2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.mencom.2022.09.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative ballistic efficiency of solid composite propellants: which plasticizer/polymer combination is the energetically preferred binder?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An important characteristic for the components of composite and double-base propellants is the enthalpy of formation [60,70,71]. Unlike NG, which has a negative enthalpy of formation, all of the new compounds exhibit a positive enthalpy of formation ranging between 1.01 and 2.31 kJ g −1 .…”
Section: Physical and Energy Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An important characteristic for the components of composite and double-base propellants is the enthalpy of formation [60,70,71]. Unlike NG, which has a negative enthalpy of formation, all of the new compounds exhibit a positive enthalpy of formation ranging between 1.01 and 2.31 kJ g −1 .…”
Section: Physical and Energy Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Binders created on the basis of a polymer and a plasticizer enriched with explosophoric groups [18] gave a significant increase in the specific impulse for metallized SCPs. Such components are even more in demand for propellants based on solid high-enthalpy high-density, but oxygen-poor fillers, C x H y N z O w , for which the oxygen coefficient, α = w/(2x + 0.5y), is significantly less than 1, as well as for propellants containing aluminum hydride [19] or boron-containing fuel [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%