Skip to content

Field Tested Modules: Hazard And Blast Resistant

Full-scale Proof Testing of Hazard and Blast Resistance

Testing completed by BakerRisk at their Wilfred E. Baker Test Facility
  • High Pressure Test Rig
  • Shock Tube Test Rig
  • Process Safety Test Rig
  • Air Ingress Testing (FORTRESS Nameplate #1)
The main FORTRESS building components and modules were tested at and above design specifications for blast resistance as well as resistance to additional hazards.
Aerial Image of WEBTF During FORTRESS Assembly
Aerial Image of WEBTF During FORTRESS Assembly

Fragment testing

Projectile testing of wall panel in the High-Pressure Test Rig
  • Concrete specimen with geometry, thickness, and reinforcement matching FORTRESS wall panel
  • Projectiles were mild steel cylinders of equal length and diameter (varying size/weight)
  • Tests conducted using a gas gun developed by BakerRisk for fragment throw
FORTRESS Wall Panel Penetration Test Setup
FORTRESS Wall Panel Penetration Test Setup
Results indicated negligible vulnerability for both projectile sizes
  • Test #1: 2.2 lb at 378 ft/s (no spalling)
  • Test #2: 13 lb at 171 ft/s (localized spalling)
Fragment Spall and Penetration Capacity of FORTRESS
Fragment Spall and Penetration Capacity of FORTRESS

Blast: Panel and Joint Testing

Dynamic testing of wall panel in the Shock Tube Test Rig
  • 10ft × 10ft target area
  • Included panel joint, corner joint, and reaction frame
Five tests conducted on a single panel configuration
  • Design basis free-field loads (1)
  • Reflected loads (4)
The blast door module of a FORTRESS protective building in a test frame before testing its resistance to blasts.
Wall Panel in Test Frame
Results indicated negligible vulnerability at design basis loads
  • Test #1: 11.3 psi at 1,006 psi.ms resulted in a max displacement of 0.5-inches (hairline cracks)
  • Test #2: 20.9 psi at 1,639 psi.ms resulted in a max displacement of <1.25-inches (cracking)
Pressure-Impulse Curve for Building Damage
Pressure-Impulse Curve for Building Damage

Blast: Panel and Door Testing

  • 10ft × 10ft target area
  • Included panel and door
Seven tests conducted on a single panel configuration
  • Design basis free-field loads (4)
  • Reflected loads (3)
Wall Panel with Door in Test Frame
Wall Panel with Door in Test Frame
Results indicated negligible vulnerability at design basis loads
  • Test #5: 10.9 psi at 990 psi.ms resulted in a max displacement of 0.375-inches (hairline cracks)
  • Test #6: 20.0 psi at 1,433 psi.ms resulted in a max displacement of 0.635-inches (hairline cracks)
Door still opened after 7 tests!
The blast door module of a FORTRESS protective building after testing showing minimal damage and demonstrating its blast resistance.
Post-Test 7 – Damage Near Load Cells and Hairline Cracking

Thermal: Panel and Joint Testing

Impinged jet fire of wall panels in the Process Safety Test Rig
  • ¼-inch propane jet fire for 1-hour
  • Full height panel with thermal barrier in panel joint
Additional small-scale testing of joint seal products
  • Patented product resists fire and thermal degradation as well as prevents ingress of smoke and toxic combustion products
Wall Panel in Test Frame
Impinged Saturated Jet Fire on Wall Panel
Results indicated negligible vulnerability for design basis thermal exposure
  • Resistant to temperature rise as well as smoke and toxic combustion off-gases
  • Temperature remains below 110° F, well below ASTM E119 required 139°F
2 means of egress is best practice in case one is compromised with impinged jet fire
Thermal Heat Rise from FDS Calculations and Experimental Testing
Thermal Heat Rise from FDS Calculations and Experimental Testing

Thermal: Panel and Door Testing

Impinged jet fire of door in the Process Safety Test Rig
  • ¼-inch propane jet fire for 30-minutes
Small-scale testing of door components to confirm performance
Panel and Door Test Setup
Panel and Door Test Approx. 15-ft from Release Location
Results indicated negligible vulnerability for design basis thermal exposure
  • High temperature paint burnt off door
  • Temperature remains below 100°F
Door was still functional after grease was replaced post-test
  • Fire test burnt door grease away
Experimental Testing and Thermal Impact at Seal
Thermal Heat Rise from FDS Calculations and Experimental Testing (left) and Thermal Impact at Seal (right)

Air Ingress Testing: Main Building

Tracer gas tested in conjunction with the patent pending Shelter-in-Place (SIP) Control System
  • Main building volume and interior SIP room
Inherent gas ingress protection
  • Limited gaps in building shell
  • Vestibules at building entrance/exits
  • System to monitor and alarm/isolate
  • SIP room with systems and controls
FORTRESS Shelter Room Tracer Gas Test Results
FORTRESS Shelter Room Tracer Gas Test Results

Air Ingress Testing: SIP Room

Results indicated protection beyond design basis
  • Main Building: 0.08 ACH with a 5-mph wind
  • SIP Room: 0.026 ACH
Protection from Gas Ingress should be addressed as part of an overall site emergency response plan.
Long Duration Exposure Toxic Protection
Long Duration Exposure Toxic Protection
Full-scale Shock Tube Testiing
Full-scale Shock Tube Testing for Overpressure Impacts
Full-scale Impinged Jet Fire Testing
Full-scale Impinged Jet Fire Impingement Testing for Thermal Impacts
Full-scale Fragment Testing
Full-scale Fragment Testing
Scroll To Top