mzman1968 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 I have been reading a lot of threads where people talk about how whatever they are talking about may go into talking about high explosives. I'm new and not sure if this is defined someone but if it isn't I suggest a Mod should make this a "sticky" post so it is easy to find. Can someone please define what things in a discussion may make it qualify as a HE? I'm not a chemistry wiz and I am sure I'm not the only one that has come to this forum to read this stuff, so for us students, can you please make this clear. As a new member I do not want to break any rules and I am sure others don't as well(at least most). Thanks
shouldnoteatindat Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) Explosive materials may be categorized by the speed at which they expand. Materials that detonate (explode faster than the speed of sound) are said to be "high explosives" and materials that deflagrate are said to be "low explosives". Edited February 2, 2014 by shouldnoteatindat
nater Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 ^^ Not even close. In simple terms, high explosive means a material that detonates. This means the pressure wave generated moves through the material faster than the speed of sound. Nothing we use in fireworks is technically a high explosive. The catch comes with how the DOT in the United States wants bulk salutes stored. Due to the risk they pose in bulk, flash and bulk salutes are to be shipped and stored AS IF they are high explosives. That does not mean they are. 2
LambentPyro Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 The only "high explosive" we use in Pyro and making fireworks is Flash Powder. Even that, compared to some mixes you can watch detonate, Flash is puny. Honestly, a good shell with a decent break can easily be achieved without any higher explosive than BP. As nater said, nothing we use in Pyro is high explosives. Stay away from it at all costs until you've been professionally trained on how to handle the material. Even with many years of experience with Pyro and BP, it doesn't mean you know how to treat and handle HE. It's a whole another realm of chemical science.
nater Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Flash powder is not a high explosive either. Some if the exotic mixes MAY be, but as far as I know, the typical flash powders are not. Like I said, the catch becomes when the DOT wants bulk salutes and loose flash stores as if they are HE. That does not make them HE.
Maserface Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) The only "high explosive" we use in Pyro and making fireworks is Flash Powder. Even that, compared to some mixes you can watch detonate, Flash is puny. Honestly, a good shell with a decent break can easily be achieved without any higher explosive than BP. As nater said, nothing we use in Pyro is high explosives. Stay away from it at all costs until you've been professionally trained on how to handle the material. Even with many years of experience with Pyro and BP, it doesn't mean you know how to treat and handle HE. It's a whole another realm of chemical science.Where did anyone say good breaks couldn't be acheived without flash? Also. OP, if you "came hear to read about this stuff [HE]" you won't be here for long, this forum is primarily a hobby firework makers forum, and what little interest there is in HE goes into a private, dedicated, section. Edited February 2, 2014 by Maserface
ollie1016 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 HE is very interesting, however it is extremely dangerous. It takes energetic materials a whole new level up from pyrotechnics. Unless done with the absolute correct procedures and techniques, you will indefinitely result in the loss of limbs. There are lots of sites discussing HE, it's just a matter of if you want to be on an FBI or CIA or MI5 watch list. This forum is for pyrotechnics, and pyrotechnics has no kind of active use for HE. Just be careful in what you type into google! 1
LambentPyro Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Where did anyone say good breaks couldn't be acheived without flash?Also. OP, if you "came hear to read about this stuff [HE]" you won't be here for long, this forum is primarily a hobby firework makers forum, and what little interest there is in HE goes into a private, dedicated, section.Mason, I never said that, you must have misinterpreted it. I said that great breaks can be achieved with no more than using straight BP.
ollie1016 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 You can get some great breaks with plain MCRH, / straight granulated BP. But if you really want a massive spread, a bit of whistle mix works a treat. Whistle doesn't give off a large metallic flash when it exploses, so doesn't take away the 'beauty' of the shell. Depends on the effect you desire... If anyone has any HE questions, I'm happy to try and answer them. I am not going to explain how to make weapons of mass destruction etc, don't ask me. I will report you to Mumbles immediately.
ollie1016 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 it is all about burn speed. if its faster than bp it probably a high explosive. and also anything that explodes uncontained is a high explosive. pretty much that simple Not true at all my friend, have a look on wiki!
LambentPyro Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 You can get some great breaks with plain MCRH, / straight granulated BP. But if you really want a massive spread, a bit of whistle mix works a treat. Whistle doesn't give off a large metallic flash when it exploses, so doesn't take away the 'beauty' of the shell. Depends on the effect you desire... If anyone has any HE questions, I'm happy to try and answer them. I am not going to explain how to make weapons of mass destruction etc, don't ask me. I will report you to Mumbles immediately.Don't take this the wrong way, but if I were to ask about HE, I'd rather discuss HE with one who is qualified. One who is proven mature enough to handle such mixtures.
nater Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Are you referring to the "HE Qualified" badge under a username here?
LambentPyro Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Are you referring to the "HE Qualified" badge under a username here?No, if they've been trained professionally and have experience handling it in a safe manner, that is someone in my definition of being qualified. A badge is meaningless, there are fake cops with badges you know. 1
pyroman2498 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Not true at all my friend, have a look on wiki!I dont mean to be rude, but that was the funniest answer I've ever read xD, "Look on wiki" .Thats like saying "the sky is blue because space is black" , it makes no sense and i wouldn't trust it. i trust my neighbor more than i trust wiki I think they even made a commercial about that " I met this french model on the internet , it must be true " "Bonjour " xD xD xD " Sorry for this being off topic but , point is , Dont Trust Wiki Stay Safe and Stay Green ~Steven 1
LambentPyro Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 I dont mean to be rude, but that was the funniest answer I've ever read xD, "Look on wiki" .Thats like saying "the sky is blue because space is black" , it makes no sense and i wouldn't trust it. i trust my neighbor more than i trust wiki I think they even made a commercial about that " I met this french model on the internet , it must be true " "Bonjour " xD xD xD " Sorry for this being off topic but , point is , Dont Trust Wiki Stay Safe and Stay Green ~StevenYou're not OT at all Steve, it makes perfect sense. That commercial was always stupid until you brought it up to this, lol
ollie1016 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Don't take this the wrong way, but if I were to ask about HE, I'd rather discuss HE with one who is qualified. One who is proven mature enough to handle such mixtures. I don't blame you too! Who would want to take advise off a stranger on the internet! I have a limited knowledge of HE and I'm interested and eager to learn more. I have enough knowledge to answer some questions. Whilst working on the farm this summer just gone, I met an retired demolition expert, who told me a fair bit about HE and it's applications. He showed me some 'stuff' let's say without too much detail. I will be conducting experiments on high temperature oxidisers/ exotic energetic materials this Summer. Similar to some of the experiments that Dornier335A carries out on YouTube. His channel is definitely worth checking out. Anyway getting back to the point, I should have said I have 'some' knowledge on HE and maybe able to offer something. Ollie
ollie1016 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 I dont mean to be rude, but that was the funniest answer I've ever read xD, "Look on wiki" .Thats like saying "the sky is blue because space is black" , it makes no sense and i wouldn't trust it. i trust my neighbor more than i trust wiki I think they even made a commercial about that " I met this french model on the internet , it must be true " "Bonjour " xD xD xD " Sorry for this being off topic but , point is , Dont Trust Wiki Stay Safe and Stay Green ~StevenHello Steven, Well Wiki has improved dramatically over the past 1/2 years, due to an increase in the amount of money spent on modifying and checking data. Wiki is good for getting an idea about a topic, but it's a simple as it's ever been! All you've got to do is type your question into google! One of the things that's great about this forum, is that people are willing to give you useful(99% of the time) information and help you. I'll have a look for that commercial now! Ollie
MrB Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 i trust my neighbor more than i trust wiki Wikipedia, as it turns out, is actually very accurate as a source. More so then most encyclopedias. This is of course due to the nature of of the two media. The Wiki can be updated as soon as known information evolves, by who-ever, where as a encyclopedia, even an on-line one, has an editor, and so has to go through a lot of steps for publishing.Your neighbors, as trustworthy as they may be, is, from a scientific viewpoint, a lot less reliable, and no where as easy to verify. Well Wiki has improved dramatically over the past 1/2 years, due to an increase in the amount of money spent on modifying and checking data. If it got even better, then there really isn't much left to speak about. The great thing about wikipedia, is the reference links for everything. Someone makes a scientific statement, and then they add the neat sources, so you can, if you want to, read the material, and decide for your self what is, or isn't relevant / correct. Would i trust my life to a wiki? No, probably not. But i wouldn't trust my life to my neighbors either. With wikipedia i can at least check the material, and find out how reliable the sources are.B!
Recommended Posts