Behavior of Nitrogen Oxides in the Product Gases 

from Explosive Detonations 

Richard J. Mainiero, James H. Rowland III, 

Marcia L. Harris, and Michael J. Sapko 

Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report (abstract/presentation) have not been 

formally disseminated by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and should not 

be constituted to represent any agency determination or policy. 

Abstract 

All explosive materials produce a cloud of reaction products, the most toxic of which is nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2). In the study reported here, 4.5-kg (10-lb) charges of blasting agent confined in either thin-wall 

10-cm (4-in) diameter galvanized pipe or 10-cm (4-in) schedule 80 seamless steel pipe were detonated 

in a closed chamber. The detonation gases were analyzed for NO2, nitric oxide (NO), ammonia (NH3), 

hydrogen (H2), carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N2), oxygen (O2), and methane 

(CH4). Data were evaluated to determine the kinetics of the oxidation of NO to NO2. Analysis revealed 

that the only mechanism for NO loss for the conditions existing in the chamber was the reaction 2NO + 

O 6 2 NO . The rate constant was 2.08 @ 10-38

2 2 cm6

 molecules-2 sec

-1 for the rate equation -1⁄2d [NO]/dt 

= K @ [NO]2 @ [O2] for NO concentrations up to 100 ppm. The rate constant is in agreement with that 

recommended by Baulch, Drysdale, and Horne (1973). 
 

Background 

In recent years, the toxic fumes generated by explosives have been a concern of blasters, explosive 

manufacturers, and mining companies. In the western U.S., blasters have been looking for ways to 

control the generation of NO2, a very toxic gas that can be produced by large blasts at surface coal 

mines. Cast blasts, some employing as much as nine hundred thousand kg (two million lb) of explosive, 

may generate reddish-orange product clouds. The color is due to the NO2 in the cloud (Turcotte, Yang, 

Lee, Short, and Shomaker, 2002). 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s Permissible Exposure Limit (OSHA PEL) for 

NO2 is 5 parts per million (ppm) and the concentration Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health 

(IDLH) is 20 ppm (NIOSH, 1997). The corresponding numbers for NO are 25 and 100 ppm, 

respectively. The study reported here deals mostly with NO2 since it is five times more toxic than NO. 

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Documentation for IDLH 

Concentrations (NIOSH, 1995) states that 10 to 20 ppm NO2 may be mildly irritating (Patty, 1963), 

exposure to 150 ppm or more may cause death from pulmonary edema (NRC, 1979), and 50% lethality 

may occur following exposure to 174 ppm for 1 hour (Book, 1982). For the past five years, the NIOSH 

Pittsburgh Research Lab (PRL) has been studying the toxic fumes produced by explosives and 

researching techniques for minimizing the fumes generation (Mainiero, 1997), (Rowland and Mainiero, 

2000), (Rowland, Mainiero, and Hurd, 2001), and (Sapko, Rowland, Mainiero, and Zlochower, 2002). 

During a meeting with safety personnel from several western mines in which techniques to minimize 

NO2 production from blasting were discussed, several people asked how rapidly the NO produced in the 

blast oxidizes to NO2. The authors were unable to find any literature specific to the kinetics of NO 

oxidation in gaseous detonation products. There was, however, a wealth of data available on the 

oxidation of NO to NO2 in power plant plumes and gaseous emissions from other combustion processes. 

In this literature, the concern was not with the toxicity of NO2 since the concentrations were very low, 

but rather the contribution of NO2 to acid rain, smog formation, global warming, and ozone layer 

depletion (Tomita, 2001) and (Date, Yoshiaki, Arai, and Tamura, 1998). 

Elshout and Beilke (1984) suggest that for the conditions existing in the detonation products in PRL’s 

research, i.e. NO concentrations of 50-150 ppm and the absence of ozone, NO will oxidize by the 

following reaction: 

2NO + O2 ÷ 2 NO2 (1) 

Based on this reaction, two molecules of NO2 are produced when two molecules of NO react with one 

molecule of oxygen. The reaction is said to be second order with respect to the NO concentration and 

first order with respect to the O2 concentration because two molecules of NO have to come together 

with one molecule of O2. The rate of NO loss and NO2 production may be expressed as: 

Rate of NO2 production = 1⁄2 Rate of NO loss = K @ [NO]2 @ [O2] (2) 

where [NO] and [O2] represent the concentrations of nitric oxide and oxygen, respectively, and K is the 

rate constant for the reaction. Using equation (2) it is possible to predict the rate at which NO oxidizes 

to NO2 based on the NO and O2 concentrations. This is of limited value in the field since the 
 

 

 

concentration of NO is usually not known but it is essential if one is to develop a computer model of the 

reactions occurring in a cloud of gaseous detonation products. 

To verify the order of the oxidation reaction relative to NO concentration, equation (2) may be rewritten 

as follows: 

-1⁄2d [NO]/dt = K @ [NO]i 

@ [O2], (3) 

where i is the order relative to NO, and 

log(-1⁄2d [NO]/dt) = log(K @ [NO]i @ [O2]) = i @ log( [NO]) + log(K @ [O2]) (4) 

Examination of equation (4) reveals that a plot of log(-1⁄2d [NO]/dt) versus log[NO] should yield a 

straight line with slope i and intercept log(K @ [O2]). Once the value of i is verified, a plot of -1⁄2d 

[NO]/dt against [NO]i @ [O2] should yield a straight line of slope K. 

Baulch et al. (1973) reviewed the available literature data for equation (2) and recommended a rate 

constant of 3.3 X 10-39 exp(530/T) cm6 molecules-2 sec

-1, for the temperature range 273 - 660 deg K. 

The data collected in the experiments at PRL were evaluated to determine whether they agreed with the 

proposed reaction and the recommended rate constant. 

Method 

A facility for detonating large confined charges in a controlled volume exists in the PRL’s Experimental 

Mine for measuring fumes produced by explosive detonations (Mainiero, 1997), (Rowland and 

Mainiero, 2000), (Rowland et al. 2001), and (Sapko et al. 2002). Tests are conducted with a thin-wall 4­

in (10-cm) diameter galvanized pipe to simulate light charge confinement and a nominal 4-in schedule 

80 seamless steel pipe to simulate heavier charge confinement. The facility, illustrated in Figure 1, 

consists of a portion of mine entry enclosed between two explosion-proof bulkheads. Total volume of 

the chamber is 274 m3

 (9,667 ft3). The chamber is equipped with an air circulating system and is vented 

by opening the vent ports to the mine's airflow. Up to 4.5-kg (10-lb) charges can be detonated in the 

chamber. 

For a typical experiment, a blasting agent is confined in the 4-in (10-cm) schedule 80 seamless steel pipe 

or a thin-wall 4-in (10-cm) diameter galvanized pipe and is initiated by a Pentolite booster 2-in (5.1-cm) 

in diameter and 2-in (5.1-cm) thick. This combination of confinement and initiation yields a detonation 

velocity of approximately 4,000 m/s (13,000 ft/sec) for a 71-cm (28-in) column of a mixture of 94 pct 

ammonium nitrate prills with 6 pct fuel oil (94/6 ANFO) for shots in the schedule 80 pipe and 

approximately 2,800 m/s (9,100 ft/sec) for shots in the galvanized pipe. The pipe is suspended 

vertically above a heavy steel plate on the mine floor with twenty-four 1.2-m (4-ft) by 0.3-m (1-ft), 5.1­

cm (2-in) thick steel plates suspended around it to form a cage. This cage stops shrapnel from the 

schedule 80 steel pipe that would otherwise seriously damage the chamber. 

After the detonation a circulating fan is run for about 10 minutes to uniformly mix the chamber 

atmosphere. Fume samples are taken out of the chamber for analysis through 6-mm (0.25-in) Teflon 

tubing via sampling pumps. Vacutainer gas samples are then taken and sent to the analytical laboratory 
 

for gas chromatographic analysis. This type of analysis is appropriate for components that are stable in 

the Vacutainer, namely H2, CO, CO2, N2, O2, and CH4. NO and NO2 are measured with an on-line 

chemiluminescence analyzer, and NH3 is measured with an MSA Chillgard®* analyzer. The fumes are 

sampled for a 73-min. period. 

The data reported in this paper were collected during 2002 as part of a study of factors affecting the 

toxic fumes released by the detonation of blasting agents. During evaluation of the data the authors 

realized that the data could also be used to develop a better understanding of the kinetics of NOx in the 

product cloud from a detonation. The analysis reported here was based on 17 experiments. For each 

experiment, 17 datapoints were utilized. In calculating the rate of NO loss, the first two and last four 

data points were not utilized in order to avoid start up and shut down errors. Table 1 illustrates the data 

for a typical experiment. 

*Reference to specific products is for informational purposes and does not imply endorsement by NIOSH. 

Discussion 

Figure 2 shows a plot of the NO concentrations as a function of time for the data in Table 1. As one 

would expect, the NO decreases with time as it is oxidized to NO2. If one NO2 molecule is produced for 

every molecule of NO oxidized, one would expect the curve for NO2 to be a mirror image of that for 

NO. However, Figure 2 shows that the curve for NO2 is not a mirror image of that for NO. This result 

suggests the existence of a process by which NO2, and possibly NO, are removed. The plots of NO and 

NO2 concentrations as a function of time showed similar behavior for the other experiments. 

The data for 16 of the 17 experiments performed in the mine chamber during 2002 are plotted as log(­

1⁄2d [NO]/dt) against log[NO] in Figure (3). The data for one experiment in the mine chamber were lost 

due to an instrumentation failure. Also, the data for the first and last 10 minutes of sampling were not 

used in order to avoid start-up and shut-down errors. 

Conducting a regression analysis on the data in Figure (3) yields a slope of 2.04, a y-intercept of -17.35, 

and an r-squared value of 0.97. This confirms that the reaction is second order relative to NO. It was 

not possible to verify that the reaction is first order relative to O2 since there was very little variation in 

O2 from shot to shot as all shots were carried out in air. The data utilized in Figure (3) were in units of 

molecules, cm, and sec. 

Determination of the rate constant may be accomplished by plotting -1/2d[NO]/dt versus [NO]2

[O2], as 

illustrated in Figure (4). Conducting a regression analysis on the data yields a slope of 2.08 x 10-38 cm6 

molecules-2 sec

-1, a y-intercept of 3.59 x 1010 molecules cm-3 sec-1, and an r-squared value of 0.95. The 

slope is the rate constant, K, of equation (2). 

Evaluation of the 272 data points for the 16 experiments in the mine chamber yielded results that are 

consistent with reaction (1). At the 15 deg C temperature of the mine, Baulch et al. (1973) recommend a 

rate constant of 2.08 x 10-38 cm6

 molecules-2 sec-1. The rate constant determined for the experiments in 

the mine chamber, 2.08 x 10-38 cm6

 molecules-2 sec

-1, agreed perfectly with that recommended by 

Baulch et al. (1973). 
 

 

Before any analyses of the reaction mechanism and rate constants for NO oxidation to NO2 could be 

carried out, it was necessary to determine whether NO was being removed by any mechanism other than 

NO oxidation. Dubnov et al. (1988) discuss this topic in the book, Industrial Explosives (Dubnov, 

Bakharevich, and Romanov, 1988): 

With the detonation of an explosive under laboratory conditions in a vacuum vessel, colorless 

NO is formed, which on contact with air converts to colored oxides: nitrous anhydride (N2O), 

NO2, nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4). In mine conditions they are formed simultaneously and in 

approximately equal quantities of NO2 and NO. The latter can remain in the loosened rock for 

long periods, and only changes gradually to the dioxide. NO2 is easily dissolved in water, and 

therefore its concentration in the atmosphere falls as it is rapidly absorbed by moist surfaces. 

NO dissolves little in water. 

The observations of Dubnov et al. (1988) were confirmed in research conducted by Harris, Sapko, and 

Mainiero (2003) which concluded that the NO concentration in explosive fumes confined in a chamber 

remains essentially constant if no air is present to oxidize the NO to NO2. Based on this information, it 

is safe to assume that NO concentration in explosive fumes decreases mainly by oxidation to NO2, while 

NO2 concentration decreases as it is absorbed onto moist surfaces. The authors searched the literature 

for a method to estimate how fast NO2 would be absorbed onto damp surfaces in the mine. There was 

extensive information on the absorption of NO2 into water droplets in the atmosphere as a precursor to 

the production of acid rain but no information could be found for the absorption onto damp surfaces. 

Blasters are aware that the gases produced by a blast are unhealthy and typically wait for the gases to 

dissipate before allowing anyone to return to the blast area. Less consideration is given to the NO that 

remains in the muck pile. The gases in the muck pile are predominately blasting fumes and do not 

dissipate. On the surface, the NO from the blast oxidizes to NO2 which is readily absorbed onto wet 

surfaces, thereby removing it from the site. In the low-oxygen environment in the muck pile, the NO 

does not oxidize to NO2. Lazarov, Brinkley, and Tole (1975) measured CO and NOx concentrations 1.5 

to 10 m (5 to 33 ft) below the surface of a muck pile for times up to 100 hours following a blast. NOx 

ranged from 30 to 250 ppm and fell to safe levels in 2 to 6 hours. Miners must be aware that the NOx 

will be released during the mucking operation with the potential for serious injury or death. 

Summary 

The NO oxidation reaction proposed by Elshout and Beilke (1984) shows promise as a means to predict 

the conditions existing in a cloud of detonation products. Following the detonation of an explosive in a 

mine chamber, the NO is removed by slow oxidation to NO2 by the reaction 

2NO + O2 ÷ 2 NO2 (1) 

The rate at which NO oxidizes in a cloud of detonation products may be defined by equation 2 with a 

rate constant at 15 deg C of 2.08 x 10-38 cm6 molecules-2 sec

-1 ,which agrees with that recommended by 

Baulch, et al. (1973). 

-1⁄2d [NO]/dt = K @ [NO]2 @ [O2] (2) 
The rate constant at other temperatures may be determined by the Baulch et al. (1973) recommended 

rate constant of K = 3.3 @ 10-39 exp(530/T) cm6 molecules-2 sec

-1. The data from the mine fumes 

chamber investigated NO concentrations up to 100 ppm. The conclusions reached in this study may or 

may not apply at NO concentrations above 100 ppm. The information on NO oxidation kinetics 

provided in this paper will prove useful in efforts to model the behavior of NO and NO2 in clouds of 

detonation products near blasting operations. 

Sample Time NO NO2 NOx 

Minutes After log(-dNO/dt) log(NO)

Detonation PPM PPM PPM 

5 185.0 70.0 255.0 PPM PPM 

10 126.0 76.0 202.0 70.0 255.0 

13 107.4 77.2 184.6 76.0 202.0 

16 93.7 77.6 171.3 12.21 15.40 

19 83.0 77.0 160.0 12.17 15.35 

22 74.6 75.7 150.3 12.07 15.30 

25 67.8 73.9 141.7 11.98 15.26 

28 62.1 72.4 134.5 11.90 15.22 

31 57.1 69.4 126.5 11.83 15.19 

34 53.1 67.8 120.9 11.77 15.15 

37 49.4 65.8 115.2 11.71 15.12 

40 46.1 62.3 108.4 11.67 15.09 

43 43.3 60.1 103.4 11.61 15.07 

46 40.6 57.5 98.1 11.56 15.04 

49 38.4 55.3 93.7 11.51 15.01 

52 36.4 53.3 89.7 11.46 14.99 

55 34.5 51.3 85.8 11.42 14.97 

58 32.9 50.0 82.9 11.40 14.95 

61 31.3 48.5 79.8 11.38 14.92 

64 29.9 47.0 76.9 

67 28.6 45.5 74.1 

70 27.4 44.3 71.7 

73 26.3 42.8 69.1 

Table 1. Data collected in a typical experiment in the mine fumes chamber. 
Figure 1. Chamber in the underground mine at the 

NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Lab in which the gaseous 

products of a 10-lb explosive detonation are confined. 

Figure 2. Plot of NO and NO2 versus time for the data 

of Table 1. 
Figure 3. Plot of log(-1⁄2 d[NO]/dt) versus log[NO] for 

experiments in the mine chamber during 2002. The line 

represents the regression fit to the data. 

Figure 4. Plot of -1/2d[NO]/dt versus [NO]2

[O2] for 

experiments in the mine chamber during 2002. The line 

represents the regression fit to the data. 
References 

Baulch, D.L., Drysdale, D.D., & Horne, D.G. (1973). Evaluated Kinetic Data for High Temperature 

Reactions, Vol. 2, Homogeneous Gas Phase Reactions of the H2-N2 System, London, Butterworth. 

Book, S.A. (1982). Scaling Toxicity From Laboratory Animals to People: An Example With Nitrogen 

Dioxide. J Toxicol Environ Health, (9), 719-725. 

Date, S., Yoshiaki, Y., Arai, M., & Tamura, M. (1998). Oxidation of Nitrogen Oxides in Exhaust Gases 

Immediately after Emission in the Atmosphere (II). Journal of the Japanese Society for Atmospheric 

Environment, 33(4), 208-223. 

Dubnov, L.V., Bakharevich, N.S., & Romanov, A.I. (1988). Industrial Explosives, M. Depths, p. 141. 

Elshout, A.J. & Beilke, S. (1984). Oxidation of Nitric Oxide to Nitrogen Dioxide in Flue Gas Plumes of 

Power Stations, Comm. Eur. Communities, (Rep.) Eur, Issue Eur. 9436, Phys.-Chem, Behav. Atmos. 

Pollut., 535-43. 

Harris M.L, Sapko M.J, Mainiero R.J (2003). Toxic Fume Comparison of a Few Explosives Used in 

Trench Blasting. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique 

(Nashville, TN, Feb. 2-5, 2003). Vol. 2. Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives Engineers, 

pp. 319-336. 

Lazarov, S.B, Brinkley, R.F, & Tole, D.M. (1975). Explosives and Formation of Toxic Gases in LargeScale Blasting. 16th International Conference on Coal Mine Safety Research, September 22 (p IV5.1­

IV5.9). Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA. 

Mainiero R.J (1997). A Technique for Measuring Toxic Gases Produced by Blasting Agents. 

Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique (Las Vegas, NV, Feb. 

2-5, 1997). Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives Engineers, pp. 595-604. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH]. (1995) NIOSH Documentation for 

Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health Concentrations (ISLHs). 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/10102440.html. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH]. (1997). Pocket Guide to Chemical 

Hazards. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 97-140. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health. 

NRC, Nitrogen Dioxide: An Assessment of the Health Effects of Short-Term Exposure. National 

Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Toxicology, New York, 1979. 

Patty, F.A., ed (1963). Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 2nd rev. ed., Vol. II. Toxicology. 

Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, 919-923. 
Rowland III J.H, Mainiero R.J (2000). Factors Affecting ANFO Fumes Production. Proceedings of the 

26th Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique (Anaheim, CA, Feb. 13-16, 2000). Vol. 

1. Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives Engineers, pp. 163-174. 

Rowland III J.H, Mainiero R.J, Hurd D.A (2001). Factors Affecting Fumes Production of an Emulsion 

and ANFO/Emulsion Blends. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting 

Technique (Orlando, FL, Jan. 28-31, 2001). Vol. 2. Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives 

Engineers, pp. 133-144. 

Sapko M.J, Rowland III J.H, Mainiero R.J, Zlochower I.A (2002). Chemical and Physical Factors that 

Influence NOx Production During Blasting – Exploratory Study. Proceedings of the 28th Annual 

Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique (Las Vegas, NV, Feb. 10-13, 2002). Vol. 2. 

Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives Engineers, pp. 317-330. 

Tomita, A. (2001). Suppression of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions by Carbonaceous Reductants. Fuel 

Processing Technology, 71(1-3) 53-70. 

Turcotte, R., Yang, R., Lee, C., Short, B., & Shomaker, R. (2002). Factors Affecting Fume Production 

in Surface Coal Blasting Operations. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Explosives and 

Blasting Technique (Las Vegas, NV, Feb. 10-13, 2002). Cleveland, OH: International Society of 

Explosives Engineers.