4.7 Article

Reactive antistatic additive modified copper(II) azide as a primary explosive with simultaneously enhanced stability and energy

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 471, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2023.144440

关键词

Copper azide; Antistatic agents; Primary explosives; Electrostatic stability; MEMS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a new strategy, the metal organic framework/reactive antistatic agent strategy (MOF/RAA strategy), which introduces the reactive antistatic agent (WO3) into the ternary copper azide /carbon activity system. The novel reactive multi-component system (ternary copper azide /carbon/tungsten trioxide) shows high electrostatic safety and remarkable detonating ability due to the electrical conductivity and active participation of the reactive antistatic agent (WO3). This discovery provides a safe and energy-enhanced way for the design and synthesis of novel energetic compounds.
The emergence of micro-priming systems expedites the demand for balancing the inherent contradiction between energy and safety in primary explosives. This paper proposes a new strategy (metal organic framework/reactive antistatic agent strategy, MOF/RAA strategy) which introduces the reactive antistatic agent (WO3) into ternary copper azide /carbon activity system by carbonization and azide of polyoxometalate-based metal-organic frameworks. Subsequent characterization validates that the novel reactive multi-component system (ternary copper azide /carbon/tungsten trioxide) performs well with both high electrostatic safety and remarkable detonating ability (detonate CL-20 as low as 0.98 mg) due to the electrical conductivity and active participation in secondary reaction of reactive antistatic agent (WO3). In general, this discovery has obtained prominent achievements in the application of copper azide in micro-initiating systems, providing a safe yet energy simul-taneously enhanced way for the design and synthesis of novel energetic compounds.

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

4.7
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