Time Fuse Investigation

Introduction
I was led into this investigation by a posting in the Pyro-Gear Forum, showing the work of US
pyrotechnist Tom Rebenklau, characterised by precision timing in relatively small (2 and 7/8 inch)
rocket header shells. I decided to take up the challenge to try and reproduce at least some of his
effects, starting with multiple precision-timed flash bursts.

Unit construction
I chose to use Chinese time fuse as the timing element, based on my previous reading, which
suggested it would be capable of achieving the degree of accuracy that I required. I then designed
the inserts, with the intention of making them as small as I
reasonably could, to maximise the number that would fit in
a header, without being too fiddly to make. The tubes are
approximately 6mm I.D.1 and 3cm long, rolled with a 3cm x
7cm, 210gsm card liner and a 4cm x 8cm outer layer of 75gsm printer paper. The outer layer is rolled
flush with one end of the liner and the overhanging end is then ‘swirled’ and tucked in to create a
neat closure at the base of the tube. I tap the end on the workbench with the former still in place, to
make sure the closure is well compacted, and then slide out the former and leave them to dry.

The tube is only partly filled with a burst charge (about 0.2g) plus a short length of black match, to
help ensure ignition. The time fuse was primed on both ends (on the belt-and-braces principle) and,
when dry, was glued in place. I insert the fuse a short way into the tube and then run a fillet of white
wood glue around the joint, before pushing the fuse a little further in, which appears to give a solid
and secure joint.

Initial Trial
I constructed a single unit using a short, but unmeasured length of time fuse and fired it from an
8mm I.D. ‘mortar’. Everything worked, but the insert hit the ground before it exploded. I deduced
slightly more lift was needed, but was left with an uneasy feeling that the delay was somewhat
longer than I was expecting.

While developing the inserts, I was also working on constructing a time fuse cutter which I hoped
would give me the cutting precision that I needed. This was now ready for use, so I repeated the
experiment – with a little more lift – and with a measured length of fuse that should have given
about a 1.5s burn time. The timed delay was 2.4s. This was too great a discrepancy to ignore, so I
decided to conduct a more detailed investigation.

1
The diameter of the time fuse was measured to be 6.0mm ± 0.1mm and I thought that a 6mm I.D tube might
be too tight a fit. For formers, I tried both a section of ¼ inch (6.35mm) stainless steel rod and a length of
aluminium rod, nominally 6mm, but visibly extruded though a worn die and actually measuring 6.05mm in
diameter. Tubes rolled on the ¼ inch former can be a bit sloppy, but those rolled on the nominal 6mm rod are
a perfect, snug sliding fit.
Notes on Measurement Techniques
All dimension measurements are made with the aid of a digital caliper, reading to 0.01mm.

The guide slot of my fuse cutter is 6.0mm wide and 3.0mm deep and holds the time fuse straight –
and snugly in place – while it is being cut. I measure the cut lengths while they are in the guide slot,
to ensure that the measurement is not distorted by any residual curvature of the fuse.

Time measurements are a bit more involved. I chose not to use a stopwatch because it is subject to
an unknown amount of user error. I find that I get more reliable results by videoing each trial,
transferring it to video editing software and extracting the audio file, which I then view in a wave
editor (my video editor doesn’t show sufficiently accurate timing data when viewing in stop-frame
mode). It isn’t always easy to select the exact moment that a report sound starts, but trials show
that I can reproduce measurements to well within 0.01s. Comparisons between this method and the
average of repeated stopwatch timings are reasonably consistent.

Burn Times for Primed Fuse

Method
For this experiment, I cut six different lengths of fuse and primed them on both ends. The inner end
was primed by dipping in 10% nitrocellulose lacquer2, quickly dabbing off any excess on absorbent
paper and then pressing the end into meal powder (-60 mesh). The assumption that this would be
sufficient to ignite the report charge has, so far, proved correct.

The outer end was primed by dipping in a thin slurry of meal in the same 10% lacquer and then
pressing into very fine (40-60 mesh) granulated BP. The idea in this case was to make sure that fire
was successfully transferred from the burst (or lift) charge and again, so far, it has worked
consistently. Both ends were left to dry for at least 8 hours.

In order to conduct the tests on the ground, rather than firing each one into the air, I modified the
inserts as shown in the diagram on the right. To emulate
ignition from a burst charge, I made a small 6mm I.D cap,
rolled from 8cm x 2cm paper, swirling the end few
millimetres closed, in a similar manner to that used for the
report case. When it was dry, I pierced a small hole near the
closed end and inserted a length of black match, added 0.1g
of fine BP and glued it over the end of the fuse. To avoid annoying the neighbours, I replaced the
burst with 0.2g of fine BP.

2
NC lacquer is from OB, diluted with acetone to approximately 10%. From the smell, the solvent in this lacquer
contains amyl acetate and, in consequence, takes somewhat longer to dry than if the solvent were pure
acetone.
Results
The results of this trial were as follows:

Length (mm) Burn time (s)

13.72 2.195
18.93 2.765
24.55 3.440
31.27 3.981
34.29 4.420
35.40 4.406

Conclusions
The points are a reasonably good fit to a straight line, which gives some degree of confidence in the
results. Furthermore, the slope of the best fit line is 0.1027 s/mm, which translates to a burn speed
of 0.970 cm/s – this is in good agreement with some earlier, less accurate, measurements that I
made (0.95cm/s) and with the quoted nominal burn rate of 1cm/s.

What is surprising is the y-intercept of 0.8281s. There is an additional, constant time delay of around
0.83s (±0.06s, estimated standard deviation) caused, in some way, by the transfer of fire at one or
both of the two ends of the fuse. The reason for this requires further investigation.

Unprimed Fuse Test

In an attempt to see what effect, if any, the priming may have on fire transfer, I made one single trial
of the same experiment, but with no priming of any kind on either end of the fuse. Although this
makes fire transfer less likely, I guessed that, under the conditions of the experiment, fire transfer
would be unlikely to fail. This guess proved correct, at least in this case.

Results
Length (mm) Burn time (s)
20.80 2.24
This result, when plotted on the graph of the previous
experiment’s results, indicates that the delay is
significantly reduced. Assuming that the slope (i.e. the
burning rate) is unchanged, the y-intercept can be
calculated to be y0 = 2.24 – 0.1027*20.80 = 0.1(001)sec.

This is just one result, but it suggests that the transfer delay is reduced to about 50ms at each end of
the fuse, which is the sort of time I was originally expecting.

As a follow-up I decided to conduct more trials, this time using a variety of priming techniques.
Priming Tests
Method
I constructed 16 further ground-test inserts, as described in the previous section, using time fuses
cut to approximately3 the same length. In all cases the end inside the report tube was unprimed. I
primed the outer end in eight different ways, preparing two samples of each.

Sample No. Code Type of Prime

1,2 A Dipped in NC lacquer and then in 40-60 mesh BP
3,4 B Dipped in NC lacquer and then in -60 mesh meal powder
5,6 C Dipped in a slurry of meal powder in NC lacquer
7,8 D Double dipped in a slurry of meal powder in NC lacquer
9,10 E Dipped in meal powder/NC lacquer slurry and then in 40-60 mesh BP
11,12 F Dipped in a meal (+ 2% dextrin) in water slurry and then in 40-60m BP
13,14 G Double dipped in the meal slurry and then in 40-60m BP
15 H No prime, 2 lengths of black match tied over the end (parallel)
16 H No prime, 2 lengths of black match tied over the end (in a cross)
The units were assembled – minus their igniter caps – as soon as all the primes were visibly dry. To
ensure that there was no possibility that unevaporated solvent could affect the results, all samples
were left in a warm room for three days, and then for a further 36 hours after the igniter caps were
glued in place. Samples 15 and 16 had modified caps, to accommodate the tied-on black match.

Results
No. Primer Unprimed Burn Time (s) Calculated
Code Len. (mm) Delay (s)
1 A 26.99 3.38 0.61
2 A 26.86 3.35 0.59
3 B 26.97 3.31 0.54
4 B 27.01 3.27 0.50
5 C 26.93 3.52 0.75
6 C 26.72 3.41 0.67
7 D 26.92 3.65 0.89
8 D 26.94 3.63 0.86
9 E 27.06 3.31 0.53
10 E 26.92 3.33 0.57
11 F 26.94 2.98 0.21
12 F 26.95 2.97 0.20
13 G 26.86 3.20 0.44
14 G 27.04 3.08 0.31
15 H 27.17 2.91 0.12
16 H 26.98 2.95 0.18
With the exception of primer type G, the two results for each prime type appear to be remarkably
consistent. I’m not sure why there is such a relatively large discrepancy in case G; perhaps the
primes in the two cases were of significantly different thickness. This case was only included to see if
the prime thickness affected the delay – and comparison between cases F and G show that it clearly

3
While cutting these time fuses I discovered a design defect in my time fuse cutter. The slight vibration while
manipulating the time fuse and cutting it caused the screwed thread to turn slightly, so the cut pieces ended
up varying slightly in length. I made a temporary fix for use in further tests, by fitting a locking nut.
does. Case G (double dipping) is not likely to be used in a practical device so I do not, at this stage,
plan to investigate the matter any further.

The following table lists, in descending order, the mean calculated delay times, together with the
corresponding prime type.

Delay (s) Type of Prime

0.87 Double dipped in meal powder/NC lacquer slurry
0.71 Dipped in meal powder/NC lacquer slurry
0.60 Dipped in NC lacquer and then in 40-60 mesh BP
0.55 Dipped in meal powder/NC lacquer slurry and then in 40-60 mesh BP
0.52 Dipped in NC lacquer and then in -60 mesh meal powder
0.37 Double dipped in a meal (+2%Dextrin) in water slurry and then in 40-60m BP
0.21 Dipped in a meal (+2%Dextrin) in water slurry and then in 40-60m BP
0.15 No prime, 2 lengths of black match tied over the end4
0.10 No prime5

Discussion
Before starting this investigation I had no idea that the nature of the prime could have such a
significant effect on time fuse burn times. In many cases, where precise timing is unnecessary, it may
not be a significant factor; ruggedness, reliable ignition and ease of application of the prime may all
be more important. However, the nature of the prime turns out to be vital in the case of creating
predictably accurate timings.

It is interesting to note that the most commonly recommended priming techniques, using NC
lacquer in one way or another, turn out to be consistently bad in this respect. The tests reported
here do not explain why this should be the case, but some speculation may be in order.

While performing the tests, I occasionally noted that the force of the jet of flame and gas from the
time fuse started out fairly weak, not achieving full strength until a short time later. On examining
the sound records more closely, I found that this was, with variable degrees of difficulty, detectable
in them and that the initial diminution in volume could last for up to around two seconds. I have not
included any such data in this report because it was almost impossible to measure the effect reliably
and/or consistently in the data I had. I did, however, notice a suggestion of a general trend such that
the length of the effect appeared to correlate with the measured delay. I also strongly suspect that
the effect is only significantly present in the cases for which NC lacquer is used in the prime.

I am led to think that the mechanism at work is a slowing of the burning rate of the first segment of
the time fuse, possibly caused by the absorption of NC lacquer into the time fuse core. Variations of
delay could be accounted for either by the different depths to which the lacquer is absorbed, or by
different concentrations of absorbed material (or both). These hypotheses could, in principle, be
tested but I do not currently propose to investigate them.

4
Combining the results from both configurations of black match.
5
A single result, from the earlier trial.
Conclusions
Firstly, throughout the investigation, there were no failures to transmit fire to the burst charge, even
when this end of the time fuse was not primed. This suggests that no priming is needed, and that the
method described earlier, using a length of black match in the tube, is perfectly adequate.

Clearly, the application of any form of prime to the outer end must, however slightly, increase the
effective length of the time fuse and thereby add to the ‘end-effect’ delay. In addition, since the
amount of prime cannot be guaranteed to be identical on different samples, the greater the length
of this delay, the greater the variation in total burn time is likely to be. It is clear that the effect must
be minimised in order to obtain reliably predictable and accurate timings.

I am led to suggest the following points:

1) The priming layer should be as thin as is reasonably possible

2) It might be worth investigating the use of a pure solvent (e.g. alcohol or acetone) and a
prime that contains a binder (e.g. red gum) that is soluble in it. Dipping the fuse into the
solvent and then into the prime should minimise absorption of dissolved solids into the core.

Finally, adding strands of black match must enhance the chance of ignition. Since it appears to have
a minimal effect on the delay, it is probably a good idea to use this technique, regardless of which
other form of prime is used. It might even be possible to dispense with any other form of prime,
though this proposition would need to be tested for reliability in real devices.

Acknowledgements
Thanks to ‘Tyvole’ for inspiring me to start on this journey

And thanks to both ‘Pyro-Gear’ and ‘Tyvole’ for their helpful comments and suggestions.