HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Paul.Elkins@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Paul Elkins)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Basic questions.
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:35:38 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <1992Sep14.161046.14475@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:


>Most authorities seem to feel that firecracker formulas do not detonate.
>They just deflagrate - eg. burn very rapidly. Any propogative burning that
>occurs does not lead to a shock wave triggered decomposition of the mixture.

Thanks for the info Bill, but I  have some more questions.


detonation is decomposition propogated by shock?
Fire/heat plays little or no role?

>You could call PETN, NG, Cyclonite, Dynamite and similar substances     
>"secondary" explosives. They are substances capable of being initiated by
>primary explosives. 

I assume such secondary explosives are preferred because they are much
less dangerous to deal with.

Other than initiation of secondary explosives, are there applications
where it is desirable to have the entire charge consist of primary explosives?



>
>There are also "tertiary" explosives. These explosives are those that are
>either insensitive to initiation by primary explosives, or are only partly
>initiated. They require a high (secondary) explosive booster for complete
>detonation. Examples are ANFO and ammonium picrate.
>

I'm not sure I understand the purpose of tertiary explosives.
They would seem to be of little value.

According to the rough definitions outlined, are caps (from toy pistols)
primary explosives because they are set off by shock; or did I miss something.




--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: v122kzkw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (A FROOD WHO SURE KNOWS WHERE HIS TOWEL IS)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: TBBOM question
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:38:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Greetings.
I've seen the number of questions relating to TBBOM go up slightly as of
late. Because of this, I've checked the two sites that I knew of that had
the file, and discovered that the files are not there any more. Can anyone
tell me, if the administrators of these sites would be upset if someone put
the files back up there? Thus if there's a third site that does have the 
file, would someone be able to transfer it to the other two sites? (the
two sites that I knew of were jyu.fi and caltech, if that helps.)
T.

---		                       __         ~~~        ^    ^
MST3K, Douglas Adams, AC/DC,          /  \       /   \       (####(
Amiga and Monty Python fan.           \  /      <    |     (~~\   /
"I'm confused." - Arthur Dent	       ||>       \   |      ~~~| |
				      /  \       /   \       /~   ~\    
~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~~~~\  /~~~~~~
V122KZKW@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu    || Oh!-Huh? || Yeah, ok || Hikeeba!  ||
From: agbrooks@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Zoz)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: "Red Arsenic"
Date: 14 Sep 1992 20:31:27 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

agbrooks@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Zoz) writes:
>holyholy@netlink.cts.com (Jeffrey Tang) writes:
>>across a recipe for a green smoke bomb (in The Anarchist's Cookbook). The
>>only problem was, it called for 'red arsenic'. I have talked to a few
>>chemistry people, and they do not know what it is. If anyone has an
>>educated guess, or knows what red arsenic is, I would be glad to hear
>>from them
>
>At a guess, I think they are talking about an arsenic-containing compound
>commonly called red orpiment. I don't know the formula for the compound
>off the top of my head, but it should be in the Merck index. Don't forget
>that the Anarchist's Cookbook is extremely unreliable and shouldn't be
>trusted as far as you can spit a rat in a headwind.

Just checked - red orpiment is arsenic sulphide, As2S3. It was used in
the old "ships blue lights" (a type of lance/torch), and occasionally
in white stars. I have never seen it in a smoke composition.
Ref: H. Ellern, "Military and Civilian Pyrotechnics", pp.135,137
--
     ______        _____________    ______________________          ______
    /\####/\      /            /   /                     /         /\####/\
   /  \##/  \    /_______     /   /    _     ______     /         /  \##/  \
  /____\/____\          /    /   /    / \    \    /    /         /____\/____\
  \####/\####/         /    /____\    \_/    /   /    /_______   \####/\####/
   \##/  \##/         /                     /   /            /    \##/  \##/
    \/____\/         /_____________________/   /____________/      \/____\/

                     agbrooks@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au
From: dblackbu@carr11.alleg.edu (David Blackburn)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: rocket fuel question (apology)
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:54:33 GMT
Organization: Allegheny College

In article <1992Aug30.223605.27116@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>  
tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
> 
> Dr. David Blackburn, Ph. D. Chemist writes
> 
> >You lunatic! Maybe it's just a typo, but if you can't spell sulfur you
> >hadn't ought to be playing with it! Adding water to Zn + S can cause it  
to
> >ignite in your face. Even un-confined that would not be very much fun.
> >Does anyone moderate this board to keep people from killing themselves?
> 
> Dear Dr. Blackburn
> 
> While I agree with the chemical sentiments, may I beg to point out that
> spelling is not particularly cogent to the arguement.   Of course, the  
ability
> to use IUPAC nomenclature is important when writing for JACS, JOC,  
etc...,
> but the mear misspelling of sulfur with an "e" is not sufficient  
indictment
> to rate your heated response (on that point, at least).
> 
> Tom Perigrin
> (nom' de plume for a Chemist, who got his PhD a good few years
> ago,  but generally doesn't bother to use the implicit arguementum
> ad valorum entailed by throwing that bit of trivia around.)

You're right. I shouldn't have flamed the guy, and I deserved to catch a  
few myself. But better an electronic flame than a real one! ;-)
 So: Be Careful with this stuff. 
I worry that people who don't know any better are going to read these  
posts, try something reckless,  and get in big trouble. 
Dave
From: Jeremiah.Blatz@dartmouth.edu (Jeremiah Blatz)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: rocket fuel question
Date: 7 Sep 92 03:33:05 GMT
 <1992Sep2.162204.4602@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

brad@slammer.UUCP (Brad Isley) writes:
: >
: >Melt black powder? I doubt if it would do that before igniting.

Well, I've done it a couple of times (buffered with sugar) and it
hasn't lit. It may light, but it hasn't with me. I would, however,
advise extreme caution when doing this, as I do when dealing with all
pyrotechnic compositions.

Jeremiah
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: pkrause@triton.unm.edu (Paul Krause CIRT)
Subject: Whistling mixtures
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 03:38:04 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM

Just to let you know:
This is actually not from Paul, but from his son.

After reading Conkling's article in the July 1990 Sci Am, I was wondering
about a couple of things.  First of all, what are some of your favorite
whistling compositions?  I didn't have any nice references when I attempted
to mix some whistling things, and I think that I didn't exactly have 
enough oxidizer in the mix, hence all the black crud I got.
Does the size of the molecule of the organic salt used (I assume this is
fairly standard, using organic acid salts, anyhow) such as sodium citrate
as opposed to some other like potassium and antimony tartrate (that was the name
) affect the frequency of the sound produced?  Like would sodium acetate
give a higher sound than a larger sodium salicylate?
These are about the only questions I have for now... I'll see what I 
can come up with later.
BTW:  Today I tried the NaNO_3 and Mg flare Conkling mentions in his 
article.  My first attempt was yellow, so it wasn't hot enough.  I,
keeping in mind the exponential growth of reaction rate, increased my
quantities a bit.  Wow.  That hardly can describe it.  I'll never set
that off in a fume hood (even great ones like we have- all enclosed with
a nice fan and all) especially at school and inside.  After it filled 
the room with smoke, the rest of the building was also filled with smoke
which I assume went on the roof out the vent, and was promptly sucked back
in through an air conditioner.  It was pretty smoky outside too.  The 
administrators were not impressed (especially because the alarm went off),
but we convinced them that it was OK.  I got home and looked up the 
most probable contents of the smoke, and decided that they, on the whole,
were not too bad.  MgO- used as a laxative, NaNO2- vasodilator, similar in 
effects to nitroglycerin, NaNO3 (I think I had a bit much, still not too 
likely)- used to produce HNO3, but not as much anymore.  But it is true.
Sodium will give off white light if you get it hot enough.

Erik.

Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee)
Subject: Re: New firecracker formula
Organization: Physics Dept. The University of Queensland
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 06:23:11 GMT

In article <spiegl.716228254@lead15>, spiegl@rtsg.mot.com (Mark Spiegl) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> Recently, we came across the following firecracker formula:
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ************************************************************************
  *                                                                      *
  *    THIS IS NO FIRECRACKER FORMULA IT IS A PRIMARY EXPLOSIVE!!!!!!    *
  *                                                                      *
  ************************************************************************

|> 
|>     Mix     Acetone
|>             Sulfuric Acid
|>             30% Hydrogen Peroxide
|> 
|> Several hours after mixing, a white powder precipitates. A small quantity 
|> of this powder, with minimal confinement, is supposed to detonate with a 
|> handsome report. 
|> 
|> TBBOM provides a very similar formula, and names the stuff Peroxyacetone. 
|> BUT, neither my Merck index, nor my CRC, nor my college organic chem book 
|> acknowledge the existence of anything called peroxyacetone, acetone 
|> peroxide, dimethyl ketone peroxide, etc. 
|> 
|> What is this stuff? What reactions are taking place? 
|> 
|>     ^     
|>    |U|     Mark Spiegl
|>    |S|     Motorola Inc.
|>   /|A|\    spiegl@rtsg.mot.com
|>   ~~U~~    

This mix corresponds to the chemicals required to make acetone peroxide.
However the reaction should take place at a reduced temperature (0-5 deg C).

As with most of the peroxides, they readily burn into detonation when confined.
Acetone peroxide is very volatile at room temperature, apparently losing 
half its weight in three months. It is an extremely powerful explosive
(detonation velocity around 5200 m/sec) and an extremely good initiator.

HOWEVER, even more so than the other peroxides, it is very UNSTABLE and VERY
SENSITIVE to SHOCK and FRICTION. It has no practical use because of its
extreme sensitivity and volatility.

Acetone peroxide has the following structure:

H3C   O-O   CH3
   \ /   \ /
    C     C
   / \   / \
H3C   O-O   CH3


I would suggest EXTREME CAUTION if you try synthesizing this, and by all
means DON'T PLAY with it!!!
      ==========

This chemical has the POTENTIAL to blow your hand OFF.

Be careful!

Mark.
From: hale@btree.uucp (Bob Hale)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: Recipe for nitrate-based flashpowder!
Keywords: flashpowder, nitrate, safe
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:08:13 GMT
Organization: Brooktree Corporation

In article <1992Aug31.190831.13599@ruc.dk> pjac@ruc.dk (Peter Jacobsen) writes:
[ flash powder recipe deleted ]
>One of the frequently asked questions in this newsgroup is "How do I make
[ flash powder ]

>"German dark pyro powder" gives the best result, but it also works excellent
>with the fat-coated variants of paint-grade "silvery" Al-powder. These also
>gives the composition a moisture protecting coating and improve its storage
>stability.

This raises a question that I have: what is the long term storage
stability of flash powder?  Is it the same when in a firecracker
as it is when stored in an airtight container?  What happens if (when)
the flash powder goes bad?

Please e-mail rsponses as my news feed isn't completely reliable and
I may miss posted responses.  Thanks.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee)
Subject: NH4NO3 + Metals
Organization: Physics Dept. The University of Queensland
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 09:44:02 GMT

Can anybody enlighten me on the behavior of NH4NO3 when mixed with Cu.
I have not heard of this before. Specifically, what does a sensitive and
brissant mixture mean in this case? I know of the Ammonal mixtures, and
these have been used with safety for many years.

Thanks,

Mark.
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee)
Subject: HTH -> Chlorate
Organization: Physics Dept. The University of Queensland
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 09:33:30 GMT

It has been suggested that boiling a mixture of HTH pool chlorine 
(65% calcium hypochlorite {CaCl(ClO) I believe}) with a mixture of
common salt (NaCl) or lite salt (KCl), one can extract nearly pure
NaClO3 or KClO3. 

I have tried this and it doesn't seem to give a very pure product.
After a little thought I came to the conclusion that it would be
more appropriate to boil the HTH solution, thus converting the 
CaCl(ClO) to Ca(ClO3)2 + CaCl2 or the like. Now calcium chlorate
is hygroscopic and deliquescent so is not likely to come out of
solution, while massive amounts of calcium chloride are formed.
If this solution is boiled until a large amount of calcium chloride 
is precipitated. It could then be cooled and the liquid decanted,
or the solids filtered out and discarded. Thus one would have a much
concentrated solution of calcium chlorate to which should be added
an appropriate amount of KNO3, while boiling the Ca(ClO3)2 solution.
When the solution is left to cool, only KClO3 should precipitate out.
This requires that the fluid volume is calculated to be able to
dissolve the resultant amount of Ca(NO3)2 at room temperature. If 
the volume remains constant, any CaCl2 in solution will remain there.
So one will have some relatively pure KClO3 after a decanting and 
further washing.

With a few calculations, this should be a relatively efficient 
extraction process. You don't need KCl, which I find hard to 
obtain in any quantity, and you don't need an electrolosis 
apparatus. Electrolosis is still the preferred process for 
chlorate manufacture due to the simplicity of the chemistry.
If NaCl is used in the electrolytic process, fractional
crysalisation easily extracts the resultant NaClO3 which can
then be combined with KNO3 to precipitate the KClO3.

It should be as easy as that. Any comments?

By the way, electrolosis must be done properley or all you end up
with is a NaOH solution and lots of chlorine and hydrogen gas.

Mark.
From: fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee)
Subject: Re: Silver acetylide
Organization: The University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 08:11:51 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.065057.4635@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
|> 
|> : An alternative silver salt to try is silver oxalate - add an oxalate to the
|> : silver nitrate solution and it precipitates. This will deflagrate when dryed
|> : and lighted, though it's more amusing than dangerous..
|> 
|> I have nothing on this except a reference that it is considered a primary
|> explosive.
|> 
|> Bill

Yes, both mercuric and silver oxalate have the properties of primary
explosives, although they find no practical application as initiators.
The products of decomposition of silver oxalate are silver metal and
carbon dioxide.

As it is a primary explosive, just take care.


Mark.

Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: fangs@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Wesley Lewellen IV)
Subject: Non-self-oxidized solid fuel boosters
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: wo
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 05:25:07 GMT

I'm not sure if this is the proper place to post this, but . . .

A couple of years ago I heard about a solid fuel booster design which
did NOT contain an oxidizer (as, for e.g. the Space Shuttle SRB's do)

Instead, the fuel (which was something like rubber) was at the bottom of 
the booster, with a hollow core;  the oxygen was delivered down the core
via a sprayer at the top.  This has the advantage of allowing a restartable,
shut-off-without-blowing-it-off-the-payload - able rocket combined with the
stability of liquid fuel (albeit you do have liquid O-2 around...):
something like this:

                   |    O  tank |
                   |     2      |
                   |            |
                   +=====||=====+
                   |    /  \    |   sprayer nozzle
                   |            |
                   |----|  |----|
                   |xxxxx  xxxxx|
                   |xxxxx  xxxxx|
                   |xxxxx  xxxxx|  solid-fuel container
                 \________________
                                  \
          
                   |xxxxx  xxxxx|
                   |====/  \====|
                       /    \        rocket nozzle

I heard also that the original design was from the 1920's, and that
someone recently revived it for a commercial booster.

Anybody know anything about it?  Thanx in advance...

- JWL IV  
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee)
Subject: Re: rocket fuel question
Organization: Physics Dept. The University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:09:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.205547.17825@leland.Stanford.EDU>, fangs@leland.Stanford.EDU (John Wesley Lewellen IV) writes:
|> I've never played around with black powder, but if you want to melt
|> it and are worried about ignition, how about melting it in a vacuum
|> or inert atmosphere (or is it self-oxidizing?)
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> 
|> - JWL IV

I know this is a joke posting.

Hello, HELLO .. HELLO!!! This is rec.pyrotechnics. 

Are you sure you have the right group?

Answer: Yes...

Mark.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: New firecracker formula
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:10:46 GMT

Paul.Elkins@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Paul Elkins) writes:
: In article <BuI72n.HtK@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au> fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee) writes:
: >                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >  ************************************************************************
: >  *                                                                      *
: >  *    THIS IS NO FIRECRACKER FORMULA IT IS A PRIMARY EXPLOSIVE!!!!!!    *
: >  *                                                                      *
: >  ************************************************************************
: >
: 
: What is meant by the term "Primary Explosive"?
: how do applications differ for "firecracker formula"'s and "primary
: explosives".

Most authorities seem to feel that firecracker formulas do not detonate.
They just deflagrate - eg. burn very rapidly. Any propogative burning that
occurs does not lead to a shock wave triggered decomposition of the mixture.

Primary explosives detonate. They are called "primary" because they are
generally very sensitive to initiation by one or more stimuli, such as
shock or heat. Examples are lead azide and silver fulminate.

: Are there such things as "Secondary Explosives"?  What are they used for?

You could call PETN, NG, Cyclonite, Dynamite and similar substances     
"secondary" explosives. They are substances capable of being initiated by
primary explosives. 

There are also "tertiary" explosives. These explosives are those that are
either insensitive to initiation by primary explosives, or are only partly
initiated. They require a high (secondary) explosive booster for complete
detonation. Examples are ANFO and ammonium picrate.

Bill
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: i came
From: holyholy@netlink.cts.com (Jeffrey Tang)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 22:51:45 PDT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

across a recipe for a green smoke bomb (in The Anarchist's Cookbook). The
only problem was, it called for 'red arsenic'. I have talked to a few
chemistry people, and they do not know what it is. If anyone has an
educated guess, or knows what red arsenic is, I would be glad to hear 
from them

--                    
INTERNET:  holyholy@netlink.cts.com (Jeffrey Tang)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!holyholy
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
From: holyholy@netlink.cts.com (Jeffrey Tang)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: Red Arsenic
Date: 16 Sep 92 00:12:52 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

Yes, I have seen a few problems with the Anarchists Cookbook. I was never
into pyrotechnics seriously, so I never did anything serious with the 
book. Anyway, thank you for your help.

--                    
INTERNET:  holyholy@netlink.cts.com (Jeffrey Tang)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!holyholy
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
From: Paul.Elkins@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Paul Elkins)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: New firecracker formula
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:44:30 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <BuI72n.HtK@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au> fernee@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Mark Fernee) writes:
>In article <spiegl.716228254@lead15>, spiegl@rtsg.mot.com (Mark Spiegl) writes:
>|> 
>|> 
>|> Recently, we came across the following firecracker formula:
>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  ************************************************************************
>  *                                                                      *
>  *    THIS IS NO FIRECRACKER FORMULA IT IS A PRIMARY EXPLOSIVE!!!!!!    *
>  *                                                                      *
>  ************************************************************************
>

What is meant by the term "Primary Explosive"?
how do applications differ for "firecracker formula"'s and "primary
explosives".
Are there such things as "Secondary Explosives"?  What are they used for?

Is this stuff covered in a FAQ?  (if not, maybe it should be)

Again, thanks in advance for the education of a new reader,


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: norm@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Norm Carpenter x3055)
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Subject: Re: Recipe for nitrate-based flashpowder!
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:31:30 GMT

Just for information:  The original Tin Man in the Wizard of Oz suffered
from an alergic reaction from the makeup.  I never heard anything about
inhailing Al dust.  By the way,  the guy that got sick was Buddy Ebsen (sp)
of 'Beverly Hillbillies and Barnaby Jones' fame.

Just so you know.

Norm
*******************************************************************************
norm@oliveb.OLIVETTI.COM

                 "Watch this space." -- Acme Advertising
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics