Tri-Grenade

[nbk2000]

I've been studying up on some variations on grenade designs that I've seen on various military, RPG, and patent sites.

Skipping the more exotic designs, I've come to think that simply changing the shape of the grenade would greatly increase its effectiveness.

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Tri-Grenade.gif" alt=" - " />

The black four sided equilateral triangle in the center is the actual explosive charge, with the rounded green being the plastic embedded fragmentation shell.

The reasoning behind the pyramid shape is that, unlike conventional grenades which are egg shaped and thusly waste about 80% of their fragments into the air or ground, a triangular pyramid will ALWAYS have three of its four sides (75%) facing upwards and outwards...towards the enemy.

(look at picture with the bottom being the ground)

Because of the upward projection, the prone thrower (you) would be underneath the path of the majority of the fragments, while the standing (or kneeling enemy) near the grenade would catch the majority of them.

Also, because the majority of us would be using these in city fighting, rather than in a wilderness setting, it makes sense to optimize the weapon for the streets. With four (essentialy) flat sides, this grenade isn't going to roll past your enemy and down the storm drain.

And, because of the shape, if it lands in front of him, it'll bounce once or twice in random directions, making it impossible to catch or dodge if they see it coming.

(Looking down at grenade from above)

With a typical modern grenade using prefragmented bodies, there's a thousand+ fragments embedded in the plastic body. If the enemy is in line with one of the three faces (likely) of the tri-grenade, than he's looking at 1/4th of 1,000 fragments, or 250 fragments.

Unfortunately, there is a small flaw...the corners. If the enemy is in line with a corner, he's not to likely to catch a frag. A cylinder, having no corners, would obviate this. And there is a grenade design patent that does just that.

However, as anyone who's ever thrown an empty can knows, it's a near miracle if it lands upright on one end and stays that way. 99.9999% of the time a cylinder will land on its side. This is prevented (in the patent) by the use of spring loaded legs to upright it. But this is complicating things.

By using the geometry of the triangular grenade body, you get the same benefits, only without the hassle. Besides which, you wouldn't want to be thought of as cheap and only give ONE grenade, when you can show you care and give TWO, right? :D

The probability of the enemy avoiding death/injury by being in the blind spot of two trigrenades is nil.

[Fallout85]

Hmm. Good idea! I never really thougth about how ineffective the convetional design is. Wouldn't making a cone shape alleviate the corner problem? It would still, most likely, land base down. I may have to test this with some wooden mock-ups.

[Yi]

Very nice. I think a cone would most is just at likely to land on its side as it is on its base.

What about the firing/fuse mechanism? any extraneous lumps would alter the shape. Perhaps a tube leading to a detonator in the center with a fuse train and percussion cap to initiate and a simple spring loaded hammer with a pull pin on the surface...when the pin is pulled the hammer would pull inside the pyramid leaving only a small area of casing without fragmentation material.

[Fallout85]

Yup, they all landed on they're sides. It would have to either be very "squatty" or weighted at the bottom. But with the "squatty" cone you would have a bad "base-to-side-ratio" and lose about half of the energy to the ground. With the weighted one it might land on uneven terrain and still not go base down. Yes the triangle design is probably best.

[0EZ0]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> However, as anyone who's ever thrown an empty can knows, it's a near miracle if it lands upright on one end and stays that way. 99.9999% of the time a cylinder will land on its side. This is prevented (in the patent) by the use of spring loaded legs to upright it. But this is complicating things.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">No need for spring loaded legs.
Make an eliptical Dome end on one end of the cylinder, and fill with cast lead or anything that will end up heavier than the explosive charge together with it's section of pipe/cylinder. When thrown, if the wieght is heavy enough, it will have a *toy-clown* effect and bob back up on it's weighted dome end. If it is too unstable when it lands and bobs too much, try making a flat section on the middle of the dome with a hammer or some other tool. This shold bob less and find the flat section which it can sit on, thus making the time to stabilise a bit less.

*Does anyone know those stupid clown toys that just bob back up again when they are pushed over? Well that is what I was referring to.

If you want to get tricky and go 'ERASER' style <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ,try making an ejection charge that would propell the actual genade charge into the air a few feet for a full target hit, while leaving behind the heavy base weight behind. But i think thats getting a bit carried away.

Well anyways, worth a thought.

On another note, a pyramid shaped grenade would probably be better for improvising, while getting quite good results. With a cylindrical charge, things could get tricky. So good design NBK!

[FarbrorBosse]

When fighting in a city cleaning rooms there is not much time.
You throw in a grenade, wait &lt; 3 seconds for the KABOOM then you rush into the room following a wall, low positions directly after detonation with your group shoulder to shoulder and spray the room with 5.56 or 7.62 from one corner to the other to remove any targets still not dead cause they have kept away from the blast and not died instantly by the stress of the detonation or metal.
I would not trust a "triangle" grenade cause of some reasons, the main one is there will be very little effect in low corners, even less then with a normal "egg" shaped grenade. People tend to keep low positions when they suspect someone will attack/kill them and if you see a grenade you will most likely hug the ground as far away from it as possible.
A standard grenade will place the metal pieces in a more spread out and regular pattern, and the new egg shaped ones kills even better now with less HE and better construction giving better killing rate and less chance of getting a brick wall over you when you throw it in, the beauty of science...

[Whitey]

Very creative idea.

How big would it be? If it is to big it would be difficult to carry on the load bearing equiptment or load bearing vest. That's the problem with stick grenades, you can throw them farther but their isn't many easy ways to carry them where you can get to them fast other than tucking them in your belt. One of the main reasons grenades are shaped like eggs or circular is because we grow up throwing things with a similiar shape (baseballs). So an American hand (is that different to any other hand?)is used to throwing something that shape long distances. And long distance are important with grenades since the the chances of getting hurt decrease with the increase in distance. As is grenades can still produce casualties at the ranges an average man can throw one. That is why soldiers are trained to always throw from cover or from the prone position.

Where would you place the fuze assembley? The mechanism should be placed so that the hand naturally has a firm grip on the spoon.

As far as city fighting goes fragmentation is not always a good thing. Modern buildings use lots of thin walls made of sheetrock, that wouldn't stop grenade fragments. What the military often does is use offensive (concussion) grenades instead of defensive (fragmentation) grenades. Offensive grenades are meant to be used against troops occupying enclosed spaces (rooms, bunkers, fox holes). Since the explosion is confined it is much more effective than it would be in the open.

Use of this type of casing might be very useful in a "bouncing betty" type anti personel mine or perhaps in a ground bursting mine. This "tri grenade" idea could prove very interesting.

<small>[ August 03, 2002, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]</small>

[MrSamosa]

One thing that bugs me about this design is how aerodynamic the pyramid shape is... It's not very stable in the air, which will lead to shorter throws. Also, the pyramid shape seems like it would be more susceptible to windage than the ordinary egg shaped design. BUT, if you're not very concerned about distances, this is definately the way to go...good thinking NBK.

[nbk2000]

Here's the problem with the standard egg grenade designs:

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Grenade-percentages.gif" alt=" - " />

Unless the enemy at a 90 degree angle to the grenade body when it explodes, he's only risking 5% of the total frag count. Also, there's no directional control as to where the frags go since it essentially a sphere. You're just as likely to get hit as the enemy is.

Whereas, with the faces of the grenade pointing upwards:

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Thrower-Safety.gif" alt=" - " />

the majority of the fragments go far over your head. The greater the distance you are from the explosion, the greater the distance over your head the fragments are.

The grenade (if commercially made) could have a hollow plastic body where one side snaps off to allow removal of the pyramidal explosive filler block to use as a concussion only grenade. But that's too complicated for us. I'm thinking a cast block of Nipolit with frag plates that clip on/off.

The detonator is in the center (natch) with a fuze well in the center of the face of one of the sides. A mousetrap type spring loaded striker could be built in, with the primer being slightly recessed. After pulling the pin, the striker is held back by the thumb till thrown.

The grenade would be smaller than a baseball, so wouldn't be very heavy. Yes, it's not to aerodynamic, but that's unimportant at the low speeds a person is able to throw at. For added range, a yard of cord could be clipped onto a recessed eyelet in one of the corners. Pull the pin, give it a whirl, then throw. You could, with practice, be airbursting these over enemies hiding behind cars.

Also, you have to remember to think about these in the context of the poster (me). I'm not worried about fighting off invading soldiers wearing camo and helmets. Rather, my enemies would be wearing blue and badges. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> They're not going to be charging through grenade bursts to assualt MY hill. :p

[FarbrorBosse]

I'll make some 50gram triangle with 4mm hardened steel bullets inside
and around the shell, to see how they behave.
I'm still looking for a program able to calculate and visualize how
pressure travel through material and such, to improve my designs
but the good ones are expensive, and do not give out any trial/shareware programs. :)
Hard to figure the exact effect just by looking at the device.

Talking about blue ones... I have a vague memory I was very close
to get uninvited visitors while thinking of a linear shaped charge yesterday (looked like xtreme's shaped charge but I used AL instead of brass and &lt; 1mm thick. Fortunately there was a 5 min delay between BOOM and the car with blue lights on the roof so I was already on the highway when it passed by.

The charge was square shaped like the border surrounding a painting.
I wanted to use equal length det cord and ignite in opposite corners but
only had about150mm homemade so it had to be a regular 1 cap charge.

The sound was very loud even though it was surrounded by a drainpipe full of sand.

Think I'll choose a better location for my tests, recall there is a
weapon storage like 1 km from where I was and someone might have suspected it got visitors.

[nbk2000]

4mm is BB size. If I remembere right, most grenades using steel balls as fragments use 2mm balls. Though BBs are much easier to obtain.

In order to properly test a weapon, you need <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000389#000005" target="_blank">targets</a>. Use these set up at varying distances from the grenade to examine the frag pattern.

Also, what HE are you going to use?

[Spudkilla]

One problem that you guys seem to not be talking about is the greandes faces? How would you keep these together, and exploding, rather than just ripping away from the seams? Welding with a primary and HE inside the thing you are welding isnt a very good idea. I dont think soldering would be a very good idea either.

It is a good idea, but not good for use. Manufacturing would probably cost 2 - 4 times more than simple egg shaped grenade, they would hard to carry, and, they could just bust if they hit the ground wrong!!!! I would do extensive testing before I tried to sell that to somebody, because this grenade has more weaknesses then an egg shaped greneade.

[James]

I have a copy of 'the illustrated encyclopedia of ammunition' in which there is a picture of a roughly cylindrical offensive hand grenade and a fragmenting jacket. (p. 107 far right) the markings read 'HGR SPRENG DM 51' \n 'LOS DN-1-2'.

[rjche]

Good Idea, if practical items can be solved. There is a serious problem of wasted fragments in most designs of antipersonnel devices.

The thing could have steel bb's embedded in a material like auto bondo, which would be resilient, tough, but NOT absorb much energy of the blast due to mass or strength.

For example of bb's , a design was theorized using an ordinary 99cent empty spray paint can, with stick of 50% dyamite in its center with cap set in the center of the stick. The volume around the stick to the outside can was filled with steel BB's, (about 4 $ worth. buck for the stick, and buck for a commercial primer.)

These were designed as pre positioned area protectors, electrically fired from inside a dwelling, to clear the deck around them. The would be positioned around obvious cover spots of attackers.

In that analysis the coupling from blast energy to bb's was estimated at about 50%. The energy of the stick was calculated, and was divided equally among the bb's. I believe there were artound 3000 in that design but I'm remembering from several itterations.

Anyway that design yielded about 2700 fps for each bb.

What I never got around to was finding the ballistic coefficient for a 17 cal bb, of steel and seeing how far it traveled before its velocity dropped below mach 1. At 1000 fps a steel bb is an effective injury inducing fragment against ordinary clothing and flesh. Armor would stop it cold, but I believe the calculation showed that a man size target at 20 some feet from it would be hit with around a hundred bb's, more or less. The paint can was chosen as the handiest container with not too much restraint, etc. and did NOT Hold too much nor too little bb's to be effective.

For safety the unit would use a fuse blasting cap, with RG58 coax crimped in as the fuse. That would be fired by a stun gun in the house to put enough hi voltage on the coax at the far end to cause it to arc over. That is about 6 kv. The flame of the capacitance of the line would make a humongous initation for the fuse cap, so it would reach detonation much better if hit by a flame. More of it would thus go off high order, although that would not be needed for dynamite.

The coax is more immune from lightning, compared to ordinary electric caps.To further reduce any accidents the cable could be put in metal tubing, such as 3/8 inch soft copper tubing, and well grounded each end.

That gives the general idea of that design, and the bb's would be just loose in that design. However the use of bondo to allow no outer container is also a good design. I recall the spinner bomblets in the carpet bomb had hard fragments embedded in a pot metal housing, which also lost trivial energy of the blast. Also in WWII, Germany used steel frags, or quartz rounded river gravel, embedded in sorry concrete for their potato masher stick grenades. The bursting charge powdered the light weight concrete, and the steel or river gravel absorbed much of the blast energy.

I think the angle protection of the thrower is an important feature. Even a bb, can make a painful dent in a buttock from 30 yards away with an initial velocity of only 300 fps or so. One going 2000 or so would be deadly to one's exposed vitals up to probably 50 yards. Get hit by a dozen and nervous system shutdown could occur as in people shot with firing squads.

Never seen any of them sass back, or say anything after the bang. Something to be said about multiple hits.

OFF thread, but while I'm on the subject those playing with projectiles, we designed one using bondo in 38 cal. 38 spcl, loaded with 8 grs bullseye, and gas check over that and filled with bondo to top, resulted in a 2500 fps light projectile from 2 inch bbl.

Exploded on impact and made large diameter 2-3 inch hole in chest cavity (side of beef). Thus bondo is a useful material for weaponeers to consider. Never thought of making one loaded with bb's before, but that would probably be even more impressive on hitting, but would probably weigh enough to require slower 2400 powder.

Nuff off topic. Those interested in weapons probably enjoyed the rant, but to the triangular grenade, I'm thinking it ought be given trials, to see what it can do, THEN if it has good tactical merit, let the mfg engrs work out the process to make it. They know tricks we'd never think of.

If soldiers like it and feel better using it, and it has a good casualty rate, they can make it.

Think what could be done if it was launched by large slingshot, like those theu use to send water balloons. With a 3 second fuze. even a lit fuse, it could be used as aerial bombardment.

Several hundred bb's coming down from above would raise much hell with one's unarmored appendages and buttocks. Could likely change ones agressive attitude into a pelp pelp pelp high speed retreat, specially for blue uniformed attackers, not used to pirania like incoming.

[zaibatsu]

I would have thought it would be relatively easy to make up a casing for the grenade from GRP. It would be simple to incorporate the BBs, after applying a gelcoat, apply a layer of thin chopped mat, then wait until the resin is close to curing and therefore sticky, then roll the grenade body in a bath of BBs. Then just lay another layer over the top of these, and you have the body. Obviously it would have to be done well to be strong, but I don't forsee it being very difficult. Also, it would be quite cheap to make.

[EP]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> Welding with a primary and HE inside the thing you are welding isnt a very good idea. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">While I agree that the casing itself would be fairly difficult to make and might end up too weak at the seams, I think the explosives problem can be solved without too much difficulty.

Why not just make the case, then fill with a castable HE, leaving a formed hole the same way you might do for a fountain or rocket core. The detonator/fuze assembly could then be slid in place and attached once the rest is all ready.

[FarbrorBosse]

I'll either use PETN or RDX as HE and then AP to cause the shock since those are the ones I am pretty sure I won't screw up on doing. Or just fill it with AP depending on next month income.

Have a friend that can get me unlimited access of 4mm rounds so I'll have to use those even if it limits the holes in my test dummies. I'll check if he can get me any smaller ones like the 2mm you mentioned and maybe even smaller to lower the safety distance, and make more holes so it is easier to see the spray pattern.

[J.T.Ripper]

Why not have a grenade that like an ice cream cone.
It would have a point at one end and be round at the other. The explosives would be in the cone part and the semi rounded bottom would be just something heavy to make it stand up. the only problem with this is that it would be hard to throw. you can fix this problem with a round case like a normal smoke grenade. just have it empty or full of tiny BB's. the wieght at the bottom would make it stand up and the blast pattern would be at the angle you want, not wasting any shrapnel.

[nbk2000]

A cone isn't going to stand upright. Even with a heavy base, the center of gravity is too high (towards the point) for it to remain upright, thus it'll always fall over.

A triangle is the most stable geometric shape there is.

Also, it's not hard to make a frag casing for these. Since it IS exactly the same shape on all sides, it wouldn't be difficult at all to make triangular plates of HFS and attach them to the explosive core.

Or, as suggested, cover in bondo and coat with BBs. Then, for added strength, cover those with a fiberglass wrap and top off with an additional acrylic coat before painting.

Obviously, the explosive can't be liquid, slurry, or powder. It'd have to be cast. That's why Nipolit would be perfect for these since it's castable, very strong (mechanically), and uses availble (or makeable) NC as a binder for more powerful explosives like PETN or TNP.

[Anthony]

A bit on the frag energy:

A steel 4.5mm BB weighs 4.5 grains, at 2000 fps, that's 40ft/lb per frag.

Comparitevly, a 12 bore shotty firing No.6 cart has 7ft/lb per pellet at the muzzle, dropping to about 2ft/lb at 45yards.

I reckon the BC of a piece of No.6 shot and a BB would be fairly similar so a bit of rough comparison would be ok. Say, divide energy by 4 (to be conservative) to give energy at 45yds. So that's about 10ft/lb per frag at 45yds. Bearing in mind that young adults have been killed by a shot to the head from a single BB at around, or less than that kind of energy, it should do some damage. If someone got hit by a bunch of them, it should be worse than a hit from a shotty at the same distance (buckshot and slugs excluded :) ).

[DBSP]

I made a tri-grenade yesterday, which I haven't detonated yet. I need to shot a sutible bird for use in the testing first.
I'll use APAN for practical reasons. What explosive I use isn't critical to my test since I just want to test the pattern at first.

It has a thin plastic body with the bbs fastened by double adhesive tape and then secured with spray glue.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_before_assembling.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_before_assembling.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/DBSPs_tri_grenade_prototype.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/DBSPs_tri_grenade_prototype.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_from_above.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_from_above.JPG</a>

<small>[ August 06, 2002, 05:41 AM: Message edited by: DBSP ]</small>

[nbk2000]

Good job there!

The only thing I'd do differently would be to have the frags in direct contact with the explosive filler, since even a couple of millimeters seperation can result in a dramatic lose in velocity.

Is the bird to test flesh penetration? Good thinking.

Also, APAN is a kinda slow explosive for a grenade filler, but if that's all you got...

You should have several cardboard targets (as detailed in the claymore thread) to test fragment dispersion pattern.

Anxiously awaiting test results. Is video possible? Using a mirror, of course, so as not to risk the camera.

[Mr Cool]

Looks nicer with the frags on the outside though, which is of course a top priority :) .
Video would be great, and be sure to have lots of stuff around (wooden planks, thin metal sheets, thicker metal sheets) and take pics of the effects.

[DBSP]

Glad you like it :) The bird is for flesh penetration test.

It's only a prototype so there are lots of things to improve.

I have some large papers I thought I'd put my brother on and draw the curves of his body, and cut them out and fasten them on a stick and position them in different hights and angles to se how the pattern is.

I haven't got a video camera so thats a bit hard, but I've allways got my digicam.

APAN isn't the only thing I've got, I could use ANNM but I don't think that I can get more than 20-30g into it. A nother thing I thought about would be NG sensitised AN with a higher percentage of NG(got any idea of this?).

BTW I've counted the bullets and there are about 240 of them.(about 80 each side)

[xoo1246]

Don't forget to remove your brother from the paper when you are done.

Anyways, to make the contruction more exotic one could attach two of thease tri-grenades to each other, thus forming a more normal grenade shape. They could be held together with NC, when thrown, they separate(with little or no force, you don't want one of them to fly back again) after a second due to a pyrotechnical train reaching the NC. Two seconds later they both detonate. It's hard to throw back two grenades.

[Eliteforum]

I agree with the idea that Xoo has, I have made a little picture to illustrate what he means but boomSHITE keeps timing out. (Anyone else having problems like this?)

I'll upload it as soon as I can log into my account.

It has the same idea as the tri-grenade, it will always have 3 sides pointing outwards, however one will always be at a lesser angle thus lowering kill/target zone.

[kingspaz]

yer but if its at a lesser angle and it land in such a way as to point back to you then you have a greater chance of being hit. nbk's picture illustrates the principle well. the angle side of the pyramid results in hitting nearby targets but not further ones (like the thrower).

[DBSP]

What xoo means is that you have a grenade made out of two tri-s when it hits the ground or when triggered by a mechanism they seperate and you have two grenades which increeses the chance of hitting the target since there are a larger number of surfaces on the grenades. This while the risk of getting hit yourself still isn't to great since you still are at a proper distace(presumably).

[Spudkilla]

I am worried about that grenade you constructed, DBSP. My worries are with the fragmentation. I am guessing that the grenade will explode, but the slugs will fail to seperate from the metal, and your Tri-Grenade will turn out to be an expensive pipe bomb. For future reference, I think the slugs should be right up next to the explosive charge, so that when the grenade explodes, you will not just have the "Expensive Pipe Bomb Effect".

I just thought of this, but NBK, you should patent your grenade sometime in the next month or so, once you have had time to experiment with it. It is an excellent design, and we don't want anybody stealing your ideas (I would never think of it :D )

[PYRO500]

I don't think NBK has the time or money to patent this. last I checked it was about 7,000$ for all the stuff needed to get a patent (patent lawyer, patent fees, drafter fees etc) I actually invented a few things before that have either already patented or patented later ( example the poloroid printing digital camera witch exposes film to a backlit lcd matrix) The only real way to make money off of an invention without large cash investments is to sell it to an invention company who's purpose is to rip you off.

[nbk2000]

I've whipped up a cardboard mock-up of two "trinades". Wonders you can make with cardboard and poster putty. :)

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/trinade_together.jpg" alt=" - " />

I see what he meant by two stuck together. That wouldn't be a bad idea if you can get a decent grip on them. But they'd have to kinda small to be able to throw two together.

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/trinade_seperated.jpg" alt=" - " />

With a small seperation charge of flash, and a little practice on the timing so they seperate in midair above the target, you could have quite an effective dispersion of fragments.

The trinades might be better suited as use as bomblets for cluster weapons. I can envision triangular plates of HFS backed with sheet explosive. The plates are layed flat, but fold up in mid-air (after dispersion from the carrier) by small flat springs. The fuse mechanism is embedded in a paper IC circuit that is embedded in the sheet explosive, along with the paper battery that powers it.

Naturally, these trinades are hollow pyramids, meaning they're light for their volume, but are flat during storage. With 75% fragment dispersion per bomblet, better than 75% of the bomblets weight being fragments (the HFS steel), and able to pack them very densely since they lay out flat... <img src="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/icons/icon23.gif" alt=" - " />

Patents are indeed expensive. And more than 99% of them never make the owner any money.

There's some guy who writes a lot of articles in some electronics magazine or something who's got a whole series of books on using trademarks, instead of patents, for protecting your ideas. Supposedly just as effective and only costs a few hundred, instead of thousands.

Well, as an example of previous ideas I've had that I could have profited from if I had had the money to patent them:

<a href="http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.com/our_products/combatvision/SNAKE_EYES/product-SNAKE_EYES.html" target="_blank">Telescopic Mast (periscope) for Armored Vehicles</a>

Only now are they coming out with this. I had this idea back in '89 and can prove it in court since the design was part of my notes which the cops copied and entered as evidence against me at my trial.

Other things which I've designed (in said notes) that are comimg out now is the OICW concept of an individual weapon that uses a laser range finder to program airbursting shells.

Another one was a "bomb" in which individual SOF troopers are dropped into hostile territory by low flying combat jets, thus obviating the need for slow (and easy to shoot down) transport planes for airdrops.

The DOD went the pussy way of having the "bombs" attached to Harriers that would actually land and disembark the troops on the ground. With mine, the bomb free falls under GPS guidance till radar detects the ground a few hundred feet below, at which time a retro-rocket fires to slow the troop carrier to a slow enough speed for the ram chute to deploy without shredding. Time form retro firing to deployment on the ground would be less than 15 seconds.

The troops would be dropped at the same time as live bombs. Small retarder fins on the carriers give adequate safe distance from the exploding bombs. This way the troopers are landing within seconds of a bombing run and can easily overcome the stunned defenders. :)

'Course it'll happen that the occasional manufacturing error results in a failure of the retro to fire or chute to deploy. But that saves time since they'll automatically be buried in a conveniently provided coffin! :D

I also have an idea for a 20mm+ man portable direct fire cannon that uses gyrojet type rockets with a rifled barrel and retaining pins similiar to the MLRS system. Rapid fire, recoilless, lightweight (under 25 pounds is light for a "heavy" infantry weapon), explosive effect, able to engage infantry in the open, behind cover, light armored vehicles, helicopters, and bunkers, all within line of sight out to more than a kilometer. Minimal firing signature, quick reloading from preloaded revolver-type drums, alloy and plastic construction (no complicated machining), etc.

Only thing stopping me is a million for R&D. :p Damn it! Where's the letter M when you need it?!

<small>[ August 07, 2002, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[PrimoPyro]

This is a very unique design. I like it very much, but it is not without it's problems.

Manufacture of the casing has already been discussed, being evaluated as a hindrance due to complexity of manufacture and structuring to maintain case integrity as long as possible to ensure complete detonation.

The other problem is that if it is detonated from a single point detonator placed in the center (the logical choice) you will have a lot of force culminating in the points of the grenade where it does little good except to tear the seams. As the force spreads out via internal combustion, and the pressure is not yet great enough to rupture the casing, the force rolls off the closest point of impact to the further points. The closest point will be the flat walls, and the farther points will be the corners. Most of your force will culminate at the corners at the time of blasting, unless you initiate the blast from these corners.

I would use a five point multi-ignition based on an exploding bridgewire circuit wired through the device. This could easily detonate all five points simultaneously from one power source (simple capacitor) and could even incorporate various extra features such as timed delay, impact detonation, arming and disarming, etc. It could be run off a watch battery placed into one of the corners.

Sounds complicated but so is this entire device if you want it to work correctly. Its not that hard. Wire all the detonators (four at the points and one at the center) in a small parallel circuit in line with capacitor discharge, and they will all detonate simultaneously upon closing of the capacitor circuit.

As for building it, I personally would make the actual device as two pieces. Imagine one piece as three of the triangles fused together, and the second half of the device is the sole remaining piece. In the fused triangle piece, the "top" corner of this bottomless pyramid should be flat and round, like a nail head for example. In this head is a + that is used in conjunbction with a screwdriver.

The other piece is the last triangle. Picture it flat on the floor in your mind. Extending upward from its inner center is a thin threaded bolt that also contains the ignition explosives and contacts.

The bolt piece is placed inside the other fused triangle piece, fitting into the small socket at the "top" of the bottomless pyramid (on the inside of course) The small space between the flat plate piece and the pyramid is enough to stick a funnel inside and fill with explosive.

Then the pieces are cranked together with a screwdriver, twising the bolt inside the shaft and causing the threads to pull the two pieces together and compessing the explosive to a higher density within.

Ideally, the bolt would slip into a small jacket that is part of the fuzed piece, to prevent grinding and premature detonation. As for what I mean by "small" well 3mm diameter of iron is more than strong enough to crank this down, and that is the average diameter of a screw.

You could actually use a REAL screw if you reversed the principle, and had the central screw on the fuzed triangle piece be the real center, and the flat triangle had the jacket that didn't turn. This jacket would slip around the the central screw shaft, and the screw is just cranked from outside to pull them together.

The metal screw can also serve as an electrical contact from the shaft where the power source for the bridgewire is contained, to the far point at the end of the screw.

All theory, but so is your grenade. :D

PrimoPyro

<small>[ August 07, 2002, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: PrimoPyro ]</small>

[Anthony]

Although the features would be nice, and multi-point detonation would be more efficient, the cost of a "smart" grenade like that would be huge compared to the regular grenades it is intended to replace.

I don't think exploding bridge wire detonators are going to practical, unless the grenade is attached to a long cable running to your cap bank :)

I think these grenades are a good idea, just as long as their probable extra expense doesn't outweigh their benefits over a regular grenade, I see no reason why they wouldn't be used.

[PYRO500]

I had an idea for the manufacture of these in large quantities. it is as follows:

1.TNT is melted and then cast in a pyramidal mold

2.The TNT pyramid is drilled out on the top to make a hole for a detonator to be placed later.

3.many parabolic indentations are machined in the sides as an area for the ball berings to be placed in.

4.ball berings are placed in firm contact with the TNT afterwards they are fastened in their place by some type of glue or epoxy.

5.the grenade is sprayed with a laquor that prevents the handelers from gettin poisoned by the TNT.

6.a detonator/ fuse assembly is inserted into the hole that was previously drilled out.

7.the detonator/fuse assembly is fixred in place and the grenade is now ready for use.

8.the shavings of TNT from drilling the triangle are recycled and thrown back into the molten TNT mix.

The only other thing I could see in the above process as being diffrent is having the ball bering spaces as being cast with the mold improving production simplicity. THe only problem I see with that is that it may be difficult to make so many indentations with a simple molding process

[zaibatsu]

To mould the TNT with indentations already present, you could make a mold from latex by first mocking up the grenades shape with the indentations. Brush the latex on to three sides of the mock-up of the grenade with the hole for the det. already in place, wait for it to set, and peel off. Then, make a metal/wooden section of the fourth side. Support the latex mould in sand etc, and pour in the TNT. While still molten, press the metal/wooden side on top and leave to solidify. When the TNT has set, remove the metal/wooden side and peel off the latex mould.

This is assuming the molten TNT doesn't react with the latex. Also, some work would be needed to ensure a good fit between the latex mold and the metal/wooden side. But, it would result in a shaped block of TNT ready for the addition of the ball bearings. You could then place a drop of adhesive in each indentation, then drop in a BB, and carry on like that. Hope this made *some* sense.

[endotherm]

Perhaps a design similiar to a weeble childs toy
"An egg-shaped plastic toy person with a weight in the bottom so that, if tipped over, they would right themselves and stand up again. They were popular in the UK during the 1970s and were famous for the slogan "Weebles wobble but they don't fall down" <a href="http://www.yesterdayland.com/popopedia/shows/toys/ty1088.php" target="_blank">WEEBLE</a>
Could be used. A triangular shape with an heavily weighted egg like bottom. The casing can be of a single metal piece, filed to release shrapnel only from the top part, so no energy is waisted destroying the bottom of the casing.

[Ron McDonald]

This design will work. That being said if you are building these things simply to kill/hurt people (I'm sure none of you are) instead of winning a governmnet contract with complex ratios, and blast patterns simple is better. A insanely simple design can be made from a toilet paper tube, duct tape, and bbs. I won't bother explaining all the details, but is a simplification of a russian design. Priotize what you are looking for. 1 Does it work 2 Cost 3 Ease of use 4 Ease of production Keep it Simple

[nbk2000]

Well I tested a full sized cardboard dummy trinade last night at work.

It's three inches along all the edges (natch) and was weighted with sand to about 3-4 ounces. Internal volume is 34 ml (measured at home with water and cylinder). Using 3/16" steel HFS plating for casing, that'd give a case weight of 13 ounces, plus 52 grams HE charge at d1.5 (C-4).

From throwing it around for a half hour in the parking lot I learned that:

It flies straight. It doesn't veer left or right. It does (naturally) tumble in flight.

When thrown, it'll fly pretty much in a straight line till the end, at which time it stalls and drops straight down. Like this:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">-----------------------+
+
+
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/(Ground)</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Throwing as hard as I could, it would go 26-28 paces (yards since I've measured my stride as almost exactly such) consistantly.

Perhaps because of the unstable aerodynamics of a triangle, there's a maximum distance it'll fly, regardless of the force applied to it. If such a "maximum" is possible, then you could, in combination with the "straight down drop" consistantly drop a trinade down small holes at a distance (like tunnel holes, foxholes, bunker entrances, etc) without the variables that fuck up most grenade throwers.

When it lands, it'll either stop exactly there (flat side landing), or bounce ONCE and land within 2 feet of it's original landing point. It did this on flat and sloped concrete (up and downhill), and thick grass. It didn't roll, tumble, or slide when thrown downhill (about 30 degree slope).

Best way to hold it was with one corner between the index and middle fingers where they join the hand. The little finger and ring finger are curled up into the palm, and the themb crosses the flat side (side opposite the palm) to touch the index and middle finger on the edge.

You don't have to complicate the design by machining or casting in dimples or such. Just make a triangular form out of cardboard, line the outside with magnetic sheeting, and pour in the shot. Line it up by hand to maximum density and the magnet field holds it in place. I've done this with BBs before. Then fill the mold with your molten explosive that, when cooled, will hold the shot in place. Hence the Nipolit. Though TNP/wax, or PBX would work fine too.

Weebles stay upright because all the weight is at the bottom. So where's the explosive going to be in a weeble shaped frag case? At the bottom? Then what about the casing? :rolleyes:

When the explosion starts in the center, it'll radiate out in a spherical manner. Thus, the center of the faces will be the first to be hit by the shockwave since they're closest to the center. The corners would be last. Thus, what's the problem?

Multipoint initiation for something like a grenade, which needs to be KISSed, is going WAY overboard.

As for why there'd be extra expense for the triangle shape, I don't know where you get that idea from. it'd be VERY cheap to stamp out a simple shape from sheet steel. A hole is stamped (at the same time) in one face for the detonator well to be screwed in (later), then stamped into a die to form it into a triangle. Fill through provided hole, and there it is.

Two or three stamping operations and one fitting makes a grenade body. How simple is that? :)

[endotherm]

NBK: </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Weebles stay upright because all the weight is at the bottom. So where's the explosive going to be in a weeble shaped frag case? At the bottom? Then what about the casing? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Most high explosive fillers would be of a lower density, than perhaps a lead slug at the base of the tri-grenade with the egg shaped bottom. Maybe the bottom of the tri-grenade could be filled with molten lead to provide the bottom-heaviness to keep it upright like a weeble. Maybe i'm complicating things too much, or maybe i'm not, because a grenade that stands upright and throws it shrapnel at only the perfect angles and wastes little explosive energy through unimportant areas(the bottom of the grenade if it's upright, or the side of the grenade facing the ground for a regular grenade) is a concept worth complication.

[Eliteforum]

I think what endotherm is trying to say, is a tri-grenade like this:

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/eggtri.gif" alt=" - " />

The black part being the weight, and the area above your frag/explosive area.

[Anthony]

Yes... Except that the weight of the explosive/frags will make the grenade non bottom heavy, so the weighted bottom will be useless.

[Eliteforum]

I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to get the balance right..

[nbk2000]

And if you succeed in weighting it so it stays upright, how heavy is it going to be? :( Probably too heavy to throw far enough away.

Lets just wait till the test results come in before we start arguing over theory, shall we?

[Eliteforum]

I'll make one like in my diagram above. If I take pictures they will be small like my other pictures were. So.. :confused:

[Eliteforum]

Just finished the demo design. Bear in mind it is just a demo and the pictures are crap and everything.. 'nuff said, here's the pictures.

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/001.gif" alt=" - " /> - Top view of materials.

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/002.gif" alt=" - " /> - View of rounded base.

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/003.gif" alt=" - " /> - Top view of compleated cone and base.

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/004.gif" alt=" - " /> - Bottom view of cone and base.

<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/005.gif" alt=" - " /> - Top view of cone.

[nbk2000]

Looks like a vanilla ice cream cone that fell upside down. And just as deadly! :D

[THErAPIST]

i have an idea. you would first make a tri grenade cast out of heavy cardboard. you would then fill the cast with AP/DBSP and put a match stick or a big tooth pick in there to make a hole for a fuse. after the putty is dry it would keep the tri grenade shape so you would be free to put a thin layer of adhesive onto the triangle and then put your BB's on the adhesive. then you would put a fuse in the afore mentioned tooth pick hole. you would light the fuse and throw it. if it hit hard enough it would detonate on impact or it would go off when the fuse hit it. if it detonated on impact we could get rid of the throwing it back problem all together. not to mention there wouldnt be any space between the projectiles and the explosive so the projectile would go at the greatest speed possible. or maybe have a bondo cover that held the BB's. the bondo covers would have an adhesive on one side, like double sided tape or something. that way you could keep the bondo covers off and have a small somewhat shitty concussion grenade for those worried about shrapnel or you could peel the cover strip off of the double sided tape and stick the bondo/ bb covers on the charge for a frag grenade. the bondo might kinda cussion the grenade from impact detonation also.
just an idea

[PYRO500]

I see potential advantages and disadvantages for both. For one the original tri grenade has it's strong points such as great kill zone schrapel coverage while it possibly lacks coverage in the sides where the sides of the paramid meet. other than that it has almost 360 coverage and has the nice feature of pretty much unlimited schrapenel. another problem is the aerodynamics witch seem to keep it from going very far, perhaps with a heavyer model the effects will differ.

On the cone idea, you get absolute 360 coverage but you are limited not only to the weight of schrapnel but you are also limited on the explosive and the size as the weight has to compensate. I'd say for aerodynamics the cone has the parymid beat by a mile beacuse when throwing the cone you have a smooth face that comes to a point in the back. the design will tumble in flight depending on how you throw it but if the end is heavy enough and the cone is long/narrow enough it would possibly strike end first meaning you could have impact detonation.
The problem I see in the cone is the small size of the base of the cone is making the surface area around the cone (witch you can only add limited weight to anyways) small and reducing the density of the schrapnel at longer ranges.

I think a combination of self righting and directional controlon where the schrapnel might work. How about a grenade that's aerodynamic and has control over the direction in witch the schrapen goes when it lands in the right position. possibly a grenade that has metal extrusions that cause it to roll into the desired position. After all, all the grenade has to do is land in the right position there's no saying a cheap plastic shell that makes it land in the right orentation (and makes it more aerodynamic) couldn't be used on the outside of the device.

Something else that I've considered is attaching high power magnets to the outside of a metallic fragmentation gredade. if the cops are taking cover and duck and firing behind their cars then you could possibly create a magnetic grenade that would practicly stick to any car or large iron containing object it might touch instead of bouncing off. Another practical use for something like this is to throw from a moving car, you have your grenade and when tossed from a car is likely to crack a few of the magnets but that won't matter beacuse there stuck to an iron ring anyways and need over 200 pounds to pull em off. any car that happened to be in the path of the grenade would have it stick and go off while attached to the car adding to the lethality and stopping power (where is a grenade gonna hit a car that won't disable it or the occupant?

[DBSP]

I made some targets today, sadly I haven't shot a sutible bird yet(when I don't one I can have one but when I really need one I can't get one, fuck :mad: ).

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/trinade_target.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/trinade_target.JPG</a>
I just couldn't resist it, I <a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/just_had_to_kill_him.JPG" target="_blank">just had to kill him</a> :D

Anyway, I added a thing to one of the sieds of my trinade today. I added some 2,0-2,2mm lead shots(US #9)to it, you don't get killed by them but thay are "extra" distractive and add to the total ammount of shock experiensed by the target, this acomplished by the greater ammount of hits.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/trinade.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/trinade.JPG</a>

[THErAPIST]

must you shoot a bird? is there anything else you might be able to bag? a stray cat or a rabbit maybe? maybe even a racoon or somehting. go out into the woods, open up a package of jimmy dean sausages, and shoot anything that comes around. or trap something. what better way to test the effects of the grenade on flesh than to test it on something thats still living? trap a cat or something, put a collar on it and stake it somewhere near the trinade. youd then be able to see the punctures better. and see if the pellets do enough damage to actually kill something instead of just puncture it a little.
tis what id do... lotsa stray cats around here.

[Energy84]

You're sick man. Mabye you should be used as the target? Why not use a human (if you can be called that) as a test target? That is what the tri-grenade is intended for isn't it?

[PYRO500]

I'm not really interested in a target demonstration. I don't care about a bird, I say save them for the poison gas testing.

I think the added bb's are going to make it harder to differentiate between the larger shot and the pattern that it spreads in. Just seeing that it slopes upwards away from the explosive (paper punch) is good enough for me althoug if you could set up multiple large targets that were in front of eachother in regular intervals you could see if the schrapnel was actually sloping upwards as intended. Another thing I wanst to know is how much schrapenl is flung aroung the ground, if you can't stop them from throwing schrapnel at ankle hiegth that dosent rise then forget about staying prone far away to avoid the schrapnel.

[nbk2000]

The military uses live `goats, sheep, dogs, and monkeys as targets to test weapons effects. After all, dead targets don't bleed out, or survive a hit. The ability to kill is a prime concern for a weapon, and the only way to test that is to KILL something that's alive.

As for ground level fragments, that'd be easy enough to test if you have a flat water pond (like a certain someone has :D ). Simply set the trinade on a float and explode it out on the water while videoing it. If you see any splashs on the water at a distance, that's a fragment. No splashes equals no fragments.

Some surveyors stakes and a roll of kraft paper or such could be used to test for low level frags. Set up a snail shaped spiral from 1 yard out to 15 or so. Attach the 18" wide kraft paper to the stakes using a heavy stapler. Look for what distance the frags no longer puncture the paper. That's you minimum safe distance. After all, if the 18" paper isn't penetrated, neither would a person laying down since they're less than 18" high.

One could deliberatly design it so the frags are very unaerodynamic. Use cubes of dense plastic as fragments. They'll travel very quickly at first, but rapidly lose velocity since they're of low mass and high drag. This would make it lethal for a few yards, but harmless at distance.

Besides which, this is just part of a larger concept anyways, which includes the use of lightweight ballistic shields. This would be between you and the target anyhows, so between the design and the shield, you'd be quite safe at even close range.

Smaller BB's won't confuse the test results since you can clearly diffirentiate between bullet sizes in paper targets. I'd include some kind of wood target to catch some frags with. If the frags penetrate a 2 inch thick pine board then it'd kill a person.

Usually, the military goes with the 2mm size because of the large number of fragments this allows to be packed into a grenade (1,500 or more), but limits the penetration since the main objective is to seriously wound an enemy, requiring the removal of two other enemy soldiers to help the wounded man.

However, since (in our context) we're not interested in wounding, but rather immediate cessation of hostilities by killing the enemy, larger fragments are required. Plus, large fragments will better penetrate soft body armor.

Interestingly enough, I saw a patent for pyramidal shotgun pellets. The patent states that they travel farther and faster than round shot since it's somewhat aerodynamically shaped, and penetrates better since it has sharp points and edges to pierce and cut a target.

I could see a mold into which regular round steel shot (heated white hot) is dropped into and hammered to turn it into a pyramid. The mold would be hard, but the conversion would be easy.

[DBSP]

Ok test results up.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/trinade_setup.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/trinade_setup.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/after_trinade_det.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/after_trinade_det.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/trinade_crater.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/trinade_crater.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/target_nr1.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/target_nr1.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/back_of_targtet_nr1.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/back_of_targtet_nr1.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/target_nr2.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/target_nr2.JPG</a>

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/closeup.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/closeup.JPG</a>

I got about 25g of ANNM into the trinade and detonated it with a 22 WM shell full of HMTD. I placed the trinade about 10cm above the ground on a piece of wood.

I was supprised to see how few of the frags that had hit the targets, target #1 had substained the heaviest damage. #1 was placed about 1,5m from the target in a position that would equil to a person sitting on the ground. Not only had about 20-25 of the larger bullets hit it, it had also been sprayed with fragments from the ground and casing, I'm not shure wether that person had survived or not but I doubt that he would have been in a position where he could have posed a threat to anyone in the area:p

#2 only got hit 3 times, and #3 not hit once.

The red rings indicate hits from the larger bullets.

I belive the results would have been better if a cast explosive had benn used and had had the frags directly on the explosive.

[xoo1246]

You know when I was in the military, they had a weapons demonstration. One example was a handgrenade on the ground with paper figures around it. The closest(few meters) had only been hit three times. This is not that bad. I would say it's fairly good to be the first test.

[Anthony]

One thing is does show is that the frags did travel at an upwards angle from the grenade.

[nbk2000]

An overhead view would have been helpful because I have a feeling that the orientation of the faces of the trinade in relation to the targets would reveal much.

For instance, was target #1 (the closest) also in direct line with one of the faces of the trinade? If so, that'd explain the almost claymore-like shredding of the target. I've looked very closely at the picture, and it looks like this may have been the case, but it's hard to tell since I'm using a TV as a monitor at the moment, so resolution is crappy and it may be my eyes playing tricks on me.

Also, target #2, while it only got 3 hits, got 2 of them in the chest cavity, one in the center mass, where the lungs/heart/arteries are. That would have been a serious or fatal hit right there.

And, let's not forget the math. Your test model had 90 frags per side. If we multiply that by 4 because of using 2mm frags instead, that increases the hits from 3 to 12 for the farthest target to get hit, and 25 for the closest to...well...swiss cheese. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :p

After enhacing the contrast in photoshop, I was able to find an additional dozen or so significant holes. These are highlighted in larger red circles than the originals.

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Trinade_Vested-Target.jpg" alt=" - " />

I also overlayed a typical ballistic resistant vest to demonstrate that, even with a vest, the target would have been fucked.

An even ten in the upper thorax, head, and neck. An additional 4 in the belly, plus numerous in the arms and shoulders. As stated, even if the target wasn't "killed" it'd be MAJORLY wounded and in no condition to fight you.

BTW, a trinade landing at either end of a parked car would likely be no more than 1.5 meters from a vest wearing target <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> hiding behind a parked vehicle, using it as cover from your weapons fire.

The targets where made out of some kind of wood or particle board, weren't they? It doesn't look like cardboard to me.

Anyways, this is indeed very interesting results. I'd suggest the next one be made from a cast explosive (TNP/wax or TNT) in direct contact with BB frags (better coverage than large shot). Also, more targets in the spiral pattern to determine frag coverage.

I've also thought of the possibility of creating a concaved indentation into the faces of the trinade to act as a focus for the frags. The focus, being very close to the face of the trinade, would cause the frags to widely disperse past the focus.

Another idea:

Create many small trinades from AP putty. Coat with BBs, then with bonbo or rubber cement to fire proof. Only a inch or less of cannon fuse protrudes out of the trinades. These are then loaded into a light cardboard container filled with (Shit! :mad: Forgot what it's called, but its rice hulls covered with black powder) to ignite the fuses and disperse the trinades. These would (in turn) explode from multiple points around the targets, ensure multiple hits from all angles.

Basically, a hand thrown cluster bomb. :D

Suspend the large grenade from a tree about 5 meters above the targets and electrically ignite.

Do you have any FLAT areas around there? Like a rock outcropping or field? This would be a better test since the trinade was envisioned as an URBAN weapon, thus nice and flat surfaces.

<small>[ August 11, 2002, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[kingspaz]

well after zooming into the picture of the setup and looking closely it looks to me as if #1 had a full face, #2 had the very edge of a face and #3 had where 2 faces join.
i have to say that the slaughter number 1 got is very impressive! also well done DBSP for your work. its nice to see some real experiments with pictures. pictures say sooo much more.

[EP]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> (Shit! Forgot what it's called, but its rice hulls covered with black powder) </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Most people just call it "bp coated rice hulls" :p

Nice work DBSP!

[DBSP]

As I don't have any cast explosives at the moment it would be a bit hard to test a trinade with the frags directly in contact with the explosive. But I got an idea when you mentioned AP putty. What if you make a trigrenade body out of AP putty, thus you would have the frags in direct contact with the explosive. The inside of the body could then be filled with a more powerful explosive(that doesn't dissolve the NC) the casing would allso serve as detonator. Perhaps you could use TNP or better RDX or PETN, at this moment I have whats needed to make TNP and perhaps RDX(I recently got a simple <a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/glassware.JPG" target="_blank">distillation flask</a> ). Do you have any ideas?

target #1 was faced directly at one of the sides at a distance of about 1,25-1,5m. #2 was about 3-4m away and faced... I'll have to continiue tomorrow, goto go to bed now, going to the hospital tomorrow.

[Anthony]

I can knock up Trinade if the construction is deemed suitable.

I don't have any RHS to hand. So it's going to have to be BB frags. I'm thinking of cutting 4, 3" triangles from 0.5-1mm thick mild steel sheet, coating with BBs (I'll give the magnet trick a go, if not glue) and assembling into a triangle.

My concern is that the relatively flexible steel skin might interfer with the frag dispersal, or do people not think this will be a problem?

Filler would be plasticised PETN or mannitol hexanitrate, although I cannot make this ATM, although I do have nitromethane and NaNO3 to hand.

Making enough carboard mankins to full map the frag pattern seems like a royal pain. I can test it indoors though. The room is about 30ft square (in fact, the exact size of a squash court), the walls are white painted plaster so should show the frag hits and give a 360 degree map.

Worth doing?

[PYRO500]

an indoor room that you can test a fragnetation device in? who would happen to own this room :) I hope for the legality it's you. I think that a 30 square foot room would give the fragments ample time to expand and with a decent digital camera could provide some useul data.

[nbk2000]

DBSP:

Why you going to the hospital? You didn't get hit, did you?

I don't know about using AP putty as a body...seems unstable. As the charge, maybe, but the casing, no.

Definatly use the TNP, since that's a good HE, and easily mixed with some parrafin wax for casting. You'd have to use a strong detonator to ensure high order detonation.

Anthony:

The thinner the casing, the better I'd think. How about trying the metal of sodas can (aluminium to you brits <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ) for the outer casing? Nice and thin, and soft too. Though, with rightous HE, the steel would easily break apart, but it MAY interfere with frag dispersal.

HFS (AKA High Fragment Steel) is a brittle steel formulation used in US arty and warhead rounds that breaks apart into nice diamond shaped fragments (as shown):

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/HELLFIRE_Warhead_Fragments.jpg" alt=" - " />

This would be nice for making a trinade casing from, but I doubt you can go to the local scrapyard and pick up some sheets of it. :( Besides, BBs make for much more numerous (if less fearsome) fragments for the same weight.

Put the BBs inside, not outside, of a cardboard trinade case so they're in as direct contact with the explosive as much as possible so they gain maximum velocity. The magnet is used only to hold the BBs still so they can be bound in place, not as permanent holding.

In fact,I think plaster would be better than glue to hold the BBs still since it's very fragile and would easily disintegrate from the explosion, with no BBs being (possibly) held in "clumps" by glue or epoxy.

Definitaly go with the PETN. Maximum velocity possible equals much greater effect. Boosted detonator too to ensure maximal VOD. The NM/NO3 would be too weak.

Don't put the trinade in the direct center of the square room since this would show only equal distance effects. Rather, place it towards a corner, so you get both the close, and the far, effects. If you get a nice line of fragments rising up the wall as it gets farther away, you've done a good job. :)

Large sheets of white plastic are available at nursery (plants, not brats) stores for covering seedlings. These sheets are yards wide and very cheap. I'm assuming wood walls for the room? If not (brick/concrete) you should cover the walls with the plastic sheeting so it can record the frag impacts. Otherwise they'll just bounce off the walls, likely leaving very small marks.

Good thing about an enclosed space is that you can easily recover spent fragments. This in itself tells you a lot about the explosions effect on the frags. Are they deformed/shattered/nelted? Or relatively intact?

<small>[ August 12, 2002, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[Bignutsami]

Could you not dip a cast pyramid into NC/Acteone, use this to stick the bb's to the surfaces. When dry coat the device with a few layers of inert laquer.

This way you would have explosive to bb contact, as NC will detonate along with the rest and no casing to interfear with shot patterns.

You can poke a hole through a bird with a blunt stick .. so i wouldnt bother messing with that. Find a kangaroo or something and you'll have a worthy human sized target.

[Mr Cool]

Yes, we can all go out and pick up kangaroos for our tests :rolleyes:

Anthony, did the stuff I sent you arrive OK?

[nbk2000]

Well...he's australian....so allowances must be made for that. :p

It's a Tri-grenade, not a Tri-garoo. :D

Though if an ozzie member wants to test one out against a 'roo, go for it! :) Just be sure to get some pictures.

NC laquer, or regular laquer, it's not going to make much difference.

<small>[ August 12, 2002, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[THErAPIST]

so i thought live animals would be a more effective test subject than a dead ones... im not all that sick. for a case, instead of aluminium maybe some thin plastic like that used in 2 liter drink bottles would work? im not sure but i think that thin plastic would give easier than some aluminum. sure aluminum would rip a little easier but wouldnt plastic give just as easily? detonation = heat, heat and force from detonation would = melting and shattering of plastic. now if the aluminum would be able to be used as fragmentation itself id say use it, but since aluminum wouldnt make very good shrapnel past a couple feet plastic might be better. the plastic might possibly cool into hard sharply shaped pieces that would be more effective for shrapnel at a meter or more but, it would more likely get vaporized. if i remember correctly A-3 is pretty much C-4, A-3 being wax binded RDX instead of being binded with oils and such, im not too great with binding things but binding some RDX with wax and then pouring it into a mold could be done easily couldnt it?.

and nice work DBSP

[Anthony]

I'll try the drink can aluminium, I am a bit concerned about it's rigidity though.

Yeah, I did intend to put the frags on the inside and the magnets only to hold the frags until they're set in place.

I will cast them in plaster.

The walls of the room are plastered brick, I'll take a reccy down there later and test the dentability of the plaster. I'm hoping it's soft enough to show the frag hits as-is.

For legality's sake: yes, I do own the building. I grew tired of my private squash courts and abandoned them to vandals :)

Emailed you Mr C

[Anthony]

I took a walk down there this afternoon. It's a shame about it being the school holidays, too many bloody little people about for my liking. They should know better than to play in abandoned buildings - especially ones used for prototype anti-personal weapons testing <img src="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/icons/icon23.gif" alt=" - " />

Anyway, I was a bit off on the measurements of the room, also the end of the room with the door only has plasterwork up to a height of 7 feet. There's enough loose material around for me to cover the door way to avoid a blind spot in the frag map.

Below is a map of the room, with dimensions:

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/room_map.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/room_map.htm</a>

The numbers in blue relate to the photos on this page:

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/squash_court.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/squash_court.htm</a>

The page contains 800kb of photos so it's going to be slow for you poor DUNers <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> Unfortunately, I managed to blur a few of the shots. I forgot you have to be patient with that poxy camera...

To test the walls for dentability, I decided to shoot some BBs at it from across the room. I would have used an airgun, but didn't have my BB firing pistol to hand. The next best thing was a 9mm blank firing pistol loaded with a tissue paper sabot and 10 BBs. I fired at an angle to the wall to avoid richocets, so the BBs striking the wall weren't at any optimum angle to penetrate into the plaster (the ejected brass still got me in the ear after bouncing off the wall behind me though).

Forgive the shitiness of this picture, but I assure you that it contains 10 dents in the plaster circled with a marker pen:

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/BB_hit.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/BB_hit.htm</a>

To guage the energy of the fired BB's, I did a control shot at a piece of hardboard from a closer distance:

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/BB_hit_hardboard.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/BB_hit_hardboard.htm</a>

Only four of the ten BBs penetrated the hardboard and one of these was still lodged in the board. I concluded that each BB couldn't have had more than a few ft/lbs of energy. So the frags from a Trinade should leave easily noticeable marks in the plasterwork.

Next step is to construct the Trinade and try synthesising some more PETN with the NaNO3 I have on hand, failing that, it will have to wait till I can get some more KNO3.

EDIT: considering the dimensions of the room, where do you think would be the best position to locate the Trinade?

<small>[ August 12, 2002, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]</small>

[DBSP]

I went back to the det site erlier today to see if I could find anything of value to the valuation of the trinade.

I was amazed by what I found. Somewhere between 8 and 10 meters behind target one there are two trees.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/2hits.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/2hits.JPG</a>

I went up to them to see if I could find anything, and I did:

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit1.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit1.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit2.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit2.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit3.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/fraghit3.JPG</a>

There where about three hits from what I could see. I took my knife and started carving into the tree to recover the bullet, I expected to find the bullet just beneath the surface but NO I found it 5mm into the actual tree, which in turn is covered by 20mm of the ...whats the english word for it, you now the outer layer of the tree. Thus it had penetrated 25mm of wood, nice :D On the tree a meter behind the first I found a hit from one of the smaller 2.. lead bullets, this one had penetrated about 5mm which isn't that bad considering the low mass of the bullet.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG</a>

And NBK I wasn't hit, I just went back to check that my heart infection had healed. I stayed behind <a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/cover.JPG" target="_blank">this</a> rock which seemes to thick to be penetrated by those tiny bullets :p

I allmost forgot one thing, the stick target #1 was held on had allso been penetrated. One of the larger bullets had hit it in the middel. It is clear that the bullets path is directed uppwards as the entrace hole was about 12mm lower than the exit hole. The bullet had penetrated the stick which is about 20mm thick with apparent ease.

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/entrance_hole.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/entrance_hole.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/exit_hole.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/trinade/exit_hole.JPG</a>

If you where to use a better design and a better explosive this thing would be DEADLY.

I've been thinking about the idea of placing the frags inside the casing instead of on the outside. If you had a thinner casing that the bullets would easily penetrate without to much hassle, the velocity of the frags would dramaticly increase, and to that you can add the raise in velocity from a better explosve. I can emagine that the the penetration abilitys would be very good.

Sorry for the bad quality of the last two pics.

[endotherm]

Does anyone have any idea what the relative velocity of grenade frags is (not necessarily improvised either)?
When these bb's fly off,let's say a cast block of PETN what is the estimated velocity at a few meters?
Judging by the wounds on stick target #1 those BB's appear to be chuggin' along at well over 1000 fps.

<small>[ August 12, 2002, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: endotherm ]</small>

[Eliteforum]

DBSP, some good info and nice pics! Oh, and the outer layer of a tree is called the *bark* of a tree.

[nbk2000]

For the US standard issue frag grenade, it's 1,600 m/s at 5 yards from the explosion for a .11 gram fragment.

[nbk2000]

DBSP:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">
If you where to use a better design and a better explosive this thing would be DEADLY.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">My design's perfect. Now IF that damn rock wasn't in the way we'd know if ALL the fragments had gone over your head into the trees. I don't think target #1 would say it's NOT deadly. :p

Assuming none bounced off the rock, then it'd seem that a thrower more than 10 meters distant (and kneeling/prone) would be quite safe from fragments, while anyone closer who was standing would catch them.

And anyone within a cars length would be shredded regardless, vest or not. :)

Being able to penetrate an inch of hardwood at 10 meters using only an ounce or so of a mid-range explosive is pretty damn good for something you could whip up in a wal-mart!

I also noticed how the crater was triangular shaped, not spherical.

You may want to try a claymore test using only one face of a trinade with 2 layers of shot inside the casing. The detonator being at the apex opposite the shot face. This might prove to be a quite effective directional mine design for something so simple to make.

Anthony:

Using the layout from your diagram of the court, I'd say place the trinade where a line drawn from 8 to 4 and 7 to 2 intersect with a face parallel to the far wall (1,2). This should give sufficient coverage for determining the pattern. Hopefully the material isn't so tough the the angled impact frags richochet off without penetrating. :(

As a suggestion, you may wish to bring a large spool of twine or thread. This way, after the test (assuming no piggies are coming), you can place one end of the thread into a frag hole, secure in place, then secure the other end at the grenades position. Repeat several hundred times :D and you'll have a visual representation of the grenade frags paths. Now THAT'D be impressive. :)

In General:

From my references, it seems that a 5mm steel ball propelled at grenade speeds has greater than 1.5x impact energy as a 5.56mm NATO (M-16) bullet. And that a 3.7mm tungsten ball has twice the penetration capability against body armor.

I got this from some info about grenade I mentioned at the beginning of this topic. Their design was intended to defeat CRISAT armor (com-block) consisting of 26 layers of kevlar and 1.6mm titanium plate that'll stop a 9mm at the muzzle.

In their design, the thrower at 25meters had a 5% chance of getting hit, while a crouching enemy at 10 yards had a 99.9% chance of catching frags. These frags being capable of directly defeating the armor. :D

You won't be seeing these though because it wasn't selected for production because a more conventional design was choosen because it would kill the enemy through saturation of the limbs with fragments, achieving the same results at 3 meters (the test criteria).

Density of the frags effects both penetration and weight velocity retention. Shape of the frags effects the distance to which a frag of given weight will travel, given the same velocity. Spheres aren't very aerodynamic, but they're easy to get a hold of.

Plastic or aluminium casing won't matter not with a HE filling inside it. Both will be equally pulverized to nothingness. Only a steel shell of substantial thickness might alter the frags pattern.

[zaibatsu]

DBSP, I don't think that you could say it penetrated 25mm of hardwood, the barks very easy to penetrate, comparable to a couple of mm of actual hardwood (at a guess). A .177 air rifle firing lead pellets can achieve about 5mm of penetration at 30 yards into a hardwood tree, where I think the power has dropped down to around 5-6ftlb. Therefore I believe the power of that one BB has to be below 5-6fltb, as the lead pellets have a greater mass, and deform more, but still penetrates the same amount at a greater distance.

All the above is IMHO! But the research you are doing is good, and the pics very interesting :)

[DBSP]

You are right, it didn't penetrate 25mm of hadwood. It penetrated 20mm of bark and 5mm of hardwood. I can imagine that it would have penetrated about 10-15mm of Hwood if it had hit it directly. The bark does and excelent job slowing the hte bullet down. I'll shoot a few rounds with my .177 and .22 tomorrow at the same distace for comparison.

What I meant with better design was that the manufacture and choise of casing could be made better.

[nbk2000]

Well, in the patnet they use a conical frag casing to direct the fragments in a circular band, but this requires a self-righting mechanism.

A similar type device would be (in theory) constructed from a plastic easter egg shell used a form into which is layered the BBs and filled with the explosive.

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Egg-Grenade.gif" alt=" - " />

Here I've overlayed the easter egg shell over the patent image to demonstrate the idea.

Naturally the plastic shell would either be removed, or reinforced with fiberglass or such, before deployment, depending on construction.

Because of the more "upward" angle of the eggshell, more frags would be directed upwards (over your head) than would be by the patented design. This reduces effective radius, but greatly increases user safety. That's a big selling point to me. :D

(I can already hear the cries of "Weeble-Wooble!")

Problem with a WW is that it wobbles for quite a bit of time if tossed about. If it isn't straight up, it could be tilted towards YOU, thus ricocheting frags along the ground into your hide. :(

Thus, you need to ensure uprightness by either geometry (Trinade), or self-righting mechanism.

I'm envisioning the use of 4 mouse traps which have the "neck breaker" cut into two parts, along with the spring which is reduced in size and twisted around a little. A wood base is made into which is fitted the "legs" (mouse traps), which are folded up against the grenade body and held in place with a string made of nitrated cotton.

The grenade fuse is run against the string, just before going into the detonator.

When the fuse is about a second or less from the det, the flash-string burns off, freeing the legs which spring open and upright the grenade. The (now upright) grenade explodes a moment later, showering the target with frags. :)

[Flake2m]

NBK I really think your idea of a tetrahedral shaped grenade is fantastic, thought there are a few design flaws concerning the shape that potenially could reduce effectiveness.

1. If the triade detonates directly below the target then the cop <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ... I mean target won't take very much shrapnel.
2. A tetrahedral shaped grenade cannot be rolled very easily.

My final point is, that if you want to reduce costs, you could use marbles rather then ball bearings. The good thing about marbles is that they are light weight, they also aren't detected by metal detectors <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> . Marbles are also cheap a large bag of about 30 is AU$3 at Big W. The bad thing about them is, that you aren't likey to find 4.5mm marbles easily but rather 12mm marbles.

[nbk2000]

Marbles are made of glass, and would thus be pulverized into bits of ineffectual sand by any decent HE.

If a trinade landed directly between someones legs, and they didn't ry to run, then their legs would be blown clean off. There's not enough dispersion at 1' distance for the fragments to miss two legs. Considering how shredded the closest target was, I can't imagine the surgeons being able to save someone point blank to one.

True, you can't roll a trinade worth a shit. But that's also a good thing in an urban enviroment. It'll stay where you land it and not roll in an undesirable direction. In stairwells, for instance, a trinade wouldn't roll back down at you. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> It'd stay right on the stair.

Conversly, it wouldn't likely roll down past an enemy. As a matter of fact, you'd WANT it lower than their level because the frags would sweep UP the stairs, catching them from behind. :)

Roofs have gutters through which a round grenade might roll back down.

And I wouldn't want to use a regular grenade in a typical car garage, what with all those sloped surfaces and drop offs.

OH! IDEA!

I was at the grocery store earlier waiting for my ride when an armored car came up for a pick-up.

I got the engine model number off the side (since it was SO conceniently on the side :D INTERNATIONAL DT466E) and was talking to this guy sitting next to me about the feeb courier who looked like he barely had enough brain power to walk, let along handle large sums of cash.

Anyways, the idea of a large SC/EFP trinade came to me. 4 copper platters embedded in a trinade charge made from NIPOLIT with RDX/PETN could be tossed on an armored car roof, engine compartment, or underneath, and it'd pretty much fuck it up no matter where it landed.

If on top, it wouldn't roll off, and would pierce the roof, injuring/killing the crew.

On the engine compartment, it would immobilize the vehicle by destroying the engine, and possibly taking out the driver if you had one of the vertical faces pointed that way.

Underneath, it would shot 3 penetrators up into the hydralics/fuel/transmission/tires, likely immobilizing it.

Rare earth magnets embedded in the corners would keep it from sliding off in wet/windy weather.

<small>[ August 17, 2002, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[Energy84]

OT: NBK, all you need for an armoured car heist is a sawed off shotgun or a handgun.
There was a guy running around Winnipeg since 1998 who used a sawed of shotgun to rob these armoured cars. His plan was flawless. He would scout out when and where the cars would be and figure out there schedules. Then when he the appropriate time came (christmas, thanksgiving, easter or any other time when money was flowing) he would steal two cars and park one a few blocks away. The second one would be used to go to the scene and do the job. Usually he would park the car infront or behind of the armoured car (he actually rammed it on a few occasions) and run out with a ski mask over his face while blasting away with either a shotgun or a pistol. The guards would either be hit/out of commission or scared shitless. Sometimes the robber would get close enough to grab the bag from the guard before opening fire. Out of eight tries, he got away with the money 6 times. Over the 4 year period, he collected over 1.2million dollars (canadian unfortunatley <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ).
Poor bugger was finally caught this spring when he got careless and started flashing large bills and buying lots of drugs. He was found in an apartment screwing a whore. When the cops burst in though, he managed to get off a few shots and wounded 2 officers. :D

[PYRO500]

No need for rare earth magnets NBK, there are far cheaper larger magnets with a bit less power but they are more than enough. I am refering to the magnets that are found on the end of the head arm inside a hard drive they can be seperated from their shielded mounts with the aid of a screwdriver or flat piece of metal and prying them up. something like 3 on each side of a grenade would allow it to stick to the steel of the car making it stick when thrown over the top or easily sticking to the side or bottob as well.

[nbk2000]

Rare earth magnets are small, very strong, and cheap. You can get them at Wal-Mart for Gods sake!

And I'd much rather not tear apart a HDD to get them, thank you very much. :p

OTR (Off Topic Reply)

That guy was an idiot. How often did he expect to do it and get away with it? Can you spot the RTPB violations?

[firebreether]

Besides, if you're gonna rob an armored car with some trinades with magnets, who the hell cares whether rare earths cost a little more then normal magnets :D

PS very good idea NBK about the magnets.

[PYRO500]

Where have you seen rare earth magnets in walmart? I sure havent seen them except in some high price headphones and such. As for tearing apart a HDD, I don't think it's that hard, you just need one screwdriver with the right security bit to get the magnets out on most of them and the hard drive magnets are very common on surplus's or if the HDD designer got fancy possibly 2 screwdrivers.

[nbk2000]

I've disassembled HDDs before, so that's not the problem. Rather, the fact that you can no longer use it as such afterwards. :(

REMs are in the crafts section in the back corner of Wally-Mart. And sometimes in the hardware section. Rat-Shack has them too.

I suppose a limpet mine would work too...sigh...but that's SOOoooo unoriginal... :rolleyes: ... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :p

Any progress Anthony?

[Anthony]

Slow at the moment I'm afraid. I tried a batch of PETN with the NaNO3, the yield didn't seem too bad when I initially drowned the PETN/HNO3. Because it was late, I left the crude PETN in the water, and chilled and filtered it the next day. I'm *sure* I remembered there being a lot more PETN than I got, but PETN is insoluble in water.

Anyway, I wasn't pleased, I've got about 10gm of crude PETN from 20gm of PE!

So it's going to take a little while till I can fill a trinade. I'm going away for a week on thursday (Reading :) ) so there won't be much progress any time soon...

OT: HDD magnets are Neodymium Iron Boron. You either get two big ones (two poles on each face) or four smaller ones. I've got some of the smaller ones somewhere and they'll hold about 10lbs each. You don't need the correct torx driver either, a drill does the job :)

[xoo1246]

A nedodym magnet with a diameter of 16mm can hold ~7,5 kg(16.5 lbs if you prefer), and one with a diameter of 32mm can hold ~31 kg(68.2lbs). They cost around 3.5$ and 9.8$. They could be used to make nice little clamp mines.
Another thing, what kind of igniter would thease tri-grenades be fitted with? A drag pull igniter that dissconnects after igniton? How would they be constructed? Played around with some improvised ideas a few days ago but didn't come up with anything reliable enough.

<small>[ August 19, 2002, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]</small>

[carbonated]

What if you simply made the trigrenade out of numerous cylinders to get the best of both worlds? If you made a pyramid out of cylinders, even the edges and corners would really be rounded and thus allow some more shrapnel, whereas the regular trigrenade wouldn't. I think you'd also have greater shrapnel increase overall. A problem I see is initiating all the cylinders to go off together, perhaps with a uniform detonater in the middle of the grenade or would detcord be fast enough? Maybe even some circuitry, but that gets too complex for my liking. An idea for crude cylinders is empty 12g CO2 cartridges or even small diameter pipe.

[Eliteforum]

It's a Tri-Grenade, not a 'friggin pipe bomb!

[kingspaz]

i agree, its not a pipe bomb! but that post did give me another idea whihc would eliminate the shrapnel less space around the trinade vertices. this would however be harder to improvise. each face of the trinade could be made from a convex section. only slightly convex so it would still retain the tetrahedral shape but the slight rounded angle would result in a better spread of shrapnel and no more 'safe' areas along verticies.

[Cricket]

I did some grenade testing a long time ago. I got a BB covered strip of duct tape and wrapped it around a BP crater maker. I was just having fun, so I didn't make any measurements. I did notice that at about 2 feet away the BB's were in the plywood, just beneth the surface toi make a more or less smothe surface. It was ok for fucking around, but to kill reliably, I would want something better for sure. It did make one HELL of a noise though (my face was about 3 feet away when it went. luckily it was not on the BB covered side!). Maybe good for scaring away bums and stray animals. One thing I have been thinking of goes like this. Get something round, about the size of a golf ball or bigger (maybe an Easter egg) and fill it with your HE. Then put your detonator in it. Then put the whole thing in a baloon and leave the fuze/wires hanging out the top. Then fill another baloon with BB's to about the diameter of a hairspray can. Then put your baloon-covered-charge with fuze/wires hanging out into the baloon with the BB's and work it into the middle. I hope this makes sence, its hard for me to explain. So you would now have a baloon full of BB's containing another baloon containing the charge and detonator (or just a fuze with a primary). It would have to be tougher prolly if it were to be used in action, but this should work for testing. The good part is that it will spread shrapnel everywhere, it should be somewhat moldable so you can put the charge closer to the bottom if you are throwing in under a truck, or smush it a little flatter if its to kill people (to give more shrapnel to the siges, not up). It will need to be modified if its to be used effectivly, the casing in particular (you throw it on concrete and it breaks and you are left with a flash bang essentially). Seems to be a semi-good idea though. I think a problem with the tri-nade is that it has blind spots and it looks like the sides will not disperse that well, maybe a convex buldge will help?

<small>[ August 22, 2002, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: Cricket ]</small>

[Madog555]

carbonated's idea isnt bad. it would give more shrapnel than a simple sheet of metal and as kingspaz said it will eliminate the safe zones. when u think about it a pipe full of HE with a grenade fuse is a crude frag grenade. pipe bombs that kewls use for noise makeing are filled with a LE. this is stupid because it makes uneeded shrapnel and isnt good enough for spreading shrapnel to be used as a good frag device. if a pipe bomb is filled with HE it is now a fairly efective fragmentation device.

[nbk2000]

The WHOLE point behind the design of the trinade is to:

A. Direct as much of the grenades fragments into an effective kill zone between the knees and top of the head of a standing man within a 5 meter radius.

B. To direct as much of the fragments as possible over the head of the prone thrower that's 25 meters or less away.

C. To do both A and B in an enviroment that is flat and level, which is the vast majority of urban areas, and possibly devoid of cover (such as a vacant parking lot).

And, you're not going to be tossing just one, since two (or more) is always better (RTPB: Victory through superior firepower) so there will be NO safe spots. And there's no such thing as overkill when dealing with someone intent on killing you!

<small>[ August 23, 2002, 07:50 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[nbk2000]

I had the idea that a trinade would make a good bounding grenade.

Firstly, the fragmentation shell would be spherical, contained within a trinade shaped body.

Recessed in the center of the face of each side of the body is a small charge of AP or such which acts as a bounding charge. This is initated by a 5 second electronic delay fuse after throwing. The fuze has a small positional sensor that conducts the firing impulse to whichever side of the trinade is in contact with the ground.

The small AP explosion throws the trinade back up into the air. As the flame from the explosion passes through a small flashhole in the body to the central core, it ignites a small amount of fuse powder. The frag sphere is supported within a slightly larger spherical space, the fuse powder being in the space to ensure that, no matter what side functions, the delay gets ignited. This, in turns, ignites a 100 millisecond pyrotechnic delay that explodes the fragmentation sphere at about 6'-10' above the ground.

Or, if inside a room, explodes at ceiling height or bounces off the ceiling so it richochets in some random direction before exploding at chest height. :)

I'd post a picture but, because of all the added traffic we got from the RC incident, I can't use my picture host. :mad:

Also, by combining two trinades, one regular frag, the other bounding, and connecting them by a wire of about 10 yards, you might be able to make a decent IPDM.

See, one trinade has an IR transmitter, the other a receiver. When tossed, the two seperate and land. Anything gets in the way of the line of sight between the two triggers the explosion of both. One directs fragments, claymore style, along the LOS, the other fires up into the air to attack from above. :D

Any progress Anthony?

[Anthony]

The PETN I was saving up for the filler had to be disposed of, along with other finished explosives due to this RC issue.

I'm also waiting to get some better H2SO4 to make the PETN yields worth doing <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

[nbk2000]

Here's an illustration of what I mean by the sphere inside of a trinade.

<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Trinade_Bounding.gif" alt=" - " />

The purple squares are the bounding charges, the pink squares are spacers, and the gray sphere is the frag ball. The yellow is the gap within which the sphere is suspended and (not shown) is the fuse powder.

I'm thinking the simplist way to make it work would be to use 4 small mercury switches. A switch is embedded parallel to each face of the trinade.

Whichever face is in contact with the ground is going to have the part of the mercury switch with the contacts at the bottom, with the circuit being completed by the mercury. All the other switches will be open because the mercury will be at the "top" of those switches.