Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Misconceptions of High Explosives

TheAlchemistPirate - 13-7-2014 at 10:32

Safely making high explosives are one of humanity's greatest accomplishments, they help us build bridges, build tunnels, mine materials, demolish buildings, etc. However there are many misconceptions about them in media with action movie scenes where a terrorist accidentally drops a stick of dynamite and blows himself up, the hero shooting a block of c4 to blow up a tank, and a truck carrying 4000 pounds of TNT runs off the road and destroys the entire city. The idiots maiming themselves with poorly made Acetone Peroxide do not help, either. This has led to mass chemiphobia and the concept in the minds of most that all explosives are evil ticking time bombs(literally) ready for someone to accidentally bump into them and kill many orphans. Though this definately is not the case. I didn't start this thread to rant about public unawareness of very important facts about these "Terrorist Weapons", however.
I want this forum to have a resource on the true sensitivities of explosives, because I firmly believe they can be made safely at home with the proper equipment and knowledge. For example, I have seen many different opinions about the sensitivity of nitroglycerin. I noticed that it was listed as a secondary on the official sites about industrial high explosive manufacture, but on the many sites for scaring the public it was referred to as extremely sensitive. I want members who have done these explosive syntheses to comment on just how safe (and unsafe) certain homemade explosives can be (when properly synthesized).

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by TheAlchemistPirate]

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by TheAlchemistPirate]

NeonPulse - 13-7-2014 at 14:06

As long as due care is taken you can safely make explosives. Having made NG several times I can't really comment on its sensitivity that much as I haven't really had a desire to push the boundary and treat it rough to see if it will pop. That's not to say it isn't sensitive I just won't push my luck. As for other compounds I'm sticking to PETN and lead azide as I like the margins of safety they provide. The most danger now comes from distilling the nitric for it.there's always going to be idiots out there to give us all a bad rep and influence the of the sheeple especially when it comes to AP. I even recently tried to buy a 400ml bottle of 6% H202 and the pharmacist said they won't stock anymore. When i asked why she said to stop people from doing illegal things with it. I did not ask further as I knew what she meant, its not used to make drugs I think. As long as the fools and kewls keep having accidents we will all be slapped with bad labels and ill public opinions.

Turner - 13-7-2014 at 14:19

Quote: Originally posted by NeonPulse  
The most danger now comes from distilling the nitric for it./rquote]


Really?

NeonPulse - 13-7-2014 at 16:42

Quote: Originally posted by Turner  
Quote: Originally posted by NeonPulse  
The most danger now comes from distilling the nitric for it./rquote]


Really?

Well not really, accidents can happen and although I take extreme care when making energetic materials but accidents can still happen. It would be naive and quite stupid to think otherwise. But there are Some measures in place to minimize the chances of one occurring.example remote pressing of caps, blast shielding, safety goggles. at the blast site earplugs are a must have. Some risks are cut by no longer use NG and never use peroxides.As for distilling nitric I always worry the flask may break. There's a fire extinguisher at hand but this won't help the acid not vaporize anything it touches and creating a great deal of toxic fumes in the process. My respirator ist a great one so I'm not sure how well it would stop Nox fumes. Not to mention cleaning boiling acid too. It may be irrational to think it so dangerous. With doing a synthesis having control over most aspects of the reaction is one of the things that makes it safer. I have never had a runaway reaction yet. But alas, accidents can happen.

Praxichys - 14-7-2014 at 05:07

Where do I start?

1. Putting "High" in front of "Explosive" does not mean the compound is more sensitive.

2. Nitroglycerin (And EGDN for that matter) is sensitive to industrial manufacturing. It is actually quite difficult to set off a small amount by shock. Like, serious hammer blows onto steel, enough to dent mild steel. Dropping a vial of it is not recommended, but is unlikely to detonate. If you have ever used organic peroxides you will be surprised how hard it is to set off.

3. Flash powder, based on density, burn rate, and energy expelled, is much less powerful than most low-velocity HEs.

4. There never really was a standard "Stick of Dynamite." Most sources say they contained about 175g of NG. A 50g flash bomb, i.e. a "Quarter Stick of Dynamite" (Or a half or 3/4, or whatever Billy Bob decides to call his pyro products) contains nowhere near the energy of real Dynamite.

5. Despite what AC/DC says, Dynamite is not TNT.

6. Velocity of detonation alone is not a good way to characterize explosive power. Some high-velocity explosives are easily outperformed by lower-velocity ones. For example, nitroguanidine has a VoD of around 8200m/s but has the same RE factor as picric acid at 7350m/s. Speed is useful, but density and C-J pressure also need to be looked at.

7. Bulk flammable liquids and pressurized non-polymerizable flammable gases do not "detonate" like they say on that show Destroyed in Seconds. BLEVE, sure. But a propane tank or a gasoline tank is not going to detonate no matter how hot you make it. There is no oxidizer. Similarly, if you shoot a full gas tank, it just leaks. The explosion risk is in the vapor/air mixture above the liquid. Thus, an empty gas tank is actually more dangerous than a full one, from an explosion perspective.

8. Organic peroxides really are indeed very dangerously and unpredictably sensitive, despite the inevitable flame war full of kids and armchair chemists saying otherwise. Just because you used it three times and still have your fingers, face, and ears, doesn't mean you should recommend it to others. Even third-world bomb makers call it "The Mother of Satan."

9. Shock waves cannot exist in the vacuum of space. Sorry to all the fans of Star Trek and Star Wars. I love those movies, but I still cringe when I see that.

10. Movie explosions are usually giant flaming geysers of gasoline, and are nothing like what they're meant to represent. How many movies have you seen where a grenade goes off with a huge cloud of black smoke and flame? In real life, it's just a lot of gas and dust. This applies to lots of things like RPGs, C4, etc.

11. I'm not sure how "Drano bombs" got classified as explosive devices. IIRC some poor little girl made one at school as a science experiment and is being charged as if she intended to bomb the school. I know by experience with water rockets that pop bottles burst somewhere around 120psi, and they usually split open on the side with no fragmentation. The only real danger from these is the spray of corrosive contents. They're not powerful enough to do damage to much of anything. There are several YouTube videos of them exploding in kids' hands with little apparent injury.

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by Praxichys]

gregxy - 14-7-2014 at 09:52

If you read these forums and history of explosives of you will find that almost every one who experiments with energetics long enough experiences an "unintentional initiation", i.e. something goes off when it was not expected. Most of the time nothing serious results, however some have lost fingers, eyes, required a difficult to explain trip to the ER, and a couple have been killed.

This happens to smart people as well as kewls. Smart people can become careless or cocky with a reaction they have done many times, or have a "brain fart" and do something that they "know" is unsafe.

So regardless of what the theory says, experiment shows it IS dangerous and something bad IS going to happen sooner
or later.

The best way to be safe is work with small quantities (a gram or two). Runaway reactions are less likely with small quantities (heat loss is proportional to area, heat generatation to volume, and volume=area^(3/2)) and if it "goes off" when you don't expect it you are less likely to get hurt.


TheAlchemistPirate - 14-7-2014 at 10:05

I have yet to make many of the popular energetics on this forum as I lack the necessary equipment/materials to confidently make them. So far I have only made NC, a small amount of ETN, and some various BP mixtures. I frequently have problems convincing my family of the safety of even these energetics, as I am in my teens and they are under the impression by the media that all explosives are extremely sensitive. One future project I plan on doing is a machine that spins a circular plywood plate,with adjustable speeds. This would let me swirl reactions that I would feel nervous stirring manually such as nitroglycerin from a distance.

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by TheAlchemistPirate]

Texium - 14-7-2014 at 10:09

Quote: Originally posted by TheAlchemistPirate  
One future project I plan on doing is a machine that spins a circular plywood plate,with adjustable speeds. This would let me swirl reactions that I would feel stirring manually such as nitroglycerin from a distance.
That's a great idea! Maybe use a ceiling fan motor to spin it if you have one. That should go at about the speed you need and would also have a few speed settings you could use.

kt5000 - 19-8-2014 at 13:47

Quote: Originally posted by NeonPulse  
I even recently tried to buy a 400ml bottle of 6% H202 and the pharmacist said they won't stock anymore.


Last I checked, that's 94% water.. Are they afraid you might drop a catalyst in it and cause it to become lukewarm?

aga - 1-9-2014 at 13:01

Quote: Originally posted by TheAlchemistPirate  
One future project I plan on doing is a machine that spins a circular plywood plate

Put the motorised axis off-centre so it's more an eccentric movement.

If you get the disc spinning perfectly centered, you'll just pile the liquid up on the outside of the flask, rather than swirling.

It would be an interesting experiment to see if anyone can Swirl a liquid in a flask without looking at it.


[Edited on 1-9-2014 by aga]

Fantasma4500 - 2-9-2014 at 07:16

Praxichys: one thing -- 'bomb' refers to an device made to cause harm to persons or structures, thus a firecracker which purpose was to give off an loud bang when the 'reaction takes place' shouldnt be labeled 'bomb'
although i DO know some k3wls that has filled decent sized firecrackers in metal tubes because.. hey that would probably make it louder, not to mention the sad number of k3wls that blow up random peoples mailboxes with whatever they find to work for doing so -- even a bottle gas pressure ''bomb'' will do such, no matter how amazing it seems
proud to say i have saved at least 10 mailboxes

anyhow during nitration runoff can happen, /Peroximane92 on YT even managed to do this without anything in yet to nitrate, not much of a danger however

i did note that OP implied PROPERLY MADE explosives, by that i suppose also it would mean properly washed, however when thats said, NG that has gone quite bad, having stood without proper washing for some time CAN get so sensitive that dropping abit on the floor will cause it to detonate (full det??)
not to mention the notorious heatshocking NG can undergo, although this is said to with NG be hard to get full det

one of the more stupid actions my country has taken as a step to minimize explosive production was to disallow 35% H2O2
its not like you cant take 3% H2O2 or 12% and boil down to 35% or even 80% or PAST that if you care?? not to mention 3% can surely be used to make AP with anyhow.. do they even know what they are trying to ban or just totally guessing?

TheAlchemistPirate - 2-9-2014 at 12:02

Most of those in charge of controlling "terrorism" do not know anything about what theyre regulating, they simply are paid to go on TV and tell people they are protecting them. Those working in labs for the DEA and such normally know, but don't care.
I was recently wondering how sensitive ETN really is, as it has become very popular among amateurs lately. I have seen several mostly credible sites saying it is a primary explosive, and one saying it is in the "middle' between a primary and secondary. I have synthesized it once (about 10 grams) and managed to detonate it with a sparkler as a fuse (ran out of fuses, ghetto I know) . I also know one member on these forums had an accident while making it, too.

Dornier 335A - 12-9-2014 at 02:24

Quote: Originally posted by Praxichys  

4. There never really was a standard "Stick of Dynamite." Most sources say they contained about 175g of NG. A 50g flash bomb, i.e. a "Quarter Stick of Dynamite" (Or a half or 3/4, or whatever Billy Bob decides to call his pyro products) contains nowhere near the energy of real Dynamite.


Actually, KClO4/Al flash powder contains twice as much energy per mass as dynamite. It's not released nearly as fast though.

Something commonly seen on TV is how an exploding car or similar throws people through the air. In reality, a shock wave strong enough to push you away wouldn't leave much: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkeOHh8AoBM&t=2m50s

Praxichys - 12-9-2014 at 08:11

Quote: Originally posted by Dornier 335A  
Actually, KClO4/Al flash powder contains twice as much energy per mass as dynamite. It's not released nearly as fast though.


I stand corrected.

In addition to speed, the thermal nature of the decomposition products must also be considered. Flash powder has a lot of high-boiling solid decomposition products, while NG goes to gases. A lot of that energy goes into heating STP solids instead of gases, which drastically reduces the locally developed pressure since pressure is a function of gas temperature for those products which are still gases at a given temperature.

I guess in the world of explosives, it's all about energy delivery.

Blinded - 24-9-2014 at 18:01

Quote: Originally posted by gregxy  
If you read these forums and history of explosives of you will find that almost every one who experiments with energetics long enough experiences an "unintentional initiation", i.e. something goes off when it was not expected. Most of the time nothing serious results, however some have lost fingers, eyes, required a difficult to explain trip to the ER, and a couple have been killed.

This happens to smart people as well as kewls. Smart people can become careless or cocky with a reaction they have done many times, or have a "brain fart" and do something that they "know" is unsafe.

So regardless of what the theory says, experiment shows it IS dangerous and something bad IS going to happen sooner
or later.



I

it would be a good idea if we had a (accidental initiations) thread for energetics enthusiasts. Or maybe (accidents) sticky in each sub forum ,Since I also believe that most of us had few unintentional/underestimated energetic reactions.
It will be more interesting to read than classical warnings which the unwise tend to skip.
If we kept registering our experience it will become a useful knowledge base for what I believe a vital aspect of such practice.

Sometimes what doesn't kill you might cripple you.
Regards

macckone - 24-9-2014 at 18:33

Quote: Originally posted by Blinded  
Quote: Originally posted by gregxy  
If you read these forums and history of explosives of you will find that almost every one who experiments with energetics long enough experiences an "unintentional initiation", i.e. something goes off when it was not expected. Most of the time nothing serious results, however some have lost fingers, eyes, required a difficult to explain trip to the ER, and a couple have been killed.

This happens to smart people as well as kewls. Smart people can become careless or cocky with a reaction they have done many times, or have a "brain fart" and do something that they "know" is unsafe.

So regardless of what the theory says, experiment shows it IS dangerous and something bad IS going to happen sooner
or later.



I

it would be a good idea if we had a (accidental initiations) thread for energetics enthusiasts. Or maybe (accidents) sticky in each sub forum ,Since I also believe that most of us had few unintentional/underestimated energetic reactions.
It will be more interesting to read than classical warnings which the unwise tend to skip.
If we kept registering our experience it will become a useful knowledge base for what I believe a vital aspect of such practice.

Sometimes what doesn't kill you might cripple you.
Regards


That thread is called 'life after detonation'

Thanatops1s - 1-12-2014 at 20:58

Quote: Originally posted by Antiswat  
one of the more stupid actions my country has taken as a step to minimize explosive production was to disallow 35% H2O2
its not like you cant take 3% H2O2 or 12% and boil down to 35% or even 80% or PAST that if you care?? not to mention 3% can surely be used to make AP with anyhow.. do they even know what they are trying to ban or just totally guessing?

Not sure where you live, but although they might not have more than 3% in the pharmacy, beauty supply store will usually have it for hair bleaching. 12% is usually available as "40 Volume Clear Developer". I got it years ago. I think they had 50 volume too(which I think is 15%), but only in gallon bottles and I just wanted a tiny bit.
Quote: Originally posted by Praxichys  
I guess in the world of explosives, it's all about energy delivery.

Exactly. Though not an explosive, thermite is a perfect example of that. Plenty of energy, just doesn't deliver it very fast.

[Edited on 12-2-2014 by Thanatops1s]

Fantasma4500 - 11-1-2015 at 04:59

well europe, but it seems you are very lucky if you can find just 100mL of 3% now adays, not that i dont have 5L 12% myself
also happened to find many litres of 35% H2O2 for sale on ebay when trying to find some gold, looking into what the contents were in some random pool chemicals, total jackpot.

Molecular Manipulations - 11-1-2015 at 08:52

If you live where only 3% H2O2 is available, go from pharmacy to pharmacy buying two to four containers at a time with cash, not plastic to avoid possible "detection" until you have about 10 or so. Then get a big glass tray (like a cooking plater) with at least a 2.5" rim, pour it all in and put in the oven at about 100 deg. C, it won't boil so losses will be low. After volume has decreased by 90-95%, titrate it to find the conc.
30% can easily be reached, and there's no record you have it.

[Edited on 11-1-2015 by Molecular Manipulations]

TheAlchemistPirate - 11-1-2015 at 12:14

You also can concentrate it simply by leaving the platter of H202 out in a dry,open place for three months. But that's only for people who are very patient and safety-conscious :D .

careysub - 12-1-2015 at 12:09

Quote: Originally posted by Thanatops1s  

Quote: Originally posted by Praxichys  
I guess in the world of explosives, it's all about energy delivery.

Exactly. Though not an explosive, thermite is a perfect example of that. Plenty of energy, just doesn't deliver it very fast.


Another useful point of reference - the energy released by the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima was equal to one hour of noontime sunlight falling on that same city. Makes a big difference when the energy is delivered a billion times faster.

Or another comparison, an average adult might burn 2000 kCal in a day through metabolism. This is the same energy as in 2 kg of TNT. Even one hour of metabolism makes a pretty hefty explosion - 40 minutes is about equal to the loading of the Mk-II grenade used in WWII.

Hawkguy - 12-1-2015 at 20:31

Quote: Originally posted by TheAlchemistPirate  
Safely making high explosives are one of humanity's greatest accomplishments, they help us build bridges, build tunnels, mine materials, demolish buildings, etc. However there are many misconceptions about them in media with action movie scenes where a terrorist accidentally drops a stick of dynamite and blows himself up, the hero shooting a block of c4 to blow up a tank, and a truck carrying 4000 pounds of TNT runs off the road and destroys the entire city. The idiots maiming themselves with poorly made Acetone Peroxide do not help, either. This has led to mass chemiphobia and the concept in the minds of most that all explosives are evil ticking time bombs(literally) ready for someone to accidentally bump into them and kill many orphans. Though this definately is not the case. I didn't start this thread to rant about public unawareness of very important facts about these "Terrorist Weapons", however.
I want this forum to have a resource on the true sensitivities of explosives, because I firmly believe they can be made safely at home with the proper equipment and knowledge. For example, I have seen many different opinions about the sensitivity of nitroglycerin. I noticed that it was listed as a secondary on the official sites about industrial high explosive manufacture, but on the many sites for scaring the public it was referred to as extremely sensitive. I want members who have done these explosive syntheses to comment on just how safe (and unsafe) certain homemade explosives can be (when properly synthesized).

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by TheAlchemistPirate]

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by TheAlchemistPirate]


Dude chemiphobia sucks. It comes with the over cautious fearmongering which prevails in society, and worst of all, it inhibits general progress. It's that scared attitude which leads people to believe that chemicals are bad as a whole. Most of all, energetic materials are frowned on because of the few bad incidents despite the advance they have brought over the course of history.

Now to the juicy; the whole 'sensitivity' issues come to ward amateurs away from pyrotechnics and chemistry. Even though its not actually THAT dangerous (Nitro can sometimes be a b**** to detonate) there's a few numbskulls who fuck up bad by not exercising proper safety precautions, they give a bad name to everyone.

[Edited on 13-1-2015 by Hawkguy]

careysub - 12-1-2015 at 22:14

Quote: Originally posted by Praxichys  


2. Nitroglycerin (And EGDN for that matter) is sensitive to industrial manufacturing. It is actually quite difficult to set off a small amount by shock. Like, serious hammer blows onto steel, enough to dent mild steel. Dropping a vial of it is not recommended, but is unlikely to detonate. If you have ever used organic peroxides you will be surprised how hard it is to set off.

[Edited on 14-7-2014 by Praxichys]


That is true, until it isn't.

It may be that it is difficult to detonate, when you want to detonate it, but there are a number of situations that detonate nitroglycerin quite easily, even if not reliably.


Any situation that can invoke the bubble sensitivity effect can detonate the stuff - any percussion against a container with a liquid containing one or more bubbles, impact on a wetted, uneven surface where bubble trapping can occur, dropping something into the liquid that might trap a bubble (as I recall someone developed a drop weight designed to do this efficiently). Then there is the friction sensitive of films, which can be considerable.

And the increased sensitivity of warm nitroglycerin, and nitroglycerin that is beginning to decompose. Aging of nitroglycerin greatly increases its sensitivity (this may in part be due to the formation of bubbles). So even if your handling methods have been accident-free with fresh NG, wait a few days. Things may change.

There are certainly enough spontaneous nitroglycerin detonations in the classic literature.

Contrast this to, say, actual TNT where nothing you can do it without a blasting cap is going to make it explode.

As you observe there are much worse things, but nitroglycerin has an unpredictable side that foreshadows doom for the incautious.

Darkstar - 18-1-2015 at 11:10

Quote: Originally posted by NeonPulse  
I even recently tried to buy a 400ml bottle of 6% H202 and the pharmacist said they won't stock anymore. When i asked why she said to stop people from doing illegal things with it. I did not ask further as I knew what she meant, its not used to make drugs I think.


I'm assuming by "illegal things" she was, as you implied, referring to its use in synthesizing organic peroxides, specifically AP. It might be worth mentioning, however, that H2O2 can, in fact, be used to synthesize certain drugs as well. Since I'd prefer to avoid helping any more of these idiot, wannabe "cooks" further destroy our hobby, let's just say H2O2 can be used to generate a peroxy acid in order to oxidize an alkene to a ketone. (alkene -> epoxide -> glycol -> ketone via pinacol rearrangement) There's an extremely popular class of recreational drugs that this reaction can be particularly useful for.

Whether or not that actually has anything to do with your pharmacy choosing not to stock H2O2 anymore, who knows. All that's certain is that it seems like every other day yet another OTC source for some useful reagent disappears...

Zombie - 18-1-2015 at 14:14

Legality aside, and all judgement reserved...

Why do you need to make explosives at home? That answer will go a LONG way towards quantifying the reason for such a thread.

Please don't respond with, Why do I do what I do. Like I said... not judging. Just looking to make the thread valid.
If there is no valid reason, there is no valid cause of action.

I had to edit this to add...
Why does anyone need safrole oil? There are dozens of valid reasons. Yet it's the people that use it for drugs that made it an analog.
Show me a valid reason for Nitro Glycerin at home... (devils advocate so please don't hate on me) I like to blow shit up as much as the next guy. I'm just stating what I understand to be "Their side of the story".
IMHO WATER is an analog so I get it.

[Edited on 19-1-2015 by Zombie]

Darkstar - 18-1-2015 at 18:12

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie  

Why does anyone need safrole oil? There are dozens of valid reasons. Yet it's the people that use it for drugs that made it an analog.


Don't mean to nitpick, but safrole would more correctly be called a "precursor" to various MDxx compounds, especially when speaking in a legal context. An analog is more like MDA compared to MDMA.

Zombie - 18-1-2015 at 19:18

Of course you are correct... I think.
I was referring to the Federal Analogue Act making a root oil illegal. In correct definition it is a precursor.
The same scenario applies to many of the chemicals used for countless experiments/reactions all over this forum.
Bottom line is the idiots that use these things for illegal profit or terror are the issue. Unfortunately they will neither go away or reduce in numbers. They will simply grow along with population., and many more things we all take for granted as harmless will be stripped away from us.

You can argue that water is a precursor, and can be controlled under the analog act.

I do have to learn to monitor my wording here.

Thank you.

[Edited on 19-1-2015 by Zombie]

Darkstar - 18-1-2015 at 20:38

Safrole isn't actually illegal in the US. You can purchase and possess safrole/sassafras oil. It is, however, a DEA list I chemical, meaning its suppliers are tightly regulated and its sales are closely monitored by the DEA. The Federal Analogue Act, also part of the Controlled Substances Act, isn't the same thing. Its purpose is primarily to deal with designer drugs, which are typically analogs of known drugs. For example, MDEA, the N-ethyl analog of MDMA, differs only by an ethyl group on the nitrogen (as opposed to MDMA's methyl group). This small change technically makes MDEA a different substance than MDMA and not subject to the same restrictions. The Federal Analogue Act is intended to address this loophole.

Precursors and reagents commonly used to synthesize controlled drugs are handled somewhat differently. With the exception of precursors like phenylacetone (which is flat-out Schedule II), most aren't actually illegal to purchase or possess. (although, in some jurisdictions, certain combinations of them can be illegal) They may be hard to buy from legitimate chemical suppliers, but that isn't because they aren't allowed to sell them to you.

DEA list of chemicals
Federal Analog Act
DEA on safrole

Zombie - 18-1-2015 at 22:30

Thank you again for the correction Darkstar.

Next time i'll use H202 for my example, and leave the dramatization out.:D

Good lookin' out.:cool: