Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Gun Propellants: Single, Double and Tripple based

Gun Propellants: Single, Double and Tripple based

Pages: 1 2 3

specialactivitieSK - 6-9-2021 at 05:35

Another way :

Ng, DeGDN, Balistite Powder maked without solvent : pressing by rolling by temperature 80-95°C for Ng and 70-80°C for DeGDN Powder.. Cutting the Powder by temperature 50°C. Somethime 2-8% solvent (Acetone).

specialactivitieSK - 10-9-2021 at 09:13

Something about size

Bert - 10-9-2021 at 09:54

Sorry, can't quite read sizes in that image... Maybe add that info?

------

Attached pdf is largely about forensics related to NC used in propellants & explosives, but note on page 207 the statement about solvents and stirring during manufacturing processes permanently changing the NC molecules, resulting in a rather lower molecular weight NC.

Choice of solvent and degree of mechanical processing have more impact on the product than night be expected.

Attachment: 978-1-61209-821-0_ch4.pdf (1.3MB)
This file has been downloaded 737 times

specialactivitieSK - 13-9-2021 at 11:46

DEGDN Rocket Propellant 25g 960fps

https://youtu.be/AmI_xQEtXzA

ManyInterests - 2-3-2022 at 13:07

I've been reading this thread with great interest since I do plan on making my own powder. There's a lot of good information here and I'll need to reread everything in the future.

But I have one question regarding NG, EGDN, and PGDN... in terms of stability when it comes to making, is EGDN better than NG or the other way around? What about PGDN? I heard that it is safer than NG but is harder to make. Would it be useful for making a double base powder as well?

dettoo456 - 14-3-2022 at 08:08

I don’t currently have the exact numbers with me at the moment but in terms of sensitivity and synthesis EGDN edges out NG in that it’s safer to produce and initiate when you want it to but is much more volatile and degrades with the presence of impurities more readily in storage if I remember correctly. OB% is also slightly higher with NG too which really matters for propellants when taking burn rate catalysts and stabilizer OB%’s into effect.

So NG is better than EGDN for performance but worse than EGDN for safety reasons; pick your battles with that one.

PGDN’s synthesis is similar to other nitrate esters and although I don’t have the numbers right now, I’m pretty sure its mechanical sensitivities are at least lower than EGDN (and by proxy lower than NG) from the addition of an extra CH3 group. OB% is of course lower as well in PGDN.

https://ipo.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/wydawnictwa/wp-content/upload... ^ Some useful info PGDN’s vapor and storage behavior.

“Nitrate Esters Chemistry and Technology” is a good book for finding info on nitrate esters and their properties although some info gets lost in translation from mandarin.

The “big players” (if you will) like BTTN and TMETN will always outshine the simple esters and if you have some spare malic acid and Pt hydrogenation catalysts, or propionaldehyde and formaldehyde then you can try with them but other than that the classic NG is proven and capable for most propellants applications so I’d recommend it over EGDN or PGDN.

specialactivitieSK - 26-7-2022 at 03:10

Maybe very slow evaporation is the way

Bert - 26-7-2022 at 03:47

Quote: Originally posted by specialactivitieSK

Maybe very slow evaporation is the way

Sorry, way to do what?

specialactivitieSK - 26-7-2022 at 04:16

To making material without bubbles.

ManyInterests - 2-9-2022 at 11:16

Quote: Originally posted by dettoo456

I don’t currently have the exact numbers with me at the moment but in terms of sensitivity and synthesis EGDN edges out NG in that it’s safer to produce and initiate when you want it to but is much more volatile and degrades with the presence of impurities more readily in storage if I remember correctly. OB% is also slightly higher with NG too which really matters for propellants when taking burn rate catalysts and stabilizer OB%’s into effect.

So NG is better than EGDN for performance but worse than EGDN for safety reasons; pick your battles with that one.

PGDN’s synthesis is similar to other nitrate esters and although I don’t have the numbers right now, I’m pretty sure its mechanical sensitivities are at least lower than EGDN (and by proxy lower than NG) from the addition of an extra CH3 group. OB% is of course lower as well in PGDN.

https://ipo.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/wydawnictwa/wp-content/upload... ^ Some useful info PGDN’s vapor and storage behavior.

“Nitrate Esters Chemistry and Technology” is a good book for finding info on nitrate esters and their properties although some info gets lost in translation from mandarin.

The “big players” (if you will) like BTTN and TMETN will always outshine the simple esters and if you have some spare malic acid and Pt hydrogenation catalysts, or propionaldehyde and formaldehyde then you can try with them but other than that the classic NG is proven and capable for most propellants applications so I’d recommend it over EGDN or PGDN.

I forgot to thank you for that answer. Yes I have learned about the volatility of EGDN and PGDN (PGDN is slightly less volatile than EGDN) but NG's volatility is non-existent.

BTW, what exactly is BTTN and TMETN? What are the reagents involved? Anything different in their synthesis from EGDN, NG, or PGDN?

Bert - 2-9-2022 at 12:13

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests

Yes I have learned about the volatility of EGDN and PGDN (PGDN is slightly less volatile than EGDN) but NG's volatility is non-existent.

From personal experience, NG volatility may be considered TRIVIAL in regards to all going away under decent storage conditions- But several splitting headaches I've experienced say it does exist.

The couple of tries I made at classic low freezing dynamite mixtures long, long ago with the method of nitrating mixed glycerin + EGDN gave me a formidable headache very quickly during the final processing with dry ingredients, I'm quite sure it was vapors rather than skin contact, I wore gloves and was careful- At least it went away faster than an NG headache too.

BTTN and TMETN?

BTTN = 1,2,4-Butanetriol Trinitrate

1,2,4-Butanetriol_trinitrate.svg.png - 35kB

TMTEN = Nitropentaglycerin; 1,1,1-trimethylolethane trinitrate

[Edited on 9-2-2022 by Bert]

[Edited on 9-2-2022 by Bert]

ManyInterests - 3-9-2022 at 19:46

Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG, I might be interested in experimented in making some. Though I don't know any sources of Butanetriol.

Triethylene glycol is another chemical that can be used to make a liquid explosive and can substitute NG. Any sources of that? It isn't Ethylene Glycol for sure (and I have a liter of that).

specialactivitieSK - 8-9-2022 at 07:24

Second attempt at slow evaporation. I need to find suitable kitchen utensils with a completely flat bottom.

ManyInterests - 1-11-2022 at 18:36

Quote: Originally posted by specialactivitieSK

Second attempt at slow evaporation. I need to find suitable kitchen utensils with a completely flat bottom.

I would like to do that, on my list of projects in the future is making my own primer compounds and propellants. I will need to do extensive research for these before doing it since this is not something I can find videos for me to use as visual guides.

Herr Haber - 1-11-2022 at 21:01

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests

Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG

If you are talking chemical stability then just overdo the washings.
Wasnt a bottle made by Ascanio Sobrero himself regularly tested for decades or a century showing no degradation ?

If you want more usability, a few strands of NC will make a gel. There, you might consider another source of possible degradation assuming home made NC will always contain tiny amounts of acid.

The other thing is: you're trying to get a bigger bang. NG, EGDN are pretty easy to set off. Before the mercury fulminate detonators black powder was used. Urbanski books basically teach you that the better the initiation, more complete is the reaction (More CO2, less CO essentially better vod etc.).
So a good number 8 is better than a firecracker even if they both work.

Not only that, but even for something easy to initiate (NG) you still need confinement and diameter. Urbanski has charts with pipes of different materials, diameters, wall thickness.
Pretty interesting stuff as is all his material.

His section on the manufacture of all the different types of double and triple based propellants is quite extensive. But what to expect from someone who writes about cellulose alone for 60 pages

ManyInterests - 2-11-2022 at 08:01

Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests

Those look really good. If they can be more stable and higher performing than NG

Sorry, when I mean stability sometimes I am referring to sensitivity. NG is really sensitive stuff and I would rather work with similarly powerful but less sensitive stuff. There's a reason why I spent so much time trying to make NHN and CHP to use as primaries.

Also remember on the PDGN thread you mentioned an author called Conklin? I couldn't find his book, and I would also like to see Urbanski's book. If you got links to where I can download them I would be eternally grateful.

Especially if he has such extensive instructions on making double-base and single-base powders. I do want to make those for rifle, shotgun, and handgun rounds. I would love to go to the range and fire off a 100 rounds or so of ammo using homemade propellant and primers, that would be epic!

Edit: https://archive.org/details/Chemistry_and_Technology_of_Expl...

Is this the Urbanski you're talking about? He has a whole series which I will download all!

https://www.amazon.com/Chemistry-Pyrotechnics-Principles-The...

and is this the book about Conklin you were talking about? Ones that has the priming compounds?

[Edited on 2-11-2022 by ManyInterests]

Bert - 2-11-2022 at 11:07

Conkling = Dr. John A. Conckling. Google will show you his several publications.

Dr. Conkling died last year, unfortunately.

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/baltimoresun/name/john-...

I also would recommend "Pyrotechnics" by Dr. Alexander Hardt.

https://www.amazon.com/Pyrotechnics-Alexander-Hardt/dp/09293...

[Edited on 11-2-2022 by Bert]

Herr Haber - 3-11-2022 at 18:35

Quote: Originally posted by ManyInterests

I would also like to see Urbanski's book. If you got links to where I can download them I would be eternally grateful.

[Edited on 2-11-2022 by ManyInterests]

I pointed you a couple of times to the SM Library but...
Where are his books gone ?!
http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/index.html

Davis is still there. Where's Shimizu gone ?

dettoo456 - 30-11-2022 at 10:36

@ManyInterests Butanetriol can be formed via reduction of Malic Acid w/ Pd/C although any reducing agent capable of carboxylic acid reduction should do.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10562-021-038...

https://zero.sci-hub.se/6469/c7aee14b783dd92a5ece2a658f608b7...

ManyInterests - 2-1-2023 at 17:46

Quote: Originally posted by dettoo456

@ManyInterests Butanetriol can be formed via reduction of Malic Acid w/ Pd/C although any reducing agent capable of carboxylic acid reduction should do.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10562-021-038...

https://zero.sci-hub.se/6469/c7aee14b783dd92a5ece2a658f608b7...

Thanks. I will look into those. I think I will be going the route of using diethylene glycol since I found that sold commonly (and cheaply) as liquid camp fuel in many camping stores. The brand that I got, Coghlan's, states in its MSDS that it is 99-100% diethylene glycol and a 0-1% ethylene glycol. the ethylene glycol contamination is absolutely minimal and won't effect the power I want to try to make with it.

I also read in Urbanski that DEGDN is less volatile than nitrogylcerin while also being substantially less sensitive. These characteristics I find extremely appealing, especially the reduced sensitivity (this making it safer to handle). The only downside is that it is quite hygroscopic and I need to take care to make sure it is free of water and remains so.

It'll be a while before I get to making propellants the primers, but I got everything I need to make them.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 3-1-2023 at 08:27

https://www.amazon.com/Coghlans-Camp-Heat-2-Pack/dp/B000FY21... .....
Fuel really contains diethylene glycol. Great message. Thanks. DEG is super fuel for NaClO4. Details:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4076
Demonstration of efficiency here from 0:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CTB9k1l15A

ManyInterests - 3-1-2023 at 11:28

Yes that is the same product I ordered. Here is the SDS from the manufacturer:

https://www.coghlans.com/content/files/Coghlans/SDS%20Sheets...

In section 3 on composition it stated 99-100 DEG. Mean it cannot contain any more than 1% EG, but there is a good chance that it contains even less, meaning it is effectively the purest DEG you can get without any processing.

[Edited on 3-1-2023 by ManyInterests]

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 08:09

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov

https://www.amazon.com/Coghlans-Camp-Heat-2-Pack/dp/B000FY21... .....
Fuel really contains diethylene glycol. Great message. Thanks. DEG is super fuel for NaClO4. Details:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4076
Demonstration of efficiency here from 0:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CTB9k1l15A

Orange???

Screenshot_20230110-100121_Samsung Internet.jpg - 125kB

Laboratory of Liptakov - 10-1-2023 at 10:49

For security reasons (YouTube) the exact composition was not stated. Another thing is that the composition can be quite variable. As stated in the patent.
Exact tested compose: NaClO4 ....(OB + 52.3) .....74 parts
DEG.......( OB - 150.8)............................................26 parts
dH2O.......(OB zero).............................................. 10 parts ..... (variable 8 - 15)
water acrylate pigment (orange, OB -160 cca)......1 by part of weight.........(variable 0.0 - 2.... green, blue, red, yellow)
Guar gum...( OB-115 cca)......................................2 parts.....(variable 0.0 - 2)

Variable tested compounds: glass microballoons 2, sodium chlorate 3,
Uncompatabile with any Aluminium. Bubble H2.

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 13:19

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov

For security reasons (YouTube) the exact composition was not stated. Another thing is that the composition can be quite variable. As stated in the patent.
Exact tested compose: NaClO4 ....(OB + 52.3) .....74 parts
DEG.......( OB - 150.8)............................................26 parts
dH2O.......(OB zero).............................................. 10 parts ..... (variable 8 - 15)
water acrylate pigment (orange, OB -160 cca)......1 by part of weight.........(variable 0.0 - 2.... green, blue, red, yellow)
Guar gum...( OB-115 cca)......................................2 parts.....(variable 0.0 - 2)

Variable tested compounds: glass microballoons 2, sodium chlorate 3,
Uncompatabile with any Aluminium. Bubble H2.

No calcium nitrate dissolved in the water or glacial acetic acid (acetic acid is a cross linking catalyst for the guar gum?). I noticed the patent claim I excerpted gave lower densities than your reported 1.7g/cc too.

Making otherwise off white compositions color coded with water soluble dyes could be a "thing"if you needed to test a number of compositions, help keep them identifiable in handling.

I wonder about adding a water or diethylene glycol soluble decomposition catalyst for the perchlorate such as ferrocene?

Laboratory of Liptakov - 10-1-2023 at 15:43

Unfortunately, using calcium nitrate in composition was not tested. Is possible that acetic acid catalyse better properties of guar gum as binder.
But also not tested. Measurement in cavity showing density 1.6 g/cc. Not 1.7. Composition is castable at 80 C without guar gum. Repeatedly. Composition, respectively his surface is partially hygroscopic. It was observed. Ferocene was not tested. Yes, was tested different acrylic pigment colors. Yellow, red, green, orange. Interest: This dry (any color) acrylic pigment create
with NH4ClO4 pretty explosive mixture at ratio AP 75 / color 25. Without change of nice color of pigment.
https://www.google.com/search?q=pigment+to+wall+color+paint&...
Maybe colors works as catalyseur of shockwave. (no confirmed, no measured)
But confirmed is better binding effect with acrylic colors. (acryl is binder itself)
Yes, different colors is possible use as identificator.
Else composition can looks: NaClO4 75, DEG 25, liquid pigment (red from link) 11, dH2O 4, guar gum 1. In of part by weight. 20g sensitive on No.8, confirmed.

[Edited on 10-1-2023 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

Bert - 10-1-2023 at 17:26

I just spent a few minutes going over solubilities of various perchlorates in various liquid fuels.

One combination that struck me: Barium diperchlorate, 125g soluble in 100ml ethanol @ 25° C. And barium (di) perchlorate is DENSE at around 3.1 g/cc.

Not so cheap as technical Sodium perchlorate, toxic like all water soluble barium salts- but also NOT HYGROSCOPIC.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 11-1-2023 at 04:55

Is it slightly exotic composition, but should by works. Ba(ClO4)2 with OB + 38.06 is also soluble in acetone (OB - 220.3) ethanol OB - 208.7 on CO2. In acetone is soluble (as binder) nitrocellulose, camphor, rosin. In ethanol is soluble camphor , rosin. Testing mixture can be:
1) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + 20 ethanol, final OB - 11.29 on CO2.
2) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + acetone 20 .........final OB - 13.61 on CO2.
3) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + ethanol 20 + rosin 5 ..........final OB - 26.39 on CO2
4) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + acetone 20 + nitrocellulose/12,4N/ .... 5 ........final OB - 17.3 on CO2

All mixtures looks no hygroscopic. Problem can be evaporation of solvents. Any way, interesting idea with Barium perchlorate. It seems , that adding Alu powder is possible.

Bert - 11-1-2023 at 06:30

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov

Is it slightly exotic composition, but should by works. Ba(ClO4)2 with OB + 38.06 is also soluble in acetone (OB - 220.3) ethanol OB - 208.7 on CO2. In acetone is soluble (as binder) nitrocellulose, camphor, rosin. In ethanol is soluble camphor , rosin. Testing mixture can be:
1) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + 20 ethanol, final OB - 11.29 on CO2.
2) Ba(ClO4)2 80 + acetone 20 .........final OB - 13.61 on CO2.
3) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + ethanol 20 + rosin 5 ..........final OB - 26.39 on CO2
4) Ba(ClO4)2 75 + acetone 20 + nitrocellulose/12,4N/ .... 5 ........final OB - 17.3 on CO2

All mixtures looks no hygroscopic. Problem can be evaporation of solvents. Any way, interesting idea with Barium perchlorate. It seems , that adding Alu powder is possible.

In pyotechnics, it has been traditional to include a small % of a weak acid such as boric acid in compositions containing powdered aluminum and intended to be bound with water activated adhesives. Mixtures containing nitrates which are prone to evolving ammonia, undergoing self heating and thermal runaway leading to ignition in particular.

At this point, my questions regarding your HE mixtures video have lead us far from the original topic of this thread- Although it began with sourcing diethylene glycol to use as an energetic precursor chemical for propellants, we're now talking about fuel use "as is" and detonation rather than deflagration?

Laboratory of Liptakov, I propose to split this thread, do you concur? If so, should our side trip into HE mixtures with soluble in fuels oxidizer salts be rejoined with one of the related earlier threads or would you like to start a new thread with this?

[Edited on 1-11-2023 by Bert]

Laboratory of Liptakov - 11-1-2023 at 08:06

The trip can be plugged with some related thread. Thanks, Bert. Maybe after testing described mixture (on BaP base) can be serious reason create a new thread.... :cool:

[Edited on 11-1-2023 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

pjig - 10-1-2025 at 20:22

Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov

Unfortunately, using calcium nitrate in composition was not tested. Is possible that acetic acid catalyse better properties of guar gum as binder.
But also not tested. Measurement in cavity showing density 1.6 g/cc. Not 1.7. Composition is castable at 80 C without guar gum. Repeatedly. Composition, respectively his surface is partially hygroscopic. It was observed. Ferocene was not tested. Yes, was tested different acrylic pigment colors. Yellow, red, green, orange. Interest: This dry (any color) acrylic pigment create
with NH4ClO4 pretty explosive mixture at ratio AP 75 / color 25. Without change of nice color of pigment.
https://www.google.com/search?q=pigment+to+wall+color+paint&...
Maybe colors works as catalyseur of shockwave. (no confirmed, no measured)
But confirmed is better binding effect with acrylic colors. (acryl is binder itself)
Yes, different colors is possible use as identificator.
Else composition can looks: NaClO4 75, DEG 25, liquid pigment (red from link) 11, dH2O 4, guar gum 1. In of part by weight. 20g sensitive on No.8, confirmed.

[Edited on 10-1-2023 by Laboratory of Liptakov]

It is nice to see some more research on this patent . I have been chasing my tail for years trying to dissect the original patent. It is very misleading and full of rabbit holes . Using AP as the perchlorate it is very insensitive and I believe a massive primer is needed to get it to go.
One question I have is if there is a gain to using sodium chlorate vs perchlorate. More likely to det with less stimulus , but less powerful. Solubility is the desired effect for intimate comp .
One other thing that bothered me was what nitrate would be the most effective to cross link the matrix . I fought the calcium nitrate .
The mix never solidified to a solid waxy comp. That was mechanically strong .

pots-o-potash - 14-2-2025 at 17:24

Might substituting NG with ETN be worth investigating for a cordite-type composition? (with adjusted oxygen balance taken into account and possibly a larger percent of petroleum jelly or mineral oil moderator/stabilizer to adjust burn rate and combustion temperature properties)

NG is known to crystalize out of double base compositions with high NG content when at below freezing temperatures. (Cordite does this, as do some modern powders, like Hodgedon Lil'Gun) In extreme cases, this can lead to overpressure and/or partial detonation when fired. (flattened and distorted case heads and malfunctions noted in .300 blackout and .450 bushmaster when used at below freezing conditions, with experiments done by storing batches of loaded ammo in the freezer able to replicate the behavior)

Petroleum jelly and mineral oil also has issues with sweating out at high ambient temperatures (somewhere above 40C), but this doesn't lead to the same sorts of high pressure or detonation conditions, and old British handling manuals point to stores of unloaded cordite simply being allowed to settle at room temperature until the petroleum was reabsorbed. (in loaded ammunition, this wasn't necessary)

So, with ETN being sold at all relevant ambient temperatures, it should be able to be dissolved in acetone along with NC and be made near homogeneous, then stay such when the solvent evaporates.

Additionally, since both NC and ETN can be made to precpitate as fine pulp, strands, or particles when dissolved (or gelatinized) in solvent, then diluted with water, they could be made to co-precipitate in a relatively homogenous mixture that would be finely devided and porous, and more easily able to incorporate petroleum jelly or mineral oil into it. (which are poorly soluble in acetone and more difficult to hmogenize; albeit I suppose forming an emulsion of PJ/mineral oil in acetone would be another option)

There's also some historical compositions (developed and patented around the same time as Cordite and Ballistite in the 1880s/90s) that used castor oil as a moderant/stabilizer in double-base compositions and possibly some single base ones. That would be much better soluble in acetone, but I'd be a bit concerned over long term oxidative stability. (though normally stored in air-tight containers and even non-air-tight ammunition has low permeability, so diffusion of oxygen into it would be quite slow)

One might also experiment with semi-smokeless powders incorporating potassium (or possibly sodium) nitrate into gellatinized NC, or similarly with nitate+Charcoal mixture with a relatively high oxygen balance. (charcoal itself, including the phenolic/aromatic fraction of it, should have some stabilizer and moderator effects on NC, while nitrates would increase the oxygen balance and make combustion properties somewhat closer to black powder or black powder substitutes, or that of 1890s era semi-smokeless powders)

Note: most commercial semi-smokeless powders from the 1890s (like Lesmok or King's SemiSmokeless) also contained sulfur and would thus be significantly more corrosive and potentially less stable than the above suggestion. (and were also known to be more prone than black powder to accidental ignition and explosion during commercial manufacture, likely due to increase risk of sulfur + NC dust ignition even worse than that of conventional black powder: sulfur dust being the likely main source of static electric spark ignition accidents as in dust-air explosions; as black powder itself, even that ground to fine dust and without graphite, can't be ignited with high voltage static spark/arc directly)

The other type of early smokeless or semi-smokeless powder from as far back as the 1860s was based on nitrated wood meal (effectively a complex mixture of nitrolignin and nitrocellulose, likely containing a mixture of nitrrophenols and polyphenols). This often had potassium or barium nitrate added to it and could be partially gelatinized with solvent (usually ether-alcohol) or left as porous woody granules as earliest examples of "Schultz" type powders used.
(Schultz powder was the most common/popular powder of this type, and the earliest to be commercialized, parimarily as a shotgun powder, potentially used in pistol cartridges or carefully used in reduced loads for some rifle cartidges as well, as later smokeless shotgun powders were or still are)

There was at least one major attempt at using wood-based powder in refined by an Austrian inventor, fully gelatinized forms, cut, rolled, or extruded into various particle shapes and sizes and made suitable for high pressure rifle cartridges of the day (in the 1870s), but Austro-Hungarian military weren't sufficiently interested to pursue this further and the inventor didn't try to commercialize it (unlike Schultz).
I can also only assume that Ferdinand Mannlicher was unaware of such developments, otherwise he'd have been extremely interested in adapting such early smokeless powders to his attempts at self-loading mechanisms he was working on, with use of black powder being a major limiting factor at the time.

Chlorates and perchlorates should be avoided in any case corrosion would be a problem, as chloride residue is really hard on iron/steel parts and more difficult to clean than the highly soluble potassium or sodium carbonate residue left by nitrate compositions. (and the alkaline nature has some corrosion inhibiting properties with steel, while avoiding the free elemental sulfur content present in conventional black powder residue, and to lesser extent the sulfate and sulfide content; though hypothetically a very low sulfur composition might avoid free sulfur and be less problematic, it would still probably hurt NC stability to some extent due to trace acid content)

This is, of course, aside from the other dangers specific to chlorates, particularly with anything that can produce trace acids (as NC can). Though a charcoal + chlorate composition or mix of chlorate and nitrate might have good performance to smoke output ratio, and likely more tolerable flame temperatures for the nitrate+chlorate mix than chlorate alone (plus alkaline residue would reduce chloride corrosion), it still probably wouldn't be that practical of a propellant compared to simply using a larger quantity of a sulfurless BP derivative alone. (or compared to using some NC content to boost energy density and reduce smoke)

Though, for historical investigative purposes, a chlorate-doped sulfurless BP composition as a "what if" for the early 1800s might be more interesting, particularly once percussion caps were invented. (Berthollet's attempt to use KClO3 as a direct replacement for KNO3 in gunpowder in 1788 was obviously not a sensible composition, particularly using an existing gunpowder stamp mill ... though the realization of friction and impact sensitivity of chlorate+sulfur compositions might have inspired an earlier development of percussion caps)
(this is well outside the main topic of this thread, and more of an alternate history sort of topic)

I do mention the semi-smokeless powder type compositions as relevant here as the residue and smoke produced should be more compatible with and less harsh on designs and cartridges intended for smokeless powder (including less likely to foul mechanisms), potentially even some self-loading designs. (with the residue fine and soft enough to not build up to the point of malfunction within the operating mechanisms or gas tubes; plus be low corrosion enough to avoid wear/erosion even of gas systems not using stainless steel; where presence of sulfur or chlorides could cause significantly worse high temperature corrosion during operation)

Also note: even the chloride (from chlorate), sulfur, and powdered glass components of corrosive type military primers contributed significantly to bore erosion (and especially) throat erosion, especially when combined with hotter burning double-base powders. (many examples of double-base poweders of the 1890s through 1930s known for heavy throat or bore wear were shown to no longer cause such wear with non-corrosive primers introduced in the inter-war period, though a handful of very hot burning, high NG content powders, like "Sharpshooter" were still erosive with non-corrosive primers, though likely not as badly so)
(paradoxically, the hottest burning, highest NG content powders of any given burn rate or type also produced much higher velocity/energy for any given chamber pressure, and also benefited more from longer barrels, likely in part due to the higher combustion temperatures maintaining the gas pressure for longer, as also happens with black powder to a more dramatic extent for short vs long barrels)

I also mention sodium nitrate rather than just potassium nitrate as it's lower molar mass and greater density should make for better energy density by mass and volume (though combustion and decomposition properties differ a bit from KNO3). Its critical relative humidity is also high enough to be non-hygroscopic in a variety of dry/arid climates for most of the year (so even humidity ingress into slightly permeable cartridges would be avoided so long as not stored out in the open during rain, or a particularly damp shed/shack/garage).
The CRH is around 72 to 73% near room temperature.

It also doesn't form hydrates, so any transient humidity that does get absorbed is also emitted more easily when conditions drop below the equilibrium relative humidity point. (though in severe cases, with partial deliquescence occurring, sufficient to exceed the absorbent properties of a charocal matrix, you'd end up with efflorescence and change in the combustion properties, plus possible corrosion of brass)

Still, the conditions suitable for sodium nitrate are vastly broader than most other nitrates, and worth considering under the right climate conditions. Barium nitrate was used historically in the 1890s for semi-smokeless powder, but is more costly and notably toxic.

Ammonium nitrate has a critical relative humidity closer to 59% near room temperature, limiting its non-hygroscopic conditions a great deal more, plus it's especially corrosive to brass and can cause stress corrosion cracking. (steel cases might be less problematic, and tend to be coated already, though additional paraffin wax or other coating might be better, and tiny flaws in the coating or scratches caused during loading friction would be less problematic than brass)
Trace decomposition of ammonia from trace alkali components (as with mineral content in charcoal) also isn't a problem for steel where it is for brass.

Of course, there's also AN's crystal phase change issues if not stored exclusively at cooler ambient temperatures (or basically limited to -16C to +32C storage conditions), unless a suitable double-salt is formed for stability. (KNO3 can be used, NaNO3 can't)
Though for lose, fine powder derivatives of ammonpulver, the crystal change might not be so much of a problem.
Ignition of pure AN+Charcoal compositions are very difficult, even confined in cartridges and need either very powerful primers or a booster charge to allow proper ignition. (this could include conventional black powder or sulfurless BP-type composition, or conventional smokeless powder) Or a portion of sodium or potassium nitrate could be included in the AN based propellant to make ignition qualities somewhat closer to more conventional sulfurless black powder type compositions. (precipitation of an AN-KNO3 double-salt into charcoal might be one option addressing the crystal phase change and ignition difficulties, though not the hygroscopic or corrosion issues, and partial deliquescence and subsequent recrystalization could lead to separation of the double salt; so preserving the temperature-phase stable qualities would require consistently dry or air-tight containment of such double salt compositions)

That said, straight ammonpulver type compositions should be completely smokeless (aside from trace mineral content from charcoal) and also have non-corrosive combustion products, provided the oxygen balance is negative and decomposition is complete.

Laboratory of Liptakov - 14-2-2025 at 23:47

You have just written a thesis on the topic of energy materials.......

Pages: 1 2 3