Vpatent357
Harmless
Posts: 22
Registered: 10-7-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
TACP Hybrid Composites Based on Al/CuO -- High Performance
Here is a recent publication in High-Performance Energetic Materials research :
Hybrid Composites Based on Al/CuO Nanothermites and Tetraamminecopper Perchlorate for High-Performance Energetic Materials (2023)
I plan to use TACP Secondary Explosive for my detonators with maximum power.
What do you think of the TACP/Al/CuO mixture? And in what optimal ratio?
(my components will be standard and not nano) with SADS primary cap.
Small blasting caps, fingers safe!
|
|
|
OneEyedPyro
Hazard to Others
Posts: 279
Registered: 7-10-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Worth a try, I suppose. That's a lot of heat energy but also a of dead weight in metals and not a lot of gas production.
I've never had any luck with detonating oxide compositions but never tried mixing them with an HE either.
Your best bet is to start with a low amount of thermite and work your way up to see what happens.
|
|
|
EF2000
Hazard to Others
Posts: 114
Registered: 10-5-2023
Location: The Steppes, now trapped in the forest zone
Member Is Offline
Mood: wrooom
|
|
SM's resident expert on TACP once said:
So, while Al/CuO thermite can for sure improve performance, it would decrease chemical stability of the mixture, right?
|
|
|
Microtek
National Hazard
Posts: 830
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I think the energy outputs seem very low. CHNO HEs are usually around 5-7 kJ/g while flash mixtures are around 10 kJ/g. I wonder if they calculate
energy output differently or what. Based on the heats of formation (and assuming complete reaction) CuO + Al should be around 4 kJ/g.
|
|
|
littlesky
Harmless
Posts: 22
Registered: 12-6-2023
Member Is Offline
|
|
Cool mixture.From the original literature, it seems that this requires nano level raw materials. For ordinary materials, they may not have stronger
performance. But it's still worth trying.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
It looks like Chinese researchers have reinvented the wheel and the light bulb. Else words, If you have good quality CuO/Al nano-thermite and add a
minor amount of any known explosive, results will always be better (or almost always better) than CuO/Al nano-thermite alone. Note that TACP is
written last in the line. From this, one can infer his minority share. For example, 10 - 49%. CuO will be stable in such a composition, but
nanoaluminum certainly will not. Stability (high reactivity of composition) will be in order of hours to days. It would make more sense to mix
nanothermite with dry and neutral NH4ClO4. There the stability would be high in the order of years. And not trying to mix nano-metals with highly
alkaline TACP......
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
Vpatent357
Harmless
Posts: 22
Registered: 10-7-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thanks LL for mentioning these observations. The devil is in the details. Like here, it finally seems not such a good idea or safe.
I'm going to stick with a basic composition like TACP+7% hexamine for the base-detonator. (compatible chemicals)
Small blasting caps, fingers safe!
|
|
|
B(a)P
International Hazard
Posts: 1119
Registered: 29-9-2019
Member Is Offline
Mood: Festive
|
|
What are the units on the X and y axis of those graphs in the first part? What are the conditions for the observations made? I am not sure I would
ever call TACP slow burning and it doesn't take much confinement to be a strong explosive.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
If I'm not mistaken, MineMan uses nanoaluminum.
And he has good results with it. If CuO/Al nanothermite was readily available to the hobbyist community, detonator construction would be much easier.
With ETN or with Cu(ClO4)2. ( and many others) Within a few months, someone in the science madness community would come up with a much better solution
than the Chinese in this thread.....
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
B(a)P
International Hazard
Posts: 1119
Registered: 29-9-2019
Member Is Offline
Mood: Festive
|
|
After reading the article I am no clearer on my above questions. The imagery they took of the combustion seems selective and misleading.
I am also confused as to how they got better gas generation with the addition CuO/Al.
They flag the issue of it not being storable, but don't attempt to address it.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1342
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
It's not storable..?...Looks like they have enough money in China to research nonsense. And they still have the audacity to publish a scientific
article about it. And since journalists usually don't understand anything at all, this nonsense gets into a scientific journal in the US. This whole
thread is a waste of time.....
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
