Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2008.09.047
DC FieldValue
dc.titleNumerical investigation on active isolation of ground shock by soft porous layers
dc.contributor.authorWang, J.G.
dc.contributor.authorSun, W.
dc.contributor.authorAnand, S.
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-23T07:08:50Z
dc.date.available2014-04-23T07:08:50Z
dc.date.issued2009-04-10
dc.identifier.citationWang, J.G., Sun, W., Anand, S. (2009-04-10). Numerical investigation on active isolation of ground shock by soft porous layers. Journal of Sound and Vibration 321 (3-5) : 492-509. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2008.09.047
dc.identifier.issn0022460X
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/50720
dc.description.abstractThe mitigation and reduction of blast-induced ground shock in near field is an interesting topic worth considering for the protection of buried structures. Soft porous materials are usually used to form an isolation layer around the buried structures. However, the interaction of soft porous layer and surrounding geomedia as well as buried structures is not well understood. In this paper, the effects of soft porous layer barriers on the reduction of buried blast-induced ground shock are numerically studied. Based on the prototype dimensions of a centrifuge test, a numerical model is set up with two steel boxes symmetrically buried at two sides of the charge. One box is directly located in soil mass without protection (unprotected) and the other is located behind a soft porous layer barrier (protected). The soft porous layer barriers studied here include an open trench, an inundated water trench, three in-filled geofoam walls with different densities, and a concrete wall. The numerical responses of the two boxes are evaluated when subjected to the protection of different soft porous layer barriers. These numerical simulations show that both open trench and geofoam barriers can effectively reduce blast-induced stress waves. However, inundated water trench and concrete wall have almost no effect on the reduction of ground shock. Therefore, a geofoam barrier is more practicable in soil mass. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2008.09.047
dc.sourceScopus
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentCIVIL ENGINEERING
dc.contributor.departmentMECHANICAL ENGINEERING
dc.description.doi10.1016/j.jsv.2008.09.047
dc.description.sourcetitleJournal of Sound and Vibration
dc.description.volume321
dc.description.issue3-5
dc.description.page492-509
dc.description.codenJSVIA
dc.identifier.isiut000264381300002
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.