The current German term ‘Zeitenwende’ which can be directly translated to ‘turn of an era’ has taken on a sadder meaning in the context of the booming defence industry. To what extent is IND EX also involved in this?
Johannes Lottermann: IND EX focuses on one principle: every employee must be adequately safeguarded when working in areas with fire and explosion hazards – regardless of the industry. This includes the defence industry. As is well known, we at IND EX always address current events and issues, including the current ‘Zeitenwende’. In these increasingly uncertain times, we therefore see our task as an association in the truest sense of the word as doing exactly that and associating as a network for fire and explosion protection: pooling knowledge, transferring experience and providing clear, professional answers to open questions. Where risks arise, guidance and robust solutions are needed. In this context, the turning point offers a historic opportunity for the transfer of knowledge from civil engineering know-how and expertise.
The security and defence industry equips armed forces, authorities, and organisations – including with weapons and ammunition. What challenges exist in production and throughout the entire production chain?
Johannes Lottermann: In my role at Rembe® GmbH Safety + Control, I can confirm the current growth in demand, but for reasons of confidentiality, I cannot comment specifically on the specifics of the technical challenges. Speaking in very neutral and general terms, however, the biggest challenge in the defence industry compared to conventional industrial applications is the concentration of fire and explosion risks throughout the entire value chain, from the receipt of the often already high-energy raw materials to production, storage, transport and disposal.
Individual process steps are similar to those in civil applications, such as mixing, drying, conveying, dust removal and storage. The key differences are that in conventional processes, only the intermediate products (e.g. in breweries, biscuit factories or pharmaceutical production plants) lead to explosive atmospheres, while the end products such as wheat flour, sugar or milk powder are considered virtually non-critical within their final packaging units. This is naturally different for explosive substances in the defence industry. Furthermore, the difference lies not so much in ‘whether’ something happens, but in ‘what happens when something happens.’ The tolerance for safety-critical errors is therefore minimal in the defence industry or in civilian activities involving explosives. As with conventional explosion protection, this requires a very closely coordinated combination of organisational, structural, and technical protective measures, as well as a deep understanding of the explosive substances and processes involved.
Are the measures for protection against fires and explosions different to those used in producing of explosive or flammable substances for non-military use?
Johannes Lottermann: In principle, no, but in detail, yes. To improve understanding, it is important to recognise the distinction between fire and explosion hazards in traditional civil applications involving ‘explosive atmospheres/mixtures’ caused by combustible vapours, gases, or dust, and those with ‘explosives’ or ‘explosive substances’. The latter can react without the involvement of atmospheric oxygen, resulting in a sudden increase in pressure and/or temperature. Such explosives, propellants or ignition materials can be used in both military and civilian industrial applications.
The basic approach to fire and explosion protection is in principle identical to the German GefStoffV, the Hazardous Substances Ordinance: Based on the hazard analysis, explosive atmospheres or explosive substances must be prevented or limited, ignition sources avoided and the effects reduced. However, there are genuine individual differences in the specific organisational and technical measures that are taken, which depend heavily on the explosive substance itself and the respective manufacturing process.
In the defence industry, the regulations of the SprengG, the german Explosives Act also apply. However, it is interesting to note how many proven principles from conventional industrial dust and gas explosion protection approaches are transferable, for example in pressure resistant design, pressure venting or the prevention of pressure and/or shock wave propagation. At the same time, however, buildings with a fire and explosion hazard due to explosives are subject to very specific structural requirements that would not be necessary in the case of conventional dust or gas explosion hazards. For instance, building and room sizes are limited, and only one storey is usually permitted. The protective and safety distances between buildings are also clearly regulated.
The risks associated with the storage and transport of defence technology must also be minimised, primarily through organisational measures. How does technical fire and explosion protection contribute to safety?
Johannes Lottermann: The generic approach is: Organisation sets the framework, technology makes it resilient.
When it comes to storage and transport of defence technology in particular, organisational measures initially reduce the probability of incidents occurring: Clear responsibilities, defined procedures, training, and access restrictions are indispensable. Technical fire and explosion protection measures then comes into play where organisation naturally reaches its limits, namely in the event of deviations, errors, or external influences.
In line with the relevant German DGUV regulations, technical explosion protection measures pursue clear goals: Limiting effects, preventing escalations, and safeguarding people. Technical measures are effective regardless of individual daily form, possible stress situations, or logistical bottlenecks. They thus create a reliable level of safety, the necessary belt, and braces for such high risks.
In practice, this means that the design of storage and transport units, targeted pressure vents, robust enclosures, functional isolation and spacing and defined energy release paths ensure that an undesirable event remains locally limited. The focus is not on the ‘if,’ but on the controlled ‘how.’
