Premium
Rocket Propellants with Reduced Smoke and High Burning Rates
Author(s) -
Menke Klaus,
Eisele Siegfried
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.56
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1521-4087
pISSN - 0721-3115
DOI - 10.1002/prep.19970220304
Subject(s) - propellant , materials science , specific impulse , rocket (weapon) , solid fuel rocket , composite material , rocket propellant , energetic material , aerospace engineering , plasticizer , chemistry , explosive material , engineering , organic chemistry
Rocket propellants with reduced smoke and high burning rates recommend themselves for use in a rocket motor for high accelerating tactical missiles. They serve for an improved camouflage on the battle field and may enable guidance control due to the higher transmission of their rocket plume compared to traditional aluminized composite propellants. In this contribution the material based ranges of performance and properties of three non aluminized rocket propellants will be introduced and compared to each other. The selected formulations based on AP/HTPB; AP/PU/TMETN and AP/HMX/GAP/TMETN have roughly the same specific impulse of I SP = 2430 Ns/kg at 70:1 expansion ratio. The burning rates in the pressure range from 10–18 MPa vary from to 26–33 mm/s for the AP/HTPB propellant, 52–68 mm/s for the formulation based on AP/PU/TMETN and 28–39 mm/s for the propellant based on AP/HMX/GAP. With 58% and 20% AP‐contents the propellants with nitrate ester plasticizers create a much smaller secondary signature than the AP/HTPB representative containing 86% AP. Their disadvantage, however, is the connection of high performance to a high level of energetic plasticizer. For this reason, the very fast burning propellant based on AP/PU/TMETN is endowed with a low elastic modulus and is limited to a grain configuration which isn't exposed too much to the fast and turbulent airstream. The mechanical properties of the AP/HMX/GAP‐propellant are as good or better as those of the AP/HTPB propellant. The first one exhibits the same performance and burn rates as the composite representative but produces only one fifth of HCl exhaust. For this reason it is recommended for missile applications, which must have high accelerating power together with a significantly reduced plume signature and smoke production.