| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante  | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
Please listen to the above advice!!!!
I really think those of you who think that HMTD and TATP is a solution should seriously ask yourselves why you are settling? Why would you choose an
explosive with so many negatives?
Just because something is easy, doesn't mean you should choose it. Then you compound your problems by making the det tube so flimsy and unstable. It's
like you are telling Darwin, hey I want my prize?
[Edited on 29-6-2019 by wessonsmith]
[Edited on 29-6-2019 by wessonsmith]
|
|
|
Simoski
Hazard to Self
Posts: 82
Registered: 24-12-2017
Location: Johannesburg South Africa
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
Good points Rocinante.
I love the idea of a detonator that has solid combustion products along with high heat output.
The thought that you've got lots of superheated supersonic particles flying out seems perfect to initiate the next more stable baddie.
Does anyone think a 20gram cored black powder rocket motor designed to fail will generate enough oomphf to initiate AN/ETN 60:40 ?
I understand that the combustion products are only half gas and that the VOD is only around 500 m/s ( 1600 ft/s ), but you also get superheated
supersonic particles.....
Just read a part of a paper that shows confined sulfurless black powder burn rates being in the order of 1500 m/s ( 4800 ft/s )
"When confined in steel tubes (4 mm i.d.), propagation rates 1500 m/s were reported for sulphurless powders"
citation from: E. J. Rose and A. P. Hardt, "Black Powder - a Modern Commentary" Proc. Symp. Explos. Pyrotechnics 10th paper 6a(1979)
[Edited on 30-6-2019 by Simoski]
|
|
|
caterpillar
Hazard to Others
Posts: 472
Registered: 8-1-2012
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Simoski |
Does anyone think a 20gram cored black powder rocket motor designed to fail will generate enough oomphf to initiate AN/ETN 60:40 ?
[Edited on 30-6-2019 by Simoski] |
A detonator must produce a shock wave, mate. Once I used homemade black powder to initiate AN+Al+C mix. And I met with success, but later I failed and
failed many times trying to repeat it. If you wanna device whom you can trust to- use normal primaries plus an additional amount of powerful
explosive.
Women are more perilous sometimes, than any hi explosive.
|
|
|
caterpillar
Hazard to Others
Posts: 472
Registered: 8-1-2012
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith | Please listen to the above advice!!!!
I really think those of you who think that HMTD and TATP is a solution should seriously ask yourselves why you are settling? Why would you choose an
explosive with so many negatives?
[Edited on 29-6-2019 by wessonsmith] |
I read the very solid book written by Bagal https://www.studmed.ru/bagal-li-himiya-i-tehnologiya-iniciir... He said no such words about TATP like "the white devil", never use it and so on.
The only problem he wrote about is that TATP is too volatile. Again- 0.5 gr cannot cause serious trauma. Or you think that TATP will go off just when
you insert a detonator into a larger charge? Just at the same second?
Women are more perilous sometimes, than any hi explosive.
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by caterpillar | | Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith | Please listen to the above advice!!!!
I really think those of you who think that HMTD and TATP is a solution should seriously ask yourselves why you are settling? Why would you choose an
explosive with so many negatives?
[Edited on 29-6-2019 by wessonsmith] |
I read the very solid book written by Bagal https://www.studmed.ru/bagal-li-himiya-i-tehnologiya-iniciir... He said no such words about TATP like "the white devil", never use it and so on.
The only problem he wrote about is that TATP is too volatile. Again- 0.5 gr cannot cause serious trauma. Or you think that TATP will go off just when
you insert a detonator into a larger charge? Just at the same second? |
My position on TATP and HMTD is if that's what some people want to use, fine. But when they promote those substances as viable options for primaries,
it's dumbing down the community.
|
|
|
caterpillar
Hazard to Others
Posts: 472
Registered: 8-1-2012
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith |
My position on TATP and HMTD is if that's what some people want to use, fine. But when they promote those substances as viable options for primaries,
it's dumbing down the community. |
OK. But you should support your own position. What did you read, that made you sure that TATP must not be used? That it is extremely dangerous? Links,
pls. Or describe your own experiments. Do you ever know, why HCl must be used as a catalyst, but not H2SO4? MF was widely used. What do you think
about it? Is it safer than TATP or not?
Women are more perilous sometimes, than any hi explosive.
|
|
|
Simoski
Hazard to Self
Posts: 82
Registered: 24-12-2017
Location: Johannesburg South Africa
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
ALL primaries are VERY DANGEROUS, there is just no getting around it ! In some way or other it is easy to initiate them!
Perhaps it boils down to the lesser of the evils: shock , friction , thermal shock, static or flame sensitivity?
I would love one that is flame sensitive, but you can hit it with a hammer as hard as you like and it won't go off.... but that just seems
counter-intuitive.
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by Simoski]
|
|
|
Tsjerk
International Hazard
Posts: 3022
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side.
|
|
|
Tsjerk
International Hazard
Posts: 3022
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side.
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: |
OK. But you should support your own position. What did you read, that made you sure that TATP must not be used? That it is extremely dangerous? Links,
pls. Or describe your own experiments.
|
A better way to answer your question would be for you to defend using energetics like LA, LS, TATP, and HMTD V.s. Nickel Hydrazine Nitrate(NHN).
Those energetics have been around long enough for anyone with an IQ over 100 and access to the internet to have thoroughly explored. TATP and HMTD
are so easy to manufacture, and the precursors are so easy to get, that even 15 yr old boys in their mother's basement can manufacture them. So
real-world experience with those energetics is commonplace.
You are asking me to reinvent the wheel by providing links and research describing the dangers and limitations of these energetics, all of which have
been thoroughly vetted already. The stats on NHN are available for anyone to read and I think they speak for themselves. We help one another on SM by
sharing new ideas and research and by challenging the status quo. In my opinion, and the stats back me up, LA, LS, HMTD, and TATP are the status quo.
I stand by my previous statement!
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | | Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side. |
Since I am using NHN I don't do anything special with mine. Even dropping my detonators in steel tubing down a flight of stairs won't set mine off.
There is just not enough energy being imparted on the tube that would be transferred to the energetics to be dangerous. 9g det tube dropped 6 m would
only impart .53 J of impact energy which is well below the 0% probability of ignition for ETN and NHN.
Now if you are using DBX-1, LA, LS, SADS, etc I can't help you. I am sure special precautions are necessary.
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by wessonsmith]
|
|
|
XeonTheMGPony
International Hazard
Posts: 1636
Registered: 5-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
You seem to be full of it, by even putting LS, and LA in the same area as TATP in the same line as HMTD says you have very little hands on experience
or understanding of them.
Organic peroxides are unstable for the most part and far to sensitive, and their characteristic can self modify by sublimation degradation, radiation
sources can cause initiation. Never mind how impurities may further make them so unstable as to detonate in the mother liquor.
Proper built dets can be run over by a tank and for the most part will not go off, Minmans experience is a rare one (I have seen boxes of electrical
fired units driven over by full sized excavators no bangs, ground was hard soil with granite rock, (Needles to say such events are bad on many levels
and some people got into very very big trouble over those incidences, but it shows the level of inherent safety of the design)).
Very carefully prepared organic peroxides with well purified reagents will appear to behave well, but even then must be very carefully handled.
Well prepared Azide and Styphnate are no where near as sensitive and are completely stable, with shit tons of documentation on what grain type will be
sensitive to what impulse.
All so tables on pressing pressures and its effect on grain size required to set of what type of explosive base charge, what environmental effect will
have on initiation strength, effects of moisture.
So where is all this data for NHN? I am serious in this request. There is a reason why I say for amateurs to go with industry standards, they are
there for a reason, then once you have the basics then move on to what amount to novelties.
This to me is a practical issue, an individual needs a safe reliable det with predictable behavior that is repeatable, this is the entire point of
industrial standards, you do not want deviancy from the base line in industry.
and if a person is even remotely interested seriously they will take the time to make some basic specialized tools, and this is only required some
drill bits, a press and some files, this can be found universally all around the world with some moderate effort.
Just because you use some thing that is insensitive is not an excuse to be sloppy, hence my warning, it is only a matter of time till you do your
self grave harm if you handle your materials sloppily no matter how insensitive they are (I see it blew over your head though)
I do not personally give a crap what you use, what I do care about is honest and accurate distribution of knowledge, you add in hysterics to it is not
helpful, especially to the point of a predictable well understood and proven to be as safe as it gets det system that is predictable and guaranteed to
work when basics are followed
and I see my point about toxicity blew over your head as well, This is the stronger driving principle in industry is to eliminate heavy metals,
period, This is why there is heavier interest in Tetrazoles as a desired replacement for green generation initiators
So how about we trade in your (as it appears to my eyes) hysterics over sensitivity and go with some more understood nuance and understanding about
each individual substance and proper material handling practices and procedure, as no amount of insensitivity will correct for ones poor handling!
(That was my whole beef with you is the hysterical way you lump in well understood industry standard primaries with that of organic peroxides, and
then further think that sloppy and poor handling is excused by simply using a less sensitive primary, then try to use an excuse to brush away the very
real fact of Nickles toxicity!!!)
As serious individuals, one must start at handling:
- you must know how to competently handle the materials you use with respect not fear, you do this by reading as much technical literature you can get
your hands on, then thoroughly test every batch for the perimeters you will be working under
- you should understand the basic principles of design and why they do it as they do
- you should understand the risk to reward ratio for each route
- you should procure tools required for the final chosen system.
- you should be diligent in each step to be clean and well organized in your production, with well defined steps to mitigate any risks (No matter how
insensitive you believe the primary to be)
As I demonstrated in other threads risk mitigation is achieved by pressing a separate primary pellet that is stand alone in its own housing, then you
press your base charges separately, and then your E-Match for electrical style or primer cup for fuse.
When ready the pellet is pressed in with much less force then either of the two first stages, then the e-match or primer cup, this is how for the most
part commercial det's are made
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by XeonTheMGPony]
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: |
As I demonstrated in other threads risk mitigation is achieved by pressing a separate primary pellet that is stand alone in its own housing, then you
press your base charges separately, and then your E-Match for electrical style or primer cup for fuse.
|
Thank you for that very longwinded reply. I guess you have missed the basic point I am making. LA, LS, HMTD, SADS, TATP are all
VERY sensitive primaries. To be very clear so that you don't misunderstand, TATP and HMTD are what people who lack common sense use!
I am starting to get a little annoyed with some of you on continuing to promote these outdated primaries. We here at SM will only advance the
community when we look for better, SAFER ways. What you offer is a twist on mitigating the danger by some multistep elaborate
process that still requires the use of, oh yeah, VERY SENSITIVE primaries!!!!
Stop the madness.
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by wessonsmith]
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: |
So where is all this data for NHN
|
Are you kidding me???? You can't do a simple google search for Nickel Hydrazine Nitrate??? Really????
I am sorry, my job is not to provide every pertinent fact about something every time I make a post. If that was the requirement, our communication
would be impossible. If you don't have the ability to do the research for yourself then you don't have either the intelligence or more importantly
the seriousness to be playing with energetics, PERIOD.
NHN is being used by the mining industry as we speak, 20+ million detonators to date, so it's not a novelty. My goal with the introduction of NHN and
the very detailed video I produced on how to PROPERLY manufacture it was to bring it to the SM community so that the average SM member wouldn't view
it as a novelty as you put it.
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by wessonsmith]
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by wessonsmith]
|
|
|
XeonTheMGPony
International Hazard
Posts: 1636
Registered: 5-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Yes I can but you are the one making the positive claim thus it is on you to at least cite one or two good sources.
Yes it is indeed your job when you make claims on a site, look up burden of proof. I have all ready posted here on lead azide and data on caps. and of
toolage, and of methods
Industrial terms that is still in novelty stage! Oh and I used the magic google box and the few reports I found it was compounded with lead azide ( I
do enjoy irony)!
So again cite some info, upload it to the library
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by XeonTheMGPony]
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: |
There is a reason why I say for amateurs to go with industry standards, they are there for a reason, then once you have the basics then move on to
what amount to novelties.
|
That is the silliest thing I have read in a long time. So you think amateur chemists, which I count my self as one, should start with highly
sensitive primaries like LA? Not to mention the very deadly and poisonous precursor Sodium Azide? Yes, Hydrazine Monohydrate is poisonous and deadly
but those concerns are easily mitigated by using a simple gas mask and proper ventillation. It's much easier to have a serious accident with Sodium
Azide than it is with Hyrdazine Monohydrate. From working with it as a precursor to disposing of it.
The fact that you think NHN is a novelty is very telling. It suggests to me that it is you that hasn't done the research. I, on the other hand,
understand very well all of the other primaries, HMTD, LS, TATP, SADS, etc. It was through this understanding that I chose to dig deeper and found
NHN. I realized early on that those other primaries were just way too sensitive for the individual handloading detonators to use.
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by XeonTheMGPony | Yes I can but you are the one making the positive claim thus it is on you to at least cite one or two good sources.
Yes it is indeed your job when you make claims on a site, look up burden of proof. I have all ready posted here on lead azide and data on caps. and of
toolage, and of methods
Industrial terms that is still in novelty stage! Oh and I used the magic google box and the few reports I found it was compounded with lead azide ( I
do enjoy irony)!
So again cite some info, upload it to the library
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by XeonTheMGPony] |
For the sake of argument, I am going to do this one last time. Here are the pertinent facts on NHN.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NkeJPoo07sqGVsAMWddR...
Here is the link to the synthesis video.
https://youtu.be/rPxdDSUGxo4
I would be very interested in hearing your new found perspective after reading the literature.
[Edited on 1-7-2019 by wessonsmith]
|
|
|
XeonTheMGPony
International Hazard
Posts: 1636
Registered: 5-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
please post here google drive bs dosn't work for me, then I will indeed read the data compleatly
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
What are you talking about??? What is wrong with the (4) papers I have uploaded???
|
|
|
twelti
Hazard to Others
Posts: 217
Registered: 20-2-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | | Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side. |
I'm with Tsjerk on this one. I also make mine in my lab, using straw, and simply transport outside for detonation in my test bucket. I may reinfoce
it using strapping tape for more confinement. For this very controlled scenario, straws seem the best to me. Minimal shrapnel and all. If/when I
get to taking them anywhere, I may rethink it. I wonder if a det transporter would be an option. Keep the light, minimal shrapnel, construction but
simply use a larger rigid and insulated container to transport them. A bucket with sawdust etc. For industrial use, with less control over the
environment, the aluminum tube is making sense though.
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by twelti | | Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | | Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side. |
I'm with Tsjerk on this one. I also make mine in my lab, using straw, and simply transport outside for detonation in my test bucket. I may reinfoce
it using strapping tape for more confinement. For this very controlled scenario, straws seem the best to me. Minimal shrapnel and all. If/when I
get to taking them anywhere, I may rethink it. I wonder if a det transporter would be an option. Keep the light, minimal shrapnel, construction but
simply use a larger rigid and insulated container to transport them. A bucket with sawdust etc. For industrial use, with less control over the
environment, the aluminum tube is making sense though. |
If you are going to use non-metalic tubes then why not use waxed paper tubes like the one I am using. At least it's more sturdy and you won't have
shrapnel issues.
|
|
|
twelti
Hazard to Others
Posts: 217
Registered: 20-2-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith | | Quote: Originally posted by twelti | | Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | | Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side. |
I'm with Tsjerk on this one. I also make mine in my lab, using straw, and simply transport outside for detonation in my test bucket. I may reinfoce
it using strapping tape for more confinement. For this very controlled scenario, straws seem the best to me. Minimal shrapnel and all. If/when I
get to taking them anywhere, I may rethink it. I wonder if a det transporter would be an option. Keep the light, minimal shrapnel, construction but
simply use a larger rigid and insulated container to transport them. A bucket with sawdust etc. For industrial use, with less control over the
environment, the aluminum tube is making sense though. |
If you are going to use non-metalic tubes then why not use waxed paper tubes like the one I am using. At least it's more sturdy and you won't have
shrapnel issues. |
I have some on order actually. However, the straw probably has the least shrapnel, or so i would think. It is very thin and light. Also i have a
bunch of different sizes that fit together nicely so far. I will try the paper ones though.
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by twelti | | Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith | | Quote: Originally posted by twelti | | Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | | Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | Plastic straws or anything like it that bends easily is completely unacceptable and extremely dangerous.
The same goes for low quality seals that can let crystals in (small cracks/openings). |
What do you guys do with detonators that they require to be sturdy? I used to prepare them, put them in a plastic lunchbox in between paper towels for
transport and use them on side. |
I'm with Tsjerk on this one. I also make mine in my lab, using straw, and simply transport outside for detonation in my test bucket. I may reinfoce
it using strapping tape for more confinement. For this very controlled scenario, straws seem the best to me. Minimal shrapnel and all. If/when I
get to taking them anywhere, I may rethink it. I wonder if a det transporter would be an option. Keep the light, minimal shrapnel, construction but
simply use a larger rigid and insulated container to transport them. A bucket with sawdust etc. For industrial use, with less control over the
environment, the aluminum tube is making sense though. |
If you are going to use non-metalic tubes then why not use waxed paper tubes like the one I am using. At least it's more sturdy and you won't have
shrapnel issues. |
I have some on order actually. However, the straw probably has the least shrapnel, or so i would think. It is very thin and light. Also i have a
bunch of different sizes that fit together nicely so far. I will try the paper ones though. |
True but the paper will lose so much energy after.5 m that it won't matter. The biggest concern for me would be the lack of rigidity of the drinking
straws.
|
|
|
underground
National Hazard
Posts: 692
Registered: 10-10-2013
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline
|
|
I have ordered few 6mm ABS tubes, they where really cheap so i would like to see how they work. Maybe i can use them instead of SS/Aluminum tubes.
|
|
|
twelti
Hazard to Others
Posts: 217
Registered: 20-2-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith |
True but the paper will lose so much energy after.5 m that it won't matter. The biggest concern for me would be the lack of rigidity of the drinking
straws. |
I try to keep my hands away from the dets, though might be a little closer than that. I agree that the difference is small in any case. Ironically
enough, I have also been using straws made of, wait for it... paper! I use those for the perhaps more sensitive initiator part. When I get the
little red firecracker tubes I ordered, I'll compare the paper straws to those.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
