KiT1212
Harmless
Posts: 2
Registered: 19-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Plasticized ETN vs PETN
I've been wondering this for a while but wouldn't plasticized ETN preform better in therms of brisance commpared to PETN plasticized to the same
degree due to the better oxygen balance? (eg 12% inerts)
ETN OB: 5.3
PETN OB: -10.1
|
|
|
underground
National Hazard
Posts: 702
Registered: 10-10-2013
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline
|
|
There is big difference between fuel in molecule and fuel in mixture. High density pressed PETN will outperform any ETN plastic with even perfect OB
[Edited on 28-9-2019 by underground]
|
|
|
KiT1212
Harmless
Posts: 2
Registered: 19-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
Well yeah at max density PETN outperforms RDX.
But plasticized i dont know what density it can reach.
My ETN mix is at 1.55g/cm3
Id wish i had piezo sensors to test out det velocity
|
|
|
wessonsmith
Hazard to Others
Posts: 203
Registered: 15-2-2018
Location: elsewhere
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by KiT1212  | I've been wondering this for a while but wouldn't plasticized ETN preform better in therms of brisance commpared to PETN plasticized to the same
degree due to the better oxygen balance? (eg 12% inerts)
ETN OB: 5.3
PETN OB: -10.1 |
Here is what people forget about when comparing HE. They always want to compare the performance figures of said explosives at their max densities:
PETN @ 1.77 g/cm³
RDX @ 1.82 g/cm³
HMX @ 1.91 g/cm³
CL-20 @ 2.04 g/cm³
The thing is, in practice, ESPECIALLY backyard chemists like ourselves, the densities of the explosives we will be using, plastic explosives, in our
detonators, etc. will be between 1.45 - 1.72 g/cm³. The power difference between PETN and ETN at a similar density is less than 1%. When you put
the positive OB of ETN into a plastic fuel binder and compare that to a PETN version at a similar density, ETN will win hands down.
Where things shine for ETN is in thermobaric mixtures based on a plastic fuel binder like HTPB. The difference is night and day even when compared to
HMX. An HMX based thermobaric explosive mixture requires 10% of the total mixture to be made up of Ammonium Perchlorate. The ETN version doesn't
require AP, so you are comparing two thermobaric compositions, ETN version that is 55% HE and the HMX version, which is 45% HE. That's 22% more HE in
the ETN version, so ETN wins even though HMX is 14% more powerful than ETN.
Now if you have the proper equipment you can press pellets of HMX mixed with 1.5% of Viton or even Stearic Acid and you will have an explosive mixture
considerably more powerful than melt-cast ETN but since I don't have that equipment, I'll stick with ETN.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
