| Pages:
1
..
6
7
8
9 |
markx
National Hazard
Posts: 645
Registered: 7-8-2003
Location: Northern kingdom
Member Is Offline
Mood: Very Jolly
|
|
The witness plates nicely complement my sand crushing test result, which indicated that the mix has roughly 88% higher brisance compared to pure
double salt. As can be seen 0,5g DS left almost identical damage compared to 0,25g mix. Though it is not correct to compare sand crushing results to
witness plates, the underlaying patterns do match quite well.
Exact science is a figment of imagination.......
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1335
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
ETN is much less sensitive on friction than SADS. Therefore is my idea, create mix, with maximum content ETN, which is still possible reliable
detonated in solid cavity. I recommend ratio for example 1:1 and try it. Mixing both under acetone and after from this create some grain on sieve 1 x
1 mm. For filling cavity. Output segment can be from 0,25 pure ETN. DDT segment from 0,15 ETN + 0,15 SADS. Advantage is, that at filling cavity we
not use pure and sensitive as classic primary, but less sensitive mix. Dr.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
Bert
Super Administrator
Posts: 2821
Registered: 12-3-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: " I think we are all going to die. I think that love is an illusion. We are flawed, my darling".
|
|
Silver acetylide has quite high sensitivity to static electricity, perhaps this might help address this?
| Quote: |
This invention relates to a process for reducing the sensitivity of primary explosives to initiation by electrostatic discharges, and to a primary
explosive composition having a reduced sensitivity to initiation by electrostatic discharges by virtue of the combination therewith of a polyol
polynitrate of low sensitivity, such as trimethylolethane trinitrate, in a small amount.
|
https://www.google.com/patents/US3461007
Rapopart’s Rules for critical commentary:
1. Attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly and fairly that your target says: “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it
that way.”
2. List any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
3. Mention anything you have learned from your target.
4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.
Anatol Rapoport was a Russian-born American mathematical psychologist (1911-2007).
|
|
|
agent_entropy
Hazard to Self
Posts: 91
Registered: 17-7-2006
Location: U.S.
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Bert  | Silver acetylide has quite high sensitivity to static electricity, perhaps this might help address this?
|
From what I can tell by handling it, the SADS:ETN (80:20) is indeed somewhat less sensitive to static electricity than pure SADS. I'm not sure how to
quantify it though.
Bonus tip: I realized that I could add some methanol or isopropanol to the water in the calcium carbide acetylene generator, in order to help control
the foaming.
|
|
|
MineMan
National Hazard
Posts: 998
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
hmm
What LoL is proposing should certainly work, but the issue is if this goes of the primary is now 4-8 times more powerful resulting in some bad damage.
It is interesting, but LoL, CHP works fine.
75mg of SADS fails to kick off PETN sometimes... so this could be a real help to that.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1335
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Of course, that CHP is during manipulation almost "indestructible" against SADS. But it is another thread. I also recommend CHP, than trouble with
sensitivity SADS....:-)
Dr.
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by agent_entropy | | Quote: Originally posted by Bert | Silver acetylide has quite high sensitivity to static electricity, perhaps this might help address this?
|
From what I can tell by handling it, the SADS:ETN (80:20) is indeed somewhat less sensitive to static electricity than pure SADS. I'm not sure how to
quantify it though.
Bonus tip: I realized that I could add some methanol or isopropanol to the water in the calcium carbide acetylene generator, in order to help control
the foaming. |
Nice idea to use alcohols as a foam killer...suds depressant.
A layer of organic oïl on top (0,5-1cm) or of benzine/ether/petroleum ether will do aswel 
[Edited on 31-10-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]
PH Z (PHILOU Zrealone)
"Physic is all what never works; Chemistry is all what stinks and explodes!"-"Life that deadly disease, sexually transmitted."(W.Allen)
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
CHP seems like nonsense since the starting perchlorate is quite sensitive primary and you won't (likely) be making small mg size batches like with
SA.DS plus the amount of handling during CHP synthesis is quite large. That's similair to the situation with NHN, where some hail it as a work of god,
yet they fail to remind that NHN is among the most static sensitive primaries or that un-dextrinated lead azide is more sensitive to friction than
HMTD and faar faar more sensitive to friction than TATP/DADP. It's like dangerous boasting about ones ability to get the right chemicals (being a
grown up with tons of NaN3 in the chems room). In the end of the day you still need remote handling, large pieces of paper with small amounts of said
primary, blast mitigation devices, cotton wrapped sticks and many layers of body protection.
Would it be possible to use another acid instead of HNO3 to create the needed acidic conditions? I mean, would a few drops of sulphuric acid be
enough? It (the sulphate) should be possible to wash it from the filter.
[Edited on 14-11-2017 by Rocinante]
|
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | CHP seems like nonsense since the starting perchlorate is quite sensitive primary and you won't (likely) be making small mg size batches like with
SA.DS plus the amount of handling during CHP synthesis is quite large. That's similair to the situation with NHN, where some hail it as a work of god,
yet they fail to remind that NHN is among the most static sensitive primaries or that un-dextrinated lead azide is more sensitive to friction than
HMTD and faar faar more sensitive to friction than TATP/DADP. It's like dangerous boasting about ones ability to get the right chemicals (being a
grown up with tons of NaN3 in the chems room). In the end of the day you still need remote handling, large pieces of paper with small amounts of said
primary, blast mitigation devices, cotton wrapped sticks and many layers of body protection.
Would it be possible to use another acid instead of HNO3 to create the needed acidic conditions? I mean, would a few drops of sulphuric acid be
enough? It (the sulphate) should be possible to wash it from the filter.
[Edited on 14-11-2017 by Rocinante] |
First part...
What starting perchlorate into CuHexP (Copper hexamine perchlorate) is a primary? NH4ClO4 or Cu(ClO4)2?
==> Not into this world sorry
Second part...
Your question is unclear what are you refering to? SADS, CHP, CTAP, HMTD, else?
[Edited on 17-11-2017 by PHILOU Zrealone]
PH Z (PHILOU Zrealone)
"Physic is all what never works; Chemistry is all what stinks and explodes!"-"Life that deadly disease, sexually transmitted."(W.Allen)
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I was talking about Dr. Liptakov synthesis on Vimeo, where he uses 10 g of TACP to synthetise CHP - I was pointing out that this TACP is quite
sensitive and handling 10 g of it is simly too big of a risk (even though you might handle it in its not completely dry state). The fact that CHP is
quite unsensitive should not lure anybody to directly handle/store 10 g of TACP. It requires somewhat more of a work than making SA.DS or lead azide,
so a person is tempted to go into the gram scale, rather than to quickly make 400 mg of SA.DS or LA for use in blasting caps. If you use another
route, without the TCAP step and in small quantitiy, than yes .. it is indeed a workable solution.
SA.DS - I understand that the nitric acid should be ideal due to the common ion effect, making the precipitation of SA.DS easier, but would it be
possible to avoid the use of HNO3 and use something else instead .. like a few drops of sulphuric acid, has this been tried out?
[Edited on 17-11-2017 by Rocinante]
[Edited on 17-11-2017 by Rocinante]
|
|
|
MineMan
National Hazard
Posts: 998
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Rocinante | I was talking about Dr. Liptakov synthesis on Vimeo, where he uses 10 g of TACP to synthetise CHP - I was pointing out that this TACP is quite
sensitive and handling 10 g of it is simly too big of a risk (even though you might handle it in its not completely dry state). The fact that CHP is
quite unsensitive should not lure anybody to directly handle/store 10 g of TACP. It requires somewhat more of a work than making SA.DS or lead azide,
so a person is tempted to go into the gram scale, rather than to quickly make 400 mg of SA.DS or LA for use in blasting caps. If you use another
route, without the TCAP step and in small quantitiy, than yes .. it is indeed a workable solution.
SA.DS - I understand that the nitric acid should be ideal due to the common ion effect, making the precipitation of SA.DS easier, but would it be
possible to avoid the use of HNO3 and use something else instead .. like a few drops of sulphuric acid, has this been tried out?
[Edited on 17-11-2017 by Rocinante]
[Edited on 17-11-2017 by Rocinante] |
I have handled much much more than 10Grams of TACP at a time, but have not stored it of course. The point it, it is not a primary explosive, it can
be treated like PETN. Look, CHP is the best around, unless you can come up with another DDT system. Of course, there are main charges that are safe
and can DDT from just a blackpowder cap... but those are kind of a secret of mine, but now you know, they are out there! Also, there are several AN
mixtures that 2grams of flash (even confined in plastic) will bring to full orde Report back to us, but trust me, you don't even need a primary  . I can say this because I have invented a complete binary system... including the det
[Edited on 21-11-2017 by MineMan]
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Has it been confirmed? I mean, is this true for the average crystal modifications? I was under the impression that TACP is about average primary (from
impact test on youtube) and that CHP is at the level of ETN/PETN ..and..with very low friction sensitivity. If so, than I stand corrected. We're
little bit OT.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1335
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: cool.gif
|
|
Primary substance is too broad a concept. They should be divided into at least 3 degrees. Depending on the hazard for general (laboratory) handling.
Example: 3 = FHg..... 2 = Lead Azide, (next?)...... 1 = TACP, CHP, NHN (next?)...... 0 = TACN. (ETN? MHN?) ETN is between primary - secondary edge? If
someon said, that This is primary, Is it as say = she is the Witch! You all are an Witches!
Development of primarily - secondary substances CHP (2015) Lithex (2022) Brightelite (2023) Nitrocelite (2024)
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The problem is that there is no real correlation between friction, impact and static sensitivity. NHN is quite friction/impact insensitive, but it's
static sensitive (I think). Undextrinated lead azide, esp. the beta modification is very sensitive to friction...from the prof. tested ones.. only
DDNP seems to be good in all 3.. IIRC.... ETN is 5× less friction sensitive than MF.. that's slightly into the secondary cat, no real static problems
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Here is a book that contains a section on SA and SA.DS:
http://pyrotechnics.no-ip.org/files/Primary%20Explosives3.pd...
|
|
|
DrManhattan
Harmless
Posts: 32
Registered: 24-1-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Im having touble with my SADS. I made a batch about 6 months ago and have been using the primary from this batch to fire my charges. All worked well
at the start with 5 continuous charges going off without a hitch. Now using the same batch i get 100% misfires. My cap has always been 700mg pressed
etn - 300 loose etn - 200mg SADS, set off with an E Match. E match always went off but even though it was in direct contact with the SADS it didn't
ignite it. The product was an off white - pale brown color at the start but it turned blackish so i thought id make a new batch. still get problems
with this fresh new batch. It seems as though either none of the primary goes off or only a fraction of it does. I took a misfired cap apart and
poured out the primary and put a blow torch to it and it crackles as apposed to all going off in one bang. Any idea on whats going on?
|
|
|
markx
National Hazard
Posts: 645
Registered: 7-8-2003
Location: Northern kingdom
Member Is Offline
Mood: Very Jolly
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by DrManhattan | | Im having touble with my SADS. I made a batch about 6 months ago and have been using the primary from this batch to fire my charges. All worked well
at the start with 5 continuous charges going off without a hitch. Now using the same batch i get 100% misfires. My cap has always been 700mg pressed
etn - 300 loose etn - 200mg SADS, set off with an E Match. E match always went off but even though it was in direct contact with the SADS it didn't
ignite it. The product was an off white - pale brown color at the start but it turned blackish so i thought id make a new batch. still get problems
with this fresh new batch. It seems as though either none of the primary goes off or only a fraction of it does. I took a misfired cap apart and
poured out the primary and put a blow torch to it and it crackles as apposed to all going off in one bang. Any idea on whats going on?
|
Could you describe your preparation process of the double salt?
Have you changed something compared to preparation of the initial functional batch (source of Ag or acetylene)?
Exact science is a figment of imagination.......
|
|
|
DrManhattan
Harmless
Posts: 32
Registered: 24-1-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Ratios i used were - 8.7ml H2O
- 1.3ml 68%HNO3
- 700mg silver nitrate
Acetylene is from a gas bottle and passed through a solution of copper sulfate. Silver nitrate solution was kept between 65-70 degrees Celsius during
the reaction. Passed gas through the solution for 3 minutes. SADS is then filtered and neutralized to get rid of the acid. The end product is
certainly SADS or at the very least silver acetylide. Makes a nice bang even in the smallest amounts but after putting it into a cap it just seems to
go dud. No change was made to the original successful batch. I have even tried alternates to the E match including nichrome wire in direct contact
with the primary and even smokeless powder + e match. Smokeless powder ignited but didnt even set the primary off, very unusual indeed. I even had a
cap where at least a small amount of the primary detonated as the cap was shattered (i use 10mm plastic test tubes as the housing for the cap) but i
recovered some silver acetylide after sifting though the remains.
I attached 3 images. I use an ear plug as a plug to keep everything together. Green plug was the failed cap with partial detonation of primary. Orange
plug cap was a successful cap. Only difference to the green was a larger 2 gram base charge of etn. SADS of both came from the same batch.
  
|
|
|
markx
National Hazard
Posts: 645
Registered: 7-8-2003
Location: Northern kingdom
Member Is Offline
Mood: Very Jolly
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by DrManhattan | SADS is then filtered and neutralized to get rid of the acid. The end product is certainly SADS or at the very least silver acetylide.
|
What did you use to neutralize the end product...something caustic? In fact I would suspect that this step might be the culprit here. Omit the
neutralization step, just wash with coupious amounts (within reason) of distilled water and store damp if you dare not dry bigger amounts.
Apart from neutralisation the approach you used should theoretically produce a potent end result that is quite stable against visual degradation due
to light. At least in my personal experience. Nor has it ever failed to ignite if a flame was used. You mentioned that the product darkened upon
storage....how long did it take for that to happen and was it stored in dark or in open light?
Exact science is a figment of imagination.......
|
|
|
DrManhattan
Harmless
Posts: 32
Registered: 24-1-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by markx |
What did you use to neutralize the end product...something caustic? In fact I would suspect that this step might be the culprit here. Omit the
neutralization step, just wash with coupious amounts (within reason) of distilled water and store damp if you dare not dry bigger amounts.
You mentioned that the product darkened upon storage....how long did it take for that to happen and was it stored in dark or in open light?
|
I used sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the end product. Took about a month for it to turn black. Stored under acetone in a storage box in complete
darkness. It was still reliable after 2-3 months of storage, only as of late has it been troublesome. I have been thinking of trying Mercury Fulminate
if i cant get my silver acetylide to work reliably.
|
|
|
markx
National Hazard
Posts: 645
Registered: 7-8-2003
Location: Northern kingdom
Member Is Offline
Mood: Very Jolly
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by DrManhattan |
I used sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the end product. Took about a month for it to turn black. Stored under acetone in a storage box in complete
darkness. It was still reliable after 2-3 months of storage, only as of late has it been troublesome. I have been thinking of trying Mercury Fulminate
if i cant get my silver acetylide to work reliably. |
Omit the bicarbonate treatment....I fear this may be the main cause of your instability and performance issues. The double salt in essence is a
nitrate complex of an acidic nature and I fear the bicarbonate treatment shall strip it (at least partly) from the nitrate. Hence the weak performance
and instability. Also perhaps the acetone storage is not the best of options....flammable and volatile liquid over a friction and impact sensitive
compound does not perhaps sound like the best approach. What if a piece of residue gets caught between the lid of the container and dries out. Next
time you open it and the stuff goes "crack" and ignites the fumes....just a dark scenario, but still.
My small samples have been storing moist in a PE baggy just fine for several years in relative darkness and cool climate without any noticeable
darkening of the product. It does not dry out and keeps just fine.
So try it without the bicarb and in simple water damp storage....compare the results. If still problems arise, make sure your thermometer is not
"crooked" and the 65-70C range is really true. Also you may try to slightly increase the acid content in the synthesis stage if all else fails, it
should not worsen the odds of getting superior product.
I've had weak product from higher as well as lower temperature ranges that showed high sensitivity towards light and also mechanical factors, as well
as a weak performance.
Your acetylene comes from a gas cylinder? A welding grade product I presume? They usually have acetone mixed into the gas tank to lower the
sensitivity of compressed acetylene in storage (I'm not totally sure it is still practiced, but I know that it was done)....perhaps the acetone
vapours also have an effect on the synthesis? If you can access some calcium carbide, then it would be useful to try the synthesis with the generated
gas and compare results. Generated acetylene purity seems not to have a profound effect upon final product, so thorough filtration and washing of the
gas is not required. At least I've never bothered and have had no issues.
MF is by far more uncomfortable, poisonous and probably also more sensitive than double salt. I trust it would be wiser to work carefully towards
perfecting the double salt synthesis than engaging in the mercury route....
Hope this helps and be safe in your practices!
Exact science is a figment of imagination.......
|
|
|
Herr Haber
International Hazard
Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by markx |
Your acetylene comes from a gas cylinder? A welding grade product I presume? They usually have acetone mixed into the gas tank to lower the
sensitivity of compressed acetylene in storage (I'm not totally sure it is still practiced, but I know that it was done)....perhaps the acetone
vapours also have an effect on the synthesis? If you can access some calcium carbide, then it would be useful to try the synthesis with the generated
gas and compare results. Generated acetylene purity seems not to have a profound effect upon final product, so thorough filtration and washing of the
gas is not required. At least I've never bothered and have had no issues.
|
Acetylene is not compressed. It's absorbed in acetone, the bottle is filled with a porous media. This has not changed much in over 100 years as far as
I know.
Generated acetylene can be quite impure depending on your calcium carbide.
I get mine from China for my carbide lamps. I usually pay 3-5 Euros per kilograms.
Impurities will mostly be H2S but I was also given a piece of shiny dense metal that looked like lead but was probably Arsenic (used in the process to
get the CaC2 out of the mold more easily)
|
|
|
DrManhattan
Harmless
Posts: 32
Registered: 24-1-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by markx |
So try it without the bicarb and in simple water damp storage....compare the results. If still problems arise, make sure your thermometer is not
"crooked" and the 65-70C range is really true. Also you may try to slightly increase the acid content in the synthesis stage if all else fails, it
should not worsen the odds of getting superior product.
I've had weak product from higher as well as lower temperature ranges that showed high sensitivity towards light and also mechanical factors, as well
as a weak performance.
Your acetylene comes from a gas cylinder? A welding grade product I presume? They usually have acetone mixed into the gas tank to lower the
sensitivity of compressed acetylene in storage (I'm not totally sure it is still practiced, but I know that it was done)....perhaps the acetone
vapours also have an effect on the synthesis? If you can access some calcium carbide, then it would be useful to try the synthesis with the generated
gas and compare results. Generated acetylene purity seems not to have a profound effect upon final product, so thorough filtration and washing of the
gas is not required. At least I've never bothered and have had no issues.
MF is by far more uncomfortable, poisonous and probably also more sensitive than double salt. I trust it would be wiser to work carefully towards
perfecting the double salt synthesis than engaging in the mercury route....
Hope this helps and be safe in your practices! |
Yep acetylene came from a bottle for welding. I'll give it a go without the bicarb and see how to performs over time. Thank you for your expertise and
advice, it's been of great help to me.
|
|
|
Rocinante
Hazard to Others
Posts: 121
Registered: 13-11-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Use tubes that are about 5 cm longer and fill the airspace with cotton wool. Touch only the upper end for safe manipulation. Use the bucket method or
something comparable.
|
|
|
snooby
Hazard to Self
Posts: 88
Registered: 24-5-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
In this video, they are using a solution of copper sulfate to wash the raw acetylene gas. Has anyone tried this?
https://youtu.be/F_TIVJS-lFc
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
6
7
8
9 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
