MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132570398 · doi:10.1002/prep.200400096

Characterization of ADN and ADN‐Based Propellants

2005· article· en· W2132570398 on OpenAlexafffund
David Jones, Q. S. M. Kwok, Marie Vachon, Christopher M. Badeen, W. I. Ridley

Bibliographic record

VenuePropellants Explosives Pyrotechnics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsPropellantIsothermal processCalorimeter (particle physics)Thermal decompositionMelting pointDecompositionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryThermal stabilityKeroseneMaterials scienceChromatographyThermodynamicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ammonium dinitramide (ADN), NH4N(NO2)2 is being considered as one of the potential new energetic oxidizers for composite propellants. In this study, ADN crystals, prills and two ADN‐based propellants having different relative amounts of ingredients were characterized. The concentration of the crystals and the prills samples was determined using ion chromatography. The thermal behavior of the crystals, prills and propellants was studied using DSC, simultaneous TG‐DTA‐FTIR‐MS, ARC (accelerating rate calorimeter), HFC (heat flux calorimeter) and INC (isothermal nanocalorimeter). Decomposition of ADN was observed from all of the samples at temperatures above the melting point of ADN (~ 92 °C). Formation of N2O, NO2, H2O, CO2, CO, N2 and NO was detected during the ADN decomposition. The thermal stability of the ADN samples at temperatures below the melting point of ADN was studied. Early solid decomposition of ADN, which generates N2O and H2O, was observed at 60 °C. Electrostatic discharge (ESD) and impact sensitivity of the ADN samples were determined. The crystals and prills are sensitive to impact, while the two propellants are relatively less ESD and impact sensitive.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePropellants Explosives PyrotechnicsSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207