Not all hazards are external—some are internal and need to be safely contained. Our team of engineers have a unique understanding of potential hazards that warrant containment, such as the sudden release of high-pressure fluid, battery abuse testing, explosives storage, hydrogen storage, and rotating equipment. These types of hazards have the potential to pose significant projectile, overpressure, fire, toxic, hose whipping, or liquid jet hazards to nearby personnel and infrastructure. Our hazard mitigation strategies leverage our knowledge base and industry-funded testing validation to develop innovative, safe, and cost-effective solutions for our clients.
Proven Designs and Evaluations
BakerRisk relies on our engineering expertise and testing validation to evaluate existing and design new barricades and enclosures to mitigate various types of hazards. We also leverage industry knowledge as a member of the ASME PCC-2 (Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping) committee to ensure safe, workable solutions for all your hazard containment needs.
Barricades and enclosures are typically custom-designed to meet the needs of the specific test hazards, operation, and facility. It’s not a one-size-fits-all world, so we offer a variety of standard hazard containment design types, including booths, horizontal bunkers, walk-in rooms, vessel/tool wraps, below-ground pits, and small mobile carts. These have utilized a wide variety of construction materials, including heavily-reinforced concrete, structural steel, ballistic blankets, and Lexan windows. BakerRisk also provides turnkey enclosures and barricades for your hazard containment needs, saving you money, time and effort in obtaining the right solution.
In addition to the structural design of barricades, doors, and bunkers, BakerRisk can calculate safe standoff distances for projectile trajectories and blast loads in the open air or impeded by a barricade to ensure personnel safety.
Applications
Hazard:
Industries:
Hazard:
Industries:
Hazard:
Industries:
Hazard:
Industries:
Hazard:
Industries:
Videos
Testing Photos
Our Specialists
Related Services
Related Resources
Discover how expertly designed barricades and solutions, such as BakerRisk’s Shock And Fragment Enclosure (SAFE™), are proven to mitigate hazards.
This paper focuses on hazards associated with hydrogen in high-pressure applications. The sudden release of high-pressure hydrogen gas represents several potential hazards and risks.
This article discusses the Ammonia-Fertilizer Damage Mechanism and Mitigation Joint Industry Program (JIP), recently developed by BakerRisk to help ammonia and fertilizer companies work together to address and mitigate specific equipment damage mechanisms.
This paper examines DDESB acceptance criteria for the design of structures housing small quantities of explosive materials (i.e., less than 10 lb TNT equivalent). From experience, following current DDESB design guidelines (e.g., UFC 3-340-02) can result in extremely fortified construction, in terms of wall and roof thickness and level of reinforcement, even when charge weights are small or significant venting is provided. This issue is particularly evident when small volume storage rooms are desired. Means of possibly reducing the rigidity of the current reinforced concrete acceptance criteria are explored by optimizing computational models with various construction layouts (e.g., different wall thicknesses and flexural/non-flexural reinforcement requirements) subject to shock and gas loading. Recommendations and limitations are provided for using small charges in containment applications.
It is common practice to proof test high pressure vessels prior to their use in the field. One technique for leak testing these vessels is submersion in water . A test failure at high pneumatic pressure and can pose several hazards to nearby personnel, such as projectile launch and blast loads. Submerged underwater testing can provide some level of protection from these hazards. However, it is largely unknown how much water cover is needed to prevent a projectile from escaping.
Pressure vessels that operate at high pneumatic pressures (greater than 10,000 psi [69 MPa]) pose several potential hazards to nearby personnel, including projectile launch and blast loads that may occur as a result of a vessel failure. In order to provide personnel protection, pressure vessels are often placed inside test enclosures. However, sometimes these enclosures are built with the intent to create an exclusion zone but are not designed to contain these hazards. On some occasions, local shields are used to provide protection from potential projectiles that may be launched from a failed pressure vessel without regard to blast loads that will ensue from a pneumatically-charged vessel.
Pressure vessels that operate at high pressures (greater than 10,000 psi [69 MPa]) pose several potential hazards to nearby personnel. Some of these hazards include projectile launch, water jetting, and blast loads that may occur as a result of a pneumatic or hydrostatic pressure vessel failure. In order to provide personnel protection, pressure vessels may be placed inside hardened test enclosures designed to contain these hazards. Some of the key response mechanisms that should be considered when designing such enclosures include applied blast loads for pneumatic testing), localized barrier perforation, global or gross barrier response, and generation of secondary debris from damage to a barrier, such as back-face spalling. Some of these hazards and shielding responses have been evaluated experimentally in the High Pressure Testing Safety Research Joint Industry Program [1, 2, 3]. This paper describes some of these hazards and some considerations for providing personnel protection.
Contact: +1 (210) 824-5960
