UN test O.1 errors in quantifying the behavior of solid oxidizers

• Validity of the UN test O.1 is examined for the case of ammonium nitrate-based products containing inerting additives.
• Anomalies and mis-rankings are found in the O.1 test criteria.
• Analysis is made of modes of action for fire-retardant additives.
• An analysis scheme is presented wherein mis-ranking does not occur.
• Additional limitations of the O.1 test are studied.

The results of the UN test O.1 for oxidizing solids are shown to be incorrect when specimens contain certain inertant additives, illustrated for the case of oxidizers in the ammonium nitrate fertilizer family. Test results for three different AN-based products containing inertants show that two of the three (including calcium ammonium nitrate, CAN, a long-known safer alternative to AN) would be misranked with the O.1 test. An analogy between the heat release rate of substances containing fire retardant (FR) chemicals is established and several ways by which FR behavior can be achieved are demonstrated. It is shown that the O.1 test implicitly adopts only one model of inertant action, and that chemicals which rely on a differing mode of inertant action are liable to be incorrectly treated. It is further shown that the physical basis of the O.1 test—an intimate mixture of finely-comminuted fuel and oxidizer—misrepresents the most common type of accidents involving oxidizers, and that such test results do not correspond to scenarios of a less extreme nature. The new O.3 test improves the analysis method, but does not resolve the problem of excessive commingling of fuel into oxidizer. It is recommended that the intermediate-scale arrangement used by the Bureau of Explosives be adopted for further development and standardization, in preference to the O.1 or O.3 test arrangements.