energeticone
Harmless
Posts: 17
Registered: 10-6-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
EGDN or PLX
...looking for new binary. Anyone whom has experience with both please help me weigh the pros/ cons. Ease of synthesis (time related) and VOD
comparison.
Serious inquiries only
Thanks
|
|
greenlight
National Hazard
Posts: 721
Registered: 3-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
The PLX would be easier to manufacture as you just mix the two liquids together.
EGDN is not a binary and falls more into the group with nitroglycerin and methyl nitrate. It also requires a nitration which will obviously take
longer to perform.
PLX is supposed to be around 6000m/s I think.
EGDN has a more precise measured VOD taken from explosives engineering of 7300m/s @ 1.48g/cm3.
They really are two different explosives but I think EGDN would be the more brisant and definitely won't freeze and become dangerous like NG.
One downside is the handling problems with headaches which I have heard are worse than the ones from NG.
PLX is safer to handle I think and requires more shock to detonate than EGDN so there is that too.
The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.
George Wald
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
PLX requires Nitromethane (NM) and Ethylenediamine (EDA).
EGDN requires Ethylene glycol and Nitric acid (plus if too dilluted some concentrated Sulfuric acid).
In theory both could be mixed resulting in a mix of NM, EDA dinitrate, Ethylene glycol and Ethylene glycol dinitrate (EGDN)...without signifiant
advantage for sensitivity or power because EDADN has a similar VOD to EGDN and because the weakest link remains the EGDN wich is the most sensitive to
shock, heat , initiation...into the range of NG (nitroglycerin).
PH Z (PHILOU Zrealone)
"Physic is all what never works; Chemistry is all what stinks and explodes!"-"Life that deadly disease, sexually transmitted."(W.Allen)
|
|