CHAPTER 17 Explosion 1559

TABLE 17.75 Some Damage Effects Produced by a Blast TABLE 17.76 Some Damage Effects Produced by a Blast
Wave
1 Wave
2
Structural Failure Peak Side-On Peak Side-On
Element Overpressure Overpressure
(Approximate)
(psi) (psi) (kPaa)

A. Original data of glasstonea Annoying noise (137 dB), if of low frequency 0.02
(1
15 Hz)
Glass windows, large Shattering usually 0.5
1.0 Occasional breaking of large glass windows 0.03 0.2
and small occasionally frame already under strain
failure Loud noise (143 dB); sonic boom glass failure 0.04
Corrugated asbestos Shattering 1.0
2.0 Breakage of windows, small, under strain 0.1 0.7
siding
Typical pressure for glass failure 0.15 1.0
Corrugated steel or Connection failure 1.0
2.0
asbestos paneling followed by buckling “Safe distance” (probability 0.95 no serious 0.3 2.0
damage beyond this value)
Brick wall panel, 8 or Shearing and flexure 3.0
10.0 (7
8)
12 in. thick, not failures Missile limit
reinforced Some damage to house ceiling; 10% window
Wood siding panels, Usually failure occurs 1.0
2.0 glass broken
standard house at the main Limited minor structural damage 0.4 2.8
construction connections, allowing a Large and small windows usually shattered; 0.5
1.0 3.5
6.9
whole panel to be occasional damage to window frames
blown in
Minor damage to house structures 0.7 4.8
Concrete or cinder- Shattering of wall 1.5
5.5 (2
3)
block wall panels, 8 or Partial demolition of houses, made 1.0 6.9
12 in. thick, not uninhabitable
reinforced Corrugated asbestos shattered 1
2 6.9
13.8
B. Additional data of Brasie and Simpsonb Corrugated steel or aluminum panels,
fastenings fail, followed by buckling
Self-framing steel Collapse 3
4 Wood panels (standard housing), fastening
panel building fail, panels blown in
Oil storage tanks Rupture 3
4 Steel frame of clad building slightly distorted 1.3 9.0
Wooden utility poles Snapping failure 5 Partial collapse of walls and roofs of 2 13.8
Loaded rail cars Overturning 7 houses
a
Concrete or cinder block walls, not 2
3 13.8
20.7
Glasstone and Dolan (1980), Table 5.145. in parentheses are from Brasie and Simpson reinforced, shattered
(1968).
b
Brasie Simpson (1968), Table 3. Lower limit of serious structural damage 2.3 15.9
Source: After Glasstone (1962); Brasie and Simpson (1968). 50% destruction of brickwork of house 2.5 17.3
Heavy machines (3000 lb) in industrial 3 20.7
building suffer little damage
Steel frame building distorted and pulled
Another damage table is that given by V.J. Clancey away from foundations
(1972b) in the context of accident investigation and Frameless, self-framing steel panel building 3
4 20.7
27.6
reproduced in Table 17.76. demolished
Commenting on these tables, Scilly and High (1986) Rupture of oil storage tanks
state that both the tables of Brasie and Simpson and that Cladding of light industrial buildings 4 27.6
of Clancey are largely derived from the nuclear weapons ruptured
data and theoretical analyzes in Glasstone together with Wooden utilities poles (telegraph, etc.) 5 34.5
some additional data for condensed phase explosives snapped
from Robinson. Tall hydraulic press (40,000 lb) in building
A damage classification which is widely quoted is that slightly damaged
by Stephens (1970), who defines the following categories Nearly complete destruction of houses 5
7 34.5
48.3
shown in Table 17.77. Loaded train wagons overturned 7 48.3
The damage levels typical of these zones are such that in Brick panels, 8
12 in. thick, not reinforced, 7
8 48.3
55.2
A the building may be damaged beyond economical repair, fail by shearing or flexure
in B it suffers partial collapse and/or failure of some struc- Loaded train boxcars completely demolished 9 62.1
tural members, in C it is still usable but structural repairs Probable total destruction of buildings 10 69.0
are required and in D damage includes broken windows, Heavy (7000 lb) machine tools moved and
light cracks in walls and damage to wall panels and roofs. badly damaged
Fugelso, Weiner, and Schiffman have described dam- Very heavy (12,000 lb) machine tools survived
age to frame structures from an explosion equivalent of Limit of crater lip 300 2000
5001 TNT equivalent. The data shown in Table 17.78
has been quoted in the vulnerability model by Eisenberg, a
These SI values are given by Gugan (1979).
Source: After V.J. Clancey (1972b).
Lynch and Breeding (1975).
1560 Lees’ Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

TABLE 17.77 Damage Classification Based on Overpressure TABLE 17.80 Some Damage Effects Produced by a Blast
Peak Wave
3 (Scilly and High, 1986)
Zone Damage Level Peak Side-On Overpressure (kPa) Structural Failure Mode Peak Side-on
Element Overpressurea
A Total destruction .83 (Approximate)
B Severe damage .35 (psi) at Different
C Moderate damage .17 Explosive Charge
D Light damage ,3.5 1 te 10 te 100 te
Window 5% broken 0.15 0.1 0.1
frames 50% broken 0.36 0.24 0.21
90% broken 0.9 0.6 0.54
TABLE 17.78 Percentage of Structural Damage Based on Peak
Overpressure (Eisenberg, Lynch, and Breeding, 1975) Houses Tiles displaced 0.64 0.42 0.38
Doors and window frames 1.3 0.86 0.77
Structural Damage (%) Peak Overpressure
Frames may be blown in
(psi) (N/m2) Category D damage 0.71 0.44 0.42
1 (threshold) 0.9 6200 Category Ca damage 1.8 1.15 1.10
50 3.0 20,700 Category Cb damage 4.0 2.4 2.3
99 5.0 34,500 Category B damage 11.5 5.2 5.0
Category A damage 26.5 11.5 11.0
Telegraph Snapped 52 26 24
poles
Large trees Destroyed 57 26 24
TABLE 17.79 Percentage of Damage Primary Limit of travel 0.2 0.14 0.12
missiles
Damage Level (%) Peak Overpressure
Rail wagons Limit of derailment 26.5 11.5 11.0
(psi) (N/m2)
Bodywork crushed 20 8.7 8.4
Steel floating roof petroleum tank Damaged but easily 11.5 5.7 5.5
20 3.5 24,132 repairable
99 20.0 137,895 Superficial damage 4.6 2.6 2.5
Vertical cylindrical steel pressure vessel Railway line Limit of destruction 205 97 93
20 12.0 82,737 a
All distances (and equivalent overpressures) are measured to the furthest point of the
99 14.0 96,527 structure from the explosion source.
Source: Courtesy of Societe deChimie Industrielle; reproduced with permission.
Spherical steel petroleum tank
20 8.0 55,158
99 16.0 110,316

situated about 250 m from the epicenter of the explosion

and were severely damaged. It is estimated in the First
They derive from these data a probit equation relating Canvey Report (HSE, 1978b) that, assuming an explosion
structural damage to peak overpressure: equivalent to 20
30 t of TNT, the tanks would have
been subjected to an overpressure of about 0.1 bar. This
½17:32:38 Y 5 223:8 1 292 ln po overpressure for tank failure is used in the report.
where po is the peak overpressure (N/m2) and Y is the A further account of overpressure damage to various
probit. items of plant and transport equipment is given in the
In further development of the vulnerability model, study by Gugan (1979).
Rausch, Eisenberg, and Lynch (1977) have dealt with the There is a considerable amount of other data on the
disintegration of walls and the resultant flying debris. effect of air blast on buildings. An overpressure of 1 psi
Rausch, Tsao, and Rowley (1977) review explosion dam- is sufficient to cause partial demolition, while one of
age to various types of structure, including frame struc- l0 psi usually causes total destruction.
tures, low office blocks, and warehouses. They also give Table 17.80 is another damage table, given by Scilly
data from Pickering and Bockholt (1971) on explosion and High (1986) for use in estimating damage for explo-
damage to process storage such as floating roof tanks, sions with yields in the range 1
100 te TNT equivalent.
vertical pressure vessels, and spherical tanks. Table 17.79 The preferred approach of these authors is use of R
W
shows the the damage levels quoted at 20% (structural or P
I methods, but the table is given for use where
damage) and 99% (total destruction). data in those forms are not available. The provision of
A description of the effects of the overpressure in the separate data for explosions of different sizes makes some
Flixborough explosion has been given by Sadee, Samuels, allowance for factors other than overpressure.
and O’Brien (1976
77). Among the installations at A further damage table is given by the CCPS
Flixborough were some storage tanks which were (1994/15).