Physical Security Measures to Address an Explosive Threat - Literature review Example

Physical Security Measures to Address an Explosive Threat al Affiliation In the year 2001, the Pentagon and theNew York City were hit by a terrorist attack. Prior to 2001 the worst bombing act was witnessed in Oklahoma following the bombing of Murrah Federal office Building (Ricks & Dingle, 2015). The more recent bombing was witnessed in the bombing of the Boston Marathon. These are just but a few of the serious of bombing attacks that have been witnessed in the United States and other parts of the world. Following these bombings, most Americans are now much concerned of their safety and have gone out to look for ways to protect their buildings and their assets from physical aggressors. When talking of physical aggressors in this case, the focus is on terrorists, criminals, active shooters, and vandals who intrude to bring damage and, at the worst case scenario killing building occupants. The terrorist attack at the New York City’s World Trade Centre was rated the worst ever seen and exposed America’s vulnerability to possible terrorist attacks (Ricks & Dingle, 2015). Following this attack, most office building owners were forced to come up with measures to detect a possible attack and in a bid to take care of the safety of occupants in the buildings. The federal agencies were also not left behind in this mission as they took part in the design of overarching mechanisms that will help in boosting security of buildings. From this time period, the discussion of buildings security has revolved around the physical security measures that may actually address explosive threats in all buildings across the United States and other parts of the world. Today, people and governments have joined hands in the improvements of buildings’ security measure as this is seen as preservation for future development. Introduction Today, the primary goal for project managers, engineers, architects, and owners of buildings is adopting a design that guarantees safety and security of occupants. The federal government has also taken part as a stakeholder in ensuring that important security measures are put in place to handle any possible security threat that may come along (Ricks & Dingle, 2015). In this paper, we will focus our attention to the physical security components that may be used in addressing an explosive threat. This literally means that we will consider solutions such as the establishment of facade to mitigate debris, protected perimeter, and isolation of explosives. In a building setup these measures will be attained through the use of ductile detailing principles and structural dynamics set at all entry points of the building. In the development of a complete and strong building security system, the operational security will need to work hand-in-hand with the physical security measures and life safety techniques. The security consultants and the engineers will work together right from the programming phase in the successful implementation of the physical security system. Coordination between the design team and structural engineers will help come up with an optimal building design that both meets the set security requirements and also remains inviting and open to members of the public. Basic Components of Physical Security 1. Wall Security For wall security, there has been the development of seismic intruder detection for walls and building structures in detecting early intrusions attempts. The components of walls security include; Seismic Intrusion Design System (SIDS), VibeWire piezoelectric cable, Dual zone analyzers, and alarm relay outputs among others (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). This security system uses state of the art SIDS analyzers combined with VibeWire cable in the monitoring of intrusion attempts on the walls, floors, and the roofs. When building the walls, the security specialist will usually install an unobtrusive system that raises an alarm to intrusion threats on the walls, floors, roofs, and all structures attached to the system. The wall security system is easy to install and use and thus considered efficient in providing optimum security. The wall security system is operated by a zoned 12 to 24 V DC which is fully monitored by a group of security analysts. A typical wall security system is shown in figure 1 in the appendix section. How and Where to use the Wall Security System The wall system uses a piezoelectric cable applied to the specific walls and structures to be protected. This is usually within an aluminum conduit that comes along with a secure fixing method that boosts the detection capabilities of the system. The system provides security by reporting vibrations and noise up to two meters radius away from the VibeWire piezoelectric detection device (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). The system is used to provide perimeter walls protections by raising an alarm in case of intrusions. This SIDS security wall system is mainly preferred as it cannot be masked or blocked. As a result, the system has been used to provide perimeter security to strong rooms, stockrooms, factories, explosive stores, control rooms, warehouses, and office buildings in need for high security monitoring. Pros of the SIDS Wall Security System The SIDS system provides optimum security owing to its use of VibeWire piezoelectric and alarm relay outputs that will detect all forms of noises and vibrations. The system is also efficient compared with other wall security systems such as conventional intruder alarm volumetric detection system in the sense that it cannot be masked or blocked. This makes it suitable to high security walls in big offices and control rooms. The installation and use of the SIDS security system is easy and thus will take the security team less time to implement and get it to work. The monitoring of the system is also easy owing to its strategic zoning. Cons of the SIDS Wall Security System First, the SIDS security system uses technologically sophisticated components that are expensive to acquire and implement. Small building owners may thus not afford such a security system. Secondly, the SIDS security system requires constant monitoring of the whole system. A failure of one of the system may lead to the failure of the whole system. 2. Protective Glazing Products and Systems Protective glazing is a common security system used to counteract threats related robbery incidents, natural disasters, forced entry, ballistic attacks, and bomb blasts. There are many types of protective glazing including; insulated, laminated, monolithic, and miscellaneous glasses and products (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). Different glazed products will fit different projects and the picking of the most preferred product will help in addressing specific threat. The various categories of the protective glazing products are discussed in details here below. a. Monolithic Glass Monolithic glass comes out as a single slab of glass with constant thickness. A “float glass” is used in the making of an annealed product of glass that when broken produces shards that resemble a dagger. The security concept is the “hazardous breaking” that prevents intruders from tampering with the monolithic glass. Typically, the monolithic float glass comes in thickness ranging between 1/8" - 3/4" (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). The floating glass can be made safer trough a number of mechanisms such as heating and thermal tempering. b. Laminated Glass This is a special kind of glass with additional monolithic glass layers that are attached together with the use of a tough interlayer sheet material. The sheet material that is most preferred is polyvinyl butyral (PVB). The tough interlayer sheet material comes in thickness ranging from 0.015" - 0.090" and different projects will use different interlayer thickness depending on the project’s nature and the specific security threat meant to be challenged (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). The fully tempered laminated glass is preferred owing to its hardened natured. The laminated glass has shown stability by deflecting explosions as needed in a number of security buildings. c. Insulating Glass The insulated glass is formed from the fabrication of glass units, where both the laminated and the monolithic glass are strategically joined; leaving an internal air space that allows higher performance of improved energy. The desired configuration will need to be installed in the interior surface when using the laminated glass. A mistake allowing the installation of the laminate lite on the outer side and the monolithic lite on the inner side may end posing the security threat to the occupants of the building instead of intruders. d. Glazing Bar/Cable Catch The glazing bar and cable catch system is used to offer glazing performance protection to buildings in the risk of facing the threat of window “blow-out”. Blow-out in this case represents a situation where a frame that has been deformed detached itself from the window frame, mainly in the case of a blast attack (Philpott & Einstein, 2006). In case of a blast attack air will tend to pressurize the window pane causing it to flex at the middle and ending up detaching itself from the window frame. By the window detaching itself from the frame, there is the risk of even more dame at the inside of the building. The glazing bar in this case comes to save the situation by providing a “back-up” to the interior of the window frame and pushes back the air pressure from the blast maintaining a balance between the inner and outer air condition. The created balance in pressure stops the detaching of the window pane from the window frame system. Pros of using the Protective Glazing Products and Systems The protective glazing products and systems are cheap and will cost relatively less to acquire and install compared with the wall security SIDS system (Kingsley-Hefty, 2013). In addition, the protective glazing products and systems will not need monitoring as in the case of other security systems and thus efficient from that perspective. Cons of using the Protective Glazing Products and Systems Question has been raised on the efficiency of the protective glazing products and systems handling blasts of very high intensity. Some blasts may come with very high intensities that may prove the glazing products and systems ineffective. It is also explained that the protective glazing products and systems may work against the occupants of a building if installed incorrectly. In some situations the misalignment of the window lites may end up hurting an occupant. 3. Perimeter Protection Security personnel’s and specialists have met challenges trying to predict the exact weight intensity of an explosive to be used by a terrorist or even the distance/location targeted. With such difficulties mentioned it only becomes natural for the security personnel to keep explosive as far away from a building as possible. This is usually achieved by maximizing the standoff distance also known as the protection perimeter (Kingsley-Hefty, 2013). Such an approach will be preferred in the situation where a specified building is noted to be in the risk of being attacked as opposed to suffering collateral damage from the attack of an adjacent building. How the Perimeter Protection Operates The perimeter protection operates by setting out the allowed keep-out distance between the building and the unscreened vehicles as well as the setting of the location of anti-ram bollards away from the building’s protective perimeter. The protection perimeter conditions also sets out the maximum allowable speed limits in the determination of the kinetic energy to be resisted within the protective perimeter (Kingsley-Hefty, 2013). In the perimeter protection area the bollards will be build in such a way that it resists the maximum load. Public parking close to the building must be fully secured or eliminated. If not eliminated, street parking touching the building’s protective perimeter should not be allowed. Additional standoff distance may also be obtained by eliminating sidewalks close to the building. Pros of Perimeter Protection Perimeter protection is a commonly protected method because it is basically a cheap method of boosting the security of a building. Basically preventing people from getting too close to the building is an activity that be achieved at a relatively low cost. In fact, a simple fence surrounding a garden flower attached to the building can do this work. The other pro is that it is an easy way that requires minimal resources and effort in design and implementation. Cons of Perimeter Protection The major con of using this method it fails to protect the building in the case of a blast. Basically, this method comes out as a precautionary measure and not really a protective measure. What this means is that it may not protect the building and the occupants in the case of a blast with a high intensity, enough to reach the building (Kingsley-Hefty, 2013). The other con related to perimeter protection is that it considered relatively “weak” compared with other security methods. This is mainly because there is minimal technology impoverished in the design, implementation, and monitoring of perimeter protection. 4. Energy-Absorbing Catch Systems This is a unique method working as reinforcement to the flexible curtain-wall system. The method takes the flexibility a step further by introducing window materials with the capability of absorbing and disseminating huge pressures and energy from a blast. The resultant effect is that the debris will be stopped from entering the space occupied. The energy from the blast is usually absorbed with the use of special equipment known as the Cable Protected Window Systems (CPWS) (Elwood & Roche, 2011). When energy has been absorbed and disseminated, it prevents the deformation of window frames and dame to the interior. Figure 2 in the appendix section is a diagram showing a sample catch system. Pros of the Energy-Absorbing Catch System First is that the method is effective in trapping blasts with heavy intensities, owing to its high flexibility and the Cable Protected Windows System technology. Secondly, the method is simple to design, install, and maintain in typical buildings. Cons of the Energy-Absorbing Catch System This method of securing buildings is considered highly technical, using state of art technology and equipments. This makes the method is more expensive compared with other protective methods. In addition the method requires more effort and time in monitoring and evaluation. Typically, the system needs evaluation from time to time, checking for errors. 5. Floor Slab Reinforcements Here, the builder will design a flat-plate structural slab that acts to reinforce the columns, to the extent of repelling some substantial energy from a blast. This methods acts to boost the lateral-load-resisting capacity of a building creating room for the slab to transfer blast forces to the sheer walls reducing the building’s chances of clashing (Elwood & Roche, 2011). The flat-plate structure also increases the contact between the slabs and the column promoted increased support for the column length as well as the buckling of the other columns. Alternatively, the slabs may be embedded with sheer resistance that dramatically increases resistance in the shear as well as the slab’s ability to distribute the moments to the columns, empowering the building as a whole. A diagram of floor slab reinforcement is shown in figure 3 in the appendix section. Pros of floor Slab Reinforcements This protection method is highly effective in shielding the building against blasts of high intensity. This is made possible because of the highly boosted columns with the capability of absorbing blast impacts and energy (In Krieken, 2002). Secondly, the method uses simple technology that is easy to design and implement. Cons of floor Slab Reinforcements Though highly effective, the method adds the cost of building and may be come out to be expensive in the case of building accommodating big floor space. The construction of a flat-plate structural slab needs to be done by experienced engineers who may not available, especially in the case of small building projects where the owners cannot afford the technology. Conclusion A number of physical security measures have been discussed here above including; wall security, protective glazing products and systems, perimeter protection, energy-absorbing systems, and floor-slab reinforcements. To come up with an optimal building security solution, building owners and agencies may have to come up with a codified platform where two or more measures are used at the same time (In Krieken, 2002). Understanding where to place a given security measure is important in the design of an optimal security system since different measures will operate well in different circumstances. References Elwood, R., & Roche, C. (2011). Insider threat: Material control & accountability mitigation. Oak Ridge, Tenn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In Krieken, P. J. (2002). Terrorism and the international legal order: With special reference to the UN, the EU and cross - border aspects. Haag: T.M.C. Asser Press. Kingsley-Hefty, J. (2013). Physical security strategy and process playbook. Oxford: Elsevier. Philpott, D., & Einstein, S. (2006). The integrated physical security handbook. Arlington, Va: Homeland Defense Journal. Ricks, T. A., Ricks, B. E., & Dingle, J. (2015). Physical security and safety: A field guide for the practitioner. Appendix Figure 1: A diagram for a SIDS wall security system Figure 2: A diagram for an Energy-Absorbing Catch System Figure 3: A diagram for Floor Slab Reinforcement Read More