4.6 Article

Quantification of probabilistic ignition thresholds of polymer-bonded explosives with microstructure defects

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS
卷 124, 期 16, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.5031845

关键词

-

资金

  1. Air Force Office of Scientific Research [FA9550-15-1-0499]
  2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) [HDTRA1-18-1-0004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microscopic defects such as voids and cracks in an energetic material significantly influence its shock sensitivity. So far, there is a lack of systematic and quantitative study of the effects of cracks both experimentally and computationally, although significant work has been done on voids. We present an approach for quantifying the effects of intragranular and interfacial cracks in polymer-bonded explosives (PBXs) via mesoscale simulations that explicitly account for such defects. Using this approach, the ignition thresholds corresponding to any given level of ignition probability and, conversely, the ignition probability corresponding to any loading condition (i.e., ignition probability maps) are predicted for PBX 9404 containing different levels of initial grain cracking or interfacial debonding. James relations are utilized to express the predicted thresholds and ignition probabilities. It is found that defects lower the ignition thresholds and cause the material to be more sensitive. This effect of defects on shock sensitivity diminishes as the shock load intensity increases. Furthermore, the sensitivity differences are rooted in energy dissipation and the consequent hotspot development. The spatial preference in hotspot distribution is studied and quantified using a parameter called the defect preference ratio (r(pref)). Analyses reveal that defects play an important role in the development of hotspots and thus have a strong influence on the ignition thresholds. The findings are in qualitative agreement with reported trends in experiments. Published by AIP Publishing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据