Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Short question / quick answer - Thread

 Pages:  1  ..  11    13    15  ..  19

XeonTheMGPony - 7-12-2016 at 09:20

Look up the ETN plasticizing thread

Bert - 7-12-2016 at 13:17

Welcome to the forum- Have fun and be safe.


Quote:
Hey, I'm completely new to the forum so hopefully this post isn't a step out of line or something that's already been over-discussed.



Please read the FAQ here on posting:

http://www.sciencemadness.org/madscifaq.html#2.1_Board_topic...

Please post quick questions with no references, links or experimental data to "short question, quick answer"

https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=26...

Or in "beginnings"

https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/forumdisplay.php?fid=...

Or ask in an existing, related thread... Of which Google will show you many.


[Edited on 7-12-2016 by Bert]

Marvin - 8-12-2016 at 03:58

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
Can anyone provide a description of the liquid explosives used in Russian PFM-1 type mines? All I find on searching are repeated references to " VS6-D or VS-60D".


The curse of Wikipedia on searching for information not on it.

The Australian Network to Ban Landmines names the VS60D explosive as 1,5dichloro-3,3-dimethoxy-2,2,4,4-tetranitropentane and there is the hint that the primary is a lead compound. Apparently causing a lot of problems for mine clearance and processing.

Thraxx - 8-12-2016 at 06:35

Please,I have a problem and I would like to please you for advice.
I did the hydrazinsulfate like here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCovDr4FVNQ.But on the place of gelatine I gave there KMnO4.This reaction is very old from year 1918 and there was written,that this KMnO4 is possible use like inhibitor and that its advantageous,because there is no foam like with gelatine.Well,I did it,but the reaction had a lot of foam and -surprisingly-there was a lot of dark brown insoluble product.But what it was??There was not sulfuric acid,this I added after and it turned to clear "watter".
Does somebody knew,what I prepared?Thank you.

Tin man - 8-12-2016 at 08:17

Thraxx-
The brown precipitate is probly manganese dioxide from the reduction of potassium permanganate by hydrazine. I highly doubt that hydrazine and permanganate could exist in the same solution without destroying each other.

Thraxx - 8-12-2016 at 08:49

Thank you,I was frightened,that in my bottle is born some dangerous something like Potassium or Manganese hydrazinate or what.

Explosives "size" ratings - 500lb, 1000lb etc - what does this mean exactly?

RogueRose - 8-12-2016 at 09:49

I've heard newscasts or military documentaries discussing munition sizes and they say 500lb, 1k lb, 2k lb, - like those used in WWII in carpet campaigns. Then I hear about missile's and "war heads", usually much smaller but some with 1K lb.

Is this the explosive amount or explosive + casing/body? does the "vehicle" hold XXX amount of the material - or is it some kind of equivalency? It just seems like a lot of weight for some of these, especially in missiles.

What is the lb rating compared to, TNT, nitroglycerine, black powder?

I have a hard time correlating some news casts that say XXXX lb was used on this event/attack - and they show the damage, but then old videos from WWII, Korea, Vietnam show much larger devices/ratings doing what looks like much less damage.

Just trying to picture a 1/2 pallet of NH4NO3 (1000lb) fitting in the head of a missile. Kind of boggles the mind if that is what those numbers mean

greenlight - 8-12-2016 at 10:23

Only info I can find quickly is from wikipedia so truth of it is unknown but it says it is the weight of the whole bomb, casing, filling and initiation system. It is not always correct though and could be more or less than the weight in pounds stated apparently.

This is what I found on wikipedia:

"General-purpose bombs are often identified by their weight (e.g., 500 lb, 227 kg). In many cases this is strictly a nominal weight, or caliber, and the actual weight of each individual weapon may vary depending on its retardation, fusing, carriage, and guidance systems. For example, the actual weight of a U.S. M117 bomb, nominally 750 lb (340 kg), is typically around 820 lb (372 kg).

James Ikanov - 8-12-2016 at 15:45

I'm of the understanding that military munitions use the weight of the whole device, unless they specify that it's the "yield in x units" such as saying a yield of 1kt. Then it's that wieght in TNT. There are also systems that specifically designate the weight of the charge inside the device itself.

You'll usually only see that on specialty items and non-standard munitions types like thermobaric devices or nuclear devices IIRC, but hey, the more you know.

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_...

You can see in the stats box the total yield is listed as 10.3K lbs, but the yield is around 11 tons of TNT. That's a fairly significant difference.

Standard munitions also often have a seperate number for the exact weight of the warhead listed in the publicly available stats as well.


I could be wrong, that's just my understanding of US nomenclature. I've spent a lot of time flipping through the stats sheets and looking up technical information about this kind of thing but I'm definitely not an expert.

James Ikanov - 8-12-2016 at 15:56

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
Can anyone provide a description of the liquid explosives used in Russian PFM-1 type mines? All I find on searching are repeated references to " VS6-D or VS-60D".


Your google-fu needs some work :P (I'm kidding, this stuff was a pain in the ass to get even vague info on)
but honestly this is some cool stuff you've mentioned

VS60D explosive in PFM-1 mines (1,5dichloro-3,3-dimethoxy-2,2,4,4-
tetranitropentane

http://australia.icbl.org/index_htm_files/Memorandum85.pdf

Sorry I can't be more helpful there, although a quick skim suggests the explosive contains some kind of lead compound



D'oh. Well, someone mentioned all this before me. At least I gave the direct link.... I think there may be something worthwhile in how the fusing mechanism operates relative to the explosive train, if that makes up for my haste. I've found a few vague references to it being hydraulically activated by the pressure of the explosive on part of the center column, and it doesn't look like there's a particularly potent blasting cap or any such thing tucked away into the center column of the mine. Doing a bit of reading on it the cap looks like a pretty standard military type, perhaps even smaller, so I'd guess this stuff doesn't exactly require a large booster to go off.

I also went and found this:
https://www.buymilsurp.com/russian-soviet-landmine-pfm1-toe-...

Which further led me to this:

http://www.apminebanconvention.org/intersessional-work-progr...

While I do think that the source is slanted it would appear to suggest that the compound inside the mines is both rather toxic and somewhat reactive even with plastics such as the stuff the shell is constructed of. Actually, at this point based on everything I've found, even the byproducts of an actual successful detonation may have traces or significant amounts of cyanides or what not....


That said, there was this extremely indicative little nugget in there:

"One of the major problems highlighted during this seminar was the lack of information on the chemical components of the PFM mine."

Basically, even the countries that are currently trying to figure out how to pull them out of inventory have no idea what the hell's in them.

Sorry, but I don't know if what you want is publicly available. I'd start looking up people in Russia or Eastern Europe for some help at this point... or start googling in russian.

[Edited on 9-12-2016 by James Ikanov]

Bert - 8-12-2016 at 21:44

Apparently, the USSR designed and used a family of liquid filled, air scattered mines. Here's an anti vehicle/anti tank version, different designation for the main charge (PVV-12S) but a similar soft, flexible body and pressure activated fuze- This one at least had a timed self destruct mechanism.

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30022000#

And nothing easily to be found on the nature of the liquid explosive, of course.

I had not previously run across the USA version of the maple seed mine, "dragontooth". At least the fill for this one is a more widely known mixture- Amine/methanol sensitizer released on activation to mix with nitromethane/nitroethane, also the sensitizer dissolves a protective coating on time release chemical deactivation unit.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-43_Dragontooth

Families of ordnance and related filler chemistry out there I had not learned of... Just in case the cold war required a few million air scattered mines with an absolute minimum of HE filling time and effort.

large_000000.jpg - 21kB

The_Davster - 9-12-2016 at 14:28

...

[Edited on 21-5-20 by The_Davster]

Bert - 9-12-2016 at 17:21



I do really wonder what the reasons were the USSR chose these liquid mixtures

(Edit)
Is it possible that the above described Russian explosive mixture of various halogenated nitroformals and ethyl trinitroacetate are all products of a single reaction or series of reactions, that this to say, this odd hell brew was made by a "one pot" synthesis? And that these proportions are just the % mixture that comes out...

USSR just used the quickest, cheapest method they could find to produce an explosive liquid suitable for the job, and would not be bothered with any extra work, multiple syntheses or much in the way of purification? Land mines gots to be cheap.

Just quickly scanning patents related to the production of the ethyl mono and dinitroacetates, this idea kind of popped out at me.

What would the precursors have been?


[Edited on 10-12-2016 by Bert]

The_Davster - 9-12-2016 at 20:19

Common precursor for all of these is nitroform, but I am not sure which route the soviets were producing nitroform by. To the best of my knowledge, nobody is producing nitroform in the west anymore. Rather curious myself why the soviets were making so much of it. The mixture of so many nitroform derivatives is interesting as well...eutectic?

Its kinda an easy way to make a non-explosive material explosive, just add a trinitromethyl or trinitroethyl moiety :D. Thermal and base stability of these materials is of course an issue.

Nitroform reacts with formaldehyde giving trinitroethanol which is used as a precursor for 3 of the 4 ingredients. The fourth ingredient is prepared directly from a salt of nitroform skipping the trinitroethanol step.


Bert - 10-12-2016 at 06:38

Look at the waste or by products of some other (then common) industrial chemical works for the cheap raw materials, + the nitroform? Some process that leaves partially chlorinated organics, maybe a pesticide?

(Edit) Dechlorane/Mirex? Soviet union made this a LOT, and it was phased out in 1976- What to do with your stock piles, how to amortize the expense of your chemical works over a bit longer time...

We used to use the byproducts as chlorine donor in colored stars, what happens if you dispose of them by sending over to the state armament factory...

Plus some catalysts, hence the heavy metal, Iodine?

[Edited on 10-12-2016 by Bert]

ANFO sensitizer?

OneEyedPyro - 17-12-2016 at 02:46

I recently had a conversation with an old timer who had just retired from a rock quarry after working there for nearly 30 years.

He was talking about various aspects of the job and what kind of explosives they used, he mentioned ANFO, detcord and shock tube but nothing else.
I asked him about what kind of booster they used for the ANFO and he kind of shrugged and said they just used detcord and ANFO, after mentioning how it typically can't be detonated by detcord alone he mentioned some kind of additive.

He said somebody would add a heaping spoonful of a white powder into about half a coffee can worth of ANFO and shake it up like how you would mix tannerite.
They would tie an overhand knot in the end of a length of detcord which was then taped to the bottom of the liner then lower it into the hole followed by the sensitized ANFO followed by regular ANFO. He claimed they never had a single dud with this setup.

Any ideas what the mystery powder could have been?
I was thinking maybe PETN or RDX but I would think pure, powdered HEs like that aren't something you'd find readily available in bulk for mining purposes.
Maybe a perchlorate or something along those lines?

Marvin - 17-12-2016 at 03:13

I don't know, and practically it could be anything but I'd have thought anything that would detonate on it's own would be used in the form of a booster, not shaken through the mixture. Making ammonium nitrate mixtures detonate seems like a dark art to me, and now it's used as a water slurry! I'd hazard a guess the additive might be microballoons.

Metacelsus - 17-12-2016 at 05:43

Yeah, it's probably microballoons.

MineMan - 17-12-2016 at 10:25

Quote: Originally posted by OneEyedPyro  
I recently had a conversation with an old timer who had just retired from a rock quarry after working there for nearly 30 years.

He was talking about various aspects of the job and what kind of explosives they used, he mentioned ANFO, detcord and shock tube but nothing else.
I asked him about what kind of booster they used for the ANFO and he kind of shrugged and said they just used detcord and ANFO, after mentioning how it typically can't be detonated by detcord alone he mentioned some kind of additive.

He said somebody would add a heaping spoonful of a white powder into about half a coffee can worth of ANFO and shake it up like how you would mix tannerite.
They would tie an overhand knot in the end of a length of detcord which was then taped to the bottom of the liner then lower it into the hole followed by the sensitized ANFO followed by regular ANFO. He claimed they never had a single dud with this setup.

Any ideas what the mystery powder could have been?
I was thinking maybe PETN or RDX but I would think pure, powdered HEs like that aren't something you'd find readily available in bulk for mining purposes.
Maybe a perchlorate or something along those lines?


As the others have said, my only guess would be microballons. But usually (always) microballoons are mixed in to the prills during manufacturing. About 5000-7000 microballons per prill (2mm). This kind of ANFO is cap sensitive when ground into powder...

Also we don't know if it was standard 17 grain cord or 200 grain. Yes, a 3/4lb pentolite booster or a stick of cap sensitive emulsion is always used for the booster. I have heard of no quarries blasting like this, it must have been a small mom and pop operation. What country was this in??

If it was in the states, I find it very hard to believe it was PETN powder. Anyways, I know the point of this question is the sensatizer...but since I cannot answer this with certainty, I will say that it was terrible blasting practice, and while they may have saved $4 a hole without using boosters they paid for it in coarse fragmentation and flyrock (detcord stemming ejection)

Also, does anyone know what happened to Laboratory of Liptakov, I really miss his contributions??

OneEyedPyro - 18-12-2016 at 02:22

This is in the US, the quarry produces crushed rock for landscaping type stuff and local road work.
It is a pretty small scale operating employing maybe 15 or 20 guys. They actually excavate sand and gravel as their main business but produce crushed rock as needed.

Some other things he said, the white powder was usually kept in a paint can or gallon ice cream pale, was prone to clumping and the owner moved it to a storage shed at night with the rest of the explosives.

A business around here uses huge quantities of sodium chlorate and has been known to sell chemicals and products to other local businesses, chlorate would seem to fit the bill in terms of appearance and properties not to mention it would definitely increase sensitivity via ammonium chlorate formation.

NaClO3 seems too dangerous though, maybe if used soon after mixing it's not an issue. Of course it may not be chlorate anyway.

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by OneEyedPyro]

Bert - 18-12-2016 at 06:38

Among white powders reasonably available and not terribly expensive- Urea, hexamine, Potassium nitrate, ammonium perchlorate and ammonium persulfate all sensitize ammonium nitrate to some extent. Usually done in a melt or water gel/emulsion, rather than a dry mix.

Potassium chlorate would certInly do it, I would tend to add a few % additional of cheap ethylene glycol antifreeze along with the chlorate- And not store it after mixing.

project ethylene glycol

Never used Sodium chlorate. NaClO3 would tend to be even more sensitive than KClO3, by several accounts. It has not been offered for weed control around here for a long time, and is not a good choice for many pyrotechnic uses. I have a few ounces of it only because of cleaning out the labs of several older pyros who died or had to go into hospice care.

(Edit)

Yes, still available through internet, but not locally OTC. As I recall, the commercial weed killers were only about 50% NaClO3 anyhow.

https://www.amazon.com/Sodium-Chlorate-Crystals-Technical-Na...

Wow. $12.00/lb. Plus shipping... Not a cheap oxidizer any more.

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by Bert]

Donor Free Radical Explosive Composition

Bert - 18-12-2016 at 10:21

And now for something completely different:

https://www.google.ch/patents/US4196026

Note example 12, page 5- A claim of reducing drop hammer test of TNT from 100cm to 44cm via a few % of tetramethyl ammonium triborohydride?

Note claims for various organic boron compounds with from 1 to 7 Carbons per chain as sensitizers for ammonium nitrate explosives, claim 14, page 6?

Although patent DOES specify more Boron per molecule, ratios of Carbon:Boron are similar to a suggested range for sensitizers. No specific data for the Boron containing sensitizers with ammonium nitrate are given, just the passing mention.

Trimethyl borate (green flame special effect liquid, dead easy to make) as an ammonium nitrate sensitizer? I wonder.

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=10778

Perhaps I can join Yamato71 in the "WTF did I just make?!" thread?

MSDS (oops, SDS) for trimethyl borate sounds quite fun... incompatible with oxidizers? Well, not by MY standards. So they are worried it might explode... Poor dears.

But not stable vs. water and air. Not storage stable?

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by Bert]

PHILOU Zrealone - 18-12-2016 at 13:39

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
And now for something completely different:

https://www.google.ch/patents/US4196026

Note example 12, page 5- A claim of reducing drop hammer test of TNT from 100cm to 44cm via a few % of tetramethyl ammonium triborohydride?

Note claims for various organic boron compounds with from 1 to 7 Carbons per chain as sensitizers for ammonium nitrate explosives, claim 14, page 6?

Although patent DOES specify more Boron per molecule, ratios of Carbon:Boron are similar to a suggested range for sensitizers. No specific data for the Boron containing sensitizers with ammonium nitrate are given, just the passing mention.

Trimethyl borate (green flame special effect liquid, dead easy to make) as an ammonium nitrate sensitizer? I wonder.

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=10778

Perhaps I can join Yamato71 in the "WTF did I just make?!" thread?

MSDS (oops, SDS) for trimethyl borate sounds quite fun... incompatible with oxidizers? Well, not by MY standards. So they are worried it might explode... Poor dears.

But not stable vs. water and air. Not storage stable?

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by Bert]

Nice finding.
Quite surprising.

I also wonder what is that triborohydride compound?
Strangely the same compound as borohydride is less efficient.
It must be very basic and as such it may be responsible of a shift of the equilibrium of TNT to the nitronate side.
CH3-C=C-NO2 <--> CH2=C-C=N(O)-OH
It is known fact that TNT and TNB are sensitized by strong bases like NaOH, KOH, LiOH.

Since the best sensitizers for TNT are by order:
Azobenzene 10% reduction explosive height (REH) (90 vs 100 cm)
Acetaldehyde 10% REH (90 vs 100 cm)
Triethylamine 12% REH (88 vs 100 cm) (maybe linked to its basicity)
Ammonium persulfate 20% REH (80 vs 100 cm)
Quinone 23% REH (77 vs 100 cm)
Ethyl bromide 38% REH (62 vs 100 cm)
T.M.A.T.B. 66% REH (44 vs 100 cm)

Since the last is not OTC.
I have some good OTC-isher ideas!
1°)Azobenzene
--> All food and dye colourizer diazo-compounds
--> Azomethane (CH3-N=N-CH3)
--> Azodicarbonamide (H2N-CO-N=N-CO-NH2)
2°)Azo compounds and triethylamine
--> tetramethylhydrazine ((CH3)2N-N(CH3)2)
3°)Quinone and acetaldehyde
--> Glyoxal
--> Acetone, Phorone, Phloroglucidol (1,3,5-trihydroxybenzene) or pentan-2,4-dione
4°)Peroxydes
--> Benzoyl peroxyde (Ar-CO-O-O-OC-Ar)
--> Tert-butyl ether peroxyde ((CH3)3C-O-O-C(CH3)3)
--> H2O2 (water desensitizes but peroxydes sensitizes --> unknown)
--> Urea peroxyde (Carbamide peroxyde) (H2N-CO-NH2.H2O2)
5°)Halogenated solvents
--> CH3-NBr2 (explosive), CH2Br2, CHBr3, I-C#C-I (solid explosive), Br-CH2-CH2-Br, Br2CH-CHBr2, Br3C-NO2 (explosive)

Some of the above may work also for Ammonium nitrate.
I especially think to urea peroxyde...urea is already a sensitizer of AN...so a little free radical HO° and HO2° can't arm :P

Of course they mention that:
-nitrate esters are sensitizers (EGDN, NG, ETN)
-organic peroxydes aswel like CTAP, CDAP, HMDATP

[Edited on 19-12-2016 by PHILOU Zrealone]

Bert - 18-12-2016 at 14:28

I have azodicarbonamide on hand, it is useful for adjusting burn speed of various pyrotechnics and composite rocket fuels-

There is a patent for an ammonium nitrate/perchlorate explosive, sensitized by using a few % of azodicarbonamide and a larger ammount of 2-ethylhexyl nitrate (a common cetane improver additive for diesel fuel).

I will need to look for this again, it was not dependant on air spaces/microballoons for detonability and so fairly dense, also had a good VOD, as I recall.

(Edit)

Found it...

http://www.google.com/patents/US5750057

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by Bert]

PHILOU Zrealone - 19-12-2016 at 08:12

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
I have azodicarbonamide on hand, it is useful for adjusting burn speed of various pyrotechnics and composite rocket fuels-

There is a patent for an ammonium nitrate/perchlorate explosive, sensitized by using a few % of azodicarbonamide and a larger ammount of 2-ethylhexyl nitrate (a common cetane improver additive for diesel fuel).

I will need to look for this again, it was not dependant on air spaces/microballoons for detonability and so fairly dense, also had a good VOD, as I recall.

(Edit)

Found it...

http://www.google.com/patents/US5750057

[Edited on 18-12-2016 by Bert]

Nice so everything is coherent...I like that.
Both patents say that nitrate esters are sensitizers and that azo compounds aswel :D;):P

Lucky you...azodicarbonamide...wow I wish I had some to make:
1°) the hydrazine variant by methathesis
H2N-CO-N=N-CO-NH2 + 2 H2N-NH2 --> H2N-NH-CO-N=N-CO-NH-NH2 + 2 NH3 (or polymeric (-NH-NH-CO-N=N-CO-)n)
--> alone as energetic fuel additive, as salts of oxydizing oxo-acids or as complexes of salts of transition metals with oxydizing oxo-anions.
2°) salts of it...with HNO3, HClO4, HIO4, HC(NO2)3, HCN4H, O2N-CN4H, ...
--> nitrate or dinitrate, perchlorate or diperchlorate, periodate or diperiodate, nitroformiate or di-nitroformiate, tetrazolate or ditetrazolate, nitrotetrazolate or di-nitrotetrazolate,...
3°) the variant of carbamide peroxyde
--> azodicarbonamide peroxyde or diperoxyde.
4°) complexes of salts of transition metals with oxydizing oxo-anions

[Edited on 19-12-2016 by PHILOU Zrealone]

SA-DS

Mark Gillogly - 21-12-2016 at 10:08

I've heard a lot of talk about SA-DS but have never seen anything about the synthesis other than vague details. Other than those, no synthesis information. I know that as with all explosives you are never 100% safe and all safety precautions must be taken. That being said, does anyone know how sa-ds is prepared?:)

mayko - 21-12-2016 at 10:34

Hi Mark! Welcome to SM.

I assume that SA-DS refers to silver acetylide double salt. (Chemistry has lots of acronyms, so it is often helpful to spell things out at least once, especially in a thread title)

If you haven't already, take a look in the library - Brauer's Inorganic has a section on SA-DS:
http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/index.html

It's pretty straightforward, though. The only thing that I'd add is, acetylene can be pretty dirty, especially when freshly generated from calcium carbide, so consider a gas washer or two.






[Edited on 21-12-2016 by mayko]

PHILOU Zrealone - 21-12-2016 at 11:48

First post...so welcome.

There is a tool into this forum called the search engine...it makes wonders...so use and abuse of it...read as much as you can and learn...

Other than that the subject of SANC (silver acetylide nitrato complex), SADS (silver acetylide double salt), Ag2C2.AgNO3, etc has been covered many times and the last one is even a few 20 treads before yours...but I guess you missed it because you don't know chemistry very wel ... otherwise you would know that SA into SANC and SADS is silver acetylide or Ag2C2 (Ag-C#C-Ag).


[Edited on 21-12-2016 by PHILOU Zrealone]

jamit - 23-12-2016 at 10:33

Quote: Originally posted by BobD1001  
I purchased a quantity of Formaldehyde from Elemental about 6 months ago. I received it in an opaque HDPE container, and it has since been stored along other similar liquids within a storage cabinet in my semi-temp controlled garage. The minimum temperature this cabinet will see in the winter is approximately 55* F. Upon taking inventory today, I noticed a thick layer of white residue on the bottom of the bottle. At first I thought the bottle was losing its integrity and becoming porous, but I quickly realized that it was in fact a white solid at the bottom of the container. A quick search reveals that this is most likely Paraformaldehyde forming due to the colder temperatures. My question is, upon warmer temperatures will this redissolve to reform the formaldehyde solution, or will it require more elevated temperatures. Here is a link to a picture of the bottle and its bottom layer. Link


I had the same problem. White solid at the bottom on the container of formaldehyde. it's paraformaldehyde. But my question is: to remove it, do we just have to filter it and you have in the filtrate formaldehyde? or is the formaldehyde now useless and/or too contaminated. thanks.

Microtek - 23-12-2016 at 14:12

The formaldehyde solution is fine, though slightly less concentrated than before (since some of the formaldehyde has polymerised, and is no longer dissolved). You could filter off the paraform, in which case I would recommend that you keep it, since it is a valuable reactant. You can also heat it in water (in a fumehood), which causes it to depolymerize and turn into formaldehyde again.

Tin man - 5-1-2017 at 19:11

Could Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl) silane be made by bubbling silane (SiH4) into a formaldehyde solution?

PHILOU Zrealone - 6-1-2017 at 07:52

Quote: Originally posted by Tin man  
Could Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl) silane be made by bubbling silane (SiH4) into a formaldehyde solution?

I would say no because SiH4 must be a strong reducer and so CH2=O will more likely be reduced to CH3-OH or CH4 with possible formation of Si(-O-CH3)x(H)4-x or SiO2 (= Si(OH)4).

Tin man - 6-1-2017 at 15:17

But if it was that strong, wouldn't it reduce water?

PHILOU Zrealone - 7-1-2017 at 05:46

Quote: Originally posted by Tin man  
But if it was that strong, wouldn't it reduce water?

Doesn't it?

It reacts with O2 from air and water catalyses the autocombustion (pyrophoricity).

SiH4 is different from CH4 because Si is less electronegative than C but also because Si is less electronegative than H while C is more electronegative than H.
C > H > Si
This means that SiH4 is a source of H(-) and that the Si inthere has a formal charge d4(+) while C has a formal charge d4(-) into CH4.

SiH4(g) + 2 O2(g) --> SiO2(s) + 2 H2O(g)

SiH4(g) + O2(g) --> SiO2(s) + 2 H2(g)

SiH4(g) + O2(g) --> SiH2O(s) + H2O(g)

SiH4(g) + 1/2 O2(g) --> SiH2O(s) + H2(g)

SiH2O(s) + O2(g) --> SiO2(s) + H2O(g)

and

SiH4(g) + H2O(l) --> SiH2O(s) + 2 H2(g)

SiH2O(s) + H2O(l) --> SiO2(s) + 2 H2(g)

SiH4(g) + 2 H2O(l) --> SiO2(s) + 4 H2(g)

Tin man - 7-1-2017 at 07:38

The only reason I think it doesn't react with water is that I have have seen several YouTube videos where magnesium silicide is added to 10% (aq) HCl and and lots of tiny silane bubbles form. They are obviously still silane when they reach the serface because they still spit fire when they hit the air.
Please let me know if I overlooked anything. Thanks!

PHILOU Zrealone - 7-1-2017 at 12:13

Quote: Originally posted by Tin man  
The only reason I think it doesn't react with water is that I have have seen several YouTube videos where magnesium silicide is added to 10% (aq) HCl and and lots of tiny silane bubbles form. They are obviously still silane when they reach the serface because they still spit fire when they hit the air.
Please let me know if I overlooked anything. Thanks!

Maybe it reacts not efficiently and you end up with H2 and SiH4 that enflames spontaneously because of the later...

Dual purpose via a DIAL?!

Bert - 11-1-2017 at 22:20

The US is planning to replace the old baseball fragmentation grenade with a dual purpose, electronicaly fused device.

Supposedly, this new grenade will select between concussion (offensive grenade) and fragmentation (defensive grenade) by merely turning a selector ring. No removeable fragmentation sleeve, all the components stay with the device regardless of mode.

Anyone got a clue how this change in function is achieved?

I can hazard a guess at a scenario where the point(s) of initiation is oriented to PROPEL the pre shaped fragments for the defensive grenade setting, and changed into an orientation such as to SHATTER the fragments into a fine dust, too small for to be a missile hazard beyond the concussion's lethal radius when set as an offensive grenade- Perhaps even behaving more like a DIME device inside the concussion's radius than as a traditional concussion grenade?

http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/u-s-army-working-dual-miss...

But found no hard information on mechanism during a quick google search.

The two devices used back in Vietnam era were very easy to tell apart, even by touch and in the dark- One was more or less spheroidal, the other a straight walled cylinder.

When using the exact same device for both purposes, possibly in the dark and certainly while highly stressed? What could go wrong.



et-mp-rendering.jpeg - 46kB

MineMan - 12-1-2017 at 09:19

Damn Bert, good question!

I would think if the concussion mode shocked the metal into dust, then it would not be thick enough to due damage during the fragmentation mode. Yes, those letters better have some tritium in them to glow in the dark! good point.

Maybe some complex metallurgy?? Yes I was thinking of the DIME also... but how would that help...

Bert, now I am unsettled until I can figure this out!.

James Ikanov - 12-1-2017 at 11:04

My brain keeps thinking there's some sort of wire mesh setup that is rotated to be closed around the explosive charge, kind of like watching a shutter close, but I'm not sure how realistic that is given the electronic nature of the fusing and the claim I'd previously read about this that the explosive train is designed in a way to make it nonfunctional until rotated into position.....


Tritium is expensive, specially doped glow in the dark polymer is cheap.

That aside I think they solved that specific design challenge by adding "braille bumps" on the selector setting. But I can't recall where I read that.

DubaiAmateurRocketry - 12-1-2017 at 12:26

Does ditetrazolecarbazide exist ?

PHILOU Zrealone - 12-1-2017 at 15:23

Quote: Originally posted by DubaiAmateurRocketry  
Does ditetrazolecarbazide exist ?

Should exist since amino-tetrazole exist and hydrazino-tetrazole aswel.
So in principle simply allowing phosgen or dimethyl carbonate to react with HT should lead to di-tetrazole-carbazide...
HN4C-NH-NH-CO-NH-NH-CN4H

Via
2 HN4C-NH-NH2 + Cl2C=O --> HN4C-NH-NH-CO-NH-NH-CN4H + 2 HCl
or
2 HN4C-NH-NH2 + (CH3O)2C=O --> HN4C-NH-NH-CO-NH-NH-CN4H + 2 CH3-OH

[Edited on 13-1-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

NeonPulse - 12-1-2017 at 21:11

Just wondering if anyone has had attempted and success with this old preparation of nitroguanidine:http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=8911

PHILOU Zrealone - 13-1-2017 at 05:05

Quote: Originally posted by NeonPulse  
Just wondering if anyone has had attempted and success with this old preparation of nitroguanidine:http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=8911

Axt into that tread and Engager into its famous tetrazole pdf paper.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 24-1-2017 at 06:39

Short question: How is compatability between ETN + KMnO4 ? ( Thanks, Philou... :cool: )

PHILOU Zrealone - 24-1-2017 at 07:54

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Short question: How is compatability between ETN + KMnO4 ? ( Thanks, Philou... :cool: )

De nada L.o.L.,

If the ETN is fully nitrated, wel neutralized and recrystallized (thus no traces of E3N, E2N, E1N and E(*)); it should be as stable as plain ETN (shock, friction, impact), but maybe just a little less vs temperature...KMnO4 and MnO2 are combustion catalyst.

You want to make purple explosive? Jocker vs Batman ;):P:):D
Or maybe in memoriam Prince - The love symbol - Purple Rain.

(*)
Erythritol is directly related to propan-triol (aka glycerol/glycerine) because it is butan-tetrol...and glycerine + KMnO4 is unstorable because of runnaway reaction involving oxydation of the OH groups, selfheating and spontaneous fire.
The organic acid produced by the oxydation provides H(+) for further faster oxydation...


[Edited on 24-1-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

Maroboduus - 24-1-2017 at 08:18

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
The US is planning to replace the old baseball fragmentation grenade with a dual purpose, electronicaly fused device.

Supposedly, this new grenade will select between concussion (offensive grenade) and fragmentation (defensive grenade) by merely turning a selector ring. No removeable fragmentation sleeve, all the components stay with the device regardless of mode.

Anyone got a clue how this change in function is achieved?

I can hazard a guess at a scenario where the point(s) of initiation is oriented to PROPEL the pre shaped fragments for the defensive grenade setting, and changed into an orientation such as to SHATTER the fragments into a fine dust, too small for to be a missile hazard beyond the concussion's lethal radius when set as an offensive grenade- Perhaps even behaving more like a DIME device inside the concussion's radius than as a traditional concussion grenade?

http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/u-s-army-working-dual-miss...

But found no hard information on mechanism during a quick google search.

The two devices used back in Vietnam era were very easy to tell apart, even by touch and in the dark- One was more or less spheroidal, the other a straight walled cylinder.

When using the exact same device for both purposes, possibly in the dark and certainly while highly stressed? What could go wrong.





Could it be that the thing has a very small low explosive charge(even just like air-bag composition in cars) as well as the large one which does the work, and the concussion setting sets off the small charge first, blowing the larger charge out of the fragmentation casing?




Loptr - 24-1-2017 at 08:27

Quote: Originally posted by Maroboduus  
Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
The US is planning to replace the old baseball fragmentation grenade with a dual purpose, electronicaly fused device.

Supposedly, this new grenade will select between concussion (offensive grenade) and fragmentation (defensive grenade) by merely turning a selector ring. No removeable fragmentation sleeve, all the components stay with the device regardless of mode.

Anyone got a clue how this change in function is achieved?

I can hazard a guess at a scenario where the point(s) of initiation is oriented to PROPEL the pre shaped fragments for the defensive grenade setting, and changed into an orientation such as to SHATTER the fragments into a fine dust, too small for to be a missile hazard beyond the concussion's lethal radius when set as an offensive grenade- Perhaps even behaving more like a DIME device inside the concussion's radius than as a traditional concussion grenade?

http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/u-s-army-working-dual-miss...

But found no hard information on mechanism during a quick google search.

The two devices used back in Vietnam era were very easy to tell apart, even by touch and in the dark- One was more or less spheroidal, the other a straight walled cylinder.

When using the exact same device for both purposes, possibly in the dark and certainly while highly stressed? What could go wrong.





Could it be that the thing has a very small low explosive charge(even just like air-bag composition in cars) as well as the large one which does the work, and the concussion setting sets off the small charge first, blowing the larger charge out of the fragmentation casing?





This was my first thought. You might have issues with the direction of the concussion charge as its being ejected from the casing--would that be an issue?

purple rain

Laboratory of Liptakov - 24-1-2017 at 10:09

Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  
Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Short question: How is compatability between ETN + KMnO4 ? ( Thanks, Philou... :cool: )

De nada L.o.L.,

If the ETN is fully nitrated, wel neutralized and recrystallized (thus no traces of E3N, E2N, E1N and E(*)); it should be as stable as plain ETN (shock, friction, impact), but maybe just a little less vs temperature...KMnO4 and MnO2 are combustion catalyst.


You want to make purple explosive? Jocker vs Batman ;):P:):D
Or maybe in memoriam Prince - The love symbol - Purple Rain.


Huhaha...thanks,
My reason is not specially detonatable Purple Rain from Prince (One from best song of World), but this mix show on 100% deflagration - detonation transfer. Basic ratios are 75 ETN + 12,5 KMnO4 + 12,5 Alu bright color type. Working it even with Bickford fuse type in cavity 6 mm. At 3 segments with different density. Maybe time show on stability during a few months. ETN is from 2 x recrystal procedure. Still more, thanks..........:cool:

PHILOU Zrealone - 24-1-2017 at 14:40

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  
Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Short question: How is compatability between ETN + KMnO4 ? ( Thanks, Philou... :cool: )

De nada L.o.L.,

If the ETN is fully nitrated, wel neutralized and recrystallized (thus no traces of E3N, E2N, E1N and E(*)); it should be as stable as plain ETN (shock, friction, impact), but maybe just a little less vs temperature...KMnO4 and MnO2 are combustion catalyst.


You want to make purple explosive? Jocker vs Batman ;):P:):D
Or maybe in memoriam Prince - The love symbol - Purple Rain.


Huhaha...thanks,
My reason is not specially detonatable Purple Rain from Prince (One from best song of World), but this mix show on 100% deflagration - detonation transfer. Basic ratios are 75 ETN + 12,5 KMnO4 + 12,5 Alu bright color type. Working it even with Bickford fuse type in cavity 6 mm. At 3 segments with different density. Maybe time show on stability during a few months. ETN is from 2 x recrystal procedure. Still more, thanks..........:cool:

Ingenious.
A flash powder Al + KMnO4
+
Al/ETN D2D explosive
+
ETN a high detonating explosive
:o
I'm more than eager to see your study of it and stability.
No moisture, and good quality Al powder --> no risk.

Maroboduus - 24-1-2017 at 15:25

Quote: Originally posted by Loptr  
Quote: Originally posted by Maroboduus  
Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
The US is planning to replace the old baseball fragmentation grenade with a dual purpose, electronicaly fused device.

Supposedly, this new grenade will select between concussion (offensive grenade) and fragmentation (defensive grenade) by merely turning a selector ring. No removeable fragmentation sleeve, all the components stay with the device regardless of mode.

Anyone got a clue how this change in function is achieved?

I can hazard a guess at a scenario where the point(s) of initiation is oriented to PROPEL the pre shaped fragments for the defensive grenade setting, and changed into an orientation such as to SHATTER the fragments into a fine dust, too small for to be a missile hazard beyond the concussion's lethal radius when set as an offensive grenade- Perhaps even behaving more like a DIME device inside the concussion's radius than as a traditional concussion grenade?

http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/u-s-army-working-dual-miss...

But found no hard information on mechanism during a quick google search.

The two devices used back in Vietnam era were very easy to tell apart, even by touch and in the dark- One was more or less spheroidal, the other a straight walled cylinder.

When using the exact same device for both purposes, possibly in the dark and certainly while highly stressed? What could go wrong.





Could it be that the thing has a very small low explosive charge(even just like air-bag composition in cars) as well as the large one which does the work, and the concussion setting sets off the small charge first, blowing the larger charge out of the fragmentation casing?





This was my first thought. You might have issues with the direction of the concussion charge as its being ejected from the casing--would that be an issue?


I don't think so if the ejection is at a relatively low speed (with an appropriate delay on the main charge of course)
Didn't they have land mines that did something like that back in the US/Vietnam war? Called them something like 'jump ups' ?

I'm not big on blowin' stuff up, so I know little about what does or doesn't work in a case like this. Just seemed like it might be a good guess.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 25-1-2017 at 03:24

Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  

[/rquote]
Ingenious.
A flash powder Al + KMnO4
+
Al/ETN D2D explosive
+
ETN a high detonating explosive
:o
I'm more than eager to see your study of it and stability.
No moisture, and good quality Al powder --> no risk.


Well, thanks for the compliment. KMnO4 is free available against NH4ClO4. AP working also, described before estimate year. But making NPED with trivial catalysator as is cheap permanganate + aluminium is almost beyond belief. Huhaha...Simply...flash powder....
"Let us do things as simple as possible. But not simpler."......Albert Einstein......:cool:

H2O2

Laboratory of Liptakov - 6-2-2017 at 09:16



h2o2.jpg - 33kB

I have a short question for experts. Is possible counting, how much is need of BaO2 for preparation 30 - 35% concentration H2O2 ? For example as base can be 100g water, respectively the crushed ice and zero cold water. Carbon dioxide is available in any amount, of course. Can be bubbled slowly and by long time.
According stoichiometry should by : 100g H2O + 940g BaO2 + 244g CO2 = 188,8 H2O2 + 1095g BaCO3 (insoluble). But it is for absolut 100% H2O2. Which is nonsense. Is thus possible use (for 30% H2O2) 313g BaO2 ?
It seems, that it will be expensive thick slurry and not hydrogen peroxide..........:D........Thanks......:cool:.......LL

hnto - 6-2-2017 at 10:54

Question on stirbars and a concave flask (convex on the inside):
I have a flask that I picked up as a part of a bunch of different things. This one has a concave bottom (causing a dome of glass inside the flask). It's a great flask, but I can't use it because my magnetic stirbars won't stay on the top of the dome. Odd that the flask is designed this way and wondering what kind of stirbar one might use with this kind of flask?

I don't have a picture I can post of it at the moment, but it is basically like a round-bottom flask with the bottom of it punched in so-to-speak.

Thanks so much to anyone who might be able to point me in the right direction of buying something that would work for this flask!

[Edited on 6-2-2017 by hnto]

James Ikanov - 6-2-2017 at 10:56

I can't answer your question, but I did have another one you reminded me of.... Have you ever tried fitting an N2O cylinder for whipped cream making into your soda stream? :D

hnto - 6-2-2017 at 11:11

Oh, I think I've found something that may work. Would love to know if anyone has experience with these:

Spinbar® Circulas™ (Dumbbell-shaped)
This magnet stirring bars provide strong turbulence at relatively low speeds, offer reduces surface contact and have excellent centering characteristics, particularly in vessels with convex bottoms. Ideal for all “problem” liquids, highly viscous mixtures, metals particles in fluid. All sizes have solid PTFE end disks 20 mm (.79”) in diameter, and bar diameter is 8 mm (.315”)

Or

http://www.bdl-cee.com/home/magnetic-stirring-bars-dumbbell-...

I think the dumbbell shape would keep it on top of the dome of glass if I have the right length/size of dumbbell stirbar.

Chlorine - 6-2-2017 at 14:25

Quote: Originally posted by hnto  
Oh, I think I've found something that may work. Would love to know if anyone has experience with these:

Spinbar® Circulas™ (Dumbbell-shaped)
This magnet stirring bars provide strong turbulence at relatively low speeds, offer reduces surface contact and have excellent centering characteristics, particularly in vessels with convex bottoms. Ideal for all “problem” liquids, highly viscous mixtures, metals particles in fluid. All sizes have solid PTFE end disks 20 mm (.79”) in diameter, and bar diameter is 8 mm (.315”)

Or

http://www.bdl-cee.com/home/magnetic-stirring-bars-dumbbell-...

I think the dumbbell shape would keep it on top of the dome of glass if I have the right length/size of dumbbell stirbar.


I haven't used this exact stir bar, but i have tried quite a few of the "fancy shaped" ones. Overall there isn't much of a difference, i've always stick with the atypical rod shaped stir bar.

Regards,

PHILOU Zrealone - 7-2-2017 at 01:32

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  




I have a short question for experts. Is possible counting, how much is need of BaO2 for preparation 30 - 35% concentration H2O2 ? For example as base can be 100g water, respectively the crushed ice and zero cold water. Carbon dioxide is available in any amount, of course. Can be bubbled slowly and by long time.
According stoichiometry should by : 100g H2O + 940g BaO2 + 244g CO2 = 188,8 H2O2 + 1095g BaCO3 (insoluble). But it is for absolut 100% H2O2. Which is nonsense. Is thus possible use (for 30% H2O2) 313g BaO2 ?
It seems, that it will be expensive thick slurry and not hydrogen peroxide..........:D........Thanks......:cool:.......LL

Yes should work...
Or you increase the H2O volume (or weight) by 3 times --> 300g
Or you reduce the amount of BaO2 by a factor 3 --> 313,3g

And for BaO/BaO2 and CO2 recylcing...
Use acetic acid :cool::D;):P

BaCO3 + 2 HO2C-CH3 --> Ba(O2C-CH3)2 + H2CO3
H2CO3 <---===> H2O + CO2(g)
Ba(O2C-CH3)2 --dry heat--> BaO + CH3-CO-CH3 + CO2(g)
BaO + O2 --dry heat--> BaO2

So as a bonus you get aceton (caution flamable so good condenser needed).

H2O2

Laboratory of Liptakov - 7-2-2017 at 05:07

Well, if I understand, is possible use only 104g BaO2 + 100g ice/water and bubble. After making decantation BaCO3. Cooling again on ice/water (now cca 10% concentration of H2O2) and added again 104g BaO2. Again bubble CO2 and decantation BaCO3. Now we have 20% H2O2. And all step repeat still one. Thanks, Philou...:cool:...LL

MineMan - 8-2-2017 at 10:48

nitroguanidine is a stable explosive with a high V det (>7000m/s) with the chemical formula of CH4N4O2

guanidine nitrate has the chemical formula of CH6N4O3, so we are able to create one more H2O... but from my understanding guanidine nitrate just produces gas for airbargs and monopropellents... why is it not explosive??

From looking at it's chem formula I would think it would be more explosive...? What part of chemistry do I need to rigorously study to know this without experimentation...?

James Ikanov - 8-2-2017 at 21:06

Cursory googling suggests that Nitroguinadine is one molecule whereas guinadine nitrate is a bit more like... I'm not sure of how I would describe it other than a nitrate ion hanging out very closely to a guinadine molecule?

Wikipedia has a similar sentiment on the matter....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guanidine_nitrate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroguanidine

Wikipedia also says that nitroguanidine is used as an airbag propellant as well.

Perhaps this short excerpt will enlighten you, I don't completely understand the mechanism it describes but it seems to back up what I have stated:

"Nitroguanidine is produced commercially by a two step process starting with the reaction of calcium cyanamide with ammonium nitrate. Via the intermediacy of biguanidine, this ammonolysis step affords the salt guanidinium nitrate. In the second step, the nitrate salt is treated with sulfuric acid, a process that dehydrates the salt and forms the N-N bond.[1]"

[C(NH2)3]NO3 → (NH2)2CNNO2 + H2O




On an unrelated note, I'm very curious, has anyone ever attempted to make an EBW capacitor bank out of a set of leyden jars? it seems like an extremely cost effective methodology given the extremely high voltage capacity for something so easily made out of such common materials....

[Edited on 9-2-2017 by James Ikanov]

PHILOU Zrealone - 9-2-2017 at 19:10

Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
nitroguanidine is a stable explosive with a high V det (>7000m/s) with the chemical formula of CH4N4O2

guanidine nitrate has the chemical formula of CH6N4O3, so we are able to create one more H2O... but from my understanding guanidine nitrate just produces gas for airbargs and monopropellents... why is it not explosive??

From looking at it's chem formula I would think it would be more explosive...? What part of chemistry do I need to rigorously study to know this without experimentation...?

Both are very unsensitive explosives (to friction and shock) with comparable volume of detonation gases (1098L/kg for GN and 1075L/kg for NQ)--> they need strong confinement for detonation.

Differences are to be found into: (data from Rudolf-Meyer's Explosives)
-low comparable lead block test expansion (GN = 240 cm3/10g vs 305/10g for NQ).
-low specific energy (964 kJ/kg for NQ and 750 kJ/kg for GN)
-low heat of explosion (3220 kJ/kg for NQ and 2604 for GN (H2O(l))
So those are cold exploding stuffs (the heat of explosion is about 50% less than NM or NG certainly linked to the very negative heat of formation, poor OB and H2O generation)...lead block test shows that they are not very powerful (kind of 50% of EGDN) and at best perform like would unperfectly balanced dinitroaromatic explosives.

This makes them good for corrosion free propellant and gunpowder applications or air bags..."cold burning"

NQ is slightly better as a detonating explosive because it contains less water and reach thus a higher explosion temperature but also because it is slightly denser than GN...
Water tends to increase specific impulse for rocketry applications but is detrimental to brisance because it reduces the heat of the detonation products (gases).

[Edited on 10-2-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

MineMan - 14-2-2017 at 18:13

Certain types of German dark and Indian Blackhead Al powder are 2-5 microns. Is this the thickness of the flake, or the length.

For example, a russian Al powder named PAP-2 has an average thickness of .2-.5 microns but the length of the flake is 20-30 microns... so would this be smaller or larger than the above powders??

PHILOU Zrealone - 15-2-2017 at 13:39

Both smaller and larger ;-)
In fact the active surface (volumic surface) is much bigger for the PAP-2...for sure both powders should provide very different properties to pyro mixes...oxyd layer will play a bigger role into the PAP-2 aswel.

markx - 15-2-2017 at 23:15

PAP powders are coated with a very persistant wax like substance that prevents them from oxidizing in air and even water for that matter. A local aerated concrete block producer in our vincinity uses PAP Al powders as gas generation media in their AAC block mixture and they used a separate washing step in alkaline media to rid the powder of the protective coating and get the most out of it.

JohnDoe13 - 16-2-2017 at 00:49

The waxy coating is Stearin. It can be easily removed with acetone, but these types of aluminum powders are very reactive even with the stearin coating.

MineMan - 16-2-2017 at 09:36

Well I want some, but had trouble finding sources, does any of you gentleman know where I can get this? (websites) I am ok ordering it form a different country of orgin!

All of the nano Al I am finding (100nm) is priced at about 3-5$ a gram shipped, wow! I would definitely like to try the PAP first. researchers seem to have great success with it.

[Edited on 16-2-2017 by MineMan]

JohnDoe13 - 17-2-2017 at 01:39

Search for paint grade aluminum powder. Most of the time it's flake aluminum.

MineMan - 24-2-2017 at 17:14

Screening Fine Chemicals.

Hello All,

To follow Berts advice I am trying to nail the particle size for flash powder. I am trying to screen potassium perchlorate ground in a mortar and pestal. I can get my particles through the 250 and 120um screen. But I cannot get particles through the 53um, 25um, and 10um screen... I think because of clumping.

What Can I do, advice?

PHILOU Zrealone - 24-2-2017 at 21:43

Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
Screening Fine Chemicals.

Hello All,

To follow Berts advice I am trying to nail the particle size for flash powder. I am trying to screen potassium perchlorate ground in a mortar and pestal. I can get my particles through the 250 and 120um screen. But I cannot get particles through the 53um, 25um, and 10um screen... I think because of clumping.

What Can I do, advice?

Maybe anti-caking agent...

Like for kitchen/table salt...for example using Potassium feri- or fero- cyanide...easily revealed by formation of blue cyan colour (lappis lazulis) upon contact with FeCl2...

Boffis - 25-2-2017 at 05:04

There is a specific product for this purpose, it is a type of fumed silica and you can sometimes buy it off ebay but I can't remember the trade name, a small amount is added before milling. Also you need to make sure your perchlorate is perfectly dry (use an oven at 110 C; before mixing!) before you grind it.

Edit: is available under the name Carb-o-sil in the UK from various ebay suppliers.

[Edited on 25-2-2017 by Boffis]

PHILOU Zrealone - 27-2-2017 at 03:30

Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  
Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
Screening Fine Chemicals.

Hello All,

To follow Berts advice I am trying to nail the particle size for flash powder. I am trying to screen potassium perchlorate ground in a mortar and pestal. I can get my particles through the 250 and 120um screen. But I cannot get particles through the 53um, 25um, and 10um screen... I think because of clumping.

What Can I do, advice?

Maybe anti-caking agent...

Like for kitchen/table salt...for example using Potassium feri- or fero- cyanide...easily revealed by formation of blue cyan colour (lappis lazulis) upon contact with FeCl2...

The use of such fero or feri cyanides is also a good way to increase energy output (see Dornier deflagro-detonating mix of such cyanides with chlorates...)

MineMan - 28-2-2017 at 14:39

I don't understand, does the fero and feri cynaides help with screening??

MineMan - 28-2-2017 at 14:41

Ammonium Perchlorate Decomposition Temperature.

Hello All,

I was upset to find that the decomposition temperature of ammonium perchlorate is only 130 degrees C. Is this correct? How could it be used for missiles and other military applications if it decomposes at such a low temperature??


Laboratory of Liptakov - 28-2-2017 at 22:23

In wikipedia is described 200 - 240 C for decomposition AP. 130 is nonsense. Maybe from homemade reactor if is contamined NaClO4. His melting point is 130 C when evaporate, respectively his decompose on pure dry NaClO4 + H2O steam. Dr.

PHILOU Zrealone - 7-3-2017 at 03:18

Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
I don't understand, does the fero and feri cynaides help with screening??

If you problem is really clumping (= caking) thus anti-caking agent should solve this...

underground - 8-3-2017 at 05:24

Can NH4CLO4 made from KCLO4 ? (using sulfuric acid and ammonium carbonate)

KCLO4 + H2SO4 --> K2SO4 + 2HClO4

( NH4)2CO3 + 2 HClO4 --> 2 NH4ClO4 + H2O + CO2

Then separate the NH4ClO4 from K2SO4 ( with Solubility )

[Edited on 8-3-2017 by underground]

NH4ClO4 prepare

Laboratory of Liptakov - 8-3-2017 at 13:58

Here is something
https://sites.google.com/site/unusualchemistry/perchlorates

underground - 9-3-2017 at 06:31

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
Here is something
https://sites.google.com/site/unusualchemistry/perchlorates


The heating method looks interesting. I notice that Naclo3 got a melting point of 248–261 °C and Naclo4 at 468 °C so i guess with Naclo3 will work too. I may try it.

I just ask from Kclo4 to NH4CLO4 cause metathesis reaction does not work and kclo3 can be made more easily than naclo3 with a cell. Kclo3 will ppt out while Naclo3 wont.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 9-3-2017 at 11:30

According all, is necessary obtained, get firstly NaClO4. After will preparation easy. Small amount NaClO3 in NaClO4 (from cell process) is possible get out helping HCl acid. Is described under picture in link.

MineMan - 13-3-2017 at 14:16

Why is hydrazine such a great fuel... it makes the highest VOD binary for AN explosives...8200-8600m/s

ANNM only goes to about 6400m/s and the NM is a molecular explosive. Are there any replacements for hydrazine that would give similar performance..? What is so special about N2H4? What about ammonia hydroxide as a fuel??

There has to be something out there that can match hydrazine and is safer... there are dozens of molecular explosives that can match HMX and Cl-20, why no fuels that can match hydrazine?

Not knowing the answer is truly pissing me off.

Dornier 335A - 14-3-2017 at 01:16

Hydrazine has positive enthalpy of formation, no carbon and lots of hydrogen. This makes it the ultimate fuel for high VoD compositions. The product gases, consisting mainly of water and hydrogen, have an unusually steep isentrope which results in high ɣ and high VoD at a relatively low detonation pressure (comparable to the pressure of other compositions with the same density like ANNM). Therefore, VoD is not the perfect performance measure. For example, it's not nearly as brisant as PETN (8400 m/s). Other explosives with great hydrogen content and similar high VoD/pressure ratio are nitroguanidine (8200 m/s) and hydrazine nitrate (8500 m/s).

PHILOU Zrealone - 14-3-2017 at 02:16

The use of N2H4.HNO3 with TATNB (triaminotrinitrobenzene) allows one to go over the 9300 m/s...
:cool: My guess is that N2H4.2 HClO4 as a replacement of N2H4.HNO3 in this mix would make it even better...because N2H4.HClO4 already reaches the 9800 m/s.

Alternative superfuels?
*:cool: Trihydrazino-s-triazine (brother of melamine) will be even better as fuels than N2H4 for most detonic applications.
*:cool: Triaminoguanidine ((H2N-NH)2C=N-NH2)
*:cool: Other molecular superfuels would involve H2N-NH-C#N (cyanhydrazide / cyanohydrazine), H2N-N(-C#N)2 (unsymetric dicyanhydrazide),N#C-NH-NH-C#N (symetrical dicyanhydrazide), N#C-NH-N(-C#N)2 (tricyanhydrazide / tricyanohydrazine) and (N#C-)2N-N(-C#N)2 (tetracyanhydrazide / tetracyanohydrazine).
*:cool: Other possibility is the same as above but based on tetrazolo instead of cyano I suppose that H2N-NH-CN4H (hydrazinotetrazole) will make wonders just like tetra-tetrazolo-hydrazine. The multiple unsaturated N chain stores energy.
*:cool: You also have non hydrazine related compounds like polyacetylenic (butadiyne, hexatriyne), polycyanido (cyanoform, tetracyanomethane, dicyanoacetylen, dicyanobutadiyne, hexacyanobenzene, ... for sure superfuels but very dense and very energetic because triple links as C#C or C#N store a lot of energy...that is why the burning temperature of such fuels is very high...and those compounds are quite unstable owing to the very negative enthalpy of formation from their elements (this means they are more than happy to split back to their elements...acetylene or cyanogen are propagating explosive/detonating on their own under specific conditions of pressure and shock.
*:cool: Azido group also stores energy so polyazido compounds or mixing of Azido and cyano, tetrazolo, hydrazino, diazo would be another way to boost up the fuel...

--> the only limitation is the practical stability of such fuels towards self decomposition or sensitivity against external stimuli (shock, heat, light,...) --> activation energy barrier.

Theorically (and practically) I wonder what would happen if TATNB is replaced by THTNB (trihydrazinotrinitrobenzene) into the initial mix as its mononitrate, dinitrate or trinitrate or better its monoperchlorate, diperchlorate or triperchlorate?

:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:
--> Ultimate mix THTNB triperchlorate and N2H4.2 HClO4 from stoechimetric mix to slightly negative one?
:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:


[Edited on 14-3-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

Dornier 335A - 15-3-2017 at 10:23

Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  
My guess is that N2H4.2 HClO4 as a replacement of N2H4.HNO3 in this mix would make it even better...because N2H4.HClO4 already reaches the 9800 m/s.
[Edited on 14-3-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]


I would be very interested to see a source for that Philou. 9800 m/s sounds like a typo.

MineMan - 15-3-2017 at 20:55

PHILOU,

What you wrote to me is foreign, what do I need to read to understand it. I have never heard of those chemicals, I don't know if they even exist? I am more interested in fuels that would be economic..

Why is nitrogen so good and carbon so bad? I thought the best fuel was hydrogen because of 142MJ/kg??? if so wouldn't hydrides be the best fuel, like nano LiAlH4??

PHILOU Zrealone - 21-3-2017 at 14:32

Quote: Originally posted by MineMan  
PHILOU,

What you wrote to me is foreign, what do I need to read to understand it. I have never heard of those chemicals, I don't know if they even exist? I am more interested in fuels that would be economic..

Why is nitrogen so good and carbon so bad? I thought the best fuel was hydrogen because of 142MJ/kg??? if so wouldn't hydrides be the best fuel, like nano LiAlH4??

Yes I know sometimes I speak chinese ;-) or too chemically.
Most of the molecules I have mentionned do exist...a few are extrapolated and may or not exist (yet).

Hydrogen is good because of its very small weight per mole, so you have a lot of moles per kg...but stil H2/O2 doesn't burn "very hot" under normal conditions (stil 2000°C) (thus not when H2 and O2 are activated or pre-splitted like in hydrogen plasma torch).
On the other hand acetylen, diacetylen (butadiyne), cyanogen, hydrogen cyanide, dicyanoacetylen, dicyanobutadiyne,...when mixed with O2 all burn very much hotter than 3000°C (and up to close to 5000°C)...this has to do with the endothermic nature of those compounds (tripple links store a lot of energy)... the endothermic energy adds to the normal burning energy of the elements alone.
Hottest flame temperature
It seems I was right in saying that non hydrogen containing HE display a hotter explosion heat/detonation heat because the H2O exhausted reduces the heat...probably linked to the heat capacity of water and water vapour.

Also you have to take into account the heat output per kg, but also per volume...hydrogen is not very dense while other fuel are denser because condensed or even solid.

To fully understand this you really have to read a little about the following:
-standard enthalpy of reaction (specifically burning reaction)
-standard enthalpy of formation of molecules (and of elements)
-Hess law of thermodynamic
Then everything will be much clearer to you.

[Edited on 22-3-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

PHILOU Zrealone - 21-3-2017 at 14:39

Quote: Originally posted by Dornier 335A  
Quote: Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone  
My guess is that N2H4.2 HClO4 as a replacement of N2H4.HNO3 in this mix would make it even better...because N2H4.HClO4 already reaches the 9800 m/s.
[Edited on 14-3-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]


I would be very interested to see a source for that Philou. 9800 m/s sounds like a typo.

It comes from datas out of a very long VOD/Lead block test/Sand crushing test table from Don J Haarman.
I will put it here soon. It seems I have made a mistake or two...but the numbers must be close.

I'm gathering info on that so you can make accurate calculations with your ingenious program VOD calculator/simulator.

FeedMe94 - 1-4-2017 at 11:26

Hello everyone , im new to the forum and i would like to ask about ANFO. Here where i live they keep detonating ANFO with 12grams per meter DetCord by doing a knot or two at the end of the DetCord which its inside the middle of the ANFO mixture. In their mixture they are using common bleach ( chlorine ) from the supermarket. Any idea why they are adding chlorine to ANFO mixture ? Cant find info anywhere on the internet about that mix. Also i would like to ask what im doing wrong when detonating ANFO and i dont get a full detonation ? Im using 10g ETN or 10g PETN as a booster for 1kg ANFO. They are using arround 15cm of DetCord for 1kg ANFO and their detonation is way better than mine

Sorry about my english

[Edited on 2-4-2017 by feedme94]

Laboratory of Liptakov - 2-4-2017 at 02:32

Your questions look like from someone who collects information about the activity on science madness. But energy materials he does not understand at all. Because your questions are contradictory and very weird. Can you make ETN and PETN? How is it possible that you do not know what exactly is Anfo? And confuses on this bleach from supermarket ? You seem as uneducated agent......:cool:.....LL:
I recommend read minimal 10 types of patents about ANFO (google) and every from this minimal 3x again around. After will your questions self - answered.

[Edited on 2-4-2017 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

FeedMe94 - 2-4-2017 at 02:50

The problem is that i cant say what i think because my english are bad. I know exactly what ANFO is and i have read many patents of ANFO. I just cant find anything about chlorine as sensitizer. Also i cant understand how does a little bit of detcord will fully detonate ANFO when im using 10g of PETN and it wouldnt

[Edited on 2-4-2017 by feedme94]

Laboratory of Liptakov - 2-4-2017 at 03:20

1) Your ANFO is maybe tragical combination some + some.
2) Using chlorine or his derivates in ANFO are bullshit.
3) Detcord is professional cable, device, in amateur praxis not using, because is it expensive.
4) after study patents on google you find ANFO, which is sensitive on detonator No. 4. Or 300mg HMTD.

Best patent on ANFO sensitive on No. 4
https://www.google.com/patents/US3247033

FeedMe94 - 2-4-2017 at 03:32

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
1) Your ANFO is maybe tragical combination some + some.
2) Using chlorine or his derivates in ANFO are bullshit.
3) Detcord is professional cable, device, in amateur praxis not using, because is it expensive.
4) after study patents on google you find ANFO, which is sensitive on detonator No. 4. Or 300mg HMTD.

Best patent on ANFO sensitive on No. 4
https://www.google.com/patents/US3247033


Thank you for your answer.

1) My ANFO Mixture is 94.5% AN and 5.5% Diesel fuel by weight. Also my AN is activated prilled or powder.

2) I have no idea why they are using chlorine in their mixtures. The only think i found so far is this
http://issc2015.system-safety.org/T12_Poly_Prop_Ex_Tutorial_...

It says in here that they use chlorine ion as catalysts for Ammonium Nitrate.


yobbo II - 2-4-2017 at 05:44

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov  
1) ....
4) after study patents on google you find ANFO, which is sensitive on detonator No. 4. Or 300mg HMTD.

Best patent on ANFO sensitive on No. 4
https://www.google.com/patents/US3247033


Is this similar to Tannerite? What is the sensitivity of tannerite and would this mixture be a good substitute.

Yob

JJay - 2-4-2017 at 05:44

I feel like a complete newb asking this, but can you submit a septum that has been pierced to a vacuum?

PHILOU Zrealone - 4-4-2017 at 14:43

Quote: Originally posted by JJay  
I feel like a complete newb asking this, but can you submit a septum that has been pierced to a vacuum?

What do you mean by this?
A septum with the seringe pin stil sticked into the septum or a septum that has lost some of its integrity after piercing and the pin is taken away?

For the first case I think it can be done and while doing this the container will be vaccuumed via the pin hole...I suppose the idea is to take the pin away afterwards and get the recipient with septum and its content (a sensitive to air compound?) under vaccuum...right?
The only trouble that may arrise is that the septum might be too flexible and afterwards (when coming back to ambiant pressure) is sucked up into the recipient...but it is worth a try.

For the second case the septum if mobile (like a rubber plug without metallic ring) will be propelled into the vaccuum chamber due to inner pressure vs outside low one; otherwise if metallic ring is present to hold it it will probably enflate and deform due to inner pressure vs outside difference and at a certain point the hole will no more be self confined by the surrounding rubber and it will allow escape of some of the inner gas to the vaccuum...thus deflation will occure until system is again at equilibrium...more than probably the pressure inside the recipient will remain higher than the outside vaccuum so some gas will remain inside it. Once again at ambiant pressure the pressure inside the recipient will be lower than the ambiant one. --> patm > precipient > pvacuum.

This in comparison with the first case with the pin where
patm > precipient = pvacuum.


[Edited on 4-4-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

JJay - 5-4-2017 at 03:45

Umm... this is actually a pretty common situation. Say, for example, that you are doing a vacuum distillation with a Hempel column that has a sidearm. Can you remove the distillate from the apparatus while the distillation is underway?

Note: I am not sure why, but questions of this nature seem to draw a lot of speculation and guesswork. I can speculate and make guesses myself; please answer only if you have actually done this before and know the answer.

DrP - 5-4-2017 at 04:00

I think it depends on the extent of the vacuum, the size of the hole from the piercing and the rigidity of the stopper.

If the vacuum is very high then then it might suck the rubber down into the apparatus and the 'hole' in the rubber septum may open and allow air in.

I have seen Shlenk type tubes used - where they are positioned at the join where you want to introduce your material into the reaction. You can use a septum/rubber stopper on the shlenk. You vac the system down and then close off the shlenk to the vacuum and introduce the reactant.... seal the shlenk and open it up to the vacuum again - once the reactant has dripped through into the reaction vessel then the shlenk can be reclosed. Any sucking in of the stopper happens in the shlenk and not the reaction vessel - if it looks bad and the seal is goin to fail then the shlenk can be closed off from the main vessel and sealed vis the tap. I hope that make sense... a bit like a dropping funnel.

The problem with this imo is that there might be reactant remaining on the side of the glass ware that never reaches the main vessel.

DrP - 5-4-2017 at 04:01

PS - I am not sure if Shlenk is the right piece of kit - I am thinking of something that's sort of between a shlenk and a dropping funnel.... maybe it's just called a dropping funnel idk.

PHILOU Zrealone - 6-4-2017 at 16:11

Quote: Originally posted by JJay  
Umm... this is actually a pretty common situation. Say, for example, that you are doing a vacuum distillation with a Hempel column that has a sidearm. Can you remove the distillate from the apparatus while the distillation is underway?

Note: I am not sure why, but questions of this nature seem to draw a lot of speculation and guesswork. I can speculate and make guesses myself; please answer only if you have actually done this before and know the answer.

OK I see.
If your septum is thick enough like a rubber stopper it will never deform enough to be able to be sucked up into the recipient and the transition hole will self obstruct once the seringue and pin are taken out of it.
Of course you will have a harder time to get your pin through it.

Why don't you make use of a roded tap? So you can close the tap...pressure equalize the receiver with distillate and collect the liquid then put it again into place, open slowly the tap to go back to full vaccuum. While the receiver is away the condensing liquid will accumulate a little above the tap.

You may also think to an anti-suck back valve on what the seringue may be placed.

[Edited on 7-4-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]

NaCl separe NaClO3

Laboratory of Liptakov - 7-4-2017 at 11:32

How apart NaClO3 from NaCl solution ? I have 100g mix NaClO3 + NaCl as dry crystals. This mix content : 50% NaCl + 50% NaClO3
Or also 10% NaCl + 90% NaClO3. It nobody know. Graph for NaCl is solubility 35g in 100g Water at 0 C. And 39g at 100 C.
For NaClO3 is graph solubility : 80g at 0 Cels. and 200g at 100 Celsia. Exist some method recrystallization. I look on all S-M, but not find describe exactly how to make. Especially making so, for relatively best purity on NaClO3. NaClO3 estimate stay as solution. But at how concentration create before heating on 100 C ? Dissolving 200g mix-salts in 100g H2O at 99 C ? And after what? Decrease slowly temperature on 50 C? And by 50 Celsius separe NaCl ? Or separe by zero Celsius all crysralls ? Thanks..........:cool:
Exist 1000 tutorials how to make KClO3 but nothing for NaClO3.

[Edited on 7-4-2017 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

yobbo II - 7-4-2017 at 12:07

You will simply love the mutual solubility graphs that are to be found here

http://www.oocities.org/capecanaveral/campus/5361/chlorate/s...

The best way to get solid sodium chlorate is to keep adding salt (NaCl) solution to your cell and keep running electricity into the cell untill solid sodium chlorate starts to appear on the cell bottom. Then cool and take out a crop of solid sodium chlorate. Keep running and adding salt solution.

 Pages:  1  ..  11    13    15  ..  19