Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

, Volume 133, Issue 1, pp 737–744 | Cite as

Toward understanding the aging effect of energetic materials via advanced isoconversional decomposition kinetics

  • Yoocheon Kim
  • Anirudha Ambekar
  • Jack J. YohEmail author


The decomposition process of typical energetic material (EM) may consist of thousands of individual reactions as well as many intermediate species. However, one-step decomposition kinetics is routinely utilized for prediction of the shelf life of EMs. The inclusion of detailed multi-step chemistry in the kinetic mechanism can improve the reliability of the lifetime prediction. This study proposes a novel procedure for lifetime prediction of EMs, which adopts isoconversional kinetics to represent the decomposition reaction scheme. The pertinent EMs considered in the study include 97.5% cyclotrimethylene-trnitramine, 95% cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine (HMX) and boron potassium nitrate. Differential scanning calorimetry was utilized for extracting the said isoconversional kinetics complemented by experimental validation of the proposed chemical kinetics through a comparison of the numerical lifetime predictions with accelerated aging experiment measurements.


Isoconversional kinetics DSC Energetic materials Lifetime Aging effect 



This work was supported by Advanced Research Center Program (NRF-2013R1A5A1073861) through the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(MSIP) contracted through Advanced Space Propulsion Research Center at Seoul National University. Additional support was provided by the Hanwha-ADD PMD Grants contracted through IAAT and IOER at Seoul National University.


  1. 1.
    Kim Y, Park J, Yoh JJ. Isoconversional method for extracting reaction kinetics of aluminized cyclotrimethylene-trinitramine for propulsion. J Propuls Power. 2016;32:777–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shekhar H. Prediction and comparison of shelf life of solid rocket propellants using Arrhenius and Berthelot equations. Propellants Explos Pyrotech. 2011;36:356–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gorji M, Mohammadi K. Comparison of Berthelot and Arrhenius approaches for prediction of liquid propellant shelf life. Propellants Explos Pyrotech. 2013;38:715–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farhadian AH, Tehrani MK, Keshavarz MH, Karimi M, Darbani SM, Rezayi AH. A novel approach for investigation of chemical aging in composite propellants through laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS). J Therm Anal Calorim. 2016;124:279–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Friedman HL. Kinetics of thermal degradation of char-forming plastics from thermogravimetry. Application to a phenolic plastic. J Polym Sci. 1963;6:183–95.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vyazovkin S. Modification of the integral isoconversional method to account for variation in the activation energy. J Comput Chem. 2001;22:178–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roduit B, Borgeat C, Berger B, Folly P, Andres H, Schadeli U, Vogelsanger B. Up scaling of DSC data of high energetic materials simulation of cook off experiments. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2006;85:195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Long GT, Brems BA, Wight CA. Autocatalytic thermal decomposition kinetics of TNT. Thermochim Acta. 2002;388:175–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roduit B, Folly P, Berger B, Mathieu J, Sarbach A, Andres H, Ramin M, Vogelsanger B. Evaluating SADT by advanced kinetics-based simulation approach. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2008;93:153–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Long GT, Vyazovkin S, Brems BA, Wight CA. Competitive vaporization and decomposition of liquid RDX. J Phys Chem B. 2000;104:2570–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burnham AK, Dinh LN. A comparison of isoconversional and model-fitting approaches to kinetic parameter estimation and application predictions. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2007;89(2):479–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Criteria for explosive systems and devices on space and launch vehicles (S-113-2005 standard). Reston: AIAA; 2005.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vyazovkin S, Burnham AK, Criado JM, Perez-Maqueda LA, Popescu C, Sbirrazzuoli N. ICTAC kinetics committee recommendations for performing kinetic computations on thermal analysis data. Thermochim Acta. 2011;520:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farber M, Srivastava RD. Mass spectrometric investigation of the thermal decomposition of RDX. Chem Phys Lett. 1979;64:307–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dubois C, Perreault F. Shelf life prediction of propellants using a reaction severity index. Propellants, Explos, Pyrotech. 2002;27:253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sammour MH. Stabilizer reaction in cast double base rocket propellants. Part V: prediction of propellant safe life. Propellants Explos Pyrotech. 1994;19:82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dick JJ. Measurements of the shock initiation sensitivity of low density HMX. Combust Flame. 1983;54:121–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations