Prediction of Crystal Density and Explosive Performance of High-Energy-Density Molecules Using the Modified MSEP Scheme
Fast screening to identify a promising high‐energy‐density molecule (HEDM) is of significant importance in developing high‐performance explosives and propellants. Our molecular surface electrostatic potential (MSEP) method applies well to various physicochemical properties of organic and energetic m...
Saved in:
Published in | Bulletin of the Korean Chemical Society Vol. 37; no. 10; pp. 1683 - 1689 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Weinheim
Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
01.10.2016
Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA 대한화학회 |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1229-5949 0253-2964 1229-5949 |
DOI | 10.1002/bkcs.10928 |
Cover
Summary: | Fast screening to identify a promising high‐energy‐density molecule (HEDM) is of significant importance in developing high‐performance explosives and propellants. Our molecular surface electrostatic potential (MSEP) method applies well to various physicochemical properties of organic and energetic molecules. In order to apply our method in an efficient way, we utilize molecular structures optimized by semiempirical methods to develop a fast screening approach that is applicable to a large number of HEDM candidates. As a benchmarking test, solid densities, heats of formation, and explosive performances of HEDMs are calculated using the “modified MSEP scheme.” In validating this new scheme, the absolute average errors in crystal densities based on our new scheme are in a range 0.064–0.078 g/cc, which serves as input data in estimating the explosive performance using Cheetah or EXPLO5 package. The fast screening procedure based on our mMSEP (AM1) scheme provides somewhat worse results than the original MSEP scheme in various aspects of the explosive's performance. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | Table S1. Solid densities (g/cc) predicted by MSEP and mMSEP schemes along with experimental values. Table S2. Comparison of RMSD values when fitted by heavy atoms (in Å). Table S3. Classification of criteria based on molecule types. Table S4. Explosive performance calculated using Cheetah 2.0. Figure S1. Structures of 41 HEDMs studied in this work. Figure S2. A distribution plot of frequency vs. criteria of density prediction in five molecular types. ArticleID:BKCS10928 INHA University and Agency for Defense Development istex:F6D717F40FD259C11350F1746911B62DAE10188F ark:/67375/WNG-23N2GTVM-4 G704-000067.2016.37.10.002 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bkcs.10928/abstract |
ISSN: | 1229-5949 0253-2964 1229-5949 |
DOI: | 10.1002/bkcs.10928 |