Mitigation of Blast in a Water Mist

  • T. SchunckEmail author
  • M-O. Sturtzer
  • J. Mory
  • D. Eckenfels
  • J-F. Legendre
Conference paper


The purpose of this work was to study blast mitigation in a water mist and more specifically the effects of the droplet size and of the water mist loading on blast mitigation. A tunnel has been equipped with a water mist fire suppression system. By using this facility, experiments of detonation were carried out in the air and in different water mists. The blast effects were evaluated by means of four pressure gauges placed on the tunnel walls and one pressure gauge placed at the end of the tunnel. The transmission factor of the initial overpressure in the water mist was around 0.8 when four nozzles were used to produce the mist, whatever the size of the droplets. The transmission factor of the initial overpressure was smaller, about 0.6, with eight nozzles generating the mist, either for small or large droplets. The shock wave was delayed by the presence of the mist. The maximum impulse was reduced by about 20% when four nozzles were used to produce the mist, whether the droplets were small or large. The maximum impulse was more reduced with eight nozzles generating the mist, i.e., by about 30% for both droplet sizes.


  1. 1.
    A. A. Buzukov, Combust. Explos. and Shock Waves 36, 395 (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Jones, G.O. Thomas, Trans. IChem E 71, 41 (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    V.H.Y Tam et al., J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 16, 81 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G.O. Thomas, Trans. IChem E 78, 339 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.A. Catlin et al., Trans. IChemE 71, 101 (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Mataradze, et al., Shock energy absorber for protection underground structure from internal explosions, in 15th International Symposium on Interaction of the Effects of Munitions with Structures Proceedings, Postdam (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Tosello, et al., Shock wave attenuation using watermist, in International Symposium on Military Aspects of Blast and Shock Proceedings, Bourges (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Ananth et al., Fire. Technol 48, 641 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H.D. Willauer et al., J. Hazard. Mater. 165, 1068 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J.L. Bailey, et al., NRL report: NRL/MR/6180- -06-8933 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A.D. Resnyansky, T.G. Delaney, DSTO report: DSTO-TR-1944 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D.A. Schwer, K. Kailasanath, NRL report: NRL/MR/6410- -06-8976 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Schunck
    • 1
    Email author
  • M-O. Sturtzer
    • 1
  • J. Mory
    • 1
  • D. Eckenfels
    • 1
  • J-F. Legendre
    • 1
  1. 1.ISL, French-German Research Institute of Saint LouisSaint LouisFrance

Personalised recommendations