| Pages:
1
2
3 |
Somniferrous
Harmless
Posts: 3
Registered: 20-1-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by hissingnoise  | FLchem10 had a disquieting experience with HMTD.
You might want to scroll down and read his thread.
IMO, the safest synthesis for HMTD is the one in COPAE.
|
There is a potential problem with the COPAE synth in that during the warming phase (just after the 3 hour 0c mixing phase) one can get frothing and/or
a minor eruption as it comes to room temp that makes a mess and deposits acidic hmtd where you probably don't want it.
I have been able to prevent it by adding more H2O to the initial solution. This suggests that the frothing/eruption problem is likely due to use of
more concentrated H2O2 solutions and that the reaction continues long after the 3 hour 0c mixing period.
I have also found that allowing the solution to stand for a while ("a while" = 6 to 24 hours) after warming to room temp increases yield somewhat.
Good luck and stay safe. Make only as much as you need so that you won't have to store it and worry about that.
James
|
|
|
FLchem10
Harmless
Posts: 20
Registered: 29-7-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
To all thinking of making HMTD You must be careful when you use citric because it seems to have a tendency to not completely dissolve when making it
the amateur way ( Which I dont recommend at all ) I did have a very bad experience with ONE of my HMTD experiences BUT things happen when you mess
with EM's not using the right processes and equipment so for all the people making this in a home lab that is very poor NOT to be down on home labs
some home labs are better than real labs Ive been in!! but if your making this stuff in you kitchen with materials bought from wal-mart dont make HMTD
there are so many other things to make and please spend your money getting the right equipment before you rush into making chemicals!!
But good luck to all I have made HMTD a good amount of time that turned out just fine bu make a small amount and when drying it be very careful where
you store it because it might just.....well you know
|
|
|
odin14
Harmless
Posts: 3
Registered: 30-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I need some help detonating my HTMD caps, I packed some HMTD into some 5.56 casings and lit the fuse and it did not explode. Can someone help me
please, I made a thread about it but it got deleted...
|
|
|
Bert
Super Administrator
Posts: 2821
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".
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by odin14 | | I need some help detonating my HTMD caps, I packed some HMTD into some 5.56 casings and lit the fuse and it did not explode. Can someone help me
please, I made a thread about it but it got deleted... |
It is not deleted. It is in "Detritus"
Read the forum FAQ.
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).
|
|
|
odin14
Harmless
Posts: 3
Registered: 30-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Bert | | Quote: Originally posted by odin14 | | I need some help detonating my HTMD caps, I packed some HMTD into some 5.56 casings and lit the fuse and it did not explode. Can someone help me
please, I made a thread about it but it got deleted... |
It is not deleted. It is in "Detritus"
Read the forum FAQ. |
Thank you Bert, and thank you for the concern, I am sorry to worry you like that I should have mentioned that I had already insulated the HMTD from
the metal. I use wax and straws. Because it not only insulates from the metal but helps prevent accidental detonation due to an electric shock.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1334
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
tube for HMTD
Plast tube for HMTD iniciator konstruction about 200mg content. Hand pressed. Rezistor 1,5 ohm/ 0,6W metalic. LL
[Edited on 30-11-2014 by Laboratory of Liptakov]
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
The detriments of HMTD are:
1) crystal morphology dependent sensitivity
2) slow decomposition >40 C in open moist conditions
3) highly sensitive relative to some other primary explosives
4) corrodes metals under moisture, acids / metal ions decomp HMTD
5) low decomposition temp 75 C
Accolades of HMTD may be:
1) simple preparation scheme, relative to other primary explosives
2) storable long term, in dry air, or under dry, select conditions
3) high performance primary explosive character
4) high flame sensitivity, suitable for thermal initiation
5) compatible with many organic materials
6) non hygroscopic
7) practically insoluble in water / organic solvents
8) compatible with basic aq. solutions (NH3, CO3/HCO3)
PTFE doped primaries typically decrease in mechanical sensitivity by a factor of twenty, doped by around 2-5%. Something like that could easily take
care of mechanical sensitivity. Decomposition issues wouldnt be solved entirely by PTFE but a polymer binder could solve mechanical sensitivities and
decomposition issues other than perhaps direct UV exposure (which is a non issue in detonators. A binded pellet could prevent reaction with materials.
For instance a homogenous HMTD polymer bound pellet inside a length of straw with NC seal on both ends.
Has anyone attempted to pelletize HMTD using nitrocellulose or chlorinated rubber or VAAR binder? Parlon can be worked with acetone as solvent and in
pyrotechnics it makes hard, near water-proof loads. Surely this has been tried with HMTD by someone before?
|
|
|
MineMan
National Hazard
Posts: 996
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hey buddy, how do coat something with 2-5 percent PTFE… don’t you need a fluro
solvent?
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
As far as I know, PTFE powder is so small and sticks to everything that it only requires handmixing, 2-5% by weight. It's not soluble so you can mix
it with a volitile solvent by hand and it coats pretty well. --There is a paper I was thinking back to of a sensitive nitrate ester from NM + Glyoxal
doi: 10.1002/prep.201000133
"For safety reasons, the impact and friction sensitivity was
tested according to BAM methods. Compound 3 is sensitive
to both of the stimuli (approx. 2 J and 50 N, respectively),
but the values are within the normal range of sensitivity of nitrate esters.
Because of high sensitivity to friction and impact, the explosive
must be tranquilized before pressing into pellets. Therefore, a composition containing 95% of compound 3 and 5% of Teflon was prepared using a slurry
method. Afterwards, the sensitivity to impact and friction was reduced
to approx. 15 J and 160 N, respectively. The composition was pressed into mechanically durable pellets with density of ca. 1.82 gcm"
In this example case 2 J to 15 J and 50-150 N isnt 20x reduction but it is significantly reduced sensitivity. Other compounds are reduced in impact
and friction with PTFE even more than this. I assume some differences arise from the crystal shape/volume vs the PTFE shape/volume. But it seems to
pretty universally tame mechanical sensitivity. I bought PTFE powder on ebay for around $20 per kilo IIRC a few years ago. I got it for PTFE
thermites, but found out it works better than anything else for phlegmatizing.
I could try it after I finish some other stuff Im already working on. I figured someone must have tried HMTD with binder or something. It seems like a
logical extension.
[Edited on 4-1-2023 by Hey Buddy]
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1334
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Flegmatisation of sensitive primary is further manipulation with sensitive primary. Of course, is it possible. If someone used HMTD, used him with
minimal manipulation steps. And usually with low density.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov | Flegmatisation of sensitive primary is further manipulation with sensitive primary. Of course, is it possible. If someone used HMTD, used him with
minimal manipulation steps. And usually with low density.
|
okay, twst my arm. I'll try it.
|
|
|
MineMan
National Hazard
Posts: 996
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I have found 5 percent PTFE increases the sensitivity in some mixes like flash powder. An actual spherical coating would be better. It is possible, I
wanted to do a patent on it…. So I haven’t mentioned it. But I think there was already a paper published on it last year.
You will find the particle size of the PTFE to be crucial. I tried moly disulfide several years ago and it added a red phosphorus like sensitivity to
detonating flash powder mixes. If the PTFE is nano I predict it will increase sensitivity.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
PTFE is a strange bird because the fluorine and carbon can either act as an oxidizer or a fuel depending on what it's added to. For metal containing
comps it is usually oxidizing to gaseous fluorinated species. The main advantage of PTFE is its low reactivity and high melting point which tends to
thermally stabilize pyrotechnic mixes. Ive tried to use it as a stabilizer in NPED mixes like NQ+ClO3 but it actually stabilizes it to the point of
being non-explosive, whether calculated as oxidizer or fuel. With metal compositions I believe fluorine from PTFE is faster than oxygen derived
oxidation so it is usually pretty intense, but the activation energy in terms of temp is usually floating around mp of PTFE >320 C, unless using a
really low melting point ingredient, (which HMTD is). I have no clue what it would do with HMTD. I suspect it would tranquilize mechanical sensitivity
a bit. Without experimenting, and just guessing out of my buttocks, I think parlon binder matrix via acetone would be better suited to HMTD than
simple PTFE mix. Assuming it doesnt dilute the HMTD to becoming non explosive. Ambient HMTD decomposition could be theoretically stopped by
appropriate binder, and it would eliminate moisture which seems to catalyze decomp of HMTD in practically all instances, from what I have read. If
parlon worked the same manor as other comps with HMTD, it would be like putting it in an airtight container. For HMTD that promotes stability. It
could be that because HMTD isso simple to produce, the effort of a binder isnt even sought after, perhaps its notorious sensitivity and
unpredictability is related to its low effort, open air low density use.
|
|
|
Raid
Hazard to Everyone
Posts: 201
Registered: 14-11-2022
Location: N/A
Member Is Offline
Mood: School
|
|
when you're making any organic peroxides make sure to clean them VERY well. the more you wash them the more stable they are.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm assuming you mean washing the crystals free of surface acid using an insoluble wash, like water or alcohol? --That reminds me to ask, I'm seeing
no recrystallization in references to HMTD. Is that accurate? Are people making HMTD and not attempting recrystallizing at all generally?
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1334
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Recrystallizing and neutralisation HMTD is interesting idea. But how type of solvent should be use...?
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
I take that as a "no".--I have no idea what HMTD would be soluble in. I've never made it so I have no familiarity with it. Ive watched darian ballards
videos. It's been a while but IIRC he's not doing any purification or washing in his HMTD videos. I havent read about recrystallization in any of the
literature Ive read. Perhaps the question is silly because its a peroxide, and no one does that, but it does use an acid. Citric acid is the most
interesting method because it is so OTC. I supposed that acid could be trapped in the crystals. Probably very likely if no recrystallization. Acid
contact is known to catalyze decomposition in HMTD according to lit, so perhaps the instances of random high sensitivity are related to moisture and
acid? I dont know, just taking a guess.
I think if something like HMTD could be controlled predictably it would be really neato.
[Edited on 7-1-2023 by Hey Buddy]
|
|
|
ManyInterests
National Hazard
Posts: 837
Registered: 19-5-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Hey Buddy |
I take that as a "no".--I have no idea what HMTD would be soluble in. I've never made it so I have no familiarity with it. Ive watched darian ballards
videos. It's been a while but IIRC he's not doing any purification or washing in his HMTD videos. I havent read about recrystallization in any of the
literature Ive read. Perhaps the question is silly because its a peroxide, and no one does that, but it does use an acid. Citric acid is the most
interesting method because it is so OTC. I supposed that acid could be trapped in the crystals. Probably very likely if no recrystallization. Acid
contact is known to catalyze decomposition in HMTD according to lit, so perhaps the instances of random high sensitivity are related to moisture and
acid? I dont know, just taking a guess.
I think if something like HMTD could be controlled predictably it would be really neato.
[Edited on 7-1-2023 by Hey Buddy] |
I also watched Darian Ballard's video on it, and his one on TATP and MEKP even though I have no interest in making any peroxide based explosive.
They're far too unstable and sensitive for me to even dream of making any.
HMTD and TATP aren't recent discoveries. They've been around since 1885 and 1895 respectively. They actually did make blasting caps with HTMD
originally, but its well known stability issues quickly made it an unsuitable replacement for mercury fulminate.
I think that if it had any potential it would have been discovered by now, but testing has been done historically. I mean the recipe that is on the
wiki and so many other places all come from the 1943 book Chemistry of Explosives and Powders that we all know They made more tests for it there.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
That's true. I was thinking of the relatively recent emergence of HMTD in terrorist incidents and subsequent studies since then. I also have been
reading up on it more and I do find it interesting but I just dont like what I'm reading. I think I will have to reconsider and pass. Perhaps I will
just undertake a small familiarization synthesis to make a few parlon/hmtd 4mm pellets. store one test others. Just for the interest.
|
|
|
ManyInterests
National Hazard
Posts: 837
Registered: 19-5-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Hey Buddy | | That's true. I was thinking of the relatively recent emergence of HMTD in terrorist incidents and subsequent studies since then. I also have been
reading up on it more and I do find it interesting but I just dont like what I'm reading. I think I will have to reconsider and pass. Perhaps I will
just undertake a small familiarization synthesis to make a few parlon/hmtd 4mm pellets. store one test others. Just for the interest.
|
The relatively recent use of peroxide based explosives in terrorism is a result of several factors.
Firstly, explosives control around the world has gotten a lot tighter. Once upon a time people stealing a whole bunch of TNT or dynamite and boxes
full of detonators wasn't uncommon. I think in the 1990s several tons of the stuff were stolen in the US alone.
Legal restrictions on things like detonators also went up. I think that blasting caps aren't weren't as control as the secondaries that need them. And
even if you stole a whole pile of dynamite, it's useless unless you have proper detonators for them. Making reliable detonators is hard, and peroxide
based stuff is the easiest to manufacture and the ingredients aren't restricted in many parts of the world. Until the 2020 European chemical controls
getting most of the stuff was a sinch.
The other thing is that the terrorist organizations that use them, especially Islamist groups in Europe, don't have the networks to get actual high
explosives needed. The IRA did far more bombings than Islamists ever did (and probably ever will do) but they didn't resort to dangerous to make and
use peroxides. They were able to get tons of Semtex that many IRA cells that still exist probably have well hidden in case some political chaos starts
to happen again.
Finally... explosives detection equipment wasn't able to detect peroxide based energetics until around 2015 or so. This is because most explosives
sniffers and detection equipment were originally made for nitrogen based stuff, which is almost all explosives, but stuff like TATP has no nitrogen in
its structure, that makes it undetectable. This has been rectified, thankfully.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
Well, I mean that Im convinced peroxides and HMTD specifically are under-investigated, and not well understood. They have quite a stigma of being
AD-prone. Most of the recent investigation is well, recent interest.-- As for explosive detection, that's a whole separate tangent, I really shouldnt
get started on, but most of that stuff is contract-award non-sense. I dont want to get into specifics but I'm aware that explosives are not detected
by conventional explosive detection systems. I would have to guess that perhaps there have been actual situations where explosives have been detected,
(only because I cant imagine how they would remain in use if they never functioned), but a majority of the time, explosives are very difficult to
detect and explosives go through things like airports and postal service etc. quite often and are not detected. They are definitely more often not
detected than detected by a lot. I have no confidence whatsoever in digital explosive detection, chemical detection works, imaging detection of
conspicuous devices works if someone is paying attention, explosive detection dogs can* work, if trained on actual explosives. Most of the real time
digital detection stuff is just a company filling a governments need to check a box and show they spent money on it. Nothing more. Ive seen government
employees forget explosives in their cargo and not realize it until they are in unloading their stuff. The idea that explosives can be detected en
masse of the worlds populations is a "feel good" non-reality.
[Edited on 9-1-2023 by Hey Buddy]
|
|
|
ManyInterests
National Hazard
Posts: 837
Registered: 19-5-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
That story about people 'forgetting' explosives is just... terrifying. I know complacency can set in on anything. But this is stupid. Stupider than
police who forget their guns somewhere, like in Canada in 2006 when some cop took off his gun belt to use the toilet and 'forgot' it. It was recovered
several years later at the site of a shooting that resulted in several deaths...
But wouldn't the digital explosive detection use some kind of chemical detection? How does it work?
Early forms of explosives detectors until 2000 couldn't detect semtex. I heard that it is only because of the taggants that the manufacturer added to
their newer batches, but earlier batches made prior to 1990 (of which there are probably quite a few tons of around the world, not just in the IRA's
inventory) might still be difficult to detect.
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
Yes they use digital sensors, and most of the IP is "protected" or "sensitive technology" meaning that it cant legally be independently validated. Or
you will often see "tests" regularly scheduled to validate a certain detection device, and the test will have "standards" but the standards arent
applicable to the real world, they are only applicable to controlled tests, merely so a contractor can check a box saying "yes we tested this and it
works correctly." In war time, I once witnessed fly-by-night international contracting companies selling boxes to the local national military as
"Explosive detection devices". Simple box devices used to search for explosives at checkpoints. The USA in this case, provided funding to the host
government, and they buy these things from large companies that pop up. The host military would have problems with the technology on the ground,
errors, problems understanding the use of the equipment etc. Then theyd bring it to US military to troubleshoot. Well the problem was the devices
were basically non-sense LED microprocessor driven randomly flashing whiz-bangs and they didnt detect anything at all, nor could it be determined what
they actually were designed to do. Im not saying it's *that* egregious at the TSA, but it's basically the same principle on a more subtle, large
scale.
The taggants are sometimes reported to be added for the purpose of detection, but the ultimate purpose is simply to trace explosives after they are
found like in cases of stolen explosives. Explosives are stolen or misplaced everywhere, all over the world, all the time. Everything from people
maliciously stealing all the way to forgetting explosives or administrative peculiarity stuff. For example, in the US military, the record standards
are stringent with explosive drawing. Explosives have to be drawn based on a need of use, they cant really be returned once drawn, they all have to be
detonated or destroyed. Munitions turned back in can be damaged or unserviceable and could cause detonation of bulk storage, so it is common practice,
the explosives only go one way, out. It becomes an issue of balancing demolition draw by the real world need versus the paperwork "need", which is
usually predrafted, standardized, then signed, by the ammo supply point and receiving command etc. Sometimes you dont draw enough and cant complete
the actual mission and dont have the option to draw again (if its a weekend or holiday or middle of the night or something). That can lead to big
problems for soldiers getting disciplined for some failure. So what happens? It is standard practice to over-draw by ~5-10% then stash the extra and
cycle it out each new draw cycle. This practice in the military dates back to I dont know when, but at least vietnam if not WW2 or WW1. So pretty much
at every military base I know of, and Ive seen it in multiple continents, you randomly find equipment sheds, janitor closets, connexes or vehicles
with unaccounted explosives. It probably occurs in every country with a military --Im not saying it's necessarily wrong for them to do that, Im just
saying you would never read about it in a military manual but it is standard practice.
Things happen, people forget about the stash, people draw a stash one draw but not the next, then forget, people get reassigned bases or deployed in
wartime. Explosives get abandoned, or people in the unit know about where the stash is and steal it. Point is, there are exposives out there
everywhere. In war zones, the situation is an order of magnitude worse, ie. missing cargo trucks. They put taggants in explosives so they can track
the dissemination of undocumented explosives and isolate trouble areas. Because the largest manufacturers and customers of explosives also have the
largest losses.
EDIT: also I should point out while Im on a rant: it is a plain and simple fact that legally authorized manufacturers and transporters of explosives
are responsible for the overwhelming numbers of civilian deaths that have been caused by explosives. The number of civilians killed by accidental
detonation of explosives by "authorized" authorities vastly and grossly outweighs any and all instances combined, to a massive degree, of all
historical malicious terrorist-killings of civilians.
Im not apologizing for terrorists, Im just saying the loss of a life is a loss of a life, whether a terrorist killed them or a government.
[Edited on 9-1-2023 by Hey Buddy]
[Edited on 9-1-2023 by Hey Buddy]
|
|
|
Herr Haber
International Hazard
Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I think the taggant was added by a Czech manufacturer to distinguish it from other manufacturers (Lybia!) that didnt care much where their product
ended.
PETN seems to be otherwise quite easy to detect nowadays anyway.
The spirit of adventure was upon me. Having nitric acid and copper, I had only to learn what the words 'act upon' meant. - Ira Remsen
|
|
|
Hey Buddy
Hazard to Others
Posts: 384
Registered: 3-11-2020
Location: Bushwhacker Country
Member Is Offline
|
|
If you say so.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
