4.4 Article

Estimated Detonation Velocities for TKX-50, MAD-X1, BDNAPM, BTNPM, TKX-55, and DAAF using the Laser-induced Air Shock from Energetic Materials Technique

Journal

PROPELLANTS EXPLOSIVES PYROTECHNICS
Volume 42, Issue 4, Pages 353-359

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/prep.201600257

Keywords

Laser-induced shock wave; Plasma chemistry; Characterization; Deflagration; Combustion spectroscopy; Energetic materials; Shock physics

Funding

  1. U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL)
  2. Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich (LMU)
  3. Office of Naval Research (ONR) [ONR.N00014-16-1-2062]
  4. DAAD

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since new energetic materials are initially produced in very small quantities for both safety and cost reasons, laboratory-scale methods for characterizing their performance are essential for determining the most promising candidates for scale-up. Laser-induced air shock from energetic materials (LASEM) is a promising new method for estimating the detonation velocity of novel explosives using milligram amounts of material, while simultaneously investigating their high temperature chemical reactions. LASEM has been applied to 6 new explosives for the first time: TKX-50, MAD-X1, BDNAPM, BTNPM, TKX-55, and DAAF. Emission spectroscopy of the laser excited materials revealed the formation of the high pressure bands of C-2 during the ensuing exothermic reactions. The low thermal sensitivity of the materials also led to unusual laser-material interactions, visualized with high-speed video. The estimated detonation velocities for the 6 explosives were compared to predicted values from EXPLO5 and CHEETAH. The LASEM results suggest that TKX-55, BDNAPM, and BTNPM have higher detonation velocities than predicted by the thermochemical codes, while the estimated detonation velocities for MAD-X1 and TKX-50 are slightly lower than those predicted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available