| Pages:
1
2
3 |
otonel
Hazard to Self
Posts: 84
Registered: 9-4-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I made lead styphnate and double salts of lead styphnate and lead acetate using just styphnic acid and lead acetate in solution at 55*C
My target was to get a sensitive explosive percussion and double salt obtained has a good sensitivity higher than simple lead styphnate.
I would like to further increase the sensitivity of lead styphnate and add an oxidant but do not know which direction to go with experiments
|
|
|
otonel
Hazard to Self
Posts: 84
Registered: 9-4-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
If I use double quantity of lead acetate and finally some lead nitrate with long time mixing ,the result double salt is more sensitive as the one
before but not so strong.
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Lead Styphnate from Carbonates
Hello all. Thanks to Roscoe's method, I have a great end product of styphnic acid. I am wanting to make small batch of lead styphate just to say I
can do it. In order to make "basic" lead styphnate, all the instructions I have seen call for Mg Carbonate to first be converted to Mg styphnate
followed, of course, by the use of lead nitrate to produce the final product.
I have an ample supply of barium carbonate, copper carbonate, strontium carbonate, and calcium carbonate. I do not (surprisingly) have any Mg
carbonate. Can any of these other carbonates be used as a substitute for Mg carbonate during the process of synthesizing "basic" lead styphanate?
Thanks,
Joel
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Also related to my quest to try out a batch of lead styphnate, I am going to be synthesizing my own lead (II) nitrate using nitric acid (of course)
and metallic lead. I am not finding any information on how lead nitrate is purified so that the excess acid can be removed or neutralized. If you
use any salts, or ammonium hydroxide, in order to try and neutralize the remaining acid in your lead nitrate, you will create other salts
inadvertently. So, how do you neutralize something so easily dissolved in water and so easily converted to other salts in the presence of other
compounds?
Thanks,
Joel
|
|
|
Microtek
National Hazard
Posts: 871
Registered: 23-9-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
You wash it with ethanol (or methanol).
About the Mg-carbonate: The reason you convert styphnic acid to Mg-styphnate is to get a soluble styphnate. If you didn't do this, you'd risk having
lead styphnate formed as a shell around styphnic acid particles (if you reacted solid styphnic acid with a lead nitrate solution).
So, you need to find out whether any of the metallic ions you mentioned form a soluble styphnate. This you should do for yourself.
[Edited on 18-4-2015 by Microtek]
|
|
|
Bert
|
Threads Merged
18-4-2015 at 04:57 |
Bert
Super Administrator
Posts: 2821
Registered: 12-3-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: " I think we are all going to die. I think that love is an illusion. We are flawed, my darling".
|
|
Metalic Lead/nitric acid is a very slow reaction. Check the Lead salts preparation thread(s), one of the Lead oxides may be an easier choice-
(About the merge)
Posting on topics
Posting- And You...
The sciencemadness.org library
Rapopart’s Rules for critical commentary:
1. Attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly and fairly that your target says: “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it
that way.”
2. List any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
3. Mention anything you have learned from your target.
4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.
Anatol Rapoport was a Russian-born American mathematical psychologist (1911-2007).
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hello all. As I said before, I am using Roscoe's method and I have what appears to be a good quality of styphnic acid (crystals showed up hex, as
described by Roscoe). I am now getting around to asking this: What do you all think of my filtrates? I filtered it the first time and ended up with
red liquid. I then filtered it a second time and ended up with yellow liquid. I know the yellow is probably the acid in h2o, but wanted to be sure
before I did anything with it (disposed of it). I put both of these containers in the freezer and brought the temperature down to -4 C, and didn't
see but a few (not even 1/2 gram) crystals in the bottom of the yellow container. In the red fluid container, there are no solids. What is this red
fluid and can any more crystals be squeezed out of it? Keep in mind this is my filtered liquid. The final clean, "crystaled" liquid batch is
described below.
The other issue I have is that my yield does not look like it is going to be very good. I haven't had a chance to filter it yet, but it looks like I
have less than 10 grams in my final h2o/styphic acid solution at room temperature (in about 700 ML of h2o). Where did I go wrong? Is Roscoe around
on the board to answer questions about his method? Has anyone had these low yield issues? Please ask me questions to see if you can figure out where
I am going wrong.
I followed Roscoe's method and quantities EXACTLY. I reacted with H2SO4, 50 ML with 10 Grams of Resorcinol powder. It reacted into a "strawberry
milk shake". I then followed to procedure to nitrate with 20 ML of 70% HNO3 and then another 20 ML of 95% HNO3. All the while I watched my temps. I
got a lot of foam and stirred it down when the temp went down to 35 or 40, which caused it to rise again. This happened two times and then the
temperature stayed at around 35, then as it sat, it dropped into the 20's and I let it sit another 30 minutes. I then followed the final parts as he
describes for harvesting the material and cleaning it, and yet I have this pathetic yield.
Please help.
Thanks,
Joel
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
FYI, I will execute the lead styphnate processing at some later date. I have decided that I am more concerned with getting my styphnic acid synthesis
down pat before moving on and fixing this problem with low yields.
Thanks.
Joel
|
|
|
byko3y
National Hazard
Posts: 721
Registered: 16-3-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: dooM
|
|
You can make styphnic acid, dinitrophenol and methylpicric acid using sodium nitrite and 60% nitric acid without any concentrated acids. However, it's
quality will be lower then via conc sulfuric and fuming nitric acid. US Patent 3,933,926 for details.
Although this compound is pretty useless for an amateur exploder, because the acid is non-sensitive and you need something like #8 cap to make a
definity detonation, and the lead salt explodes like nothing, can't even detonate PETN.
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by jharmon12  | Hello all. As I said before, I am using Roscoe's method and I have what appears to be a good quality of styphnic acid (crystals showed up hex, as
described by Roscoe). I am now getting around to asking this: What do you all think of my filtrates? I filtered it the first time and ended up with
red liquid. I then filtered it a second time and ended up with yellow liquid. I know the yellow is probably the acid in h2o, but wanted to be sure
before I did anything with it (disposed of it). I put both of these containers in the freezer and brought the temperature down to -4 C, and didn't
see but a few (not even 1/2 gram) crystals in the bottom of the yellow container. In the red fluid container, there are no solids. What is this red
fluid and can any more crystals be squeezed out of it? Keep in mind this is my filtered liquid. The final clean, "crystaled" liquid batch is
described below.
The other issue I have is that my yield does not look like it is going to be very good. I haven't had a chance to filter it yet, but it looks like I
have less than 10 grams in my final h2o/styphic acid solution at room temperature (in about 700 ML of h2o). Where did I go wrong? Is Roscoe around
on the board to answer questions about his method? Has anyone had these low yield issues? Please ask me questions to see if you can figure out where
I am going wrong.
I followed Roscoe's method and quantities EXACTLY. I reacted with H2SO4, 50 ML with 10 Grams of Resorcinol powder. It reacted into a "strawberry
milk shake". I then followed to procedure to nitrate with 20 ML of 70% HNO3 and then another 20 ML of 95% HNO3. All the while I watched my temps. I
got a lot of foam and stirred it down when the temp went down to 35 or 40, which caused it to rise again. This happened two times and then the
temperature stayed at around 35, then as it sat, it dropped into the 20's and I let it sit another 30 minutes. I then followed the final parts as he
describes for harvesting the material and cleaning it, and yet I have this pathetic yield.
Please help.
Thanks,
Joel
|
The flask I used for the synthesis described here
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4457&a...
was a 250 ml Erlenmeyer. Stirring was simply done using the thermometer for what was appearing to be a trivial, uncomplicated synthesis that was
almost self regulating. It could be that for the small reaction scale, the progress for the nitration is sensitive to the flask shape due to the low
thermal mass, and the small effects of using a different shape or size flask are making a difference in the thermodynamic observed for a different
reaction vessel which is adversely affecting the yield. I did not perform many repetitions or variations for the synthesis to see what may be the
range of yields as an average.
It would be my guess that what likely went wrong is your cooling was too aggressive. The nitration is exothermic and should proceed from its own
exotherm but could require gentle heating if the reaction isn't being pushed sufficiently by rate of addition. I didn't specify a drops per minute
rate or detail the times involved. My description of what I did and what I got was accurate to the extent I included only what details I noted. So I
don't really know what is changed that would would cause any repeatability issue, probably something that seems trivial but is affecting the time and
temperature curve.
Nitration of resorcinol to styphnic acid requires a gentler touch than nitration of phenol to picric acid, milder conditions of temperature
particularly, which can be reached by the natural exotherm in a small scale nitration of this scale. The same concept can be applied for the
synthesis of picric acid but the higher required temperatures and longer holding times would require a hundred or more times the scale as for
resorcinol to be able to use the natural exotherm of the nitration and the latent heat and longer cooling of a much larger reaction mass
to provide the needed heat sufficient to drive the nitration to completion.
Resorcinol is much more easily nitrated than phenol so a small scale nitration can proceed on its own exotherm, unless the reaction is quenched by
excessive cooling.
Phloroglucinol nitration would require an even gentler condition for nitration than resorcinol. With phenol there is one hydroxyl on the benzene ring
which makes it more easily nitrated than benzene but also makes it more susceptible to oxidation. With resorcinol, the two hydroxyls makes it still
easier to nitrate but also makes it much more susceptible to oxidation. With pholorglucinol, the three hydroxyls has still more greatly the trend to
easier nitration yet much more susceptibilty to oxidation.
The nitrations of such materials is generally stepwise and gradual and is exothermic, but obviously the scale and method will be different for each
where the rate of addition and temperature and holding times are well matched to that nitration scenario. These batch process nitrations on a small
laboratory scale can be difficult to keep "in the groove" with regards to the "window" of reaction conditions so that there is exact reproducibility.
Everything that may seem like it should not matter like the type and size of the flask, the method of stirring, the depth of the flask in the ice
bath, can make a difference.
[Edited on 20-4-2015 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thanks for responding, Roscoe. Let me give you more information. One of these things could be causing the problem (I think you might have figured it
out). I did the nitration outside and the winds were high and the air temperature was 50 F:
1. When adding the initial 20 ML of 70% Nitric drop by drop, I got a temp rise because my reaction mixture was not in an ice bath. The temp went up
and I got a little nervous at around 70 C, so I put it in an ice bath and let it calm down a little. Once the temp went down it started going down
pretty fast and I increased the HNO3 drop rate such that the mixture really didn't exceed around 30 C. In fact, it stayed around the same temp the
whole time (30 C) once it was placed in the ice bath and stayed in the ice bath.
2. When adding the 20 ML of 95% Nitric drop by drop, the starting temperature was 10 C (as specified in your instructions), and what amazed me was
that the temp never went up from 10 C EVEN AFTER adding all the fuming HNO3. Yes, I kept it in the ice bath when adding the fuming HNO3.
2a. Note: I used a magnetic stirrer during the entire nitric acid addition. I only eliminated the stirrer after the acid was all added.
3. I then took it off the ice bath and waited for the reaction temp to rise. It did not rise very fast, so I heated it on the hot plate and once it
hit 60 C, it started to thicken up and I got foam. So, I took it off the hot plate and let it go on it's own. I stirred it once it went down and it
went back up again. But it stayed up and was climbing above 80 C. I remember your instructions saying that it didn't go past 75, so I panicked and
placed it in the ice bath before I got a runaway nitration. Should I be using much higher temperatures here? Please specify. I know quicksilver was
using temps in excess of 100 C!! But he didn't use concentrated HNO3, either.
4. Once the temp went down a little, I took it out and stirred it again and the temp went up a little but finally went down to around 25 C and stayed
there.
5. I let the mixture stand for about 45 minutes (could it be overnitrated because you specified 30 minutes)? Can the mix become "overnitrated", in
general.
6. I then placed it on ice and then flooded it with ice cold water and filtered it, as you see in the photos above...my filtered water.
My conclusion is that I didn't nitrate it either A) Long enough or B) Hot enough or C) Both. Any further information is welcome. That raises another
question: Do I add the nitric acid at such a rate that I hover around the max temps you specify during HNO3 addition, or is it more important to get
the temp up after all the acid is added? Or do you have to do both???
BYKO3Y, I know about teh method that uses sodium nitrite. I have the book The Preparatory Manual of Explosives by Ledgard.
Thanks,
Joel
[Edited on 20-4-2015 by jharmon12]
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by jharmon12 | Thanks for responding, Roscoe. Let me give you more information. One of these things could be causing the problem (I think you might have figured it
out). I did the nitration outside and the winds were high and the air temperature was 50 F:
1. When adding the initial 20 ML of 70% Nitric drop by drop, I got a temp rise because my reaction mixture was not in an ice bath.
|
There is a problem there at the very start. The initial nitration needs to occur with a slow dropwise addition with ice cooling while stirring, rate
limiting the addition to keep the reaction temperature just under 35C.
| Quote: |
The temp went up and I got a little nervous at around 70 C, so I put it in an ice bath and let it calm down a little. |
Here is a second problem in that you overshoot the 35C limit temperature for the initial addition. You should instead get the nitration started more
gently and be more patient with the additions, watching the temperature rise effect which is delayed for the addition. You should be able to pace the
addition so that you get a controllable but steady rise to 35C without the reaction spiking early like you have described.
| Quote: |
Once the temp went down it started going down pretty fast and I increased the HNO3 drop rate such that the mixture really didn't exceed around 30 C.
In fact, it stayed around the same temp the whole time (30 C) once it was placed in the ice bath and stayed in the ice bath. |
For a reaction being controlled by rate of addition, you should be able to see a gentle oscillation in temperature that is a little delayed in
response to the addition. Falling temperature is nudged upward again by addition of more acid, but because of the delay affect, you can anticipate the
falling temperature will continue and resume addition cautiously, waiting for the delayed "correction" effect. It is easy to overshoot because of the
delayed response. You have to develop a "feel" for the
delay response and anticipate the effect of the delay to
"dampen" the temperature oscillation and keep the reaction near to the limiting temperature. It will vary a few degrees, but should not be tens of
degrees out of spec.
| Quote: |
2. When adding the 20 ML of 95% Nitric drop by drop, the starting temperature was 10 C (as specified in your instructions), and what amazed me was
that the temp never went up from 10 C EVEN AFTER adding all the fuming HNO3. Yes, I kept it in the ice bath when adding the fuming HNO3.
|
IIRC the fuming HNO3 addition was begun when the initial reaction from the concentrated HNO3 addition had subsided and temperature had fallen to 10C.
The addition of fuming HNO3 was rate adjusted to allow for temperature increase to near 25C through the end of the d 1.5 HNO3 addition, with stirring
and cooling continued through that addition. Then the stirring was stopped and the mixture simply allowed to sit in the cooling bath for a few
minutes.
I didn't describe this before but likely what I was doing is just watching the thermometer and seeing how steady would
the temperature hold near the 25C. When any perceived falling of temperature was observed, then the cooling would have been reduced or removed to
keep from diminishing the natural exotherm that should sustain the reaction temperature.
| Quote: |
2a. Note: I used a magnetic stirrer during the entire nitric acid addition. I only eliminated the stirrer after the acid was all added.
|
That was correct to stir during the acid additions and stop when completed.
| Quote: |
3. I then took it off the ice bath and waited for the reaction temp to rise. It did not rise very fast, |
It shouldn't matter if the temperature rise was slow, the noted changes and what seemed to be "waypoint" temperatures for monitoring the reaction I
described what I saw. Did you watch for any of those "markers" at ~28C, ~38C, or the reaction rate jump at ~45C which should carry it to peak at
~75C? It may have been a different curve followed because you got the temperature spike early in the nitration where that should not have occurred
that soon.
| Quote: |
so I heated it on the hot plate and once it hit 60 C, it started to thicken up and I got foam. So, I took it off the hot plate and let it go on it's
own. I stirred it once it went down and it went back up again. But it stayed up and was climbing above 80 C. I remember your instructions saying
that it didn't go past 75, so I panicked and placed it in the ice bath before I got a runaway nitration. Should I be using much higher temperatures
here? Please specify. I know quicksilver was using temps in excess of 100 C!! But he didn't use concentrated HNO3, either. |
It looks like you got impatient with pacing the addition and rushed the initial nitration which resulted in the exotherm exceeding the cooling needed
to limit to 35C. Accumulation of unreacted HNO3 added too quickly at too low a temperature caused an avalanche, a little "runaway" when things should
have been methodically controlled early in the addition of the first regular concentrated 1.42 d HNO3.
Higher temperature isn't needed using the stronger 1.5 d HNO3. Avoiding the higher temperature and larger amounts of less strong acid was precisely
the idea, to avoid oxidation, and "kick" the nitration to completion at a lower temperature, low water content mixture.
| Quote: |
4. Once the temp went down a little, I took it out and stirred it again and the temp went up a little but finally went down to around 25 C and stayed
there.
5. I let the mixture stand for about 45 minutes (could it be overnitrated because you specified 30 minutes)? Can the mix become "overnitrated", in
general. |
The extra 15 minutes would have been better spent during the initial addition of the 1.42 d HNO3. You are plotting a different reaction curve where
the natural exotherm is not being used to advantage. Due to the reaction temperature oscillations it is hard to know what should be the holding time,
but no I don't think you over nitrated it. I think you may have oxidized some of the resorcinol in the first runaway you quenched, and then you
quenched a second "spike" in an already compromised nitration mixture. This is like scraping the carbon off burned toast and trying to cover up the
mistake with extra strawberry jelly 
| Quote: |
6. I then placed it on ice and then flooded it with ice cold water and filtered it, as you see in the photos above...my filtered water.
My conclusion is that I didn't nitrate it either A) Long enough or B) Hot enough or C) Both. Any further information is welcome.
|
I think you rushed the initial reaction and did not pace the additions to achieve and maintain a smooth nitration at about ~35C.
| Quote: |
That raises another question: Do I add the nitric acid at such a rate that I hover around the max temps you specify during HNO3 addition, or is it
more important to get the temp up after all the acid is added? Or do you have to do both??? |
It is more nuanced "algebra", what you are trying to do is to steadily ramp the temperature from the low end to near the limit but not overshoot the
mark, and dampen the temperature swings to near the upper limit. Because of the delay effect, the oscillations must be anticipated because of the time
lag. You don't wait for the falling temperature to go all the way back down to resume addition. Exploit the trend. You learn by observing how much
delayed temperature rise three drops of HNO3 will cause so you can guess when the reaction is subsiding how much to add to predict suspending that
fall and swing it back up where it was without overshooting. It is like a fly by wire kind of effect where the control responses will be delayed by
two or three minutes, so you can't do something and when nothing happens in ten seconds then do something else to see if that "works" when there
hasn't been time to realize the effect of what you are impatient to see. A nitration is like a dog leash that is a long rubber band. The information
"feedback" is sluggish and elastic so it requires finesse.
[Edited on 20-4-2015 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Sorry for the delay in reply.
So my first mistake was the initial nitric addition and the spike that occurred. The next time, during the FIRST NITRIC ADDITION, I want to bring the
nitration temp up to 35 and hold as close to this as possible. True statement?
Other things I will note/ask based on your response:
I didn't allow for the temperature increase to near 25C through the end of the concentrated HNO3 addition. It did not rise because I kept it in a
cold bath even after I cooled it back down to 10C after the first nitric addition. Next time, I will need to remove/add the cold bath back in as the
temperature goes up/down so I can try and regulate the mixture appropriately to stay as close to 25C as possible during the concentrated nitric
addition. Is this a true statement?
I take it, from your response, that after you stopped the nitric addition (concentrated), you stopped stirring and simply watched the thermometer and
held the temp near 25C in the cooling bath for a few minutes. You would adjust the cooling to sustain close to 25 C for a few minutes. Is this a
correct assumption? I can tell you that my reaction was around 15 C or so after the end of the concentrated acid addition, and I let it fall to 10 C,
which only took a few minutes, and then I pulled it out of the ice bath to see if it the temp would rise. When it wouldn't, I put it on the hot
plate.
The markers you mention at 28/38/45 and peak at 75 didn't happen for me. I put my mixture on the hot plate and when it got to about 60 I started to
see solidification and foam. I removed it from the heat and watched it until it got to around 80 and then placed it in the cooling bath for a short
time to bring the temp down below 75. How high will it go safely, to maximimize yield? Can it go to 80 or 90? Once it hits 75, do I cool it right
away? How do I know how long to put the mix in the ice bath before I take it out so I don't over cool? This seems complicated, but it is an artform
that I want to accomplish.
I also want to add that it was a very windy day and 10C outside when I did this. I really think the wind cooled things off as well, and this might
have made it harder for me to control the temps because it seems like my temps, with the exception of the first small runaway, overall were very low.
Thanks for all the help so far.
Joel
[Edited on 21-4-2015 by jharmon12]
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
You need to start the reaction correctly and then see how things proceed.
Other business requires my time for now so I can't really analyze this further or help you with the reproduction of the synthesis beyond what I have
already described. Obviously if the temperature curve I described was not observed and yours was lower, then your cooling is more aggressive for
having a deeper or colder bath, or better stirring. You should be able to see these variations and make adjustment to your conditions to get the same
temperatures I described.
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Well, I want to thank Roscoe for posting his method and answering my questions. I was able to filter and dry my styphnic acid crystals and I ended up
with 12.45 grams of dry material from 10 grams of Resorcinol. It didn't look like that much at the bottom of the beaker, but these crystals are
heavy. It was slightly disappointing, because it is short of the roughly 20 grams I was expecting. I will watch my temperatures more closely next
time and see if I can get closer to 20 grams of finished material.
Thanks,
Joel
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
As best I recall about this nitration done over ten years ago, there was nothing elaborate about it. I think it was a very simple setup, like about a
two liter slab of ice having been freeze molded in a rectangular poly food storage tray, and left in the same tray to serve as a heat sink for the
bottom of the 250 ml Erlenmeyer flask which was simply set on the surface of the small block of ice. A lab thermometer was inserted and leaned
against the opening of the flask, and a ringstand supported a small addition funnel for the HNO3 additions. There was used no magnetic stirring, so
the mixture was simply done manually with the thermometer or picking up and swirling the flask. So if you use magnetic stirring it needs to be very
slow and if you are using a bath, the depth of immersion for the flask needs to be minimal so as to not provide too much of a heat sink. The idea is
to work with the natural exotherm and limit the temperature climb, but not too much cooling which quenches the reaction.
It is general technique for manipulation of reaction conditions where your starting temperature and rate of addition and stirring intensity, and the
thermal behavior is something you must calibrate for the conditions peculiar to your combination of flask and method of cooling and stirring because
those things are interactive and vary according to your individual setup. The size of the flask and thickness of the glass, the depth of the flask in
the bath, and the stirring rate are things in combination that affect the amount of heat being sinked away from the reaction. For this nitration you
want the cooling not to be too aggressive so the reaction should proceed slowly. Using too little cooling the reaction time would be greatly extended
and the task would become tedious for the length of time it would require to make the acid additions. Using too much cooling then the reaction is
rushed and does not have sufficient "holding time" at the warmer temperatures provided by the natural exotherm. This nitration must be allowed to
"cook" awhile from its own heat of reaction in that time where the foaming tends to make it self regulating, which should be observed after the
addition of the fuming HNO3 and after the reaction has been moderated some for awhile by continued cooling, finally removing the cooling and letting
the temperature climb to complete the nitration.
You asked about the upper limit of 75C, and I would try to keep it about there.
I would say if it goes much higher then you should probably cool it but not below 40 to 45C, and let it climb again to see if it limits itself by the
dilution effect of the foaming. The temperature should become better behaved in response to the natural exotherm and tend to self regulate by
foaming, on the next cycle if it overshoots the 75C mark on the first excursion and you intervene. If you cool it too much then the reaction will
quench and you will have to gently warm it to get it going again. I think if the temperatures and reaction profile I described are reproduced fairly
closely the yield should be very near the same 90% that I got.
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I was finally able to make a batch of Pb styphnate using lead nitrate and the TNR I made. To save time explaining what procedure I used for the LS, I
will just say that I used the procedure outlined in Jared Legard's book on producing Basic Red Lead Styphnate. I followed the procedure exactly and
got a lemon yellow product. It doesn't matter that I didn't get the red product I bargained for because testing small quantities reveals it is
definitely LS which is at least dry enough to explode in very small quantities out in the open.
The yield looks pretty good, but I don't know yet as I haven't weighed it. Part of the reason I haven't weighed it is because I am not 100% sure it
is dry.
I have been allowing the washed and neutralized lemon yellow product to air dry at room temperature around 30-40% humidity now for over five days.
The material seems wet still. But it might be the crystal shape/structure/size that is causing it to stick together and act "wet". It almost seems
rubbery in its consistency. I can tell the crystals are very, very fine. If I rub a small amount between my fingers, I get a pure yellow streak.
There is no discerning any particulate there (amorphous?).
I did some research and discovered that basic LS will hold onto water in its crystals. The only way to release this water is to break the crystals
open using elevated temperatures, and allowing the water to evaporate. I don't want to do this because they are talking about heating this stuff up
to 200 C to get it completely dry. I am trying to figure out how to get this stuff so that it is something easy to work with and somewhat free
flowing, as it still seems to work even though it has this rubbery, pulpy consistency. I am sure someone here has worked with this and knows what I
am dealing with. That leads me to my questions:
1. Why is it rubbery/pulpy?
2. Is this a problem for using it as an exploding (cap) end product or does other processing need to be executed?
3. If this form is okay for final use, how do I get it workable (flowable)? I could granulate it through a screen, but it would probably stick
pretty bad and it might not be safe to push this through a screen (not sure).
Thanks,
Joel
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
If your intended application is a detonator then basic lead styphnate is not going to be helpful for what you want to do, even when you have
successfully performed a synthesis for that material, it will not serve as an initiator in a detonator.
Basic lead styphnate is an igniting or priming charge easily ignited for transferring ignition to something else. It won't be used to detonate
anything because it lacks power for doing the job of an initiator. So does normal lead styphnate lack sufficient power to be a good initiator, which
even so is still a lot more powerful than the basic salt.
You should be skeptical and do your homework and carefully fact check anything that is written by Jared Ledgard. He is not reliable as a source of
information. The patents he does not directly or incorrectly references that are relevant to the section are US1942274 and US2275169 attached. Also
attached for different interest for the normal salt is another Brun patent US2202647. Maybe there will be a better insight going by the original
information than dealing with the interpretation of another author who is a dubious source of information not always helpful.
Obviously you have not produced a pure sample of what you were intending to produce, based upon your description. It is impossible to troubleshoot
without exact and detailed information.
Attachment: US1942274 basic lead styphnate.pdf (361kB)
This file has been downloaded 726 times
Attachment: US2275169_MANUFACTURE_OF_STYPHNIC_ACID_SAL.pdf (116kB)
This file has been downloaded 746 times
Attachment: US2202647 MANUFACTURE_OF_LEAD_STYPHNATE.pdf (85kB)
This file has been downloaded 856 times
[Edited on 6/4/2015 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
jharmon12
Harmless
Posts: 48
Registered: 27-2-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Read all three of these. Unfortunately, it doesn't really give me any ideas on why my filter cake is so fiberous. The LS does work as advertised
(explodes in the open), so I know it is basic yellow LS. I am not sure what other details I could give that would help anyone here tell why my cake
is so rubbery/fiberous. I was just assuming that some experimenters here may have come across this issue already and had already dealt with it.
Regards,
Joel
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
The patent describes the yellow form as amorphous and low density. A similar thing can happen for lead picrate which precipitates as a fluffy low
density fibrous form or as a fine dense crystalline form which gravity filters easily. The same thing occurs for the basic or the normal salt. The
level of dilution and temperature and pH and the concentration of unreacted precursor in excess, and the order of addition can affect the crystal
development of precipitates. More coarse and dense crystals are favored by more slow precipitation from more dilute and more hot solutions, and more
amorphous and low density precipitates are favored by just the opposite conditions, as a general rule. The general rule does not always hold and
sometimes a particular range of concentration provides a "window" condition where best crystal development occurs. That occurs in this particular
reaction which is a peculiarity that is basis for the US1942274 patent for the red crystal form.
But you say you have produced the amorphous yellow form. Both the red and the yellow forms are compared in the patent, and how the production of each
differs.
Good stirring is helpful for producing uniform crystals and for low solubility crystals it may be required to have stirring vigorous enough that the
crystals remain in suspension in the hot liquid through the entire reaction. A peculiarity for the styphnates can be the formation of a gel
intermediate. It can occur that a longer time of heating and stirring can cause break up and conversion of the low density form to the higher density
form. If everything else is ruled out as the problem it could be as simple to resolve as raising the temperature and increasing the stirring rate.
The patent US1942274 describes a coprecipitated mixture of the basic and normal salt which would probably be easier to make and would be more fault
tolerant in manufacture, and still provide a useful product even if the composition did not turn out to be exactly 50% of each the basic and the
normal salt.
The patent explicitly describes the difference between the yellow and the red forms and how to produce the more dense red form is the subject matter
of the patent. You mentioned your product was "rinsed and neutralized" but there is nothing to be neutralized or described as being neutralized in the
patent. The end product material is basic to a controlled extent by its chemical nature as "basic" lead styphnate and is not neutral, as would be
normal lead styphnate. And the byproduct water from which the end product is filtered contains sodium nitrate which is hygroscopic. Rinsing on the
filter with distilled water should eliminate that source of hygroscopicity for the basic lead styphnate. The end result should be like fine dry beach
sand.
[Edited on 6/4/2015 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
Keith Fletcher
Harmless
Posts: 29
Registered: 3-10-2014
Location: Eastern US
Member Is Offline
Mood: Brittle
|
|
Styphnic Acid An its Lead Salt
I recently made a video on the synthesis Of Styphnic acid and Its Lead salt.
https://youtu.be/fnwgJWn42SA
I hope you find it informative.
[Edited on 15-10-2015 by Keith Fletcher]
My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals
and in the intervals between them.
- Winston Churchill
|
|
|
Detonationology
Hazard to Others
Posts: 362
Registered: 5-5-2015
Location: Deep South
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrophillic
|
|
Are you Primary?
“There are no differences but differences of degree between different degrees of difference and no difference.” ― William James
|
|
|
Keith Fletcher
Harmless
Posts: 29
Registered: 3-10-2014
Location: Eastern US
Member Is Offline
Mood: Brittle
|
|
Primary
Indeed
My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals
and in the intervals between them.
- Winston Churchill
|
|
|
Tdep
National Hazard
Posts: 519
Registered: 31-1-2013
Location: Laser broken since Feb 2020 lol
Member Is Offline
Mood: PhD is done! It isn't good but it's over lol
|
|
I already watched the video, great work, really good content and quality as always, big fan of the channel you're running there keep it up
|
|
|
Keith Fletcher
Harmless
Posts: 29
Registered: 3-10-2014
Location: Eastern US
Member Is Offline
Mood: Brittle
|
|
Thank You
Any suggestions for future videos.
My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals
and in the intervals between them.
- Winston Churchill
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
