Advertisement

Triacetone Triperoxide (TATP)

  • Dabir S. ViswanathEmail author
  • Tushar K. Ghosh
  • Veera M. Boddu
Chapter
  • 878 Downloads

Abstract

Information on thermophysical properties of energetic materials is limited and scattered in the literature. Although peroxides have been known as energetic materials for a long time, triacetonetriperoxide has become prominent as a homemade explosive in the recent years. The properties of TATP are extremely important in its detection, and this chapter reviews the synthesis, properties, for-mulations, detonation, and detection of triacetonetriperoxide.

Keywords

Triacetone Triperoxide (TATP) Homemade Explosives Acetone Peroxide Desorption Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization Hexamethylene Triperoxidediamine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

10.1 Introduction

Improvised explosive devices have proved very fatal as has been evident in the Iraq war, and the use of homemade explosives [HME] have proven to be more effective. The HMEs, mostly peroxides, have eluded detection because of the low sensitivity of the currently available sensors/detectors. Synthesis and characterization of new energetic materials are receiving considerable interest to find materials that are safe and show better performance. Among some of the common HMEs such as hexamethylene triperoxide, nitrourea, urea nitrate and others, TATP has become a prominent one. In spite of the precautions taken during the manufacture of explosives, there are always possibilities that accidental explosions can occur, more so with extremely energetic materials such as TATP.

Triacetone triperoxide, TATP, is a simple but a powerful explosive. It has three acetone molecules joined together by O–O linkages. It is a primary explosive, white crystalline powder with an acid smell. It can be made easily and therefore the choice explosive of terrorists including suicide bombers.

This substance was used in 2005 London bombings. TATP has an explosive force equivalent to 50–80% of that of TNT. As TATP does not contain nitrogen, it is likely to go through airport scanners without detection as most of the scanners are calibrated for nitrogen containing chemicals. Reid, the shoe bomber, used TATP along with a plastic explosive. He used TATP as a trigger by using a small thread of TATP through 100 g of PETN [1]. The seven suspects who were arrested in Vollsmose in Denmark in 2006 [2] and eight Al-Queda terrorists arrested in Copenhagen had access to homemade TATP. These two events happened in 2006 and 2007, respectively. In 2005 October, Hinrichs, a student at the Oklahoma University, died near the football stadium after a backpack containing two to three pounds of TATP exploded [3] due to his carelessness. Two contractors were recently arrested by the Swedish police on suspicion that they were suspected of sabotage of the Oskarshamn nuclear plant in southeastern Sweden. One of them was carrying a small amount of TATP. These and many more incidents show the explosive power of TATP, the relative ease with which it can be made, the availability of chemicals for the synthesis of TATP, and the extreme difficulty in detecting this compound as most of the detectors are calibrated for explosives containing nitrogen. YouTube graphically illustrates the synthesis of TATP. Although the civilian and military uses of TATP are limited, and the public knowledge of peroxide explosives was very limited until recently, TATP has shot into prominence for reasons mentioned earlier. Reports of the use of TATP by the Mexican Drug Cartel during the past two to three years have been surfacing, and TATP has been linked to the explosion of home-made bombs. The ease of preparation of TATP has emboldened home grown terrorists, like Chad Wells, who was arrested recently as reported in the Augusta Chronicle [4].

These events indicate the gravity of the situation, and the need to know as much as possible about this chemical. Safe handling and disposal of these HMEs like TATP require a good understanding and knowledge of the properties of these compounds. To design and build sensitive and robust detection systems, it is imperative to have accurate vapor pressure data besides other thermophysical properties of these chemicals. Thermophysical properties are essential to develop models to predict properties such as vapor pressure when experimental data are lacking.

TATP is a white crystalline substance with an acid odor. It sublimes readily at room temperature, and is extremely sensitive to impact, friction and electrostatic discharge. It is extremely dangerous because of the constrained nature of the molecule in a ring form in three dimensions. The problems of handling and extreme sensitivity make it difficult to use TATP in military and civilian applications although it is very easy to synthesize. It is reported that TATP in quantities less than 2 g burns but more than 2 g detonates when ignited. A TATP bomb can be made with $100–$200 worth of chemicals, and simple equipment.

Denekamp et al. [5] have identified two stable conformal structures for TATP based on experimental and theoretical evidence. Figure 10.1 shows the two conformal forms of TATP. These two forms are stable with energy of transition of 26.3 kcal/mole. The authors have carried out B3LYP/6-31G computations to arrive at the crystal parameters. They note that this type of behavior is rare in cyclic organic systems and attribute it to the overlap in the “flip-flop” transition state. It is known that TATP contains the dimer of acetone peroxide [6] and a tetramer is also observed [7].
Fig. 10.1

Conformal Structures of TATP

The chemical name for TATP is 3,3,6,6,9,9-hexamethyl-1,2,4,5,7,8-Hexoxonane and is also known as peroxyacetone. Acetone peroxide most commonly refers to the cyclic trimer TCAP (tri-cyclic acetone peroxide, or tri-cyclo). The CAS Number is 17088-37-8.

10.2 Synthesis

TATP is prepared starting with hydrogen peroxide and acetone. As early as 1895, Wolffenstein [8] discussed the effect of hydrogen peroxide concentration on acetone. He showed that 10% peroxide can be used to synthesize TATP. Acid catalyzed synthesis of TATP was first described in 1959 by Millas and Golubovic [9]. They added acetone (0.2 mol) at 273.15 K (0 ℃) to a cold mixture of hydrogen peroxide (50%, 0.2 mol) and sulfuric acid, kept the mixture at 273.15 K (0 ℃) for 3 h, and then extracted it with pentane. This procedure uses large quantities of sulfuric acid but is a fast and unsafe route to synthesize TATP. Dubnikova et al. [10] used the same method as Millas and Golubovic but used smaller amounts of sulfuric acid. This procedure improved the safety of the process. Mateo et al. [11] prepared TATP by treating acetone at 271.15 K (−2 ℃) with concentrated hydrogen peroxide with sulfuric acid as the catalyst. They obtained 75% yield. Pacheco-Londono et al. [12] used different ratios of acetone and H2O2 with different inorganic acids as catalysts to make TATP. They used Density Functional Theory to elucidate the mechanism of the reaction, and used B3LYP functional with the 6-31G basis set to carry out calculations of the electronic structure of the intermediates and internal rotations and vibrations of TATP. A 1989 patent taken by Costantini [13] and assigned to Rhone-Poulenc gives details of TATP synthesis and destruction.

Jiang et al. [7] found SnCl4·5H2O and SnCl2·2H2O to be efficient catalysts for the oxidation of acetone with 30% hydrogen peroxide at room temperature. This method produced tetrameric acetone peroxide which was identified by molecular weight determination, elemental analysis, FTIR, NMR and MS. Jensen et al. [14] used Raman spectroscopy to study the synthesis of TATP. They studied the effect of temperature and pH, and observed spectral changes during the course of the reaction.

10.3 Structure

TATP crystalline is a monoclinic solid with a P21/c space group and a coordination number of 4. The lattice parameters are a = 13.925 Å, b = 10.790 Å, c = 7.970 Å, and β = 91.64° [15]. It exists in a twisted boat chair form with O–O distance = 1.483 Å, C–O bond length of 1.422 Å, and the C–O–O angle 107.4°. The C–O bond length is shorter than that found in other peroxides. Dubnikova et al. [10] compared experimental bond lengths with values based on B3lYP calculations, and their data are shown in Table 10.1. These values compare well with the values of Groth [15]. As a part of a forensic investigation, Evans et al. [16] provide chemical ionization and electron impact mass spectra, infrared spectrum, and some physical properties of TATP.
Table 10.1

Comparison experimental and calculated bond lengths and bond angles [10]

Bond length/angle

Expt.

Calc.

O–C

1.419, 1.418, 1.417

1.422

O–C

1.422

1.421

O–O

1.466, 1.471, 1.473

1.458

C–C

1.512, 1.514, 1.516

1.528

C–C

1.505, 1.510

1.529

<O–C–O

112.2, 112.5, 112.8

112.9

<O–C–C

102.7, 103.2, 107.8

102.9

<O–C–C

112.1, 112.5, 112.8

112.3

<O–O–C

107.6, 112.8

108.6

<C–C–C

113.0, 114.2

113.6

10.4 Detection

The synthesis of TATP mentioned above reveals that it can be made easily from readily available raw materials. This has made TATP a choice explosive for terrorist activities. In order to provide safety and protect human lives, it is essential to have extremely sensitive techniques to detect TATP. In recent years a great deal of attention has been paid to the detection of TATP. There was no reliable method to detect TATP until 2003 [17]. Since 2003, the number of papers published in the open literature on the detection of TATP has exceeded 100. The absence of nitro, amino, or aromatic groups makes it difficult to detect TATP. The explosive nature of TATP makes it difficult to even analyze the material, and therefore special care has to be taken to prepare a sample. Many national laboratories in the United States are involved in the detection of TATP [18].

Several methods including IR and Raman spectroscopy, ion mobility spectrometry, 1H and 13C NMR, HPLC, GC/MS, chemical ionization coupled to tandem mass spectrometry, and laser photo-acoustic and photoionization techniques have been used to detect and analyze TATP. Utilizing the quantum cascade laser photoacoustic spectroscopy technique, Dunayevskiy et al. [19] were able to detect TATP to 18 ppb levels. However this level of sensitivity may not be enough to detect TATP from a distance of 5 to 10 m when someone is carrying this explosive. Because of the difficulties in handling TATP, Dunayevskiy et al. [19] describe a simple apparatus for preparation and collection of TATP for analysis. Mullen et al. [20] describe a laser ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometric technique to study its potential for detection of TATP. In addition to the laser ionization time-of-flight mass spectrum, the authors also present UV spectra of both TATP and H2O2 and compare with the available literature spectra.

Canines are commonly employed to detect various substances such as drugs and conventional explosives, however, canines are being trained to detect TATP as more incidents have taken place using TATP. It appears that trials reveal that canines can detect 200 lg of TATP [21] although the present method used for training canines is not too satisfactory. Muller et al. [22] report that they were able to detect 6.4 ng using a GC/MS system. They used Amberlite XAD7 as the adsorbent and acetonitrile as the eluent. They also report the presence of TATP in several post-explosion areas in and around Jerusalem, Israel.

Based on chemiluminescence principle, Scintrex Trace Systems [23] offers E3500 for TATP detection. This is a hand held unit but the sensitivity of this system is not mentioned. For portal detection of TATP, Synagen Guardian MS-ETD [24] has designed and built the personal screening portal based on a technology from Sandia National Laboratory. In this method, a puff of air dislodges trace amounts of chemicals such as TATP which are analyzed by an MS- electron transfer dissociation technique. Another hand-held unit has been developed by Acro [25], an Israeli small-scale company. It is a pen sized detector but its detection capability, cost, and sensitivity are not revealed. It is a colorimetric method and requires about 25–50 micrograms of TATP. Figure 10.2 shows the sensitivity of the instrument based on the information available on the company’s website. This sensor uses the peroxidase enzyme method and is covered by a US Patent [26]. Nomadics [27] has several patents on the detection of peroxides. In general the peroxide such as TATP is decomposed and the released H2O2 is reacted further to finally yield CO2 which is detected by light emission techniques.
Fig. 10.2

Color sensitivity as a function of microgram TATP [25]

A quantitative trace analysis of peroxide based explosives, hexamethylene- triperoxidediamine (HMTD) and triacetone triperoxide (TATP) has been developed by Ladbeck et al. [28] using fluorescence spectroscopy. The limit of detection was 2 × 10−6 mol l−1 for both TATP and HMTD. Sigman et al. [29] carried out the analysis of TATP and the other products by electronspray mass spectrometry, and were able to detect TATP at levels close to 60 ng. Compared to this level of detection, the GC-MS method developed by Roman et al. [30] appears to be more sensitive down to picogram levels. This method is claimed to be applicable to both TATP and DADP to 50 pg levels. Ion mobility spectroscopy coupled with a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer was used by Buttigieg [31] during the synthesis and analysis of TATP. Sella and Shabat [32] developed a molecular probe to detect TATP. This method is sensitive only at microgram levels, and may not be a practical tool.

The detection systems described above have not been used as stand-off detection systems. Gaft and Nagli [33] describe a UV Raman spectroscopic method for standoff detection at distances close to 100 feet (30 m). The authors used a Schmidt–Cassegrain telescope fiber-coupled to an Oriel MS260i spectrometer with a gated ICCD detector along with a frequency- doubled Nd-YAG (532 nm, 20 mJ/pulse) pulsed (8 ns, 13 Hz) laser system. In addition to TATP, they report to have studied UN—urea–nitrate, TNT including by-products and mixtures, such as comp B (mixture with RDX), DNT, RDX and mixtures such as C4, A5, ANFO—ammonium-nitrate fuel-oil, PETN, HMX, and Semtex, a mixture of RDX and PETN. This appears to pave the way for commercialization of stand-off detection systems. They present typical Raman spectrum for each of these materials. Munoz et al. [34] report an electrochemical method for the detection of TATP. This method is carried out in liquid phase, and may not be useful as a practical detector. The sensitivity appears to be at nanogram levels. In their recent paper, Banerjee et al. [35] describe the use of titania nanotubes for the detection of TATP. The authors do not discuss the sensitivity but it appears to be at the ppm levels. One plus point of this research is that if the method could be made sensitive enough, it could be used in hand-held detectors. Apblett et al. [36] report the use of molybdenum hydrogen bronze nanoparticles for the detection of TATP and HMTD. As this is a calorimetric method, the sensitivity of the method may not get to pictogram levels. The authors discuss the possibility of this method as a method for in situ degradation of TATP.

Cotte-Rodriguez et al. [37] used both desorption electrospray ionization and desorption atmospheric pressure chemical ionization in their work on the detection of TATP, HMTD, and other explosives. In this technique, the explosives were complexed with certain dopants for analysis. The method is claimed to be fast and reliable. Both TATP and HMTD were detected in the 1–5000 ng range.

10.5 Properties of TATP

The unstable nature of TATP and its explosive nature makes it difficult to determine accurately the thermochemical and thermophysical properties, and literature search revealed lack of data. Table 10.2 lists some of the common properties of TATP from different sources [4, 38, 39].
Table 10.2

Common properties of TATP

Empirical formula

C9H18O6

CAS No. 17088-37-8

Other names: 3,3,6,6,9,9-Hexamethyl-1,2,4,5,7,8-hexaoxacyclononane,

 

Molecular mass, g/mole

222.24

 

Crystal structure

Monoclilnic with cell parameters

a = 13.788 Å, b = 10.664 Å, c = 7.894 Å,

β = 91.77°, V = 1160.1 Å3

[10]

Density, g/mL

1.004

[38]

Molar volume, cm3mol−1

221.1 ± 3.0

[38]

Boiling point, K

370.15-433.15; 458.05 ± 30 (97–160 ℃; 184.9 ± 30 ℃)

[38]

Melting point

367.15 (94 ℃)

365.15-366.15 (92–93 ℃)

[38]

[12]

Flash point

51.5 ± 24.4

[38]

Enthalpy of vaporization, kJ/mol

40.39 ± 3.0

46.41 and 51.73

[38]

[39]

Koc

325

[38]

Velocity of detonation, m/s

5300

 

Aqueous solubility, g/L

3.1 at 298.15 K (25 ℃)

[38]

Bioconcentration Factor

22.6

[38]

Oxley et al. [40] measured the vapor pressure of TATP and their data are tabulated in Table 10.3. Table 10.3 shows that the error between two measurements sometimes is between 10 to 20% and shows the need for better methods and accurate measurements.
Table 10.3

Vapor pressure of TATP [40]

T, K

285

285

295

295

298

298

305

305

VP, Pa

0.95

1.13

1.85

1.44

6.95

6.86

16.8

18.9

T, K

315

315

325

325

331

331

  

VP, Pa

46.1

51.2

98.4

101

720

596

  
The extremely unstable nature of the compound makes it difficult to measure accurate values. The authors represent the vapor pressure-temperature data by the relation.
$$ {\text{Log}}_{10} P\left( {P\,{\text{on}}\,Pa} \right) = 19.791 - \frac{5708}{T\,\left( K \right)} $$
where P is in Pascal, and T in K.

10.6 TATP Decomposition

TATP decomposes around 150–160 ℃. It also undergoes spontaneous transformation to DADP under certain conditions [41]. This decomposition depends on the catalysts used, the ratio of reactants to catalyst, purity of chemicals used and reaction conditions. The spectra of pure TATP have been recorded by Oxley et al. [42] and their IR and Raman frequency assignments are shown in Table 10.4. In addition they also present a comparative study of the vibrational spectra of several peroxide compounds including HMTD, DADP, etc. Vibrational spectroscopy of TATP is the subject of a presentation by Pacheco-Londono et al. [43]. In their synthesis study, the authors used different acids as catalysts, and varied the ratio of acetone to hydrogen peroxide. A recent study of the vibrational spectroscopy of TATP was carried out by Brauer et al. [44]. They carried out experimental and theoretical studies to analyze the overtones and anharmonic interactions.
Table 10.4

TATP calculated (at B3LYP/cc-pVDZ level of theory) harmonic frequencies (cm−1), IR intensities (km/mole), Raman scattering activities (A4/AMU), and frequencies [42]

Frequency

IR intensity

Raman activity

Description

 

n1

99.2

0.7

0.4

O–O–C–Methyl torsional tangent to ring

ν2

100.1

0.6

0.4

O–O–C–Methyl torsional

ν3

129.1

1.9

0.0

Collective O–O–C–Me torsional

ν4

147.0

2.8

0.4

O–O–C–Methyl torsional and Methyl twist

ν5

147.6

3.2

0.5

O–O–C–Methyl torsional and Methyl twist

Asynchronous

ν13

236.4

0.4

2.5

C–O–O–C shear

ν14

237.3

0.4

2.5

C–O–O–C shear

ν16

296.3

0.3

0.0

Collective bending

ν21

393.7

0.0

5.4

Ring breathing

ν22

429.1

0.6

0.4

O–C–Methyl scissoring

ν23

430.1

0.7

0.4

O–C–Methyl scissoring

ν25

547.2

10.6

4.2

O–C–Methyl scissoring and Methyl–C–

Methyl rocking

ν26

547.4

10.4

4.2

O–C–Methyl scissoring and Methyl–C–

Methyl rocking

    

ν27

557.1

0.0

22.8

Collective O–C–O scissoring

ν28

572.9

13.0

0.0

Collective C–C–O scissoring

ν29

623.8

6.6

2.5

O–C–O scissoring asynchronous

ν30

624.1

6.6

2.5

O–C–O scissoring asynchronous

ν31

792.1

28.6

0.3

O–C–O symmetrical stretching and Methyl

–C–Me sym stretching

ν32

792.6

28.6

0.3

O–C–O symmetrical stretching and Methyl–

C–Methyl symmetrical stretching

ν33

848.1

15.4

0.0

Collective O–C–O asymmetrical stretching

ν34

855.5

0.0

7.4

Collective O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl

Symmetrical stretching

ν35

891.2

24.7

10.1

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl asymmetric

Stretching Me–C–O symmetric stretching

ν36

891.8

24.7

10.1

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl symmetric

Stretching Methyl–C–O asymmetric stretching

ν37

903.6

3.1

32.1

O–O stretching asynchronous and Methyl

Rocking asynchronous

ν38

904.6

3.0

32.8

O–O stretching asynchronous and Methyl

Rocking synchronous

    

ν39

906.6

0.1

19.9

O–O stretching synchronous Methyl–C–

Methyl symmetrical stretching and Methyl rocking

synchronous

    

ν43

956.3

17.9

13.3

Methyl–C–Methyl stretching O–C–O

Symmetrical stretching

ν44

957.1

16.1

12.8

Methyl–C–Methyl and O–C–O symmetrical

Stretching

    

ν45

962.7

0.0

66.2

Collective O–O and C–O stretching

ν48

1022.8

0.0

3.3

O–C–O symmetrical stretching

ν49

1137.2

4.6

0.0

O–C–O asymmetric stretching

ν50

1197.4

187.8

1.0

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl asymmetric

Stretching Methyl–C–O symmetrical stretching

ν51

1197.6

192.6

1.0

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl asymmetric

Stretching, Methyl–C–O symmetric stretching

ν52

1213.9

131.5

2.4

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl

Symmetric stretching

ν53

1214.0

131.4

2.4

O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl symmetric stretching

ν54

1220.9

0.0

9.8

Collective O–C–O and Methyl–C–Methyl

Symmetric stretching

Table includes only the frequencies (all of them) that are concerned with O–O and C–O vibrations

The products of decomposition of TATP depend on the rate of heating as noticed by Hiyoshi et al. [45]. Slow heating rates produced acetone whereas methane was the product at higher heating rates. This could be because of the type of O–O cleavage at different heating rates. Mullen et al. [46] in their study of laser ionization time-of-flight mass spectroscopy found TATP decomposition products, including acetyl ion C2H3O+, acetone ion C3H6O+, C3H7O+, C3H7O 2 + , C3H6O 4 + , and C3H6O 5 + . Matyas and Pachman [47] have carried out DTA measurements of TATP in the presence of several inorganic acids. The decomposition rate was faster with sulfuric acid compared to hydrochloric, nitric, or perchloric acids. Armitt et al. [48] carried out a similar study to track the products of decomposition of TATP in the presence of inorganic acids. The products and the rates of decomposition were dependent on the type of acid. Part of this study is also reported elsewhere [49].

10.7 Formulations and Detonation Characteristics

The stability of TATP has prevented it to be used as a primary explosive although it can be made easily from chemicals that are readily available and cheap. Hanson [50] reports that TATP has 50–80% of the force of TNT, and creates a force of nearly 1.5 tons per square inch. To get a perspective of the damage that could be done by such a force is to look at the force that support columns in buildings such as the Oklahoma City A.P. Murrah building. The columns were designed to withstand at least 3000 lb per square inch which is what TATP can create. In a Truzl test, Dubnikova et al. [10] found TATP to be 80% as effective as TNT, but its volatility and unstable nature make it difficult to use for military and civilian purposes. Matyas and Selesovsky [51] have presented the detonation characteristics of various combinations of TATP, ammonium nitrate, water, uranium nitrate, fuel oil, etc.

Mayatas et al. [52] have studied TATP formulation with ammonium nitrate (AN) and water. They varied the mixture compositions from 21 to 31% TATP, 37 to 54% AN, and 19 to 32% water, and tested them for various properties including detonation velocity. The results were compared with those of 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT). The summary of their results are shown in Table 10.5. The compositions of the four mixtures are pretty close to one another. An interesting observation that the authors have made is the dependence of detonation velocity on charge diameter, and the criticality of the charge diameter. The results of Table 10.5 indicate larger charge diameters increase the detonation velocity and come closer to the detonation velocity of TNT. It is not clear how they prepared their explosion emulsion ammonium nitrate—ANE, but this low cost material has a detonation velocity closer to TNT. Another publication by the authors [53] provides more data on TATP+ ammonium nitrate and TATP+ urea nitrate.

Menning and Ostmark [54] measured the friction and impact sensitivity based on the up and down method. The results of their tests are shown in Table 10.6. The commercial samples used in these tests have been tested for purity by IR spectroscopy. The results of Table 10.6 are based on ten tests per sample. The authors determined friction sensitivity using a Julius Peters (BAM) apparatus, and performing the test by using an up-and-down method on both sides of the 50% probability level.
Table 10.5

Experimental results on various explosive mixtures [52]

Explosive composition

Internal charge diameter (mm)

Density (gcm−3)

Detonation velocity (ms−1)

TATP

AN

W

27

54

19

28

1.19

4110

26

54

20

46

1.16

4400

26

54

20

12.3

1.29

2520

26

54

20

16.5

1.29

2880

26

54

20

105

1.28

4810

21

53

26

25

1.14

4800

31

37

32

25

1.14

4470

TNT—test 1

  

25

1.20

5480

TNT—test 2

  

25

1.20

5460

ANFO

  

25

0.75

2180

ANE

  

25

1.06

5460

Table 10.6

Friction and impact sensitivity of TATP based on up and down method [54]

  

Friction

Impact

  
  

Sensitivity,

Sensitivity,

 

Temp/RH

Explosive

Form

BAM (kp/cm2)

ERL (J)

Std dev (J)

( ℃/%)

TATP (FOI)

Needle-like crystals

<1.0

<1.2

21/74

TATP (FOI)

Fine powder

<0.5

<2.0

18/27

TATP (FOI)

Fine powder

<0.5

1.9

0.9

19/26

TATP (FOI)

Crystals

<0.5

<1.2

17/25

TATP (FOI)

Fine powder

<0.5

2.3

0.3

19/28

10.8 Destruction

Several methods including oxidation-reduction, and catalytic, have been explored for the degradation and destruction of TATP. Fidler et al. [55] found 96% degradation using an alloy of MgPd. They observed acetone to be the product of decomposition. Bellamy [56] discusses a chemical reduction method for the safe disposal of TATP. The risks involved in handling this sensitive explosive are shown to be considerably reduced by dissolving it in toluene. Destruction of unwanted samples of TATP could in principal be achieved in three ways (a) burning, preferably of a TATP solution, (b) thermal degradation, and (c) chemical destruction.

References

  1. 1.
    Fresco A, O’Neill S, Tendler S (July 15, 2005) Jamaican-born bomber from the suburbs of Middle England. The Times, 15 July 2005, at www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,22989–1694965,00.html
  2. 2.
    Perry M, ‎Berg M, Krukones J (2010) Danish ‘homegrown’ vollsmose group on 5 September 2006. sources of European History: Since 1900Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NBC NEWS (2005) Bomb blast at University of Oklahoma. Bomb blast outside of sooner football game. 2 Oct 2005Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sparks P (2009) Arrest warrant issued for man involving explosives. Augusta Chronicle, 20 Jan 2009Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Denekamp C, Gottlieb L, Tamiri T, Tsoglin A, Shilav R, Kapon M (2005) Two separable conformers of tatp and analogues exist at room temperature. Org Lett 7(12):2461–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bayer VV (1900) Ueber die einwirkung des caro’schen reagens auf ketone. Chem Ber 33:858–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang H, Chu G, Gong H, Qiao QD (1999) Tin chloride catalyzed oxidation of acetone with hydrogen peroxide to tetrameric acetone peroxide. J Chem Res 4:288–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wolffenstein (1895) Action of hydrogen peroxide on acetone and mesityl oxide. Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft 28:2265–2269Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Milas NA, Golubovic A (1959) Studies in organic peroxides XXVI organic peroxides derived from acetone and hydrogen peroxide. J Am Chem Soc 81:6461–6462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dubnikova F, Kosloff R, Almog J, Zeiri Y, Boese R, Itzhaky H, Alt A, Keinan E (2005) Decomposition of triacetone triperoxide is an entropic explosion. J Am Chem Soc 127(4):1146–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mateo M, Eyler GN, Alvarez EE, Canizo AI (1998) New method for the synthesis of cyclic acetone triperoxide. Informacion Tecnologica 9(2):19–22Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pacheco-Londono LC PAJ, Primera-Pedrozo OM, Hernandez-Rivera SP, Mina N, Garcia R, Chamberlain RT, Lareau RT (2004) An experimental and theoretical study of the synthesis and vibrational spectroscopy of triacetone triperoxide (TATP). In: Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng 5403(Pt 1, Sensors, and Command, Control Communications, and Intelligence (C31) Technologies for Homeland Security and Homeland Defense III), pp 279–287Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Costantini M (1989) Destruction of acetone peroxides. US Patent 5003109Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jensen L, Mortensen PM, Trane R, Harris P, Berg RW (2009) Reaction kinetics of acetone peroxide formation and structure investigations using Raman spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction. Appl Spectrosc 63(1):92–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Groth P (1969) Crystal structure of 3,3,6,6,9,9-hexamethyl-1,2,4,5,7,8-hexaoxacyclononane (trimeric acetone peroxide). Acta Chem Scand 23(4):1311–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Evans HK, Tulleners FAJ, Sanchez BL, Rasmussen CA (1986) An unusual explosive, triacetonetriperoxide (TATP). J Forensic Sci 31(3):1119–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ember L (2005) Biochemist arrested. Chem Eng News 83:20Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miller C (2007) Quality and contamination control in an explosives testing laboratory. In American Chemical Society p NW-009 Abstracts 62nd Northwest Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society Boise ID United StatesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dunayevskiy I, Tsekoun A, Prasanna M, Go R, Patel CKN (2007) High-sensitivity detection of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) and its precursor acetone. Appl Opt 46(25):6397–6404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mullen C, Huestis D, Coggiola M, Oser H (2006) Laser photoionization of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) by femtosecond and nanosecond laser pulses. Int J Mass Spectrom 252(1):69–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oxley JC, Smith JL, Moran J, Nelson K, Utley WE (2004) Training dogs to detect Triacetone Triperoxide (TATP). In: Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng 5403(Pt 1, Sensors, and Command, Control Communications, and Intelligence (C31) Technologies for Homeland Security and Homeland Defense III), pp 349–353Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Muller D, Levy A, Shelef R, Abramovich-Bar S, Sonenfeld D, Tamiri T (2004) Improved method for the detection of TATP after explosion. J Forensic Sci 49(5):935–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Scintrex Trace Systems. E3500 Trace Detector, Detects Explosives http://www.scintrextrace.com/brochures/current/e3500.pdf
  24. 24.
    Synagen Guardian MS-ETD, Syagen Technology Inc, Guardian Explosives Trace Detection (ETD), California, CA, USA. www.syagen.com/uploads/pdfs/news
  25. 25.
    ACRO Security Technologies. Detect & Protect with ACRO_PET. www.acrosec.com
  26. 26.
    Itzhaky H, Keinan E (2004) Method and kit for the detection of explosives. US Patent 6767717Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nomadics (2008) Detection of peroxides and explosives. (Inventors: Deans R, Rose A, Bardon KM, Hancock LF, Swager TM) PCT/US2007/019248Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ladbeck RS, Kolla P, Karst U (2003) Trace analysis of peroxide-based explosives. Anal Chem 75:731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sigman ME, Clark CD, Caiano T, Mullen R (2008) Analysis of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) and TATP synthetic intermediates by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 22(2):84–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roman FR, Pena-Quevedo AJ, Rivera LA (2005) Analytical method development for trace detection of energetic acetone peroxides by GC-MS. American Chemical Society p ANYL-097 230th ACS National Meeting Washington DC United States 28 Aug–1 SeptGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Buttigieg GA, Knight AK, Denson S, Pommier C, Bonner DM (2003) Characterization of the explosive triacetone triperoxide and detection by ion mobility spectrometry. Forensic Sci Int 135(1):53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sella DS (2008) Self-immolative dendritic probe for direct detection of triacetone triperoxide. Chem Commu 44:5701–5703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gaft M, Nagli M (2008) UV gated Raman spectroscopy for standoff detection of explosives. Opt Mater 30:1739–1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Munoz RAA, Lu D, Cagan A, Wang J (2007) “One-step” simplified electrochemical sensing of TATP based on its acid treatment. Analyst 132(6):560–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Banerjee S, Mohapatra SK, Misra M, Mishra IB (2009) The detection of improvised nonmilitary peroxide based explosives using a titania nanotube array sensor. Nanotechnology 20(7):075502/1–075502/6Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Apblett AW, Kiran BP, Malka S, Materer NF, Piquette A (2006) Nanotechnology for neutralization of terrorist explosives. Ceram Trans 172(Ceramic Nanomaterials and Nanotechnologies IV), pp 29–35Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cotte-Rodriguez I, Hernandez-Soto H, Chen H, Cooks RG (2008) In situ trace detection of peroxide explosives by desorption electrospray ionization and desorption atmospheric pressure. Chem Ionization Anal Chem (Washington, DC, US) 80(5):1512–1519Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Calculated using Advanced Chemistry Development (ACD/Labs) Software V904 for Solaris (1994–2008 ACD/Labs)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Canizo GN, Eyler GP (2007) Barreto, determination of the enthalpies of vaporization of cyclic organic peroxides by correlation of changes in gas chromatographic retention times. Chromato graphia 65:31–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Oxley JC, Smith JL, Shinde K, Moran J (2005) Determination of the vapor density of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) using a gas chromatography headspace technique. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 30(2):127–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Matyas R, Pachman J, Ang H-G (2008) Study of TATP: spontaneous transformation of TATP to DADP. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 33:89–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Oxley JC, Smith JL, Brady J, Dubnikova F, Kosloff R, Zeiri L, Zeiri Y (2008) Raman and infrared fingerprint spectroscopy of peroxide-based explosives. Appl Spectrosc 62(8):906–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pacheco-Londono L, Primera OM, Ramirez M, Ruiz O, Hernandez-Rivera S (2005) Review of the various analytical techniques and algorithms for detection and quantification of TATP. In: Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng 5778(Pt 1, Sensors, and Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C3I) Technologies for Homeland Defense IV), pp 317–326Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brauer B, Dubnikova F, Zeiri Y, Kosloff R, Gerber RB (2008) Vibrational spectroscopy of triacetone triperoxide (TATP): anharmonic fundamentals, overtones and combination bands. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc 71(4):1438–1445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hiyoshi RI, Nakamura J, Brill TB (2007) Thermal decomposition of organic peroxides TATP and HMTD by T-jump/FTIR spectroscopy. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 32(2):127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mullen C, Huestis D, Coggiola M, Oser H (2006) Laser photoionization of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) by femtosecond and nanosecond laser pulses Int J Mass Spectrom 252(1):69–72. doi: 101016/jijms200601018Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Matyas R, Pachman J (2007) Thermal stability of triacetone triperoxide. Sci Technol Energ Mater 68(4):111–116Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Armitt D, Zimmermann P, Ellis-Steinborner S (2008) Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) degradation products rapid. Commun Mass Spectrom 22(7):950–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bilusich D, Fitzgerald M, Armitt D, Ellis-Steinborner S (2008) 19th Intl Symp On the Forensic Sci 6–9 October. Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hanson D (2006) Officercom. 4 June 2006 updated 8 July 2008Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Matyas R, Selesovsky J (2009) Power of TATP based explosives. J Hazard Mater 165(1–3):95–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Matyas R, Zeman S, Trzcinski W, Cudzilo S (2008) Detonation performance of TATP/AN-based explosives. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 33(4):296–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zeman S, Trzcinski WA, Matyas R (2008) Some properties of explosive mixtures containing peroxides Part I Relative performance and detonation of mixtures with triacetone triperoxide. J Hazard Mater 154(1–3):192–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Menning D, Ostmark H (2008) In: Schubert H, Kuznstov A (eds) Detection of Liquid Explosives and Flammable Agents in Connection with Terrorism. Springer, pp 55–70Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Fidler R, Legron T, Carvalho-Knighton K, Geiger CL, Sigman ME, Clausen CA (2009) Degradation of TNT, RDX, and TATP using microscale mechanically alloyed bimetals. In: ACS Symp Ser 1027(Environmental Applications of Nanoscale and Microscale Reactive Metal Particles), pp 117–134Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bellamy AJ (1999) Triacetone triperoxide: its chemical destruction. J Forensic Sci 44(3):603–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Additional Scholarly Articles for Further Reading

  1. 57.
    Baconin J, Aveille J, Zoe J (1984) Experimental study of the spherical diverging detonation. In: Proc Symp Explos Pyrotech 12th, pp 1/71–1/76Google Scholar
  2. 58.
    Bailey A, Bellerby JM, Kinloch SA (1992) The identification of bonding agents for TATB/HTPB polymer bonded explosives. Philos Trans R Soc London, Ser A 339(1654):321–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 59.
    Belcher I, Drake RC, Fleming KA, Roberts RH (1991) Thermal modeling of confined explosive systems. Int Annu Conf ICT 22nd (Combust React Kinet), pp 9/1–9/11Google Scholar
  4. 60.
    Belmas R, Plotard JP (1995) Physical origin of hot spots in pressed explosive compositions. J Phys IV 5(C4, Approaches Microscopique et Macroscopique des Detonations), pp 61–87 doi: 10.1051/jp4:1995406Google Scholar
  5. 61.
    Benziger TM (1981) Manufacture of triaminotrinitrobenzene. Int Jahrestag—Fraunhofer-Inst Treib- Explosivst(Chem Mech Technol Treib-Explosivst), pp 491–503Google Scholar
  6. 62.
    Billon HH (1994) The rheology of a high-concentration triaminotrinitrobenzene/trinitrotoluene (TATB/TNT) suspension. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 19(5):245–248. doi: 10.1002/prep.19940190506 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 63.
    Blais NC, Greiner NR, Fernandez WJ (1990) Detonation chemistry studies of energetic materials using laboratory scale samples. NATO ASI Ser, Ser C 309(Chem Phys Energ Mater), pp 477–509Google Scholar
  8. 64.
    Brasher CL (1981) TATB synthesis: processes, problems and progress. Tech Bull—Tex Eng Exp Stn 81–1:34–46Google Scholar
  9. 65.
    Breithaupt D, Kury J, McGuire R, Hallam J (1991) The extent of reaction of aluminum and ammonium perchlorate in TATB-containing explosives. Int Annu Conf ICT 22nd (Combust React Kinet), pp 6/1–6/7Google Scholar
  10. 66.
    Britt AD, Moniz WB, Chingas GC, Moore DW, Heller CA, Ko CL (1981) Free radicals of TATB (1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene). Propellants Explos 6(4):94–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 67.
    Cady HH (1986) Microstructural differences in TATB that result from manufacturing techniques. Int Jahrestag—Fraunhofer-Inst Treib—Explosivst 17th (Anal Propellants Explos: Chem Phys Methods), pp 53/1–53/14Google Scholar
  12. 68.
    Catalano E, Rolon CE (1983) A study of the thermal decomposition of confined triaminotrinitrobenzene. The gaseous products and kinetics of evolution. Thermochim Acta 61(1–2):37–51. doi: 10.1016/0040-6031(83)80302-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 69.
    Chaykovsky M, Adolph HG (1990) Synthesis and properties of some trisubstituted trinitrobenzenes. TATB analogs J Energ Mater 8(5):392–414. doi: 10.1080/07370659008225431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 70.
    Cherin H, Lemoine D, Gautier L (1996) Sensitivity to projectile impact of pre-heated explosive compositions. Int Annu Conf ICT 27th(Energetic Materials), pp 36.1–36.9Google Scholar
  15. 71.
    Cherin H, Lemoine D, Pauton M (1994) Sensitization by damage of explosive compositions. Int Annu Conf ICT 25th (Energetic Materials-Analysis, Characterization and Test Techniques), pp 101/1–101/9Google Scholar
  16. 72.
    Chisum ME (1991) Applications of negative ion analyses on the ELAN 250 ICP-MS. At Spectrosc 12(5):155–159Google Scholar
  17. 73.
    Cochran SG, Tarver CM (1984) Modeling particle size and initial temperature effects on shock initiation of TATB-based explosives. North-Holland, pp 593–596Google Scholar
  18. 74.
    Cortili G, Zerbi G (1967) Chain conformations of poly(vinylidene fluoride) as derived from its vibrational spectrum. Spectrochim Acta 23A(2):285–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 75.
    Delistraty J, Brandt H (1982) Detonation properties of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene when impacted by hypervelocity projectiles. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 7(5):113–122. doi: 10.1002/prep.19820070502 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 76.
    Dick JJ (1987) Short pulse initiation of plastic-bonded TATB explosive. J Energ Mater 5(3–4):267–285. doi: 10.1080/07370658708012355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 77.
    Dick JJ, Forest CA, Ramsay JB, Seitz WL (1988) The Hugoniot and shock sensitivity of a plastic-bonded TATB explosive PBX 9502. J Appl Phys 63(10):4881–4888. doi: 10.1063/1.340428 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 78.
    Doherty RM, Short JM, Kamlet MJ (1989) Improved prediction of cylinder test energies. Combust Flame 76(3–4):297–306. doi: 10.1016/0010-2180(89)90112-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 79.
    Doherty RM, Simpson RL (1997) A comparative evaluation of several insensitive high explosives. Int Annu Conf ICT 28th (Combustion and Detonation), pp 32.1–32.23Google Scholar
  24. 80.
    Duraes L, Campos J, Gois JC (1995) Deflagration and detonation predictions using a new equation of state. Int Annu Conf ICT 26th (Pyrotechnics), pp 67/1–67/13Google Scholar
  25. 81.
    Estes Z (1977) Summary of chlorine free synthesis of TATB. Process Development Endeavor No. 106. Mason and Hanger-Silas Mason Co., Inc., p 5Google Scholar
  26. 82.
    Firsich DW, Guse MP (1984) On the photochemical phenomenon in TATB. J Energ Mater 2(3):205–214. doi: 10.1080/07370658408012334 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 83.
    Foltz MF (1993) Pressure dependence of the reaction propagation rate of TATB at high pressure. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 18(4):210–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 84.
    Foltz MF, Ornellas DL, Pagoria PF, Mitchell AR (1996) Recrystallization and solubility of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene in dimethyl sulfoxide. J Mater Sci 31(7):1893–1901. doi: 10.1007/BF00372205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 85.
    Fried LE, Ruggiero AJ (1994) Energy Transfer Rates in Primary, Secondary, and Insensitive Explosives. J Phys Chem 98(39):9786–9791. doi: 10.1021/j100090a012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 86.
    Fried LE, Souers PC (1996) BKWC: an empirical BKW parametrization based on cylinder test data. Propellants, Explos, Pyrotech 21(4):215–223. doi: 10.1002/prep.19960210411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 87.
    Fried LE, Tarver C (1996) Molecular dynamics simulation of shocks in porous TATB crystals. AIP Conf Proc 370 (Pt. 1, Shock Compression of Condensed Matter–1995), pp 179–182Google Scholar
  32. 88.
    Glazkova AP, Kazarova JA (1992) About self-inhibition in deflagration of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (TATB). Int Annu Conf ICT 23rd (Waste Manage. Energ. Mater. Polym.), pp 67/1–67/9Google Scholar
  33. 89.
    Greiner NR, Phillips DS, Johnson JD, Volk F (1988) Diamonds in detonation soot. Nature (London) 333(6172):440–442. doi: 10.1038/333440a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 90.
    Gubin SA, Odintsov VV, Pepekin VI (1991) Thermodynamic calculations of detonation parameters. In: Proc Int Pyrotech Semin 16th, pp 325–335Google Scholar
  35. 91.
    Hadhoud MK, Shokry SA, El Morsi AK, Ragab S (1986) Study of kinetics and analysis of the amination of pentanitroaniline to produce TATB. Int Jahrestag—Fraunhofer-Inst Treib—Explosivst 17th (Anal Propellants Explos: Chem Phys Methods), pp 54/1–54/19Google Scholar
  36. 92.
    Harris BW (1985) TATB—strong basic reactions provide soluble derivatives for a simple, qualitative high explosive spot test. J Energ Mater 3(2):81–93. doi: 10.1080/07370658508012336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 93.
    Hertzberg M, Cashdollar KL, Zlochower IA, Green GM (1992) Explosives dust cloud combustion. Symp (Int) Combust, [Proc] 24th, pp 1837–43 doi: 10.1016/S0082-0784(06)80215-8Google Scholar
  38. 94.
    Hoffman DM, Matthews FM, Pruneda CO (1989) Dynamic mechanical and thermal analysis of crystallinity development in Kel-F 800 and TATB/Kel-F 800 plastic bonded explosives. Part I. Kel-F 800. Thermochim Acta 156(2):365–372. doi: 10.1016/0040-6031(89)87203-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 95.
    Hua P (1995) Energy depression coefficients of TATB and other components. China Ordnance Society, pp 377–381Google Scholar
  40. 96.
    Hutchinson CD (1988) The initiation of TATB-based insensitive high explosives in diverging geometry. Int Annu Conf ICT 19th (Combust Detonation Phenom), pp 38/1–38/10Google Scholar
  41. 97.
    Kennedy DL (1995) The challenge of non-ideal detonation. J Phys IV 5 (C4, Approches Microscopique et Macroscopique des Detonations), pp 191–207 doi: 10.1051/jp4:1995417Google Scholar
  42. 98.
    Kolb JR, Rizzo HF (1979) Growth of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (TATB). I. Anisotropic thermal expansion Propellants Explos 4(1):10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 99.
    Kunz AB (1996) Ab initio investigation of the structure and electronic properties of the energetic solids TATB and RDX. Phys Rev B: Condens Matter 53(15):9733–9738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 100.
    Larson TE, Dimas P, Hannaford CE (1991) Electrostatic sensitivity testing of explosives at Los Alamos. Inst Phys Conf Ser 118 (Electrostatics 1991), pp 107–17Google Scholar
  45. 101.
    Loughran ED, Wewerka EM, Rogers RN, Berlin JK (1975) The influence of metals on the thermal decomposition of s-triaminotrinitrobenzene (TATB). Am. Def. Prep. Assoc., p I-E, 4 pGoogle Scholar
  46. 102.
    Loughran ED, Wewerka EM, Rogers RN, Berlin JK (1977) The influence of metals on the thermal decomposition of s-triaminotrinitrobenzene (TATB). Inst Chem Treib—Explos, pp 233–247Google Scholar
  47. 103.
    Mader C, Kershner JD (1992) Numerical modeling of the effect of temperature and particle size on shock initiation properties of HMX and TATB. J Energ Mater 10(2–3):69–95. doi: 10.1080/07370659208018230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 104.
    Mader CL (1996) Detonation performance. Nova Science Publishers, pp 165–249Google Scholar
  49. 105.
    Maienschein JL, Nichols AL III, Wardell JF (1995) Reactions of TATB-based explosive with molten metal. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 20(6):287–293. doi: 10.1002/prep.19950200602 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 106.
    Makashir PS, Kurian EM (1996) Spectroscopic and thermal studies on the decomposition of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (TATB). J Therm Anal 46(1):225–236. doi: 10.1007/BF01979963 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 107.
    Mal’kov IY, Titov VM (1995) The regimes of diamond formation under detonation. Elsevier, pp 666–669Google Scholar
  52. 108.
    Marcus Y (1987) The thermodynamics of solvation of ions. Part 2. The enthalpy of hydration at 298.15 K. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 1 83(2):339–349 doi: 10.1039/f19878300339Google Scholar
  53. 109.
    Marcus Y (1987) The thermodynamics of solvation of ions. Part 4. Application of the tetraphenylarsonium tetraphenylborate (TATB) extrathermodynamic assumption to the hydration of ions and to properties of hydrated ions. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 1 83(9):2985–2992 doi: 10.1039/f19878302985Google Scholar
  54. 110.
    Martz HE, Schneberk DJ, Roberson GP, Azevedo SG, Lynch SK (1991) Computerized tomography of high explosives. Plenum, pp 187–195Google Scholar
  55. 111.
    Miles MH, Gustaveson D, Devries KL (1983) Stress-induced radical generation in TATB. J Mater Sci 18(11):3243–3248. doi: 10.1007/BF00544148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 112.
    Mitchell AR, Pagoria PF, Schmidt RD (1996) A new synthesis of TATB using inexpensive starting materials and mild reaction conditions. Int Annu Conf ICT 27th (Energetic Materials), pp 29.1–29.11Google Scholar
  57. 113.
    Morozov VG, et al. (1994) Experimentally proved numerical modeling of detonation ignition and development in TATB-based HE in terms of desensitization by shock and detonation waves interaction. Proc Int Pyrotech Semin 20th, pp 701–717Google Scholar
  58. 114.
    Oestmark H (1996) Shock induced sub-detonation chemical reactions in 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene. AIP Conf Proc 370 (Pt. 2, Shock Compression of Condensed Matter–1995), pp 871–874Google Scholar
  59. 115.
    Oestmark H, Bergman H, Aaqvist G, Langlet A, Persson B (1991) Decomposition of NTO: some initial observations. Proc Int Pyrotech Semin 16th, pp 874–886Google Scholar
  60. 116.
    Oxley JC, Smith JL, Wang W (1994) Compatibility of Ammonium Nitrate with Monomolecular Explosives 1. J Phys Chem 98(14):3893–3900. doi: 10.1021/j100065a053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 117.
    Oxley JC, Smith JL, Wang W (1994) Compatibility of Ammonium Nitrate with Monomolecular Explosives. 2. Nitroarenes. J Phys Chem 98(14):3901–3907. doi: 10.1021/j100065a054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 118.
    Pertuis C, Marteau D, Gautier L, Cherin H, Paillard C, Dupre G (1997) Reactivity of a TATB-based explosive composition after mechanical damage. Int Annu Conf ICT 28th (Combustion and Detonation), pp 15.1–15.13Google Scholar
  63. 119.
    Piunti RL, Brower KR (1995) Thermolysis of various energetic substances by exposure to adiabatically compressed gas. J Energ Mater 13(1–2):107–139. doi: 10.1080/07370659508019346 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 120.
    Plaksin IY, Gerasimenko VF, Shutov VI, Gerasimov VM (1996) On sensitivity of TATB-based shock wave damaged explosive. Int Annu Conf ICT 27th (Energetic Materials), pp 141.1–141.13Google Scholar
  65. 121.
    Plaksin IY, et al. (1996) Evolution of explosion in TATB HE in the process of its expansion into a free space followed by impact against hard barrier. AIP Conf Proc 370 (Pt. 2, Shock Compression of Condensed Matter–1995), pp 875–878Google Scholar
  66. 122.
    Pritchard RH (1976) Compatibility of TATB PBX with weapons materials. Am Def Prep Assoc, p III-A, 10 pGoogle Scholar
  67. 123.
    Pruneda CO, McGuire RR, Clements RE (1990) Development of a high-tensile-strain plastic-bonded TATB explosive. Int Annu Conf ICT 21st (Technol Polym Compd Energ Mater), pp 99/1–99/9Google Scholar
  68. 124.
    Ray SK, Sarkar S, Sinha S, Kundu KK (1994) Single-ion transfer energetics of some ions based on TATB assumption in aqueous mixtures of N, N-dimethylformamide. Indian J Chem Sect A: Inorg Bio-inorg Phys Theor Anal Chem 33A(9):805–815Google Scholar
  69. 125.
    Rigdon LP, Stephens FB, Harrar JE (1983) Precise assay of TATB by the determination of total amino and nitro functional groups. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 8(6):206–211. doi: 10.1002/prep.830080607 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 126.
    Rivera T, Matuszak ML (1983) Surface properties of potential plastic-bonded explosives (PBX). J Colloid Interface Sci 93(1):105–108. doi: 10.1016/0021-9797(83)90389-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 127.
    Rizzo HF, Humphrey JR, Kolb JR (1981) Growth of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (TATB). II. Control of growth by use of high Tg polymeric binders. Propellants Explos 6(2):27–36Google Scholar
  72. 128.
    Rizzo HF, Humphrey JR, Kolb JR (1981) Growth of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (TATB). II. Control of growth by use of high-Tg polymeric binders. Propellants Explos 6(3):57–62Google Scholar
  73. 129.
    Rosen JM, Dickinson C (1969) Vapor pressures and heats of sublimation of some high-melting organic explosives. J Chem Eng Data 14(1):120–124. doi: 10.1021/je60040a044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 130.
    Seitz WL (1984) Short-duration shock initiation of triaminotrinitrobenzene (TATB). North-Holland, pp 531–534Google Scholar
  75. 131.
    Sewell TD (1996) Monte Carlo simulations of crystalline TATB. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 418 (Decomposition, Combustion, and Detonation Chemistry of Energetic Materials), pp 67–72Google Scholar
  76. 132.
    Sharma J, et al. (1984) Comparative study of molecular fragmentation in sub-initiated TATB caused by impact, UV, heat and electron beams. North-Holland, pp 543–546Google Scholar
  77. 133.
    Shlensky OF (1994) Vainshtein EF Prespinodal thermal decomposition of highly energetic materials, vol 2. Russian Section of the Combustion Institute, pp 466–468Google Scholar
  78. 134.
    Shokry SA, Shawki SM, Elmorsi AK (1990) TATB plastic-bonded compositions. Int Annu Conf ICT 21st (Technol Polym Compd Energ Mater), pp 100/1–100/16Google Scholar
  79. 135.
    Shorohov EV, Litvinov BV (1992) Shock compressibility of the TATB-based explosive composition in the pressure range from 0.1 to 40 GPa. Oxford & IBH, pp 866–868Google Scholar
  80. 136.
    Shorohov EV, Litvinov BV (1995) Hugoniot adiabate of plasticized TATB-based explosive compositions, vol 3, pp 295–298. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  81. 137.
    Simpson RL, Pagoria PF, Mitchell AR, Coon CL (1994) Synthesis, properties and performance of the high explosive ANTA. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 19(4):174–179. doi: 10.1002/prep.19940190405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 138.
    Sinha S, Rudra S, Kundu KK (1993) Transfer energetics of some ions based on TATB assumption in some quasi-isodielectric ethylene carbonate + water mixtures. Indian J Chem Sect A: Inorg Bio-inorg Phys Theor Anal Chem 32A(1):1–11Google Scholar
  83. 139.
    Stolovy A, Jones EC Jr, Aviles JB Jr, Namenson AI, Fraser WA (1983) Exothermic reactions in TATB initiated by an electron beam. J Chem Phys 78(1):229–235. doi: 10.1063/1.444545 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 140.
    Talukdar H, Kundu KK (1992) Transfer energetics of tetraalkylammonium ions in aquo-organic systems and the solvent effect on hydrophobic hydration. J Phys Chem 96(2):970–975. doi: 10.1021/j100181a078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 141.
    Tarver CM (1990) Modeling shock initiation and detonation divergence tests on TATB-based explosives. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 15(4):132–142. doi: 10.1002/prep.19900150404 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 142.
    Tarver CM (1992) The structure of detonation waves in solid explosives. North-Holland, pp 311–315Google Scholar
  87. 143.
    Tarver CM, Hoffman DM, Urtiew PA, Tao WC (1996) Shock initiation of TATB/FEFO formulations. J Energ Mater 14(3–4):217–256. doi: 10.1080/07370659608216066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 144.
    Tarver CM, Kury JW, Breithaupt RD (1997) Detonation waves in triaminotrinitrobenzene. J Appl Phys 82(8):3771–3782. doi: 10.1063/1.365739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 145.
    Trott WM, Renlund AM (1988) Single-pulse Raman scattering study of triaminotrinitrobenzene under shock compression. J Phys Chem 92(21):5921–5925. doi: 10.1021/j100332a015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 146.
    Trott WM, Renlund AM, Jungst RG (1985) Single-pulse Raman and photoacoustic spectroscopy studies of triaminotrinitrobenzene (TATB) and related compounds. Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng 540(Proc Southwest Conf Opt), pp 368–375 doi: 10.1117/12.976139Google Scholar
  91. 147.
    Upadhye RS, Watkins BE, Pruneda CO (1996) Recent advances in the molten salt technology for the destruction of energetic materials. Int Annu Conf ICT 27th (Energetic Materials), pp 110.1–110.13Google Scholar
  92. 148.
    Urbanski T, Vasudeva SK (1978) Heat resistant explosives. J Sci Ind Res 37(5):250–255Google Scholar
  93. 149.
    Urtiew PA, Tarver CM, Simpson RL (1996) Shock initiation of 2,4-dinitroimidazole (2,4-DNI). AIP Conf Proc 370 (Pt. 2, Shock Compression of Condensed Matter–1995), pp 887–890Google Scholar
  94. 150.
    Varghese AV, Kalidas C, Singh P, Hefter G (1995) Gibbs transfer energies and solvent transport numbers of some copper(II) salts in methanol-dimethylformamide mixtures. Aust J Chem 48(5):987–996. doi: 10.1071/CH9950987 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 151.
    Volk F (1988) Detonation products of cast high explosives. Proc Int Pyrotech Semin 13th, pp 835–851Google Scholar
  96. 152.
    Von Holtz E, Scribner K, Moody G, McGuire R (1990) The search for high-energy low-vulnerability explosives. Int Annu Conf ICT 21st (Technol Polym Compd Energ Mater), pp 12/1–12/9Google Scholar
  97. 153.
    Walker FE (1994) A new kinetics and the simplicity of detonation. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 19(6):315–326. doi: 10.1002/prep.19940190610 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 154.
    Wang Z, Chen Z (1991) Deflagration to detonation transition (DDT) study in mixed HMX bed. Int Annu Conf ICT 22nd (Combust React Kinet), pp 91/1–91/10Google Scholar
  99. 155.
    Ward RL, Felver T, Pyper JW (1984) Bound and free moisture in explosives and plastics. J Hazard Mater 9(1):69–76. doi: 10.1016/0304-3894(84)80008-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 156.
    Zhang SQ, Wei YZ, Fang Q, Zhao F (1997) Detonation behavior of a TATB-based IHE. Int Annu Conf ICT 28th (Combustion and Detonation), pp 76.1–76.11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government (outside the USA) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dabir S. Viswanath
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tushar K. Ghosh
    • 3
  • Veera M. Boddu
    • 4
  1. 1.Nuclear Science and Engineering InstituteUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  2. 2.Nuclear Engineering Teaching LaboratoryCockrell School of EngineeringAustinUSA
  3. 3.Nuclear Science and Engineering InstituteUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  4. 4.Environmental Processes BranchUS Army Engineer Research and Development CenterChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations