Talk:Ammonal

Military Slang

I have a friend who was a combat engineer in Iraq, and he tells me that he was blown up my this and he called it ANAl. I feel that this brilliant title should be included in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.229.182.240 (talk) 22:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

That would be what one person called it. Is that common? Is there a reliable source? That's what would be needed to add it to the article. MartinezMD (talk) 03:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion Questions and Comments

Q: The aluminium is supposed to react as a detonation enhancer. What exactly happens to the aluminium? Does it react to aluminium oxides? Maybe someone would know about the theoretical chemical behaviour.

A: Quite right. Aluminum when finely powdered can burn violently in the presence of an oxidizing agent or a couple species of other metal oxides. When the aluminum burns it does create aluminum oxides. Also, when the Aluminum powder is in a large container or spread out in open air, it becomes a very explosive aerosol due to its high flammability. So, when the Trinitrotoluene and Ammonium Nitrate combust they will create a tremendous pressure difference and dispersion force, thus scattering and igniting the Aluminum aerosol. Here the Aluminum plays the role of a filler, so to speak, as it acts as a Fuel-Air-Explosive (or FAE) and takes the place of the large amounts of expensive Trinitrotoluene needed to create the same explosive effect.

Comment: In the field of decomisson - industrial destruction of ammunition - this is for eccological reasons from interest. Aluminium could and would clog and form unwanted layers. Michael zettner 19:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Q: Can a mining/quarrying expert confirm the following: "Ammonal remains in use as an industrial explosive. Typically, it is used for quarrying or mining purposes." ANFO seems to be the typical explosive used today, and I can't find indication of ammonal being used today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.154.235.102 (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Citations

A citation is needed for the reference "A textbook of organic chemistry" —Preceding unsigned comment added by NitricAcidandTHC (talk • contribs) 22:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

T-ammonal

Ammonal origianally does not contain TNT. The kind used in the military with TNT is called T-ammonal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MorbidFlorist (talk • contribs) 17:33, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Edits on Gelignite and Ammonal

You reverted 2 edits of mine

1. Allegedly Gelignite is being used to ignite the primary explosive. I deleted that.

The mechanism is: a. Primary explosive detonates. b Gelignite is being used as secondary charge or "booster charge" to amplify the detonation to the point where c. it is strong enough to detonate the very insensitive tertiary charge of a "blasting agent" like ANFO, which would have been too insensitive to be detonated by the primary charge, e. g. blasting cap. This is called Explosive train. If you don't understand blasting technology and energetic materials, leave your hands off the article. The ref for the faulty statement was a newspaper article by some journalist apprentice, not a valid technical ref, so I deleted the nonsense. These are highly technical matters, please refed to technical academic literature.

2. Ammonal - Is indeed a mixture of Ammonium nitrate, Aluminum AND TNT, see the body of the article. Somebody vandalized that by removing the TNT, and I reverted that. Again , hands off if you do not know what you are talking. Read the Ammonal#Proportions section in the body of the article there you are.

70.137.141.81 (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The OED defines Ammonal as A high explosive composed of three parts of ammonium nitrate and one part of aluminium. The German Wikipedia is more informative; indeed TNT is included in some recipes. If you wish to establish your credibility, please acknowledge WP:RS, WP:Truth and WP:BRD in your future edits. Tommy Pinball (talk) 09:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Please, I believe I reminded you to reference to academic-technical literature. The WP policies are familiar to me, because I have been on WP quite some time. The times where ammonal was w.o. TNT were before TNT was introduced at all, and the people were e.g. using essentially "glorified black powder mixtures". The importance of ammonal as a military explosive was that it could save a lot of TNT, with inexpensive materials, and still develop equivalent power, or even better effect in applications where the explosion energy played more a role than brisance, like sea mines and torpedoes. The disadvantages of ammonal w.o. TNT are mainly being discussed in heaven, since the times of the use of black powder type low explosives as powder mixtures of all kinds, with chlorates etc. etc. since then the quarrymen etc. etc. are bickering there like you shouldn't have used the prybar to compact the powder, Joe, etc... 70.137.141.81 (talk) 10:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I was mindful of "academic-technical literature" such as this. I am yet to be convinced by your edit. Tommy Pinball (talk) 11:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The use of Ammonal w.o. TNT predated the introduction of TNT before WW1. Here a description of Ammonal w.o. TNT as a quarrying explosive, from 1908, technical source:

http://books.google.com/books?id=mLY2AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA200&dq=ammonal+B&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gPDiUf3sDKOjiAKXk4GYDQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=ammonal%20B&f=false

This was at a time, when "gun cotton" and "black powder" and black-powder-like explosives were still regarded as practical explosives, and as I said, the disadvantages mainly being discussed in heaven, by bickering quarrymen. This never found military application because it could be ignited by a gun shot, and it needed tamping. (Give me the steel rod, Joe, I need to do some tamping of the powd..... Ka-BOOOM!) Also it could not be used in grenades, as the shock of firing could ignite it in the barrel of the cannon. This was solved by castable mixtures with TNT, which would melt around the grains and act as a binder, turning ammonal into a compact solid after cooling, at the same time making it more powerful. The disadvantage of the original 19th century ammonal w.o. TNT were particularly pronounced in experiments with the Austrian-Hungarian construction of grenades, with their rear end detonator. The shock of the firing could drive the loose ammonal to the rear end and there fire the detonator! So this was a bummer. In this source you see that already in 1911 the mixtures with TNT and other nitro-aromatics were in use.

http://books.google.com/books?id=zOJZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA310&lpg=PA310&dq=ammonal+B&source=bl&ots=h6Tam6xLhb&sig=nIbWYItLO6-N-ykFN4Ftw23ZgOs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XvPiUc2sKKPiiwK6z4C4BA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=ammonal%20B&f=false

70.137.130.255 (talk) 19:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

In the 1908 source by the Royal Engineers, appendix, you also find that Ammonal w.o. TNT showed insufficient destruction power on rails, to derail a train, and also insufficient results on steel mesh. The addition of TNT or other nitro-aromatics brought the characteristics closer to TNT, with even better results in sea mines and torpedoes. See also Torpex and Minol (explosive). 70.137.130.255 (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey 70.137.130.255, OKay I'm happy you know your shit...but the article itself still does not reflect all this knowledge and frankly remains misleading without the context you are providing here, only on the talk pages...can you not as the "expert" add this stuff to the article...and allow me as the "Reasonable person" to amend...ie collegiate editing. Tommy Pinball (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)