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

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Heavy Explosives?
APO
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 627
Registered: 28-12-2012
Location: China Lake
Member Is Offline

Mood: Refluxing

[*] posted on 30-4-2013 at 17:21
Heavy Explosives?


I've done a lot of searching about this and only found this, but it was more about fusion explosives, than what I'm thinking. I'm wondering if explosives enriched with heavy isotopes will effect the working mass of the detonation to show any measurable increase in power. After all it could increase the density slightly, and the higher affinity of oxygen towards deuterium could result in a slightly more exothermic reaction when exposed to protium. Just bored, wanted to see what you guys think of this idea.



"Damn it George! I told you not to drop me!"
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Motherload
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 245
Registered: 12-8-2012
Location: Sewer
Member Is Offline

Mood: Shitty

[*] posted on 30-4-2013 at 20:52


You will end up with a really expensive isotopic variant of an existing energetic that performs maybe marginally better.
Density isn't the only key ..... Chemistry stays the same.




"Chance favours the prepared mind"
"Fuck It !! We'll do it live !!"
View user's profile View All Posts By User
APO
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 627
Registered: 28-12-2012
Location: China Lake
Member Is Offline

Mood: Refluxing

[*] posted on 30-4-2013 at 22:29


Thanks. Just a thought.



"Damn it George! I told you not to drop me!"
View user's profile View All Posts By User
KonkreteRocketry
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 165
Registered: 12-11-2012
Location: Dubai
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 1-5-2013 at 01:35


Tantalum is one of the heaviest metal i think that can burn so well with oxygen, although 3 times less than magnesium.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Ral123
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 735
Registered: 31-12-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 1-5-2013 at 02:54


That's why the iron cases of the bombs are invented, even trough they get pulverised.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Trotsky
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 166
Registered: 6-2-2013
Location: US
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 1-5-2013 at 21:02


Replacing atoms with radioactive isotopes could make for an incredibly expensive time wasting and ultimately useless dirty bomb. Not something anyone would do, of course, there are better ways to that evil end.

I would be interested in radioactive analogues of explosives. Replacing carbon-12 with carbon-11 or 14 (the latter probably easier to work with) and hydrogen with tritium would be interesting. I wonder how radioactive decay would influence sensitivity. Could a molecule detonate due to decay?

Alternatively, and this is something I know nothing about, could detonation trigger decay? Have radioactive explosives been studied? Not the highly enriched uranium type, that is.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Antiswat
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1616
Registered: 12-12-2012
Location: Dysrope (aka europe)
Member Is Offline

Mood: dangerously practical

[*] posted on 2-5-2013 at 08:37


wolfram should be easier to get a hold of as TIG welding electrodes, its density is the same as gold; 19.3g/cm3
sorry if i completely missed the range of answers wanted :s




~25 drops = 1mL @dH2O viscocity - STP
Truth is ever growing - but without context theres barely any such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solubility_table
http://www.trimen.pl/witek/calculators/stezenia.html
View user's profile View All Posts By User
APO
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 627
Registered: 28-12-2012
Location: China Lake
Member Is Offline

Mood: Refluxing

[*] posted on 4-5-2013 at 11:11


Lets keep it to stable isotopes , I want no ideas of dirty bombs floating around.



"Damn it George! I told you not to drop me!"
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Motherload
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 245
Registered: 12-8-2012
Location: Sewer
Member Is Offline

Mood: Shitty

[*] posted on 4-5-2013 at 14:16


Lead azide has a density of 4.7 g/cm3
Doesn't help it too much.
Gamma radiation cause PETN to deteriorate faster.
May not be the best to have isotopic energetics.




"Chance favours the prepared mind"
"Fuck It !! We'll do it live !!"
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Trotsky
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 166
Registered: 6-2-2013
Location: US
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 4-5-2013 at 14:18


Don't be ridiculous, no one wanting to make a dirty bomb would make it with unstable isotopic variants of known explosives. That's retarded.

Would maybe be interesting from a materials science perspective but not as a weapon
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User

  Go To Top