Difference of Mixing and Cocrystallization of TNT and CL-20 Studied by Molecular Dynamics Simulation

Article Preview

Abstract:

For the purpose of studying the difference of mixing and cocrystallization of TNT(2,4,6-trinitrotoluene) and CL-20(2,4,6,8,10,12-hexanitrohexaazaisowurtzitane), molecular dynamics simulation(MD) was performed within Discover code. After the equilibrium of the system, the average bond length of trigger bond(Lave) is almost unchanged after mixing or cocrystallization. However, the largest bond length of trigger bond(Lmax) of CL-20 in cocrystal is shorter than that of it in pure CL-20, indicting the cocrystal is more difficult to be detonated than CL-20. The Lmax of TNT shows the same result. The cocrystal shows a larger cohesive energy density than composite ones, suggesting the cocrystal is more insensitive. Besides, trigger bond energy of cocrystal is larger than physical mixture of TNT and CL-20, suggesting the cocrystal is more insensitive. The mechanical properties show the cocrystal is more harder than pure TNT or CL-20, but has a weaker ductibility and tenacity.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

215-219

Citation:

Online since:

December 2014

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2015 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] Bolton O, Matzger AJ, Angew Chem Int Ed Engl, 2011, 50(38), 8960-8963.

Google Scholar

[2] Bolton O, Simke LR, Matzger AJ, Crystal Growth & Design, 2012, 12(9), 4311-4314.

Google Scholar

[3] Haobin Zhang, Changyan Guo, Xiaochuan Wang, Jinjiang Xu, Xuan He, Yu Liu, Xiaofeng Liu, Hui Huang, Jie Sun, Crystal Growth & Design, 2013, 2, 679-687.

Google Scholar

[4] Landenberger KB, Matzger AJ, Crystal Growth & Design, 2012, 12(7), 3603-3609.

Google Scholar

[5] Zongwei Yang, Hongzhen Li, Xiaoqing Zhou, Chaoyang Zhang, Hui Huang, Jinshan Li, Fude Nie, Crystal Growth & Design, 2012, 12(11), 5155-5158.

Google Scholar

[6] He Lin, Shunguan Zhu, Hongzhen Li, Xinhua Peng, Journal of Molecular Structure, 2013, 1048, 339-348.

Google Scholar

[7] H. Sun, J. Phys. Chem. B, 1998, 102, 7338-7364.

Google Scholar

[8] S.W. Bunte, H. Sun, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2000, 104, 2477-2489.

Google Scholar

[9] M.P. Allen, D.J. Tindesley, Computer Simulation of Liquids, Oxford University Press, NewYork, (1989).

Google Scholar

[10] Xiufang Ma, Feng Zhao, Guangfu Ji, Weihua Zhu, Jijun Xiao, Heming Xiao, Journal of Molecular Structure: THEOCHEM, 2008, 851(1-3), 22-29.

Google Scholar

[11] Jijun Xiao, Wenrui Wang, Jun Chen, Guangfu Ji, Wei Zhu, Heming Xiao, Computational and Theoretical Chemistry, 2012, 999: 21-27.

Google Scholar