Liquid straight dynamite

[nuclearattack]

Before the iDefence shutdown there was a thread on this subject, i decided to rewrite it because i'm making some test on this liquid dynamite and i think it is interesting.
Reassuming the concept:
my liquid straight dynamite is a mix of Ng and NM to a 60/40 NG/NM ratio or 50/50 ratio. In any case the mix is very powerfull and brisant and it cutted a steel bar very easy. I'm going to test it in shaped charges and i'll see if it works well as i expect.
What are the advantages of this liquid dynamite?
1.It is liquid! This means that the detonator's shockwaves travels better in the main charge and this will give a better initiation.
2.It's perfect for shaped charges because a liquid is very uniform.
3.Easy to prepare.
4.Cheap.NG/NC jell is more powerfull but also more expensive, to make NC you need a lot of acids.
5.It's a straight dynamite! NM is an explosive too! You don't have power loss like in guhr dynamite.
6.Safe.

On the last point i need some suggestions:
NM is slightly acid. In the past thread someone wrote that this will sensitize NG, this could be dangerous for the safety of storage/handling.
I want to give my opinion on this:
i'm agree on this if you add only a bit of NM. But if you add a good quantity of NM (like in my ratio) the NG will be completely dissolved and it will be desensitized because NM is insensitive. I think it is like when you add acetone to NG to desensitize it for store safety.NM is also a solvent like acetone!
In a few words:
adding an insufficent quantity on NM will sensitize the NG because NM is a little acid.
adding a good quantity of NM (the NM should dissolve completely the NG) it will desensitize the NG and you have a powerfull straight dynamite!

Any suggestion is appreciated!

[Dr.M]

Erm dude, if I get it right NG with a litlle amount of acid on it from the nutrition makes it unstable. And you want to ad acid :/ I could be wrong but I think if you mix those 2 and stir you will probably be blown to pieces..

Anyway I like the concept, but what if you mix the NM first with AN and add some NG.
Will prob be unstable too but a little bit more safe. Anyway good luck :)

[Sarevok]

I don't think so, Dr. M. Ammonium nitrate is also a little acidic, but ammonium nitrate dynamites are safe to use. To store a mixture of nitromethane and NG for a time (instead of using it immediately after preparation), however, might be unwise.

I like nuclearattack's idea. I wonder if nitrobenzene can be used instead?

[nuclearattack]

To Dr.M
with a good NM quantity the NG will be dissolved because NM is a solvent, Ng is in solution but is "dispersed" in NM.
The main question is: can solved NG detonate on its own without a shockwave? It's the same thing when you add acetone to NG, the NG is dissolved and it is less sensitive.
However i'm just making some NG to make some stability tests.
I'll do this tests in october because now i'm very busy but maybe i'll find some free time in september.
Those tests will dissolve any doubt and i'll post the results.

[nuclearattack]

Today i made a shock test for my liquid dynamite.
I pour some of this dynamite (1gr, 50/50 ratio NM/NG) in a glass test tube, waited for the 2 liquids to mix well and then i proceeded for the shock test.
I left it falling from 15 m high on a concrete floor. :eek:
I heard the test tube crashing in pieces but the dynamite didn't detonate. ;)
Then i prepared another test tube with 1 gr of liquid dynamite and i hit it with a hammer...it didn't detonate! :D
Well! I'm happy about this test, now i know that this liquid dynamite is shock stable, perhaps not so stable like other kind of dynamites but it can be handle safely.
It is also easily detonable because, even if NM is insensitive, it lowers the NG viscosity and this guarantees a better shockwave propagation. For example EGDN and Myrol are less shock sensitive than NG but more easy to detonate because they are less viscous. This is what COPAE says. ;)
I'm going to make a LSC with this dynamite...it should work perfectly. :cool:

[me234]

Nuclearattack, my friend, I really want to know something.
How exactly did you postion yourself when hitting a glass container containing explosives?
You wanted to know if it would go off right? So what would have happened to YOU if it had?
I do not intend offense, I am merely concerned with the health and safety of a fellow Forum member.

And I'm interested.

Maybe you could try pouring a gram onto something solid and then smacking it. This would certainly save you some glass test tubes.

P.S. I think your mix sounds pretty wicked!

[nuclearattack]

Yes ME234 it's a wicked explosive! I made some demolition tests and it has a good brisance also on steel targets.
About the shock test i used a protective mask made for soft air, it is resistant and it is a sufficent protection for a small scale test like this, i also wear heavy gloves and hear protections to avoid damage on drums.
However the quantity tested is very small...only 1 gr and it isn't a real danger if you are using this kind of protections.
You can also use a polycarbonate trasparent glass to protect you, at this point you have only your arm without heavy protection but as i said you should use small quantity of HE for the test. ;)

cheers my friend!

[nuclearattack]

Today i made a demolition test with this liquid dynamite, i used 130 gr of it in a glass jar, detonator made with 2 gr AP.
The target was a steel beam used for buildings steel structure, it is a very hard target and this beam was 1 cm thick of pure steel!
The charge was placed in a inner right side (the beam has a T form) with a tape. The steel beam was placed on the ground with an angle of 20 degrees and the charge was between the beam and the ground not on top of the beam.
When the charge went off it launched the beam at about 150 m away (the beam weight about 15 kg) and when the beam landed it penetrated the earth completely!
Awesome! I live for this moments!
The beam was heavily dented and it was ripped on a side but it was able to absorb some of the hit when it was launched away. I'm sure that if i had placed the charge on top of it, the beam would have been shattered and it wouldn't be able to absorb the energy released.
I have attached a small photo i took with my cell phone, the damage is visible, clearly not very well but it's sufficent to have an idea of the result.
I'm satisfied of this liquid dynamite, it's powerfull also against hard targets and it is very easy to initiate.
Test it! It's better than ANNM and easy to do, a good stuff for me!

[nbk2000]

The picture is rather small, but approved anyways.

Pictures need to be LARGE enough to clearly see details, but SMALL enough to fit the limit and save our space.

[FinnBell]

Man you should really invest in a digital camera, I'm just really wanting a closer look at that steel beam. Ive never detonated more than 100 grams of NG before and even those charges were crazy powerful. But then again Ive never tested on metal, only a telephone pole.(good stuff btw)

[Marvin]

nuclearattack,

Earlier in the post you seem to be confusing chemical stability with shock sensitivity.

I dont like the term 'liquid dynamite' either, the whole concept behind dynamite was to turn an explosive that was difficult to use being a liquid into a solid to make it safer. I'm also a little unsure what you are trying to get from the mixture. It seems to be doing little for its oxygan balence, are the only reasons to reduce sensitivity and stretch out a smaller amount of NG?

I'm inclined to think that in the case of NG the hazards lie more in its manufacture at home than in the subsiquent use of a more conventional NG based explosive mixture. NG/NC is not sane to make with homemade NC anyway. ANNM is still fairly brisant but you are forming a fairly safe explosive from 2 virtually inert chemicals. As liquid mixtures go this does look to be one of the better ones for home use, I'll concede that.

[nuclearattack]

To Finnbell:
yes man i need a digital camera but for the moment i have no money, however i have the beam at home and i can do another photo if i ask to a friend a digital cam. Well i'll go for it!

To Marvin:
i know that the term liquid dynamite it's a bit strange but i thought about the definition of dynamite. We can say that dynamite is a mixture of NG with another substance that can be active (explosive itself) or inert. NG is mixed with this substance to make it safer and more handle.
Now i started the idea of liquid dynamite because i want a liquid explosive to be used in shaped charges, this liquid should be more powerfull than plx, easy to make and more stable than other nitro esters.
If you think about this liquid dynamite we can say that it fits all these requirements and it can be called liquid dynamite because it is a mixture of NG with another substance that is active and the final product is more safer and handle than pure NG.
I like this mixture also because is a good homemade HE and it is an excellent way to stretch NG without loosing too much power and brisance.
About the stability i'm satisfied if it is shock stable, but about the chemical stability i can't say much because i had detonated it immediately.
Well i want to discover also this thing so i have prepared 16 gr of it and i'm storing it for 2 months...in january we'll see if it is chemically stable.
Long storage should be a good test...isn't it?
If NG is not very chemically stable with NM you can use EGDN instead of NG, EGDN is more stable in a acid environment and you will obtain a more powerfull liquid dynamite.
About blasting gelatine you said that NG/NC is not so safe because of the homemade NC...are you referring to the fact that NC is hard to neutralize?
Using smokeless powder or DBSP should solve this problem.

[FinnBell]

Well definitely borrow a camera cause Im dying to see these pics, Ive been working a lot with NG lately and its quickly becoming one of my favorite HEs to work with, all the precursors are dirt cheap for me, so its even better. The only problem is space, I have nowhere to conduct "experiments". I have a few pics of a detonation that I'll have to post sometime too.

[me234]

Marvin, there are exactly two things nuclearattack wants to accomplish: First and foremost: To find a liquid explosive suitable for shaped charges. See above post.
Secondly: Failing #1, to just make a kickass explosive that's fun to play around with. Who cares what good it is, as long as it's usable, it's fun, and it's experimenting to gain more knowledge. Personally, I think nuclearattack must be having a really good time just experimenting with the stuff, even if the tests prove fruitless, which they don't seem to be.

Man, this place is all about the experimenting.

Nuclearattack, can you 'cook up' a few mixtures, each pretty small, and store them? Then every couple of months you take one out and try set it off after making observations. Maybe do this to try and find more or less when this mixture starts becoming unstable? This mixture sounds fascinating to me, and I'm thinking of trying myrol and NM. Anybody know of any reasons why I shouldn't, ignoring the legality of this dream of course.

[nuclearattack]

To Me234:
yes man! This mixture is pretty funny and i think it is also practise.
However further investigations on it's stability is required and i have stored 3 small charges to study the stability of the solution during long storage.
I appreciated your idea of using more than 1 test charge to see changes after differents storing periods. Thanks for your contribute!
As you said we are here to experiment on HE compositions and this liquid dynamite has never been investigated before, so this is a good occasion to learn more!
I'll continue also with my demolition tests with liquid dynamite and i'll try to do the best to post good pictures.
One last thing: Me234 if you are tring to make myrol and you are experimenting on it please post your results on "EGDN,BLASTING GELATINE,MYROL" thread because i'm very interested in it!

[Darkness]

Hi nuclearattack
i have tried this "liquid dynamite" and i must say that it is very powerfull.
I can say this because i made 3 tests to compare it's power:
first test was with 100gr of ammonia dynamite, the second with 100gr of pure NG and the third with 100gr of liquid dynamite.
The 3 charges were in the same kind of confinement and the same detonators.
I placed the 3 charges on 3 steel plates 1cm thick and then i buried those test plates under 50 cm of earth.
The liquid dynamite was very brisant because it ripped the steel plate and moved a lot of earth, the ammonia dynamite also ripped the steel plate but less than liquid dynamite. Pure NG was the most brisant as expected.
I noticed that ammonia dynamite moved a bit more earth than pure NG and liquid dynamite probably because AN generates a lot of gas, liquid dynamite has a good brisance a bit more than ammonia dynamite but a bit less than NG.
After all i can say that liquid dynamite is between ammonia dynamite and pure NG from the output power point of view.
It's a very good homemade HE...my congratulations to you nuclearattack!
Now the most important thing is the stability, i'm waiting for your stability tests...good work!

[nuclearattack]

After 26 days i checked the liquid dynamite sample on long storage...it's all normal as when i made it, i don't want to test it immediatly, i'll wait some days before another impact test. For the moment i don't notice changes in the compound but we'll see better after the test!

To Darkness:
your test is interesting! You are just a newbie but you started well your career! I think you have some experience with HEs!
Good work!

[nuclearattack]

Surprise! I finally bought a digital camera so i made some photos of the damaged steel beam i used to test my liquid straight dynamite. ;)
To Finnbell:
you wanted to see better pictures of this test? Here you are some photos! :D
If someone need larger pictures i can provide also bigger photos...you have only to ask! ;)

To NBK:
i tried to reduce the dimension of the photos, i hope i made a good work!

About the test keep in mind that i used only 130gr of liquid dynamite and that i didn't follow any professional method to demolish the steal beam like the methods suggested in FM 5-250 or other blasting manuals. My target wasn't to cut the steal beam i only used it because i found it on the site, it was completely improvised, just only for fun! :cool:
I also placed the charge on the beam without tamping and beetween the beam and the terrain so the beam was thrown 200m away absorbing a part of the blast hit. If i had put the charge over the beam (not under it) and i had tamped it with earth following the FM 5-250 instructions probably the charge will be cutted or bended completely.
Note anyway the deep dent and the bended metal! It was 1cm thick!
I hope you'll like the photos! :D :D

[Bert]

It's allways good to have something in the picture of a known size for scale- A Coke can, a ruler, pack of cigarettes... Anything to give a visual reference to the size of what you're looking at.

[The_Rsert]

Which programm for resizing have you used?

I'm using "Irfan View" to resize and to compress my pictures.
That's work much better for the comprimation.
You can reach a size of 640x480 at <20kb with a sufficient quality.

[nuclearattack]

To Bert:
sorry you are right! Anyway the steal beam is about 40cm long and 25cm width.
The thickness of the steal is 1cm and the total weight of the beam is 20 kg.

To Rsert:
i'm using Pixela Image Mixer a program on bundle with my JVC digital camera.

[Nevermore]

Then i prepared another test tube with 1 gr of liquid dynamite and i hit it with a hammer...it didn't detonate! :D

Forgive me, but i barely think you were so stoopid that you hammered 1gram of HE in a glass vial..
i would have performed my test on a drop of NG-NM mix absorbed into a piece of toilet paper or something like that, as you know, is very hard to hammer a liquid..

:D

[nuclearattack]

To Nevermore:
as i just explained i was wearing protections and i was at a good distance from the tube test since i used a long carpenter like hammer. There is no reason to fear this test and i'm not so stupid as you think.
Anyway i'm not agree with you when you suggest to test a drop on absorbent paper...everyone knows that when NG (or NG mixtures) are absorbed in an inert media it is more insensitive. Following your suggestion i test another kind of dynamite and not my liquid straight dynamite since i wanted to verify it's sensitivity in it's pure form and not in an inert media. It's not so hard to understand. :D
Another thing: i can be stupid not stoopid! :p

[simply RED]

1 gram is too much to hit with a hammer when you are near.
Anyway the mixture is good.
Only very little problem is if it gets wet, then the nitro will decompose in the acid-water media.
Nitrobenzene or nitrotoluene + NG is good too.
Adding Al powder is also interesting.

[Nevermore]

@ nuclearattack
when around i vial of HE goes off around me i wouldn't wear protection, i would be at least 100mt far from it.
a debris at 5000m/sec can penetrate most protection, and having a piece of glass deep seated into your eye is not fun at all :D
it is true that absorbing will make more insensitive, but i guess you can quantify it easily, i tested around 30%-50% more insensitive when absorbed in paper compared to small droplet.
however, a big glob is more insensitive than a small droplet since is harder to compress a liquid, also, liquid Ng is far difficult to detonate by hammer than Ng gel.
i left you an email, give a look if you got it and answer me, i can't pm you from here.

@simplyred
true true that's damn true, 1 gram of HE going off near you is not a pleasant experience

[nuclearattack]

To SimplyRed:
EGDN should be also a good choice since it should be more stable in an acid environment then NG. About the cap sensitivity i have the impression that this liquid dynamite is more cap sensitive maybe because it is less viscous (NM dissolves NG) then pure NG. It should be like for EGDN or Myrol that are more cap sensitive because of their lower viscosity.

To Nevermore:
i'm going to answer your e-mail.

[nuclearattack]

Thinking about the two components of this liquid dynamite (NG and NM) it is evident that the final mix is oxygen deficent since NG and NM have a negative OB.
Optimizing the oxygen balance will improve the mixture increasing the vod and the output power that is in any case powerfull.
How can we optimize the oxygen balance?
The mixture must remain liquid so we can't add AN, we need a liquid with positive OB...any idea?
A choice should be using EGDN instead of NG, any other way? :confused:

[The_Rsert]

I've ever thought that NG os a positive OB!?
Maybe you can use some high concentrated H2O2.

[nuclearattack]

Maybe i'm wrong, probably i'm confused with EGDN? EGDN has negative OB and NG positive OB?
I thought about H2O2 but it is not recommended because if it is not very high concentrated it introduce water in the solution and this is bad, if it is high concentrated it will explode on contact with NG\NM mixture because it is hypergolic.
HNO3 is not recommended because will form a super sensitive compound, i'm thinking about a HE with positive OB but liquid...it's not so easy! :(

[Chris The Great]

NG has a +3.5% oxygen balance, EGDN has a perfect oxygen balance (which is why it is slightly more powerful than NG).

Perhaps a solid explosive with a fairly positive OB as well as poserful explosive properties could be dissolved in EGDN or NG (depending which dissolves more) and NM. If you go this route, it would be best to add an explosive with a high OB and very high explosive power (AN has oxygen but not the brisance).
I remember seeing something about an explosive nitramine called BTNNA. It had explosive power near that of RDX and also had a +16.5% OB. It was made by combining two moles 2,2,2-nitroethanol with 1 mole ammonia, then nitrating it to become a nitramine. The formula is C4H4N8O14. I don't know how well it would dissolve in NG/EGDN however.

[nuclearattack]

Well if NG has +3,5% OB this means that liquid dynamite should has a OB close to 0. However it depends from how much NG you put in the mixture, i noticed that more then 50% by weight of NG shouldn't be added because the NM will not dissolve it completely (too much sensitive mixture), i tried with 60% NG and it is at the limit. Damn adding a negative OB to NG may give a perfect OB, so the mixture coul be more powerfull then EGDN. Also adding a fuel to NG (acetone) should give a much more powerfull compound but we have NM!

[Boomer]

NG has +3.5% OB while NM has -56%. This means for zero OB you would need 94% NG + 6% NM. A 50:50 mix will hardly benefit from the 1.75% overall oxygen the NG leaves for the NM.

On the other hand, have you ever thought about tetranitromethane? The OB is +49%, so adding 33% to your current mix (=1:1:1) will get you close to perfect OB! It is just a *little* toxic, plus not *exactly* OTC ;)

[nuclearattack]

To chris the great:
i looked at a chart on explosives properties and it claimed that EGDN has an OB about +32! It isn't 0 OB! After this i calculated the EGDN OB with an oxygen balance calculator and results +32...this time i have no doubt!

To Boomer:
tetranitromethane is surely a very good HE in this mixture but i fear its toxicity (i don't have pro equipment) and it is not so easy to make! :(
If EGDN has really +32 OB (the oxygen balance calculator and the property charts can't meant!) this should be a very good choice to reach 0 OB without using exotic HEs.
Give me some time and i'll test it immediatly to compare the power.
How should be the ratio? I don't know how to calculate the ratio to balance the oxygen in the mixture. :mad:

[Microtek]

Nuclearattack: OB is calculated as follows:

OB to CO2 = ( (mol O)-(2*mol C)-(0.5*mol H) )*1600/( molweight of explosive )

So EGDN which has the formula C2H4N2O6 gives:

( 6 - 2*2 - 0.5*4 )*1600/152.1 = 0.0 %

NG gives ( 9 - 2*3 - 0.5*5 )*1600/227.1 = 3.5 %

[nuclearattack]

To Microtek:
thanks for your help but i want to know how to adjust the ratios beetween two HEs to give 0 OB, i don't want to know how to calculate the OB of a HE because i have already the OB calculator!
Anyway the fact of EGDN OB seems very strange to me, if you don't believe me find the thread "oxygen balance calculator" (or somewhat like that), there are two OB calculators, one made with Excel sheet and another made by XYZ with visual basic. If you calculate the OB for EGDN it gives +32! In XYZ's calculator there is also a little chart where is reported OB for most common HEs and for EGDN is +32! Know...how can we explain this? A mistake? No the calculator works well...i tryed it for NG and it gives +3,5... :confused:
Wait a moment! I had a look just in this moment to Mega's site, in the EGDN page he mentioned another formula for EGDN then yours...am i completely crazy or your formula has two more C atoms and two more H atoms?
Damn it is too late for me i'm awake from 24 hours...tomorrow will be a better day to reason about it! ;)

[Chris The Great]

I generally calculate out the explosive products by doing it the long way. For example, if I wanted to figure out how much oxygen per mole I would get from NG, I would just balance the equation (with two moles NG as there are fractions involved):

2C3H5N3O9 --> 6CO2 + 5H2O + 3N2 + O

Then, I'd figure out how many moles of whatever else I'd add to get whatever explosive products I wanted.

2CH3NO2 --> 2CO + 2H2O + H2 + N2

Therefore, two moles NG and NM will produce 6CO2 + 2CO + 7H2O + 4N2
Since we want perfect oxygen balance I'd add another four moles of NG to produce another two oxygen atoms to oxydize the two carbon monoxide molecules. Then, I'd calculate how much of each explosive are mixed together, as well as the explosive products if I felt like it, for calculating gas volume or something. For this we get

6 moles NG = 1362 grams
2 moles NM = 122 grams

6C3H5N3O9 + 2CH3NO2 --> 20CO2 + 18H2O + 10N2

So thats 8.22% NM by weight for a perfect oxygen balance.
This method is perfectly accurate, however, it doesn't give percentages and takes a long time. But since it is just balancing equations, the output is generally balanced. :D
Unfortunatly, the numbers get pretty big when we start calculating exact amounts, as we see below...

For a 50:50 mix of NG/NM, we'd get the following:

227 moles of NM (13857 grams)
61 moles of NG (13857 grams)

227CH3NO2 --> 227CO + 227H2O + 113.5H2 + 113.5N2
61C3H5N3O9 --> 183CO2 + 152.5H2O + 91.5N2 + 15.25O2 (30.5O)

Fractions suck, so we change it to

454CH3NO2 --> 454CO + 454 H2O + 227H2 + 227N2
122C3H5N3O9 --> 366CO2 + 305H2O + 183N2 + 61O

The 61O will burn 61 moles of H2.

Therefore, the total equation gives:
122C3H5N3O9 + 454CH3NO2 --> 366CO2 + 454CO + 820H2O + 166H2 + 410N2

That is the weakness of my method, really big numbers if we want to balance exactly. It's much better suited to figuring out what ratio you should use than figuring out what the ratio you have will get you. For example, if we wanted to balance out the 50/50 mixture by adding tetranitromethane, we would

CN4O8 --> CO2 + 2N2 + 3O2 (6O)

To burn the 454 moles of CO and 166 moles of H2 we need 620 oxygen atoms. Thats 103.3 moles TNM, or 20246grams. The final mixture is:

20,247g TNM 26.77%
27,694g NG 36.62%
27,694g NM 36.62%

It works....if you like making lots of calculations. Works much better to figure out the ideal mixture than to figure out what some mixture you have gets.

[Darkness]

To nuclearaatck:
i downloaded the OB calculator made by XYZ and i calculated the OB for EGDN like you...the result is +32 OB for EGDN.
Now i think that the calculator works well because it gives right values for others HEs but it seems strange to me that the others members don't see the mistake.
I'm just downloading fedhoroff and urbanski to see if there are better data on EGDN...will see as i finished the download.

[V2A]

this liquid dynamite is really powerfull!
today i have tested 30ml 50/50 mixture (in a taped glass ampoule) vs. a nearly 1cm strong steel v-profile. (ignition with 1g pressed AP cap)
pic 1 (before) (http://www.geocities.com/crvhp/ngnm1.jpg)
pic 2 (before) (http://www.geocities.com/crvhp/ngnm2.jpg)
pic 3 (afterwards) (http://www.geocities.com/crvhp/ngnm3.jpg)
as you can see the the profile, which is about 1m long, is bent at the place where the ampoule was, and the whole snow was blown away.
i will produce a lot more of this! next time i gonna make a shaped charge with it.

really good invention nuclerattack!

[Microtek]

The oxygen balance of EGDN as in ethyleneglycol dinitrate isn't debateable. There is a very simple formula for calculating the OB of any CHNO explosive, but even if this wasn't the case you really should be able to see that

C2H4N2O6 --> 2 CO2 + 2 H2O + N2

is balanced, that is, has an OB of 0. And that IS the formula for EGDN.
This is not something I'm "pretty sure" of, this is in the "rock solid" league like 2+2=4.

Having said that, it should be stressed again that OB is not really very useful for predicting which mixture will be optimally balanced. For instance factors such as density has a large say in which products are produced by the detonation.
HMX ( C4H8N8O8 ) which you would expect to react along the lines of
C4H8N8O8 --> 4 CO + 4 H2O + 4N2 actually only produce 1.06 CO at 1.80 g/cc according to Ornellas.

[nuclearattack]

To V2A:
eh! eh! You like it!
Try with a more powerfull detonator to ensure a faster detonation...this mixture is pretty easily detonable but a 1gr AP is poor in any case, try with more of it or adding some sensitive secondary as a booster.
Now i'm looking for an improvement of this liquid dynamite, maybe increasing the OB i'll have more power.
It will work perfectly in shaped charges due to its uniformity and sensivity.
A suggestion: make some sensivity test to verify if it is completely safe...i made some tests as reported but i want to have more data...it's important! Do you want to help me with this tests since i don't have a lot of time to make a lot of tests?

To Mikrotek:
I searched in Federoff and about EGDN OB is said: OB to CO2 0%, OB to CO +21%.
Why this two values? What does it mean?
The formula you mention for EGDN is a little different from the one in megas site because he use this:

O2NOCH2ONO2

You use C2H4 instead of CH2.
Anyway i don't understand why the ob calculator gives +32!
Make a search with "OB calculator" and download the one made by XYZ, you'll see that it gives +32!

If EGDN is 0 OB at this point is better to use NG since it has +3,5 so the mixture will be a little less oxygen deficent.

[Microtek]

There are two different values because you can assume that carbon atoms will be oxidized to either CO or CO2. At sufficiently high temps, the equilibrium
2CO + O2 <--> 2CO2 will be displaced to the left, so it may be reasonable to make this assumption ( there is much more to this story, and it isn't completely established how to predict the actual products ).

Anyway, EGDN has enough oxygen to oxidize all its carbon to CO2 without any excess oxygen. Therefore, OB to CO2 is zero.
If, on the other hand the carbon only oxidizes to CO there will be some oxygen left ( two atoms to be exact ). This gives the alternate positive OB.

As the calculator you found gives another value, well, there's an error in it.
As for the EGDN formula, it IS the one I gave. If you don't believe me, look in PATR2700 or Urbanski or COPAE or the patent database or....

[knowledgehungry]

OB to CO2 0% means that if the carbons are fully oxidized(to CO2) then the explosive has a 0% OB. OB to CO+21% means that if the Carbons are oxidized to CO then the explosive will have a positive OB of 21%. I'm wondering how EGDN would work in an oxygen deficient mixture, it might not go to CO2 but rather go to CO and donate oxygen to the other compund first. Because in most explosive reactions C->CO then CO->CO2 if there is enough oxygen.

It is C2H4 not CH2. O2NOCH2ONO2 is not ethylene glycol dinitrate. That compound would be methylene glycol dinitrate, which doesn't exist. Mega must have made a typo.

[Boomer]

To nuclearatack: The formula on ChemLab is a typo (yes, mega made a typo!), it should be (CH2)2 in the middle. Take a look at the pic below, there are definitely two carbons!

To knowledgehungry: you beat me by a minute!
"It is C2H2 not CH2" ??? I hope you mean C2H4 !

To V2A: Is that little dent all that 30ml (45+g) did? That is in the APAN league I would say - with that amount the flange should have been CLEANLY CUT up to the upper edge! At least that is what 45g of my plasticised NG would do. Looks a lot like a low-order det to me ... :( so try a compound cap with 2g MHN or PETN next time and see the difference.

[V2A]

To V2A:
A suggestion: make some sensivity test to verify if it is completely safe...i made some tests as reported but i want to have more data...it's important! Do you want to help me with this tests since i don't have a lot of time to make a lot of tests?


i transported the ampoule full of liquid dynamite in my backpack to where i detonated it, and drove over several road holes -> it was fairly shaked for 5 minutes at least without detonating.
trusted your rating that this stuff is save, and didn't rue it. :D


To V2A: Is that little dent all that 30ml (45+g) did? That is in the APAN league I would say - with that amount the flange should have been CLEANLY CUT up to the upper edge! At least that is what 45g of my plasticised NG would do. Looks a lot like a low-order det to me ... :( so try a compound cap with 2g MHN or PETN next time and see the difference.

its clearly more powerfull than apan. 50g apan vs. the same steel profile caused absolutely no damage. i don't know exactly what kind of steel this is but its really stable.
nevertheless i'll use a 1g+ petn detonator next time.

[me234]

Knowledgehungry, I am very pleased to say that methylene glycol dinitrate DOES exist!!!

I was reading the Urbanski volume dealing with nitramines and saw that a small amount of this stuff is produced as a by-product in the production of RDX.

I'll go and read up on it some more later to give some details.

But this is off topic.

ETHYLENE glycol dinitrate (EGDN): Eth. - 2 carbon chain

Therefore --- C2H4

Thus we have EGDN: C2H4(ONO2)2

I'll also give a reference to a book (reliable) stating EGDN has an OB = 0

[Billy Bones]

Well, as you can see, the idea behind this explosive is not really new. Nuclearattack first mention the NG \ NM mix (50\50), but without NC and with too much NM which only diluted the power of the straight NG. In my case I use NC as jelling agent and just enough NM to bind and desensitize the liquid nitro ester in the formed explosive jelly. The charge shown in the photos was made from 35 ml. NG (56 gr.) - AN \ SA method - and 15 ml.(17 gr.) NM. The NC was added to the NG at the point that there was no visible liquid, than NM was poured with good stirring. The resulting stiff jelly has all the benefits of the clear NG, but in much more safe to handle, forming and transporting form. In this mixture the NM play three major roles – to substitute the inert acetone (NM - 6500m\sec), to safe some NG and to produce explosive jelly with low freezing point (NM freeze around – 29 °C).

The materials:

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=20002wg2.jpg

As for the NM acidic, you can clearly see on the photo, that litmus paper is fully neutral.

The finished charge:

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=20014kv5.jpg

Even in this jelly form NM is still too volatile, so it’s need to be stored in sealed containers. For this purpose I use modified 50 ml. syringe, which gave me the best results in storing and upon detonation, especially for the methyl nitrate gelatins. This soft jelly can easily be put in syringe and inject in to any desire cavity, than detonated with small blasting cap or use to produce various shaped charges (both of which was tested with very good results).

The charge, taped to the target. The blasting cap contained 1 gr. HMTD, pressed in a drinking straw.

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=22044za7.jpg

The damages: Note, that the walls of the target (big steel pipe) are 0.5 cm. thick.

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=22048dz7.jpg

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=22051gn7.jpg

http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=22057dz0.jpg

Upon detonation the charge cut clear hole in the front wall – 10 cm. high \ 6 cm. wide and massive exit in the back. Not bad for such an easy to produce explosive.

[fiknet]

Very nice charge, perhaps you could do a comparison to see how the NM/NG mix without NC added performs on the other pipe?

[Billy Bones]

The whole point in this project was to produce new jelled explosive, not to try mixture which already exist. Besides, the ratios above gave me excellent results!

[Deceitful_Frank]

Hats off to you man, This is most impressive. I have tried various mixtures of NG, EGDN and NM, generally with good results but I had never thought of using NM as a replacement for acetone in the gelling of NG with NC.

I have found that 3-4% Of homemade NC will thicken NG at room temperature but it takes a couple of weeks. This process of course can be sped up by heating but nobody really wants to heat NG to 50 celcius even with a water bath do they?! The more chemically stable and easier to make EGDN is far too volatile to have indoors without strong ventilation anywhere above 10 celcious, perhaps it could be gelled with NC in a sealed glass bottle in a hot water bath... I don't know.

I think what particularly excites me about your experiment is the apparent density of the main charge. Sure, if you use enough NC you can easily get all that NG absorbed but there will be so much air and fibrous material in the mix that density and ultimately VOD and detonation pressure will suffer. It appears to me that on addition of the 15ml of NM, the NC breaks down and goes from being shredded NC suspended in NG and into a highly viscous solution of all three compounds?

Now normally without evidence of microscopic occluded air (fairly tranlucent explosive), with small diameter and minimal confinement I'd be screaming LVD for sure but the results speak for themselves! Ignoring occludent air the density of the charge would be around 1.45g/cc with a VOD of 7280. This translates to a very respectable 193kbar. Comparing this with straight EGDN (NG confined as little as this in such a small diameter would disappoint), density 1.49 and VOD 7300 gives 197kbar. This mix of yours really does look promissing as it has similar performance to the excellent straight EGDN but is easier to handle and reliably goes high order :D

It could even find use blended with ETN or PETN to REALLY give it some kick, increase sensitivity to initiation and reduce the critical diameter and the need for confinement even further... hell if you have ever mixed a nitric ester gel with 20% 600 mesh german dark flake, the sheer power is astonishing. Sure, performance againt solid steel would be slighly reduced but its gonna give everything else a really bad day!

May I ask for a little more detail about the makeup of the charge, in particular, how was your NC made, how many grams where mixed with that 35ml NG and 15ml NC and whether you evaporated NM away to thicken the mix... like you have to do when using acetone to combine NG and NC?

Thanks and regards!

EDIT:

I just noticed that the syringe had 35ml NG but the measuring cylinder contains 10ml of NM. Allowing maybe 3ml for the NC would give a total 48ml or around 3ml less than the apparent matter in the finished charge. Could this be the 6% volume of occluded air that made sure the charge OBVIOUSLY went high order?

If I am way off the mark or you indeed added more NM after the first picture was taken then please set me straight!

[Billy Bones]

You are right, the measuring cylinder contains only 10ml. NM (the other 5 was added later), because this was the only measuring glass which I had in the moment.

The NC was made by the AN\SA method - 100 gr. AN - 150 ml. SA 94 % and enough shredded cotton to nearly absorb all the nitrating mixture. The mix was left for one night at room temperature and than washed, neutralised and boiled with little urea. The resulting NC is far away from the 90 % NA product, but works fine as jelling agent ( fully dissolve in acetone or NM).

I don’t measure the quantity of the used NC (because I don’t have precise scale), so I just add enough NC to absorb most of the NG, than pour and stir the NM (the clear jelly is formed almost immediately).The ratios are not so critical, I made several test in different proportions and always had the same powerful and brisant results. The little charge in the photos below was made from 15 ml. NG and 10 ml. NM (20 ml. syringe for container).The NC was added just to bind the mix and to produce a runny gel. The target was the same and upon detonation the charge made fairly deep dent which almost penetrate the steel again.

http://img504.imageshack.us/my.php?image=25007sq7.jpg

http://img504.imageshack.us/my.php?image=25018fd6.jpg

http://img361.imageshack.us/my.php?image=25014mq1.jpg

You don’t have to evaporate the NM away.This is two component NG \ NM explosive, but jelled with some NC to produce a gel (not a gelatin). The point was to diluted the NG in the charges with another high and insensitive explosive like NM and to produce much more handy explosive with low freezing point. That’s way you have to keep it in sealed containers, if the NM evaporate you will be end with just a ordinary blasting gelatin. The strange thing in the whole story is that the finished explosive is clear from any air pockets (bubbles) - which are the main mark for the “fresh” blasting gelatins – but as you can see still detonate in high order. (Damn, my shitty English).I had a low order misfire with NG\PGDN blasting gelatin (some photos will be post, if I had time), so can easily compare the results.

[Deceitful_Frank]

Your English is fine.

Thanks for clearing up that up. I also use those same ratios of AN and acid to nitrate glycerol, glycol and cellulose but when making NC I would use maybe 15-20 grams of cotton and the OTC cheap dyed 95% H2SO4 that I can buy for a quarter of the price of the clear 98% good stuff.

Some nice pictures there by the way. Even with less damage its still surprizing given the tiny area of actual contact between the gelled charge and the target. I had forgotten but I'd detonated a similar charge a couple of years ago, it was made differently. I had 87 grams of NG and using acetone, 3 grams of home-made NC and a desk fan I made 90 grams of BG by evaporation of solvent. What I was left with after a few days and a miserable lingering headache can be seen in the first picture. Unfortunately it had the consistancy of rubber and would not fit into any available container... cue nitromethane!

Took me about an hour to cut the BG into tiny fragments using an old pair of scissors. With greasy fingers and a sweaty brow my chest and head was pounding but after I added those last ten grams of NM it was all worth it as it all slid nicely like a lump of soft phlegm into the nalgene bottle you see in the second picture. I fired it on a remote wall the following night and standing at 30 metres, my ears, having had adjusted for the near silence were ill prepared for the onslaught. Damage to the wall was minimal but the charge footprint was small and concrete is notoriously strong in compression!

[Billy Bones]

It’s not my first language, but along with my native, I can freely read English and Russian, so it’s easy to visit some other forums too.

My sulfuric acid source is also quite cheap. Here I can buy 5 liters of clear, technical grade 94 % battery acid (with almost invisible yellow tint) just for 3 Euro, which perform as well as the high duality substitute. Thought, I’m not sure about the strength of those OTC drain cleaners in your countries. Have you ever check the density, I bet it’s somewhere around 90%, but without measurements this is just speculations.

I also see that you are too concern about the acetone evaporation from the finished blasting gelatin. Don’t worry, few % left will not change his performance dramatically, in fact I suspect that acetone act as some sort of fuel, which gave better OB in the NG gelatins (same with the NG\NM mix).

The NG\NC mix

http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?image=18018ty1.jpg

After addition of the acetone

http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?image=18026qh4.jpg

The small blob on the photos (around 20 gr.) was still sticky and with noticeable acetone smell when was put in plastic wrap and detonated with only 0.5 grams HMTD. High order detonation for sure (sorry, no photos this time), which shattered some chunks from the concrete plate target.