Items in cart [0]
| [ Top of Page ] [ Home ] [ Contact Us ] [ Help ] [ The National Academies Home ] | ||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Protecting Buildings From Bomb Damage Transfer of Blast-Effects Mitigation Technologies from Military to Civilian Applications Committee on Feasibility of Applying Blast-Mitigating Technologies and Design Methodologies from Military Facilities to Civilian Buildings Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1995
OCR for page R2
Page ii
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964. under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Harold Liebowitz is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Harold Liebowitz are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Funding for the project was provided through an agreement between the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Defense Nuclear Agency, Contract No. DNA001-92-C-0083.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 95-71478 International Standard Book Number: 0-309-05375-7
Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Box 285, Washington, D.C. 20055 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan area)
Copyright 1995 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
Page iii
COMMITTEE ON FEASIBILITY OF APPLYING BLAST-MITIGATING TECHNOLOGIES AND DESIGN METHODOLOGIES FROM MILITARY FACILITIES TO CIVILIAN BUILDINGS
EUGENE SEVIN, Chair, Lyndhurst, Ohio
STUART L. KNOOP, Vice Chair, Oudens and Knoop, Architects, P.C., Chevy Chase, Maryland
TED BELYTSCHKO, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
GARY G. BRIGGS, Consolidated Engineering Services, Inc., Arlington, Virginia
WILLIAM J. HALL, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
BRUCE HOFFMAN, St. Andrews University, St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland
THEODOR KRAUTHAMMER, Pennsylvania State University, University Park
WALTER P. MOORE Jr., Walter P. Moore & Associates, Inc., Houston, Texas
BARBARA A. MYERCHIN, Strategic Science & Technology Planners, Arlington, Virginia
LESLIE E. ROBERTSON, Leslie E. Robertson Associates, Consulting Structural Engineers, New York
Staff
RICHARD G. LITTLE, Study Director
DENNIS CHAMOT, Acting Study Director (until 1/31/95)
GEORGE LALOS, Project Officer
SUSAN K. COPPINGER, Administrative Assistant
AMELIA MATHIS, Project Assistant (until 12/24/94)
OCR for page R4
Page iv
BOARD ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT
GEORGE BUGLIARELLO, Chair, Polytechnic University, Brooklyn, New York
CATHERINE BROWN, Design Center for American Urban Landscape, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
NANCY RUTLEDGE CONNERY, Public Works Infrastructure, Woolwich, Maine
LLOYD A. DUSCHA, Reston, Virginia
ALBERT A. GRANT, Potomac, Maryland
SUSAN E. HANSON, School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts
E.R. (VALD) HEIBERG, III, Heiberg Associates, Inc., Mason Neck, Virginia
RONALD W. JENSEN, City of Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona
JAMES K. MITCHELL, Charles E. Via Professor of Civil Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg
GARY T. MOORE, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
HAROLD J. PARMELEE, Turner Construction Company, New York
STANLEY W. SMITH, McLean, Virginia
RAYMOND L. STERLING, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston
Staff
RICHARD G. LITTLE, Director
DENNIS CHAMOT, Acting Director (until 1/31/95)
HENRY BORGER, Executive Secretary, Federal Facilities Council (until 2/28/95)
LYNDA STANLEY, Director, Federal Facilities Council
GEORGE LALOS, Senior Program Officer
SUSAN K. COPPINGER, Administrative Assistant
LENA B. GRAYSON, Program Assistant
AMELIA MATHIS, Project Assistant (until 12/24/94)
OCR for page R5
Page v
Contents Executive Summary
1
Introduction
4
Scope of the Study
5
Organization of the Report
6
Terrorism: Its Motives, Methods, and Immediate Results
7
Motives for Terrorist Attacks
8
Patterns of Terrorist Attacks
9
Bomb Damage to Buildings and Occupants
14
References
24
Review of Existing Knowledge for Blast-Effects Mitigation and Protective Design Technologies
26
Introduction
26
Experimental and Simple Analytical Approaches
31
Technical Design Manuals
32
Computational Techniques
35
Computer Programs for Blast and Shock Effects
39
Code Validation
41
Applications of Computational Methods to Terrorist Threats
43
Summary Observations
44
References
45
OCR for page R6
Page vi
Blast-Effects Mitigation Potential for Commercial Buildings
49
Assessing Threats to Civilian Buildings
49
Architectural Planning Process
50
Special Considerations for Hardening Existing Buildings
55
Vulnerabilities of Civilian Structures
58
Vulnerabilities of Nonstructural Building Systems
59
Below-Grade Vulnerabilities in Civilian Buildings
62
Protecting Nonstructural Systems
64
Stack Effect in High-Rise Buildings
65
Economic Considerations
66
Agents for Technology Transfer
68
References
70
Findings and Recommendations
71
Findings
71
Recommendations
75
Appendix A: Financial Performance of a Commercial Office Building
83
Appendix B: Computer Code Abstracts Provided by Code Developers
87
Appendix C: Committee Briefings
97
Appendix D: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members
99
OCR for page R7
Page vii
List of Figures and Tables Figures
2-1 The Jewish Community Center, Buenos Aires, showing vulnerability of brick masonry construction
16
2-2 St. Mary Axe, London, showing general damage to multistory office building of the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development
17
2-3 St. Mary Axe, London, showing potentially lethal glass shards
18
2-4 Staples Corner, North London, showing damage to a single-story steel-framed warehouse
19
2-5 World Trade Center, New York, showing the aftermath of the explosion within the parking garage
20
2-6 Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, showing catastrophic effects on the building's north face
22
2-7 Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, showing detail of the reinforced concrete column and slab construction
22
3-1 Comparison of predicted and observed deformation of a buried structure in clay and sand backfills
43
Tables
2-1 Analysis of Bombing Incidents in the United States by Target, 1989–1993
11
3-1 Representative Computer Programs Used to Simulate Blast Effects and Structural Response
40
A-1 Conventional Building Income and Expense Analysis
84
A-2 Return on Investment Analysis
85
OCR for page R8
OCR for page R9
Page ix
Terms Used in This Report Designing structures to withstand the effects of a deliberately placed explosive device can entail many types of protective measures. Some will increase the difficulty of placing a bomb close enough to a structure to damage it; others will physically strengthen all or parts of the structure while still others will aim to ensure the survival and rescue of the occupants in the event of a bomb explosion. Throughout this report, a number of terms are used to describe these measures. To facilitate the reader's understanding, an explanation of the most commonly used terms is provided below. Technical terms that are considered outside the normal usage of the lay reader are defined as they appear.
Blast-hardening of a structure refers to all measures that are taken, either in the design phase or in subsequent (retrofit) actions, to reduce or eliminate the effects of an explosion. This process is sometimes simply referred to as building "hardening." In the broad sense, it includes site selection and physical space planning (i.e., organization of spaces to minimize the effects of a blast on people and property).
Blast resistance is an effect of blast-hardening and refers to the ability of a structure to withstand an explosive event with minimum loss of life or property.
Blast-effects mitigation refers to the reduction in the severity of the effects of an explosion on a structure resulting from having taken specified blast-hardening measures.
OCR for page R10
Page x
Protective design technologies refer collectively to the techniques and methodologies that have evolved for addressing blast-hardening of buildings and other structures. This body of knowledge is the product of experimental studies, theoretical analyses, and advanced numerical simulation approaches developed primarily by the military for predicting blast loads and the responses of structural systems.