Identification of Interaction Pressure Between Structure and Explosive with Inverse Approach

An Erratum to this article was published on 03 March 2011


An inverse approach for the identification of the time-dependent localized interaction pressure between a structure and an explosive has been proposed and developed. In this approach, surface measurements of structural response (displacement and velocity) are integrated with numerical simulations to identify the spatial and time-dependent interaction pressure (i.e. the normal traction) on a structure surface. For verification and validation purposes, numerical simulations are used to (a) generate the time-dependent displacement and velocity fields on the free surface of the specimen at specified time intervals, (b) form a blast wave and compute the resulting interaction traction field between the structure and blast wave on the interaction interface for comparison to inverse predictions. In particular, validation of the proposed approach was performed using numerical simulation results for an underwater explosion, with excellent agreement between the identified interaction traction and the simulation generated interaction traction up to and including the maximum traction condition. To demonstrate the potential of the method, the proposed inverse procedure was employed to estimate the interaction traction field on a thin aluminum specimen subjected to transient pressure loading through detonation of explosive buried in sand.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26


  1. 1.

    All experiments were performed in the Dynamic Effects Laboratory of Prof. William L. Fourney at the University of Maryland, College Park, MD with the support of Dr. Uli Leiste and his staff.

  2. 2.

    Central difference is used to convert displacement measurements into velocity estimates at time t + Δt/2.

  3. 3.

    Heat generation is not considered in this study.


  1. 1.

    Turkmen HS, Mecitoglu Z (1999) Dynamic response of a stiffened laminated composite plate subjected to blast pressure. J Sound Vib 221(3):371–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Neuberger A, Peles S, Rittel D (2007) Scaling the response of circular plates subjected to large and close-range spherical explosions. Part I: air-blast loading. Int J Impact Eng 34(5):859–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Neuberger A, Peles S, Rittel D (2007) Scaling the response of circular plates subjected to large and close-range spherical explosions. Part II: buried charges. Int J Impact Eng 34(5):874–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Ramajeyathilagam K, Vendhan CP, Rao VB (2000) Non-linear transient dynamic response of rectangular plates under shock loading. Int J Impact Eng 24(10):999–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Nurick GN, Shave GC (1996) The deformation and tearing of thin Square plates subjected to impulsive pressures—an experimental study. Int J Impact Eng 18(1):99–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Veldman RL, Ari-Gur J, Clum C, DeYoung A, Folkert J (2006) Effects of pre-pressurization on blast response of clamped aluminum plates. Int J Impact Eng 32(10):1678–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Wu C, Hao H (2007) Numerical simulation of structural response and damage to simultaneous ground shock and airblast pressures. Int J Impact Eng 34(3):556–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Wei J, Shetty MS, Dharani LR (2006) Failure analysis of architectural glazing subjected to blast loading. Eng Fail Anal 13(7):1029–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Balden VH, Nurick GN (2005) Numerical simulation of the post-failure motion of steel plates subjected to blast loading. Int J Impact Eng 32(1–4):14–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Taylor GL (1963) Aerodynamics and the mechanics of projectiles and explosions. In: Bathelor GK (ed) The scientific papers of Sir Geoffrey Ingram Taylor, vol. III. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, pp 287–303

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kambouchev N, Noels L, Radovitzky R (2006) Nonlinear compressibility effects in fluid-structure interaction and their implication on the air-blast pressure of structures. J Appl Phys 100:063519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Kambouchev N, Radovitzky R (2007) Fluid-structure interaction effect in the dynamics response of free-standing plates to uniform shock loading. J Applied Mechanics 74:1042–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Slater JE, Rude G (1996) Experimental study of fluid-structure interaction during close-proximity underwater explosions. Proc. ASME PVP-96 on Struct Under Extreme Loading Conditions 325:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jiang J, Olson MD (1996) Non-linear transient analysis of submerged circular plates subjected to underwater explosions. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 134(1–2):163–179

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    McCoy RW, Sun CT (1997) Fluid-structure interaction analysis of a thick-section composite cylinder subjected to underwater blasting loading. Compos Struct 37(1):45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Motta ADA, Ebecken NFF (2004) Steel structures optimization to resist underwater shockwaves - Explosive charges optimization. Structures under Shock & Impact VIII, The Built Environment 73:121–128

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Gong SW, Lam KY (2006) On attenuation of floating structure response to underwater shock. Int J Impact Eng 32(11):1857–1877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Fourney WL, Leiste U, Bonenberger R, Goodings D (2005) Explosive impulse on plates. Fragblast 9(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Gupta AD (1998) Modeling and Analysis of an asymmetric mine-soil-structure interaction problem. ASME PVP-98 on Struct Under Extreme Loading Conditions 361:113–119

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Cheeseman BA, Wolf S, Yen CF, Skaggs R (2006) Blast simulation of explosives buried in saturated sand. Fragblast 10(1–2):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Elgy ID, Pope DJ, Pickup IM (2006) A study of combined particle and blast wave loading. Journal de Physique IV (Proceedings) 134:467–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Cendon DA, Sanchez V, Galvez F (2004) Modelling explosions using ALE meshes: the influence of mesh refinement in pressures and in efforts induced by blast/structure interaction. Structures under Shock & Impact VIII, The Built Environment 73:173–180

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Espinosa HD, Lee S, Moldovan N (2006) A novel fluid structure interaction experiment to investigate deformation of structural elements subjected to impulsive loading. Exp Mech 46(6):805–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Synnergren P, Sjodahl M (1999) A stereoscopic digital speckle photography system for 3D displacement field measurements. Opt Lasers Eng 31:425–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Helm JD, Schreier HW, Chao YJ (2000) Photomechanics. In: Rastogi PK (ed) Advances in 2D and 3D computer vision for shape and deformation measurement, vol. 77. Topics in Applied Physics, Springer Verlag, pp 323–372

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Peters A, Wortmann S, Elliott R, Staiger M, Chase JG, Houten EV (2005) Digital image-based elasto-tomography: first experiments in surface based mechanical property estimation of gelatine phantoms. JSME Int J 48(4):562–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Tiwari V, Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Kwon OH, Fourney WL, Bretall D (2007) On studying improvised explosive devices using digital image correlation. SEM Annual Conference, 414–415

  28. 28.

    Tiwari V, Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Xu S, Deng X, Fourney WL, Bretall D (2009) Application of 3D image correlation for full-field transient plate deformation measurement during blast loading. Int J Impact Eng 36(6):862–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Issaeson D (1986) Distinguish ability of conductivities by electrical current computed tomography. IEEE Trans Medical Imaging MI-5 91–95

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Banks HT, Kojima F (1989) Boundary shape identification problems in two-dimensional domains related to thermal testing of materials. Quarterly Applied Math 47:273–293

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Liu GR, Han X, Lam KY (2001) Material characterization of FGM plates using elastic waves and an inverse procedure. J Compos Mater 35(11):954–971

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Aoki S, Amaya K, Sahashi M, Nakamura T (1997) Identification of Gurson’s material constants by using Kalman filter. Comput Mech 19:501–506

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Lauwagie T, Sol H, Roebben G, Heylen W, Shi Y (2002) Validation of the Resonalyser method: an inverse method for material identification. Proc. Intl Seminar on Modal Analysis 2:687–694

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Kalman RE (1960) A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J Basic Eng 82(1):35–46

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Bryson A, Ho YC (1969) Applied optimal control. Blaisdell Publishing Company, Waltham

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Gelb A, Kasper JF, Nash RA, Price C and Sutherland AA, “Applied Optimal Estimation,” The M.I.T. press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England, 1974.

  37. 37.

    Sakino K (2006) Strain rate dependence of dynamic flow stress considering viscous drug for 6061 aluminum ally at high strain rates. J Phys IV 134:183–189

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Green LG, Lee EL, Breithaupt D, Walton J (1988) The equation of state of PENT detonation products, In: Schmidt SC, Holmes NC (eds) Shock Wave in Condensed Matter-1987, Proceedings of the American Physical Society Topical Conference, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 507–510

Download references


The authors would like to thank ARO and Dr. Bruce LaMattina for the support of this work through ARO Grant # W911NF-06-1-0216

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Xu.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xu, S., Tiwari, V., Deng, X. et al. Identification of Interaction Pressure Between Structure and Explosive with Inverse Approach. Exp Mech 51, 815–830 (2011).

Download citation


  • Structure-explosive interaction
  • Inverse analysis
  • Pressure identification
  • Iterated extended Kalman filter
  • Numerical modeling