HAARP large scale blast testing and fragmentation characterization

Background

The Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Physical Security Division, Research and Development Branch (DS/PSD/RD) is investigating debris generated from perimeter anti-ram barriers during a Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) attack.

DS/PSD/RD is seeking proposals to conduct large scale blast testing and fragmentation tracking.

Government Furnished Information to Performer:

• DOS DS PSD Standard Practice for Blast Tests 
• Final report and test data from previous anti-ram barrier debris characterization testing
• Physical Security Handbook (Red Book) drawing templates

Scope

This effort will be broken into two phases.  Phase 1 will be to evaluate and characterize the debris generated from a simulated VBIED attack against baseline Department anti-ram systems, identified in this document.  Phase 2 will be to evaluate and characterize debris generated from modified Department anti-ram systems.

Performers will be evaluated on:

1. Ability to perform testing in accordance with Blast Testing SOP for DS/PSP/PSD
2. Responders shall provide a narrative for test site setup as part of performer evaluation.
   • Test facility capabilities:
     • Topography suitable for instrumentation
       • Large, clear, flat, and level test spaces are ideal to best characterize the debris:
         • Ability to characterize dynamic debris at 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, and 300ft
         • Ability to character debris at rest post test (as far as 1,500ft from initial test article location)
         • Free of debris from previous tests
       • Widths that can accommodate HS camera views that capture overall events
     • A 2,000 lbs. TNT NEW range limit is the minimum required to conduct this testing.
     • DS/PSD/RD will accept either single test article test, or if appropriate, test two test articles simultaneously as seen in Figure 1: 
       • Will require larger test range, ~3,000ft

Figure 1: Example of Setup to Test Two Anti-Ram Fences in One Test

• • Instrumentation plan:
    • Required to characterize debris generated from the anti-ram barriers:
      • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, 300ft, and at rest
        • Characterize the following from debris:
          • Dimensions
          • Weight
          • Velocity
          • Height from ground
          • Dispersion
      • Plan to differentiate debris from one test to the next (concrete dye, paint, etc.) and/or clear range of debris from prior tests

DS/PSD/RD has no prescribed methodology to capture the above data; The performer shall propose their instrumentation and post processing plans including the types of data acquisition equipment and any software needed to do the analysis.

1. Schedule: Complete the project within 24 months, with more consideration given to condensed schedules.
   • Compressed testing dates are preferred to avoid excess testing travel lengths or multiple trips.
   • DS/PSD/RD Understands cost and schedule need to be balanced. Testing two anti-ram fences simultaneously saves time, explosives, and setup labor but requires duplicate instrumentation and a much larger test range.  Performer should provide their plan and justify.  Performer is also welcome to provide several; approaches and let DS/PSD/RD decide which is most advantageous to the government.

Phase 1: Initial Anti-Ram Barrier Debris Characterization:

Set up:

For planning purposes, the surrogate Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device will be a charge with the NEW of 2,000lbs TNT, in a cylinder with a L/D of 1, sat atop a 32in table, centered on a 10ft x 10ft concrete pad, and placed so that there is a 24in gap between the edge of charge and the test article.  The boundary conditions of the test articles will influence the amount of debris generated during the testing, but the government needs to balance cost with real world simulation.  Therefore, the government would like the performer to provide options to build and test the test articles in lengths of 30ft, 45ft and 60ft long sections and constructed per the drawings in Appendix A.

Figure 2: Example Test Article Layout

Phase 1 Test Articles:

Test Sample

Design Being Tested

Drawings in Appendix B

Brief Description (See Appendix A for Details)

Potential to Combine tests

Length of Test sample Options

Base 1

AC-41-05 Bar Fence on top of DS-50 Knee Wall

20x20mm Bars @ 65mm OC

N

B1.1: 30ft

B1.2: 45ft

B1.3:60ft

Base 2

AC-41-06 Picket Fence on top of DS-50 Knee Wall

50mm x 6mm Pickets @200mm OC

N

B2.1: 30ft

B2.2: 45ft

B2.3:60ft

Base 3

DS-40 Anti- Climb & Ram Fence

20x20mm Bars @ 130 mm OC w/ DN250 XS Pipes @ 1,720mm OC

Yes w/ base 4 or Option 2

B3.1: 30ft

B3.2: 45ft

B3.3:60ft

Base 4

DS-44 Steel Anti- Climb & Ram Fence

100mm x 50mm x 6mm Tubes @ 175mm OC

Yes w/ base 3 or Option 2

B4.1: 30ft

B4.2: 45ft

B4.3:60ft

Option 1

AC-41-04 Tube Fence on top of DS-50 Knee Wall

38mm dia. x 3mm Tubes @150mm OC

N

O1.1: 30ft

O1.2: 45ft

O1.3:60ft

Option 2

DS-43 Steel Anti- Climb & Ram Fence with Kickers

100mm x 50mm x 6mm Tubes @ 175mm OC with Kickers @ 350mm OC

Yes w/ base 2 or base 3

O2.1: 30ft

O2.2: 45ft

O2.3:60ft

After the Phase 1 test data will be analyzed by the performer and DS/PSD will determine which test samples produced the most and least hazardous fragmentation based of level of hazardous debris produced. 

Phase 2: Modified Anti-Ram Barrier Debris Characterization:

In certain scenarios the Department requires perimeters to employ opaque barriers to prevent easy external observation.  To meet this requirement the test samples that produced the least hazardous fragmentation in Phase 1 will be fitted with various opaque claddings and tested to determine which produce the least hazardous fragmentation.  The performer will research various opaque claddings that will provide concealment with preference to those that would mitigate and reduce the level of hazardous debris generated.

The performer will research and propose feasible fence and knee-wall cladding materials that can be tested in Phase 2.  The criteria for potential fence cladding are:

1. Opaque
2. Weather resistant
3. Aesthetically pleasing
4. Potential to break up in a non-hazardous way
   1. Large yet low mass pieces
   2. Small pieces
   3. Consumed by VBIED’s thermal energy
   4. Etc.
5. Readily available construction materials
   1. Cost effective and easily constructable

Test Sample

Design Being Tested

Example Cladding Options will be Researched and Suggested by Performer and Accepted by DS/PSD/RD

Potential to Combine tests

Length of Test sample Options

Option 3

Best Performing Fence on knee wall with opaque cladding

E.g.: 24-gauge stainless steel 316L or Alum equivalent decorative panel on fence and steel plate behind knee wall

N

O3.1: 30ft

O3.2: 45ft

O3.3:60ft

Option 4

Best Performing Fence on knee wall with opaque cladding

E.g.: Metal plate material on fence and knee wall

N

O4.1: 30ft

O4.2: 45ft

O4.3:60ft

Option 5

Best Performing Anti-Ram Fence with Opaque cladding

E.g.: Stainless steel 316L or Alum equivalent decorative panel on fence

Yes w/ Option 6

O5.1: 30ft

O5.2: 45ft

O5.3:60ft

Option 6

Best Performing Anti-Ram Fence with Opaque cladding

E.g.: Light weight material

Yes w/ Option 5

O6.1: 30ft

O6.2: 45ft

O6.3:60ft

Deliverables

Test Data:

• The performer will determine the best method to place video cameras, gauges, surveying equipment, etc. necessary to capture the desired data.  The performer shall present their instrumentation plan to DS for feedback and approval prior to the test.
• Dynamic data to be collected is as follows:
  • HS Video:
    • Overall Event and downrange point of view (e.g. at 1,000ft)
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft and 300ft
  • Dimension/description of debris (steel, concrete, steel and concrete, etc.)
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, and 300ft
  • Estimated weight of debris
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, and 300ft
  • Velocity of debris
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft and 300ft
  • Height of debris
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, and 300ft
  • Dispersion pattern of debris
    • At 75ft, 100ft, 200ft, and 300ft
• Post blast debris assessment will be conducted to characterize the debris.  The performer shall determine the search area necessary to capture 90% of the debris weighing one pound or more (estimated to be 1,000ft to 1,500ft from originating position but performer needs to confirm).
  • Data to be collected:
    • Dimensions of debris/ description of debris (steel, concrete, steel and concrete, etc.)
      • At final resting place
    • Weight of debris
      • At final resting place
    • Dispersion pattern of debris
      • At final resting place

Drawings:

• Provide updated and/or generate new drawings of modified anti-ram systems from Phase 2, drawings are intended to be included in the OBO Physical Security Handbook (Red Book). The updated, or new, drawings shall convey all details necessary to serve as a basis of design for OBO’s architects, engineers, and planners.

Reports:

A quick look report will be provided within 14 days of test completion, with full written reports within 45 days.  Reports will include test descriptions, raw gauge data, processed gauge data, high resolution photos and videos, and documented descriptions of layup and witness panel condition posttest.  All final reports, photos, and full testing videos shall be delivered at the completion of all samples testing on a hard drive mailed via FedEx or UPS to:

                       

Attention: Alec Williamson

                        1400 Wilson Blvd

                        9th Floor

                        Arlington, VA 22209

A monthly status update on progress, scheduling, delays or other information shall be provided on the 15th of the month.  Status updates shall be in the format of an email with subject “Hazards Associated with Anti-Ram Perimeters– Month”.  An example monthly status update template is provided in Appendix A.

Appendix A:

Example Monthly Status Report

DS/C/PSP/PSD/RD – Project Name

Task Manager: TBD

Developer PI: (Fill in name, phone number once contract is awarded)

Contract Number: (fill in)

MONTHLY STATUS REPORT

1)      TASK TITLE:  ((fill in)

2)      DESCRIPTION/REQUIREMENT:  (fill in)

3)      DEVELOPER(S):  (add any significant subcontractors)

4)      TECHNICAL APPROACH: (In five or six sentences, summarize the projectfts technical approach.)

5)      MILESTONES:  (fill in relevant milestones)

Milestone

Planned

Rescheduled

Actual

Project Plan

 

Kickoff Meeting

 

Preliminary Design Review

 

Operations and Maintenance Manual

 

Critical Design Review

 

Test Plan

 

Test Report

 

Etc.

 

6)      Funding & Costs:

Project Funding History

Funding Action

Date

Amount

Comment

Contract Award

7/15/2016

$68,000.00

Contract award, funds through Nov 2016

Mod 1

10/15/2016

$58,000.00

Incremental funding, funds through Dec 2016.

Mod 2

1/15/2017

$65,000.00

Fully funds effort

Funding

Provided to Date

Expenditures

(Current Month)

Accrued Expenditures (Cumulative)

Remaining

Obligated Funds

Funding

$100,000.00

$25,000.00

$100,000.00

$0.00

Total Funding Provided

$200,000.00

Contract Value

$300,000.00

Insert graph showing planned expenditures, current funding level, and actual expenditures here.  The graph must cover from contract start date to end date. If a revised spend plan becomes necessary, be sure to include the original plan as well.  (See sample below):

7)      TASK STATUS / MONTHLY ACTIVITIES:

a.             Report month – 

                   b.         Upcoming Month –

8)      ISSUES:  (Identify any issue that affects the progress of the project, funds requirements, payment of invoices, potential schedule problems.  Include requirements for resolution of the issue.)

9)      PHOTOS/VIDEO: (Include at least two current digital images of 300 pixel/inch quality or better, in “.jpg”, “.tif”, or “.bmp” format that show a conceptual application, design, physical prototype, or other meaningful representation of the project progress  If applicable, provide video compatible with Windows Media Player.)