Search Menu
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Search Scholarly Publications

Title: ABL and BAM Friction Analysis Comparison

Abstract

Abstract The Integrated Data Collection Analysis (IDCA) program has conducted a proficiency study for Small‐Scale Safety and Thermal (SSST) testing of homemade explosives (HMEs). Described here is a comparison of the Alleghany Ballistic Laboratory (ABL) friction data and Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und ‐prüfung (BAM) friction data for 19 HME and military standard explosives. Two methods were employed to reduce the data – modified Bruceton analysis (F 50 ) and the threshold initiation level analysis (TIL). The study provides a full list of friction sensitivity data for the 19 materials by both ABL and BAM friction testing equipment. Specific results highlight the differences more than the similarities of the two methods. PETN and KClO 3 /sugar mixtures exhibit the most sensitivity of the materials studied by both testing methods. On the other hand, H 2 O 2 /fuel mixtures exhibit no sensitivity in ABL testing, but exhibit some sensitivity in BAM testing. For the UNi mixtures, the behavior was the opposite, no sensitivity in BAM but some sensitivity in ABL. KClO 4 /Al mixtures exhibit high sensitivity in the ABL method, but only moderate sensitivity in the BAM method. Other differences are seen in the relative sensitivities underscoring the differences inmore » the mechanisms of how each test method operates. In some cases, data could not be attained because of the physical nature of the material. Comparison between the two friction methods on a material‐by‐material basis using absolute values not surprisingly yielded essentially no systematic correlations. Even the relative order showed little correlation between the two methods. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funded this effort. Each participating testing laboratory uses identical test materials and preparation methods. However, the test procedures differ among the laboratories. The testing performers involved are Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology (NSWC IHEODTD), Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL/RXQL).« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
OSTI Identifier:
1266686
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1401368
Report Number(s):
LLNL-JRNL-654961
Journal ID: ISSN 0721-3115
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC52-07NA27344; DE‐AC52‐06NA25396; DE‐AC52‐07NA27344; HSHQDC10X00414. LLNL‐JRNL‐654961 (775550)
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 40; Journal Issue: 4; Journal ID: ISSN 0721-3115
Publisher:
Wiley
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY; small-scale safety testing; proficiency test; friction; round-robin test; safety test protocols; HME; ABL friction; BAM friction

Citation Formats

Warner, Kirstin F., Sandstrom, Mary M., Brown, Geoffrey W., Remmers, Daniel L., Phillips, Jason J., Shelley, Timothy J., Reyes, Jose A., Hsu, Peter C., and Reynolds, John G. ABL and BAM Friction Analysis Comparison. United States: N. p., 2014. Web. doi:10.1002/prep.201400196.
Copy to clipboard
Warner, Kirstin F., Sandstrom, Mary M., Brown, Geoffrey W., Remmers, Daniel L., Phillips, Jason J., Shelley, Timothy J., Reyes, Jose A., Hsu, Peter C., & Reynolds, John G. ABL and BAM Friction Analysis Comparison. United States. https://doi.org/10.1002/prep.201400196
Copy to clipboard
Warner, Kirstin F., Sandstrom, Mary M., Brown, Geoffrey W., Remmers, Daniel L., Phillips, Jason J., Shelley, Timothy J., Reyes, Jose A., Hsu, Peter C., and Reynolds, John G. Mon . "ABL and BAM Friction Analysis Comparison". United States. https://doi.org/10.1002/prep.201400196. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1266686.
Copy to clipboard
@article{osti_1266686,
title = {ABL and BAM Friction Analysis Comparison},
author = {Warner, Kirstin F. and Sandstrom, Mary M. and Brown, Geoffrey W. and Remmers, Daniel L. and Phillips, Jason J. and Shelley, Timothy J. and Reyes, Jose A. and Hsu, Peter C. and Reynolds, John G.},
abstractNote = {Abstract The Integrated Data Collection Analysis (IDCA) program has conducted a proficiency study for Small‐Scale Safety and Thermal (SSST) testing of homemade explosives (HMEs). Described here is a comparison of the Alleghany Ballistic Laboratory (ABL) friction data and Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und ‐prüfung (BAM) friction data for 19 HME and military standard explosives. Two methods were employed to reduce the data – modified Bruceton analysis (F 50 ) and the threshold initiation level analysis (TIL). The study provides a full list of friction sensitivity data for the 19 materials by both ABL and BAM friction testing equipment. Specific results highlight the differences more than the similarities of the two methods. PETN and KClO 3 /sugar mixtures exhibit the most sensitivity of the materials studied by both testing methods. On the other hand, H 2 O 2 /fuel mixtures exhibit no sensitivity in ABL testing, but exhibit some sensitivity in BAM testing. For the UNi mixtures, the behavior was the opposite, no sensitivity in BAM but some sensitivity in ABL. KClO 4 /Al mixtures exhibit high sensitivity in the ABL method, but only moderate sensitivity in the BAM method. Other differences are seen in the relative sensitivities underscoring the differences in the mechanisms of how each test method operates. In some cases, data could not be attained because of the physical nature of the material. Comparison between the two friction methods on a material‐by‐material basis using absolute values not surprisingly yielded essentially no systematic correlations. Even the relative order showed little correlation between the two methods. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funded this effort. Each participating testing laboratory uses identical test materials and preparation methods. However, the test procedures differ among the laboratories. The testing performers involved are Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology (NSWC IHEODTD), Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL/RXQL).},
doi = {10.1002/prep.201400196},
journal = {Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics},
number = 4,
volume = 40,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Dec 29 00:00:00 EST 2014},
month = {Mon Dec 29 00:00:00 EST 2014}
}
Copy to clipboard
Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record
https://doi.org/10.1002/prep.201400196
Copyright Statement
Other availability
Search WorldCat Search WorldCat to find libraries that may hold this journal
Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 7 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science
Save / Share:
Export Metadata
Save to My Library
You must Sign In or Create an Account in order to save documents to your library.

Works referenced in this record:

Initiation of Explosions by Grit Particles
journal, October 1948

  • Bowden, F. P.; Gurton, O. A.
  • Nature, Vol. 162, Issue 4121
  • DOI: 10.1038/162654a0

An experimental comparison of three documented test methods for the evaluation of friction sensitiveness
journal, March 1993

The Relationship between BAM Friction and Rotary Friction sensitiveness data for high explosives
journal, April 1997

A Method for Obtaining and Analyzing Sensitivity Data
journal, March 1948

    Sort by:
    [ × clear filter / sort ]

    Similar Records in DOE PAGES and OSTI.GOV collections: