My 2 cents I'm not sure I agree with the conclusions. I think that super
hot AP fire melted everything into pools (what asphalt tarmack is
completely flat?) as the pools cooled toward the end of the fire (which
would have cooled fast as well) the AP crystallized causing the needed
pressure for detonation. Smaller pools first as they cooled faster than
the bigger pool.
But hey the end result was "not good"
I think the reason all that AP got backed up at Pepcon was the space
program. That AP was destined for solid rocket boosters for the shuttle
right?
IIRC they where slowing shuttle launches at the time?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [AR] Re: PEPCON AP explosion report
From: rclague@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, July 21, 2015 8:46 am
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Propellants deflagrate. Warheads detonate. Propellant detonations are called
fatal accidents.
-R
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "John Dom" <johndom@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:40:13
To: <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: PEPCON AP explosion report
Fairbrother wrote on 210715:
flame would spread, at 700 psi - not that it would auto-decompose.But 700 psi or 43 bars to have NH4ClO4 auto-decompose like a monoprop?Can't speak for Anthony, but he said it would act as a monoprop, ie
Matter of definition. The best way I can describe what a monoprop is, is
that it works because it relatively slowly auto-decomposes or catalytically
decomposes into gaseous products which next offer propulsion. H2O2 and N2H4
come to mind.
Detonating materials are considered propellants for guns maybe, not
monopropellants.
jd
