Log in

View Full Version : Smokeless Powder & Detonation


Axt
July 1st, 2003, 01:24 AM
I converted a movie of a SP test for some recent thread that I can no longer find, so now its here.

Various powders were tested for detonation. download the move here (last link) (http://www.geocities.com/roguemovies/index.html) the download is quite big and the movie is pretty crap so only bother if you feel the need.

The charges were kept consistant with same containment (65ml plastic sample bottle), detonator (commercial #8) and target (wooden beam).

The powders tested were the following:
Hercules green-dot - medium fast double based shotshell powder, low density flake grain.
Hercules Herco - Slower double based shotshell powder, low density flake grain.
Win296 - medium burning double base rifle powder, ball grain.
Win540 - faster burning double base rifle powder, ball grain.
Win748 - slower burning double base rifle powder, ball grain.
AR2207 - reasonably fast single based rifle powder, tubular grain.

Im quite sure none achieved full detonation, so dont take this as a test of power, rather of sensitivity. The only powder to not detonate at all was hercules herco. (note that "hercules" is now "alliant")

The only two powders to break the beam were win540 (the most powerful) followed by Hercules green-dot these two were considerably more powerful then the others. Strangely the single based AR2207 outperformed the other 3 double based powders coming third in power/damage to the beam which nearly broke through. More confinement would be needed for full detonation with these powders, loose powder was found on the ground after detonation.

Things I remember trying with smokeless that didnt work were:
- Casting into a block and shooting it - wont detonate.
- Trying to sensitise NM with double based - didnt detonate when mixed into a honey like consistancy.
- Mixing NM with single based wont detonate, pitty as it forms a perfect plastic.

Halo
July 1st, 2003, 01:42 AM
I have done alot of tests with smokeless powders and noticed the same thing you did. they are all different!
were you using detonator or just a normal fuse?
have you ever made AP?(sorry if its off the subject) how much more powerful is Ap than the best smokeless youve used?(assuming you have made it and made it correctly)
Thank you-Halo

Axt
July 1st, 2003, 12:16 PM
Yes - all charges contained a detonator, view the attempted 'herco' det. to see what a detonator alone will do.

Its not easily compared with AP, the quantity and confinement is a large factor in SP detonation where it isnt nearly as much with AP. While yes, I have done both ive never done side by side comparison with equal quantities and significant confinemant to find out.

Remember that the movie has no bearing on the true power of SP dets. only sensitivity.

Halo
July 1st, 2003, 04:51 PM
yea it was a bad question. sorry. I alread knew the answer any way(just what u said)
i use gal. steel pipe from ace hardwear or home depot for my pipes(also end caps suck they break before pipe splits so you should use couplers with plugs.
were your shots (detonators) improvised? if so, how?

Axt
July 1st, 2003, 05:18 PM
Commercial dets. were used for uniformity, the answers to all these questions were in my first post.

Cricket
July 2nd, 2003, 02:04 AM
Damn, what a good topic. I have been looking for something along these lines. I have a lot of questions about detonating SP. The main ones are: Is it best to leave the SP a powder, or make it into a solid (kind of) with acetone or another suitable solvent (if so, what is the optimal size to have a reasonable drying time)? How much detonator does a fella need to get it to detonate under ideal confinement and density? What is the ideal confinement and density? Sorry for all Q's and so A's, I have no experience in detonating SP. Any answers will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.


PS, Isn't the best DBSP to use for detonation Alliant Bullseye (http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/product_catalog.php)?

Axt
July 2nd, 2003, 01:46 PM
I dont know the answers, but from what ive done I expect PVC would be enough confinemant and a #8 det. will be enough to detonate it. Ive never tried to detonate cast SP except from shooting it, though it is something I can try if noone else knows the answer (i dont think it will be sensitive enough).

From the movie you can generalise that the faster the powder the more sensitive to detonation, the two fastest were the most powerful for their brands. So I have no dought that bullseye, quite a lot faster then green-dot will readily detonate.

But if your talking about power more then sensitivity its harder to say, as densities vary considerably between powders, bullseye is only 0.64 the density of Win540.

Heres a couple references -
Powder Burn Rates (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1221/powders.htm)
Powder Densities (http://www.leeprecision.com/instruct/data/VMD%20List.pdf)

nbk2000
July 2nd, 2003, 02:37 PM
The DB powders all have NG in them, so this is why they all detonate if sufficiently shocked.

To detonate SBSP requires the addition of a small amount of water into the mass to remove all air voids. Read my PDF article of the use of smokeless powder as an explosive. A #8 is inadequate. You'll need a booster to adequately shock it into detonating.

Axt
July 2nd, 2003, 04:59 PM
How can you make such generalised statements when ive just shown that different types of powders have significantly different detonation properties, nor was there a clear line between the DBSP's and the SBSP.

"To detonate SBSP requires the addition of a small amount of water into the mass to remove all air voids"

Where did you get that from? Its seems like a worthy idea to test.

Patents are a good source of ideas, but be careful when quoting "facts" from them.

nbk2000
July 2nd, 2003, 11:55 PM
Allow me to enlighten you then, courtesy of my PDF. :)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The information here came mainly from an old book called "Compressed gun cotton for military use with an introduction on Modern gun cotton, its manufacture, properties and analysis" by Max von Förster, 1886. (Now that's OLD SCHOOL knowledge! :))

USING GUN COTTON AS AN EXPLOSIVE
Dry gun cotton is much easier to detonate than wet gun cotton, but it's not as powerful. And trying to compress a large quantity of gun cotton to the required density is a pain. The solution the book presented was to take granulated gun cotton (large granules over 1 inch cubed), fill the shell with the granules, and then fill the gaps with melted paraffin wax to consolidate it into a single mass. Then a primer of dried granules (about 20% by weight of wet granules) is placed into the shell, gaps filled with wax, and it is this that is primed with the detonator.

An important detail about the granules is that they are taken damp from the tumbler that's granulated them and dipped in acetate to form a tough skin on the outside of the granules to keep them moist inside.

Axt
July 3rd, 2003, 11:03 PM
I fail to see the relevance, it says wet (with something?) gun cotton (NOT! SBSP) is less sensitive then dry gun cotton.

I believe the only correct answer to "Does smokeless detonate / how sensitive is it / how powerful is it" is that there is a different answer for each type of powder.

knowledgehungry
July 4th, 2003, 12:24 AM
I think all smokeless will detonate, the amount of work required to do so will vary, as long as your smokeless is nitrocellulose it should be detonatable.

nbk2000
July 4th, 2003, 12:57 AM
I fail to see the relevance, it says wet (with something?) gun cotton (NOT! SBSP) is less sensitive then dry gun cotton.


To answer your question, which I already have once before, I shall requote myself:


To detonate SBSP requires the addition of a small amount of water into the mass to remove all air voids.


Are you saying that you don't know that the term "gun cotton" is old time terminology for what we now call SBSP? Seems someone needs to expand their vocabulary before trying to correct someone trying to help them. ;)

"Dry gun cotton is much easier to detonate than wet gun cotton, but it's not as powerful."

The little bit that detonates scatters the rest of the loose powder.

You need to consolidate it into a solid mass of proper density for it to explode properly. This means wet. Just like ANFO, SBSP has a critical density which it must be loaded to before it'll properly propagate an explosive shockwave. If it's too low, then you get a burn or low-order partial detonation.

NG-type double bases have the NG to propagate the explosive shock, something the single base does NOT have.

Smokeless WILL detonate. The power and ease with which it does so will vary depending on many factors.

Axt
July 4th, 2003, 04:19 AM
I know perfectly well what gun cotton is, and I have no reason to believe that the gun cotton you have made reference to is anything other then straight unprocessed nitrocellulose, it wasnt until the 1900's that modern progressive burning powders were developed. Seems someone needs to check their history before trying to correct someone. ;)

The passage you have refered to only refers to wetness being used to increase power but detrimental to sensitivity. Theres no reference to dry powder not carrying the shockwave. Your statements and the passage contradict each other, wetting it to improve density but in the process losing sensitivity by wetting it - where will you end up, more or less sensitive....

Ive been careful not to say wetting smokeless is a bad idea, simply because I do not know as it could well help carry a shockwave throughout the charge, nor do I think you know if it will work. A 117 year old reference within the context of smokeless powder can at best be a source of ideas, not to be taken as modern fact. But rest assured it will be tested.

Mr Cool
July 4th, 2003, 06:44 AM
A while ago I did a few tests to find a substance that would increase the sensitivity of NC. I found that powdered KClO3 does a great job, rendering SP from 8mm blanks and 12 guage shotgun shells, as well as home-made NC containing around 12.5% N, easily detonatable with a hammer blow.
In all cases the NC was mixed with acetone to form a sticky mess, and then the KClO3 was kneeded in until it was uniform, then it was pressed through a sieve to form little grains which were allowed to dry. They could be pressed into containers while still very slightly plastic, but after almost all of the acetone had evapourated, to reduce the number and size of voids (or at least to make them more regular).
I tried a few ratios up to OB'd mixtures, but didn't actually do any tests to compare their sensitivity to each other. I just found that they were more sensitive than straight NC.

xyz
July 4th, 2003, 11:23 PM
Axt, about what you said about Smokeless powder and NM forming a nice plastique but being unable to detonate it, NM can be sensitized by the addition of acids (in ANNM, the NM is sensitized by acidity in the AN) so you could just add a small amount of an acid to it. IIRC bases work too.

green beret
July 5th, 2003, 02:55 AM
I thought that in ANNM, the nitromethane was sensitised by the ammonia ion in the ammonium nitrate? I'm probably wrong but I had always thought that, thats all.

Is Hercules green dot still available? According to makeshift arsenal, it has the highest NG content.

To detonate the smokeless, you could try it in heavy steel pipe, inside another slighlty bigger steel pipe, so as it gives double wall thickness. You'd want a large diameter pipe though, and heavy threaded encaps, you could also then put this into a bucket of wet sand or set it in concrete, for extra confinement, just while you are testing, to see what will actualy detonate and what won't.

Axt
July 5th, 2003, 04:58 AM
Very interesting Mr C, though I have no access to it to test for myself. Perhaps the salts that are typically too reactive to have any real use can be used with nitrocellulose, such as the hypochlorites?

Yep, NM/SBSP is a very nice plastic that holds its form well and sticks to things, though not your hands which is good. Ive heard of bases sensitising NM though acids is new to me (NM is already acidic) though the amines are likely more user friendly. Perhaps the Nitronate salts could also be added.

'Hercules' green-dot isnt still available but 'Alliant' green-dot is ;) . Though I havnt actually seen it in Australia since its hercules days. I only have access to winchester (odin) and ADI (Australian defence industry) powders locally so im not the best to ask. Also MA mentions bullseye as the highest NG content commonly available not green-dot, Cordite is probably the best if you can find it which contains 58% NG! check old 303 cartridges to find it. I'll point out that there is a mistake in MA, Win 760 is a double based powder not single as it says.

I really think you can get away with PVC if using a fast DBSP pistol powder, I know ive done it with improvised dets. though they have always been a bit excessive. Ill try a #8 to find out for sure.

knowledgehungry
July 5th, 2003, 12:40 PM
The ammonium ion is an acid...NH4+H2O-->H3O+NH3 acting as an acid...

Cricket
July 6th, 2003, 02:09 AM
Like Axt said, very interesting Mr Cool. Do you recall the ratios by any chance? Do you know if this will detonate from flame without or with confinement or does it still need a det? Anyone know of anything else that can be used as a sensitiser thats as simple as this? This seems to be a good improvised explosive. Not too expensive, widely available, not much chemistry goin' on either. Thanks everyone.

Mr Cool
July 6th, 2003, 12:38 PM
I don't know about hypochlorites Axt, they generally don't have long shelf-lives and I wouldn't like the idea of chlorine forming in situ in my NC!
I think chlorates would be the best, since they have a good kinetic stability. Permanganates, hypochlorites etc seem too eager to decompose for my liking. Nitrates didn't seem to make it much more sensitive, perchlorates are generally expensive and hard to get, and AN was a pain in the ass to keep dry while making the mixture!

It still needs a det (or blow), at least in the quantities I was using. Maybe in large quantities you could get a DDT, but it's wasteful to do it that way since a load is used up making the DDT.
Ratios won't be too important. Try 10-20% KClO3. Like I said, I never found out which was the most sensitive from the ones I tried. Or you could go right up to OB balanced mixtures (about 40% KClO3 with a good grade of NC) or beyond (kind of like a cheddite, but with a much better fuel :)). It depends on which you have the best access too, NC or KClO3. Use more of whichever is cheaper/easier to get. I expect low % of KClO3 will give the best power, maybe 5-10%.

Hang-Man
December 22nd, 2003, 08:26 PM
I want to know more about Cordite, has anyone made any? Mega dosn't have a synth on his site (i suppose it's a comp..) and it sounds kick-ass. Theres a nice article on it here : http://100.1911encyclopedia.org/C/CO/CORDITE.htm
and a search of the forum produced little.

xyz
December 22nd, 2003, 09:28 PM
Cordite is a mixture composed of appproximately 60% NG, 35% NC, and 5% Petroleum Jelly (Vaseline). It was used in detcord and as the propellant in old .303 ammunition.

EDIT: I just read the link you posted, you would have found the info in there if you had looked properly

Hang-Man
December 22nd, 2003, 09:53 PM
I know, I read it. I know what its made of. But just because I know what's in it dosn't mean a can make any ;-). Has anyone made a succesful batch is what I'm asking.

Droehner
January 14th, 2004, 08:33 AM
Hello,
is it possible to make Amidpulver (AN+C+Kno3 improved Smokeless powder) with a litte percent AP in it to a better proppelant Mix or Explosive ? This were quiet impressive :)

Rhadon
January 14th, 2004, 12:36 PM
Use a translation program if you need to. It's quite annoying to tell three newbies per day that they have to work on their posting style.

And don't post questions into the next-best topic. Post them to appropriate existing ones or start a new topic in the Water Cooler if it hasn't been discussed before. Last warning!

To answer your question, I don't think that adding AP would help you to achieve the desired effect.

Desmikes
January 14th, 2004, 08:42 PM
Adding AP to anything to improve it's deflagration rate will not work b/c it doesn't just "burn quickly" it tends to detonate whenever it gets a chance. For example, even in single crystal quantities, when mixed well with KNO3 based rocket fuel and packed tight, will crack and send deflagrating mixture all over the place, it will even put it out.

HVD
January 25th, 2004, 01:59 PM
There's been quite a bit posted here over the years about getting smokless powder to detonate, many people have varying opinions etc etc so i thought I'd just go and try it a while ago, but before I did, i had a dream about it!

From my dream i can tell you, that in my 'experience' I wouldn't worry too much (from a practical point of view) about sensitising it. Alliant Bullseye (D.B.S.P. , high if not highest NG content of common powders) will detonate when confined in nothing more than a film canister, loosly packed, and initiated with approx. 1.5 grams of hand pressed HMTD.

This dream has recurred quite a few times and it seems reliable. Better confinement seems to help but it certainly isn't essential to get it to detonate.

Anyway, just thought I'd chuck my 2p into the equation.

HVD.

p.s. - It'll even detonate when put into a zip lock bag and wrapped with duct tape to keep it's shape. Simply slit a small hole in the bag when ready to use and insert the cap :-) It's almost like using some form of plastic explsove :-) hehe. I've noted that in my dream, when using just a bag things arn't as reliable as with a rigid container. Perhpas more explosive in the cap would help things.

dbooksta
May 11th, 2007, 01:04 AM
I came across this (http://members.shaw.ca/cronhelm/DevelopSubsonic.html) during some other research:

The ultimate danger in subsonic loading is a phenomenon known as Secondary Explosive Effect (SEE). ... SEE is the result of slow or incomplete ignition of small amounts of smokeless powder. The powder smolders and releases explosive gases which, when finally ignited, detonate in a high order explosion.

Does anyone know of a scientific basis for such a phenomenon?

If so I wonder if the effect could be reliably exploited to detonate SP using only flame ignition.

Unless anyone has experience or knowledge that could advance this, one might start putting together small cartridges with a thick bridge element igniter to slowly heat them and see if they detonate before deflagrating.

Charles Owlen Picket
May 11th, 2007, 10:42 AM
This is a phenomenon that occurs in the loading of rounds for a firearm and although related to the general topic, there are issues that are quite diverse as well.

In the referenced page the issue is loading subsonic rounds and the 1st thing pointed to is the widening of the flash-hole of the casing. This is necessary to allow for complete combustion of the propellant. In the sited example the thrust of the work is to keep the DBSP working as propellant.

Thus we have 2 issues here. The first is that DBSP can be detonated via a true detonator. The primer in a modern smokeless powder weapon is not a detonator, per se'. It is made from less powerful initiators like lead styphnate, tetrazene and powdered glass compressing on an "anvil" via a firing pin. This in turn forms a flame-spit to ignite the DBSP and thus it becomes a propellant.

Where as in use with a proper detonator utilizing an explosive train, a shock wave initiates the powder and a detonation takes place. The problem for the hand-loader / reloader is where a small form of "fuse" is designed via a small flash hole and the smaller volume of powder finds incomplete combustion and instead of propellant - it forms an explosion within the chamber. This in turn is the cluster-fuck that pops the chamber of the rifle and turns that smile upside down.

Could flame be exploited to detonate SP? IMO - NO
The experimenter would still have an explosion if the SP is confined but "detonation" would not be the proper term to describe the phenomenon. This is due to the slower start of combustion and those gases being responsible for the explosion. When gas build-up against a confinement is responsible for a pop, you generally do not have detonation.

I believe the moderator has mentioned that research toward the older terminology and science (19th century stuff) is useful in understanding the utility of things of this nature and I have found this to be very useful. The science of the past is VERY useful in home experimentation due to the progress that allows us to exploit their research with the tools available today.

SP can be a propellant or an HE depending upon the route of initiation. But the reality is that there are few ways toward detonation of a secondary except by the use of a primary. Gun Cotton & Blasting Oil can be brought to detonation with flame but there are circumstances that must be met that are not as mobile as the use of a true detonator. Thus the use of the term "reliably exploited to detonate", would be tough to form an all inclusive scenario.

CricketSquish
May 14th, 2007, 03:22 AM
Hello folks. I would like to report success with the detonation 1 pound kegs of Bullseye DBSP ( 40% NG (http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/MSDS/msds_bullseye.html)).

To me it has always seemed plenty sensitive, but I like to overcharge when I can. So I used ~9g pressed AP detonators in glass test tubes.

One charge was suspended in the air about 4' up to see if any confinement was necessary. It preformed just like the other one which was placed on the ground and mudcapped about 80%. The one on the ground might have preformed just slightly better due to capping it. I suspect complete detonation in both cases. I got good video of it. After I edit it, it will go to the FTP.

I have also tried to detonate SB (1 lb IMR 7828, tubular) in about the same unconfined manner, but failed miserably. No or very little detonation of SP. I think SB definatly needs confinement or to be made more sensitive.

howa22-250
May 31st, 2007, 11:39 AM
Just looking at the ADI "Smokeless Powders Handloaders Guide" ... here is the order of decreasing burning rates for ADI smokeless powders:

AS30N, AP50N, AS50N, AP70N, AP100, AR2205, AR2207, BenchMark 1, AR2219, Benchmark 2, AR2206, AR2206H, AR2208, AR2209, AR2213SC, AR2217, AR2225, AR2218.

Just out of interest, Alliant Red Dot is equivalent to AS30N ... Alliant Green Dot is equivalent to AS50N. Alliant Bullseye is faster than any ADI powder on offer, and is equivalent to "Vihtavuori N310" powder. There is a winning powder that tops even the Bullseye: "Norma R-1" ... anyone had any experience with this powder?!

Vitalis
October 15th, 2007, 08:59 AM
Alliant Bullseye WILL detonate using nothing more than a flash powder detonator. I have tested this several times and have a 100% success rate.

The flash powder is Potassium Perchlorate and German dark flake Aluminium. 7g of Potassium Perchlorate and 3g of Aluminium contained in a thick walled cardboard tube large enough to fit in a vitamin bottle with a little Bullseye added to the tube. The tube is about 2/3 full and gently flipped over and over to mix the Bullseye added to the flash in order to mix it properly.

Well mixed and fit in a hole cut out of the top of the vitamin bottle which is 2/3 filled with Bullseye.

The tube is capped and well taped with duct tape and added to the hole in the top of the vitamin bottle, which is then well taped with duct tape.The detonation is complete.

The use of a flash powder detonator eliminates the need for danger primaries like AP to detonate the Bullseye.

This will work with a simple safety fuse or an electric match.

My next test will be to find out if this device will detonate an AN/NM mix, but for that I have to go way out in the country and I can't do that right at the moment. Hopefully it will work, then AN/NM can be detonated using fairly safe detonators.

dbooksta
October 15th, 2007, 09:28 AM
Vitalis, how can you tell it is detonating? I don't mean to suggest I know better, but since you're mixing the "detonator" compound (FP) with the secondary compound (DBSP) it doesn't sound like a traditional explosive. I.e., the FP probably isn't triggering a wavefront in the secondary.

Given that SP deflagrates faster than you can blink an eye how could you distinguish burning from detonating in a sample like you describe? Since the FP is homogeneously distributed, and since both compounds deflagrate with heat, it seems one could just be seeing a "boosted" deflagration.

Vitalis
October 15th, 2007, 12:36 PM
Well, I can't measure the speed, but the destruction caused by the explosions seems to indicate a detonation. I just can't see a boosted deflagration producing these type of results. I wish I could record the explosions, but I live in a city, so I have to be far away when it actually goes off.

I do check back on the detonation site and the results are akin to dynamite. You are correct though, I can't prove 100% that it is an actual detonation instead of a boosted deflagration, but if my test to see if it will detonate an AN/NM mix works, I will be a happy camper. I still think the FP is producing enough of a shockwave to trigger detonation of the SP though.

If someone with more resources that I can prove or disprove my theory, I would welcome the results.

robinhood1532
October 15th, 2007, 05:35 PM
dbooksta, I don’t think Vitalis is describing a homogeneous mixture of detonating compound and secondary compound. It sounds like the detonator is very separate from the Bullseye, being composed of mostly FP contained in the cardboard tube, which is then inserted into the vitamin bottle of Bullseye. I don’t know, maybe there is no misunderstanding here and I’m the one in the dark.

Vitalis
October 15th, 2007, 06:43 PM
I believe the FP did in fact detonate the SP. I checked on the last test I performed and it was placed on a slab of concrete in an open field. I scoured the area for an sign of the vitamin bottle and duct tape, and there was none to be found. I believe that if it was simply a case of the FP being the detonator there would have been pieces of the plastic bottle and duct tape strewn around the area.

I searched the area for a good half hour and there was no trace of any of the components I used in constructing the device.

I am currently wetting some AN and dissolving the water, which I will keep in a tupperware container with some Drierite™ (CaO4S) to keep it dry until I can test if it will detonate AN/NM.

If that works, I will be damn sure that the NG is detonating. Hopefully it will work, as I would rather not use AP or other primaries if I don't have to.

nbk2000
October 15th, 2007, 07:41 PM
Try constructing a shaped charge using this FP/SP mix. If it's actually detonating, it'll leave a hole. If it's deflagerating like BP, it won't leave a hole. :)

Vitalis
October 15th, 2007, 08:03 PM
Good idea, though I've never constructed a shaped charge. I guess some research is in order. I'm running low on BP and cash right now and I need to find a new detonation location. I am currently scouting a new location for the test, it's hard when you live in the city like I do. I can't stick around when the device goes off, and returning to the scene of the crime is risky.

I'll find a place though, and I believe it will leave a hole as I believe it is detonating.

nbk2000
October 15th, 2007, 11:46 PM
Well, you can skip the shaped charge if you want, and just use a couple of ounces in a plastic pill bottle sitting on a thick steel plate.

If it detonates, it'll leave a dent in the plate. If it simply burns, no dent. :)

Vitalis
October 16th, 2007, 12:44 AM
That sounds much better. Now all I have to do is find a new detonation site. I seem to have used up all the suitable sites in my area. I'm getting a little nervous tempting fate by setting off explosives in this area.

LibertyOrDeath
October 16th, 2007, 01:05 AM
I still think the FP is producing enough of a shockwave to trigger detonation of the SP though.The FP might not be producing a shockwave so much as aiding a deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT). If you burn an adequate amount of explosive under enough confinement to allow heat and pressure to build sufficiently rapidly from deflagration, then a DDT can result. Presumably a boosted deflagration can aid this process. But whether this is actually happening, I don't know. A low-order detonation is another possibility.

Regarding the shaped-charge idea, that will be simply outstanding if Bullseye has a high enough VoD for that purpose.

nbk2000
October 16th, 2007, 02:55 AM
Most SP/NG double smokeless powders will explode with a VoD similar to that of TNT.

dbooksta
October 17th, 2007, 10:44 AM
Vitalis, the fact that the container of your FP/DBSP sample disintegrated without a trace does suggest something closer to detonation.

If we can get an explosion out of an AN-based secondary by igniting FP then I would be much more confident it's detonating, since (I believe) AN doesn't deflagrate.

Note that the question of using FP detonaters is over here also (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=5715&page=3). And I'm still looking for a chance to run controlled tests using FP to detonate ammonal.

Vitalis, for your AN/NM tests do you intend to homogenize the FP in the secondary? As RobinHood1532 suggested I would try to segregate the FP in a thin-walled capsule. My plan is to isolate the FP in a plastic straw in the middle of the secondary.

Vitalis
October 17th, 2007, 11:02 AM
I plan to homogenize the FP/SP in the thick walled cardboard I used in my other experiments. The thick-walled cardboard with the homogenized FP/SP mix goes into the vitamin bottle 2/3 full of SP.

I will test one more time by placing the bottle on a steel plate as recommended by nbk when I can find a suitable location to do so.

The attempt to detonate the AN/NM will have to wait for now because I can't find a suitable location to attempt that right now.

I still believe the FP/SP mix in the thick-walled cardboard did indeed detonate the SP in the vitamin bottle, and I am not going to alter my method in any way.

Charles Owlen Picket
October 17th, 2007, 11:20 AM
Quite a few years back when PGII hosted a winter bash the question of flash detonating came to the fore. No less a person than than T. Shimizu was written to put the matter to rest.

He stated that flash did indeed detonate (as would SP) - IF - the initiation was via a cap. His work recorded a VoD of 3200-3800 mps with 70/30 flash under conditions of initiation via a primary. If it was ignited via flame, spark, or static it would deflagrate. This was then written into Fireworks, Art & Science" (you can find it still there; even though it was very speculative).***

DBSP and flash are dependent on the route of initiation as they are seemingly designed to be propellants (flash having no real design but that of a self contained fuel/oxygen source as most propellants, etc).

Many did not want the matter to rest with route of initiation and sought to prove that flash could cross the threshold of low explosive via flame initiation. That school of thought felt that self containment level (flash having about a 50 gram level for 70/30) would push the speed above that of the speed of sound.

Konski (sp?) and Surrette (1991) did some experiments with self containment and found that this WAS true to a limited degree (1400-1900mps) depending upon what was deemed detonation. That definition was what the experiment stalled upon.

*** Note: Shimizu's flash of that experiment may have been his own favourite of 64:23:13 or something; his "thunder flash". - Of which he used considerably in experiments. I am quoting the book from memory and sourcing is not necessarily on the dot.

Vitalis
October 17th, 2007, 11:37 AM
I will find out once and for all after I do the steel plate test, then in the future the AN/NM test. I'm still convinced that in all my tests the FP did detonate the Bullseye SP.

I do have a question though, I don't currently have a steel plate so could a steel bowl be used instead or would that just blow out the sides?

nbk2000
October 17th, 2007, 08:46 PM
A steel bowl is far too thin. You could easily puncture it with a hammer and nail.

What you need is steel too thick for such petty force to deform it. A quarter inch thick plate will do.

Vitalis
October 17th, 2007, 08:49 PM
So a square foot quarter inch steel plate with the device simply placed on top of it would be proof positive of detonation if it dents the plate?

nbk2000
October 18th, 2007, 01:12 AM
As long as you use enough of your explosive mix to dent the plate if it actually does explode, and not simply burn.

A quarter pound would be sufficient.

Oh, and make sure that the plate is supported by it's edges, and not laying flat on the ground. That'll give space for the plate to deform, or at least bend if it's a low velocity explosive.

Vitalis
October 18th, 2007, 08:35 PM
You would not believe the trouble I am having finding a piece of quarter inch fucking steel! Home Depot doesn't have any and I am getting some quotes from some online companies, but if they are too expensive, I will just try to detonate the AN/NM mixture without the detonation test using steel.

I'm 99.9% sure the devices detonate anyway, and have plenty of AN and NM.

ultrabuf
October 18th, 2007, 08:39 PM
Did you try looking in any scrap yards? I'm sure they would be much cheaper than some online company.

Vitalis
October 18th, 2007, 10:51 PM
Not too many scrap yards in my area and the pieces of scrap are already mangled and twisted.

Bert
October 19th, 2007, 10:26 AM
Welding shops. Allways have partial sheets and other shapes left over.

Vitalis
October 19th, 2007, 10:44 AM
Thanks, I'll check that out soon. I'm still thinking about where I can test this then return to the scene without getting caught though. I've used up all my abandoned fields with dark alleyways leading to them.

Charles Owlen Picket
October 19th, 2007, 11:02 AM
Remember: holes in the ground, water, sand covered pits, all depress sound. Additionally, very small weight plates (like 2 lbs) could be used a witness plate just for shits and giggles.
The best time to do stuff is when people don't listen like 0400. Seems like they would listen - but then is when they are mostly out of it....just my opinion.

hst45
October 20th, 2007, 11:49 AM
The best time to do stuff is when people don't listen like 0400. .

Rainy days too. Rain dampens sound, windows are closed, there are few joggers or people out walking Fluffy the mutt, and you have the collateral benefit of fire suppression.

Vitalis
October 20th, 2007, 12:50 PM
I prefer 3AM, but I am going to wait on my final test until my house sells and I move to the mountains. 1.5 acres of forest should keep any problems to a bare minimum.

dbooksta
October 21st, 2007, 10:13 AM
Regarding the steel witness plate: Couldn't we look for evidence of shattering (brisance) instead of denting? In that case a thin steel bowl sitting on the ground would actually be preferable: If the explosive just dents it or puts a single hole in it then it was not a high-velocity detonation. If the explosive produces multiple fragments then it was definitely a detonation.

Charles Owlen Picket
October 21st, 2007, 10:14 AM
If you plan on selling your house (where a lot of people live) and move to a rather isolated / rural area you will have a blast (ya' I know, that was bad). I have generally always lived in rural areas EXCEPT when I was in my 20-30's and wanted to make some $. Cities generally suck.

You will have all the opportunity to get into any hobby your heart desires. I started studying music when I was about 35 and learned to read music (not well, mind you but I just started to do what I wanted with more frequency is my point)... A whole world opens up when you don't have to deal with people crowding you and having to deal with the influences and issues they bring with them.

What's more, a rural environment is a good place to raise a family. You will be happy you sold the house and got out! Cities are liberal pest holes.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rainy days ARE a good choice!

nbk2000
October 21st, 2007, 07:18 PM
A low velocity explosive can tear thin sheet steel, but only a high-explosive can dent or rupture thick steel.

Vitalis
October 21st, 2007, 08:08 PM
I will use the 1/4 inch thick steel plate on supports when I do it. It will be 6-12 months probably :( but I will take before and after pics to prove it once and for all.