Richtee Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Well, in case anyone wondered... tobacco makes lousy charcoal. As I roll my own, I have a sizable amount of "dust"- real fine crap that don't go thru my machine well. Tried it. Sucks- FIY
Frozentech Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Well, in case anyone wondered... tobacco makes lousy charcoal. As I roll my own, I have a sizable amount of "dust"- real fine crap that don't go thru my machine well. Tried it. Sucks- FIY Heheh... well at least the cans that tobacco comes in are excellent for storing BP and burst powders, rocket propellant, etc in.
Richtee Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Heheh... well at least the cans that tobacco comes in are excellent for storing BP and burst powders, rocket propellant, etc in. Really... no worries about the metal and oxy-ies? I COULD put a coat of epoxy paint in 'em I guess. I have quite a few LOL!
TheSidewinder Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Richtee, If you cooked tobacco just like you do charcoal, it would probably work. Not that I'm suggesting you waste perfectly good (and expensive) tobacco on it, mind you. Tobacco ash produced from smoking is the same as openly-burned wood. It all turns to white ash, which is worthless. Cook it like our pyro charcoal, though, and I really wonder.......hmmm...
Richtee Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Richtee, If you cooked tobacco just like you do charcoal, it would probably work. Not that I'm suggesting you waste perfectly good (and expensive) tobacco on it, mind you. Tobacco ash produced from smoking is the same as openly-burned wood. It all turns to white ash, which is worthless. Cook it like our pyro charcoal, though, and I really wonder.......hmmm... I did cook it like charcoal. I would think it would be fairly reactive too... given it's rather complex chemical makeup. I will say this tho... I tested it "green". It DID work- BUT It was MUCH slower than other green batches I have made with either Cowboy lump, or cooking newspaper. This raw newsprint I have...no ink.. is impressive stuff. And like I mentioned, it's basically waste from bulk tobac packages that's too fine to use rolled. Maybe in a pipe... but ugh... I can't see me with a pipe LOL
lja Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 The tobacco is probably mostly leaves. If you could get some stems to make charcoal with you may be able to make decent BP. But I would expect the lousy result you got from using leaves.
Richtee Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 The tobacco is probably mostly leaves. No doubt. But as I was about to toss out the pile..I thought "what the hell" and made a 9 gram batch in the mill. Maybe my old ratted out concert tees? Prolly be antiques LOL!
lja Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 I don't blame you for trying. I even made some charcoal out of oatmeal, still haven't tried it though.
pyrogeorge Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 This BP is good or not??I milled it 3 hours and i make a test 3 HOURS MILLED
50AE Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 It's good for blackmatch and fountains, but not for lift.
tentacles Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Did you granulate or press and corn the powder at all, pipipi? Freshly milled powder is not fast, it never is. It has to be granulated in some way to make it fast.
FREAKYDUTCHMEN Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Can anyone tell me why the movie i posted doesn't work? i only see letters and other sighns...
pyrogeorge Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Did you granulate or press and corn the powder at all, pipipi? Freshly milled powder is not fast, it never is. It has to be granulated in some way to make it fast. no i don't granulate or press and corn..it is after milling..so i must granulate the bp to make it faster??
oskarchem Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Yes granulating powders makes them much faster.
pyrogeorge Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 i must use 5% dextrin or it not necessary?also i wet it with alcohol.right?
Mumbles Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Freakydutchmen. Look at the FAQ in the rules and announcements section. Pipipi, even granulating wont help that poor of BP. I've said this to you at least 3 or 4 times. You have a shitty ball mill. You have to mill significantly longer than 3 hours. You don't need to add dextrin, but it certainly helps the granules from crumbling and to stay a consistent size over time. You MUST use water to activate it. Alcohol will not do anything to dextrin. Solutions over 20% alcohol or so will significantly reduce the activation of dextrin.
Canadian_Pyro Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 Did you granulate or press and corn the powder at all, pipipi? Freshly milled powder is not fast, it never is. It has to be granulated in some way to make it fast. My freshly milled BP will burn in a similar manner to slow flash powder when unconfined, and shatter shells launched out of a mortar tube. I have to use large granulation sizes to make it usable for lift. Of course, I use a very reactive charcoal, so I am not terribly surprised.
Mumbles Posted April 24, 2008 Posted April 24, 2008 If you're supposedly destroying shells upon launch, I would first take a look at your construction technique. Far more likely the problem that too reactive lift.
justanotherpyro Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 My freshly milled BP will burn in a similar manner to slow flash powder when unconfined, and shatter shells launched out of a mortar tube. I have to use large granulation sizes to make it usable for lift. Of course, I use a very reactive charcoal, so I am not terribly surprised.Unless you are making your lift with holy water or having your BP blessed by the Pope then I doubt your lift is as good as it sounds. Like Mumbles said, construction techniques are probably the issue. Furthermore, corning lift makes it burn faster. Even very large pieces ( roughly gravel seize roughly 1 cm in diameter and thickness) of my BP burn lightning fast. So saying that you have to corn it to achieve a slower burn is counterintuitive.
Canadian_Pyro Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 The shells that I have destroyed were film canisters filled with sand. The bottoms would break up upon launch, and the sand would fall out within a very short time period, thus greatly increasing the acceleration of air drag. The empty, bottomless canisters would flutter to the ground after reaching an apex of less than 50 feet. Furthermore, corning lift makes it burn faster. Even very large pieces ( roughly gravel seize roughly 1 cm in diameter and thickness) of my BP burn lightning fast. So saying that you have to corn it to achieve a slower burn is counterintuitive. Corning black powder by pressing it into a solid grain, then breaking up the grain into small fragments generally results in slower flame front propagation through the mass of reactants, and a reduction in overall burn rate. This is due to the decreased surface area of the smooth grains. If you can burn the corned powder quickly enough, it will provide more energy per volume due to increased density, but such an event is unlikely, unless your mortar tube is several feet tall, or the shell has a very high static friction within the tube. The advantage comes from the additional durability of the grains, as well as the increased consistency. Granulating by wetting the powder and scraping it over a screen will increase the burn rate if the granulated particles are small enough, though the gains seem to be minimal in my experience. 40 - 50 mesh granulations will generally produce increases of about 5% over meal powder when comparing flight times of identical reinforced film cans.
justanotherpyro Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 For one film cans are not that sturdy at all. It is no surprise that they are not holding up. What you are talking about has a lot more to it. If you have corned powder then the flame is able to spread through the corns at an increased rate due to the space gaps between the grains. There is a critical point of course. Golf ball sized balls of BP would not burn as fast as meal because the "grains" would be much to large. This is why corned powder makes better lift in conjunction with increased denisty which is not guaranteed unless you are pressing it. Also, corning the powder more intimately mixes the KNO3 and C by dissolving it and recrystallizing it on the surface of the C particles.
Canadian_Pyro Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 Also, corning the powder more intimately mixes the KNO3 and C by dissolving it and recrystallizing it on the surface of the C particles.Only an issue if your mill does a poor job at intimately mixing the ingredients (media of insufficient mass, or inadequate jar velocity are common culprits). I'd also imagine that wetting the BP will also cause some of the Potassium Nitrate already within the pores of the charcoal to recrystallize outside the charcoal grain, thus canceling the effect. I've tried wet milling, and it doesn't make a difference in performance. If you have corned powder then the flame is able to spread through the corns at an increased rate due to the space gaps between the grains. As I said, small granulations will perform slightly better than meal powder in my experience. However, corned powder will perform less effectively than both (also my experience) due to the decreased surface area (and thus slowed reaction rate) of the smooth grains resulting from breaking up a pressed chunk of composition. A flame front will propagate surprisingly quickly through unpressed meal powder made from ideal charcoal. Quickly enough to tear a polumna casing into 2 pieces. Film cans are pretty resilient when used as test projectiles for my black powder made using white pine or willow charcoal, but when using red alder charcoal based powder, they tend to disintegrate.
Mumbles Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 Granular powders do indeed burn slower. It seems somewhat counter intuitive based upon experience of most though. The problem is that freshly milled meal is so fine it prevents flame propagation and essentially acts as one big particle. That being said, small amounts of meal, pea sized or so, still burn in an instant for me. Maybe it's because it's a touch clumpy, or fluffy from the mill.
Frozentech Posted April 25, 2008 Posted April 25, 2008 There is a practical effect to differing mesh sizes for corned powder. One example, I had problems with chlorate blue stars blowing up in the gun. These were chlorate/PG/shellac stars in 3" cylindrical shells. Shell construction was, if I say so myself, very good, straight Fulcanelli methods from Pyrotechnica IX and XI. Using 10-20 mesh corned BP made with Balsa wood charcoal, the shells blew in the gun every time:( Using 4-12 mesh grains of the same powder, same weight of lift charge, the shells worked perfectly. Basically I had powder that was about 4FA blowing the shells ( I won't call it flowerpotting because it was a violent explosion, shattering my racks into splinters) and 2FA working perfectly. The 4FA stuff had always worked for 3 and 4" ball shells, but the much heavier canisters want a gentler acceleration, too much setback was setting off the chlorate stars.
Recommended Posts