Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
John Michael Williams wrote:
I share this skepticism. Burning TNT probably would produce 10x more
free energy than detonating it.

When you detonate it, what happens to the 90% lost energy?
Fails to actually detonate?

Based on recent postings, my "10x" might be too high,
but what would happen is that the uncombusted atoms
of the TNT would be just accelerated away by the shock
of detonation.

Eventually, they might be combusted, but not as part of
the detonation. So, their combustion energy contribution
isn't counted as part of the explosion.

John

John Michael Williams

In article ,
(John Michael Williams) wrote:

but what would happen is that the uncombusted atoms
of the TNT would be just accelerated away by the shock
of detonation.

Eventually, they might be combusted, but not as part of
the detonation. So, their combustion energy contribution
isn't counted as part of the explosion.

The above is just plain NONSENSE. When TNT Detonates, it is the
detonation wave front that causes the cyclic ring of tolulene to
break and release the bonding energy of the molecule. The detonation
wave front is traveling faster than the the molecules can move on their
own, so they don't move, they just get slammed by the detonation wave.
There is a GIANT difference between combustion and detonation. TNT
does NOT combust when it decomposes in a detonation.

Bruce in alaska
--
add a 2 before @

NOTICE: After reading an "off-topic" complaint from one of the antenna
guys, I started replying with rec.radio.amateur.antenna deleted
from the Send To list.

This doesn't work if you bookmark this thread: Google
recovers the bookmark by FIRST group in a list; thus,
you don't see posts with the first group missing unless
you search in one of the other groups.

Worse, even if you search and read under one of the other
groups, if you bookmark there, you get the thread under antenna,
with other postings in the thread missing.

Sorry, antenna guy, I tried, but
I want to be sure this one gets seen.

Bruce in Alaska wrote in message ...

In article ,
(John Michael Williams) wrote:


but what would happen is that the uncombusted atoms
of the TNT would be just accelerated away by the shock
of detonation.

Eventually, they might be combusted, but not as part of
the detonation. So, their combustion energy contribution
isn't counted as part of the explosion.


The above is just plain NONSENSE.

You are exaggerating.

When TNT Detonates, it is the
detonation wave front that causes the cyclic ring of tolulene to
break and release the bonding energy of the molecule. The detonation
wave front is traveling faster than the the molecules can move on their
own, so they don't move, they just get slammed by the detonation wave.

OK. Maybe here you are not exaggerating.

Detonation creates a SHOCK, not a "wave"; a wave is
a cyclic vibration at or below the speed of sound
(disregarding electromagnetic waves).
A detonation is an aerodynamic (or, if you prefer,
hydrodynamic) process, not a "wave", and it
exceeds the speed of sound. Typical shock speeds for a
solid high explosive are over 9 km/s, whereas the speed
of sound in the fastest solid (e. g., carbonate rock)
is below 7 km/s. In a typical solid high explosive, sound
speed would be under 3 km/s. In nitroglycerine, it would
be under 2 km/s.

Your criticism doesn't make sense to me: If there is a
SHOCK (I assume you are referring to bonding electrons?)
it will transfer momentum to atoms in its path, and each
in just one direction, depending on the location of the
first energy-yielding bond. Each atom will be accelerated
in one direction (ignoring subsequent collisions).

I agree the shock will progress
faster than the atoms, but the atoms will be accelerated.

What are these atoms? They are the atoms, or if you prefer,
small molecules, NOT combusted as well as others not detonated,
and some previously detonated. They will move in all directions
away from their original locations. The heat liberated by the
detonation reaction, if nothing else, will have accelerated
them to high speeds.

If you think about it, that's what I wrote above.


There is a GIANT difference between combustion and detonation. TNT
does NOT combust when it decomposes in a detonation.

Bruce in alaska


I didn't say anything inconsistent with that, did I?

John

John Michael Williams

Bruce in Alaska wrote in message ...
In article ,
(John Michael Williams) wrote:

but what would happen is that the uncombusted atoms
of the TNT would be just accelerated away by the shock
of detonation.

Eventually, they might be combusted, but not as part of
the detonation. So, their combustion energy contribution
isn't counted as part of the explosion.

The above is just plain NONSENSE.

Not true.

When TNT Detonates, it is the
detonation wave front that causes the cyclic ring of tolulene to
break and release the bonding energy of the molecule.

It isn't the "detonation wave front" that disrupts the
tri-nitrotoluene molecule, but the local heating. The detonation wave
front is just another consequence of the local heating.

The detonation
wave front is traveling faster than the the molecules can move on their
own, so they don't move, they just get slammed by the detonation wave.

They actually get heated by the heat radiated from the ignition point
(which travels at the speed of light), as well as by the impact of the
molecules heated up at the initial ignition point.

The detonation wave front is a "supersonic shock wave" which is to say
it is moving exactly as fast as molecules can move on their own,
because it consists of the energetic molecules produced by the
rearrangement of tri-nitrotoluene into water, carbon monoxide, carbon
and nitrogen.

There is a GIANT difference between combustion and detonation. TNT
does NOT combust when it decomposes in a detonation.

There certainly is a giant difference between combustion and
detonation. The carbon monoxide and the carbon particles produced by a
detonation may well react with atmospheric oxygen after the
detonation, but this is a much slower process and doesn't add much to
the damage produced by the initial blast.

------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

good explanation bruce !

one of the reasons TNT became the product of choice over other
explosives such as nitro. Easy to transport and very stable

http://mooni.fccj.org/~ethall/explode/explode.htm

Trinitrotoluene is a high explosive that is
unaffected by ordinary shocks and
therefore must be set off by a detonator. TNT
is often mixed with other
explosives such as ammonium nitrate to form
amatol. Because it is insensitive to
shock and must be exploded with a detonator,
it is the most favored explosive
used in munitions and construction.
Why do nitro groups (NO2) lead to unstable
compounds?
Nitrogen has charge of +1 and nitro group have
a strong tendency to withdraw
(pull) electrons from other parts of the
compound. Attaching three nitro groups to
a compound leads to an extremely unstable
situation.




markus


Bruce in Alaska wrote:

In article ,
(John Michael Williams) wrote:

but what would happen is that the uncombusted atoms
of the TNT would be just accelerated away by the shock
of detonation.

Eventually, they might be combusted, but not as part of
the detonation. So, their combustion energy contribution
isn't counted as part of the explosion.

The above is just plain NONSENSE. When TNT Detonates, it is the
detonation wave front that causes the cyclic ring of tolulene to
break and release the bonding energy of the molecule. The detonation
wave front is traveling faster than the the molecules can move on their
own, so they don't move, they just get slammed by the detonation wave.
There is a GIANT difference between combustion and detonation. TNT
does NOT combust when it decomposes in a detonation.

Bruce in alaska
--
add a 2 before @