Bomb Damage
Analysis of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building
by Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.)
Reproduced from:
http://physics911.net/generalpartinreport
On April 19, 1995, the
Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma was
bombed, causing extensive damage to the structure, the loss of 168
innocent lives, the victimization of the families of those who lost
loved ones, hundreds of non-fatal injuries, and substantial property
damage in the vicinity. The media and the Executive branch reported
that the sole source of the devastation was a single truck bomb
consisting of 4,800 pounds of ammonium nitrate, transported to the
location in a Ryder Truck and parked in front of the building. It is
impossible that the destruction to the building could have resulted
from such a bomb alone. To cause the damage pattern that occurred to
the Murrah building, there would have to have been demolition
charges at several supporting column bases, at locations not
accessible from the street, to supplement the truck bomb damage.
Indeed, a careful examination of photographs showing the collapsed
column bases reveals a failure mode produced by demolition charges
and not by a blast from the truck bomb. To understand what caused
the damage to the Murrah Building, one needs to understand some
basics about the use and nature of explosives. First, blast through
air is a very inefficient energy coupling mechanism against heavily
reinforced concrete beams and columns. Second, blast damage
potential initially falls off more rapidly than an inverse function
of the distance cubed. That is why in conventional weapons
development, one seeks accuracy over yield for hard targets. That is
also why in the World Trade Center bombing (where the only source of
blast damage was a truck bomb) the column in the middle of the
bombed-out cavity was relatively untouched, although reinforced
concrete floors were completely stripped away for several floors
above and below the point of the bomb’s detonation (see Time
Magazine, 3-8-93, p 35). By contrast, heavily reinforced concrete
structures can be destroyed effectively through detonation of
explosives in contact with the reinforced concrete beams and
columns. For example, the entire building remains in Oklahoma City
were collapsed with 100-plus relatively small charges inserted into
drilled holes in the columns. The total weight of all charges was on
the order of 200 pounds. The detonation wave pressure (1,000,000 to
1,500,000 pounds per square inch) from a high detonation velocity
contact explosive sweeps into the column as a wave of compressive
deformation. Since the pressure in the wave of deformation far
exceeds the yield strength of the concrete (about 3,500 pounds per
square inch) by a factor of approximately 300, the concrete is
turned into granular sand and dust until the wave dissipates to
below the yield strength of the concrete. This leaves a relatively
smooth but granular surface, with protruding, bare reinforcement
rods, a distinctive signature of damage by contact explosives. The
effect of the contact explosive on the reinforcement rods themselves
can only be seen under microscopic metallurgical examination. (The
rods are inertially confined during the explosion and survive
basically in tact because of their much higher yield strength and
plasticity.) When a reinforced concrete structure is damaged through
air shock coupling and the pressure is below the compressive yield
strength of the concrete, the failure mode is generally compressive
structural fracture on one side and tensile fracture on the other,
both characterized by cracks and rough fracture surfaces. Such a
surface texture is very different from the relatively smooth
granular surface resulting from contact explosives.
Analysis
of Graphic Evidence
Tab 2 is a cross section
view of the building looking from the west. The very large header or
cross beam is shown at the north edge of the third floor. A large
but smaller header is seen at the recessed north edge of the second
floor with a brace beam extending out to the large columns in Row A.
The front of the whole building is glass.
Tab 3 shows the architectural layout of the first floor of the
Murrah Building and the location of the truck bomb with superimposed
circles of roughly equal levels of damage potential. The explosive
force drops rapidly (initially proportional to one over the distance
cubed) as the shock front travels farther and farther away from the
truck bomb. After the release wave, the shock front will propagate
proportional to one over the distance squared. The maximum possible
yield from 4800 pounds of ammonium nitrate would be obtained if it
were in a compressed sphere and detonated from the center. That
would produce a 4.4 foot diameter sphere of detonation products at
about 500,000 pounds per square inch. By the time the blast wave
hits the closest column, the pressure would have fallen off to about
375 pounds per square inch. That would be far below the 3500 pound
compressive yield strength of the concrete. Any column or beam
failure from the truck bomb would therefore have been from blast
wave structural loading and not from any wave of deformation in the
concrete. The basic building structure consists of three rows of
columns (35 feet apart) with eleven columns in each row (20 feet
apart). The four corner columns have an external clamshelllike
structure for air ducts, etc. If we label the column rows A, B. and
C from front to back, and number the columns 1 through 11 from left
to right, then columns A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, and B3 collapsed,
essentially vertically. Tab 2 shows a very large reinforced concrete
header at the floor level of the third floor of column row A. Much
larger columns extend from the header down for the odd-numbered
columns, i.e., A3, A5, A7, and A9. The even- and odd-numbered
columns extended from the top of the building down to the header.
The foundation of the building is a heavy, reinforced concrete slab
with no sub-levels. From the potential damage contours on
Tab 3, and assuming the single truck bomb, the pressure and
impulse for collapsed columns B4, B5 and A7 are all in the 25 to 35
pounds per square inch region. However, the much smaller and closer
columns, B4 and B5, are still standing, while the much larger column
A7 is down. Column B3 is down with 42 percent less pressure and
impulse than columns B4. These facts are sufficient reason to know
that columns B3 and A7 had demolition charges on them. Moreover,
there is not sufficient blast impulse at that range to collapse any
of the three. In fact, columns B2, B4 and Bs all have the sheet rock
and furring strip finish still intact on the second and third floors
except where damaged by falling debris. The large header across the
front of the building at the third floor of Row A was not blown back
into the building as one may expect from such a large bomb. The
header came straight down but rolled backward 90 degrees because the
columns above the header rested off center toward the back.
Analysis
of Photographic Evidence
A careful examination
of photos showing the “A” row columns and the large header from the
third floor reveals absolutely no air blast shock wave fracture,
which is consistent with the pressure falloff with distance from the
truck bomb. The cleaned-up building structure (Tab
4) shows that the failure line
across the roof goes all the way to the ground except around columns
B4 and Bs at the second and third floor levels. Reinforcement rods
stripped out of beams and floors extend straight down on all floors.
Columns A3, A5, A7, and B3 collapsed straight down as the apparent
result of demolition charges at the column juncture with the third
floor for column B3 and with the third floor level header for
columns A3, A5, and A7. The even numbered columns (A2, A4, A6, and
A8) in Row A collapsed straight down because they were supported at
the third floor by the header, which necessarily failed with the
demolition of its conjunctions with columns A3, A5, and A7. When
columns A2 through A8 collapsed straight down, the roof and floor
fracture lines at all floors acted as an instant hinge line, which
would have given all floors collapsing down a slight tug toward
column row B. Because of the collapse of column B3, the floors were
cropped closer to the north side of columns B4, B5, which resulted
in damage by falling debris to sheet rock on columns B4 and B5 at
the third floor level. The so-called “pit” area behind columns B4
and B5 was caused either by the blast from the truck bomb pushing
out the ceilings of the first and second floors or from the
demolition charge on column B3. From the third floor it would look
like a “pit” into which much debris fell. The blast pressure in this
area would have been sufficient to exceed the ultimate yield design
strength of the floor. There were large areas at this pressure being
held only by the floor-thick, reinforced concrete around the 20-inch
reinforced concrete columns in the B row. The floor of the first
floor could not be blown downward, because it was a heavy concrete
slab on compacted earth. The ceilings of the first and second floors
nearer the truck between the A and B column rows could also have
been blown upward initially. Although the truck bomb had
insufficient power to destroy columns, the bomb was clearly
responsible for ripping out some floors at the second and third
floor levels.
Photographic Evidence of Demolition Charges
Turning next to the
demolition charges in the building, refer to the picture at
Tab 5. Here you see column A9 with no spalling as one would
expect with the blast pressures involved and the decorative indents
are unmarred. Note also the grooves at the top of the column and
across the header. When the demolition charge on column A7 went off,
the charge instantly left a 40 foot cantilevered header supporting
column A8. Cascading columns and beams from above probably snapped
off the end with a clear structural fracture, including rugged
cracks and rough surfaces. There is a large unseen beam extending
from behind the column, between the decorative groves, back to the
first floor header. This beam adds considerable rigidity to the
lower odd numbered columns in Row A. Turning next to
Tab 6, the stub of column B3 has been cleared, showing the bare
reinforcement rods at the third floor level. The large header from
the third floor level has fallen almost straight down with what
appears to be demolition charge damage clearly evident to the right
of column A3. The exposed reinforcement rods are clearly seen at the
header end to the right of column A3. It appears that the demolition
charge pulverized the header and columns out to about two feet from
the juncture. Column A3 is standing there with the clean
reinforcement rods clearly extended. Also, the architectural
decorative band is clearly evident without blemish (indicating no
blast damage in excess of yield strength). In this picture, the
failure of the header at column As is still covered with rubble, and
is not visible. However, the discontinuity in the slope of the
header on either side of the column As location clearly shows that
it failed in the region of its juncture with column As.
Tab 7 shows the localized damage to the header at the position
of column As, the closest column to the truck bomb crater. The end
of the beam on which the men are standing shows evidence of a
demolition charge at its juncture with column As. Several feet of
the beam juncture appear to have been pulverized away by a
demolition charge and the ends jammed together in the collapse. The
blast pressure from the truck bomb would have been in the 400 pounds
per square inch region, a factor of 10 below the yield strength of
concrete.
Tab 8 shows
the localized demolition damage at the juncture of column A7 and the
header. The same telltale demolition charge evidence is clear. The
straight edge of the decorative grove at the juncture can be seen on
both the column and the header. In my discussions with the building
architect, who was on the scene as an advisor throughout much of the
cleanup, he told me that the residual building was structurally
sound and that the Murrah Building could have been rebuilt. This is
totally consistent with the collapse of columns with demolition
charges because the inflicted structural damage is more localized.
Discussions above have been limited to the reinforced concrete
structure of the Murrah Building. Reinforced concrete columns are
hard targets for highexplosive bombs. Structures that have large
areas for blast loading and low mass can be destroyed at
considerable range from a large blast. That is why glass, plaster,
and light structures were destroyed at considerable distance from
the Murrah Building, but not reinforced concrete columns. Five
pounds of blast pressure will flatten most frame houses.
Seismograph Readings
Much has been said about
seismograph readings. Was there more than one explosion? Most people
I talked to in Oklahoma City heard two explosions relatively close
together. Some close by said they didn’t even hear an explosion.
That is not unreasonable, when you consider that getting walloped by
an intense shock wave is about like being hit across the ear by a 2″
x 4″. One would expect the demolition charges to have had an
electrical or primacord interconnect. If so, it would be difficult
to separate them on a seismograph. If delays were used, they would
be discrete. If a sensitivity switch was used inside the building,
the explosions would have been distinct. Bomb initiations could have
been easily designed to go off either simultaneously or with
separation.
Conclusions
The Murrah Federal Building
was not destroyed by one sole truck bomb. The major factor in its
destruction appears to have been detonation of explosives carefully
placed at four critical junctures on supporting columns within the
building. The only possible reinforced concrete structural failure
solely attributable to the truck bomb was the stripping out of the
ceilings of the first and second floors in the “pit” area behind
columns B4 and By. Even this may have been caused by a demolition
charge at column B3. It is truly unfortunate that a separate and
independent bomb damage assessment was not made during the cleanup,
before the building was demolished on May 23 and hundreds of truck
loads of debris were hauled away, smashed down, and covered with
dirt behind a security fence. When the picture at Tab 4 was
made, all evidence of demolition charges had been removed from the
building site (i.e., the stubs of columns B3, A3, A5, A7 and the
demolished junctures at the header with columns A3, A5 and A7. All
ambiguity with respect to the use of supplementing demolition
charges and the type of truck used could be quickly resolved if the
FBI were required to release the surveillance camera coverage of
this terribly tragic event.
Appendix
Letter from Gen. Partin
to U.S. Sen. Trent Lott
Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.)
8908 Captains Row
Alexandria, Virginia 22308
703-780-7652
July 30, 1995
Sen. Trent Lott
United States Senate
487 Senate Russell Office Building
Washington, DC 205102403
Dear Sen. Lott:
The attached report contains
conclusive proof that the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal
Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was not caused solely by the
truck bomb. Evidence shows that the massive destruction was
primarily the result of four demolition charges placed at critical
structural points at the third floor level.
Weapons Experience: I do not
offer such an analytical conclusion lightly. I have spent 25 years
in research, design, development, test and management of weapons
development. This included: handson work at the Ballistic Research
Laboratories; Commander of the Air Force Armament Technology
Laboratory, and ultimately management responsibility for almost
every nonnuclear weapon device in the Air Force (at the Air Force
System command, Air Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) levels). I was also the first chairman of the OSD joint
service Air Munitions Requirements and Development Committee. (A
more detailed resume appears at Tab 1.)
Observations in Oklahoma
City: To verify earlier analysis, I visited Oklahoma City during the
last week of June. There I had the opportunity to view hundreds of
photographs taken throughout the cleanup operation as the layers of
debris were cleared away. The photos present irrefutable evidence
that at least four demolition charges were set off at four critical
columns of the reinforced concrete structure at the floor level of
the third floor.
Conclusion: Based on my
experience in weapons development and bomb damage analysis, and on
my review of all evidence available, I can say, with a high level of
confidence, that the damage pattern on the reinforced concrete
superstructure could not possibly have been attained from the single
truck bomb. The total incompatibility of this pattern of destruction
with a single truck bomb lies in the simple, incontrovertible fact
that some of the columns collapsed that should not have collapsed if
the damage were caused solely by a truck bomb, and, conversely, some
of the columns were left standing that should have collapsed if the
damage had been caused solely by the truck bomb.
It is my hope and request
that, as a Member of Congress, you will support a Congressional
investigation to determine the true initiators of this bombing,
which could not have occurred the way in which it has been portrayed
as having happened. Further, it is requested that you defer action
and reserve judgment on socalled antiterrorism legislation that has
serious civil liberties implications, and which would not be passed
except for the Oklahoma City bombing until the causes of the
Oklahoma City disaster are determined by independent investigators.
Both the Federal Building in
Oklahoma and the Trade Center in New York (See New York Times,
October 28, 1993, p. A1) show evidence of a counterterrorism sting
gone wrong.
No government law
enforcement agency should be permitted to demolish, smash and bury
evidence of a counterterrorism sting operation, sabotage or
terrorist attack without a thorough examination by an independent,
technically competent agency.
If an aircraft crashed
because of a bomb, or a counterterrorism sting or an FAA Controller
error, the FAA would not be permitted to gather and bury the
evidence. The National Transportation Safety Board would have been
called in to conduct an investigation and where possible every piece
of debris would have been collected and arrayed to determine cause
of failure.
To remove all ambiguity with
respect to the use of supplementary demolition charges, the FBI
should be required to release the high quality surveillance color TV
camera tape of the Murrah building bombing on April 19, 1995.
It is my observation that
the effort required to bomb the A. P. Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City pales in comparison with the effort to cover up
evidence in Oklahoma and the media’s withholding of vital
information from the American people.
Sincerely yours,
Benton K. Partin
Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.)
BKP:aw
Enclosure
Biographical Notes - Benton K. Partin
(703) 780-7652
8908 Captains Row
Alexandria, Virginia 22308
Thirty one years active duty
in the Air Force. Progressively responsible executive, scientific
and technical assignments directing organizations engaged in
research, development, testing, analysis, requirements generation
and acquisition management of weapons systems. Assignments from
laboratory to the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Personal contributions made
in the fields of research and development management, weapon system
concepts, guided weapons technology, target acquisition aids,
focused energy weapons, operations research and joint service
harmonization of requirements. Retired as a Brigadier General.
White House appointed
Special Assistant to the Administrator, Federal Aviation
Administration. Personally designated to prepare the White Paper on
the Federal Aviation Administration for the 1989 Presidential
Transition Team. This included development of policy initiatives on
FAA/USAF joint use of the Global Positioning System (GPS),
operational life for commercial aircraft, antiterrorism, airport and
airway capacity, requirements in the FAA acquisition process and FAA
leadership and management development.
Military Command Pilot and
Command Missileman with 4000 hours (37 combat.)
Education:
B.S. Chemical Engineering
M.S. Aeronautical Engineering
Ph.D. Candidate, Operations Research & Statistics (Academics
Completed.)
Publications/TV
Sino-Soviet Conflict. Competition and cooperation: Risks in Force
Structure Planning,
A Reduced Upper Limit for Sequential Test Truncation Error.
Frequent TV Talk Shows on the Voice of Freedom.
Honors:
Distinguished Service Medal
Legion of Merit thrice
Distinguished Graduate - Air War College
Community Affairs:
Chairman, United States Defense Committee
Member of the Board, In Touch Missions International
Member of the Board, Front Line Fellowship
Founding Chairman of the School Board, Engleside Christian School
Washington Rep. for the Association of Christian Schools
International (1981-1983)
Chairman Fairfax County Republican Party (1982-1986)
Lifelong Professional
Challenge:
Continuing studies and analyses to anticipate and forecast the
future course of world military/political/economic transforming
processes.
|