聚黑铝炸药的能量输出特性及评估方法

吴星亮; 王旭; 徐飞扬; 马腾; 董卓超; 徐森; 刘大斌

doi:10.11858/gywlxb.20210818

聚黑铝炸药的能量输出特性及评估方法

doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20210818

吴星亮^1,,
王旭¹,
徐飞扬¹,
马腾¹,
董卓超¹,
徐森^{1, 2,*, ,},
刘大斌¹

1.
南京理工大学化学与化工学院，江苏南京　210094
2.
国家民用爆破器材质量监督检验中心，江苏南京　210094

基金项目: 国防科技重点实验室基金（6142603200509，6142603180408）

详细信息

作者简介:
吴星亮（1994－），男，博士研究生，主要从事含能材料的能量输出特性研究.E-mail：wuxingliang94@163.com

通讯作者:
徐　森（1981－），男，博士，教授，主要从事爆炸力学研究. E-mail：xusen@njust.edu.cn

中图分类号: O389; TJ55
计量
- 文章访问数: 1087
- HTML全文浏览量: 657
- PDF下载量: 48
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-06-18
- 修回日期: 2021-07-07

Energy Output Characteristics and Evaluation Method of Poly-Black Aluminum Explosive

WU Xingliang^1
,,
WANG Xu¹,
XU Feiyang¹,
MA Teng¹,
DONG Zhuochao¹,
XU Sen^{1, 2,*
, ,},
LIU Dabin¹

1.
School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, Jiangsu, China
2.
China National Quality Supervision Testing Center for Industrial Explosive Materials, Nanjing 210094, Jiangsu, China

摘要

摘要: 为了研究RDX基聚黑铝炸药（JHL-X）的能量输出特性及其评估方法，通过绝热式量热仪、水下爆炸系统、空爆系统分别测试了JHL-X的爆热、水下爆炸能量、地面超压。结果表明：JHL-X在真空中的爆热值与在N₂中的爆热值基本一致，约为1.75倍TNT当量；在空气中的爆热值为8045.724 J/g，为1.93倍TNT当量，比真空和N₂中高10%。JHL-X水下爆炸中的冲击波能、气泡能分别为0.935、4.614 kJ/g，总能量为1.83倍TNT当量。空爆时，根据通过地面超压得出的TNT和JHL-X超压公式，得到1.5、2.0、2.5 m处的JHL-X的TNT当量分别为2.14、1.70、1.75，均值为1.86。采用水下爆炸和真空爆热法时，因外界环境不供氧，致使两种实验方法评估出的JHL-X炸药能量一致；而采用空爆和空气爆热法时，因外部环境供氧，致使含铝炸药中Al的反应增加，总能量提高，两种方法得到的实验结果相近。因此，在评估炸药能量水平时，需考虑炸药配方设计和实际用途，进而选择合适的评估方法。
- TNT当量 /
- 爆热 /
- 水下爆炸 /
- 空爆 /
- 能量评估方法
Abstract: In order to study the energy output characteristics of the RDX-based aluminum explosive (JHL-X) and its energy level evaluation method, the explosion heat value and underwater explosion of JHL-X were tested through adiabatic calorimeter, underwater explosion system, and air blast system. Energy, ground overpressure. The results show that the explosion heat value of JHL-X in vacuum is basically the same as that in N₂, about is 1.75 times TNT equivalent; the explosion heat value in air is 8045.724 J/g, 1.93 times TNT equivalent, which is 10% higher than vacuum and N₂. The shock wave energy and bubble energy of JHL-X in an underwater explosion are 0.935 and 4.614 kJ/g, and the total energy is 1.83 times TNT equivalent. In an air blast, the TNT and JHL-X overpressure formulas derived from ground overpressure show that the TNT equivalents at 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 m are 2.14, 1.70, and 1.75 times, respectively, and the average value is 1.86 times. In addition, the underwater explosion and the explosion heat in vacuum are not provided with oxygen from the external environment, so that the two experiment methods maintain consistency when evaluating the energy level of JHL-X explosives. The air blast and explosion heat in the air have oxygen supply from the external environment, which causes reaction of Al in the aluminum-containing explosive to increase, so the total energy increased, results of these two experiments are similar. Therefore, when evaluating the energy level of explosives, it is necessary to consider the explosive formulation design and practical use, then select different evaluation methods.
- TNT equivalence /
- detonation heat /
- underwater explosion /
- air blast /
- methods of energy evaluation

HTML全文

图 1 绝热式爆热量热仪

Figure 1. Adiabatic detonation calorimeter

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 装药结构

Figure 2. Charge structure

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 水下爆炸系统

Figure 3. Underwater explosive device

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 空爆系统

Figure 4. Air blast device

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 JHL-X的水下爆炸冲击波压力

Figure 5. Shock wave pressure of JHL-X in underwater explosion

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 JHL-X在第1次气泡脉动期间的压力曲线

Figure 6. Pressure curve of JHL-X during the first bubble period

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 TNT和JHL-X的冲击波超压

Figure 7. Overpressure of TNT and JHL-X

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 JHL-X的超压误差棒

Figure 8. Overpressure error bar of JHL-X

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 TNT和JHL-X的拟合曲线

Figure 9. Fit curve of TNT and JHL-X

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 不同实验方法下JHL-X的TNT当量

Figure 10. TNT equivalent of JHL-X under different experimental methods

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 绝热式量热仪的爆热结果

Table 1. Experimental results of adiabatic detonation calorimeter

Sample	m/g	Condition	Q_V,T/(J·g⁻¹)	$\overline{{Q}} $_V,T/(J·g⁻¹)	TNT equivalence
TNT	20.1542	Vacuum	4160.542	4170.878	1.00
TNT	20.0216	Vacuum	4181.214	4170.878	1.00
JHL-X	28.1652	Vacuum	7223.296	7301.088	1.75
JHL-X	28.1848	vacuum	7378.879	7301.088	1.75
JHL-X	28.1792	N₂, 0.1 MPa	7303.500	7308.060	1.75
JHL-X	28.1643	N₂, 0.1 MPa	7312.620	7308.060	1.75
JHL-X	28.1781	Air, 0.1 MPa	8017.592	8045.724	1.93
JHL-X	28.1824	Air, 0.1 MPa	8073.856	8045.724	1.93

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 水下爆炸结果

Table 2. Underwater explosion results

Sample	p_m/MPa	$\theta $/$ {\text{μ}}{\rm{s}}$	E_s/(kJ·g⁻¹)	T/s	E_b/(kJ·g⁻¹)	E_u/(kJ·g⁻¹)	TNT equivalence
TNT	5.472	57.6	0.762	0.131	2.268	3.030	1.00
JHL-X	6.013	74.2	0.888	0.141	4.580	5.468	1.80
JHL-X	5.945	70.8	0.968	0.142	4.678	5.646	1.86
JHL-X	5.705	78.1	0.950	0.141	4.585	5.535	1.83
Ave. (JHL-X)	5.888	74.4	0.935	0.141	4.614	5.550	1.83

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 TNT和JHL-X的超压

Table 3. Overpressure of TNT and JHL-X

Sample	m/g	Line	p_m/kPa
Sample	m/g	Line	1.0 m	1.5 m	2.0 m	2.5 m
TNT	1201.7	OA	1414.91	793.58	688.51	301.55
	1201.7	OB			559.01	258.15
	1584.1	OA	2866.66	1554.84	687.23	377.59
	1584.1	OB	2972.43	1370.58	735.99	360.19
JHL-X	1584.7	OA		982.10	614.20	577.96
	1584.7	OB		1070.18	717.62	456.54
	1584.3	OA		1083.40	691.73	525.60
	1584.3	OB		1046.54	707.67	445.85

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 JHL-X的TNT当量

Table 4. TNT equivalence of JHL-X

No.	R/m	p_m(JHL-X)/kPa	w₁/kg	TNT equivalence	Average TNT equivalence
1	1.5	1188.79	2.576	2.14	1.86
2	2.0	681.81	2.045	1.70
3	2.5	463.74	2.110	1.75

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(21)

[1]	MEYER R, KÖHLER J, HOMBURG A. Explosives [M]. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
[2]	FORDHAM S. High explosives and propellants [M]. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2013.
[3]	KINNEY G F, GRAHAM K J. Explosive shocks in air [M]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
[4]	SUCESKA M. Test methods for explosives [M]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
[5]	TRZCIŃSKI W A, CUDZIŁO S, PASZULA J. Studies of free field and confined explosions of aluminium enriched RDX compositions [J]. Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 2007, 32(6): 502–508. doi: 10.1002/prep.200700202
[6]	CUDZIŁO S, TRZCIŃSKI W A, PASZULA J, et al. Effect of titanium and zirconium hydrides on the detonation heat of RDX-based explosives: a comparison to aluminium [J]. Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 2018, 43(3): 280–285. doi: 10.1002/prep.201700237
[7]	XIANG D L, RONG J L, HE X. Detonation performance of four groups of aluminized explosives [J]. Central European Journal of Energetic Materials, 2016, 13(4): 903–915.
[8]	BJARNHOLT G, HOLMBERG R. Explosives expansion works in underwater detonations [C]//6th Symposium on Detonation. San Diego, CA, 1976: 540−550.
[9]	COLE R H. Underwater explosions [M]. New York: Dover Publications, 1965.
[10]	牟金磊, 朱锡, 李海涛, 等. 炸药水下爆炸能量输出特性试验研究 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2010, 24(2): 88–92. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5773.2010.02.002 MU J L, ZHU X, LI H T, et al. Experimental research on underwater explosion energy output of explosive [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2010, 24(2): 88–92. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5773.2010.02.002
[11]	ZHAO Q, NIE J X, WANG Q S, et al. Numerical and experimental study on cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine/aluminum explosives in underwater explosions [J]. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 2016, 8(10): 1–10.
[12]	冯凇, 饶国宁, 彭金华. CL-20基含铝炸药水下爆炸实验研究与数值模拟 [J]. 含能材料, 2018, 26(8): 686–695. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2017376 FENG S, RAO G N, PENG J H. Experimental study and numerical simulation of CL-20-based aluminized explosive in underwater explosion [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2018, 26(8): 686–695. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2017376
[13]	XIAO W, ANDRAE M, GEBBEKEN N. Air blast TNT equivalence factors of high explosive material PETN for bare charges [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2019, 377: 152–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.05.078
[14]	LI X L, CAO W, SONG Q G, et al. Study on energy output characteristics of explosives containing B/Al in the air blast [J]. Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves, 2019, 55(6): 723–731. doi: 10.1134/S0010508219060145
[15]	XU S, CHEN Y, CHEN X, et al. Combustion heat of the Al/B powder and its application in metallized explosives in underwater explosions [J]. Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves, 2016, 52(3): 342–349. doi: 10.1134/S001050821603014X
[16]	CHEN Y, CHEN X, WU D, et al. Underwater explosion analysis of hexogen-enriched novel hydrogen storage alloy [J]. Journal of Energetic Materials, 2016, 34(1): 49–61. doi: 10.1080/07370652.2014.996271
[17]	MILLER P J. A reactive flow model with coupled reaction kinetics for detonation and combustion in non-ideal explosives [J]. MRS Online Proceedings Library Archive, 1995, 418: 413–420.
[18]	YEN N H, WANG L Y. Reactive metals in explosives [J]. Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 2012, 37(2): 143–155. doi: 10.1002/prep.200900050
[19]	XIANG D L, RONG J L, LI J. Effect of Al/O ratio on the detonation performance and underwater explosion of HMX-based aluminized explosives [J]. Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 2014, 39(1): 65–73. doi: 10.1002/prep.201300026
[20]	BEN-DOR G, IVANOV M, VASILEV E I, et al. Hysteresis processes in the regular reflection Mach reflection transition in steady flows [J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2002, 38(4/5): 347–387.
[21]	COURANT R, FRIEDRICHS K O. Supersonic flow and shock waves [M]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media, 1948.