R. : (ft)
Part of R in concrete
p" : mass density of concrete (lb-sec2/ft4)
(ftlsec)
cc : seismic velocity of concrete
in formulating a
experiments can generate data useful
Equation (27) shows that model scale. Because similar
method for predicting pipe stresses
,n it'i' two-media blasting situation'
testsusingrockinsteadofconcretehavcnotbeenconducted,itisnotpossibleatthistimeto situations'
be applied directly to rock/soil blasting
determine whether this equation can Equation (27)
However, for rock/soil situations
g.o-"tri.ully similar to those in this study,
such a case the mass
the effectivl standoff distance' In
should provide rough estimates of place of the values for
density and seismic velocity of the
rock in question would be used in
more data
parametersln two-media problems, considerable
concrete. Because of the many (soil)' For
as general as the ones for one medium
would be required to develop solutions for placing the con-
the actual test site are recommended
other rock/soil geometries, tests at
crete/soil results on a firmer basis'

21
 *

VI. CLOSURE

InthisVolumelofthefinalengineeringreport,thegroundmotionandpipestress SwRI on
results have been summarized for the
blasting research program conducted by
volume provides the reader a quick reference
source
behalf of the pRC of the A.G.A. This from
ground motion and pipe stresses
with equations and methods developed for estimating user must
applying any procedure presented, the
buried detonations near pipelines. Before approxima-
be familiar with the conients of Volume
II and understand the assumptions'
the new prediction equations and methods
for deter-
rions and limitations inherent in any of
mining blast induced pipe stresses'
blasting stress is necessary but not sufficient
Furthermore, an estimate of the maximum
pipeline will yield or exceed its maximum allowable
information to determine if a buried
pipe pressurization, must be combined with the
stress. other stresses, such as from internal
blastingStressesandasuitableyieldcriteriausedtodeterminethetotalstressconditionsina
pipe.ThereaderisreferredtoVolumellforadditionaldiscussionsonyieldcriteria'factors
of safety, and other related topics'

22
 T
tt
!

t
I

b:r

APPENDIX A

lllustrative Problems

23
Ground Motions

Most chemical explosives have close to the same energy release per unit weight (W.).
This observation implies that if the explosive being used in a blasting situation is not known,
the prediction equations can be used substituting a "typical" value for Wr. Average energy
release values for a number of commercial explosives are as follows:

w-
Explosive (ft-lbf /Ib,.)

ANFO (94/6) 1.52 x 106

AN Low Density Dynamite 1.50 x 106
Comp B {60/40) 1.70 x 106
Comp C-4 1.70 x 106
HBX-I 1.30 x 106
NG Dynamite (40q0) 1.59 x 106
NG Dynamite (60q0) 1.70 x 106
Pentolite (50/50) 1.68 x 106
RDX 1.76 x 106
TNT 1.49 x 106

Consult explosive manufacturers for explosives not listed here.

To demonstrate the direct use of the simple log-linear ground motion equations,
Example Problem No. A-1 follows:

Example Problem No. A-l

Given: A point charge of 2.5 lb of 60 percent NG Dynamite will be detonated buried,4

fr in a soil with a density of 120 lb/ft3, and a seismic propagation velocity of
1,000 ftlsec

Find: The horizontal ground motions af a standoff distance of l5 ft.

Solution: (a) Put parameters in Equations (3) and (4) in consistent units

W. = (2.5 ru.l (r.z x ro'ff) :4.25x 106rr-lbr

11
LN
 i
ic.
j
1
\-
Y.,',
I

ik' ' ,.- r-':

:
.J.l -,J---------;-
lbr-sec2
f++
IL

\i '
:r -'
lir
lr" / r' !

c = 1,000 ftlsec

R= 15 ft

n.: (r+.r\) (t*t) :t'ttt9

group
(b) Calculate each dimensionless

t 2rr7 lo't :2.38x to-2

trtn-\o = |L(3J3XlPoottl
\pc'l

(#) :[ 4.25x106
(3.73Xl,ooo)'(15)', ]
: r.rtu x 10 -4

charge is within the limits

of aPPlica-
Note that the value for the scaled
bilitY given in Section II'

(3) and solve for X

(c) Substitute into Equation

-4) 1'060
a1z.ta x t0 -2) : 0.0373(3'375 x 10
15

X:0.00491
 t'\

X = 0.059 in.

(d) Substitute into Equation (4) and solve for U

U (z.rtx 10*2):0'00489(3'376x10-4)0'7e
1,000

LJ :0.372 ft/sec

U :4.46 in'/sec

be the average value for a large number

Note that the values computed for X and u would
fall within the scatter of the
of similar tests. For any one test, the ground motions would
Iarge sample.

Pipe Stresses
substitutions were
In deriving the point and parallel line stress prediction equations' Thus' the energy
most used in the field'
made to have the uuriou, parameters in the units
release (w") which had been used in the
ground motions discussions was replaced by nw'
the explosives' Using the energy
The quantity n is a measure of the relative energy among
releaseofANFO(g4/6)asthebase,allexplosiveenergieswerenormalizedtodeterminethe
valueofn.Thus,forANFO(94/6),nequals1.00'Thoseexplosivesmoreenergetichavea
have a value of n less than 1'00' A list of
value of n greater than I .00 and those less energetic
equivalent energy releases is as follows:

ExPlosive n

ANFO (94/6) 1.00

AN Low DensitY DYnamite 0.99
Comp B (60/40) t.l2
Comp C-4 l.l2
HBX-I 0.83
NG Dynamite (40q0) 1.05

26
 NG DYnamite (60q0)
l.l2
1.11
Pentolite (50/50)
1.16
RDX
0.98
TNT

not listed here' Note that since relative ex-

consult explosive manufacturers for values
plosiveenergydoesnotvarymuch,onecanalwaysassumeaconservativevalueofn.
Exam-
(7) to predict stresses from a point source'
To demonstrate the use of Equation
ple Problem No. A-2 follows:

ExamPle Problem No' A-2

A2.5-lbpointchargeof60percentNGdynamitewillbedetonatedburied4ft
Given:
W' T.l API-5L' Grade "B"
in soil adjacent to a 24-inch O' D' by 0'312
of soil'
pipeline. In this area, the pipeline has a 3-ft cover

and longitudinal pipe stresses if the

Find: Estimate the blast-induced circumferential
charge is 15 ft from the PiPe'

Solution: (a) List parameters required in Equation (7) in proper units

E : 29.5 x 106 Psi
h : 0'312in'
n : l'12
W = Z.slb
R : 15ft
(b) Substitute into Equation (7) and solve for the pipe stresses

*
a=ori,:orong :4.44u( " )ttt
\ ffi p'''7

J
t- (r.r2) (2.s)
o: x tO61
(4.44)(29.5 |

L (29.5xl06) (0.312) (15)" l"'

2',7
 ry

-6)o'77
o = (4.44) (29.5 x 106) (1.059 x lo

o = 3,284 psi

O.t, : O,on, : 3r284 PSi (S : + l,l 17 psi)

To assist in the application of the parallel line solution, Equation (12), the example pro-
blem that follows will be solved:

ExamPle Problem No. A-3

Civen: Seven 60 percent NG dynamite point charges weighing 2.5 lb each and spaced 3
ft apart are buried 4 ft in a soil media. The line of charges is parallel to a 24-
inch O.D. by 0.312 W. T., API-sL, Grade "B" pipeline which has 3 ft of soil
cover.

Find: The estimated blast-induced pipe stresses if the line of charges is 15 ft from the
pipe.

Solution: (a) List parameters required in Equation (12) in proper units

E 29.5 x 106 psi
h : 0.312 in.
n : l.l2
Nl 7 charges
L1 : 3ft
L : (7)(3) : 21 11

Wl : 2.51b
w (7)(2.s): l7.5lb
R : 15ft

(b) Since R < L, substitute in Equation (12) and solve for the pipe stresses

o:o,i,:orong :4.44e ( r'+n wzl- 1o'tt

'VEtr R't /

28
 (1.4X1 .r2\ (17 .s)/(2r)
o: (4.44)(29.5 x 106)
]o"
[

o:(4.44')(29.5 x 106X7 .414x 16-o;o'zr

o: 14,690 psi

o",. : o,on, : 14'690 Psi (S = +4'995 Psi)

simplifying method, the following ex-

To illustrate the application of the angled-grid
ample problem will be solved:

Example Problem No. A-4

Given: The exp losive grid defined

t in the figure will be used to loosen the soil over-
burden

- 23.2 rt -----i
!-\' 'a\
r)0- in PIPE ' l\l\--\
\--\,--\
\ \
l\
_rri[ \ \ _\--\
.,/. _\_y \_ \
t 9c9\ \
\.-r .8rt
\

\ I r,-!,'
l,},;illi,
lf!.--';;,-
\ \-\
29
 ql
A 3O-inch o. D. by o.344 w. T. pipeline is adjacent to the grid as shown in the
figure. The centerline of the pipe and the charges are 5 ft below the surface of
the ground.
Find: Estimate of the blast-induced stresses.
Solution: (a) List all parameters in proper units
E : 29.5 x 106 psi
h = 0.344 I

n = 1.0 ..I
Nl :5
Ll : 8ft
Wl = 9lb
B:12"
A : 23.2 ft
N2=4
L2 : 6ft
(b) Determine whether the grid is to be an equivalent point or line source
(l) R : Rr", /cos B (Eq. l3 & la)

(Nl - l) L I SinB
R_ [". 2

cos B

(4) (8) sin l2 I

f"'* 2l
cos 12

R:27.12ft

(2) L: (NlXLl) = (5)(8) (Figure 4)

L :40 ft

(3) Is R > l.5L? No, therefore, parallel line solution applies.

(c) Compute stresses

(l) w-wl-e (Figure 4)

LLI 8

I = t .l3lb/ft
L

tt
(2) oci. : orong = 4.44 r ( r.+n wzr \0
\1f;h R'' /
I

(1.4) (1.0) (1.13)

=(4.44t(29.5 x 106) |
Lffi'.'.
I

v tzqt lo1(ojaa) (27.tz)t.s

= (4.44)(29.5 x 106X3.5 x l0 -6)0.7i

o.,, : o,onn : 8,240 psi (S : + 2,802 psi)

 {q
T

t
I
I
I

i
I
\

APPENDIX B

List of Parameters
English Symbols

A Distance of nearest charge. For point and parallel line sources,

A=R(ft)
B Angle between pipeline and explosive source
C, Cs Seismic compression wave velocity in soil (ftlsec)
Seismic compression wave velocity in concrete (ftlsec)
E Modulus of elasticity for the pipe material (psi)
F Correction factor for pipeline near a free surface (nondimensional)
g Acceleration of gravity (32.16 ft/secz\
H Effective thickness of soil backing a pipeline (ft)
h Pipe wall thickness (in.)
L Length of an explosive line (for uniform charges spaced equal
distances apart, this length is the spacing between charges times the
numberof charges), 1 : (Nl)(Ll) (f0
LI Spacing of charges in an explosive line or the front row of a grid (ft)
L2 Spacing of rows making up a grid (ft)
\l Number of equally spaced charges in an explosive line or the front
row of a grid
Number of equally spaced rows making up a grid
n Equivalent explosive energy release (nondimensional)
n\\' Charge weight equivalent in lb of ANFO
n Atmospheric pressure
P-* ave Compression wave generated by a disturbance in the ground
R'R.rr Standoff distance (actual or effective) from the center of the pipe or
ground motion transducer to the center of the charge (ft)
R e-_ l Distance between geometric center of explosive line and a pipe (ft)
R
:.8 Distance between geometric center of explosive grid and a pipe (ft)
R. Part of R in concrete (ft)
R-u ave Surface Raleigh wave generated by a disturbance near the surface of
the ground
S Estimate of the standard error of test data about fitted curve
U Peak radial soil particle velocity (ftlsec)
Llc Nondimensional velocity
\\' Total charge weight of explosive source (lb)
\\' Explosive energy released (ft-lb)
\\'. /L Energy released per unit length in an explosive line source (ft-lb/ft)
\\,,/L Explosive density, charge weight per unit length of an explosive line
0blf0
\\'l Explosive weight of individual point charges making up a line or grid
source (lb)
 -----tii

X Peak radial soil displacement (ft)

X/R Nondimensional displacement

Greek Symbols

- ctr Maximum circumferential pipe strain (in./in.)

€
lorg Maximum longitudinal pipe strain (in./in.)
pe Microstrain (10{ in./in.)
p Mass density of soil or rock 1lb-sec2,/ft4)
o^ Mass density of soil 1lb-sec2/ft4)
pc Mass density of concrete (lb-sec2/ft4)
0cir Maximum circumferential pipe stress (psi)
olong Maximum longitudinal pipe stress (psi)