Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00392-y

RESEARCH PAPER

Dynamic Response of Buried Pipelines Retrofitted with Concrete

Canvas Panels Under Blast Loading
Hadi Jafari1 · Mohammadreza Atrchian2 · Younes Daghigh3

Received: 8 September 2018 / Accepted: 23 March 2020

© Shiraz University 2020

Abstract
In this study, the effect of concrete canvas (CC) panels on retrofitting of buried pipes against surface blast loads in different
situations is investigated. The variable parameters studied are CC panels thickness (20 and 30 mm), the number of CC panels
(1, 2, 3), soil type (two different soils), and the layout of CC panels (complete wrapping and U-wrap), respectively. For this
purpose, the finite element method (FEM) is used to simulate models. In the finite element model, an explosive charge of
45 kg was simulated at a distance of 1 m above the steel pipeline. Validation of FEM used in simulating the present study
was examined through comparing with the experimental results, and a good agreement was observed. The most important
results show that the maximum stress and displacement in buried pipelines retrofitted with CC panels that are subjected to
surface explosive loading are a function of thickness, number, and layout of CC panels, and to achieve optimal performance
of CC panels, a combination of these parameters should be evaluated.

Keywords  Concrete canvas panels · Finite element method · Buried pipelines · Surface explosive loading

1 Introduction lifelines and critical arteries buried in soil using concrete

canvas (CC) panels under blast loading has been studied.
Pipeline systems play a key role as one of the vital arter- CC is a promising material in civil and military engi-
ies in reducing or increasing the damage and vulnerability neering due to its flexibility, fast construction with low
caused by earthquake hazards and explosion charges. There- labor cost, and rapid strength development. CC, which was
fore, studying the vulnerability of pipeline systems is very invented by Brewin and Crawford in 2005, is a flexible 3D
important, because the failure of gas and oil pipes may cause spacer fabric impregnated with calcium aluminate cement
explosions and fires. Vulnerable points that have always been (CAC) powder. Like soft cloth, CC can cover the desired
important in natural disasters and wars are the vital arter- level of the structural element, without mixer equipment.
ies of countries. Therefore, retrofitting of these buried pipe- Then, with the addition of water, the solid surface of CC
lines is absolutely necessary. According to the mentioned hardens and forms a thin, waterproof, durable, and fire-
explanations, in the present study, retrofitting transmission resistant concrete layer (Fig. 1). Its final shape is exactly
the same as the surrounding surfaces of structural elements
* Mohammadreza Atrchian (Zhang et al., 2017; Concrete Canvas Ltd 2016).
M.Atrechian@iauz.ac.ir Due to the flexibility and rapid construction of CC, with
Hadi Jafari low labor cost, and the quick setting of CAC, it has been
Jafari.hadi_g@yahoo.com applied in civil and military engineering. Examples of CC
Younes Daghigh applications include cover for a prefabricated shelter, slope
Daghigh_y@yahoo.com protection, a trackway for vehicles or pedestrians, a pro-
tection layer for lining, and uses within the defense sector
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic (Zhang et al. 2017; Concrete Canvas Ltd 2016; Han et al.
Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
2016a, b).
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Zanjan Branch, Islamic However, compared to the casting, compacting, and fin-
Azad University, Zanjan, Iran
ishing processes of conventional plain concrete or fiber-/
3
Department of Civil Engineering, Karaj Branch, Islamic textile-reinforced concrete, the impregnation process of dry
Azad University, Karaj, Iran

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

prestressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP). The purpose

was to provide a new retrofitting of PCCP with FRP. Using
this method, the number of FRP layers for PCCP retrofit-
ting is determined and two different conditions demolition
were defined including complete destruction and partial
degradation.
Wang (2017) evaluated the interaction of the pipe struc-
ture for impact surface. Due to the interaction of the pipe
structure under the influence of concentrated impact load,
Fig. 1  Fire-resistant CC panels (Concrete Canvas Ltd 2016) its damage was evaluated.
According to the above-mentioned description, CC pro-
duction is an emerging technology that was commercially
cement powder into 3D spacer fabric leads to a relatively developed in the 2010s. This product has the potential to be
lower initial apparent density of CC, around 1300–1500 kg/ used as an explosion-resistant method in buried pipelines
m3, dependent on the geometrical pattern of the spacer fab- due to the use of special fibers. These fibers can increase
ric and the type of cementitious binder (Han et al. 2014, the mechanical properties of concrete. Limited studies have
2016a, b; Zhang et al. 2017). After spraying with water, the been conducted on the effects of CC against explosive load-
final apparent density of the hardened CC product is around ing. In this study, for the first time, the performance of CC
1700–2000 kg/m3, only 70–80% of that for ordinary concrete in buried pipelines against the explosion has been evaluated.
(2200–2400 kg/m3). Consequently, there is a greater likeli- CC advantage compared to other materials, such as FRP, is
hood of producing a hardened matrix with high porosity due higher installation speed and more fire resistance.
to initial loosening of powder packing inside the fabric and
overdosage of added water (CC Ltd 2016; Han et al. 2014,
2016a, b; Zhang et al. 2017). 2 Numerical Modeling Methodology
There have been few studies conducted on the use of CC.
Zhang et al. (2017) investigated the mechanical behavior of 2.1 Geometric Characteristics
FRP-reinforced CC panels. The tensile and flexural behav-
iors of CC and FRP-reinforced CC panels are investigated In order to investigate the effect of CC panels on the perfor-
through uniaxial tensile and four-point bending tests in both mance of steel buried pipelines against surface explosion
warp directions. The results showed that tensile and flexural loading, FEM has been used. For this purpose, ABAQUS
properties are significantly improved in the FRP-reinforced software (2016), based on the finite element approach, was
CC samples. Han et al. (2014) investigated the tensile behav- used to conduct the numeric analysis. The variables studied
ior properties of CC. Five different three-dimensional fabrics include CC panels thickness (20 and 30 mm), the number
were evaluated with different patterns. Crack propagates, of CC panels (1, 2, 3), soil type (two different soils), and the
and the tensile strain–stress curve was tested in CC with dif- layout of CC panels (complete wrapping and U-wrap). Thus,
ferent coatings. The results showed that three-dimensional the models are simulated in 26 cases according to Table 1.
fabric reinforcement is a better option than spacer yarns In this table, CC is concrete canvas, and CW and CU are
alone. complete wrapping and U-wrap, respectively. Also, T is the
Li et al. (2016) investigated the design of CC with the thickness of CC and number 1, 2, and 3 are the number of
purpose of soil retrofitting structure. The results indicated CC panels. S1 and S2 are soil 1 and soil 2, respectively. The
that the horizontal displacement of CC is a little large. geometric characteristic of the studied models is shown in
Various studies have also been carried out on the response Fig. 2.
of buried pipes and their retrofitting against explosions.
Zhang et al. (2016) investigated the mechanical response 2.2 Materials Properties
of the buried pipeline for internal explosions. In order to
investigate the strain–stress response in buried pipelines Simulated materials in the present study include soil, steel,
with internal pressure under surface explosion, the numeri- and CC. The soil and steel properties are shown in Tables 2
cal calculations of a buried pipe with internal pressure were and 3, respectively.
investigated. Dynamic response of a buried pipeline was The mechanical behavior of the linear part of the soil
simulated after the surface explosion. The results showed was simulated elastically. Mechanical behavior of the
that the maximum percentage of stress and plastic strain nonlinear soil part, which consists of two parts of elastic
was transmitted at the upper part of the buried pipeline. Lee and plastic, was defined by the Mohr–Coulomb criteria
and Lee (2013) proposed a retrofit plan method of damaged in the ABAQUS software (Baziar et al. 2016). A simple

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Table 1  Configuration Case Model Parameter

parameters for different cases
CC thickness The layout of CC panels Number of Soil type
(mm) CC

1 NON CC S1 – – – Soil 1
2 1CC CW T20 S1 20 Complete wrapping 1 Soil 1
3 2CC CW T20 S1 20 Complete wrapping 2 Soil 1
4 3CC CW T20 S1 20 Complete wrapping 3 Soil 1
5 1CC UW T20 S1 20 U-wrap 1 Soil 1
6 2CC UW T20 S1 20 U-wrap 2 Soil 1
7 3CC UW T20 S1 20 U-wrap 3 Soil 1
8 1CC CW T30 S1 30 Complete wrapping 1 Soil 1
9 2CC CW T30 S1 30 Complete wrapping 2 Soil 1
10 3CC CW T30 S1 30 Complete wrapping 3 Soil 1
11 1CC UW T30 S1 30 U-wrap 1 Soil 1
12 2CC UW T30 S1 30 U-wrap 2 Soil 1
13 3CC UW T30 S1 30 U-wrap 3 Soil 2
14 NON CC S2 – – – Soil 2
15 1CC CW T20 S2 20 Complete wrapping 1 Soil 2
16 2CC CW T20 S2 20 Complete wrapping 2 Soil 2
17 3CC CW T20 S2 20 Complete wrapping 3 Soil 2
18 1CC UW T20 S2 20 U-wrap 1 Soil 2
19 2CC UW T20 S2 20 U-wrap 2 Soil 2
20 3CC UW T20 S2 20 U-wrap 3 Soil 2
21 1CC CW T30 S2 30 Complete wrapping 1 Soil 2
22 2CC CW T30 S2 30 Complete wrapping 2 Soil 2
23 3CC CW T30 S2 30 Complete wrapping 3 Soil 2
24 1CC UW T30 S2 30 U-wrap 1 Soil 2
25 2CC UW T30 S2 30 U-wrap 2 Soil 2
26 3CC UW T30 S2 30 U-wrap 3 Soil 2

Table 3  Steel properties (Soroushnia et al. 2013)

Density (kg/ Elastic modu- Poisson ratio Fy (MPa) FU (MPa)
m3) lus (GPa)

7850 203 0.3 448 554

elastoplastic constitutive soil model, with the Mohr–Cou-

lomb failure criterion in combination with isotropic strain
softening behavior, was added in finite element modeling
(Baziar et al. 2016; Soroushnia et al. 2013; Anastasopou-
los et al. 2007a, b).
Physical properties of a cube specimen in 28 days of CC
Fig. 2  Geometric characteristics of the model section panels are shown in Table 4. The compressive and flexural
strength of the CC panels is given in Figs. 3 and 4.
The shape of the TNT is cubic, and its dimensions are
Table 2  Soil properties (Soroushnia et al. 2013) 20  cm. The internal pressure of the pipeline is 4  MPa
Soil type Ø (°) C (kPa) µ E (kPa) ρ (kg/m3)
(Zhang et al. 2016). Points A and B are defined for extract-
ing related displacement and stress results.
Soil 1 28 5 0.35 20,000 1600
Soil 2 40 2 0.30 40,000 1900

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Table 4  Physical properties of a cube specimen in 28 days of CC (Li explosion which include vehicle collisions, bombs, and fire-
et al. 2016) works (Pourasil et al. 2017; Yandzio and Gough 1999). In
Com- Tensile Poisson Elastic Flexural Density this study, the wave propagation of the bomb caused by the
pressive strength ratio modulus strength (kg/m3) surface pressure on the soil above the buried pipeline will be
strength (MPa) (GPa) (MPa) investigated. For this purpose, an explosive charge of 45 kg
(MPa)
TNT was applied to finite element models at a distance of
37 1.2 0.25 19 6.3 1700 1 m above the buried pipeline (Fig. 2). The AT-Blast soft-
ware uses the TM5-1300 to determine the explosion wave.
This law, which is expressed experimentally by Cranz (1926)
and Hopkinson (1915), is defined as follows:
R
Z= 1 (1)
W3
where Z is the scale displacement, R is the center of the
object to the explosive, and W is the TNT mass (kg). The
AT-Blast software delivers explosive loading parameters
based on an explosive wave with a hemisphere surface and
distance to the location being investigated. This program
allows the user to enter the amount of explosives, the angle
of the explosive, and the desired distance to the destina-
tion and according to the information, calculate the outputs
that contain the maximum wave velocity of explosion and
the maximum wave pressure to the destination (Pourasil
et al. 2017). To determine the history of loading due to the
Fig. 3  Time-dependent compressive strength of CC (Li et al. 2016) explosion wave, the input parameters to AT-Blast include
the weight of the explosive (W), the reflection angle (α), the
explosion distance to the investigated surface (R). The out-
puts are the maximum pressure applied to the investigated
surface (Ps), the collision velocity (V), and the time it takes
for the explosion wave to reach the target surface (t*). After
taking these steps to apply an explosive charge in the finite
element software, the Friedlander explosive charge equation,
which is a precise and complete numerical solution for the
explosion wave, is used (Larcher 2008).
t
t
( )
P(t) = pso e− t∗ 1 − ∗ (2)
t
The Friedlander equation was numerically solved using
Maple software, and the history of the explosion wave load
was calculated on the soil surface and applied to the finite
element model. Figure 5 shows the history of the explosion
wave loading into the finite element model.
Fig. 4  Time-dependent flexural strength of CC (Li et al. 2016)

2.4 Finite Element Method

2.3 Blast Loading
The finite element modeling was done using ABAQUS soft-
Le Blanc et al. (2005) investigated the characteristics of ware. The solid element was used to simulate soil. Also,
wave propagation within the structure and fluid–structure the behavior of the components is three-dimensional and
interaction, and they concluded that the propagation of deformable. The Mohr–Coulomb behavior model was also
the waves caused by the explosion was very complicated. used to simulate soil behavior. The boundary conditions
Another way to simplify the explosion wave was using AT- used in the model simulation were chosen with the purpose
Blast (2000) software. There are many ways to transmit the of satisfying the conditions for site location behavior in

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

modeling of CC, buried steel pipelines against impact loads,

and surface explosion. The accuracy of the method used to
simulate the behavior of CC is investigated using the Zhang
et al.’s (2017) study. The tensile, compressive, and flexural
behavior of CC panels was evaluated by tensile, compres-
sive, and four-point bending tests.
In order to obtain the flexural behavior of CC samples,
a four-point bending test was performed using a hydraulic
jack with a loading rate of 1 mm/min by Zhang et al. (2017).
Deflections were measured using the LVDT located at the
center point of the panel. The average bending capacity of
three samples was obtained. Sample sizes and test setup of
Zhang et al.’s (2017) study are shown in Fig. 7.
Also, the flexural behavior of CC is shown in Fig. 8. The
CC panel specimen investigated in Zhang et al.’s (2017)
bending test is simulated using the finite element technique
used in the present study. The mesh model, deformable
shape, and flexural stress–deflection curve of CC finite ele-
ment model are shown in Fig. 9. The comparison of flexural
Fig. 5  History of the explosion loading on the soil surface strength–deformation values of CC made in Zhang et al.’s
test and the simulated finite element model is shown in
Fig. 10. As it is seen, the flexural strength and deformation
numerical simulation. For this purpose, during the infinite values corresponding to the experimental and numerical
length, the hinge support was applied. For CC, the shell samples are in good agreement.
element was used, which is a four-node element. In order to The second validation of the FEM in the modeling of
improve the modeling accuracy, all properties of the mate- buried steel pipelines against impact loads is performed
rial were modeled nonlinearly. The behavioral properties of using Anil et al.’s (2015) experimental study. Performance,
steel materials used were simulated using the elastic–plastic resistance, energy absorption, and bearing capacity of retro-
model in ABAQUS. Also, the meshing size by repeating the fitted buried pipelines against impact loads are evaluated in
analysis was determined so that the modeling results could Anil et al.’s (2015) experimental study, and various param-
be obtained with acceptable accuracy and also by minimiz- eters such as pipe material (steel and composite), protec-
ing the time of the analysis (Fig. 6). The interaction between tive layers (no protective layer, sand layer, geofoam layer),
CC and the buried pipe is simulated by tie constraint, which
is one of the most widely used elements in civil engineering.

2.5 Validation

Three different experimental studies are utilized in order

to validate the finite element method (FEM) used in the

Fig. 6  Finite element model Fig. 7  Sample sizes and flexural test setup (Zhang et al. 2017)

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

and thickness of the geophone layer (30 and 50 mm) were

investigated. The impact load was applied using a 40 kN
capacity dynamic load cell. The third model of eight models
examined in Anil et al.’s experimental study is selected to
validate the FEM used in the modeling of retrofitted steel
pipes against impact loads (protective layer with sand and
50-mm-thick geofoam). This experimental model is shown
in Fig. 11. The mechanical and geometric characteristics
of the examined pipe are presented in Anil et al. (2015).
After analyzing the buried pipe described in Anil et al. using
ABAQUS, its outputs, which include the deformable shape
and the stress created in the pipe, are presented in Fig. 12,
respectively.
According to the displacement curves shown in Fig. 13
and comparing the Anil et  al.’s experimental specimen
and the simulated numerical model with ABAQUS, it is
observed that the experimental results and the FEM used in
modeling of retrofitted steel buried pipe against impact load
are in good agreement.
Also, the effect of explosive loads on steel pipe is one of
the most important purposes of the present study; Therefore,
in order to validate the method used in simulating explo-
sive loading, an experimental study that was performed by
Malachowski (2008) is used (Fig. 14). The main purpose of
Fig. 8  Flexural behavior of CC specimens (Zhang et al. 2017)
Malachowski’s study was focused on establishing an effec-
tive simulation method to study the influence shock wave
caused by an explosion on pipeline systems. The specimens
were loaded with the shock wave induced by the explosion
of 100-g TNT block.
The mechanical and geometric characteristics of the
examined pipe are presented in Malachowski (2008) and
Malachowski et al. (2007) studies. The outputs of the finite
element model of Malachowski steel pipe which is simulated
with the present study method are shown in Fig. 15. The
amount of value obtained in the Malachowski study and the
model made by ABAQUS has a good agreement (Fig. 16).

3 Results and Discussion

After analysis of simulated buried pipelines under explo-

sive loads in 26 cases, the results are analyzed in this part.
The outputs include the stress generated in the wall and the
displacement generated at the upper and lower points of the
pipe. The stress created in the 26 states studied is shown in
Fig. 17. In these figures, the unit of stress is N/m2.
As mentioned, the present study has been carried out in a
parametric manner and the CC’s impact on the response of
the buried steel pipelines has been investigated. For this pur-
pose, parameters such as a number of CC layers, CC wrap-
ping arrangement type, soil type, and CC thickness have
Fig. 9  Mesh model, deformable shape, and flexural stress–deflection been evaluated. In this section, the effect of each mentioned
curve of CC finite element model parameter will be evaluated separately and the maximum

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 10  Comparison of flexural
stress for the applied CC panel
finite element model versus
experimental results

Fig. 11  Buried steel pipe with a protective layer using sand and

50-mm-thick geofoam (Anil et al. 2015)

stress and displacement of buried steel pipelines are com-

pared with each other.

3.1 Effect of CC Layers Number

In Fig. 18, the maximum stresses of buried pipelines are Fig. 12  Deformable shape and stress counter of retrofitted steel pipe
model
presented for states in which the CC thickness is 20 mm. As
it is seen, with an increasing number of CC layers, the stress
caused by surface explosion loading in buried pipelines in retrofitted buried pipelines with complete wraping and
walls has decreased in most cases. For example, in CW-soil U-wrap decreased in both studied soils.
1 and UW-soil 1 models, in which CC thickness is 20 mm, Also, according to Fig. 18, it can be stated that the dif-
the stress of pipeline wall in the use of two CC layers com- ference between stresses of one CC case with two and three
pared to one CC layer decreased by 28.88% and 67.15%, CC cases is much greater than the difference between the
respectively. Also, in CW-soil 1 and UW-soil 1 models, that stresses of two and three CC cases, and the two and three CC
CC thickness is 30 mm, the stress of pipeline wall in the cases do not differ much from each other. So, considering
use of two CC layers compared to one CC layer decreased the stress values and considering economic issues, the use of
by 48.45% and 58%, respectively. The use of more num- two CC layers can be a more appropriate choice for buried
ber of CC layers has caused the maximum stresses created pipelines studied in the present study.

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 13  Comparison of time–displacement response for the applied

buried pipeline model versus experimental results

Fig. 15  a Deformable shape, b stress counter, c effective plastic strain

ratio of pipeline finite element model

the maximum displacement in the use of two CC cases is

decreased by 8.56% and 15.33%, respectively, compared to
the one CC case. Considering changes in the displacement
and stress of buried pipelines, it can be stated that increasing
the number of CC layers makes it possible to avoid concen-
tration of stress in the walls of the pipelines and the distri-
bution of the explosive forces on the walls is done more
uniformly, and thus, the resistance of the buried pipelines
Fig. 14  Steel pipe failure after explosion test (Malachowski 2008) increases against the pressure applied.

3.2 Effect of CC Wrapping Arrangement Type

On the other hand, in Fig. 19, the stresses of buried pipe-
lines whose CC thickness is 30 mm are compared with each The steel buried pipelines in the present study were retrofit-
other. As it is seen, when CC thickness increases, the posi- ted using complete wrapping and U-wrap. In this section, the
tive effect of increasing the number of layers on the stresses effect of CC arrangement has been studied. In both studied
created in the walls of the buried pipelines is still observed. soils, the use of complete wrapping is more effective on the
In Figs. 20 and 21, the maximum displacement generated response of buried pipelines and has caused the stresses to
at the upper point of the pipeline (point A) is shown for cases decrease more than the U-wrap. According to Figs. 18 and
which the thickness of CC is 20 and 30 mm, respectively. As 19, the type of CC arrangement can have an effective role in
can be seen, with the increase in the number of CC layers, reducing the stresses induced by the explosion wave. In both
the maximum displacement in the buried pipes is reduced. soils, the use of complete wrapping is more effective on the
For example, in CW-soil 1 and UW-soil 1 cases, which the response of buried pipelines and has caused the stresses to
CC thickness is 20 mm, the maximum displacement in the decrease more than the U-wrap. For example, in soil type 1,
use of two CC cases is decreased by 13.69% and 24.24%, which is more cohesive, in the cases of using one, two, and
respectively, compared to the 1CC case. Also, in CW-soil three layers of CC with complete wrapping and thickness of
1 and UW-soil 1 cases, which the CC thickness is 30 mm, 20 mm, the maximum stresses were decreased 25.21, 65.53,

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 16  Comparison of effective
plastic strain rate for the applied
explosive loading method ver-
sus experimental results

and 56.55%, respectively, compared to the corresponding layers of CC in both soils had the most effect on reducing
values for U-wrap. Also in soil 2 and in the cases of using the stresses caused by explosives.
one, two, and three layers of CC with complete wrapping and
thickness of 20 mm, the maximum stresses were decreased 3.4 Effect of CC Thickness
25.21, 65.53, and 56.55%, respectively, compared to the cor-
responding values for U-wrap. Also, according to Figs. 20 The CC panel’s thickness is another parameter that has been
and 21, it is seen that from the aspect of displacement, using investigated for its effect on the response of buried steel
complete wrapping is better than U-wrap and has caused less pipelines against explosive loading (Figs. 22 and 23).
displacement in the pipelines. The reason for this is that the In Figs. 22 and 23, the maximum stress in finite element
complete wrapping has caused the pipelines to have a more models of the buried steel pipelines is investigated with the
integrated behavior against the waves caused by the surface aim of assessing the effect of CC thickness in both complete
explosion and by absorbing more energy; it has a higher wrapping and U-wrap, respectively. According to these fig-
resistance than the U-wrap. ures, the maximum stress in the walls of the buried pipelines
located in soil 1 with the thickness of 30 mm, in the cases
of 1, 2, and 3 CC with complete wrapping, is 40, 36.22, and
3.3 Effect of Soil Type 50.67%, respectively, less than the corresponding values of
20 mm thickness. Also, the maximum stress in the walls of
The effect of CC on the retrofitting of buried steel pipe- the buried pipelines located in granular soil with the thick-
lines in this study was carried out on two different soils. The ness of 30 mm, in the cases of 1, 2, and 3 CC with complete
results show that the stresses created in buried steel pipelines wrapping, is 34.36, 27.31, and 59.32%, respectively, less
in the soils with more cohesiveness, which were retrofitted than the corresponding values of 20 mm thickness. This
using CC panels, are much higher than the corresponding stress reduction due to thickness increasing is also seen in
values in the soils with more friction. The reason for this is the case of U-wrap (Fig. 23). The reason for this is that in the
the stiffness of soil 2 compared to soil 1, which has caused case of using a thicker CC panel, the pipes damping against
the waves of explosives to be depleted (Figs. 18 and 19). explosive pressure increase and can have a more suitable
In all cases, CC panels reduce the stress created in the response against explosion-induced loads.
simulated buried pipeline. For example, in soil 1, the maxi- Also, in Figs. 24 and 25, the comparison of the maxi-
mum stress produced by the explosive charge in the pipe mum displacement at the upper point of the retrofitted bur-
wall, in the absence of CC, was 1.73, 5.25, and 8.24 times, ied pipelines with complete wrapping and U-wrap has been
respectively, in the use of one, two, and three layers of com- discussed.
plete wrapping CC and thickness of 20 mm. Also, accord- As can be seen from the viewpoint of displacement,
ing to Figs. 18 and 19, it can be stated that the use of three increasing the 50% of CC thickness has led to reducing the

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 17  Stress counters of pipelines

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 17  (continued)

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 17  (continued)

displacement of buried pipelines in most cases. So that in 4 Conclusion

the case of complete wrapping, increase in the CC thickness
has caused the displacement of the upper point of pipe to be In this study, the effect of CC panels on the response of
reduced to 17.35% (1CC-CW-soil 1). buried steel pipelines to surface explosive loading was inves-
On the other hand, in the case of U-wrap, the thickness tigated. Verification of FEM used in simulating the present
of CC does not have a regular effect, and in most cases, the study was examined through comparison with the experi-
displacement values are very close to each other, and only mental results, and a good agreement was observed. Based
in a buried pipe with 1 CC that is placed in soil 2, thickness on the analysis of the studied cases, the following conclu-
increasing has an important role. Therefore, and according sions can be obtained:
to the explanations mentioned above, it can be stated that the
thickness increase in the CC layers depends on their arrange- 1. Since the CC panels have anti-fire properties, they can
ment; as in the present study, when complete wrapping of have a good performance against explosion-induced
CC is used, the increase in thickness has a greater effect on waves and cause the retrofitted pipelines to suffer fewer
reduced displacement. It needs to be explained that changes stresses and displacements.
in the displacement at the bottom of the buried pipelines 2. The most important results show that the maximum
are similar to those of the displacement at the top of the stress and displacement in buried pipelines retrofitted
pipelines. with (CC) panels that are subjected to surface explosive

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 18  Comparison of maximum stresses in buried pipelines walls Fig. 20  Comparison of maximum displacements in simulated buried
with the aim of assessing soil type and CC wrapping arrangement pipe wall (point A) with the aim of assessing soil type and CC wrap-
type (20 mm) ping arrangement type (20 mm)

Fig. 19  Comparison of maximum stresses in buried pipelines walls

Fig. 21  Comparison of maximum displacements in simulated buried
with the aim of assessing soil type and CC wrapping arrangement
pipe wall (point A) with the aim of assessing soil type and CC wrap-
type (30 mm)
ping arrangement type (30 mm)

loading are a function of thickness, number, and layout 4. The results show that the stresses created in buried steel
of CC panels and soil type and to achieve optimal per- pipelines in soil with higher adhesion (soil 1), which
formance of CC panels, a combination of these param- were retrofitted using CC panels, are considerably less
eters should be evaluated. than the corresponding values in soil with lower adhe-
3. Increasing the number of CC layers makes it possible sion (soil 2). The reason for this is the stiffness of soil
to avoid concentration of stress in the walls of the pipe- 2 compared to soil 1, which has caused the waves of
lines, and the distribution of the explosive forces on the explosives to be depleted.
walls is done more uniformly, and thus, the resistance 5. In the case of using a thicker CC panel, the pipes damp-
of the buried pipelines increases against the pressure ing against explosive pressure increases and can have a
applied. more suitable response against explosion-induced loads.

13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 22  Comparison of the maximum stress in the buried pipelines Fig. 24  Comparison of the maximum displacement of point A from
from the aspect of CC thickness (complete wrapping) the CC thickness aspect (complete wrapping)

Fig. 23  Comparison of the maximum stress in the buried pipelines Fig. 25  Comparison of the maximum displacement of point A from
from the aspect of CC thickness (U-wrap) the aspect of CC thickness (U-wrap)

6. The thickness increasing of the CC layers depends on Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G (2007a) Foundation-structure systems
their arrangement; as in the present study, when com- over a rupturing normal fault: part I. Observations after the
Kocaeli 1999 earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 5(3):253
plete wrapping of CC is used, the increase in thickness Anastasopoulos I, Gazetas G (2007b) Foundation–structure systems
has a greater effect on reduced displacement compared over a rupturing normal fault: part II. Analysis of the Kocaeli case
to U-wrap. histories. Bull Earthq Eng 5(3):277–301
Anil Ö, Erdem RT, Kantar E (2015) Improving the impact behavior
of pipes using geofoam layer for protection. Int J Press Vessels
Pip 132:52–64
AT-BLAST 2.0 (2000) Applied research associates
Baziar MH, Nabizadeh A, Mehrabi R, Lee CJ, Hung WY (2016) Evalu-
References ation of underground tunnel response to reverse fault rupture using
numerical approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 83:1–17
Concrete Canvas Ltd. Concrete canvas. http://www.concr​eteca​nvas.
ABAQUS V (2016) 6.14, online documentation help, theory manual. com/. Accessed on 22 May 2016
Dassault Systems Cranz C (1926) Lehrbuch der Ballistik. Springer, Berlin

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Han FY, Chen HS, Jiang KF, Zhang WL, Lv T, Yang YJ (2014) Influ- Malachowski J (2008) Effect of blast wave on chosen structure–numeri-
ences of geometric patterns of 3D spacer fabric on tensile behav- cal and experimental study. Int J Math Comput Simul 2:238–245
ior of concrete canvas. Constr Build Mater 65:620–629 Malachowski J, Szurgott P, Gieleta R (2007) Testing of pipelines resist-
Han FY, Chen HS, Li XY, Bao BC, Lv T, Zhang WL et al (2016a) ance subjected to explosive wave. In: Proceedings of the 10th
Improvement of mechanical properties of concrete canvas by international technical conference risk management for pipeline
anhydrite-modified calcium sulfoaluminate cement. J Compos operation. Nowe Rumunki, Plock
Mater 50(14):1937–1950 Pourasil MB, Mohammadi Y, Gholizad A (2017) A proposed proce-
Han FY, Chen HS, Zhang WL, Lv T, Yang YJ (2016b) Influence of 3D dure for progressive collapse analysis of common steel building
spacer fabric on drying shrinkage of concrete canvas. J Ind Text structures to blast loading. KSCE J Civ Eng 21:2186. https​://doi.
45(6):1457–1476 org/10.1007/s1220​5-017-0559-0
Hopkinson B (1915) British ordnance board minutes. 13565. The Soroushnia S, Najafian H, Mamghani M, Mehrvand M (2013) Practi-
National Archives, Kew cal reference of ABAQUS for civil engineers—advanced level.
Larcher M (2008) Pressure-time functions for the description of air Negarende Danesh, Tehran, pp 345–350
blast waves. Joint Research Centre (JRC 46829), Technical notes Wang S (2017) Evaluation of underground pipe-structure interface for
Le Blanc G, Adoum M, Lapoujade V (2005) External blast load on surface impact load. Nucl Eng Des 317:59–68
structures-empirical approach. In: 5th European LS-DYNA users Yandzio E, Gough M (1999) Protection of buildings against explosions.
conference Sci Publication, New York, p 244
Lee Y, Lee ET (2013) Retrofit design of damaged prestressed concrete Zhang L, Liang Z, Zhang J (2016) Mechanical response of a buried
cylinder pipes. Int J Concr Struct Mater 7(4):265–271 pipeline to explosion loading. J Fail Anal Prev 16(4):576–582
Li H, Chen H, Liu L, Zhang F, Han F, Lv T et al (2016) Application Zhang F, Chen H, Li X, Hui L, Lv T, Zhang W, Yang Y (2017) Experi-
design of concrete canvas (CC) in soil reinforced structure. Geo- mental study of the mechanical behavior of FRP-reinforced con-
text Geomembr 44(4):557–567 crete canvas panels. Compos Struct 176:608–616

13