journal article·2024-07-02

Numerical modeling of charge diameter effect on detonation properties of emulsion explosives using Wood-Kirkwood detonation model

B. Stimac Tumara, M. Suceska, M. Dobrilovic, S. Stankovic

Journal of Energetic Materials· Volume 42· Issue 3
Publisher page

Abstract

Emulsion explosives exhibit strong nonideal detonation behavior, which provides a challenge for accurate numerical modeling. We present a nonideal detonation model based on the Wood–Kirkwood detonation theory and EXPLO5, capable of modeling the effect of the charge diameter on steady-state detonation velocity. The elements of the model are calibrated based on experimental data for four different emulsion explosives. It was demonstrated that both simple pressure-dependent and Kirby and Chan’s two-step reaction rate models can satisfactorily reproduce the detonation velocity–charge diameter data of unconfined charges. In addition, the reaction rate parameters are found to be a function of the density of explosives.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Energetic Materials and Combustion · Combustion and Detonation Processes · Particle Dynamics in Fluid Flows

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Funding

Croatian Science Foundation

References (47)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1063/1.132931710.1063/1.1329317 ↗
2. 10.1002/978352761982510.1002/9783527619825 ↗
3. 10.1063/1.85734910.1063/1.857349 ↗
4. Braithwaite, M., and N. L. Allan. 2002. Thermodynamic Representations for solid products in ideal detonation predictions. In 12th International Detonation Symposium Detonation. California, August 11–16.
5. Chaisse, F., J. M. Servas, J. Aveille, J. Baconin, N. Carion, and P. Bongrain. 1985. A theoretical analysis of the shape of a steady axisymmetrical reactive shock front in cylindrical charge of high explosive, a curvature- diameter relationship. In Eighth Symposium (International) on Detonation, 159–67. Albuquerque.
6. Chan, S. K. 2006a. Prediction of confinement effects on detonation with an analytical two- dimensional model. In 13th International Detonation Symposium, 224–32. Norfolk, VA.
7. 10.1023/A:101621951779810.1023/A:1016219517798 ↗
8. 10.1038/s41598-018-28641-110.1038/s41598-018-28641-1 ↗
9. Deng, J., S. Nie, U. Nyberg, and F. Ouchterlony. 1999. SveBeFo rapport 43: a burning model for five emulsion explosives and some applications. Stockholm, Swedish Rock Engineering Research.
10. Dremin, A. N. 1990. Physics and chemistry of explosions - the new scientific trend. In 18th Symposium on explosive materials. Kupari, JKEM: 79–91.
11. 10.1002/nme.142410.1002/nme.1424 ↗
12. Fickett, W., and W. C. Davis. 2000. Detonation theory and experiment. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, INC.
13. 10.1007/978-3-540-88447-710.1007/978-3-540-88447-7 ↗
14. 10.1007/978-3-642-22967-110.1007/978-3-642-22967-1 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.egypro.2015.02.09810.1016/j.egypro.2015.02.098 ↗
16. 10.1051/jp4:199541710.1051/jp4:1995417 ↗
17. Kirby, I. J., and G. A. Leiper. 1985. A small divergent detonation theory for intermolecular explosives. In 8th International Detonation Symposium, 176–86. Albuquerque, USA.
18. 10.1063/1.226335810.1063/1.2263358 ↗
19. Künzel, M., O. Vodochodsky, J. Kucera, and J. Pachman. 2019. Simultaneous measurement of detonation velocity and detonation front curvature using fiber optic probe. In 22nd Seminar of the New Trends in Research of Energetic Materials, edited by Pachman J., and Selesovsky J. Pardubice, Czech Republic: 503–08.
20. 10.1063/1.86294010.1063/1.862940 ↗
21. 10.1002/prep.1990015050710.1002/prep.19900150507 ↗
22. 10.1002/prep.1981006030610.1002/prep.19810060306 ↗
23. 10.1246/bcsj.40.183310.1246/bcsj.40.1833 ↗
24. Nie, S., J. Deng, and F. Ouchterlony. 2000. Rapport No. 48: Expansion work of an emulsion explosive in blast hole - measurement and simulation. Stockholm, Swedish Rock Engineering Research.
25. 10.22211/cejem/6277610.22211/cejem/62776 ↗
26. 10.1016/S0082-0784(67)80195-410.1016/S0082-0784(67)80195-4 ↗
27. 10.1080/07370652.2010.50367310.1080/07370652.2010.503673 ↗
28. Ribeiro, J., C. Silva, R. Mendes, I. Plaksin, and J. Campos. 2012. Simulation of the detonation process of an ammonium nitrate based explosive using the Lee-Tarver reaction flow model. In AIP Conference Proceedings 1426, 525–28. Chicago, Illinois, USA.
29. 10.1016/j.combustflame.2013.03.03310.1016/j.combustflame.2013.03.033 ↗
30. 10.1007/s10665-005-5570-710.1007/s10665-005-5570-7 ↗
31. 10.1007/s10573-008-0043-810.1007/s10573-008-0043-8 ↗
32. 10.1007/s10573-009-0074-910.1007/s10573-009-0074-9 ↗
33. 10.1007/s10573-006-0077-810.1007/s10573-006-0077-8 ↗
34. Souers, P. C., and R. Garza. 1998. Kinetic information from detonation front curvature. In 11th International Detonation Symposium. Snowmass, CO, USA.
35. 10.1002/(SICI)152110.1002/(SICI)1521 ↗
36. 10.1021/ja01613a03510.1021/ja01613a035 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.dt.2020.09.01410.1016/j.dt.2020.09.014 ↗
38. Suceska, M. 2018. EXPLO5 version V6.05 users`s guide. Hrochuv Tynec, Czech Republic: OZM Research.
39. 10.22211/matwys/021510.22211/matwys/0215 ↗
40. 10.1080/07370652.2022.205220710.1080/07370652.2022.2052207 ↗
41. 10.1051/matecconf/20203050004910.1051/matecconf/202030500049 ↗
42. 10.1063/1.174426410.1063/1.1744264 ↗
43. 10.1063/1.173994010.1063/1.1739940 ↗
44. 10.1002/PREP.1985010020510.1002/PREP.19850100205 ↗
45. 10.1134/S001050821203009410.1134/S0010508212030094 ↗
46. 10.1134/S001050821904008710.1134/S0010508219040087 ↗
47. 10.1002/prep.20070004510.1002/prep.200700045 ↗