Ammonium perchlorate is an oxidizer yes, but the molecule has it's own fuel component. It will energetically decompose readily as a monopropellant at pressures above 700 psi with a theoretical sea level Isp of about 170. The talk that APCP that will only DDT with HE materials added (and where, when and why) is also without basis. Materials such as RDX/HMX are only added to specialized propellant that tend to be used in reduced smoke applications for example. Way too much misinformation in this forum.
Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
formatting link
360-3100 x101 Sarasota (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
Of course. I was simply correcting a grammar mistake. That's why I provided the link to the wikipedia entry on the Texas City Disaster in one of my other replies.
That detonation occurred only because of very specific conditions that existed at that particular place and time.
1) Large quantities.
2) Heat induced decomposition of AP reduced the density within the storage bins.
3) A shock input started the detonation.
This was discussed at length in an issue of HPR magazine many years ago. This was the Tripoli members only "Crash and Burn" issue. Well worth the reading if you can locate a copy.
But back to APCP. Most formulations, with obvious exceptions for things that have additives like HMX and such, are "zero card". That is that they can be placed next to a detonator and fail to sustain the detonation.
Very large quantities might be able to detonate. But how much do you need? The report submitted by the ATF that shows testing on the shuttle propellant doesn't support detonation. That report discusses what the linear shaped charge used for thrust termination does to the propellant. It doesn't explode or detonate. Mild burning.
Simple. Since the Liberals are now in power and will save us with medicade/medicare, free cheese, affirmintive action, high gas prices (won't drill for gas right here in our own back yard), ect. I am SURE the following will be prevented by the liberals as they have ALL the correct sollutions:
So you are wanting to reach Allah and your 7 virgins each in your 7 palaces in heaven. In the process you want to take a few American 'white devils' with you? My camel jocky friend, have you stumbled unto the right news group!
Ok, go out and buy as many slugs of APCP as you can. Get D, E, F stuff so that you don't need to deal with any licensing or back ground checks.
Now take a simple mortar/pestal setup and grind the slugs down to as fine a powder as you can. It will take a little elbow grease, but just think of all those virgins you will banging with Allah!!!
Ok next, goto Home Depot and buy some 4 inch ABS piping. Make sure you stop by the hunting department and pick up a couple cartons of BB (buckshot). Oh don't forget the endcaps and the ABS glue.
Now go home to your safe house. Next, take fly paper and before removing the sticky side of it, cut it so that it rolls up and lays against the inside of the ABS pipe. Now remove the sticky side, and cover it completely with those BBs you bought earlier.
Next insert the BB-paper into the tubing. The tubing already has an end-cap glued to one end. Now with the tubing standing on the closed end, simply pour your fine APCP power into the pipe. Use a good 6 -7 inches of pipe. Now before you glue the other end cap on, drill an
1/8" hole into the cap for the fuse you will add later.
Now after its all toped off, tamp it down hard, but not too hard. You want to keep the burning area of the grains at a maximum!
Now glue/screw the endcap onto the pipe, and insert the fuse.
Now fusing will be the HARDEST part to come by. Best to visit a few fireworks stands, or use thermalite to set your device off.
Now remember, what I have told you is IMPOSSIBLE as everyone knows in this newsgroup, that APCP is a very harmless compund. Why in the form I described, it is safer than mothers milk. So we should all have as much APCP as we want and when we want, because I believe writen in the bible and the constitution its has to say something about a God given RIGHT to have APCP anywhere at anytime and in ANY quantity ... I am sure it does. And if not, who cares. Do what the hell you want! The liberals will protect you all ... Allah be with you.
In reading through the ATF's pile of stuff, I noticed a table of "TNT equivalence" in the report on the shuttle SRB destruct system. Most yields were on the order of a few percent. I see three with greater than
100% but in order to get that yield required initiating 74,800 lbs of propellant with 18,000 lbs of TNT for example.
Just because you can make it go "bang" by abusing it this way has no impact on the "primary and common purpose to function by explosion" criteria laid down by congress.
Judging by your past postings outlining your disdain for the ATFE over the propellant issue no hard feelings on my end. Good luck with the hybrids. Too bad we aren't be allowed to keep a limited amount of APCP on hand for our hobby. I'm in the same boat as you are brother.
From the ATf "defense" after the attempt by a certain RESPECTED government agency to make the shuttle SRBs to explode in the event of an emergency
"the LSC successfully cut through each case. The LSC ation produced no explosive yeild from any of the tests-simply mild, late-time burning."
Remember when the shuttle launch problem occured? Remember the SRBs burning wildly and not being destroyed? There's a reason. Unlimited presure was not available, and unlimited heat along with desert dryness. So in real life this whole thread is a mute point. Only a certain discredited agency would try to support it, and a minority of it's agents. ;-)
Hmm, I wonder why the shuttle boosters failed to detonate when the shuttle launch vehicle fuel tank detonated. Must of been one hell of a shock wave???
That is exactly the point in our case. I was not trying to get everyone worked up. Just wanted to make the point that it could detonate. But instead everyone got me all worked up (you probably noticed that). My wife had to remind me to take my blood pressure medication.
Sorry I took your mistake correcting as an affront to my detonation comment. Just for info, I just cut and pasted that sentence from the web page that had the video. I should have removed the rocket fuel part of the sentence (didn't even think about it). I've taken my blood pressure med's so I am a bit less sensitive as I was earlier.
would tend to imply that AP was a rocket fuel. It just dawned on me that this is what the reply posts were trying to tell me. Why didn't ya'll speak more clearly... Any way, that sentance I just copy & pasted from the web site that had the video. I did not even think to remove or correct the fuel part of it to say oxidizer. However, I did add the (ammonium perchlorate) because I was thinking the same thing.
Just wanted to apologize for getting all worked up. I just got a little defensive. My wife had to remind me to take my blood pressure meds (seriously, I was almost to the point of detonation!) So I took them and now I can see more clearly what yall tried to tell me.
A lot of confusion here, but I'll take a whack at clearing it up. Yes, APCP can detonate. This is not news. All of the ballistic missiles launched from submarines can detonate or are shock sensitive. The reason is that nitroglycerin is added to the propellant to up the specific impulse. The launch tubes make the missile volume limit so maximum specific impulse is required for the desired range. These types of AP propellants are called "Double Base". Some types of APCP propellants use an energetic binder that can make the propellant shock sensitive and detonate. Often an energetic plasticizer is added to not only "thin out the mix viscosity", but to increase the specific impulse and/or burn rate. These energetic plasticizers, even with an inert binder, can make the propellant shock sensitive. All of the propellant types above are used by the military, not in hobby rocket motors.
Your video was of an AP factory blowing up. AP by itself is shock sensitive. It becomes more sensitive as the AP particle is decreased. 90 micron AP is the smallest particle sized shipped under DOT regulations, Small AP particles are too dangerous for transportation on public highways or railroads. Simply dropping a drum full of very small AP particles can cause the drum to detonate. Again, this is well known to users of AP as the AP MSDS sheets discusses all of this. In industry, a simple bimodal mix of AP particle sizes is 10 to 1. 200 micron AP is bought and then it is ground down to 20 microns to get the
10 to 1 ratio. This is done remotely as it is not unusual for a grind station to blow up during this process of grinding.
Ok, how can it be that AP which is shock sensitive by itself, (i.e., can be made to detonate by hitting it with a hammer) be put into a propellant and not have it be shock sensitive. The answer is the binder. In very simple terms, it is like a "rubber cushion" around each particle and provides a barrier or shock dampener to a detonation wave from getting started in the propellant. The effectiveness of the binder in making the propellant non-detonable is measured using a "card gap test". Again, in simple terms, a sample of APCP propellant is impacted by a projectile fired at a known kinetic energy. Cards are placed between the projectile and propellant sample such that the projectile loses kinetic energy as it passes through the cards. The first test would be with zero cards. If the projectile does not cause the propellant to detonate, then the propellant is considered non-detonable and extremely safe. This is the case for hobby propellant. If the propellant detonates, then cards are added until the projectile loses sufficient energy as it passes through the cards such that the propellant does not detonate upon impact. This is the card rating of the propellant. Based on the rating, the propellant is classified as the 1.1 (detonable) or 1.3 (non-detonable propellant). The dividing line is 70 cards or (70 kbar input shock pressure). What that means is that propellants 70 cards and under are considered 1.3 propellants or non-detonable. However, as we just discussed a 30 card,
10 card and 50 card APCP will detonate even though they are rated non-detonable. But, hobby propellant is rated as 0 cards, which means it has not detonated under the tests, not even once.
Finally, the 60 inch rule of APCPs detonating. I have heard this, too. However, I can not find anything to back it up. Once you understand the mechanics of what is going on, it makes even less sense. What is really being discussed here is the distance required to set up a detonation wave. For example, ammonium nitrate or AN by itself has a detonation wave distance of about 8 inches. That means it takes a solid particle of AN 8 inches thick to just start the detonation wave, assuming sufficient impact force has been imparted to cause detonation. I can easily envision an APCP formulation that could set up a detonation wave in one inch, 20 inches, 50 inches, 60 inches, 130 inches or take your pick. It would depend on the formulation, particle sizes, etc. The bottom line is that there is no rule of thumb of 60 inches for all APCP formulations. I could easily make an APCP formulation that could be 500 ft long and you will not get it to detonate.
This has been long winded, but perhaps the differences between one APCP and another APCP begin to come through. There is no one APCP fits all or rules of thumb. The problem is the ATFE has decided one APCP does fit all and they picked the APCP that detonates as the one that fits all. The injustice is that the hobby APCP does not detonate. So, the TRA/NAR suit's complaint against the ATFE is accurate and not a waste of time. If the ATFE was really interested in correcting this injustice rather than just trying to save face, they would more exactly define which APCP are on the explosives list. This could easily be done by the number of cards in the card gap test. They would not have to accept 70 cards. They could use a lower number or make it zero cards. I proposed this approach to them, but received no reply.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.