COMPONENT PART NOTICE

THIS PAPER IS A COMPONENT PART OF THE FOLLOWING COMPILATION REPORT:

TTT1 F: Minutes of the Explosives Safety Seminar (22nd) Held in Anaheim,

California on 26-28 August 1986, Volume 1.

TO ORDER THE COMPLETE COMPILATION REPORT, USE AD-A181 27k

THE COMPONENT PART is PROVIDED HERE TO ALLOW USERS ACCESS TO INDIVIDUALLY

AUTHORED SECTIONS OF PROCEEDING, ANNALS, SYMPOSIA, ETC. HOWEVER, THE COMPONENT
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL COMPILATION REPORT AND
NOT AS A STAND-ALONE TECHNICAL REPORT.

THE FOLLOWING OTONENT PART NUMBERS COMPRISE THE COMPILATION REPORT:

AD#: poo? 3Q2 thja poo^ 3lt2 AD#

AD#: AM

AD#: AD#

Accession For
NTIS GRA4I
DTIC TAB
Unannounced D
Justification.

By
Distribution/
Availability Codes
Avail and/or
Special

I tw Fuitttc rakMM «ad «ai« lit

h0RM [disMMfaali
DTIC
UllL Ü63
MAR85Mb3 fi <?*A OPI: DTIC-TID

»»*»^»'<AJ^«wrWM<IWgeyOUUllÜUUUl^^
#

BLAST LOADS BEHIND VERTICAL WALLS

CO
CO
in
©
o Prepared for t he

0.
I Twenty-Second DoD Explosives Safety Seminar
Q
< Anaheim, California

26-28 August 1986

$
by

Ma r y E. Beyer

Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory

Port Hueneme, California 93043

767
w

i .■ ■ mummmmaamKmmaamaimummaamamma^maammKtmimMm mit MA «at itn^» wat w.» »» w* v.iiua ^JW» ^HLHU** */•* L» U\ n'MA<\ftf L^nAiiib LV« »I tuUMt
 BLAST LOADS BEHIND VERTICAL WALLS

by Mary E Beyer

Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory

Port Hueneme, California 93043

1%0 PURPOSE

N his paper presents preliminary design criteria

vertical cantilever blast deflector walls intended to reduce the
for

blast environment from explosions detonated immediately behind

the walls The design criteria relates the peak blast
overpressure, total blast impulse, and effective duration of the
overpressure in a format that facilitates the design of blast
deflector walls and the prediction of the blast environment
behind the waI Is^^ The preliminary criteria presented in this
paper were derived from high explosive tests completed in 1985
(Reference 1 and 2). Additional tests are scheduled for
September 1986 (Reference 3). and final design criteria will
then be developed.

2.0 PROBLEM

Vehicle bombs are a major terrorist threat to the security

and safety of inhabited facilities. One possible plan to reduce
the danger of the vehicle bombs is to construct a vertical
cantilever wall at a safe distance from the nearest people and
property. The wall is designed to stop the vehicle and to
prevent breaching of the wall from detonation of the bomb. The
wall serves to detonate the vehicle bomb a safe distance away
from the inhabited facilities.

The procedure for designing the wall to survive the vehicle

impact and bomb explosion is undefined. Some criteria exist,
but the reliability of the design process decreases with
increasing vehicle strike velocity and bomb size, and decreasing
distance between the wall and point of detonation The barrier
could be a solid reinforced concrete wall, a composite wall of
sand between two reinforced concrete walls connected by shear
diaphragms, or a solid reinforced concrete wall backed by a
massive earth berm (retaining rail).

One problem in the design of a vehicle bomb barrier is

determining where to sire the wall relative to the buildings to
be protected. Criteria exist for predicting the damage to
buildings. given the blast environment at the building.
However, no criteria exist for predicting the blast environment
behind a vertical wall. Based on the present technology, the

768

nniriTrnnnrMirvar nrnirn" i-i -n -fimr nrinr nnnr m ir nrinnn * ~ ~ -■ * .<.n;i.iii miamnii **^'.r.~. .- »?
 site location must neglect any benefits from the wall on
reducing the blast environment. Theoretically, the wall serves
as a blast deflector shield which reduces the blast environment
behind the wall. The effectiveness of the wall in suppressing
the blast environment depends on the wall height, and the
explosive size and location as illustrated in Figure 1.

The blast environment behind the wall may be further

suppressed by locating a canopy near the top of the wall on the
loaded side of the wall, as shown in Figure 2. This concept
assumes that the canopy would focus shock waves in a safe
direction. The canopy could shatter, and be blown away by the
force of the explosion, but it wouJd probably remain in place
long enough to mitigate the shock waves spilling over the wall.
The effectiveness of the canopy depends on its mass, surface
area, and location.

Blast pressures measured in high-expIosive tests of

cubicles by NCEL (Reference 4) demonstrate that reductions in
the blast environment behind walls do occur. However, these
tests did not simulate the condition of a bcmb located adjacent
to a long vertical wall designed to prevent shock waves from
clearing around the ends of the wall.

Design criteria for the blast environment (including peak

blast overpressure, total blast impulse, and effective duration
of the overpressure), behind a wall would allow site planners to
account for any benefit from the wall on the safe distance
required from a vehicle bomb barrier to an inhabited building.
# The design blast loads must be related to the critical
parameters associated with the characteristics of the wall,
bomb, and the point of interest behind the wall, as illustrated
by the curves in Figures 1 and 2.

3.0 TESTS

3 1 Ob i ec t i ve

769

ASSSMXSiUuUIKrtKXlUlkX^^^
 The measured blast environment behind the wall will be
compared with existing relationships for a surface burst without
a wall. The benefits of a vertical wall and a vertical wall
plus canopy in reducing the blast environment will be assessed.

3.2 Tes t Setup

The wall tests were performed at the Terminal Effects

Research and Analysis Group (TERA) of the New Mexico Institute
of Mining and Technology in Socorro, New Mexico. The test
schedule is shown in Table 1.

The test structure was a vertical cantilever wall 2.25

feet high and 28.67 feet long. The wall was constructed of
steel armor plate as shown in Figure 3 This test structure is
a one-sixth geometric scale model of a 13.5-foot-high by
172-foot- Iong cantilever wall.

The cano pies used for tests 2,3, 5, 6, and 7 we re

s i x-g uage or twe I ve-gu age steel s heet metal. Three canopy
des i g ns we r e used in th e tes ting (wi dth = 1.0 feet and density =
4 .38 ps f ; w i dth = 1.0 feet and dens ity = 8.13 psf; and width -
1 .5 f ee t and dens ity = 8. 13 psf) . T he length of each canopy was
t en f ee t . The canop y ma ss was chosen to represent the
equ i v a I en t of a 4- i nc h-th i ck r e i n f orced concrete slab. Th«
c a n o p i e* were at t ached to

pe r pe ndic uI a r to the wa l I . b ut
being b I own
t he wa I I by a series of tack
The t ack we Id i ng provd ed th e suppo r t for the canopy to keep
did not prevent the canopy
when
welds,
it
from
i
of f the wa I I the explosive charge was
de ton ated. F or t es t s 9 and 10. the canopies were supported by
sever al r eba r ta ck we Ided perpend icuI a r to the waI I ; the
canop ies used i n tests 9 and 10 we r e not attached to the wall by
any w elds.

The tes t program involved three charge weights (W = 1.0,

8 . C , and 15. 0 pounds C4 explosive). The explosives used in the
tests were spherical composition C4 charges. Each explosive
charge was placed in a lightweight cheesecloth pouch and
suspended by string from a rebar welded perpendicular to the
wal I . The d istance from the center of the charge to the wall
and to the ground was one foot. Conversion of charge weight
t r om composi tion C4 to TNT was made using an equivalency value
of 1.129 ( 1 129 pounds of TNT is equal to 1.0 pounds of C4,
Reference 5 ). According to modeling laws. detonating a
1.0-pound t e st charge adjacent to the scale model wall is
equivalent t o detonating a 244-pound charge adjacent to the
prototype wa II, and detonating a 15.0-pound test charge (maximum
test charge) adjacent to the scale model wall is equivalent to
detonating a 3.660-pound bomb adjacent to the prototype wall.

770

,Ajn«SUS>iCBllBKlUIAMtfJ0ltfM&K&UU£l^^
3. 3 Testina Procedure

Pressure t r a nsducers were located a) ong two horizontal gage

lines emanating f rom the charge as shown in Figure 4. One gage
line was set up n ormal to the wall, and t he other was 45 degrees
to the wall. Eac h gage line had transduc ers located at both the
ground surface C h = 0), and at the elevat ion of the wall (h = H
= 2.25 feet ) . Th e elevated gages farthe s t f r om the wall were
4.5 feet above t he ground surface. The transducers normal to
the wall were Io cated at R = 2.25, 4.5, 6.75, 9.0, 13.5, and
18.0 feet f rom th e wall. This correspon ds to 1H, 2H, 3H, 4H,
6H. and 8H, with the distance from the t ransducers to the wall
given in multiple s of the waI I height. T he gages at 45 degrees
to the waII were I oca ted at R = 4.5, 9.0, and 18.0 feet from the
wall. This corre sponds to 2H, 4H, and 8H, with the distance
from the transduc ers to the wall given in mu I t i p I e s of the wall
height. This arr angement required eighte en transducers in each
test. Based on the one-sixth scale m »del, the measurement
points correspond to full-scale 13.5 ± R i 108 feet and 0 i h ±
13.5 feet Ch = 27 feet for the two elevat ed gages farthest from
the wall).

Gage mounts for the elevated gages were stainless steel

disk baffles supported by steel gage stands oriented in the
direction of the charge. The surface gages were installed flush
with the ground.

Analog pressure data was electronically recorded on

magnetic tape using two tape recorders.

3 4 Test Results

The analog data obtained from each test was digitized, and
computer plots of the pressure-time history at each pressure
transducer were prepared The plots showed the peak blast
overpressure and the total impulse measured at each gage. The
peak pressure, total impulse, and gage locations for each test
are summarized in Tables 2 through 11.

In order to compare the test results with the blast

environment produced from an explosion without a wall, values
tor the peak pressure and total impulse were required tor the
detonation of 1.0, 8.0, and 15.0 pound charges with no blast
deflector wall. These values were obtained using the
hemispherical surface burst graphs in the revised NAVFAC P-397
Volume II (Reference 6). The calculated values of the peak
pressure and total impulse resulting from the detonation of a
charge without a wall are given in Table 12.

The barricade was not damaged in any of the ten tests. The
canopies were all completely blown away 1r om the wall.

771

.-, -« ^ :-.>«*. ■*«** AMM,,mmxt*smmajc*MX)uui BtfSJE&e **m&3JmMhXMMM!Wj^l0KMMMft(&ji

 Peak pressure and scaled impulse were plotted against
scaled ground distance for each charge weight, showing results
for each test with and without canopies, and the calculated
values for surface pressure with no wall. These plots are given
in Figures 5 through 10. Separate plots were made for the
results from the elevated gages and the surface gages, and for
the 4 5 degree gage line and the 90 degree gage line.

In general, there was a reduction in peak pressure and

impulse behind the wall when the test results are compared to
the calculated values for the blast environment produced from an
explosion without a wall.

3.5 Additional Testing

From the results of the tests in October 1985, it was

determined that additional testing would be required before
blast load criteria could be developed. Values for the peak
pressure and total impulse resulting from the detonation of a
charge without a wall were calculated using the hemispherical
surface burst graphs in the revised NAVFAC P-397. Additional
tests are planned to provide data to compare with these values
from P-397. Also, blast overpressure data from tests using the
small-scale wall are planned for validation of previous results.
The test schedule for these tests is given in Table 13.

4 0 PRELIMINARY DESIGN CRITERIA

Presented in Figures 11 through 15 are preliminary design

criteria for the blast environment behind vehicle bomb barriers.
The criteria are considered to be preliminary and will require
further test validation.

Use of the criteria requires interpolation between values

corresponding to the curves in Figures 11 through 15. Linear
interpolation on a log-log scale is recommended for obtaining an
intermediate value of any parameter, using either mathematical
relationships or log-log graph paper.

in F "gu^3 1 1 . the blast overpressure, B, and scaled

impulse, i/W are plotted as a function of the scaled
.1/3
,/J
distance. R/W . for several values of the scaled wall height,
H/W Each curve is for the results from the surface gages,
tor tests with no canopy.

In Figure 12, the blast overpressure, B, and scaled

impulse, i/W are plotted as a function of the scaled
distance, R/W , for several values of the scaled canopy mass,
w/W Each curve is for the results from the surface gages.

772

0»^>tfKkTlW&kTU3tf!UilU* F-JiR* %MKM UM BM*M*W***M**»

 1/3
for tesis with the scaled wall height, H/W equal to 0.88
ft/lb'73.

I n F 9U 13, the blast overpressure, 6, and scaled

• ' ^3
impuIse, are plotted as a function of the scaled
'^1/3
disjaoce, R/W for several values of the scaled canopy mass.
w/W Each curve is tor the results from e surface gages,
tt
for tests with the scaled wa I I height, H/W equal to 1.08
f t / I b

F,9U| the 4blast overpressure. B, and scaled

In j?3 > '
impulse, i /W are plotted as a function of the scaled
1 /3
distance R/W for several values of the scaled canopy mass,
1 / A
w/W Each curve is for the results from,the surface gages
for tests with the scaled wall height, H/W equal to 216
ft/,b!73\

In F '9"(J93 15 the blast overpressure, 6, and scaled

•mpuIse, i/W are plotted as a function of the scaled
,1/3
distance R/W'", for several values of the scaled wall height.
H/W1 . Each curve is for the results from the elevated gages,
for tests with no canopy.

5.0 FUTURE WORK

Additional explosive tests are planned for September 1986.

These tests are considered important to validate the results of
the previous test ser.es, and tc provide data for blast
$ overpressure with no blast deflector wall. The test results
will be combined with previous results to empirically derive
design criteria for the blast environment behind a vehicle bomb
ba r r t e r .

6.0 REFERENCES

1. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Memorandum

TM 51-35-14; Test plan for development of criteria for design
blast loads behind a blast deflector wall, by M. Beyer and W.
Keenan. Port Hueneme, Calif., Oct 1985

2. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Memorandum

TM 51-86-08: T ■• j t Data Report: Development of criteria for
design blest loads behind a blast deflector wall, by M. Beyer,
Port Hueneme. Calif.. Jan 1986.

3. Naval C<vil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Memorandum

TM 51-86-11: Test plan for additional testing for development
of criteria for design blast loads behind a blast deflector
wall, by M. Beyer. Port Hueneme. Calif , Jun 1986.

773
4 Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Report R-828:
Blast environment from fully and partially vented explosions in
cubicles, by W. A. Keenan and J. E. Tancreto. Port Hueneme,
Ca I i f . . Nov 1976.

5 US Department of Energy. DOE/TIC-11268: A manual for the

prediction of blast and fragment loadings on structures, by W.
Baker, J. Kuiesz, P. Westine, P. Cox, and J. Wilbeck. Nov 1980.
Appendix A, Table 6.

6. Naval Facilities Engineering Command. NAVFAC P-397,

Army TM 5-1300 and Air Force AFM 88-22, Special Publication
ARLCD-SP-84001 : Structures to resist the effects of accidental
explosions. Washington, D. C.. Jun 1969, Volume 2.

7.0 LIST OF SYMBOLS

Peak Blast Overpressure, (psi)

Blast Impulse, (psi-msec)
T Effective Load Duration, (msec)
W Net Explosive Weight, (lbs TNT equivalent)
W Net Explosive Weight, (lbs Composition C4 explosive)
C4
H Wa I I Height. ( feet )
L Wall Length, (feet)
R Distance to Point of Interest Behind Wall, (feet)
h Elevation of Point of Interest Behind Wall, (feet)
r Charge-to-wa I I Distance, (feet)
z Elevation of Charge Above Ground, (feet)
L ' Canopy Width, (feet)
H' Canopy Elevation Above Ground, (feet)
2
w Canopy Ma s s. ( Ib / < t )
1/3
Z Scaled Distance to Point of Interest Behind Wall. R/W
( feet / lb'/3)

774
• / / /
/

/ /
ki< Jent
-nock
/
Ni^ * 4.
// vortex Vji v

X's
\'vT
». region of ^^
. grooved \ I Mach front •
reflection
—*m w

— No wall (surface burst)

— With wall
hj/H<h,/W
• LI
»- s.
«
5 —
v.
I

•5 1
ü <

-►
Log ol ua'i'ij jAtütar behimj »'si!
toFo.ni -A", R/W!/\ft/a»1/Jj

Figurc 1. Blast deflector wall and blast environment behind wall.

775

MAUJiMJiuJi-^xikJSmtrMMmAMAuJimAmnmiiaMmaMii-ikA-itJiaXiA-mAuM^itMJtm***
 /

/
/
' reflected
' wave off i • •,
/ ground -^ -L»> inclden'
WaVe
-R/concrcte /point"A" \ -, '

o^
o<«2
^LT"
v*^1 Mach
I" region

w/ ' w

— — — — No wall

— x — No canopy
Wall & canopy (maybe)
£■<
Fixed parameters h.i.H.r

o _
•S *

ft

Log ktaled hor;/o»ul distance behind

wall. R/Wl/J(ft/lb,/J)

Figure 2 Qir.opy wall and bUsi envjronmeni behind wall

776

WIUMg^iM^N^^i^^^Ml^^tl^M^'^M^^MiiMMSmi
 TABLE 1. TEST SCHEDULE (Completed in 1985)

1/3
TEST WC4 H/W w w/W 1/3 L' r 2
NO (lbs) (psf ) (ft) (ft) (ft)

1.0 2.16 1.0 1.0 1 .0

1.0 2.16 4.38 4.21 1.0 1.0 1 .0

1.0 2.16 8.13 7.81 1.0 1.0 1 .0

8.0 1.08 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0

8.0 1.08 4.38 2.10 1.0 1.0 1 .0

•
8 0 1.08 8.13 3.90 1.0 1.0 1 .0

8.0 1.08 8.13 3 .90 1.5 1.0 1 .0

15.0 0.88 1.0 1.0 1 .0

15.0 0.88 4 .38 1.71 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0

10 15.0 0.88 8.13 3 17 1.0 1.0 1 .0

777

i u* urn a wirt^nvij, .-» um.\m it* ifit -'« tA if* UtfUb il, IVttM'fMi JYIIW, *> W^WM
 •28 ft 8 in.

-17 ft 6 in.

•5 ft 7 in. -10 ft. -5 ft 7 in.

1 ? Ii
W 2 ft 3 in.

iw •ma.
re move able 2 in
///////// 7Z7Z^
plate - replace 7 ft 5 in.
after each test

11 ft 6 in.

NOTE Strap welded joints

between plates

-3 ft
1 h i>

T 2 ft 3 in
i
\\W\VT rrrrrr STOW wwww
7 ft 5 in

II ft 6 in

A 5'tin armor plate

B 6-in. armor plate
C J^j-in. armor plait

Figure 3. Test wall.

778

""'''■'' ^-»w.i............... . . ^ . ■ . ^ .— ... . iM j^^ A AAA i-> A V* W> -> -> 0> bf* .H -» - i . * k •-»».»»'.. ■ u IU • ,. uaia -»
 •

Figure 4. Location of gage lines and pressure transducers.

779

»t. «..,»....-*—f..».» .—.^.,.-.-^..,^—.—,... . .... . . -irrrirntirri" rr r-f ~ r r r ' .r:r...':::"• r •-r_~-irriT:

 TABLE 2. TEST 1 RESULTS
Cha r ge We i gh t

m
1.02 lbs
No Canopy

Gage Range Eleva tion Peak Side--on Total impulse

No R h Overpressure (psi-msec)
(ft) (ft) ( ps 1 )
F1-1 2 .25 0 15.72 13.0
F1-2 2 .25 2.25 15.08 9.0
F2-1 4 .50 0 8.32 9.0
F2-2 4 . 50 2.25 6.28 8.0
F3-1 6.75 0 7.08 8.0
F3-2 6 . 75 2.25 3.23 6.0
F4-1 9.00 0 6.42 6.0
F4-2 9.00 2 .25 3.80 6.0
F6-1 13 . 50 0 3. 52 6.0
F6-2 13 .50 2.25 1 .87 5.0
F8-1 18. 00 0 3.60 5.0
F8-2 18.00 4.50 2.31 4.0
S2-1 4 . 50 0 13.29 9.0
S2-2 4 .50 2.25 9.46 7.0
S4-1 9 . 00 0 7.63 6.0
S4-2 9.00 2.25 3.06 5.0
S8-1 18.00 0 2.87 4.0
S8-2 18 . 00 2.25 1 .53 4 .0

TABLE .i. TEST 2 RESULTS

Charge Weight = 1.02 lbs Canopy Weight 45.5 lbs
Canopy Size = 12 1/8" x 10 ■ 3/4" x 0.108" *

Gage Range Elevation Peak Side-on Total impu1se

No . R h Overpressure (psi-msec)
(ft) (ft) (ps 1 )
F1-1 2.25 0 6.44 10.0
F1-2 2.25 2 .25 6.77 7.0
F2-1 4 . 50 0 3.89 7.0
F2-2 4 . 50 2 .25 2.87 5.0
F3-1 6. 75 0 3.66 6.0
F3-2 6.75 2 .25 2.55 5.0
F4-1 9. 00 0 3.66 5.0
F4-2 9 .00 2 .25 2. 49 5.0
F6-1 13. 50 0 2.56 5.0
P6-2 13.50 2 .25 1 . 72 5.0
F8-1 18 . 00 0 2.52 4 .0
F8-2 18 .00 4 .50 2.39 4.0
S2-1 4 . 50 0 4 .95 7 . 0
S2-2 4 .50 2 .25 4 .28 6.0
S4-1 9.00 0 5.68 6.0
S4-2 9.00 2 .25 2.51 5.0
S8-1 18. 00 « 0 2.96 4.0
S8-2 18.00 2 .25 1 .34 3.0

780

*ftAaft^AjqnaaAAfya«flafliMuw\Jh**&KJUift^^
 TABLE 4 TEST 3 RESULTS
Charge Weight = 1.02 lbs Canopy We ght =: 78.5 ! bs
Canopy Size = 11 7/8" x 10' 3/4 x 0 . 196"
•
Gage Range Elevation Peak S i de--on To ta 1 impu1s e
No . R h Overpressure Cp si-mse c)
(ft) (ft) ( ps 1 )
F 1-1 2.25 0 8.40 11.0
F1-2 2.25 2 .25 5.28 9.0
F2-1 4 . 50 0 3.84 7 .0
F2-2 4 . 50 2 .25 3.20 6.0
F3-1 6. 75 0 3.35 7.0
F3-2 6.75 2 .25 2.81 6.0
F4-1 9.00 0 3.40 6 0
F4-2 9. 00 2 .25 2 .73 5.0
F6-1 13. 50 0 3.05 5 . 0
F6-2 13 .50 2 .25 1 .34 5.0
F8-1 18 .00 0 1 . 66 4 0
F8-2 18.00 4 . 50 1 .42 4 .0
S2-1 4 . 50 0 4.91 7 0
S2-2 4 . 50 2 . 25 4 .67 7.0
S4-1 9 .00 0 5. 57 6.0
S4-2 9.00 2 .25 2.21 4 0
S8-1 18.00 0 2.96 4 .0
S8-2 18.00 2 .25 1 .26 4 .0

TABLE 5. TEST 4 RESULTS

• Char ge Weigh t = 8.0 I bs
No Canopy

Gage Range Elevation Peak Side-on Total impu1se

No . R h Overpressure (p si-msec)
(ft) (ft) ( ps 1 )
F 1-1 2 .25 0 29 84 36.0
F 1-2 2 .25 2 .25 29.57 22 . 0
F2-1 4 . 50 0 36 .00 29. 0
F2-2 4 . 50 2 .25 2 1.83 23 0
F3-1 6. 75 0 26.85 32 . 0
F3-2 6. 75 2 .25 13.98 28 0
F4-1 9.00 0 16.3 1 25 0
F4-2 9.00 2 .25 7 .05 20. 0
F6-1 13 . 50 0 9. 70 20. 0
F6-2 13. 50 2 .25 6. 79 20 . 0
F8- 1 18.00 0 7 . 45 18 0
F8-2 18.00 4 . 50 5.68 18.0
S2-1 4 . 50 0 28 . 39 37 0
S2-2 4 . 50 2 . 25 no data no data
S4-1 9 . 00 0 24 . 40 25.0
S4-2 9 . 00 2 25 24 59 25. 0
S8-1 18 . 00 0 1 . 80 14 0
S8-2 18 . 00 2 25 5. 57 16 0

781

"■il— Mia 1—M^MMi—■—IIMUM lilMlliMllHMllMfcllMiiiMMi'till i Ml ■ ■ M ■ M fll A £Ji*Jeti+*mm***m<mx*#m-jmizK*mmi[ir\ *kf* VUMS&M fä -SLA ILA *Ji *A fcA JLft kJl 1L&TLM M ä a Hkl^ «*
 TEST 5 RESULTS
Char ge We i ght - 8.0 lbs Canopy We i gh = 46.5 lbs
Canopy Size = 12" X 10' 1/2" x 0.105"

Gage Range E1eva t i on Peak Side-on Tota l mpu 1 se

No. R h Overpressure (ps i --msec)
(ft) Cf t) (ps i )
F 1-1 2.25 0 19. 74 30 0
F 1 -2 2.25 2.25 20.91 25 0
F2-1 4.50 0 22.26 31 0
F2-2 4.50 2.25 11.94 24 0
F3-1 6.75 0 17.32 29 0
F3-2 6 75 2.25 9.71 29 0
F4-1 9.00 0 13.94 21 0
F4-2 9.00 2.25 5.45 14 0
F6-1 13.50 0 9.33 17 0
F6-2 13.50 2.25 5.85 15 0
F8-1 18. 00 0 5.97 15 0
F8-2 18.00 4.50 4 .86 13 0
S2-1 4.50 0 18.64 27 0
S2-2 4 .50 2.25 19.45 25 0
S4-1 9.00 0 18. 79 18 0
S4-2 9.00 2.25 27.41 21 0
S8-1 18 . 00 0 6.92 10 0
S8-2 18.00 2.25 3. 90 10 0

TABLE 7 TEST 6 RESULTS

Charge Weight = 8.0 lbs
Canopy Size = 12" x 10' 3/4"
Canopy We ght :: 79.5 lbs
x 0.189" i
Gage Range E I eva tion Peak S i de--on Total impuIse
No. R h Ove rpressure (psi-msec)
( f t ) (ft) (ps 1 )
F1-1 2.25 0 13.78 16.0
F1-2 2 25 2.25 18.17 21.0
F2-1 4 50 0 15.45 34 .0
1-2-2 4 50 2.25 8.02 26.0
F3-1 6 75 0 15.67 32.0
F3-2 6 75 2.25 10.57 29.0
F4-1 9 00 0 14.10 22.0
F4-2 9 00 2.25 7. 12 15.0
F6-1 13 50 0 8.41 17.0
F6-2 13 50 2.25 5.91 16.0
F8-1 18 00 0 6.52 15.0
F8-2 18 00 4.50 6. 75 15.0
S2-1 4 50 0 15.96 29.0
S2-2 4 50 2.25 17.93 27.0
S4-1 9 00 0 16.30 18.0
S4-2 9 00 2.25 23.94 22.0
S8-1 18 00 0 6. 56 11.0
S8-2 18 00 2.25 3.90 11.0

782

»■W» MiMMM«»ft>MiaiMa«a«aMai«IB«MaMI««»iMMM—MMaa^ta ;j<v.ifti«''.«'.««*-.«««^i.* iSii> i» i»-iiLA.it**

 TABLE 8 TEST 7 RESULTS
Charge Weight = 8.0 lbs Canopy We ght == 119.0 I bs
Canopy Size = 18" x 10' 3/4" x 0.189"
•
Gage Range EIeva tion Peak S i de--on Tot a I impulse
No. R h Overpressure C psi-msec)
(ft) (ft) ( ps 1 )
F 1-1 2.25 0 12.93 26.0
F1-2 2 .25 2 .25 12.61 25.0
F2-1 4 . 50 0 10.60 27 .0
F2-2 4 .50 2 .25 6.98 23.0
F3-1 6. 75 0 9.64 26.0
F3-2 6. 75 2 .25 8.13 25.0
F4-1 9. 00 0 8.38 19.0
F4-2 9.00 2.25 5.13 13.0
F6-1 13.50 0 7 .57 15.0
F6-2 13.50 2.25 4 .88 14.0
F8-1 18.00 0 7 . 56 13.0
F8-2 18.00 4 .50 5.07 13.0
S2-1 4.50 0 13. 99 25.0
S2-2 4 .50 2.25 10.80 24.0
S4-1 9 .00 0 13.23 15.0
S4-2 9.00 2 .25 16.18 18.0
S8-1 18.00 0 5.62 10.0
S8-2 18.00 2.25 3.86 10.0

TABLE 9 TEST 8
Charge Weight = 15.0 lbs
$
No Canopy

Gage Range Elevation PeaK Side-on Total impulse

No. R h Overpressure (psi-msec)
(ft) (ft) (ps 1 )
F 1- 1 2 25 0 39. 34 35.0
F1-2 2 25 2 .25 no data no data
F2-1 4 .50 0 39.30 33.0
F2-2 4 50 2 .25 20.94 50.0
F3-1 6 .75 0 31.11 29.0
F3-2 6 75 2 .25 no data no data
F4- 1 9 00 0 23. 08 30.0
F4-2 9 00 2 .25 8.38 27.0
F6- 1 13 50 0 14.20 25.0
F6-2 13 50 2 .25 7 .80 23.0
F8 -1 18 00 0 9.14 22. 0
F8-2 18 00 4 .50 6.00 21.0
S2-1 4 50 0 41 .65 39.0
S2-2 4 50 2 .25 no data no data
S4-1 9 00 0 31.16 32.0
S4-2 9 00 2 25 36.33 37.0
S8- 1 18 .00 0 11.45 19.0
S8-2 18 00 2 .25 7.41 17.0

783

luaa^teiajffiiflBiira^
TABLE 10 TEST 9 RESULTS
Char ge Weigh t 15.0 lbs Canopy We i gh t 45.5 lbs
Canopy Size 12" x 10 1 /A 0.10 5"

Gage Range Elevation Peak Side-on ota 1 rr-pu 1 s e

No. R h Ove r p r essu r e (ps i ■-msec)
(ft) (ft) (ps i )
F1-1 2.25 0 33.14 32 .0
F1-2 25 2.25 37. 15 75 .0
F2-1 50 0 26.48 18 .0
F2-2 50 2.25 47.63 88
. 0
F3-1 75 0 23. 76 18
. 0
F3-2 6.75 2.25 no data no data
F4-1 9.00 0 13.16' 25 .0
F4-2 9 00 2 .25 4.91 19 0
F6-1 13 50 0 7 .53 21 0
F6-2 13 50 2.25 5. 16 20 0
F8-1 18 00 0 5.89 21 0
F8-2 18 00 4 .50 4.87 19 0
S2-1 4 50 0 36. 50 36 0
S2-2 4 50 2.25 53.30 80 0
S4-1 9 00 0 26. 18 24 0
S4-2 9 00 2.25 32.07 28 0
S8-1 18 00 0 1 1 .63 16 0
S8-2 18 00 2.25 6.23 14 0

TABLE 11.

Canopy Size
TEST
Cha r ge Weigh t =
=
10
15.0 lbs
12" x 10 3/4" x
Canopy We i gh t
0.189"
- 79.5 lbs €
Gage Range Elevation Peak Side-on Total impulse
No. R h Ove r p r ess u r e (psi-msec)
(ft) (ft) (ps i )
F1-1 2.25 0 13.71 27 0
F1-2 2 25 2.25 27.74 31 0
F2-1 4 50 0 24.67 40 0
F2-2 4 50 2.25 38. 14 52 0
F3-1 6 75 0 22.44 38 0
F3-2 6 75 2.25 no da ta no data
F4-1 9 00 0 11.95 26 0
F4-2 9 00 2.25 5.21 19 0
F6-1 13 50 0 8.05 23 0
F6-2 13 50 2.25 5.36 21 0
F8-1 18 00 0 8.00 22 0
F8-2 18 00 4 .50 6.86 19 0
S2-1 4 50 0 35 52 37 0
S2-2 4 50 2.25 36.93 29 0
S4-1 9 00 0 22.26 23 0
S4-2 9 00 2.25 34.2 1 31 0
S8-1 18 00 0 11.06 16 0
S8-2 18 00 2.25 6.26 15 0

784

■ ■■in—maaiiM—iiriai—nnnnirfii iiiiiMi—II^III——'—iiMnMiTiiMiiiiii i ■ uLULfuLi lalklMAM*

 TABLE 12 CALCULATED SURFACE PRESSURE (NO WALL) FROM P-397

*
1/3
W 1.13 lb H/W 2. 16

R B i Z
(ft) ( ps 1 ) (p si-msec) ( ft / lb1/3)

3.71 33.3 22 3.56

5 . 96 30. 1 13 5.72
8.21 15.1 10 7 .88
10.46 9.3 8 10.04
14 .96 5.0 6 14 .36
19.46 3. 3 4 18.68

1/3
w 9.o;1 lb H/W 1 .08

R B
(ft) ( ps i ) (psi-msec) (f t/lb1'3)

• 3. 71 388. 2 42 1 . 78
5 96 149.0 53 2.86
8 21 77 0 39 3.94
10 46 41 5 30 5.02
14 96 18 2 22 7. 18
19 46 10 7 17 9.34

1/3
w 16.94 H/W 0.88

R % 2
B
(ft) (ps 1 ) (ps i-msec) ( f t / lb1/3)

3.71 562 .0 46 1 . 44
5.96 231 .0 60 2 .32
8.21 119.0 61 3. 19
10.46 71.5 46 4 .07
14.96 28.8 32 5.82
19.46 16. .4 26 7.57

•
785
 j ' i
j 1
]
- « ■ ] - «i
i

.:_ nj Als? . i
-—il
i 3 I«
£2
l!17 -44 ^Sl 1
f I' 1
... J^i !• MJ7
ii
N H

- - -U si IJsl
i . 13
5
4 * ♦ s a • * *[ *

/'/}' 77
ff
a: 1
/
'
vl
-££ 01
/ / c
7 Z ^ / >
i
rr
'V / 01
/ // / //
4' JJk * 7 T3
a>

ai
s-
ai
■o
o

.01 ,01 fil •01 ■01 .01

(^qi/oasiu-iid)^/«/! (^q/oMiu-wd)^*/!

786

X2uauouQuaue)LäUi^iiXji:&
 j
—qp-
•- a J r M
1 £ ££
i\ • •
ft fl s ■•
I!
Ä s *J Ti
8 1
i1 _s. -4-8
i 3
! ° !
* 5
f N Fi

i1»• ]i 13
il
(3 n.
4 ♦ ♦ T c . 4 *

/ o *
F
/ t Z2 7/
,' , 1 ^ i _j__ 2 __
/ ^7 oi
/' r/ I c

01
o>
US
Ol

HI
01
!_
Ol
01
i "O

1—
to

.01 .01 .01' .0! .01 .01

n
(^qi/DMiu-itd)^»/! ( qi/awui-ifd) t/T
M/!
I—I
t/i
.a

CM

CM
....
- »4

J
^ lillff
Uts!
iliii*
01
X

ill!
g a. ■: i2
o( • « •
11 ■o

f
a

u
I/)
.,*
U
:_ ir*:z ^7^"
/ 1~
± r i t
01

i -
.01 .fli
(led) g

787

r.«\iirjw"jMiÄ^vui«atk^«^^iÄuwk^*-j*i/*w^«v-j^ »******.** ISftAiiatMUW» . C^fWUMLr«

(^qi/oMUj-iBd)^/! (lc/im/oMUJ-itd) M/S
t/\'

788

.»»»«.„jai aaaaajttaAJ n.A«a.«*.»ftm»»HM » ^jg» mJt lA *."»_" &A» 4 tuMAiiA «_n *-m
 (^qi/owui-!«d)0M/! (l q|/3»«uJ-itd)
Ci
M/!
t/i'

789

EküflBkiflLMK'tfViatiaiM3w**»«mumlini niiiMiriiwnwin i T t^*A

('C/lqt/owuj-wd) t/l
f.,M/!
(l qi/OBBUJ-ISd) M/l
C/l «/>'

(i«d) a G«<0 g

790

i imv»ii»-ilTi'WÄW*wK'i0M2»ioti«rii-«i a■ Mtkjtn w« u ii > m • * i. • . n>i tmrum*f^ftgLiMVii«i>lliMiii—i n.';.i.

(^qi/owuj-md)^«/! (^qi/oMiu-mdJ^An/i

cn
o
1 {1

1 " 4->
JC
en
1 j 1 _ r ,,;:. •f—

...lEiitl
Ol
X
// ,—

U--U4
it'ill 1
f—
*^^ TJ
3
c
I £ »1 £ o £
,, i
/
//
1 \
£1

a.
T3
01

|
s
1 * .
1 s.
DC
i/>
*J
i—

3
l/l
Ol
i oc
t-l
1/1
41

Ol
L
3
en

«01 .0» .01 fit

(.id)

791

■■■■■■■■■iaaaa^B^Miai^naBitnAJianAaAajkA« A« iu»JtBiMmmiv*a*fuHU*fitUkMaMt!MnMAmAm.aMtM.m»MMMMa>tm
TABLE 13. TEST SCHEDULE (SEPTEMBER 1986 PLANNED COMPLETION DATE)

TEST # WC4 (lb.) Sea led Wa11 r z

He i g» (ft) (ft) (ft)

1 1 .0 2. 16 1 .0 1 .0

2 1 .0 2. 16 2.0 1 .0

3 8.0 1 .08 1 .0 1 .0

4 8.0 1 .08 2.0 1 .0

5 15.0 0.88 1 .0 1 .0

6 15.0 0.88 2.0 1 .0

7 45.6 0.63 2.5 1 .23

8 45.6 0.63 2.5 1 .23

9 1 .0 0.0 x 1 .0

10 1 .0 0.0 X 1 .0

1 1 8.0 0.0 X 1 .0

12 8.0 0.0 X 1 .0

13 15.0 0.0 X 1 .0

14 15.0 0.0 X 1 . 0

* For the tests with no wall, the charge will be positioned

relative to trie pressure transducers.

792
 ■
p-i—- t
J—!—i !
!
'
!
! '
| !
1
j
MM—1 1
! 1 i 1

! i !
i ; . i ' ! 1 ■ ! 1
! i
': ! i
.'SI
! 1 1
' ! ' i 1
: ' ' • ' i III
■ i i
!
. i

i
1 ! Nl ~ o> h •= ! 1 I ! I I i
pi; d n
1 j 1 j 1 ' * i Ii i! 11
i i
i w
ii ; ,«l!
- ■
^| ^ i, |3 ■"
: i
' - ! —
i
1 x] xT x 1 o m
! 1—i—:—J—*—*J—*_]—& .i 1__
r—^—■—' ! h-* ! | ,
1
1

>?/ r i i :
1
i - , i '' i/- J' 1
i /"y / >* \
t on
! ! i ' ! ! ^ i ! ^>/r I 1
M ! ! i i i i ^r \ A 11 1
i
i
1 i ! Ii'l: ! \ 1 / f ! !
i
1 ; i ! V
! 1 i i 1 ! N i 1
!
.01
! i i i ! 1 1
■01 jar
(^qi/DMiu-wd)^/«/!
(

(!«<0 S

793

iaft*aß«vwav*ijf,ürfcAk^^^ .vtt
 —1 |

V
\
/
o
o
d
£
3 //1 }
1k" it! n

tl
IS*
1
4
3» 5
> >
1 ' M i
^ I

1
in
J3

!
<D
\ / ' Q.
O
C
rn
u

41 .01 fiV
(^qj/owiu-itd)^/*/! 3

OJ

ITS
en
- "1
1 i
—ii— <u
u
ITS

o J <4-
S_
9
o 1 .•; y 3

1 i| n /
! :>j Si S /
>
"T X S v. r // Jr/
m * »j >
J !
c
en
</)
\/
1 T3
1 r rr i

* 1
/ \ 01
Q.

CM
,/
01
3

•si fii JOl

794

• P_« fWfc I "■ J* AJ>iftAAA AM<AAAA JUk A^ #sm «it«

 If f
J 1/

^
V
a 0 a 1
o en
d /)
„i II n
n

3* 9 J3
4 ♦
00
II

a: 3
to
"\
D.
O
c
<o
•u

iOl .01 .01

(^qi/oMUJ-md^M/!

• } / >it/ . (J
j //
r 15

oq o0» r

RF
*

n
v.
n

s
11
n
v.
I
A in

>
U
3

4
9
♦
y
1 (J
C
W 1
•^
/ 1/1
<u
T3
/

I
< >>
i_
>o
C

\ 0J
\ I.
i > 1 a.

•0» fll fil

795

It 1ME* fttllP—»■ **"-* »»■ »* mm» «nai« k-> a>ii>iii .ä» J» .ig* ^a-i »ij> WA »amtuai *■,», tanattaHJt A iA 'JfUk Wtelftrt&f >A8 \A»'1»fiAf■■AttAAaAa
 f-h-
! I
—1—
j T
1 i

i
!
11 1i 1
i ° «-i
C4
T-
ffj

1 ° D it
! i
s As
I- !
-T— —H* 1
•1 ■
1
* *— I—
" P ~
1 ~-^-
*>T ,
I / [/
i I
>
/\
i
s •'•
i
O.
o
TO
u

rft ,01 .01

( qi/awuj-itd) M/i
'«/I «TV 2

1/)
Ol
Ol
r<3
o>
' 1 T : 1 ... '
■ 1 |1
I ; u
;
1 1 |
i o I '
i_

1 i S
U
a " 1
i
1
3

. i! i
1
1 1 j 1/1

>
1 "$
1 ■1 »
i 1 ii
O
*! * fit, c
1 Jj -""
■^
!
| i Ol
2
i
/
■ [
~£
U
| tjT
<T3
1
1 a:
- ^ \^, r^<
S *
Q.

|
01
U
3
CD

rfl ,01 fit

796

—■""""^MtHinftnni rtJlJIli»« UUU JUdLAAAftAfiJfciUl.ftAMl iASft. iC- «T. <V it. *V (ItXk (MJS^B
 1 1 ,1 1 I
| 1 I
I
t 1 | i i

1 1
i ! j I
! i | 0 |
1 ! 1 o
to
CM! T- oi io j i
j
li n H IS l

>! >l > 1~

xt xf x i o da
/ e
i
A * !
1
A
: ' | £
ill -*:r p]
y"
i i / /! y
j
i 1
r f a:
1 /-"7 1
Si
k^\
>X
J>i .01 .01
(^qi/owiu-tsdJ^M/!

__—_ _
-U " 1 - -4— *"
i1 | '
!
i
1
1
i1 ••« :
J
(l ,- o en g-
!
j 1
Jl 1 I
1 1
5 * if I
1 1 L/* ! \

!
■-
■ 1 '
1
[*—
1
x
,
x
,*.. A
1
o m
m
JL,
,
_S"
3**H- ''
1
i
-Hi \^y i—r*—1—:1
/' i\'—■ 1
*>
1 l
1 1-* ih \ r
1
[
1
S f
^1\

J*tf
\
1A<\|*l'
' Urn *

1 1 I
II
r s i i! i i
i
|
r> 1

1 0* l /
... j

It it *\

797
,01 fi

iTrftfTj 'rVwt'^ v*-^^»^*^*^"»«"«"«^ ,<■■> *. ^. *.,-.^ <■-. T. .-. T. v. J