Investigating the blast shielding effect of the Beirut silos

IF 1.7 4区 工程技术 Q3 MECHANICS
G.-P. Zéhil
{"title":"Investigating the blast shielding effect of the Beirut silos","authors":"G.-P. Zéhil","doi":"10.1007/s00193-024-01189-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Beirut port explosion on August 4, 2020, caused extensive destruction and significant casualties, prompting inquiries into its scale and impact on neighboring structures. Speculation arose regarding the role of the nearby port silos in shielding western Beirut from the blast. This study leverages insights from previous research and uses a tailored blast wave propagation model to settle the debate on the silos’ effectiveness in mitigating blast impacts. The analysis challenges prevailing notions: firstly, that the silos offered substantial protection, and secondly, the assumption linking the transient “window” phenomenon in the Wilson cloud to a similar opening in the preceding pressure front. Contrary to expectation, the pressure at the shock front remains continuous, albeit lower on the leeward side behind the silos. Downstream lateral regions experience pressure amplification due to the constructive interference of waves diffracted around the silos, with significant attenuation observed close (10 m) behind them—approximately 12%, 58%, and 2% of free-air values for overpressure, specific impulse, and specific energy, respectively. However, this shielding effect diminishes with distance, with the blast wave intensity largely restored at 450 m. Consequently, the silos’ shadowing effect was limited to nearby port structures and part of the Lebanese navy base, which still incurred severe damage. The lesser impact on western Beirut is attributed to its greater distance from the explosion rather than the silos’ protective influence. These findings suggest a reevaluation of urban disaster mitigation strategies, emphasizing geographical positioning over structural barriers and advocating for a holistic approach to urban resilience.</p>","PeriodicalId":775,"journal":{"name":"Shock Waves","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shock Waves","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-024-01189-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MECHANICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Beirut port explosion on August 4, 2020, caused extensive destruction and significant casualties, prompting inquiries into its scale and impact on neighboring structures. Speculation arose regarding the role of the nearby port silos in shielding western Beirut from the blast. This study leverages insights from previous research and uses a tailored blast wave propagation model to settle the debate on the silos’ effectiveness in mitigating blast impacts. The analysis challenges prevailing notions: firstly, that the silos offered substantial protection, and secondly, the assumption linking the transient “window” phenomenon in the Wilson cloud to a similar opening in the preceding pressure front. Contrary to expectation, the pressure at the shock front remains continuous, albeit lower on the leeward side behind the silos. Downstream lateral regions experience pressure amplification due to the constructive interference of waves diffracted around the silos, with significant attenuation observed close (10 m) behind them—approximately 12%, 58%, and 2% of free-air values for overpressure, specific impulse, and specific energy, respectively. However, this shielding effect diminishes with distance, with the blast wave intensity largely restored at 450 m. Consequently, the silos’ shadowing effect was limited to nearby port structures and part of the Lebanese navy base, which still incurred severe damage. The lesser impact on western Beirut is attributed to its greater distance from the explosion rather than the silos’ protective influence. These findings suggest a reevaluation of urban disaster mitigation strategies, emphasizing geographical positioning over structural barriers and advocating for a holistic approach to urban resilience.

Abstract Image

调查贝鲁特筒仓的防爆效果
2020 年 8 月 4 日发生的贝鲁特港口爆炸造成了大规模破坏和重大人员伤亡,引发了对爆炸规模和对周边建筑影响的调查。人们猜测,附近的港口筒仓在保护贝鲁特西部免受爆炸影响方面发挥了作用。本研究利用了先前研究的见解,并使用了一个量身定制的爆炸波传播模型,以解决有关筒仓在减轻爆炸影响方面的作用的争论。分析结果对普遍的观点提出了质疑:首先,筒仓提供了实质性保护;其次,将威尔逊云中的瞬时 "窗口 "现象与之前压力前沿的类似开口联系起来的假设。与预期相反,冲击前沿的压力保持连续,尽管筒仓后背风面的压力较低。由于筒仓周围衍射波的建设性干扰,下游横向区域出现了压力放大现象,在筒仓后方近距离(10 米)观察到明显的衰减现象--过压、比冲和比能量分别约为自由空气值的 12%、58% 和 2%。因此,筒仓的阴影效应仅限于附近的港口建筑和黎巴嫩海军基地的部分建筑,这些建筑仍遭受了严重破坏。贝鲁特西部受到的影响较小,这是因为其距离爆炸更远,而不是筒仓的保护作用。这些研究结果表明,应重新评估城市减灾战略,强调地理位置而非结构性障碍,并提倡采用综合方法提高城市抗灾能力。
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
Shock Waves
Shock Waves 物理-力学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
41
审稿时长
17.4 months
期刊介绍: Shock Waves provides a forum for presenting and discussing new results in all fields where shock and detonation phenomena play a role. The journal addresses physicists, engineers and applied mathematicians working on theoretical, experimental or numerical issues, including diagnostics and flow visualization. The research fields considered include, but are not limited to, aero- and gas dynamics, acoustics, physical chemistry, condensed matter and plasmas, with applications encompassing materials sciences, space sciences, geosciences, life sciences and medicine. Of particular interest are contributions which provide insights into fundamental aspects of the techniques that are relevant to more than one specific research community. The journal publishes scholarly research papers, invited review articles and short notes, as well as comments on papers already published in this journal. Occasionally concise meeting reports of interest to the Shock Waves community are published.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信