AZF FERTILIZER PLANT EXPLOSION,HUGE INVESTIGATION AND 15 YEARS LATER NO CLUE HOW AND WHY IT HAPPENED.

1. AZF FERTILIZER PLANT
EXPLOSION FACTS AND QUIZ
WE PRESENT HERE
THE FACTS AND YOU
HAVE TO BREAK THIS
MYSTERIOUS CASE.
A HUGE INVESTIGATION
AND 15 YEARS LATER
NO REAL CLUES OF
WHAT HAPPENED AND
MORE IMPORTANT, WHY.

2. AZF INVESTIGATION
A HUGE EXPLOSION OCCURRED IN A
CHEMICAL PLANT IN TOULOUSE , FRANCE
ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2001,
WITHOUT ANY OBSERVED PRECURSOR SIGN.
 OCCURRED 10 DAYS AFTER SEPTEMBER 11,
 SAME DATE BUT 80 YEARS AFTER OPPAU,
 KILLED 31 AND INJURED THOUSANDS,
THE MATCH TRIGGERING THIS DETONATION
COULD NOT BE FOUND.
FIRST FERTILIZER ACCIDENT WITHOUT
A SINGLE PROOF OF WHY IT HAPPENED.

3. PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT
• THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT TO
CRITISIZE THE HUGE WORK DONE BY THE COURT
EXPERTS OR BY THEIR DELEGATED EXPERTS OR BY
INDEPENDANT SPECIALISTS,
• THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT IS TO SUM UP, IN A
PEDAGOGIC WAY WHAT I FOUND RELEVANT TO THIS
CASE AND COULD HELP TO SOLVE IT.
THE MAIN INVESTIGATION FAILURES ARE:
 THE DEBRIS PROJECTION HAS NOT BEEN STUDIED,
 IMPORTANT WITNESSES HAVE BEEN HEARD, BUT
NOT BELIEVED,
 THE DESPERATE SEARCH LEADS TO STOP THE REAL
INVESTIGATION AND MANIPULATE THE FACTS TO FIT
THE BEST GUESS.

4. ABOUT THE AUTOR
• MY NAME IS XXXXX,
• I AM A RETIRED ELECTRONIC DIPLOM ENGINEER,
• I WORKED OVER 25 YEARS FOR MATRA / AEROSPATIALE
FRANCE AS HEAD OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND SAFETY
FOR OUR CUSTOMERS IN FRANCE AND ABROAD.
• I WAS SPECIFICALLY IN CHARGE OF OUR MISSILES
DEDICATED INFRASTUCTURE AND EVIDENTLY THE TM 5 -1300
WAS MY BIBLE, EVEN IF I CAME TO HATE THOSE UK UNITS.
• I PARTICIPATED TO DDESB SEMINARS.
• I MUST CONFESS THAT THE AZF TOPIC INTERESTED ME
WHEN, IN 2009, I HEARD THAT THE TRIAL WAS TO BEGIN
BUT THE MAIN QUESTIONS WHERE STILL UNANSWERED.
• AS FREE AND INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR,THE TRUTH ,
AND EXCLUSIVELY THE TRUTH, IS MY GUIDE.
• I TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THANK THE US EXPLOSIVE
SAFETY COMMUNITY FOR PROVIDING FOR FREE , MANY
IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS AND TOOLS .

5. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS / SOFTWARE
• THE REFERENCE DOCUMENTS ARE EVIDENTLY THE
REPORTS AND ALL OTHER AZF TRIAL DOCUMENTS,
• THE TECHNICAL REFERENCE DOCUMENTS WOULD BE
TOO LONG TO BE LISTED, BUT ARE MAINLY US DEFENSE
SAFETY DOCUMENTS.
• SOFTWARE USED IS MAINLY CONWEP, BEC V.4 FOR
SCALED METRIC DISTANCES < 40 , A PERSONNEL EXCEL
SHEET FOR DISTANCES ABOVE (BASED ON EMPIRICAL
SCALING LAWS FOR TRUCK BOMB EXPLOSIONS) AND
OTHER USEFULL EXCEL PERSONNEL TOOLS.
• I ALWAYS USE TRADITIONAL CHARTS (TM 5-1300 WITH
DPLOT AMONGST OTHERS) TO MAKE SURE MY
COMPUTATIONS ARE SOUND.

6. AZF INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL
TWO MAIN ACTIONS HAD TO BE TAKEN IMMEDIATELY
AFTER THE ACCIDENT :
• QUICKLY SECURE THE AZF SITE (CLASSIFIED SEVESO II ) TO
AVOID A FURTHER ACCIDENT, (DOMINO EFFECT),
• SECURE ALL EVIDENCE FOR THE INVESTIGATION.
• CLEARLY, SOME IMMEDIATE SAFETY ACTIONS HAD NEGATIVE
EFFECTS ON THE INVESTIGATION.
• I HAVE THE FEELING THAT SAFETY TOPICS ARE WELL
PROCESSED, BUT POST ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION SEEMS
MORE IMPROVISED.
• EVIDENTLY, 10 DAYS AFTER WTC, THE INVESTIGATION
FOCUSED ON A POSSIBLE TERRORIST ACTION.
• TO PREPARE THE 2009 TRIAL OVER 50000 PAGES OF REPORTS
AND DOCUMENTS ARE PILED UP.
• THIS HUGE AMOUNT IS LINKED TO THE EFFORT OF FINDING
SOMETHING, BUT ALMOST EVERYTHING IN THIS
INVESTIGATION IS DISPUTED.

7. AZF TRIAL
• THE AZF TRIAL HELD IN 2009 WAS HUGE, ASSOCIATIONS
TOOK PART (SIMILARLY TO A CLASS ACTION).
• THIS CASE IS EXEPTIONALLY COMPLICATED, NO CLUES
BUT THOUSANDS OF DOCUMENTS / REPORTS, 800
WITNESSES, THE GUESS WORK WAS ON FULL PROGRESS.
• THE COURT EXPERTS, HAD TO MANIPULATE THE FACTS SO
THAT THE CHLORE COULD WORK AS INITIATOR.
• THE JUDGE DECIDED THAT NO PENALITY COULD BE GIVEN,
BASED ON SUPPOSITIONS AND PROBABILITIES.
• THE MINISTRY MADE AN APPEAL HELD IN 2011/2012 ON THIS
DECISION, SINCE SAFETY RULES WERE NEGLECTED BY AZF,
EVEN, IF NOT DIRECTLY RELATED.
• THE APPEAL CONDEMNED “TOTAL”, THE COMPANY OWNER
BASED ON THE SAME SUPPOSITIONS, PROBABLY TO PLEASE
THE MINISTRY AND THE VICTIMS.
• NOW THE SUPREME COURT CANCELLED THE APPEAL
RULING AND A NEW TRIAL IS SCHEDULED IN JANUARY 2017.

8. AZF CHLORE THEORY
WITHOUT ANY OTHER IDENTIFIED AGRESSOR, THE EXPERTS
WERE SUMMONED TO FIND SOMETHING, AFTER SUCH LONG
TIME AND SO MUCH MONEY SPENT.
THE THEORY IS AS FOLLOWS:
• SOME UNDEFINED KILOS OF A CHLORE PRODUCT CALLED
DCCNa HAVE BEEN, SOME 15 MINUTES EARLIER, ACCIDENTLY
SKIPPED ON THE “AN” IN THE “BOX”, WHICH ACTS AS A
TEMPORARY STORAGE.
• THE CHLORE AND “AN” MIX, LED RAPIDLY TO THE
PRODUCTION OF NCl3 AND HEAT, INDUCING A GENERAL
DETONATION IN THE “BOX”,
• THE MAIN “AN” STOCKPILE BEEING VERY CLOSE, IT ALSO
DETONATED, TRIGGERED BY THE “BOX” BLAST.
• THE EXPERTS JUST TOOK THE DISTANCE RELATION FOR
SYMPATHETIC DETONATION, FORGETTING ONLY THAT “AN “
AS SUCH, IS NOT AN EXPLOSIVE!

9. AZF
DESCRIPTION

10. AZF PLANT
• AZF PLANT IS LOCATED FEW Km SOUTH OF
TOULOUSE (FRANCE), ON A 0.7Km2
LAND,
• AZF IS PART OF AN IMPORTANT INDUSTRIAL
COMPLEX DEDICATED TO CHEMICAL PRODUCTS,
SOME MILITARY ORIENTED,
• THE PLANT PRODUCES MAINLY AMMONIAC,
UREA , NITRIC ACID AND AMMONIUM NITRATE.
• AN AVERAGE OF 30000T DANGEROUS CHEMICALS
ARE TO BE FOUND ON THE SITE, LINKED TO THE
PRODUCTION PROCESS OR FINAL PRODUCT.
• AZF IS CLASSIFIED SEVESO II

11. AZF PLANT
BLDG 221

12. AZF PLANT, SOME DAYS LATER !!

13. AZF BUILDING 221 STORE
BLDG 221 IS PART OF A BUILDING COMPLEX
(221 TO 225).
BLDG 221 IS DEDICATED TO THE STORAGE OF
OUT OF SPECIFICATION « AN » PRODUCED ON
THE PLANT.
TWO TYPES OF « AN » ARE STORED IN 221 :
• « AN » FOR AGRICULTURAL USE, CALLED
NAA WITH 33,5% NITROGEN,
• « AN » FOR INDUSTRIAL USE, NAI WITH 34.5%N,
FOR EXPLOSIVE OR OTHER INDUSTRIAL USE.
• HYDROFUGE ADDED PRODUCT, 0.2% IN MASS
(CARBON ADDED 0.1% IN MASS).

14. BUILDINGS 221 TO 225
PERSPECTIVE VIEW BLDG 221- 225
221 -222 SEPARATING
COLUM
NS

15. BUILDINGS 221 / 222
JC TIRAT
ALUMINIUM ROOF
STOCKPILE
BOX
LOADING
PLATFORM

16. STOCKPILES IN BOX AND MAIN PILE
35m
10m
2.7m
BOX

17. “AN” STORED IN BUILDING 221
MAIN « AN » STOCK IS ESTIMATED AT 420 TONS:
• 380T, OF WHICH 75% NAA , 25% NAI, ρ = 800Kg / m3
• 40 T AS A POLLUTED CRUST LAYER , ρ = 1200Kg / m3
.
(THE CRUST LAYER, NOT UNDER THE STOCKPILE IS
IGNORED ≈ 20T ).
« AN » IN THE BOX 11,5T :
• 10 T NAA AND 3 PILES NAI , 500Kg EACH,
(8.5 T CRUST LAYER IS IGNORED).
MOST PROBABLY 50% OF THE « AN » IN THE BOX
PARTICIPATED TO THE DETONATION BUT CAN BE
NEGLECTED (ONLY ≈ 4T EQUIVALENT TNT).
TOTAL MASS, USED FOR FURTHER COMPUTATION: 420T

18. “AN” STOCKPILE ESTIMATION
• M , UNDETONATED “AN”, LIGHT CONFINEMENT
• C + Cr (CRUST) = DETONATED “AN” =>M + C + Cr =
420T,
THE CRUST HAS A 50% BETTER TNT EFFICIENCY,
• SO ФB *( C +1,5*Cr – M / 5) = 60T TNT (BASED ON BLAST
EFFECT ESTIMATION),
• ФB IS THE AN => TNT FACTOR (BLAST SOLUTION),
• M / 5 , FOR THE « AIR » ENERGY LOST BY EJECTING
« M » AT ≈ 800m/s , (SIMILAR GURNEY).
M
C
Cr

19. STOCKPILE BASED ON CRATER
IF USING CONWEP OR OTHER CHARTS,THE CRATER IS
COHERENT WITH A BARE TNT CHARGE OF 100T ON
ASPHALT (SEE NOTE), THEREFORE WE CAN WRITE:
ФC *[1.2*(C + 1.5*Cr) + M / 8 ] = 100T,
ФC IS THE AN => TNT FACTOR (CRATER SOLUTION),
1.2 IS THE COEFFICIENT FOR THE HIGHER GROUND
ENERGY, AIR / GROUND SURFACE RATIO FOR SUCH
CHARGE 0.55/ 0.45 (COMPARED TO STANDARD
HEMISPHERIC 0.67 / 0.33),
M / 8 FOR THE LIGHT CONFINEMENT EFFICIENCY.
NOTE : FOR CONWEP A MIX ASPHALT / CONCRETE
COVERED SOIL HAS BEEN USED INSTEAD OF THE
CONCRETE, SINCE THE 0.15m THICK, LIGHT REINFORCED
CONCRETE SLAB, IS DAMAGED, EATEN AND WEAKENED BY
THE « AN » PILE ABOVE.

20. STOCKPILE BEST FIT
DIFFERENT Ф SOLUTIONS FOR THE PILE :
* M = 180T => C +1,5Cr = 260T AND ФC = 0.27 ФB = 0,30
* M = 200T => C +1,5Cr = 240T AND ФC = 0.30 ФB = 0,32
* M = 220T => C +1,5Cr = 220T AND ФC = 0.34 ФB = 0,34
* M = 240T => C +1,5Cr = 200T AND ФC = 0.39 ФB = 0,37
* M = 260T => C +1,5Cr = 180T AND ФC = 0.47 ФB = 0,40
THE BEST SOLUTION IS GIVEN BY ФC ≈ ФB,
=> M = 220T , C = 160T, Cr = 40T WITH
ФPILE ≈ 0.34 AND ФCRUST ≈ 0,5
TOTAL CHARGE EQUIVALENT : 75T OF TNT

21. THE 160T DETONATED AND SIMPLIFIED PILE / CRUST
COULD THEREFORE BE AS FOLLOWS:
• CRUST AVERAGED 35m x 10m x 0.1m x 1.2T/m3 ≈ 40T,
• PILE AVERAGED 25m x 6m x 1.3m x 0,8T/m3 ≈ 160T.
THE EQUIVALENT TNT IS 0.34 * 160T + 0,5*40T = 75T,
 WITH EFFECTIVE BLAST EFFECT ► 60T,
 WITH EFFECTIVE GROUND EFFECT ► 100T.
IF WE CONSIDER THIS PILE TO BE INITIATED EAST,
THE INITIATION POINT IS SOME 6m FROM THE BOX
SEPARATING WALL AND ON PILE LONGITUDINAL
AXIS.
DETONATED STOCKPILE

22. DETONATED CRUST / STOCKPILE
INITIATION 1,3m
25m
PILE
CRUST
35m
6m
6m
10m

23. “AN” DETONATION COMPARED TO TNT
• THE SIMPLE « AN » DETONATION FORMULA IS :
NH4NO3 = N2 + 2H2O + ½ O2
• THE DETONATION ENERGY IS 1400 kJ / kg
COMPARED WITH 4200kJ / kg FOR TNT
THE ENERGY RATIO « AN » / TNT = 0.33
• THE « AN »REACTION RELEASES 3.5moles / 0.08Kg
≈ 43 moles OF GAZ PER Kg OF « AN » AT ≈ 1700K .
• THE MUCH HIGHER ANFO ENERGY IS LINKED
TO THE EFFICIENT USE OF THE LOST OXYGEN.

24. METEOROLOGICAL DATAS 1
AT 10H 17: 55 , PRESUMED LOCAL TIME OF
DETONATION, THE CONDITIONS ARE:
• TEMPERATURE 17.2°C,
• PRESSURE 997 mbar, (ALTITUDE 158m),
• HUMIDITY 88%,
• TEMPERATURE INVERSION 770m TO 970m,
(SEE GRAPH HEREAFTER) ΔT = 1.5°C, BUT
MEASURED 3 HOURS LATER,
• CLOUDY, AVERAGE SOLAR IRRADIATION
700W / m2

25. METEOROLOGICAL DATAS 2
• WIND ≈ 7 m / s GUSTY, DIRECTION ≈ 150°, COMING
FROM SOUTH EAST,
• MAXIMUM WIND PRESSURE ( WITH GUST SPEED ) FOR
10m/s => Pa = ρ*V2/ 2 = 1.2*100 / 2 = 60Pa = 0.6mbar.

26. BLAST EFFECT
• OUTSIDE
• INSIDE BUILDING

27. CALCULATED BLAST PRESSURES, FOR 60T TNT
WIND 7m/s
100mbar 550m
50mbar 950m
20mbar 1800m
10mbar 3000m
5 mbar 5000m

28. BROKEN WINDOWS
THE RING COLOUR AND DIMENSION GIVES THE PERCENTAGE OF
BROKEN WINDOWS AT A GIVEN DISTANCE IN METERS.

29. BLAST ESTIMATION FROM DAMAGES
CHARGE
20mbar average
distance 1.8Km
50mbar average
distance 1Km
NORTH
EAST
OUTLINES FROM ORANGE
TO BLUE REPRESENT :
200,140,100,70, 50, 20 mbar

30. ZOOM ON GZO VICINITY
THIS BLAST STRENGTH
REMINDS THE ROCKET
EFFECT ON THE EAST
SIDE OF THE CRATER
CHARGE
HEMISPHERICAL 200mbar
EAST
50

31. SCHOOLS CLOSED FOR REPAIR
NORTH 5 mbar
Definitively
Many months
Over 4 weeks
Over 2 weeks
Over 1 week
Less 1 week
Few days
7 mbar10 mbar18 mbar
47 mbar
113 mbar
OVERPRESSURES
FOR 60T TNT
WIND 7m/s

32. BLAST EFFECT EAST
DETONATION GAS PATH
EAST

33. BLAST EFFECT
• WE HAVE TO CONSIDER A LONG ALMOST RECTANGULAR
CHARGE, WITH A 4 / 1 RATIO, IN THE NEAR FIELD,THE SHAPE
OF THE CHARGE PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE,
• OBVIOUSLY IT HAS ALSO PLAYED A ROLE IN THE FAR FIELD
SINCE THE HIGHEST OVERPRESSURES ARE ON AN ALMOST
NORTH SOUTH AXIS,
• THE DETONATING PROCESS LASTS UP TO 25m / (3500m/s) => 7ms,
(3500m/s IS THE THEORETICAL “AN” DETONATION SPEED),
DEPENDING ON INITIALIZATION POINT.
• WINDOW BREAKAGE OR NOT, DEPENDS ON DISTANCE BUT
ALSO ON WIND AND WINDOW  BLAST ORIENTATION (FULL
REFLECTED WAVE PRESSURE IS TWICE THE DIRECT WAVE).
• 5 mbars INCIDENT , IS CONSIDERED AS THE LOWER GLASS
BREAKAGE LIMIT FOR CORRECTLY INSTALLED WINDOWS.
• THE NEAR FIELD EAST SIDE BLAST REMINDS A ROCKET GAS
PLUME SHAPING THE CRATER END.
THE EQUIVALENT TNT IS CONSISTENT WITH 60T TNT
CONSIDERING THE DAMAGE / DISTANCE CHARTS.

34. BLDG 221 § 222 BLAST EFFECT
• FOR COMPUTATION,THE IMPORTANT LENGTH OF
THE BUILDING MUST BE TRUNCATED,
• THE DOOR EAST, ALWAYS OPEN,THE IMPORTANT
LENGTH OF THE BUILDING AND THE ALUMINIUM
ROOF ACT AS IMMEDIATE / FRANGIBLE VENTS,
• ALL OTHER WALLS ARE RAPIDLY DESTROYED AND
PARTICIPATE TO THE RAPID GAS VENTING.
• THE STRESS / BLAST IMPULSE ON ANY BUILDING
PART IS LINKED MAINLY TO THE CHARGE DIRECTLY
FACING IT ,
• THE CHARGE LENGTH OF ≈ 25m IS TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT, THE BLAST IMPULSE IS AVERAGED OVER
THIS WALL LENGTH FACING THE CHARGE.

35. BLDG 221 § 222 BLAST EFFECT
BASED ON CONWEP COMPUTATION PRINCIPLES WE
OBTAIN APPROXIMATIVE IMPULSES OF :
 1 bar*s = 7000 Psi*s ON THE SOUTH SIDE,
 1 bar*s = 7000 Psi*s ON THE NORTH SIDE,
 0.50 bar*s = 3450 Psi*s ON THE EAST SIDE,
 0.10 bar*s = 700 Psi*s ON THE WEST SIDE,
 0.70 bar*s = 4800 Psi*s ON THE ROOF,
THESE ABOVE VALUES ARE THE
AVERAGE BLAST IMPULSES ON
THE WALLS , A MORE DETAILED
IMPULSE DISTRIBUTION IS
SHOWN ON THE GRAPH FOR THE
SIDE WALLS, VALID FOR THE
25m LENGTH, FACING THE
DETONATING PILE.
HEIGHT
DETONATING STOCK PILE

36. GAS
PRESSURE

37. GAS PRESSURE CONSIDERATION
THE GAS PRESSURE IS COMPLICATED TO ESTIMATE SINCE
THE DETONATION HAS A DURATION BETWEEN 3,5 ms (IF
CENTER INITIATED) AND MAXIMUM 25m / 3500m/s = 7ms (END
INITIATED).
THE BUILDING 221 CAN BE CONSIDERED AS COMPLETELY
DEMOLISHED IN LESS THAN 4ms,
THE HOT (1700K) GAS EXPANSION, INITIALLY AT 800m/s ,
REACHES THE ALREADY COLLAPSED WALLS (SCHOCK WAVE),
 NO GAS PRESSURE ACTS ON THE BUIDING, EVEN IF THE
DETONATION LASTS ONLY 3,5ms,
BUT THE GAS EXPANSION IS EFFICIENT TO ACCELERATE
FURTHER, THE LOW SPEED FRAGMENTS IN ITS PATH,
IF NEEDED FOR SIMILAR CASES THE GAS PRESSURE MUST BE
COMPUTED BY THE FORMULA PV = nRT (ABSOLUTE
PRESSURE) WHICH AVOIDS TO GUESS AN EQUIVALENT TNT;
FOR BIG STRUCTURES , CHECK WHEN GAS REACHES THE
WALLS AND THE GAS IMPULSE ACTS ON THE STRUCTURE.

38. MISSILES /
FRAGMENTS

39. BLDG 221 § 222 FRAGMENTS
 UNFORTUNATELY, IN THE FRAME OF THE ACCIDENT
INVESTIGATION, THIS TOPIC HAS NOT BEEN STUDIED ,
 IT WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE HELPED TO UNDERSTAND A
LITTLE BETTER THIS UNBELIEVABLE DETONATION,
 APPROXIMATELY 18 MAJOR IMPACTS HAVE BEEN
REPORTED ON AZF SITE, SOME PERFORATING BUILDING
ROOFS AND OTHERS LEAVING SIGNIFICANT CRATERS.
 FOR MOST IMPACTS THE BROKEN CONCRETE AND STEEL
DEBRIS HAVE BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED AND COLLECTED BUT
NOT ANALYZED,
 ALMOST ALL DISTANT AND SIGNIFICANT FRAGMENTS
ARE FROM THE 221 CONCRETE SLAB AND THE 221-222
SEPARATING COLUMNS,
 THESE COLUMN PARTS ARE EASY TO RECOGNIZE DUE
TO THE RECENT CONCRETE AND SPECIFIC REBAR.

40. FRAGMENT GENERALITIES
• FRAGMENT DISTANCE IS MAINLY FUNCTION OF INITIAL
SPEED, MASS, DRAG AND EJECTION ANGLE.
• FRAGMENTS AT VERY LOW EJECTION ANGLES ARE
DANGEROUS ALONG MOST OF THE FLIGHT PATH,
• FOR THE HIGH PARABOLIC TRAJECTOGRAPHIES , THE RISK
IS MUCH LOWER DUE TO ARRIVING IMPACT ANGLES > 70° ,
• SECONDARY FRAGMENTS QUANTITY REPARTITION f(MASS)
IS USUALLY APPROXIMATED AS FOLLOWS:
M < 0.1Kg , 55% , 0.1 < M > 5Kg, 42% AND M > 5Kg , 3%
ABSTRACT FROM BOMB
FRAGMENT, RISK STUDY
Number of fragments
Increasing
Weight

41. BLDG 221 § 222 FRAGMENTS
 FOR A BOMB,THE CASING IS IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH
THE HUGE EXPANDING GAS PRESSURE,
 THEREFORE THE CASING FRAGMENTS ARE EJECTED
AT TREMENDOUS SPEED (see Gurney / Mott for distribution),
 THOSE FRAGMENTS ARE DURING SOME 100m IN
ADVANCE OF THE SHOCKWAVE, BUT THEN, DUE TO
THEIR DRAG, ARE OVERTAKEN BY THE SHOCKWAVE.
 HERE THE SITUATION IS DIFFERENT, A MUCH SMALLER
IMPULSE IS GIVEN TO THE BUILDING FRAGMENTS,
 THE IMPULSES, ESTIMATED BEFORE, WILL LEAD TO
FRAGMENTS / MISSILES WITH VELOCITIES RANGING
FROM 100 UP TO 500m/s DEPENDING ON FRAGMENT
CHARACTERISTICS, DISTANCE AND GEOMETRY TO
BLAST.
 IN THIS CASE,THE SHOCKWAVE IS WELL IN ADVANCE
OF SUCH FRAGMENTS DUE TO MODERATE SPEED / ERTIA.

42. BLDG 221 § 222 FRAGMENTS
 THE CONCRETE AND BRICKS OF THIS 80 YEARS OLD BUIDING ,
WEAKENED BY THE « AN » HAVE BEEN PULVERIZED AT CLOSE
CHARGE DISTANCE,
 THE STEEL PARTS FROM THE ROOF, ALSO WEAKENED AND
HIGHLY CORRODED HAVE BEEN EJECTED AT GREAT DISTANCES,
 THE ROOF COVER, ALUMINIUM SHEETS , CRUSHED BY THE
BLAST, HAVE BEEN FOUND IN QUANTITIES, NORTH WEST,
FOLLOWING THE WIND DIRECTION.
 THE BLAST IMPULSE DECREASES WITH INCREASING,
STRUCTURE HEIGHT , THEREFORE THE HIGHEST VELOCITIES
ARE THOSE UNDER LOWER EJECTION ANGLES.
 THE WALL FRAGMENTS ARE EJECTED FROM 0° TO APPROX 40°
ELEVATION, HIGHER EJECTION ANGLES ARE MAINLY FOR ROOF
STRUCTURE FRAGMENTS.
 IN THIS RANGE OF PARAMETERS, FRAGMENT SPEED IS
APPROXIMATED BY SPEED m/s = IMPULSE IN Pa*s / FRAGMENT
AREA MASS IN Kg /m2
.

43. AZF , IMPORTANT FRAGMENT IMPACTS
THE MOST IMPORTANT
FRAGMENTS ARE:
• 221 CONCRETE SLAB
• 221 - 222 COLUMNS,
• BOX –PILE SEPARATING WALL
MANY FRAGMENTS ARE
EJECTED UNDER RELATIVE
AZIMUT + 15°,
THIS ANGLE REFLECTS A
CORRESPONDING CHARGE
(PART) ORIENTATION.
UNDER -40° A BIG COLUMN
PART IS EJECTED, FALLS ON A
CAR (R5) AND FINALLY LEAVES
A SIGNIFICANT CRATER (SEE
HEREAFTER)

44. FRAGMENT TRAJECTOGRAPHY 80000Pa*s, 32°, Cx 2
AVERAGE SMALL BUILDING FRAGMENTS

45. COLUMNS 221 - 222 FRAGMENTS
THESE FRAGMENTS CAN EASILY BE IDENTIFIED BY THE STEEL
REINFORCEMENT OF THE CONCRETE PILLAR AND FOR SOME BIG
PIECES BY THE ROOF SUPPORTING STEEL LATTICE .
FLOOR
CONCRETE SLAB
STEEL LATTICE COLUMN
SUPPORTING THE ROOF
1.80m
0.8m
MASS ≈ 2200Kg
AREA DENSITY
1670 Kg / m2
COLUMNS FOUND IN
CRATER VICINITY

46. COLUMNS 221 - 222 FRAGMENTS
• AZIMUT 0° IS RELATIVE (≈ SOUTH)
• BLACK DOTS ARE SUPPOSEDLY THE
10 COLUMNS FOUND IN CRATER
VICINITY (12 TO 19),
• COLUMN 19 (MARKED VIII ) WAS
STILL STANDING UPRIGHT ,
• COLUMN 12 RECEIVES AN
ESTIMATED 20000Pa*s IMPULSE, SO
WE TAKE THIS VALUE AS THE
POWER NEEDED TO BREAK AWAY
AND MOVEMENT INITIATION,
• COLUMNS 2 TO 7 RECEIVE AN
ESTIMATED IMPULSE OF 220000Pa*s,
• TO EJECT THESE COLUMNS WE
HAVE 0.65*(220000 - 20000)Pa*s =
130000Pa*s , (0.65 FOR CIRCULAR
COLUMN / EFFICIENCY FACTOR) .
CAR
IMPACT
EMPALOT
BLOCK
221
R5 Az - 40°
3
4
5
6
8
10
7
9
15
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
0°
?
25m
1
2
6m
a
d
b
e
c
222
BOX

47. COLUMN OR PART, PERHAPS Nr8, FALLEN ON CAR
CRATER
Diam. 0.8m
Depth 0.2m
ONE CAN ASSUME THAT AT LEAST, THE HALF UPPER
COLUMN HAS HIT THE CAR AT ≈ 50m/s, BEFORE IMPACTING
THE GROUND AT ≈ 30m/s, DISTANCE 420m, Az – 40° , SOUTH-
WEST, ELEVATION IMPACT ANGLE ≈ 40°, CRATER DEPTH
COHERENT WITH A FINAL SPEED OF 30m/s.
COLUMN
STEEL
LATTICE
SCATTERED
DEBRIS
CAR FRONT
DETAIL
40°
DETAIL

48. HEAVY PROJECTIONS TRAJECTOGRAPHY 130000Pa*s, 32°, Cx 2
CALCULATED FOR THE COLUMNS PARTS, BLDG 221-222 SEPARATION
POSSIBLE
CAR IMPACT

49. HEAVY PROJECTION, EMPALOT BLOCK
THIS REINFORCED CONCRETE BLOCK FELL IN A SUBURB
CALLED EMPALOT, 1600m FROM AZF CRATER!
REBAR

50. HEAVY PROJECTION, EMPALOT CONCRETE BLOCK
 THIS FRAGMENT HAD A MASS APPROX 350KG , PROBABLY
VERY COMPACT, LOW Cx ,
 1600m ! SUCH DISTANCE FOR A CONCRETE BLOCK SEEMS
EXEPTIONNAL,
 THE HEAVY REBAR SHOULD MAKE ITS IDENTIFICATION
EASY,
 FOR SUCH DISTANCE AN IMPULSE > 2bar*s IS NEEDED.
 FRAGMENT EJECTION ANGLES COULD HELP UNDERSTAND
THE PILE / BOX RELATIONSHIP.
THIS INCREDIBLE FRAGMENT HAS NOT BEEN ANALYSED AND WE
HAVE NO CLUE OF ITS ORIGIN!!
AS IS KNOWN, THE USUAL MAXIMUM
THROW DISTANCE FOR SECONDARY
FRAGMENTS IS IN THE PERPENDICULAR
BUILDING AXIS.

51. SOUNDS

52. EXPLOSION SOUNDS
• IN MANY PLACES, AROUND THE TOWN, RECORDED
CONFERENCES WERE HELD SO AS ONE RADIO STATION
EQUIPPED WITH PROFESSIONAL SOUND EQUIPMENT,
• BASICALLY THE TAPE RECORDERS ARE LIMITED IN THE
LOW FREQUENCY BAND AND HAVE NO TIME BASE.
• THESE RECORDINGS HAVE BEEN STUDIED BY NOT LESS
THAN THREE DIFFERENT EXPERTS !!
• TWO MAIN NOISES, SIMILAR TO EXPLOSIONS ARE HEARD,
• THE RECORDS, CORRECTED FOR TAPE SPEED VARIATIONS
REVEAL THE TIME DIFFERENCE OF E1 AND E2 AT THE
DIFFERENT LOCATIONS,
• E2 IS OBVIOUSLY THE AZF BLAST ARRIVAL AND E1 WAS
BELIEVED TO BE THE SEISMIC WAVE ARRIVAL ON THE
BUILDING, INDUCING THE E1 RECORDED SOUNDS,
• INDEED, EVEN IF SUCH DATA IS NOT WELL DOCUMENTED
THE TIME DIFFERENCES ARE COHERENT WITH SUCH
EXPLANATION AND PROPAGATION CHARACTERISTICS.

53. EXPLOSION SOUNDS

54. EXPLOSION SOUNDS
THE TOP LEFT TABLE GIVES THE METEOROLOGICAL
DATAS AND COMPUTED SOUND SPEED, IT USES 60000Kg
AS BLAST EFFECT CHARGE FOR Ta CALCULATION,
THE TOP RIGHT TABLE SHOWS THE DIFFERENT SITES
WITH MEASURED SEISMIC SPEEDS AND ARRIVAL TIMES
THE MEASURED TIME INTERVAL AT THE RECORDING
PLACES AND THE THEORETICAL TIME INTERVAL
COMPUTED,(RED BOXES TIME DIFFERENCE),
THE LOWER TABLE GIVES THE CALCULATED BLAST
ARRIVAL TIME, WIND CORRECTED.
AS CAN BE SEEN THERE IS A GOOD MATCH FOR 5
SITES VALIDATING THE SOUND E1 AS BEEING OF
SEISMIC ORIGIN.

55. SOUND RECORDING PLACES
WIND
URSSAF
POUVOURVILLE
H D
R P
OMP
E D
BLAGNAC
A F
ABREUVOIR
TELEPHONE
CONVERSATION
H P
AZF
GOOGLE MAPS

56. SOUND LEVEL RECORDER
• THIS SONOMETER IS DEDICATED TO MONITOR
AIRCRAFT NOISE, SOUTH EAST AND 3840m FROM AZF,
• THIS RECORDER WOULD HAVE DEFINITIVELY
NAILED DOWN THE TIME OF AZF DETONATION BUT NO
LUCK , THE EQUIPMENT, RECENTLY INSTALLED, WAS
NOT YET LINKED TO AN OFFICIAL TIME BASE, IT HAD
ONLY THE COMPUTER TIME, SET FEW MONTHS
BEFORE.
• THE AZF BLAST, GOING UPWIND NEEDS 11s TO
ARRIVE AT THE SOUND MONITORING STATION,
• OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A BIG TIMING PROBLEM ,
SINCE THE BLAST ARRIVAL IS 10H18:18 , MINUS 11s ,
WHICH PLACES THE To AT 10H18:07 , UNREALISTIC.

57. SOUND LEVEL RECORDING
SATURATED LEVEL ?
OVERFLYING
AIRCRAFTS
45dBA
NOISE
LEVEL
ESTIMATED SENSITIVITY 1Pa,
NO PRIOR EXPLOSION TO BE SEEN
BEFORE AZF, ON THIS RECORD

58. CRATER

59. AZF CRATER AND VICINITY
PRILLING
TOWER
EAST
GARONNE RIVER
NORTH

60. CRATER PROFILE WITH BUILDING
MAIN STOCKPILE
“BOX” PILES
MAX DEPTH 8,0m
VOLUME 8700M3
45m
65m
BLDG OUTLINE
NORTH

61. CRATER PROFILE / CHARGE
CRATER BOTTOM
Box
CHARGE ESTIMATION
CENTRAL PEAK
CRATER RIDGE
CRATER EAST END
BLAST PROFILED
http://www.esic-sn.fr/PDF/ESIC-XYZ-AZF.pdf ISIG

62. CRATER PROFILE
• AZF CRATER IS ELLIPTIC ≈ 65 x 45 x 8m ,
FINAL VOLUME 8700m3 ,
• THE AZF CRATER DIMENSIONS MATCHES AN
EQUIVALENT TNT CHARGE OF ≈ 100Tons.
• THE CRATER PROFILE IS SYMETRIC ACROSS
EAST/ WEST AXIS BUT NOT SYMETRIC FOR
NORTH / SOUTH AXIS, LOW SLOPE EAST 11°
AND 30° IN THE 3 OTHER DIRECTIONS.
• THE WATER BED LEVEL IS ≈ - 3m
• CRATER PROFILE FAVOURS A DETONATION
INITIATION EAST, BUT GEOLOGICAL
DIFFERENCES EAST / WEST QUESTION THIS.

63. CRATER CONSIDERATIONS
• THE CRATER PROFILE IS FUNCTION OF THE VERTICAL
CHARGE DENSITY,THAT MEANS, IN THE CASE OF AN
EXPLOSIVE STOCKPILE ,THE CRATER IS DUG IN THE
GROUND AS A MIRROR OF THE EFFECTIVE DETONATING
PILE ABOVE.
• THIS MIRROR CAVITY HAS AN AMPLIFICATION FACTOR
FUNCTION OF CHARGE / SOIL TYPE,
• THE CAVITY, COULD ALSO MODELLED BY THE CHARGE
INITIATION POINT AS FOR SEISMIC SIGNATURE (TO BE
STUDIED)
• BLUE PROFILE, CENTER INITIATION,HOMOGENEOUS SOIL
RED PROFILE AZF.

64. CRATER EAST PROFILE
EAST
• THE CRATER PROFILE ON THE EAST SIDE SEEMS SHAPED BY A GAS
PLUME SIMILAR TO A ROCKET ,
• IN LESS THAN 1ms, 20T OF GAS AT 1700K ARE EJECTED TO THE REAR
AT TREMENDOUS SPEED, IT COULD WELL EXPLAIN THE
EAST SIDE CRATER GROUND SHAPING.
• THEREFORE, THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE CRATER PROFILES
ARE CONSISTANT WITH AN EAST SIDE START OF THE DETONATION
(THIS, AS EVERYTHING ELSE IS DISPUTED).
EXPLOSIVE GASES
SHOCK FRONT

65. SEISMIC

66. MY SEISMIC (IN)COMPETENCE
• I CANNOT GO ANY FURTHER WITHOUT
INFORMING THE READER THAT MY SEISMIC
KNOWLEDGE HAS ONLY BEEN GATHERED SINCE
AZF STUDY, THAT MEANS BEGIN 2009.
• PRIOR THAT DATE I ONLY KNEW SOME BASICS
ABOUT THE RICHTER SCALE.
• THEREFORE MY TECHNICAL APPROACH ON THIS
SUBJECT MUST BE READ WITH CARE.
• BY ENTERING THIS FIELD, LITTERED WITH LOG
FORMULAS, ONE MUST ALSO BE AWARE THAT
SMALL APPROXIMATIONS LEAD TO IMPORTANT
CHANGES OF THE FINAL RESULT.

67. AZF SEISMIC ANALYSIS
• THE AZF DETONATION HAS BEEN WELL RECORDED AT
LARGE DISTANCES (A DOZEN RéNaSS STATIONS AND AS
MANY CEA - DASE STATIONS.
• THE AVERAGE MAGNITUDE GIVEN BY THOSE SEISMIC
STATIONS IS ML = 3.3.
• ONE NAMED OMP IS VERY INTERESTING SINCE THE
LOCATION IS 4190m FROM GZO.
• IT HAD A REJECTED SEISMOMETER FOR RECORDING
TESTS , NOT INSTALLED PROPERLY,THE SENSOR JUST
SET ON THE FLOOR OF A GROUND FLOOR OFFICE.
• IT PROVIDED EXELLENT SIGNALS.
• UNLUCKYLY, THE PERSONNEL IN CHARGE WAS TOO
INCOMPETENT TO PROVIDE ACCURATE CALIBRATION
OF THIS EQUIPMENT.

68. OMP VERTICAL SEISMIC SIGNAL
DETAIL OF FIRST P WAVE ARRIVAL,
VP = 4190m / 1.42s = 2950 m / s
AIR SLAP
V = 4190m/ (10.57+1.42)s =
349.5 m/s
ΔT = 10.57s
To
ΔT = 1.42s

69. OMP AIR BLAST SPEED
INVESTIGATION
• WE HAVE THE MEASURED AVERAGE BLAST SPEED ARRIVING
AT OMP AS 4190m / 11.99s = 349.5m/s,
• THIS BLAST SPEED MUST BE WIND CORRECTED,
7m/s*COS (150°- 93°) = + 3.8m/s => 349.5m/s + 3.8m/s = 353.3m/s,
(93° GZO => OMP),
• SO THE THEORETICAL BLAST SPEED IS IN FACT 353.3m/s.
• THE SOUND SPEED AT 17.2°C AND 88% HYGRO IS 342.7 m/s,
• THE DIFFERENCE OF THE AVERAGE BLAST SPEED TO SOUND
SPEED IS THEREFORE 353.3m/s - 342.7m/s = 10.6m/s,
• THIS OVERSPEED ΔV IS RELATED TO THE SCALED DISTANCE Dr
AS ΔV m/s = 1100/ Dr FOR Dr = D/W0.33
> 30, => W = (ΔV * D / 1100)3
SO W = (10.6 m/s * 4190m / 1100)3 ≈ 66000Kg TNT,
( FACTOR 1100 FOR THE GIVEN ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS).
THIS CALCULATED CHARGE CONFIRMS THAT 60T TNT FOR
THE BLAST ESTIMATION IS REASONABLE.
THE EMPIRICAL SCALING LAW, THE WIND , WINDGUSTS ,
DOES NOT ALLOW A PRECISION BETTER THAN ± 20% .

70. OMP FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
• AT 4190m FROM GZO,THE GEOPHONE, POSITIONED ON
THE OFFICE CONCRETE FLOOR, HAS WELL RECORDED
THE SEISMIC SIGNALS, BUT THE PHASES AND
AMPLITUDES ARE MOST PROBABLY BIASED.
• THE RELATIVE TIMINGS PROVIDE ACCURATE
INFORMATION (BUT NO ABSOLUTE TIME REFERENCE).
• THE TIME OF ARRIVAL FOR THE BLAST IS NOT A GOOD
PARAMETER FOR CHARGE ESTIMATION,
• AT OMP, A 10% CHARGE VARIATION MAKES ONLY
≈ 0.1% DIFFERENCE OF BLAST TIME ARRIVAL.
• THE REAL PARTICULE VELOCITY OF THE P WAVE IS
PROBABLY IN THE RANGE 0.5 TO 1 mm/s.
• THE UNKNOWN BUILDING ATTENUATION MODIFIES THE
SIGNAL AMPLITUDES AND PHASES.

71. SEISMIC MAGNITUDE
• THE AVERAGE SEISMIC MAGNITUDE RECORDED ML = 3.3 ,
• BASED ON THIS MAGNITUDE, HOW DO WE ESTIMATE
THE CHARGE W ?
• IN FACT SOME STUDIES BASED ON NUCLEAR OR
CHEMICAL DETONATIONS RELATE THE MAGNITUDE
TO THE CHARGE,
• THE FORMULAS ARE IN THE FORM M = K*log(W) + G
WITH “K” A COEFFICIENT RANGING FROM 0.70 TO 0.85,
“W” THE CHARGE AND “G” A CORRECTION FACTOR FOR
SOIL / PROPAGATION SPECIFICITIES,
• THE NUCLEAR TESTS HAD AN AVERAGE MAGNITUDE OF
mb = 0.85*log(W KT) + 4.2 , (+ 3.8 FOR NEVADA TESTS, DUE
TO EARTH PROPAGATION PARTICULARITY).

72. MAGNITUDE RELATED TO CHARGE
 A DERIVED FORMULA IS M ≈ 0.73*log (f*WKg) + G
WE INCLUDE THE DEFICIT LINKED TO THE GROUND
COUPLING FACTOR “f “, (f ≈ 0.14 FOR ABOVE SURFACE
DETONATION AND f ≈ 0.4 FOR SCALED HOB =0 AS GIVEN BY
CONWEP), G is + 0.2 FOR OPTIMAL PROPAGATION BUT WE
CONSIDER G=0 TO COMPENSATE THE MAGNITUDE
DEFICIT FOR ALLUVIUM SOIL,
 THE AZF CHARGE HAS A MUCH BETTER COUPLING
FACTOR DUE TO THE CRUST AND CHARGE SHAPE
f ≈ 0.34+30% = 0.44, 30% GROUND EFFICIENCY GAINED
OVER THE HEMISPHERICAL CHARGE .
 USING THOSE ASSUMPTIONS WE OBTAIN :
M = 0.73*log( 0,44*75000) ≈ 3.3 , EXPLAINING WHY THIS 75T
SURFACE DETONATION SETS A RECORD IN SEISMIC
SIGNATURE (ACCIDENTS OR TESTS).

73. INVESTIGATION
MAIN TESTS /
TRIALS
AUDITIONS

74. DCCNa CHLORE INVESTIGATION
• A REASONABLE DOUBT WAS ABOUT SOME CHLORE
PRODUCT, DCCNa, SKIPPED BY ERROR IN THE BLDG 221
BOX,
• THIS PRODUCT, FORMULA C3N3O3Cl2Na, HAS A VERY
STRONG CHLORE SMELL,
• THE JUDGE ORDERED THE REENACTING OF THE
SHOVELING OF SUCH PRODUCT,
• IT WAS FUNNY TO WITNESS HOW FAST THE ASSISTANCE
MOVED FROM THE SCENE, SUFFOCATING,
• SO THE THEORY CHANGED FROM IMPORTANT
QUANTITIES SHOVELED BY INADVERTANCE ,TO
A FEW KILOS OF THIS PRODUCT,
• NEVERTHELESS,THE EXPERTS CONSIDERING SUCH EVENT
COULD HAVE HAPPENED, LAUNCHED A HUGE AND
COSTLY INVESTIGATION BASED ON THIS REMOTE
POSSIBILITY.

75. DCCNa CHLORE INVESTIGATION
• THEORETICALLY IT WAS PROVEN THAT DCCNa,
MIXED WITH AMMONIUM NITRATES AND SOME
WATER, COULD PRODUCE NCl3 , WHICH INDEED IS A
PRIMARY EXPLOSIVE,
• WELL ENGINEERED TRIALS PROVED THAT SUCH
PRIMARY DETONATION CAN HAPPEN, EVEN IF ONLY
ONE OUT OF 20 TRIALS WAS POSITIVE!!
• IN CASE THE MAIN STOCKPILE IS VERY CLOSE TO
THE “BOX “ THE SOIL CRUST CONNECTING BOTH
PILES, SYMPATHETIC DETONATION COULD OCCUR,
• BUT THIS THEORY IS VERY FAR FROM THE REAL
FIELD CONDITIONS , AND EVEN MORE IMPORTANT
IT IS BASED ON THE UNPROVEN FACT OF DCCNA
PRESENCE IN THE BOX.

76. DCCNa INVESTIGATION, EXPERT VERSION
INITIATOR
EAST
RELAY 2RELAY 1
MAIN STOCKPILE
WALL
10T NAA PILE
2 NAI PILES
NAI + DCCNa
WET « AN » CRUST
DRAWING FROM THE FINAL EXPERT REPORT
FORGOTTEN WALL?

77. DCCNa THE SOLUTION ??
• FIRST, THE PRESENCE OF CHLORE, IN SUFFICIENT
QUANTITIES IN THE “BOX “ IS FAR FROM PROVEN,
• SECOND, AFTER MANY COMPLICATED CHEMICAL
TRANSFORMATIONS, THE PRODUCTION OF NCL3
IN REAL CONDITIONS, COMPARED TO THE WELL
ENGINEERED TRIALS, IS RATHER DOUBTFUL,
• THIRD, THE DISTANCE LAW FOR SYMPATHETIC
DETONATION APPLIES BETWEEN TWO EXPLOSIVES
AND NOT FOR A FERTILIZER STOCKPILE ,
• FOURTH THE REAL DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PILES,
HAS BEEN MANIPULATED,
• FIFTH THE “BOX”SEPARATING WALL IS IGNORED.

78. ELECTRICAL TESTS AND TRIALS ,
EVIDENTLY, IN SUCH INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT MANY
HV TRANSFORMERS ARE INSTALLED,
• MAIN POWER IS 225KV , DOWN TO 63KV, 20KV AND 6.2KV,
• EVEN IF NO ELECTRICAL CABLING IS IN BLDG 221
A HIGH GROUND POTENTIAL COULD BE A SUSPECT,
• MANY TRIALS HAVE BEEN MADE, ALL NEGATIVE,
• SINCE ALL ELECTRICAL CABLES, GROUNDINGS ARE
DESTROYED AT CRATER VICINITY ,THESE TESTS CAN
GIVE AT BEST AN INDICATION BUT NO PROOF.
• ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCES HAVE BEEN REPORTED
PRIOR To , BUT THEY COULD NOT BE TRACED,
• DUE TO THE DETONATION, NUMEROUS ELECTRICAL
ANOMALIES HAVE BEEN AUTOMATICALLY RECORDED,
• BUT PRIOR To, NOTHING CONSISTANT.

79. BIG ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE ?
EVIDENTLY, HUGE ELECTRICAL POWER WAS AVAILABLE
ON THE SITE,
THE DIFFERENT LINES WERE INTERCONNECTED FOR BACK
UP REASONS AND THE RESULTING NET WAS RATHER
COMPLEX,
• THE EXPERTS CONCLUDED THAT ELECTRICAL
DISTURBANCES COULD NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
DETONATION.
• CURIOUSLY, ON THE 63KV LINE CLOSE TO AZF, THE MAST
TOP GROUNDING CABLE HAS BEEN REPAIRED MANY
TIMES, AT SHORT DISTANCES,
• THIS COULD INDICATE THAT THE ELECTRICAL
ENVIRONMENT / GROUNDING AT AZF AND VICINITY
WAS NOT REALLY UNDER CONTROL, BUT IS IT SUFFICIENT
TO TRIGGER A DETONATION,

80. ELECTRICAL LINE, 63KV
• ON THE 63KV LINE, 260m FROM GZO (SEE HEREAFTER)
THE CABLE OF PHASE 7 HAS BEEN FOUND CUT, BOTH ENDS
LYING ON THE GROUND, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TWO
SUPPORTING TOWERS,
• A SHORT CIRCUIT BETWEEN PHASE 7 AND PHASE 3
(SOME 2.5m ABOVE LINE 7) IS RECORDED AT 10H18:07.39s.
• THE EXPERTS EXPLANATION IS THAT THE FAILURE
OCCURED DUE TO A ≈ 70Kg METALIC FRAGMENT, WHICH
AFTER A 11s PARABOLIC FLIGHT , HITS AT HIGH ANGLE
LINE 7 AND THE UP-REBOUND LINKS PHASES 7 AND 3,
• PROBLEM, NO SUCH HEAVY FRAGMENT HAS BEEN FOUND
AND THIS THEORY SEEMS RATHER UNBELIEVIBLE,
• NO OTHER EXPLANATION IS FOUND AND JUST ADDS TO
THE NUMEROUS MYSTERIOUS FACTS.

81. ELECTRICAL LINES, TRANSFORMERS
T36
T0,T10
T24
T53
T23
220KV
6,2KV
T xx
6,2 KV
380V, 3Φ
63KV
20KV
LA FOURGUETTE
63 KV
LINE
LINE
CUT
P9
P10

82. SEISMIC TRIALS YEAR 2004 PART 1
THE PURPOSE OF THESE TRIALS WERE:
• PROVIDE THE SOIL SEISMIC CHARACTERISTICS,
• DEFINE PRECISELY THE ARRIVAL TIMES FROM AZF
CRATER TO THE PLACES OF INTEREST ,
• TRY TO COMPARE THE WAVES AND AMPLITUDES AT
THE SEISMIC STATIONS BETWEEN THESE TRIALS
AND AZF EVENT.
 CHARGES OF YIELD BETWEEN 1 AND 35Kg HAVE
BEEN FIRED, CYLINDRICAL SHAPE, PLACED
VERTICALLY, AT A DEPTH OF AROUND 30m.
 FOR SUCH ENGINEERED TRIALS THE COUPLING
FACTOR CAN BE CONSIDERED AS OPTIMAL.

83. SEISMIC TRIALS 2004 PART 2
ADDITIONAL TRIALS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH A
FALLING WEIGHT IN THE VICINITY OF AZF CRATER:
• WEIGHT 20T, HEIGHT 20m,
• ENERGY E = mgh = 3.9*106
J, CLOSE TO THE ENERGY OF
1 Kg TNT (4.2*106
J/Kg ).
• IN FACT SUCH SEISMIC SIGNATURE WAS, AT CLOSE
RANGE, SIMILAR TO A 1 KG TNT COUPLED DETONATION:
 THE FALLING WEIGHT HAS A GOOD SEISMIC EFFICIENCY,
THE ALLUVIUM SOIL CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A GOOD
SEISMIC PROPAGATING MEDIA.
•THE AZF SEISMIC SIGNAL CAN BE WELL SIMULATED BY
ADDING UP 170 SUCH DROP TESTS,
•SUPPOSING THE DROP TEST EFFICIENCY IS 95% THE
SEISMIC ENERGY FOR AZF IS 0.95*170*3.9*106
J= 6.3*108
J
• THE AZF SEISMIC EFFICIENCY IS 6.3*108
/ 75000*4.2*106
= 2‰

84. WITNESS PERCEPTIONS

85. WITNESS LOCATION FUNCTION OF DEPOSITION
A curious geometrical pattern,
centered on BLDG 221
63 KV line

86. WITNESS LOCATION / NUMBER OF EXPLOSIONS
0 DETONATION
1
2
DISTANCE FROM CRATER METERS
NUMBER OF WITNESS, BLACK POINTS
HOW MANY EXPLOSIONS?SEISMIC RUMBLING , SHAKING

87. DETONATION TIME
 THE DETONATION TIME To, BASED ON SEISMIC Pg
WAVE ARRIVAL, ML = 3.3 , To = 10H17: 55.45s ± 0.02s.
 THE To BASED ON OTHER EFFECTS COULD NOT
BEEN DETERMINED WITH IDENTICAL PRECISION:
• TRANSFORMER T 24 SOME 100m FROM BLDG 221
REGISTERED A FAILURE AT 10H17:55.52s , ASSUMING
A BLAST ARRIVAL TIME OF 100ms WE OBTAIN To
10H17:55.42s ± 0.05s,
• AIR SLAP ARRIVAL AT MTLF STATION IS 10H21:19
THE SOUND TRAVEL TIME IS 203.6s SO To ≈ 10H17:53s,
• AIR SLAP ARRIVAL AT OMP CANNOT BE USED ,
NO TIME BASE FOR THE RECORDER ON TEST.

88. DISCOVERED ANOMALIES 1
THE INVESTIGATION FOUND OUT THAT :
 BLDG 221 WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS A SAFETY HAZARD,
NEGLECTING COMPLETELY THAT “OUT OF SPECIFICATION
AN” WAS STORED THERE !
 NO FIRE, SMOKE OR NOx DETECTOR WERE INSTALLED,
 THE FLUORESCENT LIGHTING WAS STANDARD INDUSTRY
 THE RECOMMENDATION OF STORING SEVERAL PILES, 50T
EACH WITH A 2 m SEPARATION WERE NOT FOLLOWED,
 THE 60 YEARS OLD CONCRETE SLAB, WAS HEAVILY
DAMAGED, THE CONCRETE EATEN AND PROGRESSIVELY
REPLACED BY THE AN CRUST EMBEDED IN THE REBAR,
 THIS SLAB HAS NEVER BEEN REPLACED AND THE OLD
POLLUTED “AN “ CRUST NEVER BEEN REMOVED,
 WITH THE DOORS ALWAYS OPEN, DEPENDING ON AIR
HYGROMETRY, SOME WATER FORMED ON THIS CRUST
SEEPING UNDERGROUND THROUGH THE DAMAGED SLAB.

89. DISCOVERED ANOMALIES 2
 UP TO 25 SUB CONTRACTORS WERE WORKING
PERMANENTLY ON THE SITE, THE SAFETY MANAGEMENT
WAS THEREFORE VERY VULNERABLE ON THIS SEVESO
CLASSIFIED SITE,
 THE MANAGEMENT LOST PROGRESSIVELY KNOWLEDGE
OF THE HANDLING, STORAGE AND TRANSPORT PROCESSES.
 IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT PRODUCT FLOW WAS NOT
WELL MONITORED, BIG BAGS SUCH AS DCCNa OR
CYANURIC ACID WERE FOUND AT THE WRONG PLACES =>
DCCNa ACCIDENT THEORY,
 ONLY SUB CONTRACTORS WERE WORKING IN BLDG 221,
 WITHOUT PROOF, HEAVY CRITIC FELL RAPIDLY ON
THESE SUB CONTRACTORS ,THIS, AND THE FACT THAT THE
COMPANY BARELY KNEW BLDG 221 EXISTENCE, LEAD TO
ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION DIFFICULTIES.

90. DISCOVERED ANOMALIES 3
TO MAKE THINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED
FOLLOWING ANOMALIES ARE WORTH MENTIONING:
• 18Kg OF HEXAVALENT CHROME, DELIVERED IN
AUGUST 2001, HAVE, AT AN UNKNOWN MOMENT,
DISAPPEARED FROM THE AZF STORE,
• AN ELECTRIC DETONATOR, TYPE DAVEY BICKFORD,
HAS BEEN FOUND UNDER A METAL SHEET, AMONGST
BLAST PROJECTIONS, IT BELONGS TO AZF , IT WAS IN
PERFECT CONDITIONS, OBVIOUSLY DEPOSITED THERE,
• AN ELECTRICAL HV POWER TRANSFORMER CLOSE
TO BLDG 221 HAS BEEN REMOVED WITH CUTTING
TORCHES AND CRANE , THIS UNAUTHORIZED HEAVY
OPERATION WENT COMPLETELY UNNOTICED !

91. EXPLOSION INITIATION PROBLEM
• NOBODY WAS INSIDE THIS BLDG,
• 15 MINUTES PRIOR “To”, BLDG 221, SEEN FROM OUTSIDE
SEEMED NORMAL,
• NO ELECTRICAL LINES IN THE BLDG, LIGHT FROM 222.
 HERE BELOW WHAT HAS (ALMOST) BEEN EXCLUDED:
• TERRORIST ACTION,
• FIRE, LIGHTNING,
• METEORITE AND OTHER FALLING OBJECT,
• BOMB FROM LAST WAR UNDER THE PILE,
• GUIDED WEAPON IMPACT,
• MAGNETIC, ELECTROMAGNETIC IMPULSE,
• HIGH ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE,
• BACTERIOLOGICAL , CHEMICAL DECOMPOSITION.
 AN ACT OF GOD COULD NOT BEEN RULED OUT.

92. INVESTIGATION
ANOMALIES
AND LESSONS

93. INVESTIGATION MAIN ANOMALIES 1
OMP , SEISMIC SIGNALS , A MAJOR WITNESS IS STILL
HULLED IN HEAVY FOG:
• 3 DIFFERENT CALIBRATION VALUES HAVE BEEN
OFFICIALLY PROVIDED SO AS 2 DIFFERENT SENSOR
ORIENTATIONS, WHAT CONFIDENCE REMAINS ?
• TWO SETS OF DIFFERENT DIGITAL RECORDINGS OF
THESE SIGNALS WERE RELEASED, EVEN IF NOT BOTH
OFFICIALLY.
• THE OMP SEISMIC EQUIPMENT WAS A REJECTED
GEOPHONE JUST USED TO TEST THE RECORDERS, BUT
THIS REJECTED EQUIPMENT , IT SEEMS, WENT LATER IN
OPERATION , NO REPAIR INFORMATION PROVIDED.
• THE REJECTED EQUIPMENT WORKED CURIOUSLY
WELL, NO CLUE WHY IT WAS REJECTED.

94. INVESTIGATION MAIN ANOMALIES 2
THE FRAGMENTS, ANOTHER MAJOR WITNESS OF THE
DETONATION HAVE NOT BEEN STUDIED AT ALL.
• BASED ON BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN EASY TO LOCATE THE ORIGINAL LOCATION
OF MOST OF THE BIG FRAGMENTS,
• BASED ON FRAGMENT DISTANCE AND EJECTION ANGLE
THE DETONATED STOCKPILE COULD HAVE BEEN
MODELLED AND COMPARED TO THE CRATER MODEL.
• MANY HEAVY FRAGMENTS, IN THE MASS RANGE OF
1000Kg WOULD HAVE PROVIDED THE IMPULSE
ESTIMATION OF THEIR EJECTION,
• THE IMPACT CRATER OF THOSE FRAGMENTS INDICATED
THEIR ARRIVAL ANGLE.
• THE FINDING OF ALL ROOF SUPPORTING COLUMNS
SHOULD HAVE BEEN A PRIORITY.

95. POST ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 1
• THIS CASE HAS PROVEN THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE OF
RELIABLE AND PRECISE TIME BASE FOR ALL TYPE OF
RECORDING EQUIPMENT,
• WITHOUT SUCH PRECISE INFORMATION IT IS QUITE
IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE AN UNCHALLENGED
CHRONOLOGY OF THE DIFFERENT EVENTS,
• WITHOUT SUCH CHRONOLOGY, IT BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE
TO RELATE THE EVENTS, WHICH, FOR ACCIDENTS
OCCUR IN A VERY SMALL TIME GAP.
• USE RECORDERS WHICH DO NOT ERASE PRE ACCIDENT
DATA DUE TO POST ACCIDENT DATA SATURATION,
ELECTRICAL PRE - DATAS ARE LOST FOR AZF.
• IMMEDIATELY FIND AND SECURE ALL RECORDED DATAS
OF THE EVENT ,
• IN AZF CASE, TWO IMPORTANT RECORDS HAVE BEEN
DISCOVERED IN 2004 AND 2005 RESPECTIVELY.

96. POST ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 2
• THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION MUST
QUICKLY ESTABLISH THE MOST CREDIBLE
EVENT LIST AND ANALYSE IMMEDIATELY ALL
DISCREPENCIES,
• AS TIME GOES, SUCH LATE ANALYSE BECOMES
IMPOSSIBLE OR TOO UNRELIABLE.
• EVEN IF DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE IN SUCH
CHAOTIC CONDITIONS, THE AUTHORIZED
ACCESS OF THE SITE MUST BE DRASTICALLY
MONITORED,
• AN OTHER LESSON, IS THE ABSOLUTE NEED OF
AT LEAST ONE HIGH LEVEL PROFESSIONAL
IN THE MAIN FIELD OF INVESTIGATION.

97. POST ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 3
• THE FINAL REPORT OF THE COURT EXPERTS MUST BE
CLEAR, CONCISE, DETAILING IN TERMS OF CERTAINITY
OR PROBABILITY THE DIFFERENT EVENTS ANALYZED.
• NO NEED TO GIVE A SOLUTION BASED ON GUESSES
UNLESS CLEARLY STATED SO.
• AZF FINAL REPORT IS FULL OF MISTAKES AND
APPROXIMATIONS, BUT THE FINAL RESULT IS GIVEN
WITH A PRECISION OF 3 DECIMALS !!
• AS USUAL, THE FACTS ARE DISTORTED TO FIT THE
UNIQUE FOUND SOLUTION.
• EVIDENTLY, MISTAKES IN SUCH IMPORTANT REPORT
TRIGGERS IMMEDIATE MISTRUST FOR EVEN THE BEST
ANALYSED TOPIC.
• IN FACT, IN ALL SUCH CASES,THE TENDANCY IS TO SEE
A CONSPIRATY INSTEAD OF SOLID INCOMPETENCE.

98. AZF QUIZZ

99. BASIC QUESTIONARY 1
• WHAT IS THE CORRECT “AN “ => TNT EQUIVALENCY
FACTOR FOR AZF STOCKPILE , 0.35 , 0.4 , 0.45 , 0.5 ?
• CONSIDERING THE BLAST EFFECT WHAT QUANTITY
OF TNT IS INVOLVED 40T, 60T, 80T,100T ?
• SAME QUESTION FOR CRATER 40T, 60T , 80T ,100T ?
• DOES THE CRATER PROFILE CORRESPOND TO AN
EAST INITIATION OF THE STOCKPILE?
• IS SUCH FERTILIZER PILE ABLE TO DELIVER A
ML 3.3 LOCAL MAGNITUDE?
• FOR SURFACE DETONATION, ALLUVIUM SOIL ,WHAT
QUANTITY OF TNT WOULD NORMALLY BE NEEDED
FOR ML 3.3 , 40T , 100T, 300T , 500T ?

100. BASIC QUESTIONARY 2
• IN THE MORNING, UNUSUAL STRONG AMONIAC SMELL
OVER THE AREA , HAS SUCH CHEMICAL RELEASE
HYDRAZINE FOR EXAMPLE, STORED / USED IN A PLANT
OPPOSITE GARONNE RIVER, D = 500m,TRIGGERED THE
FATAL EVENT CHAIN ?
• SOME KIND OF VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LASER
BEAMS HAVE BEEN SEEN PRIOR THE DETONATION COULD
THEY BE RELATED ?
• ELECTRICAL SHOCKS , OCCURRED PRIOR THE
DETONATION, COULD A HIGH GROUND POTENTIAL
TRIGGER THE DETONATION ?
• THE ALUMINIUM ROOF ,THE CONCRETE
REINFORCEMENT MESH, COULD THEY HAVE PLAYED A
MAJOR ROLE IN AN EVENTUAL ELECTRICAL INITIATION ,
AS CAPACITOR?

101. BASIC QUESTIONARY 3
• “AN” IS VERY FLEGMATIC, THIS SEEMS TO
EXCLUDE ALL AVAILABLE INITIATION
POSSIBILITIES, SO , WAS THIS “AN” STOCKPILE
REALLY NORMAL?
• GREY, VERTICAL,CYLINDRICAL CLOUDS HAVE
BEEN SEEN, HAVE THEY ORIGINATED A VCE
(VAPOUR CLOUD EXPLOSION) ?
• COULD SUCH VCE BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCES? AZF STOCKPILE
DETONATION?
• IS THE DCCNa THEORY MORE CREDIBLE THAN
EXPLAINED IN THE SLIDES?
• WHAT HAS RUPTURED THE 63KV LINE AT To + 12s?

102. BASIC QUESTIONARY 4
• WHY IS THE FRAGMENT STUDY IMPORTANT FOR
SUCH ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION?
• EXPLOSION SOUNDS HAVE BEEN HEARD AT
DIFFERENT LOCATIONS 4 TO 8s PRIOR THE HUGE
AZF BLAST, BUT NOT A SINGLE PROOF SUCH
DETONATION / DEFLAGRATION HAS EXISTED.
• SO, HOW ACCURATE AND RELIABLE ARE
WITNESSES UNDER SUCH CIRCONSTANCES?
• FINALLY, WITHOUT ANY CLUE, SHOULD A
TERRORIST ACTION, EVEN LONG BEFORE To
BE RULED OUT?

103. ANNEXES
SOME TOPICS DETAILED HERE :
• CHARGE CONSIDERATIONS,
• GROUND COUPLING FACTOR,
• SEISMIC ENERGY,
• PEAK PARTICULE VELOCITY
• MAGNITUDE <= > CHARGE RELATION,
• TNT CHARGE ESTIMATION FOR ACCIDENTS
• AZF POSSIBLE SCENARIO,
• INTERESTING ACCIDENTS OR TESTS CHART

104. CHARGE CONSIDERATIONS 1
WE COMPARE HERE THE STANDARD
REFERENCE SPHERICAL / HEMISPHERICAL
CHARGE USED FOR ALL SOFTWARES / CHARTS
WITH OUR SUPPOSED PARALLELIPEDIC OR
CYLINDRICAL CHARGE:
• FOR BLAST EFFECT,
• FOR GROUND SHOCK,
FOR COMPARISON WE REPRODUCE THE NEAR
FIELD BLAST EFFECTS OF AN ALMOST
EQUIVALENT CYLINDRICAL CHARGE.

105. CHARGE CONSIDERATIONS 2
THE ENERGY IMPARTED IN THE GROUND OR AIR IS LINKED
TO THE CHARGE SURFACES DIRECTED TOWARD GROUND
OR AIR, FOR HEMISPHERICAL WE HAVE 0.33 / 0.67, FOR AZF
PILE AND CRUST 0.44/0.56 EXPLAINING THE IMPORTANT
SEISMIC MAGNITUDE.
75T TNT QUIVALENT
CG 1.0m
R
≈ 2.8m
R = 2.2m
CG 2.2m
CG 0.7m

106. CYLINDRICAL CHARGE, NEAR FIELD PRESSURES
• FIGURES FOR THEORETICAL NEAR
FIELD OVERPRESSURES VERSUS
AZIMUT, FOR A CYLINDRICAL
CHARGE 70T TNT WITH L / D ≈ 5 ,
END INITIATED, GIVEN AT
DIFFERENT DISTANCES.
• TOP FIGURE CANNOT APPLY
EXACTLY TO OUR STOCKPILE, DUE
TO ITS IMPORTANT DIMENSIONS.
• CYLINDRICAL (OR
PARALELLIPEDIC) CHARGES
GENERATE SECONDARY SHOCK
WAVES SOMETIMES GREATER THAN
THE INITIAL SHOCK (OFTEN IN THE
LONGITUDINAL AXIS )
• FOR D > 300m PRESSURES ARE
CLOSE TO HEMISPHERICAL CHARGE
Pressures in bar
Pressures in mbar
BASED ON NWC TP 6382

107. AZF CHARGE, PRESSURE FOCUSING NORTH
155m
225m

108. AZF CHARGE, PRESSURE FOCUSING NORTH
• THE OVERPRESSURE FOCUSING IS OBVIOUS ON THIS
VIEW NORTH OF CRATER:
 AT 155 m STEEL PIPE SHOWS MAXIMUM BENDING,
 AT 225 m ON AXIX ,TREE TOPS CUT AT A HEIGHT OF
1,5m BUT OTHER TREES ON THE RIGHT ARE STILL
STANDING.
• THE THEORETICAL FOCUSING OF A CYLINDRICAL
CHARGE BECOMES NEGLIGIBLE AT SCALED
DISTANCES AROUND 6 m / Kg1/3
, OR 15 ft / lb1/3
.
• THE SIGNIFICANT SHARP FOCUSING AS SEEN ON
THE PREVIOUS PICTURE SEEMS CURIOUS BUT AT
SUCH DISTANCES WE DO NOT HAVE A POINT CHARGE
SINCE
Dm < 10*Lm = 250m, Lm CYLINDER LENGTH AND THE
REDUCED DISTANCE Z IS NOT 155m/600000.33
= 4.1 BUT
Z = Dm/ (W/m)0.5
= 155/(60000/25)0,5
AND Z≈ 155/50 = 3.2.

109. • THE GROUND COUPLING FACTOR “ f ” AS DEFINED
BY CONWEP IS A FACTOR TAKING INTO ACCOUNT:
 THE CHARGE ENERGY PARTITIONING AIR
/GROUND,
 THE CHARGE / GROUND EFFICIENCY FOR
RADIATED SEISMIC EFFECTS,
• IT IS UNKNOWN IF THIS FACTOR IS INFLUENCED
BY AN UPWARD OR DOWNWARD DETONATION.
• THIS FACTOR VARIES FROM 0.14 FOR ABOVE
SURFACE DETONATION TO 1 FOR FULLY BURIED AND
EARTH/ROCK INTIMATE CONTACT.
• FOR CONWEP, ALL SEISMIC EFFECTS ARE
PROPORTIONAL TO THIS FACTOR.
GROUND COUPLING FACTOR 1

110. CONWEP IS THE RED FUNCTION, WE HAVE ADDED THE
ESTIMATED FACTOR CURVES FOR UPWARD / DOWNWARD
CHARGE INITIATION,
• WE COMPARE ALSO CONWEP TO LAMPSON COUPLING
FACTOR, HIS ESTIMATION TAKES INTO ACCOUNT A LOSS
OF CHARGE EFFECTIVENESS AT GREATER DEPTH
DUE TO SOIL DENSITY INCREASE.
GROUND COUPLING FACTOR 2

111. SEISMIC PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY
• WHEN SEARCHING THIS TOPIC YOU COME UP WITH AS MANY
FORMULAS AS YOU HAVE DIFFERENT STUDIES.
• THE ADVANTAGE OF THIS, IS THAT YOU ARE ALMOST SURE
TO FIND A FORMULA WHICH FITS YOUR DEMONSTRATION.
• IN FACT ALL FORMULAS ARE OF IDENTICAL STRUCTURE,
• PPV = K* Wa
/ Db
, K IS A COEFFICIENT , SOIL AND WAVE
PROPAGATION DEPENDANT, W IS THE CHARGE, D IS THE
DISTANCE , a AND b ARE EXPONENTS.
• THE CHARGE EXPONENT IS AROUND 0.7,
• THE DISTANCE D EXPONENT HAS A CLOSE MATCH AT ≈ 1.7,
• SOME FORMULAS COME FROM MINING TESTS WHICH IS A
DIFFERENT SOIL EXITATION AS THE ONE WE CONSIDER.
• MINING USES OFTEN SEQUENCE FIRING WHICH INDUCES
WRONG RESULTS, PHASE SHIFTING OCCURS LINKED TO
SEISMIC WAVE PERIOD / FIRING SEQUENCE PERIOD.

112. MAGNITUDE TO CHARGE FOR NUCLEAR TESTS
3
3,5
4
4,5
5
5,5
6
6,5
7
0,1 1 10 100 1000 10000
KT
mb
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
5
5,5
6
6,5
7
0,01 0,1 1 10 100 1000 10000
KT
mb
ex URSS
mb = 0,85logYKT+4,2
3
3,5
4
4,5
5
5,5
6
6,5
7
7,5
0,1 1 10 100 1000
KT
mb
Essais
atmosphériques
USA NEVADA
mb = 0.85*log(WKT) + 3.8
EX URSS
mb = 0.85*log( WKT) + 4.2
FRANCE PACIFIC
mb = 0.85*log(WKT) + 4.17 THE YELLOW TREND LINES
CHECK THE 0.73 (INSTEAD 0.85)
LOG COEFFICIENT, ( IN FACT W
EXPONENT ), COEFFICIENT 0.73
SEEMS A BETTER OVERALL FIT
FOR SMALLER CHARGES.
3 ATMOSPHERIC TESTS

113. QUICK TNT CHARGE
ESTIMATION IN
CASE OF AN
ACCIDENT

114. TNT CHARGE ESTIMATION
SURFACE CHARGE ESTIMATION BY:
 BROKEN WINDOWS LIMIT, Dm => WKg = Dm1,5
4
 CRATER VOLUME ,Vm3
=> WKg = 10*Vm3
 SEISMIC MAGNITUDE , M => WKg = 101.3*M + 1
NOTE : IF CRATER VOLUME IS NOT KNOWN IT CAN
BE ESTIMATED FROM THE SEISMIC MAGNITUDE
BY Vm3 = 101.3*M

115. AZF ACCIDENT
SCENARIO
BEST GUESS

116. BASIC FACTS
THE HUGE DIFFICULTY OF THE CASE IS TO PICK UP
THE FEW DIRECTLY RELEVANT FACTS AMONG THE
HUNDREDS LISTED.
 BASED ON MANY WITNESS ACCOUNTS IT SEEMS
PROVEN THAT A RELATIVE SMALL DETONATION OR
DEFLAGRATION OCCURRED SOME SECONDS PRIOR
MAIN DETONATION,
 ELECTRICAL SHOCKS ARE REPORTED PRIOR To AT
BLDG 221 VICINITY.
 THIS FIRST EVENT DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH POWER TO
BE RECORDED BY ACOUSTIC OR SEISMIC EQUIPMENT.
 THE INVISIBLE AGRESSION OCCURED PROBABLY
UNDERGROUND TRIGGERED BY SOME GAS POCKETS
(POLLUTED UNDERGROUNG ) INITIATED BY THE
ELECTRICAL DEFECT.

117. INITIATION THEORY
A DANGEROUS GAS MIX IS JUST
WAITING TO BE TRIGGERED BY
SOME ELECTRICAL GROUND
FAILURE, WHICH SOON OCCURS.
THE CONFINED VAPOR EXPLODES
BREAKS EASILY A HOLE IN THE
CONCRETE SLAB, AND PUSHES
UPWARD THE « AN » PRILLS.
THE ROOF IS EJECTED AND THE
COLUMN IS SUSTAINED BY MORE
COMBUSTION GASES FROM THE
AGRESSED PRILLS ON COLUMN
EDGE.
A STRONG HISSING NOISE, HEARD
IN AZF VICINITY, COULD BE LINKED
TO SUCH HIGH PRESSURE
ESCAPING GAS.
STEP 1
STEP 2
STEP 3

118. AZF DETONATION
IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT IN SUCH
COLUMNS WITH PARTICLES
RUBBING AGAINST EACH OTHER
IMPORTANT STATIC ELECTRICITY
BUILDS UP,
THE ELECTRICAL DISCHARGES
HEAT THE COLUMN EVEN MORE
AND WITHIN 2 TO 3 SECONDS THE
COLUMN DETONATES AND
TRIGGERS THE STOCKPILE WHICH
WAS ALREADY HEAVILY AGRESSED
FROM BOTTOM TO TOP.
STEP 4
STEP 5

119. SOME INTERESTING
ACCIDENTS / TESTS
ANALYZED