The Explosives and Weapons Forum
The 1999 Archive
Detonation Rates
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
profile | register | preferences | faq | search
|
|
The Explosives and Weapons Forum
The 1999 Archive
Detonation Rates
profile | register | preferences | faq | search
|
This topic was originally posted in this forum: Explosives |
| Author | Topic: Detonation Rates |
|
Predator Frequent Poster |
posted December 13, 1999 07:22 PM
 
I've looked long and hard and could never find a page that detailed detonation rates for explosives. Does ANYONE know the detonation rates ( open and confined ) for Armstrong and other explosives? |
|
Al Koholic unregistered |
posted December 13, 1999 11:04 PM
Armstrong's mixture doesnt detonate...its low explosive. I suppose if you had a shit load of it in a pile it might proceede to detonation but it would be an extremely weak detonation. Nothing like HE. Try denting a steel plate with armstrong mixture and it probably wont work. Al |
|
Andy Frequent Poster |
posted December 13, 1999 11:38 PM
You can check out one of my pages: http://www.calisland.com/apcg/chemistry/info_explosives.htm Andy- ------------------ |
|
Predator Frequent Poster |
posted December 14, 1999 01:58 AM
Actually Al koholic, I have left a football sized dent in my steel filing cabinet door (3mm thick ) from a thimble sized amount that was detonated electrically and confined. Someone told me once that it was classed as a HE. |
|
HMTD Factory Frequent Poster |
posted December 14, 1999 03:58 AM
Confined explosives have good results in common. |
|
fart unregistered |
posted December 14, 1999 10:11 AM
In my opinion, the dividing line between low and high explosives is in the explosion pressure. Armstrong is indeed nasty stuff, but its energy is comparable to perchlorate and aluminum. Recall that an M-80 back when they had about a thimble full of perchlorate/al in them would take out mailboxes in grand style, with only paper confinement. The more confinement up to the point where it can't bust out at all, stores energy in the internal pressure and raises the impact it imparts to things near it. That's why a hand grenade loaded with FFF black powder will do about as well as one loaded with other stuff. The grenade container lets go long before the 50 kpsi that FFF can create, and does the same regardless of the filler. However really sassy fillers like picric acid which the japs used in WWII caused their grenades to frag into sand like particles, so the marines who were fragged, would SURPRISE, not die, but would smart fiercely from the erosion of the flying sand like particles that ate them up on the surface. The Japs corrected that later. One measure is what the stuff will do to steel unconfined. High explosives (HE) can dent or flow the steel they rest on if detonated, whereas all burning (LE) will only scorch it, but the surface remains un-moved. Anyway brisance, (the rapidity or violence of an explosive) is not everything. One needs enough brisance, along with enough energy output to do most jobs well. I remember dynamite caps were once tested by firing one standing verticle on a lead block I heard tales that black powder was tested by |
|
Al Koholic unregistered |
posted December 15, 1999 12:06 AM
Well..try placing a 5 gram sample of armstrong mix on a lead block and then do the same with a 5 gram sample of say NG. The unconfined armstrong will most likely do nothing to the block , while the NG will make a nice dent. Confined vs unconfined are totally different things. Power will increase greatly with confinment in a ddition to having whatever casing was used fly out in all directions. Al |
All times are ET (US) | This is an ARCHIVED topic. You may not reply to it! |
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.38
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998 - 1999.