Thrust 4: Blast Mitigation

Mitigation approaches depend on several factors: containment details of the energetic material; potential of the threat posed (ranging from simple energetic blast to destructive explosive fragments and even artificially-engineered case and containment structures); and physical surrounding of the "energetic material object" including proximity to personnel and buildings. Clearly, time is of the essence in mitigation against such threats.

Effective mitigation strategies must balance two competing requirements. The approach, ideally, must be threat specific, yet applicable to the worst case scenario. The threat specific approach (characteristics and properties of the energetic and containment materials) depends upon reliable detection results in determining the detailed nature of the threat (F2 and F3). However, the approach has to be applicable to the worst case scenario in the event that the detection results are not able to hone in on the details of the energetic materials involved. The nature of the containment plays a strong role in determining the mitigation approach to be used. Thus, the container properties will determine the exact approach to be used.

Either physical and chemical mitigation approaches, or some combination of the two, will be required to ensure satisfactory mitigation of the threat. We consider five specific approaches to develop effective mitigation methods, as described in the following:

>F4-H Optimal Design & Use of Advanced Structural Materials to Mitigate Explosive & Impact Threats

>F4-I Design & Use of Structural Materials to Mitigate Explosive & Impact Threats (WSU Component)

>F4-J Dynamic Crushing of Regular, Irregular & Functionally Graded Cellular Structures

>F4-K Science of Progressive Collapse Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Structures