Hubbry Logo
DunniteDunniteMain
Open search
Dunnite
Community hub
Dunnite
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Dunnite
Dunnite
Dunnite
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Dunnite
Names
IUPAC name
Ammonium 2,4,6-trinitrophenolate
Other names
Ammonium picrate; Picratol; 2,4,6-Trinitrophenol ammonium salt; Ammonium picronitrate; Explosive D
Identifiers
3D model (JSmol)
ChemSpider
ECHA InfoCard 100.004.582 Edit this at Wikidata
EC Number
  • 205-038-3
UNII
  • InChI=1S/C6H3N3O7.H3N/c10-6-4(8(13)14)1-3(7(11)12)2-5(6)9(15)16;/h1-2,10H;1H3 ☒N
    Key: PADMMUFPGNGRGI-UHFFFAOYSA-N ☒N
  • InChI=1/C6H3N3O7.H3N/c10-6-4(8(13)14)1-3(7(11)12)2-5(6)9(15)16;/h1-2,10H;1H3
    Key: PADMMUFPGNGRGI-UHFFFAOYAZ
  • C1=C(C=C(C(=C1[N+](=O)[O-])[O-])[N+](=O)[O-])[N+](=O)[O-].[NH4+]
Properties
C6H6N4O7
Molar mass 246.135 g·mol−1
Density 1.719 g/cm3[1]
Melting point 265 °C (509 °F; 538 K)[1]
10 g/L (20 °C)
Hazards
GHS labelling:
GHS01: ExplosiveGHS07: Exclamation mark
Danger
H201, H315, H317, H319
P210, P230, P240, P250, P261, P264, P272, P280, P302+P352, P305+P351+P338, P321, P332+P313, P333+P313, P337+P313, P362, P363, P370+P380, P372, P373, P401, P501
Except where otherwise noted, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C [77 °F], 100 kPa).
☒N verify (what is checkY☒N ?)

Dunnite, also known as Explosive D or systematically as ammonium picrate, is an explosive developed in 1906 by US Army Major Beverly W. Dunn, who later served as chief inspector of the Bureau of Transportation Explosives.[2][3] Ammonium picrate is a salt formed by reacting picric acid and ammonia. It is chemically related to the more stable explosive trinitrotoluene (TNT).

History

[edit]

Ammonium picrate was proposed for use as a component in gunpowder by Brugère and Abel as early as 1869: the former proposed to mix 54% of it with 46% of saltpetre while the latter, 60% with 40%.[4] Their compositions gave less smoke and were more energetic than black powder but neither was adopted by any military, even though in the 1890s "semi-smokeless" powder compositions featuring ammonium picrates were sold commercially in the US.[5] It also was a minor component of the Peyton powder made by the California Powder Works which was procured by the US military in the same period.[5]

It was the first explosive used in an aerial bombing operation in military history, performed by Italian pilots in Libya in 1911.[6] It was used extensively by the United States Navy during World War I.[7]

Though Dunnite was generally considered an insensitive substance, by 1911 the United States Army had abandoned its use in favor of other alternatives.[8] The Navy, however, used it in armor-piercing artillery shells and projectiles, and in coastal defense.

By the end of WWI a pound of ammonium picrate cost US government 64 cents, while TNT cost 26.5 c/lb, ammonium nitrate used in amatol only 17.5 c/lb and black powder about 25 c/lb.[9]

Dunnite typically did not detonate on striking heavy armor. Rather, the encasing shell would penetrate the armor, after which the charge would be triggered by a base fuze.

During WWII, it was gradually replaced by RDX-based Composition A-3.[10]

In 2008 caches of discarded Dunnite in remote locations were mistaken for rusty rocks at Cape Porcupine, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.[11][12]

Dunnite can be used as a precursor to the highly stable explosive TATB (1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene), by first dehydrating it to form picramide (attaching the ammonia as an amine group instead of an ion) and then further aminating it, using 1,1,1-trimethylhydrazinium iodide (TMHI) made from unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine rocket fuel and methyl iodide. Thus, surplus materials that would have to be destroyed when no longer needed are converted into a high value explosive.[13][14]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Dunnite

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Dunnite, also known as Explosive D or ammonium picrate (C₆H₆N₄O₇), is a high explosive consisting of a yellow crystalline salt of and , valued for its relative insensitivity to shock and . Named after U.S. Army Ordnance officer Beverly W. Dunn, who developed it in the early 1900s, Dunnite was adopted by the U.S. Army in 1901 and the U.S. Navy in 1907 as a safer alternative to more sensitive explosives like lyddite for use in munitions. This explosive's key advantage lies in its stability, allowing shells filled with it to penetrate thick armor plating—such as 5- to 6-inch steel—without premature detonation upon impact, after which a delayed fuse triggers the blast inside the target. It was primarily employed as the main bursting charge in large-caliber (over 3 inches, up to 16 inches) armor-piercing projectiles, naval bombs, and shells during , though the Army phased it out by 1911 while the continued its use. Chemically, Dunnite is slightly less powerful than TNT but features a high , moderate hygroscopicity (absorbing moisture that can reduce its sensitivity), and the need for a booster charge to initiate . It burns vigorously when ignited and decomposes to release toxic oxides, posing handling risks if wet, as it can react with metals like or lead to form unstable compounds. Early tests in 1907 at demonstrated its superiority over Japan's , shattering armor plates into fragments and prompting reevaluations of battleship designs. Post-WWI, it was largely replaced by more efficient explosives, but remnants persist as at former military sites.

Chemistry

Composition

Dunnite is the ammonium salt of picric acid, with the molecular formula C6H6N4O7C_6H_6N_4O_7. Its systematic IUPAC name is ammonium 2,4,6-trinitrophenolate. This compound forms through the neutralization of picric acid, or 2,4,6-trinitrophenol (C6H3N3O7C_6H_3N_3O_7), with ammonia (NH3NH_3), resulting in an ionic structure where the picrate anion is associated with the ammonium cation. Dunnite, chemically known as , features a molecular structure based on a benzene ring with hydroxyl group at position 1, substituted by three nitro groups at the ortho and para positions (2, 4, and 6 relative to the hydroxyl). The phenolic hydroxyl is deprotonated to form the phenolate anion, to which the cation (NH₄⁺) is ionically bound, resulting in the overall formula C₆H₂(NO₂)₃O⁻ NH₄⁺. This structure positions Dunnite as the ammonium salt of picric acid (2,4,6-trinitrophenol), where the replacement of the acidic proton with the alters key properties such as and stability compared to the free acid form. While picric acid's strong acidity (pKₐ ≈ 0.38) enables it to form sensitive metal salts upon contact with shell casings, the ammonium salt in Dunnite mitigates such reactivity, enhancing its suitability for confined applications. In relation to trinitrotoluene (TNT), Dunnite shares the characteristic of being an aromatic nitro compound, with both featuring three nitro groups attached to a benzene ring for high energy density. However, Dunnite's phenolate backbone contrasts with TNT's toluene-derived structure (2,4,6-trinitrotoluene), conferring greater resistance to acidic corrosion in metallic enclosures due to the neutralized phenolic moiety. Dunnite serves as a valuable precursor in the synthesis of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (), a highly insensitive , through initial to picramide followed by selective of the nitro groups. This route leverages the symmetric trinitrobenzene core of Dunnite, enabling efficient conversion under mild conditions to replace nitro groups with amino functionalities while preserving the aromatic framework.

Properties

Physical Properties

Dunnite, or ammonium picrate, appears as a crystalline solid. It exhibits a of 1.719 g/cm³ at 20 °C, making it denser than and prone to sinking in aqueous environments. The compound decomposes at 265 °C without undergoing a to a or boiling. Its solubility in is approximately 1.1 g/100 mL at 20 °C, classifying it as slightly soluble and facilitating safe handling in wet conditions to reduce sensitivity. Dunnite shows low solubility in common organic solvents, such as , which limits its dissolution in non-aqueous media. Regarding stability, Dunnite is relatively insensitive under normal conditions but can react with metals or reducing agents to form salts that are more shock-sensitive than the parent compound, particularly if impurities are present. This reactivity underscores the importance of purity in storage and handling to prevent hazardous salt formation.

Explosive Properties

Dunnite exhibits high insensitivity to shock and , making it particularly suitable for use in armor-piercing shells where premature detonation must be avoided. This low sensitivity is evidenced by its performance in impact tests, where it requires a drop height greater than 100 cm with a 2 kg load to avoid , and shows no explosions in tests. Unlike more sensitive primaries, Dunnite requires a base or a strong booster, such as 0.85 g of mercury or 0.06 g of , for reliable initiation. The of Dunnite ranges from approximately 6,000 to 7,000 m/s, depending on , which is slightly lower than that of TNT at around 6,900 m/s under similar conditions. At a of 1.63 g/cm³, it achieves about 7,154 m/s, but typical pressed loadings yield values closer to 7,040 m/s at 1.72 g/cm³. In terms of and explosive power, Dunnite displays moderate performance, with measured at 78–82.5% of TNT in sand crush tests and power equivalent to about 80–90% of TNT across ballistic mortar (79%) and Trauzl lead block (75%) tests. Its heat of explosion is approximately 3.4 kJ/g, contributing to this reduced output compared to TNT's 4.2 kJ/g. Overall, while less powerful than TNT, Dunnite's insensitivity prioritizes safety in applications where reliability under impact is critical, despite higher production costs. Dunnite demonstrates excellent stability under fire and impact conditions, with an of 318°C after 5 seconds of exposure and no in 70% of impact trials. It does not detonate readily from heat or shock but begins to decompose at elevated around 200–265°C, releasing minimal gas (0.2 cm³ at 100°C in stability tests). This thermal resilience supports its use in munitions requiring long-term storage without degradation.

History

Invention and Early Development

Ammonium picrate was first proposed as a substitute for traditional components in the late . In 1869, French Brugère suggested mixing 54% ammonium picrate with 46% to create Brugère's powder, which demonstrated promising performance in trials with the Chassepôt , though it posed risks of accidental during handling and transport. These early ideas highlighted ammonium picrate's potential as a high-energy material but were limited by manufacturing challenges and safety concerns, preventing widespread adoption at the time. The modern development of ammonium picrate as a standalone high explosive occurred in the early 1900s, when U.S. Army Major Beverly W. Dunn, an ordnance officer, created it during research at the in (1898-1902). Dunn's work built on prior knowledge of picrate salts, focusing on their application in military munitions. The explosive was named Dunnite in honor of its inventor, while also receiving the military designation Explosive D; its systematic chemical name remains ammonium picrate, reflecting its composition as the ammonium salt of . Dunn's innovation addressed key limitations of earlier explosives, positioning it for evaluation in U.S. service. Initial testing of Dunnite emphasized its role as a safer alternative to for filling naval shells, particularly armor-piercing projectiles. Unlike , which reacts with metal casings to form highly sensitive iron , Dunnite exhibited greater stability and reduced risk of premature during penetration or handling. Early experiments at the confirmed its insensitivity to shock and friction compared to , validating its suitability for high-impact applications while maintaining comparable power. In 1907, tests at demonstrated its superiority over Japan's , shattering armor plates into fragments. By 1907, preliminary production efforts estimated costs at approximately 64 cents per pound, reflecting the compound's viability for scaled military use despite higher expenses relative to alternatives like TNT.

Adoption and Decline

Dunnite, or ammonium picrate, saw initial adoption by the military in the early as a stable explosive suitable for armor-piercing applications. The U.S. Army incorporated it shortly after its development, recognizing its insensitivity to shock, which made it preferable for projectiles that needed to penetrate armor without premature . By 1911, the U.S. Navy had adopted Dunnite specifically for filling armor-piercing shells, valuing its ability to withstand impact upon striking hardened targets. This marked a significant shift toward insensitive explosives in naval ordnance, where reliability during penetration was paramount. During , Dunnite achieved peak use within the U.S. Navy, serving as the primary bursting charge in armor-piercing projectiles and coastal defense munitions stored at facilities like the Naval Ammunition Depot on Kuahua Island, . Its low sensitivity ensured consistent performance in high-impact scenarios, contributing to the Navy's emphasis on durable fillers for and shore-based . in 1909 further solidified its role as a standard charge for such shells, extending into early applications, including one-ton semi-armor-piercing bombs. The Army's enthusiasm waned by 1911, leading to its abandonment in favor of newer, more efficient compounds, though specific production challenges were not detailed in contemporary records. The Navy persisted with Dunnite through the interwar period and into World War II, but its standalone use declined as composite explosives like picratol—a mixture of ammonium picrate and TNT—emerged to address casting difficulties with pure ammonium picrate. By the 1940s, Dunnite had become largely obsolete in active military inventories, supplanted by higher-performance insensitive alternatives that improved upon its stability while enhancing brisance and ease of manufacture. Nonetheless, its development influenced subsequent generations of low-sensitivity explosives designed for armor-piercing roles.

Production

Synthesis

The synthesis of Dunnite involves the simple acid-base neutralization reaction between and to form the corresponding salt. The balanced for this primary reaction is: \ceC6H3N3O7+NH3−>C6H6N4O7+H2O\ce{C6H3N3O7 + NH3 -> C6H6N4O7 + H2O} In laboratory-scale preparation, is first suspended or dissolved in a minimal quantity of hot water to form a . Aqueous (typically concentrated) is then added gradually with stirring until the mixture becomes clear and tests neutral to paper or , ensuring complete conversion to the salt. The resulting solution is allowed to cool slowly, often to or below, promoting the of yellow Dunnite needles or prisms, which are then collected by . This process generally provides a high yield of 90–95%, depending on the purity of the starting and precise control of the neutralization. The crude product is washed with cold water to remove residual or acid, followed by air-drying or vacuum drying at low temperature to obtain pure Dunnite, free from impurities that could affect stability. Laboratory synthesis requires specific precautions to ensure . The reaction must be performed in a or well-ventilated area to disperse ammonia vapors, which are irritating to the eyes, , and . Additionally, all should be non-metallic (e.g., or ) to prevent formation of heavy metal picrates, which are far more sensitive to shock and than the ammonium salt.

Manufacturing Challenges

The production of Dunnite, or ammonium picrate, encountered substantial scalability challenges primarily stemming from the hazardous and resource-intensive manufacturing of its key precursor, . is synthesized through the progressive of phenol using concentrated nitric and sulfuric acids, a process that generates significant heat and risks uncontrolled exothermic reactions or explosions if not meticulously controlled. Prior to , U.S. production of was negligible, limited to small-scale dye applications, which necessitated rapid infrastructure expansion during wartime demands; this transition amplified safety risks and logistical hurdles in achieving bulk output without compromising worker safety or facility integrity. Cost drivers for Dunnite manufacturing were dominated by the elevated expenses associated with procurement and the substantial requirements for neutralization. The process demanded high-purity phenol and acids, both of which were scarce and costly to source or produce domestically in the early , particularly amid wartime shortages. , obtained via the Haber-Bosch process or other methods, added further economic pressure due to its energy-intensive production and the need for excess quantities to ensure complete reaction and crystallization of the desired yellow form of ammonium picrate. These factors contributed to overall high production expenses, limiting widespread adoption compared to cheaper alternatives like TNT. A critical impurity risk in Dunnite processing involved the potential formation of highly sensitive metal picrates when the compound, especially in moist conditions, contacted metals such as copper, lead, or iron. These metal salts are far more shock-sensitive than ammonium picrate itself, posing severe explosion hazards during handling or storage. To mitigate this, manufacturing required specialized non-metallic equipment, including glass-lined reactors and enamel-coated vessels, which increased complexity and maintenance demands while ensuring process purity. Historically, Dunnite was manufactured at key U.S. facilities including the Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia, where it was originally developed in the early 1900s, and various naval powder factories adapted for explosives production. Output at these sites remained constrained by rigorous safety protocols, such as isolated dust collection systems and limited batch sizes, to prevent accidental ignition from the compound's sensitivity to friction and heat. For instance, during World War II, facilities like the New York Ordnance Works in Middletown, New York, scaled to 60,000 pounds per day but operated under strict controls that capped overall throughput relative to less hazardous explosives.

Uses

Military Applications

Dunnite, also known as Explosive D or ammonium picrate, was primarily employed as the bursting charge in U.S. armor-piercing shells during , capitalizing on its relative insensitivity to shock and friction for safer transportation and handling at sea. This stability allowed shells to penetrate thick armor without premature , a critical advantage over more sensitive explosives like . Adopted by the in , Dunnite filled projectiles designed for major naval engagements, ensuring reliable performance in high-impact scenarios. It was briefly used by the U.S. Army prior to 1911 but phased out in favor of alternatives like TNT. It was loaded into various shell types, including those for 14-inch naval guns on battleships. The base-fusing mechanism delayed until after armor penetration, enabling the charge to detonate inside enemy vessels for maximum internal damage. Dunnite's acid resistance further prevented degradation in storage by avoiding the formation of highly sensitive metallic picrates when in contact with shell casings, maintaining ordnance reliability over extended periods. This combination of traits made it particularly effective against heavily armored targets, such as capital ships. To support wartime demands, U.S. production of Dunnite scaled rapidly after , reaching a peak of nearly 1,000,000 pounds per month by the in November 1918, resulting in millions of pounds amassed for naval stockpiles. Facilities in were expanded for this purpose, underscoring its role in bolstering America's naval explosive reserves during the conflict.

Other Applications

Beyond its primary military roles, ammonium picrate, known as Dunnite, played a significant part in early 20th-century research on . It was among the earliest explosives engineered for low sensitivity to shock and friction, enabling safer handling and reliable performance in penetration scenarios, which informed subsequent developments in insensitive high explosives. Dunnite's chemical structure also positioned it as a key precursor in the synthesis of 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (), a highly stable insensitive explosive. In modern processes, ammonium picrate is converted to picramide via heating with ammonium salts in , followed by with to yield at 70-80% efficiency and 97% purity; this approach recycles surplus stockpiles into valuable materials for advanced energetics. Civilian applications of Dunnite were limited due to its high production costs and compared to alternatives like or TNT. It found niche use in , including formulations for burst charges, and as a component in rocket propellants, though adoption remained experimental and infrequent.

Safety and Handling

Hazards

Dunnite, or ammonium picrate, is classified under the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) as an presenting a mass (H201), indicating the potential for rapid propagation of throughout the material if initiated, despite its relatively low sensitivity to shock and friction compared to more reactive explosives like . This low sensitivity reduces accidental initiation risks under normal handling, but the high consequence of underscores the need for strict control measures. In terms of health risks, Dunnite is toxic if swallowed ( category 3, H301), toxic in contact with (H311), toxic if inhaled (H331), and causes serious eye irritation (H319). It may also cause skin sensitization (H317). Decomposition or combustion can release gas and oxides (), which act as respiratory irritants and contribute to the overall toxicity profile, including potential chronic damage to the liver and kidneys. Chemically, Dunnite exhibits reactivity with metals such as copper or lead, forming sensitive metal picrate salts that significantly increase the risk of unintended detonation. Contamination with reducing agents or contact with concrete and plaster can also generate more shock-sensitive picrate derivatives. Thermal decomposition occurs above 265°C, liberating toxic gases including nitrogen oxides (NOx) and ammonia, which pose severe inhalation hazards and environmental concerns. The full GHS classifications include explosive; mass explosion hazard, acute toxicity category 3 (oral, dermal, inhalation), and serious eye irritation, emphasizing its multifaceted dangers.

Precautions and Regulations

Handling Dunnite requires strict protocols to minimize risks of initiation from , shock, or . Workers must use non-sparking tools and avoid contact with metals, , or plaster, while wearing such as gloves, protective clothing, and impact-resistant eye protection with side shields. Ventilation or local exhaust should be employed to prevent dust dispersion, and all personnel should be trained on proper procedures before handling. Storage of Dunnite should occur in tightly closed, non-metallic containers in a cool, well-ventilated area detached from ignition sources and incompatible materials like reducing agents or metals. It must be kept separate from drains or sewers to prevent environmental release, and for safe transport, the dry form is assigned 0004 and classified as a 1.1D under regulations, indicating a mass hazard. The wetted form (with at least 10% water) uses UN 1310 and is treated as a flammable solid in class 4.1. In emergencies, such as fires, responders should use large quantities of or water spray to cool exposed containers from an explosion-resistant distance, while wearing and full protective clothing. For spills, evacuate the area, eliminate ignition sources, isolate at least 100 meters in all directions (or 500 meters for large spills), and flood the material with to keep it wet, consulting explosives experts for cleanup. Dunnite is regulated as a hazardous substance under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines, listed with RCRA waste code P009, requiring compliance with storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal rules in 40 CFR 240-280 and 300-306. It falls under Department of Transportation (DOT) classifications for explosives or flammable solids, with additional oversight from agencies like the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) for quantities exceeding 5000 pounds due to release or explosive risks. Disposal of Dunnite must follow hazardous waste protocols; small quantities can be flushed with water after wetting, but larger amounts require diking, containment, and professional handling as , contacting state departments or the EPA for guidance. Open burning is prohibited due to the release of toxic fumes.

Legacy

Modern Relevance

Dunnite, or ammonium picrate, has been fully supplanted in military applications by more powerful and versatile nitramine-based explosives such as RDX and HMX, particularly in compositions like Composition A-3, since the latter stages of World War II. These modern alternatives offer superior detonation velocities, brisance, and stability, rendering Dunnite obsolete for active ordnance filling due to its lower performance metrics and handling complexities. The design principles of Dunnite, emphasizing insensitivity to shock and impact for safe use in armor-piercing projectiles, influenced the development of later insensitive high explosives, including polymer-bonded explosives (PBX) and 1,3,5-triamino-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene (). TATB, in particular, exhibits sensitivity profiles comparable to or lower than Dunnite, enabling its adoption in components and high-velocity penetrators where accidental detonation must be minimized. This legacy underscores Dunnite's role in advancing munitions that prioritize safety without sacrificing energetic output. Today, Dunnite sees no active industrial or production, having been phased out due to its obsolescence and environmental concerns associated with residues. It remains relevant in forensic explosive analysis, where trace residues from historical detonations are identified in and samples using techniques like reversed-phase to link evidence to legacy ordnance. Such analyses aid investigations of unexploded munitions at former sites. In academic research, Dunnite and related picrate salts continue to inform studies on high-nitrogen energetic materials, particularly for synthesizing , nitrogen-rich compounds with tunable sensitivity and stability. These investigations explore derivatives as precursors for eco-friendlier explosives, leveraging their aromatic nitro structures to model behaviors in computational simulations. Dunnite is now available solely from demilitarized stockpiles undergoing disposal or in museum collections of historical ordnance. Efforts by facilities like Crane Army Ammunition Activity focus on environmentally safe demilitarization of remaining Yellow D-filled projectiles to prevent contamination. Samples preserved for educational purposes highlight its pivotal role in early 20th-century ballistics.

Environmental Impact

In 2008, caches of unexploded Dunnite, mistaken for rusty rocks, were discovered on a beach in , , within the province of , ; these originated from historical military disposal practices dating back to early 20th-century exercises and posed risks of soil and water contamination due to the material's potential leaching into local ecosystems. Picrate ions from Dunnite exhibit high persistence in the environment, showing no significant biological or photochemical degradation, which leads to long-term accumulation and potential groundwater pollution. These ions are highly soluble in water (over 10 g/L) and mobile in soil, facilitating their transport and increasing contamination risks; they are acutely toxic to aquatic organisms, including rainbow trout and American oysters. Remediation of Dunnite-contaminated sites presents challenges due to the compound's high , necessitating specialized neutralization techniques such as excavation, offsite disposal, or with adapted bacteria; for instance, at the former , approximately 90,000 pounds of ammonium picrate residue were removed from evaporation ponds through such methods. Military site cleanups involving explosives like Dunnite require substantial resources to address migration risks to surrounding ecological areas, including salt marshes. Historical disposals of World War I-era munitions, including those containing Dunnite, involved widespread naval dumping at sea, contributing to pollution as corrosion allows leaching of persistent explosives into ocean environments. In response, regulatory bodies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classify ammonium picrate as a (P009) and monitor picrate residues under guidelines for explosive at closing, transferring, or transferred ranges, including ordnance and explosives response actions to mitigate environmental releases.

References

  1. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ammonium-Picrate
  2. http://uxoinfo.com/blogcfc/client/index.cfm/2009/6/9/UXO-101-Ammonium-Picrate-Explosive-D
  3. https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/master/pnp/habshaer/hi/hi0900/hi0903/data/hi0903data.pdf
  4. https://www.nytimes.com/1907/08/18/archives/dunnite-smashes-strongest-armor-an-explosive-invented-which-can.html
  5. https://www.firstworldwar.com/atoz/dunnite.htm
  6. https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/master/pnp/habshaer/ca/ca2400/ca2436/data/ca2436data.pdf
  7. https://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.8259.html
  8. https://patents.google.com/patent/US2088636A/en
  9. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Picric-Acid
  10. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/895417
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11643457/
  12. https://www.ias.ac.in/public/Volumes/reso/024/11/1253-1271.pdf
  13. https://www.science.gov/topicpages/t/tatb%2Bbased%2Bexplosives
  14. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/8577
  15. https://www.nj.gov/health/eoh/rtkweb/documents/fs/0112.pdf
  16. https://chemicalsafety.ilo.org/dyn/icsc/showcard.display?p_card_id=1631
  17. https://www.inchem.org/documents/icsc/icsc/eics1631.htm
  18. https://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/5403
  19. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-03/documents/9546041.pdf
  20. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD0643597.pdf
  21. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0274026.pdf
  22. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50446/50446-h/50446-h.htm
  23. https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/master/pnp/habshaer/pa/pa1400/pa1439/data/pa1439data.pdf
  24. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/Gun_Data_p2.php
  25. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA175865.pdf
  26. https://www.iabti.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/USNA__ChemDept_Explosives.pdf
  27. https://scitoys.com/insensitive.html
  28. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1914/july/development-our-navys-smokeless-powder
  29. https://prepchem.com/synthesis-of-ammonium-picrate/
  30. https://www.sciencemadness.org/smwiki/index.php/Picric_acid
  31. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1920/october/american-production-military-high-explosives-and-their-raw
  32. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/little-rock-picric-acid-plant-7572/
  33. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA084799.pdf
  34. https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Missions/Projects-Topics/Former-New-York-Ordnance-Works-NYOW/
  35. https://www.wgpfoundation.org/historic-markers/world-war-ii-4/
  36. https://www.history.navy.mil/content/dam/nhhc/research/library/online-reading-room/technology/evolutionofnavalweapons/The%20Evolution%20of%20Naval%20Weapons.pdf
  37. http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-017.php
  38. https://ia902902.us.archive.org/18/items/historyofmanufac00will/historyofmanufac00will.pdf
  39. https://medcoeckapwstorprd01.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/pfw-images/borden/occ-health/OHch9.pdf
  40. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc666104/m2/1/high_res_d/231282.pdf
  41. https://haz-map.com/Agents/1490
  42. https://echa.europa.eu/substance-information/-/substanceinfo/100.004.582
  43. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-172/subpart-B
  44. https://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/106
  45. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA583083.pdf
  46. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0764340.pdf
  47. https://www.dnfsb.gov/sites/default/files/document/9281/TECH-24_0.pdf
  48. https://www.army.mil/article/227875/crane_army_destroys_dangerous_munitions_while_protecting_environment
  49. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1312&context=usarmyresearch
  50. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022286019305721
  51. https://munirem.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/NASEM-Alternatives-Full-Report-25140.pdf
  52. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/beachcombing-labrador-family-carries-home-wartime-explosive-1.757030
  53. https://iu.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/1859/2024/06/Rankin_et_al_Ch6_MilitaryLegaciesIndigeneousHeritageCanadaParkReserve.pdf
  54. https://www.navfac.navy.mil/Divisions/Environmental/Products-and-Services/Environmental-Restoration/Southwest/Seal-Beach-NWS/Site-Descriptions/
  55. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014111362030862X
  56. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/75983/9781000917994.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  57. https://19january2021snapshot.epa.gov/sites/static/files/documents/ifuxoctthandbook.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.