I don’t currently have the exact numbers with me at the moment but in terms of sensitivity and synthesis EGDN edges out NG in that it’s safer to
produce and initiate when you want it to but is much more volatile and degrades with the presence of impurities more readily in storage if I remember
correctly. OB% is also slightly higher with NG too which really matters for propellants when taking burn rate catalysts and stabilizer OB%’s into
effect.
So NG is better than EGDN for performance but worse than EGDN for safety reasons; pick your battles with that one.
PGDN’s synthesis is similar to other nitrate esters and although I don’t have the numbers right now, I’m pretty sure its mechanical
sensitivities are at least lower than EGDN (and by proxy lower than NG) from the addition of an extra CH3 group. OB% is of course lower as well in
PGDN.
https://ipo.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/wydawnictwa/wp-content/upload... ^ Some useful info PGDN’s vapor and storage behavior.
“Nitrate Esters Chemistry and Technology” is a good book for finding info on nitrate esters and their properties although some info gets lost in
translation from mandarin.
The “big players” (if you will) like BTTN and TMETN will always outshine the simple esters and if you have some spare malic acid and Pt
hydrogenation catalysts, or propionaldehyde and formaldehyde then you can try with them but other than that the classic NG is proven and capable for
most propellants applications so I’d recommend it over EGDN or PGDN. |