Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  ..  22    24
Author: Subject: Exotic thermites & analogs
MineMan
National Hazard
****




Posts: 492
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 19-4-2019 at 13:42


could try that. Curious to know results. Unfortunately there does not seem to be a lot published on thermite. I think a boron oxide plus mg or mg Al could work well. Boron also has a high melting temp and is a metalliod like silicon, but should hold more oxygen and maybe more energy? I just wouldn’t think a gel would do that much more damage then a liquid. I think it will do less. As soon as it cools just a little it won’t want to fall into holes thus it will just sit and not continue to burn through.

Have you seen a thermite lance. That would work better. They use copper oxide and direct the stream of pressurized molten metal onto the target. You need to add something that produces gas like CuO and add a nozzle.

They have handheld lances the size of flares that are impressive.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-4-2019 at 12:34


regular Fe2O3 thermite produces plenty of iron vapor (7.5 % by weight in adiabatic conditions) and expanded air/humidity.

I tested 80 g of SiO2/Fe2O3 thermite 40:60 pressed to 1.2 density and it worked great the initial flame is as fast as normal iron thermite pressed to that density but less energetic
then if created a semi-molten white hot mass that reacted for 90 s - sand particles with molten aluminium
great, so it would absolutely destroy a column - no leakage possible
the penetration power is not that great, in fact it frote just after penetration - pluging the holes with iron/sillicon/sand mixture... like an icicle
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MineMan
National Hazard
****




Posts: 492
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 26-4-2019 at 11:39


That’s what I was afraid of Rocinanate.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Bert
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 2710
Registered: 12-3-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: " I think we are all going to die. I think that love is an illusion. We are flawed, my darling".

[*] posted on 26-4-2019 at 11:53


Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
You need to add something that produces gas


Teflon powder (PTFE) has been used in some torches both as an additional oxidizer and to provide gasses which "pressurize the effluent".

Don't burn your fingers-




Rapopart’s Rules for critical commentary:

1. Attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly and fairly that your target says: “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”
2. List any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
3. Mention anything you have learned from your target.
4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

Anatol Rapoport was a Russian-born American mathematical psychologist (1911-2007).

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Vomaturge
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 160
Registered: 21-1-2018
Member Is Offline

Mood: thermodynamic

[*] posted on 26-4-2019 at 20:55


Whether you believe the sociopolitical theories this guyputs forward or not, I think he proves that a narrow stream of moving thermate will get more molten material in per unit area with decent heat transfer, instead of solidifying alumina and the like on the target and insulating it to the point that the heat slowly dissipates.

Incidentally, I think part of the spattering and gassing of thermites is from oxygen dissociation. It won't stay completely tied up in oxides at those temps.

Oh, and hi Bert! Nice to have you back.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 27-4-2019 at 00:27


Yes. That's what I saw and what inspired me. I like the idea of destroying columns with something else than noisy, fragmenting plastic/melt cast.
The problem with his method is that you will need some modifications or else a column under load can re-weld together. Also, his devices are needlesly big. You can easily press thermate to higher than 2.5 density on a press, he seems to be using non-pressed thermate which is likely 0.7 just as unpressed thermite.
Also, cutting is fine but heating it to failure (900°C over a small section) via my sillicon/iron thermite is more fun.

Also, any ideas on PTFE/Boron or PTFE/Be? Seems like a cool idea. I found only PTFE/Boron papers.
Also, PTFE/Be + 15 % PETN/ETN/HMX might be a nice explosive, I know that PTFE/AL + 15 % HMX has been tested an it is an all-right explosive.

[Edited on 27-4-2019 by Rocinante]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Vomaturge
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 160
Registered: 21-1-2018
Member Is Offline

Mood: thermodynamic

[*] posted on 27-4-2019 at 06:16


Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante  
Yes. That's what I saw and what inspired me. I like the idea of destroying columns with something else than noisy, fragmenting plastic/melt cast.
The problem with his method is that you will need some modifications or else a column under load can re-weld together. Also, his devices are needlesly big. You can easily press thermate to higher than 2.5 density on a press, he seems to be using non-pressed thermate which is likely 0.7 just as unpressed thermite.
Also, cutting is fine but heating it to failure (900°C over a small section) via my sillicon/iron thermite is more fun.

Also, any ideas on PTFE/Boron or PTFE/Be? Seems like a cool idea. I found only PTFE/Boron papers.
Also, PTFE/Be + 15 % PETN/ETN/HMX might be a nice explosive, I know that PTFE/AL + 15 % HMX has been tested an it is an all-right explosive.

[Edited on 27-4-2019 by Rocinante]


A: cool! (So long as nobody melts a real building, that is) glad you can think of improvements to that design. Maybe setting it at 45 degrees to the vertical would help? You'll need about 41% more, but combined with simultaneous ignition on multiple sides and members, welding should be nearly impossible.

B:I think LiD in a U-238 case will give longer positive phase in the open, more brisance if tamped, and cost less and create less toxic aftermath, at least per unit of energy released:
Cbrvusa2-262x265.gif.jpg - 24kB
Edit: Boron might be kind of expensive, but at least it won't be so toxic. It might be a good idea given fine enough particles and good mixing. Boron has fair density and low atomic weight, so you would need less of it to reduce a given amount of ptfe.

[Edited on 27-4-2019 by Vomaturge]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 27-4-2019 at 07:13


The oral LD50 for a man is like 7 g of BeF2. Not that much. Boron is kinetically trapped.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MineMan
National Hazard
****




Posts: 492
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 27-4-2019 at 10:07


Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
You need to add something that produces gas


Teflon powder (PTFE) has been used in some torches both as an additional oxidizer and to provide gasses which "pressurize the effluent".

Don't burn your fingers-


Bert!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-4-2019 at 12:45


I was somewhat wrong about the SiO2/Fe2O3 thermite, all it took was a slight hit and it came out, it burned through all 3 layers of metal can(s) with a surface area almost equal to the can it was in. So the high-viscosity mass thing worked, though you need like 80 g to burn a 45 mm diamater hole through like 0.5 mm of steel (about 5 g) - not that bad but not amazing.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MineMan
National Hazard
****




Posts: 492
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-4-2019 at 15:41


Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante  
I was somewhat wrong about the SiO2/Fe2O3 thermite, all it took was a slight hit and it came out, it burned through all 3 layers of metal can(s) with a surface area almost equal to the can it was in. So the high-viscosity mass thing worked, though you need like 80 g to burn a 45 mm diamater hole through like 0.5 mm of steel (about 5 g) - not that bad but not amazing.


I think that is not so good. You need pressure. Bert is right. Look up underwater cutting thermite formulations. PTFE and Be... why? Be creates massive energy when matched with oxygen, but not as much when paired with F. Also. Be is toxic when not bonded to F, and expensive.

My gut (and research) tells me CuO,PTFE, and Al would be a good start. Pressed and with a nitrocellulose binder to slow the burning and to produce gas.

Don’t underestimate PTFE, it might be one of the best but overlooked oxidizers... tell me what other oxidizer is 76 percent weight active???

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-4-2019 at 08:10


I was looking for a hole creator and sillicon/iron thermite proved itself.
Now it is time for cutter type devices.
Yes, CuO is one of the most energetic thermites (comparable to iron thermite) and the fluidity of molten copper will help (m.p. of only 1300 K or so). There is no need for outside gas as plenty of the copper is turned into gas by the reaxtion itself. Also, controlling the mixture by precise ratio and density is better than adding anything else which ony makes the process more time-expensive.
I'll try copper thermite cutting devices in late july or so. I might get a small wide flange column.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 521
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 2-5-2019 at 06:48


Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  

Have you seen a thermite lance. That would work better. They use copper oxide and direct the stream of pressurized molten metal onto the target. You need to add something that produces gas like CuO and add a nozzle.

They have handheld lances the size of flares that are impressive.


Never heard of these but didnt you mean themal or thermic lance ?
Just a hollow iron / steel tube with an oxygen bottle really.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 2-5-2019 at 08:33


It's called Tec Torch and there are others like Fire Pen.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MineMan
National Hazard
****




Posts: 492
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 2-5-2019 at 19:44


Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber  
Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  

Have you seen a thermite lance. That would work better. They use copper oxide and direct the stream of pressurized molten metal onto the target. You need to add something that produces gas like CuO and add a nozzle.

They have handheld lances the size of flares that are impressive.


Never heard of these but didnt you mean themal or thermic lance ?
Just a hollow iron / steel tube with an oxygen bottle really.


Yes. I meant that and a tech torch which is a different concept.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Vomaturge
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 160
Registered: 21-1-2018
Member Is Offline

Mood: thermodynamic

[*] posted on 2-5-2019 at 23:27


I just looked up tec torch and watched a promotional video for it. Between 1:47 and 1:59 we see that for one thing the melting action is focused to cut all the way through a rod or plate in a very limited area (less than the rod's diameter in most cases) Incidentally, the safety datasheet says the thermite is copper and molybdenum oxides, aluminum and magnesium.

Also, the recoil force is "less than 5 lbs" (~20 Newtons) I don't know how much less than 5lbf it is, but clearly the thermite products are moving fast. At very most, I'd say the cartridges are 10cm long and 2 cm in radius. With a loading density of 3, that is still under .4kg of thermite. And if the force is only 10 Newton for 2 seconds, that gives an exit velocity of at very least 50 meters per second and likely far more. That makes sure that the little section of target directly in front of the nozzle gets hit by a much larger amount of reaction products, and that slag is stripped away as fast as it forms. The big question is, how do they make a nozzle which creates such a directional jet, while not being melted out of shape itself?

To copy it without the special nozzle, perhaps you could use a long thin bar of thermite (or cast CaSO4&Al) and just feed it toward the tatget as it burned up. Ah, if only I had aluminum powder...

[Edited on 3-5-2019 by Vomaturge]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 3-5-2019 at 11:03


Some issue with legislation in your country? I feel your pain.

But yes, having someone on SM experimenting with thermite cutters would have been awesome.

I actly have a paper where all thermites/intermettalic compounds are listed.

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/372665

The video by Jonathan Cole shows a simple steel tube aimed at a steel column cutting it. Some graphite coating might help, too.


[Edited on 3-5-2019 by Rocinante]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8-5-2019 at 11:32


This patent: https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalD...

They are able to burn a 8.5 cm hole through 1.27 cm thick steel plate (72 ml of steel, 560 g of steel) with 1.6 kg of thermate in a 10 cm wide and 16 cm high device. The device is coated with graphite.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Microtek
National Hazard
****




Posts: 483
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 10-5-2019 at 02:40


How about using a hollow core design? This would shield the outside cylinder from the heat, and also provide a kind of nozzle (as well as a much larger combustion area). You would probably need to tweak the formula to avoid bursting the assembly.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 113
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-5-2019 at 12:01


they describe that in the patent, the filling has many channels for the gases to escape. The graphite coating is enough to protect the tube, no problems there.

Rly, 3 g of thermate per gram of melted/blown away steel is impressive. It takes something like 1 - 1.5 kJ/g to heat and melt steel and 3 g thermate has about 10 kJ of energy (less than pure thermite) so you're looking at ~ 15 % efficiency - and that is quite impressive for such a quick process and "low-tech" device.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  ..  22    24

  Go To Top