|
Arctic W. Fox

Registered: 09/23/14
Posts: 1,357
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
|
Re: Ammonium Nitrate Prills [Re: Stonehenge]
#22266488 - 09/20/15 07:02 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I wouldn't trust that page's information. It groups every single explosive I know as a high explosive.
Quote:
Quite simply, high explosives detonate. This means the “explosive shock front” occurs and passes through the explosive faster than the speed of sound. Velocity rates generally range from 3000 to 9000 meters per second.
Well, what explosive doesn't detonate? What explosive has a velocity of less than 3000m/s? Maybe hydrogen in air - "a fuel/air explosive" which is another "high explosive" according to that site, an accidental ignition according to me.
I suppose it could be how you look at it - I go off of velocity of the shockwave versus amount of weight of the explosive to do the same damage. I do not take into account the amount of power to originally initiate the detonation (an explosion to set off the explosive), though.
The Oklahoma bombing took over two tonnes of ANFO to do that damage. I'd guess it would take three pounds of HMX to have the same effect. AN is for blasting holes in roads and runways; HMX is for destroying buildings, bridges and vehicles.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Arctic W. Fox said:
Quote:
Stonehenge said: AN on the other hand is considered high explosive.
Yes, when compared to a balloon.
You know they use ammonium nitrate to simulate nuclear weapons now that testing nukes has been banned, right?
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Arctic W. Fox

Registered: 09/23/14
Posts: 1,357
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
|
Re: Ammonium Nitrate Prills [Re: koods]
#22266534 - 09/20/15 07:12 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: You know they use ammonium nitrate to simulate nuclear weapons now that testing nukes has been banned, right?
I don't. That doesn't make any sense. Reference link(s)?
Last I heard, all nuclear detonation simulations were strictly done by supercomputers.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
|
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Scale
Quote:
Minor Scale was a test conducted on June 27, 1985, by the United States Defense Nuclear Agency (now part of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency) involving the detonation of several thousand tons of conventional explosives to simulate the explosion of a small nuclear bomb. The purpose of the test was to evaluate the effect of nuclear blasts on various pieces of military hardware, particularly new, blast-hardened launchers for the Midgetman ballistic missile.[1]
The test took place at the Permanent High Explosive Testing Grounds (33.6201°N 106.4749°W) of the White Sands Missile Range in the state of New Mexico. 4.8 kilotons of ANFO explosive (ammonium nitrate and fuel oil),[2][3] equivalent to 4 kilotons of TNT,[4] were used to roughly simulate the effect of an eight kiloton air-burst nuclear device. With a total energy release of about 1.7 ×1013 joules (or 4.2 kilotons of TNT equivalent), Minor Scale was reported as "the largest planned conventional explosion in the history of the free world",[5] surpassing another large conventional explosion, the 'British Bang' disposal of ordnance on Heligoland in 1947, reported to have released 1.3 × 1013 joules of energy (about 3.2 kilotons of TNT equivalent).[6]
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Arctic W. Fox

Registered: 09/23/14
Posts: 1,357
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
|
Re: Ammonium Nitrate Prills [Re: koods]
#22267201 - 09/20/15 09:34 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
4.8kt of ANFO for a 8kt simulated air-burst nuclear blast effect.
Yes, if I had ten million, five hundred and eighty two thousand, one hundred and eighty nine pounds of ANFO going off, I would expect people to think that was a high-power explosive.
But, the numbers are in the efficiency. So, still, in my mind, AN is nowhere close to being anything more then a glorified firecracker.
If I had 4.8 thousand metric tonnes of "nuclear bomb mass" (one tonne nuclear mass ≈ 6Mt explosive yield), the power for that would hover around 28 billion megatonnes.
Just for comparison: Tsar Bomba (USSR) was just over 50 megatonnes. Castle Bravo (largest United States nuclear bomb accident) was 15 Megatonnes.
It's been spoken that it would only take 800 Megatonnes to shake the entire planet Earth back to dust.
I'd be more than happy to consider that a high-power explosive, even if it doesn't, technically, "detonate".
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
|
They use anfo becasue it packs the most for its weight
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Gorlax



Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 6,695
Last seen: 16 days, 18 hours
|
Re: Ammonium Nitrate Prills [Re: koods]
#22267242 - 09/20/15 09:44 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah good luck outlawing an easy to manufacture fertilizer. It's essential to farming and producing crops. It will never be banned. If you didn't know it's monitored already.
|
|