What is the primary focus of the ICPS8 conference?

The conference focuses on advancements in protective structures, encompassing research, methodologies, and practical applications to enhance resilience against various threats.

When does the conference take place?

The conference is scheduled for a period of several days in the summer.

8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8)

Name: 8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8)
Start: 2027-06-21T00:00:00Z
End: 2027-06-24T00:00:00Z
Location: Prague

Jun 21–24, 2027Prague, CzechiaIn-person

Registration open

The 8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8) will convene in Prague, CZE, bringing together experts from various disciplines to discuss advancements in protective structures. This event serves as a critical forum for sharing research, methodologies, and practical applications aimed at enhancing the resilience of infrastructure and communities against diverse threats. Participants will engage with cutting-edge developments in materials, design principles, and analytical techniques relevant to protective engineering.

Committees & topics

Topics
Response of Structures and Structural Elements to Explosion and Impact Loads · Blast and Impact Resistant Design of Structures · Techniques for Mitigating Blast Load and Penetration Effects · Strengthening and Retrofitting Techniques for Existing Structures · Projectile Penetration and Perforation Mechanics · Collateral Damage Estimation · Numerical Simulation and Modelling of Blast and Impact Phenomena · Probabilistic and Uncertainty Modelling in Protective Engineering

Why it matters

The field of protective structures is increasingly vital in a world facing evolving security challenges and natural hazards. From safeguarding critical infrastructure against deliberate attacks to designing buildings resilient to extreme environmental conditions, the insights shared at ICPS8 have direct implications for public safety and national security. The interdisciplinary nature of the conference, encompassing engineering, materials science, and risk assessment, underscores the complex and multifaceted approach required to address these challenges effectively.

Discussions at ICPS8 contribute to a global dialogue on best practices and innovative solutions. The exchange of knowledge among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers from countries like USA, GBR, ISR, DEU, CHN, AUS, SGP, KOR, ITA, JPN, RUS, SWE, CHE, IRL, UKR, and FRA fosters international collaboration, which is essential for developing robust protective measures that transcend national borders. This collective effort helps to advance the state of the art in protective structures, ultimately leading to safer and more secure societies worldwide.

How to prepare

For those involved in diplomacy and international relations, understanding the technical advancements and policy implications discussed at ICPS8 is crucial. The conference provides a unique opportunity to grasp the scientific underpinnings of national security and disaster preparedness, which are often central to bilateral and multilateral agreements. Familiarity with the latest in protective structures can inform policy decisions related to urban planning, critical infrastructure protection, and humanitarian aid.

Engaging with the experts at ICPS8 can also facilitate the identification of key stakeholders and potential partners for future international initiatives. Applying principles from the "what is stakeholder mapping?" and "stakeholder workshop" lessons can help in understanding the diverse interests and capabilities present. Furthermore, the technical discussions often highlight areas where international standards and collaborative research are most needed, offering avenues for diplomatic engagement and resource allocation.

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 6 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United States

A key contributor to research and development in protective structures, particularly in defense and counter-terrorism applications.

Role in topic

The USA has historically invested heavily in research related to protective structures, driven by national security concerns and the need to protect critical infrastructure. Its contributions often focus on advanced materials, blast-resistant designs, and infrastructure resilience against various threats.

China

A rapidly growing force in protective structures research, with significant investment in urban resilience and infrastructure development.

Role in topic

China is a major player in infrastructure development globally and has a growing research output in protective structures, focusing on seismic resilience, high-rise building protection, and civil defense. Its perspective often emphasizes large-scale urban planning and engineering solutions.

Germany

Known for its engineering excellence, contributing to high-performance materials and innovative structural design for protection.

Role in topic

Germany's strong engineering tradition translates into significant contributions to protective structures, particularly in areas like advanced materials science, structural integrity, and the design of resilient buildings and industrial facilities. Their focus often includes precision engineering and long-term durability.

Israel

A leader in practical protective solutions, particularly in response to security threats and urban defense.

Role in topic

Israel has developed extensive expertise in protective structures due to ongoing security challenges. Its contributions often involve innovative and practical solutions for civilian protection, blast mitigation, and the design of hardened facilities in urban environments.

United Kingdom

A significant contributor to research in protective structures, with a focus on historical preservation and urban resilience.

Role in topic

The United Kingdom has a strong academic and industrial base contributing to protective structures, with research often spanning from historical building preservation against modern threats to the resilience of critical national infrastructure. Their perspective often includes a balance of theoretical and applied research.

Japan

A global leader in seismic engineering and disaster resilience, with extensive experience in protective structures against natural hazards.

Role in topic

Japan's frequent exposure to natural disasters, particularly earthquakes and tsunamis, has made it a world leader in seismic engineering and disaster-resilient protective structures. Its research focuses on innovative damping systems, advanced materials, and comprehensive urban resilience strategies.

Topics & background

The background behind each topic and the actors that shape it.

Response of Structures and Structural Elements to Explosion and Impact Loads

The study of how structures respond to explosive and impact loading emerged from World War II-era research into bomb damage assessment and accelerated during the Cold War, when governments invested heavily in understanding the survivability of military installations, civil defense shelters, and critical infrastructure under nuclear and conventional weapons effects. Foundational work by researchers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the former Soviet Union produced empirical scaling laws (notably Hopkinson-Cranz scaling) and pressure-impulse diagrams that remain central to the discipline. Subsequent terrorist bombings — Beirut (1983), Oklahoma City (1995), the U.S. embassy attacks (1998), and the World Trade Center attacks (1993 and 2001) — shifted attention toward civilian buildings and progressive collapse. Contemporary research focuses on the highly nonlinear, rate-dependent behavior of reinforced concrete, steel, masonry, and composite elements subjected to high strain rates exceeding 10² s⁻¹. Engineers seek to characterize local response (spalling, scabbing, breaching) and global response (flexure, shear, membrane action) and to reconcile experimental data from shock tubes, arena tests, and drop-weight rigs with analytical and computational predictions. Outstanding challenges include capturing combined blast-fragment loading, near-field detonation effects where uniform pressure assumptions break down, and the response of novel materials such as ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) and fiber-reinforced polymers.

Key players

Blast and Impact Resistant Design of Structures

Blast-resistant design originated in military fortification practice and was codified for civilian use following high-profile bombings of embassies, federal buildings, and transportation hubs in the late twentieth century. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing was a watershed moment in the United States, prompting the General Services Administration and Department of Defense to issue mandatory standoff distances, progressive collapse provisions, and façade hardening requirements for federal facilities. Parallel efforts in the United Kingdom, born of decades of IRA-related attacks in London and Northern Ireland, produced influential guidance from CPNI (now NPSA) on protecting crowded places. Modern practice integrates performance-based design, in which structures are engineered to specified levels of protection against defined threat scenarios, typically expressed as charge weight at standoff. Key codes and manuals include the U.S. UFC 3-340-02, ASCE's Blast Protection of Buildings, and Eurocode-aligned national annexes. Current debates concern the cost-effectiveness of hardening versus standoff and architectural mitigation, the integration of blast resistance with seismic and progressive collapse requirements, and how to design against evolving threats such as vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices, drone-delivered munitions, and accidental industrial explosions like the 2020 Beirut port disaster.

Key players

Techniques for Mitigating Blast Load and Penetration Effects

Mitigation techniques aim to reduce the energy transferred from an explosive or projectile to a protected asset, complementing — and often substituting for — costly mass-based hardening. Sandbags, earth berms, and reinforced concrete walls represent the traditional approach, dating to the trenches of the First World War and the bunkers of the Second. The post-Cold War era introduced more sophisticated solutions: sacrificial cladding using aluminum or polymer foams, energy-absorbing facades, blast curtains and laminated glazing, water-based mitigation, and engineered standoff barriers including planters and bollards. Recent research emphasizes multi-functional and lightweight solutions. Auxetic materials with negative Poisson's ratio, additively manufactured lattice structures, and graded cellular materials show promise for absorbing impulsive loads at low areal density. For penetration mitigation, ceramic-composite armor, functionally graded materials, and reactive layers extend protection without prohibitive weight. Challenges include validating mitigation performance under realistic combined loading (blast, fragment, and thermal), avoiding negative interactions such as spall enhancement or debris generation, and certifying products under harmonized international test standards.

Key players

Strengthening and Retrofitting Techniques for Existing Structures

Most of the world's building stock predates modern blast and impact design provisions, making retrofit a central concern for governments seeking to protect embassies, transit systems, schools, and historic buildings. Early retrofit practice borrowed from seismic strengthening: jacketing of columns, addition of shear walls, and tying of floors and walls to improve continuity. Following the 1998 East Africa embassy bombings, the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security undertook a global retrofit campaign that became a model for upgrading existing diplomatic facilities. Contemporary retrofit relies heavily on externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP), near-surface-mounted reinforcement, sprayed polyurea coatings, steel jacketing, and catcher systems to limit debris from masonry walls and glazing. Research questions include the bond behavior of FRP under high strain rates, the durability of polymer systems in service environments, the avoidance of unintended failure modes such as anchorage rupture, and methods for retrofitting without disrupting building occupancy or compromising heritage value. Aging infrastructure and the threat of vehicle ramming and small-charge attacks have pushed retrofit from a niche practice into mainstream protective engineering.

Key players

Projectile Penetration and Perforation Mechanics

Penetration mechanics is among the oldest branches of ballistic science, with empirical formulas dating to Robins and Euler in the eighteenth century and refined by Poncelet, de Marre, and others through the nineteenth. The twentieth century brought a rigorous mechanics-based treatment, notably the cavity-expansion theories developed by Bishop, Hill, and Mott and extended by Forrestal and Warren for concrete and geological targets. Parallel work on metallic plates produced the Recht-Ipson and Tate models that underpin modern armor design. The field today addresses a wide spectrum of threats: small-arms rounds against personal and vehicle armor, kinetic-energy long-rod penetrators against military targets, shaped-charge jets, fragments from artillery and improvised devices, and hypervelocity debris in space. Modern research couples high-speed instrumentation — flash X-ray, digital image correlation, particle image velocimetry — with advanced constitutive models to capture the role of strain rate, temperature, damage, and target confinement. Outstanding problems include penetration into novel targets such as ultra-high-performance and fiber-reinforced concretes, perforation of layered and graded composites, and the prediction of residual velocity and behind-armor debris.

Key players

Collateral Damage Estimation

Collateral damage estimation (CDE) emerged as a formal discipline within targeting doctrine during the 1990s air campaigns over Iraq and the Balkans, when precision-guided munitions and intense media scrutiny made unintended civilian harm both more controllable and more visible. The U.S. and NATO codified CDE methodologies — combining weaponeering, structural vulnerability analysis, and population data — to satisfy obligations under International Humanitarian Law, particularly the principles of distinction and proportionality enshrined in Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. CDE today links engineering models of blast pressure, fragmentation, primary and secondary debris, and structural collapse to probabilistic estimates of casualties and damage to protected objects such as hospitals, schools, and cultural property. The conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, Ukraine, and Syria have driven scrutiny of these methods, with humanitarian organizations and the UN highlighting persistent civilian harm from explosive weapons in populated areas (EWIPA). The 2022 Political Declaration on EWIPA, endorsed by more than 80 states, raises the bar for transparent, technically grounded CDE. Open challenges include modeling urban canyon and reflected-blast effects, accounting for substandard construction, integrating live population estimates, and reconciling military operational use of CDE with humanitarian and forensic post-strike analysis.

Key players

Numerical Simulation and Modelling of Blast and Impact Phenomena

Numerical simulation of explosive and impact phenomena began with one-dimensional hydrocodes developed at U.S. national laboratories in the 1950s and 1960s — HEMP, TOODY, and their successors — to model nuclear weapons effects. The release and commercialization of codes such as AUTODYN, LS-DYNA, ABAQUS Explicit, and Europlexus, alongside open-source tools like CTH derivatives and OpenFOAM extensions, has democratized access to high-fidelity simulation. Today's analyses routinely combine Eulerian fluid solvers for detonation products and air blast, Lagrangian solvers for solid response, and coupling schemes (ALE, FSI, SPH, peridynamics) to capture fragmentation, fluid-structure interaction, and large deformation. The central challenges remain the same as in earlier decades: constitutive modeling of materials at high strain rates, pressures, and temperatures; mesh sensitivity in failure prediction; computational cost of resolving near-field detonation and fragment generation; and validation against experimental data that is often sparse, expensive, or classified. Recent research emphasizes machine learning surrogates, multiscale modeling linking microstructure to component response, and rigorous verification and validation (V&V) frameworks. Standardization of benchmarks and open data sharing — historically limited by defense sensitivities — is gradually expanding through international research collaborations.

Key players

Probabilistic and Uncertainty Modelling in Protective Engineering

Protective design has historically relied on deterministic worst-case scenarios: a specified charge at a specified standoff, producing a specified response. Yet every input — charge weight, detonation point, material strength, construction quality, occupant location — carries substantial uncertainty, and the consequences of failure can be catastrophic. Probabilistic methods entered the field through structural reliability theory developed in the 1970s and 1980s for civil engineering, and gained traction in blast and impact applications during the 2000s as performance-based design and risk-informed decision making spread from the nuclear and seismic communities. Current practice employs Monte Carlo simulation, first- and second-order reliability methods, fragility curves, and Bayesian updating to characterize the probability of damage states given threat scenarios. Counter-terrorism risk assessment frameworks combine these engineering fragilities with threat likelihood and consequence models to support investment decisions in hardening and mitigation. Open issues include the treatment of epistemic versus aleatory uncertainty, the scarcity of high-quality test data for calibrating fragility models, the propagation of uncertainty through expensive numerical simulations, and the communication of probabilistic results to decision-makers who must justify expenditure against low-probability, high-consequence events.

Key players

Resources

News, lessons, and country profiles to prep for 8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8).

Recent reporting to ground your prep

ASEAN Fuel Sharing Amid Iran War Crisis

Spirit Airlines' Shutdown

Biden Backs Red States' Anti-Immigration Laws

Trinamool Congress Under Fire Over SIR Report

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Hidden Stakeholders

Engagement Strategies

Dynamic Analysis

Stakeholder Mapping Workshop

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Advanced Negotiation

Multilateral Negotiation

Policy Brief Writing

Conflict Resolution

The states in play, with the data that shapes their stance

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

By committee

Frequently asked questions

8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8)

Jun 21–24, 2027Prague, CzechiaIn-person

Registration open

Committees & topics

Topics
Response of Structures and Structural Elements to Explosion and Impact Loads · Blast and Impact Resistant Design of Structures · Techniques for Mitigating Blast Load and Penetration Effects · Strengthening and Retrofitting Techniques for Existing Structures · Projectile Penetration and Perforation Mechanics · Collateral Damage Estimation · Numerical Simulation and Modelling of Blast and Impact Phenomena · Probabilistic and Uncertainty Modelling in Protective Engineering

Why it matters

How to prepare

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 6 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United States

A key contributor to research and development in protective structures, particularly in defense and counter-terrorism applications.

Role in topic

China

A rapidly growing force in protective structures research, with significant investment in urban resilience and infrastructure development.

Role in topic

Germany

Known for its engineering excellence, contributing to high-performance materials and innovative structural design for protection.

Role in topic

Israel

A leader in practical protective solutions, particularly in response to security threats and urban defense.

Role in topic

United Kingdom

A significant contributor to research in protective structures, with a focus on historical preservation and urban resilience.

Role in topic

Japan

A global leader in seismic engineering and disaster resilience, with extensive experience in protective structures against natural hazards.

Role in topic

Topics & background

The background behind each topic and the actors that shape it.

Response of Structures and Structural Elements to Explosion and Impact Loads

Key players

Blast and Impact Resistant Design of Structures

Key players

Techniques for Mitigating Blast Load and Penetration Effects

Key players

Strengthening and Retrofitting Techniques for Existing Structures

Key players

Projectile Penetration and Perforation Mechanics

Key players

Collateral Damage Estimation

Key players

Numerical Simulation and Modelling of Blast and Impact Phenomena

Key players

Probabilistic and Uncertainty Modelling in Protective Engineering

Key players

Resources

News, lessons, and country profiles to prep for 8th International Conference on Protective Structures (ICPS8).

Recent reporting to ground your prep

ASEAN Fuel Sharing Amid Iran War Crisis

Spirit Airlines' Shutdown

Biden Backs Red States' Anti-Immigration Laws

Trinamool Congress Under Fire Over SIR Report

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Hidden Stakeholders

Engagement Strategies

Dynamic Analysis

Stakeholder Mapping Workshop

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Advanced Negotiation

Multilateral Negotiation

Policy Brief Writing

Conflict Resolution

The states in play, with the data that shapes their stance

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

By committee

Committees & topics

Why it matters

How to prepare

Country perspectives

Topics & background

Resources

Related conferences

Studentská politologická konference 2026

PRCP Annual Conference 2026

Transatlantic Choices: The US Perspective

Czechia-Germany Cooperation and European Security Panel Discussion

56th UACES Annual Conference

UACES 56th Annual Conference 2026

Frequently asked questions

Committees & topics

Why it matters

How to prepare

Country perspectives

Topics & background

Resources

Related conferences

Studentská politologická konference 2026

PRCP Annual Conference 2026

Transatlantic Choices: The US Perspective

Czechia-Germany Cooperation and European Security Panel Discussion

56th UACES Annual Conference

UACES 56th Annual Conference 2026

Frequently asked questions