A probabilistic risk-acceptance model for assessing blast and fragmentation safety hazards

Abstract There are many circumstances where decision-makers consider risks associated with explosions – from either natural or deliberate events – where the goal is clarity with respect to the actual safety and hazard risks posed to society and its people, systems and infrastructure. The paper describes how probabilistic safety and hazard modelling of blast and fragmentation can better inform a Quantitative Explosive Risk assessment (QERA). A QERA may be used to define an explosive safety distance based on the risk of explosive hazards being less than a societal acceptable risk. The concepts are illustrated with scenarios at a generic explosives ordnance (EO) site. In one scenario we demonstrate that current, deterministically based, regulations in Australia and internationally may be overly conservative. In other words, a deterministic based regulation may show that a building is located in an unsafe area, whereas a QERA can show, for the same building, that fatality risks are less than those deemed acceptable by society. Another example demonstrates the significant effect that uncertainty modelling, particularly that associated with post-detonation blast-loads, has on fatality risks.

[1]  D E Jarrett,et al.  DERIVATION OF THE BRITISH EXPLOSIVES SAFETY DISTANCES , 1968, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[2]  Robert E. Melchers,et al.  Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Engineering Systems , 1997 .

[3]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Risk assessment for civil engineering facilities: critical overview and discussion , 2003, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[4]  Paola Russo,et al.  Risk-targeted safety distance of reinforced concrete buildings from natural-gas transmission pipelines , 2016, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[5]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Reliability-based load factors for airblast and structural reliability of reinforced concrete columns for protective structures , 2019, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering.

[6]  Robert H. Sues,et al.  Reliability-based design methods for protective structures☆ , 1994 .

[7]  C. Sunstein.  The Cost-Benefit State: The Future of Regulatory Protection , 2003 .

[8]  A. Boardman,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice , 1996 .

[9]  Enrique González Ferradás,et al.  Consequence analysis to determine the damage to humans from vapour cloud explosions using characteristic curves. , 2008, Journal of hazardous materials.

[10]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Balancing the Risks, Benefits, and Costs of Homeland Security , 2011 .

[11]  Valerio Cozzani,et al.  Vulnerability of industrial facilities to attacks with improvised explosive devices aimed at triggering domino scenarios , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[12]  Hong Hao,et al.  Reliability Analysis of RC Columns and Frame with FRP Strengthening Subjected to Explosive Loads , 2016 .

[13]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Security risks and probabilistic risk assessment of glazing subject to explosive blast loading , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[14]  John W. Tatom,et al.  Approved Methods and Algorithms for DoD Risk-Based Explosives Siting , 2009 .

[15]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Experimental Data from The University of Newcastle's July 2014 Repeatable Explosive Field Trials , 2016 .

[16]  Ona R. Lyman.  THE HISTORY OF THE QUANTITY DISTANCE TABLES FOR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY , 1979 .

[17]  Michael D. Netherton.  Probabilistic modelling of structural and safety hazard risks for monolithic glazing subject to explosive blast loads , 2013 .

[18]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Model validation and parametric study on the blast response of unreinforced brick masonry walls , 2010 .

[19]  Pierluigi Olmati,et al.  Fragility analysis for the Performance-Based Design of cladding wall panels subjected to blast load , 2014 .

[20]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Experimental data from 2012 repeatable explosive field trials , 2014 .

[21]  Sam D. Clarke,et al.  A Numerical Investigation of Blast Loading and Clearing on Small Targets , 2014 .

[22]  I. Häring,et al.  Quantitative hazard and risk analysis for fragments of high-explosive shells in air , 2009, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[23]  CampidelliM.,et al.  Reliability-based load factors for blast design1 , 2013 .

[24]  Morris R. Driels,et al.  Weaponeering: Conventional Weapon System Effectiveness , 2013 .

[25]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Blast Load Variability and Accuracy of Blast Load Prediction Models , 2010 .

[26]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Reliability-based load factor design model for explosive blast loading , 2018 .

[27]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Reliability-Based Design Load Factors for Explosive Blast Loading , 2015 .

[28]  Mark G. Stewart,et al.  Modelling improvised explosive device attacks in the West - Assessing the hazard , 2017, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[29]  R. K. Wharton,et al.  Blast characteristics and TNT equivalence values for some commercial explosives detonated at ground level , 1996 .

[30]  Guowei Ma,et al.  Multi-level explosion risk analysis (MLERA) for accidental gas explosion events in super-large FLNG facilities , 2017 .

[31]  Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,et al.  Safety factor for structural elements subjected to impulsive blast loads , 2017 .

[32]  Sam E. Rigby,et al.  An Investigation of TNT Equivalence of Hemispherical PE4 Charges , 2015 .

[33]  G. Bennett.  Lees’ Loss Prevention in the Process Industries: Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control, vol. III, third ed., Sam Mannan (Ed.). Elsevier, Butterworths, Heinemann, Burlington, MA (2005), three-volume set, US$ 476.00, 1071 pp.), ISBN 0-7506-7555-1 (three-volume set), ISBN 0-7506-7589-3 (vol. II , 2005 .