Thanks for those thoughts, Lloyd.
I'm sure I'll survive.
It just seems a pity that so many people appear to have forgotten how to say 'please' and 'thank you'.
Crackle research
Moderators: richardh08, Boophoenix, Lloyd
- richardh08
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2226
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:54 pm
- Location: Bedfordshire
Re: Crackle research
Even when I'm wrong, I'm convincing.
Re: Crackle research
Indeed! And they're the simplest of courtesies! But we seem to have lost those skills (as a population, not individually).
Lloyd
Lloyd
"Pyro for Fun and Profit for More Than Sixty Years"
- Boophoenix
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 11:49 pm
Re: Crackle research
Richard, it’s a good thing your primary research was for self curiosity I do believe. That’s how it’s always seemed anyway. Don’t let others take the wind out of your curious sail. It’s been pretty fascinating and educational following along even when I was lost in the dark. I wish I did more physical experimenting and had more interest in crackle to contribute more. I can how ever thank you for all your efforts and sharing. Thank you very much!
I’ve always found it interesting how people are curious, but it’s not often a two way street. Even I’ve experianced a small degree of such. A year or so ago I finally moved an idea from possible to testing. I got some hounding about it from across the pond mostly threw a friend ( no one here I don’t think ). It was all a one way share.
I had deliberately kept it somewhat quite as the reactions taking place are above my paygrade and I haven’t scaled beyond testing sizes yet. I have had some warnings from one person with more knowledge than myself in the materials used which caused reservations of public sharing. I haven’t had a location fit for safely testing to scale yet.
I have heard there are two others who have accomplished the same end result I did. One from Malta and one from Mexico, but I don’t know if either went about it the same way.
The funniest part is it has always been my plan if I got it all figured out and functioning safely to share publicly after the developer of the original effect or myself displayed it somewhere publicly.
I’ve always found it interesting how people are curious, but it’s not often a two way street. Even I’ve experianced a small degree of such. A year or so ago I finally moved an idea from possible to testing. I got some hounding about it from across the pond mostly threw a friend ( no one here I don’t think ). It was all a one way share.
I had deliberately kept it somewhat quite as the reactions taking place are above my paygrade and I haven’t scaled beyond testing sizes yet. I have had some warnings from one person with more knowledge than myself in the materials used which caused reservations of public sharing. I haven’t had a location fit for safely testing to scale yet.
I have heard there are two others who have accomplished the same end result I did. One from Malta and one from Mexico, but I don’t know if either went about it the same way.
The funniest part is it has always been my plan if I got it all figured out and functioning safely to share publicly after the developer of the original effect or myself displayed it somewhere publicly.
Re: Crackle research
Is this formula now available to view and would you say it’s easier to make then one of the traditional ones?
- richardh08
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2226
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:54 pm
- Location: Bedfordshire
Re: Crackle research
I don't believe the formula has appeared anywhere except in my paper, but it's no great secret:
81 CuO, -300 mesh
19 Al, atomized, -350 mesh
+3 Phenolic resin
One of the aims was to find as simple a composition as possible, but the bulk of the paper is about what could be deduced about the chemistry, and how that relates to other's findings for similar thermite-like mixtures.
It's not particularly much easier to make than other crackles (although it can be rolled) but it's a lot cheaper than some! It isn't easy to ignite, so it need some care with priming. I use a thickish coating of a modification of the 'Spanish' crackle prime:
45 KNO3
15 MgAl, -350 mesh
12 Parlon (or PVC)
09 Charcoal, airfloat
09 Fe3O4 (or Fe2O3)
06 Sulfur
04 Dextrin
81 CuO, -300 mesh
19 Al, atomized, -350 mesh
+3 Phenolic resin
One of the aims was to find as simple a composition as possible, but the bulk of the paper is about what could be deduced about the chemistry, and how that relates to other's findings for similar thermite-like mixtures.
It's not particularly much easier to make than other crackles (although it can be rolled) but it's a lot cheaper than some! It isn't easy to ignite, so it need some care with priming. I use a thickish coating of a modification of the 'Spanish' crackle prime:
45 KNO3
15 MgAl, -350 mesh
12 Parlon (or PVC)
09 Charcoal, airfloat
09 Fe3O4 (or Fe2O3)
06 Sulfur
04 Dextrin
Even when I'm wrong, I'm convincing.
Re: Crackle research
Thanks Richard I’ll have to give it a try
-
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:39 am
Re: Crackle research
Richard is this prime alone easy to ignite or do you need BP over it as well ?
- richardh08
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2226
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:54 pm
- Location: Bedfordshire
Re: Crackle research
That prime is effectively 60% screened black powder. I've never had any problems igniting it.
Even when I'm wrong, I'm convincing.
-
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:39 am
Re: Crackle research
Sounds great then I should give it a go. Thanks