Emergency 101 - suicide bombers, crowd formations and blast waves

Zeeshan-ul-hassan Usmani, D. Kirk
{"title":"Emergency 101 - suicide bombers, crowd formations and blast waves","authors":"Zeeshan-ul-hassan Usmani, D. Kirk","doi":"10.1109/MILCOM.2008.4753519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Suicide bombing has become one of the most lethal and favorite modus-operandi of terrorist organizations around the world. While various attempts have been made to assess the impact of crowd density on suicide bomber effectiveness, the specifics of the actual crowd formation and orientation of the bomber with respect to the crowd has not been examined. A virtual simulation tool has been developed which is capable of assessing the impact of crowd formation patterns on the magnitude of injury and number of casualties during a suicide bombing attack. The tool examines variables such as the number and arrangement of people within a crowd for typical layouts, the number of suicide bombers, and the nature of the explosion including equivalent weight of TNT and the duration of the resulting blast wave pulse. The goals of the analysis are to determine optimal crowd formations to reduce the deaths and/or injuries of individuals in the crowd, to determine what architectural and geometric changes can reduce the number of casualties and injuries, and what is the correlation between variant crowd densities and formations with the weight and pulse duration of the explosives? Results indicated that the worst crowd formation is street (e.g. Zig-Zag) where 44% crowd can be dead and 71% can be injured (there is an overlap of injury and lethality), given typical explosive carrying capacity of a single suicide bomber. Bus and market crowd formations were found to be the best for reducing the effectiveness of an attack, with 24% and 26% crowd in lethal zone respectively and 58% and 54% in injury zones. Simulation results were compared and validated by the real-life incidents and found to be in good agreement. Line-of-sight with the attacker, rushing towards the exit, and stampede were found to be the most lethal choices both during the attack and post-explosion. These findings, although preliminary, may have implications for emergency response and counter terrorism. The paper also discusses additional capabilities that are being developed for the model.","PeriodicalId":434891,"journal":{"name":"MILCOM 2008 - 2008 IEEE Military Communications Conference","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MILCOM 2008 - 2008 IEEE Military Communications Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/MILCOM.2008.4753519","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Suicide bombing has become one of the most lethal and favorite modus-operandi of terrorist organizations around the world. While various attempts have been made to assess the impact of crowd density on suicide bomber effectiveness, the specifics of the actual crowd formation and orientation of the bomber with respect to the crowd has not been examined. A virtual simulation tool has been developed which is capable of assessing the impact of crowd formation patterns on the magnitude of injury and number of casualties during a suicide bombing attack. The tool examines variables such as the number and arrangement of people within a crowd for typical layouts, the number of suicide bombers, and the nature of the explosion including equivalent weight of TNT and the duration of the resulting blast wave pulse. The goals of the analysis are to determine optimal crowd formations to reduce the deaths and/or injuries of individuals in the crowd, to determine what architectural and geometric changes can reduce the number of casualties and injuries, and what is the correlation between variant crowd densities and formations with the weight and pulse duration of the explosives? Results indicated that the worst crowd formation is street (e.g. Zig-Zag) where 44% crowd can be dead and 71% can be injured (there is an overlap of injury and lethality), given typical explosive carrying capacity of a single suicide bomber. Bus and market crowd formations were found to be the best for reducing the effectiveness of an attack, with 24% and 26% crowd in lethal zone respectively and 58% and 54% in injury zones. Simulation results were compared and validated by the real-life incidents and found to be in good agreement. Line-of-sight with the attacker, rushing towards the exit, and stampede were found to be the most lethal choices both during the attack and post-explosion. These findings, although preliminary, may have implications for emergency response and counter terrorism. The paper also discusses additional capabilities that are being developed for the model.
紧急101 -自杀式炸弹,人群编队和冲击波
自杀式爆炸已成为世界各地恐怖组织最具杀伤力和最受欢迎的作案手法之一。虽然已经进行了各种尝试来评估人群密度对自杀式炸弹袭击者有效性的影响,但实际人群形成和炸弹袭击者相对于人群的方向的具体情况尚未得到审查。已经开发了一种虚拟仿真工具,能够评估自杀式炸弹袭击期间人群形成模式对受伤程度和伤亡人数的影响。该工具检查了一些变量,如人群中典型布局的人数和安排,自杀式炸弹袭击者的数量,以及爆炸的性质,包括TNT当量和产生的冲击波脉冲的持续时间。分析的目标是确定最佳人群编队,以减少人群中个人的死亡和/或伤害,确定什么样的建筑和几何变化可以减少伤亡人数,以及不同人群密度和编队与爆炸物的重量和脉冲持续时间之间的相关性是什么?结果表明,在单个自杀式炸弹袭击者的典型炸药承载能力下,最糟糕的人群形成是街道(如z形),其中44%的人群死亡,71%的人群受伤(伤害和致命重叠)。研究发现,公共汽车和市场的人群队形最能降低攻击的有效性,分别有24%和26%的人群处于致命区,58%和54%的人群处于伤害区。将仿真结果与实际事故进行了对比验证,结果与实际吻合较好。在袭击期间和爆炸后,与袭击者保持距离、冲向出口和踩踏被认为是最致命的选择。这些发现虽然是初步的,但可能对应急反应和反恐产生影响。本文还讨论了为该模型开发的附加功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信