aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Theoretical detonator accident outcome
Back when I was still making detonators and the like, I would use pliers to hold the detonators as I pressed and glued them. I used SADS as my primary
meaning that it could have detonated at any time from a stray spark (something as stupid as a hot glue gun malfunction, very unlikely but you can't
risk it with this stuff) since the DDT is freaking non existent. It just detonates in any weight.
Now, I put emphasis on never touching the detonator directly while the SADS was in there and not closed off properly (aka finished). So I had hearing
protection (I should have probably doubled up on it), face shield, leather gloves, and sometimes safety glasses underneath the face shield.
The detonators consisted of a total of around 800mg melt cast ETN, 200mg of pressed ETN, and 200mg of SADS. Likely overkill and I could have probably
gotten away with much less. (Speaking of which, ETN is pretty sensitive for a secondary, how many J of energy would it take to initiate ETN plastics?)
But that was how it was.
If that detonator had gone kaboom on me while it was about a 1-2 feet away from my chest (the detonator was all thin plastic and non lethal shrapnel,
I added a metal sleeve once it was complete) and my hand was the distance of those pliers away, how would I have ended up? I would try to minimize
holding the detonator with the pliers but it was often where I had to use my fingers to squeeze them. So had it gone off, the pliers might have either
been blown apart sending metal around, or they would have forcefully opened up.
I know I would be in a bit of pain but could the blast of the shockwave cause internal organ damage? What state would my hands have been in with the
leather gloves? Any other injuries that I could have sustained in those days had I had 2020 luck? Some have said that a full detonator would likely
cause my hearing to be royally screwed even with hearing protection. I tried doing research and from the few random numbers I scrambled together it
seemed as if #8 detonators put out 130 dB. With good hearing protection (max of 30 dB drop), that wouldn't be detrimental. I don't believe that number
though. 130 seems too low for over a gram of ETN.
In hindsight, if I had a plastic bottle, put in a wooden base that has a small hole cut in it to hold the detonator somewhat, and then fill with sand,
that would have probably been better. The mass of the sand would absorb at least some of the kinetic energy and the sand would hold everything upright
without having metal anywhere near it. Would that have had its flaws? It was just a thought I had.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 392
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
A mil M14 cap is a 1/4" aluminum tube with lead azide, lead styphenate and PETN. It has a Net Explosive Weight of 11.73g. If you hold an m14 in the
fingers during detonation it breaks bone and lacerates fingers to bone depth. The closer to the closed end receives the greatest energy during
detonation. The NEW calc is cumulative as a standard factor and combines the power of all the components and weights in combination. The aluminum caps
mostly peel out on the ends and send fragments of aluminum in random directions that do lacerate within about 12". It is possible to be around 2.5 ft
from an m14 cap detonating such as micro breaching charges but they usually use lighter caps and ppl wear PPE and every once in a while still receive
fragments.
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Good info thank you. So by the looks of it, my detonators with the net explosive weight of 1.2 grams and no metal casings (plastic) would be fine if
my hand was around 6 inches away right?
The pliers are a different story though. Although if I ever decided to make any more I could use that sand bucket type thing to hold the detonator and
that would require no metal to be near at all and absorb a lot of shock.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 392
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
A tool in contact with detonation will transfer energy to the hand. If the tool is affixed to a mass during det then that can absorb energy. Most of
the time ppl make jigs and devices for loading material that has a potential of detonation. For ETN with an RE of 1.6, you might be losing fingers at
6 inches. The fixtures or parts of a table could be projected, rings would transfer energy differently than the fingers inside. Pressure wise you
should be fine but it will ring your bell. Any surface in proximity to det will promote reflective pressure and have a multiplicative effect at the
area of detonation. If it's in a work box or something it will seriously amplify pressure, with opposite opposing surfaces.
Maybe put some thawed chicken legs at the proximity and altitude of your hands on four sides and put any tools in position and conduct a controlled
det to observe what takes place.
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thank you for the chart. I'll have to do some calculations to see what the TNT equivalent it would be.
Yea I am not into explosives anymore on the practical part but I still love theoretical. I suppose I could try and make some small amount of explosive
as it would be legal for me to set off on my property and run that test you suggested.
I have designed a simple jig for detonator building. A block of wood with a shallow hole to allow the detonator to stay straight up a bit. I don't
want to insert the detonator far into the wood for wooden shrapnel reasons. Then fill the remaining volume with sand and pack it down a little to hold
it upright and absorb forces. Then I could use tools with at a distance to put everything together. I supposed I could do some dry runs since I am not
really a fan of actually using explosives these days.
I could try and do some crude calculations to see how much of the overall energy the mass of the sand would absorb and adjust from there. I know a
friend of mine has used 5 gallon buckets of sand and they stand up well to even 1 gram of ETN. That is 5 gallons and completely covered though.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 392
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
Sand is an excellent low cost dampener for both explosive percussion and shrapnel. Sandbags are the first choice of material used to control where a
detonation energy goes in military EOD applications. Sandbags have also been used for decaying projectile energy very successfully. I think you are
thinking in the right direction.
Theory is theory but proofs in the pudding. I would recommend to do a test of what it is you're preventing from happening in as realistic condition as
possible and then adjust, rinse and repeat until you are satisfied with the level of risk.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
You can use pig's feet to test for human hand damage. Put the tongs with No.8 between the two pig legs and fire. The pliers may be destroyed. Pig legs
for sure. Are cheap. Use a non-frozen pig legs.
Or you use more safely material for filling. And not SA-DS. ...
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  | You can use pig's feet to test for human hand damage. Put the tongs with No.8 between the two pig legs and fire. The pliers may be destroyed. Pig legs
for sure. Are cheap. Use a non-frozen pig legs.
Or you use more safely material for filling. And not SA-DS. ...
|
Hi doctor! Love your work. I would take it that you would recommend CHP as a primary 
SADS is the only thing I have and like to work with. Organic peroxides are a no go for me but I suppose there are some primaries I could look into.
What I like the most about SADS is that the synthesis is very quick. That means I do not have to store the detonator nor do I have to store the
explosive. Storing is illegal where I live so SADS has been the primary of choice for me since day 1.
SADS isn't very sensitive until flame or sparks are involved. Static is supposed to set it off too so I just don't like taking chances.
If I ever make detonators again I would opt for the sand absorption rig. Should protect me much more from everything. I could even begin to use metal
casings for the detonator instead of plastic straws (which later get a thin aluminum sleeve for sturdiness and to prevent bubbling during detonation).
Pig's feet would make a pretty good indicator of damage done to the hand bone but I wonder how accurately it would indicate finger loss.
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Hey Buddy | Sand is an excellent low cost dampener for both explosive percussion and shrapnel. Sandbags are the first choice of material used to control where a
detonation energy goes in military EOD applications. Sandbags have also been used for decaying projectile energy very successfully. I think you are
thinking in the right direction.
Theory is theory but proofs in the pudding. I would recommend to do a test of what it is you're preventing from happening in as realistic condition as
possible and then adjust, rinse and repeat until you are satisfied with the level of risk. |
I definitely agree. I know someone in the explosives Explosive Ordnance Disposal unit in the military and they use sandbags for shrapnel catching.
What you said is very true, real life situation is always different from theoretical by some degree.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
The issue of safety around detonators is basically a basic issue in energy materials. About every six months, or more often, there is the question of
how to make safe detonator. And almost always someone comes up with the idea of a bucket of sand. CHP is less sensitive to all stimuli of cognition
than SADS. That is for sure. For filling CHP not need: bucket with sand, bunker, pliers, sandbags, sawdust, flour, special expensive instruments,
fear, wide eyes, fire tank. And a lot nexts. But if someone wants to make detonator, lined with sandbags, a like in war, let them experiment. His
choice and entertainment....
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov | The issue of safety around detonators is basically a basic issue in energy materials. About every six months, or more often, there is the question of
how to make safe detonator. And almost always someone comes up with the idea of a bucket of sand. CHP is less sensitive to all stimuli of cognition
than SADS. That is for sure. For filling CHP not need: bucket with sand, bunker, pliers, sandbags, sawdust, flour, special expensive instruments,
fear, wide eyes, fire tank. And a lot nexts. But if someone wants to make detonator, lined with sandbags, a like in war, let them experiment. His
choice and entertainment....
|
I agree and that is very true. Although I saw CHP seem more shock sensitive than SADS. I saw your video where after a friction test, your SADS
detonated from a little tap. CHP isn't super shock sensitive from the test I have seen on your channel.
I think even with CHP you should still prepare for possible detonation. Things are unpredictable and I would rather not lose a hand due to a slim
chance becoming reality.
I presume that may have been a spark or I have also heard of detonation from ultra pure SADS due to formation of larger crystals. Not sure which one
it was but I know my SADS is the least shock sensitive thing I have ever made besides picric acid. Friction sensitivity is also relatively low from
what I have been able to test. I might be able to reduce the static sensitivity by coating with graphite powder. I have yet to test static sensitivity
but I know it is listed as having a high static sensitivity.
I'd also add that the change of the detonator going off in my case is fairly low. Static has little chance of getting into the straw and actually
touching the SADS and initiating it. The biggest issue is the low DDT.
[Edited on 19-11-2020 by aromaticfanatic]
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Yes, CHP has lower DDT. Require steel cavity. If you has SADS quality preparation, is better than CHP.
SADS works always in any cavity. Even without cavity.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Very true. My favorite thing to do with SADS is to sprinkle barely visible amounts of it onto aluminum foil and run a lighter underneath it and watch
as the tiny pieces detonate and cause a lightning show. Goes to show the virtually non existent DDT for SADS. That is it's biggest downfall in terms
of safety but it has the added benefit of reliability. I have also found that SADS's sensitivity is very quickly reduced with moisture content. Even
visibly dry SADS that was washed with acetone an hour or two ago will sometimes fail to detonate the ETN due to the trace water content. So safer
storage can entail using acetone with small water content as a desensitizer. Be careful to keep SADS out of threads of container or use a better
container. Don't store dry that is for sure. The detonators should be stored with a dessicant to prevent failure from moisture as some people have
already experienced on this forum.
I have come up with a synthesis that makes very white and presumably pure SADS. I came onto the synthesis by accident and frustration. I had tried
various acetylene gas scrubbers, temperature control, varying amounts of acid, varying acetylene amounts, etc. and was still getting either black
spheres with white SADS on the inside, or just getting a tan/grey precipitate.
I had remembered the solubility of acetylene in acetone and used it to purify the acetylene from the CaC2 and water generator. Sure enough that worked
perfectly. Very pure and white precipitate from multiple runs and many other people tried my synthesis. I will have a look under my microscope and
observe crystal size but the sensitivity is very low in terms of shock and friction.
CHP's need for confinement may decrease reliability (for the amateur with no standardized construction methods) and safety (due to metallic shrapnel),
but I believe the power is higher and the sensitivity to flame and static is much lower. CHP and SADS both have their strengths and weaknesses. CHP is
a better explosive but in practice, SADS may be more favorable for some amateurs. As I have said, SADS is more favorable to me due to quick synthesis
that can be completed within a day. No illegal storage. I am looking into basic lead azide as a substitute. I am not certain if I will use it or not
but I am hoping that the DDT isn't as extreme and that the static sensitivity is lower.
Thanks for the information Dr. L! Keep up the great work
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Good method. Washing acetylene in acetone. And because acetone is miscible with water, I thought of putting CaC2 into 300g of pure acetone, for
example. And just add water dropwise to the acetone. Traces of water will react with CaC2 to form acetylene. And the acetone washing process could be
largely maintained. It's just an idea to simplify the acetylene generator into one bottle. Maybe it's nonsense...
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov | | Good method. Washing acetylene in acetone. And because acetone is miscible with water, I thought of putting CaC2 into 300g of pure acetone, for
example. And just add water dropwise to the acetone. Traces of water will react with CaC2 to form acetylene. And the acetone washing process could be
largely maintained. It's just an idea to simplify the acetylene generator into one bottle. Maybe it's nonsense... |
It's a good idea in theory but I think that by the time you reach a fast enough C2H2 production rate, there is too much water that knocks acetylene
out of acetone. The reactor also warms up so you'll be making a lot of acetone vapor.
I think in practice it's more time efficient and higher yielding if the acetylene is simply bubbled through acetone in a narrow test tube. That method
has given me very good results again and again.
One thing I question is if dextrin would help maintain and reduce crystal size of SADS. Very pure SADS that forms large crystals is very sensitive and
known to cause issues. I should give that a try one of these days.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
A potent inhibitor against crystal growth during NH4NO3 crystallization is Abietic acid. Pine resin contains about 30% of this acid.
Usually 0.2% - 0.5% against crystal growth is sufficient. Of course, dextrin also reduces the size of the crystals.
Rosin for tin soldering is about 80% abietic acid.
[Edited on 20-11-2020 by Laboratory of Liptakov]
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
aromaticfanatic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 173
Registered: 10-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Interesting, I have never heard of rosin for tin soldering being used to crystal size control. I wonder if it is difficult to dissolve? From what I
know it seems to be a sticky and waxy substance.
I'll look into testing some of the things I mentioned in this thread so far and I'll compare dextrin and abietic acid crystal size and sensitivity.
Thank you for the information!
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
