| Pages:
1
..
59
60
61
62
63
..
78 |
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
@nitro-genes
I keep thinking about manganese possibly being useful partly because of the precipitation problem for the ammonium complexed copper picrate which is
a deactivated low solubility undesired byproduct for the reduction in an alkaline reaction mixture. I mentioned having read a reference about
ammonium chloride inhibiting the precipitation of manganese hydroxide, and I have been thinking possibly ammonium acetate or ammonium aminoacetate
(ammonium glycinate) or the ammonium salt of EDTA could similarly operate as an inhibitor for manganese precipitation in an alkaline reaction mixture
and possibly could chelate the manganese in soluble form in either oxidation state. If ammonium ascorbate was gradually added, then everything should
stay in solution during the reduction. The scheme could be useful where the base being used to neutralize the picric acid is ammonia, and likewise the
ultimate product would be ammonium picramate.
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by underground  | Just a quick question.
Will 2 grams of "X" explosive, with lets assume its VoD is 4000m/s, have the same power or about the same power as 1 gram of "Z" explosive with VoD
8000m/s ?
[Edited on 27-1-2018 by underground] |
Theoretically, Z would be twice as good especially having more shattering power (brisance). Explosives with VOD 4000m/s and below have more of a
pushing and heaving effect while the high VOD explosives have more of a shattering and fragmenting effect on objects they are in contact with so they
really are two separate cases.
Realistically, differences in flame temperature, heat of explosion, brisance, oxygen balance, theoretical max density, etc, between the two explosives
would also come into play so it quickly becomes complicated.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
Morgan
International Hazard
Posts: 1660
Registered: 28-12-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Any suggestions of where to buy a filtered high voltage DC power supply something around 20-30,000 volts and 1 milliamp or so?
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The shattering effect on steel targets will be about an order of magnitude higher (5-10×) with 8000 m/s explosive than with 4000 m/s. Not sure about
2 g amounts, though. You're talking the difference between high end PETN/ETN and EGDN/NC plastic and melt cast ETN (250 - 300 kbar) and slightly more
powerful ammonals or pressed primary explosives like TATP (~ 50 kbar). Most inert/RDX/PETN/ETN plastics made at home will likely max out in the 7700
m/s range.
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Your correct about the PE's with inerts.
I use PETN plastic with about 15% binder and plasticizer with density @ 1.44 and I calculate VOD to be around the 7000m/s mark.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
@ nitro-genes
Some more thought has been given to the reduction in alkaline condition and has led me to consider a system using Magnesium based salts.
Magnesium hydroxide in water has a solution pH of 10.3.
Glycine will inhibit precipitation of Manganese hydroxide in an alkaline system up to about a pH of 10. So I am thinking a reduction of magnesium
picrate or perhaps sodium picrate could be done using magnesium ascorbate. A manganous glycinate salt could be used as the reducing catalyst, with an
additonal molar equivalent of glycine added to be available to neutralize the manganese +III and form the transient manganese + III (tris) glycinate
from the oxidized manganous + II (bis) glycinate.
Whether this buffering scheme works will depend on the ability of the soluble glycine chelated manganese to still be useful as a reducing agent that
can be recycled back to the +II form by reacting with the gradually added magnesium ascorbate.
In the alternative it may be that no reduction catalyst is needed if the magnesium ascorbate is found to be active in reducing magnesium picrate or
perhaps basic magnesium picrate directly.
The manganous biglycinate would form in situ via double decomposition of manganous sulfate and magnesium biglycinate
These reagents are OTC nutritional supplement items
https://www.vitacost.com/now-foods-magnesium-biglycinate-pow...
https://www.vitacost.com/now-foods-magnesium-ascorbate-powde...
https://www.vitacost.com/now-foods-glycine-pure-powder
https://www.vitacost.com/now-foods-magnesium-oxide-pure-powd...
https://www.vitacost.com/phillips-genuine-milk-of-magnesia-s...
[Edited on 1/30/2018 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
underground
National Hazard
Posts: 692
Registered: 10-10-2013
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline
|
|
Anyone who has already tried to make both ETN and PETN, which one can easier be nitrated ?
[Edited on 3-2-2018 by underground]
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1333
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
PETN is easily steps , faster steps and yields are better on the weight fo acids. Almost 2x more advantageous.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
underground
National Hazard
Posts: 692
Registered: 10-10-2013
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline
|
|
So there is no point of wasting chemicals making ETN while PETN have better yields and more power. The only disadvantage is the P. price compare to E.
[Edited on 3-2-2018 by underground]
|
|
|
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".
|
|
In USA, you can buy pure erythritol as a diet sweetener by the pound, no questions asked. Pentaerythritol is harder to find.
Looking at the industrial manufacturing processes and base materials involved, I would THINK PETN should be the cheaper chemical in bulk?
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by Bert]
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).
|
|
|
joseph6355
Hazard to Others
Posts: 144
Registered: 23-8-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: Nitrated
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Bert | In USA, you can buy pure erythritol as a diet sweetener by the pound, no questions asked. Pentaerythritol is harder to find.
Looking at the industrial manufacturing processes and base materials involved, I would THINK PETN should be the cheaper chemical in bulk?
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by Bert] |
True. There is no substantial use for PE that would justify it being sold OTC.
Sure, it has its uses besides energetics, but a common person would never need it. Erythritol on the other hand is the new mainstream sweetener that
everybody wants.
The problem with synthesizing ETN is that it takes big amounts of nitric acid to fully nitrate, and using nitrating salts makes a mess, forcing you to
add more sulfuric acid in order to dissolve it and allow you to add the rest of the salt. Not to mention that the yield gets very compromised when
using nitrating salts.
[Edited on 4/2/18 by joseph6355]
Oh, hello!  |
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
I personally prefer PETN synthesized with 70% nitric and recrystallised from acetone. Very smooth noyration with good yields.
I think whatever is more convenient is better they both end up with four nitrate ester groups.
The only real differences I can think of is that the ETN is slightly more sensitive I have read.
PETN has a very small critical diameter hence its use in detcord I think.
ETN has a positive oxygen balance to consume binders if used in specialty compositions.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
joseph6355
Hazard to Others
Posts: 144
Registered: 23-8-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: Nitrated
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by greenlight | I personally prefer PETN synthesized with 70% nitric and recrystallised from acetone. Very smooth noyration with good yields.
I think whatever is more convenient is better they both end up with four nitrate ester groups.
The only real differences I can think of is that the ETN is slightly more sensitive I have read.
PETN has a very small critical diameter hence its use in detcord I think.
ETN has a positive oxygen balance to consume binders if used in specialty compositions.
|
ETN has about 2/3 of the friction sensitivity of PETN. I think that if it was plasticized, it would improve its safety greatly.
Oh, hello! |
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Yes, the inert lubricating effects would definitely reduce the sensitivity and make for safer handling..
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
underground
National Hazard
Posts: 692
Registered: 10-10-2013
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline
|
|
Due to ETN's positive OB, woult it be a better option with plasticizer than PETN ?
| Quote: Originally posted by joseph6355 |
The problem with synthesizing ETN is that it takes big amounts of nitric acid to fully nitrate, and using nitrating salts makes a mess, forcing you to
add more sulfuric acid in order to dissolve it and allow you to add the rest of the salt. Not to mention that the yield gets very compromised when
using nitrating salts.
[Edited on 4/2/18 by joseph6355] |
Whenever tried to dissolve E into SA, yields goes down. Looks like it works better by just adding it as a very fine powder into the mixture.
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by underground]
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1333
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Of course. Very dry E in very powder form is base for adding to Acids. For high yield. His sale distribution form is wet. Against it, PE is possible
in first step dissolve in HNO3 65 (humidity is unimportant) and instantly after disolving adding as the drop into H2SO4 95. Yields are maximal.
Adding E in same method is yield zero.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
I don't think you would notice much difference between PETN and ETN plastic explosive but yeah, the ETN has a little left over oxygen to give out
which could go to combustible binders/plasticizers.
PETN is not that oxygen deficient (-10%) anyway.
I would have to get out the calculator to find OB% ETN and it is late at night (will do it tomorrow).
I don't think it will be that large of a number.
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by greenlight]
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
Hennig Brand
International Hazard
Posts: 1284
Registered: 7-6-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Putty explosives are generally for shattering, but of course are good for anything, PETN putties are superior for this by at least 10% IIRC. If you
are using your plastic explosive to remove stumps the extra oxygen from ETN might be more useful, but that would be quite a waste of an expensive
explosive. This has been discussed a lot earlier in this thread, it is so long now I would need to search. The oxygen fuel reactions are much slower
and don't add much of anything to the shattering effect, it is about proximity of the atoms, density. Molecular explosives are more powerful because
the mixing is uniform, atoms close together.
"A risk-free world is a very dull world, one from which we are apt to learn little of consequence." -Geerat Vermeij
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1333
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
ETN has OB + 5,3 Better than PETN OB - 10. PIB - 342,2 OIL - 345. (calc. on CO2 )
ETN + 10% binder = OB - 29,59. PETN + 10% binder = OB - 43,36
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by Laboratory of Liptakov]
Attachment: OB 4.0en.rar (283kB)
This file has been downloaded 391 times
[Edited on 4-2-2018 by Laboratory of Liptakov]
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Hennig brand is right, you would get performance increase by mixing an oxygen deficient explosive with an oxygen rich explosive to bring the balance
closer to zero (like TNT and ammonium nitrate in ammatol).
The extra oxygen combined with something combustible like binders, plasticizers will just create an afterburn efect and a slightly more visible
fireball.
The ETN would be better than PETN if you using metal powder as a fuel to create a slight thermobaric effect.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
joseph6355
Hazard to Others
Posts: 144
Registered: 23-8-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: Nitrated
|
|
Since you guys are talking about oxygen balance, I would like to know how to do the math and come up with an answer on how much N2, H2O and CO2 would
be generated from the decomposition of the explosive material, like this guy on this thread: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=9201#p...
Oh, hello! |
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Here is one way I have learnt of calculating OB that works for CHNO explosives:
OB% = 1600 ÷ molecular wt of explosive [o - (2c + h/2)]
o is oxygen, c is carbon and h represents hydrogen.
If the end result is negative, the explosive is underoxidized and the reverse os true for a positive number.
Heres two examples:
RDX ; C3H6N6O6
Carbon = 3 × 12.01
Hydrogen = 6 × 1.008
Nitrogen = 6 × 14.008
Oxygen = 6 × 16.00
Total molecular weight RDX = 222.126
OB = 6 - (2×3) - (6÷2) = -3 × 1600 ÷ 222.126 = -21.61% for RDX (underoxidized)
PETN ; C5H8N4O12
Molecular weight PETN = (12.01×5) + (1.008×8) + (14.008×4) + (16.00×12) = 316.145
OB = 12 - (2×5) - (8÷2) = -2 × 1600 ÷ 316.145 = -10.12% for PETN ( underoxidized)
Explosives with a balance of 0 or slightly overoxidized are good. TNT is a good explosive because of its melt casting ability and good VOD but it is
severely underoxidized with a lot of excess carbon and carbon monoxide unused. This is why there is a noticeably black cloud of detonation products
with TNT.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 705
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
I just noticed you asked how to predict how much products will result from a detonation of a certain explosive. There is a set of rules for this for
CHNO explosives I have taken from explosives engineering (Cooper).
1. All the nitrogen forms N2.
2. All the hydrogen is burned to H2O.
3. Any oxygen left after H2O formation burns carbon to CO.
4. Any oxygen left after CO formation burns CO to CO2.
5. Any oxygen left after CO2 formation forms O2.
6. Traces of NOx are always formed.
Here is the example for RDX;
C3H6N6O6 > 3C + 6H + 6N + 6O
a. 6N > 3 N2
b. 6H + 3O > 3H2O (3 O remaining)
c. 3C + 3O > 3CO (all the O is used up now and no CO2 is formed)
C3H6N6O6 > 3H2O + 3CO + 3N2
There is CO remaining which proved the OB equation on the last post that RDX is underoxidized.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
|
joseph6355
Hazard to Others
Posts: 144
Registered: 23-8-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: Nitrated
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by greenlight | I just noticed you asked how to predict how much products will result from a detonation of a certain explosive. There is a set of rules for this for
CHNO explosives I have taken from explosives engineering (Cooper).
1. All the nitrogen forms N2.
2. All the hydrogen is burned to H2O.
3. Any oxygen left after H2O formation burns carbon to CO.
4. Any oxygen left after CO formation burns CO to CO2.
5. Any oxygen left after CO2 formation forms O2.
6. Traces of NOx are always formed.
Here is the example for RDX;
C3H6N6O6 > 3C + 6H + 6N + 6O
a. 6N > 3 N2
b. 6H + 3O > 3H2O (3 O remaining)
c. 3C + 3O > 3CO (all the O is used up now and no CO2 is formed)
C3H6N6O6 > 3H2O + 3CO + 3N2
There is CO remaining which proved the OB equation on the last post that RDX is underoxidized.
|
Seems pretty easy.
How would the carbon fully oxidize?
If its not too much to ask, can you give me examples of some oxidizers and fuels? I know that aluminum can be used as a fuel, and ammonium nitrate as
an oxidizer (because it is OB+). What other EM can I use as fuel or oxygen sources?
[Edited on 8/2/18 by joseph6355]
Oh, hello! |
|
|
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: | | What other EM can I use as fuel or oxygen sources? |
Answered litteraly, that's going to be a very long list. Would this be an acceptable re statement, more or less meeting the intent of your question?
| Quote: | | Which single chemicals, themselves capable of being detonated have been COMMONLY used either as oxidizers or as fuels in explosive or propellant
systems? |
THAT could be answered in a reasonable space.
Examples?
Oxidizer: Trinitroglycerin
Fuel: Nitrocellulose
System: Double based propellants
Oxidizer: Ammonium nitrate
Fuel: Dinitrotoluenes
System: ammonium nitrate explosives
[Edited on 8-2-2018 by Bert]
[Edited on 8-2-2018 by Bert]
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).
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
59
60
61
62
63
..
78 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
