Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Theatre > Pyrotechnics > BATF strange cl...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 17 Topic 7223 of 7350
Post > Topic >>

BATF strange classification

by Mike Burge <frontier_marketing@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Apr 16, 2008 at 09:52 PM

Why are there so many debates on weather  flash is a high explosive?
There is a very simple answer. First of all the term flash powder is
not univeral. There are many forms of flash powder, and the 70/30 type
KClO4/ dark aluminum commonly used in fireworks seems  less likely to
qualify as a high explosive than other forms. First and foremost  the
way we light the flash powder in fireworks, it will not detononate
being that the shockwave through the powder is less than the speed of
sound. Many flash powders will detonate if initiated by a booster
charge/blasting cap or primary explosive if you will. We don't really
use these much in fireworks lol. Have you ever heard of a cheddite
type explosive, one that will burn when lit , but detonate when
ignited by a booster charge? The same goes for many types of whistle
mixes  and smokeless powders. Picric acid/chlorate based whistles as
well as even the traditional whistle mix can detonate with a booster
charge.

black powder and certain other low explosives/propellents other than
(smokeless powder) do not fit in this category. I have never heard of
any detonating even in hundreds of pound quantaties or initiated by
the most powerful blasting cap.

In terms of pyrotechnics whistles and flash powder should not be
classified as high explosives as we do not use booster charges or
shockwaves to set off a detonation.

So by definition these explosives are in a group of their own and can
be used as propellents(not flash)/low explosives/or high explosives
depending on how they are compacted or set off. The potential to
detonate is there if needed, but we don't use it in fireworks. I think
this group should just be called explosives as care needs to be taken
in all 3 applications. I have heard them referred to as class 6
explosives, which can be both low and high explosives depending on
type ignition.

nitrocellulose/based or double based smokeless powders
chlorate and other flashes powders
whistle mix especially piric acid based/chlorate
the possibilty also exists that perchlorate whistles and flashes can
be used as above, but the only experiement Ive read using KCLO4 (which
is documented and recorded) is

Dr. T. Shimizu (1981). In this work is sighted an
experiment in Japan wherein a common flash comp (KCLO4 x%, Alx%,
Sb2S3
x% ...the common japanese formula, what Shimizu calls his loudest)
was
initiated with a common #6 fuse-cap. It did indeed detonate @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 as stated before it doesn't really matter because we do not use
booster charges and fuse caps. We use common fire. The matter is not
as confusing as it sounds. Many flashes and whistle mixes have
detonated, but a booster charge or fuse cap was used. Most people
asking if its a high explosive are talking about common fuse ignition.
Flash and whistle even if they do not detonate are very powerful in
their low explosive form and loud which might create some of the
confusion.




 17 Posts in Topic:
BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-16 21:52:47 
Re: BATF strange classification
"Lloyd E. Sponenburg  2008-04-17 06:23:09 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-17 09:13:23 
Re: BATF strange classification
"Lloyd E. Sponenburg  2008-04-17 12:31:27 
Re: BATF strange classification
"POWDERBURNZ@[EMAIL   2008-04-17 14:47:05 
Re: BATF strange classification
"Fireball" <  2008-04-17 18:23:46 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-17 23:18:19 
Re: BATF strange classification
sstrik <sstrik@[EMAIL   2008-04-20 16:52:45 
Re: BATF strange classification
"Lloyd E. Sponenburg  2008-04-21 07:32:11 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-21 16:09:40 
Re: BATF strange classification
ekim2653@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-04-22 12:19:21 
Re: BATF strange classification
"Lloyd E. Sponenburg  2008-04-22 14:45:06 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-22 18:31:20 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-22 18:49:02 
Re: BATF strange classification
robgood@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-04-22 20:27:49 
Re: BATF strange classification
sstrik <sstrik@[EMAIL   2008-04-22 22:25:43 
Re: BATF strange classification
Mike Burge <frontier_m  2008-04-24 08:17:00 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan13V112 Fri Jul 4 15:26:26 CDT 2008.