English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) provides easy screening for thermal hazard evaluation. Here, we investigate the difference between using glass and stainless-steel vessels on the DSC measurement of exothermic decomposition energy (QDSC) for 41 chemical substances (containing nitro, halogen, peroxide, and sulfur groups, and hydrazine bonds). Two borosilicate glass vessels (capillary and ampule) and one stainless-steel vessel were used. All QDSC values obtained were investigated with reference to the permissible fluctuation range specified by the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) international Both glass vessels produced very similar QDSC values, despite different sample scales. The QDSC values obtained with the glass vessels were generally roughly within the variation tolerance range of the stainless-steel vessel. Notable exceptions were halogen- or sulfur-containing compounds; these exhibited smaller QDSC values with glass vessels in almost all cases. We will investigate whether certain structures in compounds react with stainless steel. The vessel material choice is crucial in evaluating the true reactivity of a substance.

Comparison between Glass and Stainless-Steel Vessels in Differential Scanning Calorimetry Estimation