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

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1    3  ..  6
Author: Subject: Best way for getting high density ?
VladimirLem
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 204
Registered: 24-5-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Have no fear <Vlad> is here.

[*] posted on 4-10-2011 at 08:11
Best way for getting high density ?


Hi Guys

Im a hugh fan of shaped charges and optimizing them.

But after some different tests, im not sure which way ist the best to get a high density und especially high velocity compound.

Possible:


Gelantine - maybe with Cellulose Hexanitrate and NG
Pro: All stuff of the compound is reactive (and much powerful too :-) ) but the density is not really high which gives not the "maximum" of velocity...

Wax - Dunno if normal wax would work...the "montan wax" seems not to get easily AND is an unreactive stuff - pro: only around 5-7% are needed

PIB - Have it already but would need 3-8% and some oil or NM to make it kneadable - Pro: able to get high density without many problems, but the velocity is fucked :mad:

another question...is it possible to get a velocity of around 8000m/s when usind PETN(~87)/RDX(~5%) and then the plastic/wax/gelantin stuff?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
nitro-genes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1029
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 4-10-2011 at 12:35


Some pointers:

1. After neutralization, don't crash the PETN/RDX in cold water, as you will get a very fine crystal fraction that needs more binder
2. Recrystallize slowly from warm solvent, I normally used a styrofoam box as insulation and stored it at -20 overnight to recrystallize.
3. Precipitate the last fraction instantly with cold water, which will give the fine crystal fraction
4. Dry and add 5-10% binder, roll plastic explosive for long period of time, this will remove all air and abbrases the crystals to obtain optimal packaging (higher density)

You can get above 1.6 g/cc easily this way, even with inert binder, and will get you close to the 8000 m/s mark

PIB + suitable plastcizers is superior to wax in my experience, if you do want to use wax, use a microcrystalline one

[Edited on 4-10-2011 by nitro-genes]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
quicksilver
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1820
Registered: 7-9-2005
Location: Inches from the keyboard....
Member Is Offline

Mood: ~-=SWINGS=-~

[*] posted on 4-10-2011 at 13:38


Plastiques have a great deal of information regarding their performance levels available. P.I.B. was not the appropriate material; it was Polybutene or Polybutylene w/ a Methylricinoleate. The fact that Czechoslovakian plastique was exported with up to 30% of inerts or "scrubbed" energetics was simply a matter of old Soviet economics.
The "real thing" was certainly a match for Semtex & had the somewhat sophisticated element of both a plasticizer and a tackifier in it's makeup.
For all clarity, ricinoate esters are derived from ricinoleic acid, which makes up 90% of the fatty acids from castor oil or Rapeseed oil. There WAS a period of use of silicone oil but it proved too expensive. The distinction was that some read a patent that described "motor oil" & thought in was an organic petroleum. It was not. It was silicone oil.

The styrene-butadien rubber in the Soviet product is available as flooring adhesive and can be reduced to approx 5% level in a true industrial setting with rollers, etc. A true plastique has density as a focus of it's manufacture. Once that is achieved, the energetic is not all that important as long as it shoots at above 5000mps @ it's raw density level.

Candidates are obviously RDX, PETN, HMX, TATB, or HNS. Even TNT & salvaged nitroguanidine had been used in the Czech products. I imagine that given the level of expertise of the chemist in re-crystallization, ETN, PEN, or MHN could even be used. US & EU products (C4 and C6) were mostly RDX because it was cheap & constantly re-cycled from "de-mil" warheads, etc.

I've said this before but the big issue about C-4, apart from how they cram in 91% RDX without loosing coherency (bimodal crystal size), is the high content of softener (tackifier) compared to rubber binder (1/50th part!). This can only take place via industrial roller or TIME. Once the proper binder is used TIME will allow it to "coat" the crystal as it IS actually liquid (both SBR & poly-B +). Once that is understood & the chemistry of [whatever energetic] re-crystallization is at a comfort level (using a microscope to I.D.) a plethora of plastques could be drawn up. Also it depends on how much one wants to spend.....

It took me the better part of a month of really reading and studying to find all the patents and sources.

U.S. Adhesives Industry (1991 circular)
Shell Chemical aka Resolution Performance Products
Octyl phthalate energetic binder patent + C4 pat.
"Analysis of Semtex Explosives" J.R.Hobbs.
Chapter 39. p.409-428 in " Advances in Analysis and
Detection of Explosives" edited by Jehuda Yinon
Kluwer Academic Publishers ISBN 0-7923-2138-3 (1993)
Hurst's Gravimentric Analysis posts & his material on Semtex "A1" and "H"
I have more but can't find them.....these would get anyone up to speed on the subject of plastiques.



Use of Nitromethane is not appropriate. It evaporates VERY quickly and is actually hygroscopic. The real thing (see above) - behaves and lasts. It can have a shelf life for decades!! But the chemist had damn well better know how to make a material neutral and professional.





[Edited on 5-10-2011 by quicksilver]




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




Posts: 204
Registered: 24-5-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Have no fear <Vlad> is here.

[*] posted on 5-10-2011 at 08:01


Quote: Originally posted by nitro-genes  

1. After neutralization, don't crash the PETN/RDX in cold water, as you will get a very fine crystal fraction that needs more binder
2. Recrystallize slowly from warm solvent, I normally used a styrofoam box as insulation and stored it at -20 overnight to recrystallize.
3. Precipitate the last fraction instantly with cold water, which will give the fine crystal fraction


great idea :)

how about substutuation of oil (when using PIB) with some liquid/kneadable energetic coumpounds like sorbitol hexanitrate ?
(not compleately SHN, just a few percent instead of the oil)

for example:

Main Explosives 90%
PIB 5%
Oil 3%
SHN 2%?

cause SHN also have an positive oxygen balance - if i dont calculated it wrong :D - which sould increase the coumpound...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 6-10-2011 at 05:21


Have you ever tried NG/PETN ? Density >1.6 g/cm*3 and it's VoD=~8000m/s
View user's profile View All Posts By User
VladimirLem
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 204
Registered: 24-5-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Have no fear <Vlad> is here.

[*] posted on 6-10-2011 at 08:34


Quote: Originally posted by Phantom  
Have you ever tried NG/PETN ? Density >1.6 g/cm*3 and it's VoD=~8000m/s


i have read some post from a guy used it at a chaped charge and got an awesome result...BUT...the use of NG was many many too much and really dangerous i think...about 1/3 PETN, 2/3 NG...

Positive is, that NG got an positive OB and increase the power of the PETN...AND, PETN disolves in NG...but whatevere i would try, i wouldnt go for more than...lets say 10% NG...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 01:13


And what about ANNMSA ? It's pretty effective.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
VladimirLem
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 204
Registered: 24-5-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Have no fear <Vlad> is here.

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 01:44


Quote: Originally posted by Phantom  
And what about ANNMSA ? It's pretty effective.


ur kidding me right?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 01:49


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




Posts: 204
Registered: 24-5-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Have no fear <Vlad> is here.

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 02:56


Dude, seriously...we are talking about high performace explosives and your saying some mixed bullshit which may be able to get up to the power of ~TNT...

There are no informations of its density, VoD, OB and TNT-Äquiv.

What the hell...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 06:30


Well this is not a bullshit. Even Axtran used it in his shaped charges that you can read in the firs topic and it worked very well.

It is basically a mixture of ammonium sulphate, nitromethane and conc. HNO3

VoD is around 8100m/s
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 06:40


Quote:

Patience Vladimir. . . The explosives you've mentioned aren't really suitable for use in shaped charges because their power and VoDs are on the low side.

Quote:
Bullshit...ANNM has up to 500 at lead block...THATS Power !
So why doesn't NU or even UNNM could do that job ?

Quote:
Dude, seriously...we are talking about high performace explosives and your saying some mixed bullshit which may be able to get up to the power of ~TNT...

So, Vlad the Bullshitter, consistent inconsistence!


View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 8-10-2011 at 07:47


Quote:
It is basically a mixture of ammonium sulphate, nitromethane and conc. HNO3
VoD is around 8100m/s

While an oxygen-balanced binary mixture of NM/HNO<sub>3</sub> will have a VoD which can exceed 8000m/sec, it will also be very shock-sensitive!
In ANNMSA, the presence of H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> will greatly reduce brisance!


View user's profile View All Posts By User
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2880
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline

Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic

[*] posted on 10-10-2011 at 10:21


Quote: Originally posted by hissingnoise  
Quote:
It is basically a mixture of ammonium sulphate, nitromethane and conc. HNO3
VoD is around 8100m/s

While an oxygen-balanced binary mixture of NM/HNO<sub>3</sub> will have a VoD which can exceed 8000m/sec, it will also be very shock-sensitive!
In ANNMSA, the presence of H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> will greatly reduce brisance!

First assumption is correct but don't be so sure of the second one!
If you read Axt tread thereover...you may read some of my 50 cents comments on it...roughly summarized:
AN/NM/SA is a mix of NH4NO3, CH3-NO2 and H2SO4...thus in the mix, you get some crossed reaction products NH4HSO4, HNO3, CH2=O, CH2=N-OH, NHOH.HNO3, etc and NOx, CO2 bubbles...all this participating at sensitization and high VOD!

[Edited on 10-10-2011 by PHILOU Zrealone]




PH Z (PHILOU Zrealone)

"Physic is all what never works; Chemistry is all what stinks and explodes!"-"Life that deadly disease, sexually transmitted."(W.Allen)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 01:16


Quote:
First assumption is correct but don't be so sure of the second one!

Not quite assumptions, PHILOU --- the sulphur atom, contained in an HE, has an unfavourable effect on VoD!

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




Posts: 202
Registered: 18-8-2005
Location: noitacoL
Member Is Offline

Mood: booM

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 01:48


The sulphuric acid in this mixture contributes with nothing to the energetic output of it. It is just ballast. And adding acid to any explosive decreases stability great. This is the reason I don't recommend such mixtures.

The idea of PETN plus NG is good indeed. Maybe a better (less sensitive) option is PETN plus 10-20% PGDN, just to fill the air space between PETN crystals.

[Edited on 11-10-2011 by simply RED]




When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead...
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Maniak
Harmless
*




Posts: 45
Registered: 26-6-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 03:19


1.) using liquid mixture of sorbitol nitrates as a part of plasticizer is a bad idea because of stability. The stability of sugar nitrates decreases with increasing chain length, i.e. liquid SHN mixtures will be much less stable than EGDN, PGDN and even NG. In a solid state, there is a stabilizing effect of crystalline matrix so that crystalline SHN or MHN may stay alive for longer time.

2.) NM + HNO3 stechiometric mixture will have a density about 1,25g.cm-3 and at this density, there is no chance to have over 8000m/s. I think some 7500m/s may be a possible maximum.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 04:05


In liquid explosives, VoD is affected by density, OB and viscosity!
Viscosity in NM/HNO<sub>3</sub> is lower than in EGDN and much lower than NGl.
Lower viscosities increase VoD.


View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 09:25


Well if you mix the ANNM with the H2SO4 at "ground zero" you don't need to worry about the sensitivity of the explosive mixture.

Nitroglycerine/PETN has a really good density for shaped charges. Density >1.6 g/cm*3 and it's VoD=~8000m/s
I had seen some really good videos from NUKEpyro's shaped charges and they worked very well for example the 90mm 1500g NG/PETN shaped charge.

Had seen a couple videos on the internet with only EGDN based shaped charges. They didn't work because in my opinion and knowledge the problem was with the VoD.

Liquid --> steel pipe --> 8# commercial cap --> 7830m/s

Liquid --> steel pipe --> 80g picric acid --> 8200-8300m/s

Liquid --> plastic cup --> 8# commercial cap --> ONLY 1000-3000m/s

Solid(-70*C) --> plastic cup --> 8# commercial cap --> above 8000m/s

Warning: Never use a steel pipe for casing! Sharpnels can kill you !

[Edited on 11-10-2011 by Phantom]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 11-10-2011 at 11:10


Data such as those above are of little use without the pipe-dimensions!


View user's profile View All Posts By User
quicksilver
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1820
Registered: 7-9-2005
Location: Inches from the keyboard....
Member Is Offline

Mood: ~-=SWINGS=-~

[*] posted on 12-10-2011 at 06:36


I didn't think I needed to point this out but -=source=- of documented material needs to accompany statements of activity, structure, synthesis, & history. Many of the posts have no documentation what so ever and that is not the way we do things here. You have all read the rules of the Forum & it's vital that every effort be made that the material here have documentation so that it could be depended upon to be factual.

Often times the functional level of a thread goes up but in this case it's taken a turn for the worse. If you want to keep this thread alive then please put some professionalism into it. As I saw this thread flounder I was willing to let it stay self-policed as many of you have no problem raising the level of professionalism with no comment from me. However once I started getting complaints about the sophomoric level of some of this material, I realized it would have to be closed unless the quality of posting changes.




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




Posts: 202
Registered: 18-8-2005
Location: noitacoL
Member Is Offline

Mood: booM

[*] posted on 13-10-2011 at 04:34


Very good experimental information on the point including data on bicyclo HMX nitramine.
http://www.ipo.waw.pl/wydawnictwa/cejem/3-2010/PDF/Elbeih.pd...




When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead...
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Maniak
Harmless
*




Posts: 45
Registered: 26-6-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 14-10-2011 at 15:36


Viscosity has much lower influence on VoD than density. Even mixtures of NM with TeNM have VoD below 7000m/s (Fedoroff VII, L-29). At such a low density (1,25g.cm-3) there is not even one explosive mixture detonating at 8000m/s (I mean measured and published, not theoretical values or wishes). According to my experiments with pure NM/fuming HNO3 mixture, it possesses less brisance than some usual PETN inert bonded plastics.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 15-10-2011 at 04:59


Quote:
According to my experiments with pure NM/fuming HNO3 mixture, it possesses less brisance than some usual PETN inert bonded plastics.

Do you know the density of the HNO<sub>3</sub> you used and how did you determine the brisance of the mixture?


View user's profile View All Posts By User
Phantom
Harmless
*




Posts: 43
Registered: 26-4-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: AUDENDUM EST,FORTES AUDIUVAT IPSE DEUS

[*] posted on 15-10-2011 at 22:49


By the way C-4 works great which is plastic RDX. I`m pretty sure you all had seen this video-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LudNqf56AFo
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1    3  ..  6

  Go To Top