Slow Whistle mix

[insutama]

Okay thanks livingston

[oldspark]

http://www.pyrobin.com/files/making-na-benz-whistle-fuel.wmv

[mikeee]

This is a good tutorial for making whistle fuel.

 

http://www.firesmithtools.com/Tutorials/whistlefuel.pdf

[oldspark]

mikeee-I thought he was going to change that so you were not mixing dry chemicals before the lubricant was added.

[mikeee]

Why...............I have never had a problem mixing it that way........everything is contained inside the baggie while mixing and when the baggie is opened up you pour the solvent into the dry mix and process the chemicals into a dough ball for running through the screen. The dry mix does not become sensitive until after you process and combine with the solvent and catalyst, and after the solvent is evaporated and the fuel is dry. My work area is properly grounded and I take precautions for static charges. There have been hundreds of batches of fuel made this way, with no problems encountered.

[insutama]

Can I just use one of the benzoates

[ddewees]

Why...............I have never had a problem mixing it that way........everything is contained inside the baggie while mixing and when the baggie is opened up you pour the solvent into the dry mix and process the chemicals into a dough ball for running through the screen. The dry mix does not become sensitive until after you process and combine with the solvent and catalyst, and after the solvent is evaporated and the fuel is dry. My work area is properly grounded and I take precautions for static charges. There have been hundreds of batches of fuel made this way, with no problems encountered.

 

You do realize that bag is basically full of dry flash right? With that said, I make mine the exact same way.

[oldspark]

Yea there was a discussion on fireworking and all seemed to agree (including Ben) there was a better way then mixing the dry chemicals and he was going to change it on his web site.

I do the Dan Thames method.

I dont have a problem with the dry chemicals but if there is a safer way to get what you want why not do it?

[ddewees]

I don't think you're correct. I believe Ben agreed it would be more work trying to incorporate a dry chem (perchlorate) into a wet soupy mix of benzoate.

 

It's no different than baking. You mix your dry chemicals (ingredients) first.

 

I think it's the plastic bag that alarms most people.

 

The last batch I made (5 kg/11 lbs) was intimately screened several times through a 16 mesh, then placed into a 5 gallon bucket, where solvent and phlegmatizer was added.

 

Edit: 5 kilos, not 5000.

Edited July 19, 2015 by ddewees

[nater]

5000 kg of whistle? Are you trying to put a shell in orbit?

[ddewees]

Sort of, it was for that three inch ID whistle motor. It didn't fly though.

http://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/o588/SaltLakeAreaPyros/20150503_171948_zpsyltx1wtb.jpghttp://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/o588/SaltLakeAreaPyros/20150525_142234_zpsbbvqtclq.jpg

http://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/o588/SaltLakeAreaPyros/20150525_142248_zps3odsrgmo.jpghttp://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/o588/SaltLakeAreaPyros/20150530_125524_zpslwpmi57x.jpg

Edited July 19, 2015 by ddewees

[calebkessinger]

5000 kg...

lol .. nice catch Nate.

 

a Fleet of 3 in rockets !!!

[mikeee]

Oldspark,

 

You statement is misleading, Ben Smith stated that he and a large number of Pyro's have made fuel in this manner

for quite some time with no issues. The dry chemicals are not as sensitive as flash powder until after the wet mixing

process is complete and the fuel is dried out. Mixing the dry chemicals in a baggie is basically a binary mixing method

in a closed container, rolling the materials back in forth inside the baggie does not present any more risk then many

other pyro compound mixing processes. The title of this thread "slow whistle mix" explains why mixing the dry chemicals together will not produce a high power fuel.

Edited July 19, 2015 by mikeee

[oldspark]

Not sure why my post is misleading.

"Now.. .with that being said, I can certainly see the benefit to adding the oxidizer to the bag after the lacquer thinner & Vaseline mixture is already in there. I have a backlog of tutorials to write (along with a new website to put together) but it won't be any time soon. This may be the method I detail in further instructionals."

[oldspark]

"but it won't be any time soon."

I will admit that part of the post I did not remember

Other wise I stand by what I said.

I dont care how you mix it or any one else I just think its something to consider for saftey's sake.

I too mix dry chemicals in a bag, just trying to helpful for some who may want to do things as safe as possible.

Edited July 19, 2015 by oldspark

[oldspark]

"The title of this thread "slow whistle mix" explains why mixing the dry chemicals together will not produce a high power fuel."

Dont follow, looks to me like he did not think he needed to make it like a true whistle mix for rockets so it will be slower.

[oldspark]

I will add the whole static thing is probably not understood by many.

[mikeee]

This was the first paragraph in Ben's reply.

 

Ask any 10 pyros how to do something and you'll get at least a dozen different answers. I've used the technique described in the tutorial many, many times. It certainly isn't the only way to make whistle (or the best... or the worst for that matter), it's just what works for me. I'm perfectly comfortable tumbling the bag with the dry ingredients. I really just roll it over itself a few times. There is no friction and the mixture isn't even remotely close to a fully mixed fuel.

 

Sparky,

 

Maybe you could detail how static potentials work so we all know what to watch for.

[oldspark]

Mikeee-LOL that is the first part of the post but he ended it with what I posted, so he was willing to change the procedure.

As far as the static thing goes, I kinda think your yanking my chain because I know your back ground.

[nater]

I use the wet method and I think it turns out a little slower than mixing it well dry before adding the solvent. For long cored rockets, slower whistle works fine so it suits my needs.

[oldspark]

I use the wet method and I think it turns out a little slower than mixing it well dry before adding the solvent. For long cored rockets, slower whistle works fine so it suits my needs.

Good to know as I have never compared the two methods, I have used the wet method (Dan Thames method) and been very happy with it using it on short whistle tooling, might have to give the dry method a try.

Edited July 19, 2015 by oldspark

[mikeee]

Oldspark,

 

There are reasons we all do specific processes and there are trade offs for each method. When mixing the dry chemicals in a sealed zip-lock baggie all three dry chemicals end up being mixed evenly across the entire batch while still dry. This speeds up the wet mixing process with the solvent and oil/vaseline. This also decreases the number of passes through the screen to ensure a well mixed fuel compound. When adding the premixed solvent and oil, the zip-lock baggie is opened and the liquid is poured directly into the opened baggie. Mixing in this manner reduces the amount of time the chemicals are exposed to any potential ignition sources. My work space is properly "grounded" and the high humidity we have in this region of the country does not provide an environment for a static potential, this would be a concern in other parts of the country with low humidity, which would require proper methods to mitigate static concerns for many other pyro compounds as well. Just like making flash powder you would have the same concerns with properly grounded work surfaces, humidity in the air, ignition sources, proper p.p.e. etc. Many people have adopted the binary method for mixing flash, is that safer then the diaper method? You have trade offs in using both methods when making flash powder. The key part is taking proper precautions when mixing any pyro compound and using proper equipment to mitigate the risks that are involved with everything we do.

[oldspark]

Mikeee, dont get me wrong I was just pointing out the fact he mentioned changing the porcedure and some may prefer one way over the other.

The ESD thing is a can of worms with many in the industry not agreeing on some of the points so can only imagine what some might think who are not familiar with the subject.

Proper grounding itself sets off a shit storm of discussions and disagreements.

Edited July 19, 2015 by oldspark

[mikeee]

Oldspark,

 

You are well aware that the grounding and bonding has constantly evolved over the past century.

Many books have been written on the topic with what little knowledge each one had on the science.

And its all based on an unproven theory, I have to laugh each time a new code book is issued and

written by all of the current day "experts" and each new issue requires retractions and corrections

based on the mistakes written in to the code by the "experts". There are only a handful of "experts"

that really have a full understanding of the entire scope of grounding and bonding. Too many trades

are based on the knowledge passed down from the "experts" from way back when. Read a code book

from 25, 50, 75 years ago and you really come to realize the lack of knowledge the "experts" actually had.

Too many of the codes written these days are influenced by corporate interests wanting to push new

products. The problem with the current code practice is they want to write (1) code that covers every

industry, with some industries/technologies that practice causes more problems then it solves.

[oldspark]

Getting side tracked here but I am not getting that deep into it mikeee, properly grounding for ESD is what I was referring to.