Characterization Techniques Employed to Determine the 

Energy Release of Reactive Materials 

by John J. Ritter, Andrew L. Brant, Joseph W. Colburn, 

Barrie E. Homan, and Kevin L. McNesby 

ARL-TR-5125 March 2010 

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 
NOTICES 

Disclaimers 

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position 

unless so designated by other authorized documents. 

Citation of manufacturer’s or trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or 

approval of the use thereof. 

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator. 
Army Research Laboratory 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066 

ARL-TR-5125 March 2010 

Characterization Techniques Employed to Determine the 

Energy Release of Reactive Materials 

John J. Ritter, Andrew L. Brant, Joseph W. Colburn, 

Barrie E. Homan, and Kevin L. McNesby 

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate, ARL 

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 
ii 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently 

valid OMB control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

March 2010 

2. REPORT TYPE 

Final 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 

July 2008 to July 2009 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Characterization Techniques Employed to Determine the Energy Release of 

Reactive Materials

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 

5b. GRANT NUMBER 

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 

6. AUTHOR(S) 

John J. Ritter, Andrew L. Brant, Joseph W. Colburn, Barrie E. Homan, and 

Kevin L. McNesby 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER 

5e. TASK NUMBER 

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Army Research Laboratory 

ATTN: RDRL-WML-D 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

 REPORT NUMBER 

ARL-TR-5125

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT 

 NUMBER(S) 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

14. ABSTRACT 

Reactive materials show a promising future in an assortment of Army weapons systems due to their unique material 

characteristics. They have the potential to provide for enhanced lethality over their conventional munitions counterparts. 

However, those characteristics are not well defined, particularly the materials’ fundamental energy release mechanisms. 

Through live fire experimental testing of an array of reactive materials consisting of an Al-Ni base, energy release 

characteristics can be understood on a more scientific level. This is accomplished through the incorporation of customized 

diagnostic techniques. Test samples of reactive material are fired via a powder gun into a steel-enclosed test chamber fitted 

with a polycarbonate window for witnessing the event. Raw data from the reaction event is recorded via high speed cameras 

and oscilloscopes. Analytical tools that are incorporated to characterize the event include pressure measurement gages, high 

speed imaging, pyrometry, spectroscopy, and flash x-ray. Through a systematic, scientific approach the vast amounts of data 

collected using these diagnostic tools is then processed into practical information of the reactive material’s energy release 

behavior. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Reactive material; energy release; optical diagnostics 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

UU 

18. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

34 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

John J. Ritter 

a. REPORT 

Unclassified 

b. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified 

c. THIS PAGE 

Unclassified 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 

(410) 306-0709 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
iii 

Contents 

List of Figures iv

Acknowledgments v

1. Introduction 1

2. Test Setup 1

3. Data Measurements 5

3.1 Pressure ...........................................................................................................................5

3.2 High Speed Imaging ........................................................................................................6

3.3 Pyrometry ........................................................................................................................8

3.4 Emission Spectroscopy..................................................................................................10

3.5 Radiography ..................................................................................................................12

4. Conclusions 13

5. Rererences 14

Appendix A. Test Chamber Drawings 15 

Distribution List 25 
iv 

List of Figures 

Figure 1. Test facility diagram. .......................................................................................................2

Figure 2. Diagnostics test chamber. ................................................................................................3

Figure 3. X-ray cassette assembly. .................................................................................................4

Figure 4. Schematic of optical equipment in control room with relation to diagnostic 

chamber. .....................................................................................................................................5

Figure 5. PCB gage mounted in plug with Delrin® isolating sleeve. ............................................6

Figure 6. Ultra high speed imaging; time 45 μs (top) and 105 μs (bottom) from t0. ......................7

Figure 7. High brightness images. Top: before anvil impact, bottom: after anvil impact. ..........8

Figure 8. Phantom cameras incorporated for pyrometry. ...............................................................9

Figure 9. Top: Al-Ni-Mg sample composition, bottom: Al-Ni-Cu sample composition. Left: 

temperature profile of processed pyrometry data at t=1.4 ms. Color scale represents 

temperature in Kelvin. Axes are units of arbitrary distance. Right: corresponding 

histogram in Kelvin. .................................................................................................................10

Figure 10. Emission Spectroscopy Instrumentation. Top: overhead view of the photon 

collecting diodes ‘staring’ into chamber, Bottom: Spectrometer with Phantom camera. .......11

Figure 11. Test Chamber prior to shot. Note x-ray heads angled to maintain optical LOS 

into chamber, flash bulbs adjacent to heads, and fairing on top to protect pressure 

gages/wires from shot blast. .....................................................................................................12

Figure 12. X-Ray image of Al/Cu-Ni sample. ..............................................................................13
v 

Acknowledgments 

The authors would like to thank General Sciences, Inc. for the material samples used in testing. 

Also, special thanks to Zachary Quine for his overall assistance during testing. 
vi 

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 
1 

1. Introduction 

The U.S. Army has a critical need for increased lethality while maintaining an objective for 

green and insensitive munitions. Reactive materials (RMs) have been identified as a possible 

solution to this need as they can efficiently couple their energy into existing and novel lethality 

mechanisms. RMs, with the potential of high densities and materials strengths, have the 

potential to replace the parasitic materials that are integral to almost all current munitions designs 

providing enhanced performance and lower sensitivities. Reactive materials having theoretical 

energy densities, much higher than conventional explosives, can achieve insensitivity because 

they are not detonable, or are highly insensitive. Understanding the energy release mechanisms 

of these materials is key to fully exploiting their unique characteristics. Using an array of 

diagnostic tools and techniques, information can be gathered about the energy release 

mechanisms in reactive materials. Data, primarily collected through optical devices, is analyzed 

to provide scientific insight into the reactive material’s energy release process. Similar reactive 

material characterization efforts have been put forth by the Navy and Air Force (1, 2), however, 

the Army’s efforts are unique in that they rely primarily on measuring the reaction event using 

optical techniques. For this discussion, the materials tested consisted of an Al-Ni matrix with 

complete, detailed data results available (3). 

2. Test Setup 

The reactive material energy release characterization testing facility (4) developed by the Army 

Research Laboratory is an indoor experimental facility located at Aberdeen Proving Ground, 

MD. The facility, originally designed as a gun test range, has been adapted for reactive materials 

research. Figure 1 illustrates the layout of the range. Reactive material test samples are right 

circular cylinders with a nominal diameter and length of 0.503 in. Samples tested are comprised 

of an aluminum-nickel matrix, with some samples having a tertiary element such as copper or 

magnesium to vary material properties. The range gun consists of a 30 mm smooth bore powder 

gun which launches the reactive material sample via a two-piece plastic sabot. Muzzle velocity 

is nominally 1615 m/s. This is achieved through the use of 109 g of M30 propellant. 

Approximately 8 ft from muzzle exit a stripper plate is incorporated to terminate the flight of the 

sabot. Along the flight path velocity measurement devices, break or light screens, are positioned 

to measure projectile velocity. Break screens were the velocity measuring device of choice and 

placed 10–12 ft from muzzle with a separation of 3.28 ft. Initially, light screens were used, 

however, they tended to have a problem picking up muzzle flash and strobe lighting from a 

safety signal, and therefore where abandoned early in the testing process. Approximately 23 ft 

from the muzzle is the entrance to the closed testing chamber where the energy release event 
2 

occurs. At one point in testing, the distance was increased in order to place the gun and 

subsequent muzzle blast in a separate room. However, due to the projectile design, dispersion 

issues became apparent and the RM samples were not always striking the impact plate. 

Therefore, the gun was moved back to its original position. 

Figure 1. Test facility diagram. 

The testing chamber (figure 2) is the focus of the diagnostic suite used to characterize the 

reactive material combustion event. This chamber is a derivation of the Navy’s reactive material 

test chamber (1), but with optical enhancements. The chamber is a 5-sided rectangular steel 

enclosure measuring 33”Lx21”Hx21”W. Appendix A contains the engineering drawings 

associated with the chamber. The projectile enters the chamber through a six inch diameter 

opening, which prior to testing is covered by a witness plate. The plate thickness can vary from 

1/32” up to 1⁄2” of material, generally steel or aluminum. At the back of the chamber is a 1” thick 

RHA anvil. In order to contain and view the event, the open (optical front) side of the chamber 

is sealed with a gasket, sacrificial 1⁄4” thick acrylic sheet, and then 2” polycarbonate cover and 

fastened with bolts. The top, bottom, and optical rear of the chamber are equipped with five 

oversized ports each which can accommodate instrumentation to monitor the event inside the 

chamber. Unused ports are sealed with threaded steel plugs. At the optical rear of the chamber 

is a customized assembly containing x-ray film cartridges and retro-reflective paper to aid in data 

acquisition. From the chamber’s optical rear to front, this assembly consisted of x-ray cartridges, 

a protective quarter inch thick acrylic, reflective paper, and finally another sacrificial piece of 

quarter inch acrylic to protect the assembly from the combustion event. Figure 3 illustrates this 

configuration. This modular assembly allows for quick access to the x-ray film for processing 
3 

and only requires the replacement of the outermost acrylic sheet which is exposed to the 

combustion event. 

Figure 2. Diagnostics test chamber. 
4 

Figure 3. X-ray cassette assembly. 

After the reactive material sample is launched from the gun, it first penetrates the witness plate, 

where the sample is pulverized into a debris field of particles. The material particles continue to 

travel to the back of the testing chamber where they ultimately impact the anvil and release the 

majority of their energy. While evidence shows material does react upon impact of the witness 

plate, the primary combustion event occurs at the anvil. Furthermore, as the debris cloud of 

particles travels towards the anvil, aerodynamic drag separates the particles according to size 

with the larger ones impacting the anvil first as the particles are the same density and are near 

spherical in shape. 

The diagnostics time zero trigger is controlled by a break screen placed on the front of the 

witness plate. This assures consistent triggers when the projectile first impacts the testing 

chamber. The signal is relayed through a conditioning box which triggers the various cameras, 

oscilloscopes, and x-ray equipment incorporated to record the test data. 
5 

The main diagnostic tools incorporated to characterize the event consist of high speed imaging, 

emission spectroscopy, pyrometry, pressure measurements and radiography. Due to limited 

space, a series of lenses and/or mirrors are integrated to direct the desired event images to the 

cameras. To aid in imaging, an Oxford copper vapor laser is incorporated as are PF-300 MeggaFlash flash bulbs for lighting purposes. Due to the hazardous nature of such a test, the majority 

of diagnostics are situated outside of the testing range in control rooms, and the event is viewed 

through an optical port which separates the main control room from the range. Figure 4 shows 

the optical diagnostic tools used in characterizing the combustion event in the main control 

room. 

Figure 4. Schematic of optical equipment in control room with relation to diagnostic chamber. 

3. Data Measurements 

3.1 Pressure 

An Agilent MSO8000 series oscilloscope is used to record pressure measurements from PCB 

Piezotronics Model 101A06 gauges. Measurements are taken by using four of the five port holes 
6 

on the top side of the test chamber. The port plugs being used were machined to accept the 

pressure gages (figure 5). To reduce errant thermal effects caused by combustion, the gauges are 

coated with grease. A custom fairing was fabricated and installed to protect the gauges and 

wires from the muzzle blast. Initial testing showed an unacceptable level of noise caused by 

vibrations from the slug’s impact. To mitigate this problem, we fabricated an isolation sleeve out 

of Delrin® to separate the pressure gage and the steel plug which held the gage. Subsequent 

testing showed the Delrin® sleeve successfully eliminated the noise. 

Figure 5. PCB gage mounted in plug with 

Delrin® isolating sleeve. 

3.2 High Speed Imaging 

High speed imaging measurements provide a spatial representation of the reactive material’s 

combustion event, and are an integral part of the characterization process. Three distinct high 

speed imaging techniques are incorporated into the testing process; regular high speed, ultra high 

speed, and high brightness imaging. 

Regular high speed imaging is accomplished using Vision Research’s Phantom series camera. 

The frame rate is set as high as possible once the desired field of view and resolution are set. As 

the frame rate is increased, the resolution the camera provides will decrease due to the 

information processing rate of the imaging chip. So while the cameras are capable of imaging 

well beyond the 17,000 fps, it would not be possible to capture the desired field of view. To 

provide adequate lighting, two PF-300 flash bulbs are placed near the outside edges of the test 

chamber and directed towards the event. The flash bulbs provide peak illumination at 30 ms 

with 6 million lumens of power each. This imaging technique is most practical in showing the 

entry of the material sample into the test chamber through the impact plate and the flight path of 

the subsequent debris field towards the anvil. Once the reactive material begins to combust on 

the anvil, the light intensity of the reaction saturates the camera. 

The ultra high speed imaging is accomplished with a Cooke Corporation’s HSFC Pro unit. The 

unit uses a single optical input and a series of beam splitters to transfer light to the four CCD 

cameras. The cameras are capable of capturing two frames each for a total of eight frames per 
7 

testing shot. Each camera is capable of capturing images with an exposure time as fast as 3 ns 

with zero delay between cameras. This equates to the possibility of capturing images at 

approximately 300 million frames per second, albeit only with a four frame sequence. The 

minimum time delay between two images captured on a single channel is 500 ns. In testing the 

reactive materials, a more modest exposure time of 1–2 μs was used with a 15 μs delay between 

images. This provided eight images of the combustion event over a 105 μs time span, which is 

effectively 70k fps, about four times faster than the ‘regular’ high speed imaging. Figure 6 

depicts an image from the ultra high speed camera which represents data collected from channel 

4 of the system. In this sequence each camera was used to capture two images each. The top 

image corresponds to image number four while the bottom represents image number eight in the 

sequence of eight images captured for the test shot. 

Figure 6. Ultra high speed imaging; time 45 μs (top) and 105 μs (bottom) from t0. 

The third high speed imaging technique incorporated into the diagnostics suite is high brightness 

imaging (5). In this technique, light from a copper vapor laser, emitted at 511 and 578 nm, is 

directed into the test chamber through a fiber optic cable and series of lenses. The laser light is 

reflected off of the optical rear of the test chamber, which is fitted with a retro-reflector. The 

reflected laser light is then imaged by a phantom camera that is filtered at 510 nm. The laser 

nominally operates at 12.5 kHz with 20 ns pulse duration, but through external syncing can 

continuously run up to 20 kHz. Nominal energy output is 20 Watts; however, output is adversely 

affected by the fiber optic used to transport the light as well as running the laser at higher 

frequencies. Additionally, the laser features a burst mode which can provide light up to 50 kHz 
8 

for a one second maximum burst. Images are captured by syncing a high speed Phantom camera 

to the laser. A delay generator is used to synchronize the camera shutter to the output of the 

laser. It has been found that a delay of 6–8 μs is needed to sync the exposure to the laser. The 

camera is also fitted with a band pass filter at 510 nm ± 5 nm, effectively filtering out all but the 

laser light. Because this technique removes the majority of interfering light from the fireball, 

particles and shock waves, normally hard to see in standard imaging, can be discerned. In 

essence, this technique produces a high speed shadow graph of the event with one frame from a 

typical movie shown in figure 7. High brightness imaging is nominally captured between 15,000 

and 20,000 fps, although using the burst mode can produce images up to 50,000 fps. 

Figure 7. High brightness images. Top: before anvil impact, 

bottom: after anvil impact. 

3.3 Pyrometry 

A temporal temperature profile of the reaction event is generated by using two high speed 

cameras. The cameras are coupled with a beam splitter in order to produce identical imaging 

Leading Edge 

of Debris 

Cloud 

Anvil 

Fireball with 

light filtered 

at 511nm. 
9 

through one optical input. One camera is mounted rigidly on an optical breadboard. Because the 

intensity from corresponding pixels in each camera are ratioed to determine temperature, image 

registration is critical. To this end, the other camera is mounted using a Newport-460P-XYZ 

mounting base, which allows for three degrees of translational motion. The cameras are 

equipped with band pass filters at 700 nm and 900 nm, respectively (figure 8). The bandwidth of 

the filters is 10 nm. Data collection for this setup is typically between 1000 and 5000 fps. 

Figure 8. Phantom cameras incorporated for pyrometry. 

Temperature profiles were generated from the data through the use of Planck’s Law (6), 

1

2 1 ( , ) 5

2





kT

hc

e

hc I T

 

 ; 
10 

where I is spectral radiance, h is Planck’s constant, c is the speed of light, λ is wavelength, T is 

temperature, and k is Boltzmann’s constant. A temperature profile can be produced by applying 

Planck’s law to the ratio of intensities recorded on the cameras for an event. Using MATLAB 

software, we developed a custom in-house code to import the two image files per shot, perform 

pixel registration to align the images, and execute the necessary calculations in order to produce 

temperature profiles and histograms of the reaction event (figure 9). The grey body assumption, 

used to apply Planck’s law to real systems, was used in the calculations. We calibrated the 

system prior to testing using an Omega BB-4A blackbody source with an operating temperature 

up to 1800 o

F. This image provides both a temperature and pixel registration reference for the 

two cameras which is then used in the data reduction program. 

Figure 9. Top: Al-Ni-Mg sample composition, bottom: Al-Ni-Cu sample composition. Left: temperature 

profile of processed pyrometry data at t=1.4 ms. Color scale represents temperature in Kelvin. 

Axes are units of arbitrary distance. Right: corresponding histogram in Kelvin. 

3.4 Emission Spectroscopy 

In an attempt to quantify the gas phase chemistry involved in the process, we incorporated high 

speed emission spectroscopy into the suite of diagnostics. This experimental rig is designed to 

spectrally resolve light emitted from different regions of the enclosed chamber during energy 

release. Specifically, this rig is engineered to measure certain gas phase products of metals 

(AlO, MgO, ZnO, NiO, etc.) burning in air. Since these metal combustion species occurs in the 

gas phase only at high temperatures, their measured discrete emission is always accompanied by 

a thermal greybody continuous emission from nearby hot solid particles. 

The experimental setup uses four fiber optic cables (600 micron core Si-Si) that “stare” at 

different regions of the experimental chamber, looking through the polycarbonate chamber 

window (6). The light emitted during energy release is collected onto the individual fibers (22 

degree acceptance angle) and delivered to an imaging spectrograph, a Princeton Instruments 

Acton Series 320Pi. Light from each fiber is focused onto a different physical portion of a 

diffraction grating and dispersed onto different regions of the chip of a high speed Phantom 
11 

camera. Typical framing rates are 15,000 fps. Calibration is by Cu vapor laser radiation 

described earlier. Figure 10 shows the components of this setup. 

Figure 10. Emission Spectroscopy Instrumentation. Top: overhead view of the photon collecting diodes 

‘staring’ into chamber, Bottom: Spectrometer with Phantom camera. 

Data from this event is processed using MATLAB and a custom in-house code in a similar 

manner as the pyrometry data reduction. The recorded images from the event are imported into 

MATLAB, with individual frames being converted to spectra. The data can then be processed to 

generate numerous plots of interest which depict the relationship between wavelength, intensity, 

and time. From this data a single wavelength of interest can be extracted to determine species’ 
12 

specific information. Similar plots are produced for all regions of interest; impact plate, chamber 

center, and anvil 

3.5 Radiography 

We took digital flash x-rays of the projectile as it initially enters the chamber using a 150 kV L3 

Communications pulsead x-ray unit. In total, four channels were incorporated to image the 

debris cloud at four discrete times as it progressed toward the anvil. The x-ray imaging heads 

were situated 8–12 in from the polycarbonate window of the test chamber (figure 11). Typically 

images have been obtained by using a 30kV pulse. To use the limited space available, two 

images were projected onto one x-ray film. Also, in order to maintain an optical line of sight for 

the cameras, the x-ray heads were positioned in a manner above and below the shot line, then 

angled in order to capture the event. This angular mounting creates a vertical separation of the 

two images on the single film. Since the heads were on the same vertical plane but timed 

discretely, there was also a horizontal separation of the images. These vertical and horizontal 

mismatches on one x-ray film make it possible for two distinct images to be read. For example, 

figure 12 shows a sample x-ray image from the first cassette in the chamber. When processed 

the images are arranged vertically, but for presentation purposes the images were placed side by 

side. Located in the cassettes was a lead marker (one ‘L’, one ‘R’) indicating the left and right 

cassette. This marker made it easy to distinguish orientation of the processed image as well as 

provide a scale. To protect the cassettes from the reaction event, a sacrificial acrylic window 

was placed over the assembly. The cassette and protection window where fastened to the back 

of the testing chamber using standard bolts. 

Figure 11. Test Chamber prior to shot. Note x-ray heads angled to maintain optical LOS into chamber, 

flash bulbs adjacent to heads, and fairing on top to protect pressure gages/wires from shot blast. 
13 

Figure 12. X-Ray image of Al/Cu-Ni sample. 

Results have shown promise in producing images that illustrate a detailed image of the reactive 

material debris field. From these images, it is possible to determine particle sizes within the 

debris field. Furthermore, because x-rays are attenuated (7) as they pass through a material, the 

opacity of the imaged fragments can be used to estimate the size of the fragments in the direction 

along the x-ray beam, therefore generating a more accurate three dimensional determination of 

particle size. As the knowledge base of the system expands, higher fidelity images will be 

produced to give greater insight into the debris field characteristics. 

4. Conclusions 

By using an array of diagnostic tools such as pressure measurements, pyrometry, emission 

spectroscopy, high speed imaging, and radiography, data can be collected and processed to 

characterize the energy release of a reactive material. Pyrometry measurements provide a time 

based temperature profile of the energy released. Emission spectroscopy gives insight into the 

products of combustion. Finally, the multiple high speed imaging techniques along with flash xray provide a detailed spatial and temporal resolution of the reactive material’s energy release 

process. Using the processed data ascertained from these testing methods, materials with 

desirable characteristics can be chosen and integrated into current weapons systems to enhance 

lethality or produce other desirable effects while maintaining system insensitivity. 
14 

5. References 

1. Ames, R. Naval Surface Warfare Center Program Summary, XB-NSWCDD/VA, (2003). 

2. Richards, D. W.; Kramer, M. P.; Wilson, W. H. Air Force Research Laboratory Technical 

Report, AFRL-MN-EG-TR-2004-7013 (2003). 

3. Homan, B. E.; McNesby, K. L.; Ritter, J.; Colburn, J.; Brant, A. Characterization of the 

Combustion Behavior of Aluminum-Nickel Based Reactive Materials; ARL-TR-4917; U.S. 

Army Research Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2009. 

4. Homan, B. E.; McNesby, K. L.; Pandey, R.; Ritter, J.; Colburn, J.; Brant, A. Fundamental 

Mechanism of Energy Release in Reactive Materials; ARL-TR-4524; U.S. Army Research 

Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2008. 

5. McNesby, K. L.; Homan, B. E. Real-Time Optical Measurements for Improved 

Understanding of Enhanced Blast Materials; ARL-TR-3483; U.S. Army Research 

Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2005. 

6. McNesby, K. L.; Homan, B. E.; Piehler, T. N.; Lottero, R. E. Spectroscopic Measurements 

of Fireballs Produced by Enhanced Blast Explosives; ARL-TR-3318; U.S. Army Research 

Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2004. 

7. Hubbell, J. H. Bibliography of Photon Total Cross Section (Attenuation Coefficient) 

Measurement 10 eV to 13.5 eV. 1907-1993, NISTIR 5437, 1994. 
15 

Appendix A. Test Chamber Drawings 

Diagnostic Chamber Assembly 
16 

Main Chamber 

Material: Steel 
17 

Detailed End of Chamber Drawing 
18 

Chamber Flange 

Material: Steel 
19 

Target Plate Holder 

Material: Aluminum 
20 

Anvil 

Material: RHA 
21 

Mount 

Material: Steel 

All Joints Welded 
22 

Plug 

Material: Steel 
23 

Plug Modified to Accept PCB Pressure Gage 
24 

Chamber Windows 
25 

 1 DEFENSE TECHNICAL 

 (PDF INFORMATION CTR 

 ONLY) DTIC OCA 

 8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD 

 STE 0944 

 FORT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218 

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RESEARCH LAB 

 IMNE ALC HRR 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RESEARCH LAB 

 RDRL CIM L TECHL LIB 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RESEARCH LAB 

 RDRL CIM P TECH PUBS 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 1 DIR USARL 

 RDRL ROP TECH LIB 

 PO BOX 12211 

 RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK NC 

 27709-2211 

 1 US ARMY 

 PEO AMMO PMCAS 

 SFAE AMO CAS 

 J IRIZARRY 

 BLDG 171A 

 PICATINNY ARSENAL NJ 07806-5000 

 1 COMMANDER 

 RADFORD ARMY AMMO PLANT 

 SMCAR QA HI LIB 

 RADFORD VA 244141-0298 

 1 DIR BENET WEAPONS LAB 

 TECH LIB 

 WATERVLIET NY 12189-4000 

 1 CDR NAVAL RSRCH LAB 

 TECH LIB 

 WASHINGTON DC 20375-1972 

2 OFFICE OF NAVAL RSRCH 

 C BEDFORD 

 B ALMQUIST 

 875 N RANDOLPH ST RM 653 

 ARLINGTON VA 22203-1927 

 1 GENERAL SCIENCE INCOPORATED 

 A ROZANSKI 

 205 SCHOOLHOUSE ROAD 

 SOUDERTON PA 18964 

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND

 1 DIR USARL 

 RDRL CIM G (BLDG 4600) 

 15 DIR USARL 

 RDRL WML 

 M ZOLTOWSKI 

 RDRL WML B 

 B E HOMAN 

 R C SAUSA 

 RDRL WML C 

 K L MCNESBY 

 RDRL WML D 

 R A BEYER 

 A L BRANT 

 J COLBURN 

 RDRL WML H 

 C CANDLAND 

 M FERMEN-COKER 

 R SUMMERS 

 RDRL WMM D 

 V CHAMPAGNE 

 M TREXLER 

 RDRL WMP B 

 B MCANDREW 

 R EHLERS 

 RDRL WMS 

 J RITTER 

TOTAL: 28 (1 ELEC, 27 HCs) 
26 

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.