| Pages:
1
..
3
4
5
6
7
..
68 |
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I choose to forget about using steel, not worth the risk and PVC obviously works even if performance is somewhat reduced.
Easiest way to fit the liner is to use a liner that will slide into the pipe, then fix it with a smaller diametre pipe as shown below. In this case a
4" PVC fitting is used as confinement and a small section of 4" pipe glued into the fitting hods the liner in place.
Alternatively leave the top of the charge open, with sufficient head height and fix the standoff to the liner. This stops the liner from being pushed
out the bottom.
The only charge here that failed to penetrate was the "tulip" charge on the first page, in this case the liner wasn't secured firmly,
rather glued into the end of 3" pipe without any support.
<center><img src="http://ww1.webtop100.net/~52497/rogue.webtop100.net/images/shapedfront.jpg"></center>
This particular one was <a href="http://ww1.webtop100.net/~52497/rogue.webtop100.net/images/shaped.jpg">setup</a> but failed to
detonate.
[Edited on 25-10-2005 by Axt]
|
|
|
nitro-genes
International Hazard
Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline
|
|
glass liners
I'm confused why glass works so well as a liner, since on sudden force it behaves as a very brittle material. Though there is some discussion
about glass being a solid or a supercooled liquid, the myth of slowly downwards flowing window glass doesn't seem to be true.
Modern soda/lime glass has a transition temperature ranging from 270-550 deg C. Which means above these temperatures it behaves as a liquid. These
temperatures are easily reached for copper liners. This could also be the case for glass if the high temperature of a jet is mainly formed because of
internal friction in the liner when it collapses. (Is this true?) I can't imagine that there is a large conduction of heat from the explosive to
the liner material in those few microseconds...
I'm convinced however the glass liner doesn't form a jet of glass powder because in a test with a 3 cm glass cone I found the glass to have
formed a thin deposit layer on the inside of the perforation hole. It appeared as a shiny light blue plastic like layer. Has someone else noticed
this?
Anyway, the jet didn't travel through the entire 5 cm of steel, but 4,7 cm instead. Although the jet penetrated almost the entire block, there
was not even a slight bumb on the other side of the block! Incredible to see that there is indeed only sideway displacement of the steel around the
jet.
This time i used a 85% PETN platique as I found that NM plastique isn't detonable with these diameters, or has a very poor performance instead.
(i used 37 mm steel hemispheres with a 50mm PVC tube earlier) So I really expected a full penetration this time.
I am wondering if the standoff might be to blame, as I used 2 times standoff as usual. Could it be that a because of the brittle nature of glass the
jet is less coherent? The M2A4 demolition charge also uses a 60 degrees glass cone, but is used with only a 1,2 times cone diameter standoff...
|
|
|
Microtek
National Hazard
Posts: 872
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
In some advanced shaped charges, the liner is composed of a powdered metal such as tungsten which is pressed into the desired shape. When the glass is
shocked, it probably shatters into a fine powder similar to the pressed metal.
Since this presumably works well ( or they'd just use cheap copper instead ), it might be worth considering if copper powder could be bound with
something ( plaster of paris or perhaps a suitable polymer ) if copper cones were difficult to come by.
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I cant remember the name of the process so I cant give references, but some exotic alloys are formed by explosive compression of metal powders, when
normal processes cant be used. This is a solid homogeneous alloy, not a compressed powder.
I'm willing to bet this is also what happens to glass, rather then a "powder stream" the pressure involved squeeze it into a cohearent
solid. Glass being lighter then the metal will be accellerated faster, in part compensating for its lower density.
Another advantage of using glass, and possibly the reason it is used commercially is that thee will be no "carrot" formed as at those
presures and velocity it will just shatter. Thus there will be no obstructions left in the hole.
|
|
|
chemistr1
Harmless
Posts: 5
Registered: 6-11-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I have been designing aluminium cold cast cones but with limited results as I have been using ANxxx secondaries.
Now that I have some erythritol maybe it is time to restart the research.
With 75% Al 25% resin cold cast cones. If this works satisfactorily then 75% copper 25% resin would be the next logical step or maybe a mix of metal
powders.
Not wanting to start a new thread but how high a yield have people had with ETN as I have around 100gm yield for a 45gm/180gm/300ml E/AN/H2SO4 batch.
Its still drying, is perfectly neutralised and white but the yield just seem very high although I know that it is in the theoretical range.
Was I just lucky or has something gone wrong?
[Edited on 28-10-05 by chemistr1]
|
|
|
Chris The Great
Hazard to Others
Posts: 463
Registered: 29-10-2004
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Very interesting idea with metal powder/resin! I am inclined to try it, as I tried making a cone before and had a very hard time. Does any
particular resin work better? I think I will try my 5-minute epoxy since I happen to have it lying around. It would appear to be a very easy and
(hopefully, have you tried yet) effective method of making good cone liners. Although it should also work well for trumpet cones and other exotic
shapes.
As for the ETN yield, check some threads about it, everyone seems to get huge yields from what I've read. Since it has a low melting point (?) I
think it would work well in a shaped charge as it could be melted with hot water and cast.
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Take ETN discussion not related to shaped charges here http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=1100
Cast ETN failed in the bullet jacket SC's, exploding with a vvvvvppBANG, very little penetration. Though it will probably perform better it
larger quantities.
|
|
|
Boomer
Hazard to Others
Posts: 190
Registered: 11-11-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Axt wrote: "Also with thick containment the liner should be held as firm as the body, no point constructing a SC out of 5mm steel pipe and then
sticky taping the liner in."
Could you please elaborate on this? While I *did* experience that a thick-walled metal pipe gives better penetration than a cardboard pipe, I thought
it was from higher VoD with confinement, especially with a dense, nearly void-free plastique that needs confinement at low diameters. I do not
understand the reason for having to firmly hold the liner:
IIRC the pressure on the liner is much higher than its tensile strength, and the VoD is higher than the speed of sound in copper. How can the lower
rim of the liner 'know' that it should dislodge from the casing and spoil jet formation, when the collapsing upper part of it is overtaking
the sound wave in the liner which would 'tell' the rim that something is happening upstairs? Hope that is clear, what I mean is the forming
liner will overtake the rim (folding over) before it can dislodge. Am I mistaken here? If yes why?
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I cant say with certainty, and can provide no direct references to liner "security", but my thoughts and experiances follow;
The liner which ideally is acting as in incompressible liquid (though nothings ideal) will "know" its been hit. Pretend you have a long
incompressible rod, hit one end and the end will move before you hear it. The cone shaped liner won't collapse in on itself perfectly and is
"pushed" along the axis of its walls if not secured.
I have read your posts on SC's, from memory your ("laminated" I guess your could say) liners are quite thin correct? easily collapsed
thus liner "security" is less of an issue with liner collapse, but more important for explosive VOD in this case (HDN).
The steel liner I used and the stronger "tulip" shape failed miserably where the liner wasnt secured, yet whenever the standoff held up the
liner (the glass liner) or the liner sits directly on the target itself (cylindrical/linear/bjsc) the holes have been very concentric circles with no
spray at all.
The posts on body confinement above are mainly restating, and adding lost context to the fundamentals of shaped charges extract. Which unequivocally
states that heavy confinement aids to keep detonation pressures high during liner collapse (thus doing more then just ensuring high VOD).
|
|
|
Boomer
Hazard to Others
Posts: 190
Registered: 11-11-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
"Pretend you have a long incompressible rod, hit one end and the end will move before you hear it"
I get your point, and a have no reference either. But my 'gut feeling' (read limited understanding of thermo/hydrodynamics - my nick is not
cheetah  ) tells me there is a fault in this reasoning: Firstly, you rod example
would suggest the whole mass moving *before* the shock reaches the other end. That cant be. Secondly, this wave (shock or sound) *is* a compression
wave. Though compression factor is usually small, since e-module is big. Thirdly, while (nearly) incompressible, metals *are* compressed considerably
by HE shock waves. IIRC the Pu in a non-gun-type nuke is compressed 2-3 times, going from 20 to 40-60 g/ccm !!! This is in addition to collapsing the
hollow sphere. (Fat Man had a massive pit, not relying in collapsing a cavity at all.)
Apart from this, just for fun I calculated the acceleration of the liner material. It cannot be instantaneous, since this would require infinite
pressure: Assuming linear acceleration over 5mm from zero to 8 km/s, you get 640 million g acting for 1.25 µs.
To back this up, I chose one square cm of 0.8mm thickness, weighing roughly 0.65g. If hit by 400 kbar, this will accelerate with a = 4 million N /
0.0065 kg = 615 million g for 1.3µs. Close enough!
Now please tell me, what is happening to the metal in that microsecond? Is it being compressed while speeding up? Is the det wave slowed down at
first, speeding up again with the metal? As I said above it cannot go to full jet speed instantaneously. I whish I were cheetah.... 
Edit: It was not too much HDN, mostly NG, MHN, RDX, so quite fast at 1.65 g/ccm I bet.
[Edited on 14-11-2005 by Boomer]
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
There has been an idea which I have never tried for a PETN melt cast composition that may be useful for
shaped charges and should have about
10 % ( or more ) brisance than C4 or SEMTEX 
The constituents would need to be very pure acid free and and stabilized , perhaps with urea / dicyandiamide / betaine via the entrapped trace
stabilizer
method applied during the recrystallization of each of the nitroester
constituents for the eutectic .
The composition would predominately consist of the 80/20 PETN / MHN eutectic which melts at 101.3 C . It seems likely that the m.p. of the eutectic
could be lowered further by addition of yet a third
nitrated polyol , ETN or perhaps Inositol Hexanitrate or one of the other nitrated polyols . The possible use of RDX as a filler of suspended solid
particles,
using such a melt as an energetic binder
is also contemplated if the RDX is found to
be compatable with the melt .
The output of such a melt cast should be very high energy and velocity , and not difficult to initiate .
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
But it stands to reason that the transference of detonation pressure into the liner will be greatest if its firmly held. Same as if a coin will be
pancaked if placed between an explosive and steel plate but flung largely unharmed into the air if placed on top. I guess it comes down to a matter of
significance, I think its going to be just as significant as strong confinement regarding transfer of detonaton pressure when it comes to strong rigid
liners.
"<i>Allison and Vitali (1963) and Harlow and Pracht (1966) indicated that the effect of compressibility on penetration of metal jets into
metal targets is slight.</i>" FOSC.
Not entirely within context, but I'll concede that slight compression doesn't necessarily mean insignificant.
| Quote: | Originally posted by Microtek
it might be worth considering if copper powder could be bound with something ( plaster of paris or perhaps a suitable polymer ) if copper cones were
difficult to come by. |
A mixture of latex and copper powder (~50:50 by volume) was made and an aluminium cone (alternatively, use a plumb bob) was dipped into it. Once a
skin formed on the surface it was dipped again, and repeated again. Latex was used since it is sticky when wet but not once dry so can easily be
removed off the cone.
The copper mixture was more viscous then straight latex and held a thicker layer easier, but when I left it upside down to dry it drooped a bit
resulting in the outside forming a tulip shape, but its proof of concept. The dried latex/Cu is quite strong and elastic.
<center><img src="http://www.sciencemadness.org/scipics/axt/latex-liners.jpg"></center>
[Edited on 14-11-2005 by Axt]
|
|
|
lacrima97
Hazard to Self
Posts: 93
Registered: 24-7-2005
Location: MS
Member Is Offline
Mood: experimental
|
|
Cylindrical charge?
I looked at the picture from the very first post and I don't see the inverted cone part, but a narrow tube. Is this tube used instead of the
cone?
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by lacrimachemist
Is this tube used instead of the cone? |
Yes, through the combination of title, picture and quote that really should have been obvious :/
|
|
|
lacrima97
Hazard to Self
Posts: 93
Registered: 24-7-2005
Location: MS
Member Is Offline
Mood: experimental
|
|
Oh, I'm sorry Axt, I have never seen a shaped charge that looks like that, but nice job on the charge btw.
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Axt
A mixture of latex and copper powder (~50:50 by volume) |
I have to go back on that, It was a guess as I was just adding copper while mixing it in. I tried weighing while mixing some today and there is no way
you can get 50:50 by volume and keep it runny enough to dip. Also, copper reacted with my latex due to its ammonia content, its OK if used immediately
but cannot be stored.
Anyway, you can dilute liquid latex with water, and nickel powder can be substituted for copper (Probably still reacts slowly, but Ni is a better
material for SC liners anyway). The following worked for me.
90g 5 micron nickel powder
35g Liquid latex
20ml Water
Ratio is probably the same for copper due to simular densities, though not all liquid latex is the same, simply add water until a viscosity simular to
glycerine.
Place them into a small container and give it a shake, this will give ~80% Ni by weight once dry. Problem is, it no longer comes off the cone easily.
Solution is to first use a coat of pure latex, dry it and remove it, slide it back on and dip that into the Ni/Latex emulsion.
Alternatively, since you now have the latex sleeve, you could add any binder to the metal powder and dip that since the problem of removing the liner
from the cone is no longer an issue.
|
|
|
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: crystalline
|
|
In casting (for art purposes) Cu, Al or Bronze powder is often mixed into clear casting resin, to give a thick paste that is identical in strength,
very heavy and can be polished to a metallic sheen.
Trust me, I tried it. The resin can be made so saturated with Cu that it is hard to tell it apart from real copper, by weight and touch (it even feels
cold).
Something you may want to try. You'd need an outer and inner mold for the cone however, you'd really want to do it properly. You *will* be
impressed by the strength and metal-likeness of the resulting material, however.
Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
|
|
|
Axt
National Hazard
Posts: 814
Registered: 28-1-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Heres some of the same .45 colt/.357 mag shaped charges as shown on page 3. This time into 6 3mm plates. Also the plates were clamped and a .45 was
fired into the side.
<center><img src="http://www.sciencemadness.org/scipics/axt/45-357-hole.jpg">
<img src="http://www.sciencemadness.org/scipics/axt/45-357-plates.jpg">
<img src="http://www.sciencemadness.org/scipics/axt/45-peno.jpg"></center>
|
|
|
MephistosMinion
Harmless
Posts: 24
Registered: 16-1-2005
Member Is Offline
|
|
Very nice Axt.
Hypothetically, if someone was pissed off at the cost of plasma cutting, and somone wanted to cut 25mm mild steel plate, would a linear charge similar
to the one posted on page one be adequite for the job using pressed ETN?
Hypothetically of course.
|
|
|
Fulmen
International Hazard
Posts: 1725
Registered: 24-9-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bored
|
|
Personally I feel that any time a problem that can be solved (or at least complicated in an amusing way) with high explosives it should be used.
Plasma torch? We don't need no stinkin plasma torch!
*BOOOOOM*
|
|
|
Duster
Hazard to Self
Posts: 56
Registered: 19-7-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Theres more than one way to cut down a tree eh?
Duster
|
|
|
Chris The Great
Hazard to Others
Posts: 463
Registered: 29-10-2004
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I think that it would work very well for cutting your hypothetical metal very well. Axt managed to do a VERY nice striaght cut with his linear shaped
charge, I doubt you would have any trouble.
Guys, although I agree (HE makes things alot easier, quicker, more enjoyable etc) it is getting pretty off topic. Unless you're cutting down trees
with linear shaped charges
Hypothetically of course.
Have you tested the latex bonded cone Axt? Or are you going to try again and make a better one before testing how well it works?
Nice pics btw. I fired a shaped charge recently but it just splattered a bit of the liner on the target, making lots of microscopic, round craters on
the metal (looks cool under microscope) but penetrating only 2mm in one spot. No jet formed at all. I wasn't really surprised, it was made with 15g
of excess AP from a higher than expected yield, and I don't think I gave the detonation enough space to build up before it hit the 60 degree poorly
made cone (it was my first try )
|
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Axt
NM/HNO3 Is a very brisant explosive in its own right, and the intimate contact between these liquids is better then NM/AN for example. Ammonium
sulphate will happily explode as well, and acts to hold it into a solid structure.
Though im not sure about the safety of this mix, pure NM mixed with pure HNO3 is very sensitive. Theres many dilutants in this mix however
NH4NO3/NH4HSO4/H2SO4/HNO3/NH4CH2NO2 probably more... I'll try shooting it to get some measure of its safety.
[Edited on 7-6-2005 by chemoleo] |
Axt,
I believe you must be a noctambule almost not sleeping  unless you are jobless
and single ... regarding the amount of good experiments you have done and the
impressive amount of data you gathered here in so little time. RESPECT!
Back to the black sheep... I like the mix you invented!
NH4NO3 + NM + H2SO4
First of all allow me to make a tiny correction NH4O-NO=CH2 can't be a potential dillutant in the mix for the simple reason media is fairly acidic.
It is interesting in many aspects although stability is a bit complex to evaluate owing to the incredible amount of sensitisers that will arise from
that a priori simple mix.
As you said HNO3 and NH4HSO4 aside from (NH4)2SO4...but also HO-NH2 hydroxylamine (as hydroxylamine sulfate)...
CH3-NO2 -H2SO4-> HO-NH3HSO4 + CH2=O
This proces is usually done upon heating but it happens moderately at lower temperatures.While CH3 oxydises into CH2=O, NO2 reduces to HO-NH2 ...
As a mather of fact a good lab procedure to get hydroxylamine sulfate is to mix H2SO4 and O2N-CH2-CH2-NO2 to get glyoxal and hydroxylamine
sulfate...although I would spare DNE for other uses  ...
You thus have two extra guest molecules and what VIP guests...
CH2=O is very prompt to oxydise with HNO3...I stil remember the runnaway I had during my first attempt to get CH2(ONO2)3...delayed boiling suffocating
mix...man I felt the temp rise so fast a just had the time to drop the contain and take cover a lot of gas... and NOx the HNO3 was only 70%conc and
the CH2O was 30% conc and stil reaction was quite fast. Later I tried with (-CH2-O-)3 and got a milder oxydation but speeding up as the prills
dissolved and the HNO3 warmed up.
CH2=O + HNO3 --> CO2(g) + H2O + NOx
In this case you have almost no heating and so liberation of NH2OH and CH2=O is slow...concentration remains low but you stil get CO2 bubbles which
are scavenged by your ingenious matrix...bubbles also mean hot spots and sensitisation...
Part of the NOx reacts with the NH2OH to form H2O, N2O and N2...here again slow release of tiny bubbles ...and resulting sensitisation.
In the mix dus also:
*NH4NO3, CH2=O --> Hexamine dinitrate (VOD 7000m/s), sulfate
*CH2=O, CH3-NO2 --> CH2=CH-NO2, HOCH2-CH2-NO2, (HOCH2)CH-NO2, (HOCH2)3C-NO2
And the resulting nitric esters...(VOD > 7000 m/s)
*HO-NH3ONO2 (VOD 8000m/s)
Note that from a single slow reaction to make hydroxylamine and formaldehyde, you get more and more other reactions that free H2O...(esterification,
oxydations)...there is thus a good chance the mix isn't stable if kept in big quantities at ambiant temp (what favours hotspots). Better consider this
mix as "a make and use".
That's it for the chemical point of view.
To get a bit back on the track of shaped charges:
1)
*The macroscopic effect can be seen with shaped charges.
*This can be transposed to a microscopic level with the famous "microballoons effect"...those tiny gas bubbles in a hard matrix...are the bubbles or
foam that is used to sensitise AN based explosive...they account for the need of low densities (a lot of air in the solid matrix).
If you think wel a detonation wave comes into contact with a hollow sphere...the system is thus a hollow hemispheric shaped charge.In the hollow globe
a high pressure and VOD dart forms and percuts the otherside of the sphere and enters the explosive again giving a kick. In low reliability detonating
explosives this allow a better propagation of the detonation wave and the use of sub critical diameter of detonation (wich is quite high for plain
AN).
The same principle applies to sonochemistry and the cavitation effect... except here the waves are periodic and at a given time, the bubble compressed
kind of adiabatically by steps, ends to be unstable and implodes in the almost same fashion...dart from one side imploding the other side of the
hollow chamber.
**********************************************
In sonochemical processes very high temps are produced and very high local pressures are reached.
One can observe radical reactions like formation of H2O2 in water with O2, complete destruction of benzene to CO2 and H2O, nuclear reactions (neutrons
are formed and they start now to make Tritium from water (the tiny % deuterium allow this)-what will happen if they play with D2O (100%?)..nuclear
fusion?)).
Also some unfavourised endothermic reaction vs exothermic major product passes from 0% to 50% yield...
***********************************************
Now that this is said, imagine you make detonators based on the hollow shape principe; I would call this the hollow chamber principle...
Schema:
See attachment
Then an explosive with a too low VOD and initiation property would be transformed into a device of better output and localised efficiency...Since
locally the heat of reaction, the pression and VOD would be higher and pollarised in direction of the target explosive at the exit of the detonator...
Advantages lower quantities of explosive needed in detonator for a better effect.
Diminution of the diameter also possible
Sole factor to determine...as a function of the inner diameter of the tube (d)... the position of the center of the cavity (a)...
Note the fact there is a transition explosive...air...explosive and that the hot dart will activate thisone before entering the main charge...this gap
might be filled with the same compound as the other side or with another one...3 possibilities then exists...
Fuse --> E1-R-E1--> E2
Fuse --> E1-R-E2--> E2
Fuse --> E1-R-E3--> E2
Test must be done on various explosives to determine if there exist some constant behind this theory!
f(d) = f(e)*f(a)
2)
Your modified ammos...remind me a story my father told me:
When he was at the army (a few 40 years ago), he remember that he had tried "Energa" gun cartiges...those where stange gun bullets looking precisely
like common ammos but with a hole on the top.
He remember it made almost no noise upon shooting and had almost no backshoot effect...but when this percuted the armored target...it was perforated
and on the other side there was a terrific amount of flame and a sharp detonation...
I'm sure it was based on the shaped charge principle...but it was adaptable to normal gun...I stil don't figure how they didn't had it to explode on
shooting...maybe delayed ignition?
Has someone else heard of such things?
My guess is that it was made by the Fabrique Nationnale of Belgium (FN).
[Edited on 16-12-2005 by PHILOU Zrealone]
Attachment: hollow chamber det.ppt (14kB)
This file has been downloaded 1889 times
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)
|
|
|
lacrima97
Hazard to Self
Posts: 93
Registered: 24-7-2005
Location: MS
Member Is Offline
Mood: experimental
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone
| Quote: | Originally posted by Axt
2)
Your modified ammos...remind me a story my father told me:
When he was at the army (a few 40 years ago), he remember that he had tried "Energa" gun cartiges...those where stange gun bullets looking precisely
like common ammos but with a hole on the top.
He remember it made almost no noise upon shooting and had almost no backshoot effect...but when this percuted the armored target...it was perforated
and on the other side there was a terrific amount of flame and a sharp detonation...
I'm sure it was based on the shaped charge principle...but it was adaptable to normal gun...I stil don't figure how they didn't had it to explode on
shooting...maybe delayed ignition?
Has someone else heard of such things?
My guess is that it was made by the Fabrique Nationnale of Belgium (FN).
[Edited on 16-12-2005 by PHILOU Zrealone] |
I believe sir, what you might be talking about is a "Complete Round of Ammunition?". There is a section in it in Tenney L Davis's Chemistry of Powder
and Explosives.
It is a bullet which does in fact have an explosive inside.
I hope this might help and is what you are talking about. |
|
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
You play matriochka with quotes...a bit confusing I must say...
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)
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
3
4
5
6
7
..
68 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
