Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT: Accidental actions due to impacts against a structure are taken into account in the latest versions of most
important building codes. These codes make some recommendations about the equivalent static load that must be considered.
However, application criteria are confusing and given values are dispersive. In this work we make a critical analysis of low
speed impacts against reinforced concrete building columns through finite element modelling and using a realistic car model.
Contact forces, equivalent static loads and peak dynamic forces are obtained for a typical car model using different values of car
velocity and carried mass. With our simulations we obtain reliable values of the equivalent static load and show the lack of
reliability of many building codes.
KEY WORDS: Vehicle impact; Reinforced concrete column; Building codes; Equivalent static load; Low velocity.
Table 1. ESL (kN) according to different building codes vehicle models have been checked through tests with the real
applied to our parameters. vehicles. Specifically, the model used in this work was
checked by Zaouk et al. [16] using the results of two collision
Mass (kg) 1800 3000 tests. The results show that there is a good agreement between
Velocity (km/h) 10 20 30 10 20 30
analysis and tests, both in displacement, velocity and
CTE [3] 50 50 50 50 50 50 acceleration.
EC1 1.7 General [4] 50 50 50 50 50 50 We selected a 1994 Chevrolet pick-up model named “C-
Annex C EC1 1.7 [4] 65 129 194 83 167 250 2500 reduced model” in the database. This model has 41,062
EC1 2.7 [5] 40 40 40 40 40 40 nodes and 10,500 elements arranged in 61 parts. Figure 2
DIN 1055-9 [6] 40 40 40 100 100 100 show a three-dimensional, top and bottom views of the C-
2500.
Additionally, intermediate velocities were used to obtain
extra information regarding the variation of ESL with velocity
but, for the sake of simplicity, only the necessary results for
these scenes will be presented.
elastic modulus 33 MPa. Density of this material was 2500 on the column will be very similar for simulations with
kg/m3 and Poisson number 0.2. The parameters to define different mass but the same velocity.
Willam and Warnke failure criterion in ANSYS code are
listed in table 2.
Points with the largest displacement are located at 130 mm velocity. We found that variations on mass did not provide
high in the column. Movement of a point belonging to the axis any significant difference on the maximum value for contact
of the column and located at 130 mm was analyzed. load or on the shape of this load. Only the duration of contact
Maximum displacement of this point is shown in table 4. was affected by the change on mass.
Equivalent static load for each considered case was found Through static simulations the ESL was found for each
through static simulations with different values for the static studied case and the obtained results could be adjusted to a
load (figure 1B). Results for the ESL are shown in table 4. straight line. In most cases these values were higher than those
recommended by the analyzed related codes thus indicating
Table 4. Maximum displacement and Equivalent Static Load.
that many of them are not in the safe side. Specifically, values
Maximum Equivalent Static given by Eurocode 1 Part 1.7, Eurocode 1 Part 2.7, DIN 1055-
Simulation displacement Load 9:2003 and Spanish Building Code have no variation with car
(mm) (kN) velocity and are lower than those obtained in this work for
1800 kg – 10 km/h 0.035 40 velocities higher than 10 km/h. The values given by Annex C
1800 kg – 20 km/h 0.17 204 of Eurocode 1 Part 1.7 and Annex A Eurocode 1 Part 2.7 also
1800 kg – 30 km/h 0.25 300 follow a straight line but the slope of this line is smaller than
3000 kg – 10 km/h 0.035 40 the slope of the obtained results. This means that for velocity
3000 kg – 20 km/h 0.16 192 higher than 15 km/h the values given by Annex C of EC1 1.7
3000 kg – 30 km/h 0.27 324 and Annex A EC1 2.7 underestimate the ESL.
Furthermore, the obtained values had not a high variation
By comparing the calculated values of ESL with those with the mass of the car. Therefore, a single line can be used
obtained from related codes (figure 10), it is clear that the to find the ESL for velocities ranging from 10 to 30 km/h,
values obtained on this work are higher than all other for a regardless the mass of the car.
velocity higher than 15 km/h. The increase in vehicle mass
gives a growth in the slope both for values from Annex C of
Eurocode 1, Part 1.7, and for calculated values, although in REFERENCES
this late case the increase is smaller. Therefore, values given [1] Ferrer B., Ivorra S., Irles R., Low velocity vehicle impact against
by Eurocode 1 in Parts 1.7 and 2.7, Spanish and German building strucutres: an outline of relevant codes, Revista de la
building codes are highly discouraged for a velocity impact Construcción, Vol. 9, No. 2 (2010)
higher than 15 km/h. Values given by Annex C of Eurocode 1, [2] Ferrer B., Ivorra S., Segovia E., Irles R., Tridimensional modelization of
the impact of a vehicle against a metallic parking column at a low speed,
Part 1.7 are closer than those obtained on this work, but still Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 1986-1992.
they are not in the safe side. [3] Código Técnico de la Edificación (Spanish Code of Building),
Ministerio de Vivienda, March 2006, (in spanish).
[4] Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-7: General actions –
Accidental actions, Final Project Team Draft (Stage 34), Draft prEN
1991-1-7, Comité Europeo de Normalización, March 2003
[5] “Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2-7: Accidental actions due to
impact and explosions”, ENV 1991-2-7, European committee for
Standardization, June 1998
[6] DIN 1055-9 (2003), “Actions on structures - Part 9: Accidental actions”,
Deutsches Institut für Normung eV., August 2003
[7] “ANSYS theory reference 10.0” ANSYS Inc., 2004
[8] “LS-DYNA Theory Manual”, John O. Hallquist, March 2006
[9] “ANSYS LS-DYNA User’s Guide”, ANSYS Release 9.0, Noviembre
2004
[10] “Finite element model” Available in: http://www.ncac.gwu.edu
Figure 5. Comparison between calculated ESL and values /vml/models.html [accessed on 27 Oct 2007]
given by related codes, for a vehicle mass of 1800 kg (left) [11] Sherif El-Tawil, P.E., M. ASCE; Edward Severino; Priscilla Fonseca,
and 3000 kg (right) “Vehicle collision with Bridge Piers”, Journal of Bridge Engineering,
ASCE/MAY/JUNE 2005, p. 345-353
5 CONCLUDING REMARKS [12] Y. Itoh, T. Ohno, C. Liu, “Behaviour of steel piers subjected to vehicle
collision impact” Proceedings of international conference on steel and
The study of low velocity car impact against a building aluminium structures, Espoo, Finland, 1999. p. 821-828
column was addressed by means of some finite element [13] Lu Xin-zheng, Zhang Yan-sheng, Jiang Jian-jing, Ren Ai-zhu, Ning
Jing, “Nonlinear Finite Element Simulation for the Impact between
modelling. The study focuses on reinforced concrete column Over-high Truck and Bridge-Superestructure”, Proc. 7th. Int. Conf.
belonging to a car park. Additionally a review of the related Shock & Impact Loads on Superestructures, Beijing, 2007, 387-394
codes was done and their recommendations were compared [14] Bi, J., Fang, H., Weggel, D.C., “Finite element modelling of cable
with the obtained results. median barriers under vehicular impacts”, 11th International Conference
on Structures Under Shock and Impact”, Wessex Institute of
With a realistic car model, mass and velocity variations Technology, UK, 2010, 219-230
were taken into account to obtain information about its [15] M. Borovinsek, M. Vesenjak, M. Ulbin, Z. Ren, “Simulation of crash
influence on the ESL. The use of the same car in all cases test for high containment levels of road safety barriers” Engineering
allows keeping separate the influence of the damping Failure Analysis 14, 2007, 1711-1718
[16] Zaouk, A. K., Bedewi, N. E., Kan, C. D., Marzoughi, D., Validation of a
characteristics of different cars in the results. non-linear finite element vehicle model using multiple impact data,
The found deformations in the car showed the importance Crashworthiness and occupant protection in transportation systems,
of using real car models in the study of impacts, even at low AMD-Vol. 218, ASME, New York, 1996, 91-106
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2011 3372