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

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1    3  ..  5
Author: Subject: TATP--How sensitive is it?
mbrown3391
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 133
Registered: 2-9-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 09:11
TATP--How sensitive is it?


I have a 30 gram batch of acetone peroxide under water and i want to detonate it today, but i need to know exatly how sensitive it is. Is it as sensitive as nitrogen triiodide, or would i be able to dry it and then transfer into something for detonation?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Levi
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 196
Registered: 24-1-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 09:24


Very VERY sensitive. It may well detonate whenever it feels like it or so they say. Another thread mentions some kid DIED when he attempted to remove it from its container--most likely detonation was caused by friction!

[Edited on 28-1-2007 by Levi]




Chemcrime does not entail death. Chemcrime is death.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Bromine
Harmless
*




Posts: 45
Registered: 7-9-2006
Location: Slovenija
Member Is Offline

Mood: good

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 09:43


AP is really sensitive. Be careful. It is not completly safe under the water like NI3, it can still detonate by smaller shock or friction plus thaht it can detonate any time. Be careful again.



View user's profile View All Posts By User
mbrown3391
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 133
Registered: 2-9-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 09:46


ive removed it from the water and it is drying outside on a peice of paper towel. the problem is, its cold outside and it might not dry by the end of today. also, how big of an explsion should i expect from 30g of TATP?
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 28-1-2007 at 09:48


There is a variety of factors that may determine sensivity. These are the methods of production, conditions in which the material is maintained, and external factors such as exposure to stimulus via temp, etc, etc. Since there is no mention of production variables in your question (I don't know how you made it), - I only know that it's under water, I would have to say that answering that question entails a hell of a lot of generalities. But on the whole it's fucking sensitive and 30 grams popping off in close proxcimity to your face would blind you and if you held it you most likly would loose a finger or three. Energetic peroxides are very, very bad news. HTMD is the only one that was even considered for use and the USBoM found it simply too much of a pain in the ass to continue. However HTMD was a great initiator of secondary explos. TATP is junk IMO and violently unpredictable. It held no interest for me what so ever. I saw a gram explode and was not particularly impressed that it was even so damn powerful. It's just strong enough to do great and permanent harm....once it's chemistry is understood it seems a bit boring as well.
However if you INTERESTED in the chemistry of that material I have few articles related to decomposition, makeup, etc that you might find interesting (as well as a whole lot safer!).

[Edited on 28-1-2007 by quicksilver]

Attachment: TATP-articles.rar (276kB)
This file has been downloaded 1545 times





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 28-1-2007 at 10:10


Quote:
Originally posted by mbrown3391
ive removed it from the water and it is drying outside on a peice of paper towel. the problem is, its cold outside and it might not dry by the end of today. also, how big of an explsion should i expect from 30g of TATP?

Again without knowing the production variables there is no real gage for that answer in so far as the effecency of the material as an energetic can be hieghtened or lessened, etc.
However think of it as over an ounce of a familiar primary, let's say Hg fulminate (although that's a very unprofessional thing to say but seriously safer:D material) and that's what gonna' pop..... well if it takes a gram of mercury fulminate to make up a #6 cap; you have about 30 #6 caps poping at once.....Jesus, this sounds bad....OK, so 30 caps are going off and if they are out in the open you have a seriously big bang! A really big loud noise. BUT --- if it's contained... then you have a situation that needs addressing as that can be a danger to those around you. So don't contain the material.

:) Also we are getting out of chemistry here and dealing with funtional issues here. I have enormous respect for the moderators here so if you have dynamic query here better to U2U me and we can chat about that there.

[Edited on 28-1-2007 by quicksilver]




View user's profile View All Posts By User
mbrown3391
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 133
Registered: 2-9-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 10:19


its not contained, i cant think of a way to contain it while its wet and still let it dry. anyway, i made it by combining 34ml of 40% H2O2 with 48ml of 100% acetone. i cooled this mixture down to 0 degrees celcius and slowly added 10 ml of concentrated sulfuric acid. This was kept at 0 degrees celcius for 24 hours. the result was 25 ml of TATP (about 30g, 27% yield). I filtered the mixture and rinsed the TATP with Sodium bicarbonate solution to neutralized the acid, then with distilled water. the filtrate was placed under water over night. this morning i filtered it again and it is now drying outside on a paper towel at 41 degrees Fahrenheit. its been about an hour, and it doesn't look any dryer. i would like to dry it inside, then move it outside, but it sounds like that is too dangerous.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Waffles
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 196
Registered: 1-10-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 11:24


You people are ridiculous. TATP is not like nitrogen triiodide. 30g unconfined won't get you an explosion, it'll get you a loud detonation and small flash. And someone like you obviously shouldn't be trying to confine it. Just don't scrape it quickly or crush it with some force or let it contact metal. Jeez.

Honestly, what you should do with these 30g that might actually serve your long-term health is take out very small amounts at a time (<0.25g) and MESS AROUND with it just to get an idea of the sensitivity. I mean, considering you're doing this at home and such, you shouldn't assume that this is the most sensitive it will ever be (each production yields different ratios of the monomer, dimer, trimer), but you'll get an idea of what you should and shouldnt do. Just never confine it, even with <0.25g amounts.




\"…\'tis man\'s perdition to be safe, when for the truth he ought to die.\"
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 28-1-2007 at 15:12


I beg to differ. An ounce of an explosive perocide is a serious issue and one that the individual should be warned about. The worst thing about perocides is that they are so damn unperdicable. I know of a situation personally that the individaul in question made peroxides for quite a lengthy period. He used the same method, same ratios and considered the resultant material predicable. It must have been this guy's 32nd batch or some damn thing when it didn't do what he expected it to do.
There are quite a few things that are unpredicable and for various reasons. It has been pointed out that Armstrong's is so unpredicitable for reasons of granulation friction (where as N triiodide is actually more predicable just unusually sensitive). The point is that TATP is not a uniquely sensive material as it is unpredictable. Overstating the dangers is doing a service to the individual. The whole of hobby rockety, pyrotechnics, home chemistry, etc, etc is on the edge of being lost due to very "bad press". If overstating a dangerious situation can prevent an accident and the public furor afterward so much the better IMO.




View user's profile View All Posts By User
nitro-genes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 28-1-2007 at 15:23


Quote:
Originally posted by iamthewaffler
You people are ridiculous.


Lol, at least he was not talking about stuffing it into a steel container! ;)

30 grams of TCAP will detonate under any circumstances and can kill without a doubt if you hold it in your hand while it goes off. Although deflageration of small amounts may look not very impressive, TACP is NOT harmless or a weak explosive! Compared to TNT it gives leadblock expansions up to 80% or 250 ml...
And don't be fooled by it's sensivity by hitting it with a hammer! It's friction sensitivity is what makes it really dangerous, especially with increasing crystal size. When I used to make TCAP for detonators, I occasionally heard small clicks when I gently scraped off the crystals (wooden spatula) that had been drying on a piece of paper. Just to give you an idea...

It's ability to deflagerate without confinement is deceptive as well, even a single piece of paper loosely put over the TCAP may provide enough confinement to result in detonation...

[Edit] Hehe, quicksilver beat me to it...:P



[Edited on 28-1-2007 by nitro-genes]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Boomer
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 190
Registered: 11-11-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-1-2007 at 00:57


This stuff has killed and maimed before, and not only stupid kids. Experienced chemists have fallen victim, as well as advanced amateurs who used it with care for years. It takes about a gram to loose fingers, and 30g can be lethal if only by blood loss while you are knocked out. Consider your eyes and ear drums gone as well.

As stated, the problem is not impact but friction, plus static electricity. People here and on APC/E+W... had it (or HMTD) detonate when they withdrew a wooden dowel from a cap after pressing, in the sunlight, on the shelf (from incompatibilities), when pouring it from a folded paper (probably static), or when lighting a pea-sized lump in the open air. Nobody died because those were (sub-)gram quantities.

To give you an idea about the danger, I paste some test results in (posted on APC, plus E+W before):


AP sensitivity tests

Drop test: 300g hammer head, falling free on steel anvil. Material not covered.
Friction test: Pestle on mortar, mortar standing on a scale to measure force.
Given are the number of detonations and the number of tests.
Flame test: cigarette and lighter.


Test 1: Completely dry AP (2 weeks at 25C)

1A: 'Normal' crystal size, dried directly from the filter

6cm 5 out of 5
5cm 5 out of 5
4cm 4 out of 5
3cm 3 out of 5
2cm 2 out of 5
1cm 0 out of 5

50N 10 out of 10
40N 10 out of 10
30N 10 out of 10
20N 9 out of 10
10N 4 out of 10
7N 2 out of 10
5N 0 out of 10

1B: Ground to flour-like consistency, clinging to all tools from static

6cm 5 out of 5
5cm 5 out of 5
4cm 5 out of 5
3cm 4 out of 5
2cm 2 out of 5
1cm 0 out of 5

Friction was not tested, the crystals will be crushed anyway.

Both crystal sizes flashed from cigarette and flame with a distinct whoomp. Smallest sample do ever make DDT unconfined was 200mg (pea sized)!
UPDATE 2006: Smallest amount to DDT confined was 3mg in 1.2mm dia brass tube!

Test 2: Nearly dry AP, normal crystal size (pressed between filters in a vice)

6cm 5 out of 5
5cm 4 out of 5
4cm 3 out of 5 (funny: 1 time no bang, only fireball!)
3cm 2 out of 5
2cm 1 out of 5
1cm 0 out of 5

50N 10 out of 10 (sometimes crackling)
40N 10 out of 10 (sometimes crackling)
30N 9 out of 10 (sometimes crackling)
20N 5 out of 10 (2 x crackling)
10N 3 out of 10 (2 x crackling)
7N 0 out of 10

Flashed from cigarette and flame with a distinct whoomp. It was hard to distinguish it from the dry sample.

Test 3: Slightly moist AP, normal crystal size (hand-pressed between filters)

20cm 4 out of 5
15cm 2 out of 5
10cm 1 out of 5
7cm 0 out of 5
5cm 0 out of 5
3cm 0 out of 5
2cm 0 out of 5

50N 10 out of 10 (crackling)
40N 9 out of 10 (crackling)
30N 8 out of 10 (crackling)
20N 5 out of 10 (crackling)
10N 2 out of 10 (crackling)
7N 0 out of 10

Burned from both heat sources with a fast flash, but without the whoomp-sound. Still faster than good (commercial) black powder.

Test 4: Wet AP, normal crystal size (dripping wet!)

75cm 0 out of 5
50cm 0 out of 5
40cm 0 out of 5
30cm 0 out of 5
20cm 0 out of 5
10cm 0 out of 5

50N 10 out of 10 (crackling)
40N 10 out of 10 (crackling)
30N 9 out of 10 (crackling)
20N 6 out of 10 (crackling)
10N 0 out of 10

Did not react to flame until it started to dry out, a cigarette could be put out in it safely.

We learn several things from these tests:

1. The friction sensitivity is hardly reduced by moisture.

2. Crystal size has a much lower influence than we thought. This might be because the crystals were not precipitated in the smaller form, but ground from the bigger crystals of the same batch.

3. Dripping wet AP is safe towards impact, and also towards fire. Towards friction it is only safe if you assume it cannot make DDT if confined (which is probable but not sure).

4. Moist AP is not much safer than dry AP. Even the hand pressed stuff (still crumbly) was more sensitive than NG and MHN, and the heavily pressed sample (more powder-like) was nearly as bad as the dry one.

To sum it up, this shit is too dangerous to use in amounts over some hundred MILLIgrams.

Forget your plan, it would be fucking loud, but not the earth shattering event you dream of. With earplugs, I would not mind standing two steps away from 30g, behind a tree. But I would NOT handle it.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Microtek
National Hazard
****




Posts: 821
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-1-2007 at 01:20


In my opinion, overstating the danger of a substance is not safer for people in the long run. If that is done on a regular basis, then people will start to get complacent about things that are merely dangerous and only think twice about handling things that are incredibly ultra dangerous. This is seen all the time among lab workers who are routinely handling toxic substances; only those reactants that are labeled as deadly toxins are respected, those that are merely carcinogenic are not.

So I think you should take small amounts as suggested above, but much less than a quarter gram. Start with just a pinch ( ca. 10-50 mg ) and get a feel for the substance. You should still bear in mind that all those other kinds of stimuli might set it off, so don't escalate the charges beyond 0.5 g.
This strategy ( of keeping the charges very small ) has kept me safe for many years, and I highly recommend it.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
photoguy
Harmless
*




Posts: 9
Registered: 25-12-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-1-2007 at 11:07


TATP is fairly inert when wet. 100 grams of TATP was transported to a local test range on a rocky bumpy road without detonation inside a bunker storage unit. Please remember this material was WET during transportation. When dry, TATP is sensitive to any kind of sudden shock or friction that i can assure you of. You can compress TATP without detonation WHEN IT IS WET using distilled water and plastic tools slowly putting direct downwards pressure on the material. WET TATP is quite hard to ignite and detonate reliably- nor is it reactive to metals in this state. Once the product is dry it will be more stable as the mass of the explosive and compressed crystalline structure will lessen the sensitivity. Still the material is extremely hazardous... I've had years of experience with explosives of different forms. TATP is one of the most sensitive I've seen, but it still doesn't explode by itself unless the conditions promote a detonation- it does NOT explode by itself contrary to popular belief. Nitrogen Tri Iodide is about 100X as sensitive as TATP --- but NG is less sensitive than TATP is- not by a lot -- but still you have to be extremely careful when handling this material.

Compressed TATP can detonate PLX, ANNM, ANFO, ANNMAL, and a host of other explosives. So it can be useful... but as I said before, you need to be so careful and 30 grams is more than enough for any experiment. You definitely DO NOT want to be storing TATP for any length of time.

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by photoguy]

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by photoguy]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
nitro-genes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 29-1-2007 at 18:14


With more than 25% water TCAP becomes very insensitive indeed, though compressing sensitive primaries to a higher density it will not reduce sensitivity like it would with secondary explosives. Compressing lead azide for example will have little effect on it's sensitivity and the ability to make DDT upon ignition. In the past I have experimented with molten droplets of TCAP from a double recrystallized sample from acetone. (in the microwave actually, don't burn me for this, it was on a less than 50 mg scale :P) I found that even though the density of the droplets (once it was cooled) was higher than water, it made DDT in much smaller amounts than the loose powder did. Even the smallest droplets detonated by flame without any confinement, showing high brisancy by punching a hole trough the plate is was on. Very strange...(admittedly of no value though)

" it still doesn't explode by itself unless the conditions promote a detonation "

Isn't that true for every explosive? :P Those peroxide bonds are pretty sensitive by themselves, add up the ringstrain of the dimer, which will always be present in your product, and it is obvious that the conditions for TCAP to detonate do not need to be as obvious as mistreating it. UV radiation like on a hot day in summer combined with confinement can be enough, just like the static electricity spark from wearing wool or synthetic clothing. When I'm working with flashpowder, I choose a humid day, deelectrify myself by touching the metal watertap, lock up the cat, and never think about using plastic or metal tools. This may seem paronoid, but static electricity is a an issue in pyrotechnics that is taken very serious. It would be lunacy not to so with something as sensitive and dangerous as TCAP!

TCAP is remarkably stable btw, not remotely comparable to it's cousine HMTD for that matter. The volatility of the compound is what is dangerous, and can be mistaken for decomposition. Recrystallized and stored under a layer of destilled water it remains intact for many years. This is not recommended though, since drying out of the container would mean serious trouble...

[Edited on 30-1-2007 by nitro-genes]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
*****




Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline

Mood: crystalline

[*] posted on 29-1-2007 at 18:29


As to HMTD, it can be only vouched for.
When prepared by the method in COPAE, it needs a strong hammer strike to get it to set off.
Unconfined, it always deflagrates, it was found that only a thermite-based temperature shock is sufficient to set it off unconfined.
Keep it in acetone at all times, and only dry before use, drying at RT should be fast that way. When in acetone, and exposed to sunlight in a plastic container (polypropylene, which should absorb hard UV), bubbles form nonetheless, but no further problem was observed.
Storage in the dark, for 6 months, under acetone, left the material unchanged, no change in sensitivity or strength could be observed, pressing is no problem in neither the freshly prepared or stored HMTD.
Always work with small amounts (<3-4 g), and always keep it loose.




Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
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 30-1-2007 at 07:39


Quote:
Originally posted by nitro-genes
Isn't that true for every explosive? :P Those peroxide bonds are pretty sensitive by themselves, add up the ringstrain of the dimer, which will always be present in your product, and it is obvious that the conditions for TCAP to detonate do not need to be as obvious as mistreating it. UV radiation like on a hot day in summer combined with confinement can be enough, just like the static electricity spark from wearing wool or synthetic clothing. When I'm working with flashpowder, I choose a humid day, deelectrify myself by touching the metal watertap, lock up the cat, and never think about using plastic or metal tools. This may seem paronoid, but static electricity is a an issue in pyrotechnics that is taken very serious. It would be lunacy not to so with something as sensitive and dangerous as TCAP!


You took the words right out of my mouth. I do the exact same thing...I look for conditions to be right: thinking of static & friction continually. It's the unseen shit that will ruin your day.
I think one way to appraoch this is to list the conditions that would promote initiation and then to address them as a conditoned response whenever handleing energetic material.

But to address the question of "overstatment" - You can make an argument on either side of this coin. I understand Microtek's point about complacency and yet I have not seen that with everyone. There is a difference between a lab environment and a home use environment. And people react differently to warnings. My gut tells me that when a question is asked about sensitivity of perocides that the considerate thing to do is to overstate to dangers due to the possiblity of the user having limited experience with same. It COULD be said that lack of overstatement could be framed in a person's mind as understatement. For instance: if encouraged to experiment with it and not speaking to the possibility of stay static popping the whole batch the user may develop a chaviar attitude that "it hasn't happened - so it won't happen". Or that 30 grams is minor league and that it won't do that much if it pops - just flash and burn some hair. My point is that the person in question could misinterperate the resonse that perocides are on the same level as well dextrinated silver azide, etc.
I'm actually the type who doesn't want to see anyone get hurt or make a mess of the hobby publicly. I remember a lot of folks in other places, who, when hearing about an injury, reply with scorn and hostility....I honestly hope that sht doesn't happen - And in so saying, this whole discussion probably served it's purpose to find a middle ground.
Perhaps I am wrong to use the term "overstate"! Perhaps a stern warning about all the injuries suffered would suffice. IIRC perocides lead as the majority of self inflicted hospitalizations from energetic material in both the EU & US.

[Edited on 30-1-2007 by quicksilver]




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




Posts: 190
Registered: 11-11-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 30-1-2007 at 08:39


You bet that. And I bet that HMX + HNIW are last!

Not to make a one-liner... There is a way of storage apart from the under-water-in-plastic-under-saran-wrap method, which also is accident-free to my knowledge (the fingers fly later, after drying):

Acetone solution, crashed into water before use. Stores for years just like wet crystals, but is even safer (probably undetonable), plus it gives superfine (1) crystals while even under water, they seem to grow with time.

(1) Usually, if spread thinly on paper TATP disappears within 2-3 month at RT. The crashed powder did so in two days (admittedly near the radiator, but still much faster). Another advantage: You cannot *forget* the shit somewhere, then weeks later drop a ciggie on it :P
View user's profile View All Posts By User
gregxy
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 421
Registered: 26-5-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 3-2-2007 at 10:08


Since the diemer is supposed to be what causes the
trouble has anyone ever checked to see
if removing the diemer improves the safety of the TATP.

Maybe just recrystalizing it from acetone. Or some method
of destroying the less stable diemer like disolving in
acetone and heating with acid or base.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Boomer
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 190
Registered: 11-11-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 5-2-2007 at 03:51


Nonsense.

The trimer is only marginally less sensitive. Those 2cm drop for a 300g hammer equal *3mm* for the standard 2kg hammer. This is about 6-7 times less than nitroglycerine or mercury fulminate at 4cm.

Keeping this in mind, I don't give a fuck whether "Compressed TATP can detonate PLX, ANNM, ANFO, ANNMAL" (photoguy) if I have to use "small amounts (<3-4 g)" (chemoleo) to do this. Rather use 0.1g with a 1g base charge of a much more brisant HE like PETN/MAN/ETN. *If* you have to use it that is, otherwise 25-50mg of an azide or clathrate would be better to get the solid nitric ester going.

BTW I doubt you managed to det ANFO with TATP alone. Oh sorry, I forgot you used 200 gram for a cap :P
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 5-2-2007 at 08:58


The reason that HMTD was experiemented with at all was that IT was a viable initatior: but not TATP. The need for more than a gram-level of material has been one of the factors amongst many that kept it from even making it into the USBoM's discussion of alternatives to Hg Fulminate. Has single gram levels initiated secondaries? On occation it has, but not consistently. That lack of consistency, relaibility, & predicability has made that material simply a field expedient explosive since it's isolation. In fact, peroxides have generally been viewed as a lab hazard for the most part: a by-product of improper storage.
HMTD on the other hand has resulted in accidents from unpredictable things like the withdrawl of a tamping rod from a cap body. But if powdered Al was used as a dry lubricant that may have been avioded...no it was the static, not the friction...no, it was the crushing of crystaline material built up on the tamp rod.... Good Lord, that's too damn much for me.
Studying it (TATP, etc) from a "paper perspective" is one thing but I can't deny the stats that place it on the top of listed materials to aviod. Too many people who have a great degree of experience with energetic material have been hurt by it.
People make it, work with it time after time and believe that THEY won't have an accident until they do. Then you never hear from them again. After being blinded, loosing fingers, etc who wants to hear: "I told you so"?
There are a Hell of a lot of people who have worked with energetic materials on this board. Most have very strong opinions about what and how to work with these same materials. Unfortunatly the commonality is the concept of "it hasn't happened, so it won't happen". That's exactly why it only makes sense to work with any energetic material on the gram level or below.
Strong opinions generally come from a powerful experience with something {pun intened}. :)


A guy once was very candid with me. He told me of loosing sight in an eye from an experiment gone bad. I really appriecied his honesty with me. But he also said he never wanted to "re-live" that same tragidy and I can respect that. I also knew a guy with no thumb and fore finger...HE did tell me the whole sorry affair and it was bad.
He had some TATP in a plastic film can and opened the lid. That's all. I asked if it was dry, I asked if he made sure the rim was clean, bla, bla, bla.... But the bottom line was what happened when he got hurt. We are talking about 20 grams IIRC. The blast was so loud that he got deaf for a long time and he couldn't drive from the injury. but he said he was bleeding like a fountain and HE KNEW he lost his thumb. He wrapped the hand up in a towel and had to call 911. he made up a story about picking up a "piece of metal that exploded". That was a big mistake. The ambulance people were OK but at the hospital, the ER doc thought that there might be "more" of whatever hurt this guy floating around and naturally called the sherriff. The sherriff then called the feds because he wasn't going to go hunt around for something that could hurt HIM like that! Well you can imagine what happened next!
I'll keep this guy's confidentiality and leave it right there...but you get the idea. Getting hurt is bad enough! But getting in deep Doo-Doo on top of THAT is actual torture.....you can't think because you hurt so bad, Remember you have exposed nerves, broken bones, torn tissue....you can't hear, you can't plan to minimize the problems....Makes BP rockets seem like a good idea to me.



[Edited on 5-2-2007 by quicksilver]




View user's profile View All Posts By User
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
*****




Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline

Mood: crystalline

[*] posted on 5-2-2007 at 16:50


It may have been asked before, but have any accidents recorded with HMTD, due to friction, sublimation, even pressing (other than copper metal onto it with excessive grinding/shear/friction force), all of the above which are a common problem with TCAP?
But yeah, H. definitely requires some kind of booster, almost regardless the secondary involved.




Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
nitro-genes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 6-2-2007 at 02:46


Most of the accidents I heard of involving HMTD were related to incompatibilities with other compounds, mostly binders and even inert ones like polyisobutylene or polybutylene. My batches of HMTD were not stable at all btw, and deteriorated over the cause of several months when stored under water, maybe also an impurity issue. I would say that HMTD is slightly less impact sensitive compared to TCAP, but the friction sensitivity is about the same...

A more safe possibilty could be derived from the old Callery patents mentioned by Rosco. They probably involve a HMTD/AN or HMTD/Methylamine nitrate complex salt which could be usefull as a more stable, less sensitive and probably also more energetic basecharge compared to HMTD alone...

It was mentioned briefly over here:

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=6317

The synthesis could be as simple as heating a conc. hexamine solution together with a large excess of AN untill most of the ammonia smell is gone, after which the hydrogen peroxide is added. Or basically a HMTD synth with methylamine nitrate or AN added. I've seen some people mention a large difference in their batches of HMTD taken after shorter and longer reaction times and I think this complex salt formation may be the cause of this, since the concentration of complexing compounds like methylaminenitrates and ammonium nitrate from hydrolysis/oxidation of the hexamine in acidic environment will become higher in time. Evidence of the formation of a doublesalt should be easily confirmed by weighing the product and calculate the yield from hexamine compared to pure HMTD, assuming the reaction is just as efficient...

[Edited on 6-2-2007 by nitro-genes]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
pyromainiac420
Harmless
*




Posts: 11
Registered: 8-2-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8-2-2007 at 20:36


ok well concidering you seem amature WHY THE HELL DID YOU MAKE 30G my first time a made like a couple grams then started making 25 g ive never sythesized more that about 25-30 g (more likly 25) and mine was trimeric so it was safe i found it quiet stable but jesus dont make so much and you'll probably be fien just dont press it with your fingers use somthing else
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 9-2-2007 at 06:17


Several years back (quite a few) there was a thread in rec.pyrotechnics on usenet that was based on safety. It was a damn long thread and became an "I had this accident once" type of thread. That's where I heard of the tamping of HMTD leading to a pop in the guy's proxcimity. I don't believe that he got hurt that badly but it scared him and everyone started in on the perocides, etc.
rec.ptrotecnics and alt.eng.explosives have some of that stuff if you get archives that are about 10 yrs old.




View user's profile View All Posts By User
nitro-genes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 9-2-2007 at 07:19


Another thread about HMTD in which several incidents occured with experienced people:

http://yarchive.net/explosives/hmtd.html

Simply pressing HMTD into blasting caps can lead to a spontaneous detonation. Note that using other metal tubing than aluminium, like copper, reduces the force needed for accidental detonation considerably, indicating the sensitivity of HMTD to catalysing impurities even when completely dry...

The iniating ability of HMTD is phenominal though, equal or even better than lead azide or DDNP. The statement that HMTD is less powerfull than TATP is probably derived from comparing detonation velocity figures which mention 5300 m/s for TATP at near crystal density (1.2 g/cc) and only 4800 m/s for HMTD at a density of 1.0 g/cc. The crystal density of HMTD however is 1.57, much higher than TATP, with theoretical detonation velocities far exceeding TATP. This potential can never be realized though because there is a certain pressing force above which HMTD will cetainly detonate. This is where I think the HMTD/AN or HMTD/MAN double salt would have a significant advantage. The sensitivity should be examined in detail before such an attempt should be made of course. I don't think many members are enthusiastic about experimenting with organic peroxides, though someone might have clue about the behaviour and performance of such a hypothetical doublesalt...:P

[Edited on 9-2-2007 by nitro-genes]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1    3  ..  5

  Go To Top