Hubbry Logo
Phlegmatized explosivePhlegmatized explosiveMain
Open search
Phlegmatized explosive
Community hub
Phlegmatized explosive
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Phlegmatized explosive
Phlegmatized explosive
from Wikipedia
Prills of paraffin wax: a versatile, inexpensive, and popular phlegmatizing agent used in the high explosive fillings of various munitions

A phlegmatized explosive is an explosive that has had an agent (a phlegmatizer) added to stabilize or desensitize it. Phlegmatizing usually improves the handling properties of an explosive (e.g., when munitions are filled in factories.)

Trinitrotoluene can itself be used to phlegmatize more sensitive explosives such as RDX (to form Cyclotol), HMX (to form Octol), or PETN (to form Pentolite). Other typical phlegmatizing agents include paraffin wax (5% used in OKFOL and Composition H6), paper, or even water (used in water gel explosives). Such agents are nearly always flammable themselves (therefore adding fuel to the blast) or will at least boil off easily. Typically, a small amount of phlegmatizing agent is used, such as Composition B, which has 1% paraffin wax added, or the Russian RGO hand grenade which contains 90 grams of "A-IX-1" explosive, comprising 96% RDX and 4% paraffin wax by weight. Another example of use is the VS-50 antipersonnel mine, which contains an explosive filling of 43 grams of RDX, again phlegmatized by combining it with 10% paraffin wax by weight.

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
A phlegmatized explosive is an substance or mixture to which a phlegmatizer—a desensitizing agent—has been added to reduce its sensitivity to external stimuli such as , shock, impact, percussion, or , thereby enhancing its for handling, storage, and transportation without substantially diminishing its explosive performance. This process, known as phlegmatization, is commonly applied to high-sensitivity explosives to prevent accidental initiation and is defined in international regulations as incorporating a substance that renders the material less reactive to such hazards. Phlegmatizers are typically inert or low-reactivity materials, including (such as polyethylene wax), polymers, , or solvents like and alcohol, which coat or dissolve into the explosive crystals to buffer mechanical or thermal stresses. For instance, fine particles of (cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine) are often phlegmatized by coating with a thin layer of wax dissolved in acetone, which precipitates onto the crystals to improve stability while maintaining . Similarly, PETN (), a highly sensitive , is routinely desensitized by wetting with not less than 25% or alcohol by mass, or with not less than 15% phlegmatizer such as by mass, to classify it under less hazardous transport divisions. In regulatory contexts, such as the Model Regulations on the Transport of , phlegmatized explosives fall under desensitized explosives when the treatment suppresses their properties to the point where they no longer meet full classification criteria, allowing safer shipment and use in applications like military ordnance, , and . This approach balances the high energy output of primary explosives with practical safety measures, reducing risks associated with their inherent volatility.

Definition and Fundamentals

Definition

A phlegmatized explosive is defined as an material to which a phlegmatizer—a substance added to enhance —has been incorporated, typically through mixing or , rendering it less sensitive to stimuli such as heat, shock, impact, percussion, or friction while maintaining its capacity for . This process applies primarily to high explosives, allowing them to retain their inherent power output and chemical reactivity under controlled initiation conditions. The terminology "phlegmatized" derives from "phlegmatic," a term rooted in ancient humoral theory describing a calm, unexcitable disposition associated with an excess of , thereby evoking the idea of tempering the volatile nature of the explosive. In this context, the phlegmatizer acts as a stabilizing agent without fundamentally changing the explosive's core properties. Phlegmatized explosives differ from diluted formulations, such as (ammonium nitrate-fuel oil), where a large proportion of inert or combustible diluents is added, often reducing both sensitivity and overall by altering the mixture's composition. In contrast, phlegmatization targets precise desensitization to improve handling safety while preserving the base explosive's performance and minimal impact on its stoichiometric balance. This approach enhances operational security in applications requiring reliable explosive efficacy.

Mechanism of Phlegmatization

Phlegmatization desensitizes primarily through physical mechanisms where inert phlegmatizers form a uniform coating or matrix around individual explosive crystals or particles. This coating serves as a barrier that absorbs, dissipates, and redistributes from impacts, , or shock waves, preventing the concentration of energy into localized hot spots that could trigger . By isolating the particles, the phlegmatizer interrupts the efficient of shock waves across the explosive mass, requiring a higher input energy to achieve the critical conditions for . Chemically, phlegmatizers are inert substances that do not react with or participate in the explosive's or processes. Their role is to dampen energy by promoting viscoelastic deformation, which converts mechanical stress into harmless or deformation rather than reactive buildup. This inert encapsulation stabilizes the against accidental stimuli while preserving its energetic potential for controlled use. The effectiveness of phlegmatization depends on several key factors, including the reduction of explosive particle size to enhance surface area for , uniform distribution of the phlegmatizer to avoid unprotected regions, and strong to maintain under mechanical stress. These elements ensure comprehensive coverage and energy dissipation. Qualitatively, this can significantly raise the impact sensitivity threshold in phlegmatized explosives like PETN, illustrating the desensitization without altering core reactivity.

History

Origins of the Concept

The concept of phlegmatization originated in the mid-19th century amid efforts to mitigate the extreme sensitivity of , a liquid explosive discovered in 1847 by Italian chemist and initially deemed too hazardous for practical use. 's volatility led to numerous industrial accidents, including a devastating 1864 explosion at Alfred Nobel's factory that killed five workers, among them Nobel's younger brother Emil, prompting regulatory bans on its manufacture within city limits and intensifying the search for stabilization methods. In response, Swedish chemist and engineer developed in 1866, patenting it in 1867 as a safer alternative; this involved absorbing up to 75% into kieselguhr (), an inert porous material that desensitized the compound to shock and friction while preserving its detonative force. This formulation not only enabled safer transportation and handling for and but also represented the foundational principle of phlegmatization—diluting an explosive's reactivity through admixture with non-reactive agents—though the specific terminology had yet to emerge. Nobel's innovation stemmed directly from the industrial accidents plaguing production since the , transforming a notoriously unstable substance into a viable commercial product. The term "phlegmatizer," evoking the ancient humoral concept of as a calming influence, first appeared in during the early , coinciding with advances in high-explosive synthesis. An early documented application occurred in a 1925 German patent describing a process to phlegmatize lead azide, a sensitive primary explosive used in detonators, by incorporating 5-14% fatty substances such as paraffin or oils; this reduced shock sensitivity and improved moisture resistance without diminishing ignition efficacy. Such methods extended desensitization principles to military and industrial primaries, building on Nobel's earlier work with nitro-based compounds. Pre-20th-century precursors to phlegmatization existed in the handling of low explosives like black powder, formulated in 9th-century from saltpeter, , and to achieve controlled rather than violent . By the 15th and 16th centuries, European powder makers granulated black powder into uniform grains to moderate its , preventing excessive pressure buildup in early firearms and enhancing safety during storage and use; these techniques, while not termed phlegmatization, demonstrated rudimentary desensitization for propellants.

Key Developments and Adoption

During , the adopted phlegmatized compositions for broader explosive fills, notably in , a mixture of 59.5% , 39.4% TNT, and 1.1% developed in 1941 by British and American teams to enhance castability and insensitivity while maintaining high performance in bombs and shells. Post-war, the evolution of phlegmatized explosives accelerated with the integration into plastic-bonded explosives (PBX) during the 1950s and 1960s, driven by demands for stable, transportable warheads in nuclear and conventional arsenals. PBX formulations, embedding high explosives like or in polymer matrices, were first developed in 1947 at U.S. facilities but gained widespread adoption by the 1960s for their superior mechanical properties and reduced sensitivity. Key early patents from the 1930s and 1940s, such as those describing wax-coating techniques for -based mixtures like (/TNT blends), laid foundational methods for desensitization, enabling pressed or cast explosives with improved safety profiles. Organizations like played a pivotal role in post-WWII standardization, testing and refining phlegmatized formulations for U.S. military use, including variants of and early PBX, to ensure consistency in production and performance across munitions. By the , these technologies spread to civilian sectors, particularly , where phlegmatized emulsion explosives—water-in-oil mixtures sensitized with chemical agents—were commercialized for safer blasting operations, offering better water resistance and lower sensitivity than traditional dynamites.

Phlegmatizers

Types of Phlegmatizers

Phlegmatizers are categorized primarily by their physical state, which influences their application method and interaction with the base, as well as by factors such as in common solvents and stability to ensure compatibility during processing and storage. Solid phlegmatizers, typically used for protective coatings on explosive crystals, reducing sensitivity through physical barriers. Liquid phlegmatizers provide for impregnation. Solid phlegmatizers commonly include waxes and polymers that form protective coatings on explosive crystals, reducing sensitivity through physical barriers. , with a around 50-60°C, is widely used for its low cost and ease of application in coating nitramines like and . enhances binding in pressed formulations while maintaining stability. Polymers such as , often in wax form with of 100-110°C, provide superior resistance and are employed in high-temperature processing for nitramine-based explosives. Liquid phlegmatizers, such as oils, are absorbed into porous explosive matrices to dampen shock propagation, particularly in slurries or gels. , a synthetic with low-temperature flexibility down to -50°C, acts as a plasticizing agent in polymer-bound explosives like Composition C-4, where it constitutes about 5% of the formulation alongside . Other types encompass dry additives for surface desensitization and specialized plasticizers in bonded systems. and function as dry phlegmatizers by coating particles to mitigate mechanical stimuli, with graphite offering moderate effectiveness due to its lubricity. In polymer-bonded variants, plasticizers like complement binders to achieve desired without compromising explosive performance. These materials demonstrate compatibility with nitramine families, where waxes effectively coat crystals to enhance handling safety, as seen in formulations akin to .

Selection and Compatibility

The selection of phlegmatizers for explosives is primarily driven by the need to match the thermal stability of the additive to the temperature of the base explosive, ensuring no premature reactions occur during storage or handling. For instance, high-melting waxes with melting points of 103–110°C are chosen for their ability to withstand temperatures up to 150°C for extended periods without degrading the explosive's integrity. Cost-effectiveness and availability further influence choices, with synthetic substitutes like amides or copolymers preferred over traditional petroleum-based waxes for consistent supply and formulation flexibility in applications. Phlegmatizers must also minimize reductions in detonation velocity to preserve the explosive's performance, with desensitizing waxes and their substitutes typically incorporated at low levels to avoid significant energy loss while enhancing . Historical adoption of waxes, such as in early 20th-century formulations, underscores their role in balancing desensitization with reliable characteristics. Compatibility testing is essential to verify that the phlegmatizer does not react adversely with the base explosive, employing methods like (DSC) to detect exothermic reactions or shifts in onset temperatures. These tests help avoid catalytic effects, such as those observed in mixtures where additives accelerate , potentially increasing instability; for example, DSC analysis of or with polymers identifies incompatibilities if the onset temperature decreases by more than 5–10 . Vacuum stability tests complement DSC by measuring gas evolution at elevated temperatures (e.g., 120°C for 40 hours), confirming long-term chemical inertness with limits of approximately 1 mL/g. Key challenges in phlegmatization include achieving uniform distribution of the additive to prevent localized hotspots that could initiate unintended , particularly in porous or crystalline explosives where uneven coating leads to stress concentrations. For phlegmatizers, environmental poses additional risks, as high levels can alter sensitivity by promoting or , necessitating controlled processing conditions to maintain homogeneity. Optimization of phlegmatizer content focuses on maximizing desensitization while retaining efficacy, with higher loadings of wax substitutes (e.g., 10% in aluminized formulations like AFX-644) providing superior impact resistance through better crystal coating and void filling, though this may slightly reduce explosive power in blast tests. In high-sensitivity peroxides like TATP, phlegmatizers such as vacuum oil or activated charcoal at 40–60 wt% achieve impact sensitivities exceeding 30 J and thresholds over 360 N, passing UN stability criteria with minimal weight loss (<1.5% at 75°C for 48 hours).

Composition and Examples

Base Explosives Commonly Phlegmatized

Phlegmatized explosives commonly employ high-energy secondary explosives as base materials, particularly nitramines such as cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX) and cyclotetramethylenetetranitramine (HMX), due to their exceptional brisance and detonation performance. These compounds exhibit high power, with RDX achieving a sand crush test value of 60.2 g (129% relative to TNT) and HMX at 60.4 g (126% relative to TNT), making them ideal for applications requiring intense shock waves. However, their inherent sensitivity—RDX with an impact height of 32 cm and HMX at 60 cm in Bureau of Mines tests—necessitates phlegmatization to mitigate risks during handling, processing, and storage. The crystalline structures and melting points (RDX at 204°C, HMX at 285°C) of these nitramines facilitate effective coating with desensitizing agents like waxes or polymers, which coat the crystals to reduce friction and impact sensitivity without significantly compromising explosive yield. Nitrate esters, exemplified by pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN), are another primary base for phlegmatization, valued for their superior brisance (sand test 62.7 g, 131% relative to TNT) and velocity of detonation (up to 8400 m/s). PETN's high sensitivity, however, with an impact height of just 17 cm, renders it prone to accidental initiation, prompting routine desensitization through additives such as at least 7% wax or 15% phlegmatizer by mass to stabilize it for safe use in detonators and boosters. Its lower melting point (143°C) and orthorhombic crystal habit further support uniform phlegmatization via coating or binding, enhancing processability while preserving performance. In phlegmatized formulations, these base explosives typically constitute 80-95% of the mixture to maintain high energy output while the phlegmatizer (5-20%) provides the necessary desensitization. For instance, plastic-bonded explosives (PBXs) often feature 90% or HMX bound with polymeric desensitizers, reducing friction sensitivity from 100 N for pure HMX to over 360 N. Less commonly, primary explosives such as lead azide are phlegmatized, though their handling differs due to extreme sensitivity and small quantities used in initiators; dextrin incorporation prevents large crystal formation but is not standard for broader phlegmatization. serves as a base in emulsion explosives, where the water-in-oil emulsion structure inherently desensitizes it, improving safety over pure forms despite its lower brisance.

Specific Formulations and Examples

One prominent example of a phlegmatized explosive is , which consists of 59.5% , 39.5% TNT, and 1% wax as the phlegmatizer to reduce sensitivity while maintaining high performance. This formulation balances the high detonation velocity of RDX with the castability of TNT, with the wax serving to desensitize the mixture during handling and pouring. is widely employed in military munitions for its reliability and moderate sensitivity. Semtex represents another key category of phlegmatized plastic explosives, where variants such as Semtex 1H incorporate an RDX/PETN mix (e.g., 58% RDX and 28% PETN), bound with styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR) and a plasticizer such as dioctyl sebacate to enhance pliability and stability, while Semtex 1A is primarily PETN-based at 83%. The SBR acts as the primary binder and phlegmatizer, reducing friction and impact sensitivity, while the plasticizer improves molding properties; overall, the explosive content comprises 76-86% of the total weight in these formulations. Semtex 1A and 1H, in particular, are noted for their versatility in demolition and mining applications due to this desensitized composition. A high-performance military-grade example is PBX-9404, formulated with 94% HMX, 3% nitrocellulose binder, and 3% centralite (CEF) plasticizer, where the binder and plasticizer together phlegmatize the highly energetic HMX crystals. This composition achieves a high detonation velocity of approximately 8800 m/s at a density of 1.84 g/cm³, with the phlegmatizers ensuring processability via pressing or casting while mitigating accidental initiation risks. Preparation of phlegmatized explosives typically involves methods such as melt-casting, where the phlegmatizer and lower-melting components (e.g., TNT in ) are heated and mixed with the explosive crystals before cooling into molds, or slurry coating, in which phlegmatizers are applied to explosive particles in a liquid suspension for polymer-bound variants like PBX-9404. Phlegmatizer loadings generally range from 1-20% by weight, depending on the desired sensitivity reduction and mechanical properties, with lower percentages (1-5%) common in castable mixes and higher (up to 20%) in plastic-bonded types for enhanced flexibility. In modern research, particularly for counter-terrorism applications since the 2000s, phlegmatized variants of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) have been developed using vacuum oil as the desensitizing agent, mixed at ratios that increase the impact energy threshold above 2 J (e.g., via BAM Fallhammer test) while allowing safe handling and disposal by explosive ordnance disposal teams. This approach contrasts with traditional diesel oil phlegmatization, offering better penetration into TATP's porous structure for more uniform desensitization in improvised explosive scenarios.
FormulationExplosive Components (% by weight)Phlegmatizer/Binder (% by weight)Preparation MethodKey Application
Composition BRDX (59.5%), TNT (39.5%)Wax (1%)Melt-castingMilitary munitions
Semtex 1APETN (~83%)SBR (~4%), plasticizer (~13%)Mixing and extrusionDemolition and mining
Semtex 1HRDX (58%), PETN (28%)SBR (~7%), plasticizer (~7%)Mixing and extrusionDemolition and mining
PBX-9404HMX (94%)Nitrocellulose (3%), CEF (3%)Slurry coating or pressingHigh-performance military
Phlegmatized TATPTATP (variable, 80-95%)Vacuum oil (5-20%)Slurry mixingResearch/disposal in counter-terrorism

Properties and Performance

Sensitivity and Stability

Phlegmatized explosives demonstrate markedly reduced sensitivity to mechanical stimuli compared to their pure forms, primarily due to the buffering effect of the inert phlegmatizer, which dissipates energy and prevents hotspot formation. Impact sensitivity, assessed via the BAM fallhammer test, shows substantial desensitization; for instance, pure pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN) exhibits a sensitivity of 3–4 J, whereas phlegmatized PETN with 25–35% water content increases this threshold to approximately 20–25 J. Similarly, pure cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX) has an impact sensitivity around 7.5 J, which rises to over 30 J in polymer-bound RDX formulations. Friction sensitivity, measured by the BAM friction apparatus, follows a comparable trend, with phlegmatizers mitigating shear-induced initiation. Pure PETN registers about 50 N, reduced further in phlegmatized variants to values exceeding 80 N, while pure RDX at roughly 240 N shifts to over 360 N in desensitized compositions, often classifying them as friction-insensitive. These reductions enhance safe handling, as the phlegmatizer absorbs frictional energy without propagating reaction. The following table summarizes representative sensitivity data for pure and phlegmatized forms of common base explosives:
Base ExplosiveFormImpact Sensitivity (J, BAM Fallhammer)Friction Sensitivity (N, BAM Apparatus)
PETNPure3–450
PETNPhlegmatized (e.g., wetted, 25%)≥20>80
Pure~7.5~240
Phlegmatized (e.g., polymer-bound)>30>360
Data derived from standardized BAM testing protocols. Phlegmatization also bolsters thermal stability by encapsulating the energetic crystals, delaying decomposition onset and curtailing autocatalytic processes. Decomposition temperatures for pure nitramines like typically begin around 200–210°C, but phlegmatized variants, such as those bound with fluoroelastomers like Viton A, exhibit increases of about 5–10°C, enhancing resistance to spontaneous ignition under elevated temperatures. This stabilization arises from the phlegmatizer's role in suppressing initial exothermic reactions. Storage stability is prolonged in phlegmatized explosives, often achieving shelf lives exceeding 10 years under ambient conditions (e.g., 20–25°C, low humidity), with some formulations like polymer-bound (PBXN-80) maintaining integrity for 38–56 years based on vacuum stability testing. Aging effects, such as minor phlegmatizer migration or binder degradation, are minimal and do not significantly alter sensitivity or over time, provided storage adheres to controlled environments.

Detonation Characteristics

Phlegmatized explosives exhibit detonation velocities that are generally 5-10% lower than their pure counterparts due to the dilution of the energetic component by the inert phlegmatizer, which reduces the overall while slightly increasing material density. For instance, phlegmatized consisting of 94% and 6% wax achieves an experimental velocity of (VOD) of 8300 m/s, compared to approximately 8750 m/s for pure at similar densities. This reduction stems from the fundamental relationship in detonation theory, where the VOD can be approximated as VOD2EρVOD \approx \sqrt{\frac{2E}{\rho}}
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.