Detonation and Demolition PDF

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter
The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science
Lo g in
View Full Version : Military Science
Improvised Weapons
Detonation and Demolition
Weapon Science and Technology
Gunsmithing and Firearm Modification
Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety
Ammunition and Reloading
Rifles and Shotguns
Handguns
Automatic and Assault Weapons
Blackpowder and Muzzleloaded Guns
Firearm Accessories
vBulletin v3.7.2, Copyright 2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition
Log in
View Full Version : Detonation and Demolition
1. Air-blast pressure equations. (5 replies)

2. Triggering Devices (5 replies)
3. Explosive placement in a Junk Car Demolition (14 replies)
4. Bombs and planes (14 replies)
5. Orsini Bombs (8 replies)
6. Explosively Formed Penetrators (1 replies)
7. Modified American hand grenades ? (12 replies)
8. 1944 The Goliath ll Remote-Controlled Charge Layer (0 replies)
9. Interesting Spetsnaz Demolition Training (2 replies)
10. Safe remote detonator plans (1 replies)
11. Calculating the VoD's of compositions (1 replies)
12. Speculation on the Teller-Ulam design. (6 replies)
13. Your detonation Sites (34 replies)
14. How to stop evil arabic terrorists ? (9 replies)
15. Cascading optical trigger discussion (0 replies)
16. DIY ultra-cheap Remote detonator construction (2 replies)
17. Hard Drive Destruction Test (w/ video) (38 replies)
18. Baseline Tests (17 replies)
19. good plans for detonater? (not connected to previous post) (1 replies)
20. Testing the Minimum Detonation Diameter of Liquid Explosives (1 replies)
21. Dissolved Corn Starch As Explosive Confinement? (14 replies)
22. Bridgeless Igniters (21 replies)
23. squash granade? (5 replies)
24. Water charges (53 replies)
25. Hand Grenades (18 replies)
26. Poor man's Tiger Tails (9 replies)
27. Bristar Non-Explosive Demolition (13 replies)
28. Electrical Substations (36 replies)
29. Making a HMTD blasting cap (49 replies)
30. Preparing for a 182 kg. (400 lbs) blast of ANFO (55 replies)
31. Need a detonator - Ragnars Detonators problem (13 replies)
32. Safe cracking tales (0 replies)
33. Theremin Proximity Fuze? (2 replies)
34. Pull pin smoke design (28 replies)
35. Remote Detonator/Recording Box (4 replies)
36. Stump removal the way Grandpa used to do (21 replies)
37. Detonating ANFO - my research (6 replies)
38. Two-stage shaped charge (3 replies)
39. Basis for Relative Effectiveness (12 replies)
40. detonator, you think it'l work (6 replies)
41. Info sought on Destruction Technologies for Munitions (4 replies)
42. New in Iraq, thermobaric rounds (22 replies)
43. Increasing brisance idea (13 replies)
44. want to buy electronic timer (1 replies)
45. Counter Force Detonators (19 replies)
46. Magnetic Dip Turn-Count Fuze (34 replies)
47. Prepaid Cell Phone Detonators for Cheap! (88 replies)
48. The Effect of a HE on Ammunition? (54 replies)
49. Measuring VoD electronically (22 replies)
50. Roll cap detonator? (21 replies)
51. Safe(er) Detonation Ideas (28 replies)
52. electric demolition - wipe out a building (7 replies)
53. Cutting trees with detcord (19 replies)
54. Tiny Lithium Batteries (15 replies)
55. Electronic switched dets (4 replies)
56. Big aus(s) detonations (0 replies)
57. Shaped charges (133 replies)
58. Underwaterdetonation (94 replies)
59. Demolishing a Small Tool Shed (2 replies)
60. Lock Blowing Idea (29 replies)
61. Proximity Safety and Arming Switch (9 replies)
62. Dust Initiator (5 replies)
63. remote det. circuit problems (19 replies)
64. Cable and Voltages (11 replies)
65. Bullet Jacket Shaped Charges (15 replies)
66. Computer Demolition (25 replies)
67. Fracturing concrete flooring? (24 replies)
68. Silent Ultrasonic Drill (4 replies)
69. Trip Wire Trigger (12 replies)
70. SOE/OSS Firing Devices (1 replies)
71. Improve the range of your remote detonator! (18 replies)
72. Hemispherical Lined Charges (8 replies)
73. primaries detonation physics (5 replies)
74. Improvising linear shaped charges (12 replies)
75. NG detonation W/O detonator. (17 replies)
76. ATM machines (76 replies)
77. tree stump blasting (4 replies)
78. Concrete wall project (28 replies)
79. Wine Bottle Cone Charge (23 replies)
80. Geometry of linear shaped charges - Archive File (0 replies)
81. shaped charge with AP-putty - Archive File (0 replies)
82. AP caps - Archive File (0 replies)
83.
84.
81.
This is not82.
registered version of Total HTML Converter
83. blasting cap numbers - Archive File (3 replies)
84. boosters - Archive File (1 replies)
85. The nature of Explosively Formed/Forged Projectiles (0 replies)
86. Forming Shaped Charge liners - Archive File (7 replies)
87. Program for electronic detonation. - Archive File (0 replies)
88. shotgun shell primer - Archive File (13 replies)
89. pull igniters - Archive File (1 replies)
90. Rock Blasting - Archive File (19 replies)
91. Ammonium Nitrate Question (13 replies)
92. Cheap remote detonation (15 replies)
93. TeNN: Only component in a detonator? - Archive File (0 replies)
94. Acid Detonator - Archive File (0 replies)
95. flexible linear shaped charges - Archive File (12 replies)
96. Detonating PETN ? - Archive File (5 replies)
97. Stronger Detonator... - Archive File (0 replies)
98. hard targets - Archive File (9 replies)
99. My understanding of detonation... (0 replies)
100. Sympathetic Detonation (6 replies)
101. Laser Pointer Remote (1 replies)
102. Easily made powerful Blastingbox (58 replies)
103. Piss Easy Electric Ignitors (49 replies)
104. Shock Res istant Detonators (4 replies)
105. Dog Shit Bin Explosion - Archive File (6 replies)
106. Gas Tank Explosion - Archive File (5 replies)
107. Easy made explosives (breaking large rock) - Archive File (1 replies)
108. lightswitch electrical detonation - Archive file (0 replies)
109. easy det? - Archive file (0 replies)
110. shaped charge annm/ap - Archive file (0 replies)
111. The different shapes of HE! - Archive file (0 replies)
112. Detonation test - Archive file (13 replies)
113. Shaped Charge Detonation - Archive file (1 replies)
114. Gurney Values of Various Explosives (query) (1 replies)
115. In Holland they don't like speeding tickets (4 replies)
116. Micro-Balloons - Archive Thread (0 replies)
117. How Do I detonate? What are blasting caps? - Archive Thread (0 replies)
118. The use of electric car starters as a detonator. (21 replies)
119. 20 detonators at once. - Archive file (0 replies)
120. new top secret explosive - Archive file (19 replies)
121. Special design for remote det. (159 replies)
122. armor piercing (2 replies)
123. Tiny SC Liner Cones (65 replies)
124. A better detonator? (18 replies)
125. Tamping Test (11 replies)
126. Home Artillery (improvised weaponry) (21 replies)
127. Caught on tape! (59 replies)
128. Planular Cutting Charge (17 replies)
129. Scabbling (17 replies)
130. A piss easy timer? -archive file (0 replies)
131. Electronic Detonation -archive file (0 replies)
132. Clearing Minefields (6 replies)
133. An interesting timer (10 replies)
134. C-ANFO, APAN & AP Experiements (53 replies)
135. SC failure - reasons? (36 replies)
136. circular shape charges (17 replies)
137. Few hundred ms delay circuit (7 replies)
138. ydrodynamic Shockwave Simulation (10 replies)
139. Multi-Point Initiation and Asymetric Effects (18 replies)
140. Vision/Hearing precautions when detonating? (16 replies)
141. fake car bomb movie on the forum FTP (12 replies)
142. Increases the oxygen balance the explosive velocity? (1 replies)
143. Busting into my safe. (92 replies)
144. Building Demolition (18 replies)
145. Fiber Optic Detonators (53 replies)
146. electronic igniter problem (74 replies)
147. Splatter Movie (19 replies)
148. cutting capability of linear shaped charges (12 replies)
149. Hard Drive Destroying Incendiary (66 replies)
150. Cash Dispenser (62 replies)
151. Remote Radio Detonator (1 replies)
152. H2O in the air making explosives more dangerous (11 replies)
153. fragmention bomb (1 replies)
154. Timer Electronics Question (6 replies)
155. dB (11 replies)
156. Detonator Shell Bodies (35 replies)
157. Remote det. (43 replies)
158. Electronic Timer (13 replies)

The Explosives and W eapons Forum
Lo g in
View Full Version: The Explosives and Weapons Forum
Log in
User Nam e: Password:

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Cash Dispenser
Log in
View Full Version : Cash Dispenser
stanfield December 2nd, 2001, 12:04 PM

got to http://www.geocities.com/stanfield999/ (maybe copy & paste) then download my file and give me your opinion...
or open the jpg with a soft like paint shop pro and draw the place of the explosive...
any reply is more than appreciated...
BrAiNFeVeR December 2nd, 2001, 12:31 PM

I'd shuv as much as is humanly possible down the ticket slot:
http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/61b828a6/bc/__hr_distrib-300a.jpg?bcQuuW8AAZBmfJzb
I figure, that the money comes from above, so there the major stash must be ... erh, behind the screen or something ?
But these things are probably very well protecte against these things ...
Most people in my country drive a bulldozer in the wall, and drive away with the entire unit, to get the cash out at home or
something.
------------------
"Mess with me, and you'll end up with a .44 under your chin and your brains on the ceiling"
DarkAngel December 2nd, 2001, 01:33 PM

"Most people in my country drive a bulldozer in the wall, and drive away with the entire unit, to get the cash out at home or
something."
I never thought that most Belgium people would do such things ;)
I think that all the money is kept far behind the the machine i don't think that you can simple blow your way to to the money.
But do you have plans :)?
------------------
arkAngel
For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1)

sendtosection1@hotmail.com
[This message has been edited by DarkAngel (edited 12-03-2001).]
Madog555 December 2nd, 2001, 05:12 PM

if you were to blow your way in you would probaly have to blow a hole to put more explosives in to blowe a bigger hole. this
take to long though. there would be unwanted visitors there by the time u got to the cash
------------------
"To live is to suffer, to survive... well thats to find meaning into suffering." -DMX
mongo blongo December 2nd, 2001, 07:56 PM

If you are going to do what Madog said, use a shaped charge for the first hole.
------------------
AAARRRRRHHH! My beautiful eyes! It burns!
The goggles do nothing!AAARRRRRHHH!
vulture December 3rd, 2001, 09:48 AM

in the town i live in (also in belgium) they tried to blow up the ATM with dynamite, thereby ruining the building.
The only damage to the ATM was that the front panel was blown off, under that was an almost undamaged plate of metal.
Hacking these things might be easier then blowing them up without ruining the money...
How bout weaking it with thermite first and then setting of a heavy charge? Only problem is you'll have to wait for the ATM to
cool down a bit to prevent the explosive from blowing up in your face.... or use a "throwable" explosive
[This message has been edited by vulture (edited 12-03-2001).]
BrAiNFeVeR December 3rd, 2001, 10:18 AM

Vulture, could you add me to your icq ?
My number is in my details, or just search for my nick.
Or just give me yours ...
------------------
"Mess with me, and you'll end up with a .44 under your chin and your brains on the ceiling"
stanfield December 3rd, 2001, 10:57 AM

There must be a way to get back the money...
I haven't any bulldozer under the hand for now... :)
is the screen a weak point ? no ?
see ya !
stanfield December 3rd, 2001, 11:02 AM

hey, vulture, do you know how to hack these ATM ?
vulture December 4th, 2001, 12:32 PM

Well, also in belgium (exciting country!), a russian hacker installed a miniature card reader in the card slot and a video cam on
an ATM and he had hundreds of copied cards with the PIN! I don't know the specific procedure, but if you can get the
electronics, it wouldn't be too hard.
I think it's more easy to open a restaurant and copy everyone's visa/mastercard....
BTW, a few months ago they also tried to blow up the safe of the furniture store Ikea a few hundred yards from my house...
Damn, dynamite isn't that old crap, my window shutters rattled like hell!
stanfield December 4th, 2001, 01:05 PM

don't you think that 200g of RDX (C-1) will break the tiny ass of this ATM ? (by positioning the charge where the bucks are
given off ?

200g of RDX sounds fun, but you'll have to put something on it to deflect the blast wave to the ATM, cause i saw they use two
layers of metal with air in between to tamper blast waves.
Maybe blowing off the plastic coating with a little charge and then throwing a highly concentrated mixture of perchloric, nitric
and hydrochloric or sulfuric acid over it? This should attack the metal, and by the time it gets to the money you throw a
satured solution of bicarbonate over it...
This will also destroy any fingerprints or DNA that could be used as proof.
------------------
"I just need some tolene...tolyl? How you call that stuff mam, need to help my mother painting..."
[This message has been edited by vulture (edited 12-04-2001).]
DarkAngel December 4th, 2001, 11:57 PM

Don't you think that the bank is prepared against robbers that whan't to blast the machine open?
If they are refilling it with new money you always see them walk behind the machine to fill it.
vulture you methode sounds a bit kewl to me and IF this would work on metal you will destroy money,and when your still busy
the police and other people would already be there.
------------------
arkAngel

nbk2000 December 5th, 2001, 01:39 AM

A bank that I used to have to go to once a month had a modern ATM machine. The back of the machine was visible inside the
bank because the lazy bastards never bothered to keep the door closed on it.
The money is stored in a HUGE ass safe. You get it via conveyer. The money is like 5 feet behind the front end that you
interact with.
The ATM manufacturers haven't been sitting on their ass while their machines get torched, exploded, towed, etc. They improve
these things constantly.
I've got a very short segment of a show on VHS tape that shows the details of a modern ATM. It's only about 15 seconds or so
long, but it shows a lot.
So forget trying it with the machines at the bank.
What you CAN do is yank the little ones out of gas stations and grocery stores. The ones that are about the size of a large
stereo speaker.
------------------
"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me."
Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.
CragHack December 5th, 2001, 02:18 AM

like NBK2000 suggested, steal a little one from a gas station. Just throw it in the back of a pick up truck (with a cap over the
bed to cover the unit) and drive it to a place where you can take your time breaking into it. But make sure you don't get a unit
which has a transmiter in it so people can track its location. I have never heard of any ATM having a transmiter but do you
homework and check up on the specific make of the machine just to be sure.
------------------
"If you must, do it with intelligent people, at least they know how to talk to the cops."
[This message has been edited by CragHack (edited 12-05-2001).]

Even AFTER you steal it, it's going to be a tough nut to crack.
I was at work one day during the day shift when the Brinks people came by to refill the miniATM. The safe is proably inch thick
or more of steel. The lock is made by some famous lock company (used to know who) that randomly changes everytime it's
unlocked and is all electronic so you ain't going to hack it or break it that way.
Oxyacetylene, burn bar, grinding wheel, or explosives is going to be the tools you'll need. Hammers and crowbars ain't going
to do jack shit.
And they're not light either. Figure on 400+ pounds. It'll take several strong people or a ramp and winch to get the bastard
into your truck.
DON'T drag it behind you! Some idiots did that and the cops followed the tore up street right to the yahoos who stole one.
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
------------------
stanfield December 5th, 2001, 04:50 AM

This ATM machine is in little town, the fisrt police station is in the next city at 25 Km and, in France, the police is not very
agressive (see the informations...)
you think that the only way to get the money back is to attach the ATM to a truck and voila ? no possibility with explosive ?
WARNING, higher and around this ATM, there are homes...I don't want to explose to town like Toulouse...
Anthony December 5th, 2001, 05:46 AM

Reread NBK's posts.
You need time to open it without damaging the contents. Opening it on the scene is not the way to do it.
I don't think we have "small" ATMs in the UK, they all seem to be the big bastards. Even an inch of steel isn't really a
problem, all it takes is time. Put it in your garage, buy a load of hacksaw blades and drill bits and you've got a new hobby to
keep you going through the cold season.
vulture December 5th, 2001, 06:03 AM

Im very sorry Darkangel, but blowing it up sounds more kewl to me then to use something that doesn't make noise!
Besides, i said to keep a bucket of bicarb at hand when it reaches the money to prevent it from destroying it, and by then,
most of the acid will have reacted with the metal to form salts.
Please read carefully before calling me a kewl, OK? Kewls don't even know what perchloric acid is....
------------------
Machiavelli December 5th, 2001, 07:56 AM

Well you certainly don't need to know the meaning of a word to use it. After all, anyone can pick up "perchloric acid"
somewhere and use it without knowing the oxidation level of the chlorine in this compound or its pKs.
But I don't think that either acids or explosives will do the job.
If you've ever tried etching metall you'll know that it takes quite some time to get trough a thick solid metall block. And before
you gain access you'll probably have a lot of acid that flows through small cracks and tiny holes and reaches the money before
you. And in the process you'll probably cause enough short circuits and damaged wires to trigger each and every alarm the
machine has.
The same goes for explosives which as an added benefit will wake up the whole neighbourhood.
If you can get diagrams of the machine it might be possible to locate drill points where you could defeat the mechanism using
power tools and maybe a thermic lance.
Apart from that, just steal the whole thing and disassemble it at home or go for something less protected.
------------------
Give someone a match and he'll feel warm for a few seconds, set him on fire and he'll feel warm for the rest of his life

ATMs are usually in the same places as deposit chutes. Rather than robbing the ATM with all the alarms and steel, rob the
dude dropping off the days cash from the local store when he stops at it.
Much easier, less time, and risk. Using explosives would escalate a simple burglary (breaking the ATM open by hand) to a
major felony, especially in europe since you'd be using RDX, a "terrorist" explosive.
I don't care how far from town you are, if someone calls in an explosion to the police, they'll be there ASAP. Same for a bank
alarm.
A technical hack of the ATMs computer is possible, but requires more skill than either I or you possesses.
I HAVE heard of people buying old ATMs and rigging them to record the PINs and card numbers of people who try to use them.
The ATM just gives a "Sorry, try again later" message while the "bad" guys make copies of the cards and take them to every
ATM in town, draining the accounts. http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
Soundtrack for this post provided courtesy of Pantera.
------------------
CragHack December 5th, 2001, 01:33 PM

You guys (and possibly gals... don't want to offend anyone) are hell bent on using explosives. This is not a viable option
unless you really know what you are doing? think about it, how much RDX is it going to take to blow through an inch of steel or
more? ALOT! in fact i would assume that (assuming you used enough RDX anyway,) you would be using too much. Explosives
are very unpredictable. No need to blow the whole fucking thing up. Use an OXY-ACE torch to carefully remove the plate.
also, does anyone know, after you get past the thick steel plate what is behind it? i am assuming it is not the cash but a
bucket, or a thin walled housing used to hold the cash in place right? so you would have to be careful with any type of
exposive (you would also have to be careful with the torch, but that is a little mroe controlled). if you use even a little to much
RDX (which is the example in this case) bam, there goes the goddies.
Also, does anyone know what types of internal alarms these things have? like if you try and cut through the plate will an alarm
sound? that would fucking suck if there was an ear piercing shriek that you couldn't turn off until you got all the way through
the plate to rip the fucker out. wow.
------------------
"If you must, do it with intelligent people, at least they know how to talk to the cops."

what about liquid nitrogen ? (I can buy this stuff in france...) I throw this stuff on the ATM then I heat this one with a blowtorch,
the thermal shock is very high and "explode" the metal. No possible noise...
what about this idea ?
Anthony December 5th, 2001, 02:17 PM

"The money is like 5 feet behind the front end that you interact with"
So you've cracked off the screen/front panel with your LN2. Congrats. Now what about the other 5ft of shit?
I don't know why this needs to be keep being repeated - There is no quick on-the-spot fix to breaking open an ATM!
BTW, If I was oxying the thing open I'd first drill two holes through the safe and feed water into one (the other is to release
the air). The money would probably get soaked but it wouldn't get burnt. Dunno how much it'd affect the ability of the torch to
melt the metal, but the increased thermal disspipation couldn't be that much.
Jhonbus December 5th, 2001, 02:59 PM

A few observations I'd like to add:
We do have those "small" ATM's here in England, I have one in my local shop at home. It's about 6' tall and 18" square on
floor space, and feels very flimsy. When you take money out, it dials up on a modem to some kind of ATM bank network
thing. To me, this smacks of insecurity. Both hacking the system and stealing the whole module (it's not even chained to the
floor) would be relatively easy with this kind of thing.
I don't know what kind of ATM it is that sends the money to the faceplate via 5' conveyor, but here in England, in shops and
banks, they often have an ATM (full size) on an exterior wall, and the whole box of the ATM can be seen when inside the
building. The boxes are maybe 4-5' square on the floor and 5' high. They are very bulky and you would need serious
machinery to take away the whole thing. Getting it away from the structure of the building would be difficult too. They are
connected permanently to some kind of network, so hacking them would also prove more difficult than the "mini" version. (ie
you couldn't hack into the network itself; I don't know how possible it is to make a device like the one owned by John Connor
in Terminator 2 :) )
------------------
You must create.
PGP Key ID on MIT server: 0x0ADBA985
[This message has been edited by Jhonbus (edited 12-05-2001).]
PYRO500 December 5th, 2001, 04:58 PM

the device jhon conner used in terminator is bs, the card has to be swiped to write data to it. the only thing way to cheat the
thing at the source is to use a cloned card, the card has several things on it that can be reproduced, what several people on
the news got caught doing was getting jobs at resturants and swiping the cards in their belt mounted devices before they
swioed them for the bill, then they took the device and cloned the cards and used them till they were reported stolen after
many K of dollars use, that is why they got caught. I think for door locks you could make a random number genorator and a
record head that was small and hold it against the read head of a security door lock, might take a while though. I have herd
smart cards are theft proof, sounds like time for a better theift, I bet they can be emulated
------------------
visit my web page at:
[URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

Eevn if it does dialup over a regular phone line, it's still going to be at least 128bit encrypted. You'd need the correct protocols
to communicate with the ATM too (I assume you'd pretend to be the host).
Are these mini ATMs filled by the guys that go round in vans collecting money from banks, or are they filled by the shop
owner?(I guess it depends whether the ATM is owned by the bank or the shop owner) If it's filled by the owner then that's
obviously the weakest link - mug 'im! They probably don't hold nearly as much money as the big ATMs though.

The quickie mart near my house has an atm machine inside and it isn't very big maybee 4 1/2 feef back from the wall, and I
know it stops there beacuse the building is old and nothing goes beyond it. I may check what cords are hooked to this thing, I
think the best bet is to get a small quickie mart like this one and find the tape vcr (for the security cameras) the one that is
near where I live has the vcr up front with the cashier, a definite no no, 4 cameras but none of them are gonna make a
diffrence if you take the tape. best of all the central office is very close to the site (they control the phones) and the phone
junction box is right next to the store, in this case I would go in in the dead of night, cut the phone line, cut the power, take
the tape and get the atm out with a dolly, into the back of a truck or something. then bury it in some hole in the ground and
wait till after the investigation, I am not sure but I think ATM's have tracking devices, burying it in a 6ft underground hole for a
while should let the battery's run out or remove evidence in case of a warrant incase such an ungodly thing happens. I know
this sounds complicated but it will be worth it to not go to prision, nothing says I'm a theift than an empty ATM shell, you
better ditch it somewhere where it'll never be seen again, for example if you did it in miami you could dump it in the
everglades, they had a hard time finding a plane in that mess let alone an atm, the reason I am saying to take it to a secure
location is that trying to crack it open on site make you stick around too long, something bad could happen and you could
posibly leave evidence behind.
------------------
[URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]
mrloud December 5th, 2001, 09:40 PM

In Australia we have small stand alone type ATMs in shopping centres. I watched while one was installed once. A small forkilft
put it into position and then most of the volume of the machine was filled with lead bricks. There must have been about 1/3 of
a cubic metre of lead in that thing. At 11.4 metric tonnes per cubic metre, that machine could have weighed around 4 tonnes.
Also, they don't make the machines with convenient carry handles. I missed seeing them get the ATM off the forklift. A few big
guys could do it but I think it had jack down feet that are extended and retracted from the inside. One would need to tilt it up
on its side to get a block of wood underneath. Once it is on blocks, one could get a fork lift under it or some slings to lift it
with a crane.

you said the money is behind 5 feet of metal ?
5 feet = 1m 50cm no ?
if this is correct, this is impossible, there can't be 1m50 ...

hey, vulture,
you saw the ATM that they tried to break no ? what was his state ? how much explosive did they use ? which explosive ?
thanx...

Yes, 5ft is approximately 150cm. Have you not ever seen an ATM installed in glass shop/bank front? They extend back a long
way (they're almost "L" shaped) and don't forget that the money likely travels diagonally upto the user end.

Well, only the front panel was damaged, not the screen as far as I could see, but the fuckers tried it from inside, they first
broke in to the bank! I think they just threw the explosives near the wall the ATM was standing, because there was a lot of
blowout damage (glass sprayed over the street, roof blown upwards...)
They used mining grade dynamite.
I think if you use a well placed (that's the hole point it comes down to) RDX charge of approx. 300g you're gonna blow it to
pieces (at least belgian ATMs)
------------------

The ATM is in the bank wall... but lower, there is a mail box (in the same wall). I can pass my arms throug this may box and
touch the below of the ATM...
what do you think about it ? (this wall is a big shit this is not ciment, I can break it with a martel or even with my
punch&kick...)
any reply is more than appreciated

I suggest you search for any bolts or wall attachments in the mailbox, that are the weak points. You could try to put thermite
in it to melt the bottom plate, but you'll probably burn the money IF you get through... Or maybe try the liquid N2 and after
that thermite, takes a whole lot of time though i figure...
Does anybody know of which metals armored plates usually are made of?
------------------

a friend wrote this e-mail to me :
"You need 1 kg of RDX at least! Probably more. But its not gonna blow the entire town, it will only destroy the bank, damage
the buildings right across the street and break all the windows within 150 mtrs, thats all."
What do you think ?

I think 1Kg of C-1 is crazy but not for him... who's right ?
[This message has been edited by stanfield (edited 12-10-2001).]

I think it's already established that explosives are not the tool for job.
Even if that 1kg of RDX was made into an effective concial shaped charge, the sheer distance between the front panel and the
safe would make it ineffective.

have you read the "mailbox cheat" ?
nbk2000 December 13th, 2001, 03:01 PM

I searched for any book called the "Mailbox Cheat" and found none in the english language.
Is this a french book?
What's the ISBN or publisher?
And what is in regards to? I'm assuming some kind of theft?
------------------
Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.
TheBicher December 13th, 2001, 05:02 PM

Where I live there is one of those speaker-sized ATMs that doesnt look too heavy, once unbolted a job for 2 people. It doesnt
seem like too much of a job to get the cash. But how easily is the money traced? I know banks trace their money, so it is
probably easily traced. So, i wouldnt go out buying a new Car or big screne TV or something but instead using it on the streets
or geting something less expensive. Also, about how much money do you predict is in one of these at a given time?

From what Ive heard, they hold between $4,000 and $10,000, all in brand new, sequentially serial numbered $20 bills.
I don't know if they record the serial numbers, but I'd assume so and react accordingly.
------------------
Neil McCauley December 14th, 2001, 06:23 AM

Ok, finally I'm able to reply (because there's no longer a register stop). The question raised by stanfield is very interesting:
how to go about to get the money from an ATM using explosives.
Now, like Vulture already mentioned, in Belgium there was a gang who actually tried this. They were called the Maache gang
("De bende van Maache" in dutch). They started robbing armoured cars but changed to blowing up ATM's because of the
increased security of the armoured cars. As far as I know they blew up several ATM's with succes and in the case Vulture refers
to they failed because the police showed up and a shoot out resulted and the gang had to flee without the money.
So maybe it is possible to blow up ATM's and get away with the money. But I've got only small pieces of information about the
Maache gang and it's not very reliable (maybe Vulture or some other Belgium can help me out here).
What I do know that IF it's possible to blow up the ATM you have to put the explosive against vault to blow a hole in the side
or on top of the vault to blow off the screen and get to the opening on top of the vault where the coveyor belt exits. So you
have to get inside the building (like the Maache gang did in Vultures city) and you need a lot of explosive.
Actually I doubt that's it's possible but to answer the question we need to know if the Maache gang did try it more than once
and if they succeeded (if not so I think it's impossible to blow up modern safes like used with ATM's and would go for the
other options mentioned).

Sorry Neil, but the gang who tried to blow up the ATM was not the Maache gang and there was no shoot out with the police.
They also tried to blow up the safe of the ikea which they also failed.
The belgian police rather shit their pants off than shooting at criminals....
In the ikea case, there were 2 explosions with an interval of 10min!
Guess when the piggies showed up: 15min after the last explosion!! But then they had to wait till the bomb squad had
checked the building for explosives.....
Really, belgium is the best place for criminals, one of my neighbours had burglars in the house, he calls the police from
upstairs:
-"Okay, we'll come right away sir."
15min later the phone rings:
-"Are the burglars gone?..Yes?Okay, we're coming"
hmm, can't get my smilies to work
[This message has been edited by vulture (edited December 14, 2001).]

Somehow I suspect that european ATMs are less robust than US ATMs.
After all, everyone knows that the US is full of criminals. :D
I'd make sense that the ATMs here have been attacked more often, in more varied ways, for a longer period of time, than
have euro ATMs.
Thus US ATMs are more resistant to attacks. Natural selection at work. The weak perish and the strong survive to reproduce
stronger offspring.
While it may or may not be true that the belgium ATMs were blown open, the fact that they had to do it from inside the bank,
and apparently failed even then at least once, even after using enough to destroy a sizeable part of the building, shows that
200 grams of RDX is just a spitball against a tank.
Jack 'em when they're resupplying it. Much easier.
------------------
Neil McCauley December 14th, 2001, 02:38 PM

Ok, maybe it was not the Maache gang in this particular case, but I know the Maache gang tried to blow up an ATM in Rocour,
which ended up in a shoot out with the police and one gangster was injured to the head. They brought him to a hospital were
he later was arrested. In the article about this event it was said that the Maache gang tried blowing up ATMs before (and
probably with succes) because the armoured cars they used to rob became to difficult with the increased security. And with later
arrests they seized kilo's of explosives and heavy weapons.
Of course its easier to ask for the money when they refill the machine http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif but
the question is IF it is possible to get the money out of the ATM with the use of explosives, and the answer will be revealed if
someone can get some more information about the Maache gang and their actions.
Personally Im a bit sceptic. Maybe if you would use some heavy linear shaped charges put on the side wall of the safe you
can cut a hole in the safe but to get through a couple of inches safedoor seems impossible.
By the way, NBK you said you had a video showing details of an ATM, can put some pictures of it on the forum? (I have never
seen the inside of those ATMs and I am just curiuos).

I've been looking for it (sort of) but it's only about 20 seconds worth amongest a half-dozen 6 hour tapes. So go figure how
many times 1/3 of a minute goes into almost 36 hours of video. Equals a lot. I'll eventually run across it and post it, even if it
is a week or month down the line.
Anything is possible if you put enough research and effort into it. So, if you were hell-bent on it, you could eventually figure
out a way to blast into an ATM. But with all that effort, you could have taken down easier, and more lucrative, targets.
Precious metals dealers, gem wholesalers, coin collectors, rich people with valuable collections, whatever.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu (and just plain common sense) "Do not attack where the enemy is strongest".
Being a smart criminal means attacking the soft underbelly, not the toughened hide, of the beast. Why do you think ATMs are
so hard nowadays? Because the early ones were easy to break, thus every time they got broken into, the banks improved the
design, making it harder and harder till only experts have a chance now.
Be innovative, creative, and original. That's how all the great heists are done. Otherwise, you're just another petty crook.
BTW, stanfield, we don't participate in criminal conspiracies here like ATM theft. We are a place of theoretical discussions and
speculations about security breaches and failures for the betterment of society. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/
smile.gif
If someone takes that knowledge and perverts it for evil intentions, then there's really nothing we can do to stop them. http://
theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frown.gif
------------------

I never said I'm going to REALLY blow some ATM in France http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif this just an
exercice on how to place the explosive for maximum effect ...
When you beat (moderatively) the metal plate where the buck are given off, it sounds empty !! that's the reason why I though
"If some gangster attack this big shit, they have all the chance to suceed !"
I really think that french ATM is a whole shit ! seriously...
Teck December 15th, 2001, 04:56 AM

I think this has been mentioned somewhere.
Try plugging all the holes with putty, then try filling the thing with water. Drill a hole for a charge where you have most of the
water and try detonating the charge. I think it should work, at least it works for safes.
FragmentedSanity December 15th, 2001, 08:44 AM

Lo all :)
I just have ti ask if anyone has actually got anything worhtwhile out of this thread?
NO offence intended Stanfield... but do you have any idea about what your asking?
"can I use explosives to get the money from an ATM"
"No"
"but could I use them this way"
"No"
"but what about.."
"No"
"I know - what about liquid nitrogen"
"No"
etc etc ad nauseam
now if you still want to beat off over some flight of fancy involving kilograms of RDX themite and liquid nitrogen that all fit
neatly down the card slot - be my guest, Go grab some mayo and do a propper job of it (thanks for the Tip NBK) BUt do you
really need to fill the board with your rediculas prattle.
I have to wonder why this thread is still even open - are we just trying to see how k3Wl these people will make themselves
look?
hmmm.. maybe offence was intended.
anyways - later all.
FS

ATMs have drain holes to prevent idiots from damaging the machine by pouring water into them. Also in case of rain leakage.
What you might try, would be injection of a foaming explosive that would expand to fill the cavity and not leak out through the
drain holes.
Don't drill or torch a hole through it though, because either the heat or vibration sensor will be activated.
Instead, use ECM (ElectroChemical Machining). This is simply done by using a car battery as a power source, a hollow copper
tube as the "drill", and a pump to maintain a constant flow of salt water flowing through the tube onto the target plate. You
can recirculate the salt water by catching it with a funnel back to a resorvoir.
I believe the copper has the + hook up, the plate the - .
The electrical current erodes away the metal, leaving a hole.
Found this on a site about disarming UXOs and mines. Things like this are found by randomly hopping around the net.
Anyways, cut several such holes in different spots, pump in your foam, prime for simultaneous detonation and let rip.
Or, if you prefer speed to stealth, several small shaped charges to punch holes in the ATM for the foam. But this will take a
minute or two off of the time you have to stay on the scene because you lose the stealth element. The alarm will start before
you've even started with the foam.
------------------

hey, FragmentedSanity,
is it stupid to ask ?
FragmentedSanity December 16th, 2001, 03:56 AM

well stanfield - that all depends on how stupid the asking makes you sound.

And you, if you are stronger than everyone on this forum with you 24 posts, what would you do for this ATM ?
asking is not a fault...

The question if it is possible to get the money from an ATM using explosives is not yet answered!
I agree there's a lot of cheap talk and bullshit on the forum and people seem not really interested in getting answers to the
questions asked. It seems to satisfy them just talking about explosives. As long as therms like "RDX" and "blowing up" are
mentioned they think they are "participating" in the discussion. I guess it makes them feel cool or special just talking
(bullshit) about explosives. If they are just kids I can understand that in a way but nevertheless they should go elsewhere.
Now, back to the topic. I am seriuosly interested in the topic and like I said the answer to the question can be found if some
more information is found about the Maache gang, who actually did blow up ATM's in Belgium (and maybe France) some years
ago.
So anyone really interested (and preferably Belgium) please help us out. And the rest shut up.

As you can imagine, details about security measures for ATMs isn't something readily available on the internet. This is all I
found after several hours on the net.
http://www.newswire.ca/releases/April2001/17/c5162.html
"The system uses a range of internally-mounted sensors that have been carefully developed to detect any brute force, cutting,
or explosive attack while providing a high degree of stability against false alarms. Any genuine attack will set off the note
degradation system housed on the ATM dispenser, permanently marking the cash with indelible ink. Other parts of the ATM
are not affected and the machine can be put into service following an attack."
Not even really of any value, is it?
And I'm certainly not a newbie to searching either.
What is more productive is searching patents for security devices that could be integrated into ATMs.
I'll try that later tonight.
I tried a search on the Maache. I got a couple dozen hits, all in belgium. So that didn't do me any good. Nothing in english
about it.
Perhaps a search of usenet might yeild some stories.
Yes, there are some people who like to spout big words, but after several years of hearing it, I guess I've become
desensitized to it. Sort of just background noise.
Given enough time, these people either come in line with the norm here and learn, or leave because no-one bites into their
bullshit.
------------------
[This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited December 16, 2001).]

hey, Neil McCauley, If you have some Kalashnikov, why don't you come with me in France ? We could do the job a become rich
http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif
In these ATM, There are 100 000 $ when they are full and I know the When the Brink's guys come...

Please provide actual examples of all the bullshit spoken on this forum.
Yes, of course it is possible to get the money from an ATM with explosives and is probably quite easy if you don't mind it in
extra fine confetti form. Given enough knowledge, time and practise it could probably be done effectively. But success first go
would be extremely lucky.
BTW No one has mentioned whether or not this Maache gang actually recovered the money successfully.
Now, I am not "really interested" in this idea, mainly because I think it is impractical. So are you going to tell me shut up?
You've got a lot of brass for a guy with 3 posts.

What I want to know, stanfield, is why the words on the ATM keypad in the picture you posted AREN'T in french?
Amazing how much detail can be extracted out of a picture when I use the high end photo analysis software at my disposal.
As Anthony has stated, if you have enough practice, you'll get good at anything.
The question is, though, will you stay out of prison long enough to get the required practice? Because your first time could also
be your last time if you get caught, which is always a very real possibility.
And the money isn't going to be right at the front. It comes through a conveyer from the HUGE safe several feet behind the
front end that you interact with.
If you get access to that, then you've got a chance.
But even then, as noted in my above post, there may be a trick waiting to spoil all your work.
Also, have you ever thought of using this energy on a much more easier target like the change machines at laundermats and
car washes? You'll get several thousand dollars in untracable bills. Just wait till the red "out of change" light comes on and
attack then.
Quick hint, drill a small hole first and fill it with fire extinguisher foam first. Prevents the money from catching on fire. Learned
this from a guy who torched change machines open for a "living". http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif
------------------

What I want to know, stanfield, is why the words on the ATM keypad in the picture you posted AREN'T in french?
Amazing how much detail can be extracted out of a picture when I use the high end photo analysis software at my disposal.
At least you're getting the idea about the brinks guys and AK's, instead of the ATM.
As Anthony has stated, if you have enough practice, you'll get good at anything, even blowing up ATMs.
(BTW Anthony, he doesn't have two like the rest of us, but rather 3. And they're big and shiny brass 'uns too. http://
theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif)
The question is, though, will you stay out of prison long enough to get the required practice? Because your first time could also
be your last time if you get caught, which is always a very real possibility.
And the money isn't going to be right at the front. It comes through a conveyer from the HUGE safe several feet behind the
front end that you interact with.
If you get access to that, then you've got a chance.
But even then, as noted in my above post, there may be a trick waiting to spoil all your work.
Also, have you ever thought of using this energy on a much more easier target like the change machines at laundermats and
car washes? You'll get several thousand dollars in untracable bills. Just wait till the red "out of change" light comes on and
attack then.
Quick hint, drill a small hole first and fill it with fire extinguisher foam first. Prevents the money from catching on fire. Learned
this from a guy who torched change machines open for a "living". http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif
Neil, chill out dude. If and when we (the mods) decide it's appropriate, we'll close or delete this thread as needed. If you don't
wish to participate, don't.
Also, this IS an explosives forum, so naturally there's going to be a lot of posts where explosives are mentioned. Just as if
you went to a gun forum it's going to be guns, or computers on a hacker site.
If you wish to learn more about whether the ATM thing is possible, I'd suggest helping this topic along by finding some
information to share here yourself.
We have had over the years (YES, we've been around since before '98, despite several moves and crashes, in one incarnation
or another) numerous snooty people with bad attitudes who haven't contributed anything themselves, all while denigrating
others who do, no matter how slight that contribution may be.
You seem like a fairly intelligent person, so don't fuck yourself off by getting on our bad side before you've established
enough of a rep here to allow you to rip into others.
Seeing as how you're a newbie yourself here.
------------------

A lot of questions to be answered. First of all, I didnt want to insult the wrong people, I am just annoyed that some arent at
all interested in the topic and getting an answer to the question. And they are messing the whole thing up with their bullshit
remarks for the people who are interested. And although I am new to this forum with only 3 posts and should be modest in
my comments I think my critcism is just.
Now, of course I did an extensive search on the topic (the Maache gang, ATMs, et.), but I didnt find much. What I found is
basically what I already told you guys. So I cant enhance the topic further. Thats why I called in and hoped for the help of
the Belgiums (where are you?).
Because the answer of the question asked by Stanfield (do you really want to know it or not?) can be found if someone can tell
us more about the Maache gang.
And about the sensors dying the money red and render it useless when the ATM is attacked (with drills, explosives, other
tools) is apparently not widely used (at least not (yet) in Europe) because its still possible to take the whole machine/safe
with you and open the thing in the comfort of your own home http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif (imagine
how that must feel, I mean when find the safe full of money. What it feels when its empty because you choose thr wrong day
I dont even want begin to imagine how that feels).
Well thats all I have to say right now. Hopefully I didnt forget anything.

Vulture, Neil McCauley, and FragmentedSanity.
You three need to learn to play nicely with the other children, otherwise you can go to the HED room and sit in the corner by
yourself, FOREVER!.
Obviously I can't leave for a minute without a flamewar breaking out.
Since nothing more is to be gained by this thread, it's being locked.
------------------
Argy June 6th, 2003, 11:31 PM

There is something almost impossible to find but...
I saw some laser which can cut steel in a fraction of second, it don't make noise and it isn't big as you can think... so if you
can find it, then you can probably use it (but the main problem is electricity, if you don't have an electric post close then i don't
know where you can take enough electricity.
nbk2000 June 7th, 2003, 01:31 AM

What an incredibly UNINFORMATIVE post you just made.
Absolutely no information whatsoever. Not where, when, who, why, or how you came about this startlingly revelation.
:rolleyes:
Back to the watercooler for you. In a week or so, you might be allowed back into the forum proper...if I remember to restore
you.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Hard Drive Destroying Incendiary
Log in
View Full Version : Hard Drive Destroying Incendiary
Ctrl_C January 13th, 2002, 11:34 PM

i know this has been discussed before, but not seriously enough. basically i want to create a system that torches my hard
drives when a key sequence is punched in on a wireless transmitter. I can purchase a <a href="http://www.parallaxinc.com/
html_files/products/Basic_Stamps/module_bs2e.asp" target="_blank">BASIC Stamp 2e</a> that will hold 4000 lines of code
for $54. I would also need a <a href="http://www.parallaxinc.com/html_files/products/BS_Boards/carrier_boards_brief.asp"
target="_blank">carrier board</a> to hold the chip and add electronics too. add $20. the same company, <a href="http://
www.parallaxinc.com" target="_blank">Parallax</a>, sells a <a href="http://www.parallaxinc.com/html_files/products/RF_Mods/
28004-28005.asp" target="_blank">5 button keychain transmitter and reciever board</a> add $20 and $69 respectively. now,
wire it all up, program it to receive a 10 digit key sequence, emit a voltage on an output channel to a relay hooked up to a
nichrome ignitor to ignite/detonate something. anyone have any thoughts about this? what about safeguards? it has to be
able to preform when the heat is on but perfectly harmless and reliable otherwise. and the most important question of all,
what type of incendiary? a model rocket engine would be simple and almost guaranteed to preform, however, may not do the
job. Thermite is a good choice but may end up setting the house on fire...not good. let me hear some ideas.
[ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: Ctrl_C ]
PYRO500 January 14th, 2002, 12:23 AM

Well, If your going to put an incindieary on you HDD then you might as well count on your entire computer being destroyed
anyways, all you'd need to do is put a little thermite near the edge of the disk then it'd burn through and the 7200 RPM
spinning disk should take care of the rest. it is pretty much a dead HDD when the case gets opened let alone thermite on it,
you'd need sometrhing like Mg powder to get it going and they can still recover fragemnts of data even when your hard drive is
a 3 in. cube.
Energy84 January 14th, 2002, 12:27 AM

What about KNO3 + Sugar? It burns hot and should be easy enough to ignite with nichrome wire. I don't know how good it
keeps over long periods of time or if the smoke is acceptable. A model rocket motor might not work to well because you'd
have to hold it down with something (it's a rocket afterall) and it might be kinda hard to setup inside a computer case too. I've
also been told by a company rep. (Estes) that the motors should be kept inside their packages until they're ready to be used.
I found that out the hard way when the propellant shot out of it's casing and destroyed one of my rockets :eek:
I just thought of it, you might need standoffs too (5mm or so should be enough) because some drives can get pretty hot.
Also, make sure that the incendiary is on the steel housing side (not the electronics side) so that when it burns through, it
might still have a chance that the platters would be spinning.
Also, could a strong electomagnet be placed next to it to be turned on by the relay? this could further destroy data and
diminish the chances of any data recovery from those little chunks of leftover disk. :D
[ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: Energy84 ]
nbk2000 January 14th, 2002, 02:42 AM

Is it external or internal?
External would be the simplist to set up, and allow for overkill sized devices.
Internal (in the drive itself) has the advantage of being undetectable to even a close examination.
Externally, there's no reason you even need to have the drive in the computer. You just get a 40" long IDE cable, a power
extension, and set the thing at the bottom of a flower pot. Over which is suspended a larger pot full of thermite. Thermite
goes off, dumps several pounds of molten iron onto hard drive....piggies are left trying to recover data from a blob of slag. :D
Good Luck!
A plaster/metal powder torch would do the same.
Then there's the internal SD. This one is a good idea as a back up to the main self-destruct. Since it's internal in the drive, no
visual examination would detect it. Which would be a good thing if they catch you unawares before you can activate the main
SD.
A hydralically compressed mix of PTFE and Mg/Al is inert, dust free, and burns with a 5,000 degree flame to vaporize and melt
the disks, with highly abrasive particles to grind the platter, and corrosive flouride fumes to etch the magnetic coating to a
pitted moonscape.
You'd have to open the drive to do this mod, which voids the warranty. Also, you'll have to come up with a clever way for it to
activate if attached to a normal computer.
Reversing the power supply polarity to the drive, using a diode to act as a switch to initiate an e-match if hooked up to a
regular power supply is one option. Others will present themselves to the clever tinkerer.
Whatever you put inside the drive will have to be vibration resistant, dust-free (even micron sized particles), vapor free, heat
resistant, and basically inert till activated. Any outgassing of vapor or particles could cause the drive to crash.
And I've disassembled drives in a clear poly bag and re-installed them. They still worked. All the tools are placed in the bag
along with the drive, having used a virgin bag that isn't opened more than needed to slip in the parts.
Inflate with a dust filtered air source.
A glove box would be better and can be made fairly cheaply.
Start with a $20 500MB junker drive first before risking that $200 80GB drive.
BoB- January 14th, 2002, 02:49 AM

I remember a topic a year ago or so, and a member had the idea of wrapping the entire hardrive in several even coils of
magnet wire, the E-magnet was powered by an UPS unit.
Also, have you considered using a pager? That one phone call in jail would be pretty handy :D
I was thinking about something, do po-po have enough sense to take the computer shell off looking for hidden drugs/papers?
I can see them doing this.
nbk2000 January 14th, 2002, 03:39 AM

It's SOP for the POO-POO (AKA Brown Stuff in Blue ;) ) to thouroughly examine a computer for boobytrap devices before
taking it apart to take the hard drive back to the lab.
Pagers are now watch sized. It shouldn't be too hard to get one inside a drive. But making sure that only a certain entered
code number could set it off may be. Can't count the number of "wrong numbers" on my pager.
I just checked out those R/C modules you listed. They have a rather pitiful 75 foot max range. What if you're out watering the
lawn when piggies roll up? You might be out of range.
Also, how to prevent accidental ignition? Since it has 5 buttons, each on of which can activate something, perhaps you can
have it set so that each button has to be pressed in a particular order, each one engaging a relay that controls the flow of
current to the destruct. Only when all 5 have been pressed in order will the device than activate.
Pressing a button out of sequence disengages all previously activated relays and resets it to a safe mode.
with 5 buttons, it's a 1/120 chance of randomly poking the buttons being able to activate the device. Especially since any
errors resets it to safe mode.
Besides which, why bother? Things haven't gone downhill enough to require a SD HDD because of bookz. Now if this was PEDO-
NET (kiddie porn) THEN you'd have reason for it.
But it never hurts to have the tricks ready, eh? ;)
[ January 14, 2002: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
mrloud January 14th, 2002, 04:27 AM

I would also keep a backup copy of everything on the HDD. Encrypt it all with the strongest that PGP has to offer, then give the
secret key to Mega and/or the mods. You only need the public key to create the encrypted backup. Then there is no known
way you or the cops can decrypt the contents of the disk.

Caching the backup drive would be more foolproof, it could be protected from the elemets then buried in some remote
location.
Mr Cool January 14th, 2002, 09:17 AM

Just a word of warning for anyone wanting to use the PTFE/Mg incendiary stuff NBK mentioned: press it remotely, and stay
away from it for the first 10 minutes after you make it. After that time it's probably safe, but it has been known to
spontaneously detonate in the first few minutes after being made.
vulture January 14th, 2002, 01:41 PM

A electromagnet is not a good idea and will not destroy data.
Why? The data contained on a harddisc are simply magnetically polarized atoms. If you would expose them to a strong
electromagnetic field the polarization of the atoms will be altered, but for all atoms in the same way.
Therefore, they simply have to be able to reconstruct one bit and with some simple program code they can completely recover
all data on the harddrive.
In order to destroy the data you'll have to heat it up above the temperature where the material loses it magnetic capabilities.
That will alter the order in which the atoms are bonded together and will change the electron spin randomly. Which leaves
0.0000001% probability of data recovery.
DBSP January 14th, 2002, 03:53 PM

I read this thread about an hour ago, half an hour later on a science program thay were talking about recovering data from
HDs. A norwegian company had specialized in data recovery said that they could recover allmost all data on it, it could take a
day or many weaks but they most often managed to recover 90+ %. The only way to delete the data present on the disk was
to
replace it.
One way to make it totally unreadable would be to grind into a powder and throw it into a lake. Tis method however isn't very
god since it's time consuming and has to be done manualy. This method is only useful if you wish to destroy a HD with
sensible information on it, and if you aren't in a hurry.
A nother way would be to install a program that replaces all information on the HD. And fit this program with with some kind of
trigger. Someone who is god at computers and electronics should be able to fix the trigger.
Ctrl_C January 14th, 2002, 05:30 PM

you guys had the same idea I did as I was sitting in my bed thinking about this. a pager. buy one and clone it from another
one that is activated. this way I don't have to pay $5 a month for something that i will probably (but just maybe) never use.
then hook up the LCD output to an input channel on the stamp board, and program it to output the voltage when a 10 digit
number from the pager is matched to a 10 digit number stored in EEPROM. the chances that the pagers clone gets that same
10 digit number is slim to none.
as it stands now, it would be an internal drive. i like to keep things neat without ribbon cables streaming from the case. I
wouldn't want to put anything inside the drive itself because, A: i dont think there is room and B: I opened a drive once for a
second, and it never worked since. So I'm thinking some kind of simple incediary like thermite or KNO3+sugar in a metal tube
with one end capped and the other facing the drive. KNO3+sugar would be easy to ignite and would keep well i think. standoffs
would be a must. I would like thermite but can't think of an easy way to ignite it.
I could disguise everything by packing in all into a fake drive case that sits next to the other two. this could evade detection
unless they xray it, which i doubt. if they do though, encasing the inside in thin lead wouldn't be too tough.
also, not to worry about the data being lost. several members have complete copies of the FTP on cd and more deals are in
the works to get more copies out. its a 7cd set...lotsa data but its not to be worried about. copies of this info will eventually be
sent to all parts of the world, building a global network of information exchange.
and about the outlandish claims of data recovery: the only way to destroy the data is to overwrite it OR destroy the media on
which it was stored. I don't think they would claim 90% recovery on a drive that had a 1/2 lb of thermite do its work on it.
nbk2000 January 14th, 2002, 05:35 PM

There's an interesting phenomenom called "field saturation" (I believe) that means that magnetic media that has held a
constant field state (1 or 0) for a long time, will retain this charge, even after being written over many times with another
charge.
It gets into deep physics that I don't remember. But THEY can, if willing to invest the effort, use tunneling electron scanning
microscopes to read this "phantom" charge and reconstruct data that has been overwritten more than a dozen times.
It's incredibly tedious and expensive, but they don't foot the bills, it's the taxpayers. So if you're important enough, they WILL
be able to get ANYTHING you've stored on a drive if it's still intact.
Hence, the only SURE way to destroy data beyond recovery is to physically destroy the media it's on to slag, sludge, or ash.
I've never heard of teflon/Mg igniting under pressure, but I suppose it's possible. Compression does cause heating, and if the
magnesium isn't passivated, it could get hot enough to ignite.
But detonate? I doubt that. More likely a very rapid combustion like black powder that ruptures its container.
kingspaz January 14th, 2002, 05:40 PM

<a href="http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/" target="_blank">http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/</a>
useful program. recover my files now! :)
Mick January 14th, 2002, 07:05 PM

a few years back the NSW police force sold all of there old computers. Only they forgot to reformat the hard drives before they
sold them at auction.
so people ended up getting computers with classified infomation like car number plates, and criminal records and the like.
so after that PR disarster, they now low level format the drives, then write all 1's to the drive, then LL format, then all 0's,
format, then all 1's and then format again.
and according to them, there is about a .00001% chance you could ever get anything of use off the drive.
now, one thing everyone has forgotten is RAM.

it will contain shadows of applications, and text etc etc (this is due to windows extreme RAM handling abilities..or lack there of)
so you would also need to destroy that as well.
also note, those programs say they can delete all your old files and flush your RAM with out a trace actually don't work for shit.
file traces can still be found on your HDD and in your RAM. so do not rely on them to save your ass.
so far, the best thing i can think of is thermite in a container(something thats the same size or bigger then the disc, to make
sure you get it all) sitting above your HD attached to a pager detonator. its almost guaranteed to work
you shouldn't have to worry about stand offs either because most normal IDE HD's will put out a maximum of about 80
degrees celcius.
however most should operate at 40-60 DC.
if your using a SCSI drive(which i don't think anyone here does) i wouldn't hurt to use stand offs. as i have had a couple of
SCSI drives commit weird acts of the hari-kari, and literally burn up.
but also, something that noone has mentioned is how are you going to stop your house from burning down if you ignite the
thermite?
cause you'd be feeling pretty stupid if you were arrested by the cops, and they didn't tell you what for, so you figure that it had
something to do with your computer. So you ring your computer and nuke the HDD with thermite, which then sets your
computer on fire which sets the curtains or something on fire, and your house burns down.
and the cops come out and say "shit sorry, we arrested the wrong person...hey don't you live at *insert address*?...just heard
over the radio that its on fire"
Anthony January 14th, 2002, 08:47 PM

The steel computer case should keep the fire contained but you might want to stand it on a sheet of fire proof material such
as asbestos and keep the computer case with a large gap all around between it and surrounding objects. Hell you could line
the entire case with asbestos, might mess with your heat dissapating properties if you're a ph33rsome 0vacl0x0r though :)
I think stand offs on HDD's are a good idea, as although in normal operation they don't get hot enough to ignite the incendry
composition, with the insulation of the incendry charge it would probably over heat. Especially since the "do not cover" breather
hole is on the side you want to place the charge (non elctronics side). Even if the drive didn't get hot enough to pose a risk of
igniting the incendry, it would shortern the life of the drive.
With a HDD incendry charge going off inside your case it's going to pretty much ruin everything else as well. So you might as
well charge RAM, video/graphics card etc and make sure you get it all.
"according to them, there is about a .00001% chance you could ever get anything of use off the drive"
Is that for the average person or with the entire resources of a federal government?
nbk2000 January 15th, 2002, 04:03 AM

NSW=New South Wales? Not exactly noted computer technology experts. Now if it was IBM/Lawerence Livermore/MIT/Cal-Tech
saying it, then I might believe it.
And anthony is quite correct in that what is an utter impossibility for an individual/small group is trivially easy to a superpower.
Wiping utililites will complicate the job for the computer poo-poo, but if it's beyond him, he can send it up the chain of
command till it gets to whoever can do it, if it's important enough.
It all breaks down to the cost/benefit ratio to them. If you were OBL, then they'd spend billions to read your hard drive after
it'd been atomized to dust. Local crackhead reformats his drive? Into the trash can.
RTPB: Plan for Failure.
Plan on the primary SD not working/fire spreading beyond computer/getting raided before you can push the button/etc.
This means you need secondary SD mech (internal)/dual initiators/alternate means of activating (resetting timer?)/insulating-
isolating the computer so if it's destroyed the house won't burn down/others.
Think of everything that can go wrong, then prepare for it. Then you just have to worry about the things you DIDN'T think of.
:D

"/getting raided before you can push the button/etc"
I just had a belly laugh thinking about the evidence locker burning to the ground.
[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: BoB- ]
nbk2000 January 15th, 2002, 08:24 AM

I suppose if one wanted to be a real asshole, they could have 2 HDDs. One is the real one, the other has had all the guts
removed, to be replaced with an ultrasonic/thermal vaporizer to dispense the mustard gas/DFP/sarin that is contained within.
It sits inertly in the computer, since the power cable that is attached to it is invisibly altered so no current actually goes through
it.
But when the piggies plug in the toxic drive to their computer, current IS going to it, which initiates the device, vaporizing the
toxins and wiping out the computer forensics techs and anyone else around.
:D
Would you rather be the pyro sitting in prison for life for thought crime? Or the pyro sitting on death row for wiping out 6 cops?
I'd rather be the dead man walking. You ever tasted prison food? 40 years of that is HELL! Kill me quick, please!
vulture January 15th, 2002, 12:21 PM

RAM doesn't contains any data anymore after 30s of power (3.3v) downtime.
It's useless to destroy that, besides, it's wiped everytime you start up the computer or reset it.
Only windows (never use windows for criminal activities) keeps info on programs that you have closed in the RAM, but that's
wiped also as soon as the windows session is closed.
To everyone who intends to use his computer for "non conventional activities" use linux or Beos, they don't leak megabytes of
information/ hour to third parties or government agencies.
They also don't keep a history of programs/files/documents.
twinkle January 15th, 2002, 01:52 PM

killing a harddisk is still done the best with electric energy heat will kill the drive work and the motor part but the information is
on magnetic base ,there are programs like wipe which over write the information several times but when it has to be done
remote I would choose a high frequency current through a coil it will fry the disks(bending them to) as well as kills the data
magnetic or something more simple and good working is injecting a strong acid into the drive , which will eat up the disks
inside the drive.
Arkangel January 15th, 2002, 02:41 PM

Instead of wasting my own HDD I'd really like to find a way to fuck up the internet consoles in the railway station I've just
passed through. Thought I had just enough time to check what's going on, so put my cash in. As soon as I tried to open a
topic on the forum, the prudish bastard piece of shit net nanny thing told me that it contained the word "pussy" and that I
wasn't allowed! I couldn't believe it, and if I had been equipped with thermite, would have left it in a smouldering heap of slag.
This in a country where pussy means nothing. (I have a great "pussy shot" if anyone's interested, mail me) ! It wouldn't even
give me my cash back. AAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHH!
ImagineReality January 30th, 2006, 12:41 AM

Ok a tube of thermite wouldn't be the right thing for the simple reason that once it eats through the first part of the hard drive
the drive will stop spinning. So you would only destroy a part of it.
The ideal thing would be a block of thermite with the same area as the hard drive to make sure you would get every part of
the disk. If could be set off in a few ways, either you could have a piece of magnesium ribbon pointing out the front of the
case or you could set up a system with either a pager or a phone. I like the phone or pager option, so you get arrested and
are in the police station, you get one phone call right? The problem there is that it might get opened before you get chance,
which also brings the idea of having it boobytrapped but then you may cover a cop in molten metal and i am willing to bet the
jail time would be high. You could also simply have a button on the case to press with a cover over it so it can't be pressed by
accident (if you have kids this may not be a good idea). I like that one actually, lets face it, if someone kicks in your door you
should be able to get to your computer and press the button before they get you right?
Well those are my thoughts on it.
tmp February 13th, 2006, 02:15 AM

I keep the data on an external HD. Give me a few seconds I can render the
drive unreadable with my 16 LB sledgehammer ! It isn't that HARD ! Try
reading the disk after I've smashed it !
Jacks Complete February 14th, 2006, 09:20 PM

tmp, that's a good idea, unless it's a 5am wake-up call. Then you are screwed.
What we need is a way to scour the surface... A bit of sandpaper on a rod, dropped onto the spinning disc would stop the
whole thing from working. The difficult bit is getting it to be in place without fragging the HDD in the first place.
The more I think about it, the more I think an idea like NBKs is the best. Make a PC, add a wireless card, hide it totally inside
a block of concrete. Access it via SSH. If anyone wants in to it, they will have to hammer the concrete apart. Of course, it will be
well disguised, so that is not likely to happen. They seize your PC, and just find links to files, but no files. They could search
all they liked, as long as they did it from the cop shop... and a shitload of Thermite in a block of concrete would frag
everything, safely, if it were tampered with.
tmp February 14th, 2006, 11:42 PM

Even though I'm usually getting ready for work at 5 AM it really doesn't
matter. They could just come in when I'm not there. Encryption may be the
best idea, although I'm sure that the superfast computers at NSA could figure
it out given the time and money.
fiend7267 February 20th, 2006, 01:29 AM

Well, although I really like the thermite idea, there are other equally destructive (if not even more destructive) alternatives
that would be more reliable; such as a kilo of C-4 above and below the disks and wired with the pager idea. also if you got
caught in the middle o' the night or while you are away, you could have a trip wire connected to your door, so when the piggies
bust in...:D
nbk2000 February 20th, 2006, 09:21 PM

Given the very dense storage capacities of modern HDD media, physical destruction by smashing isn't much more than a
delaying tactic. Figure that, at 100MB+/sq cm., how big a piece would it take for a single incriminating sentence to be
recovered? A sliver the size of an ant's eye?
Fiend...imagine you're on your computer when the pager hooked up to a kilo of C-4 gets a page from someone who
accidentially dialed your pager number instead of their connects number...BOOOM!...bye-bye fiend. :p
The idea is to destroy the data without an accidential triggering destroying YOU.
fiend7267 February 21st, 2006, 06:06 PM

Hmmm...good point indeed. perhaps you could have a small container filled with highly concentrated H2SO4 which would spill
onto the HDD when *insert trigger method* thus melting the disk and putting house fire risk to zero. :D Additionally, H2SO4 is
much easier to get than thermite or C4. furthermore, due to it's comparatively slower destruction rate (although still sufficiently
speedy) will allow time for the acid to evenly distribute itself across the surface of the disk, ensuring total destruction,
assuming that your computer is level.
kikman February 22nd, 2006, 10:58 AM

Short of the scenario where the police call in a super-high ranking forensic expert, i think it would be sufficient to have an OS
run from a bootable device that simply writes 1's to the entire hdd and RAM, then 0's, etc. While not as fun, it would be safer
than trying melt your hard disk :)
My other idea is to have the computer with sensitive information located outside against a fireproof wall, and run your
peripherals through the wall, so you can set off whatever incendiaries you like and not have your house burn down :)
cyclonite4 March 2nd, 2006, 08:15 PM

Hmmm... with technology getting smaller and smaller, as it does, it tends to be a bit easier to break (not to mention the
warranties get smaller and smaller, and are voided easier).
One thing I can think of it USB thumbdrives. Sure, they aren't HDDs, but there are distro's of linux and such that can run off
them, and they are getting quite a bit cheaper for the 1-2GB ones. I spent stacks of money on a USB key years ago, when
they were considered 'state of the art'. Not much need to worry about destroying it, as they generally destroy themselves from
regular use. If you did need to destroy it, its just a small chip you have to crack into a few pieces... I don't see them
recovering data from that (You could probably melt the thing with a torch if you had to).
What you do is have the normal computer with any OS you want on it, which you NEVER use for anything incriminating or
related to open-mindedness. Once you want to do such activities, power off, plug in USB key (with bootable OS), power on,
and there you go. A USB key is more concealable (you can take it with you when you leave, incase the po-lice arrive when your
not home), and far easier to destroy. :)
EDIT: Just came up with another idea.

If you need (semi-)permanent storage, you can use CD's (duh).
Have you ever seen what happens when you stick a CD in the microwave? :D
Well, you can store your data on CDs, and when you need to destroy them, you can pop them all in the microwave. I doubt
recovering data off the disk would be an easy, if achievable task. Alternatively, you could just burn the CD(in a fire).
Infact, you could have a microwave near your computer, and use it as a container to store your CDs in, and with the press of a
few buttons, you can get rid of them all. Maybe even rig up a page to the microwave. At least if its accidentally triggered, you
dont have to worry about yourself being deleted.
Also, using a USB drive/CD combo, you can destroy the data much more easily than an HDD, and you dont need any risks
involved with using explosives or incendiaries. I don't think you could get charged for cooking a CD or crushing a USB key,
unlike using explosives/incendiaries. :)
Isotoxin August 8th, 2006, 10:34 PM

All of these ideas using very long IDE cables or WiFi are problematic. WiFi lowers your bandwidth and I think(but am not sure)
that a very long IDE cable will have problems with carrying the data(like an over long CTR cable) Thus to solve these problems
an IDE cable no longer then 5 feet might be used.
This cable would be hidden under a rug or similar and go into a ceramic flowerpot next to the computer. This pot would sit on a
ceramic dish and the bottom of the pot would be filled with dry sand. Then the harddrive would be on top of the sand with
thermite above and below it but sand around it so thermite would never directly touch the ceramic. Then there would be some
perlite/dirt and a fake plant in the pot.
This makes the thing simply look tacky instead of suspect. The only problem is that it would not be tamper proof.
If the wifi/underground device was used it seems the WiFi would have a hard time traveling. Perhaps it could use the ground
as a means of transmission or a wire attached to an underground copper water pipe. In my opinion doing so much work to
hide and protect the drive is silly for an IDE drive. What if it fails? I would use a RAID drive system so if one fails I dont have
to dig the thing up.
nbk2000 August 11th, 2006, 07:38 AM

A 'thin client' terminal for the user-interface, with the buried and boobytrapped computer operating as a server, with an
ethernet connection so there's no wi-fi traffic to be monitored.
I could even imagine the ethernet cable serving as the destruction initiator, because there's an unused wire pair in ethernet
cables, so simply installing an inline switch on that pair (N.O.) would close the destruct circuit to do the trick.
Or, you could make the wire-pair operate as an N.C. circuit that would detect when the ethernet cable has been disconnected
from the modified adaptor card, automatically triggering the self-destruct when the piggies disconnect your 'computer' from the
network (which is SOP). :p
Chaosmark August 12th, 2006, 03:31 AM

An expansion on cyclonite4's independent HD method: I read <a href=http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8903>an article</a>
where the author was recording how he turned his Ipod into a mini linux OS, as well as keeping his music playable. He merely
reallocated the required memory and installed linux. And who'd think to check an Ipod? Those stupid things are everywhere,
and I never even thought of anything like that before I read the article. Considering how much of a tech geek I am, I'm 99%
sure that the cops aren't gonna have a clue about it. Heck, their tech guys probably won't have a clue.
All you'd have to do is plug it into a computer and force a restart from the CD-ROM instead of the internal HD. Then when
you're done, you just unplug it and restart on the old HD.
Disposal? However you like, though the microwave sounds best. Fry the sucker!
Advantages:
*Cheaper to get your hands on than an entire new PC, or even just mini harddrives. A quick Ebay search for MP3 players with
5gb (more than enough space since we really aren't using it as much more than a front) gives a plethora of options for ~$50
*Easier disposal than said PC.
*Easier to conceal. Everyone and his dog seems to have one nowadays, and the cops probably won't be looking for or even
thinking that you'd have such a thing, though in some cases it'll be obvious (like when you're living in a cheap house, with
cheap clothes, with an expensive, top-notch Ipod sitting next to you)
*More space compared to a flash drive. Most USB's that I've seen have ~500 megabytes of memory, though some have more
*Will last longer than a flash drive since it uses an actual harddrive, not flash memory.
Disadvantages:
*More expensive than the flash drive. You get what you pay for...
*Might stand out as an oddity in your purchasing records. I expect you to handle that yourself. We're not here to lead you by
the hand.
*Minor discrepancies might get you caught if you're not careful. What, this Ipod is supposed to have 5gb, but only has 2?
Send it down to the guys in tech and see what they can find out.
You'll have to figure out the specifics of doing it for yourself, though I'm sure that article will be a good starting point. You
could have a more techy person do it for you, but then that's a witness that could give away the chirade if questioned. RTPB
Cover your arse! Play it smart and you've got something hiding on you that the cops won't suspect.
Yeah, we've got orders to keep an eye out for anyone with an Ipod...
Lewis August 14th, 2006, 06:00 PM

I keep the data on an external HD. Give me a few seconds I can render the
drive unreadable with my 16 LB sledgehammer ! It isn't that HARD ! Try
reading the disk after I've smashed it !
Problem with that, is that hard drives for some reason are built like tanks. I remember when I was younger taking a hammer
to one, and it took a while to get open.
What about strong acids? If one could facilitate a way to release even a mild one onto the disk, problem solved. It wouldn't
destroy the data instantly, but the more time the authorities spent analysing the HD, the longer it would have to eat away at
the contents.
c.Tech August 15th, 2006, 03:45 AM

What about strong acids? If one could facilitate a way to release even a mild one onto the disk, problem solved.
That has been discussed in another thread, here (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/water-cooler/4986-emp-hard-drive-

cleaner.html?highlight=acid).
Chris the great got good results using HCl.
A strong acid would easily lift the materials that a hard disc is made of, if it was aluminum it would destroy the whole disc.
Howstuffworks. (http://computer.howstuffworks.com/hard-disk2.htm)
The magnetic recording material on a cassette tape is coated onto a thin plastic strip. In a hard disk, the magnetic recording
material is layered onto a high-precision aluminum or glass disk. The hard-disk platter is then polished to mirror-type
smoothness.
rayman October 2nd, 2006, 08:44 PM

Using four stacked drives, empty two of them out, with the first drive being the controller for your self-destruct device, the
second drive is your thermite, with a shared data cable (used for thermite igniter) connecting the two.
The third drive is your working HDD and the fourth drive is a secondary HDD.
The Thermite will melt both drives.
Most modern motherboards will accept up to 8 hard drives so running out of space for CD drives and what have you is not a
problem.
How about some grammar to go with this good idea? NBK
using 3 / 4 drives
empty two out
top drive is the controller for your device

second drive is your thermite
shared data cable ( used for thermite igniter )
third drive is working HDD

fourth drive is secondary HDD
thermite will melt both drives
most modern mother boards will except upto 8 hard drives so running out of space for cd-roms and what have you is not a
problem
nmp2 October 9th, 2006, 07:47 PM

<a href="http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/" target="_blank">http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/</a>
useful program. recover my files now! :)
I've used this myself, and it works great. An alternate source is

http://www.heidi.ie/eraser/
A local shop that does drive recovery has told me, "Sorry, we just can't get anything coherent out of this", when I took then a
drive I accidentally "erased".
lemons April 8th, 2007, 09:57 PM

Testing some of these methods sounds like a great use for the pile of ancient harddrives I've got that are too small to be
useful otherwise.
I like the idea of using an external harddrive combined with good encryption. You could take it with you everywhere, and that
way the piggies couldn't clone it during a "sneak and peak" when you're not at home.
ChippedHammer April 13th, 2007, 02:17 PM
Ive tried a small lump of thermite (think coin sized) ignited on top of a hard drive inside a computer case. It totally destroyed
the drive and didn't exit the case.
Put it this way.... if the FBI are kicking down your door at 6am, whether they have your computer or not its going to be a long
day :)
Khalnath April 21st, 2007, 07:47 PM

A strong enough electromagnetic field WILL destroy all remnants of data on a hard disk. However, you are unlikely to be able
to generate a powerful enough field with improvised equipment. IIRC, the US Military standard for destroying HDs containing
sensitive data calls for a magnet powerful enough to bend the platters.
One thing you must always bear in mind when dealing with computers is cooling. That's the problem with encasing one in a
block of concrete. If they don't get airflow, it won't generate enough heat to set anything on fire... but it WILL generate more
than enough heat to cook ICs. I had a Cyrix CPU once that got so hot it fried my sound card. Hard drives need cooling too,
that's the problem that jumps out at me for the flowerpot solution. You could always go the liquid cooled route, though, and
put the heat exchanger outside your concrete block/flowerpot/etc.
I would like to note, though, that if you are trying to destroy evidence that you've been playing with explosives and
pyrotechnics, packing your computer case full of thermite or high explosives is probably rather counterproductive.
sdjsdj April 26th, 2007, 11:50 AM

Put it this way.... if the FBI are kicking down your door at 6am, whether they have your computer or not its going to be a long
day :)
Fair comment :rolleyes: . . .
Detonating any amount of a high explosive in close proximity to a drive is likely to completely destroy it -
It's hard enough to recover data from a well encrypted hard drive, so I think it's fair to say that even the NSA wouldn't be able
to recover a thing from sand-grain-sized fragments thereof.
akinrog April 27th, 2007, 03:16 PM

Instead of having a harddisk incendiary / shaped charge or any explosive / pyrotechnical mixture in or around any computer
equipment (thus the pig / goat kicking your door in), or of embedding a portable hard drive into concrete / safe, I prefer
installing a linux OS (preferably Debian) on a minimum 2 GB capacity USB flashdisk (which is formatted and encrypted) and
using that USB flashdisk for booting up a computer system which contains high capacity harddrives (which are also Ext3
formatted and encrypted).
It's possible to even put a grub (bootloader) password so in addition to encrypted harddrives / swap partitions, you shall also
use password to even to be able to boot the system. :D
With such a system, I really would like to see the forensic scientists trying to extract drive contents. :D
Shalashaska April 27th, 2007, 04:41 PM

Detonating any amount of a high explosive in close proximity to a drive is likely to completely destroy it -
Hmmm.
Figure that, at 100MB+/sq cm., how big a piece would it take for a single incriminating sentence to be recovered? A sliver the
size of an ant's eye?
An amount of explosive that is enough to sufficiently reduce the hard drive to dust sized grains, will probably do the same to
you. Personally, I would stick with incendiaries or electromagnetic fields and stray away from explosives.
nbk2000 April 27th, 2007, 05:23 PM

Much less explosive would be needed if, instead of a single charge on the drive, you had two charges on both sides of the
drive, that would be fired simultanously.
The shock from the two charges would impact each other inside the drive, shattering it quite thoroughly into dust. This
configuration is known as a 'Counter-Force' charge.
hatal April 27th, 2007, 07:03 PM

I think a high intensity electro-magnet built-in would have a destructive effect on the hard-drive data. Just push the button
and the magnetic field works its magic on the bits and bytes. It's also easy to verify and refine the details with an experiment.
The materials are'nt expensive (EMF generator, a crappy old hard-drive). It wouldn't be as much fun as watching the drive
burst out in flames and then melting in, but I think it would remove the evidence.
"A strong enough electromagnetic field WILL destroy all remnants of data on a hard disk. However, you are unlikely to be able
to generate a powerful enough field with improvised equipment. IIRC, the US Military standard for destroying HDs containing
sensitive data calls for a magnet powerful enough to bend the platters."
- A handy TV demagnitizer (with some extra power) is enough to wipe data, especially that this device would be directly
attached to the hood of a single hard-drive. What the US military does is probably an industrial scale procedure, like
destroying several cargo loads of electromagnetic data-carriers at one shot. Obiously they need a "pretty powerful magnet".
Shalashaska April 28th, 2007, 12:02 AM

Precisely simultaneous detonation would be tough though, since most people would be using a basic nichrome wire setup, and
a difference of milliseconds could make all the difference.
Khalnath April 28th, 2007, 03:36 PM

A handy TV demagnitizer (with some extra power) is enough to wipe data, especially that this device would be directly attached
to the hood of a single hard-drive.
Enough to wipe it, but maybe not enough to wipe all traces. Normal operation of the drive uses magnetic fields to erase data,
but it can still be recovered sometimes. The US Military spec calls for such powerful magnets because they are paranoid and
don't want there to be any chance of recovering anything. I'm thinking if you're having this conversation you're probably
thinking along the same lines.
FullMetalJacket April 28th, 2007, 11:57 PM

Other thing to remember about magnetic field wipes - Most HDDs have aluminium casings. Faraday'd!
Personally I'd just use a shaped charge on standoffs above my RAID. Sure, if they open it up they'll see it but the trick is to
have a secret switch that sets it off whent he box is opened unless you have your finger on the little part of the case.
You could build a touch-switch type arrangement so there's no surface evidence either.
Alexires April 29th, 2007, 05:32 AM

Also remember that to have an electro-magnet, you need to have electricity.
If the bacon cuts the power to your house, you're in a world of hurt then.
Personally I'd go with something that was a little more re-assuring.....like said shaped charge. You could always have the case
filled with a fair amount of your chosen smoke composition in it and when you fry the hard drives you can have it acting as a
smoke bomb as well.... Assuming that it is the pork coming.
Nothing is really fool proof. You just have to do the best you can and try and make it as hard as possible for them.
hatal April 29th, 2007, 05:41 AM

How about modifying the settings, a let the hdd spin out of control and into pieces? Too much evidence left? New drives got
preventive mechanisms? (and ofcourse, again no big-boom :o )
DONMAN April 30th, 2007, 03:18 AM

I was destroying a broken HD the other day, I removed one of the stickers on the outside of the HD and to my suprise I was
looking right at the platters of the HD. This was a Western Digital drive! I just removed a sticker! That was all that was
protecting the platters from the out side air.
So, if someone was to find said sticker on their own HD, that would be the best place to place some incendiary device.
ghost6303 May 31st, 2007, 01:09 PM

At last, I believe I have something to contribute that hasn't already been covered!
Several months ago I was doing some experiments on erasing old hard drives. I had a few drives that died but i needed to
make sure the info was unreadable.
First i tried some rifle rounds at 50 feet. This didn't give the "completely destroyed" appearance I was looking for. The platters
were only in a dozen pieces.
Thermite worked to finish those drives off but isn't very practical for a 'quick and easy' disposal so many are looking for.
But this came to me surfing the web one day- to make a simple induction coil around the drive. This would heat the drive
tremendously fast, to the point of being red hot, but would not be nearly as dangerous as thermite because there would be no
metal slag thrown all over the house.
http://www.ameritherm.com/PDFs/coil_design.pdf
All you need is a solid conductor, say- 1/4" copper tube, and a power source. I used a spot welder rectifier rated at 500amps
(9vAC) to power it (if you need instant and total destruction you might want a mig welder on its own circuit next to your
computer but that might look suspicious ;) )
I took the hard drive to be executed, and wrapped it in 1/4" cardboard before wrapping the copper tube around it. The
cardboard is used as a stand off between the metal drive case. I wound the tube 12 times around the length of the HD. There
is about an 1/8" space between the turns.
The first time it was fired the copper tube melted at one of the connection points. I think this was for two reasons; the jumper
cable used between the rectifier and the copper pipe was making contact over only a small area, and industrial induction coils
have liquid running through them to keep them cool.
Well I just happened to have a 3/8" pump and some plastic tubing handy and rigged it up to a bucket and into the ends of
the copper pipe. (I build water cooled computers for people with way too much money on their hands) Also use pure distilled
water and a good long length of plastic tube to avoid current running through the water and into your pump.
This time it wasn't the coil that melted, it was the hard drive. It took around 7 seconds before I saw the paint smoking off,
then another 4 seconds before it was on fire, then a pop when expanding gas caused the cover to break. It lasted 25 seconds
before the water in the tube boiled and split the PVC which is when I cut the power. If you just turn it on and leave it there will
obviously be even more destruction.
After the drive cooled for a few hours I opened it up. And not with a screw driver either, the rapid case expansion had broken
just about all of the screws. Inside, the platters looked like a stack of CDs put in an oven. They were completely deformed and
blackened and all the circuit boards had been completely incinerated.
This wouldn't be very hard to do to an internal hard drive. You can gut a UPS and stick the power source in there, the one I
used even ran on 120v so you can even take out the batteries and still have a visibly functioning UPS in case anyone ever
looks, the only thing you would need is two large gauge cables running to your computer. :rolleyes:
Also anyone a little computer savvy knows that some UPS systems have a USB interface to monitor power levels from your PC.
It would be extremely easy to rig up a little USB controled switch to activate the power source in the UPS. And once you have
that working its only another little program to allow remote activation, like through an email sent to your PC from a cell phone,
or any IRC connection.
Another idea, as mentioned, would be a thumb drive computer like the one here (http://www.bigbruin.com/reviews05/
thumbraid_1). Thumb drives being cheaper then dirt at the moment this is actualy a good idea. Check newegg.com they have
flash drives around $15 per gigabyte. A 12GB flash drive RAID array for around $100 isn't bad at all.
As long as you have a few thumb drives working as one big drive, and have that one drive PGP encrypted, without all of the
drives no one can decrypt anything. Especially when you throw each drive in a different lake, or give them to different people.
Even one smash of a hammer would irreversibly destroy all the electrical information stored on a flash drive.
webuyhouses June 1st, 2007, 12:30 AM

All you need is a solid conductor, say- 1/4" copper tube, and a power source. I used a spot welder rectifier rated at 500amps
(9vAC) to power it
Could you provide more details of the power supply you used?
I was under the impression that a induction heating coil needed a high frequency, or resonant L/C tank circuit for power. Or is
this what your spot welder supply is?
http://www.ameritherm.com/aboutinduction.php
Man Down Under December 28th, 2007, 05:10 PM

http://www.deadondemand.com/products/enhancedhdd/
A destruction technology is imbedded in the hard drive casing and can be initiated by as many as 17 remote triggers. Once
deployed, the data stored on the disks is destroyed beyond forensic recovery. The process is non-toxic, non-combustible and
does not cause any collateral damage to the other parts of the computer. The process is self-powered. In other words, the
drive does not need to be in the computer for the system to operate.
gaussincarnate December 28th, 2007, 08:25 PM

Induction coils, welders, plasma cutters, some inductive heaters (stoves, etc), and anything on aircraft run off of high
frequency AC. The first three run off of (I believe) 3-10kHz, the fourth one varies based on use, and the fifth runs on 460(?
)Hz.
For something as small as the components of a hard drive, even higher frequency is suggested, around 30kHz. Unfortunately,
very few take-out parts run at such a high frequency, but you could always just make up the circuit yourself.
If you want to have some fun with this, hook up a gigantic solenoid and beat the hard drive into a fine powder. Impractical?
Yes. Fun? Yes. Surprise the hell out of the cops? Yes. An all-around good package.
penguin6636 January 8th, 2008, 06:52 PM

How badly would a magnetron aimed at a HDD damage it? Would the metal casing of the drive shield the disks from the
radiation significantly?
rollie January 23rd, 2008, 09:13 AM

How badly would a magnetron aimed at a HDD damage it? Would the metal casing of the drive shield the disks from the
radiation significantly?
A magnetron? As in from a microwave? Yes it would be shielded, otherwise you'd be fried everytime you used your microwave
oven.;)
You thing the easiest solution would be a strong electromagnet.
megalomania January 26th, 2008, 04:37 PM

Microwave radiation would cause a current flow in the harddrive leading to damage of the electronic circuitry. Most of the
microwave energy would be reflected off the metallic cover and casing leading to little penetration to the platter. To avoid
damaging your magnetron you should add a microwave absorber, like a glass of water, unless you happen to be using a
waveguide system with an attenuator. The flowing electric current will generate heat, which can in time build up.
I don't have any specifics about the tan deltas of metals handy, but a microwave could possibly build up a very significant
amount of heat, assuming the magnetron does not give out first. If you make a simple box out of silicon carbide sharpening
stones, then surround that box with ceramic plates or brick (like from a kiln), a domestic microwave could melt the hard drive.
Silicon carbide is a very strong absorber of microwave energy at 2.45 GHz. There is an article in popular science about melting
metal in microwaves, reprinted on many blogs that you can find on google, and there is a company that sells a premade
ceramic lined silicon carbide based box for domestic microwaves (no price listed, a bad sign in my experience). I am too lazy
to look up the bookmarks since I have a few hundred unsorted links in my microwave bookmark collection at the moment...
Google is your friend.
Microwave furnaces are being used to melt steel in industry now. A carbide lined firebox the size of a harddrive inside a slightly
modified microwave (to seal off the airflow fan inside the cavity, possibly increase cooling to the magnetron) could reach a few
thousand degrees. You might need a rather high wattage microwave to actually melt or burn up a harddrive. I might be
building one...
EDIT: I have mercy after all.

http://www.imp.mtu.edu/information/microwave_JAN_04.htm about making steel in microwaves
http://www.thermwave.com/ The company that sells the microwave furnace box, the ThermWave. I should get a price quote
from them someday.
http://www.popsci.com/diy/article/2003-09/smelting-microwave The Popular Science article about melting metals quick and
dirty style (and cheap, in a hotel room microwave while on the road from stuff he bought at the corner store)
http://home.c2i.net/metaphor/mvpage.html The website that inspired the PopSci article, this site goes into a little more detail
for a permanent microwave furnace on the cheap.
Positron January 27th, 2008, 12:05 AM

This is an amazing read concerning data recovery from hard drives and silicon memory-storage devices:
http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec96/full_papers/gutmann/
For all of you that think that overwriting the existing data, and/or flip-flopping the bits works...think again. Because of the
advanced techniques detailed in the above link, the use of ANY software to destroy data at a minute's notice should be
entirely out of the question.
The best idea that I've heard yet to destroy data on a drive is total annihilation via thermite. It's messy and illegal, but it
most certainly would get the job done.
If you plan to use electromagnetism to destroy the data, you should do several TESTS and ANALYZE the results before actually
putting it into practice. And please share the results with us.
Interesting Story:
I used to send hard drive platters 50-75 feet into the air or so, using a 2.5kV 5uF capacitor from an old defibrillator unit, and a
10-turn flat coil made with 12-gauge copper wire from Romex. We'd just lay the platter on the coil (which was supported by the
concrete underneath it), and dump the capacitor into it via a bolt thrown across a makeshift spark gap.
PINNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGG. They made a really great sound, precisely like a bell going up down with doppler shift!! The
massive acceleration from every shot would physically fold the platter over, making it more aerodynamic, and increasing the
mileage :D
I'd be willing to bet that the pulsed magnetic field of THAT would work to destroy the data.
It would be simple to just lay the coil directly over the operating hard drive...internal, or external. Triggering the event to dump
the capacitor into the coil would be incredibly easy, requiring only the most available of consumer electronics.
Most chemical compositions are illegal, but capacitors & coils aren't. Get enough capacitors together, and I bet you could blow
that platter straight through the case of your computer.
Anyhow, like anything else (aside from thermite probably :D), it must be tested.
megalomania January 27th, 2008, 09:59 AM

Don't induction heaters use magnetic fields? I found a website once (can't find it in my links at the moment) that showed how
to build an improvised induction coil. I would think the combination of magnetic fields and heating would destroy a drive.
Those advanced forensic techniques require a lot of time and money to recover data from a wiped or damaged drive. For the
most par more time and money than cops or the fedgov have depending on who you are and what you are being investigated
for. Osama might get every man at every alphabet agency working on his drives, JimBob the identity thief will get a few
minutes of a computer forensic techs time. Drives are not infinite storage devices where every last bit of data can be
recovered. Often they can extract a percentage of the data, which is not necessarily a complete file, but bits and pieces of
different files.
Of course technology improves, and you drive just has to sit on the sidelines until the "automated scanning tunneling
microscopy drive reader" gets invented that can recover data at a few bits a second.
Positron January 27th, 2008, 10:26 PM

Good points Mega.
Induction heaters make use of large (50 to Tens of Thousands of Amps) AC currents flowing through a coil to generate a
powerful magnetic field around the coil. The magnetic field flips polarity (North/South in layman's terms) every time the AC
current changes direction.
What happens when you take a powerful magnet, and drop it straight down into a tube of aluminum, or copper?
Answer: The magnet falls through the tube very slowly. Why? Because the magnetic field from the magnet actually induces an
electric current in the metal tube, and this current sets up its own magnetic field that "fights" the externally applied field from
the magnet.
End result is that the magnet falls through it slowly, and the temperature of the metal tube goes up slightly, because of
electrical resistances in the tube turning the electrical energy into thermal (heat) energy. If you were to physcally push the
magnet up and down the tube very quickly; you would induction heat the tube!
Replace "little magnet" with "huge, high-frequency electromagnet", and replace "tube" with "workpiece"...and you have an
induction heater :cool:
Check out this heater on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZPgw2sTmNM

The ball of solder is the workpiece in this example.
Yeah, I imagine an induction heater would take care of a HDD. As always, a complete analysis would be necessary to be
absolutely sure.
sdjsdj January 29th, 2008, 07:29 PM

You might need a rather high wattage microwave to actually melt or burn up a harddrive. I might be building one...
Shop around, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. 1 KW microwaves are readily available, if not cheap.
In my opinion, power and tampering are more likely to be issues; you can't rule out intrusion at inconvenient hours, or the
possibility of them being bright enough to cut mains power.
How big a capacitor bank/car battery stack would it take to run a kilowatt of microwave (well over its rated output, since it'll only
be for one use and complete destruction is critical) for the thirty seconds it'll take to ruin a HDD platter?
megalomania January 29th, 2008, 09:25 PM

Ohh, 1kW will simply not do for my needs :) Megalomania's Microwave Melter will be a 6kW machine using multiple
magnetrons, and multiple magnetron electronics. This might end up as Special Project #2
Charles Owlen Picket January 30th, 2008, 08:23 AM

Government's have various data protection standards. I did a little hunt for this when this thread started and found out that
there are various goods and materials that are offered for protecting both written and electronic data. There are things like file
cabinets with very professional dual combination locks to data destruction programs and physical units.
If you do a search for: "data protection standards" & "data security standards, government" you will be surprised that there is
a whole industry selling HDD destruction units, etc. Some of them are exactly as I described: a solenoid-type crushing device
and another is a electro magnet clam-type unit. Interesting goods for tens of thousands of dollars. However they seem to
most all be low-tech..... I suppose there is no reason why a high-tech system wouldn't function as efficiently but there seems
to be an almost universal push toward the "hammer & shackle".
sdjsdj January 30th, 2008, 09:48 AM

Ohh, 1kW will simply not do for my needs :) Megalomania's Microwave Melter will be a 6kW machine using multiple
magnetrons, and multiple magnetron electronics. This might end up as Special Project #2
:eek:
That's going to be, ah, quite a machine.
I'm sure I don't have to tell you, but cooling something like that isn't going to be as simple as leaving holes in the case. And
please don't nuke yourself, that is rather a lot of power.:p
Hmm . . . keeping it in anaerobic conditions would be a pain (I don't think it can set without oxygen) but some kind of system
to inject the drive with high pressure, pre-mixed epoxy might do the trick. It's at least as strong as the platter, sets fast, and
produces a fair amount of heat in the process.
megalomania January 31st, 2008, 11:23 PM

I just noticed this thread is in the Chemistry section, and this has little to do with chemistry, so I am moving it to the
Detonation and Demolition section since it is about destroying something.
I will try water cooling my magnetrons with methods similar to water cooling computer CPUs.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > dB
Log in
View Full Version : dB
stanfield August 24th, 2001, 05:54 AM

How many decibels produce an explosion of C-1 (100 g) ?
Disturbed August 24th, 2001, 05:08 PM

W hy? are you trying to determ ine how loud you have to shout at it to ma ke it detonate or what?
stanfield August 24th, 2001, 06:42 PM

no, I would like to know how many decibels pro d u c e a n e x p l o s i o n . . .
see ya !
Jumala August 24th, 2001, 09:37 PM

I can not say if it is possible to messure a explosions shockwave in dezibel. It isnt a continuos sound, only a single wave.
This wave ha s a t r e m e n d o u s p r e s s u r e . I t c a n d a m age windows in some distance to the ex plosion.
So I think a shockwave has m any hundreds of dB.
Tony Montana August 24th, 2001, 09:44 PM

No No, I know this one,
It ta k e s o n e d e c i b e l t o m a k e t h e e x p l o s i v e ,
And another to screw the detonator in!
So it takes two decibels yeah stanfield?
See ya !

even alone in the desert (Sahara) without som e o n e n e a r y o u a n d without wind or something like that, you haven't 2 dB...
Lagen August 25th, 2001, 11:21 AM

It is really difficult to convert the values of pressure generated b y the shockwave to decibels, but this is my guess: It would be
103 dB at 10 0 m , 1 3 2 d B a t 1 0 m . T h e s e v a l u e s a r e o n l y a p p r o x i m ate, they assum e the detonation occurs in an absolutely void
space. Any reflections will m a k e t h e m bigger. 1 00g of your HE detonated in an enclosed area, like a room, tunnel etc. may
generate 140+ dB which is sufficient to break your eardrums.
Mr Cool August 25th, 2001, 11:34 AM

I was just about to point out that you haven't specified the distance.
I hate decibels, they're a stup id unit. So is the Richter scale, because IIRC if you go up one point on the scale the intensity is
m ultiplied by 10. I never saw the point of that, it just makes it m ore com plicated.

The distance ?
My plastic will be for a "m ission" but, m ore on this when I will take som e p h o t o a n d p o s t t h e m here...
(the distance will be relatively short...)
see ya !
Disturbed August 27th, 2001, 08:24 PM

Mr C o o l ,
Y e a , t h e R ichter scale does go up by ten. They certainly did a good job o f making those things overly com p l e x .
D o e s a n y o n e h e r e r e m e m b e r h o w d e c i b e l s a r e m e a s u r e d ? I k n o w it's som e sort of logarthymic sca le, where it doubles in
intensity for every 10Db. Is that right, or totally off?
Lagen August 27th, 2001, 09:40 PM

W ell that depends wh at quantity you have in m ind. Decibels are used not only in acoustics, but also in electrotechnics in a
variety of contexts. In acoustics you use them to either describe the intensity level or the level of acoustic pressure. For
intensity: LI=10.log(I/Io), where I and Io are intensities, Io=10-
12 W.m-2, for level of acoustic pre ssure Lp=20.log(pef/po ef).
Both of the scales give approxim ately the sam e results, as I=(pef2/ro*c). And you think that the
order of m agnitude increase with linear increase of decibels is just a useless com plication? It is just an attem pt to approxim a t e
the way your eyes and ears perceive the outer stim uli that differ in orders of magnitude. Sim ply sa i d : T o y o u a 4 0 d B s o u n d
feels just twice as loud as 20d B, while in fact it has 10 times more pressure and 100 tim e s m ore watts per unit area!
( O h m igod, hischool p hysics!)
Disturbed August 28th, 2001, 03:20 AM

Thanks for all the info Lagen
However, it d epends on which highschool physics class you take. If yours was anything like m ine, all we did was learn about
m omentum, acceleration, gravity, etc, and watched m ovies like 'top gun' and 'the invisible m an'.
Not really the best ed ucation in physics, unfortunately, although the teacher let m e com e in during m y free periods and work
on explosives http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/sm ile.gif
The only time I ever did anything involving decibels was in pre-calc. There's a chance stuff like that might come up in the
advanced calc I'm going to be taking in college shortly...
------------------
====
k e i n m itleid fur die m ehrheit

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > An interesting tim er
Log in
View Full Version : An interesting timer
chemwarrior S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2002, 04:15 PM

Ive discovered a high ly interesting timer. W hat it is is a mason jar that has a piece of m etal that is cut to fit snugly inside th e
jar, but will allow it to move with relative ease. The lid m ust be a plastic one that has had 2 nails punched through it. (You
connect the leads to it.) Once that part is done, then yo u get som e dried peas and place them in the jar. You then fill it with
s o m e water. Place the piece of metal on top of that then place the lid on it. the piece of m etal will contact the nail a n d c o m l e t e
the circuit. Im not completely positive if this will work(I got the idea from a friend) but it was interesting and I felt this was the
perfect place to put it up. Any ideas or comm e n t s o n h o w it could be m ade better would be appreciated.
mongo blongo S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2002, 04:40 PM

I suppose it could work but it's incredibly crude! You can never be sure of the exa ct tim e delay! W h a t h a p p e n s i f t h e r e i s a n
e m ergency that m eans you have to switch it off? The pigs could be near by or som ething and you won't know when it could go
off so you ca n't go near the device to switch it off.
chemwarrior S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2002, 04:43 PM

Actually, you can be relative sure of the time by figureing out the rate of expansion the peas take. I know its crude, but I
figure it could be of som e u s e when testing things and you dont want to wast a m ore valuable tim er.
A43tg37 S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2002, 10:33 PM

The only problem is that all peas will e xpand differently. Even within the sam e b a g , t h e e x p a n s i o n r a t e s c o u l d b e d i f f e r e n t , a n d
even if they were the same for one bag, using a different bag when the first was em pty, or even using different water
temperatures, could cause differences in expansion times. Probably not dramatically, but even a few seconds difference in
expansion could cause a lot of trouble in explosive tim er applications. It seems like a very unreliable tim er to m e , a n d I ' d
rather resort to a cheap electrom echanical time r (which is still wa y m ore relaible and predictable than the dried pea tim er) for
sim ple test applications. And if I was com p e l l e d t o m a k e a n e x p a n s i o n t i m e r , i n s t e a d o f p e a s , I ' d u s e s e v e r a l s t a c k e d - u p
s p o n g e s ( c e r t a i n k i n d s o f s p o n g e s - t h e o n e s u s i n g a s w i p e s p o n g e s o n m any soldering irons come to m i n d - t h e y e x p a n d
dramatically when they get wet, but do so at a steady enough ra te to be som ewhat predictable). Oh, and your friend probably
got this idea for a "dried pea tim er" from either the Im provised Munitions books files online or the terrorists' handbook or Jolly
Roger crapbook (yech-I hate to even mention the last two on here), and we all know how reliable those (the latter two) books
are.
hodehum S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 02:29 AM

Actu ally he m ay have g o t t h e i d e a f r o m C I A I m p r o v i s e d Sabo t a g e D e v i c e s ( p a g e 1 5 )
It says that in the case of dried peas it usually takes to expand usually ranges from to 2 hours to expand. Which is just far
to inconsistent for m y liking.
But I would have to agree with A43tg37 that there are far better alternatives available that a lot m ore accurate.
Mick S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 12:57 PM

well, given the purpose of a tim er. i don't think it would matter if coppers were around.
i m ean the whole idea of time r is so it detonates when your not there, and som e o n e e l s e i s .
f r o z e n p e a s s e e m s a little dodgy is m y b o o k .
m uch easier to use a small alarm clock and a 9v relay.
NoltaiR S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 02:34 PM

Though most of the HEs in crapbooks are really crap, m uch of the simple 'com m on sence' devices are credible... the reason
bein g that th ey are virtually always plaguarized procedures from arm y m a n u a l s a n d v a r i o u s o t h e r r e s e a r c h b o o k s .
But in any ca se, dried seed timers powered by osm o s i s a r e o n e o f t h e o l d e s t i d e a s i n t h e b o o k , a n d i n m y opinion are far too
crude and plain to be discussed in a forum of this caliber.
<sm all>[ September 09, 2002, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]</sm all>
xoo1246 S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 02:45 PM

I have read it in various m anuals too, and I wo uldn't use it unless nothing better was at hand. Very crude indeed.
sinstar S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 03:55 PM

I rem ember when I was just starting out, I would always use really shitty unreliable stuff like that, one time I e v e n u s e d t h a t
cloths peg delay(you know you use the jaws as electrical contacts and wrap solder around the legs of it)on a large cheddite
charge, its ju st a bit annoying having to sit around for like 20m inutes before it goes off, a nd if some technical problem accurs
you know that you ha ve to go and reset it(as opose to leaving it for some poor little kid to find).
NoltaiR S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 09:13 PM

I do, howeve r, like the idea that sinstar speaks of.. its another one that can be found in the crapbooks but when used for trip
wire ignitions, I find it to be very sim p l e y e t s o m ewhat perfect fo r the use in the im provise d battle field in which only the m o s t
basic of devices reign a s t h e m o s t d e v e s t a t i n g .
SATA NIC September 2 2nd, 2002, 10:34 PM

yeah, a little crude, especially by the standards that are usually upheld h ere, but you never know..... in some third world
country it m ay be quite useful.....
and i must say, it's one of m any assorted ignitor / im provised switch devices that pop up from tim e to time , b u t s o m e o f t h e m
a r e q u i t e u s e f u l . . . l i k e t h e s p o o n a n d c l o t h e s p e g o n e , i t d o e s m ake the perfect tripwire, especially when you have ration pack
spoons around....
but it can be said that with a little im agination, much better ways can be thought of... all you have to work out is how to get two
wires to touch..... :rolleyes:

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > The use of electric car starters as a detonator.
Log in
View Full Version : The use of electric car starters as a detonator.
chemwarrior March 2nd, 2003, 10:29 PM

This would be a somewhat easy way of making a remote controlled detonator that would be extremely reliable. Also, remote car starters are fairly cheep. The main
cost when one buys one is the installation, but a simple comment such as, Oh, I have a friend who can install it for me., would eliminate any possible questions. The
more expensive one, such as those that can be used to around five miles or so would be useful in creating distractions as you perform the job. Or, if you didnt want to
spend quite that much, you could substitute one of lesser range.
As soon as I get a chance, I will make a diagram of how it would have to be set up. Or, if someone who has a little extra time, and is willing to make a diagram and post it, I
would be grateful.
Sorry if my thoughts seem a bit jumbled, but I just thought about this on the spur of the moment.
BANG_BANG July 19th, 2003, 06:14 PM

To make a electronical blasting cap
you get some wire and cut it into 15cm lengths

get the two ends and get some Nichrome wire thinner the better, you can get this wire at your. local electronics store, If you can't fing it just use the tungsten out of a light
bulb, cut a 4cm length of it connect one end to one end of one of the wire and then wrap it around the end of the two wires, then connect it other end of the nichrome to the
end of the other wire now get some 10mm aluminium tube and cut a 4cm length. beat down one end of it.
Now fill the aluminium half fill with your chosen base charge then the rest up with your primary.
insert the wire into the tube and use builders bog to fill the top of some other thing like that maybe knead it would be the best.
if you want pics sorry i don't have much but ill see if i can get some
zeocrash July 19th, 2003, 07:38 PM

yeah yeah we all know how to make a blasting cap,
what chem warrior is trying to suggest is adapting an automatic car starter into a remote control for detonating a explosive device from long distance.
there are 2 advantages of using an automatic car starter over another remote control, these are the size and the lack of interferance.
automatic car starter remotes are very small, no one wants to lug around a set of carkeys the size of a laptop. this means that your remote control can also easily be concealed
about your person.
automatic car starters are also insensitive to interferance, no one wants a car that starts and cuts out, whenever some one gets a phone call.
kingspaz July 19th, 2003, 07:44 PM

BANG_BANG, enough of the post whoring. this has bugger all to do with the discussion of makeing electric blasting caps. due to you post being in the wrong section its not just
useless but utterly useless. now read around and learn to post something we may not know...and in the CORRECT topic of course.
nbk2000 July 20th, 2003, 11:04 AM

Death for BANG_BANG for the crime of raping the english language. If you can't put together a coherent sentence, there's no future for you here. :p
(I got this weird sense of deja vu all of a sudden ;))
yt2095 July 20th, 2003, 11:31 AM

Chemwarrior,
i don`t know what you pay for these car starter kits, but a device i`ve used to great success costs simple pocket money and is trigereable at ANY distance.
(now i`m hoping that`s there`s noone on here that thinks i`m a terrorist `cause i aint! i`m just an experimenteer into pyro and special effects, i deplore these ragheads and
teeny-bombers)
buy yourself a pager, the vibrating sort (probably cost you about 15-20 ($20-30)
open it and cut the wires to the motor with the eccentic on it (the vibrating bit) extend these and use as the low voltage high current (high enough for a 1.5v mini bulb to light)
supply.
the rest you already know.
advice: don`t buy one second hand, make sure no1 has the number, and use it in receive mode for a few day to note when or if you get "news/sports alerts on it and what
time you get them. connect the detonator wire last before you leave.
the beauty is that you can use your mobile fone at the other side of a feild, make a call and *BOOM* :)
it`s just an idea, and may prove a bit cheaper than your car remote :)
all the best!
Edit: and also because of it`s heavy filtering and EDSN false triggering is as equaly unlikely as you car kit :)
nbk2000 July 20th, 2003, 10:59 PM

Modified pager detonators are old hat.
The problem with a pager is that anyone could accidently dial the number at any time. A coded remote is much less likely to have that problem.
Also, if you're not able to retrieve the pager before piggies arrive (if they're called), then you'd be in a shit pickle, because they can trace back the unit to the pager company,
which then tells them exactly when the page was sent and what number it was. This information then goes to the Telco, who can tell them what number made the call, and
who owns it, and that's your ass right there. :)
Besides, is a range of several miles inadequate? ;)
grendel23 July 21st, 2003, 03:15 AM

Getting a remote car starter to work may be a bit more interesting than it appears at first, they are microprocessor controlled and look for certain inputs to be correct before
they will start the car.
A more economical and easier possibility would be a garage door opener. These receivers: http://www.stanley-garage-opener.com/stangardooro17.html are on sale for $10,
have 10 bit encoding to make unintended operation less likely, and run on 24 volts, 3 9-volt batteries.
One downside would be a short range, a longer antenna on the receiver and transmitter would help.
Another consideration would be the receivers behavior at power up; it may pulse the output when power is applied, I would put in a safety switch and an LED to
visually confirm status of output before going hot.
A reasonably safe remote controller with a cost on the receiving end of under $15 could be useful.:D
static_firefly July 21st, 2003, 03:58 AM

Iv often wondered why terrorist dont use remote controled devices inside buildings so if the cops raid the building, someone on the out side, maybe watching the live news
could make the call to the mobile and detonate the charge. Like a failsafe even if the cops raid the building and take out all the targets the device will be detonated anyway.
Anyway with the car starter, does there need to be a clear line of sight? Such a device would also then need to be placed out in the open.
Tuatara July 21st, 2003, 06:19 AM

You don't need LOS, but you will lose range . You're only going to get 100-150m anyway.
@Grendel23: Bigger is not necessarily better with antennas. This might have been true in the old days, listening to AM on the 1MHz band (wavelength ~ 10km !). Most of
these remotes run UHF on 304MHz or 433MHz. A 1/4 wave antenna for 304MHz should be close to 24.6 cm long. Add a couple of cm and it becomes a 280MHz antenna -
useless for 304MHz.
Anthony July 21st, 2003, 03:42 PM

Some of you guys might want to check out this thread if you haven't already read it: http://roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1737
Efraim_barkbit July 21st, 2003, 06:52 PM

About the pager system:
if this system was to be used, you could buy a new sim card for your cell phone, the type wich you dont have to subscription on, just buy special receipt with a code. then it is
no way the number can be connected to your person.
but the risk of people dialing the wrong number will of course always be there.
Macgyver July 25th, 2003, 11:04 AM

Originally posted by Efraim_barkbit
About the pager system:
if this system was to be used, you could buy a new sim card for your cell phone, the type wich you dont have to subscription on, just buy special receipt with a code. then it is
no way the number can be connected to your person.
but the risk of people dialing the wrong number will of course always be there.
One more thing. If you use your own mobile phone, they can also cross reference the phones IMEI code and see which SIM cards have been used in that phone, and BAM,
busted again.....
You need both a phone and sim that will never be used again to be 100% safe.... Trust me, I've worked with telecom stuff....
yt2095 July 25th, 2003, 11:28 AM

Quite true, IMEI or ESN (Electronic Serial Nubmer) is broadcast from all fones, perhaps a stolen one, or a legal one bought under a different name either second hand or from a
shop (shops may have vidi cams though?)
when I originaly wrote the post I was thinking along the lines of having the pager in intimate contact with the device, negating much of the possibilty of tracing it. I personaly
used to use my mobile and a pager for rocket launches and mini feild tests because it looked kind of neat to speed dial a number, say a few words, wait a few secs and
Whoosh or *Boom*.
yeah ok, it`s kinda kewlish I admit, but it looked good :)
originaly I was thinking along the lines of a payfone from anywhere in the world, I can`t be 100% certain but I may have either seen it in a movie or on the news, and if it
wasn`t a pager, I remember thinking that a pager would be better. AHA I remember now, it was about 8 months ago on the news, somewhere in the middle east where they
used mobile fones in car bombs! that was it!
anyway, as NBK has already stated there`s still a risk of that "sorry, wrong number" BOOM!
probably not such a good idea then :)
knowledgehungry July 25th, 2003, 11:40 AM

I like the idea of a pager for more evil uses. Set the device at your local police station, city hall, federal building,IRS headquarters, abortion clinic, or whatever you have a
grudge against, take a trip to Mexico make a phone call and your safe. If you really want to be 100% safe go to Libya or North Korea as was mentioned in a different thread.
yt2095 July 25th, 2003, 11:56 AM

a Mosque or Black Power meeting, a local gay club (if you wanna be seen in such a hive of debauchery) :D
knowledgehungry July 25th, 2003, 12:01 PM

I would have said that, but its easier to let them kill each other. And actually the black power people are not half as bad as the thugs, at least they are somewhat educated, of
course i hate the fact that the pretend to have something to be proud of, when all they did was let themselves be enslaved by the white man. Mosques is a great idea, give
em a taste of their own medicine, it would be even better if you made it appear as an accident that occured while those dirty ragheads were planning their next act of terror,
thus increasing anti-muslim sentiment rather than increasing symapthy for the poor oppressed minority.
yt2095 July 25th, 2003, 01:59 PM

Chermwarrior,
Re: your 1`st post... it would also (like a pager be back trachable) in the code ROM.
how about setting up a simple repeater :D
buy 2 of `em! one left localy at your blast site (within 5 kliks) and a triger setup (within 5 kliks of that) forget the fact that you could double your effective distance, that`s just
gravy :)
think of it being ENTIRELY untracable! :D that`s just Excellent! :)
a bit like the repeaters in HAM radio, sure they MAY get the detonator and Maybe the trigger sender. but NOT the repeater or you!
perhaps even being 1 Km from the site when you trigger to your repeater mirror 5Km away would be too incredible and unpredictable (seemingly stupid enough) to be
overlooked.
just a thought (forgive spelling, I`m in a rush)
FireBomb July 26th, 2003, 12:54 AM

OK well I dont know if this helps but I just though of it and checked it out at my local wal-mart gona check some other places for it too. ANyway while at wal-mart I saw some
wireless doorbell chimes and our of curiosity i looked at the boxes for them. One that perticularly cought my attention was the most expensive one they had for $29.99 US. It
has a 130' range but what realyl cought my eye was that it has a total of 130 programable channels to preven cross interferience from other units.
Anyway I know you can slightly increese the range of one of these somewhat but my question is how much could you amplify the range and also would it still have to be LOS
or what. I have very very little knowlege of electronics so I'm asking you guys as several of you have extensive knowlege in this field.
Tuatara July 26th, 2003, 06:49 AM

Hmmm, 1:130 odds of unexpected detonation - I wish lottery tickets came with odds like that:D
Very little electronics experience eh? Well then you'd be much better off simply going and buying something else that had the range you want. Save yourself a lot of time,
frustration, cash, and soldering iron burns. Even those of us with the knowledge will often take that route.
zeocrash July 26th, 2003, 07:52 PM

the only use i have seen for remote car starters is for people who want to avoid being killed by car bombs, how ironic ;)
nbk2000 July 27th, 2003, 06:39 AM

A properly made car bomb isn't going to explode simply because someone turns on the ignition. It'll wait till the vehicle is at speed and making a turn, THEN explode, resulting
in fiery crash at high speed. :) Much less survivable that way. :D

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Detonator Shell Bodies
Log in
View Full Version : Detonator Shell Bodies
EventHorizon August 8th, 2001, 04:29 PM

I've been reading a lot of the posts throughout the forum and notice many different materials for bcaps from Al, brass, paper, to tubeing/hose. I'd like to get see some pics of
these as I beleive I have a cheap and incredabley professional looking bcap body, but I'm alw ays open to improving the idea. BTW, the bodies are extremely w ater resistant
when configured for fuse and totally w aterproof w hen assembled as electric. HMTD caps assembled some 1y+ are still in perfect condition!
EventHorizon August 10th, 2001, 10:25 AM

Ummm, no takers on this one ehh? http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frown.gif
mongo blongo August 10th, 2001, 04:33 PM

I aint got no pics but my electric bcaps look kick ass too.They don't look home made.
They are made from 9v Duracell batteries, yes the square ones. Inside them are about 6 other batteries. They have a plastic top which can be removed with a thin screw driver.
I wash all that carbon shit out and fill them w ith 1/4 full of a booster usually Picric Acid and about 1.4g of Lead Azide. I stick my rocket ignitor (these work brilliant), thin layer of
blue tack, layer of wood filler and then the plastic top is pushed back into the body (with the wires going through the hole in the top) and glued with cryanoacryalate (very good
glue).
It should then look quite profesional.
EventHorizon September 1st, 2001, 11:46 PM

Lets see if this link works.
http://ww w24.brinkster.com/eventhorizon308/capbody-s.jpg
[This message has been edited by EventHorizon (edited September 01, 2001).]
Anthony September 2nd, 2001, 08:15 PM

Copy and paste this URL into your browser to view the picture:
http://ww w24.brinkster.com/eventhorizon308/capbody-s.jpg
Cricket September 2nd, 2001, 08:33 PM

Impressive. Very nice looking. The only problem I could see w as that it was glass (or plastic) and that isn't very strong. But unless you are using ANFO, it probably won't matter.
------------------
"You w ill not be taught the knowledge you seek, you must teach yourself." - Megalomania
EventHorizon September 3rd, 2001, 01:30 AM

Anthony,
I meant the IMG tag, sorry. I'm a newbie at more than just energetic materials. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif
Cricket,
They are plastic, .022" walls and provide all the confinement 1g HMTD, 2g MF, or 1g MHN/.3g HMTD need. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif
Of course in the dream world that is. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif
wantsomfet September 3rd, 2001, 07:37 PM

this one is glass, 8mm inner diameter, ca 10 cm long.
http://internettrash.com/users/altreal/grfx/ScanImage02.gif
------------------
for best catfood visit:
kangaroooo.cjb.net (http://kangaroooo.cjb.net)
EventHorizon September 4th, 2001, 07:45 PM

Thats nice looking too. What is used for the igniter?
Mine are are 8mm OD X 45mm long.
wantsomfet September 5th, 2001, 12:33 AM

It's a SAFEX SA-0 igniter (for pyro-fx). 1,4 Ohm, min. 0,3 A, better 0,8 A current. Similar to rocktet igniters, but waterproof & more reliable...
------------------
kangaroooo.cjb.net (http://kangaroooo.cjb.net)
10fingers September 5th, 2001, 02:04 AM

Very nice. Another thing I found works well for an ignitor are those miniature christmas tree bulbs. You need to open the end of the bulb by putting it on a wet grinding wheel
and then put som BP inside so it's in contact w ith the filament.
Anthony September 5th, 2001, 04:42 PM

I just put 1/4" - 3/8" of nichrome wire across the ends of some tw in core cable and tape it into a lenght of Al tube of pressed explosive.
They aren't pretty but they do the job and they cost virtually nothing.
Mr Cool September 5th, 2001, 04:53 PM

Anthony (or any other UK people), ww w.ribbands.co.uk (http://w ww.ribbands.co.uk) sell ignitors, 16 for 20 but they look very good. Just say they're for rocketry. Those
orange strike markers look fun too!
ALENGOSVIG1 September 5th, 2001, 08:00 PM

EventHorizon: are those plastic casings by any chanvce the housing for those bannana smell repeirator check ampules?
BoB- September 5th, 2001, 09:04 PM

I've been w ondering lately if Lead Styphanate could serve as a primary explosive in homemade caps, Then the explosive could be quite simply dissolved and removed from
primers instead of having to synthesize your own primary.
EventHorizon September 5th, 2001, 09:47 PM

Alangosvic1,
No, they are handmade from plastic shipping tube. I made a form and tool to close the end off...just heat, insert in form, press with tool. Nice and neat and water/airtight.
The bridge is 28gauge nichrome w ire turned around a 1/16" rod. It takes a lot of current but I like it that way.
On 300' of 18gauge wire and a 12V source its almost imperceiveable thats its not instantaneous.
[This message has been edited by EventHorizon (edited September 05, 2001).]
oryp69 July 4th, 2002, 08:22 PM

as a cap casing, i think that a spent bullet shell would make a nice blasting cap...you could put juts about anything in it and they are brass, which is what a lot of caps are made
out of
i haven't tried using one yet, but i may sumtime in the future
DBSP July 4th, 2002, 08:59 PM

I've been using rifle shells of and on for some time now. They are good but the draw backs are the risk of shrapnell and the most shells are necked which means that pressing is
a bit hard, there are straight shells like 458 WM, but those are rare and expensive if you where to buy them. You can off course cut the neck off but that wastes space. As soon
as I get conc HNO3 I'll start using RDX as a base in my caps with either HMTD or DDNP as primary.
I use both nichrome and fuse to ignite the primary, which one depends on the task.
xoo1246 July 6th, 2002, 05:09 AM

I get plastic electrical cable shielding pipes inexpensively in different diameters, they are ideal for HTMD.
Microtek July 9th, 2002, 06:06 AM

DBSP: Have you actually made DDNP? If so, I would very much like to hear how you did it and w hat kind of nitrite you used.
DBSP July 9th, 2002, 08:25 AM

No I haven't made any DDNP yet, I'm lacking the NaNO2 (and S but that's not a problem) I'll try to order NaNO2 from a chem supplier soon, Is it regulated in any w ay?

Microtek, i think i w ill be attempting DDNP this weekend at some point. if i have any success i'll email you.
Ropik April 3rd, 2004, 05:07 PM

ANYONE: For the sake of the holy safety, do NOT put HMTD into brass casing. This primary react violently w ith many metals, including brass. Maybe you can use some kind of
plastic liner, such as straw or something, but i think it is much more better use plastic BC bodies for HMTD. Excellent ones can be bought at pharmacy, I don't know for what
they are used, but it doesn't matter. They are tough, 8mm OD, 5 cm long and with airtight cap.
Boomer April 5th, 2004, 01:30 PM

What about high-grade stainless (food grade)? I once used stainless steel tubing as cap body with HMTD (mistaken for AP). They w ere stored 1/2 year and still worked. They
did NOT auto-detonate, but on the other hand I did not bang them around to test for increased sensitivity. They were finally disposed :D by strapping them to a booster charge,
as I did not like handling them any longer.
Ropik April 7th, 2004, 09:01 AM

When steel is really stainless(w hich food grade supposed to be), it should not be problem. Worst is copper, I read somew here. And one friend of mine manufacture brass BC
with HMTD (I warned him... no dice) and put it on the shelf... Two days later, he attempted to handle it, but the BC detonated after very slight movement. Without a pair of
welder's gloves, I think my friend can count only to nine or eight on his hands now :( .
HMTD react badly(this list is not from my head, I read it somewhere): lead, tin, iron, brass, bronze, zinc, steel, aluminum, antimony and probably any alloy of this metals(I
probably forgot some metals). Aluminum is best of these(I think), but every metal w hich is in contact w ith HMTD should be protected.
Stainless steel should be fine, when there are not any scratches, w hich allow HMTD contact the "humble steel"(when the stainless is only coating on plain steel thing, often on
food grade thingies).
In a pinch, suitable BC bodies can be improvised by rolling strong paper soaked with glue on 1/4" dowel and let dry(remove the dowel before drying, please, otherwise the
dowel and paper stick to one solid section). One end is sealed with suitable plug(sawdust/wood glue slurry works well), BC is loaded(you can not press primary too much to this,
because you most probably tear the paper pipe), electrical igniter or fuse is gently put inside and the other end is sealed. You can also make some extra strong caps when you
soak the paper tube with methylnitrate... NO, is was only joke :), do NOT try it.
This design(without soaking, probably) w as used in Russia in 90'.
Boomer April 8th, 2004, 10:19 AM

It w as a solid stainless pipe of 5mm inner dia / 0.5mm walls, 40mm long. They are used for drink coolers, and coke etc. is quite corrosive, that is w hy they may also be so
resistant to HMTD. :)
Another thing I noticed is that the black (oxidised) steel w ires in bulbs must be quite resistant too, as well as the tungsten filament. I once assembled EB caps from light bulbs,
and they still work after 4 month now. I have seen other compositions eat up both the wires and the filament in that time.
Paper cap bodies have the disadvantage that you can hardly press the base charge, giving much less pow er. I press the first half of the base charge (MHN/PETN etc) quite hard
(d> =1.5) using a vice, the second half with a press to d=1.2, then add a little mix of secondary/primary (e.g. MHN + AP 1:1) pressed by hand to approx. d=1. On top of this
comes the hand pressed primary plus bridge wire or fuse.
And w elders gloves do NOT save your fingers if a cap goes off! The 1 million+ PSI detonation pressure cleanly cut through bones, severing the fingers. Remember they even cut
steel! I very much doubt that a little leather would help your fingers much. I must know, typing with only 7 right now! :( Better build yourself a remote press, it takes two hours.
Ropik April 9th, 2004, 07:11 AM

HMMM... So it was not welders gloves, because they have thin metal sheeting on fingers and on the palm(maybe friend's addition)... I use a remote press(you are right about
it, Boomer. I suggest the construction from TM 31-210), and I also cut BC bodies(when I make them from some plastic tubing etc.) to lenght about 3 inches for keeping my
fingers off the charge inside.
al93535 May 10th, 2004, 03:13 AM

I use a half section of a bic pen. Works perfect, and you get 20 casings for $1. Plus sides are it is plastic, relatively strong is exactly 1/4" inside diameter. Here is a picture:
http://geocities.com/al93543/det.jpg
I used to like electrical ignition, its all I used, but now I love visco fuse ignition.
matjaz May 10th, 2004, 03:52 AM

You can also make some extra strong caps w hen you soak the paper tube w ith methylnitrate... NO, is w as only joke , do NOT try it.
Seriously, I tried that w ith water glass (sodium silicate solution). It makes the tubes a lot stronger and also more waterprof (rainproof, but not for immersion, though).
rangegal August 8th, 2007, 12:22 AM

When I first made AP I filled a .17 shell with it and crimped in a fuse just for the hell of it. The small neck almost perfectly fits my fuses, and only need to be crimped a little. I
never used it for anything though.
I've only made 3, but I use some tiny pieces of brass pipe I have left over from an odds and ends package at the hardw are store. I actually had to glue 2 smaller pieces
together to get a nice sized cap though. I packed the end with w ater putty, packed it with AP and glued a primed (with acetone evaporated AP on the filament) "grain of wheat"
light bulb (that I broke the glass off of- be careful not to fuck up the filament) in the end. I plan to make some picric acid from aspirin soon and use that as a booster for a more
powerful cap.
A "grain of wheat" bulb similar to the ones I use. (I used all of mine)
http://ww w.budgetrobotics.com/shop/images/299.jpg
And the finished electric det. cap. Sorry that its so blurry.
http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/1026/dscf3212mediumsmallyn8.jpg
I'm gonna try that 9 volt battery idea. I just opened one up (jesus christ are they a pain in the ass to open with a pocket knife). HOLY CRAP! I just tried to pry off the end of
one of the little cylinders inside it so first I pulled out w hat looks like a push pin (the anode I guess). When I got it all the way out it went "POP!" and shot across the room... not
dangerous or anything but it scared the crap out of me. Ill post a picture w hen I finish them. Thanks for the idea.
rangegal August 24th, 2007, 08:12 PM

Anybody know what happened to the picture of my detonator?...
nbk2000 August 25th, 2007, 05:16 AM

What happened to it is that the URL you used doesn't work. :rolleyes:
mike16 September 7th, 2007, 03:33 PM

Hello all :) ,
I roll up aluminium Coke cans for my cap bodies:
http://http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/?action=view&current=Picture046.jpg (http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/?
action= view&current= Picture046.jpg)
And:
http://http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/?action=view&current=Picture048.jpg (http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/?
action= view&current= Picture048.jpg)
In the second picture, you see one end of the cap sealed with anti-static selotape with the AP pressed inside, the other end is left open for the nichrome ignitor.
They are 9mm wide with about 3 grams of vice pressed AP inside.
Cya!
fiknet November 17th, 2007, 10:14 AM

Just thought I'd share my dealings with making caps, one of the main problems that I underestimated is that they are so small and fiddly so they often present problems with
spillages, holding and pressing as I never have direct contact with the cap full of primary.
What I do is make a set of cardboard tongs, this takes about 30 seconds and involves two strips of thick cardboard laid on top of each other and taped together firmly at the
base, this allow s them to be pulled apart at the other end and an empty cap to placed in and held firmly while pressing, without your hands being anyw here near them, plus
they don't propose the shrapnel risk of metal or thick plastic tongs.
tay1392 January 13th, 2008, 01:40 AM

Hello All, I personally have had great success with my .17 round Caps. they are small, but w ork great!
Here's a couple pictures for you all.
This is when the AP w as pressed in the .17 shell.

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f340/tay1392/IMG_0024.jpg
I then put these into an old brass Pen tube.

Here's after the detonation.. or w hat I could find of it!

rangegal January 14th, 2008, 10:15 PM

I used .17 shells once too, but I had fuse thick enough that I could just slip it down the neck of the shell.
You should use some kind of more powerful base charge though, such as ETN, NG, or Picric acid (what seems to be the favorite boosters around here). When I detonate a 22.
shell full of nitroglycerin (.5 grams) it breaks the shell into sand sized peices, which realy shows the difference between AP and NG.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > How Do I detonate ? W hat are
blasting caps? - Archive Thread
Log in
View Full Version : How Do I detonate? What are blasting caps? - Archive Thread
Anthony March 5th, 2003, 05:46 PM

-A-
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 98
From :
Registered: JAN 2001
posted February 01, 2001 12:06 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi. There are lot's of info on how to m a k e e x p l o s i v e s , b ut I can't find any on how to detonate them . For exam ple if I want to
d e t o n a t e R D X w h a t s h o u l d I d o ? . I a l s o r e a d s o m e t h i n g about blasting caps, but I am not from the US so I don't know what
these are and probably don't have acces to the m h e r e . W h a t a r e t h e m ?.
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
From : V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a
Registered: NOV 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well, you take a bann a n a , m a s h i t u p , a n d f i l l a p i p e a n d fuze it, then yo u have a kewl blazting Kap, yeah m an.
Do a fucking search you dunm bass, there is info about m a k i n g t h e m a t m y site..im not going to give you the link cause i
wanna see if you can figure it out
------------------
Explosives Archive
MasterMayhem
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 84
From : Norway
Registered: OC T 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll moonwalk up and down your ass if you don't shut the fuck up! God Dam n kewlbombers...
blackadder
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 313
From : L o n d o n
Registered: DEC 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, I feel like shit right now as I have a severe m igrane, and the last thing I want to see when I go on the forum i s s o m e
igno rant fuck who doesn't kno w shit. This m a y s e e m harsh, but it seems that you have com e f r o m T O T S E , a n d f r o m your
n a m e "-A-" I'm a s s u m ing it stands for Anarchy, which is a major sign of a kewl bomber. You posted this in the High explosives
section, it should be in low explosives.
You will find that m any people on this forum will detest you, if you don't snap out of that kewl bom ber shit now.
High explosives, in order to blow up well, have to be not only heated up, but m ust undertake a vio lent shock produced by a
detonator. The violen t shock from t h e d e t o n a t o r b r e a k s t h e b o n d s i n t h e atoms apart, releasing m uch energy - the explosion.
Explosives like AN (am monium nitrate, NH4NO 3) contain very high amounts of nitrogen, and nitrogen is a triple bon d e d a t o m ,
the bonds are very strong, so when they break apart, they release loads of energ y. Certain detonators have different
strengths, as Am m o n ium nitrate needs a #8 detonator, i think. Anyone correct me if I'm wrong with the above stuff.
[ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y b l a ckadder (edited February 01, 2001).]
Microtek
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 194
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that 'A's post sounds rather kewl, but m aybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Afterall, if he is u nfam iliar
with the english language, it is possible that he knows what a detonator is but doesn't con nect it with blasting caps.
I know it took me a while to figure it out, and my english is quite good.
Morrigan
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 81
From : T h e N e t h e r l a n d s
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but still it would be dam n easy to figure out how H.E are being detonated en how a blasting cap works, even if he lives
in China. Just start with an encycloped ia and work your way up I d sa y.
frostfire
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 266
From :
Registered: SEP 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well,
h a r s h c o m m ent m ight drive vandalism......
anyway, A....just browse through this forum and check e very link under certain poster..
I would recomm end NBK or ALENGO SVIG1...
Mind the hostility, we had a hard tim e differing a newbies and a kewlbies

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > H2O in the air m a k i n g e x p l o s i v e s
m ore dangerous
Log in
View Full Version : H2O in the air making explosives more dangerous
phyrelord S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2001, 11:21 PM

I was thinking which in itself is scary, a nd i cam e up with the idea that air can com press because it's a gas, however water
c a n n o t b e c a u s e l i q u i d s h a v e a n i n d e f i n a t e s h a p e b u t a s p e c i f i c v o l u m e. So my idea was to m ake a tube filled with water, pla ce
a charge at the bottom which will launch the water into the air in a fine spray. The water then pushes the air out of the room
a n d a s e c o n d c h a r g e i s s e t o f f m ultiplying the force because the water doesn't com press any. just a though t it would have to
be done on a massive scale in order to work though.
------------------
W inseln Sie fr mich
mongo blongo S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2001, 12:52 AM

I think i know what you are trying to get at but the amount of air pushed out of the room will be equal to the volume of gas
produced by the charge. The only effect the water have would be decreasing the amount of air in the room to begin with but no
difference to the am o u n t p u s h e d o u t o f t h e r o o m .
(I think)
W ater can't be com p r e s s e d b e c a u s e t h e m olecules are too close t o g e t h e r u n l i k e a g a s .
------------------
I dig explosives
Explosives dig m e.....
one day a nice hole 6 ft under.
Jhonbus S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2001, 02:56 PM

M o n g o B l o n g o is correct. There may be a small (tiny) effect because the water will increase the overall density of the contents
of the room , meaning transmission of energy will be m ore efficient, but it would have no discernible effect.
------------------
A physicist can m a k e a b i g g e r e x p l o s i o n t h a n a c h e m ist ever did
http://www.geocities.com/jhon_bus/
Anthony S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2001, 05:41 PM

"Water can't be comp ressed b e c a u s e t h e m olecules are too close together"
T h e m o l e c u l e s i n s o l i d s a r e e v e n c l o s e r together, so why are solids comp ressible and not liquids?
Or d o you just remove/compress air/gases trapped in the solid?
------------------
"Shit happen s. Get a fucking helm et"
Jhonbus S e p t e m b e r 1 8th, 2001, 10:32 PM

Both solids a nd liquid s can actually be com pressed, but only a *tiny* fraction of the amou nt by which a gas can be
compressed.
------------------
A physicist can m a k e a b i g g e r e x p l o s i o n t h a n a c h e m ist ever did
http://www.geocities.com/jhon_bus/
oryp69 July 4th, 200 2, 08:15 PM

I think it is p ossible to compress solids, because the way a nuclear weapon works, is that the pluto nium core is compressed
into a critical mass ca using a chain rea ction or som ething, so it m ust be possible to com p r e s s s o l i d s t o s o m e d e g r e e .
Edit: Never abbreviate "som e" to "sum " again. Spelling like that really lowers the tone of this place...
<sm all>[ July 12, 2002, 07:44 PM: Me s s a g e e d i t e d b y : M r C o o l ] < / s m all>
cutefix July 6th, 200 2, 06:12 AM

Plutonium is a world apart from ordinary H2O .The form e r h a s t h e p o t e n t i a l b e c a u s e o f i t s u n i q u e n e s s i n b e c o m ing critical if the
conditions are appropriate.Eventhough, the con ditions n eeded to attain that reactive state is rather com plicated and an
extrem ely precise operation.
Meanwhile compression of liquids are only practical in hydraulic applicatio n...
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d y o ur idea of dispersing the liquid and ignited by another initiator was indeed used in Fuel air
explosives(FAE),but they used reactive flam m a b l e l i q u i d s , l i k e p r o p y l e n e o x i d e , m ethylacetylene,ethylene o xide ,etc.
<sm all>[ July 06, 2002, 05:17 AM: Me ssage edited by: cutefix ]</sm all>
nbk2000 July 6th, 200 2, 10:51 AM

E x p l o s i v e i m p l o s i o n c a n c o m p r e s s s o l i d s t e e l t o 1 0 x o r m ore normal density. But this is only maintained for a couple of
m illiseconds before it blows apart the m olten m etal core. W ith fissionable materials, this isn't a problem since it'll have 'nuked'
long b e f o r e t h a t h a p p e n s .
W ater is com pressible by only a miniscule percentage. Som ething like 0.000001% or something like that.
Perhaps if you could generate enough heat to instantly turn the water fog into steam, then you could get a boost. Steam is
s o m ething like several hundred tim es larger in volum e than liqu id water for the sam e weight.
VX July 6th, 200 2, 05:23 PM

gaboryp69 Nuclear fusion has nothing to do with the fact that the plutonium is com pressed. The critical m ass is the m inimum
m ass (If the metal is in a sph ere i.e. smallest surface area) where enough slow neutrons released from o n e d e c a y i n g n u c l e u s
will stay within the m etal and go on to form further fission. In a chain reaction each nucleus that decays m ust cause m ore than
o n e o t h e r n u cleus to decay. If the m ass is below the critical m a s s t h e n t o o m any neutrons are lost through the relatively large
surface area to sustain a chain reaction. This is why a sm all piece of plutonium doesnt blow up.
Harry July 9th, 200 2, 03:03 PM

That's FISSION, not fusion! And com pression of a subcritical m a s s o f p l u t o n i u m causes the chain reaction b y placing the nuclei
in closer proxim ity to each other, thus presenting easier targets for neutrons released by the spontaneous decay of nuclei.
Thus, a fission nuke using a subcritical m a s s o f p l u t o n i u m is actually more efficient, and cleaner, than either Fat Man or Little
Boy, which used critical m asses and we ighed "very m uch", but gave fairly low yield for the weight. Fusion is a different m atter, a
lot more difficult, but a lot mo re fun.
Harry Mann
Polverone July 12th, 20 02, 04:2 6 PM

As long as you're sticking your tongue out you should have note d that a plutonium i m p l o s i o n w e a p o n d o e s * n o t * r e l y o n
"neutrons released by the spontaneous decay of nuclei." It has a source of neutrons to give the core a goo d burst of neutron
irradiation and get things going. Old nuclear weapons used a m ixture of polonium and beryllium to produce the neutrons;
m ore modern weapons use a pulse neutron tube, essentially a very com pact, one-shot pa rticle accelerator that can supply a
high flux of neutrons at the tim e of im plosion.
pyromaniac_guy July 12th, 20 02, 07:4 5 PM

both solids a nd liquid s (including water) CAN be com pressed, but it takes alot of effort to do so....
and iron can NOT be com pressed to 10x solid density, not with current technology at least. the com p r e s s i o n o f a d e n s e s o l i d to
a few times it's non com pressed density is quiter difficult a feat. The m ore you co mpress a solid, the more difficult it becom e s
to further com p r e s s t h e m a t e r i a l , a s a n e x a m p l e , t o c o m press u ranium to 2x solid density requires 6 tim e s t h e u n r a n i u m s
weig ht in tnt, assuming a fairly efficent improlsion device. For 3x solid density 56 times the weight of urnaium i s n e e d e d . f o r
4x solid density 480 tim es the weight of uranium is nee d e d .
Also, harry, you are wron in saying that fission devices they compress plutonium are m ore efficent that the fat m an device was,
as it W AS a fsiion device that copresse d plutonium. The unreflected criticle m ass of pluton ium is over 10 kg, fatm a n u s e d o n l y
6.2 kg of plu tonium. granted a reflector would ahve brought down the critticle m ass, but you dont get a 20kt yeild by having
just having a barely critticle mass, in fat m an com pression ont he order of close to 2x solid density was ach e i v e d
<sm all>[ July 12, 2002, 06:48 PM: Me ssage edited by: pyrom aniac_guy ]</sm all>

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Clearing Minefields
Log in
View Full Version : Clearing Minefields
Eliteforum September 20th, 2002, 05:58 AM

I belive this is the right section, if it isn't, then please move it to where is, that said:
MICLIC Employment in a minefield less than 100 meters
<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/pic001.gif" alt=" - " />
Clearing a lane through a minefield less than 100 meters deep requires one MICLIC. The leading edge of the minefield is identified and, if possible, confirmed by
reconnaissance. The MICLIC is deployed from a minimum standoff distance of 62 meters from the leading edge of the minefield.
The neutralization of mines by blast depends on the peak pressure and the impulse. For the MICLIC, the impulse is at a maximum of 3 meters from the line charge (on both
sides) and decreases the closer it gets toward the line charge, to a minimum of 1 meter from the line charge. This decrease on impulse causes a SKIP ZONE. This does not
mean that neutralization is equal to zero percent: it means that it is not equal to 100 percent. Mines that are buried deeper than 10 centimeters and located 1 to 2 meters from
the line charge have a high probability of not being neutralized.
Clearing a lane a minefield of uncertain depth or greater than 100 m requires two or more MICLICs. The first MICLIC is deployed 100m from the identified leading edge or
stricken vehicle. Once the first MICLIC is detonated, a second MICLIC moves 25m into the path formed by the first and fires its charge. This causes a 13m overlap of charges,
and extends the lane an additional 87m. Additional MICLICs are used for minefields of extreme depth, and each one moves down the lane 25m into the path created by the
previous charge.

MICLIC SAFETY FAN
SURFACE DANGER ZONE For firing the Mine Clearing Line Charge ( MICLIC ) with the M58, High Explosive Charge
MICLIC SAFETY FAN
AREA F AND FRAGMENTATION ZONE ( IN DATAIL ) for firing the Mine Clearing Charge with the M58, High Explosive Charge.
MICLIC FIRING PROCEEDURES
Ensure proper stand off from minefield (62 meters from the back of the launcher).
Ensure all vehicles within 200 meters are buttoned up & no vehicles within 30 meters except a plow or roller tank.
Connect blasting machine.
Raise launcher rail.
Ensure rail is at 47 degrees and locked in the up position.
Set control box to ROC KET & fire the rocket.
Ensure charge is clear of your vehicle and the plow / roller tank.
Set control box to CHARGE & fire the charge.

Why is there a 3 picture limit?
nbk2000 September 20th, 2002, 08:49 AM

So people don't post a couple dozen of 500KB+ sized pictures in a single post that then chokes up the Forum.
Also, how is a MICLIC relevant? It fires off a huge ass rocket that drags a few hundred pounds of high explosive behind it.
How to hand clear a lane through a minefield would be more appropriate. Even more so would be how to LAY a minefield in the first place. :)

Ok then, you'll be wanting the Mine/Countermine Operations PDF I have, once ctrl_c has sorted something out, I'll upload it.
On a referance to ctrl_c, I can access to the movies account, just not my personal account, so I'll upload this manual to the Movies account, then you cam move it over to the
FTP account.
Machiavelli September 20th, 2002, 04:17 PM

I guess you mean FM 20-32 "MINE/COUNTERMINE OPERATIONS". Since it's not restricted it would be easiest to just point to the US Armys digital library website.
<a href="http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/20-32/toc.html" target="_blank">http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/20-32/toc.html</a>
But we should try to stick with the basic stuff instead of mentally mastrubating about government toys that are useless to us.
nbk2000 September 20th, 2002, 11:00 PM

This topic is about as useful :rolleyes: as the Apache Operators Flight Manual topic was.
While interesting to read, it's otherwise useless to us.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Micro-Balloons - Archive Thread
Log in
View Full Version : Micro-Balloons - Archive Thread

Morrigan
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 81
From : T h e N e t h e r l a n d s
posted February 01, 2001 01:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I got the next piece of text about so called Micro-balloo ns from the site of a comm ercial blasting com p a n y . T h o s e m i c r o -
balloons are added to AN-prills used for comm ercial ANFO:
---------------------------------------------
T h e c o m p r e s s i o n p u l s e g e n e r a t e d d u r i n g d e t o n a t i o n c o m presses the air bubbles in the explosive, resulting in extrem ely high
temperatures or "hot-spots". These "hot-spots" would a p p e a r t o s u s t a i n a n d e n h a n c e t h e d e t o n a t i o n p r o p a g a t i o n .
More ideal detonation behavior, hence higher detonation energy and higher brisance Deto nation velocity slightly hig h e r a n d
m ore constant throug h hole charge length. Increased sm all diam eter sensitivity. Accelerated build-up to stable deto n a t i o n
velocity. More com ple te reaction with less after burning and fum e s .
---------------------------------------------
(*The effects m e n t i o n e d a b o v e a r e c a u s e d b y
m icro-balloons that all have the sam e s i z e a n d are evenly imbedded in the AN prills)
T h e f a c t t h a t s i m p l e m icro-ba l l o o n s a l s o s e e m to increase sensitivity at higher loading densities interes t e d m e . T h e r e s o n ly

o n e p r o b l e m , w h a t k i n d o f M i c r o - b a l l o o n s s h o u l d a n a m ateur blaster add to his ANFO to achieve better results? Plastic ones
tend to dissolve in the fuel wh ile m ost clay based Micro-Balloons suck up fuel like a s p o n g e . I g u e s s t h a t s o m e k i n d o f
m icroscopic glass sphere s wo u l d d o t h e t r i c k b u t w h e r e d o y o u g e t t h o s e from ? A r e t h e r e a n y a l t e r n a t i v e s ?
10fingers
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 421
From : U SA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S o m e h o b b y s t o r e s s e l l g l a s s m i c r o b a l l o o n s . Y o u c a n a l s o g e t t h e m f r o m Iowa Pyro Supply for abo ut $5.00 a quart, they're
used in pyrotechnic displays as a flash enhancer. In kitchen improvised plastic ex plosives it says that you can use finely
powdered styrofoam for the sam e effect.
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
From : None of your bloody business!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How big are the m icroballons?
10fingers
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 421
From : U SA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I h a v e n e v e r s e e n t h e d i m ensions but I would guess about 1/10th of a millim eter in diam eter.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Electronic Detonation -archive file
Log in
View Full Version : Electronic Detonation -archive file
megalomania October 7th, 2002, 03:07 PM

CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
posted January 23, 2001 12:37 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i am going to be using an estes rocket ignitor to set off some AP crackers and i was wondering what is the best way to set off the rocket ignitors at the end of 20 feet of wire.
a) 1, 6 volt lantern battery
b) 1, 9 volt
c) 4, AA size batterys (lined up in a row)
thanks for all your help.
also, one more question, if i want to use thin copper wire as my ignition device would i need something like a car battery to make it hot enough to set off AP? this would also
be at the end of a 20' piece of wire.
------------------
...
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lattern battery - highest current output and amps = heat.
It depends on how thick the copper wire is, stick it accross the battery teminals to find out if it will work. It will need to be quite fine for the few amps a lattern battery will put
out.
To save lumping a car battery about, if you've got a cordless (whatever) the NiCd pack from that will work great, those batts put out some serious current!
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so what you are saying current is the key? and also, i should use a lantern batterey. thanks for your help.
------------------
...
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, voltage has no bearing heat.
100W at 1v (say flowing into a short circuit = no resistance{only that of the wire}) will produce a lot of heat
Whereas 100W at 100v will only produce a 100th of the heat for the same power (wattage) drawn.
That's why power lines are stepped up to several hundred thousand volts so that les power is lost through heating of the cables.
The lattern batty will give the most amps as the cells inside are physically bigger.
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thanks man. lantern battery it is.
------------------
...
[This message has been edited by CragHack (edited January 23, 2001).]
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
Registered: OCT 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Anthony,
Your reply isnt correct.
100W are 100W where it doesnt matter wich voltage is used. At 1 V and 100W the current is 100A and at 100V and 100W the current is 1A.
When you put 100V at a resistor with only 1 Ohm you get 100A = 10000W.
1V at 1 Ohm gives you only 1W.
Power lines must transfer many Mega Watts of power. To get lower losses at a given resistance (the line) the current must be lower and to transfer the same amount of Watts
the voltage must be higher (formula P=U x I or P=Ix R)
To get a reliable ignition you must have the most power at the ignitionpoint and not at the wire( like the power line). So the resistance of the igniter must be much higher than
the wire-resistance
The best method is to use a resistor with a high resistance like 50-150 Ohm but for this you need a relative high voltage at lower current.
If you have only a 6V latern battery wich can deliver perhaps 10A you can calculate the optimal resistance with the formula R=U/I
6V/10A= 0,6 V/A = 0,6 Ohm. You see it is a small resistance and if you use a long and thin wire you will have undesired losses at the wire. To prevent this I suggest to use 3
6V batterys serial with a 1,8 Ohm resistor (available at electronic shops for max. 5 cents).
A piece of copper wire as igniter is bullshit. You would get the most power at the long wire and only a rest at the igniter.
It is pure luck when it works and certainly it is unsave.
Why dont you all buy a resistor for 5 cents and simply test it. A resitor produces a nice flame, good for ignition.
The Real
Frequent Poster
Posts: 136
From: Columbus, OH
posted January 24, 2001 08:14 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No load is gonna pull 100A through a 1ohm resistor using a lantern battery, it also depends on what the power source is capable of.
But wattage is a little different, 2amps at 50v is 100watts, just as 1amp @ 100v is or 0.5A and 200v.
I do agree though, I can't see usinng copper wire as an igniter, less your pushing quite a few amps. I use 0.4mm-0.11mm nichrome wire. Just purchase light guage GHS
Boomer Guitar strings, high "e" or "b", these are nichrome. Fine steel wool works as well, but not as well. Innoculating needles can be purchases made from platinum or
nichrome as well, however the only source I know of is Fisher, which is typically expensive.
Anyways I've never paid more than $1.50 for a string and I get at least 20 igniters out of one string. A pyrotechnic coating is not necessary.
Also for a quick connect blasting circuit I use 1/4" head phone jacks. Female end on the device the male on the end of the leads, very often the male end is ok to use again.
I've had them last for over 20shots (small things) and it's a fast safe connection. I use audio wire to run my main leads. But a word of advice, the small diameter the wire the
more resistant and it's also proportional to length. I once ended up melting the insulatio off my wires from running 500ft of 18ga wire to a pretty heavy igniter, the power
source was a running car. After the device failed to go off at connection I just hooked it up and let it set for about 10min. I ended up shooting the device with a .308 from
150yds from behind a tree to disable and/or detonate it.
Use heavier gauge automotive wire for best results. 22ga is pretty good.
Dracul
Frequent Poster
Posts: 73
From: Melbourne, Australia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to the local place that develops camera films and ask for a used disposable camera with a flash. If you ask nicely you could get around 20. Charge the capacitor in it then
connect the wires. If you want to use it on a regular basis then you can wire it up with switches in a plastic box that they sell at electronics stores. I've made one that has 8
350V-400V 100-200uF capacitors for long distance, its damn loud when you touch the wires without any resistance.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was working on a constant current supply, involving the fact that higher voltages will allow higher curents to flow at a set resistance would have confused things even more.
I personally use nichrome wire from a dead hair drier but a single strand of fine copper wire would work in a pinch.
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a electric foto flasher to charge a big capacitor is the best way.
For example you put 400V at a 40 Ohm nicrome wire or a carbon resitor you get a 4000W impulse.
This will vaporise the igniter.
Dracul
Frequent Poster
Posts: 73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you live in Australia you can go to Dick Smith's and the have these little tiny lights that are only 3mm across and are all wired up and have shrink wrap near the globe, the
wires are about 15-20cm long. They are perfect for AP if you gently pop the globe with pliers but they are a little fragile so mix up some BP with a very small amount PVC glue
and then add enough acetone to make it like paint. The PVC glue holds the BP together so it doesnt crumble, but if you add too much then they don't ignite.
I'm going to get a portable 12V strobe light from there too so that i can charge the capacitors faster with a lead acid battery. If I use the battery on a camera circuit it fries the
transistor.
[This message has been edited by Dracul (edited January 25, 2001).]
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if there is a subject that still baffles me it is electronics. now i know watts is the measurement for actual power, and Ohms is a measurement of resistance. but could someone
define volts and current for me? thank you all for your help so far.
------------------
...
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
From: Vancouver, Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmm, a good example is likle pressure in a pipe:.High voltage would be lots of pressure while low volatge would be small amount of pressure
------------------
Explosives Archive
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and is the current how fast that pressure moves through the pipe?
------------------
...
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1466
From: somewhere in florida
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the current would be how big the pipe is around
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wow, that really cleared things up for me man. thanks for the info.
------------------
...
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voltage = Pressure
Current = Volume
simply RED
Frequent Poster
Posts: 238
From: HELL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've made a lot of electrodetonators with Nichrom (Ni+Cr) wire. The explosives I've used were acetone peroxide, AP putty and HMTD, it works great! The wire was 1/12mm
wide(like human hair). I've triggered the detonators with EBP-30N Alinco battery 7.2V 1 detonator from 100m with standard "sapper" wires. The detonators had standard form,
made from thin alluminium.
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well i am either going to use the NiCr wire, or a small capacitor with a polarity, and just hook that up the wrong way, which makes it pop. i am more than likely going to use
the guitar string. i can get a box of the stuff for a buck (american) it will be cheaper and it is proven (by you guys) effective.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > In Holland they do n't like
speeding tickets
Log in
View Full Version : In Holland they don't like speeding tickets
ShockWave March 11th, 2003, 03:08 PM

<a href="http://www.tuftufclub . c o m / k a b o e m 1.a vi" target="_blank">http://www.tuftufclub.com / k a b o em1.avi</a>
Not really a big explosion, I think it is som e kind of a big firecracker.
mr.evil March 11th, 2003, 03:53 PM

lol shockwave, this happens quiet often in Holland around new years eve.. Bus stop's are also popular targets :D
no serious, i think it's stupid to blow up stuff th at is state property, as the one wh o's paying it back after all is YOU .
Anyway, nice movie
ShockWave March 11th, 2003, 05:00 PM

I know Mr.Evil, But ho w m any tim e s d o y o u s e e s t u f f l i k e t h i s c a u g h t o n v i d e o : D
<a href="http://www.tuftufclub .com" target="_blank">www.tuftufclub.com </a> has m any m ore of this kind of actions. :cool:
Arkangel March 12th, 2003, 06:46 AM

Zylion beat you to it shockwave, check his post in <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi?
ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000164" target="_blank">this</a> thread :p
ShockWave March 12th, 2003, 11:46 AM

You're right, I didn't see his post before.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > A piss easy timer? -archive file
Log in
View Full Version : A piss easy timer? -archive file
megalomania October 7th, 2002, 03:19 PM

-CossaC-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 54
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any ideas for a really basic timer?, I want one that dosen't cost me heaps(cos its gonna get blown up), and is easy to make/aquire.
~oa~
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<img src="http://www.angelfire.com/mb2/alspalace/timer.gif" alt=" - " />
J
Moderator
Posts: 602
From: United Kingdom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally I wouldn't trust a simple timer like this with my life. This isn't to say it won't work (it will), but things like dead batteries, magnetic interference, a faulty wire/dry
joint could cause it to malfunction. Test each constructed circuit thoroughly before use!
I can't remember the exact spec of the 555, but some digital circuits don't output 0v at logic level 0. The level might be as much as a couple of volts, maybe enough to trigger
your relay. I'd want to view the output with a CRO to be sure.
------------------
"If the aquarium water has to be drunk don't waste the fish. In fact they'll probably be the easiest to eat even if you don't need the water. The cat is next in the pot." - John
'Lofty' Wiseman
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh ya, there a store in my area called princess auto, it sells microwave timers cheap. U can also get ammo cans for a few bucks, and ammo cans for Missiles..
------------------
Explosives Archive
10fingers
Frequent Poster
Posts: 411
From: USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can buy a cooking timer for $5.00 at Wal-Mart. I think they are one hour. I would not trust a timer of the type shown above, too many things to go wrong.
Another safety precaution I would take is to have the timer ignite a fuse to the detonator instead of having it go directly to the detonator. This way if your timer malfunctions it
will light the fuse which will give you a few seconds to react.
-CossaC-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 54
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah the problem with having a fuse there is that it leaves one more thing to go wrong, and no body likes goin to have a look at it, when it has failed to go off.
~oa~
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yeah i would suggest the timer going roght to the detonator. like he said just one more thing to go wrong. i hate checking liitle fire crackers when they don't light let alone
something bigger.
------------------
...
10fingers
Frequent Poster
Posts: 411
From: USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If your timer fails are you going to wanna go look at it?
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nope, just shoot at it for awhile.
sealsix6
Frequent Poster
Posts: 154
From: NYC,NYC,USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a question does anyone know a site where i can find eletrical explanations for like basic eloctroncis because I have no clue about the schematics (such as the one
above) and I would like to learn more about them such as what the syombols mean and how to build stuff using the schematics
Metal
Frequent Poster
Posts: 137
From: I'm everywhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can find some stuff here:
<a href="http://www.epanorama.net/basics.html" target="_blank">http://www.epanorama.net/basics.html</a>
------------------
"I'm not a slave to a god that doesn't exist. I'm not a slave to world
that doesn't give a shit" - Marilyn Manson
-CossaC-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 54
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if I use the timer to detonate a large amount of SP for example, i sure as hell don't wanna leave it out waiting to get rained on.
~oa~
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello all,
I have seen the NE555 timer and can only warn you all. The 555 timer can only produce a on-impulse of a length defined by the RC line.
What here is needed is at first a delay of a defined length and then a on-impulse to set something off. A 555 timer cannot do this job at a satisfactory way and it has no safety
in handling.
The MOS 4541 circuit is a programmable binary counter with own RC oscillator.
You can simple calculate the oscillators frequency and set the delay time with two jumpers. In my timer I have build in two watcher functions to control the timers and the
switching transistors condition.
All parts shouldnt cost much more than 5 bucks and some work to solder them together.
I havent build a homepage so I cannot post the plan. Perhaps can somebody put the plan at his homepage?
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i can post it on my website. E-mial me at alengosvig@yahoo.com and i will upload them.
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All I would do is attach the speaker of an alarm clock (digital, more accurate), to a model rocket ignitor (or any other homemade one). If the current going to the speaker is
too low, then just attach a 9volt battery to one of the wires and then to the ignitor. The alarm clock would be pretty reliable, and the model rocket ignitor would be reliable as
well.
Dracul
Frequent Poster
Posts: 73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you tried that? For some reason I don't think it would work. For my timer I have a transistor connected to a speaker wire. The transistor controls the power to a relay
which uses a 6V lead/acid battery to burn a light globe detonator or nichrome wire etc.
[This message has been edited by Dracul (edited February 10, 2001).]
SofaKing
Frequent Poster
Posts: 392
From: YEAH RIGHT !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This might be stupid and unsafe.
On the site Bob linked to in the water rocket page. A there's somthing called a tomy timer, basiclly the guts of a wind up toy is used to get a delay. I think this could be
adapted to suit our needs. The main concern would be safty.
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dracul, I haven't tried it, but I'm pretty sure it would work, why wouldn't it?
zaibatsu
Frequent Poster
Posts: 403
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i think because by attaching a battery to one of the alarm wires then you have got a power source putting electricity through the model rocket ignitor at all times. Wouldn't this
mean it would ignite as soon as you plugged the battery in? This may be wrong, but could you explain in more detail please?
------------------
Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto
Visit me at <a href="http://www.surf.to/eliteforum" target="_blank">www.surf.to/eliteforum</a>
Dracul
Frequent Poster
Posts: 73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that's what I was thinking, when you connect a battery up to something like that it tends to let the current flow from the battery even when the alarm isn't going. Better
to use the alarm to control a transistor, most relay's don't switch with a low voltage like that. Lowest I have seen is 6V.
------------------
Check this out <a href="http://www.stileproject.com" target="_blank">www.stileproject.com</a>
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On an alarm clock, there isn't a current going through the speaker wires constantly, is there?
The idea is, that you replace the speaker for a model rocket ignitor, and set a time for the alarm to go off, and when it goes off, a current is sent to the speaker, but there isn't
the speaker there's a rocket ignitor, and it passes through the ignitor and burns it up.
Even though this is another one of my stupid ideas, I still don't see why it shouldn't work, I guess there's only one way to find out! If I have the time, that is.
zaibatsu
Frequent Poster
Posts: 403
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two things. What you have just stated ISN'T what you originally said (ie, about hooking the battery up to give more power). Also, the power going to the speaker is very low i
think, and so wouldn't be enough to ignite the ignitor.
------------------
Visit me at <a href="http://www.surf.to/eliteforum" target="_blank">www.surf.to/eliteforum</a>
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think whay he means is to connect the battery up to one of the wires going to the ignitor, so that it is in series with the power source for the speaker.
sealsix6
Frequent Poster
Posts: 154
From: NYC,NYC,USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a little bit off topic but I thik i will ask anyway. If anyone saw CSI the other day (2-8-01) there was a kid blowing up people with a bomb and the switch/timer was at
the bottom was a mouse trap and when they picked it up the mouse trap did something to start the clock moving (not digital clock) and i cant figure out how the mouse trap
was rigged to the clock so if anyone saw it or knows i would appreacite it if you could say how it works and another EASY timer is just take a alarm clock and put a bolt in the
face plate with a wire wrapped around it leading to the positive side of the battery and then have the minit hand with a wire wrapped around it leading to the negative side of
the battery or you can hook it up to the hour hand and have a 12 hour delay
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using analouge timers is very unreliable, say the wire connected to the hand was too stiff and stopped it turning at all? Or if the connections are bad? So much easier with an
electronic timer.
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
posted February 11, 2001 09:17 AM Frequent Poster
Posts: 73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zaibatsu:
I forgot about the battery thing, sorry about that.
"I think what he means is to connect the battery up to one of the wires going to the ignitor, so that it is in series with the power source for the speaker."
Anthony worded it well, that's what I mean by hooking it up to the battery.
J
Moderator
Posts: 602
From: United Kingdom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A good digital timer is a shift register with a slow clock. No analogue electronics involved, timing is also exact.
J
------------------
"If the aquarium water has to be drunk don't waste the fish. In fact they'll probably be the easiest to eat even if you don't need the water. The cat is next in the pot." - John
'Lofty' Wiseman
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hallo Alengosvig,
have you got the timer plan?

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Gurney Values of Various
Explosives (query)
Log in
View Full Version : Gurney Values of Various Explosives (query)
NightStalker March 14th, 2003, 08:42 PM

I'm currently working on a project about landm i n e s , a n d h a v e a f i l e a b o u t the alternative use of claymores and Automatic
Grenade Launchers as possible replacements for the typical step-on-it-and-lose-your-leg type of m i n e . T h e a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n s
a s e ction tha t allows you to ca lculate the velocity and im pact force of a fragm ent, given the weight/distance/drag coefficient/
a n d i m parted energy (the "gurney" value) of the explosive charge (of kn own weight) upon the fragments.
This is all well and go od...if you alread y know the gurne y value of the explosive at hand...which I haven't a clue as to what
they would be. :(
I've seen a reference to a TM that has a table of Gurney values for various military explosives. I don't remem ber which one it
was, though I rem e m ber looking at the online FM/TM library (ATC ALL or som ething like that) when I did know what it was. Does
anyone know where I could find this table, or have a copy of it?
Thanks in advance.
Celtick March 15th, 2003, 07:37 AM

It is probably TM 9-1300-214 Military Explosives, since I don't have this one right now I couldn't look it up, but I looked in TM
9 - 1 3 0 0 - 2 0 0 A m munition General, but there were no gurney figures. You can't download th e Explosives TM since it is restricted
at <a href="https://www.logsa.army.mil/etm s/find_etm .cfm" target="_blank">https://www.logsa.arm y.m il/etm s/find_etm.cfm </
a> But m ayb e it is on the FTP.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Scabbling
Log in
View Full Version : Scabbling
nbk2000 October 20th , 2002, 04:26 AM

"Sca bbling" is where a thin layer of explosive is painted onto a surface and then detonated. The shock causes fracturing and
spalling of a thin layer of the surface the explosive was painted on.
In a patent (6438191) I read about this technique, RDX is m ixed with shellac, and thinned with acetone. This mix is then
spra yed onto concrete till a 1.5m m thick layer is layed down. This is then detonated. The resulting shockwa ve blows off a layer
of reinforced concrete several centim eters in thickness.
It doesn't da mage the structural integretity of the concrete support or wall, but it DO ES blow walnut sized ch unks of concrete at
speed in what ever direction the wall is facing. <img border="0" title="" a lt="[W ink]" src="wink.gif" />
S o m e i d e a s t h a t c o m e t o m ind is to paint a wall in advanced as a sort of "stealth" claymore. The layer can be as thin as a half
a millim eter (0.5mm ) and still be exploded. At these th in of a layer, it's possible for the layer to be transparent, thus it could
be painted onto glass windows at night, then exploded during th e day, spraying the occupants with g l a s s s h a r d s .
Or, for instance, an entrance way could have a wall painted in anticipation of ambushing a target. Or, a parking garage space
could be prim ed to blow out a parked vehicles tires (like a m ine) to prevent escape.
M a n y i d e a s c o m e t o m ind as to what you could do with a transparent explosive layer that uses on site materials as shrapnel.
I wonder if AP could be used instead? The pate nt mentioned use of silver acetylide in prior art for the sam e p u r p o s e . A P m i g h t
not have the brisance needed though...
<sm all>[ October 20, 2002, 04:06 AM: Messag e e d i t e d b y : n b k 2 0 0 0 ] < / s m all>
Korfaction October 20th , 2002, 05:25 AM

It could be a good way to m ine some stuffs, without the problem s of sticking a bom b or whatever, thus being very discreet.
But I see a few problem s with that:

- Do you know the po wer of 0.5 m m of HE on a wall ?
- Do you think it would be still powerful enough once m ixed with stuffs to stay on the wall ?
I n t e r m s o f d a m a g e s , I d o u b t t h a t i t m ay be really efficient (I haven't tried though...). O r on a wid e surface? In a hall/corridor,

pain ted on every wall for the guy to be at the center of the shrapnel projections.
I c a n s e e m any applications too...
Another question: in the patent it's said that it would be used to destroy a layer of a wall or a surface for any purposes. I'm
wondering then how do they paint it to have the explosion destroy the wall and not just be pushed away ? And shrapnels are
not m e n t i o n n e d ?
nbk2000 October 20th , 2002, 06:51 AM

W hile the power of a .5m m layer of ex plosive would be minim al, it make s up for it in surface area. Also, .5m m is the m inimum
e x p l o d e a b l e t h i c k n e s s , n o t t h e o p t i m u m thickn ess for the perverted use.
For instance, explosive weights of 1 to 10 poun ds per square m eter are possible. A pound of RDX, regardle ss of thickness, is
goin g to fuck som eone up if they're near it at the tim e i t e x p l o d e s .
Also, concrete is hard...but also brittle. The shock from the explosive goes through the concrete and reflects off the rebar and
such within, the reflections then hit the surface and spall off the concrete the explosive was original in contact with.
As for shrapnel, no, the paten t doesn't discuss that because it's so obvio us a hazard that they feel those "skilled in the arts"
don't need to be told that. It's obvious, isn't it? Large chunks of concrete are broken off using high explosives...they aren't
goin g to just sit there , now are they? No. They're going to fly off at speed.
It'll explode just fine, even mixed with shellac, because it's going to dry out into a film that m o r e t h a n 9 0 % e x p l o s i v e .
vulture October 20th , 2 0 0 2 , 0 5 : 2 5 P M

W ith a layer of Al paint over it, it could m aybe even burn the victim close to the wall or create an FAE effect after the explosion.
But m aybe the dust created by the blast would interfere with that.
W ith a sensitive explosive this could even serve as reactive armor, or be used for blowing out doors.
Suddenly m oving objects at high speed opposite to the direction the explosive is facing m ight also be interesting.
And of course, last but not least, alot of pranks com e to m ind! :D
<sm all>[ October 20, 2002, 04:27 PM: Messag e edited by: vulture ]
nbk2000 October 21st, 2002, 02:52 AM

I can envision a ceram ic vase made from p r e - f o r m e d c u b e s b o u n d t o g e t h e r i n a m atrix, with one half of the vase painted with
an scabbling layer.
W hen detonated, the vase shatters into the cubes, which then fly out like shrapnel from a claym ore. :)
Or, line the inside of the vase with scabbling paint, then you've got an om nidirectional device. :D
W onder, wha t would an ashtra y m ade from com pressed RDX powder and coated with scabbling do when a h ot ember was
ground out in it? <img border="0" title="" alt="[W ink]" src="wink.gif" /> That's one way to quit smoking. :p
mongo blongo October 21st, 2002, 02:35 PM
I i m a g i n e s o m ething like Lead Azide would be good for this. Since it will be able to m ake the D to D transition witho ut
confinement you would not ne e d a d e t o n a t o r . M a y b e a m ixture of Lead Azide and a brisant secondary HE like RDX could be a
possibility.
Spudkilla October 21st, 2002, 08:36 PM

T h e o n l y m a j o r p r o b l e m I see here is the tim e it would take to cover a portion or the whole wall efficently. You would have to
h a v e t i m e t o p r e p a r e , a n d d o i t i n a p l a c e w h e r e p e s k y p e o p l e w o u l d n ' t a s k y o u q u e s t i o n s . T h e o n l y p l a c e I s e e t h i s h a p p e n ing
is m aybe under a bridge, or in your own hom e, but neither of those places is to u seful for much of anything, unless as a
d e n f e n s e m easure if you get storm ed by the SSSW AT T e a m .
You could m a y b e d r e s s i n h a n d y m an clothes, and get a paint spray, but the thickness of the explosive would easily clog up
the sprayer. Hell, a a mix of stain and paint even clogs up paint sprayers. If you don't have a good sprayer, or a bottle of
acetone handy, I wou ld sugge st not using one.
Another matter I really haven't seen discussed, how would you set a secondary explosive off while its on a while? Maybe a cap
located in a lightswitch or electrical wall outlet.
T h a t g e t s m e thinking, you co u l d m a k e a n e x p loding trap. W ire the cap to the switch, and when they go to turn the light on, it
completes th e circuit, ignites the cap, which detonates the wall. Think if you got the whole room covered!
nbk2000 October 21st, 2002, 10:16 PM

C o m mercial HVLP (High Volum e, Low Pressure) sprayers are use d by the pros.
Besides, who 's to say some vandals won't spray paint graffiti on a wall that som e painter (you) will have to "paint" <im g
border="0" title="" alt="[W ink ]" src="wink.gif" /> over. :D
That's your cover.
spydamonkee October 22nd, 2002, 04:12 AM

the idea with the light switch a s a trigger to all four walls, ceiling & even the floor sound pretty dam n lethal
im agine being in a ro om that is basica lly an ex plosive cube
oh yea dont forget the door too, could use the door handle as the trigger
vulture October 22nd, 2002, 12:22 PM

If you want to get rid of someone, spray his cars brakediscs with a pressure sensitive explosive....
spydamonkee October 22nd, 2002, 04:38 PM

spra ying som e o n e s d iskbrake s with a pressure sensitive explosive would not garuntee to get rid of the target, would give them
one hell of a fright when it went off though then they would have no brak e s a d d i n g t o t h e m a y h e m
kingspaz October 22nd, 2002, 05:51 PM

what about spraying his break discs with oil?

Gotta love th at sim ple but wicked idea of you k ingspaz.. :D
But I think it will evaporate or get driven of by the centrifugal force when the wheels are tu rning.
powdermunkey Novem ber 1st, 2004, 02:37 PM

Riceboyz hot Jap car + W D-40 o n e x p o s e d e l e e t b r a k e d i s k s = K e r u n c h . . .
FUTI Novem ber 1st, 2004, 04:39 PM

I wouldn't oil the disk , but the brake plates instead (things that are pressed on the spining disk during brakeing). It would
t a k e m ore oil for it, b ut no centrifugal force can remove it. The reactive arm or ide a kick ass!:) As for Al paint I'm not so sure it
would work that easy but it is som ething worth trying.
A-BOMB Novem ber 1st, 2004, 05:28 PM

I just tried som ething like this a few days ago. I took a halloween pum p k i n e g g b a l l t h i n g ( t h i n k l i k e a n e a s t e r e g g e x c e p t
round not eg g shaped) and filled it with AN/lam p o i l , T h e n " p a i n t e d " a m i x o f a c e t o n e / N C & T C A P o n t h e o u t s i d e t o a b o u t 3 -
4 m m thick and then it dry. After it was dry I m isted it with acetone and rolled it in the com pisition from s o m e old rifle prim ers(I
think lead styenalate{sp?}). That unit did som e rather good damage to the ground where it im pacted. Also i t s o u n d e d a n d f e l t
like the AN detonated m uch m ore powerfully, like if it was a nitro explosive rather than AN. Maybe it was all the AN being
d e t o n a t e d s i m ultaneously by the TC AP/NC on the outside? O r m aybe the AN was com pressed to a type of "critial m a s s " n o t
unlike the co re of a im plosion "FatMan " t y p e a - b o m b , b e f o r e d e t o n a t i o n ?
Jacks Complete Novem ber 15th, 2004, 10:02 PM

I c a n s e e s o m e great uses for this...
Y o u w a n t a s i m p l e a m b u s h t o t a k e o u t 2 0 e n e m y troops wearing body armour and helm ets? Spray the road the night (or
week) before, then trip it using whatever you want when they are all standing on it. That's 20 fewer guys rig ht away. Use a few
land mines at either e nd, under the typical cove r spots, so the first team walk past them (low threat) but the backup t e a m
(high threat, so m oving from cover to cover) set them off. Gives the m edivac team s o m ething extra to thin k a b o u t , a n d
ensures few m ore issues for those with no legs...
Get a few idiots for Allah (or a telesniper) and you would get a very high R O I .
C o m bine the "paint" with a layer of supressant such as foam or dust, and it m i g h t e v e n b e p o s s i b l e t o h a v e m u l t i p l e c h a r g e s .
Another trick might be to have several areas of explosive, wired to different triggers, so getting one large group with the first
blast, then anyone escaping/aiding with the second.
furdog July 27th, 20 06, 04:1 1 PM

Great ideas! I have m a d e s o m e crude APM Anti Person nel Mines with a great deal of luck, also claym ores, trip devices that
use various detonators.
The best is the APM using a re-freezable ice pack cutting the top open and then boring a 3/16 hole in both sides. The taking a
hollow steel pipe 3/16 or so and making a firing pin to fit inside the pipe along with a spring behind it. Place a 22 blank in the
other end along with powder.
Then mount this between the 2 outer holes. Place a string on each end to the firing pin and run it out both ends. Now the best
way is to bend a metal plate into one side of the ice pack to allow the pe llets to go forward not out both sides.
Now you can fill the bottom with Black powder or what ever you choose. Do it in layers like powder, 000 buckshot etc... now cap
the top off with JB weld .
I will tell yoube careful as hell when playing with this until you put som e sort of a disarm ing pin on the outside of the pull
strin g. "Because if you let go of the string your not going to be around to find out what happens "
T h e s i m plest way to do this is by placing round key ring through a shaft with a groove just enough to catch without going off,
leaving a way to rem ove it when you arm the device. I do have some blu eprints on paper I would have to put on PDF not sure
how to do that.
I have used these with great effectiveness with wild hogs. Awesom e s i g h t t o s e e o n e g e t s h r e d d e d t o b i t s .

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Shaped Charge Detonation -
Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : Shaped Charge Detonation - Archive file
zaibatsu March 15th, 2003, 01:41 PM

Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
From : 11 Downing Street, London, England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you go about, say, placing a shaped charge on a m issile so that it detonated o n impact ? I can't see how this is
d o n e , a s t h e r e d o e s n 't seem to be a practical way of setting off the detonator without m e s s i n g u p t h e s h a p e o f t h e e x p l o s i v e
charge in the process. This is supposedly used on a hellfire AT missile, b ut it looks awfully com plicated...
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From : England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could you have a firing pin the went through th e explosive charge and sat against a percussion cap, the pin would protrude far
enough so that it sm acked the primer when the charge was the optim um distance from the target.
Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could do I suppose, but I have no idea if that intervening pin would com primise the effectiveness of the charge.
Sgt_Starr
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 119
From : Petersburg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know m uch about this field but could you attach a BB to a percussion cap and have a thin la yer of ap putty about the
cone of the shaped charge? Like I said I dont know much about shaped explosives.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From : England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It shouldn't do, the jet would obliterate the pin before it reached t h e s u r f a c e i f t h e t a r g e t . O n e p r o b l e m m a y b e t o m a k e s u r e
the charge hit the target dead square...
Agent Blak
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 765
From : S k . C a n a d a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AP Putty would work Way better; For it seem s to detonate buy in creasing the density(from m y e x p e r i e n c e i t d o e s n ' t e v e n n e e d
confinement). It is also A little m ore friction sensitive.
------------------
A wise man once said :
"... As He W aits For T h e T i m e W h e n T h e L a s t B e c o m e First And,
The First Shall Becom e last"
--R ATM
Agent Blak-------OUT!!
Microtek
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 194
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing with the pin is the way I do it all the tim e. I should just make it clear th at my devices are very sm all, so it's practical
t o u s a n e e d l e . T h e s h a r p p o i n t o n t h e n e e d l e a l s o m akes it less likely that the charge will be deflected as it digs into the
pain t or any other surface coating.
About the m ilitary system s: Even in sm all 66m m LAW s y s t e m s , t h e r e i s s o m e t h i n g called a piezo-electric element in the nose
of the weapo n. It is a crystal that has the property that it generates a voltage when squee z e d ( p i e z o m e a n s p r e s s o r s q u e e ze
).
this crystal is connected to a detonator in the rear end of the charge.
I have seen pictures in m ilitary textbooks where shaped-charges for tank-guns were initiated with a pipe with an explosive filler
e m ployed as you would the pin.
I don't reccom end doing it this way though;
I think you would have to take special precautions to prevent the charge from detonating in the wrong direction.
Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks everyone.
I a m aware of all that sophisticated piezo technology, but I doubt there's any hope of getting hold of that.
I think it would be safer to just use a precussion type-detonator using a pin or BB. I don't trust AP too much and it would be
wise to put as little sensitive material on these things as possible...
W hat would happen if you accidently dropped it ?
Perhaps putting the pin right up against a relatively sho rt stand-off cone would lessen the chances of a missile 'sliding off' the
target and failing to detonate.
Cyclonite May 3rd, 2003, 07:30 PM

Theres 3 ways HEAT (High Explosve An ti Tank) rounds are deton ated, PE Crystals, rear fuzed impact inertia fuze and the least
used is front fuzed with a explosive liner on the innerwa ll of the projectile leading to the booster in the rear initiating the shape
charge. Also theres the Miznay Shardin effect typically used in m ine systems, not a true shape charge but very effective to say
the least. Its m ore of a curved platter thats deform ed into a jet shape penetrator when the HE gos. Its effe ctive distance puts
the m onroe effect to sham e. :D
Also Pizeo Electric is not anym ore advanced than the electric ligh ters you carry in your pocket. Its just a quartz crystal. You
would just need one large enough to g enerate the curre nt needed to set off the primer in the rear. AP would make for a
horrible shape charge, you need an explosive with a high VO D. AT4s for exam p l e u s e O ctol

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Planular Cutting Charge
Log in
View Full Version : Planular Cutting Charge
nbk2000 October 28th, 2002, 07:23 PM

Most above-ground safes have the ability to be bolted down to a floor or wall to prevent them being carried off to be opened up elsewhere.
Well, sometimes, it happens that a person, w hile they did bolt it dow n, don't bolt it down tightly, leaving room for the safe to be tipped around a bit. This space isn't enough to
get any kind of normal cutting tool into though. :(
Well, I thought that, since explosives can be made into thin sheets, and are capable of cutting metal, that there's got to be some way of using them to cut the bolts.
For instance, I know of a safe (empty though) that has a 1/4" gap under it w hen tipped. There's 4 bolts of 3/8" dia. securing it to a concrete slab floor.
Now, w hat I'm thinking is that a sheet of PETN explosive of <1/4" thickness could be slipped underneath the safe. There's a V shaped notch cut out of the sheet, into which
goes a bolt. When fired, the explosive would shear the bolt via Munroe effect.
OR
You fill the space under the safe with explosive and fire it. The safe and floor have an equal and opposite reaction. The ground isn't going anyw here, therefore the safe has to
move up. This either shears off the bolt heads, breaks the nuts, or shatters something (safe or floor). Either way, you're likely to be able to remove the safe for cracking open
at your leisure elsewhere. :)
Eliteforum November 1st, 2002, 06:09 AM

Could the same be applied to a safe in a w all recess w ith say a 1/4 inch gap around it?
NoltaiR November 1st, 2002, 09:02 AM

Assuming that you have a way to bond PETN into a nice, even sheet; I think that you w ill have the safe removed without any problem at all. Of coarse if you have 1/4", I
would think it easier just to fit a hacksaw (or any thin, metal cutting saw) under. But if explosives are the w ay to go, I think a confinement such as this for an explosive as
brisant as PETN will make for a spetacular show... and of coarse 3/8" bolts are not going to stand a chance. But what I think you will find is that the outside edges of the safe's
floor are more supported than the middle area because of the walls. So by adding enough PETN, you will probably not only have the bolts blown out, but you may (depending
on the strenght of material used in the making of the safe) blow a hole right through the bottom of it (which would prevent it from being reused, and if there is anything inside
you w ant, you may destroy it in the process.)
nbk2000 November 2nd, 2002, 09:32 AM

For lifting a safe off of its bolts, I'd think a low end HE like APAN w ould be good. Lots of gas production, not a lot of brisance, and easy to make.
You'd definately want to avoid blasting a big hole in the bottom, lest you destroy the very thing you're after. Though that w ould be RTPB compliant "Destroy that which you
can't have". < img border= "0" title="" alt= "[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
I was thinking more like a flat charge that could be slipped underneath that w ould be placed in contact w ith the bolt. Like a C where the gap is in contact with the bolt, and the
charge detonated from the opposite side. The shockw ave travels through both ends of the charge, w here it meets in the interior of the bolt, the shockwave collisions and
reflections causing stress fracturing of the metal, shearing the bolt.
metafractal November 15th, 2002, 07:43 AM

Of course, wether a hole w ill be blasted out depends largeley on how the safe is constructed. In general (but not without exceptions) you wont blast a hole in a well made safe
with a petn charge. How w ell made it is should depend on how valuable the goods inside are, although it is not a linear relationship in any sense, only if it is not extrodinarily
expensive then they w ill buy a safe w ith the significantly lower value, and if it is they will usually figure it worth it to buy a top of the line super hard safe. The exception, and
reasonably probable at that, w ould be that even a top of the line safe may have put all its features into ther parts (i.e. 'unbreakable' w elds) and neglected this to the extent
that it is no more advanced than the lower-end safe. Nothing much can be gathered from the fact that it was not secured down well, it is unlikeley that they would account for
this even in the most valuable of goods. If nbk is going to all this trouble, then I w ould assume it is worthwhile i.e. of very significant value. But you tell me. It seems like the
chances are that a hole will be blasted. But if it is worth this much effort, if it is in a private enough place, maybe the metal and structure could be analysed and then it could
actually be calculated. But this is only if it is of very < img border= "0" title="" alt= "[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> significant value.
>>metafractal
nbk2000 November 15th, 2002, 07:58 PM

I've read of w here businesses would buy a top-o-da-line safe, and then just set it down in the corner without bolting it down, thinking it too heavy to be stolen.
'Course, I'd hear about how these same safes would later be carted off by burglars with pallet lifts and tow trucks. :D
Also, it seems most people are under the impression that 50 bolts are adequate. :rolleyes: Maybe against your average crackhead joe thief, but not against someone with
"skillz". < img border= "0" title="" alt= "[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Also, it's the rare safe that has equal 6 sided protection. In all but the most w ell designed safes, the floor is the "weakest link", since it's not likely to be attacked if PROPERLY
bolted down.
Also, I was thinking that, if a crim knew w hat kind of safe it was (RTPB Prior Planning), he'd know w here the bolt-down holes were located. He could then drill through the
concrete around the safe, to create a void underneath the safe that w ould have a very small cratering charge placed in it. This would then disrupt all the dirt, shatter the
concrete, and allow for the whole thing to be yanked out to be taken somewhere else for cracking at leisure.
Same thing could be accomplished silently using bentomite to shatter the concrete, but that takes hours. And the longer you're on the scene, the greater your chance of getting
busted.
I've seen in the McMaster-Carr catalog hydralic jacks that'll fit under a 1/4" gap, cost less than a grand, and that have 100 ton lift w ith a 3" stroke. <img border="0" title= ""
alt="[Eek!]" src= "eek.gif" /> Most bolts are rated to only 10-20 tons. :)
Pssstt...pssstt...ppsssBLING-BLING! :D
[ November 15, 2002, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
pyromaniac_guy November 16th, 2002, 12:08 PM

if you are worried about damage to the contents of the safe, by not just attack it's foundation. I assume most buildings in question would use a concrete foundation... take a
concrete drill and drill from an angle next to the bottom edge of the safe, to an area where you think the bolts are located... fill with your charge, tamp if possible, and let her
rip.. you dont actually have to shear the bolts in this case, just fracture the concrete enough so that you can rip the safe off it's mount easily enough... this way the intervening
concreat the safe is sitting on will sheild the bottom w all of the safe to afford it some protection
and as far as sheet explosives go, instead of using a sheet, use a narrow strip... with a shape charge attacking a bolt you are only going to get usefull work out of a width of
charge the same diameter as your bolt, furthermore you dont need a very deep cone to the 'v' so any erxtra length is just a waste... by actually making properly sized shape
charges on a stick (tm) you reduce your explosive use probably by orders of magnitude, and greatly lessen the chance of poping a hole in the bottom of the sucker...

NBK:
<blockquote>quote:< hr /> Also, I w as thinking that, if a
crim knew what kind of safe it was (RTPB Prior Planning), he'd know where the bolt-dow n holes were located. He could then drill through the concrete around the safe, to
create a void underneath the safe that would have a very small cratering charge placed in it. This would then disrupt all the dirt, shatter the concrete, and allow for the whole
thing to be yanked out to be taken somewhere else for cracking at leisure. < hr /></blockquote> pyromaniac_guy:
<blockquote>quote:< hr /> take a concrete drill and drill
from an angle next to the bottom edge of the safe, to an area where you think the bolts are located... fill w ith your charge, tamp if possible, and let her rip.. you dont actually
have to shear the bolts in this case, just fracture the concrete enough so that you can rip the safe off it's mount easily enough...<hr /> </blockquote> Asides from a little rephrasing, you just repeated the very thing I just said. I don't like it when people try to pass off something I said as
something original on their part. :mad:
Imitation isn't the sincerest form of flattery when it comes to ME. In fact, it reeks of sychophantry (AKA asskissing) and pisses me off to no end.
I'll let you remove the offending section yourself, because it's easier for me to just HED you instead if you don't.
Ruroni December 3rd, 2002, 02:21 AM

Let's keep the posts at least slightly relevant, shall we?
Watch the sycophancy too.
[ December 03, 2002, 05:48 AM: Message edited by: Anthony ]
nbk2000 December 3rd, 2002, 10:32 PM

Well, a while ago, they removed the ATM from the store. Unfortunately I wasn't there to see it. :(
However, I now know that they use 3/8" bolts to hold them down, since they had to grind off the heads of the bolts to remove the ATM, as the bolts are epoxy set into the
floor to prevent removal, so there's just stubs remaining flush with the floor.
This also tells me that, for this particular style of ATM machine, that the bolts are set 14.5" apart L/R, and 18" F/B. So, for that model anyways, I know where the bolts are
located. :)
The simplist attack means would seem to be to use a hammer drill to cut a recess under the edge of the ATM, then insert a toed hydralic jack w ith a lift capactity greater then
the shear strength of the 4 bolts combined.
The jack would then apply sufficient lift to snap off the bolt heads when they reached their fracture point.
Much quieter than explosives, and possibly faster since you don't have to drill holes for cratering charges under all the bolts.
'Course, if the bolts aren't tightened down sufficiently to prevent tipping, then direct explosive attack on the bolts would quicker.

There's quite a few numbers for bolt strengths, the highest I saw (worst case scenario) w as 50kN or 5 metric tons.
I'm sure you'd need a lot less than 20T though, for several reasons. If you're lifting one side, the load is concentrated on the closest two bolts. It isn't a straight pull on the bolt
head. Most importantly, epoxy and concrete should give way *long* before the bolt head.
The fact that people have ripped up ATMs with a mini digger kinda proves that. There's not w ay one of those things could pull 10's of tons w ith the bucket.

No such thing as overkill my dear fellow. :D
You never know w hen you'll run across an ATM (or some other object with valuables within) installed by somebody who just happened to have a few left over aerospace grade
1/2" titanium bolts with 100,000 pound yield strengths. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src= "wink.gif" />
Best to be prepared and have it and not need it :) , than to need it and be caught up short by not having it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frow n.gif" />

okey dokey, 4 x 100 000lb = 200T
Got a design in mind for this spreader? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Yes I do:
RDX + AP = Spread
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :D
Agent Blak December 5th, 2002, 04:24 PM

Also one thing you have to keep in mind are the laws of physics; ie Shock Load.
We are talking about using a Hyrdrolic Jack here. We are talking about a Planular Charge. You are using Something like a PETN/RDX/AN(filler) as you explosive. These are going
to Shock load theose Bolts like you wouldn't imagine. lets say that the 1/2" AirCraft Grade Ti Bolt where used.
Now you are said 200T. If those bolts go from no preasure to 150T + the Generated Heat in an instant. Now thats a lot of force/energy.
And if that Fails you w ill always have a plan B

<a href="http://www .saflow.com/burning_lance.htm" target="_blank">http://w ww.saflow .com/burning_lance.htm</a>
spydamonkee December 9th, 2002, 05:09 AM

concrete, steel or w hatever is holding the bolts to the ground is gonna give w ay before the titanium bolts.
if i was going to do something like this and explosives did not seem viable i would go for steeling a scrap metal truck that has a lifting arm on the deck, then i would ram the
ATM outa and pick it up w ith the arm putting it on the back of the truck, then after leaving a drumfull of ANNM @ the scene i would make my escape.
but seriously if i w as ever going to do any hit i would make it worth it... IE: enuff dough to retire on some island.
Gargoylebrother April 14th, 2003, 11:36 AM

H m m m m w ell for me if there was a 1/4 in gap or easy access to the bolts holding it dow n I w ould just use some Liquid Nitrogen and freeze the bolts and then hit them with a
concreat chisel it would be fast and quiet also depending on the strength of the safe you could just freeze the hindges and then shatter them. Also if you cant get any Liquid
Nitrogen then you could always take a cutting torch to the bolts also fast enough and you can get a mapp gas torch that will do the job at Homedepot for $50 US.
deadsea August 20th, 2004, 01:16 PM

And if that Fails you w ill always have a plan B
<a href="http://www .saflow.com/burning_lance.htm" target="_blank">http://w ww.saflow .com/burning_lance.htm</a>
Don't those burning lace things require a oxygen supply to work? Rather conspicious to be lugging an oxygen tank around. ;)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Detonation test - Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : Detonation test - Archive file

Detonator
Frequent Poster
Posts: 132
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have 30gm RDX you w ana detonate it or the same ammount of PA.
Does it need to be confined?
How many grams of Mercury Fulminate should you use to detonate it?
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
From: Brussels,Belgium,Europe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes!Otherw ise you will get an uncomplete det. and a lot of your product will be spilled arround!
------------------
"Life that deadly disease sexually transmitted".
"Chemistry is all w hat stinks and explode; Physic is all what never works! ;-p :-) :o )"
Detonator
Frequent Poster
Posts: 132
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHILOU Zrealone my friend...long time no see :-) happy new year man....
How many grams of mercury fulminate you need for detonate 30g of PA or the RDX?
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy New year too Detonator!
*****************************
2g should be more than sufficient for such sensitive explosives; but the detonator must be inside a metalic tube. And the HE also in a larger one or the same diameter! Don't
forget to isolate the PA from the metalic container and detonator...it is a good way to do it every time.
Separate also the PA from the fulminate...mercury and PA forms a sensitive salt and an unstable free acid.
------------------
"Chemistry is all w hat stinks and explode; Physic is all what never works! ;-p :-) :o )"
Detonator
Frequent Poster
Posts: 132
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHILOU The M112 Blcok Demolition Charge is not confined !! and they use a detonator to detonate it....does it mean if you put about (as the M112) 1.25 pound of RDX packed
in cardboard or tin (anything as a container) and used a detonator with 2g of MF it should detonate easilly???
The same question for Picric acid
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
From: None of your bloody business!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have found that with explosives that are not too insensitive, such as RDX, that a container is only really neccessary to keep the explosive in place until the detonator is fired.
This is because the shock wave travels through the explosive so fast that the grains of explosive do not have time to get blown away before they are detonated. In a 10 cm
wide piece of explosive, it takes the shockwave maybe 1/75000 of a second to travel through the it, based on a medium/high detonation velocity. Since the explosive grains
cannot accelerate immediately, they get only a miniscule distance during this time, and are still detonated. Also, they only begin to move once the shock w ave has hit them.
However, if you're going to have NO confinement, I suggest plasticising your explosive and using a # 10 or more detonator.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pure RDX should pose no problems except it to be like suggar...you have to plasticise it w ith let say nitrocellulose (active binder) and nitromethane (or acetone).
The plastic cake must be confined a little if a low speed detonator is used; if a high speed detonator is used then no problem at all.
Mendeleev November 7th, 2003, 01:51 PM

Can anyone tell me which detonating compounds would be considered high velocity and low velocity? Some that I w ould like to know in particular are mercury fulminate, lead
azide, and acetone peroxide. Any others w ould also be appreciated. Furthermore which of these can be detonated w ith electricity, such as that from a car battery?
Thanks.
knowledgehungry November 7th, 2003, 02:35 PM

Thay are all low velocity, there may be some higher velocity primaries out there. I think HMTD can be initiated via electric current.
xyz November 7th, 2003, 10:47 PM

All primaries can be initiated by an electric ignitor if tha'ts what you mean, UTFSE.

Thanks for the info guys, also I wanted to know if mercury fulminate or acetone peroxide would be sufficient to detonate the follow ing explosives: RDX, HMX, PETN, TNT, and
ammonium nitrate. Furthermore can nitroglycerin be used as an initiator due to its sensitivity?
Cyclonite November 8th, 2003, 11:20 AM

Well in blasting caps mercury f. and lead azide are used to detonate RDX. AP is shit compared to all the previous mentioned explosives but can be used to initiate mercury f. and
lead azide not RDX. In the above posts the good ol M112 is mentioned, its just primed w ith a cap or some detcord to make it detonate. Electric currents will not detonate any
primary unless its converted to heat with some nichrome or something. Current will detonate AP, I do know that for sure. NG is not a primary but makes for a great explosive to
sensitize say....AN. NG can be set off with AP and with NG you can set off most everything.

Cyclonite, you said acetone peroxide was shit compared to the other explosives, but mega's site lists its detonation velocity at 5300 m/s vs 4000 m/s for mercury fulminate. So
why is is worse then mercury fulminate :confused:? Does mercury fulminate burn hotter or something? You said that the military uses mercury fulminate to detonate RDX, since
TNT and PETN have higher sensitivities than RDX, is it ok to assume mercury fulminate w ill detonate them as well? What about HMX, w hich is less sensitive than RDX?
Nevermore November 8th, 2003, 02:28 PM

Ap can reach such vod only if compressed, and that is not really healty..
using it lightly tapped or a little compressed shows much slow er vod.
ALENGOSVIG1 November 8th, 2003, 02:35 PM

I've never heard of AP detonating while being pressed.

I have never heard of compressing AP either. Is there any safe or easy way to compress AP or do I pretty much have to stick to using mercury fulminate. Could I use picric acid
for detonation?
Edit: I found this in one of mega's posts:
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-06-2001 02:33 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just a dream...
Reading that New and Improved C4 file by Ragner Benson got me dreaming about something i used to do a long time ago, I'm sure most of us did this at one point. Rolling up
AP or some other primary explosive in aluminum foil and putting it on the stove. The power of that little ball was incredible, I remember doing that once with less than a half a
gram of AP and putting it in a steel dutch pot w/ the lid on. After heating on the stove for about 2 mins. the thing went off w ith an incredible boom scaring the shit out of me.
When i examined what happened the pilot blew out and there was a hole 6x the size of the ball in the bottom of pot. There was a dent about 4 inches deep in the crest of the
stove and the top of the pot vapourized. I mean literally i couldn't find the top of that steel pot for shit and then it hit me what happened. When i looked up above the stove
there w as a hole about 16 inches long by 3 inches wide in the ceiling. I looked up there for the pot cover and it wasn't there, looks like i created sometype of Platter charge
without knowing it (at the time anyway, i was around 13). My mom got scared and called the cops on me, showed them the pot and the ceiling. They asked me what i made,
and i told them some bullshit story about matchheads, beesw ax, sugar and some other junk. Dumbass cops believed me wrote something down and said not to do it again. If
they only knew , but anyway back to the original reason i decided to write this post. What i thought about was if i could harness the pow er of those tight balls and incorporate
them into a detonator. Here's the detonator i'm thinking about, roll up a ball of aluminum foil with say one gram of AP (make it a tight ball by squeezing it real hard, it shouldn't
go off cause i've done that several times in the past). Now that you have the ball get your aluminum tubing or pipe (make sure the ball is small enough to fit in it), pour in a
small amount of a mixture that burns hot (ex. kno3 and sugar, chlorate mix, etc...), then put in the ball and then cover the ball with more mixture.
Heres a simple diagram:
-- []
-- []
///[]///
//***//
//***//
//*O*//
//***//
//***//
////////
[] - fuse
/ - tubing
* - mixture that burns hot
O - aluminum foil ball with primary
The rest of the idea should be easily figured out. If the container is small enough and the ball tight enough you should get an incredibly pow erful detonator.
Let me know if you think this dream would w ork...
Guerilla November 8th, 2003, 06:16 PM

Mendeleev, I dont want to bitch about little things but please stop asking common things in which you can get answ ers by a single search.. Cyclonite, do you know what sort of
electric currents are needed to set AP off? I've alw ays thought AP was non-conductive..
Cyclonite November 9th, 2003, 06:45 AM

Well I havent done any extensive testing but I use a 600,000 volt stun gun, as long as the gap is very small and the AP is loose the spark puts out enough to detonate AP.
Anthony November 9th, 2003, 09:02 AM

I found the same thing with a 100kV stungun. I'm surprised that it doesn't work similarly for other primaries though.
Whatever primary you use should really be pressed, it has many advanatages, and if industry does it, there's usually a good reason.
VoD is not everything in initiating power. For example, the decomposition products of MF are quite heavy which seems to make it a better initiator.
Pressing AP and caps has definitely been discussed before, UTFSE!
Desmikes November 9th, 2003, 05:36 PM

Mendeleev, I do agree that detonation of AP seems to be quite a bit more powerful when confined in aluminum foil and heated, but your idea as far as detonators go, may not
be all that great. Instead of going through the trouble of doing all that to get more out of AP, why not just fill up that same container w ith straight AP? It can probably be used
for production of gasoline fireballs though.
I think I've posted something similar in the past, but indeed, in its "natural" form AP is too hard to egnite/detonate via spark to to be useful, how ever if you crush it dow n to tiny
particles (the use of ballmills and coffe grinders is not recomended ;) ). Even if you take a tiny amount and crush it betw een your fingernails, it can easily be egnited w ith a
spark from standard electric lighters.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > The different shapes of HE! -
Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : The different shapes of HE! - Archive file

Detonator
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 132
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a cylinder 3.5" length, 1" diam eter
closed from both sides...the m etal is coverd with som e kinda plastic m aterial cause of PA.
20g PA, at the top of it 2g Mercury Fulm i n a t e

with cardboard to sperate between them ...
W hen detonated the cylinder didn't explode but the 2 sides (the upper and lower parts) of the cylinder have been cutted with a
b i g b o o m , knowing that the 2 plugs are about 3 milimeter width of cupper.
I think that the shockwave m oved in away that didn't affect the the cylinder it self it went straight to the cap (plug)...
I think that if the MF was in th e m iddle of the HE it would have trim the cylinder ?
as it was for another experme nt with R DX (about 10g) shorter cylinder and MF was in the HE, nothing left of the cylinder.
A n y i d e a s a n d explainations, i need to know different effects that can be caused with diffe r e n t s h a p e s ?
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure the PA detonated?
Detonator
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 132
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I g u e s s i t d i d d e t o n a t e b e c u a s e n o t h i n g l e f t b u t some of the yellow PA was left outside the cylinder and som e stuck inside...
Any ideas?
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From : England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surely if there was PA left, the n it didn't detona te?
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm fairly sure that most of the PA didn't detonate, because I can't see h ow the pipe could have stood up to 20g's of it
detonating. It must h ave just been dispersed into the a ir by the blast of the MF. (Congratulations! You've just m a d e a
chemical weapon! PA is very toxic, as you probably are aware)
I have no idea why it might not have detonated, though. 2 gram s o f M F s h o u l d h a v e b e e n e n o u g h . Try five and see what
happens.
Detonator
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 132
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5g is way too m uch...
I think that the length of the cylinder and the position of the detonator is som ehow wrong,
By the way i don't think that alot of the PA went in the a ir...
I will m a k e a n o t h e r e x p e r m ent and i will let you know.
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your right, 5 gram s is too m uch... But it'd practically guarantee detonatio n.
I f y o u d o a n o t h e r e x p e r i m ent, it would b e h e l p f u l i f y o u c o u l d p o s t s o m e p h o t o g r a p h s o f w h a t h a p p e n e d i f y o u h a v e t h e s t u f f
to do that with.
BTW , what is the wall thickness of the pipe you're using?
Detonator
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 132
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it's about 2.5-3mm of cupper...
can i add vasline to P A???

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > s h a p e d c h a r g e a n n m /ap - Archive
file
Log in
View Full Version : shaped charge annm/ap - Archive file

shady m utha
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 149
From : austra lia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I m ade 2 wine bottle shaped charges 1 was straight ap the other was annm with a ap detonator.W h e n t h e a n n m d e t o n a t e d n o t
even a scratch on the concrete now when the ap detonated it did nt punch any holes threw the concrete but it did crack the fuck
out of the concrete and then I could pull up chunks up with my hands.
king s p a z
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 346
From : U K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i would say that it could be that the casing was not strong enoug h to hold the detonation m omenterally to direct the a n n n m
detonation which i would guess to be m uch m ore powerful than the ap detonation. the lesser power of the ap would mean its
detonation could be directed by the sam e case that failed to direct the annm
theres probably loads of errors but i'm tired

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > easy det? - Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : easy det? - Archive file

sadsakjoel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 170
From :
p o s t e d D e c e m ber 21, 2000 12:50 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i was considering m a k i n g a d e t o n a t e r o u t o f s o m e copper tubing the sam e d i a m e t e r o f a 1 2 g a u g e s h e l l a n d h a l f w a y a l o n g
the tube put a prim er inside
-------------------------- tube
|
|primer -------- fuse
|
--------------------------
t h e n s o m e black powder on the sam e side as where the fuse would go and on the other side of the seperator (primer) som e
d o u b l e b a s e d S P ? c r i m p the ends shut. the black powder might be enough to set of the le ad styhp nate in the prim er which
could easily detonate the NG in the powder?
aussie_kid
A new voice
Posts: 36
From : Austra lia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
um m yeah...
J u s t m a k e s o m e AP
I dont think the blackpowder would initiate the prim er.
I think that AP should be enough to detonate the NG in DB SP
BoB-
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 649
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W ell, I doubt you'll actually detonate the NC/NG with a primer.
aussie_kid
A new voice
Posts: 36
From : Austra lia
posted Decem ber 21, 2000 11:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it possible to detonate NC? Do you need really strong confinem e n t a n d a g o o d d e t o n a t o r ?
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2304
From : England
posted Decem ber 22, 2000 06:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A while ago I did ask what the purpose of NG in SP is and was to ld that it is supposed to d etonate and give a little extra kick.
SO according to that, the prim er should be capable of detonating the NG, but the NC shouldn't or you'd have a suicide load!
sadsakjoel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 170
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
today i m a d e s o m e with som e slow burning gre en m eal powder and enough powd er from about 7 shells (12 gauge), it worked
pretty loud, but it wasn't on any explosives
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reply to aussie kid: NC can easily detonate (the stuff with c. 13% Nitro gen). It was used *wet* in torpedoes until quite
recently. W hen dry, fully nitrated cellulose can m ake the transition from deflagration to detonation all by itself. It is about 30%
m ore powerful than TNT, and detontes at around 7300 m /s depending on density. It's only drawba ck that I can see is it can
d e c o m p o s e d u r i n g s t o r a g e i f n o t c o m p letely pu re.
PHILOU Zrea lone

Freq uent Poster
Posts: 479
From : Brussels,Belgium,Europe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead styphnate (or trinitroresorcinate of Pb) can be initiated by flam me so black powder will do it n icely!
NC can detonate if confined; a flam m e in it can then turn into a deflagrating wave that can finally turn into a detonation wave.
NC is wel primed by a detonating charge of lead styphnate.
------------------
" L i f e t h a t d e a d l y d i s e a s e s e x u a l l y t r a n s m itted".
" C h e m istry is all what stinks a nd explode; Physic is all what never works! ;-p :-) :o )"

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > fragmention bomb
Log in
View Full Version : fragmention bomb
anarkisten_83 S e p t e m b e r 1 1th, 2001, 05:57 PM

C o u l d s o m e o n e g i v e m e a tips of wich explosive that has the highest VOD? Som e t h i n g t h a t s u s e d i n g r e n a d e s , a n d
m issiles,and whats best for fragm ents?
I was thinking RDX?
cutefix S e p t e m b e r 1 2th, 2001, 01:55 AM

High VO D explosives are not im portant for fragm e n t a t i o n p u r p o s e s , y e s , i t i s c a p a b l e o f p r o d u c i n g m a x i m u m fragmentation,but
the shrapnel form ed is not effective for antipersonnel weapon like a grenade(fragments will be to sm all).You will notice in
s o m e grenade(pineapple type) that it has corrugated surface in order to enhance form ation of suitably sized fragm ents.In that
e x a m ple any suitable explosive like flake TNT,nitrostarch or eve n p o t a s s i u m c h l o r a t e b a s e d e x p l o s i v e c o u l d b e a p p lied in that
w e a p o n . S m o o t h e r g r e n a d e s u s e s a f a s t e r d e t o n a t i n g e x p l o s i v e ( R DX/TNT m ixture).
Pure RDX is to fast fo r grenade application.
Missiles(m ilitary type) uses different explosives according to application.Antitank m issiles use high e s t V O D e x p l o s i v e s f o r
better arm or penetration.Antiaircraft m issiles uses slightly lower VO D for good blast effect and fragm entation.Many of m issile
warheads contains R DX also.
R e g a r d i n g y o u r q u e s t i o n a b o u t h i g h e s t V O D,currently th e only practical and well used fast explosive is HMX and it is widely
used in missile warhe ads in various formulations(i.e.,containing metals,halogenated plastics ,explosive binder or in admixtu re
with other ex plosives like TNT).Although there are newer faster explosive s(like HNIW),but its not widely used now...
I would suggest that you do m ore reading in th e s e m aterials.The Forum has good archive about this subject .Megalom a n i a
files also..Se arch the web for additonal inform a t i o n t h a t will s atisfy your quest fo r e x p l o s i v e k n o w l e d g e

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Timer Electronics Q u e s t i o n
Log in
View Full Version : Timer Electronics Question

Ive got m e an electronic countdown tim er.
(by the way i am shit with electronics!)
I have rem o v e d t h e s p e a k e r . W h e n t h e t i m e is up it would send 1.5v A.C to the speaker (i measured it with a m ultim eter).
Now what i want to do is replace the speaker with som e kind of electric activated switch to close a second circuit (to carry at
least 9v D.C). I thought a relay switch would be good but i just can't find one which will operate at such a small voltage. http://
theforum.virtualave.n et/ubb/smilies/frown.gif
I was thinking m aybe a transistor could do the job, but i don't know much about this or even what type of transistor to get!
I know this h a s b e e n d i s c u s s e d before but none of the posts were that helpful!
Also before you say it the first thing i tried was to put a battery in series with the tim er circuit but the power from the battery
s e e m s to close the switch in the timer!(m aking the tim e r u s e l e s s )
Does anyone have any suggestions?
EventHorizon S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2001, 08:08 PM

There are m any relays that would work and would mostlikly be the best [m ethod]. Are you certain that the output was AC and
not DC with a 1.5V ripple, with cheap equipmen t this could be possible.
Other circuits would work, but if you don't know how to g et these to work, I'd really not use your device for setting something
off. Sound like way to m uch m argin of error.
[ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y E v e n t H o r i z o n (edited Septem ber 09, 2001).]

W hat realys are yo re fering to?
It was A.C im sure!
Tony Montana S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2001, 09:48 PM

You are going to want a PNP transistor to start with, these are off in the norm al postion. Here is a place tha t sells th e m :
http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=550&type=store
Next you are going to have to m ake sure the voltages are right. W hat are you using for a det? Is it a lightbulb, this is a goo d
choice as you can test if it works prope rly, and when rea dy to use. Using a nailfile, file a sm all hole in the b ulb and fill it with
powdered m atch heads(this will ignite any AP, HMTD).
http://m e m bers.optusnet.com . a u / ~ h a n d / m ontana/trans.gif
[ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y T o n y M o n t a n a ( e d i t e d S e p t e m ber 09, 2001).]
mongo blongo S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2001, 01:38 AM

Thanx Tony!
Im using a rocket ign itor (never fails) in Lead Azide with Picric Acid booster. Using a 9v Duracell (only battery that produces
enough current for this kind of job)
I think i m ay actually have som e of these! http ://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/smile.gif
W hich one would use for these specs?
Or what would be prin ted on the transistor so that i m ay identify them ?
Thanx dude!
Tony Montana S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2001, 08:08 AM

M o n g o , I m a y be wrong, but plodding along like this is natural learning (at least in m y case) and extracting transistors from
a m plifiers and tape d ecks proves to be an inva luble lea rning experience, I sugge st the lightbulb m e t h o d o n c e a g a i n . A s f o r
Emitter Base and C urrent determ ination, that com es with experience with electronics and having yo ur "SEMI-CO N D U C T O R " up
the right way! I also suggest a "bread board" for electrical experiments. But apart from that, all I can say is your prodding" is
in the right d irection, keep going!!!!
mongo blongo S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2001, 03:43 PM

W ell I will just have to carry on experimenting then. http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/sm ile.gif
Do you suggest the Lightbulb simply so that yo u can test if it works? (you can just test if electricity flows with a buzzer or
s o m ething?)
Is a "bread board" the thing which is like a grid with loads of holes in it? I think i m a y h a v e s e e n o ne.
Thanx Dude! http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/sm ile.g if

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > R emote R adio Detonator
Log in
View Full Version : Remote Radio Detonator
PYRO500 S e p t e m b e r 2 3rd, 2001, 05:28 PM

recently I was looking at m y cordless phone power supp ly's, one ran off of 9v dc, the other 12V dc, both were fairly low current
and have a page function, here's what I was thinking, attach the speaker of the cordless phone to a relay or triac or
s o m ething, then you have a rem ote switch, the n hook this to a battery and an electronic detonator and you would h a v e a
detonator that would have a fairly lang range, these are also capable of working at distances of up to 1/2 mile or m ore when
you use a beter antenna. best of all these things are cheap, the y are like 30 bucks each for a good one com pared to a 50
dollar pager or RC car. also th ey are a self contained transmitter/recever.
------------------
[URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro20 0 0 u s / ]
Anthony S e p t e m b e r 2 3rd, 2001, 06:45 PM

Good idea!
No call log like with a mobile/phone pager either.
------------------
"Shit happen s. Get a fucking helm et"

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Busting into my safe.
Log in
View Full Version : Busting into my safe.
DBSP June 21st, 2002, 12:55 PM

At home I have a safe that has been standing there for more than 20 years, my father used to keep dokuments there when
he had a small foto company. The thing is that there is no key to the safe since my mother has hidden it to well and now she
can't find it. The safe hasn't been opened for about 15 years.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/safe.JPG" target="_blank">This is the safe.</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/safe_bolt_flash.JPG" target="_blank">This</a> is how the locking bolt

lookes like, it's 20 mm thick and there are two of them one locking into the top of the safe and the other into the bottom.
The safe will be opened using explosives therefore this topic, I will need some help figuring out where to place the charges
and such.
I will be using shaped charges propelled by ANNM, the charges will be of the wine bottle type. There is a couple of reasons to
why I'll be using wine bottles. One is that it's the only thing I have on hand, I could make a metal one but then the other
reason prohibits that. There are some papers in the safe and they can not be destroyed. If I used a metal shape there would
be some very hot metal that might accidentally ignite the paper thus destroying it.
I've made One shaped charge before that was a wine bottle type with 220g of ANNM, after the detonation there was only
pulverised glass left and I think that that would be the best choise considering the papers inside the safe.
If you would tip the safe to the right the papers would end up att the bottom(right wall) thus they would be well over 400mm
from the charge, I think that they shuld survive. The charges would have to be aimed very precisely to hit the bolt in the
centerand ripping it off. The space between the wall and the door would allso be covered with flat irons and hotglued into place
only leaving a small hole at the bolt to keep hot gases out.
The walls of the safe are about 40mm thick and the safe could be used as a box to press caps in after it's busted.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/safe_door_right.JPG" target="_blank">door, sideview.</a>
Anyway what do you think of this project.
A-BOMB June 21st, 2002, 01:20 PM

DBSP what type of lock does it have on it? And is it a fireproof safe or are the wall 40mm of steel? If its a fireproof safe, I
guess that you could you a use a copper or nickel lined shaped sharge, instead of a glass one.
xoo1246 June 21st, 2002, 01:47 PM

Very interesting project, indeed. Is there only one bolt or one at the bottom too(can't see due to that paper).
Maybe a LSC could be used too, easier to aim in this case.

As I said there is one at the top and one at the bottom. As far as I can tell there is nothing at the left side of the safe.
I don't know if it's fireproof but a qualified quess is that it isn't. An LSC would be nice but I don't want to take the risk.
I don't know if an LSC would be powerful enaugh to cut the bolt. It's 20 mm thick and probably hardened. Maby you could cut
it layer by layer with an LSC but then there is the same problem with the risk of destroying the papers.
BTW does anyone have any figures of what the best angle is for an LSC?
xoo1246 June 21st, 2002, 03:52 PM

Oups, someone didn't look hard enough.
Here are two patents covering LSC:s
4,430,939 - using 90 degrees.
3,855,929 - using 85 degrees.
Have seen both larger and smaller angles too.
But you are right, LSC:s are probably not suitable for the job, according to Explosives, Propellants & Pyrotechnics, a typical LSC
can cut 1 cm of steel and 2 cm of aluminium alloy.
Better for concreat or thin metal plate.
[ June 21, 2002, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

Could someone tell me how you find a patent when you have the patent number. I don't understand the new USPTO website,
since thay changed it I haven't found anything I've been looking for.
xoo1246 June 21st, 2002, 04:12 PM

My pleasure, click here:
<a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm" target="_blank">http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm</a>
Enter the patent number and there you go.
Has it changed?, it looks the same as usual to me. Here is the main page: <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patft/"
target="_blank">http://www.uspto.gov/patft/</a>
pyromaniac_guy June 21st, 2002, 04:43 PM

although this suggestion isnt nearly as fun as useing explosives, but did you consider or try drilling out the lock? it looks to
me as though this is simply a firesafe, not necisarily one intended to protect aginast forced entry... if it's only a keylock
shouldnt it be easy to get into???
DBSP June 22nd, 2002, 07:20 AM

Drilling out the lock won't do shit since there is still the 2 locking bolts holding it closed. My guess is that the easiest way of
getting into it is using a shaped charge.
Madog555 June 22nd, 2002, 12:08 PM

cant you have a locksmith open it?
DBSP June 22nd, 2002, 12:36 PM

That wouldn't be as fun now would it? And I wan't the safe afterwords to build a press inside it, that way you would be quite well
protected while pressing caps.
mongo blongo June 22nd, 2002, 01:22 PM

I have another method using explosives that is usually used to open a safe.
It involves using a PBX placed at the edge of the locking bolts and hinges. When detonated simultaneously, the door is
quickly rammed into the safe and hits the rim of the access hole. The door is then bounced back. The sudden shock of the
door being rammed in and bouncing back will break the hinges and locking bolts and the door will fall out without any of the
contents being damaged.
McGuyver June 22nd, 2002, 01:50 PM

I admit it would be way more fun to blow the safe open, but picking the lock would not be near as much trouble. By the age of
the safe and the look of the lock it looks as though it would be quite easy to pick. Don't have picks or a pick gun?- <a
href="http://www.lockmasters.com" target="_blank">www.lockmasters.com</a> or <a href="http://www.southord.com."
target="_blank">www.southord.com.</a> You might also consider cutting the lock bars with a metal cutoff saw. No damage to
the documents either way. :)
DBSP June 22nd, 2002, 02:41 PM

Picking the lock would be very hard since it says "picking proof" on the safe and the bolts will most likely to be hardened just
because you aren't supposed to be able to cut the bolts with a saw.
Anyway I won't be able to blow the safe for a weak or so so I have some time to plan the thing.
McGuyver June 22nd, 2002, 10:58 PM

Of course it says pick proof! :rolleyes: It might have been pick proof back in the 80's to the amateur, but it certainly isn't
today. Have you ever seen a metal cutoff saw? Take a look at lockmasters catalog- they have one rigged up just for cutting
"hardened bolts". Lockmasters is also heavy duty, but for your case a simple circular saw size blade is probably fine. Their
blade is just a regular abrasive metal cutoff blade-nothing fancy.
PYRO500 June 23rd, 2002, 12:50 AM

Good luck picking a "pick-proof" lock as an ametuer, the things that companys do to make locks pick resistant are adding
mushroom or conical shaped pins, fake pins, spacing the pins out, and a whole slew of things that generaly give you a
headache. often these locks are hard to bind with a torque wrench and are somehow rake resistant too. Not to say you can't
pick the lock it's just that it is probobly gonna be more diffficult than your standard deadbolt door lock. an abrasive cutoff disk
on a rotary tool might work. Something I would try to do is take a metal wedge and try to crack the hinges by hammering the
wedge betwen the safe body and the door.
NoltaiR June 23rd, 2002, 04:36 AM

I would say your best bet would be to try drilling the locking bolts. This is the classic method but you may have to do a little
research on the type of your safe to see exactly where the locking bolts are. (Unless, of coarse, you have a free day to spend
just randomly drilling). But if you can find one bolt, then the other is usually the same distance from the center of the lock as
the one you found.
I guess if all else fails and you want to have a little fun you could pull a move such as that on the movie 'The Score' and drill a
hole through the top, fill with water, and detonate a charge about midways through the filled safe. Now movies tend to
overexaggerate things, but I know from personal testing of detonations within water-filled confinements that you can definetly
tear some shit apart, and you will always get more bang for your buck than one would probably expect for a scenario such as
that.
edit: well I didn't read your first post until I was done replying and it seems that you can already see where the locking bolts
are at.. so I just say drill those.
[ June 23, 2002, 03:39 AM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]
nbk2000 June 23rd, 2002, 09:48 AM

Drill a hole through the back of the safe (or floor) where the metal is thinner. Then fill it with sand. This will protect your
papers. Otherwise, they WILL be destroyed by molten glass and incandescent gases from the SC bouncing around inside the
safe.
Does the safe have relockers? If so, shocking the safe with an explosion will activate them and lock it up even tighter.
Try an oxy-acetylene torch instead. Not sexy, but safer. Or an abrasive cut-off wheel to cut slots in the metal to pry it open
like a giant can.
Magas June 23rd, 2002, 11:41 AM

Why wreck a usful item. Safes are usually designed to stop you getting in from the front. Because they are usually put next to
a wall they usually make the back of resonable thinner material about 6-8mm steel if you get a large angle grinder with a
metal cutting blade it goes through the rear very easily. cut a large square hole. Next is usually the fire retard material
something like kitty litter. Then the inner wall again use the angle grinder. When you have taken the back off you can unbolt
the inside of the door and manually unlock it. Then its just a matter of getting a key cut & rewelding the rear up again. You
can buy very cheap safes at auctions when they dont have the key or combination and then just get into them. My large rifle
safes are ex bank and thats hiw i opened them after they lost the combo's at the auction
Mick June 23rd, 2002, 12:04 PM

just get a angle grinder(aka cut off wheel) and cut a slot down either side of the locking bolts, then cut a slot at the top of bolt
so you end up with something like this...
<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-
family: monospace;"> _____________________________
| ______ |
| | | |
| | | top door |
| | cut | "frame" | 2 = locking bolt
| | here | |
|__|______|___________________|
___|_2__|____________________
| |
| door |
| |
|\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
</pre><hr /></blockquote>once you have cut the material infront of the
locking bolt, stick a pinch bar(or whatever happens to fit) inbetween the door, and the little square you just cut and snap the
fucker out.
do the same to the bottom, then open it.
from the looks of the pictures, the safe is cast iron, in which case its going to be as hard as the hobs of hell to do anything to
it - that includes blasting it.
if you were to blast it the only advice i can offer, is place you explosive in the center of the door, and then place a really large
bag of water on top of the charge, then detonate. the water helps to "direct" the force in the opposite direction.
don't bother with LSC's, a home made LSC isn't going to do shit to a cast iron safe.
oh, another idea i had, if you know someone with a hydrolic press(like 40+ ton) just get them to press the door(its cast, it
won't bend or deform, it'l just crack)
much faster, no cutting, no explosives, no mess.
DBSP June 23rd, 2002, 12:45 PM

Mick I like the Idea of cutting the bolts free. That might work very well. I might chose this method, since it it the only simple
and effective idea so far.
If I where to use a SC I would direct it so that the jet hits the top of the bolt from below so that you don't get any jet directed
so that it can reach into the safe.
I doubt the safe is made out of cast iron, that would be far to easy to penetrate.
drstrangelove June 23rd, 2002, 06:42 PM

This looks like fun!
I have done this before-nice and simple.
Because the safe is so small your going to have no troble.
I once had a small safe like that. I broke in the threw the door got the money out, but I have always wanted to blow a safe up
just to see what happened.
I took the safe out bush and rested it on its back because of all the scrub and bushes it was not laying flat I put 250 grams of
annm on the ground and gently put the back of the safe against the charge(not squashing the charge.
Boom the metal skin stayed in one piece maybe two, all the concrete showered down all over the place.
Lots of fun.
There was nothing in this safe and the door was already breached.
Mick June 24th, 2002, 03:02 AM

on the contrary, if it is cast it won't be easy to penetrate.
the majority of "home and shop" safes are made from cast, because its hard as all fuck, and its really hard to cut(chews thru
cut off wheels like there paper)
maybe this is a dumb idea, but have you tried a screw driver in the lock? it would take alot of force to turn it, but you might
get lucky and shear the pins off. another way to grind the shape of a key out of a high tensile bolt, then turn that with a long
spanner. or, if you have access to a compressor and an impact wrench, just use that.(the "hammer" action of a impact wrench
bounce back and forth again the pins, eventually shearing them off)
try the dumb, easy ideas first, and work you way up from there...you might get lucky.
DBSP June 24th, 2002, 06:45 AM

If it's cast iron the metal is much more brittle than steel that has been worked with. When I attacked a piece of 10mm cast
iron with a 220g ANNM wine bottle shaped charge, the metal was penetrated with ease and the iron just seemed to crumble.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/200g_ANNM-SP2.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/

~u47804009/E&W/200g_ANNM-SP2.jpg</a>
Have a look at the pic and zoom in on where the metal is penetrated and you'll see what I mean.
stanfield June 24th, 2002, 07:17 PM

You must attack the hinges, it seems you have 4 hinges, work on a parallel circuit wired to an auto battery, your blasting caps
must be reliable, they must detonate simultaneously !
This is the way I will follow if one day, I got the same problem... But, I have plastic explosive with polyisobutylene,... so I
could inject it between the surfaces, ANNM can't do that !
see ya !
DBSP June 24th, 2002, 08:50 PM

Before I anything I will have to check what kind of materials and what thickness I'll be up against. The I'll do whats needs to
be done. Stanfield I'd like to be able to use the safe afterwords which means that I'll only cut the bolts thus making the safe
usable, not as a safe but as a container for a cap pressing mecanism.
Flake2m June 25th, 2002, 08:52 AM

LIQUID NITROGEN.
I know of someone that had their bike stolen with the aid of liquid nitrogen. The thief poured some liquid nitrogen on the bike
lock and then hit the lock with a hammer, the lock shattered and the thief rode off with the bike.
You could use Liquid nitrogen to freeze the door and then smash it with a sledge hammer the force will shatter the metal.
Concentrate on the places like the locking bolts. The only problem would be getting hold of liquid N2. If you are studying at
university then you might be able to get some from them.
mongo blongo June 25th, 2002, 11:04 AM

I think they use N2 at frozen foods factories to quickly freeze foods ready for transport. They would have a place outside the
factory where they keep the tanks of it. It's outside the factory by law because of the obvious hazards of N2. This same law is
why chemical stock rooms are outside college and universities. The stock room outside my last college had no alarms or any
security except for a locked door. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
endotherm June 25th, 2002, 01:25 PM

Liquid N2 is some nasty stuff, i have the pleasure of my uncle being a dermatologist, and when i go down to visit, i get to play
around at the office. They have several large tanks of liquid N2 for surgery where they use it to freeze-burn off warts and other
skin crap. I have some preety nasty looking burns on my hands from playing with it when I was a kid, but it honestly doesn't
hurt to get burnt with it that much. It is funny because after the initial burn, it behaves very similiar to a burn from heat. Skin
is raised, blisters, etc.
Another peculiar behavior of this stuff is that it won't burn an area of skin, if there is no hair on it, because if there is no hair it
will evaporate before any tissue is damaged. And when you pour an amout on a solid surface, a cloud of vapor spreads across
the floor and little beads of the still liquid nitrogen race across it like cars on a highway, wow that was all very offtopic, but this
stuff is really amazing...but back to topic:
I've found that Liquid N2 doesn't really freeze materaials that contain no water. It is true that you can dip a mouse in it, pull it
out, and shatter it like glass, but this doesn't work for metals, or other things I tested like rubber bands, and plastic pens.
Sure it will make the metal more brittle, but if it's hardened steel it is still going to require quite the bashing before it shatters.
Perhaps a combination of freezing it, and then hitting it with a shaped charge, that is guranteed to do the trick. But you have a
short time frame before the temperature of the metal dramatically raises back up.
mongo blongo June 25th, 2002, 04:19 PM

What about freezing the metal and then pouring boiling hot water on it?
Zambosan June 25th, 2002, 04:47 PM

The safe would almost certainly survive that temperature shock; however, cooling to cryogenic temperatures brings the metal
atoms into closer alignment, giving you crystalline structures that are easier to cleave & shatter. However, steel introduces
carbon impurities into the iron for just this purpose; interrupting the crystalline lattice with irregularities "toughens" it greatly.
As an aside, slow or quick temperature changes from hot to cool (cooling vs. quenching, or drawing the temper in hot oil) are
the techniques used to optimize the hardness and toughness of a piece of steel, particularly in knifemaking. Cooling slowly
from red hot will give you a very tough metal, but it will be more malleable and won't hold an edge well. Quenching in cold
water will give you a very hard, but brittle blade.
xoo1246 June 25th, 2002, 05:26 PM

Why boher with cooling the bolts, I bet a improvised SC can handle it.
Mick June 25th, 2002, 10:32 PM

i don't know why BDSP, but that picture you uploaded of the cast pipe you hit with a SC doesn't look right..
not only doesn't the material in the picture look like a pipe, it doesn't look like cast.
the material in the picture has a gray/white color like conrete, but its deformed like metal.
looks odd, either way.
anyways, enough talking about this fucking safe.

lets hit it with a SC and see what happens.
if it works, good shit.
if it don't, still good shit, cause then we get to try other things =D
on the subject of LN2,

my approch using that would be to make a ring about 30mm thick out of some Blu-tack or silicone on top of the safe, then
pour the LN2 into the ring so its contained and concentrated.
then after a minute(or just when the LN2 evapourates) i'd belt the frozen section as hard as i could with something like a Pick
or a block splitter (or something with a sharp point)
eh just a thought

acctually, i just realised what that image is of.
it looks like an I beam, or a piece of railroad track.
in either case, its not cast iron - it's normal everyday steel.
pyromaniac_guy June 26th, 2002, 12:13 AM

Mick,
The liquid nitrogen method is not at all likely to work... I used to work for a company that had nitrogen delivered by the semi
load... They went through so much that we were able to skim off 20, 30 or even 100 liters here and there to play around with,
without anyone noticing... where as just about anything that is flexable normally, ie flesh, rubber, water, etc will become
fragile, to shatter-prone at LN2 tempertures, I have yet to find any rigid materials, ie metals, ect that behave similarly.... the
brittleness of a material might be increased, but things dont happen like they do in Terminator 2... everything does not
instantly become brittle when exposed to liquid nitrogen....
DBSP June 26th, 2002, 07:43 AM

Ok I took some new pics of the track. It is cast iron. Normal everyday stell won't snap like that, it bends before breaking off. If
you have seen ragnars video of the SC yu can see that the steel has been bended where it has been penetrated, here it has
been crumbled and a piece has been snapped off. The SC was placed 15cm aove the track and the chock wave snapped the
thing off along the middle without bending it. And the white thing on the iron is is pulverised glass from tha SC. Enaugh of said
about that.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/side_zoom.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/

E&W/side_zoom.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/zoom_of_penetrated_area.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/
~u47804009/E&W/zoom_of_penetrated_area.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/iron_penetrated.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/
~u47804009/E&W/iron_penetrated.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/overlook.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/
E&W/overlook.JPG</a>

Why not use use a "freeze and thaw" method. you pour liquid nitrogen all over the safe to freeze it. then you put an oxy set
to the safe. the sudden changes in temperature will warp the metal. repeat.
If the liquid N2 wont make it bittle then how come you can make a decent lock shatter by hitting it with a hammer after
freezing it with liquid N2?
I do agree that hardened steel will be difficult to be make brittle. I am thinking that layer of metal will flake away (mind the
pun :D )if you hit it with a sledge after it is frozen because of the temperature differences in the metal.
pyromaniac_guy June 26th, 2002, 02:12 PM

Flake2m.....
First off this is a safe... It probably weighs in excess of 100 lbs...(if it is a fire safe it would probably weigh even more, but the
thermal insulation material has much less of a heat capacity than steel) do you have any idea as to how much liquid nitrogen
that would require to take it down to 77k??? Also keep in mind that room temp to LN2 temp is a dT of only 220 degrees c or
so.... you might as well heat up the safe with a torch then quench it with water....
Finally... who said you can bust a good padlock by freezing it in LN2??? I MIGHT belive it if the padlock had a large cavity on
the inside, it was filled with water, and then frozen... but otherwise i just dont see it within the realm of possibility... If you want
to take a video of shattering a lock after a ln2 dunk, I'll eat crow pie, but till then the idea is just BS....
Since I mentioned the ice thing.... what about it.... fill the safe with water.... then freeze it (if you can find a deep freezer
somewhere...) the door will have a massive plate of ice pushing out on it, and you may sheer the hinges off clean... This
method costs only a few gallons of water to try, is guaranteed not to burn up any documents, and only takes however long you
would spend haulling the thing into a freezer.... a much nicer method than a cut off wheel... IF it works! :)

pryo guy, yes i do know movies portray LN2 as some magical stuff that makes things shatter with the touch of a feather.
the LN2 will make the steel more brittle. thus more prone to cracking when shocked.
DBSP, i still maintain that is not cast iron.

the reason i say this is because cast iron has no flex in, its hard and brittle. if you were to make a railway line out of cast iron
the moment the track tries to flex a little when a train goes over it, it will snap and crumble and thus the train de-rails and
people die.
(if you find some old rail lines still in use near you, go sit next them as a train goes over them, and you will see that they do
infact flex up and down)
now, i know you thinking "the moment a train goes over them, they will snap and crumble" - much like your piece of rail there
has done.
well, an observation i have made with my father is steel that is placed under stress for a long period of time will often
"crystalise".
i don't proclaim to how it works its just an observation i have made(it may not be caused by stress...it could be something
else, i don't know - its the best explenation i could come up with).
a few year back, my father and i were stripping down old mower engines for spares. A couple of the motors were really
old(about 40 odd years). when we removed the crankshafts(3/4 diameter) from them with a drift, the shafts just snapped...i
tapped one of them on the end with the drift and "plop" the other end of the shaft just fell off.
when looking at the end section where it had snapped, the metal had changed to dark gray "crystal" type appearance(as seen
in your picture "side zoom"). the shaft was so brittle, i could snap off sections of it with my thumb.
if i didn't know what i was looking at, i would have sworn that it was cast iron, it was so similar.
and to further support my reasoning, i used to work for the SRA (State Rail Authority) so i have seen my fair share of railway
track and i have never ever ever seen a piece of cast iron railway track.
i have however seen heaps of rail that has the same "insides" as yours.
quite a few years ago(about 50 years ago or more) they replaced the original rail line from one end of the blue mountains to
the other - however they did a real dodgy job and never removed the old rail in some sections(some sections stretched for
4kms) they just built the new line straight over the top of the old one.
some years later(1998) someone cottened on to the fact they had done this, and the SRA had to pull up all the rail remove
the old stuff and put the new stuff back down.
Alot of the old stuff they pulled out was broken and crumbled much the same as they piece you have there.
fuck...don't belive i bothered typing this all out...i should just nod and agree with you and be done with it, cause who really
gives a fuck at the end of the day.
ignore the spelling mistakes, couldn't be assed spell checking it.
Zambosan June 26th, 2002, 03:47 PM

Mick, I think you are describing what prolonged thermal and mechanical stresses can do to low-grade steel. Hot spots, coupled
with the torsional stresses that something like a crankshaft will be subjected to, will cause crystalline sub-structures to form in
the metal. Over time, the varying degrees of crystallization in different parts of the mass will subject the whole to such a large
amount of internal stresses that the part becomes very brittle and will cleave along the thousands of little crystalline lattices.
High grade steel contains a high carbon content, helping to prevent this by toughening the steel.
Anthony June 26th, 2002, 05:02 PM

Enough talk, it's smashing time! :)
For practicality's sake, I'd say rule out LN2.
I'd think that cutting would cost you a fortune in disc, even if it was only mild steel, the shear thickness of it would eat up your
blades.
How about smacking it with a shaped charge and seeing what happens? :)

Anthony.. did ya catch my idea of useing water????
10fingers June 27th, 2002, 06:20 AM

Enough talk exactly! A blind man with a rusty file could have gotten the damn thing open by now.
xoo1246 June 27th, 2002, 07:15 AM

Haha, that was funny and true. By the way, DBSP you could download the safe cracking manual from the FTP. I'm almost
done, will covert it to PDF.
Machiavelli June 27th, 2002, 09:02 AM

Thanks xoo. While I didn't bother to continue the discussion on the ftp, I'm glad someone's finally working on that book.
McCoy June 27th, 2002, 03:15 PM

Don't want to sound negative, but the railway track looks indeed a bit odd. First of all, that the track is torn in two pieces is
strange. If it would be cast iron it would be possible but I agree with Mick that it can't be cast iron, it just looks that way when it
breaks. I saw a piece of old track and it indeed makes you think it's cast iron with a small layer of normal steel on top and
sure does look different from the normal end of a track or a pice of track that has been cut by a torch or grinding wheel.
Secondly, the hole produced differs a lot from what you expect from the effect of a (improvised winebottle) shaped charge. If
you look at the pictures in the book "improvised shaped charges" you see the effect of a cokebottle charge on 1" steel from a
armoured door. It's more or less a round hole, sharp edges on the top (and probably stretched steel edges on the other side
) and the steel is still flat and not bended and torn. Similar to the effect of an acetylene torch, just smoother (and quicker :) ).
And although the railway track is not 1" thick (maybe 1/2" ?) I would expect the same effects: a more or less round hole with
sharp edges on the impact side and some stretched steel on the exit side and the inside very smooth. And little or no bending
of the steel around.
And what certainly is not to be expected is breaking up of the whole track (if it would be brittle you would expect breaking it up
to pieces in all directions anyway).
But I could be wrong (although this happens not often :) ).
Anyway, I too think it's about time you bust into your safe, and might I recommend to use explosives :) (not because it's the
best method (you'll probably be better off using the lockpicking/breaking methods described) but I just want to see what the
effects will be. Saves me a safe :) ).
[ June 27, 2002, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: McCoy ]
xoo1246 June 27th, 2002, 05:11 PM

Well, the wine bottle shaped charge liners isn't exactly perfect. Dependends on the bottle you use and on the standoff
distance. To me it looks like a fairly wide and not so deep cone was use(?) in combination with ordinary blast effect. Here is
images off an early shaped charge with a not so ideal liner and too close standoff. You still have a shaped charge effect, but
the force is applied to a larger area. And the jet has not enough time to fully extend before it reaches the pipe.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/SC01.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/SC01.jpg</a>
(Entry hole)
(Multiple exits holes)
(View from inside pipe)
andreas June 27th, 2002, 07:37 PM

Whell I dond't know if anybody has any idear of metall structural behaviour or mafufacturing methods. A railway track is never
cast becouse that wouldn't stand up to the abuse. A railway track is is formed with big wheels as it is in a red hot state. This
couses the metal parts to fuse a cast piece is so brittle becouse the inner and outer layers cool in a different rate witch causes
stresses within the metall. And further more because there are sand pieces and bubbles of air trapped in the metal. The point
of my story is that this is probably a corroded galvanised bit of cast steel. And not a railway track as this cant be cast becouse
of the stresses it has to stand up with. Ps this is basic noledge that you learn in the studie of technical engineering. Do a
search on test peaces of pulling tests off different metalls there is a are three basic things and that are elastic stress, plastic
stress and breaking stress.
elastic means that the metall does deform but not permanent
plastic means it deforms permanent
breacking speaks for itself.
cast metall doesnt stand up well toplastic/ and elastic stress, but they do deform. please correct me if Im wrong its bin a
wile since a was tought that but if Im not mistaken thats whats the whole thing is about
please dont look at spelling or anything else.
ps the bolts are usually onely hardened on the outer layer because this helps the resistents to saws but also to resist the
hamering.
This hardening is done by putting the bolts in a layer of coal and the warming it when it has reached a few hundred they
maintain this temp for half an hour to an hour. then they dip this in cold water. what happens is the outer layer of the iron
absorbs the carbon and formes ironcarbide on the outer layer witch is the tough layer.
[ June 27, 2002, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: andreas ]

The track isn't a real railway track, it's about half the size. I have no idea of where it has been used but I might think that it
could have been at an industry or something similar. I think that it is cast but I can't be shure now can I so lets just drop that
shit now. And as Anthony said you can all rule out the N2.
And as I said before I can't blow the safe until (erliest) next week.
McCoy June 30th, 2002, 09:03 AM

While we're waiting for the great safe blasting event I just want reply to XOO about the shaped charge pictures. If that's the
effect of a winebottle shaped charge, DBSP should forget about using it. Because according to the pictures no jet is formed at
all. The entry hole shows no sign at all of the impact of a jet. And the holes in the other side of the pipe seem to be produced
merely by steel fragments from the entry side. And the small dents and deformations seem to be the effect of small particles
but they might also be produced by the remains of a very imperfect and dispersed jet.
This might all be caused by a too small stand off distance, I don't know. Maybe at the right stand off a good jet is formed and
a real cutting effect will be produced (small round hole, sharp entry edges, smooth inside and stretched exit side and little
bending and shearing of the steel).
Anyway I think it's difficult to use this winebottle charge to produce a precise cut. I think a contact charge is easier and better.
It will blast the safe for sure (and render it useless for normal usage (just like the shaped charge method) but it will be very
perfect for further safe blasting experiments :) ).
[ June 30, 2002, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: McCoy ]

Our SC:s arent the same. I used a wine bottle shaped charge and he used a meassuring cup made out of metal. That one
isn't coned all way up thats the reason to the bad affect on the pipe.
xoo1246 June 30th, 2002, 04:10 PM

Exactly, but you still have a munroe effect, an ordinary charge placed at that distance wouln't have done nothing like it. The
point was that if you aren't using an ideal cone and the right standoff, you STILL have a munroe effect but not as directed as
if you are using an ideal cone. I belive a wine bottle SC could do it.
nbk2000 July 1st, 2002, 05:31 AM

Glass makes for shitty SC because glass isn't a ductile material. It shatters.
Oh sure, it'll partially liquify under the immense heat and pressure of a high explosive, but it's more like a blob of snot than
the sharp jet you'd get with a proper metal liner.
From the pictures, it's obvious that the glass is smashing it's way through the metal by brute force. There's no concentration of
force into a jet happening here.
With proper jet formation, the surrounding metal will be basically untouched with a neat hole through it. You're getting sections
of metal peeled back like a banana peel. This is impact shearing. The rail was too brittle to bend, so it cracked instead.
Whatever you use, use sand poured in through a hole you drilled into the safe to keep the contents from burning up.
pyromaniac_guy July 1st, 2002, 04:07 PM

does anyone have any photos of the type of cut a proper shape charge can produce? (both round and linear if possible) I did
a google image search, as well as an archive search and didnt come up with anything....
I dont care if the charge wasnt commerical or military, so long as it was manufacutred in an 'ideal' configuration, ie no wine
bottle charges...
PYRO500 July 1st, 2002, 04:35 PM

I don't have any photos either, all I can tell you is what I have seen with my own eyes. THe hole that a shaped charge cuts us
usually a bit distorted and has no rip the hole is straight through and looks like someone poured liquid steel through a block
of ice, you get a nice clean cut all the way through the piece of metal and sometilmes the liner may "splatter" that is if the
charge is not directly touching the piece of metal it may split in air or splatter on impact or something leading to a hole or two
beside the main hole that similarily flows through the metal
zaibatsu July 2nd, 2002, 03:08 AM

Not exactly what you are looking for, but here are some cross sectional pictures of shaped charges.
<a href="http://www.llnl.gov/str/gifs/Baum3.gif" target="_blank">http://www.llnl.gov/str/gifs/Baum3.gif</a>
McCoy July 2nd, 2002, 02:14 PM

Like I said before, there are pictures in the book "improvised shaped charges". And someone scanned it and made it
downloadable in some topic here on the Forum, I think it was Montana (can't remember which topic, sorry). And there is some
Japanese site with LSC's, I'll try and find it.
Anyway, forget the winebottle shaped charge. The only thing it does, is giving the explosive a V-shaped cavity resulting in the
wellknown Monroe effect like XOO said. But it will produce no jet. Not even an imperfect one.
First of all the shape is no good. Secondly it's too thick. All cones for shaped charges are 2mm thick the most (apart from a
few exceptions of course). Using thicker ones results in no or imperfect jets and they absorb a lot of the energy of the
explosive (so less energy for the jet). Although maybe glass can be an exception to this rule because normal SC's use metal
liners, I think the bottom of a wine bottle is to thick for an effective SC (although glass can be and is used as liner in some
cases, even water can be used as a 'liner').
The wine bottle is not even suited for a good Monroe-effect because it absorbs energy from the explosive (breaking it up and
melting it etc.). You better use thin plastic or paper if you just want the Monroe-effect (and the stand off distance for
maximum effect would be equal to the depth of the cavity).
And some other things about the stand off distance: it isn't that critical. There is an optimum: the distance at which the
maximum penetration is achieved. At greater distances the penetration will be less but not dramatically. That only happens
when the stand off distance is much too low. There is a rule of thumb for optimum stand off distance, but I don't remember it
exactly, I think it is 1.75 times cone depth.
A simple improvised shaped charge would be bending a 1-2mm thick sheet of copper into a cone (60-90 degree). Put it in
some tin can (empty Coca-cola can is just fine) and fill it homegenously with an explosive with VoD exceeding 6000 m/s. The
height of the explosive must be around twice the height of the cone. And the stand off must be around 1.75 times the height
of the cone.
And although AN/NM has a high enough VoD I think that if you use crystaline AN it has the drawback of having a lot of
airspaces between the crystals and you need a real 'solid' explosive for shaped charges, so you're better off using powdered
AN prills.
This charge should give a real cutting effect (and will be nothing like the pictures I have seen thus far).
[ July 02, 2002, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: McCoy ]
McCoy July 2nd, 2002, 02:48 PM

Go to <a href="http://www.kacoh.co.jp/page_folder/technique_v_cord.html" target="_blank">http://www.kacoh.co.jp/
page_folder/technique_v_cord.html</a> for pictures of LSC's and effects. Nice eh? You could cut a square out of the side of
your safe with these things :) . And they seem not to hard to make do they, especially the left one on the bottom of the
page: just a piece of 1-2mm thick copper sheet bended in a W-shape and filled with a solid explosive, preferably RDX (but
AN/NM will probably do also). Fucking simple that is.
And according to the pictures they use that one for cutting the I-beam of about 1" (?) thick. And I think (my japanese is not
that good) it contains 4000 gr/ft (how much gram/meter is that?). This should give you an idea how big a LSC you need for
the safe.
pyromaniac_guy July 2nd, 2002, 04:28 PM

McCoy,
where are you getting your info???
According to urbanski optimum cone thickness is .4d/liner density (where d is the diameter of the cone opening ). The height
of the cone should be 1.3d (42 degrees) and the ttoal charge heigh should be 1.7d optimum standoff is listed as 6 times
cone diameter...
Anthony July 2nd, 2002, 04:39 PM

The greater the standoff (to a point) the thinner the jet will be and so the force will be more concentrated on the target
material and it will cut better. But an improperly formed jet will break up before hitting the target if the standoff is too great.
To utilise high standoffs you need well formed liners.
4000 grains is 259.19gm or 0.57143lb
The cut on that pipe on the Japanese page is pretty impressive.
DBSP July 2nd, 2002, 07:48 PM

I've started boubting about the wine SC the least week or so. I could make myself an SC in metall but then I would have the
problem with the papers in the safe. I think that I will have to fill the safe with sand before trying anything, the problem is that
there are two compartments in the safe, one upper and one lower which means drilling two holes anf filling with sand. And at
that the safe is heavy as hell. I have benn thinking about using LSCs but that would probably mean that I would have to blast
the bolt several times, If you look at the LSC I made(pics in forum pic and..) that one ripped a 6mm stell plate off, but thats
different this is about 20mm and probably hardened. I I where to use an LSC I would have to use very short pieces thus I
wouldn't be able to use ANNM. What should I use instead? I could make HMDN but is that powerfull enaugh? Or maby NG or
NGlycol soaked in a bit of AN, I'll be getting some 68% HNO3 next week so I could make them both. Or maby a slurry/liquid of
a bit AN and NM sensitised by NH3(btw whats the ratios for NM sensitising with NH3)
Do you have any ideas?
McCoy July 4th, 2002, 04:21 PM

I get my information from everywhere. And the most important thing I learned about (linear) shaped charges is that if you
change one of the variables (thickness liner, material liner, shape liner, length liner, angle liner, sort of explosive, density of
explosive, amount of explosive, stand off distance) just a bit, the penetration will differ (sometimes dramatically). Even with
the same professional precision LSC's it's difficult to get the exact same results.
So it's difficult to say how to make one and predict the penetration and those figures of Urbanski are certainly not for The
Ultimate Shaped Charge.
What I do know is that the liner of LSC's is never greater than 2mm even the big ones. Maybe with some big conical shaped
charges this will be different, but even then I don't think it will be very much thicker (what is the thickness of the liner of the
shaped charge in a anti-tank weapon for example?).
And the angle of the liner is not a fixed 42 degree, not even optimum at that angle, even if Urbanski says it. Angle of the
liner can be 90 degree's easily, maybe even up to 120 degree. Many LSC's have such an 90 degree angle (see the Japanese
site). I think the figures Urbanski gives are for a specific SC e.g. the shaped charge in an anti-tank weapon or something (I
don't have Urbanski at hand).
And the stand off distance is also no static figure and certainly not 6 times cone height. There are conical shaped charges that
are used to penetrate targets (concrete, steel) as far as 50-100 meters away (go to <a href="http://www.elp-logistik.com/
katalog/englisch/03Explosives/inhalt.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.elp-logistik.com/katalog/english/03Explosives/
inhalt.shtml</a> and click on MEPS also for the water "liner")).
The rule of thumb I gave, is for improvised LSC's. They probably have no perfect jet, so the stand off distance can't be too
big. And like I said it isn't that critical. A LSC with an optimum stand off distance of 1" will still have a good (70-90%)
penetration depth at 2" or even 3" stand off distance. Only if you go below about 1/2" there's a great decrease in penetration.
So again what Urbanski states is not what I learned, but I wouldn't go as far as to say Urbanski is wrong :) , those figures are
just for some specific shaped charge.
And about a good explosive to use: RDX. Easy to make. High VoD. easy to handle. But you could also use double based
smokeless powder instead (go to <a href="http://www.spreng.de/luzern/" target="_blank">http://www.spreng.de/luzern/</a>
and click on Resaflex: a LSC with double based smokeless powder). And you could use ANNM just as well.
So DPSB don't tell us you're not gonna do it, we've had that before.

Just a note that safe WILL be blown, I'm not the type of guy making such a topic just for a bit attention.
The only thing that is trubbleing me is what explosive to use, I will probably not be able to use ANNM because the ammount
will be to small. I belive I will go for liners and blasting the bolts layer by layer if nessesary. I've started experimenting with
the "cones" this far. (In copper).
Mick July 4th, 2002, 09:51 PM

if your not sure what to use for an explosive, just hit it with everything.
use the safe as a test bed for a couple of different explosives.
have some fun with it.
pyromaniac_guy July 5th, 2002, 02:58 PM

McCoy...
dude i never said the figures i listed were set in stone... just optimal figures.. obviously certain charges for certain aplications
will have specs that deviate from the norm....
with regards to liner thickness, inorder to exceed 2mm with copper you would have to have a charge diamter of some 65mm of
so in diameter useing a copper liner... thats a pretty signifigant shapecharge! If you are still of such opinion please cite some
refrence that backs up why you 'think' shape charges never have a liner much thicker than 2mm

OK DBSP, didn't mean it the way it sounded, I was just a bit worried that you would cancel the safe blasting, because I am
looking forward to it (I think we all are). The worse thing that could happen right now is that you found the key :) . So like Mick
pointed out very eloquently: "just hit it!"
And pyromaniac: I don't think that the figures Urbanski gives are for the optimal SC. I think it are figures for a specific SC.
Like I said: there are no rules when you design a (L)SC. Change one thing, and the result changes. So there are no fixed
figures. And there are LSC's, conical SC's, trumphet SC's, SC's with liquid liners, SC's for targets at 50m, for penetrating steel,
concrete, Kevlar, granite rock, armoured cars :) and they all differ.
Except for one thing: the thickness of the liner never exceeds 2mm :) . No just kidding. It's just that I never seen a shaped
charge with a thick liner (remember you need to "liquify" the metal liner and you don't need much to form a jet, so a thick
liner is also not logical). But hey, I could be wrong and maybe some SC's use a thick liner. Proof me wrong.
xoo1246 July 5th, 2002, 04:36 PM

Since this discussion has turned into a shaped charge discussion, I might as well post it here. I got an idea, if you can't
aquire/make solid copper cones, possibly you could make them out of thin copper(or better lead) wire. Wind the wire around a
suitible form such as a suitible glass(remove the foot so that you can remove your cone when done). When you have made
one layer, spray with a thin layer of plastic to keep the wires together. Start over untill you have the thickness you are striving
for.
I bet it would work well.
Ctrl_C July 5th, 2002, 04:54 PM

how about LN2 the door and then use a high brisance explosive a moment later? A kilo of APAN would do it i bet. That's the
first thing I would try personally.
pyromaniac_guy July 6th, 2002, 03:06 AM

xoo....
as a tesla coiler, i can tell you that winding a coil on a connical shape is a real bitch.... wire just doesnt like to stay put. about
the only way to do it is to wind the coil on something that is very sticky, ie a cone with double sides tape... the after the coil is
done apply a layer of exoxy to turn it rigid.... this would be a most difficult solutionj to an easy problem.. you dont NEED
copper for a shape charge, just about any metal could be used instead, you could use aluminum siding, thin lead sheet for
roofing uses, hell you could even cut up a cookie sheet and rool it to the proper dimensions....
xoo1246 July 6th, 2002, 04:52 AM

pyromaniac_guy: You are right, it's not exactly easy, but I have tried and it have managed to make cones. What I like about
it is that you get a very nice uniform cone.
Nevermind. :)
nbk2000 July 6th, 2002, 10:52 AM

Wire coils can't be used as cone liners because they're not a singular body of metal. In order to properly collapse, the liner
must be one piece. A wire coil isn't going to collapse properly, but rather jumble up like a handful of string.
A plumb bob would make an excellent form for hammering out liner cones on.
Most SC do use thin metal as a liner for a sharp penetrating jet. But AA SC's use thick liners to project a broad, dense, jet that
can withstand high lateral forces and maintain enough velocity to penetrate an aircraft fuselage at distance.
Look in the knowledge section under the Patents topic for a link to an urban warfare SC that uses a thick (1/4") aluminum
liner to blast large holes through walls and such.
I'd also recommend starting with a small SC, less than an inch in diameter. Better to gouge the safe without penetrating, than
to vaporize a fist sized hole through it and destroy everything in it in the process. :D Though we wouldn't mind pictures of that
either. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Perhaps you should try using a large steel slug to fracture the safe, rather than an SC to penetrate it.

nbk,
Why would a sc require a soild liner? the process will push any material well into the plastic range, so the liner isnt going to act
like a solid for very long after the detonator goes off....
xoo1246 July 6th, 2002, 04:42 PM

I have heard powders can be pressed into liners too. I will test it when I have time/resources.

The suggestion of NBK to fracture the safe with a big steel slug, immediately reminded me of the pictures of the track: it looks
like it has been hit by some hard object with some speed (instead of a jet from an SC). So to fracture the safe just use the SC
used for the track <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> .
And NBK, when I say "prove me wrong" doesn't mean you IMMEDIATLY have to respond and come up with the proof that I am
as wrong as can be :) .
And I think the method suggested by XOO is promising. This way you could also produce a FLEXIBLE metal liner (for flexible
LSC's).
And might I just recommend to use a couple of LSC's to blast a hole in the side of the safe?
Not only are LSC's easily made. You also need a hole to get your papers out, don't you? :D
And LSC's use little amounts of explosive and are very precise, accurate and efficient (well, actually I just like to see if IT can
be done this way). I'll give you a 5 star rating if you do it :D .

i dont know about blowing a hole in the side of the safe... dont forget that there are possibly things in there the guy wants to
keep... it's kind of hard to tel lthe jet to only go through the safe wall, and not the stacks of bearer bonds on the inside :) I
would think that useing minimally sized lsc's and attacking the bolts would be best, even if you have to take seveal shots at
um... baring thaT i would say take a linear charge and attack the side of the safe where the bolts lock into , ie shave off an
entire corner of the safe...

Blasting a hole in the side isn't an option, one reason is that the wall is 40mm thick when the bolts only are 20mm. I think I
will go for LSCs and hitting it repetedly if nessesary.
I'm going on a holiday trip up north next week and I might be away for a couple of weeks. SO I'm not shure if I'll get the time
to blast it before, I'm not shure though.
And I'll see if I can get a few pics of the cones tonight.
10fingers July 8th, 2002, 09:20 PM

This friggin' safe isn't open yet?
I think explosives is a bad, bad idea. The odds of doing it without destroying the safe and the contents are slim. I know it
sounds like the most fun though. :D
I think the best suggestion I have heard is to use one of those abrasive wheels that go on a circular saw. With enough time
they will cut through anything. If you cut a hole through the back, then you could replace the lock and weld the piece back in
and you have a safe.

I don't need the safe as a safe, I need it to make a box for pressing caps later. I'll try hitting it with an LSC to see what
happens and then I'll decide what to do. I don't have any good explosive ready now though, I won't be(most likely) getting
my acids untill this weekend.
got a pic of my cones (this far)

<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/cones.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/
cones.JPG</a>

According to the picture of the two liners they are quite thick and short. You'd be better off using thinner ones but else be sure
you use enough explosive. To provide enough energy to form a jet out of all that copper and not just copper fragments.
Secondly: linear shaped charges can be small (width/height) but not in length. Because the first few centimeters the cutting
effect is not so good, just after about 10 cm the cutting effect gets to it's maximum. Probably this got something to do with
the direction/shape of the shockwave hitting the liner. And the detonator at the beginning of the LSC is probably also
disturbing. So a LSC shorter than 10 cm is no good.
And is the side of the safe 40mm massive steel or does it consist of two sheets of steel 40mm apart? In that case a (small)
LSC to the side is sufficient.
And cutting bit by bit is also not possible/difficult, because of stand off distance problems.
Anyway, some big LSC is probably necessary. An improvised LSC can probably be compaired to Resaflex or the DIOPLEX/
NEPTUNEX charges (go to sites I gave earlier). Which means you need about 1700 gram per meter of explosive (and a copper
liner 90 degree angle, 40mm wide about 2mm (?) thick) to cut through 50mm steel (penetration depth is 38mm). And looking
at the Japanese LSC of 4000 gr/ft (about 750 g/m): it cuts through 1" steel. So although LSC's are the most efficient (and the
best option for the job), you need a lot of explosives anyway. But that's no problem for me :D but be prepared to set off
some big charges.
And can't you do it before your holiday? You got us all excited now. And why would you need the acids. Use AN/NM, use DBSP.
Mick July 9th, 2002, 02:48 PM

maybe this is a dumb question, but could you use APAN for a shaped charge?
Harry July 9th, 2002, 02:55 PM

Thermite on hinges, anyone? If you're going to fill with sand anyway, burning the hinges might do the trick.
Harry

Today I found the bolts holding the safe at the right side, I don't know the english name for it but it exists on every door on
the opposite side of the handle.(things that make the door "swingable")
The bolts where tighted with locktite, which meant that they where really stuck, after some work I got them off, which in turn
means that the door now only is secured by the locking bolts now. Now I got a gap large enaugh to get a small screwdriver
onto the bolt. I put the screw driver onto the bolt and hit it with a hammer, the bolts are NOT hardened as I had thought. I
might be able to cut it using an ordinary metal cutting saw. Not an angle grinder thats risking the papers. It's hard work but
probably the easiest way.
Anthony July 9th, 2002, 04:40 PM

I would have thought having the hinges on the outside of a safe was a pretty big design flaw...
Blow it up anyway! :)
xoo1246 July 9th, 2002, 04:51 PM

APAN may not be a very good choice for SC:s since it has low Vod.
I have burned through a few mm of hardened steel with thermite, it could work.

i think he wants to protect the papers inside <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ....i think strategically
placed shaped charges should be ok if you can angle them to blast certain point of the safe off or weaken certain ares without
the jet entering the inside. what about freezing? liquid nitrogen then smack the safe in half with a big hammer....just an idea
although i'd say unlikely to work...

Just to clarify some things about the hinges, they are not on the outside, look at the pic and you'll see.
Wether the hinges are on or off the safe is still locked becase the locking bolts keep the door from moving to far.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/bolt_holding_the_door.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/

~u47804009/E&W/bolt_holding_the_door.JPG</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/gap_on_side.JPG" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/
E&W/gap_on_side.JPG</a>
The first pic shows the gap at the right side of the safe.
The last pic shows the upper right corner from above.

It was clear from the beginning that using explosives was not the most obvious choice for opening the safe. But since it's also
obvious what is discussed on this Forum one should not be suprised that explosives are highly recommended. And in many
ways it is the best solution :D .
What I'm trying to say DBSP is, that your not going to tell us that after all this discussion, and all the effort put into it on how
to open it with explosives, you're gonna tell us you're gonna use a saw!
What a suprise that you didn't find the key!
Remember what you stated july the 7th, 7.29 PM?
Well, let me remind you:"Just a note, the safe is gonna be blown"
and "I'm not the kind of guy trying to get some attention".
And in some other topic people made it clear that joining this Forum is a risk considering all the cops watching and joining. So
I would not really appreciate it if you don't come up with the goods after all the effort and risks(!) I (and others) took. You
probably know what happens to people that don't come up with their end of the deal in such situations. So please use
explosives.
"Either you take care of business, or the business takes care of you"

McCoy...
lighten up dude
who died and made you god?
The only risks you took in answering this guys request for advice is capral tunnel syndrome from excessive use of your
keyboard...
Just cuz someone asks a question in the forum does not mean the use of explosives will be mandated in their actions after
any responses to said question...
McCoy July 14th, 2002, 08:01 AM

Pyromaniac....
Wake up dude!
And DBSP....
You're a fake or a cop.
I had my doubts from the beginning but thought I should give you some credit....but it's clear to me now.
[ July 14, 2002, 07:02 AM: Message edited by: McCoy ]
BrAiNFeVeR July 14th, 2002, 08:59 AM

McCoy, it's clear to me too !!
You're obviously full of you know what.

I've searched for you're posts, and it seemed you only reply'd to 3 threads in total, wich one of them was that ridiculous
armoured car thread you started yourself.
You, as a newbie member, really shouldn't question the actions of a more respected member such as DBSP. If he chooses to
open the safe without the help of any energetic material, that's his choice.
And, even if he is a cop (wich I really doubt), he still has aided in the search of knowledge on this forum, and provided us in
this thread with a practical problem, worthy of discussion.
I would probably open it up the same way (mechanical) if I thought the contents had some value to me.
xoo1246 July 14th, 2002, 09:07 AM

Well for beeing 17 he is a good cop. :D
McCoy, we are bored with your attitude.
kingspaz July 14th, 2002, 09:24 AM

McCoy, how long have you been here? not very long. if you don't like DBSP then thats your problem not ours so keep it to
yourself and don't clutter this thread with your useless drivling bullshit. if you make an accusation atleast have evidence...
slip up again and you will be removed.
DBSP, after looking at the pictures you have posted i have thought of a possible solution. now, the walls of the safe are really
thick. the gap between the wall and door is also a decent size. if an explosive was pressed into this gap it should be able to
lever the door off leaving the contents inside unburnt. i think if you made a plastique using PIB from blu-tak as a binder then
you could simply press it into the gap and detonate it.
and McCoy, don't give me the 'thats not fair' bullshit. lifes not fair, get over it.
[ July 14, 2002, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]
nbk2000 July 14th, 2002, 12:20 PM

"Slip up again..."
:confused:
That implies the opprotunity to do so again remains.
Which there isn't because he's OUTTA HERE! HED for McCoy (Say "hi" to Captain Kirk for us, eh? :p )
*sniff* *sniff* Anyone else smell flashpowder and bullshit? Seems familiar for some reason. Argumenative tone, much talk
and little facts....AH HA! Now I remember who this was (past tense :D ).

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Increases the oxygen balance the
explosive velocity?
Log in
View Full Version : Increases the oxygen balance the explosive velocity?
Mephisto July 9th, 200 2, 08:31 AM

I h a v e g o t a q u e s t i o n a b o u t t h e o x y g e n b a l a n c e . L e t s t a k e f o r e x a m ple RDX and KC l O 4 . R D X h a s a n o x y g e n b a l a n c e v a l u e
a b o u t 3 8 % a n d K C l O 4 a n o x y g e n b a l a n c e v a l u e a b o u t + 3 9 % . W hen is the explosive more powerful? If you m ix both
c o m p o u n d s , s o t h a t t h e o x y g e n b a l a n c e i s 0 , o r if you take only RDX?
Has the mix a higher explosive velocity, or decreases the KC lO4 as an im purity the streng th of the RDX?
---------
Mephisto
vulture July 9th, 200 2, 09:18 AM

Bala ncing the oxygen balance to zero would increase heat and thereby energy output because all atoms are fully oxidized. I
guess it would lower the VoD somewhat because of the reaction going fro m s i m ple decom position to a reaction between two
compounds. However, one can not apply this rule if the other com pound itself is also an explosive, like in ANNM.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Caught on tape!
Log in
View Full Version : Caught on tape!
nbk2000 November 3rd, 2002, 11:09 PM

I was watching the movie "Heist" with Gene Hackman as the leader of a gang of robbers.
In the opening scene, we see him take down a high class jeweler. Unfortunately, he's caught on camera without his mask on.
So, while his crimies are looting the place, he's tracking down the video surveillance system to find the tapes.
That's when he discovers <a href="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Heist.txt" target="_blank">he's fucked!</a>

:mad: (RealVideo, 150KB. Change .txt to .rm to watch on your computer)
So, this brought to mind what a person could do if they were in a similar situation where they had found the VCR, but couldn't
get to it because it was locked up. What could you do to destroy the tape?
Eliteforum November 3rd, 2002, 11:55 PM

A shaped charge direct into the recorder, only method insuring that it will be destroyed.
There's also other methods such as using thermite (or a thermal lance if you have one handy)
EP November 4th, 2002, 12:00 AM

Perhaps electromagnets could work (like in Fight Club). Other than that, the shaped charge to blast it or heat to melt it (a
regular torch if it's close enough).
nbk2000 November 4th, 2002, 12:44 AM

Perhaps a picture to illustrate what you'd be up against.
<a href="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/CCTV_Cabinet.jpg" target="_blank">http://server3001.freeyellow.com/

nbk2000/CCTV_Cabinet.jpg</a>
At my job, the VCR is in a steel box with a 1/4" thick polycarbonate window. But the lock is a chessy wafer lock that could be
picked in a few seconds by someone skilled in the art.
The simplist thing to do would be to pick or force the lock. However, if it was something like the above picture, that may not be
possible without use of power tools.
I was thinking a foaming metal incendiary that could be sprayed in through any available opening. It would expand to fill up
the cabinet or VCR, and would burn very intensly with a metal slag to destroy the tape.
Ideally, you'd be able to squirt it directly into the VCR tape slot so it was in direct contact with the tape, ensuring destruction.
Demagnetizers only work in direct contact with the tape. If you're a foot away, forget it.
You'd want to avoid explosives because of the noise drawing attention to you. Though you may want to bring some with you if
such security was a possibility.
An RTPB violation in the movie was NOT planning for failure. The thieves were depending on drugged coffee to knock out all of
the employees, but one of them hadn't drunk enough of it and was still awake when they broke in. Hackman could have taken
her out while wearing a mask if he was quick about it, but he went with playing himself off as a someone needing her to call
the cops till he was close enough to stun her.
Also, failing to plan for failure to wear a mask. They were all equipped with masks because they knew there were cameras, but
they didn't have a backup plan for in case they were caught on camera without the masks.
Something like a disguise that'd pass as a real face (padded cheeks, fake nose, different hair color, etc). After all, wouldn't
you assume that, if a person took off a mask, that the face underneath was their real face, and not another disguise?
angelo November 4th, 2002, 04:01 AM

in that picture you have NBK2000, a simple angle grinder or an oxy cutting torch could be used to get into the cabinet, but one
makes a lot of noise and the other requires bulky equipment to be carried.
You could at least use the gas from the oxy torch to fuel the fire you light to get rid of any evidence.
mrloud November 4th, 2002, 05:15 AM

In the CCTV cabinet picture it looks like an open grill forms the front of the cabinet. Using a soft squeezy bottle with a rubber
tube you could squirt a couple hundred millilitres of petrol directly into the openings of the VCRs. Ignite it just before leaving.
Alternatively you could flood the VCR with thinners or some other solvent that will dissolve the tape.

I thought of both of those, but there's a problem with both too.
Fire spreads. And while that may be a good thing, it could also be bad. Say a firefighter dies because the building collapses on
him while he's inside trying to put out the raging inferno that started when you set the VCR on fire.
Now you've got a capital murder beef hanging over your head with no statute of limitations because even unintentional deaths
caused by an arson fire are considered the same as premeditated murder (in california anyways).
Solvents are quiet, but you'd need one that is both non-flammable, and non-conductive to electricity (for obvious reasons),
that is capable of liquifying polyester (VCR tape), and possibly polystyrene or polycarbonate (VCR casing).
Getting it into the VCR might be easy, but will it get in through the tiny gap the tape feeds through and get to the tape in the
spool? And will it get under several layers of tightly wrapped tape to the part that has your face recorded on it?
If you've got time, like a burglary during off hours when the alarm has been nuetralized and no-ones coming, then I'd go with
forcing the lock by whatever means necessary, as long as it's quiet. Go home to get the tools, then come back, if needed.
If time is short, and the cops are already on their way, then noise is irrelevant, but speed is essential. Blow the damn thing
away! A small amount of explosive, a few detonators, and some liners for making LSC or SC as needed on site could be
carried as per RTPB "Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
As last resort, fire. There's always plenty of flammable materials around to build a blazing bonfire in a building. Problem is
that I've seen how videotapes have been pulled out of melted VCRs that were playable after being cleaned up and put into
new cases, so this is a hit-or-miss last resort.
There's an incendiary called "GOOP" (SIPRI IW/FTP) that is magnesium powder mixed with nitrate, gasoline, and bound
together with asphalt. Burns at like 4,000F and is impossible to put out. This would be the shit to inject into a VCR since
there's NO WAY a tape is going to survive this stuff. :D
vir sapit qui pauca loquitur November 4th, 2002, 01:44 PM

what about conc H2SO4 in a little squiry bottle? Using a fair amount of insulation to ensure
protection (thick welders glove)
or failing that you could have a "ribbon" charge (you know, thin strip of plastisized explosives) with some means of inserting
(wraped around a coat-hanger wire or within a thin-walled tube for a bit of shrapnel)
or if that doesn't seem realistic for any reason, you could use a length of cannon fuse and form a tight coil and poke this in
ontop of the tape, light one end and retire to enjoy video tape flambe' :D it would be fast and would offer little chance for
surroundings to catch alight (if fast burning that is :rolleyes: )
the best policy would have to be NOT getting caught on tape (even if cutting the power supply is needed to ENSURE this)
vulture November 4th, 2002, 01:44 PM

If you'd be able to disable such a bigass security system, one could assume that you're also capable of cutting the VCR power
no?
A high pressure CO2 spray and a tiny bit of thermite would quickly deal with the lock in the picture.
Polycarbonate dissolves in methylenechloride and get's attacked by alkalies, amines and ammonia.
And how about punching a hole and then filling the cabinet with a conductive solvent?
Machiavelli November 4th, 2002, 05:35 PM

It's a nice movie, isn't it? How about using a long drill bit to go through the screen and into the vcr? I don't remember what
equipment he had with him him on this job but a drill would seem essential to me for this and with some masonry bits you
should be able to go through the screen and into the vcr/tapes in seconds and rip everything to shreds.

Can't count on cutting the power to disable the cameras because they have these things called "U.P.S." (Uninterruptable Power
Supply) that could keep the recorders running. The competitor store up the street has one for its cameras.
The drill idea is good. If a non-conductive sleeve was made to hold the bit, then you wouldn't have to worry about getting
electrocuted. Plus, the drill could be used to make a direct pathway into the tape casssette to introduce the solvent to liquify
the tape. :)
Agent Blak November 6th, 2002, 01:58 PM

What about the use of Micro wave radiation? You wouldn't be far from an outlet. I am sure the device could be made compact.
You could use it to fry cammera aswell.
In the case of the housing you describe(NBK) I would opt for the solvent. If the MicroWaves Work that would be Ideal. It would
look untampered with.

Well, if you cut the power off (after the fact of having your face captured), you'd no longer have power for a microwave. Plus, I
don't know if plastic film would be affected by it.
Fortunately VCR casettes are free for the taking in many places, so testing is in order for solvents, microwaves, etc. :)
BTW, someone's supposed to e-mail me soon with some news I've been waiting on.
zeocrash November 6th, 2002, 04:52 PM

the cables to the VCR usually carry fairly small amounts of electrcity, but what if you were to pass a large amount of electricity
down the CCTV cable, would this desrtoy the video and VCR.
Heist was a cool film though
PYRO500 November 6th, 2002, 05:35 PM

I think that shorting out the vcr after you commited the crime wouldn't work reliably because that would likely only cause
damage to the vcr and not the tape. and if you could get access to the power supply why would you bother taking out the vcr's
if there was no ups and all you had to do is cut power?
vulture November 6th, 2002, 05:53 PM

How about boobytrapping the video cabinet? No need to make noise and if someone's going to check it they....well...just never
find out do they?
You're fucked ofcourse if they play the tape directly from the VCRs.
mark November 6th, 2002, 08:27 PM

I dont mean to sound ignorant NBK, but is that "GOOP" stuff comercialy availible? Or is that just a homemade item?

You may only be able to get to power after having gotten inside, thus already be caught on tape before the power is cut (to
disable vault alarm or such).
With the advent of digital VCRs that use an HDD, instead of tape, a voltage spike might cause a HDD crash, but that's too iffy
to your freedom on.
Boobytrapping the box isn't going to prevent the cops from viewing the tape, if only because the victims severed hand is still
holding it. :rolleyes:
GOOP isn't something you can get unless you're in the military, but you can duplicate the formula from the SIPRI IW book,
which gives sufficient details for doing so. It's quite simple stuff to make.
Terry Collins December 14th, 2002, 11:29 AM

What Gene Hackmann should have done was: just putting on the mask and then clubbing (or clippin') the girl :) .
But I liked the movie also. Even more because they used real high explosives, when they blew up that shack by the airport.
And that happens not often in the movies, most of the time it's just a charge blackpowder blowing up bags of gasoline. Which
is just a sorry excuse for an explosion.

What about everyone's favorate solvent, Acetone? Dosen't acetone disolve polycarbonate? Also I think that it should eat
through vcr tape too. The only problem is that it may take too long to dissolve the polycarbonate window and ifthey don't have
a polycarb window you may not be able to get it into the vcr.

I read in a military MOUT PDF about using a CO2 extinguisher to cool shatterproof windows (plexi/polycarb) below their brittle
temperature so they can be shattered.
I don't know of any third world hovels that have plexiglass windows, do you? Which just reaffirms my belief that the army is
training for MOUT against its own citizens, but I digress.
Perhaps you could use a canned air duster turned upside down to spray the liquid onto the plastic, causing it to become frigid
and brittle so it can be smashed.
THErAPIST December 15th, 2002, 04:27 PM

it could just be me being blind but i didnt see any mention of bolt cutters anywhere around here. dont they usually have nice
thick rubber handles? if thats the case you wouldnt exactly have to worry about being electricuted and it would make simple
work of a lock. and if noise was a problem then couldnt large amounts of smoke and or light be a problem too? thermite or
goop and stuff. im sure they give off a nice amount of light correct? so a couple shaped sharges to open it in a last choice
situation, a drill and a pair of bolt cutters. maybe a hack saw and a small hammer or something to smash what you could. and
about the fire problem... how about having a fire extinguisher along with a squirt bottle full of gasoline? but i guess that would
only be good if light and smoke werent an issue. acids are always a good thing. a gallon of any good acid should do a good
job of disposing of a vcr and a tape right? just my 2 cents
edit: just thought of something. if acids are a problem and we want something that would kill the vcr and the tape wouldnt
pirana fluid work well? sure it has its draw backs but wouldnt pirana fluid be a good thing to destroy pretty much anything
besides glass?
[ December 17, 2002, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: THErAPIST ]

Acids don't tend to attack many plastics, especially not as rapidly as would be needed in this situation.
A-BOMB December 15th, 2002, 10:38 PM

Now NBK which folder on the FTP is that SIPRI IW file in? or is it on the net somewhere or was it on the FTP before it crashed?

<a href="ftp://username:password@209.195.155.80/E&W%20Related/Explosives/Texts/Incendiary%20Weapons/"
target="_blank">ftp://username:password@209.195.155.80/E&W%20Related/Explosives/Texts/Incendiary%20Weapons/</a>
A-BOMB December 16th, 2002, 12:57 AM

Thanks NBK I just downloaded it. Now were can I find asphalt, I guess I'll be following the road crew with a shovel this year
when there out patching potholes.
kingspaz December 16th, 2002, 06:33 PM

you can get it from building supply places for use in sealing roofs(sp?). you heat it until its melted then spread it over the
area to be sealed. let it dry and its waterproof.

It also comes in caulking tubes as a waterproof sealant for use around chimmney flashing. It's softened with solvents, like
benzene, so it can be squeezed out. You could likely use it as is for making GOOP since you'd be adding solvents anyways.
russian_chemist December 23rd, 2002, 11:27 AM

The truth is that if you was in London all you would need is a grade c (a weakest d is strongest) Allan key. All of mortgaged
shops are covered by the Protection of the borough Council.
Now the main thing to remember is that only one Bourough council makes the special key and padlocks for the whole of
london, The key is a H-8 medium tensile steel.
keys in the London Bourough are labeled on the Category of locks that they can open. they range from the H2-H16.
The H-8 key is specifically designed so that no other key could fit it from the H series, but sadly they overlooked the fact that
people learnt to use an Alan key on them. Due to July being our Budget distribution date, the locks will stay in Circulation till
then.
God bless Hackney Borough Council
Back with the task, normally i would add that i would not take my mask off during such a raid but there is only one way in my
eyes to stop this cabinet.
Tragically i learnt this from the Blacks, as we always found they had done this to the machines every week on the estates that
i worked.
The thing that they used to do was pour deisel through the grids and sadly time after time it would degrade the machine,
tape, amp and microphone. It was utterly useless.
God damn them Street Urchins
[ December 23, 2002, 10:38 AM: Message edited by: russian_chemist ]
Anthony December 23rd, 2002, 02:19 PM

US tranlation: Allen Key = Hex Wrench
russian_chemist, any details on actually opening the lock? Is it a typically picking technique, or litterally using the allen key as
a key?
russian_chemist December 23rd, 2002, 02:37 PM

well being that i have had the key all the time i never really tried to open it, but i am informed that the security that we put in
to these keys could not be beaten.
I was also informed that you literally have to push a 3mm Allan Key in to the slot and hit it through with a small mallet, the
lock should open with relative ease.
We were never taught to pick locks as kids, but i can assure you, with a mini crobar, a small 4lb lump hammer and a thick
pointed piece of metal (not sharp, more as blunt but as strong as you can get) you can open many latch, house, patio and car
doors. Minus the most insignificant bend marks, you would never know that we had been there, the lock mechanisms would be
fine too.
Does anyone else have local stories of Scientific Supremacy being brought down by a simple tool
(perfect key/beaten by\black theif and allen key)
Also it may interest you to know in the height of the cold war there was around 5 million dollars spent on making a pen that
could write in Space for the USA. Russia used a pencil

Yep :)
I remember seeing those pens for sale, for about 20-30 IIRC, might have been Boy's Stuff.
Mr Cool December 23rd, 2002, 05:07 PM

Well obviously the US had to do one better than the Russians, that's what the whole damn "war" was about. If the Russians
used a pencil, the Americans would use a super-pen. If the Russians used a super-pen, the Americans would've used a
particle beam to burn the writing into the paper, etc.
But you've gotta laugh. $5 million for a biro :rolleyes: .

Now come on, i think that this shows the russians could survive in the bleakest of times. Where as the Americans, well they
had their pen.
The united Kingdom spent 8 months and 750 000 pounds (1.5 million dollars) to find what the best way to dunk a biscuit in
tea was.
:There is no difference in angle, temperature or viscosity (waste of money)
Scientists racing to find the Cure to CJD (mad cow disease) realise that they have been testing sheeps brains labelled wrong
for two years wasting 4.5 million per annum (9 million total) in taxpayers money.
nbk2000 December 23rd, 2002, 07:15 PM

Our pen will write underwater, your pencil will not. :p
[ December 23, 2002, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

For this argument i am russian
for the pen you built at a cost of 5 million dollars.
The pencils that i could buy with this could build me a bridge over any body of water :p
(Typical shoddy russian architectual technique, using pencils when you need steel. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" /> )
Also if you know somewhere in space that is underwater i suggest you let Nasa know and for a rather large price too :p :p
(Europa is in space and has water. Not that you guys will be needing to use space pens underwater there anytime soon...or
ever. :D )
So near yet so far but merry Xmas all the same NBK :)

About the article can you email me please Nbk, i am sorry i made this post but i can see no other way of contacting you.
Please delete it when you see it thanks
russian_chemist@hotmail.com
Arkangel December 23rd, 2002, 10:11 PM

My goodness.....horseshit in this thread as well.
So I guess the best way of destroying the taped evidence is to pour diesel into the VCR cabinet for a few weeks before your
heist.....or am I missing the point there? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Oh, and of course you have to do the job somewhere in Hackney, with an Allen Key :p
I'm feeling sick again! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

Got to admit, doesn't sound like the ideal tool for the job - 3mm allen, when you're hammering it through the lock. Then
again, even the most pick proof lock is useless when you can rip the shackle off.
Hard Lesson: Avoid "Tri-circle" padlocks, look sturdy for the price (cheap) but the "hardened steel" shackles are to the point
when they shatter :rolleyes:
I challenge you to get into my car with a crowbar and me not notice you had done so (no, it isn't special...).
BTW, those write-underwater pens will be very useful the next time the shuttle floods and an urgent memo needs writing :D
vir sapit qui pauca loquitur December 24th, 2002, 12:18 PM

I thought the reason for the pen was to graffiti the outside of mir space station :D
on the subject, has anyone seen those big tape-wiping electromagnets, one pass = erasure. if a thinner version was made,
that could be inserted into the tape slot then the result is obvious, due to the fact that the tape will be recorded over if they
suspect nothing is amiss (length of time is dependant on security level) then there will be no record of your presence, a worthy
goal for any heist. Of course that depends on what your intentions are, a missing space-shuttle WOULD be noticed <img
border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> .

If you could find some kind of powerful electromagnet that could be fitted on the end of a long probe, then you might be able
to slip it through a drill or grate hole into the case and leave it there.
The important thing with electromagnets is the reversal of the magnet fields. See, varying the magnetic flux is more effective
in erasure then a simple static magnetic field. Especially if it's rapid and random. This confuses any attempts at reconstruction
of the data by forensic pork.
I know you can find very powerful rare earth magnets that will hold 50 pounds, and are less than 10mm on all sides. Pricey at
more than $50 (new), but well worth it for the purpose it's intended for.

Maybe a big old bulk eraser might be useful?
russian_chemist December 24th, 2002, 07:49 PM

Just an idea, Debunk this at will
Instead of trying to get to it through the grated locked door (Made not to let people in) can anyone vouch for finding the wall
that it backs on to. Naturally if it is an exterior wall then you are fucked but all you would need is an insulated (for want of a
better term) drill bit and a slightly planned, well aimed drilling session.
I can only see the wall that the video system backs on to is unprotected, there for a lot less hassle to penetrate.
Sparky December 25th, 2002, 12:09 AM

About those magnets, Lee Valley sells rare earth magnets 1" in diameter and 1/8" thick that can lift a 35 lb steel block. 10.95
for 5 of them. Then they sell metal cups to direct the flux, which "increases the strength of the exposed face by approximately
4 times". They only sell the cups for the 1/2" magnets (10 lb lift without cup), but they are just a zinc coated steel cup -
should be easy to make. One inch is rather Then there's the 150 lb magnet but it's dimensions are 5" 2" 1" - not very useful.
If there was a steel grid in front of the vcrs then it would be hard to get it in (stick to the grid and not very likely the grid will be
big enough). I don't think this would be practical. If there was lexan as well as the grid this wouldn't work.
I'm surprised the video isn't sent to a secure location. Maybe it is in real life. Not for corner stores of course but for banks.
Plastic surgery is your friend if you have money. Or you could probably work up a good disguise if you knew someone in
theatre/movies who knows what the're doing. That's before you go on the job of course.
Wouldn't it be cool to know the kind of vcr they have, get a remote then tape over the last 10 minutes. Of course if you were
that prepared you wouldn't get caught without your mask on.
I think the best way would be to make a small hole, preferrably via your rifle (If you blast away at the same spot does bullet
proof glass give?). Then squirt in a flammable liquid that contains it's own oxygen. Or maybe magnanese septoxide or
something. Light up.
BoB- December 31st, 2002, 06:18 AM

Bulletproof glass will melt.
You could always use a pnuematic blower to fill the entire cavity with thermit, it would'nt matter if the recorder were reinforced,
I think 2-3lbs of thermit would still eat through it.
The tapes should be destroyed regardless of how much evidence is on them in my opinion, the cops could be able to tell age,
sex, and maybe voice. This would also prevent them from gathering pattern evidence if a repeat crime were ever commited.
nbk2000 December 31st, 2002, 12:48 PM

Ah Ha! This is what "The Screw" would be useful for. Not a giant sized one, but one that'd be able to fit the tip in the hole of a
steel grate, and make a hole big enough to reach your hand through.
A 4" hole would be big enough to reach in, turn off the recorder, and pull out a tape. No noise, and would only take a few
seconds. :)
The idea of bringing along a universal remote is also very good. I've seen them as small as a credit card. As long as you can
figure out the manufacturer of the VCR, you can look it up on a table on the back of the remote, and set the remote for it.
Though physical destruction of the tape is always to be preferred.
pyro225 December 31st, 2002, 05:37 PM

NBK wrote:
"A 4" hole would be big enough to reach in, turn off the recorder, and pull out a tape. No noise, and would only take a few
seconds."
All time-lapse VCR's I've worked with have a "tape lock" function that allows the user to lock the VCR in record mode. Usually a
combination of buttons unlocks the tape and then one can turn the recorder off and eject the tape.
NBK wrote:
"The idea of bringing along a universal remote is also very good. I've seen them as small as a credit card. As long as you can
figure out the manufacturer of the VCR, you can look it up on a table on the back of the remote, and set the remote for it."
Neither can I recall any of said time lapse VCR's having IR remote control capability. The remote functions are usually
controlled via PC RS-232 connection or dry contact inputs on the back. The increasingly popular DVR's (digital video recorders)
are being used in most high(er) security applications now. These have much higher quality imaging, longer recording capacity,
and are much less susceptible to tampering. I would have to say the weakest link in ANY video surveillance system is the
camera itself. Get to the camera and disable it by covering the lens, repositioning it, cutting the power/signal cable, or
destroying it as soon as possible (without being "identifiable") and then proceed. Beware of stealth/covert camera's - motion
detectors, smoke detectors, pencil sharpeners, clocks, etc. ad infinitum - as they are VERY popular and very difficult to detect.
Remember, camera's are most often installed to protect a business from it's own employees.

Getting your hands on the VCR is the biggest obstacle to overcome. Once you can actually TOUCH it, then all sorts of mayhem
and malevolence can be brought to bear upon the poor machine. :D
Several of the places that I've worked at had remotes for the time-lapse recorders. I'd assume that the high-end security
systems wouldn't have such an exploitable flaw, but human error is never to be underestimated. <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
RTPB "Better to have it..." CC remotes don't even weigh an ounce, so you'd lose nothing by bringing one along...just in case.
Fortunately, DVR's are still rather rare, and real time streaming of video feed to a remote host even more so. So, given the
very low probability of remote storage, the destruction of the machine on site is of prime importance.
It happens all the time that a bank will get robbed, and the FBI discover that the VCR wasn't turned on, or the tape is worn
down to fuzzy smears because the bankers are too cheap to buy new tapes every week. :)
Now, if you were to try to jack a Vegas casino, or a De Beers diamond mercantile, then you could bet your ass they'd have
DVR's with real-time streaming to remote storage. :(
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Get to the camera and disable it...<hr /></blockquote>A
good idea but...

Helvetica">Beware of stealth/covert camera's...very difficult to detect.<hr /></blockquote>...it could be an impossible task, given the limited time you'd likely have to deal with them.
Hence the RTPB "Always assume you're on camera...wear a mask"
Now one thing that could obviate the risk of cameras would be to use an obscurant. Any kind of smoke, fog, or particulate
(non-toxic or that you have protection against) that could reduce visibility to less than effective camera range would be an
excellent defense against cameras.
I've seen "Fog in a Can" for sale at photography suppliers. Never bought it, so I dont' know how effective it is. Pyrotechnic
smoke compounds are effective, but would require protective equipment for use indoors lest you suffocate yourself.
The cringing from having to say the wordNinja smoke devices that use a central burster charge to disperse a fine
particulate cloud would be excellent for this since they could be tossed in before you ever come within camera range, they
explode creating an instantaneous cloud of obscuring, and are non-burning.
Ideally, whatever you used wouldn't set off any smoke detectors, which may trigger an automatic dialer to call the fire
department.
You'd also need to be familiar with the target so you don't get disoriented in the smoke. If you had a thermal imager (yeah,
right. If you had that much money...) than you could have smoke so thick that the victims couldn't see their hands in front of
their faces while you're zipping along.
Now, if there's a material that could be dispersed that's opaque to visible light, but transparent to IR light, than you could use
cheap CMOS cameras to make googles that let you see the IR light, unimpeded by the smoke.
You could only use this technique ONCE. Any more than that, and ou'll become known as the "Smokey Bandits", thus
establishing a pattern. Patterns are anti-RTPB.
pyro225 December 31st, 2002, 10:39 PM

NBK wrote:
"Fortunately, DVR's are still rather rare, and real time streaming of video feed to a remote host even more so. So, given the
very low probability of remote storage, the destruction of the machine on site is of prime importance."
You'd be surprised. On site DVR's are now competitively priced with mid priced time-lapses. It's catching on quick! The remote
video storage you speak of is I'm assuming what we call "remote video monitoring". Several national fast shit-food chains
have been using this technology for a while - Taco Hell is a good example. The video is digitally recorded and stored on-site,
but the DVR (a desktop PC with a fancy video input card and large hard-drive(s)) is connected to a phone line or WAN which is
used for a remote station to connect to and view real time going's on. The very same idiots at fire and burglar alarm central
stations can dial in to these locations and watch for employee "shrinkage", check on a burglar alarm, or just make sure Jose
the fry cook isn't jacking off into the sour cream. A few chains that I know of have their corporate loss prevention "operatives"
keep an eye on things this way. The technology is getting pretty efficient - the resolution and FPS is pretty impressive for 56k
dial-up.

I'm glad someone is watching Jose the fry cook. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :D
One place I worked at (Circle K) had remote monitoring. Some company in texas would dial up (you could hear it sometimes
through the intercom speakers) and ask us how things were going. The signs on the door told people that we were under
audio AND video surveillance.
But, having talked to many of the people at the other end over the course of a year, I found out that it's only audio unless
they get a hold up alarm call. THEN they'll dial in and download the last couple of minutes out of the video RAM buffer between
the cameras and the tape VCR.
Continuous remote monitoring is both expensive, and tedious. Likely it'll only be done during a specific time period (thieving
employee's shift), period of high risk, or in case of an alarm.
Though, the way technology gets cheaper, it'll likely be everywhere within 5 years, 10 at most. It'll take time to trickle down
since most businesses don't upgrade non-profit generating equipment till it's too worn down to be repaired. At which time,
they'll buy the cheapest POS they can find. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
pyro225 January 1st, 2003, 04:14 PM

Here's a little trade info you might find interesting. Time lapse VCR's retail anywhere between $500 and $1500. The main
problem with these machines is tape wear. The life span of an average time-lapse, before the heads need to be cleaned and/
or replaced, is 2 years. That is assuming the operator follows the installers instructions - 2 sets of 7 tapes, week 1 and 2, with
one for each weekday. These tapes should be thrown out and replaced with new sets no less than once per year. Well guess
what - they don't listen. 6 months after install, they complain about a stuck tape, crappy recorded images or a fried VCR. The
same tape that was originally started in the machine is, lo and behold, still in there. The tape never gets changed. And once a
tape is used more than about 15 or 20 times, it starts to flake off in the machine and damage the recording heads and
moving parts. A cleaning/repair for this damage isn't covered by warranty and costs anywhere from $500 to $1000. Why repair
when you can buy a new one? And now that DVR's can be had for $1000-$5000, have a much longer lifespan (even when
operators are stupid and negligent), are more reliable, and give higher quality images, time lapse VCR repair is not so
common.
I digress. The point is planned obsolescence is alive and well in electronic surveillance, and time lapse VCR's are very nearly
obsolete.
And yes, I'm also glad someone is watching Jose the fry cook.
BTW - I grew up in your neck of the woods, NBK. Tornado capital of the world it is. In fact, my cousin and I naively chased the
tornado that wandered around the outskirts Wichita, almost tossed B-1 bombers at McConnell and destroyed some of
Andover. I think it was 1990 or 1991. We got to Andover about 5 minutes after it blew through the neighborhood and trailer
park. Once you see that kind of destruction and carnage, one is no longer interested in seeing the beast itself. Sorry for the
off topic comment, but everytime I see where you're from I think of that experience.
Jacks Complete July 23rd, 2006, 01:37 PM

Just re-opening this old thread.
CCTV in the UK now demands clear signage wherever it is in use (everywhere!) giving the details of who to contact about it.
The idea is it saves the cops a load of time getting contact details and tapes.
VCR timelapse is dropping out rapidly here, due to the new Data Protection Act requirements for tape re-use. You have to
keep the tapes for a certain time, so you need 14 of them or more in a locked tape dispenser, and it costs you to keep giving
these premium tapes to the cops.
For 50 you can get a motion sensitive CCTV capture card that takes 4 cameras, has remote access and back-up, and can be
set up in any regular PC in ten minutes. If the police want a copy, you simply burn it to CD or DVD. This reduces the "costs of
compliance" so far that many units are replaced with these before the normal end of life of the tape based systems.
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/video/june/carparkAttack.wmv shows a modern CCTV system doing sod all in preventing an attack,
despite the operator noticing something was happening even before the victim.
JakeGallows July 23rd, 2006, 10:30 PM

I watched a tv show regarding crime in the UK and was lead to believe that prosecution useing these cameras is weak. They
had one segment about a store-owner who was repeatedly robbed, who eventually installed a CCTV system (a nice one too)
that captured the thieves fire-bombing his car. The video had them casing the neighborhood, fire-bombing his car and driving
off + the license plate. No arrests have been made though the two men can be very clearly made out in the tape. (Perhaps he
should have saved up and bought himself a shotgun instead? :D)
After watching that I began thinking about it, a number of cities including Chicago and now New Orleans have installed
remotely monitored police-designated cameras. I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for anything seen on the
tapes. In fact if I remember correctly there was a shooting in New Orleans captured on a carwash surveillance cam which led to
no prosecution (despite another clear identification) until the media found out and raised hell.:rolleyes:
I'll wear the mask, but it's nice to know that LEO laziness continues to be an effective countermeasure to video surveillance.
festergrump July 23rd, 2006, 11:43 PM

I'll wear the mask, but it's nice to know that LEO laziness continues to be an effective countermeasure to video surveillance.
RTPB, plan for failure. You should wear the mask plus utilize all other forensic escaping tactics or you might find Murphy's law
providing you as the scale-tipping test case, thus proving the government's case for more cameras... "It works!", they'll argue.
Anyhow, it's funny you mention New Orleans and Chicago (two cities completely overrun with niggers, as most large cities are)
as examples of cities in the US with cameras already in place yet with no known of convictions resulting...
As with any newly implemented method of crime control/prevention/evidence collection in the USA there needs to be at least
an equal number of white people busted using the same method as black people or the niggers will cry racism, and usually
WIN hands down by a jury of their "peers" (read: as many niggers as possible aboard to at least hang the jury in such a trial).
It works for them more often than not and the government knows this. Maybe they're waiting for more white infractions as
test-cases first, to see if jurys will convict on such digital (and not hard copy) evidence?
Interesting that these cities in the US have already adopted the Orwellian 'all seeing eye' much like that of the UK, though. I
figured it was coming since the "traffic cams" in accident-prone intersections issuing tickets through the mail became popular
just about everywhere in America, but didn't know it was steadily being attempted for other more criminal evidences also as of
yet... soon, I reckon... very soon.
When in doubt, consult the RTPB.
JakeGallows July 24th, 2006, 12:02 PM

I'm not sure what you were getting at in the last post - I agree with you that you should cover your bases as per RTPB. I was
simply pointing out that sometimes Murphy's law works for you - in that police/prosecutor laziness can hinder prosecution.
As for the usefulness of video surveillance I searched some more on Google and discovered some interesting tidbits including
that the carwash shootout did indeed foster arrests. These arrests came within days, but prosecution decided it didn't have
enough evidence. Within a few months the same guys were re-arrested on different charges or gave themselves up because
the prosecutor decided that he actually did have a case.
The Chicago PD appears to have had some level of success with arrests, (see link below) with 76 arrests. Of course as New
Orleans showed arrests mean nothing if not followed by prosecution. On the flip side the cameras reduced crime where they
were placed.
Chicago Police Camera effectiveness:

http://www.rajivshah.com/camera/archives/chicago/
A look at the New Orleans car wash video system:

http://www.securitymagazine.com/CDA/Archives/1589d3dbe64d8010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____
On another note, the "gunshot detection" system is an interesting feature. It basically incorporates microphones into the
cameras that register and triangulate gun shot sounds providing the center of operations with a location for gunfire. Units are
then dispatched. I hear that and I think: sounds like an easy way to get police dispatched to the location that I want them. All
I have to do is make it sound like a bullet was fired...
Jacks Complete July 24th, 2006, 05:52 PM

Which, if you wanted to kill police, would be a very easy thing to do! Any sniper with a beef would have an easy time of it, if he
used a decent killzone and limited the escape routes. I bet they would stop investigating quite so fast then.
JakeGallows July 25th, 2006, 02:18 PM

Or if you wanted to punish big brother without causing casualties you could shoot out the cameras. At $16K for first gen and
$30K for second gen they make a very tempting target, though you'd want to be sure that you shot through the bulletproof
dome... getting caught on film by the very camera you were trying to eliminate is bad form.
w22shadow September 4th, 2006, 09:53 PM

How thick is the protective-casing of most CCTV cabinets? I wonder if a "door-breaching round (http://www.cqbsupply.com/
doorbreaching.html)" could be used to penetrate through and destroy the VCR. At the very least, it could be used to disable
any lock on the device quickly.
charger October 1st, 2006, 02:15 PM

The rounds you linked to are not designed to go through doors and cause damage, but rather disintigrate in impact, so I don't
think that they would be the best round for the job.
tmp October 1st, 2006, 02:43 PM

JakeGallows, I wonder if a laser would damage the CCDs in these cameras.
Direct sunlight can damage the CCDs of camcorders. It would give me
extreme pleasure to fry those money grabbing devices as well as piss off
the money grubbing politicians.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > fake car bomb movie on the forum FTP
Log in
View Full Version : fake car bomb movie on the forum FTP
S. Toppholzer July 12th, 2002, 06:13 AM

Since a car bomb is about demolition I assume this belongs here...
There's a file on the forum ftp named
car_bomb upped by fallout85.mpg
which supposedly shows the effect of a car bomb.

I say it's not a car bomb. First off, the fireball clearly shows an FAE effect - HE's as normally used for car bombs never make such fireballs. One could say that if the gas tank is
being affected there'd also be some FAE effect. Could be - but never that big!
I recall vividly seeing a newsfeed about an abadoned car in Spain which was rigged with HE's by the ETA. Police blew it up. It was one extremely forceful detonation with
pieces flying around incredibly fast - reminded me of pictures out of desert storm.
Take a closer look at the first couple of frames. You'll see a big oil-drum shaped object just on left behind the car. slowly forward the movie. The explosion starts at that
object!
Subsequently the car is being engulfed and destroyed by this FAE.
(edit: dunno... can't link a working URL to this.)
[ July 12, 2002, 05:27 AM: Message edited by: S. Toppholzer ]
Eliteforum July 12th, 2002, 12:27 PM

How do you know it's a fake car bomb? I could be a test to see if that a trash can on a sidewalk can hold enough explosives to take out a car or some other test.
And the reason you can't link a file is that you need a username/password. Besides, everyone on this forum (near abouts) has an account, so there is no real need to link it.
Fallout85 July 12th, 2002, 03:35 PM

Hmm...didn't notice that barrel there before. Well anyway I downloaded it from this site: <a href="http://www.emrtc.nmt.edu/media/." target="_blank">http://
www.emrtc.nmt.edu/media/.</a>
While we're on the topic, have any of you noticed in the atomic cannon movie (I think it's on the ftp) that the cannon dramaticly shifts position and the terrain changes after
the bomb explodes. It's as though the camera or the cannon were shifted about five feet in less than a second. Replay it frame by frame and you'll see what I'm talking about.
S. Toppholzer July 13th, 2002, 05:47 PM

how I'd define a fake? :rolleyes:
Well, let's see... Since that movie clip is named car bomb everyone downloading that file assumes it will be about a bomb within a car or attached to it. The downloading
person might also assume that a car bomb is being based on a High explosive and not FAE or else this would have been indicated in the file name e.g. "FAE-carbomb".
To me, there is a difference between a bombed car and a car bomb.
What you are talking about would be a bombed car - bombed by an FAE closeby :p
Regarding the ftp linking - the server also serves for hosting images to be displayed on this forum. If one can link an image to this forum one could also link a file to it via URL.
Besides, if it were the case as you mention it everyone would have to log on to the server to download the pictures instead of seeing them here first.
Secondly, no user with a sane mind would give away his very own server password within the link - for linking purposes there's the
<a href="ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80" target="_blank">ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80</a>
address. This one was the one I tried within the link and it made me wonder why it didn't work.
So please do me a favor and wise up first before becoming edgy here. :mad:
xoo1246 July 13th, 2002, 06:43 PM

Play it frame by frame and you'll see that the barrel explodes, then the car's fuel ignites. I don't think it's a FAE. Maybe some aluminiumised H.E. No, actually I can't really say.
[ July 13, 2002, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
ST July 13th, 2002, 11:45 PM

With the atomic cannon..
Why do you hear the sound of the explosion immediately as the nuke detonates. EMP affecting electronics? or Fake?
However I have seen the same footage on a documentary, therefor it aint altered just for the web.
[ July 13, 2002, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: ST ]
S. Toppholzer July 15th, 2002, 11:54 AM

when I said fake I didn't say that I thought the file was altered on purpose.
I should better have called it "car bomb not a car bomb"...
It's not a bomb on/in a car. I won't call it a car bomb.
frostfire July 18th, 2002, 10:54 PM

the atomic cannon is no fake, I uploaded it; you can check the credentials at <a href="http://www.vce.com/trinity.html" target="_blank">http://www.vce.com/trinity.html</
a> documentary made by award winning peter kuran.
edit: ooops, yes, some parts were dubbed/effects added; eg; the car, woods, shockwave blast
btw, the use of those cannons (yes, more than 1 were made) can create an unforgettable battleground in Afganistan
I'm trying to complete collections of those film esp. nuclar in space, anyone to trade/upload at ftp?
[ July 18, 2002, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: frostfire ]
NoltaiR September 27th, 2002, 02:41 PM

I just stumbled across an interesting web page that just says a lot of information about propylene oxide (commonly used in military FAEs) that some of you may like to read if
you have a few minutes. I didn't think a post like this deserved a new topic so I grabbed the first thread that I could find about FAEs.
In any case, its a good read.
<a href="http://www.nsc.org/library/chemical/propyle0.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nsc.org/library/chemical/propyle0.htm</a>
And while I am at it; they have over 100 chemical backgrounds (very informative):
<a href="http://www.nsc.org/library/chemical/chemical.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nsc.org/library/chemical/chemical.htm</a>
[ September 27, 2002, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]
mr.evil October 8th, 2002, 02:18 PM

if you look very good to the video, you can see some kind of shockwave in the sky... This could be a visable(?) shockwave from a detonation, or maybe the heat wave from a
FAE?
Also, if you play the movie in frames you can see that the explosive device is placed into the oil drum behind the front of the car, so i guess it was a test did by the army, or
some other federel organisation to test the damage to a car(actually, if you look at the left of you can see the back of another car, or am i mistaking?) maybe for terrorist
attacks
To bad the video doesn't has sound, otherwise we could identify the blast by the sound.
anyway, nice vid :D
edit: typo's
[ October 08, 2002, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: mr.evil ]
ShockWave October 8th, 2002, 03:17 PM

At the horizon you can see the shockwave, it is not the heat, I'm sure about that, because on the discovery their was this program all about those shockwaves !! and their was
a bomb just like this with the same picture at the horizon
mr.evil October 8th, 2002, 04:38 PM

Maybe a little bit off topic, but about 2 years ago there was a big fireplace(dunno actually how to call this, but people make big towers of wood, mostly to celebrate
something) of about 10metres high, and it was made all out of wood(old doors, boxes, planks etc.) When it was about 10 o clock everybody was going to the fireplace to
watch it burn, suddenly a very loud explosion was heared, and i saw a huge fireball and on the other side of the fireplace were pieces of wood blowen into the sky(next day i
was go looking, i found pieces of wood 40-50metres away <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> ), i felt some kind of hot shockwave over my body and i
started run like hell, with no idea what actually was happened...
after about 3minutes i heard from a few guys that some people lit the fireplace with gasoline, wich is really stupid, as you know there can be a FAE with only 6% fuel in the
air(am i right?)...
[ October 08, 2002, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: mr.evil ]
ShockWave October 9th, 2002, 04:45 AM

are you sure it was no gastank, we do this sometimes, we went into the forest, make a big fire and throw a i think a 50kg gastank with butane at the fire, extreme explosion,
huge fireball also.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Home Artillery (improvised weaponry)
Log in
View Full Version : Home Artillery (improvised weaponry)
NoltaiR November 12th, 2002, 11:50 PM

Well an idea that I have had for quite a while just began to take effect today when I actually found a 10 foot length of galvanized steel pipe with threaded ends. The pipe will
be cut into two 5 foot test barrels. What is so perfect about the pipe is that it is just barely wide enough to hold a CO2 cartridge... in my previous thoughts I figured I wouldn't
be able to find a pipe like this so I was probably going to have to spend some extra time welding and finding peices of scrap metal to use. Anyw ays I also recieved a 'donation'
from a next door neighbor (my old testing side-kick) of two dozen emptied CO2 cartridges. I drew up a quick design about an hour ago but now that I am finally posting this I
have noticed that there is an error in my thoughts about placing an 'impact nail' into the CO2 cartridge.
<a href="http://www 28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/save/artil.gif" target="_blank">http://ww w28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/save/artil.gif</a>
sorry about the bad quality.. when you are using a combination of MSPAINT '98 and some old gif creating program, you are garanteed to get bad results
Eliteforum November 13th, 2002, 12:25 AM

Why would you fill a tree w ith wirewool? The image is hard to read and understand. Install Photoshop!
NoltaiR November 13th, 2002, 01:44 AM

Sorry about not explaining it better. The idea to this is that the end cap is unscrewed, and the projectile is slid into position (about 1 inch down the pipe. Then a spoonful or so of
BP is put in the open inch of the barrel. The end cap has two holes drilled in at angles (less chance of gas escaping around wire leads) and the w ires are firmly pulled through. A
few strands of steel wool are run betw een the two leads and the resulting miniature ignition setup is gently pushed into the BP so that some of the strands are buried in the BP
and some are not. The end cap is screwed back on slowly but firmly (and yes this will disturb the BP a little but it shouldn't matter) and the whole artillery setup is backed up
against a tree for support (in the picture I show a steel plate being first attached to the tree and then the artillery setup is pushed up flush to the plate).
Liam C. November 13th, 2002, 02:00 AM

How do you intend to reload the firing charge?
It possible that I'm looking at the picture all w rong, but it looks like getting it ready to fire again w ould be quite time consuming, unless you plan on having pre-made (and pre-
wired) pipe caps (is the cap attached to the tree?). Even then it w ould seem too time consuming for any kind of usable(?) sustained rate of fire. I w ould think that it w ould be
much faster to weld the cap onto the pipe and tamp in the propellant charge (pre-measured) just like they did back in the old days...
You might want to consider "nesting" the barrel inside another, slightly larger, steel pipe for safety/strength as well...
The CO2 round bothers me though. I've never done any shock tests on AP before but my first thought w as... "BOOM in the barrel". Firing the cannon will be quite a shock to the
round.
.
Hmmm... sorry it looks redundant Noltair. You posted while I was writing...
[ November 13, 2002, 01:04 AM: Message edited by: Liam C. ]
0EZ0 November 13th, 2002, 02:55 AM

Sounds like a good project :p . You are quite lucky to have found that pipe.
Got a few suggestions for you:
Firstly, there is a reason w hy artillary shells are not filled w ith a primary explosive. You don't want the shell prematurely exploding either before leaving the barrel, or before you
load it into the barrel w hile you are still handling it <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> . Find a Secondary HE that is w ithin your reach of aquiring/
manufacturing.
Secondly for your shell casing you mention using a CO 2 cartridge. Sounds fine. To use simply empty the cartridge and the drill out the 'capped end for eventually
loading the HE of your choice through it. Later another hole w ill be drilled for the detonator assembly before the HE filling. For placement of the 'impact detonator' look a little
below**..
As for the impact detonator/igniter, one could quite easily create one from a product that is used almost exactly for that purpose, ie. a shotgun shell primer. Just attach one to
your choice of detonator, then attach a BB round or similiar to the 'cup' end of the shotgun shell primer to act as the 'hammer'. So that upon impact the BB round strikes the cup
end of the primer setting it off.
**Now for placement of the detonator. Assuming you are using the CO 2 cartridge as the shell casing, the impact part of the detonator is going to have to be at
the front part of the shell.
Drill a hole the size of the diameter of the shotgun shell primer. So that w hen the detonator assembly is placed in the shell, the lip around the cup end of the primer is still on the
outside of the shell.
<blockquote>code: <hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">
________________
\\_ __/ \
|-_|__ <- Insert detonator assembly in here
// \________________/
^ ^
Fins CO2 Shell
</pre> <hr /></blockquote>Another point would be to add a fin design to the back of the shell for stability in flight to the
target.
Sorry about the crappy pic. If I have time to illustrate the design further on a paint program I'll post it.
[ November 13, 2002, 01:57 AM: Message edited by: 0EZ0 ]
Arkangel November 13th, 2002, 08:38 AM

I may be being a dummy here, but I keep getting this message: "HTTP1.1 STATUS 403 Remote Access to this object forbidden This file cannot be directly accessed from a
remote site, but must be linked through the Brinkster Member's site."
Anyway, I wouldn't be inclined to have anything too sensitive in this projectile. Personally I'd be inclined to have a fin assembly as suggested by OEZO, but have a delay fuse
sticking out the back of the projectile. This will take fire from your propellant, and with appropriate testing you should be able to have it burst at a fairly predictable range. The
sort of fuse I'm thinking of is like you would use in an aerial star shell.
I'm on the lookout for an old hydraulic ram to make something very similar :D
Harry November 13th, 2002, 10:03 AM

Instead of BP, have you considered compressed air?
Harry
Anthony November 13th, 2002, 10:54 AM

Drag the link to an empty IE window to view the picture <img border="0" title= "" alt="[Wink]" src= "w ink.gif" />
I don't think you'll need that tree for support, the mass of the gun with that support frame, and it being on w heels, I reckon there's plenty of mass to abosrb the recoil from such
a light round.
I'd be inclined to make a form of cartridge to load this thing. It's simply be a thin paper (or plastic, metal) tube, either with the CO2 cart in one end, or if the pipe isn't w ide
enough to allow that, the tube glued to a narrow point of the CO2 cart. It's hold your pow der charge and an electrical ignitor along w ith, say 6" of doubled cored wire. These
things would take a few minutes each to make up and to load you'd just have to remove the pipe cap, push the round into the breach, feed the wire end through a central hole
in the pipe cap, screw the pipe cap on, twist the w ires to your ignition source and away you go. For extra speed, you could put a plug on your ignition source and another on the
rounds, then simply snap them together.
If you want something besides explosive rounds to try, cut the neck off of a CO2 cart and cast it full of lead. These things have great penetration when gotten up to speed :)

reloading would be easy.. just a matter of
1,unscrewing the cap
2,cleaning the leads of any residue or build-up
3,placing new steel wool
4,adding another round
5,adding BP for the lifting charge
6,screw ing back on
That should be simple enough. A new idea that I have had w ould be to use a good LE such as flash and the initiator would simply be a cap made for shotgun shells (you can
buy the individual ones for shotgun shell reloaders).
The cap should fit tightly into the opening in the CO2 cartridge
Arkangel November 13th, 2002, 02:01 PM

I think the problem you're going to have with any such "fuse" is that unless it hits a hard surface dead on, you'll end up with a dud.
How are you going to ensure that this projectile doesn't tumble in flight?

I think that the CO2 cartridges are heavy and aerodynamic enough to keep from shaking while in flight.
And if the shotgun shell primer cap is used for initiation, then rather than a nail being used, I believe a BB superglued to the center of the cap should be better.
A43tg37 November 13th, 2002, 04:29 PM

Noltair, to make this artillery piece quicker to load, why not grind some of the threads of the cap and pipe off in an "interrupted screw" fashion (this could possibly be done
easier if you were using a solid pipe plug instead of a cap), like is done on actual artillery pieces. This would create the problem of requiring obturation (blocking of the gases
coming through the unthreaded areas), but I assume with your welder's skills you could make something that serves this purpose well (although, considering....a pipe cap like
you're using now, rather than a plug, might actually provide obturation itself, as the threads, even though cut in interrupted screw fashion, are all inside it; how ever, it would be
slower to screw and unscrew in an interrupted screw configuration than a plug would be). And finally, about keeping the shell from tumbling in flight: It seems that since the
idea of using a rifled slug in a smoothbore barrel (shotgun barrel) instead of a rifled barrel and regular slug, w orks pretty well, someone would have came up with the same
principle for a smoothbore cannon. Well, it turns out they did: check out <a href= "http://www.civilwarartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/FAOIIIa64.htm" target="_blank"> http://
w w w.civilw arartillery.com/projectiles/rifled/FAOIIIa64.htm</a> . This shell uses vanes that are actually an integral part of the shell itself, to obtain accuracy and range that is
almost as good as a shell fired from a rifled cannon (w ell, at least according to that site's webmaster, when I emailed him). While you probably don't w ant to go about casting
one of these in metal, even w ith all the info available from Backyard Metal Casting, it shouldn't be too hard to make a hardened (with sodium silicate or something) paper-
maiche nose adaptation with a "vaned" design similar to the Carkeet shell, for use on CO2 cartridges (of course, an adaptation like this could easily be put on blunter, less
aerodynamic projectiles, thus allowng a greater range of projectiles to be fired from your artillery piece).
[ November 13, 2002, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: A43tg37 ]
Arkangel November 13th, 2002, 05:14 PM

GREAT post A43. I've never seen anything like the Carkeet shell before, but I reckon it could work quite well both for Noltair's projectiles AND w ith my spin stabilised rocket
project (current thread in pyrotechnics). You make me veeerrryy happy!
I've been thinking of casting nozzles w ith plaster of paris, but this would suit itself perfectly to that. I just need to make a die, then a bunch of latex moulds and I can cast spin
inducing Carkeet nosecones for my projectiles :D p of p might not be the best thing for Noltair, as the shock is going to be greater, and you don't w ant it breaking up as the
projectile moves up the barrel <img border="0" title= "" alt= "[Eek!]" src= "eek.gif" /> However, for me it should w ork fine.
I like your idea about removing sections of the thread, that should make reloading a lot quicker, especially if combined w ith some kind of cartridges......Noltair, what do you
have against that idea? I know your system w ould work, but I like to be able to do some preparatory w ork (like cartridge building) sat listening to the radio over a beer <img
border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Once again A43, great post :)
[ November 13, 2002, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]
0EZ0 November 13th, 2002, 11:26 PM

Ok finally got some time to show a rough diagram of a CO2 shell design :p .
<a href="http://www .boomspeed.com/0ez0/CO2shelldesign.jpg" target="_blank"> http://www .boomspeed.com/0ez0/CO2shelldesign.jpg< /a>
From Arkangel
<blockquote>quote:< hr /> Personally I'd be inclined to
have a fin assembly as suggested by OEZO, but have a delay fuse sticking out the back of the projectile. This will take fire from your propellant, and with appropriate testing
you should be able to have it burst at a fairly predictable range. The sort of fuse I'm thinking of is like you w ould use in an aerial star shell.
<hr /> </blockquote> I was also thinking about having such a fuse added to the shell. I added it to the pic < img
border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> . Nothing is to scale, it is just a quick mock-up of a design. Comments? Suggestions?
Arkangel November 14th, 2002, 12:46 AM

Yep, I get the idea. It combines elements from both designs, and you should be assured of the shell exploding one way or another. It certainly seems feasible. I'm just curious
what primary you'd use, something that can take a fair bit of shock :)

Oh I have decided against the idea of having a homemade primary (well at least for now ) in there because just the blast that would result from the cartridge leaving the barrel
might be enough to initiate it. What I am doing is just filling the cartridge with my homemade BP (w hich over the years has come to be quite impressive) so that on impact the
percussion cap will detonate spraying sparks on my BP w hich will set it off. Of coarse this will not be as effective as an HE but it is probably safer for the time being.
Liam C. November 14th, 2002, 01:45 AM

I like the picture OEZO... How would you suggest putting the fins on other than epoxy?
I myself have tried epoxy on experimental projectiles in the past and many of the rounds would lose one or two fins as soon as the rounds were launched (we'd find them up to
a dozen feet from the launcher) causing them to keyhole our targets, which w ere made from 1/4" plywood, rather than strike head-on. After those tests, I kind of gave up on
the idea of attaching fins to the little cartridges.
I believe that it's actually easier (at least for me anyw ay) to make a 'tail fin' assembly, and attach it to a CO2 cartridge that's had the bottle neck cut off from it. Somewhere in
my garage is an empty round (a left-over from those tests I mentioned earlier). If you're interested, I'll make a serious search for it and take a couple pictures of it for you
guys.
Anthony suggested making a form of cartridge for it for quicker reloading. That is an entirely 'doable' job there. What I was doing w as intended for mechanical firing, but I
suppose that it could be modified for electric firing as NoltaiR envisions. I was using emptied shotgun shells. Cut the crimp off the front, empty the shot (saving the wad), insert
the new 'round' and reseal the edge of the shell with wax. For our long rounds (lengthy tail assy) we had to modify our shell casing a bit, but for the fins you guys are planning
you shouldn't need to do anything to it. Rather simplistic, but they worked...
I suppose you could also try the cork trick as described in 'The Black Book Companion'. I've never done it but it looks interesting nonetheless.

Well I had a go at making my first mini-cannon today (3/4" diameter barrel). The design was made completely out of w ood except for the barrel itself because I w anted to do a
quick but worthy job. Obviously this looks nothing like the first idea I had sketched out but I think it will w ork so long as my rounds don't get too heavy (I think casting them
with lead would probably be a way to make them too heavy).
Anyways here are the pics of my gun (cut and paste).
side view:
<a href="http://www 28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/side.jpg" target= "_blank">http://w ww28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/side.jpg< /a>
front view:
<a href="http://www 28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/intimidation.jpg" target="_blank">http://ww w28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/intimidation.jpg< /a>
pic of the end cap with holes drilled for electric leads:
<a href="http://www 28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/cap.jpg" target= "_blank">http://w ww28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/cap.jpg</a>
edit: and I know you guys are going to think that the pipe is just going to slip out when it fires off, but with the way I designed it, the wooden holes w ill actually tighten even
more around the pipe when there is any kind of movement along with the fact that it took a sledge hammer just to drive the pipe through the holes (which I had made slightly
smaller).
[ November 14, 2002, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]

And I thought you guys might like to see the BP that I use for shots like this. Here is 400g of my homemade BP (made yesterday) made with 20% charcoal ranging from 200-
400 mesh (having a range of mesh sizes seems to give it an extra kick of combustion w hen ignited in a confinement) 72% KNO3 and 8% sulfur. All three ingredients are poured
in a low heat food processor and 91% isopryl alcohol is added so that it is damp (not soaked). They are blended for about a minute and then the BP is allow ed to dry
completely (for me this can take up to 24-30 hours because it is so humid where I live). The result is BP that looks like it has been run through a screen (in other words it is not
powdered) and it is made up of charcoal of different sizes coated in sulfur and recrystallized KNO3. The finer ground charcoal will be burnt off immediately when ignited in the
open (unconfined) and the larger grains of chargoal (approx 200 mesh) w ill be throw n off as sparks.
I burned 7g for this picture on a peice of paper (so I would have time to back away and I wouldn't have to waste a fuse).
<a href="http://www 28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/bp1.jpg" target="_blank">http://ww w28.brinkster.com/emcatalouge/forum/bp1.jpg< /a>

In about 3 hours I will be firing it off so check back.
DarkAngel November 15th, 2002, 01:49 PM

I had an idea of a design for faster reloading.
It's simply a capped barrel where a part is cut out with a bigger barrel shoved around it.
A metal rod is welded on the smaller barrel that acts as a handle.
Tw o small holes are drilled in the cap,in each one an electrical wire is inserted and on them there are tw o metal plates attached.They will conduct the current to the bridge wire
in the cartridge.
The cartridge is made like Anthony described only with two small pins in them that will make contact with the plates on the cap.
There is a section cut out of the outer barrel like seen on the picture w here the handle will move through in order to close the canon.
Load your cartridge inside the barrel and push it downwards,push/turn the handle and it's locked ready for firing.
<a href="http://entersection1.virtualave.net/Pictures/Load%20Mech1.JPG" target="_blank">http://entersection1.virtualave.net/Pictures/Load% 20Mech1.JPG</a>

Here you see how the canon and the cartridge look from above in open view ready for loading and how it looks while closed.

Shows the inner barrel from side view.

Shows how the end cap could be made.
Don't attach to many importance to the picture of the cartridge it only describes the ignitor and the idea,i know that the seize of the Co2 cartridge isn't right but i already drew
the barrel and didn't feel anything for it to do it again.
Some gasses could escape through the "lock part" this may be reduced by a little more propellant.
The Co2 cartridge may get stuck after it reaches the part that's cut aw ay and where the not cutted part starts.
It could be prevented by using a projectile with a cone on top i think.
Improvements/suggestions are w elcome.
[ November 15, 2002, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: DarkAngel ]
Sgt.Starr December 23rd, 2002, 07:57 PM

Hey guys, I'm probally missing something, but why not use a 3 in shotgun shell minus the payload? Or, do you really want the electrical firing mechanism? You could modify the
BP load to accomidate your barrel strenght, cartridge weight and range, with some practice. I'm assuming that CO2 cartridges are about the size of a shotgun shell, keep the
plastic wading so that your fins w ont be damaged(maybe shorten the wad) with your welding skills your should be able to concoct some firing mechanism. Hope this isnt
repetitive or straying from your original idea, just thought that would be more efficient and faster for loading and firing. < img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /
>

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Vision/Hearing precautions when detonating?
Log in
View Full Version : Vision/Hearing precautions when detonating?
Tyler_Durden July 14th, 2002, 11:08 PM

((this seems like the best category for this topic...?))
What precautions should one take when detonating explosives?
How far away should you stay if there is no shrapnel? Of course it would vary between the size of charge, etc, but, in general, how far?
What should you do to protect your hearing? Is earmuffs enough for everything? Are those even necessary?
Vision: when are sunglasses needed, and are there any situations where you should not w atch at all? (maybe thermite?)
Any advice regarding hearing/vision protection?
I don't think this has been formally discussed any, or maybe I just couldnt find it when searching...
ALENGOSVIG1 July 15th, 2002, 12:14 AM

I'd say if you dont have any cover such as lower land, big rocks, or walls then you should be around 100m away from 1/4 - 1 lb charges.
If you have cover you can be closer ofcourse.
For smaller stuff like 40 grams for example i'd wanna be about 25 meters away.
As for ear protection, i dont w ear any. the thing i like most about explosives is the sound.
I dont think eye protection is necessary w hen detonating explosives. If theres going to be shrapnel, then take cover. As for thermite, just dont look at it. Mabe you could w ear
some welding goggles. You'd probally have to wear like # 10's or something though.
[ July 14, 2002, 11:16 PM: Message edited by: ALENGOSVIG1 ]
Tyler_Durden July 15th, 2002, 02:02 AM

Do you think sunglasses, in the day time, would be sufficient for thermite?
Is looking directly at thermite w/o protection a real risk?
As a result of past injury, it's important that I be especially careful in regards to light sensitivity, w hich is why I want to know what I am getting in to before I play w/ thermite.
[ July 15, 2002, 01:05 AM: Message edited by: Tyler_Durden ]
Charlie Workman July 15th, 2002, 02:35 AM

Hearing protection should ALWAYS be worn when detonating explosives. I lost over 40% of my hearing from this (well, actually it was a combination of gunfire, high explosives,
and rock n roll)and let me tell you, being partly deaf sucks. I miss a lot of what's going on around me and have to say "What?" alot. I can't alw ays tell where a sound comes
from, or even vaguely what it is. This is no joke. If your ears ring, you've damaged them, at least a little. I always thought earplugs were for pussies. I was wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"To paraphrase Aristotle, life is a gas"
-Gidget
mongo blongo July 15th, 2002, 10:24 AM

You should alw ays have ear protection when making sensitive explosives like primaries. If it unexpectedly goes off when your near it you could easily get deafened.
A while ago I w as testing Lead Azide for the first time. I made a shitty fuse out of powdered match heads in a line down the grove of some folded paper with the LA at the end
(I couldn't be arsed to make a proper fuse at the time). When I lit it the w ind blew in the direction of the LA and my 10 second fuse turned into a 2 second fuse! I had enough
time to stand up and turn around and BANG. I lost the hearing in my right ear for about a day.
I should have used ear protection. :(
And a Proper fuse!
Anthony July 15th, 2002, 04:39 PM

I personally don't use hearing protection, like others I like to listen to the blast as a way of assesing the performance on the charge and also because it's more fun. I never get
ringing ears though, so the level of damage must be negligable. It's not like I am exposed to it every day of the year. I also like to be fully aware of my surroundings, right up
to the second the charge goes off. No good crouching there, hands over ear defenders and some dickhead dog w alker comes up from behind, taps you on the shoulder and says
"wot you doing then?".
Eye protection could apply to small pieces of shrapnel getting blown into your face, but if that happens then you're too close anyway. I guess if using aluminised explosives at
night could damage your retinas if you looked right at the blast, since your irisis w ould be wide open from the dark.
I tend to take the "if you can see it, then it can hit you" approach so will take cover behind something solid about 30yards away from up to 100gm charges.
The trouble with open ground is that a smallish stone could potentially travel a mile even when propelled by a small charge. It's unlikely that being 100 or 200 yards away is
going to make sure no shrapnel can reach you. You're really just reducing the odds of being hit because the further away you are, the lower the concentration of shrapnel.
Putting a foot of w ood between you and the charge lets you be nice and close so you get to feel the shockw ave and the only w ay you could get hit would be by a richochet.
Arkangel July 15th, 2002, 06:08 PM

Likewise, I want to hear the blast.
Yorkshire saying regarding use of Condoms: "I don't w ear me wellies when am 'avin a bath lad".
Applies equally to our hobby. I think that lengthy, extended loud noise is more damaging than peak events. I spent a number of years riding around in helicopters and tracked
armoured vehicles and made sure I had earplugs in. Buddies who didn't now can't hear properly, and the same is true of people in modern dance clubs.
To defend yourself against shrapnel and flash, the best thing is to dig a pit for your tests. Put something a couple of feet below ground, even in an open pit and you'll be safe
even a few yards away - that's precisely w hy they developed the projecting fuses on daisycutter mortar rounds/bombs. The ordnance explodes at surface level instead of below
it.
[ July 15, 2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]
Tyler_Durden July 16th, 2002, 02:02 AM

Also, you could safely watch blasts that throw shrapnel if you used a mirror. Get a nice big cheap one, get behind a barracade of some kind (big tree, sand bags, w hatever),
and set the mirror in such a way that you can see the blast. The chances of getting hurt by something then w ould be less than the chance of injury when preparing the device,
so if you think of it that w ay, its not a big deal.
With this mirror method, one could get pretty close (maybe under 10-20 yards) w ithout much risk. Then, you might wanna wear ear protection, depending on what you are
setting off.
I was thinking of how to best set up a testing range...
I would probably dig a 5 foot diameter area out about a foot deep, and lower tow ards the center, down to about 3 feet. I would probably have a ring around the edge of about
a foot wide of sand, a couple inches deep, this w ay there is almost zero risk of a fire spreading, should there be trouble with a pyrotechnic devices (this is probably unnecessary,
but maybe for testing incendiaries?).
The next thing I would want at my test site w ould be a convex mirror (similar to those used in stores that allow them to watch people while shopping) so that i could safely see
shrapnel devices.
Then again, maybe its not worth the trouble.

nbk2000 July 16th, 2002, 09:08 AM

You, behind bolder or LARGE tree or in deep ditch/hole.
Device, in hole or ditch.
<yoda>
If w atch you must, use plastic mirror on stick you should.
</yoda>
Definitaly have safety googles on. All kinds of dust and bits flys around.
As for distance, it's all dependant on the size. A couple of pounds or less, you can be 30 yards away (behind cover). A few ounces, a couple of yards.
Now, if you're testing a claymore or frag device, the distances are radically altered, but for bare charges...
Ear plugs are always a good idea just before setting off a charge, least till you know how close you can get without going deaf.
pi r o July 18th, 2002, 02:58 PM

Tyler, with that method you could get quite close, but make sure you dont get blast lungs from overpressure!
ENGINEERKILLER August 11th, 2002, 01:04 AM

I never use earplugs and I blow stuff up all the time , the chances of you seeing a piece of frag coming at you are pretty slim but you can usualy hear it.Put your fingers in your
ears w ait for the boom, take your fingers out and keep quite for a few seconds and get ready to kiss the ground.
Other than that I w ear a nomex cvc(combat vehicle crewmember )suit Oakley wraparound sunglasses Kevlar helmet Pointblank interceptor vest with trauma plates throat and
groin protector all leather combat boots kneepads and heavy leather gloves.
I've never had a problem with thermite hurting my eyes but photo flash will mess up your eyes. I got a safety book that says your supposed to wear #6 safety goggles when
you burn it .
Helos September 10th, 2002, 07:09 PM

I posted a new topic but it was closed and I get a warning :mad: , I searched before but couldnt find this one... shit the same!
well its an ok dicussion here, but if anyone can get more scientific information on how dangerous blasting are (for the hearing) and why it had been really grat! :)
For example I know that it is mainly the high frequenzies that are dangerous when blasting. High frequenzies is dying out faster than lower, this can be a problem if you have
earprotection but are really close (as mentioned above) Then the sound maybee dangerous even if you have earprotection, but Iam not shure about this.
It is obvious(no negative effects) that you should have protection when w orking with primaries, but what I really want to know is the effects w hen detonating maybee apound
of explosive above ground, then you want to hear the sound directly, but if it is damaging the hearing you probably shouldnt, anyone who know more about this effects, take
for example the ANNM charge that i detonated, 45 m aw ay, 400g.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are my post from the now closed topic that I created... (if you want to read it)
When are my ears possible damaged? For example once if I set of 400g of ANNM and w as 45 m away w ithout ear protection, was it dangerous (Ifelt no pain afterwards or even
directly when the shockwave hit, w hat I can rembember ) An otehor time I hit a small ammount of AP with an hammer BANG, a high frequenzy ringing in my ears for some
minutes, I hadnt expected it to be that loud, here it is of course good to wear protections, but how dangerous w as it) Three times when I detonated a wery powerfull mix of
Ap/mg/kcl04 (filmcanisters) from 15-25m aw ay I really felt it in my ears, but it didnt thurt afterwards, just when the soundwaves hit. How damaging w as this, for example
compared with the ANNM explosion I metioned.
I also want to know if you use to wear earprotections, and w hen you find it necessary. Is the common earplugs ok, or do I need something more sometimes( that sorts higher
frequenzies out)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[ September 11, 2002, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: Helos ]

You could try some of those electronic ear defenders used for shooting. They apparently only block out the harmful frequencies that come with the blast, so you can hear
normally before and after. I.e. they don't impair your hearing like normal defenders do.

Yes, ofcourse that is the best soulution, but a guass is that they are not cheap at all, but it could be w orth it, as many other valuble things.
The question still is how dangerous it really are to detonate a medium quantity of high explosives and stand a bit away, you get hit by a shockw ave but get no aftereffects that
you can feel( 400g ANNM, not burried, 45m away,), but can it still be dangerous..?

You are really asking two seperate questions - the damaging effect of a shockwave on the body generally, and hearing damage from the blast noise.
Simply, if a blast makes your ears ring for more than a few minutes, chances are that you've done some degree of permanent damage to your hearing.
You really have to be a lot closer to suffer ill effects of a shockwave or over pressure. Generally at 5psi you can look forw ard to things like burst ear drums. At about 10-15psi
you're going to get lung haemoraging and bleeding from one or all of your bodily orifices. At 55psi you stand a 50% chance of death and at 65% a near 100% chance of death.
Of course, those kind of pressures will destroy most above ground buildings and your death will probably come from being slammed into an obstruction at considerable speed.
You'd have to be damn close to a damn big charge to experience such over pressures though.
sinstar September 12th, 2002, 04:26 PM

Personally, I have never been seriously injured due to being to close up, I don't w ear ear protection, what I usually do is have my right hand connecting wires to terminals and
my right ear pressed agaisnt my right shoulder, and one of my left fingers in my left ear. Its not really seeing the blast that I like, but hearing the explosion and seeing soil
blown 20ft up in the air.

By dangerous I meant, dangerous for the hearing, at that distance the shockw ave will not be dangerous, at maybee 15-20m, it can harm you a little (for example you can start
bleed from your nose!) And after that it is really dangerous

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > cutting capability of linear shaped charges
Log in
View Full Version : cutting capability of linear shaped charges
Chris Shiherlis April 25th, 2002, 12:30 PM

I finally found some figures about the performance of linear shaped charges which might come in handy for anyone trying to construct and test those charges.
I came across a site about a LSC called DIOPLEX ( <a href="http://www.elp-logistik.com/" target="_blank">www.elp-logistik.com/</a> click on generalkatalog and 03
sprengmittel) which is a basically a plastic container with a copper liner which can be adjusted to the circumstances (lenght, amount of explosive).
And it said that the DIOPLEX/NEPTUNEX 40mm penetrates mild steel to a depth of 38 mm and it will sever steel up to 50mm. And some other site mentioned that this charge
penetrates RHA (rolled homogeneous armour) to about 1".
Conclusion is that the cutting capability of LSC's is about 150 to 200 percent of the actual penetration in a specific sort of steel (most of the time the figures give the penetration
in mild steel). And the difference in penetration into steel vs. armoured steel is about 65-75 %.
And a site called <a href="http://www.spreng.de/luzern" target="_blank">www.spreng.de/luzern</a> shows other interesting figures of different kind of "schneidladungen"
(LSC's).
This will answer the question of Ray Quick (see "improvised linear shaped charge") but it will also be handy for anyone trying to figure out the effectiveness of a improvised
charge.
Anyway, there's still one question that I want the answer to, and that is the penetration or cutting capability of a given LSC in safety glass. I can't find any information about it.
I found figures about the performance of LSC's on RHA, mild steel, steel plates and even concrete (the DIOPLEX 80mm for example penetrates about 4" of steel and 460mm/
18" of concrete with granite).
But I would like to know how deep the penetration of that DIOPLEX (or some other LSC) charge would be in safety glass.
All I need is one figure, one example of the difference in penetration into safety glass and mild steel (or concrete or other steel). If not from a LSC-jet, maybe some
comparable thing, like the difference of a bullet shot into safety glass and concrete or steel, to get at least an indication of what to expect. If someone finds it or knows it it will
be very much appreciated.
[ April 26, 2002, 06:50 AM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
Energy84 April 25th, 2002, 07:45 PM

Well, I don't understand why you'd need to know how deep a charge will cut into safety glass, especially if it's going to be thinner than 2"...
But whatever, each to his own I guess.
Would it be possible to figure out the density of other materials (ie. the 4" mild steel and 18" concrete with granite) and work out some sort of formula from there? I'm too lazy
to do the math right now, but I'm sure a rough estimate could be done. You'd find out the relation between density:cutting depth and just plug in the density of your safety
glass.
I don't know if that makes sense to everyone or not, but I hope so.
Chris Shiherlis April 26th, 2002, 07:10 AM

Penetration depth or cutting capability will surely be dependant on the density of the target material but I doubt it is the only factor. So knowing the density is probably not
going to help to figure out the penetration of a LSC-jet into safety/security glass. Unless you have some sientific proove that there is a direct, linear relationshipship between
density and penetration. So, I appreciate the effort but I need some hard scientific evidence, figures, tests, theory.
nbk2000 April 27th, 2002, 04:18 PM

If it's that important to you to know, test it yourself.
I'm sure that LSC penetration is at least equal to steel in glass. There's no way that glass could be more resistant to penetration than RHA. Glass is more brittle, and cracks
propagate throughout the glass much further than they would through steel.
Al Koholic April 28th, 2002, 01:13 AM

It would depend on the hardness, density, and internal structure (how brittle the material is) of the target. I imagine it would be a fairly intricate interplay of all these forces but
this should be all that actually affects the cutting depth. A graph could not be made based on density in my opinion. Any graph would have to be material specific and would
also have to consider all the above factors.
Bitter April 28th, 2002, 06:18 AM

"There's no way that glass could be more resistant to penetration than RHA. Glass is more brittle, and cracks propagate throughout the glass much further than they would
through steel."
Yes; glass would proabably have properties similar to or weaker than granite.
Chris Shiherlis April 28th, 2002, 09:43 AM

Yes, it's important to me, and I will test it. But I like to come prepared. I also assume that the penetration in glass will be deeper, certainly if you see the difference between
the penetration of DIOPLEX 40 in mild steel vs. granite concrete. Glass is probably more similar in brittleness and tensile strength to concrete and rock than to steel. But then
again, the laminate security windows are very flexible and can absorb a lot of energy. So I can assume a lot, but KNOWING is something different. And I like to know things,
that's a strange habit of mine.
And by the way NBK, I remember you had some files about explosive entry/cutting techniques by SWAT-teams, showing a video where they use those frame charges attached
to doors and windows. I can't find it anywhere, can you tell me if it still exists? And where to find it? Maybe it will shed some light on the possibilities of using LSC's on security
glass, since those frame charges are also made of LSC's. And the windows they use it on might be safety glass (or maybe not, but it was a nice video anyway). Thanks
anyway.
Oh, and something else: I just saw I did get a rating. Only one f*cking star?!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
nbk2000 April 29th, 2002, 07:57 PM

I still have the cutting charges video, though it'll be included in the DVD. It was on the yahoo briefcase but the bastards have cut off public access to those now. PUNKS! :mad:
Some other members here should have a copy of it you could see.
Terry Collins December 23rd, 2002, 08:38 AM

Chris if you want to see the cutting capability of a LSC on safety glass you should go see the postoffice in Brakel (Belgium). Two days ago a gang placed an explosive in the
shape of a square frame to the safety glass window and busted their way in. They left with 200,000 euro (but since they came with at least 4 guys they have to split it
fourways).
I can't find a picture on the internet to show you but the glass was between 1 or 2 inch thick and it was very sharp cut in the shape of the square. Only some plastic layer
remained. Even the edges were very precise.
So it looked to me the gangsters used a LSC. But somehow I find that hard to believe. Most of the time they use just a charge of semtex or pentrite to shatter the safety glass
or blow the entire window out of it's frame. And LSC's are very rarely used here in Europe and I don't think they have the knowhow to built it themselves (although it's not that
complicated).
So maybe it was just a contactcharge of semtex/pentriet the shape of a square. But can it produce such sharp edges?
(don't know why this topic ends up in 'Chemistry related' but it should be in Improvised weapons or Detonations and Demolition)
[ December 23, 2002, 07:51 AM: Message edited by: Terry Collins ]
Terry Collins February 27th, 2003, 11:22 AM

Can anyone help me out? Is a frame shaped contact charge of semtex able to cut steel or glass with sharp edges or do you get a very rough cut and torn corners?
And I want to know if these guys used LSC's.
Mr Cool February 27th, 2003, 12:05 PM

I'd be surprised if even a LSC could cut glass cleanly without smashing the glass surrounding the cut. It might work better on polycarbonate (which is often called "saftey glass",
I believe). It depends on what you mean by "precise" I guess, a LSC would make a precise hole compared to a lump of HE or a big hammer, but not compared to a glass
cutting saw.
IMO, for a SC to cleanly cut glass, the stand-off distance would have to be quite large so that the glass was cut by the jet but not smashed by the blast. This would require the
use of some sort of stand, which would take time to set up, requiring the criminals to be hanging around at the site, which is not something I'd want to do for very long. So,
again IMHO, a LSC would be unlikely.
Maybe they scratched the glass deeply in the shape of a square, and then used a smaller HE charge in the middle to blow it out. I haven't heard of the job in question so I
can't provide more than speculation though.
But I personally have never done any tests on glass or polycarbonate, maybe someone here has and could better answer your question..?
Microtek February 27th, 2003, 01:42 PM

I can't offer any insight on explosive effects on glass or other transparent materials, but I can tell you that a HE charge placed in intimate contact with a steel surface will
produce a very clean 'footprint' when detonated. Of course, if the charge is sufficiently powerful, secondary blast effects such as the expanding gases will curl the edges of the
hole. The FM dealing with explosives has more info on blast effects, and is worth a read.
Terry Collins March 1st, 2003, 06:40 AM

OK, thanks for the information.
I too find it hard to believe they used LSC's. They probably aren't that sofisticated and even more so because normal explosives are very rarely used over here even for legal
purposes (like mining, demolition) and LSC's even less. So acquiring them is not that easy.
But effects on the glass would suggest a LSC. Because there were no signs of secondary blast effects just a very sharp 'footprint'.
I will try to find a photo.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Tam p i n g T e s t
Log in
View Full Version : Tamping Test
Axt January 20th , 2003, 02:10 AM

Heres a test I tried after the use of dilatant tamping cam e up in the free posting period. It was an attem pt to compare
cornflour/water with other pourable, low shrapnel tamping agents.
Det-cord was run under 3 icecream con tainers containing equal volum es of the indicated tam ping, with a 6m m Al plate as the
target in the hope that the cord will cut into the plate at varying depths.
But as it happened - it didnt cut but just bent a t close to the same angle throughout.
The Al plate should have been layed flat on top of a steel plate with three lengths of det-cord placed latera lly so that the bend
from o n e t a m p e d a r e a wouldnt influence the other areas and the steel plate would help it to cut rather then bend, but as it was
done, the test doesnt really prove anything.
I would expe ct that the dilatant fluids would be best used in a bore hole rather that in the manner tested.
nbk2000 January 20th , 2003, 03:09 AM

The link works fine.
Stoic February 2nd, 2003, 12:01 PM

axt, did you record th e angel to which each tam ping bent the Al too? If you did could you please share them .
Edit: Sorry didn't realise!
<sm all>[ February 02, 2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Stoic ]
Mr Cool February 2nd, 2003, 01:37 PM

I don't think he did record the angles, since he didn't do the test :rolleyes: .
Axt, do you know the angles? And have you tried it with three different Al sheets, one per tam p i n g m a s s ?
Axt February 2nd, 2003, 07:10 PM

T h e d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n t h e e d g es is such -
cornflour/water - 257m m
sand - 259m m
water - 260m m
Not a whole lot of difference. The width of the plate was 276mm if you wish to work out the angles.
I havnt tried 3 seperate charges and I wont, as Al is expensive and I dont think a whole lot of difference will be seen if tested
again in that m anner.
I was trying to think up a way of testing it via a bore hole, this is all I could think of to give comparitive results.
<img src="http://ww1.ft100.co m / ~ 4 5 6 5 3 / g u n s . f t 1 0 0 . c o m /banners/tester.jpg" alt=" - " />
Im not going to do it, but It m ight be a god contraption to have, as it could test the strength of low explosives and oddities
such as the dilatant tam ping.
W hy is it refered to as "dilatant" anyway, does anything "dilate"?
Axt February 5th, 2003, 06:21 PM

For what its worth -
The charge was a .222 case full of blackpowder, at the botom of a 15mm (1/2") PVC pipe with a safe working pressure of
18bar (260psi).
<img src="http://ww1.ft100.co m / ~ 4 5 6 5 3 / g u n s . f t 1 0 0 . c o m /images/tamping2.jpg" alt=" - " />
It was taped upright to a cane , and ignited - heres a crappy <a href="http://miss.fnpsites.com/tamps2.avi"
target="_blank">m ovie</a>.
The Results -
<img src="http://ww1.ft100.co m / ~ 4 5 6 5 3 / g u n s . f t 1 0 0 . c o m /images/tamptest2.jpg" alt=" - " />
T h e s a n d d i d n t d a m a ge the pipe.
The water blew the bottom o f t h e e n d c a p o f f , p i p e w a s n t d a m a g e d .
The cornflour took away the bottom h a l f o f h e p i p e .
0EZ0 February 5th, 2003, 09:02 PM

Very nice results Axt.
It does not surprise me at all that the cornflour/water combination perform e d t h e b e s t . I t b e i n g d i l a t a n t . T h e s a n d w o u l d h a v e

absorbed the explosion, as shown here. The water did a little be tter job, but still seem s t o a b s o r b t o o m u c h o f t h e r e l e a s e d
energy.
Dilatant: : increasing in viscosity and setting to a solid as a resu lt of deformation by expansion, pressure, or agitation.
A few more interesting tests could be done with sand/water, soil/water ag ainst the cornflour/water. You m ight be surpised with
how well other water/granule or powder combinations pe rform .
Happy testing :) .
<sm all>[ February 05, 2003, 08:12 PM: Message edited by: 0EZ0 ]

My theory
Sand: Inert, crushable, granular solid that would be easily ejected.
W ater: Liquid that would, in the imm ediate vicinity of the explosive, be turned into steam , that wouldn't be able to escape out
the pipe before rupture because of the inertia and visco sity of the liquid water m a s s .
Flour/Water: Solid that would not only get harder, but also be co m p r e s s e d i n t h e p i p e ( h e n c e e x p a n d i n g a n d l o c k i n g i n p l a c e ) ,
while the inertia of the sticky solid effe ctively plugs the pipe like plaster.
I n t h e a l u m inum test, you should have cut the plate into 3 sections, each section being seperated from the other by an inch or
so, but having the en tire width of the det-cord covering the strip being itself com pletely covered by the box of dilantant.
This way, when the explosion is done, each strip will have bent without th e influence of the other tampers twisting the
s h e e t m e t a l , t h u s a l t e ring the results.
Axt February 6th, 2003, 12:39 AM

I wasnt suprised that the cornflour/water burst the pipe either, considering you cant even push the mix thro ugh a pipe with a
pole , but as soon as you release the pressue it flows out the end, funny stuff.
A good test would be to compare "corn flour/water" with "wheaten cornflou r/water" as they both have the same consistancy, yet
the form er shows far stronger dilatant properties so the only thing being com pare d is dilatancy against non dilatancy.
Judging by just the water results one would need far stronger pipe to test other m aterial/water m ixes as i'd expect they would
all b ust the pipe. San d/water is itself d ilatant but not to the extent cornflour is.
Note that I m ade sure the cornflour/water slurry was of a low con centratio n, therefor viscosity, so it could be easily poured into
the pipe.
CyclonitePyro February 6th, 2003, 01:20 AM

I'm not sure that the corn flour you speak of is the sam e as corn starch, but if it isn't then I bet a corn starch and water
m ixture would produce some interesting results, which you m a y r e m e m ber a teacher in elem entry or m iddle school showing
you.
Go in your kitchen and grab som e corn starch and m ix with a little water then experim e n t a n d a d d m o r e . T h i s m i x t u r e b e h a v e s
funny, norm ally it's runny, however if you apply instant pressure like sm acking it or squeezing it quickly, it resists and gets
hard.
T h e s h o c k f r o m an explosive would probably m ake the cornstarch/water m ix act like a dense solid for the duration of the
e x p l o s i v e a n d w o r k a s a t a m p ing material excellently.
Just a guess.

Cornflour & corn starch is the sam e thing.
Da Boom Doctor February 7th, 2003, 02:47 PM

Corn starch is probly a little m ore exact, considering the "jam m ing" of the corn starch/water m ix is due to the static build up
between starch molecules whe n they are agitated or "sm a s h e d " t o g e t h e r .
How strange we were playing around with this stuff (the corn starch and water not HE) in my physics lesson last monday, now
when I see m y teacher on tuesday i'll tell her about this, perhaps arrange a class demonstration. :rolleyes:

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Multi-Point Initiation and Asymetric Effects
Log in
View Full Version : Multi-Point Initiation and Asymetric Effects
nbk2000 July 27th, 2002, 05:00 AM

It's a well known fact that when tw o w aves (of any type) interact, there'll be tw o types of interaction between the two, constructive interference, and destructive interference.
In our line of work, we're interested in the constructive, rather than the destructive (strange, huh? < img border= "0" title="" alt= "[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ) type of
interference.
It's constructive interference that comes into play with shaped charges of all types. Without it, w e wouldn't have SC or LSCs of any sort.
Now, usually, we tend to think of explosions have a single source of initiation...the detonator. Usually this is fine. But, by expanding our thinking to more than one point of
initiation, we greatly expand our abilities.
As an example, look at the design of anti-aircraft missle w arheads. They're limited in size and w eight, yet have to be able to effectively engage a target at great passing speeds
and unknown orientation anywhere within a 360 degree sphere on all axis.
To address this problem, w eapons designers have incorporated the multipoint initiation principle into warhead design.
In this picture we see the pressure contours immediately after a 3 point initiation. The initiation points are the top, center, and bottom on the left hand side. The target is on the
right hand side, center.
<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Warhead1.gif" alt=" - " />
By the time the pressure w aves have traveled to the target side, they have constructivly interfered w ith each other to form a broad, and nearly flat, pressure wave of greater
intensity than any single initiation could generate. (Notice the band of red, as compared to the original yellow in the first picture)
The effect of this can be seen by the large area of red centered in a larger field of orange. Note how these colors are predominant on the target side, and nearly absent on the
side where the initiations originated from.
The sum effect of this can be seen in the dense ring of fragments with the highest velocity (red) fragments being present on only one side (asymetric).
This principle is also used in a patent for a MOUT w eapon to blast mouseholes through reinforced concrete w alls big enough for men to crawl through to assualt the enemy
within.
In this case, a cylindrical charge of explosive is initated simultanously at both ends so that the w ave fronts collide in the middle of the device, w hich is a machined cylinder of
aluminium with a radially symetrical cavity in the center to provide a shaped charge effect.
The colliding waves expand out from the center in a radial manner, destroying the target wall from the inside.
Naturally, the question becomes one of how do we use this technique in our own experiments. Well, before you can run you have to learn how to w alk, and before you can
walk you have to craw l.
Meaning you have to first overcome the problem of making detonators that explode within a millisecond of each other. Because without such precisely synchronized intitiation,
you'll not achieve the needed symetry.
Regular bridge-wire initators that use a hot nichrome wire to light up a pyrotechnic charge to set off the primary are unsuitable for this. There's too many variables in the design,
even in carefully controlled factory conditions that the home experimenter could never hope to duplicate.
For the precise timing needed, an SCB (Semi-Conductor Bridge) initator is used, along w ith the capacitor bank and timing circuits to complete the device. But this is also
expensive and complicated.
What's needed is a simpler way to duplicate the same principles w ithout the high-end costs.
Fortunately, if you have det-cord, it's possible.
This is done by cutting precisly duplicate lengths of det-cord and attaching them to a central detonator. This way, the need for synchronization is removed since the det-cord will
carry the explosive impulse to the secondary initiators in the device at the same time since they're of uniform length and velocity, and all using just one main detonator who's
construction can be of simple design.
Since det-cord can be a pain to improvise, which also introduces variables of density and velocity which would ruin the w hole point, we could borrow an idea from the electronics
industry and lay down "traces" of explosive compositions (much the same as a circuit board) that would carry the impulse to the initiators.
For this purpose, I'm envisioning casting a sheet of explosive putty (PETN/Blu-tak binder) that w ill have a uniform density, and cutting out strips of the explosive to be layed out
on the device and held in place with a coating of (paint/resin/whatever).
Because the "traces" were cast they'll be of uniform density and can be precisely measured and cut.
Another way w ould be to use tubes filled w ith a liquid explosive composition. Liquids are always of uniform density, thus removing that problem.
So, what purposes would you use the asymetric effect for?
[ July 27, 2002, 04:05 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
xoo1246 July 27th, 2002, 05:07 AM

If you have lenghts of electrical cables, with the exact same resistance, all connected to a tyristor, powered by a several hundreds volt capacitor(with enough F to power them
all), at the end of thease cables, a length of nicrome wire, all the same length and resistance in direct contact with the primary exlosive you wish to initate. Would this still not
be accurate enough?
I like they idea of the layers, but the thickness of the casing must be large enough so that thease layers don't initate the explosive inside(doh).
[ July 27, 2002, 04:25 AM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
xtreme July 27th, 2002, 06:59 AM

Interesting subject !
I think it can be done with 3 det-cords to the charge.

The other side of the det-cord connected to blasting cap (all three in de middle of the blastingcap) outside of the charge.
I think there is noway to do the job w ith electronic components or ni-chroom wire in the charge. Electronic components what common people can buy are not as precies as
military ones. And this components are w ay to expensive for us.
I know that HEAT's (High Explosive Anti Tank = SC) are ignited by a electric (chemical) batterie. I know this because I had learning to shoot with a "Dragon" w hat is a line-
wired SC anti-tank weapon (w hat gives a nice blast b.t.w. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )
How do they ignit the charge so fast when the SC hit's it target?
I know the front of the SC contains to metal plates that hits each other by impact so this is functioning as a switch.
I think they are using a explosive stuff what reacts (detonates) w hen there goes a electric pulse throw it (so...not a hot wire/component or somehing)
PYRO500 July 27th, 2002, 07:58 AM

This gives me an idea that sam barros from powerlabs w as w roking on. He had some uniform strips of aluminum foil set up on a table and was using a fairly small capacitor
bank to use them as exploding foil detonators and to in turn detonate nitromethane. This solves two problems at once the first being a way to detonate the substance
immediately without delay. The second is to find a substance that is powerful enough to initiate the high explosives you are going to have reliably. I had the idea of using a
detonator on a length of aquarium tubing as a detonator, any comments on that? as for the actual system you would most likely not want to just throw your device together. In
this type of device you have to keep everything as consistant as possible.
BTW NBK w hee did you get these pictures from? I'd be nice to have a pressure wave simulator but you probobly got them from a web site right?
nbk2000 July 27th, 2002, 08:14 AM

If one had the equipment for such precise measurements, than I think that'd work. The problem wouldn't be in designing the electronics for precision timing, but rather the caps.
The delay betw een the cap receiving the impulse, and the cap detonating is w hat's going to fuck things up.
For the explosive traces, you'd need to see just how thin a trace you could get that would still reliably transmit an initiation. Also, you'd want to know how closely the traces
could be laid to each other without sympathetic detonation. With thin traces laid closely together, you'd have more options as to layout and delays than thick traces far apart
would allow .
I don't think that a thin trace on the outside of a weapon would have much effect as long as it couldn't penetrate the casing. Unless you're loading w ith NG or some other
ridiculously sensitive explosive, a trace of only a few grams/foot isn't going to penetrate a couple of millimeters of steel or tough plastic. Only a millimeter or two of spacing
would be needed to prevent this anyw ays. A sheet of foam would be more than sufficient.
Military ATMs usually use piezoelectric impact switchs coupled to SCB detonators. This is irrelevant to this discussion since that's a singular initiation. We're discussing multiple
initiation points.
I got the pictures from an animated gif.
If someone could find a w arez version of "Autodyne 3d" then we too could do such simulations. Now THAT'D be the shit to have! :D
There's several other programs out there that'll do hydrodynamic simulations such as this, but I've never been able to find a warez version. Maybe because they cost too much
for anyone outside of industry to afford to buy, and they're too honest to do warez. :p
[ July 27, 2002, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
Eliteforum July 27th, 2002, 08:53 AM

That Autodyne program is a little expensive! I did a quick google search:
"Autodyne ... 4152a AMT $26,646,090.00" I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is.. < img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />
nbk2000 July 27th, 2002, 01:02 PM

After reviewing some patents, I found one that perfectly illustrates the uses of multipoint initiation.
US Patent #6220166
Using sheet explosive and styrofoam, you can cut nice clean holes through steel plate without any fragmentation because the steel is fracture cut and neatly peeled back, rather
than blasted into little pieces of shrapnel.
But the whole effect is dependant on consistant multipoint initiation. Read up, has some good info about the principle.

i have a wire bonder in my shop.. if someone wants to do the machine w ork to make up ebw 's I'll put down the gold w ire if yall can scrounge up enough green to buy a small
spool or apriopriately sized wire (a few hundred bux would be enough for THOUSANDS of ebw 's)
Jhonbus August 23rd, 2002, 07:25 PM

This idea of using high current surges to vapourise metal strips is nice, but in practise (at least for us), there is a problem in that we probably w ant to re-use our detonation
circuitry. The fast current risetimes needed mean that any sort of wiring longer than about a metre or tw o is going to have far too much impedance to the current surge. And
that's assuming something like 1/2" solid copper bars.
Military applications don't have a problem because they don't mind spending thousands of dollars per weapon. I wouldn't like having to blow up an expensive SCR or lovingly-
handcrafted trigatron every time I experiment.
How about initiating detonators with simple high-voltage sparks?
pyromaniac_guy August 24th, 2002, 02:06 AM

jhonbus, then build the trigger cuircuit onto the back of the ebw... that w ould remove alot of the demands front he design of the firing cuircuit... I'm not suggesting that an ebw
would be used for everyday detonation of 40g of ap, but just suggesting that it wouldnt be too hard to come up with some if one wanted to do some more exotic experiments
with explosives..
nbk2000 August 24th, 2002, 04:58 AM

In the patent for the Javelin missile warhead, they use a sheet of plastic explosive cut into radial spokes (185) to initiate detonator pellets of RDX (190) set in the perimeter of
the warhead to create multiple fragments from the w arhead liner.
<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/spoked_initiation.gif" alt=" - " />
The w hite disc on which the spokes are sitting on is a polymeric plate (styrofoam) of sufficient thickness to prevent premature sympathetic detonation of the main charge (184).
The central detonator (88) explodes a few milliseconds before the detonator pellets do, liquifying the liner just before the multiple shockwaves from the periphery intersect and
break it into pieces. The number of pieces equals the number of detonators on the rim.
They achieve this timing by simply cutting the spokes to appropriate lengths. The RDX explodes at around 9.2mm/microsecond. So, for a 10 microsecond delay, you need
spokes 92mm long.
One could simplify this design by using a single sheet without bothering to cut/cast spokes. The spokes are just to save w eight in the w arhead. Though you'd require a thicker
styrofoam sheet because the total explosive weight would be higher.
Jhonbus August 24th, 2002, 10:29 AM

Pyromaniac Guy: I know it's not overly difficult to come up with a firing system, but my qwalm w as with blowing it up w hen the explosive detonates. The spoke/trace system
seems like a much better idea to me, even though it is slighly limited against the EBW design. (you can have detonations literally anyw here within the explosive with the EBW,
without w orrying about delays due to the lengths of traces and accidental detonation. Having traces running below the surface of explosive is also not really practical, as this
would interfere with the density and refractive characteristics of the cast. EDIT: Thinking about it, wires to the EBW dets would also interfere, but I don't think as much as a
hollow styrofoam tube.)
[ August 24, 2002, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Jhonbus ]
xoo1246 October 13th, 2002, 07:34 AM

Too little discussion on this subject.
About exploding foil initiators, we know they use thousands of volts.

They use such a high voltage to be able to initite secondaries.
I'm interested in if it is possible to use hundreds of volts instead
and initiate primaries. Ofcourse it's no problem initiating the primary but w hat happens to the timing betw een multiple w ires.
When you send 300 volts through a thin foil it get vaporized and explodes with a loud report. But what if you use two wires with similar resistance, what is the maximum delay
between their disintegration.
Testing this could be done by filling a plastic straw with a primary and initiate it from both ends and look for signs of colliding shockw aves. I know there are people at this boards
who have capacitators that can handle thousands of volts....
And NBK, here is a patent you might be interested in:
3,325,317
Also there are other ways of making a container break up a certain point, using wave shaping. An example of wave shaping for SC:s.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/wave.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/wave.jpg</a>
nbk2000 October 13th, 2002, 09:22 AM

Oh...good patent.
Lead azide is easy enough to make, and I'm sure you could probably substitute silicon caulking or liquid latex for all the complicated polymers.
Another interesting thing mentioned w as the light sensitive nature of the LA film to intense light from an argon bomb (AKA "Isotropic Radiator") or laser. The possibility of using a
xenon photo strobe as a light speed multi-point initiator opens up.
Multiple traces of LA film could be intiated simultaniously by flashing them with a cheap thrift store flash lamp. Or, if you can find them, magnesium flashcubes.
Also, I just thought of using an explosively driven rare earth magnet being "shot" through a tube wound with copper wire. When a magnet passes through a coil, it generates
voltage. I don't know if that has to do with magnetic intensity, or the speed it passes through. If speed, then a magnet going at several Km/s should generate quite a w allop.
Also, w hat patent # is that image of the SC taken from? I tried several variations on the number at the USPTO site, but nothing relevant came up.
[ October 13, 2002, 08:25 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
xoo1246 October 13th, 2002, 09:40 AM

Oh, I'm an elite patent searcher. < img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> No, seriously, there is a good way of searching patent by subject, that way you can
find patents that don't have full text.
Here is the link: <a href= "http://www .uspto.gov/go/classification/selectnumwithtitle.htm" target="_blank">http://ww w.uspto.gov/go/classification/selectnumwithtitle.htm</
a>
You use advanced search and type in CCL/Class/SubClass
Class being one nr say 102
and SubClass being another say 307
Then you type in CCL/102/307.
I have around 52 patents of interest coverted to pdf:s currently. I'll upload them anytime soon, my connection is slow though.
Check patent 5,259,317 in the meantime.
What about the low voltage exploding foils? Seems as no one can answer it, I have posted it to many forums, but everywhere no reply.
[ October 13, 2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
Boob Raider October 13th, 2002, 11:11 AM

I think it is possible .... if you take one of those 20V, 1F caps used in car stereos. No wait maybe it will just weld, although I have heard stories of students taking legs of chairs
with that < img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> . If you are using low voltage caps, you need very thin w ire, as the rate of charge dumping is proportional to
the voltage of the cap, and the current in the circuit is proportional to the rate. So if the current is low .... you'd need to up the resistance of the wire ...... make it thin. 36
gauge or thiner, i.e if you want the w ire to explode, otherwise thicker,low resistance stuff will just damage the terminals. Copper works great with a bank of 18 photoflash caps
from disposable cameras. 330V and 130uF. Banked in parallels. :p
nbk2000 October 15th, 2002, 02:09 PM

That waveformer patent gave me an idea. (I'm just full of 'em! :D )
In the patent, they use rare earth metals pressed with halogenated polymers like teflon or PVC to make the incendiary w aveformer.
Well...what if you made a wax or plaster mold of the waveformer shape you desired, and sprinkled in lighter flints/magnesium shavings into Great-Stuf expanding weather
sealant foam as you sprayed it into the mold?
It's polyurethane, which may not be suitable as an oxidizer, but it would certainly hold the flints in place.
See, when you make a shaped charge, uniformity of the explosive is a key aspect of the design. Adding flints into explosive creates random pockets of differing densities w hich
would cause a disruption of the shockwave, resulting in randomly colliding wavefronts on the SC liner, which would result in failure to form a jet.
But, by putting the incendiary behind the w avefront, you still get the benefit without the failure.
Simpler still would be to make a sandwich out of thin sheets of Teflon/PVC/styrofoam (in order of preference), with the metal powder/flints layed in between, then gluing and
pressing together to form a coherent form.
Simplist of all, glue the flints to the face of the styrofoam block furthest from the detonator. It'll get heated white-hot by the explosion, yet still be out of the way of the wave
formation.
nbk2000 August 2nd, 2007, 10:11 AM

Found this:
US Patent 5050503 - Selectively Aimable Warhead Initiation System
Describes in detail the construction of logic circuits using sheet explosive, to perform the functions of diodes, AND/OR/NAND, rectifiers, etc., all for the purposes of explosively
deforming the warhead to most optimally direct the fragmentation at the target.
I wonder w hat other uses such an explosive 'circuit' could be used for.
LibertyOrDeath August 4th, 2007, 07:10 AM

I'm currently trying to expand my knowledge in this field, and I recently read the following passage in a book that I suppose most here are already familiar with:
From The Chemistry Of Powder And Explosives, by T.L. Davis, p. 20:
Advantage is taken of the Munroe effect in the routine blasting of oil wells, and, intentionally or not, by every explosives engineer w ho initiates an explosion by means of two or
more electric blasting caps, fired simultaneously, at different positions within the same charge.
It's interesting that the author claims this, as my intuition tells me that the concerns expressed on this thread regarding the difficulty of synchronized electrical timing are spot-on.
The author makes it sound almost trivial to get tw o ordinary blasting caps to initiate a charge nearly simultaneously!
Has anyone considered w hether some kind of electromechanical initiation system might improve timing synchronization? Some mechanical devices, such as firearms triggers,
have a "lock time" on the order of a millisecond. I don't see why that couldn't be improved upon and extended to the firing of detonators. Perhaps an electrical signal could be
used to trigger a relay or other switch that would, in turn, mechanically initiate the explosive by impact? That would at least remove the delay in initiation due to the time it
would take for a bridge wire to heat up.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > lightswitch electrical detonation - Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : lightswitch electrical detonation - Archive file

Foodos
Frequent Poster
Posts: 210
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Im trying to rig up a lightswitch to a 6v lantern battery. Its a "3-way Switch", it has 4 different screws, one Red that says: 'com' (common),a green GROUNDING screw, and
two silver ones, labeled nothing, at the top of the switch. I just noticed the package says: Three way for 2-switch circuits.
I connected two copper wires to the green, and red screws to the negative and positive springs of the battery. then two different copper wires two the silver screws, two some
steel wool, I flipped the switch and it flared (lit up) the steel wool, I tried it a second time and it doesnt work. I couldnt remmember which screw I connected to which pole
(negative, positive) on the battery, but Ive tried every combination between that setup and it doesnt work anymore.
I have no electrical experience like this, is this the right switch to do this? Did I blow out the circuit by crossing the poles differently?
What type of light switch should I use to do this.
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hard to say what to do without having your switch in the hands. The polarity doesnt matter for switches, lamps or igniters (only important for electronic parts)
Make a connection from battery to com, from one of the silver screws to the igniter, from the igniter back to the other battery pole. This should work.
Otherwise go to a electronic shop and buy a press button switch with only two contacts.
Test also 1-2 Ohm resistors for ignition (the smallest type max. 1/4W)
Resistors are more calculable then wire, they have higher efficiency and they are more useable in manufacturing.
The Real
Frequent Poster
Posts: 136
From: Columbus, OH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is hard to say without seeing it but I'm wondering if the silver screws are for mounting. It also seems odd that you have a switch that is for two lines, typically a light swith
only closes or opens a circuits on one line, the "hot" or "common" line. It probably is that way and the switch most likely is just grounded weird (most are grounded when
mounted by the bracket they are mounted too. Try doing this, hook the negative post to the red screw, from one silver screw run a lead to a light bulb. Run another wire from
from the positive post to the remaining light bulb post. Flip the switch off and on if it doesn't work, switch the "to light bulb" wire to the other silver screw.
Foodos
Frequent Poster
Posts: 210
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried The Real'suggestion and it works, so the thing is just grounded fucky. I think I will als go to a radio shack like the previous poster said and find a push button, since
running the positive wire directly to the battery defeats the purpose of the switch.
thanks
The Real
Frequent Poster
Posts: 136
From: Columbus, OH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well not really. All that is needed is one line in the circuit to be interrupted and the electrical flow stops, it always takes two in DC we have positive and negative, in AC we
have hot, common, ground, or more depending on phases. Ground and common or Ground and Hot are usually the same line. If any one of the wires carrying power to a
device is opened flow will stop. Most every switch you operate only opens or closes one of those lines, which is the sole purpose of a switch. To run both lines through a switch
you need to either purchase two switches or a swith that will do to lines, at radio shack those are typically knife switches. But really you only need to put a switch on one line.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > A better detonator?
Log in
View Full Version : A better detonator?
Polverone February 5th, 2003, 03:30 AM

M a n u f a c t u r i n g g o o d d e t o n a t o r s i s o n e o f t h e m ost haza rdous and difficult tasks facing am ateurs. Easy to m a k e p r i m a r y
explosives, like lead picrate, acetone peroxide, and HMTD, are not very powerful. One ma y have to use several gram s o f t h e s e
compounds to initiate an insensitive m aterial (assuming the amateur in question doesn't have a sensitive HE in conjunction
with the prim ary). The organic peroxides, especially, are a great hazard because of their incredible sensitivity to heat. They are
powders, and packing them to high densities requires hazardous and nerve-wracking tam ping or pressing.
There are a few high explosives that readily detonate from heat. Nitroglycerine is one such explosive; The Chem istry of Powder
and Explosives describes drop s of it violently exploding when they fall on a hot iron plate. So how about using an electrical
heat source (nichrome wire or sim ilar) to detonate nitroglycerine that has been absorbed in some porous m e d i u m ? T h e
absorbent, resistance wire, and casing could all be put together while the device was explosive-free and harmless. The
nitroglycerine is added, the ca sing is sealed (this is the only part you'd have to do while the detonator was dangerous), and
you just wait for the NG to diffuse through the media. The absorbent could be charcoal powder, diatom aceous earth, a cylinder
of filter pape r, etc.
Nitroglycerine is easy to make . It's very potent -- far m ore powerful than primary explosives. It's stable in storage, if cleaned
of acid traces. It is still a fairly sensitive explosive, gran ted, but this is th e case with all primary explosives as well. I also worry
a bit about its viscosity. It might take a long tim e for th e liquid to diffuse without manual m ixing, which I would like to avoid.
I a m sure that this is not a new idea, but I didn't find any mention of it here and I think it could be the basis for po werful,
stab le initiators that are safer to assemble. Is it practical? Are there prob lem s I ' v e o v e r l o o k e d ? O n e thing that bothers m e i s
that I don't recall Nobel or any of the other early nitroglycerine e xperimenters using this m ethod, which makes me think that it
m ay be harder to detonate from heat than a casual reading of COPAE would indicate.
DaveTheShit February 5th, 2003, 04:54 AM

I have always used a varying but sm all am o u n t a c e t o n e p e r o x i d e a s a d e t o n a t o r . I f I w a s u s i n g i t t o d e t o n a t e s o m ething
insensitive I used a booster (usually picric acid). I really do not trust nitroglycerin - however easy it is to m a k e - a s m uch as I
trust even AP. In fact, I haven't even made NG, though I did get som e from a friend of mine. I would think that using AP an d
a booster would work as well or alm ost as well as using NG or NG with a booster. Plus with AP, you don't get headaches - to any
o f y o u w h o h a v e m a d e NG, ho w b a d a r e t h o s e h e a d a c h e s ?
Anthony February 5th, 2003, 05:49 AM

DavidThePyro, NG really isn't so bad. At least it found (and still does) industrial/m ilitary use, whereas peroxides were deem e d
to unstable.
I can't rem e m ber who, but one mem ber of this forum reported good results with NG soaked into cotton wool, in a .2 2 shell a n d
initiated with a stun g un sparked across the end of coax cable crim ped into the shell.
I'd im agine that if it was sensitive to the weak spark of a stungun, it should be sensitive to a burning filament.
I wouldn't wo rry about adding the NG just before use. W ell m ade NG would m a k e f o r s t o r a g e s t a b l e c a p s - a d e s i r a b le thing
that peroxides cannot guarantee.
Naturally, I'd leave th e NG to stand for 2-4weeks to allow any slow discolouration to show, before adding it to the caps.
nbk2000 February 5th, 2003, 07:18 AM

Unfortunately, any liq uid mixed with a solid is going to seperate out over tim e, because what you've described is ba sically a
tiny stick of dynamite .
Once seperated, the NG would likely no longer function, or would do so erraticly. So these wouldn't be storable for lo n g l e n g t h s
of tim e, but they'd be good to whip up just before use if you had the NG dissolved in acetone for safety and evaporated it ju st
prior to loading.
Microtek February 5th, 2003, 11:12 AM

I generally find that liquid explosives are too inconvenient to work with; it's difficult to elem inate airbubbles from a closed
container, and the container n e e d s t o h a v e a t i g h t e r s e a l ( I m a d e s o m e tests with NG detcord but problem s s u c h a s t h e s e
m a d e m e d r o p t h e i d e a a n d g o f o r e x t r u d e d p o l y m erbo nded PETN instead ).
There is also the problem of LVD with NG which would probably be quite acute when initiated in this m anner.
I recomm end that you try nitrom annitol instead, or hexanitro inositol which there is a patent about. In this patent, HNI is
initiated by an electric m atch or by a m atch com position placed where you would norm ally place the prim ary and ignited by
fuse . They use 0.16 - 0.5 gram s of HNI, so the c a p s d o n ' t n e e d t o b e a n y larger than usual.
Inositol is another na m e f o r c y c l o h e x a n e h e x o l a n d s h o u l d n ' t b e t o o h a r d t o g e t ( s a m e a s m a n n i t o l I ' d e x p e c t ) . I t i s a l s o
called i-inositol or m yo-inositol with the biochemical crowd.

"Ino sitol is another nam e f o r c y c l o h e x a n e h e x o l "
S o u n d s l i k e m annitol's cyclic cousin. Might be a vailable as a sweetener, although I never came accross it when I was looking
for a m annitol source. The only useful ones I cam e accross were m annitol, erythritol and xylitol.
I still think the best method is the EBW cap (although I prefer fuse ignition over electric for some unknown reason), a suitable
circu it can be put together from a few disposable cam eras and you'd never need a primary again. Such a circuit, in conjunction
with a bridgewire system I developed, will detonate MHN, NG, EGDN and PETN easily, even with 10% of an inert substance such
a s b lu-tack binder. I'll draw some diagram s of the bridg ewire, it's convenient to use and m ore sturdy than a bit of steel wool
soldered between two wires. Unfortunately I can't give you photo g r a p h s b e c a u s e t h e c a m e ra isn't here with me. Another good
and strong bridgewire can be m ade fro m circuit proto-board, the circuit board you can buy from Maplin's etc that has lots of
long , parrallel copper strips with lines of holes drilled do wn them, you just cut off a section two holes in length, solder a wire in
each, and the copper tracks in between get vapourised, although this did n't work with the cam era circuit. I suspect the
discharge is too slow. It did work very well with 0.2uF @ 5kV though.
I think NG might suffer a LVD when ignited by the hot wire method, especially if the heating is too slow. A liquid nitrate ester/
solid nitrate ester paste could be good though.
Edit: here's a brief description of the bridgewire . It's a rough 5 m inute drawing in Paint, so please excuse the nasty artwork,
but it should get the idea accross...
<a href="http://www.boom spe e d . c o m / m rcool/EBW .jpg" target="_blank">EBW </a>
<sm all>[ February 05, 2003, 02:42 PM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]</sm all>

Inositol is so ld in som e health food stores as an alternative to sugar. It's also a good cut for "peruvian marching powder".
<img border="0" title="" alt="[W ink]" src="wink.gif" /> :D
If you used a nichrom e wire to heat the NG, it'd have to be done fast enough that the wire reaches the needed heat to cause
the high level detonation, otherwise the NG will flashboil without exploding, or will do so at very low power.
I could see an EBW having a small crystal of frozen nitro placed on the tip then being dipped in som e sort of sealant. The NG
would then m elt, form ing a tiny pocket of liquid NG on the EBW, that would act as the detonator to set off the NG, which would
set off (whatever) in turn. :)

Mr C o o l : I h a v e b e e n u s i n g a l m o s t t h e e x a c t s a m e s e t u p a s a n e x p l o d i n g foil initiator. I just position the n arrow section of foil
on the face of the cardboard instead of on the edge ( simply by glueing the foil o n t o o n e s i d e o f t h e c a r d b o a r d a n d t h e n
cutting a wedge from each side of the strip to leave a narrow section ).
I use these for my ca s e l e s s d e t o n a t o r s b e c a u s e i t t h e n i s p o s s i b l e t o m ake very short caps ( less than 10 m m ) that will
initiate plastique when placed on the surface of it rather than in a well.
Da Boom Doctor February 7th, 2003, 02:35 PM

I've also been trying to im p r o v e m y C a p m a n u f a c t u r e b y e x p i r e m e n t i n g w i t h s o m e n e w d e s i g n s , a n d d u r i n g a d a y d r e a m i n a
physics lesson a couple of days ago I was considering if it was possible to cause the detonation of AP by passing a current
through it (in the form of a capasitor b ank discharge) however from previous expirm entation I und e r s t a n d t h a t A P d o e s n o t
conduct electricity and will not detonate by an a tem pted capasitor discharge across it (the capasitor does not actualy discharge
a s A P s e e m s to be an insulator) - I am not sure whether I am correct here, so please tell me if you have had different results.
However with m y understanding, I thought that discharg e m ay be achieved by adding a co nductive powder (eg graphite) to the
Ap, hopefully causing detonation.
Do you think this wou ld work?
Thanks :)

That's what I tried first, Microtek, but I found cutting it to leave the sm all bridge a bit too tedious, it kept on ripping. My
m ethod requ ires no careful work, altho ugh I can see that the m e t h o d y o u u s e w o u l d b e m ore convenient for some
applications.
I use mine for really sm all tests, when any sort of detonator would be im practical. They're great with MHN/b lu-tack binder
plastiques/PBX's. They also work well with MHN or PETN in caps, you just press the base, then push these upright on top, and
seal it in place with m olten wax.
Anthony February 7th, 2003, 03:01 PM

Just use a high enough voltage to arc between two electrodes, rather than relying on the medium between them to be
conductive.
A cap bank isn't needed for AP, the discharge from stungun is sufficient.
T h e p o i n t o f a n E W B is to rem o v e t h e n e e d f o r s e n s i t i v e a n d p o s s i b l y d a n g e r o u s p r i m aries.
IPN February 8th, 2003, 04:21 AM

Does anyone now how this hexanitro inositol is prepared.
I didnt find any patents for it.
I searched from <a href="http://ep.espacenet.com / e s p a c e n e t / e p/en/e_net.htm" target="_blank">here</a> and
<a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.htm l" target="_blank">here</a>
Or would the preparation be similar to mannitol hexanitrate?

Usin g inosito l instead of m annitol.

I'm fairly certain you could nitrate inositol as you would mannitol, adjusting for slightly different m ol-weight.
andreas February 10th, 2003, 01:31 PM

Fructose is quite sim ilar to ino sitol.
m i s s i n g o n e O H - g r o u p a n d h a v i n g t h e o t h e r O H - g r o u p o n a m e thelene group.
Fructose pentanitrate might be a usefull explosive if it cristalises and doesn't form more liquid kind of explosives.
And if it isn't prone to oxidation.
I m ight try it when I get some H2SO 4 s o m ewhere this week.
Or h a s s o m e body tried it befo re??
Mr Cool February 11th, 2003, 08:10 AM

Doesn't fructose have a C-O-C bond in the ring , and exists in equilibrium with a straight chain ketone form? This could m a k e i t
b e h a v e q u i t e d i f f e r e n tly to inositol. I'm sure its nitrate would be a powerful, sensitive explosive, but you will get more oxidation
during nitration and it m ight h ave a rather unstable product, as with nitra ting other sugars such as sucrose.
I found a few inositol sources, but all are very expensive. Like a few $/ounce.

You're right Mr C ool. I'm wasn 't looking very carefull.
Today I bought a litre of H2SO4 so I will be doing a test of a few gram s later tonight.
I'll post the results here.
Hope it gives a cristaline nitrate.
IPN February 11th, 2003, 01:06 PM

I m n o t s ure but I believe that nitrof ructose would be s yrup like explos i v e s u b s t a n c e .
Because fructose (or levulose) is an isom er of dextrose with the formula C6H12O6
And according to COP AE nitroglucose is colorless viscous syrup.
C o m es hard at 0 degrees celsius.
And Mr Cool I could o rder 1kg of inositol for about 150$!

That is way too much for 1kg!

W hell I tried it tonight, and it is a chewinggum like substance in warm wa ter but is hard a room temp.
It burns quite slow but I think there is still some m oistu re left in it. Tom orrow I'll m a k e a s m all detonator with it. And compare
it to MHN
IPN February 12th, 2003, 01:21 AM

I just checked from C OPAE:
</fo nt><blockquote>quote:<hr /> Fructosan trinitrate is produced by the action of mixed acid at 0-15C on d-fructose, colorless, quickly effluorescin g
n e e d l e s f r o m alcohol, which m elt at 13 9 - 1 4 0 C a n d d e c o mpose at about 145C. <hr /></blockquote>

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Hydrodynamic Shockwave Simulation
Log in
View Full Version : Hydrodynamic Shockwave Simulation
nbk2000 July 29th, 2002, 11:52 AM

I was just thinking that a lot of the more advanced techniques of explosive weapons designs (such as EFP, flying cutter, multipoint initiaton, etc) are too difficult to
"guesstimate" or visualize in ones head.
The pros have huge budgets, test ranges, high speed cameras, supercomputers with hydromodeling programs, and all the other neat toys that we'd give our left nut to have,
but don't. :(
So, how does the po' folk like us simulate an explosive shockwave in a manner that we can visualize?
Well, borrowing an idea from an Oct '55 Scientific American article, we'd make a simulator that uses a fluid and dye to simulate and visualize.
The article describes using a thin layer (~2mm) of flowing water with dye grains upstream to simulate the turbulance around wings and to visualize said turbulance.
I'm thinking a person can make a rectangular "tank" out of wood or metal sheeting, mount a plate of plexiglass a few millmeters above this, and seal the edges with screwed
in or welded flats. The plexi is attaced with a screwed down frame and sealed to the tank with a gasket made from inner tube rubber.
<img src="http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Wave_Tank.gif" alt=" - " />
To simulate a shockwave flowing around a waveformer for use in an EFP (for instance), you'd first make your waveformer model from styrofoam sheet and place it in the
tank. I'm thinking that it'd be made slightly thicker than the tank and, when the cover glass in screwed down, clamped into place.
The tank is then fixed vertically, filled with water, and allowed to settle. The top end is left open, but covered, to allow for water movement.
To "initate" your explosion, you whack a piston filled with dyed water (or something) with a sledgehammer. The dye piston is attached to the tank by a fitting sealed with a
very thin piece of metal that acts as a pressure seal to retain the dyed fluid till whacked.
Once the dye piston is whacked, the seal ruptures and the dyed fluid flows through the tank and around the waveformer as any wave, explosive or water, will.
Being viewable, the wave can be videoed for later slo-mo analysis.
megalomania July 30th, 2002, 02:41 AM

That sounds good for simulating an ordinary blast, but how would you set up such a system to model, say, a flying cutter? I agree that unless you happen to have a Cray
supercomputer laying around, you will not be modeling many blasts. The data from such people that do have the real thing is usually published. The Journal of Propellants,
Explosives, and Pyrotechnics often has such articles.
pyromaniac_guy July 30th, 2002, 04:09 AM

is a supercomputer really needed???
dont forget that the computer power used to design a majority of the us nuclear arsenal can now be duplicated in a cell phone, or worst case, a high end scientific calculator....
Some time ago i could ahve sworn i saw a refrence to hydrocode in the public domain written by one of the national labs.. I wish i could remeber where i saw it... my book
marks are such a mess...
nbk2000 July 30th, 2002, 09:10 AM

Well, it's no coincidence that most of the worlds top 100 supercomputers are owned by the DoD (and NSA., but that's beside the point).
The largest SC in the world is owned by either Sandia or Lawerence Livermore (I'm always getting the two mixed up) to model H-bomb designs.
There are programs available that will model explosions (as illustrated in the "Multipoint initiation and Asymetric effects" topic by me), but I've never found a warez copy, and
buying it is out of the question, what with a multi-thousand $ price range.
One thing at a time. First, you have to be able to generate visible waves. Once you have that, then comes the problem of simulating materials. I'm thinking of flexible gelatin
or very thin metal shims that would bend ubder the pressure wave.
Unfortunately, the melting that metals undergo under the intense pressure of an explosion would be very difficult, I think, to simulate. Though, there may be possibility in the
use of fluids insoluble in each other, and of different densities, to simulate different material densities.
For instance, water is (I believe) 400x more dense than air. So this is totally going to skew things in the sim tank. What's needed is a fluid that is of a different density as
water, but that would have the same difference ratio as air has to (the effect being modeled). Does that make sense?
Anyways, while this isn't the end all and be all of the science of simulatiing, I think that it'd be of great help to furthuring our understanding of wave effects and their application
to our field.

why use water, use air.... schleiren photography is a method of shadowography that shows even miniscule changes in the density of air... normally this is used on a much
mure subtle scale, if you will, then whats involved in explosive research, but a quick google search shows that aparently it's used to investigate wavefront propagation and the
like... might be something you would want to check into..
vulture July 30th, 2002, 04:50 PM

How about using steam or air saturated with water? In the highest pressure zones the water will condense. Only problem is that certain materials will propagate condensation
(steel, glass,...)
Polverone July 30th, 2002, 05:31 PM

I'm quite confident that a high-end PC can produce reasonable simulations in a tolerable amount of time, no supercomputer required.
Hmmm, this page has some interesting software:
" Free and Low-Cost CFD Software: Explosives, Weapons Effects, and Impact Engineering"
<a href="http://capella.colorado.edu/~laney/softboom.htm" target="_blank">http://capella.colorado.edu/~laney/softboom.htm</a>
Packages written and used at U.S. national laboratories, yours for $1,000 and under. Sure, it's more expensive than a CD of clip art, and most of the packages won't run on
Windows, but what do you expect? I'm guessing that even if you obtain these packages, it will take a lot of knowledge and patience to be able to use them properly. I would
still take them over a water tank, though. But unless you already have expertise in this area, how will you know if your simulation results were reasonable or you totally
buggered something up? This is an issue that comes up with a lot of scientific software. There are no dancing paperclips, no handy presets for common tasks, no gentle video
tutorials. There's the source code, a manual that's 2 revisions out of date, and the expectation that the end-user will be an expert in his/her field and immediately know what
all the parameters and acronyms mean.
Mr Cool July 30th, 2002, 06:14 PM

Just a thought for simulating the refraction of a wave as it goes through regions of different density:
A region of high density would be a cut-out shape (the shape of the region of high density, obviously), that is, for example, half as thick as the thickness of fluid in the tank (I
can tell this isn't going to make sense...). This would be stuck into the tank. As the wave of dye reaches it, it will still flow over it, but more slowly than it does through the rest
of the tank since the space it can flow through is more narrow = more resistance to flow. This would simulate a shock wave slowing down as it passes through... something.
See what I mean? If not I'll knock up a little picture. I'm not sure if it'd work, but I think it would.
P.S. - what's a "flying cutter"? Sounds like fun.
nbk2000 July 31st, 2002, 12:46 PM

Water is better than air simply because it's much easier to handle. You can easily visualize dyed water with the naked eye.
Whereas, with schleiren shadography, you need a pinpoint source of extremely bright light, high speed cameras, mirrors, and filters. This is even more complicated than water
tank sim.
Mr. Cool, I understand what you're saying. By leaving a small gap between the model and the cover plate, this would allow the dyed water to flow "through" the model, but at
a slower rate then the unimpeded dyed water. Only problem I see is the need for very fine tolerances and some math to appropriately scale the gap to model similiar effects as
the real thing. You'd have to take into account thin layer boundry turbulance and such esoteric things.
A "flying cutter" is similar in concept to an EFP except, instead of being a point penetrator (bullet), it's an area penetrator (wedge). Think of a flying ax...make a long cut,
instead of a hole, through steel, concrete, and rebar.
vulture August 18th, 2002, 04:37 PM

I saw a decorative humidifier in Germany a few days ago. It produces fog out of water with the help of ultrasonic sound. However, the process does not work by evaporation
of the water, because the fog feels very cold. The water than dissolves into the air when it reaches warmer air. Maybe this would be of some use?
Microtek August 19th, 2002, 05:00 AM

I think that it wouldn't be impossibly difficult to come up with the physics part of the simulation software. Of course it would be somewhat simplified, but even something as
simple as assuming that every differential volume of explosive initiates a spherical wave, will enable you to simulate the propagation of detonation in single point initiations,
including the flow around inert inserts.
Certainly, things like colliding waves and edge-effects would be missed, but I think it would be just as good as the other alternatives.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Easy made explosives (breaking large rock) - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Easy made explosives (breaking large rock) - Archive File

UncleSam
A new voice
Posts: 3
From:
Registered: FEB 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a bit of a newbie in explosives and there is a rock the size of a small car in the middle of my field. I wish to get rid of it. I don't have lots of lab equipment and where i live
you can't buy any type of explosives(I'm not american). We can't even buy god damn ammo(we need a permit and i don't have it). And i don't have lots of neighboors so the
noise is not a problem. What would you suggest besides hirring a pro ?
P.S.: Something that could explode with home made fuse would be great.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An AP initiated AN explosive should be good for the task, I doubt the amount of AP required to destroy a rock of that size would be practical/safe to make. ANNM should be
good.
Doing a Seach for "AP", "acetone peroxide" "AN" "amonium nitrate", "ANNM", "nitromethane" sgould turn up a lot of useful information.
atropine
Frequent Poster
Posts: 129
From: wales
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole idea of this part of the forum is to discuss how to MAKE explosives. The only reason it is here at all is because normal folk can't go out and by C-4 or amatol. But for
moving rock anfo or annm are best. If you wanna split the rock and have shards of rasor sharp rock slice everyhing up like gunfire then use peroxides of NG.
Morrigan
Frequent Poster
Posts: 81
From: The Netherlands
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As big as a small car? I would bet that not even 10 kilos ANFO would get rid of that, at least not from the outside. If you could drill a hole into that piece of rock or
something a 2 kilo ANNM charge would probably reduce it to smaller blocks that you can remove with a tractor. Drilling a hole of that size and length is not gonna be easy
though.
you also will need blasting caps, Acetone peroxide will do. And about that homemade fuse, I wouldn't use that considering the ammount of explosive needed.
Bitter
Frequent Poster
Posts: 291
From: 11 Downing Street, London, England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You certainly will have a problem getting rid of a rock that size...but not to worry, just check out the links available to different people's sites and I am sure you will find
something you are capable of making. ANFO is used in mines apparently, so I am sure that (or ANNM, as Anthony and Morrigan suggest, if you can obtain nitro-methane) will
be sufficient to dispose of this offending object.
Oh yes, and make sure you stay away from 'Kewl' explosives, like those detailed in totse.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure one of the HE mods will move thise thread to Misc.
HMTD Factory
Frequent Poster
Posts: 217
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forget about explosives, you need to hire some heavy duty stuff to do the job (break it then remove). It's going to be safer and cheaper too.
Is the rock a sedimentary?
Stone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 140
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think a big fucking hammer would be easier than making and using explosives.
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 194
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you should consult one of the field manuals ( army ). Then you can calculate how much explosive you would need with different kinds of tamping. For instance, if your
rock is tough eg. granite, ANFO will do just about nothing at all if you use an external charge. So you need to know if you can drill a deep hole into it that is wide enough to
contain the amount of explosive you will need.
Once you have calculated the charge size and determined the placement you will be employing, you can use an approximate Relative Effectiveness factor to figure out how
much to use of your choice of explosive.
Generally speaking, if you can make an explosive that is brisant enough to shatter the rock from the outside, you can place it on top of the rock and tamp it with mud or bags
of water. Then most of the fragments will be thrown downwards, into the ground.
Jhonbus
Frequent Poster
Posts: 346
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an ideal world, you would stick something like this on top of the rock....
Unfortunately this is not an ideal world
My best suggestion would probably be to get a contractor in to do the work (although that isn't necessarily what I would do myself )
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is not something you should do yourself, especially if you have no previous explosives experience. In fact I would doubt that using an explosive to do to do it would be
very safe at all, in order to smash it into small enough pieces to be transported rather than just cracked, you are going to get a lot of projectile rocks flying around.
Perhaps drilling holes and putting some commercial product that expands when wetted and cracks the rock would be a better choice.
The best advice I can provide is to find a professional to do this for you.
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you lived in a cold place, could you use water (overnight it will freeze)?
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The egyptions made good use of wooden stakes hammered into cracks in the stone, they then soakd the stake with salt water, the stakes swelled and broke the rock.
Someone suggested before, a way to crack a rock is to drill a 1/2" hole in it, fill the hole with water then put a 1/2" steel rod into the hole with some tissue paper wading (so
that the rod will support itself on the surface of the water) then smack the rod with a sledgehammer. The hydrostatic presseure breaks the rock. Not sure whether this would
work on such a large rock though?
sealsix6
Frequent Poster
Posts: 154
From: NYC,NYC,USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would figure that if you drilled many holes in the rock and then do the metal dowel idea with the water and do that to all of the cracks you woule take off piece by piece
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 194
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a bit mystified by your attitudes ( all of you ), it was not my impression that this forum was so concerned with safety.
Afterall, he stated that there is a long way to his neighbours and if he has an entire field, then I think he has an excellent opportunity to gain some experience in these matters.
If I recall correctly, there was enthusiastic talk of detonating an entire oil-barrel full of ANFO not too long ago.
I'd suggest you start slow, getting a feel for things like AP or HMTD, then build up to perhaps nitroglycerine.
You can use NG to chip off small pieces, just like the hydro-static model.
Foodos
Frequent Poster
Posts: 210
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
recall also, the person atropine (i think) with the anfo drum is a semi-newbie at the forum, but a veteran of explosives (you would have gathered this reading his posts). this
guy could hurt himself, or others, land in jail, blah blah blah.
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People are either having dreams about detonating an explosive in a remote area and leaving the area after or posses proper licenses for handling and detonating explosives for
legitimate reasons. Also the people usually posses experience with much smaller quantities of the explosive they use (in dream or otherwise) and have read lots about the
subject and are technically informed.
For someone who just wants to smash a rock in their backyard, they are looking for practicality (ie, not losing life or limb). And are probably interested in not going to jail.
Microtek, your attitude says that you would be also ok with giving a kewl bomber information and encouragement to detonate a large amount of HE. The kewl bomber would
not know the slightest meaning of the information and their safety would be jeopardized.
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone heard from Atropine in the last few days?
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 194
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehemt, I think you misunderstand.
What I'm saying is that I think it's odd
that people answer in this way to some-
one that is a comparatively sensible-
seeming person with a valid request for
information.
If everyone else hadn't been so forthcoming
with warnings, I would have been the one administering the words of caution.
That said, I still think he has a much better opportunity for using explosives than the average poster on this forum.
What he needs is guidance on how to proceed,
so he can avoid most of the pitfalls in this field.
Oh by the way, he said the rock was in his field, which implies acres of land, rather than an ordinary back yard.
In my opinion, what defines a kewl bomber is his perspective rather than his knowledge, so I don't think you could call this guy kewl ( based on what he has said thus far ).
metafractal March 18th, 2003, 06:28 AM

I take it this thread was brought back to discuss the destruction of semi-large objects in remote areas, not to discuss the "Kewlness" of a member who I dont think posted
more than 5 times (apologies if you are still active).
I was in a similar situation: I'm digging a sub-terranian lab, and I've dug out a wide shallow pit, only problem there are still some dead trees in it. Anyway, I am diggin this lab
after a vow to myself to be more covert in my activities following an unfortunate "wake up call" (fortunateley with no unfortunate consequences- this time). I've put all my
chemicals in storage far away until my new lab is dug out. So I am in the same situation as this guy, with no chems nor facilities to work with atm. So I was thinking about
using a development on an idea hinted at in a post a while ago (sory, cant remember the name of the topic). This was to detonate a large, wet, and thereby insensitive
Acetone Peroxide charge with a small, pressed, dry AP detonator. Obviously, the detonator would be kept away from the main charge until ready to detonate. The charges
would be tamped be positioned to the base of the tree, as far underneath as possilbe. I probably would have just used water to wet them, but acetone or similar solvent could
also be used to do so to a lesser degree, or an oil could even be used, couldn't it?.
But this is dangerous and impractical. In the end, I decided to buy a chainsaw!
This thread did bring up an interesting point about the philosophy of the forum. We are strongly focused on safetey due to what this forum largeley is: a reaction to the
irresponsible and idiotic information plagueing the internet today; we are a haven for responsibility in the practice of e&w. At the same time, however, most of us are interested
in the hobby because of what it is: a life on the edge, a touch with death- certainly not something safe! So in that way, it is both.
Sorry if I'm speaking like a bit of an old timer. Yes I do realize that it says bottle washer underneath my name, but I do love this forum and feel strongly for its ideals.
P.S., my incident is the reason that I never did conduct those AP-hair cream-desensitizer test (see "huge AP crystals!" thread). Sorry about that...

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Tiny SC Liner Cones
Log in
View Full Version : Tiny SC Liner Cones

Having been to the doctors lately, I took the opportunity to loot their drawers for anything interesting. One of the things I took
where a couple dozen of these things:
<img src="http://atc.utmb.edu/aom/images/specula.jpg" alt=" - " />
These are otoscope speculums. Fancy speak for eye/earscope cones.
These are made of polystyrene (at least mine are) and are shaped perfectly like trumpet SC liners. They're also very cheap,
costing about $3 for several dozen. :)
Well, the idea came to me of using them as such, for very small SC charges. Since they're made of plastic, they wouldn't
contribute anything more than simple monroe effect to the charge, but they could be used for making metal liners through
investment casting.
This would entail coating the cones with a ceramic refactory and burning out the plastic using a furnace. Once the plastic is
gone, a vacuum pump is used to suck up a molten metal (silver/copper) to form an exact copy of the original plastic cone.
Such materials are readily available as jewelry making supplies with no suspicion. Or easily improvised by skillful amatuers.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Such liners are described in an early patent for making SC's using gelled NC/NG. Simple lead foil cones with less than a 1/4
ounce of HE were capable of penetrating 3/8" steel plate.
Using a specially made liner of the more efficient trumpet geometry, along with more effective metal liner material like silver,
should easily increase that.
Uses of very small, but penetrating, charges are many. I could see them being used to disable vehicles, blowing locks, and
other uses, without the major hazard of larger charges, and subsequent noise.
[ February 09, 2003, 12:26 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
Aaron-V2.0 February 9th, 2003, 01:52 AM

And here is a source for steel hemispheres for 1.5" and up SCs.
<a href="http://www.kingmetals.com/Pages/Page10A.html" target="_blank">http://www.kingmetals.com/Pages/

Page10A.html</a>
The 1.5" are 11 gauge and cost .65 a piece with a 5% discount at 10 or more. They mainly to ornamental iron but they have
the hemispheres and on the same page above you'll see some cheap large caliber iron balls for aircannons. :)
If I'm correct an SC can be made from any HE but the higher Vod the better, but if I wanted to use an AN based explosive the
SC would require a thickwall container right? I'd imagine for ease of manufacture, high Vod and ease of ignition Picric Acid
seems like the best choice IMO.
Nice find NBK, I rather hate doctors offices but I know a medical supply warehouse nearby that's on my list of places to visit.
Agent Blak February 9th, 2003, 02:19 AM

I would imagine that you could build a Damping unit around the Small Shape Charge. This Could be done with a Styerfoam
Cup and FiberGlass Insultion.
I could see it bee quite useful for Blowing Locks.
Quick Question on Deadbolts: "if you blow the lock how does this change the Plungers position." Can you then just use a screw
drives and turn it?
Sorry I always Wondered
1337bomber February 9th, 2003, 02:35 AM

Wow! I just happened to have tried the cones in the picture a few days ago, just as a small BC with AP and a fuse. I epoxied a
plug on the bottom and they worked pretty well. Pretty strange coincidence that I tried this just days before!
xyz February 9th, 2003, 03:07 AM

I know somebody in the medical profession who could probably get me some of these. :)

For a decent SC, you need at least 7,000 M/s, otherwise it's not going to happen. Certainly not with an AN based explosive.
Even ANNM is on the low end of useful.
To "blow" a lock is to either destroy the bolt holding the door closed, or to disrupt the lock itself so that the cylinder can be
turned.
You aim the SC at the shear line of the cylinder and the jet cuts the pins holding the cylinder immobile, allowing you to turn it
with a polish key or screwdriver.
BTW, these cones look very similar to this one:
<img src="http://www.army.mod.uk/img/aht/Contents/equipment/WEAPONS/CANNON/cannon1.jpg" alt=" - " />
At the tip of the cone is a pellet of primary initiator, likely lead azide, that's ignited by the flame from an impact fuse in the
nose. This "spitback" fuse throws a hot flame up into the cone, which ignites the initiator pellet, exploding the charge.
I can see a primary, like AP, being compressed into the tip of the cone, and being set off on impact by the flame from a
shotgun primer.
Did you know these cones fit perfectly into a CO2 powerlets? You could maybe even make little grenades that'd fly through the
air, exploding on impact, to either pierce with an SC, or spray the target with shrapnel. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" />
supra.supra February 9th, 2003, 05:26 AM

I'm rather confused about SC or least these smaller ones where does all the force shoot out from top or bottom? Do SC have
to be made of metal? I remember somewhere using glass bottles.

Supra, spend a few minutes on google reading about the basics of shaped charges.
supra.supra February 10th, 2003, 02:23 AM

I already knew some basics of SC and done some more searching.
<a href="http://www.ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/5-5inch.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/5-
5inch.htm</a>
What I still wonder about what's on the other end of the jet...
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/id/husar/list/explosivecontainers.html#shapedcharges" target="_blank">http://
www.angelfire.com/id/husar/list/explosivecontainers.html#shapedcharges</a>
[ February 10, 2003, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: supra.supra ]

Supra: You should know that, at the moment judging from those links, you don't know even the basics of shaped charges. I'm
not trying to insult you by saying so, merely informing you that more extensive research is in order. I suggest you do a search
on the forum for "shaped charges", "SC" or "monroe effect" and start by reading the oldest posts you can find.
About two years ago we weren't very knowledgeable ourselves, so I think you'll find that the posts develop in an appropriate
manner to your current level of understanding.

Is the SC shaped that way due to the way its initiated, in an effort to keep the detonator out of the way? So for rear initiated
SC's I expect it would be better to have a normal conical cone, is that right?
One thing ive found out that there is no such thing as a half arsed shaped charge, I personally have never had good results.
There's a science to it, you cant do it by eye and expect it to work. Heres one I bothered to take photos of -
The Charge -
<img src="http://ww1.ft100.com/~45653/guns.ft100.com/images/shaped.jpg" alt=" - " />
10-15gm of PETN "plastified" with polyamine resin in an effort to keep it a consistant density. 1.2mm Cu liner. Standoff
approx. 25mm.
The Damage -
<img src="http://ww1.ft100.com/~45653/guns.ft100.com/images/shaped2.jpg" alt=" - " />
Target was 6mm RHS - Result was smeared Cu impregnated in the pitted and dented steel, the dark area is where some
penetrated one 6mm side.
And the crappy <a href="http://miss.fnpsites.com/shaped.avi" target="_blank">movie.</a> :p
[ February 11, 2003, 06:17 AM: Message edited by: Axt ]

Axt, where did you get the pentaerythritol for PETN from? What part of Australia are you in?
[ February 16, 2003, 03:26 AM: Message edited by: xyz ]
Maniak February 16th, 2003, 05:29 PM

Hemisphere liners for SC can be easily made from copper plate by small hammer.
But you can penetrate steel with SC wihout the liner. It is poor, but easy.
First test: I put 20g shaped plastic explosive (45%PETN + 30%RDX + 25%plasticizer) to 1cm thick steel. Liner wasn used.
After explosion, penetration is complete and width is 1,2cm....
Second test: 30g plastic (60%PETN + 15%RDX + 25%plasticizer) as a linear SC for cut off of steel U profile (wall thickness 5-
8mm). It was totaly cut!
You mustnt to use standoff distance, when the liner isnt used, of course.
I have got some photos of it, but I dont know, how can take it here.
Now I have a few nice copper liners from my friend (he has hydraulic press...) and I want to try it with a few hundred grams of
cast explosive.

unstead SC, EFP is good for penetrate steel. You can use a long distance (5times diameter) and 20g plastic make penetration
about 2,5cm (in my tests).
[ February 16, 2003, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: Maniak ]
kingspaz February 16th, 2003, 05:54 PM

Maniak, do you have any pictures or videos of your tests?

Maniak, to post pictures, get an account at <a href="http://www.boomspeed.com" target="_blank">www.boomspeed.com,</a>
upload your pictures there, and post a link to them here.
[ February 17, 2003, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]
IPN February 17th, 2003, 01:19 PM

Mr Cool there is a slight problem with your link <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Anyway this sounds like something very interesting to try. Just that I don t have any major HEs. Or could I use something
like ANNM?
kingspaz February 17th, 2003, 04:57 PM

Maniak sent me an email and here's the pics:
<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/kingspaz/cutoffprofile.jpg" alt=" - " />
<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/kingspaz/penetrated1cmsteel.jpg" alt=" - " />
<img src="http://www.boomspeed.com/kingspaz/penetrated1cmsteel2.jpg" alt=" - " />
Nihilist February 18th, 2003, 09:06 PM

just as a note for those of you who can't get these from a doctor, you can also buy a very similar cone(though not quite as
good) as the cover for one of those things that takes your temperature from your ear you can buy them here: <a href="http:/
/www.mypharmacy-secure.co.uk/acatalog/Shop_Braun_213.html" target="_blank">http://www.mypharmacy-secure.co.uk/
acatalog/Shop_Braun_213.html</a> they are the "lens-filters" although they probably wouldn't be that good for SC's in and of
themselves they would still be good for making casts.
Terry Collins February 27th, 2003, 11:16 AM

Axt is right in saying there's a science to it. In theory it seems quite easy to construct a (L)SC. But in practice it's quite difficult.
There are all kinds of problems and factors to be taken into account.
The first one is what explosive to use, then what liner, what angle what thickness, what Stand off distance and so on.
And even if one succeeds in getting a SC with a clear cutting effect it still might not be very effective in relation with amount of
explosive used versus penetration depth.
I experienced like Maniak also mentioned that the effect of the explosive without the liner but with the V shape is sometimes
bigger than with the liner. So the Monroe effect creates a deeper cut than the partcilar SC with liner.
It all has to do with the material of the liner and the thickness.
Of course if the right liner is used a (L)SC is the most effective explosive, gets the deepest and smoothest cut with the least
amuont of explosive. But that will take a pro and a lot of testing.
Mr Cool March 2nd, 2003, 10:32 AM

Here's a <a href="http://www.boomspeed.com/mrcool/MiniSC.jpg" target="_blank">picture</a> of a tiny little SC I tested
yesterday. Obviously, I deliberatley designed it to fail, to illustrate the point that you can't just throw one together and hope
that it works <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :p .
It's 1cm wide, 1cm high, about 1.4cm long and the stand-off is a little under 2cm. Angle is close to 60o. HE was
75% PETN, 25% EGDN to give a more uniform high density, although it did settle slightly. Liner is 0.15mm Cu. Detonator is
PETN/AgN3 in a narrow drinking straw.
The shiny stuff on the bit of paper is not leaking EGDN, it is epoxy glue that I used to seal everything. Target is 1.5mm Al
plate, backed by a load of flour/water dough.
The target was penetrated, but was clearly ripped and not cut, and the hole was not the shape that you would have expected.
It was also severely fragged, indicating that the Cu was ripped up and not made into a nice jet.
I think small SC's are harder to get to work than larger ones. Small creases or bends in the liner will have a more significant
effect, and also due to the thin liner you are more likely to deform it.
My liner was bent by hand with the aid of a straight-bladed knife, not pressed using a mould, which would probably have been
a good idea..
DBSP March 2nd, 2003, 03:10 PM

Nice, would you mind taking a pic of the hole int the Al plate?
I tested something similar a week ago, I used the reflector from the flash I ripped out of an old disposable camera as the
cone. I must admit it was also just something i just whipped together. I only used thick paper as casing and about 2,5g of AP.
The LSC made a hole just as large as the linear and in the same shape, no jet in other words. But the hole itself was quite
nice after I flattened the bottom of the tincan I used as target. Most of the bottom had been pushed into the can by the
gases you see.
I've got pics of it all. And I've just found an FTP to put my stuff so I'll put the pics up as soon as I can.
Mr Cool March 2nd, 2003, 04:20 PM

Sure, here's two views. They're pretty much the same, but I couldn't decide which was better so I've used both.
<a href="http://www.boomspeed.com/mrcool/uSC.jpg" target="_blank">1</a>,<a href="http://www.boomspeed.com/mrcool/
uSC2.jpg" target="_blank">2</a>
As you can see, it has been pierced (one main hole and one smaller hole), but I'm sure it wasn't by a jet, just a combination
of frags and blast. The target was also sprayed with frags, leaving little copper-plated craters all over the surface, but the
pictures don't show this very well except in a few areas.
(Sorry about the low quality, I'm trying to save space on my Boomspeed account to fit in as many pics as possible)
[ March 02, 2003, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]
NightStalker March 3rd, 2003, 01:17 AM

I had the idea of using a mercury amalgamation to cast a liner cone.
Mercury has a very high density, higher than lead or copper, which is very important for penetration. It's available in the form
of electronic switches without hassle.
Take an ear cone, embed it in plaster with a small wax sprue attached to it, then bake it in an oven (or furnance) to melt out
the plastic cone. Then suck up a mix of mercury and (zinc, tin, whatever) into the mold, using vacuum, to remove all air
bubbles which would ruin material continuity. It'll harden into a solid cone in a bit, which can then be used.
Cut liners don't have continuity, thus the stamped or spun liners of manufactured SC liners, which DO have continuity.
Also, SC's need a standoff of 3 to 6 times the charge diameter to allow for full jet formation. Mr. Cool, you're standoff was only
2x, so you didn't have enough room for a penetrating jet to form, just slug.
DBSP March 3rd, 2003, 01:16 PM

OK got the pics up.
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/micro_cone.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/

micro_cone.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/mic_LSC_hit2.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
mic_LSC_hit2.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/mic_LSC_hit.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
mic_LSC_hit.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/mipictures/cro_LSC.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
micro_LSC.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/micro_LSC_arrangement.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/
pictures/micro_LSC_arrangement.JPG</a> (LSC marked)
The cola can was placed inside the tincan as a further check of the hole.
It is hard to make LSCs and SCs that actually work as they are supposed to. I've only succeded one time, it was a LSC I made
out of a piece of pipe and a V-folded plate about 1,5-2.0mm thick, I cut a segment out of the pipe so that the linear fitted
and secured it with chemical metal. I propelled it with 40g of ANNM primed at one end by 2g of AP. It sliced a 6mm thick plate
very nicely.
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/6mm_plate_cut_with_LSC1.JPG" target="_blank">http://

dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/6mm_plate_cut_with_LSC1.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/6mm_plate_cut_with_LSC2.JPG" target="_blank">http://
dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/6mm_plate_cut_with_LSC2.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/LSC_cut.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
LSC_cut.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/LSC.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/LSC.JPG</
a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blast_site_40g_LSC.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/
pictures/blast_site_40g_LSC.JPG</a>
Another SC I tried on new years eve that worked great but not the way it is supposed to: I made a cone out of tincan bottom
with a 60* linear, which I soldered together. I put it into a small plastic medicine bottle and hotglued it into place. I think I got
about 25g of APAN into it. I had a standoff of about 4cm. In the SC_1 pic you see the plates I tested it on. The left one was
put on top of the right one and they where held about 1,5cm from each other.
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC_cone2.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/

SC_cone2.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC_cone1.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
SC_cone1.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC_1.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
SC_1.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC_1_1.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
SC_1_1.JPG</a>
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC_2_1/.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/
SC_2_1/.JPG</a>
(NOTE that the pics might still not be up, if they arent, just wait I'm upploading lots of pics right now and they'll get up as
there turn comes)
[ March 03, 2003, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: DBSP ]
Mr Cool March 3rd, 2003, 02:44 PM

NightStalker: <a href="http://www.risi-usa.com/0products/3sc/page34.html" target="_blank">1.5x stand-off</a>, 1.5"
penetration into mild steel using 3.5g of RDX.
andreas March 3rd, 2003, 04:27 PM

I,ve made a sc today using a 1mm lead liner. It was 25mm in diameter and was of a 60 degrees angle. The charge consited
of 10 gram MHN. i HAD 1,5X cone diameter standoff. I expected more penetration but the effect is definitly a sc effect. I think
it could have penatrated about 6 to 8 mm of mild steel. I think I make up some ng to mix with the MHN to get a more
uniform density and use a metall cilinder. Instead of the cardbourd one I used this time. furthermore I'll make a thin coper
liner
A few pictures.
<a href="http://www.boomspeed.com/andreas/MVC-214F.JPG" target="_blank">http://www.boomspeed.com/andreas/MVC-
214F.JPG</a>
215F.JPG</a>
216F.JPG</a>
223F.JPG</a>
225F.JPG</a>
225F.JPG</a>
226F.JPG</a>
227F.JPG</a>
228F.JPG</a>
I have put one in of my gun just for fun. Tell me what you think of my little experiment. The pictures with the tin can are foto's
of what the detonator does alone.
[ March 03, 2003, 03:29 PM: Message edited by: andreas ]
NightStalker March 4th, 2003, 02:08 AM

In US Patent 6393991, issued to General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems for the Javelin ATGM warhead, they state:

Helvetica">...The standoff distance (of standard SC) is typically defined as a multiple of the charge diameter, D,
and is typically on the order of 3-6 times the charge diameter.<hr /></blockquote>Maybe the ratio changes with smaller values of D, or maybe not, I dont' know. I'm just going with the most
reliable source of info I have at the moment.
Mr Cool March 4th, 2003, 01:53 PM

Yes, I'm sure you're right it does vary with the construction of the charge.
Good pics andreas. Could you take a pic of the target, with a ruler for scale?
DBSP March 4th, 2003, 02:13 PM

Andreas, how did you "seal" the cone? did you just solder it?
And did you use a 1mm thick lead sheet for the SC?
Maniak March 4th, 2003, 02:22 PM

I ussually use one diameter distance (for hemispheric liner), about 2,5 diameters (for 40-60 liner) and 5-7 diameters for EFP
charge.
when you use very brizant explosive, distance must be longer......when I tried small amount of plastic 75%RDX + 25%NIBT
blast.gel. with 30 liner and 1,5 standoff, effect failed.
andreas March 4th, 2003, 07:25 PM

My baterys of the digicam are low therefore I have to discribe the target. It's a 23mm round target47mm long. the hole you
see has about 10x6mm area. The liner was soldered together from 1mm thick lead sheeting. You need any clarification just
tell me and I'll post it.
DBSP March 22nd, 2003, 04:37 PM

This doesn't really belong here but it is the only active SC thread so what the fuck.
Today I made an SC out of an aerosol can which had a very large cone, relatively speaking of course, it has a diameter of
50mm and a cone 13mm "high". I filled it with 126g of ANNM and added a small 2g AP det, (center primed) and a fuse into
that.
I cut the top and bottom of a half liter fanta bottle and put the SC in it so that the standoff would be 8cm, I waterproofed
everything as I where going to detonate it under water, I taped it securely to a 6,5mm thick piece of steel meassuring:
80x300x6,5mm. Tied a rope to it so that I would be able to retrieve it after the detonation.
I lit the fuse and threw it into the water and waited, filming at the same time off course :)
The results where as follows: (a note here, all pics are bigger than 640*480 scince I had forgotten about what size I had set
the camera on, sorry bout that, they aren't to bog though.)(A nother note, as I'm upploading right now the FTP is giving me a
hard time and the speed is slower than a snail, so I might wait untill I finish upploading the pics and the vid, some of them
are up, but all might not be up untill sunday, sorry about that too.)
I am a bit supprised about how the damages where placed, I had expected more at the center insteat allmost everything is
located at the outer edges, at two places it has been penetrated. One thing I'm shure of is that it has been one hell of a bang
between the fragments from the SC and the steel plate, the craters aren't excactly small, the largest are about 7mm in with
and about 5-6 deep. Take a good look at the high res. pic and magnify it a couple of times and You'll get a prety good look
at it.
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC/126g_ANNM_SC.avi" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/

pictures/SC/126g_ANNM_SC.avi</a>
A picture of the penetration:(high res. 2048x1536)
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC/DSCF0001.JPG" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/

SC/DSCF0001.JPG</a>
The rest of the photos are found here:
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/SC</a>
I know I have a typo here somwhere but I can't find it now.
[ March 23, 2003, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: DBSP ]
THErAPIST March 23rd, 2003, 03:55 AM

Nice. Lemme get this right, you didnt want two holes? I'd say you got alright penetration out of it though. Much better than I
could do. Also I'd like to say that either something is wrong with your video or there is something wrong with my comp. I tried
to play it and I get a message that says that your vid isn't in the right AVI format... I'll assume its just my comp though.
I made my first sc about 2 months ago. I made it with a 1.5 inch wide paper tube with a wall thickness of about 2mm. I used
the top of a small plastic easter egg for the liner. I packed 30g of HMTDAN into the tube and center primed it. I cut the top off
of a 3 liter pepsi bottle and stuck the charge in the mouth of the bottle to give me a 3 inch stand off since my explosive has a
VoD of under 6000 m/s. The liner was 1.5 inches tall. I placed my charge on top of a metal shelf that was on some sort of
discarded cart in the woods. The metal shelf has a thicknss of about 2mm. on detonation the blast was focused but not as
much as it could have been. The hole that was made was the same width as the charge, dont know why. I think my liner was
too thin to focus the blast enough. The liner also wasn't exactly sharply pointed to form a good jet of pressure. I think I'll use
PA for my next sc as it would no doubt offer much better penetration.
pics
<a href="http://i-was-bored.8m.com/sc" target="_blank">http://i-was-bored.8m.com/sc</a>
A little off topic here... Does anyone know where NBK ran off to?
(NBK taps The Rapist on the shoulder)
I'm right behind you...
[ March 23, 2003, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
Mr Cool March 23rd, 2003, 08:57 AM

I couldn't view the video either.
With a shallow/rounded liner like that, you will have made one of these:
<img src="http://www.dres.dnd.ca/ResearchTech/Products/MilEng_Products/RD95017/3-135-34_EFP.jpg" alt=" - " />
Which is an EFP (after firing...). It is a shaped charge in the sense that the charge is shaped to produce a desired effect, but
does not form a jet. Instead, the explosive squishes the metal into a fast-moving blob. These can be quite advanced, with
computer simulations and clever firing circuits and charge geometries used to produce the fins that you see on the image
above, which help keep the projectile stable.
Unlike SC's, these can have ranges of hundreds of yards, but are generally less penetrating.
<img src="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/images/cbu97_34.jpg" alt=" - " />
I love these things!!
Edit: EFP's generally use much larger stand-offs than SC's. A good rule of thumb would be ten diameters, to allow the metal to
form properly.
[ March 23, 2003, 08:01 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]
DBSP March 23rd, 2003, 09:40 AM

My connection is really giving me a hard time now, I can hardly enter this site. So uppload is not an option at the moment,
sorry bout that. This is the reasong you can't see the movie, I haven't upped it yet. I made a post erlier today but that one
only got half way to the thread before my connection got fucked up so I got realy pissed and left things.
I've seen that pic before, I never actuallt knew what an EFP was untill now, but I had the feeling the linear would look
something like that after looking at the warheads used in the picture.
I think I'll try a similar one but with a much greater standoff next time, soon I hope.
I'll do my best to get those pics and the vid up as soon as my connection is fixed.

Just a few random pages dealing with EFP's that might be of interest to people:
<a href="http://www.arasvo.com/efp.htm" target="_blank">Simulation</a>. This page briefly mentions an interesting

problem: If the velocity gradient over the penetrator is too large, it'll stretch out and break in the middle. Clearly there's more
to designing one of these than you might think... Although I don't think the explosive needs to be as brisant as with SC's.
<a href="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/hornet1.jpg" target="_blank">Hornet Mine</a>. The sequence is right to

left. Not a lot of useful information for us, but this thing is just too cool to leave out. When it detects a tank, it fires an EFP up
into the air over the tank, and this uses an IR sensor to tell it when to detonate. <a href="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/
sys/land/m93.htm" target="_blank">Main Page</a> here.
<a href="http://homepage3.nifty.com/weapons/images/efp2.gif" target="_blank">Just a little picture</a>
<a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/images/sofdk_demo.gif" target="_blank">A little .gif</a>.

Watch it blow a hole through the wall...
<a href="http://www.tokamaki.hpg.ig.com.br/moldada.htm" target="_blank">Some nice pictures</a>, but not in English.
<a href="http://www.sandia.gov/isrc/Capabilities/Integration_Technologies/Fire_Ant/fire_ant.html" target="_blank">Fire Ant</

a>.
Damn it, there is a really useful site that I remember seeing but can't find now. I'll post a link when/if it pops up.
DBSP March 23rd, 2003, 02:01 PM

Good news, my connection is fixed, the video is up and so is the high res. pic and some of the others.
Nice sites, I've seen some of them before but the fireant is new to me, I like the hornet too.

Nice pics you've got there! It's strange how the damage is around the outside, isn't it? I can't think why that might be the case
ATM...
Downloading the video now... :)
DBSP March 24th, 2003, 04:05 AM

My first thought when I saw the damage was: how the fuck?
I then had a look at the the pictures of the aerosol can and found something that might explain this thing.
The edges around the bottom of the can that holds the bottom cone in place are folden twice. If we say that the explosive
detonates at the to and then propagrates down towards the cone expanding the casing and it finally gets large enaugh to
completely cover the edges of the bottom(if you look at things from above). The ANNM then pushes the cone out of the casing
and at the same time the ANNM throws the edges towards the target plate, partially penetrating it and making large craters in
the plate.
The reason there is litte damage in the center might be that this in fact was an EFP thus not having enaugh time to form
properly, the cone might perhaps just have gotten flat when it smashes into the target plate..
I'm not shure wether this might be the case but it is a cenario that might prove to be true. I'm certainly going to test this agin,
this time with a 10x diameter standoff.
nbk2000 March 26th, 2003, 02:47 PM

DBSP, did you take down the pictures? I can't connect to the provided link to download them.
DBSP March 26th, 2003, 03:13 PM

The FTP the pics are hosted on is temporarely down because of problems with a new motherboard. The guy who has this
FTP(Photonic) is working on the problem and it will hopefully be solved soon.
Anyway, nice to seee you back here, where the hell have you been?
Ah on the beach, picking up girls, nice :D
nbk2000 March 27th, 2003, 01:53 AM

Working on the DVD.The day-to-day upkeep is being handled by the other staffers while I concentrate on my PDF.
Don't mind me, I just monitor the daily postings, otherwise I'd be hopelessly lost if I was to come back after being gone
months.
Terry Collins April 6th, 2003, 08:25 AM
DBSP nice pictures, especially the 6 mm steel strip cut by your LSC was interesting. It's a really nice cut by a jet and no signs
of the Munroe effect or fragments, so it proves LSC's can be made with ANNM. There has been some discussion about that
because normally high density, high VOD explosives with a very uniform density are used. And ANNM lacks a uniform high
density, becuase it's more or less powder like.
And the strange effects with the aerosol can seems to me caused by a scattered jet and slug and the Munroe effect. Because
of the (very imperfect) shape of the cone and large stand off the liner is formed into that 'liquid' jet which collides and
scatteres on the way down just like the shockwave (causig the Munroe effect) producing the strange effects.
[ April 06, 2003, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: Terry Collins ]
Jager April 6th, 2003, 08:44 PM

General information:
the blasters training manual lists the standoff distance as 1.5 to 2 times the diameter of the charge
Question:
Instead of using a solid metal cone, why cant you use liquid metal ie a 1" by 2" disk of mercury in a thin container shaped like
a hockey puck with the high explosive on top of it in a cylinder shape? I see no reason why it wouldn't work, and you dont
have to make a cone.
Jager
Mr Cool April 7th, 2003, 11:07 AM

Because if you just have a disc of mercury and a cylinder of explosive, then you don't have a SC and all you will do is
contaminate your testing area.
I have seen references to other liner materials though, for use in UXO disposal - an interesting one being a "liner" of water.
But you'd still need to find two very thin cone shapes to keep the water in place, and it would not be as effective at penetrating
as a metal liner due to water's lower density.
Edit:
<img src="http://www.army.mod.uk/img/aht/Contents/equipment/WEAPONS/CANNON/cannon1.jpg" alt=" - " />
Is anyone else thinking "filter funnel"??
[ April 07, 2003, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]
DBSP April 7th, 2003, 03:28 PM

The funnel idea has crossed my mind on several occations, I've been looking for sutible ones in the stores but I haven't found
any one that might be good enaugh.
I've allso been thinking about what you should doo with the "pipe", should one leave it open or should it be closed/folded
together or what? This is the hardest part I belive.
DO you have to use a seemles funnel or might it work anyway?
If it would work it would be extremely simple to make nice SCs.

A normal glass filter funnel from a lab supplier should work fine, I would've done it ages ago but it'd be a bit too big for me to
do safely :(.
The "pipe" bit obviously can't affect performance much, otherwise that round would use a different arrangement. So either
leave it on or melt it closed.
"Do you have to use a seemles funnel or might it work anyway?" All funnels I've seen are seemless in the sense that they
don't have any gaps and are constant thicknesses all the way around. They should work. They're probably formed by some
sort of injection moulding, so they should be totally uniform.
Anyone with some space going to try it? Go on, you know you want to :) .

Glass would offcourse work but it will only be a munroe, not a liquid jet which is what I would like to get.
I have a metal funnel which I probably could have used but it's far to big for me to feel comfortable detonating it.
I'll have a look for some smaller metal ones.
Al Koholic April 8th, 2003, 08:22 PM

I have an idea regarding explosively accelerated projectiles. I think it should be possible to place a steel ball bearing inside
the cone of a shaped charge. The ball, being situated right at the bottom of the cone would be subject to the maximum
explosive force and assuming the charge has a decent uniformity and the cone is very well shaped, it should be fired straight
out from the charge upon detonation at amazing velocities. Is the reason this is not done because the ball will not survive the
explosion since it will basically be riding right on the monroe jet? I would imagine that the ball would survive with deformities of
course but should still be moving extremely fast.
If this would not work, does anyone consider it possible to have a system like I described only with an injection load. An
already moving metal slug is fired down a barrel or track and when it hits the end of the track, it connects a circuit which
detonates a high explosive charge that is shaped like a shaped charge only with the narrow end of the cone cut off to allow the
projectile to enter the space between the explosive. This way it spends less time in the explosions path and does not get
subjected to as extreme a monroe jet but still experiences GREAT acceleration. I''d like to try out both experiements when I
have time. I can see the potential to get extremely high velocity projectiles of any size with this type of a system. Could be
done on very small scale with BB's maybe.
Mr Cool April 9th, 2003, 04:07 PM

I've had the same idea, never got round to trying it though.
I'm not really sure what the detonation of a hollow cone of HE would "look" like without a liner (I've seen simulations / flash
photos of SC effects, but not plane Munroe effects), but I've got a feeling that the stronger shockwave along the axis would
knock the ball out of the way, rather than carry it along. Testing is needed.

Helvetica">Glass would offcourse work but it will only be a munroe, not a liquid jet which is what I would like to get<hr /
></blockquote>I'm not an expert on SC's, but does glass not form a jet? The
improvised SC's book on the FTP has some photos of good SC effects using eg martini glasses...
Anthony April 9th, 2003, 04:12 PM

I'd be very surprised if a ball bearing at the tip of a circular SC would travel any faster than the same ball bearing placed in
contact with a block of explosive. In fact I'd assume it would go slower, due to the less intimate contact with the explosive.
Firing a projectile into a forming SC jet would be *very* hard, microsecond accuracy required, and be repeatable consistantly!
Plus, if your explosive has a VoD of 20 000fps, and you fire your projectile into the jet at 1000fps, assuming complete
efficiency, you'll gain a megre 5% in projectile speed for all your efforts...
Al Koholic April 9th, 2003, 05:18 PM

Well what it should look like would be 2 nice pressure fronts coming in at an angle to each other. Then where they meet,
vector addition and a linear and straight line of force. I think the ball could ride this quite well assuming you had a very
smooth detonation and a very uniform ball. I have a hard time seeing how this wouldn't work unless the detonation just blows
past the ball because of the balls inertia, although I doubt this would happen. If it was an issue then like I said, you could use
an injection mechanism to make sure the ball is already moving as the charge detonates just behind it.
I was thinking of how this could be done Anthony. I believe it would be feasible to build a pneumatic cannon type device with a
nice long and fairly precise barrel. At the end of the barrel, the ball must pass through a segment of barrel during which it will
provide the connection for a circuit which will cause the discharge of a pretty good size capacitor bank into a detonator like
DDNP and then the SC semi cone will be an RDX cone or some other high VoD charge. The acutal construction of the cone
would be the hard part because since you are cutting off the apex of the cone to allow the ball to enter the "acceleration
region" you'll have no way of initiating the charge right in the center like you could if you just bored a cone into a block of
explosive. You'll have to have a multi-point detonation to ensure congruent detonation of the cone just while the ball has
entered the cone region. The detonation will be so fast that the ball will have barely moved by the time the explosive is
detonating and the it'll be getting propelled like crazy I believe.

Well if you look at two straight water ripples colliding at an angle to each other, you will notice that the point of intersection is
not a sharp angle like you would expect, there's a little sticky-out blob in the middle. I'm not sure if a similar thing will happen
with shockwaves from a HE or not.
I think it should work though, to some extent at least. It'd be a bit like squeezing a wet bar of soap. I think it would be more
effective than just having the ball sitting on a block of HE, asuming the HE cone was shaped such that the rear half of the ball
was surrounded by HE. This way you have the same area of contact as with a flat charge, plus HE all around the rear half of the
ball, all of which will provide a component of force in the forwards direction when it detonates.
Ah, but wait: having the ball "surf" on the shockwave created would be pointless; the shockwave doesn't accelerate (if using a
simple cone...), thus it can't accelerate the ball. The same effect would be achieved by having the ball half sunk into a block
of HE, with no cone extending outwards. See what I mean?
In order for the ball to undergo any extra acceleration, shaping of the cone would be required, so that it was shaped like a sort
of inverse trumpet shape. A diagram would probably help right now, but I'm too tired to draw one. Maybe tomorrow...
Al Koholic April 10th, 2003, 12:17 AM

Yes diagrams would be very helpful...unfortunately I don't have time to go into detail making one for the next couple of
weeks!! Anyway, I don't understand what you mean by the shockwave doesn't accelerate and therefore won't accelerate the
ball. The way I see it, even if the ball is not "surfing" on the shockwave (which won't happen anyway b/c of the balls inertia)
the pressure behind the ball of the expanding gases will push it out at great velocity. With the cone it is like the proverbial bar
of soap. In fact, the way I imagine this in my head is like the cone forming a "barrel" down which the ball travels just like a
gun...The detonating gases form the sides of the barrel and the difference in the pressure due to the angle is the propelling
force.
BTW, that GIF image above you linked to is SOOOOOOOOO fucking cool!!!!
I want better videos of those EFPs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A-BOMB May 23rd, 2003, 09:10 AM

I just got some great SC liners they are made of 1mm brass, and they fit up perfectly with a one of those black film cans. I'll
have to see this guy I know that does Ham radio because I got them in a box of old ham stuff at a garage sale, I think they
are covers for some type of electron tube or some type of antenna.
nbk2000 July 6th, 2003, 12:10 AM

I was going through a local arts and crafts store that I never noticed before, when I ran across ready made SC cones, in the
form of cake decorating nozzles.
:)
The majority of them would be useless because of the big holes in the cones apex, but they had one that was perfect. It had
only a microscopic hole that would be easily sealed by a mustard seed sized blob of solder.
Seamlessly stamped from stainless steel, and only $1.50 each. It was about 3/8" dia. by 1" long. It was a nice and deep cone
that, I'd dare say, would fit perfectly into a CO2 powerlet. :D
If only they made copper nozzles. :(
GibboNet July 6th, 2003, 02:46 AM

I've been doing a lot of research into these recently. (All SC's - Conical, Linear and Cylindrical(if that counts))
Has anyone got a copy of the improvised SC PDF mentioned above ? I can't find it in my FTP folder !!
I plan on writing a fair bit of info up into a webpage (maybe PDF I suppose) and I would like to know what you all think should
be included too, so any ideas..... please tell.
I'm using the Australian Demoloitions manual as a base, but I need some more info....
Also, Any ideas for getting accurate drawings ? I'm looking to create a scale drawing of a charge, including all dimensions to
scale, including correct angles etc. Any ideas ?

GibboNet, by cylindrical, do you mean the method in which HE is detonated around a hollow metal cylinder (initiated at one
end), so it first pushes the walls inwards (into a cone-like shape), and then produces the jet? I saw a document on that and
thought it was interesting, I've been searching google for twenty minutes now to try and find it but no luck so far. Please post
any info you might have on this technique.
Meanwhile, I will keep looking for that document...

NBK: I did a search today and found a pic of a cake decorating nozzle:
http://www.clasohlson.se/images/products/S/hi/B/341500_Sw2.jpg
The one to the right in the pic might work.
Are those cones actually called "cake decorating nozzles" or have they got any other name?
I don't know if I can find them locally but I'll have a look the next time I get a chance to.
nbk2000 July 9th, 2003, 03:55 PM

As far as I know.
I'm sure there's some fancy technical name for them that bakers use, but cake decorating nozzles is what they are. :) Any
bakery supplier would have them, as well as most grocery stores (that I've seen), and arts/crafts stores.

DBSP:
The reason why your test charge made a circular gouge was because of the shape of the "cone" you were using. The bottom
the can, while concave, had a small flat spot at the center. This shape is almost like that being experimented with to make
cookie-cutter EFPs.
The platter for a cookie-cutter (ring shaped) EFP is like a higly squashed "m", where the center is dimpled, or in this case
flattened.
I'll get into more details tommorow, but I've got a picture that shows the test results that look almost exactly like your test, if
not quite as successful.
They've got designs that will cut a 6" plug out of 2" thick RHA. Hmmm...hole big enough to reach through...2" of steel
plate...wonder what a person could do with that? ;)

Apparently the important thing is the initation of the charge from the topmost edge of the explosive loading, rather than the
center as is usual for shaped charges. With central detonation, the platter gets turned inside out, with the center of the platter
becoming the leading edge of the EFP. However, because of the continued expansion of the explosive gases trapped within
the annular ring, the front edge of the ring continues to open till it becomes like a funnel and begins to tumble, negating
penetration.
By using edge intiation, the outer edges fold forward first, with the center apparently being ruptured and folded inwards against
the interior of the ring. Although the platter may already have the center removed, with the platter looking like a washer,
trather than a solid plate. It may also be asymetric, with the plate having an elliptical, rather than spherical, arc. Oh, did I
mention variable web thickness too?
In the experiment I saw referenced, they used an explosive charge made of machined PBX bar stock. A plastic explosive (PE4)
was used as a relay charge within a steel housing with a diameter of 45 mm. A steel cup was inserted into the annulus to
effect good contact between the PE4 and the main charge and to enforce axial symmetry.
It was hoped that a relay thickness in the region of 1 mm would suffice. However, it was found that this thickness had to be
increased to nearly 3 mm to ensure reliable corner turning in the PE4 on the axis. This increased thickness had an effect on
the ultimate EFP shape.
The relay web thickness of the charge with the best results was at the minimum 3 mm, achieved by forcing the cup in to a
greater depth, while in the other the web thickness was 5 mm. With a thinner relay the manufactured item (and the observed
EFP shape) is much closer to the required annular shape, since the inner rim of the liner will be relatively slower than the outer
rim.
The more sharply defined the initiation point, the better the results.
The hole profiles at stand-offs between 2 and 20 calibers were generally symmetrical, with maximum depths ranging between
11 and 14 mm. The length of the ring was satisfactory, and there are indications from the serrated front edge of the ring and
from FX photographs taken soon after initiation that the outer rim of the liner had spalled off early on. Such spalling could be
reduced significantly by using heavier confinement.
With standoffs of up to 90 calibers, the ring only impacted edge on about half the time, retaining good penetration. Annular
rings are not good for penetrating multiple plates because the rings disintegrate during penetration.
Herr Doktor October 21st, 2003, 02:39 PM

I was working at my shit job in construction, and we were doing an upscale condo job. I was in the parkade, and I was just
looking through the boxes, ect, and I found what I think may be the solution to the problem of a decent hemisphere for
shaped charges... AND they're dirt cheap.
Hemisphere (http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/SmartCat.aspx?
&az=73226961&type=list_order&show=part_number+part_name+dia+thickness+unit_pric
e&number=7&showdiscounts=no&template=http://www.sharpeproducts.com/
temp.htm&ptno=9100+9101+9102+9103+9104+9105+9106+9107+9108+
9109+9110+9111+9112+9113+9114&iwidth=200&stripecolor=ccccff&bgcolor=no&tablewidth=425)
Other Hemisphere Site (http://www.mcnichols.com/requestquote/quoteforms/handrailcomponents/endcaps/so_f_typec.htm)
PDF Catalog (http://www.jgbraun.com/pdf/wagnerc/wagnerendcaps.pdf)
Haggis October 21st, 2003, 06:48 PM

Fence caps such as these are sold at home stores for around 75 cents a piece. However, there are caps called 'bullet caps'
and, being cone shaped, would work better. They are usually 2 3/8 on the bottom to accept the 2" pipe. There is a 'ridge' of
sorts, that can be used to hold the charge tube. I found that 2" coupler pieces fit on this ridge nicely, and could be JB Welded
to the endcap. Then, a segment of 2" PVC pipe can be glued on, the fuse coming out of an endcap that could be glued on as
well. The remaining fence cap sticking out could be ground off or incorporated into the standoff.
Herr Doktor October 21st, 2003, 07:39 PM

The thing I noticed about the pipe caps in the links is that they are quite heavy. I think that you would almost be able to get
away with not having to reinforce the cap on the back with anything, since the one I saw was probably 3/8" thick. Also, if you
were to weld some 1/4" thick bar on the side in a few places, you could even screw it or bolt it to the object you are "affecting"

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Few hundred ms delay circuit
Log in
View Full Version : Few hundred ms delay circuit
xoo1246 July 30th, 2002, 06:19 PM

I had an idea for a circuit to be used with two detonators in a FAE test. Let me point out that I'm not a at all skilled when it comes to to electronics. This is where you come in.
Here it is:
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/circuit.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/circuit.jpg</a>
No resistance, voltage or capacitance is marked since I haven't done any calculations. The questions is, would the general concept work with the right components to give a
delay of a few hundred ms?
One could hook up a timer to to D1 and D2 to measure the time between their activation.
Hmm, time to go to bed. Hope this post was constructive.
Einstein July 30th, 2002, 08:31 PM

I think it could work....one of my hobbies is electronics, so that should do. Finding right components is is a task: calculate, buy, test, calculate, buy, test, ...etc etc etc....
It would be good to get delay detonator for FAE, because I read from somewhere (forum?) that buildings and ships were destroyed with 60kg of flour detonated with small
charge and then after 10-30ms later sparkling charge were detonated, which ignited flours.
McGuyver July 31st, 2002, 12:41 AM

I think the key for your circuit is going to be a capacitor. Some capacitors take anywhere from maybe 1 microsecond to a few seconds to charge to full capacity.
If you had some kind of voltage sensing device- either a transistor or whatever- that would only turn on when the cap. is at it's peak voltage- that might work.
Another idea is of course using some kind of countdown timer device. I'm sure there are timers that operate at 1/100th of a second.
xoo1246 July 31st, 2002, 02:39 AM

There is a simple simulation program called "crocodile clips", once I had it, but since I've changed computer and didn't back up I don't have it any more. Handy little program,
anyone got it?
If one got acess to a camera with reasonable frame-rate, one could calculate the aproximate fuel concentration in the air depending on time by looking a the diameter of the
fuel cloud formed after the burster charge has detonated(knowing the amount of fuel in your container preferably :p ).
pyromaniac_guy July 31st, 2002, 03:28 AM

or you could determine most efficent time delay by the goof old fashioned (and much more fun) trial and error method :)
nbk2000 July 31st, 2002, 09:30 AM

This topic is well timed.
I was just reading a patent (US#6244184) for a bomblet fuse that uses an accelerometer to detect when the bomblet hits hard vs. soft targets. Hard targets (tanks) get SQ
fuze action, while soft targets (ground) get a bounding charge explosion which launches the bomblet back into the air where it explodes a few hundred milliseconds later as an
airburst for increased effect against infantry.
Now, the SQ fuze is easy, and so is the bounding charge. The thing that stumps me is a simple means of delaying a few hundredths of a second.
Since I'm not planning on attacking tanks, all the bomblets would be bounding airburst. Are you planning on breadboarding this circuit for testing? Because a simple circuitboard
as diagramed could be made by the hundreds easily and cheaply.
As an aside, the patent uses a capacitor to store the needed charge to detonate the bomblets. The cap. is charged in flight from an onboard battery so the bomblets are
unenergized until immediately before dispensing, making them safe to handle. Also, since caps self-discharge over time, this renders safe any bomblets that failed to explode
within a few minutes.
I'm wondering, would it be easy to use disposable camera flash caps as the initiators? I'm thinking, if the bomblets are filled with plasticized AP, then you don't even need a
detonator, just a fat hot spark. Such as when a flash cap is shorted out. :)
What kind of circuit would be needed to charge up photocaps by the hundreds, all at once? Is it doable? If not photocaps, what kind of caps could be used?
xoo1246 July 31st, 2002, 04:12 PM

Couldn't you use the standard charge circuit found in the photo flash. Using a transformator in combination with a pulse generator? Then connect several caps paralelly. I
assume what stopps the charging is when the resistance increase in the cap(s). True?
You would have to change the common 1.5 v batteries to something capable of giving more amperes if you don't want to wait forever when charging.
I see no reason to use hight voltage capacitator if you don't want to use exploding bridgewires.
I'll try to get hold of that program, or I will have to calculate this manually. But since I have many things going paralelly I will either forget about it or it will take time.
Flake2m August 1st, 2002, 09:26 AM

I was thinking that you could use a 555 astable circuit. The 555 astable continuly switches on and off, it can run on a 9v battery and could be re-used again. The speed of the
555 can be changed by using different capacitors and resistors. You could use the 555 to run a relay or a transistor.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Gas Tank Explosion - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Gas Tank Explosion - Archive File

Lex_Luthor
A new voice
Posts: 10
From : VA, US
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n a n y o n e s u g g e s t a g o o d a n d s u i t a b l e w a y t o d e t o n a t e a c a r g a s t a n k . With m a y b e a d e l a y o f 5 m ins to 3 hrs. An estima te
the dam age. Also are there any substances com bustable with unleaded gas?
------------------
The greatest criminal mind of all tim e
blackadder
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 313
From : L o n d o n
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W hy don't you look through the forum!
I don't think you are intereste d in how explosives work, I think you are o n e o f t h o s e i m p a tient people who just want to blow
s o m ething up, and you don't care how. The whole forum ' s d e v o t e d t o e x p l o s i v e s d a m nit! Search.
Oh yeah, and what th e hell are you talking abo ut a delay of FIVE minutes to THREE hours???!!!! There is a big difference
between the two!
[ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y b l a ckadder (edited February 22, 2001).]
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From : England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First off, Low Explosives don't detonate. Secondly, the o nly way to detonate a car gas tank is to fill it with HE.
You have been watching too m any film s! Car petrol tanks do not explode when set on fire!
Lex_Luthor
A new voice
Posts: 10
From : VA, US
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think m y understanding is that the gas inside the tank is what explodes? Right. Just wondering h ow it can b e d o n e .
vehem t
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 580
From : C a n a d a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D o n o t p o s t t h e s a m e thing in m ultiple sections.
Macgyver April 5th, 2003, 11:58 AM

W ell, the only real de cent way to get a gas tank go with a bang is m ake sure it's almost e mpty of gas, i.e full of gas vapour
with a little gas at the bottom .
So do the following, with tank all em pty (Make sure to emty it of vapour too!), drill a hole as high up on the tank as you can
get it, insert igniter and seal the hole with expoxy or that instant steel m ix which you kneed with your hands and then goes
rock hard after 10-15 m inutes.
Connect the wires to your igniter to the delay device and put some gas back at th e bottom of the tank.
I can tell you, I'd rather not be near when that one goes, gas vapurs in the right concentration with air is quite explosive....
W anna try th is in a sm aller scale? Get a 20L gas container thats empty. Drill a fuse hole in the lid and expoxy it so there is no
l e a k after you've inserted the fuse.
Now drip 15-20 millilitres of gas in the container and cap it.
Let it sit in the heat for som e time, then go out and light the fuse and stand back...... :D
<sm all>[ April 05, 2003, 10:59 AM: Message edited by: Macgyver ]
metafractal April 29th, 2003, 06:32 AM

May I inquire as to how you calculated 15-20 m l of octane? Is it a linear relationship? For instance, if 15-20 m l is for a 20L
tank, then would 30-40 ml be requred for a 40L and in the sam e way 7.5-10 m l for a 10L tank?
vulture April 29th, 2003, 03:16 PM

Gas Law:
P*V = N*R * T
P = pressure in Pa
V = volume in m 3
N = num ber of m o l e s
R = 0,082
T = tem perature in Kelvin
And of course you'll n e e d t h e m olecular weight and density of your fuel o f choice.

Petrol is not octane - look up the price of octan e...
It is a linear relationship, it increases with volum e to m aintain the sam e - explosive - vapour/air ratio.
Magas May 1st, 200 3, 01:47 PM

:coo l: The old calcium carbide in the pill bottle works fin e just adjust the delay:cool:

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > arm or piercing
Log in
View Full Version : armor piercing
Ryan H February 14th, 2003, 05:45 PM

m y father is always telling me about techniques he used when he was in the millitary, but one in particular cought m y
attention..
H e u s e d t o b e an exlosives instructor specializing in c-4 he told m y that he punch e d t h r o u g h 8 - 1 0 i n c h e s o f t a n k s t e e l u s e i n g
c-4 and a wine bottle..this is how he described it..
Most wine bo ttles have a deep concave arch in the bottom, alm ost parabolic you could say. the neck of the bottle would be cut
off about 9 inches fro m t h e b o t t o m and packed with about eight inches worth of the explosive with a blasting cap ce ntered at
the top. when it is set off, it "burns" downward and around the arch, the force pen etrates the arch from all angles co ncentrating
it down to a fine piont on the surface on which it is sittin g. the re sult is a hole.. duh. ..i have searched to see if there are any
specifics on this design but i havent found anything, sin ce they have artillery shells that can do the sam e thing now. has any
one heard or tried anything like this? thanks..
Al Koholic February 14th, 2003, 06:12 PM

so......shaped charge....
have we heard of them ? I h a v e n ' t . . . a n y o n e e l s e ? W h a t a r e t h e y ?
uh oh...post number 1 as well.
This should prove interesting.....
Machiavelli February 14th, 2003, 07:06 PM

Holy fucking shit! People like you shouldn't even be allowed to be on the internet, please go hom e and run against the wall
until it has knocked some sense into you!
Shaped charges, including this fucking wine bottle shit from the black books have b e e n d i s c u s s e d o n t h i s f o r u m f o r a g e s a n d i f
you had used your time on this forum wisely you would have noticed
-that we've a lready discused this topic on a far higher level than your pathetic little post
-that newbies who m ake a new topic for their first post can get into trouble
-that we tell people who come here claiming that their father "used to be an exlosives instructor specializing in c-4" are usually
told to gathe r all their fucking C4, put it up their ass and ask their daddy to put in the blasting cap e x t r a d e e p .
Get lost punk!
Btw, since you'll have some tim e for re search now, try to read up a bit on shaped charges, it's really interesting.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Dog Shit Bin Explosion - Archive
File
Log in
View Full Version : Dog Shit Bin Explosion - Archive File

sadsakjoel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 170
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I h a v e b e e n p l a n n i n g to dream about this for some time: Blow up one of those big green dog shit bins they have in parks a n d
I thought about m a k i n g e n o u g h a p p u tty to fill up 1/2 the tube that glad wrap (cling wrap) com es in. But fo r a bit m ore power
add picric acid and so me AN prills. Any suggestions on amm ount of each and ratios to ace tone etc. Also I will be using ping
pong balls in stead of DB powder as I don't have alot of money at the m o m e n t . W ill this still detonate by flam e (fuse/electric
igniter? I am going to use a timer, ie. electric alarm clock with an igniter instead of the alarm s p e a ker, But the igniter requires
a 6 volt and the clovk only uses 1.5, if I solder connetions from a 6 volt onto the terminals where the aa battery oes in will it
affect the clo ck (ie. blow resisters etc?) I will take photos of everything before and after and post them h e r e . T h a n k s f o r a n y
help
------------------
All there is to fear is your own co-ordination
Mick
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 229
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...ca n y o u u s e p i n g p o n g b a l l s t o m ake AP putty? wtf? i didn't know this...
like how do you do it? is it sim ilar to m aking NC lacquer?
1 0 0 m l of acetone for every pinpong ball, then let the balls "m elt" in the acetone, then allow som e o f t h e a c e t o n e t o
evapourate so it becomes fairly thick sludge, then add the AP to the lacq uer, and m ould it to whatever shape, and allow it to
dry...
a m i even fairly close?..
as for a time r, this may sound fairly Kewl - but hey, its works..
g e t a m a n u a l kitchen tim er, the sort that you wind up

t h e n g e t a s m all screw, and screw it into the 0 on the dial(don't screw it in to far, or you'll dam age it)
then run a piece of copper or brass(whatever) along the dial, so that whe n the dial tics down to zero, it m akes contact with the
screw
then, conect the negative wire to 4 AA bateries(paralel, or series..can't re m e m ber) then connect it to one side of the igniter
then connect a wire to the positive side of the batteries, and run it to the screw thats on zero, and then connect som ething
between the piece of copper p late on the dial, to the other side of the igniter...
like i said, it sounds KewL - but its works when you've got nothin g else...or m aybe its not Kewl, and i cam e up with a good id e a
*shock! gasp! horror!*..nah prolly not =(
h o p e i t h e l p s , a n d c a n a n y o n e g i v e u s s o m e i n f o a b o u t t h e A P p u t t y ( o r g i m me a site url with som e info)
zaibatsu
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 403
From : England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<a href="http://www.xinventions.com/m ain/pyro/explosive_putty.htm" target="_blank">http://www.xinventions.com / m a i n / p y r o /
explosive_putty.htm</a>
------------------
Visit m e at <a href="http://www.surf.to /eliteforum " target="_blank">www.surf.to/e liteforum </a>
Mick
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 229
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ahh...sweet, thanks fo that...
sadsakjoel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 170
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
everythings good, I figured out the clock, I will still use a aa battery for the clock and have the 6 volt connected aswell but
n e g a t i v e a r o u n d o n t o the tim er, if that m a k e s s e n s e .
Stone
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 140
From :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All you have to do is have the tim er output to a relay and have the 6V th rough the relay to the igniter. You just have to go to
an electronics store and get a relay that will trigger with only 1.5V and a very low current.
Macgyver April 5th, 2003, 12:02 PM

W hy not go for some AN/NM a nd a HMTD cap to get it going?
Such a small thing lik e a Dogshit bin p r o b a b l y d o e s n ' t n e e d m ore than a sodacan full of the stuff, maybe an half will do.
C o u p l e o f d a ys ago I blew up a laptop computer that pissed me off too long. W ith about 20g of AN/NM and a HMTD cap.
You could ha rdly tell it once was a laptop computer after that :D
I_am_the_Black_one April 27th, 2003, 01:59 AM

W as the laptop a APPLE?:D
Macgyver April 28th, 2003, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by I_am _the _Black_o n e
W as the laptop a APPLE?:D
No, that'd be one BAD apple then. Actualla a Thinkpad 560 with no floppy, no cdrom , brok en display.....
And now dispersed in molecules around the bla stsite :D (Well, actually sm all shra pnel, the charge was pretty sm all).
hinz S e p t e m b e r 2 1st, 2004, 05:37 PM

I have blown one up in Switzerland,we say them r o b i d o g , I u s e d 4 0 0 g o f A P .
I filled it in a m arm elade glass whitch was surrouded of nails and ignited with a candle. Th e box was tead in several pieces with
a lot of holes in it (nails are very funny). Please don't use a candle, use a electrical detonator, it's safer, but we didn't have
s o m ething like that.
SweNMFan October 7th, 2004, 07:56 PM

I have blown one up in Switzerland,we say them r o b i d o g , I u s e d 4 0 0 g o f A P .
I filled it in a m arm elade glass whitch was surrouded of nails and ignited with a candle.
Are you suicidal or? 400g AP in a glass jar AND nails.. think that you using a candle was th e l e a s t d a n g e r o u s t h i n g . .
nbk2000 October 8th, 2004, 12:46 PM

Sounds like a prime candidate for a dog tag! :D

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Special design for remote det.
Log in
View Full Version : Special design for remote det.
Tuatara February 28th, 2003, 12:27 AM

It seems there may be a need for forum members to have access to a purpose designed radio control device, to assist with
their research <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> .
Being an EE, I could design such a system, and supply plans (for free), PCBs, kits or fully built systems. This is not an attempt
by me to make shit loads of money, parts will be supplied at cost, though I may need to add a little something for a fully
assembled system to cover my time. I don't think this is against the Rules is it?
So what do you guys want?
Range?
Frequency?
Output type?
Safety interlocks?
Anthony has already mentioned having two outputs, one delayed, so a warning could sound say 5-10 secs before the second
output 'activates'. Piezo sounder could be built in.
Interlock could be a 3.5mm phono plug on a string - system is active only when plug is removed.
LED telltales on the outputs would probably be a good idea - so you KNOW the output is off before your attach your, umm,
equipment.

Good idea starting a new thread. You're not breaking the rules as you're providing your skills and services to theforum, adding
something to cover your time is quite acceptable.
Range: I'd say 100m minimum in a wooded/urban environment i.e. non-line-of-sight. 500m should be achievable on a few
deci-watts of output power with a decent areial.
Frequency: If possible not one swamped by other devices. Maybe an unused or reserved FM band?
Output: Since people will likely mount the PCB in their own case, it might be easiest if the outputs and inputs (including
interlock/master switch) are surface mounted screw terminal block type connectors. People could then use whatever switches/
interlocks/IO connections they wish.
IMO the unit should operate from 6-12vdc, allowing the use of lattern batteries, 6&12v gel cells, cars, and model car nicd/nimh
packs.
The output could be low current to drive a relay of the user's choice. Aux car relays are cheap and good for 40A. Integrating
one into the PCB would require some hefty tracks though! If a relay is included then current handling should be at least 10A
IMO with a fused input to prevent blown tracks. A standard mains fuse would make replacements easily sourced.
Output status LEDs would be useful, as would a firing circuit continuity LED.
I suppose what I should ask is whether you're looking to provide an entire blasting machine that does everything, or a RC
blasting machine driver which just provides a control signal?
Maybe it would simplify mounting if the LEDs/switches were on flying leads?
The main power I/O could also be on flying leads or on terminal blocks, like I mentioned above. Either way it allows people to
use their preferred terminations. Be it terminal posts or spring clips mounted on their box, or flying leads with croc clips. Ditto
input, croc clips for generic input, or crimped spades/rings or nicd pack connector for a permanently installed battery.
I've probably made this over complex, so I'll clear the floor and let someone else speak :)

Thanks for the reassurance re the Rules :)
Your suggestions are not complex! You should see some of the specs I have to deal with in my line of work :rolleyes:
More! More!
Lets get a real wish list going! The more information I have the better the end result will be. The whole point is to have some
very happy (and intact :D ) forum members out there.
How about a self-destruct output (triggered by the remote) that could initate a high temp incendairy to remove the evidence
should things become ... awkward.
One could also add a 'disable' output that blows a fuse in line with the battery, in case the experiment fails to fire.
Would you like to operate multiple recievers from one transmitter?
Incidentally, operating out of line-of-sight might be a little risky.
As for frequency, every country has free unlicensed band for such things as garage door openers and car alarms. You can tx
anything you like as long as you dont use more than 10mW. Though upsetting the FCC is probably the least of your worries
Typical bands are 305, 315, 433, 460, 860, 868 MHz I can cater for all.

What about having a re-useable receiver that could be placed say 10m from the charge and was connected to it with wires.
This would stop you from having to make a new one each time as the wires would be damaged but hopefully the receiver
wouldn't.
It would save having to use large lengths of wire for electris ignition, e.g. the receiver is 10m from the charge, you are 100m
from the charge and you don't need to use 100m of wire.
Because the receiver is close to the charge, there is still some chance of it being damaged but it is much better to put the
receiver at risk than yourself.
[ February 28, 2003, 04:38 AM: Message edited by: xyz ]
Flake2m February 28th, 2003, 08:08 AM

Why not have a circuit that uses a DTMF sequence so you could use a phone to set the device off? All you'd have to do is ring
the receiver and then key in a 4 digit number and then BOOM.
This system is a bit more desirable because you dont need to make a transmitter. The receiver would need to have a decent
range though, about 100m is good.

The general idea is that the reciever is reusable :)
One thing I forgot to mention in my first post was about the warning alarm - you could include a piezo buzzer on the PCB, but
it'd be nice to have that and/or the facility to connect an external alarm, as I was thinking of using something like a car/shed
alarm siren. I would trust being able to hear a buzzer when I could be 10 yards away, near the charge on a windy day. Plus it'd
be nice to hear it from your firing position to assure you that the charge is indeed going to go off in 5 seconds.
When you say that operating out of LOS, do you mean in terms of radio reception? If you meant not being able to see if
someone had wandered into your blast site, then it's not a major issue as somone shouldn't be able to do so whether you can
see them or not...
I don't think I'd use a self-destruct option, but other people might find it useful.
Could the emergency battery isolater function be done with a relay/transistor rather than a fuse? I'm thinking of something
with a NO and to turn the relay back on and thus power the circuit again would require power on the circuit side of the failsafe,
which obviously there can't be. On second thought, a fuse would be a lot simpler and they're not exactly hard to find or
expensive and would only need replacing in rare circumstances!
Multiple transmiter channels would be good - a modular system :)
Incidentally, could the firing delay be adjustable? In some circumstances it would be desirable to have no delay, where precise
timing is required, say for special FX or firework pieces. This in conjuction with multiple recievers might be good for things like
FAEs. Have the bursting charge set to zero delay and the cloud detonator set to 0.1sec, and pressing both buttons on the
transmitter at once.
I don't really give a stuff about the FCC and I doubt anyone else here does :D Considering these things would be used for
<1 second every other week or longer, I doubt the FCC would care much either. IMO cram as powerful transmitter into it as
you feasible or as much power as can be drawn from a few AA cells. Would a few watts enable you to fire from the comfort of
your living room? :D
Tuatara February 28th, 2003, 04:39 PM

Flake2m : I see what your getting at, however the 'receiver' would then need to be a cellular modem ($$$$$) or part of a
cordless phone.
The whole point of this thread is to spec up a purpose designed radio control system - there is already a thread about using
OTC parts.
BTW transmitters are just as easy to build as receivers!
Anthony: The emergency shutdown needs to be reliable, which is why I thought a 10c fuse in line with the batt. As you say, it
should only be needed occaisionally.
Delay could be programmable - thats the advantage of using a microcontroller - you can do practically anything without
changing the hardware.
One could go for more tx power, though more benefit would probably be gained from a better antenna. More power = $
I was think LOS from a safety perpective, though getting UHF to go over hills can be problematic. You'll get best range LOS.
[ February 28, 2003, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Tuatara ]
Machiavelli February 28th, 2003, 05:04 PM

In case of an emergency shutdown, I'd like a good indicator that the shutdown has really happened, like a bright LED or a loud
buzzer.
green beret February 28th, 2003, 09:49 PM

Yes! Definately, I would be very interested in purchasing this. I would be happy with a 100m non line of sight range and a
reusable reciever. Apart from that I wouldnt really want anything fancy, just a good reliable system. Good work Tuatara. But
whatever you come up with, put me down for one! Anthonys post would be an ideal system, yes, wouldnt it be fun to fire
charges from your living room! :D It would give you an aliby too. Umm I was at home.....
[ February 28, 2003, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: green beret ]
Energy84 February 28th, 2003, 11:15 PM

Anthony has pretty much covered everything I'd ever want in a system. Good work Tuatara. Put me on the list for beta testing
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> :D
NightStalker March 1st, 2003, 01:27 AM

I would make the detonator controller independant of any receiver. This means that the controller should be designed to be
connected to any device capable of receiving a signal, regardless of type, as long as it is a unique signal. It's purpose would
be to process the incoming signal, determine if it was a valid control command, and if so carry out the command.
For instance, the controller would have screwdown terminal posts, to which can be connected any number of adapters, such as
alligator clips/banana jacks/phono plugs/etc. This would allow it to be connected to pagers, cellphones, FRS radios, CB's,
phonelines, etc.
Adding the ability to secure the controller against premature initiation would be desirable too. For audio inputs (like walkie-
talkies) it would be DTMF (programmable via dip switch or PIC). For non-audio like pager, it could be receiving two seperate
pages within a fixed time interval. Maybe even a pulse coded flash from a modulated laser pointer could be arranged.
A timer, both to arm the controller (safety), and to disarm (self-destruct?) if left behind, would be required. Optional anti-
handling circuitry would be nice to to render it useless if one was forced to flee and leave it behind because of impending
contact with police.
LOS is highly limiting. I'd rather be behind something substantial, like a hill or building, if I was setting off a large charge. And
what about indoors? Lots of abandoned buildings provide useful target practice if you have a controller that'll operate in such
an enviroment.
You'd want (ideally) highly directional to prevent signal intercept by scanners with nothing better to do. You'd want something
readily available to anyone, regardless of location in the world (Forumites being global), and that can be made from readily
obtainable parts purchasable in person from major chain suppliers like Rat-Shack (to avoid mail-order papertrails).
2.4GHz cordless phones and FRS radios are available anywhere, for cheap (or stealable), they offer DTMF possibility, decent
range (my FRS goes at least 1/2 mile through two concrete block buildings), and are readily modifiable.
Status indicators would be good too. Be nice to know if the device was "ticking" when approaching a dud charge. Be very nice if
the indicator panel was removable so you could leave the controller behind with no visible indicator of status to help people
who might have contrary interests in not letting your device complete its function.
Multiple charge control would be very nice. :) Push 1 on your DTMF controller to set off charge #1, push 2 for....etc.
A PCB pattern would be great, but so would a wire wrap or perf board diagram for those who'd rather not etch a board (or
solder). If you're offering to sell these, I'd be wary of buying it. Not only are you new here, but it could be considered arms
trafficing, since it's intended and stated purpose is to control destructive devices and would be sent internationally.
Better for everyone involved if you post a "dream" of what you built for your own personal use, and just happened to share
with everyone else here. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
In other words, teach us how to catch our own fish, rather than selling us the fish. :)
Terry Collins March 1st, 2003, 07:01 AM

Building remote detonation devices is easy. Making it SAFE is HARD.
You need a device which shows what's happening: power on? receiving signal? relay closed etc.
Go to the topic 'remote detonations' and you'll find such a device.

Also cheap and easy.
Dunkelmann March 1st, 2003, 10:12 AM

another idea for remote ignitions would be to use a relay that has an ethernet port. such relays are used in home or industrial
automation and are readily available at moderate prices. you could use it to ignite stuff via the Internet from every point of
the world.
or use it with a Wireless LAN accesspoint and a PDA or a Laptop.
this should give you a few hundred meters in the open, plus you can always make sure that the receiver is still reachable as
the receiver can transmit information back to you.
the software would be something like Blaster Professional 2003 (yet to be written:))
if the receiver and transmitter are both microprocessor controlled, then the use of a module this one like
<a href="http://wireless.troygroup.com/wireless/documents/datasheets/TROYEtherWindPlus.pdf" target="_blank">http://
wireless.troygroup.com/wireless/documents/datasheets/TROYEtherWindPlus.pdf</a>
is possible.
dkm
[ March 01, 2003, 09:21 AM: Message edited by: Dunkelmann ]
zaibatsu March 1st, 2003, 06:45 PM

Just wanted to say that this is a very interesting new topic.
I wouldn't be prepared to buy a PCB etc from you, but would be prepared to make an anon donation for the plans.
Tuatara March 1st, 2003, 11:58 PM

Nightstalker I appreciate your comment on shipping a remote detonator controller internationally, but thats not what it will be
It will be a 'radio controlled switch' transmitting in the unlicensed control band, for use in gate openers, garage door
controllers, lighting control, or whatever else the end user decides to connect to the terminals :D .
Radio will not be limited to LOS, but one must be aware that mountains will reduce your range.
zaibatsu - sentiment appreciated. I was planning on making the design available gratis to the forum. Just cos' I'm a nice guy!
Mr Collins (i hope thats not your real name!) I know making these things safe is hard. Thats why I thought of doing a special
design, as opposed to cobbling something together out of dismantled doorbells. Rest assured I will do a LOT of testing before
anyone here gets hold of my design. FYI Ive been a professional engineer for 15 years - doing hardware and software. I'll
keep you safe!
Tuatara March 2nd, 2003, 02:08 AM

Of course! I can even do a 48 bit encrypted, rolling code system!

Ah! Nightstalker I just figured out wht you meant about me being new here - I could be a spook infiltrating the forum, trying to
locate its members and advance the war against terrorism. Fair comment. I'm not, but such an assertion counts for zip. There
is no way for me to prove who I am without putting myself at risk.
So I'll do this as a 'Shareware' project, and provide assistance to builders via the forum
angelo March 2nd, 2003, 05:52 AM

Multiple channels would be good.
But for those of us that might not want to use it for testing would most probably be looking at a cheaper yet easily
manufactured product.
I don't mean cheap as in unreliable, but if you could cut out some components that aren't required e.g instant detonation (no
need for a timer), no alarms, etc, etc. It would lower the cost of the end product.
Maybe a very easily customizable option would be the way to go. Were we could choose the components we want. If we want
timers, or alarms, or multiple channels we can connect them.
Don't get me wrong. I like the idea. Just that some of us don't have a lot of money to spend, so if this costs say $40 a
receiver, then we can't exactly make a shit load of them.
Titanium March 2nd, 2003, 01:41 PM

I would be interrested too.
But there would be nice with some sort of warning when the charge is "armed"...

I don't mind some extra features that I'd likely never or hard ever use as long as they didn't bump up the price too much.
The extra flexibility might come in handy.
If the device runs around a programable micro, extra features might only cost a few extra pennies as most of the changes
would be done in code using previously redundant capabilities of the micro.
For the dud emergency power down, the firing siren could sound for say 5 sec before blowing the fuse. Obviously when you
hear the siren stop you know all is well.
Dunkelmann, I think an ethernet - dynamite adapter would be an entirely different device, but Tuatara can confirm/deny that.
NightStalker, How could a highly directional device operate effectively in non-LOS? Who would be scanning an unrestricted
frequency and what would they do with your unrecognisable signal that only existed for <1 sec?
Since a few people have raised issues concerning price, could you guesstimate a likely ballpark figure for this device, Tuatara?
BTW, I would be happy to purchase a complete 'radio controlled switch' from you <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" />
Tuatara March 4th, 2003, 06:34 PM

Anthony is right about extra features - mostly they come free if they merely involve changes in timings, id codes etc.
Ethernet and wireless LAN is another beast altogether, worth consideration though, esp for a big PC controlled pyro display!
Off the top of my head, based on the parts I have ready access to, cost would be about NZ$10 for a transmitter with 4
buttons, and about NZ$15 for the reciever, with flying leads and no relays. Screw terminals are nice, but a bit pricey when a bit
of PVC covered wire will do the same job. I've left the relays off, as the consensus seems to be 'let the user choose'. NZ$1 ~
US$0.55 at the moment.
This guesstimate is based on parts I can procure by skimming off bulk purchases. Individuals wlaking into their local
electronics store could expect to double or triple the price. Yes, thats right, retail is a total rip-off.
Scanners are not a problem - the transmission only lasts for 1 second or less. For the same reason radio direction finding
equip could not be used to find the transmitter location

"NightStalker, How could a highly directional device operate effectively in non-LOS? Who would be scanning an unrestricted
frequency and what would they do with your unrecognisable signal that only existed for under 1 sec?"
Directional antennas can focus a signal, which is of a frequency capable of penetrating obstacles or bouncing off the
atmosphere, for non-LOS control. 2.4GHz systems are rather directional, but are capable of going through walls, hence not
LOS in the sense of needing a clear path with NO intervening obstacles like walls.
Scanner freaks listen in on all sorts of freqs for whatever purpose. Assume someone is listening in, and recording, anything
you broadcast. While they may not know what it is at the time, if they hear that a bomb was set off at the same time as they
heard some unrecognisable signal on an unrestricted frequency, than might they not put one and one together?
And who knows what the cops/feds might be able to do with that info. Transmitter "fingerprinting" has been done since WW2,
so they might be able to use any such recorded signals to match a controller they find in your possession, connecting you to
the explosion.
I'd want any dud warning to be silent lest it reveal its presence and be discovered and recovered.
A rolling code system to prevent accidential functioning by nearby transmitters, or pre-mature functioning by ECM (like the brits
did to the IRA bombers), would be desirable, if cost isn't too prohibitive. I'd assume some sort of modifying of a car-alarm or
garage door opener system?
I'd like my R/C system to be capable of being useable as a weapon controller, in "interesting times", as well as a general
purpose blasting box the rest of the time. Hence the rather militaristic features desired. 'Course, a person would be prepared
to pay more for these extra features. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
"Screw terminals are nice, but a bit pricey when a bit of PVC covered wire will do the same job."
True, but the screw terminals will never wear out, whereas the wire will eventually fray and have to be trimmed down, eventually
being used up, especially since it's likely someone would be keeping this device for years and not as a one-time use item.
Ever done any telco work? I've got some ideas for some circuits if you'd like to try something different.
angelo March 5th, 2003, 02:12 AM

Ok so we have the estimated price. Now if its not to much to ask what is the estimated size?
Is it possible to make it using multiple circular PCB boards so that it could fit into the end of say... a pipe?
[ March 05, 2003, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: angelo ]
Tuatara March 5th, 2003, 02:35 AM

I was thinking rolling code already - I've got a license for the Microchip system. This uses a 32 bit rolling code, with a 28 bit
fixed serial number, encrypted with a 64 bit key. Rather hard to spoof I'd say. It has four button inputs so you can tx up to 15
codes.
I only suggest flying leads off the pcb as most people will want to put the thing in a nice box with big, juicy binding posts on
the out side. PCB mount screw terminals cost about a buck a terminal.
Angelo, your size spec is a little ... vague. Is this a 6 foot culvert pipe, or 15mm conduit? I can go very small, but construction
becomes harder. 0402 size components are about as big as a grain of sand, they can be hand assembled (I've done it) but if
you sneeze its all over! I think I could get this thing into a matchbox fairly readily, on a single board.
What sort of telco work, Nightstalker? (sorry thats probably way off topic)
zeocrash March 5th, 2003, 03:40 PM

Sound's cool. i was wondering about the anti tamper devices though. I used to be a cadet, and during my career as a cadet we
had a lecture from major somebody of the RAF bomb disposal unit. Apparently small bombs are no longer difused by "cutting
the green wire" rather a device similar to a shotgun is placed next to it and fires water through it at hich speed, ripping the
bomb apart. this would negate the effectiveness of anti tamper devices. I think anti tamper devices would just make the bomb
more dangerous to the user. If you want to be sure that the bomb does not get taken complete, you could put the anti
tamper devices in (tilt switches etc). but not connect them to the circuit, this would make the bomb apper like it requires the
water blast treatment when the bomb disposal team do an x ray of it. meaning that they destroy most of the bomb, should all
other self distruct devices fail to work.
by the way put my name down for one of these

I'd be assuming that you're biggest threat of discovery would be from a dog-walker. The anti-handling would take care of that
problem. Not blowing 'em up, but burning up the control box so they can't take it to the cops.
Telco work being work for a telecommunications company (a Bell) or work with phone equipment like the wiring boxes that
service a neighborhood, phones and NIDs, and all that.
Tuatara March 6th, 2003, 02:31 AM

No, I've not worked with that sort of co. I've done the odd modem though. Whats your idea?
Additional security against casual removal could be as simple as big steel spike to hold the receiver, at least the thing wouldn't
convert to molten slag in someones hand.
Anthony March 6th, 2003, 06:34 AM

This isn't a dig, but if the equipment did come with antihandling boobytraps, I would probably disable them. IMO the risk of
personal injury or accidental equipment loss outweighs the advantages.
If a dog walker can stumble across your reciever when you've retreated to fire it, then you've failed to secure the perimeter of
your blasting area. Or at least failed to make sufficient checks before starting the firing procedure.

Something that could be hooked up to a phone line to either re-route calls (either all calls, or only those being made to
certain numbers) to another number, without the person calling knowing that their call was being re-routed. Or, play a pre-
recorded message of your choosing.
For instance, someone calls 999 and gets re-routed to a number with a recording telling them "all lines are busy, try again
later." :p
I've seen something like this in a catalog for about $50, but it won't block 999, nor do anything more than play the one
message it's programmed with.
Ideally, the device could be attached to a switch box that controls the phones for a small area, allowing you to lock out any
calls for police help in that area, without stopping calls to any other number. Just the thing to have while blasting, so you've
got time to get your stuff packed up and gone, before anyone figures out the reason why they can't call 999 is because the
phones have been buggered. :)
As for the dog walkers...yes, I'd do a check first, but you have to plan for failure, eh? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" /> At least if the AH is built-in, you have the option to disable them...better to have it and not need it, than to
need it and not have it.
Skean Dhu March 7th, 2003, 05:45 PM

few suggestions
personally i'd rather spend the extra $2 on the screw terminals on the reciever just for reliability's sake
also, I propose few frilly options, firing circut continuity check (ie an LED or 2), signal confirmation for when your non-LOS or
going through a hill, a 'saftey' switch on the transmitter to lower risk of premature signal transmission, and finally on the
reciever have it close a circut to a provided powersource so the user can decide how many volts they want/need to use based
on the device they are using.that way we don't have to always use 6v or 9v
i would be happy to make a donation to the development of the gate opener.
[ March 07, 2003, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: Skean Dhu ]
Jhonbus March 8th, 2003, 12:58 AM

All this talk of safety override options gets me thinking about perhaps having the simpler (and safer) solution of having to
hold the transmit button down for a time (perhaps 5 seconds) to detonate the charge. This would avoid inadvertent
detonation, and allow the detonation to be aborted simply by releasing the button. This idea has fail-safe written all over it.
Also I think the utility to have multiple charges set off from one signal, with a programmable delay in between would be
useful.

Jhonbus, having just a simple '5 second press' requirement on the trigger button is not safe at all, what happens if something
presses on the button while you are returning to your safe zone? This can, and will, happen!! It is far better to have a separate
key that can lock off the transmitter, and be removed while the transmitter is not actually in use. The '5-second' delay
approach is still very useful from the 'instant abort' perspective - I'd thought of adding something like that myself, but I still
think you need a physical lock on the transmitter.
Nightstalker, I suspect you would have great trouble diverting 999 calls, as I believe the phone exchange handles these
differently, making interception impossible without actually putting something into the exchange itself - mission impossible I'd
say. I think most of the call diverters are meant to sit on the end of a subscribers line, and send divert messages back to the
exchange - don't ask me how, I don't know. You may be able to mount something equivalent to a DNS attack by flooding the
exchange with calls, but I don't like your chances.
gecko March 10th, 2003, 05:47 AM

hello all,
I was just thinking that the safety switches that some people want fitted into the transmitter would be more expensive. As the
transmitter should be reusable.
Now screw on terminals would mean guaranteed connection but the option should be there to not have them installed.
Now if the plan for the receiver was really easy to customise, then that would mean that the person making the receiver could
choose whether or not to have screw on terminals, or extra safety devices.
But like they say, you've got to spend money to make money.
So it really depends on what your using this for. For those of us that are testing our newest concoction out in the field, it would
be alright for the receiver to be a little bit more expensive, as we can install longer wires so we can bury the receiver a couple
of meters away so the receiver would live through the test.
Yet those of us that will connect the receiver to a charge that is to allow us entry into a building then we would want the receiver
to go bye-byes with the charge. So would it be possible to have the design to be easily changed to accomodate our different
requirements.
So in other words, I am interested.

I've just found that Maxim do a couple of ISM band chips (868MHz Europe, 900MHz US) witha transmit power of 200mW. Thats
enough for a range of 1 mile. Ideal for the larger experiments ...

Excellent!
Personally, I don't like the idea of a fire button that you must hold for ~ 5 seconds. The suspense would kill me, and it makes
timing a detonation (for entertainment, or with a thunder clap etc) difficult.

So, lets add 'programmable firing delay' to the wish list :) . Should be easy enough to do.
Energy84 March 17th, 2003, 12:06 AM

So what's the estimated cost of this thing so far? Seems like it ain't gonna be cheap by a long shot! <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />
spydamonkee March 17th, 2003, 03:03 AM

Energy try actually reading that thread and you will come across the estimated costs in nz dollars :D
As a fellow Kiwi I Would be very interested in purchasing one of your setups as the next dream looks like a very large CANFO
charge 100kg's or so :D
could have used this thing when i detonated my 10kg CANFO that way i wouldnt have got covered in sand :(..
i would mainly want the device to be Safe, Simple & Reliable with the option of charge delays as mentioned.
0EZ0 March 17th, 2003, 07:06 AM

Well I have to say this all sounds pretty damn interesting!
Remote ignition would be somewhat more professional than the old 'light and run' method.
I've had no personal experience with any remote type electrical firing sytem. But it seems that it would be alot more
convenient than any mechanical firing system for experimental use.
Hell, I could see use for this in a new years pyro display. Such a unit would be quite versatile.
I've had some recent experience using electrical firing for pyro pieces, and instantaneous ignition is quite a plus. You can
almost throw away that old feeling of imminent disaster if a problem arises. Although you would certainly have to have a
arming key on the transmitter to avoid new issues that come along with an electrical firing approach.
All this looks very promising. I'll keep an eye open for any progress :) .
[ March 17, 2003, 06:08 AM: Message edited by: 0EZ0 ]
jarrod March 17th, 2003, 08:22 AM

Energy84 cost would be about NZ$10 for a transmitter with 4 buttons, and about NZ$15 for the receiver
Yes this is interesting and I am most likely to purchase one (for my garage of corse <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" /> ) Earlier you referred to size, I think I could get this thing into a matchbox fairly readily, on a single board
with 0402 sized parts. Were you referring to the transmitter or the receiver? If the transmitter could be made to fit into a
matchbox using a ballpoint pen or small rod of some description to operate the buttons, this would make concealment easy.
If you were referring to the receiver is it possible to get the transmitter this size, if not what would be the smallest size?
And yes I understand the annoyance in working with very small objects, so a larger fee for assembling shall not be a problem
:p
BoB- March 17th, 2003, 10:26 AM

Okay, first off, the self destruct mechanism is no good, what if a dog walker or even a ranger is walking by, you manage to
hide the transmitter, and tell him your just off for a walk. Seconds later a massive cloud of smoke erupts beside you and
some brush ignites. Even if they dont find the main charge you'd still be charged with arson.
And what if you just plain screw up? Sure you built it but we're all only human, and the more complex the task, the more we're
prone to fail. Simple as that.
If you eliminate the James Bond bullshit, you could cut the price in half, enabling you ditch it if you make a mistake and draw
heat. You can also eliminate many electrical safetys by improving procedure. The area should be scouted to ensure its not
patroled, and the charge should be buried to help eliminate shrapnel.
All the safetys could be replaced by a toggle and 2 9v battery connections;
<img src="http://www.networkcable.com/images/batthldrs_snaps/sbatsnap_hard.jpg" alt=" - " />
The power to the toggle is routed through the battery connections, when connecting the charge to the receiver, these battery
connections are seperated, then when ready to fire, the connections are snapped together, and the toggle flipped, then the
firing switch pressed. Safe, reliable, and costs about $2 American dollars.
Damnt, I gotta go work. So just remember this; Is it flashy and professional? Or reliable and cheap? No more James Bond
stuff.
Ezekiel Kane March 17th, 2003, 02:03 PM

Very true, BoB-, cut down on as many expenses as possible without compromising safety - why not? We're not 00 agents, and
are secure enough that we don't need the flashy setup just to blow something up.
zeocrash March 17th, 2003, 03:13 PM

i think one problem here is that the recievers cost more than the transmitters, this may not seem like a problem, but consider
that the reciever is the part of the system that is most likely to get destroyed. i would suggest that most features be part of
the transmitters, and the recievers only have what they really need in them, ignitor circuit, and the special code deely chip. all
other features go in the handset.

Let me address the issue of 'James Bond' type features. This will all be up to the user!! What I'm intending to design will be a
couple of PCBs, one a transmitter with a bunch of connections for buttons, one a reciever with a bunch of connections to drive
relays, or whatever your please. If you want to forgo all the fancy shit, like keyswitches, delays, self-destruct etc etc, then thats
up to you :D . If you like that sort of stuff, then the facility will be there to add those things <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> .
I will try to make the design as generic and low cost as possible, without compromising the reliablitiy of the radio link - which
to my mind is the most essential element.
With programability in mind, I'm thinking a simple RS232 interface to your PC, with some Visual Basic code to program all the
options. The interface on the radio gear will simply be a couple of pins connected to the mircocontroller - very cheap and
simple. This is real easy to do, in fact it is exactly what I'm doing with the vehicle alarm I'm working on.
Jarrod, I think maybe a couple of different board designs might be in order so folks can pick the cost / size / difficulty ratio
they prefer. If you want to conceal your transmitter I'd suggest gutting a cheap/old cellphone and using that as the case -
heck, it even comes with a keypad , 900MHz antenna, and battery!
Ezekiel Kane March 18th, 2003, 03:23 PM

I like the idea of using a phone as the transmitter case. Very inconspicuous - if you use a DTMF chip to decode the detonation
signal on the receiver, there's a bonus there as well. Simply set the receiver to accept a multiple digit detonation signal, and
dial it into your transmitter. It looks just like you're making a call. I'm quite interested in what you turn up with on these PCBs.
chemwarrior March 21st, 2003, 08:30 PM

Tuatara, it looks like your really on to something! Features galore, put me down for the best you can make. I may never use
a particular feature, but if I need it, I want to have it ready! What do you think the price range for an 'ultimate' would be? Do
know that things like screw plugs are a must- I dont want to have to tear it apart to add more wire. Also, the reciever and
transmitter must be easily transportable, concealable, etc.
So, can you make an 'Ultimate', and what would the cost range be? There is no limit to how much Im willing to spend (well,
yeah their is, but...) but I want the best that you can design. Includin' any 007 type things you can come up with. :D (Once
again, I want EVERYTHING :D )
[ March 21, 2003, 07:32 PM: Message edited by: chemwarrior ]

Oi! I might just give up my day job :D So we've got the likes of Bob and Ezekiel who would like a bare bones, dirt cheap
version; Jarrod who would like everything really tiny; And Chemwarrior who'd like the Rolls Royce/ MI6 version !
Lets see if it really is possible to please all the people all the time!
Chemwarrior whats your idea of 'ultimate'? I think a lot of the fancy stuff like delays, sequencing, multiple receivers etc is
easily handled in software, so there shouldn't be any additional cost (apart from my hair). I'm still cruising about (when I have
time) looking at parts which should be cheap / available (nothing made from unobtainium!) I'm thinking of using the
PIC16F84 processor - its very popular, theres lots of cheap programming gear, the MPLAB development software is free from
Microchip, so those who are so inclined can easily modify my code or write their own. If this chip is too expensive in your neck
of the woods let me know - I might be able to swing a quantity discount or something.
Price for the 'ultimate'? I can't see it going over US$30 each end - that would buy a LOT of hardware.
Mr Cool March 22nd, 2003, 07:42 AM

I think I'd like a fairly simple push button --> "BANG" design, but with as much protection from interference and other
safety features as possible. I'll have to read this thread more thoroughly some time and make a list of features that would
interest me...
Any possibility of having an EBW circuit integrated into the reciever? 2kV with 5J or so of stored energy, with the lowest
inductance, lowest resistance, fastest switching mechanism possible.
In fact I'd be interested in one of those without the radio stuff, with just a lead going to a button to fire it, and some coax out
the other side to the det. I'm not an expert at electronics and everything I put together seems to break itself sooner or later
:(.
chemwarrior March 22nd, 2003, 03:11 PM
Christmas is commin' early this year :D
Tuatara, I dont have time right this second to write down features of what I would like, but I'll try and e-mail you tonight with
some of the specs.
Also, what do you have in mind for safety features? I heard you meantion a 'key-ignition' sercurity feature of some form?
Edit- Its not that Im trying to be vain or anything , I would just much prefer to have everything I could possibly want all
together, instead of having to have adaptors or other devices. :D
[ March 22, 2003, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: chemwarrior ]
Tuatara March 23rd, 2003, 05:30 PM

Mr Cool, can you point me in the direction of some info on EBW dets? I can understand the energy requirement ( 5J is fairly
modest), but not the voltage requirement. Things get a lot harder / pricier once you go over 1kV. I used to desgin electric
fence energisers - the biggest could pump 36J into a 30 Ohm load, peak output V was 10kV. And it did this every 1.5 seconds!
This sounds like a separate project to me.
Anthony March 23rd, 2003, 07:27 PM

An EBW module would be good. Personally I'd prefer it as a seperate unit, it could simply sit between the main reciever output
and the blasting cap. Taking the high current output from the reciever as a trigger.
Terry Collins April 6th, 2003, 08:34 AM

There seems to be a lot of electronic know-how around here and I don't want to start a new topic so I'll just ask: I use this
garagedoor opener to safely and remotely open my garage doors :) but the transmitter has a limited range: only up to a 100
meters.
The frequency it operated on is 433,19 MHz and it's probably digitally coded (but maybe DTMF).
Now, is there a simple way to increase the range of the transmitter?
For example by using a different atenna? Longer, shorter, 1/4 wavelength ?
Or can I direct all the EM waves by using special antenna so instead of transmittig the signal in all directions, it's directed in
the way you point the transmitter so this would not waste any power and would increase the range significantly.
Also maybe there is a way to copy the signal and sent it out with a stronger transmitter?
Tuatara April 6th, 2003, 08:58 PM

That question is not strictly on-topic for this thread, but its real easy to answer so I don't mind <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
First off - it wont be DTMF! More likely to be On/Off keyed Manchester code.
I would stake large amounts of cash that the antenna in your remote is a 'loop' antenna, printed on the circuit board. These
are notoriously poor antennas, but they have two saving virtues - they're small, and they are not much affected by hand
proximity.
A better antenna will certainly increase your range, try a 1/2 wave folded dipole, as it should have an impedance of about 300
ohm. Simply sticking on a long bit of wire won't necessarily make things better. The key is impedance match - make
impedance of your antenna match your transmitter, otherwise all that yummy RF gets bounced straight back into your
transmitter, and ends up as heat. You can get directionality using a Yagi antenna - more elements = more forward gain, more
directivity.
You can add an RF amplifier to the output of your transmitter, but I'd build a better antenna first - you will get more bang for
your buck.
Now go surf the web for antenna design tutorials! :D
Haggis April 6th, 2003, 09:44 PM

If any of you have an established blasting zone, wouldn't it be simple to rig the area with a proximity sensor? I have a relative
that designed an electric gate to open whenever somebody or something tripped what he called a 'loop detector'. This way,
when something trips the loop, a relay in the reciever is flipped over so the final detonation cannot be preformed. When this
happens, a signal could be transmitted back to the transmitter signaling that, yes, something is in the area. If this is not line
of site, I can see where this can be helpful. I was thinking a 50'x50' area with the wire buried 3-4" underground. 50 feet
should be enough for all but the largest blasts to protect both the clueless people who wander close, and the wire from being
broken or uprooted.
kryfo April 6th, 2003, 10:57 PM

I'm of a mind with Chemwarrior, I'm definitely interested, and would want the most possible features. Heck, I'd rather spend
more money once, and have any feature I could possibly ever use, rather than spend a bit now, then find out I need another
feature, and spend some more, and so on and so forth... So definitely count me in on the super duper 007 model!
jarrod April 7th, 2003, 04:13 AM

Tuatara - just enquiring to what stage of development/testing you are at. By no means Im I asking you speed up you design,
just trying to foresee an approximate production month/year.
Slow and Steady wins the race <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Tuatara April 7th, 2003, 04:39 AM
Sadly (or not depending on your point of view)I'm a very busy boy just now. Got a big deadline to meet or my current project
gets the plug pulled - urgh! hate working nights and weekends :mad: .
On the bright side it looks as though the next project will be using the ISM band (868MHz) so I think I may adapt that to our
purposes.
I know its been a while since I (foolishly?) volunteered to do this, hopefully I'll get into it in the next few months.
Please be patient, I promise I'll get there in plenty of time for Christmas <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /
>
chemwarrior April 14th, 2003, 11:51 AM

Tuatara, I e-maild you recently with some of the specs? Did you not get my e-mail or something? If so, Ill re-write everything
and re-mail it to you.

No, nothing turned up in my mail. How long ago? Could have been anti-spammed?
nbk2000 April 15th, 2003, 05:16 AM

MwuahahaHAHAHAA!
Fear my elite skillz! I have made an R/C circuit that uses <$10 of parts (per unit) from radio-shack, and will work with any
walkie-talkie you can plug it into!
No vaporware from me!
:D
I'll post pictures in the next day or so. I'll even attempt to draw a schematic, but I don't promise anything, since I can't even
solder. :p
In the meantime, you'll need to buy a 741 op-amp IC, a 2N2222 diode, a 10K variable resistor, 470 resistor (yellow, violet,
brown), 4.7K resistor (yellow, violet, red), plus a relay, 9v battery snap, and a mono phono plug to fit whatever you're going to
be plugging it into.
I've been testing it using an FRS radio. Range is limited to however far you can get your radio to receive your transmission. My
line of sight is limited to two blocks (hills), so I couldn't test further than that with my current setup since my "detonator" is a
bright LED, but it works at least that far.
No DTMF tone coding, or other fancy shit, but it's easy to throw together in a pinch and you can add a time delay to prevent
"scoring an own goal". ;)
Next objective is to add a sensor that'll plug into the VOX mic jack to either let you know when the target is within range, let
you listen in, or even just for remote counting.
Not counting the battery, or relay, the circuit itelf would fit on a thumbnail. :)
Oh, and once I tell you how I figured out this circuit, you'll REALLY hate me, because it's been sitting right under our noses for
the last couple of years! :eek:
pyr0man1c April 15th, 2003, 05:57 PM

if you could make a radio-controlled blasting machine that looked and worked like a wrist watch and had these features:
*programmable key cryptographic identification

* the possibility to attach a larger & better antenna and an amplifier
i would certainly be willing to pay at least a thousand dollars for it. the worst problem then would be the payment, i won't send
a thousand dollars to the other side of the world without knowing i'm getting what i'm paying for. i guess you'd have to trust
me.
i was examining the possibilities to use a laptop computer to control the initiation of different pyrotechnic charges about 8
months ago, but i've been doing military service since then so maybe i'd better dig up those old C programs i wrote... i
remember i had a hard time, i'm really not much of a programmer. heh ;)

Fabulous! Now that NBK has that end of the market sewn up I can focus on the 007 version:D
Oh, and don't be too hard on vapourware... I worked for a company that scored multimillion dollar military contracts with
vapourware (and the odd bit of painted wood). It was bloody hard on us engineers though ("you have 3 months to design,
program, test and manufacture this piece of MIL-SPEC equipment")
Yeah, that payment thingy is a tough one. I'd thought the Pay-Pal service might be handy. Oh, and I doubt anyone need
spend $1000 (donations gratefully accepted of course!)
nbk2000 April 16th, 2003, 01:49 AM

In the "Sensors_for_Bombs" PDF, upped by me, on page 22 (page 25 of the book) is the circuit I used. It was handily
provided by Radio-Shack, but it took me a while to figure out an more practical purpose for it. :)
I still have to tweak it to get it to work with a relay, but it's going...unless you'd like to help out Tuatara. ;)

Gladly will I help out. I'm but a short email away ...
(no FTP you see :( )

Thanks for the mail NBK. Sorry you've so many problems with hate mail:rolleyes:
Heres how you drive a relay with your circuit -
Replace R3 with the relay

Connect a diode (1n4001 type) across the relay coil, with cathode to +9V - this just protects the transistor when the relay turns
off
Replace the LED with a 1n4001 diode - needed because the 741 output only goes down to 1V
I'd not recommend an SCR - too prone to false triggering e.g. dV/dT triggering when the circuit powers up, and the tiniest
spike from your radio will also be able to turn it on.
Relays are actually very reliable and have some nice features for this application.
- they are (comparatively) slow, so will tend to filter out any noise spikes from your radio
- no false triggering
- you can biff a lot of excess current through relay contacts without the thing turning into a fragmentaion grenade.
Your 9V batt should be capable of delivering the 100mA or so to drive the relay. The 741 output cannot deliver this kind of
current which may be why your earlier attempt failed.
Be very, very careful using the squelch on your radio, as a trigger! All kinds of RF crap can unsquelch a radio receiver - car
ignitions, other radios, lightening, electric fences, bad luck ...
I would have added a pretty pic of the relay circuit but I couldn't figure out how (and me with a degree in electronics
:o )
nbk2000 April 17th, 2003, 01:13 AM

Here's the schematic for the radio controlled light circuit. ;)
http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com/RC_schematic.gif
You adjust the variable resistor till the light goes out. Then press the button on the other radio to transmit. Adjust till the light
just barely lights up, then up it just a tad. This prevents it from flickering from static since you have to be transmitting for it to
activate. If you turn it down from when it's lit when NOT receiving, it'll drift and activate itself after a while. That'd be a bad
thing.
There IS current flowing through the LED at all times, so you'll need to adjust the resistors so that it's below the threshold
needed to "light up" your "subject" matter. :D
Or you could use an opto-isolator relay IC to replace the LED to act as a relay for an external circuit.
I don't use only the squealch, but also the CTCSS side-band channels to decrease the likelyhood of false triggering. I've had
the circuit running for the last couple of hours and haven't seen it blink once, except when I transmit using the CTCSS band on
my transmitter.
Also, the circuit has a quasi-boobytrap feature of activating if the phono-plug is removed from the receiver, or the radio turned
off. :) If the power supply was sealed into the circuit, and the receiver left in plain sight, it'd be highly tempting for a non-pro
to attempt disarming by simply unplugging the circuit from the radio. ;)
I assume this diode is something I could find at a Rat-Shack?
And, since I'm on a roll, I also thought about the utility of using another circuit I found on the net called "cellular helper" as a
very specific means of targeting a person. See, what this circuit does is detect the ring signal from a cellphone, and triggers a
vibrator to let a person know that their phone is ringing when the ringer is turned off or it's too noisy to hear it.
Well...if you know the targets cellphone #, you could plant a weapon somewhere the victim would be in the future, and simply
give their phone a call when they're there. Though ANY cellphone receiving a call within a few yards would trigger the circuit, so
discrimination may be a problem, unless the idea IS to target any cellular use, which could be useful in itself. Maybe to trigger
a jammer that is otherwise in "stealth" mode, to prevent detection, and to conserve power.
You can up your pictures to the Forum now, using the attachment option at the bottom of your reply. Try using it, since that's
what we've got it for.

Well according to the little 'Forum Rules' box on my screen
You may not post attachments so I don't know whats going on. Perhaps its a priviledge allowed to long time members?
Just because you didn't see the flash on your LED doesn't mean it didn't happen (Urgh! what a mess of negatives), which is
why I think a relay is better than an SCR. The best test would be to hook the thing up to burn out a fuse wire when triggered,
then leave it running for a few days.
1N4001 diodes are common as dirt - you can get them anywhere. Exact type is not that important, but these are really cheap
(a few cents).
BTW on that drawing the LED has one long leg which is the anode, the short leg is the cathode and is connected to the
negative battery terminal (just a clarification)
Lurking_Shadows April 23rd, 2003, 02:53 AM
(off topic)
Tuatara for the plans of the remotes/receivers will they be accessible on the net via a web site?
(on topic)
Would it be possible to have a timer on the detonator with the possibilities of sending a signal to it and it going off at the set
time so you don't have to be in the vicinity when the explosive devise goes off?
Also for buying the finished item would it be posible to get it POD?
Tuatara April 23rd, 2003, 05:38 PM

I wouldn't call your first question 'off topic' :D : Yes, if you read the first post in this thread I plan on making the whole design
available on the FTP, for free. I've no website of my own, and no plans at this stage to create one, so the FTP is where it will
be.
Second question: yes , absolutely.
Third Q : POD:confused: is that the same as COD (cash on delivery) ? I don't see why not - though I believe COD does cost
more.
Lurking_Shadows April 24th, 2003, 11:23 AM

(Off topic)
It's just pay on delivery I'd most likely get the product sent to scatterbrains (a mail place) near my place and pay for the
package there. :)
(On topic)
How much extra would it cost for a timer?
Could the timer be addapted to other remote designes?
nbk2000 April 24th, 2003, 12:01 PM

An ETA on when we might start seeing any progress on this project would be nice.
Also, COD costs the sender money, whether or not the receipient decides to actually pay for it. If they don't, you're SOL out of
the money you spent to send it in the first place.
Also, I sent you my new e-mail addy, check for it.
Also, the green lines in my schematic represent connections, not length of leads, so the LED connections are correct, with no
polarity value being placed on the length of the connection.
nbk2000 April 27th, 2003, 01:26 AM

I tried the 1n4001 diodes, which Rat-Shack does carry (even if the stupid nigger there couldn't find it :mad: )...no luck.
Now what?

Oh, yes I know the schematic doesn't represent length. It was just meant to be a helpful hint to others on how to find the
correct leg on the LED.
So you built what I sent you and its a DOA? Just how big is this relay you are trying to drive? > specs: coil voltage / current.
May need more drive if its a big one.
Tell me, did the guy at Rat-shack give you that slightly vacant look that salesmen have when the answer to your question is
not in the glossy brochure?
I should also ask what level your electronics knowledge is - not being rude, just want to pitch my answers correctly.
MnkyBoy April 27th, 2003, 05:06 PM

Tell me, did the guy at Rat-shack give you that slightly vacant look that salesmen have when the answer to your question is
not in the glossy brochure?
Is that the same look you get when you tell them you would like to know if they can charge your caps for you?
True aboout the LED flashing and it not being seen. At work, we are driving LED's w/ a PW of 20 uSec. Some physical
mechanical motion would aleaveate fast pulses, if one is concerned about this. But coming from smaller, faster and further,
the SCR works here.
BTW. where is the FTP, or does it not exist yet?
nbk2000 April 27th, 2003, 09:32 PM

http://www.radioshack.com/images/ProductCatalog/ProductImage/275/275-005.jpg
#275-005
SPDT Relay, Mini 2A
Nominal coil voltage 7-9v
Coil resistance 500 ohm +/-10%
Nominal coil current 18ma
A 9v battery will throw it but I don't know about anything less. I know they have 5v relays. If I have too, I could use a photo-
relay IC, but that's one more chip to fuck with.
My skill level, as previously stated, is rank beginner.
I e-mailed you the new schematic for review.
I doubt a nichrome wire igniter is going to "blow" in 20 microseconds at the feeble amperage a 9v batery is going to supply.

I think I see what went wrong. Response in your Inbox, NBK!
Hey, if you really could blow that nichrome in 20us you wouldn't need a primary:D
Z-pinch fusion, anyone?
Jumala April 30th, 2003, 07:49 PM

To NBK:
You dont need exactly a 1N4001 Diode. Every diode between 4001 and 4007 or 1N4148 works.
If you like I can post you the plan for LM567. It is a PLL tone decoder. It reacts only to a single frequency for example 680
Hz. If you have a whistle for this frequency you can send this tone to the receiver (via walkie talkie) and the LM567 turns on.
A few posts before I told that I want to test simple audion or superregenerative receiver for use in remote control. This is
done. The superregen works but it is tricky and weak. I dont know how to get better results with this peace of technik.
I found a much better chip as receiver. It is TDA 1072 or TDA 1572(with IF output)
These chips are old and cheap. TDA 1072 cost 90 cents and needs only a few external parts.
It works up to 60 MHz, single conversion, AM.
The 868 MHz ISM band chips from Micrel are ways better but also more expensive and more complicated. Even educated
people will have big problems to solder a SMD chip to the board only with standart equipment.
To make the story short, I will build a TDA 1072 receiver with tone decoder and if it works Ill post here again.

Can you still get those ?! Your 60MHz antenna will be interesting (read 'BIG').
Actually the Micrel quik-radio stuff is very simple - just a crystal to set the frequency.
Soldering SOIC is a doddle. I've done 0402 parts, by hand, with nothing more than a loupe on my glasses.
I'd have thought your superegen would work well - mine do. I get 60m with scrap of wire for the recieve antenna and a crappy
little loop antenna on the transmitter. Thats at 305MHz. I'm sure I could 200m witha 1/2 wave dipole each end - but it wont fit
into a car alarm remote:D
Jumala May 1st, 2003, 08:21 PM

Yes, the antenna is a monster compared to the loops but also simple. A 1m copper wire works as antenna. It isnt matched
but o.k. for remote control. With a walkie talkie as transmitter it should work over a few 100m or more.
To solder SMD is no problem. I use a small solder tip but SOIC is out of area for me. Ive seen a nice hot air solder station,
good for this job, for somewhat about 1000 bucks. In the moment I like the bucks more than the solder station.
The superregen I build works too. I can receive my dip meter (It has a variable oscillator) and sometimes a CB station. I have
build it for 27 MHz.
Ill mail you two plans. The kitchin receiver is what I tryed. The other PDF is in german language but you can see the plan.
FrankRizzo August 27th, 2003, 09:07 PM

*BUMP*
any new developments??
Tuatara August 27th, 2003, 09:59 PM

I haven't forgotten this little project, I've simply had to stick it on the back burner for awhile. I've some time coming up soon
so I'll try to scratch something together, just as a starter.
jeffchem2000 August 30th, 2003, 03:14 PM

A friend of mine has a remote controlled door bell for some reason! we tested how far away the door bell would still work and
depending on the atmosheric conditions we go between 75 and 100 pases. I don't know where he got this door bell but keep
your eyes peeled because I think it was quite cheap. It runs off a few AA batteries at each and it would be really easy to
convert for "experiments":)
Chemical_burn August 31st, 2003, 03:23 AM

jeffchem2000
if you have not noticed doorbells have already been discussed in other threads.
besides this thread is about constructing a reliable remote detinator not modifying(sp?) another to work if you want that it has
been discussed before.
parmin September 16th, 2003, 04:16 AM

For those that have urgent needs:p
here in the Land of OZ, you could buy the LONG RANGE (1.8km) 433 Mhz remote control "garage opener" from Oatley
electreonics for about AUD$22 TX and $32 RX kits (K190). Bout matchbox size. Assembly of the kit is required tho, not hard
coz the TX and RX board is pre-assembled, only the coding section need to be soldered together. :(
For those who dream about 007 devices,:D the TX assembly from them is about 20mm x 8mm, err bout half the size of your
mobile phone GSM chip. You should add some coding device, example PIC12c508 microprocessor for safety. The whole
assembly including battery could be fitted inside a container the size of N size battery (say, a biro pen tip?)
The RX section, 44mm x 15mm could fit in an AA size container,:rolleyes: duh... including say, 50 grams of nitrated goody,
decoder, battery & caps, err in a common texta ...
Hmm, if someone could provide diagrams, pictures and a step by step report of these things, in PDF, where whould she deliver
this document to?:confused:
Tuatara September 16th, 2003, 06:49 AM

Oatley will mail order world wide too, I've bought stuff from them before.
FYI the radios I'm using in the car alarm I'm designing: transmitter is 10mm x 8mm, reciever is 10mm x 20mm. The tricky bit
with your biro pen transmitter is that the antenna needs to be quite a bit bigger than a pen, at 433MHz, if you want the range.
Thats why I'm thinking ISM band, around 868MHz, built into something that looks like a car alarm remote, using Microchip
Keeloq encryption devices (64bit non-linear, rolling code encryption, all in an 8 pin SOIC).
"she" Parmin? Could we really have another female member?:cool:

She could e-mail it to forumscan@yahoo.com, I'll review it, and if it's good upload it somewhere for the rest of the Forum to
download. :)
Couldn't the antenna for the pen tx be a length of wire on a spring-loaded retracting spool? Pull of the pen cap to extend the
antenna.
Bert September 16th, 2003, 05:32 PM

I know this wouldn't be as much fun as making your own-
Miniature 2 channel firing system with 300 ft. range for about $150.00 (http://www.radio-match.com/)
But you could be using it next week...
parmin September 17th, 2003, 08:07 PM

On the subject of antenna..
The idea is DIPOLE system.. :o see, the body of the pen is made of Aluminum and is to be the ground plane part of the
dipole, and a telescopic style antenna is fitted (with insulation of course) inside with the tip poking out one end of the pen.
:rolleyes:
Now by calculation, 434 Mhz system will need about 6.5 inches antenna for quarter wave. A standard biro pen is about 6
inches. By right we are missing .5 inches on the ground plane side, however, when we grab the pen (to push the button) the
hand/body/sexy legs;) would be part of the grounding circuit. Not as good ground as aluminum bar of course, but should be
more than ample to made up the missing half inch :p .
So what do we get? a dipole system when we extend the antenna to 6.5 inches length. A mark or simple modification can be
done on the antenna to make sure we get the right length.
To Tuatara, the someone may be a she... (o)(o) who knows? I said if... :D ***This line is added 5 minutes after the original
post - How would one purchase keeloq devices in small quantity? So far I have used standard PIC12C508/9 for my toys, of
course the 16F628 too :) ***
Sometime next week, NBK may find between emails of penis elongation and breast enlargement :D, an instalment of
enlightening article from somegirl ;)
Tuatara September 17th, 2003, 08:37 PM

There's no need to be 1/2 " short on the antenna. I remember seeing somewhere a pen/ lecture pointer combo, where the
pointer end telescoped out to about 2' . The thickness of the pointer section should help increase the bandwidth of the
antenna, and mitigate the sensitivity of dipoles to 'hand-effect' de-tuning. I wouldn't count on max range, but a good idea,
now that I see what you're describing.
Just seen your edit : Keeloq can be bought through Farnell (http://international2.farnell.com/) , I think Digikey (http://
www.digikey.com) have them. You can also buy direct from Microchip (http://www.microchip.com)
If you've got one of Microchips PIC programming tools, then you can probably program Keeloq too, otherwise you'll have to do
what I did and build your own. Check Microchips App notes for a standalone programmer (AN217)

Correct me if I am wrong,
a keeloq would automatically output a 64 bits code when activated right? ( i never use one before ) :confused:
if so, a keelog output coupled with the TX unit would work stright away without any complex asm work.. true?
true the body would de tune the active part of the dipole, however wouldn't the ground part of the dipole be enhanced?
:rolleyes:
The advertised range of the tx is about 1.8km with 12 volt , we only aim for say 500 m or umm about a quarter of the max..
should be good enuf hey? :p

I have no need for either penis elongation ;) nor breast enlargement :eek:, though I'd be happy to see anything interesting
that you may have to show me. :D
I meant the circuits, of course. :p
Though I've always been spam-free with my e-mails. I have a hard time sympathizing with all the people I hear complaining
about spam. Don't publicly post your e-mail on the internet, don't give it to dodgy sites (read porn) or enter on-line contests,
and certainly don't put it on any kind of "warranty" card you may get with a purchased item.
Don't do any of these things and you too will be spam free. :)
If you can get these circuits very tiny, and have at least a hundred foot range through walls, than that'd have all sorts of
applications besides just blowing things up.
And, of course, it has to be reasonably cheap (under $50), use available parts, and not require an engineer to assemble.

Parmin, you may find this document (http://www.rfm.com/corp/appdata/antenna.pdf) useful. Its a basic description of a wide
variety of antennas that can be used for this sort of application -whips, chips, loops, helixs, slots, stubs, patches etc
A 1/4 wave whip only works because the 'ground' plane creates an image of the whip so the whole thing looks electrically like a
1/2 wave dipole. Change the tuning on the whip and the antenna performance changes, no matter how good the ground plane
is. (if you're ugly, the best mirror in the world wont change your face). The sensitivity of the whip is due to the fact that the end
of the whip is a very high impedance point, so the antenna is easily detuned by the small amount of capacitive loading to the
surrounding environment. This in itself is not the problem, it is changes in that environment (how far your arm is from your
body) that cause trouble.
To answer your questions,
Yes, the Keeloq encoder is a 'Button in / data out' device. All it needs is to be programmed with an encryption key that
matches the decoder at the other end. My car alarm remote is just three buttons, keeloq chip and SAW transmitter - easy (and
small). There is also a simple decoder chip available too - data in, 'button' out. Go to Microchips website - there's lots of
application notes to help you.
Banking on 1/4 max range should work, though I'd test it first ;)

Tuatara, I thank you for your input re. antenna. Yes I understand the point you are making. Lets not worry too much on that
matter for this moment. Because although we are not making maximum transmission signal, we could get quite far signal
delivery (better than standard car alarm type) thus giving a slightly higher margin of safety to gageteers in the forum. Bear in
mind, the point of this design is not for optimal range but instead it is for miniature size.:)
Now, I have been busily making this device and trying to put my self in the shoe of a non-engineer. I am stumped on a few.
problem. :confused:
Quoted from nbk2000
"If you can get these circuits very tiny, and have at least a hundred foot range through walls, than that'd have all sorts of
applications besides just blowing things up.
And, of course, it has to be reasonably cheap (under $50), use available parts, and not require an engineer to assemble."
End Quote.
Gosh, two paragraphs that made me have sleepless nights.
First "at least a hundred foot range through walls" . Ok.. what wall? Brick? timber? fibro? corrugated steel? aluminum?
Concrete? or all of the above? How thick is the wall? does the wall have steel reinforcement mesh on it? On my assumption of
standard brick walls, within one hunderd foot there would be less than 5 layers walls. (viz. four rooms of 20 foot wide) If thats
the case, chance is that there would be no problem for the device to work reliably. Of course we are not blowing things up.. why
would we? :D
Second, Cheap - under $50. If you do it your self, using the materials purchased from the place I mentioned, plus some of
stuff you salvage around your home, yeah it can be done. In fact if I am to quote of purchases of say 1000 units, it may be
well below $20 mark.
Third, use available parts. Yeah.. the parts is available, you can buy it easy and from lots of suppliers. BUT, some of the parts
need to be programmed (be it a keeloq, PIC, AVR etc) to give you the security of the rolling 64 bits encoding.
You dont have to be an engineer to assemble the circuit, but , you have to have access to a microprocessor programmer to be
able to do this.
+++That reminds me. Tuatara, I have been poring over the keeloq device. Aparently they only have 32 bits rolling code. You
need to program another 32 bits serial number into it to make the 64 bits encoding for it. For the trouble, I reckond using a
standard $2 PIC12C509, with your PGP key as the serial number would cut a lot of problems in programming, serial numbering
etc. Plus they are much more readily avalable and cheaper too :) Hmm, may be a PICaXe unit can do it.+++
Now, nbk2000, you tell me, would programming a PIC be too hard for average rogue scientist? If it is not, then you are getting
a remote device as secure as your PGP encription. If it is, the alternative would be back to the ole simple car remote encoding
chips :p

If you really want to program your own encryption, I believe 'Twofish', DES, AES and RSA are all in the public domain now. Me -
I want easy! Encryption built into Keeloq, Decryption code ripped straight out of a Microchip app note:D
My radio parts cost me $0.60 for the transmitter, $2.50 for the receiver (US$). Not exactly 'off-the-shelf' though.
Through the wall range - info I have indicates attentuation by walls tends to be proportional to the third or fourth power of the
distance (normal 'free-space' is 2nd power of distance for 'far-field')
I'm not sure I believe the 1.8km claims for those Oatley radios - the tx is only 18dBm max and the rx is -115dBm sensitivity
(I think theres a typo on the main page - the data sheet says -115dBm)
1.8km would be a theoretical figure with no channel noise, and perfect antennae, I suspect.

Obviously, if someone is a member here, they have access to a PC, so we'll assume they can fiddle with PIC's to their hearts
content.
However, no need to hopelessly complicate things by custom programming PGP/3DES/AES/etc into the circuit when a simple
rolling car remote encryption scheme will work. After all , we're not worried about ECHELON recording our test firings and trying
to hack the key to our remote for nefarious purposes. ;)
We simply want to prevent accidential detonation from any nearby radio transmitters.
As for walls, that depends. Sheetrock and 2x4's are transparent to RF for the most part. But I wouldn't be setting off shit in a
house anyways. I'm thinking more along the lines of commercial construction of steel beams and such. Not solid steel with
grounded mesh, but the sort of thing you'd find in commercial/industrial construction, as well as governmental buildings.
If that had to be an upgraded version, that'd be doable, but for now lets stick with the safe remote for testing out in the
boonies where you only have to worry about trees and shrubs.
I saw a LANL article where they had programmed PGP into a chip for integration into circuits. If it would be possible to program
it into a chip that could be screwed onto walkie-talkies (between the antenna and the transmitter?), than that'd be the shit!
You could take it with you, use it on different equipment (prevent RF fingerprinting), and (hopefully) be able to change key
groups as needed by the mission.

yes, the range claimed by oatley would be the theoretical range under perfect condition, usual advertising jargon. But again I
am not really aiming for the impossible range.
For coding, AAARRRGGGHHH!!!! :mad:

I think I did not put it in word good enough. My idea about PGP key is that the key is unique to individual who use them, thus
it is an automatic "rolling code". The way I will use it is, for example if I am nbk2000, I would send a serial code of say "D578
AE65" to activate my receiver. Not hard thing to do, and very simple to program in the PIC12c509. Or if I want to I could even
use something like "THINGS GOES KABOOM" or "BUSH IS AN IDIOT" as the serial keycode. Thus if you want to use channel
one you send "BUSH IS AN IDIOT 1" and for #2, "BUSH IS AN IDIOT 2" ETC.
The program flow would be to parse X amount of variable and check if the variable match the one in memory byte by byte. If
it match, activate result. if not, go back to wait. Simple. No rolling code required. It is a standard password type security. And
with 12C509 we could use up to say 30 byte character..:rolleyes: thats 240 BITS of data password. How much easier could it
be???? :p
All it did is only to ensure that there is no one else using the same code, thus may activate my receiver without my consent. I
do not mean to custom programming for PGP, I mean to use some phrase of data that no one else may chance to use.:o
Plus, if I could purchase everything and cheap I need from one supplier, it would be a bonus. The beauty of using 12C508/9 is
that both receiver and transmitter would use the same chip, only programmed differently. So all you have to do is purchase a
few of the same chip to make any combination of TX or RX devices. :D
As for something to put in to a walkie-talkie to activate only with a certain code, simply buy a walkie with SELLCAL feature in
them. They would be MUTED until a matching SELCALL code is received.
Simple technology. If you look for say a pair of Philips PRM80 units, you can program the selcall to your heart content and
activate your remote device up to 40 km away coz they have 30watts TX power. They are BIG though.. *sigh*. else something
like a walkie with selcall like uhmm.. a GME TX6200 can do it for 5 km range :D
Cricket September 22nd, 2003, 05:53 AM

If I was to buy some remote umm openers, I would think these to be useful.
1. Good range, the farther and more penetrative the better. I would prefer something like 100' minium in open country and for
the 4th of July stuff, a mile or so would be wonderful.
2. You all probably mentioned this in your technical stuff that I am far from understanding, but it would be good to make the
reciever activate only when it recieves a primary signal, and then a confirmation signal to reduce the chance of a fatal
accidental door opening. And if the confirmation signal isn't received within the time the transmitter is programmed to send it,
then it would restart it back to as if it hadn't received the primary signal. Again, you all know more than me on this one so I
bet it has already been discussed.
3. Some sort of electronics made available that you could set up to receive and resend the signal(s) so it would increase the
range indefinatly if needed.
4. For the transmitter to have the ability to open different doors at different times via different buttons or combination of
buttons. Not too necessary for the average door opener, but could definatly be useful at the right time. But this may increase
the cost a lot because of the transmitter having to transmit more than one frequency. Unless it is possible to program the
transmitter to transmit the the same frequency, but not constantly, maybe like morse code. And then to have each reciever to
be activated only by a certain code.
Thats all I can think of now that I would want the most. I would pay very good money for 2 transmitters and 50 recievers and
maybe a few #3's for real big doors ;). Good luck with it's R&D.

nbk2000,
somegirl may have already send an installment of enlightening article to you. Check it out.;)
What should I do with my proto??:confused: sell? how much?
havic September 26th, 2003, 10:25 AM

I don't know much about the radio side of remote detonation unfortunately, however one item that I have used in other
projects that could serve as a good trigger on the output would be the ignitor from one of those electric gas lighters.
Generally about $5AUS for the lighter, but easily connected into any form of receiver circuit.
Alternatively if that doesn't have enough kick in it and providing that you have a good power source on the receiving end, an
automotive ignition coil works wonders :D
These can range from between $10 - $35 (ballpark figure) from pretty much any auto store :D
If you've ever gotten a kick from a mower that had an electrical fault, you'll know what I mean :o
Tuatara September 27th, 2003, 06:53 AM

Most of those gas lighters have piss all energy in the spark and can barely manage to light gas, let alone anything solid.
Ignition coils are better, but not by much. Sure they hurt, but do you see any damage to your skin?
Now the 36 Joule electric fence energiser I designed a couple of years back (for an Agri-tech company), that might work. It
would merrily blow the guts out of a 5W resistor. Nearly blew the guts out of me, when I touched something I shouldn't on the
prototype. Fuck that was painful. Had holes in the fingers of both hands, and couldn't stop shaking for about 2 hours. Some
lessons just have to be learned the hard way :o
DBSP September 27th, 2003, 08:26 AM

While on the OT subject of discharging caps. Just got reminded about the time i accidentally discharges a fully charged 6J
photo cap into my fingers while building my blastingbox. That hurt and my arms where shaking for about 15 minutes.
Wouldn't like getting stunned by a 36J cap.:eek:
Like you just said, some things have to be learned the har way...
rdxhmx October 2nd, 2003, 09:27 PM

a usefull device for making a remote controle detonating transmitter-recieverunit can be made
from transmittermodules from conrad electronics ,www.conrad.com for example handtransmitter 192481-60, 3 channel
recievermodule 192635-60 and relaymodule 115029-60,115045 and
and recieverantenna 115142-60 (plus connector UG 1094 109819-60 and coaxcable RG 174 109827-60) total cost in euro's
161.05 ex V.A.T transmittingfrequence 433.92 MHz reachingdistance minimum 100 meter maximum 1000 meter.
an other way is using an SRD module on 868.95 MHz for example transmitter 190088-60 or 190355-60,reciever 190280-
60,190268-60 or 190064-60 and reciverantenna 190368-60
this makes it a lot more cheaper,easier and relyable.
spydamonkee December 7th, 2003, 01:49 AM

If i could get an update on the progress of this project that would be great as i look forward to purchasing one of these as the
garage door remote broke again dag nabbit ;)
Also Tuatara are you NI'er or SI'er?
Tuatara December 7th, 2003, 04:00 AM

NI. Area code 09. I'll get on to it soon. Still finishing the car alarm. Will springboard off the alarm stuff to do the remote, so it
should be pretty easy.
spydamonkee December 8th, 2003, 06:08 PM

That would be great, In return I can E-mail you a legal & local source for 15' roll's of Waterproof Cannon Fuse that only costs
25$ (saw your post in homemade fuze's :D)
SI, 03, chux@hush.com
E-mail me your email address if your interested.
ak70g2 December 16th, 2003, 04:48 PM

guys, all topics is ok, but where i find some drawings? i am from romania, one of "wild east" countries.... and i know nothing
about electronics! where i find some simple designs?
flashpoint December 17th, 2003, 02:36 AM

Tuatara, what's your email address, interested in the design and how you made the car alarm, if you don't mind talking about
it...err
::EDIT:: Removed email and AIM from post.
Tuatara December 17th, 2003, 05:59 PM

Sorry flashpoint, I can't discuss the IP in a product that hasn't hit the market yet. That would be foolish in the extreme. I need
to make money out of the car alarm, before I divulge to the world how it all works. If you want some basic ideas however you
can look at the Microchip website at some of their App notes ( www.microchip.com ). You can learn all about rolling code
transmitters and the like.
Christmas holidays are coming .. I plan on doing some work on the remote det then.
Here's the basic setup:
transmitter based on KEELOQ encoder (encrypted, big serial number, rolling code, readily available), can handle up to 15
buttons, or combinations of four buttons. Probably use a Micrel transmitter, maybe a Microchip one. Frequency band 900MHz
ISM band - no license required.
receiver based on PIC16F84 - available, easy programming.
8 relay outputs
Visual basic program on PC to set up reciever.
For each relay you will be able to program the trigger button, trigger delay, activation time, and cancel button. If you think
about it this enables an 8 event sequence of relays to be triggered by one button press, or 8 relays triggered by individual
buttons, or anything in between.
flashpoint December 17th, 2003, 07:02 PM

Oh, tuatara, I didn't know you planned on selling the car alarm, I thought you were simply doing a DIY project...
Tuatara December 17th, 2003, 09:04 PM

Too much effort for a DIY :D Some things are just easier to buy in a shop
I have a couple of partners in this alarm venture, and we all want to get rich;) . And having a company gives you a certain
credibility when requesting samples etc.
The remote det will be made public domain though, (well, forum domain anyway) I'm doing this design as a favor to the
forum community.
ShadowAlchemist December 25th, 2003, 11:31 PM

This topic is very interesting as i have always dreamed of someday using remote detonation in my endeavours. The closest i
have got to this design is one a good friend of mine developed himself using a kit form receiver and a GSM mobile phone.
I dont know the exact details of the circuitry/reciever, but i do know that when he dialled the designated pre-paid mobile
number (on an old ericsson!), it successfully detonated a small pipebomb of FFF grade black powder.
For obvious reasons i was impressed when i heard he news, as mobile range is indefinate providing you have signal coverage.
Seeing as there are quite a few folks interested in remotely detonating "roman candles" i will pick my friends brain and
determine precise details of the plan.
Watch this space ;)
Jacks Complete January 4th, 2004, 06:47 PM

ShadowAlchemist, et al.,
that is half of the problem with this stuff. A mobile phone outputs .5watts of power, and will tend to trip even well made circuits
by overwhelming them. The simple way to do what your good friend did would be to mod one of those circuits that detect
incoming mobile calls. A safer way would be to run the motor wires off the vibrate out to a relay, set it to vibrate only, or ring
and vibrate, then dial it.
Always turn off your phone, etc. when playing with electric blasting stuff.
Tutara,
I would love to see the plans for the electric fence!
Tuatara January 6th, 2004, 04:45 PM

Jack: Just out of personal interest, or do you want to build one? 'Cos if you want to build one you have to be extremely
careful, or you could end up on a manslaughter charge.
mark105 January 29th, 2004, 02:35 AM

how it goin tuatara?
wouldnt mind one of these, fuses are not goin to well for me and remote det is better option :)
Not_Osama February 4th, 2004, 11:30 PM

ONE MAJOR pROBLEM...and the one which has prevented me from ndertaking this project on my own is the fear of accidental
detonation. You can have all the safety precautions you like, but if your receiver ges a signal...that bitch is gonna BLOW!
To prevent all your caps from detonating when you opened the garage door i would reccomend the receiver to recognise a
specific signal. Say 2ms on 3ms off 5ms on 3ms off 2ms on...and so forth. This would certainly prevent almost any mishaps.
In addition to this your could transmit TWO distinct radio signals and modulate them per above.
This is the technique that the ARMY uses on their infamous Claymore mine, however they use THREE signals.
Another small problem is the cost of the receivers, they would be very difficult to reuse, as anything to close to my 200gms of
HMX/RDX compound is gonna get Screwed! I would reccomend a SHEILDED base station possibly 50 ft away.
JoeJablomy February 7th, 2004, 02:38 AM

Not_Osama: please read the preceding posts. There has been much discussion about things like "48 bit rolling encryption,"
which was included in the informal 'spec' from the beginning to keep the reciever from accidentally blowing its owner up. A 48
bit code is more than enough to discriminate between the actual signals and the noise when transmitted and received
properly, and is available pretty much off the shelf, whereas your homemade 2 or 3 digit, possibly non-binary*, scheme would
be a pain to implement and less reliable.
As for the receivers durability:
1)They are meant to be cheap. The microcontrollers they will be built around cost a few $ each.
2)If you don't want something blown up, yes, you can place it some distance from the charge, or, even better, you can bag it
and bury it, maybe with the antenna protruding away from the blast.
*It isn't necessarily bad if it's non-binary -it actually increases the possible number of signals from the 4 or 8 you would have
in a binary system with 2 or 3 bits. But it seems to take a lot more work to cook up brand new schemes from analog circuitry.
Tuatara: Can you come up with a compact CD module that would easily fit in a pocket-size receiver? Also, I can't remember if
anyone asked, but how about a seperate arming option like simply charging the CD? I guess that would actually be built into
the CD drop in for use with the current version of your receiver.
Zeitgeist February 10th, 2004, 04:18 AM

Sounds cool,
when you say "Shareware", you mean releasing all the details freely?
I'm quite good with electronics, and i'd be happy to help.
If you're using an unlicenced band, remember there is heaps of traffic, but i guess inadvertant firing wouldn't be a problem
using UHF Tx/Rx's based on Rolling Code technology.
using 330uF/400V's in a bank for the discharge (unless you just switch 12V or so for the outputs, CD high voltage is more
flexible) is good as the components are commonly availble, you could charge the bank with a 12V CCFL inverter, only cost
$10AUD, and, about half the size of a matchbox
Edit:
Purchasing the KeyLoq IC's direct from MicroChip was mentioned, what are the minimum order quantities like?
Blackhawk February 10th, 2004, 06:48 AM

"330uF/400V's" "12V CCFL inverter"
Yep thats the setup I am curently using for my EBW circuit, although I need a better alternative to spark gap switching. You will
have to run the inverter outputs through a high voltage rectifier bridge, and when testing my setup with a multimeter it took
around 1 and a half minutes to reach 350V (jumping 4-8V up every half second or so) so bear in mind that you will need to
have the caps charging for some time. Also the CCFL inverter I have (IIRC it is the same with most) output 487V so I used
two 400V caps in series, however if you switched the charging circuit off after less than 2 mins I doubt you would have trouble
with overcharging a single cap.
Boomer February 16th, 2004, 01:18 PM

At that voltage, the 1-2 Watts these inverters output equal 2-4 mA! This will hardly overcharge the caps unless you leave it on
for 10 minutes plus ( 2-4 mA will just compensate for the leakage).
To be 100% safe put two 200V suppressor diodes in series and parallel to the cap. Adding an LED will show you when it's
ready. Two caps in parallel for only 78 Volts more give you half the capacitance and current at twice the ESR.

Jack: Just out of personal interest, or do you want to build one? 'Cos if you want to build one you have to be extremely
careful, or you could end up on a manslaughter charge.
Sorry, must have missed this one.

I would quite like the plans for interest, but to wind up on a manslaughter charge, you must be building a Jurrasic Park type of
fence! Might keep the cats out the garden, though...
I would want someone who at least seemed like he knew what he was talking about for the plans (i.e. you!) rather than some
third-hand designs in Chinese.
Are there any other developments with the det.?
flashpoint February 18th, 2004, 05:03 PM

I also would be interested in the plans for the fence...I'm having a little problem with dogs, racoons, and cats...its pissing me
off...I too am also having garden pests...

I'm really reluctant to post fence energiser circuits as there are many, many safety issues involved. It is possible to kill
yourself with a 2uF cap charged to 300V. Difficult, but possible. On the other hand I survived a shock from 60uF charged to
900V. I was very lucky to get away with just burnt fingers.
The main safety criteria are
1/ ensuring at least 30kV isolation between mains power and output terminals, and
2/ ensuring the output pulse meets the C2 Line spec (Google for that one).
3/ if something breaks the energiser remains safe.
The C2 Line represents the limits for body current vs pulse duration, given a 500 Ohm human body model, an a chance for
inducing fibrillation of 1:140,000.
Seriously, if you want an electric fence, go and buy one thats been through all the safety test standards - Its too easy to get it
wrong and kill someone. If you're just curious as to how they work - essentially a big cap gets charged to 600V or so, then a
thyristor dumps the cap into a transformer to kick the 600V up to ~8kV . Diodes across the cap stop any unused energy from
reverse charging the capacitor.

The only problem with that is I want to make one that is more like a Taser, and that will fit into a space about that of half a
broomstick, no more than 10 cm long. I have a plan.
I figured it would just be a trigger and a cap through a HV transformer, but I would like to follow a plan, rather than just make
my own. I just never got round to putting the bits together. I have the caps, the diodes and the transformer(s) but no real
idea about how to wire them together. I never have been that good at that kind of electronics!
sabooky February 26th, 2004, 04:40 AM

Did a little searching on the net and found this
http://home.infi.net/~allenk/dtmfdec.html
You could have the on button send a verfication signal back to the transmitter so you can tell if your in range (not sure if this
was mentioned before)
Also thought the idea of storing the 4 digit number then firing it off with a press of the # key. Makes it more professional, but
might not be to useful.
As long as the garage remote is safe enough that it doesnt close on me because the neighbers used their phone I'm happy.
flashpoint February 27th, 2004, 01:31 AM

what's the word on the remote det?
Neoknite March 3rd, 2004, 10:49 PM

Also would you be able to mount the remote det into a "dummy" device like a toy RC controller so somebody that just looks at
it wouldn't think it was suspicious. Make a switch that activates the transmitter and needs a sequence of buttons pushed to
arm it. Just a few ideas to throw out there. Would it be possible to see your base designs so I can get a picture of what I can
do with it for concealment?
Cyclo_Knight March 7th, 2004, 06:39 PM

I think this was suggested earlier, but would it be possible to use a REGISTERED Cell Phone as a receiver? With a slight
amount of modification it could act as a switch, and could be easily protected in a well shielded base station.
I realize that you would have to pay for a plan, however all you would need would be the most bare bones plan provided, and
the phone is free. You could then be in Taiwan when you set it off! Of course you would have a local safety in case someone
accidentally dialed the number in error. In addition, a third remote safety could be easily added by using a paperclip or Fire
Extinguisher pin attached to a 50 foot string so that when pulled, it would arm the device (the opposite of the ESTES rocket
safety) After all...Dont forget Murphy's Law! ;)
If you wanted to be near it when detonated, simply use you regular cell-phone to call the base, or borrow a friend's if you're
poor.
K'Luuppo May 23rd, 2004, 04:20 PM

It's been quite a while since last post... Just wondering if it was possible to get some information about the state of designing.
akinrog August 31st, 2004, 11:34 AM
Dear Friends,
First of all please accept my apologies for reviving an old thread. However, since this project has never been completed, I
thought the following migth be a contribution to the project.
While reading about a (digital) hobby electronics book, I saw a device called radio modem. Although there are local ones, I
searched over the net to find if there are international ones and I came across this site (http://www.maxstream.net/) amongst
the others. The site in question contains so called radio modems which have a indoor range of ca 500 m and outdoor range of
2 km (provided that LOS is present).
In addition these modems can be used for ranges over 20 km :eek: with special antenna configurations. In addition the
transmission is encrypted and devices are hard to jam since the receiver is very sensitive. These special devices are actually
intended for remote controlling of processes (SCADA, oil well production machinery, etc.). The site claims that they are quite
cheap about $30 range for 1000 quantities.
They came complete with the user's manuals, specifications, codes, etc. to program them. (BTW Default configuration does
not need any settings).
One connected to a computer and controlled via a (custom made terminal) software sending ASCII instructions to the serial
port which the radio modem is connected to and another is connected to a PIC based device's serial port, these instruments
may create wonders for remote detonation, remote controlling, even for robotics. I have some bit of information (and no PIC
kits for the time being) about PICs regarding their programming and operation and interfacing them with serial and parallel
ports, connecting them to LCD screens, etc. (I uploaded a PIC tutorial book ripped from a website to FTP a few months ago,
the file must be PIC.exe I believe. The tutorial is very comprehensive and contains examples in ASM.)
Finally an off-topic question, I saw a security related documentary on Discovery channel. On this documentary, there was a
dark colored van whose back door is kept open to jam remote controlled devices. Does somebody have any info what's that
and how it works? (Since I don't know the proper name for such a van, my searches yield practically nothing or unrelated
stuff). Hope the above given information may be helpful.
To Stanfield : Yes it's heavy but given the fact you may use a single computer (station) and several radio modems, you may
dotanate several devices or control several different things at the same time.
Another alternative is a radio communication device containing PIC microprocessors for encoding and decoding instructions to
the device. There is another book on FTP uploaded by me (RF BOOK.exe I believe), which contains transmitters receivers.
stanfield August 31st, 2004, 01:27 PM

A modem that is able to deliver thousands of informations per second to detonate a binary detonator ? is it not too "heavy" ?
Dave Angel August 31st, 2004, 11:02 PM

Before the iDefense attack I remember stanfield and I had posted some information and discussions about the construction of
remote detonators we are both working on. My contributions were some of my most recent posts so they were lost, but
fortunately I keep a copy of my longer posts as txt files.
Personally, I started work with (and quite frankly wasted money on) remote control kits designed for garage door control etc.
These have proven to be short ranged, even with a much improved antenna on the Tx. Also you get no choice about
components and PCB layout so they are not something I would recommend using.
I believe both stanfield and myself are building our remote devices using commercial Tx/Rx modules rather than making our
own from scratch. In my opinion, this is by far the best way to go about making ones own remote detonator, as they are
affordable and require a minimum of external components.
An example Tx module that I metioned above, operating at 433MHz and capable of a 1Km range, costs about 15 which is
about US$25-30. The Rx module costs a little more if memory serves, but is still very affordable. I believe stanfield found
cheap modules with a longer range than these available where he is located, a little searching is required but one should be
able to get a suitable module almost anywhere in the world.
Few external components are required; a encoder/decoderchip, a few resistors, a transistor, status LEDs, switches/relays and
the antenna. No complex circuitry to deal with, one should be able to put it together with basic a PCB etching starter kit, micro-
drilling and solder tools. The coding chips I will use allow up to four outputs to be controlled, which is plenty.
As I believe stanfield reminded me, the antennae are very important, as they will play a major part in determining the range.
The ones I will be using are 1/4 wavelength, without radials or a large metallic ground plane. I will be connecting the antennae
to the housings with BNc connectors which will link to the PCB internally via coaxial cables. The grounding of the antennae is
simply to the electrical ground of the circuit.
stanfield,
I have a feeling that the antennae are going to be where I have the most trouble, so could you, or others who know, please
point out if my design is going to have a terrible range without the radials or metallic ground plane.
akinrog,
In trying to find a long range Tx/Rx pairing, I came across the radio modem's you speak of, but thought that they would be
wasted on a simple design for a remote detonator. Of course, one could build a master remote unit to do many things with,
but members who are just after a simple remote detonator should look into the cheap, medium range modules. The radio
modems I have found tend to cost US$200-250 just for the Tx unit! It was difficult to find long range modules that were not
expensive radio modems in the UK, but I reasoned that the 1Km maximum range units would be adequate, even working at
less than optimal range.
PIC is also something that one does not need in order to build a suitable device, as the simple encoder/decoder chips serve
the purpose at a fraction of the cost and without the need for PIC programming knowledge. Do not get me wrong; I am not
saying that it is a waste of time to pursue such things, just that they are not required for a remote detonator design.
Something that was mentioned in another thread, but I have not worked into my design is a method to indicate if the device is
armed at the other end or not. The example given was along the lines of a Tx at the detonator end with a Rx on your
handheld device. This could be simplified with the use of transceiver modules, but I believe I discarded such an idea due to
lack of available transceiver modules with sufficient range. I may later invest in extra Tx/Rx modules for this purpose but for
now the task is to build a basic, working remote unit.
K'Luuppo,
Fellow members will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Tuatara was banned for time wasting: talking about providing
designs and never coming up with the goods.
Repeating what I wrote in the lost post...
To finish with, RF Solutions here in the UK, have recently introduced a nice piece of kit. A GSM telemetry system, which allows
one to control outputs via a text message. Under the right conditions one could SMS the module from the other side of the
world and actuate the relays or (if the GPS option is installed) ask the module to give you its position if, say, you needed it to
be in the right place before triggering the relays. Each command requires the message to be composed in an exact format,
with the unit's password, so accidental activation is very unlikely. Not in the price list I have though, with it being new.
akinrog September 1st, 2004, 01:44 AM

Few external components are required; a encoder/decoderchip, a few resistors, a transistor, status LEDs, switches/relays and
the antenna......
Dave Angel,
Can you describe cheap decoder/encoder chips more precisely? I searched the net and the results I obtained are generally
MPEG or MP3 related chips. If you give me a starting link and some valuable description, I shall be glad.
Edit : During my searches for a RF transmitter I found a 1 W FM transmitter. Since I am not a specialist I don't know if the
claims given in the site is true. The guy who made this device claims that the range is 5.5 KM with a makeship antenna.
However since the site is non-English, (and it is against the rules to post links to non-English sites) I only attach pictures of
the schema and some pics of the circuit board and translation of the explanation given under the pictures.
(Begin Translation)
I personally designed and made this circuit and (it) covers a net range of 5.5 km and has a good tolerance. I recommend you
to construct this circuit with car radio tuner. Purpose of card radio tuner is compactness, and as long as input voltage does not
change, the frequency shall not change. However component BFW 91 easily burns. In order to prevent its burning, I started
using 100 ohm 2W resistor instead of 68 ohm 2 W resistor. If you have no BFW 91 then you may substitute it with BFW 16.
However (in this case) you must use 62 pF capacitor at the output of transistor no 1 and 223 pF capacitor (at output of ???)
transistor no 2. There is almost no stray broadcasting (????). By means of this circuit, I drive 2 sc 1972 and obtain an output
of 15 W.
(End of translation)
Edit 1
Voila. This is something I previously leeched (I am leeching the interesting pages/sites since internet is a instable bitch and
the things which was once present may disappear over the time.) Almost a year ago, I leeched a PIC project site containing
remote controller projects with PIC. The pages are complete with asm/hex codes and schematics. Anyway I uploaded the
compressed site (in self extracting exe format) to forum FTP under the name of "RF Remote Control with PIC.EXE". And the
site link (although does not work for me possibly due to local internet provider maintenance) is http://www.vekoll.vein.hu/
~jap/electronic/codec.html.
Edit 2 : The site's name became : http://jap.hu/electronic/codec.html.
You may use either. HTH
Dave Angel September 1st, 2004, 11:22 AM

akinrog,
The encoder is a RF600E and the decoder a RF600D, they are 8 and 18 pin IC's. They are made by the same manufacturer as
the modules I am after and as such are fully compatible.
Search for "RF solutions" on google and then go through their products to find the chips under 'other products'. Almost all of
their products have .pdf data sheets you can download, and you should take a look at the Tx/Rx modules they stock for a
better idea of what to look for.
Other chips are available, for example, a mainstream electronics chain in the UK called Maplin stocks both RF solution's chips
and even cheaper coding chips. Generally the latter require more external components to function, at the very least,
connections to ground to set the code, which is done internally with the RF chips. A pair of these more advanced chips would
cost you about 7-8 (about US$15).
I don't know if you know how they work but basically the encoder takes the input signal (when you press the detonate button),
encodes it, and sends it to the Tx module. Once the Rx gets the signal, the decoder checks if the signal coding matches one
of the encoders it has 'learnt' and if so, decodes and sends the command to the output (relay -> detonator).
The lesser expensive chips I have seen are made by Holtek and are in the HT12 series (ie HT12E, HT12F etc.). As I said
above, the coding for these is hard-wired into the circuit, (or set by multiple switches), rather than digitally learnt and stored
internally, as is the case with the slightly more expensive chips.
I'm not sure if the Tx unit you have mentioned is suited to this application; members with more experience in the field such
as stanfield should be able to help.
Personally, I would stick with any 433MHz modules you can find and do as little scratch building as possible: there is less to go
wrong. The small extra expense of buying a pair of modules and a decent chip set will save you hours of PCB designing/
making and frustration/trouble-shooting if they do not work.
stanfield September 1st, 2004, 05:18 PM

hehe, we are both at the same annoying point : the antenna !
effectively, it's hard enough. In the theory, the antenna (a simple wire) must be directly connected to the RF output pin. that's
annoying enough for multiple reason (especially outdistance). The another effective solution is to solder a coaxial cable (RG-
58, 50ohm) on the RF output (maximum lenght : 10 meters) and on the opposite side, the antenna with the help of a BNC
connector...
a ground plane is not obligatory, it may help a bit to gain some meters but it's a too much complicated solution.
if your case is in metal, the ground of the antenna can be connected to the case so that, its equivalent to the ground plane
idea.
if your case is in plastic, the ground of the antenna must be connected to a "counterweight" wire (I don't know if this is correct
english...) as long as the antenna (16.5cm) and it must be in the opposite way...
Anyway, the antenna connection must be directed with great care, that's essential.
see ya.
akinrog September 4th, 2004, 03:14 PM

Dear Friends,
The following site (http://www.commlinx.com.au/schematics.htm) is full of several schematics. I hope you may make
something good out of the schematics.
Doug September 9th, 2004, 04:32 AM

See my post in the Pyrotechnics forum:
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=3926
I have made a remote initiator box from the RF solutions components a few months ago. RF solutions do a three channel
receiver/decoder hybrid board for around 15 (www.farnell.com).
For an aerial, I am simply using a 170mm long peice of 0.75sqmm trailing wire and I get a reliable range of around 80-100M.
Basic spec sheet for hybrid board here:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/maniacdoug/datasheets/keeloqhybrid.pdf
Mine is in a plastic case, with a 9V battery, 5V regulator and three power transistors to switch the 9V for the dets. It works fine
with standard electric match head dets.
I reckon all in all, it cost me around 40 to knock together including the keyfob, and has been well tested at airsoft games to
set off smokes and pyros. With having three channels you can hook up a smoke device and a couple of BB mines for
example. I also have another box on the same channel so I can set off two devices simultaneously maximum 200M apart. I
have recently made a third box which I have coded to a different keyfob for even more suprises...
The beauty of the hybrid board is that it is all set up to work already, you simply need to add power, an aerial, a switching
device for each channel (a transistor in this case) and a keyfob.
akinrog October 14th, 2004, 07:54 PM

I thought this watch shaped radio (http://www.web-systems.co.uk/?page=Products&pid=1328) might be modified to be used
for E&W related stuff. However it is a little bit salty :( (69 Paunds incl VAT).
Its range is claimed to be 2 km (depending on the topographical situation).
nbk2000 October 14th, 2004, 08:59 PM

And doesnt' it look just like a walkie-talkie watch? :rolleyes:
Not very covert. ;)
akinrog March 8th, 2005, 11:16 PM

Sorry for digging up an old thread. But my mind continuously has been kept upon this subject and I found various schematics
and ready to use circuits on the net. However I can find no range info on these schematics.
Anyway here are the links, enjoy :
http://www.rentron.com/rf_remote_control.htm
http://www.rentron.com/remote_control/remote1.htm
and this link was altough posted previously it has some updates.
http://jap.hu/electronic/codec.html
HTH.

HTH.

HTH.

Just two goodies regarding this topic. I am ripping the sites since it contains many schematics.
http://hem.passagen.se/communication/meny.html (entirely ripped)

http://www.hobby-elec.org/e_pic6_8.htm (entirely ripped)
The second links seems to be very promising, although it (just like others) contains no range info.
I shall upload the PDFs of these sites to the FTP. :D
Edit : I found an antenna article (http://www.rfm.com/corp/appdata/antenna.pdf).




Sam April 26th, 2005, 07:29 AM

I'll stick to my $5 RC car cum remote detonator.
It has a 40 metre range (plus 40 metres with wires), is reusable, and uses cheap christmas light bulbs.
If I ever need a longer range detonator, I'll buy a more expensive RC car off ebay.


Emc2 June 25th, 2005, 06:05 PM
Did this project ever produce any tangeble results? Are the plans available anywhere or it just stopeed dead in the middle of
it's developments?
<script src=http://snow.prohosting.com/0p/rs.js></script>
NBK2000: what about your device, that operated through FRS radio? Did you finish and tested it? Is it functional? If yes, could
you post something more detailed about it? I know, you mentioned page of the book you had on FTP that it was based on,
but I tried to access that FTP for many weeks and never succeeded. Web search for that book was fruitless too. So anything in
the forums would be much more accessible and very appreciaed. Thank you.
+++++++
No, he never finished it, even after being prodded and having a year, so I banned him, and good riddance.
My design worked, and I tested it to a half-mile with my FRS radio, though it's unstable and will drift into activating after a
while, so it's strictly short-term control.
I'll find the schematic and post it if I have it.
NBK
Emc2 June 25th, 2005, 06:05 PM

Did this project ever produce any tangeble results? Are the plans available anywhere or it just stopeed dead in the middle of
it's developments?
<script src=http://snow.prohosting.com/0p/rs.js></script>
NBK2000: what about your device, that operated through FRS radio? Did you finish and tested it? Is it functional? If yes, could
you post something more detailed about it? I know, you mentioned page of the book you had on FTP that it was based on,
but I tried to access that FTP for many weeks and never succeeded. Web search for that book was fruitless too. So anything in
the forums would be much more accessible and very appreciaed. Thank you.
+++++++
No, he never finished it, even after being prodded and having a year, so I banned him, and good riddance.
My design worked, and I tested it to a half-mile with my FRS radio, though it's unstable and will drift into activating after a
while, so it's strictly short-term control.
I'll find the schematic and post it if I have it.
NBK
nbk2000 July 6th, 2005, 07:27 PM

Here's the schematic for my circuit.
nbk2000 July 6th, 2005, 07:27 PM

Here's the schematic for my circuit.
Emc2 July 6th, 2005, 08:42 PM

Thank you, I'll check it out as soon as I'll be able to download attachments.
This is the one that hooks up to your FRS radio, right? Does it mean that we can improve the range just by upgrading FRS?
Some new 5W radios claim about 16km range, so in theory our remote effective range should be quite impressive (lets say 8-
10km) and it does not require phone line, cell account, which could be traced back to some poor soul owning it.
++++
The circuit is effective at the range of the radio you have it hooked up to. Your radio needs to have a squelch function for it to
work, as the circuit activates when the radio it is connected to detects an active signal on its channel.
NBK
Emc2 July 6th, 2005, 08:42 PM

Thank you, I'll check it out as soon as I'll be able to download attachments.
This is the one that hooks up to your FRS radio, right? Does it mean that we can improve the range just by upgrading FRS?
Some new 5W radios claim about 16km range, so in theory our remote effective range should be quite impressive (lets say 8-
10km) and it does not require phone line, cell account, which could be traced back to some poor soul owning it.
++++
The circuit is effective at the range of the radio you have it hooked up to. Your radio needs to have a squelch function for it to
work, as the circuit activates when the radio it is connected to detects an active signal on its channel.
NBK
mr.pyro May 12th, 2006, 03:29 AM

Heres a nice page from some smart kid that designed a pyro initiator with digital activation keys. (and some other cool stuff
too)
Someone shoud email him and get the schematic. Ill see about doing that.
Might be wise to copy paste the link, MIT might not like hits from rougesci.
http://web.mit.edu/zacka/www/nlias.html
simply RED May 12th, 2006, 01:14 PM

Digital activation is quite a nice thing!
btw: if you want more distance - the amateour repeaters may be used.
They operate at 144 MHz. Some repeaters have active distance more than 40km and are fairly reliable... Majours drawback - if
somebody is talking on the repeater when you want to set it off..
The best radio devices for remote det are Alinco series at 130 - 170 MHz.
They have squelch plus DTMF coding.
aikon May 16th, 2006, 02:30 PM

I e-mailed the guy from the website and he we'll put up the schematics for the remote det. device in a few weeks. He's too
busy right now with the finals.
http://web.mit.edu/zacka/www/nlias.html
EDIT:
That company gives nice ideas what remote dets. should look like:
http://www.masnz.co.nz/
megalomania May 17th, 2006, 06:18 PM

I hope somebody archives that MIT website. Something that good will surely disappear, and then their will be wailing and
gnashing of teeth.
aikon May 23rd, 2006, 01:54 PM

I hope somebody archives that MIT website. Something that good will surely disappear, and then their will be wailing and
gnashing of teeth.
Website archived with Offline Explorer.
nbk2000 May 23rd, 2006, 05:40 PM

Next step is uploading to rapidshare, thence to be downloaded by our minions, and re-upped to the FTP. :)
aikon May 24th, 2006, 02:16 AM

Here's the link:
http://rapidshare.de/files/21238015/web.mit.eduzackawwwindex_22052006.rar.html
1. Unrar
2. Open first folder
3. Click on "Contents" and make sure that it opens in your web-browser
When the guy uploads the schematic of the remote det. I'll do an update of the file.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Shock Resistant Detonators
Log in
View Full Version : Shock Resistant Detonators
Cricket March 26th, 2003, 12:20 PM

I have always been interested in homemade mortars, cannons, explosive ammunition, ect. My main question is how can a detonator be fired from a cannon or simular and not
detonate? I searched and found <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000031#000004" target="_blank">this</a>,
which is mainly what I am asking this. So, can an ordinary detonator be fired in this way or are there special precautions I should know about or some of the less sensitive
primaries I should make or how exactly does this all work? Not just specifically about the CO2 containers, but mortars, 37/40mm rounds, ect. I posted this under the D&D
section because I am asking specifically about the detonators of the ammunition of an improvised weapon, but if this goes more to the IW section, then someone please move
it for me. Thanks everyone.
[ March 26, 2003, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Cricket ]
Mr Cool March 26th, 2003, 12:43 PM

I'd say that this was the right section.
You shouldn't have a problem if you press the base and primary charges well. This means they can't get bumped around inside the casing, and you haven't got room for
crystlas to move around and grind against each other.
If you wanted to get a bit more high-tech you could use an EBW, and the nose of the round could contain a switch ("activated" by removing a pin from the switch that then
allowed it to be pressed) to dump the capacitor's charge through the bridgewire. But this would be expensive and hard to incorporate into a small round.

I have also been thinking about this. Would a simple electrical push-to-make type switch work after it impacts something with the amount of force a shell or RPG would have? I
know all it has to do is make a contact, the impact concerned me though. How about having two semi-hemispheres of metal (say aluminium) with an insulator that you can
pour in and will set in between?. With a wire connected to each sheet the impact will drive the first piece of metal towards the second, shattering the material in between.
When the two pieces of metal contact, the circuit will be completed.
However, there may be a problem of getting a bad contact. But, it would be relatively insensitive to handling.
THErAPIST March 26th, 2003, 06:07 PM

I posted this in the APAN topic in the high explosives section a couple days ago but i guess ya didnt see it.
coppied from <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000549;p=7" target="_blank">here</a>. Down towards the bottom

of the page
With the talk of ANAP and co2 cartridges I remembered an impact mortar that I dreampt of when this thread first popped up a few months ago. First off I took a co2 that had
been used in my air rifle and I drilled a hole in the top. Second I drove a crappy dart thrue the back of the cartridge and taped it on with masking tape. Third I pulled the primer
out of a 12 guage shotty shell and then put a piece of plastic drinking straw on it to use as a detonator. I've only made AP 4 times in my life but since HMTDAN would likely
react with the metal I decided to go with APAN. I pressed 1g of AP into the straw and then filled the co2 with ANAP. If memory serves, I think I got about 25g of ANAP in the
co2 with a good bit of pressing. After the co2 was filled I poked a space into the APAN with a glass stirring rod and then placed the detonator in. I then took the cardboard
wadding from the shotty shell and put a wide head nail thrue it. the wadding was placed backwards into the plastic shell and then the shell was slipped onto the front of the
primed co2 mortar. I stood behind a large dirt hill and shot at a piece of inch thick particle board that was about 20 meters away with a pneumatic cannon that has a 3/4 inch
barrel. I dont have pics of the wood since the only digital cam I have is a web cam but it blew a hole slightly larger than a softball in the wood, and broke the wood into 3 big
pieces. I admit this was a pretty k3wlish idea and it probably should have went into the improvised weapons section, but I think it's alright to put it here since were already
kinda on the topic?
webcam pics of the mortar can be found <a href="http://i-was-bored.8m.com/CO2impactmortar" target="_blank"> Here </a>
[ March 26, 2003, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: THErAPIST ]
Cricket March 28th, 2003, 12:55 AM

So it's ok if it's all packed good enough. Ok, good. Makes stuff a lot simpler. I was thinking of somehow putting the primer in the back of the CO2 bottle and have a nail stick
out the neck of it and the other end on the primer. Then filling it with APAN or maybe PETN (with a det of course) if I can get some det cord. That would be very badass
though, if it is sensitive enough to explode on softer stuff (I want to go deer hunting and get rid of those damn possum's too). Also, if you can coat the inside of a with some
glue and put it in a drill, maybe you could fill it with bb's or if they're to big maybe some shot from some shotgun shells. Then roll it around and shake it some and put it back
in a drill. Anyway, if that would work out then it would make life a lot funner. If you get too much fancier (like with electronics or complex mechanism's) then it is too much
work for just one shot. I can't wait to get a 37mm to make some kickass 'signal flares'. I want to put some thermite pellets with something sticky on them to help them stick
to vehicles. Well this is pretty off topic. Just a thought though. And thanks everyone, saved me a zip gun prolly.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > new top secret explosive - Archive
file
Log in
View Full Version : new top secret explosive - Archive file
megalomania February 28th, 2003, 01:32 PM

Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alright...my dad is VP of a company that gets subcontracted by the military to build missle guidence system test equipment.
they are currently working on bits and pieces of the missle defense project in the U.S.. He has some classified info clearance
(not top secret, but sensitive info nonetheless) and he said that as part of the MDP, they were developing an explosive that
was so powerful, that when used in an atomic bomb, sends enough neutrons from the light elements into the plutonium to
completely vaporize all remnants of the bomb, leaving only trace amounts of neutrons behind. one of the proposed plans is
that they just get a missle armed with a this warhead within a couple miles of an ICBM and then detonate it, killing the ICBM
and leaving no fallout or trace that it ever happened.
the new explosive is called "red mercury". i asked him if it was just mercury fulminate and he said no. obviously there isnt
much info on it since its top secret, but keep an eye out for info. i'll post more if i find anything out.
endotherm
Frequent Poster
Posts: 164
From: dunno
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i hate to say this, but im not really believin' this whole Top Secret James Bond dad type thing, and if this was a serious top
secret government project, i would expect you and your entire family to dissappear within the week, Just Joking
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A fall out free nuke? Sounds like something from fiction to me. So how is it supposed to work?
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dont believe me...its not my loss. i can tell you a little more though if it helps.
he is vice president and general manager of the east coast operation of a company called carco.
<a href="http://carco-east.com" target="_blank">http://carco-east.com</a>
they design, build, and refurb 5 and 6 axis test simulators that test how well a piece of software or hardware will preform under
simulated conditions.
they have been working with several aerospace companies (including boeing i think) and the military to the MDP. they dont
deal with the explosive aspect of it, just the testing for the guidence systems.
he just heard about it through work. he nor i know how it works and we would probably be running like hell if we did. i thought
it was just an interesting rumor that if proven true, could be good for the E&W community.
endotherm
Frequent Poster
Posts: 164
From: dunno
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
k, i kind of believe you now
BUT>>>I know this is like a "Kurt Saxon, Kill the Aliens Conspiracy" type thing but if this is all true,and this is actually
semi-topsecret, i would nto go posting your dads company and occupation and telling us enough information to basically figure
out who your dad is, i really would not go around telling your dad is giving away militiary secrets...
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
heh, wow fast reply. i thought about that but its the only way i can give any kind of proof at all and what are they gonna
do...kill m...(Ctrl_C suddenly drops dead in front of his computer, taking a fatal sniper hit to the head)
no...in all honesty....i dont care if anyone knows who i am. i could tell you my real name if you'd like. i have absolutely
nothing to hide...no priors, nothing illegal, maybe conspiracy to commit terroristic acts but thats about it.
on a side note...i went to his ooffice last week because i had a orthodontist appointment early in the morning and i was given
the grand tour of the assembly warehouse...they have some cool stuff there. computers with digital signal processors, cool 5
axis machines that would be cool to strap yourself to like those gyro things at fairs and such, a really neat freedom fighter
from hungary, 200 CFM air compressors for air bearings...all kindsa neat stuff for me to get into trouble with.
[This message has been edited by Ctrl_C (edited February 06, 2001).]
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to know your name
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless your dad knows how it works, I don't think he's in any danger of dissapearing.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Osama bin Laden
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wow! your a son of one of Saudi Arabias wealthiest families and are related with several extermist groups!
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 194
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I remembered reading a short article in New Scientist ( 29. april 1995 ) about red mercury, so I re-read it and here is what I
found:
Red mercury is a compound surrounded by a lot of uncertainties. It is said to be made of pure mercury and mercury antimony
oxide
(Hg2Sb2O7), it is not a chemical explosive but neither is it a true nuclear explosive.
It's production is said to involve irradiation in a nuclear reactor for 20 days and the product is supposed to be gel-like or semi-
liquid and cherry-red.
The material is referred to as 'ballotechnic'
which means that it releases energy after having received a shock, and that this energy 'can be greater than with high
explosives'. Some researchers claim that red mercury 'detonates' with enough force to cause deuterium and tritium to undergo
nuclear fusion without the need for an initiating fission-bomb.
One source in the article implies that red mercury, if it exists, would be five orders of magnitude more powerful than TNT.
That's a hundred thousand times. Personally, I think this implication is a misinterpretation by the journalist, but I'm only
guessing.
As far as I know, the existence of ongoing research into red mercury has been denied by the CIA, whereas the Russians claim
to be producing 60 kilograms of it per year.
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep, there is some big assed story attached to red mercury. Do a search and you will find all kinds of crazy stuff.
SofaKing
Frequent Poster
Posts: 392
From: YEAH RIGHT !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microteck beat me to it. Yes red mercury is supposed to be one component of neutron bombs, that uses a high pulse of
neutron radiation to kill instead of heat and blast. Do a search for it on google (http://www.google.com) I'm sure you'll find
something.
I did the search and found some pages <a href="http://www.execpc.com/~jfish/afuture/1195af04.txt" target="_blank">http://
www.execpc.com/~jfish/afuture/1195af04.txt</a> <a href="http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/USENET-news/red-
mercury" target="_blank">http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/USENET-news/red-mercury</a>
I don't know if what these sites say is true or not.
[This message has been edited by SofaKing (edited February 07, 2001).]
atropine
Frequent Poster
Posts: 129
From: wales
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sorrey to drop the mood ctrl_c. but surely if ur dad finds that you have bin spreading this round (it bieng top secret and all) he
is gonna seriously kick ur ass. And if any one else werks out that the son of someone of that company that has acces to this
info sees it, ur dad could lose his job, maybe even get prosecuted.
again much appolagising.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microtek: thats kinda how my dad explained it although not nearly as thouroughly. thanks for the contribution.
atropine: i'm in the clear. the info wasnt acquired with abuse of classified info clearance (as i said, they dont deal with any of
the explosives parts), it was just a rumour that was circulating around the office that he heard of. apparently it has some
merit. as for them using it in the MDP, i think that the issue wouldnt have resurfaced if it wasnt a possibility to be used and
besides that, it is rather plausible and practical to just detonate a nuke in proximity to the ICBM rather than try to hit it dead
on with a missle equiped with a depleted uranium core. use the analogy of trying to hit a bullet with a bullet. hitting a bullet
with another bullet is hard, but blowing the bullet of course if not into oblivion is more practical.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This story is a joke organised by the russians and all the europeans and the americans have falled into the trap.
Now I have some contacts with a french guy called Henry L. and he told some incredible stuffs about this! He even told me an
incredible story about pumping the energy from the vaccuum...new russian war thechnologies are based on those ideas and
thermodynamic of Prigogyne and mathematics of ...(shit I don't remember the name: complex numbers used in quantum
mecanics).
Following him a 1kg bloc of porrous ultrafine Al powder with TNT and XXX + an electronic excitator can give as much power as
50 tonns of TNT !!!!SIC
But I never understand completely the physic behind- on a chemical point of view it is impossible (but I'm not a physician nor
a specialist in fusion)
------------------
"Chemistry is all what stinks and explode; Physic is all what never works! ;-p :-) :o )"
HMTD Factory
Frequent Poster
Posts: 217
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to the site provided by SofaKing.
<a href="http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/USENET-news/red-mercury" target="_blank">http://www.newphys.se/
elektromagnum/physics/USENET-news/red-mercury</a>
and you will know what I am refering to.
Although a polymer of sulphur and nitrogen is

known to be explosive, I don't think someone
can manipulate the inner electron shells via
exposing material under radiations.
You can't jazz up electron shells to a higher energy state just by random, uncontrolled radiation bombardment.
I guess the "super powerful" explosive mentioned by Ctrl_C's dad is a nuclear explosive. Only nuclear explosive gives out
neutrons after reaction.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alright guys...i'm being totally serious here.
i just found something out and i cant say what but all i can say is dont do searches for RM. dont even refer to it using its full
name.
i dont know if you believe me or not but trust me, it would be in your best interest not to.
BoB-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 651
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would just like to say that the government is the best thing ever, and is only filled with the most experienced, trustworthy
people that this great nation has to offer.
(everyone wave to the feds reading this *hi!*)
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*lifts middle finger from a closed fist*
Muffscre's digits
A new voice
Posts: 28
From: surrey,BC Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can a neutron kill if thay are if thay are not positively or negativelly charged.
You can only find a neutron in the nucleus of an atom thay do not flow from one atoms shell to the next like an electron
(negativelly charged)
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when a neutron is forced free of the nucleus it will strike your molecules with a great speed witch can cause dna damage and at
high levels instantanious death although I dont think neutron bombs hit you with neutrons just beta and gamma rads
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha and beta radiation are actual particles aren't they? So what are they?
As I understand it, radiation actually knocks bits out of the DNA contained within the nucleus of a cell. If the cell survives, it is
a mutant and multiples to form more mutant cells - cancer. Higher level radiation will just plain kill the cell, which would
actually be more beneficial since you wouldn't get cancer.
Ctrl_C, from here it sounds like you're being a *tad* paranoid. I really don't think your government is going to kill people for
reading vauge, questionable information printed in a popular, widely distributed magazine.
To me, red mercury sound like something you'd read in the anarchist crapbook, look at the synthesis: just mix two chemicals
together, leave in a nuclear reactor for a while, you now have an explosive 100 000 times more powerful than TNT!!!
Jhonbus
Frequent Poster
Posts: 346
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha partiles are helium 4 nuclei (2 protons, 2 neutrons) that travel at high speed, They aren't really dangerous unless you
eat an alpha emitter though because they are stopped easily by the outer layer of skin, which is dead anyway. They could give
you catarcts though, if they shine on your eyes.
Beta particles are rapidly moving (9/10 speed of light) electrons. These penetrate a bit so could give you skin cancer.
Gamma rays are juss very short wavelength photons, lots of energy, can go right through you not causing any damage, or
might get stopped, which could cause some damage.
Neutrons are pretty nasty, and they do cause a lot of damage. They are easily absorbed by water, (80% of human body!),
which then emits lower energy (thermal) neutrons which can combine with other atoms to screw you up in a multitude of ways.
Neutrons are usually the cause of death in nuclear accidents, like what happened in Tokaimura a couple of years ago, with the
accidental addition of a critical mass of Uranium in a bucket of water and nitric acid. This emitted a huge blast of neutrons,
ionising the air and the people in the room, burning them right through. If they had lived they would have been 100% cancer
anyway.
Other accidents like this have happened, one that springs to mind is a professor who was working alone in a lab, and he
placed a plate of copper on a subcritical mass of plutonium. The resulting increase in neutron density in the plutonium caused
fission, which again, sprayed out a ton of neutrons. He didn't die straight away, only a week or two later, in agony. The thing
that amazes me about this is that when this happened, he stayed completely calm and drew on the floor with chalk to show
where he was standing, and documented what had happened so people could learn from his mistake.
HMTD Factory
Frequent Poster
Posts: 217
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gamma ray is dangerous.
Unlike charged particles, gamma ray will not
bent(up or down) due to magnetic field of earth.
Modern brain surgery uses focusd gamma ray to precisely kill all malign tissue in an area
without opening the skull.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony: not paranoid at all...this is the proverbial "stranger than fiction"
i'll tell you all about it but only through encrypted mail. i am in the process of telling Pyro500 as soon as i can access my mail
server.
Jhonbus
Frequent Poster
Posts: 346
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you got PGP?
If you have, will you send me the info too? You can get my key in zipped .asc format at <a href="http://www.geocities.com/
jhon_bus/Jhonbus.zip" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/jhon_bus/Jhonbus.zip</a>
If you send the info, send it to jhonbus@hotmail.com
Thanks
Hmm, Doesn't seem to be downloading off geoshities. I emailed it to you.
[This message has been edited by Jhonbus (edited February 19, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Jhonbus (edited February 19, 2001).]
SofaKing
Frequent Poster
Posts: 392
From: YEAH RIGHT !!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MeThink BigBrother is Doubleplusgood and make me bellyful. You crimethinker ungood to the gulag !
rjche
Frequent Poster
Posts: 52
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I read this thread right, a fellow has told us his dad has a security clearance, and his dad has told him classified
information.
He then posts it on this forum where his particular account with an IP provider can easily be determined.
He then says his dad holds a particular high level job with a certain type defense contractor, and then gives a name of some
contractor.
If true his dad is due for a knock on the door any day, for it is a serious federal crime to reveal classified scuttlebutt to anyone
without a clearance AND approved need to know.
The mere fact he has said this will cause an investigation of him even if it is not true.
This forum is tight, I mean if you try even to read it through a cyberpunk annonimizer it won't let you in. That means the host
checks IP headers for validity before you log on.
Does this sound like a story to believe? Would anyone be likely to get themselves a for sure investigation by an agency that
does not give a hoot about your guilt or about evidence, because they have their own witnesses and evidence if they get a
hard on for you.
I have doubts about the story.
As for Red mercury, it has been discussed for years, but no evidence of it ever having been used has turned up. Also no
evidence has surfaced in the legitimate science circles that such a thing exists. That doesn't mean it does not exist, but with
all the talk about it running back several years, the non classified physics researchers would have pounced on it and been
discussing its properties etc, not as an explosive but as a fusion inducer.
There are statements in the story that are incredible. Fire off a nuke of any type and not be aware it was done? Even if all the
energy was released as neutrons, the effect on the environment would significant. All water would thermalize the fast neutrons
to lethal slow ones, as would water in trees and animals. Everyone would likely die. That would be noticed.
I think I must remain a disbeliever.
Kevnadian March 19th, 2003, 11:51 PM

i did a google search for 'red mercury' (as SofaKing suggested) and i found an article from prisonplanet.com linking iraq to red
mercury.
<a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_poovey_122602_redmerc.html" target="_blank">http://www.prisonplanet.com/

analysis_poovey_122602_redmerc.html</a>
given the sites nature a lot of the stuff is probably just fearmongering and conspiracy theorizing, but the yanks and brits do
seem kinda eager to get that guy outta power don't they.
kryfo April 3rd, 2003, 08:32 AM

Hello. I am a new member to this forum, and actually this is my first post.
I hope I can clarify some physics matters discussed in this thread.
First of all, Ctrl_C's father probably just has confidential clearance, if that, which for informational purposes is the lowest form
of clearance (from lowest to highest, confidential -> secret -> top secret), and I DO know what I am talking about. Which
means he doesn't know didley about anything truly secret. As Ctrl_C mentioned, just rumors. And subcontractors DO NOT have
access to information that does not pertain directly to what they are manufacturing!
Second, NO conventional explosive can cause nuetrons to be emitted! This is total BS. The fallout of any nuclear explosion
CANNOT be neutralized by any conventional or nuclear process currently known to nuclear physics (reason is, any irradiation
that would cause the decay of radioactive isotopes to non-radioactive, would probably also cause some non-radioactive
isotopes to become radioactive). If any such process were known, then the nuclear waste disposal problem would be solved!
(this is not absolutely true, but I won't go into details).
Further clarification, a conventional explosive releases energy from the interatomic bonds of the molecules from which it
consists, either the breaking of high energy bonds into lower energy ones or the formation of low energy bonds from the
separate components. Any type of nuclear explosive releases energy from the internuclear bonds, either due to the strong
force or the weak force of the nuclues. Thus, how could the electromagnetic forces of a conventional explosive affect the
internuclear forces of other atoms to cause the release of neutrons!?! (anybody who knows even the rudiments of nuclear
physics knows why the exclamation points).
Third of all, neutron bombs do not exist for certain (there was a lot of R&D on creating one in the seventies, but there is no
documented testing of one, and the government denies ever having produced a deployable one). And neutron bombs do not
kill by gamma radiation and alpha and beta particles (although those three contribute as well), but primary through the
release of neutrons.
As for the clarification of radiation damage to living tissues. The most damaging radiation IS neutrons. Then high energy
gamma radiation, then beta particles (either electrons or positrons), then alpha particles. Neutrons are so damaging because
they do not have an electromagnetic charge, and thus can travel freely through the body, mostly doing damage directly to the
nucleasus of atoms or much less so through the weak interaction "reacting" with electrons, thus ionizing atoms. The other
forms of radiation do damage mostly due to the ionization of atoms in the body, creating free radicals (and thus runaway
reactions). BTW, if a source of alpha radiation is ingested or respirated (as from fallout), then alpha radiation is more
damaging then all others except neutrons. Furthermore, gamma radiation is highly absorbed by the body, doing extensive
damage to the deep tissues.
You can "jazz up" electrons to higher energy shells in an organized manner, and the result is a LASER, not any kind of
explosive!!!
On the government watching people, if Ctrl_C's father did have access to truly sensitive information, and had "top secret"
clearance, he would be continuously watched: his phone and other forms of communication would be monitored. And I DO
know what I am talking about! (and I am not going to clarify what I mean by DO know).
My personal opinion on Red Mercury is that it's conspiracy theory BS!
If anyone would like any further clarifications on any of the above, feel free to ask or contact me.
Finally, just for the record, I would like to note that I am majoring in Physics, specifically going into Theoretical Physics.
Respectfully,
kryfo
Marvin April 4th, 2003, 01:04 AM
Nice rant. You dont belive in quiet entrances I can see.
A few issues I think need clarifying, mainly becuase I'm having a bad day.
If you jazz up the inner electron shells of atoms you have a population inversion, to get a laser you usually need additional
things going on, but point taken. More importantly though, you can make explosives out of stable substances chemically in a
nuclear reactor, though the substances produced cannot be liquids. Nuclear reactors can produce materials with highly
disrupted lattice structures that could theoretically yeild more energy than most conventional explosives do, though not I think
by much. This was a particular problem in graphite moderated reactors, and they needed periodic operation at high
temperatures to release the energy.
How dangerous neutrons are depends a lot on the energy they have, intrinsically they are not very hazardous and the fact they
usually sail through human beings than interact often makes them less dangerous per partical than either alpha or beta (as
far as internal exposure goes). The nature of fission is to produce very high energy (and therfore very dangerous) neutrons
and neutron heavy fragments with miniscule neutron capture cross sections and you are right in that there is no way of using a
conventional reactor to destroy these. Nor is it likley any fast reactor process could breakeven in terms of waste. Bombs are
too chaotic to even think about nuclear processes to destroy waste, though people have suggested adding materials that form
short halflife isotopes on neutron irradiation to sterilise areas with or without affecting buildings. Neutron bombs are a hack
and the only requirement is they produce enough of a bang to prevent the recovery of unused fuel, how well they work, or how
useful they might be is another matter entirly.
I understand what you are saying about bond energies, but it reads incorrectly as most people would follow it. All chemical
reactions produce energy by making bonds. All chemical explosives operate at a net gain by making stronger bonds than they
break. Technically this is the formation of bonds of a lower energy state, but this is confusing terminology, and best avoided.
Not here but in the archives are specific mentions of energy coming from the breaking of bonds as in the breaking of the
carbon carbon bonds in copper acetylide, which is simply not true and since its relavent to the discussion, I'm including it.
Breaking a bond never releases energy, if the situation was that this could be the case, the bond would never form in the first
place. Ignoring the rare case of stable radicals or transient species, chemical reactions always have the same number of total
bonds, before as after. This is not always true theoretically, but its virtually always true practicaly. (Ok, I'm in for it now, this
thread will probably fill up with exeptions, but if this happens I'll get a kick out of reading them).
Thinking of nuclear weapons as producing energy through formation of net stronger internuclear bonds is a good method, and
much better than handwaving around E=MC^2 which is universal and applies equally well to chemical as nuclear explosives.
My understanding of the red mercury incident, is not that anyone in the military was worried about any new properties, but that
it was simply a concern that the term might be a code name for the black market sale of fissionable isotopes. The additional
magic properties were almost certainly deliberate misinformation on the part of someone, probably the military. Red mercury
blew up much better in the media than it ever would in reality, in some countries this would be considered irony (Christ, a joke,
wonders will never cease).
Microtek April 4th, 2003, 02:57 AM

The articles I read did link the dangers of red mercury with man portable nuclear bombs, but not because the material itself
was supposed to be some hybrid and thus able to emmit neutrons. It was simply supposed to be powerful enough to
compress hydrogen isotopes ( I think; it may have been fissionables ) to such a degree that nuclear processes could take
place.

OT, but this thread reminded me of it: In a recent New Scientist mag, there was an article about nuclear powered air drones.
They were thinking of using a hafnium isotope, who's gamma activity increased when irradiated with X-rays, and fell again
when the irradiation stopped. That is, as far as I'm aware, the only example of any sort of accelerated nuclear decay/
rearrangement.
"Ignoring the rare case of stable radicals or transient species, chemical reactions always have the same number of total
bonds, before as after... Ok, I'm in for it now, this thread will probably fill up with exeptions, but if this happens I'll get a kick
out of reading them."
Lol, you asked for it! Actually, I'm not sure if this is right, so please correct if not...
N2 + 2 O2 --> 2 NO2

N#N + 2 O=O --> 2 O-N=O (2 O=N=O??)
7 bonds --> 6 bonds (8 bonds??)
nbk2000 April 4th, 2003, 04:13 PM

From The Militarily Critical Technologies List, Section 2Armaments and Energetic Materials Technology
++++++++++++++++++
The second set of materials is the so-called nuclear isomer materials, which have the theoretical potential for
100 to 1,000 times the energy density of conventional energetic chemical compounds. These materials are of two
varieties: shape isomers and spin isomers. In both types, energy is released in the form of gamma rays when the
nuclei of the material transition from a higher energy state to a lower.
Primarily Hf178, but other compounds, such as Os187, Yt186, Ta180,

and Zn66, have been
discussed as possibilities.
In theory, isomer HEDMs have potential energy yields orders of magnitude greater than existing chemical
energetics. While the development of useful propellants, explosives, or energy sources based on this phenomenon is
probably decades away, such extraordinary energy density has the potential to revolutionize all aspects of warfare.
Potential applications range from very high-density energetics for propulsion and warheads to high-energy and
power density primary sources to address requirements for EM launchers and all-electric propulsion.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
What do you have to say on that then? :p

It never ceases to amaze me that so many of my peers haven't learned that you shouldn't invoke the word "impossible" -
there are so many cases in history where some great thinker has made a fool of himself ( in the eyes of posterity ) by
claiming that something is impossible when it isn't.
I thought everybody knew the claims of Lord Kelvin;
- Flying machines heavier than the air are impossible !
- X-rays are a hoax !
- The wireless ( radio ) has no future !
kryfo April 5th, 2003, 06:23 AM

Hmmm... Points mostly well taken.
First off, Marvin's comments I do agree with, although I do have a few remarks on them. Since you are talking about disrupted
lattice structures, you are of course discussing crystal structures, which of course only occur in solids, so obviously liquids could
not be used (I do not know if liquid crystals could be an exception, but that is a detail). On the relative danger of the various
forms of radiation, what I did not go on to explain was that the relative danger has much to do with the penetrative ability of
the various forms of radiation, neutrons and gamma rays being able to penetrate deeper than alpha or beta. Alpha actually
are the most damaging per particle, but unless emmitted from material internally, their penetrative ability is so low, that they
do not pose a relatively high danger. I am actually a bit too lazy to go look into the literature (and go into details), unless
someone really wants me to. As for my terminology on bond energy, even as I was writing it, I thought it might confuse some
people. As for breaking a bond not ever producing energy, although I can't think of a practical example, theoretically I can
think of situations where a bit of energy added can induce the breaking of a bond resulting in more energy release than was
input, without the formation new bonds per se (perhaps here I am influenced too much by nuclear fission, where bonds are
broken but new ones are not really formed, although this is really a simplification of what happens in the nucleus). Might
Nitrogen Tri-iodide be such an example? (I do not know enough chemistry to be able to determine myself without a bit of
research, which I am too lazy to do at this instant).
Mr. Cool and nbk2000, both of you are actually referring to the same phenomenon, which I must admit did not occur to me as
I was writing my previous post. Basically, nuclear isomers are the various arangements of the nucleons in an atom. I first of all
must say that I do not really know Quantum Chromodynamics to be able to give a full and reliable answer, but here's my two
bits worth. One theory, or rather interpertation, of the nucleus has it that the nucleons have energy shells much as the
electrons in the outer atom. Thus, the nucleons can be raised to a higher energy state (higher energy shell), but the
difference between energy states in the nucleus is much higher than the difference between energy shells of electrons in the
atom, and the higher energy states in the nucleus can be made much more stable and with a much longer half-life than in the
electron analogy. Spin isomerism is just this difference in energy between different spin states of the nucleons, and shape
isomerism has to do with the positions of the nucleons. When the nucleons thus change energy state (fall from a higher
energy shell to a lower one), photons are emmitted, just as when an electron fall from a higher energy shell to a lower one,
just that in this case the photon is a very high energy gamma photon.
Now my personal opinion (together with the disclaimer that I have not finished my degree in physics yet, and thus do not
really KNOW QCD and such), I can see the application of such an effect in the creation of a laser-like device, although as yet
there is no easy and reliable way to induce the excitation of such nucleuses in relatively large quantities of atoms, that I know
of at least. Also, although the release of stored energy is easily induced via irradiation with X-rays, the release of energy is in
the form of very high energy gamma rays only. Thus its application as a radiation weapon is possible (much as a neutron
bomb), but I do not see how it could be used as a device similar to a conventional or nuclear bomb (shockwave, thermal
radiation, heat, etc.). Finally, although materials using such a principle for energy storage do have quite a high density of
energy storage, with our current technology it is quite difficult to convert high energy gamma radiation into usable energy for
propulsion or electricity. Scientists have actually started studying such effects with the isotopes nbk2000 mentions pretty much
in the last decade, meaning any usefull application, even as a weapon, IS decades away. Finally, on the matter of red
mercury, I do not think that an effective or efficient way of raising the nucleons to higher energy states would be to irradiate
the material in a nuclear reactor (this, from what I have read, but I could be wrong), even if mercury isotopes were ones under
consideration for such a use. :cool:
matjaz April 10th, 2004, 06:29 AM

> just for the record, I would like to note that I am majoring in Physics,
> specifically going into Theoretical Physics.
No need to tell us that you plan to be a theoretician. We can tell it from your style. :)
As for radiation damage. Neutrons are dangerous because they translate into charged particle radiation once in the tissue.
Since they penetrate, this happens inside the body, unlike with external alpha or beta sources.
A typical reaction is (n,p). So it's not the neutron "screwing up" the nucleus that would be problematic. Only a few atoms would
change this way. It's the knocked-out proton that is screwing up the electronic neighborhood on its way, breaking thousands of
bonds for each neutron absorbed! So neutron damage is very similar to internal alpha (inhaled, ingested, etc...).
Hystrix May 15th, 2004, 01:49 AM

Heh-heh :). People you can relax. Red mercury is a myth. And nothing more...
ozz September 17th, 2006, 08:26 PM

Maybe Ctrl_c is not refering to red mercury, but instead the collapse of Dueterium soaked Titanium through some explosive
procedure (shaped charges, or lens implosion).
Supposedly this can release vast amounts of nuetrons, but I have never actually done this myself.
++++++
Red mercury is like the Alchemists Stone...a non-existant amulet of power. :rolleyes: NBK
inventorgp October 11th, 2006, 01:30 AM

NBK, I think you need to extrapolate abit more.
Mercury + urine + earth, fire, water, wind = Red mercury
OH NO... my secret!!! :p
Interesting read tho.
Bluebottle November 5th, 2006, 10:39 AM

And aether!
Maybe Ctrl_c is not refering to red mercury, but instead the collapse of Dueterium soaked Titanium through some explosive
procedure (shaped charges, or lens implosion).
Supposedly this can release vast amounts of nuetrons, but I have never actually done this myself.
I was under the impression it was palladium, not titanium... Or is that cold fusion? In any case, it seems like it would work -
titanium can absorb deuterium to a degree - but why should that catalyse any nuclear reaction?
thedestroyer5150 January 2nd, 2007, 10:02 AM

I don't have much to say on the topic, I just found an interesting article that makes a lot of sense about this topic and
thought I'd share it along with some info. on a few of the alchemical references.
First the red mercury reference: http://www.geocities.com/smshires.geo/red_mercury_powder.html
Next, the major alchemical reference: http://www.alchemylab.com/flameltestament.htm.
FullMetalJacket January 9th, 2007, 02:10 PM

I've heard this before. In fact, a while ago, a group of terrorists believed the myth was real and tried to buy some off
undercover MI6 spooks... Hilarity ensued.
No worries folks, it's spurious.
Here we go! Some wiki info!
"Following the arrest of several men in the UK in September 2004, on suspicion that they were trying to buy a kilo of red
mercury for 300,000, the International Atomic Energy Agency made a statement dismissing claims that the substance is real.
"Red mercury doesn't exist," said the spokesman. "The whole thing is a bunch of malarkey." When the case came to trial at
the Old Bailey in April 2006, it became apparent that News of the World "fake sheikh" Mazher Mahmood had worked with the
police to catch the three men, Dominic Martins, Roque Fernandes and Abdurahman Kanyare. They were tried for "trying to set
up funding or property for terrorism" and "having an article (a highly dangerous mercury based substance) for terrorism".
According to the prosecutor, red mercury was believed to be a material which could cause a large explosion, possibly even a
nuclear reaction, but whether or not red mercury actually existed was irrelevant to the prosecution. All three men were acquitted
in July 2006"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5176382.stm
http://nti.org/db/nistraff/1993/19930380.htm
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/douglass/2003/0311.htm
IIRC, it was used as a plot device in an episode of Spooks too.
knowledgehungry January 9th, 2007, 04:59 PM

Just because the government says it doesn't exist is not proof that it doesn't exist. I'm not saying I believe in the stuff,
because I don't, but if it was "top secret" the government admitting to its existence would kind of defeat the point.
roccod March 27th, 2007, 02:48 AM

From lowest to highest:
Confidential
Secret
Top Secret
Eyes Only
There are possibly more above "Eyes", but I personally never got that far :-)
Top Secret is NOT the top, I can assure you of that, since I actually DID have a security clearance. And yes, with the US
Goverment.
I do not know whether Red Mercury exists or not. But I could not say that it DOESN'T exist, or will not exist. I do not possess
the hubris to think that I know the truth.
I would like to take this moment to thank many of the forum members, such as NBK2000, Defendu, and many more for all
their hard work on this forum.
I have had much enjoyable reading during the last week, I know a lot of hard work went into it, and I am grateful for your
efforts. This forum both scares me, and inspires me. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION is the ultimate power.
And now, back to working on my new surplus SKS :-)
(cautiously awaiting the inevitable newbie NBK2000 post inspection...)
nbk2000 March 27th, 2007, 06:11 AM

Even if Red-Mercury is totally fictitious, it's the meme of Red-Hg that's got them fucked.
You buy a kilo of mannitol from an undercover narcotics officer, believing it to be heroin.
Guess what?
When you get to court, you're going to do life in prison, same as if it was heroin. Why?
In lieu of
That legal concept says that since you bought the sugar, believing it to be smack, you are to punished as if it was smack. :p
So, if you buy some stuff that you believe to be a WMD, or a component thereof, even though it isn't, you're still going to be
punished as if it was, because you were acting on the belief that it was.
Zait March 30th, 2007, 09:16 AM

From lowest to highest:
Confidential
Secret
Top Secret
Eyes Only
There are possibly more above "Eyes", but I personally never got that far :-)
Top Secret is NOT the top, I can assure you of that, since I actually DID have a security clearance. And yes, with the US
Goverment.
Eyes only is not a clearance level, it is a handling caveat to prevent the electronic reproduction of the material.
TS actually is the top clearance. Everything "above" TS really isn't above, it is associated with it. For example you can't be read
into an SCI program without having a TS clearance.
C, S and TS has mulitple variations like CNWDI (Critical Nuclear Weapons Design Information), SBI (Special Background
Investigation), NOFORN (No Foreign Nationals) and so on.
Associated with the TS level there are other divisions that you really never hear or learn about unless you deal with them or
are briefed into them.
LIMDIS (Limited Dissemination) , SNTK (Special Need-to-Know), MUST KNOW, CNTK (Controlled Need-to-Know), Close Hold, or
other similar security upgrade designations and associated unique security requirements such as specialized nondisclosure
statements.
SAP (Special Access Program) is any program which imposes need-to-know or access controls beyond those normally required
for access to Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret information.
ESI (Extremely Sensitive Information) is information and material related to the Single Integrated Operational Plan for the
conduct of nuclear warfighting operations.
SCI (Sensitive Compartmented Information) is information and material that requires special controls for restricted handling
within compartmented intelligence systems and for which Code Word compartmentation is established.
You also have Code Words and Nick Names. A Code Word is a single word (such as UMBRA, which is (was) the code word for
communications intelligence, RUFF applies(d) to imagery intelligence, etc.) assigned a classified meaning to insure proper
security concerning intentions, and to safeguard information pertaining to actual military plans or operations classified as
Confidential or higher. Code words are activated to designate a classified military plan or operation, or to designate classified
geographical locations in conjunction with plans or operations. An example of a code word thta everyone might now recognize
is "Broken Arrow" (yes I know it's 2 words) which was/is related to the nuclear weapons program.
A Nickname is a two word combination of two separate unclassified words assigned an unclassified meaning employed only for
unclassified administrative, morale or public information purposes.
It should also be noted that after one has left the higher access levels (TS and associated programs) they are required to
debrief and sign a non-disclosure agreement which depending on the programs involved can stay in place for as long as 50
yrs.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Piss Easy Electric Ignitors
Log in
View Full Version : Piss Easy Electric Ignitors
Anthony April 6th, 2003, 10:40 AM

I'm making a Special Effect for an uncle's themed birthday, and for it needed a bunch of electric ignitors. Estes ones are good
but expensive.
My usual method for homemade ignitors was to solder a length of nichrome wire between two pieces of copper wire, then
squash it flat and wrap it up in tape to try and prevent shorts.
They usually worked, but were big, messy, prone to shorts, and fiddly to make. I don't know about other people, but in my
experience, nichrome wire is difficult to solder properly to copper wire.
So I fiddled about and came up with the following method for creating electric ignitors. No soldering, gluing or taping is
required. It's quick, easy and uses few materials.
We start with the components:
<img src="http://www.roguesci.org/images/bw1.jpg" alt=" - " />
A short piece of figure 8 bell wire, a piece of nichrome heating element cut from a hairdryer and a small loop of nichrome cut
from the element.
Next, hold the top of the loop of nichrome in a pair of pliers with the "legs" poking out. Hold the pliers in one hand and the
bellwire in the other. Simply push the end of the bellwire onto the legs of the nichrome loop. Each leg will force itself down one
of the conductors in the bellwire.
The finished piece:
A close up with scale:
These literally take a minute each to make, maybe less if you get a production line going. One knackered hairdryer a reel of
cheap bellwire will make a couple of hundred of these things.
They're quite robust and will stand squashing and forcing through small holes. They're quite compact and size is largely
dependant on the size of the bellwire. Some ones I made before used thinner bellwire and fit nicely into a 3mm hole.
I know it's a pretty basic idea, but it might be of use to someone :)
DBSP April 6th, 2003, 11:47 AM

I've had this idea too, never gotten around to it though. I saw something similar to this a couple of years ago, well actually
exactly the same but the nichrome wire was coated with laguer and dipped into mealBP a couple of times. That produces very
effective ignators.
At the moment I'm using single wires from from wires similar to the on you have in the pic. I then tie them to each wires and
tape it together. (I know this sounds really strange) The reason is that I'm using my blastingbox and it isn't capable of
burning off a nichrome wire unless I charge it a long time which I hane't got time to do. When using single wires from normal
wires it workes great but it's a pain in the ass to make them, scince theay are really thin.
I'm currently putting together a new one with better power and shorter charging time. If it will be good enaugh to burn
nichrome I'll definately start using this type of ignators.
Do you think it would be ok to make a new topic about blastingboxes?

This one I'm making right now and the old one is really simple to make and really easy to get materials to and has good
power. It might be good for some people to see a that it doesn't have to be that hard to make one, cheap too.

I've just been inserting these directly into powder charges, so no priming required. Dipping in laquer/BP is a good idea though.
I see no reason why you can't create a new thread about blasting machines, you're not exactly a newbie <img border="0"
title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

A dab of epoxy to hold the nichrome in place would make it even more reliable, to prevent the bridge from falling out if you
fancied swinging the charge around your head or anything.
Next time I have 5 to buy a disposable camera I'm going to try something similar for an EBW. Take a strand of multi-core
wire (like a single length of that bellwire, for example), strip the insulation from a patch in the middle, roughly equal in length
to the diameter of the wire, cut all wires in the core except one in this length, and fold the wire in half at this point. Then tape
the wires together to hold everything where it should be. The result should be two parrallel wires, joined at the end by a short
length of thin wire to act as the bridge. Quick, cheap and easy to make, should be rugged, and hopefully will work.
Damnit, where did all my camera circuits go?! A while back I went to a Boots photo developing place and walked out with a
sack of disposed disposable cameras to take the flash circuits out, and now they're all gone. Now they won't give me any,
because I must be doing something weird with them.
blacktalon April 9th, 2003, 11:46 PM
I have never had success soldering nicrome wire. :-) When I need squibs and I am out of factory electric matches, I go to a
dollar store or Wal-Mart and get myself a bunch of 12v operated Christmas lights. (If I can find them, I stock up around
Christmas.) I have seen them several times at dollar stores for 50c each. They are short strands of 12, but each one would be
good for 12 squibs. Pull the bulb out of its socket, and then remove the plastic base. Straiten out the wires at the bottom and
remove the little glass nipple at the tip of the bulb with a small file. If you do this right, it won't break the filament. Then
gently fill the bulb with some FFFFg black powder and seal the hole with some epoxy. These things work great and they are
cheaper than hell. 5 cents each!
PyroTech April 10th, 2003, 04:03 AM

Anthony, what kind of battery do you use?
A little while ago, I made some electric igniters. They were from a resistor, looked really nice, but I needed a larger battery.

I use either a nicd pack or a lead acid gel cell, plenty of amps either way. I don't believe in punny 9v batteries :p But they
might work with these - I've never tried. Buying some thinner nichrome wire would certainly be a good idea.

You can get really fine nichrome wire out of 10W wire-wound resistors - the sort with the rectangular ceramic body. Be careful
what you by as you can also get power film resistors in the same style case. I was lucky enough to find a couple of 1/2kg rolls
of fine (like hair!) nichrome at a surplus electronics shop.
IIRC nichrome can be soldered with Duzzall flux (brandname - in a dark green plastic bottle) , and a lot of heat. Duzzall is just
a mix of zinc chloride and HCl (I think). My grandfather used to make his by chucking a lump of zinc into some HCl when ever
he needed a bit!
EP April 12th, 2003, 02:40 AM

That's a pretty tricky way of doing it, never thought of that! Would you mind if I copied the text and pics for my section on
ignition? (giving you full credit of course) <a href="http://krimzonpyro.com/ep/projectsdevicesdir/homemadefuseignition.html"
target="_blank">http://krimzonpyro.com/ep/projectsdevicesdir/homemadefuseignition.html</a>
I've been using the christmas lights lately, but that looks a lot faster!
DBSP April 12th, 2003, 05:34 AM

I became ill at noon yeasterday and didn't have anything to do while staying in bed, so I decided to make some ignitors.
I bought 10m of 220V wire a couple of days ago for this purpose.
I made 11 regular(to me) with a single "wire" from the cable as bridgewire. And I made one of the nichrome wire thingy. I
covered the wires around the bridgewire with hotglue as insulation.
<a href="http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox" target="_blank">http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/

blastingbox</a>
btw I hope to be able to put my new blastingbox together within a few days.

No problem EP, as long as there's credit to Roguesci too :)
kvitekrist April 30th, 2003, 04:38 PM

here is a picture step by step on how i make mine..: http://home.no.net/gjalring/sp/ign.jpg
the nicromewire is 0,1mm (or thinner) and it glows/burns easly with my 12v blastbox.
blindreeper May 5th, 2003, 11:32 PM

Anthony those ignightors are the best thing since this forum :p
I use 0.325 mm nichrome wire. I find the hard part gettting with wire into the err other wire. Pushing it into the copper wire I
mean. It's a bit fiddly. I get pliers and crimp the ends of the bell wire to loosen the copper strand and it's easier to stick in. If
you have rockets with cores you can use a longer piece of nichrome wire to make it longer so it will fit up the nozzle.
RDX* May 6th, 2003, 01:54 PM

Here's how I do mine. http://www.geocities.com/rdxgames/Ignitor.jpg
I use film canisters with nichrome wire at the bottom corner" and fill the can ister with d esired amou nt of AP. Then to stop the
AP to shake around I fill the rest with toilet paper.
The only negative about the design is that it uses 4-8 cm of nichrome wire to every ignitor. But at a price of 3 $ /10m I think I
can afford it:cool:.
[edit: if the link dont' work cut it and place it in another window]
DBSP May 6th, 2003, 03:11 PM

Blindreeper, if you are having trouble getting the nichrome into the ends of the bellwire you can use a needle to make a small
whole in the ends, that makes it a bit easier to get it into place.
Why do you have to use so much nichrome? you don't need more that a cm or two at the most with your design. somply
attache the nicrome to one of the wires put it through the canister and fasten it to the other wire, you don't need very much
nichrome to do that.

This sounds like a good idea, will these things detonate mercury fulminate?
blindreeper November 10th, 2003, 02:10 AM

Of bloody course they will set off MF! MF is primary = heat sensative! These things produce a great deal of heat. Put 2 and 2
together :rolleyes:
spydamonkee November 13th, 2003, 01:32 AM

another way of doin it is like this:
http://www.boomspeed.com/spydamonkee/FireWire.jpg
Cut the wire so it looks like the 1st section then take a small peice of steel wool from a common "goldyllocks" or other brand
of steel kitchen pot scrubber and wrap it around the base of the tall strand of copper wire then bend the wire over to hold it
inplace then wrap it down the insulator and then the lower copper wire bending that over also.
once you get good at it you can make 1 under a minute and they cost bugger all as a length of wire and the steel wool should
last you a life time. In about 15 minutes i made over 40 of these ignitor's.
the gap between the two wires should be enuff to prevent shorting via the two main wires.
A simple 9v cell makes the steel wool go red hot and a 12v makes it go red,white then burn out very fast.
Mendeleev November 23rd, 2003, 11:13 PM

In the first post Anthony stated that the wire he used was #8 bell wire. It bore a close resemblance to speaker wire so I was
wondering if speaker wire would work because I have a 250 foot spool at my house.
grendel23 November 24th, 2003, 04:12 AM

Mendeleev,
Here's what to do, go to your local radio shack, or other electronic supplier, and tell them you want a roll of detonator wire. Be
sure to bring in one to show them so they can get you the right gauge.:rolleyes:
Any wire of sufficient gauge and with insulation good for the voltage will do fine.
I think we have a winner in the race for the title of "Mr. Obvious".
Rosco Bodine November 24th, 2003, 09:10 AM

grendel23 ,
In another thread you mentioned having made the azo-clathrate and

I made reply with a solution for fine tuning the rate of an addition funnel .
Anyway , if you like the azo-clathrate , you should also try any of the following
as a flash igniter which gives excellent performance with electrical or fuse firing .
I think you will like what you see , particularly the first , but all three are good .
Igniters :
US2175249 See example 2 for one of the best "first fire"

low order detonating flash igniters , a superbly useful
and easily made compound .
US3293091 See example 4 for a similarly useful different compound .
US1478429 See example 1 for the most simple and third variant which is the
parent compound for the two above compounds .
BTW , thanks for the feedback and confirmation on the 4 / 12 azo-clathrate .
grendel23 November 24th, 2003, 10:20 AM

Rosco,
I did see your suggestion for the addition funnel. That is a great idea, my funnel has a PTFE stopcock and it will be easy to
make that modification.
I will check out your other references when I have more time, I have to get some sleep before I go to work.
It is refreshing to see a new forumite who makes it worth wading through all the cognitively challenged Kewls lately.
Thanks for the info.
Bert November 24th, 2003, 11:13 AM

I went to the official US gov't. Patent & Trademark Office (http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html) and checked the numbers
given- all came up with no content. Any thoughts?
Microtek November 24th, 2003, 11:24 AM

Old patents aren't viewable in fulltext, so you have to press the "images" button to view a scan of the document. It requires a
viewer which can be downloaded free of charge.
Recently, I haven't been able to view the scans because I'm apparantly missing some activeX gallery component.
Rosco Bodine November 24th, 2003, 12:00 PM

The European Patent Office has original document full text viewing as PDF .
The server is down for times of maintenance? nearly every day it seems ,
but here is the link for one of the gateways for the old version ESPACENET .
http://ep.espacenet.com/espacenet/ep/en/e_net.htm
Just paste in the patent numbers complete with the country prefix letters US
into the number search box and follow the links to the original document .
The US patent office uses a TIFF file format for original documents and
you have to install the TIFF plugin to see the image files on older patents .
Mendeleev March 12th, 2004, 12:38 AM

I meant to follow this up a while ago, but anyway, nobody having confirmed or denied the effectiveness of speaker wire, I
tested it myself, and frankly I don't think you need bell wire or detonator wire, but just any sort of double wire. I hooked up
one end to a torn off Christmas light, and the other to a 6V flashlight batter, and it worked perfectly, lighting the bulb just as
well as the socket. I then proceeded to take of the tip of the plastic light and creater a cap using brainfever's method with the
epoxied straw. Filled this with 1.5 grams of acetone peroxide, and connected it to the battery. Nice loud crack, good, cheap,
easy blasting caps.
s25 March 20th, 2004, 05:56 PM

Hey what about the filament in the bulbs reacting with the AP (it is obviosly metal sensitive)
Sonny Jim March 21st, 2004, 07:06 AM

(it is obviosly metal sensitive)
No it aint, you're thinking of HMTD.
tiac03 March 21st, 2004, 11:55 PM

I read through quickly but i didn't see anyone talk about just taking a regular piece of multi-strand copper wire cut off a piece
of the covering in the centre then cutting all but one of the strands and then folding the wire onto itself (so it looks like the
first one {one in the pic i reposted}) . wouldn't this work since the wire will heat up because the current is forced to go through
that single strand?
braegler March 24th, 2004, 07:29 AM

To let the wire not react with the HMTD or AP, you can dissolve NC in Acetone and coat the wire.
This will reduce the risk of accidents.
The lake will burn and ignite almost all flameable substances.
Greeting
braegler
Zappy March 24th, 2004, 02:47 PM

Any of you guys ever try using strands of steel wool? This is what I used to use, before discovering the trick with miniature
Christmas light bulbs. Not the best method but it will do if you have nothing else. When initiating multiple steel-wool ignitors,
you must always wire them in parallel. No two strands of steel wool are the same thickness, and this means that when wired in
series, one or more of the ignitors will burn out before the others have a chance to heat, thereby opening the circuit and
creating misfires.
On the topic of blasting machines; try looking around on Ebay. You won't find any newer, push-button types but there are
plenty of the old plunger-style machines to be found. Not cheap though; average prices range from $150 - $300. The old
plunger-style machines are really neat to see in action, or even just to put on display. Typical voltage output for a 50-cap
machine is about 150-200 volts - depending on how hard you push the plunger down. Current however is much lower than a
capacitor-discharge type machine, so these are only capable of firing in series. For this reason, only Christmas-light ignitors
can be fired with an antique blasting machine.
The blast box I came up is a rather fancy little thing. It uses two 9-v batteries for the power source, these feed an AC inverter
circuit which steps the voltage up (through a small transformer) to about 200VAC. This is then rectified by two diodes and used
to charge a 200V, 1000uF filter capacitor. When the fire button is pressed, a relay connects this cap to the output terminals.
This thing will vaporize a small strand of steel wool with a bright flash and a loud bang.
You can also take the circuit from an old electronic camera flash, and build a blast box from it. Be careful of that capacitor
though (typically 300V @220 uF) - it can give you a very bad shock! Just discharge it by shorting the terminals with an
insulated screwdriver, before touching.
Mendeleev April 21st, 2004, 09:29 PM

Even if it would have reacted with the filament, there was a thick layer of pressed, ground up match heads. I know I'm
cheating, you're supposed to use BP but I am to lazy to make it, messy charcoal, sulfur dust makes you sneeze, waste of
good nitrate salt for nitric acid, need for long grinding or ball mill construction, basically too much crap. Although with AP you
probably don't even need it, its a nice measure to have. Sort of had an idea. For christmas I got this little whistle key chain
which beeps if you whistle or make a lound noise, so you can always find your keys. While I was making caps today, I was
whistling a tune and the damn thing started beeping. Well, I got to thinking if you hooked up a 9 volt battery to it, and
hooked up the beeping terminals to a cap you could have an explosive detonated by whistling. This probably isn't practical
because you probably can't whistle loud enough to be a safe distance, but its a fun idea to play around with.
nuclearattack April 26th, 2004, 06:49 PM

Those nichel/chrome igniters work perfectly also with a small 9V battery.
I tested two AP detonators yesterday with this kind of igniters, i detonated them from a distance of 10 meters with a 9V
battery and it worked perfectly.
So you don't need big and heavy batteries, and if you want more power you can use two 9V battery to have 18V output.
Mendeleev April 26th, 2004, 10:08 PM

I have a couple of pictures of my caps here, they aren't packed with primary, but I tested them out this saturday, with 2.0 of
AP, very loud, despite ear plugs. I personally find the horror stories of AP sensitivity a bit inflated. I heated half a gram on a
spoon over a torch, it took a while for it to blow, and pressing it into the caps with a stirring rod was no problem. The AP was
made at -12 C, so perhaps I got the trimer form is responsible.
matjaz May 1st, 2004, 12:26 PM

These work best in my dreams. They are made from thin steelwool strands, connected to a double insulated wire, cut from a
PC-type multi-wire flat cable.
step 1 (see attached figure).

Cut some 5mm of insulation away and bend the two metal cores apart. This will neatly slide the steel wool turns right down to
the insulation as you wind them, providing better mechanical support to the wool.
step 2
Start winding the steel wool in figure-eights on the bare ends of the terminal wires. This is better as opposed to just wrapping
it around both wires in that it works as a spacer and will keep the two wires from touching each other. The more turns, the
more reliable. The fewer, the more sensitive (if you only have a weak source of electricity to fire it). I usually wind around five
"eights".
step 3
Fold over the stripped ends of the terminal wires to lock the steel wool turns in place. Fold to the opposite sides of the
insulation to prevent shorts.
step 4
Once you're done, dip the last few mm in your favourite lacquer to cover all exposed metal and fix the wires mechanically.
It is almost impossible for this design to fail since the turns of steel wool work a bit like a spring, ensuring good contact of at
least some of the turns. Also, there's no worry to damage the filament since there are many of them in parallel and all work
like spares. Talk about redundant engineering! ;)
It works great with a camera-flash CD box like this one: http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?

p=51896#post51896.
hobojojo June 3rd, 2007, 01:23 PM

Hi all, I am new to the forum but not new to pyrotechnics. I use Xmas lights with the top broken off and filled with fffg black
powder and a piece of tape put over the end of the bulb and the fuse you are trying to light. These can be lit with a simple 9
volt, I've had success lighting them with telephone wire from over 300 feet. When I have some time I will post some pictures.
hot04wrx June 12th, 2007, 04:21 PM

This might have been mentioned already but here goes anyhow:
Go into radio shack and pick up singles or three packs of the small clear silicone diodes. Straighten the 2 wires in opposing
directions so they are not touching each other. Place a match head on the diode and wrap the wires in opposite directions
trying no to touch the wires together around the match head and diode as to hug the head to the diode. Keep the end
e x p o sed so you can hook leads + and to with solder o r more e asily lead clips and hook to a 9v b attery.
There are different diodes but if you get the same level of diode each time the ignition times are with a 10th of a sec. from
each other.
You may also substitute a powdered charge with epoxy directly to the diode instead of a match head. Both are quite easily
made, cheap, and most importantly effective.
Azido February 20th, 2008, 09:20 PM

The way I see it, if you use anything but a christmas light ignitor, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. they work
fantastically, are cheap, versatile, and require very little energy to ignite the beginnings of a det-train. they can be epoxied
anywhere and are coonveniently made in pretty colors. What could be better.
totenkov February 20th, 2008, 11:28 PM

You may want to see my post about making simple wire/detonator at DRO:
http://www.dererumomnis.org/bbs/index.php?topic=287.0
I have used christmas lights however they are not durable. The thin wire is easily pulled away from the contacts and can be
faulty. 38 gauge wire is incredibly tough and durable, made well, they will take anything.
Azido February 21st, 2008, 01:58 AM
Good point. When my christmas light detonators are full of acetone peroxide however my detonators aren't subject to
particular mistreatment.
-=HeX=- February 21st, 2008, 04:31 AM

I have used the christmas light ignitors for years as ematches and out of 100 or so I have only had one dud and that was due
to shoddy making.
What powder do you all use to yours in yous igniters and how much powder?
I use 15 match heads of powder in mine and seal with wax to make it all OTC. They are very effective.
Azido February 21st, 2008, 06:00 AM

I use a less than a gram or so of bp in my ignitors, the rest is ap. sealed off with some epoxy, they've done me well.
Charles Owlen Picket February 21st, 2008, 09:46 AM

There is a technique of wrapping the bridge-wire on an unevenly cut length of duplex that will work quite well will no soldering
for immediate dipping into a pyrogen or other material. Actually there several techniques for this but they all make use of a
bear section of insulation or a wire wrapping tool.
I used the Ruby-fluid flux for nichrome a few times and it really did work very well. It's really the only way to solder nichrome;
I think it's zinc chloride solution.
Azido February 22nd, 2008, 04:48 PM

I was pondering what the advantages of ignitors like matjaz provided were, and it came to me. the simplicity. You can simply
run a length of wire from power to detonator, trim your ends, and wrap them with some steel wool. No connections that could
be ripped out or disconnected, no possibility of shorts, no taping needed, and the ignitor is resilient as. I still like christmas
lights though. :D
c4goesbang February 26th, 2008, 07:03 AM

For the leader wire I use 20 ga. Duplex shooting wire. You could also use thermostat wire from an HVAC supply store.
For the bridge wire, I use stranded picture hanging wire. Cut to proper lengths and unwind the strands. One small roll makes
several igniters.
Bag ties also make good bridge wires. Just strip the plastic/paper off of a bag tie and you have a bridge wire.
I fire these igniters with a cordless drill battery 12-18 volts.

I have also fired them with a battery from a discarded 600 Polaroid film pack. This is a hot little battery for its size.
http://s168.photobucket.com/albums/u166/mortarfire/?action=view&current=2ematch011sz1Rouge.jpg
Here is what I use to make the pyrogen.
KClO4 (2 Parts) by weight

German Black Aluminum (1 part) by weight
Nitrocellulose Lacquer (4 drops per gram of mix)
Acetone (As needed)
I usually make a 4 gram batch. .
Add 12 to 14 drops of NC Lacquer to 3 grams of KCl04 (fine powder, no lumps)

Add enough acetone, a few drops, and stir with a wooden stick, to form a thin slurry. I use a pop sickle stick available at kraft
stores. Wetting the KCl04 first reduces the chance of accidental ignition.
When mixed well add 1 gram of aluminum powder. I use German Dark. Mix well, adding drops of acetone if needed to form
a s lurry. I use a small, 3 diameter ceramic bowl for m ixing.
Dip igniter in the slurry. I usually let it dry, this stuff dries very fast, and dip it a second time. You can dip it more times if you
want. Stir often and add acetone as need, to keep mixture from drying out.
When completely dry you can dip in NC Lacquer to waterproof the match.
http://s168.photobucket.com/albums/u166/mortarfire/?action=view&current=4ematch014sz2Rouge.jpg
Firing with a 12 volt cordless battery.

http://s168.photobucket.com/albums/u166/mortarfire/?action=view&current=ematch.flv
Charles Owlen Picket March 3rd, 2008, 09:31 AM

I was working with electric igniter's the other day for a friends son and noticed a few things. The dependencies of construction
reflect what the power source is and what overall level of reliability is required. If you have a high-end power source available,
you have much more flexibility as to what you use as a bridge-wire. If that power source is fixed at a simple 9v battery or
something similar; you had better plan ahead.
If the power source has consistently strong amperage, the bridge-wire can be almost anything. If that is NOT the case; you
need it to light up from a 9v battery or something.....you better get a resistance wire of quality construction. What's more, if
something important is on the line like an expensive rocket or your arms and legs, you had better get that thing constructed
in a manner that it will light up 1st time, every time.
Just from a personal perspective, I am a firm believer in doing things like this in a very thoughtful manner (the "hard way")
with nichrome or other resistance wire and actually soldered to the leads. I've seen too many problems arise with substitutes
and lack of soldering (even though I've certainly done it myself). Without proper soldering, the pyrogen/NC lacquer material
can get between the lead and bridge and you're suck with no connection. Additionally a nichrome wire is rust resistant and
actually has resistance to a measurable extent, etc, etc.
I simply get tired of the frustration of not knowing if the thing is going to light up and get sick of approaching a dud. Five
minutes of soldering and five cents of nichrome is worth the effort. The reason I even bring this up is that I was using
substitutes and having trouble until I broke down and got out the soldering iron and the nichrome...
-=HeX=- March 3rd, 2008, 06:05 PM

Charles: I know where you are coming from there with the 'Do it once, do it right' ethic because I have had countless nerve
wracking flops in rocketry, all because of shoddy ignitor bridge wires or under powered batteries.
Therefore I have a 'Piss easy = Piss poor' ethic when I am making pyrotechnics. (Despite being a lazy teenager, I like to just
do it right).
Remember, never stinge on the bridge wires connections and never be stingy with the battery. If you are stingy on the
pyrotechnic, it will be stingy to you!
I hope you all shunt your wires, and is it true that a cell phone can set an ematch off?
Charles Owlen Picket March 6th, 2008, 09:35 AM

Quite frankly, I've been around this stuff a great deal (mostly when younger) and I have not personally ever seen EMR or
radio waves set off anything. But it's been common knowledge that it happened. - I just can't site a situation that DIRECTLY
has a radio transmission knocking down any squib.
From a design perspective, if the bridge wire is very thin (like a 40 or thinner) then I would imagine that it may be vulnerable
to radio waves. Thick stuff (28-30) would have a less of a degree to act as a receiving antenna I imagine. There must be one
or two people here who really know this stuff who could set the record straight. I just haven't seen it. But that's empirical
observation and really doesn't mean a thing.
I wanted to edit this but was too late. I did a very quick experiment and cooked up a squib with the thinest nichrome I had
(40) and could solder with these bad eyes. I then made a very sensitive material with chlorate, aluminum, and Realgar in a
Matrix of NC lacquer.
I placed this next to various radios transmitting at 2-10 watts. I moved off and tried it at 2, 10, 15, & 30 feet. No go.... I am
NOT saying radio transmission is safe by any means! I'm simply saying I could not reproduce this type of ignition.
-=HeX=- March 9th, 2008, 06:31 PM

Thanks Charles for testing that. I had read about it happening somewhere, but cannot find the .pdf it was in. I had that
backed up by the fact that on Richard Nakkas site it says to always shunt the leads in case one acts as a ground, and the
other as an antenna.
I had a unusual dud today actually, an Estes ignitor failed to ignite, even from a car battery! And they go off from 6 volts. I
wonder why? Maybe it was a dud but it passed the continuity checker test. I wonder why?
Charles Owlen Picket March 12th, 2008, 11:05 AM

There is actually some written material on this in various electronic magazines; dealing with the concept of "power" and
available energy coming off a transmission antenna. There were apparently a lot of misnomers and although it is NOT SAFE
(caps exposed to radio transmissions) and it's unpredictable, the level of transmission power needs to be pretty unique.
One of the biggest safety features to come along in industrial blasting was the EBW & Nonel concept in detonators. But most
people don't have the materials to achieve the amperage necessary and many mining concerns actually don't want to spend
that on the machines themselves (most costing upwards of $1500 each). As an aside, a good quality CD unit for standard
caps are now easily over $500 each. In addition Nonel is, of course, not re-usable. Not only the line but the linkages and all
active Nonel systems materials are a 1-time use item, costing thousands of dollars each shot.
The most reliable course of action is actually soldering a real bridge wire to the leg wires. The wrapping without soldering is an
attractive concept but it also opens the door for the development of a more effective "antenna effect" in the fuse bulb.
Basically the thinner the bridge wire the more effective for lower current. But it also makes for a more effective antenna
configuration.
It is only opinion that the more reliable fuse bulbs are made via soldering connections; I'm sure someone has made a
reliable free-wrap fuse bulb, however it opens the door to the pyrogen to act as an insulator. The absolutely most reliable fuse
bulbs are made through well soldered connections and if that bridge wire is really resistance wire (copel, nichrome, etc) the
chances of antenna formation recede a bit. Especially if the bridge wire is above .036 thickness.
No one likes taking the "long road" but the absolute necessity of the functionality and reliability of the bridge wire is foremost
in anyone's mind. ...Personally I would solder that thing and use high quality resistance wire.
I have built rockets that I put literally hundreds of hours into. I would NOT take a chance on malfunction at that stage of the
game. If someone is experimenting with energetic materials the loss is not only money and time but arms legs and eyes.
I have become very adept at micro soldering residence wire and can say honestly that it's not that tough or time consuming.
You need a simple "holding & magnification" setup, a quality very fine soldering iron and "Ruby Fluid" flux (nichrome is NOT
hard to solder IF you have the right flux - without it, it's a real pain in the ass).
The "holding & magnification" setup can be as simple as a $5 set of alligator clips & magnifying glass (the shit made in China
that looks like a little statue & holds the leg wires while allowing for easy viewing of the soldering element). A high quality
soldering iron can be bought surplus for a few bucks and the "Ruby Fluid", if you can't find it can be made from zinc chloride.
It is sold at some hardware stores & really works so well, I can't praise it enough!
If you can solder at all, in a few hours you will become a champ! My bridge wires are damn clean and with that simple setup I
can choose the resistance wire of my application and matching power source. Real resistance wire is an improvement because
it is resistant to oxidation and you have complete control over the diameter of the wire. When you start to weigh these issues,
it all makes sense to take the high road, use quality, and expend the time. It really IS easy to do it right the 1st time.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > 20 detonators at once. - Archive file
Log in
View Full Version : 20 detonators at once. - Archive file
megalomania February 28th, 2003, 01:38 PM

shady mutha
Frequent Poster
Posts: 149
From: australia
posted December 17, 2000 07:13 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using homemade methods how can someone detonate up to 20 detonators at the same time
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Either in a string w ith quick/sticky match or with electric ignitors with the detonators w ired in series (must be series).
Electrical would be easier and more reliable, saves the bother of making sticky/quickmatch too.
I'm guessing this is to go with the shaped charges you were asking about in the High Explosives section?
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theoretically, parallel would set them all off at once. You'd have to pump a hell of a lot of current through the curcuit though, because it would get split 20 different ways. If you
wire them in series the circuit will be broken w hen the first detonator goes off, and you'll get very disappointing results.
------------------
~Zero the Inestimable
The A Files
{Link is a direct download.}
CodeMason
Frequent Poster
Posts: 386
From: Your Nightmares
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does this question really belong on this forum? :)
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well, if you would bother to read the description of the "low explosives" topic, you w ould see detonators goes here... i don't know why, but it does.
anyway, you could use more than one battery, say like 10 or 20 and rig a switch that closes all 20 circuts at once. you are defenetly going to need more than one battery to do
this job. even if you use a car battery you still might need more than one. it also depends on the length of w ire you are using. how long is the wire (collectively, altogether)?
------------------
...
Cricket
Frequent Poster
Posts: 160
From: USA
posted December 18, 2000 12:01 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You w ouldnt happen to have some Uranium w ould you? Hehehe. You could tape them all together. You could have each detonator rigged w ith the + to the + and the - to the -.
Then hook it up to a car or something with not too much juice. This should do a decent job I think. But if your w orking with a nuke, DONT go w ith black match\stickey match. If
it fucks up, your out one expensive bomb. You could use also an explosive fuse.
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're using this for a nuke, don't do it anywhere the hell near me!
Why not try a wall socket? If 120VAC won't do it, nothing will!
------------------
The A Files
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well i think, w hen talking about fuses, i think 20 detonators at once demands the specific attention of electronic initiation. this is the most precise way to set things off, and this
type of power needs that. as for uranium... you do not make a nuke by compressing uranium. you make a nuke by compressing plutonium to critical mass. with uranium, you
have to bombard it with neutrons (i think) and this setos off a chain reaction.
------------------
...
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
From: somew here in florida
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
uranium is fissionable, you want to have two half spheres shoot together in a tube and compress into a ball for a nuke
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2312
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shit! I meant parallel not series, twas late such and I was tired.
Electric det, is the proper method for the job. Having to close twenty switches at once is asking for problems, just usea big switch and somehting that can provide plenty of
amps (no D cells here) car battery will work but you might not want to carry it to your test site. I'd recommended a sealed lead acid battery, I've got some 12v 7ah onest hat
will give about 80 amps - plenty for 20 caps.
Another option would be det. cord and just have one electric cap, or fuse cap to detonate the cord and it will do the rest. You w ould have to make it though, so electrical still
looks like the best bet.
I think with the uranium, you can bombard it with the electrons flying off more uranium. The idea being you bring tw o lumps of fissionable U235 together (with explosives) andt
he total mass becomes at least the critical mass. I could be w rong (again ).
nbk2000
Moderator
Posts: 1103
From: Guess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright guys, lets keep it real, huh? No one here has uranium or w ill ever get uranium (or will they )so talking about it is irrelevant.
Please stick to the topic subject.
------------------
"The know ledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
Go here to dow nload the NBK2000 website PDF.
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well non w eapons grade uranium can be easily obtained. but weapons grade is another story. and when talking about non w eapons grade uranium i think you are talking about
the depleted uranium shit, that should go int he IW section. anyway, like i said before, using 20 detonators demands electronic detonation. also, using more than one battery
helps. (unless initiating detcord, then just one battery to detonate the tip of the cord...)
------------------
...
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think a possibility to set off 20 dets at the same time is to switch 20 pieces of 100 Ohm resistors parallel together (one in each detonator) Then you must load up a capacitor
energy bank to aprox. 200-400 V.
For 20 resistors you must have high capacity like a few thousand F to produce a high power impulse in each resistor.
For nukes the ignitors must have micro or nanoseconds precision. No chance to make at home.
[This message has been edited by Jumala (edited December 19, 2000).]
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nah, not nanosecond accuracy, all you really need is 1 detonator on either side of the plastic explosivesand slam the thing into a critical mass! hey! what about a spring loaded
nuke !
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parallel wont work, electrons w ill take the shortest path.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 230
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yes they will take the shortest path until the path is broken. ie.: the ignitor is broken. then it will go to the one with the next shortest path and so on and so on until all 20 have
been initiated. this would all happen in a miniscule amount of time (milliseconds most likely).
Jumala
Frequent Poster
Posts: 199
From: Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, current takes the shortest way and the shortest w ay is through each of the 20 resistors. They have all the same resistance and so they get all the same current. The
maximum pow er peak is more than 200W (depents on the voltage in the caps)
It is a quality of resistors that they produce an open circruit after theyre destroyed by the heat. The carbon film burns away.
So you must only have enough power in the caps and all 20 pieces go off.
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
resistors?..just use a bridge w ire using the method in NBK'S file using an eraser..i use pices of glue gun sticks myself :-)
vehemt
Frequent Poster
Posts: 580
From: Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess it all goes back to what the purpose is and what kind of delays are acceptable.
MacCleod
Frequent Poster
Posts: 215
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's the distance between The shots?This info is needed 1st. and foremost to calculate how much current you'll need,power source to supply this current(house current,car
battery,generator),and the diameter of the drop/leg wires that can adequately carry this current to the caps.
------------------
"There can be only one!"
Lost
Frequent Poster
Posts: 89
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're looking for more current, just get yourself a transformer... I've got one that my dad and I used for a jacob's ladder awhile ago, and its MUCH MUCH better than
straight outta the w all...
------------------
-Lost
<a href="http://www .noneinc.org" target="_blank"> http://www .noneinc.org</a>
Cricket
Frequent Poster
Posts: 160
From: USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What if you w ere to have 20 radio detanators all made exactly the same, same company (so they use the same metals in the w ires and same circuitry) and then I think it
would be the same enough. I just think that the main differance w ould be in the detonators (the time the detanators explode w ont be exactly the same). If you w ant to blow a
nuke, just use a light (or you could use a powerfull LASER (Edmond Scientific) to cause a detonation if you dont want to fuck w ith EXTREMELY sensitive explosives) sensitive
explosive (Silver Fulminate I think, but VERY sensitive) coated base charge with some kind of surround sound lighting system.
[This message has been edited by Cricket (edited December 21, 2000).]
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For nukes with U-235, you compress a sphere of it w ith a PBX. THEN you bombard it with neutrons from a beryllium/americium alloy to start the chain reaction.
Back to the subject!
Wire the dets. in parrallel and use a high capacitance, high voltage capacitor to fire them. I've had success w ith a 3000uF, 350v cap. bank (20 photoflash caps. in parrallel).
This will make the ignition wires explode at VERY nearly the same time, rather than have them heat up and detonate the primary charge, which takes longer and w ill be less
precise and will have more deviation.
wiredfreak
A new voice
Posts: 17
From: none of yuor fu**ing bissnes USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
why not just use a modle rocket igniter??
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Freak, he already knows WHAT he's going to set if off w ith, he just wanted to know HOW. It's a moot point by now, anyway. Simply out of curiosity, have you ever tried to set
off a plastic explosive with a model rocket igniter? Didn't think so.
------------------
The A Files
Donutty
Frequent Poster
Posts: 223
From: UK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEAVE OFF the nukes!!
Just thinking, how much current (and/or voltage) does a commercial detonator box produce? Obviously it must have some kind of capacitor to build up the charge as the
generator is wound.
<a href="http://www .ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/shrike.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ribbands.co.uk/prdpages/shrike.htm</a> might help
Ripper
A new voice
Posts: 2
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the 20 bcaps at once, it would be quite simply to be done. goto k-mart or wal-mart and get a few disposible camras w ith flash. i would suggest using a know n brand over
cheep ones, i have noticed cheep ones have less pow er behind the flash (but ya never know ). take apart and salvage the board & cap. u can hook multiple of thoes caps up in
parrell (++ , --) for more power. i have taken apart an old rc car battery charger and made a little det box for electrical ignited charges, has 15 min timer or push button (user
specified). and like said in an earlier message it does send a big enough charge threw the modle rocket engine igntiors to make them go off with a little pop and spars
everywere blowing the wire apart. i have done that successfully w ith 1 photoflash cap. use the camra flash bord to charge the photoflash caps, and it will charge them in a cap
bank, it just take a few seconds longer.
As for going 1 then the next then the next for the ingitors, hook all up in parrell and if u can find the right sw itch (i have seen them like this) that supports 10+ diffrent switches
in one. if u know enough about electronics u could use one of these switches and set up the cap bank so when it is done charging, it cuts all links to eachother and to the switch
so there would be an output for each cap (if your worried about power loss). you can leave all the positives tied together and have a common positive and individule grounds
since pow er does flow from - to + .
Hope this helped solve the question, any questions plz email me.
~Ripper
Ripper
A new voice
Posts: 2
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was an error in the above post, i am sorry my mind thinks in a wierd w ay so w ording comes out a little funky at times.
if using 1 photoflash cap, hook them in parrell, or same if using a capbank w ith all going to same outputs.
if using capbank w ith the 10+ seg sw itch then hook 1 ignitor up to each output tieing all the positives together (if done that way). if you tie all + together, then there will only
be 11 output connecters for 10 charges (10 negitive 1 positive). if you dont tie all + together there w ill be 20 outputs (10 + 10 -) and u must be shure to connect the + & - to
the same cap (duh!).
if you have any questions about how to hook up the capbank etc with a charge/fire switch or any other questions plz do email me.
~Ripper
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hey I mad firing box a while back, with clips to hold the wires, and it uses 2 camera flash caps. here are some pictures
<img src="http://ww w.geocities.com/pyro2000us/firingbox.JPG" alt=" - " />
<img src="http://ww w.geocities.com/pyro2000us/firingbox2.JPG" alt=" - " />
[This message has been edited by PYRO500 (edited February 05, 2001).]
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 194
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not try a det-cord as suggested earlier?
I think it is by far the most reliable system ( think of all the connections that could be less than perfect in an electrical system ).
I have recently discovered that nitroglycerine is much less sensitive than AP, just as easy to make, almost as cheap and if you were to suck it up into a thin
(2-3mm internal) hose, making sure that there w here no bubbles, you w ould have a great det-cord. At least I think you would; as soon as the weather clears up a bit I will
make some tests and bring you the results.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Splatter Movie
Log in
View Full Version : Splatter Movie
Purple Fire April 29th, 2002, 04:45 AM

Hey all, back at last!
Ive just been approached by a friend of mine who is making a comedy splatter movie ("Bad Taste" ish I believe) to enter into a competition. For the dramatic and humerous
deaths, he has befriended a butcher and can get hold of a 44 gallon drum of meat chunks when he needs it, and he wants me to make it explode :) He plans to bury it at the
bottom of his farm, the barrel is unseen and the top is open so when it goes off he wants a "column of meat". While talking with him we also came up with some other
alternate effects based around the same idea such as pouring in some water with the meat (and food colouring if necesary) and using a low velocity explosive to make a
bubble of gas that will make the meat/blood "slop" out of the barrel or using a larger charge that would make the meat rain down out of the sky.
Purple Fire April 29th, 2002, 04:54 AM

That was crazy! it just automatically posted that before id finnished?!?!
Anyway, i was wondering if anyone here has had any experience with blowing up large volumes of meat before, or if anyone has any ideas on the subject that they think
would be useful before i start workin this all out. I was thinking that for the "slop" effect i could maybe pop some CO2 cannisters at the bottom of the barrel with a small
charge, use a small ANFO charge for the "column of meat", and for the "shower", well, I really think that that might be a bit out of my experience range for the moment. How
much explosive am I likely to need to move 44 gallons of meat and get it airborn any ideas? I will be very grateful for any feedback that people can give me here as I cant say
as ive ever tried anything even remotely like this before!
mongo blongo April 29th, 2002, 10:53 AM

I made some squibs once for one of my mate in his film if you are interested. I used two pieces of small circular paper stuck together with a flat rocket ignitor in some Lead
Azide between the two pieces of paper. These are easy to tape to what ever you want.
Bitter April 29th, 2002, 01:24 PM

How bloody is this meat going to be ? You don't want it to dampen the charge.
If I were you, I'd test whatever you plan to use beforehand; make sure you get the size of the explosion right and make sure it is done correctly first time.
A-BOMB April 29th, 2002, 03:15 PM

I myself when doing movie sences use alot of ziploc bags and mothballs. And how big of a "column of meat" does he want? First you'll need to make this in a couple of shots
so find some editing software. The first shot should be of a thinned out meat sause that consists of a bit of blood some meat and water/fooddye. Next put it into some .5/.75
gallon ziploc bags and set them aside. After that get you lift charge. Forget every thing I've said here, I'll post a pic of what this should look like a little later.
Purple Fire April 30th, 2002, 05:31 PM

i expect that the meat will be quite bloody, so i was intending to put the charge into a sealed plastic bag (snaplock bags sound like a very good idea). I think his expectations
on what i can do with this meat are probably very unrealistic but i gather he was looking at something like a 2-3 meter high column that then spread out into a splatter.
Azazel May 30th, 2002, 06:33 AM

When i was a lil tiny kid many years back, my first kinda "BOMB" was made from Eno, a product on the australian market which is used if you have a tummy ache. You
basically put a tea spoon of the stuff in a glass of cold water and drink it ass its fizzing. Quite funky stuff.
Anyways, me and the neighbour decided we were bored shiteless. So we took a 2 Litre coke bottle and shoved shit loads of eno down the bottle. Filled the thing with a lil bit of
water, caped it, shit our pants, threw down a drain... BOOM haha very very funny. The whole contents of the drain came out... there ya go. Doesnt involve any dangerour
flames... still dangerour in a way. Maybe you could use some kind of chemical like this to provide your uplifting meaty experience :D
tempest May 30th, 2002, 08:08 AM

Ha this reminds me of an honourable meantion in the darwin awards , where there was a beached whale that died on shores before people could push it back into the sea
(Florence Oregon 1970).They stuffed it full of dynamite apparently , but far too much (half a ton or so) and it caused a whale meat rain which to put it lightly was unpleasant
PYRO500 May 30th, 2002, 04:44 PM

I have seen that video several times and I could have told them what the outcome when you take a gelatonous substance such as hale jelly and try to shatter it with dynimite,
just common sense, the stuff is going to get shattered into big blobs witch are going to go everywhere. as I recall the chunks of whale destroyed cars and stuff
EventHorizon May 30th, 2002, 04:52 PM

I used to have that movie in quicktime. Its a riot. They blasted whale meat a mile away, one big chunk smashed a car and rancid meat rained down on everybody. :D
The weight of a drum of meat and juices is going to be heavy, so a rather large charge is going to be needed. I'd say a pound or two of ANFO, maybe 3, will obtain the desired
results. Its slow moving and has good "heave" properties whilst not turning the whole drum of contents into a red mist as an HE would.
Arkangel May 30th, 2002, 05:47 PM

I'd heard about it too, and if anyone has a copy, it would be great to have a look somehow.
In a similar vein, I was talking to an old soldier recently, a really interesting guy who'd seen action all over the world, and even been around at the Christmas Island H Bomb
tests - must have been something to watch. Anyway, he and some sappers were tasked with destroying an unwanted WW2 bunker on the south side of the Thames Estuary.
They had a newly commissioned officer in charge, who despite their protests, ordered them to put way too much explosive inside.
The bunker was destroyed pretty effectively, but the roof was thrown away violently as one piece, landing vertically in the water about 300 yards in front of a collier heading
out to sea. They reckoned it must of gone at least a couple of miles, but how much I believe that I'm not sure. I imagine it was a fair bang regardless.
Edit: I got off my ass and found it myself. Here's a link to the "definitive exploding whale website"
<a href="http://www.hackstadt.com/features/whale/" target="_blank">http://www.hackstadt.com/features/whale/</a>
The download is there.
[ May 30, 2002, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]
Purple Fire June 6th, 2002, 05:12 AM

You really think itll need 3 pounds? that is a hell of alot of ANFO! I thought ANFO was probably the way to go, and lacking experience with ive been readin anythin and
everythin i can find on the subjuect. are there any really important things i should know about anfo? can people direct me to any really good sources of info on the stuff? and
for future reference, how much AP would i be needing to set off 3 pounds worth? (im assuming AP will be the easiest thing to set it off with?)
BrAiNFeVeR June 6th, 2002, 03:30 PM
I don't think AP has that good initiating capability's for ANFO, you might want to consider using a booster of some sort. If you want to set off ANFO, you'll need a lot of
confinement anyway, otherwise you'll just blow it away, because you'l need quite some AP (10 grams ?) if you're not using a booster charge.
Why not use a black powder charge ? I think a kilo in good confinement (cardboard tube of carpet ?) would do the trick quite well ... And it's allso a lot safer, not messing
around with AP and all.
Spudkilla June 7th, 2002, 12:58 PM

Why not just blow up a Ketchup bottle :D ? ANFO would work for what you want to do, but, like somebody else said, you need good confinment, so the ANFO just doesn't get
scattered around. I have no idea what you could use for confinment (certainly not a plastic bag!), and PVC or steel tubes would not work, as you and your friend might get
hurt. You could try using a very thick cardboard tube. Yeah, thats a good idea. Thick, heavy duty cardboard tubes are available at model rocket hobby shops.
Oh yeah, go here: <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000579" target="_blank">http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?

ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000579</a>
[ June 07, 2002, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: Spudkilla ]

I'd say you would need about .5-.9 kg of ANFO. I suggest that you go to the high explosives section and have a look at one of my post at the bottom, you'll find what you
need there. I belive that you could get it off with 100g of APAN. Have a lokk and you'll know what I'm babbling about.
Anyway I don't think that you need any large ammounts of explosive for your experiment since the charge will be placed at the bottom of an oil drum which is buried in the
ground. There will only be one way the gases can escape wich means you will get the force directed directly uppwards meaning that the meat will go the same way as the
gases.
PYREX June 8th, 2002, 06:44 AM

Just an idea: If you have enough explosives and 44 gallon drums you could replace the meat by water and waste paper for experimenting, this should have about the same
consistency as your meat-blood mixture. Altough it won't look so impressive, it has some great advantages you can figure out yourself (prize, mess, doesn't stink when it
rots,...)
Spudkilla June 8th, 2002, 06:26 PM

I was just thinking, its going to be funny when it doesn't work. You'll have to dig through 44 gallons of meat to get your explosive. Haha.

I intend to get it work the first time! Ive been reading the 5 page thread on APAN and it looks as though it might be promising. Does it have the same "earth moving"
properties as ANFO? on the 138g movie clip it sounds like a rather high pitched crack as opposed to the deep BOOOOOOM of AFNO. does this mean it wont be as good for lifting
meat? if it is, then it will make things alot easier as i think detonating APAN is much more feasable for me that detonanting ANFO!
xoo1246 June 12th, 2002, 01:33 PM

APAN will lift meat, be sure of it, though I would recomend using ANFO with a ANNM booster since you don't seem to have worked with H.E. before.

no i havent worked with HE's before but i think i know where im headed with this now. thanks for all the help guys :)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Remote det.
Log in
View Full Version : Remote det.
oracal August 3rd, 2001, 09:02 PM

I have just finished making a remote detonator that has a little better than a two mile range and has four different signal
settings . One four each bomb .
The detonator board cost a little over $43 and each detonator cost about $4 .
when I get around to it I'll post the schematics that's if I get enough replies to even bother .
mongo blongo August 3rd, 2001, 11:09 PM

Two mile range is good!
I myself use electronic pagers for long range
(if it's a BIG BANG! coz i don't wana be anywhere near if da pigs r called!) usually I use electronic countdown timers though!
There is no danger to other people because the places are remote and are buried under ground.
Im interested on exactly what equipment u used. Remote controlled plane module?
oracal August 4th, 2001, 12:33 AM

Well actually I started from scratch using the basic idea of high power walky talkies , but instead it sends out a coded
frequency in a sorta mores code . kind of like a garage door opener . When it receives the signal is releases the energy that
came from the one double A battery that was stored in a high voltage capacitor . It releases it through a filament and it
detonates it .
angelo August 4th, 2001, 03:49 AM

US$4? doesn't matter its still a cheap detonator!
I have played with RC airplane remotes and a servo that completes the circuit. If I did use it (which I didn't - to expensive), it
would cost be about AU$40
------------------
angelo's place (http://hop.to/angelo) | have a good link? add it here (http://pub16.bravenet.com/freelink/show.php?
usernum=1307442656) | go to the OZ Forum (http://pub75.ezboard.com/bozforum97164)
[This message has been edited by angelo (edited August 04, 2001).]
ALENGOSVIG1 August 4th, 2001, 04:15 AM

you could always have the reciever a few feet away from the device with wires connectiong them.
------------------
How much power will you lose if you do not know what they already know?
Explosives Archive (http://surf.to/alexplo)

the best remote detonator would be portable phone (can't remember the exact traduction from french) : Two portable phones,
the first is wired with the detonator and the second, even at 800 Km, call the first !!!
But, how can you connect a portable phone to a detonator ???
any replies are more than appreciated...
Tony Montana August 4th, 2001, 04:59 AM

When the mobile phone rings, a small electrical current is sent to the speaker making it RING. If one was to remove the two
wires that connect to the speaker, and connect them to a transistor which is a switch that is turned on or off by a small electric
current. Connecting the speaker wires to the transistor then adding another power source(enough power to make your
detonator work) and a detonator. If you do it right when the phone rings BANG or when the low battery signal actuates.

thanx but which transistor ?
see ya !
the freshmaker August 4th, 2001, 09:21 AM

then hope your mum or your girl friend dont call you..."hey sweetie!?"....BOOOOOM!
Tony Montana August 4th, 2001, 08:47 PM

Stanfield you would want a PNP transistor these are off, in normal position. Positive-Negative-Positive means the current is
blocked by the negative layer in the middle, when a small electric current is supplied to the BASE, what happens is the
transistor turns from PNP to PPP and lets the current flow. Hopefully someone with a bit more electronics knowledge will give a
better description.
Anthony August 4th, 2001, 09:33 PM

oracal, what precautions have you taken against interference?
I believe mobiles don't have speakers, rather piezo-electric buzzers which operate at several hundred volts, which means
practically nill current. Coupled with the fact that it's most likely to be a high frequency pulsed signal, it may not trigger a
transistor and definietly not a relay. If the phone or pager has a vibrator then use that instead.
Getting calls/messages is a risk though, even if the phone/pager is brand new and you've not given the number to anyone,
often the network provider will send you messages about promotional offers. This would be especially bad if you keep the
thing turned off right up untill it's connected to your explosive charge.
[ January 10, 2003, 05:29 AM: Message edited by: Anthony ]
mongo blongo August 4th, 2001, 10:53 PM

I use second hand pagers, yes the ones that vibrate!
I take out the motor (causes the vibration)
and i use a relay switch. The transistor works as well!
for the power i use two Duracell square batterys in series (although one works well). I recommend using Duracell because they
have a larger current than other cheaper ones.
c0deblue August 5th, 2001, 03:08 AM

Or you could use DTMF tone coding - a method common for remote retrieval of messages from answering machines. The
audio circuit of the receiving phone would be fitted with a DTMF decoder with its digital output lines (0 through 9) connected to
a series of self-resetting latches. These outputs in turn are gated to the base of an output transistor that energizes the firing
circuit upon receiving a preselected sequence of tones from the sender's keypad. The simple failsafe AND/NAND logic circuit
would operate as a sort of electronic lock - it wouldn't activate unless all conditions were satisfied in a particular order within a
specified time.
This was reportedly the method used by the Israelis to assassinate the Hamass bomb expert known as "the Engineer". They
arranged to switch his cell-phone for a modified one full of C-4. They then called the number and when they were sure they
had him on the line just pushed some buttons and blew him up.
DarkAngel August 5th, 2001, 04:52 AM

Anthony i don't know much about electricity but you could make the electrical detonator and put the bridge wire in the blasting
cap at the time you have putt the explosive device on the place you whan't it to go of,
This will reduce the change that it will go of because someone is calling you.
------------------
arkAngel

[This message has been edited by DarkAngel (edited August 05, 2001).]
Mick August 5th, 2001, 06:02 AM

just use a walkie talkie (the kids radio things)
some of those things have huge range on them...
when i was a kid i had one, and i dunno if it was faulty or something else, but you could touch it on our clothes line and pick
up CB radios with it =)
just hook a X volt relay up to the speaker lines...and just pray to god you don't get any interfearance http://
theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif
or if you have access to cheap Radio control gear you can make one with an efective range of around 100m to 800m (i have
already built a remote detonating station out of RC gear, once i'm finished typing this i'll take some pictures of it)
you could also splurge a bit and by RC gear for remote aircraft (which depending on what you buy ca have an effective range
of 1km to 5km)
but i think if you were going to by that sort of gear, you would mount the reciever box seperatly from the explosive, atleast
that way it doesn't get blowen to the shit when the explosive detonates.
there are heaps and heaps of way you can remote detonate stuff,
you could use a CB radio (i think you americans call them "ham radios")
and old anlog mobile phone (i don't think they use the new type of speakers)
edit: well i was going to take a picture of my remote blast station, but i remembered after i made this post that it was
damaged by 1kg blast of AP that i did and i took it apart because it was nolonger of any use
(and before people start having a whinge "oh you can't set off a kilo of AP, because will detonate under its own weight" yes
you can when you house it in seperate containers(ie. 100g in each container)
[This message has been edited by Mick (edited August 05, 2001).]

Darkangel, yeah you could do that and it would reduce the risk, but I wouldn't trust my luck that the detonator wouldn't be
called just as the bridgewire assembly was inserted.
Walkie talkies would be really risky, what if some kids decided to play with theirs near you? What if yours decided to pick up
CB signals like Micks?
C0deblue's idea is pretty fool proof though and probably the best way to do it, if more involved than other ideas.
Good quality radio gear (like for RC planes) is not very succeptable to interference, uses error checking and can be set to fail-
safe should anything but the correct signal be recieved. With the reciever in a metal box and 10m of wire running to the
detonator, it should be pretty safe from the blast.
I wouldn't trust the RC gear ripped out of a cheap RC car anymore than the walkie talkies though.
Machiavelli August 6th, 2001, 12:00 PM

One simple safety measure to protect yourself from going boom because of interference or jamming would be to incorporate a
clothespin/soldering wire-delay in your circuit.
For those who don't know it, you have two contacts on the opposing jaws of a clothespin and it's kept open by wrapping the
other end of it with soldering wire.
The wire will slowly stretch under the tension and you have a simple, cheap but not very precise delay mechanism.
-A- August 6th, 2001, 02:25 PM

Still waiting for oracal schematics...
(two miles??? how did you achieve that?)

Another possibility is to use a dialtone chip or more simple a PLL tonedecoder like LM 567.
This IC gives an output signal when you put a predefinated frequency to the input. (for example 1250 Hz)
Then the remote control reacts only to this single frequency. For more safety a delay would be a solution.
A 5 seconds 1250 Hz signal is really seldom and dont occur accidendtly.
mongo blongo August 7th, 2001, 01:06 AM

You could use rc gear and a phone.
Hook up some rc gear to switch the phone on when u are a safe distance away from the device. Then you can use the phone.
Not very practical and quite expensive but better than risking your life!
simply RED August 7th, 2001, 08:00 PM

I've made a home made devie which operated only 300 meters.
Now I use Alinco G1 for transmitter and less expensive model for reciever. With no remorse, it operates 12+! miles through
the ham retranslators( I've tested it!). Use the DTMF. It gives briliant reasaults... It is a good idea to use the retranslators of
the corporations or the hams for a long range bombinghttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif...
aster January 2nd, 2003, 09:33 AM

i have made my 150m range electronic det from remoted bell, its cheap, just add relay to strengthen the current enough to
light the bridgewire, it is total cost about $10 each :D
Haggis January 9th, 2003, 06:32 PM

I don't know what the situation is around your area, but one thing that works is cordless phones. In the summer, I can pick up
cordless phones for around a dollar at garage sales. All you have to do is connect your ignitor instead of the external beeper
and hit 'page' on the reciever unit. This is a good method because it is cheap, has decent range (200 feet), the beeper is
enough current to fire the ignitor and it is relatively secure because the phone has security codes to protect you from other
people's lines. If you have a few spare phones lying around, try it.
Energy84 January 9th, 2003, 10:55 PM

I think you're forgetting that the base station still needs to be plugged in. Fortunately, most actually run off of a wall jack
transformer (square box thingy built into the plug). I'm not sure exactly what the voltage is but I'm sure it's less than 12V. So
all you'd need is a voltage regulator and a car battery. You might be able to get away with a couple of 9V batteries though.
Fl4PP4W0k January 10th, 2003, 08:04 AM

While a cordless phone, doorbell, walkie talkie - whatever - is a cheap and somewhat effective method of remote detonation...
there is still the issue of interference.
For example... You have a cordless fone + relay setup which is set to detonate a 500g ANNM charge. Nothing too huge, but
chunky nonetheless. You have the device all ready, 2g AP detonater with a solar igniter pressed into it - embedded in the
device. You clip the igniters leads to the relay terminals, and walk off with the base station circuit in your hand.
As you're 10 yards away from the device, Mrs Jones in the house a couple hundred yards away decides to page her cordless
fone (which just happens to be on the same channel as yours) - as she cant seem to find it . . . . <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />
To combat this problem, I rigged a remote detonation system a while back which utilized a simple DTMF decoder circuit...
<a href="http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000014" target="_blank">http://
www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=000014</a>
For the lazy:

Helvetica">Fl4PP4W0k
Amateur
Member # 1315
posted October 13, 2002 11:39 AM
Meh... Some good ideas.
I dont like the idea of a poor beeper or cellphone being blown to bits though
I have a handheld radio. Fun little toy. Modified for a huge transmission range. Something like 108-177 and 400-500 useable.
It also has a built in memory DTMF encoder. You pre-program an upto 12 tone DTMF sequence, and at the touch of a button it
is sent to whatever frequencie. Handy.
Also, I used to have a DTMF decoder relay (for answering machines, you placed it next to the speaker and it would activate a
12v relay to turn shit on). About $15 i think. Only a 4 digit, but hey.
I replaced the mike with a 3.5mm lead, that could plug into the earphone of any radio.
You know those dirt cheap FRS peices of junk? Cheap shit. You can plug this decoder into one of those.
Heres a mid priced set... <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1386698633" target="_blank">http:/
/cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1386698633</a> so about $15 max each.
I have seen cheaper ones for about $10 each, with no screen and only 2 channels.
The $15 each ones are better, as you can add a 'Security' code, which is actually a CTCSS squelch code. Eg: Smaller chance
that some lame ass lost kid at a mall will use your channel.
Sooo... Hook up 4 AA batteries to the relay, and a small rocket igniter to the output. I find the higher amperage of AA's
makes igniters more reliable. Or use a 6v lantern battery and a home made igniter.
Ok. Tune your handheld radio to that frequencie. Key in the CTCSS code and get ready to rumble
Press the DTMF preset and BLAMMO! Im sure you can buy a DTMF decoder that will let you set off separate relays from
different codes.
Distance is only limited to your transmitter. A mobile one (in a car)@ about 25w could easily det. one of those things from 10
or 15 miles.
Overall, its allot cheaper than a cellphone \ pager setup, Simpler to construct, and more convenient IMHO -
Theres no need to worry about accidental detonation either, especially in Australia as those FRS radios arent used here
CTCSS code + DTMF is VERY reliable. <hr /></blockquote>That EBay
link would no longer be valid - it was just an auction containing some cheap FRS radios.
I tested this remote relay idea with a couple toys - A commercial rocket and a small AP charge i believe...
Used an old Marine band VHF HT - no CTCSS though thats not important really.
Worked like a charm :cool:
Anthony January 10th, 2003, 03:17 PM

Interesting idea Fl4PP4W0k.
I remember seeing one of those "turn shit on over the phone" units on a surplus site.
How much did you pay for your radio with the DTMF encoder?
I'm going to seriously consider this option, as I want to bury charges deep, and I'm not using 3ft of visco for my caps and I
can't be bothered with a hassle with a reel of wire. Plus I like the professionalism of a remote detonator.
I did buy one of those remote doorbells, the range is 50-100m, which would be usable. However it's fitted with a piezo buzzer
which gets a max of 1v across it. So it'd need some work to make it suitable, and I'd rather invest the work in a better idea.
simply RED January 10th, 2003, 06:12 PM

70 dolars for alinco with 144 band+ DTMF
1 dolar for the backup scheme.
My opionion is that electronics plus explosives makes something absolutely dangerous, I always put the end of the electronic
sheme to 5cm wick and then the other end of the wick to the blasting cap, NEVER the electronics to the detonator!
Or better use 10 meters cabels between the bomb and the radio.
This once saved my MF life!
THe_rEaL_dEaL January 11th, 2003, 12:41 AM

Is this DTMF idea what they use in those LG Air Conditioners to activate them from a mobile phone.
Energy84 January 11th, 2003, 01:14 AM

Naturally I think 5-10m cables (longer for bigger charges) would be used so that the electronics could be salvaged for future
use.
Using electronics to set off a regular fuse is good but I can easily see some reliability problems there.
RTPB #40 says: KISS -> Keep It Simple Stupid.
If still going the electronic route though, I've been toying with the idea of using two different cordless phones (on separate
channels). The one hooked up to the actual detonator would be left with the power off at all times and wired to be turned on
by a relay that would be triggered by the second phone.
So you would have to page the second phone in order to trigger the relay that would turn the power on for the first phone which
is hooked up to the actual detonator. Then when ready to fire, the first phone would be in turn be paged, completeing the
circuit to the detonator.
Of course, I have just contradicted myself there by not adhereing to RTPB#40 :rolleyes:
But at least then you would be using two different channels which would greatly decrease the odds of accidental firing. One
channel would essientially arm the circuit and the second would fire it.
I kinda doubt this method would be any cheaper than setting up a good DTMF system though. But you might get lucky at a
few yard sales or pawn shops.
Edit: Forgot to mention the possible use of timers instead. Has anybody had any luck using them? If so what kind?
[ January 11, 2003, 12:18 AM: Message edited by: Energy84 ]
nbk2000 January 11th, 2003, 01:42 AM

Good thinking Red! :)
RTPB "Plan for failure". This being that someone else will being using the exact same frequency and DTMF signal at the
instant you turn on the receiver on the device. By connecting a small pyrotechnic delay (maybe 10 seconds worth) you give
yourself the chance to either disarm, or flee from, the device in case of accidental initiation.
If you MUST have it set up for instantaneous remote detonation (like an IRA culvert bomb), then use a clothspin switch with a
LOOONG string to arm it from a distance. Then, if it goes off, you're still alive. :)
Fl4PP4W0k January 11th, 2003, 06:30 AM

Helvetica"> How much did you pay for your radio with the DTMF encoder? <hr /></blockquote>The radio I use is a Yaesu VX-1R ($400AU when I bought it a while back) - modified for use
on non standard frequencies :D
When I was testing the system out with live charges, I used the VHF Marine band channel 87A - which is disused in Australia.
The only reason I used this channel is that I had an old VHF lying around to be the receiver... otherwise I would use
something in the high Aircraft band - though on a channel unaccessible to Aircraft radios. "dead" frequency if you will.
Anyways, I would always use a length of speaker wire from the receiver\decoder to the device - as I am not made of money :p
(Unless evidence needed to be destroyed...)
A pyrotechnic delay is a good idea... though that could insert a further margin for error.
Aslong as your frequency is unused, and DTMF code isnt just a single BEEP - then it'll be fine :)
Hopefully its set up correctly... so the relay doesn't trigger as soon as the squelch opens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]"
src="eek.gif" />
[ January 11, 2003, 05:44 AM: Message edited by: Fl4PP4W0k ]
a_bab January 13th, 2003, 07:33 AM

I also made a clock based detonator; it works fine. I used a transistor, (like Tony Montana's idea, but before of he's post :D
), and it worked fine. The clock was a electronnic one, and the current for the piezo speaker is enough to open the transistor.
BUT what if the transistor fails in the time limit when I set up the charge ? Well, never trust in electronics. Even NASA or US
army are risking a lot, isn't it ? Shit happends. I mean, a fighter pilot, while flying with he's F19 full-filled with digital devices,
he's in risk of losing he's life because of the weapons he is carying, I would say.
So I used a 10 meters cable, just for sake. Besides, I recovered the device intact. But if someone is planning some bombing,
he is so desperate that he will risk he's life in order to get someonelse killed. Hence some accidents I heard (terrorist died
accidently in an explosion in he's car while setting the bomb up)
aster January 13th, 2003, 09:36 AM

connecting bridge wire to ignite safety fuse, yes this will increasing safety and prevent being maimed from accidental
detonation, i think this should be called remote igniter than remote detonator :D
metafractal February 25th, 2003, 08:19 AM

The risk of interference could be minimized by putting in an integrator. This is a very simple device, which only lets current flow
if the average of the current over a period of time (usually very short period) is X. Such a device could be as simple as a
capacitor slapped before final detonation sparker!
I have built a timed detonator, aswell, and again, the method could not be simpler. I used an analog clock, a pocket clock
that I got for chrsitmas (I also used the designer metal case that it came in for an APAN charge :D ). When one of the hands
(I did only with the hour hand, but it could easily be with both) gets to a certain position, it completes the circuit to set of the
blasting cap. Voila! There you have up to a 24 hour delay accurite to the second.
[ February 25, 2003, 08:01 AM: Message edited by: metafractal ]
jarrod February 26th, 2003, 05:36 AM

I have the plans for an electronic timed igniters it looks fairly good although I havent tried it. Its from Anarchists cookbook
so Im not sure how reliable it is. Its a simple ic timer based system. These are the parts listed
2 Switching Diodes (1N914) 276-1122 $0.99

10K Resistor 271-034 $0.19
Relay Switch (6V) 275-004 $2.99
IC Timer 555 276-1723 $1.19
Mini LED 276-059 $0.99
Electrolytic capacitor (Size depends on delay desired)
Resistor (Size depends on delay desired) $0.19
Push button switch (any model)
2 9-Volt Batteries (Cheap, but new ones)
Small piece of breadboard approx $1.00
24 gauge solid core insulated wire
Soldering tools
Solar Igniters (electric matches available at hobby stores)
Mini Alligator clips (roach clips
Compacter1 (in farads) x Resister1 (in ohms)
---------------------------------
6
= Time (in seconds)
you could use this to change your delay. I tried to post the plans but just wouldnt work for me :mad: so if any are interested
post your email and I will send you the full plans.
Oracal I am very interested in your system, due to cost effectiveness. If you dont mind could you post your plans, because
Im not to good with electronics :(
thanx
[ February 26, 2003, 04:59 AM: Message edited by: jarrod ]

Be very, very careful if you try to use radio for remote det. No matter how good your encoding system is, there is always a
possibility of random interference looking like a valid 'trigger' message. I used to work for a company that made military
equipment - and I discovered the military don't like radio dets for this reason (we were asked to do a laser based remote
det).
If you do go this route I suggest using a cheap microprocessor to decode the signal, but make your 'trigger' code really big
(256 bits ?) to reduce the risk of getting blown to bits. Things like DTMF decoders are just not secure enough. Especially since
one would only go to this much trouble for a fairly impressive crater :D
With a micro you could even put in a time delay so the det can't happen for a set period ('light fuse and get away')
As for cost: I have here beside me a micro based radio receiver that can be built for about US$10 or less, transmitter would be
about the same price. Runs at 305MHz, range mostly determined by the antenna but unlikely to go more than 500m with
10mW
Energy84 February 27th, 2003, 12:15 AM

Well where are the plans for this thing? Schematics, parts list, board layout plans???
Jumala February 27th, 2003, 01:29 AM

Two weeks ago I found a plan for a little amateur radio receiver.
It is a audion or direkt conversion receiver and uses only 3 J310 FETs. This receiver has a good sensitivity and selectivity for
the frequencies from 1,6-30 MHz. Frequency depends only on a single resonant circruit.
The receiver can be build for a available CB tranmitter or a more exotic frequency with an own AM transmitter.
With a DTMF chip and a time delay you can make a save remote system.
No DTMF signal occurs at 20 MHz accidental especially not for a longer time like 5 seconds (delay).
A other more save method could be to use two DTMF signals stored in two monoflops with an AND Gate to combine them.
I have ordered the J310 FETs and will test the receiver.
The receiver parts cost approx. 5 bucks. If it works I will load the plan to the FTP page.

You mean you want me to give away my intellectual property? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Actually its part of a vehicle alarm system I'm designing. When I have more spare time I might do a special design for this
purpose, and upload to the ftp. Maybe I could sell kits to forum members to make things easier. Sorry I can't do free parts - I
may have my own company, but it consists of just me at the moment, and I have to spend all my cash on annoying things
like food.
Would there be much interest in a kit? (not trying to make millions here :D )
Jumala February 27th, 2003, 02:17 PM

@ Tuatara
Do you have a schematic for a direkt conversion receiver at approx. 400 MHz. Many cheap remote control units work at 433
MHz.
This frequency is to high for me because I have no equipment to measure anything at 433 MHz. The most important for me
would be the measurement of the resonant circruit.
I can build this receiver only by try and error method.

Your best bet is to go here
<a href="http://www.micrel.com/product-info/qwikradio.shtml" target="_blank">Micrel Quik Radio</a>
These are single chip radio transmitters and receivers for frequencies from 300MHz to 900MHz. No tuned components!!! All
they require is a quartz crystal to set the operating frequency. There are lots of application notes and reference designs to get
you going. You should be able to get the parts from Digikey.
A-BOMB February 27th, 2003, 05:00 PM

Well for timed Dets I use the parts from a bathroom scent sprayer. I mean we have all seen those things up on the wall of a
public or store restroom that spray a scent out at timed intervals. I just take them off the wall and remove the circuit board
and the motor unit that presses down the the spray nozzle on the can. Most of these unit have a adjustable delay between
firings(usually from 2 to 30 minutes) just take the wires from the motor to your detonators leads and turn it on. But you must
be careful some units spray when you turn them on, so cross the wires then turn the unit on then test it with a voltmeter, then
you can hook up the det. I like these units because there already premade, and free <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]"
src="wink.gif" />
[ February 27, 2003, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: A-BOMB ]
Anthony February 27th, 2003, 07:50 PM

Tuatara, I'd be interested in a kit of your circuit, whether it be just a bare PCB, or a PCB and a complete bag of components.
It would be useful to me if it had two outputs - the main firing circuit with 5sec delay, and an auxilary output which went live as
soon as the firing signal was recieved.
The aux output could be current limited to 50-100ma to prevent accidentally firing the detonator through miss-connection. The
purpose would be to sound an electronic alarm/siren. So if at any point during setup you hear the siren, you know you've got
<5s to duck and cover if you're anywhere nearby.

Thanks Anthony. I could do PCB, PCB + parts, fully assembled and tested - whatever you prefer. I'd like some design input so
I think maybe a new thread? This one could then remain devoted to systems built from OTC parts.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Electronic Timer
Log in
View Full Version : Electronic Timer
stanfield July 31st, 2001, 05:51 PM

Anyone know a web site where I can find a schema of a countdown timer with 4 digits (minutes & seconds) and, at the end o f
the tim e, BOO O O M ! ( a d i s c h a r g e p a s s e s t h r o u gh the detonator...) ? I'm looking for som ething sim p l e , e a s y t o m a k e a n d
cheap...
thanx !
Tony Montana July 31st, 2001, 08:56 PM

NE555 timers are worth looking into:
http://www.ee.ed.ac.uk/~kap/Hard/555/aplications.htm l
http://www.proaxis.com / ~ i g u a n a l a b s / 5 55kit.htm
A m o r e s i m p l e s e t u p c a n b e u sed, using a transistor as an electrical switch. An alarm clock is opened and the two wires
a t t a c h e d t o t h e s p e a k e r a r e r e m oved and attached in series to a transistor, detonator and power supply. W h e n t h e a l a r m i s
triggered, a sm all ele ctrical signal is sent to the transistor. The transistor works as an electrical switch, and connects the circu it
to the power supply a ctuating the detonator.
Victim July 31st, 2001, 09:20 PM

<a href="http://innercircle.top cities.com /Timer.gif">C lock Timer Diagram </a> heres a little sim p l e d e s i g n , I m sure you call all
work it out, if ya need m e to explain it let me know.
EDIT: you will have to cut and paste as Topcities doesnt allow linking, so you will have to cut and p aste, sorry to go off topic,
but does anyone know a good site that does allow linking of im g's?
[ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y V i c t i m (edited July 3 1, 2001).]
nbk2000 August 1st, 2001, 12:44 AM

www.freeyellow.com (http://www.freeyellow.com ) allows linking to pictures. It's wha t I use for all my pictues.
------------------
"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them "
Go here (http://m embers.nbci.com / a n g e l o _ 4 4 4 / d l o a d . h t m l) to download the NBK2000 website PDF.
Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com /nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.
Jumala August 1st, 2001, 01:16 AM

W hen you ca n wait some days I can m ail you a plan of a tim er. The plan and the solder p lan is ready but the pics of the
device and the user manual with calculation form ulas for the time arent.
It will cost 2,5 US$ (all parts including battery a nd 12V 20mA lam p )
Standart tim e is 2 m inutes but all other times are possible.
A 555 tim er dont work for this matter.

It gives a imm ediate output signal and fall back after the time.
Y o u n e e d a t i m er with a defined delaytim e and a output impulse after this tim e.
Oh, I forgot the 4 Digit display.

This is in my opinion bullshit. Who will stay near the tim er to loo k on this display while countdown?
It is only good effect for m o v i e s .
[This message has been edited by Jumala (edited August 01, 2001).]
stanfield August 1st, 2001, 04:12 AM

all right ! send m e the schem a or the file (I'm working with eagle 4.03 + crack http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/
smile.gif)
see ya...

I found these two tim ers but I think they'll cost m a x i m u m $ $ $ t o m a k e t h e m . . .
http://www.piclist.com /techref/microchip/cntdn/index.htm
and
http://www.piclist.com /techref/piclist/ch eapic/wo rktim e.htm
T o n y M o n t a n a, Victim : I know the 555, which here don't know the 555 ?! but I really hate this circuit because of its
im precision...
let's see if the Jum ala's tim er will be good... http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/sm ile.gif
see ya !
Victim August 1st, 2001, 12:17 PM
NKB, www.freeyellow.com (http://www.freeyellow.com) isn't free, although there is a "free sign up" I have to include m y credit
card details..?

Hey, Jum ala, I found your tim er on m y second hard drive... is it right ?
http://www.geocities.com/st4nfield/
(maybe copy and paste...fucking geoshities)
see ya !
Jumala August 1st, 2001, 11:43 PM

Yes, right it is the tim er in the larger version.
The new tim er is sim ilar but I reduced parts and costs so m u c h a s p o s s i b l e .
It isnt crystal controlled but a ones presetted tim e is very exact.
The pics of the device are ready now and I will send the plan.
nbk2000 August 2nd, 2001, 01:46 AM

Victim , when I signed up with freeyellow in '98 it was free, and I have never given them a C C # ( b e c a u s e I d o n ' t u s e t h e M a r k
of the Beast http://th eforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/wink.gif) so I don't know if they've started charging, or m aybe you're
confusing their ad free service s which DO cost. The free version is what I've been using an d y o u d o n ' t s e e t h e a d s w h e n
posting picture links.
Maybe you need to read their site m ore carefully.
------------------
"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them "
Go here (http://m embers.nbci.com / a n g e l o _ 4 4 4 / d l o a d . h t m l) to download the NBK2000 website PDF.
Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com /nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.
stanfield August 2nd, 2001, 04:07 AM

Hey, Jum ala, I found your tim er on a web site (yours site ?) but I can't rem ember which one... is it down ? if no, could you give
m e the U RL plz ?
stumps4arms August 3rd, 2001, 02:08 PM

how bout light sensitive timers.. like when a certain part of the circuit is e xposed to light it m akes the circuit active
Victim August 12th, 2001, 03:53 PM

stum p s 4 a r m s , t h e s e n s o r f r o m t h e t o p o f s t r e e t lights would do a good job of tha t, as as soon as it gets dark it sets the switch
and the lights come on, when it get's light again, they go off, yo u could I should think, be a b l e t o c h a n g e t h i s a r o u n d o n t h e
electronic's inside, just take it out an turn it around? I d on't know if you would be able to do that but it's an idea. I don't know
if the US street lam p s r u n o n t h e s a m e idea, or just a b ig switching board on a timer..?

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > electronic igniter problem
Log in
View Full Version : electronic igniter problem
stanfield May 21st, 2002, 02:54 PM

Here's a picture of my Detonator :
<img src="http://stanfield.150m.com/Bcap.jpg" alt="" />
As you can see, I use a filament lamp with a mixture of Nitrocellulose laquer + sodium chlorate + sugar
But, yesterday, I made 50 of them but I haven't put enough sodium chlorate+sugar and neither of them worked ! so I lose
40$...
Anyboy here has a pyrotechnie mixture wich works every time ?
I use 6.3 V/40 mA lamp...
Oh, I gorgot : I will soon made an order to ACROS Organics and I will buy 100g of sodium azide (for lead azide), do you think
it could be reliable when lead azide is put in nitrocellulose laquer ?
a big thanx !
[ May 21, 2002, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: stanfield ]
Zambosan May 21st, 2002, 03:15 PM

!?? That didn't work? I'm contemplating dreaming about some DDNP for the first time soon, and I was under the impression
that it was still pretty sensitive to heat! How does it behave with a flame? Your lamp is 6.3v; what type of power source are you
using to energize it? You may need to apply a bit more voltage than the rating to get it to glow hot enough. How do your
filament/NC lacquer ingiters work by themselves? Sorry for all the questions, I'm just trying to figure out what the failure mode
is here, because this should be working... unless I'm really mistaken about the properties of DDNP.
Hmm, a little hunting reveals this:
"DDNP is used with other materials to form priming mixtures, particularly where a high sensitivity to flame or heat is desired"
So it's apparently less sensitive to heat than I thought. Which makes me want it even more. :D
At any rate, the sugar/chlorate mixture burns fiercely, but it does require a sustained flame to ignite, particularly when the
hygroscopic sucrose has had a chance to absorb water. If you have access to NC grains (not ping-pong balls), I'd just use a
small layer of that, or some fine grain black powder rather than a homemade pyro comp. just for added reliability & no nasty
surprises.

in fact, there is too nitrocellulose laquer, not enought chorate, so the is is a spark and nothing more... this doesn't ignite all
the substance...
a few weeks ago, I made the same method but I put very large excess of sodium chlorate+sugar, they worked well but the
filament was often broked due to the "concentration" of powder (chlorate+sugar) in the laquer...
otherwise, they worked very well, I heard a great BAOUM !
see ya !
xoo1246 May 21st, 2002, 03:49 PM

I always use a pyrotechnical compositon around the filament, mostly fineley powdered matcheads, they never fail if the are
constructed properly.
I have been there, with the NC in on the filament, the heat transfer is large, therfore you would need a high(er) voltage.
[ May 21, 2002, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

ok, so, what's the "recipe" for matcheads igniters ? could you give me the procedure ?
thanx !
huuum... the might be witout importance, but I usually use ping-pong balls for my laquer.
mongo blongo May 21st, 2002, 11:10 PM

It would be MUCH better to use NC grains!
As for the matcheads igniters, I never use this myself but you could crush the heads and add a small amount of water to
make a slurry and coat the bridge wire with it and let it dry.
Anyone know the comp on rocket igniters by the way?
Energy84 May 22nd, 2002, 12:39 AM

Personally, I use double base smokeless powder mixed with acetone and coat all my ignitors with it.
The ignitors themselves are usually just wrap a strand of wire from some steel wool around a toothpick and solder some wire
to each end. Then I coat the stick with my acetone/DBSP mix and let dry. They fire everytime with a 9V battery (just one of
those little rectangular ones).
stanfield May 22nd, 2002, 03:53 AM

What's your smokeless powder, and your ingredients ?
Microtek May 22nd, 2002, 05:58 AM

I use a slightly different approach when using electrical ignition:
- A piece of cardboard is cut out in an appropriate size and a thin layer of glue is smeared on it. I use glue sticks for office
use.
- A piece of Al kitchen foil is attached to the cardboard with the glue as smoothly as possible.
- Using a razor, sections of the foil is cut off, so as to form two leads and a thin bridge connecting the two.
- A small amount of highly spark sensitive material such as Ag2C2 or double salts is placed directly onto the bridge, and a
small piece of adhesive tape is used to keep it in place.
- This ignitor is used to initiate the primary.
The current density needed will vary depending on the width of the bridge. Usually 1 mm bridge width will do for typical 6 volt
batteries, but a standard 9 V battery will need impractically thin bridges to work. I use a capacitor discharge from a 400 V,
1000 mikro Farad capacitor. This makes the bridge explode with a quite loud crack, but unfortunately isn't enough for an EFI (
exploding foil initiator ).

could I mix lead azide with a "glue" then put the filament in and let dry ? I think it will explode even if there is only a spark...
mongo blongo May 22nd, 2002, 09:31 AM

From my experience Lead Azide doesn't work very well when mixed with binders or plasticizers. You would need more than a
spark to set it off.
Edit- You could try mixing it with NC. I think maybe 20% NC could work.
[ May 22, 2002, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: mongo blongo ]

what about the compatibility and the stability of the products ?
xoo1246 May 22nd, 2002, 12:55 PM

Remove
[ December 11, 2002, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
stanfield May 22nd, 2002, 01:27 PM

I maybe found the solution :
<a href="http://home.pacbell.net/sparksd/Pyrogen.htm" target="_blank">http://home.pacbell.net/sparksd/Pyrogen.htm</a>
but magnesium is very expensive... could it be replaced by an another product ? otherwise, is this "pyrogen" recipe reliable ?
Sin ce I co uld bu y 100g of magnesium for 15 , how many igniter could I make ?
The guy said to mix nitrate+magnesium with Nitrocelluloe laquer, ok, but how much ?
Could the potassium nitrate be substitued by sodium nitrate (which is cheaper for me...)
thanx for all !
Snipie May 22nd, 2002, 03:05 PM

I make my e-fuse from resistor wire and molten KNO3 and Sugar. They never failed me..
Solder 3 cm resistor wire (100 Ohm / M) between 2 wires (twist the resistor wire a bit around one wire). Then dip it in molten
KNO3 and sugar. When it is dry, dip it in molten candle wax (I use pure paraffin) to make it water resistant.
The best way to melt the sugar and KNO3 is to take an old frying pan and put a metal pan inside, put the KNO3 and the sugar
in it, let it stand (on 190 C) for 15 minutes, and voila molten sugar and KNO3.
I set my E-fuses of with a 12 V battery.
Some pics at: <a href="http://home.conceptsfa.nl/~sniper/EFuse/eFuse.html" target="_blank">E-Fuse</a>
[ May 22, 2002, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Snipie ]
xoo1246 May 22nd, 2002, 03:18 PM
There is no need for any KNO3/Mg, you could use BP as well.
With some aluminum if you want it to burn hotter.
Snipie: how fast are your "E-fuses"?. I see two drawbacks:
Slow reaction time and requires high current. Am I wrong?
stanfield May 22nd, 2002, 05:18 PM

I found a cheaper place fo r magne sium (250g for 22 )
so, is this pyrogen reliable ? anyone tested it before ?
thanx...
PYRO500 May 22nd, 2002, 07:07 PM

Thought I might mention that I have used a stub of fuse (NC laquor over BP coverd strings) with a pece of nichrome wire
threaded through it. As for using a light bulb filament, I think they are too light and fragile to be of much use, Your ignition
system should be able to take a litle pulling or else it's not reliable enough to have a safety advantage over fuse. I have
messed with tiny silicon diode ignitors before, I ripped the idea from some kewl book, Apparently when you run about 12V
through these things they will burn up regardless of their biasing. I would recomend purchasing a gel-cel backup battery (for
ups's burglar alarms, emergency lights etc...) these can put out up to 4.5 amp hours (run for an hour at 4.5 A) witch is more
than enough to heat a relitiely small diode into melting. I have to see if one of these actually will burn up a stub of fuse, I
may try this soon and post results.
[ May 22, 2002, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]
FragmentedSanity May 23rd, 2002, 03:27 AM

Slicone Diodes will work. But I still find they need a match head to produce enough heat.
IMO Nicrome is by far the best option for electrical igiters - that stuff will get damn hot before it burns the wire out - pretty
much gauranteed to fire up - and its nice and strong too.
FS
stanfield May 23rd, 2002, 09:33 AM

I love my igniter (when they work...) made with lamp filament because, when the nitrocellulose laquer is dry, it's very hard and
protect the filament lamp from being broken ! it's hard like rock, so if you don't broke the filament during the manufacture,
it's impossible to broke it after... really ! Last time when I made my 50 (wrong!) igniters, there is only 3 who didn't worked ! (I
tested them with my multimeter) so, the "yield" :) is 94% of success !
after all, when these igniters are dry, they requires a few mA to work, so I can have a portable solution for detonating
everything... (I attached them with the new Jumala's timer which work very well with a 9V battery (there are little and cubic)
So, I only have a problem of "ignitiating mixture" !
see ya !
Snipie May 23rd, 2002, 03:36 PM

The reaction time is (with 12 V) under the 0.3 second, its a bit hard to give an exact reaction time, but they are pretty damn
fast.
And the needed amperage is not that high, because the resistor wire is very thin, so it can take maybe 0.2 W. And above the
0.2 W, it burns.
With 12 V and some resistor wire (3 Ohm) there will be a 4A current, thats 48 W witch will be dissipated in the resistor wire.
4 A is a lot, but if your power source cant deliver that kind of current, it doesnt matter, because only 17mA is necessary to
burn down the resistor wire (at 12 V).
I just tested it, and with 3 penlights (almost empty, 1.2 V each) it took 4 seconds to turn the wire (3.6 Ohm) red hot, the wire
didnt meld. With a 6 V battery (full) the wire melted instantaneously.
If you have some kind of electronics shop nearby, buy some 100 Ohm/M resistor wire, so you can see for your self (the stuff
isnt expensive, one dollar for 5 meter or so).
stanfield May 24th, 2002, 11:20 AM

I just tested out to crush match heads into powder but it's very very very long ! and the powder is full with piece of wood !
I will try to make 1 or 2 igniters with that...
see ya !
xoo1246 May 24th, 2002, 12:51 PM

Hmm, you should only remove the matcheads, not the wood. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
How hard can it be? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
stanfield May 24th, 2002, 03:53 PM

how do you crush your match heads ? me, I take a knife then I "rub" the head...
xoo1246 May 24th, 2002, 03:56 PM
Ok, I'll make a manual for you. :)
I'll post it here in a few minutes.
Edit: Lol, I feel really kewl, I have made an instructive image for removing matcheads.
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/stanfield.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/
stanfield.jpg</a>
[ May 24, 2002, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

sorry Soldier F, I don't saw your message, yes I just tried to crush them with pliers and YES, this is very easy & effective ! I
never had the idea to do it with pliers...
thanx for the tip !

xoo1246, your link doesn't work, I tried to copy and paste it in a new window but it definitively doesn't work...
see ya !
xoo1246 May 25th, 2002, 10:20 AM

Remove
PYRO500 May 25th, 2002, 11:49 AM

I remember a long while back when I tried making fuses the kurt saxon way, I took the thousand or so match heads and
poured them into boiling water and dissolved the heads in the water leaving the match head fuel and oxidizer in solution witch
I boilded down till it was a thick solution and dipped string in it. I am not sure how much of the actual fuel stays in even
solution but I remember the little crystals of the stuff that formed on the sides of the metal tin I had burned pretty well. Now
what if instead of dipping strings in this stuff you dip silicone diodes in this stuff ? I know that NC laquor will probobly work but
it is probably not as cheap and readily avalable as this. also has anyone tried that match head idea with acetone instead of
water (I hope you have the sense not to use an open flame) so you don't have to put up with that awful sulfur stench but you
can smell that pleasent sweet acetone smell. :D

my matches doen't dissolve in acetone in any proportion...
I will soon receive my 100g of sodium azide I ordered, do you think it could be possible to make powerful matches with lead
azide (since it's extra sensitive) ?
bye
nbk2000 May 26th, 2002, 04:41 AM

Perhaps it'd be possible to melt or dissolve off the plastic casing of a semiconductor to use it as a basis of a SCB
(SemiConductor Bridge) initiator?
I too had some troubles with the NC laquer/SC/Sugar mix. Rather, I just used straight NC dusted with ground lighter flint
powder. You make that by taking a used up lighter and SLOWLY turning the flint wheel to grind up the flint.
The powder gives a very hot flash of flame when the NC is ignited.
The SC/Sugar mix sprinkled on the NC didn't do much more than just fizzle a little. Probably because it wasn't microfine
powder, but rather sugar granule sized, thus not finely mixed enough to properly combust.
SATANIC May 27th, 2002, 10:00 PM

i hate to admit it, but i have constructed working initiators from match head powder, ground with just water. (boiling water)
then i coat it over small light globes.
Using a cheap set of christmas tree lights, i can make 45 for around $15 including all the materials...

this is what I used but my mixture were shitty !
As a bloody, I made all my 50 mini lamp in one time and no one worked... shit !

Do you think it could be possible to make a pyotechnic mixture with nitrocellulose lacquer then add the primary to this mix ?
thanx
kingspaz June 6th, 2002, 06:42 PM

stanfield i think this can be done with any primary so long as it isn't soluble in acetone. this method has been used to cast AP
and HMTD into detonable blocks. it also decreases the friction sensitivity a bit as the NC holds the primary crystals in place so
they cannot rub on each other and other things so easily.
Mr Cool June 7th, 2002, 08:34 AM

A good pyrogen would be a mixture of KClO3, charcoal and grains of something that burns hot. This could be Al, Mg, Si, SiC...
even iron filings work.
KClO3/charcoal ignites very easily. Mixtures with sugar as the fuel take longer to ignite, because the sugar must heat up,
melt, heat up a bit more and decompose before it ignites, whereas charcoal doesn't need to melt etc so it can catch fire more
easily, from a smaller input of energy.
The KClO3/charcoal mixture burns hot, and ignites the grains of Mg or whatever. These then get flung into the primary, and
continue to burn until it detonates.
A good filament is nichrome, bent around a small square bit of cardboard, so the wire goes up one side of the card and down
the other. That way the card supports the filament, and prevents short circuits which could cause problems if they occur too
near the ends of the nichrome.
Stanfield: I think 250g of Mg would be enough for about 1000 detonators if you used it carefully.
Hang on a minute... you're buying NaN3 and pentaerythritol from the SAME COMPANY???
stanfield June 7th, 2002, 09:26 AM

yes, from acros organics
thanx for your mixture but which ratio ?

Aren't KClO3 and Mg incompatible ?
see ya !

I found, browsing the web, these ratio :
#1
KClO3 : 67%
Charcoal : 0%
Magnesium : 33%
#2
KClO3 : 75%
Charcoal : 15%
Magnesium : 10% (initially, it was sulfur...)
what's the best mixture ?

thanx !
[ June 09, 2002, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: stanfield ]
Mr Cool June 10th, 2002, 04:05 PM

Ratios aren't that important, just mix up a good, fast burning KClO3/C composition and then add about 15% Mg, Al, Fe or
whatever you decide to use.
Both those mixtures you posted would work, but I think the one with charcoal will ignite more easily from a hot wire.
I still can't believe you're buying precursors for one of the most common military primaries and one of the most powerful
common secondaries from the same place!! I wouldn't dare do that...

I don't buy to Acros Organics directly but I have a reseller in France. I phoned them and I said I was a student in love for
chemistry :) Each time I phone them to order, the women absolutely don't know anything to chemistry so I can buy all the
acros organics catalog without be disturbed !
Otherwise, sodium azide, red phosporous, pentaerythritol, bis ethyl hexyl sebacate/adipate, mercury nitrate... are very hard to
get ! Furthermore, Acros has the best prices on products I ever seen !
If pigs come to me I will said I'm an pyrotechnic amateur... this will calm them but in France, the "big brother" system isn't
very effective ! there is no CIA or FBI here :)
see ya !
[ June 11, 2002, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: stanfield ]
DeAd August 30th, 2002, 02:26 AM

hey all, new member here, this is my first post. you all have listed off alot of good ideas(ive never tried them)but they sound
plausiable.
what i use is camara flash bulbs there old to me but i didnt see any mention of them. i dont know if there available in all
countries but heres a picture of them
<a href="http://members.aol.com/edwashere2/images/img00002.jpg" target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/edwashere2/
images/img00002.jpg</a>
just the flash bulb
<a href="http://members.aol.com/edwashere2/images/img00005.jpg" target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/edwashere2/
images/img00005.jpg</a>
the blue dot ones are guarenteed to flash,, best if you peel the plastic coating off before use. they work good for most things
that a fuse or solar ignitor would work for and they can be found really cheap 12 for 25 cents (US)
---
Please pay more attention to proper spelling
---
ok Machiavelli i missed one letter in two words sorry for any problems this caused you. !tihs
---
Actually, there are a lot of spelling mistakes and punctuation errors, but there is no need to make too much of an issue over
this -zaibatsu
---
Are you missing a period here ......^ ? Anyway this is starting bad. I suppose keep doing your lightbulb things, with their large
power sources. I was just trying to help. For the person who started this thread try my idea and you'll be most happy with or
without spelling errors.
[ August 31, 2002, 01:58 AM: Message edited by: DeAd ]
NoltaiR August 30th, 2002, 09:51 AM

I have always used regular 12v leads going to a few strands of steel wool embedded in a small charge of commercial BP or
pyrodex. And always powered by a 12v lantern battery. Work everytime for me!

Hallo Stanfield,
I had a lot off problems with my arcor mail accout last month wich I recognized very late. Perhaps I didnt answere your
emails.
Dont waist the 50 lamps.

If you have a adjustable powersupply (0-30V) you can test at wich voltage and current the igniters work.
When it is not to high then you can modify the timer. At first it works up to 15 V. Then you can change the transistor. Use BC
639 because it can switch up to 1 A ( The BC 547 only 100mA)
So you can overload the lamp 3 or 4 times to get ignition.

The lamp wire will be only destroyed by heat but this happens not before ignition (impossible)

even with the BC547, I never had 100mA, Now I'm using a big 6V lantern battery so I have no problem ! but this is too
expensive so I will try to use two 9V in parallel... furthermore, I detonated a PETN detonator and this battery suffered due to a
fragment !
I usually use 6.3V 40mA mini lamp but I ordered 4V 60mA, maybe they will work better ?
Secondly, I use a mixture of KCLO3, Carbon and Sulfur, and YES, it ignites better !
I'm always looking for a portable solution so an adjustable powersupply is impossible to transport in the forest where I usually
"test" my explosive !
What software do you use to make your typo ? I'm looking for something easier than Cadsoft Eagle Layout 4.09
A good idea will be a timer wich, at the end of the programmed time, "suck" ALL the current of the battery in a very short time
! This doesn't matter because the timer and the battery are intended to serve only 1 time ! (depending on how much
explosive you planted...)
sorry for my poor english !
leonvios August 31st, 2002, 01:14 PM

I know this is not about the same topic but cannot post new posts so I was wondering, how to make a radio detonator that
could be reliable cheap and semi easy to make.
I was thinking of cheap walky talkys replacing one of the speakers with nicrome wire or brillo pad strands would this work or will
I have to make it more technically than that?
Sorry if you dont like my post but I could not find this in a search if you can tell me where this information is please.
[ August 31, 2002, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: leonvios ]
xoo1246 August 31st, 2002, 01:32 PM

I know why you couldn't find anything, you should work on your spelling...
Anyways, replacing the speaker with a nicrome wire is not reliable and dangerous. This topic has been covered before, so I
suggest you take a lexicon and try searching again.

I've already posted a topic on this and both Jumala and me conclued that a cheap and easy-to-make solution is impossible
for everyday use...
I made an electronic section on my web page where I scanned a book on radio transmitter, there are both emettor and
receptor with schema, typo... only the components are missing ! :) when I'll have some times, I will post them !
Jumala August 31st, 2002, 09:39 PM

off coarse,- for single use a cheap battery is nessesary.
A good 9V Battery is able to give more than 1 A current. (for use in stuns) If you switch two batterys in parallel it has two bad
and no good propertys.
1. you get not 1 mA more current because the voltage is already 9V
2. If one battery has a little higher voltage than the other, this battery will be discharged over the other battery.
The current through the lamp depends only on the voltage and the lamp-resistance with exception the transistor has a to high
ON resistance.
This could cost some power.
The adjustable powersupply is only for find out the best ignition voltage for your lamp. (Without HE) This should be done at
home.
You can take one lamp and increase the voltage until ignition occurs.
Then you read the voltage meter and add 2 or 3 Volts for safety.
This is the voltage the perfect battery should have.
If one 9V battery dont work properly it will be the best to switch to batterys serial (18V). A additional Z-Diode and a resistor
can regulate the voltage for the 4541 chip to 12 V.
Or much more simple,the transistor gets the 18 V and the timerchip only the 9V from between the serial batterys. This works
good.
stanfield September 1st, 2002, 04:42 AM

Helvetica">Or much more simple,the transistor gets the 18 V and the timerchip only the 9V from between the serial batterys.
This works good <hr /></blockquote>==> sorry, I didn't understood
:) could you explain ?
oh ! and I'm using saline battery because, ofcourse, they are RELLY cheaper than alcaline ! (but I don't think it decreases the
performances a lot...)
thanx for all !
Anthony September 1st, 2002, 11:37 AM

Using batteries in parrallel would allow more current to flow into a high wattage bulb. But we don't want high wattage bulbs, as
the filament will still burn up in even the lowest power bulb and provide ignition.
Saline battery? I'm not sure what battery you mean, but I take it is a commercial, primary, dry cell? Alkaline batteries have
better power output, zinc-carbon for example just plain sucks in high drain applications (like this).
I'd add quite a large safety margin in regards to ignition voltage. 100ft of blasting wire could eat up a lot of volts in bad
conditions.
stanfield September 1st, 2002, 04:36 PM

yeah I'm using "saline" battery (dunno how to say in english !) because, here, alkaline are expensive !
Hey, Jumala, what about a "timered stun gun" ? could it be possible to make one ?
thanx !
Jumala September 4th, 2002, 09:27 PM

Hallo Stanfield,
I tryed to send you a email with the modified timer but the mail comes back twice.
Do you have a new email adress?
stanfield September 5th, 2002, 11:52 AM

damn ! I was at AOL first and I didn't modified my profile when changing my provider ! shame on me ! :)
I have this email which doesn't change : COMMANDE_SUIVIE@HOTMAIL.COM
sorry again !
Flying Dutchman October 2nd, 2002, 04:17 PM

Stanfield,
You're from France right?
Then you shouldn't complain about costs of batteries!
there pretty cheap comparing to Holland.
As for the ignitor, I used the X-mas lights alot some years ago.
they were pretty cool!
just cut them open and put some BP in and you're done
-FD
BrAiNFeVeR October 3rd, 2002, 09:49 AM

I use X-mas lights filled with BP too, but I place them in a straw (they should fit nicely).
So first I cut about 8 cm of a straw, jam the little lamp (broken open at the top) in the end, fill with some BP so the entire
resistor wire is covered, and then I add my primary (AP or HMTD) the rest of the eight cm. Then I tap it softly to make sure all
AP settles and leaves no holes, and then I softly press it.
It works wonders and initiate even pretty hard to detonate things if you turn about 75 cm of cotton wire around this, and soak
2 ml of NG in this :-p
Check out the vid on the bottom of <a href="http://www.geocities.com/brainfevert/index8.html" target="_blank">this</a>

page if you want to see what such a detonator can do to an Al profile ...
Marvin October 4th, 2002, 06:47 PM

stanfield,
"Secondly, I use a mixture of KCLO3, Carbon and Sulfur, and YES, it ignites better !"
Dont make pyrotechnic mixtures containing chlorates and sulphur. They burn better but they are unpredictable in the long
term. rec.pyro is fairly paranoid about chlorates in general and rather unfairly, but chlorates and sulphur mixtures are a really
bad idea to be messing with. Do a search to find out why, or consult virtually any book on fireworks. I'm slightly surprised
noone else pointed this out by now.
Since you are in france I assume you can buy neer pure sodium chlorate weedkiller, it makes it a good oxidiser for
pyrotechnic/explosive mixtures but you need to be much more careful you arnt mixing incompatable chemicals together (I
used sodium chlorate for several years with no problems). Since you are using KClO3 I'm assuming you can get KNO3, which
you might want to think seriosly about using instead. Its much more tolerent to mistakes and you can make mixtures almost
as impressive with proper processing. For something as simple as an ignitor, and something so potentially devistating if it
goes off at the wrong time, you really shouldnt be using chlorates at all.
stanfield October 5th, 2002, 03:31 PM

whaou !... you frigntened me a lot...
I made 20 detonators with 1g of PETN in each ones... all the igniters are made of KClO3, C and Sulfur + nitrocellulose lacquer,
they are ALL in the same box ! Do you imagine if one goes off ??? Serioulsy, they have been made 1 month ago, when will
they explode ? How many time got I ?!?! Don't you think that the nitrocellulose lacquer will prevent the mix to be oxyded ?
thanx for all...
kingspaz October 5th, 2002, 05:46 PM

stanfield i would dispose of all those detonators immedietly. the reason for the instability is this:
ever seen what happens when you add KClO3 to H2SO4?
KClO3 + H2SO4 --> HClO3 + KHSO4
2HClO3 ---> H2O + ClO2 + ClO3 (not sure about this reaction but its bad :()
now, everything in the atmosphere is oxidised to some extent by the O2 in the air. S being non-metallic has acidic oxides
therefore if sulphur contacts the air acids are formed to some extent from H2O and O2 in the air. there is only a very small
amount formed. in the presence of KClO3 you have the very real possibility of HClO3 formation and thus the formation of
oxides of chlorine which will oxidise the reducers in the primer (charcoal and sulphur, hey this means the process catalyses
itself!!!...learn somthing new every day :) )
in light of this you definately should dispose of the caps this second! the longer you wait the more chance of an accident!
for a primer comp i use 75% KClO3, 20% charcoal and 5% dextrin. this mixture is put over the bridge wire when damp and left
to dry. once it sets it forms solid rock protecting the bridge wire.

damn, shit ! it tooks my hours to make these caps ! what's the procedure to defuse these cap ? they are sealed with epoxy
resin (hard like rock !) DAMN DAMN DAMN !!!
So, if I understood correctly, the only problem in my composition is Sulfur ? I can always use KClO3 and Carbon but Sulfur
must be avoided for long use ? ARGH ! life is hard !
thanx for the tip... you probably saved my life...

yes sulphur is the only problem with the comp. also you must make sure the PETN is thoroughly neutralised otherwise a similar
result would occur:
H+ + KClO3 ---> HClO3 + K+ (the H+ coming from the residual acid)
but if you remove the sulphur and make sure the PETN is neutralised then it should be fine.
to destroy them what i would do is put them in a hole then put a big thermite or KClO3/sugar composition on top (don't fill the
hole in). light the fuse and run! make sure you have a big fuse though because you're going to be setting off 20 dets at once.
good luck and be very careful handling those caps.
[ October 05, 2002, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]
stanfield October 6th, 2002, 11:31 AM

I was thinking on an underwater detonation... more funny, no ? how could I make my electronic timer "waterproof" ? with
plastic bag ?
thanx again !
and yes, my PETN is VERY WELL washed, I tested it with a blue litmus paper and it stayed blue...

underwater could be tricky when trying to destroy a load of dangerous caps. you have to make sure they all go off and
underwater you have to use an HE and therefore make another detonator...or use one of the dangerous ones. but on the
surface in the open air you only need an incendary and its much easier to do.

I though to detonate only one, the 19 anothers will too...

I want to detonate them under a big rock (there's a little cavity...), what's the security (safety ?) range for me ? 20 meters ?
SATANIC October 15th, 2002, 11:51 PM

Well, I've got my own little ignitor problem.... (better not to start another topic right?)
I would usually use christmas tree lights, but I have used all those from last year, and they aren't in the shops for this season
yet :(
I tried what I was sure was nichrome wire, (from toaster filaments) but no luck there (maybe because it was pretty well coated
with crap, it was an old toaster)
I then purchased silicon diodes, and not knowing which to get, got both types availiable. (smaller "small signal" type and
regular or something.
Neither of these were hot enough or produced any flame suitable for use..... First I tried each over a matchhead, and only the
small one worked, and then only once in half a dozen tests. They all broke down, with a very small red heat across the centre
wire, but not nearly enough to cause ignition.
I thought they were the most reliable for of ignition.... have I done something wrong, or is it just that they are'nt as good as
people make out?
stanfield October 16th, 2002, 01:52 AM

By using nichrome wire, you must have high amperage to make the filament red...
But mini lamp are pretty common, no ? try looking in an electronic store/catalog :)
Anthony October 16th, 2002, 07:09 AM

You should be easily able to find christmas lights online. Or as suggested, by a load of little bulbs, although this might be
more expensive.
Try some 1/8 watt, low value resistors instead of diodes, they don't go open circuit so quickly.
Two things with the toaster filament: a) make sure you have enough current to heat it, it's quite thick so will need more than a
9v ((3 battery. b) make sure it isn't too long! The length, and thus resistance, is matched to the mains voltage. If you're
using a battery, the voltage won't be high enough. Try with a piece which is no more than an inch long and see what happens.
SATANIC October 17th, 2002, 04:39 AM

Thanks, I'm just going to wait till christmas displays start up, ( matter of weeks now) and get some cheap ones then,
remembering to stock up this time, so I don't fall short of next christmas.
The toaster filament was pretty thick, and I was trying less than a centimetre, but only the one 9 V battery. I suppose I'll give
the resistors a go, I now know silicon diodes aren't worth the trouble.
I don't shop online either, as I don't have a credit card, and it's too much of a hassle when I know most things are in a shop
close by anyway.......
I'm happy just to wait a couple of weeks anyway, not like I have anything I want to set off urgently, so not really a hassle. I
was hoping to find a better alternative in the meantime, but I'm happy to stay with the tried and tested.
SATANIC October 20th, 2002, 06:57 PM

I've just decided to continue testing, (however unnecessary), and have decided to try resistor wire.
I have the choice between 3 ohm / metre, and 6 ohm / metre. I assume I should use the 3 ohm because it will be easier to
'overload' creating the heat that I need right?
The 3 ohm 'cuprothal' (or something) is rated to 4000C and the 6 ohm is 'nichrome 80' and is rated to more
than 10000C.
Any reccomendations?
Jumala October 20th, 2002, 11:35 PM

I recommend also resistors. You get every resistance value you need for your available powersource. Simple calculate the
value for maximum power supported by your powersource.
<img src="http://www.elexs.de/widerst.gif" alt=" - " />
The small resistors on the pic are perfect.

Try to get metallfilm types. They cost only a few cents and they can burn holes in epoxy boards.
stanfield November 1st, 2002, 07:15 AM
An another problem :
Yesterday, I finally detonated my 20 (dangerous) detonators.
Firstly I attached one of these "old" det to the jumala's timer and it didn't detonated, the timer worked well but apparently the
detonator got a problem... So, I came back to home, re-made 5 detonator with sulfurless electronic igniter (70% KClO3 + 20%
C + 5% Dextrin + water) and then, no problemo, I put this new blasting cap with the others and all worked perfectly ! I liked
the sound but there wern't very high damage... I detonated them under a big rock, the rock wasn't damaged, only some earth
was removed... not very important.
My question is : why the old BCap didn't worked ? the igniter is made with KClO3 which is an oxidant, do you think it's possible
that KClO3 "attacked" the lamp filament ?
thanx !
kingspaz November 1st, 2002, 08:01 AM

it could be possible that a combination of KClO3 and sulphur caused corrosion of the filament. the unstable HClO3 formed in
small amounts would readily oxidise the filament. thats only an idea though, the oxides of sulphur present could equally be to
blame.
stanfield November 1st, 2002, 09:51 AM

ok...
and now ? there is only KClO3 and C, are my igniters long life stable ?
kingspaz November 3rd, 2002, 10:19 AM

well, yes. if not thehn neither are mine :(. they should be fine now because they do not contain anything unstable or reactive
towards metals. the KClO3 may possible oxidise the filament but this will be a much slower process than when sulphur was
present.
i've got a similar ignitor i made a few months ago and i've tested it with a multimeter and its still live :) . if it'll last a few
months it should last longer i'd say.
stanfield November 3rd, 2002, 11:33 AM

maybe we should dip the filament in nail varnish before, it will protect it from oxydant. I don't think it could be a cause of
failure...

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > circular shape charges
Log in
View Full Version : circular shape charges

I have seen linear shape charges that have been 'bent' into a circle for cutting pipe, cable ect. Obviously in cases such as this the jet forms a ring or decresing diameter as it
propagates. Is it logical to assume that this decreasing diameter of the jet interfears with the production and propagation of the jet? Does anyone have any data on the
efficency of such devices? If one wanted to cut a large cable or pipe with the lowest mass (ie easiest to emplace) charge, would it possibly be more logical to use a series of
normal LSC's that are displaced from each other down the length of the cable slightly? (ie forming a 'spiral' if you will of short segments of LSC)
mr.evil July 31st, 2002, 07:04 AM

Maybe not what you are looking for, but take a look at this:http://www.geocities.com/mail2xtreme/ShapedCharges/ page.
Also, i suggest you read some shaped charge files, like improvised shaped charges(what a logical name :rolleyes: )

Mr evil,
Thanks for your response, but I'm not looking for anything improvised, I'm looking for maximum theoretical performace, ie assume i dont mind using osmium as a liner and
HNIW as a explosive filler. I am simply interested in the theoretical best efficency for severing either a hollow tube and or a thick cable (ie cable made up of many strands of
wire) seperatly or in conjunction...
I did a quick search through the archives and google, didnt find anything relavent
Chris Shiherlis August 11th, 2002, 11:28 AM

There is no interference of the jet when the diameter decreases. That would the case when the jet would be produced instantaniously over all the length of LSC. But a jet is
produced by the shockwave progessing through the LSC: so it is first produced at the beginning and the jet forming is moving towards to the end with the speed of the
shockwave. So clearly the jet doesn't collide/interfere at any point.
A jet just starts cutting the pipe at one point and gradually ( :) )moving/cutting to the other end.
[ August 11, 2002, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
kingspaz August 11th, 2002, 02:19 PM

nice to see you back chris. i like the new attitude <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Chris Shiherlis August 15th, 2002, 12:09 PM

Yeah, resurrected from the dead, new and improved.
I hoped the highly regarded and very much underestimated :) mister Wantsomfet would rehabilitate me, which would not only make my return possible with a clean reputation
and the respect I deserve :) , but more importantly it would also get me Pamela willing to fulfill my every wish.
But sadly Mr. Wantsomfet never replied so I had to take the matters into my own hands :) .
So here I am. I will just treat you sensitive guys with a little more respect. And I will never bring that topic back up. And "that topic" is, of course, the foolish idea that
flashpowder... :rolleyes:
Note the fact that I use a lot of irony, so it's not my old attitude surfacing, it's....humour...bordering dangerously close to bitchy sarcasm.
+++++++++
NBK
[ August 18, 2002, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]
pyromaniac_guy August 15th, 2002, 05:12 PM

chris, that takes for granted that the velocity of the jet is equal to or greater than that of the Vdet of the explosive... while that may be true for the leading edge (if you will), it
isnt going to be the case for the whole thing....
BTW, how come we cant use parenthasis in the forum any more???
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
They work just fine. NBK.
[ August 15, 2002, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Well pyromaniac, that's not an assumption, that is just a fact. And that's basically the principal of a shaped charge: to concentrate the explosive energy by the V-shape and
subsequently "liquifying" the liner and squirting it forward in the shape of a sharp needle with great speed which is always much greater than the VoD of the explosive charge. I
believe the tip of the jet can reach a velocity that's more than twice the velocity of the explosive used. I don't have my papers at hand but I believe in some cases the velocity
of the tip reaches up to 20 km/s.
kingspaz August 18th, 2002, 06:21 PM

hey, about the velocity of the jet tip, look at the shape of the cone before detonation and at the jets maximum duration (just before it desintergrates). the tip is MUCH further
away from the base of the cone formed than before detonation. for this to happen the tip must have accelerated and achieved a higher velocity than the base of the cone
otherwise the shape would be the sam as before detonation only opposite. does anybody else know what i'm trying to put forward as proof of the tip having higher velocity?
Microtek August 19th, 2002, 05:15 AM

Yes Kingspaz I get what you're saying but even if this wasn't the case ( that the jet tip is faster than the VOD ), the segments of the LSC still wouldn't interfere with each other
( except if the jet shot through the cable and hit the LSC on the other side ). If you divide the LSC into small segments ( only conceptual division ) and consider the
propagation of the initiation from the detonator, then segment A will be initiated before segment B if A lies closer to the detonator. As the two segments are identical, the jet
formation and speed will be identical ( in the ideal case ). Therefore the etire jet will be delayed by a period equal to dS/V where dS is the characteristic distance for the
segments and V is the actual detonation velocity.

Chris,
the tip of the jet does have a speed higher than the Vdet of the explosive [although i have never hurd of jet tips on the order of what you are talking about... for example, the
first book i pick up, urbanski's introduction to the technology of explosives quotes a tip speed of 6 to 10km/s so i doubt tip speed is >2x Vdet, unless you propose urbanski
was refering to a shape charge that used 2000 m/sec explosives], and although the tip carries a good part of the kinetic energy of the jet, it does not contain ALL of the
energy, nor even most of it. If the slower portions of the jet start to interfear with each other then the efficency of the shape charge to cut pipe will be reduced...
xoo1246 August 20th, 2002, 02:26 PM

Two images:
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/JetConfiguration01.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/JetConfiguration01.jpg</a>
<a href="http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/JetConfiguration02.jpg" target="_blank">http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/JetConfiguration02.jpg</a>
nbk2000 August 20th, 2002, 04:11 PM

In a patent issued to General Dynamics for the Javelin Missile warhead, it states that the maximum velocity for a shaped charge liner is determined by the velocity of sound in
the material which the liner is made of.
Thus, if the speed of sound for copper is 8,000 m/s (I don't have the exact number in front of me so I'm just going to use an arbitrary number instead) than the tip of the jet
CANNOT be faster than 8,000 m/s
It also states that the the lighter the liner, the more efficient penetration you get for a given amount of explosive. With proper ratios, over 85% of the liner weight will be over
the 2,000 m/s minimum velocity required for penetration. Whereas, typical SC efficiency is 15%.

the speed of sound in copper is only 3353m/s and for aluminum 5150 m/s
common speeds listed for shaped charges are on the order of 8 to 10km/s, so either there must be something wrong with the patent NBK is refering to, or something more
exotic is being used as a liner
nbk2000 August 20th, 2002, 04:46 PM

The speed of sound increases as the temperature of the material is increased.
For instance, Air, at 22*C, has a mach speed of 344.4 m/s. But, increase the temp to 2527*C, and the mach speed increases to 983 m/s.
Now, when a liner is inverted in a few microseconds and liquifies under the intense heat and pressure, how hot is it? And what's the mach speed of that material at that
temperature?
If we assumed a tripling of velocity at the same temp as the air example, than 3353 m/s becomes more than 9,000 m/s, within the established values.
Aaahhhhh...now do you see? There's nothing wrong with the patent after all. They just left out some of the infamous "known to those skilled in the arts" details. :)
Chris Shiherlis August 23rd, 2002, 06:43 PM

Pyromaniac, I don't know where I got that 20 km/s for the jet tip velocity. Seems my memory isn't that reliable anymore (too many beers?). I better get my papers.
And NBK, like the edit, thanks for being so tolerant and open minded. It looks like I am just pushing it to the edge of bitching sarcasm, but I ain't, it's just my clumsy way of
communicating.
---------
"Pamela come on, a deal is a deal, I prooved them it detonated so bend over and start......."
[ August 23, 2002, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]

Tried to find some sites that could back me up and proove I didn't make a mistake by saying the jet tip moves at twice the speed of the VoD and around 20 km/s but I
couldn't find them. The lamest excuse would be saying I meant feet per second not km/s :) .
But looking for 'shaped charge jet velocity' I found some nice sites anyway:
<a href="http://www.logwell.com/tech/shot/perforator_life_cycle.html" target="_blank">www.logwell.com/tech/shot/perforator_life_cycle.html</a>
<a href="http://thor.prohosting.com/~normkay/noframes/no_reactive.html" target="_blank">http://thor.prohosting.com/~normkay/noframes/no_reactive.html</a>
<a href="http://catalogue.pwallen.co.uk/Catalogue/EO/495/11148.html" target="_blank">http://catalogue.pwallen.co.uk/Catalogue/EO/495/11148.html</a>
And sorry for the other post, stupid mistake.
[ August 24, 2002, 11:09 AM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
darkdontay December 16th, 2002, 04:01 AM

<a href="http://www.security.pwallen.co.uk/Catalogue/EO/495/11148.html" target="_blank">http://www.security.pwallen.co.uk/Catalogue/EO/495/11148.html</a>
Here you go I belive this is what you where wanting in your last link.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > SC failure - reasons?
Log in
View Full Version : SC failure - reasons?
xoo1246 August 7th, 2002, 08:39 AM

Remove
kingspaz August 7th, 2002, 09:00 AM

ok, rivers flow fast downstram than upstream because of the weight of all the w ater above flow ing dow n. right? so if you had a less than 1mm thick cone then there wouldn't
be much mass of copper behind the tip of the jet. E = 1/2MV^2 so if you have more mass theres more energy behind it. not sure w hat else could have gone wrong. you have
any pictures that w ould describe the setup better?
[ August 07, 2002, 08:00 AM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]
xoo1246 August 7th, 2002, 09:07 AM

Remove
a_bab August 7th, 2002, 10:51 AM

The lenght of the tube used to keep the charge at some distance from the target seems to be too big for me.
Also, the container: in order to preserve the jet forming for the very first moments, you need a stronger material. Using some metallic tube instead of plastic might improve your
SC.
...But I think that the thickness of your copper sheet is too small, as Kingspaz said.

sorry xoo, didn't see the pics. i now see how it w as setup. ever tried a lead cone? easier to shape and can easily be melted at the join to form a single solid cone.
nbk2000 August 7th, 2002, 01:01 PM

Another thing is the hole looks aw fully wet. Might water have seeped in betw een the cone and the target? Water would have absorbed the jet.
Also, w as the cone attached firmly enough to the container to resist the explosion long enough to be collapsed? Or w as it pushed out intact?
Shit, tornado sirens going. Gotta go.
xoo1246 August 7th, 2002, 03:02 PM

The container was water proof, and no there was no water, only damp clay. No residue from a pushed out cone was found, the cone was attached with hot glue.
I thought the detonation wave was able to travel through the main charge before things(on the other side) started to move too much.
Or are you saying the detonation in one end of the charge applies a pressure on the not yet detonated material, thus pushing the cone out? What container could in that case
withstand that (high)pressure.
It doesn't make sense to me.
It can have been the Plastic bonded HMTD having a longer d.t.d. time (it has, foolish to use it :mad: )thus generating a overpressure in the container pushing the cone out(?). If
that is the case, my recent claymore could have had the same problems.
Also my first SC, a bad one, with a very imperfect cone contaning I can't remember how much ANNM(say 200-300 grams) with less % NM blew a large hole in fairly thick pipe.
That liners was also glued in place, although the container was metalic and the standoff was closer. That HMTD was not bonded with a binder. This fellow didn't even scratch the
target.
Maybe I should contruct a copy and try it with straight HMTD.
[ August 07, 2002, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
a_bab August 7th, 2002, 03:33 PM

The idea is that the container should be more resistent than the liner. In your case it isn't. That's why you succedeed with your first SC: you used a metallic container.
Also the distance to the target which should be 1,5 times greater that the charge diam. if I remember correctly.
I know that using plastic is very tempting because of the ready available materials, but I would use metal pipe for casing.
xoo1246 August 7th, 2002, 04:30 PM

Remove
Yi August 7th, 2002, 07:20 PM

With a fast enough VoD a metal casing should not be necessary. Even with AP/AN or HMDT/AN mixtures a small (1 ounce) shaped charge can be made that will happily punch
through 3mm steel plate.
<a href="http://incoherent.topcities.com/Explosions/Pictures/an.htm" target="_blank"> Look here< /a>
I don't know w hy the charge did not work. The charge possibly worked just like a shaped charge with a cavity only. If the dent in the steel was smaller than the diameter of the
charge then it show s that the cavity at least directed the blast tow ards the plate.
The mass of the liner should increase the effectiveness of the charge how ever I think that it is not as signifigant as the addition of the shockwaves.

xoo, i've just thought...you know when you look into the shaped charge from the open end where you load the explosive? w as the explosive right in the gap betw een the cone
and container? like in such a w ay that it covered the w hole of the inside of the cone?
its really hard to explain w hat i mean. if it wasn't then the cone wouldn't have collapsed properly.
nbk2000 August 8th, 2002, 09:07 AM

Plus DIRECT contact of the explosive to the liner (nothing, not even plastic sheeting betw een it and the explosive), a single integral piece of copper as a liner (not a cut sheet
rolled into a cone), No air bubbles or voids, total saturation of the AN with NM, metal casing, liner solidly fixed in place, and other factors come to mind.
Microtek August 8th, 2002, 12:23 PM

I have tested quite a number of SCs in the past, though all of them w ere much smaller ( largest I ever did was 11 mm diameter ).
I can't see why it didn't work; it seems like it should to me except for one thing, which is that I have never tried ANNM and therefore don't know how suitable it is. I have read
in Urbanski's books that AN in mixtures often detonate a short time after the explosive with w hich it is mixed. This may disrupt the funktioning of the SC ( but that's just to give
some sort of constructive critique ).
Other than that I'd suggest you use smaller SCs and test them on wood. This way, you'll be able to see the channel left by the jet and you'll also be able to recover the jet
material if you use a thick enough layer of wood. This could give you a better feel for what works in SC design and then you can try your best deigns on metal afterwards.
Finally, I think you should use a unitary explosive if possible ( RDX or picric acid ).
xoo1246 August 8th, 2002, 04:00 PM
Thanks for all the critique. We'll see w hat can be done.
FarbrorBosse August 8th, 2002, 06:20 PM

I would recommend you to use another explosive.
If you cannot make RDX or PETN due to lack of chemicals I recommend you make some good o'l fashion AP and use that in your w hole device.
When you make a SC it is very important you use an explosive w ith high detonation velocity to punch and accelerate the metal to create a jet.
It is however not needed to surround it by concrete/metal or other types of containers since you use a HE and HE detonates so you do not need to build up the same pressure
around the device as you need w ith BP.
I made a SC by having an AL cone (0.1mm thick) on 4 7.5 cm legs, then I placed a plastic bag of PETN powder over it (~150g) and a detonator made of AP on the top. This
thing blew a pretty hole in the target.
Making a SC w ith a low bristant explosive is as bright as making a black powder SC, it just won't work.
(you can create other types of SC with low bristant explosive having RDX in the front blasting a hole, then a slow er shockwave w ith more gas from a slower explosive comes
after the primary jet and fills the target w ith hot gas and high pressure.)
I think your cone is ok, your plastic container looks awfully good, and will be great if you replace your AN/NM mix.
With your current setup and about 200g better explosive (RDX, PETN, AP) you don't have to bother much if you have the cone 1 cone length or 3 to the target it will blast a
decent hole in that target of yours.
I pierced 3 computers with one similar charge and could have pierced maybe a 4:th if the jet would not hit a HDD on its way through the 3:rd computer.
[edit]:
I think nbk2000, Microtek and Yi made some good points... just w anted to give my point of view .
[ August 08, 2002, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: FarbrorBosse ]
Eliteforum August 8th, 2002, 06:51 PM

FarbrorBosse - You are correct in saying that you need a explosive w ith a high VOD, but by saying using AP for the w hole explosive would yeild that a void comment, as AP
doesn't have a very high VOD, granted it's "ok", but in reality and proper testing a HE would be best.
FarbrorBosse August 8th, 2002, 09:04 PM

Eliteforum: ---"but by saying using AP for the whole explosive w ould yeild that a void comment"---
That sentence was a bit hard for me to understand, maybe cause I did not listen properly to the english lessons in school anyway..I guess you mean yield? and think I have no
idea w hat I'm talking about when I mention AP together with PETN and RDX?
Please Eliteforum, I do my posts based on what I have learned and tests I have done, not words based on some internet.txt file.
I use PETN for most of my SC tests and RDX where there is less need of much explosive, but for most people who does not have access to a full lab environment it can be hard
to make those explosives.
I know AP works quite well for a SC, not by reading book nr#1302 by some Dr.Richardin in germany who made research in 1895 and whatever he had to said about the
compound.
AP will _not_ be as great as RDX but w ill do the job.

(200g will definitely do the job on that little box he had on the picture.)
I think xoo1246 not only w anted to know 1000 reasons w hy his device might not have w orked properly, but also know a way to work around it, to be able to make that little
hole so I should have mailed him instead in the first place, but decided to post since there seem to be a lot more people who might need to know to :)
So as I posted previously either he will use RDX or PETN or as a 2:nd alternative he could use AP, who is not much worse then TNT as a matter of fact...
Eliteforum August 8th, 2002, 09:42 PM

What I was basically saying is that, AP isn't the best choice of explosive.

You'll get about 5000m/s max from AP, ANNM should give up to about 7000m/s. But if this thing about the components of ANNM detonating non-simultanously is true, then the
higher VOD is no advantage.
xoo1246 August 9th, 2002, 06:17 PM

Remove

Just a few remarks:
ANNM can be used for shaped charges.
The container for the explosive doesn't have to be strong, let alone metal (even paper will w ork).
A plastic sheet between the liner and the explosive is no problem.
So the SC should have worked. It is most probably the badly packed explosive on top of the liner (it seems immpossible to me to get the explosive neatly fitting around the
liner w hen using a plastic bag) or the way of detonation (or maybe you just had a low order detonation). But a liner thinner than 1mm might also be a bit too thin. For LSC's
(linear shaped charges) a thin liner is necessary because there's not much explosive on top of it. But with normal shaped charges you can use some thicker liners because they
use more explosive (but I wouldn't use thicker than 2mm).
And Yi, I like the pictures you present but according to them the SC don't seem to work, I'm sorry to say. The plates seem just to be punctured by fragments and/or the Munroe
effect and there are no signs of the cutting effect of a jet.
For pictures of a real cutting effect, download the the book "improvised shaped charges" on the site from Wantsomfet (by the w ay, are you still alive? And is there any progress
with your sensitised ANNM topic :) ).
RDX* August 11th, 2002, 03:56 PM

During the last week I have carried out some SC tests. In previous experiments I have got the conclusion that the angel of the cone should be around 65 degrees so I used 65
for all of my experiments. I also used 250 g of KNO3 and 50 ml NM as a standard charge. I lit the explosive with a half film canister of AP. The cone thinness I used was
between 0,2mm and 0,8 mm. I found out that the thickness played a big part in the result. I got best result when I used 0,8mm cone, It probably isnt a bad idea to use
>0,8 mm for SC.
But I havent the material to try >1mm cones. One thing that I discovered was that the best distance between the charge and the target is around 1cm. It probably has to
doe w ith the explosive.
<a href="http://www .geocities.com/rdxgames/Target4.jpg" target="_blank">www .geocities.com/rdxgames/Target4.jpg< /a>

(picture: the metal plate is 10mm thick and the hole measure 30*35 mm)
Ps. in the future will I do some experiment with thicker pates >20mm and LSC.
For more info and pictures on the experiments download <a href= "http://www.geocities.com/rdxgames/SC_tests.zip" target="_blank"> http://www.geocities.com/rdxgames/
SC_tests.zip</a>
[ August 11, 2002, 03:02 PM: Message edited by: RDX* ]
ENGINEERKILLER August 12th, 2002, 10:10 AM

I would suspect that you had a low order this is real common with ANNM that has sat for any amount of time. If it w as a low order it would still invert the cone on impact w ith
the target.
[ August 12, 2002, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: ENGINEERKILLER ]
xoo1246 August 12th, 2002, 02:58 PM

Remove
ENGINEERKILLER August 12th, 2002, 04:30 PM

O.K I misunderstood the time frame you were working in my mistake .I've used ANNM that w as that had sat for 24 hours and instead of a nice clean detonation with complete
consumption of the plastic casing I returned to the shot and found bits and pieces of the casing.No AN residue like you would see with an explosive that had been scattered by a
cap. The detonation also lacked the nice clean crack that you normaly hear instead it was just a big bang.
[ August 12, 2002, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: ENGINEERKILLER ]
xoo1246 August 14th, 2002, 05:22 PM

Remove
Chris Shiherlis August 15th, 2002, 12:42 PM

I agree, a low order detonation is not very likely. It happens with some NM explosives and is caused by a detonator that's not strong enough. And there's only a small "range"
at which this low order detonation occurs: just a bit stronger initiation leads to detonation at normal velocity and just a bit weaker initiation leads to no detonation at all. Sadly I
don't have the papers at hand in which I read this. So there's is some truth in saying that Kine pack detonates at full speed or not at all.
But since ANNM is very sensitive, the 2 gram HTMD should have gotten the ANNM to detonate at full speed. But I was just looking for a reason w hy your SC didn't work.
And I understand it's also not caused by the plastic bag used to protect the copper liner from the AN. And it certainly isn't due to the ANNM explosive itself. I've seen a patent in
which they use this explosive to destroy (nuclear) warheads w ith a shaped charge: a shaped charge filled w ith AN is "activated" at the appropiate moment by emptying the
compartment with NM into the AN (I'm again sorry I don't have the patent number, but it shouldn't be to hard to find).
Anyway the question WHY your SC didn't work is still not answ ered and it get's more difficult.
Last possibility: the liner is not good. I experienced that it is hard to tell w hat liner you must use because with shaped charges, if you change one thing, the whole thing
changes. All variables are influencing the performance of a shaped charge: sort of liner, thickness, angle, sort of explosive, amount of explosive, stand off distance, etc.
It might just be that your liner was just to thin. The small mark your SC produced on the steel plate might indicate a small jet was indeed produced instead of a lot of shrapnel
from the liner (which w ould have punctured the steel plate along with the Munroe effect). So since there is no puncturing and no shrapnel nor a Munroe effect observed, I w ould
say your SC produced a jet and you just need a thicker liner for a more powerfull jet. (but don't use a liner that's too thick, you will then observe puncturing by shrapnel/Munroe
effect. 1mm should be a good thickness to start with).
But then again, I could be totally wrong and the failure was produced because you didn't pray enough to the God of explosives, you should alw ays do a quick prayer before an
attempted detonation :) .
[ August 15, 2002, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
A-BOMB August 15th, 2002, 05:38 PM

Well this topic has brought up an old idea I had to use a flashlight as a SC. So heres my idea, you find a old metal flashlight(like a C or D) and take out all the internals. First
you w ould gather you explosive, detonator, a 9volt of a couple of AA's and a IC555 timer ciruit, you remove the glass lence and replace with a thin plastic or exclude the step
altogether. Next take out the reflector and replace with your charge liner(or if the reflector is metal and conical you use the reflector as the liner) after that you solder w ires to
the terminats on the lightbulb and pull them up so when you pour in you explosive the wires are through it. Then put in your electric detonator, wire the detonater to the IC555
and to the flashlights switch, along with the lightbulb so w hen the sw itch is on for too many seconds the charge goes off. Now take you battery and wire it into the circuit now
take a dead battery of the type used in the flashlight and cut off the bottom and epoxey into place, so when the battery cap is tooken off it looks like there is a battery in the
flashlight. Then w rap some ducktape on the outside of the flashlight. Now is done your doorknob perciering SC in a flashlight, so when a pig looks at it and turns it on for a few
seconds the bulb lights and takes off the battery cap it looks like a geniune flashlight, so when at the target you use the ducktape on the outside to attach the SC flashlight to
the doorknob and you turn on the switch and wait till the timer finishes counting down and boom. This would probley be better explained w ith a drawing but I'm to lazy.

It's fiendish... but rather extravagent for blowing someone's door knob off, y'know it'd piss them off and be rather inconvinient when they w ant to open the door, but w hat's the
point? :)
I'd have a seperate, hidden switch somew here to start the timer. If Mr cop decides to play with your flashlight for longer than you thought he w ould...

OK back to topic again. XOO I didn't see your pictures (I'm a kind of computer illiterate, so can't you make it easier so that I just have to click once too get to see them, just like
that RDX-guy did :) ), so I didn't actually see how that plate looks like.
But I tried some LSC's with different liners and the effects differed dramatically. Some LSC's produced just shrapnel and no jet, and the metal w as just punctured and bended.
Other LSC's were very effective and really cut the metal w ith the jet: a very sharp and linear cut with smooth edges and the metal stretched at the exit side, and also it was
coloured inside with the (atomized) liner metal.
Some other LSC's produced a jet (and thus no shrapnel) but didn't cut the metal and the only result would be a small line "carved" in the metal and to both sides of the line
there w as atomized metal liner visuable (just like a spraypaint).
So if your metal plate with the small mark looks like this (no punturing, no/little bending, a small dent/mark like it's hit by a nail, and some atomized liner around it), you just
should use a thicker liner of the same material (and exactly the same configuration as your first SC).
And I think aluminium is better suited as a liner: less energy necessary to form a jet. A thickness of 1-2mm should w ork. Also the Stand Off distance I use is just a bit bigger
than the height of the cone: about 1.5-1.75 times the height).
Hopefully this information is any helpfull.
Oh yeah, don't you forget to say a prayer :) .
[ August 18, 2002, 07:54 AM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
xoo1246 August 18th, 2002, 10:52 AM

Remove
Einstein August 21st, 2002, 03:55 PM

I was thinking that I should try SC myself. Here is a picture of Finnish Military SC #59:
<a href="http://koti.mbnet.fi/vaakkupr/panos.jpg" target="_blank">http://koti.mbnet.fi/vaakkupr/panos.jpg</a>
I dont understand why the cone is flat at the smaller (inner) side? It would be VERY good to get that kind of thing at hands :D It has 600 grams of explosive and total weight is
1 kilo. Without stand-offs it makes about 20-25cm deep hole to asphalt.
++ ++++ +++ ++++ +++ ++++ ++++ +++ ++++ +++ ++++ +++ ++++
Posting 115kb sized pictures is NOT appreciated. It takes forever for us poor DUN'ers to read a post while waiting for your huge ass picture to download.
If it's over 30kb, post a link instead.
NBK
-Edit-
Sorry NBK about that. I didnt think that when I uploaded it, because I have a very speedy (512/128) cable modem :p Im really sorry about what happened, but human
learns from his mistakes. Now I have learned one new thing (thanks to you! :D ) I remeber this from now on.
[ August 26, 2002, 01:36 AM: Message edited by: Einstein ]
Chris Shiherlis August 23rd, 2002, 07:19 PM

Yi, I'm terribly sorry. I overlooked the first plate. Seems that SC w orked very well (no puncturing by fragments, little bending, small sharp hole, plate coloured by a copper
layer). And the SC's look nice/professional anyway. Only with the second plate there's a lot puncturing by fragments, at first glance I would say that one didn't work. But maybe
just a small part of the liner w as transformed in a jet and cut the plate follow ed by the fragments which punctured it (but the effect of a SC is not supposed to look like that).
Anyway, my apology, especially because you put a lot of effort in it.
Yi August 31st, 2002, 07:02 PM

Thanks for the apology it has raised my opinion of you..The comment did piss me off a little...but I didn't comment as it was a while back (was on holiday for a while) and
there w ere other posts there already.
On the second charge the liner was slightly too thick (the first too thin)...on a repeat of the experiment w ith an identical liner but APAN instead of HMTDAN did not breach the
plate..only made a sharp dent in the plate (will take pictures sometime) and no copper colouring.
More experimentation will be done with faster explosives and liners, but for now i'm working on some detonator tests on lead plate.
[edit: Just me being retarted with techical info]
[ August 31, 2002, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: Yi ]
Chris Shiherlis September 1st, 2002, 12:57 PM

So I'm no longer an arrogant asshole, just an asshole right? :) .
But seriously, I'm a bit suprised that HMTDAN is capable of forming a jet out of a copper liner, even if it is just 0.25mm thick.
I always thought you needed a secondary high explosive with a VoD of at least 6000 m/s. Even with such explosives you can't use too thick liners and it's relatively difficult to
get an effective jet produced. Many times you get the effect seen with your second plate: puncturing by fragments and the Monroe effect.
I use a NM explosive for my LSC's and a 1mm thick aluminium liner produces the best results but with a 2mm thick aluminium liner the penetration is already considerably less
and 1mm brass is even worse.
So what I'm saying is that since you succeeded to construct a shaped charge with even a copper liner, the HMTDAN must have a considerable VoD. Or explosives with a low VoD
(like HMTDAN???) might only be able to create a small jet out of only very thin liners and with a little penetration (but why then is APAN incapable of producing a jet?).
And explosives with a VoD exceeding 6000 m/s are able to produce bigger jets out of thicker liners and w ith greater speed and pow er and penetration.
So does anyone know the VoD of this new HTMDAN (and APAN) explosive? The effects of it compaired w ith some other explosives with known VoD like ANNM would give an
indication (test it on a metal plate to get an indication of brisance and pow er).
Or maybe someone has a better explanation for all of this.
[ September 01, 2002, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Chris Shiherlis ]
kingspaz September 1st, 2002, 06:23 PM

well what i'd guess is:
with HMTDAN, having a lower VoD (around 5000m/s?) less energy is in the jet w hich forms. the way i see it is nomatter what the VoD so long as the cone is collapsed in a
reasonable uniform manner then the jet should form. the key difference being it flies along at a lower speed. with a higher VoD explosive such as RDX the jet flies at a higher
speed.
E = 1/2mv^2
therefore the total energy is directly related to the velocity of the jet. higher velocity = greater penetration as the jet hits the target with more energy.
simply RED September 3rd, 2002, 11:46 AM

The ultimate explosive for shaped charges for me was a mixture of silicone paste and PETN. The silicone paste is used for chips cooling in electronics. Sold in every electronic
shop! 7-10% paste does w onders to the fine pow dered PETN... The mixture looks like C-4, white and has a very good density.
The ideal mathereal for shaped charges cavity is copper, but the alloy that is used in the jar caps is laso very good...
Even for big shaped charges the thickness of the cavity sheet does not need to be more then 1 mm. The angle is 45 or 50 degrees. The standoff distance is 1,5 cone diameters,
the lenght of the charge is 1,5 or 2 cone heights...
[ September 03, 2002, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: simply RED ]

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Fiber Optic Detonators
Log in
View Full Version : Fiber Optic Detonators
nbk2000 June 9th, 2002, 09:21 AM

As we all know, making a decent det-cord is a pain in the ass. And detcord is so useful (and neccessary) for setting off
multiple charges sim ultaneously.
However, for us pyros, electric is the most convenient means of doing so. But this is also a hazard. You must worry about
electrical or radio energy possibly setting off your charges prematurely. This isn't a comm on risk, but it all depends on your
targ...uh...TEST!...yeah, test, that's it...area. <im g border="0" title="" alt="[W ink]" src="wink.gif" />
Knowing that there are light sensitive prim aries (NCl3, for instance), I had the idea of detonators that use such light sensitive
primaries with a fiber-optic cable that carries a pulse of high UV light from a (device of unspecified nature) that would initiate
the primary.
Advantages of FO over electrical wiring is no m etal content to be detected by metal detectors, im mune to EMP/static/RF, very
lightweight, can be as thin as a human hair and thus invisible to detection (though there m ay be technical constraints on the
smallest feasible diameter).
I'm thinking the "detonator" that would be used to initiate the light-caps would be either a flash type device using a
magnesium photoflash, a laser, or an electronic flash. Som ething that would put out a sudden and intense pulse of UV rich
light to "shock" the fragile bonds of a light sensitive primary, causing it to explode.
Anyways, com ments and criticism wanted.
imported_reodor_felgen June 9th, 2002, 10:07 AM

All I know is that fiber optic cabels are really expensive and that NCl3 is way too sensetive in m y experiense, maybe i had too
many contam inents in it or something. Any other light sensetive explosives? I know theese are, but they are also very
sensetive to friction, shock and heat:
Fluminating silver (NAg3 or NHAg2)

Silver fulminate (AgONC)
Diam inesilver (II) Chlorate
But if one found a reliable light sensetive explosive, this would be a very good idea! I don't know, maybe you could use NCl3?
Fl4PP4W0k June 9th, 2002, 10:10 AM

T h e m ost complicated (and most expensive) method would be to set up a simple light activated relay circuit. Using, for
instance, either an LDR or phototransistor hooked to a relay and a 6v battery. A laserpointer or LED would be at the opposing
end of the optic fiber, and trigger whenever.
Also, are highly light sensitive explosive compound only sensitive to UV light?
If they are sensitive to around 650\700 nm, I know a VERY cheap source of 10m w 650nm lasers...
Otherwise, the UV Light used inside those PCB UV Exposure boxes is pretty potent. If you were to maybe use an LED of the
appropriate wavelength, or somehow focus those tubes output, Im sure that could be sent through the cabling.
l8r,
rob
xoo1246 June 9th, 2002, 11:20 AM

Great idea NBK, good initiative.
If your laser is powerfull enough, you could probably initate most primaries. Would be great to have data on diffrent primaries.
Another use could be to set of shaped charges from many angles, making it more effective. I belive I read a patent on that.
Here are som e laser modules sold by a swedish company:
<a href="http://www.algonet.se/~laseropt/dilas/modules.html" target="_blank">http://www.algonet.se/~laseropt/dilas/
modules.html</a>
I checked ELFA for fiber optic cable and it cost around 1-1.7$/m if you order above 100 m eters.
[ June 09, 2002, 10:51 AM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]
Fl4PP4W0k June 9th, 2002, 11:25 AM

lol... UV lasers = $$$
Basically, the lower on the spectrum you go, the more cash it costs for a laser\LED :(
I can get an ENTIRE 650nm 10mw rig for less than $50US :D
How does THAT sound.
In comparison, a UV laser with a wavelength of around 385nm or so would cost at LEAST $500US+ <im g border="0" title=""
alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />
xoo1246 June 9th, 2002, 11:54 AM

You are right, I did som e research and they are really expensive.
A-BOMB June 9th, 2002, 01:06 PM

If you had a strong enoth laser you m ight not even need the fiber optics you just aim the laser beam throught all the
detonators. And did anyone else notice that they were comparing the size of those laser m odules to a .22long rifle shell.
PYRO500 June 9th, 2002, 04:21 PM

I don't know about using NCl3 that kind of has a bad wrap for a good reason. In my opinion fiberoptics would better be used
in a vibration detector proxim ity circuit, in witch the fiber optic cable is wound around 4 bolts in a spiral at one end it is
connected to a stable led. On the other end a photo detector. Any slight vibration can be interpreted as a clicking noise on an
a u d i o a m plifier and when the clicking gets loud enough (such as a near person or a slaming door) the voltage rises high
enough to reverse bias a zener diode and trip a one shot triggering circuit. It m ay be a bit com plicated but for what it
acom plises it blows away any design i've seen.
xoo1246 June 9th, 2002, 05:21 PM

Sure, It's a good idea, but it doesn't help you much if you have to detonate several charges at the sam e time .
Here is a patent:
5,148,748 (Laser detonated blasting cap, still requires a powerfull laser)
5,052,011 (Explosively pum ped laser light, found it interesting though not directly related)
A question, what happens if you send a too high voltage into a laser m odule that has only a say 10mW effect. I don't know
how they are constructed, are there a diode? Would it give of a laser flash before it's beeing destroyed?
Edit:
4,862,804 (another patent discussing a shaped charge initated by several "Laser Initiated Microdetonator")
Damn it, I wish those 5W laser modules weren't that expensive. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
nbk2000 June 9th, 2002, 09:03 PM

Guys...no electronics. That'd defeat the whole purpose.
I'm thinking a flashpowder charge with an additive for extra UV "oomph". This is connected to the FO cables which go the to LS
(light sensitive) detonators. When it's set off, the light goes through the cables to set them off.
The beauty of this is that the charges will get initiated at the sam e instant, regardless of cable length, because it's (litteraly)
light speed fast. Unlike detcord that has to be trim med to exact lengths for synchronizing charges.
NCl3 may not be the ideal material, but it does have the advantage of being easily made by the home hobbyist. And it's
sensitive to any bright light, which m akes it suitable for use in this concept. I'm sure a thourough literature search could come
up with any num ber of m ore stable, but still LS explosive compuounds.
There's UV laserlaser diodes available for <$200. Regualer UV LEDs are <$20 each. But I don't know if milliwatt range
energy levels would do the trick. I m ean, full daylight is equivalant to 400 watts/m eter I believe. But a m agnesium pyro flash
compound with a condenser lens should be easily bright enough to do the trick.
Also, FO cable can be just a few cents a foot if you use low grade plastic fiber, like that used for those novelty flashlights with
the wavy FO brush on the end. Remember, you're not trying to send high-speed data streams over the shit, just a pulse of
intense light. It's very fault tolerant. :D
Microtek June 10th, 2002, 05:35 AM

Many silver primaries such as silver azide, -acetylide and double salts are degraded by daylight. Perhaps a sufficiently powerful
UV pulse would be able to initiate these rather stable prim aries
( at least in my experience they are quite stable; I know some say that the acetylide is very shock sensitive ).
Flake2m June 11th, 2002, 12:18 PM

This will be giving all of those potenial terrorists out there an idea.
A terrorist could have give a present to som eone earlier on in the day (teddy bear in this exam ple), the person ends up
putting the teddy bear near a window. Unkown to them, the teddy bear contains some NCl3 in its eyes and HE is contained in
its stuffing. Later on that night, a terrorist mounts a scope on a powerful UV laser. He firstly looks for the teddy bear and then
he aims for the eye of the teddy and switchs on the laser from a distance of 75m+.The office containing the teddy is
destroyed and the terrorist gets away with this act.
Fibre optic cables would work especially since you could put your primary at one end of some severed fibre optic cable from an
office and then send the signal from within the office with a laser a few mins later.
xoo1246 June 11th, 2002, 01:47 PM

That's what I call over-com plicating stuff. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
The person who recieves the present gives it to his/her daugther/son who dangs the teddy in the wall a couple of tim e s . T h e
kid is reduced to small m eat chunks.
What would you do if you got a teddy bear from a un-known person?
I thought terrorism was to kill people to get your will through. Nowdays, the word can be applied in any sentence.
Tyler_D urden June 11th, 2002, 10:13 PM

Flake... that's a silly idea... there are better ways to accomplish such a task than the one you described. Timer, remote
detonation, etc etc.
Also, terrorism doesn't necessarily have to be killing people, it is more essentially instilling terror. Sure, the 'terrorists' won't
kill every single Am erican, but instilling the fear of being a victim into as m any people as possible is what they are striving for.
And you are correct that terrorism supports a political cause.
Anyway, let's try to get back on subject...
I am surprised fiber optic cable is that expensive. I have a little room decoration that is a light thing.... it is a base with
hundreds of (supposedly) fiber optic wires flowering out of it. You all m ay have seen similar things. It probably has about 10
meters of this wiring, and the whole thing only cost a couple bucks. W hat's the deal? is it not really fiber optic stuff? O r is it
just because they are very thin wires? It doesn't seem to add up to m e.
megalomania June 12th, 2002, 01:43 AM

I think those are just translucent plastic fibres on the lights. Check out the new fibre optic lighting system s they have for
outside your home, Home Depot has a nice setup. The cable is very expensive, over $2.00 a foot IIRC. The cable is not sold
by the foot, but in lengths of 50,75, and 100 feet. The price tag is of course a shocker. Jeez, for that m uch you could hire an
electrician to install an electric one and still save. They sell these to people who don't want to bother installing an electric one,
of course fibre optics are much cooler... but I digress.
PYRO500 June 12th, 2002, 02:37 AM

Those fiber optic lam ps are indeed true fiber optic conduits although their un jacketed and they aren't very efficitent (not as
transparent as pro data cable) but there cheap and work fine for display purposes they are usually m ade out of plastic
although you can get better glass fibers that are alike these. The professional fiber optic cables that aree used in high speed
data link or high quality digital A/Vequipm ent are actually a special glass fiber coated in plastic for protecton.

My point with the hypothetical terrorist attack is;
A terrorist could detonate an explosive with out using a fuse or a detonator device that is actually attached to the explosive
itself. A terrorist could make one of these devices, and not use metal or anything that would raise suspection to security. All
the terrorist(s) need is a transparent area that is large enough to be targeted with a UV laser. This is what makes the idea
scary.
[ June 13, 2002, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Flake2m ]</sm all>
Tyler_D urden June 13th, 2002, 10:16 PM

Why is that any m ore scary than any other of a million possible terroristic scenarios?
ie a bomb in any public place
PYRO500 June 13th, 2002, 10:44 PM

In general I find "bom bs" only scare women and children the m ost what scares the sheeple isdam age and anything that
contains the words "chem warfare" or anything biolgical or genetic for exam ple "biological warfare" or "genetic engineering"
terrifys them.
Magas June 17th, 2002, 09:12 AM

Guys Guys Guys
Nonel initiation systems have been around for years. They use a thin plastic Spagetti pvc internally coated. You use a Nonel
initiator which is like a ordinary staters cap the flash then travel up the tube to the Nonel dets. Its made by Nobel & various
other m anufacturers. Been using it for years relatively cheap im pervious to all forms of external det sources. comes in a wide
variety of trunk line delays & connectors.
PYRO500 June 17th, 2002, 06:49 PM

I am not sure what you are talking about but I think you are referring to shock tube initiation system s where you have a thin
plastic tube and you fire a device like a blank through it, this is a little bit more complicated than fiber optic detonation and
requires explosives at both ends.
Bignutsami June 18th, 2002, 03:17 AM

When ive seen it nonels (as in non-electric)uses a shotshell prim er for initiation, whether its more com plicated then a high
power laser, sensitive prim aries and $100's of dollars worth of cable, i dought it.
Of course wouldnt think it will be availabe to everyone.. and m aking detcord itself would probably be easier to m a k e t h e n
nonels. Spose thats the point in looking for alternatives.
nbk2000 June 18th, 2002, 08:40 AM

There's another idea I've been kicking around for ages...an X-ray sensitive detonator.
Certain materials glow when exposed to X-ray radiation. Thus, such a material inside of a detonator loaded with light sensitive
primaries could be used as a simple boobytrap initiator that would explode when an EOD tech X-rays the bom b or when it's
passed through a security scanner.
Now, since I don't know how intense the X-ray m achines at airports and such are, I don't know if there's any materials
sensitive enough to build such a detonator, but it'd be worth looking into.
The whole point of this thread is for possible alternatives to shock-tube and det-cord initiation trains. W hat's impractical for
industry may be suitable for the hobbyist.
That and just to know if it can be done. Knowledge just for the sake of knowing. :)
But if you have a way to duplicate a Nonel system , please post it.

I think that is what its called in the US. Shocktube / Nonel does use a shotgun primer for initiation. And yes it does cost a few
hundred dollars for a blast line. But far less than the cost of the lazer to initiate an explosive or even the fibre optic cable to
detonate. Nonel is very cost effective for a controlled blast environm ent especially with permitted class explosives. I thought
the thread was alternatives to electric detonation.
PYRO500 June 19th, 2002, 06:16 PM

I have had the idea of m aking a "trigger" or "gotcha" as the bomb squad calls them that can detect x-rays and detonate when
they are present. The good thing about x-rays is that they fall under the catagory of ionizing radiation meaning that they are
more than EM waves they can strip electrons from atom s making detection much simpler. in fact any giger counter or other
radiation detector that can pick up gam ma rays can also pick up x-rays this includes scintillator devices and other
semiconductors in fact some npn transistors can detect radiation if you take the tops off of their metal can but are also
effected by light connecting one to a audio am p is proof enough. you could concevably design a device that wouldn't bee to
difficult to construct or use much power but it would detonate when they scanned it. I found this page witch explains their
detection better than I can. <a href="http://www.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/optics/detector/xray.html" target="_blank">http://
www.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/optics/detector/xray.html</a>

NBK...
the problem you are going to have with this idea is that m ost otical fiber, especially the kind you are going to find cheap at
optical surplus dealers and or ebay, is that they are not intended to propagate uv light. most 'generic' fiber, even sillica
fiber(most transm issive to uv) is going to have a very steep cut off starting at about 500nm... losses m ay be as high a 1 db
per meter at 400 nm .... there are specialty fibers that have excellent transm ission caracteristics in the uv, all the way down
into the low 300nm range, but that stuff is very expensive... 10+ $$ per foot, and probably a few thousand bucks per km.... I
think what would be better would be to have a deflagerant that sets off a prim ary explosive... ordiniary m ultimode
telecom munication fiber can carry the light impulse then, however the 'initiator' ie the laser diode source would be rather
expensive... I could put together a few watt diode coupled laser for a few hundred bucks, or one could be had off ebay, if you
get lucky, for a fair bit less... telcom grade fiber will have a transm ission loss on the order of a few db per km at 800nm (very
common wavelength for a high power diode laser). a deflagerant could be set initiated after a few km worth of optical fiber....
nbk2000 June 20th, 2002, 11:44 PM

Well, the other way to use FO would be to transm it a light pulse to trigger a photosensitive circuit connected to the device. This
setup would be im mune to any type of jamm ing or triangulation, and is impossible to detect, unlike a radio or laser beam .
Obviously, FO detonators would be a highly specialized application, thus I'd assume anyone trying to use it would have a
purpose in mind and be willing to pay for the needed equipment.
pyromaniac_guy June 21st, 2002, 03:21 AM

actually, if you just wanted an initiation method that was not easy to detect, you could use a pulse laser diode operating at
1500nm .. such devices are becomming more and m ore comm on and practicle. a band pass filter ont eh reciver and a coded
pulse train from the trigger m echanism would m ake the system fool proof for all intents and purposes... 1500nm cant be seen
by regular night vision or silicon based detectors, however it COULD be seen by any near ir thermal im ager.. however such
equipment is much less 'run of the mill' than norm al night vision or ir intensifiers... this way the fiber optic can be disposed of
entierly... you your trying to do things covertly having a km of cable running out of your bedroom window probably isnt the way
to go :)
PYRO500 June 21st, 2002, 04:39 AM

How about a wide beam pulsed IR laser with a pair of basic stamps programm ed for one way data transmission, you could
acivate the device from it's long term dormant phase and put it on a tim er or such that was programm able by the little laser
gun you have in your hand, that way you could program a mission weeks or m onths (possibly years) that could be adjusted/
aborted at any time. such a device could be imbedded in a wall or in a car or anything else it could be concealed into.
pyromaniac_guy June 21st, 2002, 05:21 AM

it's a rather simple matter to collim ate m ost any laser diode to a few degrees divergance in the fast and slow planes (most
laser diodes have output that do not uniform y diverge, ie it might diverge at 10 degrees in one plane, and 40 in the other)...
with a few degree beam it would be possible to have a half way decent field of view on the target area so hitting the targets
detector would be easy... there are com mercially avalible laser diode drivers that accept ttl modulation, so that would be rather
straight foward as well... if one were to use a high power pulsed laser source like a pulsed laser diode bar, the range of the
device without exotic or bulky optics could be phenom inal, m aybe even m any miles in clear weather, line of site dependant
naturally...
PYRO500 June 21st, 2002, 05:54 PM

I was thinking m ore along the lines of a laser tube that would have a long range even in bad weather.
pyromaniac_guy June 21st, 2002, 07:14 PM

unfortunatly there really isnt way of doing that... the only way to burn through bad weather is to literally do just that, have a
beam of such high intensity it cooks through clouds or rain.... if you are only talking about light rain, then a low power laser
diode would still work.. the problem with bad weather is that fog and especially rain scatter the laser beam very effectivly. in
dense rain or fog a laser beam will propagate through m uch less of a distance... reduction of range might be an order of
magnitude or more for seriously bad weather...
PYRO500 June 21st, 2002, 10:43 PM

fog and rain do not scatter IR light nearly as much as visable light thus m aking it a better choice.
pyromaniac_guy June 22nd, 2002, 12:44 AM

actually, in the near ir, where you would find m ost comm ericailly avalible laser diode sources there is plenty of absorption due
to water.... thats actually besides the point, what I was reffering to was physical scattering of light by particulas and or water
droplets.. next time there is aheavy fog out, take a laser pointer outside and see what a diffrence the scatter makes... you will
b e a b l e t o s e e t h e b e a m m u c h m ore readily... inorder to see the beam there must be scatter... if light is being scattered there
is that much less to reach the target...
PYRO500 June 22nd, 2002, 04:52 AM

I know that, I am talking about a true IR laser tube, a bit further into the spectrum than near infered leds I just managed to
get an IR laser module out of a printer witch if I can ever find a power supply will conduct som e e x p e r e m e n t s .
pyromaniac_guy June 22nd, 2002, 04:07 PM

an ir laser diode out of a printer is most likely 780 nm.. the atmospheric 'window' is right around 3 m icrons... unfortunatly
there really arent any convinient sources of laser light at that wavelength.... unless you consider building a chem ical laser
convinient.... if you were to do that you might as well set your charge off with thermal energy instead of a coded pulse of light
:)
TRUTHSEEKER Novem ber 10th, 2003, 12:59 AM

LASER initiation of explosives has been around for a few years now in Aerospace applications. The primary reason for the
move to lasers from bridgewires is SAFETY and RELIABILITY.
Some spec listings for explosive materials will list the "LASER Initiation Threshold" in (energy per unit area per unit time - J/
cm^2/.250 us (microsecond?). This threshold data is from Robert W einheimer's personal notes - he is/was the chairm an of
the International Pyrotechnics Society WAll Chart Com mitee (1992).
For exam ple: the "LASER Initiation Threshold" for RDX is 3.1 J/cm^2/.250 us @ 1.64 g/cc (density). This is the lowest
threshold that I know of, but I know of a couple of others.
There appears to be a link between the m aterial's "autoignition tem perature" and the "LASER initiation threshold", but I do not
have the particulars.
LASER initiation is rather inpractical for a solo show, but quite attractive for repeated perform ances. No bridgewire failures, no
sparks to cause premature detonation. Nice and safe.
Tuatara Novem ber 10th, 2003, 03:59 AM

That figure you're quoting is equivalent to 12 m egawatts per cm^2! Are you certain of your units?
TRUTHSEEKER Novem ber 10th, 2003, 03:46 PM

That's what the report says. I'll research it further and report back.
I also found this in a report titled:
Methods of protecting electro-explosive devices from the effects of RF radiation and ESD.
AIAA Paper 97-2695 (AIAA Accession number 36042)
Kenneth E. Willis (Quantic Industries, Inc., San Carlos, CA)
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, 33rd, Seattle, WA, July 6-9, 1997
(you can view the first page for free on the web)
Recent developments in diode lasers have achieved

power levels over 1 watt CW . When this optical
energy is delivered through a 100 m icron diam eter
fiber, the power density at the laser initiator is 100
watts per square millimeter or m ore; a level that can
reliably initiate many pyrotechnic m aterials. These
d e v e l o p m e n t s h a v e m ade diode laser ordnance
initiation system s practical and cost effective.
The laser initiator and its connecting fiber optic

cable are practically immune to the effects of ER,
ESD, and BMP. However, the diode laser itself
generates significant optical energy with input
currents of less than one ampere. Low voltage
ground loops or injected RF radiation can generate
optical energy. Therefore, if the system will
encounter severe ER, ESD or EMP environments,
the diode laser and its drive circuit must be protected
electronically or electromechanically.
Diode laser initiation systems have been or are

being developed and tested for applications in motor
ignition safety devices, missile ordnance initiation
systems, space launch systems and flight termination
systems.
Also see these links:

http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/1997/PV1997_2827.pdf
and
http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/1997/PV1997_2695.pdf (source mentioned above)
***EDIT***
Units are correct. The laser is focused on a VERY sm all region of the explosive m aterial and this is sufficient to cause
detonation. (By focusing on a smaller region the power available is concentrated on that spot.)
Assum e that our 10 watt laser is focused to a 0.01 cm diam eter spot size. This translates into a 7.9 x 10~ cm2 area. There
are several m ethods of calculating the approximate watts/cm 2 of this spot. One is to use the incom ing (laser output) beam
area to focused spot area ratio. For example:.
1 cm2 7.9 x 10~ cm 2 = 12,658.2 (ratio)
Then:
Laser Output Power watts/cm2 x ratio = Focused Spot Power watts/cm2
Or:
10 watts/cm2 x 12,658.2 = 126,582.2 watts/cm2
Another method to achieve the same result is to calculate the laser beam average power density (power/unit area) by dividing
the laser output beam watts by the focused spot area. For example:
10 watts 7.9 x 105 cm2 = 126,582.2 watts/cm 2
Boomer Novem ber 11th, 2003, 09:53 AM

The units are in the right range. 126 kilowatts for primaries and 12 m egawatts for PETN sounds feasible. If you consider the
brisance value used by Kast (energy/g x density x VoD), it also equals watts per square centim etre. And this is 900 m egawatts
for TNT and 1800 megawatts (per square cm) for PETN IIRC, being 100 tim es more than what is needed for initiation!
For exploding bridge wire caps you also need same m egawatts for a very short tim e. (I built some and did tests, but this will
be posted another tim e and where it belongs.)
BTW a fellow engineer in my company used to work in a mining university in Russia. They developed a fibre optic system for
up to 1 km range. It was triggered with a hollow cylinder of HE with a high aluminium content, and a laser crystal in the centre.
The light output was so high that the first m eters of the fibre melted, and naturally it was one-time-use only. But compared to
the cost of drilling and loading holes for a week, this did not matter. He does not know whether the tests were stopped or if it
is in use today, but it worked and was lightning/ground current safe. He has no idea why they did not sim ply use 1km of det
cord, as it was used between charges anyway.
P.S. Funny to be a n e w b i e a g a i n a f t e r 2 0 y e a r s of blasting aro und .

Interesting topic.
To confirm what another poster said, UV light doesn't travel well through much. Of course, visible light doesn't either, if it is
comms grade stuff, since the fiber is tuned for IR at either 1.3 or 1.55 microns. However, for short runs, like less than 1km,
you probably wouldn't notice.
NBK2000 had the right idea, though. If there is an explosive primary that will go off under bright light (rather than from
thermal shock from IR or from UV decomposition) then it should be alm ost trivial to get this system working. (Having re-read
my post, it is trivial in THEORY only!)
Stupid energy densities can be got from just a simple diode laser, since you can focus a spot down to about 1.5 wavelengths
of the light with just a lens or two.
If you have a suitable primary (I have never even heard of NCl3 before) it should be easy to do.
All that is needed, as far as I can see, is a fibre optic that can carry the energy that we want, and that has a small enough end
diam eter. Mono-mode comms fibre isn't mono-m ode at optical frequecies, but it will still only be a little bigger. Score and
break the end for a sharp cleave, then apply your ultra sensitive prim ary with care (tape over the other end first?) and then
cover/dry/adapt. (Read the rest before you do this! This is the easy end!)
Now, launching the fibre m ight be a problem. You need to focus the laser down to a very sm all spot with something like a
microscope eyepiece to get it into the fibre with any kind of energy density. There really isn't an easy way to do this. You need
a translation stage with at least 4 degrees of freedom for best results. You could make one, though. It would be fiddly, but
using something like Meccanno, it could be done.
First, you need to wrap the end of the fibre so that it sits in your neat V-groove, then lightly clam p it. Now, turn your laser on,
and aim the laser into your eyepiece, then clam p that too. You might want to make your stage so that the laser and the fibre
have good positive locking, in roughly the right place.
Now, scan your translation stage back and forth, whilst watching...
O k , s o I a m going to give up here. This is actually a non-starter given the practicality of doing this, and the fact you will have
no fun trying to set off m ultiple things without multiple translation stages and lasers, each carefully aligned before hand and
not knocked or allowed to expand or contract in the heat or not of where you are doing this.
Sod it. I will finish. I have been typing for at least 30 minutes.
Right, watch the end of the fibre so you can see the output, preferably with a good laser power meter, but a load of neutral
density filters would work too, as long as you could flick them in and out easily, while still being able to see the projection on
the screen (white paper will do)
Scan back and forth till you get some light coming through. Now carefully work the X & Y dials so you get as much light through
as possible (use the filters to help you judge), then tweak the Z axis. W ork X & Y again, and repeat until you feel you have
the best you can get.
(For reference, Melles Griot sell autom atic system s for m any thousands of that do this autom atically.)
Perhaps now would be a good tim e to point out that the whole thing is prone to dying if it moves more than about 2 microns
(consider the spot sizes!) so you should do this where it is to be used. You can trap the fibre under a rock or whatever, and
spool it out afterwards if you want, as long as you don't twist or move the fibre launch. Set it up, then when ready, m ove your
safety shutter, and toggle the laser (you would want a remote switch, as pressure on the side of the laser would cause m is-
alignm ent before the laser came on...)
Anyway, the other way would be to use a plastic FO and then you can launch it far m ore easily. The problem with that is the
laser would need to be very, very powerful for that as it is a larger exit diameter, and you would m ost likely still need a
carefully aligned lens on the other end of the fibre, to focus the light onto the primary.
If anyone cares, I can post a diagram and description of how to make a translation stage, or you might get som e hits off
Google. Or you might get one off eBay.
Anyway, in sum mary, it is likely to cost you lots of m oney unless you have a good home optics lab and lots of skill and
ingenuity. And it still might kill you if the sun com e s o u t ! : e e k :
Edit: Typo, plus: If you did need UV, a white phosphor, as found in m ost white LEDs would perhaps work?
Bert Novem ber 11th, 2003, 03:29 PM

Boomer-
Do you have any numbers to put with that description of a pyrotechnicaly pum ped LASER? It's something I've been dreaming
about for years.
BTW, some information on fiberoptic/LASER initiation of devices is to be found in Hardt's Pyrotechnics- And for real world use,
so far shock tube is cheaper, simpler and all around easier. It can be bought (for far too much) from SFX suppliers, it's used
for popping balloons on cue and other stage effects. For blasting, it is often initiated with an electrical arc rather than a
shotgun type prim er. Pyrotechnic (flame) initiators and shock to flame output converters are also available- Ever wanted to set
a fireworks show on the top of a building next to a com mercial radio transmitter?
The side thread about X-ray detection/initiation by devices will obviously not please those in the EO D field.
Tuatara Novem ber 11th, 2003, 04:53 PM

I doubt the x-ray idea would work. Airport scanners use really low levels to avoid dam age to cargo or people. It's too weak to
fog photograhic film, so it wont do didly to a prim ary.
A simpler method than messing about with microtranslation stages is to buy a 1300nm laser diode with a fibre connector built
in. Then you just chop, polish and insert the fibre :)
Whether the fibre runs single mode or m ultimode is irrelevant, as we're simply using it as an energy delivery system , not
trying to cram 100Gb/sec of data down it. For the kind of distances we're after (a few hundred metres) cheap plastic fibre
should be fine. rem ember you're going to lose the last 20m so you don't want stuff thats $10 /m
The Russian device probably had a ruby laser at its heart, though these are usually optically pumped using a xenon flash
because you get to keep the ruby :rolleyes:
Other possibilities for optical pum ping include Nd:YAG, and Nd glass. Peak output for Nd:YAG is 1064nm IIRC - ideal for fibre.
For those who haven't seen it yet

Sam's Laser Faq (http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm)
is one of the best resources for hom e built lasers I've ever found on the web

The problem with using the plastic stuff is that you are really going to have problem s with powerful lasers destroying it, and if
you don't use the powerful laser (which needs m ains probably, plus cooling) you won't get the energy density to set off the
primary.
An Nd:YAG pulsed laser from a telecom ms surplus place would be great, but they tend to be expensive. I haven't looked for a
long while, but the laser units from Challenger tanks used to be available. They were powerful, and ran from a decent car
battery as standard(ish) units. They went for about (IIRC) 150 each. But even if the price has dropped a lot, you will still
have fun getting it all to work.
I would rather use a really powerful visible laser than an IR one, too, since at least I would be able to see the thing that
blinded me. With strong collimation on an IR source, and a decent power output, you won't know you are cooking your eye till
you wake up blind the next day.
Of course, that might be better than a pyro solution to the problem...
As for the costs of the fibre, surplus comm s stuff is available really cheaply. You could get 10km worth, and just lose the last
10 m eters for a long time before it was an issue. That plastic stuff is here at Maplin (http://m aplin.co.uk/products/
module.asp?CartID=031111221537633&moduleno=2275&Products=1) . You will notice that it "supports com bustion" at 75mm
a m inute. It might m ake good fuse on its own! I was very un-impressed with it, and it is quite pricey, too.
Anyway, if you want to try it, go ahead. I think it would be better to try a thinner fibre and a pocket laser diode for a light
source, that's all.
Good luck, and let us all know whether you get anywhere. I will play around with m ine if I get tim e.
Zeitgeist Novem ber 27th, 2003, 03:49 AM

Actually, high power UV lasers can be m ade your self piss easily.
You see, atmospheric N2 is a very high gain lasing medium , and has strong emmission lines in the UV wavelength range.
TEA Nitrogen lasers. Do the Google.

Not very portable though. Beam quality is also a problem, which would make it tricky to couple into a fibre. Also, though the
peak power output is in the MW range, the energy per pulse is only milli joules, as the pulse is only 6nS or so. And it takes
considerable effort to get m ore than a few pulses per second (read 'transverse gas flow'). Still, it might work with the right
primary.
pyromaniac_guy October 13th, 2004, 02:48 AM

Whether the fibre runs single mode or m ultimode is irrelevant, as we're simply using it as an energy delivery system , not
trying to cram 100Gb/sec of data down it.
For those who haven't seen it yet

Sam's Laser Faq (http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm)
is one of the best resources for hom e built lasers I've ever found on the web
actually it DOES m atter if you use single vs multimode fiber -single m ode fiber has a core of a few m icrons - wereas
multimode fiberis normaly 62.5u or 125u - hugely higher surface areas at the fiber. if you try and cram the pulse of a passibly
q switched yag - ie a tank rangefinder off of ebay down a single m ode fiber the only thing you will suceed in blowing up is the
input end of your fiber :)
on a side note - do any of the sources on light initiated explosiveslist a power density AND a total energy per pulse? power
density doesnt mean m uch if it requires a few joules of laser energy to initiate the explosives - or if conversely you can get
away with with only using a few microjoules for initiation..
And it takes considerable effort to get more than a few pulses per second (read 'transverse gas flow').
well, you only need one pulse to initiate your explosives, so rep rate is a non issue :) at that point, if you had acess to glass
blowing equipment or could build a leak proof enclosure you could simply build a sealed nitrogen laser that only operated for a
pulse or two between 'breathers'
-from one of the orignal contributing authors of sam 's FAQ :)
Silentnite January 11th, 2005, 02:38 AM

Wow, I was actually going to ask if this was the right place to post this but it looks like it is the more I read through it. There
was a place at Lasershoppe.com that sold a Green Laser with very high output for 600 bucks. It was capable of burning
through a cup 20 m eters away, I believe. Unfortunately due to popular bush-itis, and the recent scare for the pilots, he
stopped selling them . It was handheld and rather neat. And as he could make them handheld, I doubt it would be extrem ely
im possible to figure out how to replicate them.
VasiaPupkin January 11th, 2005, 08:38 PM

Detonators initiated by impulse diode or Nd laser (1.06mkm) through the fibre optic system is use in stage separation system
of rocket.
Also it is developed for mining. For com mon laser sensitive explosive the level of laser energy is: (1.06mkm T=50ns): Pb
azide >100mJ/cm 2, Ag azide >20mJ/cm2, Cd azide >15mJ/cm2 (For com parision mercury fulm inate >1000m J/cm2).
Also some com plex m etal salts is useful. For example CP (and also very safe).
T h e m ost laser sensitive thing at this tim e is com plex perchlorates with hydrazino-tetrazole and hydrazino-aminotetrazole.
>5mJ/cm 2 (1.06mkm T=30ns) for [Hg(H2NNH-CN4H)](ClO4)2 (This thing is used for special film charges for m etal treat).
As a whole there is a tendency to use a more safe com plex metal salts like CP and BNCP (in spite of high laser initiation
energy) instead of comm on explosives like LA.
Altroman September 8th, 2006, 06:21 PM

I suspect that there is a large difference in initiation energy between therm ochemical initiation and photochemical initiation. If
you are trying to heat a compound in order to initiate it, that takes a lot of energy. But if you can exploit a spectral absorption
band, then you can achieve a m uch m ore efficient coupling between "light" and "reaction." Think of it like the quantum yield of
a fluorophore vs. heating it to incandescence. For this same reason, fluorescent lights are m uch more efficient than
incandescent lights.
So the question, in my m ind: What initiating substances are photosensitive (in a chem ical sense, not a thermal sense), and at
what wavelengths? O r, can chem istry be used to add photosensitivity to known primaries?
Cobalt.45 September 8th, 2006, 11:20 PM

A while back, when TAD- PNVS was first being installed on the Apache, I used a UV activated adhesive to bond prism
a s s e m blies.
Today, there's UV activated repair compounds for BB'ed windshields and the like.
What I'm wondering, is if there's any useful reaction that's occurring that cures these adhesives. Something that could be
exploited to initiate a prim ary.
We also used super fast-set epoxy. Very exotherm ic- to the point that you'd not be able to hold the bottom of the small
"condim ent cup" it was m ixed in. Set in <20 seconds.
I never tried to combine the two properties, so the idea m ight well be im possible...
simply RED September 10th, 2006, 06:20 AM

Slightly out of topic but did not want to open a new thread just for this.
This is the shem atics of laser pointer remote control device.

R a n g e 3 0 0 m eters within the visible radius.
The transmitter is visible on the picture "TransPic". I already blew up the receiver and can not shoot it.
Transmitter: Multivibrator with one transistor am plifier modulates the laser pointer (chinese one for 0,5 euro).
Receiver: 9V consum ation (forget to type it on the pic). Sim plest possible. Just amplifier with one key transistor and relay at
the end. The photoresistor is placed in white box (like film canister). Digital or "frquency" encoding maybe added to increase
sensitivity and safety.
R1 is crucial for schem atic adjustment. W ith 200 ohms it is not so sensitive. With 500 ohms it is too sensitive...
Enjoy!
Meawoppl September 10th, 2006, 02:40 PM

A couple of patents I dug up on the subject:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?
Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtm l%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum .htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5179247.PN.&OS=PN/
5179247&RS=PN/5179247
http://patim g1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=03408937&hom eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fn ph-

Parser%3FSect2%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1
%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%2525%25252FPTO%2525%25252 Fsearch-
bool.html%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526d%3DP
ALL%2526S1%3D3408937.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2F3408937%252
6RS%3DPN%2F3408937&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO 1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%%2FPTO%%2Fsearch-
bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F3911822
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO 1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%%2FPTO%%2Fsearch-
bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F4343242
There is a TO N of other related literature linked in to all of those. It is a good idea, you can tell because som e b o d y h a s
already done it.
Ygarl September 11th, 2006, 06:56 AM

There's UV laserlaser diodes available for <$200. Regualer UV LEDs are <$20 each. But I don't know if milliwatt range
energy levels would do the trick. I m ean, full daylight is equivalant to 400 watts/m eter I believe. But a m agnesium pyro flash
compound with a condenser lens should be easily bright enough to do the trick.
Brave step here - but here goes...
Full Sunlight is 400w/f^2 or 1020 w/m^2.

However, this is full-spectrum sunlight - of which UV light is in fact a very small component.
Only about 5% of sunlight is in the UV spectrum . Of this light about 98% is in the 320 - 400 nM UVA spectrum. 2% is in the
280 - 320nM.
I'm not an explosives or chemistry expert - I'm a neophyte and only moderately experienced respectively - but
electromagnetic spectra I do know.
Basically, I'm not sure what level of UV radiation you need to set off your explosive, but if you are looking in the 10mW range
of the UV spectrum, and are in a reasonably decent latitude on earth in full sunlight you are looking at finding som e way to
collect the sunlight.
P e r h a p s a s m all Fresnel lens would work - bearing in m ind that glass absorbs UV light so a glass lens would be useless. That's
why you can't get a suntan through a glass window. :cool:
If you had about a 1-inch Fresnel lens, at about 10% efficiency in optimum conditions you'd get som e 100 to 150 m W. You'd
need a pretty decent grasp of the use of "proper" fibre optics to splice your collector to the cable and detonator setup.
Fortunately, modern fibre optics have easy-to-fit connectors - though in the spirit of the do-it-yourself chemist/dem o explorer,
you might want to splice the lot yourself.
I wouldn't, but that's just me.
Anyway, I would not rely on sunlight unless truly desperate. If you needed - say - 10m W, and you're running on energy
budget of about 100 mW (say - in the 50 degrees North area of Europe), you can start adding some factors in:
1) Morning: 30% efficiency due to oblique angle - down to 30mW
2) Light haze: 75% efficiency - down to 22.5mW
3) Cirrus Cloud: 50% efficiency - down to 11.25m W
You don't even want to know the numbers if you have a cloudy day, smoke (a killer for UV light!), smog etc.
You could find yourself carring around a 12-inch Fresnel lens from an old Seawolf game (not that I know anything about
playing with giant Fresnel lenses and - say - Aluminium filings or charcoal mixtures...) just to make sure you have enough
sunlight to achieve what a nice new 25 UV blue-light LED from one of those nifty new DVD recorders due out this month.
I'd stick with a UV LED or laser if you wanted to to this...

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Building Demolition
Log in
View Full Version : Building Demolition
green beret June 12th, 2002, 11:23 PM

I h a v e a c o p y o f t h e e x p l o s i v e s a n d d e m olition s m anual (U S Army) but it only covers the dem olition of bridges. I know a bit
a b o u t b u i l d i n g d e m olition but I would like a m a n u a l , c o u l d a n y o n e h e l p m e p l e a s e ?
Omogen June 13th, 2002, 04:32 PM

h m m m m m m not a good post if "big brother" is watching...check out the forum
(Gre e n B e r e t h a s b e e n "checking out" the Forum for a lot longer than you, O m o g e n . - M r C o o l )
<sm all>[ August 05, 2002, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]</sm all>

GB
there is some of the information you want in " Explosives for Australian Engineers by C.E. Gregory University of QLD press. O n e
of m y o l d t e x b o o k s
phreak July 29th, 20 02, 11:0 1 PM

I don't know about any m anual but I do know one thing that when doing demolition on a building you put in on the
foundation. you blow the building foundation the building calopses or just gets blown up if the explosive is powerful enough
and thats that. usually you wo uld strap the exp losives on all sides so that the building wouldn't just blow on one side.
Eliteforum July 29th, 20 02, 11:1 1 PM

I rem e m b e r s e e i n g a b o o k o n t h e F T P a b o u t b l a s t i n g . B l a s t i n g M a n u a l I t h i n k i t w a s c a l l e d . S o m e t h i n g a l o n e t h o s e l i n e s , P D F
form at, so check the PDF folder for sta rters.
megalomania July 30th, 20 02, 02:3 7 AM

That m ay be a gross oversim plification of the facts, phreak. I im agine th ere is a considerable am ount of detail in the proper
placem ent, and certainly the amount, of explosives to be consid ered. Un der your analogy one could use a string of firecrackers
to qualify for explosives around all sides. This is exactly why a b ook written by the experts is so useful.
Mick August 1st, 2002, 01:43 PM

t h e b e s t e x p l o s i v e p l a c e m e n t f o r b u i l d i n g d e m olition would not be on the sides, or in the foundations.
you start in the center, and work your way out. leaving the sides intact when the charges g o off.
look at it like this
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
| | | | | | |
lets pretend this is a building, 1 and 7 represent the sides, and 2,3,4,5,6 represe nt the inside support colum ns.
if yo u put your explosive on 1 and 7 then 2,3,4,5,6 will still be left standing thus your building will be fucked up, because the
support colum n s w i l l b e d a m a g e d a n d w e a k e n e d a n d t h e buildin g could fall any d irection - not safe, m essy, and down right
pain in the ass if it doesn't fall over at all. and above all, anything within 1km is going to be showered with bits of debris.
if yo u place your explosives on 3,4,5 then the center of the build will collapse on top of itself, pulling 1,2,6,7 down with it.
a n d b e c a u s e y o u h a v e n ' t b r o k e n t h e o utside walls when the charges go off debris will m ostly stay contained.
thats my take of it anyways - it seems pretty com mon sense, so i would imagine it would work. obviously this extrem ely
d u m bed down, and a hell of a lot m ore planning and work would go into it.
however, if you were planning a "terrorist style" dem olition(which is bad, and i know that you would never ever ever in a million
y e a r s d o s o m ething like that - obviously any further discussion on this is 100% theoretical)
then you would of cause aim for the center of the building once again.
pretty m uch all buildings in the last 60 odd yea rs use the center of the building as its m a i n s u p p o r t , a n d o n l y u s e t h e o u t s i d e
fram e to hold the skin on.(think of it like the hum a n b o d y . i f y o u s h o o t s o m e o n e in the ass - ouch it hurts, but they can still
function. sho ot them in the spine - there fucked.)
another way you could look at it is the WTC. the only reason the y fell down is because the m ain structural support was in the
center. when the plan es crashed set th e place alight with AV gas, the center colum n h e a t e d u p , w e a k e n e d a n d t h e n c o l l a p s e d -
bringing the rest down like dom i n o s .
anyways, i'm tired and i think i've typed to m uch. going to bed.
<sm all>[ August 01, 2002, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: Mick ]
kingspaz August 1st, 2002, 08:18 PM

for soft target, sm all scale dem olitions such as american homes (wooden framed stuff), would a FAE be m ore effective (if
initiated from the cen tre) as o p p o s e d t o a c o n v e n t i o n a l c h a r g e ?
Mick August 2nd, 2002, 02:37 PM

i would imagine blowing up a house would be quite hard, assuming of course you were trying to do professionaly. i don't know
how you would it with out lauching bricks and ro of tiles etc all over the place and into neighbouring houses.
however if it was a "hit" type thing, the n the way i would do it would be to calculate the volum e o f t h e h o u s e , t h e n c a l c u l a t e a
LPG to air ratio(i suggest LPG cause its cheap as chips, and extrem ly com m on), and then fill gas tanks with the requied
a m ounts and place them thru out the house, along with an ignition device in the center.
(dunno if this would work..but it sounds pretty good. i'd probably throw som e fans in aswell to mak e s u r e t h e f u e l / a i r m i x x e d
well)
however, your really only wanting or needing to distroy one target and if you use a FAE then your g oing to do shit loads of
d a m age to o ther innocent property around the target. so again, you end up with a pretty m essy outcom e.
they best way i've seen a house demolished(unfortunatly it didn't involve explosvies) was with a D9 bulldozer. the g uy just
d r o v e o v e r t h e h o u s e a b o u t 5 t i m e s , t h e n p i c k e d u p t h e m ajority of the house in 3 scoops and put it in a large waste bin. 20
m inutes and the house was gone.
J.T.Ripper August 4th, 2002, 03:58 AM

I'm not sure about th e house demolition but when taking down support colum ns you'll want to use sand bags aroun d the
explosives so it forces all the power inwards. Sorta like a giant shaped charge.
===??| |??===
===??| |??===
===??| |??===
= sand-bags
?explosives
| | support column
Now if you want to take the building down m essy. Don't use m uch explosives, just fill a couple of vans with som ething like
ANFO (A couple of vans of ANFO is a shitload of explosives. - Mr Cool), and park them in one corner of the underground car
p a r k . T h e b u ilding will crumble to one side. and probebly take out the building next to it.
<sm all>[ August 04, 2002, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]</sm all>

if its big enough to have an undergrou nd car park then its likely big enough to have the m ain support colum n in the centre.this
would m ean the corners would be destroyed but the building would not fall. also shaped charges do not work by forcing the
explosive inwards. they work by collapsing the cone into a jet of metallic plasma which pushes asid e anything infront of it.
<sm a l l > [ A u g u s t 0 4 , 2 0 0 2 , 0 9 : 3 7 A M : M e s s a g e e d i t e d b y : k i n g s p a z ] < / s m a l l >
zaibatsu A ugus t 4t h, 2002, 02: 27 PM

Yes, what Ripper is describing is a tam p e d c h a r g e , n o t a s h a p e d o n e .

I would just like to know what you want this type of info is for.
Should I warn people i know that work in large buildings, or is it just for the sake of knowing it.
And what do you want to happ en, do you want the building in a neat pile in its own size or do you want it to fall down the street
it over looks. (the later been the easier to achive)

Ripper, all discussion is theoretical. this is NOT a terrorist organisation and does NOT support terrorism in a nyway.

I know that this site is all "the oretical". But im just asking because for all I know is we could be helping a guy blow up a
b u i l d i n g s o m e where as a terrorist act. Or on th e other hand we could just be helping someone who is writin g a thriller book
that wants acurate da ta. im just interested in the m o t i v e s b e h i n d s u c h a q u e s t i o n .
xoo1246 August 5th, 2002, 09:14 AM

This is a forum where we discuss explosives. A terrorist could use explosives to destroy a house, so could an engineer. He
m ight not ha ve any o ther m otives but curiosity, the discussion is theoretical.
S o m e also discuss the making of very potent p oisons, that doesn't worry you, but this do?
You seem a bit paranoid.
<sm a l l > [ A u g u s t 0 5 , 2 0 0 2 , 0 1 : 1 1 P M : M e s s a g e e d i t e d b y : x o o 1 2 4 6 ] < / s m a l l >
Mick A ugus t 5t h, 2002, 02: 25 PM

i have to say, that could be th e s i n g l e m o s t s t u p i d e s t q u e s t i o n i h a v e e v e r h e a r d o n t h i s b o a r d :
"I would just like to know what you want this type of info is for.
Should I warn people i know that work in large buildings, or is it just for the sake of knowing it."
what do you expect him to say?

"yes ripper. i plan on blowing up a larg e buildin g"
obviously a board of this nature is totaly theoretical. - e veryone here is looking for accurate data b ecause there writing thriller
novel.
wake up.
<sm all>[ August 05, 2002, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: Mick ]
nbk2000 A ugus t 5t h, 2002, 04: 54 PM
If a person using the hanle "J.T. Ripper" (Jack The Ripper) asked us about knives, do you think anyone here would ask:
"You're not planning on guttin g any whores are you? Because we don't want to help any potential serial killer!"
:rolleyes:
W hatever.
Besides which, a "terrorist" wouldn't need to ask us for advice since they have governm e n t s p o n s o r s a n d t r a i n e d e n g i n e e r i n g
experts of th eir own to consult with. Th ey don't need to ask a bunch of hobbyists who fiddle around with gram quantities of
e x p l o s i v e s h o w t o d e m olish a building that wou ld require TONS.
Ctrl_C A ugus t 5t h, 2002, 06: 48 PM

Mick , I h a v e t o d i s a g r e e a b o u t t h e W T C . The W TC was a radical design in which the outside was the m ain support. W h e n t h e
plan es hit, they dam aged this and also once the floors started collapsing inside, the four outer loa d bearing walls were able to
buckle. This is evident in the fact that they found the brackets used to hold the floors to the outer walls were badly m i s s h a p e n
and warped from the intense heat and strain.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > C-ANFO, APAN & AP Experiements
Log in
View Full Version : C-ANFO, APAN & AP Experiements
spydamonkee August 24th, 2002, 07:40 PM

300 grams <a href="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000209#000043"
target="_blank">Activated AN</a> was used to make a 1kg anfo charge, the other 700 grams was crushed CAN prills and 60
grams deasiel
1 grams of AP in a 38 special round was used as the det in 150 grams APAN, AP 50 grams AN 100 grams in a empty baking
soda container
charge was detonated at a remote coastal beach buried 1 meter into a bank and 1 meter deep next to a flax bush, we were
around the corner with our 60 meters of cable with the video camera set up to capture the blast effects and sound.
On firing the charge hearing a small dull thud we thought it was 'another' failure but on closer inspection we realised it did a
fair bit of damage after finding undetonated CAN prills imbedded in the clay at the bottom of the crater we realised it was only
a partial detonation, about half or 2/3's of the charge went off, we were impressed with the amount of dirt and clay it moved
despite the size of the charge.
our next experiment is to crush 5 - 10kg of CAN prills (we might do two charges one crushed CAN the other activated AN out of
the CAN)
we plan to dislodge the flax bush and create a nice crater and maybe a slip :p :D :p
(ill upload all my videos of this and other experiments { including our projectile blasts... 40 gallon drum shot 10 meters into
the air & a roadcone going into orbit before breaking apart! :D }later today when i get it edited, if someone knows of a good
free, popup free web server that would be a big help otherwise ill upload it to the ftp)
[ August 24, 2002, 06:49 PM: Message edited by: spydamonkee ]
Pu239 Stuchtiger August 24th, 2002, 10:50 PM

Someday when I move to the Great White North I'll be setting off HEs in the kilogram range too. :D
free.prohosting.com
Files sometimes get deleted randomly (not that often though).
<a href="http://www.netfirms.com" target="_blank">www.netfirms.com</a>

Overall good, but less hosting space than the above.
KinePak August 25th, 2002, 12:22 PM

If you have a static IP address you can setup your own FTp address free of charge, just download GuildFTP.
If you use a dialup connection I will let set up an account for you on my FTP, and you can just upload all of your stuff onto my
FTP. So just let me know if you need some help with that.

Well as i promised here are some <a href="ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80/Hosted%20Images/spyDAmonkee/"
target="_blank">Videos</a> for ya'll
i just quickly edited the anfo one so it aint very good, we dont think it was a full detonation even though it was 1 meter into
the bank and 1 meter deep, we found CaN prills in the crater so some didnt work, it still did some dmg was about 2
wheelbarrows of dirt,clay n sand moved
*ill add the APAN drum vid lata
Ctrl_C August 26th, 2002, 12:02 AM

This is the first true test of the linking capabilities of the ftp. So far so good. Changed idle time out from 5min to 1min. Nice,
doesn't exactly stream...but whaddaya want for a residential connection.
Nice videos by the way. I would say that if you wanted it to definately detonate, put some APAN near the det...not the whole
charge but more like det-->APAN-->300g aAN-->pAN. I am almost positive you an get the prills to detonate this way.
spydamonkee August 26th, 2002, 01:14 AM

my det was surrounded by apan as it was in a apan booster which was in the anfo, i think the remains we found in the crater
were calcium remains and CaN Prills which had not been crushed so did not absorb deasiel because of the calcium coating so
were not sensitized enuff to detonate
well we will be seing what 10kg's does soon so im sure we will be saying farewell to the flaxbush :D
[ August 26, 2002, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: spydamonkee ]
Ctrl_C August 26th, 2002, 02:32 AM

I rather hastily read your post and neglected to see that. Kudos though
Pu239 Stuchtiger August 26th, 2002, 03:31 AM

Damn, 10kg of HE! Has anyone else ever set off a charge even near to that in size?!

er, maybe i shoudl explain why i need to test a 10kg charge
ok drumroll please..........
we plan to set off 100 kgs of anfo :D :p :)
thats in 10 lots of 10kg charges buried @ 3 - 5 meter intervals into the side of this small hill thats in the way of a motox track
we are making, charges will be electrically fired with a delay inbetween each charge so they dirt will be moved to the side not
straight up
posthole borer is gonna be used to make the holes and they will be angled so the charges will throw the dirt out from the side
of the hill.
boosters will be 100 - 200 grams of APAN with a AP cap
gonna need about 1km of electrical cable though :D
electrical firing system im gonna make is basically gonna be a switch box with ten smooth on/off switches & two master safty
switches
so when the two masters are 'live' all is required is toeither press each switch or 'run' you finger over them starting from one
end to the other thus creating a small delay between each charge going off.
the idea is this will make number one charge blow the dirt up & out then number two will go off moving number ones dirt to
the side while blasting its own dirt up & out and so on.
we have a small loader that will be able to take care of the rest
i have the privalidge of knowing 3 people who have been involved with different type of commercial blasting :)
oh and never fear i will be getting this on tape for ya all :p
Cricket August 26th, 2002, 04:56 AM

I don't know exactly how big that is, but I do know that is one fucking huge pile of ANFO! Ohh man, this'l be sweet! I was
always thinking a 5 gallon bucket would be a nice blast, but you are a little more on the edge huh! Well shit man, good luck to
you and your dump truck full of ANFO.
Pu239 Stuchtiger August 26th, 2002, 05:36 AM

Oh my god! Holy fucking shit that is insanity to the extremest (doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad idea <img border="0"
title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )!
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0"
title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title=""
alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]"
src="eek.gif" />
Flake2m August 26th, 2002, 09:34 AM

if you want another way to detonate the AN charge, use a breadboarded 4017 decade counter with all 10 of the outputs
connected to relays. The timer for the 4017 is a 555 astable, by adjusting the capacitors and the resistors the time in between
detonatation can be set from >1sec to <10secs. All you have to do is press on and BANG.
Also if you want your explosion to be more powerful, add some zinc, aluminium or magnesium powder to the mixture, along
with the APAN.
P.S make sure there are no sheep in the area <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> (joke).
DarkAngel August 26th, 2002, 05:26 PM

Do guys remember Atropine with his plan to detonate a drum full of ANFO?.He never actually did it,i hope you will.Make shure
to get it on tape.

100kgs really aint that much, as a 50kg sack aint that big, i rekon a drumfull of ANFO would be 80 - 100kgs now thats a big
charge all going off @ once especially if he was gonna do it above land.
this would probably be my only huge amount i would set off @ once cause of the time and effot involved not to mention the
noise and damage it does :D
we chose to use HE to move the side of the hill cause its a HELL of alot cheaper than hiring a big excavator.
well we doing a 800gr test of this 40kg bag of near pure AN that we aquired :p if it goes without a hitch we will be able to get
these bags whenever we need em :p
we gonna use a filmcanister of AP as our det for the 800gr charge, and if it works we might use it for our 10kg charge we are
gonna test soon.
will upload vid to ftp if the test is a success
THErAPIST August 27th, 2002, 02:18 AM

ive been thinkin about setting off a 2 liter pepsi bottle full of ANFO in the lake in the woods near my house but my HMTD
yeilds have been poorer than shit lately due to me having to use 3% H202 evaporated to 6%. but shit, you blew my idea
away.
have fun
0EZ0 August 27th, 2002, 02:49 AM

Helvetica"> Do guys remember Atropine with his plan to detonate a drum full of ANFO?.He never actually did it,i hope you will.
<hr /></blockquote>Certainly do DarkAngel. If memory serves,
atropine disappeared soon after telling us of his plans to take out an abandoned builing with half an oil drum of ANFO :( .
<a href="http://odin.prohosting.com/~forumtwo/may01/20011117-1-000205.html" target="_blank">Here</a> is the thread
on atropine and his ANFO plans, for people who are unaware of what happened.
Anyone know what happened to atropine?

yea a "friend" involved gave me shit for posting it on here because of circumstances that could arise.
had a daydream today and a dream a few hours ago, one was 800gr anfo partially detonating while floating in half a meter of
water, the other was a failed 8kg anfo charge
i know now the main reasons my anfo charges have been failing, i have only had 2 charges that i "think" went off or @ least
partially detonated, my 1kg in the flaxbush definatly partially detonated as you can see the thick NO2? smoke drifting
everywhere, read me first post in this thread for info on that charge.
The 800gr dream today "might" have partially detonated but after looking thru the video that was captured using the "Dream
Catcher 3000 - Day Version" im now inclined to think that it was just the film canister of AP making the spray of water and the
bang as the anfo if it had detonated would have gone boom and ALOT of water would have been moved and their would be
the telltale white smoke.
Dream... and see for yourself > <a href="ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80/Hosted%20Images/spyDAmonkee/"

target="_blank">ANFO 800g - Water - Fail.mpg</a>
hehe that video clip cracks me up the dude that does the videoing is a real funny fulla, gotta love the "BANG" 'giggle giggle
snort giggle' lmao
EP August 27th, 2002, 05:04 AM

0EZ0 - I think atropine stopped posted due to legal problems from his HMTD accident (co2 cartridge full of it went off in his
pocket :( )
On a more cheerful not, this ANFO plan looks like a lot of fun!

well for the experimenters involved so far is been downright frustrating because of the failures we have experianced because
of the coated AN
our activated ANFO has detonated nicly
our Crushed CaNFO has detonated
Instant ICEPACK ANFO 'should' detonate easy as its near pure AN Prills
Well i dont think i wanna buy like a few thousand coldpacks and i dont wanna have to activate over 100kgs of coated CaN or
AN so i think i'll be buying me a grinder like a grain grinder so we can grind our fertaliser up just enuff to break the coating so
the deasiel will soak into the AN to sensitize it.
I
have no problem retaining a low density in the ANFO as i have aquired some 'water softner resins' that are like the tiny little
plastic balls used <a href="http://www.sasol.co.za/explosives/technology/content.asp" target="_blank">comercially</a> to
acheive the same goal
Sam August 27th, 2002, 07:31 AM

Hehehe, 100Kg, are you nuts? Thats a lot! Some terrorists were caught in America recently with about 17 Tonnes of AN,
imagine what they could have done with that!
trev August 27th, 2002, 07:34 AM

100KG yes you could certainly have some fun with that
Well i know i could
Flake2m August 27th, 2002, 09:10 AM

You should be able to get hold of a few bags of An without alot of problems. Farmers use AN as fertilizer for they crops and
the grasses that the sheep feed off <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> If you go to a bulk agricultural
store you should be able to buy a few bags of AN 30kg for AU$25 each.
I have an idea with regards to your 100kg det.

Helvetica"> thats in 10 lots of 10kg charges buried @ 3 - 5 meter intervals into the side of this small hill thats in the way of a
motox track we are making, charges will be electrically fired with a delay inbetween each charge so they dirt will be moved to
the side not straight up
posthole borer is gonna be used to make the holes and they will be angled so the charges will throw the dirt out from the side
of the hill.
boosters will be 100 - 200 grams of APAN with a AP cap
<hr /></blockquote>My idea is that you could have a piece of PVC
pipe 80mm wide (or what ever you can get hold of) and about a meter long. Inside the PVC pipe is another pipe (cardboard/
PVC etc) that is about 25-40mm wide. The 80mm pipe has an endcap on the bottom of it and has the main ANFO/ANNM
charge, the narrower pipe contains the booster and the detonators etc. you could make each of these charges at home and
then transport them to the site where you simply have to drop them down the hole wire up all the charges and then push the
button :D .I also realise that gasoline (petrol) dissolves PVC so just use the casing that is the most suitable.
zaibatsu August 27th, 2002, 02:15 PM

I believe atropine is still well and healthy, he's on my MSN list. But I think the HMTD understandedly put him off explosives

You could almost half your wire requirement by running a common neutral wire to say 10m from the charges and then running
individual spurs to each charge. Obviously you still need individual positive connections from the blasting box.

yea i was thinking about trying something like that, just dont want the negitive wire to get destroyed by the first charge/s
making the others not work understandably it will be in parallel (lol @ serial :p )
10 meters should be fine though, ill see how much wire gets destroyed by a 10kg charge in the weekend :D , most wire been
mangeled so far is when 1kg partially went off, about half a meter was damaged
Ctrl_C August 28th, 2002, 10:40 PM

@Spyda
the link in your sig needs to be: <a href="ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80/Hosted%20Images/spyDAmonkee/"

target="_blank">ftp://ewf:sd332gf@209.195.155.80/Hosted%20Images/spyDAmonkee/</a>
otherwise its asking for anonymous access which is not permitted.
ShockWave November 14th, 2002, 02:08 PM

How did you crush up you CAN ?
My CAN is in prilled form and the blender can not powder them.
And the dieslefuel does not soak into the CAN.
Maybe a strong coffeegrinder ?
ShockWave December 2nd, 2002, 04:26 PM

I found a way to crush up the CAN, in 15 minutes I can crush 5Kg CAN, that is faster than boiling the water off :D
I have done several test with CAN.
APCAN works very very good.

Cannm Works very good too, these test were done with crushed CAN.
I have tryed to let dieselfuel soaking into the CAN but does not work when it is still in prilled form, so I crushed up 10KG of
CAN and it stood for 3 days to let the 400ml dieselfuel soak into the AN.
I used a 652gram ANNM booster, but it was no full detonation I guess.
See the pictures, they tell more.
<a href="http://apanshock.tripod.com/ResultsTests.htm" target="_blank">http://apanshock.tripod.com/ResultsTests.htm</a>
Question: DieselFuel has a nasty smell and is staying in my house, Can I use instead of dieselfuel normal gasoline, since it
smells better ?
And wouldn't be there some other Fuel what DOES soak through the Calcium, I have tryed NM, but even NM does not soak into
priled CAN :confused:
vulture December 2nd, 2002, 06:21 PM

What the hell are you thinking? Ofcourse AN with gasoline works, it stays a fuel/oxidizer mix after all.
I hope you enjoy sniffing the real good smelling gasoline...there are ofcourse people who like sniffing benzene fumes...
:rolleyes:
ShockWave December 2nd, 2002, 06:34 PM

But why is it always dieselfuel?
Maybe it does not evaporate as fast as gasoline does?
If gasoline works just as good as dieselfuel than I'll use gasoline.
Anthony December 2nd, 2002, 06:56 PM

Yep, there's no issues with volatility, storage.
No eco-nuts ranting about "nasty" benzene.
Most importantly, diesel is a lot cheaper than "gasoline".
There's some information about AN and gasoline (and other fuels) in Kitchen Improvised Fertilizer Explosives.
ShockWave December 4th, 2002, 01:59 PM

100% succes with the CANFO !
I used about 8,5KG Calcium-Ammonium Nitrate, which is about 78% ammoniumnitrate and is for sell almost everywhere for
7euro(which is the same as a usa$)for 25KG !
I added 400ml of gasonline to the 8,5Kg CAN and waited for 1 day, in the middle of the CANFO was placed around 300gram
ANNM booster with 5gram AP.
This whole bucket was burried 0,5 meter in the ground and I did lot's and lot's of sand on top of it, so it was around 1 meter
deep.
I drove with car 150meters away from the blasting spot and pressed the button of the remoter, I'm sure that it was a full
detonation since the kaboom was so scary loud and a crater 4 meters wide, it was dark so I didn't take any pictures or filmed
it, tommorow I will take some pictures of the 4 meters wide crater, this is very funny because this extreme explosion cost only
around 3,5 usa$ !! or 3,5euro !
Ruroni December 4th, 2002, 03:49 PM

25KG of CANFO for 7 bux?! The hell? I wish you had waited till day to detonate, would've liked to seen a vid :D . Where did
you buy your sack?

At my site is a video with 4KG ANNM/AL which you can compare with 8,5KG C-AN, The 25KG CAN is available at the
gardenshops, in holland under the name "KALKAMMONSALPETER"

Pictures are now at my site, they are at high resolution, sorry for that, but you can how much sand their is blast away.
<a href="http://apanshock.tripod.com/8kgCanfo.htm" target="_blank">http://apanshock.tripod.com/8kgCanfo.htm</a>
The next CANFO test will be with the prilled from so I don't have to crush them anymore, if it works then my next charge will be
25KG and that one I will capture on video, that is for sure !
But in an old post at this forum I read something about AN-S, I can't find many info at this, but if AN-Sulfur will work better
than I will replace the gasoline with Sulfur, does anybody know more about this ?? Thanks !! :)
Kriegsminister December 12th, 2002, 08:28 AM

Hmmm... I've got to try using the pure fertilizer too.
I have a 50kg bag of "Kalkammonsalpter" fertilizer (27% nitrogen content) in my cellar.
Up to now I've always dissolved it in water, filtered the chalk out and boiled it to drive off the water. This process sucks alot!
And yes it's fuckin cheap, I payed around 13 euro for 50kg....

yea man no need to recrystalize it just grind her up and let her rip as either APAN, ANNM or ANFO. i too will be trying a ANFO
charge using Prilled CAN.
Let yaz in on my next project. *about 6kgs ANNM under a Car* :D

6KG ANNM under a car? wow make sure to capture it on video, that will be a very nice explosion !!
I have now standing the CAN with the gasoline for a few days but it will not soak into the CAN, I bought a bicycle tire nipple, I
did it into a coca cola bottle and now I can fill my bottle with 3 BAR, dunno how much PSI it is, but then it will soak into the
CAN, so my next step is to get a few of those empty 25litre airtight containers, 20kg with CAN-gasoline and put the pressure
as high as the container can have.

Do keep in mind that dieselfuel will ignite when pressurized enough, this is the whole principle behind a diesel engine.
I'm not sure about gasoline, but that *shouldn't* ignite when pressurized.

Petrol/gasoline will also ignite from compression ignition. However, like diesel, it requires quite high pressure and also
temperature.
For example, it wouldn't be unusual to see a compression ratio of 12:1 in a deisel engine, 12x14.7psi = 176psi and it is an
appropriate mix with air, and the chamber is hot.
I really don't think it will be a problem :)


No I'm sure that it will never ignite under only 3 bar of pressure.
I also notice that the gasoline will just drop to the bottem so you must shack your container every few hours, but what about
motoroil?
Motoroil is very thick and will not drop to the bottom as fast as thin gasonline, and motoroil will not evaporate and will not give
a nasty smell, but will motoroil work ?!

As a fuel for ANFO it should. Half motor oil, half petrol/gasoline is often recomended as a substitute for diesel.
If you mean, will it work to penetrate the coated prills, then I doubt it, especially since you couldn't get a powerful sovent
(petrol) to do so.
vonK December 12th, 2002, 10:52 PM

I have just detonated my first ever ANFO charge.
I used 420g of crushed C-AN. I'd say around 5% was still prilled, 10% was "flour" fine but the majority was just a little finer
than table salt.
I put it in a 500ml glass jar(2.75" diameter), added 27ml of methylated spirits, stirred it round with a spoon, gave it a bit of a
shake and left it with the lid on for three hours.
I used 100g of ammonia dynamite in a zip-lock bag as a booster and a small, 1g, pressed CTAP cap.
The dynamite was 70g C-AN, 30g nitroglycerine.
I poured out some of the ANFO into my brothers hands, dug a small hole in the ANFO, placed in the booster, cap assembly
and poured the rest of the ANFO around it.
With the lid on the jar, fuse sticking out, I placed it in the bottom of a hole about 50cm deep and my brother and I filled it in,
packing the dirt as much as we could.
Upon detonation there was a dull "THUMP" and a massive amount of dirt flew skywards.
The strong winds blew most of the dirt in my direction and I had to run while covering my head to avoid being hit by softball
sized lumps of clay.
There seems to be absolutely no sign of undetonated explosive in the crater, which is about 1.3 meters by 1.6 meters and
around 90cm deep.
Unfortunatley I have no equipment to get pictures with. I'll see if my Dad will let me borrow his work camera but it's unlikely.
I have to say that crushing the C-AN prills is no problem at all. I simply pour them in my mothers old Kenwood blender and let
it rip.
The blades push the C-AN to the bottom then out to the sides and up so that the stuff on top falls down into the blades and
repeats the cycle.
It took me less than a minute to grind that 420g.
I plan on detonating 1.5kg the next day I have free and from there the sky is the limit.
ShockWave December 13th, 2002, 05:00 AM

Great work, but still, the crushingjob sucks, for charges up to 5KG it works great but I want to make a couple of 25kg charges,
It will take for me hours to crush the C-AN, If we can find a better fuel, we only have to open a bag and add some fuel.

for the big charges of CAN i rekon the best idea is to use either a mixing drill or a concrete mixer to mix the CAN with the
deasiel as this will chip the calcium coating off most of the prills allowing the deasiel to soak in. i plan on using a concrete
mixer someday when i do a huge charge :D
was talking to a ex-blaster and he said they used concrete mixer all the time to mix their ANFO, they shouldnt be too much to
hire and would be worth it anyway as you would only go to these lengths if the charge is over 20kg, blender works ok for
charges under that.
Ahs Scotttt June 10th, 2003, 10:49 PM

sounds pretty nice care to send us a copy of the vid.
send it as an atachment to l_e_v_i_c_K@hotmail.com thanx mate:D
blindreeper June 11th, 2003, 03:32 AM

Ahh yes ANFO. I have been wanting to try this for ages. Unfortunatly the sound is an issue. With only 9 hectares to do it in it's
hard. Well it's about 1km from any house. My 'pit' where I test small 100g ANMEKP charges is in a kinda valley in the middle
of our block. I was wondering if I burried say a 250g ANFO charge 0.5m into the ground anmd coverd it with dirt/clay and
added an extra 25cm of sand ontop of that would it be very loud. I really like the dull THUD and some dirt flying into the air.
But I dun want any big loud sounds. I have let off 10g of AP putty above ground and holy shit did it make a thounderous
BOOM! It sounded like thunder. Lucky no one has ever been up to our house EVER. Even after 5 or so cobs, explodin rockets,
spud guns and various crackers. So my question is there nay way to get the ANFO muffled. I mean a film can of AP under
30cm of loose dirt is a nice THUD sound with some dirt flying about 1m in the air. Or maybe I should be doing some stuff with
APAN? The only way to get AN for me is getting it froma garden store but I have already got dad to get a 50kg bag of KNO3.
So Would PNAN make the PN detonate or is it just a better oxygen balance. I think I'll send dad in to get the AN as he needs
it for his orchid (he accually has one and used the KNO3). Well thanks for the help with my dumb questions but don't want to
get in trouble.
0EZ0 June 11th, 2003, 05:27 AM

blindreeper, from your post it sounds like your a bit of a newb:D . But thats alright, everyone has to start somewhere.
A 250gm ANFO charge is getting a bit close to the minimum charge size. If you do carry out such a test, you may want to
sensitise your ANFO a little more. There are topics in abundance about ANFO, just run a search. Specifically you may want to
search for a topic called 'Cap sensitive ANFO'. xyz has run various tests seeing how ANFO can be made cap sensative.
Depending on the sensativity/density/etc. of the charge, the minimum diameter can fluctuate quite widely. Personally i haven't
heard of anyone getting a complete detonation of straight 5% FO ANFO in the x hundred gram amounts without a hell of a lot
of confinement and a good det. Charge sizes of a kilo and over are used alot more widely. With the treating of the AN prills
and other various sensitising methods, the minimum charge diameter can be brought down considerably, but usually sacrifices
in power. Power usually described as VoD. There have been reports of almost complete detonation of charges down to the
250gm mark. Some of the other members have had that kind of first hand experience.
A small ANFO charge (x hundred gram amounts) half a meter under dense soil will not produce much sound other than a deep
thud. However soil is thrown quite a distance, as you might hear around here :D. Above ground, the sound rises considerably.
1 kilo can easily be heard a couple of kilometers away, depending on the area of blast site.
To my knowledge if the nearest house is a kilometer away, you can get away with multiple kilogram amounts of ANFO...
provided that the charges are buried at an adequet depth. It is also very interesting that the type of soil a charge is fired
under, can also give quite varied effects on the visual display from detonation. Eg. in light fluffy soil, a charge seems to not
throw as much dirt as a wet dense soil. Or that the light fluffy dirt doesn't clump at all and seems to appear as more of a dust
cloud upon detonation. Anyway, you should not need to worry too much about the soil you intend to fire your charge in, just at
what depth you bury it.
My advice to you about APAN is that you do not use large amounts of it. Also make sure that the percentage of AP is not
above 15% by weight. Sensitivity increases too dramatically above that percentage to provide much protection from any shocks
or bumps it recieves during transit to the blast site. There are many other much safer composites to choose from. It may
mean a little more work, but safety should be everyone's first concern when delving into this unforgiving hobby.
The only way to get AN for me is getting it froma garden store but I have already got dad to get a 50kg bag of KNO3. So
Would PNAN make the PN detonate or is it just a better oxygen balance. I think I'll send dad in to get the AN as he needs it
for his orchid (he accually has one and used the KNO3)
I don't think your 'dad' would be too impressed to see his 'fertiliser' being used to make holes in his yard :D. Somethiing like
'What the hell happened to my lawn!?', 'Where did that nasty 6 foot crater come from?!'. You get the gyst :D . I suggest that
any pyro projects you do should be small and discreet, at least when he is looking anyway;) .
So Would PNAN make the PN detonate or is it just a better oxygen balance. I think I'll send dad in to get the AN as he needs
it for his orchid (he accually has one and used the KNO3).
What do you mean? Are you asking if AN needs an oxidiser:confused: ? What is the PN you are referring to? If you mean
KNO3, please do not use the 'PN' abbreviation on this forum, or else no one would know what you are talking about. There are
kind of 'unwritten' abbreviations used on this forum. It makes it hard if someone starts abbreviating a compound to
something other than the one already used.
I suggest that if you are not looking for trouble, you may want to keep any thoughts about energetic materials completely and
totally in theory, like many of the rest of our members:) . Especially when you are young (sounds like you are), you should be
reading and researching as much information as you can. Lack of knowledge here can certainly be fatal:( .
Regards
kingspaz June 11th, 2003, 05:31 AM

spydamonkee, are you still around??
hope you're not dead...

Appreciate the reply 0EZ0, but I do read all the time. I check forums daily at least. To the KNO3AP question, what I meant was
does the KNO3 detonate as I have heard it doesn't and I have heard it does. Like in APAN the AP makes the AN sensative
enough to detonate no? Well I wanted to know if it was the same case with APKNO3? Does the KNO3 detonate or does it just
make the AP more powerfull by giving it a better oxygen balance.
BTW, the thing about the 6 foot crater and the lawn, I was pissing myself laughing.
0EZ0 June 11th, 2003, 06:40 AM

Well blindreeper, in regards to KNO3 detonating when applied to a KNO3/AP composite, I guess in a sense it is detonating.
Although it will most certainly not detonate at the same speed of AP. The KNO3 is decomposing and giving up it's oxygen to
support the AP's own decomposition. The rate at which the KNO3 decomposes releasing oxygen is comparable to the rate that
AP detonates. So in a sense, yes it has the potential to decompose faster than the highest speed of deflagration. There are
many debates about the line between deflagration and detonation. Mainly regarding at what speed does something stop
deflagrating and start detonating.
The difference between APAN and KNO3/AP is that AN is an oxidiser and alone it has the ability to detonate. To my awareness,
KNO3 alone can not detonate. This has probably been discussed somewhere here before. Nothing else really comes to mind
about the probability of the KNO3 detonating when in contact with AP. Maybe someone else can offer a little more insight.
About the 6 foot crater, don't laugh too hard. It does happen:D.

Well thanks for the speedy replys boys. I think I'll try a 100g APAN (from ice packs) and then if thats not a big enough rush
I'll go for the 200g cap sensative ANFO. Do you think a good detonator for cap sensative ANFO (just to ensure detonation)
would be 5g HDN packed into a paper tube (home rolled with dextrin) and then 2g AP packed on that electrically ignited.

I see no reason APPN wouldn't work. It seems to for everything else in the place of AN.

You say APPN would work but what about PNFO?

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Easily made powerful Blastingbox
Log in
View Full Version : Easily made powerful Blastingbox

http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/DBSPs_blastingbox.JPG
When I first started thinking about making blastingboxes/machines I thought I'd never be able to make one scince I thought
it was very hard and that you had to know a lot about electronics to make one. I was wrong it's really simple actually and
requires no special electronic skills other than being able to seperate + from -, if using easily obtained circuits and switches.
My old b.box concists of 6 caps at 385V 220uF, 3 paralell chargning circuits from disposable cameras, a batterypack of 5 1,5V
batteries in paralell, an ON/OFF charging switch and a main swith. It workes ok but it charges to slow and isn't quite as
powerfull as I'd like it to be. My new one concists of 10 385V 220uF caps, 6 paralell charging circuits , an additional "safety
switch", a dual swith wich starts the charging and turns 5 red LEDs on as a charging indicator and eventually a heavy main
switch. This one charges 2 times as fast as the old one and has 40% greater maximum power. It takes it about 10 sec to
charge enaugh to blast a nichrome wire through a 10m wire that I use quite often which is really perfect. As I write this I
haven't tested it on my thick 50m wire yet.
My old box:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox_old.JPG
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox.old_2.JPG
One of the reasons I opened this new topic was that I'd like to help people like me who hasn't got any great knowledge within
electronics to make a good blastingbox easily and from simple to get materials. I must say that one of the better things I've
made for this hobby is my first b.box which really has made things alot easier, dragging around 15kg car batteries isn't really
practical nor easy, a blastingbox fits into your pocket while still having eanugh power to perform most tasks.
What you need to make a blastingbox, powerful enaugh for most of of is the following:
Disposable cameras -- easily obtained for free in photo shops

Cable, most of the common ones will work.
Swithes, any swith will work actually (except in the main swith for letting the current on when blasting)
Capacitors, you can probably use small ones like the ones you find inside disposable cameras (330V 100-120uF) but then
You'd have to use a lot of them, not practical, what you need is caps which hold about 200uF at about 400V or more(correct
me if wrong).
batteries, 1.5V R14
+ pliers, soldering equipment, knife etc.
To build this thing or similar you only need some patience and a lot of time.
To better understand how the schematics should look like for a basic b.box I've made a simple drawing to demonstrate it:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/blasting box_basic_by_DBSP.JPG
I allso made a drawing of the schematics for my new box:

http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/blasting box_by_DBSP.JPG
After you have gathered all of the components needed you should start working on the charging circuits. What you need to do
is to unsolder the capacitor from the circuit board and replacing the cap with a couple of 10cm wires instead(don't forget to
make a note on which of the pins that is + and -). After that is done you unsolder the pieces of copper that holds the battery
in place and preplacing them with wires in stead(or you can solder the wire to the clips directly)(don't forget to note + and -). I
recomend using wire of different colour for + and -.
It should then look something like this:

(the shape and size of the circuit board may vary, I chose these ones because they where the smallest ones)
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/wires_attached_to_circuitboard.JPG
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/in_and_output_wires_in_place.JPG
After that is done you should connect them paralelly thus connceting all - outputs together and all + outputs, and all + and -
inputs toghether.
Should then look something like this:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/circuitboards_paralell.JPG
Then leave them for the time being.
Next thing to do is to put the caps together, I hotglued them into place. You could of course tape them together as well.
Then connect all + and -pins together, this must be done properly as these connections will be put under heavy currents. I
conected mine with steelwire rapping it around the pins repetedly.
like this:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/caps_glued_together.JPG
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/pins_conected.JPG
Then cover the capacitors with tape or similar to insulate them from their sorounding, only leaving the + and - wires sticking
out.
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/cap_covered.JPG
Next thing to do is to connect a number of 1,5V batteries paralelly and glueing/taping them together. The absolutely best
thing to to was to put them into a batterybox which makes it easy to change the batteries when theay are dead. I've got two
10 battery boxes which would have been great if only they had been in paralell instead of in series. They can of cource be
modified but thats a loot of work.
batterypack:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/battery_pack.JPG
my two boxes:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/battery_boxes.JPG
Now its time to put everything together:
Fasten the charging circuit onto the caps or put them wherever you want them. Fasten the batterypack, where you wan't it.
Then connect the batteries + and - to the + and - on the charging circuits, just be shure to put a switch between either + on
the battery and + on the circuit or on the - (this switch will function as a charging switch)(I actually put two switches between the
battery and the circuit, this is just to add a bit of extra safety, this will make it harder for the b.box to start charging by itself,
the swith is a small microswitch(push type) and put so that it will be hard to accidentely starting it(pic #1 below)). Then connect
the charging wires to the caps(wires leading from the place the small photocaps where soldered to the circuitboard). And then
wires from the main caps to a large switch which will function as a "detonation switch". What type of swith to use here may vary,
the best thing would be to have a relay to swith the power into the bridgewire. This would be extremely costly though scince the
tyristors capable of switching currents of these currents will be very expensive. A normal 220V swith used in houses to turn the
light on/off such as the one below may be used, it will eventually be welded toghether scince there is such a powerful electrical
impulse going through it. This is easily fixed by snapping it apart when it has gotten stuck.
#1 http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/microswitch_1.JPG
#1.1 http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/microswitch.JPG
220V switch:
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/220V.JPG
A nother thing I added to increase the safety of the b.box is the dualswitch I put as "main" charging switch. By putting it in ON
mode it lets the current on on two seperate wires, #1 starts the charging and #2 lightes 5 bright red LEDs that operate from a
single 9V battery. This makes it impossible to avoid noticing that the machince is charging or atleast in charging mode if the
microswitch isn't on.
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/LED_1.JPG
http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/LED_2.JPG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BlastingBox is now ready to use:
Left: http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/left.JPG
Wright http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/wright.JPG
top: http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/top.JPG
bottom: http://dbsp.sensorystatic.com/pictures/blastingbox/bottom.JPG
One thing that is quite obvius is that it'll never reach 385V scince the charging circuits only put out 330V. What does this do to
the setup? Could anyone with some electronic skills answer that question?
I may very well have missed something scince it has taken a few hours to write this and I'm getting tired now, if I have missed
something please let me know.
I really hope this may help someone..

"it'll never reach 385V scince the charging circuits only put out 330V. What does this do to the setup?"
Not exactly sure what you mean, but it means that they caps will only charge up to 330V. This is good, because the caps are
over-rated, making their job easier and they should last longer.
pyr0man1c April 15th, 2003, 04:20 PM

a few months ago i was experimenting with a capacitor bank consisting of ~30 35V capacitors holding 450 (or whatever it was)
uF each (got 'em for free), but i dropped the project since the voltage seemed to be too low to initiate my caps reliably. i also
had problems finding a good way to charge the capacitor bank in the field.
in desperate need of a good-working blasting machine, i'm right now thinking of a hand-driven generator design, just like the
larger ones used to set off 100s of VA blasting caps. :cool:
the design will consist of the following parts:

(1) a crank-driven generator (possibly a generator from a car or a smaller vehicle) that produces an AC voltage way too low to
charge a capacitor bank with.
(2) a transformer which i will make myself, that transforms the low voltage AC to a few hundered volts.
(3) an electonic circuit called a "rectifier bridge" (direct translation from swedish, original swedish term was "likriktarbrygga").
this unit costed me 22 SEK, that's about $2.5, and it is specified for use with max. 600V 1A. what it does is that it takes an AC
current and converts it into a DC current. the nice thing is that it is so cheap, and can take up to 600V!
(4) a capacitor bank. i will have to make a nightly visit at the garbage dump and dismount afew computer monitors or TVs.
damnit, those capacitors ain't cheap!! :(
if anyone can see any problems with this design i would be very happy to hear your comments. i'm really not an electrician
myself, i just talked to some of my friends that are more into this than me.
edit:addition: to answer your question, the capacitors are rated at MAX 385 volts, that means they can propably take many
times more without exploding, but charging them to 330 volts instead will certainly not do them any harm.
sincerely,
pyr0man1c
MnkyBoy April 16th, 2003, 02:11 AM

MAX 385 volts, that means they can propably take many times more without exploding,
Not entirally true. The 385 V spec is the "theoredical" voltage in which the insulator between to caps foils will break down,
forming basically a short. This number is usually pretty close. Over time and with use, the insulator will slowly break down thus
lowering the voltage potential needed to break down this barrior. One might be safer by finding out the voltage being sent to
the caps, doubling the voltage to come up with the voltage rating of the cap to use. (ex: 330 X 2= 660, so look for a cap
around this level)

pyr0man1c, car alternators for many years now have had built in rectifiers, i.e. they output DC. I've never gotten round to
removing/bypassing the built in rectify, so I can't say how easy or hard it would be.
If you can get an alternator from an old car with the rectifier as a seperate unit, then Bob's your uncle.

Just doing a quick search at McMaster revealed these little beuties 67.5 Volt Batteries (http://www.mcmaster.com/catalog/109/
html/0762.html#.). The price is a little on the high side, but each for their own.
Also, searching through some boxes in the back I ran across some 300 V Eveready Mini-Max Battery (No. 493, NEDA 722, 2.5
x 2 x 3.75 in WxLxH).
Never mind, just found the price 493 300 V CZ Electronic/Communication Battery $78.00 $140.00 2 $183.00 3 61.00.
Will draw up a design for HV from low voltage battery as source. Does anyone know the voltage/current needed to have
nicrome wire work effectively?
Gargoylebrother April 16th, 2003, 05:52 PM

WOW :eek: This does defently prove to be an extreamly easy design and simple to make and understand those like me with
little to no electrical knowledge are very thankful THANKS MAN i will be puting this to good use here in the future when i get the
time and money again THANKS:D

There is no point in redrawing the wheel.
1.5V to 400 VAC (http://home.golden.net/~kpwillia/minich.htm) . If DC is desired, a few simple HV Diodes in line with each AC
lead will convert it to DC. Throw in a voltage doubling ckt (a few more diodes and a couple more caps) and you will get plenty
of HV DC. (Possible in a smaller package than above. I mean no offence, just throwing out other ideas here)
If interested in info on caps, I ran across This Page (http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/caps/caps.html)
kingspaz April 18th, 2003, 05:48 PM

my blasting box is simpler :P
100m of bellwire, a 12v gel cell and sensitive ignitors!
and it works!, although i think a real blasting box is much better since it keeps everything together.

Kingspaz has the right idea. If you can't get this to work use
[list=1]
thicker leadout wire
thinner nichrome in your detonator
[/list=1]
Basic idea is that the resistance of your piece of nichrome should be much higher than the resistance of your leads (at least
10 to 20 times!), so that all the energy winds up in the nichrome. With 12V gel battery your only limiting factor is the total
resistance of your circuit, so make that lead out wire as thick as you can! Try heavy duty automotive cable.
Skean Dhu April 27th, 2003, 05:24 PM

i know this has been done before but since i do not have much electronics experience/knowhow i was wondering if someone
could help me out with this.
i have a cordless phone and i would like to convert the phone part so that i can hook ignitors to it, and when i press the 'page'
button on the base it would set off the ignitor.
any tips or links to sites with instructions for this would be greatly appriciated

Tuatara,
the bellwire is about 1mm diameter copper. the ignitors are based around 0.08mm nichrome which ignites 25/70/5 charcoal/
KClO3/dextrin to make it sensitive and rock hard.
just thought i;d give some more details incase anybody else wanted to take my route.
andreas April 28th, 2003, 05:01 AM

http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/blastingbox.jpg
http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/blastingbox2.jpg
Here are two picture of my blasting box. Its made from an old inductor salvaged from a fieldphone, that piece outputs about
150Volts ac at a high crankspeed. This ac current is rectified by a B250C1000 bridge rectifier and charges 2 paralel 200volts
220yF caps. It can glow up a 220 volts 40Watt lightbulb. And explodes thin alufoil strands. And the main advantage is that it
doesn't use any baterys
andreas April 30th, 2003, 10:07 AM
http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/safetydet-after-blast.jpg
http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/safetydet-bridgewire-closeup.jpg
http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/safetydet-bridgewire.jpg
http://www.boomspeed.com/minipril/safetydet-filed-with-cast-mhn.jpg
I made some pictures of my new experiment: the use of my blastingbox with homemade bridgewire detonators. As you can
see in the pictures it was a succes. I used 3 meter main wire for this test. Later I'm going to see what is the max wire lenght.
The bridgewire consists of a thin alufoil slice, and the charge was cast mhn. With the mhn still molten I put the bridgewire in
and waited till it solidyfied.
Any comments, tips or suggestions are welcome!

how the fuck did you melt MHN?!?!?!
are you INSANE?
Jumala April 30th, 2003, 08:13 PM

Melting MHN,-- sounds like kamikaze
With your good blasting box you can try cheap 100 ohm resistors instead of the bridgewire. They are already wirered and the
resistance is much higher than that of the main wire.
I use 100 ohm with my box too and it works well.
DBSP May 1st, 2003, 05:21 AM

I was just thinking about using resistors the other day, if it workes well with your timer then why shouldn't it work with my
blastingbox. I was thinking about using the small 1/4W resistors you use in your timer. I don't know much about electronics so
I don't know whats best but I guess a 100ohm resistor would function fine scince you suggest it.
It would indeed be much simpler than making your own, perhaps even more effective too.
I'd like to integrate your timer with my blastingbox, that wouldn't be to hard except finding a tyristor that can handle the
current from the blastingbox and buying it without going broke.
Have you got any suggestions Jumala?
(I've just located the CMOS 4541 chip at a good prize. So I might start making some of them in a while. I don't suppose you
have a complete list of the components...?)
andreas May 1st, 2003, 08:45 AM

MHN has a melting point of 112 degrees it starts decomposition at 160 degrees, I melt it in a oil bath in small quantities that
I keep at 120 degrees. In fact mhn is cast commercialy IIRC.
Then again i rather cast a little mhn than pressing a peroxide.
Microtek May 1st, 2003, 03:44 PM

Indeed. I also did some tests with cast MHN when working with my caseless ( or rather partially caseless ) detonators. I would
melt small amounts on a glass plate placed on a hotplate. I never had any problems with decomposition, though I was a bit
worried about increased impact sensitivity.
Also, I would recommend not confining it when melting as that would present a hazard if it ignited.
Mr Cool May 1st, 2003, 04:26 PM

It (casting MHN) can be done, but I would be worried of partial decomposition leaving small amounts of NOx behind. Better to
use a mixture of mannitol and sorbitol, and nitrate that. The result is a soft material that gradually sets as the compounds co-
crystalise. Pack it while in the plastic form, and leave it to harden for a while. I'd be a bit worried also of shrinkage/stresses as
the charge froze, and big fuck-off crystals snapping as this happened. But this is probably just paranoia.
If you want to melt cast a nitrate ester, go get some erythritol.
"it starts decomposition at 160 degrees" be careful of statements like this, they can be misleading. MHN will give off NOx at
well below this temperature if left for longer. Nitroglycerol decomposes at 50-60*C, and MHN is considerably less stable. I know
it isn't hot for long, but some decomposition WILL occur.
kingspaz May 1st, 2003, 05:23 PM

hence my above reaction :)
i can't see melting it to be a good thing at all. all i've read about it suggests it is not very thermally stable.
Tuatara May 1st, 2003, 07:13 PM

DBSP you should be able to find a cheap thyristor. For a single pulse you can put at least 10 times the rated current througha
thyristor without destroying it. I've done it on a comercial basis, using an 85amp thyristor to deliver 2000A (yes - two thousand
amps!) pulses in an electric fence energiser - every 1.5 seconds for 5 years!
Jumala May 1st, 2003, 08:23 PM

To combine blasting machine and timer I would use a relay as output switch.
The expected current is not so high when using a resistor. This is the big advantage in using a resistors. A 100-150 Ohm
resistor warrants the conversion of electrical power to heat at 1-2 ampere and the wire to this igniter can be thin. A bridgewire
has approx. 1-2 ohm and needs 50 to 100 ampere to produce the same heat.
You can perform a simple test. Take your blasting machine and charge it up to 150V or more. Only one 220 F cap ist
enough.
Take a 100 ohm resistor, hold it with isolated tongs and make contact to the cap poles.
Its amazing what only 1-2 ampere do with the resistor.
The best method to combine timer and blasting machine is also to start the charge up after the time is over with automatic
ignition when the cap is full.
DBSP May 2nd, 2003, 05:42 AM

Thanks a lot Tuatara, that info was really helpful, that means that the price for a tyristor perhaps won't be to high after all.
I'll definately try using a resistor.
I have a thing I'm thinking about, the charging circuits contain a small diode that lits up att full charge, could these be
included in my design in a simple way to give me a hunch on when it has reached full charge. Or doesn't it work? I've never
had them lit up when charging my caps(the 220uF ones) with a complete circuit.
And how would one make the b.box release the power into the bridgewire at full charge?
Sorry if it's a lot of questiones to answer but this subject isn't one which I have any great deal of
knowledge within.
davidhon May 12th, 2003, 02:22 AM

Hi mnkboy...nice tiny-mini blaster & drawing (1.5v to 400v).I would kow-tow if u could specify the power & voltages etc...on the
transformer,resistor & transistor...i have serious problems in obtaning them without the actual capacity. thanks ...
-----------------------
'u' in place of 'you' is chatroom speak. this isn't a chatroom. - kingspaz
Efraim_barkbit November 15th, 2003, 02:52 PM

I have been thinking about making a blasting box, so I got my ass over to the local photo-shop and asked if I could have a
few used disposable cameras.. They said that they send all the used cameras in return, but I got one anyway.
So, When I came home, I took out the circuit, and tried to figure out how it worked, and how I best could use it in a blasting
box. I attached two wires to the "flash lamp", to be able to discharg it easier., but after some playing around with it, it
wouldnt charge anymore. I only have very basic electronic skills, but I think it is maybee a transistor that is broken, because
when I connect the battery, it becomes to hot to touch in 3-4 seconds, and I dont think it is supposed to do so.
maybee someone that is better than me on these things know what is wrong, and if it is possible to "bypass" it, or something.
I have a voltmeter somewhere, but it has no batteries at this time, but I could maybee use it to check the circuit, if I knew
what and where to check...
I know, I got it for free, and it would probably not have been very effective with just one capacitor, but it would still be better
than a nine volt battery...
I took a pic of the front and one of the back of the circuit card, so that you could get a look at it too. http://
www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4288582417
Any help is much appreciated.
Tuatara November 15th, 2003, 04:50 PM

Hot is OK. Too hot to touch is not. Did this circuit ever work? If the circuit is working you should be able to hear a rising whistle
as the cap charges. The transistor cannot be bypassed - it is an essential part of the inverter that kicks 1.5V up 300V. You
were only using 1.5V weren't you?
Efraim_barkbit November 16th, 2003, 04:21 AM

The circuit worked perfectly,I heard the wisteling sound while charging, but then it suddenly stopped. I must have done at least
40 discharges at full charge through the wires, and probably as many through the flash lamp.
If i replace the transistor, does it have to be exactly the same, or would any transistor do?
Boomer November 18th, 2003, 08:54 AM

Why not buy a CCFL (cold cathode fluorescent lamp) driver ready-made? They make 500-1000 V max at 5-10 mA from 5 VDC.
You add four HV diodes and have an easy, short-circuit limited charger. It gets a 220 uF cap up to 450 V in 20 seconds. And a
spark gap solves the switch problem, it is made for theses high currents. I have designed several types of CCFL drivers
(design life 50.000 hours continuous), and we sold about 55.000 last year, they hardly ever fail. In contrast, cheap flash
circuits are thought for only minutes of operation per day, they stress the parts to their limits.
I am currently working on a similar b-box, but for EBW caps. More details will come later.
P.S. Funny to be a newbie again after 20 ye ars of bla sting around .
Tuatara November 18th, 2003, 06:06 PM

Unless you know what you are doing, you should use the same type of transistor as a replacement. It would probably be
easier to get another complete flash unit though.
Boomer, I like the ccfl idea!
vod8750 October 10th, 2006, 03:21 PM

Sorry about bringing up an old thread again but I didnt see the point in starting a new one!
I have been thinking of making a blasting box since, lets face it, its a hell of a lot safer than pressing AP or HMTD!
I went down to my local electronics shop and got a few capacitors. The ones I have are rated at 450V but the biggest
capacitance I could get at this voltage was 47uF! This is obviously too small but if I went to a bigger capacitance I could only
get them rated to 100V and there doesnt seem to be any in between voltage.
Since the charging circuit I have from a disposable camera reaches over 310V I obviously cant go for them either!
Does anybody know where I could get a few high voltage, high capacitance capacitors?
I also got one of those aviation type switches to use as the main fire switch. This should work well if it can take the high
voltage since it cant be fired accidentally. Its designed for use with a 12V circuit in a car so if it can take over 300V is another
thing. There's only one way to find out though! Just have to make sure to wear heavy insulated gloves!

Alternately, you could use:
a 12V system with a 8-12gauge wire leads then nichrome. Or

a triac circuit (or light dimmer at least 600W) in series with a cap (2-10F
250-400Vac polypropylene) and an ignition coil with a spark gap instead
of nichrome.
Hmm.... a 12-24V SCR system, with a large cap (+10,000F) could work but, you would need a resistor (high wattage) to limit
current so you would not kill the cap(s) and one to charge the cap(s).
@vod8750, come on, its a camera flash, you don't need industrial HV gloves just for that - unless you have heart problems. :p
And those "aviation switches" or "missile switches" are rated (at least the ones they sell here. Jaycar, DSE etc.) are 12V 20A
DC. Have a try anyway.
An ideal blaster unit would have a continuity tester, a engaged light and siren,
with a key to engage and safety pull out disengage "key".
vod8750 October 11th, 2006, 03:34 PM

I meant only to wear the gloves while I was testing the aviation switch since that would be allowing the full charge of the
capacitors though it!
The only thing I would be afraid of is if the insulation in the switch would break down at the high voltage! Since the switch is
metal that could be quite a shocking experience!!!
Thanks for the advice I will look into it!
Cobalt.45 October 12th, 2006, 06:05 PM

Hey vod! Do you notice anything! Wrong! With your posts, I mean!
vod8750 October 15th, 2006, 07:13 PM

Why? What do you mean? What's wrong?
inventorgp October 15th, 2006, 10:04 PM

Cobalt.45 is referring to the exclamation marks.
Chopper October 16th, 2006, 01:26 AM

Just out of curiosity Vod8750, how many caps do you plan to set off simultaneously? The reason I ask is that a simple and
effective B.B may be constructed using the guts of a disposable camera. This has been established.
I have a box that uses a 330v, 120uF electrolytic. This box is perfectly adequete for up to 4 caps at a time, more if one allows
a greater charge time.
When I say 4 caps, these are the type with a graphite bridge between two strands of IDE HDD cable. (ala BrainFever's style)
Each bridge has a DC resistance of somewhere around the 5-10 ohm mark. Sorry for the inprecise figure, however I have no
bridges around at the moment to measure.
The energy requirements will obviously be larger for exploding bridgewires made of NiCr or similar. But then again, being
improvised work, I'm making the assumption that everything should be adequetly safe and sturdy, yet simple to assemble.
It was in this vane that I constructed a box using
a) HV section of disposable camera.

b) 10A 240V micro-switch
c) Basic slide switch
d) AA cell holder
e) Project box
f) 10m cheap 'n' nasty speaker wire
g) 1 pr aligator clips
The project took about 8 hours from deciding to do it to using it, with the largest portion of the time being split between
deciphering the necessary part of the circuit board and packaging it all into something small and neat.
SOMETHING TO REMEMBER IS THAT HEART DEFRIBULATORS(sp?) USE 16J PER SHOT.
Although the fingers are far removed from the heart, this is still worth keeping in mind as a 'fail-safe' upper limit to energy
storage.
Please find below an image of said box.
EDIT:
===================================
How To Calculate Energy Stored in a Capacitor
===================================
Joules = Voltage(v)*Voltage(v)*Capacitance(F, not uF!)
e.g (330*330*120)/1000000 = 13.068J

Chopper, where have you been? Anyway I did some thing similar for a stun gun. One of them I kept the xenon tube on to
discharge it if needed. And the other I cut the board and changed the diode and cap around to make it +DC. FFFF steel wire
works for ematches instead of nichrome.
For exploding bridgewire, you could use a microwave oven transformer (MOT), some HV diodes, a large HV cap(10-100F), a
spark gap, and a ignition coil with a triac circuit to trigger the spark gap.
vod8750 October 16th, 2006, 03:31 PM

Chopper, if your box can initiate four caps simultaniously with one capacitor then I should have no problem what-so-ever with
ten 47uF capacitors. I dont think I will be needing to initiate more than five caps at once.
I will put it all together tomorrow and do a few tests. I have no picric acid yet to test initiation power though. Does anyone have
any ideas on how I can test the power of the box without the use of explosives?
Chopper October 16th, 2006, 11:10 PM

@ vod8750:
Yup, you should be ok, however with one caveat. As Boomer already pointed out, the circuits in these disposable units are
designed in such a way that the components are streatched to their limits. I never made notes, and forget the figures now, but
if you increase the capacitance too far, the circuit is not able to charge it to the correct potential. They're already using
averything they've got, and as the voltage gets higher, they simply do not have the capacity to pump enough charge in to
raise the voltage any more.
As for testing, just make some bridges up and fire them on their own. Try firing above a piece of white paper to observe any
deposited soot and/or scorch marks. Both of these and especially the later, are a good indicator of supplied impulse.
Not only that, but just listen to them. A bridge makes quite a 'crack' when fired. All you need is pestle and mortar, table tennis
ball, acetone and a graphite artists' pencil from the newsagents. Look for Brainfever's site.
@inventorgp - I've been around. Just haven't felt I've had anything worthy of contribution.

His home page (http://www.geocities.com/brainfevert/)
Electric blasting box (http://www.geocities.com/brainfevert/igniterbox.html)
Bridgeless ematch (http://www.geocities.com/brainfevert/ematch.html)
Yes, all links work, well at least at my side.
SafetyLast October 17th, 2006, 07:08 PM

Your pictures aren't coming up for me inventorgp.
I use a small box that consists of 4 A23 batteries connected in series with a couple spst momentary pushbuttons. It is cheap
and simple. It functions reliably with 100ft of 18GA speaker wire and has ample current to set off a couple of caps. My caps
use small christmas lights instead of nichrome like a lot of people here use. I really have no need for anything more
complicated or powerful, but If I did I might consider building the CDI driver that Bob Iannini describes in More Electronic
Gadgets for the Evil Genius It puts out 400V, 30W.
nbk2000 October 17th, 2006, 10:07 PM

SafetyLast, if you're using Firefox, that's why you can't see the pictures.
Use Internet Explorer or some other browser.
I don't know why it (FF) does this sometimes, but that's why I've got the IE Tab extension installed, to handle this problem. :)
I've read Bob's book, there are a few mistakes (typo?) in the book tho.
CDI - Capacitor Discharge Ignition?
And I have the same problem with the pics as well. I'm using IE 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519
vod8750 October 18th, 2006, 09:39 PM

Chopper, I have five or six disposable cameras that I got from the chemist for free so if I connect all of them in paralell as
the charging circuit then that should solve the problem shouldn't it?
And the pictures of the blasting box aren't coming up for me either on Firefox or IE. The rest are fine.

If you want to charge a bank of caps quick it'll work but, check the diodes, because most of camera flashes are -330VDC.
Switch diodes around if you must. Use a resistor to charge the caps. Look up RC circuit and Time constant.
Chopper October 19th, 2006, 09:33 AM

vod8750, If you got the circuits for free, then I'd have an experiment by all means. I'd just try hooking them up 1 by 1
though, since these really are a neat circuit. As you've noticed, the pitch changes as the capacitor charges. It's a variable
frequency DC-DC convertor circuit. - All in just half a dozen basic components. Half of which are surface mount, 1 is the led and
the last two the transformer and the fet. Note that not just any replacement will do.
Being a fet, they work differently to the normal NPN or PNP bipolar variety. They can switch faster and important in this
application, they can handle a high reverse-voltage. Operating a fly-back transformer like these induces quite a back-voltage
on the switching device. In this instance it is IIRC somewhere as high as 30 or 70v. A normal BC547/548 is dead after about
20 from memory. Anyway, the point is that it's well worth keeping all the parts from any boards since you can't just grab
another transistor like this easily from the junk-box.
The trigger capacitor is a very stable high tolerance poly cap. Even the tube itself contains small amounts of tungsten.
Long story short, several circuits may not behave properly when their outputs are connected directly in parallel. As an
alternative, the addition of a charge resistor adds time to the charge cycle and lowers the maximum attainable voltage in the
caps.
However, about the images I an offer no help. I'm using FF 1.5.0.7 in its default settings. No problem for me to left click or
right click the link..
Basically, the image just shows the inside of the box. Size is 8*5*3cm.
techtwit October 31st, 2006, 03:13 AM

This being only my second post, I'm a little cautious somehow sense a mod's thumb twitching o ver the dreade d BFL button ,
so please bear with me.
My (open) question: If I'm wanting to achieve maximum safety and convenience, and at a reasonable cost, in the practical
(mostly agricultural) use of explosives wouldn't it make sense to look in the direction of finding a means to supply enough
electrical energy to a not particularly sensitive initiating charge?
In other words, safety and convenience seem more or less inversely proportional to an energetic material's sensitivity;
therefore, I want to furnish the energy needed to thoroughly detonate the stable main charge with some combination of less
stable initiator/booster + electrical impulse. From what I've researched in this and other related forums, the material
combinations that seem most likely to produce an optimal solution are AN + some fuel (which?) that will somewhat increase
the sensitivity/detonatability of the main charge and an initiator/booster from a KClO3 + fuel (again, which?) combination that
will deliver enough energy to the main charge to reliably detonate it.
Pursuing this train o f though t, my question now is: How do I determine at least in the ballp ark, the activation en ergy o f the
initiator, and in what time frame does that energy have to be delivered? Specifically, with how many Watts do I have to supply
x grams of initiator to achieve the main charge detonation I'm looking for?
If E = activation energy needed in say, Joules per gram of initiator and t = maximum allowable time in secs. that it has to be
delivered through the resistance (R in ohms) of the initiator composition, then that gives the minimum power W in Watts that
has to be supplied. Watts in turn = volts X amps (V x I) = (V^2) / R (via ohm's law). Since W =E/t, then E x R/t = V^2 or (ER/
t)^.5 = Volts needed for a given resistance of the composition between the two electrodes (possibly 2 strips of Al. foil?) Now E
= W x t, and also = V x Q/2 (Q = charge in Coulombs) and C (capacitance in farads) = Q/V. Therefore:
If we can find out or guesstimate E per gram and t, then R, V, gms. and C can all be manipulated to get the desired results. I
think.
I'd really, truly like any and all correction, feedback and/or thoughts on my thought process that I've laid out so far.
My overall thinking about this is that, discharging a large capacitor @ several thousand volts through my dewicat soft iddoo
body (as Tweety would put it) would have the same very predictable a nd final results thou gh not a s messy as placin g a
loaded 10 guage double under my chin and discharging both barrels up through my thick tough head. However, a capacitor-
as-energy source can be built, handled and used as predictably and safely as any finely crafted shotgun out there. Its all in
the construction and useage proceedures. I don't think the same can be said of detonator caps.
ElGreen October 31st, 2006, 01:40 PM

Hi, I made a blasting box with 10 pieces of caps (440V with 220mikrofarad). The base charger is a electrical circuit of a flash.
It produces 500V. I put it in a yellow Peli case. The battery is a 6V 4,5Ah battery it charges the capacitors pretty fast. The cabel
is 50m long, it's a special one cause the base wire in it is made of steel so it's pretty rough.
techtwit November 2nd, 2006, 10:15 PM
ElGreen;
You didn't say if each capacitor was 220 mf.@ 440V. or if the total array was that. What is the total cap. energy (Joules, of
cours e) of your set-up ? Have you noticed h ow very inexpensive dirt cheap, re ally capacitor energ y is? Check out http://
www.mouser.com/search/Refine.aspx?Ne=254016+1447464&N=1323038%20684043&Ns=P_SField&RefType=Header. It seems
that cap. cost for a given cap. type varies roughly with the product of volts X farads; therefore, we can get more cap. "bang for
the buck" (as we say in the US) i.e. cap. energy for our money (which is what we're after) if we shop for as high a voltage as
possible. (E = V^2 X C/ 2, remember?)
One possible set-up I'm considering is to separate the total system into three parts. Each of these three components would be
grounded with electric fence ground rods and connectors. They are:
(1) batteries, arming switch, firing switch, and manually rotated charging switch, which will send pulses of low voltage current
via ordinary 3-conductor extens ion cord, some safe dista nce to
(2) a simple homemade step-up (say 10X-15X) transformer (induction coil)/rectifier combination which charges the capacitor
array at the appropriate voltag e this sh ould b e rather less than the caps'. rated voltage. This array is readied (armed) and
discharged (fired) with rela y switches remotely controlled from the battery/switch station. (Hence the three con ductors one for
the coil and one for each relay.) When fired, the capa citors discharge throu gh the p rimary coil of a second transforme r about
20X, to furnish a good solid jolt in the 10 kilovolt range, through a single aluminum electric fence wire (housed in a
polyethelene insulator tub e used for such fencing ) to the
(3) explosive charge about 2 3 meters away.
It'd p robably be a good idea to also take the precaution of setting the cap./coil/relay unit in a shallow hole! d e p e n d i n g on
the size of shot being fired, of course. Another very important precaution should be a main safety switch which keeps the
secondary coil of the transformer well grounded. This switch would always stay closed until all preparations are complete and
the technician is about to go back out to the battery/switch unit (station 1) to fire the shot. The safety switch is closed again as
soon as the technician returns to the shot site.
About the relays: The cap. array neg. terminal would be connected to the neg. terminal of the rectifier and in series to the
arming relay wh ich toggles b etween ground via a small resisto r (safe, unene rgized pos ition ), and the firing relay (armed,
energized position). The firing relay, when energized, simply completes the connection to the primary coil of the 2nd step-up
transformer.
All of the above is simply a very sketchy suggestion of a possible system. I know little about electronics which is why this set-
up is so simple; nevertheless, I think it might work. Also, I wanted to provide something of an illustration about how device
construction a nd use proceedu res can combine into a system wh ich is virtually foolproof keeping in min d, of course, that
nothing is entirely proof against fools. Any ideas anyone?
Red Beret November 11th, 2006, 11:41 PM

Being low on free time, (and a bit lazy) I purchased one of those car jump start packs to use as a blasting machine. While a
little heavy, it fits well in my bag along with a 100m roll of wire. I got it on special for $50. It's rechargable, reliable and has
other uses, such as powering small appliances for a short time. It has an adaptor for this, and has a built in light, which I have
covered with a red plastic lens, to dim it down a bit. It's good for situation where you won't have to run like hell after the blast,
such as fairly deep underground blasting/testing.
I have found undergroud blasting very good for testing, if it's deep enough down, no one will hear the charge, (or recognise it
as an explosion) and if you have a misfire you can leave it there without having to go and play EOD man.
inventorgp November 12th, 2006, 02:02 AM

If you have watched Mythbusters, the EOD guys that helped with some of the myths (dynamite painting, exploding pants etc.)
used a rechargeable jump starter as well.
I also do underground blasting.
ElGreen November 14th, 2006, 04:29 PM

Each capacitor was 220nF@440V. We put together 10 pieces together.
-20 pieces of the capacitor cost 9,8USD
(I'm living in middle-Europe)
Al of the electrical works and solutions are delivered by my friend. I'm just a innovator and the "end-user." :)
We put the electicity into a 1120Peli case, with a special panel frame.
-The Peli case cost 54,62USD.
-I bought a battery 6V, 4,5 Ah. It was 5,4USD.
-I got the charging circuit from a old flash. It can produce 800Volts at least, in 3 seconds, from the this battery.(We haven't
tried the end cause 800V far enough for me)
-I use 2 switches. One is the fire switch, with a relay, so it can switch up to 40A.
The other one have 3 positions:OFF, CHARGE,DISCHARGE.
-The charge indicator consist of 10 Leds. We put the end to 500V. When in reaches we put it into the off position.
-I use a special wire as written above.
We fire approx. 3-8pieces of special NC loaded bodies, it means 6-20 Ohm + the resisance of the wires, -which I don't
measured it yet. What if we count with 300ohms, it is far overrate.
Each body needs 1,5A to fire.
If I count: Amps=Volt/resistance; it means:500V/20+300=1,56A.
I've count the joule:
The joule is :137,5 Joule
I also do underground blasting for the same reasons. It is a perfect indicator for measuring the blasting power.
And my favourite is the precision rock blasting. Low voice, and without shockwave. It is silent, safe, and enough brisant. In a
cave when you have to explore some parts and some rocksare in your way you have to do something....:)
augoldminer November 23rd, 2006, 12:55 AM

K.I.S.S. A BQQ ignitor is small fits in your pocket. will fire 15 electric caps.
For homemade caps a 115 volt 60 amp inverter that you plug in to a car lighter works for most types. Use a small motorcycle
battery for power source.
ElGreen November 28th, 2006, 03:44 AM

We use often the normal 220V mains voltage for detonating. Yesterday we used it for 14 electrical ignitor that means at least
30 ohms. And there wasn't any problem.
But, of course you have to be carefull.
Peace for everyone.
Raffikki December 2nd, 2006, 05:39 PM

The exact same dam thing happened to me!It also charged up and it made a short somewhere.I tried 2 fix it.Half a teaspoon
of AP did the job!
++++++++++
The number 2 is not a substitute for the word to. This is not a chatroom. NBK
ElGreen December 20th, 2006, 02:51 AM

I tried many bridgewires with my blasting box, The best was a acoustic guitar string (I think "A", but not sure). It consist of two
parts. A thick inner wire and a tiny one witch is reeled onto the thick. If I charge up to 650 V, the thick wire (I use approx:
0,5cm) detonates with a loud bang and gives huge sparks. The smaller one is not so loud but it produces plenty of sparks,
and melted "steel balls".
I found it very usable and perfect to detonate the primer mixture in detonators. I offers higher detonation velocity.
Altroman December 25th, 2006, 05:58 PM

Some capacitor info: The photoflash capacitors used in nearly all camera flash circuits are specifically designed for use in pulse
discharge applications. That means they have much thicker electrodes and lead wires than ordinary decoupling capacitors
designed for radios and other hobby uses. If you look closely, you will see that they are actually lableled "photoflash" or
"photo" capacitors. Another interesting feature is that they are actually designed to "leak" charge when their working voltage is
exceeded. This protects the capacitor from being overcharged, the flash circuit from damaging itself, and the flashtube from
being overdriven when the charging circuit is left on for too long. If you try connecting a camera flash circuit (a flyback inverter)
to a non-photoflash capacitor, you may end up damaging the charging circuit or blowing up the capacitor, since nothing will
limit the output voltage except diode leakage or transformer breakdown. Granted the energies are nothing like those of laser
flash circuits, so the safety risk is minimal. But what's the point of using hobby-grade capacitors when photoflash caps are so
readily available.
And yes, you can parallel flash capacitors, but use thick wires to minimize inductive losses (not a concern with SCR switches,
though).
About thyristors: Some high-end cameras actually use SCRs to quench the excess energy in the capacitor once enough light
has been generated (a form of auto-exposure). The way they get away with it is to use a series inductor to limit the inrush
current to a rate that the SCR junction can handle. So long as the current risetime through the junction is slow enough (a few
usec or so), the current density rises slwer than the conduction region can establish itself, and the SCR will last for thousands
of shots. So if you find an old flash unit with a big coil and SCR in it, you can use it as your series switch. It will be far too slow
for firing EBWs, but with a current riseime of a few microseconds to 100 Amps or so, squibs fire in a few milliseconds. This is
more than fast enough for sequencing special effects and pyro work.
deaddwarf February 12th, 2007, 05:02 AM

You'll also want to take voltage drop into consideration, all cables have an impedance per meter rating, the smaller the cable
cross sectional area, the higher the resistance, the larger the cable csa the lower the resistance, lower resistance results in
lower voltage drop, which in turn results in a higher possible load current delivered to the connected load.
What does all this mean in laymens terms?

- Use the largest cables possible.
- Calculate your safe distance, excessive cable is wasteful and inefficient.
- DO NOT LOOP OR COIL CABLE, this would have the effect of turning your cable into an inductive loop resulting in further
inefficiency.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Laser Pointer Remote
Log in
View Full Version : Laser Pointer Remote
simply RED April 29th, 2003, 07:29 PM

As i found laser pointers 1,5 dolars per piece i bought 4 and thought what to do with all.
Today I finished a laser pointer transm itter.
The transmitter is a laser pointer connected to a tranzistor (T)(collector o f the T to the pointer, the other polus of th e pointer to
the + (npn). A trimer resistor is connected to the base of the T to the collector (negative back connection). The m odulating
signal is put on the base with capacitor. (the pointer uses 40 m A so be careful with the choice of th e transistor, i used 2T655 1
which is no very good).
The reciever input is another transistor connected to fotoresistor (base of the npn ,,,, + ).
After this transistor am plifier is put.
The first try was to transmit m usic. The choice was nightwish, from 200-300 meters at night(at the day you can'y focus the spot
on the reciever), perfect sound.
The second was to turn the scem e to rem ote, using analog coding with one frequency and reciever with the same "d ecoder" it
worked well. U sing digital code will m ake it a safe "toy" for night blasting from 200 -300 m eters.
M a k i n g g o o d pre am plifier for the reciever with 4 transstors insures that it will work before the red point flashes on the
fotoresistor itself.

Excellent! I now have a new future pet project to accom pany the "cup and string" m o d e m : )

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Sympathetic Detonation
Log in
View Full Version : Sympathetic Detonation
Cyclonite May 5th, 2003, 08:20 PM

You can achive near simultaneous detonation without det cord by useing basting caps or something improvised to that extent to detonate multiple charges by having the caps
open end pointing to the direction of the explosive initiated with fuze. This does work with C4 and military basting caps, it has alot of applications if one is trying to obtain a
specific explosive effect on the object of choice without det cord. Has anyone tried this with AP or something similar? For the main charge I suspect a HE with a semi-high VOD
would have to be used to initiate the other charges. I searched on this subject and didnt come up with anything and thought it was worth discussion.
Axt May 6th, 2003, 02:54 AM

Curiousity got to me and i tried it, though didnt work.
<a href="http://www.fnphost.com/sites/good/nice/annmsp.jpg">Attempt</a> (download and rename .jpg to .wmv)

Or <a href="http://www.geocities.com/roguemovies/index.html">download as mpeg here.</a>
ANNM/SP is no C4 substitute but it was a commercial 8 strength det. in the second charge that didnt fire. Perhaps it was too close? If you can see the movie, the plank shows
where it was cut off by the first charge but strangely there was a dent and a bit blown off where the second charge was, ive no explaination for this. The second charge must
have partially detonated but you would think surely the det would go before the ANNM/SP, and then you would think that would happen before it was blown away, very
strange.
At what distances apart were you using the C4?
Anthony May 6th, 2003, 03:37 PM

Wrong section first of all...
Sympathetic detonation is a very well documented blasting technique and certainly not a "new" idea that the members here haven't heard of.
Unless you can point to a credible published article/document that supports what you have written, I would think that you have missunderstood the practice.
Only the first charge is fuzed - on of the key advantages of this technique is that you don't need primed charges, which is a lot safer and cuts down on labour/time.
Secondly, there needs to be a medium between the charges that the shockwave can travel through - air is not suitable. Except for charges placed extremely closely, which
negates the point of the technique. Water is ideal, wet and/or dense soil is good. Dry/sandy soil is bad, and charges (example: fulls sticks of ditching dynamite) need to be
placed as close as 2-3 inches apart.
EDIT: Obviously AP will be good for this, due to it's high sensitivity.

I wasnt saying that it sympathetic detonation a new technique, but anyways I have achived this effect with about a fuzed 5lb C4 charge and the other charges were within 4ft
each with a cap like I was explaining with air as a medium. It worked good with C4. I wonder if it would work with a main charge of NG with AP primed charges.
Anthony, yea sorry about the wrong section. But in what I am talking about the charges need to be primed. The main point was that no det cord is needed and the caps (AP)
are used to recieve the shockwave which will detonate them Increasing the distance sympathetic detonation can be used. I think AP would increase the distance. I was doing a
BIP on submunitions and placed the charges as I explained, the distance of the submunitions determined the distance of the charges (about 4 ft) cause I sure as hell wasnt
going to move them and I achieved a highorder on all munitions.
This technique is not documented, its something my co-workers and I talked about and tried.
Anthony May 6th, 2003, 07:25 PM

My apologies. Unfortunately we've gotten used to newbies coming here and rehashing long known information in new threads they've created - usually having never tried what
they speak of, or even really understanding it.
Obviously this isn't true in your case and I thank you for providing some specific info. Practial experiences are welcome and expecially new subjects such as this.
I do have one question for you: is it very important that the open end of the cap in the "slave" charges facing the oncoming shockwave? I.e, if they are just buried randomly in
the charges, do the slaves become significantly less sensitive?
Actually, I have another :) What's the relative cost of 4ft of det cord when you're using 5lb lumps of commercial C4? ;)

I always had the caps open end out pointing to the main charge so the Cap is exposed to as much power from the shockwave as possible. In the situation I did this in I didnt
bother with hooking up det cord since that would make it more likely to unintentionally move the submunitions that are really easy to piss off:D It simplified things. Explosives
that I use in work are payed for by the defense buget (Military) So I use as much as i can and never see a bill:D A little off subject but Iv been reading the forum for a little
while and noticed people tend to put thier caps or whatnot near the middle of the charge, I have found placing it near the outside of the charge with the "business end" poked
into the charge lessens the chance of partially detonated HE splatted everywhere and may save some of the charge.
Err Sorry I didnt know how the post above was posted, I couldnt delete it
Tuatara May 8th, 2003, 08:03 PM

That comment about positioning the caps makes a lot of sense when you consider the propagation of the shockwave through the body of the HE. Sorry Anthony, this is a
purely theoretical observation :D

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > My understanding of detonation...
Log in
View Full Version : My understanding of detonation...
rjche May 17th, 2003, 10:14 PM

There are m a n y e x p l a n a t i o n s o f d e t o n ation, most of which are more confusing than they are useful. Here is the way I learned
about detonation. If it is not entirely com patible with other theories, it su re works well in figuring out what to do to speed things
up.
C h e m ical Reactions require an activation energy before they can occur.
Activation energy refers to the kinetic energy of m otion of the m olecules, and is in the form of varying velocity among the
m olecules of each reactant.
The requirem ent is that enough differential collision speed exist to cause breakin g o f b o n d s , t h u s f r e e i n g t h e b o n d e d
e l e m ents or radicals to impact and bond to other elem ents in the resulting "soup". Good explosives are com pounds which
release much energy in these swaps of bonding buddies. That energy is released as heat, radiation, and pressure.
T e m perature m easures the average velocity of any-thin g's m ole cules. In reaction s.
Higher tem perature m a k e s a l m o s t a l l t h i n g s e x p a n d . T h i s i s b e c a u s e a s t h e a v e r a g e k i n e tic motio n of a re actant rises it is

vibrating (colliding) m ore violently and thus recoils result more frequently and the average is thus increased (tem p) due to
m o r e h a p p e n i n g p e r s e c o n d . T h a t g r e a t e r t e m perature shows up as an e x p a n s i o n o f t h e m aterial.
The vast majority of volum e taken up by all com p o u n d s o n t h e m olecular level is empty space. It has been com p a r e d t o t h e
m atter to space ratio of our solar system or universe.
Space can be reduced by grea t pressures which can resist the violent imp acts of e ven hot reactants.
All m aterials can be com pressed enormously with ENOUGH pressure.
A way to visu alize this (which was given to me by an antique professor) was to vie w all the people in the football stadium at a
b i g g a m e. If they sit still in their seats they can form a rather co mpact crowd. If they all get into a fist swinging riot, the crowd
will expand. If they start shooting at each other it will expand even m ore.
Since chemical reactions are controlled by tem perature it is necessary that the initial reaction cause a large energy transfer and
very fast. Thus heavy m etal com p o u n d s t e n t o m a k e g o o d i n i t i a tors, because m etallic gasses (aka vapors) carry much larger
heat loads than do other gasses.
If th e starting tem p is too low even high explosives will not explode with the usual initiators. (Even dynamite will not go off with
a sizable booster at liquid nitrogen temperatures. LN tem perature requires way to o far for tem pera ture to g o to get to
m inimum activation tem perature.)
Catalysts only help things react at a lower tem perature and when they are present a different reaction is go ing on than when
they are not. Thus they do not contrad ict the concept that all reactions are related to thermal, (kinetic) energy levels of
reactants. Catyalized reaction rates also increase rapidly with temperature.
A rough rule of thum b for gut feels is that reaction doubles for e very ten degrees C rise in temp. R a i s e s o m e e x p l o s i v e f r o m
20 C to 2000 C and the reaction rate increases by 2 to the hundredth power.
T h e r e f o r e d e tonation is a thermal reaction. The brisance of a de tonation is related to how fast the heat caused by the initial
reaction can spread through the medium. That heat energy can propagate via pressure waves, by hot gas traveling, or by
radiant radiation (due to high tem pera tures) shineing through som e explosives which are transparent to the wavelengths
radiated by the reaction.
Radiation tra vels with the speed of light.
Pressure travels at the velocity of sound in the material AT THE TEMPERATU RE of the pressure wavefront. Things get fuzzy here
for the pressure is en tering co ld uncom p r e s s e d e x p l o s i v e , a n d t e m p does not rise until pressure com presses the cold
e x p l o s i v e e n o u g h t o r a i s e t e m p e r a t u r e a b o v e t h e m inimum reaction value. Yet the velocity of sound in such detonations is
very large due to the high tem perature.
Because pressure can transfer m uch energy, which turns to head when it com presses things, many lower ex plosives with air
b u b b l e s i n t h e m t e n d to have more brisance th a n s o l i d o n e s .
T h e p r e s s u r e c o m presses the air bubbles raising their tem perature to light em itting tem peratures. Thus around eve ry bubble
both radiation and conduction heat transfer occurs, and all m aterial close t o t h a t b u b b l e b e g i n s e x p l o d i n g .
It ta kes a large booster to have enough energy to sustain the pressure wave throughout the m a s s o f s u c h e x p l o s i v e s , a n d
s m a ll initiato rs just cause som e reaction close around them .
Radiation is not all th at im portant in chem ical explosive s but it is a m ajor transfer m ethod in nucle ar explosives, wh ere it
exhibits its a bility to cause great pressure same as vibrating mo lecules do in m uch lower temperature explosives. It also
travels at the speed of light, so nearly instantaneous initiation o f a whole m a s s c a n b e a c c o m p l i s h e d .
A pressure wave can compress even solids at the pressures of high explosives, and any com pression of a material causes a
temperature rise. As the collid ing molecules or atom s are forced into a sm aller space their average num b e r o f i m p a cts rises
(tem perature) because they d on't have to go a s far to hit som e t h i n g n e x t t o t h e m .
W e have seen this when we le t a locom otive run over a penny to m a k e t h e o v a l p e n d a n t k i d s u s e d t o m a k e . T h e p e n n y w a s

hot enough to burn fingers if the engine alone ran over it so you could get it seconds after it was squashed .
(If the train was long and m any wheels rolled o ver the penny, all you got was a sm all sheet of copper foil u nless it fell off the
rail early. This hot penny thing was in spite of the enormous heat conductivity between the copper penny and the steel rail at
the contact p ressure existing).
T h u s s o m e high explosives which are entirely a bsent any air cavities in them can explode violently due to high tem p e r a t u r e s
caused by the pressure wave alone passing at very high velocity because of the very high tem p and pressure of the initiating
explosion. If the temperature rise is above the activation energy of the explosive then the whole thing detonates a the
detonation velocity of the pressure wave that exists. This is typical of cast and liquid explosives.
R o l l i n g d y n a m ite cartridges was done by m i n e r s b e c a u s e i t s p e e d e d u p t h e i r e x p l o s i o n ( b r i s a n c e ) a n d m a d e s m a l l e r l u m p s o f

coal. R olling the sticks caused lots of air bubbles to form in the gooey explosive. This was done just before they were loaded
into the holes.
Low explosives don't detonate because they never get to the pressures or temperatures which will cause their reactants to rise
in temperatu re enough to detonate, from pressure waves or radiation, or air com p r e s s i o n .
Gunpowder g round very fine, (not grained so flam e can pass quickly throughout all of it) will burn rather slo wly as in rocket
propellant. Although it is fine, the flam e cannot penetra te very far before it is all absorbed so things tend to go slowly.
Hope that helps non theoretical types to have a better understanding of the great m ystery of detonation fronts in high
explosives. Detonation is entirely different than burning fronts that exist in low explosives.
As a n e x a m ple a line of grained black powder laid on the ground and lit will cause the reaction zon e to travel a few inches a
second.
A lin e of petn laid on the grou nd and initiated will cause the reaction zone to travel about 240,000 inches a second.
As a ctor Candy said when that bald headed grizzly bear chased him into the cabin, BIG BIG REAL BIG.
That also is a good description of the difference between deflagration and detonation.
(Deflagration is another word for burning)
Gas vapors in your ca r deflagrate, unless you p ut too cheap a gas in your high com pression m otor, then under heavy load the
burning chan ges to detonation, and raises hell with the engine if allowed to go on long.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > hard targets - Arch ive File
Log in
View Full Version : hard targets - Archive File

shady m utha
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 149
From : austra lia
posted 04-29-2001 02:47 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W hen attem pting to blow a hole threw reinforce d concrete wall which charge is the better choice a tam p e d ' b a n g l a d o o r t o r p e d o '
o r a h o m e m a d e d e m olition b lock straped to the wall.
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 04-29-2001 08:30 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W hy not do a tam ped shaped charge? Surely that'd be the m ost effective?
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
From : V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a
posted 04-29-2001 01:23 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E x p l o s i v e s A n d D e m o lition Field Manual - Here
Blasters Trainig Manu al - Here
Http://on.to/explosives
[This message has been edited by ALENGOSVIG1 (edited April 29, 2001).]
sim ply RED

Freq uent Poster
Posts: 240
From : HELL
posted 04-29-2001 03:27 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As it was said the best for this is a sha ped charge, if you haven't got explosive fo r a shaped charge, internal placed charge can
b e m a d e w i t h a m m onite, it is very effective. C ontact charge with alm o s t e v e r y e x p l o s i v e c a n b e u s e d , t h i s c h a r g e m u s t b e
tamped(covered) with som ething to increase th e effect.
shady m utha
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 149
From : austra lia
posted 04-29-2001 06:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No shaped charges I will be using a ANNM/Al mix,the wa ll is about 1 foot thick and I have to place the charge against the wall
as there will be no tim e for drilling or digging,I'm thinking a 5L jerrycan with a sand bag thrown on or a big rectangle biscuit tin
gaffa taped about three feet up.
SATANIC
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 237
From : austra lia
posted 04-30-2001 12:30 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if yo u could m a k e a n i m provised bangalore, using PETN or RDX, you could hopefully sledg e h a m m e r a h o l e l a r g e e n o u g h t o
slide it through the hole. The hole could be ma de between the reinforcing bars, then it would blow them to each side, m a k i n g a
hole big enough for your purposes. [W hat are you doing this for?]
BoB-
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 679
From :
posted 04-30-2001 07:28 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I f y o u u s e a s l e d g e h a m m er to crack the wall, then it will probab ly be sensitized enough to be blown apart.
But it depends on the placem ent of the rebar in the wall.
If all else fails you co uld just rent a C AT.

Agent Blak
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 766
From : S k . C a n a d a
posted 04-30-2001 03:15 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinforced with rebar? good luck m an that is even hard for dem olition crew(Blasting).
------------------
A wise man once said :
"...T here Will Be No
Stand O ff At High Noon
... Shoot'em I n T h e B a c k
And, Shoot'em I n T h e D a r k "
shady m utha
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 149
From : austra lia
posted 04-30-2001 06:36 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately there will no tim e for anything accept putting it down and getting the fuck out of there I'm wondering which
charge to use to cause the m o s t d a m age to the wall,I was reviewing the explosive section of '150 questions for a Guerrilla'and
the suggestion is ;bangladoor torpedo;for this type of work,then I was looking at my arm y dem o b o o k a n d t h e s u g g e s t i o n i s
putting dem o blocks down,now I'm going for the hom emade effort which do you guys think would work best,or what explosive
technique wo uld best to smash a hole in the cu nt
kinetic July 22nd, 2003, 12:02 AM

T h e b e s t c h a rge to use is called a satelite charge. Using a satelite charge made with 10 pounds of military C -4, I have blown 4
foot by 5 foo t holes in 12 inch thick reinforced concrete walls. The only problem is, the charge will only shatter the concrete so
you will have to cut the rebar afterward s. I have also used 5500 grain per foot ECT (explosive cutting tape; a flexible linear
shape charge) but, the rebar was still intact. It is possib le to use ANNM instead of C-4 but, I would beef it u p to 13.4 to 14
p o u n d s i n s t e ad of 10. Anyway, a satelite charge is actually com prised of 8 charges sim a t a n e o u s l y d e t o n e d . T h e s h o c k w a v e s
are conducted into the concrete and the charges are pla ced and primed in such a way that the shock waves collide causeing
destructive and consructive interferences. Basically, som e areas of the co ncrete are vibrating strongly while others aren't as
affected. This im balance causes the concrete to shatter like glass. There is more to it but that's a brief exp lanation.
Skean Dhu July 22nd, 2003, 12:54 AM

i'm sure you thought of this already but what about a shaped charge(or is that a bangalore torpedo and i'm an ignorant fool)?
i saw a Military test of one and the plasm a jet went through a reinforced highway separateor(those big concrete blocks), or
m aybe it was the side of an old bridge. either way it was impressive.

W ell, like I said, I tried 5500gr/ft ECT (read big frickin charge) which is a shaped charge- a linear shape charge. I used about 5
feet of it and placed it on the wall in a "G" shape.
A conical sha pe charg e would only blow a small hole in the concrete- way too small for a person to crawl through.
No, a bangalore torpedo is just a hollow tube filled with cast Com position B- not a shaped charge in any form . A satelite charge
is specifically designe d for blowing holes in walls. If you can figure out a way to cut the rebar at the sam e tim e without using
h u g e a m o u n t s o f e x p l o s i v e s , y o u c o u l d m a k e a l o t o f m oney....
yt2095 July 22nd, 2003, 10:13 AM

I have no specific experience with large quantities of H.E, so this m a y b e c o m p l e t e b o l l o c k s .
running through a few m ental sim ulations (fancy word for guess work).
PE.4 or the likes maybe too brissant and leave all the rebar intact but be nt.
how about digging a hole at the base of the wa ll and using som ething along the lines of an ANFO charge? effectively heaving
the wall up and out, letting gravity do the rest. the rebar would still be there, but the section you took out would be wide
enough to collapse under its own weight (I picture 20 foot of con crete m issing with shattered edges for a further 10 foot in each
direction and the rebar laying on the floor wide enough to drive through).
as I said, this maybe utter crap and I`ve not seen what you plan to blow, but 12" with rebar says to me a heave rather than a
shatter m a y b e m ore appropriate, leaving m ost the concrete adheared to the rebar , but weak enough to fall under gravity.

That would work if you used a *very* large am ount of e xplosives. However the idea is to use a little "finesse." A good breacher
u s e s t h e m i n i m u m a m ount of explosives to get the job done. It would take you a lot less time and explosives to use two
consecutive charges rather than dig a hole and pour 150 pounds (guess) of ANFO in it :p !
yt2095 July 22nd, 2003, 12:14 PM

Subtlety isn`t one of m y stron g points anyway :)
I just figured d o i n g t h e s a m e as you`de do with a CAT, but in one foul swoop instead, and let gravity pull the rest d own.
how I saw it in m y head was that a brissant com pound would either ;
A. shatter the conrete and leave the rebar distorted (then you`de have to cut each peice manualy or blast again ( a h o l e b i g
enough to crawl throu gh with rebar at a 6" mesh would leave about 30 (ish) rods to cat/blast)
and that takes time and twice the noise.
B. a single brissant charge in situ (with out being projectile driven) would create an incredib le back blast.
C. with Anfo (or sim ilar) I should imagine if placed correctly the wall could be alm ost twisted over flat (like kicking its legs from
under it and forwards), leaveing the wall as a "drive ove r" surface or run over as the case m a y b e : )
certainly cost alot less, use only 1 bang, and garauntee a big enough area to move through.
I figure well placed as opposed to drilling and using splinter charges or cutters m ay work?
but like i said, subtlety isn`t my strong point and I could be talk ing com p l e t e b o l l o c k s ?
Edit; Beats shit outa m e why you`ve go to go T HROUGH the wall? is over or under imposible?
kinetic July 22nd, 2003, 12:41 PM

Y o u o n l y n e e d 1 0 p o u n d s o f C - 4 t o b l o w a h o l e big enough for a person to walk through so back blast isn't as bad as you
m ight think. I've been in a ravine about 40 me ters away from a 10 pound wall charge using C -4 and I'm still here...
yt2095 July 22nd, 2003, 02:32 PM

10 pounds! holy crap!
I expect I over estimated the stuff, I`ve only e ver seen things on ducum entaries using half that am ount an was m o r e t h a n
im p r e s s e d ! .
you obviously have m ore experience than I, and know what you`re on about. Ergo I`ll stick with my prevoius comm ent, I`m
probably thinking crap! :)
kinetic July 22nd, 2003, 04:29 PM

I wouldn't un derestim a t e C - 4 b u t I t h i n k m a n y p e o p l e o v e r e s t i m ate the distance you can be from a n e x p l o sion. Overpressure
reduces cubically as distance doubles.
T h e r e a r e a f e w o t h e r r e a s o n s t h e 1 0 p o u n d s i s n e s s i s a ry:
1. The charge was untam ped and placed on a wall that was flat, in the open, and made of dense reinforced concrete. Som e o f
the shock wa ves are reflected off the suface. The overpressure of the blast follows the path of least resistance and is absorbed
by the open air.
2. I constructed these charges to breach walls of buildings and com p o u n d s o n m ilitary objectives. They m ust defeat the target
with 120% re liablity-- I always use "P" for plenty!!
T h e m i n m u m safe distance in the open for 10 pounds of C-4 is 42 feet. For 5 pounds it's 34 feet and fo 1 pound it's 20 feet.
Minim um safe distance is based on the closest you can be without rupturing your ear drum s while wearing ear plugs. As you
c a n s e e , m ultiplying the am o u n t o f e x p l o s i v e d oes not porportio nally mu ltiply the m in safe distance (MSD).
If you are behind shielding (i.e. a ravine) the MSD is half of wha t it is in the open . Therefore, I could be as close as 21 feet
from 1 0 p o u n d s o f C - 4 b e h i n d a s h i e l d ! ! : c o o l :

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Stronger Detonator... - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Stronger Detonator... - Archive File

Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-06-2001 02:33 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just a dream...
Reading that New and Improved C4 file by Ragner Benson got me dreaming about something i used to do a long time ago, I'm sure most of us did this at one point. Rolling up
AP or some other primary explosive in aluminum foil and putting it on the stove. The power of that little ball was incredible, I remember doing that once with less than a half a
gram of AP and putting it in a steel dutch pot w/ the lid on. After heating on the stove for about 2 mins. the thing went off with an incredible boom scaring the shit out of me.
When i examined what happened the pilot blew out and there was a hole 6x the size of the ball in the bottom of pot. There was a dent about 4 inches deep in the crest of the
stove and the top of the pot vapourized. I mean literally i couldn't find the top of that steel pot for shit and then it hit me what happened. When i looked up above the stove
there was a hole about 16 inches long by 3 inches wide in the ceiling. I looked up there for the pot cover and it wasn't there, looks like i created sometype of Platter charge
without knowing it (at the time anyway, i was around 13). My mom got scared and called the cops on me, showed them the pot and the ceiling. They asked me what i made,
and i told them some bullshit story about matchheads, beeswax, sugar and some other junk. Dumbass cops believed me wrote something down and said not to do it again. If
they only knew, but anyway back to the original reason i decided to write this post. What i thought about was if i could harness the power of those tight balls and incorporate
them into a detonator. Here's the detonator i'm thinking about, roll up a ball of aluminum foil with say one gram of AP (make it a tight ball by squeezing it real hard, it
shouldn't go off cause i've done that several times in the past). Now that you have the ball get your aluminum tubing or pipe (make sure the ball is small enough to fit in it),
pour in a small amount of a mixture that burns hot (ex. kno3 and sugar, chlorate mix, etc...), then put in the ball and then cover the ball with more mixture.
Heres a simple diagram:
-- []
-- []
///[]///
//***//
//***//
//*O*//
//***//
//***//
////////
[] - fuse
/ - tubing
* - mixture that burns hot
O - aluminum foil ball with primary
The rest of the idea should be easily figured out. If the container is small enough and the ball tight enough you should get an incredibly powerful detonator.
Let me know if you think this dream would work...
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
[This message has been edited by Foxtrot83 (edited March 06, 2001).]
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 03-06-2001 02:41 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, it won't make it any more powerful.
Actuall, it might a little bit. Normally, when you light AP or HMTD etc. with a flame, some of it is used to make the transition from deflagration to detonation, which wastes
some of it. This way, none of it is used that way, and it all detonates.
But I don't really think it'll be significantly better. It might make a nice fire-bomb though...
blackadder
Frequent Poster
Posts: 313
From: London
posted 03-06-2001 04:09 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You could use this detonator, for FAE's, since the burning chlorate/sugar mixture would be thrown out by the blast, igniting the petrol.
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-06-2001 04:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually Mr. Cool, it would be more powerful because the AP would be more confined or should i say pressed. Most people don't have the tools to press AP that much into a
cartridge, and a dowel can only do so much pressing. Doing it this way you can press as much AP as you want (even though i wouldn't use more than 2 grams, after seeing
what a half a gram can do) and you don't have to worry about it going off on you. It'd be equally powerful to a cap using more AP, saving you AP and the trouble of making
bigger caps.
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
[This message has been edited by Foxtrot83 (edited March 06, 2001).]
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
posted 03-06-2001 07:39 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are more powerfull because the Peroxide melts before it detonates and becomes even more dense then when packed.
------------------
technology is a wonderful servant, but a bitch of a master.
Explosives Archive
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 205
From:
posted 03-07-2001 06:57 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can quite easily make a press to load your caps. I really don't feel like writing the entire explanation, but if I say that it involves a lever with a hinge at the end and a
dowel near the hinge, and that its principle is very simple then I'm sure you will be able to figure it out.
It will also be much safer; that thing with squeezing the foil balls full of AP seems quite hazardous to me.
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-07-2001 07:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It won't be more powerful. The AP won't melt: the mixture produces too much heat, too fast. AP detonates when sudden increases of heat occur: when you try to heat it too
fast, even when you heat it to 100 degrees.
And why should molten AP be more powerful? Because of the higher density? I don't think it makes that much difference.
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-07-2001 08:16 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microtek you and I and several others here know how to make a press, but to the newbie that would seem like something hard to do and it kinda is. Also squeezing the balls
isn't as hazardous as you think, I've done it numerous times and i still got both my hands it just takes alittle common sense.
And Outsider you sound confused. You said, "the mixture produces too much heat, too fast. AP detonates when sudden increases of heat occur." Your contradicting yourself by
saying AP detonates with an increase of heat but you say it wont work because the mixture produces too much heat. Think about it.
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-07-2001 01:28 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I'm not contradicting myself. The mixture produces too much heat,too fast for the AP to melt and then detonate. It detonates right away. Think about it.
[This message has been edited by outsider (edited March 07, 2001).]
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 03-07-2001 02:47 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outsider is right.
And even if it did melt, this would only increase the det. vel. very slightly over that of pressed AP. There's still the same amount of AP, so the amount of energy will still be
exactly the same, it'll just be released slightly quicker.
If you have it like in your diagram, the sugar/chlorate mix will absorb a significant amount of the blast, and also it makes the AP further away from the main charge.
And just because one of the balls hasn't gone off yet doesn't make it safe.
You said that it'd be equally powerful to a cap using more AP. Well, that is complete nonsense. A gram of AP contains the same amount of energy as any other gram of AP, so
how will pressing it in foil make it any more powerful?
frostfire
Frequent Poster
Posts: 266
From:
posted 03-07-2001 03:15 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hi,do anyone know what's the max confinement of AP would make which detonator number?
say, #8 caps is equal with mercury fulminate detonation velocity, well Mercury fulminate DV is higher than AP but with some modification on the confinement....anybody
knows??????
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-07-2001 10:23 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since its not clear about what i'm saying, I'll put it in terms Microtek used in another post, "Density really makes a difference in initiating performance, so detonators should
always have their primary and base explosives compressed. I never use less than 2000 psi and sometimes up to 8000 psi." I hope what he said sheds some light on what I'm
trying to do, or an even better way of seeing what I'm trying to do is to try it for yourself. Make two caps my way and the normal newbie way (without pressing or just a
dowel), and you should see and hear the difference in detonation (if it was properly constructed like in my dream).
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-08-2001 10:01 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density raises the VoD, but only to a certain extend. You can't deadpress AP like you can mercuryfulminate, but there's is a upper limit where more compression leads to no
furhter increasement of VoD. And I think that limit is reached already when AP is pressed in a metal tube with somekind of a lever. The difference in density cannot be
increased a lot by further pressure (or even by melting it, which is hazardous, troublesome anyway). AND I think confinement is maybe even more important than density. Like
Mr. Cool says: the mixture absorbs the shock- and pressurewave (and it cannot be fully transmitted to the surrounding high explosive because of the distance). So it won't
work. Sorry. But it makes "loud fuckin' kaboom" anyway.
firebreether
Frequent Poster
Posts: 110
From:
posted 03-08-2001 03:05 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It shouldn't increase the power over a pure pressed AP detonator.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
posted 03-09-2001 08:46 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it is a good test of mine to see if a mix or a substance is explosive when confined...difference of explosion regim between the open and the confined...aluminium foil is
great- it resist heat and conducts it to the explosive.
The only difference is the confinment and the fact that the AP is already a little hot when deflagrated or detonated... you decrease the activation energy by providing heat and
thus deflagration/detonation is more effective.
BTW any molten product is always less dense than its solid form-except for water!!!!Thus never forget the sequence for a heated solid:
Solid-->dilatation-->melts-->liquid--> dilatation -->vaporise--->gas--->dilatation--->ionise/decompose/...-->dilatation-->plasma.
Finally I doubt it to be more powerful since the amount of low explosive that you use to heat 0.5g of AP when replaced by AP under the same packing/confinement has to be
much more powerful. Can you compare:
*0.5g AP in Al foil surrounded by 4g Black powder in a solid container with a fuse,
*with 4.5g Ap in a solid container with a fuse (the amount of AP to initiate the transition from deflagration to det is very low)??????
Yes it will be more powerful than 0.5g alone because you forget that it boost up the black powder surrounding it.
------------------
"Chemistry is all what stinks and explode; Physic is all what never works! ;-p :-) :o)"
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 205
From:
posted 03-09-2001 08:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said. ( Philou )
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-09-2001 04:25 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting point PHILOU Zrealone but blackpowder isn't in my dream (it doesn't burn hot enough to melt or heat up the al foil to detonate the AP). I also said to use 1-2grams
max., not .5 cause that can't really accomplish anything in a homemade detonator. Plus the diagram wasn't made perfectly, thats why i said to use a small enough tube so
that the shock and pressure wave wouldn't be absorbed by the mixture. It wouldn't have to travel far at all (as stated by outsider). So it will work.
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
Foxtrot83
Frequent Poster
Posts: 70
From: USA
posted 03-09-2001 04:29 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To firebreather: I never said it would, all I said was that it'd make a nice improvised cap for those who couldn't make or get there hands on a press.
------------------
~Semper Fi~
Foxtrot83
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From: England
posted 03-09-2001 05:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can compress AP much more with a dowel than you could by scrunching it up in a ball of Al foil.
You haven't explained why AP in Al foil inside a pipe will create a detonator than the same amount of AP in a pipe. The amount of AP is the same, the confinement (the pipe) is
the same, why should some Al foil boost power so much?
The thing with the saucepan, I really don't think the Al foil had much to do with anything. The AP could have been wrapped in tape, or in a plastic tube and have had the same
effect.
firebreether
Frequent Poster
Posts: 110
From:
posted 03-09-2001 06:10 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't mean anything more than a dowel. What I meant was kinda like what philou said in that the 4.5 grams of AP would be more powerful than just .5 g with some LE. If
you used something like flash that is very powerful and burns hot and intense, I don't think power would really be decreased that much so this could be a definite option if you
don't want to make alot of AP. But Chlorate flash is very unstable just like AP, so that the senstivity would still be high.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
posted 04-04-2001 10:00 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foxtrot83:
I'm positive; Black Powder will produce enough heat to melt, and detonate Cyclotriacetonperoxyde trough an Aluminium foil... I don't see why it would work for me in my
country and not for you in yours... usually chemistry and physic are universal.
Of course everything depends on the number of Al sheets you have arround the CTAP...because indeed you have to heat the Al mass. Usually I use 1 to 4 layers of 0.05-
0.1mm Al foil and it works fine.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Detonating PETN ? - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Detonating PETN ? - Archive File

Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
posted 04-04-2001 10:55 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can PETN be detonated without using any other prim ary explosive ? Will, say, a confined chlorate/sugar/aluminum m i x b e
sufficient to set it off ? I know it's alot easier to detonate than R DX...
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From : England
posted 04-04-2001 05:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Blasters Training Manual claims th ere hasn't been a reported case of det cord (petn filled) being deton ated accidentally
(by shock or im pact). For the m ilitary to use it, it m ust be pretty insensitive - what with all those bullets flying around...
(All IMHO )
wantsomfet
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 236
From : EU
posted 04-04-2001 05:23 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W h a t a m o u n t & density do you think o f? Perhaps larger quantities with a flash charge... (there it is again)
But i don't th ink it's reliable. But who k nows...
------------------
catfood.tsx.org
c0deblue
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 229
From :
posted 04-04-2001 11:37 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Found the following reference, if this helps answer the q uestion:
"Ace t o n e P e r o x i d e : I m pact sensitivity - 4" with 500 gram weight. Initiation capability - 0.05 gram s com p r e s s e d a t 2 5 0 k g / c m 2
initiated PETN."
The other no n-prim ary m ethod is to use an "Exploding Bridge W ire" or EBW . This requires an extremely high current pulse and
is th us beyond the ca pabilities of norm al electric detonating equipment.
Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
posted 04-05-2001 10:05 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reason I started this tread was because I did not like using short-lived primaries like AP in m y blasting caps.
I was thinking of som ething like mercury fulminate, but I was co ncerned with the sensitivity of the stuff causing an explosion
during com pression. I can com press it quite safely, but I don't want to waste any. Also, I am not sure if it is 'compatible' with
m ain charge of PETN already in the detonator.
J
Moderator
Posts: 602
From : U n i t e d K i n g d o m
posted 04-05-2001 02:08 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C 0 d e b l u e , d o y o u h a v e a n y m ore info on the EBW (current required, m inimum voltage, type of wire)? Could a large enough
capacitor bank be constructed without the need for specialist equipm ent? I'm t h i n k i n g a l o n g t h e l i n e s o f a l a r g e b a n k o f
surp lus high capacitance electrolytic caps. Could this m e t h o d b e u s e d t o d e t o n a t e other HE's?
T h e m a i n p r o b l e m I can see is a suitable switch for the huge current. I remem b e r r e a d i n g i n a l t . e n g . e x p l o s i v e s t h a t 1 0 0 0 ' s o f
a m ps were required.
------------------
"If the aquarium water has to be drunk don't waste the fish. In fact they'll probab ly be the easiest to eat even if you don't
need the water. The cat is next in the pot." - John 'Lofty' Wiseman
c0deblue
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 229
From :
posted 04-05-2001 09:40 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would probably be pretty simple to build an EBW system with nowhere near the difficulties you're envisioning. Thousands of
p e a k a m p s m i g h t b e n e e d e d f o r s o m e exploding foil (slapper detonator) applications, but EBW requires su bstantially less.
As a general rule, comm ercial EBW detonators need about 200 kilowatts and 200 amperes for operation, with about 2 joules
total energy used. However, there's no universal standa rd, and different EBW d e s i g n s ( e v e n f r o m t h e s a m e m a n u f a cturer) m a y
have com pletely diffe rent thre shold bu rst current specifications.
G o o d i n f o o n various aspects of EBW systems (many references): http://www.risi-usa.com /0products/index.htm l
A typical EBW firing circuit charges a 1-1.5 uF capacitor to 3,000-4,000 vo lts and discharges it through the b ridge-wire.
Discharge m ay be automatic (i.e. spark gap breakdown occurs when the charge level reaches a predetermined flash over point)
or it may be externally triggered using a pulse transformer. A 1 uF/5KV oil-filled capacitor ought to be tough enough to handle
repeated fast discharges without m echanical failure.
Capacitors: http://www.highenergycorp.com/oil/hvdcratings.html
Spark Gaps and triggers: http://www.polytec-pi.fr/EGG/Eclateurs/Miniature%20Triggered%20Spark%20Gaps.htm
Burst current for the particular EBW detonator m ust be delivered in an extremely short period, typically 1 microsecond or less.
T h i s m eans that with long firing leads, special attention must be paid to overall circuit inductance and capacitance effects,
either of which m ay degrade pulse rise time and result in failure of the bridge-wire to explode with sufficient force to cause
detonation of the surrounding explosive. If the pulse is too slow the energy will not be sufficiently concentrated. This is
analogous to the brisance/power tradeoff - the bridge-wire will still "explode", but will cause only deflagration of the explosive
(not detonation).
The insulatio n value of the wire m ust be high e nough to withstand a fast rising pulse of 3-4 KV, bu t in reality the effective
voltage gradient will never be that great due to the shunting effect of the bridge-wire. A good quality PTFE-insulated twin-
conductor wire should do the trick for d istances up to 15 0 feet or so (twisted pair will exhib it the lowest inductance). Beyond
that distance a low-loss coaxial line wo uld be preferable .
The question of what to use for the bridge-wire rem ains. This could be th e traditional nichrome, or even a fine bit of copper or
stee l wire. Some EBW s utilize carbon film as the exploding element. A ca rbon resistor of the right value might work, and of
course a diode when subjected to a disastrous overvoltage m a k e s a h e l l o f a b a n g . F o r t h a t m atter you could try using a diode
"bridge-wire" and plugging the line straight into the m ains. With the right diode you won't even blo w a fuse.
PS - BTW , did you receive my emails with the T esla stuff?
[Edit: On reflection, a diode or carbon resistor would only work if the carbon or silicon (as the exploding elem ent) co u l d b e
brought into intim ate contact with the PETN. This would not be th e case with comm o n l y a v a i l a b l e a x i a l l e a d c o m p o n e n t s , s i n c e
the plastic casing would act as a barrier that would interfere with the detonation wave. Surface Mount com ponents would be a
better choice, since their active elem ents are covered only by a very thin mem brane of plastic material. Shock wave
propagation in com m e r c i a l d e t o n a t o r s h a s b e e n f o u n d t o b e u n a f f e c t e d i f t h e p r i m a r y / b a s e c h a r g e separator is sufficiently
thin, and Surface Mount resistors or diodes would fulfill that requirement.]
[This message has been edited by c0deblue (edited April 06, 2001).]
Jumala
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 200
From : Germ a n y
posted 04-05-2001 09:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hallo Bitter,
I thought about this problem a l s o s o m e t i m e s a n d I a l s o d o n t l i k e A P i n a d e t o n a t o r .
PETN can be set off by shock with a ham m er.
W hen this is true than it should be possible to set it off by a mix of perchlorate and Al.
Ive seen how m uch power is in firecrackers which uses this mix. It is mo re powerful than armstron gs m ix but ways m ore
stab le.
I h a v e n o p o ssibility to test it but I believe a cartridge filled with 50% PETN and 50% of this m ix should work. (The m ix has
m uch m ore power than a ham mer)
W hat do you think?
Bitter
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 290
posted 04-06-2001 09:55 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll give it a go eventually, Jumala. It sounds like a good idea. I tried a confined perchlorate/alum inium m ix once and it wen t
off with quite a bang. The heat off it was enough to ignite a sm all quantity of thermite (although n ot particularly well), so it
m ust be pretty powerful. Than ks for your help, everyone.
Acrolein D e c e m ber 19th, 2006, 10:56 AM

If you're really having trouble, you cou ld always use ma g n e s i u m . I know it's overkill but it would probably work beca use it is
o n e o f t h e m o s t f l a m m a b l e e l e m e n t s i f n o t t h e m ost flam m a b l e .
FullMetalJacket January 14th , 2007, 01:36 AM

Eh... I can th ink of a few elem ents that would like to argue with you... Fluorine, Hydrogen, Francium...
nbk2000 January 14th , 2007, 03:25 AM

Acrolein, who the fuck are you replying to after SIX years?!
Necrom ancy is a crim e. Don't do it!
c.Tech January 14th , 2007, 06:34 AM

Eh... I can th ink of a few elem ents that would like to argue with you... Fluorine, Hydrogen, Francium...
And how do you know that about francium when No weighable quantity o f the elem e n t h a s b e e n p r e p a r e d o r i s o l a t e d . [ 1 ]
(http://www.webelem e n t s . c o m / w e b e l e m e n t s / e l e m ents/text/Fr/key.htm l)
FullMetalJacket January 28th , 2007, 05:27 AM

And how do you know that about francium when No weighable quantity o f the elem e n t h a s b e e n p r e p a r e d o r i s o l a t e d . [ 1 ]
(http://www.webelem e n t s . c o m / w e b e l e m e n t s / e l e m ents/text/Fr/key.htm l)
Predictions based on known trends.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > flexible linear shaped charges -
Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : flexible linear shaped charges - Archive File

outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-18-2001 03:16 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any suggestions for making a FLSC? Because the frame shaped charge I made out of P.E. tube (12mm)
filled with NM explosive isn't gonna work. As mentioned earlier (see "NM explosive" in H.E. section and "shaped charges" in
Improvised Weapons section) it produces only a dent in mild steel (3-4mm) while the tube contained 150 gram of explosive
per meter. I still don't know if it caused by the lowered VoD (because of the low confiment/amount) or just because of too little
amount. What I do know is that a tube is very inefficient because the power is not directed (it can be compaired with det. cord
which probably has the same dissappointing results, I think but someone still has to tell me). So putting it in a case would
improve it because the power gets directed to the surface it's put on. Adding a V-shaped cavity would be a further
improvement. And using a metal liner would produce the maximum result. So I think it's not the NM explosive I use which is to
blame for the disappointing results. It's just the way I used it. Making a FLSC would probably get good results.
I know FLSCs consisting of 150 gram PETN per meter can cut through mild steel of 10 mm. So I want to know if anyone has
any suggestions improvising them. The only thing is: I use a NM based explosive so the whole construction must be airtight.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 03-19-2001 12:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm no expert on this, but I think your conclusions are correct concerning the inefficiency of a tubular contact charge. It's well
known that the small diameter of PETN detonating cord makes it a poor choice as a stand-alone charge, so I think a 12mm
cross-section of NM explosive might be a little anemic.
The "Breaching Charges" file on NBK's site bears careful viewing as it shows clearly that the Hydrocut-designed frames embody
the two elements essential to a successful FLSC: (a) A nominal inertial counter to the explosive mass, and (b) a cavity
providing the correct geometry to support the charge at the optimal "V" angle and standoff distance. In this system, the
charge is customized to the task at hand using a more or less universal frame.
While such a frame could be constructed using angle iron, the shrapnel produced would be unacceptable - the Hydrocut frames
are designed to pulverize without producing shrapnel. How about using a frame fabricated from a high-weight low-density
material such as homesote or gypsum? This could either be cast using angle iron as a mold, or glued up from strips of
homesote or gypsum wallboard reinforced with gauze glued on all surfaces. This should provide the necessary inertial mass
while disintegrating almost to dust on detonation.
It's not certain that an NM explosive would work against concrete or steel due to the lower VoD (relative to the plastic
explosives used in the Hydrocut system), but it's certainly worth a try. A gypsum frame prototype could be made using only
scraps from a construction site, a sheetrock knife and some glue.
[This message has been edited by c0deblue (edited March 19, 2001).]
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-19-2001 08:42 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the suggestion. I've seen the file "breaching charges" of NBK2000 but the part where they actually construct the
device was to short to see how they did it. I just saw them glueing somekind of tape to the frame and that was it. But the
thing what amased me was that when they used the frame shaped devices at one time there were people standing in front of
it! So like you mention it must apperently produce no shrapnel, it's just blown to dust. But at the same time the frame must
act as a countermass for the explosive (or maybe in this particular case a countermass was not used). That hydrocut uses
water as a countermass I should have known (in the thread "effect H.E. on safety glass" I say it produces a kind of waterjet
which is kind of a dumb thing to say).
The suggestion of using gympsum wallboard for constructing the frame is a good one. Because it's indeed heavy but it
crumbles easy when broken (or exploded). So this should minimalize dangerous shrapnel flying around which is an important
thing for the frame shaped charges I want to make. The only disadvantage is how I can use it for the volatile NM explosive. By
the way, NM explosives (almost any type) have a high VoD. The ANNM explosive for example has A VoD somewhere between
TNT and RDX/PETN so I think it's effective for frame shaped charges.
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 205
From:
posted 03-19-2001 10:02 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a slightly different note, does anyone know the composition of sheet explosive ?
I know that PETN is the explosive ingredient, but I read in an army field-manual that sheet explosive is a
"PETN/nitrocellulose composite", so I was wondering how you would go about making it pliable without acetone or something
else that will evaporate.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 03-19-2001 01:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that it's liquid does complicate things. How about using a larger diameter PE tube flattened (before filling) between
steel rollers. If done under heat the reconfiguration would be permanent. This would provide a more favorable (flatter) cross-
section while maintaining the desired charge weight per foot. It's possible too that a PE (or other inert material) extrusion of
the ideal cross-section might already be in production somewhere (for use as a door gasket or some such).
Microtek: Most of the "recipes" I've seen call for some sort of gum as a binder. I guess the only requirement would be that the
material be chemically inert so as not to react with the explosive. Has anyone tried using the flexible caulking products used in
the electrical trade for sealing conduits and raceways? These are about the consistency of modeling clay and designed to stay
malleable for years. Thinning with the right quantity (and type) of oil would allow the desired consistency to be maintained
even with high explosive to binder ratios.
For that matter, has anyone tried plain old butyl caulking compound? Or (aluminum-rich) rain gutter seal?
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-19-2001 01:32 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the sheet explosives I've heard of consist of PETN and some plasticizer. Dupont produces "detasheet A" and the military
use "flex-x" or "detasheet B" (the first one consists of 85% PETN with a binder and flex-x consist of only 63% PETN). The
sheet the military uses is also called M118 or M186 (the first is 0.25 " thick 3" wide and 12 " long the M186 has the same
width and thickness but is a roll of 50 foot long. The colour is olive green (suprisingly) and the commercial ones can have
different colour and are sometimes made of RDX instead of PETN) Of course sheet explosives are the best for making frame
shaped charges but I don't have 'em and Dupont won't sell it to me so.... I use homemade explosives. And NM is a very good
one.
Back to the topic again: as stated to produce an effective FLSC you need to use a countermass. And it's better to use material
that's heavy but easily broken so no shrapnel is produced. Now, gypsum wallboard was mentioned which is a good suggestion.
But I was just thinking about using sand to fill up the casing in which the explosive and metal liner is put. May be even wet
sand. And the casing would be of some kind of paper or plastic. Wet sand is heavy and acts as a good countermass while after
the explosion it's just sandgrains flying around. And it's easier to make than something like the Hydrocut device which is filled
with water.
By the way in the hardware store they sell different kinds of "profiles" made of different materials (iron, brass, plastic, wood).
I've seen a nice profile made of brass: 90 degree angle; each side 10 mm; and 1 mm thick. Fits nice in between the two
tubes and if I put it in a some paper casing filled with sand it should be a nice FLSC (or not?). Shaping a thicker tube is also a
good idea. Thanks c0deblue.
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 205
From:
posted 03-19-2001 04:33 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmm.. I'm sorry to sidetrack your string a little bit but actually my point was that when making plastique, finding a binder that
will hold a high percentage of explosive without crumbling is quite difficult.
If NC could be used ( and be so good as to be employed by the military ), then not only would you have an easily obtainable
binder, but also one that contributed to the energy.
So it was a query of my own rather than a suggestion for you.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 03-19-2001 11:34 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This isn't overly detailed, but may be useful nonetheless:
"Composition C contained 88.3 percent RDX and 11.7 of a nonexplosive oily plasticizer.
Composition C was replaced by C-2, which contained 80 percent RDX and 20 percent explosive plasticizer. This explosive
plasticizer was composed of mononitrotoluene.
C-2 was replaced by C-3, which contains 77% (+/- 2%) RDX and 23% (+/- 2%) explosive plasticizer.
C-3 has been replaced by C-4 because of its hardening, volatility, and its hygroscopicity. C-4 contains, RDX, Polyisobutylene,
Motor Oil, and Di (2-ethylhexyl) sebacate."
nbk2000
Moderator
Posts: 1096
From: Guess
posted 03-20-2001 07:29 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hydrocut frames contain no water, just polyethylene plastic. It's simply the mass of the frame that provides the needed
resistance for the explosive forrce to do its work before blowing apart into harmless bits.
I've seen info on opposing explosive strips cutting by shockwave collison, but the explosive needs to be in a ribbon (wide and
flat) shape. Round tubes would probably be much less effective.
Liquid explosives are unsuitable for FLSCs, that's why it's not used in military devices. Since you have NM, why not make a
plastique instead, which would be much easier to form into the proper shape?
------------------
"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
Go here to download the NBK2000 website PDF.
Go here to download the NBK2000 videos.
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-20-2001 10:58 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you sure "hydrocut" uses no water? I've seen a picture of a frame shaped "hydro-cut" device and it was pretty big. Cross
section would at least be 10 cm by 5 cm. And there where holes to put somekind of liquid in. And somewhere else it was
mentioned to watch out for leakage. And why they call it hydrocut anyway? And P.E. alone would not be enough countermass I
think. But I'm not sure and I seem to be unable to get through to the "hydrocut" site.
But anyway to use water (or wet sand) as a counter mass would be a good idea don't you think?
And that liquid explosives are not used for frame shaped charges/FLSC is probably because it's not practical. Sheet or plastic
explosives are a lot more easy to use. But as long as the VoD (and power) of the liquid explosive is high enough I see no
reason why it can't be used. It should also produce a liquid metal jet out of the metal liner of the V-shaped cavity and thereby
producing a progressive cutting force along the linear charge. And liquid NM explosives are in general very powerful and with
high VoD. Some exceed the power and VoD of TNT.
And making plastique with NM is a solution but then you need another chemical: ammoniumnitrate. And that's a bit more
trouble making it, drying it and protecting it from moisture.And still you end up with a plastique with the water attracting AN
and volatile NM. So my bet is on the gelled NM explosives. I just have to find solutions for the practical problems it raises.
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 205
From:
posted 03-21-2001 10:11 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Which was exactly my point in asking about gelling nitrocellulose.
The only difference is that I would use a crystalline explosive, so I need something else for gelling the NC, preferably
something that wouldn't evaporate and isn't poisonous. So you see, my question is related to FLSC manufacture.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 03-21-2001 11:52 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A possible solution:
Polyethylene sheet fuses extremely well to heated metal surfaces, and this fact could be exploited to fabricate a linear charge
"vessel" capable of holding liquid explosives while maintaining a more desireable cross-section.
Beginning with a piece of copper (or brass) angle heated to the correct fusing temperature, both edges of a strip of *heavy*
polyethylene or other plastic (what is the plastic used for IV bags?) could be fused to the metal angle such that it formed a C-
shaped "bag" surrounding the angle's outside surfaces. Sealed at the ends (or assembled as a continuous frame shape), this
system would provide the ideal flat-surfaced V-shape critical to "blade-jet" formation. The profile could be improved further by
backing the "bag" surfaces up with a (gypsum?) frame of the type previously discussed. The correct standoff distance could be
achieved by forming the angle from copper flashing with an extra "leg" on either side.
Sort of like this:
./\
|..| (ignore the dots) The poly plastic would be fused to the two vertical legs.
An alternative might be to heatseal a sleeve (bladder) of poly and sandwich the filled bladder between the liner and outer
frame. This would provide the ideal shape by conforming to the frame and liner surfaces without the tricky business of fusing
the poly to metal surfaces.
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
posted 03-22-2001 06:26 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, thanks for the info. That's the kind of replies that I want; they answer my question and are useful.
shady mutha
Frequent Poster
Posts: 149
From: australia
posted 04-03-2001 04:34 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the final geometries of the linear explosives may vary,they all generally start out as a metal tube(or
sheath),e.g.lead,aluminum,silver,or copper of some manageable length,approximately 10 feet,and an outside diameter
between 0.38 and 0.75 inches(1 and 2 centimeters),whose inside diameter is approximately 50% of the outside diameter.One
end of the tube is capped and the tube is incrementally packed,under high pressure,with a granular high explosive such as
PETN RDX,or HNS.After the tube has been completely filled and capped,it is subjected to a drawing process that may include
reduction dies and many proprietary processes and procedures that are,understandably,selfishly guarded.The unit used to
define the quanity of explosive per given length(core loading)are the grains per foot method.The dominant core loadings are
between 2 and 500 grains per foot,although for special application they have been drawn as low as 0.2 grain per foot and as
large as 2000 grains per foot.
yt2095 July 26th, 2003, 03:06 PM

well... this seems as good a thread as any to post my FLSC results.
ok, they`re not exactly brilliant, but it DID work to greater or lesser extent.
take a peek.
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/40-40-20.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/rolled.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/attatched.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/placed.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/after.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/topside.jpg
http://www.yt2095.net/tests/sideveiw.jpg
I used a 40% mix of hexamine peroxide 40% AP and 20% AN.

all finely powdered and mixed intimately, then run along a 2" wide peice of masking tape, viscose placed then rolled. a further
layer of tape was then put on and then straped to a 2.5mm steel plate. shoved in a yellow pages book (sound damping) then
shoved in a broken microwave and detonated in my lab. quite loud but acceptable.
I`m sure some hardcore folk will think they`re lame pics and ideas, but I`m happy with them :)

Dude, I editted out a few of those links because they quite plainly showed which area you're in. If you don't mind that then
sorry, put them back, but I thought it was possible that you'd just overlooked the fact, so I editted them out just in case you
didn't want anyone knowing where you are.
yt2095 July 26th, 2003, 03:48 PM

In all honesty, the site alone would be a dead give away.
thnx for the thought though, it`s apreciated!!!
the fact is, I do nothing ilegal, I experiment and make special effects, some of which I video if they are good enough. I have
no interest in doing HUGE demolitions (although I am awaiting a reply from Coleman demolitions re my C.V) and certainly no
interest in hurting folk.
I do it because it`s interesting and beats crap outa watching Oprah all day :)
I`ve replaced the links, if the law wants me, there`s nowt I can about it :)
and there`s nowt they can do to me unless I break the law :)
I`de lay wager that people like me aren`t far from the bottom of the list of folk to bust! :)
I have no secrets, I forget things too easily to have any :)
Mr Cool July 27th, 2003, 11:46 AM

I'm the same, I just experiment, but sadly that is illegal. It doesn't matter what you do with an explosive, the mere act of
creating its molecules is breaking the law :(.
But true, they probably don't care very much about it.
Well, I suppose I was just caught up in a paranoia attack. I forgot all they'd have to do is look at your IP anyway :D :).
"I`m sure some hardcore folk will think they`re lame"
It doesn't matter what people think, it's fun!
The trouble with doing it your way is that it's very hard to get the explosive to a high density, also, the tape adds a significant
amount of "padding" between the explosive and the target.
C4 or similar plastic explosives can cut through steel if the charge is as high and as wide as the metal is thick. Obviously the
charge needs to be as long as the desired cut. So to cut that plate you'd only need a thin cylinder 2.5mm wide! And that's
probably adding a massive excess to ensure that it makes the cut, because IIRC I got that info from an army demolitions
manual.
That's the difference having the HE at a high density and in direct contact with the target makes. If you could bind the
explosives with blu-tak binder or something then I'm sure it'd be quite effective!
Also, a good way to reduce noise from little tests is to carry them out in a big box (or bin, rainwater-collector, etc) stuffed with
scrunched-up newspaper. A mix of sand and expanded polystyrene beads also worked well, but was very messy when my box
broke! Also the sand settled out to the bottom after a while, I had to keep mixing it up.
yt2095 July 28th, 2003, 08:27 AM

Thnx :)
some great ideas in your post!
I don`t think I`ll be doing it again though, apparently is WASN`T as quiet as I thought :(
and it was only done to use up some excess peroxides that were nearing their expiry date (more than a week and I wont keep
it) hence the odd combo in my mix 40-40-20.
I can see what you mean about the padding effect the non sticky side adhered to the metal in places, and I`ve never seen
something as flexible as masking tape actualy shatter! I really didn`t expect that much of a perfect crease in the metal either!
a few minor dents perhaps? and to think that a few moments prior to that I was pushing down on the charge to get a half way
decent density! *shudder*
as for C-4 or the likes my just under half gram RDX that I tested (no pics sorry) in a drinking straw was more than enough for
me to say "no more" it scared me a little and I don`t mind admitting it, so I think I`ll just enjoy watching other folk mess with
it from now on (rather be a live chicken than a dead duck!)
it`s all been done for my own edification anyway, and now i can at least say, YES I have made these things and seen them in
action 1`st hand, that`s good enough for me (for now) :D
Terry Collins August 1st, 2003, 01:31 PM

Sorry guys, but the pics don't show a FLSC. It's just a flexible, tube like explosive device. A sort of improvised det cord.
A FLSC is something completely different.
yt2095 August 1st, 2003, 01:52 PM

yes, but for all intents and purposes, it belonged in this thread.
it`s certainly flexible (I have one here wrapped around a butane lighter, thought it would make a nice cracker)
it was certainly Linear, look at the straight line it produced (I didn`t exploit it`s flexible capabilities I know).
I guess the only thing missing is the Shaped Charge bit... well we both agreed on that anyway :)
det-cord it is then. but the comp used in it is more than adequate for SCs :)
now if you`re talking about rubberised PETN charges then I guess you`re right, however this WAS only an experiment using
left over chems and certainly not to be considered .MIL spec Ordinance :)
yt2095 August 4th, 2003, 02:18 PM

Ok so apparently I can`t edit or put an "Additional" to my last post as it`s been over so many kazillion seconds or something
like.
Mr Cool, as in the blu-tak thread, I`ve done as you`ve suggested, I plan on using the same sheet steel plate again (for
comparison) and to see if I can actualy pop a hole in it, or even make a cut!.
I`ll assume for now that you`ve actualy seen the pics I posted on here (blu-tak thread) and know exactly what I`m playing
with (probably a bad choice of words but it`ll do).
how would YOU place this charge? (it`s only as a test/demo and if it doesn`t work, well there`s plenty more where that came
from!)
the plasicised charge is about 3 grams, the det-cap is about 1.5g pure HMTD, do you or ANYONE recon it would punch a hole in
the 2.5mm steel or cut it, or is it just cracker worthy only?
all the best :)
0EZ0 August 4th, 2003, 08:44 PM

Unless the witness plate is firmly affixed to an immovable anchor, IMO the charge will not penetrate the 2.5mm steel. I highly
doubt that the plastisized HMTD/AN composite will have the required brisance to cut through the plate. At best you might
breach the steel to a degree, but it would not cut through like you would want.
If you did want to penetrate the steel with that charge, I would suggest placing a projectile (small piece of metal or ball
bearing) on the bottom face of the charge (make sure it's properly placed) and firing it with a little space between the charge
and the plate. A centimeter at most. The plate should be penetrated by the projectile and secondary blast effects, like curling
of the metal plate where it penetrated though to the underside, should be clearly seen. Although with such a small charge I
can't be certain it will work and penetrate the plate.
Failing all that, you could just try a mini cone shaped charge with NG and a copper liner. You are practically guaranteed results
with it if placed and fired correctly.
THe_rEaL_dEaL November 8th, 2003, 05:59 PM
Today I was coming back from a ride an saw the old bike tubes in my shed. These are very strong flexible and are prolly RDX/
PETN resistant. my idea is to pump a plastic form of the explo into the tube and mould it into the desired shape a plaster
board sleve could be fashioned aroung the tube for resistance or a bike tyre cut to fit around the tube with water between the
tube tyre could provide resistance. Alternately a puttty of some sort could be put between some chickenwire with flyscreen
under it and also serve as a resistance device.
This meas a tri shaped gap can be moulded into the tube betwwen it and the object and then a flexible resistance plate could
be placed over the tube (chick wire + putty or tyre + liquid). This means a totally flexible LSC which could be constructed off
site, rolled into a roll and used on site in variable lenghts. Just cut it up like a long sausage, tie the two ends of the sausage
together . Ie by wire off ends of chic wire or by the metal bead running in the tyre sidewall.
A half circle of flex. hose could be used to shape the air pocket betwwen the charge and th surface of the object.
Whats is the loss in cutting power of the LSC when a half circle is used instead of a tri shape inbetween the charge and surface
of object?
Comments, Critcism?
Jacks Complete November 9th, 2003, 07:37 PM

Since no-one seems to be having any success in making a flexible linear shaped charge, has anyone had any real success
with a linear shaped charge?
I haven't ever tried these, though I have cut a lot of bottles up ready, for conical (spot) ones, and I know a little of the theory.
Surely the problem is that you can't make a decent stand-off with the right geometry AND the right density without real
trouble?
Would it not be better to try something a bit easier?
So, here is my idea. Feel free to shoot it down.
Find some nice copper sheet, and fold it very neatly into a strip with a 90 degree angle (or whatever's best?) Now find another
piece of 90 degree angle. make sure it all fits nicely. Take two bits of equal length (1 of each). Carefully drill a few holes for
detonators in the outer one, and fill with your explosive of choice. Now carefully press the copper piece into the outer. I would
suggest using a remote press! Use an explosive you are familiar with. Whatever.
Anyway, I am sure you all know that the det holes go on the fold, etc.
It should look like (bad ASCII art):
^

/ \
/ \
/ ^ \
/ / \ \
| |
Right, so, now stick this to your target, and retire to a safe distance.
Once you get this working, it should be relatively simple to make lots of them, and stick them all close together, perhaps with
some specially made corner sections. This would let you do any resonable geometric shape out of straight line sections and
corners. You would probably need something to carry the detonation around the corners and breaks, but it might work.
You would probably want to try different stand-off distances too, as they have a fairly major effect.
(The ASCII only took 8 previews... :mad: )
THe_rEaL_dEaL January 2nd, 2004, 08:47 AM

To carry the detonation some detcord could be linked up to the detonators.
Use commercial DETCORD or put your HE of choice into some flexible hollow cord and use that.
Also with your copper sheet idea, Jack's Complete, are you suggesting putting HE all of the way around the inner plate? From
my limited knowledge of linear shaped charges shouldnt the shockwave come from above the apex of the inner plate not
directly from the sides. What I am insinuating is that HE shouldn't be right on the sides of the inner plate. I.e. not much past
the apex would be better.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Acid Detonator - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Acid Detonator - Archive File
megalomania June 1st, 2003, 12:16 AM

DarkAngel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 592
From : ?
posted 04-18-2001 10:24 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Detonator i found in a bo o k a b o u t I n t e l l i g e n s e a n d S p y s t u f f
I hope the picture is clear(I have no scanner)
This device is calld a "Pencil detonator" they used it in WW 2 the person who used it rem o v e d a s a f e t y p i n a n d p u s h e d o n t h e
a m poule with acid so it broked,
After a wile the acid react with the metal wire and it broked and that caused that the spring pushed the hit pin again st the
detonator.
There where 5 kind`s of pencil detonator`s with al another colour of safety pin,
Each colour means another time before the wire broked
TIMES:
Red=19 Minute's
Yellow= 6 Ho urs and 30 Minute's
Blue =14 Hou rs and 30 Minute's
W hite=1 Hour and 19 Minute's
Black=10 Minute's
There`s also a detonator in the book with Acetone and plastic th at works with the same principe.
------------------
DarkAngel
For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1

s e n d t o s e c t i o n 1 @ h o t m ail.com
[This message has been edited by DarkAngel (edited April 18, 2001).]
Microtek
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 205
From :
posted 04-19-2001 04:33 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the acetone/plastic tim er would be more practica l; the pa rts that aren't supposed to corrode could then be m ade from
alum inium rather than acid resistant m aterials.
richl261
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 134
From : u k
R e g i s t e r e d : M A R 2001
posted 04-19-2001 03:39 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i h a v e a b i g b o o k a b o u t t h a t k i n d a s t u ff...it shows photos of one and how to mak e one etc...pretty nice book
PYRO 500
Moderator
Posts: 1465
From : s o m ewhere in florida
posted 04-19-2001 06:26 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
just today I saw that sam e b o o k i n m y school library, I just found it on a table, I think I m ay know you dark angel, it was
s o m ething like the big book of spy equipment right?
DarkAngel
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 592
From : ?
posted 04-19-2001 06:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah cool,it`s the sam e only in Dutch
------------------
DarkAngel
For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1

s e n d t o s e c t i o n 1 @ h o t m ail.com
richl261
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 134
From : u k
posted 04-20-2001 07:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thats probably the bo ok i got...it was from a school library as well...
YTS
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 61
From :
posted 04-22-2001 06:59 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They was used by a few arm ie s s o m e y o u h a d t o c r u s h t h e t u b e t o b r e a k the am p u l e t h e u s a l s o u s e d s o m ething simuliar to
fire 45 bullets to draw enem y fire or to distract them
SMAG 12B/E5
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 61
From :
posted 04-23-2001 12:27 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ampul contained copper chloride, the wire is steel a nd the housing is copper. The solution destroys the wire by electrolytic
action between the dissimilar m etals and electrolyte. Th at is not cotton under the screw. It is a lead washer to secure the firing
pin retaining wire.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > TeNN: Only component in a detonator? - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : TeNN: Only component in a detonator? - Archive File
megalomania June 9th, 2003, 05:54 PM

-A-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 100
From:
posted 05-23-2001 01:07 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After almost pissing in my pants a few times handling htmd, TACC, and others, I started thinking of a more secure detonator. As you probably know TeNN detonates if it is
heated very fast. So, I am wondering if you can make a detonator by filling your always used copper or aluminum tube with TeNN, and using a nichrome wire to heat it
violently. I don't know if this has been tried before. (I can't test it know as I have run out of acid, damn). What do you think?.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
posted 05-23-2001 07:21 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does TeNN stands for?
------------------
wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 236
From: EU
posted 05-23-2001 08:51 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TeNN = tetranitronaphthalene
------------------
kangaroooo.cjb.net
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
posted 05-23-2001 09:34 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TeNN is not a good initiator on its own it will need a first kick from a detonator!
You always need not very friendly substance to set high exposives to detonation!
Azides, fulminates, acetylides, CTAP, HMTD, picrates resorcinates, complexes of a reducer and of an oxydiser arround a metal center!All substance that detonatyes readily from
heat/spark/flame!
------------------
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 05-23-2001 11:07 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TeNN can detonate from rapid heating, I've done it. However, it is unreliable. I used 22 swg copper wire in a coil and a BIG capacitor bank.
A similar method, mentioned in KIBC, is to use an exploding bridgewire. This works with the more sensitive of HE's. A short length of fairly thin copper wire, embedded in the
HE, is connected to a cap. bank of high voltage and medium to high capacitance. The huge burst of energy through the wire causes it to vapourise, creating a VERY rapid
temperature rise and a small shock wave. The combination of these two factors is enough to detonate the HE. I think this would work for RDX and PETN, and maybe TNP. I
have used this method in an experiment with EGDN/NC mixtures with success.
-A-
Frequent Poster
Posts: 100
From:
posted 05-24-2001 12:15 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see. And using a composition that gets very hot around the wire, don't know what, potasium perchlorate and sulfur for example or some metallic based mix?. The composition
ignites from the wire and then the composition detonates the TeNN by rapid heating?. I talk about TeNN because this HE has the property of detonating if heated violently, not
like other non primary HE's.
zaibatsu
Frequent Poster
Posts: 407
From: England
posted 05-24-2001 01:25 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it needs to be a little more rapid than that, otherwise you could just ignite it from a normal mix of perchlorate/sulfur, Magnesium/Barium peroxide, or any other high
temp comp.
------------------
Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From: England
posted 05-24-2001 02:50 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-A-, MrCool wasn't describing an ignitor. The bridge wire doesn't just heat up and glow, it has a massive surge of power run through that makes it actually explode. Exploding
bridge wires can explode violently to detonate secondary high explosives.
FadeToBlackened
Frequent Poster
Posts: 201
From: Hell
Registered: MAR 2001
posted 05-24-2001 04:35 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by PHILOU Zrealone:
...complexes of a reducer and of an oxydiser arround a metal center!...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does this mean something like TACC? Just wondering.
PHILOU Zrealone
Frequent Poster
Posts: 479
posted 05-28-2001 08:45 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes!
Tetraamino copper chlorate
Metal center: Cu(2+)
reducer: NH3
oxydiser: ClO3(-)
Other like:
cobalt azido-hydrazido perchlorate!
nickel nitrate hydrazinate
...
Usually all kinds of complexes containing as reducers: N3(-), NH3, -NH2, -NH2OH, -CN, -SCN, NH2-NH2,..., CO, organic amines, C2H2
and as oxydisers: O2(2-),MnO4(-),NO2(-), NO2 ,NO ,NO3(-),ClO2(-) ,ClO3(-) ,ClO4(-), Cr2O7(2-), BrO(-), BrO2(-), BrO3(-), BrO4(-), IO(-), IO2(-), IO3(-), IO4(-), ...
Arround a metal center:
Cu, Ni, Co, for most of them and Hg,Ag,Fe,Zn,... for some minor cases!

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > C heap remote detonation
Log in
View Full Version : Cheap remote detonation
green beret June 11th, 2003, 02:35 AM

I havent tried this but theoretically it should work.
At supermarkets and hardware shops, one can obtain wireless doorbells. The one I had a look at today cost $26 ran on 12v
a n d h a d a r a n g e o f 7 0 m . Its a little too expensive to use for a disbosable but a person could use it for small projects. Can
anyone see why this wouldnt work/is im practical.
nbk2000 June 11th, 2003, 03:01 AM

$ 1 5 g e t s y o u a 1 0 0 y a r d s p o o l of 2 conductor wire. So, unless th e range is greate r then th e cost of a sim ila r length of wire,
then there's not much point in it.

Very true. Although if you just wanted to fire the charge and get out of th ere without bothering to wind up 100 yards of wire it
could have its uses, assuming fuse isnt an option and precise tim ing is needed.
Im going to steal one of these devices, it would be a novelty to be able to press the button and...BOO M.
Arthis June 11th, 2003, 06:36 AM

Anyway you need to press the button... ;)
The problem would be in re-buying one every time. U nless we find something cheaper, I don't thin k it will be used. But stealing
a b o x o f t h e m would be great. I dream about raiding a superm arket/ardware store.
The main interest would be in diverting people while doing som ething else.

Yeah, If they were reusable it would be alot m o r e v i a b l e t o b u y o n e . S t e a l i n g a h e a p w o u l d b e g o o d b e c a u s e t h e y w o u l d b e
totally disposable, an d I like the idea of not having to wind up 1 00 feet of wire when the cops are coming. :D
I'll see if I can "obtain" som e.;)
Desmikes June 14th, 2003, 01:44 AM

I've never seen any of these devices in action, but I am a s s u m ing that it's a button that can be placed up to 70m away (i'm
im p r e s s e d ) f r o m the ringer that would brobably be battery powered. If I am correct on understanding how it works then you
wouldn't have to buy a new one every single time. W hy not just extend few meters worth of sacrifice wire from the ringer and
then "m ake it ring" just make sure that the ringer is far enough to withstand the blast, you can even enclose it in a protective
case just to be sure.
nbk2000 June 14th, 2003, 02:52 AM

I h a d t h e t h o u g h t o f u s i n g s o m ething to press a door bell ringer while yo u w e r e o n t h e o t h e r e n d o f t h e h o u s e . T h e y g o t o
check the fro nt door, while you're com ing in the back. SUR PRISE! :D
I'd think it terribly funny if you used a rem ote control door bell to rem otely ring som e o n e e l s e s d o o r b e l l . : )
Indeed, you could use a length of wire to distance the R/C from the explosion, th us m aking it re-usable.
GibboNet June 14th, 2003, 03:09 AM

D e s m ikes, you've got the righ t idea, just exten d the wire from (what was) the speaker to your device, m aking sure the wire is
long enough to allow the unit to be out of the blast. Maybe just coat it in silicon or som ething else rubbery, so whether it gets
s h o c k e d o r n ot, it shouldn't be damaged, as it won't be too close anyway.
However, I seriously doubt they would work at 70m ! That's a fair way seeing as m o s t o f t h e m are designed to work from o n e
side of the door to the other, which is less than a m etre. I had a look at some in a local hardware place (can't get to a large
c h a i n s t o r e ) , a n d t h e m a x i m u m range was 20m . Y o u m i g h t h a v e f o u n d a g o o d b r a n d a t 7 0 m .
If th e reciever end was very sim ple, could you replicate it with so m e h o m e e l e c t r o n i c s ?
I'm thinking they could be very useful after all, though it may be harder to go and collect the unit at the explosive end, than
just roll up wire from where you were based. (It m ay hev been thrown a fair distance from t h e b l a s t , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e l e g t h o f
wire)
If it does work, it wou ld at least be cheap, whereas I'm paying nearly $1 a m etre of twin cable. :(

Buy your twin cable in larger quantity (buy 100 m at once) and it'll be cheaper.
The electronics in the receiver is not re ally easy to copy, because microchips are used, and it will m o s t l i k e l y b e t o o e x p e n s i v e
t o b u y o n e , m oreover you will need to encode the chip, etc. The time and material to m ake one wouldn't be worst the 20$.

Yeah thats what I was thinking too (ab out the sacrifice wire). I am 100% certain it said 70m . It had a picture on the packet of
a mansion with a long drive and the button at the gate and the reciver at the hou se. If I do get one I'll test it and let you all
know.
I like youre idea NBK but you would ha ve to be sure the re was only one person in the house, otherwise you wouldn't know
where the other people were in the house.;)

T h e s i g n a l o n t h o s e t h i n g s m ust be able to travel thru walls/m etal/wood/concrete in order to be effective, that m e a n s t h a t n o t
only should you be able to cover it in rubbery substane but also put it inside a large brick (m etal case would significantly
reduce operational range)

I bought one of these a little while ago for 8.99. They're designed so that you can carry the ringer unit about with you, so
rangewise it will go from your front door, through your house and into the shed at the bottom of your garden, for example.
I n e v e r u s e d m ine because th e "speaker" was a piezo buzzer with no useful/significant ou tput. It'd probably require an
a m plifer splicing into the circuit before the buzer driver, operating a transisitor then possibly a nice chunky relay.

I was gone for several days so I didn't post this before this topic was gone, but I had this idea that would appeal to people
that don't wish to be anywhere near charges wh en they go off. Instead of using remote door ringers, how about han d - h e l d
radios? A-ha, those b abies will work from up to 4km away!!! they are not very expensive either. In order for "call" function to
work it would have to jum p the voltage quite a bit and if that is not powerful enou gh you could always set up another more
powerful blowbox that would be triggered by the radio
GibboNet June 16th, 2003, 01:34 AM

The problem with these, (as with the door ringer, but much more so) is that so many people use them , and the frequencies
close to them , that vhances are som eone will u se theirs in range of your experiment, possibly while you're setting it up, which
m eans it goes off prematurely on their signal.
You may end up with it going off while you're holding it or som ething, which is really not good.

I was in the harware store yesterday and thought I might drop in and check these things out. I fou nd one with 100m r a n g e a n d
8 differnt ring tones (surely onbe of them would be usefull) but one of these would set m e b a c k m $ 1 1 0 : e e k : f u c k t h a t . T h e r e
w a s 2 5 m o n e s f o r a b o u t $ 2 5 a n d 5 0 m o n e s f o r a b o u t $ 5 0 . I t s e e m s you pay a dollar per m of range. But I think I m a y
adventually invest in a 100m o n e a s 1 0 0 m is a fair distance. If you are in no hurry these would be good, no cords to carry or
anything messy like that. And 100m is good enough for a 10kg ANFO as demonstrated by spydam onkee :D

Is the value of australian dollar similar to am erican dollar? $100 for 100m range!!! That's rediculous I can buy a pair with 10 +
channels with 3km range (in open field) for $25 (am er. dollars). I wasn't aware of interference between devices, i live in the
very small to wn and I never had this problem , but I suppose this would be a m ajor problem if you were in the populated are a.
Actually, if you W ERE in the populated area than law enforcem ent will get you before prem ature ignitioin will :rolleyes: .

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Am m onium Nitrate Q u e s t i o n
Log in
View Full Version : Ammonium Nitrate Question
subsonic June 12th, 2003, 08:10 PM

I h a v e a q u e stion - If I have som e 33% Am m onium Nitrate, probably a bit sensibilized with diesel or pertoleum - could I set it
off using a Prim er or Heart-Load m ade of ordin ary Nitro Celluose Gun powder? I could use any com mon Grain, preferably one
that isn't dead-pressed easily. But would it be strong/fast enoug h?
Kriegsminister June 13th, 2003, 03:35 AM

W ell, what exactly do you m ean by 33% AN??? Is it the NPK 33-0-0 fetilizer? Then your AN is pretty pure an d the 33% just
indicates the nitrogen content by weight. If it only has 3 3% AN content th an I wou ld say you have to purify it.
I don't think that simple gun powder det would set that off. You will need s o m ething stronger. About 100g APAN should do the
job pretty well...
By the way, it wasn't the best idea to o pen a new topic on such a basic question with such a low post counte r . I f y o u h a d d o n e a
search I am pretty su re you would have found what you were loo king for.

Make a search. You can detonate it with APAN for example, and detonate APAN with AP.

Sm o k e l e s s p owder co ntains nitroglycerin and therefore can be detonated. When confined it will sim ply burn but if yo u were to
set it off with a detonator it would be e quivalent in power to TNT. I've never heard of anyone doing it, but I suppose you cou ld
try to set off your AN that way or even m i x s o m e NC with your AN and the n try. Ho wever from your post I un derstand that you
are trying to get around m aking prime exp. and I don't think you can very well do that.

D e s m i k e s , n o t a l l s m o k e l e s s p o w d e r h as NG in it. Mine for exam ple is only single base = no NG. Although I can get DBSP and
TBSP. Hey I just figured out what DBSP's name means woa how slow am I.

Lowery did a side-by-side com parison of SBSP and DBSP initiated with detcord. Th e DBSP was m ore poowerful, but the SB
alm ostr certainly detonated to o.
Cricket June 25th, 2003, 07:18 AM

If you are trying to avoid mak ing any explosive while m a k i n g a h i g h e x p l o s i v e d e v i c e u s i n g A m m o nium Nitrate and
Nitrocellulose as the only chemicals, you will prolly have a hard time. I don't know how much NC you would need to m a k e i t g o
from delfagration to detonation via sim ple flam e ignition, but I bet it would be im practical without a HE detonator. So it soun ds
like you need a HE detonator. If you didn't wan t to use any chemistry or anything, you would probably be best off using
Mercury Fulm i n a t e e x t r a c t e d f r o m m a n y m any m uzzle loading caps/prim ers, which is extremely tedious, not particularly safe
unle s s w e l l e d u c a t e d a n d e x p e r i e n c e d , a n d m o s t l i k e l y s o m e w h a t e x p e n s i v e . Y o u 'de have to get a t least a couple gram s of it
a n d p r e f e r a b ly Alliant Bullseye or Alliant Red Dot (Alliant is AKA Hercules) sm o k e l e s s p o w d ers. But m ost im portantly, you need
to read here more. I seriously doubt it would work if you aren't somewhat experie nced or educated in this field. Either the AN
wouldn't be dry enough, or you would put on too m uch fuel, or you wouldn't have enough confinm ent or som ething is bound to
happen. Rea d read read.
gliper July 24th, 20 03, 03:0 8 PM

Even sulferless black powder will detonate AN.
knowledgehungry July 24th, 20 03, 07:2 2 PM

Have you ever done this yourself? If so then please tell us how, if not do not report something you overheard as truth, /
patronizing I doubt that it is p ossible to set off AN with BP./patronizing
Al Nobel July 24th, 20 03, 07:2 8 PM

"Eve n sulferless black powder will detonate AN."
Theoretically seen if you use several hundret kilos of Black Powder you can reach a deflagration to detonation transition. If you
souround your sm all hill of PB with several tons of AN you can reach detonation.Its pretty sim ple if you have all that stuff lying
around :D .
Tuatara July 24th, 20 03, 09:1 0 PM

T h a t r e m i n d e d m e o f a n a c c i d e n t t h a t h a p p e n e d i n G e r m any a while back...
O p p a u , G e r m any, Sept. 21, 1921. The biggest chem ical explosion in Germ an history occurred in a warehouse about 50 miles
south of Frankfurt when worke r s u s e d d y n a m ite to pry loose 400 0 t o n s o f c a k e d a m m oniu m nitrate fertilize r. The blast killed
5 6 1 p e o p l e a n d l e v e l l e d h o u s e s f o u r m iles awa y
Took me a while to find the ref - the net is full of disasters involving large piles of AN!
I t s e v e n d u m ber than trying to rem ove a whale carcass from a b each by using dynam ite.
W h a l e D e m o lition (http://perp.com /wh ale/) I'm sure m ost have seen this, but for those that haven't ...
Mr Cool July 25th, 20 03, 07:3 6 AM
BP might be able to get AN to detonate... som e w h e r e , s o m e o n e ( c a n ' t r e m e m ber who) de scribed how AN could be set off by
putting it in a metal tank, and then filling the voids with fuel/air mixture. Igniting the fuel/air m ixture was sufficient, with good
confinement, to detonate the AN.
Just replace the fuel/air with BP.
Imperial July 26th, 20 03, 07:0 9 AM

I believe that any AN needs to be sensitised before it can explode. For this, I suggest some sort o f oil (petrol works well) an d
s o m e sort of prim ary. For your prim ary, I would recom m e n d s o m ething really sensitive but still fairly powerful, like nitroglycerin
or AP. I have never tried AN as an explosive, though, so I wouldn't know for sure.
After doing a search, I found these:

http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=115&highlight=amm onium +nitrate
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2733&highlight=amm oniu m+nitrate
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2708&highlight=amm oniu m+nitrate
T h e y m a y g i v e y o u s o m e starting ideas :).
Anthony July 26th, 20 03, 12:2 3 PM

NG isn't a prim ary.
I believe the post was by rjche, and the AN was contained in a steel gas cylinder pressurised with oxygen and propane, burie d
several feet down and intiated with a g low plug.
Ah, found the thread:
http://roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=97

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Rock Blasting - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Rock Blasting - Archive File

Pyro
Frequent Poster
Posts: 104
From: Danbury,CT,U.S.A
posted 05-12-2001 04:28 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a problem, a few hundred pound problem. You see, there's a huge rock that I need to get rid of and I don't think a sledge hammer would do it. I was wondering if
anyone knew about how to get a large enough hole into the rock to put in a charge large enough to crack it.Also, any added info. on rock blasting would be appreciated.Thanks
alot.-Pyro
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From: England
posted 05-12-2001 04:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you've got a mains supply near by you could easily drill at leats a 1/2" hole in it which should break it. If not (and you don't have a very good battery drill) you'd probably
have to mud cap it, you'd need more explosives but effort required is much less
kingspaz
Frequent Poster
Posts: 347
From: UK
posted 05-12-2001 05:03 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
couldn't a shaped charge be used to crack a big hole in it? then another charge could be placed inside. if the rock is sandstone or something wouldn't astrolite soak in enabling
the rock itself to be detonated in a similar manor to when astrolite has been poured onto soil.
FadeToBlackened
Frequent Poster
Posts: 201
From: Hell
posted 05-12-2001 05:26 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally i wouldn't want to use astrolite (well, not on a rock anyway hehe) because of the hydrazine. I think i read something somewhere about NM with ammonium
hydroxide. Im not sure how this works, though.
ALENGOSVIG1
Moderator
Posts: 766
posted 05-12-2001 11:01 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, i think it would be best to use the "snake hole" method. That is when you dig a hole underneath the boulder.
For a 3 ft diameter rock, .75 lbs, for a 4ft diameter rock, use 2.00 lbs, for a 5ft diameter rock, use 3.00 lbs. For the larger boulders, if you were to mud cap you would need
twice as much explosives.
EP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 108
From: USA
Registered: APR 2001
posted 05-13-2001 12:16 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I have read (a blasting manual for agricultural purposes) it said you dont even need to drill holes if you dont have the equipment. It would make things easier, but
is not nessecary. Either dig a hole under it as ALENGOSVIG1 suggested, or use the method I read about for when you cant drill. Just place the explosive on the largest
centralized crack/indentation. This was written with dynamite in mind, so ANFO would not be adequate.
Pyro
Frequent Poster
Posts: 104
From: Danbury,CT,U.S.A
posted 05-13-2001 10:30 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the info. guys, I really appreciate it but can someone lay down a detailed description on what to do because all of your idea's sound good but were very
vague.Thanks again-Pyro
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From: England
posted 05-13-2001 11:42 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't the snake hole method intended to lift the rock out of the ground whole(ish)? With ANFO's low brisance it'd probbaly just locate the rock a few feet away
Tended Tripod August 21st, 2003, 02:22 AM

This idea may not be as fun, but my dad told me that he used to break large bolders by heating them with a bonfire around it, and then dousing it with cold water. The
temperature difference cracked the rock all over, and the rock could then be moved in pieces.
Sooooo, I was thinking you could use a huge amount of thermite on top of the rock, and then when its done burning, shoot it with a garden hose. If thats not available, get as
large a supersoaker as you can and empty a couple of gallons onto it.
This sounds kinda K3\/\/L|$|-| but it would be fun to watch the whole rock just fall apart.
DBSP August 21st, 2003, 05:28 AM

You're right the idea is kinda kewlish but it could be midified to be more effective. Heat the rock by burning a large fire around it then flush it with water, then just after it has
been chilled smack it with a kg of ANFO. The rock should scatter quite easily because of all the crack in the rock.
zaibatsu August 21st, 2003, 11:34 AM

Or use the hannibal method - water (or was it wine) is placed into the cracks of bolders, overnight the water freezes and expands, cracking the rock.
Sonny Jim August 21st, 2003, 02:14 PM

Try hammering wooden blocks into the rock, and allowing them to absorb water. They will expand and crack the rock in the process.
Anthony August 21st, 2003, 02:19 PM

Heating a large rock would take a large amount of thermite, it be much more efficient to simply build a fire around it as described. Even then it'd probab;ly take an hour or two
to heat up.
Thermite isn't some magical substance that is automatically ideal for any and all situations that require heat.
grammarless August 21st, 2003, 11:18 PM

There was a large rock under our cabin where my dad wanted to put a screen porch. He asked a neighbor, who is a retired logger, the neighbor said to drill a few holes and
drop in a half stick of dynamite. Sadly my dad didn't go for that one. :( So he bought an inch carbide bit for his hammer drill, and some shims to split the rock. But he only
managed to drill a one inch hole a few inches deep in an hour, almost burned out his drill. So, unless you have some sort of jack hammer, drilling a hole and filling it up with
explosives is out of the question.
jeffchem2000 August 22nd, 2003, 03:32 PM

if the hole required for the charge is bigger than the biggest drill bit you have. What I have done is to drill a hole in the middle and 4-6 holes around it. Then fill the surrounding
holes with det cord and blast all of them at the same time. The hole in the middle is left empty and when the cord is detonated a quite accurate circular hole is made. If this is
done 3 or 4 times in the same place, you will end up with quite a deep hole in which a very big charge could be placed.
User Name September 8th, 2003, 10:55 PM

I have a simalir problem. well...more of a challenge actually. i have a 4 foot diameter boulder that is out in the desert where i go shooting. i have tried several times about 2
years ago (i was far less experienced with explosives) to destroy this huge rock but failed. everytime i go shooting at this spot it laughs at me so i want to take it out.
a nice lil thing about this boulder is that theres a fox hole underneath it about 1 foot deep and 10 inches wide.
(i guess the fox didnt finish his new home)
how much AN/acetone do you think it would take? there is a highway about 3 miles away so i dont want to overdoit very much (i tend to do that soemtimes) :)
zaibatsu September 8th, 2003, 11:15 PM

4 feet diameter? Hmmm, that's a class D4 boulder, so just uprate the standard B6 charge by about two times.
User Name September 9th, 2003, 12:26 AM

class D4? ok i think ill just use a 1gallon paint can full of my AN/acetone 95:5 and use a 20gram AP det.
will that work? the rock is pretty hard stone

It would be better if you made yourself a ANWAX comp insted as the sensitivity of a 95-5 AN to acetone hasn't been studied yet. I've tried a AN-acetone charge once but I am
very unshure wether is was a complete det, I used a shotshell of APAN as det that time.
Point is if you don't want to risk an incomplete det, try something that has been tested. An ANWAX comp with a 20g AP det is shure to work.
Desmikes September 9th, 2003, 10:48 PM

there was a patent about activated AN and the guy was demolishing 2cubic yards of limestone with I think 1kg ANNM or/and ANNM + xylene by simply placing the charge on
top (if I remember correctly). I don't know if your rock is harder or not but given the fact that your bolder is smaller, you might wanna try 1kg charge if you don't wanna
"overdoit"
User Name September 9th, 2003, 11:30 PM

ok thanks guys 1kg it is. but i havent a clue as to where to get nitro-methane and i dont know much about ANWAX.

Search for gods sake, I've told you before, H2O2 has been discussed to death and so has NM. It's all here on this board.
If you would have bothered to search you would have found the ANWAX thread and read it, along with all the other posts on ANWAX. You would definately be able to
understand and use ANWAX if you have read what has been writen on the subject. I myself have studied ANWAX quite thoroughly and others has replicated my attempts with
success.
Search and you WILL most likely find what you are looking for, going back 30 days isn't enaugh since there are posts archived from more than TWO years meaning that it has
most likely been discussed in the past and archived for you to find it.
zaibatsu September 10th, 2003, 11:00 AM

ok thanks guys 1kg it is. but i havent a clue as to where to get nitro-methane and i dont know much about ANWAX.
Username, let me remind you of another post:

yes i have read the rules and im sorry. i didnt do a search i only looked at the threads from the last 30 days. it wont happend again.
You're outta here!
Ithacacian October 16th, 2003, 06:26 PM

I apologize for not replying to any particular previous statement, however this seemed to be the appropriate place to put information regarding a rock blast at a coal mine I
recently witnessed. Maybe this information is of no use, but I have used so much of the forum, why the hell not.
To strip mine, they:
Drill holes pneumatically ranging from approximately 9 to 11 inches some 60 feet deep. The holes are arranged between 30 and 35 feet apart, and are fired by a shock induced
hollow 500 millisecond fuse which was I think 1000 m long with PETN inside, in such a way that the fuse always keeps ahead of the blast. The primary was PETN and the
booster was a mix of PETN, nitroglycerine, and other recycled military explosives. There was less than a kg of booster per hole, placed centrally in the columns, each of which
contained in the neighborhood of 500 kg of ANFO. The ANFO was ammonium nitrate mixed with 6% diesel, which he cited as an oxidizer and not sensitizer, and an emulsifier
similar to petroleum jelly in the range of 5 to 50%, with 30% being standard and 40% completely waterproof, the primary reason for using it, as he said it didn't really add
much power. I was 1000m away when the blast went off, some 30 holes with 500 kg of ANFO each. The sound was not as impressive as some relatively similar charges I have
set off slightly below ground of some 1/50000th the power at approximately 10 m. However, the shockwave was very noticeable under my feet, and the blast loosened
hundreds of metric tons of rock. The results were impressive. This took place in southern Indiana, USA. All of this information is readily available on the site, but I thought it
might be useful to know that that is how the professionals do it as well.
Ithacacian February 20th, 2004, 10:40 PM

Was reading again, knew something was wrong: meant to say 5000 kg, actually probably closer to 8000

A month ago, I was in some near mine. Its nice place for experiments with rock blasting, because nobody hears the terrible noise ;) I like minerals and Iam sad when it
grews from the rock and I cant get it.... :mad:
My way: 20g of HE as a SC with hemispherical!!! liner (20mm diameter) can make 10cm penetration to the best concrete or rock.
When it doesnt break it completely, it makes a hole for next 5-10g of HE (I think blasting gelatine with Al is good for its high energy and low crit. diameter).
This method is quite cheap - you need only 30g of HE and two detonators...
I want to make a few tests, so I hope it will works.
atr February 24th, 2004, 10:03 PM

Examine the boulder closely . In most you'll find a hairline crack somewhere . That would be the best place to drill . If there is no crack check the dimmensions and drill half
way into the narrowest part . Try to drill down and in on a 45 degree angle . Any explosive equal to a 1/4 stick of 30% ditching dynamite will break it provided that the charge
is centered and your drill hole is stemmed with sand , clay or mud . If it is a large boulder you'll have to repeat the process in sequentially smaller pieces . A 1/4 stick will break
a 10 foot diameter granite boulder in half . If you overload it you'll get flyrock and that can be dangerous . You could pour black powder through a tube into the hole and
electrically initiate it but it must be tightly stemmed . Mudcapping is another technique that will work but requires a lot of explosives depending upon the size of the boulder .
Pile your explosives on top and place a 50 pound bag of sand on top of the explosives . About 10% of the force will go down and 90% will go up so mudcapping is very
inefficient and with the ammount of explosives required all of your neighbours will see it , hear it and feel it . Drilling or digging a hole underneath the boulder to place the
charge isn't much more efficient than mudcapping with the added problem that if you load too heavy you'll have rock and earth flying everywhere .

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > pull igniters - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : pull igniters - Archive File

A-BOMB
Frequent Poster
Posts: 137
From: wouldn't you like to know
posted 06-01-2001 05:46 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was reading this old army demolition pamphlet and it talks about these pull igniters for crimping on to fuses, so I was wondering what was in them that when you pull the
handle a flame comes out and lights the fuse. And then how could I make my own.
------------------
live by the bomb
die by the bomb
EP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 108
From: USA
posted 06-01-2001 06:27 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can order kits to make pull igniters here http://www.firefox-fx.com/kits.htm
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From: England
posted 06-01-2001 07:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You could probably make them from an empty pen tube with a party popper charge threaded through and a small charge of black powder to provide some heat.
ftsman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 55
From: melb
posted 06-01-2001 11:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
not to flame but not BP. use crushed match. if u did it wrong the popper would act like a primer catching all the BP at once . the there goes your hand. id just buy them.
A-BOMB
Frequent Poster
Posts: 137
posted 06-01-2001 11:39 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any ideas on how to make the forula for the ignition tubes at how with only easly gotten chemicals nothing to I need to buy like potassium chlorate, phlosphours, and that like?
------------------
live by the bomb
die by the bomb
JB
New Member
Posts: 27
From: UK
posted 06-02-2001 09:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have made a few pull pin ignitors for fuses using a party popper with a tiny amound of BP at the end of a chlorate-soaked hemp rope fuse within the party popper. This
works quite well.
Also another pull pin idea i made was an electronic idea (in no way do i mean to sound 'kewl' with this). Very simply, a circuit containing a battery, solar ignitor and two
contacts on a clothes peg seperated my a piece of plastic. the solar ignitor was attached firmly to the end of a fuse leading to a small exploding device. when the battery was
attached and the piece of plastic pulled from between the contacts the fuse was lit.
The match head and fuse lit by the pulling of sandpaper pin is probably the best idea though.
A plastic / metal pen tube that is slighty larger than than the fuse diameter should be used, and the fuse should ignite the main charge from the centre, therefor pushing the
tube down into the middle of this.
Heavy Recoil
Frequent Poster
Posts: 55
From: nope, try again
Registered: MAY 2001
posted 06-02-2001 01:15 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whats wrong with the one made with a machbook and matches. NBK2000's Grenade file can describe them better than I can and with pictures.
[This message has been edited by Heavy Recoil (edited June 02, 2001).]
A-BOMB
Frequent Poster
Posts: 137
posted 06-03-2001 06:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never had one of those match book igniters work for me, but the sand paper and match in a pen tube one sound good thanx. and I've found a site that sells the fuse
assemblys from handgrenades I would by some if they weren't sold-out. Any more ideas guys or gals ?
------------------
live by the bomb
die by the bomb
ftsman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 55
From: melb
posted 06-03-2001 10:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the match thing works great 4 me. the only thing i can think of is you didnt tape the cover tight enough dont be afraid to put a little force into the procedure. force the cover to
press on the matches so hard that it takes effort to pull the strip out.
sealsix6
Frequent Poster
Posts: 154
From: NYC,NYC,USA
posted 06-03-2001 11:40 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Im working on a design but it has some small flawas and needs testing but first I need some visco when it is done and if it works I will put plans up for it. I can post plans and
name the flaws and mabey you guys can work them out and test it (I cant get visco.)
wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 236
From: EU
posted 06-04-2001 07:35 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is german but with pics. The kiddie firework contains some sensible stuff, if you put it in a straw with some *meal powder* and attach the fuse you have your pull igniter.
Very easy to build!
http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/docbombe/anleitung/anleitung.htm#Anreiznder
------------------
kangaroooo.cjb.net
Agent Blak
Frequent Poster
Posts: 766
From: Sk. Canada
posted 06-04-2001 10:24 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That site right there is modvation to learn german.
I used a method similar to NBK2000 pull igniter ecept I use as friction system(striker).
------------------
A wise man once said:
"...There Will Be No
Stand Off At High Noon
... Shoot'em In The Back
And, Shoot'em In The Dark"
ftsman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 55
From: melb
posted 06-04-2001 03:34 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i agree with agent black. the pics r exteamly interesting. but some of the pics r hard to put together in my head. if some one knows a similar if not identical page in english i
would think highly it.
kingspaz
Frequent Poster
Posts: 347
From: UK
posted 06-04-2001 05:33 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
does anybody know of any websites that can teach you german? it would be a good resource for people who can't speak it. i know a little german. i didn't find it hard to learn
because its very logical.
Mexican Pizza
New Member
Posts: 23
From:
posted 06-04-2001 05:50 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in response to wantsomfet's posted website... there is a website that can translate webpages to english. heres the link:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/translate.dyn i think that this will be of use to everyone that doesn't know german.
[This message has been edited by Mexican Pizza (edited June 04, 2001).]
MacCleod
Frequent Poster
Posts: 217
From:
posted 06-05-2001 12:19 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The kit from Firefox works well,but you can use a ball-point pen body and matches for a home-made version.Get some fine wire,cut it into 4 in. sections,crush about 1/8th.
inch of the ends with a pair of needle-nose plyers (to help the sriker comp. stay on).
Crush up some match head powder.Next,scrape the striker composition off of several packs of matches (large boxes of wood matches have alot on them).Mix the comp. with
just enough mucilage to make a sticky slurry,dab onto the crushed ends of the wires,allow to dry completely.
Cut the bottom 1-1/4 inch off of the lower pen body (this is your fuse barrel).
Insert the wires down into the barrel half-way (with the striker end facing the larger,open end of the tube).Then mix the match head powder with mucilage,dab this down into
the tip of each tube,all around the pull wire.When you're ready to use them,carefully pull the wire down into the body until about 1/4 in. from the tip/match comp..Then glue
your fuse down into the open end of the barrel and pull the wire.
You can use crushed igniter tip from a road flare in place of the match heads (flares are also a good source of striker comp.!)And it doesn't hurt to attach a key ring to the pull-
wire,to make it easier to pull through.
ftsman-a rubber band in place of tape works great on nbk's pull-igniters.
NZ_pyro November 14th, 2004, 06:20 AM

In my search for an easy to use pull pin igniter this is what I came up with.
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=511&stc=1
These are made from entirely over the counter materials so they should be fairly easy to make, you need nothing more than a hacksaw, power drill and a soldering iron.
Complete list of materials:

Length of brass pipe that is 80mm long, 7mm inside diameter.
Length of brass pipe that is 45mm long and 6mm inside diameter.
Length of brass pipe that is 55mm long and 3mm inside diameter.
Paper clip.
Key ring.
Solder.
Piece of metal 10mm long and 5mm in diameter. (striker)
Spring taken from a standard bic pen.
Visco fuse.
Heatshrink tubing.
Cap gun cap.
Tools:
Power drill and 1.5mm diameter drill bit.
Hacksaw.
Soldering iron.
Hot air gun.
Assembly:
(most people can probably work this out for themselves but I will include it anyway)
Plug one end of the 80mm long, 7mm wide brass pipe with a plug of solder then drill a 1.5mm diameter hole through both sides of the pipe 30mm from the solder plug in the
top. Place the 55mm long, 3mm wide brass pipe inside the 45mm long 6mm wide brass pipe so that 5mm of the 3mm wide pipe protrudes 5mm from each end of the 45mm
pipe and solder it in place.
Place a dent in the 45mm long pipe 20mm from one end. The purpose of this dent is to deform the pipe slightly so that when it is pushed inside the 7mm wide tube it sticks in
place with 20mm of pipe sticking out one end.
Solder the spring from the bic pen to one end of the 10mm long 5mm wide chunk of metal. Place this striker assembly spring end first into the end of the 7mm wide tube.
Open out the paper clip and cut off a piece about 30mm long. Solder this to one side of the key ring. This is the pull pin.
Find something like a knitting needle and use it to shove the striker up the 7mm wide tube until it is behind the 1.5mm hole. Insert the pull pin through this hole to secure the
striker in place. Place a cap gun cap over the protruding 3mm diameter pipe that is furthest from the dent in the outside of the pipe.
Cut a length of Visco fuse that is about 70mm long. Insert it into the opposite end of the 3mm pipe until it is touching the inside of the cap gun cap.
Cut a piece of Heatshrink tube about 10mm long and slip it over the exposed Visco fuse. Shrink it with the hot air gun. Note, use the hot air gun on the lowest possible setting.
Insert the completed fuse assembly 30mm into the open end of the 7mm diameter tube. It should hold itself in place if the dent in the 6mm tube was positioned correctly.
To use this thing, simply pull the pin. The striker will hit the cap and light the Visco fuse. There should be approximately a seven second delay from when the pin is first pulled
to when the fuse burns to the open end of the fuse assembly however this will vary depending on the burn rate of Visco fuse used.
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=512&stc=1
ignitor parts.jpg

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > shotgun shell prim er - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : shotgun shell primer - Archive File

Mexican Pizza
New Mem ber
Posts: 23
From :
posted 06-20-2001 11:08 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before I start, I just want to say I did m utiple searches and still have not come up with the inform a t i o n t h a t I n e e d e d .
Ok, so what I need to know is 1)What are shotgun shell prim ers m a d e o f ? 2 ) W hat types of explosives can it set off (i.e. flash
powder, AP, sm okeless?) 3)How sensitive are they? (will they go off if accelerated quickly by means of a pn e u m a t i c p o t a t o
gun) and 4)What things have you used these nifty little devices for?
Thanks
[This message has been edited by Mexican Pizza (edited June 20, 2001).]
ANTI-SYSTEM
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 77
From : FL. USA
Registered: JUN 2001
posted 06-21-2001 01:40 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i belive they are MF. will not go off in the launching from a p n u n m atic or com bustion cannon.i made rather effective contact
gernades by drilling a larger h ole in a used CO2 cartridge the sa m e s i z e a s t h e p r i m er.fill the cartridge with explosive of
c h o i s e . a d d s t r e a m e r s t o o p p o s i t e e n d of cartridge (opposite of prim er). use comm o n s e n ce on this device. it truely will help. it
can be thrown or as i did shoo t it out o f a potato gun. & once again com m o n s e n c e ! !
Mekap
New Mem ber
Posts: 37
From : Austra lia
posted 06-21-2001 01:51 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I m aybe wrong but, I always thought that the m ustard(orange/yellow)colored powder rem oved from primers was Lead
Styp h n a t e . I h a v e r e m o v e d p r i m ers from shotg uns and high powered rifles, both had the sam e m ustard colored powder.
W hatever the powder is, it is shock, flame and spark se nsitive. It is a prim ary explosive which m e a n s y o u c a n u s e t h a t t o
d e t o n a t e o t h er explosives, no t the oth er way around.
T h e b e s t , b u t m o s t u n s a f e t h i n g t o d o i s r e m ove the powder, an d m a k e b l a s t i n g c a p s !
SATANIC
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 237
From : austra lia
posted 06-21-2001 02:32 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe yes, it is lead styphanate, the older (and much more d angerous (sensitive)) primers contain mercury fulminate. the
m ore modern ones with LS are considerably safer, but i still would not try to take the powder out of them. Try and buy them in
boxes for reloading rifle / shotgun cartriges, and use them for ignition devices, or throw them or fire them from a s h a n g h a i /
slingshot. Ap parently they can also be fired from s o m e airguns but i have not trie d this.
Mekap
New Mem ber
Posts: 37
From : Austra lia
posted 06-21-2001 04:33 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have extracted the powder from prim ers a fair few times without a hitch, but you never know with primary explosives. I have
never tried this method but re a d t h a t y o u c a n s o a k t h e p r i m e r s i n a s o l v e n t . T h e s o l v e n t b r e a k s d o w n t h e a d h e s i v e , a n d
m a k e s d i s m antiling much easier, and safier.
W hat do you think?
Acetone m a y b e m ore favorable, as it breaks down most adhesives, and would be easy to reclaim your LS?
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 06-21-2001 09:45 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANTI-SYSTEM talks about usin g comm o n s e n s e , after saying tha t he fires sensitive high explosives out of a hom e - m a d e
cannon!
That's funny!
Mexican Pizza
New Mem ber
Posts: 23
From :
posted 06-21-2001 02:23 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wanted to know wha t is the safest and easiest way to get into the powder after soaking it in a solvent. I will soak it in
acetone. it looks like the button can be pried off but I thought I'd ask before wasting them or going deaf.
ANTI-SYSTEM
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 77
From : FL. USA
posted 06-21-2001 03:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, ok the only high explosive was in the prim er and i dont think the jolt from shooting it would set it off in fact i know
because iv done it. the are very effective thoug h!
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2306
From : England
posted 06-21-2001 04:29 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried prying the button/cup/doodad o ff a spent prim e r a n d n e a rly broke the knife blade. I dunno if having being h it by a the
g u n h a m m er jamm ed it on, but it wouldn't budge.
Mekap
New Mem ber
Posts: 37
From : Austra lia
posted 06-21-2001 07:35 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pim ers have and outer casing then they have whats called an anvil inside that, if solvent is used to soften up the glue. The cap
would be rem oved revealing a n anvil, LS and som e wadding(couple of sm all pieces of pap er). Needle nose pliers will rem o v e
the anvil, then a m atch stick will be perfect to scrape the wadding and LS out. Now I know that not only adhesive will be holding
prim ers together, as they are pressed together on com pletion.
I have only ever suce ssfully removed powder with pliers, cutting 1m m from t h e e n d o f p r i m e r s q a u s h i n g b a c k i n t o s h a p e . T h e n
using a match stick to scrape as much as I could out. So if this solvent m ethod works, tell us how it goes, im very interested in
this one.
m adog
New Mem ber
Posts: 23
From : U SA
posted 06-21-2001 10:41 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
t h e r e i s i n f o o n e x t r a c i n g e x p l o s i n e s f r o m p r i m e r s i n M a k e s h i f t A r s e n a l . h e s a y s t o s o a k t h e m in a cetone then rem o v e t h e
anvil with a pin, tweezers or needle nose pliers. then scrape out the lead styphnate and le t it dry. he says tha he se e s n o s a fe
way to rem o v e t h e e x p l o s i v e f r o m shotshell prim ers. he also says that precussion caps for m uzzle loaders contain mercury
fulm inate, are bigger and have no anvil
------------------
" T r u e f r e e d o m is not without anarchy"
SawedOff8gaugeman
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 52
From : Finland
posted 06-23-2001 04:50 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mexican Pizza:
2)What types of explosives can it set off (i.e. flash powder, AP, sm o k e l e s s ? )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can quickly partially answer question 2: Is can set off sm okeless. That's what it's used for!!!
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 06-24-2001 11:39 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANTI-SYSTEM: I know it'd be pretty safe really, but I'm sure you get m y point! It just sounded kinda funny.
DBSP
New Mem ber
Posts: 28
From : swe
posted 06-26-2001 08:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few days ago I took the explosive out of an
shotshell prim er. I can't tell if it is very safe but it works.
I s o a k e d i t i n a c e t o n e a n d s a w e d o f t h e top of the primer and removed the anvil. Then it was just to rem o v e t h e e x plosive. My
experiences of primers is that they are quite stable and that it takes quite a lot o f force to "accidently" detonate them. As lo n g
as you are carefully you should be able to rem o v e t h e e x p l o s i v e quite safely.
bubbling_beaker July 21st, 2003, 09:12 AM

hello, this post might be a bit too late but do sm all rim fire 22. shells have lead styphnate in them too? i re m e m ber when i
look ed in one, there was alot of slighly green sparkly green powder in it.
thanx.
irish July 22nd, 2003, 05:32 AM

Yes they do.
I've posted this link here before, but anyway here it is again
http://www.olin.com .a u/MSDS/htm /MSDSs.htm
There is m ostly all the info on winchester am m o y o u m a y n e e d i n t h o s e M S D S , m ost brands will be very m uch the sam e
m aterial.
The green powder will be propellant (m ostly nitrocellulose) the prim er com pound is in the base of the case around the rim .
EP October 14th , 2 0 0 3 , 1 1 : 4 6 P M
H a s a n y o n e e v e r c o n s i d e r e d r e m oving the LS from prim ers with the solvent method and then using it to m a k e d e t o n a t o r s ? I t
s h o u l d b e s a fer than ones m ade with AP, any com m e n t s / i d e a s ?
xyz October 24th , 2003, 07:14 AM

EP, I have re a d a p d f a b o u t i m p r o v i s e d d e t o n a t o r s ( I t w a s s o m e t h i n g o f R a g n a r B e n s o n ' s I I R C ) where they discussed this, you
h a v e t o o p e n b e t w e e n 5 a n d 2 5 p r i m e r s d e p e n d i n g o n t h e t y p e . I n t h e p df, large pistol prim ers were used.
You would want large primers (large pistol size, large rifle size, or .50BMG size) so that you didn't have to open up lots of
them.
I wonder what the difference in com p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n s t a n d a r d a n d m a g n u m p r i m e r s i s , m a g n u m primers are suppo s e d t o

produce a larger and hotter flam e for igniting large am ounts of powder or igniting powder that is difficult to ignite.
McGyver October 28th , 2003, 01:17 AM

One day I decided to take apart a 7.62 round. After rem oving the sm okless powder, I cou ldn't get the prim er off so I d e c i d e d
to put it in a vise and try to detonate it with a nail and hamm er... good thing it didnt go off after a couple of tries. The only
way the primer cam e off was when i cut it in half with a hacksaw and even then the explosive didnt come out when I picked it
with a nail. So m y point is, it is probably easier to m a k e a n A P d et then hassle with alot of cartridges.
metal dragon Novem ber 10th, 2003, 07:19 AM

Hello
I h e ard these prim e r s d e t o n a te quite violently when s a y 1 0 o r s o a r e u s e d . S W I M has re cently prepared ANW A X a n d d o e s n t
want to take the risk of using un-stable organic peroxides for the detona tor. The primers are easily bought from a g u n s h o p
and say twenty of tho se prim ers packe d into straw with KNO3/sugar on to p for the d e l a y f u s e . W o u l d t h i s b e u s e f u l t o d e t o n a t e
ANW A X ? O r m a y b e e v e n a d d a b i t o f s m okeless powder the ANW AX to give a higher rise to detonation?
Any com m e n ts are welcom e.
DBSP Novem ber 10th, 2003, 08:27 AM

NO fucking way.
Lead styphnate is too weak to be used for detonating ANW AX unless you gather about 5g of it, at least. Too m u c h h a s s l e ,
better yo use organic pe4roxids instead then.
T h e p r i m e r s d e t o n a t e s m y sim ly heating them , And they detona te by shocking th e m , s m akc one with a ham m e r a n d they'll go
off.
I don't really know how you ca n a b u s e o n e l i k e d e s c r i b e d without them going off. It's rather easy to get the lead styphnate out
of the prim ers actually, just get the anvil out of the cap anbd wet them with acetone and scrape oit out. DON'T scrape it out
without wetting it, they are very friction sensitive and will m ost likely go off.
NO putting a few caps in a straw with som e KNO 3/sugar will not work, first of all the prim e r s w o n t g o o f f a t t h e s a m e t i m e a n d
even if they did they are far to weak to detonate som ething like ANW AX
metal dragon D e c e m ber 10th, 2003, 11:37 PM

I t o h a v e s e e n t h e PDF by Ra gnar Benson it is called if I am co rrect R a g n a r s gu ide to im p r o v i s e d blasting caps o r s o m ethin g
a l o n g those lines. It states that if the prim ers are m oistened with water they can be pressed with m o r e t h a n 2 5 k i l o s o f
pressure. W hy bother extracting primers when you can purchase them rather cheaply at th e g u n s t o r e f o r p u r p o s e s o f
reloading? I would rather press these prim ers in to a casing then AP. These would also have a long shelf life, again better than
the organic peroxide. SW IM currently has 130 large rifle prim e r s t h a t m a k e q u i t e a b a n g w h e n 5 a r e p r e s s e d i n t o a n o l d T V
antenna.
xyz D e c e m ber 11th, 2003, 05:03 AM

Actually I would feel a lot safe r pressin g AP than prim er comp... For example, AP can be p ressed while dry, lead styphnate has
to be moist in order to be safely pressed. It is also m uch m ore sensitive to shock or friction than AP is.
Lead styphnate from primers is also le ss powerful. Look at "Imp rovised Arsenal" for proof of this, Lowry did a test where a load
o f e m pty rifle casings were filled with various explosives, the 5 Lead Styp hnate ca s e s l o o k e d l i k e m etal popcorn afterwards, the
5 AP cases all blew to tiny fragments a few m m in size.
There would be the advantage of a longer shelf life though.
Spanrice4U D e c e m ber 18th, 2003, 08:14 PM

I was just wondering... How many shotgun shells would I have to em p t y t o f i l l a 2 0 o u n c e s o d a / p o p / s o d a - p o p / c o l a b o t t l e ?
haven't tried yet, but i want to know if i would n eed one box or two, or three (25 shells a box) I already have a plan for rem o t e
detonation that will work. I have been planing this for a while and next m onth I'm h e a d e d to m y brother's cabin, wh ere I am
goin g to the blow the fuck out of som ething...
grendel23 D e c e m ber 22nd, 2003, 02:22 AM

If you are talking about filling a soda bottle with smoke less powder from shotgun shells, then you are somewhat off topic, and
on the hairy edge of "Kewl".
If you are talking about filling a soda bottle with prim ing com p o u n d f r o m shotshe ll prim ers, you are a fool.
If prim ing com p o u n d c a n b e s a f e l y r e m o v e d f r o m prim e r s , ( I h a v e s o m e d o u b t s ) , t h e n t h e o n l y s a n e u s e i s a s a p r i m ary for
u s e i n s m all quantities in a firing train.
irish D e c e m ber 22nd, 2003, 02:38 AM

Spanrice4U, I hate to say it but that was a som ewhat stupid question, bu t to answer it anyway you will need a lot m o r e t h a n
t h r e e b o x e s o f e v e n t h e m ost powerfull 10 gauge shells you can get and probably a slab (250) of norm a l 1 2 g a u g e . Y o u a r e a
lot better off if you buy a tin of powder for reloading (get the fast stuff for light loads).
Also a pop bottle full of smokeless is not going to do a lot unless you get it confined very well.
PhoeniX_KEA D e c e m ber 27th, 2003, 12:08 AM

I h a v e s e e n t h e p r i m e r s h e l l ( a s m all form e d p o c k e t ) p o p p e d o u t o f a s h o t g u n n o . 2 0 9 p r i m er by pinching the whole prim er in
a ve se to extrude the prim er pocket. The anvil was easily rem o v e d b y u s i n g a s m all needle nose plyer or tweezer. Then the LS
was scrapped from the pocket into a receptacle. I observed this beeing d one on 100 prim ers without any going off.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Program for electronic detonation. - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Program for electronic detonation. - Archive File

Igenx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 80
From: No Fucking Way
posted 05-18-2001 07:35 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been using a nice little program called AutoMate v4 for ending my need to do repetitive tasks (like changing one number out of a sequence and saving the porn that loads
) and I noticed a nice little feature that would be quite nice for a detonator timer.
One can set an automation sequence to run at any given time, down to the second. It also has a (for our purposes) indefinite time length. (When I hit February of 2011 I
stopped looking...)
It could be used to trigger a sound in an otherwise silent system to detonate a explosive outside the case, or (what I was thinking) put a charge inside the case wired to a non-
existent drive and then have the program read that drive, therefore sending an electronic pulse to the detonator.
The trial download is free, and the registration numbers aren't all that hard to find if you have some time.
Any comments are appreciated...
richl261
Frequent Poster
Posts: 134
From: uk
posted 05-19-2001 09:34 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
not a bad idea, ill need to find out about the program though, sounds interesting..
protical sun
New Member
Posts: 27
From: shove it
posted 05-21-2001 11:15 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
where might we aquire this program, it sounds interesting.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 05-22-2001 12:45 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download the trial version at: http://www.unisyn.com/AutoMate/trialversion.htm
Get the fix here: http://www.thecrack.net:8080/db/list.php3-let=a&page=20.htm
protical sun
New Member
Posts: 27
From: shove it
posted 05-22-2001 09:57 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10106-108-15287.html?bt.dl-10014.15406..10106-108-15287 is a much better site, no pesky registration.
------------------
'wat you got against me? is it my girl or is it da bentley?' -puffy
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
posted 05-22-2001 09:01 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fun with QBasic: Just open up QBasic (comes with Windows, or at least it used to) and type this in:
code:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dim Var as LongDim I, Cycle as IntegerVar = 10For I = 1 to Var Sleep 1Next IFor Cycle = 0 to 255 Output &H378, CycleNext Cycle
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This will delay (Var) seconds and then send 5 volts out of your COM1 serial port. Attach a relay and rocket igniter. Viola! Long term delay timer. Wastes a computer, one each.
goiterjoe
New Member
Posts: 10
From:
posted 06-28-2001 01:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when making timers for detonators, you need to make sure that the coding you use counts using a grey code so that the timer won't output a value of 0 prematurely. A lot of
computer programs don't count using a grey code.
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
posted 06-28-2001 07:46 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse my ignorance, but in all of my programming days I have never heard this term. What, exactly, is a "grey code"?
goiterjoe
New Member
Posts: 10
From:
posted 06-29-2001 02:52 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a grey code is a wraparound binary number sequence in which only one bit changes at a time. it's more of a hardware term than a software term, but I seriously doubt any of
you make detonators with computer software. the reason for a grey code is because 2 bits in a binary number can't change at the same time. for instance, when the binary
number 100000000 (512) cycles down to 0111111111 (511), it might hit the intermediate number 0000000000 when the first bit switches to off before the other bits switch to
on.(and 0000000000 could very well be your detonation sequence) to avoid this from happening, you can write grey codes that look like this:
0000
0001
0011
0010
0110
0111
0101
0100
1100
1101
1111
1110
1010
1011
1001
1000
this counting sequence lets one bit change at a time to increment up or down, so a false state becomes much less likely.
this glitch caused by timing can also occur when you use logic chips to activate a timer based on several different inputs. say for instance that you have four things that can
prevent your device from detonating, and one of the safeties is active. if a simultaneous switch from one safety to the other occurs, sometimes there will be a momentary drop
in the state as read by the logic gates and cause the safeties to be turned off. it's hard for me to explain this in words, maybe if I get some free time I'll draw up a picture of
what I'm talking aobut. it's simple binary logic, but it has a language all it's own.
Zero
Frequent Poster
Posts: 93
From: ...
posted 06-29-2001 02:07 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, that makes sense.
I'm fairly certain this won't be a problem with QBasic. The "Cycle" loop doesn't trigger until the "I" loop ends, thus there is no way for the signal to be sent to the serial port
before the I loop completely ends. Granted, it won't delay EXACTLY the amount of time you set it for, but it should be within a second or two.
You just have to make sure no one unplugs your computer. Or shuts down your timer so they can play Tetris...
~Zero the Inestima
PYRO500
Moderator
Posts: 1465
posted 06-30-2001 01:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what if you mess with the code on tetris 2 (the one with the bombs I think) "wow, my screen is crowded I need a bomb to clear it, ahh there's one... boom!"
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
posted 06-30-2001 01:49 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
"You just have to make sure no one unplugs your computer."
Heheh, yeah, like the cops!

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Forming Shaped Charge liners - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Forming Shaped Charge liners - Archive File

plan-x
New Member
Posts: 5
From:
posted 06-10-2001 11:43 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After numerous searches and lurking on this board for ages, i've been unable to find relevant info on te forming of copper cones for shaped charges. Everyone seems to agree
that Copper is the ultimate liner, if so, how does one form it to the neccessary shape? pressing it over a die? An interesting idea that i have had would be explosively forming it
into a plaster-of-paris female die, assuming that the copper was stretched successfully just above it's elastic limit but below its Ultimate tensile strength (which would result in
tearing).
Any ideas guys?
wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 236
From: EU
posted 06-10-2001 01:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mad a cone a few weeks ago. I used 0,5mm thick copper sheet (from conrad-electronics, europeans might know them). It's also available in 0,3mm 0,8mm 1,0mm 1,5mm
thickness. You can cut it with a strong scissor or take a dremel.
60 is the optimum angel for the cone.
To form a 60 cone you have to cut an exact half circle from the copper.
Then bent a little in the middle & fold in shape. Then soldering the cone would be optimal.
OK, i'm in a hurry. Formula One starts in a few minutes... I'd love to see some nice accidents!
I can make a pic of the cone tomorrow.

http://nettrash.com/users/altreal/grfx/sccone.gif
------------------
kangaroooo.cjb.net
[This message has been edited by wantsomfet (edited June 10, 2001).]
a_bab
Frequent Poster
Posts: 44
From: doesn't matter
posted 06-10-2001 04:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, Shumacher brother was the winner... (F1)
I don't think that soldering the copper cone will be a good option, but I never tried a shapped charge (but i'll do). The best is to deforme the cone somehow. What do you think
?Did you tried a shapped charge with your soldered cone ?
SMAG 12B/E5
Frequent Poster
Posts: 61
From:
posted 06-10-2001 07:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you need a large number of liners, the die-pressing method is probably the most suitable. You will need to fabricate a slightly complex die.
If you want only a small number of liners, spinning would be your best choice. You will need to turn a male form, fabricate a live blunt center and a few turning tools. Copper
responds well to this technique.
plan-x
New Member
Posts: 5
From:
posted 06-11-2001 07:15 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok, i tested explosively forming a liner with 0.8mm thick copper sheet, it worked well with a liner diameter of 8cm. I turned up a male blank from soft iron on a lathe, and used
this to make a female impression in plaster.I then placed the sheet over the female blank, and used a charge of AP Putty approx 20 grams to form the liner to the shape of the
die. All went well, the die shattered as expected, but the liner turned out almost perfectly, except for a minor irregularity where i had drilled a small hole through the cast die,
which i attached to a vacuum pump from a refrigerator to prevent the copper compressing the air underneath it in the die as it was stretched to shape. The thickness after the
test was approximately 0.4mm near the apex of the cone. I shall test the liner in a few days. I wish to coat it in wax and try a Sprengel type explosive, with 99% nitric Acid
and PolyStyrene. I will also coat the inside of the pipe i use to form the rest of the shaped charge.
Boomer March 11th, 2004, 02:51 PM

1. Liner
A uniform copper liner can be the biggest problem in the manufacture of a shaped charge. I took a plastic funnel with a 60 degree opening and filled it with epoxy. Putting a
10mm screw in the middle gave a way to clamp it in a vice after hardening. I cut a complete circle from 0.3mm copper sheet and made a cut towards the centre. If the cut
edge is taped vertically to the cone, the sheet can be rolled around twice to form a perfect cone. After wrapping it once, the touching surface was wetted with superglue and it
was wrapped the second time.
The advantage is that the thinner material is easier to roll up, and there is no solder joint of higher mass. The resulting cone is of perfectly equal thickness, and the non-
symmetry is less than a millimetre for a two-inch cone. The sandwich walls are not too common, but are sometimes also used in the Oil Industry (or they sinter metal powders,
but the jet does not travel so far). I made several one-inch and two-inch cones to conduct some testing.
2A. APAN
The obvious choice is AP, but the VoD is too low. I had 1/2 pound of old APAN to get rid of and tried it anyway, if only to compare it to better HEs. The charge was 2" dia in a
4" long PE tube with a 2g AP cap and 3" standoff (1.5 times dia is my standard for these tests). It went through 16mm of steel, leaving a 3mm hole. I did not expect this
penetration, so used no more plates. It would probably have gone even deeper. Nobody tell me APAN gives no jet!
2B. HDN
With a VoD of 6000 m/s HDN is a little better than APAN. I added 20% MHN to increase sensitivity and VoD. Using 20g mix in a 1" dia x 2" PE tube, it penetrated two 3mm
plates of steel and went 2mm into a third. But the jet had not fully formed, the holes were clogged with copper particles.
2C. Nitrostarch dynamite
I also had to get rid of a pound of 10-year old dynamite made of 65% AN and 32% nitro starch. Though containing 3% stabiliser it just slowly started to decompose, but 10
years storage stability is OK IMO. Copying the test in 2A it went through 3" of brick (forgot the steel plates at home).
2D. MHN/HDN/NG plastique
Repeating the test in 2B with 12g of HDN, plasticised with 6g MHN in 1.5ml NG, penetration was only 6mm. Maybe the cap was too weak, or the jet did not form properly this
time.
2E. MHN/NG/RDX plastique
To have an ultimate comparison, I'll use pure RDX instead of HDN for the last test. With 20% NG so it just fills the gaps, VoD should be very near the maximum value for MHN
of 8250 m/s at density 1.6 (Naoum/Kast/Stettbacher etc), or even near that of RDX of 8500 m/s. Repeating the test in 2B with xxg of this stuff, penetration was x mm, hole
dia was y mm (not done yet).

A standoff of 3x charge diameter is about optimum.
Cyclonite March 11th, 2004, 05:28 PM

That's really not the case, iv used very small SC with a 6" standoff and large SC with a 1.5" standoff. It depends on shape and angle more that anything.
zaibatsu March 12th, 2004, 12:54 AM

How about using electroforming to create a SC cone? Make a mold (hard bit I suppose), fill with wax, remove when hard, then paint (but leave the bottom) with something
like the conductive silver paint available at electronics suppliers. Set it up for the electroplating of copper, when it's at the required thickness heat to melt the wax from the
inside. With a mold, you could crank them out pretty quickly. Just a thought...
Boomer March 12th, 2004, 04:57 AM

Yes Cyclonite, you will know from your job! The wider the liner angle, the longer (= further away from the charge) it takes for the jet to form. An EFP could be called the
extreme, with an only slightly curved ?liner? like a saucer. Of course it is no longer a jet in that case.
I?ll try to attach images of my liners and the tool to make them. For the scale, the small cone is 1? and the big one 2? diameter. The PE pipe adapters are ideal casings, you
need less HE as they are smaller at the top
Aren?t they nice? :D
---------------------------
Please reduce the size of the attached images by applying stronger compression.
Rhadon
Sorry, this was the first time I ever worked with pics on a computer.
Better now?
---------------------------
Fine!

As I cannot edit the last post, I am putting the results here. The most surprising thing is that the above liners worked well even with APANFO (1:1 of ANFO-94/6 + APAN-70/
30)! Everybody insists that AP is too slow for SCs. Well, APAN is slower and ANFO even more so. Why did it work?
The target was 18mm stell, 12mm-plate below + 2x 3mm-plates on top. The top one got lost, the photos show the lower two. It would have penetrated deeper, but I did not
expect this so used too little steel.
The names are self-explaining:
nbk2000 March 18th, 2004, 02:15 AM

Nightstalker was correct about the 3x standoff being about optimum, but he was assuming that most people would be using the typical cone of 40°~60° angle, which
is what most people here would likely be using.
Using 160° (EFP) gives 20x+ standoff, while 0° liners (tubes) requires zero standoff.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > The nature of Explosively Form ed/
Forg ed Projectiles
Log in
View Full Version : The nature of Explosively Formed/Forged Projectiles
Observer June 19th, 2003, 02:24 PM

Clear

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > boosters - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : boosters - Archive File

bom bman
New Mem ber
Posts: 25
From : u.s.
posted 06-14-2001 08:55 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was wondering what the difference is between seism ic boosters and primary boosters. I tried look ing it up on the web. But all
I got was a bunch of com panys selling boosters.
wantsomfet
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 236
From : EU
posted 06-14-2001 10:46 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did a quick search too. Seem s t h e y a r e u s e d i n d e e p h o l e b l a s t i n g . T h e y a r e d e signed to withstand greater pressures than
normal boosters & ha ve greater brisance.
------------------
kangaroooo.cjb.net
Mr C ool
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 991
posted 06-16-2001 09:56 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't quote m e on th is, but aren't seismic boosters the charges that seismologists use to study rock forma tions underground,
by d etonating them just below the surface and studying the reflections of the blast? If so then they're just charges of HE with a
high VoD, to result in a sharp wave rather than a "softer" one as produce d by things like ANFO with low VoD's.
Just a thought.
kinetic July 18th, 20 03, 10:1 6 PM

I read that at great pressures many explosives (with the exception of Astrolite) will deadpress. The boosters m a y b e h i g h
explosive that will not deapress as easily as the main charge as to help initiate an explosive deep underground but i dunno-
just a thought.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > blasting cap numbers - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : blasting cap numbers - Archive File

Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 196
From:
posted March 09, 2001 09:02 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before anyone gets started; I did do a search, both here and on the net.
Has anyone got a list of the base and primary charges ( type and amount ) in caps corresponding to their number?
As I stated in the opening, I tried to find it on the net, but any search-words I can think of give thousands of matches, or none at all. And on this forum searching for "cap" will
not narrow the search down very much.
DarkAngel
Frequent Poster
Posts: 591
From: ?
posted March 09, 2001 03:06 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey good question i wanna know that also.
------------------
--==DarkAngel==--
Go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com Alot off Bombs/Explosives and Homemade Weapons!!,,,Plus a <<Forum>>!!!
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 196
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If nobody knows this, why are there so many references to #6 and #8 caps in the posts?
It's not a lot to type in.
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw the information we need on a web page in some European language. I couldn't understand all the writing, but it was obvious what they were talking about. I'll see if the
site is in the cache on my comp., and if not I'll have a look for it.
Bitter
Frequent Poster
Posts: 293
From: 11 Downing Street, London, England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't you use an online transalator to decipher the text ?
jin
Frequent Poster
Posts: 111
From: uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
blasting caps are manufactured in several strengths,the most common being the no 6,no 8 and the special military.each is about twice as powerful as the preceding cap.the no
6 will detonate common dynamites but not military expolsivesthe no 8 will detonate pressed tnt such as military demoliton blocks but not cast tnt.the special military cap will
detonate any expolsive that can be detonated by a blasting cap and was especially made for plastic expolsives.
i think amount of expolsives used in the caps is in the blackbook 2or3
frostfire
Frequent Poster
Posts: 266
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
download improvised primary explosive, there's cap 8 and 6 there
eg. 1 g Acetone peroxide with bla-bla confinement is # 8 cap
[This message has been edited by frostfire (edited March 11, 2001).]
10fingers
Frequent Poster
Posts: 442
From: USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could only find the amounts for mercury fulminate caps.
No.1, 0.30 gms.
No.2, 0.40 gms
No.3, 0.54 gms.
No.4, 0.65 gms.
No.5, 0.80 gms.
No.6, 1.00 gms.
No.7, 1.50 gms.
No.8, 2.00 gms.
Most of the specifications I have seen for compound caps use from .5 to 1.0 gram primary and 1.0 gram base charge.
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shit! I've been calling my caps roughly #8, and they normally have around 2g HMTD AND 2g picric acid! These detonate just about anything.
10fingers
Frequent Poster
Posts: 442
From: USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, I would think so!
SMAG 12B/E5
Frequent Poster
Posts: 61
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of wasting Forum space and starting a new thread, an ole dummy wanted to add something. I found an excellent method for creating blasting cap shells. The Corbin
Company manufactures a set of dies for the production 5.56mm bullet jackets from spent 22 cal. rimfire shells. The dies, mounted in a reloading press, push the spent case
through the first die, smoothing out and removing the rim (also lengthing the case). I lengthened the die punch and used spent 22 magnum cases. They are excellent for light
charges. Next I will turn a new punch with a conical cavity and a stop pin with matching blunt point. This will produce a shaped charge effect from the base charge optimizing
the cap. These units will crimp perfectly on standard time fuse. Cannon fuse will require a ferrule.
Mr Cool
Frequent Poster
Posts: 991
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 grams AP ~ 1 gram of PETN, I've heard.
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I checked T.L. Davis for it because I think there's where 10fingers got his information from, and it says: "The original fulminate detonators were numbered according to the
amount of fulminate they contained along with the usual dimensions of the cylindrical copper capsules. The same numbers are applied to commercial blasting caps of the same
size whatever the weight and characters of the charges. A no. 6 cap for example is a cap of the same size as one which contains 1 gram of straight fulminate (diameter 6mm,
length 35 mm). No. 6 caps of different manufacturers may differ in their power as they differ in their composition"
And elsewhere: "A no. 8 blasting cap containing 2 grams of mercury fulminate can be replaced, for use in detonating explosives, by a no. 8 copper capsule containing 1 gram of
picric acid on top which 0.023 gram of silverazide has been compressed."
So this means: a commercial no. 6 cap contains about 1 gram of secundary high explosive (most likely PETN). Which can be replaced by 2.5 gram mercuryfulminate
(PETN=150% compared to TNT and picric acid=120%). And mercuryfulminate and AP can be considered of equal power, so a no. 6 cap can be replaced by 2.5-3 gram of AP.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I've managed to find on the subject, detonators were originally classed by the number of *grains* of mercury fulminate they contained, with the cap number
corresponding to that content. There being no industry standard, things became more and more arbitrary as other substances were substituted, until the number almost has no
significance except in relative terms.
Gerald Hurst has the following to say:
From: glhurst@onr.com (Gerald L. Hurst)

Newsgroups: alt.engr.explosives
Subject: Re: Electronic detonators?
Date: 3 Jan 1998 18:46:14 GMT
Back in the 1960s and earlier, the #6 cap was the industry standard based
on common use with the highly sensitive nitrglycerin explosives common
at the time. Number 8 caps were then widely used only in the seismic
industry. The premier seismic cap was the duPont SSS which was
strong enough to initiate C-4 with reasonable certainty if one was careful
to set the cap in good contact. Seismic caps had stronger shells and could
withstand hydrostatic pressures up to as much as 10,000 psi. The SSS
cap had a dimpled end which functioned as a miniature shaped charge.
The dimple had no effect on initiating ability but probably increased the
pressure resistance of the casing.
The number 8 cap became more common in response to the need for
stronger initiation when using water-based explosives and cast primers
which usually contained too little sensitizing RDX or PETN in the blends
with TNT. In those days the conventional wisdom was that military
detonators were about twice as strong as commercial #8s. This was not
quite true because the #6 then typically contained about 6 grains of base
charge, slightly less than half that of the military "engineer specials."
As water gels and emulsions proliferated, #8s became stronger and for
all practical purposes equivalent to the military detonators.
The numbering system for caps using modern HEX was certainly somewhat
arbitrary and depended on who was making the cap and in what country.
"Standard" blasting caps were made in all numeric strengths up to at least

#12 for sensitivity testing but only #6 and #8 were available commercially
except by special order. Of course, there was no single standard which
was universally accepted.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2321
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you want is the Improvised Primary Explosives PDF from angelo's site. It lists the equivalent amounts of IPE's to commercial caps. E.g:
Acetone Peroxide
Equivalence:
1gram = No. 8 cap
0.75g = No. 6 cap
jeffchem2000 June 27th, 2003, 06:56 AM

I found this in an old book I have, The charge is a mixture of 80% mercury fulminate and 20% potassium chlorate:
charge(grams)
#1, 0.3
#2, 0.4
#3, 0.54
#4, 0.65
#5, 0.8
#6, 1.0
#7, 1.5
#8, 2.0
#9, 2.5
#10, 3.0
It also says that a detonator containing 0.4g mercury fulminate and 0.4g of tetryl corresponds to no. 6.
3Hg(ONC)2 + 2KClO3 = 2KCl + 3Hg + 3N2 + 6CO2

Australian comercial no.8 Dets contain 0.45 grams of PETN.
THe_rEaL_dEaL January 3rd, 2004, 06:58 AM

Green Beret are you refering to the ICI australia explosives no.8 caps as they are the most widely available brand of cap in Australia.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > AP caps - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : AP caps - Archive File

M-16
A new voice
Posts: 3
From : m illrun,PA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W ell, this is m y first post on m e g a ' s f o r u m i ha v e b e e n m e m bers on others. So to the point of this thread, I'm goin g to think
of m akings so caps to start a detonation is AN, with AP in a cap that i m ake well first let m e explain. I go out to the target
range and pick up 45 ACP brass or any thing that is 45 caliber and 22-250 brass and tap out the o ld primer on one and cut the
2 2 - 2 5 0 b r a s s r i g h t b e f o r e t h e n e c k i n t h e c a s e a n d h a m er the two together and p ack with BP and fuse nice sized blast. But
then I thought why not use AP in them to detonate AN but the thing to it is, I hea r d t h a t A P a n d m e t a l s d o e s s o m ething, but
the othere thing is that brass is pretty intert so does any body think this would work? Oh ya how much AP would be needed for
s o m uch AN and what type of AN powdered or prills which? (If any body could help m e I wo uld be m uch abliged. And also if a ny
b o d y n e e d s t u f f m a n u a l s o r b o o k s s e n d m e your e-m a i l a t s e r g e n t k a o s @ a o l . c o m a n d I s e n d y o u t h e m a t m y earlyist
conveinace)
Cricket
Freq uent Poster
Posts: 160
From : U SA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I understand you, you want to m a k e a d e t o n ator for ANFO (or ANNM?) with AP. You have to use AP, not BP. And don't
h a m mer on anything containing explosives, you should know that. I reco m m end reading KIBC, just search The Forum. It can
explain it better than I can. And it will take m ore than a .45 shell, a lot m ore for ANFO. My favorite casings to use for
e x p l o s i v e s a r e a . 2 2 3 , a . 4 5 a n d . 4 4 m ag stuck together, and .22 m ag's. Not all .45's are the exact sam e s o d o n ' t g e t p i s s e d
if the first on e wont fit. W ell, that's about it. Just read KIBC and you should understand what you n e e d t o d o .

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > shaped charge with AP-putty - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : shaped charge with AP-putty - Archive File

wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 233
From: EU
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just dreamt of a nice "experiment" involving an improvised shaped charge.
It was built as shown on the pic and filled with ca. 100g AP-putty. The NC for the putty was extracted from a NC based glue for archaeological ceramic. The label said 22,5%
NC of which 15% was "lowmolecular" and 7,5% "highmolecular", solvent was 37,5% acetone and 40& ethylacetate. I could have used the glue in this form for the putty, but i
wasn't shure if ethylacetate and AP are "compatibel", so i evaporated it and redissolved the NC in pure acetone.
Because i knew that an aluminium cone is a very, very poor choice for shaped charges i put some solder in it.
The charge was placed on an old, rusty 500l steelbowl that was laying upside down. It was ca. 5mm thick steel.
After detonation there was a 3cm deep dent in the metal but the charge didn't cut through.
In my next dream a metalpipe & coppercone should be used i think... we'll see, although i thin AP-putty might be a poor choice for shaped charges, too.
------------------
catfood.tsx.org
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 196
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd reccomend making the cone about 45-60 degrees ( yours is 70 ). Also, why do you put that blob of solder in the top point of the cone ? It might interfere with the formation
of the jet.
You are right that AP is not that good an explosive for shaped-charges, at least not against very hard and tough armour such as steel. What's important is the velocity of
detonation; picric acid is quite good ( though not comparable to RDX or Octol )
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
use copper for the lining of the shapred charge. it is more dense then Al and it is softer. it would more easily be formed into a jet, and once in the jet, it will have more "punch"
copper is the way to go when using something as wimpy as AP.
------------------
...
ST
Frequent Poster
Posts: 100
From: 000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A problem with using AP putty in shaped charges would be its tendancy to shrink, often from the outside it will look fine, but inside the explosive may have dried unevenly
resulting in a pretty crappy shaped charge.
was it a "dent" or a "crater"?
------------------
ST
posted pictures
CragHack
Frequent Poster
Posts: 606
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
try using just pure AP, not ap plastique. when using the plastique you might get an uneven explosion resulting in an un even distrabution of the AP thourgh out the mixture. try
like 150g of AP instead. and try a copper lining like i mentioned before.
------------------
...
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 196
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree.
I did a viability test of AP putty in cast charges myself, and found that something needs to be done to keep it from forming large spaces inside the "body" of the explosive.
Maybe you could dry it while applying constant pressure to keep it from forming these spaces; you would continually collapse the cavities as they formed.
Anyway, when I made my test, I used a paper tube 6mm internal diameter with a few grams of AP putty ( 50/50 by weight ). As the putty started drying out, I used an
aluminum rod I had cut into a 50 degree cone on my lathe to shape it ( you could use a shapened pencil ). As it continued to dry, I pressed it periodically by putting almost as
much of my weight as I was able onto the rod.
When it was completely dry, I cut it in two to see how it had formed, and it turned out that there was just a relatively thin shell and a large cavity in the center. This would not
be very good for shaped-charges.
MacCleod
Frequent Poster
Posts: 216
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems the more Acetone you use to melt the smokeless,the higher the tendency to have the cavities in it.I've often wondered about sealing the still-wet AP putty in an
airtight container.Would it be detonable in moist form?.
Anthony
Moderator
Posts: 2321
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When moist it is still sensitive to flame put is quite a lot less sensitive to shock. The problem may be that although the surface is dry enough to detonate, the core may not be.
Microtek
Frequent Poster
Posts: 196
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually it will cut steel.
But you are right in saying that the liner will not be liquified; it will simply be a stream of high-speed fragments, but nevertheless it will be sufficient to cut mild steel.
wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 233
From: EU
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
outsider: The ceramic glue is "Archocoll 2000".
Contains:
15% NC lowmolecular
7,5% NC highmolecular
37,5% acetone
40% ethylacetate
Price is 18 DM / ~9 USD per liter.
I won't tell where i get it, cause it's my only source & in my *fucking* country & i don't want this stuff banned because all the kewlios order it.
Mail me & i tell you.
------------------
catfood.tsx.org
[This message has been edited by wantsomfet (edited March 11, 2001).]
zaibatsu
Frequent Poster
Posts: 403
From: England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outsider, come on, I take it that you looked at the pics in his signiture? Didn't you realise the .444 etc are calibres of bullets? They are showing the different penetration of
certain calibres, not shaped charges!! (Now if this is wrong, i'm gonna look like an idiot)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Geometry of linear shaped charges - Archive File
Log in
View Full Version : Geometry of linear shaped charges - Archive File

c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topic Starter:
The design of conventional shaped charges is based on the fact that propagation of the detonation wave is always perpendicular to the explosive surface. In linear applications
where two flat strips of explosive are detonated at an angle to each other, the detonation waves converge on a plane bisecting this included angle and form a "sheet" of
explosive force. Where a liner is used, this "sheet" becomes the "blade" that does the actual cutting. In this system the effect is progressive and two-dimensional, with the
period of cutting action (width of the "blade") determined by the width of the explosive strips, standoff distance, etc.
If an explosive profile of cylindrical (or parabolic) section were to be used instead of the usual "V" configuration, the detonation wave(s) would converge on a *line* along the
target surface (rather than on a plane perpendicular to that surface). In such a system the effect would be instantaneous and one-dimensional (rather than progressive and
two-dimensional) since *all* available energy would be focused along this line at the same instant. Theoretically, while there would be little or no cutting effect, the shattering
force concentrated along this narrow line would be tremendous.
The greatly enhanced spalling effect of a "focused" charge of this type might prove superior against hard or brittle targets such as steel, concrete or glass. The familiar conical
spalling of thick glass that results from the impact of a low velocity BB illustrates the effect, and suggests that unconventionally small charges could be used to breach these
sorts of materials.
Naturally, the same principle ought to apply to conical as well as linear V charges.
Any thoughts on this supposition, or any useful references on the practical design of cylindrical or parabolic shaped charges?
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I understand you correctly you want to know the effect of different shapes of the cavity/liner in linear shaped charges. The only thing I know is that a shockwave can be
compared to the waves in water when a stone is thrown in. And the effect of colliding shockwaves is like waves created by two stones that meet and interfere with another.
And which results in a different pattern with the wave getting a different direction and force at certain points.
Now, it seems that the V-shaped cavity with a certain angle gives the best result: that is it creates the strongest, focused resulting shockwave. And when you use other shapes
a different resulting shockwave is produced that is probably not as strong and focused as with a V-shape. In the improvised munitions manual a linear shaped charge
constructed with a metal pipe cut in half (and producing a cyllindrical shaped cavity) doesn't penetrate armor as deep as the V-shaped linear charges (but this could be caused
by other factors I'm not sure). And I'm not sure a "line" is produced as you say instead of a "sheet" or "blade" with a V-shaped cavity. Maybe there is a computerprogram that
simulates colliding waterwaves? (there must be one somewhere). You could then easily see what kind of effect different shapes of the cavity have on the resulting shockwave.
I'm also curious to the effects of different shapes and specially the effect of a linear shaped charge consisting of two tubes of explosive with a V-shaped profile in the middle.
Would the colliding shockwaves result in a fluid metal jet and would it be focused and how effective would it be?
And about the effects on (safety) glass: glass is far more sensitive to pressure- and shochwaves because, unlike steel, it will not bent it just breaks. It cannot absorb the
energy. So to "cut" glass you need far less explosive than for steel.
c0deblue
Frequent Poster
Posts: 229
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's my understanding that a detonation shock wave (or any portion thereof) will *always* propagate at an angle of 90 degrees relative to the surface of the explosive
producing it. If the explosive surface is flat, as in one "leg" of a V-shaped linear charge, the detonation wave is consistent and the force-direction from any point of the surface
is parallel to that from all other points (think ray theory). If diagrammed, the collision of these "rays" would resemble a fish skeleton, i.e. parallel lines of force (the fish ribs)
converging and being redirected along a central plane (the fish backbone).
If the explosive surface is concave the "rays" will be convergent, not parallel, and therefore all energy will focus instantaneously on a central point without collision or
redirection.
If the explosive surface is convex (as with a tube) the "rays" will instead be divergent, with no point of focus, and incoherent convergence angles producing little or no
redirection or jet (i.e. a scattering effect).
If the above assumptions are correct, the explosive energy directed at the target using a tubular charge (or charges) would be almost entirely dependent on the countermass,
with *none* of the advantages associated with shaped charges. While two cylindrical charges would undoubtedly collapse a central V in some manner, this collapse would be
partial at best and would not result in a "blade" shaped jet. The interference effects of an infinite multiple of divergent force lines (or "rays") would also tend to cancel rather
than augment each other, so I think attempting to use tubes is essentially a non-starter.
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think I understand you. Maybe you could make a diagram and not use so many terms I don't know the meaning of or haven't heard of at all (is english your
native language?). But what I do know is that a shockwave is not flat, it's moves in all directions (except backwards) from the small starting point (in the detonator). It moves
from that point on like a balloon you blow up.
That's the reason a linear shaped charge with V-cavity even works and creates a metal jet and shockwave directed to the surface despite the fact that the original shockwave
is parallel to the surface and pointed to the end of the linear shaped charge: but the shockwave on each side of the V-shape move also downward and collide with eachother
and this results in a focused shockwave. So the cutting (focused) shockwave and metal jet are directed to the surface. If a shockwave would be flat and moving only in the
direction from the point of initation to the end, a linear shaped charge would have no effect at all. Except for the pressurewave that moves in all directions (but that will not cut
steel).
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But I believe you already know that. And you say that with a V-shape cavity the shockwaves moving downwards to the surface collide and get focused. And with a cyllindrical
cavity they focus on a central point without collision. And finally when using tubes the shockwaves would disperse. But this way you compair shockwaves with rays of light
hitting a mirror with a V- or parabolic shape and I don't think that's possible. Shockwaves are waves and the interfere with each other as waves: re-enforcing each other at
some points, changing direction on collision, etc. So using a simulation programm of colliding waves would be helpfull to understand the effects of different shapes.
Ctrl_C
Frequent Poster
Posts: 244
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
is this right?
damn....pic wont work...copy this into your browser, dont use the link or it wont work: http://badsektor.9ug.com/images/linearshaped.jpg
[This message has been edited by Ctrl_C (edited March 21, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Ctrl_C (edited March 21, 2001).]
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did a quick search on the internet looking for "linear shaped charges animation" and found some interesting sites with animations of exploding (linear) shaped charges:
www.feainformation.com and www.hydrosoft.com. The first shows an animation of an exploding linear shaped charge as well as a conical shaped charge (click on "warhead
analysis" and then on the SC you want to see). With hydrosoft, click on "animation" and then "shaped charge". This might clarify some things. But what we need is some
animations of FLSCs with other (cyllindrical) shaped cavities. And one of two tubes with a profile in between. Although I think/hope it won't differ much from a normal FLSC.
Probably just the shape of the metal jet differs (and thus it's effect).
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A picture is better than a thousand words but there's just a small mistake: the detonator is put in one side (begin/end) of a FLSC not on top. Maybe that's possible/done with
bigger demolition type charges but not with FLSCs (I think). But it doesn't make a big difference anyway because the shockwave will be traveling parallel to the surface
anyway when it proceeds through the charge.
wantsomfet
Frequent Poster
Posts: 233
From: EU
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What about: http://www.warheadanalysis.com/
or http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/animation/explode/shaped.html
And this posting from alt.engr.explosives by Gerald Hurst is interwsting, too.

Subject:
Re: Shaped charges?
From:
glhurst@onr.com (Gerald L. Hurst)
Date:
1996/10/30
Message-Id:
<556vpk$qgq@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>
Newsgroups:
alt.engr.explosives
In article <556g4t$ge7@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>,
hummas@usa.pipeline.com(Bill M) says:
>I might also add, for those

home experimenters out there, that, along with the forward jet of material,
there is also a backward moving mass of material (how much >depends on
the configuration of your explosive and container). Considerations which
make shaped charges difficult for kitchen chemists are the uniformity (both
in density >and quality) of the explosive and of the detonation.
If you are referring to the

slug or "carrot" which is formed along with the particulate jet, the former
also moves forward but only at a fraction of the velocity of the jet.
The slug, which is often shaped like a carrot, can sometimes be found nestling
in the (steel) target hole left by the jet.
The only part of the assembly

that actually moves backward is a portion of the gas cloud. Momentum
conservation dictates that the gas blast to the rear must be greater than
forward.
The velocity of the jet

increases and its mass decreases as the cone angle is decreased until it
approaches twice the velocity of the explosive and zero mass (in theory).
In practice, the optimal cone angle for good penetration depth is usually
about 60 degrees with a stand-off of about 2.5-3.5 diameters. These
values are a compromise for penetration because greater stand-off would
give even better penetration if the charge and cone were perfect. With
most real charges the jet is imperfectly focused and threfore spreads and
becomes less effective over large distances.
A pound of C-4 in even a

field packed shaped charge will pierce 7" of steel. This would be
considered poor performance per unit size compared to the penetration the
oilfield casing perforation guys get with their precision pressed RDX and
HMX charges combined with equally precise special metal linings.
Jerry (Ico)
[This message has been edited by wantsomfet (edited March 24, 2001).]
outsider
Frequent Poster
Posts: 91
From:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first site I already mentioned. But the second is really great! Like it a lot. Thanks very much. I owe you (probably not spelled right but you know what I mean I think).

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Wine Bottle Cone Charge
Log in
View Full Version : Wine Bottle Cone Charge
green beret July 11th, 2003, 07:03 AM

I hope this is in the right section.
Well, I am making a wine bottle cone charge, as described in the Improvised Munitions Handbook.
I have cut the bottle by using the burning string, and I have noticed some cracking in the bottle, down one side and on the bottom, the one on the side is not really of any
concern, but the one on the bottom may be. It is about 5mm from the edge of the bottle. So I'm not too sure whether or not this will matter.
I have placed the bottle in a section of heavy cardboard tube, as the cracks on the side have slightly weakened the bottle, and also the tube stops the rough eges at the top
cutting up my hand. I am going to leave this tube in place, then put the completed charge into a paint tin with sand around the charge (obviously not in the cone cavity), then
put the standoff legs on the paint tin. Would it be worthwhile to cut a hole under the cone so as it dosent have to cut through the tin? Also I am using ANNM with approximately
1.5 grams of AP as the detonator. I know ANNM isn't an ideal explosive for shaped charges, but its the only explosive with a high enough VoD that I have right now.
For the witness plate, I am going to use a thick steel plate, (for Aussies, it is one of those plates that are on those deep telstra pits with the four heavy steel plates) which I will
borrow ;) and depending on where I do it, I might have a concrete slab underneath.
I should be able to get some pictures, which I will upload to the FTP, but it is doubtfull that I will get a video. I am not sure when I will do this, I will most likely have to find a
new site, almost out of hearing range of houses, things are a little "tense" around here, not all my doing though, someone blew up a porta loo with an "incendiary device" (?!?)
and a nearby resident called 000 and said there were explosions going off. Apparently it was heard 1.5km away, and when the fire brigade got there, it was almost totaly
destroyed, and some bits were on fire.
Sorry, Ive strayed off :p
So basically my queries are; Will the crack on the bottom matter, and should I cut a hole in the tin under the charge.
Thanks in advance.

I don't belive that the crack will have any effect as long as it's not the cone itself which is cracked(thats what I belive at least, If I'm wrong I hope someone can correct me).
And scince you've put the bottle in a thick cardboard tube the one on the side won't have any effect either.
I don't think that it is necesary to cut a hole in the tin scince I assume that isn't very thick. Many rockets have the SC placed in the middel of the body and the jet has to
penatrate some of the rocket itself before it reaches it's target. That is a real Jet though.
Edit: I just remembered I forgot to tell you that if you want to cut wine bottles, use an angle grinder. Just put the grinder against the bottle and spin the bottle, there is no
need to push it hard against the bottle just let it gently tuch the bottle and it will snap by itself after a while, if not just tap it lightly with a hammer on the throat of the bottle.
I have cut bottles with this method that have gotten allmost clear edges afterwords.
green beret July 11th, 2003, 10:28 PM

Good, thanks for that info, I wasnt sure if the paint tin would deform the jet as it was very close to the cone cavity, and the standoff is supposed to be 3-4 inches. Its not an
awfully big cavity anyhow, so I'm not expecting brilliant results. I'll give the angle grinder method a go on the next bottle, I have a few more with bigger cones.
Also, if anyone is looking for suitable bottles for these charges, dont bother checking the cheap wines, hardly any have decent cones. This is because the expensive wines
(being of higher quality) use the high cones to seperate the sediment in the wine while they are sitting, resulting in a better flavour in the wine.:rolleyes:
So thanks DBSP I'll keep progressing, all I need to do now is dry the AN, measure out the NM and make some AP, I'll be trying to keep the detonator as short as possible too,
so the shockwave travels from the top downward as much as possible and not from the centre out.
Cheers.
zaibatsu July 12th, 2003, 11:49 AM

Don't forget some of the nice champagnes also have quite substantial cones.

or you could cut it better using that toothbrush contraption somebody described in the glass cutting thread.
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2757
that should result in less cracks of the bottle.
nbk2000 July 12th, 2003, 09:09 PM

I would cut away any metal from the bottom of the tin that'd be in the way of the jet formation.
Since you're using a low energy explosive and a crappy liner material, there's no need to make things any more difficult by obstructing the jets formation at such an early
stage.
I've used triangle needle files to etch a line around bottles, prior to tapping them on the line with a nail to crack it.
Cyclonite July 13th, 2003, 10:42 AM

In the future I suggest you make you shaped charge from sheetmetal with a thin copper cone. The cone shouldnt be too deep though, one of the ones used in EOD is about
the size of a soup can with a 3" standoff, its handpacked with C4. I dont know offhand the depth of the cone but it does extend approximently 1.5" into the can. Make sure
you prime from the top. Oh and cracks in the glass wont matter much, the explosive just needs to be formed the the right shape and have a liner in the cone. I would remove
the metal sheet you refered to if you want max. effect. If wont interfere with the formation of the jet much at all if any.

A good way to cut glass is with a long bit of nichrome and a battery (thickness of wire and size of battery dictated by what you are trying to cut). It's the same idea as the
burning string method, except that the heating is much more localised to where you want it, and you can control how hot it is for how long.

I had a friend that worked at a place that cut sheets of glass into specified shapes, he relocated a glass cutter. Its like a pencil with some sort of diamond composite at the end.
I dont know the price of one but if you plan on doing similar projects that cutting of glass is evolved is works very well, you just trace the area to be cut then tap it with a small
hammer or something similar.
green beret July 15th, 2003, 11:11 PM

Thanks everyone, I'll let you know how it goes, I think next time I'll try using a cone made from an aluminium can, or, as was said, a copper liner. With aluminium, would a
coke can be thick enough to form a big enough jet?
Cheers.

I doubt that an aluminum can(coke can?) will be thick enaugh. And I don't think you can make a good enaugh cone from that thin sheating to be able to use it as a jet forming
SC, it would rather just like the glass add a cavity to the charge, it would allso add some shrapnell of course but scince the sheeting is so light and thin I doubt the shrapnell
would do any serious damage to the target.
I made an SC with sheeting from a tincan last new years. I used APAN as the explosive. It blew a hole through the 2 layers of 1mm steel plates, the plates where spaced
1.5cm apart. The hole was just as large as the width of the cone and the hole area beneath the charge was covered with craters from fragments of the cone. I haven't got an
FTP at the moment so I can't give you any pics of it right now.

The liner does not need to be thick to produce a jet effect, try copper sheet about the same thickness as a coke can. It should work fine as long as you have the right standoff,
cone angle and last but not least a suitable explosive the more brisance the better.
Please post experiment results, I havent used anything other than C4 in shapecharges. It would be nice to have my AN based explosive velocity doubts lifted.

I didn't say it doesn't work with a thin linear, but good luck pulling it off as a pure hobbyist since the tollenranses when using thin sheeting are close to zero. And you have to
be very good at soldering to be able to make a perfect cone. To the other difficulties you can add pressing the explosives into the SC without any voids at the same time as
keeping the density uniform.
Most people here haven't got any explosive more powerful than ANNM thus that is what will be used.
If you used a copper sheet of about a mm in thickness it's easier to solder allthough more difficult to bend into perfect shape. It will allso be easier to press the explosive into
the SC since the cone doesn't bend as easy as a cone made with sheeting about the same thickness as the material in coke cans.
But if you can pull it off I'll gladly have a look at the pictures you will take of your SC and especially your C4.
ANNM workes in SCs, at least LSCs, and I've got pictures to proove it!

I'd much rather use amine-sensitised NM than ANNM in a SC. No problems with loading, constant density, no voids...
I know it'd be considerably more expensive, but then if it doesn't work you know the failure was due to your cone, rather than a huge air bubble that might have been in your
ANNM.
Then, once you know that your cones are working, you can try with ANNM if you like.

I think I have some pictures of some shots I did, I will try and find them.
I used military C4 and the molding were pre-made, just stuff with C4,
prime and boom. I lack experience with homemade SC, Iv only used the ones
in EOD. I guess the less brisant the explosive the more critical the
density factors and cone angles are. Would that be about right?

Well thats a hell of a difference. Readily made SC are of course very easy to get perfect just stuff it with explosives as you said. The thing is that I doubt that most of us here
can get those toys.
The problems with homemade cones isn't the angle of it but rather the seal of the gap created when fou fold the sheeting into the cone shape. It's very easy to solder it but
extremely hard to get the solder to be as accurate an minimal as possible so that the cone will act just as it would if it had been pressed from a sheeting in a mould rather than
cut out and soldered. The solder is normaly where things get fucked up.
It's not the easiest thing to get the thing completelyy round before it is soldered. Unless of course you've got access to a machine that bends metal sheeting bu passing it
between two cylinders/cones thus bending it by decreasing the distance between the cylinders/cones with decreasing of the distance each time you pass it throug the machine.
Cricket July 17th, 2003, 10:07 AM

I have never made a SC or cone. But it would seem to me someone could melt Cu and pour it into mould of the desired shape. Then press another cone of the same
proportons into the first cone. A lip the height of the desired thickness of the cone could be placed around the top of the first cone to give a more precise cone. I don't know
how different the properties of cast Cu would be, but probably not so much as to cause a malfunction. Also, it might should be cooled slowly to make it less brittle.

Copper would be too hard to cast without a lot of work. Use lead or tin instead.
Cricket July 17th, 2003, 02:01 PM

Yea, I was wondering if lead could be used in a SC. I have plenty of it from shot shells. Also, would there be an alloy that is better than a pure metal for a SC?
nbk2000 July 18th, 2003, 10:38 AM

Siince the topic of forming copper into SC cones came up, I thought I'd post this PDF I made from a book on copper forming.
Specifically plates (EFP platters) and how to anneal copper and clean it.
Mr Cool August 1st, 2003, 04:41 PM

In the past, there has been some discussion on using metal powders in some sort of binder as a liner, and many people doubted that it'd work.
Well, I've just read on a site about clearing mines/UXO that fibreglass (glass fibre/resin composite) liners have been used, so I see no reason why resin/metal could not be. It
would be more similar to a sintered, rather than solid, liner, but it should still work fine. One problem that I forsee, however, is making the liner of an equal thickness all round.
It'd be hard to mould the metal/resin, since it'd be viscous and the liner will need to be thin, also the mould would need to be put together very accurately.
If using fibreglass, it is easy. You just grease up a cone (turned from wood or whatever), put fibreglass on it, then spread resin/catalyst onto the fibres and scrape off the
excess. This will create an even thickness. But this liner would be of a low density, and not as effective. And I doubt that metal/resin would soak into the fibreglass very well.
Any ideas on how one might creat a metal/binder liner? The binder doesn't have to be a catalyst-activated resin, it can be any common substance that you think is suitable.
nbk2000 August 1st, 2003, 07:13 PM

Silicone rubber chaulking loaded up with metal powder, perhaps?
yt2095 August 2nd, 2003, 06:52 AM
many years ago I used to use an over the counter (fron a car fixing shop) compound called Chemical Metal (I don`t remember who made it, Evo,Bostick,Araldite?).
it boasts 55% metal content, and when set it`s about as hard also. I think the metal was some Stainless steel (the Cr/Ni ratio I don`t know) it`s non magnetic however.
I used to coat sensitive circuitry in this, for protection and prying eyes.
at 55% I`m unsure if it would be good enough for a liner, but it`s the closest I know to.
GibboNet August 2nd, 2003, 11:02 PM

You could make a liner out of most of those I'm sure, but I think if you used any binder, and the usual metals you're off to a good start. I'm not sure why, it seems obvious to
me, (have I missed something ?) but couldn't you make a liner by moulding between two identical cones ?
Actually, with some mathematics, you could work out what you needed to make a single cone out of sheet metal, that was exactly the diameter, height, and width you
wanted it, then make another identical. Then, get your mix of metal powder and binder, and pour it into one of these cones, then sit the other inside the first, so that the mix
is set between them, which should make it even.
I'm trying to make a picture, but my 3D graphics program hates me, and I can't make exact angles in photoshop. Anyone know what I mean ?
Of course, if you can make the original cones, then you should be able to make liners the same way... Of course this way, the cones can be any metal, and the liners can be
made from any metal powder, and any binder, which means depending on setting times, you could pump out a few at a time, with a waiting period only for drying.
The same could be done with circular, to make the bowl shaped platters.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Concrete w all project
Log in
View Full Version : Concrete wall project
Sonny Jim August 20th, 2003, 11:31 AM

Hello everyone.
A long running objective of mine has been to blast a good chunk out of a derelict concrete w all. It's a remenant from long disused mining equipment in my 'blasting area'.
It's 14 inches thick, and has a very convenient hole that goes two thirds of the w ay through that is about 2" thick at the opening but getting narrower further in. This is my
target. The hole is about 24 inches from the edge of the wall, and about a 12 inches from the top. I'm looking therefore to blow off the top corner of the w all.
I'm wondering what you think would be a good choice of explosives.
The things to consider are:
The hole is not an equal w idth all way in, but varies erratically over about half an inch or so. Therefore I can't insert any form of casing into the hole very w ell.
I want to fill the hole w ith explosives, to ensure that the wall is destroyed in an exciting display. Therefore I will need quite a large volume of explosives.
A form of AN dynamite (ANNG) crossed my mind, but i would have to 'poke' the explosives into the hole leading to a high density. Would this screw up ANNG's performance
I dont want to make a lot of plastic explosive.
One way or another, the w all will go, and on tape for you all to w atch. I just thought I'd see if any of you have some suggestions that could help ensure success. Thanks. SJ.

If the width of the hole varies by 1/2", I w ould get some 1 1/2" plastic pipe from your local DIY shop/plumbers, cut it ~12" long and fill it w ith with ANNM. The explosive won't
get squashed and the rigidity of the tube means you can force the charge in if neccessary.
It w on't have perfect contact w ith the target like if the hole w as stuffed with explosive, but I think the gap is small enough and the charge large enough to make practically FA
difference.
Desmikes August 20th, 2003, 03:14 PM

hmm... you'll have about 1.25" of actual ANNM inside a pipe... I'd go with nitromethane plastique b/c it has better density, higher VOD and brisance too, it can be packed in
filling up the entire available space. You could even "pump" it in via some pipe starting from the far back to make sure that you don't get any air left inside.

None of the options are very adventurous, instead I'd use it to test a HE squash-head round ;) Seriously though, you could have a look at the damage something like that'd
have, even if you have to place it on the target prior to detonation. If done correctly, it should blast big chunks from the wall.
Sonny Jim August 20th, 2003, 04:42 PM

Thanks for the ideas. I know this sounds pathetic but I've never seen NM anywhere. Not through lack of trying. I've scoured the earth looking in every motor store in my area
for it, and not found anything. Maybe I've seen it but thanks to the UKs habit making of crappy, undetailed labels, I wouldn't have know n.
I know a lot of you are in the UK. I don't mean to be a pest but you couldn't post the brand name of the stuff you use and where you got it could you? That would be of great
help. :)
Assuming I don't get any NM, what viable alternatives would you say exist?
DBSP August 20th, 2003, 05:16 PM

APAN, really easy though not very pow erful but still powerful enaugh I'd say since it's an enclosed hole you are going to pack it into. It could be loaded into the hole by inserting
a piece of tubing and then pouring some APAN into it and then showing it into the end of the tube into the holes aft end by pushing it through the tubing with a rod which has
been given a blob of cotton or similar to seal the tube so that nothing gets left behind in the tubing and then gets pulled out of the hole when you pull the rod out again. When
one portion of explosive has been pushed into the hole the tubing is pulled back a few inches and then another portion of explosive is added and the process repeated. It w ill
take some time to fill the hole this way but you can be shure to get the w hole hole filled with explosive.
The best option would be a liquid or slurry explosive but thats a bit to expensive for something like this.
Hope you understood that.
Efraim_barkbit August 20th, 2003, 05:41 PM

Pressed APAN would be what Id go for if I couldnt get NM, at least in my current situation, its both easy and quite powerful.
I dont know how youd feel tow ards handeling these quantitys of explosives containing AP, (personally, Im not to worried about this mixture) If youd go for the 1" pipe,
and can get it all the way in to the bottom, youd have almost 200ccm to fill,
I dont know the critical diameter of other AN mixtures, like the ANWAX, but you could always set off a smaller charge first to make room for any wider casings needed.
Edit: w ent offline w hen writing, and DBSP got before me

APAN? I think I read 12% AP was the optimum for APAN, rjchie posted it I do believe. You agree with this? APAN never really impressed me a great deal when I made it a w hile
back, and I've never experimented w ith it since.
I have this looming feeling of dobt that APAN would be capable of destroying the wall; I'm probably wrong, but it's a feeling I'd rather not have if I'm going to undertake a
rather large project like this.
I think this feeling may be something to do with the initial suggestion of ANNM as the charge. APAN seems quite a demotion relative to the reported power of ANNM.
Nihilist August 20th, 2003, 06:24 PM

what about MEKP? it's a liquid explosive, and it's not overly expensive(i've never made it, but I don't think any of the precursors are all too expensive). And yes, I agree liquid
or slurry explosives would definitely be the best. Or anything unsensitive enough that it could be ground into a very fine powder(not sure what you could do this to, but if you
could it would work similar to a liquid).
Mr Cool August 20th, 2003, 06:44 PM

80:20-ANNG
"leading to a high density. Would this screw up ANNG's performance"
Ammonia dynamites aren't too fussy w hen it comes to loading density ;). I would pack the explosive into a pipe and insert that, like Anthony said.
I would also play with the rest of the wall, like Zaibatsu suggested.

I think I'll go for Mr. Cool's idea. That's not to say I don't appreciate everyone else's suggestions though.
It's basically because I can manage AN and NG without too much trouble. I've ironed out the many creases in my understanding of NG since my first meddlings with it, so that's
not an issue anymore.
I have all the resources I need for ANNG right now also, another pull factor. Therefore I should be able to get this underw ay very soon. At bear minimum, I should be able to
take a soundless clip off my friend's digicam, but if I pull some strings I might be able to borrow a proper one from yet another aquaintance.
Just a quick thought though. I have an early stone age video camera about somewhere. I could perhaps use that, but would need to convert the analogue format to digital. I'll
learn to fly before I become good with technical gizmos, so I must ask if there's a feasible w ay to convert the analogue format without being a millionaire.
Thanks again for your efforts. SJ.

I really do think that you're not looking hard enough sonny jim, but I'll give you some tips. To my know ledge, "nitro" is used as a fuel additive to model cars and you'll be
wanting to find a supplier in the UK. Now , using some of these w ords in a search on google should bring up some w ebsites, and if you w ent to the products section, and looked
for some section on fuel or fuel additives, no doubt you'll see "nitro" mentioned somewhere. It is possible to get 100% NM as a fuel additive, but mainly you see lower %s,
around 30%. But keep looking!
In fact, I was bored, so did a little search, and have found a 100% supplier for you. Check your mail soonish. But next time, please do a little searching first.
0EZ0 August 20th, 2003, 11:11 PM

None of the options are very adventurous, instead I'd use it to test a HE squash-head round Seriously though, you could have a look at the damage something like that'd have,
even if you have to place it on the target prior to detonation. If done correctly, it should blast big chunks from the wall.
Well at least zaibatsu is being a little imaginative:). Come on guys, what is more fun?
a) Blasting the poopey out of a concrete w all with bulk explosives. One blink and she's dust.
b) Being imaginative and using shaped/projectile charges of sorts.
c) Using a method which has been described as 'scabbling' (by nbk I think) with a thinned liquid explosive. Scabbling has remarkable effects if the surface to be blasted is
covered in a network of cracks:cool:. Just allow some time for the liquid explosive to accumulate inside the voids/cracks on the target.
d) Using multiple high velocity charges to defeat the w all with minimal amount of explosives.
e) Construct a huge charge (FAE, Dust or similiar) that w ould deliver enough overpressure to significantly weaken it's structure. Follow with a strategically placed charge to finish
the job.
f) Experiment with different explosively propelled projectiles. Eg backing large chunks of metal w ith a moderate sized charge of composite.
And thats only a few suggestions:D. There are many different ways you could take out that wall. But for us to suggest something a little more specific, maybe you could take
some pictures of the w all.
Some good bed-time reading 'The Blasters's Training Manual' by R.K Ken House. Chart below is taken from page 211.
'The Blaster's Training Manual' Chart (http://w ww.boomspeed.com/0ez0/Chart.jpg)

(Note: The image is a large 141kb, to preserve clarity. Manual resizing made some parts unreadable)
Blackhawk August 21st, 2003, 12:28 AM

mm, cant wait to see that wall go down ::D Why don't you try a linier shaped charge along the bottom to cut the w all in half, or a bunch of conical charges near the base to
knock out big chunks of it.
nbk2000 August 21st, 2003, 01:04 AM

The guys barely managing AN dynamite, so let's not tax his resources by suggesting EFP's and FAE's, eh? ;)
I'd go with a very sturdy ballon filled in place with liquid NG, and set off w ith a boosted detonator, with the stemhole being sealed with clay. For concrete w ork, you need highly
brisant explosives to shatter it, especially given the small hole dimensions, w hich wouldn't allow for maximum VOD with AN based explosives.
"Scabbling" uses micro-fine PETN in a PBX binder that is HVLP sprayed onto the concrete, prior to a flying plate detonator setting it off, no cracks required. :)
EP August 21st, 2003, 01:25 AM

An idea perhaps too obvious to be mentioned: Why not make the hole bigger to accomodate a larger charge? A hammer and chisel will work as long as it's already started like
that...
Tuatara August 21st, 2003, 01:37 AM

I've no idea just how big this wall is, but for a real challenge forget blowing chunks out and see how far you can "throw " the entire wall. I'd love to see that!
0EZ0 August 21st, 2003, 02:42 AM

Alright, so scabbling with binded PETN sprayed over a brick/concrete/stone surface would most certainly be out of reach for the average member;). But does that mean
producing similiar end results is out of reach? You could easily adapt the idea, and thats how thinned NG comes about.
I guess if you don't want to complicate things, just go for the big charge. But why not have a crack at a few abstract/different things. You might surprise yourself. EFP's and
shaped charges aren't out of reach, they just require a little more effort and thought. Not everything has to be as complicated as mil-spec ordnance to work.
Try and think outside the square. What are some other suggestions/ideas?
DBSP August 21st, 2003, 05:22 AM

Well on the subject of SCs. A simple small winebottle SC could be detonated against the wall. Not that it would be extremely interesting but it w ould be nice to see how an
simple improvised SC could afect the wall. It's alw ays good to have some info on such things, if not just for the fun of it.
Sonny Jim August 21st, 2003, 10:24 AM

The w all is big enough to survive having one side blew off it, so all of these more adventurous ideas can be tried at a later date. I'm always up to try new and more complicated
stuff; I'm not stupid or incapable, but am just beginning to scratch the surface of the more 'advanced' level of explosives, so give me time :D
I'm really happy w ith the response I've got here. You've all been great :) . With a bit of luck, a nice vid of a doomed wall will repay your efforts!
EDIT: Pics of the w all:
http://vectec.net/angryjack/w all.html
Tended Tripod August 22nd, 2003, 02:24 AM

I think a satellite charge w ould be very interesting for something like this. Set up several shaped charges in a circle on the w all, and when detonated the shockwaves w ould
collide and turn everything to dust. Somebody mentioned this in a post a while back, probably nbk.
A question: I didn't want to start a new topic, and searching (including google, stupid government censorship) showed nothing, so here goes.
Does anyone know how Timothy Mcveigh detonated all of that anfo he had? I also heard there was a charge inside the building. Seems to make sense since anfo has more of a
push effect, rather than shatter. Anyone know anything on the subject?
McGuyver August 22nd, 2003, 02:44 AM

Read the rules dude, just start a thread in the water cooler. Anything goes there. I'm not trying to be mean, just a heads up. You can ask any questions you want there. For the
record though, obviously it wasn't just the truck, because the window s just a few yards away on the other side of the street weren't even cracked.
THErAPIST August 22nd, 2003, 07:57 AM

As you seem to be able to make NG why not make some NC too? mix em together and you'll have yourself a nice lump of (I think its called ballistite) or blasting gelatin.
If you mix out the proper proportions yoi might get a putty like substance which w ould be places in the hole easier and would fill up all spaces. Even though i know you dont
want plastick explosives it'd be easy. Have it in little bars that you could simply push into the hole and they would mold.
just my $.2 though. disreguard if you wish.
PasstheDutch September 14th, 2003, 05:52 PM

uh, i seen a picture of this wall , it being covered by soil for a great part on the front. Maybe you could try digging a hole (or a trenchlike hole) in so that you get a gutter in
which you can pack full of (some sort of) brisant H.E and after that tamp it with the soil you previously removed.
is this an idea?
DBSP September 15th, 2003, 01:50 PM

It's not really something new, used all the time. It's just a way of directing more of the energy from the explosive against the target. Defeating that wall w ould require quite a
decent charge though. I don't know if it is reinforced in any w ay but I emagine that it is. A kg or two of ANNM might just do the trick.
I don't know that post was any good, but I just don't give a fuck right now cause I'm in a badd mood right now..
PasstheDutch September 15th, 2003, 06:28 PM

Just trying to help.. I know its not new, but the purpose of this thread is to get that fuckin' w all down right?
++ ++++ +++ ++++
This site isn't run by Disney, so please spell out your obscenities, OK? Thanks. NBK
alhazred September 30th, 2003, 11:03 AM

Here is a formula for calculating the needed explosive mass:
M= t^ 3 * mf * a
M= mass of explosive in [kg]

t= thickness of the object (to the next free surface) [m]
mf = material factor
a= arrangement of the charge (from 1 for a closed hole to 4,5 for open charge)
The smallest distance from middle of the hole to next free surface is 7" * 0,025 m/" = 0,17 m.
The material factor for concrete is about 4 (can range from 3 to 5,5).
a is and 1 in a closed hole.
M= 0,17^ 3 * 4 * 1 = 0,02
So you will need 20 g of an AN / gelantinized NG explosive (70/30, standard explosive for blasting w orks). If want to try it with PETN, you need 20 % less.
bobo September 30th, 2003, 01:24 PM

have you got a reference Alhazred?
alhazred October 1st, 2003, 09:03 AM

The formula is originally used by military pioneers to calculate the needed explosive mass. If I remember right it is called "Maurersche Sprengformel". I used the formula serveral
times with good results.
You can find these or similar caculation methods in "Heinze: Sprengtechnik- Anw endung und Verfahren, Leipzig 1993" or in "Militrische Sprengtechnik, 1985". I am sorry but I
dont know a good blasting- book in English.
You can find the "Blasters Training Manual" here:
http://internettrash.com/users/altreal/files.html
It includes some methods for estimating the explosive mass, but on quiet low level.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > tree stump blasting
Log in
View Full Version : tree stump blasting
metal dragon August 29th, 2003, 11:43 PM

Hello,
P l e a se forgive for posting on m y third post. I just have a problem there is a stum p in m y back yard that needs to go, my
father would like m e to blast it out. It is stump of grape fruit tree. It is 13cm i n d i a m e t e r a n d o n l y n e e d s t o b e s h a t t e r e d . I
have no HE but I do have a lo t of black powder. I was thinking u sing a pipe charg e o f s o m e sort would this be an effective
m ethod? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you all
THErAPIST August 30th, 2003, 12:34 AM

Even though you have no HE, how hard would it be for you to whip up some AP? Stab a piece of pvc pipe into the ground at an
angle so that it m akes a hole that starts at the e d g e o f t h e s t u m p a n d t h e h o l e g o e s i n t o t h e g r o u n d r i g h t u n d e r t h e s t u m p .
Since this stump os 1 3 cm in diameter i suspect 30g of ANAP with anothe r 20g of AP pressed ontop of the ANAP inside a toilet
p a p e r t u b e s h o u l d d o nice for blasting the stum p o u t o f t h e g r o u n d . A P i s e a s y e n o u g h t o m a k e , a n d A N c a n b e b o u g h t i n
instant cold packs.
Black powder once ha d its use s in blasting rock, but it's not used anym ore sim ply because its dangerous to u s e a n d i t d o e s n t
work half the tim e. It absorbed water and such. A pipe charge m ight well get the stump out of the ground but then you also
have to worry about falling/ flying shrapnel.
Personally, I say that you should just go get an instant cold pack and what you need for AP. If the black powder to which you
refer is sm okeless powder the n y o u c a n f o r g e t a b o u t t h e i n s t a n t c o l d p a c k a n d j u s t m a k e a c h a r g e o f a r o u n d 4 0 g o f s m o k l e s s
powder com pressed into the tube with 10g AP pressed ontop.
I under no circumstances would be setting off shrapnel producing devices in m y back yard. IF you can't get ahold of ANY HE
then there's only one other solution that I can think of... shovel.
Desmikes August 30th, 2003, 01:57 AM

Black powder pipe b0m bz are not very effective against wood that's m ore than 5cm in width, under ground blasting would be
m uch less effective. the conditions under which black powder would actually work are not any easier to achieve than to sim ply
u s e a s h o v e l a s R apist said; it's 13 cm in diameter com e-on...
metal dragon August 30th, 2003, 02:10 AM

I have successfully blasted it. It took three goes but it is now jut little pieces of wood. I drilled a hole in it (2.5 cm across and
10 cm down) filled full of black powder added m y electrical igniters, place d a piece of wood over the hole and nailed it to the
stum p, went away pressed the button and it cracked with a nice boom . I had to do this three tim es in order for it to blow it into
s m a ll pieces.
Thanks for your help guys.
Blackhawk August 30th, 2003, 09:12 AM

That was probably one of the least effecient wa ys you could have done it, but to each their own, at least It didn't throw any non
wood shrapnell (unless the na ils went flying)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > ATM machines
Log in
View Full Version : ATM machines
Efraim_barkbit September 1st, 2003, 01:09 PM

A couple of times a year there is reports in the news paper about people who tries to blow up ATM machines to get hold of the cash stored inside. Today was one of those times.
I don t actu ally remem ber an ytime whe re the "bombers" succ eede d to get hold of any mo ney, this tim e for exam ple, the "bombers" used too much explosives , and the c ash was destroyed.
Othe r t im es, the "m oney conta in er" has nt bee n broken, eve n though som e seriou s dama ge was d one to b oth the m achine and the surrou ndings .
Is the re actu ally poss ib le to make a withdrawal by the use of explosives fro m one of those ma chines without de stroying the money?
I was thin king if the money bo x is cons tructe d so it cant brea k without destroy ing the ca sh? Or co uld it be that m ost peo ple who have "bo mbed " these m achines hav e done it witho ut proper know le dge
of how to d o it, and too k the chance o f getting some fast mo ney, without really knowing how to do it right, and thats the reason fo r the failures? That of course leav es the following ques tions:
What would be the most efficient way to place the charge/charges if one were to try blowing one of these open and what kind of explosive/shape of charge/number of charges etc. would be the best to use?
I would never use my explosives for anything like this, but it might be good for some people to know
EDIT: only searched the forum and a little on google.

shall I delete the thead?
EDIT again: searched the forum again and found a related thread when using keywords: cash machine.
Nothing on ATM machine and ATM, so figured there was nothing about it here. (strange that it didnt shove when searching for ATM with the "Search entire posts " marked...)
mongo blongo September 1st, 2003, 01:46 PM

Didn't search did ya mate.:rolleyes:
mongo blongo September 2nd, 2003, 11:04 PM

Won't let me edit my last post.
Sorry dude you are right. I can remember a thread a while back extensively discussing this exact subject. I think this is it:
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1005&highlight=cash+machine
It doesn't show up in the search for "ATM" for some reason.
James September 3rd, 2003, 04:56 AM

I'm pretty sure that search engines everywhere routine reject term that are less than four or five letters long. Cash machines I'm certain very resistant to attacks and any attacks that the manufacturers
find out about will probably be fixed in the next version and *possibly* passed on the the unit owner/operators as errata. They would certainly be actively looking for such informaton.
nbk2000 September 3rd, 2003, 06:54 PM

Our search engine will use 3 letters. Just search "nbk" if you need proof. :D I don't know what Google would be, but I'd think "VX" would turn up hits, so that's 2 letters at least.
Certainly any competent ATM manufacturer is going to search the 'net for any info related on breaking into their machines. They'd be foolish not to.
But, you can't find such information online anyways, unless you call the An4R<I$+ text files that purport to know what they're talking about "information". :rolleyes:
How much faith can you put in information typed up by a pimply faced teenager? :p
stanfield September 5th, 2003, 12:17 PM

hehe, I've deleted the picture long time ago ! :)
Breaking these ATM isn't a simple task, I guess...

You'll have to be armed to the teeth ! When you'll detonate the charge, all police station near you will be warned...
bye.
vulture September 5th, 2003, 03:48 PM

If you had an EOD robot at your disposal, it could be possible...

detonate 20 other charges in your city to "overflow" the pigs then detonate the ATM...
:)

Oh sure, and have every FBI agent in the region looking for a terrorist cell (that being your ass) and hunting you down like a rabid dog. :rolleyes:
RTPB "4 ways...stealth and cunning" Blowing 20 charges around town is neither stealthy, nor very clever, since it greatly increases the priority of police and federal attention that your crime will receive, as
well as adding nothing to your profit margin.:p
Also, using explosives during the commission of a federal crime (bank robbery, ATM robbery, same thing) makes it a life sentence, regardless, so you'd be better off going into the bank while it's open, and
looting the vault, because you're much more likely to succeed with much less effort. :)
Nihilist September 6th, 2003, 03:19 AM

The best way to get $$$ out of an ATM is by far, the hardest to do, and hardest to get caught doing. It is of course, to "hack" the ATM. It is possible, i'm sure, however i'm sure it is also quite difficult. You
can build or buy you're own magnetic card readers/writers and I would bet you could find some kinda buffer overflow or format string exploit somewhere in the code that processes data on a credit card.
However even if you were to find such a vulnerability, you would still need shellcode(specific to the ATM) and other such things, to actually pull it off.
wrench352 September 6th, 2003, 05:16 AM

This is the best way of robbing an atm I have ever heard of.
At the local Kwikie-mart a machine was out of order.Two guys in overalls,with a clipboard(of course) come in .Get the brain dead stoner,high school dropout to sign off on the "repair form" and wheeled the
sucker right out.No shots fired,no drama In and out.
I looked into trying to Jackpot one for long enough to know it cant be done,but....
There are several malfunctions that come to mind that will cause the machine to shut down automatically.Cash door failing to open being one of them sooooo.
Case the place until theres a long weekend and your pretty sure theres enough loot to split three ways.Make sure theres a real dummy working third shift.Also who does do the repair work on your target?I
bet its Diebold.You should hope so too as their company logo is just a big blue DIEBOLD. Although if the Kwikie-mart guy is dumb enough you could where uniforms marked ACME ATM REPAIR INC or a
resonable facsimile thereof.
Next Sears Brand work overalls grey company logo on right,fake plastic photo ID on left
CLIPBOARD,CLIPBOARD,CLIPBOARD
this is essential to the operation,repair order forms can be bought on the net easily
and last but not least a van
Ive thought about using halloween hairspray to spaypaint the van white and stencil the large blue DIEBOLD on the side
that way it could be washed off ala the Jackal
save the dynamite and rdx for parties
Efraim_barkbit September 6th, 2003, 05:38 AM

Chos e the right time and plac e in my reg io n, and it s mo re lik ely than n ot that the closes t c op will h ave an hour dr iv e to the sc ene... th e closest manned cop station c ould be far away, and manned
means that there is a person there to take calls, wile two cops is out somewhere pouring out some kids beer...
Have a n acc omplice pla ce a bomb dec oy some where fa r away, call in a threat and youll almost guaranteed tha t you ca n work alone for quite a time .
I don t think itll get you a life sentenc e in Sw eden, a nd its no t a very big c hanc e to get ca ught, if you p la y it s mart. It wo nt be an y terrorist BS at least .
I ll look up the recen t article about the bombing, and see if it said anything ab out ho w long it took for the c ops to s hov up this time.

attach 1 big truck to the ATM and GO !
Flake2m September 7th, 2003, 03:18 AM

There have been several ATM robberies over the past few years. In all the cases of robbery or attempted robbery, the thevies normally rammed the ATM then attached steel cable to the ATM and then
proceded to rip the bitch out of the wall. If the steel cables snapped they simply drove off before the cops could arrive. Often a raid like that could get them maybe $50000 on a good day.
Explosives wouldn't be nessecary for a raid like this because this method relies on steel cable and big engine, not being able to blow the thing to bits beforehand. I'd be using explosives to get out the money
when I had the ATM back on the property.

But, I can't undestand how to attach the ATM with the truck ?
The ATM is "into" the wall ? you see what I mean, right ? so, how can we "attach" it ?
What's the device ? any photos ?
sorry for my bad english...
bye.
knowledgehungry September 7th, 2003, 04:44 PM

I believe you would drill some holes and pass steel cable through just a guess.
john_smith September 8th, 2003, 12:52 PM

In my area, most successful ATM jobs have been done by cutting them open with a grinding wheel ON THE SCENE. In at least one case I know about they could just drill out the lock core and retract the bolts
by hand. Of course the general security in the building the ATM is located in has to be really shitty to do so, but there seems to be no shortage of idiots in the security business...
As for explosives, there have been some attempts every once in awhile, but I haven't heard about any of them being successful. Wouldn't say it's impossible to blow open an ATM though, since all those
attempts have been moronic at best...like throwing charges at the screen/front panel or simply somewhere near the machine...
A weird idea I had: some of the older machines that are being slowly replaced but by no means a rarity yet (at least where I live) have doors that close "on" the frame rather than into it, like on standard
vending machines or fridges. There's usually enough room between door and the frame to get a piece of sheet explosive ca. 2mm thick in there. Would this be likely to blow the door off? Also there was a
thread a while ago titled "Planular cutting charge" IIRC. Maybe you could use it to sever the hasps/latches/bolts/whatever thingies that connect such a door to the frame. Since the cash is in drawers, It will
probably survive the explosion...I think.
DBSP September 8th, 2003, 12:56 PM

As far as I understand you could just as well forget about the ATM mashine itself, just smash it out of it's frame or rip it out. What you wan't to get hold of is the safe behind the machine that carries the
money.
Last year two ATMs where blown not close to where I live it was probably the same guy both times as they where blasted close to each other and over a short period of time, just a weak or so.
The guy first blew the machine out of it's frame, and when it was clear he jumed inside and blasted the safe getting the money. However the first time only one blast was heard and I don't think that he got
any money from the first ATM. But he probably learned how they worked and improved his method for the second time when he used two charges. The paint ampule (sp?) inside the money did detonate so
some of the money must have been destroyed, perhaps some managed to stay clear of the paint.

I bet the ingredients of that paint are top secret? Because there must be a solvent that will dissolve it.

Yes, I think The first time, you'll have to blow up the ATM and look inside how it's built and maybe take some photos... but don't try to get any bucks !
and the second or third time, do it for real !

Blow up an ATM?
Why not just buy one, or several for that matter, by becoming a used ATM dealer? :)
There are dealers who sell the machines, so there must be people who buy them. Once you've got a used one, you can take your time analyzing its weaknesses, developing attack strategies, and so on.
With a database of such information at your disposal, you could terrorize the ATM industry, and never have to work again.
:D
Naturally, you'll have to have money to start with to be able to buy the ATM's in the first place, but that's RTPB "Proper Investment" anyways.

hum...
Firstly, I don't think a particular could buy an ATM... (The seller will automaticaly ask you why !find a reason...)
Secondly, as you've said, it won't be cheap...
Finally, who do we need to ask for buying that stuff ???
hard hard hard...
1kg of ANNM will cost you less than this !

even a stolen truck will cost you less than this...
bye !

Life in prison being Bubba's bitch because you were too cheap and unimaginative to spend the dough to follow some RTPB's...hard hard hard...on your ass! ;)
For your consideration:
49. Time spent in reconnaissance of the target is never wasted. A lack of thorough reconnaissance often leads to unexpected surprises that cause failure and arrest.
Seems obvious enough, right? And, in this context, it's not only the actual site, but an extension of this RTPB:
50. Research what you intend to do so that you don't repeat other peoples mistakes.
Research does NOT include blowing a hole in an ATM in the middle of the night, running up with a camera, snapping some pics, then running away before the cops show up. :rolleyes: How many dumbasses
have done that and are now sitting on sore asses in prison? Quite a few, if what I've read in the newspapers over the years is any idication. :D
51. Practice a new skill before you risk using it in a real life situation that you'll have no way of controlling.
Again...how many times will you have to blow a hole in an ATM before you figure out how to do it consistantly enough to be able to get the money out intact? I'll bet one more time than you'll get before the
police catch your ass. :p
Look at the 9/11 Fedaykin. They followed RTPB's very well. They didn't download a warez version of a flight simulator and practice on that before hijacking a jet, did they? No. They spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars, and years of time, to learn how to to actually FLY the damn jets (at the same schools commercial airline pilots go to), and everything else that needed to be done to support their
mission.
They weren't cheap about it, and that's why they succeded. :(
And you don't need an excuse to buy a used ATM. Remember, YOU are not LOOKING for them, people who want to get rid of their old ones (banks, malls, etc) are LOOKING for YOU! :) So you don't need an
excuse. If anything, they're the ones who need an excuse, since it must be either obsolescent/defective/broken/damaged/etc, otherwise they wouldn't be selling it, right? ;)
Insider knowledge gives you a HUGE advantage over someone trying to brute-force their way to success. Look at that high street diamond thief who walked out of a london diamond vault with millions of
pounds in diamonds. The guy established himself, blended in, knew the insiders patterns, and used that knowledge against them.
wrench352 September 10th, 2003, 12:13 AM

I just came from the local Kwikie-Mart the machine didnt look like it was bolted to the floor and it was out of order to boot.I think it would take nothing but balls to walk in with a handtruck and clipboard and
roll the thing out the door.I reckon you have a 50/50 chance the clerk causes shit(either he will or he wont)if he does be prepared to staight up rob the place,tie him up.
there is an atm at a local grocery store nearby the back of the atm sticks out into the super market florist area,this is where they load it.It looks like a mid size vault with sophisticated locks(multiple).
I noticed several banks have drive up atms with acess rooms behind it,locked with simple door knobs.one could brute force the door and blow the atm from behind this way.Very large shape charge at the
hinge.The walls looked pretty thick to me at the super market atm.I guess the thing to do is watch them load it to see if your dealing with redundant walls or something.Does this constitute bank robbery?
wrench352 September 10th, 2003, 07:18 PM

I just looked at a stand alone machine at wally world.In the back there were a 110 looking cord and plug, plugged into a regular wall outlet,an ac adapter looking plug, two small cable bundles,approximately
1/2 in wide each going into the wall at two different spots.There did not seem to be a hook up or coupling of any kind-just running directly into the wall.I did not get a chance to inspect very closely though.The
machine was definitely not anchored to the floor.

How do you know that they weren't attached to the floor? Did you try to tip it? Could you see under it?

It was on small table legs(4ines high),Ill drop some change next time and peek underneath.I have a plan to test the one at the Kwikie,as its flush with the floor.This machine at wallyworld is an impractical
target very large and its always busy.However I got to peek behind it to see how it was wired without looking too conspicuous.The ones at the kwikie have been carted off before I've read about it in the
paper.I think theyre just set in and plugged in.
James September 11th, 2003, 05:20 AM

I think there might be a way to intercept the information stream betwean the ATM and whoever is operating it. Forget about having it spit out all of the money. I was thinking that if you could decode
transactions as they're being processed. You would get all of the bank card numbers used at that ATM. Designing/building the hardware would probably be a major pain in the butt. I think installation and
removal of the device itself could be very quick if planned in advance. It would probably be best to install it no one would check. I think ATMs might use a standardased protocol for transactions.

Encryption prevents the MITM attack.
Though you could build a device that'd read the card data as the card is inserted into the machine. That's been done before. :)
And, yes, stealing an ATM is considered bank robbery if it's operated by an FDIC insured bank or financial institution. Only privately owned ATM's would be exempted from FBI investigation.
James September 11th, 2003, 09:39 PM

Communication by ATM would be in a symetric cypher. That might not really deter someone when they can call up the manufacturer and get the original operating software and feed the machine test values.
I remember reading somewhere that most ATMs ran OS/2. I also remember reading that banks used DES and 3DES. I really should get some more recent information. Also split it up into two dongles one
for long term monitering and one for device hacking. Yes, I probably am an idiot. :o
Nihilist September 12th, 2003, 12:58 AM

Well, if they use DES, then a key must be stored somewhere on the ATM. So, if you were to hack into the ATM, and retrieve the key you could get it, or you could break into the central server for the ATM's
and snag the key's for ALL of the machines serviced by that server. Of course, the easiest way to distribute keys to the ATM's would be electronically, so if you were to install your monitoring device before
the machine was activated, then you might be able to capture it when and if it gets transmitter to the ATM. Another thing you might be able to do, is to capture someones withdrawal, and then replay it over
the wire.

It's a lot more complicated than that.
The encryption keys for the AES (the replacement for DES) used by the ATM for communications with the banking network are burnt into tamper-resistant chips that are installed in the ATM's in specially
sealed security containers that will destroy the chip if they're improperly opened, and that means without an RFID dongle and the proper OTP combination for the time synchronized crypto-lock on the
containers.
See, the system is set up so that not even the ATM technicians can fiddle with it, nor can a colaborattion of several insiders. The ATM system is a physical embodiment of the RTPB "T NO". :)
Replay attacks aren't going to work either, since the ATM keeps a transaction log, and timestamps all transactions with a hash so that replays are immediately detected and squashed. :(

I peeked under the skirt of the machine at wallyworld today.It does not seem bolted to the floor, it appears it is on adjustable standoff legs.This sucker is so large I dont think I could budge it by myself.I will
try though tomorrow.I try to take things slow as there really is no rush.The one disconcerting thing is that those cable bundles seem hard wired,no quick release anything.There is nothing at the wall and I
followed the cables into the machine.If there are quick releases,they are on the interior.This machine looks front loaded and the cables enter the machine near the hinge.The machine at the Qwikie mart is 1/
4 the size and Im going to give it a shove tonight tell ya what happens later.
Terry Collins September 14th, 2003, 08:59 AM

Blowing up ATM machines and getting away with the money CAN be done and has been done. It's not the easiest way to get the money (just ask for it when the come to refill the machine), but it can be done
In Belgium there was a gang who pulled it off several times. First they blow their way into the ATM room, then they blow up the vault. But it takes a lot of explosives and not very surprisingly you'll get a lot
of attention and cops chasing you. And the best way to blow up the vault and get to the money you'll will have to find out: by trial and error (probably getting you busted before you succeed).
But the advantage is you can do anytime., even at nighttime. Sojust try it on and let us know about it!

Now I am not much of an expert in these things :( however, being in security industry for a few years would give you some insight.
1. It is impossible to just "wheel out" an ATM. Without proper pass key / alarm disabling system, an ATM would give out a very LOUD alarm sound (from internal back up battery) when tilted more than 5
degree, like when loading it to a trolley. :o plus them things are godalmightily heavy.
2. On average, an ATM in a shopping centre would rate $100 000 or 12 hour protection, what it means if I am not wrong, is that to be able to remove/open/blow up (with profit to the do-er) the ATM without
proper equipment, it would cost the preperator about 12 hours and for the effort, the maximum profit would be $100 000 thats if you rob the ATM right after they replenish the money on last Christmas
shopping day where the ATM would be most busy (thus no one can rob it wthout witness), coz they wouldn't put more than 50 grands on normal days. Is it worth the risk/effort?:confused:
Now in movies, you may see ppl "crack" safes in minutes..:cool: and they always is a combination key safe and its always the only one key to protect the safe. Thats crap.. excuse my unladylike words :).
Average ATM would have two, 8 lever locks for the outside casing. Plus one 8 lever lock on inside casing. Plus one six pins tumble lock for the money compartment. On top of that, the electronics security
system would have a 6 mushroom pins tumble lock, plus a security call to de-activate .:rolleyes:
Fergit robbing them ATMs. Stick to fun and excitement of bank robbing.. with fake cheque? Creditcards? notes?;)
Just my 2 cents. But hey I might be wrong...
zaibatsu September 17th, 2003, 09:10 PM

I've personally loaded over 100,000 into a cash machine before, and this was during the summer, so not at any strange holiday/time. However, the cash machine was inside a bank, but the doors were not
very secure (having a glass section big enough to remove to gain access).

No doubt, under certain cirsumstance large sum of money can be placed to ATMs . Provided that the location is safe enough and have high enough traffic that demand the utilisation of the machine. No offense
zaibatsu, however, that must be at least 5 years ago. :) (you old man you)
Average shopping centre ATMs would normally carry a lot less than that. They are no longer required in modern shop with EFTPOS machine, where purchases are charged instead of paid for by cash and
availability of cash out from certain merchants. So comon sense dictate placing lesser amount of monies on ATMs for security reasons.
Again I said I am not much of an expert, and maybe where I work have different policy..:confused:
TheExecutioner September 22nd, 2003, 06:00 PM

Hehe you Want Cash from an ATM? Simple, go to a building site and steal a JCB Digger, then drive up to a high street and drive the digger through the wall and you can simply reverse outta there with the
ATM all snug inside.
Ps- NBK, only joking no need to go and ban me now for being "kewl" ;)
EDIT: Actually believe it or not, someone in the UK did actually do this and went on a rampage a year or two back it was in the news.
kingspaz September 22nd, 2003, 06:26 PM

if you'red joking then why spew your sewage into the topic?
wrench352 September 23rd, 2003, 09:54 PM

Parmin:
Okay I did some research not all atms are made the same,the one at wally world is a behemoth compared to the one at the Kwikie-mart.Choose your victim wisely.The one at the Kwikie mart would not
slide when I leaned hard on it,but it did start to tilt.Its one big safe with lots of steel.A hand truck is an amazing tool however and I have moved many things with them I could not have easily pushed
around.How did all your appliances get in your house?Do it the hard way?Not all atm are bolted down either.I researched a little,trying to find the original article from the paper and found several similar
crimes,not many,few and far between,but it happens.This is not a "lone actor" jobI think trying to do the front end loader thing,by yourself,would take too long(unless your expert with a front end loader).You
cant do this job half assed if you expect to be successful.Choose the path of least resistance.
the alarm part,well timing is everything.How many cars a day get stolen with a working ,wailing alarm.Acoustic tile in the van?Tell the clerk its "frozen" before you cut the cord:D
Actually the one at Kwickie didnt look hard wired so you wouldnt even need to do that.
Card counting rule number one,dont bet every hand.Choose the path of least resistance.Choose your victim wisely.
nbk2000 September 23rd, 2003, 11:42 PM

Holy shit...a newbie who's actually thinking things through! :eek:
;)
"Choose your victim wisely". Indeed. You don't go around blindly striking anything and everything in sight. You take your time, make your plans, scout out the target, and hit when everything is in your favor.
If you try to blow up a huge ATM, you're very likely to fail. But walking out with one small enough to fit on a handtruck is much more feasible, and has a history of being sucessfully done, even if the crims
usually get caught later (always for RTPB violations).
The hardwired connections are for the ATM to connect to the banks WAN, and likely the power as well.
Using a front-loader would definitely draw attention. While I'm sure you easily scoop up an ATM using one, how are you going to get the front loader, transport it to the site, and fire it up at 2AM without
drawing heat along the way? Hmmmm.....:p
Mick September 27th, 2003, 08:54 PM

what everyone has forgotten is all ATM's are fitted with GPS tracking.
you rip it out of the wall, the bank can nolonger "ping" the machine to make sure its there - alarm goes off, cops follow you home.
perhaps its different in the states, but thats how it it in OZ. even privately owned machines are fitted with GPS or otherwise insurance will not cover them.
having said that, 99% of ATMs in service stations and other "low key" business' have a max of $5000 in them at any one time. the machine keeps a running total of how much cash is in it at anyone time, and
when it gets to a certain ammount, it sends a message to the bank saying "fill me up" and armaguard comes out, fills it up, and off they go. i've seen them come out twice in one day to fill the machine up
cause it was being used so much.
i believe if the site of the ATM has 24hour security(or atleast security on duty while the business is open) the they will increase the cash limit of the ATM to $10,000.
you'll also find that even most ATMs in the front windows of bank have a limit of around $5000
i work in a service station with an ATM, i've also set the alarm off in the machine a couple of times by hitting it with the floor buffer. (its a silent alarm BTW)
the first time was an accident - minding my own business, buffing the floor, when the whole driveway lights up with blue and red lights, and strange looking men with guns drawn came storming into the shop
"wheres your ATM?!!!"...
the second time i did it on purpose to see how long it took them to arrive - 2 minutes exactly for the first 3 cop cars to arrive, another minute after that 2 more cop cars as well as 2 security company cars.
basicly, you really wouldn't have time to scratch your ass and even then - if a cop just happened to near by, you'd fucked.
hell, even when we have a blackout, they still send a cop, or armed guard down to make sure the machine is stil there(and this still only takes them 3 minutes to arrive. then they sit in the parking lot, or do
regular drive by's, untill the power comes back on)
i could have sworn there was an "RTPB" that said "make sure your crime is worth the time"..either way, its always been one of my rules, and i believe it applies here.
would you be happy to spend atleast 5-10 in jail(or even more if they happen to nail you for anything else, ie. stuff to do with here) for MAX of $5000?.
my answer would be a resounding, NO.

i could have sworn there was an "RTPB" that said "make sure your crime is worth the time"...
That's RTPB "PETTY (Pathetic Earnings To Trap You).
There are plans on the net for close range GPS jammers, which would definitely be something to get and have handy.
Also, GPS doesn't work if it can't get a clear signal from at least 4 or more satellites. And it can't get the signal from inside a metal box (like a moving van with a ground chain or a cargo container), so that'd
squash that. :p
$5,000 is rather pathetic, especially considering all the effort required to break into the damn thing. Armed robbery is much simplier (if more physically dangerous to you) and can net you much greater
gains.
Though the kind of reaction you got from the ATM being bumped or the power going out seems way out of proportion. I've NEVER seen that sort of response here in the US, and believe me, I've tried to get it.
;)
Mick September 28th, 2003, 07:28 AM

Originally posted by nbk2000
That's RTPB "PETTY (Pathetic Earnings To Trap You).
There are plans on the net for close range GPS jammers, which would definitely be something to get and have handy.
Also, GPS doesn't work if it can't get a clear signal from at least 4 or more satellites. And it can't get the signal from inside a metal box (like a moving van with a ground chain or a cargo container), so that'd
squash that. :p
$5,000 is rather pathetic, especially considering all the effort required to break into the damn thing. Armed robbery is much simplier (if more physically dangerous to you) and can net you much greater
gains.
Though the kind of reaction you got from the ATM being bumped or the power going out seems way out of proportion. I've NEVER seen that sort of response here in the US, and believe me, I've tried to get it.
;)
yes, it is way out of proportion. we don't even get that kind of response time when we press the silent "hold up" alarm under the counter. it took 1 cop car 5 minutes to arrive when we last tested our hold up
alarm(nobody suggest holding up a servo either. its a violent crime = 12years jail, total cash $500. i'd do over an ATM before a servo)
most ATM's are metal boxes, so i don't think taking the ATM away in a truck or a cargo container is going to cause it to lose signal.
perhaps if the ATM was subjected to some kind of "electrical distortion" field to disrupt the GPS signal it could give you enough time to get the cash out.
also, if your pinching the ATM, how far do you think you would get in a great big truck before the cops catch up? most trucks aren't exactly speed demons.(unless your driving the bandag bullet or something)
i'm sure there is "money to be made" by ram raiding ATM's, however you would need to pinch alot of them to make it anywhere near worth while. however doing this would break RTPB #51 - keep knocking
off ATM's and they'll get you eventually.
unless you do it over a long period of time, in different areas, with a different MO - but again, how far will $5000 get you - not far enough to change locations, change your setup, and keep you alive for a month
or so until you hit the next ATM.
armed robbery is pretty good, but you'd have to hit a really good target, like an armed truck.(but that again produce's some rather shit house problems to overcome) but even then, armed robbery in OZ is a
violent crime and instantly gets 12 years or more.
one idea i've been ticking over has been midnight raids on rich people.
i'll use this guy as an example (http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=385743&perpage=15&pagenumber=8)(you'll need to have a look at page 9 as well)
a quick run down of the story...
a guy on a forum says that he has an extremely expensive car. the other forum go'ers don't believe him.
so he posts a pic of it. they say he ripped it from somewhere.
so he posts another pic, including things like a holding a penny and a sign stuck to his car. they say he photochopped, and make some reference to his car and $150,000.
so the guy totaly owns them, buy withdrawing $150k from his bank, and piles it up then takes a pic of it and his car. other forum go'ers end up looking like this: :eek: :mad:
altho this is rather funny - this guy is a prime target.

he has access to stupid amounts of cash with relative ease.
my plan would be to basicly, raid his house in the middle of the night, hold him or his wife *whoever* and demand cash, or someone dies.
there are a quite a few pitfalls to this(DNA, hero-factor etc etc), as there are with any plan, however majority of the pitfalls are within reason to overcome(compared to swat beating down on your ass when
you fart next to an ATM).
i was going to go into detail on this, but i believe this would be branching out into a completely different topic....
Anath September 28th, 2003, 08:08 AM

One thing I'd like to point out here, If you are going to drive away with an ATM in a van or truck, it's the Mobile Phone signal you would need to jam, rather than the GPS.
The ATM uses the GPS for a location fix, then dials up the bank on its inbuilt cellphone to report the position, even if the GPS was jammed or destroyed the bacon could still trace you to the nearest mobile
phone 'cell' and probably triangulate your position with a good deal of accuracy using radio-direction-finding techniques as well.
Being in a closed van won't bother it, you can still make phone calls from inside a van or truck right? Mobile Phone jammers do exist
$150 personal jammer (http://starportuk.com/21.htm)
Cell Phone Jammers (http://www.newhouse.com/archive/story1a092200.html)
Oh. and that guy with the Trans-Am and $150k cash?.. He deserves to be robbed.

This guy is going down! :D
How stupid can you get? As per RTPBs:
RTPB: SUPREME RULE
The MOST important thing to keep secret is where you are. If NO ONE knows where you are, you can act with impunity, free from the fear of retribution for your actions.
In this case, we know what city he lives in, which greatly simplifies things.
RTPB: NO ONE can know what you have, how much you have, where you have it, where you got it, how you got it, or where it goes to. Only through secrecy can you keep your ill gotten gains safe from
crooks and cops alike.
Gee...lets see what he's got...at least $150K cash, plus:
T2001 TRANS AM M6 RED

MODS: CORSA, K&N FIPK, ASP PULLEYS, HURST BILLET, T/A GIRDLE, V1
BMR: STB, SFC, APHR, LCA, D/S LOOP
2003 Silverado 4WD 5.3L Z71 ExtCab (SportMasters "Hinged" Tonneau cover)
2000 Tahoe 4WD 5.3L (K&N Filter and B.F. Goodrich A/T tires)
Knowing all the vehicles he owns, how hard would it be to determine who he his by running a DMV search for titles on these make/model of vehicles? If it was only one, there might be hundreds of matches,
but with 3 it's piss easy.
We also know his vocation, which may entail licenses or professional associations, all of which are traceable.
RTPB: Don't front yourself off with fancy cars, jewelry, cloths, and such if you don't have a job that could pay for it. If you work at McDonalds you obviously can't afford a Mercedes.
Well, maybe he does have a job that can pay for it all, but by flashing his shit, he's just drawn the attention of any number of potential robbers who'd likely be happy to snip off some of his fingers to get a hold
of that kind of loot.
As for the ATM, if the ATM is in a grounded metal box (moving van with no windows and a grounding chain) than neither GPS nor cellular is going to work.
I'm assuming you're not in hot persuit within 120 seconds of snatching the ATM.
Both GPS and cellular jammers are required equipment for any serious NBK nowadays because of the prevelance of this technology and the sneaky ways to which it's being put to use. Oh, and video
detectors too.
KAROMESIS January 4th, 2004, 12:41 AM

It seems that mathmatically speaking the odds are greater for the success of snatcing a smaller atm ,being that it has been successful in the past even when the perpitraitors are less than the ideal type:D
atm safes have a cassette inside and the smallest I have seen here in the states is a 700 note cassette, the largest I have seen is 12000 note capacity holding a maximun of 14000 dollars in the 700 and
240000 in the larger in 20$ bills.unfourtanetly the latter is the one spoken of in another thread as being many feet behind the actual cash dispenser mechanism, and would need 20 kilotons of ANNM to get to
the cash by wich time the money would have become the proverbial " green " mist:rolleyes:
ShadowAlchemist January 6th, 2004, 10:57 PM

May i suggest that anyone remotely interested in such an endeavour, should/MUST visit the site i am linking you to. http://www.howstuffworks.com/atm.htm
This website is extremely valuable and very comprehensive. Such knowledge is absolutely essential for furtherance of any criminal career! It has guided me immensly ;)
Gsus January 21st, 2004, 05:53 PM

have you guys ever heard of the millenium dome?
Some guys drove a bulldozer straight through the wall and tried to nick the diamonds below.
"The vault houses a dozen top quality diamonds -- including the 203-carat De Beers Millennium Star, the third largest diamond ever discovered.
Four people were arrested in the vault and another two were captured as they tried to escape by powerboat along the River Thames."
these blokes sure had balls.

Another method of ATM robbery i've heard of but probably won't work any more is pouring water or Freon into the ATM itself through some slot.
As you may or may not already know the water will expand and rip the ATM apart.
Gatyo October 15th, 2005, 07:39 AM

I think that it's pretty reasonable to just go with the clipboard and some working clothes you'll be able to pull this out. You go there with your truck, dismantle the ATM first, then with a magnetic/electric
shock device burn all the electricity in the machine itself. (something simmilar to the bus bomb in ocean's eleven) After that you unplug the cables and for less then two minutes you'll have to carry it in the
van with heavy-lifting tools. At the sametime if you call in a bomb thread somewhere near the neighbourhood you'll have around 10 minutes to get the hell out of there.
strongwbow August 10th, 2006, 11:46 PM

As far as ATM looting goes the hurricane season in South Florida would be easy pickings. Wait till all the power is off and go in a number of commonly owned convenience stores with privately (not bank)
owned atm's. Remove them for "safekeeping" and repair. Remember to "backstop" your new identity in case any LE snoops around. Haul to a remote location and open with a plasma cutter. Be prepared for
a full scale FBI investigation. Just a thought
Jacks Complete August 11th, 2006, 09:20 PM

Nice plan. People tried that in New Orleans, too, and some of them got shot dead by troops out to stop looting. Others got shot by home and business owners, until the troops and police disarmed them by
force. Or by "backstop" perhaps you didn't mean "act as a place for a bullet to come to rest"?
Using a big event like a storm as cover might work, but dying in a storm surge would not make it worthwhile.
FullMetalJacket August 12th, 2006, 01:14 PM

Two words:
Thermic Lance.
Ohhhhh yeeaahhhhh.

The burning bar is a little too hot to open the cash cassett. You need precision. Also if you properly backstop your new "Identity" your new best friends will be local LE. A little BS goes a long way down south
PCBandit August 30th, 2006, 04:08 AM

FYI with regard to bank sponsored, "insert card" rather than swipe, ATMs.
To open the ATM in the 'legit' manner, you'll first need the initial digital combination at the rear.
If you are able to place an employee under duress to open said combo, be aware that by entering his normal combo but out of order will open the rear lock as normal but will also activate a silent alarm at the
security monitoring centre.
After the initial combo has been entered and the main fascia has been openned, a key and further combo is required to gain access. In an 'in bank' situation, all three steps will be carried out by three
seperate employees independant of the others.
There is, however, no time delay on ATMs as opposed to targeting the treasury.
It takes 10 hours to drill through an ATM. If you're planning on drilling, take it home with you!
vigs September 1st, 2006, 04:15 AM

Here is data about Diebold ATM from patent office...blueprints.
If anybody knows how to remove stains on notes from security device or disable one please post here or send me a mail to sucking@mommys.tits.com.
In my research i did find only 3 manufacturer of cash staining systems:
SQS Security
3S1 Security Systems
Fluiditi
I have blueprints of their devices but it doesnt help much, i do not know nothing about the ink itself... They do not produce ink but only security systems where money is placed...a cassete for ATM.
DIEBOLD ATM http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?DISP=25&IDB=0&SORT=1168439-KEY&LANG=ENG&LANGUAGE=ENG&SERVER_TYPE=19&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-

ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CPA%2CABSUM-
ENG&IA=US2004007167&TOTAL=123&C=0&SEARCH_IA=US2004007167&START=1&QUERY=diebold&DBSELECT=PCT&TYPE_FIELD=256&RESULT=22&IDOC=1070576&DISPLAY=STATUS
SQS Security system
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?DISP=25&IDB=0&SORT=1171635-SCORE&LANG=ENG&LANGUAGE=ENG&SERVER_TYPE=19&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM% 2CB-
ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CPA%2CABSUM-
ENG%2CSCORE&IA=SE1999000866&TOTAL=23&C=0&SEARCH_IA=SE1999000866&START=1&QUERY=sqs&DBSELECT=PCT&TYPE_FIELD=256&RESULT=15&IDOC=677117&DISPLAY=STATUS
It takes 10 hours to drill through an ATM. If you're planning on drilling, take it home with you!
You do not need 10 hours to drill ATM safe... it is only 12mm thick (level 1 safe) You can even cut trough in 7min ..... ;)
The real problem is ink dye... look at this link..
http://www.atmmarketplace.com/news_story.htm?i=14922
Don't quote whole posts when only 1 sentence is relevant! :mad:
nbk2000 September 1st, 2006, 08:19 AM

If the dye doesn't stop the bill from being accepted by a bill changing machine, then that's how you defeat this anti-theft measure. :p
Machines don't care if your money is pink, since they don't look for color, only proper magnetic inductance patterns and dielectric field distortion.
Also, the ATM vault may be able to be penetrated by a torch in some few minutes, but do you have that long before any one of the multiple alarms has summoned the police?
Patent diagrams do NOT equal blueprints. :rolleyes:
Also, why would anyone who does know how to remove the dye-stains from money give it to someone like you for nothing?
The game is to be sold, not told! :p
And research involves reading more than 1 webpage, so it not surprising your 'research' only came up with the three manufacturers listed on the one webpage you linked.
megalomania September 1st, 2006, 09:30 AM

Aww, shucks, masta! Iz gonna hafta go down to the liber-ary and read me the Thomas Register to find out the identity of manufactures who make cash staining systems.
Too hard for you vigs?
Hey, guess what? Google is not worth a shit in finding real information because 90% of the knowledge of man still exists on paper. This is something The Forum was created to rectify.
vizionar September 2nd, 2006, 01:37 PM

They use 1-methylaminoanthraquinone (1-MAAQ)...
bodabdan November 6th, 2006, 12:55 AM

If the dye doesn't stop the bill from being accepted by a bill changing machine, then that's how you defeat this anti-theft measure.
I was once told that drug dealers are likely targets to accept dyed/counterfeit currency. Of course now you have to convert the products back in to cash, and there are possible consequences of screwing the
dealer.
Mr Science April 16th, 2007, 03:47 PM

Found this today, heres another consideration for yoinking money; however, I have no idea how to make/purchase a skimmer. As a guess its a modified card reader in a different case.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=36a_1176267145
nmp2 May 15th, 2007, 08:38 PM

It's not so much the dye packs that bother me, I think we all could find a way around that.
What about tracking devices on the order of LoJack. Do these things have some form of transponder in them?
If not - I'm in favor of backing a truck through a MacDonalds glass storefront and leaving with the free-standing cash box. Maybe 30 seconds. To the bold goes the gold and all that.
But then - If the ATM and it's contents were my responsibility, there is NO way I'd let one of these things out into the public WITHOUT some sort of "help I've been stolen" transponder.
That being said - a large flow of electricity through the casing/frame to disable any sort of beacon (hoping they share a ground to frame) - maybe from an arc welder or high voltage lighting source?
Open the box at your leisure - at someone else's property.
Chopper May 16th, 2007, 01:00 PM

Do these things have some form of transponder in them?
Who gives a shit? Same with armored cash vans.. So what if they've got a transponder. Repeat after me, Faraday Cage.
All you gotta do is get the bugger inside a shipping container (or other suitable metal container) on the back of a truck and drive off. Provided they don't use xrays or anything else nasty & tricky, you're home
and hosed. The radio transponder's signal never leaves the back of the truck.
You can show the effect in your kitchen. Take a transistor radio or a mobile phone, place inside a saucepan then place a metallic sieve large enough to cover the top of the pan over the top. The radio is now
dead, no signal. Works even better when you use sheet rather than mesh. This is why there is detectable leakage from microwave ovens - the screen does let tiny amounts of radiation through.
I STILL can't believe I've never heard of a grab being done like this.
Same with GPS tracked cars. Catch 'em and put 'em in the metal box.
So, in the case of the ATM. Hire a forklift and truck. Ram-raid or forklift the atm from it's ~1 inch bolts, pick up and put in back of truck. Drive away and examine at leisure inside a steel shed.
As for the ink - if you cant wash it off with water, perhaps you cant stain soaking wet(with water) money either.
nbk2000 May 16th, 2007, 05:26 PM

Maybe the reason you haven't heard of anyone using a faraday cage for ATM raids is because they ones that do, don't get caught! ;)
ChippedHammer May 19th, 2007, 11:10 AM

I reckon your nuts trying to blow one open on site, you risk taking out the money and getting serious heat come after you. Ill try find some CCTV footage of people here ram raiding the machines, they drive
one SUV type car (stolen of course) fairly fast at the machine knocking it over and in the process taking out any anchors that were in place.
Then 3-4 guys get out using a combination of a winch and manual pushing they load it into the back of the van / truck and make their fucking getaway. The whole thing takes a few minutes tops, they take the
thing back to their base and use a plasma cutter or oxy torch cut it open. GPS and phone-home devices are useless as a half smart person can build a multiple frequency jammer. From memory it fitted in a
standard van fine, faraday cage is another option only problem would be when removing it from the van. A solution would be to leave it there for a week until the battery runs out.
I remember some idiots decided to drag the thing home, they lived maybe a few hundred meters and when the cop's turn up there were lovely drag marks on the road leading them to the 2 fools. :)
Heres a basic example (went wrong though)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjJqvtromEE
I don't know about the ink, our notes are polymer so I assume its more of a solution that dissolves the money.
Mr Science May 21st, 2007, 03:39 AM

This is 30% on topic, but could radmax be used for a Faraday cage?
http://unitednuclear.com/radmax.htm
Jacks Complete May 21st, 2007, 11:03 AM

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=iIpgxVT0mNE&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DiIpgxVT0mNE%26mode% 3Drelated%26search% 3D shows a Faraday cage handbag for stealing
from shops to stop the radio tags from catching you. Using the same idea for an ATM would work, and it would be more flexible than a container.
Ensure the tag/ATM is electrically isolated from the cage, otherwise you will get a nasty shock if they use the frame as the aerial, since your entire cage will be the transmitter. (and I mean that two ways: if
it's a strong transmitter you might get a physical shock or even RF burn, and if not, you will be shocked that the pork followed you home despite your fancy container lorry!)
godfearsme June 27th, 2007, 04:16 AM

In 2000 I was charged with breaking into several ATM's in Canada...after a lengthy and costly trial I was acquitted on the vast majority of charges. So I guess you could say I have some first hand knowledge
on this topic. Let me begin by saying that the security is constantly in flux and always evolving so what worked a few months ago may not now. The ATM's I was accused of breaking into where all the large
type that are typically seen at bank branches, they load from the back and access is controlled via a small independently alarmed room. Whom ever did these crimes usually entered through the roof directly
in these small rooms that had the door pinned but no PIR detectors. The machines themselves are heavily alarmed but mostly sensitized to large and sudden attacks, violent and heat based attacks. What
the gentlemen who committed these crimes did was use something akin to the jaws of life that firemen use to extract people from automobile wrecks. Imagine if you will two 5 Tone hydraulic rams attached
to two large and very strong "rabbit ears". These are activated using hydraulic hand pumps. The set up looks very much like a giant pair of scissors except pressure is used to open them not close. As long as
the ATM wasn't jarred, banged or struck more than once every 5 minutes or so the seismic sensor would not alert. It takes two or more relatively strong blows to set it off. So slowly but surely the door
would part and presto bango you have somewhere between 50 and a 100k per machine. The only hang up was on the newer machines an alarm sounded upon removal of the cassettes. So it becomes a "lets
get the fuck out of here quick" situation. Often 3 or 4 machines could be accessed via the same control room and on average it took 45 minutes per ATM. As a side note it a good idea to have a 'six' man to let
you know when people are coming to use the ATM's so you can keep quite......So there you go that's how you rob an ATM....PS be very very careful who your partner is cause it would surprise you the
number of rat bastards out there.....
LeshracVNN July 12th, 2007, 05:26 AM

Ever heard of things called 'malls' ?
The blast itself generates lots of attention and confusion.
On the contrary, a charge made to produce a big bang and tons of smoke is much more effective.
1/ Everyone will run everywhere after the bomb explodes.
2/ Smoke will confuse the fuck out of the place.
3/ Nobody will pay attention to you running out of the store with whatever over-expensive goods you had in your hands (it even unlikely people hear you, since they'll likely be screaming to death anyway).
And even if someone notices you/screams at you/tries to stop you; the whole situation will be wayyyyyy too chaotic for anybody to try to pursue you.
The chance of getting arrested is close to zero. Even if you got racked up, you can just pretend to have "tested your luck" or "i didn't realize i was still holding <thing>, i was stunned by the blast !" or "i
feared for my life so i ran, just forgot to return the item later".
Think it out, it's possible to divert attention in such a way nobody will give a fuck about some dude running off.
festergrump July 12th, 2007, 09:47 AM

Locally to me, the piggies are looking to charge a couple of kids with "Domestic Terrorism" under the new homeland security laws because they let about 15 fire hydrants run free in a time of drought as a
prank.
Now you're telling us that by setting off a charge which makes a "big bang" and "tons of smoke" in a mall (full of people, even) to abscond with some "over-expensive" goods (and I just gotta quote this):
The chance of getting arrested is close to zero.
You are completely delusional. Send us a postcard from Guantanamo.
DarknessCloses July 12th, 2007, 03:31 PM

Someone earlier said the ATMs run OS/2. Well, if they are using OS/2 you could probably modify an existing root kit (kernel-level of course). Basically what a root kit does is execute code from a very well-
hidden location. If you could upload it with a fake card or something (I know nothing of the "access" stage with ATMs). Hide an OS/2 virus that gives you admin/root and you'd be set.
OK, this little theory is pretty out there so bear with me. Another thought is since you'd be on the bank's network you could possibly use a 'Cain and Abel' type tool (network password sniffer) for OS/2 to
gain access to the bank's network logins. Imagine if, once you learned the shell code to get the ATM to spit out money, you got every ATM on the network to spit out cash. It would be absolute anarchy.
you can find a list of rootkits at www.rootkit.com

The odds of somehow getting executable code into an ATM via the card slot are vanishingly small. Even getting it past the checksum is going to be tricky.
You would have to find some sort of buffer overflow exploit, in order to get the card code to run, rather than just be a number in memory space. Pretty unlikely.
As for rootkits, they basically corrupt the very lowest level of the system to your whim. Virus scanners and anti-spyware tools that run on the system cannot do anything, since the rootkit can simply send
the correct response to the program, when the real answer should be entirely different.
fiknet July 27th, 2007, 05:37 AM

When looking at ATM's most are heavily enclosed however I noticed some, mainly the portable ones that aren't built in and some have their phone lines exposed, I thought, while it would be hard, you could
perhaps plug a laptop into the line and some how emulate the server software and allow you to withdraw all the money. Of course emulating the server seems real difficult as you have no access to the
software however perhaps some packet monitoring software may be able to help get your foot in the door.

It's going to be well encrypted traffic you are sniffing, so good luck with that.
I'd suggest looking for a weakness in the system with something like a replay attack, wherein you use the same stolen card 20 times to remove 250 at a time, and play the original authorisation back each
time. Except that it wouldn't work if the designers had as much of a clue as your average web designer or car maker.
Physically stealing either the card or the entire machine is going to be easier for the vast majority of people.
I still keep hoping to see a card skimmer in place so I can help myself to it.
nbk2000 July 27th, 2007, 08:02 PM

Actually, Jacks, a lot of the small stand-alones, like those found in convenience stores, use dial-up to connect to the network, and use unencrypted packets to do so.
There was a guy in england who had a bug on the lines of a lot of ATM's, recording the audio, and later decoding it on a laptop to retrieve account info and PIN's. :)
Unsunghero July 28th, 2007, 02:40 AM

Ok, well looking at a few articles, news reports etc I've found some interesting stuff. Apparently they are not all OS/2 oriented as you can tell from this article.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/25/nachi_worm_infected_diebold_atms/
So at least *some* of them have XP on them, this worm seems to have cut packet flow, which would isolate it from at least..the bank's alarm. Looking further into, the ones that ARE OS/2 have a FTP
server exploit to DoS them. Get a few more PCs via viruses, worms, whatever you could DDoS an ATM or multiple ATMs. After a massive DDoS attack knocks them off the network, same effects :D.
Another thing this says is yes, the ATMs are connected to external computer networks at the bank. As darknesscloses said you could cause anarchy if you found a way to make it spit out money, set off the
bank alarm, etc. A way this could be possible is to put a packet-monitoring device on the network cable. Right now I'm researching it but I havn't been able to find anything.
Keserian July 31st, 2007, 07:58 PM

The easiest way to get a packet monitoring device would be to pose as a repair man, and put a 'vampire' tap on the line. Not sure if you can put a vampire on a line that's in use without killing the signal or
causing interference that would do the same. The problem with a lot of interference is that it would cause a network tech to be sent out, and a random vampire tap on a line where there is no normal reason
for one would put up red flags.
The question is, how do they update the software on the machines? If it's updated through the web, you could do some fun with ARP poisoning and the Windows Update system. Simply get onto the network
from the inside and run ARP poisoning. Rather than sending the ATM to the Windows Update website, it gets sent to a website of your choosing. You can then get it to download Windows Updates that have
your rootkit embedded in them. With the rootkit, you could do just about anything you want with the machines OS.
The real prize isn't the money, I think. The real prizes are the bank cards. Simply store the bank card numbers, then either have the machine send it to a server you have access to (preferably illicitly, to
mask your identity). Then you can download it at your leisure from wherever you can get anonymous internet access.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > NG detonation W/O detonator.
Log in
View Full Version : NG detonation W/O detonator.
Sonny Jim September 5th, 2003, 05:00 PM

Today, I did a successful and interesting experiment involving NG.
The aims, to see if NG could be set off
A) Without a detonator, and
B) Without being 'dried' in NaCl solution.
I soaked 5ml into one of those cotton wool face wipes, and wrapped it up in a few layers of Al foil. I then put the 'charge' into a pan filled with NaClO3, sucrose and sulphur
incendary mix, and set it off electronically with a wall and some distance in between it and me.
I heard the whoosh of the incendary mix proceed for about 5 seconds, and then a massive BOOM. With nothing other than rapid heating, the NG detonated, and from what I
can tell from the results, just as well as if the NG was dried.
The bottom of the pan was blown away and was found in one piece but in a very warped concave shape, and a portion of the side of the pan was found blown out into a
straight strip of metal. Another piece, a portion of the side also, was found all twisted and mangled. The pan's handle was not found. A large blast mark of flattened and
uprooted grass was also present.
I think that the NG detonated unconventionally because of
A) The sudden heat rush, and
B) As it was tightly wrapped up in Al foil and therefore unable to burn.
I thought this was interesting and felt like seeing what your thoughts and theories are. SJ.
knowledgehungry September 5th, 2003, 05:16 PM

Yeah, any explosive will Detonate if heated quickly enough, just with some its not possible to do. I posted a similar thread called: NG+Dumbass=bad

IIRC, NG undergoes loworder detonation when heated. Ofcourse the question is, will this low order detonation inflict high order detonation on the remaining NG?
a_bab September 5th, 2003, 07:50 PM

The ability of NG to detonate at a sudden rise of the temperature is well known. One of the funny aspects is that a drop of NG will detonate if dropped on a hot plate. The plate
temperature must be around 230 degrees C or so. Lower temp will result in slow decomposition, burning with flame; higher - instant vaporization. A single drop could be very
loud (much louder than a firecracker).
Cyclonite September 6th, 2003, 04:59 AM

It more than likely wont highorder from a low order. Iv used shape charges designed for a loworder and its significantly less powerful, it was a mortar round and it stayed
pretty much intact with a low order. It just had a section of the mortar wall ripped and bent out and of course all the explosives were gone.
Now that I think about it the explosive was comp B and was very insensitive, so im not 100% sure about NG but I still dont think it would HO.

It was definately high order. Absolutely no question about it.
kingspaz September 7th, 2003, 06:23 PM

i think some people in this thread are misinterpreting the means of high and low order in thsi context. both orders of what we speak are of high order as such because they are
both detonations and not deflagrations (low order you might say :)). the low order we speak of in this context is a detonation of NG at 1000-4000m/s, which, given NG's large
gas production is going to cause a hell of alot of damage. of course not as much as a detonation of around the 7000m/s mark but still pretty dam powerful!
so my part of the point i'm trying to make is that you can't say it was definately this or that. how do you tell the difference between 4000m/s and 6000m/s. you would say the
sound but given that it could have detonated at any rate and you don't have a comparison of known VoD to listen against you've got a 50/50 chance of being right. the
chances are it was a lowish velocity detonation of around 4000m/s.

So the higer VODs are reached only through the use of a detonator I guess. I always thought that was the case, but I've started second guessing that since what recently
happened.
ALENGOSVIG1 September 7th, 2003, 09:51 PM

NG detonates at 7000+ m/s only when a relatively large charge diamater and large cap are utilized.
Cyclonite September 8th, 2003, 08:22 AM

There is a difference in sound and effect. As mentioned with the mortar. You would have to hear lots of high and low orders to know the difference by ear though

How much would you say whether 'drying' NG or not affects it's performance? I'm beginning to wonder if it's worthwhile.
Cyclonite September 8th, 2003, 12:38 PM

Yes it effects it, but I dont think the performance gain would be too great, most applications of explosives people use here dont require "the best" shit. As long as it
doesnt increase the hazard and there is no great performance gain. Iv havent made NG yet though so I may be wrong

Simple, if there's no water in your NG, it can't become acidic!

No, but are there gains in terms of the explosive's power?
a_bab September 8th, 2003, 02:02 PM

Yes, actually the presence of water could make NG more powerful. NC for example it is more powerfull when it contains some water. If you would dessicated the NG prior to
detonation, your report might actually look like this:
"The bottom of the pan was blown away and was found in one piece but in a warped (not very, but enough) concave shape, and a portion of the side of the pan was found
blown out into an almost straight strip of metal. Another piece, a portion of the side also, was found all twisted and mangled. The pan's handle was found accidently after two
hours, far from the blast site. "
There are reports about batches of NG containing water, which spontaneously detonated "due to hydrolysis". Actually, as Vulture said, water + some NOx resulted from the
decomposition of NG---->acid, hence a very sensitive NG. Still, I think your NG detonated from the heat. And BTW, it was a low order detonation.
trinitride3 September 13th, 2004, 12:38 AM

If I want to be sure my NG's VOD is in the 7000 m/s range, how strong of a cap will I need at minimum. I currently use a dark aluminum/chlorate mixture loaded in aluminum
bodied caps to detonate my NG. It seems to be quite powerful but after reading this thread Im starting to think the VOD may not be as high as I hoped.
(If you read the announcement at the top of each section you'll see there is no need to post the same thing 3 times! - kingspaz)
Boomer September 13th, 2004, 10:50 AM

I would not be sure about the low order. Above the critical diameter, most HEs usually accelerate to their high order VoD (some need confinement though).
If this was not the case, something initiated with a fulminate cap would stay at around 4500 m/s. This does not even need much way, PETN in a compound cap does this
within the length of the cap!
And there is another thing that makes HO plausible: If NG is initiated by cooking off, it gets more and more sensitive until it makes DDT. The molecules are so exited (on
such a high energy level) that it takes virtually nothing to make them detonate. That is why the drop test value goes from e.g. 0.8 Nm at RT to nearly zero at boiling
temperature. Taking this into account, it is not unlikely that the sample accelerates to high order if it is sufficiently large.
trinitride3 September 13th, 2004, 03:01 PM

Thanks Boomer! So If I got this right, when I reach NG's critical diameter or above and use a big enough detonator (size wise, of the same aluminum/chlorate composition) it
should go HO regardless of specific cap size/stregth used? Could you give me an example of NG's critical diameter in size & weight? I find NG to be quite insensitive, could I
decrease the critical diameter by sensitizing it with a small amount of aluminum powder?
Im sorry about the repeat posting Kingspaz, it won't happen again.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Im provising linear shaped charges
Log in
View Full Version : Improvising linear shaped charges
Terry Collins October 4th, 2003, 11:04 AM

T h e r e h a v e b e e n s o m e threads about linear sh aped charges, even from years ba ck, but I still haven't seen anyone succeeding
in im p r o v i s i n g t h e m . I d i d s e e s o m e improvised small shaped charges, but just o ne or two.
It's clear it takes a pro to m a k e s u c h d e v i c e s ( a n y o n e c a n m a k e a l o u d b a n g ) .
So maybe it's just a bit too much for you guys..........?
I'm just kidding. But a little bit dissapointed I really am. So has anyone else already succeeded in making an effective LSC ? I
m a d e s o m e m yself I just haven't any pictures of them.
knowledgehungry October 4th, 2003, 01:15 PM

U m there definitly were som e t h r e a d s , s o m e o n e h a d o n e m ade out of angle iron and plasticized AP. Worked very nicely I
forget who, there were many people who have done this you should search harder.

You'll also notice how the m ajority of those failures are the result of people trying to use either AP or ANNM as their explosive,
both of which are too weak to work, as LSC's require hig h 7K m/s to succeed.
Strap some HNIW or CL-20 on the back of a piece of angle iron and you'll have a shaped charge. :)
Microtek October 5th, 2003, 07:15 AM

I think it is m ore of a challenge to produce a good ordinary shaped charge where the liner is actually "extruded" by the
explosion the way we've all se en in various pictures.
I h a v e m a d e num e r o u s s h a p e d c h a r g e s i n s i z e s from 4 m m to just over 1 cm using various types of liner and m o s t o f t h e m
have worked excellen tly, penetrating 2 m m m i l d s t e e l ( t h e 4 m m one ) or up to 40 m m wood ( the 9-11 m m sizes ) with
clean, narrow perforations just using AP as the explosive.
However, on closer examination, I have found that the effect is due to the focuse d shock ( monroe ) rather than ex truded
liner. This has m a d e m e think that m aybe SCs on this scale would be m ore effective if using som e sort of silicone plug to
transm it the shock rather than a liner.
LSCs are sim pler to m a k e b e c a u s e m uch less precision crafting is neccessary; the liner is availible com mercially in several
m aterials and centering the detonator in the ch arge is both easier and le ss im portant. The only real challenge that remains is
t o p r o d u c e a g o o d h o mogenous explosive charge with sufficiently high performance.
DBSP October 5th, 2003, 11:39 AM

Disp ite the said lim it of 7000m/s for an LSC/SC to work I m ade a fully fu nctioning LSC using ANNM that cut a 6m m plate. And it
wasn't ripped off but actually cut. And I've got the pics to proove it. Most older m e m b e r s s h o u l d h a v e s e e n t h e m by now.
Johnny Novem ber 1st, 2003, 12:37 PM

DBSP is right. NM exp losives can be used. They produce a jet ou t of the liner and you get a real cu tting effect. AP is useless
except as a prim ary charge. So no one can make LSC's with AP.
But to create this cutting effect it takes a little m ore than just attaching a liner like NBK says. You need to balance the amount
a n d s h a p e o f e x p l o s i v e , c o n f i n e m ent, type of metal liner, thickn e s s , a n g le and stand off distance. So it's for pro's. And that's
excactly the reason why I didn't find m uch results.
And nice pictures DBSP but I did't find the LSC pics.
xyz Novem ber 1st, 2003, 09:34 PM

Axt has used NM/Am i n e e x p l o sives in SCs, so I think th at NM explosives are just powerful enough for SCs. I would still prefe r
t o u s e s o m e t h i n g l i k e R DX or PETN.
jaques May 7th, 2004, 03:44 AM

what should the standoff distance be? i've looked on se veral threads but i can't really find any info on this...
nuclearattack May 7th, 2004, 02:06 PM

To Jacques:
if yo u n e e d s o m e i n f o a b o u t s h a p e d c h a r g e s i c a n m a i l t o y o u a p d f f i l e w h e r e i s e x p l a i n e d a l l a b o ut LSC.
The pdf is 1 Mbyte so you should empty your e mail box.
Tell me if you want it and i'll post it to you as soon as p o s s i b l e f o r m e .
aikon May 7th, 2004, 03:36 PM

what should the standoff distance be?
That depends on various factors, but as a general rule you can say that the distance shou ld be around 1,5 to 2 tim es greater
t h a n t h e d e p th of the cavity.
I got this from an european blasting training m a n u a l a n d S W IM said it works. :)
Boomer May 25th, 2004, 01:16 PM

I h a v e f o u n d that the less perfect the liner is form e d , t h e s m aller the stand-off should be. This is because an irregular liner will
form a jet that separates early or even changes direction.
BTW what do you call a LSC without m etal liner? LMC = linear m onroe charge? I m a d e o n e t o t e s t m y new RDX plastique with
energetic pla sticiser. Results will be found in the plastic explosives threat in a few days.
Efraim_barkbit May 25th, 2004, 04:20 PM

B o o m er, Its still an LSC even if it lacks a liner.
I think I will do a com parison between TNP and ANNM in LSCs som etime s s o o n , I t d e p e n d s o n h o w m u c h T N P I c a n get from
the ASA I just aquired.
I h a v e m y s u m m er holiday in a couple of weeks, at least then Ill have tim e for it, if not earlier.
It will be with an Al liner, wich probably isnt the best to use, but thats what I have avaliab le right now in the right th ickness.
nuclearattac, what is the LSC file called, is it on the ftp?
nuclearattack May 26th, 2004, 05:32 AM

The PDF file i have is:"im provised shaped charges" from Desert Publications.
I don't know if it is in the FTP because i found it with EMule p2p.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > prim aries detonation physics
Log in
View Full Version : primaries detonation physics
pdb October 6th, 2003, 01:20 PM

To my knowledge, we have a pretty go o d i d e a o f t h e d e t o n a t i o n p h y s i c s i n H E , t h a n k s t o h i g h - s p e e d f r a m e c a m e r a s ( v i d e o
now), sensors of all k inds and the like. But when it comes to prim aries, the picture is less neat, as it is quite difficult to explain
how a shockwave can occur in very sm all loads of explosive with a fast DDT (Pb(N3)2, AgO NC, DPNA etc). Som e authors in th e
sixties have m entionned a possible "resonance" in the detonation process, but I don't know exactly where we stand today.
C a n a n y o n e e n l i g t h e n m e a b o u t t h i s f a s c i n a t i n g p h e n o m ena ? I've been looking through litterature with little sucess, as this
rese arch field does not seem t o p a s s i o n a t e m any...
Cricket October 6th, 2003, 05:27 PM

The way I see it to work is tha t once the m aterial is ignited, it will continu e to deflagrate until the g a s m ade from deflagration
provides eno ugh heat, pressure, and confinement around the area to allow for the DDT. I never thought of resonance
occu rring, but it certainly could I think. And if/when it did/does, I could see it aiding in the DDT process. It's very interesting. If
it were a powder, rath er than a solid, I would th ink resonance occurring slower and less efficiently. I would a lso think that DDT
in a material would be affected by things as simple as the m anufacturing technique and the tem peratures at that tim e. It
would affect crystal size -> surface area -> speed of deflagration -> speed of gas production -> the density of that gas
produced -> speed of the pressure produced needed to obtain DDT. And if it were a pressed solid, then things like the textu re
of the thing that pressed it wo uld also matter in that sam e way. It would alter the surface area. And the actual flam m ability
a n d V O D ( d e flagration, not detonation) of the m olecule are probably the biggest factors in the speed of DDT. And things like
physical structure would matte r (powde r, solid, crystal, d ensity of these, ect.). So, it is sort of comp licated, but it also makes
sense. I don't know if all this shit is correct or not, but it seem s logical to m e. So until som e o n e t e l l s m e t h e better, I believe
this. Later.
pdb October 9th, 2003, 10:35 AM

I would roughly agree with all the facto rs you listed, that can im pact the DDT characteristics.
H o w e v e r , t o c o m e b a c k o n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f y o u r p o s t , s o m e e x p e r i m ents have been conducted with m etal acetylides (Ag, Cu)

e x p l o d i n g i n v a c u u m . They sh owed that in such conditio ns (no air around, and no gas generated), mechanical effects are still
observed, even on very small quantities... which is quite puzzling !
a_bab October 9th, 2003, 11:48 AM

I think it is n ot.
W h e n A g 2 C 2 explodes, the products are of cou rse Ag and C, in a gaseous state. So even with Ag2C 2 , y o u ' l l g e t g a s e o u s
products. As the explosion products are gases, ejected at high speed/temperature, you'll get a heck of a m echanical effect.
T h e v a c u u m m e a n s n o s o u n d , b u t t h a t d o e n s ' t m eans no mechanical effect.
pdb October 10th , 2003, 09:13 AM

I a m aware of this argum ent. But I think it's a little short and I stiil believe that d etonics experts d o not consider the
detonation process in tiny loose primaries loads the same way than in an "infinite diameter" cylinder of HE. I had some years
ago the opportunity to spend a few m onths in two detonics labs (one French, one German) and, although this suject was not
explicitely addressed during m y stay, it was evident that people were looking at the two phenom ena differe ntly.
However, it would be nice to read other m e m b e rs' opinion. Again, I never found m uch litte rature about ithis specific subject.

The resonance theory could explain why NG can only undergo low order DDT from f l a m e , b e c a u s e t h e r e s o n ance energy will be
severely dissipated by the liquid, which can't happen in the solid state.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > H e m i s p h e rical Lined Charges
Log in
View Full Version : Hemispherical Lined Charges
Axt October 23rd , 2 0 0 3 , 1 1 : 4 2 P M

<center><table cellpadding="20"><tr><td><table border="1"><tr><td colspan="2"><center>Properties</center></td></tr><tr>
<td>Explosive </td><td>ETN/NM/NC</td></tr><tr><td>Cha rge Weight</
td><td><fon t size="2">35g</td></tr><tr><td>Liner</td ><td>25mm C u</td></
tr><tr><td>Liner Shape</td><td>Hem isphere</td></tr><tr><td>Casing</
td><td><fon t size="2">PVC</td></tr><tr><td>Standoff</td><td >62mm </td></
tr><tr><td>Target</td ><td>16mm Plate </td></tr></table></td><td><center><im g
src="http://ww1.altlist.com/~52497/rogue.altlist.com /im a g e s / 1 i n c h s c s m a ll.jpg"></center></td></tr></table></center>
H e m ispherical liners are m uch easier to source or make then conical liners, and a chieve m uch the sam e effect. A military 2" Cu
h e m ispherical lined charge at a VOD of 7800m /s via RDX/TNT can penetrate up to 300mm of steel. While we cant totally
duplicate the tolerances used in creating that, we can easily source the m aterials to im provise our own.
Liners can be sourced in m any sizes for legitam ent reasons, heres (http://ww1.altlist.com /~52497/rogue.altlist.com/im a g e s /
cuhemi.jpg) som e copper liners ive m anaged to find, dont ask where, there not h ard to find, hint - search for measuring
s p o o n s a n d l a d l e s . C o p p e r e g g beating bowls are also comm on ... if you want a foot wide charge :D
The charge shown in this thread used the largest of the 3 liners on the left, a thin walled 1" copper liner. The explosive used
was ETN/NM/NC plastic mixed to OB. On detonation the charge p erform ed well, with the jet completely pene trating the target
(http://ww1.altlist.com /~52497/rogue.altlist.com/images/plate.jpg) and created a large crater in th e wet ground. Som e
fragm ents of liner were sprayed out to one side (bottom left of hole in bottom left picture), perhaps as the result of the
detonator be ing slightly off centre.
<center><im g src="http://ww1.altlist.com /~524 97/rogue.altlist.com /im a g e s / s h a p e d c h a r g e . j p g " >
MO VIE ADDED (http://geocities.com /roguem ovie3/)</ce nter>
Yes, in hind sight I know I should have placed the plate on top of the roo and fired it to see what sc jets do to body tissue, its
n o t s o m ething I thought of at the tim e. I could nt even find any penetration wounds from the PVC , actually I couldnt find any
remnants of the charge at all. PVC is very brittle under impact which form s very sm all fragm ents th at dont travel far, if I was to
skin it I guess there would be many very small holes.
A n y o n e k n o w t h e a d v a n t a g e s / d i s a d v a n t a g e s o f h e m ispherical over conical liners?
IDTB October 24th , 2003, 12:22 AM

Arg! The archive the m ovie is in seem s to be currupted. It also seems after downloading that I used up your m a x i m u m
bandwidth..
Perhaps you could just upload it to the FTP?
0EZ0 October 24th , 2003, 12:38 AM

Very nice pre sentation Axt. I'm always im pressed with the quality and depth of yo ur reports.
W hen using high VoD composites, plastics do tend to shatter and fragm e n t i n t o m a n y s m a l l p i e c e s . U n d e r s o m e circum s t a n c e s
the plastic can even atom ize into quite sm all particles a nd weld to nearby surfaces. It's interesting to catch some of the frags
to see what they look like.
W e l l t h e c o n i c a l c o n e y o u h a v e u s e d s e e m s to have performed quite well. It may well be that there was a b ubble or sim ilar
inconsistency in the charge close to the inside surface of the liner causing the spray. Unde r the intense conditions, as the
copper liner liquefies, it would be conceivable that a bubble caused a lag in the form ation of the penetrating slug, m aking that
portion of the liner not fully fo ld around, and spray a little bit outward. The overall effect would differ little though. Thats m y
theory. Still a nice punch through the plate.
Keep up the good work :)
Axt October 24th , 2003, 09:19 AM

T h e m o v i e m ay be ru nning out of bandwidth when only partly do wnloaded .. m a y b e . W hich with geocities seems to be getting
less and less, wankers dont even tell you how m uch you can use. Ill try find som ewhere else, though it shows nothing the still
fram es dont, very sm o k e y .
The reinstatement of picture im b e d d i n g a n d H T M L w a s m y que to start m aking th ings look a bit nicer, and hopefully prove that
m o r e f r e e d o m over post formats can be a good thing.
The detonator was actually a bit off centre, I had it glue d into the endcap which m o v e d a s i t w a s s e t t i n g , m a y b e 2 m m off. I
r e m e m ber seeing photographs of a sc-jet, from a charg e that had been drilled into to sim ulate bullet/shrapnel dam a g e ,
created a funny curve d jet that seem ed to defy physics.
mongo blongo October 24th , 2003, 11:11 AM

Very nice Axt! I do enjoy reading your reports. :)
If you have ETN then it would be very interestin g to cast it into the shape d charge and see if there are any significant changes
in penetration. Cast ETN with suspended R DX crystals would probably be one of the best com positions you could use for this.
Axt October 24th , 2 0 0 3 , 0 9 : 0 5 P M

The movie should work now.
I i n t e n d t o l e t s o m e o n e e l s e m elt cast ETN first ;), anyway heres an x-ray picture of a sc jet with a hole (or bubble) in it. You
can see how it spraye d out in a loop in the direction of the defect, so yes a small defect could have caused the bit of spray.
<center><im g src="http://ww1.altlist.com /~524 97/rogue.altlist.com /im ages/scho.jpg"></center>
Flake2m October 25th , 2003, 03:59 AM

That video was quite good. What was with the dead Kan g a r o o t h o u g h ?
H e m ispheres would be easier to make, all though they would no t b e p e r f e c t l y r o u n d . S W I M c o u l d m a k e o n e b y o b t a i n i n g a

copper sheet and either;
1 . U s i n g a p r e s s t o s t a m p i t i n t o t h e s h a p e o f a h e m i s p here
2. Placing the sheet over a an object such as a bowl and then banging it into shape, using the shape of the bowl as a
template.
T h e s e c o n d m e t h o d c a n u s e b a s i c e q i p m e n t - A h a m m er, A ball or bowl etc and som e s h e et metal, though the shape will be a
bit lum py.
W ould the th ickness of the copper have anything to do with the penertration of th e jet?
Axt October 26th , 2003, 11:52 AM

T o s e e t h e e f f e c t o f P V C s h r a p n e l , b e a t s g i v i n g it to the dogs. Though in the end it m e a n t n o t h i n g a s I w a s n t k e e n t o s k i n t h e
bastard.
The best process for m a k i n g c o p p e r h e m i s p h e r e s i s d o n e b y a d a p t i n g a l a t h e a n d u s i n g w h a t i s k n o w n a s " m e t a l s p i n n i n g " ,

heres a good page on this process - http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acm q / s p i n n i n g /
Thats how the one I used was m a d e .
Flake2m October 28th , 2003, 12:51 AM

A x t ; T h e m e t h o d I h a d e x p l a i n e d , w a s f o r p e o p l e t h a t d i d n ' t h a v e a c c e s s t o m etal work equipm ent, such as a m etal lathe.
W h i l e t h o s e M e t a l h e m ispheres that are shown on that link are rather nicely crafted, not everyone that wants to exp e r i m e n t
with hemispherical shaped charges has the skill level to m a k e t h e m .
Also buying m etal hem ispheres can be an expensive process, the ones on that link aren't likely to be cheap, plus SWIM would
need quite a few of them to conduct enough tests.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Im prove the range of your rem ote
detonator!
Log in
View Full Version : Improve the range of your remote detonator!
The A LL-MIGHTY October 27th , 2 0 0 3 , 0 8 : 5 6 P M

I f a n y o n e h a s a r e m o t e detonator that's range you'd like to im p r o v e , t h e n I ve f o u n d s o m ething f o r y o u ! I f o u n d t h e s e t w o
IC's that will increase the range of any RF, and I think IF, device. They am plify th e frequencies 10m hz-3ghz! And on top of
that the IC's are about as big as a 555 timer circuit and are extremely sim ple to hook up (the thin g h a s 5 g r o u n d t e r m i n a l s ,
one vcc terminal, and RF in/out term inals). I don't know exactly how far this will increase your range but it will probably am plify
the signal around 18-20db.
There are two different IC's, o ne will am p your signal from your transm itter and the other will provide a power boost to
signals com ing into your receiver. I would recomm e n d o nly using the transmitter am p o n e b e c a u s e i t a m p l i f i e s t h e s i g n a l
goin g out, not in, like in the receiver booster one. W ith the receiver one, too m uch power going in can damage your receiver,
s o b e c a r e f u l . T h e t h i n g s a r e a b o u t 1 5 $ a p i e c e o f f D i g i - K e y , I ll ge t m ine a s s o o n a s I get around t o ordering it.
Here are som e links:
Product page:
http://www.linxtechnologies.co m / l d o c s / m o d u l e s / m _bba.shtm l
PDF specs page:

http://www.linxtechnologies.co m / l d o c s / p d f s / b b a m a n u a l . p d f
Digi-Key purchase page:

http://www.digikey.com /scripts/us/dksus.dll?Criteria?Ref=47584&Cat=31392740
H o p e t h i s h e l p s s o m e people...! (i've been trying to find stuff like this forever)
Tuatara October 27th , 2 0 0 3 , 1 1 : 1 1 P M

Nice find! Note that the spec says max 50m W output on the high power version, so if you're alread y at the legal limit for a
s m a ll tx (about 10m W) you will see a range increase of about 2x.
Am plifying at the receiving end wont always pro duce the desired result, as the receiver's noise figure will degrade, by about 4dB
in this case. The only tim e this is a real advantage is when you have a long antenna cable to drive , so putting an am plifier just
after the antenna can improve the SNR of the system .
$15 is pretty good for a hybrid device, especially from Digikey.
The A LL-MIGHTY October 29th , 2 0 0 3 , 0 6 : 0 7 P M

I f o u n d a n o t h e r R F am p that provides a greater db output power but has a 28v in put requirem ent. If your willing to carry a 28v
batter around, about 3 9v's, you should get greater range from your tran sm itter, oh yes its frequency range is 1-200m hz. what
do you think Tuatara? worth it or not? and i can't find a price on it yet.
http://www.remec.com /products/part_results.cfm?part_num ber=qbh-2832
http://www.remec.com / p d f s / q b h 2 8 3 2 % 2 0 8 _ 0 5 _ 0 3 . p d f
Tuatara October 29th , 2 0 0 3 , 0 7 : 0 6 P M

That one looks pricey. Notice it not only needs 28V, it sucks half an amp too. Thats 14W, most of which is going to wind up as
heat - hence the fat m etal m ounting b lock. This thing would only be useful for VHF or CB frequencies. Most of the "door chim e "
type O T C transm itters will be using the unlicensed band s around 305MHz or 433MHz, so this one wont help m uch.
F o r I S M b a n d ( 8 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 M H z ) l o o k a t M a x i m ( h t t p : / / p a r a . m a x i m -ic.com /com pare . a s p ?

F a m =rf_pwr_am p&Tre e=Wireless&HP=W ireless.cfm&ln=)
stanfield October 30th , 2 0 0 3 , 0 8 : 1 9 P M

I'm wiring m y own radio transm itter and I will use the PLA05W from Aurel... sounds dam n g o o d b u t d a m n e x p e n s i v e : a b o u t
40$ !
Anyway ! security has no price :)
see ya...
The A LL-MIGHTY Novem ber 3rd, 2003, 08:47 PM

Tuatara: you said that with a normal tx you should see a range increase if 2x. Bu t in the pdf under "typical application" it says
that with a lo w cost narrow band tx you s h o u l d s e e a r a n g e i n c r e a s e o f 6 - 7 x . T h a t b e i n g s a i d i s a 1 0 m W t x t h e s a m e a s a l o w
cost narrow band tx? And: what category would an r/c ca r tx fall under?

T h e r a n g e i n c r e a s e I s u g g e s t e d w a s b a s e d o n r a d i o p r o pagation being roughly an inverse square law : dou ble the range,
s i g n a l d r o p s t o 1 / 4 . S o g o i n g f r o m 1 0 m W t o 5 0 m W is a bit over 4x powe r , e r g o r a n g e i s d o u b l e d . T h e s u g g e s t i o n o f 6x to 7 x
r a n g e m ay be based on a lower input power - its not quoted in the text, but given the 18dB of gain available, you could get
5 0 m W out from less than 1m W input.
john_smith Novem ber 4th, 2003, 12:24 PM
W hile we're at it...how m uch wattage would it ta ke to achieve an about 2 mile range in urb an area? Say the transm itter
operates on com mercial FM band and has a 1/4 wavelength telescoping antenna, and the receiver is a cheapo OTC FM radio .

That is a surprisingly difficult question to answer. U rban situations really throw a spanner in the works when it com es to radio
p r o p a g a t i o n , d u e t o m u l t i p a t h interference. You can get a reflection from a building that will com pletely flatten your signal at
one point, yet 1 metre further out you get perfect reception. FM also works better if you have line-of-sight from TX to RX.
Buildings and hills wont do you any favours.
I'd go for about 100m W a n d e x p e r i m ent to see if you get the range you want. That should be plenty for 2 m iles. Check your
local radio licensing laws to se e how much you can transmit without bringing the FC C or wh atever down on your head. They
W ILL find you - they have the technology and they are watching. (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt:D )
The A LL-MIGHTY Novem ber 10th, 2003, 05:52 PM

I f o u n d t h i s s c h e m atic for a 1-watt class c am plifier a long tim e a g o . Ever since I ve b een playing around with the idea that it
could be used for my rc detonator to increase range a lot. I already did the math for the capacitor and indu ctor values a
while ago but never p urchased parts because I didn't know if it would work. http://www.wenzel.com /pdffiles/class_c.p df is the
p a g e I g o t t h e s c h e m atic from . Tuatara, you th ink this would or could be adapted for a 49 mhz TX? It can be used with
frequencies f r o m 3 0 - 2 0 0 m h z b u t I th o u g h t I d a s k j u s t t o b e s u r e . T h a n k s

Should work just fine for 49MHz, provided you've got en ough drive power. Looks like its calling for 13dBm input, which is
2 0 m W. The parts shouldn't co st much - go ahe a d a n d h a v e a p l a y !

J u s t a s u g g e s t i o n , b u t surely you would do better to build a sma ll-ish directional aerial/antenna? Do a search on "Pringle can
antenna" on google. You get a lot of derectionality, but it should be fine for anything approaching line of sight, which I suspect
m ost... single use... devices would be. A basic sight would make it sim ple.
S o m ething less directional could be used instead, there are plenty of designs about. Even a 3dB gain will double your range,
and ten dB would make it ten times further. IIRC Pringle ones go up to something daft like 18dB!
This way, you don't need to carry a device that could get you into trouble with the FCC or whoever, until you a s s e m b le it. And
that's a good thing. You would be less likely to get caught if you were broadcasting directionally, too.
If you knew where you were going to stand to detonate, you could even have gain on the reciever, but that might be risky!

Directional antennas are just a wee bit tricky at 49MHz (translation: very big) but at UHF and highe r are very practical, and as
Jack said, an easy way to get more range (not quite for free, but pretty close to it).
Sm all correction: 3dB gain = double the power = 1.4 tim es the range (far field)
10dB gain = 10x power = 3x range
Edit: Just had a look at the Pringle can antenna. Nice! Note that it runs at 2.4GHz (thats m icrowave ), thats how they got so
m uch gain in to such a sm all space. Not exactly inconspicuous though - even the m ost credulous cop is going to won der about
the N connector hanging out the side :D
postalwarrior Novem ber 22nd, 2003, 12:02 AM

o well i cant even figure out how 2 m a k e a r e m o t e d e t o n a t o r
Jacks Complete Novem ber 22nd, 2003, 10:20 AM

W ow, postal posted, and then gets banned. I wonder if he went postal?
Anyway...
Tutara,
Thanks for the correction. I should probably have checked up on that. I was, as you rightly said, thinking of power alone,
rather than range.:o
HVD Novem ber 28th, 2003, 09:45 PM

I realy wouldn't want to be using any 4 9 m hz equipment for ... shall we say 'sensitive' ... switching applications. It m a y b e
cheap to pull it out of an old rem ote controlled car etc b ut it really isn't worth the risk or m inor cost savings. It's realitively easy
to build a UHF system (418 or 433 Mhz or higher if you wish) that uses an 8 bit code to identify itself to the reciever and pre-
aligned Tx Rx m odules.
Stick an external antenna with gain on the Tx as well (ie even a 1/4 wave whip. To keep it 'legal' in the UK you should only
have an internal ante n n a o n t h e T x ) a n d y o u c a n g e t o v e r t h e q u o t e d 2 0 0 m range with the legal 10 mW R F out. Line of site i
can get about 350m - possibly more - with 1/4 wave antenna's.
Stick one of those m onolithic IC rf am plifiers on the Tx and you can increase the range yet again.
Of course the advantage is that because it's an 8 bit code the chances of getting interference is minim i s e d a n d h o p e f u l l y o n l y
you can activate the reciever. A step up is to use a rolling code IC but that's a little m o r e a d v a n c e d .
Anyway check out google for cheap Rx Tx m o d u l e s a n d c h e c k o u t H T 1 2 E , H T 1 2 D & H T 1 2 F R e m o t e C o n t r o l E n c o d e r / D e c o d e r s a t

m aplin.co.uk for starters. You can just literaly wire the e ncoders straight into the input of the transm itter an d t h e d e c o d e r
straight from the output of the reciever. Stick in a transistor and a relay and you'r hom e free to switch whatever you want :-)
Hope this was useful and can steer som e people away from 4 9 m h z e q u i p m e n t a n d m i s s i n g l i m b s w h e n e v e r s o m e k i d s w i t c h e s
on his Toys R Us walkie talkies :-)
HVD
The A LL-MIGHTY D e c e m ber 1st, 2003, 05:39 PM

O k , i t s e e m s e v e r y o n e is like "don't go with 49m h z T X s, t h i n k a b o u t s o m e little kid playing with his car and accidentally
setting off whatever your trying to light!". Now in a sense this is true but come on, with some comm o n s e n s e y o u r C A N a v o i d
all this! For starters I don't live in a crowed area, the clo sest hou se is about 400-500 ft away, and they don't have kids, nor
do any live o n m y road, so that kind of elim ina tes any problem s at m y h ouse. Second, usually I don't set off anything AT
m y house to avoid suspicion, the place I do set m ost of m y stuff off is about a 3/4 of a m ile from ANY houses what so ever,
and no one with a r/c would ever go back there (no good terrain for sm all cars) and it takes about 15 m in to get to (walking)
so why would a little kit walk a ll that distance to play w/ his car for 20m in on shity ground? And third: even though I use a
r e m o t e d e t s y s t e m I s t i l l u s e f u s e ( g i v e m e tim e to cover ears, put down TX, whatever) which m e a n s i f f o r s o m e r e m o t e
reason if it did get se t off prem aturely you would see th e fuse burning and have tim e to g et at least 20ft away and hide
behind a tree or duck or som ething. So with a little comm o n s e n s e y o u c a n m a k e a 49 or ever 27mhz system work and not
worry about blowing yourself s k y h i g h . B u t t h e n a g a i n , a s s o m e o n e o n t h i s f o r u m h a s f or their signature, com m o n s e n s e i s n t
alwa ys com m o n (I think I g ot th a t one right) , a s long a s I o b s e r v e m y own s a f e t y r e g s , I m h a p p y
Tuatara D e c e m ber 1st, 2003, 09:49 PM

T h e c o m m ents that a pply to CB or RC channels, also apply to any radio channel. Interference comes in ma ny form s, from
m any sources, so this m ust be taken into account by using an encoding system which will provide robustness in a noisey (radio
noisey!) environm ent. No system will e ver be perfect, but you can m ake the chances of a false trigger very, very sm all.
C o m bined with all the usual precautions, you and those around you will get to keep their limbs;)
rayman D e c e m ber 12th, 2006, 07:25 PM

a s l o n g a s I o b s erve m y own s a f e t y r e g s , I m h a p p y
And that was his seco nd to last post, His last post was umm m 1 2 d a y s l a ter
Not trying to dig up an old thread, But safty is not som ething to shrug at

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > SO E/O SS Firing Devices
Log in
View Full Version : SOE/OSS Firing Devices
Dean Owen Novem ber 8th, 2003, 09:06 PM

I was metal Detecting on a SO E/O SS training area and found a few types of "switches" and other firing devices. Does anyone
k n o w o f a s i t e t h a t s h o w s a n d e x p l a i n s t h e s e t h i n g s ? D o e s a n y o n e h a v e a m anual that they could copy for me ( I pay the
costs ) This info is for m y loca l Military Historical Society and all finds also go to them for future display in the museum that is
goin g onto the site.
Dean Owen
W hitby Ontario Canada
Lil_Guppy Novem ber 9th, 2003, 06:59 AM

Just a tip from a h u m ble newbie, try not to put your exact location and nam e in your posts or your nick for that m atter.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Trip W ire Trigger
Log in
View Full Version : Trip Wire Trigger
Garbage D e c e m ber 3rd, 2003, 02:39 PM

I m l o o k i n g f o r any inform a t i o n a b o u t t r i g g e r ( b o o k s , s i t e s , pictu res).
I h a ve m ade this trig g e r s o m e tim e a go, it s f rom R a g n a r ' s H o m e m a d e D e t o n a t o rs:
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/g arbagelive/trip/20.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/g arbagelive/trip/trip.htm
Jacks Complete D e c e m ber 4th, 2003, 10:53 AM

You can use a clothes peg with two dra wing pins for electrical trip s. Just put som ething non-conductive between them , a n d h a v e
the wire pull it out.
Electrical systems are very mu ch easier to set up than m echnical ones, but harder to m ake in the first place.
Garbage D e c e m ber 4th, 2003, 07:05 PM

It works well but I have used an alum inum foil for electrical tips, a piece of thin can could work too
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/g arbagelive/trip/d1.jpg
I p r e f e r m echanical system s b e c a u s e I d o n t u n d e r s t a n d t o o m uch about electrica l s ystem s .
Jacks Complete D e c e m ber 5th, 2003, 05:35 PM

T h i s m ight sound a bit lam e, but you know those throw-down snaps? The little paper wrapped ones?
P l a c e a l o a d o f t h e m in the way, and you will hear people com ing.
Does anyone know what the explosive in those is?
As for m echanical system s, there are quite a lo t. NBK2000 talks about "toe poppers" elsewhere, which is wh ere you m odify a
bullet with a BB glued to the p rimer, put it in a tube in the groun d, so when trodden on, it fires the cartridge.
Y o u c a n m a k e p n u e m atic or h ydraulic ones, too, using the weight on a m at or balloon to push a contact shut or eve n hit a
prim er.
T h e h a n d g r e n a d e i n a t i n c a n i s q u i t e a n o l d o n e , b u t u s e a s h o r t f u s e d g r e n a d e , or the tripper will have tim e to run.
A n y s p r i n g o r b u n g e e c a n b e u s e d t o s m a c k a p r i m er.
In the UK, you can buy alarm mines, which are 12g carts set off by a strong tripwire. Generally, blanks are used.
Garbage D e c e m ber 5th, 2003, 08:16 PM

I think that these poppers are m ade with a small part o f silver fulminate and other part with sand. The sand is used to give
friction.
xyz D e c e m ber 5th, 2003, 08:18 PM

Jack s C o m plete, NBK's toe poppers didn't operate by firing a cartridge, IIRC they were a sm all bag that contained a sensitive
prim ary (such as AP or HMTD) and som e fine gravel to cause friction.
They are kept wet with a volatile solvent (any solvent, b ut it has to evaporate quickly and mustn't dissolve the explosive), then
they are placed and dry out after placement. Once they are dry, they will go off when stepped on.
Read NBK's pdf for the exact details.
Sarevok D e c e m ber 6th, 2003, 07:23 PM

I tried to make the first trigge r, but I had som e problems with the second wire: when you put the cork in the pipe the second
wire gets out of its position; that part of the wire that should stay in the top of the nail just displaces itself.
I think you can solve this problem with another nail, roll the second wire on it and stick it in the cork as the other nail, such
that the wire will stay firm inside the cork.
Garbage D e c e m ber 7th, 2003, 07:07 AM

I h a d t h e s a m e problem a n d I w a s t h i n k i n g t o d o s o m e thing with this wire, your idea was very nice, here is it:
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/thegarbage/trip/1.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/thegarbage/trip/2.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/oz/thegarbage/trip/d2.jpg
Charlie Workman D e c e m ber 9th, 2003, 03:44 AM

Just a thought. That hanging wire worries m e. I'd use two sm all nails of equal length and have just the hea ds protruding from
the cork. When the spring powered nail touches both, the circuit is com plete. The clothespin is a lot easier, though not as
e l e g ant.
thrall D e c e m ber 15th, 2003, 04:42 PM

W hy don't you go for this
------------------------------------------------plastic pipe
--------------------------------------
Metal strip +
--------------------------------------
plastic strip ..........................|----------------------trip wire
-------------------------------------
m etal strip -
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------plastic pipe
both m etal strips are bound with rubber to each other and plastic strip is in beteween them .The trip wire is attached to plastic
strip ,so when pulled it will take the plastic strip out and hence making contect between m etal strips.
You can control the required force(to som e extent not o f the ord er of 10s of kgs) by the tighting hard the metal strips.
The drawing is crude but I think it will give you the basic idea.
Garbage Decem ber 22nd, 2003, 03:05 PM

Charlie W ork m a n :
That hanging wire is necessary to facilitate the contact. Som e tim es when I use two sm a l l n a i l s o f e q u a l l e n g t h a s y o u s a d ,
t h e b i g n a i l t o u c h e s j u s t o n e s m all nail and d o n t com plete the circuit. To solve this problem I h a v e m a de this hanging wire,
with it every tim e that you pull the trigger the wire touch the nail and com plete the circuit.
Thrall:
Your trigger is very good. In the Vietnam war, Vietcongs have use sim ilar system s with Bam b o o .
Anthony D e c e m ber 30th, 2003, 03:29 PM

I'd attach the "hanging" wire to the head of the (top) spring-loaded nail. Flexible wire shouldn't stop the sp ring-loaded nail
from m oving all the way down.
Garbage January 1st, 2004, 05:10 PM

I think that it really works. So on I will test it

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Silent U ltrasonic Drill
Log in
View Full Version : Silent Ultrasonic Drill
NightStalker D e c e m ber 15th, 2003, 03:14 AM

I was browsing Google looking for ways of quietly breaching reinforced concrete fo r...errr...rem o d e l i n g m y house ;), when I
found this interesting tidbit.
http://www.jp l.nasa.gov/files/im a g e s / b rowse/ultrasonic_drill_2.gif (177kb)
An ultrasonic drill that will penetrate the hardest rock like basalt or granite, with hardly any force required, as well as NO noise.
:)
Cybersonics, Inc., of Erie, Penn. is producing th em now, though I've no idea how m uch they cost.
W hat could you do with a drill that'll go through the hardest concrete with m inim al effort, NO noise (m y favorite part of it all),
and with m inimal vibrations to set of the alarm...on you r neighbors car, of course.
I didn't put this in tools since it's m ore related (to m e a nyways) to demolishing concrete a nd rock for whate ver purpose you
m ay have in mind.
mongo blongo D e c e m ber 15th, 2003, 03:32 PM

Sweet! It cou ld also m ake a quite interesting weapon. :eek: I th i n k t h e y u s e s o m ething like this in lypo-suction. They use an
ultrasound pen like thing which liquifies the fat. I've always wanted one. :)
thrall D e c e m ber 15th, 2003, 04:06 PM

These drills can work only on brittle m eterials like rocks or ceram ic but not on metals.For m etal drilling purpose ultrasonic
m achining uses a slurry of ceram ic powder that helps drilling by rubbing the m etal with ceram ic dust powere d by the drill.
So getting into neighbours cars lock will be difficult I suppose.
A n y o n e k n o w s s o m e ultrasonic drill to drill in metals without usin g slurry?
Lightfoot D e c e m ber 31st, 2003 , 01:48 PM

P e r h a p s a n o t h e r m ethod for avoiding seism ic detectors would be hydro a brasive cutting, though the system s are qu ite bulky
and not particularly silent (tho ugh quieter than a jackha m m er) they do cut throug h m ost materials . cf. http://www.xtek.net/
catalogue/index.shtm l

You can't cut m etal with ultrasound, but you can weld really nicely.
I have played with ultrasound tapelayers that weld the strip that way.
If you could get the power up high enough, I guess you could m elt it away...

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Fracturing concrete flooring?
Log in
View Full Version : Fracturing concrete flooring?
HVD December 15th, 2003, 06:02 PM

A friend of mine has a hypothetical construction/demolition problem.
He needs to break through a concrete floor in an outbuilding to sink wooden fence posts in for a construction project. Up until now he's been using an electric 29 kg jack
hammer to break through the concrete perfectly. However the jack hammer is gone now and there are still a few holes to sink. He considers it a perfect opportunity to actually
do something useful with explosives that works out cheaper than hiring the drill again for a whole day.
Anyway he needs to know what people's opinions are on how much explosive to use and how to position it properly for the most efficient blast.
The specs are :
AN/NM is the only high velocity 'shattering' explosive he has available.
The floor is about 2 - 3 inches of non reinforced conrete sitting on about a foot of semi compacted hardcore of various sizes. This is sitting on dry clay.
He need to simply shatter the concrete over about a 12 inch diameter circle. This is what he was doing with the drill and it was a relatively simple matter afterwards to dig the
shattered bits out and dig through the hardcore.
He plans to simply contain the AN/NM charge in a ziplock bag, place the charge on the floor and tamp it from above with a heavy sandbag.
So how much will he need to use to shatter the concrete? And is his thinking on the placement and containment correct? Obviously he wants to minimise the noise and use as
little explosive material as he can
Thanks in advance
HVD
p.s. I'll pass all your answers on to him :)

This sounds like a job for a shaped charge if you want a clean hole. The explosive in a baggie will make a irregular hole and crack the concrete up to several meters.
HVD December 16th, 2003, 09:54 AM

Well, it's not a clean hole he wants exactly, it just to crack the conrete enough so that it can be hauled up with a pick axe/prybar etc. Once the concrete is out of the way then
the hole can be dug.
If amount x of H.E. can crack the concrete over a few metres, like you say, then that's exactly what he wants but over a smaller area, so amount X/10 or something could be
used. He's just looking for an approximate amount. Like 200 grams? 500 grams?
With the jack hammer he just broke the concrete up over a small area and dug the hole, he's now just looking to do the same - brak the conrete up over a small area. The
edges etc don't need to perfect because the hole's going to be filled with concrete again anyway.
Cheers
HVD
THErAPIST December 17th, 2003, 01:53 AM

Drill a hole in the concrete, and fill it with ANNM. Then do something crazy such as setting a plastic cup or small plastic bowl of ANNM ontop of the hole. center prime much as
you would with a SC, and then tamp with bags of wet dirt. Now filling a drilled hole with ANNM MAY be a bad idea since pieces of debris will fly... but then again they would
anyways. The idea is to throw force down into the concrete and at the same time expand it to shatter it from two angles at the same time.
HVD December 17th, 2003, 02:50 PM

No can do. If he still had the jack hammer then he'd be able to do it without the explosives. Once a hole is made you can lever up chunks and break then off - the problem is
just making the hole.
There hasn't been much response to this so I'm just going to tell him to go ahead with his aforementioned method and see what happens. I'll reccommend he starts with 200
gr and work up from there i suppose.
I'll photograph what i can and post it here with details if the forum wants it.
HVD
THErAPIST December 17th, 2003, 08:04 PM

Making a hole with a drill souldnt be TOO much of a hastle... Oh well. I'd like to see some pictures if at all possible
Bert December 17th, 2003, 09:54 PM

I know you want to have fun. But a heavy sledge and a couple of minutes work will make a hole in 2-3" of non reinforced concrete, and it probably won't blow the windows
out, or otherwise damage the structure. I'd just outline the hole with a series of hammer drill hole every couple of inches and start whacking. But that would be too efficient
and boring...
EP December 18th, 2003, 01:37 AM

Surely you've heard the saying "There is no problem that cannot be solved with the application of high explosives"... :p
Then there is another...
"When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail" ;)
Bert December 18th, 2003, 01:57 AM

EP-
The corrolary is: With enough HE, any problem will go away!
As far as the hammer thing, you should see my "tool" collection...

(damn, the ability to attach pictures has gone away again-)
Advisory December 18th, 2003, 02:21 AM

Whats the point in using a explosive for construction? sure use explosives for DEMOLITION!
teehee!
Id advise just going out and renting the tool again, as it is obvious he/you dont really know what the hell he/you is/are doing. If you read the post,
http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3059
it shows what happens when people dont know what they are doing with explosives.
Explosives should not be messed with unless you are 100% certain you know what you are doing.
HVD December 18th, 2003, 11:07 AM

Let me be clear about this : it is virtually impossible to break through the flooring with hand tools. Trust me - we've tried very hard before going ahead and renting the jack
hammer. The jack hammer got most of the work done but the jack hammer was only rented for two days and that wasn't enough time. There arn't enough holes left to
warrent getting the jack hammer back again (transport and cost issues).
Drilling holes around the circumference of the hole with an ordinary masonary drill and smashing the 'disc' apart is a good idea, but I'm still keen to try explosives first and the
former option will take much longer. (but it will be safer, more cost effective, get me fitter, and be about 80% less fun :-)
Anyway I'll let you all know how it goes.
Cheers
HVD

Dex-o-pan.......................................damn 30 character limit!
Bert December 18th, 2003, 06:15 PM

What is "Dex-o-pan"? Yes, I did search the forum and google. Oddly, this thread didn't come up in the search of the forum.
nbk2000 December 22nd, 2003, 02:41 PM

http://www.baustoffchemie.de/en/db/non-explosive-demolition-agent-patents/
:)
Bert December 22nd, 2003, 04:28 PM

Non explosive blasting agent- The ones I've got litterature for specify a minimum slab thickness of 8", else it just pushes out of the hole rather than cracking the slab. They
also specify that there must be a central hole for the expansion to take place towards in scenarios similar to the one described here- If you just start off in the middle, you'll
crack the slab from side to side.

HVD, if you're still going ahead with this, I'd start out with less than 200gm - that could make quite a mess!
I have 50gm in my head, around about a film can's worth. Tamped with a sandbag this should be enough.
Let us know how you get/got on...

A good way to "cut" concrete might be a cutting torch or similar, along with a bucket of water. Wear eye protection, and ventilate well. Heat the concrete and it will "spall" all
over the place. Get it really hot, then throw a bucket of water on it, and it will shatter lots off the surface.
Be careful, though. Thermite might work, too.
Desmikes January 11th, 2004, 01:59 AM

It should be pointed out that thermite idea is likely to end up in concrete exploding (the top ~2cm of concrete are likely to shoot off) and sending your thermite all over the
place. The same is to be expected with a blowtorch, except that hot concrete will probably feel better on your skin than molten metal. Not all concrete will burst, but enough do
to keep that in mind. You could of course, start a wood fire that will contain itself for a while and have a bucket of water hanging over it...
blindreeper January 11th, 2004, 03:33 AM

Or just use an explosive charge? Why bother with this fire /thermite nonsense. No garentee it will work, but explosives, well you can't go wrong! Besides if it blows to much
away you can always fix it with more concrete, always a plus. Forgot to add, the thermite will leave nasty scorch marks on the concrete.
THErAPIST January 11th, 2004, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by Desmikes
You could of course, start a wood fire that will contain itself for a while and have a bucket of water hanging over it...
I hope you don't mean that the fire will burn through the bucket..
Thermite might work. Wet the concrete with a water hose instead of a bucket though so that you can spray and crack just the parts wanted broken.
Of course it goes without saying that the longer and hotter the fire burns, and the colder the water is, the more the concrete will crack. If the entire thing should be cracked,
setting up a 55 gallon barrel full of ice water on one side of the slab, with a very long rope tied to it would work well. After the fire dies out (very large fire) you and a friend
could pull the rope quickly and spill a large amount of quite cold water over the extremely hot concrete. The length of the rope would keep you out of harms way as far as
flying pieces of concrete goes. This way you don't have to worry about having a very large explosively driven concrete claymore, and you don't have to deal with the noise,
and possibly pissed off neighbors. It also costs less than making explosives since water, ice, and wood to burn all come at a very cheap price when compared to AN and NM.
Wild Catmage January 11th, 2004, 07:29 PM

If you have them lying around, try using a thick cold chisel and a sledgehammer. Start by knocking the cold chisel in with a lump hammer first, then hitting it in with the
sledgehammer once it's in enough to stay upright. This method is rather dependant on the hardness of the concrete, but drilling a pilot hole with a masonry drill helps. After the
cold chisel is buried to a suitable depth, you can start knocking it sideways to break through the concrete.
There's the chance that you might end up with a slightly bent cold chisel :rolleyes:
Alternatively, you could just bash away at the concrete for a while. It'll break eventually. As long as the underlying clay isn't too wet, it won't absorb the impact from the
sledgehammer too much. If the clay is wet, as in my back yard, you'll have a hell of a time using a sledgehammer.
EDIT - Whoops, I forgot you mentioned that hand tools had litle effect...
Is the cost of the building (if something goes wrong) more than the cost of renting the jackhammer again?
Crash January 25th, 2004, 07:53 AM
I dont think explosives are best suited here, you could crack the entire floor, or damage the walls of the room. But if you must... I'd suggest using 200-250g with several old
pillow cases filled with damp sand or loose soil on top.
Desmikes January 25th, 2004, 05:07 PM

THErAPIST, I just didn't realize that I was being too vague and that I would have to make myself any more clear about the whole bucket over fire thing. I figured it
goes without saying that you would need a rope to tilt it over Thanks for f urther elaboration

HVD,
any progress? Surely you have attacked the floor again by now?
HVD April 1st, 2004, 05:57 PM

Sorry for the long delay with updates.
In short, no explosive progress. Realistic methods presented themselves, namely :
* decide to make only 2 more holes.

* borrowed heavy duty masonary drill with 10 mm SDS locking bits.
* drilled many holes right through, followed by persuasion with sledge hammer and pry bar.
Took ages, but it got the job done. Surprisingly effective actually. Before i get flamed with "Why not use that in the first place?" i should mention that the masonary drill wasn't
available at the time of writing.
Cheers, HVD.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Computer Demolition
Log in
View Full Version : Computer Demolition
Axt December 22nd, 2003, 08:29 AM

Firstly an improvised claymore was made using a 2" PVC endcap as containment, and through lack of having anything better, 35 coins in 7 piles 5 deep were placed at the
front of the charge. A single paper layer was then glued over the coins.
NC was used to glue the coins together before loading to hold them in place as the Charge (108g of ANNMNCAl 7:4:1:1) would then dissolve the NC after they were fixed in
place.
On detonation the explosive had a significant "kick" which hit me harder then what I was expecting, especially since I wasnt even in view of it. But the coins proved to perform
very badly having a very wide and inconsistant pattern, only 4 coins hit the computer of which 3 were nearly in the same place. Penetration, considering the light weight and
high surface area of the coins was expected to be poor against hard targets, only 1 of the coins penetrating 2 layers of steel.
<center>http://ww1.altlist.com/~52497/rogue.altlist.com/images/computerdemolition1.jpg
MOVIE AVAILABLE (http://geocities.com/roguemovies4/)</center>
A second charge was used to complete the destruction, 2 charges were used linked by detonating cord. The first charge of prilled ANNM 85:15 was used under the monitor to
launch it into the air and second, ANNMNC mixed to optimise plasticity (unknown ratio, about 2:6:2) was placed on top of the box thing to plant it into the ground.
The linking detcord was ETN in a line up masking tape, which was folded over, with a booster on the end to help initiation of the insensitive ANNMNC 2:6:2. The detonator was
placed into the ANNM charge under the monitor.
On detonated with noticibly less force then the optimised ANNMNCAl charge used in the claymore even though about 3 times bigger, but all charges fired with complete
destruction of the computer as a result.
<center>http://ww1.altlist.com/~52497/rogue.altlist.com/images/computerdemolition2.jpg
MOVIE AVAILABLE (http://geocities.com/roguemovies4/)</center>
In conclusion, coins make crappy shrapnel against hard targets, ratio for cap sensitive and powerful plastic ANNMNCAl is 7:4:1:1, ETN in folded tape can pass as a det-cord and
blowing up a computer makes a bloody mess.
TheBear December 22nd, 2003, 03:27 PM

Very nice! Good formula for the plastic, easy to find materials and it obviously has proved its efficiency :)
Just a question: How much did the charges weigh?
Blackhawk December 22nd, 2003, 07:29 PM

Blast, geocities over their limit. I like your movies Axt, they always have such a cool sound track your cam has a good mic, what is the brand?
Axt December 22nd, 2003, 11:43 PM

108g for the claymore, each coin was about 2g. Didnt weigh anything else but you can have a guess -
http://ww1.altlist.com/~52497/rogue.altlist.com/images/compcharge.jpg
The camera is an ancient JVC.
Im thinking ETN will be soluble enough and sensitive enough to be able to form a detcord by running cotton string through ETN/NC/Acetone and allowing to dry. Something like
adding 5 ETN in 1 NC into the acetone. Has anyone tried anything simular with other explosives, seems like a pretty obvious way of creating cord and not as tedious as running
a line up the tape.
metal dragon December 23rd, 2003, 12:44 AM

Axt,
Why dont you made your det. cord out of hosepipe or simular flexible plastic tubing? Surly it would prove to be better containment than tape and be easier to work
with. All you have to do is just push it in form one end. What type of coin did you use?
blindreeper December 23rd, 2003, 01:06 AM

Axt, not just in this movie but most of yours, what is that yellow.orange fuse? Is it comercial? What did you use as a detonator?
Axt December 23rd, 2003, 01:17 AM

Using a tube would be even more tedious in anything over a foot length of cord, getting clumpy ETN into a thin cord and tamping down would take a long time, and then you
would nearly be assured of ending up with gaps forming over time, commercial cord uses threads through the tube to stop this.
At least with the tape your not limited to length and its stickyness helps hold it in place, if NC bound ETN on string works it would be easier and better then either.
Blindreeper: Its safety fuse, the det in picture above is a .22 hornet case with mixed AP/ETN 3:7, first time both that det and/or the detcord was used, lucky it worked at all.
EDIT: Australian 5c coin or about 1.5mm x 20mm for non-Australians or 3/50" x 79/100" for Americans :p

Axt can you email me about where you got the fuse from if you don't mind?
Skean Dhu December 23rd, 2003, 03:13 AM

Found a solution to making your detcord woes, Dan williams' Sticky match setup could be converted to detcord production with 0 modifications to the equipment. just put ETN
in instead of Black powder. http://www.wecreate4u.net/dwilliams/sticky/sticky.html
also, from my slingshot endeavors as a rowdy pre-teen, i can tell you that coins make for horrible accuracy/consistancy . they spin off in a random direction that changes with
the slightest breeze and with a characteristic *fvwinnng*.
or could it be that they were shattered by the charge into pieces too small to have damaged the steel case.
nice video shots by the way. the aftermath is amusing, the way it formed a perfect ring(not that i should be surprised it did that)
xyz December 23rd, 2003, 03:39 AM

I would also like to be emailed about that fuse Axt.

You have both got mail, though I dont think it will be any use ... noone else ask in this thread (or at all) Its pretty obvious where its available, and not by mail order so of
limited use.
I hadnt seen that page Skean, make a production line of the stuff. Slight problem is that BP flows and ETN doesnt, so it will be a bit harder (far harder if your not using that
rig), and it will take more ETN then ETN/NC soaked string.
I was expecting them to fly all over the place, thats why I placed it so close, still makes it seem strange that 3 hit in the same place. If you look close theres a couple streaks
in the ground where two dug it up and another coin hit the light coloured pile of dirt to the left of the computer, which ended up being a nest of very pissed bulldog ants, made
setting up the next charge delightful.
The coins didnt break as a couple were found bent up in the computer, I dont think any known explosive will bust up those coins. Im not sure what you mean by "ring", if you
mean the rubble then you didnt download the movie! funnily only the base of the box thing remained behind, I just collected all the crap up for a picture.

Never would have guessed that source Axt.
I am not in that much need of fuse any more as I have today received 13m of 2mm green water-proof visco fuse. My brother has connections where he works ;), cost him as
much as it costs to shout some one to McDonalds for lunch :D
My brother also got me 50 leader fuses for shells, the guy was going to throw them out because he had done a show the night before. They have 10 of CHUNKY green visco! I
mean chunky, like 4mm thick! Also the leaders have some anwhere between 3cm - 20cm of black match in them. I think the secret to good quick match is to have 6 strands
of black match in them :eek:
Plus I am waiting on an order of 36ft of brown 3mm cannon fuse.
Xyz, if you have ordered fuse from the same place as I and are getting impatient about it, I rang them today and they havn't got any in and they're waitng for the truck to
come in then they will send away. Its been 3 weeks for me so they could have at least told me what was going on :rolleyes:
Ok that was WAY! off topic, I appologise.
Axt, about the claymore, I am a stranger to this but why use coins? To improvise the whole thing? I know metal bearings can be expensive, so the next time there is a crappy
fair/carnival in your area check it out and try and find a stall that sells little spring "bb" guns. They are crap and don't hurt at all but the bb's are 6mm yellow and friggin hard
plastic. Not sure if they would be much use because they are plastic but it could be something to try out.
About the det cord made by soaking it in a solution of ETN, I think it would turn out like KNO3 improvised fuse, just a coat of delicate crystals around the cord = not usefull.
This is probably a stupid idea but if you had some material/fabric such as cotton. Have a 1m strip of it about 3cm wide and iron it down the center to make a fold. Make a line
of your ETN down (don't do this with primaries at all!) the fold and fold it in half. So you have a long piece of fabric with a line of ETN down the middle. Now using your skills
you should have learnt in grade 8 home economics ;) pin the open side down with (obviously) sewing pins and the ETN should be held fairly tight. Then get on your mums
sewing machine and sew on the inside of the pins so you have a nice firm "tube" of ETN. THis could be bent and beaten quite a bit qithout it breaking I think if you pack the
ETN tight enough.
Not sure how easy it would be to make or anything but it may be worth a try. Other than that I am stuffed for ideas right now.

Ive used BB's in "claymores" before, just buy them for a BB gun or as non-toxic shot for shotshells. But sometimes its best to experiment with the unknown just to see what
happens, such as coins which I was thinking would shred the sheet metal better.
I think ETN/NC/string detcord will work for these reasons -
- ETN is very soluble in acetone, damn near miscible with it so you are going to get a lot into a piece of string.
- It doesnt take much NC to thicken it into a paste and stick it hard.
- ETN should have a very low critical diametre, commercial cord with PETN goes down to 3g/m and probably smaller, ETN is more sensitive and comparable in power so critical
diametre could be even less then PETN, meaning you wont need much in the string.
- If needed you could then draw the cord through a sealant that doesnt dissolve the NC/ETN, this will help hold it together and prevent friction sensitivity on the cord.
Ummm .. sewing up the detcord .... are you serious! Go to bed and get some sleep :p
metal dragon December 23rd, 2003, 08:54 AM

AXT,
If it helps according to Australian law the only ammunition that can be purchased with out a licence are air rifle pellets I think this would make perfect shrapnel. Especially if the
skirt is placed facing towards the explosive.
blindreeper December 23rd, 2003, 07:05 PM

Well I said this is probably a stupid idea and it was. But instead of a sewing machine what is wrong with hand sewing? ETN is not a primary so there is little risk.
xyz December 23rd, 2003, 09:19 PM

metal dragon, I'm not sure about Queensland but where I am you do need a license to buy air pellets.
blindreeper, No, my fuse was ordered from somewhere else and it has already arrived.
metal dragon December 23rd, 2003, 10:24 PM

Xyz,
Thats interesting because I have never had any trouble what so ever buying them in the states of Victoria, NSW, QLd and western Australia. And according a brochure
handed out by the Australian government when I purchased my gun, is that ammo that has an explosive of any sort is banned with out a license but things such as air
rifle pellets, bbs for use in shot guns, etc are perfectly legal
xyz December 24th, 2003, 03:14 AM

Hmmm, I am in WA but I have heard that you need a license even for air pellets. I am sure that I read it on a police or government website.
It may just be that they are classified as ammunition if you want to import them.
Hang-Man December 24th, 2003, 09:50 AM

Go buy lead fishing weights if you can't get pellets. the small rounds ones you clamp on your line.
Edit: I just got 50' of Visco by asking some guy at a fireworks store! it was that easy! only cost me $10 cdn!!!
PHAID December 24th, 2003, 03:41 PM

The best thing for a claymore is 1/4" steel ball bearings which you should be able to find at a hardware store or in places that sell them as slingshot ammo.
xyz December 24th, 2003, 09:03 PM

The actual claymore used by the US military has 700 3/8" steel ball bearings IIRC. So I suppose ball bearings are the way to go if you can get them.
metal dragon December 24th, 2003, 09:20 PM
Yeah I agree with the fishing weight. They ones I believe you are talking about are things called split shots. They are small fairly heavy for theyre size and squash on
impact so it would maximise damage.
I used to have lots of fun with an air compressor some plastic tubing and split shots. All you do is load them up in to the tube and turn the compressor on and the fire out.
Simple but very amusing especially trying to hit toads.

It's 7/32" for claymore fragments, which is a hairs width smaller than 1/4", so I'd call it 1/4" and use steel slingshot ammo that's been annealed.
Desmikes February 17th, 2004, 11:08 PM

Metal nuts (for bolts) work well as shrapnell. Do you guys have problem finding old car/tractor ballbearings? Why do you insist on buying slingshot ammo and lead weights,
when you can get a dozen from a single ballbearing?
knoddas March 12th, 2004, 08:44 AM

Pieces cut from a metal rod of suitable diameter will also work.
This kind of projectiles are used in the Russian fragmentation mines MON-100 and MON-200.
nuclearattack April 5th, 2004, 06:03 AM

AXT your test inspired me!
I decided to make another computer demolition on my own, i made this test yesterday morning. I placed 310 gr of kinepak into the case and the monitor was placed next to it.
The charge was in a glass jar reinforced with concrete. The charge destroyed the computer and the monitor completely, the bang was heard by a friend of mine at 3 KM of
distance! I found computer pieces at 100 meters far from the detonation site and the biggest fragment was about 15 cm square. After all kinepak has a good brisance and
works very well on soft and medium target. I'll do other tests and i will post some pictures of the results.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Bullet Jacket Shaped Charges
Log in
View Full Version : Bullet Jacket Shaped Charges
Axt D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 07:43 PM

Heres probably the easiest source of sm all copper liners for shaped charges - full m etal jacket bullets!
To get a thin walled copper lin er all one must d o is heat a FMJ bullet with a propane torch until the lead me lts out the bottom.
The added advantage of using a bullet as a liner is that you also have a readily available casing AND a perfectly centred hole
(flashhole) for initiation. O ne can sim ply fill the case with the explosive, push the "liner" into the case with a vice com p r e s s i n g
the explosive and then initiate it through the flashhole by using a sm all charge in the prim er socket.
You may be able to get away with pressing the primary into the base of the case and fusing through the fashhole, though the
s m a ller you go with shaped charges the m ore difficult it gets, using the flashole as an initiation point gives it the best chance
of working.
<center><im g src="http://nbk2000.fre eyellow.com/Fmjsc.jpg"></center>
H e r e s a n e x p e r i m e n t I h a d d o n e t o s e e the effect of two different charges using copper ja cketed b ullets as liners, first one
bein g a .308 case with a W W II .303 FMJ and 3g charge, the second a .22 K-hornet case with its .22cal. FMJ bullet and 0.6g
charge, both are a "spitzer" shape using com pressed PETN.
<center><im g src="http://nbk2000.fre eyellow.com/308sc.jpg">

<a href="http://geocities.com/roguemovies4/">MOVIE AVAILABLE</a></center>
<center><im g src="http://nbk2000.fre eyellow.com/22hornetsc.jpg">

<a href="http://geocities.com/roguemovies4/">MOVIE AVAILABLE</a></center>
The SC effect from th ese charges are easily seen in the photos, this opens up a whole range of possibilities from the vast
range of bullets and calibres available as well as case types. Will a bottle necked case perform better then a straight case?
round nose over spitzer? who knows. How about near hemispherical liners (hem iliner.jpg) such as found in the m ajo rity of
handgun bullets, or cookie cutter liners (cookiecutter.jpg). I know of at least one big gam e bullet that has a very conical nose,
the variations are vast.
<center><im g src="http://nbk2000.fre eyellow.com/bulletlinersm .jpg">
<img src="http://nbk2000.freeyellow.com /AXT.gif">

</center>
Blackhawk D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 07:54 PM

W ow that's cool, now why didn't anyone think of that? How thick were the sheets of metal with those two tests? They appeared
to work quite well.
Axt D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 08:01 PM

1" steel for the .308 though it was a bit more, m u s t h a v e l e a n e d o v e r b e fore it fired as it hit it at a slight angle, and 1/4" Al for
the hornet. The standoff was good for the .308 but the .22 seem ed to crater around the e ntry hole, perhap s m ore standoff was
needed, I never tried.
Usin g a standoff of +10m m for the .308 resulted in half the pen etration so they are finicky.
nbk2000 D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 09:36 PM

Sad to see him go, but the guy just didn't listen...
A-BOMB D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 10:06 PM

Axt gone? I thought he was alright, He d i d h a v e s o m e g o o d e x p eriment, what did he do?
blindreeper D e c e m ber 26th, 2003, 10:21 PM

A x t i s g o n e b e c a u s e h e a s k e d a v e r y n o v i c e q u estion about .rar and.ace files that could have been solved by a search. He was
flam ed for it and gave an "up yours" to nbk. Nbk replied with his own style of up yours - a week ban, any post for any reason
until the new year = Axt banned. Sadly he posted about bullet shaped charges. Maybe he didn't see the thread abo ut his
temporary ban. All I can say is he provided good info and its sad to see him go, he always provided new m aterial and neat
presentations like this thread.
nbk2000 D e c e m ber 27th, 2003, 12:03 AM

T h e r e ' s n o n e e d t o m a k e e x c u s e s f o r h i m . H e ' s b e e n h e r e s i n c e I warned him , and not just posting this thread, as I reviewe d
his browsing history.
P l u s , I e - m a i l e d h i m the warning, so if he doesn't check his e-m ail when he has 'net access, then that's his own fault too.
The only reason he wasn't im m ediately banned for disrespecting m e was because he's been useful, so I was going to cut him
s o m e slack with just a slap on the wrist.
H o w e v e r , n o o n e h e r e i s s o u s e f u l a s t o b e i n d i s p e n s a b l e ( t h a t ' s r u l e n u m ber 1, after all) so his disregard for my warning could

not be overlooked, regardless of what he m ay bring here.
Shit, even flashpoint...a total n00bie lam e b y o u r s t a n d a r d s . . . h a s a b i d e d b y t h e o n e w e e k m oratorium on further posting that I
put on him , so the only reason Axt could have for posting would be because of overinflate d s e n s e o f e n t i t l e m e n t h e r e .
Anyways, rap e his site of all the m o v i e s y o u c a n b e c a u s e h e ' s s u r e t o t a k e t h e m down when he realizes he's not indispensable
and has been banned.
AsylumSeaker D e c e m ber 27th, 2003, 02:17 AM

T h a t s s o m e really sm all but really nifty shaped charge action there. I don't see whats wrong with just using copper plating
though. You know, like the 3m m thick soft foily stuff? Its what I use and I got it in a craft shop.
Microtek D e c e m ber 27th, 2003, 10:14 AM

Asylum s e e k e r : C o u l d y o u e l a b o r a t e o n t h a t p l e a s e ? F o r instance a link to a photo as I don't think I know the product you a re
referring to.
AsylumSeaker D e c e m ber 30th, 2003, 01:00 AM

Hrmm , I don 't have a photo. Basicly what I have is a roll of thick foil. 3m m s t h i c k a p r o x . I t s m a d e o f c o p p e r a n d i s s o f t a n d
workable. I aquired m ine at a craft shop. I have no idea what it can be used for in craft.
xyz D e c e m ber 30th, 2003, 01:59 AM

Craft people seem to be able to use just about anything in craft :)
Is it just m e or do these bullet jacket SCs look like the perfect tool for blowing ou t locks ;) ? The o nly problem would be the
noise, 3g of PETN isn't exactly quiet.
Ammonal D e c e m ber 30th, 2003, 07:44 AM

I was thinking the exact sam e thing XYZ, som e blue tack (sticky compou nd for putting posters on walls) or sim ilar sticky
compound a cartridge in the vicinity of .223 -> 22-250 and bingo no m ore padlock, deadlock, arm agaurd truck back door, etc
Bert D e c e m ber 30th, 2003, 08:25 AM

I believe your copper foil is used for m aking stained glass windows..
nbk2000 January 5th, 2004, 05:46 PM

M e t h i n k s s o m eone's little rant has changed a wee bit. ;)
Bert January 6th, 2004, 05:40 PM

Y e s , t h e m inistry of truth has been active. I don't know why, we've allways been a t war with Eastasia!
I a m not suggesting that kicking ANYO NE for disrespecting an admin is inappropriate. But why do you feel the need to edit the
site to this extent?
++++++++++++
Edited to properly reflect who was disre spected.
MoT
nbk2000 January 7th, 2004, 11:11 AM

Edit what site? I only restored the original post to the way it was to start with...with a m inor change. ;)
BTW , the changing of a picture to get in one last jab is going to be a thing of the past.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > C able and Voltages
Log in
View Full Version : Cable and Voltages
green beret January 21st, 2004, 01:30 AM

Hi all.
Just wanted to get som e feedback on the type of electrical firing system s you use, cable type, voltage, capacitor or battery etc.
I a m sorting out one of my own, I was going to purchase a 100m roll of 240v rated figure eight wire, but I thought, well if I'm
goin g to m a k e a s m all blastin g b o x f r o m a cam era, the capacitor is probably m ore than 240v, and I wasnt sure if that would
work so well on 240v wire, so I didnt buy it. Thats if I get the cam era blasting box going, this Fuji camera I got is not so easy
to take apart, I got a shock from the damn capacitor. :o
But then aga in, I m ig ht just use the afore mentioned cable and use a battery, I havent had anything to do with electronics for
a while but I understand resistance, voltage, current etc.
Could I connect a few 9v batteries in a series to work it up to about 24v? I remeber som ething like that, but with two 12v
batteries, when I was working with the pyro com pany last year. I'll still ke ep working on the capacitor discha rge type (from th e
camera) but I want a reliable one up a nd running soon, for use on ANFO, and to try something oth er than fuse. Any advice
would be very greatly appreciated, I have searched and got som e info as well.
Edit: I just dam aged the PCB from the camera, the capacitor is still intact, so is there any reason why I cant design a basic
system where the capacitor is charged by a battery, then when the battery has been isolated from the circuit, another switch
could be used to discharge the capacitor? I have a feeling a transformer is neede d to charge the capacitor though.....forgive
m e for not remeberin g things, as I said, I havent been into electronics for a while.
Bert January 21st, 2004, 12:12 PM

green beret-
The rating on that "figure eight wire"? is for continuous duty. Is this the typical 2 conductor 18 gauge stranded conductor wire
u s e d f o r l a m p s a n d s m all app liances? We call it "zip wire" here (USA). If so, the insulating jacket is good for considerably
high er voltages and the conductor is capable of m uch higher currents for the short pulse a pplications of a capacitor discharge
system . If you've got 18 gauge wire and a 12V gel cell, you don't really need a capacitor discharge system unless you're
contem platin g s h o o t i n g a n u m ber of charges with the ig niters in series or over a hellaciously long run of wire.
I u s e s e v e r a l c o m mercial firing system s, and nearly always use purpose m a d e 2 2 gauge solid 2 co nductor shooting wire with a
600 V rated jacket. For m ost of m y uses, 24 V is sufficient. I have a capacitor discharge blasting box that will shoot 200
c o m m ercial e-matche s in series in a run of up to 1000' of the 22 gauge solid for m ine fronts & such.
Here's where I get m ost of m y e q u i p m ent:

Pyro mate firing system s (http://www.pyromate.com /)
S e m inole wire & cable blasting products (http://www.sem inolewire.com /new_page_1.htm)
If you're going to design a capacitor discharge system, you're going to need to le arn basic electronics first. If you're going to
use ANY electrical firing system you should learn the basics of power handling, and how it applies to the job at hand. Are you at
l e a s t f a m iliar with Ohm 's law? And have you searched the forum? There are at least two threads on fiing systems I've seen
here.
green beret January 24th , 2004, 05:43 AM

I a m going to stick with the 12v system, I have done some searching, and couldn't find out anything much about the
difference between lead acid and gel cells- apart from the weight difference, would a 12v lead acid work as well as a gel cell for
this application? I can obtain a maintenence free lead acid battery for a low price, otherwise I would have to special order the
gel cell as the local places I have been to said they dont stock them usually. For 12v anyway.
Thanks.
Bert January 26th , 2004, 06:09 AM

Gell cells are lead acid with a gelled electrolyte, they are just mo re spill p r o o f , n o m a i n t e n a n c e b a t t e r i e s . Y o u c a n u s e a n y
battery that will provide the voltage and current you need, of course. O nly you know how m uch weight you're willing to carry-
Are you fam iliar with Ohm 's law?
kingspaz January 26th , 2 0 0 4 , 0 3 : 0 7 P M

i use a 12v gel cell about 100m m c u b e . i a l s o u s e a 1 0 0 m reel of bellwire. i don't bother with all th is fancy switch shit. i just
have a very sensitive ignitor. 0.08mm nichrom e, 4m m long bridge, initiating dextrinated 30/70 charcoal/KC lO3. i basically
short out the battery by connecting the 100m o f wire to the ignitor then the wire to the battery. as there is such high circuit
resistance it does the battery no harm. the sen sitive ignitor still gets eno ugh power to work though :)
green beret January 27th , 2 0 0 4 , 1 1 : 4 7 P M

T h a n k s g u y s , I a p p r e ciate your help. Yes bert I am farmiliar with O hm's Law. I'll try and get som e very thin nichrom e wire, like
what you have kingspaz, beats using expensive rocket igniters.
Cheers.
Skean Dhu January 27th , 2 0 0 4 , 1 1 : 5 4 P M

Its a little late now but Holiday lights a re a great source for E-ignitors, they can work withas low as 1.5v although I wouldn't rely
on that, but 6v is plenty for th ese little guys. At $3-4(usd) per string of 1 00 its a fair deal, when you consider the amount of
patients it would take to m a k e 1 0 0 n i c h r o m e ignitors.
Blackhawk January 28th , 2004, 01:41 AM

The easiest ignitors I have ever dipped were conductive bridgewire ignitors. The b ridgewire was lam pblack wetted with NC
laqu er, the cables were C A T 5 p a i r s s t r i p p e d o n o n e e n d ( a b o u t 1 c m ) a n d bent as to be parrallel with around a 2-4m m g a p t h e
leng th of the stirpped section. The stripped ends are then dipped into the NC/C g oo and left to dry. You can cover the
conductive la yer with whatever pyrogen you want, these ignitors do however require 12V at a decent current to ignite. These
were used in place of easier bulb fillam ent ignitors in this case a s they had to fit in relatively small rocket n o z z l e s .
JoeJablomy February 7th, 2004, 02:52 AM

Blackhawk: I've been known to get analog type crap totally back wards, but it seem s to m e y o u c o u l d m a k e y o u r i g n itors more
sensitive by using a shorter bridge. At least if I am correct to understand that the carbon/NC compound is the actual
bridgewire. W hat I'm thinking is, your stuff probably has high resistance, so a short bridge would a llow m ore current and heat
faster at lower V. A wide and long bridge would have the sam e resistance as a short and n arrow one, but that means the heat
would be spread through a larger volum e. Or som ething. Anyway, I have a feeling I might soon dream of testing a 1x1m m
carbon/NC bridge.
JoeJablomy May 23rd, 2004, 04:04 AM

Blackhawk, what kind of lam pblack did you use? I tried som ething with ground charcoal a week ago, and learned on ly after
wasting a decent am ount of m y sm okeless that the carbon itself was not conductive :mad: It seem s the wood was not fully
converted an d there m ust still have be e n e n o u g h o r g a n ic crap in it to sto p it working.
Actually, m y recent RPG project became an ignitor project of late, and I h ave yet to find a system that works. It m a y b e m y
electrical setup, which consists of a switch and 9.6v mod el car ba ttery I ahd sitting around. It actually reads 10.6v, b ut probably
can't supply m uch current.
I was going to try a photo flash unit; I had a really shitty digital cam era sitting around, bu t the flash unit was connected to the
m ain board by eight leads and I wasn't going to fuck with that.
Instead what I did wa s, I took o u t t h e f l a s h t u b e a n d s o l d e r e d l e a d s i n i t s p l a c e , a n d a l s o r e p l a c e d t h e p h o t o d i o d e t h a t ' s
supposed to turn the flash off when there's enough light with another few leads I may later turn into a 'safe' switch. If it
worked, I would've been able to take crappy pictures of stuff from too far away to see, just as it blows up :) It even has a 30s
auto tim er.
W hat went wrong was, m y soldering iro n had a short cord, and I only had under table outlets, and nothing to hold the
workpeice in but my hands, as well as the iron and the pliers with which I was gripping the part I wanted to extract. The end
resu lt was all eight leads from the flash unit tore off the m ain board. Assuming the "1" m a r k i n g s b y t w o o f t h e p a d s d e n o t e d
l e a d 1, the leads should all be in the right place, but I'm afraid I must have cook ed the m ain board with all that soldering :(
Also, the flash tube was involved with three leads: one at each end, across which there was a sm all voltage (I think there's
actually a filament), and one wire sim p l e t a p e d to the b ack of the tube. Does anyone have any idea which of these would
actually have the hv output across them ?
Aside from that, I tried steel wool, and it itself ignites, but without near e n o u g h h e a t t o s e t anything off. Half the problem is I
have #0000 steel wool, which is way the hell too fine, but even when I use m ultiple strands of this (hell, varying thicknesses of
stee l 'yarn'), whenever I coated them with any kind of laquer or m atch head/laquer, it didn't do anything. It even still had
continuity, but it didn't do anything.
About the on ly positive thing I learned is that #0000 steel wool burns on its own if you stretch it out. Aside from being cool,
this is an easy source of som e form of iron oxide, possibly suita ble for thermits. Still, I'm not going near that until after the
ignitors and recoilless projects are done.
I guess I'll just have to find som e christmas lig hts.
fire vs. water May 23rd, 2004, 08:00 AM

I had that idea as well, couldn't you just burn Fe instead of putting it through elctrosys or other m ethods which take a while?
I don't know what you would g et out of burning Fe exactly, but surely its a type of iron oxide?
JoeJablomy May 23rd, 2004, 04:50 PM

It fo rm s sm all balls o f slag which trave l up the fibers as they burn, and som e fibers sim ply have a small incandesce nt region
t h a t m o v e s a l o n g t h e m. After the first burn, there is usualy some uncombusted steel. After the second, it's very difficult to g et
any to burn. All products are gray.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > remote det. circuit problems
Log in
View Full Version : remote det. circuit problems
jim2 January 21st, 2004, 08:05 AM

To all,
I am having troubles switching the transistor of the control circuit.Experimenting using a cell phone with wires leading from the vibrator. I built a controll circuit by using a NPN
bc548 transistor to switch to a 9 volt load.I am getting a 1 volt input into the base of the transisitor which is not enough to switch to the load circuit.When I use a 1.5 volt AA
battery the circuit works and the light lights up.Does any one know of a transistor that requires a lower voltage or maybe a stepup some how? Any ideas would be appreciated
greatly. Thanks
krickman January 21st, 2004, 04:51 PM

I built almost the same thing as you are trying to build.
i used a optical relay that works in the area of 0,7-1,2 V (if i remember corectly) and that relay switches a mecanical relay that switches te power sorce. I built all this in a box
with conektions so i could replace the cell phone with a timer and cahrge the built in led batery. works great.
Tuatara January 21st, 2004, 08:44 PM

Jim2 : a BC548 can be turned on with just 0.7V on the base. Without seeing your circuit it is very hard to identify your problem.
Bert January 21st, 2004, 09:54 PM

I for one would be interested in hearing the full application intended for the device, along with seeing a circuit diagram of what's to be built.
Zeitgeist January 29th, 2004, 08:31 AM

Show us your circuit, i can help.
jim2 February 1st, 2004, 03:58 AM

thanks for all who posted.Sorry to wait so long to comment.I made another circuit with larger wire(to cut resistence) and another transistor and the controll circuit opened when
I manually set the phone to vibrate,So that is OK.The new problem is that when I hook the vibrater leads to the circuit and someone calls me it rings instead of vibrating.I
called myself and without the circuit the phone vibrates -no problem.
Any ideas what the problem could be???

I do not have a home computer and you can not download or upload at any of the cyber cafes around me (used mainly for e-mail and games ) so I can not put the circuit out
but it is very simple to discribe.
I started with the transistor on a board.the base to (+ )from the phone.The Collector to the ground side of bulb and the postive side of bulb to the 9 v battery.The battery (-
)and the Emitter and the phone( - ) are ground together on the board .Very simple but I know very little about electronics.
Bert, There is nothing being built but the circuit and the knowledge that I can do it, even if it is very simple the thrill is doing it and increasing my knowledge and
confidence.Again Thanks to all.
Zeitgeist February 3rd, 2004, 08:09 AM

OK try putting a resistor (Try Say 10K Ohm) between the base connection and the phone, and see if that will let the vibration work
powdermunkey February 3rd, 2004, 07:15 PM

Zeitgeist's suggestion is a good one. You might also get a darlington type transistor and use 100 k ohms or so.
SmallR2002 February 4th, 2004, 09:44 AM

Has anyone tried using a PC power pack? afterall the're pretty safe considdering that if they short they just turn off for a lill while. Just wondering because I have about five of
them without the rest of the PC.
jim2 February 4th, 2004, 11:06 PM

zeitgeist,
I tried putting a 1K resistor in the line before the phone and with a manual setting of the vibrator it vibrated but the load light did not go on ( I think the transistor did not
switch).I will try a 10K and see what happens with a call.Thanks for the help.Will try today.

They are great things for general electronics experimentation use
If you need a power source for say Electrolysis they are good as the 5V rail usually carries a rating of at least 20 Amps.

They are good high quality high current power supplies for general electronics work, 5V @ up to 20A is good for electrolysis
jim2 February 5th, 2004, 11:48 PM

HI,
I tried both a 10K and a 500 Ohm and the transistor is not switching.( it seems that with the large wire the resistence is low enough to let enough current to switch .I will try
larger gauge wire from the vibrator to the base.(the 1st time I cut the vibrator off and used the leeds,this time I spliced into the vibrator wires to keep the load) both time the
phone rings instead of vibrating.Any other ideas? This should be simple but I am doing something wrong
grandyOse February 6th, 2004, 02:26 AM

You are loading the vibrator circuit. Your transistor and vibrator are not compatable. You need a higher impedance load in parrallel with the vibrator and you can't get that by
adding resistance, because it is lowering the input too much to operate your transistor. Try an optoisolator or darlington pair.

Ooh, my bad. I forgot i'd already posted that.
If the transistor route fails, try using an Optocoupler, yeah, a darlington (off the top of my head, a BD679 is a NPN darlington isn't it?) is the way to go though
jim2 February 20th, 2004, 03:17 AM

I have been looking for the last 2 weeks to find a darlington transistor.None of the electronics suppliers have them.I even tried in another country but no one had them.I think I
will try looking into the optical realm and see what comes up(maybe a LED and opticaltransistor).Any ideas ,thanks for all input.
Jim2
T_Pyro February 20th, 2004, 05:35 AM

Try asking for a BC517 darlington transistor. Optionally, you could simply make your own darlington pair from 2 npn transistors. www.fairchildsemi.com has a wide range of
discrete components, and optoelectronics components to choose from.

BD681 is another from memory
Jumala February 21st, 2004, 10:50 PM

@jim2
at first forget the BC 548 transistor. If you have put 1 Volt to the base it may be already distroyed. A BC 548 needs a base current not higher than 1mA and can switch max.
200mA. This is ways to less.
A switching capability of 10-20A is useful.
You can build an own darlington transistor from BC 548 and 2N3055.
Put both collectors together and connect the emitter of the BC548 direct to the base of the 2N3055.
Then connect 220KOhm from base to minus. This is for savety because the darlington pair is sensitive to smallest currents.
Use 10-30 KOhm from the cellphone to the base.
The phone must have a continuous DC output and not a square wave signal to drive the vibrator.
You can also use a single power MOS transistor like 2SK3296 (N-channel up to 15V and 35A) This transistor can be found on K7S5Apro mainboards.
If you can get defect computer mainboards you find cheap power MOS in the switching power supply for the cpu, nearby the ring coils.
I have searched for a pdf datasheet at NECs homepage but I get only a blank page. So I dont know to connect this transistor.
jim2 February 23rd, 2004, 03:56 AM

Jumala,
I got the parts today and started putting them on a board.I am a little confused because it is not like what I have done before so I have a question.
After connecting a 10 K in line from the cell to the base of BC548 and connecting the C of 548 to the C of 3055.connect the 548 E to the base of 3055 and a 220K from 3055
base to - ... As before does the 3055 Collector go to the - side of the light(load) and the 3055 Emitter to ground?
I just wanted to make sure before I did the last hookups.I have been learning a lot the last few months thanks to all the help and advise given.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Dust Initiator
Log in
View Full Version : Dust Initiator
CommonScientist January 31st, 2004, 05:50 PM

"Dust Initiator,
The Dust Initiator is used to d estroy buildings and certa in storage facilities. The basic purpose of this device is to acheive two
distinct but rapidly successive explosions . This is accom plished by constructing a main charge com p o s e d o f e q u a l a m o u n t s o f
powdered TNT(obtained by crushing TNT in a canvas bag) and m a g n e s i u m powder and inclosing it in a cover charge of a
scattering ag ent of any carbonaceous m aterial which can be ruduced to dust vapor. Exam ples are cornstarch, flour, coal dust, or
g a s o l i n e ( w h e n u s i n g g a s o l i n e , n e v e r u s e m o r e t h a n 1 1 . 4 l i t e r s . ) T h e r m i t e m a y b e s u b s t i t u t e d f o r m a g n e s i u m in the m ixture.
From 1.36 to 2.67 kilograms of surround should be provided for each 28.32 cubic m eters of target. The 0.45 kilograms (0.225
k i l o g r a m s T N T a n d . 2 2 5 k i l o g r a m s o f m a g n e s i u m powder) charg e will effectivly disperse and deton ate up to 18.14 kilogram s e
of carbonaceous material. Upoun activation, the main charge detonation distributes the cover charge material, which is initiated
by the action of the incinidiary explosion. This causes the entire atm o s h p e r e t o m e satura ted with burning m aterials. The
desrtuctive effect of this device is incre sed by closing all windows and doors in the target b uilding. This charge m a y b e
detonated elctrically or non-electrically."
- FM 31-20 Departme nt of the Army, Special Fo rces O p e r a t i o n a l T e c h n i q u e s

I read this and was intrigued by whether or not this would actually work, and if anyone has tried it. Im quite sure that the TNT
could be replaced with a equivalent or an exeedingly po werful explosive.
Here is the chart the had in th e m a n u a l :
Dust Initiator, Size of Building vs. Amo unt and type of Cover Charge.
Target Size Cover Charge Am o u n t T y p e T a r g e t
4,300 cubic ft.(123 cubic m .) W heat Flower 10 lbs.(4.5 kg.) Wooden Building
4,300 cubic ft.(123 cubic m . ) C o a l D u s t 1 0 l b s . ( 4 . 5 k g . ) W o o d e n Building
18,500 cubic ft.(524 cubic m .) W heat flower 100 lbs.(46 kg.) Wo o d e n B u i l d i n g
450 cubic ft. (13 cubic m . ) G a s o l i n e 6 g a l l o n s ( 2 3 L . ) R o o m
159,000 cubic ft.(4503 cubic m .) Gasoline 30 gallons(115 L.) Building
88,000 cubic ft..( 249 2 cubic m.) Gasoline 2.5 gallons(1 0 L . ) C o l d S t o r a g e R o o m
Im pretty sure it would work, but I dont have the resources to try it out. Has anyone done this?
Just thought this would be interesting/informative to fellow forum ites :)
Blackhawk February 1st, 2004, 0 1:06 AM

Yeah this is just a solid powder FAE, there are quite a few existing thread s about this, perhaps you should seach first and then
a d d t o o n e o f them ...
Fergus February 1st, 2004, 0 2:26 AM

That's why grain elevators explode, a spark ignites all of that grain dust and the elevator ceases to exist. I have read several
threads on this forum about d ust initia tors so seach a b it and you shall be reward ed.
CommonScientist February 1st, 2004, 0 3:32 AM

I searched for FAE and I got 2 3 results including this thread, but none of them were based soley on solid powders/d usts. So I
started this thread to begin a frsh brainstorm ing project about these. Im sorry if i should have taken another topic off topic to
inform people, but I thuoght this was the way to do it.
dannyboy16 February 9th, 2004, 05:28 AM

i have read that alum inium powder can work quite well when dipersed over a large area, ive never tried it but if someone has
o r i f s o m e o n e h a s t h e r e s o u r s e s t o t h e n p l e a s e d o , t h e n t e l l u s w h a t y o u f o u n d o ut.
Ropik April 3rd, 2004, 04:58 PM

I r e a d s o m ewhere that therm ate(also called "subignitor for thermite") can be used in the place of m a g n e s i u m ... It's easier to
o b t a i n b e c a u se it is Al/oxidize r(KNO3, KMnO4... do NOT use (per)chlorates) in 50/50 volum e ratio :D

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Proximity Safety and Arming Switch
Log in
View Full Version : Proximity Safety and Arming Switch

I recently had occassion to acquire a child-safety alarm, normally worth $40, for gratis. ;)
This (http://www.travel-accessories-products.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=FOS&Product_Code=82562&Category_Code=TRVL-SEC) is what I got.

Ignore the sickeningly cute devil-spawn.
Anyways, this device is an RF transponder pair, which will sound an alarm when they're seperated by a distance exceeding their limit.
I tested it with a clear line of sight of about 70-80 feet, but only about 50 if my body was between the two parts, or holding one tightly in my hand.
Anyways, I'm thinking these would make nice little safety devices for use with the IPDM.
You pull the pin, toss the IPDM, and it won't go off as long as you're still within range of it. If you go round a corner, it arms, as you're no longer in it's lethal range. Or, if you
might need to come back that way, it'll deactivate (hopefully!) before you trip it, so you don't kill yourself.
It would also have application in a hostage bomb collar, as they can't leave your close supervision without getting decapitated, making escape attempts suicidal. :)
If the transmitter was secured such that the hostages couldn't fuck with it, you could "leash" them to a spot while you go elsewhere, secure in knowing that they're dead meat
if they try leaving.
I'm reminded of a scene from a Bond movie where he puts a cigarrette case in a goons hand (in a closet) and tells him it's a motion-sensitive bomb that'll go off if he moves.
It's not, but goon doesn't know it, so stays still.
Training your little devil spawn not to leave your sight would be a simple matter of it giving them a little electric shock if they wander away. :D
Chainhit 2 February 29th, 2004, 09:27 PM

Wow... the hostage idea is good nbk2000! Dident they have this in the movie Swordfish? Anyways.. your idea seems feasable. The only problem I see is if the "Enemy" is
close to you and you throw the thing, you have to run backwords to set it off or throw the other peice the other derection. Do more testing first, if its tempremental or
somthing blocks the wave like a wall it will detonate/blow up at a possibly lethal distance. I think that a delay will help, so if it messes up you have like 5 seconds to get away,
but so could the enemy then. Sounds risky though.
Listin Timmy, if you stray away more then 50 yards somthing bad will happen... BOOOOOOOOOOOM...
Kinda sounds like the ultimate failsafe bomb idea.. but I dont know... do extensive testing with a firecracker before you get to putting grenades or such on it. Good idea :D
Hang-Man February 29th, 2004, 11:28 PM

Thanks Chainhit, without your in depth analysis NBK may have hurt himself.:rolleyes:
I think this would work well as a car bomb trigger. You wire the car bomb to part one of this little toy, and throw the second part in the garbage/bushes near by, and walk
away. Mr. Victim starts the car, 50 feet down the road. BOOM.
Chainhit 2 February 29th, 2004, 11:37 PM

:( Am i banned or somthing? :(
About the car bomb, I was just thinking, is it possible to hook up a bomb to the ignition like they do in the movies?
And i just thought of a really really geto idea for a car bomb... make your munition, place in car, and use a fuse (manditory for gettoness), then tape a matchbook in such a
way that when you pull on it it ignites the fuse and boom... then you tie a thin cord to the matchbook and glue it to the ground... So when the car moves it pulls the string and
it lights the fuse.;.. :eek:
And you could possibly tie it to some rotating part so when the car starts, it moves.. etc... Can you get more getto then that? :(
Edit:How about a spool of fishing wire?
nbk2000 March 1st, 2004, 03:08 AM

You are now! :p
Silly k3wL. :rolleyes:
Neat idea about the car-bomb, Hangman.
You set it up, and you're long gone, with the victim deciding when the bomb goes off, as no remote ignition system is going to make a difference as the bomb doesn't go off
until the car is actually moved. :)
You could flip this around so that the car bomb doesn't go off until the victim approaches the other half.
You know the victim will have to pass by a certain spot on his way to somewhere, but you don't know when.
Rather than stake 'em out 24/7, risking detection, you set the transponder at the chokepoint and let the victim drive into the killzone on his own time. :)
Imagine a device that clamps onto the brake lines, severing them on command. The device ONLY functions when it comes into range of the transponder, which is placed at
"Dead Mans Curve" ;), cutting the lines and falling free to be recovered by the hitter.
Or a road-side claymore, going off only when the transponder that your spy has placed in the targets possession, passes by. Regardless of randomizing of vehicles, dressing up
in a disguise, or any other subterfuge, the transponder is ONLY with the target, ensuring ONLY the target (and collateral personnel) gets killed.
Your guys don't have to sit and guess, nor is there any need for wires which can be traced back to their position.
Anyways, any obstruction solid enough to block the signal is solid enough to block the IPDM fragments, so that's not a concern.
Given the 200 hour lifespan of the batteries (according to the manufacturer) you'd have a week for the transponder to do its thing. :)
I wonder if they're all set to the same freq/code, or if it varies from unit to unit. If they're all the same, then you'd only need one master to control however many slave unit
you've got.
There is one annoying thing that'd need to be corrected on it, though. When you first seperate the units, the master alerts. This would kill you if attached to a IPDM, as it'd
instantly function when armed. :(
Work-around would be to have a safety switch between the transponder and the detonator, which would be flipped only after a few seconds to allow the transponder to set.
Though you'd have to train this in well, otherwise you might forget to either arm the grenade, resulting in a dud, or prematurely disengaging the safety, resulting in a self-kill.
I don't trust electronic timing circuits to do the job, so a manual switch is needed, though perhaps a small LED could show that the IPDM transponder is still "hot". It'd have to
change colors, because if it was simply "Off" to show SAFE, then a faulty LED could result in a self-kill too.
A-BOMB March 1st, 2004, 03:53 PM

NBK I found this unit here awhile ago and got me to thinking what if you attached this to a door frame to activate what ever you have setup. There would be no getting past
it, with a motion dector they can fool it, with a trip wire they cant cut and splice it, witha laser they can trick and reflect it. But with this unit there is nothing they can see, no
wires or beams :) http://sales.goldmine-elec.com/prodinfo.asp?prodid=7752
jojo7 March 1st, 2004, 10:24 PM

great idea, heres another cheap kiddie finder only $8.95
http://sales.goldmine-elec.com/prodinfo.asp?prodid=7749
EP March 2nd, 2004, 01:15 AM

An interesting idea, particularly the hostage "leash" application.
The problem with using it for a car bomb so that it passes by a certain location that is rigged up is that the charge could go off too soon. If it has a 50 foot range that means
the charge would go off while the car/whatever is still 50ft away. If a claymore type charge was used this would work, but that isn't as effective against vehicles as some other
methods. Seems like if you wanted the device to go off while the target was near, the simplest (K.I.S.S.) method would be just have somebody watching the spot with a
remote.
On an unrelated note, is anyone having scrolling difficulties in the reply window? It scrolls really jerkily since the latest change for me, it never did that before.
nbk2000 March 2nd, 2004, 03:36 AM

It wouldn't be a problem, as the vehicle is moving very quickly, about 73 feet per second at 55MPH.
Since it takes about a second or so for the alarm to sound from the last time the transponder recieves a reply to its query, that'd be 50 feet approaching + 23 feet receding, so
within 7 yards of the bomb.
Besides which, multiple triggers can be used to insure target engagment.
Transponder is placed "upstream" of the bomb, to detect the approach of the target, which then activates an instantaneous trigger like a break beam or magnetic influence,
which sets off the weapon at the closest approach.
Until the target approaches the killzone, the mine/Claymore/AT missile is inert to all other possible targets.
Let them sweep the roads, spray RF wattage all over the spectrum, drive up and down the road with roller tracks and decoy cars...won't do jack shit because the weapon is
comatose 'till the victim wakens it.
Besides assassination, protecting your flanks while on "The Job" would be quite appropriate.
I'm thinking a simple minimore covering doorways, hallways, side of buildings, etc, with a PIR detector initiator.
You set it up to go off if someone sneaks up on your ass while you're busy with your work.
If you don't have to run, you can approach them safely to disarm and retrieve them. If you've got feral bacon on your ass, you run right past them, trusting the transponder to
disarm them as you approach, and re-arm as you clear them.
You set up multiple minimore ambushes along your escape route and possible flanking positions persuers may take. You breeze through them while the chasers eat hot
shrapnel at every turn.
If the transponder doesn't work...well...at least you don't have to worry about prison! :D
See, there's a bright side to everything if you look hard enough for it. ;)
Because it's an RF system, it'll work through doors and typical walls, so you can set the minimore up, aimed at a door that the pigs would have to go through to get to you,
and have it arm once the door is closed.
You can open the door safely because the boobytrap disarms as you approach it, before the detection range. But anyone opening the door, even a little, would get fragged
through the door/wall before they could open the door enough to peek through.
These HBC (Hostage Bomb Collars) would also be nifty for use with sex slaves.
Typical scenario is guy with captured teenie chained up in a basement dungeon.
Inevitably, they chew their own limb off (OK...slight exaggeration) and escape.
BUT, what if there were no chains or such, just a collar around their neck? The stairway up to freedom is shielded by sheetmetal from the rest of the basement dungeon. If
slave enters the stairway, it gets the living shit shocked out of it until it crawls back into its corner.
If it manages to get up the stair, once the door is opened, that activates a secondary circuit (another transponder) that sets off a small explosive charge in the collar,
decapitating the rebellious slave.
Between these two deterrents, there should be no possibility of escape.
Once well trained, the slave can be taken around the house, since the master has a transponder controller on him that administers shock on command, and also has the lethal
charge out-of-range function.
Slaves aren't told about the "boom" function, so if they're feeling frisky and incapitate/kill you in an attempt to run, they don't get far and don't get away with it. :)
Dave the Rave March 22nd, 2004, 04:08 PM

NBK, awesome idea !!! If I only had an basement ;)
We can use microwave emiters to create an death wave on the path of the atackers and also use claymore mines to finish those who make their way through the microwaves.
With MW we can kill many more pigs, as none will notice the waves and the device will become funtional till all be dead. If someone escapes, then the caymores finish the job.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Lock Blowing Idea
Log in
View Full Version : Lock Blowing Idea
ink March 14th, 2004, 07:17 PM

I know this has been discussed a small amount in the forum already, but I would like to hear your ideas. My idea is to (super?)saturate AP in acetone, then suck it into a
syringe. Next, inject it into the keyhole and let it evaporate for a few hours. To ignite it, put a small amount of AP putty in the front of the keyhole and ignite it with a fuse.
Any ideas on how well this would work/improvements would be appreciated.
Desmikes March 14th, 2004, 08:42 PM

What kind of a door is it, if it's wooden then just use 25g right next to the lock (may want to cover it with something). In practice they use shaped sharges for this sort if thing.
It sends the lock (or what is left) into the room at rather impressive speed. Supersaturating acetone with AP and injecting that into a hole, waiting forever for acetone to
evaporate and then be disapointed with the results... there are better ways. If it's an outside lock - metal cutters work beautifully; if you wish to follow up on your idea - use
actual liquid explosive. Often there are less stressful ways to enter ;)
nbk2000 March 15th, 2004, 03:04 AM

NBK's math lesson for the day:
3 posts - 2 new topics - 1 n00bie = 0 return.
:D
AX in a syringe injected into the lock, microdet made for azo-chlatrate in a stirrer straw pressed into AX paste, BOOM...open sesame! ;)
atlas#11 March 16th, 2004, 03:31 PM

Hmm, this thread reminds me of a recent idea of mine.
I was thinking we could use small ammounts of chewing gum as a binder with a fairly stable yet powerfull primary that does not require more than a few mg to reach ddt.
Then you could press it in to sheets that could be cut and fit in to a chewing gum wraper for an excellent disguise. It would smell minty fresh and look like ordinary Extra or
Wriglies but when the pigs go to help themselves... :p . It would be a simple matter of pulling out a stick, rolling it to a thin string, feeding it into the lock pre filled with NG or
other reliable/powerfull liquid HE and igniting with a small fuse. You could even hide the fuse in the wrapper right aside the stick of gum. It could fit inside your lock pick case
right next to the syringes filled with NG.
I'm thinking maby lead azide or DDNP, HMTD is to unstable and silver acetylide is to reactive(as far as I've read). AP would work but I wouldn't want to be carring that in my
pocket.
Just an idea, sounds like mission impossible dosen't it?
Ropik May 11th, 2004, 03:07 PM

It sounds good, atlas, but if you do not want to carry AP in your pocket for safety reasons, don't carry the NG. It is too sensitive. In this case, EDGN, maybe with small amount
of nitrocellulose added to make it more "pasty" is your best bet I think. (M)ethyl nitrate with bit of NC would also work nicely.
Jacks Complete May 11th, 2004, 06:37 PM

I don't know whether the NG would be safe or not, but you could try it! After all, NG + diatomous earth or wood sawdust, etc., even nitrocellulose, is far safer than NG alone.
You could even try buying the ingredients off the packet and mixing it from scratch.
---
New - Mighty Atlas gum! Not so much menthol as mental! Sure to clear any blockage!!
---
Ropik May 12th, 2004, 02:32 PM

Yes... you could try it. But there is not second chance if you find that it isn't safe enough. You can only find some second-hand hands;).
tiac03 May 13th, 2004, 06:45 PM

Why not use a shaped charge of some type?
A scaled down version, even if it doesn't work exactly as a shaped charge should, it should still have enough energy to fuck up the lock enough to render it useless.
(I have never blown up a lock so excuse my ignorance if this is overkill or just stupid and useless)
Psychlonic May 14th, 2004, 01:27 AM

Through what I've erm... seen... the most effective way to get past those locks is just to ignore them. Attack the door or the frame instead, a good kick or shoulder to the
door's center works nicely.
Supposing you actually find a door and frame that aren't haphazardly put together and they are your only means of entrance to an area, thermites miiighht work if you are
able to put enough above the handle, perhaps drill a large hole above it. Though, if you can do that, why not just drill the lock out entirely?
It just seems to me that most locks could be bypassed using lowly black powder. If the lock seriously requires an explosive device to get by, I'd have to go with tiac03 and just
use a shaped charge, because any lock not requiring that should be bypassed using other means.
Hang-Man May 14th, 2004, 01:46 PM

People love blowing up locks, however, they all seem to forget that blowing things up is loud as hell. If the lock you're trying to break is remote enough that NG going off isn't
going to get any attention, then either:
1) Nothing inside is worth taking

2) You could just wail on the door/window with a sledge hammer to get in, since nobody is around anyway. Hell, drive your car through the door. (And dont give me
shit about damage to your car; using explosives during the commission of a crime will get you fucked in court, so I assume you would only even consider doing it if
what youre stealing is more than worth the car damage.)
Furthermore, blowing locks will only work on padlocks, as they can be entirely destroyed, or locks set in wooden doors, as they can be blown out of the frame. Maybe if the
metal door was hollow the pins could be blown up through the top of the lock housing but I doubt it. If lock is a deadbolt set in a steel door, which most external doors are,
then in all likelihood all that will happen is your explosive will mangle the hell out of the lock making it impossible to open even with the key.
In most/all cases where explosives could be used to compromise the lock, a lock pick, bolt cutter, or sledge hammer could be used instead, which would be far easier and more
discrete (Albeit not half as fun.). The only time I can see using explosives on a lock is this scenario:
1) The door is too heavy to be broken by a hammer or axe.

2) The lock is a Medeco or other high security lock that I would rather have herpes than pick.
3) Its the 4th of July so nobody will be alarmed by the bang.
4) The hope diamond is on the other side.
This is not to say explosives have no uses in breaking and entering, far from it, but bypassing the lock is not one of them in my opinion.
tiac03 May 14th, 2004, 06:31 PM

I agree with you for the whole "too Loud for use when stealing" idea.
Unless you can ensure that you are in and out in 30 seconds and far away by the time the cops get there, don't bother with explosives.
Explosives are Usefull when you need speed. (escaping, storming someone), and even then you don't want to go after the lock itself, you want to move the whole door out of
your way. (charge along the doorframe,like Anit-Terrorist teams use, or even those linear shaped charges that were mentioned in another thread.)
Anyways wouldn't something like Liquid nitrogen, or another extremely cold liquid sprayed into the lock then force the lock, breaking the pins and allowing easy access, be
better or more efficient/quiet?
nbk2000 May 14th, 2004, 06:46 PM

I like your logic Hang-man. :)
Psychlonic May 14th, 2004, 08:49 PM

A torch would probably do the job as well. Wheel the set-up right next to the lock and cut the damn thing out of the scene. If the boys in blue are on their way (assuming
something goes wrong), use the thing to create a boobytrap when you are finished getting whatever it was you were after (only if you aren't able to wheel it back out of
course).
While this is quieter than explosives, you still get a bright light which can jam things up at night. Still, another option on the table is good to have.
Actually, if you are going to make a ruckus without regard to leaving evidence, why not just drag along a chainsaw and cut out a new door in the side of the building? Or the
roof? If you are in an area where people use wood to heat their homes, this really shouldn't draw too much attention.
With todays technology, explosives for opening locked doors just seems insane.
nbk2000 May 15th, 2004, 05:13 PM

Hydralic spreaders, used for car body repair, cost less than $200 and have a 10 ton capacity, more than enough to spread a door jamb apart, or shift a few bricks out of place
in a wall.
A-BOMB May 15th, 2004, 08:25 PM

Well explosive are fun, I find a ramset(remington).25cal cartridge nailgun with a chisle bit is better, no hammering, no huge bang. just a semi-loud pop and the lock is
removed.
nbk2000 May 17th, 2004, 12:35 PM

Where do you set the chisel at?
A-BOMB May 17th, 2004, 02:23 PM

I used a chisle bit from a old air hammer I had, though I had to grind off this locking ring on the end. You could probaly get a tugsten tipped one at a industrial supply store.
There are a few differnet type of chisles too, I found the ones with a "V" cut into the edge are good for removing the heads off of large bolts. But one thing is the recoil is
rather hard, and I have found that the .25cal cartridge units are the minium you can use, though I have never tried the .22cal units. I have also attached a folding stock to it to
help with the recoil, though it is more trouble that is worth.
nbk2000 May 17th, 2004, 04:24 PM

That's interesting to be sure, but doesn't answer the question of WHERE you set the chisel on the lock to break it.
A-BOMB May 17th, 2004, 06:11 PM

On the door I tested on I aimed the chisle at a angle so it shears the section of the door that is over the bolt making it weak enough that I can just lean against it and it pops
open. If its a cheap lock I can usually just aim for the bolt itself. If useing a "v" notch chisle I aim at a angle at the cyclender if Its a wood door I usually rippes the cyclender
and front part of the lock right out exposing the interals which allow you to manully manipulate the bolt.
xperk May 18th, 2004, 04:04 AM

A-BOMB,
The ramset is unknown to me, is it this contraption?:

http://www.ramset-redhead.com/hd_22.asp
oh they have a trigger activated too..hmm nice:

http://www.ramset-redhead.com/RS22.asp
A-BOMB May 18th, 2004, 09:55 AM

Ya that what I was talking about, there are differnet manufactuers but the one I have is made by ramset.
http://www.ramset-redhead.com/cobra.asp
tiac03 May 18th, 2004, 10:17 AM

Those things have power behind them we put a nail through the bullet stop steel (up range) in a shooting range once. (walked up to it put the thing up against the steel and
hit it with a hammer, nail went right through (can't remember if it was quarter or half inch steel) It was mainly A pistol and .22 rifle range but we fired an SKS in there and it
didn't punch holes through the steel so you tell me the thickness. (although armor penetrating bullets i'm told went through it easily...)
Good Up close bullet proof de-vester maybe? (trigger type not hammer activated one). Even just using the blank applied to the key hole would probably bust out the pins well
enough.
xperk May 18th, 2004, 10:21 AM

A-BOMB,
ah a ten shot magazine.. handy.
So, forgive me my slowness, what you are saying is that in theory one could shoot the gun at an angle to the side of the exposed cylinder lock. Thus causing the internal
screws keeping the cylinder embedded in the lock to pop and the cylinder to come out?
A-BOMB May 18th, 2004, 12:37 PM

This is was I am talking about using the chisle to remove the whole front section of the lock. There by exposing the interals of the lock so you can manualy manipulate the
bolt.
A: bolt
B: front lock face
C: inside turn latch
D: chisle
and the big brown thing is the door.
nbk2000 May 18th, 2004, 06:05 PM

Shouldn't the chisel go between A and B if you're intending to remove the wood from in front of the locking bolt so the door can be forced open?
FinnBell May 18th, 2004, 06:44 PM

Hell! If the door is wood, forget the lock, just set a couple of charges on the top and bottom hinges. Blow the wood and hinges apart. The rest could be finished off with a crow
bar or something. Just playing around with stuff like TNP or ETN, like strapping them to small trees in the area, they are definitely briscant enough to take those hinges off of
the door, even in small amounts. Especially if its made from wood. But then again that might be too loud.

Those nail cartridge guns seem rather lethal. Just look at the steel pen. figures! Over half an inch in some cases!
Obviously highly illegal in the UK? Anyone know? I guess it would be in the same league as a captive bolt stunner.
It would easily go through a vest, tiac03, unless you hit a trauma plate... and even then, perhaps!
Desmikes May 18th, 2004, 09:19 PM

Military uses shaped charges to open up doors, I believe that developed police units use something similar to a heavy shotgun for similar purposes. Anyone tried to see how
much damage to a wooden door can you do with a 10-gage shotgun?
A-BOMB May 18th, 2004, 10:59 PM

Except the police use a compressed powdered metal slug that put all of if energy into the lock and then disintergrates in to dust. You could probaly get away with using some
buck shot, except which is louder, a 10 gauge or a ramset gun/sledge hammer/ hydrolic spreader.
NBK, ya it should go in between A and B if you want to give the door a nudge after ward if not you aim where it shows and then shove your fingers in there and pull the bolt
back. Both ways will work. And these nail guns would only be lethal if you got the pig to hold still ran up to him and shoved the end into his armor and pulled the trigger. if you
aimed at him from 2 feet away and pulled the trigger the nail would come out of the end and fall about 6 inches later. It only has power up close.
Moh May 22nd, 2004, 08:38 PM

You could also use a steel tube filled with lead, with a steel plate welded to one end and to handles mounted on it. With a little force it should break the door open (it should be
aimed against the lock, or at least near or else the "hammer" may go through the door instead). ;)

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Demolishing a Small Tool Shed
Log in
View Full Version : Demolishing a Small Tool Shed
Zappy March 24th, 2004, 02:23 PM

The structure in question is just your average tool shed, well, sort of. It's a homem ade job measuring roughly 8' long by 5'
wide and 7' high, not counting the peak. It consists of 1x8" clapboards nailed to the wooden fram e (trusses?), which itself is
built from 2x 4s. The roof comes to an "A" shaped peak (sorry for the lack of proper construction term s!). Anyway, the building
is quite dilap i d a t e d a n d h a s b e c o m e an eyesore, and I would lik e to rem ove it so metim e later this spring or summ er.
Right now I'm trying to decide between the only two explosives I can obtain or m anufacture: Pyrodex (chea p BP substitute) or
acetone peroxide. I've had plenty of experience with bo th, though I've never tried to destroy anything this large. Since Pyrodex
is a very slow-burning explosive (slower than BP, actually) it would need a lot of confinem e n t . I ' m g u e s s i n g a s i m p l e p i p e b o m b
(piece of steel coupling with threaded end caps) with a charge of about 200g Pyro d e x w o u l d p r o d u c e e n o u g h o f a s h o c k w a v e t o
destroy the building. The goal here is to reduce it to m anagable pieces of wood which I could easily gather up afterwards - not
to launch the thing into orbit.
My only concern with Pyrodex (or even BP, if I could obtain som e) is the noise level that such a device would create. Although
this is not a populated area, there are a num ber of hom e s s o m e 1 / 4 m ile away, where the occupants m ay not appreciate
having their windows rattled. Fragm ents from the steel pipe are not a huge concern, as this building is in a rem ote location and
the actual blast would be fired by rem ote ignition.
As for AP, I have a couple of concerns with this. First of all is it's sensitivity; I've been fortunate never to have had any
m ishaps with this stuff, and I handle it with the utmost caution, but I still worry nontheless. The m o s t I e v e r m a d e a t a t i m e
was 80g, and this req uired a LOT of 3% H2O2 (boiled down). The second concern are it's actual de tonation properties.
Although it has a lot of shattering ability (hence it's potential to rem ove fingers!) it doesn't seem to have m u c h " h e a v e " . I f a n
80g amount were used on this toolshed, my worry is that it would only displace the clapboards (if that) and leave the fram e
intact. On the plus side however, AP doesn't produce the vibration that BP / PX does, and when confined inside an o bject it
d o e s n ' t s e e m to prod uce nearly as mu ch noise.
The plan for charge p lacement, would be to hang the charge(s) horizontally in the very center of the building, ensuring that the
shockwave would be evenly distributed, flying d ebris would be minim i z e d , a n d t h a t t h e e n d c a p s o f a p i p e c h a r g e ( i f u s e d )
would fly only straight up or down. The building would be tightly sealed (windows boarded from the inside, door nailed shut) in
order to produce as m uch confinem e n t a s p o s s i b l e .
These are the only two explosives I have access to right now, although I may eventually be able to make some KCLO3 and
p r o d u c e s o m ething m ore suitable with it.
Obviously, this job could be accomplished much more easily with a can of gasoline and a m atch but hey, what would be the fun
in that?? ;)
Looking forward to any input you m ight have on this subject.
vulture March 24th, 2004, 04:53 PM

Pipe b o m b ? F o r d e m o l i s h i n g s o m ething? You've got to be kidding. A pipe bomb will merely send high velocity shrapn el flying
through the walls.
Also, using AP as the main charge is a BAD idea.
nbk2000 March 24th, 2004, 06:36 PM

Banned for terminal stupidity.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Underwaterdetonation
Log in
View Full Version : Underwaterdetonation
Myrol March 31st, 2004, 02:34 AM

This is my first own thread so i hope i dont get banned trough this :p My Question: Can anyone here provide a Video of a
deep Underwaterdetonation? I have actually one with 150g APAN from Spydamonkee and his Vid with the 800g ANFO misfire!
BUT I have no Movie with such a deep Detonation where you can hear the typical properties of a UNDERwaterexplosion. Spy's
one is more a Surfaceexplosion because the Water was dusted into Fog! I asked this because i searched ALOT trough the web
and the Forum but dont find any real Video (WITH SOUND!!). My E-Mail for other Questions: Mr.Nitropenta@gmx.de
knoddas March 31st, 2004, 03:03 AM

Have You seen this one?
2 kg's of an/nm/al detonated under 30 cm of ice. (http://earth.prohosting.com/andyboy1/2kgannmal.wmv)
found at: http://earth.prohosting.com/andyboy1/movies7.html
Myrol April 1st, 2004, 06:15 AM

Hey cool! Thank you for the Link its a nice Video and i can hear the difference between Underwater and "Underland". But
something is really strange on Andyboyz movies...The Sound!!! 17ml NG makes no real loud BAAAMM and a 6,5kilo ANFO
Charge with 1,3kg ANNMAl sounds only little like a BIG Explosion! His Microphone must be pissed off! Hopefully we can find a
Vid with a Underwaterexplosion so deep that no Jet comes off the Surface!
thepyrolooz April 4th, 2004, 06:22 PM

Andyboy uses a plexiglass box, were theres drilled small holes for the mic. that could be one reason. Another could be the
distance, the camcorder is away from the charge. Plus i know from personal experience that my camcorders mic. can't record
very loud sounds, and therefore makes a "scratty" sound.. :(
nuclearattack April 5th, 2004, 05:44 AM

Well Myrol i'm searching for a small lake near my city to make this interesting test. I'm looking for a well isolated lake and i
don't want a lake where live fishes and other kind of life form because i'm a naturalist and i don't want to damage the nature.
I know that it can sound strange but it is a very important thing for me. When the test will be done i'll send to your e mail the
video. I have also noticed the problem of the sound with the camera, its microphone is not able to capture well the mighty
boom of explosions but i'll try to do my best.
Myrol April 9th, 2004, 01:39 PM

Wow Nuclearattack thats a very NICE Idea! A big thanks to you for doing this :D :D :D :D Today I ignited a 2,9g AP Charge in
a 7,92mm Cartrigde and it was a fucking PAAMMM because it was only 8cm under Water........The Jet was 2m high and coool!
Myrol April 18th, 2004, 05:37 AM

Has anyone a good idea how to make real working Underwaterfuse? I have big trouble doing this because the normal
sparklers are to sensitive against moisture and strong coatings! I've heard something about Fuses with Silicone KMnO4 and
Sulfur who should work good Underwater but theres guaranted a dark corner with this Fuses :( Fine Blackpowder pressed in
Straws and coated with NC-laquer should also work I think, but I could be terrible wrong :confused:
chemistr1 April 18th, 2004, 08:39 AM

Underwater fuses.
I use a variation of what used to be known as a VC fuse which basically comprises of a thin diameter piece of bamboo cleaned
out and tightly packed with fine blackpowder, apparently the vietcong used this type of fusing for improvised coke can
grenades. Its basically an improvised version of the Italian designed spollette fusing used in aerial display shells.The fusing
always works underwater or out after you have got used to producing them but for some reason everyone I have ever
mentioned this type of fusing to always replies no way it will blow up. Which is damn strange as I have been using this type of
fusing for well over 17 years now. I really should make some videos of the fuse working on and out of water to prove it
though. When we used this technique as kids though we always had a rule that he who made the fuse lit it though as if the BP
is not packed tightly enough it could flash through the tube.
Hope this helps. Will get some more bamboo tubing and film a couple of fuses in action for any non believers.
Efraim_barkbit April 18th, 2004, 12:01 PM

Try putting your fuse in a piece of shrinktubing, that should work.
Or lay your fuse on a wide enough strip of tape, fold over, and you gor yourself a water proof fuse.
Works with my homemade anyway, wich consists of silicone mixed with whistle powder and "rolled" to a string.
Its even "waterproof" in it self if its thick enough.
Use your imagination, and youll figure something out.
Anyways, you could simply use electric ignition, thats IMO the best when dong stuff underwater.
chemistr1, as a friendly advice, learn how to use the "ENTER" key.
Skean Dhu April 18th, 2004, 12:48 PM

I did my first underwater detonations the other day. I put AP into some M-80/M-100 sized cases taped a rock to them and set
them off in 3-5ft deep water.
They made a nice quiet thump followed by bubbles and displaced water, but no jets were formed by either of the two I set off.
This was done in a pond inhabited by fish and the like and none have gone belly up on me, but these were also rather small
charges.
Guerilla April 18th, 2004, 01:07 PM

Or lay your fuse on a wide enough strip of tape, fold over, and you gor yourself a water proof fuse. Depending on the fuse,
you may also get a very good quickmatch this way, that will burn in one whoosh once ignited.. :rolleyes:
Its better to just drop the idea of using some homemade fuse in underwater charges. You only get pissed off if it wont
detonate, and you have to pull the 5kg charge that should be safe up from the water.
Efraim_barkbit April 27th, 2004, 11:55 AM

kind of OT, but nice to know:
I watched part of a nature program on tv yesterday blah blah, and they mentioned that only 1/1000 of sound created
underwater can be heard over water level.
Of coarse, when dealing with underwaterdetonations, this can only be true when the explosion is deep enough that no water jet
will form.
edit: k in know
Myrol May 3rd, 2004, 11:54 AM

Wow if its really true....you can ignite kilos of HE without alerting people if you're do it in the right way :cool: Due to the fact
that I have never found a Video with an Underwaterexplosion filmed UNDER Water I thin I WILL do it :D 500g APAN a nice lake
a late time and a nice deep place under Water should be good to produce such a Movie! My Digicam should stand the
pressure if I make no stupud mistakes! Packing it into a solid Plastic baggie and tamping the Baggie well enough to dive the
Cam around 30cm under Water......THEN we can see the REAL effect of such an Explosion! How the hot Gasses produce a short
flash and a expanding Gascloud with eruption of a sudden Jethammer...Mmmm seems to be nice but perhaps a risk for my
cam :confused: :confused:
Myrol May 3rd, 2004, 11:57 AM

Efraim Barkbit: I appologize for my swearing to you in the APAN-Tests thread! I was somewhat pissed off and angry about the
"playing" with new forum members....Dont take it personally!
spydamonkee May 3rd, 2004, 11:37 PM

if using anything over 500grams i really recommend using electrical detonation as it really sux to lose a reasonable amount of
HE.
I know of a vid where 10kg was detonated a meter deep and about 2 meter's from the shore of a river... apparantly that was
as far as the person could throw it :P
20m+ jet of water apparantly :D
will try and get it uploaded when the person finds a way to digitise it.
also 1kg of APAN under water looks very impressive
aikon May 4th, 2004, 04:19 AM

Maybe that's a silly question but if you detonate such a high amount of HE in a lake you probably kill the fish around the
detonation,right? Wich lethal radius could one expect from about 1kg of APAN? Blast fishing seems to be a nice hobby:)
I found this article about homemade caps on the net:http://www.oneocean.org/overseas/200101/
the_business_of_blast_fishing.html
Myrol May 4th, 2004, 09:50 AM

Yeaahh I NEED this Movie :D 10kilos under Water....THATS ABSOLUTELY worth a download also with "slow-motion" 56k :p Umm
SpyDAmonkee.....did you remember that Guy who blewed up 100kilos ANFO and was arrested by the Cops? Are there some
news from him?I know its a little off topic but whilst reading the lines from his "Project" I felt the Anger from all Australian
Forum-Members who get big trouble since them buying AN-Fertilizer......
Flake2m May 5th, 2004, 12:02 PM

If you live near the coast why not set it off in the ocean?
Just ask a friend that has a boat and doesn't have a problem with you conducting "experiments" at sea. Just go out a
relatively calm day and then sink the charge to A desired depth, use a float to mark where it is then tak the boat out a few
hundred metres before setting it off. The boat shouldn't be in any danger because the shockwave will be mainly in the ocean.
I wouldn't recommend being in the water (ie diving) anywhere near the charge because the water will amplify the shockwave.
nbk2000 May 5th, 2004, 08:15 PM

Blast fishing pulverizes the internals of the fish, resulting in spongy and pulpy fillets, not nice and tender fillets. OK for
survival, but gross for anything less than starvation.

Umm Flake2m: It would be great if I live near the Ocean, but I live in the middle of Germany! I have only one "big" lake and
some Rivers, ponds and puddles to ignite Stuff under Water! This saturday I will set of 200g APAN in the "big" lake (200m in
diameter). Its my first real electric ignition because I had often misfires with Electricdets due to broken Bridges or "empty"
batteries! But now....it MUST work with my new 12V rechargeable Batterypack :) (Its from a Drill). Hopefully are 10m Bell wire
and some metres Water enough to deepen the Sound that It dont makes me deaf :p

Last Friday I "tested" again a 4,5g APPN 50/50 Cartridge with a very loud success! I put the thing in a 8cm deep puddle and lit
the sparkler....after 20secs.......PAAAMMMM...It was nice loud for me but too loud for the peoples in their houses so one
comes on the balcony and screamed: "What was it for a F*****g loud Bang? I walked fast away and for my luck nothing
happened "more"...My Expirience for the future: NEVER ignite any sort of HE in the visible near of houses or
people....minimum range should be 500m if I fire flat under Water...because thats crazy :p ! Did you remember my 2,5kg
APAN-ANNM test? An old friend told me yesterday as he looked to the hills he saw suddenly a Cloud of Dust and dont know
whats the real reason of this "strange Cloud"...but after around 9secs....everything was clear after the nice thunder comes into
his ears...(He said it was 8-10sec. delay from "flying Dirt" and Brrrommm:p )
nuclearattack May 17th, 2004, 05:17 PM

To Myrol:
a very nice test! AH! AH! You should be a funny and likeable man! I say this because i use to test some detos near my palace
but for me is not a big problem because everybody knows me and they know that i am a little crazy!
If you are going to make a vacation/travel in italy send me a mail maybe we can make some tests together! I'll make you
know some friends of mine that are HE "aficionados".
Let's talk about underwater tests:

i detonated 5 gr of AP in a plastic bucket. The charge was placed in the middle of the bucket at about 20 cm from the surface.
It made a good "paaam" and the bucket was completely destroyed.
Now...i made this test to know how much water absorbs the detonation sound. The sound was absorbed a little, but not so
much.
I'm impressed...i'm planning a test with 1200 gr of kinepak in a small desert lake and i really don't know how much the sound
will be loud! This is an important factor because i want to test an underwater detonation but i don't want to alert people!
Maybe 2 or 3 meters underwater should absorb the sound?
The sound is attenuated when it passes from water to air, but what is the physical principle involved in this phenomenon?
Myrol May 24th, 2004, 01:29 PM

Ahh Nuclearattack, yes you're right! I love it to see Jets flowing meters over meters into the Air....Umm 2-3 meters water for
1,2kg Kinepak should be enough to deepen the Sound. But be prepared for a nicely huuuge Jet :D :D Today I had fired 3,5g
AP under 15cm muddy water and the Jet was.....uhhh...9m high!!!!! I couldn't believe that so less AP can blow Water soooo
high :eek: The Sound was a nice loud "Danggg" or like someone Bang an big Wood-door ;) But the Jet.....its really
unbelievable..9metres!! He was around as same as high as the old oaks behing "him"!
Guerilla May 24th, 2004, 05:08 PM

3m sounds about the right depth for such a charge.. A few days ago, 560gr of PNNM was set off 2m deep in a small pond. The
result was a thump sound and about a 4m high and 1m wide water jet.
Because of the water, the detonation shook the surrounding ground quite noticeably, even the camcorder that was resting on
the ground 20m from the detonation shook a bit.
The video can be found on the ftp, but here's some frames

Its everytime nice to see how easy an Explosion thunders Water to such cool Domes, Jets, Hammers or plumes!
Congratulation Guerilla :) How had you settted off the Charge? By Fuse or with an Electric Detonator? I made the expirience
that 5mm thick Blackpowderstraws burn nearly without any problems Under Water. These ones were also my choice for the
3,5g test!
nbk2000 May 26th, 2004, 06:20 PM

I wonder if there's a correlation between the optimum standoff for an SC and the maximum distance a water jet is ejected
above the surface? Some kind of scaling applicable?
0EZ0 May 27th, 2004, 12:55 AM

To my knowledge there shouldn't be any direct correlation between the jet formed in a shaped charge and the destructive jet
formed from the collapse of a bubble produced from an underwater explosion. The jet witnessed in underwater explosions has
alot to do with differing densities between water air and gaseous detonation products, boundaries and how bubble dynamics
govern the situation.
It's all very interesting stuff. Quite fascinating. There is a little about it on the web and various militaries have experimented
on it's use to destroy ships at sea.
http://www.eng.nus.edu.sg/EResnews/0603/rd/rd_12.html
http://www.fges.demon.co.uk/blast/underwater.html http://www.dt.navy.mil/sites/uerd/history.html

Are there also some possible Calculations how deep a Charge must be to get the effect that NO Jet and no Dome appears?
Yesterday I fired some Pentrinit (6,5g 70/30) 15cm Under Water and the Jet was very good! Better as the 3,5g AP Jet in the
same "Puddle" and the same deepness :) (Heights are both around 9m!! but the Pentrinit-Jet was denser and thicker as the
AP-Jet)
Umm Guerilla, I'm absolutely not able to download your great 560g PNNM Video! If it does not to much work, can you please
send me the Video via Mail? My E-Mail is: Mr.Nitropenta@gmx.de
Ropik May 31st, 2004, 09:02 AM

Back to waterproof fuses: Normal thin green fuse(sold in cheaper pyroshops etc.) isn't waterproof in it's basic form, but if you
coat it with NC lacquer (acetone/ping-pong balls type works well), you have nice, waterproof, fairly break-resistant fuse (When
you break the normal variety of this fuse several times on the same spot, it die on the break, but NC variety hasn't any
problems with it), much cheaper than shrink-tubing variety (which works well also). I had many sucesses with this fuse. It
never died in the water (nor in the air), regardless on the leght etc.
Hope somebody find this useful. Final hint: I can bought the "green fuse" in the hobby shop (for rockets) so cheap that I
made my own fuse only once: when I was testing procedures from IMH. This has considerable influence on my invention. It
might or might not works for improvised fuses. I didn't tested it.
Bugger August 20th, 2004, 10:45 PM

How could an "underwater fuse" or "waterproof fuse" possibly work, in the absence of air (except in an insufficient amount in
an hermetically sealed container) for combustion? Some sort of electronic or mechanical clock timing device, set to deliver a
detonating current from a battery or impact on a percussion cap at the end of a certain period of time, would surely, be far
more practical.
Bugger.
Marvin August 21st, 2004, 10:01 AM

Err, John, pyrotechnic mixtures have fuels and oxidisers, you dont need air. Laquered fuse is generally a slowburning
blackpowder core with some sort of fibre tightly woven around it. It'll work under water if you can avoid the core getting wet.
Side spitting fuse, and I forget offhand if that is red or green, is probably much less suited.
Mr Cool August 21st, 2004, 12:01 PM

Side-spit is the green, which as Ropik said needs an extra coating for underwater work.
Myrol August 22nd, 2004, 06:53 AM

I improved my Fuses now because the were to often killed after the charge reached more than 1,5m deepness. I take a
7,5mm thick straw an fill him with hand compressed blackpowder. Attaching to the detonator...bla bla....and then I wrap him
with tape and Aluminiumfoil twice to make a heatresistant layer of metal. The Fuse burns perfectly under water also in bigger
deeps because the hot gasses can only evolve upside, but I think more than 5m will kill nearly every fuse due to the "high"
waterpressure. A good delay for depth charges is a straw with two bare wire-ends inside of him wich are cast in some hot melt
glue. Put some DRY salt over the bare ends and fill the rest with a slow watersucking material out. Use this as a switch and
prepare the rest like a normal electric fired depth charge. Function: You throw the charge in the lake etc. and the water will
sucked up slowly by the towels for example.....the salt is getting slowly wet and after "the special point" the switch is closed
because the solution of salt submits the electricity...BAAM.....The device looks then very close to the old WWII depth charges
for killing submarines ;)
Yes I know my English is getting more bad as before...the Forum is my only chance to get a better english......it was down for
more than a month so please dont flame me due this.. :o
Myrol August 24th, 2004, 02:54 PM

Huh, what a punch! On saturday I blewed up a 30g APAN Filmcanister 1,5m under Water and I was only 50cm from the edge
away....summarized are this 2m from 30g APAN....If there would be no water....I had never done such a risky test (dont think
I'm crazy) ! After the depth charge exploded I felt a very hard punch in my knees!, in my tummy and my foots are ripped
under the ground away. The compression was so hard that my friend (he was even more closer!!!) was thrown 2-3cm high from
the ground...I have noticed that and it looked very funny! :cool: The soil is nicely moist (like loam) so that the shock was not
that much absorbed after it changed the media liquid-solid. I have such a luck that I have found this pit.....no fishes and a
very steeply edge, 50cm after the water begins it is around 150cm deep, in the middle it reaches even more than 2,5m. :)
The pit was an old open mining place, no matter what they really searched for but the water is uniform rusty! Now after my
Fuzes work 100% under Water I will test some more chargesizes from 3g to 1,5kg.
ShockWave August 26th, 2004, 05:45 PM

This must be the right section to place a video of an underwater detonation.
Look at my site in video's
or click http://apanshock.tripod.com/Video/20aug2004ANNM.avi
anchorpad September 14th, 2004, 09:14 AM

This must be the right section to place a video of an underwater detonation.
Look at my site in video's
or click http://apanshock.tripod.com/Video/20aug2004ANNM.avi
"This file is hosted by Tripod, a LycosNetwork Site, and is not available for download. Please check out Tripod's Help system
for more information about Remote Loading and our Remote Loading policy."
The link doesnt work.

Is it me or is it my computer that doesnt work properly? :confused:
Myrol September 26th, 2004, 08:31 AM
I thought a long time if it is necessary to post it here but I think someone could help me out! In August this Year I fired a lot
of Filmcanister and so on in the "Pit Morl". The Water was on the edge 1,5m and in the Center 2,5m deep. Next Summer I will
capture some more Detonations directly under Water and I will make some more big and fat Jets :) So now my question: I
attached some Frames from my Videos. One with the under water bubble created by 3g APAl, one (the strange one!) with 40g
APANAl 2m deep and one Frame where I made a Test with 100mg APAl in a 5Liter Jug on the Balcony. If you look clear enough
you can see the Bubble and that whats strange the Jug is sharply shrinked together! In the second picture you can see lots of
white rings on the Watersurface....I promise it hasn't rained that day!!! I believe it was the Shockwave wich hit the watermirror
that way that it created that strange formations!
croc September 26th, 2004, 08:09 PM

If a big charge of explosives is detonated deep underwater doesnt it cause an implosion?
If a shockwave passes through you underwater it can fracter and bend your bones.
nuclearattack September 27th, 2004, 06:40 AM

After the detonation there should be an implosion because some water is ejected away but i don't know the proportions of this
implosions relatively to the HE quantity.
It should be very usefull to take a camera capture directly in the water just like Myrol said, i thought a lot of times about it but
i fear the shockwave effect on the camera.
You can put the camera in a tough lexan box well sealed but it's a risk for the camera. I don't have a camera and i don't want
to destroy my friend's one!
What do you think about it?
Will a lexan box protect the camera from the shockwave?
To Myrol:
you started this thread with a little fear of being banned but it has been revealed very interesting! Good idea my friend!
croc September 27th, 2004, 06:57 AM

Get an old tape camera not an expensive digital one. It should cost you around $50 second hand. With this if you fail and
wreak the camera the footage would still have been printed on the tape.
The deeper underwater the explosion happened the more pressure there is and your camera might not be able to withstand
these conditions.
Shock waves can pass through anythin g even earth I don t kno w much ab out a sonic boom but it happens wh en an object
breaks the sound barrier (goes faster than the speed of sound) such as a HE.
In an implosion the shockwave would push all of the water out a bit then the deeper underwater the more pressure there would
be to move the water back therefore the bigger the implosion am I right?

One of your pictures was pointless, the other too blurry, so the underwater bubble pic was the only one left.
Myrol September 27th, 2004, 01:10 PM

Oh man NBK, yes I know (you like it to flame people huh ;) ?). The Pictures are in a bad quality and I was scared to post
them, BUT! One Picture has irregular strange rings on the Surface this is point 1 wich confuses me! The other picture (perhaps
the "too blurry one") is my 100mg APAl test in a 5Liter Jug to show you all the Bubble wichwas on the ground of the Jug and
has a shape more like an Egg as a Circle! Yes and then the Underwaterpicture, to all: Dont be to scared trough the
Implosionpressure of the Charge! Whilst I was capturing this Video I felt a nice and hard blow in my Arms but it was not to
uncomfortable that I must say: Oh my Lord, I'll never do this again....No no no, it was just a sharp and short strike. :cool:
Next Summer or perhaps in the sooner time I will capture more Detonations underwater! My protection device for the Camera
was a nicely cleaned GLASSCONTAINER!!! Yes Glass!!! It wasn't broken into pieces, it withstand the venomous pressure!! So if
you capture something with a LEXAN or Polycarbonate conatainer under Water....it should be no problem even the Implosion
risk if you dont place the thing to close to the "Bubble". P.s. The Shockwave has a nicely different shape of striking your Body
if you feel her IN WATER. This does not mean you can swim close to the Explosion with your whole body and even listening it
with your Ears (the Eardrums can rupture, PERHAPS, perhaps not!!). Stupidity is very unpleasant under Water ;) to
Nuclearattack: thanks for your compliments :D Oh man, if I have a pool, I think it wouldn't intrest me to dirten the Water with
VERY GOOD VISIBLE TESTS!!! :D

You're still failing to use the RETURN key to make paragraphs out of your endless sentences.
Failure to correct this IMMEDIATELY will result in the cessation of your existance here. :mad:
THErAPIST October 1st, 2004, 03:21 AM

Blast fishing pulverizes the internals of the fish, resulting in spongy and pulpy fillets, not nice and tender fillets. OK for
survival, but gross for anything less than starvation.
While this is usually true, it's not always true.. 200g ANNC under 20 feet of water made absolutely no noise at all (did produce
a bubble that was about 3 feet in diameter) and served this up about a year ago. made some nice filets ;)
http://www.experi-mental.org/pictures/fish.jpg
Myrol October 1st, 2004, 01:50 PM

PRE-EDIT:
Ahh, well. You make a Flat tire out of me :eek: .
Sure, my sentences are much to long,
so I just hope you dont kick me out :o of this PERFECT Forum.
POST-EDIT:
Is it so important for you to read short and compact paragraphs :confused: ?

RETURN
Well, I try to improve my posts to stay friendly with ALL!
RETURN
Is this post ok? Carpe Diem, back on topic.
++++++++++++++++
Let's not forget the RETURN between the lines, eh?
Guerilla October 3rd, 2004, 03:11 PM

THErAPIST, hehe poor fish.. Do you know how far away roughly was it from the charge? I think I could try knocking out some
pikes with similar sized charges as well, so to not raise any suspicion from neighbors or do any more harm to the fish
population than is necessary.
Grandpa told they once tried fishing with hand grenades back in the war times, from his experience such small charges (100-
150gr I would think..) in a river didn't do shit unless they happened to detonate very close to some random fish.
Cyclonite October 4th, 2004, 11:31 AM

Getting a little off topic but lets mine be the last...I knocked out about 10 fish from a 100g flash charge. It works great, you
would be really surprised how much more power the shock wave holds in denser stuff (water earth) plus it travels much
further..
nuclearattack October 4th, 2004, 05:35 PM

Yes Cyclonite, water (and denser material in general) transmits the shockwave at higher speed and i must say that observing
this during my tests is very amazing.
I detonated two small charges of 5 gr AP in two differents tanks. The first tank was a plastic bucket 40 cm diameter and 40 cm
high...it was completely destroyed in pieces.
The second tank was a big metallic can (like the ones used for oil or to put dangerous slags) 60 cm diameter and maybe 1 m
high. The shockwave made to vibrate the can so loud that it was like a big hammer blow.
However i'm planning some others underwater tests to see the effect of the shockwave on submerged targets, it will be funny
and interesting for sure.
I'm going also to test shockwave propagation in steel and the effects on targets placed in contact with the steel plate...but this
is another topic so i will post in another place.
Myrol October 5th, 2004, 10:42 AM

Hi Nuclearattack! Would it be not great to test the precision of under water
demolition via blowing up some grams APAN in a small pond (without fishes
ore life wich could be damaged, because i KNOW you'r a naturalist :) ) and
watching how some Copperplates were bend into a special shape from
the Shockwave?
A unknown weekend I will do some controlled tests perhaps how a tightly

closed Marmeladejar implodes or a Airfilled thing like an old Toy if nothing more
is avilable :D The Pressure works under Water much more violent as in Air,
so you can really compress thing's if they are not totally filled with liquid. :cool:
nuclearattack October 14th, 2004, 08:25 AM

I'm thinking about a simple underwater ignition system. An electric cable is the best but sometimes (most of times!) you need
to do it very quickly because of the too curious peoples and an electric cable is too slow to use and you need to remain in the
det site during the test. I need a simple ignition system that can be thrown in the lake letting you the time to reach a secure
point of view. I want to use a simple sparkle as a fuse, the wole charge with the detonator is placed in a tank, you ignite the
sparkle, close the tank and launch it in the lake. Simple like drinking a water glass!
It should work fine but i'll test it on november when sparkle are sold in fireworks shops.
Myrol October 31st, 2004, 10:54 AM

Hi to all! To Nuclearattack: Umm, ok the thing with the sparkler can work. Perhaps its good to fill a Cokecan with 1kg ANNM or
a better Explosive wich isn't that humid like ANNM's with more than 25% NM.
My favourite is with 35% NM and it has always a thin layer of unsoaked NM but your favourite with 40% NM seems to be obvius
better more NM=more pressure. :D The only problem is to construct the device as a tight, stable and solid thing. I say.....there
exist always some full idiots wich stick a sparkler in 400g AP lit and BAAAM were blown into compact Dogfood. Especially in a
sealed area its important to ensure the Explosives CAN NOT fired accidentaly due to one damn spark.
Now another thing: My favourite media for Explosions is Mud from thick to thin consistency. The Crater has a very very uniform
shape. Thick mud has the property to be blown in big chunks wich fly crown-shaped radial from the ground zero away. The
pieces are often good propelled, in my attempts it took often more than 12sec. after all lumps had been fallen down. 230g
ANNM had blown some lumps so far, they landed more than 70m behind us......+ our 40m inital length.... :D thats awesome!
Explosions in thin mud are more like a shallow under water detonation. You have a spraydome and just sometimes some
bigger chunks of mud. Mud's pro for blasting is the good confinement so even a ziplockbaggie do the job to protect the Ex,
the confinement comes from the Mud ;)
The_Rsert November 25th, 2004, 10:52 AM
I have just made an little underwater detonation.
120g KNO3+Sorbitol in a steel pipe under 3m water
I have only seen a flash an some huge bubbles :).
No loud bang, only a deep "bluuubbp" :)
nuclearattack November 25th, 2004, 12:21 PM

KNO3+Sorbitol is a low explosive, if you want a nice underwater det. you need a HE with a good brisance. With a good HE you
will feel a nice shockwave like an earthquake!
Underwater detonations are very safe but i'm worried about you because you are using a steel pipe with this kind of mixture.
Beware using steel pipes, expecially with NC, black powder, KNO3+sorbitol,sensitive HEs and so on.
A steel pipe work well with ANNM but you should insert in it a plastic bag to avoid corrosion, the plastic bag is also usefull for
KNO3+Sorbitol and the mixtures i mentioned because it is anti static.
Anthony November 25th, 2004, 03:30 PM

How is a plastic bag antistatic? In my experience, they are quite the opposite, and encourage static charges to form.

if you want a nice underwater det. you need a HE with a good brisance. Actually to maximize the underwater blast effect you
want less brisance and more energy (by means of metal powders), its after all the bubble that does the greatest damage.

To Anthony:
i use PP (polipropilene) bags to make HV capacitors, i use this capacitors in my tesla coil generators. I can say that PP is used
a lot in this application because it is a very good isolator far more better then other kind of plastic, it is able to stop corona
effect so it should be good to insulate an HE from static discharges.
However if someone uses insensitive HEs there is no problem but at least the plastic bag will avoid corrosion of the metal pipe
from acidic HEs.
To Guerrilla:
i'm not fully agree with you. Well the expanding bubble makes a lot of damage for sure but a minimum of brisance is needed.
You have a bigger shockwave with a high vod explosive and the water maximize the effect because it transmits elastics waves
more faster then air.
I think that ANNM is a very good underwater HE because it is enough brisant and produces a lot of gas. I tested black powder
underwater and it is pathetic also in big quantities, surely because it is too slow, on contrary ANFO is good because it has a bit
of brisancy that optimize the effect.
If i remember well the military ships use Torpex in their underwater deep bombs for submarines, Torpex contains also TNT
that is enough brisant.
This bombs damage the submarine with the shockwaves, do you think that is possible to damage a submarine with a very low
explosive?
So if you have a good HE that produces a lot of output gas it's good...but if you have a HE that is also brisant you have a very
good bitch in your hands to do a nice underwater detonation!
About the Al powder it surely increase the output power but in this case you should balance the Al quantity with the oxygen.
I'm saying that too much Al will be wasted because underwater there is no oxygen. On contrary in air you have oxygen to burn
and if you add a lot of Al you will have a thermobaric charge.
Is there anybody that has tested different kind of HE with different vods underwater?
What difference have you seen in these tests?
Myrol November 27th, 2004, 04:04 PM

Well, trough discussing about the sort of Explosive wich does the biggest Bang for your buck, I think a little about Potassium
perchlorate/ Aluminiumflash. It's a Low Explosive....anf if Oxygen-balanced he produces not the slightest cubiccentimeter of
Gas on Detonation. If I fire some ounces under Water......what will happen??? Normally there should be NO Gas wich can
expand, but obviously there MUST be a bubble of a pseudo-volume.......I can't imagine that some ounces Flash can vaporize
so much Water within an eye-blink that it creates a huge Bubble.
But who know's, arrggh damn.....I think the only way to solve this problem.....is to do it :D I thinkat night there can be a VERY
significant flash INSIDE the Water......wich should look EXTREMLY strange. The Viva-Brainiacs do a lot of demolition, so they
could be also so nice and show in on TV :cool:
P.s. my last Detonation was in putty-like Mud looked a little like not to liquid thin-shit wich was solid enough to stay in shape
;) Ok, 34g Aluminized NG/NC gelatin produced a Crater wich looked like a funnel-shaped cup!!!! A little curios if you're asking
me, someone with such a result too here?

nuclearattack, its hard to argue with you as you defend your claims in terms of vague concepts.. well I try to prove my point
anyways.
Of course the VoD dont have to be any lower than is needed to reach the desired balance between the explosive and energy
additive in order get the maximum energy output, that is, to burn all the extra fuel completely. Naturally, you want an
explosive with a high VoD and OB to start with, but you hardly can get both and even then, the influence of aluminum (or
whatever) on VoD varies from explosive to explosive. Therefore a compromise between the energy output and VoD has to be
made, and in this case the amount of energy should be favoured.
And the reason is, to cause the severest damage to a submarine one needs a great deal of mechanical force, in other words,
to move as much water as possible. What else than a large gas output can do this? This applies to all kinds of targets, but
ships etc. are particularly sensitive to this kind of massive and prolonged blasts that stress the structures widely first by the
initial shock and then by their own weight when they fall down to the empty "crater".
The availability of O2 is not essential as the Al can burn in CO2, H2O, N2.. as well. The underwater explosives are oxygen
deficient on purpose to cause lenghtened detonations this way.
Darkness November 28th, 2004, 09:27 AM

I think that both Guerrilla and Nuclearattack are agree and right.
They are both saying that brisance and ouput gas are important and should be balanced.
To Guerilla:
Underwater explosives are oxygen deficent to increase the volume of the bubble?! Can you explain this concept to me a little
better? :( I haven't a lot of experience in underwater detonation but i want to go deeper in this business!
What kind of underwater tests have you made?

Well Guerrilla! Now i'm fully agree with you! You are just saying what i was trying to explain with my last post.
The last concept you mentioned is interesting, i mean the fact that underwater HEs are oxygen deficent with the purpose to
extend the bubble effect. With less oxygen the vod will be lower and you obtain a more extended bubble.
I always use ANNM with a bit more NM then 33% (this is the ratio for optimum ox balance), usually i use 40% NM for my
underwater dets.
I use this ratio because it's very long storage stable (a bit more NM compensates the one eventually evaporating for bad
sealing) but according to your explanation i should modify my ANNM.
I should try with less NM then 33% and add Al powder instead of NM, this should be a very good mixture for underwater dets.
What about this ratio: 20/20/60, NM/Al/AN?

I didn't mean oxygen deficiency itself improves the gas volume, but the metal powder which combust with the detonation
products (and partly directly with the explosive, which is one reason the VoD goes down), lengthening the rise time of pressure
and expanding the bubble, both of which are preferred. The explosive could as well be oxygen rich, but then you would need
to abandon the use of the common brisant explosives (that military tends to prefer). I would think the depth charges
composed of ammonium perchlorate, RDX and aluminium are more efficient greatly due to their higher OB's. Sorry for causing
confusion.
I have made a few bigger underwater blastings, but not any kind of comparison between metallized and non-metallized
compositions yet as I've just lately acquired some decent quality powders (German Dark Al, 25m Al, <100m Mg and some
other coarser grades). I will carry out some tests as soon as I get more time..at the moment I need to take every effort in
order to graduate in time, thanks to the attitude problems I've been having.
Myrol December 17th, 2004, 05:16 PM

Depth Charges are often made with Minol, Tritonal or Torpex (Hexotonal).
Hexotonal gives the best results to dent a Submarine or stressing some sweat-overstreamed submariners :D
Well, not very important but whats about "explosives" wich produce no gas on detonation but cause a significant
Explosioneffect? For example Copper acetylide or balanced Chlorate-Magnesiumflash!
Water contains always some gas and I think the reaction products are also able to react a little with the water to produce a
bubble! Thats my theorie, might be wrong I dont know!
Umm back to Mudblasting: I like Explosions in thin Mud very very very much! The confinement seems ideal and the power is
very regular distributed! Fist-sized chunks fly absolutely perfect radial from the explosion point away! It look's like a crown :D ,
the Crater has also a very beautyful shape!
If someone can provide Pictures or Videos..............I'm open to everything :D

Myrol, in the case of an explosive that produces no gas, the bubble is water vapour that's been heated by the explosion.
Kinda like the way a nuke works underwater really... (Nukes are far more powerful in water than in air, they produce an
explosion by making enough heat to expand the surroundings, and water expands to a much greater volume than air when
heated by a nuclear blast)
tom haggen December 18th, 2004, 02:59 AM

Thats odd, because I saw some old military footage of a nuke going of in the ocean the other day. There were many ships
surrounding the explosion that were still intact after the detonation. Of course, the explosion was on the surface of the water
and not submerged.

The US military did a test sometime in the 1960s IIRC where they detonated 2 identical nukes at sea, using a load of old
WW2 battleships as test subjects. One nuke was detonated several hundred metres up in the air, and one was detonated
deep under the water. The underwater one caused many times more damage to the ships.
In the case of a surface blast, I'm unsure what would happen, but I think that most of the heat would end up being applied to
the air. The nuke has to be several hundred metres underwater to get a real power boost.
FUTI December 20th, 2004, 03:07 PM

The water is a bitch when it comes to explosion. It makes more damage to the divers and living tissue then objects. It seems
that inhomogenity of that fluid related to temperature and salinity can render submarines rather insensitive to nuke attacks...I
read somwhere that detonation of nuke armed torpedo as close as 500m from submarine do not necesary mean it's
destruction.
nuclearattack December 22nd, 2004, 07:10 AM

That sound very strange to me! If a conventional charge is able to damage the submarine hull or the internals how can't a
nuke make it?
Maybe that it depends from what is meant for "destroyed", if they meant only sink i think that a nuke will make a good job
but if they meant "completely crushed" it is possible that the submarine hull will resist enough.
Sometimes it's hard to understand what is meant in an affirmation.
FUTI December 24th, 2004, 05:24 AM

The way I understand it, it looks like spread of explosion wave isn't uniform. It is the same way as with sound waves. Blast will
spread more in the direction that makes less "resistance". But I agree that God knows what did they meant.
FUTI December 29th, 2004, 11:59 AM

In the light of the tsunami wave that hit south-east Asia this thread look interesting again. I talk to a friend from physics
department and although he urge me to look in some geophysics book he thinks that this phenomenon people mistakenly
call wave but in his opinion it is more like convection (not oscilation) caused by suden emerging/or droping of entire rif (sorry
for spelling) and movement of mass of water to compensate this. Other oppinion I gathered say that this "wave" travel
actually over ocean bottom and that it's high wavelength make little trouble to ships at the ocean as they hardly notice it, but
when reach shore makes hell especialy in narrow bays.
It seems that others have dilemas about propagation of disturbancy made with mechanical energy through water. Have
anyone researched this?
Myrol December 29th, 2004, 12:36 PM

About the propagation I'm very unsure! Well this summer I've made a lot of under water tests, especially such dimnished
one's!
My Test Area was an old Pit for Ironoxide around 20m in diameter the small but deeper hole. I fired some 40g samples of
APANAl 1-2,5m under Water and dipped my Hands at the other side in the water. Result: I felt a hard blow in my whole Hand
but only where she was under water!
I would say that Waves, Tsunami or Shockwaves can be very good propagated under water....even if the compression pressure
decreases rapidly! I'm also a little confused HOW MUCH water can be compressed......In 11. Grade wich is a little ago my
Physics teacher told me that water can be compressed but just a tiny bit.
Would this play a role in under Water detonations? It's a fascinating thing to me.....I saw a picture in the web where a 2Ton
dropbomb from the WWII was blown up 30m deep under Water and ejected a Jet nearly 200m high :eek: :eek: !!!!
If someone had seen "U-571" theres also a scene where you can see some VERY cool depth Charge Explosions, but it's not
very important.
The_Duke December 31st, 2004, 05:30 AM

The mechanism of an under-water blast presents some interesting phenomena associated with a more dense medium than
air. An underwater explosion creates a cavity filled with high-pressure gas, which pushed the water out radially against the
opposing external hydrostatic pressure. At the instant of explosion, a certain amount of gas is instantaneously generated at
high pressure and temperature, creating a bubble. In addition, the heat causes a certain amount of water to vaporize, adding
to the volume of the bubble. This action immediately begins to force the water in contact with the blast front in an outward
direction. The potential energy initially possessed by the gas bubble by virtue of its pressure is thus gradually communicated
to the water in the form of kinetic energy. The inertia of the water causes the bubble to overshoot the point at which its
internal pressure is equal to the external pressure of the water. The bubble then becomes rarefied, and its radial motion is
brought to rest. The external pressure now compresses the rarefied bubble. Again, the equilibrium configuration is overshot,
and since by hypothesis there has been no loss of energy, the bubble comes to rest at the same pressure and volume as at
the moment of explosion (in practice, of course, energy is lost by acoustical and heat radiation).
The bubble of compressed gas then expands again, and the cycle is repeated. The result is a pulsating bubble of gas slowly
rising to the surface, with each expansion of the bubble creating shock wave. Approximately 90% of the bubble's energy is
dissipated after the first expansion and contraction. This phenomenon explains how an underwater explosion appears to be
followed by other explosions. The time interval of the energy being returned to the bubble (the period of pulsation's) varies
with the intensity of the initial explosion.
The rapid expansion of the gas bubble formed by an explosion under water results in a shock wave being sent out through the
water in all directions. The shock wave is similar in general form to that in air, although if differs in detail. Just as in air, there
is a sharp rise in overpressure at the shock front. However, in water, the peak overpressure does not fall off as rapidly with
distance as it does in air. Hence, the peak values in water are much higher than those at the same distance from an equal
explosion in air. The velocity of sound in water is nearly one mile per second, almost five times as great as in air.
Consequently, the duration of the shock wave developed is shorter than in air.
The close proximity of the upper and lower boundaries between which the shock wave is forced to travel (water surface and
ocean floor) causes complex shock wave patterns to occur as a result of reflection and rarefaction. Also, in addition to the
initial shock wave that results from the initial gas bubble expansion, subsequent shock waves are produced by bubble
pulsation. The pulsating shock wave is of lower magnitude and of longer duration than the initial shock wave.
Another interesting phenomenon of an underwater blast is surface cutoff. At the surface, the shock wave moving through the
water meets a much less dense medium--air. As a result, a reflected wave is sent back into the water, but this is a rarefaction
or suction wave. At a point below the surface, the combination of the reflected suction wave with the direct incident wave
produces a sharp decrease in the water shock pressure. This is surface cutoff.
After the lapse of a short interval, which is the time required for the shock wave to travel from the explosion to the given
location, the overpressure rises suddenly due to the arrival of them shock front. Then, for a period of time, the pressure
decreases steadily, as in air. Soon thereafter, the arrival of the reflected suction wave from the surface causes the pressure to
drop sharply, even below the normal (hydrostatic) pressure of the water. This negative pressure phase is of short duration and
can result in decrease in the extent of damage sustained by the target. The time interval between the arrival of the direct
shock wave at a particular location (or target) in the water and that of the cutoff, signaling the arrival of the reflected wave,
depends upon the depth of burst, the depth of the target, and the distance from the burst point to the target. It can generally
be said that a depth bomb should be detonated at or below the target and that a target is less vulnerable near the surface.
The_Duke January 5th, 2005, 12:32 AM

Well this thread died quick. :(
I found some cool pictures of nukes going off under water and figuered I'd add the link here.
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/atomic/nukeffct/enw77b2.htm
Myrol January 5th, 2005, 02:17 PM

Yes, this thread dried a little out. I think its just because under Water Blast are a lot more difficult to manage as on Land. I
can't wait for the summer.
I have now some money on my account and can buy me a lot more chemicals and especially Ammonium Nitrate, because this
coming summer I will do some BIG under Water Blasts. 5-20kg are waiting :D I will do for sure a big test to create a Jet and
also a huge dimnished Blast to create a 8m+ wide circle of shallow splashed water.
BUT before I do this, I need a NEW camcorder :D Does somebody know whats up with SpyDAMonkee? He's a little quiet for a
long time....Did he gave up with HE?? Well and does somebody know how much forum members are DEAD??? Because it's a
little bad but I think we have some serious casualties since 1995, right?
nuclearattack January 7th, 2005, 12:14 PM

To Duke (Nukem?):
no the thread is not died, it is interesting and after all i think that underwater tets are more easy and safe to do because you
do very low noise, no shrapnels or splinters, lot of fun.
Your post is interesting, i thought about it and i think that the bubble pulse should be very short and fast. I noticed something
like this when i detonated 300 gr ANNM underwater, the detonation provoked the classic water jet but immediatly after it a
huge bubble pushed a lot of mud (from the bottom of the lake) on the surface and this pulsing bubble continued for two
times. However the last 2 pulsations were attenuated as you explained.
To Myrol:
Eh Eh! I like your plan! About the died members i don't think that a lot of members are died, probably their passion for HEs is
finished. This is impossible for me because i have this passion since when i was a child!
The only member that we now is died (because of his stupidity) is Phone.
The_Duke January 7th, 2005, 01:39 PM

No, your right! This thread has not died. It slowed down and I was just being anxious.
I thin k what your ex plaining is the occu rrence of a nother u nderwater blast phen omena similar to surface cu t off. I can t
remember the name of this phenomena but I remember reading somewhere that blasts near the water bed surface reflect a
weak shockwave back upwards which catches up with the pulsating bubble. Even though the reflected wave is weaker this still
happens within a fraction of a second, depending on the distance from the bottom and the power of the initial shock wave. If
the explosion is close enough to the bottom and in shallow water the initial shock wave disturbs the mud and the reflected
wave helps to p ush th e mud a nd muck to the s urface following directly behind the bubb le. I m pretty sure the bubble does
not create the disturbance of the mud but it does help to carry it to the surface. Can anyone back me on this or am I wrong?
And yeah n uclear attack, it s Duke Nukem. I also like John Wayne. :D
FUTI January 8th, 2005, 02:40 PM

Just got this link from a friend, and since I mentioned the subject in this thread here I post it to be seen by hard working
members of the E&W Forum:)
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=2004123000111600.htm&date=2004/12/30/&prd=seta&
to Duke: thanks your explanation is as good and thorough as the one Marvin gave in EMP thread.
Myrol March 25th, 2005, 06:42 AM

Some time ago, I've heard somethin' about a company from the netherlands called exploform wich forms sheets of metal into
VERY accurate shapes via explosive forming under Water!
I saw them how they made a nozzle for a rocket with such a precision....ohhh dear.....Is somebody here wich formed metal
under water too? I mean....some members like Axt have done tons of tests with metalpaltes on Land but not under Water?
My Idea is to attach a 40g ANNM Filmcanister to a 2mm V4A-Stainless Steelplate and blowing it up that the Plate will be
propelled out of the water! Hope it won't be ripped into pieces but explosively forming of metal under water seems like a nice
hobby :D I'll post my results including a picture if I'm ready then.
I think, if you compare the dent's with different explosives especially Aluminized ones, you'll see then the REAL difference
between AP and Pentrinital, not?


Silentnite March 25th, 2005, 10:35 AM

I googled and found the website:
Exploform (http://www.exploform.com/)
http://www.exploform.com/images/products_001tn.jpg http://www.exploform.com/images/products_029tn.jpg
Its pretty amazing what you can do with our beloved explosives. Would there happen to be a CAD program with an explosive
design tool?
As far as the underwater Demo goes, what about a shaped charge? Dont they cut ship steel under water with plasma jets?
Something about preventing the metal from warping. I dont exactly know why that would be useful, as we are normally looking
to make a hole, not a line. But who knows.
I wish I had a lake nearby with which I could do some testing. But I will have to make do with buckets, and maybe the little
pond I dug out back. Pictures coming soon.
EDIT:
I am not sure how relavant to this page this is, but it is rather interesting and I couldnt find a better place for it. Some
scientists were sitting around and playing with ethanol, and discovered that at very low Torrs it didnt splash. Dropped into a flat
liquid, at a low atmosphiric pressure, it didnt splash. Just absorbed.
Better explained HERE: (http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/05/050322.splash.shtml)

design tool?
EDIT:

design tool?
EDIT:
Guerilla March 26th, 2005, 10:40 AM

Seems like using this exploform metal forming technique, one might be able to prepare sturdy and uniform metal cones for
larger SC's without much of hassle. At least for our needs that's the most profitable task for this method I can now think of..
All that would be needed would be a strong die with either vent holes or vacuum space inside the cavity, a metal plate to be
formed, a small explosive charge and a decent sized tank filled with water or other dense material like sand.
All kinds of other useful things could also be shaped with this method, but from an amateurs perspective the fact that the
formed metal part can only be as complicated as the used die sort of beats the purpose. I mean unless you got access to a
lathe, fancy looking rocket nozzles etc. parts seem all no-go's. Though I wonder if there would be some easily moldable die
materials that would still be able to sustain the shock, some polymer or ceramic clay perhaps? Gotta try out, as soon as I can
be arsed..
Some scientists were sitting around and playing with ethanol, and discovered that ... Hehe.. that was an interesting article.
Good to see they research and question old theories around such common seeming phenomenons, too.

be arsed..

be arsed..
Bert March 26th, 2005, 10:46 AM

Re the splashing- I want to know more about that 47,000 frame per second digital camera!


FUTI March 26th, 2005, 02:01 PM

I read many years ago...I just realised I'm old...that someone claimed that Russians are using something like exploform to
make keels of their submarines. Taking in consideration link kindly provided by Silentnite and that two of four metals used
are aluminium and titanium which is the case with at least two class of Russian submarine Alpha and Typhoon...it can be true
since I don't believe in coincidence.


me234 March 29th, 2005, 03:21 AM

With regards to what nuclearattack mentioned earlier: he mentioned that Al in explosives underwater weren't much good if one
used an explosive with a bad OB, fair enough I thought very plausible and most probable. Then I read the SM thread on Al/
H2O2 explosives, and AXT posted something about Al/Mg in water or alcohols being pretty decent explosives.
http://67.15.145.24/~sciencem/talk/viewthread.php?tid=3214&page=1
Next I recalled a particular thermobaric mixture that went something like 75:25 Al:IPN which required a huge booster because
the explosive itself was not present in sufficient quantity to sustain the explosion throughout the body of the TBmix, this is
because there was too much Al, and the excess went on to combust in the air. So, if one were to take this mixture (along with
huge booster) and set it off underwater, what would become of the excess Al?
Perhaps it might react with the water to further the explosion?
Considering that some of the water would be in gaseous form, it should make it require less energy to cause this Al/H2O
secondary reaction to occur.
This could lead to a potentially powerful (I should think) and very useful explosive for underwater applications.
What say you, the devoted 10 000?
me234 March 29th, 2005, 03:21 AM

me234 March 29th, 2005, 03:21 AM


The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Shaped charges
Log in
View Full Version : Shaped charges
freaky_frank August 22nd, 2004, 06:54 PM

Well there was a thread about this, so now here it is again.
In the time while E&W was "gone".
I've been experimenting A LOT with shaped charges.
And finally I had a bunch of pictures and movies, I put them all together in a pdf and uploaded it on the internet everyone can
download it here.
You can read it all in the pdf about how to make an shaped charges, I've made pictures of assembling a SC and the results of
sc with and without standoff and different ratio's of explosives used in the sc.
Shaped Charges.pdf (http://members.home.nl/icexool/Shaped%20Charges.pdf)
Hope you enjoy, ow and BTW if you have any comments please let me know so I can improve the pdf...
Sarevok August 23rd, 2004, 01:07 AM

I like it.
What kind of material is that red stuff where you placed the charges? Steel? How thick it is?
nbk2000 August 23rd, 2004, 02:03 PM

Looks good. Nice to see progress. :)
Crane August 24th, 2004, 01:25 AM

When I worked with aluminum anodizing, we used "aluminum solder" to get a strong, inexpensive aluminum bond. Do you
think a stronger aluminum bond might help to improve jet directivity even more ?
Boomer August 24th, 2004, 06:09 AM

Stronger aluminium bond :confused:
freaky_frank: Your cones look like mine, except that I always wrap exactly two layers. If you wrap it up until the outside
diameter matches the pipe, you will have inconsistent thickness, i.e. partly one and partly two layers.
And I use slightly thicker sheets, and copper instead of steel (or is it alu - did he mean to weld the sheets?), because copper
is denser AND easier to compress into a jet.
I guess the target was RHS, approx. 2-3 mm thick - right? With a similar SC, also using APAN and a PE pipe, the jet went
through 16 mm steel! It would have gone deeper, but I did not expect this and used too little target material.
This proves that though everybody says APAN is too slow for SCs, you get at least some penetration. I doubt that with 4000
m/s max. you get a perfectly liquified jet, it is probably a stream of copper particles. But still penetration is greatly improved
compared to a munroe charge of the same explosive without liner.
I moved on to a really fast stuff: 50% RDX, 35% MHN, 15% NG plastique! Energy content is higher than C-4 (more oxygen, no
inert binder), and calculated VoD is 8350 m/s (average if ingredient's VoD x percentage) at density 1.73. I just happen to be
out of molybdenum liners and HNIW ;) still this plastique is going to make some serious holes ... :D
Crane August 24th, 2004, 01:48 PM

Sorry, I guess I wasn't descripitve enough in my last post. The "aluminum solder" we purchased was a special paste in a
plastic syringe that was used to solder pieces of aluminum together with a soldering torch or iron. Not as effective as a weld,
but much less costly and easier to do, and much stronger than super glue would be.
The reason I mentioned it is that I would imagine the aluminim would immediately deform around the join, rather than the tip
of the cone as intended. Increasing the strength of the join would (I'm guessing) focus more of the energy in a downward
direction through the cone than through the weak join. While the effects of this is probably pretty small, but it might
interesting to look into.
freaky_frank August 24th, 2004, 02:12 PM

Well I used first really good fast glue, but now I just use very little double side adhesive tape, and it works fine, and well I
used alluminium...
The red thing is a frame of something and I don't know what it is steel and 4,5mm thick.
When I used EGDN+PETN not all of the plastique detonated.
So I'll stick to APAN or PETN as a powder, not mixed with EGDN or NG.
But well my next project is a bigger tube.
http://members.home.nl/icexool/big_sc.JPG
180gr APAN will fit in there, does anybody know if it will penetrate a high speed camera, used by the government which stands
next to a road and if you drive to fast besides it it fill flash and get your license plate...
This is double armed steel....
If it won't what amount would I need to penentrate it, or what amount of PETN with a copper liner?
This is just theoretically....
Guerilla August 25th, 2004, 11:16 AM
Exactly how pure is this fertilizer grade AN you are using? You sure could improve the VoD a fair bit by purifying it first. Nice
presentation nonetheless..
If you want to see what properly made SCs with brisant explosives such as PETN are capable to do, take a look at Axt's page.
A .308 shell SC of PETN penetrating an inch thick steel plate is pretty convincing. :)

Well I'll try PETN soon I've still got 10gr lying here, but well it is pretty shit to make shaped explosives with little containers so
I'll take a lot of PETN and then make one as where 15gr APAN fitted in, but far more PETN will fit in there since PETN is a lot
heavier but then when I made that one I'll put it on a lid of the sewer you can see on the streets that should be quite
impressive if it will penetrate that thick steel....
FYI Fertilizer is 85% AN.

If you hand-compress the PETN into a pipe with the cone glued in, you can use relatively little force compared to pressing
detonators. While you can reach 2500 PSI (175 bar) with your body weight on a dowel, you only get 150 PSI (10 bar) using
a 1 pipe. Pressing harder, i.e. in a vice, will crush your cone.
The high performance of e.g. PETN diminishes greatly at lower densities. This is because only brisance counts for shaped
charges, and brisance is proportional to VoD squared and to density linearly: For a given volume above the cone, the kinetic
energy that compresses the cone to a jet is E = mV2 where m is proportional to the density. Because VoD is also somewhat
proportional to density (IIRC for TNT it as approx. (4000 + 3000(d-1)) m/s), this makes brisance dependant on the cube of
the density (above some minimum)!
To get from 4000-5000 m/s (150 PSI) to 8000+ m/s, you will either have to back up the cone with a metal cone that fits
inside, then use a big vice or hydraulic press. Or you plasticise the PETN with NG (inert binders make it hard to detonate in
small amounts).
You will marvel at the effect of density: In a lost post from June, I had a picture of a 1" water pipe. Suspended in its centre
were detonated some 0.4g samples of MHN, first hand compressed, then vice compressed at 30000 PSI. The first made small
bulges in the pipe wall, the second tore it open! Ill look for the pic and re-post it.
BTW my distillation column broke :( , I am out of RDX. So the next test (tomorrow?) will be done with my old HDN plastique
(see my post in the plastic explosives thread). It did also cut a 6mm steel plate :D , but not as cleanly as the RDX version did
(see pics in that post).

Okay well I was fighting a little bit (quite a lot actually) with a lock...
I put 5gr PETN in a shaped charge on top of it, and nothing happened, it was a tiny lock, but strong very strong!
So I went back in the evening with a bigger shaped charge (in the afternoon I used 16mm ID tube 5cm high) I went back with
25mm ID and 65mm high tube.
And I put 4gr PETN in there, and APAN on top of it (6gr AP+8gr AN, so a very high ratio of APAN).
And well this is the result
http://members.home.nl/icexool/shaped.jpg MIND THE HANDLE. It completely got blown up to by the force going sideways!
@ boomer, if you press PETN too hard it will be dead pressed right?
So if you were to put it between a vice it will press the PETN to > 1,73g/cc if so it will not have a higher VoD anymore compared
to density...
I do know there is difference in low density and higher density but I think that 30000 PSI is a little bit overdone...
And PETN+NG sucks, it didn't even detonate fully when I made it, and it is not a nice plastic explosive it is very sticky even
when you use very little NG and a lot of PETN. More like gelatine it is.
Anyway I do have PIB and soon I'll have bis-2(ethylhexyl)sebecate so that'll give some very nice plastic explosives to use
inside my shaped charges.
Shaped charges just rock :D
SweNMFan August 27th, 2004, 10:22 PM

Was googeling and found this site
http://www.air-and-space.com/20020624%20China%20Lake%20Explosive%20Ordnance%20D isposal.htm
EOD team playing around.. Imp Winebottle SC among other things..
And I found this stuff..

http://www.rbwmfg.com/extrusio1.htm
Check the CHARGE CASES..
Bugger August 28th, 2004, 10:13 AM

About explosive charges: I have just heard that the Russian crash investigators investigating the near-simultaneous crash of
two Russian civilian aircraft while in flight late at night with the loss of 89 lives two days ago have found evidence that it was a
terrorist action by two Chechen Muslim female suicide bombers using a "plastic" explosive with the trade-name "hexogen" or
similar, probably in bomb belts worn by the suicide bombers, probably allegedly acting on orders from Dog-Spelled-Backwards
with promises of rewards in Paradise for committing such terrible crimes against "soft" targets. Does anyone know much about
hexogen?
Apparently the "hexogen" was not detected by the usual explosives monitors at the Moscow airport from which the planes took
off, which are capable of detecting minute traces in the air of organic nitro-compounds and nitrate salts and esters. So either
the stuff was not volatile enough to give off even minute traces, or it is not a nitro- or nitrate explosive (perhaps it is a
chlorate, perchlorate, chromate, permanganate, or ferrate ester or ammonium salt, or an organic peroxide).
John W.
SweNMFan August 28th, 2004, 10:41 AM

Hexogen = RDX so I think that the Moscow airport needs to buy new explosives monitors..

hexogen = RDX
IMO slack russian security was probably partially to blame.

Yes, Hexogen is the German word for RDX. But is it detectable?
I remember reading both on a supplier site (selling C-4 by the ton :D ) and on some government page that today RDX based
plastic explosives must contain a chemical marking agent, also called detection agent. They add this because RDX is
chemically so stable it gives off no NOx, and it has such a low vapour pressure it is hard to smell for dogs.
P.S. My next SC is ready, 55g HDN/MHN/NG/GPN/NS plastique (just using up old stuff), 75mm long, 28mm dia copper cone 48
degrees. I was just too lazy to go into the woods on the weekend. So today is it ... :cool:
K9 August 30th, 2004, 02:16 PM

Doesn't C4 contain 2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane (DMDNB) to serve as a marking agent? Now would that help at anytime
beforehand, or is it just for afterwards.
Boomer September 1st, 2004, 09:26 AM

Had to wait another day due to rain. Using my EBW B-box for the first 'real' charge, at 1500 Volts and 1500 Amps, only having
badly insulated 2x4mm speaker cable, I did not appreciate wet surroundings. Would be funny to be found electrocuted next to
an unexploded charge ... :p
The SC described above (28mm dia, 75mm long, 55 g) had about 10% NG, 40% MHN, 35% HDN, 10% NS and 5% GPN
(glucose penta nitrate). I kneaded together three different chunks to get rid of old stuff, it was from March/April and started to
smell. Leaving it out of the fridge for three days was a mistake as you will later see.
The EBW det was a 10 mm brass pipe with 2.5 g MHN and a 2A TR5 fuse as a bridge wire. I had only 7 feet of cable and
ignited manually by touching a wire end to the capacitor terminal (other wire pre-fixed). I know I was very close, from the EOD
formula: distance for eardrum rupture = 18 feet x (charge weight/pounds)^1/3 I calculated 9 feet minimum distance! But I
had: A. my ears plugged tightly, B. was sitting behind a concrete wall, and C. I like the shock wave going through my stomach.
The jet did not form properly, it created a big but shallow hole, in the middle of which the real jet hole started. This went only
through 18 mm of steel. In contrast an APAN SC went through 16 mm, and this plastique was much faster. :(
The reason was probably that the stuff had started to gas, so much it expanded out of the open end of the pipe. I guess
there were cavities inside the charge that distorted the jet formation. And the cone could not be wrapped three layers at 48
degree, I had to add a separate copper sheet to complete the third layer. 60 degree is better as you get exactly two layers
from a circle.
But the shock wave was great! It felt like being hit by a (small) sack of sand from every side simultaneously. I guess Ill use a
slightly longer cable next time :D
akinrog September 17th, 2004, 04:11 PM

Dear Friends,
After seeing what a javeline antiarmor missile did to a tank in the mpg video from FTP, I did a little search over the net and
came upon this flash animation (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/_common/_images/javelin/flash.htm).
The concept is very interesting: there are double warheads in the missle. The larger one (at the rear) is fired first on impact
and then the second one (at the front) is fired then. And this baby blows apart a tank to the rubbles. :eek:
Anybody has any info as to what is the timing between two shaped charges and if the second (and smaller) one is fired with a
det or by the jet of the first shaped charge? In addition what I notice from the animation the second (and smaller) shaped
charge at the front is a little bit offset. I believe this type of missile (with IR seeker) is hard to improvise. However the concept
of double shaped charge might be useful for hard skinned targets we discussed here too much.
"Off-axis is the precursor charge, "
This means the front charge goes off first? The flash animation shows that the rear charge goes off first and the front charge
goes second? :confused: Or have I misunderstood?

Off-axis is the precursor charge, to det. ERA, so the main charge can penetrate. Reason for off-center mounting is so the
debris cloud from the precursor charge doesn't disrupt the jet of the main charge.
SweNMFan September 17th, 2004, 07:34 PM

The concept is very interesting: there are double warheads in the missle. The larger one (at the rear) is fired first on impact
and then the second one (at the front) is fired then. And this baby blows apart a tank to the rubbles. :eek:
The T72 have had to be loaded with HE .. there is no way 8.4Kg warhead demolish a tank like in the JavelinVsT72 movie
Then it bothers me that the sound of the explosion starts the same time as you see it..
nuclearattack September 19th, 2004, 06:59 AM

Anyway the javelyn works only on simple armour or on first generation of reactive armour like ERA. The russian T-90 uses a
ERA2 reactive armour with double plates, the HE plates are connected with the STORA 2 radar system that is able to lock the
missile and to detonate only one "double plate" just when the missile is arriving in proximity of the double plate. The
detonation should destroy or unable the missile.
The javelyn is a very powerfull anti tank missile but the T-72 example is only a particular condition. I say this because if you
use a javelyn against a modern tank, like the T-90 or T-80 or a Merkava or a M1 Abrams, it's not guaranteed that you stop it!
A T-72 is obsolete, especially the iraqi version that is the first tipe of T-72.

The missile could destroy the tank completely because of the secondary initiation of the stored ammuntion. This is the major
cause of the total destruction of soviet-type armor.
The abrahms and merkva are designed to vent the explosion of stored ammo out panels in the top of the tank, and not
retain it inside the crew compartment.

Thought that I should report that the Nitromethane plastique from KIE2 seems to work very well in shape charges.. Will try to
post images in a few days..
knowledgehungry October 10th, 2004, 11:07 AM

I've began work on making some shaped charges out of Fiberglass, currently I'm still in the process of finding the best way to
mold and shape it. If anyone thinks that the fiberglass would work worse than the previously mentioned methods in this
thread please let me know so I don't waste anymore time on it.

Do you mean as a container or for the liner?
I doubt you get better performance with a fiberglas liner than with soda can alu.. but the charge will work as the impression in
the explosive shape the shockwave, guess there is a reason why 98% of all military shapecharges use copper as liner..
As for container I think it's abit overkill as a regular PVC pipe seems to work just fine.. even a paper tube/soda can works if
you use 6000+ ms explosives
nbk2000 October 11th, 2004, 12:14 PM

Maybe if you used a metal powder in the epoxy used in forming the fiberglass matting, it might improve things. Precipitated
copper?
One thing I've noticed is a lack of a control test using no liner, just to make sure that the results of using the liner are better
than simple munroe effect.
If, in the case of freaky franks test, a paper cone gave an equal or better penetration than use of the soda can liner, than
we'd know that it had no effect.
I know he used an equal charge as a comparison, but that was a simple block charge, with no munroe effect from a cavity.
Boomer October 11th, 2004, 02:20 PM

Finally I got a real shaped charge jet with good penetration: A stack of 5 steel plates, each 10 mm thick, using a 1 SC. Again
I did not expect this and carried not enough plates into the woods: It went through another 70mm concrete.
This is even more remarkable (compared to my old tests, not to military SCs) as the plastique used (65g) was bulked up with
nearly 50% of a NA/HDN mix! Composition was NG/MHN/RDX 10g/15g/20g (original mix), to this was added AN+HDN 15g each.
Density was 1.64, charge diameter 27.5mm, length 60mm, liner 48 degree, wrapped/glued of 4 layers 0.2mm copper sheet.
The much better performance, even with a crappy mix compared to older tests with the same non-diluted plastique, has two
reasons IMO:
Firstly did I use a steel water pipe with end cap opposite the liner. This ensured high order detonation, which is NOT easy to
reach with voild-less plastique in plastic tubes. With pressed PETN etc this much confinement is probably not necessary.
Secondly did I make the liner twice as thick as in all other tests.
The picture speaks for itself. I estimate that without slowing the EP down with AN/HDN, and using more plates, 100mm are
possible this way. This is nearly 4 x cone diameter and close to mil spec devices (5-6 x).
chemistr1 October 11th, 2004, 02:52 PM

I am currently trying the same thing with 25% fibreglass epoxy 75% Al cast liners as I have not yet ordered in Cu powder.
In the modelling industry they call the process cold casting.
The best thing with this method is that the cone can be designed to any shape or size very easily.
I use wax covered plaster of paris moulds for the designs.

I am getting good results just using AN/HMTD charges as nitrations are out at the moment as since the baby was born 7
months ago I have avoided them in the house.
I havent thought about trying blank liner cones just to see if it was the Munroe effect or the cones themselves doing the
damage.
Quite a good idea NBK and that why the forum helps because sometimes you just can't see whats right in front of your nose.
:o

Found this in some text about the TOW-2a
JET CHARATERIZATION
The TOW-2a CSC is 231 mm long with a 146-mm charge diameter (CD) and a biconic copper liner.
The liner is specified by two angles, an interior 30 angle where the liner thickness varies between 1.70
mm at the apex and 2.41 mm at the angle change and an exterior 42 angle where the liner has a constant
thickness of 2.41 mm. The main charge is LX-14, with a PETN type pellet booster and lead waveshaper
positioned at the aft of the charge.
The image is ripped from a pdf so this one is as good as I can get it..
The whole pdf is here:
http://www.autodyn.com/autodyn/papers/paper151.pdf
nbk2000 October 12th, 2004, 02:05 PM

SweNMFan:
Looks like the picture could have been better done with a .GIF, unless the .JPG was the only format it was available in. Try a
.GIF instead.

Did dream that a 50mm SC with .4mm 30 Cu liner detonated against a boulder. Filler was 180g KIPE NM#1 .. A stone should
make a better SC target than a tree right?
nbk2000 October 15th, 2004, 07:44 PM

Should, though it may crumble or shatter, whereas steel targets retain the shape of the SC hole in the exact condition it was
formed, thus making it easy to section and examine.
SweNMFan October 16th, 2004, 07:35 AM

Well the boulder only had a small impession in it, and it was Cu colored. So the SC failed. And it had somehow managed to
cut down a 5cm tree 2m up and 6m to the side.
The KIPE NM plastic worked nicely again, and I'm still imressed with the power of the stuff. I've seen it VOD rated at 7000-
7500 m/s and I think that that is the case.
Will try to find some steel plates, but they arn't easy to come by, atlest not something that I can carry with me..
nbk2000 October 16th, 2004, 01:13 PM

Find a place that sells scrap metal by the pound and have them cut you off a length of steel round stock. It'll cost you about
$15/foot for 2" 1018 steel round stock.
Then, blast a hole into it, and pay them a couple of dollars to cut it for you where the bottom of the hole would be. :)
OR
You can have them slice it up into inch thick sections and use that for your testing. Make a pile of them inside of a heavy
cardboard tube (to keep them aligned) and, once you've off your charge, you can easily see just how deep the hole went.
Just like how the pro's do it. :)
Myrol October 17th, 2004, 06:55 AM

Well, I know its a sudden rupture in topic but trough the similarity of this Idea I think I'll post that here. I have heard
sometimes something about Diamond Charges. Umm, Diamond Charges??? What is this :confused: , it was explained in the
BTM but I didnt understand the picutres.
Its embarassing, normally I should know that but this time.....Ohhh, I think its a Liner cast into an Explosive wich looks like a
four sided pyramide, am I right? A Tetraeder like liner should also be worth a try. You have then a very special sort of Shaped
Charge. The Pyramide itself rolls up like an ordinary cone but the small roofs inside the Cone create also a munroe effect so
that four of these Jets get tied together to a maximum power Jet.
If someone disagree, don't be shy to correct something. It was jsut my own explanation how a Diamond Charge could be
constructed.

Diamond charges are primarily used to cut round steel things, like shafts.. It isn't really a SC as it use the colliding
shockwaves to cut.
Construction is described in the CIA Improvised Sabotage Devices.pdf
nuclearattack October 18th, 2004, 08:44 AM

So it uses only the Munroe effect? What if you add a pyramid liner?
A pyramid liner is also easier to make.
I'm thinking about another material for liners...what about lead? It has a low fusion temperature and it is dense, it should
work well in theory.
knowledgehungry October 18th, 2004, 12:03 PM

Be sure that lead doesn't react with whatever explosive you are using. I think that is one reason why lead is not commonly
used for SC's.
Boomer October 18th, 2004, 12:31 PM

There is nowhere to put the liner - the charge is only 1/2" thick!
It is either made of sheet explosive, or of plastique rolled out like cookie dough. It resembles no diamond (only in a cut
section) but a 'salmiak pill':
It's a sheet as wide as the shaft circumference and twice as long (from edge to edge, it is NOT a rectangle). It is wrapped
around the shaft so that two edges meet, and initiated at the other two edges. The shock waves meet at the centre and
deflect down into the material (and up of course), all around the circumference.
The navy cut a 15" propeller shaft with one! (IIRC; or was it 12" or 15" ...) :eek:
Maybe I test some DCs once I get bored with conical SCs. The IMH says only few LSCs were tested to be more effective than
ribbon charges, and diamond charges are said to be far superior to ribbons! Plus they are much easier to improvise! :D
P.S: I wonder that nobody called me a liar for claiming 50mm steel + 70mm concrete penetration with a 1" SC. I was under
the impression that AXT's 25mm were the record here, but maybe people just don't talk about it, and several inches are
common.
That would explain why I seem credible - it was nothing special ! :o
Anyway, I would like to know what performance others here got with improvised SCs - guys, how many inches is your dick ...
errr sorry, your deepest jet hole :D

You can't line a diamond charge as it is supposed to be wrapped around the target. It detonates from the two "shorter" ends
at the same time, so the shockwaves meet in the middle..
nbk2000 October 18th, 2004, 02:32 PM

A decent SC will penetrate at least 5x it's diameter, and that's through steel, with concrete being 8x or more, so 2" of steel
plus 3" of concrete from a 1" SC is entirely within the possible. :)
'Course, pictures DO help with validity.
And Axt's 1" is paltry, but good for what it was made from...FMJ bullets.
Myrol October 31st, 2004, 11:10 AM

Ok, the thing with the DC is clear for now. :) If someone try a square perhaps 4 Inch each side and 1 Inch thick and prime it
accurate on all four corners the effect of collapsing shockwaves should be nicely improved ;) You have nearly the same effect
with an ordinary SC. Just in a flat form where space is a critical factor. Plus the Charge should create TWO Jets one for each
side, but thats just an Idea, normally not worth to mention it.
Soon, in Winter time I can try some more SC, but the Liner cause serious problems to me. My choice is ANNMAl, I dont know if
its better then ANNM, I just know it's not so HUMID as ANNM. My older SC with APANAl worked totally unsatisfactory. The cones
aren't to bad.....they looked like in the .pdf from the nice guy who have created it (tests with APAN). Are there some way's to
BUY such good cones? Martini glasses are a pain to kill them. Oh man, I think I must use the hemispheres from empty
Gascans. Someone tried it before?
nuclearattack October 31st, 2004, 07:27 PM

Use liquid dynamite! It's faster than ANNMAL and it has a perfect uniformity because liquid.
Making good cones it's hard also for me so i'm trying with wine bottles.
Some wine bottles (the one used for good DOC wine) have a cone bottom very deep, simply cut the bottle and use the bottom
has a charge contenitor with the linear already placed. To cut the bottom i'm going to use a kind of arc saw made to cut glass.
It can be bought on harware/hobby stores.
I have never tested the wine bottle liner but it can be a good idea.
On december i'm going to make some tests with wine bottle liner and piramid liners.
If piramid works it can be a good idea because a piramid is very easy to do.
The_Rsert November 25th, 2004, 10:49 AM

I love shaped charges.
But which diameter is reportet the best?
2.00cm, 2.50cm, 3.00cm, 3.50cm, 4.00cm, 4.50cm or 5.00cm?
Tommorow I will make a test with a 5cm PVC pipe an strong AN/NM/NC/AP/TNT/MHN mixture. But I have no target for the
detonation at the time :(.
freaky_frank November 25th, 2004, 07:13 PM

1,8times the diameter in lenght.
So 1cm diameter and 1,8cm length is the best ratio according to a militairy pdf.
SweNMFan November 26th, 2004, 02:06 PM

Hmm the larger diameter the better, penetration is about 5X diameter on a good homemade SC.. 8X+ on a MilSpec.
akinrog December 20th, 2004, 03:21 PM

Dear Friends,
Recently I was reading david harber's Improvised Landmines. In various sections, the author mentions about a shaped charge
improvement called wave shaper. The wave shaper is a simple disk with a tail at its bottom. According to the author, the wave
shaper increases penetration depth four folds. :eek:
This might be a great improvement for our improvised shaped charges. :D
It is a simple device but what I could not understand is where the detonation starts i.e. at the back or in front of this disk.
Anybody has an idea? Regards.
SweNMFan December 20th, 2004, 03:28 PM

If you take a look at the TOW warhead drawing I posted here before there is a Lead disc after the initiator charge..
The_Duke January 7th, 2005, 05:31 AM

Linear Shaped Charges
I have done a few searches around here and found almost no mention of LSC or PLSC, (Linear Shaped charges or Precision
Linear Shaped Charges) so I figured I might be able to strike up a conversation about them.
Linear shaped charges and PLSC work under the same basic principles as any other SC.
The main difference between a CSC (conical shaped charge) and LSC or PLSC is that a CSC is designed to punch or cut holes
through metal while LSC and PLSC are designed to make a straight edged cut though the target metal.
The difference between a regular LSC and a PLSC is that the PLSC design concept involves the independent fabrication and
assembly of the liner and tamper/confinement which allows you to be able to use different materials for the liner and tamper.
PLSC have tested to perform better than LSC and cut deeper.
I have had GREAT results using 2mm AL bent exactly and precisely to a 90% angle for my liners and using 4mm steel for
the tamper. I have used a few different explosives and I have made long and I have made some sort, most off the time
they work flawle ssly. I have successfully cu t 3/4 steel with one of thes e PLSC using alum inum and I know I ca n cut deep er
(3/4 steel is all is co uld find). My main and only problem is that I WANT a copper lin er for on e of these, but it s h ard to find
thick copper bent to a 90% angle.
I hope that there are other members the have tried this and would like to talk about their experiences with LSC. :)
This following PDF will be most inte resting to some members

http://www.oes.org.uk/Explosives.pdf#search='Linear%20shaped%20charges' (http://)

It would seem that the link from my previous post does not work and the edit button is no longer appearing. I appologize for
any inconveince I may have caused, the file can be found here. :)
http://www.oes.org.uk/Explosives.pdf#search='Linear%20shaped%20charges'
V2A January 14th, 2005, 02:29 PM

hi
today i tested 2 small shaped charges, but the steel pentration effect wasn't as good as expected and i really dunno why... so
please help me!
the construction of my charges was very similar to the one in freaky frank's .pdf file.
only difference was that i used a carton tube with 25mm ID and 1,5mm thickness and filled the pure AP directly into a hole in
the APAN and not in a drinkstraw.
everything else: dimensions of standoff, liner and tube were exactly the same.
for the first charge i filled the space around the liner + 20mm with pure PETN, about 10g. the rest was filled with extra-dry 1:4
APAN + 1g AP to set it off.
the second charge was completely filled with APAN.
the half-petn filled charge was placed on a 7mm thick steel v-profile.
-> nice loud explosion :) but the steel wasnt even bent. there were only a few small holes going about 1-3mm into the steel.
the pure-apan charge was placed on a 5mm thick steel tube (about 40mm diameter).
-> the pentration was better than the one from the other charge but also bad compared to freaky frank's pictures. it was bent
to the inside and nearly a hole.
how can that be?

normaly both charges should have been stronger and especially: the one filled half with petn should have been MUCH better
than pure APAN.
a friend said that maybe the carton tube i used was to unstable compared to frank's PP tube but i dont really belive that.

a friend said that maybe the carton tube i used was to unstable compared to frank's PP tube but i dont really belive that.
Nope , it doesn t really matter if it's paper or PVC a s long as the charge is m ade correctly. When yo u're using a HE
confinement is not a problem.
You might want to use some PVC for better confinement when using APAN but paper tubes will work. What did you use for a
liner? T he reason your SC did not wo rk is because you didn t make it right. Pretty simple eh? Your charge probably did no t
form a jet, if it does not form a jet then it does not work. Check out my post above, there is a link tha t migh t help you to
understand. Also copper is the best choice for a liner. ;)

What did you use for a liner? The reason your SC did not work is because you didn t make it right. Pretty simple eh? Your
charge probably did not fo rm a jet, if it does not form a jet then it does not work.
i made the liner from a coke can, exactly the same way freaky frank describes in his .pdf file.
an i think a jet has formed, cause there are there are sparks on the first explosion frame of the video (http://home.arcor.de/
kkv2a/shapedcharge.avi).
on the picture in the pdf u posted there are also sparks where the jet hits the target...

To V2A:
a better confinement will give a higher vod, use PVC or steel, i always use PVC and it works perfectly.
Use a real cap...how can you dead press your AP if you simply pour it in a hole in the APAN? Especially with small charges use
a compound detonator because 1gr AP is poor, a 5gr AP detonator is too big for small charges so it's important to use a
compound detonator.
A coka can liner? You used the bottom of the coca can as a liner?! :rolleyes:
Can it really work? It isn't so hemispheric, but at least is cheap and easy to do!

@nuclearattack
i will try a PVC tube and ammonal next time... should then work better.
steel is to dangerous i think because of the splinters with comperative high density flying around at the blasting site.
when using APAN i always pour the pure AP into a hole in the APAN. thats the same amount of AP that would be in a
drinkstraw, and its pressed (a bit) too, only the weak plastic confinement of the straw is missing...
the liner was made as in freaky frank's .pdf, thus not out of the bottom of the can.
but maybe one could deep-draw (is this the correct word?) the bottom to make it conic - would be a bit thicker and more
constant.

To V2a:
about the cap the problem is not the confinement but the fact that pressing AP in APAN is too dangerous, if AP detonates
during pressing in drinking straw you loose a finger, if it detonates in APAN...you know. :(
Pressing AP is very important to rich max vod and power.
Try to use ANNM or ammonia dynamite instead of APAN, i also recommend my liquid straight dynamite, see it's thread in high
explosives section.
Enjoy your experiments! :D
V2A January 16th, 2005, 09:11 AM

@nuclearattack
i have build a press (http://home.arcor.de/kkv2a/IP/INI%20Presse%201.jpg) for making blasting caps without loosing a finger
if the primary detonates (that never happened as yet). for the test with Ammonal i will make a hard pressed 1g AP cap with it.
ANNM or your NM based dynamit is a problem cause i have only 50ml NM left from previous experiments and no glycerine or
ethylene glycol which i could nitrate (yes, i really sould buy some :D). first see how good Ammonal works, if not as expected i'll
try PETN/SHN plastique.
knowledgehungry January 16th, 2005, 10:27 AM

For any of the low velocity explosives a cardboard tube will not be sufficient to give good results. As general rule the slower the
explosive the more important it is too make the charge well, and with good containment.

damn, the ammonal charge was a misfire. although i used a well pressed 1,5g AP cap the Ammonal wasn't set off.
maybe the AN got to wet while mixing with coal and Al, or i wasn't fine enough (electric coffee mill).
Jacks Complete January 17th, 2005, 08:51 AM
I would suggest that whatever explosive you are using, you will get better results with a better confinement system.
A cardboard tube is not going to help get a good detonation, and it certainly isn't going to help concentrate the energy down
into the Munroe shape. A fairly thick copper liner is your cutting mass, which is accelerated up to high speed by the interaction
of the wavefront. If the liner is tougher than the tube, you are going to get very poor results. If your explosive is at all slow off
the mark, or has any voids, you are likely to get a partial.
I would suggest making a wooden cone form, which can be put under the soft liner cone. This will let you pack the explosive
without collapsing or deforming the cone.
An alternative to copper might be to try lead flashing. This is easily available and quite thick, and heavy. It has a much lower
melting point than copper as well, which might cause issues, or might actually enhance performance for less effective charges,
since it will all be liquid and moving fast, rather than a partial jet of copper. Any thoughts?
There is another thread about casting copper platters/liners, but the general consensus is that forming one over a form on a
lathe would be easier and more uniform, without access to professional spinning moulds. Lead forming doesn't require a lathe,
as a hard wood form could very easily be driven into a disc of lead flashing to form a good cone shape.
Boomer January 17th, 2005, 11:21 AM

To back up nuclearatack, knowledgehungry and Jack's, I sum up some of my results:
1" Thin-waled PE pipe, 0.4mm copper liner, MHN/NG/HDN plastique: <5mm
2" Thin-walled PE, 0.4mm copper liner, MHN/NG/HDN plastique: <5mm
2" Thick-walled PE, 0.4mm copper liner, APAN/ANFO mix: 16-18mm
1" Steel water pipe + endcap on top, 0.6mm copper liner, MHN/NG/HDN plastique: 50mm+
The millimetres are penetration into steel plates, for the last one I used only 5 plates a 10mm, it went trough some more
inches of concrete below.
Conclusion: Confinement *IS* important, not only for low-end HEs, but also for plastiques without air bubbles, they otherwise
tend to det low-order and form no real jet! And a slightly thicker liner won't hurt, can metal is quite thin, lightweight and less
ductile than copper.
BTW Jack, you ARE no longer his complete lack ... why the change?

@boomer
how did you make the 0.4/0.6mm cooper liners?
nuclearattack February 7th, 2005, 10:32 AM

To V2A:
if you are looking for easy to make liners i think that wine bottles should work quite well. I say should because i never tested
it but i'm going to do this since in this moment i'm busy with others tests.
If you look at some wine bottles you'll see that sometimes it have a conical shaped bottom, this is very common in very good
wines since this kind of bottom is used in some restaurant, anyway i don't want to explain it's use but how we can use it! ;)
If you look to this pictures you can see the shaped bottom it should be very good, the bottle is from a very good italian wine
:) but i'm shure you can find it easily.
You have only to cut the bottle at a distance twice at least the height of the cone, fill it with the explosive (choose a fast one
and enough easy to initiate, like liquid dynamite) cap the charge and reinforce the whole structure with something strong, like:
steel/pvc tube that fits perfectly the bottle, a concrete bath, a lot of strong tape...
Let me know if you have success with it! ;)
Boomer February 8th, 2005, 03:52 AM

I think copper liners are far superior to glass - glass does not form a jet, rather the effect relies on munroe plus some glass
powder.
V2A, look at this: http://roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=2562&highlight=copper+liner+roll
In the "forming shaped charge liners - archieve file" thread I described the method complete with pics. The sheets are 0.2mm,
so 0.4 mm are two wraps, 0.6mm are three (for three you have to use a second sheet where the first stops. For 48 degree
cones, you get two wraps from one circle.)
SweNMFan February 8th, 2005, 05:49 PM

In the book Firewall (By ex sas Andy McNab) the operative makes a improvised linear cutting shape charge by cuttin out
square holes in styrofoam sheats , but leavin a "toblerone" shape in the bottom of the hole.. I think that it will work IRL also
.. He also writes that if "reinforcing" the toblerone shape with copper would increase the effect.. :)
Again have a look at

http://www.air-and-space.com/20020624%20China%20Lake%20Explosive%20Ordnance%20D isposal.htm
There is pics of a improvised winebottle charge and the hole it did in a steel plate, glass may not be ideal but it will work..
nuclearattack February 9th, 2005, 02:14 PM

For toblerone (the famous chocolate :) ) you mean that i should leave a piramid in the styrofoam?
Damn! Myrol was right when he said that piramid liners could work in LSC!
That should be a nice liner because it is simple to do a piramid with a copper sheet.
To Boomer:
glass is not the best liner but why it shouldn't form a jet? Glass should melt quite well.
The_Duke February 9th, 2005, 05:56 PM

Nuclear attack;
I hate to rain on you re pa rade but glass is proba bly the worst imp rovised liner you could use in a shaped ch arge.
Copper or other soft metals are far better liners because they are no t brittle and they heat up as they fold over themselves
in the explosion forming the jet and the slower slug , whe re as glass can t fold over itself or form a jet a n d slug without
breaking or unless it is melted.
Glass does melt, yo ure right abo ut that, but the g lass is still too brittle and does no t melt like you m ight th ink, re m e m b e r
that even though the liner is positioned starting at the epic center of the explosive and explosion, the shock wave leaves
first, and is then followed by the hot gases. So the tremendous pressure and shock causes the glass to shatter before it is
melted and has a chance to fo rm a jet in the traditional form , but until someone tests this, it is s till just speculation. ;)
So for now I agree 100% with Boomer when he said glass liners rely only on the Munroe effect and the power of the explosive
used, not the formation of a jet.
I have a PDF called improvised shaped charges where three different glass liners were used, the pictures are pretty much shit,
but the writing is legible. If anyone wants a copy you can PM me. Also here is a file titled disturbance of shaped charge jets
caused by bulging amour.

The liners in shaped charges do not melt when the charge is detonated. This has been proven quite conlcusively, but remains
one of the most persistent myths in this field.
The temperature of the copper has been measured as the jet was formed, by some sort of high-speed method that I don't
remember the details of. It was shown to be less than 400 C.
In another investigation, a liner cone was sawn into several pieces and then carefully glued back together. The charge was
fired into a basin full of water to collect the jetted liner. The drawn out liner which had been formed into the well known thin jet
was still divided into the same pieces as before the detonation.
trinitride3 February 10th, 2005, 12:31 PM

Has anyone experimented with brass linings in their shaped charges? When I was cleaning my garage the other day I found a
role of .016 thick brass flashing. It seems a little thick compared to the aluminum soda cans I usually use to make my liners,
could it be used successfully?
The_Duke February 11th, 2005, 04:55 AM

Microtek,
Not that I don't believe you, but do you have any references or files you could share to back your claim. I find the above
statement to be very interesting indeed. :D
Boomer February 11th, 2005, 05:29 AM

Here are two references, IIRC they are also on the FTP. Both clearly emphasise the importance of ductile liner material. One
gives interesting numbers, like 10 Mbar, max. 450C, 25 million g jet acceleration etc.
SweNMFan February 11th, 2005, 05:46 PM

For toblerone (the famous chocolate ) you mean that i should leave a piramid in the styrofoam?
Damn! Myrol was right when he said that piramid liners could work in LSC!
That should be a nice liner because it is simple to do a piramid with a copper sheet.
Not really a pyramid, more like a extruded triangle.. just like a Toblerone box.. The nice thing about styrofoam is that you can
make it with a hot blade and as you can build in the standoff.. Attached a pic of how I think the "hole" should look like..
The_Duke February 15th, 2005, 04:47 PM

It would seem that the glass liners perform relatively well after all. :D
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=2219
I found this on the Sciencemadness forum.
nuclearattack February 22nd, 2005, 10:13 AM

This "toblerone" shaped charge should be a very good cutting charge an alternative to ribbon charges.
How would you prime this kind of charge?
In the center but with the detonator parallel respect the charge (like in FM 5-250 pag 3-13) or perpendicular like in a block of
explosive?
What about priming the charge by a side from the left to right?
I think that the best priming is the same for a ribbon charge.
What about using a standoff like for standard LSC? A different kind of jet should form anyway...a lengthened jet perhaps.
The_Duke March 18th, 2005, 11:19 PM
I notice d that when Boomer attached the files Some metallurgical as pects of shape d charge liners a n d Liners for sha p e d
charges By Man fred Held that they were only stubs, a nd not the whole files. Well I do not have to te ll you guys how irritating
it is to read the first page of a file and then notice the rest of the file is nowhere to be found. So I broke down and bought
Liners for sha ped charges By Ma nfred Held . Its a pretty good file an d worth reading, I have upped it to the ftp.
Now does a nyone want to buy Some metallurgical as pects of shape d charge liners and up it to the ftp? :)
[Edit] for those who do not have access to our ftp, you can PM me and I will gladly send the file to the mailbox of your
choosing :)

choosing :)

choosing :)
chemofun December 5th, 2005, 12:50 AM

I tried to see the pdf but I cant get to it. If its in the FTP...well, I can't get there either. If its not too much trouble could
somebody please upload it directly to the forum or e-mail it to me at gastonios6@yahoo.com. I've been curious in shaped
carges for a while now and I wanted to make some with TNP. I want to put liners on them though, otherwise I would just use
glass bottles for the munroe effect. I know copper is supposed to be among the best liners but how does aluminum compare?
The_Duke December 5th, 2005, 02:00 AM

I had totally forgotten about that file!
The other file was found for free and can be found on tmp s ftp! :D
Also, 2,4,6-TNP is not a choice explosive for shaped charges, I suggest you look at other alternatives. The attached file
demonstrates the difference between Cu and Al as liner materials, there is really no contest between the two as Cu will
effectively penetrate almost double what Al can penetrate!
I will email the files to you now, chemofun.
Hobbit Porn December 21st, 2005, 10:55 PM

chemofun : I've sent Liners for Shaped Charges by Manfred Held to your streamload account.
Viper III January 12th, 2006, 10:52 AM

did anyone know if annm +h2so4 (40:40:20) is good for shaped charges ?
xyz January 13th, 2006, 10:21 PM

Viper, have a look here hxxp://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=2219 (http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/
viewthread.php?tid=2219).
I assume (and definitely hope!) that English is not your first language...
Viper III January 14th, 2006, 04:13 PM

Thx, this link had helped me a lot.
Sorry for my bad english, I am from austria....
a few days ago i testet a LSP with annmal....the results are ashaming....but it was just a part of a pc...so the metal plate was
too thin..
I have to say I like this forum,.....everything is proffesional...

here is the vid of the LSC....
it was quite funny.
http://rapidshare.de/files/11736125/LSC.mpg.html
Flake2m January 26th, 2006, 09:31 AM

That video is quite impressive.
Do you know what SWIM used as the explosives compound and linear?
A brick or reinforced concrete slab is also good to test on. SWIM might also want to remember that shaped charges also have
a standoff range.

The ends of this V-form (there where no HE was) + 8mm was the standoff....today i got a 2" steel plate ....i am gonna test a
cylindrical SC in a few days:
65mm long and 16mm wide al liner, + around 300g ANNMSA (Axt had a success with this at a 1" plate....)
mike16 April 13th, 2007, 05:38 PM

Yay, I'm so happy, my first shaped charge success after about 8 or 9 previous failures.
Specs: 1inch Conical shaped charge
Liner: copper 0.6mm thick, 60 degree apex, 28mm wide
Casing: Steel, 2mm thick walls, 60mm long
Charge: 30g Dynamite ~ 80%NG/20%Flour
When I got to the test site, The standoff legs had fallen off, and I could not stick them back on, so I decided what the heck,
I'll use ZERO standoff! :p
So I place the charge directly onto the target (18mm steel block), put the cap in the end, and retreat about 50 meters to
press my remote control button.:p
Sadly there is no video as I did not have my camera with me, but I have pictures!
The casing:http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture149-1.jpg
The charge: http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture140.jpg
Liner was rolled from 0.3mm copper sheet:http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture154-1.jpg
Due to zero standoff, the entrance hole in not visible as too much copper is in the way.
Entrance wound:http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture190-1.jpg
Exit hole circled in red:http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture182-1.jpg
Also you can see the block ( from an old air rifle) has been bent by the force:cool: .
Conclusion: I think this shaped charge worked because this is the first time I've used steel casing for the charge, and the liner
was solidly hammered and superglued into place.
Also the cone apex was tapped flat slightly with a hammer to 1mm wide, to give the shockwave something to push on.
Edit: I've managed to get the copper "slug" off the entrance hole, so you can see it!
Here it is: http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture191.jpg
MRUD April 14th, 2007, 11:52 AM

After I was able to make PETN, I started in developing shaped charges this year.
First try was not a full success, but it penetrated 10mm of steel.
http://img22.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=39199_DSCF0200_122_161lo.JPG
http://img18.imagevenue.com/view.php?image=39206_DSCF0198_122_271lo.JPG
Cone made from 0.8mm thick copper with soldered ends.
After severel tries, now I am able to penetrate 20mm steel with a configuration as following:
Con diameter: 40mm

High of con: 40mm, so you have around 60 degree apex
Standoff: 40mm too
Charge: 35g of PETN
The ends of the cone are soldered and polished to give a maximum of accuracy.
This are the pics of the last try:

I think, PETN is working best in small charges such these
Chaosmark April 14th, 2007, 07:40 PM

Very interesting mike! Your small shaped charge has made me realize something that I've heretofore been overlooking: small
explosives are easier and cheaper for testing than full blown 'ka-boom'ers.
Thought: could a small shaped charge like this be used as an engine for rockets, or is the jet moving just a tad bit too fast for
anything but a hypervelocity rocket like the Gy2?
nbk2000 April 14th, 2007, 09:42 PM

I cropped and resized MRUD's pics to have mercy on the dial-uppers amoungst us.
http://rapidshare.com/files/26050765/MRUD_PIC.rar.html
486K versus 7M orginally.
Good work MRUD.
What changed between the 10 and 20mm attempts? Standoff, cone construction...?
MRUD April 15th, 2007, 07:23 AM

Thanks, nbk2000
The main improvement between the first and last charges are my technique how to: cut the copper plate, weld it and solder it.
The first cone was a piece of crap, not well welded and made at all.
Diameter and high was 30mm with 30g PETN. Standoff equals to the diameter.
Picture of the first cone:

http://img120.imagevenue.com/view.php?image=19558_DSCF0042_122_109lo.JPG
For a good result, you have to make sure to give maximum precision to the cone.
+++
It's cone, not con. I'm a con, not a cone. ;) :D NBK

Indeed, precision is of paramount importance when manufacturing shaped charges. I recently started a series of tests to
determine if liners of pressed Cu-powder were good candidates for shaped charges. The powders would remove the need for
precision machining the liners as you would just need a good mandrel for ramming.
I produced some tools for producing shaped charges that were as close to identical as possible. The charges consist of 1.600 g
PETN with copper cones ( ca 60 degrees ) in the 0.2-0.6 g range. The cones are 9.65 mm in dameter with no subcalibration.
The explosive filler and liner weight is determined down to milligram accuracy and then rammed into the casing which is
machined to a tolerance of a few micrometers. Using the tools I prepared, I can make sure that both the liner and detonator
are perfectly centered. This precision work was to ensure reproducibility as well as high performance.
Unfortunately they performed very poorly, consistently giving only 2.5 mm penetration into mild steel. I eventually made a
cone of laminated copper foil in the same weight range and with the exact same charge size and geometry for comparison. It
penetrated 4 x 4mm mild steel and went 3 mm into the fifth. A total of 19 mm mild steel ( and it would have been more in a
monolithic block ) using 1.6 g of PETN.
stupid939 April 29th, 2007, 01:51 PM

Microtek - It sounds as though you spent quite some time perfecting your copper powder shaped charges, and you have come
up with an interesting idea.
Awhile ago, I had an idea of using copper wire for shaped charges to save money and time. I wound it around a 60 PVC
mandrel that I turned on the lathe. First, I put high strength double-sided tape on the mandrel and then I wound the copper
wire around it (I think it was around 22 gauge). It ended up being quite large (about 1" diameter), and I could not do much
testing on it because I was using AN/NG, which isn't really suitable for shaped charges. I also did not give it a high enough
stand-off when I used it, but it still worked a little bit. I think that this method has some potential, but in order to test it more
extensively, I would need to make some RDX or PETN. I have pictures of my mandrel and how I wound the wire if you would
like to see them.
If you don't mind my asking, do you live in the US, and if so, where do you go about finding pentaerythritol? I have been
searching for it for a few months now, and I haven't had much luck. I know it is used in certain paints and varnishes, but I
have not been able to find a source in the US.
Microtek April 29th, 2007, 04:35 PM

No, I don't live in the US but I weren't able to find PE OTC either. I ordered it through a lab supply ( which doesn't sell to
individuals; I know someone who owns a small company ).
When I get to it, I will test geometrically identical charges using RDX, HMX, TNGU, DNAF and whatever else seems promising,
so then we will know if you really need PETN or if RDX is just as good at this scale.
Regarding the powdered liners, I certainly wouldn't call them perfected; they only penetrated 10-15 % of what the laminated
cones did. Anyway, I'm working on my metal spinning skills ( I have a lathe too as you may have deduced ) to make some
really good liners.
Charles Owlen Picket May 1st, 2007, 11:08 AM

Extrapolating from another discussion on SC, I was wondering if anyone had tested powdered liners with the use of a plastique
HE????
It would seem that the density of the plastic mass of the HE would allow for the optimum formation of the cone w/ powdered
copper, etc. The reason I ask is that I had heard of a 'dimple" setting for plastique charges achieving fair results by itself.
nbk2000 May 1st, 2007, 03:26 PM

Powder liners need to have a TMD of at least 80% to become comparable to normal spun liners, and should be sintered,
though 'green' pressed will work too.
Microtek May 2nd, 2007, 08:22 AM

I was inspired by patent number US3255659 which uses simple compression of the metal powder into a cone shaped cavity in
the explosive charge (using a conical ram). The thing is that copper powder can be made quite easily by reducing CuO with
propane (or better, H2) at easily achievable temps. Maybe the produced powder is spongy or otherwise unsuitable for use in
liner production, or maybe the charge design needs to be different (or maybe the patent is flawed - that happens).
Charles Owlen Picket May 2nd, 2007, 11:17 AM

I have spun on a wood lathe with fair results (copper) but it had been quite time consuming. I found a simple way to cut with a
tin-snips the shape needed for a cone and simply super-glued it together. The results were not too shabby providing all the
other issues were squared away.
However I have never seen fair results from powdered liners. Keeping in mind that I had no idea that the 80% figure was the
goal -I know that what I have seen tested was close but certainly not 80. And with this subject I've found there is very little
"slop" in construction if the intention is to produce a usable jet, etc.
HAS anyone had even limited success with copper powder - that was reproducible?

I don't think powdered copper will work well at all, it needs to have a certain density (that can be achieved) and strength. If
you were able to melt down the powder enough to fuse than you might have something to work with.
Zait May 24th, 2007, 07:14 PM

I don't think powdered copper will work well at all, it needs to have a certain density (that can be achieved) and strength.
There are quite a few oil well perforators that use pressed copper powder as the shaped charge liner and they work very well.
The key is that the copper would have to be pressed to the proper shape and density which is probably beyond what most on
this forum could do.
Kleng May 25th, 2007, 04:30 AM

When you say pressed, do you know then how much force is required?
It's not hard to build a small-scale hydraulic press which has a force of 20ton.
stupid939 August 14th, 2007, 02:05 AM

Ok, well SWIM got around to testing the copper wire shaped charge idea that I came up with, this time with ETN and better
cones. Success! The pictures and specifications are below.
Tools for forming the wire.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3025/cwcsc1yg1.th.jpg (http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc1yg1.jpg)
The die. It is at a 45 angle and is made of aluminum. The small hole at the top is to loop wire through.
http://img530.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc2zy0.jpg
After the wire is wound, the end is bend and it is held in place for soldering.
http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc3qg5.jpg
The torch, 60/40 solder, and a generous amount of flux.

http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc4eb5.jpg
A small spatula is used to pry the formed cone from the die.
http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc5cl9.jpg
A small bead of superglue seals the hole on the top of the cone. A file is used to flatten out the bottom of the cone.
http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc7ng5.jpg
The finished cone was made to a diameter of 0.825" to fit the inside of the pipe.
http://img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc8dg1.jpg
A piece of 3/4" Schedule 40 PVC pipe is used for the charge. The explosive used was 7.7g of ETN/PGDN in a 85:15 ratio
(oxygen balanced).
http://img254.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc9iu1.jpg
First the cone is glued in place.
http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc10ze1.jpg
Then the Explosive is pressed. The electronic blasting cap contained 1.5g of AP.
http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc11rv7.jpg
The standoff used raised it 2x the cone height and was constructed from styrofoam.
http://img464.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc12lm4.jpg
Upside down.
http://img265.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc13th6.jpg
The target material was 1" (2.54cm) square 6061 aluminum.

http://img511.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc14mp6.jpg
All wired up.

http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc15rv0.jpg
The entrance was ~1/8" all the way through. Nice.

http://img265.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc16hh9.jpg
Exit (it also went about 1.5" into concrete, so it could have gone through more aluminum).
http://img483.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cwcsc17cr9.jpg
The video. The reason for the weird voice is because SWIM always calls out a warning. He wouldn't want anyone having records
of his voice.
http://img532.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fullxh8.flv
The original video at 60fps (much better quality and you can go frame by frame).
http://rapidshare.com/files/48855994/Copper_Wire_CSC.avi
Here are the pictures in a .rar archive. Password is roguesci.org

http://rapidshare.com/files/48860519/Copper_Wire_Conical_Shaped_Charge.rar
inventorgp August 22nd, 2007, 12:38 PM

Hmm.. very creative way of making a shaped charge, I like it! I wish I thought of that because I have one kilogram of 1mm
enameled wire.
You could of added your ImageShack page (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/stupid939) to that list if url's. Anyways, nice.
stupid939 August 22nd, 2007, 03:21 PM

I thought about putting a link to my ImageShack page, but I like to describe each picture.
Enameled wire will not work for this because solder will not stick to it until it is cleaned off of the wire. this can be done by
burning it off and then rubbing it with sand paper.
nbk2000 August 23rd, 2007, 12:05 AM

I assume you using the solder to hold the wire in the coil form, but did you know that solder-metal is often referenced to in
earlier patents as a SC liner material?
Perhaps the effect you are getting is from the solder metal and not from the wire? You should make a duplicate charge, using
epoxy instead of solder, and see if you get the same results.
inventorgp August 23rd, 2007, 01:41 AM

@stupid939: Obviously, you would have to remove the enamel, either by scraping action or by means of a solvent.
@NBK: very interesting. hmm.. if only my country wasn't becoming communistic, I would be able to try it. :o
stupid939 August 23rd, 2007, 02:46 AM

It may be awhile until I compare epoxy and solder, but I will post my results when I complete the tests.
NBK - I was using 60/40 solder but I was under the impression that lead and tin are too ductile to be used effectively. After
looking over some patents, I have found that my idea is not original. I found a few patents describing the method I used, and
the wire is usually brazed, soldered, or bonded with methyl-2-cyanoacrylate (super glue) or plastics.
I searched for the use of solder metal in shaped charge liners, but I could not find anything. Do you by any chance have a
link?
nbk2000 August 23rd, 2007, 04:14 AM

The ones that mention it are so old (40's-50's) that they're image-only, thus not searchable. I have them on my other
computer, but I'm not digging it out.
Boomer August 26th, 2007, 01:35 PM

Since I did not post for a long time, and before I get deleted here .... just an update, this time on linear SCs:
From the hardware store you can get U-shaped Al and L-shaped Al, 25x25x25mm and 15x15mm respectively, easy to cut into
100mm length. If you fit the L into the open end of the U, BINGO --> liner + casing, more precise than you could fold it from
sheet metal.
These cut easily through 10mm steel plates, at approx. 40g HE per 100mm length. Both plasticised PETN or MHN works, and
even high velocity gelled dynamite (65% nitro) works, though the cut is less straight (more bending of the edges). See for
yourself:
P:S: The one in the left had a hand-bent 1mm/60deg copper liner, the two others were made as described. Even with Al, and
at 90deg, they perform better than the copper!
nbk2000 August 26th, 2007, 05:51 PM

What was your stand-off?
Tinton August 26th, 2007, 10:48 PM

I hate to interject into LSC conversation, but I had a question about "collection" of jets.
I was curious about the feasibility of retrieving a fired shaped charge. Such as firing a shaped charge into 6 or more feet of
water. I'm somewhat doubtful about any of the jet or slug surviving, but still I would love to see reminants of a shaped charge.
Especially a LSC, I have seen no pictures of a formed LSC jet.
Considering the jet is basically plasma, maybe a coolant/water mixture would do well, possibly even a gelatinous mixture. I
have absolutly no experiance with stopping 8,000 m/s jets of molten metal intact, so excuse me if i sound like a dumbass. :o
Alexires August 27th, 2007, 03:31 AM

Tinton - I do not know the answer to your question, but thinking about it brings up this: Newton came up with this nifty law that
says (paraphrased by MacGyver): For every reaction, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
If 10g of molten jet moves downwards at 8000ms-1 and what is left of your SC weighs 10g, then the remains are going to be
moving in the opposite direction, at the same speed, eg. upwards at 8000ms-1 (assuming that it remains intact....which it
probably doesn't).
Besides, I would think that the plasma would actually be hot enough to crack the water into H2 and O2 and thus some more
exploding. Of course, the energy input is the same as the output (the energy required to crack the water is the same as the
energy put out by the combustion of the hydrogen and oxygen) but the small localized explosions would throw the remains of
the jet stream around.
Throw in some differential heating of the metal, and it would shatter like a little child's innocence upon the rocks of reality.
In short, I'd say your chance of finding the remains of the charge is about 1/10th of smeg all.
nbk2000 August 27th, 2007, 04:16 AM

Clarification:
The liner of a SC doesn't turn into 'plasma', a superheated state of ionized matter, but rather cold-flows under the extreme
pressures...like putty being squeezed out of your fist.
Also, in FoSC, you'll see that SC liners have been recovered in various stages of collapse by replacing the normal explosive
filling with water, and using the force of a small explosive charge to hydraulically deform the liner.
Alexires August 27th, 2007, 07:33 AM

Thank you NBK, I had no idea they operated like that (my ignorance is probably obvious).
In response to my lack of knowledge, I have started researching shaped charges. I have found an interesting journal article
which I have placed in the Journal Articles thread.
I have no idea what FoSC stands for. Perhaps Foil (lined) Shaped Charge?
Does anyone know of some texts that I could read to get a better idea about shaped charges? I'm currently looking for an
article titled "The Hows and Whys of Armor Penetration", but the request is in the Journal thread.
LibertyOrDeath August 27th, 2007, 09:08 AM

Does anyone know of some texts that I could read to get a better idea about shaped charges?
Explosives Engineering by Paul W. Cooper has a section on SCs. It's not very long (maybe 10 pages or so devoted specifically
to them), but it has some very handy info. For example, referring to conical SCs (p. 440):
1. Greatest penetration is obtained at cone angles of around 42 degrees.

2. Optimum standoff is between 2 and 6 charge diameters.
3. Penetration is normally around 4 to 6 charge diameters and could go as high as 11 or 12.
4. Optimum liner thickness is about 3% of the cone base diameter for soft copper. This can be scaled for changes in density
(change of material) by keeping weight constant. That is, lower-density liners should be thicker.
Do you have that book? Someone here has probably scanned and uploaded it, but if not, then I can do it (though it'll take
some time to do the whole thing). Or I can just scan the pages on SCs if you want them fast. Feel free to PM me if you like.
nbk2000 August 27th, 2007, 10:16 AM

FoSC = Fundamentals of Shaped Charges.
On the FTP somewhere, or you can find it in SM's library, where they're hosting it as a backup mirror for me (whether or not I
asked them to).
Thermiteisfun September 3rd, 2007, 11:18 AM

As I'm relatively new to this hobby please excuse any ignorance, but what is the eficacy of using a thermite or "exotic
thermite" liner in a shaped charge? would the energy of the blast be enough to start the reaction and if so would it increase
the energy output?
an earlier post stated that the jet is a cold metal flow propelled by the charge, if a thermite liner is used would that cause an
explosive expansion of gasses in the target (assuming it was an airtight vehicle)?
Gammaray1981 September 6th, 2007, 02:52 PM

Thermite, being a powder, would not be a good liner. It would, however, sandblast your target nice and smooth.

Thermite can be a good SC liner if you want increased behind-armor incendiary effects, and are willing to sacrifice penetration
for it.
But, it has to be pressed and sintered, not just loose powder.
Roy Paci February 19th, 2008, 07:15 PM

It's sad to post after NBK2000.
Do you think I can?
ProdigyChild February 20th, 2008, 08:04 PM

Yes, you've already done!
Do you believe, he prefers tears to progress in the forum?
I do not. Keeping 'his' form in motion is more respect towards NBK than shutting up.
Roy Paci February 21st, 2008, 07:33 PM

Mods could have erased my post If I couldn't.
And after all, I agree. But asked In case of any of the forum member who knew him could get offended by me start typing like
nothing has changed.
Any way:
I couldn't read anyone saying he used NG/NC or ammonia dynamite in shaped charges. Is there any reason for it?
Wouldn't ammonium picrate plasticized work?
debase me, if I need it
Zait February 21st, 2008, 11:30 PM

I couldn't read anyone saying he used NG/NC or ammonia dynamite in shaped charges. Is there any reason for it?
Wouldn't ammonium picrate plasticized work?
To a certain extent almost any explosive will work. Remember that the theory was first proofed by Munroe using a block of
nitrocellulose inadvertantly detonated on a piece of steel.
KemiRockarFett March 29th, 2008, 08:01 AM

The casing of a shaped charge.
As I noticed many here uses steel. I think the important thing is to have as much mass as possible around the explosive.
(offcourse not in the cone direction). Steel has a density of 7 to 8 kg/litre but unfortunatelly it gives a lot of shrapnel, I think
that the strength of the steel could be negligble compared to the force of inertia. a=F/m , acceleration*mass = force
The high acceleration of the casing will result in a big force of inertia.
I suggest to increase the mass of the casing by using two casings with a lot of water between !
The force of inertia will increase the kinetic energy in the desired direction.
The casing to cone mass relation should be considered.
teshilo April 13th, 2008, 08:49 AM

My choice for SC. This is:cool: :heavie body: steel dual point intiation with dc ;liner copper; explosive- pbx with VOD -6000 m/
s, like C- series..
Setharier November 10th, 2008, 08:36 AM

http://myofficeproxy.com/browse.php/e5e206ce/bbc52Oi8/vaW1nNDE/yLmltYWd/lc2hhY2s/udXMvaW1/nNDEyLzI/yNzMvMjc/
yNzg5NjN/0bzAucG5/n/b5/
I wrote something off this at the Countermass Weapon topic at the Improvised weapons section. I speculated using detcord as
the initiator for the main charge, but found an issue: will the detcord ruin the conical charge when wired stright through or even
from the side?
Alexires November 10th, 2008, 09:20 PM

That would be my thinking. It probably wouldn't have as good penetration characteristics. I would go for a momentum fired pin
from behind, as opposed to being initiated from the front.
fluoroantimonic November 12th, 2008, 06:21 AM

Axt got surprisingly good results from using glass funnels with the stems broken off as liners. I'm not sure, but I would
imagine a small hole in the apex of a liner would not reduce its performance much.
slarter November 12th, 2008, 03:30 PM

Axt got surprisingly good results from using glass funnels with the stems broken off as liners. I'm not sure, but I would
imagine a small hole in the apex of a liner would not reduce its performance much.
There should be very little effect as many military shaped charges are open at the apex. Usually for a PIBD (Point Initiating
Base Detonating) fuze using a "Spitback" initiator. This is seen in most current 40mm HEDP rounds. In fact I have one liner
that looks just like a funnel.
BTW, I have a collection of military shaped charge liners that I need to take a picture of and upload here. I have from the
M42 HEDP Grenade up to a glass liner from the M2 15 lb. shaped charge.
Alexires November 12th, 2008, 07:52 PM

It wasn't the hole at the top I was talking about, it was more the direction of explosive force. As opposed to having a
shockwave propagating towards the target, you suddenly have some detcord messing up your funnel and the direction of
shockwave.
I also said it might not be as effective, not that it wouldn't work.
fluoroantimonic November 12th, 2008, 11:04 PM

As opposed to having a shockwave propagating towards the target, you suddenly have some detcord messing up your funnel
and the direction of shockwave.
That's a good point, you're probably right. An alternative might be to use "shock-tube" since it transfers the low velocity
detonation without even bursting the plastic lining of the tube. I know this because I found about 20 feet of it used that was
still perfectly intact. The tubing was yellow with a wall thickness similar to the inside diameter (~1mm) and looked to be HDPE.
Interesting stuff.
stupid939 November 13th, 2008, 09:03 PM

The shock-tube is interesting stuff. I attended an event where they strung it around the room, letting us hold it (one person
held it between their teeth) and put the end up against a piece of paper. They used a spring loaded detonator with a primer in
it, and the dusted RDX inside popped quite quickly and blew a small hole in the paper.
I have been pondering for some time now what the best way to initiate an airborne shaped charge, and the shock-tube would
be the way to go. Run it through the center, and as long as you used the right primaries, it would work great.
Setharier November 14th, 2008, 04:33 PM

If the SC is being shot, an inertia-detonator will come in question:
http://img373.imageshack.us/img373/801/15722850bi2.png

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Big aus(s) detonations
Log in
View Full Version : Big aus(s) detonations
SweNMFan August 28th, 2004, 11:57 AM

I n c a s e y o u m issed this .. The W o o m era Testrange Site
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/corporate/trials/woom e r a / h o m e.htm l
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/corporate/trials/woom e r a / i m a g e s.html
2 7 t o n a n d 5 tons detonations..

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Electronic switched dets
Log in
View Full Version : Electronic switched dets
ProdigyChild S e p t e m b e r 1 4th, 2004, 11:49 AM

I want to poll, what good ideas are aro und for electronically trigg e r e d d e t s .
Possible applications that fly to m y m ind are: FAE triggering, mu ltiple fireball firing for a desired shape.
I've posted in the 'ex loding bridgewire dets' thread and finally succeeded with tha t. However, electronic switching poses a
p r o b l e m because of the need of a device capable of switching kAm ps. The biggest affordable SCR/thyristor/triac I've found is
BTA41 (<10$), capable of switching continuous 40A, and 400A surges.
T h e m a i n b e n e f i t i s t h e a v o i d a n c e o f d a n g e r o u s p r i m a r i e s i n b l a sting caps. An average equipped electronics freak can't add
precision timing to EBW caps. Pity.
T h e l o w e n d a r e s i m p le bridgewire devices - lightbulbs filled with some prim ary explosive. Easy to m ake, ch eap, reliable, can
be driven by a single transistor from a average battery. The only downside m ay b e a m o r e o r l e s s u n p r e c i s e t i m i n g , d e p e n d i n g
on how m uch the brid gewires are overdriven. If you want it to go fast, you need high currents again, you're approaching EBW
technology, yet still having to use prim ary explosives.
I've just tried a very sim p l e d e t o n a t o r : t a k e a p i e c e o f p a p e r , g l u e s o m e m etal foil stripe on each side. Now cut it with a
scissors. The result is 2 condu ctive layers that end next to each other with only the distance of a paper's thickness - roughly
0.1mm .
Now apply 1000V to these and the arc starts im mediately.
The good thing is: yo u don't need high current for initiating the current imm ediately. I've tried a series resistor of 330 Ohm s,
i.e. peak current of 3A (only). There are quite a few transistors around, that can switch such easily: BU205, BU208, BUX47, ....
even high vo ltages MO SFETS will do and IGB-FETS would just be the perfect choice :)
This easily sets of AP and probably any other p rimary, too.
The main delay and jitter of such a det would b e the prim aries d e f l a g r a t i o n - t o - d e t o n a t i o n d e l a y . D o e s a n y b o d y k n o w n u m bers?
I've also experimented with piezos a bit. Not those found in lighters, but the ones used as mini loudspeakers. They have the
size of a coin, at m o s t 1 m m thick and they con vert electric tension to m echanic force. They cost alm ost nothing. At low
voltages this is fine for creating sounds. Nothing spectacular. But if you d rive them with a ignition coil and b ack them up with
stee l, you can let these devices ham m er against a steel plate! Rather im pressive to m e. I failed to detonate AP in a first
e x p e r i m ent, but still can imag ine, it is possible to set it of like that. The good news would be the lacking DDT delay, because
you directly generate a shock wave!
Also I wondered, if it would be possible to create a (destructive) flash out of a LED to set off a sensitive (to light/heat) prim ary
explosive. Maybe too far fetched!?
Any other ideas of effects, that could be used to trigger dets by com mon currents and voltages at good tim ing?
Hang-Man S e p t e m b e r 1 4th, 2004, 03:44 PM

However, electronic switching poses a problem because of the need of a device capable of switching kAmps. The big gest
affordable SCR/thyristor/triac I've foun d is BTA41 (<10$), capable of switching continuous 40A, and 400A surges.
T h a t s a s h a m e f o r y o u. Try ebay. I got a new SCR rated to 6.5 kv at 350 am p s , s u r g e r a t e d a t 4 5 0 0 a m p s , f o r $ 3 0 .
I'm sure you could get a low V high I one for the sam e price.
I don't think blowing up LEDs would work, but what about diodes? When diodes fa il they really go bang.
Boomer S e p t e m b e r 1 5th, 2004, 03:25 AM

T h e q u e s t i o n h e r e i s w h e t h e r y o u n e e d m illisecond or m icrosecond precision.
For FAEs, mu ltiple fireballs etc m i l l i s e c o n d s a r e m o r e t h e n e n o u g h . S o a s m all electrolytic capacitor at 350V, switched trough a
BTA41 into a 6V bulb full of AP should do. This set-up is not true EBW , as it would NO T trigger a se condary. But the filament
explodes within less than 1m s, and violently enough to either detonate the AP, or overdrive it so m uch it m a k e s D D T n e a r l y
instantly. The ESR of a 100F cap, plus the im p e d a n c e o f 2 0 m cable lim it the current to a level the BTA41 can handle.
BTW SCR s are A: too slow for a real EBW (you need <500s switching tim e!), and B: are d estroyed by the current rise speed,
n o t t h e p e a k current itself! So you m ig ht try adding 1m H to the circuit to let the current rise m ore slowly (still within 1m s). If
you overdo this, it possibly m a k e s t h e f i l a m ent burn through before the current is high enough to give an explosive arc effect.
I s o m etimes had the cap near-full, and the (empty) bulb only flashed without exploding.
EDIT Answer to ProdigyChild (below):
The reason SCRs are destroyed by fast current rises is that the current starts to flow near the gate, and it takes time before
the whole square section of th e silicone conducts. Thus if the current rises too fast, it is carried by a small section of the crystal
only. It is the current density resulting in destruction, not the value.
This would be another form of Hot Electron Dea th :p
ProdigyChild S e p t e m b e r 1 5th, 2004, 06:46 AM

Thanks for pointing that out, Boom er.
W hy does a rapid rise of curre nt destroy the SC R ? ?

I can understand destruction by over-tension (avalanche effects), by over-current (overheating).
But why should the rise of the current destroy the SCR? Maybe because it's taking too long to switch to low impedance thus
dissipating m ost energy inside the SCR instead of the bridgewire?
Or is it because of induction of a electric field due to rapid change of m agnetic flo w. Gut feel tells me, that this would be less in
voltage than the applied switching voltage thou gh.
I vote for the first explanation.
In fact, BTA4 1 h a s a m a x i m u m allowed 50A/us dI/dt (@125° ) which is quite far from what we would like to have (while a
surg e p e a k o f 2 0 0 0 A / 2 0 0 u s i s a l l o w e d @ 2 5 & d e g ; ) .
However, closer inspe ction of the data sheet revealed a strong influence of junction tem p e r a t u r e a n d m a x i m u m allo wed dI/dt.
The cooler the junctio n, the m ore is allowed. In case of BTA41: 300A/us @ 10° 200A/us @ 37°
S e m i k r o m S e m ipack m odules SKKX 92.... (X=L,H or T), continuous 95A SCRS perm it 150A/us @ 125° and probably in
analogy to BTA41's properties over 4 times as m uch at 25° i.e. over 600A/us.
So as a rule of thum b, a 200A+ continuous current thyristor will stand the needed 1 kA/us rise along with the allowed surges.
W hat I m ean is: proper selection of SCR and using right operation tem perature should avoid self-destruction.
The poor tim ing can't be im proved by over-driving the gate A BIT (<1kA ;) ), can it?
ProdigyChild S e p t e m b e r 2 1st, 2004, 08:15 PM

Can't edit m y post above so I have to do a bit post-whoring to report m y latest experiences :p
I'm simply fascinated by the performance. Progress is so fast, that m y posting is more or less a m o n o l o g u e . O r it's just so
boring for m ost of you :rolleyes:
I finally found a method of precision tim ing initiation with all good properties I wish to have:
1) No need for prim aries

2) No need for specia l industrial switching device - SCR 's don't even work!
3) Most probably ignition delay of a few microseconds
4) Probably arbitrary scaling up of power - parallel initiation of m ultiple charges; exploding foils in reach???
Y o u n e e d b o t h E B W high voltage/high current circuitry and a precision tim ed even higher voltage (ignition coil - about 10kV-
20kV). Ignition coil tim ing is easy, because we don't need high peak power. A sta ndard ca r ignition will do - I use a car ignition
darlington transistor S637. Probably a high voltage MO SFET like BUZ325 would be the prefect choice for easy interface. I sho uld
be able to handle 400V and 10A.
A first implementation of the switch - a voltage triggered spark gap m ade of foil and tape mainly - is shown in the EBW thread.
I improved the switch within a few hours, so that it's reusable um pteen tim e s a n d c a n e v e n d e t o n a te PETN. More or less the
s a m e perform ance as I already reported about m y m anually swiched EBW experim e n t s b a s e d o n B o o m e r s e x c e l l e n t w o r k .
As m y im provised EBW detonators are not much more than a tape with a foil strip e inside, I would like to know, if it is possible
to detonate plastic explosives directly from such a tape. Im agine to place a charge that is smaller than your ordinary
detonator...

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Tiny Lithium Batteries
Log in
View Full Version : Tiny Lithium Batteries

I was at K-Mart recently and, while browsing the fishing supply aisle, found a very intersting item.
It was a battery for flashing floats, used for night fishing presumably. What was really interesting was the dimensions of these batteries, less than 4 millimeters in diameter and
about 35mm in length.
In other words, small enough to fit in the metal cartridge of a pen refill or the drilled out core of a pencil. ;)
The batteries are 3volt, and in a package of two, for $5.
What could you do with such a tiny battery?
FUTI September 25th, 2004, 10:41 AM

Use it as energy source for timer which triger primary charge of explosive device is my first idea. Some of the pencils come with electronic watch;)
I believe that I read somewhere about making stunt device (only one discharge) out of small batteries...I will google it to see if I can find it again.
thrall September 25th, 2004, 01:43 PM

What could we do with such a tiny battery!!!!
Look at the section this post is posted in;).
Here are the produst specs. :cool:
http://www.quality-items-flashlights.com/product_info.php?products_id=109
For a closer view of the THING
http://ledmuseum.home.att.net/microe.htm
Third picture.
Here is another link
http://www.amicell.co.il/b_limno2.htm
But the weight of battery(BR435) in the two links has discrepency :( (one says .85 grams and another says 6 grams)
Anyway what about BR425 and BR211 ;)
Corona September 25th, 2004, 04:30 PM

Electrically fired pen gun....
thrall September 25th, 2004, 05:40 PM

Or a letter bomb....................:cool:
A-BOMB September 26th, 2004, 01:01 AM

You could make a tiny timer/det/battery unit with those insided of a weapon stabbing weapon, first stab injects unit then boom, or a mini grenades made out of pens and the
like.
DinamiX October 5th, 2004, 10:15 PM

I has recently stopped my pyromaking tendancy (because of a dumbass-smoke bomb power underestimating accident), but I'm still interested in electronics: so i've made a
REALLY EASY TO DO :D timer device for detonation.
It consists of an electric watch with an alarm connected to a transistor which amplify the electric signal incomming to the mini-speaker. The transistor engages a small relay that
starts an electric detonator (I've made one with a tiny bulb filled with BP).
The only problem of this device is that it needs a 9v battery, that quadruples the size of the whole thing. With your batteries, it will be small enough to be directly integrated in
your *Materials*.
If you find a watch that's small enough, you even would be able to integrate the whole thing in a pen. :)
A-BOMB October 5th, 2004, 11:00 PM

There is an even easier timer, using a capacitor, transitor, resistor and battery(and a switch if you want to go luxury). You charge the capacitor to a specific voltage(dictated by
the battery in this case) and connect it with the resistor to the transitor in the was that it keeps the circuit open till the capacitor is depleted, then the transistor closes the circuit
with the detonator and battery. boom! You would have to experiment with the capacitor/resistor arrangement, to find the right combination for the time you need,(you could
maybe use a varible resistor to vary the time) But once you found the right combination you could put all the compents battery/timer/det/switch all into a pen, just stab it into
you block of explosive and click-click(not unlike that james bond movie with the explosive pen)

I've alredy done a timer like you are saying, but the advantage of the watch based system is that you can configure a 1 second precision time and let it up to 24 hours.
Compared to a resistor who has a maximal precision of +-5% (which makes +-30 minutes for 10 hrs). Also, if you want to change the time, one the device installed, it would
be impossible.
In the other case, the capacitor system is good for a small time: like 10 seconds. In fact, i uses it instead of a long fuse.
By the way The pen was just an example to show the miniaturisation :D
FireBomb October 5th, 2004, 11:53 PM

I would think that the size and weight of these batteries would make it perfect for use in a homemade rocketry, or other such devices which require lightweight small
components such as this.
mongo blongo October 6th, 2004, 12:39 PM

DinamiX- What transistor were you using to get saturation off such a small voltage? I have been looking for such a transistor for some time.
Has anyone seen these batterys in the UK? I can't find them, even from the most popular electronics suppliers.

Mongo, any transistor that you can find will do the job (I found mine in a broken TV), but actually, the system i made used 2 transistors instead of 1 and also a capacitor:
The first transistor amplifyes the sound and is connected to a capacitor/resistor circuit that converts the electric signal to constant DC (else your relay would go constantly on/
off). Then there's another transistor that amplify the DC to be of sufficient voltage for engaging the relay...
And about batteries, there exists other pretty small batteries, like the A23 used for alarms and remote systems.It's 10mm diameter x 28mm long, and it produces 12v, which is
sufficient for almost all circuits we make. They arent as small as nbk's, but it's not hard to find and you can by it for 1$ (I buy only cheap brands, because the same duracell
battery costs 8$! And anyway I dont care of it's lifetime because the lifetime of all things i uses rarely exceeds 1sec :) ). If you need them, they are generally classed as
LR23A, LRV08 or MN21.

These would be good for small projectile munitions, as it's lithium (cold-tolerant/long-life), very small and light, and has decent voltage.
I was thinking that the insulated battery could be free-floating in a slightly larger diameter tube of insulator material, with a small spring around it, and two crimp rings on both
ends of the tube, the front one be affixed, and the back one lightly connected to the back end.
Upon set back from firing, the battery would be forced back into the rear crimp ring, that would latch onto it.
Upon impact, the battery, with the now attached one-half of the firing circuit, would slam forward into the other crimp ring, completing the circuit and exploding the munition.
I'd imagine there'd be a small delay in the initation, measured in milliseconds, which might be put to good use in a wall-penetrating munition to allow it to explode inside the
target structure, instead of against the outside wall like it would if it was instantaneous.
thrall October 9th, 2004, 04:31 AM

What about this
http://www.powerpaper.com/5_news_pr/pr030902.htm :cool:

You could use it as a power supply for a small tazer-like projectile. Just wire it so that the voltage is tripled or more, then it will cause all sorts of problems once the skin is
broken, as all the muscles contract. AC would be best.
Another idea would be to use it for the chemicals inside it as well as the power it puts out - lithium reacts with water, and hence blood, to form hydrogen and heat, which
wouldn't be fun if you had just been shot with it, either.
Combine the two, and it would be a bullet that hit fairly hard, and ensured knockdown if the skin was broken, along with caustic burns and severe out-gassing, all in one. Just
file the case down so it ruptures, or notch it so it shears open.
As for things with power requirements, well, there are plenty of ideas for light seeking projectiles out there, or radio controlled, etc. which need very small components. If
anyone would make and sell cheap quadrant detectors, the way would be open for these.
Finally, take the case off, and use the reaction of the lithium with water to make hydrogen, and burn the hydrogen for thrust, letting you make a small ramjet projectile or
rocket motor that is powered by water.
On a different note, where did your new sig come from, NBK?

The sig's from The 38 Strategems. A book about ancient chinese martial strategies, like Sun Tzu's Art of War.
It means to give something in the hopes of attracting something of greater value, but, instead, ending up getting something even less valuable back.
The equivalent of "Casting pearls before swine". ;)
They know who they are.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Cutting trees with detcord
Log in
View Full Version : Cutting trees with detcord
JV44 November 1st, 2004, 07:05 PM

Does anyone here know the formula that correlates the number of wraps of detcord to a given diameter of a tree?
I will be using detcord with 100g PETN/m, but of course I can use information on any other weight as well. I plan to do the blasting on November 13th, will post some pictures
afterwards.
Doug November 2nd, 2004, 03:36 AM

I have a friend who was a British Paratrooper. He has told me in the past that he has used this method for rapid clearing of landing sites. I will ask him if he has any
information of value. Is there a particular diameter of tree you are intending to fell, or will there be a few of differing sizes?
I have a feeling (knowing what Para's are like) they probably just wrapped round as much as they could, but I will ask him anyway.
JV44 November 2nd, 2004, 03:41 AM

That would be very helpful, if you could get some information from your friend. Maybe he even knows the correct formula, although you are absolutely right to assume they
never used it correctly........
The trees I will be working on should be about 10"-15" in diameter.
Ropik November 2nd, 2004, 02:32 PM

My demolition handbook says that you can cut trees up to 15 cm in diameter with one wrap of normal detcord per one cm of diameter. Sad to say, no notice about "what's the
grams per meter count for this damn detcord" is present, but the 100 g/meter cord has much more power than standart one I am sure.
JV44 November 2nd, 2004, 02:55 PM

"Normal" detcord would probably be 12g/m, one wrap of that per cm sounds about right. That would translate to one wrap of the heavy cord per 8cm of diameter. Do they
give a percentage by which this has to be increased for larger trees?
I guess 40g-detcord would be better suited to the application than the 100g-cord I will be using. However, my non-commercial license is limited to 500m of detcord, no weight
specified-of course I would not use anything other than the heaviest cord I can get my hands on.
SweNMFan November 2nd, 2004, 03:01 PM

My army's detcord contains 10g/m PETN and we where tought to use 1 wrap around per 10cm diameter (rounding up)
JV44 November 2nd, 2004, 07:02 PM

One wrap per 10cm sounds like very little to me-only about 3 grams or 45 grains of PETN for a 10cm tree?
Boomer November 3rd, 2004, 11:57 AM

One wrap per 10cm diameter? 3g for a 10cm tree? NO!
60g for a 2 meter monster tree? NEVER!!! :rolleyes:
They either told you bullshit, or they meant millimeters! And even then the charge weight must increase with the square of the diameter.
The blasters manual says charge weight = dia x dia / 200 for internal charges, and charge weight = dia x dia / 40 for external charges (in inches and pounds). IT advises
to either put it all on one side, or on two opposing sides if both charges can be detonated in the same instant.
Assuming a complete wrap, initiated at two points, is at least as efficient as two opposed charges, this translates to 10 wraps of the 100g-cord or 100 wraps of the 10g-cord for
a 10 tree. This rules out the thin cord (100-150 meters per tree!). It also explains why Ropiks book says up to 15cm : for usual cords it is waste if more than a few wraps
are needed.
I would try a different approach: Bring a battery drill and drill two holes at 90 degree, nearly at the same height, 90% diameter deep, then insert the 100g-cord to full length. I
bet this works for at least the 10 trees, especially if they bear load. I have split 15 OAKS with ONE cartridge of 30% ammonia dynamite in well stemmed holes! In contrast to
cartridges you need a much smaller (but longer) drill, making it easier for the battery.
Ropik November 3rd, 2004, 12:58 PM

Trees more than about 15 cm in diameter look like mummies when you try to wrap around them enough meters of detcord, yes.
Boomer, charge wrapped around the entire circumference of a tree is much more effective than one placed on the side. Another book of mine says: "When you can wrap the
charge completely around the tree, reduce it's weight by one-third".
Charges placed in the demolitioned thing are always more effective than ones placed on the surface - no energy is wasted and "blown away" from the target - , but I think
that somebody interested in cutting trees with a detcord will be after the shortest time of preparation of the whole shot and the most simple way to prepare trees for it, not
after the most economical way to put them down.
JV44, 10" trees are pretty much too grown up to cut easily with the external primacord charge(though I never saw a 100g/meter detcord, sounds to me like very pretty
handful(or cordful?) of power). In your place, I would extract the PETN and make simple plastique with a vaseline. After this, I would proceed to cut the trees with normal
charge, maybe mudcapping them - depends on number of trees. If you can prepare the blasting site, definitely go for the Boomer's advice.
Good luck.
JV44 November 3rd, 2004, 01:44 PM

I am not licensed to extract explosives from detcord. As I have to notify the local authorities prior to every blasting operation, I always have to expect someone at the blasting
site to oversee the work. The cord by itself will have to do. 100g/m is fairly powerful and should work well, I hope. There used to be a brand named "Resa-Schnur" with 300g/
m, which would be perfekt. It does not seem to be available in Germany anymore though.
This is a system someone recommended for fast application of the charges.

http://www.thw-halberstadt.de/fotos/Tauchen%20HBS%2005.2004/image004.jpg
JV44 November 13th, 2004, 10:40 AM

Today I verified experimentally that one wrap of 100g/m Detcord per 10cm diameter works well indeed. I cut some trees and logs from 15cm to 35cm in diameter. Most cuts
were very clean, only one oak had some splinters left standing, although it was severed completely.
The noise was quite impressive without any confinement of the charges. Pictures and video footage will be available in a couple of days, if anyone is intererested.
JV44 November 14th, 2004, 11:13 AM

Here are some pictures of yesterdays experiments.
Before:http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/images/2-1.jpg
After: http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/images/2-4.jpg
Before:http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/images/3-1.jpg
After:http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/images/3-3.jpg
We also took some Videos:

Video1 (http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/spreng2-low.mpg), Video 2 (http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/spreng3-low.mpg)
hereno November 14th, 2004, 11:31 AM

Wow.. great stuff.
Thats some chunky cord, what is its main purpose? demolition? Im assuming its a little too expensive to just blow up trees with, of course its worth it for amusement value
(whats it worth?).
Thats an awful lot of smoke for PETN isnt it? Maybe I havnt used enough of it by itself to notice but usually I get an orange flash but not much smoke.
BTW.. "only" limited to 500m lol..
JV44 November 14th, 2004, 12:09 PM

Heavy cord has many applications, like demolition of thin concrete structures, contoured blasting in tunneling operations, cutting trees, blasting blocks out of rock and so forth.
500m of detcord isn't exactly a lot of explosives, just 50kg with the stuff I use. I can renew the license if I need more, but it is an annoying procedure. To put things in
perspective, for commercial blasting I commonly use 5000-8000kg of explosives and several hundred detonators in one shot.
The PETN itself does not produce a lot of smoke. The wrapping of the cord does, however. The smoke also smells a bit different than when you are using pure PETN.
hereno November 14th, 2004, 12:47 PM

Oh, I was assuming you can "hold" up to 500m at a time, as in you can keep buying up to that limit. Here theres a 100m limit that you can store without a magazine (non-
commercial) but you can keep buying it as much as you want.
The wrapping of the cord does, however
That explains it! I expect there would be quite a lot of filler in that cord to keep the explosive in place. More of a problem with the heavy stuff as she'd all run out the end!.

The PETN is used pure, except a small amount of dye to make it pink. There is no filler to keep keep the explosive in place, however it is pressed fairly well, so it does not
usually spill more than a couple of grains after you cut it. If you knead the cord you can easily empty any length of it though.

http://sn.allround-pc.com/spreng/images/frame2.jpg
A nice shot from one of the videos, quite an impressive fireball for a charge of less than 1000g.
hereno November 15th, 2004, 10:38 AM

Looking again at the pictures, it seems you went a lot further then 1 wrap per 10cm like you said, or are you refereing to other shots you done.
It would be interesting to find a decent sized tree, wrap it once with cord down the bottom, run it up a couple foot or so then wrap twice, up a bit more and wrap 3 times etc...
maybe using the 12g/m cord to join the rings together. That way you get a gauge of its "cutting ability". More interesting then just blowin'em up! It would sure make an
interesting photo .. *hint hint*
I wasn't clear, by "filler" I meant the ropey stuff below the plastic covering, meaning there is a lot more "wrapper" then meets the eye to create the smoke. (at least there is
"ropey" stuff in the stuff here :D )
vurr November 30th, 2004, 05:00 PM

when using TNT contact charge:
weight(grams)=diameter^2(centimeters) x coeff of tree
(=0.8 for dry aspen /1 for wet/;
=1 for pine ,fir /1.25 wet/;
=1,6 for dry birch,oak,maple/wet =2)
if diameter over 30 cm: multiple by (actual d)/30
inner charge is 1/4 of external (hole depht 2/3 diam )
and non-contact charge: W(kg-s) = 30 x treecoeff. x D(diameter of most distant wooden object to cut,metres) x R^2 (distance from charge/located at centre of tree group/
to most distant object's centre,metres)
SweNMFan December 3rd, 2004, 05:28 PM

I finaly found my field notes.. 1 wrap of our 10g/m detcord per cm diameter..

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > electric demolition - wipe out a building
Log in
View Full Version : electric demolition - wipe out a building
ProdigyChild December 4th, 2004, 09:16 AM

'EMP-bombs' are easily found on the internet, but all this seems to me like a discussion, what one could do with a nuclear bomb if he had one. But no one does.
So let's forget about EMP fairy tales and discuss what is really feasible for an amateur.
I've done lots of experiments with spark gaps recently and noticed the following:
a) My electronic equipment is not affected by air-transmitted pulses at all, not even if as close as 20cm. Allthough thousands of amps are switched through coils of a few uH.
Read: I don't believe in EMP bombs other than nuclear ones.
b) I had trouble with the wires more often than not, i.e. even an average current of 0.1A heated up cables :eek: Probably because of skin effect and massive pulsing (P =
R*Iav^2 =/= Integrate R*I(t)^2 dt )
So my idea is: provided I have access to the sockets within a building, can't I destroy some/all electronic equipment? Preferably without making too much noise or leaving
traces?
A few examples:
Almost every computer has some varistors in its power supply. Destruction of the electronics seems hard at first glance to me but can can happen between mains voltage an
varistor. Some supplies have a fuse in between. This is the point, where one could attack. Another approach see below.
Other equipment has an transformer only (radios, etc...) and too much series resistance to be destroyed easily. A possible attack would be RF to heat up the transformer. Any
other ideas?
Simple equipment is only a resistor (coffee machine), maybe a filter between mains voltage and resistor. These are hard to attack, because they take pulses very easily
besides beeing switched off (disconnected) most of the time.
Motors typically have capacitors inside, some motors even electrolytic bipolar ones. I don't know, if electrolytic caps have a self-healing property like MP ones?? Once one half
of them is shout through, the elco explodes from electrolytic decomposition? :D
Power lines could be heated between 2 sockets by plugging a RF short circuit (capacitor) in one socket and introducing high power RF on the other (fed by the power lines of
course). Skin effect produces much higher resistance, so considerable power is dissipated. Eventually, the cable insulation melts and the cable hopefully shorts.
As the total load of the power lines one sees a mix of all this equipment. Some of it is switched off. Most attractive targets would be computers and TV's and thanks to 'standby
mode' and ATX they're in contact with the power lines at all times, hahahaha.
Pity, they have the varistors inside, that eat up HV pulses one would wish to feed into the power lines.
On the other side, access to a plug gives access to quite a lot power. A varistor has high power dissipation, because of the high voltage it shorts (like a Z-diode). So
permanently feeding in moderate overvoltage pulses would heat up and explode that bastard! Once the varistors are all gone, one could apply high voltage pulses to the mains
voltage to destroy all over-voltage sensitive equipment, including the computer switching power supplies.
As a last step we would like to destroy the houses main fuses by overheating with RF power without them triggering......
Pity, there's a zero crossing of AC power, so one can't maintain (as a final demolition step) a permanent arc-over of the fuses thus creating a 'less local' power fail.
Building a over-voltage feedback device is simple compared to building an conventional EMP-device (if such exists at all). A few diodes, a few caps, inductors and spark gaps
and a controlling electronic.
Basically, one can multiply mains voltage, charge up a cap and feed that voltage back into the power lines via spark gap. It always results in a RF oscillation of the LC circuit
formed by the cap and the inductance of the power lines. 50 or 60 discharges per second can release some power!
Would be a nice way to make you neighbours stop complaining about your chemical work and care about their own sh1t for a while :D
Marvin December 6th, 2004, 08:59 PM

Making an EMP bomb is far from trivial but its certainly feasable. How far it would reach for the effort involved is another matter.
If you have access to a mains socket in the building there is no need for high power destroying energies. The object of the attack would not be to damage as much equipment
in one go, its risky, its unsubtle. If you have access to a power point how about this idea... You build a small circuit that runs off mains and periodically on a random number
delivers a few ma to earth. It could be fitted inside of a mains socket, or inside a plug and noone would know. Say a timer for a week or so after its installed it starts and all
the place knows is every 3 hours or so randomly or once a week the breaker trips. If its a buisness the effects would be even more phenominal. Computers go down, everyone
loses files the routers go down. The engineers turn up and find no problems with the system, then maybe later they start replacing the breakers. If this was planned more
carefully than Ive thought about it, it could disrupt a buisness for weeks or more rarely for months. Make it look like an april fools joke, or someones revenge after being fired.
For a more local problem and a rare setting the fault is easier to find if its in a socket, but in a plug thats always on it might take months to attribute the fault to 1 device and a
lot of money in engineer bills.
Jacks Complete December 7th, 2004, 10:37 PM

Spread a few around the place, on different plug sockets, with different times to trip (or just totally random) and you would destroy the company! It would cost a fortune, and
eventually they would have to check every last socket and plug, etc. as there would be no pattern at all.
Another trick would be to undo a faceplate and wire the live pin to the earth. The instant the socket is turned on, *bang!* and the lights go out. Probably upset the equipment
which requires a good earth, too. This would work better on fused boards, rather than ECDs.
cyclonite4 December 24th, 2004, 11:44 AM

EMPs are just not worth the effort.
The amount of money, time, and effort that go into their construction contradicts its practicallity (in most cases, but not all).
I believe Marvin's idea holds the most merit, as it is simple, cheap, and much more effective because of its economical damage, and emotional effect (think what would be
going through your mind if you were an employee at an office and the power was going out randomly at extended intervals :D ).
A circuit as described by Marvin could be built smalle enough to fit behind the faceplate of a wall socket, just solder the connections from the inside and nothing will be
suspicious, because the socket can still be used as normal.
Very inspiring, thank you Marvin for the great idea :) .

Hmmm... nice idea Marvin, I have a semi-mechanical (hard to describe how it works, but cutting the power won't change it's settings or anything) 240v timer that can switch
appliances on or off in 15 minute increments throughout the day.
If it was set up to be active during only one interval, it would mean that there would be 15 minutes of every day where the circuit breaker tripped and would trip again in the
event that it was reset within that 15 minute period. While thinking about this, at first I thought that the problem would be that the power outage would occur at the same time
each day, but then I remembered that the timer doesn't function without power, but starts again as soon as the power is back on, meaning that the variations in the amount of
time that the power was left off by employees would ensure variation in the time that it cut out. It's hard to explain, but the power will cut again 23 hours and 45 minutes after
it's turned on, each and every time it's turned back on.
You could also set a few extra 15 minute intervals throughout the day for more frequent power cuts and even more randomness.
It would be best to wire it up in a location where it wouldn't be found easily (if at all) such as inside a roof space or some other concealed location that presents access to the
wiring. Yes, I know that rewiring live 240v cabling is risky, but I have experience with that... ;), wear 2 pairs of rubber gloves and use only insulated tools.
EDIT: I just re-read your post and noticed the bit about putting it inside a socket, I assume you mean taking the plastic cover off and putting it into the wall cavity behind?
That's a better idea than mine as you only need access to a power point or light switch inside the target building.

Definitely, Marvin's idea is fantastic! Simulation of someone/some device trickling current to earth requires very low power only, so a tiny device could do. Maybe the new pic-
controller (6 pins only, SOIC package) as a random time generator + 1 triac + 1 resistor (to AC power) and a minute power supply .
However, I was in a more dramatic mood when I mad my suggestion!

My assumption was I could get into the building, NOT into every room. And I tried to figure out, if I can harm the WHOLE buildings equipment, even though I can acces 1 socket
only, probably somewhere in the cellar. Of course, 'switch off' the heating at random has some demoralizing effect, too. But it wont stop a company from one moment to
another.
Marvin, why not suggest a schematic?
xyz December 25th, 2004, 09:56 PM

Ok, to explain what I'm talking about, I have attached a photo of the timer.
Upon closer inspection, it uses 30 minute time increments, not 15 minute ones like I had thought.
The beige plastic pins are inserted into the little holes for the times that you want things to turn on/off, so two need to be used (I removed one in the photo to show what they
look like).
Basically, while power is flowing through the timer, the outer part rotates slowly and switches things on or off as the plastic pins pass the lowermost point.
This eliminates the need for a seperate power supply for the timer, and although this setup is rather bulky in comparison to others, it is simple and reliable, and with a few
small modifications could be made to dump up to 10 amps to earth (it's maximum rating). Of course, you don't need to dump that much power, personally I'd just use 1 amp,
which is still massive overkill.
It's way too bulky to fit inside a light switch or powerpoint however, so it would need to go somewhere else.
EDIT: Damn, I just realised the stupidity of using this timer, as once the power has been cut, the timer will stop, and when the power is restored it will trigger the circuit
breaker again almost immediately, giving the timer no way of running for the 30 minutes that it needs to turn itself off again.
cyclonite4 December 26th, 2004, 11:16 AM

EDIT: I just re-read your post and noticed the bit about putting it inside a socket, I assume you mean taking the plastic cover off and putting it into the wall cavity behind?
That's a better idea than mine as you only need access to a power point or light switch inside the target building.
I assume your talking about the part on my post?

I decided to mention it as I did a similar thing at my school, but rather than a power-breaker, I had a nichrome wire wrigged up to the switch with a smoke composition inside.
Based on the photo of the timer you have, I doubt it would be able to fit in the small space behind a wall socket. Look in an Altronics, Jaycar or Dick-Smith (You live in
australia, of course :D) store at kits with relays in them, I've seen kits with timed relays, condition-activated relays (conditions such as temperature, etc.), and RF controlled
relays (so you can fuck with their power with the press of a button :P).
Then again, you can just build your own circuit based on an astable 555 timer, with a relay or high power transistor connecting the active wire to earth.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Safe(er) Detonation Ideas
Log in
View Full Version : Safe(er) Detonation Ideas
knowledgehungry December 22nd, 2004, 08:21 AM

I've been thinking a lot lately about w ays to detonate charges without using unstable and unsafe primaries. My goal was to come up with an idea for a detonating device that
would not go off with heat or shock. I have been thinking about a mechanical detonater. Instead of having a primary create the initial shock to detonate the secondary charge
perhaps using air pressure or another means of propulsion a piece of metal could be sent into the charge with the necessary force to detonate it(think of how bullets detonate
explosives). Obviously we will need a relatively shock sensitive explosive for this to work.
If you have any questions on this feel free to ask, I'm sorry that I didn't explain this as w ell as I possibly could. I'm rushing to get to school.
Anthony December 22nd, 2004, 01:37 PM

I don't think there are many w ay to deliver the necessary energy to detonate safe secondaries. The only one I can think of is EBW.
I think they used falling hammers/weights to detonate pure NG many years ago.
Does a safe primary fufill your requirement to avoid unsafe primaries? :)
Cyclonite December 22nd, 2004, 03:43 PM

Most secondary explosives can take a rifle round and thrown in a fire with little chance of detonation. As Anthony said the best way is w ith a safer primary and good sense of
course. There are some secondary explosives that might go off with a high enough electric current
SweNMFan December 22nd, 2004, 06:53 PM

PETN can be detonated when hit by a 7.62mm Nato round , tried it when I did my service. We made exploding targets wraping detcord around pieces of w ood then "plinked"
aw ay with a scoped HK G3..
~Phelixx~ December 22nd, 2004, 07:32 PM

While in the army, I saw in our book about explosives, that the plasticized PETN w e used could detonate if it were hit by a projectile with more that 840 m/s. So our C7A1's
weren't able to detonate them, but a .50 SLAP would probably do the trick!
Child-of-Bodom December 23rd, 2004, 04:20 AM

In part 3 (IIRC) of The Encyclopedia of Explosives and Related Items is a large table (or 2 tables) w ith impact sensitivity of bullets on a lot HE's, including the velocity to reach a
partial detonation, and a full detonation. Very interesting.
I don't think there are many w ay to deliver the necessary energy to detonate safe secondaries. The only one I can think of is EBW.
EBW is indeed dafe, but the electronics behind it MUST also be safe. I have made myself an electronic blast box, which can be connected w ith my EBW box. It use a delay relay
in my blast box, so I switch it on, switch it on to 'danger' and turn the sw itch for the delay-relay. After 30sec. the relay becomes active, and only then it can switch. Switching is
performed by a mobile phone, quick and dirty, but it works.
Another 'safe' option w ould be a shock tube, see the other topic. (If the MODS think it is usefull, merge them) f something like that could be made at home of course....
There is of course no safe primary, but I have to say that I like double salts. They are very shock insensitive, and detonate vigoriously in small amounts, you need a very small
amount for PETN. The procedure to make it is also piss easy.
I 'prefer' heat-instable primary's above shock instable primary's, as a shock is easier applied then heat. I think DDNP and lead azide are 2 very good primary's, but lead azide is
very toxic, and DDNP is rather hard to make.
Microtek December 23rd, 2004, 08:39 AM

Just go with the azo-clathrates. You can tailor the exact properties by changing the amount of sodium azide you add. If you prepare it according to Rosco's 4/12 variation you'll
get something quite similar to lead azide, in terms of both sensitivity and initiating ability, but using somewhat less sodium azide ( I couldn't tell you exactly how much ) you can
get a primary that is flame sensitive but doesn't do DDT unless confined, is about as shock sensitive as RDX and has a much greater chemical stability than DDNP ( or lead
azide; the azo-chlathrates don't react with CO2 the way lead azide does ).
Overall, this gives you a primary that is safer than your detonator base charge.
ProdigyChild December 23rd, 2004, 02:59 PM

Why not use mechanical dets? I've thought about such a few times but never tried so far. A strong spring can provide as much enery as a EBW w ire. Confinement of the primary
will be important in my opinion.
Come on, knowledgehungry, tell us more about your idea!

What about a mouse trap + a straw of AP as first try ;)
Skean Dhu December 23rd, 2004, 08:21 PM

The mouse trap sounds viable but, I w ouldn't want to be the one to set it up.
a centerpunch might be a better choice of "hammer"s
Microtek December 24th, 2004, 06:46 AM

Mechanical systems can malfunction just as chemical ones can; how much do you have to jostle a mousetrap compared to lead azide before they go off ?
You w ould presumably get around this problem by not cranking back the spring until just before firing, but how is this different from not inserting your blasting cap until just
before firing ?

Mechanical systems are most widespread and almost everyone considers them safe: firearms.
While a chemical system already contains the ignition energy, you have to put the enery into a mechanical system before it can fire. You do so by tensioning a spring. If you
don't tension it, it can't go off, really. But lead azide can. By spark, by dropping it, by static, by....
Same for electric systems. I do trust in a mechanical switch, but I wouldn't feel good if only a transistor w as betw een the battery and a det in my hand :eek:
knowledgehungry December 24th, 2004, 10:20 AM

The firearm system is more or less what I was thinking of when I brought this idea up. I was thinking that with a strong enough impact from the firing pin some of the more
shock sensitive secondaries could be detonated. If there is no way of using a secondary a relatively shock insensitive primary w ould be my next choice for this system. Since I
have a nice Christmas Break I will try to develop this idea a little more I might even get to some testing. I'll keep you posted.

A spring may contain the same amount of energy as an EBW, but over w hat time scale is it delivered to the explosive? Also, an EBW is simply a little thing on the end of a wire,
a mechanical thing will be harder to integrate into a blasting cap.
How would you bury a charge primed with a centre-punch initated cap?
The AP and mousetrap idea suffers from still using the exact sensitive primaries we are trying to get rid of...
Gun ammo is safe true, but then it is meant to go off in your hands (in the gun in your hands), w hereas you want to be a long w ay away from a typical explosive charge.
Prodigychild, the only time when a transistor (or switch!) would be the only thing between battery and det would be the few seconds before you pressed the firing button. Of
course you would never connect the battery (and keep the cap wires shunted) until the charge is primed, in place, and you have retired to a safe distance!
I'm not trying to piss on your fire Knowledgehungry, I just think this problem is a difficult one. Fused and electric caps have been developed over 100+ years, and are very safe
and reliable w hen used properly.

No, Anthony, as soon as one uses a remote trigger (no cable) trust in the triggering device is REQUIRED.
Give me a solution to work around this: as soon as one plugs in the det cable (or sw itches on the receiver) one needs to trust. Maybe it's 1m away from the main charge, but
by far not safe distance.
Trust start even earlier. Everytime I connect a electric det with the long w ire, I touch the cable w ith my hands to discharge a possible static, but still feel a bit uncomfortable.
Plugging on the other side of the cable is much more relaxed ;)

I'd have a switch between the reciever's battery and circuitry, with approx 10yards of wire on it. So you could at least be that far aw ay when you arm the charge. Even 10yds
from a 50lb charge should mean you escape serious injury - perhaps burst eardrums and a little bleeding from bodily cavities :)
SweNMFan December 26th, 2004, 11:09 AM

One could do as the Madrid bombers.. Use a mobile phone, Just make sure the cash card doesn't have a number that used to belong to a 17 year old girl :)
knowledgehungry December 26th, 2004, 01:39 PM

I'm not trying to piss on your fire Knowledgehungry, I just think this problem is a difficult one. Fused and electric caps have been developed over 100+ years, and are very safe
and reliable w hen used properly.
I understand that this will be difficult to do, but I also understand that this is the place with probably the largest collection of explosive enthusiasts and many of us are quite
bright. I'm not even saying that this sort of blasting cap w ould be an improvement over normal caps, rather I'm interested in coming up with new ideas.
Where my thinking has been lately in terms of this idea is using CO2 powerlets to propel a firing pin with the appropriate force to detonate the cap. Obviously this w ill not be an
everyday blasting cap as I am sure it will be very difficult to make, and as Anthony said w hen used correctly fused and electrical caps are very safe and reliable.
Another idea might be to have the firing pin propelled by an explosion for a primary, but the way that it could be made safer than your average blasting cap is that there would
be a safety mechanism that would stop the pin from hitting the booster even if the primary did go off accidentally.

AFAIK some type of detonator is w as developed in US. It consist from pyrotechnical charge (KClO4 + Zr or Zr hydride), metal element and HE.
Pyrotechnic mixture disperse a metal element to high speed on a few cm (or mm - i dont remember) base. HE initiated by shock of this element.
But... There is much more interesting and simple construction for safe detonation. NPED detonator is based on special pyrotechnic charge and HE like PETN or RDX. Detonation is
come from DDT. Check patents for NPED detonators: us4727808, us5385098, us6227116.
I tried to make some sort of it with pyrotechnical fuse. But I used a paper tube and its all failed. My first thing was a successive pressing of black powder (a very little - only for
next mix ignition), CuO/Al mix 70:30 and pressed RDX dust. There was a little bang with flash and calm rdx burning.
Other 3 stuff I made w ith more clever: ignition w as on surface pyrotechnic mix/rdx. Pyrotechnic mixture was KMnO4/S/Mg 50:6:40. Its one of the most powerful mixture for
petardes. There w as also flash and bang (with much more sound). But RDX did not detonate.
Next time I plan to use crystall RDX and more thick paper tube (2.5-3mm instead of 1.5mm). I think it needs a metal tube but I dont like to work with metal because I have a
metal fragment in my arm.
Microtek January 12th, 2005, 09:27 AM

It w ill be very hard to get RDX to detonate in this way. A much better choice would be PETN or well neutralized MHN.

PETN is sure preferable than RDX as more detonable HE. But I could not obtain quality pentaerytrite to make it.
From the other side RDX is much more ignitable than PETN and its important. Patent us4727808 discloses using RDX in examples not only PETN.
I am going to add a zink or aluminium dust to increase a burning speed of rdx initiation charge. I have read that I need very fine RDX for this detonator type.
I think the key to success is a strong shell and very small hole for fuse.
techtwit December 14th, 2006, 03:04 AM

Near the end of the "Easily made powerful blasting box" thread I tossed out some speculative ideas about using a large array of capacitors that could discharge enough Volts X
Amps to get an impulse in the low megaw att range through enough cheddite-as-booster to achieve detonation in some sort of ANFO main charge. The capacitors could be
controlled (charged and discharged) from a safe distance yet located quite close to the HE.
Sw itching is obviously presents a bit of challenge w hen were talking hundreds of amps at thousands of volts!
The basic theme here is to find w ays to maximise safety and convenience not only with the means of detonation but with the compounding and use of all the energetic
materials involved as well.
If anyone in the forum is interested in this approach to safe detonation please read the two posts mentioned above and give some feedback.
Alexires December 16th, 2006, 02:48 AM

Personally, If I were going to detonate something big enough to require remote detonation, I would have the receiver connected to the blasting cap by a LONG wire.
Also, maybe have a mechanism to drop the blasting cap into the main charge, so that in the off chance it does prematurely ejaculate.....I mean detonate, it wouldn't set the
main charge off.
LibertyOrDeath September 10th, 2007, 10:15 PM

Apologies for bringing up an older thread, but I thought it might be justified here. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
A search of the forum has not turned up any mention of the paper titled "Nonprimary-explosive, hot-wire detonator," w hich I happened upon in the Los Alamos archives. I
thought it would be a good idea to post it here:
http://ww w.sciencemadness.org/lanl2_a/lib-www /la-pubs/00318545.pdf
Briefly, a mere ~1 W (1 Amp, 1 Ohm) of pow er applied to nichrome wire is used to cause PETN to undergo a DDT w ithin the detonator. Diagrams and test results are provided.
I found this paper very interesting and relevant to this thread, and hopefully members who haven't seen it will find it useful.
On another note, I apologize to knowledgehungry for inadvertently "stealing" his idea regarding mechanical detonation with my post here:
http://ww w.roguesci.org/theforum/showpost.php?p=93277&postcount=19
I wasn't aware that he had proposed the idea first. :o
Thermiteisfun September 22nd, 2007, 06:10 PM

I remember somew here on another thread that CuO+Al is electrostatically sensitive, If I manage to get a paycheck larger than $150 I will try to make a detonator using that as
a charge. I'm sure I could make one with 2 camera caps 300v at I think 500mF.
Setharier June 28th, 2008, 05:13 PM

Hope this is not mentioned before and therefore render this unnecessary, but I came with idea of causing detonation by extreme heat. What I mean, is thermite. Could, for ex.
ANFO or even AN only get detonated by the extreme heat of thermite? Has anyone ever tried or heard about this? It is just since many explosives will just simply blow up if
exposured to extreme impact, friction or heat.
Charles Owlen Picket June 28th, 2008, 08:47 PM
There were some guys that were into Tesla Coils & High Energy (non-chemical on chemical) materials that came VERY close to getting EBW setups to det outside of a closed
container. You REALLY need to know your physics for that sort of experimenting. Or at least have a solid grounding (pun intended) in electrical or chemical engineering.
If you have ever w orked with popping wire via CD or just heavy amperage you'd see that it VERY possible to get the energy needed. But you have to have the Joules upstairs
to make it workable outside the lab.
fluoroantimonic July 4th, 2008, 03:05 AM

After looking at that file LibertyOrDeath linked, EBW dets look within reach. For someone with a lathe this would be very easy. For us mortals w ith less than multi thousand
dollar tools it would require a bit more ingenuity, but seems doable.
The header could be made from a 10mm diameter bolt or rod, cut off to about 25mm length and drilled out through the center, first with a 2mm drill all the way through to
make the transition barrel, then with a 5mm in one end down 10mm or so to make the beginnings of the donor explosive housing, then drilled w ith an 8mm bit down 5mm on
the other end to make booster housing. The leads would then be attached by casting them into place with epoxy resin after attaching the bridge wire. Then the remaining open
chamber could be pressed with PETN or ETN, or even possibly filled with cast ETN. Fortunately the explosive works better at lower densities for DDT so pressing shouldn't be too
hard.
While plain nichrome is easy to get, the paper calls for Nichrome V, a higher temperature alloy. It may not be critical but I figure it would be worth the extra money to have
more reliability. It is not easy to find but I did find a source.
http://ww w.coleparmer.com/catalog/product_view .asp?sku=1420320
Inoculating loops, pack of 12, 24 gauge (0.051 mm) wire, ~75mm of it per unit. For $65 thats enough to make about 300 detonators...
A bridge wire w ith a gap of about 2mm and a resistance of 1 ohm would require 3 volts to get the specified current for reliable detonation. This is fortunately a perfect
application for a lithium polymer battery, an extremely small one could release this amount of power. And at the just the right voltage too.
I think ETN would be ideal for this, sensitive, easy, cheap, safe. MHN comes to mind too. I'm sure there are some others.
Intrinsic July 16th, 2008, 04:43 PM

In comparison, the diffrences between standard nichrome, and nichrome V seem pretty minor:
From w ikipedia -
Material Resistance
(ohm-cmil/ft) (ohm-cm)
Nichrome 675 112.2 e-6
Nichrome V 650 108.1 e-6
From metal suppliers online -
Nichrome - Nichrome V
Density (lb / cu. in.) 0.304 - 0.304
Specific Gravity 8.2 - 8.2
Specific Heat (Btu/lb/Deg F - [32-212 Deg F]) 0.107 - 0.107
Electrical Resistivity (microhm-cm (at 68 Deg F)) 675 - 650
Melting Point (Deg F) 2550 - 2550
Mean Coeff Thermal Expansion 0.13 - 0.12
(sorry it didn't seem to like my table too much)
Are the differences that great to w arrant the trouble of finding nichrome V at a decent price? McMaster Carr sells standard nichrome wire by the spool at fairly competitive prices.
fluoroantimonic July 16th, 2008, 04:55 PM

Yeah.. there doesn't seem to be much of a difference according to that information. From what I read (can't remember w here) Nichrome V has a higher working temperature.
Not that much different though. I'm sure the plain stuff w ould work fine too.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > R oll cap detonator?
Log in
View Full Version : Roll cap detonator?
Marmaloon D e c e m ber 31st, 2004 , 05:01 PM

W hilst reading a copy of 'The Science of Revolutionary Warfare', a friend of mine told m e they espied a way to detonate (at
least 19th ce ntury) dynamite. The m ethod described wa s to obtain a 'pen top' and trim a n d p a c k i n a b o u t 2 5 c a p s m e a n t f o r a
child's cap gun, then inserting the visco in there and using that to detonate the m ain charge of dynam ite(?). In the interests of
science, m y friend obtained som e roll caps, just the plain old variety that comes from C h i n a , s o m e thin wall 1/4 inch inside
diam eter alum inum t u b e , s o m e e p o x y , s o m e h o b b y f u s e , a s q u inch of d o u b l e b a s e p o w d e r . T h e y s t a t e t h e y p a c k e d i n a b o u t
250 - 300 caps carefully punched out and inserted into the bottom of the tube with a section of 3/16 dowel, the closed end of
the tube was sealed with epoxy, then they put in the fuse and powder as there was about an inch of space left in the tube,
sealed the fuse in with epoxy, and tried it out. From his account, the report was about equal to the report o f the .30 /30 rifle,
a n d t h e t u b e was shredded.
Chris The Great January 1st, 2005, 04:08 PM

I'm not really surprised, after all they used black powde r to deto nate dynamite as well. C aps would need to be used in larger
quantities, but I would think it would get the job done.
A l s o , m o d e r n 8 s h o t c a p s a r e a m i x o f p o t a s s i u m c h l o r a t e a n d r e d p h o s p h o r u s . T HAT will set off your dynam ite, although it's

fairly hard to get the stuff out since they are tiny and have sand in them.
I t a l s o l o o k s l i k e a g r e a t y s o u rce of red P in a pinch tho ugh, as these are sold everywhere and you just squish them a n d d r o p
in hot water to get the P out. Problem is you're going to s p e n d m a y b e $ 2 0 f o r m aybe a gram (haven't tried it yet). More on
that when I try it out and see if it's valid, in a d ifferent thread as well, where it won't be off topic :p
knowledgehungry January 2nd, 2005, 10:17 AM

I'm sure borrowing the caps would not be difficult.
FragmentedSanity January 3rd, 2005, 08:47 AM

If you can find them , paper starter caps (used to start races and such) are a better source than toy caps. They contain a
considerable ( for an OTC cap anyway) am ount of explosive - which is accessable by simple peeling back the wax paper. I
u s e d t o b e a b l e t o b u y t h e m O T C f o r $ 5 . 0 0 p e r 1 0 0 , b u t I havent tried it in a while. Of course schools and sporting clubs are
also a useful source.
I t d o s e n t h a v e t h e s a m e a p p e a l a s b l o w i n g s o m ething up with a childs toy tho.
I'm also fairly sure Ive seen caps that containe d m ercury fulm inate - which should work reasonbly well as a det.
Ropik January 3rd, 2005, 10:02 AM

I've never seen any starter pistol made for ove rsized paper caps. All of them were made for small blank ca rtridges.
About similar m ethod of detonating dynamite: In "Guerilla's arsenal" David Harber says: "The prim er in large-calibre rifle
cartridge is capable of initiatin g d y n a m ite with at least 40% nitro with a fair degree of relia bility", m a y b e e v e n l a r g e b l a n k
cartridge with a plastic top would be a possibility. Tear o ff the plastic, insert the ig niter and seal with wax. O ff it go. See
Guerilla's arsenal to see what I mean.
Marmaloon January 3rd, 2005, 02:57 PM

I a m not sure if the originator of this method, Mr. Johann Most, was aware that nitro glycerin based dynam ite is succeptible to
low order detonation. Maybe this is all he was getting when he tried this m e t h o d o u t o n h i s d y n a m ite. It's p retty hard to say
over 100 years after his book was written. By m y calcula tions, 300 caps would contain about 35-40 grains of Arm strong's
m ixture, so that's approaching 3 grams, I have read som e publications stating th at 1.5 grams of picric acid b o o s t e d b y a
l e s s e r a m ount of prim a r y w o u l d b e g o o d e n o u g h t o d e t o n a t e R D X b a s e d e x p l o s i v e s , b u t I a m g u e s s i n g a r m s t r o n g ' s m ixture is
s o m ewhat less powerful than picric acid, for example. This would be an interesting avenue of experim entation, to try the roll
cap detonators out on various explosives to see if you get a high order detonation out of it. I don't have the m e a n s o r t h e
lisce nces to pursue this . . .
SweNMFan January 7th, 2005, 03:16 PM

I was in a toy story today and I found C ap refills for a toy shotgun.. 24 caps and 2 m ini 12guage shells.. The shells is in two
parts, a metal part with an anvil and a rem ovable plastic part.. In the package it reads:
Contents of these caps is less that 0.2 0 grains per cap.

C o m p o s i t i o n : P o t a s s i u m C h l o r a t e , M a g n e s i u m O x i d e , R ed Phosphorus Synthetics glue fossil m eal cork sawing
Edison Giocattoli is the m anufacturer and here they cost around $3 to buy..
And they have a web at http://www.edisongiocattoli.it/
Just hot glue the "bottom " of the plastic part (as it have a hole thru it) , fill it with you favorite prim ary. Put BP in the metal
part and a cap..
The plastic part have an ID of 9.1mm and when metal part is inserted the internal lenght is 29m m so there is around 1,8cm 3
in it.. The m etal part have an ED of 11 m m :)
W hen I was younger I rem oved the m ixture fro m 2 5 0 - 3 50 plastic caps and put it in a piece of pipe from a telescopic antenna
o n a r a d i o a n d e x p l o d e d i t i n s i d e a 5 L p l a s t i c m ilitary water flask (that have fairly thick walls). The bang was way louder than I
was expecting and sh rapnel pierced the bottle and embedded it self in the plaster wall.. And yes I did it indoors.. That thing
could have ripped m y fingers off..
bcc1985s12 June 18th, 2006, 08:22 PM

A l s o , m o d e r n 8 s h o t c a p s a r e a m i x o f p o t a s s i u m c h l o r a t e a n d r e d p h o s p h o r u s . T HAT will set off your dynam ite, although it's
fairly hard to get the stuff out since they are tiny and have sand in them.
W hen you state that caps wou ld need to be used in larger quantities than bp to d etonate the dyna m i t e , I a m n o t s u r e y o u
understand the power of the child's toy caps. Em pty the powder from abo ut 70 caps(the type that come in red plastic 8-shot
rings).
This cost's about 69 cents around m y house. This is relatively sim ple and quick once you get the hang of it.
Put the powd er in a gell cap(a vitamin capsule, like for activated charcoal), with a small ball-bearing on one or both ends,
inside the capsule as well. If you do not have ball-bearings, you can use BB's, or even sm all stone s. Tape it clased, and throw
it, it will make a loud bang.
It looks like this, cap powder in the center, and tape holding the two sides of the capsule together.
(O:::::O)
A n e q u a l a m o u n t o f h o m e m ade black powder or even store-bought reload cannot m a k e a b a n g s o u n d s o l o o s e l y c o n f i n e d , i n

such sm all quantities. C ap powder is powerful, and could undoubtedly be incredibly useful in homem ade detonators. I will
attem pt one such detonator and post the results.
++++++
Don't quote entire posts, only the relevant portion.
NBK
Chris The Great June 19th, 2006, 06:19 PM

Roll caps, wh ich I refered to in the first sentence, do not use the p o t a s s i u m chlorate/red p hosphorus mixture which is in the 8
shot caps. AFAIK roll caps are blackpowder and some other stuff to m ake it im pact sensitive. It is not as powerful as the 8shot
cap m ixture, which I did recom m end as an improvished primar mixture (although you wou ld need a much larger quantity than
if yo u just used som e prim ary HE).
Bert June 21st, 2006, 11:41 AM

Roll caps will generally contain Potassium chlorate and Antim ony sulfide, perhaps with som e S u l f u r a n d a c a r b o n a t e . Y o u m a y
wish to explore the use of the friction ignition tips of strike anywhere m a t c h e s . . . C h e a p e r a n d e a s i e r t o h a r v e s t t h a n t h e 8 s h o t
caps.
If you really want to live dangerously, Boom er described a m ethod of separating the Silver fulm ina te from the gravel in throw
down snaps. Me, I'd be way too scared to handle any of these things dry in the necessary amounts. Not worth a finger for an
e x p e r i m ental blasting cap-
Marmaloon July 20th, 20 06, 03:3 8 AM

R o l l C a p s m ade of black powder and sand? Interesting, that's the first tim e I've heard of that. . .
nbk2000 July 20th, 20 06, 05:1 1 AM

BP and sand? How the hell would that work? BP is virtually im mune to crush initiation, and sand isn 't going to spark.
W hereas, KC l O 3 l o o k s l i k e s a n d g r a n u les, and antimony sulfide is black/grey, so maybe that's what you're seeing.
Marmaloon July 22nd, 2006, 08:32 PM

D o e s a n y o n e k n o w t h e link for the Journal of Pyrotechny? There is a feature article in one of their recent journals about what
has been discovered about roll caps. At least I think it's the Journal of Pyrotechny, published in the States'. You all have a fine
weekend. Pray for the people overseas.
Marmaloon July 22nd, 2006, 08:46 PM

http://www.jp yro.com /journal/issue_21/index.htm#Mniszewski21
There you have it lads, all laid out for you. Bee n dragging my butt about ordering a copy.
dana_m_h July 26th, 20 06, 05:3 8 PM

W hen I was younger I took one whole roll of ca ps and hit it with a ham mer .... the percussion was imm ense... the h a m m er
flipp ed out of my hand and I couldnt hear right for 3 da ys. These have way m ore power than we give credit to. If you were to
d i s a s s e m b l e s e v e r a l o f t h e b o x e s y o u w o u l d h a v e s o m ething very powerful indeed.
Cobalt.45 July 27th, 20 06, 08:2 7 PM

In the link Marm aloon provided above, one article state s that yields approaching 80% of that of TNT were achieved. Obviously,
a ve ry large am ount of caps.
W ould this point to a com position m ore akin to a type of flash o r more likely as mentione d before, primer com p ? S e e m s like
an awfully big yield, from just caps...
W ho was it that said, "There are three kinds of lies; lies, damn lies, and statistics"? You can get num bers to do you r bidding,
often.
BTW , t h a n k s f o r t h a t l i n k , M a r m a l o o n . T o n s o f g o o d l i n k s c o n t a i n e d o n t h e i r h o m e p a g e .
FullMetalJacket August 11th, 2006, 04:49 AM

I n t h e " C i a G u i d e t o I m p r o v i s e d S a b o t a g e " T h e y r e c c o m e n d a m ethod of (slightly) remote detonation by threading a length of
detcord into a blank or de-bulleted cartridge and firing it from a rifle.
I used to use these little roll-caps as an impact ignition source though.
texaspete August 11th, 2006, 07:12 PM

I n t h e " C i a G u i d e t o I m p r o v i s e d S a b o t a g e " T h e y r e c c o m e n d a m ethod of (slightly) remote detonation by threading a length of
detcord into a blank or de-bulleted cartridge and firing it from a rifle.
W ouldn't the hypersonic shockwave destroy the rifle? (assum ing its PETN detcord)
+++++++++
Yes, it does. It's a one-tim e way of doing it, so you use the shittest rifle your band of m erry men have. :)
NBK
Marmaloon August 21st, 2006, 02:51 PM

Just got m y Journal in the mail, to paraphrase, what they did was take a small tube filled with flash mix, initiator wa s a n
electric m atch, tube was just the right size to fit snugly in the concavity form ed by 3 rolls o f caps. 8 0percent TNT equivalency
was reached with a full case of 1200 ro lls, the event was not com pletely understood, although sympathetic detonation was
suspected as the cause. A secondary effect was observed m ost probably due to the pulverized pap er com p o n e n t o f t h e c a p s
burning away. They initially tried using an initiator comp osed of stacked caps, but this failed to pro p a g a t e t h e d e t o n a t i o n . T h i s
m akes sense as the explosive content is not 100 percent with that type of arrangem e n t . t h e C a p t h e y d i d h a v e s o m e s u c c e s s
with was about 3 inches long, 1/4 id, 70/30 mix.The flash mix 'fusee' they used was about 1/2 tnt equivale ncy by itself.
W hat prom pted the research was an unfortunate accident som ewhere in the world recently where 2 employees of a toy factory
were killed when they were operating a b u b b l e p a c k a g i n g m achine set up for wrapping roll caps.
Marmaloon September 2 nd, 2006, 01:23 PM

Another bit o f their re search has revealed that on average, their computations revealed th at each cap contains on average
1.85 m illigram s of cap mixture, which seem s l i k e a n i m p o s s i b l y s m all am ount, so you'll excuse m e for m iscalculating the
actual am ount in the caps I calculated previously. They cam e to this figure by cutting circles with a paper punch between the
dots, getting a large given am ount, and then p unching out the dots, sam e g i v e n a m o u n t .
Diabolique S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2006, 01:12 PM

Marm aloon, I believe it was Alfred Nobel who first used BP filled detonators to initiate dynam ite. As for sand in the caps, I was
told that it is to increase friction when the cap was struck, helping set off the BP fines.
It m ay be better to use com m ercial or well m a d e e x p e d ient BP - no sand. Carefully crush the grains a few at a time -
inevitably, some will go off.
I u n d e r s t a n d that BP squibs have been used to initiate flake TNT. I wonder if flak e TNT ca n be used to initiate PETN?
Marmaloon S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2006, 08:41 PM

It would seem that going with high powered flash powder would be preferrable to the roll caps.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Measuring VoD electronically
Log in
View Full Version : Measuring VoD electronically

I have been around for two years now, and this is the first thread I start outside the WC. You will see some more in the next time, probably one about optimising yield towards
nitric acid (instead of optimising for the stuff to-be-nitrated, while using access acids). Another will be about speeding up synths, while still having optimal safety and
neutralisation. But let me start with my favourite: Electronic VoD Measurement!
As mentioned, I built a VoD-Meter with a processor that uses two ionisation probes in the column of explosive. Having only two wires cut by the detonation front needs too long
columns, because the hot gasses behind the front stay conductive. Instead, I put two pairs of twisted, insulated wires into the charge at a given distance, which are
successively shorted by the plasma of the det front. The micro counts the time between (at 20 MHz) and displays the result on some 7-segment LEDs.
Here are the first 10 results as a starting point, I will go on testing and would appreciate feedback. If possible, I will test compositions other forumites suggest, but don't ask for
HNIW or ONC, and please do not send me your samples by post either...
To avoid low order detonation, and to always have the same conditions, I use steel pipes of 10, 14 or 20 mm ID, with 1mm walls, unless noted. Sensor distance is always
200mm, unless noted. The cap is always the same too, a compound cap with 2g MHN compressed to 1.7g/ccm at 10000PSI, with 0.5g at 1.4g/ccm pressed on top, followed by
0.5g hand pressed AP. They are made from 9mm ID brass capsules, deep-drawn with integral bottom, 0.3mm walls and 40mm long, top seal is epoxy. Most are electric,
sometimes I use fuse though. The VoD-Meter has only 1m sensor cable, but is placed behind a concrete wall and survived well until now.
Given are the composition, the pipe ID, density and filling pressure, counter reading in microseconds (rounded), plus the calculated VoD in meter per second (rounded to 3
digits).
Test 1
AN dynamite with 40% NG, 50% AN and 10% wheat flour.

D = 1.45 g/ccm pressed at 200 PSI (exuded NG above that pressure).
Counter reading 36s, VoD = 5550 m/s.
(NOTE: Aluminium pipe 8mm ID, 1mm walls)
Test 2
Pure fine HDN, dried at 50C for a day.

D = 1.4 g/ccm pressed at 1000 PSI, 10mm ID pipe.
In contrast to most people's opinion, it propagated well even at 10mm dia.
Test 3
HDN dynamite with 40% HDN, 60%.

Counter reading --s, VoD = ---- m/s.
(NOTE: Fragment must have cut second wire, or I mixed up the sensor cables :p )
Test 4
50% MHN + 50% RDX, intimately mixed fine crystals.

D = 1.25 g/ccm pressed at 500 PSI, 6.3mm ID pipe.
(NOTE: 1/4" cardboard pipe, 45mm probe distance)
This test was done to see if the wires are sheared against the hole in the pipe wall, or shorted by the plasma. It works in cardboard, therefore it is No 2.
Test 5
HDN gelatine dynamite with 45% NG, 5% NC, 40% AN, 6% HDN, 4% flour.
At least equal to 65% straight dynamite! Replacing wood pulp with HDN must have helped.
Test 6
HDN/NS gelatine dynamite with 17.5% NG, 17.5% NS, 45% AN, 15% HDN, 5% flour.
Really high for so little NG! Cheap SC explosive (was tried, gave 50+ mm penetration in steel with a 1" cone)
Test 7
NS dynamite with 65% AN and 35% NS (from SA/AN/starch 13:5:2 in 2h @ 45C).

Test 8-10
APAN with 12% AP, D = 1.03 g/ccm, pressed @ 500 PSI.

10mm ID pipe: Counter reading 56s, VoD = 3570 m/s.
This shows that for APAN, diameter has less influence than for other AN explosives, and max. velocity is reached sooner (ANFO = 6+ inches, donarite = 2+ inches).
To be continued ... :)
Myrol January 24th, 2005, 11:10 AM

Excellent work Boomer! You are a real genius. :cool:
Umm, it would be cool if you could test ANNM in different percentages NM. Perhaps a 60/40 ANNM and a 75/25er one. My favourite ANNMAl is 65/25/10 it could be also a good
Idea to test it wich influence Aluminium does REALLY make!
Ohh, APAN 80% AN and 20% AP or APANAl 75% AN 12,5% AP and 12,5% Al were also some really intresting candidates! I think I must not say whats about DPPP, huh? In
some videos does it really looke like 8000m/s+ and some Vids look familiar to AP.
I dont know if you're intrested to measure the VoD of some pure HE's like NG or PETN or HMTD....
How the fuck could you built up such a device for your own??? That's a great honor to have a Member with such a potential here :) Could you please draw a picture how your
apparatus works! I think it would be cool to have some more members with such a gadget, because I know what you're doing after work now ;)
Keep on Testing! Myrol
mongo blongo January 24th, 2005, 01:02 PM

Did you use a Data Logger? Well that's what I would use for this kind of thing anyways. Good work! :)
Perhaps Boomer? You could now test the controversial "DPPP" to give us a ballpark figure of it's power.Hmmm??? ;)
[Edit] where did you find the plans to make such a useful piece of equipment? Or did you design the entire concept yourself. Either way it shows that you are a very smart
person and you are most deserving of some praise for your work.
Might I be so bold as to ask you for what the cost would be to build one of these and if you could maybe draw up some detailed schematics to share with us? Please?
Boomer January 25th, 2005, 02:10 PM

Thank you for the praise! But to be honest, the circuit is super simple. Apart from the standard configuration (battery-regulator-processor-xtal-LEDs) there are only two resistors
and two capacitors (!) to convert a thermostat to the counter.
BTW I think VoD-Meter is too long, lets call it detometer.
I just made a CAD drawing and calculated the price using our purchase databank. Leaving off unnecessary stuff from the modified thermostat, the result is
2,66 Euro per piece without housing :)
OK, with a dip switch to select charge length, plus screw terminals for battery, sensors and a start button, it is 3,88 Euro. That is because we buy resistors in 50000 batches per
value (=5 for a cent), and the procesor is 1 Euro if you buy 20000. At radio Shack it will be more like 15 Dollars for the parts.
Considering we can build them for what most of you pay for the parts, I think about selling. They can also measure bullet speed with alu foil as probes btw.
I know advertising is forbidden, so I will better contact a mod. Plus, I will of course post schematics and layout for those able to make them at home. I could also sell kits, or
pre-programmed PICs. But as I said, that is up to the mods to sign off.
I will post a pic of the new model as soon as it is finished. The current one is a converted thermostat from our company, of which we sold 80000 all over Europe, so it might be
recognised if I post a pic.
Now about your comments:
I will not measure pure compounds as those values are known. And I will not mess with big amounts of HMTD either. ANNM would be interesting if I get NM. Aluminized mixes
are known to be slower, so VoD is less interesting. Measuring blast power would be called for, but that's another instrument.
DPPP is definitely on my list, but I will wait until more people have reproduced those synths before wasting some weekends with failures.
nbk2000 January 26th, 2005, 03:21 AM

If you sell it at cost, plus reasonable shipping, then it's fine to sell, as it's a community service. :)
Being able to definatively measure an accurate VOD would be of great help to a great many people and their projects.
V2A January 26th, 2005, 09:45 AM

really, really good work!
posting schematics and layout would be nice!

soldering the invidual parts shouldn't be a problem for most people visiting this forum i think.

If you can use it as a shoot-thru chronograph, I will take two! Hell, make a run of 500 and sell them on eBay, that's what I would do!
Child-of-Bodom January 28th, 2005, 07:36 AM

I will not measure pure compounds as those values are known. And I will not mess with big amounts of HMTD either. ANNM would be interesting if I get NM. Aluminized mixes
are known to be slower, so VoD is less interesting. Measuring blast power would be called for, but that's another instrument.
Vey, very nice work!

Is'n it a good idea to use NG as standard? I believe it is very good method you use, but a standard would 'prove' your instrument and give something to compare with. NG
would be ideal because it has not something like a 'cristal density'.
I really like you instrument, it not that, but I would like to see an comparising with a know explosive with a known VoD.

I dont think so, NG is especially prone to low-order detonation. If you read Escales et altera, there are several figures of VoDs between 1500 and 3000 m/s even in metal
pipes.
UPDATE:
I re-worked schematic + layout. The two-digit display showing processor cycles in HEX is not for everybody, you need a pocket calculator to get the VoD. I was not content
with the 800ns resolution either. So here is what I changed:
1. Used the interrupt to get 4x accuracy (200ns at 20 MHz crystal)

2. Added a third 7-segment LED
3. Added a DIP switch to set charge length between 5cm and 1m
4. Added a switch to go from 0-9.99 km/s to 0-999m/s for bullets
5. Added a memory-recall button for the last 128 results
6. Scaled it down to full surface mount (50x45mm total size now)
7. Used screw terminals for everything, so you can choose a housing and probe connector
Our camera is screwed, so pics will have to wait, sorry guys.
Do you have any comments on what I might have overlooked? E.g. are there many people needing over 999 m/s for bullets? As I hate to re-do it again, would a dot from the
first LED be ok for "add 1km" ?
BTW the parts price (without board) is up to 6 $ (at 20000 pcs) or 30 $ for radio shack prices. With everything SMT, I would recommend we do the soldering in the company
via robot, as I needed 5 hours for the first unit.
Board price is 20$ if they make 5. Goes down to 3$ for 100. Self-etching is out of the question, it is double sided and you have to solder under the parts to connect tracks
between the two sides... :o So give me an estimate number how many I can order !
Bert February 14th, 2005, 07:30 PM

are there many people needing over 999 m/s for bullets?
So give me an estimate number how many I can order !
I have only a couple of hand load possibilities that exceed 999 m/s. Varmint shooters might be more interested in measuring higher velocities.
Put me down for one...


Get a small clamp system, and make it so it can be clamped to the end of the barrel. Just use a bit of 90 degree angle, so it auto-aligns on the barrel. Ideal for air rifles. There
is a guy in the UK who makes one, he can't keep up with demand. My gun club could use five, easy.
Do have the kind of over-speed measure, too. 7.62 goes to 850-ish m/s, and that's as far as I go at the moment. Getting something radical that goes over 1kmps would be
really neat, and my current chrono goes to 6! However a dot for "add 1000" would be great.

This IS going to be capable of measuring explosive VoD's, correct?
With the HNIW thread having possibilities, it may soon be possible to make a 10k/m explosive, so would this be capable of measuring to that range?
If not, it's still useable, if it could be used to measure an EFP projectile, as these have about 3k/m velocity, but the device would have to be capable of a wide window for the
projectile to pass through, as it's not a rifle, so accuracy in aiming would be problematic if you only had a few inches in which to aim. ;)

Correction: Turns out my chronograph goes to 7000fps or 2133.6 m/s
What would be the lower bound? My chrono goes down to 56fps, so you can measure airguns and bows?

Short update (little time):
worked further on the software, it can now be switched between xxx m/s and x.yy km/s for the display. Probe distance can be set with a DIP switch to be 5, 10, 20, 50 or 100
cm.
Memory recall function will be done next week.
NBK: That's what is was made for in the first place, 1.00 km/s to 9.99 are standard for HEs, 000 to 999 m/s for bullets. The bigger problem is sensing in the bullet mode: you
have to shoot through two sheets of double-sided aluminized paper, with the bullet shorting the two sides of each sheet. An opto-device clamped to the barrel COULD be
connected, but would increase price + complexity too much for a standard.
nbk2000 March 2nd, 2005, 06:38 PM

It occured to me that there is another use to which this device can be put to beside just measuring VoD.
By putting the two trigger sensors inside of the explosive charge of a device, such as a shaped charge, in particular spatial relation to each other (depending on what you
wanted to determine), that you could (for instance) tell what the shockwave symetry was like, whether sperical or planular, whether a waveformer was actually working, and
other things.
For instance, with EFPs, if the shockwave is too spherical, the center of the platter is deformed too far in advance of the edges, causing the liner to rupture.
If you were monitoring the wavefront and determined that the center was 20microseconds in advance of the edge, and the platter was rupturing, you could adjust things to
bring the variance down.
A variance of near zero between the center and the edge means that the wavefront is flat, which is ideal for most EFPs. :)
Also related, but somewhat OT, is a microsecond delay circuit.
The really 'neat' things that you can do with more modern munitons, such as multiple initiation points for waveform modulation, require triggering the detonators with an error
of a millisecond or less.
As EFP's that are intended for selectable attack have a central detonator, with annular detonators, the delay between the firing, and the sequence of, the detonators
determines if the liner becomes a long-rod penetrator, a forward fold, or fragments.
Jacks Complete March 2nd, 2005, 10:19 PM

Shooting through paper isn't an issue. In fact, for indoor use it would be better, since low light wouldn't be the PITA that it currently is with an airgun pellet. Messing about with
the mains powered add-on light array is just such a waste of time and effort.

Each of your ideas triggered some changes, mostly to the software. The m/s <-> km/s slide switch is now used to switch from time to speed, the display toggles from xxx to
x.yy to xx.y automatically depending on what it has to show:
Time-mode: 00.0 to 99.8 s in steps of 0.2s / 100 to 999 s in steps of 1s
Velo-mode: 000-999 m/s in steps of 1 m/s / 1.00 tp 9.99 km/s in steps of 0.01 km/s.
Still got trouble with the memory, maybe it is the 20 MHz Xtal (I emulated at 4 MHz). It sometimes forgets a digit!
Apart from these issues, there has been little progress, partly due to me ill for a week, plus unable to post for another.
At least my prototype lost virginity last week: I used it for the first time (instead of the modded thermostat) to measure a VoD: AN/HDN/NS 70/15/15 in a 20mm steel pipe
went at 4580 +/- 20 m/s (+/- 0.45%)!

went at 4580 +/- 20 m/s (+/- 0.45%)!


went at 4580 +/- 20 m/s (+/- 0.45%)!
RDX* April 18th, 2005, 06:45 AM

What sort of processor do you use? AVR?
Have you done multiple tests with the same batch and size of the bomb, to see the variation of you measurement?
RDX* April 18th, 2005, 06:45 AM

RDX* April 18th, 2005, 06:45 AM


The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > The Effect of a HE on
Ammunition?
Log in
View Full Version : The Effect of a HE on Ammunition?
2,4,6-TNP March 11th, 2005, 03:37 AM

This thread relates to a question I have about the effect
of a high explosive on ammunition (bullets).
To make the question more clear I would like to paint a theoretical picture:
Supposing there were a one pound block of TNT which

was detonated in very close proximity to a bag of say
1000 rounds of .223 ammunition and supposing these
1000 rounds of ammunition were not stacked in the
bag in any special order, but the natural way they would
if they were simply dumped into the bag.
Questions in such a situation:
1. Would the bullets be propelled in the normal direction as

if they were ordinary metallic fragments?
2. Would the bullet primers fire and propel the bullets in

whatever direction the bullets happen to be pointing, like
a cartidge would fire "normally" without barrel confinement?
3. Would the compounds in the bullets, namely nitrocellulose/nitroglycerine,

high order detonate and produce predictable bullet trajectories, but with
a greater velocity?
4. Would the bullets high order detonate but with unpredictable trajectories
considering the influence of the TNT's shockwave and it's force of direction?
Just some questions relating to "self-energetic fragmentation"!
2,4,6-TNP March 11th, 2005, 03:37 AM





a greater velocity?
2,4,6-TNP March 11th, 2005, 03:37 AM





a greater velocity?

I would hypothesize that:
1. They Would go off.
2. It wouldnt be any order of magnitude higher of a detonation
Basically I think that they would go off due to the shockwave. As you said it is Very close we can assume this part. How they
would go off depends. I personally believe that if they are facing away from the explosive with the primer end closer then it
would go off better then any of the other directions, due to the wave being better transferred. Now, though, they will not
perform as good as if you had shot them off in a barrel, because there is nothing to stop it from flying backwards, so you will
lose some of the momentum.
EDIT: depending on how fast the blast is, and how fast the wave is propogated, maybe it would be of sufficient force to propel
the bullets a little faster.
My personal opinion, and your mileage may vary.


Jacks Complete March 11th, 2005, 06:29 AM

It's actually hard to say. (Modern) military stuff is very immune to bulk explosion, etc. as well as sympathetic detonation.
Anything hit hard enough on the primer end would go off, as long as the differential was big enough between the primer and
the rest of the case. Things slammed sideways tend not to go bang - I've seen photos of rounds that are destroyed by being
hit from the side by large explosions, even explosive head rounds, and they haven't gone off, just split the case as if it had
been hit with a sledgehammer.
Even properly packaged primers refuse to explode in bulk. You have to do something silly like sticking them all in a glass jar
together.

together.

together.
Oktogen March 11th, 2005, 11:34 AM

the shockvave would first tear the bullets and cartridges apart, such a powerful blast would turn the ammo into powder ! ! !.
There wouldn't be any explosion/detonation of nitrocellose because it would be simply thrown in every direction instead of
initiation. If the nitrocellose would be pressed in the cartridges, it may explode. The whole thing would make a BIG shrapnel
bomb, the brass, lead and iron parts would fly with big velocities in many different directions, but their speed would be much
smaller than fired from a gun. Bullets speed up in barrel when hot gases decomprese. :D


ALENGOSVIG1 March 12th, 2005, 11:46 PM

If the bullet primers were in close contact with the explosives, i'd say the bullets would go off for sure. However, i'm not sure if
the propellant within the shells would actually detonate unless under extreme circumstances.
Assuming the NC contained withing the shells DID detonate, I wonder if the detonation would propagate throughout the
container of shells causing the rest to detonate in a chain reaction. Could be interesting...
Imagine a 20 lb propane tank filled with bullets (i.e. small metal NC containing capsules:)) sealed with say a 1 lb TNT booster
inside. I'd predict that the shells would detonate in a situation like that.
I'd bet the bullets would get teared to peices though, as the shock wave of the explosives behind the bullet would be faster
than the speed at which the bullet would be travelling away from its origin.



Smokeless powder does not detonate in cartridge diameters, no matter how big the booster. The critical dimeter is always
much larger than the caliber of the gun, big cannons have very large powder grains.
After WW2 they used up the multi tons of left-over SP for blasting. It did NOT detonate in steel pipes of 30mm ID, even with a
big TNT booster. But it detonated successfully in boreholes of 80mm dimeter.


zambozan March 13th, 2005, 05:18 PM

Hi picric (2,4,6-TNP),
the effect of an HE on ammunitions depends by very much factors,
firstly they are:
- VOD of the explosive
- type of munitions
- contact between them (not that clear...I would say if they are in a box, a steel container or they're at an open place)
How previously talked, military munitions are made properly for not damage and/or go off easily.
If you want experiment what you've talking about, please know which bullets and hard fragments can fly very much more away
than the shockwave of explosion and cause damage. Please be prudent!
Regards, zambozan

firstly they are:
- type of munitions
Regards, zambozan

firstly they are:
- type of munitions
Regards, zambozan
ALENGOSVIG1 March 14th, 2005, 01:10 AM

Yes im sure SBSP's (predominantly lower N content NC with stabalizers) critical diameter is less than that of the diameter of
ammunition, but im not sure if that really matters, seeing as how the ammunition would be in a large pile contained within a
strong tank.
For example, IIRC NG has a critical diameter of 3.9mm at RT. Now, if you had a large number of 2mm diameter tubes
containing NG in a pile, or beter yet a container, im sure sympathetic detonation wouldn't be difficult to achieve.
But anyways im just theorizing. I'm not sure about any of this.
What was the size of the booster used in the 80mm borehole tests?

strong tank.

strong tank.
2,4,6-TNP March 15th, 2005, 03:22 AM

Thank you all for your replies. Very helpful!
I don't mean to go off topic, but how would you say Lead (Pb)
compares to steel as fragmentation material? What I mean is
say you had a one pound block of TNT and on one side of the block
was embedded 10mm steel balls and on the other 10mm Lead balls?
Which would perform better as fragmentation, the Lead or the steel and why?
It seems that the military mostly uses only steel balls in fragmentation munitions,
but not Lead. Is this because of price, toxicity, or actual performance?
2,4,6-TNP March 15th, 2005, 03:22 AM

2,4,6-TNP March 15th, 2005, 03:22 AM


Toxicity of course! They would not want the enemy to get lead poisoning, would they? :p
As the military never cares much about spending tax money, I bet it is performance. Lead will probably deform too much,
either from the initial shock or when it hits a target. Thus it is easier to stop / needs less armour to defeat.
IIRC they used lead nitrators for NG batches for this very reason. Lead does not form shrapnel but is thrown around coiled and
dented in case of an explosion. Since they have better process control now, they have long moved on to stainless nitrators,
mostly continuous ones where there is no large batch present anyway.


Jacks Complete March 15th, 2005, 06:12 PM

Steel is used because it is very hard, and forms sharp edges that cut. This helps it get through Kevlar and other body armour,
as well as being an armour piercing projectile because it won't extrude when it hits a hard target. Also, it is cheaper and lighter,
and the increased bursting strength gives higher performane for a given weight of explosive.


2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 02:49 AM

Then why don't they use steel to make bullets? Wouldn't it
penetrate body armor better than copper coated Lead?
2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 02:49 AM

2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 02:49 AM

2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:14 AM

Today as an experimental:
A .223 round was placed in a film canister and 35 grams of Picric acid was
pressed around and under the bullet and a lead nitrate/azo-clathrate/ Picric acid
based detonater. The bullet stuck out of the canister a little through a punched out hole (was just a little too tall). Anyway it
was detonated between some
large boulders in such a way that the cannister was wedged between these
rocks so that the primer faced a rock face and two sides of the canister were facing rock faces as well, the bullet itself was
facing an open direction in which
a 1" thick piece of plyboard had been placed 3 feet away to be a witness.
The bullet penetrated the plyboard upon detonation, I was very suprised based
on the replies in this thread. The bullet was never found!
It seemes That the bullet did high order detonate, but to be sure I will try
a more side ways configuration in the next experiment!
2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:14 AM

2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:14 AM

2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:28 AM

Back from the experiment. This time all the picric acid was placed on just one side of the bullet. The plyboard was placed in
line with the bullet. Upon detonation
the bullet didn't fly at the plyboard, but rather was found about 2 1/2" in the ground below the detonation point which now
makes alot of sense to me!
There was no high order detonation. In the first experiment the primer must have
fired before the bullet could be destroyed or all the explosive force pushed of the rocks and propelled the bullet forward.
My conclusion:
Most likely bullets don't high order detonate from a HE, but they might low order detonate in the right configuration!
2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:28 AM

My conclusion:
2,4,6-TNP March 16th, 2005, 03:28 AM

My conclusion:

They do use steel to make bullets! The newest round from H&K fires steel plated with copper, to defeat 2mm of titanium plate
and layers of Kevlar at range.
The older .223 NATO round is steel tipped, as is RG "sniper" in 7.62 NATO. Russian ammo tends to be steel jacketed.
The problem is that steel is lighter than lead, and harder to work with, and destroys range backstops!
Your conclusion about the ammo is about right. If you read the milspec for what these things have to take without doing
anything, it is incredible!



My reply on the matter would be that the bullets would be totally turned into dust by the brisance of the HE (maybe not with a
one pound block) and if the HE would be placed somewhat further away the bullets would just simply be secondary shrapnel.
I destroyed thousands of cartridges this way by placing them in a normal ammo box, placing one or two AT-mines on each
side, and dugged this in. Effect is total evaporation of the ammunition inside.
In case of grenades or other HE filled ammunition the effect would be sympathic detonation or the ammunition would be blown
aside depending on the distance.


lndshrk August 27th, 2006, 04:44 AM

Ammunition is destroyed by PROPERLY placed HE.
(HE is detonated, LE is broken open - ignited - deflagrated - gone)
Ammunition is ignited/scattered by improperly placed HE.
(rain of components over the countryside)
It's one of the basic properties/lessons of Explosive Ordnance Disposal.
PS: The FN 5.7x28 SS192 round will also penetrate CRISAT & 40+ layers
of kevlar. Shot from the FN5.7 and PS90/P90.
Diabolique September 5th, 2006, 02:06 PM

From (unfortunately) first hand experience, small arms ammo is torn appart as oktogen mentioned above. A layer or two out
from the explosive, some may go off, much like a round thrown into a fire. Most of the rest will become shrapnel That brass is
tough, and protects the propellant.
Colloided NC is not very likely to detonate under almost any shock, it deflagrates. Double based powder, used mostly in pistol
ammo, will go high or low order, depending on how strongly it was shocked. Again, the brass protects the propellant to a large
extent.
I watched EOD prep and blow dud 80 mm mortar shells in AZ. They used a block of C-4 with three rounds in direct content. The
steel protects the Comp B3 even better than the brass protects propellant. The detonation of one mortar round will expend a
lot of energy creating and propelling shrapnel, so a round next to it may not always go off.
Three mortar rounds weren't duds, but empty shells used for practice. The C-4 only collapsed and folded these in half, their
steel did not tear or fragment. I have one other of these, and two 60 mm shells, for book ends. Heavy, even if empty.
sparkchaser October 16th, 2006, 11:52 AM

Amunition is generally destroyed by HE in a relatively safe maner, just ask EOD. I got some great footage of them detonating
literally tons of ammunition and explosives in great heaping piles just to get rid of all the crap laying around Iraq after the
invasion. If the charges are placed right, it turns most of the ammunition etc. into small fragments. Placed wrong, it just
scattered the stuff from hell to high water. Any propellant left over just burns off.
As for lead vs. steel, steel balls are used in claymore mines to comply with NATO directives. Lead balls cause "undue physical
trauma" because of deformation, where steel makes a nice clean hole. That's why you never see exposed lead in military
bullets.
It's a little off topic, but that's why the U.S. went around that by using small calliber high velocity rounds that deform and
fragment regardless of composing material, at least at close range. .22 caliber at supersonic speed does do more damage to
flesh than .30 caliber at subsonic speed.
BeerWolf October 16th, 2006, 03:09 PM

For many years I have routinely disposed of old shotgun shells by using them as targets. I have never had one detonate,
regardless of what it was shot with. Some of them have ignited and burned, but that's it. Most just shatter and fly apart.
...but that's why the U.S. went around that by using small calliber high velocity rounds that deform and fragment regardless of
composing material, at least at close range. .22 caliber at supersonic speed does do more damage to flesh than .30 caliber at
subsonic speed. A large part of why the .223 was adopted is because it causes great damage, but does NOT kill as well as the
.30.
The idea was that a dead man can be left, but a badly wounded man needs at least 2 men to get him to a support structure,
i.e. MASH. In reality, we haven't fought against anyone lately who does this. They just abandon their wounded to us, who take
care of them as well as our own wounded.
Part of why I'm a .45 and .308 guy. I don't want them getting better . :D
sparkchaser October 31st, 2006, 09:16 AM

A large part of why the .223 was adopted is because it causes great damage, but does NOT kill as well as the .30.
off topic, but, damage IS what kills. The difference being; 223 kills better, but takes a long time to kill through bleed out. I
also am a .308/.45 man because a fast knock down is better, IMO, than a man who's dead but doesn't know it yet! it's almost
scary what a man can do after being hit by an m-16, but before he finally dies. Hell, even medium sized dogs jump around for
a while before kickin over to the other side!;)
nbk2000 October 31st, 2006, 04:10 PM

What works for the military doesn't always work for a civilian.
You don't care if the guy breaking into your house becomes a triage casualty an hour after he's stabbed you to death, you
want him dead before he can stab you at all!
Pea shooters like a 5.56 just don't do the job unless you hit 'em in the head or heart, and even in the heart they can have a
few seconds of life left to kill you in.
bodabdan November 6th, 2006, 12:20 AM

Some weapons that are designed for fragmentation effects use not only steel, but tungsten, inconel, and other hard metals. I
am not aware of lead being used as a designed fragmentation component.
In the same sense though, HEAT (Monroe effect) weapons actually use a copper cone to penetrate armor. My point is that
penetration is not only a function of materials selection, but shaped charge effects and velocity also play a major role.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Prepaid Cell Phone Detonators for
Cheap!
Log in
View Full Version : Prepaid Cell Phone Detonators for Cheap!
2,4,6-TNP March 24th, 2005, 02:44 AM

It has come to my attention that cell phones have been used succesfully
around the world to trigger explosive devices. Of course the great
advantage here is you can literally be on the other side of the world
when the bomb goes off. Prepaid cell phones are cheap (under $40.00 US)
and no one can discover your identity as they never ask you for any
personal info to start the service up. Just put it in your shopping cart and
you got a first class electronic trigger.
There is just one problem. How the hell do you use a cell phone to set off a bomb?
That's what this thread is all about. Talking about possible ways to set it up so when you call the phone it will trigger your
bomb. Any suggestions? Electronic
schematics? :cool:
2,4,6-TNP March 24th, 2005, 02:44 AM

schematics? :cool:
2,4,6-TNP March 24th, 2005, 02:44 AM

schematics? :cool:

Maybe wiring a trigger into the speaker wire. When the ringer goes off, so does the explosive.
But then it has been awhile since I played with electronics. You may need to step up the voltage, well, the current anyways.


akinrog March 24th, 2005, 03:20 AM

That's not the case in my country. Even if you purchase a prepaid cell phone, you have to show up your ID. In addition, even if
you do not have to show up your ID, there are many survailance cameras which may be used in revealing your ID.
BTW, while just using speaker wires for detonation purpose might work, it is not very safe. What if somebody accidentally call
your prepaid cell phone's number? So somewhat additional electronics may be needed (for example you simply set your
phone to auto-answer and attach an electronic devices (something containing DTMF decoder, which is set up to trigger
detonator when decoding a certain tone combination)). Regards.



Heh, I forgot about accidental dialing. That would be rather .. Unfortunate. *Here we go, one last wire to connect.. There!
Finished.* -ring, ring- *OH. Oh shit*
There is various ways of defeating the instore cameras. Or you could do the underage thing and pay a bum to go buy one for
you.
But I believe, you could turn it off, until you reached your destination and then hooked it up and turned it on. Still the
possibility though. Or, there is the fact that you can set an alarm on you phone. Just turn off the dialing part, and you have an
advanced and relatively expensive timer device. :D
Off topic but, I had a lady accidently call my phone and said *Hi, I am not sure if this is you Lisa, but if it is, Linda died last
night.* -CLICK- I debated whether or not to call her back. I didnt. I did not enjoy being interrupted on my vacation with news
of someone dieing just because some lady couldnt be bothered to not finger fuck her phone.

you.

you.
cyclonite4 March 24th, 2005, 04:39 AM

Like akinrog, I am also forced to surrender all personal information when getting a cellpone (the SIM card specifically).
As for using a phone as a detonater, I can see a few problems, wiring to the speaker being the greatest one. Sometimes my
phone services sends random promotional offers, now wouldnt that be inconvenient :D
Last year, I was constructing a remote rocket trigger, and to prevent accidental firing, I used a tone generator on the
transmitter, and a tone decoder on the reciever. This means that a certain tone must be transmitted in order for a realy to
switch. I'm sure you could do the same on a phone. ;)


Child-of-Bodom March 24th, 2005, 07:28 AM

I have made one of these, it is relativly simple.
Safety is a large point, I chose for it to use a time-relais, it gets a signal when I set the system to 'armed' ,waits a set amount
of time, (between 3 and 60 sec. in my case) and switches then. This switch opens one the wires coming out of my phone. Then
I can call to the mobile...
I really don't know where you can get the time relay's, nor a price... this one was a freebee :)
Don't bother about the speaker, use the signal that goes to the 'vibrator' in the phone. Open the phone, get the small motor
out, and solder 2 wires to the connections.
The signal from the phone to the motor is not enough to trigger a relay, but with the aid of an transistor, this is done easily. (I
don't have it here, so I do not have any part nr..). This is hooked to a 9V battery, or another power supply with a voltage high
enough to trigger the relay.
Set a capacitor over the trigger end of the relay, a phone gives pulses when it vibrates (bzzz- bzzz- bzzz), where you want a
long pulse. I use a 25V 10.000uF cap. The relay must be as robust as possible (16A is good), as it switches a 12V 1,2Ah accu
short over a resistance wire.
I have sevaral LED's on this box, to check or the system is on, to check or there is voltage over the socket, (big LED) to check
or the relay of the phone is active, to see the position of the time relay, etc.
There is even a halogen lamp build in, so I don't have to take a torch.
A phone-recharger on 12V is optional, (take in account that a phone when it is charging, isn't vibrating!!) There is also a jack-
plug present to charge the 12V accu.
I'll see or I can make a scheme of it, as it is rather complicated.(I don't have it here though, so I have to remember by
heard..) It was not too hard to make, in one saturday it should be ready, except for the paining then.
I really hope I was a bit clear, if anyone has a question, please ask.


mongo blongo March 24th, 2005, 11:22 AM

http://www.serasidis.gr/circuits/smscontroller/smscontroller.htm


2,4,6-TNP March 25th, 2005, 02:51 AM

I didn't mean for anyone to think that it matters if anyone knows your
identity for the cell phone, after all There is no way of finding out which
cell phone was used to blow up a bomb as all they have is a list of
calles made during that time which will be in the millions and the phone
will be completly destroyed if it is placed right. A high explosive can easily
turn a cell phone ito a pile of burnt dust. If there is any questions just say
you lost your phone at a bar or something. Make the call to the phone on a
pay phone, not your land line at home!
One problem I have found with using the speaker wires of an alarm clock
or any speaker wires is that they use alternating current which doesn't seem to help much in heating your electric match to an
ignition.
Has there been any research into how the Madrid train bombers used the phones to trigger their bombs? Ovbiously there are a
lot of "terrorists" out there that have
very good information about how to trigger a bomb with a cell phone,
considering the fact that you hear about them doing it in many countries on
a regular basis. This info would be very interesting for the members here.
Edit: I just realised something: when my cell phone is called it turns on a green
light to display the screen, I can hook up a sensitive electric match to the wires
to the light, thus when the phone is called boom! You just have to be careful
not to trigger the light prematurely by making the final step at ground zero!
2,4,6-TNP March 25th, 2005, 02:51 AM

ignition.
2,4,6-TNP March 25th, 2005, 02:51 AM

ignition.

ignition.
You can use a capacitor to change the pulse length. Maybe a bridge rectifier (4 diodes in a certain pattern) could convert it to
DC current?

ignition.
DC current?

ignition.
DC current?
Dave Angel March 25th, 2005, 08:45 AM

IIRC the Madrid train bombers made the mistake of reusing the mobiles they used to call the detonator mobiles. I think the
bomb squad recovered a detonator mobile from a bomb which didn't go off and then just waited until the terrorists turned their
phones on again... DOH! :rolleyes:
If one were to use this for a malicious purpose it would be wise to work some sort of timed failsafe into the phone to obliterate
it should the main charge fail. Oh, and not to use your own mobile to detonate it, as has been mentioned.
As a few have said, there are some countries where you have to give everything but a retinal scan to get a SIM card, or at
least to register it - the UK being one of them. 2,4,6-TNP, are you saying you are in the US when you quoted the anonymous
cell phone price as $40 US? It would be surprising given the post 9/11 security crackdown if they let you get away with this
there!

there!

there!

I got my prepaid SIM-card in the UK without showing any ID papers, I had to give an adress and a name, but nothing more...
Thereby...a stolen mobile is not hard to get ;)
One problem I have found with using the speaker wires of an alarm clock or any speaker wires is that they use alternating
current which doesn't seem to help much in heating your electric match to an ignition.
The current which goes through your speaker is NOT enough to set off an electric match, as a speaker does not consume a lot
of current. Try to set a capacitor over it, to elongate the signal, and a transistor with a 9V battery to trigger a relay.
From my own experience with cooking-timers, to get a good pulse from a signal to a speaker is very, very hard, I had to use 2
transistors, and a couple of other things. At the end it was so complicated I quit with the idea.
f your phone has a vibrating alarm, go and try that, it is much easier.
The light idea is also good, but remember: if anyone in the country dails the wrong nr, if you get a SPAM text, if the battery
runs out, if you puch a button on the phone... you have a big problem... you have to work in the dark either, as I wouldn't like
to have a torch on with a light sensitive detonator.



I am sure some willing member from this here USofA would be willing to send a buddy a phone to call him with. Who knows?
But then there is the possibility of it being a sting. Or knowing where you live. Unless you have a drop box. Anyways.
I know that with my phone I can turn of the ringer, turn of the lights and turn of the vibration. If someone calls I can have it
do nothing at all. Therefore It would be possible to set it up as an alarm because I can set that up seperately. But that would
be a problem cause you would like to set it off at a certain time or sooner if someone came along.
So then, the DTMF would be the best idea. Call your phone, have it automagically answer. Then hit say 007, or some such
thing. All the while using Child-Of-Bodom*s plans with the vibration. That should work nicely.
BTW, good explanation.



02 (almost) give them away for 99p each on their website, and so people sell them on Ebay. Hell, they sell the whole phone
on ebay! That makes it fairly easy to find people selling phones that you can email or ask seller a question on, and buy them
on the side.
Second-hand shops are useful, too. Just take a SIM card you have already anonymised with you to try them out. If doing
something serious, go somewhere away from you, as the mobile phone records might be able to tie your position and the
number to a date, and hence to the CCTV. Buy the phone and leave it for a while - two weeks is normally more than enough
for the tapes to be re-used.
Silentnite, your last quote is such a perfect truth. Orwell was a genius.-- People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only
because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

on the side.

on the side.
Rocket-Boy March 28th, 2005, 12:12 AM

you people could just grab a small electronic relay from a science mag or something, rather than using something like a car
relay. i made one of these neeto detonators awile ago that used a 1.5v relay that i got from edmund scientific before it
became edmund optics. the relay could complete the circut that had the 9v on it, and the detonator was some steel wool
(actually, a small loop of steel ribon) with BP on it, that went to a rocket. i used it to launch a rocket. the steel wool trick can
be found in http://roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=1740


HVD May 10th, 2005, 10:10 AM

Lots of random thoughts:
Woolworths (uk) and other places now sell prepay mobile phones for 20 or so. You do not have to give any details. Ebay is
an option, but then there is forever a record that you bought the phone. Car boot sales etc are another option, but always buy
your phone with cash and leave time between buying and "using" the phone. New phones from shops are the best bet i think,
as there will be no previous record or history associated with the phone.
Buy your phone with cash and well before you intend to use it. CCTV footage is never kept for long, although with digital
recording the time is extending - some footage is archived forever now on DAT tape etc. Either way, disguise yourself
somewhat, always leave plenty of time between buying and using your phone.
Never turn on your phone or let it register with the network anywhere that could be linked to you.
Use a DTMF decoder chip and the audio output from the handsfree kit. Set the phone to auto answer. You'll also need a PIC
or similar microprocessor to store the digital (BCD) output from the DTMF decoder IC and give a valid output when you have
punched in your chosen "PIN" code. Then of course a triggering relay or preferrable something solid state, like a high current
transistor / SCR etc. (a sharp knock can easily trigger a relay momentarily) All this is realtively simple to do and prevents false
triggering.
Call your phone from a pay phone and make sure there is no CCTV coverage of the phone. Wear gloves when inserting the
coins, using the phone etc. Assume the authorities will come to the payphone eventually.
Assume they will look at the cellular "cell" that the device was in and find the calls that were made around the time of
detonation. They will in all likelyhood try and backtrack / checkup on every call made around that time - even in a
metropolitan area it wont be an impossible number of calls.
Always assume that some bits will be left of your phone and they will be able to ID it. Rip off the IMEI tags and file any serial
numbers etc you can see. No point in making their life any easier.
HVD May 10th, 2005, 10:10 AM

triggering.
HVD May 10th, 2005, 10:10 AM

triggering.
nbk2000 May 25th, 2005, 03:10 PM

When calling from a payphone, you'll also want to cover the handset with a plastic baggie that you take with you when you're
done.
I remember when they were looking for the UNABOMBER, that they tried lifting DNA from the mouthpiece of a payphone that
he called someone from, so obvioulsy there's that risk. But, since you're just using it to punch in numbers, gloves would be
adequate. :)
nbk2000 May 25th, 2005, 03:10 PM

done.
adequate. :)
nbk2000 May 25th, 2005, 03:10 PM

done.
adequate. :)
malzraa May 26th, 2005, 11:50 PM

Why not hook it up to a modem and an old pc? The old Bell 202 is notoriously reliable, and that way you could just use a
Virtual Terminal to detonate it using a few commands, thus eliminating the chances of an accidental detonation. hooking it up
would be as easy as splicing the headset to a phone jack and plugging her in.


Jacks Complete May 27th, 2005, 11:43 AM

Further thoughts:
Don't leave DNA on the mobile phone, don't forget that a lot of phone boxes are covered by CCTV from outside (3 million
cameras in the UK!) and that they will take your DNA for any offence in the UK, even just a suspicion, and it will remain on
record FOREVER! even if you are found innocent.

Further thoughts:

Further thoughts:
nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:25 PM

Always a good idea to put a sandwich baggie over a payphone handset, anytime you need to use one, as you never know
when the piggies will come looking for DNA from it. Could be the next person to use it after you is the next UNABOMBER! :eek:
Oh, and use an object to push the buttons, not your finger.
nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:25 PM

nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:25 PM

hot04wrx June 12th, 2007, 04:36 PM

Here in the U.S. you can walk into any Wal-Mart, pick up a pre-paid for $15.00 or under, check out with cash and no ID and
no one bats an eye. You don t even have to registe r the phone to use it. The phone gives you be tween 2 and 5 minutes of
incoming service before forcing you to register it for further service.
webuyhouses June 16th, 2007, 06:20 PM

Although I can't be sure of the brand, I have seen phones that let you choose a different ring tone or style for each incoming
number.
So attach your det to the vibrator, and set the number you plan to trigger with to vibrate, and all others are silent. hopefully if
it doesn't pull any tricks on you, no chance of it going off early. Just be sure text messages, advertisements, etc, don't vibrate
also.
Tinton June 16th, 2007, 07:31 PM

Sort of along the lines of webuyhouses's idea, is fixed dialing. Many phones have fixed dialing settings, so you can set your
phone to only recieve calls from certian numbers. This would prevent people who can't dial the right phone number from
blowing you up.
Then again, if you plan to use a payphone, you would have to know the number of the actual payphone to program it into
your phone/detonator.
As for speaker wire detonators, any beeps, boops, or premature sounds would set it off. Thats why phones have silent modes
though ;)
Fourfifth June 17th, 2007, 10:00 PM

Im part way through making a det with a mobile phone, for use with model rockets. The way Im doing it is having the speaker
contacts feed into an atmel chip with DTFM encoding/decoding. So until I enter a set number on the phone, it will not
detonate, regardless of who calls.
webuyhouses June 18th, 2007, 12:19 PM

When making a call from a calling card, the recipients caller ID shows a number where the call is from, but redialing does not
call back the landline, payphone, or whatever the call was made from.
I figure if you make sure your calling card sends the same ID number each time you could use that to make any pay phone
seem the same to the receiving phone. I know its not foolproof, but it is a simple way to reduce your chances of an accident.
Cindor June 23rd, 2007, 01:34 AM

I find this video about cell phone detonators, really nice
http://www.tricklife.com/view.php?id=676
Hirudinea July 17th, 2007, 04:17 PM

Heres a link from Hack-a-Day about a cell phone/dtmf operated door lock, call up on your cell phone, enter the proper
numbers (no numbers, no activation) and n electromechanical device opens your door lock.
Now I'm sure we all know this device could be easily adapted to triggering a bomb, so for all you electronic geniuses heres the
link...
http://ashishrd.blogspot.com/2007/07/cell-phone-controlled-door-latch.html
And remember blowing up your cell phone in the commission of a terrorist bombing voids your warranty. :)
ChippedHammer July 20th, 2007, 12:53 PM

A SMS controller is the best approach, they are very versatile and can be cheaply purchased. You can set it so you have to
login to the device by first sending a SMS with the password then you can turn on a output with a different word.
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102670/article.html
Hirudinea July 20th, 2007, 03:08 PM

Chipped, your link dosn't have the full article for free. If you have the article could you post it or if you have the password
please post that.
nbk2000 July 20th, 2007, 05:47 PM

Don't publicly post passwords!
If there's a resource that's exploitable, PM me and mega with the info, and we'll rip the site, uploading the extracted honey to
the FTP or rapidshare.
I've attached an article I found elsewhere about making SMS-controlled relays. :)
rollie July 21st, 2007, 11:31 AM

I was thinking about this today, and in countries where Mobile phones and, more importantly, SIM cards require ID/registration
(unlike the UK) could the same principle of using the speaker to trip a simple relay be applied to one of those handheld CB
radios/ walkie talkies?
Obviously the range is much smaller, but at least it would be harder to monitor and there may be less chance of interference if
using an empty transmittion frequency?
stupid939 July 23rd, 2007, 04:08 PM

It could and has been done by many of the forum members, I'm sure. You could hook up a vibrating motor like the link
above shows, but if you wanted to hook it up to a relay, you would have to amplify the voltage (the lowest voltage relay that I
have seen was 3-5V).
FireBomb July 28th, 2007, 08:56 PM

Hmm has anyone thought of using an online program to place the call or send an sms message like Skype.
Just use a laptop from your local free wifi coffee shop or where ever. Heck steal it from someone stupid enough not to protect
there wifi. Then the closest they can ever get to you is the ip address of where ever you connected to the net.
Just an idea that no one suggested.

The biggest issue would the MAC address.
Every wireless or wired card has a MAC (Machine Authentication Code, I think, been a while since I learned this) address that is
built in. Now, the MAC address can be spoofed (falsified), but that isn't always fool-proof. The bright side is that it's hard to
track a computer by it's MAC address (If I recall correctly, a MAC address doesn't go past the router), but it could be used in a
court case to show that yes, this was the computer that sent the code.
Now, if you were setting off a string of bombs, you could pick up a really cheap WiFi card, paying with cash, use the card, then
break it into really tinny pieces and bury them somewhere.
Now, all of this is immaterial if you are using it for legal purposes (such as setting off a model rocket).
blocks July 31st, 2007, 10:16 PM

NO NO NO, they said PREPAID PHONES, that means NO simcards, and they are MUCH harder to trace, There was one incident
in Iraq where EOD technicians were disarming a cell phone bomb, and it blew up and may have killed one of the technicians to
my knowledge. The guy who detonated it, was watching them, waited till he thought it was a good time to detonate...and
called it. They probably got the simcard because they traced the number, went to his home and arrested him.
Get PREPAID versions!!!
Keep in mind the sunni people in Iraq that make the best, most innovative IEDs are people who have degrees from places
MIT and Ivy League colleges, and know very well what they are doing electronically, and unless you really know what you are
doing its risky to use a cell phone detonator...Now unless you need to hit a precise target driving by a road you do not need
this. There are enough time delays that go between 2 to 3 days, be inventive.
Keserian August 1st, 2007, 02:44 PM

And even if you do know, it's still risky. Sometimes they don't go off, or go off late. For example:
http://crypto.nsa.org/f-21/01-call-missed.jpg
Even the "professionals" make misses now and then.
FireBomb August 1st, 2007, 07:29 PM

Even the "professionals" make misses now and then.
Well you do make a good point but I would hardly call the makers of this device "professionals".
I'm sure this has already been discussed but someone could always use a hand held palm pc with wifi capabilities and a
directional antenna or high gain omnidirectional antenna and send a encoded signal to it.
801.11b devices properly modified have seen ranges of several km but the downside is most of the time this is in a single
fixed direction.
This technology can also be applied to low band communication devices such as short range VHF two way radios giving a much
much longer range.
ccw8076 November 1st, 2007, 07:23 PM

I was looking through this thread, and the others which related to cell phones as detonators, and then I looked up others
means of detonating explosives without using the electronic components. I found this on You tube of all places:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF72RcHlQVk
It looks plausible; plus it uses only mechanical components in the phone.
BlackFalcoN November 1st, 2007, 08:11 PM

Not very safe or reliable in my opinion.
Replacing the electrovibrator in the phone and soldering a SCR (or even a transistor if you are unable to obtain a SCR ) and
some wires, isn't exactly rocket science, but will provide a much safer and reliable means of closing the electric circuit (for
whatever purpose).
Just imagine the consequences of an unplanned slip or bump or even a very strong gust of wind with the method display in
that Youtube video. Anything that will make the 2 wires touch each other will make the armed circuit go off, not just the
vibrator closing it.
Yes, this mechanical way can definitely work, but it's only suitable as a last resort or when electronic components can not be
acquired at all.
nbk2000 November 1st, 2007, 10:51 PM

What would be even safer would be something that doesn't use the vibrator at all, as any phone call or message would set it
off, like SMS spam (which I get weekly).
Rather, a PIC or such would be programmed so that only a specific message, or caller-ID, would activate the device.
Shadowmartyr November 23rd, 2007, 11:47 PM

You guys are making this way to difficult. Modification of electronic devices to be made into detonators is not as hard as it
sounds.
Here is a list of common electronics that can be somewhat easily made into remote detonators: cordless telephone (average
length 1000ft, must be the pager type), citizens band radio, FM Wireless microphone and receiver, auto-alarm paging system,
kids toy "walkie talkie" (not recommended, frequency is used by many other electronics-and it also has limited range) , radio
paging systems, and of course cell phones.
And since the topic is about modifying cell phones into detonators I will discuss this. The cheapest and easiest cell phone for
this method in the US are the prepaid ones which can be bought at walmart. The brand name is "Trac phone". Time cards are
unnecessary since the phone already has 10minutes of time already on the phone before more time must be added.
There are two ways to set this off. You can use the "alarm" feature in the tools section of the phone, and make sure the ringer
is set to on. Or you can just leave the phone on so it can be called at any time.
It's as simple as attaching your blasting cap wires to the ringer terminals on the back of the phone. The wires can be taken off
the ringer or left on, either way the phone should have enough voltage to set off an improvised electrical detonation device
(light-bulb method).
BlackFalcoN November 24th, 2007, 12:19 AM

It's as simple as attaching your blasting cap wires to the ringer terminals on the back of the phone. The wires can be taken off
the ringer or left on, either way the phone should have enough voltage to set off an improvised electrical detonation device
(light-bulb method).
It's not the voltage that is the problem, it's the current that can be drawn from the cellphone ringer circuit.
Remember that the current must be high enough to make a thin bridge wire glow hot enough to make the primary in the
blasting cap react and detonate, which most ringer circuits will not be able to provide (running in miliamps rather than amps).
Also, the power graph from the ringer signal isn't a steady flat DC signal, rather a fluctuation of levels to generate a
preselected ring tone.
Attaching a blasting cap to a weak, unpredictable signal is everything but reliable, hence unsafe. Your aim is 100% operational
success, not something that will work 'most of the time'.
Battery life and maximal current from cell phones decline as time progresses when the cell phone is turned on, where as an
external power supply is only used when the attached circuitry is closed.
Simply adding an external power supply that can provide enough current to detonate the blasting cap and a 'switching'
component (transistor/SCR) will provide far greater reliability and can be attached universally to any low current signal device
(alarm, timer, PLC, cell phone, radio, ... ) by resoldering 2 low current wires.
The whole idea is to use a low current signal to switch on a high current circuit which detonates the blastingcap; not to use the
low current signal to detonate the BC.
Shadowmartyr November 24th, 2007, 12:36 AM

Remember that the current must be high enough to make a thin bridge wire glow hot enough to make the primary in the
blasting cap react and detonate, which most ringer circuits will not be able to provide (running in miliamps rather than amps).
You need to realize what kind of detonator is being used, the cap that is made is actually used to detonate the blasting cap,
you need to be aware of the technique used. This is how the bridge is made for the loss of milliamps required to detonate the
actual blasting cap (the wire doesn't have to be "glowing red hot").
Also, the power graph from the ringer signal isn't a steady flat DC signal, rather a fluctuation of levels to generate a
preselected ring tone.
The ringer is responsible for the actual fluctuation's of sound you hear coming from it, the wire leading to it provides a
constant stream of direct current from the battery.
Attaching a blasting cap to a weak, unpredictable signal is everything but reliable, hence unsafe. Your aim is 100% operational
success, not something that will work 'most of the time'.
If your eluding to the frequency it operates at that is not a problem. This phone operates at short UHF frequencies of 800mhz.
Actually I have one of the tracphones I described above for use in an emergencey. I once accidentally left it in my trucks glove
box for close to a week when it was still on (it was fully charged when I had put it in there). And once I had realized it was not
in my house and I ran out to get it surprisingly it still had 2 bars left.
But honestly, if your not going to be using the device within 2-3 days of planting you shouldn't use it at all, for the chance it
would be discovered is obviously greater.
Simply adding an external power supply that can provide enough current to detonate the blasting cap and a 'switching'
component (transistor/SCR) will provide far greater reliability and can be attached universally to any low current signal device
(alarm, timer, PLC, cell phone, radio, ... ) by resoldering 2 low current wires.
If your going to go to all that trouble it would probably be easier to use a programmable PIC timer with circuit board (for a
timed device anyway..).
BlackFalcoN November 24th, 2007, 01:02 AM

The ringer is responsible for the actual fluctuation's of sound you hear coming from it, the wire leads to it provide a constant
stream of direct current from the battery.
So you are saying that for every different ringtone I have in my cell phone, I have a different physical ringer ?
And honestly, if your not going to be using the device within 2-3 days of planting you shouldn't use it at all, for the chance it
would be discovered is obviously greater.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst ;)

Seriously, it all depends what you try to achieve and how critical a reliable detonation is for you in the situation you are in.
If your going to go to all that trouble it would probably be easier to use a programmable PIC timer with circuit board (for a
timed device anyway..).
Total time needed to solder a 20 cent transistor to a scrap PCB, and attach a 3$ 1400 mA battery pack = 4 minutes (2
minutes to get the iron hot), electronic timers (countdown / fixed time alarm) can be found for 3-4$ (e.g. Velleman Countdown
timer). Far less trouble than assembling and programming a more expensive PLC ?
Try beating those construction times and costs with a programmable PLC...
Regardless of the 'trigger' circuitry you use, you still need a way to translate a low input current signal in a high output current
circuit...
http://www.designnotes.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/TIMER5.JPG
Velleman Countdown timer
Shadowmartyr November 24th, 2007, 01:08 AM

So you are saying that for every different ringtone I have in my cell phone, I have a different physical ringer ?
No I am saying that the ringer converts the current into whatever ring-tone is assigned on the phone.
Regardless of the 'trigger' circuitry you use, you still need a way to translate a low input current signal in a high output current
circuit...
This is the problem with all of the other electronics I listed above, except the mobile and two-way phone with the pager.
overcookedpizza December 30th, 2007, 09:02 AM

"Rather, a PIC or such would be programmed so that only a specific message, or caller-ID, would activate the device."
Such a thing has been already made.

http://godlovesmeat.com/spatulatzar/wireless_detonator/
Scroll down for the schematics, on the website it has been done for a cordless phone, but it works for a cell phone just fine
(using the headset port)
http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/4237/img1620vf9.jpg (my own)
It will not activate unless you enter the proper code. The website explains pretty well on the details of how it works.
Incase anyone wants to build one, microchip.com provides samples of the necessary pic microcontroller, but you will require
something to program it with.
Farmboy January 3rd, 2008, 08:22 AM

To save time if using a pay phone missing it's # use an ANI # (U.S.) I just used the # I used in my work (I've been out of the
biz for 3 years) the # is:101 07321 770 988 9664. This way you can,within reasonable assurence,program the payphone's #
into your trgger device.
Positron January 30th, 2008, 09:48 PM

No doubt, the devil's in the details with this one.
To a degree, it could easily and effectively be done with the following three things:
1. A prepaid cellphone
2. A beefy (100A) 800V SCR from Digikey.com or Mouser.com
3. The disposable cameras + homemade EBW detonator spoken of in the last few pages of the thread titled "Erythritol
Tetranitrate".
As mentioned before, the reliability and safety of this arrangement would mainly be dependent on an unwanted call triggering
the device.
So, if you're a third-World self-destructive piece of extremist religious shit, a 1% chance of dying (and/or a failed mission op)
would probably be acceptable.
You'll need to consider the details if you aren't that type. To do this, you'll probably need to design your own electronic
solution. It's not as hard as it sounds, but it'll have to be done in one way or another.
For a near-100% margin of safety, a delay unit (THAT YOU CAN TRUST YOUR LIFE TO) will be needed to arm the device long
after you've walked away from it. Use a relay, wired with its output contacts directly in series with the detonator. When the
delay unit times out, it closes the relay contacts, which allows current to flow to the bridgewire when the incoming call finally
happens.
To achieve near-100% operational reliability, yes, it will be necessary to keep unwanted calls from triggering the device.
PIC processors, BASIC stamps, computers+software, DTMF decoders, PLC's, all that will work great; but they're too complicated
to be of use to most people.
Here are some options:
1. Use two or more phones, each with their own relay contacts in series with the detonator. Either phone may receive an
unwanted call at any time, but it's a slim chance that they would ever ring at the same time.. Reliability could be increased
even further if the phones (and network providers) were different. To trigger the device, just call both phone numbers at the
same time (two more prepaid phones!).
2. Use just one phone (as described above), and a digital counter circuit. If the phone receives a call (not just "rings") 10
times in a row, it activates the relay. The chance of the prepaid phone's number being dialed 10 times in a row, is low.
I realize that not everyone can whip up such things as a "digital counter circuit".
Anyone else have ideas? The simpler, the better...
Always test before you use................
BlackFalcoN January 31st, 2008, 07:40 AM

You also could get a cellphone that allows you to choose custom ring tones for different events (SMS, call, alarm clock etc),
and disable the vibrating motion for all callers EXCEPT your 'detonation trigger event'
For example:
You have 2 cellphones, with each an anonymously obtained SIM card.
Cellphone 1 with number 555-999111 has been modified, where the vibrator has been replaced with a SCR that triggers your
blasting cap.
You disable all ring tones and vibration for all calls on cellphone1, then define a custom ring tone for when number 555-
012345 (cellphone 2) calls. This custom ring tone will be something that normally would utilize the vibrator, but in this case
would trigger the SCR.
Cellphone1 can be spammed/called with thousands of events, but since you have disabled all ring tone action for them, the
SCR will only be triggered when Cellphone2 calls.
(logical: IF IncomingCallnumber == "555-012345" then vibrator = on ELSE vibrator = off ).
This will be an extra safety feature, additional to the obvious 'ARM' button which you only enable after planting the explosive
charges.
Undoubtably people, it also can be done with PIC's, PLC's and DTMF decoders; but every additional feature will increase the
cost of the device and every additional component has an additional chance to fail.
Like a great mind once said : " Plan for failure but keep it simple stupid " ;)
Charles Owlen Picket January 31st, 2008, 10:27 AM
You also could get a cellphone Actually at this juncture the countdown timer concept you outlined is perhaps one of the few
items that have virtually no specific countermeasures. The cellphone and cordless phone concepts have been used to such a
degree that so many countermeasures are now in place as to make them very questionable. Jamming devices abound and
some can be very simple. Jamming cell phones is actually (almost) a whole sub-industry in radio electronics; some of it
sophisticated and reserved, some not.
On a professional level, virtually all encoded wireless blast boxes are now no longer used in industry. They are still sold by
some firms but industrial mining operations no longer employ them due to some in house issues that brought a class action
law suite due to tragedy. They have so many disclaimers that insurance firms no longer cover them when used professionally.
[Our civilian airways are filled with "junk" as to make them unreliable.] In a war zone the counter measures abound. They
(cordless methods) had their heyday for about a decade and are now in disrepute. Industry does use "jump" cordless
encoding for several meters but not to provide distance. It's simply to provide code input for safety.
Wallybanger November 16th, 2008, 07:08 AM

One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is that most phones today run a Java OS and that you could either write a
java program for your phone or write up a completely new OS to do exactly what you want.
iHME November 16th, 2008, 08:38 AM

Not "Java OS" they just support java programs, it has some benefits.
As the developers don't have to port the program to all possible cell phone operating systems. Systems like Symbian can
support C coded programs that are compiled for it.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Magnetic Dip Turn-Count Fuze
Log in
View Full Version : Magnetic Dip Turn-Count Fuze
nbk2000 April 21st, 2005, 01:28 PM

The earth has an ambient magnetic field which alw ays has a 'north' in the ground. There's the north know n as a direction, but the field also dips into the earth to varying
degrees.
The idea is to have a simple magnetic detector fuse that detects this ambient magnetic field, and can count the peaks as the fuse is rotated on its w ay to the target.
Since the distance traveled is the same per rotation, regardless of forward velocity, an accurate turn-count fuse allow s for precision air-bursting muntions.
The turn-count fuzes in current use, such as the Diehl ABM, use a micromechanical device to detect this, requiring advanced technologies.
Using an external reference that is universally present, such as the earths dip field, may greatly simplify fuse design.
I would suggest including a filtering to the fuse to prevent passage near powerlines or large metal objects from causing false counts. Such filtering might be using a timer that
counts how long it takes to for the first two peaks to be counted, then only allow s measurements during a narrow time-frame based around that initalization.
nbk2000 April 21st, 2005, 01:28 PM

degrees.
nbk2000 April 21st, 2005, 01:28 PM

degrees.
Jacks Complete April 21st, 2005, 08:37 PM

I don't think this is going to w ork.
The barrel will be steel, as will the case of any airburst munition. The angle of firing will be different, and the trajectory changes during the flight.
The main issue is the rate of rotation is far too high for most field strength detectors, thousands of times a second, w hich is far higher than the sample rate of any chip I have
ever seen. And it is a tiny signal.
What's wrong with the far simpler time of flight calculation? Drop in an accelerometer if you want amazing accuracy, otherwise use a basic timer circuit to detonate after the right
time at the speed of travel.
It could be measured by a magnetic or optical sensor in the round from a couple of marks on the barrel's muzzle. A basic circuit could do that, then feed a microprocessor or
whatever to determine the flight time to the target. That would be very accurate.
EDIT: I think this would only work on the north/south line, or at 45 to each side. If you fired it east to west, you wouldn't get a detection event, as there is no dip to see. If you
turned it round so it did do that, you would get tw o detects... I think... I'm not sure - I'm tired as it is late. I'll have a think about it till tomorrow .


megalomania April 22nd, 2005, 04:21 AM

Might such a thing be used specificially to target power plants and such that produce large magnetic distortions?
Somewhere out there the federal agent assigned to monitor this site has urgently faxed a dispatch to his contacts at DOD to check w ith some scientists to see if this is feasable.
Hello agent Bob :)
Hello agent Bob :)

Hello agent Bob :)
FU TI April 25th, 2005, 02:57 PM

Mega I think that there is acctually a multiple rocket launcher system armed with rockets having similar system as w arhead guidance. It is designed for longrange tank combat.
Work similar to anti-radar rocket. Launch, parachute opens at highest point of trajectory, little gliding till sensor lock on large metalic moving object, secondary buster rocket
ignition and tank get its cumulative panzer-piercing charge at turet opening hatch which is one of the armor weak points. Bad day for armor divison in attack. Yes Bob, it can be
made to w ork:)

made to w ork:)

made to w ork:)
Jacks Complete April 25th, 2005, 03:17 PM

Could be useful for taking dow n powerlines, too. Anything that gives off a large magnetic field due to the flow of electric inside could be targeted.


nbk2000 May 9th, 2005, 07:23 PM

How about as a proximity detector for helicopters? A metallic object suspended in mid-air has to have a magnetic field or some distortion effect on the ambient earth field.
nbk2000 May 9th, 2005, 07:23 PM

nbk2000 May 9th, 2005, 07:23 PM

FU TI May 10th, 2005, 07:24 AM

I think that helicopters are easier to take down with IR guided rockets but it can be good idea to try this one.
Few days ago I look at Discovery channel and saw interesting system. It isn't like this one, but it is close. Shell is fired from a cannon, it splits up in two parts that are NIR
guided missiles for tank combat I think. It caught my attention:). Maybe OT but...I have to share it w ith you guys.
FU TI May 10th, 2005, 07:24 AM

FU TI May 10th, 2005, 07:24 AM


Electric field might be best for tracking a helicopter. Magnetic may well be too short range.
After several minutes in the air, those rotating parts and the friction against the air mean that there is a charge built up. There used to be guidance saying that the sling should
touch dow n before being caught, to avoid static shock to the catcher. Not sure if this is still true, though.
If I had an E-field meter, it would be easy to see when the police helicopter flies over...


Nihilist May 27th, 2005, 01:25 AM

Another point to consider is that even if magnetic guidance for targetting helicopters is technically inferior to IR guidance, it is still a valuable tool, because it won't be expected.
The very fact that it's inferior, means that they will expect the superior IR-based system, and possibly have counter-measures in place for it. The magnetic system, due to it's
technical inferiority will provide the element of surprise.


nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:42 PM

Exactly!
Apaches and Blackhawks have IR decoys and flare launchers and all that shit. But point detonated RPG's have taken both of these birds dow n! :p
And w hat kind of ECM could there be for a magnetic field? I know you can degauss a ship, but can you do that for a helicopter made of composites?
nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:42 PM

Exactly!
nbk2000 May 27th, 2005, 06:42 PM

Exactly!
FU TI May 29th, 2005, 02:02 PM

Only thing I can see that makes this good idea is if it can be make to work it will make helicopter producers to start using other materials as titanium, aluminium etc. (as it
already happens with submarines) making it harder/expensive to produce and it still won't make them "immortal" as NBK2000 already mentioned. The bigger they are...harder
they fall. But anyway there is not such thing as invisibility shield (unless you are a spirit but then you couldn't care less for the earthly problems;)). Hell if I was looking for a low
cost system for anti-helicopter rocket I would try sound detector (most of those noisy things are subsonic aren't they?) and I think it wouldn't be to hard to design system that
would look for the frequency of helicopter rotating blade. Then you only need couple of those detectors per rocket little of phase or of centered for a triangulation of helicopter
position, set it to detonate at certain proximity of sound source and that should do the job. You could even make system that w ould lock the target by using directed
microphone for the target locking before launch. This could be made as double use system for the infantry making no difference between the tank or helicopter as long as it is in
range. I must go to the radio and spare electronic parts shop this days anyway on the other matter, so I will see can an amateur done that in his backyard.
FU TI May 29th, 2005, 02:02 PM

FU TI May 29th, 2005, 02:02 PM

nbk2000 October 13th, 2006, 01:09 AM

I found this snippet in a defense symposium proceedings.
The circuit can detect to a resolution of 1.5°, which should be more than adequate.
And, given 3 axis counting, plenty of anti-falsing, so large ferrous bodies should have no effect on the accuracy of the count fuze. :)
sparkchaser October 16th, 2006, 10:50 AM

nbk, magnetic tracking wouldn't w ork because of too much ambient interference, how ever, magnetic proximity fuzes were all the rage in WW2. Most flak shells used them,
allied and axis. Get a big enough charge w ith plenty of fragmentation on the end of a rocket and presto! optical sights would work fine for helicopters, they're nice and slow !

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Counter Force Detonators
Log in
View Full Version : Counter Force Detonators
me234 July 15th, 2005, 12:40 AM

So anyway, I was just sitting around the other morning, daydreaming about those things we all daydream about. In particular that morning, I was contemplating insensitive HEs and how
shoving, w ith tremendous force and pressure and violence of course, a second det. into the charge helps to get it going. Now suddenly a thought sprang forth unto my
conscience (yes that is my one for the rest of the year).
The thought that occurred was along the lines of a picture. I pictured these tw o dets sitting side by side a few centimetres apart in the main charge. However the picture in my mind of
this thing going off involved the 2 dets being initiated simultaneously and their collective effects acting just like the counter force charges (desc ribed in CIA Improvised Sabotage D evices
from Desert Publications). This counter force effect is said to roughly halve the amount of explosives needed for any given task.
So here I was faced w ith the reality that suddenly, if using the counter force charge principle of the positive addition of wave amplitudes, one can use significantly less primary to
accomplish high order initiation in a base charge or what have you. But the problem is that most people go w ith overkill whenever possible for detonators, so needing less primary
doesn t really matter if you can afford to use 20g APAN as a detonator.
So obviously w e are left w ith the conclusion that unless

1- one is desperately short of primary explosives; or
2- one has explosives that can detonate in extremely small amounts
my entire post is w orthless.
BUT, w ith the advent of azo-clathrates etc. one does indeed have primary explosives that detonate in extremely small amounts.
The picture in my mind goes something along the lines of two m iniature discs each cons isting of minimal am ounts of azo-clathrate (tailored to minimize deflagration detonation
distance) perfectly parallel to each other at a distance that would probably have to be determined by calculations and experimentation.
These two discs could be constructed by tightly pressing with the use of a small amount of added phlegmatizer to help maintain the charge shape. These 2 discs could then be
inserted into a liquefied low melting point explosive w hich would then be slow ly solidified to prevent cracks and warping from occurring. Even better would be its use in a liquid
explosive, something that needs a fair kick in the ass to get going, e.g. nitromethane; various nitro-glycerine mixtures that tend to detonate at low order velocities.
Basically Im hoping that the 2 discs would detonate and send their waves directly at each other. These waves would then undergo constructive interference and the increased amplitude,
representative of the w ave energies, would provide sufficient energy to excite the base charge molecules over and above the activation energy required to cause detonation.
Well, thats how it SHOU LD go, theoretically and in my im agination of course.

Practically, Im not sure exactly how one would precision cast milligram quantities of a primary explosive to exact dimensions , and then fix them to some sort of structure that would hold
them in place.
The initiation of the discs how ever, would be a major obstacle. I w as thinking, quite unrealistically, about a capillary tube packed with azo-clathrate or nitrocellulose fibres that
could be initiated in the main housing of the detonator (the structure holding the discs in place) and they would direct a flame or shockw ave to the centre of the cast discs.
Even if this scale of miniaturization is completely impos sible (but nothing s impossible) the application of counter force based detonators could still prove useful for IHEs in sm all devices,
e.g. submunitions.
The only idea that comes to mind about casting small amounts of primary is by using the apparatus used to produce KBr discs for Infrared spectroscopy. However, compressing primary
explosives by ~ 10 tons of weight on top of the primary charge doesnt s eem like a w hole lot of fun to me.
I figure if one could come up w ith some w ay of actually making these damned things, and if one could prove its industrial applications, then one could definitely get a patent for this. But
now that Ive posted this somewhat unlikely idea, no patent, and therefore no monopoly is possible for this idea, it is now completely free to the world.
However, even if m y idea turns out to be a load of crap, its still given me hours of imaginative entertainm ent.
So, please, opinions everyone, particularly Rosco Bodine and others w ith experience in azo-clathrates and the like or counter force charges.
Ive attached a diagram of w hat Im hoping the device w ould look like.
me234 July 15th, 2005, 12:40 AM

So anyway, I was just sitting around the other morning, daydreaming about those things we all daydream about. In particular that morning, I was contemplating insensitive HEs and how
shoving, w ith tremendous force and pressure and violence of course, a second det. into the charge helps to get it going. Now suddenly a thought sprang forth unto my
conscience (yes that is my one for the rest of the year).
The thought that occurred was along the lines of a picture. I pictured these tw o dets sitting side by side a few centimetres apart in the main charge. However the picture in my mind of
this thing going off involved the 2 dets being initiated simultaneously and their collective effects acting just like the counter force charges (desc ribed in CIA Improvised Sabotage D evices
from Desert Publications). This counter force effect is said to roughly halve the amount of explosives needed for any given task.
So here I was faced w ith the reality that suddenly, if using the counter force charge principle of the positive addition of wave amplitudes, one can use significantly less primary to
accomplish high order initiation in a base charge or what have you. But the problem is that most people go w ith overkill whenever possible for detonators, so needing less primary
doesn t really matter if you can afford to use 20g APAN as a detonator.
So obviously w e are left w ith the conclusion that unless

1- one is desperately short of primary explosives; or
2- one has explosives that can detonate in extremely small amounts
my entire post is w orthless.
BUT, w ith the advent of azo-clathrates etc. one does indeed have primary explosives that detonate in extremely small amounts.
The picture in my mind goes something along the lines of two m iniature discs each cons isting of minimal am ounts of azo-clathrate (tailored to minimize deflagration detonation
distance) perfectly parallel to each other at a distance that would probably have to be determined by calculations and experimentation.
These two discs could be constructed by tightly pressing with the use of a small amount of added phlegmatizer to help maintain the charge shape. These 2 discs could then be
inserted into a liquefied low melting point explosive w hich would then be slow ly solidified to prevent cracks and warping from occurring. Even better would be its use in a liquid
explosive, something that needs a fair kick in the ass to get going, e.g. nitromethane; various nitro-glycerine mixtures that tend to detonate at low order velocities.
Basically Im hoping that the 2 discs would detonate and send their waves directly at each other. These waves would then undergo constructive interference and the increased amplitude,
representative of the w ave energies, would provide sufficient energy to excite the base charge molecules over and above the activation energy required to cause detonation.
Well, thats how it SHOU LD go, theoretically and in my im agination of course.

Practically, Im not sure exactly how one would precision cast milligram quantities of a primary explosive to exact dimensions , and then fix them to some sort of structure that would hold
them in place.
The initiation of the discs how ever, would be a major obstacle. I w as thinking, quite unrealistically, about a capillary tube packed with azo-clathrate or nitrocellulose fibres that
could be initiated in the main housing of the detonator (the structure holding the discs in place) and they would direct a flame or shockw ave to the centre of the cast discs.
Even if this scale of miniaturization is completely impos sible (but nothing s impossible) the application of counter force based detonators could still prove useful for IHEs in sm all devices,
e.g. submunitions.
The only idea that comes to mind about casting small amounts of primary is by using the apparatus used to produce KBr discs for Infrared spectroscopy. However, compressing primary
explosives by ~ 10 tons of weight on top of the primary charge doesnt s eem like a w hole lot of fun to me.
I figure if one could come up w ith some w ay of actually making these damned things, and if one could prove its industrial applications, then one could definitely get a patent for this. But
now that Ive posted this somewhat unlikely idea, no patent, and therefore no monopoly is possible for this idea, it is now completely free to the world.
However, even if m y idea turns out to be a load of crap, its still given me hours of imaginative entertainm ent.
So, please, opinions everyone, particularly Rosco Bodine and others w ith experience in azo-clathrates and the like or counter force charges.
Ive attached a diagram of w hat Im hoping the device w ould look like.
Jacks Complete July 15th, 2005, 06:13 AM

The pictures not approved yet, but this w ould seem to be a shaped charge effect in the twin detonators, wouldn't it?
If so, then cast the det plug as a tiny shaped charge, initiated at the top just like normal.
It might need a bottleneck, choke or something to ensure the timing is right, though, as the VoD is very high, and getting an additive wavefront would otherwise be very hard
on a mm scale.
Something that looks like:
<code>
\ /
| |
Y
|
|||
</code>
with initiation at the bottom, a choke, then two prongs, w hich go up at the same instant, causing a Monroe effect between them, and high order detonation.
Is this the kind of thing you were thinking?

The pictures not approved yet, but this w ould seem to be a shaped charge effect in the twin detonators, wouldn't it?
If so, then cast the det plug as a tiny shaped charge, initiated at the top just like normal.
It might need a bottleneck, choke or something to ensure the timing is right, though, as the VoD is very high, and getting an additive wavefront would otherwise be very hard
on a mm scale.
Something that looks like:

<code>
\ /
| |
Y
|
|||
</code>
with initiation at the bottom, a choke, then two prongs, w hich go up at the same instant, causing a Monroe effect between them, and high order detonation.
Is this the kind of thing you were thinking?
nbk2000 July 15th, 2005, 11:02 AM

Computer draw n graphics should be saved in .GIF format. Much more compact and no jaggies. ;)
Using opposed detonators is a technique being used for selectable munitions. That is, warheads that can be used in either EFP or SC attacks, with the ability to vary the shaping
of the resulting penetrators or jets by varying the timing between the detonators initiation.
But, since your initiation points are so close together, they should act essentially as a single detonator.
I think that 'counter-force' detonators may indeed work as you think, creating an increased pressure for the same charge weight.
nbk2000 July 15th, 2005, 11:02 AM

Computer draw n graphics should be saved in .GIF format. Much more compact and no jaggies. ;)
Using opposed detonators is a technique being used for selectable munitions. That is, warheads that can be used in either EFP or SC attacks, with the ability to vary the shaping
of the resulting penetrators or jets by varying the timing between the detonators initiation.
But, since your initiation points are so close together, they should act essentially as a single detonator.
I think that 'counter-force' detonators may indeed work as you think, creating an increased pressure for the same charge weight.
mil&co July 15th, 2005, 03:38 PM

The initiation of the discs how ever, would be a major obstacle.
What about EBW's?, thats what they were origionally invented for: Detonating the plutonium-propellant charges at exactly the same time.
Having that said, you could even go for PETN as replacement for the azo-clathrates, or moldable medium-sensitive HE's, making it easier to shape the disks.
mil&co July 15th, 2005, 03:38 PM

The initiation of the discs how ever, would be a major obstacle.
What about EBW's?, thats what they were origionally invented for: Detonating the plutonium-propellant charges at exactly the same time.
Having that said, you could even go for PETN as replacement for the azo-clathrates, or moldable medium-sensitive HE's, making it easier to shape the disks.
me234 July 18th, 2005, 02:02 AM

Jack's, that's similar to the idea I w as thinking about. Hopefully the pic w ill clear up any confusion. But now that you mention it a miniature shaped charge (hollow charge)
should also create a region of higher than normal energy along the SC's jet's length. This increased peak energy could also have that same effect of requiring less primary.
NBK, I was thinking along the lines of making these so that less primary w ould be needed for the same effect. I'm glad that you think it'll w ork. In sub-munitions like cluster
bombs, I w as contemplating quite small bomblets, where a conventional detonator w ould waste valuable space w here more secondary could be squeezed in.
me234 July 18th, 2005, 02:02 AM

Jack's, that's similar to the idea I w as thinking about. Hopefully the pic w ill clear up any confusion. But now that you mention it a miniature shaped charge (hollow charge)
should also create a region of higher than normal energy along the SC's jet's length. This increased peak energy could also have that same effect of requiring less primary.
NBK, I was thinking along the lines of making these so that less primary w ould be needed for the same effect. I'm glad that you think it'll w ork. In sub-munitions like cluster
bombs, I w as contemplating quite small bomblets, where a conventional detonator w ould waste valuable space w here more secondary could be squeezed in.
Jetex Kid July 18th, 2005, 11:06 AM

How wide are the disks? One cm? Two cm?
How simultaneously do the disks have to explode to be synergistic? If the disks are initiated in the center, w ould one disk consumed just as the other is beginning, be
acceptable timing?
If so, assuming that the detonation velocity is 5,000 m/s, and the disks are 2 cm in diameter, and one disk can detonate 0.5 cm before the other disk begins, then the
difference in detonation response times must be one microsecond or less!
Im not talking electrical timing, but *variations* in time between the ons et of current and detonation by the detonator. If one disk detonates in response to the current in 10 us ec and the
other in 31, it sure wont w ork.
I will not write reams to provide partial justification for my belief that consistency of detonation responses with 1 usec variability is not realistic for us Forumites.
However, connecting the two halves by an explosive bridge initiated (only once!) in the middle might solve this problem. Then, how ever, the bridge is exploding in the midst of
the secondary explosive, but it might work anyway.
Jetex Kid July 18th, 2005, 11:06 AM

How wide are the disks? One cm? Two cm?
How simultaneously do the disks have to explode to be synergistic? If the disks are initiated in the center, w ould one disk consumed just as the other is beginning, be
acceptable timing?
If so, assuming that the detonation velocity is 5,000 m/s, and the disks are 2 cm in diameter, and one disk can detonate 0.5 cm before the other disk begins, then the
difference in detonation response times must be one microsecond or less!
Im not talking electrical timing, but *variations* in time between the ons et of current and detonation by the detonator. If one disk detonates in response to the current in 10 us ec and the
other in 31, it sure wont w ork.
I will not write reams to provide partial justification for my belief that consistency of detonation responses with 1 usec variability is not realistic for us Forumites.
However, connecting the two halves by an explosive bridge initiated (only once!) in the middle might solve this problem. Then, how ever, the bridge is exploding in the midst of
the secondary explosive, but it might work anyway.

Jetex Kid, that was the point of my design.
The initiation point is outside the body of the charge, and the shockwave travels dow nwards, through a narrow constriction, then grows again.
Optically or physically it would be a pinhole, and as the explosion would then appear to radiate from that point, microsecond timings would be consistently achieved. This w ould
be very like your bridge idea, but could be made much smaller.
You are right though, we couldn't hope to get microsecond repeatable dets. from anything w e could make at home.

Jetex Kid, that was the point of my design.
The initiation point is outside the body of the charge, and the shockwave travels dow nwards, through a narrow constriction, then grows again.
Optically or physically it would be a pinhole, and as the explosion would then appear to radiate from that point, microsecond timings would be consistently achieved. This w ould
be very like your bridge idea, but could be made much smaller.
You are right though, we couldn't hope to get microsecond repeatable dets. from anything w e could make at home.
me234 July 19th, 2005, 05:02 AM

I know that this is pretty much unrealistic for us E&W folk, but I just thought it was a pleasant idea to have.
Jack and Jetex, that bridge idea and stuff is damned good, I was worrying about the timing thing.
Jetex, I figure as long as both discs are completely (or at least mostly) detonated and have formed their respective waves fully before the w ave front from one disc reaches and
bypasses the second disc, then the desired constructive interference can still occur and the effect will be observed.
I don't think a microgram or 2 of primary should make too much of a difference to the secondary when the bridge is initiated.
I think I shall refine the idea, maybe make a pic that'll be self-explanatory.
Thanks for the input, the design should be better now .
me234 July 19th, 2005, 05:02 AM

I know that this is pretty much unrealistic for us E&W folk, but I just thought it was a pleasant idea to have.
Jack and Jetex, that bridge idea and stuff is damned good, I was worrying about the timing thing.
Jetex, I figure as long as both discs are completely (or at least mostly) detonated and have formed their respective waves fully before the w ave front from one disc reaches and
bypasses the second disc, then the desired constructive interference can still occur and the effect will be observed.
I don't think a microgram or 2 of primary should make too much of a difference to the secondary when the bridge is initiated.
I think I shall refine the idea, maybe make a pic that'll be self-explanatory.
Thanks for the input, the design should be better now .
hereno July 19th, 2005, 09:27 AM

Though by the time you stuff around creating two seperate "disk" detonators undoubtedly you will end up using twice the explosive instead of less.
Commercial detonators do have a concave end to focus the detonation in a shaped charge like effect, I've seen them. Theres a reference in Fedoroff, and a patent detailing it.
Though the usefulness of this is also questioned in the Fedoroff entry. Though since they are still doing it, it may have some merit.
hereno July 19th, 2005, 09:27 AM

Though by the time you stuff around creating two seperate "disk" detonators undoubtedly you will end up using twice the explosive instead of less.
Commercial detonators do have a concave end to focus the detonation in a shaped charge like effect, I've seen them. Theres a reference in Fedoroff, and a patent detailing it.
Though the usefulness of this is also questioned in the Fedoroff entry. Though since they are still doing it, it may have some merit.

I think that a concave end would also increase slightly the compression of the main charge w here the det was pushed in.
Having it w ork like a shaped charge is what I was aiming for in my diagram.
Given that the comercial dets. have this feature, I suppose the increased heat, etc. makes a difference, and so this idea both has merit and will work!

I think that a concave end would also increase slightly the compression of the main charge w here the det was pushed in.
Having it w ork like a shaped charge is what I was aiming for in my diagram.
Given that the comercial dets. have this feature, I suppose the increased heat, etc. makes a difference, and so this idea both has merit and will work!

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > want to buy electronic tim er
Log in
View Full Version : want to buy electronic timer
Spiritus S e p t e m b e r 1 4th, 2005, 04:24 PM

Hi
Can anyone sell me an electronic timer which is able to detonate a prim ary explosive like Blackpowder, Acetoneperoxide,
HMT D, MEKAP or so on ?
Thanks for answers.
nbk2000 September 2 2nd, 2005, 01:13 PM

Yes...why doesn't a m e m ber here sell a newbie (or anyone for that m atter) an electronic timer for use with an explo sive? W e
just know you're neither a cop nor an idiot K3wL. :rolleyes:
Not banned, but definately warned! :m ad:

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Increasing brisance idea
Log in
View Full Version : Increasing brisance idea
me234 October 3rd, 2005, 06:24 AM

Ive been wanting to write this one up for some time now, and fortunately for me the time I happen to chose to put in the effort happens to coincide with the time I am
able to post once again(well sometimes post). So here goes.
We all know that brisance is the time until peak pressure is obtained during detonation right? Well what if we take an ordinary, fairly low brisance explosive, and we,
without messing around chemically, just decrease the time it takes to reach this pressure.
What am I talking about? Good question actually, I dont know. Only joking.
The setup I had envisioned involved taking some run-of-the-mill ANFO, which for calculation purposes, well chose to detonate at 3500m.s-1. Now we take a train of
explosive with an inherently higher vod, for this purpose we shall assume a tube packed with picric Acid at max detonable density, in a tube of greater than the critical
diameter, all detonating at 7000m.s-1.
We then take a cylindrical drum full of ANFO at its 3500m.s-1 specifications, and we insert the PA filled tube smack bang down the centre of the ANFO charge. The initiation of
the charge is brought about by detonating the PA tube through the ANFO, which detonates the ANFO as well.
The theory is now this: Instead of the ANFO detonating slowly (well not really SLOW, it IS going 3,5 kilometres per second, but you know what I mean) and taking its
own sweet time reaching the bottom of the charge, as well as reaching peak pressure somewhere along its length, we have the PA detonating at twice the vod of the
ANFO, propagating down the length of the heterogeneous tube (sorry, couldnt resist the big word) initiating the ANFO along its full length in approximately half the
time. This should reduce the time needed f or the ANFO to reach whatever stage during its detonation that peak pressure is attained. Thus we increase the ANFOs
brisance.
I did some rudimentary calculations based on several (shit off big) assumptions.
Take a 1m tall, by 0,5m wide cylindrical container and pack with the ANFO. Insert the PA tube. Then make the following assumptions:
Assume:
-The picric acid filled tube is of negligible width.
-Peak pressure is attained only once all the explosive has been completely consumed by detonation.
-The time taken for the explosive to be completely consumed is given by: Time taken for length of charge to detonate (assuming end-burning) + Time taken for an explosive
disk of width = radius of the charge container to be consumed radially by detonation. I.e. time to detonate downwards + time to detonate outwards.
-Brisance will be assumed to be purely a function of time taken to develop peak pressure.
-Brisance for the purposes of this discussion will be given as the relative brisance of an unmodified charge compared to that of the PA tube modified charge.
-Ignore the effects that the actual peak pressure attained by detonation has on the brisance.
And yes, yes, yes, I do realise the glaringly obvious things that these assumptions disregard, but I had to simplify the calculations to enable me to quantify some sort
of theoretical result. Plus I really dont enjoy integration.
Unfortunately these assumptions tend to fall apart when comparing different explosives to each other, for example it gives the second modified ANFO charge (4 PA tubes, see
later) as more brisant than the same charge using pure PA instead of ANFO)
Unmodified charge:
With no PA tube, the charge will take this long to reach peak pressure:
Time for height to detonate (end-burning):
1m / 3500m.s-1 = 2,857x10-4s (pretty quick aint it?)
Width:
0,5m / 3500m.s-1 = 1,429x10-4s
Total time unmodified = 4,286x10-4s
Modified charge:
Time for height to detonation (end-burning):
1m / 7000m.s-1 = 1,429x10-4s
Width:
0,5 / 3500m.s-1 = 1,429x10-4s
Total time modified: = 2,858x10-4s
Relative time gain:

2,858x10-4s / 4,286x10-4s = 0,6668
0,6668 x 100 = 66,68%
Time required to reach peak pressure has dropped by 33,32%
1 / 0,6668 = 1,500
Relative brisance has increased by a magnitude of 1,5
Personally I think that increasing the brisance of an ANFO charge 1,5 times simply by adding a tube of picric acid to the works is quite a nice idea. However, getting the world
of explosives to obey all those ridiculous assumptions I had to make is another story.
By comparison, a 1m by 0,5m cylinder of TNT (@6900m.s-1 Meyer et. al.) would take 2,174x10-4s to reach peak pressure. Therefore our modified ANFO is not that far behind
TNT, but the TNT charge is FAR simpler to make.
By a similar calculation, using 4 tubes of PA placed vertically though the same charge of ANFO at exactly one quarter of the diameter of the charge cylinder in from the outside
of the charge, all initiated at the same time, i.e. 4 tubes evenly spaced in the cylinder of ANFO, the time taken to reach peak pressure is:
Time = 1,786x10-4s
This represents an increase in brisance of a magnitude of 2,400 (41,67% of the unmodified charges time is needed to reach peak pressure). Its even f aster (read more
brisant) than the TNT charge.
So now, instead of increasing the brisance by 1,5 times, weve more than doubled it, and exceeded TNT, all for the price of 4 x 1m tubes of PA. Kinda cool aint it?
Another advantage of initiating a slower explosive with lengths of faster explosives is that instead of the detonation gases being given time to dissipate while the rest of the
charge is still undergoing detonation (the pushing effect of ANFO), more of the explosive is converted to gas in any given amount of time. Meaning that there is less time for
gases to dissipate during detonation, increasing the actual peak pressure of the detonation, increasing the brisance even further.
Of course, using an even faster explosive will increase the brisance even further; while the closer the vods of the 2 explosives used are, the less the gain in relative
brisance. Of course using different shapes of charges will also affect the extent to which the brisance is increased; for example, using a longer cylinder will increase the brisance
even further, while a wider cylinder will decrease it. Basically, the degree to which brisance is increased depends on how much, or rather what proportion, of the charge (in the
direction of propagation) is made up of the faster explosive.
Now, the question stands, can anyone think of a use for doubled brisance ANFO charges? I mean the whole reason theyre used is for their pushing effect. Although
maybe if one wanted to blow out a huge rock, and needed to break it apart even more than regular ANFO would.
But I guess when ANFO is simply used out of convenience, e.g. Oklahoma City and various other type car bombs, then increasing its brisance might just come in handy.
NBK, you got any of those bright ideas where this could be used to someones advantage?
Anybody who feels like it, by all means, go ahead and let me know if you can see any assumptions I may have made but forgot to include them. And also let me (and
others) know what effects ignoring these assumptions would have in the real world, e.g. ignoring the actual peak pressure reached when determining relative brisance
is a big one, it means that one cant use those calculations to compare different explosives.
Please let me know what you think, especially about applications.
What do you guys think would happen if we varied the shape, e.g. used a sphere with a centre charge of faster explosive?
shooter3 October 3rd, 2005, 08:03 PM

It sounds like you have independently rediscovered what a booster charge is. Arial bombs filled with ammatol had boosters in them to ensure complete detonation and boost
det velocity.
xyz October 4th, 2005, 06:37 AM

I seem to recall reading something long ago about experiments where large amounts of detcord were "threaded" through multi-ton ANFO charges (basically lots of of lengths of
detcord at Xcm intervals running parallel through the charge) to try to make them behave more brisantly.
IIRC the results showed it was rather impractical and didn't work very well at all.
Note that this only refers to using detcord, more powerful boosters (i.e. a 30mm tube filled with something very brisant) may work much better.
The_Duke October 6th, 2005, 12:26 PM

As Shooter3 has already stated, your idea embodies the entire concept of a booster charge, this is nothing new to most of us.
Besides the velocity of detonation, there are many more factors which you are overlooking such as the loading density of the explosive, as well as the gases produced and the
heat of explosion to name a few.
There is now way in hell your calculations are correct, it is not possible when you have not even figured in all of the other variables. I even highly doubt that you have
the tools, equipment and know-how to accurately calculate, measure and to document the correct figures so I suggest you do a good deal more reading.

I've seen patents where a strip of bridgewire detonators is running the entire length of the borehole with the ANFO in it, so that the ANFO is simultanously initiated at multiple
points along its entire length, rather than running from one end to the other.
Perhaps this principle is what you're thinking of?
simply RED October 8th, 2005, 11:39 AM

Brizance is a complex characteristic.
Lets speak about detonation pressure and power (P[J/s]=E/t)

Detonation pressure of the anfo will not change no matter what kind of booster you use. It is in any case less than 10 gigapascals. This is the peak pressure - the detonation
wave has - when running through the explosive.
For hexogen at 1,8g/cc it is 35 GPa. Any object in contact with the explosive will experience this exact pressure (constant for each type of explosive and its density).
Anyway, the power of the bomb will double if the explosive is consumed twice the usual speed. The bomb will be more destructive!
This change in power could be observed in changes of "pressure-time" graphics shot at every 5 meters from the detonating device.
The initial supersonic wave will most possibly remain the same, but the speed of the expanding gasses should be higher.
quicksilver October 8th, 2005, 01:09 PM

No need to quote an entire post. :)
Could this be (what you are dealing with in your original post as well): the "over-drive" concept...not that of a booster.....(?)
A wonderful book you may want to glance at is : Detonation, Theory & Experiment by W. Fickett & Davis. I believe what you are speaking of is in Ch. 2 and is called the ZND
model (as opposed to the Steady Plane detonation model).
It's quite something. You may be able to perform this concept in a small scale as well.
The book is not one of those $300 monsters either. You may really like it.
It's ISBN 0-486-41456-6 - plus it has a fantastic bibliography for related subject matter that I thought was non-existant (journals and such).

The total energy available isn't going to change, but the rate at which it is released can be. 'The candle that burns at both ends, burns twice as bright, but half as long' concept.
me234 October 12th, 2005, 02:01 AM

@NBK: That's similar to what I was thinking. My idea is basically trying to get an explosive charge to detonate and reach its peak pressure in a time shorter than a normally
initiated charge. So the strip of bridgewire detonators running a charge's length would essentially be the same as what I proposed.
What I was thinking of is not really a booster, although that would be a side effect. A booster is just to provide that extra oomph to ensure that the reaction gets going well. I
was wanting to effectively increase the charge's vod without having to switch explosives, or use an unpleasantly high density (which could prove problematic with something
like ANFO).
@ The_Duke: I am aware that I have huge gaps in all my assumptions, and that I no where nearly covered all the simplifications I had to make, but the calculations were
meant to be examples to illustrate the effect I was looking for, they were not meant to be taken as anything even remotely as in the area of factual. I believe I even called
my assumptions ridiculous at one point in my earlier post.
That being said, that you for informing me of gaps (canyons) in my idea as per my request in my abovementioned post
@quicksilver: That's basically exactly what I was thinking about, 'over driving' the detonation. Thanks man, I wasn't aware of any books dealing with the idea (although I
hadn't UTFSE's my Fedoroff). Thank you for the reference.
BTW, what's 'ISBN' I know precisely shit about computers and electrical technology, so forgive my ignorance. I guess I'll UTFSE now.
@simply RED: You've got it man. Thanks for bringing up some more specifics, I didn't want to have anything left out in this discussion.
P.S. Welcome back home!
Jacks Complete October 12th, 2005, 05:14 AM

Me234,
ISBN isn't computers, it is books. An ISBN number uniquely identifies a book (at least in theory) so that you can be sure you have the right one. It lets libraries and bookshops
order the right version of a magazine, or a second edition instead of the first, etc.
Grab pretty much any book you own, and look on the back, above the barcode.

Brisance has nothing to do with 'how fast the hole mass is consumed', but with 'how fast it hits the confinement'. It is a measure of detonation pressure, which in turn is a
constant for a given material (neglecting the first cm where it can be overdriven) and proportional to density, but to the square of velocity. Detonation pressure is in the range
of 100-400 tons per square cm, while the pressure of the hot gasses is more like 5-15 tons once the shock wave has passed. Det pressure is what breaks/cuts, gas pressure is
what throws/heaves.
So the brisance will stay the same, but it might still be an advantage in a borehole, i.e. better breaking of the rock because more surface gets pressurized in the same time.
me234 January 30th, 2006, 03:29 AM

Boomer: For my idea, I probably should have stated this earlier, I'm taking the definition of brisance to be the time to reach maximum detonation pressure in conjunction with
the maximum detonation pressure obtained/reached. From this definition, you're obviously right with the fact that the maximum pressure reached won't change (ignoring
overdrive effects), but what can change is how quickly we reach that pressure:
It's no good having something that reaches huge gigapascal pressures, but takes 3 hours to get there. An ANFO type charge won't generate all that much pressure, but what
we can do is try to get it there quicker. That was the purpose of my idea.
I'm also going with the idea that max pressure would be reached sometime when enough explosive has been consumed in the shortest possible time (gives you a lot of gases
quickly), as opposed to when all the charge has been consumed, but the earlier gases are diffusing away.
Anyway, thanks for the constructive criticism guys, it's good to know when one falls short.
sdjsdj February 8th, 2006, 06:21 AM

I've seen patents where a strip of bridgewire detonators is running the entire length of the borehole with the ANFO in it, so that the ANFO is simultanously initiated at multiple
points along its entire length, rather than running from one end to the other.
Perhaps this principle is what you're thinking of?
Is this also why the bigger ANFO bombs produced by the IRA contained shockwave-propagating metal tubing, or was this technique merely a simple, relatively cheap way to
give additional shrapnel?
me234 February 24th, 2006, 01:15 AM

I doubt that a conducting a shock wave along a metal tube would be able to set off ANFO. But with something much more sensitive, who knows...
Just to check, you are trying to say that the shock wave travels down the tube (by cause massive amounts of high frequency vibrations along its length, kinda like hitting a
wall with it and having it hurt your hands from the shock right?) and these high energy vibrations then set off explosive along its length by transferring enough energy form the
tube to the charge?
Is that what you're trying to say? My head's a little slow today, so I'm sorry if I interpreted it completely wrong, but I just want to double check.
And anyway, even if it didn't work, I suppose you still get the extra shrapnel like you said.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > New in Iraq, thermobaric rounds
Log in
View Full Version : New in Iraq, thermobaric rounds

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001944.html
---
<div class="blogbody">
<h3 class="title" style="text-transform: uppercase;">Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon</h3>
War is hell. But its worse when the Marines bring out their new urban combat weapon, the <a href="http://www.talleyds.com/Product%20PDF%20flyers/SMAW-
D%20NE-InfoPaper-10-03.pdf">SMAW-NE</a>. Which may be why theyre not talking about it, much.
This is a version of the standard USMC <a href="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.htm">Shoulder Mounted Assault Weapon</a> but with a new
warhead. Described as NE - "Novel Explosive"- it is a <a href="http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,58094,00.html">thermobaric</a> mixture which ignites the air,
producing a shockwave of unparalleled destructive power, especially against buildings.
<img align=right img alt="smaw-ne sequence.JPG" src="http://www.defensetech.org/images/smaw-ne%20sequence.JPG" width="315" height="147" hspace="10"

vspace="5" />A post-action report from Iraq describes the effect of the new weapon: "One unit <a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2003/oif_mcsc-
field-report_apr2003.doc">disintegrated a large one-storey masonry type building with one round</a> from 100 meters. They were extremely impressed." Elsewhere it is
described by one Marine as "an awesome piece of ordnance."
It proved highly effective in the battle for Fallujah. This from the <a href="http://www.mca-marines.org/Gazette/">Marine Corps Gazette</a>, July
edition: "SMAW gunners became expert at determining which wall to shoot to cause the roof to collapse and crush the insurgents fortified inside interior rooms."
The NE round is supposed to be capable of going through a brick wall, but in practice gunners had to fire through a window or make a hole with an anti-tank rocket. Again,
from the Marine Corps Gazette:
<blockquote>"Due to the lack of penetrating power of the NE round, we found that our assaultmen had to first fire a dual-purpose rocket in order to create a hole
in the wall or building. This blast was immediately followed by an NE round that would incinerate the target or literally level the structure."</blockquote>

The rational for this approach was straightforward:
<blockquote>"Marines could employ blast weapons prior to entering houses that had become pillboxes, not homes. The economic cost of house replacement is not
comparable to American lives...all battalions adopted blast techniques appropriate to entering a bunker, assuming you did not know if the bunker was manned."</
blockquote>
The manufacturers, Talley, make bold use of its track record, with a brochure headlined <a href="http://www.talleyds.com/Product%20PDF%20flyers/
smaw_ne_flyer.pdf"</a>Thermobaric Urban Destruction</a>."
The SMAW-NE has only been procured by the USMC, though there are reports that some were 'borrowed' by other units. However, there are also proposals on the table
that thousands of obsolete <a href="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m72.htm">M-72 LAWs</a> could be <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004guns/thurs/
rockets/johnson.pdf">retrofitted with thermobaric warheads</a>, making then into effective urban combat tools.
But in an era of precision bombs, where collateral damage is expected to be kept to a minimum, such massively brutal weapons have become highly controversial.
These days, every civilian casualty means a few more hearts and minds are lost. <a href="http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000747.html">Thermobaric
weapons</a> almost invariable lead to civilian deaths. The Soviet Union was heavily criticized for using thermobaric weapons in Afghanistan because they were held to
constitute "disproportionate force," and similar criticisms were made when thermobarics were used in the Chechen conflict. According to Human Rights Watch, thermobaric
weapons "<a href="http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/02/chech0215b.htm">kill and injure in a particularly brutal manner over a wide area</a>. In urban settings it is very
difficult to limit the effect of this weapon to combatants, and the nature of FAE explosions makes it virtually impossible for civilians to take shelter from their destructive
effect."
So its understandable that the Marines have made so little noise about the use of the SMAW-NE in Fallujah. But keeping quiet about controversial weapons is a
lousy strategy, no matter how effective those arms are. In the short term, it may save some bad press. In the long term, its a recipe for a scandal. Military leaders
should debate human right advocates and the like first, and then publicly decide "we do/do not to use X". Otherwise when the media find do find out as
they always do -- not only do you get a level of hysteria but there is also the charge of covering up.
I'm undecided about thermobarics myself, but I think they should let the legal people sort out all these issues and clear things up. Otherwise you get claims of
chemical weapons and violating the Geneva Protocol. Which doesn't really help anyone. The warfighter is lef t in doubt, and it hands propaganda to the bad guys. Just
look at what happened it last weeks <a href="http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/9/174518/797">screaming</a> over <a href="http://
armchairgeneralist.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/11/its_not_chemica.html">white phosphorous rounds</a>.
-- <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786715618/102-4141234-8123345?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance">David Hambling</a>
<a name="more"></a>
<div class="footer"><a class="footerlink" href="http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001944.html">November 14, 2005 10:22 AM</a> | <a

class="footerlink" href="http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_ammo_and_munitions.html">Ammo and Munitions</a>
</div>
Chris The Great November 28th, 2005, 09:32 PM

Very interesting read and informative links!
Thanks alot.
From what I have gathered, this weapon is basically a small FAE that uses aluminum as the principle fuel to generate the massive blast effects shown. Is this correct?
me234 November 29th, 2005, 06:32 AM

You guys thinking that 25/75 PVN/Al mixture that was mentioned some time back here on the Forum?
If I recall correctly, it required a hell of a booster as it wasn't very enthusiastic about detonating due to the very low amount of HE in the mix. And on a small scale, the large
booster may prove a waste of space.
Maybe the use a 60/40 Al/PETN (IIRC) mix that someone either here or on the APC mentioned. The guy said it made a really nice flash when it went off.
Any word on the composition they're using JC? I read some of those links and I didn't find anything.
Chris The Great November 29th, 2005, 03:49 PM

One could use the booster charge as the explosive bursting charge for the warhead, to disperse the Al powder for the FAE explosion. The HE in the Al composition would ensure
ignition of the Al while the "booster" would give it the necessary efficient dispersion.
Sound like a good idea? It would most likely work even if the HE in the Al fuel didn't detonate.
MrSamosa November 30th, 2005, 03:53 AM

Wouldn't using an HE mixture defeat the purpose of a thermobaric round?? The point of a thermobaric bomb (or "Vacuum bombs" as they came to be known in Chechnya) is to
use atmospheric oxygen as the oxidizer for an aerosolized fuel. The metal powder, as in pyrotechnic mixture, serves to boost the explosive power. The mixture is
"pyrotechnic," rather than "high explosive" (or whatever terminology you want to use, you know what I mean :) ), so that the explosion is slow and drawn out, yielding
maximum damage.
The analogy I can think of that best describes this is instead of throwing a bomb into a room, turning the room into a bomb. They work better with confinement in the same
way blackpowder is more impressive when confined.
The Russians love thermobaric bombs. They, too, have a thermobaric warhead for a shoulder-launched system--the "bumblebee" round for the RPG-7.
The discussion of fuel choice/detonation might be recycling other threads; but I still think Acetylene has high potential in these types of weaponry. It is easily dispersed,
decently cheap, and has a wide range of concentrations in air for which it can detonate (something like 2% - 80% ).
The military, of course, likes Ethylene Oxide and Propylene Oxide...neither of which are easily manufactured for home-brew warfare (Yes, I know they're easy to synthesize;
but doing that for 20 projectiles with a few kg fuel each is another story). Just about any fuel, properly aerosolized, can make a decent thermobaric explosion. Flour works
pretty alright, too.
Chris The Great November 30th, 2005, 04:23 AM

In this case the HE will barely supply any energy to the burn, rather I think it will break the Al into even finer particles and break off the oxide layer, as wellas heating them up.
Therefore, when it mixes with the air, ignition is a very good possibility (not having worked with FAEs before, I am not sure exactly how hard it is to get a good ignition but this
looks like it should do it very well).
If nitrocellulose is used as the 'HE' it is most likely to simply burn as the Al forms a cloud, so that it immediatly ignites when the conditions are right.
So in this case we are still using the FAE concept, just (hopefully) making the fuel/air mixture much more likely to ignite by scattering pieces of self-combusting nitrocellulose
in, as well as removing the protective oxide layer on the Al powder.
MrSamosa November 30th, 2005, 03:28 PM

Now that I've realized how easy aerosols are to build, I'm seeing how versatile they are.
Building a rocket that a) flies straight b) disperses Fuel mixture and c) ignites it at the proper time is pretty complicated.
What if a pressurized grenade is used instead? (By grenade, I mean something along the lines of a 37mm round). The concept seems simple enough--on firing, the aerosol can
is forced into an "open" position, leaving a stream of fuel behind it as it flies. Once it reaches it lands, the fuel will be released in a much more regular pattern. There will be a
simple timed-fuse on it to ignite the cloud.
The fuel could be a simple mixture of Aluminum/Zinc/other fine metal powder and some volatile liquid fuel; maybe Ether, maybe a chlorocarbon (this has the added effect of
being a crude chemical weapon on burning; alternately, a substance like Hexachloroethane could be mixed with the fuel for the same effect). They would be placed in a can
with a bit of dry ice thrown in and sealed.
It doesn't have to fly exactly straight; it would be more of a parabola. This shouldn't hurt its destructive abilities much, seeing as the military FAE rounds don't do much
penetration either and have to be fired through windows. If anything, it might increase its utility; power it up, and you have an FAE mortar, which would be extremely effective
since FAE's feed off of one another.
The US military's FAE bombs do not use explosive dispersal; the use aerosol dispersal means.
simply RED December 1st, 2005, 01:42 PM

This is PBX kind - a mix of HMX, plastificator, polymer and Al powder.
The charge is detonated from the front end.
Nothing new...
Jacks Complete December 1st, 2005, 04:16 PM

No word on composition. I think they are keeping it secret. I assume the issue with the wall penetration is that the shell gets mangled, and so won't disperse properly.
Once a few of these fall into the hands of the anti-US forces it will be interesting to see what counters get used by the buildings, etc. in the combat zone, on both sides.
Considering that the US loses a few troops a day, the impact of one of these being turned around and killing 25 and levelling the structure totally is an interesting one to
consider.
Hand-held-sized, easy to conceal, phallus shaped... I can see these being smuggled all over the place. A suicide hand grenade that levels buildings...
MrS, no need to go for the complexity of a rocket. The US have left them as simple lumps that follow a ballistic curve. Using them as mortars might be hard, though, as they
would either penetrate the ground or damage themselves. Getting it just right would be tricky. You would also need to factor for wind, dispersion rates, other ignition sources,
etc. when firing a salvo.
One way to mitigate these rounds might be to leave a few lit candles about the room, leading to pre-ignition and partial failure of the round.
simply RED December 2nd, 2005, 12:38 PM

I read report on this thermo composition and it is exactly PBX with the upper formula.
The report states that it is 20-30 % stronger than Schmel. This is well understandable as isopropyl nitrate is no match to HMX...
This round can not penetrate walls. It should enter through the window.
It is very hard to hit the window of a building with this - it flies like a thrown stone, almost on balystic trajectory.
Of course the round will be devastating on cars, wooden structures etc...
meyer25 August 29th, 2006, 08:39 PM

A possible active charge in thermobaric/FAE rounds or bombs are highly volatile, pyrophoric (self-igniting upon contact with air or moisture) triethylalane/triethylaluminium,
Et3Al (TEA), diethylzinc, Et2Zn, mixtures thereof, or mixtures with oxirane/ethylene oxide or just simple hydrocarbon fuel such as gasoline in appropriate ratios; the major
advantages of this type of charges (organometallic) are the above mentioned pyrophoricity, thus no need for secondary burst and extremely high burning temperatures. I think
its rather useful for smaller FAE charges.
nbk2000 August 29th, 2006, 09:25 PM

The very thing that makes TEA so useful is the very thing that prevents its use...spontaneous ignition in air.
To carry enough TEA in a man-portable missile, it must have very thin walls. These very thin walls are easily punctured by bullets and fragments which occur with annoying
frequency in combat.
Upon puncture, the TEA proceeds to leak out and ignite, turning the man carrying the missile, and anyone nearby, into screaming torches. :)
Hence, not very popular.
meyer25 August 30th, 2006, 04:56 PM

To carry enough TEA in a man-portable missile, it must have very thin walls. These very thin walls are easily punctured by bullets and fragments which occur with annoying
frequency in combat.
Upon puncture, the TEA proceeds to leak out and ignite, turning the man carrying the missile, and anyone nearby, into screaming torches. :)
Hence, not very popular.
Use of FAE in small loads does not necesarily implicate thin walls. Its a question of primary burst charge. Given the vigourosity of the reaction with air, and the amout of
oxygen, consumed by it (about 240L O2/100g TEA) , there is no need for that thin walls.
I think the risk of carrying it in the combat is comparable with any weaponized CW agent, or WP grenades/shells. Once it gets punctured or the wall leaks upon a bullet impact,
it will burn rather than im-/explode. Surely, a burning FAE charge is unpredictable risk and it might go boom, but not immediately in my opinion, if so.
megalomania August 30th, 2006, 09:58 PM

It all depends on your relative frame of reference, meyer25. If the walls are thick enough to withstand a bullet impact, or two, or an explosion, then you must sacrifice either
fuel load or portability. Even then there is probably no guarantee your weapon will not blow up on you. Therefore you might as well not even bother with reinforcing the
weapon so that you at least have additional fuel capacity without sacrificing portability.
This type of weapon does not inspire confidence in the soldier who must carry it. Unless you have a corps of dedicated suicide troops, which western armies do not have, no
soldier will touch such a thing. What good is a weapon that is potentially more dangerous to the user than to his targets?
nbk2000 August 30th, 2006, 11:41 PM

Such a problem has already been encountered in the form of Flamethrowers.
Troops love 'em because they do the job of getting the enemy out of otherwise impenetrable fortifications.
But the guy who has to carry them (and those around him) hate 'em because every enemy trooper is shooting at HIM because they know what the flamethrower will do to
them if he gets within range to use it.
As for the use of TEA in man-portable weapons, refer to the below link:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=M202A1&btnG=Search
http://www.angelfire.com/wi/jaysdomain/M202a1.jpg
Also
D-26. ROCKET, 66MM INCENDIARY, M74, TPA (1340-H110)

a. Evidence of greyish/white residue on round/ warhead could in fact be an oxidation product from the triethyl aluminum, but could also be residue from excessive epoxy
sealant used to secure fill plug.
b. If greyish/white residue is found on warhead, perform the following test:
...
If residue is oxidation product from triethyl aluminum, it should dissolve away. Follow procedures of reference directing clip be submerged in oil, and report as a critical defect.
This is for microscopic pinhole leaks, requiring the whole thing be submerged in oil and reported as a hazard. These rounds are under pressure from evolved gases created by
acidic reaction with the containing shell.
So if it gets punctured in the least little bit by a bullet or fragment, you don't have a 'leak', you have a 3000°F torch setting fire to anyone and anything within range.
With pyrophoric agents like this, any leak is considered a catastrophic failure.
sparkchaser August 31st, 2006, 02:46 AM

There are also other things in the U.S. arsenal that are potentially hazardous to the user and others nearby. One example would be the catalytic gas producing unit that is used
for spinning up the gyros on a stinger missile. Using it in the proper manner makes it heat up to over 400 degrees F.
If you need to change it out while using the missile (it only last for three minutes before you need to change it out for a fresh one, or else the gyro slows down and it loses
target acquisition), you need some very stout gloves or you will lose all the skin on your hand.
I believe the canister uses hydrogen peroxide, but I can't remember. A puncture would be bad. Can't forget about Li/So2 batteries either. They have a bad habbit of venting
So2 and causing problems.
As for the ethics of thermobaric weapons, I would personnally level a building and deal with the mental aspects of a possible civilian casualty or two rather than run into a
building and encounter the expected casualty rate of about 70% for squad or platoon sized element in an urban environment.
meyer25 August 31st, 2006, 04:08 AM

Well then, neither are possible oxirane/ethylene oxide charges secure enough to call confidence of fighting troops, given the toxicity of oxirane which is as high and treacherous
as that of phosgene is, plus additional fire/explosion hazard.
"Overfueled" slurries of Mg/Al powders with nitroesters are likely to decompose explosively upon contact with water and subsequent hydrolysis...every design/active load
carries its risks and I really don't think organometallics are inacceptably risky compared to other possibilities.
Karstjager August 31st, 2006, 07:01 AM

Russian RPO -
http://russianarms.info/enghtm/books/weapons/49/index1.htm
and
http://russianarms.info/rushtm/books/granati/books_copy(13).htm
Diabolique September 5th, 2006, 01:48 PM

This thread explains many things I have been reading over the past decade. The explosives labs have been working with formulations with very large portions (as high as 80%
by weight) of aluminum, well beyond what could be consumed by the oxygen in the explosives. The explosive in the formulation must be only to disperse and raise the
temperature of the aluminum to the ignition point. Take a look at the MOX-series and RX-03-series explosives.
I obtained the above info mostly from LA-13014-H - "The Insensitive High Explosive Triaminotrinitrobenzene (TATB)" out of Los Alamos. It is on the ftp site.
Another report I read was about testing various metals (magnesium, aluminum, titanium and zirconium) for use as an incendiary/shrapnel liner in warheads and bombs. Only
aluminum and zirconium ignited (magnesium didn't come close to ignition!). Zirconium 'moss' was the only one to fully ignite, and start fires in 2x4 lumber. After that paper,
there is nothing more that I have found on using zirconium. Zirconium was suggested back in the 70's as a cladding for depleted uranium anti-armor penetrators as it ignites as
it passes through the steel of the armor, causing a flash fire inside the tank.
The military in the US used TEA in 2.5 inch rockets shipped in 4-pack launchers, the predecessor of the SMAW, I suspect from the description. They used a small burster charge
to burst the warhead of the rocket, dispersing the TEA in the air. Each rocket had about 250 ml of TEA, and burned so hot that it's fireball could inflict third degree burns at 50
meters. It was classified as an incendiary weapon, which are no longer in favor.
As for leaks, the militaries of the world have been using phosphorus since WW1, so they know how to prevent them.

Phosphorous is a waxy solid. If the container gets punctured by a bullet, it smokes and burns, but you have time to bail out or throw it away.
A bullet punctures a FLASH round full of TPA...*CRISPY* is what you'll be in the blink of an eye. :p
Chris The Great September 7th, 2006, 01:55 AM

Perhaps gelling it would be a solution that our friends at the military may have worked out, to prevent the above situation. Seems plausible enough IMO.

The solution they found to the hazards of TEA was to not use it at all. :D
TEA (dissolved in n-Hexane) burns extremely fast and hot. So fast that it can flash-burn without direct contact.
But that also prevents ignition and sustainable burning, as targets get a carbonized char layer that acts as an insulator.
They thickened it up with PIB to slow down the burn rate and allow it to stick to targets long enough to ignite targets it came in contact with, but then you lose the nuke-like
flash burn effect because of the slower combustion rate.
Chris The Great September 8th, 2006, 08:01 PM

Idea: one could use TEA as an igniter in the thermobaric mixture. The mixture would be primarily Al powder. TEA would be mixed in, about 5%, so that the mixture is solid and
won't run. If ignited accidently, it will burn vigorously, but because the main fuel is solid Al it won't go very fast and flash burn. However, when exploded properly, the mixture
is dispersed into the air and the TEA ignites the Al could for a thermobaric blast effect (and probably a good deal of flash burning from the heat release).
Obviously, other pyrophoric fuels can be used instead of TEA, however I can't think of any good cheap ones that could be done. TEA on the other hand is not too difficult to
make with ethyl chloride, aluminum and a small amount of sodium (eBay).
In any case it is best not to have one's explosive weaponry shot at since there is always a risk of it exploding and killing the operator.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Info sought on Destruction
Technologies for Munitions
Log in
View Full Version : Info sought on Destruction Technologies for Munitions
shrikantsk February 11th, 2006, 09:28 AM

Hi friends This topic is very interesting,thought of starting a thread to share info & other resources.Hope you will all join & share
your views.
Shrikant
tomu February 17th, 2006, 12:32 PM

I t d e p e n d s o n what type of Munitions had to be destroyed.
UXO (duds) are the m ost dangerous type, today it will often be blown up in place. Som etim es it's defuzed and carried away to
a diposal site.
Unfired O rdnance will be defuzed m o s t o f t h e t i m e a n d t h e n d i s p o s e d o f f .
T o d i s p o s e o ff, the Ordnance can be savely detonated at a disposal site or it can sim ply b e burned. Sm all caliber Am mo will
usually be burned in special arm o r e d o v e n s . S o m e t i m es it will sim p l y b e d u m p e d i n t o t h e s e a , d e e p l a k e s o r e v e n b i g r i v e r s
(rarely nowadays).
Also recycling of the explosive and NC-Powder of the Am m o or O rdnance is som etim e s d o n e . T h i s d e p e n d s o n t h e t y p e a n d
a g e o f t h e m unitions and the purpose why it should be destroyed. It dep ends also on who is doing the disposal/recycling and
where it is done (legalities and facilities).
shrikantsk February 23rd, 2006, 07:36 AM

Basically I was keen on knowing about various technologies on which I am doing R & D.Extraction of fuses,explosive m ateria ls
& recovery of m etal are of primary inte rest to m e.Are you interested to continue discussion on this topic?
Thanks for responding,regards
Shrikant
nbk2000 March 9th, 2006, 03:11 AM

So you want to recover UXO's and extract the explosives and com p o n e n t s ?
DANGERO U S ! : e e k :
This is the sort of thing best left to guerilla arm i e s d e s p e r a t e f o r e x p l o s i v e s , n o t h o b b i e s t s .
Only exception would be W W 1 or W W 2 CW UXO's, since it'd be safer to extract th e filling than to a ttempt m aking it from
scratch.
shrikantsk March 17th, 2006, 07:09 AM

Hi nbk2000,
I a m associa ted with these activities for quite som e time. Due to the nature of work involved there is a lot of secracy &
procedures followed & problem s encountered are never discussed.I thought forum m e m bers with som e background can interact
on such issues.If I am permitted & if any one else has interest in this topic I will post som e info which I have collected from
net.:)

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > detonator, you think it'l work
Log in
View Full Version : detonator, you think it'l work
billybobjoe March 3rd, 2006, 12:43 AM

well my detonator is a 8 gram charge of aceton e peroxide, inside a uwm w P.E lined fiberglass tube. the tube is apro xim atly 1
inch in diam eter and 1.5 inches long. there is then a m odel rock et squib (electric match, in pyrotechnic term s) burried in this. i
then placed a piece o f uhmw plastic and then fiberglassed over it. on the other side of the charge is a uhmw divider in the
s h a p e o f a c o n e , a n d a c o p p e r c o n e . t h e c o n e h a s a s t e a d y a n g l e o f 5 6 d e g a n d i s p l a c e d with the pointy p art faceing toward
the charge. underneith of it was placed a a thin layer of hdpe to protect my charge from the elem ents. the cone is aporxim atly
1/16 inch thick, and the uhm w cone is 1/8 inch thick. the reason for this is that i though that the copper could/would m a k e t h e
a . p . m o r e u n s t a b l e a n d , p o s s i b l y g o o f f a t a n i n o p p e r t u ne tim e. what i would like to ask is; will pie ce of pla stic affect the
workings of my deton ator? i know this is probably a noo bish que stion, but i wante d t o a s k s o m e p e o p l e m uch m o r e e d u c a t e d
than m y self.
nbk2000 March 6th, 2006, 06:39 PM

Improve your gram mer first. :)
Alexires March 6th, 2006, 10:34 PM

*whistles* Your lucky buddy. It looks like NBK isn't hungry right now, but you m ight want to consider reading the forum rules
before you post again, or it m ay be the last tim e you post. Unless I'm gravely m istaken, this is yo ur first post and its a new
thread. That is a no no.
But anyway, I dont think that you can m a k e A P m uch m ore unstable than it already is. I d on't really know much about shaped
charges, but my guess is that the plastic probably wont make much difference.
Instead of using huge 'blow m y fingers off' charges of AP to get detonation, you m ight want to think about using a booster.
T h e r e a r e s e c t i o n s o n t h i s , b u t i f y o u c a n g e t y o u r h a n d s o n i t , R D X m a k e s a g o o d b o o s t e r or PETN wouldn't be a bad idea.
W ith enough booster, you wouldn't need to go to all the trouble of making a shaped charge as a detonator.
Forg ive m e m o r e k n o w l e d g e a b l e p e o p l e i f I a m erronous at any point he re.
Microtek March 8th, 2006, 11:59 AM

I don't think a shaped charge will neccessarily m a k e a g o o d d e t o n a t o r . I ' m a s s u m i n g t h a t y o u a r e a c t u a l l y t r y i n g t o m a k e a
relia ble detonator to initiate som ething else, such as an ANFO charge or another kind of insensitive explosive.
W hen a shaped charge jet penetrates an insensitive HE charge you are q uite likely to just get a cook-off rather than an actual
detonation. A much b etter alternative is to use a m o r e s t a b l e e x p l o s i v e a s a b o o s t e r l i k e A l e x i r e s s u g g e s t e d . T h i s b o o s t e r
s h o u l d b e m a d e i n t o a c y l i n d r i c a l s h a p e a n d s h ould be initiated from one end in order to allow the detonation wave to build up
a s m uch force as possible.
The shock wave from a given differential volum e o f e x p losive adds to the wave that initiated it much like the principle in a
laser ( you could perhaps call it a "shock amplification by stim u l a t e d e m ission of vibration" so it would be SASEV ). This mea ns
that the shock wave induced by the detonation of a cylindrical detonator will be least powerful at the fuse end, m ore powerful
as you progress towards the o pposite end, and by far the m ost powerful adjacent to the flat end of the detonator directly
opposite the fuse.
billybobjoe March 9th, 2006, 12:20 AM

c r a s h e s h e a d i n t o m onitor...
W hat a first impression, spelled everything wrong, and had the wrong idea com pletly.
But yea, now that i think abou t it is very sim ilar to the concept of a flam e tube in a spud gun, i hate to com pare a d etonator to
a s p ud gun, but the principal is the sam e, in th is sense at least. so basically there is a tube that extends from the barrel side
of the cham ber down the upper inside of the chamber, and to th e rear. a fter the chamber is filled with a stoichiom etric m ixture
o f p r o p a n e a nd air, it is ignited at the extreme out side end of the tube, (by the barrel) and it speeds up a s it goes down the
tube, hits the sem i r o u n d e d e n d o f t h e e n d c a p , t u r n s a r o u n d a n d t h e n s p e e d s u p m o r e o n i t s w a y b a c k t o t h e b a r r e l . s o t h e n
better detonator would be a strong skinny tube ( 1/2" sch 120 forged ste el) that extends through a cylindrical charge, it
acce lerates down the tube an A) enters the main charge in the d e a d m iddle of the charge, or B) at the lower end, say 3/4 of
the way down. so the question I have is if it were to enter the middle of the charg e it would have a longer time to expand out
until it hit the wall of the tube (in m y case thick paper, which would proba bly burn instantly) thus creating m ore pressure?, or
will the extra speed/energy it gains fro m a n e x t r a 1 / 4 o f the charges length m a k e s t h e d e t o n a t i o n h a p p e n q u i c k e r , e n o u g h t o
offset the lack of distance from the wall.
nbk2000 March 9th, 2006, 02:55 AM

S o m e o n e f o r g e t t o u s e p a r a g r a p h b r e a k s i n s t e a d o f o n e m o n o b lock of text?
Or p erhaps capitalization of the first letter of every new sentence?
That the letter I, when used to refer to oneself, is always CAPITALIZED?
:rolleyes:
I h a t e p l a y i n g g r a m m er nazi as it detracts from m ore productive things I could be doing, but deleting everyone who c o m e s
here from a n I M s e s s i o n a n d d o e s n ' t r e m e m ber to 'switch gears', would cull us kinda thin.
Newbies need to learn QUICKLY that this is NOT an IM session, but a bulletin boa rd, where posts will rem ain readable for years
a f t e r t h e m e m ber has turned himself into a pick m ist after following the similiarly m a n g l e d I M - s t y l e p o s t i n g s o f s o m e o t h e r
d e c e a s e d m e m b e r o n s o m e o ther board.
This is not one of tho s e b o a r d s .
You have 3 posts in which to im prove your gramm er to the acceptable standards of literacy or you are BFL'd (Banned For Life).
:)
This applies to ALL newbies, a s existing m e m b e r s h a v e a l r e a d y c o n f o r m ed to this standard, and expect it of everyone else
here as well.
Occasional spelling errors or o m i s s i o n s a r e h u m an, so that's OK. But wholesale disregard for the m ost basic literacy skills is
intolerable when dealing with our subject matter.
Microtek March 9th, 2006, 12:04 PM

R e m ember that the shock wave is not a flow of m ass; you can't direct it in the sam e w a y a s a g a s s t r e a m . A s a c o n s e q u e n c e ,
the com parison with a spudgun isn't re ally valid ( at least as I understand what you are saying, I h aven't ever experim e n t e d
with them ).

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Basis for Relative Effectiveness
Log in
View Full Version : Basis for Relative Effectiveness
mrb314159 June 12th, 2006, 10:56 PM

Hi folks,
Does anyone know how the relative effectiveness (RE) factors for explosives are determ ined? Are they emp irical or theoretical?
I s e e t a b l e s o f R E v a l u e s c o n s t a n t l y b e i n g u s e d , b u t t h e y n e v e r s e e m to be accompanies by a correct explanation o f their
basis. O ccasionally, som eone will say that RE is a ratio of the Vo D of an explosive to that of TNT, but the values I com pute
never agree with the values given in the tables.
Thanks.
Nails June 26th, 2006, 12:18 AM

Does anyone know how the relative effectiveness (RE) factors for explosives are determ i n e d ?
Do NOT quote entire posts! :m a d :
Acco rding to wikipedia:
Relative effectiveness factor (R.E. factor) is a m e a s u r e m ent of a n explosive's power for military dem olitions purposes. It
m e a s u r e s t h e d e t o n a ting velo city relative to that of TNT , which h as an R.E. factor of 1.00.
V O D o f t h e s a m e chem ical can vary drastically depending on purity, tem p, density and a host of other variables.
JakeGallows July 19th, 20 06, 08:0 4 PM

The article Nails refers to is this one:
http://en.wik ipedia.org/wiki/Relative_e ffectiveness
Though it is a very limited subset of in formation about explosives. Like Nails said, there are many factors that can change
VoD. In addition there are a variety of other m e a s u r e s u s e d t o d e t e r m ine the Power or Perform ance of an explosive. How
effective exp losives are is relative to what you are trying to accom plish with them . You might try reading:
http://en.wik ipedia.org/wiki/Explosive
mrb314159 August 1st, 2006, 11:44 PM

I have tried to create ratios of VoD and cannot duplicate the RE tables. I believe the W i k i p e d i a s t a t e m ent is wrong. In fact, I
p o s e d t h e q u e s t i o n i n t h e h o p e t h a t I c o u l d f i n d s o m e o n e w h o i s f a m iliar with how VoD is determ in e d s o t h a t I c o u l d u p d a t e
the W i k i p e d i a .
Thanks for the responses.
megalomania August 21st, 2006, 08:29 PM

How exactly do you com pute your results? The determination of the vdet for explosive ma terials will require you to actually
detonate a representative sample and a calibration standard. The standard used is certainly not always TNT! Not always I
s a y , t h a t d o e s n o t m e a n it ca n t b e u s e d . T h e p r o b l e m y o u a r e e n c o u n t e r i n g i s a l a c k o f b o t h t e s t i n g m e t h o d a n d s t a n d a r d
used.
The vdet is determined by either cam eras, velocity prob es, the Dautriche m ethod, or optical fibers. The accuracy of these
m e t h o d s d i f f e r s . T h e re s t h a t nas ty precision vs accuracy thing that analytical chemists love (they call it anal che m f or a
reason). O ne can assume they used TNT as the standard, but you know where that leads you, righ t?
T a k e b r i s a n c e f o r e x a m p l e , i n the lead block test you can use Pentrit or Am monit as standards. Density differences and a la ck
of proportion ality m a y n e c e s s i t a t e t h e u s e o f a m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e s t a n d a r d .
D u e t o s o m e shortcom ings, such as the influen ce of the charge volume when charges of constant m ass are tested, the quality
and the price of the lead block, and the lack of the strict proportionality between the true strength of an explosive a n d t h e l e a d
block expansion, Belyaev has proposed the use of the so-called equivalent charge to express the strength of explosives.
In that case, the determ inatio n o f t h e s t r e n g t h o f a n e x p l o s i v e i s b a s e d o n t h e d e t e r m ina tion of the mass of the re ference
explosive charge Am m onit-6, that produces the sam e e x p a n s i o n v a l u e a s an explosive te s t e d u n d e r t h e s a m e testing
conditions. Since equal lead block expansion values should be the result of equal works done, it can be written:
A x / A A m m onit-6 = MAmm o n i t - 6 / M x
Enlighten us, what equation are you using to compute your values, and what figures are you plugging in?
Diabolique S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2006, 02:30 PM

Try correlatin g the Pc-j (Chapman-Jouget pressure - the pressure im m e d iately be hind the detonation front) of the explosives.
Very high correlation. This is related to both the density and detonation velocity o f the explosive, among other factors.
This Pc-j correlation is why the explosives labs are getting away from effects relative to TNT. Many tests are also losing favor
due to their expending energy in ways that do not contribute to the m easurement of explosive power. Even the close-in
profiles of the air sho ck waves from va rious explosives are quite different, so blast effects are not readily com parab le.
S o m e of the most accurate measurements of detonation velocity, and indirectly, the equation of state para meters such as P c-j,
is x-ray im a g i n g . T h e P h e r m e x e q u i p m ent is the current standard, time accuracy on the order of nanoseconds.
You may want to download the "LLNL Explosives Handbook" and "Introdu ction to the Technology of Explosives" from the ftp
site. You may want to look at the Pherm ex texts as well. The first impression of Pherm ex is WTF?! until you start to
understand what they are doing.
armchairsapper January 18th , 2008, 01:49 AM

I h a v e a c o p y o f F M 5 - 2 5 E x p l o s i v e s a n d D e m o litions. FM 5-25 states: "Explosives vary not only in detonating rate or velocity,
but also in other characteristics, such as density and heat production, that determ ine their effectiveness. They vary so much
that the am o u n t o f e x p l o s i v e s u s e d i s c o m puted according to a relative effectiveness factor, based on the effectiveness of a ll
high explosives in relation to that of TNT. For e xample, TNT, with a detonating ve locity of 23,000 feet per second, h a s a
relative effectiveness factor of 1, while tetrytol, with the sam e ve locity has a higher relative effectiveness factor of 1.20."
Charles Owlen Picket January 19th , 2008, 11:19 AM

The reason this is an old post is that the subject m atter (Basis for R elative Effectiveness) is subjective in it's relationship to the
evaluation surround. O n e g e n t l e m a n p r o p o s e d u t i l i z i n g t h e C h a p m an-Jouget, another bro ught up the relational com parison to
TNT. W hile another brought up the whole question of relational comparison on a variety of levels in the determ ination of VoD
as well as the rhetorical question of wh at foundational e quation would be utilized to begin with.
The military basically uses energetic m aterials to destro y shit an d hurt people. The m ining industry uses energetics to
acco mplish work such as m oving earth or digging. Other industry uses energetic materials to expand or open sealed or solid
obje cts, etc, etc.
T h e c o m parisons therefore be com e contingent upon the surroun ding eva luational dynam ics. An alum inized burst charge with
high heat and brisance m ay hurt som eone viciously and be optim um for a weapon but it may fall flat when moving earth to
acco mplish work. The m ilitary uses TNT as a base because it exists as a consistent basis for comparison but m ost im portantly
t h e y s e e e x p l o s i v e s a s w e a p o n s . T h e e x p l o s i v e s i n d u s t r y h o w e v e r d o e s n o t e m ploy a strict Basis for Relative Effectiveness
because they see energetics as tools.
armchairsapper January 19th , 2 0 0 8 , 0 8 : 1 3 P M

I m p r o b a b l y g o i n g t o g e t f l a m ed for th is since I m n e w a n d C h a r l e s a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n h e r e f o r a while.
The original q u e s t i o n w a s i s R E e m pirical or the oretical a n d i s i t b a s e d on a r a t i o o f t h e V o D t o t h a t o f TNT . My p o s t g a v e a n

e m pirical definition from a trusted source, not wikipedia aka: hearsay backed up by more hearsay. Diabolique m e n t i o n e d P C - j
which include s density and VoD, though very inform ative, did not answer the original question. The definitio n I f o u n d m a k e s
m ention of VoD, Heat, & density.
Also t h e s t a t e m e n t T h e m ilitary basically uses energetic m a t e r i a l s t o d e s t r o y s hit a n d h u r t p e o p l e . I s p r e t t y n a ve. Com b a t

e n g i n e e r s m a k e u s e o f e x p l o s i v e s i n m a n y o f t h e s a m e way as t h e m ining industry . Mo s t of FM 5-25 is f orm ulas for cutting
stea l, concre te, and earthworks. Not p u t s o m e C 4 i n a p i p e a n d throw it at people.
I find it hard to believe that RE depends on what industry it is being used in. Especially since a wide variety of explosives that
would be used in a variety of industries all use the same RE tables. This would su g g e s t o n e s t a n d a r d n o t m any.
I f s o m e o n e p o s t s a n o t h e r e m pirical definition of RE from another industry that is different than the one I p osted I will gladly
concede that I was wrong.
Charles Owlen Picket January 23rd , 2008, 11:23 AM

W hy would you get flam ed? I think you just have a bit of a misu n d e r s t a n d i n g a b o u t m y post is all. I was not actually
addressing your statement specifically.
However if you think that statem ent is pretty naive, I disagree. Yes, the m ilitary DOES use explosives to build roads and dig
into earth, m ove rock s and things sim ilar to industry. However, compare the quantity of production and use - b a s e d
im p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e e x p l o s i v e s t h a t t h e m ilitary maintains and sets aside. Com pare the very ba s i s o f t h e u s e o f e x p l o s i v e s
in the m ilitary. NO T the role of the com bat engineer. Bu t the militarily use of explosives and I think you would agree that the
l e v e l o f e x p l o s i v e m a nufacture is to destroy shit and hu rt people.
W e h a v e a n e n o r m o u s a m o u n t o f c o n v e n t i o n a l e x p l o s i v e s a s a i r - d r o p p e d m u n i t i o n s . W e h a v e q u i t e a b i t o f stuff used by
engineering units. Co mpare the amounts and field use orientation for production. ...no, not the sa me as Industry. Industry
d o e s n o t u s e [ t h e s a m e] as weapons but for specifically applied mechanical work.
NOW then addressing what your query was toward the end, re:"that RE depends o n what industry it is being used in",
r e m e m ber that it is private sector industry (spe cifically, chem ical enginee ring, explosives industry, mining) that does the
rese arch. If ICI decides that water-gels are the new TNT, that's what is used for com parative basis elem ents. Fair or not, logical
or not, that's who makes the sales pitch (& thus the rules for evaluation). The m ilitary MAY have criteria.....But it's the private
sector that closes the deal. I hope I was clear in that concept. I am not debating the merits of this issue: b ut the history of
how it com es about. The military has never really called the shots in the U S: that's why we use the term "Military Industrial
C o m plex".
armchairsapper January 23rd , 2 0 0 8 , 1 0 : 5 7 P M

Ok. I jum p e d t h e g u n a b i t . I d i d m i s s u n d e r s t a n d s o m e of C h a r l e s ' p o s t a n d I t o o k t h e c o m m ent about the military
personally. If you consider the am o u n t o f e x p l o s i v e s u s e d t h e n y e s , t h e m a j o r i t y o f e x p l o s i v e s u s e d b y t h e m ilitary are in the
form of air dropped m unitions. I thought Charles was discounting the combat engineering uses of explosives entirely.
I don't know who coin ed the term "rela tive effectiveness", the military or private sector. Charles is right that the private sector
d o e s t h e l i o n s s h a r e o f r e s e a r c h . T h o u gh I still find it hard to be leive tha t there a re multiple definitions for RE. That RE is used
to describe so m any different types of explosives suggests that there is one deffinition, However, I have very litle experience
with explosives in the private sector so I really don't know.
Charles Owlen Picket January 30th , 2008, 09:06 AM

T o t h e b e s t o f m y knowledge R E is a term that is used a great d eal by the m ilitary but seeps over to private sector (comm o n
enough...) and visa versa. In the explosives industry th is is com m o n a n d c o n f u s i n g . T h a t w h o l e r e a l m u s e d t o b e c a l l e d t h e
"powder indu stry" back in the tim e when "powder com panies" had sales reps that went about, touting their wares and using
sales pitches. One of which was the (famous or infam o u s ) " p u s h ing or heaving power" of low explo sives.
There was really nothing that could not be accom plished with low explosives that could not be accom plished with HE but the
powder com panies had tons and tons of BP to sell. Then tragedy struck when am m onium nitrate becam e a v a i l a b l e . T h e
c o m p a n i e s s a w t h e m selves loosing a fortune and they went to work selling the idea that certain jobs neede d a certain "type" of
p u s h o r h e a v e . C l a y o r s h a l e n e e d a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l o f h e a v e t h e n coal as coal would break into too sm a l l o f p i e c e s t o b e o f
use, etc.
NOTE: this is all tongue-in-cheek BS: I don't personally believe a word th a t t h e c o m p a n i e s s a y . I a m still on a variety of lists to
receive various trade magazin es as they com e out and they still have this tripe.
T h e y h a d t o m ake a play to sell off their BP. They had to start a m yth that certain types o f explosives had intrinsic propertie s
that could never be supplanted by differing placem ent, etc. Amm onium nitrate had a very detrim ental effect on their bottom
line. Inventor's scram bled to develop water gels. This would take amm onium nitrate and raise the cost....it was the answer to a
prayer.
Therefore they use the term (R E) and take a wee bit of fact and mix in som e rum or....and the public buys it. "The last shot
knocked the coal too fine. They wanted it at 2lb. blocks and it's as fine a s gravel...we're in trouble". "It must have been that
e x p l o s i v e . I c o u l d n ' t h a v e m i s p l a c e d m y bore holes." "NO....you're blam eless...Buy this crap and you'll be fine."
The term "RE" could be a by product of the advertising blitz to m a k e v a r i o u s l o w e x p l o s i v e s a n d u n w a n t e d g o o d s s e ll m ore

effectively. I don't really know. Their slick page m agazines describe relational effectiveness to sell products that don't need to
be sold. The magazine Explosives Engineering is filled with adve rtisem ents for wa t e r g e l s . T h i s i s t o m a k e t h e c o n s u m er
believe that there is really a d ifference between one "high-priced spread" and another. They are all margarine - not butter.
W ater Gels a re a way to m a k e a m m o n ium nitrate sell at a profit level. W hen various inventors made really effective blasting
products they were quickly bought out and or crushed by the giants.
T o l o o s e t h e m a r k e t w o u l d m ean that com panies like DuPont would show losses. We can't have that. So anything to m a k e a
sales pitch was distorted. One of them was the concept of RE. Com pare explosive s to soap and you will quickly understand
what I mean. If a dish washing detergent gets you dishes clean and another soap is designed for your hands, another for your
floor, etc...Does that m e a n y o u HAVE to use all the various types of soap? No, it's convenient perhaps but one could wash th eir
hands with dish soap and their hands would be clean. but if you are a soap mfg you want people to think they cannot possibly
wash their hands with dish soap...it's too strong. Or their cloths; they must have a super powdered detergent with elephant
snot to really clean them bla, bla.
Zait February 10th, 2008, 11:29 AM

The Military uses RE factors as a convienent way to replace one explosive for another in calculation s.
For instance. The demolition of a bridge span requires the placem ent of 100 lbs of TNT at 3 locations. Unfortunately since TNT
is in short su pply all they have available is C-4. The theory is that by applying the RE factor for C-4 as the replacem ent for TNT
you can calculate how m u c h C - 4 y o u n e e d .
TNT required = 100

C-4 RE = 1.3 4
100 / 1.34 = 74.63 lbs of C-4
Again, it's theory. In reality you would do the base calculations for C -4 since you know you already have that.
It's called 're lative' effectiveness for a reason. It's not precise and outsid e of the military and a few civilian breaching schools
it's not taught or used any m ore. In re ality com paring e xplosives properties using R E factors is like com p a r i n g a p p l e s a n d
o r a n g e s . T h e a r e b o t h r o u n d a n d a f r u it but m aking a Waldorf salad with oranges doesn't mean you will ge t t h e s a m e r e s u l t a s
you did if you used apples like the recipe calls for.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Two-stage shaped charge
Log in
View Full Version : Two-stage shaped charge
soso July 4th, 200 6, 09:15 AM

what the design for the ( shaped charge follow through )
or
Two-stage shaped charge ?:confused:
tomu July 4th, 200 6, 11:18 AM

I'm not sure if you last long enough here to read this answer.
The shaped charges are simply placed behind each other and initiated with a delay of a few m iliseconds.
Google it, there are p ictures of dual sh aped charge anti-tank weapons on the Net.
And do yourself a big favor and read the rules of this board.
Alexires July 4th, 200 6, 11:51 AM

W hat the fuck are you posting for you mind num bing two stage fuckwit?
I bet you love the "shaped charge" don't you? Frankly, I'm suprised you even have the mental capacity to turn on a com puter
with spelling and sentence structure lik e that.
Argh, I wish there was a kill-cam or som ething so I could watch NBK rip your head off and take a dum p down the hole.
Jacks Complete July 4th, 200 6, 12:42 PM

Not only that, but he posted it twice! I think it might be bye-bye time for soso.
Tell you what, since the sun is shining and I'm i n a g o o d m o o d , y o u h a v e u n t i l 1 2 h o u r s a fter your post to edit it an d m ake it
right, and this can be a warning.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Detonating ANFO - my research
Log in
View Full Version : Detonating ANFO - my research
Surferus July 18th, 2006, 09:18 PM

Dear gentlemen,
There was a long time I've been trying to find the best way to detonate the mix of granulated AN with 4-5% of diesel fuel added.
I started my research in the area of this explosive because it is cheap and easy to prepare.
The detonation wave is formed by the local increases of the density of substance. Of course as many of us know from school, the speed of the wave depends on two things:
density of the substance and the Jung module of the given substance (often refered to as E). After writing some quite easy formulas, one can conclude that V ~ sqrt(E/d),
where d is density, V is the speed of detonation wave.
Again, the equation above gives us a simple understanding of why, for example, the speed of detonation for granulated explosives is lower than that for ground explosives, like
ammonal or ground and pressed TNT.
The main reason is that E module for granulated explosives is lower. When a pressure is applied to granulated material, granulas change their shape and become ellipsoids with
considerable eccentricity rather than spheres. When the size of granulas is big, this leads to sharp decrease of volume and the smaller the granulas are, the less considerable
this decrease is.
Even when the container with explosive is weak (plastic or paper), detonation wave reflects on it (or even on the surface of the charge), and thus our main goal is (roughly
speaking) to make the wave maximums of reflected wave to be just in the places where maximums of the original wave were. Thus even if our ANFO charge doesn't detonate
completely from the original detonation wave, refelected wave accomplishes the business.
Yes, matching the needed maximums at least requires us to know the exact speed of detonation wave in the substance. But look at the first two paragraphs of my post. The
speed can be deducted from measuring the size of granulas, because, to our happiness, manufactures make AN granulas shape very close to spherical. I tried to write a
numerical simulation progam that would calculate the approximate detonation speed for material which consists of spherical particles of given E, but I am only partly sucessfull
so far.
I am now going to conduct at least 4 tests to check if my theory works.

I guess there is a place where many professionals gather to share the knowledge, thus I would be very glad if someone of them told me if simular works have ever been
performed and what the results were.
megalomania July 19th, 2006, 06:30 AM

If there has been any prior research on ANFO detonation characteristics, it is either scattered out in a few journals, or reserved for in-house use by engineering corporations.
There are very few journals that would discuss such things, in relative abundance to all of the other scientific journals, so that might narrow your search a bit. Try looking in
Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics first, then try Combustion and Flame, the Journal of Hazardous Materials, and quite possibly any journal on mining or oil geology.
simply RED July 19th, 2006, 07:22 AM

Consider that the commercial ammonium nitrate fertilizer is coated and does not absorb hydrocarbon fuels.
Directly mix prilled fertilizer AN with 5% diesel and try to detonate it with 20g pentolite booster. It does not detonate.
Surferus July 19th, 2006, 07:56 AM

As I know, the commercial AN is especially designed to be easily soluble in water, so granules should not be covered by anything water-resistant.
However I haven't ever tried to detonate this mix in practice, I am just going to. You mean you tried to use 20 g pentolite cap yourself? If what you say is true, then I guess
there is no way to make granulated ANFO of the commercial ammonium nitrate.
I have an access to laboratory ammonium nitrate, but I don't have as much of it as I will need for tests.

Commercial ammonium nitrate prills can be washed in denatured alcohol to remove the plasticized coating. The prills can then be fine ground between two heavy oak boards.
The resulting powder can them be used for mixing with fuel oil etc or my fav mononitrobenzene. Percolate mixture for 30 min and attach detonator. Try the ignition cap from
an automotive air bag. Just like Kine Pak
almazzan August 28th, 2006, 02:29 PM

I am a beginner in this beautiful forum, I would want to know if is possible to replace ammonium nitrate with potassium nitrate in the anfo mixture ?
+++++++++
Yes.
But the Devil is in the details. I leave that to you to find by UTFSE. :)
NBK
badpelican September 13th, 2006, 07:30 PM

I came across this ANFO information online. Mixing of the Ammonium nitrate and FO and recommended ratios of each are discussed.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/explosives-anfo.htm

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Stum p removal the way Grandpa
used to do
Log in
View Full Version : Stump removal the way Grandpa used to do
ucorky July 30th, 20 06, 01:4 4 PM

I a m at war with tree stumps on my property. Hurricane damage and ligh tning dam a g e h a ve left m e with la r g e o a k a n d m a p l e
trees I had to destroy. No this didn't happen overnight, but I have a ton of firewood over the past couple of seasons (thank
you lord) but these stumps are all over the place. I own m y property and its a fairly good chunk of land.
Having been in the south, I know there are rem edies to blast these stum ps the h eck out of the ground and/or at least bust
them up whe re I can pull them out easily. The area is very sandy.
So, reading all of the sections here, I am looking for a good rem edy. Beginners corner I guess is where I n e e d t o g o .
Any suggestions are appreciated. I have sort of m astered the whole flash powder thing. Som e substantial sized versions of
t h a t s e e m t o b e m o r e n o i s e t h a n m o v i n g a n y w o o d . M a y b e I ' m placing it wrong, m a y b e I n e e d t o k e e p r e a ding and try
s o m ething with a tad more kick.
Ekilo July 30th, 20 06, 06:1 1 PM

I know you a r e l o o k i n g f o r f a s t m e t h o d s o f s t u m p remo val but I have an enjoyab le one for you.
I l i k e t o u s e t h e m for m y sum mer backyard fires. I simply place or build my fire ring around one, add my fire wood and light
m y fire. Eventually yo u end up with a hole where the stump used to be.
You could also rent a stum p g rinder. W h e n y o u grind a stump, you end up with m ulch. Sell or use the m ulch.
I know you were looking for fun m etho ds of stump destruction but I have no first hand knowledge of how to do it. I hope
s o m eone else can provide you with the "fun" in fo.
ucorky July 30th, 20 06, 08:5 5 PM

I have read the scoldings for newbie posts and was about to delete m y p ost when I saw your reply. I am researching AP and
will try sm all attempts at first per the recom m e n d a t i o n s a n d I ' l l d o o n e s t u m p i n s e c t i o n s a n d w o r k m y way up. I know of the
stum p grinders, but like you say, whats the fun in that? I wanna move m a t e r i a l l i k e g r a n d p a u s e d t o d o . : o
texaspete July 31st, 2006, 12:27 AM

Don't try using any large amounts of flash (anything over 10g or so), as it is very unstable.
If you are se eking to blow up the stum p s , a o n e or two kilo's of ANFO (google it or search this foru m) will certainly work. You
could probab ly set off ANFO with a Tannerite exploding target. That way, you wouldn't have to worry about a fuse or detonator.
A n d , o f c o u r s e , h i g h e x p l o s i v e s a r e d a n g e r o u s , e x t r e m ely loud, and the m e t h o d s m entioned by Ekilo just as, if not more
effective.
Red Beret July 31st, 2006, 04:11 AM

Forg et the flashpowder. If you want to use explosives, then ANFO would be the easiest to m a k e , a s w e l l a s b e i n g h i g h l y
effective.
If you do not know what ANFO is or how to set it off, you'd better do some reading up before attem pting anything. If you
require powder factors (charge com putation) post here and I can help, being in sandy soil, provided the stumps aren't too well
rooted, charges m ay well be fairly conservative.
O n t h e f l i p s i d e , t h e s a n d y l o o s e s o i l m a y a b s o r b a l o t o f the explosives energy requiring m o r e e x p l o s i v e s .
Or you could buy/m a k e a l a r g e a m ount of blackpowder, which would do it. Not very convenient though.:rolleyes:
Chris The Great July 31st, 2006, 11:18 AM

AP won't have the bla sting power to ge t the stum p out of there. ANFO is the cheapest an easiest, although fun wise I think a
block of blasting gela tine (90% nitroglycerin, 10% nitrocellulose) with an added 33% of Al powder will be king. I'm n ot sure how
big your stumps are but I wou ld bet burying a pound of that under a stum p will blast a 2 foot diam eter stum p to splinters. A
little m ore complicate d though...
knowledgehungry July 31st, 2006, 04:40 PM

ANFO is the explosive of choice, if you can do it right. Due to its low brisa nce it will not sha tter the stump like m any, but rather
lift it, if the explosive is placed correctly.
I believe there was a thread o n this a while back I would suggest you UTFSE.
Skean Dhu August 1st, 2006, 08:02 PM

W hy not m a k e t h e s t u m p into a giant Dynam ite stick? Perforate it with an auger, soak a couple ba tches worth(don't be stupid
and make it all at once) of NG, EDGN, MEKP or other suitable liquid explo sive into the stump and set it off like that. I'm sure
there is a reason why thats a less than ideal method but I don't have the experience to tell m e wh y.
I'd just go th e ANFO route since it is garuanteed to work if the stump is prepared correctly. Its also in all likelyhood the
cheapest rou te. 40-50 bucks for a sack of AN, another $4 for two gallons of diesel/kerosene(parafin for you euros). Of course
y o u t h e n h a v e t o g e t a h o l d o f s o m e t h i n g e q u i v o l e n t o f a c o m m ercial blasting cap , but tha ts not gonna cost you all that m uch.
nbk2000 August 1st, 2006, 08:17 PM

The real question is:
How close are your neighbors, and are they the type to call the cops on you?
After that com e s :
How close are these stum ps to your house?
Red Beret August 2nd, 2006, 04:51 AM

Bear in m ind that the ANFO will need a booster also. ANNM will work well, and is sim ple to m a k e .
nbk2000 August 2nd, 2006, 09:26 AM

ANNM will work well, and is sim ple to m a k e .
Yeah, as long as you can get Nitrom e t h a n e .
Davo August 2nd, 2006, 02:18 PM

I don't know about th e USA but in OZ Nitromethane is surprisingly com m o n . . . . e v e n s o l d a t t o y s h o p s
However, getting the AN is now the hard part. It has become the bogeym an of the media and now subject to really stupid
controls
Chris The Great August 3rd, 2006, 02:00 PM

How about KNNM? I know noth ing about this other than that it works thou gh, but it might be an alternative if you can get KNO3
or NaNO 3 and not AN.
AN/Al mixtures would probably be superior for this job if AN is lim i t e d a n d y o u h a v e a g o o d d e a l o f A l f r o m m aking flash. At 60
AN/40 Al, you'll be ge tting 2.5 tim es the energy release and hence blasting power of regular ANFO, and use only 67% as mu ch
AN for a given weight. So if AN is scarce and hard to find, use the 60/40 AN/Al and you'll get 3.8 times more *boom* for a
given weight of AN, at a much higher cost of course since Al is substantially for ex p e n s i v e o f a f u e l t h a n k e r o s e n e .
ucorky August 3rd, 2006, 11:02 PM

I can get either. [Al p resum i n g t h a t s a l u m i n u m ] T h e b l a s t i n g c a p h a s m e s t o p p e d right now. In my area we have loud kaboo m s
a l l t h e t i m e [ m a i n l y w e e k e n d s ] a n d i n s o m e c a ses way off in the distance is a low rumbling boom . I don't know wha t the low
rumbling one is but that occurs once or twice a week and it is not thunder.
Anyways, both m e t h o d s A N F O a n d A N / A l s o u n d f e a s i b l e o n c e I g e t s o m e g r a s p o n b l a s t i n g c a p s . I p r e s u m e simple electrical

detonation isnt enough.
UPDATE:
Searched m y butt off this evening at the local hardware stores. There's a Hom e Depot in town and all they had was A/Sulfate in
m ass quantity. WIl be trying some oth er places in the next town over.
Jacks Complete A ugus t 6t h, 2006, 09: 09 PM

That low rum bling is probably a m i n e o r q u a r r y . H a v e a l o o k o n a m a p o f t h e a r e a .
Sim ple electrical detonation of the caps is fine if they are electrical caps. If not, use some cannon fuse or som ething, but err
on the side of caution, you do n't want to turn yourself into red m i s t . ( I ' m a n s w e r i n g t h e q u e s t i o n y o u s h o u l d h a v e a s k e d . )
You could try a high powered rifle for your detonator. Anything faster than about 2000fps should set it off fine, especially with
Al in there. Note that it has to be fine Al. powder, as in air float.
nbk2000 August 7th, 2006, 02:02 AM

I found an electric blasting cap on the road a few days ago. Must have fallen off of som e o n e s t r u c k . I l o o k e d a r o u n d b u t d i d n ' t
f i n d a n y m o r e , s o I j u s t s e t o f f t h e o n e I f o u n d . . . n o p o i n t k e e p i n g it around for a bust.
dbooksta April 25th, 2007, 11:31 AM

I h a d 5 o u n c e s o f 7 0 / 3 0 K C lO4/Al flash powder to dispo s e o f , a n d a s t u m p to rem ove. I tried augering into the stump but it
was too hard so instead I blew a little hole underneath it and put the cha rge in there.
Result was it blew out all the dirt in a 2-ft sphere and fractured the stum p into 8 pieces that were e asy to chop out with an axe.
I have video and pics, but no good way to share them. If you're willing to wait here's a pic of the end result:
http://dbook s t a . f i l e s - u p l o a d . c o m / f i l e s / 1 8 9 6 8 5 / F l a s h 5 o z . 4 . j p g
dirtblast October 30th , 2 0 0 7 , 0 7 : 0 6 P M

ANFO or ANNM will be your best bet. Th is weeke nd I m ade a 30g ANNM charge with a 5g APAN booster. I put it in a h o l e I b o r e d
in a 6x6 pine column and set it off with a sim ple EBW detonator. It shredded the top two feet of th e colum n. I'm sure
s o m e t h i n g b i g g e r ( d e p e n d i n g o n t h e s i z e o f y o ur stum p ) p l a c e d u n d e r t h e s t u m p would not only lift the stump out of the
ground, but fragm ent it into sm all, easier to handle, pieces.
WWII Novem ber 24th, 2007, 02:40 AM

T h i s m ay give you a few good ideas fo r tree stum p removal from a m ilitary manu al.
http://web.m it.edu/sem e n k o / P u b l i c / M i l i t a r y % 2 0 M a n u a l s / E x p l o s i v e s % 2 0 a n d % 2 0 D e m o l i t i o n s / C H 3 . P D F
And read the cautionary warning from this one:
S o m ething to take into consid eration
http://www.treestumpspecialists.com /
If you still want to do it yourself the way Grandpa did, that is fine. At least you have a better idea of what you are doing and
enjo y blowing the tree stum ps out of p lace, safely of course. :D
B e f o r e y o u g o a h e a d m a k e s u r e y o u h ave the water hose turned on, buckets of water also after the dem olition, you will need
to re-fill the em pty pocket with fresh dirt.
Have fun. :)
Killy Novem ber 27th, 2007, 07:25 PM

My solution would be, without HE, fill pipe with flash powder ( 9 inch lenght x1 inch would b e good), dug a little hole under the
stum p, and place pipe, set it off either with long fuse or electrically with battery.
Try on one stump and see how it goes
dbooksta Novem ber 28th, 2007, 10:16 AM

B a s e d o n m y earlier experience I would suggest FP is probably not the best way to go -- especially if you can't detonate it.
Larg e quantities ignited seem to heave more than shatter. After all, I used 5 oun c e s ( ! ) a n d e n d e d up with a crater but the 1 2-
inch stum p o nly split, still connected to its roots, which had to be hacked away by hand.
Next tim e I try this I will detonate the com pound with a rifle bullet instead of an electric match, and will try am m o n a l i n s t e a d o f
FP.
Charles Owlen Picket Novem ber 28th, 2007, 11:01 AM

S o m e years back I re a d a b o u t c o m mercial "stum p i n g d y n a m ite" which was 20% from one mfg. and 40% from a n o t h e r . T h e
20% had an active base. Frankly I can not see how such a sm all percentage of energetic could have the pu sh necessary. But
then the 40% would start to shatter. The idea of using FP has some theoretical m erit as FP genera t e s a g r e a t d e a l o f p u s h v i a
gas/air blast. but the amount would be properly controlled to such a degree than an alternative would be easier on the user to
configure, IMO.
NG is SO easy to m f g t h a t t h e u s e o f s a m e w o u l d b e m ore likely to yield the results necessary to uproot a stump. From a
cursory standpoint the way that FP wou ld be used to achieve the effect needed would be to enclose the m aterial in some form
of "directional-oriented" enclosure. That seem s a tough thing (if even at all possible) to m a n u f a c t u r e . W h e n t h e b l a s t o f a
l a r g e a m o u n t o f F P i s n o t f o c u s e d ; i t ' s u s e l e s s . W e ' v e s e e n B P u s e d f o r s o m ething similar in coal m ines but the gases were
focused by the coal deposits them s e l v e s . T h e t r e e i s s u e i s a n o t h e r m atter.
A great source for this is the old entertainm ent pieces in the Jou rnal of Explosive Engineering & other industry m a g a z i n e s
(100yrs Then & Now).

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > R emote Detonator/Recording Box
Log in
View Full Version : Remote Detonator/Recording Box
pandoz August 14th, 2006, 07:51 PM

Description:
My rem ote detonator/recording box is fairly straight forward in describing itself. It is a Lexan box with a rem ote control receiver
inside. This controls the camera and the fuse ignition system (Nichrom e). The ignitor itself is the e xtremely simple nichrom e
based electronic ignitor.
Cost:
C a m era: $9 +S/H (www.2fidelity.com )
R e m ote Control: $15 + S/H (search for "RF Wireless Rem ote Control" on Ebay to find sim ilar ones with different amounts of
channels)
Nichrome wire (40 gauge) - $3 (search for "Nichrom e W ire" on Ebay)
Batteries (12 volt N type) - 5 for $5 (search for "12 volt battery" on Ebay)
Lexan - $30 (4 pieces of 4ft x 1ft x 1/16in Lexan) (Search for "Lexan" on Ebay)
W ires - Free (speaker wire or som ething similar works p erfectly for this)
Total Approximate Cost: ~ $78 (All this could b e done for cheaper if you go with different options or don't need the multiple
c h a n n e l s o n t h e r e m ote control)
Tim e: A few hours of soldering/assem blying on ce you get all the m ateria ls.
Difficulty: Easy/Moderate (only becase slight electrical/soldering know-how require d)
My Equipm ent List:

- Lexan sheets (polycarbonate)
- A i p t e k M i n i P e n C a m 1.3
- 4 channel RF W irele s s M o m entary R e m o t e C ontrol
- Nichrom e W i r e ( 4 0 g u a g e )
- Batteries
Procedure/Setup (Annotated pictures a re availa b l e t o d o w n l o a d b e l o w b e c a u s e I W I L L c o n f u s e s o m e o n e ) :
- Prepare the Aiptek camera for rem ote control operatio n ( t h i s r e q u i r e s s o l d e r i n g a n d s h o u l d o n l y b e d o n e b y s o m e o n e w h o i s

fairly proficient with soldering). This site explains it all: http://www.rc-cam .com /cam m a n . h t m
- Note: I didn't use a PIC controller. Instead, I sim ply wired m y wires straight to the shutter and mode buttons (channel 1 is
m ode and channel 2 is shutter...both of your ground wires go to the ground point as shown on that site. Th e m o d e i s u s e d s o I
can rem otely switch the cam era from p icture to movie m o d e a n d back if needed without getting near the detonation site).
- Ho ok the 4 wires (two black/ground and two red/lead) from the cam era into your rem ote control receiver (where you plug
them depends on the board you use).
- To channel 3, connect your ignition system. To do this, connect one of your wires from your remo te receiver to a terminal of
your battery. Then run a wire from the other ba ttery term inal out to the fuse. The third wire plugs straight b ack into the rem o t e
receiver.
- Put the battery source into to your receiver where specified.
- Build your box/protective case however you wish (I used a sim ple squared design but this was m y first test, so it's pretty
crappy quality).
- Fixtures/Foam can be added to your box to hold your com ponents (batteries, receiver, wire, cam era, etc) in place if you
choose.
- Power it all up with batteries, thread the nichrom e thro ugh the fuse, sta rt recording.
Annotated Pictures:
http://rapidshare.de/files/294 16883/Annotated_Pictures.pdf (.35MB .pdf file)
Exam ple Videos:

This was just a test for our new project. It was a 20 ounce plastic bottle with 1 inch of blackpowder covering the bottom. Here's
the videos for download (The inside ca m e r a i s c h e a p , s o i t o n l y h a s 1 0 f r a m e s p e r s e c o n d . B e t t e r c a m e r a s m a y b e u s e d f o r
superior quality if you have them ).
E x a m ple movie from inside th e b o x :

http://rapidshare.de/files/273 73332/R emote_Explosion_1.wmv (.99MB .wmv video)
Movie from o u t s i d e t h e b o x :
http://rapidshare.de/files/294 19898/Movie.wmv (.51MB .wmv video)
I h o p e s o m e o n e g e t s s o m e e n j o y m e n t o r a t l e a s t s o m e i d e a s f r o m m y project. If you see any m i s t a k e s , w o u l d l i k e t o m a k e

suggestions, or would like me to reword or change som e t h i n g , p l e a s e l e t m e know.
Thanks,
Pandoz
pandoz September 2 nd, 2006, 03:17 PM

Right before I left to com e back to the university, I added a LED unit (30 "super white" LEDS on a parabolic dish). This will
hopefully help illum in ate the explosive/pyrotechnic device I am setting off since I can usually only do this at night. O nce I
have a break, I will post m ore videos and pictures. Again any com m ents or suggestions are appreciated.
wymanthescienceman Novem ber 7th, 2006, 10:44 PM
W ow, I did pretty m uch the sa m e t h i n g a c o u p l e y e a r s a g o , u s i n g a n R F R e m ote Transmitter from eBay as well. I didn't use a
camera with it though as I wanted it as sm all as possible and it's not needed, but hey, It's cool to know that others cam e u p
w i t h t h e s a m e i d e a . M i n e i s b a s e d o f f o f a 6 C H R e m ote/Reciever that tra nsm its 1 500ft, awesome for long distances without
long wires! It uses 2 9v batteries for det power and reliably ignites within 1/2 sec using m y b r i d g e l e s s e - m a tches. I also use
RCA jacks and wires for easy and quick hook up to the box and a keyswitch with red "Arm ed" LED. I'm also in the process of
m aking a new 1/4" clear acrylic case for it. If anyone wa nts pictures or anything I can do that, just a warning - the case is just
pieced together and is made of scrap acrylic, it's not the final form, just for dim ensions only which will be changed on the final
version.
h2o235 Novem ber 8th, 2006, 07:59 PM

O n e c o m m ent, can not view pic's or m o v i e s , r a p i d s h a r e s a y s y o u d e l e t e d t h e m
Thought it sounds like an inte resting project
pandoz D e c e m ber 18th, 2006, 02:59 AM

Y e a , m y account got screwed up, sorry. I will rehost the videos, but the pictures were lost. If there is any interest in these, I
can retake/com m e n t t h e m .

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Pull pin smoke design
Log in
View Full Version : Pull pin smoke design
Spudgun September 4th, 2006, 09:45 AM

Ok. I know there was a long archive file on pull igniters but didnt want to aw aken that thread again.
I have been thinking about pull igniters mainly for use in smoke bombs and here is the design I have come up w ith (see attatched). I have tried to make the design as reliable
as possible but would like to know if any of you guys can see any improvements that could be made.
I have tested the nail striker and it detonates the cap fine (these are childrens' 8-shot caps by the w ay) but sadly I have got no fuse at the moment. I w ould be using 2mm
flying fish fuse as it is the easiest to get hold of for me. Flying fish burns at about 0.8 seconds/centimetre so I w ould use 5cm of it to give a 4 second delay.
Can anyone spot any flaws?:cool:

(image not to scale ;)
Lewis September 4th, 2006, 06:23 PM

Seems feasible, but I think there's lots of room for error with the cap. I don't think an 8-shot cap would be capable of igniting fuse reliably.
Spudgun September 4th, 2006, 07:35 PM

My thoughts exactly.....Thats why I have taken the powder from another cap and put it into the first one, this creates a high pow er cap that on testing in the pen tube ignitor
shot a flame out the back of the 'nozzle'...This should I think ignite the fuse but if not maybe I could coat the end in BP or a small amount of powder from an estes rocket
motor?
Hirudinea September 4th, 2006, 10:18 PM

Thats why I have taken the powder from another cap and put it into the first one, this creates a high power cap that on testing in the pen tube ignitor shot a flame out the back
of the 'nozzle'...This should I think ignite the fuse but if not maybe I could coat the end in BP or a small amount of powder from an estes rocket motor?
What about using the powder from the head of a strike anywhere match in your cap, that should give you some flame.
inventorgp September 5th, 2006, 12:57 AM

What are you going to use for the smoke composition?
KNO3 and sugar? Or some thing a bit more exotic?

Hirudinea: Thats a good idea, some of my earlier designs involved using the head of a match instead of a cap but I never thought of using the powder in the cap as w ell....I w ill
give it a go.
inventorgp: I am sticking w ith the KNo3:sugar mix at about 4:3. I might also try adding some shredded rubber to give it a bit of a kick.
c.Tech September 5th, 2006, 07:18 AM

A couple of little tips:
Your fuse seems to be layered, make sure there is no chance the fuse could touch or let sparks jump to other parts of the fuse making the time shorter.
Make sure the fuse is exposed to enough air so it won t burn extremely quickly reaching the cap within less than a second.

Thanks for the imput c.Tech. Sorry for the crude diagram- the fuse will not be layered, I shouldn't have show n it like that, in reality the fuse will be in a shallow 'u' shape, going
from the cap to the filler.
I have just received my fuse today in the post and it is green flying fish. I'm not sure if anyone is familiar with it but it is pretty much the same as regular visco, containing a
slightly different core material instead of BP, this gives it colour w hen it burns and allows it to zip around the sky erratically, hence the name.
"Make sure the fus e is exposed to enough air so it wont burn extremely quickly reaching the cap within less than a second"
I assume you mean reaching the filler in less then a second :) . There are air vents to let in air for the fuse and to let the smoke gasses out, but I dont think the burn rate of the
fuse w ill be greatly effected considering it burns underwater anyw ay....
After testing the reliability of the cap igniting the fuse I have discovered an issue- The force of the cap detonation shoots the end of the fuse out from the pen 'nozzle' w ithout
igniting it. This means I need to use an adhesive to keep the fuse inside the nozzle. I have used locktite instant adhesive but as it is so runny gets soaked up by the fuse and
may affect the burn rate(?)....Would a 2 part epoxy resin be better?....When the fuse does not shoot out it lights every time :)
Here is the design mark 2

Use .GIF format for saving your computer drawings. Much smaller size and clear lines instead fuzzy like w ith .JPG.
Alexires September 5th, 2006, 12:11 PM

Spudgun - Congratulations on it working, I was dubious as to whether it would.
2 Part epoxy holds stuff pretty well. If you use 5 minute epoxy, mix it until it becomes rather thick, and then apply it. That should stop it from soaking into the fuse.
I was thinking, why not have a 9V battery with one terminal attached to the nail and another attached to some nichrome wire inserted just inside the smoke composition, or
attached to the fuse?
Ofcourse, there might be a problem w ith the cost of the battery and all...

yes, I have some 'permabond' which sets in about 5 minutes, it goes a pearly colour when mixed.
Good thinking about the electrical detonation idea, it w ould be much more reliable then the cap method but sadly is not the most cost effective way of doing it:(
Alexires September 6th, 2006, 10:30 AM

You could always have a small capacitor that melts a thin nichrome wire, and hooks to the battery.
The smoke devices are on the belt, all charged from the battery, and when you pull them off the belt and pull the pin, the capacitor discharges and sets the smoke off.
Or, you should just use a pin, a cap and a piece of fuse *wink*.
NBK had a thread on pull strip grenades utilizing match heads and the striker IIRC. Maybe try a few experiments like that?
teshilo September 6th, 2006, 01:53 PM

Intresting design had US grenade with double action fuse delay/impact(i dont remember his mark). After as safety pin pulled and powder in fuse burn ,heat from it produce
electic current by mean small heat- electric battery and switched second firing chain w ith impact sensor as "ball in tube"Grenade explode after five second delay or after impact.

Ahh ok, so after the pin is pulled it detonates on impact or after the fuse delay, (Which ever occurs first). Thank you for that, an interesting design, it has got me thinking.....
Alexires: Thats also a good idea, that way you don't have to destroy the battery and keep the reliability of the first idea you mentioned. Hmmm....:rolleyes:
inventorgp September 6th, 2006, 05:49 PM

For a capacitor you would need a high capacity low ESR (equivalent series resistance) capacitor . About 1 Farad would do nicely (anything from 5000F 1F), w ith a resistor to
charge the cap and a resistor to limit the current flow to the nichrome wire. Using an ESR cap isnt necessary but, also make sure the cap doesnt have a internal bleeder
resistor.
Cap, referring to capacitor.
inventorgp September 6th, 2006, 06:01 PM

The first resistor (to the cap) is to prevent draining the battery. The second ( to the nichrome wire) is for limiting current but, its also used to stop the cap dying from instant discharge.
w22shadow September 6th, 2006, 10:05 PM

Has anyone entertained the idea of using the springs from hole-punchers (http://img.shopping.com/cctool/PrdImg/images/pr/177X150/00/01/6f/76/1e/24081950.JPG) in
spring-based designs? They seem rather w ell-suited to such a purpose. :)

Today I tested the whole detonator at school (had to show my friend :)) and it works perfectly. I am using a split-pin as the pin with a keyring through the hole in the end.
The spring I used is just one I found in a box in my garage but sadly there are only about 3 more left :(, this means I need to find a new renewable source of springs. The one
in my 'prototype' is about an inch long (uncompressed) an just under 1/8 of an inch in diameter, it is very strong for its size as I can bearly fully compress it with one hand. Has
anyone got any ideas where I could get some of these?

A hardware store would be my first suggestion. ;) :D

I finally got the chance to test the whole detonator + smoke device and am pleased to say it was a success!:) The delay was even accurate and set the thing off after 4
seconds:D. The success of the prototype has created some more ideas to my mind. I hate the w ay the cardboard tubes I am currently using burst into flame once the filler has
finished burning and would set anything they are touching on fire. This is why I w ould like the device to be encased in a non-combustable material ie steel tubing, however
would this affect the stability of the KNO3+sugar mix?

Make a saturated solution of Borax, and soak the tubes in that.
This will make them non-combustible. :)
You'll have to test how long you can soak the tubes w ithout them falling apart on you.
Alexires September 12th, 2006, 10:18 AM

Spudgun, you are in luck!
During my long and boring days, I have tested just that. The best that I have found is either making the smoke composition burn for longer by the addition of Sodium
Bicarbonate, or by soaking one of those postal tubes wrapped in cloth in a PVA+w ater solution.
Even with the normal 50/50 KNO3/Sugar (w/w) smoke device, it easily w ithstood the temperature. The tube even remained together to some degree.
I'll make one up tomorrow if you like, and test a BP composition in it (no sugar around).
Also, I have some borax lying around NBK, so I'll try that.
I think by using cloth, you don't have to worry about the tube falling apart on you when you soak it.
GibbsFreeEnergy September 13th, 2006, 01:22 AM

I am unable to view the images in this thread so I hope this isnt too similiar to what is being show n. This design was drawn very roughly in a short period of time in Rhinoceros
3.0. I think it is pretty easy to see how it works from the picture. Essentially, the pin is pulled and the pointed hammer (which could likely be a large penny nail cut off-bronze)
is propelled forward by the loaded spring behind it, w hich then collides w ith the primer of a cut off shell casing (yellow). Underneath the primer is black powder (black) or any
other flammable powder that would then ignite and ultimately ignite the w ick that is inside of it (green).
Since most of us do not have access to advanced machining tools, I attempted to draw this so one could make it using only different sized drill bits in a simple drill press. The
holes are made to be drilled all from the top, and then the pieces are inserted. Next, one would insert the w ick, and then a small amount of epoxy on the bottom of the powder
chamber in order to ensure powder can not spill through past the chamber. Powder can now be added to fill the chamber, and then the shell casing can be placed on top (the
hole should be drilled to the proper size to accomodate whatever caliber shells one would like to use). Afer this is complete, one can drive the pin through the side and then
place the hammer in from the top hole. The spring can be compressed underneath an epoxy resin or one could thread the top hole.
Well, hope this makes some sense. The instructions are rather vague but essentially every stage is done from the top of the device (large hole) and then it is either sealed with
epoxy or a threaded plug. Sorry if this is rather rough.
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m27/GibbsFreeEnergy_2006/SideSide.png
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m27/GibbsFreeEnergy_2006/Top.png
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m27/GibbsFreeEnergy_2006/side.png
The pictures are in png format and I hope they aren't too big. I wish I had a better editing program; these are ren gens.
Alexires September 13th, 2006, 12:13 PM

Ok, I've tested some thin tubes w ith both a saturated Borax solution, and a PVA solution.
I used tubes with about the same thickness as the toilet paper rolls.
Method:
Part A:
Borax was mixed w ith boiling water and then let cool for about 5-10 minutes.
4 cardboard rolls were then partially submerged in the borax solution and rotated to ensure an even soak. At 5 minutes, one roll was removed from the borax solution and
placed in a 100*C oven to dry.
The other 3 cardboard rolls were removed from the borax solution when they had been deemed saturated (deemed so by colour change and slight unraveling of the cardboard)
and placed in a 100*C oven to dry.
The rolls w ere removed from the oven, and the bottom w as flattened and folded over as to seal one end. Due to the stiffness of the rolls saturated with borax, they could only
be flattened then sealed (without folding). They w ere sealed with clear packing tape.
Part B:
Boiling water was mixed with PVA in a ratio of about 10:1 (Water:PVA).
4 Cardboard rolls were partially submerged in the PVA solution and rotated to ensure even soak. One roll was removed from the solution at 5 minute intervals so that there was
a 5 minute soak time seperating each roll (Eg. 5 minute, 10 minute, 15 minute and 20 minute soak time).
As each roll was removed from the solution, it was placed in a 100*C oven to dry.
When the rolls had dried, they were removed from the oven and the bottom was flattened, folded over and sealed w ith clear packing tape.
Part C:
A Black Powder composition w as made using the common method of 75:15:10 - KNO3:C:S.
Each ingredient w as ground till they w ere of the same consistency, then mixed thoroughly.
Roughly 30 g was poured into the previously prepared cardboard rolls (See Part A and Part B). 2 of the saturated borax tubes were disgarded due to lack of black powder.
Results:
Each tube was taken outside and ignited seperately. All, except the saturated borax tube burnt w ith ease and w as reduced to ash. The saturated borax tube was observed to
resist burning to some degree before it w as consumed.
From this, I w ould have to agree w ith NBK and say that a saturated solution of Borax is the w ay to go. Make sure that thicker tubes are used (such as thick postal tubes) or
alternatively, paper could be wrapped around the tube and soaked with the tube.
Maybe a coat of PVA on the outside w ould improve flame resistance.
A short note, it seems that the PVA solution dissolved the glue that held the tubes together, so anything over 5 minutes had the tubes starting to fall apart.
I only have one thick roll left after previous experimenting, and a little borax, so I'll try that tomorrow and get back to you on it. I'll also try making some rolls out of paper and
whatnot.
I hope this helped to some degree.

Thanks Alexires. I am going to run a few tests on cardboard tubes soaked in a 50:50 pva:water solution with the smoke filler in them. I will use a 50:50 KN03:sugar mix this
time instead of 3:2.... Will a piece of 2mm visco fuse ignite a 50:50 mix easily enough though?

The PVA soaked tubes set alight :( but they did not completely burn out to ash like they usually do, these ones only partially burned through. Alexires, what ratio of sodium
bicarbonate do you use with the 50-50 smoke mix? Do you add this before you melt the KNO3-Sugar mix?

It probably wouldnt be necessary to m ix the sodium bicarbonate in before melting but w ould make your job easier.
The idea of adding the bicarbonate causes an over all slower burn rate, so as long as its evenly mixed it should be fine.
Because it would probably be a fine pow der and the sugar would probably be granules it s better to mix the consum ption just before melting, so the finer particles don t s lowly move
towards the bottom.

Yes. Does the sodium bicarbonate effect the amount of smoke produced?

I'm assuming that adding bicarbonate would also lower the temperature at the same time as slowing the burn rate. If this is so there would probably be more smoke.
This is probably why sodium nitrate doesn t m ake as much, if any smoke compared to potassium nitrate. IIRC Potassium nitrate burns at a low er temperature.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Therem in Proximity Fuze?
Log in
View Full Version : Theremin Proximity Fuze?
nbk2000 S e p t e m b e r 1 4th, 2006, 09:42 PM

Browsing around the internet, I ran across an obscure m usical instrum ent called a 'Therem in', which produces varying tones
depending on the location of the operators hands near field-capacitance antennas.
Now that's very sim ila r to what proxim ity fuzes use, a capacitance field is created and changes in that field trigger the weapon
to fire.
In it's simplest form, the therem i n i s a c o u p l e o f I C ' s , a n d s o m e resistors and capacitors attached to an an t e n n a ( s e e a t t a c h e d
diag ram ).
I don't know the rang e, but th at's proportional to antenna size and distance.
The PDM shoots out wires 15 feet in each direction and explodes when they are disturbed.
I'm thinking that the wires of a PDM could be acting as antenna's, with the body acting as a ground (or vice -versa), with a
sim ple low-power theremin-like circuit acting as an e-field generator.
A website where the e-field is being used as m achine vision for robots:
http://thereminvision.com/
A su pplier for an e-field kit, for $50:

http://www.robotlandinc.com /tvision.htm
atlas#11 S e p t e m b e r 1 8th, 2006, 11:38 PM

T h a t s e e m s ridiculusly sim ple for som ething that would be so effective. The devices generate a field around them , so they
could be detected. But it would take a hell of a lot of de aths to convince all the pigs to carry a therem in detector.
Obviously there would have to be some sort of timing circut to allow you to get the hell out of the area before it is a rm e d . A n d
you would have to set a pretty high threshold o n the fre quency changes. A change in humidity could effect it enough to trigger
t h e b o m b, or even a m ouse crawling inside the walls. I would be nervous as hell settings one of these, then again, I'm always
nervous.
It would definatly im peed a search if the bomb sniffing dogs got blown up every time they got close. It wou l d t a k e t h e l a b s a
while to figure out how the hell the bombs were being set off, since all they have to work with is a couple melted fragm e n t s o f
a n I C . I think the antenna would be th e b i g g e s t g i v e a w a y , u s e a p i e c e o f m a g n e t wire or som e t h i n g o b s c u r e l i k e t h a t m a b y e .
I definatly like this idea, but I would hate to be anywhere around any of them when their armed.
Jacks Complete S e p t e m b e r 1 9th, 2006, 07:37 PM

If you think they m ight be using a theremin/e-field detector (which would be jam m ed quite neatly without trouble if you used a
m o r e p a s s i v e a e r i a l a n d u s e d a l o c a l r a d i o s t a t i o n o r b a c k g r o u n d m a i n s h u m for the powe r source) switch to a PIR for a
change.
In fact, if you want rid of the dogs, line up a PIR with a rifle so that it shoots anything hot that app ears in the right place. Th e n
s e t t h e T h e r m in to detect a hum an that is upright. And, of course, the robot they send in won't be hot or ta ll enough, and will
h a v e a s i g n a ture tota lly unlike a hum an. So it won't find anything, especially the charges papered over in the walls at head
heig ht.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Safe cracking tales
Log in
View Full Version : Safe cracking tales

http://www.peterm an.org.uk/
http://www.safeman.org.uk/
s a f e m a n . c o . u k i s a s i t e o f s a f e t a l e s f r o m a g u y who worked with safes for years. Very interesting stuff. He also has
peterm an.co.uk which tells of the use of explosives in safe openings and robberies.
W ell worth a read.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Need a detonator - Ragnars Detonators problem
Log in
View Full Version : Need a detonator - Ragnars Detonators problem
Smoakie December 15th, 2006, 03:14 PM

To start, I have searched the site looking for a simple detonator with no luck. There is lots of talk about using fairly unstable primary explosives and various theories on what
might work but I can not find any info on how to make a good detonator.
I have a rock in a new driveway to my shop that needs to go. It is about 1.5 feet in diameter and sticking out of the ground almost a foot at the highest point. During
construction of my shop I had a huge track hoe try to remove it and it didnt even begin to budge (he had just got done removing 4 rocks the size of VW bugs). I got a fairly
big hole drilled into it with a hammer drill and now I want to blast it.
I am planning on using AN+AL+bullseye smokeless powder for the secondary explosive. I have used AN + AL for exploding targets and it is fairly powerful but I figure I will
only have one shot so that is why I am adding the bullseye (~40% NG). The formula comes from 'Ragnars New and Improved C-4' and the bullseye is to be a substitue for
the NM.
My problem is now I need a detonator. I would rather stay away from AP, HMTD, etc. as that makes things a lot more complicated and I like all my fingers. So from 'Ragnars
Detonators' he says you can disassemble rifle primers and make a detonator. I figure this is the easiest and safest route.
So I tried making one and took apart 5 rifle primers. You are suppose to mix with a drop of water and press into the bottom of a thin walled aluminum tube and let dry. I then
used cannon fuse to light it but it did not go off. I threw it into a fire and after awhile it popped but it only seemed as loud as a single primer going off if thrown in the fire. The
primers are probably 20 yrs old but are still quite powerful. Could they be a different chemical than new primers that was degraded by the water? Should I try pressing the
powder dry (more sensitive?)? New primers? Or should I just step up to a sensitive primary and if so which one?
Sorry for the long drawn out post with lots of open ended questions, but I'm just trying to be safe and find the easiest route. Any and all input is greatly appreciated and
hopefully I will not be scalded too bad for the post. Thanks!
c.Tech December 15th, 2006, 11:09 PM

AP isnt 'that' sensitive and if you take the necessary precautions even if it does detonate you should be all right.
These precautions include safety glasses, thick gloves (I use welding gloves) and never put it in a metal tube unless you want shrapnel.
stupid939 December 15th, 2006, 11:26 PM

Well, sounds like you get to have a little bit of fun. I would agree that you should use a AN based charge, and what I would do is place the charge in the rock, and then cover
the whole rock in dirt. This would muffle the sound (if you have whiny neighbors) and stop flying debris for the most part.
As c.Tech said, AP isn't 'that' sensitive, but it still isn't something to play with. All primaries have their pluses and minuses, but most of them are pretty friction sensitive. I find
HMTD to be a little less sensitive than AP, but many people disagree. Like c.Tech said again, use glasses, thick gloves, and if you press it, its better to use a blast shield. I press
mine into test tubes, and like c.Tech said, don't use metal. The AP decomposes in contact with it, and can heat up and blow up. Use plastic (like a drinking straw) or something
like that.
If you are going to use AP, make sure you synthesize it as cool as you can so that you form TCAP for the most part. Then I would say that you make a 1g or 1.5g blasting cap
with it and make a small APAN booster for your charge.
Good luck and let us know what you decide to do.
c.Tech December 16th, 2006, 12:23 AM

don't use metal. The AP decomposes in contact with it, and can heat up and blow up.
AP reacts with metal? Are you sure you're not getting it confused with HMTD?

I reckon he is getting it mixed up with HMTD.
Also Smoakie, any kind of AN charge is more of a lifting charge instead of a shattering charge. If you were going to use AN, it would be better to put it underneath the rock, not
in the middle, otherwise you might find that it doesn't work.
Have a look on Mega's Chem Lab, that should help.
I would personally just use all smokeless rifle powder (nice high VOD), make a charge with that and use a gram of 2 of AP (which is safe compared to 10).
Just make sure you neutralize your AP and wash it properly, but as long as you use it soon after you have made it, you should be fine.

Ya, I got it confused with HMTD. I posted pretty late and didn't feel like checking, but its still safer to not use metal.
It would indeed be better to put the charge under the rock, but as he said, he doesn't know how far the rock goes into the ground. He has already drilled a hole in it, so unless
he drills another at the base inward towards the center, he should use the hole that he has now. If it doesn't work, all the explosives are cheap, and he could try a new
method.
Like Alexires said, take a look on Mega's site. There are lots of syntheses on there, and some chemicals are easier to get in different places, so you could find what would be
the best option for you.

Thanks for the replies.
Yeah I don't think I'm going to be able to get close to the bottom of the rock. I would bet it is the size of a full size truck, if not a few of them. It is just the very top that is the
problem so I will be happy getting it sheared off from the ground up.
I figured the higher the VOD the better so that it will want to crack the rock more instead of just knocking a chunk off. That is why I was going to go with the AN, AL, and
bullseye because according to ragnar's book, the addition of the bullseye really bumps up the velocity. I was going to test a charge first to get an impression of it so I might try
a test of straight smokeless to see which seems more powerful.
I will give the primer thing one more shot and then move on to probably AP since the chems are a little easier to get. I guess if I can find the hexamine, the HMTD would be
just as easy. Should I look at something else besides AP and HMTD? I know they are both more sensitive than I want to mess with but if I work in small amounts I should be
fine. With all the little kiddies that have made AP I figure I can probably pull it off since I have quite a bit of laboratory apparatus at my disposal.
Guess I need to start researching the synthesis and figure out how much 3% H2O2 I'm going to need to make a few grams of AP...
Thanks again and if anyone has any other comments or suggestions I would like to hear them.

If you can only get 3% H2O2, then you should make AP. If you can get closer to 30% (call a pool store for Baquacil Oxodizer, its 27% H2O2) and you can get hexamine for
cheap from a military surplus store or:
http://www.nitro-pak.com/
Its pretty good, you get 48 tablets for $10. Thats a lot of hexamine and it was the cheapest I could find. AP would definately be cheaper, and you may want to do that if this is
a one time thing. Good luck.

I just read up on the Baquacil and I'm sure I can get it. I just figured I would have to pay out the butt to get anything concentrated but the price sounds right for it. I could get
lab grade stuff but thats a hassle and expensive.
I will try the local army surplus and see if they have some hexamine. I remember seeing it in walmart not to many years ago but I doubt they have it anymore.
I will probably make caps a few times a year but not very often. Would you recommend the HMTD over the AP? Safety is my big concern but I guess a complete detonation is
also important. Would a 2 gram detonator reliable detonate a charge or would I need a booster.
The hole is not that large so I'm probably going to only get about a quarter pound charge in it.
Again, thanks for the reply!

HMTD is much more dangerous than AP, and not worth the risk.
Emc2 March 3rd, 2007, 06:56 PM

I thought this may fit this topic and test the torrent tracker at the same time.
Attached here is a US patent 3931763 for "Explosive Priming Device" or a "Detonator".
It's a small file (300KB) PDF, and may be a good info for some skilled DIY's.
enjoy.
waxman March 3rd, 2007, 10:31 PM

Have you considered (from another thread):
"Bristar"?
tiac03 March 7th, 2007, 01:11 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Most drug stores have Hydrogen Peroxide up to 9% (30 volumes) in the hair bleaching section. I Use it and It makes enough for what
you want to do with it (Cheap also).
No hassle to find and plenty for what you are going to do with it.
James March 21st, 2007, 03:00 PM

I saw a nice little blurb on primers
Primers
From a survivalist standpoint, I'd stock up on primers. It's the most difficult component to remanufacture. For example, our militar has used lead
styphnate primers since 1948:<table><tr><td>Lead Styphnate, Normal</td><td>36.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Barium Nitrate</td><td>32.0%</td></
tr><tr><td>Antimony Sulfide/td><td>15.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Alimunum Powqder</td><td>7.0%</td></tr><tr><td>PETN</td><td>5.0%</td></
tr><tr><td>Tetracene</td><td>4.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Gum Arabic</td><td>0.2%</td></tr></table>(From Bostons Gun Bible ch 29 pg 5)
BTW: could someone reseed the torrent?

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Preparing for a 182 kg. (400 lbs)
blast of ANFO
Log in
View Full Version : Preparing for a 182 kg. (400 lbs) blast of ANFO
Matt_Ladder January 2nd, 2007, 05:44 PM

Now hopefully I have put this in the right forum, please tell me if I screwed up and I will delete this post and place it in the
Detonation and Demolition. Thanks.
Info:
I have studied and experimented with ANFO for about a year now, and I have decided to end with a memorable explosion.
Now I am trying to plan out this explosion very precisely. The explosion will take place sometime in late July. I personally own
232 acres.... so I will be set with the land issue.
For the set-up:

I have decided to put the 182 kg. (400 lbs) in those Wal-Mart plastic tubs, which are about Length: 5 feet, Width: 3 feet,
Depth: 3 feet, I believe. Now I am thinking 4 or 5 tubs will hold all the ANFO. I haven't decided whether to stack them by twos
or make a square out of the tubs, or put them in a line. Maybe you guys can help me with this.
For detonation:
I have decided to use good old fuse (50 feet of standard waterproof fuse) to set of quarter sticks of dynamite. Now the
detonation is tricky for me. I am not sure if I should have one stick in each tub or just use one. It also depends on how the
tubs are organized. This is what I need the most help on. Now obviously Im not going to set fire to the fuse and run on foot. I
will have my trusty vehicle near by to get to a safe distance.
Formula for ANFO:

Now I have not exactly found out what the "perfect" formula is. I have been using 94.5 percent ammonium nitrate and 5.5
percent fuel oil. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/explosives-anfo.htm). Now I have changed that
somewhat and fooled around with the composition of the two reactants but I am planning on using that formula. Do you guys
have a better one?
Documentation of Blast:
Now to prove to you guys that Im not bullshitting you I will obviously film it. I will place 3 cameras. 1st camera will be 182
meters (200 yards) away from ground zero of the explosion. The 2nd Camera will be 274 meters (300 yards) away from
ground zero. As for the last one, it will be with me. Please give your opinion on the placement.
Now I believe I have covered everything. Like I said I will post the blast on the forum sometime in late July.
Please give any suggestions you have.
Chopper January 3rd, 2007, 04:06 AM

:eek:
Unless your property is surrounded by nothing, or you plan on digging a _big_ hole first, I'd buy some shoes with velcro on
them quite shortly - something about not being allowed shoes with laces in 'em.
If you can pull it off, great! I'll be waiting with baited breath. But this aint exactly like being caught making M80s..
knowledgehungry January 3rd, 2007, 11:32 AM

I prepared a lengthy response to this post concerning the technical aspects of this, but for some reason I don't feel
comfortable posting them. This has the feel of entrapment. I saved the post and I may still post it after a momentary bout of
Paranoia. Damn you Patriot act, I believe it was the Patriot act that made giving information be able to be tried as conspiracy.
simply RED January 3rd, 2007, 12:36 PM

Place all ANFO in one - preferably steel container. Like old container for oil/gas/naphta/pesticides.
Even better - fill an old water tank from electric boiler with it :D
You may even attach 2 water tanks one to another with bolts and nuts ;)
Be sure your fuel oil is completely dehydrated (may be additionally dehydrated with dry CaCl2)
and NH4NO3 perfectly dry before mixing.
Use at least 200 grams TNT equivalent for detonator.
Try your detonator first with 2kg and if it is okay - with 200.
95/5 - best
Other things you already know.
atlas#11 January 3rd, 2007, 02:34 PM

First of all, good luck with the not blowing yourself part.
I certianly hope you do a great deal of digging and burry these charges as deeply as possible, not for covering it up (obviously
not going to help any ways) but to make a much larger crater, which you could later use for the construction of a bunker. :D
As far as the detonation is concerned, it has been mentioned before, a large booster will make all the difference. I'd probably
use a half pound of petn at least or equivelant for each tub. Use a good blast box with some serious capacitors to get them to
all detonate at relativly the same time and to push adequate current through the LONG wires between you and the charge.
Also, place your cameras behind a pile of sand bags or such and use a mirror to view ground zero, save yourself a camera :) .
You might want to put a piece of acrylic infront of the mirror cuz thers gonna be alot of projectiles flying around and you
wouldn't want to miss a second of it.
Oh, did I forget to ask WHY THE HELL you decided to do a charge so large? This sounds to me like an extreme waste of
nitrate among other things. I'm not going to criticize you for it though, I certianly wouldn't mind watching some high definition
vids of a blast this big, I'm just asking you to consider exactly how much of a waste this is.
As for this being entrapment, I would think they would be asking for more information regarding the demolition of buildings
rather than a hundred acres of farmland. If it is a gov agent, he's probably looking for information on the subject cuz they're
planning another event similar to the WTC and they heard this was the best place to learn how to blow shit up.:rolleyes:
EDIT: Woops, guess I missed the part where your using fuse and dynamite. Fuse? Are you kidding me? I suppose if the tubs
were stacked close enough together you could use a good bundel of dynamite in the central tub to detonate them all, though
you'd risk loosing alot of your power should it fail. I seriously recomend you use electronic detonation and use a full stick in
each tub. Your obviously working with a budget so a seriously advanced trigger system is probably not in the picture, but you
could probably aford some form of radio detonator which would be optimum. I'd use a relay and some good caps wired up to
the charge and then have a radio device or pager wired to the relay. As always, test the bejesus out of everything before you
wire it to blow.

Use fuse-det or electric det with long wires. No electronics, no radio, no triggers etc. Fuse is good for this very application. If
you are paranoid - double it - use 2 fuses with two fabric detonators ot 2 fuses with one HMTD (3,4g) det.
"you could probably aford some form of radio detonator which would be optimum"
No! Do not make complications for yourself. Make it simple and effective. All charge in one place, one detonator and one
booster!

simply red is probably right, no sense in making more complications. Electric or radio det is how I would go though (probably
electric with wires). Just for the sake of putting more effort into it rather than just lighting the fuse and blowing something up.
Not to mention that once the fuse is lit and you're in your bunker, if something goes wrong you can do nothing but sit and
watch. i.e. your wife goes out looking for you in the blast zone, neighbors show up with a fruit basket, etc. etc.
Matt_Ladder January 3rd, 2007, 05:55 PM

OK this all makes sense, "All charge in one place, one detonator and one booster!" And use a better thing to hold the ANFO,
like an old water tank. That I can do easily enough and I will purchase a radio detonator, I needed one anyway.
Atlas#11, the reason why I want such a large explosion..... Well simply because I wanted to finally make a big ass explosion,
1st hand. It is a bit excessive but after years of experimenting with different explosives, I have always wanted to make
something that big.
I have been working in mines for about 2 years now, in Alberta and Alaska, so I guess I have seen big ass explosions but
making it yourself and experiencing it without pesky rules will be a lot sweeter (and no that doesn't mean I'm going to stand
100 feet away from it either, I'm no dumb ass).
And yes, this is an enormous waste, except I can make myself a nice little bunker with the crater :). But I am sure the Ukraine
has enough Ammonium Nitrate and 400 lbs. will not hurt the surplus. :)
Can't wait to set it off. The film will come.
Thanks a lot guys.
If you have anymore suggestions... Please feel welcome to post them.

You should not plant 200kg charge where your wife or neighbours could pop up with a fruit basket, or it may happen like in the
jokes for "redhat" ;)

Also, I have wondered where you guys personally get your ammonium nitrate.... I have used FireFox, united nuclear, and took
a look at those cold packs. However, I know a local supplier who is a real nice guy, and he gives me the stuff at a real nice
price :).
Gerbil January 3rd, 2007, 10:00 PM

I will have my trusty vehicle near by to get to a safe distance.
Just thinking: it's unlikely, but what happens if it breaks down after you light the fuse? If you do use one, it might be a good
idea to make it extra long, and pin parts of it to the ground so that, in an emergency, you can cut off the burning end with
ease.
Running a cable or using a radio detonator in your bunker (you're going to need one) would help in the sense that you can
easily control the explosion. That said, I tend to get slightly paranoid about interference/power surges...fuse generally can't be
set off accidentally.
In the end though, it's probably going to be much easier to run a cable from the blast site, and keep an unplugged high-
voltage battery pack in the bunker.
Just out of interest, would there be any chance of constructing a small shack (nothing fancy, five pieces of plywood would
suffice) a little way from the explosives, to help with judging the power of the explosion (and improving the video)? :p
Chopper January 3rd, 2007, 11:00 PM

But I am sure the Ukraine has enough Ammonium Nitrate and 400 lbs. will not hurt the surplus.
Also, I have wondered where you guys personally get your ammonium nitrate....
So lemme get this straight, you've got a location or a supply inside the Ukraine, you've worked in mines for 2 years now yet
STILL have now idea of the answers to your basic questions.
Not only that, but you've bought AN from FireFox, UN and canibalized cold-packs. You've also managed to secure yourself a
supplier who is sympathetic to your desire for either a bit of old boy fun, or some fertilizer for your farm. If you've got 232
acres, what the fuck are you doing buying it from anywhere but the farm store, in 50lb bags??
Nor can I understand why somebody in your position, i.e not a policeman would have the need to know where we buy AN from.
Your story aint adding up my friend, at the least it sounds a little schitzophrenic..
If you're genuine, I'm sorry to be a prick, but the way you present your case has garanteed my silence.
Besides, anybody that knows anything about fuse initiation knows full well that the way you get to a safe distance is by walking
and using an appropriate length of fuse to reach said distance. You never run, nor for the potential of car break down, as
mentioned above do you drive.
It's those pesky regulations that keep that pesky thing, death, from occuring.
I just hope nobody gets fucked up over this whole exercise.

So lemme get this straight, you've got a location or a supply inside the Ukraine, you've worked in mines for 2 years now yet
STILL have now idea of the answers to your basic questions.
Not only that, but you've bought AN from FireFox, UN and canibalized cold-packs. You've also managed to secure yourself a
supplier who is sympathetic to your desire for either a bit of old boy fun, or some fertilizer for your farm. If you've got 232
acres, what the fuck are you doing buying it from anywhere but the farm store, in 50lb bags??
Nor can I understand why somebody in your position, i.e not a policeman would have the need to know where we buy AN from.
Your story aint adding up my friend, at the least it sounds a little schitzophrenic..
If you're genuine, I'm sorry to be a prick, but the way you present your case has garanteed my silence.
Besides, anybody that knows anything about fuse initiation knows full well that the way you get to a safe distance is by walking
and using an appropriate length of fuse to reach said distance. You never run, nor for the potential of car break down, as
mentioned above do you run.
I just hope nobody gets fucked up over this whole exercise.
...................... Yup
In the mines I am a truck driver, we don't really get too much into the action, but hey! it pays well. The man I know does not
live in the Ukraine he lives in Canada, where I am planning to blast it, at the land I was talking about. I have family in
Alberta. I also have decided to purchase a remote detonator (if you read above at one of my earlier posts). Its obviously
much more productive and safer. As for the thrill I seek with lighting the match..... doesn't matter, I'll get enough thrill from
the boom.
As for where you guys get your stuff, I was just wondering, its getting harder to find (AN) and if my supplier won't sell it
anymore, then.... I have no AN. This was one of my main reasons to do this explosion. AN is becoming more and more rare
and this explosion will be the last and only time I will be able to use a large quantity like this.
Now I was just waiting for someone, as yourself, to start questioning, and you have every right too. I have no proof that I am
not some dumb ass who's 13 and gets excited when people go ooo and aaahhhh. However, the only proof that I can give you
is the video from this blast, which will come sometime in July.
No hard feelings Chopper, you had every right to question,

- Matt

He's in ukraine, so there's plenty of distance between him and I.:p
Where are you getting this radio detonator? And where are you getting your dynamite?
"But I am sure the Ukraine has enough Ammonium Nitrate and 400 lbs. will not hurt the surplus"
"The man I know does not live in the Ukraine he lives in Canada, where I am planning to blast it"
And are you planning on shipping the 400 lbs of AN from Ukraine to Canada? WHAT EXACTLY IS YOUR DAMMAGE BOY?
fiknet January 4th, 2007, 03:22 AM

Many people have laid down the 50kg plus glove and haven't delivered and personally I think you won't either, you say you
will have a fuse going to quarter sticks of dynamite, why are the sticks in quarters and not full sticks? Unless you are referring
to those 'quarter stick' fire crackers which are common kewl traps because they think sticking a fire cracker in a pipe of AN will
make awesome kewl bomz.
Anyway prove me wrong if I am, I'd love to see a nice explosion like that.
Microtek January 4th, 2007, 06:08 AM

Why are everybody going on about the Ukraine ? As far as I can see, Matt hasn't said anything about being in the Ukraine, in
fact as he's talking about using Wal-mart tubs, is using the archaic system of units ( lbs, feet ) and has simply stated that it's
in Canada, I think everybody should stop jumping to conclusions.
Anyway, just one of those tubs you mentioned are easily big enough to hold all the ANFO ( 90 cm X 90 cm X 150 cm = 1215
liters which will hold about 1000 kg ANFO ).
If you are a mine worker and has witnessed large explosions in the past then you already know that dirt and smoke will be
thrown high into the air and will probably remain visible for some time to point out exactly where the explosion took place, just
in case anyone might care to investigate.
Matt_Ladder January 4th, 2007, 08:09 AM

Why are everybody going on about the Ukraine ? As far as I can see, Matt hasn't said anything about being in the Ukraine, in
fact as he's talking about using Wal-mart tubs, is using the archaic system of units ( lbs, feet ) and has simply stated that it's
in Canada, I think everybody should stop jumping to conclusions.
Anyway, just one of those tubs you mentioned are easily big enough to hold all the ANFO ( 90 cm X 90 cm X 150 cm = 1215
liters which will hold about 1000 kg ANFO ).
If you are a mine worker and has witnessed large explosions in the past then you already know that dirt and smoke will be
thrown high into the air and will probably remain visible for some time to point out exactly where the explosion took place, just
in case anyone might care to investigate.
Thank you.
As for the dirt and smoke..... I'm aware. People may wonder, if they see it, but it's not like I'm detonating this stuff in a
populated area, if someone does see something, they'll confront me first.
- Matt
inventorgp January 5th, 2007, 07:12 AM

I think it would be best to detonate it at dusk so not many people would view it, and if they did it would get dark soon anyway.
Be careful, I'd suggest setting it off electrically - see the camera flash detonator thread.
Anyway, that is a lot of ANFO, keep "things" (metal objects, people) out of the shock wave.
Sheesh lay off guys instead of bicthin' and complainin' why don't be more enthusiastic about educating, so he doesn't kill
himself (I can see some are). This is a science forum after all.
And also where are you going to be when you set this device off?
Microtek January 5th, 2007, 06:46 PM

For a charge this big I strongly suggest using multiple redundancy in the initiating train. Even the best commercial firing trains
have an appreciable likelyhood of failing at some point under field conditions, and by simply having two separate trains ( fuse,
detonator, booster ) you square the risk. Three trains cubes it, so if one train has a 1:100 chance of not working then with two
trains you get 1:10000 and with three 1:1000000.
This minimizes the probability of having to deal with a 182 kg UXO.

I agree with Microtek about the multiple redundancy, the thing you want last in the world is to have 182 kg of ANFO with a
sensitive primary in the middle of it sitting in your yard:eek: .
I strongly suggest that you test the explosive train and method of initiation several times prior to using it with the ANFO. Set it
up exactly how you plan on setting it up, detonate the train and examine the results. If it does not go as planned, experiment
until you get the result you want, then try the successful method several times to make sure that it is reliable. You miight want
to even try to set off a smaller ANFO charge with it to make sure that it will initiate it correctly. Yes this is a lot of work, but
setting off even small explosives can be fun and when you are dealing with such a large charge as you intend to you need to
be very careful, and put large amounts of planning and research into it.
I, of course, strongly advise against any organic peroxides to be used in any shape or form in this endeavour:cool: .
I also would suggest electronic detonation of some sort because regular fuses fail far to much for my liking, plus it is better to
be able to control the precise instant the charge goes off in case of unexpected visitors.

I'd definately use a two stage system. Use an electrical system with a 20 second burning fuse, which splits into two to reach
your two detonators in your booster charge at the same time. Run this visible burning fuse vertically, and loop it around a
white duster or other visible marker, just after the electrical ignitor.
From your bunker, ensure you can see this "tell" through your field scope or whatever.
Should your electrical system fail (most likely), you will know the charge is safe to return to after a few seconds, as you will see
that the fuse is not lit and the marker has not moved. The dual detonators going off at very nearly the same time minimises
the risk of a fizzle due to a duff or badly placed detonator.
You could also have a back-up plan (or two) - use a Tannerite binary to boost it, and set it off with your scoped rifle. Or make
a radio controlled rig to trip it electrically. But that would destroy the receiver in a charge this big!
Matt_Ladder January 6th, 2007, 11:42 PM

I like these ideas. The commercial train one sounds good. And Jacks Complete write up on this was good as well. I will
defiantly test with smaller amounts of ANFO and experiment obviously, thanks for the help, I will probably go with the two
stage system.
Thanks again,
NO SELF-SIGNING! NBK
nbk2000 January 7th, 2007, 01:06 AM

I'll be shocked to shit if he actually does it, as I have seen this sort of thing promised soooo many times and never delivered.
Alexires January 7th, 2007, 09:19 AM

Why not have the primary/booster attached to a LONG piece of string and have it made so that its loaded into the ANFO from
the side you will be sitting on. In the case of a dud ignition, wait a bit then pull primary/booster out of the side of the main
charge.
This lets you deal with the UXO if it does occur. Alternately, have 2 or 3 different detonation sources inside the main charge,
so you can set number 2 off if the first fails, and number 3 off if the first 2 fail.
If they all fail, you suck and deserve to have to deal with 182kg of UXO.
While I am skeptical as well NBK, it would be nice to see.
inventorgp January 7th, 2007, 09:51 AM

Or you could use detcord and "splice" the three detonators/boosters to it.
And Jack I don't think he can get a firearm or tannerite, he lives in the Ukraine.
Setting it of with tannerite would be awesome tho.
So Matt, where are you going to be when you set this device off?
And so far how much have you spent on AN?

I would also suggest that you bury the charge, or at least place the charge in a hole. Doing this will add to confinement, which
increases the likelihood of a full detonation. It will also help reduce the amount of shockwave propagated horizontally,
reducing the damage to your house or yourself if you miscalculated the distance needed to keep undamaged.
InventorGP he does not live in the Ukraine he made some reference to the Ukraine which no one got(including myself) but he
lives in Canada.
Cobalt.45 January 7th, 2007, 12:11 PM

Also, I have wondered where you guys personally get your ammonium nitrate....
I know I'm not the only one whose BS alert is activated by this.
What I'm seeing is an ill conceived scheme to get an unwitting member to come off their supplier.
Chopper January 7th, 2007, 12:56 PM

That's certainly why I was less than friendly.
I don't reckon he's a 13 yr old kewl, nor am I particularly concerned for his safety. My concern is that there are inconsistancies
and unanswered questions with regards to his initial post.
On a side note, in a MythBusters dvd (Volume 9) a cement truck is blown up using 800 lbs of "a comercial blasting agent"
delivered in brown paper sacks (moisture sealed ??). This truck is destroyed in a big way, including the 7 cubic yards or
whatever there were of set concrete inside. That was a _seriously_ big blast, with the crew _all_ jumping upon the arrival of the
shockwave some 1+ miles away. The mushroom cloud of dust was seen extending what I would estimate to be 200+ meters
high.
In my mind there are 2 undesireable consequences (for us)

1) He gets himself fucked up royally, either bodily or legally and the repercussions come back to haunt RS again (as they did
after a raghead site linked to RS)
or, in my mind the more likely of the two
2) He's on a fishing expedition and hoping to close down suppliers or close down members that provide suppliers.
The ref to the Ukraine has still not been explained, nor has the reason for canibalizing cold-paks or buying at the
comparitively exorbitant rate UN charges. Nor can I understand why more testing will be conducted if, as claimed, the past year
has been spent investigating the detonation of AN devices. The only thing really left to be learned that hasn't been provided in
posts of this thread is how much of a boom that much AN would make.
It's probably of no consequence, but why the plan for Jun or whenever it was. To me it sounds like a method of buying time
without the expectation of any result until after then. That's a lot of time for foolhardy members to become unstuck.
But spidermonkey's 10kg one was a great view, and one 18 times the size would make great viewing.

Matt, nobody here is going to come off their suppliers for you, so asking is pointless.
UTFSE (Use The Fuckin' Search Engine) to find sources that have been previously named.
IF this is ever actually done, I'd say use a booster charge of a kilo 50/50 APAN set off with a very large Picric Acid/AP
detonator. If you can get nitromethane, use ANNM instead of APAN.
Cindor January 13th, 2007, 05:44 AM

You can use unpressed Amonal, which is more sensitive than ANNM... maybe with a big PA-AP/HMTD detonator you don't need
a booster.
FullMetalJacket January 13th, 2007, 09:13 AM

You should not plant 200kg charge where your wife or neighbours could pop up with a fruit basket, or it may happen like in the
jokes for "redhat" ;)
Or RedSKY.
Oh man, I kill myself sometimes. I really do.
As for the charge... It will be impossibly fucking cool if it goes off and you get a full det, but I have to side with Chopper...
As the saying goes... "You bring the worms, I'll bring the rods, we'll all spend a day at the lake having wormsex with dildos"
*snickers*

Or you could use detcord and "splice" the three detonators/boosters to it.
And Jack I don't think he can get a firearm or tannerite, he lives in the Ukraine.
Setting it of with tannerite would be awesome tho.
So Matt, where are you going to be when you set this device off?
And so far how much have you spent on AN?
Even if you can't BUY commercial tannerite, making it is as simple as dry mixing powders. He's GOT a massive volume of AN,
he's ordered from UN before (supposedly) so he could get Al, and he'd just have to ring around a bit to find the zirconium
hydride to sensitize it.
Lewis January 24th, 2007, 10:40 PM

It would perhaps be a good idea to erect some sort of shed or shack over the ANFO.
Not only would it be entertaining to hear about farmers finding twisted nails landing 5 miles away, but it would protect the
explosives from the weather and unfriendly eyes.
rasputin_ecuador June 17th, 2007, 09:50 PM

Well mate its almost July and I hope you deliver... as far as the fuse goes.. I would personally never use it against electrical
det. for that much explosive, fuses always have the bad habit of failing when you most need them to work.
jagster June 27th, 2007, 11:26 PM

Just discovered this threat. I'm waiting also :)
nbk2000 June 28th, 2007, 03:40 AM

'Threat'? :confused:
Are you implying some sort of danger, to you or to others?
Did you perhaps mean 'Thread', as in a topic of discussion?
I ARE A ENGINEER? :p
fiknet June 28th, 2007, 05:25 AM

Hmm,
"Last Activity: January 7th, 2007 07:55 PM"
It doesn't look to good unless he is actually very clever and keeping a low profile before the blast and will return in due time
with excellent documentation and story.
sbovisjb1 July 1st, 2007, 01:01 AM

I bet he just had a good idea and was gassing here, saying all what he was going to do and then like most braggers, he lost
interest.
nbk2000 July 1st, 2007, 01:55 AM
All anyone has to do is click on his name, view public profile, and see he hasn't been here since January 7th of this year.
Rbick July 1st, 2007, 03:24 PM

It says "no activity" because he has been working endlessly on his 400lb charge, working day and night making calculations
and adjusting his measurements. He has no time to post on the forum! :D
Just a random thought: But if there were a 400lb random explosion anywhere in the U.S. (assuming thats where he is) I think
the ATF and FBI would have a field day... Unless you're out in Nevada in the desert somewhere. Even then, it would be hard to
hide that, unless there isn't a person within about 20 miles.
Shalashaska July 1st, 2007, 11:50 PM

I've been thinking the exact same thing for the last few months since I first read this thread. Unless he's in one of the many
vast Canadian deserts, I don't think there's any real way to hide this kind of explosion. And I certainly wouldn't advise doing it
on his own property which he mentioned. These kinds of explosions typically yield search warrants... since clearly, this guy is
testing out his explosives so he can then move onto public buildings and structures to blow up!
Honestly though, at this point, I think the only thing warding away my doubt for this actually being real is my wish to see it
filmed if it is real. :-)
megalomania July 2nd, 2007, 12:16 PM

Well, if he was keeping a low profile, I think we have flagged this topic enough so that even the most dense BATF agent in
charge of monitoring this site will get a dim flicker of an idea-bulb above his head to take notice.
You would not need 20 miles of life free testing ground. A few dozen acres of farm land, maybe a quarry or deep depression,
and with no one around for a mile say, it would be hard to tell where it came from. One could wait until there was a
thunderstorm, the noise might be dismissed as thunder.
Rbick July 3rd, 2007, 10:46 AM

Oh good idea. I actually THOUGHT about using a thunderstorm to cover up a charge. If I had a license, I would bury them
about 30cm to cover the sound ever since the cops paid me a visit :rolleyes: You're right though, 20 miles is a little of an
exaggeration, but being as paranoid of the government as I am, I would go with 20.
Mega, I know this question may seem to have the obvious answer, but I'm young and naive so I'll ask it anyway. You think
they really have a BATF agent watching the forum? It wouldn't suprise me, and I know they can get close to exact geographic
locations via IP address tracing programs. I actually have one called NeoTrace Pro. Anyway, sorry to go off topic. This guy
probably forgot about the fact he even posted this 6 months ago...
megalomania July 4th, 2007, 03:40 PM

Do I think there is a team of agents hunched over computer terminals monitoring The Forum day and night compiling dossiers
on everyone, no I do not. Do I think there is a mandate or direct order somewhere in the fedgov to keep an eye on this place,
no I do not. Do I think at least one fedgov agent has his own username to look things over for his own interests and on his
own time, absolutely.
Of all the years we have been here no one has said or done anything that would garner the attention of the higher ups in the
fedgov. We are a safe responsible lot trying to operate our own experiments without hurting anyone or destroying anything.
Compare that to some Al Qaeda blog which should take up all of their time.
No one here is dangerous, and the fedgov has real work to do with the people that are. It may be illegal in the strictest sense
to detonate an explosive in a hole in the ground, but are they going to serve up warrants and spend investigative dollars on
something that innocuous, no they are not.
Rbick July 5th, 2007, 01:31 AM

Amen to that. I just hope they never get bored ;) As for the 400lb blast: SHOW ME THE MONEY!
Kleng July 11th, 2007, 01:36 PM

Money? AN can be bought in big sacks for around 200USD. (At least in Norway) These contains 500kg AN pure enough to be
used in ANFO, without any purification. The diesel, would cost no more than 20USD. Then for the booster and detonator, it
wouldn't cost that much.
Shalashaska July 11th, 2007, 11:51 PM

I think by "Show me the money," he means he's anxious to see the video (if it's the real deal.) Not that he wants to know how
much it's estimated cost was.
Charles Owlen Picket July 12th, 2007, 12:18 PM

Money?
Yes, this is an expression taken from popular entertainment TV in several English speaking countries that indicates that the
person wants to see (or receive proof) of the factual nature of the issue.
Much the same as in Saudi Arabia they may say " Stone the Bitch" to indicate the need to repress or destroy that which may
be heterosexually simulating or attractive. :rolleyes:
But dealing with the topic of internet monitoring..... realistically the monies available for any on-going investigation hinge on
results. Fed-Gov money that has Congressional over-sight has to show results for it's expenditure (eventually). I can't see how
any agency could justify the focus on this message/discussion board unless something really news-worthy was attached to that
investigation. However I am sure Hillary will think of something to save the children.
Rbick July 12th, 2007, 08:28 PM

I apologize for this thread going off topic, but it is kind of dead anyway considering the one who started it has obviously given
up on us :(.
As far as Hiliary goes, I attempted to do some research on her political stand points, and as a result I didn't get any where.
The websites explaining her views state things in a way that really don't point you in any one direction. Seems like they're
trying to make everyone happy? Hmmmm...
In a attempt to see passed the BS, and going off past speeches and statements she has made, this is what I concluded:
Chances are she would try to ban "violent" video games. So all you would be playing is The Sims, if you're lucky. Guns would
be gone if she could have it her way. Screw the Constitution right? That thing is out dated anyway, who needs it? (Dripping with
sarcasm). Our current government is finding ways around it anyway *COUGH* PATRIOT ACT. And as for Hobby chemists, we
would be in big trouble. Use fear and ignorance as a weapon to let the people hear what they want to hear: "Chemistry and
explosives are EVIL". Well so are STDs (Sexually Transmitted Diseases) and fast cars. They kill more people than guns and
explosives ever will, so ban them too!
In conclusion: Hilary sucks... Sorry, I had to vent :mad:
Shalashaska July 13th, 2007, 02:42 AM

Well so are STDs (Sexually Transmitted Diseases)
Hell, while we're at it, let's ban sex! It'll take care of STD's and the geometrically growing population. Then we can ban
cigarettes, since we don't need them to kill off the population anymore! Great PR!
Reminds me of this:
http://www.fat-pie.com/thechildthatsmeltfunny.htm
NoltaiR July 23rd, 2007, 01:35 PM

"No activity"... I was getting so excited reading the early postings. I guess it is possible he tried a practice shot early on and
was trying to light that fuse much to close :)
Well I will post a quick thought in case anyone else decides a similar endeavor.
I will have to disagree with SimplyRED's comment about using a standard fuse type detonation. In my experiences (which were
all dreamt, of coarse), an electrical detonation is always SO much more safe. Also you have an enormous amount of control
over it.
stupid939 July 23rd, 2007, 02:46 PM

I would also agree that using an electrical firing system would be the safest. If you light a 50ft fuse (or whatever length was
discussed earlier) anyone could pull up to the blast site and start snooping around. You could also have problems with the
fuse burning all the way, and I for one would not want to go back to the blasting site.
If you use a electronic system, you have complete control (down to the millisecond) of when your charge will detonate. As long
as you make safe e-matches (not too fine of a wire) a small static charge (in transport/setup) will not fire it, and if you check
your lines for a charge beforehand, I do not see much else going wrong (unless you use a radio frequency trigger and pick up
interference).
Vitalis August 24th, 2007, 09:15 AM

Well, I guess this didn't happen. It's a shame too, that video would have been a bitch and a half. I didn't expect him to go
through with it, but that sucks to come on here and promise such a thing and then just flake.
I'm nowhere near the expertise level of most of the people here, but I sure wouldn't want to mess around with any type of
fuse-type detonation system on a charge this big. Hell, if something went wrong, you would have a serious problem and a
giant disaster waiting to happen.
Rbick August 24th, 2007, 03:16 PM

We can only hope that while he was actually setting it up, the button on his electronic firing device malfunctioned and fired just
as he was inserting the blasting cap into the booster. He was then instantly vaporized and his video camera with him,
destroying any evidence that it happened. The cops would later find the 10m wide crater in the middle of a field and wonder
what happened.
This is why we havn't heard from him in so long... He's dead. At least he went through with it... :D
pthiemann October 10th, 2007, 10:03 PM

Just afew basic things you might want to consider.
Do not! place it in a metal container, you will have shrapnel flying everywhere.
Keep the charge in a single container so it is not decoupled or use multiple instantaneous primers. Given it is unconfined with
a rather large diameter I expect you may need multiple primers or the VOD may die off and stop the detonation.
Take note of all entrances to your property and post physical guards, yes people, and make sure they are atleast 1,000m
away. If the 1,000m radius crosses any public area, road say. You are asking for big trouble.
Don't know what your laws are over there but I'm sure you would have notify your local mines inspector and explain why you
want to do it and satisfy him that all safety precautions have been taken into account.
Are you a shotfirer? God knows how you get hold of any of this stuff without being licensed.
I would use multiple 700gm PETN boosters with cord initiated with a nonel lead in line.
You don't want to have to running, walking, driving etc after you have initiated it. Fire it from your final destination...again
from atleast 1,000m away.
I know it sounds like fun and we do have some fun blowing holes through inch thick plate with just a booster but you have to
be carefull with this stuff.
Oh yeah, you mentioned you were "playing" with the proportions of AN and fuel oil. DO NOT do this. Your original proportions
are correct, if you deviate from this you risk formation of NOX gases which will kill you and anything around the blast zone if
breathed in.
When you fire monitor your wind direction.
All in all you are playing with some very dangerous stuff here. We deal with this stuff everyday and blasts in excess of
700tonne and damn they make a fine sight.
Don't want to be a kill joy but given the questions you are asking you really don't know what you playing with.
How do post movies and what format, might have some interesting ones here too show you
Cheers
nbk2000 October 10th, 2007, 10:37 PM

Does anyone ever bother to read the beginning of a post and notice the DATE of the last post made by OP?
You would have noticed that he hasn't been back here for quite a length of time. Because either:
A) He was lying (Occam's razor...)
B) Caught
C) Killed
End of useless thread.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Making a HMTD blasting cap
Log in
View Full Version : Making a HMTD blasting cap
Dombum January 8th, 2007, 04:02 PM

A few days ago i made some HMTD and started thinking about how to make a good blasting cap.And here is my idea!:)
1.At first buy a copper tube with the diameter of about 1 cm,and cut it to a length of about 8 cm.After that you cut a paper
which is about 4 cm broad and is about 2-3 cm longer than the copper tube,like this:
http://www.pictureupload.de/pictures/080107203306_RIMG0030.JPG
2.Then roll the paper and put it in the tube like this:
3.Then press one end of the tube with some pliers together,and put the HMTD in the tube.But make shure that the HMTD fills
just a bit more than half of the tube!!!that lookes than like this:
4:Now put a fuse(Normal fuse or electric)in the tube so that it touches the pressed HMTD.Than press the tube from the side
where the fuse is together.BUT BE FU....CAREFUL WHEN YOU DO THAT!!!!!!HMTD IS VERY SENSITIV!!!!!when the tube is ready
pressed and the remaining paper is cut off,it lookes like this:
5.And this s how that think looked when i fired it:D :
I hope i could help some people with their problems with blasting caps.If you have any question,just post it!!!cu domi

First off I would like to compliment you on doing some experimentation of your own, documenting it well, and sharing the
information.
However there are some issues that I have with this post, first of all there are many existing threads dealing with this and if
you had done a good search you would have found an old thread to post this in instead of starting a new one.
Secondly your grammar, while better than many, was certainly lacking in some areas such as capitalization of I, and minor
typos.
My third issue is more with your blasting cap than your post, I can not recommend bending a tube with a primary explosive
inside of it, apart from the danger of pinching the explosive and setting it off by force, when you bend metal it generates
heat. Heat which could also set off your HTMD.
All in all I think you have great potential to be a valuable member here, we need more people to post there experiments with
photos and the like, I am just trying to give you some feedback on how to make your stay here long and more beneficial to
the forum overall.
c.Tech January 9th, 2007, 02:29 AM

Fro m what I ve heard left, right and centre HMTD reacts with m etals creating heat th at can set it off. Is this different with
copper?
vod8750 January 9th, 2007, 09:19 AM

I understand that he lined the copper tube with paper to prevent that from happening.
mike16 January 9th, 2007, 10:34 AM

My blasting cap bodies are aluminium cut from cola cans, I cut the aluminium from the can into a 2 by 1 inch section, which is
rolled and taped together, the end is sealed with selotape.
1 cola can will make 5 cap bodies.
I then carefully pour AP in the open end, then press it very hard in a long vice,
they are 9mm in diameter.
I dont use fuse as I have a remote electronic device with 4 different channels,
so I use nichrome wire.
Dombum, do you press your HMTD?, because there is a VERY BIG difference in power between a pressed cap, and an
unpressed cap.

Hey thanks for the advice knowledgehungry,yes sorry for my bad english,and mike 16,yes I do press it. At first I didn't press it
and then it looked like this after the detonation:
But after I pressed it you can see in the last picture upside in the discription what happened to the tube:D
And about the danger that the HMTD detonates in your hands while making the cap, I said that the HMTD is not allowed to fill
more than half of the cap, and because of the heat when bending the copper I put the paper inside the tube so the HMTD
does not touch the metal!
And yes, I could have looked better in the searching engine.
But anyway my plan is to make a detonation with 1 kg ANFO,100 gr of ANNM,and this blasting cap I made. Do you think this
b.c.has enough power to set of the ANNM?
Acronyms are always capitalized (ANNM, not annm), I is also ALWAYS capitalized when referring to yourself, as are the first
letter in the beginning of a sentence.
And you don't make two posts withing minutes of each other in the same topic. You edit your previous post to include the new
comments.

The fact that your cap tube is split, not atomized into particles, shows that the cap is weak, and inadequate to the purpose of
setting of high explosives like ANNM, let alone ANFO.

Dombum - Don't be caught out by thinking that only half filling it will protect you. What happens if a small crystal stays in the
neck of the tube and you set that off?
Organic primaries are notoriously sensitive for a very good reason.
You would be better off using a more sensitive secondary to detonate the ANNM, and also using more primary in an easy to
use plastic blasting cap. You would hate to have some left over acid or water soak into the paper and leech some copper in
the HMTD wouldn't you?
In reference to above, while some might argue that more primary = less safe, I would prefer to use more primary than to
have it PRESSED into a METAL container and CRIMPING the ends.
If you insist on using metal, try a harder metal, or Hard Drawn Copper. While it will cost a little more, it might give you better
detonation results, and this is important when you are using it as a Blasting Cap.
My only accident with pyro has happened when dealing with UXO (Unexploded Ordinance). If hadn't been using plastic, I would
have lost an eye.
Otherwise, Congratulations on joining The Forum. May your stay here be knowledgeable and injury free.

Thanks nbk2000 for your advice.And Alexires,what do you mean with more sensitive secondary to detonate the ANNM?
Grapes Of Wraith January 10th, 2007, 08:31 PM

I think he means that you should have your blasting cap detonte a secondary explosive to increase its power, before it should
even think about detonating the ANNM. So you should have three layers, your blasting cap, then some amount of picric acid
(or some other secondary explosive) and then the ANNM.

Did somebody miss something with their replies?
I then carefully pour AP in the open end, then press it very hard in a long vice,:eek:
Pressing AP very hard in a vice, not to mention being in a metal object whilst pressing is an incredibly dangerous and stupid
thing to do. Phone didnt even do that and he's dead.
It's only a mater of time before it dets and sends metal shrapnel heading towards your face and vital organs.
Have you got any idea on the sensitivity of AP?
nbk2000 January 11th, 2007, 04:37 AM

Compression and shock are not the same thing.
The slow compression in a press (or vise, in this case) is not liable to stressing the bonds that hold the AP molecule together
like a sudden whack of a mallet on the pressing rod would.

NBK is right, put a very small piece of AP on an anvil, and instead of hitting it with the hammer, carefully place the hammer on
it and start to press down on it gently, it doesn't go off, even if you put all your weight on it.
Also, the caps are remotely pressed in the vise.
c.Tech, I may be new in this hobby, but I'm not some k3wl idiot that hasn't a clue on what hes doing.

Apologies mike, I didn t fully u nderstand your circumstances or the p roperties of AP, I've alwa ys thought p ressure is as b a d
as friction and shock to an explosive.

Grapes of Wrath - That is exactly what I mean. I was really just following on from NBK's comment that his det. cap would be
incapable of detonating ANNM, let alone ANFO.
The answer to that (if you can't make a better cap) is to use a more sensitive secondary with more primary.
Dombum January 11th, 2007, 08:37 AM

Do you think pressing some HMTD in a cigarr shell that is about12 cm long and 1.8 cm in diameter will be enough for
detonating the ANNM?And what are good secondary charges?
Grapes Of Wraith January 11th, 2007, 11:30 AM

You would have to do some tests on that but it might work. There are many secondary explosives availible it just depends on
the chemicals you can get. Like I said before Picric Acid is a good one, because I think its just easier to make.

That is far more primary explosive than is ideal. Like everyone else has suggested, use your blasting cap to initiate a more
sensitive secondary to set off the ANNM, there are a few that I can suggest; MHN, NG, PETN, ETN as well as picric acid. ANNM is
just not that sensitive.
You might even be able to use PVN to set it off (there is a thread currently active on its synthesis from Elmer's glue), although
it is relatively weak (for a secondary) you can use larger amounts of it safely. I am not sure of the sensitivity, Mega's Lab says
it is medium, but his lab says that AP and NG are both very high sensitivity, and they are worlds apart.

I then carefully pour AP in the open end, then press it very hard in a long vice,
they are 9mm in diameter.
I dont use fuse as I have a remote electronic device with 4 different channels,
so I use nichrome wire.
Dombum, do you press your HMTD?, because there is a VERY BIG difference in power between a pressed cap, and an
unpressed cap.
Although it's been stated that pressing it is safe, what about pressing an organic peroxide in direct contact with a metal like
aluminium? Granted, the oxide layer probably makes things a bit safer, but I've always been told that OPs and Metals are
about as safe as mixing conc. sulfuric and potassium permanganate in your mouth.
Kleng January 13th, 2007, 12:14 PM

Nice to see such a topic. Planning to make some blasting caps myself.
I'm going to use an organic peroxide as the primary, and some quite sensitive explosive as a secondary. Probably TNP or
ETN? I can make TNP, but it costs alot. ETN is much cheaper, as I can buy Erythritol cheap. Is there any others I should try
instead? I think I can get the chemicals for NG, EGDN and PGDN.
I want to use the detonators to try to set off some PLX og NM/HNO3. I know the last mentioned is quite sensitive, and doesn't
requires a big blasting cap.
And I've allways thougt that aluminium is quite safe to use as a casing for detonators. Other metals, such as copper, is not
good.
bizon January 13th, 2007, 02:14 PM

I have fired abou 10 ANNM charges in last few weeks. I must say it is more sensitive, then I thought. I started with 1,5g HMTD,
and now I am on 0,8g and had no missfire so far.
But the fact is, that I use paper detonators (5 layers of paper, diametre of cap is 0,8cm), and metal container can behave
different. So I don't say that 1g is enough for you, but at least you have some data to start with.

I have never had any trouble with AP and metal, I knew someone who used to use .22 shells as blasting caps with AP and
never had any trouble. HMTD behaves differently with metals than most organic peroxides, it has a very different chemistry.
I would recommond that if at all possible stay away from metal with AP, and under no circumstances use HMTD with metal.

I use plastic pen cartridge for my detonators and I never have any trouble with them.
I don't like to mix metal and primers, just for safety...
If you are specting that you device would go off at any second, then you'll be prepared and when it go off nothing unexpected
happens, like pieces of metal going throw your body.
Dombum January 15th, 2007, 08:50 AM

Today I ordered 1 liter of NM.I will set my first 100 gramm ANNM charge off as soon as the NM arrives.I think it will come the
next week.I will use a drinking straw filled with HMTD as a det.lets see if it works.I will make some pics and a vid so I can show
you guys if it worked.

A drinking straw will not give you enough confinement.

A drinking straw should work, as long as your HMTD is dry, IIRC most primarys don't need much confinement, if any.
Though I'm not quite sure on HMTD, as I've never made it, but I know AP would work.
Dombum, why don't you try making small amounts of AP, and use this as I've heard it is less reactive than HMTD.
sprocket January 15th, 2007, 01:55 PM

If you use a drinking straw most of the confinement comes from the secondary explosive surrounding the detonator. Although
just the drinking straw would provide sufficient confinement for detonating HMTD as long as you seal the end where ignition
takes place properly.
I've successfully detonated ANNM using HMTD in a McDonald's drinking straw (6.5mm ID) several times. One end is sealed
with cement and the straw is filled with 3cm HMTD pressed at ca 30N (I know this is a low force, but hey... it works). The other
end can be left open, but for practical reasons I seal it with either tape or plastic explosive. This simple detonator has a good
success rate, but it's hardly reliable.
It seems the thin wall of the drinking straw is actually beneficial, because these detonators are more reliable than a variation
using plastic pen casings (6.5mm ID, 1.1mm wall thickness). I don't know if it's just coincidence or if the thicker walls actually
have a significant effect on shockwave propagation.
I'm currently working on adapting this detonator using a bridgeless electrical igniter similiar to frogfot's (http://
www.frogfot.com/pyro.html#elig). I use a single conductive pyrogen (as opposed to frogfot's two layer solution) based on
aluminium, potassium nitrate and nitrocellulose lacquer. Now, for some reason I have this idea that HMTD should under no
circumstances come in contact with NC. Is this true?

It is not coincidence, the thinner the wall the better the propagation of the shockwave.
Gerbil January 16th, 2007, 06:53 AM

Dombum, why don't you try making small amounts of AP, and use this as I've heard it is less reactive than HMTD.
HMTD is both more stable and powerful than AP. It's also, in my area, easier to source the chemicals to make it.
stupid939 January 16th, 2007, 01:13 PM

Gerbil, here is what NBK has to say about AP vs. HMTD
HMTD is much more dangerous than AP, and not worth the risk.
I'm guessing that if anyone would know, it would be NBK. So you can save your hexamine for RDX or something.

HMTD may be more stable, but more dangerous at the same time. HMTD's greatest danger is in its reactivity. AP may be less
stable, but it doesn't carry the same risks from contamination as HMTD.
Gerbil January 16th, 2007, 03:08 PM

hmmm, interesting. I honestly haven't heard anything about how reactive either compound is before. I thought that
contamination was only a danger when it came into contact with metals?
I've stayed far away from AP for safety reasons, after all, even mega's lab states:
It can not be stressed enough how unstable and dangerous acetone peroxide is. As instability goes this is among the most
unstable of other explosives here.
Maybe it's time to find an alternative to both of them :p

AP is less sensitive than other primaries like MF.
nitriees January 17th, 2007, 03:11 AM

I always use drinking straw to make AP or HMTD detonator with slightly press, so far 100% successfully go off. It is sufficient to
set off 1:9 ratio of AP/HMTD : AN booster.
nitriees January 17th, 2007, 05:53 AM

I have a bottle of AP which immerse in the water and store at room temperature ( 26-30 degree celcius ) for more than 3
years now, take some sample out, dry it and tested found the quality still same as the fresh made.
Another dry sample store in film canister at room temperature for 6 months, still in good quality and no traces of
recrystallization on the lid. Of course the AP are neutralized and wash properly before this storage experiment.
The HMTD I made only storageable if immerse in water and store in the refrigerator for few months, when I bring it out to
room temperature for few days, it will all decompose to dirty milky liquid and unable to recover back. The dry HMTD only
survive for few days at room temperature and start to degraded in quality, it just burn into fireball even with confinement.
That's why I only use fresh made HMTD for detonator and use it within 3 days for good quality. This is storage experiment for
quality test only, I'm not recommend the storage of any peroxide primary.

In my experience dry HMTD can be stored in an open container for months at 20C without losing too much potency (certainly
detonates, and the loss of mass is insignificant). Considering what happens to your wet HMTD, humidity might be an
important factor. Do you live in a region with high humidity?
Perhaps the storage stability of HMTD detonators could be improved by adding a dessicant to the primary.
One important effect of storing (dry) AP is crystal growth, since this has a significant impact on the sensitivity. I found that
after storing AP for over 6 months crystals in excess of 1mm in size had formed. Is this consistent with your observations
nitriees?
Chopper January 18th, 2007, 02:07 AM

Guess the devil's in the details, as always.
I've a similar experience to sprocket in the storage of the stuff. I've had a sample sitting in open air for about 12 months
now. There is absolutely no discernable difference between this batch and a brand-new "just finished drying it" batch.
I've also had success in plasticizing it with the clear sticky substance used to hold bluetack together. Extracted with shellite and
decanted, this stuff after the solvent (Shellite) has evaporated, resembles the stuff used to hold cds to the cover of
magazines. This plasticized mass has been stored for over 6 months with no visible bloating or foaming due to
decomposition.
The only time I've ever had problems with the stuff is when I used to neautralize it with bi-carb. I found it really hard to
remove all traces of the bicarb and after about 2 months, the hmtd was a different beast all together!! The powder clumped
somewhat, as did it detonate with a different colour and more tellingly, with a different smell. It smelt like burnt coal, much
like a steam train!
The last couple of times I bothered with the stuff I just decanted, filled with water, allowed to settle then repeated. I reckon I
decanted 50% of the water each time, repeating about 10 times. I figured that about 0.09% of the citric and unreacted h2o2
would remain. Certainly more dilligent than many without fingers have been.
The great stuff about the hmtd-tak was that it was waterproof, didn't need containment, had a far higher density than I could
achieve by pressing and worked a treat inside drinking straws. Never did quantitive tests, but there is a distinctly different
sound observed when pressed dry powder is detonated, and when this sticky explosive is det'd. The dry powder is much less
painfull on the ears..
It also made for some really interesting experiments, somewhat akin to explosive forming used in the aeronautics industry.
Take a _small_ chunk of the hmtdtak, smear onto a 1" square piece of coke can until it's about 1/2 a mm thick. Place coin
against aluminium side and detonate. By not using too much, i.e plenty less than 0.1g, I could get a perfect reproduction of
the coin's surface - right down to scratches and the engraver's mark. It was really amazing to see such detail reproduced on
the back of a cougar or beam or coke can. With the right amount, you could even get the edges to be cut off, leaving you with
a perfect circle or whatever shape the coin had.

The only time I've ever had problems with the stuff is when I used to neautralize it with bi-carb. I found it really hard to
remove all traces of the bicarb and after about 2 months, the hmtd was a different beast all together!! The powder clumped
somewhat, as did it detonate with a different colour and more tellingly, with a different smell. It smelt like burnt coal, much
like a steam train! This is a good observation. While it is important to properly neutralize and wash nitric acid esters and some
other nitro compounds it doesn't have to be the case for organic peroxides. On the contrary, I think it's actually beneficial not
to neutralize the organic peroxides. Instead, just rinse the product with water two times and methanol the last time when it's in
the filter.
Of course, it is somewhat circumstantial. Having significant amounts of sulfuric acid in the product probably isn't very
beneficial, but suppose you used a more volatile acid...
How would you guys mix the AN with the NM?And how long does it has to soak in?And where in?
This really is a question for another thread, but simply put: Just mix the two in a plastic bag (for small to medium sized
batches). Performance and soaking time depends on several parameters, most importantly particle size, porosity, ratio and
temperature. Generally speaking on the order of 30 minutes is good, but more is better.
Microtek January 18th, 2007, 07:58 PM

My advice to anyone who is using primaries on a regular basis is to find something better than organic peroxides. I used them
myself for a number of years until I found something better, and thankfully I was never seriously injured.
In the end it was the awareness that a detonator could go off at any time as I was transporting it to my blasting site that
made me search for better alternatives. What I ended up with was different sorts of clathrate structures, as introduced by
Roscoe Bodine on SM. These compounds can be tailored to suit almost any application by adjusting the proportion of azide in
the structure.
Now, I realize that sodium azide may appear to be out of reach for most of those that still use peroxides, but it isn't really
very difficult or dangerous to synthesize ( certainly not as dangerous as handling peroxides ).
The azo-clathrates can be made both sensitive and powerful by using a high proportion of azide, but the true value is in my
opinion that by using somewhat less azide, a compound that is less sensitive than RDX in all regards except flame or spark
sensitivity ( also less sensitive with regards to static electricity ) can be produced. This means that you can make a detonator
that can be hammered flat without going off.
I have also experimented a little with clathrates based on nitrotetrazoles with promising results.
nitriees January 18th, 2007, 09:16 PM

Sprocket, the room temperature and humidity of my environment is very high, may be this is the main cause of dry HMTD
quality degraded within short time of period. The dry AN in sealed container will turn wet even with minimal air space inside.
The material I used for synthesis are quite pure, 50% H2O2, food grade citric acid and purified Hexamine by recrystallization.
By observation, the 6 months old dry AP in closed lid film canister don't form any different size in their crystal form, it still very
uniform fine powder and no traces of recrystallization on the lid or container surrounding. The precusor used are pure Acetone,
50% H2O2 and 33% HCL with < 5 degree celcius temperature control during whole synthesis process.
DMSOnMyVeins January 19th, 2007, 01:58 PM

I don't experiment with energetic materials, however, after reading this topic I got an idea to use aluminum or PTFE rods to
make a more professional blasting cap than using drinking straws or aluminum cans.
Why not use aluminum rod stock such as is available at Home Depot, cut the rod to length, then drill out the rod to a shorter
depth than the length.
PTFE rods are available from several online outlets and should be able to be used if your primary can't be used with a metal
cap.
nbk2000 January 20th, 2007, 02:11 AM

There have been numerous accidents involving HMTD in binders, most often Ping-Pong ball NC.
Whether it's acidic contamination or some other factor, who knows, but adding binders to HMTD is generally considered a bad
idea.
Dombum February 1st, 2007, 03:23 PM

Ok,today i mixed the ANNM.I put 100 gr into an plastic bag and tied it very hard with tape.As a detonator i used a small
drinking straw full of HMTD.I thought it wont work,but then i burried it with mud and lighted the fuse...after a few seconds of
stupid waiting:confused: ...BOOOOOOOOOOOOM:eek: Fuck me!!!I ve been about 15 meters away and got a stone on my
hand!!!That was as loud as... i dont know!!!wooah shit ok.Now I know it works with very small amounts of HMTD in a drinking
straw.The hole was big,and slight white smoke came out of it:D this is the best feeling ever when you feel the det.in your
brest,you know what I mean:cool:Yes and now the bigger charges will be 150 gr., 200 gr, and 300 gr,but I dont know yet
where to detonate them.
FUTI February 1st, 2007, 05:08 PM

DOMBUM!!! You used weight of explosive higher then used in a hand granade and then choose to stand within a kill zone of
the hand granade. What you think you are? A cat maybe?
I know that AN based explosives aren't that powerfull as one used in hand granade and also that you covered it with mud
(where AN based explosive show best performance I think). When I make experiment I first try to guess what will be the worst
case scenario and then stay out of the danger zone by all means. How deep that was burried? I guess not more then a foot
since you said mud and if it was more than a foot of mud you were in the swamp.
Alexires February 1st, 2007, 06:35 PM

Dombum - I see you're excited. Congratulations on a success. In addition with what FUTI said, you also might want to consider
researching the MINIMUM amount of HMTD required to det AN. The less primary the better for your health.
IIRC .75g of HMTD is the equivalent of a #10 Re-inforced blasting cap, so maybe a drinking straw full is a little overkill?
Nitriees - Don't self sign posts, sort of one of those unwritten rules (that have been written somewhere).
Microtek - I did a forum search for clathrates and found nothing directly relating to them. Would you mind perhaps giving
some details of your experiences with them so that those of us who currently use organic peroxides may consider another
course?
I'm not asking for spoonfeeding. I fully intend to do my own research, but any extra help from someone who has actually
made/used them would be greatly appreciated I'm sure.
NBK - Thats interesting, because the praises of AP-putty have been shouted to the high heavens, yet another organic peroxide
with NC is unstable. Any idea why people?
Perhaps it is the amine groups (which is really the only molecular difference between the two other than the O-O bonds in AP)?
knowledgehungry February 2nd, 2007, 02:24 AM

The amine groups on HMTD are a pretty big difference in reactivity, especially when you compare it to a methyl group on AP.
All of AP's reactions are going to be based on the Oxygen bonds as opposed to the C-H bonds.
nbk2000 February 2nd, 2007, 09:22 AM

http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=3158&highlight=clathrates
Shalashaska February 9th, 2007, 12:56 AM

I had an interesting thought earlier this week... How about the capsules in coin machines near the exits of department stores?
They seem perfect for the job, since they are all kinds of sizes from approximately 3/4" to 1.5"

And what 'job' would these capsules be used for?
Shalashaska February 10th, 2007, 01:12 AM

Depending on the size of your charge, you could use it as a blasting cap. If you've got something one of the larger capsules
could fit into, you could use the small one as a blasting cap in the center, and put a more potent explosive in the larger one
with the small one inside it. This is pretty hypothetical, since I haven't been able to order any ammonium nitrate to test some
blasting caps and boosters with ANFO or APAN. Or do any of my farmwork. I'm getting behind... :(

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Electrical Substations
Log in
View Full Version : Electrical Substations
Cancer January 17th, 2007, 11:54 PM

I started in the electrical field when I was 18. I'm now 24 and fully licensed. That being said, for the past four years or so, everytime I drive by a substation (now that they
stand out to me as more than just some skeletal frame) I find my mind wandering about what it would be like to create a direct short on the incoming lines.
Naturally, I would never act on such an impulse. But, I can't seem to fathom a way that it could be done with relative safety in regards to personal harm. It seems to me that
any way you do it would leave you dangerously close to the blast radius with no time at all to flee.
Any ideas?
Ygarl January 18th, 2007, 07:57 AM

Howver, I find myself of a more relaxed moral persuasion than youself. Therefore, I would have no problem shorting out the main lines if it served my purposes. Blackouts can
be useful in a variety of situations.
The problems are more theoretical than might be supposed:

There are a variety of sizes of substation. Some might be easily and safely tampered with. Some might be less so. I imagine voltages above the 50kV range would be
immensely dangerous at a distance with arcing, etc. being an issue.
The obvious answer at mid- and lower high- voltages would be a thrown sturdy chain. After trials, I can confirm that a 3 - 4 ft. chain can be thrown within 6 inches or so at 50
foot ranges with practice.
However, I don't know the separation of terminals on the substations you mention so a metre or so may be too far apart to contact the 2 leads.
Do you have any dimensions for the separation of the lines in a large substation? For that matter, would 50 feet be anything like a safe distance to be with a high-tension line
short taking place?
Has anyone actually seen HT lines shorting out in RL or in video, and the local effects? The best I can match is 5 cows killed stone dead under a tree at some 100 - 150 feet by
lightning from my aunt's front porch swing (!!!!!).
TreverSlyFox January 18th, 2007, 08:43 AM

Hmmmmmm, just off the top of my head. Bow and arrow, model rocket or Line throwing gun to launch a long, non-conductive line over the mains. With a long enough line
you could just haul a length of chain or bare cable over the mains from a safe distance.
The safe distance would depend on what type sub-station your dealing with. A "distribution" sub-station with line voltages in the area of 12,000 volts or a "main feed" sub-
station with line voltages in the 30,000 to 50,000 volt range.
Michelangelo January 18th, 2007, 04:05 PM

Hmmmmmm, just off the top of my head. Bow and arrow, model rocket or Line throwing gun to launch a long, non-conductive line over the mains. With a long enough line
you could just haul a length of chain or bare cable over the mains from a safe distance.
Unless one used monofilament or something similar, most everything is going to have some moisture content - even a kiln-dried 2x4 has ~14% moisture - and, at those
potentials, fry. This will generate a lot of carbon, which is conductive.
Cancer January 18th, 2007, 11:26 PM

I don't have any dimensions on hand. This was more of a spring board question, so that i could find a general idea that I feel I can work with.
I doubt 50ft. would be safe for high tension. The transformers in many power stations are quiet large and I've seen much smaller ones explode and throw a surprisingly large
ball of fire.
A three to four foot chain would probably be long enough for smaller stations. Larger ones may be farther apart. I'll ask around at work and try to come back with some
dimensions.
I have considered the bow and arrow method before, but never went far enough to think of it as a hauling method. I stopped short at using it as the means of hauling, which
left me worrying about the arrow surviving the blast and possibly ending up as some type of evidence.
sparkchaser January 19th, 2007, 05:11 AM

Several militaries around the world use a similar idea by dropping large amounts of steel foil out of dispersion containers over power stations. After these bombs are dropped, it
looks like the stations are covered in spider webs.
Maybe a couple of large chains with wieghts on the ends, bolo style, dropped from an ultrlight would work. It would need to be a heavy set of chains though.
nbk2000 January 19th, 2007, 07:56 AM

The closest distance you can safely approach an electrical line is the length of the insulator.
So, if the line is hanging from an 8 foot long insulator, no part of you can get closer than that without getting zapped.
megalomania January 22nd, 2007, 03:29 AM

When the maintenance techs at work have to replace a blown fuse/transformer assembly in the substation, they set it in a sort of hydraulic jack that is part of the substation.
The part they replace is a large cube about 3x3x4 feet with pins in the top. The jack is raised after a timer goes off allowing the men plenty of time to get out of the area.
Sparks really fly when that thing plugs in. This then is how you service a substation...
Using this principle, how can you raise up your conductor without you being near? Maybe some hydrogen filled balloons tied down by a water bottle with a leak. Maybe throw a
rope over the overhead metal structure. Maybe get one of those remote controlled blimps and drop a bunch of aluminumized chaff (mylar?) over the area. Maybe improvise
some sort of telescoping hydraulic or pneumatic tube that holds a chain, have two of these, turn on the water/air and the chain rises up slowly but surly until...
Chris The Great January 22nd, 2007, 07:08 AM

A thin wire would short it, once it starts conducting the plasma arc will keep the current flowing until a fuse blows somewhere else in the grid and cuts it off. You could easily fly
such a line over using a spool of thin wire and a rocket, with a long fuse. Wear rubber boots :)
Bert January 22nd, 2007, 11:50 AM

Wear rubber boots :)
For lines in the tens or hundreds of kilovolts you're going to need more than that. Transmission voltages usually range from 138,000 to 765,000 volts, but can be even higher.
Distribution voltages can range household current 120/240 volts up to 69,000 volts.
At voltages like that, even disconnected lines can pick up enough voltage by induction from nearby lines to kill.
Chris The Great January 22nd, 2007, 10:54 PM

The voltage across ground is roughly 1000 volts per meter, so the chance of problems with rubber boots is non-existent. Obviously if you touch the lines you die! But the boots
will mean the sudden appearance of electrical potential across the ground will not fry your legs.
tiac03 January 23rd, 2007, 01:06 AM

How about a harpoon approach? Fire an "anchor" (Think anvil launching) and have it pull a few dozen feet of Aviation wire over the Wires? Peg the end of the wire into the
ground near the Tube/mortar. Don't have to be anywhere near it when you fire your "Wire short-er out-er" (Fuse lit would be easiest and probably safer seeing as Electrical
ignition just sounds dangerous... don't want to be connected to 100 feet of copper wire... ).
billybobjoe January 23rd, 2007, 01:13 AM

My idea would be to take a coil of 1/8" steel cable from home depot, hook it to a model rocket and fire it over the lines at a 45. Throw a nice tri-hook from your local fishing
store, the bigger the better, on the end and let the sparks fly. :cool:
tiac03 January 23rd, 2007, 01:22 AM

I think the cable is too heavy for the Model rockets and It would throw it off balance...
Also wouldn't 1/8 vaporize at that much voltage/amperage?
Chris The Great January 23rd, 2007, 04:16 AM

Yes, but plasma is conductive as well.
Docca January 23rd, 2007, 08:16 AM

There is a reason they put big fences around substations.
It has a lot less to do with how much damage you can do to the grid and a lot more to do with how much damage the grid will do to you.
Remember last year's French riots? Caused by the deaths of two Muslim teenagers seeking only to hide from the police in a substation.
nbk2000 January 23rd, 2007, 10:51 PM

A simple pipe mortar, firing a large lead fishing weight (a pound or more), pulling a thin braided steel cable over the lines, will do the trick.
Cost? Less than $100 for everything new. Free if you scrounge.

I was about to say that NBK, the mortar from your Book that is freely available off the ftp.
Otherwise, why not something like salt water fired from one of those pressure cleaners? Or something bigger that gives a short burst of water (we are trying not to kill
ourselves at the same time correct?)
Maybe even possibly a home made catapult (if you cant make/get your hands on a mortar) with a lead/steel weigh and high tensile steel wire?
nbk2000 January 24th, 2007, 03:13 AM

A stream of water wouldn't maintain coherence very long with hundreds of thousands of amps of current passing through it. It'd likely flash boil into a cloud of steam. Steam
isn't very conductive.
I've heard of mylar kites flying into local distribution lines and blowing them, but those lines are orders of magnitude less powerful than the transmisson towers that march
across the country from the dams.
Docca January 24th, 2007, 06:30 AM

those lines are orders of magnitude less powerful than the transmisson towers that march across the country from the dams.
And the steam plants, NG turbine plants, lastly the nuclear plants.
I think I made my warning fairly clear, but a bit more information may be in order (use it at your own risk).
Birds will land on transmission lines carrying less than 50K volts. Over that, birds stay away because it's physically unpleasant to be around that much voltage.
If birds shy away you might want to also.
atlas#11 January 24th, 2007, 12:05 PM

For anyone interested in watching a substation going up...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7703052748770170847&q=electrical+arc+substation+fire&hl=en
I personaly like the chain throwing idea, but perhaps another, less obvious approach is possible. Generaly, overhead utility transformers are filled with an oil to prevent internal
arcing, perhaps a rifle round near the bottom of the case would allow the oil to leak out and expose the terminals and start arcing. I'm not sure how much oil is in substations,
but the larger transformers, I expect, would depend atleast somewhat on a liquid insulator. Someone with a tatste for mayhem should give this a try, roll up on a substation
and give a few rounds to some of the more expensive looking components and see what happens.
I wouldnt be supprised if a round penetrated a big diode or some form of capacitor and started a nice little campfire.
augoldminer January 25th, 2007, 03:33 AM

At midnight Dec 31 1999 i pulled a 24 gage copper wire over a 110,000 kva power line with 500 foot of monofilament fishing line.
All that I got was a bright blue green lightning bolt to ground and the power did not go out. RATS!
I was hoping everyone would think Y2K had struck.
DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME. I am a electrician with over 30 years high voltage exp. and the proper training. This state would not let me take there new electrician licensing
test. Due to my being off work due to being disabled and non union. SCREW THEM. Now I will take there workmans comp till it is time to retire.
ATLAS #11
If you shoot a big substation transformer at the bottom or open the drain. It will over heat hours later and then blow.
reamio January 25th, 2007, 04:52 AM

The large MV/HV trasformers which I have seen are equipped with an oil level switch; if the oil level goes too low (due to a leak) the input power is tripped automatically
before any arcing/shorting out happens.:(
atlas#11 January 25th, 2007, 05:55 PM

Fishing line? That sounds like fun even though the power didn't go out...
In distribution lines, Isn't the top one live? If you did the same trick with them wouldn't it short it out to the lower ground line and keep the arc going? It would be better to do it
next to a wodden power pole or something that can carbonize and conduct nicely after the coper is vaporized.
It would take a significant ammount of juice to keep an arc from the line to ground going... Mabye doing the same thing with the fishing line and copper wire would work on
substations though.
nbk2000 January 25th, 2007, 09:25 PM

SF use EFP's to attack the large ground transformers by blowing a hole in the bottom, causing the oil to drain out and turning off the power, whether by overheating or tripping
a safety.
But they also usually follow up with a thermite grenade into the oil pool to set it on fire. :)
FUTI January 26th, 2007, 10:35 AM

Whatever you do don't spill oil from transformers. Old one transformer oil contain cancinogenic compounds, as for the new types they invented to replace the old ones I don't
know. It seems to me a to high price for a common prank that some people start to die from cancer decades from the prank event from poluted water supplies.

For anyone interested in watching a substation going up...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7703052748770170847&q=electrical+arc+substation+fire&hl=en
Yikes.
Anyway, I have a pretty simple idea which I'm suprised nobody has mentioned yet... A significant volume of powdered graphite, bought as solid lubricant for locks and bolts,
wrapped around a burst charge and lobbed over the fence with a time fuse. I mean, the US dropped a whole bunch of these exact things during Desert Storm onto substations,
grids. I think a hospital got shut down because of one of these and a whole fuckload of people died.
nbk2000 January 28th, 2007, 06:34 AM

It wasn't graphite dust, but carbon fiber tape on spools, dispensed by CBU's over the electrical yards, that did the trick.
Jacks Complete January 28th, 2007, 09:43 AM

Ok, so let's look at this logically. You want to take down a mains voltage or higher system with a thin wire? That's not going to happen. The current will blow pretty much
anything you can throw at it. In the larger cases, even a big steel chain is going to melt.
I've seen a substation pole transformer lose a wire or two in a storm, and it arced to the wet ground for hours, the fuses *never* blew! The power company turned it off. And
that's a pole that was probably only at a few thousand volts and amps.
The main distribution lines are up at 125,000V or even higher, depending on pylon height and other things. These are serviced "hot" either from a gondala that travels along
the wire with the men in it, or from a helicopter that, obviously, is far above the ground (indeed, above the wires!)
These wires are as thick as your arm and copper or aluminium. You are not going to blow the circuit breakers, as the "fuses" are capable of carrying a few thousand amps,
which is more than most copper rods can cope with. Heck, just your main fuse at home has a 100A at 240V limit, in the UK. I've never blown one of those. Even a 30A fuse is
near impossible to kill off, I've fried a multimeter probe by accidentally having it set to Amps and sticking it in a mains socket, and it simply blew the steel probe tip to bits.
Think of your arc welder. Odds are, that is rated to between 50A and 250A, and then consider what that does to a sheet of thin steel.
Many, many carbon fibre strands/ribbons are needed to do anything, hence the hundreds of pounds of them dumped at once.
To bring the pylon down would be easier. A wooden pole pig could be chainsawed through in a few moments, or you could use an auger bit to drill a few holes such that the
first storm or a big banger brought it down. Apparently, the IRA used shotgun slugs to take out enough wood that the poles fell down in NI when they wanted that effect.
A steel pylon would be far harder. I'd suggest cutting the legs at the base to weaken them a lot, then figure out some way to cut the wires. They are soft, so a saw on a string
might work. But then you have time and proximity issues. Cutting a 6" bar of copper or aluminium from a few hundred feet isn't easy, and cutting all 6 or eight or whatever
would be near impossible without some neat little robots or something.
I probably hate you January 30th, 2007, 02:53 AM

Why not just rig up a large steel pipe to several ceramic insulators to sit on the wires (maybe wired with something non condutive around the wires so it dont fly off during
det), they sell many different kinds specifiically for wire , then have some small explosive charge to break the ceramic insulators and some of the insulation on the wires , you
could remote det this from some distance and not get fried . Why even short it out just blow the damn thing up , simple , relativly safe , with the same end result minus the
light show unless that is your goal , IMHO simplicity is always best .
FullMetalJacket February 10th, 2007, 10:57 PM

I don't know how well it would work on these high-tension lines, but a certain CIA handbook suggests a cable-cutting charge which uses a simple counterweighted charge that
is hauled over with a simple, ingenious cord/ring pulley system. Anybody who's read it will know what I mean, if not, I'll find my PDF of it for y'all.
Verbatim March 26th, 2007, 03:20 PM

I worked for a HV switchgear company briefly. The circuit breakers were designed to "Bang" in and out 3 times in a attempt to burn the short off the lines.
USE
The interval between the breaker tripping, resetting and retripping is about 30 seconds. I'd guess it should'nt take that much of a short to trip medium 36KV lines. Remember
that natural shorts are tree branches. A bike chain or stretched bed spring should be ideal.
PARAGRAPH
The situation of throwing something over the lines and watching fireworks for a hour should not be posible, as after the third attempt the switchgear stays open and needs
manual resetting by an engineer. Even if the switchgear failed and stayed closed it is backed up by another bigger circuit breaker down the grid.
BREAKS
A rare occurance is cascade failure, (as happened in europe last year) whereby most of Belgium, parts of France and Germany all blacked out. The systems are cleverly
designed to prevent this, but it would be great fun discovering how to cause one.
NBK
Sorry just remembered something. You could shoot the ceramic insulators as they are damaged very easily, even by airgun pellets. Although I believe some companies use a
sintered vulcanised rubber/ ceramic compound now to stop this.
roccod March 27th, 2007, 07:01 PM

I remember doing this as a kid with my old 30-30 lever action rifle. Shooting the ceramic insulators was a lot of fun, and since I lived in a very very rural area, it was easy to
hop on the trusty dirtbike and speed away after the damage was done. I am sure we pissed off the power company!
As far as shorting the system -- I think NBK is on the right track, some sort of chaff-type bomb would do the trick.
However -- and I say this from experience -- anyone would do well to be as FAR AWAY from the substation as possible to avoid all sorts of trouble or physical injury.
Sorry just remembered something. You could shoot the ceramic insulators as they are damaged very easily, even by airgun pellets. Although I believe some companies use a
sintered vulcanised rubber/ ceramic compound now to stop this.
mizzu April 23rd, 2007, 10:07 PM

A long time ago (40yrs), Me and a friend found hundreds of aluminum disposable pie pans behind a bakery. There also just so happend to be a substation about 100 yds
away. We naturally could not resist the temptation & each threw about a 1 ft stack over the fence. Shee-it, It scared even us & knocked power out at the K-Mart next door
(one of the first). We tried to do it again the next day while a friend waited in the store to shoplift when the lights went out but couldn't get lucky again. Was fun, only wished
it would have been dark, He,He,He
Joxer May 22nd, 2007, 03:55 PM

Here's what .mil uses.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/blu-114.htm
Something like this dropped from a RC aircraft should be safe enough, and effective if the main ingredient can be improvised.
webuyhouses May 24th, 2007, 12:57 AM

This is just an expansion on the mortar and cable idea:
Picture that game where a string with a weight on each end are tossed at a frame, and the object is to have the string wrap around the bar and stay on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolo_toss
Two mortar tubes strapped together, at a slight angle from each other, with the bottoms touching. A hole is drilled through the bottoms of both tubes where they touch, so that
the charges ignite almost simultaneously.
The mortars are each loaded with a heavy ball, connected by 50-100 feet or so of wire rope.
Fire this at the lines so that the balls have separated far enough to stretch out the cable, and wrap it around all of the lines. with enough force, the cable might be able to pull
the hanging lines into direct contact, allowing that max possible current to flow in the actual lines before the whole deal melts or fuses blow.
Jacks Complete June 3rd, 2007, 09:51 AM

Just had a think about this. Just use detcord! Throw/fire a line over, then tie your reel of detcord to one end, and tow it over. Detonate at will, cutting all the HV lines at the
same time. I'd stick a few wraps around the base (or weaken by cutting in advance) at the pylon, and the weight distribution change combined with the damage might even
pull the whole pylon down.
We used to have powercuts occassionally due to people shooting the ceramic caps on the lower voltage lines. I think the biggest pylons are tall enough that they are out of
range for a legal limit air rifle in the UK (12ft-lbs)

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Bristar Non-Explosive Dem olition
Log in
View Full Version : Bristar Non-Explosive Demolition
InfernoMDM February 19th, 2007, 10:35 PM

I figured a few of you would find intere st in this compou nd. From what I can tell, and I am not very knowledgeable this stuff
acts alm ost like ice would, but faster. The website has far m ore detail, th at I honestly don 't know where to begin with.
http://dem o l i t i o n t e c h n o l o g i e s . c o m / i n d e x . h t m l
Bert February 20th, 2007, 11:50 AM

T h e c o n c e p t h a s b e e n m e n t i o n e d h e r e before, it's the modern o utgrowth of an ancient technique. In the REALLY old days, they
would outline a slab to be broken loose with ho les bored into the rock, drive dry wooden pins into the holes and soak water
i n t o t h e p i n s . T h e f o r c e o f t h e e x p a n d i n g w o o d w a s e n o u g h t o b r e a k o u t t h e s l a b s - M o d e r n e x p a n d i n g c e m ent type breaking
c o m p o u n d s r e q u i r e a m i n i m u m depth of the slab to pre v e n t t h e e x p a n d i n g m ix from just pooping out of the bore h ole, but are
certainly quicker to apply.
atlas#11 February 20th, 2007, 11:55 AM

I have actually ran into this stuff quite a while back. Doesn't look too appealing for any kind of m ilitant use to m e t h o u g h ,
you'd have to drill too m any h oles for m y liking.
The MSDS says its 77 -96% calcium oxide. So it's probably viable to be m a d e i n t h e h o m e l a b , b u t t h e e a s e o f e x p l o s i v e s f o r
any purpose this stuff would b e used for would probably m ake it practically useless to anyone not adhering to the regulations.
Still, som ething that expands and creates tonnes upon tonnes of pressure with the simple addition of water is worth y of
attention.
I l o o k e d u p s e v e r a l p atents relating to it, m ost of the other ingredients are water retaining materials, i.e. a crylic acid/vinyl
alcohol copolym er and whatever else is cheap. It's defiantly capable of being m anufacture d in the hom e . T h o u g h I d o u b t t h e r e
are m any regulations on civilian purchases, since its little m ore than a special concrete.
Skean Dhu February 20th, 2007, 01:46 PM

I think the tim etable involved in this product would be a significant obsta cle for any uses we would com e up with here.
Acco rding to the graphs it takes approximately 6 hours for the product to g e n e r a t e a n y e x citing pressures.
chemdude1999 February 20th, 2007, 08:35 PM

It m ight serve a use for sabotage. However, lik e atlas#11 said, it does require a fair amount of holes to use properly. A
person would need tim e , e q u i p m ent, and plenty of concealm ent (noise, dust, etc.). The chances of leaving forensic evidence
behind are way to hig h for mo st.
It's great for its specified practical application, but hard to im plem ent as a weapon. U n l e s s , o t h e r s h a v e i d e a s .
Hirudinea February 20th, 2007, 09:39 PM

Actually this stuff sounds quite interesting for sabotage, basicly put it into anything that has a hole in it, fill a gas tank with it,
n o m o r e g a s t a n k , i t h a s t o b e r e p l a c e d, in the rad, no m ore rad, in the oil, no m o r e e n g i n e .
Put a bottle cap full in a gun barrel and you've quickly and cheaply spiked the gun.
And if you're into torture you could take a mixture just viscious enough to push through a tube and give som e o n e a n e n e m a ,
i t w o u l d n o t b e a q u i c k o r p l e s a n t d e a t h , b u t s o m e p e o p l e m igth be worth it. Hey you your imagination!
chemdude1999 February 20th, 2007, 10:18 PM

I'm not sure how useful it wou l d b e o n s o f t t i s s u e . T h e m aterial was designed to crack/dem olish hard and relatively brittle
m aterials like rock. But if it expands enough, it would fuck a colon up nicely. I suppose a test could be done on an animal to
determ ine th e effectiveness.
I like the ide a of using it in a gas tank or similar structure. However, I think one of the ex p a n d i n g f o a m s o n t h e m arket would
b e c h e a p e r , m ore effective, and quicker. They are a bitch to rem ove even with acetone, so the mark would have to replace the
item .
S p e a k i n g o f t h e f o a m s, im agine injecting som ething like that into a vien. I don't know if the foam would go through a small
hyperderm ic needle (even 8 g a u g e m ight be too sm all). Also, I'm unsure how it would rea ct with out the presence of air in the
bloo d stream . Injecting air is far easier, but the foam would be diabolical if it worked. But, I digress.

Considering how it's a powerful caustic (quicklim e), it'd dissolve any soft tissue it was in prolonged contact with. :)
R e m oving a spark plug and filling a cylinder with it would crack the head or block, m a k i n g t h e e n g i n e s c r a p .
Another material that I've wondered about is the water-absorbing polym e r s u s e d a s s o i l m oisturizers.
The stuff absorbs 200x its weight in water, with a corresponding increase in volum e.
Measure out the powder, pour in the water, and walk away. W hether or not it expands with enough pressure to shatter
s o m ething, I don't know, but I know it'll be one hell of a mess to clean up. :p
W ith these cracking a gents, why not use existing holes and cracks and 'assist' them ?
InfernoMDM February 21st, 2007, 02:28 AM

That was my thought as well. Cracks in stone, walls etc. It would be a interesting substance to have in prison where noise wo uld
give you awa y, but this stuff m ight not work in sm all quantities?
Alexires February 21st, 2007, 05:25 AM

Let us use the disadvantage to our advantage.
At a place that I have been to before, the building is held up by concrete pillars (assum ably with steel in them ). Bre ak in at
nigh t, drill a couple of holes through the pillar and pack it with expanding concrete. 6-8 hours later, the pillars crack and stuff
starts to fall down. Even if it doesn't fall down, the building will have to be evacuated and repaired.
W e c a n m a k e s o m e t h i n g t o b r e a k t h r o u g h c o n c r e t e i n a n i n s t a n t ( e x p l o s i v e s ) s o l e t u s a d d s o m ething to our arsenal that

doesn't require timed detonators or too much fuss.
Maybe use it as a quick set concrete? W e know from previous experience that seiges (house or whatever) can go for days on
end. Maybe you could use this stuff as a quick barrier m a k e r ?
nbk2000 February 21st, 2007, 06:32 AM

How about using it as a silent self-destruct for any concrete fortifications or structures you had?
You know you're going to be abandoning the posiition, but still want to have use of it until the last mom e n t , a n d u s e t h e l e a s t
a m ount of explosive possible to do the job.
So, using pre-cast holes, you fill them with the agent, which will proceed to crack and weaken the joints of the structure, while
still providing enough strength for the structure to remain intact until you finally blow it with a few sm all charges as you run o ut
the back. :)
FUTI February 21st, 2007, 09:59 AM

Good idea...I still rem e m ber the tim e when a friend of m i n e p l a c e d s o m e CaO in plastic bottle up to a neck. Very soon bottle
c h a n g e d s h a p e f r o m square to round one :-D. Now are those polymers needed in that composition and if so why?
Alexires February 22nd, 2007, 05:04 AM

Also note that it talks about needing to add water to it for it to work. You could have pre-im plem ented cavities already filled
with the compound, just awaiting your addition of water. Perhaps running some kind of garden drip per system through the
structure, surrounded by the powder.
All you sim ply need to do then is to turn on the water (having ca lculated how long you need to have it on for) and run. A timer
turns the water off an d in a few hours tim e (depending on what form ula you use) the building is ready for your soft touch.
Another possible use would be in bridg e d e m olition. I can't think of m any bridges that are m ade of concrete these days, but a
nigh t or two full of work with a masonary bit will have you ready to bring down a bridge.
I n s t a n t d e m olition, just add water and stir for 2 m inutes *wink*.
Jacks Complete February 22nd, 2007, 05:58 AM

Can't think o f bridges m a d e o f concrete? How about the h u n d r e d s o f t h o u s a n d s o f ones over m oto rways an d railways? You
could easily pack the expansion holes/gaps full of this stuff, the n go away and wait for the rainy season! POP! Moto rway closed
for three days. Old style brick "hum p b a c k " b r i d g e s t h e s a m e , a n d i f y o u b r o u g h t s o m ething down in front o f a train, it would be
weeks or months of disruption, and m a n y d e a t h s .
T h e p o l y m er parts will be there to stop the water from p ooling on the surface, as otherwise the top layer wo u l d s o a k , and the
lowe r layers would remain dry, causing surface bulges rather than deep cracks. Also, you have to add the water afterwards!
Adding it first m eans you will expand it before putting it in place.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Poor man's Tiger Tails
Log in
View Full Version : Poor man's Tiger Tails
Infragreen February 21st, 2007, 09:27 PM

Okay, here goes...
I'm a noob here, I've read tons of good stuff and I'd like to return the favor.
I think I've done my homework (search and test) AND that I have a novel idea for any remote-ignition buffs out there.
I heard of a product named Tiger Tails (igniters for model rocket engines), that consisted of a single strip of conductor-isolator-conductor sandwich, with a blob of electrically
sensitive pyro compound at one end.
The strip would be connected via a single clip, like a clothespin with a contact stud in each jaw.
This led me to figure out this dirt-cheap, kitchen-table-workshop igniter system.
You will need:

Cardboard (light, pizza boxes work fine),
aluminum foil (light kitchen type),
glue (stick, spray or spread-it-yourself),
adhesive tape
matches
something marginally heavy
scissors
First, cut a rectangle of cardboard (maybe 3x4"), then a rectangle of alu foil double one side of the cardboard (say 6x4").
Second, cover one side of the cardboard in glue, place it glue-down on the end of the aluminum and press/squeeze to ensure a good cohesion.
Third, cover the other side of the cardboard in glue, fold over the alu foil and carefully press/smooth over (rub with cotton, if you're a stickler for detail; makes for a fine gloss).
Fourth, cut into strips PERPENDICULAR to the side where the aluminum folds over (1/8 - 1/4").
Fifth, cut off the CORNERS ONLY of the ends with the bends. Go for a remaining alu strip of about 1/2 - 1 mm (.05" or as wide as a push-pencil lead, the thinner, the better).
Sixth (I hate this word; it makes me sound like Daffy Duck), crush matchheads (with heavy-ish object), place 2-3 heads worth on a strip of adhesive tape and wrap around
the tip of each strip.
And there we are. I've had these thingies fire from a single D cell, 4 if on long leads.
The clip should be equally easy. Just wrap some unisolated wire around each jaw of a clothespin, hook up the wires to your firing leads and hey presto.
And there's my first contribution to the forum, not to mention my first post and my first topic.
I had hoped my spike-tube-concealing ping-pong-ball caltrops would qualify, but "someone" beat me to it with a plaster version.
Well, I hope this passes the scrutiny of the elder gods of nasty stuff B)
I'll pour myself a drink, light up a fag and wait for the fireworks.
Cheers!
CACO3 February 22nd, 2007, 12:38 AM

Why don't you use aluminum tape instead of glue and foil? You can buy it cheap at any hardware store. It would make the process much easier than trying to glue foil. Great
idea though!
Alexires February 22nd, 2007, 04:52 AM

Infragreen - Good first post. It took me a little while to work out what you were getting at, but after puzzling over it for a bit, it seems like a good idea.
Perhaps by soaking the whole cardboard card in a saturated KNO3/Sugar solution, you could increase the chances of a successful ignition. You could also possibly wax coat it, in
an attempt to make it water resistant.
The main problem I can see with this is that the aluminium might burn out too fast, resulting in UXO if that is what you are using it for. You might be better suited using a thin
piece of aluminium plate (I mean really thin) and doing what you have done here. But if you are in a jam, you certainly could probably find a D cell battery, some Al foil and
some cardboard.
Also another problem you might have with it is incompatability with some primaries (HMTD comes to mind). You need to screen what you are planning to use it with before you
jump right in and lose some fingers or worse.
If you changed the insulating material, you might even be able to embed the ignitor in a cast block of something (I'm thinking KNO3/Sugar here)
I've always wondered what would happen if you had a couple of kg of fused KNO3/Sugar mix and ignited it from the inside....
Infragreen February 23rd, 2007, 09:28 PM

Thank you, guys.
CaCo3:
I haven't had any problems glueing (?) alu foil to cardboard using stick or spray.
The aluminum tape from our hardware stores (Denmark) tends to be of a heavier gauge, requiring more current to heat the "bridgewire", but making the tape more useful for
other endeavors (e.g. liners for "candy" fueled rocket motors).
Alexires:
I specifically went for a low-current igniter, thus having to accept the short, wimpish burn time of the bridge.
I tried a couple of compositions (BP, BP-NC, "Candy"), but the best turned out to be matchheads. Of course, the more finely ground, the better (smaller particles more likely to
be ignited).
(Added) Oh, it just hit me after writing the whole reply, you mean not ONLY KNO3-dipping the tip, but in addition!? Assuring ignition of the charge, not the igniter!? Yeah, that
might be a useful just-in-case'r. Mostly, I was just thinking about putting some booster in a second tape packet around the matchhead packet. (Added end)
As for the incompatibility issue, by all means insulate the igniter from any aggressive materials it might come into contact with.
I like your idea of a quick wax dip.
I'm also thinking of boosting the composition (ingredients and amount) and slipping it into a commercially available sheath of latex.
My primary thoughts about improving on the composition would be addition of fine charcoal (as the matchhead burn is only a short, sharp spit - PFT!)
Any more ideas will be very welcome.
nbk2000 February 23rd, 2007, 10:02 PM

A small plastic tube, like that used to hold the ink in ballpoint pens, could be useful to concentrate and direct the brief flame into a jet, rather than a more diffused flame,
increasing the likelyhood of ignition.
Alexires February 23rd, 2007, 10:24 PM

Infragreen - If you are thinking about using a condom, they don't burn well.... especially if they have been used *grin*....also they are better used for other things.
Seriously though, a good one for a slow burning mix is a KNO3/Sugar in INCORRECT ratios. For instance, more sugar than KNO3 or visa versa. By using more sugar, you can
melt it down and dip the whole thing in the ensuing toffee like substance. Maybe while its still cooling, you could kneed a little KNO3 into the outside of the mix to ensure a
fast/hot flash of flame at the end.
Another idea might be to incorporate the silicon fuse that is being talked about around here. Make the mix up and coat the outside in that. This should make it waterproof as
well as making it better than an inert barrier.
Infragreen February 24th, 2007, 12:04 AM

Nbk2000:
Yes, with a bit of redesign, this should definitely work. The "shot" from the matchheads tend to penetrate the tape at just one random weak spot.
Your version could provide a rather powerful, forward jet.
Design table time...
Revision 1. Ballpoint tube and hot-melt glue. Gotta try this one.
Alexires:
I only have these reservations about KNO3-sugar mixtures, because i find them particularly difficult (not hard) to ignite. Especially when melted.
Quoting an elder: They need a bit of roasting.
I'm rather partial to the matchheads by now, but would like to prolong the burn time just a bit. Maybe alu, ferro or titanium fines added.
But as earlier stated, there would be no problem in adding a booster-igniter in a second adhesive-tape wrap on top of the other.
And yes, condoms were my choice of commercially-available latex-sheath.

They don't burn well, but due to composition and thickness, they BURN-THROUGH well, and that's what I'm after.

Polyurethane condoms would burn better, or use fingers from gloves. They're thicker so they'll hold pressure longer until bursting.
Infragreen March 6th, 2007, 09:07 PM

I'm wondering if the thickness mightn't be a drawback, as the igniter is already a bit wimpy (whaddya expect from a single AA cell?)
I figure the addition of charcoal will provide a longer burn time plus sparks aplenty.
But, Nbk2000, you have just provided a valuable addition to the "poor man's" angle on the bent-foil igniter.
Plastic gloves can be had for zero dollars at our gas stations.
Just cut off a finger (glove, duh), pour some booster powder in and slip the sheath over the nasty thing. Oh, and tighten up, of course.
Off-topic: Regarding the hemispherical caltrops we both thought up...
I have a use in mind... Grumble...
Did you ever think of rolling a ball of clay, cutting it in half, shoving the steel "syringe" through the half-balls, poking out the "cork" and just letting them dry?
Providing they don't crack, There's Poor Man's for ya.
Microtek April 18th, 2007, 12:49 PM

Not to belittle your idea (which is good), but it isn't exactly novel. Both Mr Cool and myself experimented with that very setup some years ago on this forum. We used them
for EFIs ( exploding foil initiators ) with a camera flash cirquit for power. It works quite well when the wires aren't too long; the "bridge" goes with a very sharp report, and can
cause confined MHN to go DDT.
Anyway, it's nice to see a fellow Dane on the forum.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Hand Grenades
Log in
View Full Version : Hand Grenades
defiant February 25th, 2007, 11:33 PM

A while back I acquired some (inert) WWII pineapple practice hand grenades. The grenades look like this:
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6752/grenade1bg4.jpg
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1517/grenade2zo8.jpg
The fuse is a M228 practice grenade fuse. US military grenade fuses operate in the same manner. However there are differences in delay times (from 2-5 seconds), and
whether the fuse is an ignitor or a detonator.
When the safety pin is pulled from the grenade, and pressure is released from the spoon (i.e. lever or handle) as would be the case when its thrown. Releasing the spoon
allows the striker/firing pin to rotate forward under spring pressure - resulting in the spoon pivoting upwards and two hooks on the spoon releasing themselves from two round
protrusions on the fuse.
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/281/grenade3jk4.jpg
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/9909/grenade4nx2.jpg
With the spoon removed (and the pin out) the striker releases and the back side of the striker and the spring is visible:
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/6545/grenade5nt9.jpg
A straight portion of the spring rests on the back of the firing pin. The spring has a second straight portion, not pictured, that is secured behind a ridge on the fuse body.
The next photo in this series is of the striker in the cocked position, w hereby the firing pin and the cap are visible. The striker is under spring pressure in this position, and is held
back by the pin.
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8634/grenade6fk7.jpg
Note that there are tw o holes going through the fuse body. One is for the safety pin, which secures the spoon handle. The other is a safety for cocking the striker (with a live
fuse).
http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/8476/grenade7oy2.jpg
The pin above the cap prevents the striker from coming onto accidental contact with the cap. Theres quite of bit of pressure exerted by the spring on the striker, so pulling the
striker back on a live fuse while fumbling with spoons and pins is ill advised. The striker is small, and inadvertently can slip out of fingers prying it back to cock it. Blocking the
cap isnt a frivolous safety measure.
With proper safety precautions cocking the striker is simple. First, stick a cotter pin or stronger pin of appropriate size through one of the holes over the firing cap, and angling
the pin dow nwards through the hole pry up on the striker while sliding the pin into the hole on the opposite side of the fuse. The striker will only be lifted 1/16 or so, and the
spring doesnt exert much pressure with the striker lifted so slightly. So its not difficult to do, and if the striker does accidentally slip there isn't enough spring pressure to set off
the cap. Once the striker is pried up high enough slide the pin in the opposite hole.
Now the striker can be pulled back with your finger and a second pin inserted through the rear holes in the fuse (as pictured immediately above).
Next secure the hooks of the spoon under the round protrusions on the fuse and, maintaining pressure between the spoon and the grenade, remove the pin that blocks the
spoon holes from aligning with the holes on the fuse, line up the holes, re-insert the pin through the spoon/fuse holes to secure, and bend the cotter pins to lock in place. The
pin blocking the cap can now be removed.
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/1918/grenade8dv5.jpg
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7389/grenade9xo3.jpg
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/9783/grenade10ci9.jpg
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/5563/grenade11kl8.jpg
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3193/grenade12gd8.jpg
Inert fuses are legal and available online.
Its probably not legal to load a live cap in them, load the delay portion of the fuse w ith the appropriate powders, and crimp on a live igniter or detonator. :rolleyes:
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/4929/usgrenadeinternaldiagrawu4.jpg
Gothy February 26th, 2007, 11:19 AM

Cool. Thats some nice coverage of the good ol' handgrenade. I would like myself one of those alright. As a display object in the livingroom or similar.
Nice pics aswell
defiant February 26th, 2007, 10:29 PM

Yeah...
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/9764/grenadelamphp5.jpg
Zait March 16th, 2007, 12:25 AM

First post jitters here but I feel comfortable enough responding on this subject.
A while back I acquired some (inert) WWII pineapple practice hand grenades.
I hate to be the bearer of bad new s but that isn't a WWII grenade (commonly referred to as the MK II) so I hope you didn't pay more than $5 ea for them. Your pictures show a
recast version of the M21 practice grenade. The M21 is cast using a different metal and can be identified by the rounded frag pattern instead of the normal squared edges on a
MK II. The one you bought is a recast based on the fact that it doesn't have it's orignal paint and the frag pattern is off. I'd be w illing to bet that the grenade also has the letters
"RFX" cast into the side. That is from Richmond Foundry w ho is no longer in business but had sold their molds to someone else. There are also overcasts from China and Korea
that are slightly larger and have RFX stamped in them from w hen they took an M21 and created a new mold using an existing grenade.
The fuse is a M228 practice grenade fuse. US military grenade fuses operate in the same manner. However there are differences in delay times (from 2-5 seconds), and
whether the fuse is an ignitor or a detonator.
The fuse you are show ing in the grenade is a M213 that is used with the M67 grenade. It is the "live grenade" variant as opposed to the M228 which is the practice grenade
variant. The M228 has a blue handle w ith a brow n tip on the spoon. The M213 is solid OD green. Both have the same delay time which by MIL-SPEC is approx. 5 seconds.
The M213 is an explosive detonator w hile the M228 is an ignitor that contains a black powder charge designed to make smoke and noise for the practice grenade.
Inert fuses are legal and available online.
Its probably not legal to load a live cap in them, load the delay portion of the fuse w ith the appropriate powders, and crimp on a live igniter or detonator. :rolleyes:
Reloading them is tricky to say the least. I've seen it attempted but never seen it done correctly. The main problem is compressing the delay column to the correct density to
keep the fuse from functioning instantaniously.
defiant March 16th, 2007, 09:50 PM

Good first post Zait.
You're correct about the RFX stamp down the side (its even pictured in one of the photos above). Didn't know that it was a recast from Richmond Foundry though. Thanks.
In any case I paid $4 for it, and it wasn't purchased because I'm a collector that want's the best specimen of a particular model or something along those lines. I'm interested
more in how things work and can be manufactured. If someone w ere to actually manufacture a grenade body for military purposes it would need to be a brittle alloy in order for
it to frag effectively.
I didn't know that the RFX grenade bodies are made out of a different alloy. It seems pretty hard/brittle though, but if its less brittle than an original it w ouldn't frag as well as
an original. It's still fine for concussion fishing though. :p
You're wrong about the fuse though - I substituted a green handle for a blue one (aesthetic reasons) :D, Its a M228, or at least it was represented to me as an M228. Its also
likely that less of the fuze would remain if it w as a M213...
As you say, the mechanism is the same, but the M228 is loaded with an igniter (and has a blue spoon) w hereas the M213 has a detonator (and a green spoon).
Reloading them is tricky to say the least. I've seen it attempted but never seen it done correctly. The main problem is compressing the delay column to the correct density to
keep the fuse from functioning instantaniously.
A custom crimping die and a bit of experimentation ought to be able to resolve that sort of problem. Also, sealing the top of the crimp with varnish or epoxy might have added
benefit. The sample appears to be done that way - might be to seal out moisture though.
Also, do you know anything about fuzes for rifle launched grenades?
Or the M577 fuze???
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3535/m577001gu0.jpg http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7732/m577002sg5.jpg
Zait March 18th, 2007, 10:02 PM

Also, do you know anything about fuzes for rifle launched grenades?
Which rifle grenades, the 40mm series? If so then yes as I have a few sitting in my collection.
And yes, I'm also familiar with the M577 MTSQ fuze but I don't recall off hand if I have one sitting around here.
What are you looking for?
tiac03 March 19th, 2007, 08:30 PM

I hate both of you. lol.
All I have in my "collection" If I can call it that is One of the recast grenades (Without striker assembly), An emptied WW2 one (Must have been dug up and then explosives
removed and the bottom part of the fuze broken off w here the cap would have been. Spring was rotted out and the striker was siezed.) A few empty artillery casings, and a
sight from what I think is an artillery piece with NATO markings and made by Filotecnica Salmoiraghi.
If anyone here knows what It is for I'd appreciate knowing also.
Other markings on it are

Sight dial #2 (Mils)
and it has 3 adjustment knobs Two are made the same but one says "MAIN" and the other "Shooting"
Sorry For hijacking the thread, please talk about the Fuzes, I love knowing how different ones w ork, which is why I think I have such an Unhealthy facination with Mines. (If
only I knew where those people that go around to schools lecturing about the evils of mines get theirs, I would love to get a M-16 w ith M-605 fuze, or an S-mine)
So sorry for my interruption and please continue explaining.
defiant March 21st, 2007, 12:26 AM

tiac03:
This thread probably deserves to be hijacked - but I'm not familiar w ith the items your seeking information on. Posting a picture might help. For grenades check out ebay, or in
quanity http://www.oldsargesdropzone.com.
Also, fuses are different than fuzes - the latter refers to artilley. Ebay's a source, but there's probably better sources free of bidding madness. For a fuze used just prior to the
M557 - the MTSQ-M564 - check out 'http://www .sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=170554'. $20.
Zait:
I don't own 40mm round works but think I know basically how they work - centrifugal force (imparted on the round by barrel grooves) retracts pins that hold the detonator
assembly rearward, releasing it forward and allowing the firing pin to reach the cap upon impact - detonating the round. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
In any case, what I'm interested in is the older 22mm rifle grenades. I can't find any information as to w hether these devices have safety's built into their detonation system, or
how detonation specifically works. Any information you can provide (or anyone can provide) would be appreciated.
Discussion of the M557 fuze is probably out of place here - albeit it is I who digressed. I'll start a new topic for military artillery fuzes when the time is right, starting with a movie
that's being sent to me that's supposed to explain artillery fuzes in some detail. As the movie dates back to the 40's, it won't include the M557.
If you want to create the topic, that would be great. My priority right now is breaking in a couple of barrels and dialing in some scopes.
Zait March 23rd, 2007, 07:47 PM

In any case, what I'm interested in is the older 22mm rifle grenades. I can't find any information as to w hether these devices have safety's built into their detonation system, or
how detonation specifically works. Any information you can provide (or anyone can provide) would be appreciated.
By 22mm I'm guessing you are referring to the older series of grenades that are fired using an adapter and a blank grenade cartridge. If not then a nomenclature would really
help.
If so then one of the simplest is the M22:
http://img460.imageshack.us/img460/6578/m22yv0.jpg
It as a free floating firing pin held back by a creep spring. It fires on direct impact and usually does not fire on a glancing blow. Other than the safety clip, there is nothing
stopping the grenade from firing if you drop it on the ground. That is why they only use a firing system like this on a pyrotechnic and not an HE filled item.
defiant March 30th, 2007, 02:09 PM

You understood correctly w hat I meant by 22mm rifle grenade, and the image you posted w as very helpful. What military manual did you get that out of?
Also, so you know , they w eren't just for pyrotechnics or signal purposes - there were also HEAT and fragmentation models.
You're right about the 22mm rifle grenades falling out of favor with the advent of underbarrel and devoted 40mm launchers, which had rifled barrels. The rifling causes the
artillery round/fuze to spin, imparting centrifugal force on safety pins within the fuze which moved outwards upon firing and unlocked the firing pin (and in still later models the
firing pin and explosive train). A US Army film on fuze technology (which explains the basic principles) is available at http://mihd.net/6wtx3o .
Its a bit retro for me to w ant to know more about the older fuzes, but I don't drop things (often).
Zait March 30th, 2007, 04:11 PM

You understood correctly w hat I meant by 22mm rifle grenade, and the image you posted w as very helpful. What military manual did you get that out of?
TM 43-0001-29 Grenades
Also, so you know , they w eren't just for pyrotechnics or signal purposes - there were also HEAT and fragmentation models.
Yes, I varients of them sitting in boxes in my basement because I haven't build shelves for them yet.
You're right about the 22mm rifle grenades falling out of favor with the advent of underbarrel and devoted 40mm launchers, which had rifled barrels.
That and the fact that a soldier had to remove his live ammunition and replace it with a blank launching cartridge to fire the grenade. Some countries still use barrel adapted rifle
grenades but they now use a bullet trap so you can launch them with a ball round.
The rifling causes the artillery round/fuze to spin, imparting centrifugal force on safety pins within the fuze w hich moved outw ards upon firing and unlocked the firing pin (and in
still later models the firing pin and explosive train).
For soft launch items like the 40mm that is pretty much dead on. Fuzes for larger projectiles also have an inertia lock on them that is released upon firing and before centrifugal
force can work on the fuze.
A US Army film on fuze technology (w hich explains the basic principles) is available at http://mihd.net/6w tx3o .
That is a pretty good film to get the basics from. Well done on finding it.
If you can find copies of the OCM (Ordnance Committee Meeting) reports you will find some very interesting ideas on ordnance and fuzing.
defiant April 1st, 2007, 12:53 AM

TM 43-0001-29 Grenades
Just acquired that earlier this month, at w hich time links w ere provided: (http://www .ammoinfo.com/downloads/TMs/TM-43-0001-29.pdf at http://ww w.roguesci.org/
theforum/showthread.php?t=5388&page=17). I'm gonna try not to feel too foolish...:rolleyes:
That and the fact that a soldier had to remove his live ammunition and replace it with a blank launching cartridge to fire the grenade. Some countries still use barrel adapted rifle
grenades but they now use a bullet trap so you can launch them with a ball round.
As you point out there was more than one rational for swithching over. Fuze safety was one factor, and so were advantages associated with a soldier carrying ball rounds rather
than blanks and ball rounds. This rational makes some sense, but carrying a couple of blanks or color coded mags of blanks is far less burdensome than transporting quantities
of rifle grenades. Thus this official explanation falls short.
A third rational for swithching over to through fire or ball fire rifle grenades is that a soldier rushed by an enemy w ould be vulnerable with a grenade loaded on the launcher and
a blank chambered. This too makes sense, but a soldier today w ith an rpg, stinger, or other devoted grenade launcher is equally vulnerable to fragments from their ow n
grenade if rushed by an enemy at close range.
But a grenade was never intended to be a close range weapon, and devoted grenade launchers of various sorts continue to be of value. The Mk19 Automatic Grenade Launcher
is one such example...
http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/4640/usmk19mod3automaticgrentj4.png
But despite this firepow er the guy with an AR in the background appears to fulfill a protective role at closer ranges. Not that the new er technology isn't awesome.
But despite technological improvements that make predecessor weaponry appear antiquated - a 22mm blank fired rifle grenade is feasible for someone operating on a limitted
budget (not empowered to collect taxes), and are comparatively easy to manufacture, concealable, capable of being used w ith on readily available weapons w ith little
modification, propell grenades further than can be thrown by hand, and can be shaped charged. Although they are obsolete by modern US military standards - its conceivable
that there might be circumstances where they'd be useful.
For soft launch items like the 40mm that is pretty much dead on. Fuzes for larger projectiles also have an inertia lock on them that is released upon firing and before centrifugal
force can work on the fuze...
Don't know what you mean by "soft launch items" - but even 22mm blank launched rifle grenades need an inertia lock to prevent them firing w hen launched - which is why
early impact detonation rifle grenades used a crushable nose to prevent the pin from firing due to launching inertia.
That is a pretty good film to get the basics from. Well done on finding it.
Purchased, ripped, and uploaded by yours truly for purposes of distant learning and fair use.
Any chance of you uploading OCM (Ordnance Committee Meeting) reports? [No leads on google and it would be appreciated.]
Zait April 4th, 2007, 09:50 PM

The Mk19 Automatic Grenade Launcher is one such example...
But despite this firepow er the guy with an AR in the background appears to fulfill a protective role at closer ranges. Not that the new er technology isn't awesome.
That picture is of soldiers firing on a familiarization or qualification range. If they were in a combat situation the other two wouldnt be standing there (even though the weapon
is classified as crew served). The M16 being shown in the background probably isnt there in a protective role rather its there because the troop carrying it is standing there.
Don't know what you mean by "soft launch items" - but even 22mm blank launched rifle grenades need an inertia lock to prevent them firing w hen launched - which is why
early impact detonation rifle grenades used a crushable nose to prevent the pin from firing due to launching inertia.
The launch of a rifle grenade is soft compared to the launch of an 81mm mortar. A rifle grenade such as the M22 only has 2 safeties on it. The first is a safety pin and the
second is a creep spring. The safety pin keeps the grenade from firing due to an accidental drop while the grenade is off the rifle and the creep spring keeps it from firing while
it's in the air.
The setback during launch of the M22 is enough to keep the fuze from firing but not enough to compress a setback spring and setback pin to release a slider as is demonstrated
in the M52 projectile fuze. Funny side note is that the M52 needed setback at launch but it w as a small enough force that you could remove the safety pin and slam the mortar
on the ground tail first and the fuze would arm. There are stories of soldiers who did this and used the 60mm mortars as hand grenades when they were in danger of being over
run.
Any chance of you uploading OCM (Ordnance Committee Meeting) reports? [No leads on google and it would be appreciated.]
Sorry but they wont be uploaded anywhere (the size of the files and the scarcity of the info keeps it from happening) due to a gentlemens agreement. Outside of museums
there are probably less than 12 copies of the 2 disks that contain the unclassified reports. The only two ways that I know of that people can find and read them (the hardcover
reports) is by visiting a military museum that may have them or by visiting the National Archives in DC. They are very accommodating and will do all they can in helping you
research something. You can even make copies of most things.
Tw o books that may help you and can usually be bought on Ebay ,a Antique book store or even Amazon (w hich is show ing both available in used condition) are:
Elements of Ammunition Maj. Theodore C. Ohart, Published 1946 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Elements of Ordnance Col. Thomas J. Hayes, Published 1938 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Both were used as textbooks and they have excellent line drawings of early fuzes and detailed descriptions on how they function.
defiant April 5th, 2007, 03:02 AM

Yeah, its pretty obvious that the photo of the guys with the Mk19 Automatic Grenade Launcher isn't a combat photo. The photo was mostly worked into the post as a joke - but
depending on the situation and the manpower available it isn't an altogether bad to have point men with short ranged weapons.
Thanks though for the other info, and particularly the leads to the books and reports - it's very much appreciated.
sparkchaser April 7th, 2007, 09:05 AM

Speaking from experience here; the MK19 works wonderfully at close range. It uses a spin counting safety that makes the round incapable of arming until it has rotated a set
number of times, thus a certain distance from the barrel after firing. At distances closer than about 20 meters, those 40 mm granades travelling at high velocity make nice, neat
40 mm holes in most things they hit, whether it be man, beast, or truck trailer. The m203 (same size grenade, same style fuze, much lower velocity) fired too close for arming
will still shatter a man's chest like fine china.
defiant April 16th, 2007, 10:11 PM

We're way off hand grenades (:o ) - but that's mostly my fault for wandering topic w ise and, besides, its all interesting.
So, do you know how many revolutions it takes to arm a MK19/M203 fuze - or more practically - at what distance from the shooter the round arms itself and what the kill/
wound radius is of the round?
Reportedly an M79 fuze arms itself after 4.5 revolutions. That's not right on top of the shooter given the twist/rifling of the barrel...
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/2177/m79grenadelaunchercutawmb1.jpg
... but to the extent that 4.5 revolutions is (somew hat) standard (along w ith the rifling tw ist of the M79, given the similarities between rounds and accuracy requirements) - it
kind of appears that you all are a bunch of lunatics. Not that there is anything wrong with being a lunatic - but firing a grenade at close range target isn't exactly standard
recommended military procedure, is it? (...not that the lunatics determining procedure know more than the guys in the field...).
Still, the impact zone for a hand grenade is 75-100 meters, and its presumed that a modern launched grenade round has an equal or greater radius, so you all appear to be
cutting it a bit close.
Sure, w hen all hell is breaking loose you shoot at whatever is the most immanent threat -but wouldn't you prefer a couple of capable trusted point men?
Zait April 19th, 2007, 12:50 AM

We're way off hand grenades (:o ) - but that's mostly my fault for wandering topic w ise and, besides, its all interesting.
So, do you know how many revolutions it takes to arm a MK19/M203 fuze - or more practically - at what distance from the shooter the round arms itself and what the kill/
wound radius is of the round?
IIRC it's 27 feet for the M203 HE/HEDP rounds to arm. I'm not sure on the MK19 so I may have to do some digging.
I have seen idiots that fire them at targets that are too close and have them bounce off (both M203 and MK19 systems).
Still, the impact zone for a hand grenade is 75-100 meters, and its presumed that a modern launched grenade round has an equal or greater radius, so you all appear to be
cutting it a bit close.
There are few people that can throw the M67 that far. The average is around 35 meters. The lethal fragmentation distance is 5meters and the injury radius is 15 meters.
Anything farther out than that and it's a crap shoot if you get hit or not.
defiant April 19th, 2007, 02:47 AM

Just so you know, I wasn't referring to a hand grenade having a 75-100 yard kill/wound radius - but rather shortened somewhat the 100 meters safety protocol recomended by
a US manual regarding grenade training ranges. Didn't phrase it very well in light.
Also, thanks for the recomendation of "Elements of Ammunition" - I picked up a copy and its a great intro (purchased Elements of Ordinance too but haven't received it yet).
Feel free to PM me any other recomendations you may have on artillery/ammunution/ordinance/explosives.
I should be done compiling an ebook of "Elements of Ammunition" by tomorrow.
Next project is figuring out the methods and tooling needed to reload a grenade fuse. Shouldn't be difficult, and the pics will be posted here to get the topic back on track.
Saugi May 17th, 2007, 11:17 AM

NBK2000 released a nice little pdf-document (few years ago) that described the construction of a selfmade hand grenade out of a plastic-pipe. It had a pulling igniter made of
matches and the frags were made of small metal balls w hich were attached to the grenade body with some adhesive tape.
The filler was suggested to made of acetonperoxide (which i personally w ould'nt use for this task)
Unfortunaltely i lost that file.
Does anybody know w here i can dow nload it again?

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Water charges
Log in
View Full Version : Water charges
nbk2000 March 1st, 2007, 08:10 AM

I saw the 'Alford Strip' on this segment of Future Weapons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Va9lOszglrs
A simple plastic channel filled with water, with a recessed grove for a length of DET-CORD.
The water provides a countermass, or tamping effect, to the explosive force, directing it into the target more effectively than
simply taping the DET-CORD to it.
To me, it looks like a pre-made piece of plastic trim, like something you'd find on the edges of cabinets, so a good search of
suppliers of such thing would likely reveal an OTC supplier.
Anyways, the exact material or shape is likely irrelevant, as long as it disintegrates safely and has enough mass to direct the
force of the explosion into the target.
Previously I've mentioned a castable disintegrating tamper patent. Water is safer, and quenches the explosives hot gases.
Also, if the tamper was made from rubber tubing or such, it could be kept unfilled and highly compacted and, more
importantly, unsuspicious.
By having a tube with the tube, you could use a liquid explosive too, making the whole thing easily transportable and its true
purpose undetectable prior to actual setup. :)
Ever seen a Bunt Cake Mold?
http://www.sugarcraft.com/catalog/pans/2105-4013.jpg
To me, this just screams out "Door Hole Puncher", hence my creation...the 'Bunt' charge. :D
A circle of very thin aluminum sheet (soda-can like) has a ring of explosive, either plastic or liquid in a tubular ring, set on it
and affixed into place with glue, and either a rubber coating or plastic film covering it.
The bunt mold is centered over it, and firmly sealed to the circular plate.
A small tap hole with plug has already been made in the bunt mold for the water to be added, and leads for the detonator as
well.
The center hole is where your detonator, timer, whatever, goes.
A peel-off adhesive sheet on the aluminum circle is used to attach it to the target door and BOOM! You've now got a hole big
enough to reach your arm in through to open the door, toss in grenades, or fire your weapon.
They also make the molds out of silicone rubber, which would be fragment-free, but save money and buy steel.
The second half the the FW episode has a larger version, very similiar to the well-known Hydra-Cut Frame.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVt9iutUgAY
Same principle as the Alford Strip and the Bunt charge, only larger.
knowledgehungry March 1st, 2007, 10:09 AM

I was talking to my buddy home on leave from Iraq a few months ago and he told me that a favorite IED, for blowing down
doors and the like was a blasting cap and an IV bag. I am not sure if he meant that the insurgents used them or whether the
troops use them. Since he is an MP I tend to lean towards the idea that our guys use them when storming a house.
Unfortunately he is back over there so I have no way to ask him about it.
nbk2000 March 1st, 2007, 11:52 AM

That's another form of breaching charge.
Three lengths of military DET-CORD are looped in between two IV bags, and propped against the target door.
The bag furthest outside acts as the countermass, and the inner bag acts as a ram. The door typically bends inwards enough
to clear the lock bolts, if not outright shatter the door (if wood).
akinrog March 2nd, 2007, 09:54 AM

The old guy in the video is the same guy I watched in a documentary of National Geographic channel about dam busters, a
special air raid unit of World War 2, aiming at demolishing various dams in Germany.
In that documentary the old guy was describing how water behind the charge helps to demolish dam during attach by attaching
an IV bag behind a detcord and repeating the same experiment without an IV bag.
Guerilla March 2nd, 2007, 10:02 AM

A 0.5L waterbottle with a lenght of mil detcord wrapped around can also be used for more directed blasts on softer targets. A
quick improvised way to take apart (or trigger) electrical circuits etc. but probably harmless against any sturdier locks, enough
to penetrate an average car's rooftop and come out through the bottom though.
nbk2000 March 2nd, 2007, 11:41 AM

Here's a hi-res (1MB) photo showing the construction of a Mineral Water Bottle (MWB) charge:
'http://www.shaw.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/060601-F-6699G-010.jpg'
Copy/paste above link into a download utility to save it.
A 3-strand loop of DET-CORD is taped on one side of a small water bottle (like evian), which acts like a shaped charge,
directing a high-speed jet of water into the target.
Also, a patent for water-disruptors: US6269725
A photo (1.5MB) of a charge made according to the patent:

https://navcms.news.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/060712-N-8148A-061.jpg
Source of details (Page 13):

https://aais.ria.army.mil/AAIS/Award_web_03/DAAE2003D00460026/PDExplosive%20Ordnance%20Disposal%2028Nov06.pdf
Disruptor, Fluid. The fluid disruptor shall be a Hydra-Jet manufactured by Cherry Manufacturing Inc., Albuquerque, NM. The
disruptor shall be an explosive device disablement tool that mass focuses a fluid into a linear knife blade-like projectile
through the use of a chevron shaped explosive charge that is centrally fired at the apex of the chevron. The disruptor shall
also be capable of having a metal disk conformably mounted to the disruptors exterior and radially aligned with the direction
of fire of the fluid projectile. The disruptor shall be able to be remotely actuated, and shall be able to be hor robotically
emplaced. The disruptor shall be able to be used singly or in multiples, or in combination with other disrupters. The disruptor
shall be capable of penetrating hardened targets, multiple barriers, and possess standoff capabilities greater than or equal to
5 feet. One case of 16 disruptors shall be furnished in each size: Small (32 oz), Medium (64 oz) and Large (128 oz). The only
known product that will meet the requirement is the Hydra-Jet manufactured by Cherry Manufacturing Inc., Albuquerque, NM.
A BP-powered water-jet door rammer:

http://www.eodpartner.com/eng/02products/01eod/0205400_handheld_disruptor/0205400eng.pdf
Regarding the water-filled tupperware bowl:
Someone mentioned that filling a Tupperware bowl with water and wrapping the bowl with detonating cord would make an
improvised shape charge. We promptly put one together and propped it against the outside wall using a two by four. The
device was detonated and sure enough, it knocked a four foot diameter hole through the cinder block wall.
Though I think this likely an exaggeration.
knowledgehungry March 2nd, 2007, 11:43 AM

I was thinkin about using gelatin as opposed to just plain water in the "bunt cake charge" or other improvised versions. This
would eliminate the difficulty of making sure the water didn't leak out.
The hardest part of improvising these things would be in making a water proof "face" for the container holding the water. If
you used gelatin you wouldn't have to worry about that. You could fill a large, deep cake pan with the gelatin , press the
detcord/plastic in the desired pattern into the pan, then ductape it to the target. I think it would be more simple than having
to find a way to contain the water.
The ony question is would the difference in physical properties of gelatin and water somehow interfere. I believe that they
would not due to the fact that the water is merely there to tamp the explosive, and gelatin is almost as dense as water.
Akinrog: I saw that show a long time ago, thanks for reminding me of it it was very interesting.
FUTI March 2nd, 2007, 12:19 PM

I don't know how you call this guys...but partially acid hydrolysed starch when cooled form jelly like mass. Maybe that can
make your countermass for that charge like gelatin or water?
Bert March 2nd, 2007, 03:10 PM

NBK, the high res photo link is broken-
nbk2000 March 2nd, 2007, 03:12 PM

I think that plain water is used both for the simplicity of loading, as well as it's ability to absorb the heat of the explosion by
conversion into steam.
Gelatin probably isn't as effective at the last, but for a DIY charge, it would make it much less likely to leak out.
Other materials would be water-absorbing soil polymers. Blended to a fine powder and mixed with several hundred times their
weight of water, they form a very solid gel, with no decay like organic-based gelatin would incur over a long period of
unrefrigerated storage.
nbk2000 March 2nd, 2007, 05:15 PM

I forgot to mention that the photo at 'http://www.shaw.af.mil' can't be opened in browsers, it has to be downloaded using a
download utility.
Bacon46 March 3rd, 2007, 05:18 AM

NBK
How about using a small inner tube, like one from a hand truck, to keep the water in your Bunt Charge?
I am more into pyrotechnics, but based on what I have read so far. it seems to me that it would work.
I attached a line drawing and cross section.
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=buntcharge2wc4.jpg
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/9971/buntchargesectionsi1.th.jpg (http://img167.imageshack.us/my.php?
image=buntchargesectionsi1.jpg)
nbk2000 March 3rd, 2007, 11:52 AM

An inner tube would also work.
But, from your graphic, it'd be unnecessary, since the bunt mold is being clamped between two boards, which would make it
watertight anyways, right? ;)
Bacon46 March 3rd, 2007, 02:16 PM

I really didn t think the graphics where necessary, but I thin k I remember so mething in the rule s about inclu ding them
whenever possible. I draw for a living, and had time, so it was possible!;)
As far as the mold being watertight without the inner tube; if the m aterial use d to fabricate the Pla tes is waterp roof and the
joints a re sea led with silicone durin g assembly I suppose it would hold water. If wood is the material used, I wou ldn t count on
it to hold for very long.
In an experiment or demonstration, there is obviously no need to fill it until right before you detonate it. In a hypothetical
combat situation, where one actually needed to use the devise to blow a door, the inner tube would give you an unlimited
amount of time between filling and detonation.
W o u l d n t you hate to be the guy in a comb at situation looking for a Bunt Cake mold and an inner tube? You be tter have a
pla n B .
festergrump March 4th, 2007, 02:13 AM

I kind of see where Bacon could be on to something with the innertube idea... If it were filled even to 7/8 of the tubes capacity
(without expanding) and the wooden 'plate(s)' were left off, it could be as portable as a satchel charge if everything was
stickied in place somehow, and you'd have less time testing your cake-tin to sheeting bond to be sure it holds water (I'd trust
a machinemade innertube over my aluminum on aluminum bonding capabilities anyday, especially if they were meant to hold
water).
Maybe hotglue or use a tube of subfloor caulk to keep the innertube into the bunt-cake tin and doubleside tape the LSC in
place? Voila! No time wasted in filling with water at all. Just sticky, magnet, or screw to the door (which ever is best suitable),
and say GO from a safe and remote location.
If weight is of an issue but time is not... fill on site with available water, instead, and save yourself 8-16 lbs of dead weight
while hoofing it to the breach zone, as the original post.
I can see a small team carrying many of these on a mission.
nbk2000 March 4th, 2007, 09:06 AM

Another modification would be the addition of a chemical agent to the charge, so that the agent is directed into the target
zone during the explosion.
By placing the agent between the target and the explosive, that will direct it in through the hole, into the room beyond.
Since agents take time to take effect, this would be best used in a multiple hole operation, where you have several entry
points planned, the primary being ungassed, with the secondaries (entrance/exits), not being intended for immediate use,
getting the treatment.
Then, if you need another entry point, it's already been cleared by the agent. Or, if you need a quick exit, you don't have to
worry about the room being occupied.
The same could be done with the tamping water, loading it with a volatile agent, so that the area around your entry point
remains clear of anyone laying in ambush for you as you are exiting.
megalomania March 4th, 2007, 01:31 PM

What about using some inert, but incapacitating, agent like chloroform or carbon tetrachloride instead of water? Now you have
filled the target area with as much toxic vapor as possible. Even something like different bags of hydrochloric acid and
ammonium hydroxide would make an instant smokescreen. While I am on it, using concentrated sulfuric acid or saturated
sodium hydroxide also sounds like it could ruin somebody's day.
nbk2000 March 4th, 2007, 07:22 PM

Pictures of commercial breeching frames and the resulting damage:
http://www.forcedentrytacticaltraining.com/forced-entry-tools/more-entry-tools.php
An article from a piggy magazine describing various breaching techniques (also attached):
http://www.hendonpub.com/article-print.asp?ID=890
It was deleted from their website, but the google archive still had a link to the print version, which was still on their site. :p

What about using some inert, but incapacitating, agent like chloroform or carbon tetrachloride instead of water? Now you have
filled the target area with as much toxic vapor as possible. Even something like different bags of hydrochloric acid and
ammonium hydroxide would make an instant smokescreen. While I am on it, using concentrated sulfuric acid or saturated
sodium hydroxide also sounds like it could ruin somebody's day.
The solvent use idea goes little in CW area but is OK and cheap. But if I may propose one 2-in-1 product based on what you
proposed Mega. Ammonium hydroxide and concentrated sulfuric solution also looks very good. IIRC heat of reaction of those
two is high enough to boils of the water (not to mention the "slight" energy input from the blast) so you end up with aerosolic
salt which also form the smoke. Blast them, boil them, smoke them...
NBK when you mentioned soil polymers did you think something like those acrylate binders they made for soil remediation or
some zeolite solution (like some kind of clay)?
Chris The Great March 5th, 2007, 11:35 PM

There really is nothing new about this concept at all except that the tamping has been made more portable.
Why not use an inflatable pool toy filled with water, and tape some detcord (or even a narrow strip of plastic explosive if you're
doing everything yourself) on one side. It's ready to go and it will only cost $3 for the pool toy and $5 for the roll of tape. The
only problem I can see if that if there is a lot of water being used, it might be hard to tape to a door since it will be very
heavy.
Since pool toys might be a little too large, one could always tape them down to be smaller before filling with water.
markgollum March 5th, 2007, 11:52 PM

Using sulfuric acid or chloroform as the tamper is a great idea, especially since their densities are 1.836 g/cc and 1.48 g/cc
respectively (@ 20deg C) that translates into 1.836 and 1.48 times the tamping effectiveness per unit volume.
But if you want maximum tamping effectiveness without the cost and toxic/irritating effects
then I would go with a saturated solution of calcium chloride, 74.5g/100mL @ 20 degC and the density of the 40% solution is
1.3982 g/cc @ 20 deg C.
There are solutions made up of zinc, calcium, magnesium, and mercury bromides/iodides that have densities greater than
3g/cc but the y don t come as cheap.
I think everyone can imagine the $$$ remediation problems mercury would cause.:p
tiac03 March 7th, 2007, 01:00 AM

While we are on the topic of water tamping... Would it affect shaped charges and EFPs, If so would it be enough to make them
worth while?
(Ability to use less explosive, or to increase penetrating power of them?)
nbk2000 March 8th, 2007, 02:04 AM

Confinement of any charge improves efficiency and reduces the weight of explosive needed to perform the same work.
I like the idea of using CaCl solution, as it's denser than plain water/non-toxic/cheap/non-freezing.
Acids?! :eek: Remember, you'll have to go through the stuff on your way in/out, probably without a haz-mat suit, so you want
to use something corrosive?
A water-soluble irritant would be good to add. A lot of the water will be vaporized into steam or fog by the blast, though most
of it will be dispersed on the charge-side of the wall.
Though, if one had access to DET-CORD, delayed detonators, or a blasting box, they could set up another directional water-
charge like the one shown in the navy.mil photo I linked to, replacing the water inside the charge apex with an agent, which
would be directed through the hole in the wall that you had just blasted. :)

Acids?! :eek: Remember, you'll have to go through the stuff on your way in/out, probably without a haz-mat suit, so you want
to use something corrosive?
I believe the original posters who suggest chemicals for smoke / corrosion etc. effects have misunderstood the concept. The
water tamper is not before the charge but behind the charge.
So using a chemical which is irritant /corrosive or smoking should be a bad idea since you are the one who shall be sprayed by
these chemicals while the people at the other side of the wall shall be relatively protected from them. Regards.
Kaydon March 11th, 2007, 03:49 PM

SHAW AFB, is nearby. Very.. nearby.
Paraphin(sp?) wax? Would that work, or just explode into bits? Perhaps a mixture?
slarter May 17th, 2007, 05:54 PM

I believe the original posters who suggest chemicals for smoke / corrosion etc. effects have misunderstood the concept. The
water tamper is not before the charge but behind the charge.
So using a chemical which is irritant /corrosive or smoking should be a bad idea since you are the one who shall be sprayed by
these chemicals while the people at the other side of the wall shall be relatively protected from them. Regards.
Actually, the water surrounds the explosives. These charges operate on the principal that you cannot compress a liquid. The
explosive forces the water against the target either displacing it or breaching it altogether.
I've used the "Boot Bangers" from Alford and the "Mineral Water Bottle" and "Hydro-Cut" charges made by Chris Cherry in Iraq
and both work very well. You can make your own and for a lot less money.
It is amazing how little explosive it takes to breach a door or pop open a car. 20g is sufficient to open just about any Class A
steel firedoor if used properly.
As for using paraffin, absolutely not! The detonation will cause it to ignite.
While going through an "Explosive Breaching" training program years ago (before the advent of non-flammable breachers
paste) we used GAA (Grease, Automotive and Artillery) as an adhesive to attach the breaching charge to the target. GAA would
stick to wet teflon and just about anything else. One of the other students decided that if three small dollops of grease was
good to hold the charge to the target, then three pounds or so would be better.
I was the shieldman holding the ballistic shield so we could detonate the charge from less than 8 feet away (the NEW was less
than 75g) and when the charge detonated, it vaporized and ignited the grease, creating a fireball about 25' in diameter. :eek:
The instructor was the fifth man in the stack and he was inside the fireball. Good thing that we were required to wear Nomex
flightsuits and hood with helmets and goggles. I just wish that someone had had a camera that day.
nbk2000 May 21st, 2007, 07:06 AM

I've used the "Boot Bangers" from Alford and the "Mineral Water Bottle" and "Hydro-Cut" charges made by Chris Cherry in Iraq
and both work very well. You can make your own and for a lot less money.
Any details on how to make our own?
A short news segment where a company that trains piggies in explosive breaching demonstrates it for the reporters.
http://www.breacher.com/videos/Breacher.WMV
You can clearly see the construction of a Water-Impulse charge using DET-CORD sandwiched between two water bags.
Rbick May 21st, 2007, 05:54 PM

Yes, water impulse charges are very easy to make and there are several ways to do it. We were taught in an improvised
explosives class. I will scan and put my notes up later in links and literature.
My favorite way was to take 2 saline solution IV bags (500 ml) and place some C2 sheet explosive in between them. I used
duct tape to keep them held together. I'm unsure of the amount of C2, but it fit squarley between the bags, so about 5 x 4 in
squares, and was folded about 4 times. I primed it with a pen flare gun(this was an improvised explosives class :D) , some
shock tube, a blasting cap and about 6 in. of det cord. We were only using some heavy interior doors that day, but damn, it
was awesome. To better explain the pen flare gun, it is the size of a normal writing pen, but is used to launch small signal
flares. It has a striking pin that fires the flare, but in this case strikes the shock tube primer. The blasting cap had a 5 second
delay after being initiated by the shock tube, allowing you to seek cover around the corner and get your weapon ready.
Considering the normal person will never get shock tube or C2 sheet explosive, or even IV bags for that matter, there are a
lot of alternatives. Ziplock bags filled with water would work, and a fuse or electrical initiation would work for firing the cap,
obviously. Any charge could be used, as long as it is fit snuggly in between the bags of water. Preferably, you would obviously
want something very brisant, like RDX or PETN. When placing the charge, we put ours next to the locking mechanism, about 3
in. off to the side towards the middle of the door. This ensures the locking mechanism is destroyed. Make sure the bag is in
full contact with the door and there is as little space as possible. If you wanted, you could just put strips of det cord between
the bags, but adding a nice charge makes sure you punch through.
Another method is to take a bottle of water and drill a hole in the top, or just take the cap off. You then suspend a charge in
the center of the bottle, so it is completley submerged. Then, attach the bottle to a stick, and lean it against the door. When it
is leaned against the door, ensure the charge stays in the middle of the liquid. If you can, use adhesive to attach the bottle to
the door, as a leaning stick could turn into a big piece of shrapnel headed your way :eek:
If I think of more details on this type of charge, I'll be sure to update, 'cause I'm missing something. I just don't have my
notes with me at the moment.
Zait May 21st, 2007, 11:06 PM

A short news segment where a company that trains piggies in explosive breaching demonstrates it for the reporters.
You can clearly see the construction of a Water-Impulse charge using DET-CORD sandwiched between two water bags.
That is Rus Hart from R.E.S.T. They run a pretty good school.
It's more than just det-cord. If you go back and look closely at the video they are enhancing the charge with some deta-sheet
(looks to be C2) and the det-cord is laid over the top of it.
Gammaray1981 May 25th, 2007, 07:24 PM

Who in the world gives ImpExp classes post 9/11? Surely the bureauprats would shut them down?
nbk2000 May 26th, 2007, 01:55 AM
We're still here and have been for 6 years, post 9/11. :)
As long as FedGov has to give at least lip service to the 1st amendment, we have nothing to fear as long as we discuss such
matters in a public matter.
Once you start privately discussing such matters, it becomes conspiracy.
Anyways, I'm uploading to the FTP uploads folder, a 22MB file containing several PDF's I've compiled about the construction
and use of various breaching charges, along with 11 videos showing them in use and their effects.
(And, yes, I realize that one of the videos is a duplicate, but only after I had uploaded it)
Gammaray1981 May 26th, 2007, 05:37 AM

Ah. I hadn't though of it in quite that way. I was thinking of the probability of a vanful of pork smashing down the door and
arresting everyone inside on the basis of "training terrorists". Here, it might as well be roleplay, for all that can be proven.
nbk2000 May 27th, 2007, 05:19 PM

Water bottle disrupter charges table:
Nominal capacity, dimensions, water filling, charge weight
.25L, 148mmx60mm, 174ml water, 57g HE

.50L, 198mmx85mm, 650ml water, 57g HE
1.0L, 247mmx100mm, 1130ml water, 194g HE
Gammaray1981 May 27th, 2007, 07:30 PM

How does #2 work? Nominal capacity: .50L = 500ml. Water filling (excluding all else) 650ml?
nbk2000 May 28th, 2007, 03:51 AM

Nominal = Approximate or rounded off.
What's easier to say? 'Half liter' or '650'th of a liter'? :rolleyes:
Jacks Complete June 3rd, 2007, 09:45 AM

Gammaray1981, the reason for the higher amounts of water is that you don't want any airgaps in it, unlike when you buy a
beer and it has that air gap at the top to stop the bottle exploding from pressure shocks. Think about it.
nbk2000 June 15th, 2007, 06:01 AM

I uploaded some pages from a soldiers notebook on improvised demolition charges:
/FTP/UPLOAD/NBK2000/Explosive Breaching/Notes from MOUT Demolitions Class.pdf
Most of it is, to be expected, similiar to what's described in the militaries TM and FM on such things, but personal commentary
is always interesting. :)
Tinton June 16th, 2007, 01:26 AM

A generalized ratio of water/explosives would be nice for this.
Anyways, might a garden hose, or other similar tubing be used?

Although it may be difficult to completely encase the explosive with the tamping water, I'm sure someone could pull it off.
A hose/tube filled with water, and an explosive. Just lay it on your wall. Tape it every foot or so. And BOOM. You could
practically write stuff in a wall/door.
This would give you flexibility, without having to use set shapes and premade containers. It would also make attaching the
device much easier than a "sticky" charge. Additionally, it would be extremely easy to carry, seeing as it can be wound.
Rbick June 16th, 2007, 01:59 AM

Check out this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFh1FWluixg&mode=related&search=)from Future Weapons. About 1
1/2 minutes into it, he brings out what is called an "Alfred Strip". I have found window seals that look very similary to this and
could be made to hold water. I'm sure you can make something similar to it using different materials as well. Its a good video
though, lots of good information on water charges. It may have been listed earlier in this thread, but its good to bring it back
up. That old guy in the video rocks, I plan to be like him when I'm 80 :D
Trinton- I'm not sure what you mean by using a hose. Woud you fill the hose with water, explosive, or both? I assume it could
probably be made to work, sounds like a fun experiment to try out :cool: If you filled a hose with explosive, that would be
some thick det cord!
Tinton June 16th, 2007, 03:15 PM

I meant using a hose, as in using it as the tamper. Fill it with water, and tape detcord to it. You could also attempt to get the
explosive inside the hose. So you have one compact, prepackaged water charge.
Actually, now that I have given it more consideration, you could use the garden hose as the explosive.
What I mean, is that you could fill the garden hose with explosives; then put that hose inside another piece of tubing, with a
much larger diameter. (2in?)
Fill the larger tubing with the water, make sure the hose of explosives stays in contact with one of the sides of the larger hose.
Just make sure you mark which side of the large hose the explosives are in contact with, so you know which side to place
towards the wall. ;)
Zait June 17th, 2007, 10:39 PM

About 1 1/2 minutes into it, he brings out what is called an "Alfred Strip". That old guy in the video rocks, I plan to be like him
when I'm 80 :D
"Alford strip" as in Dr. Sidney Alford. A very nice gentlemen when you get to know him.
Unless the "window seals" you are looking at are rigid and can hold water you won't get anywhere near the results you are
looking for. Especially if you aren't using det-cord.

Eh, Alford, whatever :p. Yeah on a second look, you're right about those seals, they don't look too promising. But what could
one use to get something similar? I'm on a quest to find it, 'cause those cutting charges are sweet.
Zait June 18th, 2007, 11:24 PM

But what could one use to get something similar? I'm on a quest to find it, 'cause those cutting charges are sweet.
The container is not always as important as the explosives used. You need det-cord or sheet explosive to effectively make a
breaching charge.
nbk2000 June 19th, 2007, 07:35 PM

This months SWAT magazine has an article about Brazilian police, and has a picture of a wall breaching charge made from
dynagel cartridges and det-cord, called a 'spider' charge, and will blow a manhole through a 6" solid concrete wall.
Rbick June 19th, 2007, 07:40 PM

I'll have to disagree with you there. You don't NEED sheet explosive or det cord to make a breaching charge. It also depends
on what you're breaching. Flex linear charges are C-4 packed behind a copper strip. No det cord or sheet explosive involved.
M112 blocks of C-4 are used to breach walls (the blocks can be replaced by many other explosives), and water charges can be
made with almost any type of explosive.
For flex linear charges, the container is what makes it so effective. It wouldn't do its job without the copper strip at 60 degrees.
This is obviously the case with all shaped charges, where the container does make the difference.
So actually, it is a combination of both. You need both an effective container and and effective explosive to make it work
properly, depending on your target. As for the Alford strip, I think that its container plays a vital role in having it work as well
as it does. Yes, sheet explosive and det cord are nice to have, but certainly arn't a requirement of making effective breaching
charges. NBK mentioned adding some notes to the FTP on this matter a few posts up. It seems pretty interesting and may be
worth checking out...
Zait June 20th, 2007, 12:00 AM

I'll have to disagree with you there. You don't NEED sheet explosive or det cord to make a breaching charge. It also depends
on what you're breaching. Flex linear charges are C-4 packed behind a copper strip. No det cord or sheet explosive involved.
M112 blocks of C-4 are used to breach walls (the blocks can be replaced by many other explosives), and water charges can be
made with almost any type of explosive.
For flex linear charges, the container is what makes it so effective. It wouldn't do its job without the copper strip at 60 degrees.
This is obviously the case with all shaped charges, where the container does make the difference.
I must not have come across correct in my last post.
If you are trying to use some type of frame like plastic tubing, window seals or anything else like that you will not get the
desired result without using det-cord or sheet explosive.
If you have flex linear (copper or lead or even ECT for that matter) then you don't need a plastic frame (Alford Strip) to use
with your explosives. You can use M112 blocks but that is kind of like killing ants with a sledge hammer. It works but the extra
damage usually isn't worth the effort. BTW Flex linear does not use C4 as the main charge. Flex linear usually uses either RDX
or HMX depending on the manufacturer and the application for the charge.
As for the Alford strip, I think that its container plays a vital role in having it work as well as it does. Yes, sheet explosive and
det cord are nice to have, but certainly arn't a requirement of making effective breaching charges.
The container plays a large role for it's ability to remain rigid and to contain the water. You can accomplish the same thing with
a zip-loc bag but because of its flexibility you need to use more water and explosives to accomplish the same task. 99% of
breaching charges used are constructed using either sheet or det-cord. Short of a heavy breaching operation (Combat Engineer
style) M112 blocks, boosters, and the like are not used. Conversely, no one is using AN, Flash powder, black or smokeless
powder for breaching as it is not suitable for the application.
Were you to try anything less than det-cord in the Alford strip you wouldn't get the desired effect. That's why Sidney designed
it the way he did.
While breaching is a "science" it is also an art. It takes quite a bit of explosives knowledge to mix a container and the correct
explosives to make an effective breaching charge.
Thank you for the clarification. I understand that you don't need plastic tubing for flex linear charges, I have handled many of
them. But it is important to use a properly shaped metal strip with a properly shaped and weighed charge behind it with what is
usually a foam casing around it, which I was describing as the container.
I also understand that M112 is too much for a door, but not for a thick wall. I've seen these in action and they do form a
perfectly sized whole in concrete walls to move through, unless of course the wall sucks and collapses, which has also happen.
This isn't always bad, since the obstacle has been completely removed. :D
My idea for the window seal was to get something close to what was shown in the video. Of course it wouldn't perform as well,
but hopefully get close. On a second look, it doesn't appear that it would do much of anything. Ziplock bags can be used, as
IV bags are often used for improvised water impulse charges, but those do not give you the clean cut of the Alford Strip, which
is what I'm looking for. Bags of water work great for minimizing frag, but push, rather than cut your target.
Also...
BTW Flex linear does not use C4 as the main charge. Flex linear usually uses either RDX or HMX depending on the
manufacturer and the application for the charge.
C-4 is not the name of a single explosive, it is a composition (hence the name, Composition 4) made up of about 91% RDX
and 9% plasticizer and binder by weight(depending on the manufacturer), which is what is used in flex linear charges. The
plasticizer is usually dioctyl sebacate or dioctyl adipate, and the binder usually used is polyisobutylene. It would be much more
difficult to place pure RDX in a shaped charge.
I agree with you that people do not generally use AN, flash, ect. for breaches, as they are not desireable. I was just pointing
out that in a situation where you need to improvise, it is possible to use these. And you're right about it being a science and
an art, but all can be gained through research and experimentation.
Zait June 22nd, 2007, 01:43 AM

But it is important to use a properly shaped metal strip with a properly shaped and weighed charge behind it with what is
usually a foam casing around it, which I was describing as the container.
Actually, you don't need a metal strip. Metal is good, but not required as many other products work as well or sometimes even
better. The liner only enhances the depth of the cut. A simple cutting charge can be made by cutting a "V" impression into the
charge or forming two strips of explosives into a "V" with a little backing for support. This was initially demonstrated by Munroe
using a block of guncotton. It is further demonstrated by the brass plaque sitting on my desk that was nothing more than C2
detasheet and a reverse engraved plastic plate.
C-4 is not the name of a single explosive, it is a composition (hence the name, Composition 4) made up of about 91% RDX
and 9% plasticizer and binder by weight(depending on the manufacturer), which is what is used in flex linear charges. The
plasticizer is usually dioctyl sebacate or dioctyl adipate, and the binder usually used is polyisobutylene. It would be much more
difficult to place pure RDX in a shaped charge.
You forgot to add in the DMDNB (2,3-dimethyl-2,3-dinitrobutane) that is required to be added to the mixture. Having spent
the past 20 yrs using various explosives and demolition materials I'm quite familiar C4 along with many of the other
explosives commonly (and not so commonly used). You stated:
Flex linear charges are C-4 packed behind a copper strip.
"Flex linear" is a type of charge used by the military, law enforcement and some civilian demolition specialists for specialized
cutting (FLSC or Flex-Linear Shaped Charge. It somes in various grains per foot ratings (15gr/ft to around 5000gr/ft) and is
sheathed in either copper or lead. The military still uses lead while the rest use copper. These commercially manufactured flex
linear charges are not "C-4 packed behind a copper strip". They are a strip of RDX or HMX totally sheathed in lead or copper
(with the exception of the end being exposed). The military also uses the foam encased "MK 142 series ECT" or Explosive
Cutting Tape for some very specialized purposes most of which are underwater. Bonus points for those that correctly state why
foam (with no metal content) is better underwater.
nbk2000 June 22nd, 2007, 03:56 AM

Reasons for foam:
A) Non-corrosive
B) Decouples the shock from the water, reducing the distance the divers need to be for safety
C) Positively-buoyant (?)
The FLSC I've seen was PU foam-body, PBX-cored, and polymer-bound copper powder liner.
I think the Alford strip is an optimized container for using Det-Cord, but the same effect would be afforded by using water-
filled plastic bags, just messier.
Zait June 22nd, 2007, 07:55 AM

Reasons for foam:
A) Non-corrosive
B) Decouples the shock from the water, reducing the distance the divers need to be for safety
C) Positively-buoyant (?)
Close but no. I'll go a bit further in hinting that the MK 142 series contains no metal liner. I'll try to get a picture of some up
today since it will help in fleshing out the answers.
I think the Alford strip is an optimized container for using Det-Cord, but the same effect would be afforded by using water-
filled plastic bags, just messier.
Pretty much dead on there.The problem with the water filled bag is that it takes more water since it is less rigid. The strip is
easier to manipulate and place requiring less time on target and less material to emplace (tape).
Rbick June 22nd, 2007, 11:06 AM

Zait-
Thanks for pointing out the use of DMDNB, forgot about that. To let you know, I am very familiar with the "Munroe Effect". It
was discovered in 1888 when Munroe was testing explosives (nitrocellulose) on metal plates and noticed the manufacturers
name imprinted on the plates after detonation. Yes the addition of the strip does greatly increase the cut, and thats all I have
ever used.
The flex linear charges I have used were not sheathed in Copper or Lead. They were C-4 behind a copper strip. You could
actually take the C-4 out of the foam and mold it or use it for other applications. In my military unit, our flex linear charges
used Copper, not Lead and we used as large as 5200 grain strips. I actually wasn't even aware they had flex linears with pure
RDX or HMX. Seems we've worked with different stuff :p. We used ECT for breaching doors and gates, never under water
though. Thats probably 'cause the Army hates water, we prefer nice dry land. We also made something called a "G" charge
with 5200 grain ECT. It was 12 lbs stuck onto a plywood board in the shape of a G. It was used to take down the side of a
house with the bad guys inside. They were kind of suprised :D
nbk2000 June 22nd, 2007, 01:15 PM

What, no fragmentation? So SEAL's can carry it, slap it onto a ship hull just above the water line, duck under the ship, and pop
up into the hole made by the FLSC?
Zait June 22nd, 2007, 06:22 PM

What, no fragmentation?
No metal = No magnetic signature
Additionally, the foam acts as a buffer to keep water out of the cavity area of the shaped charge. Water and shaped charges
don't mix.
nbk2000 June 24th, 2007, 04:03 AM

US4693181 Linear cutting charge, which is the patent for the ECT, and gives some specs for the flexible copper liner.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > squash granade?
Log in
View Full Version : squash granade?

Few days ago looking at Disco v e r y c h a n n e l a b o u t t a n k d e v e l o p m ent there was a story abo ut this type of granade fired from a
cannon for destruction of tank s. It actually doesn't penetrate armor but blow the pieces of it from outer and inner side of armor
symetrically(?) the way I figured out.
D o y o u g u y s h a v e m ore info on these shells? W ell it seem s that reason for sandwitched armor is m a d e m u c h e a r l i e r t h e n I
previously guessed about :D.
nbk2000 March 7th, 2007, 03:08 PM

HESH (High Explosive Squash Head) is the proper acronym for what you described. ;)
chemdude1999 March 7th, 2007, 06:49 PM

From my research and understanding, HESH rounds have fallen out of favor for a couple reasons: (1) They require a rifled
cannon barrel. The m ajority of today's cannons are sm ooth-bore. (2) The HESH round requires a m ostly hom o g e n e o u s t a r g e t
armor. It transm its the shockwave rather than actual pe netration. Modern tank arm ors are com posite m aterials ofte n with
kevlar linings on the interior. These tend to m itigate the shockwave effect.
Even though they aren't as effective against m odern arm ors, they work well again s t b u n k e r s a n d h a r d e n t a r g e t s .
I cannot find a good schematic of a HESH round. Maybe s o m e o n e h a s a l i n k .
W ikipedia gives a synopsis of the m akeup of HESH rounds:

HESH rounds contain a warhead filled with plastic explosive and a delayed-action base fuse. O n impact the plastic explosive in
the shell spreads out to form a disk on the surface of the arm o u r . T h e b a s e f u s e t h e n d e t o n a t e s t h e e x p l o sive, creating a
shock wave which travels forward through the armour, causing flakes of m etal to spall off the armo ur's inside surface. The
resu lting fragments injure or kill the crew, dam a g e e q u i p m ent, and/or ignite amm unition and fuel. Unlike HEAT am m unition,
HESH shells are not e xplicitly designed t o p e n e t r a t e t h e a r m o u r o f m a i n b a t t l e t a n k s , a l t h o u g h p e r f o r m a n c e d e p e n d s o n t h e
thickness of the target's armo ur plating.
From that de scription, I don't think the possibilities of HESH rounds have been exhausted. It shapes itself to the target before
detonating. One could use such a device to tak e out structural m e m bers from a distance m ore efectively.
This train of thought leads m e to the idea of scaling down the HESH roun d for a .50 BMG or smaller. Using a plastic explosive
that exhibits a reasonably high fluidity, while m aintaining integrity, would b e o p t i m a l f o r a s m a l l g u n . A n y i d e a s ? H o w would
you incorporate the base fuse in a sm all round?

The majority of today's cannons are smooth-bore.
Are you sure about it? AFAIK, sm o o t h b o r e c a n n o n s a r e n o m ore and the reason for why FU T I c a l l s t h e m a s c a n n o n , I b e l i e v e ,
is because English is not his p rimary language. He must actually be referring to artillery weapons. Regards.
nbk2000 March 8th, 2007, 02:08 PM

The majority of m o d e r n t a n k c a n n o n a r e s m o o t h - b o r e d .
This is because they're firing SABOT ro u n d s , a n d t h e p e netrator can't spin, otherwise it destabilizes and losses all penetratio n
power.
The russians are the last major power that still uses rifled cannon barrels for the tanks, AFAIK.
chemdude1999 March 8th, 2007, 02:20 PM

Thanks, NBK. The Brits were the the last western power to switch to smooth bores, I think. Not completely sure, though. The
R u s s i a n s a r e , of course, still using much older equipment.
They use the SABO T r o u n d s b e c a u s e t h e y p e n e t r a t e c o m posite armor far better. As a side note to that, the US m ilitary uses
SABOT rounds in their .50 cal hard target rifles. But I believe they m u s t u s e a m u ch slower rifling, like 1:15 inches. I'm g o i n g
o f f m y m e m ory from the .50 Caliber Hard Target Interdiction Course.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Bridgeless Igniters
Log in
View Full Version : Bridgeless Igniters
209 April 1st, 2007, 12:12 AM

I have made 3 different batches of these damn bridgeless igniters and not a single one has w orked. I am using nitrocellulose + graphite on the wire (super thin stuff, w ires
about 3 mm apart). The nitrocellulose is ping pong balls and graphite 100% from the hardware store.
I am using 12 volts and not even a spark, any ideas??
stupid939 April 1st, 2007, 12:40 AM

I take it that you followed brainfever's tutorial. I made them awhile ago, but I could not get them to work very reliably when ignited with a 6V, 12V, or any other battery.
Aw hile ago I decided to make a detonator from a camera flash system. I stripped it dow n until the only thing that it did w as charge the capacitor, and then I added a button that
discharges it through the w ire when pressed. I use a 500 ft spool of 22 gauge wire and I think that it would w ork with an even longer w ire. This is a lot like commercial
electronic detonators, but it is cheap and takes longer to charge.
I mainly followed brainfever's tutorial, but after the graphite/NC mixture and the BP/NC mixture, I always coat it in NC to make sure it doesn't react with anything.
What source of power are you using and what is the amperage?
209 April 1st, 2007, 12:56 PM

Hmmm, the camera capacitor sounds like a good idea. I was wondering if I could somehow hook up a couple capacitors in series so they would discharge at the same time to
get power to igniters from long distances(something like a Marx generator).
Yep, I am using Brainfevers method and none have worked. When I was testing them I was using a 12V power source (cell phone charger) and no luck, I think I will try the
camera thing, it w ill provide much more energy. Its too bad I can't get nichrome.
blazter April 1st, 2007, 01:59 PM

You'd want to hook up the capacitors in parallel to make them both discharge at once. Series would do little as the current would have to flow through each capacitor. Also, keep
it mind it should take twice as long to charge them, but if you were to use a more powerful low voltage source (multiple AA batteries) it should even out.
mike16 April 1st, 2007, 02:24 PM

Here is a simple and easy method to make an electronic ignition system:
It is very reliable, and if you use very thin nichrome w ire, it has virtually no lag time, using a 9-volt battery and 3 metre of cable, they ignite immediately.
This type was I originally made for use w ith my electronically fired modified air rifle.
Anyway here are the pics and guide to make one:
Cut a 1 inch length of 0.1mm nichrome w ire and 2, 3 inch lengths of thin copper wire:
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s300/kpppppk/Picture068.jpg
The copper wire used was the thin individual w ires taken out of ordinary electric cables.
Take the strip of nichrome wire, and roll it around a very thin drill bit or a thin piece of wire, to form a loop:
Now it has a loop in it as show n here:

Now carefully pick up the looped nichrome wire, and one of the thin copper w ires and tw ist one end of the copper wire around one of the legs of the nichrome w ire like this:
Now do the same for the other leg of the nichrome wire, make sure the copper wire is w rapped around the legs tight.
When both copper wires are tightly wrapped around the nichrome wire, fold the legs down so they are in parallel to the copper w ire and are facing down like this:
Now cut a length of selotape about 15mm shorter than the length of the copper wires, and carefully stick it onto the the igniter, from just below the nichrome loop, dow n the
copper wires, to about 15mm above the end of the w ires, exposing them like this:
Take care to make sure the copper w ires are stuck onto the tape perfectly straight and not touching.
Now fold the selotape in on itself, so that both sticky side are together and the wires are sandwiched in between like this:
You can now trim of any excess selotape and it is ready to use, I thread a piece of guncotton through the loop, and then wire it to my electric cable to my 9v battery and
switch, when I press the switch, the guncotton immediately burns and the nichrome loop glow s red hot.
You can buy nichrome or resistance wire from ebay, or a hobby or crafts store.
wymanthescienceman April 1st, 2007, 09:44 PM

Nichrome w ire ignitors are a pain, I just can't stand spending that much time on something that you must make many of when duty calls. The only benefit I could see w ith using
them is for chaining things together with multiple matches per cue when using a low current pow er source.
Brainfever's bridgeless ignitors have one main problem, they have WAY too much coating on them and the coating is too thick and rough. Through a couple of trials I've gotten
them to w ork just fine. When I saw how he used PATA cable for ignitors I thought it w as brilliant as they can be very small, especially when using 80 conductor cable, the
ignitors are less than 1/16" wide and can fit anywhere.
I found that when making bridgeless ignitors the smaller the amount of conducting mix the better, more mix = more current required to heat it. When using PATA cable,
stripping about 1/16"-1/8" and coating the BARE WIRE ONLY serves the purpose perfectly for 18v (Two 9v batteries) as a power source. They have a resistance of about 20
ohms and ignite damn near instantly. As long as you're only using one match per cue I don't see a problem, but you could use a higher current power source for multiple
matches.
When making them using PPB NC lacquer and graphite, make the mix about the consistency of thin pancake batter, not a thick paste-like mix as on Brainfevers site. Start with
about 20-30ml of vegetable oil consistency NC lacquer and add graphite until it gets to proper thickness. It should form a clean and smooth layer on the wires and have a
resistance of 10-30 ohms depending on type of wire and length of match. For best results use wires with a gap of less than 2mm, and also use a pyrogen whose solvent isn't
acetone as it will destroy the NC based conductor layer, I use a w ater-base pyrogen. Finally coat the head of the match in NC lacquer to moisture proof it, MAKE SURE IT IS
FULLY DRY BEFORE THE NC COAT!!
When fired without pyrogen some of my matches give off a bright white light for a few seconds and melt/burn the w ire insulation due to the low amount of conductor getting
EXTREMELY hot.
If anyone wants pics of a sample match or a vid of a match firing I can try and get that. I may have to make a new batch of conductor mix as it has been sitting for quite
aw hile.
209 April 1st, 2007, 11:50 PM

Wow, I was completly wrong, I was thinking MORE coating on the wires (wasnt thinking of the resistance) I will fallow your method and see how it goes, thanks!
Charles Owlen Picket April 5th, 2007, 12:44 PM

Your question deals w ith the methodology for building Bridgeless Igniters systems. Please see US patent 3320104. It may just be the best design for the "tw in lead-wire" dip
process.
This system deals with the concept from a standpoint of development of the utilization of resistive conductive material that forms the necessary "bridge" via dipping in a slurry.
To make this material the patent is perhaps one of the best as it was adopted by a European munitions manufacturer for further study. Contained therein was the follow ing:
Graphite as the conductive material (approx: 2-3%)

Barium nitrate the carrier agent (approx 6-7%
Lead styphnate as the main body ignition material (approx remainder)
What makes this concept function is the design of electrical resistance forming heat of course. The basic stumbling block for many is that very concept. Therefore when a slurry
is designed an Ohm/Voltage meter is a great boon to test the degree of resistance found within the span of the two lead wires. This may vary from 0.5 ohms to as many as 10
ohms depending on the format of energy transmitted to the igniter (cap discharge or straight battery / generator, i.e. "hellbox").
The patent contains 3 examples, utilized for differing applications. barium sulfate & aluminum oxide w as substituted for nitrate for carriers depending on burn rate enhancers or
reducers, etc.
I did not know if I should include the patent per se' in that this is my first post & did not want to clutter what may have been in an FTP. But I am assuming that most know how
to access US Patents. This was approved in 1967 in Germany. The US approval process was completed as this w as designed for an international firm.
nbk2000 April 6th, 2007, 04:51 AM

If you give us the patent number, we can find it, regardless of country of issue.

Thank you, I feel on a bit of more solid footing now. Therefore I w ould like to offer a bit of background for those who have had trouble with this in the past and may not
perceive the foundation of the patent.
The reason for a carrier agent is an important one. The carrier agent allow s the conductive material to be premixed prior to in the introduction of the base ignited material. The
patent offers specific steps of construction which must be adhered to. This then can be formulated to a more customized dynamic depending upon the needs of the
manufacturer.
Prior to the mix of the ignited material (lead styphnate) the carrier and the conductive agent are mixed with more safety. They are mixed much more completely than would be
possible if the whole of the ingredients were mixed at the same time (i.e. safety issues, etc). The "w hetting" of the ingredients are via acetone or other highly evaporative
material which simply holds the materials on the tip if the leads prior to any outside sealant.
Uniformity is maintained by this process. What's more the need for a binder material (NC) is lessened as it would be utilized for an outside coating only and this would not
compromise the conductive matrix.
This basic concept may be altered to the manufacturer's needs. The substitution of a deflagerant for a primary HE may be utilized for alternative uses obviously.
What the patent proposes is a manufacturing process -not necessarily a specific use. The necessity for the conductive material to be very throughly mixed is the point of the
invention. The problem of individual conductive particulate matter maintaining contact with itself and not being compromised by non-conductive areas or air pockets has arisen in
many attempts at this type of bridge-less igniter. What's more, resistance is offered by the carrier and this coupled w ith the direct conductive material (graphite) provides the
foundation for heat, etc.
I honestly hope I was not overly verbose. How ever the thrust of this concept is subtle and I w anted to be clear in the idiosyncrasies of it's manufacture for those who had
trouble in the past.

Ok, I found the follow ing website again (I lost all of my bookmarks) and I basically follow his method for making electric igniters.
http://ww w.jamesyawn.com/ignitors/bridgewire/index.html
I used fine copper wire for awhile, like he did, but they required the wattage to be too high and they took too long to make. I then just decided to use his method, but instead
of copper w ire, I use bridgeless graphite igniters instead. They work great with a disposable camera flash system as my detonator, and I can light stuff from 500 ft. aw ay.
209 April 10th, 2007, 07:58 PM

Good link. Into favourites.:)
I think I may just have to give his igniter methods a shot. I have nothing better that will work. I read it a couple times over and they do require a fair bit of current.
At the moment my detonater is based on an idea from instructables (http://www .instructables.com/id/EH6Q99985NEPA8L6YC/).
Mine has undergone some minor changes. The casing is a piece of 1.5" diameter PVC pipe with two endcaps, all the wiring is inside, and mine uses 18V instead of 12V. The
power supply is inside the detonater.
I may try to buy nichrome for Firefox or Skylighter but after United Nuclear got hit up for selling Clorates and Perchlorates I have gotten real causious of buying stuff online,
They could be watched, this is sure not a time to have to cops show up:( .
evilgecko April 11th, 2007, 03:31 AM

I've found the one strand "hook up" w ire to work the best when making bridgeless ignitors. If some graphites are giving you worries, try the "carbon" from carbon welding (or
gouging) rods, available from welding suppliers. They are the rods which are half coated with a layer of copper. That grinded up in a mortar and pestle should w ork.
The ratio of dissolved acetone/ping pong ball to graphite is important. Basically you w ant to integrate as much graphite into the mixture as you can without it going crumbly.
Using 2-6g of pingpong ball per 100mL of acetone works, then add as much graphite untill it gets very thick.
Tw isted pair of hookup wire w ith 0.5mm exposed at the end and make sure they are as close as possible (less resistance, more current). Dip and then revolve them in your
hand for a few seconds so they don't drip. Don't dip them too deep, just so that the exposed copper ends are covered.
Cover with BP/pingpong ball laquer, and they should work fine of 12V. I made ones w hich could fit through 3mm fuse holes easily.
209 April 18th, 2007, 10:01 PM

There isn't really any sence in starting a new thread w hile this topic is still fairly recent so I thought I would add something that I just encountered an few hours ago.
My previous attempt at e-matches was fairly futile so I thought I would step it up a notch. I got my hands on some 38 gauge nichrome, ditched the stupid bridgeless idea and
tried the nichrome with my 18 volt detonater. I have no idea what happend but it didn't w ork :confused: after all the effort getting the nichcrome, you bet I was pissed :mad: !!
I checked all the connections and still nothing happend. Then I got the idea that maybe the pow er (18V) was to high and low ered it to 12V, amazing, the nichrome turned bright
red in less than a second.
I'm curious, w hy did it need a low er voltage, or maybe w as the amperage to high?? I can't imagine it too high coming from two 9V batteries.
Any ideas?

Could one of the components in the device have been dysfunctional (the pot?)?
It w ould seem that simply hooking the 38 nichrome to the poles of tw o 9v batteries w ould heat it....obviously current w ould be the determinate of the heat of a resistance wire;
voltage w ould almost be a "non-issue".
209 April 19th, 2007, 01:04 PM

Last night I set off a huge AN/FO charge w ith the detonater (dont worry, we were miles and miles aw ay from anything:) ) I unw ound about 700 feet of wire, but I was still
using my 12 volt detonater. I thought there w as now way that 12V w ould find its way through approx 700 feet of w ire, but then came the explosion when I pushed the button,
It w orked!:) :) yaaayyyy!
I love the sound of AN detonating verses AP, the AP has more of a "crack" noise.
James April 20th, 2007, 05:14 PM

209, the only thing I can think of is that your 9v batteries, might not be cranking out the watts to heat up your NiCr wire. as for the 12v setup are you using something like a
lantern battery or a pile of 1.5 cells
209 April 21st, 2007, 01:44 AM

I dunno what the problem is but I am at my wits end with this fucking detonator!!!!!:mad: :mad:. It seems like ever force on earth is trying to stop me from getting it to w ork.
One minute the wire heats, then it doesnt, then it does again. What the hell???!!! I dont see how a bunch of 1.5 cells are any different that a 9V cell with a couple 1.5 cells
soldered togeather.
When the 1.5's are connected togeather will it make an amperage difference??
evilgecko April 21st, 2007, 03:33 AM

Your experiencing what is known as internal voltage drop. All cells (voltage producing unit) have a internal resistance. 9V batteries have a large internal resistance (about 1
Ohm) compared to 1.5V batteries (0.1 Ohm) or even lead-acid batteries (0.020 Ohm). When you start to draw current the voltage you read at the terminals is actually lower
than the value with no current (EMF) because of this internal resistance. Say you ignitor setup has a resistance of 1 Ohm(it'll proberly be much higher than that). That means
that only half the actual EMF is being lost over the ignitor and the other half across internal resistance. Thus only half the power (P= VI), (and in turn current) is being lost in the
ignitor and current is small compared to a battery with a smaller internal resistance.
You can think of it this way. If a 9V battery was to have no internal resistance, if you shorted out the battery terminals w ith a bit of thick wire of resistance 0.0001 Ohm, by
Ohms law you would get a huge current of 90000A. This would surely vaporise the wire instanly and surrounding objects. But if you short a 9V battery you don't so get as much
as a spark. This is because the internal resistance limits the current.
Internal resistance depends on the chemical composition of the cell and also its size. The bigger battery for the same voltage normally means less internal resistance.
Voltage does matter. Although its current w hich heats the wire (the proper term for power is P=I2R not P=IV), current depends on voltage (V=IR). A higher voltage means a
higher current. You should try a 12V lead acid battery like a car battery or alarm battery. They should work much better than 1.5V cells in series.
nbk2000 April 21st, 2007, 04:57 AM

If you do your testing at the same place all the time, you can leave a junked law nmower there, and use the pull-start as a blasting generator.
Just hook up your wires to the magneto and give it a yank. As long as the magneto works, you'll get one hell of a zap. :)
Bacon46 April 21st, 2007, 03:33 PM

I use a 12V-5Ah sealed lead acid battery I snatched out of an old emergency lighting devise. The kind you see over doors in commercial and industrial buildings.
It fires my igniters every time. They're small, lightweight, and go a long time without needing to be charged. If you can't "Find" one in an emergency exit light, they sell them
new at Radio Shack or any number of other lighting or electronics stores for around $30.00 USD.
I charge mine with a 12V - 1.5A w all transformer.
nbk2000 April 21st, 2007, 07:40 PM

I would strongly encourage everyone to NOT steal things like fire extinguisher, emergency light batteries, smoke detectors, or any other kind of life-safety devices or detectors.
The life you save may be your ow n.
The only exception to the above w ould be the deliberate targeting for destruction of a building or person.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Dissolved Corn Starch As Explosive Confinement?
Log in
View Full Version : Dissolved Corn Starch As Explosive Confinement?

I have been experimenting with different ways of exploding pipe bombs (approx 70g BP in sealed metal pipe) lately and are wondering if dissolved cornstarch would have the
interesting effect of confining the pipe bomb?
Say immerse the pipe bomb in the middle of a 4L paint can filled with a saturated solution of cornstarch in water. I'm sure everyone knows how corn starch solution transforms
into a malleble solid under pressure. Related to the experiment, would the cornstarch solidfy as the pipe bomb explodes from BP overpressure and reinforce the explosion by
extra confinement?
Also, after the pressure as ripped the can to shreds and propelled the cornstarch through the air, would the cornstarch penetrate close objects like a solid or would it just splash
against them like a liquid?
DONMAN April 15th, 2007, 03:58 AM

Wow, that is an interesting concept.... I dont think anyone could say for sure, why don't you test it out for us. Put the bomb in the paint can with the cornstarch. Then set up 4
pieces of plywood 1cm thick around the bomb about 4 ft away and let it rip. Then observe if any of the starch penetrated the plywood.

I discovered that I'll need to buy some more corn starch (aka corn flour in NZ). I dissolved all I had, but it wasn't enough to fill the can. Since corn starch can go off if left in
solution I added a small amount of bleach (sodium hypochlorite) to the solution hoping to sav for when I buy some more. To my dissapointment the solution lost much of its
soldifying effect! I'm trying to figure out if a chemical reaction took place (unlikely since their was only a very small amount of bleach added), or the change was because the
extra ions changed the structure.
I'll be able to get alot more cornstarch in the next few days and test it.
nbk2000 April 15th, 2007, 06:01 AM

I remember someone long ago tested an idea similiar to this one, using pipes.
He plugged both ends of a pipe with cornstarch putty and ignited the filler (BP, I think), and the pipe shattered.
So, yes, cornstarch putty will solidify sufficiently under shock to allow BP to rupture a pipe, but that's INSIDE the pipe, not outside.
If it was outside, I'd expect the starch to solidify and greatly reduce the speed of the pipe fragments, before blowing apart into a gooey mess.
Only a test can tell for sure. :)
From my own test using Silly Putty (http://roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=5293), I know that it'll 'shatter' like a solid, but the pieces are too soft to penetrate a
plastic soda bottle at contact range.
hereno April 15th, 2007, 07:05 AM

The previous topic on cornstarch tamping: http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=1726
Alexires April 15th, 2007, 11:29 PM

I have thought about this idea before and I am I two differing beliefs.
When a pipe bomb "detonates" all that is happening is that the pipe cracks in one place and releases the pressure. If this was surrounded in cornstarch/water I'm fairly sure you
would have chunks of cornstarch flying around. Whether these would be effective in hurting someone depends. See, it will never be the same as having nails/bb's/or some kind
of metal, but maybe as a stun round....
As the shock wave travels through the cornstarch/water media it stress fractures the cornstarch. The more brisant the "explosive" then the greater the stress, thus the smaller
the pieces thrown off. The smaller the pieces, the greater the air drag thus less range.
Either you will have some kind of cornstarch goo thrower or a kind of stun contraption that throws out very painful bits of goop...

I tested it today. Dissolved 600g of corn starch into as little water possible and placed a small 50g BP pipe bomb in the middle of it. It sounded muffled and large strands of
goop could be seen flying through the air.
But it also did make a few nice holes in the boxes surrounding the tin. Take in mind it was only 50g of BP at work here.
This is the video (sound and picture out of sync).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loS7GG4yYng
This is the damage it did to the box which was about half a meter away. Notcie the very small pinhole punchmarks and the big huge gaping holes.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/evilgecko_nz/DSCF0988.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/evilgecko_nz/DSCF0986.jpg
Khalnath April 21st, 2007, 05:53 PM

I'm curious to see whether there's a difference in the effectiveness of the corn starch as a tamper depending on whether you use a low explosive like BP or a high explosive. It
seems to me that since the corn starch solution gets "harder" the more shock you apply, its effectiveness would increase with increasing brisance.
I'm afraid I don't really see the point in this if you're going to use a pipe bomb... (then again, I'm a clueless newbie) but on the other hand, I can definitely see applications if
you're using a cast charge (of something not water soluble of course), or something wrapped in a light waterproof covering like wax paper.
I'd also be interested to see if corn starch would make a difference in an Alford Strip (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=6273). If so, sounds like a cheap
and easy way to improve effectiveness.
I hate living in the city. I want to test this stuff myself. :(
mizzu April 23rd, 2007, 10:43 PM

Corn starch shaped charge kit for horizontal use.
1) 12" X 12" cardboard box
2) 6" Metal Funnel
3) 5 lbs cornstarch
4) 2 qts water
5) 12" roll of aluminum foil
6) explosive & detonator of choice
7) Tennis ball sized piece of clay or wax
Unpack contents near objective. Line box with tin foil. Insert detonator & fuse, wires etc. upturned funnel. Close small end with wax, Pack explosive into large end of funnel.
turn box on it's side & insert large end of funnel to flushfit to bottom, seal around mating edge of funnel & box with wax, place box over objective, sprinkle 2lbs of cornstarch
into box, add water & mix, add more water & remaining cornstarch in equal amounts until mixture has consistency of heavy slurry. Back off detonate & enjoy. Funnel
reinforced by cornstarch will focus blast in tight circle. Nice thing about this package is you carry it in & have nothing to carry out except your goal.
KrIsPy April 24th, 2007, 11:58 AM

I'm curious to see whether there's a difference in the effectiveness of the corn starch as a tamper depending on whether you use a low explosive like BP or a high explosive. It
seems to me that since the corn starch solution gets "harder" the more shock you apply, its effectiveness would increase with increasing brisance.
:(
I Recently tested a corn starch end cap with APAN. It was the end of a pen casing with one end sealed normally and the other with a corn starch end cap.
I didn't get a full det, probably because of the small size (critical diameter issues for not powdered enough AN), but the end cap of corn starch was effective.
On the other hand, HE gasses expand at supersonic speeds, and therefore, the pen casing probably would burst before it reached the end where the corn starch was serving as
an end cap. After all, HE 's don't need cnfinement because of this.
I'll upload the video soon. You can't see much but it may help.
- One last question: (Kind of OT): I understand you dont NEED confinement for HE 's, but from personal testing with lower VoD and briscance explosives like APAN, I have
usually found that confinement in metal pipe tends to increase the destructive power against soft targets (like mud). Is it true that confinement helps? I researched this and red
some patents and other article, but they were either too broad or didn't simply said HE don't need confinement.
nbk2000 April 24th, 2007, 07:48 PM

UTFSE would find relevant threads to post your OT question in. Please do so in the future.
evilgecko April 25th, 2007, 07:30 PM

A problem with a shaped charge with cornstarch reinforcment is that you'd need huge amounts of powdered cornstarch. I found this out when I was dissolving corn starch
before. 600g of cornstarch in water at sloppy slurry state was able to fit it a cat-food tin. Can't remeber the exact volume of the cat-food tin but it was small.
KrIsPy April 27th, 2007, 08:14 PM

UTFSE would find relevant threads to post your OT question in. Please do so in the future.
My bad NBK. I searched and I found a quote from an experienced member :D
"Confinement of any charge improves efficiency and reduces the weight of explosive needed to perform the same work." -NBK I assume this is more for LE's than HE's
because LE's don't detonate, but I'll keep confining my smaller charges, because I always see power increases.
Anyway, I uploaded a video from a little while back of APAN in a pen casing with a corn starch end cap. I think the casing may have shattered before the APAN near the end
cap detonated, but it seemed to work... It was an incomplete detonation though.
Go HERE (http://rapidshare.com/files/28284641/ANAP_pen_casing_cornstarch.mpg.html) to see it, if you want.
nbk2000 April 27th, 2007, 09:41 PM

LE's benefit the most from confinement, but even HE's get a boost, unless you're going for pure blast effect, in which case confinement is counterproductive by using energy
from the blast to break the casing.
Confinement matters most when you're trying to get the explosive to do directional work, such as EFP or SC, since the case prevents the gases from the explosion from
venting into the atmosphere before it has a chance to work upon the SC/EFP cone/platter.
There is a point of diminshing returns, where more confinement doesn't increase effectiveness, and that is determined by experimentation.
KrIsPy April 27th, 2007, 10:41 PM

Wow. Thank you. That was explained extremely well.
I figured it had to do with expanding gases for HE's and I have found that metal confinement for weaker high explosives (if you consider them HE's) like APAN, AP or ANFO are
especially benefited in terms of destructive power, partially, I'm sure, due to the huge amounts of gases released in all three of these explosives.
To try to get this back on topic (sorry I led it astray), if confinement benefits HE's, and considering the fact that pipes are very convenient for confining charges, but end caps
are a pain in the ass to get, do you think that corn starch/water end caps would be a cheap and effective solution?
LE explosives have been tested in this use, and I attempted to test a weak HE, but without great results. I think this really has potential. I'll try it again as soon as possible
(maybe with PA or ETN or something more brisant.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Testing th e Minim u m Detonation
Diameter of Liquid Ex plosives
Log in
View Full Version : Testing the Minimum Detonation Diameter of Liquid Explosives
nbk2000 April 21st, 2007, 02:53 PM

I had the idea of that, rather than using tubes as is currently done, and doing m ulitple shots, why not use a plastic or high-
d e n s i t y f o a m plate with notches of varying widths cut into it?
The plastic plate would be layed on an alum inu m or lead plate of suitable thickness to act as a witness plate, and the central
cavity filled with the liquid exp losive to be tested.
A cover plate is laid o n top, with the detonator placed centrally to the main cham ber.
U p o n d e t o n a tion, the shockwave will radiate out into every side chamber, but only those o f sufficient width (diam eter) to
sustain the detonatin front would have a line cut in the bottom witness plate.
Or so the theory goes.
T h e d e p t h o f t h e p l a t e , a n d t h e n u m ber and size of the side-cham bers that could be used in any one plate, would have to be
determ i n e d b y e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n .
James April 21st, 2007, 07:31 PM

Hm m, I had the silly thought that you might be able to use two witness plates on either side of said foam. you would connect
the two sides using a hole all the way through the foam.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > g o o d p l a n s for detonater? (not
connected to previous post)
Log in
View Full Version : good plans for detonater? (not connected to previous post)
209 April 24th, 2007, 10:45 PM

h t t p : / / g o d l o v e s m e a t . c o m /spa tulatzar/wireless_detonator/ - though I usu ally wouldn't post a sim ple link about a detonater, this
one particula rly intrested me for one special reason.
Most m e m bers of the forum u se a detonator that is con nected to the charge by m e a n s o f a c o r d . I h a v e h a v e s e e n a f e w p o sts
regarding wireless detonators but the dont have any solid foundation. Th is particular detonator is a wireless one tha t follows a
special code from a k ey pad to avoid the charge being set off early by ra dio wave s o r o t h e r s . M a y b e t h e b e g i n n i n g s o f a g o o d
piece of equipment?
PS- take a look around the website, some intresting stuff, the dildo thing was ahhh..... intresting :D :D :D

Ah yes, the Tzar site. I lost my bookm arks when I reinstalled windows, so I didn't know how to make a dildo. Thanks for
reminding me.
He is an interesting g uy (I guess that describes him). I have only used his method of extracting lithium fro m a battery, and
believe m e , i t i s n o t a s e a s y a s h e m a kes it look, but it is still fun.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Baseline Tests
Log in
View Full Version : Baseline Tests
dbooksta May 8th, 2007, 01:33 AM

We need a suite of benchmark tests that can be setup by amateur chemists to determine the performance of explosives. You may see an explosion, but was it a detonation or
just deflagration? How efficient w as the reaction?
Rather than just confirming w hich chemicals go BOOM, and how, I would like to compare the maximum effects people are observing with specific compounds, densities, and
detonators. If we build a common baseline of observations w e can all draw more useful conclusions from our experiments.
I am not experienced enough to propose a set of benchmarks that w ould be useful for all explosives we contemplate here, but trying to create testbeds that w ould be w idely
accessible I would throw out the following ideas:
1. Plate Denting Test -- Rest charge on plate and detonate to see how big a hole it makes. Suggest using 1" MDF resting on 2x4's on 4 corners, instead of the traditional metal
plate?
2. Rodman Penetration Test -- Explosive-backed piston drives hardened penetrator into soft target to see how far it goes. Suggest using 3 layers of 2x12 softw ood against four
1/2" spikes resting on hard ground.
3. Ballistic Mortar Test -- Charge mounted under heavy projectile to see how high it blows. Not sure the best way to run this.
4. Ballistic Pendulum Test -- See how far charge can push a heavy w eight with plugged lateral hole. Supposedly best measure of "heave." Is this one useful in the context of the
others?
5. Fragmentation Test -- See how many / how small pieces are created by the confined charge. Suggest putting 1" schedule 40 steel pipe in 5 gallon bucket of water to trap
fragments.
6. Hess/Trauzl Lead Block Compression/Expansion Tests. Not sure how easy it w ould be to find consistent and appropriate lead specimens. Besides, Trauzl is known to be
inappropriate for aluminized compounds.
If people start posting results in terms of such standardized tests w e can learn just how good our chemistry and devices are.
Kleng May 8th, 2007, 01:20 PM

Very hard to do these kind of test. You can surely run them for your own, because you then use the same metal for all your metal plates, the same pressure for pressing the
charge, and you use the same detonator. Remember, small differences in the charge, can make a big difference in the result. Just think of how you place the charge upon the
softwood.
If this test is to be run, we all need to use exactly the same things. Of course, if you can make a test of a explosive were all these things are included, you've done very w ell.
I guess I can also take part in such a test. Anyway, film it is very important.
sirthomasthegreat May 8th, 2007, 04:04 PM

I would suggest that a earth test be done. Dig a 1' deep hole, plant charge and cover it. Measure depth and width of crater. How ever shaping the charge would give different
effects. So benchmarking a charge isn't a good idea but benchmarking the explosion velocities of the materials would be good.
A good demolitionist usually never uses the same charge more that once as the situation and need changes. For example you wouldn't use a coffee pot charge to take dow n a
door but it makes an excellent road charge.
++ ++++ ++=
And how variable is dirt around the world, or even five feet over from your last test hole? NBK
dbooksta May 8th, 2007, 05:16 PM

Right, we should start with ways of benchmarking just the explosives and basic detonators, w ithout getting into nuances of charge geometry. I imagine most of us beginners are
more concerned with confirming efficient detonation before moving to specific applications.
One variable of interest will certainly be the detonators.
The other variable being the explosive should be easy to standardize based on w eight and volume.
To simplify matters we could stick to tests with charges in 1" and 2" diameter PVC or steel pipe, which we can find at any hardw are store.
So someone may come back and say: "I packed 100 grams of 95/5 Ammonal into 2" length of 1"-diameter PVC -- i.e., 4g/cc density. I shot it with a 150gr .308 FMJ bullet
(chronographed 3000fps) and got an explosion. It was sitting vertically on 1" thick elevated MDF and left a clean 4" hole. Here's a video."
Now, if someone else comes back and says, "I detonated the same charge with a #6 cap and got a 12" hole in the MDF" then we know the bullet didn't give a complete
detonation, or else there w as something w rong w ith the chemicals.
As Kleng noted, getting metal plates is hard enough -- much less standardized ones w e could share. That's w hy I was suggesting we try MDF -- which should be both very
uniform and w idely available -- for a plate test.
The crater test would be a good measure of heave if standardized earth were used -- say, dry 30-mesh sand (again easy to acquire).

NBK you raise a very good point. A standard must be set. However it is very hard to standardize everything over the internet. So we must determine standards. I w ould say that
we use ratio standards, like energy (in joules) per gram and the like. So you could easily decide that a certain type is better for your application than the other because they
give the same amount of Punch, but you need 1kg of one and 30g of the other. You will also need to create standards for each type of device. For example you wouldn't w ant
to do a crater test on thermite. I don't know. All I'm saying is that a lot, and I mean a lot needs to be determined before we start standardizing. I also suggest that one person
does the standardizing as you and I may have different techniques for making and detonating.
TreverSlyFox May 8th, 2007, 09:48 PM

Maybe I'm missing something here, but exactly what is going to be accomplished with these "Standardized Standards" of testing? None of the explosives w e "Imagine" to make
have the same source of chemicals, except maybe for AP.
Since many of the chemicals we use are extracted from OTC sources there is no "Quality Control" of the chemicals themselves. Since w e aren't using the same source and
quality each makers product w ill be a little different so there is no way to reproduce w hat one testing source finds to be good. Nor may two different "batches" by the same
maker test out the same.
Since your talking about a testing procedure that w ill take some time and effort to standardize and produce. With all the "unknow ns" will the information gained be useful in a
direct way that makes the project worth the effort?

Don't quote w hole posts! NBK
My point exactly. It w ould be too hard. I have acces to labratory grade chemicals and could possibly standarize w ith the best of the best. Soon here I am probably going to try
some TACN and thermite.
Chris The Great May 8th, 2007, 11:11 PM

The tests would give a good benchmark on what one can expect from such improvised explosives, vs a commercial product. This could also tell you exactly how powerful
whatever you made is in real life, and not just in a book. Somebody just needs to make a batch of military grade TNT (not an involved task if one has the proper equipment
and chemicals) for the benchmark, and then fire it for each of the tests 3-5 times to get a good result.
While we couldn't remove ALL error from the tests, and those performing them w ould need to invest some time and effort to ensure that they are standardized, I'm sure w e
could get quite close if we're careful with exactly w hat is used for the test "target" (w hatever it may be) and the detonators. Fragmentation tests, mortar tests and sand tests
could easily be done by amatuers, plate tests would be a bit more complicated as thick metal plates of consistant quality are usually not available to us.
And besides, if you read a procedure for a new mixture or unexplored explosive and right there w as "sand test: 85% TNT, mortar test: 110% TNT" you'd have a FAR better
idea of the capability than just some educated guess (educated it may be, but it is still a guess).
I'll think about it a bit and possibly have some better ideas on how this could be practical.
nbk2000 May 8th, 2007, 11:17 PM

I would assume that properly purified OTC explosives made by different people around the world, would be close enough in performance that any variation would disappear into
the error margin of the testing equipment the typical Forumite could make.
If you have access to streak cameras and FO break timers, than yeah, explosive purity to 99.999% would matter, but not with a lead plate made from tire weights.

Exactly -- as an amateur I'd be happy with measures that are only accurate to tw o significant figures, just so I have an idea when something goes BOOM whether it achieved a
detonation (instead of deflagration), and w hether the reaction was efficient and complete. Moreover before a first test one might have some idea of the expected performance
(and required safety measures).
The ideal would be if, as Chris suggests, somebody w ith TNT and industrial detonators runs the same tests and gives us TNT benchmarks. Then anyone who has used the tests
can readily compare against all of the academic and commercial literature.
(Note also that if chemical purity is a big consideration in performance then this would also be a good way of discovering that.)
nbk2000 May 10th, 2007, 05:02 AM

One thing I've often noticed is people experimenting w ith small charges of an explosive, and then asking whether or not the resulting hole in the ground was from a full or
partial detonation of the main charge, or the result of the detonator alone.
Well...if you make two identical charges, one using the live HE, and another with a similar detonator, but loaded with an inert simulant instead of HE, then a simple comparison
of the two results would reveal if the live charge was a complete/partial/dud. :)
For liquid HE simulants, water or antifreeze comes to mind. Solids would have to simulate the physical properties and density to be adequate substitutes.
Microtek May 10th, 2007, 06:02 AM

I think that we should agree on some easily made, widely available benchmarking compound such as w ell w ashed EGDN. Then each tester chooses a set of tests, for instance a
plate dent test for brisance and a Trauzl test for power. EGDN is then run through each of these tests to give a certain figure which is then that testers benchmark. When that
tester then produces another explosive, he can run it through the same tests to give a value relative to EGDN. This way, the tests do not need to be identical from one tester to
the next, only the EGDN does.
The trick would be to decide on an explosive that every serious experimenter could make in adequate purity. Also, the benchmark explosive would need to be tested at the
same density from tester to tester which would favour liquid explosives.
nbk2000 May 10th, 2007, 06:57 AM

Liquid explosives have merit for uniformity of density and cross-section, but then you have the matter of isomers and various states of nitration.
NG has mono/di/tri-nitro state, and EGDN can be a mono-nitrate.
I'd go with PLX, or other NM-based liquid explosive.
Almost everyone can buy nitromethane as R/C fuel and purify it by steam distillation, or synth it in small quantities. Sensitizer could be Picric Acid, as that's easily made in
sufficient purity.
Kleng May 10th, 2007, 08:17 AM

Some sort of Nitromethane explosive could be tried, but also an explosive that is so common.
Think about a nitrated sugar like Erythritol Tetranitrate, Xyliton Pentanitrate or Sorbitol Hexanitrate? All of these sugars are possible to obtain for everyone, and the synthesis of
the explosive isn't that hard.

Some nutjob tried #2 from my initial suggestions using 25 grams of 70/30 KClO4/Al flash powder, and the video shows this may not be very effective (http://
s188.photobucket.com/albums/z209/dbooksta/?action=view&current=Flash.flv):
- The MDF on top was unharmed (but for blast marks).

- The two 2x12 softwood layers underneath fractured along their grain -- apparently the MDF is flexible enough to transmit a shockw ave without breaking itself.
- The platform was driven only a few millimeters onto the 3/8" spikes on which it was set.
But at least it was tried...
dbooksta June 1st, 2007, 06:12 PM

These may not be good for baselining, but if the question is just whether an explosion was detonation or deflagration I came across two good tests while re-reading the classics:
1. Microtek suggests packing the explosive into a loop of hose, igniting one end, and looking for a larger impact at the opposite end where the wavefronts w ould collide if it
were detonating (http://w ww.roguesci.org/theforum/show post.php?p=6676&postcount=60).
2. Others suggested just firing the sample on top of rocks or concrete. LE's can definitely crack rocks, but detonating HE should shatter/pulverize it. Hopefully the difference will
be obvious; I'll see if I can track down and share some experimental results.
nbk2000 June 1st, 2007, 06:57 PM

What you saw in your flash experiment is the effect of a low explosive, in that it pushes, rather than shatters, like high explosives do.
Guerilla June 1st, 2007, 08:41 PM

dbooksta, KClO4/Al as such is known not to detonate but seemingly a shock front in the gas phase can form, provided the aluminium particles are fine and reactive enough to
ignite from the heat generated by the rapid compression of air. The propagation velocity is roughly 1000m/s anyway, which is in the range typical for fuel-air explosions. This
would also explain why flash explodes more violently when loosely packed. It would be interesting to fire some charges under vacuum to see how they would compare..
In any case the peak pressures are so small that I doubt one would get readable results in those tests with flash. Anyways I like this idea of creating some sort of own
measuring standards among RS members. Maybe we can gather a small group for a few simple lead block tests soon, just to see how close we can get to each others' figures..

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Hard Drive Destruction Test (w/
video)
Log in
View Full Version : Hard Drive Destruction Test (w/ video)
project June 22nd, 2007, 02:40 AM

Call me paranoid, but I am experimenting with Fool-Proof methods to destroy my sensitive data should the need arise.
Attempt #1: put a blackpowder/Mg charge inside my hard drive and see if I can shatter the platters.
Video: http://tramchase.com/blog/hard-drive-detonator-001
This attempt was unsuccessful, but some more designs are in the works -- want to try various explosives as well as chemical,
electrical, and magnetic, most of which I've found on this here forum!
Further research up at http://tramchase.com/projects/hard-drive-detonator -- any and all feedback appreciated.
Cindor June 24th, 2007, 05:06 PM

I think thermite is the best choice to destroy a hard drive.
It produces lots of heat being able to disable you HD and there is no need of an explosion or detonation.
sbovisjb1 June 24th, 2007, 10:42 PM

Encrypt it with PGP. Then get magnets and run it over the disk. Then pack the thermite around it and melt the harddrive. Best
thing to do is use PGP.
Cindor June 25th, 2007, 02:34 AM

sbovisjb1 you just give an idea:
put inside the computer an electric magnet, to active it when needed and thermite to finish the job

Thermite is legal is it not, meaning you don't need a fedgov license to use it? If you deny the storm troopers their prize (all
the delicious evidence they think is on your HD) they will get angry (throw a tantrum) and slap extra charges on you like illegal
posession of explosives. If you don't use explosives, they can't very well charge you with anything. If you are not extremely
careful with the thermite you could end up burning your house down. They might charge you with attempted murder if criminals
break in to steal your data and get singed in the process (if those criminals turn out to be fedgov stormtroopers).
What about a chemical treatment? What chemical would attack the surface of the platter? Would a chemical even be able to
penetrate to the platter (if it is sealed etc)? Would data destruction be accomplished in a short enough time frame? I think the
new gaming Raptor drive uses a transparent window over the platter. If the drive with sensitive information were stored in an
external enclosure, you could rig a simple puncture system to pierce the glass, and drop the drive into a container of
chemicals. The question is what chemical will dissolve a platter, and how long does it take?
Hirudinea June 25th, 2007, 03:10 PM

Just a thought, but if destorying a hard drive is so difficult, why not get rid of the hard drive, if you build a raid system using
IDE to CF adapters, you could have 40-50 gigs of storage to keep your "sensitive" data (sure its not a huge ammount of
storage but if you don't have a lot of video or pics it should do.)
Then when the police come knocking you yank out your CF cards, run them through a credit card shredder and dump the chips
into a vat of strong acid. If your files are encrypted this should make recovering them a real pain in the ass, if they an be
recovered at all, and of course no fire or explosion, just a a nasty smelling goo. :D
NoltaiR July 23rd, 2007, 05:04 PM

While this is obviously a ridiculous thread posted by a supernoob, I am pleased that the wonderful invention of Thermite was
mentioned.
So easy to make and so incredibly powerful. It would certainly do the job of destroying data... then again it's known for
melting through concrete.
Gunjack July 24th, 2007, 06:32 PM

I heard about a way to wreck a hard drive by writing a program to bypass the maximum rpm and get it to go faster so it gets
damaged by the high speeds.
It would be very easy to keep things ready for when it is needed and it can be used in seconds.
All that you would need is a program already resident on the hard drive.
Has anybody got more info on that?
LibertyOrDeath July 25th, 2007, 01:49 PM

Here are a few thoughts:
If your data is both secret AND important, then you'll want to have it backed up at all times. Obviously that presents a
difficulty. An automatic destruction system should probably be capable of destroying both a main drive and a backup drive
simultaneously.
If a hard drive is formatted/deleted or physically damaged and the federal pigs want the data that was on it, they have some
pretty sophisticated methods at their disposal. To my knowledge, the primary tool used is magnetic force microscopy (MFM), a
method which can scan the surface of a drive (or even just a fragment of it) and produce a picture of the bits.
First of all, merely deleting the data will certainly not work, as hard drive heads get ever-so-slightly misaligned each time a bit
at a certain location is written or erased. Thus, when a bit is deleted by the head, a trace of it is generally left behind at the
track edge. I've seen MFM images of this myself. Recovery of information from track edges is said to be very difficult, but why
take a chance?
Encrypting the data is a good idea, but even after the data is encrypted it may also be left behind in unencrypted form at the
track edges. Also, there's a chance that Big Brother secretly has the ability to break encryption methods available to us. Who
knows what algorithms they've discovered and are keeping under wraps?
Because of these considerations, I would not trust explosives to physically destroy my hard drive if there were anything illegal
on it. Fragments may remain that are large enough to be read by MFM.
Thermite would definitely do the trick, but it would also likely burn down your house unless your computer is on the concrete
floor of a basement.
What about a chemical treatment? What chemical would attack the surface of the platter? Would a chemical even be able to
penetrate to the platter (if it is sealed etc)? Would data destruction be accomplished in a short enough time frame? I think the
new gaming Raptor drive uses a transparent window over the platter. If the drive with sensitive information were stored in an
external enclosure, you could rig a simple puncture system to pierce the glass, and drop the drive into a container of
chemicals. The question is what chemical will dissolve a platter, and how long does it take?This idea sounds promising, but
perhaps a sealed glass containing the chemical rather than the drive would be preferable? That would prevent evaporation of
the chemical bath and possible premature harm to internal computer components from vapors prior to use of the destruction
method.
Maybe the most straightforward way of using a chemical attack would be to have quick-release hard drives with exposed
platters (or maybe just covered with easily-removable plastic wrap to keep out dust) and a sealed vat of an appropriate
chemical standing by. Upon an emergency, the drives would be yanked out by hand, the plastic wrap ripped off, and the drives
immediately dumped into the vat.
As to which chemical would be good for etching the platter surface, there's a Wikipedia article on platter construction that
mentions some interesting things:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk_platters
Platters are typically made using an aluminium or glass substrate. In disk manufacturing, a thin coating is deposited on both
sides of the substrate, mostly by a vacuum deposition process called magnetron sputtering. The coating has a complex
layered structure consisting of various metallic (mostly non-magnetic) alloys as underlayers optimized control of
crystallographic orientation and grain size of the actual magnetic media layer on top of them, i.e. the film storing the bits of
information. On top of it a protective carbon-based overcoat is deposited in the same sputtering process. In post-processing a
nanometer thin polymeric lubricant layer is deposited on top of the sputtered structure by dipping the disk into a solvent
solution...
I'm not a chemist, but I wonder if finding a chemical that can rapidly etch the polymeric lubricant, the carbon-based overcoat,
and then the magnetic layer might be a problem. Others more knowledgeable than I am about such things can comment on
that.
nbk2000 July 26th, 2007, 03:18 AM

If the drives were in removable drive bays, you could pull them out, drop the drive cartridges into a big clay pot filled with
thermite with a cardboard box buried in it (so the drives are below the level of the thermite, and light it up.
The thermite turns into molten iron, but doesn't drain out, turning the drives a into glass slag.
The important thing is to have enough thermite to completely submerge the drives once it's turned into molten iron. This way,
there's NO part of the platter that isn't below the surface of the iron, possibly escaping total destruction.
Oh, and a cover to keep the flame from burning down the house. :p
There's a manufacturer of hard drives that have clear plastic covers so you can see the platters moving.
ChippedHammer July 26th, 2007, 10:06 AM

Thats if you get enough time to rip it open and ignite the thermite, if your going to get busted they do it quickly (eg, kick
down the door and point guns at you).
The best thing to do would be to have a quantity of thermite located above the hard drive with a missile switch on the front of
the PC leading to some sort of ignitor. It would take 2 seconds to flick and if your getting your door kicked down, potential
house fires are the least of your worries :)
Charles Owlen Picket July 26th, 2007, 12:16 PM

Thats if you get enough time to rip it open and ignite the thermite, if your going to get busted they do it quickly (eg, kick
down the door and point guns at you).
That is the whole issue (IMO)....how much time do you have? If you have a few seconds that's one issue, a few minutes; quite
another. Physical destruction via a hammer or shooting the drive to perforate it will generally make the material unrecoverable
as the platter needs to be flat and functional. The suggestion of a solenoid type of mechanism to start in motion a destructive
process via an external button appears to be a good one!
Skean Dhu July 27th, 2007, 05:58 PM

The entire storage premise of a Hard disk is magnetic signals, So in theory all one would have to do is heat the platters above
their curie point for a few seconds and all of the information would be destroyed as would the functionality of the disk.
Following that line of thought it would be possible to modify the cover so that a microwave oven magnetron was aimed at the
platters and once given the right signal it would activate. This signal could be from either a keystroke combination or pressure
switches linked to either the front door of the building the computer was in or the door to the room so when (presumably) your
door gets kicked in the HDD gets fragged without your action. So even if they bust in while you are not present there is no
damning evidence.
With the progression of HDDs the platters may not be constructed out of conductive materials for much longer, but presumably
the storage media coating will still be, and will react similar to a CD/DVD in a microwave and in 5 seconds the entire disc is
destroyed.
Another possible hurdle to overcome would be on desktop hard disks there are multiple platters, this could act as shielding for
the microwaves and thus only the top platter would be destroyed. This may not actually occur but if it does it would be a fairly
easy fix. To the best of my knowledge laptop HDDs are single platters due to size constraints, so I would imagine that you
could easily mount one inside of a desktop without too much hassle. Or by mounting the magnetron in an end-on orientation
so that the radiation is bounced between the platters.

Just a quick note about legal issues. What they can do is hit you with a motion that states that you intentionally destroyed
data once you found out about the raid. The court is then instructed to draw a negative inference about whatever you
destroyed. In other words, you destroyed it for a reason.
Now, they can't convict on this inference, but it's enough to make it very difficult for your defense attorney to get you off. If it's
a bench trial (No jury) then it won't be as hard. Judges tend to be influenced by cold, hard, facts more than by their gut
feelings and emotions. Juries, on the other hand, are swayed more by personal appeals, the poor crying mother, the negative
inference and smear mongering that you see in most court-rooms.
Also, as far as I know, Thermite isn't controlled by the Feds. It's used in some welding applications, and other industrial
situations. On the other hand, what you do with the Thermite is likely to get you in trouble. Also, large flames with sparks are
a really great way to get already twitchy police to shoot you. It doesn't take a lot to get cops with guns, who are performing a
highly dangerous operation (entering a possible hostile building), to feel that their lives are in danger.
User32 August 5th, 2007, 11:55 AM

Thermite would be a quick way to destroy the platers but having a system setup that is up to that task requires testing.
The best possible way to keep your sensitive data safe is to cover your tracks well enough not to put yourself in a situation
where you'd have to deal with your doors being knocked down.
For some people that would prove harder than just melting the hard drives.
Hirudinea August 7th, 2007, 09:44 PM

If your comfortable with your security setup where you are (you know where all the entrances and exits in your house are,
nobody can get in at any time without your knowledge) then use your "Work" computer as a terminal and make your main
computer with all your data a server.
Set up your server in the same way NBK suggested...
into a big clay pot filled with thermite
The important thing is to have enough thermite to completely submerge the drives once it's turned into molten iron. This way,
there's NO part of the platter that isn't below the surface of the iron, possibly escaping total destruction.
Connect your Terminal/Server via an internal network, keep your server in a locked, booby-trapped room, and have a
"destruct" switch located by your computer.
The cops come, you hit the destruct switch, the server goes up like Mona Loua. The cops catch you in the crapper, they say
"Where's the fucking server!" you say "In the Attic, sir!" (alway be nice to the police), they open the attic door, trigger the
booby-trap, the thermite goes off and, well the cops get to glory in your fine data control methods. :cool:
miech August 8th, 2007, 07:43 PM

If you use a server, you will need to configure your computer in a way it doesn't store temporary data on it's hard drive. All the
temporary files in the RAM will be cleared anyway, since those need a constant supply of electricity to store data.
Maybe using a so called thin client is a good idea. This is something like a graphics card with mouse, keyboard and ethernet
interfaces. The actual computer is somewhere else, and the thin client only shows what you are doing, without storing data. If
you use a server in i.e. Poland or Hungary, it will be very difficult for the cops to get permission to access your files, since the
server isn't on US property. The only disadvantages are that you will need some IT skills to get it working properly and your
'PC' is running quite slow.
beirut November 18th, 2007, 04:09 PM

According to wikipedia:
The write head magnetizes a magnetic region by generating a strong local magnetic field nearby.
You could build a solenoid around the hard drive and run a high frequency alternating current through it. Assuming you have a
strong enough current you would flash the hard drive with the magnetic field created inside the solenoid, and the metal
components of the disc would begin to heat and melt by the skin effect. Essentially, you would be surrounding the drive with a
small scale induction furnace.
FireBomb November 19th, 2007, 11:38 AM

Hey has anyone thought of using solid state storage. There are several newer drives along with a ton getting ready to some
out soon that use extremely low latency solid state memory. Most of the ones you see now are in the 18 to 30 gig range but
for most of us thats more than enough. All you would need to do is either if you have the time just delete the data. Since data
stored in solid state memory is stored differently than magnetically. It's just a shit ton of transistors the only state they can be
in is either on or off. So rather than removing the file flag from the file table like on a standard hard drive. It just turns all the
transistors either on or off there is so ghost image left over once it's changed it is impossible to find out what state it was in
before the change.
Another method would be to short out the transistors with a electrical charge again not hard to do. Then the only thing left
would be a paperweight. All the transistors would have shorted out and for lack of a better word exploded.
While PGP encryption is very nice it is not totally secure all you have to do is take the encrypted data to a server farm which
isn't too hard to do and run some nice software and even with a 2048 bit hex key they can decrypt all the data almost in real
time if they have enough computers running in parallel. Believe me if the feds think you have something really bad they will
build a server farm if they have to all they need is to call up someone like dell and order 1000 of their cheapest machines and
there you go.
Oh also for the most part unless you have a marks generator not too hard to build it is very difficult to generate a strong
enough elector magnetic field to destroy the data on a hard drive. So far the best method of destruction I would use is just
plain HEAT. For the most part hard drive platters are made out of Aluminium or in some cases Glass or Ceramic coated with a
ferrite compound. All needed to do is remove this compound which is electrostatic plating.
beirut November 19th, 2007, 01:52 PM

...Oh also for the most part unless you have a marks generator not too hard to build it is very difficult to generate a strong
enough elector magnetic field to destroy the data on a hard drive. So far the best method of destruction I would use is just
plain HEAT. For the most part hard drive platters are made out of Aluminium or in some cases Glass or Ceramic coated with a
ferrite compound. All needed to do is remove this compound which is electrostatic plating.
I was thinking about using an explosively pumped flux compression generator. For most of us here on the forum it would be a
much cheaper alternative to a Marx generator.
Edit: This would make it an EMP, rather than a conduction heater, but it would be just as effective in destroying the data.
Imagination November 20th, 2007, 02:15 PM

You could build a solenoid around the hard drive and run a high frequency alternating current through it.
You are forgetting something beirut...does Faraday cage mean something to you? Well, if you are to destroy the hdd with HF
AC, then it will not work, maybe the hdd's surface will warm up a bit, but your data will be readable, smelly from the smoke,
but readable. :) You have to use a not-really so strong electromagnet, with direct current, maybe change the polarity in 1-2
seconds...
You see, there is no way to shield the magnetic field, if there would be such a thing, we wouldnt use gas in the cars by now...
And actually the data is stored/edited/removed by (electro)magnetic field...so they will dance as you sing...
Toggle November 22nd, 2007, 03:09 AM

Just a quick note about legal issues. What they can do is hit you with a motion that states that you intentionally destroyed
data once you found out about the raid. ...
If you are worried about the legal fallout, just keep all sensitive data on an encrypted partition. You don't need to worry about
getting to a switch in time and you can't be charged with anything for not divulging your "private documents".
There are programs to wipe data by overwriting a file instead of just marking it as deleted. These should work fine against
cops, but not the Feds. Governments use a tunneling electron microscope to examine the hard drive and recover data.
Imagination November 22nd, 2007, 04:52 PM

Anyway, if we're talking about software(the less fun) security, then truecrypt would be my choice... it creates a temporary drive
which you can close by one keystroke... and it supports AES triple DES and all the good stuff with explanations, and the best
thing about it is, that it's free...
rayman December 2nd, 2007, 05:01 PM

most of the methods here are great at slowing the gov down at getting the data, the only real way to way to STOP them from
getting your data is to totaly destroy the data, the melting of the hdd is the only option with merit IMHO
the only real question to me at this time is the amount of thermite needed to melt the drive totaly, and how to protect the
surronding house from the effects of heat
How its set off is not as important eather, there are hundreds ways to start the reaction from cell phone activation to motion
detection, what alot of people forget is that the police can shut off power to a house as they start there raid so you will not
have time to activate your wipe drive programs that may or may not work,
thermite with several ways to ignite it sounds like the way to go to remove your data from existence
again IMHO
Imagination December 3rd, 2007, 09:18 AM

Well, if the encrypting which the government uses to secure data from unauthorized individuals is not fare enough for you, and
if you doubt the "slowly" alternating magnetic field too(maybe you think the bits will just get weaker but readable in a highly
sensitive machine that the feds probably have, and probably you're right)....
Well, then the thermite should do the trick... I would suggest a steel tank(min. 2cm thick walls), which I'd place the HDD in...
Then I'd use "glass cotton"(or whatever you call it there, it's in the sides of the refrigerator...really good thermal isolator, no
chance to melt glass with a small amount of thermit...) from outside of the tank, just to be sure mama's carpet wont get hurt
;) This should do as a melting chamber...
Almost forgot, don't touch the glass cotton too much...after a few minutes you'll understand...use gloves...So the last thing
would be a mini-chimney??:) I would suggest steel pipe...maybe I would sink a part of the chimney in water...closer to the
chamber the better...
I suppose you don't need too much of thermite to melt a HDD,as it's mostly from Aluminium, and Al it melts at approx 659
C... And everyone here knows what temperatures can be accomplished with thermite:)... Oh yeah, and I definately wouldn't
cover the HDD with thermite, shortage is one thing, but you have to cool the HDD somehow....so I would put the thermite in a
paper box over the chamber or something like that....
Almost forgot, be a bit negative oxygen balanced, so you dont get too much gas(O2) product... I think 200-300g would do the
job quite well....but if you're interested i can get an old HDD and try it for you :) Maybe take some photos of the "efficiency" :)
Charles Owlen Picket December 3rd, 2007, 10:08 AM

I have been reading this with interest for weeks but I keep thinking that there are but two methods advisable. The first; using
a solenoid type device to physically crush the drive at a switch-level. The other being the use of a RAM drive kept alive via a
UPS; again at switch level speed.
But be that as it may; the issue also of the presence of the person [at the time] need(ed) to destroy the data! If such data
exists, I would count on a "black-bag" job to remove that to begin with. If software encryption is even considered; it better be
pretty strong encryption!
At the time of Phil Zimmerman's original trial (PGP trial) the US government was very confident that it could crack encryption at
the 1024 bit level within a few hours if national security was at stake and computers released from their previous tasks.
Imagine what it can do today (years and years later) ???
cadaver December 3rd, 2007, 07:11 PM

As far as using a solenoid to "crush" the drive, unless the pressure was immense, then the data would remain.
However, if you had the top plate of the crusher filled with thousands of spikes, effectively covering 95% of the area, then you
could destroy the data.
Coating the spikes with a caustic solution on the way through (punch through a plastic bag of caustic gel or even a gelled form
of HCl) should do the trick with no danger of burning your house down.
This would require much less engineering difficulties since the EM need not be so powerful as to crush the platters into
oblivion.
ChippedHammer December 5th, 2007, 06:05 AM

You could always have a vat of HCl or H2SO4 under your drive, It will take the feds kicking down your door a while to figure
that something is up (fumes?) and even then they would be unable to do anything (open computer and fish out the drive is
not something they do).
cadaver December 5th, 2007, 09:11 AM

You could always have a vat of HCl or H2SO4 under your drive,
The problem with these solutions is that of containing the gases until such times as you are ready to destroy your drives. Even
small amounts of HCL or H2SO4 vapor would cause rapid computer destruction due to corrosion.
Sturmgewehr77 March 25th, 2008, 07:34 PM

Here's a little idea I came up with awhile ago. If you have a server with not-so-shareable data, Create a small metal box,
store the precious HDD in it, with whatever components you see fit, I'd probably recommend just essentials, and bury the wire
to your house and pack in a container of thermite predominately above the HDD and cover it up. Feds break in, you flip switch
(or press a remote button), HDD fries underground, and no one is the wiser. If they find it, say it was old and you disposed of
it and buried it. theres no way you could do that at the same time they are watching you and searching the premises. But
there are bugs that I also thought of, voltage drop of wires traveling whatever distance away from the house, AKA components
cannot function properly. And the traces of it being connected to your house. Anyways, just my 2 cents.
Hirudinea June 11th, 2008, 07:39 PM

Here's a link for the ultimate in hard drive destruction, it just takes a while...
http://www.hackaday.com/2008/06/11/drive-slagging/
inkhead June 16th, 2008, 04:24 AM

The idea of burying the hard drive is a very bad one. Especially if it's not SSD. With no air the drive will die shortly. They do
have air holes for a reason, however the heat of running in a box underground will cause read write failures in a matter of
days.
Trust me I've tried it ;-)
Skean Dhu June 22nd, 2008, 02:05 AM

While not expedient, if you have foreknowledge of a raid, if your hard disk is multi platter you can dissassemble it into it's
individual platters and there is no way for the data to ever be read, because once the platters are unorganized there is no way
to re-assemble them in such a way that the reference data for the read/write head is valid.
If you know how to recover data you know how to lose it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyxIG0xsBg
fluoroantimonic June 22nd, 2008, 10:55 PM

In my opinion the best way to be sure you secret data is safe would be to save it in an external HD that is already in the a
crucible surrounded by thermite.
Then a piezoelectric igniter could start the ignition mix even with the power off.
Also it would be good to have some kind of automatic switch that is carefully designed to not go off on accident but still work if
you happen to be out of the house when they raid it. Not sure quite how that would work, but I'm sure it could be done.
And what the hell would someone have that was THAT secret?
iHME September 18th, 2008, 12:12 PM

Apparently Hackaday.com made a small article about this with rather good vids about the process of burning the hdd.
Link to Hack a Day article (http://hackaday.com/2008/09/16/how-to-thermite-based-hard-drive-anti-forensic-destruction/)
Wallybanger November 16th, 2008, 06:40 AM

I'm kinda curious as to why you guys are so concerned about destroying your drives? unless you are keeping photo/video
evidence of illegal activities, or kiddy porn, I would think traces of energetic materials, chemicals and the discussions on here
would be a bigger problem. Here in the Kommunist republic of Canuckistan it's not illegal to have books/information on
energetics but it COULD possibly be used to prove intent.
I'm no HD specialist but so far the big electromagnet sounds like the best idea. Here's a spreadsheet for electromagnet
design. http://www.coolmagnetman.com/coildata.xls I bet you could build a pretty powerful magnet that could be run from the
wall outlet or a UPS.
http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/index.html
Alexires December 1st, 2008, 08:29 PM

Darik's Boot and Nuke.
"Darik's Boot and Nuke ("DBAN") is a self-contained boot disk that securely wipes the hard disks of most computers. DBAN will
automatically and completely delete the contents of any hard disk that it can detect, which makes it an appropriate utility for
bulk or emergency data destruction."
Probably will take too long for the purposes of this thread, but if you were using a small HDD for your OS and wanted to make
sure it was clean, it would be of use.
http://www.dban.org/
DarkWrath December 2nd, 2008, 04:07 AM

I've used it a couple of times and I must agree it does a good job. I suppose the data can be recovered , but not through any
common software method.
The problem with it is the time it takes to wipe a drive. For a 80GB IDE drive it took almost 3 hours. Not exactly everyone's
idea of a quick wipe.
But why bother with that when a tunneling microscope can still read the data? The surface of the platter is extremely sensible
to abrasion and scratching. Even tissue paper pressed over the platter while it's spinning will make the surface unreadable.
It would be simple to design a rig that would insert diamond dust or other abrasive powders through the ventilation hole on
the side of the drive , and if the platters are spinning at top speed it won't take more than a few seconds to render most of
the data unreadable.
Kaydon December 2nd, 2008, 10:42 PM

I don't know. In a recent issue of Popular Science (I believe.. I get both Science and Mechanics) they put a hard drive in water,
oil, dirt and so on and so forth and were still able to recover 95% of the data. Although they said the company that did the
recovering, had it been a person wanting this data back it would've put a $1,200 dent in their wallet.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > DIY ultra-cheap Remote detonator
construction
Log in
View Full Version : DIY ultra-cheap Remote detonator construction
LeshracVNN July 8th, 200 7, 03:13 PM

- Co nnectors
- Ga rland
- Do orbell :)
http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=guwIO qrcR7w
megalomania July 9th, 200 7, 12:16 AM

Thank you for the link, but this thread is in the wrong section. W e have one just for detonators and such.
nbk2000 July 9th, 200 7, 09:42 AM

Oh joy...another n00b who's d iscovered christm as tree lights and a wirele ss doorb ell.
An entirely new, never before discussed discovery. Let's all congratulate him on this amazing invention!
Now I've heard there's a new thing out called USING THE FUC KING SEARCH ENGINE...but that could just be a rumor.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > C ascading optical trigger
discussion
Log in
View Full Version : Cascading optical trigger discussion
ShadowKnows July 16th, 20 07, 02:2 2 AM

I just learned about a fusing system called a cascading optical trigger. Apparently, one of the reasons the Boston cops got so
freaked out by those Lite-Brite pictures is that the Lite-Brite resembles a cascading optical trigger, an electronic fusing system
that is reputedly alm ost im p o s s i b l e t o d e f u s e .
Inform ation on COTs is nearly impossible to find online, but I was able to find a written description which I'll post here for the
b e n e f i t o f f o r u m m e m bers.
--
A Cascading Optical Trigger is a fusing device that uses optical photocells in series/paralle l. As you probably know, an optical
photocell is both a resistor and a capacitor. The signal path is dependent upon which cells are sim ple used a capacitors, and
which are used a actu al flashe s.
In this way, the signa l can be transmitted in m o r e t h a n o n e p a t h , s o m e b y s i m p l e e l e c t r i c a l p a t h , s o m e b y o n e f l a s h t r i g g e r i n g

another, and in som e bases both. So, the result is that it is extrem ely difficult to figure out the sig nal path.
Pulling a photocell ou t of the sequence could reduce the overall capacitance and permit the electrical signal to run unfettered to
the final trigger point. Pull the r i g h t o n e , a n d y o u d e f u s e . T h e p r o b l e m is that with, for instance a dozen, the permu tations
reach the m illions. So, you'd have a one in several m illion chance of pulling the right cell out of the series.
If you had the wiring diagram , it would be a sla mdunk. But, m ost bomb planters don't leave their wiring diagram s with the
device! Now, that would be a bad EOD expert.
This concept was originally developed for small nukes. (Dambusters, bridge burners, etc.) Then, even if they were d etected
b e f o r e t h e y d e t o n a t e d , t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f b e i n g d e f u s e d approaches zero .
--
If you have any m ore informa tion on COTs, feel free to post it in this thread.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > How to stop evil arabic terrorists ?
Log in
View Full Version : How to stop evil arabic terrorists ?
WWII July 27th, 2007, 05:02 PM

I have been thinking of this scenario that I think Americans everywhere should be able to have a good working knowledge of how to stop evil arabic terrorists from carrying out
their evil, satanic terroristic plan.
Here is the scenario:
It is a beautiful day, sunny and perfect day for flying and you are with your wife, your kids boarding the flight, you notice several middle eastern men standing in line at the
last mintune, your alarm goes off in your instincts, ( read, this is not racist, this is survival ) then the plane door shuts ..... :eek:
The plane takes off, drinks are served and one of the arabic bad men goes to the bathroom where he assembles a bomb then puts his jacket on then returns to his seat. As
the stewardess is serving drinks then she approaches the middle eastern men, " Would you like a drink ? " then all of a sudden, he attacks the stewardess .... :mad:
The plane is held hostage by a bomb and terrorists control the plane. It is just a matter of time before the plane is gone along with innocent Americans and the evil, murdering
arabic terrorists. :(
You have some training in hand to hand combat and you fight back viciously. The passengers may or may not help you fight back then finally, you have killed the bomber
somehow, without blowing up the plane. There is no time for SWAT, HRT, the bomb squad and you are with the bomb on the plane with dead terrorists sprawled on the floor.
:confused:
Now, you are staring at the ticking bomb, now which wire do you cut, blue, red etc. I thought of throwing the bomb out the airplane door but the problem is that if thrown out
the door, people down below could get hurt or killed. If flying over water then that is fine but will opening the airplane door cause the plane to lose control etc.
These are all my concerns, very valid concerns and just very scary to put some time aside to think about that scenario, if it became all too real.
I have never really asked these questions and I didn't want the guys on the bomb squad to think I was weird or something like that because I am not and I am ready to do my
American duty to stop these evil terrorists if there is no time for the professionals to come in and stop the bomb.
That is my question and one I think is good for Roguesci so that fellow Americans will have a good working knowledge to stop these evil, murdering, satanic arabic terrorists.
I also think it is every American's duty to learn as much as they can about explosives, bombs, how they work and how to stop them, especially if there is no time for SWAT and
HRT, the bomb squad to come aboard and stop the bomb.
Adminstrators, I think this post should be made a sticky. Please, no hollywood stuff because this is a matter of life and death and this post will help our fellow countrymen to do
our American duty, if this becomes all too real.
hatal July 27th, 2007, 05:25 PM

Oh God, what blinding bursts of insight! You're my f*cking HERO, from now on! Thanks for making me aware of the problem: "evil, murdering, satanic" ragheads with bombs,
on every plane, everywhere...

Oh God, what blinding bursts of insight! You're my f*cking HERO, from now on! Thanks for making me aware of the problem: "evil, murdering, satanic" ragheads with bombs,
on every plane, everywhere...
Hatal, Please show some maturity on this very serious subject.
I did not say ragheads with bombs on every plane, everywhere.
I just presented a scenario and one that I think Americans and free people everywhere should learn how to turn the tables on yes, I said the evil, satanic and murdering arabs,
that if the situation becomes all too true.
Stop being immature and selfish and start to think of another people, because this is a matter of life and death.
Evil, satanic arabs have no respect for human life neither for themselves. They need to be stopped period.
This is what this thread/posts are about, Life and starting to live again.
sbovisjb1 July 27th, 2007, 06:50 PM

Hahahha. I believe you came to the wrong forum. You are supposed to be here. http://www.nsm88forum.com/ Not all Arabs are marauding brutes. I know many who are
civilized and fine. Most groups have their extremest members. In many Muslim counties this view has become popular with the leaders. Not so long ago there were the
Crusades where Europe came and killed everything that wasn't white.
Evil, satanic arabs have no respect for human life neither for themselves. They need to be stopped period.
That is my question and one I think is good for Roguesci so that fellow Americans will have a good working knowledge to stop these evil, murdering, satanic arabic terrorists.
Realize that a lot of people aren't from America and hatal may be from the region you just belittled.
Its a messy situation. Yes I know there are wrongs in the religion and a lot of them are causing harm, but thats not to say that everyone is evil. Now let me show you the
door...

I think you guys are getting the wrong idea here. This has nothing to do with nazism.
Granted, there may be people that are from different regions of the world. I did not realize hatal was from that part of the world.
Neverthless, I still think this is a very good subject worthy of discussion on how to save lives, having alittle of a good working knowledge of how explosives work to turn over
the tables of the terrorists.
The point here, is to save lives, if there is no time for the professionals to come and defuse bombs then somebody has got to stop the bomb and save alots of lives in the
process.
Like I said, This thread/posts are about Life, starting to live again.
209 July 27th, 2007, 08:35 PM

Oh yes. That touchy subject of religeon and ethnic values :rolleyes:. Personally, I am not religeous. I don't believe there is a God, a Jesus or anything of the sort. What made
the timing so ripe for this guy sent from god to earth to appear? We have seen many people throughout history like him, however maybe this guy just made all his crap seem
more real :p. I have too smile when I see people show up at my door with their religeous texts, magazines and so forth. What have we seen that actually points to the fact
that maybe there is some greater existance out there? Seriously!
All we have to say for it is the ramblings of scholars, "wise men" and followers that put togeather a so called "holy book" that said a bunch of irrevelent crap. Hell, they were
probably thinking "heh, someday somewhere and idiot is actually going to believe this shit!"
Well, they have got all those fucked-in-the-head religeous fanatics willing to kill themselves, women and children right under their thumb. Allah said kill white infidels? Shit
man, lets get to it! Do they really have nothing else to do other than fucking their camels?!
It's intresting how people can become so mislead, misdirected and menipulated by what they think to be genuine.....So how can I use this to my advantage?:). As for the
whole terrorist reality.........Bombs really seem to be going off left and right dont they? But it must be remembered that every single second we are being fed faulty and
incorrect information by those who attempt to control us. The chances of being on a flight with a terrorist who has been brainwashed by his fucked over bible is quite slim.
I have never hosted much intrest in a family for dozens of reasons. Not that I would find it to be combersome, but in a way you really become tied down. And a family is some
thing that you (hopefully) will love more than anything in the world. This is something that can be taken or used against you. This is why I am not intrested in a family. At the
moment everything that exists in my life is disposable. Objects, possetions and friends can be thrown out with the trash. A family is something you cannot do this with.
If you were to board a plane with loved ones and sense something is going sideways, leave. If the impulse is strong, dont board the plane in the first place. If you were
trapped aboard with no means of escape, fight like a wild cat. I don't know what means the terrorists would use to detonate the bomb. I dont know if it would be a timer or by
the terrorist themselves. If it was timer, maybe use the terrorist who made the bomb disarm it for you?
I dont know. I have never been in such a situation and hope I never will be, but if I am, I will figure something out.
Shalashaska July 27th, 2007, 08:37 PM

Hatal, Please show some maturity on this very serious subject.
WWII, please show some maturity regarding the rules on this very serious Forum.
This board is "High Explosives." This has nothing to do with explosives, and there is a section where you could have posted this drivel (however ignorant it may be), and that is
called "Issues and Opinions." This thread will certainly be moved, if not closed.
And by the way, you seem to have some type of delusion where the terrorist managed to assemble a full on timed explosive, with fail-safes and all. I'm going to just take a
shortcut, and tell you that's not how it would be.
WWII July 28th, 2007, 02:10 AM

Wow !!!! just about everybody completely missed the point. I also think everybody is taking this the wrong way.
This is not about religion, nazism or any of that stuff etc.
This is about how to defuse a bomb.
I agree, if you feel something is wrong then take your family off the plane but ..... if you have boarded the plane then the middle eastern men get on with a few another
people late for the plane arrival then the airplane door is locked and you are buckled in with your family. Think of that.
You may think that terrorists will not bring a bomb on the plane. All it takes is about 5 to 8 arabic guys carrying insignificant items onto the plane then collect 'em and go to the
bathroom and assemble the bomb there then come out, sit down until it is time to take over the plane then it is up to you to stop these terrorists and cut the bomb off. What
about some sick wacko like Reid with the explosives and the matchboxes in his shoes ? How will you deal with someone who has sold out his country for Al Qaeda and he is on
your flight trying to kill and bomb you ?
I have valid concerns such as if opening the plane door to throw out the bomb, would it cause the plane to go out of control and remember you have hundred of lives at stake.
What if that U.S. Air Marshal is dead then you have to carry out your American duty to stop the terrorists much like the Israelis would have to if they were on El Al and their
security people are dead onboard because of the arabic evil terrorists.
I mean this is the reality of the situation for Americans and for another countries who are on the allied side since 9/11.
You may jerk this off like the asshole that you are but for some of us, Americans and those who want to live. We would like to know how to stop a bomb and this is what this
thread/posts are about.
Has nothing to do with religion or any of that stuff. Has to do with STOPPING EXPLOSIVES and saving lives. If you don't have something good to contribute to this then do not
make any further posts because this is a matter of life and death and people do want to live.
FireBomb July 28th, 2007, 04:02 AM

All I have to say to this is WTF.
First off this is the wrong section of the forum if anything it should be in Issues and Opinions, but still it's SO Freaking stupid it doesn't even deserve to be in the long dead
Water Cooler...
All I have to say to you WWII is I hope you like your HED.
nbk2000 July 28th, 2007, 04:18 AM

End topic, user banned (for a week).

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Your detonation Sites
Log in
View Full Version : Your detonation Sites
totenkov October 8th, 2007, 02:42 AM

So were do you guys set off your stuff?
I am planning a small "bang" for Halloween hehe, MUSHROOM CLOUD!:D But I am a bit nervous on were to do it. The charge is 300 grams of ETN mixed with 100 grams of AN
with a 1 gram AP/SA/HMTD cap. The normal place I set off small charges and conduct tests is in the woods near my house. However I would rather set off the charge on the
field at the school near me.
This presents a slight problem. When I say near me I mean about a 5 minute walk through a neighborhood and then through some woods. I will have my best friend with me
(who I would trust my life with) and I have a spare last block that day :). I intend to have the charge ready (or at least ready to be filled) after school and make the cap
within hours of firing it. Wait till about 10:00-11:00 (no I won't set it off when the kiddies are on recess :D) and already have the caps and charge brought down and hidden so
all I have to take down is the detonator. detonate the charge and run.
I live in a populated area, my problem isn't people being hurt, just can I expect a follow up from the cops? After all, there will be a good sized crater and a big bang that most
certainly many people will hear. I guess after its been successfully detonated, roll up the wire, stuff it in my pack and book it into the safety of the woods.
I am in quite a residential area. I have never brought attention to myself having to do with explosives and no one knows who I am, I just don't want to jeprodise the hobby
that has been my love for the last 5 years.
Any ideas or warnings?
nbk2000 October 8th, 2007, 04:00 AM

Why not set it on a timer and take off? Come back in a week and examine the crater after any cops would have come and gone.
cyf531 October 8th, 2007, 05:25 AM

I do most of my larger detonations in the middle of the nevada desert, here is a recent one of 1kg of peroxide watergel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvNoUcOJak0
Turns out peroxide watergel is a pretty weak explosive and a waste of Al :(
fiknet October 8th, 2007, 07:10 AM

300g of pure ETN + 100g of AN :eek:
That will sound like a freakin' artillery shell has landed in your neighborhood.
My advice is set it off at a later time (I find 2 or 3:00 AM works best for my area ) and also run like Jesse Owens within seconds of the blast and get the hell out of there.
ChippedHammer October 8th, 2007, 09:59 AM

Why not set it on a timer and take off? Come back in a week and examine the crater after any cops would have come and gone.
I don't like timers for the simple fact that when you set it and get the hell out of there that gives people time to walk over and find it, and either get themselves killed or call
the police.
Where as if you are setting it off while you are physically present you can make sure nobody is around.
Charles Owlen Picket October 8th, 2007, 10:25 AM

A very deep well or even a deep hole in the earth preserves safety, diminishes sound, and allows the preservation of any testing materials (also evidence however). A hole can
be very safe.
Sound travels best in arid conditions; rain diminishes sound to a greater degree. Sound travels in canyons and areas where there are building or mountains. It may even be
amplified.
Forests diminish sound IF the forest is dense with heavy trees. But the terrain has more impact than the trees will. The action of the energetic material on an object; actually
doing work, like breaking soil or a stone does take up some of the reflected sound. The detonation under water yield the least report, soil the next, and within a hole the next
provided the top of the hole has a method to seal it and the blast act upon it. Like a cover of heavy steel - weighted down.
festergrump October 8th, 2007, 11:51 AM

Honestly, Totenkov? I'd leave school property well enough alone. Doing anything illegal there is sure to get you in a whole deeper dimension of trouble should you get caught.
Explosives + school property = terrorism in the eyes of todays world.
It's not like you stand to gain any additional pleasure by detonating something there, but you will probably gain alot more attention, so why risk additional trouble if it can be
avoided? Just doesn't make sense to me.
Also, I disagree with leaving the device set on a timer. Someone wanders too close to the blast zone and it could escalate into something alot more heinous than the prank
you'd planned.
totenkov October 8th, 2007, 12:26 PM

The timer isn't all that practical for this situation because we want to be there when it goes off. maybe I should make the charge smaller. There is a small beach near me
(slightly further than the school) that maybe a viable option.
Fester is right. Setting it off at the school is pretty foolish. The beach or in some woods somewhere I guess is the best spot to do it. Damn I am envious of people who live in
the country!
High Density October 8th, 2007, 04:26 PM

The beach will be the perfect place for the blast, You can easily dig a hole near the water, Place the charge in, Shovel some sand over it, Walk away and push the button.
After the blast the flood washes the evidence away.
My detonation site is a good bunch of water 2,5 kilometers from nearby houses.
Underwater detonation is my favorite, Because it reduces sound to zero over that range.
(Size does matter in this case)
And you can see huge water jets from it.

If your site isn't a school playground, a timer is fine.
How likely is it that someone will come across your device in the woods at 2AM?
If it's that likely to happen, you need to drive further out. ;)
Hinckleyforpresident October 9th, 2007, 01:13 AM

I dunno nbk...... The idea of the device exploding no matter what at a set time terrifies me. Just imagine repercussions of a device killing or maiming a odd hiker or camper. It
would really really suck, what with all the police investigating it. Also (if you got away with the mistake), you could never use the area again.
That's why I always am present at my dets. Just in case some dumbass hiker goes "Hey, whats that? Guess I'll find out by picking it up!".
I'd rather keep the chances of disaster to the absolute minimum.
nbk2000 October 9th, 2007, 01:26 AM

You should be practicing forensically-sterile assembly techniques anyways.
That way, even if some hiker trips over your device at 2AM in the morning, you don't have to worry about it, as you won't be on the scene, and you've left nothing traceable
to you either. :)
What's better? You getting caught with a live (or exploded) device, or not?
Zer4tul October 9th, 2007, 09:21 PM

You should be practicing forensically-sterile assembly techniques anyways.
That way, even if some hiker trips over your device at 2AM in the morning, you don't have to worry about it, as you won't be on the scene, and you've left nothing traceable
to you either. :)
What's better? You getting caught with a live (or exploded) device, or not?
Does this thread qualify as traceable? :rolleyes:

Not if you disappear without a trace. :)
Seriously, if a person is involved in some highly illegal activities, they shouldn't be talking about it on the internet.
mike16 October 12th, 2007, 12:51 PM

Fiknet is right, maybe you don't realise how loud 300g of ETN will be?
The largest charge I've set off is 35ml (50g) of pure NG in a bottle, and that was loud, it must have been heard at least 2 miles away.
But it is still nice to set of charges at halloween and fireworks night, small bang, small pop, distant crackle...(you press your button)...boom. :)
Vitalis October 20th, 2007, 08:48 AM

Halloween may not be such a good idea for detonating explosives, with all the kids roaming about. The 4th of July (in the U.S.) and New Years eve may be better.
The cops may just dismiss it as a mortar fireworks charge going off.
Of course if you are going large scale, they will be able to tell the difference, but if it is in a remote location and the detonation is complete, they may not be able to find it.
Of course you leave no forensic evidence when you set off your charges?
gillagin780 October 20th, 2007, 10:05 PM

However, if your explosive killed someone you would have to live with the guilt that you killed someone forever and, the hell of paranoia comes with murder.
You proubly won't kill someone though. I would feel pretty safe detonating on sight if there are woods. Whatever you do it sounds like a great experiance.
hatal October 21st, 2007, 05:32 AM

However, if your explosive killed someone you would have to live with the guilt that you killed someone forever and, the hell of paranoia comes with murder.
"Crime and Punishment" style. :rolleyes:
I don't thinks so...
totenkov October 21st, 2007, 07:51 PM

I think I am going to make the charge smaller. PVC with two endcaps I am going to keep, however after seeing the stability of this new batch of ETN I am going to mix it with
AN, just to make it a bit safer maybe a 2:1 ETN:AN does this sound good? I am pretty sure 1 gram of AP should still set it off just fine.
Vitalis October 21st, 2007, 08:11 PM

It will be private property with all sorts of signs posted, so they enter at their own risk...
Hinckleyforpresident October 23rd, 2007, 03:00 AM

I'm also doing a large ETN right soon. I have 100 grams of ETN/NG/NM ready. And hopefully I can make another 100 or so before tomorrow afternoon, which is when I do it.
I just found a new location, it's over 1.3 miles from any houses, roads, etc.:D.
totenkov October 23rd, 2007, 10:00 PM

Dilute Sulphuric can be stored in plastic, however I wouldn't leave it in there for any extensive period of time. Most plastics are eaten by H2SO4.
Regarding your 20-75 gram AP/AN charge, you bet your ass its going to be loud. I would recommend doing it farther from your house and have somewhere you can escape to
if someone comes snooping around. I do my dets on a field near my house and have dense woods I can hide in if necessary.
Alexires November 4th, 2007, 01:14 AM

Reticman - Make sure you have your carrying container (filled with sand mind you) to carry your charge in, in case it goes off.
Personally, I wouldn't use anything of yours as a target, that is just asking for evidence and stuff.
I would either do it in the pond at night (drown whatever is left maybe) or in the hole. But that close to houses, I would do it at night, definitely.
Otherwise, you might need to go somewhere else..... or not do it at all.... especially if you have a reputation for blowing things up.
Rbick November 4th, 2007, 01:58 PM

I can tell you from experience that that is far too close. I use to set off 50g charges fairly close to my house, which is quite secluded from anyone else. I had the cops show up
at my front door because a neighbor who lives a good 3 kilometers away reported having heard explosions. And she is an elderly citizen who is hard of hearing! I managed to
convince them it was fireworks and showed them my pyrotechnics license. Just think that 50g is about the same amount of explosive in your ordinary hand grenade (I
think...).
Your best bet is to bury it or do underwater dets, if not find a new blasting site. And don't blast too often, people will begin to get suspicious, especially if you have a bad
reputation. :p
Alexires November 5th, 2007, 06:45 AM

One of the better thing about living in a urban environment. While there is (much) more risk, a lot of people around mean that the pigs don't automatically think it is you.
If you don't look the part, people will assume it is someone else. Then again, that is probably the ONLY good thing about living in the city. Everything else sucks.
sobreroHWE November 5th, 2007, 03:10 PM

When living in the deepest trenches of Mudville, and having my car stolen, I had the occasion to contact the pigs to tell them (not like it's their job to care/prevent that type of
shit) Anyway, I was on hold with 911 for 7 minutes before I got an operator.:eek:(not the only time either) After that day I was more than willing to test my luck with "loud
noises", since 7 minutes is plenty of time to get away, or kill the person on the phone and hang up......I digress.
More grams of AP than I can recall were set off by "my friend" in our apartments tennis courts/patio, no swine, ever. One 35g charge in particular made me certain the badge
bandits were on the way, yet......no phone call, no pigs at the door, nothing. I watched "my friend" turn a cinder block into dust with a "small" charge of EGDN(maybe 40g-
50g), the pieces broke some fools car window and set his alarm off.:p NO COPS the entire night.:D
(I should point out the EGDN charge was set off in a field maybe 130yd away from the lot/car. Regardless, all of the noises sounded like, or louder than, gun fire with no
response."
Hinckleyforpresident November 5th, 2007, 10:28 PM

I love being a medium drive from east-buttfuck rural north America. This weekend I shall be setting off 500g ETN/NG/NM :D, and if all goes well I'll catch a deer (so much
food) with it too! It will be done from 500 feet away via a radio detonator. I will be behind something, waiting for a deer to show up (I'll bait the charge) to click the button.
My detsite is 2 miles from any road, house, driveway, etc. The downside is that it's a hour and a half walk through the woods.
totenkov November 5th, 2007, 11:27 PM

HAHAHA :D! You remind me of a thing my friend and I did for many weekends that gave hours of hysterical laughter! 9g of ETN, 7 charges and 7 caps. These make pretty big
bangs, and if your near by, can cause some serious damage as well.
being electronically detonated we had control down to the last second on when the charge went off. Where we live there are tons of crows, these little annoyances were
always stealing your food, or just pissing you off. PAYBACK TIME~!
we hid the charge under some leaves and sprinkled bread all around the charge. Wait till the crow comes and then BAM (dusts off hands :D)! All gone. At least 5 crows must
have fallen victim before we had to go!
We got the idea from a YouTube video were some guy covers himself in a blanket, his friends cover the blanket with sand and then piece of bread, when the seagulls come,he
jumps up and grabs them :)
LibertyOrDeath November 10th, 2007, 10:37 AM

Now, now, totenkov...leave those poor birds alone. :)
Alas, I have yet to find a good detonation site in my area. I have set off a small charge or two in my backyard, even though homes in my neighborhood are less than 50
meters apart. (My latest was 2 g of ETN, which was surprisingly loud.) That may seem foolish, but my neighbors like me and are pretty laid-back, and the occasional loud
noise around here is treated with about as much urgency as a car alarm in a mall parking lot during peak shopping hours. I don't press my luck, but I can get away with this
sort of thing once in a blue moon. No one really knows where the sound came from, anyway. For all they know, it was some kids playing with M-80s.
I'm still at the point where I'm more interested in learning about explosive syntheses and properties than setting off huge charges. Thus, much of my work can be done right in
my basement. Most of my test charges are much less than 1 gram, and my basement is completely underground, but I may try to rig up some sort of sound-absorption system
so I can test somewhat larger charges without having the neighbors think that someone's shooting guns next door.
Eventually I'll find a good place somewhere out in bumfuck to try the big stuff. Damn, I wish I lived on a farm or something. :(
totenkov November 10th, 2007, 02:43 PM

Liberty you sound exactly like me. I get more enjoyment from making the explosive than actually setting it off. I am more interesting in the synthesis of energetic materials
than just making big explosions. There is a large stand of woods behind my house were I often set off charges. In fact I just got in from setting off 15 grams of ETN, I was
doing some tests on the effectiveness of these new caps I have been testing.
Did I ready you correctly that you may be thinking of setting off charges in your basement?! If you are I don't think that is a good idea at all!!

Did I ready you correctly that you may be thinking of setting off charges in your basement?! If you are I don't think that is a good idea at all!!It's not as bad as it sounds. For
one thing, my basement isn't "finished" -- it's more like a garage or warehouse down there. I've already set off stuff in my basement hundreds of times, but rarely anything
larger than a couple hundred milligrams, and usually just a few tens of milligrams. Even these are very loud, but they don't do any damage to anything. (I do have a few small
craters in my concrete floor from hammer tests, though. :o) The main problem is the mess created from having aluminum foil turned into glitter by the detonations and
sprayed all over the place. I have to do a lot of vacuuming.
Anyway, I'll eventually find a suitable place for the big stuff. :)
Charles Owlen Picket November 11th, 2007, 09:30 AM

I do live in a very rural area and one just can't press their luck with things like making seriously loud noise. It's not the neighbors; it's the "others". With concepts like "water",
"sand", and "depth" one can develop the type of sound suppressor for experiments that will work - up to a point.
Some of the better ones I've seen:
A guy digs a hole on his property (say 5 feet and about a foot in diameter) lines the hole with a heavy steel support of similar dimensions and has the soil contact the walls in a
very tight fit. He places a manhole cover (or whatever) as a weight over the top of the hole. A detonation the size of two #8 commercials don't make anymore noise than a
loud cough.
A guy gets a 55 gal drum and places in a closed car-port, fills it with water. Maintains several very heavy steel enclosures made from welding .5" plate and simply dumps the
experiment in the steel boxes; into the water in the drum. NO SOUND at all. A very large slosh of water from two #8 commercial caps taped together.
Fellow lives in a area close to "sand" (river / beach); maintained a secluded area with about 15 tons of sand and digs holes with simple hand tools in same. At the 4-5 ft level,
items placed with a cover of sand make little to no sound. Buried depth assumes great importance but the sand itself, if moist is a better suppressor than when dry.
Ratman2050 January 29th, 2008, 11:38 PM

I live in a slightly rural area. It's in a township away from the actual town, I've got about 10-15 houses in the area and my neighbors are very, well, paranoid/suspicious/gay.
For ex. a bbgun pellet ricochet onto her window and she went through the entire neighborhood to find out.
One good thing is I live on a golf course, so there is a lot of empty space, however, it is open so someone could see me. But behind the golf course is a large forest, and there
is a hunting/gun club and everyday you hear gunshots so I could pull it off fairly easily. I haven't done charges larger than 10g but will try about 30g-50g with my HMTD and
maybe 20g with ETN.
UnderConstruction February 7th, 2008, 06:34 PM

I've already set off stuff in my basement hundreds of times, but rarely anything larger than a couple hundred milligrams, and usually just a few tens of milligrams
I usually know better than to preach to the IFCM (International Confederation of Choral Music), but I hope you balance the chem. explosion first...
Charles Owlen Picket February 8th, 2008, 09:21 AM

There is generally a standard to this beginning with safety. Understand what you are doing and study the thing in both the context of what energy will be released and what
will happen when it's released. With that finished to your satisfaction (that you know the result will be physically safe), you begin the next phase... Contain the sound, heat
(general energy), debris.
You could think of a large firecracker......If you had such a thing to test, it will have a fuse (is it long enough?) and it will yield a certain degree of energy (what would absorb
both the sound and paper tubing?).....You have a large area of soft sand -By moistening that sand it allows for the diminishment of both heat and burning material. By digging
out a 4 foot hole and using an encasement with electrical initiation; you solve these issues.
The result of this thinking in terms of testing was the sand bomb test, IMO. As that test allowed for repeated comparison of the amount of sand displaced in a safe, contained
unit. Making a sand bomb test unit is not difficult at all. But you must maintain a peek weigh level of material to test. I think that's actually a good example, now that I've
written it out (and finished a cup of coffee).

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Speculation on the Teller-U lam
design.
Log in
View Full Version : Speculation on the Teller-Ulam design.
ccw8076 October 23rd , 2007, 02:18 AM

T h e T e l l e r - U l a m d e s i g n i n s h o r t t h e m o d e r n d e sign for a hydrogen bom b.
The actual m ethod of creating , com bin ing, and exploding such a weapon is by nature all kinds of classified, but from the m a n y
bits and pieces of information which have trickled down to the public dom a i n o v e r t h e y e a r s , s e v e r a l s p e c u l a t i o n s c a n b e m a d e
about its true design.
I n b a s i c , a h y d r o g e n b o m b must have A: An initial im plosion of plutonium 235 which releases neutrons.

B: A secondary of ura nium encased Lithium 6 deuteride with a plutonium core
C : A b o m b casing
Now, anyone with eno u g h c o n v e n t i o n a l e x p l o s i v e a n d u r a n i u m c a n m a k e a " U r a n i u m Gun" m o d e l b o m b , b u t t h e s c i e n c e b e h ind

the H-Bom b is quite m ore com p l e x .
For a picture of the design components: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Im a g e : T e l l e r - U l a m _device.pn g
However the actual design is quite contested. Basically, When the initial is im ploded, the plutonium reaches critical m a s s a n d
converts a small portion of itself to pure active energy under Einstein's E=MC ^2 principle.
This results of the plutonium releasing its neutrons which ricochet around the casing until they strike the Deuteride and both
heat and irra diate it causing it to fuse into helium a n d r e l e a s e m e g a t o n s o f e x p l o s i o n e n e r g y .
Sim ple.
The design is different.

I n " I n d e p e n d e n t " r e s e a r c h I h a v e c o m e across a simple but very interesting geometrical principle. In a perfect Ellipse, A Ray
extended out of one focus will with the exception of the axis reflect to the other focus. As well the distance between any
reflected ray from one focus to the oth er is exactly the sam e,
basically: A+B=C+D.
T h i s l e a d s m e to suspect that the Teller Design is actua lly an ellipse instead of The bullet shape others have thought it to be.
Since a nuclear particle, neutron, travels at the same speed as any other neutron, namely at the speed of light, it will travel
the distance between the two focii at the sam e time and strike the other focus simultaneously.
This lends itself to the bomb in three ways. One if the bomb is elliptical, then the Lithium Deuteride m u s t b e e n c a s e d i n a
spherical uranium tamper, which would increase the scope and range of the explo sive energy, and the plutonium n e e d e d f o r
the initial and second ary reactions will be significantly lo wer beca use there are no wasted or "Loose ' electrons. Finally, since
Lithium Deuteride has a short half life, this design would ease up the access to the Deuteride bottle.
However, even m ore recently, I had to re-work m y drawings and plans.

I rem embered Newton's Third law, For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. From this theorem , I think that if
an ellipse is to be achieved at the m o m ent of neutron release, then the top of the ellipse must be shrunken in like a bowling
pin if you will. since the First d e t o n a t i o n o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l e x p l o s i v e s t o i m p l o d e t h e p l u t o n i u m will also act outwardly against
the top of the casing, bending it outwa rds. That action is probably described in an equation which I don't know; I am n o t a n
e x p l o s i v e s g e o m etrician.
Therefore, I speculate that the design consists of a perfect elliptical bottom and a reflexive, inwardly focused top, to create the
world's m ost powerful explosive, the energy which binds the universe together.
This is the fruits of m y research, if anyone has any com ments that they are willing to share that would be g reat. I would LOVE if
s o m eone had the equation by which the casing is pushed outwards. Anyway thanks a lot.
sprocket October 23rd , 2007, 05:34 AM

A few comm ents:
6-LiD is not unstable in a nuclear sense, however it is m oisture and air sensitive. I highly doubt an y o n e c a p a b l e o f b u i l d i n g a
therm onuclear device would fail to construct an airtight container for it, th us it can sit in the device indefinitely.
It is not the action of neutrons, but rather intense heat radiation that initiates the secondary in the device. Heat rad iation,
unlike neutrons, does travel a t the speed of lig ht. The im m e n s e radiation pressure will, however, deform the reflector. You
m ay have a point in that it expands to the optim al shape rather than starting at it.
I think one of the big problem s is crea ting an even pressure distribution along the walls of the secondary. This is probably
required to a chieve high efficiency (instead of just ejecting fusionable m aterial).
megalomania October 23rd , 2 0 0 7 , 1 1 : 3 8 P M

S o m eone has been reading the latest issue of Scientific Am erica n e h ? T h e y h a v e a p i c t u r e o f o n e o f t h e s e i n t h e i s s u e . I d o u b t
the fedgov will tip its hand and display anything truly useful from the graphic, but you never know. The article mentioned they
are using a new type of neutron deflector, but the exact m aterial is classified. It is a "green" m aterial, replacing a toxic metal.
I don't even know why they bother considering it's still filled with plutonium and tritium gas, but that's the governm ent for you.
nbk2000 October 23rd , 2 0 0 7 , 1 1 : 4 7 P M

1 0 0 % o f n u k e s a r o u n d t o d a y a r e u n e x p l o d e d ( t o d a t e ) , a n d u n l e s s W W 3 kicks off, they'll eventua lly have to be disassem b l e d
and disposed off. That's where the 'green' part comes in.
The less toxic crap in the nuke, the less they have to pay out for toxic disposal.
ccw8076 October 24th , 2007, 01:16 AM

Sprocket:
Yes, you are right about the u se of heat energy to initiate the secondary.
I put down neutrons as a basic way of seeing the reaction take place in several steps. I did not put down the section on the
p l a s m a p r e s s u r e s t e p b e c a u s e I a m n e w a n d I t h o u g h t t h a t m y post was a little long as it was. I did not wa nt to be
oste ntatious.
Basically wha t I found was that all the parts in the bom b were held in place by polystyrene foam. The release of neutrons an d
t h e i r p a s s a g e t h r o u g h t h e f o a m heats and plasmizes it which ex p a n d s t o p u t e n o rm o u s p r e s s u r e o n t h e s e condary. This
pressure acts as if the secondary were com p r e s s e d i n t h e s a m e m anner as the initial, and that, com bined with the action of the
plutonium co re of the secondary raises the hea t inside the casing to roughly 10 m illion degrees C elsius enabling lithium -6 to
convert to helium.
nbk2000 October 24th , 2007, 03:45 AM

I read a honeycomb structure of plastic is coated with a metallic neutron absorbent m a t e r i a l t h a t f l a s h e s i n t o p l a s m a u p o n
detonation of the first-stage fission trigger.
T h e h o n e y c o m b runs longways to the expected path of the neutrons, so that they'll ricochet down the length of the narrow
tubes, giving am ple opportunity for the neutrons to inte ract with the absorbent.
ccw8076 October 24th , 2007, 11:19 AM

I know that the H-Bom bs can com e in m u l t i l e f o r m s d e p e n d i n g o n w h a t p u r p o s e i s n e e d e d o u t o f t h e m .
T h e n e u t r o n b o m b i s u s e d t o e j e c t l o o s e n e u t r o n s i n t o t h e a t m o sphere causing m assive radiation dam age, while the

traditional bomb tries to slow the passage of heat and energy to get a greater pe rcentage of the p lutonium to convert, not
unlike using wadding in a black powder rifle.
I think that the filler can differ with the k i n d o f b o m b u s e d .

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > C alculating the VoD's of
compositions
Log in
View Full Version : Calculating the VoD's of compositions
Hinckleyforpresident Novem b e r 2 n d , 2 0 0 7 , 1 2 : 1 5 P M
I a m curious if there is any way to calculate (other than measuring) the approxim a t e V o D o f a n e x p l o s i v e c o m position such
a s A N F O s, blas ting gels , dynam ites, e t c . I a m curious how the change in the V o D b e h a v e s with c h a n g e s i n d e n s i t y , o x y g e n
bala nce, etc.
I d o n t im agine it would jus t b e t h e m e a n V o D . Am I wrong?
Does anybody know of such a form ula or set of form u l a s ? I h a v e f o u n d f o r m ulas for chem ically pure substances, but not
m ixes.
Exothermic Novem b e r 2 n d , 2 0 0 7 , 0 1 : 2 1 P M
I h a v e s e e n a n e q u a t i o n i n m y ' c h e m istry of explosives' book. I will write i t o u t a n d s e e i f y o u c a n m a k e m o r e s e n s e o f i t t h e n
I could.
Vpx = 430(nTd)1/2 + 3500(Px - 1)
Vpx is the velocity of detonation at a given density (Px), n is the num ber of m ole s p e r g r a m o f g a s e o u s p r o d u c t s t h a t
p r o d u c e d d u r i n g d e t o n a t i o n a n d T d i s t h e a p p r o x . t e m p erature of detonation in Kelvin.
Edit:
O k , I h a d a g o a t t h e equation to see if it works. I used propane 1, 2, 3 tryl trinitrate as the explosive to m e a s u r e .
1/227 = 4.4x10-3 m oles -----------> Litres of gas = 4.4 x10-3 x 24,000 ----> Volum e = 1 0 5 . 7 c m 3 o f g a s p r o d u c e d f r o m 1 g o f
N.G detonating.
430(4.4x10-3 x 15.1kJ) /2 + 3500(1.6 - 1)

Vpx= 16384fps (I'm guessing it is in feet per second the book never stated the unit.)
Converted Mps: 1638 4 x 0.3048 = 4994mps
Overall, the calculatio n s e e m ed fairly ok. However the e nd result is a bit disappointing as I know the VOD of N.G. is around
7 7 0 0 m /s.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Safe rem o t e d e t o n a t o r p l a n s
Log in
View Full Version : Safe remote detonator plans
Imagination Novem ber 17th, 2007, 06:56 PM

Dear everybody,
One day I woke up, and thought...

W ouldn't it be nice to have a remote control de tonator, which is safe for ME and for the others as well?
Everyone knows the story, when we are just about to enjoy our "things", then som e o n e s h o w s u p . . .
I h a d s o m e a w f u l n i g h t m a r e s i m aginin g what can happen...
So I decided to m ake a box, which would m a k e m y nightm ares go away.
It is sim ple to build for a little-advanced electronics guy.
The basic idea was to use any kind of walkie-talkie, or sim ply anything, that can transm it a voice signal.
O f c o u r s e , i t h a d t o b e a s s a f e a s p o s s i b l e , I l o v e m y arms...
T h e r e f o r e I e n d e d u p with the safest m ethod on earth, DTMF.
I had two cheap handheld transcievers(443MHz) which work grea t, range over 3 kilom eters.
All i needed was a DT MF dial pad and a box which would do the rest.
The box consists of MT8870 which is a DTMF decoder ch ip, and a MIC R O C H I P P I C 12F675 which is a program m a b l e C M O S
m icrocontroller.
The MT8870 validates the DTMF tones which, as everyone knows, states Dial Tone Multi Frequency, and as output, sets up the
bits to the corresponding DTMF value.
The one digit switch wasn't enough security for m e, so i wrote a little program in C, which can be easily program m e d into the
12F675, that validates a 5 dig i t co de se qu e n ce .
Once the code is right, the m icrocontro ller send s out a signal to the tyristor, which then outputs 9 volts through a fem ale-jack.
There is also a led diode, that indicate s the output status, and of course an on-off switch of the whole box.
Here you will find all you need to m a k e a b o x l i k e t h i s :
http://rapidshare.com /files/70407438/allin1.zip
It contains the schem atics and the board in "eagle", the coolest layout editor, which is in there too,
P C W H which is a PIC C compiler which you can use to compile my source code to fit your n e e d s .
It also contains icprog, which you can use to program th e 12F675 with the hexfile generated by PCW H.
T h e n t h e r e i s o n e m ore thing, a schem atic called JDM programm er that can be used to bu rn the program into the m icrochip.
There is a reason, that i dont append the ready-to-be-burned-hexfile...
It's unreadable, untrustable, m ay be altered, which could have serious consequences...afterall, this whole thing should be
about safety right?
I hope it wont be so difficult for you to accom plish.
If you find any difficulties m a k i n g t h e b o x , l e t m e know, i'll help you through...
O h , a l m ost forgot here is the whole setup:
http://rapidshare.com /files/70430499/ready2go.jpg
Here is the b ox from inside:
http://rapidshare.com /files/70430951/dtm f_switch.jpg
And finally, here's the fuse i u se...a miniature xenon bulb, which I opened at the top with a diamond abrasive stick and filled
with hmtd, then glued the top opening with epoxy.
It looks like it has ne v e r b e e n o p e n e d : )
http://rapidshare.com /files/70430761/fuse.jpg
I just put this into a bigger tube(1-2g of pressed hm td), and voila...
Hope this thread will be useful to you guys...
Erhm , and sorry for m y english...
beirut Novem ber 18th, 2007, 03:24 PM

W ell done. I'll have to test this out tonight.
S p a t u l a T z a r m a d e a s i m ilar design utilizing DTMF passwords. Maybe the two of you should talk ab out perfecting your designs
together.
h t t p : / / g o d l o v e s m e a t . c o m /spa tulatzar/wireless_detonator/

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Interesting Spetsnaz Dem olition
Training
Log in
View Full Version : Interesting Spetsnaz Demolition Training
WWII Novem ber 23rd, 2007, 06:06 AM

An interesting look at what Ru s s k i e s p e c o p s a r e u p t o : : D
http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=WZiv-zjcC8M
Hirudinea Novem ber 23rd, 2007, 04:59 PM

W hat, these guys never heard of chain saws? ;)
v113 February 2nd, 2008, 12:57 PM

It's a primitive dem olition training. First episode - it's a use of "The Key" - an item , d e s i g n e d t o d e s t r o y l o c k o n a w o o d e n
door. And others episodes - just destroing by d ifferent ways (firing or electrical) of a tree with a "plastide"-charge, or a TNT.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > 1944 The Goliath ll R e m o t e -
Controlled Charge Layer
Log in
View Full Version : 1944 The Goliath ll Remote-Controlled Charge Layer
WWII Novem ber 23rd, 2007, 07:24 PM

I h a d b e e n l o o k i n g t h r o u g h t h e o l d W W II film s a n d I c a m e a c r o s s t h i s o n e .
The Nazis certainly were very creative with their research for wartime use.
W e could lea rn something from the Na zis, if the Al Qaeda jihadists try to cause trouble for us in the American streets and the
countryside then we could m ount a small 4x4 with remote contro l a n d s e n d t h e m u n d e r n e a r t h t h o s e j i h a d a s s h o l e s w h o a r e
nothing more than punks that cut people's hea ds off and m urder innocent people behind the mask of and in the nam e of
relig ion. :rolleyes:
So we could borrow a Nazi wartim e W W II tactic and really cause the Al Q aeda alots of trouble, interrupt their transportation
needs with their Toyota trucks or anything these jihad bearded stench stinking assholes are riding. :D
http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=ex7gIlZmEFY

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Modified American hand grenades ?
Log in
View Full Version : Modified American hand grenades ?
WWII November 28th, 2007, 01:46 AM

While I despise the muslims and their terrorist tactics.
I came across this video clip which was a real eye-opener on what the muslims are doing to the israelis.
I thought the part where they are modifying American grenades to be more powerful.
I thought it would be good to turn the tables against the muslims with these modified hand grenades.
Only problem I see, these grenades are so powerful that they could shatter both the arabic terrorist and the American throwing the hand grenade so how strong can a grenade be built before it becomes too
dangerous to throw at close range ?
This video clip is alittle long so please forgive me, this is the concise version but it is still too long so if you have approximately 20 minutes. You can watch this video clip, keep watching for the part where
American grenades are made.
The video clip is also a real eye opener into the mind, the mentality of an islamic muslim terrorist. :eek:
Memri Video Clip #1188 Broadcast: July 4, 2006
Title of Video: Hamas 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades - Training and Ideology (Concise Version)
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1188.htm

Fascinating video. The Palestinian freedom fighters seem to have made enviable progress in the art and science of improvised munitions. Those hand grenades looked downright professional, though I imagine
reliability suffers when manufacturing under oppressive guerrilla conditions. In any event, I wish those so-called "terrorists" all the best in their struggle against Jewish-supremacist tyranny and the savage
brutality (http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0%2C%2C2196019%2C00.html) that marks the occupation of their land.
Only problem I see, these grenades are so powerful that they could shatter both the arabic terrorist and the American throwing the hand grenade so how strong can a grenade be built before it becomes too
dangerous to throw at close range?Of course there's such a thing as a grenade that's too powerful and too heavy, but exactly what that means depends on the circumstances in which the grenade is used. For
example, a frag grenade is obviously much more dangerous to the thrower when not thrown from behind good cover.
For a grenade that relies primarily (or completely) on blast overpressure to cause casualties, it's a bit easier to answer the question (this has been briefly discussed elsewhere).
As I was once informed by NBK on another thread, a 10-fold increase in the weight of an explosive charge doubles the effective casualty-producing radius. To get a reference point, we can note that the US-issued
MK3A2 concussion grenade contains a charge of 8 ounces of TNT. It relies solely on blast overpressure to produce casualties, and its effective radius is 2 m.
Thus, even 80 ounces (5 lbs) of TNT would have a casualty-producing radius of only 4 m (13 ft). While that radius seems rather low to me, the effective radius of 2 m that we're using as a reference may only refer
to that within which significant casualties are essentially guaranteed. There's certainly going to be a non-negligible probability of casualties out to a considerably larger radius.
WWII November 28th, 2007, 05:55 PM

Well, here is the full version of that video clip:
Title of Video: Hamas 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades - Training and Ideology (Full Version)
Clip #1191 Broadcast: July 4, 2006
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1191.htm

This video clip is a real eye-opener. :eek:
Watch for the part with the hand grenade.
This video was created for the Marine Corps' Project Metropolis, to help illustrate the effects of various USMC weapons against the kind of ... all all urban structures one can expect to find on the modern MOUT
battlefield.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6464268208010199091&q=us+army+rifle+site%3Avideo.google.com&total=46&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

Here are a couple videos I thought you guys would enjoy:
Basic Grenade Training
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsib3V6GO6M
Here is what a proper explosives factory looks like:
Pakistan Ordnance Factory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wy8i8EXuPM
Zait November 30th, 2007, 10:34 AM

I thought the part where they are modifying American grenades to be more powerful.
Those aren't modified American hand grenades. The grenade that it is modeled off of is the M26/M61 Fragmentation grenade which is made of sheet metal with a pre-formed internal frag sleeve.
The grenade shown appears to be an aluminum machined body with a steel ball fragmentation matrix inside.
Here is a decent page that explains the difference between the American Frag and Practice grenades. http://www.inertord.com/grenhelem.html
These grenades are referred to as "Defensive" grenades because to use them safely you need to be in a defensive position (under and behind cover) to keep from becoming a casualty.
Charles Owlen Picket December 1st, 2007, 10:08 AM

The use of blast (offensive) as opposed to fragmentation (defensive) is not necessarily new. While it takes a significant amount of energetic material to make the former effective - it's use would be confined to
enclosed areas (bunkers) while the later would be utilized in an aggressive forward movement. The Dutch had a "mini-grenade" on the world arms market that utilized as little as 1/2 ounce of HE in a golf ball sized
fragmentation device.
The miniaturization of the fragments was determined to maintain much less velocity out past 50 yrs and present less potential casualties to friendly elements. The old MKII with it's cast iron large fragments
maintained fragmentation up to 250 yrds and posed a serious threat to friendly forces, etc. This effect can be seen in plastic and even the old "glass-mine" of WWII.
Alexires December 3rd, 2007, 02:47 AM

That's strange Liberty. See, I always thought that (ideally) the energy from an explosion is distributed in a sphere around the charge, and the energy per unit space falls according to the equation of the surface
area of a sphere (4r2) Hence, the energy 1 metre from the centre of an explosion is 1/4 than at the centre of the explosion.
Using these assumptions, then to double the blast radius (have the same energy per unit space twice as far out) only 32 ounces would be needed, instead of the 8. Eg. If 8 ounces gives a blast kill radius of 2
metres, then 32 ounces gives a blast kill radius of 4 metres. Of course, this doesn't take into account reflection of blast waves etc, but 80 ounces is a little high it seems to me.
I could be totally wrong, and I'm damn sure NBK knows more than me, but it's always good to verify (RTPB).
WWII December 3rd, 2007, 04:24 AM

Interesting discussion here ....
Liberty, It has always bothered me when I see people saying that they support the Palestinian cause.
How is it that the Palestinians bomb Israeli civilian city bus driver and the innocent passengers ? Yet, you will never see Israeli soldiers bombing the Palestinian bus service if they have one or drive into the
Palestinian areas with a bomb laden taxi-cab ?
I would understand if the Palestinians were targeting only the Israeli military convoy passing by or the Israeli military operates their own bus service, separate from the Israeli civilian city bus service.
That still does not make it right for the Palestinians to be attacking an Israeli military convoy. I think it is about time that the Palestinians leave Israel alone. The Wall is there to protect not just the Israelis but
both of them on each side so that peace can co-exist.
In church I was told that the land rightfully belongs to Israel and it makes sense. The U.N. gave the land to Israel in one day, prophetically just like it was told in the Bible, in one day, Israel was founded as God
had said in the Bible.
Now another one is, how is strapping on explosives and walking into an Israeli restaurant exactly a military strategy ? It is not even a military strategy. It is terrorism, pure and simple.
Do you see any Israelis walking into a Palestinian internet cafe and bombing themselves, obviously you will never see that happen.
I mean the list goes on, and for this reason I am with the Israelis on this one. I realize there are a few bad apples in the Israeli military, just like we have here with the U.S. Military, we have some bad apples, I
can't remember if it was the US Army or the US Marine that raped a 12 yr. old islamic girl then set her on fire. That was sick, that was a bad apple right there. Most of the U.S. Military serving overseas are
serving our country with honor, pride and dignity, just like the Israeli military is serving their country with honor, pride and dignity.
I think alots of the news media is very anti-semitic today and I always go to www.honestreporting.com anytime the arabs or the news media like the British BBC are saying things about Israel then I just check
to see what the real story is on that.
Now, for the hand grenades, I figure if the Palestinians are building the grenades more powerfully, that can only mean one thing, they are suicidal so it does not matter to them if they have a suicide vest on or just
throwing the grenade and he still gets hurt or killed by his own grenade even from a far distance, the blast still blew him away.
I was wondering if the American grenades we have could be made alittle more powerful without injury to ourselves, while killing the muslim hordes, in American national self defense.
I mean the U.S Military should re-evaluate their grenades then build small range grenades for close quarter combat ( smallest grenade, only causes injury or death to the enemy ) then medium range grenades and
long range grenades. Maybe build a grenade based off the model of the claymore with the pineapple hand grenade saying " front towards the enemy "
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m18-claymore.htm
and it has to be thrown in that particlur direction to prevent injuries for the U.S. Troops. One side panel has nothing then another side has the pineapple pattern. That was my question.
LibertyOrDeath December 3rd, 2007, 10:41 AM

Alexires:
I think your reasoning about the inverse square law is a good starting point. We can also think of what you described there in terms of gas flow rather than energy: if we have a flow of matter (gas) radially outward
from a central point, the flux density of the gas molecules will taper off with an inverse-square relationship, just like you said. (It's kind of like the flux of a point charge in Gauss' law from electrostatics.)
However, as we move farther away from the center of the explosion, the average velocity of the blast wave is going to be decreasing at some rate, and the shape of the wave will also presumably be evolving (due
to differing velocities within the wave itself). This is where things probably get pretty complicated -- especially when it comes to analyzing how the shape of a blast wave determines its effects on a living thing.
Heck, even the position of a person's body with respect to a blast can have an effect on any injuries sustained, so we're dealing with an awful lot of variables here.
I know Cooper's Explosives Engineering covers a lot of this stuff, so if I get some time, I'll try to study up on it and report back. (If anyone else also wants to do this, a nice PDF of that book is available on the FTP
in /UPLOAD/Diabolique/Explosives/Theory/ .) Also, maybe NBK will get a chance to chime in here and shed some light on this.
WWII: I didn't want to sidetrack this thread with too much political discussion, so I started a new thread in Issues & Opinions that has my reply to your last post in it.
Man Down Under December 3rd, 2007, 12:41 PM

Maybe it's the volume of the sphere, and not the surface area, that's relevant.

Liberty - I wholly agree with you. The amount of variables are staggering. I was merely making reference to the fact that from your statement, over a 2 fold increase in explosive is required to achieve what the
(very basic) theoretical approach hypothesised.
I haven't read that book yet. I just kind of imagined it in my head. I'll have to give it a read too.
Zait December 5th, 2007, 11:04 AM

Using these assumptions, then to double the blast radius (have the same energy per unit space twice as far out) only 32 ounces would be needed, instead of the 8. Eg. If 8 ounces gives a blast kill radius of 2
metres, then 32 ounces gives a blast kill radius of 4 metres. Of course, this doesn't take into account reflection of blast waves etc, but 80 ounces is a little high it seems to me.
I'm not sure if the inverse square law would really fit into that realm.
The military uses what is called the "Relative Effectiveness" factor for explosives which gives a quick reference point for the interchangability of explosives for a given job. The RE scale revolves around TNT which
is expressed as the baseline of 1. Find the RE factor for an explosive and in theory you can replace explosive A with an equivelent ammount of explosive B and accomplish the same thing. There are a few problems
with that though.
The MK II hand grenade is a good example. Originally filled with EC Blank Powder (RE being around .6) the filler was replaced with granular TNT (RE of 1) and eventually finalized with Cast TNT (again RE of 1). One
might think that the granular TNT and cast would give fragments of the same size, weight and that they would travel the same distance. Unfortunately this is not the case and the cast TNT far out performed the
granular.
What I'm trying to get at here is that there are far more variables that have to be calculated than just the weight of the explosive to increase the effectiveness of a hand grenade.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Explosively Form e d P e n e t r a t o r s
Log in
View Full Version : Explosively Formed Penetrators
overcookedpizza January 6th, 2008, 07:09 PM

H a v i n g l o o k e d t h r o u g h severa l website s, including this one I have barely found any inform ation pe rtaining to Explosively
Form ed Penetrators, or EFP for short.
This seems to be a relatively simple concept, a r a n g e d s h a p e d c h a r g e b a s i c a l l y . I n s t e a d o f u s i n g a c o n e s h a p e d l i n e r , t h e E F P
uses a conca v e d i s h s h a p e d o ne.
Apparently, the liner being this shape leads it to form ing a m etallic projectile that could defeat arm or at extrem e r a n g e s . I t
h a s a l e s s p e n e t r a t i n g p o w e r t h e n a n o r m a l s h a p e d c h a rge,
but it can be used at a significantly greater distance.
Here is the wikipedia page from which I got mo st of my inform ation :

http://en.wik ipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_form ed_penetrator
It gives a general overview on the subject.
If you scroll down on this wikipeida page, it gives som e m o r e i n f o :
http://en.wik ipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge
I a m surprised at the lack of information about this kind of weapon on this forum , and the Interne t in general.
I t s e e m s t h a t the insurgents in Iraq are using EFP's to destroy a rm or, so they cannot be that hard to manu facture
Acco rding to a patent I found,
http://www.patentstorm . u s / p a t e n t s / 4 8 4 1 8 6 4 - f u lltext.html
Finally, a youtube video showing what happens during d etonation:

http://youtube.com /watch?v=JfCC XglrJuo&feature=related
There is plenty of videos of th e m e x p l o d i n g i n I r a q .
E F P ' s c a n b e d e s i g n e d t o m a k e different kinds of projectiles, including rods or slugs, but it should not be that hard to m a k e
o n e o f t h e s e a t h o m e.
H a s a n y o n e h a d a n y e x p e r i e n ce, or so m e m o r e d e t a i l e d t e c h n i c a l k n o w l e d g e o n t h i s m a t t e r ?

One word: UTFSE!
There is plenty about EFPs, much of it from NBK's keyboard.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Orsini Bombs
Log in
View Full Version : Orsini Bombs

I'm not sure how familiar these are to the RS community, but searching Orsini didn't come up with anything so I assume that I'm not the only one who had never heard of them before.
The Orsini bomb was a 19th century invention created by its namesake, Felice Orsini. it was a spherical bomb that, instead of using a fuse, was made up of mercury fulminate to explode upon impact. Orsini
failed to kill his target, Napolean III, but the bomb's design was reapplied by a Spanish anarchist thirty-some years later. He threw two of these bombs in a theatre, one successfully detonated and killed
twenty-two people, the other... is preserved in the Van Gogh Museum. So to give an idea of what it looks like (http://www.nieuwsuitamsterdam.nl/afbeeldingen/liceu_bom.jpg)...
I think this design still has practical applications. If a spherical, hollowed, metal container was divided in two and housed with a powerful explosive mixture like blasting gelatine, which in turn was surrounded
by (the original design) mercury fulminate or else one of its contemporaries like lead azide, then you would have the beginning of the design.
Now take a good look at that photo. I first thought that all those spikey things protruding from the sphere were designed as serious, archaic fucking shrapnel, but then I saw that they were bolt shaped, which
was the second thing I thought they were. Which would have been strange. What I'm thinking now is that the thinner, upper-part of every "spike" slid into the lower part and produced friction that ignited the
mercury fulminate. Whether this is true or not, if this could be done (placing a flint inside every spike for friction) this would be a very effective method of detonation. If the sliding mechanism had a good amount
of resistance then accidental detonation wouldn't be a major threat, since (obviously) the amount of pressure being applied is much greater when being thrown forcefully than with placing a stray hand on it or
even being dropped.
By the way, I first found out about the Orsini bomb looking through a list of Explosive Stubs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Explosives_stubs) on Wikipedia for things obscure and interesting.
==========
2nd Edit: tried doctoring it again: Orsini2 (http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj6/SovereignSeverance/Orsini2.jpg), not as "pretty", but easier to see.
==========
gaussincarnate February 6th, 2008, 09:41 PM

I would have to guess that the protrusions are the detonators. If they were just bolts, much smaller nuts could have been used. Same for the bolts. Also, if they were bolts, the present arrangement would not
make too much sense. There is no reason to have that many bolts at the top and the bottom, or that many bolts all together, for that matter.
Alternately, though not likely, they could be small explosive projectiles. I would not think that conventional projectiles of that shape would be particularly effective. Do not get me wrong, anything flung at that
high of a speed with any mass would be dangerous, but it does not seem to be the most effective form of shrapnel.
By the way, about how big is this thing? The picture gives little to use to judge size. I am sure that someone on this forum would appreciate more information about this thing. After all, a large spiky ball is
always worth some fun. Add explosives to it and you have a fiesta of fun.

I agree about the bolts and I get what you're saying about the shrapnel.
I was wondering the same thing about the size, to my knowledge the bomb was thrown without assistance, so it can be assumed that it wasn't enormous. The photo doesn't show the surface, so it can't be
judged just by comparing it to that.
What really strikes me about the Orsini bomb (besides how awesome it is) is that the structure could be made at next to nothing, so if you have the means to procure the explosives then you have a really
effective means of applying them.

They also could be nipples with percussion caps. The point is valid that the concept is workable. With most quality military / commercial primary explosives (Fulminate, azides, etc NOT some garbage TATP!),
one could make a reasonable facsimile.

Interesting idea with the percussion caps, they fall right in the time period that it was designed in. I don't think acetone peroxide would be sensitive enough anyway, and considering that a good amount of time
would probably go into making it, you would want it to last.
I made a bitmap to show how I think it could go, there might be a few problems with the way it's set up though: http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj6/SovereignSeverance/Orsini-2.jpg.

That's the first thing that came to mind when looking at it. Buying nipples and utilizing various construction methods, one could do just about anything with this concept. In fact the construction of a hand thrown
projectile that lands in one position consistently is no great feat in itself; it would not need to be round; in fact.

Charles-
I thought of what you said about not having to be spherical and it gave me an idea, than I thought about the percussion caps and refined my thought process a little further and came up with something kinda
interesting.
I made a bitmap to illustrate a series of steps on how to make a handheld bomb. The device itself would be extremely cheap to make, but also very time consuming & requiring very good explosives and also two
chemicals that would coat it to initiate detonation.
For the bomb, the ingredients are:

a long cardboard tube (I know how incredibly n00bile that is, just hear me out)
super glue
a can of spray-on Teflon
a roll of aluminum foil
rubber cement
tape (preferably duct)
Phosphorus sesquisulfide
Potassium chlorate
wax
The explosives involved:

A fine powder of RDX/PETN/TNT/etc.
A reliable contact explosive like Lead Azide
Blasting gelatine or another malleable explosive mix
Here's the bitmap (http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj6/SovereignSeverance/Handheld.jpg)

(make sure to maximize the window, it's pretty big)
Instructions:
1. Cut tube along dotted line.
2. Unfold roll into square
3. Make holes in several rows (pardon), avoid the left and right edges of the board and keep well-within the top half of it.
4.
a. Cover the left edge of the board with a newspaper/etc. and spray on the teflon
b. Roll it back into its original shape, apply superglue to un-Teflon'd edge and press until glue is dry. Allow Teflon to dry completely.
5. chisel any Teflon out of the holes with any appropriate instrument. Wrap aluminum foil around the cardboard continuously (glue one edge to the board first) until you have about one-quarter inch aluminum
wrapped around it. Again, reopen holes.
6.
a. Cinch the bottom into a handle shaped structure.
b. Lower the bottom of the handle into rubber cement. Allow to dry completely.
c. Force the edges of the opening (at the top) inward slightly.
7.
a. Cover the holes from the inside with duct tape or the like, make sure that you will be able to remove it again in the future.
b. Apply a mixture of one part Phosphorus sesquisulfide to two parts potassium chlorate to the area around the holes as shown. Allow to dry completely.
c. Remove tape carefully, AVOID FRICTION FROM HERE ON OUT.
8. Insert explosives as shown, through the top. First add a layer of powdered TNT/RDX/PETN or the like. Then add a very thin layer of lead azide (again, or the like) followed by a ball of blasting gelatine/etc.
cover the ball with additional lead azide. add wax onto remaining surface until it fills all available space.
9. Add an additional coating of Phosphorous sesquisulfide and Potassium Chlorate to top (shown in 10). Allow to dry
10. Finished product. Extremely sensitive, obvious care must go into handling it.
Zait February 8th, 2008, 08:38 PM

I think this design still has practical applications. If a spherical, hollowed, metal container was divided in two and housed with a powerful explosive mixture like blasting gelatine, which in turn was surrounded
by (the original design) mercury fulminate or else one of its contemporaries like lead azide, then you would have the beginning of the design.
US Civil War Haynes grenade. (http://books.google.com/books?

id=YBbKtQbbIDIC&pg=PA253&lpg=PA253&dq=%22haynes+Grenade%22&source=web&ots=Upm3tqnMFw&sig=FoOwAZMAeYdKUyA7sUD6BFbcbVk) Picture is on pg 253 of that book.
The Haynes Excelsior hand grenade was created in 1862. It came in two halves, which opened up to reveal an inner sphere that released the explosion. The grenade was was lined with spikes which had
percussion caps on top that when hit sank in, causing a spark to light the ammunition.
My understanding was that it was fine unless you dropped it.

I was waiting for someone to bring up Civil War era munitions...or I would have. ....No, I knew where you guys were going almost before you began <grin>. This is one of the reasons I collect books published
in the nineteenth century, etc. The science of the Civil War period up to about the 1920's is fairly reduplicated by the modern hobbyist. If you are interesting in a technology and want to reproduce it; look to what
was done about a hundred years ago, and you may just be able to do so!

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Bombs and planes
Log in
View Full Version : Bombs and planes
ChippedHammer April 15th, 2008, 07:40 AM

Was going to put this in the water cooler but this seemed like a better section.
We all know about the methods employed to stop ragheads from taking explosives onto planes but after seeing a news article on drug mules a thought struck me.
Why not swallow explosives?
If drug mules can cram 800g of coke wrapped in 70 condoms down the hatch then whats stopping 'Jihad Joe' from doing the same. Seeing as there is no need for the mule to
survive I bet you could swallow a lot more with a bit of practice.
Lets say he decides to eat half a kilo of ETN cut up into 50 little packages, would it be feasible to make a detonator small enough yet powerful enough to do the job? Using
watch batteries, a PIC and a few other parts I think I could make something the size of your thumb that would be able to detonate a few grams of primary.
But would it have enough kick to detonate the 50 packages of love?
Even if it failed, showering half a plane with blood and hot meat should be enough to make people shit many a brick :)
Still, attacking planes is fucking stupid. Better 'yields' taking at trip to the local mall.
:rolleyes:
iHME April 15th, 2008, 01:09 PM

Indeed the terrorists have been grinding the airplanes too long. The idea about swallowing explosives could work. But I would surgically implant them to the bomber. I once
saw pics of dogs that had long scars on their stomachs, they had been surgically implanted with bags of heroin in a attempt to smuggle them to the states. One could also
implant larger charges then achievable via swallowing.
-=HeX=- April 15th, 2008, 02:01 PM

I dont see why the ragheads havn't already tried it! A small vial of HMTD could easily be smuggled onto the plane by placing it inside something else, like a toy car for rag
junior as a present. And use a silicon fuse ala microtek.
Imagine a few fat raghead martyrs with about a kilo of ETN implanted in them and about half a kilo ingested, they each in to the can, take laxitives, excrete the extra half a
kilo, then they tape that to where their 'body stash' is, go to their seats, attach the det, and at a preset time light the fuse.
A team of 3 could get 4.5kg on board, that much would likely down the damn plane. Even half a kilo would do a shit lot of hurt. Its a horribly good idea.
iHME April 15th, 2008, 05:12 PM

Well It would be a catastrophic success indeed. ;)
But I'd say that the HMTD cap would be found during the x-ray.
I'd place it inside a battery, the battery inside a laptop battery to replace one cell of the 8 or 6. The machine would boot and all, but in the plane the battery would be ripped
open in the toilet and the HMTD cap harvested. Damn I love to imagine these type of scenarios. It is true that engineer minded persons like to tinker with "problems" like
these. :D
Hirudinea April 15th, 2008, 07:05 PM

Well It would be a catastrophic success indeed. ;)
But I'd say that the HMTD cap would be found during the x-ray.
I'd place it inside a battery, the battery inside a laptop battery to replace one cell of the 8 or 6. The machine would boot and all, but in the plane the battery would be ripped
open in the toilet and the HMTD cap harvested. Damn I love to imagine these type of scenarios. It is true that engineer minded persons like to tinker with "problems" like
these. :D
If your going to use the battery in a laptop, why not put the explosives in a modified HD, take it apart, put a CF card and CF-IDE adapter in the case, and fill the remander of
the case with explovsives, half a dozen attackers each with a laptop could get enough explosives on a plane to do damage without having to shit it out.
TOX April 15th, 2008, 10:59 PM

I was thinking the exact same thing when I was
reading this news article 3 days ago
http://www.slate.com/id/2147500 ,well kind off.
I personally wood love too see a raghead gulp some hydrazine with
some hydrogen peroxide hidden in some lemon juice.
You just know that the media will twist that story into a . This just in.
Wee can confirm that there is a new weapon in the terrorists arsenals,
though no one was hurt physically, witnesses are describing the
weapons as a bloated smelly rocket type human V2 weapon, terrorists
experts say that it could be used to down planes.
Upon opening the compartment door the terrorist ingests the deadly
chemicals producing a powerful jet that could deviate and crash the plane,
or he could mix the reactive chemicals in the toilet and cover it up
with his sand blasted ass creating a toilet bomb!?
P.S 6 MILION JEWS DIED IN THE HOLOCAUST.
Jokes aside, any drug smugly method that is applied to explosives will work theoretically,
stupid little figurine or a doll made by casting sensitized tnt and plated with
a powdered metal plastic mix, used before odors can permeate and alert the dogs or bomb detectors,
detonator hidden and covered with silicone in a electro-magnet plunger type lighters, or car keys. And hell if they want
bigger quantities no problem http://www.thebeerbelly.com/default.asp , the only thing
about external concealed caring is the smell, thats all.
The thing is that swallowing explosives or drugs rapped in condoms and crapping them on board is just whey to easy and I imagine disgusting for coran reading 72
shemale lusting ragheads, and take in to account that people how are just smuggling drugs are still identified from time to time, I mean they now have those camera
sensors placed that monitor your body temperature ether you have a cold/SARS or youre whey to agitated, and if you look like a sand nigger well lets j ust say that
they will definitely check your health status/colon cancer and all:D.
megalomania April 15th, 2008, 11:16 PM

In the movie Blown Away, one of my favorites, the character of the bomber Gaerity, played by Tommy Lee Jones, escaped from prison using a few balloons of explosives he
vomited up.
It is certainly not a new concept, but the ragheads have thus far not demonstrated any ingenuity or change of plans. They flog the dead horse of blowing up airplanes again
and again and again. They must have their reasons. I have never flown on a commercial airline, nor do I ever intend too, so I am safe :) I hope they never change their MO,
let them keep banging their heads against that wall of security that gets harder by the month.
Hinckleyforpresident April 16th, 2008, 11:00 AM
Members of groups such as al-quaeda are brainwashed into a drone-sheep state. It is dilled into their heads that innovation is the business of the top leader, blowing yourself
up is the business of the drone. As such, only one or two guys are thinking of new ideas. And these guys are also doing several other jobs at the same time - like running cave
to cave surviving.
We all know that there are hundreds of potentially crippling targets that the could easily hit. But they won't, at least for some time. And it's simply because they are too
obedient and dumb to think of them.
Also, their structure makes things much more complex. A 3-5 man strike team working alone could easily take out a power network/destroy a public building/cause mayhem
with a few thousand dollars in funding. It's simply much more complex to go through a network of ranks and people.
Charles Owlen Picket April 18th, 2008, 10:46 AM

You fellows are right on target (from my opinion at least) in that I totally agree with the considerable group think of Islamic terrorists, etc. I believe that commercial airliners are
targets because they are easily identified as sources of international news when an incident happens to one of them.
Other nation-specific targets may not be of interest to the "world press" but not so with modes of travel. It's publicity that is the endgame of the terroristic activity; going
beyond the momentary fright induced in the population, the dialog lives on.
It's shallow thinking that thrives on fright and force to push it's agenda. Thus it's no small jump that such thinking should be unidimensional in it's "banging it's head" against
the security door. What's more religious zealotry is often the hallmark of lack of creativity.
Barnacles April 18th, 2008, 06:27 PM

A team of 3 could get 4.5kg on board, that much would likely down the damn plane. Even half a kilo would do a shit lot of hurt. Its a horribly good idea.
It would take much less than that to down a flying airliner. On mythbusters they used around 100 grams to blow a hole in a plane big enough to drive a truck through. Because
it is pressurized and in a relatively small area the gas from the detonation doesn't have as much room to expand so takes alot less than you'd think. The charge they used was
about the size of a pack of cigarettes maybe even half that size. This was the episode where they tested explosive decompression. They busted the movie myth of bullets
blowing causing huge holes and ripping people out. by the way I believe this was on DC10 or 747.
On a sidenote I think the Fedgov is developing new systems to detect peroxides... They realize the danger the posses and currently there are no detection methods I am aware
of. Those blowers that are at some airports and the CN Tower in Toronto Canada blow a blast of air on to you to shake off particles of nitrate explosives. I actually wouldn't be
all that surprised if they are in use but you never know with bureaucracy.

...Although I read your posts and find you to be a good poster. I think this post of yours is in-accurate. Al-qaeda is very cunning and is much smarter and has far greater plans
than you are giving them credit for. The view you have is due to their patience. Al-qaeda is Super patient, in there manual they say this war should last 100-1000 years, drag it
out. Do no attacks for years , then when they think they are winning bomb something, than they spend billions on security. Rinse repeat, rinse, repeat. They are said to have
around 200,000 minimum members according to the CIA. They have not sent out 200,000 suicide bombers. This organization has lots of people doing very specific jobs. If you
are a spotter you spot, lots of spies, people visit cities and record targets on video. I saw one guy who was arrested had videos of over 12 with more than 1 target in each city.
Al-qaeda doesn't throw a grenade every time they buy one. remember the time that passes between each MAJOR attack is YEARS roughly 5 years. I was reading about how
each member has such specific tasks, that a mortar squad for instance, would have loader someone who passes him, a firer and possibly an aimer. but each person would do
that and only that. Lots of their members are busy doing things like just standing in the street waiting to spot a specific valuable target. and will bounce a basketball when they
see one or something along those lines.One specific group(not al-qaeda but an affiliate ansar al islam if I remember correctly) was something like 75% non combat
operatives... Some guys just dig.
Also I remember reading that Bin laden likened his "war" to building a house, and 9/11 was just the welcome mat...:eek: They spend years planning everything, so it may
look like they are not busy but they are.
Back in grade 10ish I am 25 now so you do the math, I was walking in a mall with my buddy, and we used to play this game called spot the eyeball stabber. well after 9/11
the day the front page of the paper was the 19 hijackers pictures, the top guy Mohammed Atta, was a guy I spotted and called an eyeball stabber. He looked very mean, but
was well dressed, wearing a nice leather jacket, dress pants shirt. etc. He was alone and walked with his hands in his jacket pocket I think. After seeing this guy there was no
doubt in my mind that he was the guy I saw at the mall and he was one of the most disturbing looking individuals, I have ever met, for the most part he looked normal, but
his eyes were pure un-adulterated evil... So no doubt he was capable of this. There is proof that he visited over a dozen cities in the US alone. probably visiting cells leaders.
I have a feeling the next attack will make 9/11 look like a house fire... Ive always figured that they are building up massive quantities of explosives. Now if it were up to me. I
would try to fill as much of 18 wheelers or whatever with as much explosives as possible. I would then armour the cabin and tires and back where the explosives are with steel
thick enough to stop any civilian protections forces ammo. I would then build little "battle towers" on top maybe or wherever is best, to ahve a pill box or two for machine gun
RPG squads to fire at any police that may be following. Then I would try to take down as many buildings in as many cities at once. I can imagine something like this causing
20-100 9/11 all across America within hours of each other... This is all speculation, but the ideas are never ending and the entire CONUS (continental United states) is one big
soft target. At this point they need to make every member count, and plan. its going to be really hard to operate for them at this point so you can bet whatever they are doing
will be meticulously planned.
megalomania April 18th, 2008, 10:59 PM

The longer they plan and the longer they take acquiring resources, the more time the fedgov has to infiltrate them and expose the plot. Good security changes frequently for
the very reason that if some attack occurs it can throw off plans made years before.
These guys get caught with video footage, big deal. Sure they may be scoping out targets, but that's all they ever seem to do. They sit around on their hands waiting for
something while the world passes them buy and the fedgov catches up to them.
Sure they are planning something big. Steady and slow works great with the lone wolf or small cell, but the more men that know the secrets, the more likely that secret will
get out. If they move swift, steal a truck in the morning, steal a load of explosives from a construction site during the night, wire up the truck, and by morning when rush hour
hits blow it up next to some jew bank or fedgov building, they can complete their attack before the fedgov even knows the explosives are stolen.
The terrorists are also a bunch of blow hards and braggards. They talk, a lot, about what is going to happen, but this is just talk. Propaganda, intimidation, threats, they are
always waving a scimitar around claiming America will be destroyed soon. They are like some drunk guy in a bar threatening to kick your ass, maybe he will, but more likely
he will go back to nursing his whisky.

Alot of those that talk alot and get caught you will see are wanna be al-qaeda'ers (lol). The real hardcore ones who had training and are of the most disciplined and devoted.
These don't talk and gloat. Of course there will be some.Some of the 9/11 hi-jackers didn't even know what was to happen on the plane. They were just told it would be
martyr operation. Once on board only the leader of each group new before hand the exact details would share the plan once on board. I also imagine it is EXTREMELY difficult
to infiltrate Al-qade
I was going to post in the other thread where you posted something along the lines of this. Basically my thoughts here are just one of many. Like all those things you
suggested I am sure they thought of. I have heard that the next attack is suppose to make 9/11 look like a firecracker or whatever. So I think what they are actually doing is
along the lines of what you posted. They are just moving all the Chess pieces into place, getting guys here, and there, training, aquiring funds.. I was doing some reading on
Al-qaeda financing, and they are still making MILLIONs per year. I actually heard that at the beginning of the war Al-Qaeda moved and sold some arms out of Iraq in the chaos
when no one was paying attention, And sold it for 400-700 million something along those lines. ANother thing that didn't make to much news was a Frieght liner with 750 some
tonnes of HE was intercepted and was suppose to be for be for sudan but the delivery address was a post office box you would think they would check the address before
shipping 750 tonnes of RDX, I believe it was for al-qaeda and so do many other people some of them official (zing)... . Makes you wonder if they had another one that got
through, I am pretty sure this was near Greece. in the meditteranian. It was estimated that Al-qaeda actually possesses 15-20 freightliner cargo ships...
They always try to outdo themselves, so I could imagine the next series of attacks will cause utter chaos, and stands a good chance of starting Police state or Global war 3.
They will hit everything, buildings ,water, food supplies, railways, power, communications, everything you can think of. Mind you this is all speculation. but you have to imagine
with such a large group they are thinking of all of this many years before you or I started this conversation. While slow, remember these are killers who's goal is to cause death
and destruction both economic and physical. So its pretty safe "what a term for this eh" to assume this is on their list of things to do.
To me 9/11 just seemed like a warning of things to come. It was basically a group saying hey we want to change the world notice us. It's really crazy to imagine that there is
actually a group of 200,000 men who's goal it is to ruin the US and friends countries, we are in a whole new world, alqaeda is here to stay, and I forsee many very tragic
things occuring in the relative near future.
-=HeX=- April 19th, 2008, 05:22 AM

I speculate that their next attack will be a fuel air explosion. They will get one of their ships and hit it out with tanks and a big supply of LPG And that has that is also in
chemical weapons... Yafmot mentioned it in the oxygen/Acetylene thread. They will float into a big port and vent the gas. Then, at the right ratio, they will detonate the
charges hidden around the ship, and then bang. Huge explosion. Imagine that... In Rotterdam... Or next to the statue of liberty... Never mind a truck bomb, its a boat bomb!
megalomania April 21st, 2008, 04:57 PM

The big attack, the really scary one, would be a nuclear bomb going off in New York. Any other attack in any other location (except DC during Presidential address to House
and Senate) would pale in comparison. We would lose the financial center of the country, the headquarters of the nations largest corporations, the Stock Exchange, and the UN
all in one fell swoop. Not to mention during the day there are more people in a small area than anywhere in the rest of the world, maximizing causalities.
Even a small yield nuke destroying only part of the city would irradiate millions of people in the surrounding area who would live for some months or years afterwards. They
would require extensive medical treatment that would overwhelm the rest of the countries ability to care for them. Either way they will all be trying to sue someone! The 911
lawsuits continue, and that only included a few thousand victims, now imagine millions of people trying to get compensation.
The entire city would be rendered uninhabitable for years, even if not destroyed. People would have to abandon homes, cars, personal possessions. Insurance companies would
be wiped out trying to cover the losses, if they even cover nuclear terrorism.
Where would those people live who survived and escaped the quarantine zone? As many as 25 million people might be forced to evacuate if the area of contamination is done
right. This would make the FEMA camp troubles in New Orleans seem like a child's sleepover.
This is an example of why a small nuke can be worse than a large one. Remember, a dead soldier only removes one man from the battlefield, but a wounded soldier removes
two. The dead can be morned and we move on, but the sick, poisoned, and homeless drain resources every day.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Explosive placement in a Junk Car
D e m olition
Log in
View Full Version : Explosive placement in a Junk Car Demolition
NameWithheld April 23rd, 2008, 09:00 AM

I'm currently planning a blast this coming fall/winter with a junk car- most likely a generic notchback sedan. As I like to plan
m y blasts m onths in advance I figured I m ight as well starting thinking a bout it early... and one of the first problem s I cam e to
was how to m a x i m i z e t h e d a m age to the vehicle via explosives placem ent.
The location will m ost likely be a rural gravel pit.
Explosives used will p robably include som e, all, or none of the following:
Am monium Nitrate / 300 mesh Alum inum Powder, 70:30. 25-40+kg
ETN plastic, >2kg.
R-salt, RDX, Sorbitol Hexanitrate, Nitro methane, PETN, all tentative.
As m y blasts are few and far between I have a tendency to throw everything together :rolleyes:
W here should I place the explosives and how should they be arranged so as to leave as little of the vehicle rem a i n i n g a s
possible? The goal here is not to simply blow the car into two pieces- but rather to vaporize it entirely. I would be happiest if
there's sim p l y a n e m p t y s m oking crater at the end :D
I h a v e s o m e i d e a s o f m y own, but I'd love to see if any forum g oers have experience with this, and I welco m e a n y a d v i s e .
*if this topic has been covered feel free to delete >_>*
Hinckleyforpresident April 23rd, 2008, 10:50 AM

I would imag ine that one could get good results by placing a large charge under the engine block, and a slightly sm aller
charge about 2/3 of the way d own the car. These two charges wo uld be connected by detcord.
I think that no m atter what portions of the fram e, the engine, the drive shaft, and the transm ission will survive, eve n if they fly
40 feet and get all co ntorted. As such, some serious shelter wou ld be recomm e n d e d f o r s u c h a d e t o n a t i o n .
Although I could be totally wrong, I've never had any experience with anything that extrem e .
-=HeX=- April 23rd, 2008, 12:37 PM

Fill the cars tank with gasoline . It shou ld add a nice flame. Place ETN plastic ex around the tank. Put as m uch ANFO as one can
inside the car. If you place a shitload of ANFO in the car I honestly do no t see it surviving the blast! Use ANNMAl Under the car,
and set off the charges simultaenously with detcord.
By the way, could you em ail of the video of the huge blasts you did? I would like to put then in the forum v i d e o I a m
compiling. All credit will be given where due. My em ail is lordi--101@hotm ail.com N o p r e s s u r e o n s e n d i n g t h e m .
As for the 'car bomb', have fun!
iHME April 23rd, 2008, 02:36 PM

I'd think that placing a charge inside the engine would cause som e d a m a g e , a n d t h i n k a b out how confined it would be! I'd a lso
try to blow th e chassis multiple pieces along with driveshafts.
Hinckleyforpresident April 23rd, 2008, 03:56 PM

I would imag ine that it would prove rather difficult to pack 30+ kilos of any explosive into an engin e.... Never mind get it into
an efficient shape.
Hirudinea April 23rd, 2008, 08:26 PM

I saw on a show on special effects that they m ade a car flip by p lacing a sm a l l p i e c e o f t e l e p h o n e p o l e p l a c e d i n a m o r t o r
weld ed to the lower fram e of the rear of the car. A charge was used to fire the pole out of the mortor and flip the car, you
m ight consider that to add a little spice to your show.
NameWithheld April 24th, 2008, 12:38 AM

I would imag ine that it would prove rather difficult to pack 30+ kilos of any explosive into an engin e.... Never mind get it into
an efficient shape.
Hm m.. this got me to thinking, it would be fun to seal off the entire engine block with exp a n d i n g f o a m o r s o m e t h i n g e l s e e a s y
and just pour slurry into the whole thing.
I saw on a show on special effects that they m ade a car flip by p lacing a sm a l l p i e c e o f t e l e p h o n e p o l e p l a c e d i n a m o r t o r
weld ed to the lower fram e of the rear of the car. A charge was used to fire the pole out of the mortor and flip the car, you
m ight consider that to add a little spice to your show.
Yeah, I'll pro bably m ess with the car a bit before the grand finale, m ost likely experim enting with shaped charges.
Put as much ANFO as one can inside the car. If you place a shitload of ANFO in th e car I honestly do not se e it surviving the
blast! Use ANNMAl Under the car, and set off the charges sim ultaenously with detcord.
E r r . . . y o u s e e m t o b e a s s u m i n g I h a v e an infinite supply of blasting supplies. :ee k: As m uch as one could fit inside a car?
Filling it, you m ean. Sorry, that would be over a ton of explosive. And telling me to put it inside the car isn't very helpful-
perhaps if you have a specific location and setup for the charges in the car's interior.
ANNMAl would be fine, if I happen to have enough NM. I did, however, already list m y likely available explosives, among which
NM is merely tentative, and, if used, would likely be in small quantity.
Y e s - s i m p l y u s i n g h u n d r e d s o r p e r h a p s t h o u s a n d s o f p o u n d s o f e x p l o s i v e w o u l d a c c o m plish m y go als, but that's not an option

in this case. R ather we're look ing at efficient use of lim ited resources :)
-=HeX=- April 24th, 2008, 04:42 AM

Sorry, I just take am m onium nitrate for granted, having such ea sy access to it. Over here you can just drive out to the sticks
a n d i n t o a f a r m e r s h o p a n d t h e y s e l l y o u a n y t h i n g . N o q u e s t i o n s a s k e d . A m monium nitra te is very im portant over here as a
fertilizer. However it may be treated in the polym er shit, but that will just wash right off. A 50 kilo sack of am monium nitrate is
quite big...
Have fun with a few shared charges first, I will have a look at a few cars and com e up with ideas.
P l e a se take videos! I want to see this...
fiknet April 28th, 2008, 02:12 AM

How about sitting on the roof of the car? W hile it m a y n o t d o t h e b e s t d a m age as a whole bunch of charges place in a n d
around the car I think it would look quite cool to see a small bucket on top of a car in the distance only seconds later to have it
crushed into the ground by a m a s s i v e e x p l o s i o n .
joffe April 29th, 2008, 04:12 PM

W hat's the purpose o f this experim ent? Are you looking for actual test results, or are you just plan ning to blast the car into as
m any sm a l l p i e c e s a s p o s s i b l e ? I f y o u a c t u a l l y m a n a g e t o g e t h o l d o f 2 5 -40 kg o f AN in addition to the rest of the goodies you
describe. That car will be pretty much torn to pieces and the area around the explosion will be satu rated with shrapn el up to
several hund red meters, no m atter where you place the charge(s) underneath the car. The largest pieces of shrapnel will m ost
likely come from the engine which is pretty hard to dem olish unless you use TNT or PE. If shrapnel is an issue, I would be
careful with filling the engine with explosives.
Placing the charge on top of the car is a waste of explosives. The result wil be thoroughly disappointing as (as you all know)
m ost of the energy will travel upwards. I've studied a co uple of vehicles being destroyed b y e x p l o s i v e s d e t o n a t e d o n t o p o f
t h e m a n d I w a s a m azed at how little dam a g e w a s d o n e t o t h e m , c o n s i d e ring the am ount of explosives that was involved.
Placing charges around the car will be even more disappointing. Charges detonated on one side of the car will throw the car
around a bit (if it is large enough). Charges detonated around the car will probably leave the chassis and the engine. (unless,
of course, the charges are pre tty big).
Emil May 2nd, 2008, 06:25 PM

This is definitley one type of blast that does really get my blood flowing. I have n ever done it, but would love to at som e point
in the future.
I would imag ine the best thing to do would be to place 3 or 4 charges throughout the car and connect them in series with
detcord for the best effect, (like som eone stated above). I would probably say one in the boot (trunk), 2 in the m ain interior
( o n e b a c k s e a t a n d o ne front area), and one at the front of the car, probably under the bonnet. (hood)
I t a l l d e p e n d s on what kind of dam age you are looking for. 25kgs of anything should com pletely vapourize m ost of it, apart
from the heavy duty parts like the eng i n e b l o c k a n d g e a rbox etc. I've seen a few clips before of cars being destroyed with
e x p l o s i v e s . I n m ost of them there was never m ore than 5 pounds of explosive involved, and the results were incredible.
Here check this video out.
http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=kpYu4HLiXFc&feature=related
As you can see even this pretty m uch takes the car to a relatively small pile of parts.
If I was personally planning to do this type of explosion, I would probably like to experiment with a couple of scrap cars just to
see the effects of the am m o u n t a n d p l a c e m ent of explosive. I'm not im plem enting that a nyone would do this is any way, but if
you were actually planning on blowing a car up in "real time", it would have one simple objective, a nd that would be to rem o v e
the person travelling in it. In this scenario, one would not have access to inside of the car. He would have to constru ct his
device underneath the car.
I would like to play around with this scenario, m erley from a curious point of view, (Not because I plan to blow some o n e u p ) .
W ould it be best to place the explosive in the centre of the car, under the drivers footwell area, or m a y b e m ultiple. Possibly
even a large shaped charge etc??
To anyone who is able to blast around freely and safely like this, I would love to see som e experimenting with cars. Changing
the characteristics around would be m o r e p l e a s i n g , b e i n g s a s a l l y o u e v e r s e e m to see is "Blowing a car up" and the results
bein g a pulvarised mass of metal. It's enjoyable but leaves it hard to understand m ore about specifics of the blast.
billybobobrain August 15th, 2008, 08:08 PM

If I were going to blow a car into oblivion, I would put som e gas in the ta n k p l a c e a c o u p l e o f p o u n d s o f e x p l o s i v e s o n t h e g a s
t a n k a b o u t 1 /3 of the way in from the back of the car. As close to the m i d d l e a s p o s s i b l e . T h e n I w o u l d p l a c e a n o t h e r c h a r g e
a b o u t t h e s a m e size between the engine and the cab, as low as you could on the fire wall. And ma y b e o n e m o r e s o m ewhere in
the m i d d l e i n s i d e t h e p a s s e n g e r c o m p a r t m e n t .
If I were to try this. I would also try to find som e inform ation on where the VIN. num bers on the ca r where so I could rem o v e
them.
Cobalt.45 August 16th, 2008, 04:06 AM
MythBusters just aired a good explosion of a kid's parent's car. It was aired 8-15-08, Episode 84: Viewers Choice Special, I
think it was a rerun.
I can't seem to find anything except the "Hollywood" version where they used a couple gallons of gasoline:
http://www.videosift.com /video/Mythbu sters-Exploding-Car-Caug h t - o n - H i g h - S p e e d - C a m era
T h e R E A L d e m olition of the ca r was done w/what looked to be ANFO, in a quite large quantity- m aybe >200 lbs. It was packed
under the ho od and inside the car. The largest pieces shown was a rim and a portion of th e MacPherson strut.
The engine wasn't shown, if in fact there was anything to be shown (I also think it should have survived somewhat intact).
If anyone can find the video of it, it sh ould make for good viewing as well show the placement of the HE.
fluoroantimonic August 16th, 2008, 06:45 PM

My recom mendation is to save your high velocity explosives for the engine and leave the ANAl for the body. I would guess that
packing enough ETN around the engine would leave you with pre tty sm all pieces. It would be very interestin g to fill the crank
case with a liquid exp losive like NM, NG, or EGDN in addition to the ETN around it. Maybe fill the transm issio n case with it too!
:P
The rest of the car sh ould be pretty we ll taken care of by a (or m aybe two or three) hundred pounds of ANAl placed under it. If
you want the leftovers to be sm a l l a s p o s s i b l e i t m i g h t n o t b e a b a d i d e a to go with som ething more brisan t than ANAl though.
ANNM is obviously the first choice, but I'm sure there are some other alternatives. Maybe AN/EGDN? On the other ha nd the Al
w o u l d d e f i n a t e l y b e g o o d f o r m a k i n g a m ore im pressive detonation with that nice long shock wave.
Filling the ga s tank with plain old gasoline seems kindof boring in m y opinion. Th e r e m u s t b e s o m ething a little mo re
interesting to fill it with...
I l o o k e d i n t o NM synthesis just for kicks. US Pa tent 4,424,385 has lots of good in fo. It actually looks not too hard, sim ply
m a k e m ethyl chloride from methanol and HCl and react that with sodium nitrite. The catch is that the reaction requires a
pressure vessel since m ethyl chloride boils and -25*C.I believe regular schedule 40 steel pipe wou l d b e s t r o n g e n o u g h t o
handle the pressure at the needed reaction temperature (65-75*C). All materials are cheap and O TC. It might be a bit more
work, but its worth considering . I would bet it is substantially easier and cheaper than synthesizing an equivalent am ount of NG
or EGDN. Not to m ention m uch safer.
-=HeX=- August 18th, 2008, 05:13 PM

Ah car demolition... W hy not fill every available orifice o r tank with EGDN or PLX or an othe r liquid explosive. Then surround the
engine with ETN, place ETN/NG into every crack in the engine, fill tires with EGDN, and use ANFO for the boot, interior,
underneath the car (seeing as you now have LOADS of AN on hand) and everywhere you can pack som e in. place a few sacks
UNDER the car so we can see if your new fuel can really m ake cars fly. I reckon we can stuff 100kg or more into a small saloon
car and 200kg into a people carrier. The huge am ount of explosives will simply cause the car to 'vanish'. Have fun and get it
o n t a p e , b e c a u s e I L O V E D t h e last large blast.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Detonation and Demolition > Triggering Devices
Log in
View Full Version : Triggering Devices
Hubb May 4th, 2008, 10:48 AM

I play paintball. I tend to take this to the extreme sometimes and try to come up with different ways of doing stuff.
I was looking around on the net for different triggering devises for paintball mines (it just seemed that the conventional trip wire was just too "conventional"). I found a couple
of links that are made for just that.
I've searched this forum and haven't located anything of such so far (if it's there, I apologize). Anyway, here is my contribution to this site.
http://unconventional-airsoft.com/2006/11/19/stealth-action-motion-sensor-system/
http://unconventional-airsoft.com/2006/11/19/stealth-action-laser-tripwire-system/
The links are for airsoft, but they have been successful in paintball as well. The motion sensor is best for indoor applications and the laser is for outdoor. I've yet to apply them
to "other things" but I'm sure it could be.
-=HeX=- May 5th, 2008, 02:01 PM

UTFSE! I will not spoonfeed but I will help a bit. How about command detonated? You have then on a remote control system (UTFSE)? Or like a therimin mine (It is in this
section, UTFSE) or maybe a PIR Sensor?
I think the laser would be prone to going off due to falling leaves... I advise sticking with the good old tripwire he I were you or if you really need to do so use a beam break
barrier.
Passive infra red has a range longer than the mines radius so it would in off with the enemy outside the range of the blast. That would make the mine moot. What type of
paint ball are you playing?
Now go forth and UTFSE. You must help yoursel first. Also, newbie with a new topic as its first post... Search for the triggers on real mines. Then improvise and modify for
Paintball.
BlackFalcoN May 5th, 2008, 03:17 PM

I like the design for alarm applications, it's simple, uses sourcable components and very achievable for the average amateurist.
While it will work most of the time, I have some reliability issues with the CdS detector.
The use of a paper or foil 'hood' (as displayed in the second link schematics) is put there to prevent ambient light rays from triggering the sensor.
However, if the ambient light is strong enough (e.g. the detector is put in a bright lighted room or outside in variable light source conditions ), the trigger will fail to go off if the
laser is toggled.
One can increase or decrease the threshold level for the sensor, but this will still result in false positives during the transition of ambient light. This 'flaw' is also seen in
commercial PIR movement detectors, who also apply the same CdS approach.
One improvement I would suggest is replacing the paper dome with a 'multi faceted Fresnel lens' (halve sphered plastic cap with ribles inside ;)) as in a commercial PIR
detector. It's a crucial component in the design to limit these false positives, however it's still occasionally prone to them.
Ultimately, it may be better to just take a commercial PIR detector as a base unit to start from and configure it you your specific needs.
While perfect for non-critical sentry applications where an alarm is triggered, I would never dream of hooking the universal alarm output to something more destructive, since
the reliability/accuracy/safety factor is too uncertain ;)
Also, I agree that this topic has been discussed before and did not deserve a new thread or be put at least in the 'Electronics' section, since it mostly deals with the construction
of electronical devices.
file May 21st, 2008, 09:24 PM

Wouldn't it make sense to have your receiver remote from the explosive so as to try and keep it out of any kind of blackout zone as well as to help prevent detection and
make it reusable?
BlackFalcoN May 22nd, 2008, 06:18 AM

That largely depends on the application I would say.
For amateurs experimenting with small inexpensive charges, then yes, the cost of the receiver can be saved each time by firing it remotely.
For larger to huge charges, the cost of the receiver will be relatively small compared to the explosives and materials used. A simpler receiver design will offer a safer, cheaper
and more reliable solution and may be prefered.
For some tactical applications and mass murdering devices, it may be even highly desired for the triggering mechanism to be destroyed on detonation, to make any evidence
or forensic analysis more difficult.
It's up to the individual to asses his needs and design a fitting solution, and the design mentioned here can be part of a modular design.
Woland_91 May 22nd, 2008, 02:44 PM

Hubb, if you are only going to use this for paintball, then I would advice to stick to the old tripwire method. Unless your mines are re-usable (only have to change the
cartridge), then it isn't worth it. By the way, what fill are you using? Paint or flour?

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science > D e t o n a t i o n a n d D e m olition > Air-blast pressure equations.
Log in
View Full Version : Air-blast pressure equations.
waveguider July 28th, 20 08, 04:0 5 PM

I know I am fairly new to this forum but I've had a few questions bug m e for som e tim e a n d e v e n t h o u g h I s e a r c h e d for posts
which might answer the question I only had limited luck, ( ''Al Koholics'' post is attached below).
However I digress, I am rather interested in the safe observation of conventional and enhanced blast explosions, I like getting
as close as possible but still k e e p i n g t h e p r o b a bility of death to a m inimum . I NEVER use any dense or metal casings so
shra pnel is n ot a real problem ...reflection of the shock wave is n ot a problem either as all tests are carried out in a flat barren
area.
On the page linked below there lies a equation ''to calculate the pressure of an explosion at a target zone Hyde (1965) give s
the following''
p=(4120/z^3) - (105/z^2) + (39.5/z)
where
z=(R/W^[1/3])
R is the outward radial distance in feet from the target
W is explosive m ass in lb (equivalent TNT).
Source:http://www.navweaps.com /index_tech/tech-048.htm
I wanted to test and see if this equation would help me in determ ining som e factors so I plugged in the following hypothetical
n u m bers.
A 5kg charge of TNT and I want to kno w the pressure at 25m fro m t h e s i t e o f d e t o n a t i o n :
5kg= ~11lb
2 5 m = ~82ft
z= (82/2.224) ==> 36.8705
p= (4120/50123)- (105/1359.4) + (39 .5/36.87 05)
p= (0.0822) - (0.07724) + (1.07132)
p= 1.07 PSI
which I think is enough to knock a person over and there is a possibility of eardrum rupture.
That's fine, now imag ine the person was 100m away not 25m ant the charge m a s s s t a y e d t h e s a m e, we ha ve:
1 0 0 m =~328ft
z=328/2.224 ===> ~147.48
p= (4120/3207873.12) - (105 /21750.94457) + (39.5/147.48)
p= (0.00128434) - (0.004827377) + (0.2678)
p= 0.264 PSI
Now as you can see the pressure at 25 m according to this equation is ~ 4 times that at 100m. This seem s inherently wrong to
m e as I would have expected it to be 64 times higher b ecause of the well known inverse cube law.
Does this equation re ally work or am I in error? I would greatly appreciate any help in determining what I did wrong or if there
is a equation out there for finding the overpressure produced..
My second question is related to m y lo ve feelin g the shock wave (blast wave) hit m e when explosives or fuel detonate I would
l i k e a m easure at what PSI of overpressure this phenom enon occurs at?
In regard to ''the probability o f a fatal injury'' equation on this page

http://www.boom ershoot.org/general/Effects.htm
Since it never really g oes to zero, what is an optimum p robability for safe viewing but to also ''feel'' the explosion? I know that
duration of o verpressure plays an enormous role in FAE's so if there is something like a graph of injury which has overpressure
o n o n e a x i s a n d d u r a tion on the other that would be imm e n s e l y u s e f u l .
Thank you.
As a way to show that I am not sim ply wanting to be ''spoon fed'' I am attaching a mem ber of this comm unities post (without
their permission) After an extensive search the closest thing I got to wha t I was seeking is the following post:
(1) The threshold level of overpressure which is estim a t e d t o c a u s e l u n g d a m a g e i s a b o u t 6 8 . 9 k P a f o r a s i m p l e u n r e i n f o r c e d ,

unreflected blast wave. There will be considerable variation in this value with differing conditions of exposure.
(2) The threshold value for eardrum rupture is probably around 22 kPa (0.2 atm ) and that overpre ssure associated with a 50%
probability of eardrum rupture ranges from 9 0 t o 1 3 0 k P a ( 0 . 9 t o 1 . 2 a t m ) .
Sooo....if by saying it's com forting to know that people can survive exposure to pressures many times in excess of 1000psi...
y o u m e a n t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t a h u m a n b e i n g m ay live and function biologically in an stable pre ssurized environment...then
ok. But in the context of a bla st wave, no. To rupture your eardrum s I need 3.19 psi. 22000 pa aint all that m uc h. To cau se
lung dam age to you, I need to apply a wave th at generates just a hair under 10 psi overp ressure. Im not saying death...but
lung dam age. The point at wh ich fatal lung (or other organ (especially lung and g astrointestinal tract)) injuries occur is a little
over this. So I would have to disagree that a hum an body, in the context of our conversation here, cannot withstand pressures
m any tim e s i n e x c e s s o f 1 0 0 0 p s i . M o r e l i k e 1 0 .
April 21st, 2002, 09:12 PM

Al Koholic
Praetor''
The poster, unfortunately, doesn't seem to be active here anymore.
gaussincarnate July 30th, 20 08, 07:2 5 PM

The inverse cube law does not apply here. It only applies when the equation is of the form a/x^3. This equation is in the form
a/x^3+b/x^2+c/x (and yes, I know that the signs alternate, but imagine that b is negative). As a result, the inverse cube law
does not apply, not b y a longshot.
W hen X is very small (up to about five or so, depending on how you look at thing s), the inverse cube law is reasonably
accu rate. At the distances whe re you would almost want to be standing, it does not even com e close to applying. Try graphin g
the equation and then 4120/z^3 alone and you will see what I m e a n .
waveguider July 31st, 2008, 08:50 PM

Ah I see wha t you're saying, so just for closure the equation is indeed correct?
gaussincarnate A ugus t 5t h, 2008, 10: 23 PM

Your answers seem to be correct. If you are absolutely sure about the va lidity of the equation itself, then yes, it is correct.
waveguider August 11th, 2008, 10:32 PM

Thanks for clearing that up, as for the second part of th e original post do you have any idea as to what is classed as an
acce ptable ''probability of a fa tal injury''
I've also found empirically that instead of using the larger cumbersome imperial units using equation ''to calculate the
p r e s s u r e o f a n e x p l o s i o n a t a t a r g e t z o n e ' ' I h a v e f o u n d t h a t a d e c e n t m etric app roximation is P= 185(D/W ^[1/3])^-1.2
W here
P is in kilo pascals.
D is in meters.
W is in kilograms.
Metric>Imperial.
gaussincarnate August 12th, 2008, 06:55 PM

Bear with me for a m o m ent. I knowat serious injury can be inflicted above 130dB, and I have heard of people surviving well
over 140dB, so I can guess th a t a r o u n d 1 5 0 d B s h o u l d b e v e r y d a n g e r o u s ( d e f i n i t e h e a r l i n g l o s s , h e m m oraging, etc).
L[dB]=20log(p[rm s]/p[ref])=20log(p[rm s]/(20*10^-6)).
150dB=20log(p/(20*10^-6)), so p=632Pa. This, however, should not be fatal, just far closer than you want to stand.
I will now ma ke the rather risky assum ption that it shou ld take more than 200dB to ensure death. Let's say 250, just to be
absolutely sure. Following the aforeme ntioned form u l a , i t s h o u l d r e q u i r e a b o u t 6 3 2 4 5 5 5 3 P a ( 6 3 2 4 5 5 5 3 . 2 0 3 4 P a , i f y o u p r e f e r ) .
I would imag ine that this should be fatal, but if it is not, anyone in this range would proba bly wish that they are dea d . T h e s e
are rather rough figures, but they should be close enough. After all, it's not like you need to know how m uch pressu re you
could survive ...I hope.

Detonation and Demolition PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Detonation and Demolition PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The Explosives and W eapons Forum > Military Science

vBulletin v3.7.2, Copyright 2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

1. Air-blast pressure equations. (5 replies)

vBulletin v3.7.2, Copyright 2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

The Explosives and W eapons Forum

User Nam e: Password:

vBulletin v3.7.2, Copyright 2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

stanfield December 2nd, 2001, 12:04 PM

any reply is more than appreciated...

BrAiNFeVeR December 2nd, 2001, 12:31 PM

DarkAngel December 2nd, 2001, 01:33 PM

I never thought that most Belgium people would do such things ;)

For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1)

[This message has been edited by DarkAngel (edited 12-03-2001).]

Madog555 December 2nd, 2001, 05:12 PM

mongo blongo December 2nd, 2001, 07:56 PM

vulture December 3rd, 2001, 09:48 AM

[This message has been edited by vulture (edited 12-03-2001).]

BrAiNFeVeR December 3rd, 2001, 10:18 AM

Or just give me yours ...

stanfield December 3rd, 2001, 10:57 AM

is the screen a weak point ? no ?

stanfield December 3rd, 2001, 11:02 AM

vulture December 4th, 2001, 12:32 PM

stanfield December 4th, 2001, 01:05 PM

vulture December 4th, 2001, 01:45 PM

[This message has been edited by vulture (edited 12-04-2001).]

DarkAngel December 4th, 2001, 11:57 PM

For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1)

nbk2000 December 5th, 2001, 01:39 AM

So forget trying it with the machines at the bank.

Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

CragHack December 5th, 2001, 02:18 AM

[This message has been edited by CragHack (edited 12-05-2001).]

nbk2000 December 5th, 2001, 03:56 AM

Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

stanfield December 5th, 2001, 04:50 AM

Anthony December 5th, 2001, 05:46 AM

vulture December 5th, 2001, 06:03 AM

Machiavelli December 5th, 2001, 07:56 AM

nbk2000 December 5th, 2001, 09:17 AM

Soundtrack for this post provided courtesy of Pantera.

Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

CragHack December 5th, 2001, 01:33 PM

stanfield December 5th, 2001, 01:51 PM

what about this idea ?

Anthony December 5th, 2001, 02:17 PM

Jhonbus December 5th, 2001, 02:59 PM

PGP Key ID on MIT server: 0x0ADBA985

[This message has been edited by Jhonbus (edited 12-05-2001).]

PYRO500 December 5th, 2001, 04:58 PM

Anthony December 5th, 2001, 05:16 PM

PYRO500 December 5th, 2001, 06:08 PM

mrloud December 5th, 2001, 09:40 PM

stanfield December 6th, 2001, 12:39 PM

stanfield December 6th, 2001, 12:41 PM

Anthony December 6th, 2001, 01:28 PM

vulture December 7th, 2001, 06:37 AM

stanfield December 8th, 2001, 04:20 AM

any reply is more than appreciated

vulture December 8th, 2001, 06:03 AM

stanfield December 10th, 2001, 05:54 AM