| Pages:
1
..
57
58
59
60
61
..
68 |
NeonPulse
Hazard to Others
Posts: 417
Registered: 29-6-2013
Location: The other end of the internet.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Isolated from Reality! For Real this time....
|
|
Continued: some loose packed PETN was used to fill the cap well and to Fill the spaces in the top of the cast and to fill the gap between the cap and
cast. At the site a hole was dug and the charge was duct taped to the sledge hammer head and place into the hole and earth was packed around it,the
cap was placed in the cap well and the whole thing buried. Firing line was connected and from a safe distance behind a large tree I heard the dull
thud and dirt showering the ground. Great. The anticipation of digging through the crater for the target was great.
This charge had Successfully penetrated the target to a brilliant 110mm of solid steel plus the air gap. 65mm through the first section and the jet
and carrot continued through to the second section for another 45mm exiting out the side on an angle.
I think if the jet was straight it wi old have gone clean through both ends no problem. I was thrilled! All the effort of ensuring everything was
done as carefully as possible payed off.
On looking at the hole there was very little splatter and no raised edges at the entry, it was pretty clean. The carrot was plugged in tight and I had
to poke it out through the exit it was like a little copper spear.
All in all it was a great attempt and I would say a complete success with just over 3CD penetration. The Cyclotol/pentolite combo worked very well
along with the dirt tamping. This is by far the most penetration I've gotten out of all the tests I've ever done, I thought it would be hard to beat
the last effort.
     
|
|
|
nux vomica
Hazard to Others
Posts: 267
Registered: 18-7-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Nice job neon , looks like there was some more penertration if the jet hadnt come through the side of the target .
|
|
|
Microtek
National Hazard
Posts: 869
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Perhaps you could try it with a higher RDX/PETN content. Cyclotol is usually around 75 % RDX. Of course, not all the RDX will dissolve in the TNT.
|
|
|
NeonPulse
Hazard to Others
Posts: 417
Registered: 29-6-2013
Location: The other end of the internet.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Isolated from Reality! For Real this time....
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Microtek  | | Perhaps you could try it with a higher RDX/PETN content. Cyclotol is usually around 75 % RDX. Of course, not all the RDX will dissolve in the TNT.
|
I plan to now I know that casting it is not as difficult as I thought. I had tried a 50/50 pentolite before and it was a co-precipitation of TNT and
PETN which took a while to melt properly. Not only that but I only had 40g of RDX left and did not want to use it all in that charge. It would be a
while before I can test it again since I'd have to distill more nitric for an RDX batch and to make another cone like the one I used. Maybe I'll try a
waveshaper to cut the amount of HE needed. Maybe even a smaller charge. I do have a couple of other cones I could use too.
|
|
|
gnitseretni
Hazard to Others
Posts: 282
Registered: 5-1-2007
Location: Colombia
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Nice one Neonpulse!
Those electroformed liners work pretty good huh?! And they're easy to make!
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1387
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: old jew
|
|
electroplanting
Electroplating of copper cone? Very interesting question. Maybe same interesting, as result, thus the long hole. Some electro device we will see? WE
are curious... ...LL
|
|
|
NeonPulse
Hazard to Others
Posts: 417
Registered: 29-6-2013
Location: The other end of the internet.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Isolated from Reality! For Real this time....
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Laboratory of Liptakov | | Electroplating of copper cone? Very interesting question. Maybe same interesting, as result, thus the long hole. Some electro device we will see? WE
are curious......LL |
They work very well but require a little effort to produce. The guy who posted above you here Gnitseretni came up with the idea and even wrote up a
PDF about it. It is very simple and reproducible. No special equipment needed but a cell phone charger or other power supply. There's a whole thread
about it in technochemistry thread. I think it was called "electroforming copper liners" or something like that.
|
|
|
Laboratory of Liptakov
International Hazard
Posts: 1387
Registered: 2-9-2014
Location: Technion Haifa
Member Is Offline
Mood: old jew
|
|
Thanks Neon, will be study.......LL
|
|
|
Hennig Brand
International Hazard
Posts: 1284
Registered: 7-6-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Very interesting test. You took the time to do good work and it definitely paid off. Shaped charge experiments involving cast explosives, especially
TNT or mixtures with it, are very interesting I find. Yeah, electroforming is a decent option for making copper liners for the hobbyist in my opinion
as well.
"A risk-free world is a very dull world, one from which we are apt to learn little of consequence." -Geerat Vermeij
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 737
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
That is a very nice result NP!
I like how you could recover the copper jet/carrot.
I am in the process of designing a EFP with a diameter of 39mm to penetrate 20mm steel. The pipe casing inside diameter was supposed to be 40 mm but
upon measuring it, it is slightly smaller.
I have 1.1mm thick Copper sheet and 1.85mm thick copper sheet. Before I cut and shape the liner, I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on
which thickness would be better?
[Edited on 9-8-2016 by greenlight]
[Edited on 9-8-2016 by greenlight]
Be good, otherwise be good at it 
|
|
|
NeonPulse
Hazard to Others
Posts: 417
Registered: 29-6-2013
Location: The other end of the internet.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Isolated from Reality! For Real this time....
|
|
Why don't you try both? I would probably go the thicker of the two. Just anneal it nicely and it should be fine. 40 mm is nice and wide and no doubt
you will be using a highly brisant explosive. 40 mm is wide enough to consider trying a waveshaper to ensure a nice evenly formed slug and slam
through the test plate.
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 737
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Thanks, I will try the thicker copper plate for the first test and yes explosive will be PETN plastic explosive with minimal inerts.
I will attempt using a waveshaper after the I see how the first test goes.
Be good, otherwise be good at it
|
|
|
Bert
|
Thread Split
20-9-2016 at 08:19 |
Zyxel
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-9-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hi, Im new here.Today I lathe small shaped charge.Tomorrow will be tested.
Cone diameter is 24 mm, height 30mm thickness 1mm, cone angle is 42° .
Cone material is brass.
I use genuine military grade plasticized PETN, 40 gram.
Detonator is military grade, I aded electric match.
Casing tube is from LED flashlight, material aluminium, thickness 1mm.
Standoff is 85mm.
Target is 145mm mild steel plates.
    
|
|
|
nitro-genes
International Hazard
Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline
|
|
Your plastique looks like a potato...stealth plastique? Nice looking cone! Was it spunformed or machined, why brass btw?
[Edited on 23-9-2016 by nitro-genes]
|
|
|
Zyxel
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-9-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
My plastiqe and detonator is from Yougoslav M75 hand granade.Cone is machined in lathe.I dont have copper so I use brass.
Velocity of detonation is 7800m/s.
https://www.marstar.ca/html/reflibrary/YugoOrdnance/handgren...
|
|
|
MineMan
International Hazard
Posts: 1004
Registered: 29-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
nice, please post pics of the result!
|
|
|
NeonPulse
Hazard to Others
Posts: 417
Registered: 29-6-2013
Location: The other end of the internet.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Isolated from Reality! For Real this time....
|
|
I think I remember brass doesn't work very well for liners. Still a nice looking charge though. Is that an old torch?
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 737
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
Hmmm, brass, will be interesting to see the results.
I would say the same as NP that brass liners wouldn't afford much penetration compared to copper.
I had a quick look for documents with tests and found this pdf were the penetration of different shaped charge liners was tested in granite. On page
56 in the conclusions section, it says that "copper and brass liners gave equal penetration for 42 degree apex angles".
I am sure copper is still superior to brass so maybe this was just an effect seen when penetrating rock and copper take the lead in metal targets.
BTW: I finally put together a 40mm EFP, took it out and fired it but the detonator was inferior and didn't give enough shock for the PE to go high
order.
It sounded like a loud firecracker instead of a HE and scattered bits of PVC pipe from the casing around proving it was indeed low order. I still
don't know what caused it , I did use some very old PETN for the base charge in the det so that may be it. 
[Edited on 24-9-2016 by greenlight]
[Edited on 24-9-2016 by greenlight]
Be good, otherwise be good at it
|
|
|
Fulmen
International Hazard
Posts: 1716
Registered: 24-9-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bored
|
|
I've been wondering about brass as well, but so far I haven't found much data on it.
Copper works, but it machines like crap and can be hard to find. Brass has roughly the same density and melting point, and while not as ductile as
copper it's not bad either.
We're not banging rocks together here. We know how to put a man back together.
|
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 737
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
I just use the copper pipes sold at hardware stores, cut through one side, anneal and flatten them, cut out a rough circle and shape it on a bench
grinder.
One thing that is different is that copper has a high speed of sound than brass by about 1000 m/s I think which may make the copper behave better than
brass under the extreme pressures of an SC.
Be good, otherwise be good at it
|
|
|
Zyxel
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-9-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Here are results penetration is 15,5mm.I think cone is not good centered or explosive is not equally pressed.
But explosion make big holes in concrete blocks.
I found this chinese company that manufactures tungsten copper alloy liners.I asked they to manufacure one for me with same dimension as previous
brass cone but they cant manufacture so thin (1mm) liner.I cant test bigger liners.If someone will try these tungsten copper allyo liner can ask they
to make bigger liner.
This is company: http://www.tungsten-alloy.com/shaped-charge-liners.htm
   
[Edited on 24-9-2016 by Zyxel]
|
|
|
nux vomica
Hazard to Others
Posts: 267
Registered: 18-7-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Nice maybe useing a 60° cone would be a less difficult to set up , i didnt have much luck with 42° cones , i had better forming jets useing the 60°
ones .
[Edited on 25-9-2016 by nux vomica]
|
|
|
Microtek
National Hazard
Posts: 869
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
With non-zero manufacturing error, brass could prove to be better than copper. Since copper is difficult to machine on a lathe (apart from spinning
which introduces torsion in the jet), and brass is not, using brass for the liner could produce cones with micrometer precision.
Since this is not possible with handmade cones of copper, maybe it would be advantageous to go with brass.
|
|
|
nux vomica
Hazard to Others
Posts: 267
Registered: 18-7-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Zyxel | Hi, Im new here.Today I lathe small shaped charge.Tomorrow will be tested.
Cone diameter is 24 mm, height 30mm thickness 1mm, cone angle is 42° .
Cone material is brass.
I use genuine military grade plasticized PETN, 40 gram.
Detonator is military grade, I aded electric match.
Casing tube is from LED flashlight, material aluminium, thickness 1mm.
Standoff is 85mm.
Target is 145mm mild steel plates.
|
Just looking at the photos again and i notice the detonator is in the charge a long way i wonder if you should of only let it enter the charge 2 or 3
mm so as to give you more head hight and give the detonation wave more time form correctly .
Nux
[Edited on 26-9-2016 by nux vomica]
|
|
|
Zyxel
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-9-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hi, new test cone.
Cone diameter is 34 mm, height 26mm thickness 1,5mm, cone angle is 60° .
Cone material copper.
Explosive 34 grams.
Does is better to put detonator depper or shallower in explosive.
 
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
57
58
59
60
61
..
68 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
