P. 1 

## PTrkMJ P hATF

. 3/1R/?f.f_ 7 

# BO X l £ O F

• 

# 10

EP A DOCKE T ID : 300PQ-EH Q 1 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 1 3 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 3 5 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 5 7 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 7 9 ) 300PQ-EHQ-7- 1 11 ) 300PQ-EHQ-7- 3 13 ) 15 ) 17 ) 19 ) 21 ) 23 ) 25 ) 27 ) 29 ) 31 ) 33 ) 35 ) 37 ) 39 )

Ste p 1 : FO R ASR C INTERNA L US E ONL Y Ar e ther e more document s fo r thi s "Fil l ou t Continuatio n Shee t an d g o ' Interna l SFUN D Bo

x Numbe r Initials/Date : 3/9/200 7 H.T . Ste p 2 : FO R ASR C INTERNA L US E ONL Y 

### (PART_B__of_B__

)

Ste p 3 : FO R ASR

C INTERNA L US E ONL Y CD : OA : / 

# 2 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 2 4 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 4 6 ) 300PQ-EHQ-2-L3 6 8 ) SOOPQiHQ^LS S lOjda^PQ-EHQ-T^ ) 12 ) 14 ) 16 ) 18 ) 20 ) 22 ) 24 ) 26 ) 28 ) 30 ) 32 ) 34 ) 36 ) 38 ) 40 )

Docke t i n anothe r box ? *YE S / N O t o Ste p 2 4 7 O F 28 3P. 2 

# SodPQ-eHS-t-Z

CONSEQUENCE S O

F ACCIDENT S INVOLVIN G COMMERCIA

L EXPLOSIVE S

July 5 , 1990



# aP. 3



### TABL E O F CONTENT

S

age
1. 0 Introductio n 1 2. 0 Backgroun

d 1 2. 1 Characteristic s o

f Explosiv e Material s 2 2. 2 Past Incidents Involvin

g Commercia

l Explosive s 3 3. 0 Existin

g Classificatio

n System s 3 3. 1 DO T Standard s 4 3. 2 ATF Standard s 5 3 3 Othe r Standard s 7 4. 0 Compariso

n o f Methodologie s fo

r Determinin

g Affecte d Distance s fo r Commercia

l Explosives 7 4. 1 Approac

h 7 4.1. 1 Explosiv

e Material s Selecte

d 7 4.1. 2 Damag

e Criteri a8 4.1. 3 Assumption s 8 4.1. 4 Quantitie s Modele

d 8 4. 2 Methodologie s for

Determinin

g Explosiv e Distance s 9 4.2. 1 Scalin

g La w for Explosives 9 4.2. 2 ATF 1 1 4.2 3 ARCHI

E 1 5 4.2. 4 "K-Factor " Methodolog y 1 6 4 3 Result s 1 8 43. 1 Hig h Explosives 1 8 43. 2 Lo w Explosives an

d Blastin g Agent s 2 3 5. 0 Finding s 2 7 Reference s 2 8P. 4

TABL E O F CONTENT

S (Continued ) Pag e APPENDICE S Appendi x A : Tes tMethods Use d i n Qassificatio n o f Commercia

l Explosives A- l A l Screenin

g Test s A- l A. 2 Standar

d Test s A- 6 A.2. 1 Explosivenes s b

y Shoc k Initiatio n A- 6 A.2. 2 Ignitabilit

y an d Violenc e o f

Deflagration A- 9 A.2. 3 Occurrenc

e an d Violenc e o f

Decompositio n an

d Deflagration Du e t o Externa

l Heatin g A-1 0 A.Z 4 Fiel d Combustion Test s fo r Unstabl e Substance

s A-l l Appendi x B : Damag

e Criteria/Overpressur

e Dat a B- 1 B. 1 Damag

e Criteri a B- 1 B. 2 Effect

s o f Varyin g Overpressur

e B- 9 Appendi x C : Differences in Methodolog y C- 1



# 4P. 5

LIS T O F EXHIBIT

S Pag e 1 K-Factor

s a s a Function o f

Pea k Overpressure

s 1 0 2 Table o f

Distances - Hig

h Explosives & Blasting Agent s 1 2 3 Table o f

Distances - Lo

w Explosives 13 4 Sample Printou

to f ARCHIE Modelin g Result s fo r 25 0 Pounds o f

Tetry l 1

7 5 Affecte

d Distances fo

r Commercia

l Hig h Explosives , Determined Usin g Fou

r Differen tMethods (Pea

k Overpressur

e - 0. 5 psi ) 19 6 Affeae d Distances for Commercia l Hig h Explosives , Determine d Usin g Four Differen

tMethods (Pea

k Overpressur

e = 1. 0 psi ) 2 0 7 Affecte

d Distances fo

r Commercia

l Hig h Explosives , Determined Usin g Four Differen

tMethod s (Pea

k Overpressur

e - 2. 0 psi ) 2 1 8 Affected Distances fo r Commercia

l Hig h Explosives , Determine d Usin g Fou

r Differen tMethods (Pea

k Overpressur

e = 3. 0 psi ) 2 2 9 Affeae d Distances for Lo w Explosives , Determined Usin g th e AT F Table o f

Distances fo

r Lo w Explosives 2 4 1 0 Affeae d Distances fo r Lo w Explosives , Analyze

d as Hig h Explosives , Assuming Detonatio n 2 5 1 1 Affeae d Distances for Blasting Agents , Analyze d as Hig h Explosives , Assuming Detonatio n 2 6 A- l Screening Test

s Use d i n th e Classification o f Commercia

l Explosives A- 2 A- 2 AssessmentCriteri a i n th e Combustibilit

y TestA- 4 A- 3 Metho d o f

Gradin g i n th e Ignitio n Poin tTes tA- 5 A- 4 A n Exampl

e o f Hazar d Gradin g wit h Respe a t o Impa a Sensitivit y A- 7 A- 5 Summar

y o f Standar d Test s Use d t o Evaluat

e Hazard s Associate d wit h Explosives A- 8 B- 1 Huma

n Injur y Criteri a B- 2 B- 2 Propert

y Damag e Criteri a B- 4P. 6

US T O F EXHIBIT

S (continued ) Pag e B- 3 Lethalit

y Curve s B- 7 B- 4 Lethalit

y an d Injur y Curve s B- 7 B- 5 Air-Blas tCriteri

a fo r Personne

l Standin g i n th e Ope

n B- 8 B- 6 Consequence Distanc e Versus Overpressur e fo r Fou r Hig h Explosives (Amato l 60/40 , Amatol 50/50 , Lea d Azide , an

d Metrio l Trinitrate) B-1 0 B- 7 Consequence Distanc e Versus Overpressur e fo r Fou r Hig h Explosives (PLX , SUve

r Azide , Tetryl , an

d TNT ) B-l l C- 1 Comparison o f

Result s o f Consequence Analysis (Overpressur e 0. 5 psi ) C- 2 C- 2 Affeae d Distance s Determined b y K-Faao r Method fo

r Tw o Commercia

l High Explosives , Usin g Severa l TN T Equivalent

s C- 5



# fcP. 7

CONSEQUENCE

S O F ACCIDENT

S INVOLVIN

G COMMERCIA

L EXPLOSIVE

S

1. 0 Introduction Whe n th e Superfun

d Amendment

s an d Reauthorization A a (SARA ) wa s enacted i n 1986 , a lis to f extremel y hazardou

s substances wa

s publishe d unde r Sectio n 302 o f

Titl e III. Sectio n 30 2 require s a facilit y tha tha s a n extremel

y hazardou

s substanc e (EHS ) above its threshol d planning quantit y (TPQ ) t o notif

y th e Stat e Emergenc

y Respons e Commissio

n (SERC ) tha

ti ti s subje a t o th e requirement s fo r emergenc

y planning . The origina

l lis to f EHS s wa s create d usin g only acut

e toxicit y criteria . Th e purpos e o f th e lis twa

s t o identif y thos e substances that

, i f accidentall

y released , coul d caus e deat h o r seriou s irreversible healt h effect s off-site . However, toxicit y i s no tth e only hazar

d pose d b y chemicals . SAR

A state s tha

tth e Administrato r ma y revis e th e list , bu

tsuc h revision s "shal l tak e into accoun

tth e toxicity , reactivity , volatility , dispensability , combustibility , o r flammability o f a substance. " EP A i s currentl

y contemplating a rulemakin g addressin

g th e hazard

s o f commercial

explosives. Th e Agenc y i s awar e tha tth e Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d Firearm s (ATF ) alread

y ha s a rul e o n thi s issu e (AT F P5400.7 , ATF : Explosives La w an d Regulations) . However, th e AT F regulation doe s no trequir e reporting o f

th e presence o f

commercia

l explosive s t o loca

l emergenc

y plannin g authorities . Therefore , EP A i s considering a rule tha

twould mandat

e reportin g t o th e Loca

l Emergenc

y Planning Committees (LEPCs ) t o enabl e proper planning fo r th e hazard

s associated wit

h explosives . The purpos e o f thi s repor

ti s t o compar

e th e quantity-distanc

e relationship foun

d i n th e AT F rule

s t o quantity-distanc

e relationship s use

d b y othe r generall y accepted methodologies . This repor ti s intended t o b e use

d a s technica l suppor tfo r an y futur e listin g o f commercia

l explosive s o n th e Sectio n 30 2 lis t 2. 0 Backgroun

d EP A originally develope d th e EH S lis tas par to f th e Chemica

l Emergenc

y Preparedness Progra

m (CEPP) whic

h wa s designed t o increas e public awareness o f chemica l hazard s i n communities an

d focus effor

t o n emergenc

y planning . EP

A believe d tha

tcommunities needed a starting poin tan d intended tha

tth e lis t dra w attentio n t o th e chemica l substance

s an d facilitie s tha

tpos e th e mos timmediat e concer n fro m a n emergenc y planning an

d respons e perspective . EP A recognize

d an d emphasize

d tha tther e ar e ten s o f thousands o f

compounds an

d mixture s i n commerc

e tha tma y pos e a hazar

d unde r specifi c circumstance

s an d tha tthi s lis tonly deal s wit

h lethalit y o r seriou s irreversible healt h effect s associate d wit

h acut e toxicity . The Agenc y chos e lethalit

y becaus e i trepresent

s th e mos timmediat

e concer n i n a n emergenc

y situation . Severa l commenter

s t o th e rulemakin

g for th e EH S lis tnote d tha tphysical/chemica

l hazard s suc h a s flammability o r explosivit y ma y als o lea d t o seriou s consequences , includin g deat h an d irreversible injury. I

n a n officia l inquir y t o th e Agenc

y i n 1987 , Senato r Fran

k Lautenbur

g als o note d concer

n fo r hazard s othe r tha

n toxicit y an d aske d tha tEP A focus o n othe r hazards . The Agenc y agree d an d note d its inten tt o evaluat e hazard s othe r tha

n toxicit y i n th e future.

^P. 8

A Physical/Chemica

l Criteria Workgrou

p (P/ C Workgroup ) wa

s forme d a tEP A t o address th e concerns raise d b y Senato r Lautenbur

g an d others an

d t o focus o n th e proble m o f identifyin g materials whic

h ar e hazardou s base d upon thei r physical/chemica l propertie s an

d coul d thereb

y b e candidat

e EHSs . The Workgrou

p initially considered th e hazard s referre d t o i n th e A a an

d determine

d tha tthe y fel l into tw

o genera l categories : hazard

s related t o toxi c properties an d hazard s relate d t o physical/chemica

l properties . Th e charaaeristics o f

reactivity , volatility , dispersibility , combustibility , an d flammability, mentioned i n th e Act , ar e related t o a variet

y o f physical/chemica

l properties ; th e Workgrou p chos e t o focus o n th e physical/chemica l properties tha

tlea d t o th e greates tpotentia l hazard s t o people . Hazard

s associated wit

h physical/chemica

l properties ar

e primaril y base d o n tw o phenomen

a tha tca n caus e seriou s persona

l injur y o r death . Thes e phenomen

a ar e th e resulto f

th e releas e o f

energ y from highl

y reactiv e o r flammable chemicals an d ar e identified as overpressure

s from blas twave

s an d therma l radiation from fires. Overpressure s resultfrom nearl

y instantaneous energ

y release , o r detonation , whil e therma l energ y i s released durin

g combustion , whic

h occur s mor e slowly . Since explosive chemicals ar e highl y reactiv e substance

s tha tca n detonat

e an d creat e overpressures , an

d flammabl

e chemicals ca

n bur n an d produc e therma l radiation , th e Workgrou p focuse d o n explosives an

d flammable chemicals a

s chemicals o f

concern . The workgrou

p eleae d t o segregat

e th e chemical s fo

r revie w into separat

e categories fo

r flammables , explosives , an

d reactrve s fo r purposes o

f analysi s an d possibl e regulation even thoug h i twa s recognized tha

t ther e ma y b e overla

p o f th e consequences ; e.g. , th e detonatio n o f a flammable materia

l ma y yiel d th e same result s a s th e detonatio n o f

a commercia

l explosive . However, th e workgrou p wante d t o determine whic

h parameter s distinguish extremel

y hazardou

s explosive s from al l othe r explosives , extremel y hazardou

s flammable substances from al l othe r flammables, an d s o on . Thi s repor

tfocuses o n commercia

l explosives . I n thi s instance , th e workgrou p decided t o investigat

e th e various methodologie s used i n analyzin g th e consequence s o f

explosive s an

d t o compar

e th e result

s using thes e methodologie s wit h th e Table o f

Distance s used i n th e rulemakin

g b y ATF . Separat

e document

s wil l address th e consequences o f accident s involving flammable materials , non-commercia l explosives , an

d othe r reactiv

e chemicals . 2. 1 Characteristics o

f Explosive Material s A n explosio n i s defined as a sudde n an d violen treleas e o f

energ y (Lee s 1980) accompanie d b y hig h pressur e gases . The mor

e rapi d th e releas e an

d th e greater th e available energy, th e mor e violen tth e explosio n (U.S . DO T 1988) . Mos to f th e available energ

y from a n explosio n i s converted into som e for m o f mechanica

l energy , manifesting itsel f i n th e form o f

blas twaves , fragmentation, an d groun d shock . O

f thes e damag e effects , blas toverpressur e contributes th e greates tdamag e i n chemica

l explosions . The remainin g portio n o f

th e explosive energ

y remain s i n therma

l form an d i s o f concer n becaus e o f

it s fire hazard. Explosive materials typicall y ar e classified as eithe r "high " o r "low " explosives . "High " explosives ar e defined b y AT F as thos e material s tha tdetonate if

ignited , shocked , o r subjeae d t o heato r friction. Detonation s resultfrom exothermi c chemica l reactions tha

tproceed a

tsupersoni c velocities , generating larg e volume s o f

hig h pressur e ga s an d hea tinstantaneously , even thoug h n o confining vesse l o r structur e exists . I n a n explosio n caused b

y a hig h explosive , th e rat

e o f energ y releas e i s particularl

y rapi d an d th e shoc k wav e ha s a ver y shor tduration . Som e example s o f hig h explosive s ar

e TNT , dynamite , gunpowder , an d nitroglycerine . I

n contrast, "low

" explosives deflagrate , o r bur n atsubsoni c velocities . A deflagration generates lower pressure

s an d i s les s destructive tha

n a detonation . A deflagratio n reaction propagate

s throug h th e unreaae d materia

l vi a a diffusion mechanis

m rathe r tha n a shoc k wave. However, unde

r th e rightcondition s (e.g. , confinement

) som e lo w explosive s ma y detonate ; conversely , som e hig h explosives ma

y bur n i f ignited . A n example o f

a lo w explosiv e i s blad

e powder . (Not e tha

talthoug h th e Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d 

# 3P. 9 "*!_______

_

Firearm s consider s blac k powde r a lo w explosive , th e Departmen to f Transportatio

n regulates i ta

s a Qas s A explosive. ) The Physical/Chemica

l Criteri a Workgrou

p investigated severa

l possibl e approache

s t o charaaerizin g explosive materials , includin g acciden thistorie s an

d quantitative physical/chemica l properties . A s th e following section s demonstrate , non e o f th e approache

s investigated provide

d satisfaaory distinctions . The acciden tdat a o n explosive s ar

e no tcomprehensive enoug h t o provide an

y clear cu tmean s o f placing certain commercia l explosive s into extremel

y hazardou

s categories ( a revie

w o f th e dat a i s presented i n Sectio n 2.2) . A revie w o f th e literatur

e associated wit

h explosion s reveale

d tha ta n explosio n usuall

y result s i n bot h a therma

l an d pressur e (Le. , blast

) wave. Typically , th e damag e associate d wit

h th e pressur

e wav e i s fa r greater suc

h tha tth e therma l wav e ca n b e ignore

d (Brasi e an

d Simpson 1968) . Blastwave s from accidenta

l explosion s ca

n caus e damag e t o peopl e an

d propert y b y subjecting them t o transien tcrushin g pressure

s an d winds . Relatively simpl e concept

s hav e bee n use

d effectivel

y t o correlat

e blastwav

e properties wit

h damage . Thes e concept s ar e discusse d i n Sectio n 4.2,1 . 2. 2 Pas tIncident

s Involving Commercia

l Explosives The Acut e Hazardou

s Event s Dat a Bas e (AHE/DB ) wa

s develope d b

y EP A t o provide a historica

l perspective o n accident

s tha treleas e hazardou

s substances i n th e Unite d States (EP A 1988) . Th e 1988 versio n o f th e dat a bas e includes dat

a o n 5,82 7 event s tha toccurre d between th e 1960

s an d 198 7 (th e majorit

y o f th e incident s appea r t o hav e occurre d i n th e 1980s) . The AH E dat a bas e list s approximatel

y 3 6 incident

s resultin g i n fires o r explosions tha tma y hav e involved commercia

l explosives. 1 Thi s dat

a bas e doe s no tappea

r t o provide clear evidence tha tcommercia

l explosives shoul d b e considered extremel y hazardou

s base d solel y o n thei r acciden

thistory . I

tdoe s sho w tha

tcommercia

l explosive s hav

e bee n involved i n accident s tha tresulted i n deat h an d injur y i n th e pas t A recen tacciden tno tincluded in th e AHE/D B occurre d i n Kansa

s City, MO , o n November 29,1988 . I n thi s incident, si

x fire fighters wer

e killed i n a

n explosio n o f

a blend o f

ammoniu

m nitrat e an d fue l oi l (ANFO) . About59,00 0 pound s o f ANFO , a blasting agent, wer e stored i n tw

o trailer s a ta constructio n site . The trailer

s explode d in a fire caused b

y arson . 3. 0 Existin g Qassificatio n System s The Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacco an

d Firearm s (ATF ) an

d th e Departmen

to f Transportation (DOT ) ar e th e tw o principa l regulator

y group s tha

toverse e explosives . Explosives an d explosive mixture

s generall y ar e no tdistinguished i n an

y classification schemes . Mos torganizations recogniz e tha ta "mixture " containin g a n explosive substanc

e ca n b e jus ta s hazardou

s as a "pure

" explosive substance . Therefore , th e classificatio n o f explosive s b

y ATF , DOT , an

d others i s no tbase

d directl y o n chemica

l properties , rathe

r i ti s base

d o n empirica l dat a obtained from tests performe d o n th e substanc

e o r mixture. Thes e standardize d tests typicall

y ar e performe

d b y th e Burea

u o f Mines an d othe r agencie s an

d ar e describe d i n Appendi

x A . Th e numbe

r o f

1 The identitie s o f

th e substances involve

d ar e no talway

s known . I

n som e cases th e substances reporte d ma y b e considere

d commercia

l explosive s unde

r certain condition s bu

tno tunde

r others . Fo r thes e reasons , th e total numbe

r o f incident s involving commercia

l explosive s i s a

n estimate . 3 - 

# qP.1 0

chemical s an

d chemica l mixture s classified a

s explosive s i s unknow

n (Whit e 1989 , Dowlin g 1989 , McCun e 1989 , Schult z 1989) . 3. 1 DOT Standard s Th e DO T regulates th e transportation o f explosives an

d defines a

n explosive as "an

y chemica

l compound , mixture , o r device , th e primar y o r common purpose o f

whic h i s t o function b

y explosion , Le. , wit

h substantiall

y instantaneous releas e o f ga s an d heat.. " (4 9 CF

R173.50) . Explosives ar

e furthe r defined b

y th e DO T accordin

g t o th e following classifications :

• Class A — Detonating orotherwise of maximum hazard: Type 1: Soli d explosive s whic h ca n b e cause

d t o deflagrat

e b y conta a wit

h spark s o r flame bu

tcannotb e detonate d b

y mean s o f No . 8 tes tblasting cap. 2 Example : blac k powder . Type 2: Soli d explosive s whic h contai n a liquid ingredien tan d whic h whe n unconfined ca

n b e detonated b

y mean s o f a No . 8 tes tblasting cap ; o r whic h ca n b e exploded i n atleas t50 % o f th e trials i n th e Burea

u o f Explosives ' Impa a Apparatus unde

r a drop o f

4 inches o r more , bu

tcannotl>

e exploded i n mor

e tha n 50 % o f th e trials unde

r a dro p o f les s tha n 4 inches . Example : commercia l dynamit e containin g a liqui d explosive ingredient Type 3: Soli d explosive s whic h contai n n o liquid ingredien tan d whic h ca n b e detonate d b

y mean s o f a No . 8 tes tblastin

g cap ; o r whic

h ca n b e exploded i n at leas t50 % o f

th e trials in th e Burea

u o f Explosives ' Impa a Apparatu s unde r a dro p o f 4 inches o r more , bu

tcannotb e explode

d in mor e tha n 50 % o f th e trials unde r a dro p o f les s tha n 4 inches . Examples : commercia l dynamit e containing n o liquid ingredient, TNT , amatol , tetryi , picric acid , ure a nitrate , pentolite , an

d commercia

l boosters . Type 4: Soli d explosive s whic h ca n b e cause

d t o detonat

e whe n unconfined , b

y mean s o f conta a wit

h spark s o r flame ; o r whic

h ca n b e exploded i n th e Burea u o f Explosives ' Impa a Apparatus , i n mor e tha n 50 % o f th e trials unde

r a dro p o f les s tha n 4 inches . Examples : lead azide , fulminat e o f mercury . TVp e 5 : Desensitize d liqui d explosive s ar e explosives whic

h ma y b e detonated separatel y o r when absorbe

d i n steril e absorben

tcotton , b

y a No . 8 tes tblasting cap ; butwhic

h cannotb e exploded i n th e Burea u o f Explosives ' Impa a Apparatu s under a dro

p o f les s tha n 1 0 inches . Example : desensitized nitroglycerine . Type 6: Liqui

d explosive s tha

tca n b e explode

d i n th e Burea

u o f Explosives ' Impa a Apparatu

s unde r a dro p o f les s tha n 1 0 inches . Example : nitroglycerine .

2 A No . 8 blasting ca

p i s on e containin g tw

o gram s o f a mixtur e o f 80 % mercur

y fulminat

e an d 20 % potassiu m chlorate , o r a ca

p o f equivalen

tstrengt h (4 9 CF R173.53) . - 4 -


# I CP.1 1

Type 7 : Detonators an

d initiatin g devices . Type 8: An

y soli d o r liquid compound , mixture , o r device whic h i s no tspecificall

y included i n an

y o f th e abov e types , an

d whic h unde r specia l condition s ma

y b e s o designated an

d examine d b y th e Burea

u o f Explosives . Example : shaped charges . Type 9: Propellantexplosives , clas s A (soli d chemical s o r soli d chemica l mixture s whic h ar e designed t o function b

y rapi d combustio n o f

successive layers ) whic

h detonat e i n thei r packag

e i n on e ou to f

fiv e tes ttrials , whe

n ignited .

• Class B — Flammable Hazard: Thos e explosive s tha

tin genera

l function b

y rapi d combustion rathe

r tha n detonatio n an

d includ e som e explosiv e device s suc h as specia

l fireworks, flash powders , som e pyrotechni c signa l device s an

d liquid o r soli d propellan texplosive s whic h includ e som e smokeles s powders .

• Class C

— Minimum Hazard: Certai n type s o f manufacture

d articles whic

h contai n Class A , o r Qas s B explosives , o r both , as component s buti n restriae d quantities , an d certain type

s o f fireworks . Qas s A explosive s ar

e considered b

y DO T t o b e mor

e hazardou

s tha n Qas s B explosives , whic h i n tur n are considered t o b e mor

e hazardou

s tha n Qas s C explosives . I

n general , Class A explosive s will detonat e whil e Qas s B an

d C explosive s wil l deflagrate . Anyon e wishin g t o transpor tmaterials classified as clas s A , B , o r C explosives i s subje a t o th e requirement s specified i n th e DO T regulations fo r packaging, labeling an

d prope r transpor t DO T als o regulates transportation o f blasting agents , define

d a s materials designed fo

r blasting tha

t hav e bee n teste d i n accordanc e wit h a serie s o f

specifie d tests an

d foun d t o b e s o insensitiv e tha

tthere i s ver

y littl e probabilit

y o f accidenta l explosion . 3 J AT F Standard s Th e manufacture , processing , use , distribution , an d storage o f

explosive materials i s regulated als o b y th e Burea u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d Firearm s (ATF ) as se tforth i n 2 7 CF RPar t55 . Th e AT F defines a

n explosive materia

l as follows: "Any chemical

compound, mixture, ordevice, the primary orcommon purpose of which is to function by explosion. The term includes, but is not limited to, dynamite and otherhigh explosives, black powder, pellet powder, initiating explosives, detonators, safety fuses, squibs, detonating cord, igniter cord, and

igniters." Explosive materials hav

e bee n divide

d int o thre e classe s b

y th e AT F for purposes o f regulating storage :



### - 5 - 

# U• Hig h Explosives : thos e explosive s whic h ca n b e detonate d b

y mean s o f a blasting ca p when unconfined (e.g. , TNT , dynamite) .

• Lo w Explosives : thos e explosive materials whic h ca n b e cause

d t o deflagrat

e when confined (e.g. , blac

k powder , safet y fuses , an

d DO T Qas s B explosives) .

• Blastin g Agents : an y materia l o r mixtur

e consistin g o f

a fue l an d oxidizer tha

ti s intended fo

r blasting an

d no totherwis e defined as a n explosive , provide

d tha tth e finished produ a cannotb e detonated b y a No . 8 blasting ca

p whe n unconfine

d (e.g. , ammoniu

m nitrate/fue

l oi l (ANFO ) an

d certain wate

r gels) . Not e tha tblasting agent

s ar e ver y insensitive an

d unlikel y t o explode ; however

, i n th e eventtha

tthe y d o explode , th e consequence ma y b e a detonation , wit

h accompanyin

g overpressure , a

s fo r hig h explosives , rathe

r tha n a deflagratio

n (intens e fire), as fo

r low explosives . For example , a n explosio n o

f th e blasting agen

tANF O kille d six fire fighters i n Kansa s City , M O (se e Sectio n 2.2) . The AT F regulations contai n a table , called th e Tabl e o f Distances, " (se e Exhibi

t2 ) whic h mus tb e used b y explosive materials handler s t o determine acceptabl e minimu m separation distances fo r storing an

d handlin g hig h explosive s an

d blasting agents . The tabl e als o state s th e maximu m quantities o f

explosive s allowed i n an

y on e location . Location s tha tcontai n explosive s mus

tb e separate

d from:

• Inhabite

d buildings , including structure s o r othe r places no tdirectl y related t o explosive s operation s wher e peopl e usuall

y assembl e o r work ;

• Publi c highways ;

• Passenger railways ; an d

• Other location s whic h contain explosives . Fo r example , i

f a sit e ha

s from 4 0 t o 5 0 pounds o f hig h explosive s in on e magazine , ther e ca n b e n o unbarricade

d inhabite d building (e.g. , a home ) within 30 0 fee t(9 1 meters ) o f tha tmagazine . A separat

e tabl e i s provide d for determining separatio n distances for th e storag e o f lo w explosives (se e Exhibi t3) . Thes e distance requirement

s diffe r from thos e for hig

h explosive s becaus e th e consequences o f a n acciden tinvolving lo w explosive s ar

e likely t o resultfrom therma l radiation rathe

r tha n overpressure . I

n al l instances , th e separation distances increas e as th e quantit y o f explosive s store d increases . Th e origina

l Tabl e o f Distance s wa

s publishe d i n 191 0 base

d o n th e wor

k o f a specia l committe e o f

th e Associatio n o f

Manufacturer

s o f Powde r an d High Explosives . Thi s committee gathere d an d evaluated information o n a numbe

r o f explosion s rangin

g from smal

l amount s o f explosive materials t o on e millio n pounds . Since then , th e tabl e ha s bee n revise

d periodicall

y t o incorporat

e informatio

n obtaine d from past accidents . The explosion s studie d hav e covered a perio d o f

almos tfifty year

s an d hav e occune d i n manufacturing, transportation , an d storage , bot

h i n th e Unite d States an d abroad. Th e las trevisio n t o th e tabl e wa s i n 1985 . Th e tabl e i s designed t o cover manufactur e an d permanen

tstorage o f

explosiv e materials an d i s no tapplicabl e for th e incidenta l handlin g o r temporar

y storage o f

explosive materials bein g transported .



# l lP.1 3

3 3 Otiie r Standards Other agencies suc

h a s th e Occupationa

l Safet y an d Healt h Administration (OSHA) , Min e Safet y an d Healt h Administration (MSHA) , Departmen to f Defens e (DOD) , th e Internationa l Maritim e Organizatio

n (IMO) , an d others regulat

e certain aspect

s o f th e explosives industry. Fo r example , DO D regulates th e storage o f munitions an

d militar y explosives , OSH

A regulates worke

r safet y a texplosive s manuCaaurin

g sites , an d th e IM O i s concerne

d wit h internationa

l shipment

s o f hazardou s materials . 4. 0 Compariso

n o f Methodologies for Determining Affecte d Distance s for Commercia l Explosives 4. 1 Approac

h Th e Agency' s Physical/Chemica l Criteri a Workgrou

p compare

d th e result

s o f severa l methods fo

r estimating th e consequences o f explosion s an

d evaluated th e effe a o f quantit y exploded o n th e distanc e affeae d a tvariou s overpressur

e levels . Th e approac

h use d fo r thi s comparison wa

s t o obtain publishe

d saf e storage distances from th e Table o f Distance s (se e discussio n o f AT F standards) fo

r varyin g quantities an

d type s o f explosive materials an

d compar e the m t o distances derive

d from othe r widel

y recognized explosives consequence methodologie s suc h a s th e K-facto

r an d th e Automated Resource fo r Chemica

l Hazar d Inciden t Evaluation (ARCHIE ) computer program.

4.1. 1 Explosiv

e Material s Selecte d Fo r thi s analysis , commercia l explosive s hav

e bee n groupe

d into three categories : high , low , an d blasting agents , i n th e sam

e wa y AT F ha s classified explosive s fo

r storage purposes . The analysi s ha s bee n performe

d usin g explosive materials representing eac h o f th e three categorie s as follows : Hig h Explosives
• Amatol (60/40 ) (Ammoniu m nitrate/TNT )
• Silver azide (CA S numbe r 13863-88-2 )
• Amatol (50/50 ) (Ammoniu m nitrate/TNT )
• Metriol trinitrat

e (Trimethylolethane trinitrate)
• PL X (Picatinn

y Liqui d Explosive : Nitromethane , CA S numbe r 75-52-5 , wit

h 5 percen

tethylen e diamine , CA S numbe

r 107-15-3 )
• Tetry l (N-Methyl-2,4,6-tetranitroaniline , CA S numbe r 479-45-8 )
• TN T (2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene , CA S numbe r 118-96-7 )
• Lea d azide (CA S numbe

r 13424-46-9 ) Tn w Rtplnstve s
• Blad e Powde r (usuall y mixtur e o f 7 5 percen

tpotassiu m nitrate , 1 0 percen

tsulfur, an

d 1 5 percen

t charcoa l (Meye r 1987) ) Blasting Agent

s
• Ammoniu

m Nitrat e Fuel Oi l (ANFO ) (9 4 percen tammoniu

m nitrate , 6 percen

tfue l oil ) Thes e explosive materials hav e bee n chose n base

d upo n th e availabilit

y o f chemical/physica

l propert y dat a an d know n commercia

l use . Singl e examples o f lo w explosive s an

d blasting agent

s wer e use d du e t o th e smal

l numbe r o f material s regulate d as suc h fo r whic h dat a ar e available . - 7 -



# . £4.1. 2 Damag e Criteria Th e nex tste p i n th e consequence analysi s i s th e identification o f

credibl e acciden

tscenario(s) . Fo r hig h explosives , only on e scenari o i s likely : a quantit y o f explosive i s someho w detonated . Damag e from accident s involving explosives i s a function o f th e pea k overpressur

e resulting from th e blastwave . Thi s i s discussed furthe

r i n Sectio n 4.2. 1 belo w an d i n Appendi

x B . I n th e analysi

s whic h wa s use d t o determine th e threshold planning quantities fo r acutel y toxi c materials , lethalit

y wa s chose n a

s th e endpoin tI

n th e cas e o f explosions , huma

n deaths an

d injurie s ma y b e cause

d directl y b y blastwave

s o r indirectl

y b y flying glas s o r othe r objects . Ver

y hig h overpressure

s ar e needed fo

r fatalit y a s a dire a resulto f

a n explosion ; various sources dt e threshold level s fo r fatalit y o f 14.5 pound

s pe r squar e inc h (psi ) t o 12

0 psi (se e Appendi

x B) . However, muc

h lower overpressure

s ma y caus e propert

y damag e tha tmigh tlea d t o huma

n injur y o r death . Fo r thi s analysis , EP

A considered blastoverpressure s o f 0.5 psi , 1. 0 psi , 2. 0 psi , an

d 3. 0 ps L A n overpressur

e o f 0. 5 psi ca n caus e shatterin

g o f glas s window

s (Brasie an

d Simpso n 1968 , U S Ai r Force 1983 , U S DO T 1988 , Lee s 1980) . A n overpressur e o f 1. 0 psi ca n caus e partia

l demolitio n o f

houses , an

d i s th e threshol d fo

r skin laceration from flyin

g glas s (Lee s 1980) . A n overpressur e level o f 2. 0 psi ca

n lead t o th e partia

l collaps e o f wall s an d roof s o f house s an

d shattering o f

non-reinforce

d concret e o r cinder bloc

k wal l panel s (Brasi e an

d Simpson 1968 , Ai r Force 1983 , U.S . DO T 1988 , Lees 1980) . Overpressure s between 2. 0 an

d 3. 0 psi ca

n caus e eardru m ruptur e (Lee s 1980) . Overpressur e o f 3. 0 psi ca n caus e a stee l fram

e building t o becom e distorte d an d pull awa

y from its foundation

s (Lee s 1980) ; i tca

n als o hur l a person t o th e groun

d (Brasi e an

d Simpso n 1968) . Appendi

x B contains mor

e detaile d backgroun

d informatio

n o n blas toverpressure

s an d thei r effects . Th e result

s o f consequence analysi

s a tdifferen toverpressure

s ar e presented i n Sectio n 4.3. 1 an d graphicall

y i n Appendi

x B . Th e result

s show that

, a s would b e expeaed , if

a higher overpressur

e i s chosen , th e blas teffe a extends ove r a shorte r distance . However, th e affeae d distanc e doe s no tchang

e linearl y wit h overpressure ; th e rat e o f decreas e in distanc

e i s considerabl

y greate r betwee n overpressure

s o f 0. 5 ps i an d 1. 0 psi tha n between 1.

0 ps i an d 1 0 psi o r 2. 0 ps

i an d 3. 0 ps i (se e Sectio n 4.3. 1 an

d Exhibi tB-6) . 4.1 3 Assumptions Th e following assumption s wer e mad e i n th e consequence analysis :

• Explosions occur a tgroun d level ; an

d

• The are

a surroundin

g th e explosio n i s charaaerize d b y flatope n terrain . I n actuality , potentia

l reflections o f

th e blasto r shoc

k wav e from building wall s o r th e side s o f othe r obstacle s an d surface s ma y caus e damag

e t o b e somewha

tmor e erratic tha

n tha tpredirte d using thes e assumptions ; i n fact , damag e ma y b e increased , especially if ther e ar e obstade s paralle

l t o th e shoc

k wav e frontHowever , th e above assumptions ar

e used widel

y i n performin

g consequence analyse

s fo r explosive materials . 4.1A Quantitie s Modele

d Th e following quantities o f materia l wer e utilized i n th e analysis : 50,100,250,1,00 0 an d 5,00 0 pounds . Thes e amount

s wer e chose n t o provid

e a wid e rang

e o f values i n th e analysis .


# HP.1 5

4 2 Methodologies for Determinin g Explosiv e Distance s 4.2. 1 Scalin g La

w for Explosive s Damag e from explosion s i s primaril y a functio

n o f th e pea k overpressur

e resulting from th e blas twav e an d i s no tdependentupon on e specifi c physica l o r chemica

l property. I

ti s a functio

n o f a n empiricall

y derive d function , know

n a s th e scaling law : D = (K)(W 1/3 ) where : D = Required , o r potentially affeaed , distance , f t K = Protectio n faao r depending upo n th e degree o f ris k assume d o r permitted ; th e relationship between th e pea

k overpressur

e an d th e K faao r i s show

n i n Exhibi

t1 (e.g. , using thi s exhibit, a K-faao r o f

1 1 (Kll ) correspond

s t o a pea k overpressur

e level o f 8 psi ) W =TN T equivalen

tweight, l b The TN T equivalen

tweighti s th e weighto f

TN T tha twould yield th e same pea k pressur e o r impuls e a

ta given distance as th e tota l weighto f

explosive materia

l unde r consideration . Th e scaling la

w relates pea

k overpressure , explosive weight, an d distance fo

r th e purpos e o f

evaluatin g th e effect s o f blas twaves . Blas twave

s generated durin

g a n explosio n o f

a given materia

l are compare

d t o thos e whic

h woul d hav

e resulted from a

n explosio n involvin

g TN T (Le. , TN T i s used as a referenc e material) : Thi s approac

h i s used becaus e o f

th e large amoun

to f experimenta

l dat a available o n blastwave

s from TN T explosion s an

d o n damag

e produce d b y TN T explosions . This relationship i s applicable t o an y explosio n provide d th e equivalen

tweighto f

TN T i s known . The scaling la w i s th e basis for th e consequence analysis methodologie s discussed below . Ther e ar e severa l limitation s o f

th e scaling la

w usin g TN T equivalen

tweight s tha tneed t o b e recognized (U.S . DO T 1988) . The y are :

• No tall o f

th e acddentally-release d materia l ma y b e involved i n th e explosion . Par t o f th e materia

l ma y dispers e withoutreactin g an d par tma y rea a a ta differen

t tim e o r locatio n from th e initia l explosion . A s such , measure d TN T yield s o f explosiv e materials depend upo n acdden tconditions , duration , an d failur e mode ;

• Of th e portio n o f

released materia

l tha treact s i n th e explosion , par

tma y detonat e an d par tma y deflagrate , wit

h th e latte r contributin

g littl e energyt

o th e blas t Predicting whether a detonatio n o r a deflagratio n (o r a combination ) will occur i s ver y complex . Th e outcom e depend s o n th e materials ' properties an d o n th e condition s o f

th e acddent ;

• Th e blastcharaaeristic s o f th e released materia

l ma y b e differen

tfrom thos e o f a TN T charg

e wit h a n equivalen

tenergy . Fo r example , measure d overpressur

e amplitudes ar

e generall y lowe r an

d duration

s ar e longer for low explosives tha n for TN T becaus e o f

slower reactio n rates; an d



### - 9 

# 1 5EXHIBI T 1 . K-FACTOR

S AS A FUNCTIO

N O F PEA K OVERPRESSURE

S

6 8 u n K-fACTO R (FT/US.*" . Source : U.S . Ai r Force . 1983 . "Explosive s Safet y Standards, " Ai r Forc e Regulatio n 127-100 . 2 0 Ma y 1983 . -1 0 - 

# I d~ !m Wk

m TN T yield s ar

e only available fo

r materials whic

h hav e bee n tested . New chemicals would requir

e testin g befor

e consequence analyse

s coul d b e performe d (Se e Appendi

x A) . A s th e above limitations indicate , th e TN T yield o f a materia l i s no ta n absolut e propert y suc h as densit

y o r molecular weigh tInstead , i tdepends upon th e tes tcondition s unde r whic h i ti s measure

d (Se e Appendi

x A fo r information o n som e o f th e tests used ; e.g. , th e lea d bloc k tes tan d th e ballisti c morta

r test) . Thes e limitations , however, d o no tpresen ta seriou s proble

m i n th e us e o f

th e scaling la

w equatio n sinc e th e dependence o f

blastparameter

s o n yiel d i s low du

e t o th e cube-rootexponenti n th e equation . The predictio n o f a hazar d distanc e i s no tver

y sensitiv e t o th e TN T equivalen tweigh tFurther

, th e limitation s o f

th e equatio n will generall

y lea d t o a worst-cas e estimat

e and , hence , a conservativ e analysis . Th e TN T metho d o f analysis ha

s bee n use

d effectivel

y ove r man

y year s despit e th e limitation s mentioned above . The scaling la

w i s accepted widel

y an d well established i n th e publishe d technica

l literature . I

tha s bee n adopted b

y severa l governmen

tagendes , includin

g th e Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d Firearms , th e Departmen

to f Defense , an

d th e U.S . Ai r Force , an

d privat e companies fo

r relate d uses , including hazard

s assessmentan

d emergenc

y respons e an

d planning . I

ti s use d i n som e o f

th e existing classification systems fo r commercia

l explosives whic

h ar e describe d abov e in Sectio n 3.0 . N o othe r methods o f estimating blastwav

e effect s hav e bee n found. EP A seleae d th e following commonl y use d methodologie s for comparison wit h th e AT F standards :

• ARCHIE: A computerized hazar d assessmen

tmode l develope d fo

r DOT , FEMA , an

d th e EPA ; an

d

• K-Factor. Us e o f th e scaling law

, a s describe d above . Th e discussio n o f

methodologie s begin

s wit h a description o f

th e AT F standard

s an d distances obtaine d using th e Table o f Distances . Following th e AT F sectio n ar e descriptions o f

th e ARCHIE an

d th e K-facto r methods an

d a comparison o f

result s obtained usin

g each . Appendi

x C provide

s a n analysis o f

th e quantitative difference

s i n results . 4.2. 2 AT F Th e primar

y purpos e o f

th e AT F regulation

s i s t o control th e distribution o f explosive materials t o authorized persons . A s par to f thi s goal , th e AT F regulations specif y a se to f standard s t o b e use d i n th e saf

e storag e o f explosives . Th e standard s ar e se tforth in tabula

r form i n tw

o tables : (1 ) th e Tabl e o f Distances " fo r hig h explosive s an

d blasting agent

s as show n i n Exhibi

t2 , an d (2 ) a second tabl e for lo w explosive s a s show n i n Exhibit3 . Th e distance requirement s i n thes e tables ar

e designed t o ensur

e tha texplosive s store d i n accordanc

e wit h th e regulations wil l no tpresen ta n off-sit e hazard. The origina

l Table o f Distance s i s based upo n th e scalin g la

w an d wa s develope d b

y th e Institut

e o f Maker s o f Explosives (IME) (Dowlin g 1989) . Sinc e th e equatio n tha

tth e tabl e i s base

d upo n i s known, additions ma y b e mad e t o th e table depending upo n th e need s o f th e analysis . Fo r example , th e tabl e for hig h explosives (Exhibit2 ) ha s severa l columns representing differen toverpressure

s an d damag e criteria . I

n calculating th e saf

e distance t o a

n unbarricade

d inhabited building (fourt

h column) , a

n overpressur

e o f 0. 4 ps i i s used . I

n contrast, i n determinin

g th e saf e distance t o a barricade

d inhabite d building (thir

d column) , a

n overpressur

e o f 4. 5 ps i i s used , an

d distanc e requirement

s


### 1 1 

# tfP.1 8

* i _-"*• < EXHIBI T 2 TABL E O F DISTANCE S - HIG H EXPLOSIVE S & BLASTIN G AGENTS^ /

QUANTIT Y O F EXN.OSIVE

S flai l • w r 2 S 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 S O 7 5 10 0 12 5 15 0 20 0 25 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 to o 90 0 1.00 0 1.20 0 1.40 0 1.80 0 1.10 0 2.00 0 2.50 0 3.00 0 4.00 0 5.00 0 1.00 0 7.00 0 1.00 0 S.00 0 10.00 0 12.00 0 14.00 0 16.00 0 18.00 0 20,00 0 25.00 0 30.00 0 35.00 0 40.00 0 45.00 0 50,00 0 55.00 0 60,00 0 65,00 0 70410 0 75.00 0 80,00 0 85.00 0 90.00 0 95.00 0 100,00 0 110.00 0 120.00 0 130.00 0 140,00 0 150.00 0 160.00 0 170.00 0 180.00 0 190.00 0 200,00 0 210.00 0 230.00 0 75 0 00 1 .75.00 0 f M n

MtM f 5 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 7 5 10 0 12 5 IS O 20 0 25 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 to o 90 0 1.00 0 1.200 1.400 1.600 1.80 0 2.00 0 2.50 0 3.00 0 4.00 0 5.00 0 6.00 0 7.00 0 8.00 0 9.00 0 10.00 0 12.00 0 14.00 0 16.00 0 16.00 0 20,00 0 25.00 0 30.00 0 35.00 0 40.00 0 45.00 0 50.00 0 55.00 0 60.00 0 65.00 0 70.00 0 75.00 0 80.00 0 85.00 0 90,00 0 95.00 0 100.00 0 110.00 0 120.00 0 130.00 0 140.00 0 150.00 0 160.00 0 170.00 0 "180.00 0 190.00 0 200,00 0 210.00 0 230.00 0 250.00 0 27 5 00 0 M0.00 0 1 laMM M

tortc s M 7 0 9 0 11 0 12 5 14 0 15 0 17 0 19 0 20 0 21 5 23 5 25 5 27 0 29 5 32 0 34 0 35 5 37 5 39 0 40 0 42 5 45 0 47 0 49 0 50 5 54 5 S M 63 5 60 5 73 0 77 0 W O 83 5 M S 17 5 11 5 N O 04 0 97 5 1.055 1.13 0 1.70 5 1,27 5 1,340 1.400 1.460 1.51 5 1.56 5 1.61 0 1.65 5 1.69 5 1.73 0 1.780 1.79 0 1.61 5 143 5 1.855 1.17 5 1.89 0 1.90 0 1.93 5 1.96 5 1.990 2.01 0 2.03 0 2.05 * 2.10 0 2.15 5 2. m 1 U7 J lilli-t i

Makam - » 1 H 14 0 I M 22 0 25 0 2 N 30 0 34 0 31 0 40 0 43 0 47 0 51 0 54 0 59 0 64 0 (8 0 71 0 75 0 78 0 to o IS O 90 0 94 0 91 0 1.01 0 1.090 1.11 0 1.27 0 1.37 0 1.46 0 1.54 . 1.600 1.670 1,73 0 1.75 0 1.770 1.100 i.tt o 1.95 0 2,00 0 2.00 6 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2,00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.6 U 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2,01 0 2.03 0 2.05 5 2,10 0 2.15 5 :.2i | 2-21 0 MITMCt t I B TOT

fvMl c Mgtarai v cit x m iurnu * « 3 0 3 5 4 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 7 0 7 5 t o I S IS 10 5 11 0 12 0 13 0 13 5 14 5 IS O 15 5 16 0 II S 17 0 17 5 11 0 it s 19 0 19 5 21 0 22 5 23 5 .4 5 25 0 25 5 26 0 27 0 27 5 2 M 28 5 29 0 31 5 34 6 30 0 3 M 40 0 42 0 44 . 45 5 47 0 41 5 50 0 51 0 52 0 53 0 54 0 54 5 55 0 55 5 56 0 56 5 57 0 51 0 59 0 60 0 60 5 61 0 -2 . 63 5 69 0 67 0 69 0 MtMTt UtH 6 0 7 0 M 10 0 11 0 12 0 14 0 15 0 16 0 17 0 

### m 21 0 22 0 24 0 20 0 27 0 29 0 30 0 31 0 32 0 U O 34 0 35 0 36 0 37 0 

### m 30 0 42 0 45 0 47 0 4 H 50 0 51 0 52 0 54 0 55 S 5 M 57 0 5 M 63 0 U S 72 0 76 0 to o MO i U 11 0 94 0 97 0 1.00 0 1.0 H 1.040 1.0 M 1.0 M 1.0 M 1,100 1.11 0 1.12 0 1.13 0 1.140 1.180 1.180 1.2 M 1.21 0 1-220 1-24f l 1,27 1 1.3 M 1.34 0 1.3 M TfSM c VMM H flf M l

t k a M M VMMii/ta r lan . CM M 5 1 M 1 1 9 3 10 3 11 0 12 7 13 9 IS O 15 9 17 5 I N 20 1 22 1 23 1 25 3 2 M 27 1 2 N 3 M 11 1 33 8 351 3 M 37 1 4t t 43 2 47 4 51 3 54 1 St t M S 12 4 M S M 7 

### m 7 M 7 M 11 3 17 1 4 M N I 1.1B 6 1.0 M 1,10 4 1.14 1 1,17 3 UO O 1-23 8 1X 3 1X 3 1.31 7 1.34 4 1.3 M 1.39 2 1.4) 7 1,47 9 1.52 1 1.55 7 1.59 3 1.629 1.68 2 1.69 5 1.725 1.75 5 1.7* } 1.M 0 1.M 0 >.9 » 2.N 0 MftS-Tt *

am* 10 2 12 0 i n I M 20 0 22 0 25 4 27 0 30 0 31 0 35 0 37 1 40 2 44 2 47 1 S M 53 2 S M 57 1 60 0 ti t 67 2 70 2 73 2 7 M 81 1 8 M 94 1 1.02 0 1.00 2 1.14 4 1.2 M U 4 I 1.2 M 1,37 4 1.4 M 1.51 2 1.57 2 1.62 8 1.752 l.lt t 1.962 2.00 0 2.0 M 2.0 M 2.00 0 2.0 M 2.0 M 2.0 M 2.0 M M M 2.00 0 2.0 M 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.0 M 2.0 M 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.0 U 2.0 M 2.0 M 2,00 0 2.00 0 2.A M 2.0 M 2.0 M 2J M 2.0 M IMMKI M Macitto t •art . c a M 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 4 2 7 2 9 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 9 3 6 3 9 4 1 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 0 5 2 M 6 1 6 5 i i 7 2 7 5 7 1 1 2 1 7 9 0 M N 10 5 11 2 11 9 12 4 12 9 13 5 14 0 14 5 I M 15 5 I M I N 17 0 17 5 I M I U 19 5 20 5 21 5 22 5 23 5 24 5 25 5 26 5 27 5 21 5 29 5 31 5 33 5 3 M M 5 •akarrt f * t 1 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 2 4 2 1 M 3 2 M M 4 2 4 1 a 5 4 M 6 2 6 4 M 7 0 7 2 7 6 6 2 M M M N 10 4 11 6 12 2 I M I M 14 4 I M I M 16 4 17 4 I M I M ' I N 21 0 22 4 23 8 24 0 2 M 27 0 2 M 29 0 30 0 31 0 32 0 3 M 34 0 3 M 3 M 37 0 3 M 41 0 4 M 4 M 47 0 49 0 51 0 53 0 5 M 57 0 5 M 6 M 67 0 72 0 77

_ A separat e tabl e i s provide d b y AT F for determinin g require d distance s betwee n blastin g agent s an d explosive s o r othe r blastin g agents .


### 1 2 

# l< 3P.1 9

EXHIBI T 3 TABL E O F DISTANCE

S - LO W EXPLOSIVE

S

P (
Ove r
0 1,00 0 5,00 0 10,000 20,00 0 30,00 0 40,00 0 50,00 0 60,00 0 70,00 0 80,00 0 90,00 0 100,000 200,00 0 ound

s
No tOve r 1,00 0 .5,00 0 10,000 20,00 0 30,00 0 40,00 0 50,00 0 60,00 0 70,00 0 80,00 0 90,00 0 100,000 200,00 0 300,00 0 Fro m Inhabite d Buildin g
75 11 5 15 0 19 0 21 5 235 25 0 26 0 27 0 28 0 295 30 0 375 45 0 Distance s (ft ) Fro m Public Railroa d & Highwa y
75 11 5 150 19 0 21 5 45 5 25 0 26 0 27 0 28 0 29 5 30 0 375 45 0 Fro m Abov e Groun

d Magazin e
5 0 75 100 12 5 14 5 15 5 16 5 17 5 18 5 190 19 5 20 0 25 0 30 0

Source : AT F P 5400. 7 (11/82) , "ATF : Explosives La w an d Regulations, " Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d Firearms , Departmen

to f th e Treasury

.



### -1 3 

# \° »-* • -*» •

ar e lower . Barricades , b y AT F definitions , ca n b e natura l barriers , suc h a s hill s o r dens e timber , o r artifida l barriers , suc h a s mound s o r wall s o f earth . Suc h barricade s mus tb e hig h enoug h tha ta straigh tlin e from th e to p o f th e barricade d magazine (explosive s storag e building ) t o th e eav e lin e o f anothe r magazin e o r building , o r "t o a poin t1 2 fee tabov e a railway o r highway , wil l pas s throug h th e barricade . Presumably , a barricade d buildin g coul d withstan d highe r overpressure s (Le. , overpressure s tha tmigh toccu r close r t o th e explosio n site ) tha n a n unbarricade d building . Dat a ar e provide d fo r fou r overpressur e levels. 3 However , distance s base d o n variou s othe r overpressure s ca n b e calculate d sinc e th e equatio n fo r th e table i s known . Th e difference s betwee n th e scalin g la w an d th e tabl e fo r hig h explosive s ar e th e following :

• Th e AT F assume s tha tal l hig h explosive s an d blastin g agent s hav e roughl y equivalen texplosiv e energie s an d therefor e doe s no tcalculat e a n explosiv e weigh tbase d upo n TN T equivalent s ( W = M^^ , rather tha n W = [Mche m x %TNT] ) fo r eac h hig h explosiv e material ; an d where : W = TN T equivalen tweigh t

M che m = Tota l mas s o f th e explosiv e materia l % TN T = TN T equivalen t(fraction )

• Th e Table s provid e specifi c distance s for range s o f weights , resultin g i n som e degre e o f

error , especiall y a tth e endpoints . Fo r example , th e distanc e determine d usin g th e table for a hig h explosiv e weighin g 4,00 0 pound s i s th e sam e a s th e distanc e fo r on e weighin g 5,00 0 pounds . Th e Tabl e o f

Distance s fo r lo w explosive s (se e Exhibi t3 ) wa s originall y develope d b y th e Departmen t o f Defens e an d adopte d b y AT F fo r applicatio n t o th e privat e seaor . Iti s designe d fo r us e wit h material s tha t deflagrat e rathe r tha n detonate . Th e distance s ar e base d o n level s o f hea tflu x produce d b y a fireball rathe r tha n blas toverpressures . Th e hea tflux leve l use d fo r determinin g distance s i s 4 calorie s pe r squar e inch ; n o exposur e tim e i s specified . Whe n th e table wa s developed , thi s hea tflux wa s considere d t o b e a leve l a twhic h peopl e coul d avoi d injury b y movin g away . T o calculat e distances , th e followin g equatio n (empiricall y derived ) i s use d fo r inhabite d building s an d publi c railroad s an d highway s (Mora n 1989) :

D = 8W W where : D = Required , o r affeaed , distanc e i n fee t W = Weigh to f

materia l i n pounds . Fo r determinatio n o f

distanc e t o magazines , th e equatio n is D = 5W w (Mora n 1989) . Becaus e th e tabl e o f distance s fo r lo w explosive s i s base d o n therma l radiation , th e ARCHI E an d "K-fattor " methodologie s discusse d below , whic h ar e base d o n blas toverpressures , d o no tgiv e comparabl e results . Non e o f th e model s

3 I n determinin g th e saf e distanc e t o a barricade d publi c highway , a n overpressur e o f 4. 5 ps i i s used ; fo r unbarricade d publi c highway s an d barricade d passenge r railway s an d hig h volum e publi c highways , a n overpressur e o f

approximatel y 1.7 5 ps i i s used ; for unbarricade d railway s an d hig h traffi c publi c highways , a n overpressur e o f

betwee n 0. 6 an d 0. 7 ps i i s used ; an d for unbarricade d inhabite d buildings , a n overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s used . -14 - 

# 30P.2 1

reviewe d tha tgiv e therma l radiatio n result s (e.g. , model s fo r poo l fires an d BLEVEs ) appea r t o b e applicabl e t o explosive s tha tdeflagrat e (Le. , lo w explosives) . However , a s lo w explosive s suc h a s blac k powde r may detonat e unde r som e conditions , i tmay b e appropriat e an d conservativ e t o carr y ou tconsequenc e analysi s fo r thes e material s usin g th e sam e method s a s fo r hig h explosive s (i.e. , th e K-facto r metho d an d th e ARCHI E mode l fo r condensed-phas e explosions) .

4.2. 3 ARCHI E Th e Automate d Resourc e fo r Chemica l Hazar d Indden tEvaluatio n (ARCHIE ) compute r progra m wa s develope d fo r FEMA , DOT , an d EP A t o provid e emergenc y plannin g personne l with th e tool s necessar y t o asses s th e vapo r dispersion , fire, an d explosio n impact s assodate d wit h hazardou s material s acddents . Containe d withi n th e progra m ar e severa l method s fo r evaluatin g th e consequence s o f a n explosion , dependin g upo n th e typ e o f

materia l involve d Mode l "K" , th e Condensed-Phas e Explosio n Model , wa s use d fo r thi s analysis . Th e mode l i s base d upo n th e scaling la w discusse d earlie r an d i s appropriat e fo r us e wit h commercia l explosives . Th e Condensed-Phas e Explosio n Mode l differ s from th e scaling la w i n tha tth e TNT-equivalen t weigh ti s calculate d a s a functio n o f hea to f combustio n an d empiricall y derive d yiel d factors , rather tha n a s a functio n o f

a n empiricall y derive d TN T equivalence . (Se e Appendi x C fo r a brie f discussio n o f

hea to f combustio n an d hea to f explosion. ) I n addition , th e curv e relatin g K t o overpressur e ha s bee n approximate d b y a logarithmi c expression . Th e ARCHI E manua l present s th e followin g equatio n fo r determinin g distance :

X = (M-rNT^Xex p (3.503 1 - 0.72411n(Op ) + 0.0398(lnOp) 2 ) ) where : X = Require d distance , f t MTN T = Adjuste d equivalen tmas s o f TNT , l b

- [M cteB x[(AH 0 /1155)xY t ] ] Mche m ~ Origina l mas s o f explosiv e materia l AH C = Lowe r hea to f combustio n o f

explosiv e material , kcal/k g Y f = Yiel d faao r O p = Pea k overpressure , ps i 115 5 = Hea to f

explosio n o f

TNT , kcal/k g Th e ARCHI E manua l recommend s usin g a yiel d faao r o f on e fo r condensed-phas e explosion s (Le. , i ti s assume d tha tal l o f th e energ y i s availabl e for th e explosion) . Th e followin g expression , from th e abov e equation , give s a n approximatio n o f th e K-faao r a ta give n overpressure :

ex p (3.503 1 - 0.724 1 ln(Op ) + 0.0398(lnO p ) 2 ) Th e primar

y limitatio n o f

thi s metho d i s tha ti tattempt s t o estimat e TN T equivalence , a n empiricall y derive d parameter , wit h heat s o f combustio n usin g yiel d faaors , anothe r empiricall y derive d parameter . Not e als o tha tth e hea to f

explosio n give n for TNT , 115 5 kcal/kg , i s highe r tha n th e hea to f explosio n reporte d elsewhere , 101 1 t o 109 0 kcal/k g (Kirk-Othme r 1980 , Meye r 1987) . I n addition , th e equatio n approximatin g th e curv e relatin g overpressur e t o K i s imprecis e a tth e endpoints .



### 15 - 

# ol iWhile th e ARCHIE manua l present s th e abov e equatio n fo

r estimatin g th e K-faaor , i tappears , base d o n a n analysis o f

th e mode

l result s fo r severa l chemicals , tha

tth e mode

l actuall y use s seleae d value s o f

th e K-faao r corresponding t o specifi c consequences rather tha n th e equatio n fo

r th e K-faao r and , therefore , th e result s produce d b y th e compute

r mode l ar e somewha

tdifferen tfrom th e result

s obtaine d from th e equation . The mode l result s ar e presente d a s distances (o r range

s o f distances ) t o 1 4 damag

e levels . Apparentl

y th e Kfaao r fo r th e overpressur

e relate d t o eac h o f thes e damag

e level s i s included i n th e model . Exhibi t4 present

s a sample printou

to f ARCHI E mode l result s fo r 25 0 pounds o f

tetry l (heato f combustion 5,262 BTU/lb) . The expeae d damag e level s presumabl

y correspon

d t o th e overpressures an d expeae d damag

e presented i n th e ARCHI E manual , Le. , "Window

s usuall y shattered ; som e fram

e damage " corresponds t o overpressure s o f 0.5 psi • 1.

0 ps L A n overpressur

e o f 0.5 psi would b e reache

d a t36 8 fee tfrom th e explosion ; a

n overpressur

e o f 1. 0 ps i woul d b e reache

d a t21 2 fee t(Se e Appendi

x B fo r mor e information o n th e effect

s o f various overpressur

e levels. ) 4.2. 4 "K-Factor" Methodolog y The K-faao r methodolog

y i s equivalen

tt o th e straigh

tusag e o f th e scaling law. Th e scalin g la w i s represented b

y th e following equation :
where : D = (K)(W 1/3 )

D = Required , o r affeaed , distance , f t K = Protectio n faao r (se e Exhibi t1 ) W = TN T equivalen

tweight, lb . As describe

d i n Sectio n 4.3.2 , W i n th e above equatio n i s equa l t o th e TN T equivalen

tweighto f

th e materia l o f concer n a s follows : W = [M^ x %TNT ] where : M che m = Tota l mas s o f chemica l %TN T = TNT equivalent ; th e rati o o f th e quantit

y o f TN T t o th e quantit

y o f explosiv e materia l tha twill hav e a n equivalen

teffec t The %TNT, o r TN T equivalent, varies an d i s derive

d for eac h explosive materia

l from empirica

l tests an d actua l acddents involving TN T an d othe r explosive materials . Th e paramete

r K i n th e scaling la

w i s referre

d t o as th e protectio n faaor . I ti s a function o f

th e pea k overpressur

e an d i s independen

to f th e materia

l o f concern . The value o f

K a ta given overpressur

e i s determine d from th e grap

h show n i n Exhibi

t1 .



### 1 6 

# SQP.2 3

* **HHf_i_—W—v



### EXHIBI T 4 . SAMPL E PRINTOU

T O F ARCHI E MODELIN

G RESULTS FOR 25 0 POUND S O F TETRY L (HEA T O F COMBUSTIO

N5,26 2 BTU/LB. )

CONDENSED-PHAS E EXPLOSIONEFFECT S DISTANC E FRO M EXPLOSIO NEXPECTE D DAMAG E (feet ) 689 5 Occasiona l breakag e o f larg e window s unde r stress . 97 2 Som e damag e t o hom e ceilings ; 10 % windo w breakage
. 36 3 - 62 9 Window s usuall yshattered ; som e fram e damage
. 36 3 Partia l demolitio n o f homes ; mad e uninhabitable
. 9 3 - 36 3 Rang e serious/sligh t injurie s fromflyin g glass/object
. 21 9 Partia l collaps e o f hom e walls/roofs
. 16 7 - 21 9 Non-reinforce d concrete/cinde r bloc k wall s shattered
. 7 5 - 19 4 Rang e 90-1 % eardru m ruptur e amon g expose d population
. 18 9 50 % destructio n o f hom e brickwork
. 14 0 - 16 7 Frameles s stee l pane l building s ruined
. 12 2 Woode n utilit ypole s snapped
. 10 1 - 12 2 Nearl ycomplet e destructio n o f houses
. 8 3 Probabl e tota l buildin g destruction
. 5 0 - 6 9 Rang e fo r 99-1 % fatalitie s amon g expose d population s

du e t o direc t blas t effects
. Note : Th e explosio n i s assume d t o tak e plac e o n o r nea r th e ground
.

Not e tha tth e distances provide

d b y th e ARCHIE mode

l ar e i n fee tSinc

e th e Agenc

y ha s used meter

s a s th e unito f measur e i n its evaluations , th e values her e shoul d b e divide

d b y 3.2 5 for purposes o f

comparison .



### 1 7

^43 Results 4.3. 1 Hig h Explosive s • Exhibi t5 present

s th e faaor s used an

d th e result

s fo r analysi s o f eigh thig h explosive s usin

g th e ARCHIE equation , th e ARCHIE model , an d th e K-faao r method a

ta n overpressur

e o f 0.5 psi , an

d th e AT F tabl e o f distances fo

r overpressur

e level s o f 0. 4 psi (th e level use

d fo r developmen

to f th e table ) an

d 0. 5 psi . Exhibit s 6 , 7 , an d 8 show th e result

s a toverpressures o f

1. 0 psi , 2,0 psi , an

d 3. 0 psi , respectively . Distance s fo r 0J , 1.0, 2.0 , an

d 3. 0 ps i ar

e no tincluded i n th e AT F Table o f Distances ; th e AT F distances a tthes e overpressure

s were estimated from th e K-faao r fo r purposes o f

comparison . Distances from th e AT F Table o f Distance s (based o n 0. 4 psi ) ar e als o included i n thes e exhibit s fo r comparison . Th e analyse s wer e carrie d ou tfo r 50,100,250,1,000 , an

d 5,00 0 pound s o f

eac h hig h explosive material Th e exhibit s sho w th e hea

to f combustio n used fo

r ARCHIE modeling an

d th e TN T equivalen

tan d K valu e used i n carryin

g ou tth e distance calculations using th e K-faao r method . A yiel d faao r o f on e wa s use d fo r ARCHI E modelin g i n al l cases , a s recommende

d fo r condensed-phas e explosions . Affeae d distanc e i n metei s based

) o n eac h o f th e method s i s shown . TN T equivalent

s ar e no ttake

n into accounti n usin

g th e Tabl

e o f Distance s (Le. , al l materials ar e assume d t o hav e th e sam e explosiv e potential) ; however , th e TN T equivalen ti s taken int o accoun

ti n th e Kfaao r method . Therefore , th e Table of-Distance s gives greate r distances tha

n th e K-faao r metho d for materials wit

h TN T equivalent

s les s tha n one , whil e th e K-facto

r method gives greater distances tha n th e Tabl e o f Distance s for materials wit h TN T equivalent

s greater tha

n one . (I tshoul d b e note d tha tth e TN T equivalen ti s a n experimentally-derive

d quantity , no ta physica

l property, an

d values ma

y vary , depending o n th e tes tused . Se e Appendi x C fo r additiona

l discussio n o f

th e effe a o f

varyin g TN T equivalent

s o n th e distances calculated. ) The equatio n presented i n th e ARCHIE manua l fo r calculating distanc

e (se e Sectio n 4.2.3 ) doe s no t give result

s tha tar e consistently higher o r lower tha n th e K-facto

r method o r th e Table o f Distances . Thi s equatio n i s base

d o n a calculated K-faaor , whic h ma y b e significantl

y differen ta ta give n overpressur

e from th e K-faao r valu e rea

d from th e graph , an

d a TN T equivalen

tweightcalculated fro

m th e hea to f combustio n o f th e material Fo r a

n overpressur

e o f 0. 5 psi , th e K-facto

r calculated usin

g th e ARCHI

E equatio n i s 56 , compare d t o about7 0 from th e graph . A t1. 0 psi , th e equatio n gives 33 , whil e th e grap h shows 43 . A t2. 0 psi , a K-faao r o f

2 0 i s calculated from th e equation , compare d t o 2 6 from th e graph, an d a t3. 0 th e calculated valu e i s 1 6 an

d grap h valu e i s 20 . Th e TN T equivalentuse d i n th e K-faao r metho d i s base d o n empirica

l tests comparin g th e substanc

e t o TNT . I

n al l th e case s considered , th e TN T equivalen tcalculated from th e hea t o f combustio n using th e ARCHIE metho d i s greater tha n TN T equivalent

s reporte d i n th e literature . Becaus e bot h th e calculated K-facto

r an d th e calculated TN T equivalen tma y affe a th e result

s o f th e ARCHIE equation , bu

ti n opposite way

s (th e lowe r K-facto

r woul d ten

d t o lea d t o lower distances an

d th e higher TN T equivalent

s t o higher distances) , n o dear-cu tcomparisons ca n b e mad e between th e ARCHIE equatio n an d th e othe r methodologies . i The ARCHIE mode

l yield s greater distances tha n th e K-faao r method , probabl y becaus e hea

to f combustion rather tha

n hea to f explosio n i s used t o calculat e a n approximat

e TN T equivalen tHeat s o f combustion fo

r explosive s ar

e generall y higher tha

n th e heat s o f explosion , s o th e calculated TN T equivalen t use d b y th e ARCHIE mode

l tend s t o b e greater tha

n th e TN T equivalent

s from th e literatur

e (whic h ar e base d o n tes tresults ) tha

twer e use d i n th e K-facto

r calculations . The K-factor s used b y th e ARCHIE mode

l (a s 

# I 18 -


# S*EXHIBI T 5 . AFFECTE D DISTANCE S FO RCOMMERCIA L HIG H EXPLOSIVES , DETERMINE D USIN G FOU RDIFFEREN T METHOD S (Pea k Overpressur e = OS psi ) Explosiv e Materia l

Amato l 60/4 0

, Amato l 50/5 0 jfl~'

Lea d Azid e

Netrio l Trinitrat e

PL X

Silve r Azid e

Tetry l

TN T Amoun t

(lbs )

5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 1Q0 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 Hea t o f

Combustio n (kcal/kg )

165 8

; 199 0

63 0

264 2

283 0

103 7

292 5

362 0 TN

T Equivalen t *

1.2 8

1.2 4

0.4 0

1.3 8

1.3 1

0.8 8

1.2 1

1.0 0 Overpressur e

(psi )

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5

0. 5 K Valu e

7 0

7 0

7 0

7 0

7 0

7 0

7 0

7 0 ARCHI E

Mode l
9 3 11 7 15 9 25 2 43 1 9 9 12 4 16 9 26 8 45 8 6 7 8 5 11 5 18 3 31 2 10 9 13 7 18 5 29 5 50 3 11 1 14 0 19 0 30 1 51 5 8 0 10 0 13 6 21 6 36 9 11 2 141 19 2 30 5 52 1 12 0 15 2 20 6 32 7 55 9 ARCHI E

Equatio n 7 1 8 9 12 1 19 2 32 9 7 5 9 5 12 9 20 4 34 9 5 1 6 5 8 8 13 9 23 8 8 3 10 4 14 2 22 5 38 4 8 5 10 7 14 5 23 0 39 3 6 1 7 6 10 4 16 4 28 1 8 6 10 8 14 6 23 2 39 7 9 2 11 6 15 7 24 9 42 7 Affecte d Distanc e (m )

K-Facto r

8 5 10 8 14 6 23 2 39 6 8 4 10 6 14 4 22 9 39 2 5 8 7 3 9 9 15 7 26 9 8 8 11 0 15 0 23 8 40 6 8 6 10 8 14 7 23 3 39 9 7 5 9 5 12 9 20 4 35 0 8 4 10 6 14 3 22 7 38 9 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 AT F (0. 5 psi)* *

7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 7 9 9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 .

AT F (0. 4 psi) +

9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1

* Source s o f TN

T equivalents : NTI S 1971 , NAS A1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . * * Estimate d fo r purpose s o f compariso n • Th e valu e o f K correspondin g t o a n overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s betwee n 8 0 an d 90 . 

# 8 l

## g EXHIBI T 6 . AFFECTE

D DISTANCE

S FO RCOMMERCIA

L HIG H EXPLOSIVES , DETERMINE D USIN G FOU RDIFFEREN

T METHOD

S (Pea k Overpressur

e = 1. 0 psi )
Explosiv e Materia l

Amato l 60/4 0

Amato l 50/5 0 /. -

. •• * Sl'eY.' ' i -..•

. ..ea d Azid e

Metrio l Trinitrat e

PL X

S i Ive r Azid e

Tetry l

TN T Amoun t

(lbs )
5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 Hea t o f

Combustio n (kcal/kg )

165 8

> 199 0

63 0

264 2

283 0

103 7

292 5

362 0 TN

T Equivalen t *

1.2 8

1.2 4

0.4 0

1.3 8

1.3 1

0.8 8

1.2 1

1.0 0 Overpressur e

(psi )
1. 0

1. 0

1. 0

1. 0

1. 0

1. 0

1. 0

1. 0 K Valu e

4 3

43

43

43

4 3

43

43

4 3 ARCHI E

Mode l 5 4 6 8 9 2 14 5 24 8 5 7 7 2 9 7 15 5 26 4 3 9 4 9 6 6 10 5 180 6 3 7 9 10 7 170 29 0 6 4 8 1 109 17 4 29 7 4 6 5 8 7 8 12 4 21 3
v 6 5 8 2 11 1 17 6 30 0 7 0 8 8 11 9 18 8 32 2 ARCHI E

Equatio n 4 2 5 3 7 2 11 4 19 5 45 5 6 7 6 12 1 20 8 3 0 3 8 5 2 8 3 14 1 4 9 6 2 8 4 13 3 22 8 5 0 6 3 8 6 136 23 3 3 6 4 5 6 2 9 8 16 7 5 1 6 4 8 7 13 8 23 6 55 6 9 9 3 148 25 3 Affecte d

K-Facto r
5 2 6 6 9 0 14 2 243 5 2 6 5 8 9 14 1 24 1 3 6 45 6 1 9 7 16 5 5 4 6 8 9 2 146 25 0 5 3 6 7 9 0 14 3 24 5 4 6 5 8 7 9 12 6 21 5 5 1 6 5 8 8 14 0 239 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 22 4 Distanc e (m ) AT F (1. 0 psi)* *
4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 4 8 6 1 8 3 13 1 224 ,

AT F (0. 4 psi) +
9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1

* Source s o f TNT equivalents : NTI S 1971 , NAS A 1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . * * Estimate d for purpose s o f comparison . + Th e valu e o f K correspondin g t o a n overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s betwee n 8 0 an d 90 . 

# t rs > EXHIBI T 7 . AFFECTE

D DISTANCES FORCOMMERCIA L HIG H EXPLOSIVES , DETERMINE D USIN G FOU RDIFFEREN

T METHOD

S (Pea k Overpressur

e = 2. 0 psi ) Explosiv e Materia l

Amato l 60/4 0

Amato l 50/5 0

^ Lea d Azid e

:vH>.3 l "r-nitrat e

PL X

Silve r Azid e

Tetry l

TN T Amoun t

(lbs )
5 0 100 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 100 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 Hea t o f

Combustio n (kcal/kg )

165 8

- ' 199 0

63 0

264 2

283 0

103 7

292 5

362 0 TN

T Equivalen t *

1.2 8

1.2 4

0.4 0

1.3 8

1.3 1

0.8 8

1.2 1

1.0 0 Overpressur e

(psi )
2. 0

2. 0

2. 0

2. 0

2. 0

2. 0

2. 0

2. 0 K Valu e

2 6

2 6

2 6

2 6

2 6

2 6

2 6

2 6 ARCHI E

Mode l 3 2 4 1 5 5 8 8 150 3 4 43 5 9 9 3 15 9 2 3 3 0 4 0 6 4 109 3 8 4 8 6 5 102 17 5 3 9 4 9 6 6 10 5 17 9 2 8 3 5 4 7 7 5 128 3 9 4 9 6 7 106 18 1 4 2 5 3 7 2 11 4 19 5 ARCHI E Equatio n 2 6 3 3 44 7 0 12 1 2 8 3 5 4 7 7 5 128 1 9 24 3 2 5 1 8 7 3 0 3 8 5 2 8 2 14 1 3 1 3 9 5 3 8 4 14 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 0 10 3 3 1 4 0 5 4 8 5 14 6 3 4 4 2 5 8 9 1 15 6 Affecte d Distanc e (m ) K-Facto r
3 2 4 0 5 4 8 6 147 3 1 4 0 5 4 8 5 14 6 2 2 2 7 3 7 5 8 100 3 3 4 1 56 8 8 15 1 3 2 4 0 5 5 8 7 14 8 2 8 3 5 4 8 7 6 13 0 3 1 3 9 5 3 8 4 14 4 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 13 6 AT F (2. 0 psi)* *

2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 13 6 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 2 9 3 7 5 0 7 9 136 AT F (0. 4 psi) +

9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 160 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1
Source s o f TN

T equivalents : NTI S 1971 , NAS A 1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . Estimate d fo r purpose s o f comparison . Th e valu e o f K correspondin g t o a n overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s betwee n 8 0 an d 90 . 

# 5

# 4

K EXHIBI T 8 . AFFECTE D DISTANCE S FO RCOMMERCIA L HIG H EXPLOSIVES , DETERMINE D USIN G FOU RDIFFEREN T METHOD S (Pea k Overpressur e = 3. 0 psi )
Explosiv e Materia l

Amato l 60/4 0

Amato l 50/5 0

Lead Azid e

Metrio l Trinitrat e

r*t "

Silve r Azid e

Tetry l

TN T Amoun t

(lbs )

5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 Hea t o f

Combustio n (kcal/kg )

165 8

f 199 0

63 0

264 2

283 0

103 7

292 5

362 0 TN

T Equivalen t *

1.2 8

1.2 4

0.4 0

1.3 8

1.3 1

0.8 8

1.2 1

1.0 0 Overpressur e

(psi )

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0

3. 0 K Valu e

2 0

2 0

2 0

2 0

2 0

2 0

2 0

2 0 ARCHI E

Mode l
2 5 3 1 4 2 6 7 11 4 2 6 3 3 4 5 7 1 12 2 1 8 2 3 3 1 4 8 8 3 2 9 3 6 4 9 7 8 13 4 3 0 3 7 5 1 8 0 13 7 2 1 2 7 3 6 5 7 9 8 3 0 3 8 5 1 8 1 13 8 3 2 4 0 5 5 8 7 14 8 ARCHI E

Equatio n 2 0 2 5 3 4 5 4 9 2 2 1 2 7 3 6 5 7 9 8 1 4 1 8 2 5 3 9 6 7 2 3 2 9 4 0 6 3 10 8 2 4 3 0 4 1 6 5 11 1 1 7 2 1 2 9 4 6 7 9 2 4 3 0 4 1 6 5 11 2 2 6 3 3 4 4 7 0 12 0 Affecte d K-Facto r

2 4 3 1 4 2 6 6 11 3 2 4 3 0 4 1 6 5 11 2 1 7 2 1 2 8 4 5 7 7 2 5 3 2 4 3 6 8 11 6 2 5 3 1 4 2 6 7 11 4 2 2 2 7 3 7 5 8 10 0 2 4 3 0 4 1 6 5 11 1 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 Distanc e (m ) AT F (3. 0 p s

2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 2 2 2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 . ) * * AT F (0. 4 psi) *

9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 9 7 11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1
Source s o f TN

T equivalents : NTI S 1971 , NAS A1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . Estimate d fo r purpose s o f comparison
. Th e valu e o f K correspondin g t o a n overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s betwee n 8 0 and 90 ."••"•'^fif c

estimate d using th e scaling law ) ar e ver y clos e t o th e values rea

d from th e grap

h fo r us e i n th e K-faao r method . Th e ARCHI

E mode l gives greater distances tha n th e AT F Table o f

Distance s i n case s wher

e th e calculated TN T equivalen ti s greate r tha n on e (Le. , wher

e th e hea to f combustio n o f

th e explosive i s greater tha n 115 5 kcal/kg, th e hea

to f explosio n o f

TN T dte d b

y ARCHIE) , an

d smaller distances wher

e th e TN T equivalenti s les s tha

n on e (Le. , wher

e th e hea to f combustion i s les s tha

n 115 5 kcal/kg) . Compariso

n o f distances affeae d a

tdifferen toverpressur

e level s show

s a greate r decreas e i n distance between 0. 5 psi an

d 1. 0 psi tha n between 1.

0 psi an d 2, 0 ps L The decreas e i s eve n smaller between 2. 0 psi an d 3. 0 psi . (Graph

s o f affeae d distanc

e versus overpressur

e ar e presented i n Appendi

x B. ) Fo r a given weight o f explosive , affeae d distanc e i s directl y proportiona

l t o th e K-faaor . Th e K-faao r i s no tlinearl y related t o overpressur

e (se e Exhibi

t1) , bu tdecreases mor

e rapidly wit

h increasin

g overpressur

e a tlower overpressure

s tha n a thigher overpressures . Therefore , th e overpressur e chose n ha

s a greater effe a o n th e distance a tlowe r overpressure

s (e.g. , betwee

n 0. 5 psi an

d 1. 0 psi ) tha n a thigher overpressure

s (e.g. , between 2. 0 psi an

d 3. 0 psi o r a thigher) . 43. 2 Lo

w Explosives an

d Blastin g Agent

s Blac k powde r wa s chosen as a

n example o f

a lo w explosive fo

r analysis . Blac

k powde r wa s analyze d bot h as a low explosive (assumin g tha tth e materia

l deflagrates ) an

d as a hig h explosive (assumin

g tha tth e materia l detonates) . Exhibi

t9 present

s th e distances calculated for th e deflagration o f fiv e quantities o f

blac k powder, base

d o n th e equation use

d i n developin g th e AT F Table o f Distance s fo

r low explosives . Distance s ar e reported i n meter

s fo r comparison t o th e distances calculated fo r hig h explosives . Th e result s for deflagration were obtained from th e following equation , use d fo r th e derivation o f

th e AT F Tabl e o f

Distance s fo r lo w explosive s (se e Exhibi t3) : D = 8W W where : D = required, o r affeaed , distance , f t W = weigh

to f material , l

b (Th e tabl e itself

wa s no tuse d becaus e o f

th e wide range

s o f quantities presented. ) Blac k powde r wa s als o analyze

d as a hig h explosive (assumin

g a detonation ) usin

g th e ARCHIE mode

l fo r condensed phas e explosions , th e equatio n presente d i n th e ARCHIE manual , an d th e K-faao r method . Analysi s wa

s carrie d outfor overpressure

s o f 0J , 1.0, 2,0 , an

d 3. 0 psi for five quantities o f blac k powder. Exhibit1 0 shows th e result s o f th e analysis a

s wel l as th e hea

to f combustio n used for ARCHIE modelin g an d th e TN T equivalen

tan d K-valu e used , for th e K-facto

r method . Comparison o f

Exhibit s 9 an d 1 0 show

s tha tth e Table o f

Distance s for low explosive s gives muc h shorte r distances tha

n th e ARCHIE an

d K-faao r methods . This resulti s t o b e expeae d becaus e th e Table o f Distance s assumes a deflagratio n rathe r tha n a detonatio n an

d i s base d o n therma

l effects , whil e th e ARCHIE an

d K-faao r methods assum e a detonatio n an

d ar e base d o n blastoverpressures . Ammoniu m nitrat e fue l oi l (ANFO) , th e mostcommonl y use d blastin g agent, wa

s analyze d as a hig h explosive a

toverpressure

s o f 0.5 , 1.0, 2.0 , an

d 3. 0 ps L Result s ar e presented i n Exhibi

t11 . Analysi s wa

s carrie d ou tusing th e ARCHI

E model , th e ARCHI

E equation , th e K-facto

r method , an

d th e AT F Tabl e o f Distance s fo

r hig h explosives . Faaor s used for th e analysi s ar e als o included i n th e exhibi tResults for -23 - 

# -i 

# %°\EXHIBI T 9 . AFFECTE

D DISTANCE

S FO RLO W EXPLOSIVES , DETERMINE D USING TH

E AT F TABL E O F DISTANCE

S FO RLO W EXPLOSIVE

S (Assuming Deflagration ; Results Base d o n Therma

l Radiation ) Lo w Explosive : Blac

k Powde r Amoun tAffeae d (lbs ) Distance (meters )
5 0 9 10 0 1 1 25 0 1 5 100 0 2 4 500 0 4 2



# 1 -24 - 

# 3 o

### C P EXHIBI T 10 . AFFECTE D DISTANCE S FO RLO W EXPLOSIVES , ANALYZED A S HIG H EXPLOSIVES , ASSUMIN G DETONATIO N

(Overpressur e OJ , 1.0 , 2.0 , an d 3. 0 psi ) Hea t o f Combustion (kcal/kg)* * Affecte d Distanc e (m ) Explosive Materia l Amoun t (lbs ) TNT Equivalen t Overpressur e

(psi ) K Valu e ARCHI E ARCHI E K-Facto r Mode l Equation
. Blac k Powde r (0. 5 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 684 0.5 0 0. 5 7 0 6 9 8 7 11 8 18 8 32 1 5 3

6 6 9 0 14 3 24 5 6 2

7 9 10 7 16 9 29 0
Blac k Powde r (1. 0 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 684 0.5 0 1. 0 4 3 4 0

5 0 6 8 10 8 18 5 3 1

3 9 5 4 8 5 14 5 3 8

4 8 6 6 10 4 17 8



## K Blac k Powde r

(2. 0 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 684 0.5 0 2. 0 26 2 4 3 0 4 1 6 5 112 " 1 9

2 4 3 3 5 2 9 0 2 3

2 9 4 0 6 3 10 8
Blac k Powde r (3. 0 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 684 0.5 0 3. 0 20 1 9 2 3 3 1 5 0 8 5 1 5

1 9 2 5 4 0 6 9 1 8

2 2 3 0 4 8 8 3

* Sourc e o f TN

T equivalen t fo r blac k powder : NTI S 1971 . * * Hea t o f detonatio n fo r blac k powde r (NTI S 1971) ; hea t o f combustio n no t available
.EXHIBI T 11 . AFFECTE D DISTANCE S FO RBLASTIN G AGENTS , ANALYZED A S HIG H EXPLOSIVES , ASSUMIN G DETONATIO N

(Overpressur e 0 3 , 1.0 , 2.0 , an d 3. 0 psi )
Explosiv e Materia l Hea t o f

Amoun t Combustio n TNT Overpressur e (lbs ) (kcal/kg) + Equivalen t * (psi ) K Valu e ARCHI E Mode l ARCHI E

Equatio n Affecte d Distanc e (m )

K-Facto r AT F AT F (0. 4 psi) '

ANF O (0. 5 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 62 6 0.7 7 0. 5 7 0 6 7 8 5 11 5 18 2 31 2 5 1

6 5 8 8 13 9 23 8 7 2

9 1 12 3 19 6 33 4 7 9

9 9 13 4 21 3 36 5 9 7

11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1 

# r ANF O

(1. 0 psi ) 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 62 6 0.7 7 1. 0 4 3 3 9

4 9 6 6 10 5 18 0 3 0

3 8 5 2 8 3 14 1 4 4

5 6 7 6 12 0 20 5 4 8

6 1 8 3 13 1 22 4 9 7

11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1
ANF O (2. 0 psi ) 

## £ 5 0 10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 626 0.7 7 2. 0 2 6 2 3

3 0 6 6 6 3 10 9 1 9

2 4 3 2 5 1 8 7 2 7

3 4 4 6 7 3 12 4 2 9

3 7 5 0 7 9 13 6 9 7

11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1
ANF O (3. 0 psi ) 5 0

10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 626 0.7 7 3. 0 2 0 1 8 2 3 3 0 4 8 8 3 1 4

1 8 2 5 3 9 6 7 2 1

2 6 3 5 5 6 9 6 2 2

2 8 3 8 6 1 10 4 9 7

11 9 16 0 25 1 43 1

* Sourc e o f TN T equivalent : averag e o f value s fro m NTI S 1971 , NAS A

1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . * * Th e valu e o f K correspondin g t o an overpressur e o f 0. 4 ps i i s betwee n 8 0 an d 90 . + Hea t o f combustio n fo r pur e ammoniu m nitrat e (Kirk-Othme r 1980) ; hea t o f combustion for ANF O no t available .



# J

### -*°**m

ANF O ar e similar t o result

s fo r hig h explosives . AT F use s th e Table o f Distance s for hig

h explosive s for blasting agents . Although blasting agent s ar e muc h les s likely t o detonat

e tha n hig h explosives , th e consequences , i n th e evento f a detonation , migh

tb e expeae d t o b e simila r t o th e consequence s o f a detonatio n o f

hig h explosives . (See , fo

r example , th e descriptio n o f th e Kansa

s Cit y ANF O explosio n i n Sectio n 2.2. ) 5. 0 Finding s I n general , th e AT F Table o f Distances , th e ARCHIE model , th e ARCHI E equation , an

d th e K-faao r metho d give result

s fo r hig h explosives an

d blasting agent

s tha tare o f th e same order o f

magnitude . A s al l three method s ar

e base d o n th e scaling law, simila r result s would b e expeaed . I

n som e cases , however, th e result s diffe r significantly , apparentl y becaus e o f

th e approximation

s mad e (Appendi

x C discusse s th e differences i n mor

e detail. ) I ti s no tclear tha

tan y o f th e three methods ca

n b e considered t o hav

e mor e validit y o r t o give mor

e conservative result

s tha n th e others . However, i tshoul d b e note d tha tth e AT F Tabl e o f

Distance s i s widel

y used an d accepted , an

d tha tth e Institut

e o f Maker s o f Explosives an

d th e Departmen

to f Defens e favo

r th e AT F metho d (Sawye

r 1989 , Dowling 1989) . Fo r low explosives , th e AT F Table o f Distance s gives distances tha tar e muc h shorter tha

n th e distances obtained usin

g th e ARCHI

E an d K-faao r methods . I

f i ti s determine

d tha ti ti s reasonabl e t o trea

t blac k powder an

d othe r lo w explosive s a

s materials wit

h th e potential t o detonate , the n th e ARCHIE and Kfaao r result

s should probabl

y b e considered reasonable . I n thi s case , th e Tabl e o f Distance s fo

r hig h explosive s woul d b e used , rather tha n th e tabl e for lo w explosives . Thi s would b e consistentwit h AT F treatmen to f blasting agents , which , lik e lo w explosives , ar e muc h les s likely t o detonat

e tha n hig h explosives , bu tma y hav e consequences simila

r t o hig h explosives if

the y d o detonate .

27 

# 3B >REFERENCES

AT F 1982 . "ATF : Explosives La w an d Regulations, " P 5400.7 , Burea u o f Alcohol , Tobacco , an

d Firearms , Departmen

to f th e Treasury, November 1982 . Brasie , W. , Simpson , D . 1968 . "Guideline s fo r Estimating Damag

e Explosion, " AICh

E Symposiu

m o n Los s Prevention i n th e Proces s Industries , Februar y 18-23,1968 . Dowling , T . 1989 . Telephon e conversation between Tom Dowling , Institut e o f Maker s o f Explosives , Washingto

n D. C an d IC F Incorporated . June 12,1989 . EP A 1988 . "Acut

e Hazardou

s Event s Dat a Bas e (1988), " Prepare

d fo r th e Offic

e o f Polic y Analysis , Offic

e o f Policy , Planning , an

d Evaluation , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Prepare d b y Industria

l Economics , Incorporated , Cambridge, Massachusetts , 3 1 Augus t1988 . Kirk-Othme

r 1980 . "Encyclopedi

a o f Chemica l Technology, " Thir

d edition , volum e 9 , John Wile y & Sons , Inc. 1980 . Lees , F . 1986 . "Los

s Preventio n i n th e Proces s Industries : Hazar d Identification , Volum e I," Butterwort h & Co . (Publishers ) Ltd , 1980 (Reprinted 1986) . McCune, L , 1989 . Telephon e conversation between Larr y McCune, Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacc

o an d Firearms , Explosives Technolog

y Branc h an d IC F Incorporated . June 13,1989 . Meyer , R. 1987 . "Explosives, " third , revised an d extended edition , Sponsored b y WASAGCHEMIE , Essen/Germany . 1987 . Moran, P . 1989 . Telephon e conversation between Pau l Moran, Departmen

to f Defens e Explosives Safet y Board , Washington , D. C an d IC F Incorporated , November 1,1989 . NFPA . "Fir

e Protectio n Handbook, " 16t h edition , Nationa

l Fir e Protectio n Assodation . NAS A 1988 . "Ignitio

n an d Therma

l Hazard s o f Seleae d Aerospace Fluids, " RD-WSTF-0001 , Nationa l Aeronautics an

d Spac e Administration , Lyndo

n B . Johnso n Spac

e Center, Whit

e Sand s Tes tFacility , Pos t Offic e Drawe r MM , La s Cruces , New Mexico , Oaobe r 14,1988 . NTI S 1971 . "Engineerin

g Desig n Handbook Explosive s Series Propertie s o f Explosives o f

Militar y Interest, " AD-76 4 34 0 (AMCP 706-177) , Headquarters , U.S . Arm y Materie l Command, Washington D.C , Januar y 1971 . Sawyer , R. 1989 . Telephon e conversation between Ra y Sawyer , Departmen

to f Defens e Explosives Safet y Board , Washingto

n D. C an d IC F Incorporated . June 13,1989 . Schultz , C 1989 . Telephon e conversation between Charlie Schultz , Departmen to f Transportation an

d IC F Incorporated . Jul

y 5,1989 .



### 2 8 

# MP.3 5

REFERENCE

S (Continued )
U.S . Ai r Force . 1983 . "Explosive s Safet y Standards, " Ai r Force Regulatio n 127-100 . 2 0 Ma y 1983 . U.S . DOT . 1988 . "Hazar

d Analysis o f

Commerda

l Spac e Transportation, " U.S . Departmen to f Transportation , Offic e o f Commerda

l Spac e Transportatio

n Licensing Program

s Division . Ma

y 1988 . White , L . 1989 . Telephon e conversation betwee n Larr y White , Burea

u o f Alcohol , Tobacc

o an d Firearm s an d ICF Incorporated . Jun

e 13,1989 .



### -2 9 

# 4 3 5P.3 6

APPENDI X A TES T METHOD S USE D I N CLASSIFICATIO N O F COMMERCIA L EXPLOSIVE S



# y*P.3 7

APPENDI X A TES T METHOD S USE

D I N CLASSIFICATION O F COMMERCIA L EXPLOSIVE S

A l SCREENIN G TEST S Th e exten

t an d typ e o

f experimentatio n an d testin g carrie d out b y users/handler s o

f explosive substance s var

y dependin g on th e natur e o f th e hazard

. Som

e commonl

y use d screenin g test s ar e presente d i n Exhibit A-l

. Thes e screenin g test s ar e performe d o n sample s i n acondense d phas e t o examin e th e tendenc y o f amaterial t o ignite becaus e o f a n external sourc e o

f aflame , t o determin e i

f th e sampl e ignite s upo n indirec t heating , an d t o determin e th e violenc e o f decompositio n whe

n asubstanc e catche s tir e or i s heate d indirectly (Yoshid a1987)
. A.1. 1 Curren t

Internationall y Recognized Screenin g Test s Seale d Cell Differentia

l Scannin g Calorimetry (SC-DSC ) Thi s tes t i s employe d t o estimat e th e decompositio n initiatin g temperatur e an d hea t o f decomposition

. Durin g thi s test , th e sampl e i s heate d a t aconstant

rat e simultaneously wit

h a n inert sampl e whic

h doe s no t absor b o r releas e heat

when heated

. Th e cell i s seale d becaus e i t enable s testin g sample s o f material s whic

h evaporate o

r sublime before o r

durin g th e decomposition

. Th e DS C operatio n i s carrie d ou t at aheatin g rat e o

f 10° C per minute

. Hea t

supplie d o r

remove d t o kee p th e temperature s o f th e sampl e an d th e referenc e substanc e i s recorde d an d th e differenc e (betwee n tha t recorde d fo

r th e sampl e an d that

fo r th e referenc e substance ) i s plotte d a s millicalorie s per secon d versu s th e sampl e temperatur e t o obtai n athermogram

. Th e amount o f heat release d a s th e resul t

o f th e decompositio n i s calculate d usin g th e equation : M x A H = K A where , M = sampl e weigh t (mg ) A H = chang e i n energ y pe r unit weigh t (mcal/mg ) K = apparatu s constant , an d A = pea k are acompute d fro

mth e are ao

f th e char t
Bunde s Anstaltfar Materiaprufun g (BAM ) Ignitabilit

y Tes t Thi s tes t i s employe d t o determin e th e tendenc y o f asubstanc e t o catc h fire fro ma n external ignitio n source . Thi s i s carrie d ou t i n fou r differen t ways , cesium-iro n spar

k ignitio n test , safet

y fus e test , smal l ga s flame test , an d red-ho t

iro n ro d (at

800°C) tes t

(Yoshid a1987)
.

A- l


# 3 DEXHIBI T A- l SCREENIN

G TESTS USE

D I N TH E CLASSIFICATIO

N O F COMMERCIA

L EXPLOSIVE

S P.3 8

Tes t Purpos e
Seale d Cel l Differentia

l Scannin g Calorimetr

y (SC-DSC ) BA M Ignitabilit

y Tes t
Combustibilit

y Tes t Ignitio n Poin t

Tes t fo r Powdere d soli d sample s Exothermidt y Tes t
Dro p Hamme r

(dro p weight ) Test s Decompositio n initiatin g temperatur e an d hea t o f decompositio n Tendenc y of

asubstanc e t o catc h fire froman externa l ignitio n sourc e Ignitabilit y an d combustibilit

y of solid s Temperatur e a t

whic h dr y sampl e ignite s o n aho t

surfac e i n ai r Minimu mtemperatur e a t

whic h asubstanc e can underg o exothermi c decompositio n Impa asensitivit

y of substance s



### A- 2


## 3%I n eac h o f thes e tes t methods , th e spar

k o r th e heate d sourc e i s brought int o contac t

wit h th e sampl e ( 3 ml ) t o se e i

f ignitio n o r

explosio n occurs . Th e substance s ca n b e classified as : easil

y ignitabl e (i

f th e sampl e ignite s within on e second) , ignitabl e (i f i t ignite s afte

r more tha n on e secon d elapses , an d difficul t t o ignit e (i f th e sampl e doesn' t

ignite)

. Combustibilit

y Tes t Thi s i s ascreenin g tes t

popularly use d i

n larg e chemica

l firms in Switzerland an d Wes t German y t o determin e th e ignitabilit

y an d combustibilit

y o f solids

. In thi s test , 5 m

l o f th e sampl e i s pile d on a

n asbesto s shee t an d are d ho t

platinu mwir

e i s brought

int o contac t

wit h acorner

o f th e sampl e fo

r 5 seconds

. I

f th e sampl e doe s no t

ignite , th e wir

e i s inserte d int o th e sampl e an d lef t ther e fo r 5 seconds

. I

f th e sampl e decompose s an d release s gases , amatc h stick i s use d t o tes t

th e ignitabilit

y o f th e gases . Th e criteri ause d fo r th e assessment

o f th e observation s mad e durin g thi s tes t ar e summarize d in Exhibit A-2
. Ignitio n Poin t

Tes t for Powdere d Soli d Samples

. Thi s tes t i s carrie d ou t

t o determin e th e temperatur e a t whic h dr y sampl e ignite s on aho t

surfac e i n air

. Durin g thi s test , 10 0 m g sample s ar e place d on ho t stee l plate s attache d t o ho t aluminumblock s maintaine d a

t temperature s o

f 240 , 270 , 300 , 330 , 360°C
. Th e criteri ause d fo r th e assessment

o f th e observation s mad e durin g th e tes t ar e presente d in Exhibit

A-3
. Exothermicit

y Tes t fo r Pile d Powder s Thi s tes t i s employe d t o measur e th e minimu mtemperatur e at

whic h asubstanc e ca

n underg o exothermi c decomposition

. Durin g thi s test , a2 gra msampl e in ates t

tub e i s place d in a

n aluminu mblock whic h i s use d fo

r heating

. A 2 gra

msampl e o

f powdere d graphite in atub e i s als o place d in th e same block a s areferenc e substance

. Temperature s o f th e sampl e an d th e referenc e substanc e ar e recorded , an d an y ga s that i s generate d du e t o decompositio n i s teste d fo r combustibility

. Th e aluminumbloc k i s heate d linearly u p t o 550°C
. Th e assessment

o f th e result s ar e carrie d out a s follows : 1
. I f th e sampl e temperatur e exceed s tha t o f th e referenc e temperature , i t

i s conclude d that

a n exothermi c reactio n ha s take n place

. 2
. I f th e temperatur e differenc e betwee n th e sampl e an d th e referenc e substanc e reache s 30° C i n 3 minutes , i t

i s conclude d tha

t spontaneou s exothermi c decompositio n ha s occurred

.

A- 3 

# S< ?P.4 0

EXHIBI T A- 2 ASSESSMEN

T CRITERI

A IN TH E COMBUSTIBILn

Y TES T

Typ e o f Reactio n Grad e
After th e star t o f ignitio n th e flame doe s no t sprea d No t

ignite d Fir e extinguishe d immediatel y after ignitio n Localize d burnin g o r

reddenin g wit h almos t n o flame propagatio n
Th e flame spread s Reddenin g o f th e substanc e withou t spark s o r slo w decompositio n withou t

flames
Firecracke r

typ e burnin g o r slo w an d mil d burnin g wit h visibl e flam

e Rapi d burnin g wit

h flam e o r decompositio n withou t

burnin g
SOURCE : Yoshida , 198 7

A- 4


# 4 0P.4 1

EXHIBI T A- 3 METHO D O F GRADIN

G I N TH E IGNITIO

N POIN T TES T

Observe d Result s Qas s
N o reactio n a t

360° C (Bu t

reaaio n ma

y occu r a t ahighe r temperature ) 1 Reactio n occur s a t

360° C 2 Reactio n occur s a t

330° C 3 Reaaio n occur s a t

300° C 4 Reactio n occur s a t

270° C 5 Reactio n occur s a t

240° C 6

SOURCE : Yoshida , 198 7



### A- 5


# ir iP.4 2

Dro p Hamme r

Sensitivit y Test s Ther e ar e variou s version s o f dro p hammer

test s (or , dro p weigh

t tests ) suc h as : BA

M dro p hammer test , U.S
. Burea

u o f Mine s (USBM ) dro p hammer test , Japanes e Industria

l Standard s (JIS ) Test
. Al l thes e test s ar e aime d evaluatin g sensitivit y o f a n explosive substanc e t o mechanica l impact

. Thes e tes t method s us e droppin g hammer s (or , weights ) rangin g betwee n 2 5 gram s an d 1 0 kg , an d thes e weight s ar e droppe d o n sample s fro mheight s rangin g betwee n 5 0 c mt o 33 0 cm . Th e result s ar e evaluate d base d o n th e frequenc y o f observatio n o

f event s such a s burning , fir e or sparking , productio n o

f larg e amount o f smoke , o r

detonation

. A n exampl e o f hazard gradin g wit

h respec t t o impac t

sensitivit y i s show n in Exhibit A-4
. Base d o n th e result s o f th e screenin g tests , mor e detaile d (an d therefore more expensive ) test s ma y b e required

. Thes e test s ar e use d t o evaluat e characteristic s suc

h as : detonability , deflagration-to

detonatio n transitio n (DDT)
. Th e followin g sectio n describe s briefl

y th e detaile d test s that

ar e currentl y used

. A2 STANDAR

D TEST S Th e standar d test s use d fo r detaile d evaluatio n o

f hazard s assodate d wit

h explosive s ar e presente d i n Exhibi t A- 5 (Yoshid a1987)
. A2. 1 Explosivenes s b

y Shoc k Initiatio n BA M 50/6 0 Stee l Tub e Tes t Thi s tes t i s use d t o determin e i

f asubstanc e ha s th e potential t o detonate

. A sampl e siz e o f 91 0 m l i s packe d in astee l tube , an d th e booste r charg e i s place d at

th e center

o f th e top
. Th e booster

charg e whic

h i s use d fo r firing consist s o

f 95 % RD X whic

h i s ahig h performanc e explosive

. Th e assessment o f th e result s consis t o f evaluatin g th e potential fo r detonatio n base d o n th e degre e o f shatterin g o

f th e stee l tube , a s indicate d below : YES : Complete shatterin g PARTIAL : Mor e than 50 % o f th e tub e shatter s NO : Les s tha n 50 % o f th e tub e i s shattere d Th e descriptio n o

f th e tes t (Yoshid a1987 ) als o indicate s tha t th e rat e o

f propagatio n o

f detonatio n ca n als o b e measured , however , i t i s no t ver y dea r ho w i t i s carrie d out
. Unite d State s Burea

u o f Mine s (USBM ) Car d Gap Tes t Thi s tes t i s employe d t o determin e i f aliqui d ha s th e potential t o explode an d measur e initiatio n sensitivit y o f liquid s t o detonatio n shocks

. A shock wav e cause d b y th e detonatio n o

f ahigh powere d explosive i s applie d throug h acard ga p t o aliqui d sample

. Th e booster charg e i s mad e u

p o f pentolit e (50/5 0 PETN/TNT ) Ai r

i s blown becaus e th e detonabilit y o f liquid s containin g air

bubble s i s measure d b

y thi s test
. Velocit y measurement s ar e continuously carrie d out usin g acontinuou s velocit y probe

. Condusion s ar e draw n base d o n th e measure d valu e o f velocit y o f propagation , formatio n o f ahol e i n th e witnes s plate , an d natur e o f fragmentatio n o

f th e sampl e tube

.

A- 6

*%EXHIBI T A- 4 A N EXAMPL

E O F HAZAR D GRADIN

G WIT H RESPECT T

O IMPAC T SENSITIVIT

Y

Reactio n observe d Numbe r of +' s Grad e

Fire , sparks , o r

fairl y larg e amoun t o f smok e 0 - 1 2 - 5 6-1 0 1 2 3
Detonatio n 1 0 o r mor e

Source : Yoshida , 198 7

4 Th e nois e i s 1 0 d

B higher tha

n th e standar

d value .

- A- 7


# 4* >P.4 4

EXHIBI T A- 5 SUMMAR

Y O F STANDAR

D TESTS USE

D T O EVALUAT

E HAZARD

S ASSOCIATE

D WIT H EXPLOSIVE

S

Purpos e Tes t Explosivenes s b

y Shoc k Initiatio n BA M 50/6 0 Stee l Tub e Tes t USB M Car d Ga p Tes t Trauz l Lea d Bloc k

Expansio n Tes t Ballisti c Morta r

Tes t Ignitabilit y an d Violenc e o f Deflagratio n BA M Re d Glowin g Stee l Dis h Tes t IMC O Burnin g Rat e Tes t TN O Deflagratio n Tes t USB M Thre e inc h DD T Tes t Occurrenc e an d Violenc e of Decompositio n an d Deflagratio n du e t o Externa l Heatin g Dutc h Pressur e Vesse l Tes t U S Pressur e Vesse l Tes t
Fiel d Combustio n Test s fo r Unstabl e Substance s Bonfir e test s Burnin g Trial s Bonfire an d Fas t

Cookof f Test s Externa l Fir e Test s Violenc e o

f Spontaneou s Decompositio n Durin g Storag e U S SAD T Tes t BA M Hea t Accumulatio n Storag e Tes t Kotoyori' s Spontaneou s Ignitio n Teste r

(SIT )

Source : Yoshida , 198

7

A- 8 

# 4 +-'-"rlWff

Trauz l Lea d Bloc k Test Thi s tes t i s use d t o estimat e th e explosio n powe r o f unstabl e substances

. A s th e nam e suggests , a sampl e i s place d in alead block , an d detonatio n i s initiate d using acap . Th e explosio n powe r i s measure d base d o n th e siz e o

f th e cavit y produce d i

n th e lea d block

. Th e assessment

criteri ause d are : HIGH : Th e volum e o f th e cavit y formed in th e bloc

k i s greate r tha n 7 5 ml/1 0 gm s o f sampl e MEDIUM : Th e volum e o f th e cavit y i s betwee n 3 0 an d 7 5 ml/1 0 gm s LOW : Th e volum e o f th e cavit y i s les s tha

n 3 0 ml/1 0 gm s Ballisti c Morta

r Tes t Thi s tes t i s use d t o measure th e explosive powe r o f explosives

. Th e sampl e i s place d within th e bor e hol e o f asuspende d mortar
. A projectil e i s place d in th e hol e an d detonatio n o f th e sampl e i s initiate d wit h acharge

. Th e projectil e i s sho t forwar d an d th e morta

r swing s backwar

d du e t o th e reaction

. Th e maximu m angl e o f th e swin g i s use d t o estimate th e explosive power . Th e assessment

criterio n consist s o

f comparin g th e angl e o

f deflectio n produce d b

y th e sampl e t o tha t produce d b

y areferenc e substanc e such a s TN T an d aballisti c morta r rati o i s calculated , a s show n below : Ballisti c Morta

r Rati o = (1-Co s 6^/(1-Co s 9, ) where , 9 S = angl e o

f deflectio n cause d b

y th e sample , an d 6 r = angl e o

f deflectio n cause d b y th e referenc e substanc e .V_-. 2 Ignitabilit

y and Violenc

e o f Deflagratio

n BA M Re d Glowin g Stee l Disk Test Thi s tes t i s carrie d out

t o tes t th e ignitabilit

y a s well a s th e deflagratio n potential o f th e sample

. A s th e nam e suggest s th e sampl e o f materia l bein g teste d i s teste d i s droppe d o n are d ho t dish

. A small quantit

y o f sampl e (0. 5 gms ) i s throw n int o th e ho t dis h whic h i s maintaine d a

t 700°C
. I f ther e i s n o ignition , alarger quantit y ( 5 gms ) i s throw n in

. The assessment consist s o

f making observation s o n th e immediac y o f th e ignition , time dela

y before th e ignitio n starts , th e general mod e o f burning , an d formatio n o

f an y residue s upo n combustion

. IMC O Burnin g Rat e Tes t Thi s metho d i s suggeste d b y th e Chemica

l Grou p o f th e Organizatio n fo

r Economi c Cooperatio n an d Development

(OECD-CG ) an d th e International Maritim e Consultiv e Organizatio n (IMCO ) fo r evaluatin g combustibilit

y o f granula r or paste-lik e material s an d oxidants

. I n thi s tes t method , th e oxidan

t i s mixe d wit

h acombustibl e material such a s woo d or cellulos e powder

.

A- 9 

# -\5Th e oxidant s use d a s reference s ar e sodiu m chlorate , sodiu m nitrate , an d anhydrou s sodiu m

dichromate . Th e maximum rat e o f combustio n advancemen t(cm/min ) fo r eac h mixin g rati o o f fue l wit h oxidan tversu s % combustibl e i n th e mixtur e i s plotted . Compariso n i s carrie d ou twit h th e result s obtaine d from testin g th e referenc e oxidants unde r identica l conditions . Base d o n th e comparison , th e oxidant s ar e classifie d a s follows : Grou p I : Oxidants stronge r than sodiu m chlorat e Grou p II : Oxidants stronge r tha n sodiu m nitrate Grou p III : Oxidant s stronge r tha n anhydrou s sodiu m dichromat e TN O Deflagratio n Tes t Thi s test , develope d b y th e Dutc h Organizatio n fo r Applie d Scientifi c Researc h (TNO ) i s use d t o measur e th e rate o f

propagatio n o f

deflagratio n an d thi s rate i s the n use d t o estimat e th e violenc e o f th e deflagration . Th e sampl e i s hel d uprighti n a glas s tub e and th e substanc e atth e to p o f th e tub e i s ignited . Th e velotit y o f

deflagratio n i s measure d usin g thermocouple s locate d a tvariou s point s i n th e tube . Th e assessmen to f

th e deflagratio n potentia l i s carrie d ou tusin g th e followin g criteria : HIGH : Velocit y o f deflagratio n propagatio n greate r tha n 3 mm/se c MEDIUM : Velodt y o f deflagratio n propagatio n betwee n 0 an d 3 mm/se c LOW : N o ignitio n o f sampl e USB M Thre e inc h DD T Tes t Thi s tes ti s carrie d ou tt o evaluate th e deflagration-to-detonatio n transitio n (DDT ) o f a substanc e unde r confinement . Th e U S Burea u o f Mine s develope d thi s tes to n behal f o f th e U.N . Committe e fo r Transporto f

Dangerou s Goods . I n thi s test , a powdere d sampl e i s packe d tightl y insid e a tube . Th e ignitin g agen tuse d i s compose d o f ammoniu m perchlorate , aluminum , an d polyurethane . Th e assessmen tcriteri a ar e base d o n th e exten to f

fragmentatio n o f

th e pip e an d th e caps . A23 Occurrenc e an d Violenc e o f Decompositio n an d Deflagratio n Du e t o Externa l Heatin g Dutc h Pressur e Vess d Tes t Thi s tes ti s carrie d ou tt o determin e th e violenc e o f decompositio n o f

unstabl e substance s (peroxides ) whe n the y ar e subjecte d t o externa l heating . A smal l quantit y o f th e sampl e (1 0 grams ) i s place d i n a pressur e vesse l havin g a n orific e and equippe d wit h a rupture dis k an d th e vesse l i s heate d externally . Th e gase s evolve d a s a resul to f

decompositio n escap e throug h th e orific e unti l th e pressur e i n th e vesse l sufficientl y i n whic h cas e th e ruptur e dis k bursts . Th e violenc e o f decompositio n i s measure d base d o n th e pressur e vesse l limitin g orific e diamete r (PVLD ) whic h cause s burstin g o f th e ruptur e disk . Th e assessmen tcriteri a use d fo r th e peroxide s are : HIGH : PVL D > 9. 0 m m MEDIUM : 3. 5 mm < PVL D < 9. 0 mm LOW : PVL D < 3. 5 mm A-1 0 

# 4 &P.4 7

US Pressur

e Vesse l Tes t Thi s tes t i s use d t o measur e th e energ y o f decompositio n o

f organi c peroxide s whe

n subjecte d t o rapi d external heating

. Th e prindpl e o f thi s tes t i s simila r t o th e TN O tes t

describe d abov e except

fo r difference s such a s th e heatin g i s electrical (a s oppose d t o ga s heating) , an d th e sampl e i s place d i n a n aluminumcu

p an d the n place d i

n th e pressure vessel

. Th e assessment

o f th e peroxide s i s carrie d out using th e parameter , maximu morific e diamete r

(PV T value ) a t whic h th e burstin g occurs . Th e criteri ause d fo r ratin g differen

t peroxide s ar e give

n below : HIG H (3) : 1 4 < Orific e Diamete r < 2 0 m m MEDIU M (2) : 1 < Orific e Diamete r < 1 4 m m LO W (1) : Orific e Diamete r < 1 m m A2. 4 Field Combustio

n Test s fo r Unstable Substances Thes e ar e test s suc h a s Bonfir e Tests , Burnin g Trials , Bonfir e Cookof f an d Fas t Cookof f Test s an d ar e conducte d t o determin e th e degre e o f hazard whe

n explosive s ar e expose d t o fire. I n th e Bonfir e Test, th e materia l bein g teste d i s expose d directly t o fir e b y burnin g fire woo d whic

h i s pile d aroun d it

. I n th e Fas t Cookof f Test, th e sampl e i s heate d rapidly b y placin g i

t ove r acontainer

o f fue l oi l whic

h i s ignited

. Reportedly , thes e test s ar e use d by th e Canadia n an d Japanes e government s t o mak e transportatio n decisions

. I t i s no t ver y dea r wha t assessment

criteri aar e employe d t o evaluate th e results

. However , i t i s als o reporte d that substance s were cleare d fo r transportatio n i

f "n o explosio n occurred" , o r

"i f th e vessel di d no t

burst " whe

n th e tes t wa s carrie d out

in avessel

.

A-l l 

# 4- 1P.4 8

REFERENC E
Yoshida , T
. 1987
. Safet

y o f Reactiv e Chemicals

. Amsterdam : Elsevier

.

A-1 2 

# Hg >P.4 9

APPENDIX B DAMAG E CRITERIA/OVERPRESSUR E DATA



# tfAppendi x B Damag e Criteria/Overpressur

e Dat a
This appendi

x contains backgroun

d o n blastoverpressur

e damag e criteria an

d its effects . Als o contained withi n thi s appendi x ar e graph s illustrating th e effe a o f

varyin g overpressure

s o n consequences . B. l Damag

e Criteri a Blas twave

s from acddenta

l explosion s ca

n cause damag

e t o peopl e an

d propert y b y subjecting the

m t o transien

tcrushin g pressure

s an d winds . Relatively simple concept s hav e bee n use

d t o quit e effectivel

y correlat e blastwav

e properties wit

h damage. The concep tstates tha tdamag e i s primaril

y a funaio n o f

eithe r th e pea k overpressure , th e impuls e o r som e combination o f thes e factors . Pea

k overpressur

e i s most commonl y used . Criteri a fo r pea k overpressure

s causing persona

l injur y ar e give n i n Exhibi

tB-1 , including injur

y from dire a blas teffect

s an d from flyin

g glass . Guideline s fo

r pea k overpressure

s require d t o produc

e propert y damag e ar e presented i n Exhibi

tB-2 . Thes e dat

a ar e largel y base d o n empirica

l observations . Ther

e seem s t o b e genera

l agreemen

tbetween sources o n th e dat a presente d i n Exhibi

tB-2 ; however, th e sam

e i s no ttrue fo r th e dat a presented i n Exhibi

tB-1 . According t o Exhibi tB-1 , lung damag

e ma y occur a toverpressure

s o f 1 0 psi . According t o othe r sources , threshold lun g damag e ma y no toccur until pea

k overpressure

s reac h 3 0 t o 4 0 ps i (Grelecki , Richmon d 1968) . Th e values fo

r correspondin

g fatalities als o vary

. According t o th e Exhibit , th e lowes toverpressur

e dte d fo r fatalit y from dire a blasteffect

s i s 14. 5 psi . According t o another source , a 1 % mortalit

y rate i s probable a

t27. 0 psi . Other

s dt e values i n th e range o f 3 5 t o 12 0 psi a s th e threshol d overpressur

e valu e fo r fatalities , 20. 5 t o 180 psi fo r a 50 % fatalit

y rate, an d 2 9 t o 25 0 psi fo

r a 99 % fatalit y rat e (Grelecki , Richmon

d 1968 , Lee s 1980) . Exhibit s B- 3 an d B- 4 show ho

w lethalit y an d injur y var y wit h bot h overpressur

e an d th e duration o f th e blas twave . Exhibi

tB- 5 shows simila

r dat a a s a functio

n o f bot h pounds o f

TN T an d range i n feet . Exhibit s B- 3 throug

h B- 5 presen

tpotentia l injur y level s resulting from dire a exposur e t o blas t overpressure

s i n a n ope n area. The

y d o no ttak

e into accoun

tinjurie s resulting from propert

y damag e presented i n ExhibitB-2 . Fo r example , substantia l injur y an d possibl e deaths ma

y resultfrom th e shattering o f concrete wall s at2. 0 t o 3. 0 psi . I n planning wit

h regar d t o injur y t o personnel , th e following guideline s hav e bee n recommended (Brasi e an d Simpson 1968) :

• Personne

l i n area s subje a t o overpressure

s greate r tha n abou t2 psi ar e likely casualties from fragmentation or self-impac tagainstobjects .

• Personne

l beyon d th e unde

r 1 psi overpressur

e rang e shoul d b e reasonabl

y saf e insid e a reinforce

d structur e awa y from window

s or , if outdoors , lying o n th e ground .


### B- 1 

# S oP.5 1

EXHIBI T B-1 . HUMA

N INJUR Y CRITERI

A (Indude s Injur

y from Flyin g Glas s an d Direc tOverpressur

e Effects )

Overpressur

e (psi )
0. 6
1. 0 - 2. 0
1. 5

2. 0 - 3. 0
2. 4
2. 8
3. 0

3. 4 4. 0 - 5. 0
5. 8

6. 3 Injur y

Threshold fo

r injur y from flyin

g glass * Threshold fo

r ski n laceration from flying glas s Threshold fo

r multipl e ski n penetrations from flying glas s (bar

e skin) * Threshold fo

r seriou s wounds from flying glas s Threshold fo

r eardru m ruptur e
10 % probabilit

y o f eardru m ruptur e Overpressur

e will hur l a person t o th e groun

d

1 % eardru

m ruptur e Serious wounds from flying glas s nea r 50 % probabilit

y Threshol d for body-wal

l penetratio n from flying glas s (bar

e skin) * 50 % probabilit

y o f eardru m ruptur e Comment s

Base d o n studies using shee p an

d dog s Base d o n Arm y dat a
Base d o n studies using shee p an

d dogs
Base d o n Arm y dat a
Conflicting dat

a o n eardru m ruptur e Conflicting dat

a o n eardru m ruptur e On e source suggested a

n overpressur

e o f 1. 0 ps i fo r thi s effe a No ta seriou s lesio n Based o n Arm

y dat a
Based o n studies using shee p an

d dogs
Conflicting dat

a o n eardru m ruptur e Sourc e

(Fletcher , Richmond , an

d Yelverto n 1980) (Lee s 1980) (Fletcher , Richmond , an

d Yelverto n 1980) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980 ) (Brasie an d Simpson 1968) (U.S . DO T 1988 ) (Lee s 1980 ) (Fletcher , Richmond , an

d Yelverto n 1980)
(Lee s 1980 )

* Interpretation o f

dat a table s presented i n reference .

B- 2 

# 5(EXHIBI T B-1 . HUMA

N INJUR Y CRITERI

A (Indude s Injur

y from Flying Glas s an

d DirectOverpressur

e Effects ) (continued )

Overpressur

e (psi ) Injur y Comment s Source

7. 0 - 8. 0
10. 0

14.5
16. 0
17.5
20. 5
25. 5

27. 0 Serious wound s from flying glas s nea r 100 % probabilit

y Threshold lung hemorrhag

e

Fatalit y threshold fo

r dire a blas teffect

s 50 % eardru

m ruptur e 10 % probabilit

y o f fatalit y from dire a blasteffect

s 50 % probabilit

y o f fatalit y from dire a blasteffect

s 90 % probabilit

y o f fatalit y from direc

tblasteffect

s 1 % Mortalit

y

29. 0 99 % probabilit y o f fatalit y fro m dire a blas teffect

s Base

d o n Arm y dat a
No ta seriou s lesio n (applie s t o a blas to f lon g duration (over 5 0 msec) ; 20-3 0 ps i require

d fo r 3 msec duration waves ) Fatalit y primaril y from lung hemorrhag

e Som e o f th e ea r injuries woul d b e severe Conflicting dat

a o n mortalit y Conflicting dat

a o n mortalit y Conflicting dat

a o n mortalit y A hig h inddenc e o f

sever e lung injuries (applie s t o a blas to f lon g duration (ove r 5 0 msec) ; 60-7 0 ps i require d fo r 3 msec duration waves ) Conflicting dat

a o n mortalit y (Lee s 1980) (U.S . DO T 1988 )

(Lee s 1980 ) (U.S . DO T 1988) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980 ) (U.S . DO T 1988 )

(Lee s 1980 )

B- 3


# 5%Overpressur e (psi )
0.0 3 EXHIBI T B-2 . PROPERT

Y DAMAG

E CRITERI

A

Damage
Occasiona l breakin g o f larg e glas s window s alread y unde r strai n '

Source(s )

(Lee s 1980) P.5 3

0.0 4
0.1 0 0.1 5 0.3 0

0. 4 0. 5 - 1. 0

0.7 1. 0
1. 0 - 2, 0

1. 3
2. 0 Lou d nois e (143dB) . Soni c boom glas s failur

e Breakag e o f windows , small , unde

r strai n Typica l pressur e fo r glas s failur

e "Saf e distance " (probabilit

y 0.95 n o seriou s damag

e beyon d thi s value) . Missil e limi tSom e damag

e t o hous e ceilings . 10 % window glas s broken . Mino r struaural damag

e Shattering o f

glas s windows , occasiona l damag e t o windo

w frames. On e source reported glas s failur

e a t0.14 7 psi
Minor damag

e t o hous e structure

s Partia l demolitio n o f

houses , mad

e uninhabitable (Lee s 1980)
(Lee s 1980 ) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980 )

(McRa e 1984 , Lee s 1980 ) (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968 , Air Force 1983 , U.S . DO T 1988 , Lees 1980) (Lee s 1980 ) (Lee s 1980)
Shattering o f

corrugate d asbesto s siding (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968 , Failure o f corrugate

d aluminum/stee

l paneling Ai r Forc e 1983 , Failur e o f woo d siding panel s (standar d U.S . DO T 1988 , housin g construction ) Lees 1980 ) Stee l frame o f

cla d building slightly distorte d (Lee s 1980 )
Partia l collaps e o f

wall s an d roof s o f house s (Lee s 1980 )

B- 4


# 3* 5EXHIBI T B-2 . PROPERT

Y DAMAG

E CRITERI

A (continued ) • . . '^Sv i

Overpressur

e (psi ) Damage Source(s )

2. 0 - 3. 0

2. 3 2. 5 3. 0

3. 0 - 4. 0

4. 0
4. 8 5. 0
5. 0 - 7. 0 7. 0 7. 0 - 8. 0 Shattering o f non-reinforced concret

e o r cinder bloc k wall panel s (1. 5 psi accordin g t o anothe r source )

Lowe r limi to f seriou s structura

l damag e 50 % destructio n o f

brickwor k o f hous e Stee l frame building distorted an d pulle d awa

y from foundations Collaps e o f

self-framin

g stee l pane

l buildings Ruptur e o f oi l storage tank

s Snapping failur

e - woode n utilit

y tank s Claddin g o f ligh tindustria

l buildings rupture d Failur e o f reinforce d concret e structure

s Snappin g failur e - wooden utilit

y pole s
Nearl y complete destruction o f house s Loaded train wagons overturne d Shearing/flexur

e failur e o f bric k wall panel s (8-1 2 inche s thick , no treinforced )

Sides blow

n i n o f stee l frame buildings Overturnin

g o f loaded rai

l car s (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968, Ai r Force 1983 , U.S . DO T 1988 , Lees 1980) (Lee s 1980 ) (Lee s 1980) (Lee s 1980) (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968 , U.S . DO T 1988 , Lee s 1980 ) (Lee s 1980) (McRa e 1984) (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968, Lees 1980) (Lee s 1980 ) (Lee s 1980 ) (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968, Ai r Force 1983 , U.S . DO T 1988 , Lees 1980 ) (Ai r Forc e 1983 ) (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968 , U.S . DO T 1988 )

B- 5 

# 5*P.5 5

EXHIBI T B-2 . PROPERT

Y DAMAG

E CRITERI

A (continued )

Overpressur e (psi ) Damag e Source(s )

9. 0 Loade d trai n box-car s completel y demolishe d (Lee s 1980 ) 10. 0 Probabl e tota l destructio n of building s (Lee s 1980 ) 30. 0 Stee l tower s blow n dow n (Brasi e an d Simpso n 1968 , Ai r Forc e 1983 ) 88. 0 Crate r damag e (McRa e 1984 )



### B- 6 

# 5 5EXHIBI T B-3 . LETHALIT

Y CURVE

S (Fo r a 15 4 I

b Perso n i n Fre e Strea

m Situations )

kP a P *

Maximu m inciden t overpres sur t 10,00 0 5.00 0

2.00 0

1,00 0 so o 20 0 U. 9 9 9 * lethalit y —— — SO * Lethalit y —- - — I H lethalit y -

0. 2 0. 4 1. 0 2 4 71 0 2 0 4 0 10 0 20 0 100 0 (Juratio n o f positiv e inciden t overpressure , mut t 500 0

EXHIBI T B-4 . LETHALIT

Y AN D IN JUR Y CURVE

S (Fo r a 154 lb Perso n i n Free Strea m Situations )

kP a 10 *

10 3 Maximu m inciden tQSHTpntrw r t 10 *

1 0

0. 1 I S lethalit y

P « 1.00 0

10 0

1 0

0. 1
0.0 1 Threshol d lun g damag e -»«*«»• » S0 H Eardru m ruptur t * " 95 H Eardru m protectio n wit h muff s ~~S~~= 95 H Eardru m protectio n w/ o muff s —. — .—.

•+• •+ • •4 - •+ • Notes : mse c = millisecond s kP a= kilopascal s = 6.89 5 ps i ps i = pound s pe r

squar e inc h = 0.145 0 kP a Source : U.S
. DO T 1988
. 0. 2 1 0 1 0 10 0 Duratio n o f positiv e inciden t overpressur e — I — 100 0

, mse c •+ •

10,00 0



### B- 7 

# 5f cEXHIBI T B-5 . AIR-BLAST CRITERI A FO RPERSONNE

L STANDIN

G IN TH E OPE N

10 0 RANG E I N FEE T 10,00 0

Source : U.S . DO T 1988 . 

### B-8 

# an_. ' _V V "V. -J-r. ] ^gMfT^ .

Th e values presented i n th e Exhibit s ma y b e use d t o relat e damag e o r injur y criteria t o saf

e distance s fo r emergenc

y planning , using th e scaling la w describe

d i n th e tex t Not e tha talthoug h glas s i s reporte

d t o shatte r a

ta n overpressur

e leve l o f 0. 5 ps i (se e Exhibi

tB-2) , ther e i s evidence tha

thuma n injur y from flying glas s i s unlikel y atthi s leve

L Lee s (1980 ) dte s a repor tstatin g tha tris k o f injur y fro m flyin g windo w glas s i s negligibl e fo

r a n explosio n tha

tgives a pea

k overpressur

e o f 0. 6 psi o r less . Lees als o dte s a repor tgivin g th e ski n laceration threshold fo r flying glas s a

s 1- 2 psi an d th e seriou s woun

d threshold a

s 2- 3 ps i (se e ExhibitB-1) . Fletcher , Richmond , an d Yelverto n (1980 ) carrie d ou t experiment

s o n th e effect

s o n sheep an

d dogs o f glas s fragment

s from window

s shattered b

y various blast overpressures . Thei r result s (briefl y dte d i n ExhibitB-1 ) appea r t o agree reasonabl

y wel l wit

h th e dat a reporte d b y Lees . Their dat

a indicat e tha tth e threshol d fo

r injur y from flying glas s i s about0. 6 psi . Multipl e injuries from skin penetratio n (Le. , te n o r more ) ma y occur fo r bar e skin a toverpressure

s o f 1. 5 psi o r higher . Flyin g glass ma

y penetrat

e th e body-wal

l a t5. 8 psi o r highe

r i f th e skin i s bare . The author s poin tou ttha

t th e skin an

d body-wal

l thicknes s o f

me n an d shee p ar

e approximatel

y th e same (Fletcher , Richmond , an d Yelverto n 1980) ; therefore , th e dat a reporte d shoul d b e roughl

y applicable t o humans .
B.2 Effect

s o f Varyin g Overpressures T o determine th e effe a o n distanc e o f choosin g differen

toverpressur

e levels , analysis wa

s carrie d ou t atfou r differen toverpressure

s fo r th e eigh thig

h explosive s studied . K-faao r methodology wa s used , an d calculations wer

e carrie d ou tfo r a quantit

y o f 10 0 pounds o f

eac h materia l a toverpressure

s o f 0.4 , 0.5 , 1.0, 10 , an d 3. 0 psi . Exhibit s B- 6 an d B- 7 presen

tgraph s o f distance versus overpressur e fo r th e commerda

l explosives . The exhibit

s indicat e tha thigher overpressure

s occur a tlower distances (i.e. , close r t o th e explosio n site) , an d overpressur

e falls of f a s distanc e increases . Thi s i s a

s expeae d from th e scaling law. Distance an d K ar e directl y proportiona

l i n th e scaling law. Therefore , as K increases , s o doe s th e affeae d distance . However , a s K increases , overpressur e decreases (a

s i s indicated b

y Exhibi t1 i n th e mai

n tex to f thi s study) . The decreas e i n distanc

e affeae d wit

h increas e in overpressur

e appear s t o occur mor

e rapidly a

tlow overpressure

s tha n athigher overpressures ; not e tha tth e distanc

e decreases muc

h mor e sharpl y between 0. 4 an d 0. 5 psi tha

n between 1.

0 an d 2. 0 psi o r 2. 0 an

d 3. 0 ps i (se e Exhibit

s B- 6 an d B-7) .



### B-9 

# S B

## w

I I— © 

### u o c o n 

# 5
U 

### o u 15 0 14 0 13 0 

### - 12 0 

### - 11 0 

### - 10 0 

### - 9 0 

### - 8 0 

### - 7 0 

### - 6 0 5 0 4 0 

### - 3 0 

### - 2 0 EXHIBI T B- 6 OVERPRESSUR

E VERSUS DISTANC

E FO R100 POUND S OF FOU RHIG H EXPLOSIVE

S (Amato l 60/40 , Amato

l 50/50 , Lea

d Azide , and Metrio

l Trinitrate )

0. 0 0. 4
Amato l 60/4 0 1. 2 1. 6 Overpressur e (psi ) Amato l 50/5 0 Oo c o 

# * i £ 5 T 3 U u u 

### 15 0 14 0 

### - 13 0 

### - 12 0 

### - 11 0 10 0 

### - 9 0 

### - 8 0 

### - 7 0 6 0 

### H 5 0 4 0 

### - 3 0 

### - 2 0

D 0. 0
PL X EXHIBI T B-7 OVERPRESSUR

E VERSUS DISTANC

E FO R10 0 POUND S O

F FOU RHIG H EXPLOSIVE S (PLX , Silve r Azide , Tetryl , an d TNT)



### 0. 4 0. 8 

## - 1 r 1. 2 1. 6 

### 2. 0 2. 4 2. 8 3. 2

+ Silve r

Azid e Overpressur e (psi ) Tetry l 

### TN T 

# R T J b >P.6 1

REFERENCE S
Brasie , W. , Simpson , D
. 1968
. "Guideline s Fo r Estimatin g Damag e Explosion, " AICH E Symposiumo n Los s Preventio n in th e Proces s Industries , Februar y 18-23,1968
. Fletcher , E.R. , Richmond , D.R. , Yelverton , J.T
. 198 0 (Ma y 30)
. "Glas s Fragmen t

Hazar d fromWindow s Broke n b y Airblast. " Washington , D.C : Defens e Nuclea r Agency
. Repor t

Numbe r DN A 5593T
. Lees , F.P
. 1980
. Los s Preventio n i n th e Proces s Industries , Vol

. 1
. London : Butterworths

. U.S
. Ai r Forc e 1983
. "Explosive s Safet y Standards, " A F Regulatio n 127-100 , 2 0 Ma y 1983
. U.S
. DO T 1988
. "Hazar d Analysi s of

Commerda l Spac e Transportation, " Offic e of Commerda l Spac e Transportatio n Licensin g Program s Division , U.S
. Departmen t of Transportation

. Ma

y 1988
. NFPA
. "Fire Proteaio n Handbook, " 16t h edition , Nationa l Fir e Protectio n Associatio n (NFPA)
. McRae , T
. 1984
. "The Effect s o f Larg e Scal e LNG/Wate r

RP T Explosions, " McRae , T.G. , et.al. , Lawrenc e Livermore Nationa l Laboratory

. Apri l 27,1984
. Grelecki , C
. "Fundamental s o f Fir e an d Explosio n Hazard s Evaluation, " C Grelecki , Hazard s Researc h Corp. , AICH E Toda

y Series

. Richmond , D
. 1968
. "Th e Relationshi p Betwee n Seleae d Blast-Wav e Parameter s an d th e Respons e of Mammal s Expose d t o Ai r

Blast. " Richmon d DR , Damo n EG , Fletche r ER , Bowen IG , Whit e CS. , Ann
. N.Y
. Acad

. Sd. , 1968
. Eichler , T. , Napadensky , H
. 1977
. "Accidenta l Vapo r Phas e Explosion s o n Transportatio n Route s Nea r Nuclea r Plants, " HT Researc h Institute , Prepare d fo r Argonn e Nationa l Laboratory

. Apri l 1977
. Wiekema , B
. J
. 1984
. "Vapo r Clou d Explosion s - A n Analysi s Base d o n Acddents, " Journa l o f Hazardou s Materials , 8 (1984)
.

B-1 2 

# UP.6 2

APPENDI X C DIFFERENCE S IN METHODOLOG Y



### WLP.6 3

Appendi x C Difference s i n Methodolog y

A n attemp twa s mad e t o lear n th e reaso n behin d th e difference s i n result s betwee n th e thre e methodologie s use d i n th e consequenc e analysi s (i.e. , ARCHIE , K-Factor , and ATF) . Theoretically , al l thre e methodologie s shoul d yiel d ver y simila r result s sinc e they eac h are base d upo n th e scalin g law . However, th e result s d o var

y considerably . Exhibi tC- 1 present s th e difference s i n distance s calculate d fo r hig h explosive s usin g th e equatio n from th e ARCHI E manual and th e ARCHI E mode l (se e Sectio n 4.2. 3 o f th e text) , th e K-facto r metho d (se e Sectio n 4.2.4) , and th e AT F Tabl e of Distance s (se e Sectio n 4.2.2) . Th e difference s are presente d a s percentages . Th e firs tcolum n o f

percen tdifferenc e shows th e differenc e betwee n distance s calculate d b y th e ARCHI E equatio n and th e K-facto r method . Th e percen tdifferenc e was calculate d a s follows :

% differenc e = (K-facto r distanc e - ARCHI E equatio n distance . x 100

ARCHI E equatio n distanc e Th e secon d colum n o f

percen tdifferenc e show s th e differenc e betwee n distance s resultin g fro m th e ARCHI E mode l an d th e K-facto r method . Th e percen tdifferenc e wa s calculate d a s follows :

% differenc e = (ARCHI E mode l distanc e - K-facto r distance' , x 10 0

ARCHI E mode l distanc e Th e thir d percen tdifferenc e colum n show s difference s betwee n distance s calculate d usin g th e ARCHI E equatio n an d thos e foun d usin g th e AT F tabl e o f distances , calculate d a s follows : % differenc e = (AT F distanc e - ARCHI E equatio n distance ) x 10 0

ARCHI E equatio n distanc e Fo r th e fourt

h column , th e percen tdifferenc e betwee n th e distanc e determine d usin g th e K-facto r metho d and th e distanc e from th e AT F Tabl e o f Distance s wa s calculate d a s follows : % differenc e = (AT F distanc e - K-facto r distanc e _x 10 0

- . . K-facto r distanc e Th e fift h colum n show s th e percen tdifferenc e betwee n th e distance s calculate d usin g th e ARCHI E mode l and thos e calculate d from th e ARCHI E equation . Th e differenc e wa s calculate d a s follows :

% differenc e = rARCHT F mode l distanc e - ARCHI E equatio n distance ) x 10 0 ARCHI E mode l distanc e

C- 1 

# tf

# ¥> Z O

OON M OOWOU 1 OOOO O

u i w ro*-* - (TirooCT i r o (£>-sjo>ro o

_Nt-i - r o .t- . u i •-t o -* j t o *^ J O ) r o

wrOH - _r>>—coto^ j cnc-.fe(0( 0

ojro. —

I I t I

0 0 G O d o d o O D XXXX X

O J O J O J O J O J

^ 1 **J^ J ^ J ^ J * - r o o o «* i O J XXXX X

.b . « . .b . .b-• * O D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xxxx x

OOOO O OOOO O

OICTJ^OJO D OON H

oocnoc n OOOO O

rs»0(DXb*- ^ H*uiro»"*r\ »

u»ro*—• — (DOJ.UOO O

o^ro*-* ^ a o r o j * o C D

W N M cnoj^toc o

OJOJOJ-* * O J _t k c n i—c » c n

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

C D Cf > OT O O )

o > * ^ c n «* * ** . OON H

oocnoc n OOOO O

0)MW00 3 ( 0 0)0)0 0

ro*~* ~ OOOOOO ) H*4fcAO)H -

t n o r o co-» J o^tDcnc n

oaro* - (J l W J * toc o

r o ror o ror o O J OJOJOJO J r o ror o ror o xxxx x

c n c n c n c n c n •-•HNCdC d tn-fthODC D _<k

. x x xx x

r o ror o ror o C D ( 0 C D C D C D OJO J OJOJO J XXXX X

OJOJOJO J O J u i a i c n c n c n XXXX X

^-^ J 0 0 o o o

o Qp^-coc n HttHM H OON K

ooyio m OOOO O

H-OCO-U* - U1HOO H

O J r o *-*•- • CDOJJkOO O U)OUlN J W I

wroH*^ - CO0 J Jk O 0 D CO O J "v l COO )

O J r o i — O » —O J C D "*J CnO J J * t o C D

_ _OOOOO O 0 0 xxxx x

^ cncnc n c n OSONlvi O XXXX X

i i i i i

** J •** ! K J V J "S i

Qi Oi CJ > fJt

<J ) xxxx x



### 8 V J VJV J -^ J ONJNI Q xxxx x —r + 3 - 1

- » — • 0 1

OON H oouio m OOOO O

cnr o * - *-* - O (oaoc<> o O J c n c/ i ^-t o

ooro.t-.oa o .fecnro4->O J

ouviHo t 0)0000 9

OJro* - O)* —OJtO-* J cnoj^cot o

(71(71(71(71(7 1 •^ i ** i > j ^ l * g c n (/ i c n c n CT I xxxx x

( O ( 0 ( 0 ( O ( O u>U ) roroc o O - ^ ** J 0 0 ** J XXXX X

oooo o
»--»- - t—

» H —.- » XXXX X

OOOO O 0 0 0 0 O D 0 0 0 0 XXXX X

0)*^0)0 > v j tOWOINO ) XXXX X (Tin -

OON H ooing w OOOO O

C J H-H - *_»0D»~0 D O ) NUUIVI M

GXOOOOXT I 0 D (OO O (7 1 H ron oicnco** . c n IDVIIOUO O

coro.- * 0>H~t> ) c o *^J U1UAUX O

r o ror o ror o 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0)0)0-0 ) XXXX X

G 3 OJOJO J .fe . 00( 0 00( 0 O t o ro._-.» - . ^ XXXX X

OJOJOJO J O J V I (7 1 t n (7 1 (7 1
r o r o r o r o r o ff? ffC # ^ # ^ # ^

•*J*-JO)> J O

D •-O J c n n o 4- . XXXX X 

# I

ooro* - oocnoc n oooo o

cna>o>ro( o aoo<oj.i o

loron - fcONIBM (0^(0(71(7 1

ojro»~* ^ ro<o^o> »

OJro^ - O>*-0J(O* ^ (7 1 O J .«- . ( 0 ( 0

r o ror o ror o O ) O l O ) O ) o > XXXX X

XXXX X

(0(0(0(0( 0 r o ror o ror o XXXX X

O ) * M •*->J-* - 0 0 J-.-^*.0 0 XXXX X 

# r

o O )

J_.l»»-H - fa> aic/iH>( o »-K><o^o >

U)H-H - ro(0rooo-> - (OMKIO H

curon-H - IOUAOO - O)roo)0 o u i

C->rj M O)H~OJ( 0 > J UlUfrlSU )

r o ror o ror o oooo o O ) O ) C D 0 5 0 0 XXXX X

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D o»-h.i-r j (T i r o r o (T I r o XXXX X

oooo o (0(O(O(O( O XXXX X

( 0 ( O C O ( O ( O 

## 8888 8

O ) *>i^^" ^ 0 0 O ) O J U-(7 ) »- » XXXX X a — •

- » o

—1 0 B > — —.< n

- O

a a . o 

### o o 

# 1 O 

# I 

# 3 E 

# n n

~ 2 ?> vs P S O

7 S O

o 7 S X

rt- O o a .

- I ( 0

o B»- E o

a

C D

- 1 n 3 O ( 0 2



## . n

o —

— 3> O a .

fr9dP.6 5

I n a n attemp t t o determin e th e source s o f th e majo r differences , th e result s fro mARCHI E (usin g th e equatio n presente d i n th e ARCHI E manual ) an d fro mth e K-facto

r wer e analyze d further

. Th e scalin g la w i s mad e u p o

f tw o components : (1 ) "K

" whic h relate s overpressure an d distance , an d (2 ) " W whic h define s th e amoun t o f materia l whic

h i s involve

d i n th e explosion

. ARCHI E an d th e K-facto r methodolog y arriv e a

t thes e tw o component s in differen t ways , a s describe d below :

• Calculation ofK ARCHIE : K

= ex p (3.503 1 - 0.72411n(Op

) + 0.0398(lnO p ) 2 ) K-Factor : K

= Functio n o

f O p (rea d fro

mgraph ) where : O p = pea k overpressur

e Th e differenc e betwee n th e tw o method s i s tha t th e K-facto

r metho d use s th e empirically derive d K-facto r a t agive n overpressure fro

mth e grap h show n in Exhibit

3 o f th e text , wherea s ARCHI E use s th e above equatio n t o approximate th e K-factor

. (Note that ARCHI E use s thi s equatio n i n th e manual ; th e mode l itself

appear s t o us e K-factor s a t selecte d overpressure s fro mth e graph. ) A t

a n overpressure o

f 0.5 , th e K-facto

r valu e fro mth e grap h i s abou t

70 , whil e th e K-facto

r fro mth e ARCHI E equatio n i s 56
. Th e K-facto r use d b y th e ARCHI E model was calculate d t o b e 7 3 a t 0. 5 psi

. Th e differenc e betwee n th e ARCHI E mode l an d ARCHI E equatio n result s (abou t 2 4 percent ) i s du e entirely t o th e differen t K-factor s used

.

• Weight

of the material Th e method s diffe

r i n th e metho d use d fo

r determinatio n o

f th e TN T equivalen t weigh t o f th e explosive material

. ARCHI E calculate s th e equivalen t weigh t a s afunction o

f th e material' s hea

t o f combustio n compare d t o th e hea t

o f explosio n o

f TN T an d it s "yiel

d factor " (assume d t o b e on e fo r condensed-phas e explosions) , wherea s th e K-Facto r methodolog y use s empirically derive d TN T equivalents : ARCHIE : W = Adjuste d equivalen t mas s o f TNT , lb

= [M chenJ c[(AHyil55)xYg ] ft-Factor: W = [M che „j c %TNT ] where : M che m= Origina l mas s o f explosive materia l AH C = Lowe

r hea t o f combustion , kcal/k g Y f = Yiel d facto

r (assume d t o b e on e fo

r condensed

phas e explosions ) 115 5 = Hea t

o f explosion o

f TN T (kcal/kg )

C-3 

# fr£Th e TN T equivalen

t weigh t determine d using th e ARCHI E method , base d on heat o f combustion , i s generall y greate

r tha n th e equivalen

t weigh t use d in th e K-facto

r method , base d o n TN T equivalent s reporte d in th e literature

. Difference s betwee n th e K-facto r result s an d th e ARCHI E mode l result s ar e primarily du e t o th e difference s in TN T equivalents , althoug h a t 0. 5 ps i overpressure , th e ARCHI E mode l als o use s aslightl

y highe r K valu e (73 ) than th e valu e use d in th e K-facto r analysi s (70)
. Hea t o f combustion , use d in th e ARCHI E metho d t o estimat e TN T equivalents , represent s th e tota l combustio n energ y o

f asubstanc e an d depend s onl y o n th e compositio n o

f th e material

. Heat

o f explosio n i s th e heat

liberate d durin g it s explosive decomposition ; it s magnitud e depend s o n th e thermodynami c stat e o f th e decompositio n products

. Experimental value s o f hea t o f explosio n ma

y diffe r fromtheoretical values , a s compositio n o

f th e explosio n product s ma y b e differen

t an d ma y var y wit h th e loadin g densit

y (Meye r 1987)
. TN T equivalent s foun

d in th e literature , use d i n th e K-facto

r method , ma

y vary , severa

l differen t value s ma y b e reporte d fo

r th e same substance

. Exhibit C- 2 present s result s o

f calculation s b

y th e K-facto

r metho d fo

r silve r azide an d tetryl , usin g variou s reporte d TN T equivalent s an d also , fo r comparison , TN T equivalent s estimate d b

y th e ARCHI E metho d (i.e. , hea t o f combustio n (kcal/kg)/1155)

. Not e tha t althoug h th e tw o reporte d TN T equivalent s fo r silve r azide diffe

r b y nearly afacto

r o f two , th e calculate d distance s diffe r by amuch smalle

r factor becaus e th e distanc e i s proportiona l t o th e cub e roo t o f th e TN T equivalent

. Th e TN T equivalen

t calculate d fromth e heat o f combustio n fo

r silve r azide i s ver

y clos e t o on e o

f th e reporte d values ; however , th e calculate d TN T equivalen t fo r tetry l i s considerably highe r than th e value s reporte d in th e literature

. Th e distanc e calculate d using thi s TN T equivalen t i s significantl

y highe r than th e distance s calculate d fro

mreporte d TN T equivalents

.

C-4



## <dcEXHIBI T C- 2 AFFECTE D DISTANCE S DETERMINE D B Y K-FACTO RMETHO D FO RTW O COMMERCIA L HIG H EXPLOSIVES , USIN G SEVERA L TN T EQUIVALENT S (Overpressur e OS psi , K Valu e 70 ) K-Facto r Result s Usin g Reporte d TN T Equivalents * Result s Usin g Calculate d Calculate d TN T Distanc e Distanc e Distanc e Distanc e Distanc e TN T Equivalen t 1 2 3 4 5 Equivalen t (ARCHIE ) (01 ) (tn ) (m ) (m ) (m ) (ARCHIE ) Explosive Materia l Amoun t

(lbs ) Hea t o f

Coo-bustio

n (kcal/kg ) Reporte d TN T Equivalent s

Silve r Azid e S O

10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 103 7 0.8 8 0.4 5 0.9 0 7 5 9 5 12 9 20 4 35 0 6 0

7 6 10 3 16 3 28 0 7 6 9 6 13 0 20 6 35 2
Tetry l 5 0

10 0 25 0 100 0 500 0 292 5 1.2 1 0.9 6 1.1 5 1.2 5 1.3 1 2.5 3 8 4 10 6 14 3 22 7 38 9 7 8

9 8 13 3 21 0 36 0 8 2

10 4 14 1 22 4 38 2 8 5

10 7 14 5 23 0 39 3 8 6

10 8 14 7 23 3 39 9 10 7

13 5 18 3 29 1 49 8

Source s o f TN

T equivalents : NTI S 1971 , NAS A 1988 , Kirk-Othme r 1980 . 

# 2

_- .