michael walsh, marianne walsh, charles a. ramsey, sonia

34
QUANTIFYING ENERGETICS CONTAMINATION FOR LIVE - FIRE TRAINING ON MILITARY RANGES Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia Thiboutot, Guy Ampleman 21 May 2013 European Conference of Defence and the Environment

Upload: others

Post on 21-Dec-2021

5 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

QUANTIFYING ENERGETICS CONTAMINATION FOR LIVE - FIRE TRAINING ON MILITARY RANGES

Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey,

Sonia Thiboutot, Guy Ampleman

21 May 2013

European Conference of

Defence and the Environment

Page 2: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Introduction

• Training with live ammunition is critical to maintain the combat efficiency of armed forces.

• This requires the expenditure of energetic materials at the firing points and downrange in impact areas.

• All energetics are not consumed during detonation, leaving residues on the range.

• Range managers and those involved with range sustainability need solid information on the impacts of live fire training on the environment.

Page 3: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Presentation Outline • Problem definition

• An effective method of determining deposition rates

• Test procedures

– High-order detonations

– Low-order detonations

– Blow-in-place field disposal

– Close-proximity detonations

• Results of tests conducted

– Conventional munitions

– Insensitive munitions

• Summary

Page 4: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Problem Definition

• Munitions contain explosive compounds that are detrimental to the water quality within training ranges.

• These compounds, when occurring above established limits, will adversely affect the environment and human health.

• If these compounds occur at high enough concentrations in groundwater, range use may be suspended, restricted, or terminated, and very expensive remediation (> €1B) may be required.

• An effective, defensible method to determine the environmental loading of various activities pertaining to training with live ordnance is needed.

Page 5: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Energetic Components Present In Military Explosives

Formulation Uses Major Energetic Chemical Ingredients

Composition B Howitzer rounds, mortar and

tank cartridges

60% Military-grade RDX (Contains ≈ 10% HMX)

39% Military-grade TNT (Contains ≈ 1% other

TNT isomers and DNTs)

Composition C4 Demolition explosive 91% Military-grade RDX

TNT Howitzer rounds Military-grade TNT

Composition A4 40-mm grenades; fuzes Military-grade RDX

Tritonal Air Force bombs Military-grade TNT, aluminum

Octol Antitank rockets, AAA Military-grade HMX and TNT

PAX-21 (IM) Mortar & Grenade munitions RDX, DNAN, Ammonium Perchlorate (AP)

IMX-101 (IM) Howitzer rounds DNAN, NQ, NTO

IMX-104 (IM) Mortar cartridges NTO, DNAN, RDX

Page 6: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Energetic Components Present In Military Propellants

Formulation Uses Major Energetic Chemical Ingredients

Single-base Howitzers NC, DNT

Double-base Mortars, Small Arms, Small

(<100 mm) Rockets

NC, NG (DNT, AP added to some formulations)

Triple-base Larger howitzer rounds NC, NG, NQ

Rocket propellant Large rockets AP, aluminum

Some of these compounds also appear in explosives

Page 7: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Sources of Residues from Training with Explosives on Impact Ranges

• Corrosion of surface and subsurface UXO

• Rupture of UXO items by detonations

• Low-order (partial) detonations

• UXO blow-in-place operations (BIPs)

• High-order detonations

Page 8: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Challenges to Sampling • Access to impact ranges

• Separation of past events from current tests

• Placement of rounds (live-fire tests)

• Determination of detonation (high- vs. low-order)

• Determination of affected area (plume)

• Obtaining a reproducible sample

• Presence of unexploded ordnance (UXO)

Page 9: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

An Elegant Solution: Sampling on Snow-covered Ice

• Separated from previous activities (including UXO)

• Easy to set up tests

• Easy determination of plume on snow surface

• Easy to collect samples

• No dilution from soils: Good for low mass / concentrations

• Processing and analysis straightforward

Page 10: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia
Page 11: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Use MULTI – INCREMENT ® Sampling

• Collect samples with: – At least 40 increments

– We use ≈100 for research

• Sample increment locations: – ≈ Evenly distribute through the

sampling unit starting at a random location in the first cell

Path of travel

Increment collection points for two separate MI samples

Sampling

Unit

100-increment Sample Collection Pattern

MULTI INCREMENT ® is a registered trademark of EnviroStat, Inc.

Page 12: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Testing of Munitions High-order Detonations

• Live rounds fired onto

ice-covered impact area

– OR –

• Use of fuze simulator to

mimic explosive train

• Snow surface sampled

for residues

• 7 – 10 detonations

sampled per test

Page 13: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Testing of Munitions Low-order Detonations

• More difficult – Few,

random occurrences

• Impact points observed

• Soil surface sampled

for residues

– OR –

• Use fuze simulator to

mimic functional low-

order dets

Page 14: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Testing of Munitions BIP Detonations

• External donor charge

• Fuzed rounds

• Spaced det points

• Snow surface

sampled for residues

• Can vary donor

charge and orientation

Page 15: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Testing of Munitions Close-proximity Detonations

• Simulated a detonating

fired round (fuze sim.)

• Orientation / location of

“UXO” controlled

• Post detonation

characterization of

UXO

• Post-detonation

characterization of

residues

• Mass balance

UXO

UXO

Detonating

Round

Page 16: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results

Conventional Rounds – Comp B, TNT

Insensitive Munitions – PAX-21, IMX-104

Page 17: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results Conventional Rounds: High-Order Detonations

Weapon

System

Number

tested

Analyte

Plume

Area (m2)

Mass of

Analyte* (mg)

Residue per

Round**

Mortars

60-mm 7 RDX/HMX 214 0.073 3.2E-05 %

81-mm 14 RDX/HMX 230 8.5 1.4E-03 %

120-mm 8 RDX/HMX 450 19 1.1E-03 %

Howitzers

105-mm 13 RDX/HMX 530 0.095 7.3E-06 %

155-mm 7 RDX/HMX 757 0.30 7.1E-06 %

7 TNT 938 BDL —

Rockets

203-mm 6 RDX — BDL —

* Mass of analyte per round estimated in plume

** As a percentage of the original mass of the analyte in the round

Page 18: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results Conventional Rounds: Low-Order Detonations

Weapon

System

Site

Analyte

Plume

Area (m2)

Mass of

Analyte*

(mg)

Residue per

Round**

Mortars

120-mm 1 RDX/HMX 250 130,000 4.4 %

2 RDX/HMX 150 450,000 15 %

3 RDX/HMX 380 650,000 22 % * Mass of analyte per round estimated in plume (Collected chunks + analysis)

** As a percentage of the original mass of the analyte in the round

One low-order detonation = 1,000 high-order dets

Page 19: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results Conventional Rounds: Blow-In-Place Detonations

Weapon

System

Number

tested

Analyte

Plume

Area (m2)

Mass of

Analyte* (mg)

Residue per

Round**

Mortars

60-mm 7 RDX/HMX 500 200 2.7E-02 %

81-mm 7 RDX/HMX 820 150 1.4E-02 %

120-mm 7 RDX/HMX 1500 25 1.1E-03 %

Howitzers

105-mm 7 RDX/HMX 860 50 2.8E-03 %

155-mm 7 RDX/HMX 1600 16 3.2E-06 %

7 TNT 2000 15 8.9E-05 %

Demolitions

C4 Block 13 RDX 138 5.9 1.1E-03 %

* Mass of analyte per round estimated in plume

** As a percentage of the original mass of the analyte in the round + donor block

Page 20: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results Conventional Rounds: Close-Proximity Detonations

Weapon

System

Damage Descriptor*

Number of

Rounds

Distance from

Detonating

Round

Mortars

81-mm Intact: Surface damage 4 0.5 – 0.8 m

Pierced to HE filler 9 0.5 – 1.2 m

Low-order / Partial detonation 7 0.3 – 0.6 m

High-order detonation 1 0.5 m

Not recovered** 2 0.3 – 0.5 m * Visual assessment of damage to recovered “UXO”

** Round was ejected from the test area

Page 21: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Low Order Detonations

Pierced

Round

Partial

Detonations

UXO Damage from Close-Proximity Detonations

Page 22: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results Conventional Rounds: Close-Proximity Detonations

Round

Distance

From

Detonation

Damage

Assessment*

Pieces

Recovered

Mass of HE

Recovered**

Deposition

Area (m2)

% Analyte

Recovered

4b 0.3 m Partial det 839 220 g 600 20%***

8a 0.5 m Low-order det 12 26 g — 1.1%

8b 0.5 m Pierced body 20 22 g 2 1.8%

9a 0.5 m Partial det 11 12 g — 1.0%

10a 0.5 m Low-order det 16 60 g 140 5.5%

* Visual assessment of damage to recovered “UXO”

** Mass recovered external to and intact munition

*** Percent of original mass of analyte in HE filler

Page 23: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Test Results: Conventional Munitions

Summary

• High-order detonations will leave very little

residues: 10-3 to 10-6 % of original HE load

• Blow-in-place will leave slightly higher levels

of residues: 10-2 to 10-6 % of original HE load

• Low order detonations will leave high levels

of HE over a large area

• Close-proximity detonation outcomes varied

but most UXO compromised

Page 24: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Insensitive Munitions Tests

• 60-mm Mortar Rounds

– PAX-21 IHE filler

– IMX-104 IHE filler

• 81-mm Mortar Rounds

– IMX-104 IHE filler

• Series of four tests

– High-order

– Low-order

– BIP: C4 Donor block

– BIP: Shaped charge

Page 25: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

IM Tests

• High-order and BIP w/

C4 donor block

– Snow-covered ice

– Residues deposition

• Low-order and BIP

w/EFP or shaped

charge

– Cleared ice pad

– Particles & chunks

• BIPs fuzed

• HO & LO used fuze

simulators

Page 26: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: PAX-21

Low-order Detonations

• 33 – 34 g per detonation

• 12% of IHE

EFP BIPS

• 21 – 70 g per detonation

• 15% of IHE

High-order Detonations Donor Chg. BIP Detonations

Mass (g) Efficiency* Mass (g) Efficiency*

Organic Compounds

RDX 0.009 99.99% 0.87 99.9%

DNAN 0.007 99.99% 0.74 99.4%

Inorganic Compound

AP 14 85% 35 62%

1

10

100

1000

10000

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Cumula

venumberpar

cles

Mass(g)

PAX21LO4

PAX21LO1

PAX21LO8

PAX21LO6

PAX21LO2&3

TNTLO

CompBLO

Donor Charge BIPs

*Percent of compound consumed during detonation

Page 27: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: PAX-21

• Photomicroscopy

– Characterization of AP

– AP Particles ≈400μm

• Raman spectroscopy

– Developed method for

perchlorate (935 nm)

– Confirmed AP crystals

935 nm

Courtesy David Ringelberg, CRREL

Page 28: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: PAX-21

• Dissolution Testing

- 98%+ of detected AP in

melted samples (0°C

water)

- Rapid dissolution of AP

from post-detonation

particles

- Leaves weakened RDX

/DNAN matrix

1 mL Water -

Drip Dissolution

Test

AP

Courtesy of Dr. Susan Taylor, CRREL / Dartmouth

Size ≈ 2 x 3 mm

Dartmouth µCT Scan

Voids

Page 29: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: PAX-21

• Organic Energetics

– Slightly higher deposition rates

– Consistent with hypothesis

• Perchlorates

– Very high deposition rates

– Loosely tied to organic deposition rates

– Severe implications for range sustainability

• Drinking water limits very low (≈2 ppb)

• 98% of mass recovered in aqueous portion of sample at

0.1°C

• High-orders: 3 – 13 million L of water contaminated per round

• BIPs: 10 to 27 million L of water contaminated per round

Page 30: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: IMX-104

Compound

High-order Detonations Donor Chg. BIP Detonations

Mass (g) Efficiency* Mass (g) Efficiency*

60-mm Mortar Rounds

RDX 0.005 99.99% 4.3 99.3%

DNAN 0.005 99.99% 10 90%

NTO 2.2 98.8% 15 74%

81-mm Mortar Rounds

RDX 0.016 99.99% 20 97%

DNAN 0.027 99.99% 45 83%

NTO 1.9 99.6% 233 45%

*Percent of original compound consumed during detonation

Page 31: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: IMX-104

• Photomicroscopy

– NTO Particles ≈400μm

– Very irregular shapes

• Dissolution Testing

– 99%+ of NTO in the

melted samples

– Rapid dissolution of NTO

from post-detonation

particles

– Leaves weakened

RDX/DNAN matrix Courtesy Dr. Susan Taylor, CRREL / Dartmouth

NTO

8 mL Water -

Drip Dissolution

Test

Dartmouth µCT Scan

Dissolution

Voids

Size ≈ 2 x 3 mm

Page 32: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Results: IMX-104

• RDX / HMX / DNAN

– Slightly higher deposition rates

– Consistent with hypothesis

• NTO

– Very high deposition rates

– Correlates with but much higher than other compounds

– Implications for range sustainability?

• High solubility in water

• 99% of mass recovered in aqueous portion of sample

• Toxicology tests not complete

• Do we take the chance?

Page 33: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Research Products • Developed method to obtain per-round post-

detonation energetic residue mass

• Developed method to detonate munitions

high order without firing or external charges

• Conducted first close-proximity detonation

tests to assess UXO damage

• Able to simulate LO detonations

• Built detonation efficiency / residues table for

detonation and BIP of common munitions

• Field data will enable range managers to

assess impacts of training with live

munitions

• Data is proving critical to weapons designers

Page 34: Michael Walsh, Marianne Walsh, Charles A. Ramsey, Sonia

Kiitos!

Kysymyksiä?