Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Gun Propellants: Single, Double and Tripple based

 Pages:  1    3

specialactivitieSK - 6-9-2021 at 05:35

Another way :

Ng, DeGDN, Balistite Powder maked without solvent : pressing by rolling by temperature 80-95°C for Ng and 70-80°C for DeGDN Powder.. Cutting the Powder by temperature 50°C. Somethime 2-8% solvent (Acetone).

specialactivitieSK - 10-9-2021 at 09:13

Something about size

img00000.jpg - 43kB

Bert - 10-9-2021 at 09:54

Sorry, can't quite read sizes in that image... Maybe add that info?

------

Attached pdf is largely about forensics related to NC used in propellants & explosives, but note on page 207 the statement about solvents and stirring during manufacturing processes permanently changing the NC molecules, resulting in a rather lower molecular weight NC.

Choice of solvent and degree of mechanical processing have more impact on the product than night be expected.

Attachment: 978-1-61209-821-0_ch4.pdf (1.3MB)
This file has been downloaded 533 times


specialactivitieSK - 13-9-2021 at 11:46

DEGDN Rocket Propellant 25g 960fps

https://youtu.be/AmI_xQEtXzA

ManyInterests - 2-3-2022 at 13:07

I've been reading this thread with great interest since I do plan on making my own powder. There's a lot of good information here and I'll need to reread everything in the future.

But I have one question regarding NG, EGDN, and PGDN... in terms of stability when it comes to making, is EGDN better than NG or the other way around? What about PGDN? I heard that it is safer than NG but is harder to make. Would it be useful for making a double base powder as well?

dettoo456 - 14-3-2022 at 08:08

I don’t currently have the exact numbers with me at the moment but in terms of sensitivity and synthesis EGDN edges out NG in that it’s safer to produce and initiate when you want it to but is much more volatile and degrades with the presence of impurities more readily in storage if I remember correctly. OB% is also slightly higher with NG too which really matters for propellants when taking burn rate catalysts and stabilizer OB%’s into effect.

So NG is better than EGDN for performance but worse than EGDN for safety reasons; pick your battles with that one.

PGDN’s synthesis is similar to other nitrate esters and although I don’t have the numbers right now, I’m pretty sure its mechanical sensitivities are at least lower than EGDN (and by proxy lower than NG) from the addition of an extra CH3 group. OB% is of course lower as well in PGDN.

https://ipo.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/wydawnictwa/wp-content/upload... ^ Some useful info PGDN’s vapor and storage behavior.

“Nitrate Esters Chemistry and Technology” is a good book for finding info on nitrate esters and their properties although some info gets lost in translation from mandarin.

The “big players” (if you will) like BTTN and TMETN will always outshine the simple esters and if you have some spare malic acid and Pt hydrogenation catalysts, or propionaldehyde and formaldehyde then you can try with them but other than that the classic NG is proven and capable for most propellants applications so I’d recommend it over EGDN or PGDN.

specialactivitieSK - 26-7-2022 at 03:10

Maybe very slow evaporation is the way


2022-07-26-13-08-16-419.jpg - 583kB

Bert - 26-7-2022 at 03:47

Quote: Originally posted by specialactivitieSK  
Maybe very slow evaporation is the way


Sorry, way to do what?

specialactivitieSK - 26-7-2022 at 04:16

To making material without bubbles.

ManyInterests - 2-9-2022 at 11:16

Quote: Originally posted by dettoo456  
I don’t currently have the exact numbers with me at the moment but in terms of sensitivity and synthesis EGDN edges out NG in that it’s safer to produce and initiate when you want it to but is much more volatile and degrades with the presence of impurities more readily in storage if I remember correctly. OB% is also slightly higher with NG too which really matters for propellants when taking burn rate catalysts and stabilizer OB%’s into effect.

So NG is better than EGDN for performance but worse than EGDN for safety reasons; pick your battles with that one.

PGDN’s synthesis is similar to other nitrate esters and although I don’t have the numbers right now, I’m pretty sure its mechanical sensitivities are at least lower than EGDN (and by proxy lower than NG) from the addition of an extra CH3 group. OB% is of course lower as well in PGDN.

https://ipo.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/wydawnictwa/wp-content/upload... ^ Some useful info PGDN’s vapor and storage behavior.

“Nitrate Esters Chemistry and Technology” is a good book for finding info on nitrate esters and their properties although some info gets lost in translation from mandarin.

The “big players” (if you will) like BTTN and TMETN will always outshine the simple esters and if you have some spare malic acid and Pt hydrogenation catalysts, or propionaldehyde and formaldehyde then you can try with them but other than that the classic NG is proven and capable for most propellants applications so I’d recommend it over EGDN or PGDN.


I forgot to thank you for that answer. Yes I have learned about the volatility of EGDN and PGDN (PGDN is slightly less volatile than EGDN) but NG's volatility is non-existent.

BTW, what exactly is BTTN and TMETN? What are the reagents involved? Anything different in their synthesis from EGDN, NG, or PGDN?

Bert - 2-9-2022 at 12:13

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests  
Yes I have learned about the volatility of EGDN and PGDN (PGDN is slightly less volatile than EGDN) but NG's volatility is non-existent.


From personal experience, NG volatility may be considered TRIVIAL in regards to all going away under decent storage conditions- But several splitting headaches I've experienced say it does exist.

The couple of tries I made at classic low freezing dynamite mixtures long, long ago with the method of nitrating mixed glycerin + EGDN gave me a formidable headache very quickly during the final processing with dry ingredients, I'm quite sure it was vapors rather than skin contact, I wore gloves and was careful- At least it went away faster than an NG headache too.


BTTN and TMETN?

BTTN = 1,2,4-Butanetriol Trinitrate


1,2,4-Butanetriol_trinitrate.svg.png - 35kB


TMTEN = Nitropentaglycerin; 1,1,1-trimethylolethane trinitrate


Trimethylolethane_trinitrate.png - 8kB

[Edited on 9-2-2022 by Bert]

[Edited on 9-2-2022 by Bert]

ManyInterests - 3-9-2022 at 19:46

Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG, I might be interested in experimented in making some. Though I don't know any sources of Butanetriol.

Triethylene glycol is another chemical that can be used to make a liquid explosive and can substitute NG. Any sources of that? It isn't Ethylene Glycol for sure (and I have a liter of that).


specialactivitieSK - 8-9-2022 at 07:24


Second attempt at slow evaporation. I need to find suitable kitchen utensils with a completely flat bottom.

2022-09-08-17-18-10-886.jpg - 691kB2022-09-08-17-18-53-521.jpg - 918kB

ManyInterests - 1-11-2022 at 18:36

Quote: Originally posted by specialactivitieSK  

Second attempt at slow evaporation. I need to find suitable kitchen utensils with a completely flat bottom.


I would like to do that, on my list of projects in the future is making my own primer compounds and propellants. I will need to do extensive research for these before doing it since this is not something I can find videos for me to use as visual guides.

Herr Haber - 1-11-2022 at 21:01

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests  
Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG


If you are talking chemical stability then just overdo the washings.
Wasnt a bottle made by Ascanio Sobrero himself regularly tested for decades or a century showing no degradation ?

If you want more usability, a few strands of NC will make a gel. There, you might consider another source of possible degradation assuming home made NC will always contain tiny amounts of acid.

The other thing is: you're trying to get a bigger bang. NG, EGDN are pretty easy to set off. Before the mercury fulminate detonators black powder was used. Urbanski books basically teach you that the better the initiation, more complete is the reaction (More CO2, less CO essentially better vod etc.).
So a good number 8 is better than a firecracker even if they both work.

Not only that, but even for something easy to initiate (NG) you still need confinement and diameter. Urbanski has charts with pipes of different materials, diameters, wall thickness.
Pretty interesting stuff as is all his material.

His section on the manufacture of all the different types of double and triple based propellants is quite extensive. But what to expect from someone who writes about cellulose alone for 60 pages :)

ManyInterests - 2-11-2022 at 08:01

Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber  
Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests  
Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG


If you are talking chemical stability then just overdo the washings.
Wasnt a bottle made by Ascanio Sobrero himself regularly tested for decades or a century showing no degradation ?

If you want more usability, a few strands of NC will make a gel. There, you might consider another source of possible degradation assuming home made NC will always contain tiny amounts of acid.

The other thing is: you're trying to get a bigger bang. NG, EGDN are pretty easy to set off. Before the mercury fulminate detonators black powder was used. Urbanski books basically teach you that the better the initiation, more complete is the reaction (More CO2, less CO essentially better vod etc.).
So a good number 8 is better than a firecracker even if they both work.

Not only that, but even for something easy to initiate (NG) you still need confinement and diameter. Urbanski has charts with pipes of different materials, diameters, wall thickness.
Pretty interesting stuff as is all his material.

His section on the manufacture of all the different types of double and triple based propellants is quite extensive. But what to expect from someone who writes about cellulose alone for 60 pages :)


Sorry, when I mean stability sometimes I am referring to sensitivity. NG is really sensitive stuff and I would rather work with similarly powerful but less sensitive stuff. There's a reason why I spent so much time trying to make NHN and CHP to use as primaries.

Also remember on the PDGN thread you mentioned an author called Conklin? I couldn't find his book, and I would also like to see Urbanski's book. If you got links to where I can download them I would be eternally grateful. :)

Especially if he has such extensive instructions on making double-base and single-base powders. I do want to make those for rifle, shotgun, and handgun rounds. I would love to go to the range and fire off a 100 rounds or so of ammo using homemade propellant and primers, that would be epic!

Edit: https://archive.org/details/Chemistry_and_Technology_of_Expl...

Is this the Urbanski you're talking about? He has a whole series which I will download all!

https://www.amazon.com/Chemistry-Pyrotechnics-Principles-The...

and is this the book about Conklin you were talking about? Ones that has the priming compounds?

[Edited on 2-11-2022 by ManyInterests]

Bert - 2-11-2022 at 11:07

Conkling = Dr. John A. Conckling. Google will show you his several publications.

Dr. Conkling died last year, unfortunately.

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/baltimoresun/name/john-...

I also would recommend "Pyrotechnics" by Dr. Alexander Hardt.

https://www.amazon.com/Pyrotechnics-Alexander-Hardt/dp/09293...

[Edited on 11-2-2022 by Bert]

Herr Haber - 3-11-2022 at 18:35

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests  


I would also like to see Urbanski's book. If you got links to where I can download them I would be eternally grateful. :)

[Edited on 2-11-2022 by ManyInterests]


I pointed you a couple of times to the SM Library but...
Where are his books gone ?!
http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/index.html

Davis is still there. Where's Shimizu gone ?


dettoo456 - 30-11-2022 at 10:36

@ManyInterests Butanetriol can be formed via reduction of Malic Acid w/ Pd/C although any reducing agent capable of carboxylic acid reduction should do.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10562-021-038...

https://zero.sci-hub.se/6469/c7aee14b783dd92a5ece2a658f608b7...

ManyInterests - 2-1-2023 at 17:46

Quote: Originally posted by dettoo456  
@ManyInterests Butanetriol can be formed via reduction of Malic Acid w/ Pd/C although any reducing agent capable of carboxylic acid reduction should do.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10562-021-038...

https://zero.sci-hub.se/6469/c7aee14b783dd92a5ece2a658f608b7...


Thanks. I will look into those. I think I will be going the route of using diethylene glycol since I found that sold commonly (and cheaply) as liquid camp fuel in many camping stores. The brand that I got, Coghlan's, states in its MSDS that it is 99-100% diethylene glycol and a 0-1% ethylene glycol. the ethylene glycol contamination is absolutely minimal and won't effect the power I want to try to make with it.

I also read in Urbanski that DEGDN is less volatile than nitrogylcerin while also being substantially less sensitive. These characteristics I find extremely appealing, especially the reduced sensitivity (this making it safer to handle). The only downside is that it is quite hygroscopic and I need to take care to make sure it is free of water and remains so.

It'll be a while before I get to making propellants the primers, but I got everything I need to make them.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 3-1-2023 at 08:27

https://www.amazon.com/Coghlans-Camp-Heat-2-Pack/dp/B000FY21... .....
Fuel really contains diethylene glycol. Great message. Thanks. DEG is super fuel for NaClO4. Details:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4076
Demonstration of efficiency here from 0:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CTB9k1l15A

ManyInterests - 3-1-2023 at 11:28

Yes that is the same product I ordered. Here is the SDS from the manufacturer:

https://www.coghlans.com/content/files/Coghlans/SDS%20Sheets...

In section 3 on composition it stated 99-100 DEG. Mean it cannot contain any more than 1% EG, but there is a good chance that it contains even less, meaning it is effectively the purest DEG you can get without any processing.

[Edited on 3-1-2023 by ManyInterests]

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 08:09

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
https://www.amazon.com/Coghlans-Camp-Heat-2-Pack/dp/B000FY21... .....
Fuel really contains diethylene glycol. Great message. Thanks. DEG is super fuel for NaClO4. Details:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4076
Demonstration of efficiency here from 0:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CTB9k1l15A


Orange???



Screenshot_20230110-100121_Samsung Internet.jpg - 125kB

Laboratory of Liptakov - 10-1-2023 at 10:49

For security reasons (YouTube) the exact composition was not stated. Another thing is that the composition can be quite variable. As stated in the patent.
Exact tested compose: NaClO4 ....(OB + 52.3) .....74 parts
DEG.......( OB - 150.8)............................................26 parts
dH2O.......(OB zero).............................................. 10 parts ..... (variable 8 - 15)
water acrylate pigment (orange, OB -160 cca)......1 by part of weight.........(variable 0.0 - 2.... green, blue, red, yellow)
Guar gum...( OB-115 cca)......................................2 parts.....(variable 0.0 - 2)

Variable tested compounds: glass microballoons 2, sodium chlorate 3,
Uncompatabile with any Aluminium. Bubble H2.

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 13:19

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
For security reasons (YouTube) the exact composition was not stated. Another thing is that the composition can be quite variable. As stated in the patent.
Exact tested compose: NaClO4 ....(OB + 52.3) .....74 parts
DEG.......( OB - 150.8)............................................26 parts
dH2O.......(OB zero).............................................. 10 parts ..... (variable 8 - 15)
water acrylate pigment (orange, OB -160 cca)......1 by part of weight.........(variable 0.0 - 2.... green, blue, red, yellow)
Guar gum...( OB-115 cca)......................................2 parts.....(variable 0.0 - 2)

Variable tested compounds: glass microballoons 2, sodium chlorate 3,
Uncompatabile with any Aluminium. Bubble H2.


No calcium nitrate dissolved in the water or glacial acetic acid (acetic acid is a cross linking catalyst for the guar gum?). I noticed the patent claim I excerpted gave lower densities than your reported 1.7g/cc too.

Making otherwise off white compositions color coded with water soluble dyes could be a "thing"if you needed to test a number of compositions, help keep them identifiable in handling.

I wonder about adding a water or diethylene glycol soluble decomposition catalyst for the perchlorate such as ferrocene?

Laboratory of Liptakov - 10-1-2023 at 15:43

Unfortunately, using calcium nitrate in composition was not tested. Is possible that acetic acid catalyse better properties of guar gum as binder.
But also not tested. Measurement in cavity showing density 1.6 g/cc. Not 1.7. Composition is castable at 80 C without guar gum. Repeatedly. Composition, respectively his surface is partially hygroscopic. It was observed. Ferocene was not tested. Yes, was tested different acrylic pigment colors. Yellow, red, green, orange. Interest: This dry (any color) acrylic pigment create
with NH4ClO4 pretty explosive mixture at ratio AP 75 / color 25. Without change of nice color of pigment.
https://www.google.com/search?q=pigment+to+wall+color+paint&...
Maybe colors works as catalyseur of shockwave. (no confirmed, no measured)
But confirmed is better binding effect with acrylic colors. (acryl is binder itself)
Yes, different colors is possible use as identificator.
Else composition can looks: NaClO4 75, DEG 25, liquid pigment (red from link) 11, dH2O 4, guar gum 1. In of part by weight. 20g sensitive on No.8, confirmed.
71mnW78e+tL.jpg - 368kB

[Edited on 10-1-2023 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 17:26

I just spent a few minutes going over solubilities of various perchlorates in various liquid fuels.

One combination that struck me: Barium diperchlorate, 125g soluble in 100ml ethanol @ 25° C. And barium (di) perchlorate is DENSE at around 3.1 g/cc.

Not so cheap as technical Sodium perchlorate, toxic like all water soluble barium salts- but also NOT HYGROSCOPIC.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 11-1-2023 at 04:55

Is it slightly exotic composition, but should by works. Ba(ClO4)2 with OB + 38.06 is also soluble in acetone (OB - 220.3) ethanol OB - 208.7 on CO2. In acetone is soluble (as binder) nitrocellulose, camphor, rosin. In ethanol is soluble camphor , rosin. Testing mixture can be:
1) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + 20 ethanol, final OB - 11.29 on CO2.
2) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + acetone 20 .........final OB - 13.61 on CO2.
3) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + ethanol 20 + rosin 5 ..........final OB - 26.39 on CO2
4) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + acetone 20 + nitrocellulose/12,4N/ .... 5 ........final OB - 17.3 on CO2

All mixtures looks no hygroscopic. Problem can be evaporation of solvents. Any way, interesting idea with Barium perchlorate. It seems , that adding Alu powder is possible.

Bert - 11-1-2023 at 06:30

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Is it slightly exotic composition, but should by works. Ba(ClO4)2 with OB + 38.06 is also soluble in acetone (OB - 220.3) ethanol OB - 208.7 on CO2. In acetone is soluble (as binder) nitrocellulose, camphor, rosin. In ethanol is soluble camphor , rosin. Testing mixture can be:
1) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + 20 ethanol, final OB - 11.29 on CO2.
2) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + acetone 20 .........final OB - 13.61 on CO2.
3) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + ethanol 20 + rosin 5 ..........final OB - 26.39 on CO2
4) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + acetone 20 + nitrocellulose/12,4N/ .... 5 ........final OB - 17.3 on CO2

All mixtures looks no hygroscopic. Problem can be evaporation of solvents. Any way, interesting idea with Barium perchlorate. It seems , that adding Alu powder is possible.


In pyotechnics, it has been traditional to include a small % of a weak acid such as boric acid in compositions containing powdered aluminum and intended to be bound with water activated adhesives. Mixtures containing nitrates which are prone to evolving ammonia, undergoing self heating and thermal runaway leading to ignition in particular.

At this point, my questions regarding your HE mixtures video have lead us far from the original topic of this thread- Although it began with sourcing diethylene glycol to use as an energetic precursor chemical for propellants, we're now talking about fuel use "as is" and detonation rather than deflagration?

Laboratory of Liptakov, I propose to split this thread, do you concur? If so, should our side trip into HE mixtures with soluble in fuels oxidizer salts be rejoined with one of the related earlier threads or would you like to start a new thread with this?

[Edited on 1-11-2023 by Bert]

Laboratory of Liptakov - 11-1-2023 at 08:06

The trip can be plugged with some related thread. Thanks, Bert. Maybe after testing described mixture (on BaP base) can be serious reason create a new thread....:cool:

[Edited on 11-1-2023 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

 Pages:  1    3