Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Fatigue crack propagation behaviour of carboxyl-terminated polybutadiene solid rocket propellants

Abstract

The fatigue crack growth behavior of composite solid carboxyl-terminated polybutadiene (CTPB) base propellants from a two stage-rocket has been analyzed. Both motors presented similar compositional percentage of the different constituents but while the booster motor presented aluminum as fuel and fine oxidizer particles, the sustainer motor presented nitroguanidine as fuel and coarse rigid inorganic particles. The fracture characterization revealed that the critical energy release rate values obtained from the grains of the booster motor were higher than those computed from the sustainer motor. The fatigue crack growth behavior of the propellant grains under study was comparable to that shown in rubber and the fatigue crack growth curves obtained from the booster motor were below those from the sustainer motor. The micromechanism of failure in both motors was microvoid nucleation and growth till the formation of a macro-crack capable of subcritical advancement. In the grains from the booster motor, the nucleation and progression of damage occurred through the matrix with fracture surfaces plain and with no trace of oxidizer particles. Instead, in the propellant grains from the sustainer motor, the damage was generated in the particle–binder interface and the progression occurred along these interfaces leading to an abrupt fracture surface with discernible oxidizer particles. The mechanism of failure in the booster motor led to a better fatigue crack growth behavior and the irregular crack advancement in the sustainer motor implied a lower exponent of the crack growth rate to the energy release rate power law.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

References

  1. Abdelaziz MN, Neviere R, Pluvinage G (1988) Experimental investigation of fracture surface energy of a solid propellant under different loading rates. Eng Fract Mech 31:1009–1026. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(88)90212-3

  2. ASTME1820-15a (2015) Standard test method for measurement of fracture toughness

  3. Baron DT, Miller TC, Liu CT (1999) Subcritical crack growth in a composite solid propellant. J Reinf Plast Comp 18:233–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/073168449901800304

  4. Bencher C, Dauskardt R, Titchie R (1995) Microstructural damage and fracture processes in a composite solid rocket propellant. J Spacecr Rockets 32:328–334. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.26614

  5. Blackwell PO, Davis RT (1975) CTPB back-up propellant for SAM-D. Technical Report RK-CR-76-9, ADA023033, Defense Technical Information Center, pp 1–133

  6. Bills KW, Wiegand JH (1963) Relation of mechanical properties to solid rocket motor failure. AIAA J 1(9):2116–2123

  7. Chaille JL (1965) Development of a composite propellant. AD361714, Technical report by Redstone Arsenal Research Division, USA, pp 1–24

  8. Devereaux AS (1994) Assessment of solid propellant grain flaws through J-integral fracture predictions. In: Paper n\(^{\underline{{\rm o}}}\) AIAA 94-3288, proceedings of the 30th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference, June 27–29, Indianapolis, IN

  9. Francis EC, Carlton CH, Thomson RE (1974) Viscoelastic rocket grain fracture analysis. Int J Fract 10:167–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00113924

  10. Gent AN (2012) Engineering with rubber—how to design rubber components, 3rd edn. Hanser, Ohio

  11. Gledhill RA, Kinloch AJ (1979) A unique failure criterion for characterizing the fracture of propellants. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 4:73–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/prep.19790040404

  12. Ho SY, Ide K, Macdowell P (1996) Instrumented service life program for the pictor rocket motor. In: Proceedings of the 87th NATO/AGARD/PEP symposium on service life of solid propulsion systems (Athens)

  13. Ho SY, Caré G (1998) Modified fracture mechanics approach in structural analysis of solid-rocket motors. J Propuls Power 14:409–415. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.5303

  14. Hoffman DM (2000) Fatigue of LX-14 and LX-19 plastic bonded explosives. J Energ Mater 18:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370650008216110

  15. ISO27727 (2008) Rubber, vulcanized—measurement of fatigue crack growth rate

  16. ISO 13586 (2000) Plastics: determination of fracture toughness (G\(_{{\rm IC}}\) and K\(_{{\rm IC}})\): linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) approach

  17. ISO 34-1:2010 (2010) Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic—determination of tear strength. Part 1: trouser, angle and crescent test pieces

  18. Kinloch AJ, Gledhill RA (1981) Propellant failure: a fracture-mechanics approach. J Spacecr Rockets 18:333–337. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.57825

  19. Kinloch AJ, Tod DA (1984) A new approach to crack growth in rubbery composite propellants. Propellants Explos Pyrotech 9:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/prep.19840090204

  20. Langlois G, Gonard R (1979) New law for crack propagation in solid propellant material. J Spacecr Rockets 16:357–360. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.57674

  21. Liu CT (1987) Effects of cyclic loading sequence on cumulative damage and constitutive behavior of a composite solid propellant. In: 28th structures, structural dynamics and materials conference, structures, structural dynamics, and materials and co-located conferences, pp 847–854. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1987-776

  22. Liu CT (1990a) Crack growth behavior in a composite propellant with strain gradients part 2. J Spacecr Rockets 27:647–652. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.26194

  23. Liu CT (1990b) Critical analysis of crack growth data. J Propuls Power 6:519–524. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.23251

  24. Liu CT (1991) Evaluation of damage fields near crack tips in a composite solid propellant. J Spacecr Rockets 28:64–70. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.26210

  25. Liu CT (1996) Microstructural damage and crack growth behaviour in a composite solid propellant. In: Proceedings of the 87th NATO/AGARD/PEP symposium on service life of solid propulsion systems (Athens)

  26. Liu CT (1997) Crack growth behavior in a solid propellant. Eng Fract Mech 56:127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(96)00107-5

  27. Liu CT (2000) Monitoring damage initiation and evolution in a filled polymeric material using nondestructive testing techniques. Comput Struct 76:57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(99)00144-3

  28. Lopez R, Ortega de la Rosa A, Salazar A, Rodríguez J (2018) Structural integrity of aged hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene solid rocket propellants. J Propuls Power 34:75–84. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.B36496

  29. Martin Ide K (1997) Thermal and fracture behavior of rocket motor materials. Dissertation, University of Adelaide

  30. Mastrolla EJ, Klager K (1969) Solid propellants based on polybutadiene binders. In: Advances in chemistry series, vol 88, pp 122–164. https://doi.org/10.1021/ba-1969-0088.ch006

  31. Olalde F (2017) Informe tecnológico de patentes: máquina de carga cíclica para propulsantes sólidos. Reference number: 76188/P7073. Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, Madrid

  32. Rao BN (1992) Fracture of solid rocket propellant grains. Eng Fract Mech 43:455–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(92)90113-S

  33. Rao S, Krishna Y, Rao BN (2005) Fracture toughness of nitramine and composite solid propellants. Mater Sci Eng A Struct 403:125–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2005.04.054

  34. Seo BH, Kim JH (2013) Effect of temperature and thickness on fracture toughness of solid propellant. Trans Korean Soc Mech Eng A 37:1355–1360. https://doi.org/10.3795/KSME-A.2013.37.11.1355

  35. Shapery RA (1984) Correspondence principles and a generalized J integral for large deformation and fracture analysis of viscoelastic media. Int J Fract 25:195–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01140837

  36. STANAG 4506 (2000) Explosive materials, physical/mechanical uniaxial tests. MAS NATO

  37. Tong X, Chen X, Xu J, Sun C, Liang W (2017) Excitation of thermal dissipation of solid propellants during fatigue process. Mater Des 128:47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.04.088

  38. Tong X, Chen X, Xu J, Zhen Y, Zhi S (2018) The heat build-up of a polymer matrix composite under cyclic loading: experimental assessment and numerical simulation. Int J Fatigue 116:323–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.06.040

  39. Tormey JF, Britton SC (1963) Effect of cyclic loading on solid propellant grains structures. AIAA J 1(8):1763–1770. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.1922

  40. Tussiwand G, Saouma VE, Terzenbach R, De Luca LT (2009) Fracture mechanics of composite solid rocket propellant grains: material testing. J Propuls Power 25:60–73. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.34227

  41. Wang Z, Qiang H, Wang G, Huang Q (2015) Tensile mechanical properties and constitutive model for HTPB propellant at low temperature and high strain rate. J Appl Polym Sci 132:42104. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.42104

  42. Xu F, Aravas N, Sofronis P (2008) Constitutive modeling of solid propellant materials with evolving microstructural damage. J Mech Phys Solids 56(5):2050–2073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2007.10.013

  43. Xu J, Chen X, Wang H (2014) Thermo-damage-viscoelastic constitutive model of HTPB composite propellant. Int J Solids Struct 51(18):3209–3217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.05.024

  44. Zhou G, Yin X, Li A (2015) Study on the fracture toughness of hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene solid rocket propellant. J Propuls Power 31:912–918. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.B35467

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are indebted to Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of Spain for their financial support through project DPI2016-80389-C2-1-R.

Author information

Correspondence to A. Salazar.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

López, R., Salazar, A. & Rodríguez, J. Fatigue crack propagation behaviour of carboxyl-terminated polybutadiene solid rocket propellants. Int J Fract (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-020-00435-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Fatigue crack growth behavior
  • Fracture behaviour
  • Tensile behaviour
  • CTPB solid propellants