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

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  ..  24    26    28  ..  37
Author: Subject: Diphoronepentaperoxide (DPPP)
Microtek
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 638
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 03:21


Quote:
Originally posted by Matsumoto_Hideki
I never said the amount is dead on since I cannot measure small amounts of anything I did say 1-3mg range as I compaired this to a weight of a 1mg loratadine tablet used for alergies :mad:



That might explain the apparant discrepancy; if you are saying that 1-3 tablets containing 1 mg of loratadine each weigh the same as the amount of DPPP you are using, then you will have much, much more than 1-3 mg of DPPP.
The tablets obviously contain large amounts of fillers and other ingredients as it is simply not practical to handle pills of the 1 mg size; they would be about one cubic millimeter in size.
100-300 mg for one pill is a more probable figure assuming a quite small pill.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 07:35
hummm...


---I just tried forming a micro tablet sized amount into a compressed chunk and the smallest I could form was 150mg. Even at 150mg the material still was very explosive--- maybe this is what happened with hideki's test? DPPP material density is quite high due to its molecular structure--
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 09:04


The small compressed samples which I have ignited have only burned rapidly ,
even in chunks 5.5 mm X ~ 12 mm contained in a cylindrical cavity drilled in a block of hardwood . However at that dimension , the loose crystals low order detonate when ignited . Now the response to impact is certainly there for a smaller amount , perhaps even for a single crystal , but that is an entirely different parameter which has no real bearing upon what will be the response to the material to heating or to ignition .
Many energetic materials give no clue to their potential power when initiated under conditions different from those conditions under which their power is fully realized . Certain preliminary tests like those I am doing only provide some specific information which has bearing upon identifying those conditions where
the potential of the material may be revealed . It may be interesting to know what amount of DPPP will detonate when heated at certain rate to a certain temperature , but such information has no real practical significance . A sufficient amount of just about any primary explosive will deform a spoon to some extent under some condition of initiation , but the data derived from such tests is only pertinent to the long term study of the various parameters of techniques for the destruction of tableware . If there is another point , someone please tell me , as I lack the imagination to see the scientific relevance of the spoon destruction experiments , particularly in the absence of good data concerning the comparable effects on forks and knives , while wondering also if cultural bias has spared chopsticks , or if the wok is being reserved for larger scale tests involving a recipe for DPPP "stir-fry" , when the protective barricade and remote sensors are installed :D
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Matsumoto_Hideki
Banned





Posts: 103
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: detonated

mad.gif posted on 21-1-2005 at 09:39
Am I going to get heard ?


I get really frusterate with people when they fly to conclusions about what was said/
Sorry I overeacted.
I guess roomate was right "Pyroz" weight could have been more than 1-3mg. I don't know. I will stick to my story as I am somehow getting it to detonate in MUCH smaller quantities than Rosco is. I have not got anything close to Wavefront's picture though which i am sure was several 100mg detonated or ..............?
***************************************I am taking the DV camera tommorrow for sure up to the local range to test fire some BIG DPPP devices and some APAN for fun. One device is a 300g modified Al butane cylinder with a wedged rounded cone at the bottom. I will also use some 150g/m homemade detcord against a target.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
PainKilla
National Hazard
****




Posts: 306
Registered: 29-4-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 11:33


Instead of bitching and moaning that we arent listening why don't you take a fucking picure or movie. We are going pages and pages off topic because you are exxagerating and then claiming that we are "not reading post."

I will be doing my test today, Ill report later today but probably late tommorow.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
WaveFront
Harmless
*




Posts: 31
Registered: 1-1-2005
Location: Southern Europe
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 13:41


Matsumoto, maybe it was 100 mg, maybe a little bit more. Edit: maybe 200
This can be slighty off-topic, since it is HMTD, but can help to distinguish between AP and explosives which are really more brissant. Observe how the aluminum dust is burnt in the air, producing metallisations in the proximities.

edit: I agree entirely with Rosco that is necessary a bigger amount to determine the true potential.

http://webs.ono.com/rym/TAPA.WMV

[Edited on 21-1-2005 by WaveFront]

[Edited on 21-1-2005 by WaveFront]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Matsumoto_Hideki
Banned





Posts: 103
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: detonated

biggrin.gif posted on 21-1-2005 at 13:49
Don't worry movies and pics coming!


You will see movies tommorrow late.
I am going to the range, You will have some proof soon enough.
:P
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 21-1-2005 at 19:50
video clip #1


Here you are, a video clip of just how explosive DPPP is in small amounts. I honestly didn't expect a detonation in quantities less than 100 mg but I was wrong. In the video I placed 30mg of DPPP into a spoon and spread it out evenly to insure that the crystalline material has equal opportunity to melt. It did not take very long for it to liquify...and then "BANG" I recieved a sharp detonation. AP by comparison just deflagrated and that video is also coming soon.

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by Pyroz]

Attachment: 30mgDPPP.mov (533kB)
This file has been downloaded 1296 times

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Matsumoto_Hideki
Banned





Posts: 103
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: detonated

thumbup.gif posted on 21-1-2005 at 22:34
15-20mg DPPP?...


Geeze would you look at that. Rosco I think we have totally different material than what you got if your "DPPP" just sizzles. That detonation on the video nearly bent the spoon. About that amount was detonated by me in a small pile, it liquified and detonated with a bit more power and bent the spoon back into that U shape I was talking about. Try it if you like.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 06:52
rate of temperature rise


You are incorrect to assume we have different materials .

Try a candle and slow gentle heating and you'll see that's the difference . Nearly any explosive can be rapidly heated or dropped onto an already heated surface is even more effective at demonstrating this "cooking off" which has zero to do with the amount or the power of the explosive . Actually this is one of the effects which is responsible for the behavior of "putty" , a few test pellets of which I have drying now . Putty combines the effect of a local cookoff induced detonation with the confinement and densifying effect of the binder which also is energetic and amplifies the output .
By comparing the output of putty made from AP and putty made from DPPP , using equal weight samples of each resting upon a witness plate , some data will be provided of how the small mass cookoff performance compares . This will be useful information , even though it is in no way definitive about what will be the performance of DPPP in different firing schemes where larger quantities are involved . For example HMTD putty detonates in smaller masses than does AP putty , while the loose crystals of AP detonate in smalller diameters than HMTD . So each of the tests I am choosing
are intended to reveal some practical data about the behavior of the sample material , in *weighed * quantities . My tests are working systematically through a series of comparisons with the effects of control samples of already known materials , increasing the quantity incrementally and the performance demands of each test sample so that a good picture of the properties of the DPPP is revealed . And I do have on hand control samples of bona fide 8500+ m/sec test charges for side by side comparisons of metal cutting effects when the tests are up to 3 gram quantitites . By the time I have finished my tests I will know enough about the material to make some intelligent conclusions from not only such physical tests but also from the chemical tests . The residual unused free peroxide remaining in the filtered reaction mixture is one of the chemical tests which should be very revealing . The thermal curve which the reaction follows during synthesis is one factor alone which suggests that Mackowiak's alleged "pentachlorophorone" intermediate is a reach , and perhaps the identification of the reaction endproduct as well is therefore misidentified . But no number of mangled tableware will prove or disprove that . Only pertinent tests involving *measurable* quantities and properly interpreted results accurately reported will tell the true story about DPPP .
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Matsumoto_Hideki
Banned





Posts: 103
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: detonated

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 08:51
Oh ok Rosco, I though you said it woulden't detonate?


Rosco, earlier I was under the impression that I was full of it for claiming this material would detonate in (unmeasured) 1-3mg range, turns out this was more like 10-20mg as i stand corrected by my room-mate. OK, but you still have no detonation at this amount, even? BTW I tried a candle and it melts much more effectivly (cooler flame) and then detonates just as you saw in the film. ie) not much difference.

BTW I have an initial report from my university about DPPP, and the results are quite interesting.

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by Matsumoto_Hideki]
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Joeychemist
National Hazard
****




Posts: 275
Registered: 16-9-2004
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: Sedated

mad.gif posted on 22-1-2005 at 09:14
ARG! WTF?


Well are you going to share it or what???

We don't like to be teased like dogs Hideki.:mad:

You say you have very interesting findings, and you dangle it right in our face and then you don't deliver?WTF?:mad::mad:
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:15


Hideki, I have warned you not to mess with this forum...pls post somewhere else for everyone sake.

..just sharing my finding guys.

Thanks for your feedback Rosco and others. I'm doing my best to show some of my findings here. I hope something can be gained by this video data. More tests today, and more video evidence.

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by Pyroz]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
WaveFront
Harmless
*




Posts: 31
Registered: 1-1-2005
Location: Southern Europe
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:24


Rosco, I encourage to you to continue with your scientific method, you will achieve reliable results... and you could even discover other things to do with the precursor, or similar precursors that could be lead to more powerful products :).

Many of us just don´t have laboratory equipment to do measurements or just do small explosions for fun.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
vulture
Forum Gatekeeper
*****




Posts: 3330
Registered: 25-5-2002
Location: France
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:27


The real problem, Matsumoto, is you. You pulled off too many unbelievable stunts for anyone to believe you anymore.

It's called a rep. You might want to read about that and how to conduct scientifically valuable experiments instead of bloating your results to fairytale proportions.




One shouldn't accept or resort to the mutilation of science to appease the mentally impaired.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Joeychemist
National Hazard
****




Posts: 275
Registered: 16-9-2004
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: Sedated

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:32


It’s rather suspicious that you two do not act like roommates. I mean hell, if all of us lived in the same building we would have this DPPP puzzle solved by now, you know why? Because we could *talk* about it face to face and we could perform the tests *together*, but it would seem (from you’re posts) that you guys almost don’t even *talk* to each other outside of the forum?

Here is a thought, maybe you guys could do us and this thread a favor by combining you’re posts together from one user name. That would help to slow the growth of this thread.Just a thought.

I know everyone feels that this thread is just too big, and it is becoming harder and harder to go back and find something that was said 2 weeks ago. Maybe we could carry on with this conversation in another thread?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:40


"t’s rather suspicious that you two do not act like roommates."

I have been meaning to get rid of Hidekis account for good... I asked the admin to take it off line. But no can do. So Hideki can post somewhere else...I have had it.

I barely speak with Hideki, and I'm not fond of his attitude.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
KemiRockarFett
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 84
Registered: 23-7-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 10:55


Quote:
Originally posted by Matsumoto_Hideki
Geeze would you look at that. Rosco I think we have totally different material than what you got if your "DPPP" just sizzles. That detonation on the video nearly bent the spoon. About that amount was detonated by me in a small pile, it liquified and detonated with a bit more power and bent the spoon back into that U shape I was talking about. Try it if you like.


Hey you!!! Thats not even possible even if we say that the DPPP goes off with 9000 m/s on your spoon it will not be bend at all! The VoD is so high that the result is a hole but than you have to have a BIG amount like several grams on your spoon. PRESSED and maybe forming an jet-beam.
If compare the DPPP with an much more powerful explosive as penthaerytthritoltetranitrate all people reading this can se that you are telling us garbage the hole time. I am sure you never even have seen an acetone or hydrogenperoxide bottle.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 11:39
putty test 300 mg spherical charge


Spherical 300 mg chunks of putty made from DPPP and AP were tested side by side on the lid of a candy tin . Loud reports were produced by each test charge and each produced deep dimples in the thin sheet metal , but neither punctured or cracked the metal and the diameter and shape and depth of the dimples produced is identical .
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 12:12
humm... more curious


okay, Rosco
Have you tried putting equal amounts of AP and DPPP into brass rifle cartidges? For example 2 grams side to side...? I am curious as to why my witness plate has two very different marking indicating a power difference. Maybe this is my problem and I did not compress each material with the same pressure? humm,
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 14:15


The 300 mg charges are the largest tested so far side by side under identical conditions involving ordinary flame ignition
and self-accelleration of the materials under minimal or no confinement . So far the AP and the DPPP are behaving
* exactly * the same , which is very curious to me too . They even sublime at about the same rate , even though the crystals obtained by sublimation look different . I think a melting point test which I haven't done yet , including a a mixed sample melting point test , is getting higher on my list of priorities for tests to do , at this point . It isn't looking good in the preliminary tests for DPPP , but there are still more tests of the "fire for effect" type larger charge tests to do , especially the picric acid initiating ability tests which are about as definitive as it gets for small charges . With complete detonation of picric acid the test chamber is full of black smoke and coated with black carbon dust like lampblack . An incomplete detonation produces a yellow dye smoke and covers everything in the test chamber with the micronized yellow dye residue dust of undetonated picric acid .

One thing I can point out from the test results so far is that if you are firing a 2 gram compressed chage for a test , you need a loose amount of maybe a quarter to a half gram on top of the compressed 2 gram column , because the self accelleration upon ignition of the compressed material is slow in the open ended capsule tests , while the loose powder achieves low order DDT at the same diameter with greater predictability .
The compressed column will therefore be more desirably initiated by shock from the low order DDT of the loose material , and then the compressed material will lose less potential for its own acceleration from low order to high order detonation .
It is always a good idea in a single component cap of this sort to apply the strategy of using some of the loose material as a primer for the pressed material for this reason that the loose material establishes the detonation wave far more readily than does the compressed material . The rule is general . Without the loose priming layer ,
two compressed charges of identical material could demonstrate very different plates , merely because of the variation in how each accelerated in unpredictable fashion following ignition . If enough charges were tested , indeed some of them might even fail to detonate at all , but only burn , while some others may give excellent plates , and others give a range in between . Eliminating this variable is one of the reasons why matchheads and ignition charges have been standardized for commercial devices so that predictable performance is achieved from one device to the next .

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pyroz
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 76
Registered: 27-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: curious...

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 15:07


Quote:
Originally posted by Rosco Bodine
One thing I can point out from the test results so far is that if you are firing a 2 gram compressed chage for a test , you need a loose amount of maybe a quarter to a half gram on top of the compressed 2 gram column , because the self accelleration upon ignition of the compressed material is slow in the open ended capsule tests , while the loose powder achieves low order DDT at the same diameter with greater predictability .
[Edited on 22-1-2005 by Rosco Bodine]

I have been using a loose powder primer for initiation in all of my tests. But just to make sure I haven't messed up somewhere i'll redo my plate test..on video. I'll show you how I'm loading the cartidges as well. I'm even planning a synthasis video late sunday as well.
A bit of a set back today as the road to the firing range is closed due to heavy rains so I'll have to try again tomorrow. I appriecate your pointers! I would like to contribute as much as I can and solve this "DPPP" mystery once and for all.
Thanks, cheers all!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 15:54


No video is required really , just state precisely what you are doing with loadings , because the performance can definitely vary considerably because of any detail
for small charges particularly , including any priming scheme . The behavior of many explosives can be deceptive below a certain threshold amount which can even be several grams or more . I have seen reports by others testing certain compositions in amounts below their threshold for high order , and using inadequate initiation sometimes too , and have results which speak poorly of those compositions potential . I am not going to make any premature conclusions about DPPP , because I know from tests on HMTD to not be too hasty about the small quantity and small diameter evidence , which may not hint at what occurs next when the quantities and initiation schemes are increased in intensity . And it could also be that DPPP is a "crossover" type of "primary" whose performance is docile as a primary sort of like lead styphnate , and yet has excellent performance when fired as a secondary by another material which has much better performance in small amounts as an initiator . I haven't yet tested DPPP being shock initiated by another primary , even in the scheme where the loose DPPP is used to fire the compressed material . That is likely the method which accounts for your results with the 2 gram charges , where the combination of loose and compressed material in tandem actually constitutes a "firing train" . So far my tests have involved single density , single component charges in only threshold amounts . I look forward to seeing what the heavier loadings and tandem firing train tests will show . I generally go to electrical firing for the larger stuff , and use a low order DDT composition in the electrical squibb ,
like a tenth gram of basic lead picrate .

[Edited on 23-1-2005 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Dodoman
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 79
Registered: 2-8-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 17:16


Just performed a few tests today with the 40 or so grams of DPPP that I had.

I made a chaped charge using 2 gm of DPPP. The cone had an acute angle and with a 4 cm standoff. The whole thing was standing on a fome plate. I placed a coin under the charge and lit the fuse. After the detonation I found the plate intact :o. And the coin was not found. I'm sure that nithing happened to it as the plate was not even broken. But the strange thing was that it was covered in fine black dust just like lamp black.

I also made two AN/DPPP (10% by weight) charges and used one to detonate ANFO. Complete detonation.
And the other to vaporise some gasoline in the direction on a flame. The charge detonated but the FAE device failed I guss it had too much gasoline in it.

I have a few pictures and a very low quality video of the failed FAE device that I can post if you want.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 22-1-2005 at 19:55


There is a patent which describes a synthesis of trimeric AP under moderately acidic conditions which are similar to the conditions of acidity for synthesis of DPPP .

GB620498

Mostly the patent describes the use of sulfuric acid , but does mention
that HCl can also be used in lesser concentrations . On page 3 line 29 of
the patent , it states that too large a proportion of HCl particularly at
elevated temperatures favors the formation of chloroacetone . Of course
there is plenty of free acetone in the reaction mixture of the patent so
it is different in that respect from the reaction mixture for DPPP . Anyway
it would seem possible that any traces of acetone in the DPPP reaction mixture
could also be a source for chloroacetone formation , although the potential
concentration would be lowered . From what I have read about the reaction
of H2O2 and HCl , the reaction takes place only slowly , and produces Cl2 , and
also some HClO by the further reaction of the chlorine with water . I have speculated
that the initial reaction of the DPPP precursor during "peroxidation" which is actually
a chlorination , may be favored by warm temperatures , but at the same time it
is also possible that no advantage may be taken of this if it is true , because of
the undesired simultaneous production of chloroacetone or other undesired byproducts .
This is still an open question not fully resolved for me with regards to the synthesis
of DPPP . If the reaction of the H2O2 and HCl does occur slowly , then the rate of
formation of the pentachlorophorone would be limited by that slow reaction providing
the chlorine . In my estimation the chlorination of the precursor is the least well
understood part of the synthesis of the DPPP .
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  ..  24    26    28  ..  37

  Go To Top