Abstract
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) provides easy screening for thermal hazard evaluation. Here, we investigate the difference between using glass and stainless-steel vessels on the DSC measurement of exothermic decomposition energy (QDSC) for 41 chemical substances (containing nitro, halogen, peroxide, and sulfur groups, and hydrazine bonds). Two borosilicate glass vessels (capillary and ampule) and one stainless-steel vessel were used. All QDSC values obtained were investigated with reference to the permissible fluctuation range specified by the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) international Both glass vessels produced very similar QDSC values, despite different sample scales. The QDSC values obtained with the glass vessels were generally roughly within the variation tolerance range of the stainless-steel vessel. Notable exceptions were halogen- or sulfur-containing compounds; these exhibited smaller QDSC values with glass vessels in almost all cases. We will investigate whether certain structures in compounds react with stainless steel. The vessel material choice is crucial in evaluating the true reactivity of a substance.
Highlights
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) provides a quantitative evaluation of the calorific energy associated with a chemical or physical change in a chemical substance
The QDSC values obtained for the glass capillary vessel (GC/glass ampule vessels (GA)) are not within the QDSC tolerance range for the stainless-steel vessel
The QDSC obtained with the stainless-steel vessel was analyzed with respect to the permissible range of variation based on a report by the ASTM
Summary
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) provides a quantitative evaluation of the calorific energy associated with a chemical or physical change in a chemical substance. The United Nations recommends the use of DSC in transporting dangerous goods as a means of screening for chemicals that are considered an explosive according to Test Series 1 and/or Test Series 2 [1] [2]. DSC provides a safe means of performing risk assessment of chemicals, with the convenience of only requiring very small amounts of material, the value obtained is known to be affected by, e.g., the sample vessel material/type, the heating rate, and the sample volume. These effects have not been studied in detail; most researchers tend to use their own preferred vessel for thermal risk assessment. Our present study focuses on comparing the variation in the measured exothermic decomposition energy when using stainless-steel and glass vessels for several chemical substances
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
