Sciencemadness Discussion Board - ANNM/ detonation

ANNM/ detonation

prometheus1970 - 19-12-2010 at 08:17

I read that the following mixture produces one helluva powerful charge:
1000 grams nh4no3
Nitromethane 185 grams
Methanol 84 grams

Can anyone tell me if this is a valid composition? Would 2 grams tatp with 3-4 grams nitrocelluose booster be sufficient to initiate said composition?

hissingnoise - 19-12-2010 at 09:49

Leaving out the MeOH and increasing the quantity of NM should increase sensitivity and improve OB . . .

holmes1880 - 19-12-2010 at 10:08

Actually, MeOH is very oxygen negative, but it is a desensitizer. Surprisingly, this is right off the activation of ammonium nitrate patent. Methanol based on quick math is 349.5% OB negative. (39.3)% for nitromethane and 20% for AN. At the end this ends up being a very positive mix (+33%)and it shows it during detonation. 3 detonations I've seen, NO2 was present every time in a nice little brown cloud. Power.....can't say because I didn't use any plates and anything over 500g sounds like a thunder hitting next to you.

BTW, what are you playing around with TATP for? AP and HMTD have terrible properties like no other primary 0.01K.........lead azide and silver acetylide which any adult with 2 hands and half a brain can make will go a long way.

medx - 19-12-2010 at 12:04

I tried mixture of NM/AN. Their ratios were 28.5%/ 71.5% respectively. Its power was high as TNT. But it has a big drawback. Since volatility of NM mixture losses its power in a few days.

holmes1880 - 19-12-2010 at 13:00

medex,

Elaborate on where you got the idea than the "mixture loses its power in a few days". If it is airtight? I really doubt that, but please explain.

On a different note, did you find a minimal time for NM to sensitize ammonium nitrate. I read references of as short as 3-5 minutes for NM to even absorb into the grains of AN.

prometheus1970 - 19-12-2010 at 16:13

As for tatp, I use it primarily because it's the only primary synth I know well/ it's so easy, obtainable. I know it's really nasty, but I figured (perhaps incorrectly) that if I keep my batches <5 grams and don't press it, I'd be okay. I've been considering synthing silver acetylide, but don't have the apparatus yet. Funny you should say"two hands and half a brain", I'm doing just fine in the brains department, but only have the use of one hand (not related to pyro activities at all)

[Edited on 12-20-2010 by prometheus1970]

prometheus1970 - 19-12-2010 at 19:28

I had only planned to use 1/10 of the amounts in the above composition. I have some property where I could get by with a very loud gunshot sized bang, but if it sounds like above ground nuclear testing, the local authorities may take an interest.

prometheus1970 - 19-12-2010 at 19:33

BTW, what are you playing around with TATP for? AP and HMTD have terrible properties like no other primary 0.01K.........lead azide and silver acetylide which any adult with 2 hands and half a brain can make will go a long way.
[/rquote]

Another thing I like about ap is that those little crystals look like they could be much smaller. I have about 300 grams I can't wait to put in my coffee grinder in order to maximize surface area/burn rate (sic)

holmes1880 - 19-12-2010 at 21:19

Pressing peroxides isn't a great idea, but can be done if moist and with proper tool(not fingers). Still, making SA is not hard and ingredients can be easily attained. Don't cheat yourself of safety. Pressing is done not to make things more dangerous and thrilling, but to attain higher detonation pressure:

Pd = detonation pressure (MPa)
ρ = explosive density (kg/m3e)
D = detonation velocity (km/s)

Pd = ρ X D^2 / 4

Always more reliable to use a small cap that is pressed, than a bigger cap with lose mix. Just have a safe procedure for pressing caps....shield, ear muffs, goggles, never come in contact with cap directly, etc... Sorry to hear about you missing one arm, though, how the heck do you get your arm missing. You must have been doing something stupid...

[Edited on 20-12-2010 by holmes1880]

medx - 19-12-2010 at 22:30

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

medex,

Elaborate on where you got the idea than the "mixture loses its power in a few days". If it is airtight? I really doubt that, but please explain.

On a different note, did you find a minimal time for NM to sensitize ammonium nitrate. I read references of as short as 3-5 minutes for NM to even absorb into the grains of AN.

holmess, for details, i prepared my mixture. after one hour i exploded half of it. it was very powerful. i stored remained mixture in a plastic container. its mouth was closed but was not airtight. it was stayed at about 27- 33C six or seven days. after that i exploded it like first. it was explode but its power was very low.

holmes1880 - 19-12-2010 at 22:32

Well, so not airtight. That explains it the drop of power, AN will suck up water even if the container is apparently closed well.

hiperion42 - 20-12-2010 at 00:31

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

...how the heck do you get your arm missing. You must have been doing something stupid...

If you knew how many times you possibly came close
to loosing something you wouldn't say such a thing.
And he didn't implicitly say he was missing anything.

[Edited on 20-12-2010 by hiperion42]

prometheus1970 - 20-12-2010 at 06:36

Thanks hiperion, I just sent holmes a u2u explaining that all my parts are intact, but due tosome neurological issues, they don't all function as they should.

quicksilver - 20-12-2010 at 07:13

Quote: Originally posted by prometheus1970

I read that the following mixture produces one helluva powerful charge:
1000 grams nh4no3
Nitromethane 185 grams
Methanol 84 grams

Can anyone tell me if this is a valid composition? Would 2 grams tatp with 3-4 grams nitrocelluose booster be sufficient to initiate said composition?

Check out Hurst's vast backlog of materiel. He held the patent for KinPak & KinStik (I believe he still does). Nitromethane is extremely interesting in that it evaporates so quickly that a level of material in a container that is not fully sealed will evaporate very quickly - what's more nitromethane is also hygroscopic! So in addition to looses due to evaporation; you'll fine water in the material.......
That's the exact reason for the binary containers. The nitromethane is in a sealed polymer envelope. The Ammonium nitrate is also in a sealed container. The containers are made to actually fit together and seal again.
Kinestik was also produced with a sensitized formula of powdered Al (it's 10% of total weight of mixed product).
The most materil will be Hurst's two patents and the new-groups dialogs on KinePak. Google:
News groups, "alt.engineering.explosives", Hurst
-=-=-
You'll get the real nuts and bolts from there.

No booster needed: never had been. Material had been over driven via SSS detonator (documented in patent) and few issues were altered.

[Edited on 20-12-2010 by quicksilver]

prometheus1970 - 20-12-2010 at 08:14

Thanks! I'll look into that.

holmes1880 - 20-12-2010 at 12:47

Quote: Originally posted by hiperion42

If you knew how many times you possibly came close
to loosing something you wouldn't say such a thing.
[Edited on 20-12-2010 by hiperion42]

That's why most people in the world are walking around crippled and missing limbs/body functions. NOT.

Go away troll.

Lead azide, ag2c2 syntheses

prometheus1970 - 21-12-2010 at 08:00

Speaking of ag2c2 and lead azide, I've seen many videos of the ag2c2 synthesis, but they were not annotated with amounts, ratios, etc. I have yet to find a direct syntesis of lead azide, they all involve making sodium azide and reacting that to get lead azide is this the only way, or is there another, more direct approach?

holmes1880 - 21-12-2010 at 10:49

http://www.powerlabs.org/chemlabs/acetylide.htm
Silver acetylide synthesis, as plain as it gets. All ingredients I can purchase right now over the internet, not a problem. Silver nitrate is rather pricy, but you're not making any big amounts with it.

Lead azide is also rather simple synthesis, but I didn't look too much into. Try Ag2C2, since there's more info on it.

[Edited on 21-12-2010 by holmes1880]

prometheus1970 - 21-12-2010 at 13:59

Found the ag2C2 info I needed, but I'm still not finding a direct route to pb(n3)2, lead azide

prometheus1970 - 21-12-2010 at 14:03

I've found that Ionly need a gram or so of agno3 per batch, but still not sure what the yield is, so getting the silve nitrate, not a big problem, nor the apparatus, since I can bubble aceylene gas through agno3 aqueous solution rather than a nitric acid solution (my tubing is vinyl, which might not withstand the acid)

holmes1880 - 21-12-2010 at 14:36

I didn't find any info on yields(but can find out from reliable sources). Keep in mind that 1g of Ag2c2 should give you at least 3-5 cap tests. Here's another method for you if you're short on money

http://www.jackerypyro.com/silver_acetylide.htm
First synthesis, don't make more than 250mg and just focus on testing its properties: friction, impact, and spark.

franklyn - 21-12-2010 at 16:23

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

Pd = detonation pressure (MPa)
ρ = explosive density (kg/m3e)
D = detonation velocity (km/s)

Pd = ρ X D^2 / 4

The formula as presented does not indicate an answer consistent with
what is implied , that this expresses the detonation front pressure.
Unless " e " as shown ( the base of natural logarithm ) figures somehow.
Assuming values for calculation shown below here at the right

(MPa) = detonation pressure
ρ = density of explosive (m/V) . . .1.6
D = detonation velocity (km/s). . . 6

MPa = (ρ D ²) / 4 . . . (1.6 x 6 ²) / 4 = 14.4

one atmosphere is equal to 100,000 pascals , 14,400,000 / 100,000 = 144 atm

144 x 14.7 p.s.i. = 2117 , a ton per square inch , about that inside a tank of compressed gas.

detonation of an explosive produces 1000 times as much pressure.
typically 10's to 100's of kilobars (1000 atmospheres)
_____________________________

It should be obvious also that this cannot apply generally
to all explosives since the density of lead azide is triple
that of other primary explosives with similar velocity of
detonation and have comparable performance.
.

[Edited on 22-12-2010 by franklyn]

prometheus1970 - 21-12-2010 at 16:52

I just noticed that my "status" was changed from "harmless" to "hazard to self" I can't help but wonder if this is because of my lack of knowledge, yet continued interest in energetics or the assumption Holmes 1880 made about my'missing' arm it doesn't really matter, I suppose, I'm just idly curious...

prometheus1970 - 21-12-2010 at 19:20

I found a super easy synth for lead azide and sources for the necessary reagents (NaN3, PbN3)

franklyn - 21-12-2010 at 23:30

See first page here _
Explosive Evaluation of Coordination Compounds
http://www.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/preprint%20archive/Files/07_3...

P = 0.01 ρ _D ²
. . . . . . . . . . . 4

where :

. . . . . . . . .P = detonation pressure in bars
. . . . . . . . .ρ = density
. . . . . . . . .D = detonation velocity , m / s

Using identical values as before :
ρ = 1.6
D = 6000

144000 = _0.01 x 1.6 x 36,000,000_
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

.

.

prometheus1970 - 22-12-2010 at 06:01

Thanks, that clears thing up a bit

SB15 - 23-12-2010 at 13:03

Quote: Originally posted by franklyn

The formula as presented does not indicate an answer consistent with
what is implied...

ρ = density of explosive (m/V) . . .1.6

Hey, I didn't know there was any solid explosive in existence with similar density to air at STP.

You messed up the unit conversion. The formula Holmes posted clearly lists the density in kilograms per cubic meter, not grams per cubic centimeter. Taking your figures and properly converting them, this gives:

Pd = p*D2/4
Pd = (1600kg/m3

*(6.0km/s)2/4
Pd = 14 400MPa

Or about 142 000ATM (2.1MPSI). Very reasonable.

holmes1880 - 23-12-2010 at 15:04

SB15,

Thanks for explaining it to franklyn.

I didn't bother cause that's missing the point, which is that density is very critical. In practical terms, pressing blasting caps is necessary.

prometheus1970 - 23-12-2010 at 17:27

Good point. Pressing is necessary, pressing tatp is friggi'n retarded if it can be avoided, therefore using tatp when it can be avoided is friggin retarded...

franklyn - 23-12-2010 at 20:23

@ holmes1880

@ SB15

yes I see now - query withdrawn

S.I. unit for mass/density kg /m ³ explains the 1000 times greater magnitude
which only if figured in this way the given formula correctly implies a realistic value.

Standard explosives data is given as an decimal factor times 1 , the value for
the density of water. Densities as this are expressed in gm / cm ³
"explosive density " to me does not imply anything else.

It seems out of category to utilize a calculation appropriate for determining
explosive charges for boreholes at an open pit mine in the context of
applications of gram amounts. But oh we'll that's just me , you go ahead
and speak of energetic material densities in tons per cubic meter if that suits you.

.

[Edited on 24-12-2010 by franklyn]

SB15 - 24-12-2010 at 11:39

I'm not in any way implying that kg/m3 is a more suitable unit for explosive density, I was merely indicating that the formula is correct when used with the given parameters.

That said, it makes little sense to me to use an inconsistent unit system tailored only towards convenience in a specific application. Having studied physics and chem at University, I find that it's beneficial to simply use SI base units in all calculations. It helps to eliminate the exact type of confusion that occurred here.

Just my opinion though.

prometheus1970 - 25-12-2010 at 07:17

I want to thank evrybody for their help with my various questions. I'd also like to wish everybody a MERRY CHRISMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Jimbo Jones - 27-12-2010 at 11:25

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

http://www.powerlabs.org/chemlabs/acetylide.htm
Silver acetylide synthesis, as plain as it gets. All ingredients I can purchase right now over the internet, not a problem. Silver nitrate is rather pricy, but you're not making any big amounts with it.

Lead azide is also rather simple synthesis, but I didn't look too much into. Try Ag2C2, since there's more info on it.

[Edited on 21-12-2010 by holmes1880]

Even Ag2C2. AgNO3 is weak initiator. Well it’s useful to some degrees, but if I had silver nitrate around, I will definitely try this silver azide route.

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=874

hiperion42 - 28-12-2010 at 08:44

Quote: Originally posted by Jimbo Jones

Even Ag2C2. AgNO3 is weak initiator. Well it’s useful to some degrees, but if I had silver nitrate around, I will definitely try this silver azide route.

For most the latter will be substantially more difficult to synthesize.
Ag2C2. AgNO3 in conjunction with a nitrated sensitive sugar alcohol
works.

[Edited on 28-12-2010 by hiperion42]

Jimbo Jones - 28-12-2010 at 12:36

Quote: Originally posted by hiperion42

Quote: Originally posted by Jimbo Jones

Even Ag2C2. AgNO3 is weak initiator. Well it’s useful to some degrees, but if I had silver nitrate around, I will definitely try this silver azide route.

For most the latter will be substantially more difficult to synthesize.
Ag2C2. AgNO3 in conjunction with a sensitive sugar alcohol
works.

Not so good in small diameters…

Rain - 9-1-2011 at 10:39

Quote: Originally posted by prometheus1970

-->It might be the Methanols reduction properties.
Try adding in some Al powder, as methanol removes the oxide layer, thus providing another reducing compound in contact with the AN.

Be careful though - this mixture might be extremely sensitive.

[Edited on 9-1-2011 by Rain]

holmes1880 - 14-1-2011 at 02:37

@Rain

Adding Al to ANNM does not make it potentially "extremely sensitive". It makes it sensitive to #4 blasting cap.
The 1000/185/84 ratio using Methanol is just horrible. Methanol is a desensitizer and this is so far from OB that it's not even funny.

prometheus1970 - 14-1-2011 at 08:21

How about these ratios? (for annm/al):
AN-43%
NM-22%
Al-35%

Rain - 14-1-2011 at 10:57

The Methanol is key, as it removes the Al oxide layer from the Al particles.This gives the Al a lower barrier to overcome to act as a reducer towards the oxide -AN in this case-.The reason I say that it might become very sensitive is because of the above mentioned fact.Take for example Zinc powder.When mixed with AN, it becomes extremely sensitive, so that it will ignite when in contact with moisture which acts as an electrolyte.This is because of Zn natural elecronegativity -1.1Volt in water, and thus its properties as a reductant.The same laws for Al, it only has a lower reduction potential than Zn.

White Yeti - 31-7-2011 at 09:38

I don't think 3-4 grams of nitrocellulose is enough to ignite such a mixture. I'm intrigued by your use of methanol, why would you use a fuel that has a relatively low energy content by mass? In this case, I would have used diesel fuel. It's a lil more expensive, but you should be able to use less of it per Kg of AN.

As for the boost, I would use much more than 3-4g. In my oppinion, using too little boost is really dangerous. Imagine you use too little and the ANFO doesn't ignite, you have the most dangerous kind of charge, one that hasn't detonated, but that can detonate at any time without warning, whether you're close to it or not.

Rosco Bodine - 31-7-2011 at 09:50

IIRC there was an inconvenient storage problem for the aluminized NH4NO3 composition which was used some as a filler for the parachute deployed "daisy cutter" munition MOAB device ......which resulted in storage depots going up predictably without any provocation whatsoever, other than passing time.
Tick, tick, tick .....the clock is surely running

sometimes even when there is no
ticking to be heard.

holmes1880 - 31-7-2011 at 12:00

^^^
You are talking of BLU-82B 12,600lb bombs with DBA-22M slurry was what detonated. AN/Al 50/34, water, guar gum, boric acid, ethylene glycol.

http://books.google.com/books?id=15KyF-iOdmYC&pg=PA274&a...

They were stored for years in ton quantities inside a metal casing. After that, these BLU-82Bthey were further used, but could not be stored for more than 6 months.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yEdhcxG...

NH4NO3 and NM all detonated spontaneously in metal containers in HUGE amounts. Are you trying to scare me with that Rosco?

Nice...

pjig - 31-7-2011 at 13:46

Are you suggesting that the aluminized the AN has a limited storage life? If it is under vacuum, will it delay the nitrogen formation ? What if a nitrogen robbing urea or other stabilizer is added? Is there still a danger of the stuff becoming unstable ?

holmes1880 - 31-7-2011 at 14:55

@pjig

What is this noobery, did you not read any of the links and just started asking questions? When you have a 6 ton AN/AL/Water mixtures sitting in a metal casing for 6 years outside in hot weather, it will decompose. The bomb incident happened after 4 days of 40C heat on day 5. That thing must have been heated up to several hundred degrees celsius. Any explosive subjected to high temperatures in large amounts will decompose. Take C4 shelf life-- it is 10 years under *normal* storage conditions. These MOABs could be safely stored for 180 days without any decomposition.

That being said, a binary explosive shouldn't be stored for prolonged amounts of time, nor does it need to be. You mix the ingredients before the detonation or an hour before you go to detonate.

Rosco was just trying to mess with me. I have been deflating his argument that primaries are safe, particularly SA, so he tried to prank me with this:

Quote:

Tick, tick, tick .....the clock is surely running

sometimes even when there is no
ticking to be heard.

KemiRockarFett - 31-7-2011 at 16:16

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

^^^
You are talking of BLU-82B 12,600lb bombs with DBA-22M slurry was what detonated. AN/Al 50/34, water, guar gum, boric acid, ethylene glycol.

http://books.google.com/books?id=15KyF-iOdmYC&pg=PA274&a...

They were stored for years in ton quantities inside a metal casing. After that, these BLU-82Bthey were further used, but could not be stored for more than 6 months.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yEdhcxG...

NH4NO3 and NM all detonated spontaneously in metal containers in HUGE amounts. Are you trying to scare me with that Rosco?

Nice...

Dont beleave everything you read on the internet.
A 6 ton bomb with mainly Al, water and AN that detonates by it self after 40 degrees in the sun. Sure baby yes.

KemiRockarFett - 31-7-2011 at 16:18

Quote: Originally posted by Rain

The Methanol is key, as it removes the Al oxide layer from the Al particles.This gives the Al a lower barrier to overcome to act as a reducer towards the oxide -AN in this case-.The reason I say that it might become very sensitive is because of the above mentioned fact.Take for example Zinc powder.When mixed with AN, it becomes extremely sensitive, so that it will ignite when in contact with moisture which acts as an electrolyte.This is because of Zn natural elecronegativity -1.1Volt in water, and thus its properties as a reductant.The same laws for Al, it only has a lower reduction potential than Zn.

No, the methanol will not effect the Al2O3 at al.
Methanol will act as a fuel, why use that toxic garbage ?

holmes1880 - 31-7-2011 at 18:06

@KemiRockeFett

Yeah, it looked like Gerald L. Hurst was willing to throw nuclear waste in those kinepak compositions for the economy's sake. Methanol and xylene....you can't even work with xylene without a respirator. Ugghh. But I think the commercial product only has colored NM.

Are you saying the military reports are misleading about BLU-82B's detonating on their own. They investigated that pretty thoroughly and found traces of decompositions in other bombs and so decided to limit their safe shelf life to 6 months. If NM can detonate inside a truck drum, so can a binary composition with similar critical diameter, while being on a hot sun for years.

KemiRockarFett - 1-8-2011 at 01:48

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

@KemiRockeFett

Yeah, it looked like Gerald L. Hurst was willing to throw nuclear waste in those kinepak compositions for the economy's sake. Methanol and xylene....you can't even work with xylene without a respirator. Ugghh. But I think the commercial product only has colored NM.

Are you saying the military reports are misleading about BLU-82B's detonating on their own. They investigated that pretty thoroughly and found traces of decompositions in other bombs and so decided to limit their safe shelf life to 6 months. If NM can detonate inside a truck drum, so can a binary composition with similar critical diameter, while being on a hot sun for years.

The so called military report claiming the mix of mainly aluminium and ammonium nitrate in a water gelly is detonating by sun storage, forget it. Otherwise we need to find a lot of more references on that. Materials for bombs cant just have a shelf live of 6 years, it must be much longer. What will happend if the bombs start to detonate by them self around 6 years storage, how big is the risk then after 3 years? So this so called reference to military report have some serios errors for sure.

Kinepake is NM/AN in perfect mix , everything else is garbage. Put an volotaile compound as CH3OH to the bulk is not to recommend as its toxic and also reduces the power.

holmes1880 - 1-8-2011 at 02:50

I don't know, but I don't see any need for cover-up. These were one of the most massive, non-nuclear bombs ever made, so storing them in confined metal shell, subjected to wide range of temperatures has potential to decompose ANY explosive, not just binary, but even the most stable secondary explosives like TNT. As far as shelf life, they have limited operation as FAEs, so maybe they use just-in-time inventory method. That woudl make the current U.S. debt much smaller if gov-nt cronies weren't stockpiling bombs and then send them to be controllably detonated because they expired.

AN/NM, with powdered, high density FGAN, is one of the most powerful compositions I've ever tested. Although, adding metal helps to add some significant brisance in this composition.

KemiRockarFett - 1-8-2011 at 07:44

Quote: Originally posted by holmes1880

I don't know, but I don't see any need for cover-up. These were one of the most massive, non-nuclear bombs ever made, so storing them in confined metal shell, subjected to wide range of temperatures has potential to decompose ANY explosive, not just binary, but even the most stable secondary explosives like TNT. As far as shelf life, they have limited operation as FAEs, so maybe they use just-in-time inventory method. That woudl make the current U.S. debt much smaller if gov-nt cronies weren't stockpiling bombs and then send them to be controllably detonated because they expired.

AN/NM, with powdered, high density FGAN, is one of the most powerful compositions I've ever tested. Although, adding metal helps to add some significant brisance in this composition.

1) The bomb subject. TNT could be stored 10 000 years at normal conditions without decomposing. The same is true for very many military explosives. I think that you have NC propellants on your mind that will start to accelerate their break down as fast as their stabilizers are consumed. Therefore the ammo storages are checked for NOx/HNO3 at regulary time intervalls.

2) FAE, not this bomb, its a high metal content so some thermobaric effect may be ecpected. FAE is fuel air explosives.

3) Adding Al or Mg fuel to kinepake increases its energy content but decreases it VoD therefore probably NOT increase its brisance at al, if you did not added some nano-tech super fine al powder.

Rosco Bodine - 1-8-2011 at 11:11

I'm pretty sure the storage instability problem was real and was reported in reliable literature. It was a problem which led to having to redesign the munition
filler and use an alternative composition. So far as I know this is not some urban myth but was documented in DOD published literature. That has been a few years ago and the particular references to cite I don't know, but they probably do exist since it is not a trivial issue when bomb storage depots go up all by themselves after some vague sort of "expiration date". Ordinarily a "fail safe"
engineering rule is applied to munitions where unreliable function is manifested as a dud which does not fire, rather than a failure being manifested as an unexpected self-initiation which may be even more inconvenient.

Bot0nist - 1-8-2011 at 11:33

Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine

Ordinarily a "fail safe"
engineering rule is applied to munitions where unreliable function is manifested as a dud which does not fire, rather than a failure being manifested as an unexpected self-initiation which may be even more inconvenient.

Lol, I'll say.

KemiRockarFett - 1-8-2011 at 12:55

Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine

I'm pretty sure the storage instability problem was real and was reported in reliable literature. It was a problem which led to having to redesign the munition
filler and use an alternative composition. So far as I know this is not some urban myth but was documented in DOD published literature. That has been a few years ago and the particular references to cite I don't know, but they probably do exist since it is not a trivial issue when bomb storage depots go up all by themselves after some vague sort of "expiration date". Ordinarily a "fail safe"
engineering rule is applied to munitions where unreliable function is manifested as a dud which does not fire, rather than a failure being manifested as an unexpected self-initiation which may be even more inconvenient.

Still need explanation of how a higly water containing Al/AN gelly goes high order spontaniosly. This must be of serious concern as very many comersial explosives are based on water/AN/Al base. Therefore I wounder why this is not reported more on. Have somebody access to articles on the subject please add link to pdf file. Some interesting chemistry to learn.
We need to know more.

watson.fawkes - 2-8-2011 at 06:44

Quote: Originally posted by KemiRockarFett

Still need explanation of how a higly water containing Al/AN gelly goes high order spontaniosly

Why do you keep assuming it was detonation? Deflagration would be almost as inconvenient as a surprise.

Gargamel - 11-6-2015 at 08:26

I decided to resurrect this old topic, because it is mentioned in the compendium thread.

Reading the Wikipedia article on ANNM, I found this statement:

Quote:

Depending on the detonation impetus (for example a #6 versus a #10 detonator), the products of the detonation can be decidedly unstoichiometric.

Does that mean ANNM is capable of low order detonation?
I was under the impression that once you got it going, it will accelerate itself to it's own characteristic Vdet?

[Edited on 11-6-2015 by Gargamel]

VladimirLem - 11-6-2015 at 08:36

Quote: Originally posted by Gargamel

Does that mean ANNM is capable of low order detonation?
I was under the impression that once you got it going, it will accelerate itself to it's own characteristic Vdet?

it could be, as far as i know
Using ANNM may be not that much because it is very easy to ignite and so its not that much likely than with lets say ANFO or Ammonal mixtures but i think most explosives can detonate low order.
The more easy they are to ignite, the less seems it to go low order...

A strong Det-Cap/Booster is never worthles afaik

Madchemistrystudent - 7-9-2019 at 17:15

I'm going to give this a whirl. I don't see any obvious drawbacks since I've got fresh NH4NO3 and one liter of 100% NM
I've read that it's very powerful if everything is right.

[Edited on 8-9-2019 by Madchemistrystudent]