Progress in experimental studies on the evolution behaviors of non-shock initiation reaction in low porosity pressed explosive with confinement

HU Haibo; FU Hua; LI Tao; SHANG Hailin; WEN Shanggang

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2019-0346

Volume 40 Issue 1

Jan. 2020

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Article Navigation > Explosion And Shock Waves > 2020 > 40(1): 011401

HU Haibo, FU Hua, LI Tao, SHANG Hailin, WEN Shanggang. Progress in experimental studies on the evolution behaviors of non-shock initiation reaction in low porosity pressed explosive with confinement[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2020, 40(1): 011401. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0346

Citation:

HU Haibo, FU Hua, LI Tao, SHANG Hailin, WEN Shanggang. Progress in experimental studies on the evolution behaviors of non-shock initiation reaction in low porosity pressed explosive with confinement[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2020, 40(1): 011401. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0346

Citation:

HU Haibo, FU Hua, LI Tao, SHANG Hailin, WEN Shanggang. Progress in experimental studies on the evolution behaviors of non-shock initiation reaction in low porosity pressed explosive with confinement[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2020, 40(1): 011401. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0346

PDF( 9271 KB)

Progress in experimental studies on the evolution behaviors of non-shock initiation reaction in low porosity pressed explosive with confinement

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0346

Laboratory for Shock Wave and Detonation Physics, Institute of Fluid Physics, CAEP, Mianyang 621999, Sichuan, China

Received Date: 2019-09-04
Rev Recd Date: 2019-10-17
Publish Date: 2020-01-01

Abstract

Abstract

The progress in explosive safety studies related to experiment achievements with precise diagnostics and understanding of non-shock initiation of explosive phenomena in recent 20 years is reviewed. Some widespread misconceptions and misleading in non-shock initiation reaction behavior and corresponding process modeling is commented and suggestions for improvement are given. Recent experiments focused on the reaction propagation and violence evolution conducted by the author’s team in recent years are introduced and interpreted in detail as an illustration of the basic mechanism of non-shock initiation reaction. For low porosity explosive, the abnormal reaction behavior is dominated by the surface conductive burning and the convective flow of hot, high pressure gaseous reaction products through confinement slot and cracks in explosive bulk, which should be taken as the basic kinetics during the reaction propagation and reaction violence growth process. The evolution of reaction violence is unstable when the surface combustion is coupled with the dynamic evolution of crack network in explosive, but the utmost violence is usually limited by the mild conductive combustion rate of typical secondary explosive and confinement failure. Especially, the deflagration to detonation transition could hardly come true in low porosity explosive system with confinement of limited strength.
- low porosity explosive,
- non-shock initiation of explosive,
- conduction burning,
- convective flow,
- explosive bulk crack,
- structure response,
- reaction violence,
- modeling & validation

FullText(HTML)

References(43)

References

[1]	ASAY B. Shock wave science and technology reference library, Vol. 5: non-shock initiation of explosives [M]. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010: 1−14.
[2]	胡海波, 郭应文, 傅华, 等. 炸药事故反应烈度转化的主控机制 [J]. 含能材料, 2016, 24(7): 622–624. DOI: 10.11943/j.issn.1006-9941.2016.07.00X. HU H B, GUO Y W, FU H, et al. The dominant mechanisms of reaction violence transition in explosive accidents [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2016, 24(7): 622–624. DOI: 10.11943/j.issn.1006-9941.2016.07.00X.
[3]	SHANG H L, YANG J, LI T, et al. Convective burning in confined explosive cracks of HMX-based PBX under non-shock initiation [C] // 16th International Detonation Symposium. Hawaii, 2018.
[4]	郭应文. 压装PBX反应烈度演化主导机制的实验研究[D]. 四川绵阳: 中国工程物理研究院, 2017.
[5]	HU H, GUO Y, LI T, et al. Reactive behavior of explosive billets in deflagration tube of varied confinements [C] // AIP Conference Proceedings. AIP Publishing, 2018, 1979(1): 150020.
[6]	HU H B, LI T, WEN S G, et al. Experimental study on the reaction evolution of pressed explosives in long thick wall cylinder confinement [C] // XXI Khariton’s Scientific Readings. Sarov, Russia, 2019.
[7]	LI T, GUO Y W, FU H, et al. Reaction cracks and pressurization of a pressed HMX-based PBX under high confinement [C] // 49th International Annual Conference of ICT, 2018.
[8]	LI T, HU H B, QIU T, et al. Experimentas of violent reactions of pressed high explosive in thick wall confinement [C] // XXI Khariton’s Scientific Readings, Sarov, Russia, 2019.
[9]	WEN Y, DAI X, HAN Y, et al. Reaction characteristic for various scale explosive under mild impact [J]. Journal of Energetic Materials, 2014, 32(S1): 41–50. DOI: 10.1080/07370652.2013.820808.
[10]	BAER M R, KIPP M E, SCHMITT R G, et al. Towards assessing the violence of reaction during cookoff of confined energetic materials [R]. Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States: Sandia National Laboratories, 1996.
[11]	NICHOLS III A L, COUCH R, MCCALLEN R C, et al. Modeling thermally driven energetic response of high explosives [C] // Proceedings of 11th International Detonation Symposium, 1998: 862−871.
[12]	REAUGH J E. HERMES: a model to describe deformation, burning, explosion, and detonation [R]. Livermore, California, United States: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2011.
[13]	陈朗, 王飞, 伍俊英, 等. 高密度压装炸药燃烧转爆轰研究 [J]. 含能材料, 2011, 19(6): 697–704. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.06.022. CHEN L, WANG F, WU J Y, et al. Investigation of the deflagration to detonation transition in pressed high density explosives [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2011, 19(6): 697–704. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.06.022.
[14]	陈朗, 马欣. 炸药热安全性理论与分析方法[M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社, 2015.
[15]	薛鸿陆. 爆轰波基础知识 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 1983, 3(1): 89–96. XUE H L. Fundamental knowledge of detonation waves [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 1983, 3(1): 89–96.
[16]	ZENIN A, FINJAKOV S. Characteristics of octogen and hexogen combustion: a comparison [C] // 36th International Annual Conference of ICT, 2006.
[17]	MAIENSCHEIN J L, KOERNER J G. Deflagration behavior of PBX 9501 at elevated temperature and pressure [R]. Livermore, California, United States: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2008.
[18]	孙承纬, 范宝春, 黄正平, 等. 爆轰术语: GJB 5720-2006[S]. 2006.
[19]	SMILOWITZ L, HENSON B F, ROMERO J J, et al. Thermal explosions: sub-sonic deflagration in PBX 9501 [R]. Los Alamos, New Mexico, United States: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2011.
[20]	SMILOWITZ L B, HENSON B F. Temperature measurements during sub-sonic thermal explosions [R]. Los Alamos, New Mexico, United States: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2012.
[21]	奥尔连科. 爆炸物理学[M]. 孙承纬, 译. 北京: 科学出版社, 2011.
[22]	BELYAEV A F, BOBOLEV V K, KOROTKOV A I, et al. Transition from deflagration to detonation in condensed phases [J]. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerulasem, 1975.
[23]	БЕЛЬСКИЙ В М. Механизм инициирования и развития детонации в твердых гетерогенных ВВ [M]. Sarov, 2019.
[24]	ANDREEVSKIKH L A, VAKHMISTROV S A, PRONIN D A, et al. Convective combustion in the slot of an explosive charge [J]. Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves, 2015, 51(6): 659–663. DOI: 10.1134/S0010508215060064.
[25]	Hazard assessment tests for non-nuclear munitions: MIL-STD-2105D [S]. Indian Head, MD : Department of Defense, 2011.
[26]	JOHANSSON S R. Clear thinking requires clear concepts and terms (Explosion: disruption of a container. A mechanical term, not chemical) [C] // 含能材料与钝感弹药技术研讨会论文集. 成都, 2014.
[27]	KUO K K, KOVALCIN R L, ACKMAN S J. Convective burning in isolated solid propellant cracks [R]. Government-Industry Data Exchange Program, 1979.
[28]	BERNECKER R. The deflagration-to-detonation transition process for high-energy propellants-a review [J]. AIAA Journal, 1986, 24(1): 82–91. DOI: 10.2514/3.9226.
[29]	MAČEK A. Transition from deflagration to detonation in cast explosives [J]. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 1959, 31(1): 162–167. DOI: 10.1063/1.1730287.
[30]	TARVER C M, GOODALE T C, SHAW R, et al. Deflagration-to-detonation transition studies for two potential isomeric cast primary explosives [C] // Proceeding of the Sixth Symposium (International) on Detonation. White Oak: Office of Naval Research, 1976: 231.
[31]	JACOBS S J. Comment on “deflagration-to-detonation transition studies for two potential isomeric cast primary explosives” [C] // Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium (International) on Detonation. Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research, 1976: 249.
[32]	ASAY B. Shock wave science and technology reference library, Vol. 5: non-shock initiation of explosives [M]. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010: 483−533.
[33]	BERGHOUT H L, SON S F, ASAY B W. Convective burning in gaps of PBX 9501 [J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2000, 28(1): 911–917. DOI: 10.1016/S0082-0784(00)80297-0.
[34]	JACKSON S I, HILL L G. Predicting runaway reaction in a solid explosive containing a single crack [C] // AIP Conference Proceedings, 2007, 955(1): 927−930.
[35]	HOLMES M D, PARKER Jr G R, HEATWOLE E M, et al. Center-ignited spherical-mass explosion (CISME); FY 2018 report [R]. Los Alamos, New Mexico, United States: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2018.
[36]	HOLMES M D, PARKER Jr G R, HEATWOLE E M, et al. Fracture effects on explosive response (FEER); FY2018 report [R]. Los Alamos, New Mexico, United States : Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2018.
[37]	文尚刚. 炸药缝隙中燃烧模式转化及反应烈度增长行为研究[R]. 四川绵阳: 中国工程物理研究院, 2017.
[38]	DAI X G, WEN Y S, HUANG F L, et al. Effect of temperature, density and confinement on deflagration to detonation transition of an HMX‐based explosive [J]. Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 2014, 39(4): 563–567. DOI: 10.1002/prep.201300112.
[39]	王建, 文尚刚. 以HMX为基的两种压装高密度炸药的燃烧转爆轰实验研究 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2009, 23(6): 441–446. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5773.2009.06.007. WANG J, WEN S G. Experimental study on deflagration-to-detonation transition in two pressed high-density explosives [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2009, 23(6): 441–446. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5773.2009.06.007.
[40]	王建, 文尚刚, 何智, 等. 压装高能炸药的燃烧转爆轰实验研究 [J]. 火炸药学报, 2009, 32(5): 25–28. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7812.2009.05.008. WANG J, WEN S G, HE Z, et al. Experimental study on deflagration to detonation transition in pressed high density explosives [J]. Chinese Journal of Explosives and Propellants, 2009, 32(5): 25–28. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7812.2009.05.008.
[41]	代晓淦, 申春迎, 文玉史. 模拟跌落撞击下PBX-2炸药的响应 [J]. 含能材料, 2011, 19(2): 209–212. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.02.019. DAI X G, SHEN C Y, WEN Y S. Reaction of PBX-2 explosive under simulated drop impact [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2011, 19(2): 209–212. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.02.019.
[42]	李涛. 低幅值冲击条件下带壳炸药反应烈度的研究[D]. 四川绵阳: 中国工程物理研究院, 2003.
[43]	李克武, 尚海林, 胡秋实, 等. 针对PBX炸药的SHPB实验方法改进与结果解读[C] // 第十四届全国物理力学学术会议缩编文集. 四川绵阳, 2016.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(16)

1.	教继轩，白志玲，段卓平，张连生，黄风雷. 考虑壳体运动惯性约束效应的装药燃烧裂纹网络反应演化理论模型. 爆炸与冲击. 2025(03): 13-25 . 本站查看
2.	吴艳青，潘帅，江鹏. RDX基PBX在高温条件下热损伤表征试验研究. 安全与环境学报. 2024(03): 891-897 .
3.	董泽霖，屈可朋，胡雪垚，肖玮，王奕鑫. 不同尺寸HMX基压装装药的烤燃特性. 高压物理学报. 2024(02): 140-149 .
4.	康松逸，许杰，卢熹，王树山，贾曦雨. DNAN基含铝炸药低应变率下J-C本构关系. 水下无人系统学报. 2024(05): 923-930 .
5.	许礼吉，白志玲，段卓平，黄风雷. 基于慢烤实验的混合炸药热传导系数计算方法. 含能材料. 2024(11): 1174-1181 .
6.	张烨，王新宇，徐文雨，王在成，姜春兰. 升温速率对JEO炸药烤燃响应特性的影响. 含能材料. 2024(11): 1182-1193 .
7.	杨天昊，种涛，李涛，傅华，胡海波. 非冲击点火反应驱动的吉帕级缓前沿斜波加载技术. 爆炸与冲击. 2023(06): 152-159 . 本站查看
8.	许礼吉，段卓平，白志玲，吴艳青，黄风雷. RDX基PBX炸药热损伤演化行为的量化表征. 兵工学报. 2023(07): 2002-2013 .
9.	Zhuo-ping Duan，Meng-Jing Bai，Zhi-ling Bai，Xin-jie Wang，Feng-lei Huang. Combustion crack-network reaction evolution model for highly-confined explosives. Defence Technology. 2023(08): 54-67 .
10.	白志玲，段卓平，李治，许礼吉，张连生，黄风雷. 热刺激约束DNAN基不敏感熔铸炸药装药点火后反应演化调控模型. 含能材料. 2023(10): 1004-1012 .
11.	董泽霖，屈可朋，胡雪垚，沈飞，肖玮. 约束方式和强度对HMX基压装含铝炸药慢烤响应特性的影响. 火炸药学报. 2023(10): 897-904 .
12.	姚奎光，王淑娟，樊星，聂少云，王翔，代晓淦. 不同机械约束下压装PBX炸药反应演化行为. 兵工学报. 2022(08): 1772-1778 .
13.	郭历伦，刘平，罗景润，李明海. 跌落/撞击载荷下装药结构的安全性评估方法. 装备环境工程. 2021(05): 1-5 .
14.	王硕，卢芳云，陈荣. 约束PBX炸药中心点火反应烈度演化实验研究. 火炸药学报. 2021(05): 623-630 .
15.	楼建锋，张树道. 炸药装药爆炸反应演化过程和约束影响的数值模拟. 含能材料. 2021(12): 1186-1191 .
16.	段卓平，白志玲，白孟璟，黄风雷. 强约束固体炸药燃烧裂纹网络反应演化模型. 兵工学报. 2021(11): 2291-2299 .