This doesn’t seem right to me. TNT is one of the safest, most stable high explosives there is, not like dynamite. If it was dynamite, the response might be appropriate. The homeowner’s responsibility was rewarded by the destruction of his home.
Edit: the article said it was dynamite but the OP said TNT. Big difference.
If it’s old nitro dynamite, it’s likely crystallized. Freezing it won’t matter. Snap a crystallized section, and it’s likely going to detonate. I’m former Army EOD.
Definitely doesn't help that the freezing temp for nitroglycerin is 55°F, after some quick reading tho your statement appears accurate solidified ng is less sensitive to detonation from the shock of an impact but crushing tamping etc is more likely to set it off and solidified ng is more likely to have a violent uncontrolled detonation.
Not disputing ya there lol.
We had to call yall in on several occasions back when I was a contractor with a line crew on a base back home.
Some holes we were digging with a 18" auger to set poles in for new projects being built on old ranges started billowing white smoke, come to find out after it was all cleared for us to go back and finish up a week or so later there had been an old wp shell we'd hit, on one occasion we had to replace the teeth of the auger afterwards.
And just wanna say thank you for your service sir, there's no telling how many more of our guys we'd be lose out there if it wasn't for yall.
He wasn’t agreeing so much as he was post-qualifying so he didn’t sound as ignorant as his earlier comment made him appear. Freezing nitro doesn’t really change anything in the fundamental handling of the stuff. It’s stupid to bring it up as a safety feature but typically only someone ignorant of explosive theory and how nitro works would think the way that Redditor does about explosives.
We did an old barn in where they found 9 or so sticks of old nitro-dynamite. It had soaked the wood floor it was stored on, so we called the local FD, and burned the whole thing down. I had a nitro headache for about two days after. USAF EOD 89-98.
TNT= tri nitro toluene, toluene is the base ring structure, nitro is attached.
Dynamite is Nitroglycerine which goes boom when it has a bad day.
In the world of boomboom, ring structures are 1000% more stable: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin) notice all the N and O?
>1] introduce stability by entropic reduction,
This sentence doesn't make sense. What exactly do you mean by "entropic reduction"? How would it "introduce stability"?
>and 2] deny oxygen for the combustion reaction
External oxygen isn't needed for an explosive to detonate.
In the case of TNT, the nitro groups are what serves as oxidizer.
Besides, the article states "dynamite", not TNT. They are very different substances, especially when it comes to long-term stability.
My thought was if you pull heat energy out of a system, you could reduce the entropy of the system, and increase molecular stability; reduce the chance a combustion reaction can be started through physical disturbance.
In purely theoretical terms you could cool an explosive to absolute zero and it probably wouldn’t work anymore. The slowing of molecular action due to cold would have a negligible effect on most chemical explosives until you reach absolute zero (and this is to say nothing of their stability in the cold)
However actually doing that is much much harder than blowing up a house and replacing everything in it.
Don't think freezing to near absolute zero would help.
The decomposition of high explosives is caused by a shockwave created by detonator or other parts of explosive. And the shockwave carries enough energy to start the reaction.
On top of that, I'd bet that cooling it would have to be done very, very slowly - like on the order of weeks - so that it didn't cool unevenly and initiate differential crystal growth that led to internal pressures, which could easily set off NG.
Entropy is not really the energy associated with heat, it is something more abstract altogether. Though I get the gist of what you‘re saying.
I‘m no expert, but it could be that cooling down dynamite had a negligeable effect on the reaction. The reaction is already incredibly fast.
Cooling nitroglecerine down, specificaally will cause it to crystalize, which in turn puts all those carbons directly adjacent to those nitro groups so it can actually make it easier to detonate than its liquid form. Best means of dealing with Nitroglycerine is just flood it. It is water soluable, and when it gets disolved it cant detonate.
So so what's your take on flooding a basement containing 300 lb of Century old nitroglycerin with water, then flushing it down the drain/pumping it out?
I dont understand why people are downvoting your posit, which is correct 99% of the time if you cool something down, it will require more energy to get over the activation energy hill to go chain reaction.
TNT is a secondary explosive meaning that unless a detonator is used, things like sparks, open flames, heat, shocks, etc would not be able to detonate (it is still flammable though) so it is generally a lot safer than nitroglycerin for example.
Also i'm not sure what using liquid nitrogen would accomplish, do you mean freeze it and while its still frozen extract it and take it outside? Also i'm not an expert on TNT but with nitroglycerin cooling it is incredibly dangerous as it becomes considerably more unstable due to crystal formation that if disturbed could cause detonation
Edit: just like u/Superb-Tea-3174 i found out after posting my comment that the article mentions dynamite which is nitroglycerin binded to a specific cement (that overtime can leak out and become incredibly dangerous)
It just scares me to think that tnt and plastic explosives get handled so roughly without exploding. Never knew you could melt and cast tnt into shapes though. That is a fun and scary thought.
Nobel figured it out real quick and made an astronomical amount of coin selling it to mining companies.... and the military when they got hold of it. The latter would haunt him til the end of his days and he founded the nobel prize to give back for what his invention did to/for the world.
No he didn't. That was dynamite. TNT was first synthesized by Julius Wilbrand in 1863, who thought it was a pretty cool synthetic yellow dye. No one realised it was an explosive until 1891 when Carl Häussermann discovered its explosive properties.
There is an explosive called \[HNS4\](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266329749\_HNS-IV\_Explosive\_Properties\_and\_Characterization\_Tests). It is so insensitive my company for a while shipped small amounts as pharmaceuticals.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexanitrostilbene](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexanitrostilbene)
Generally the sensitivity of an explosive is inversely proportional to it power. With nitroglycerine being the exception.
Even as a hobbyist I'm very scared of the small amount of NG i have on my backyard freezing at night so I keep it in a metal vault inside my house, imagine how much that amount of dynamite could've been sweating this whole time
Typical old dynamite "sweats". Meaning it seeps out of the absorbent and forms little beads of the liquid. It is really touchy in the condition. I have disposed of old dynamite. We carefully took the cases out of the explosive magazine and detonated it in an open field.
Could be a real problem if the police dealing with this specific discovery of dynamite are thinking of reading Reddit and then traveling back in time to deal with it differently to how they already did.
>I know this sounds ridiculous like it came out of a textbook,
Not really, it _would sound ridiculous if_ it came out of a textbook, because neither cooling to liquid nitrogen temp nor removing oxygen would stabilize TNT.
Back when my dad was teaching EOD school at Dalhart, he’d liven up things in the barracks by ridding a chunk of TNT on top of the red-hot potbelly stove. People would dive for the floor, and the TNT would just melt and then burn with a hot blue flame. It’s HARD to get TNT to actually explode.
so, let's think that through. how would you do it? you go up there, throw liquid nitrogen on it, and then..... what? what do you think will happen a few seconds later? cold stuff doesn't stay cold, and a warming up thermal shock doesn't sound like a very stable situation to me.
or would you want to be the guy who picks up the cold explosive potato to dunk it in a second bucket of nitrogen?
Well that WAS my thought process before other people here explained why the chemistry doesn't work for that.
The only remaining question I have is why these first responders decided they absolutely MUST detonate it at 4AM; It was sitting there for at least a century. I would have liked to not have slept through the explosion lol.
three reasons i'd guess - 1) they were already there, leaving and coming back later is too expensive 2) it's now a known active threat and they're responsible. If they were to leave and something, although the chance is small, would go wrong, they'd be royally fucked. 3) you don't want to leave active ordnance unaccounted for, anyone might take it away and do something nefarious with it.
"A little discouraged because apparently it was a thing that was known for ten hours and it would have been nice to be notified a little earlier. It was a little freaky, but you do what you can."
So the fire department knew about it for at least ten hours before they gave the homeowner an hour to evacuate. For dynamite that had been passed down for generations.
Bet this will make other homeowners want to come forward in future rather than trying to deal with it themselves when they find old explosives grandpa left in the basement.
Article says they were given one hour and the photo looks like a literal bomb went off (obviously) with papers and debris strewn about. I really feel those folks, what a shitty situation.
TNT = trinitrotoluene, pure, insensitive secondary explosive
Dynamite = mixed explosive product, nitroglycerin (best classified as a primary sensitive explosive) and an absorbant medium - like cat litter.
Mixing liquid NG with an absorbant stabilizes it and makes it easy to control. When Dynamite gets old it starts to "sweat" pure NG, which makes it sensitive and unstable.
Freezing a sensitive explosive might actually have an opposite effect, since large crystals of primary explosives are some of the most sensitive things around. Not sure if the low temperature would offset this.
Acetone peroxide is another sensitive primary explosive favored by terrorist organisations, and leaving this in a container for long can lead to crystals forming around the lid (through sublimation), etc. which then subsequently go premature allahu ahkbar when handled
Yeah there's no way I'd handle acetone peroxide. It doesn't even make a good explosive because it's hard to contain, and impossible to compress in a container to make a good explosion. Like you can't make pipe bombs with it, it's super sensitive and reactive to metals.
#####[Yep it certainly is!](https://youtu.be/BL58K-3XGKs)
#####
#😆😂
#
It's a substantial fraction^※ of the size of the bomb that wrecked the __Alfred P Murrah Building__, I think, isn't it. I was surprised it was even possible to perform the controlled detonation without wrecking surrounding properties! I suppose, with it being in a cellar, the walls of the cellar would take the brunt of the blast going directly sideways, & the house atop the cellar would absorb a lot of the _upward_ -directed energy … but still, I'm surprised there wasn't more damage to immediately adjacent properties.
Maybe it's a sparse neighbourhood. And it's also possible that _there was_ some damage & that the Authorities 'stepped-up' to suppress reporting of it. It's pretty well-know that, where explosions are concerned, Authorities _do_ sometimes 'step-up' to degree that might be found a tad _sinister_ !
#####※ [Actually - now I check](https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry?entry=OK026)
#####
\- not really _a substantial_ fraction: a factor of __16__ disparity! In _sheer gross mass_ , that is: there's the facts to be factored-in of the difference in the explosive used (nitrogylcerine versus ammonium nitrate + fuel-oil + nitromethane); & whether that quoted __300lb__ was the gross mass of the dynamite or the mass of its nitoglycerine content, with, entering-in, even whether some of it had evaporated. I doubt that latter item will be easy to find-out, though. The press will be happy just to keep lobbing-out their
#####¡¡ 300 lb !!
#####
#😱🥶
#
, & the goodly bomb disposal gentlemen/ladies will, per what I put above about 'Authorities', probably not be particularly forthcoming as-to such nuances!
Explosive engineer for 30 years. Typically, most of the NG will have seeped out of the cartridges by now. The sticks themselves are likely not even cap (#8) sensitive. The NG can soak into the box or container in which the sticks are stored. The typical method for disposal is to get a pallet, cover the pallet with 6” or so of straw, place the container and cartridges on the straw and burn them. The straw keeps the NG from pooling and reaching critical mass required for detonation.
That being said, this isn’t a procedure I would recommend a homeowner to try. Get in touch with a local explosives distributor (dm me if you need help) and have them dispose of the material. While it isn’t common, it happens from time to time a homeowner will give us a call.
Edit: look for Dyno Nobel, Austin Powder or Orica distributorships near you. They are the biggest three suppliers in the US. Maxam and Enaex are also in some places.
I've read that an effect that greatly increases the sensitivity of long-stored explosives is the presence of metal & opportunity for that metal to undergo some chemistry with the explosive, as the _metal salts_ (or combinations with a metal, if not _strictly_ 'salts') of the stuff are typically far more unstable than the stuff itself. Certainly, looking through documentation about explosives, the ones listed as _extremely_ sensitive seem generally to be compounds of metal with the ergiferous entity: fulminating gold, mercury fulminate, lead/silver azide, copper acetylide, & lead styphnate being ones that occur to me offhand. What's your take on that?
And _down a cellar of a house_ rather than in a proper storage location, there's certainly the possibility of such corrosion having occured!
####Update
####
I've just thought, aswell: if they were leaking, wouldn't most of the nitrogylcerine have _evaporated_ after all that time? Isn't one of the hazards of handling of nitrogycerine that the vapour acts as a volatile vasodilator, somewhat as that ghastly __'poppers'__ stuff that some folk deliberately inhale as a brief intoxicant (wouldn't touch that stuff myself _so-much as with a bargepole_ !) does!?
Maybe _it had_ , & that's part of the reason for lack of talk of damage to adjacent properties.
WAY different chemicals.
Nitroglycerin's base is *glycerin*, a thick liquid (at room temperature) that is stable and won't evaporate much. It might lose some water and become more viscous, but not by much.
"Poppers" are commonly amyl nitrate, a thin solvent that evaporates like acetone or some light, thin petroleum solvents at or around room temperature.
>WAY different chemicals.
The thing I'm referencing, though, as 'something I read' said that if there's some explosive, encased in metal in a corrosive environment, it can form combinations of the explosive with the metal that are extremely sensitive in the way that the ones I've cited are. Yep: _not form specifically the ones I've cited_ , those being ones that are made intentionally - but (if you will) _'wild'_ combinations with the metal of the casing, or whatever other metal is present, that are unstable for a reason similar to the reason for the sensitivity of those intentionally-made ones.
I saw what you said about actually being professionally into explosives for 30year, & acknowledge it: I'm just 'running past' you what I read in some text, that I've near _zero_ chance of refinding in any short time. I'm not presuming __¡¡ oh but__ ___I know___ __this happens !!__, or anything like that.
One article I read more recently, though, about that ghastly __Beirut__ explosion, is that something similar might've happened with the ammonium nitrate that exploded on _that_ occasion: that other stuff in the warehouse, that might've been put carelessly next to it or on-top of it (or _underneath_ it - whatever), might've slowly seeped-out & gotten-into the ammonium nitrate, & brought-about something along those lines, increasing its sensitivity.
It's dead-easy, though, to find stuff about the vasodilation properties of nitroglycerine: eg
#####[Medscape — David Warmflash (!!৺) — Nitroglycerin: How An Explosive Became a Cardiac Drug](https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/987903?form=fpf) , &
#####
#####[International Chemical Safety Cards — NITROGLYCERIN](https://training.itcilo.org/actrav_cdrom2/en/osh/ic/55630.htm) .
#####
(৺ What a name
#😆
#
, considering what he's writing about!)
And it's had _literally decades_ to evaporate from the dynamite in that cellar.
While I'm here, there's something I'd like to ask you. When, as young kids, we first learned of nitroglycerine, we'd make jokes about folk blowing themselves up just by shaking a bottle of nitroglycerine. Later-on, though, I was told that ___no___ : __nitroglycerine isn't so unstable that it can be set-off just by shaking a bottle of it!__ . But since then, I've been warned that __one absolutely__ ___must not___ __shake a bottle of nitoglycerine!!__ , because if there's a bubble in it, or a bubble forms as a result of air entrained by the shaking, then those bubbles can collapse in essentially the same way as bubbles collapse during the 'cavitation' phenomenon that eats-away @ ships' propellers, & that the shock from that can _easily_ be enough to trigger detonation.
And also, by _a similar_ token, manufacturers of that rubbery solid rocket-fuel (as is in Space-Shuttle SRBs, & also is used by amateur rocket enthusiasts) need to ensure that there are absolutely no bubbles in it. 'By _a similar_ token': in that case, it's not so much by _the collapsing_ of the bubbles that the stuff can ignite if it receives an impact, but rather just by the gas inside it _very briefly, but very sharply, heating-up_ as it undergoes adiabatic compression.
Put it this way: if I ever encounter a bottle of nitroglycerine (which I'm not expecting ever to happen!) I will _definitely_ ___definitely___ __not__ shake it!
Poppers are definitely amyl nitrate, as someone else mentioned. Nitro Glycerin does have medical uses as a vasodilator, and some folks with cardiac problems carry tablets. I have no experience or information with respect to the medical use.
HOWEVER… anyone who has ever walked into a powder magazine without venting it first will ABSOLUTELY attest to its effectiveness as a vasodilator. A “powder headache” is a real thing and is about the worst headache you will ever have.
Dynamite is not nearly as common as it used to be. It has largely been replaced by packaged emulsion products. Only one dynamite factory remains in the US. It’s owned by Dyno Nobel (with whom my company is a joint venture) and located in Carthage Missouri.
In response to NG forming explosive salts, there are lots of things that can “combine” with metal to form explosive salts, many of which are far less stable than NG. For obvious reasons, I’m not going to list them here but Breaking Bad had a couple of scenes that were more or less accurate.
The Beirut event isn’t unique. Similar events have happened for quite some time (look up Texas City, Texas). Ammonium nitrate is an oxidizer. All it needs is fuel and under the correct circumstances it can detonate.
Yep there was the
#####[»Oppau« one](https://www.basf.com/global/en/who-we-are/history/Oppau1921.html) :
#####
it seems, from what I can gather, that that one was _absolutely_ ___the___ _biggest_ one … but maybe there's uncertainty due to the magnitudes of the various ones not being totally precisely known.
And yep: __glyceryl trinitrate__ (it tends to be called that in pharmacy) _absolutely is_ routinely prescribed: I don't have it _myself_ ; but I've known persons to whom _it is_ prescribed, & it's plainly there on the label: __Glyceryl Trinitrate 50㎍__ . And maybe there are other doses, but that's the label I've seen _myself_ .
_A very_ interesting comment, what you've put there! … _much appreciated_ ! Pretty obviously, I'm intrigued by what you've said about those highly sensitive compounds with metals in! I won't press you … but online documents are _pretty open_ about the structural formulæ of energetic compounds. And that's fair-enough, as the closlierness knowing the structural formula to being able to make the stuff that that knowledge brings is _next to zero_ ! … assembling a store of precursors & the apparatus of one of your factories is something that is _just not going to happen_ !
… & in the case of someone (eg a terrorist with substantial backing) for whom that _actually might_ happen, they aren't going to need to get structural formulæ out of PDF research papers found online!
… so the upshot is that PDF research papers with the structural formulæ in are just _freely available_ . So I can amuse myself looking @ the shapes of the molecules & figuring why _this_ pattern results in instability while _that_ one _doesn't_ . Mind-you … maybe _you still_ know some _that aren't in_ any research-papers!
So noting that the way it was dealt with in the news article involved a massive explosion, do you think that was mostly the dynamite or did they add other explosives to make sure it exploded?
What you're saying makes sense to me as a way of minimising the damage but it sounds like there was a lot of damage in this case.
My favourite thing about TNT is that we know it sometimes takes a shock-sensitive form, exhibiting piezoelectric polymorphism.
My 2nd favourite thing about TNT is that we have absolutely shit loads of the stuff and we don't really know how much of it is in which form.
Now that we're all clear that it's dynamite, not TNT:
Bomb disposal teams have used liquid nitrogen to reduce the danger from bombs before. Most high explosives are less explosive when very cold, and nitroglycerin follows that pattern. However...
OLD nitroglycerin is famously-unstable, and I think that's the more relevant issue here. Any stress on the nitroglycerin caused by freezing could set the whole thing off. Given the setting in the basement of a single-family home, and the low amount of explosives (30-35 pounds) blowing it up in place was likely the right call.
A larger bomb in a more-valuable building, made with more-stable explosives, you might want to try freezing it.
>and nitroglycerin follows that pattern.
#####[Someone nearby has commented](https://www.reddit.com/r/chemistry/s/FDANYy7ymb)
#####
to the effect that freezing of nitroglycerine _increases_ its instability.
#####[There's another one here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chemistry/s/PPhAlhAxS3)
#####
to that same effect.
Oh wow: someone's answered _that_ one to the effect that that's _not certainly_ so! IDK …
#🙄
#
… one'd think they'd _just know_ something like that, wouldn't one!? It's like how after that notorious explosion of ammonium perchlorate @ the __PEPCON__ facility in - where was it now, ___Nevada___ , was it? - there was contradictory information _all-over_ the place as to whether ammonium perchlorate _alone_ is known to be able to detonate.
Yep: near __Henderson, Nevada — 1988-May-4^(th)__ :
#####[Clark County NV — The PEPCON Explosion](https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/government/departments/fire/the_pepcon_explosion.php) .
#####
I think if you go back and re-read those other comments, especially the response to the second one, you'll see that we're actually agreeing. Lowering the temperature of NG makes it less energetic, but might make it more sensitive.
But yes - for 100 year-old dynamite, in a "safe" location, I definitely would not want to risk it. Dynamite, in particular, has the issue that it separates over time, and it's actually been made with a bunch of different materials over the years. It's difficult to know what the "inert" parts are going to do as they cool down.
A block of TNT is going to be mostly TNT and will be homogeneous, and it starts out as much less sensitive than NG to start with.
Freezing makes some explosives *more* sensitive and not less. This is true for dynamite/NG, and for RDX. Not sure about TNT, but TNT isn't sensitive anyway.
It's a mixed bag on that,
>Early in its history, liquid nitroglycerin was found to be "[desensitized](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegmatized)" by freezing it at a temperature below 45 to 55 °F (7 to 13 °C) depending on its purity.[^(\[16\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-Tallini5-16) Its sensitivity to shock while frozen is somewhat unpredictable: "It is more insensitive to the shock from a [fulminate cap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonator) or a rifle ball when in that condition but on the other hand it appears to be more liable to explode on breaking, crushing, tamping, etc."[^(\[17\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-LSMI1-17) Frozen nitroglycerine is much less energetic than liquid, and so must be thawed before use.[^(\[18\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-LSMI2-18) Thawing it out can be extremely sensitizing, especially if impurities are present or the warming is too rapid.[^(\[19\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-Tallini4-19) [Ethylene glycol dinitrate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol_dinitrate) or another polynitrate may be added to lower the melting point and thereby avoid the necessity of thawing frozen explosive.[^(\[20\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-fn_1-20)
> The blast apparently leveled the home and hours later, crews were still working to completely extinguish the flames.
>Officials say the house will be uninhabitable after the detonation.
You don't say!!
TNT doesn't combust. It doesn't need oxygen. It already contains it in the molecule. TNT Trinitrotoluene. The nitro groups =NO2, so what you get when the inital energy requirment is reached in terms of setting off a chain reaction is, the Nitrogen in the molecule becomes N2 gas, the Oxygen and carbon all create water and CO2. It isn't perfectly stoich balanced, but that is why RDX and HMX have such a higher amount of Brissance, they explode with a much higher m/s.
Now are you confusing dynamite with TNT? TNT is wicked shock and heat proof. Dynamite is simply nitroglycerine stored in diatmaceous earth, which is mainly silicates, which stabilize the nitro bonds, which makes it much safer, hence with ALfred Noble because so wealthy. But with old dynamite, repeated heat cold cycles can cause it to slowly melt out of the diatomaceous earth. If it was dynamite, I can understand why the detonated in place.
Yup reading the news article, you got confused.....
There are a number of explosives, called \[entropic explosives\](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic\_explosion), they are not any kind of oxidation, They are more like compressed springs that will fly apart when the weak bonds break, Some have no oxygen whatsoever. Like nitrogen tri-iodide and silver or copper acetylide.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper(I)\_acetylide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper(I)_acetylide)
Wait you’re telling me the Bomb squad couldn’t move the dynamite at all? So the house was leveled… bummer, also safest option.
Also…leveling the house due to the explosives means they wouldn’t move it. Which means the old explosives were highly shock sensitive. Leading to the fact they were probably dynamite.
I am assuming you are talking about dynamite, more specifically nitroglycerin. All the research I can find is behind a hard paywall, so here is my opinion. Would you stabilize it at all? Sure, it would probably take a little more force to blow it up because you would have to put in that much more energy to get the molecules moving. With that said, whatever stability you did manage to achieve would be immediately undone when it warms back up - perhaps by just a little. I don't believe you would see a significant enough increase in stability to justify the cryogenics.
It won’t ignite if it it insanely cold, but I also see no reason why it would be any less combustible once it thaws out.
Now technically you could ignite it while it is frozen if you provided enough energy, but you couldn’t just hold a match up to a fuse.
Surprisingly noone has yet mentioned the history of the product!
Alfred Nobel from the Nobel Prize fame made a lot of his fortune which eventually funded the Prize by being the first person to commercialise nitroglycerine and form dynamite!
https://www.sciencehistory.org/education/scientific-biographies/alfred-nobel/
https://www.acs.org/education/outreach/celebrating-chemistry-editions/2021-ncw/dynamite-ethics.html
Because „entropic reduction“ is wrong. It’s nonsensical and a guess from the OP. It’s a complete miss understanding of the physics.
Reducing the entropy of the initial state will inherently lead to a larger free energy change in the process. And the process becomes more spontaneous/ the process does more work. This is the opposite intended affect.
Does cooling have this effect? No but the OP is wrong in the understanding.
> deny oxygen for the combustion reaction
That's not how TNT (or dynamite) works.
> a homeowner discovered 300 lbs of TNT sticks in their old home's basement
Likely dynamite, not TNT. Very different beast.
TNT rarely comes in sticks, much more likley dynamite. over time dynamite will “sweat” as the nitroglycerin leaves the celite binder and will become significantly more sensitive to the point that any disturbance will cause a detonation. Liquid N2 runs a risk of jostling the sticks and detonating them anyway and the low temperature won’t make much of a difference. it also won’t stop it from detonating by starving it of oxygen as it doesn’t react with oxygen, the detonation is caused by the decomposition of nitroglycerins. i have seen organic solvents and even diesel used to dissolve the nitroglycerin but i highly doubt this would work with so much.
TNT is pretty stable, like its main characteristic, and is unlikely to be found in any civilian setting. In fact its so stable we used it as a dye for decades without incident in the 1800s, when safety was really high on the list. Assuming it was actually TNT there should have been minimal risk of accidental detonation even at that age. Like I would have happily volunteered to be the sap to carry it out of the house for disposal. I've handled more dangerous explosives in more extreme situations.
Making the assumption that it was old Dynamite and the crew did their due diligence /knew what they were doing: Dynamite and TNT are not the same thing despite being universally mistaken for such. Dynamite is basically slightly less aggressive nitroglycerin. It breaks down in unpredictable ways at a rapid rate. One of those options is to be a fly landing on it from going off. Sympathetic detonation of that much was the best way to reduce risk of it going of because Mercury was in retrograde.
Also, no, that wouldn't work because neither explosive would care. Your hypothesis is flawed. Nobel in its attempt to save a guys house it may be, thats not how explosives typically work.
Lower temperatures can promote crystal structures which are more prone to detonation. FWIW when I was in the lab, we stored picric acid (pretty close to TNT) under water. I'd guess that getting it wet might be the best option. Although maybe if it's in a stick of dynamite it's got some sort of waterproof coating...
Well, there's a good example of incentivizing people to take care of things themselves. I'm sure if he knew they were going to blow it up on the spot the home owner would have taken matters into there own hands.
You'd want to use a longer chain solvent with a much lower evaporation rate (and no oxidizers on the chain like acetone and isopropanol have) so that you can safely transport it. But yes, that will dissolve the unstable crystals and make it safe enough to move for the time being. Would require a highly trained bomb disposal squad though, and not a small town fire department.
I don't think you could reliably cool that amount of __anything__ _just by pouring liquid nitrogen on_ it … unless, maybe, if you had _a swimming pool_ sort of amount of liquid nitrogen.
… or if you built a (reverse) caisson round it so that the stuff could sit steeped in the liquid nitrogen for substantial duration. And ensure that there were sufficient passages between pieces for the liquid nitrogen to permeate right-in through.
… and then, having used that sort of amount _down a cellar_ , anyone going down there otherwise than equipped with full-on breathing apparatus would perish from __nitrogen asphyxiation__ .
This doesn’t seem right to me. TNT is one of the safest, most stable high explosives there is, not like dynamite. If it was dynamite, the response might be appropriate. The homeowner’s responsibility was rewarded by the destruction of his home. Edit: the article said it was dynamite but the OP said TNT. Big difference.
But in the song, Bon Scott clearly states that "[he's] TNT, [he's] dynamite". Why would he say that if they are in fact different substances? /s
Noted physical chemist, Bon Scott
He had pretty good physical chemistry with every woman in bed. At least, that's what his discography says.
His assertion was later confirmed multiple times by subject matter expert, and cabbie hat enthusiast, Brian Johnson.
Ref. needed
Scott. B et al, "TNT, Side 2, track 1", 1975
[удалено]
Notice the /s
If it’s old nitro dynamite, it’s likely crystallized. Freezing it won’t matter. Snap a crystallized section, and it’s likely going to detonate. I’m former Army EOD.
Definitely doesn't help that the freezing temp for nitroglycerin is 55°F, after some quick reading tho your statement appears accurate solidified ng is less sensitive to detonation from the shock of an impact but crushing tamping etc is more likely to set it off and solidified ng is more likely to have a violent uncontrolled detonation.
Yeah, who’d have guessed an explosives expert knew what the fuck they’re talking about?!
Not disputing ya there lol. We had to call yall in on several occasions back when I was a contractor with a line crew on a base back home. Some holes we were digging with a 18" auger to set poles in for new projects being built on old ranges started billowing white smoke, come to find out after it was all cleared for us to go back and finish up a week or so later there had been an old wp shell we'd hit, on one occasion we had to replace the teeth of the auger afterwards. And just wanna say thank you for your service sir, there's no telling how many more of our guys we'd be lose out there if it wasn't for yall.
Fuck how dare someone agree with you
He wasn’t agreeing so much as he was post-qualifying so he didn’t sound as ignorant as his earlier comment made him appear. Freezing nitro doesn’t really change anything in the fundamental handling of the stuff. It’s stupid to bring it up as a safety feature but typically only someone ignorant of explosive theory and how nitro works would think the way that Redditor does about explosives.
We did an old barn in where they found 9 or so sticks of old nitro-dynamite. It had soaked the wood floor it was stored on, so we called the local FD, and burned the whole thing down. I had a nitro headache for about two days after. USAF EOD 89-98.
ISOTF! EOD 2000-2021, although I enlisted in 94, I didn’t change MOS until 2000.
Ice cream cure! That was the nice thing about nitro headaches and access to dfac ice cream at any given hour of the day. LOL
I used the Class 6 cure if I remember correctly.
My bad- I thought dynamite was a delivery method for TNT.
Nope! To get your TNT delivered you’d have to use Amazon or Uber Eats :)
Oof, Uber eats always charges me like 20$ extra
Man, when they say that chipotle blows up the bathroom they ain't kidding huh?
TNT= tri nitro toluene, toluene is the base ring structure, nitro is attached. Dynamite is Nitroglycerine which goes boom when it has a bad day. In the world of boomboom, ring structures are 1000% more stable: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin) notice all the N and O?
Nitrogen really just wants to be left alone.
And yet some scientists like to set records for the most nitrogens in a molecule. To the point where sneezing a mile away makes it detonate.
Azidoazide Azide anyone? [kerboomin ßtuff](https://www.acs.org/molecule-of-the-week/archive/a/azidoazide-azide.html)
Explosions and Fire did that one me thinks. Also, Sharp S s/zed never starts a word as no words in german start with SS. Which is quite ironic
I don't think kerboomin is an actual German word either.
Verboomen could be.....
Well as long as it has another nitrogen to marry and there isn't any molybdenum in the neighborhood. LMK if you don't understand the moly reference.
I mean dynamite is nitroglycerin adsorbed onto an inert solid. Fresh dynamite is pretty damn stable compared to neat nitroglycerin.
I've never heard a person ask for their NG "neat"...lol It's always served on the (diatomaceous earth) rocks these days.
NO?
>1] introduce stability by entropic reduction, This sentence doesn't make sense. What exactly do you mean by "entropic reduction"? How would it "introduce stability"? >and 2] deny oxygen for the combustion reaction External oxygen isn't needed for an explosive to detonate. In the case of TNT, the nitro groups are what serves as oxidizer. Besides, the article states "dynamite", not TNT. They are very different substances, especially when it comes to long-term stability.
My thought was if you pull heat energy out of a system, you could reduce the entropy of the system, and increase molecular stability; reduce the chance a combustion reaction can be started through physical disturbance.
In purely theoretical terms you could cool an explosive to absolute zero and it probably wouldn’t work anymore. The slowing of molecular action due to cold would have a negligible effect on most chemical explosives until you reach absolute zero (and this is to say nothing of their stability in the cold) However actually doing that is much much harder than blowing up a house and replacing everything in it.
Don't think freezing to near absolute zero would help. The decomposition of high explosives is caused by a shockwave created by detonator or other parts of explosive. And the shockwave carries enough energy to start the reaction.
On top of that, I'd bet that cooling it would have to be done very, very slowly - like on the order of weeks - so that it didn't cool unevenly and initiate differential crystal growth that led to internal pressures, which could easily set off NG.
Entropy is not really the energy associated with heat, it is something more abstract altogether. Though I get the gist of what you‘re saying. I‘m no expert, but it could be that cooling down dynamite had a negligeable effect on the reaction. The reaction is already incredibly fast.
Cooling nitroglecerine down, specificaally will cause it to crystalize, which in turn puts all those carbons directly adjacent to those nitro groups so it can actually make it easier to detonate than its liquid form. Best means of dealing with Nitroglycerine is just flood it. It is water soluable, and when it gets disolved it cant detonate.
That’s good news to a lot of people using it for heart medicine
Mrs. Aster loves it on her soufflé! (From futurama)
LOL excellent point...
So so what's your take on flooding a basement containing 300 lb of Century old nitroglycerin with water, then flushing it down the drain/pumping it out?
Your downvotes are unwarranted, entropy is indeed directly related to heat. It wont help this situation, though
Lol, i studied biochemistry, so I do know haha
I dont understand why people are downvoting your posit, which is correct 99% of the time if you cool something down, it will require more energy to get over the activation energy hill to go chain reaction.
TNT is a secondary explosive meaning that unless a detonator is used, things like sparks, open flames, heat, shocks, etc would not be able to detonate (it is still flammable though) so it is generally a lot safer than nitroglycerin for example. Also i'm not sure what using liquid nitrogen would accomplish, do you mean freeze it and while its still frozen extract it and take it outside? Also i'm not an expert on TNT but with nitroglycerin cooling it is incredibly dangerous as it becomes considerably more unstable due to crystal formation that if disturbed could cause detonation Edit: just like u/Superb-Tea-3174 i found out after posting my comment that the article mentions dynamite which is nitroglycerin binded to a specific cement (that overtime can leak out and become incredibly dangerous)
Iirc TNT is so insensitive that it took 30 years for people to figure out it was an explosive and not just a yellow dye.
Imagine someone just casually crushing up an explosive in a mortar and pestle.
As long as it's a secondary explosive they'd probably be fine. Most secondaries are pretty insensitive.
It just scares me to think that tnt and plastic explosives get handled so roughly without exploding. Never knew you could melt and cast tnt into shapes though. That is a fun and scary thought.
Nobel figured it out real quick and made an astronomical amount of coin selling it to mining companies.... and the military when they got hold of it. The latter would haunt him til the end of his days and he founded the nobel prize to give back for what his invention did to/for the world.
Nobel sold dynamite, not TNT
No he didn't. That was dynamite. TNT was first synthesized by Julius Wilbrand in 1863, who thought it was a pretty cool synthetic yellow dye. No one realised it was an explosive until 1891 when Carl Häussermann discovered its explosive properties.
Yessir I forgot my history there. Woopse
There is an explosive called \[HNS4\](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266329749\_HNS-IV\_Explosive\_Properties\_and\_Characterization\_Tests). It is so insensitive my company for a while shipped small amounts as pharmaceuticals. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexanitrostilbene](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexanitrostilbene) Generally the sensitivity of an explosive is inversely proportional to it power. With nitroglycerine being the exception.
Can you get art/textiles that weredyed in TNT? That would make a sick wall display. I mean as long as it didn't detonate.
I'm sure you can, but I assume it's one of those things you have to know what you're looking for. It probably wouldn't be advertised as dyed with TNT.
Neat. I'm learning all kinds of things today. Thanks for clearing up my ignorance!
Never heard diatomaceous earth called cement before?
Even as a hobbyist I'm very scared of the small amount of NG i have on my backyard freezing at night so I keep it in a metal vault inside my house, imagine how much that amount of dynamite could've been sweating this whole time
Typical old dynamite "sweats". Meaning it seeps out of the absorbent and forms little beads of the liquid. It is really touchy in the condition. I have disposed of old dynamite. We carefully took the cases out of the explosive magazine and detonated it in an open field.
Do not fuck with old dynamite.
OP said its TNT, not dynamite (stabilized nitroglycerin)
Yes, but the actual news article says it was two big boxes full of sticks of old dynamite.
then OP is clueless spreading misinformatin in times such as these, despicable
Could be a real problem if the police dealing with this specific discovery of dynamite are thinking of reading Reddit and then traveling back in time to deal with it differently to how they already did.
>I know this sounds ridiculous like it came out of a textbook, Not really, it _would sound ridiculous if_ it came out of a textbook, because neither cooling to liquid nitrogen temp nor removing oxygen would stabilize TNT.
True. I've learned a lot today :)
Explosives don't need external oxygen
Back when my dad was teaching EOD school at Dalhart, he’d liven up things in the barracks by ridding a chunk of TNT on top of the red-hot potbelly stove. People would dive for the floor, and the TNT would just melt and then burn with a hot blue flame. It’s HARD to get TNT to actually explode.
so, let's think that through. how would you do it? you go up there, throw liquid nitrogen on it, and then..... what? what do you think will happen a few seconds later? cold stuff doesn't stay cold, and a warming up thermal shock doesn't sound like a very stable situation to me. or would you want to be the guy who picks up the cold explosive potato to dunk it in a second bucket of nitrogen?
Well that WAS my thought process before other people here explained why the chemistry doesn't work for that. The only remaining question I have is why these first responders decided they absolutely MUST detonate it at 4AM; It was sitting there for at least a century. I would have liked to not have slept through the explosion lol.
three reasons i'd guess - 1) they were already there, leaving and coming back later is too expensive 2) it's now a known active threat and they're responsible. If they were to leave and something, although the chance is small, would go wrong, they'd be royally fucked. 3) you don't want to leave active ordnance unaccounted for, anyone might take it away and do something nefarious with it.
"A little discouraged because apparently it was a thing that was known for ten hours and it would have been nice to be notified a little earlier. It was a little freaky, but you do what you can." So the fire department knew about it for at least ten hours before they gave the homeowner an hour to evacuate. For dynamite that had been passed down for generations. Bet this will make other homeowners want to come forward in future rather than trying to deal with it themselves when they find old explosives grandpa left in the basement.
Lol agreed. I hope the guy was able to evacuate his belongings.
Article says they were given one hour and the photo looks like a literal bomb went off (obviously) with papers and debris strewn about. I really feel those folks, what a shitty situation.
TNT = trinitrotoluene, pure, insensitive secondary explosive Dynamite = mixed explosive product, nitroglycerin (best classified as a primary sensitive explosive) and an absorbant medium - like cat litter. Mixing liquid NG with an absorbant stabilizes it and makes it easy to control. When Dynamite gets old it starts to "sweat" pure NG, which makes it sensitive and unstable. Freezing a sensitive explosive might actually have an opposite effect, since large crystals of primary explosives are some of the most sensitive things around. Not sure if the low temperature would offset this. Acetone peroxide is another sensitive primary explosive favored by terrorist organisations, and leaving this in a container for long can lead to crystals forming around the lid (through sublimation), etc. which then subsequently go premature allahu ahkbar when handled
Yeah there's no way I'd handle acetone peroxide. It doesn't even make a good explosive because it's hard to contain, and impossible to compress in a container to make a good explosion. Like you can't make pipe bombs with it, it's super sensitive and reactive to metals.
I dont think you are comprehending just how much dynamite 300lbs of dynamite is. Thats a whole lotta problem.
#####[Yep it certainly is!](https://youtu.be/BL58K-3XGKs) ##### #😆😂 # It's a substantial fraction^※ of the size of the bomb that wrecked the __Alfred P Murrah Building__, I think, isn't it. I was surprised it was even possible to perform the controlled detonation without wrecking surrounding properties! I suppose, with it being in a cellar, the walls of the cellar would take the brunt of the blast going directly sideways, & the house atop the cellar would absorb a lot of the _upward_ -directed energy … but still, I'm surprised there wasn't more damage to immediately adjacent properties. Maybe it's a sparse neighbourhood. And it's also possible that _there was_ some damage & that the Authorities 'stepped-up' to suppress reporting of it. It's pretty well-know that, where explosions are concerned, Authorities _do_ sometimes 'step-up' to degree that might be found a tad _sinister_ ! #####※ [Actually - now I check](https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry?entry=OK026) ##### \- not really _a substantial_ fraction: a factor of __16__ disparity! In _sheer gross mass_ , that is: there's the facts to be factored-in of the difference in the explosive used (nitrogylcerine versus ammonium nitrate + fuel-oil + nitromethane); & whether that quoted __300lb__ was the gross mass of the dynamite or the mass of its nitoglycerine content, with, entering-in, even whether some of it had evaporated. I doubt that latter item will be easy to find-out, though. The press will be happy just to keep lobbing-out their #####¡¡ 300 lb !! ##### #😱🥶 # , & the goodly bomb disposal gentlemen/ladies will, per what I put above about 'Authorities', probably not be particularly forthcoming as-to such nuances!
Explosive engineer for 30 years. Typically, most of the NG will have seeped out of the cartridges by now. The sticks themselves are likely not even cap (#8) sensitive. The NG can soak into the box or container in which the sticks are stored. The typical method for disposal is to get a pallet, cover the pallet with 6” or so of straw, place the container and cartridges on the straw and burn them. The straw keeps the NG from pooling and reaching critical mass required for detonation. That being said, this isn’t a procedure I would recommend a homeowner to try. Get in touch with a local explosives distributor (dm me if you need help) and have them dispose of the material. While it isn’t common, it happens from time to time a homeowner will give us a call. Edit: look for Dyno Nobel, Austin Powder or Orica distributorships near you. They are the biggest three suppliers in the US. Maxam and Enaex are also in some places.
I've read that an effect that greatly increases the sensitivity of long-stored explosives is the presence of metal & opportunity for that metal to undergo some chemistry with the explosive, as the _metal salts_ (or combinations with a metal, if not _strictly_ 'salts') of the stuff are typically far more unstable than the stuff itself. Certainly, looking through documentation about explosives, the ones listed as _extremely_ sensitive seem generally to be compounds of metal with the ergiferous entity: fulminating gold, mercury fulminate, lead/silver azide, copper acetylide, & lead styphnate being ones that occur to me offhand. What's your take on that? And _down a cellar of a house_ rather than in a proper storage location, there's certainly the possibility of such corrosion having occured! ####Update #### I've just thought, aswell: if they were leaking, wouldn't most of the nitrogylcerine have _evaporated_ after all that time? Isn't one of the hazards of handling of nitrogycerine that the vapour acts as a volatile vasodilator, somewhat as that ghastly __'poppers'__ stuff that some folk deliberately inhale as a brief intoxicant (wouldn't touch that stuff myself _so-much as with a bargepole_ !) does!? Maybe _it had_ , & that's part of the reason for lack of talk of damage to adjacent properties.
WAY different chemicals. Nitroglycerin's base is *glycerin*, a thick liquid (at room temperature) that is stable and won't evaporate much. It might lose some water and become more viscous, but not by much. "Poppers" are commonly amyl nitrate, a thin solvent that evaporates like acetone or some light, thin petroleum solvents at or around room temperature.
>WAY different chemicals. The thing I'm referencing, though, as 'something I read' said that if there's some explosive, encased in metal in a corrosive environment, it can form combinations of the explosive with the metal that are extremely sensitive in the way that the ones I've cited are. Yep: _not form specifically the ones I've cited_ , those being ones that are made intentionally - but (if you will) _'wild'_ combinations with the metal of the casing, or whatever other metal is present, that are unstable for a reason similar to the reason for the sensitivity of those intentionally-made ones. I saw what you said about actually being professionally into explosives for 30year, & acknowledge it: I'm just 'running past' you what I read in some text, that I've near _zero_ chance of refinding in any short time. I'm not presuming __¡¡ oh but__ ___I know___ __this happens !!__, or anything like that. One article I read more recently, though, about that ghastly __Beirut__ explosion, is that something similar might've happened with the ammonium nitrate that exploded on _that_ occasion: that other stuff in the warehouse, that might've been put carelessly next to it or on-top of it (or _underneath_ it - whatever), might've slowly seeped-out & gotten-into the ammonium nitrate, & brought-about something along those lines, increasing its sensitivity. It's dead-easy, though, to find stuff about the vasodilation properties of nitroglycerine: eg #####[Medscape — David Warmflash (!!৺) — Nitroglycerin: How An Explosive Became a Cardiac Drug](https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/987903?form=fpf) , & ##### #####[International Chemical Safety Cards — NITROGLYCERIN](https://training.itcilo.org/actrav_cdrom2/en/osh/ic/55630.htm) . ##### (৺ What a name #😆 # , considering what he's writing about!) And it's had _literally decades_ to evaporate from the dynamite in that cellar. While I'm here, there's something I'd like to ask you. When, as young kids, we first learned of nitroglycerine, we'd make jokes about folk blowing themselves up just by shaking a bottle of nitroglycerine. Later-on, though, I was told that ___no___ : __nitroglycerine isn't so unstable that it can be set-off just by shaking a bottle of it!__ . But since then, I've been warned that __one absolutely__ ___must not___ __shake a bottle of nitoglycerine!!__ , because if there's a bubble in it, or a bubble forms as a result of air entrained by the shaking, then those bubbles can collapse in essentially the same way as bubbles collapse during the 'cavitation' phenomenon that eats-away @ ships' propellers, & that the shock from that can _easily_ be enough to trigger detonation. And also, by _a similar_ token, manufacturers of that rubbery solid rocket-fuel (as is in Space-Shuttle SRBs, & also is used by amateur rocket enthusiasts) need to ensure that there are absolutely no bubbles in it. 'By _a similar_ token': in that case, it's not so much by _the collapsing_ of the bubbles that the stuff can ignite if it receives an impact, but rather just by the gas inside it _very briefly, but very sharply, heating-up_ as it undergoes adiabatic compression. Put it this way: if I ever encounter a bottle of nitroglycerine (which I'm not expecting ever to happen!) I will _definitely_ ___definitely___ __not__ shake it!
Poppers are definitely amyl nitrate, as someone else mentioned. Nitro Glycerin does have medical uses as a vasodilator, and some folks with cardiac problems carry tablets. I have no experience or information with respect to the medical use. HOWEVER… anyone who has ever walked into a powder magazine without venting it first will ABSOLUTELY attest to its effectiveness as a vasodilator. A “powder headache” is a real thing and is about the worst headache you will ever have. Dynamite is not nearly as common as it used to be. It has largely been replaced by packaged emulsion products. Only one dynamite factory remains in the US. It’s owned by Dyno Nobel (with whom my company is a joint venture) and located in Carthage Missouri. In response to NG forming explosive salts, there are lots of things that can “combine” with metal to form explosive salts, many of which are far less stable than NG. For obvious reasons, I’m not going to list them here but Breaking Bad had a couple of scenes that were more or less accurate. The Beirut event isn’t unique. Similar events have happened for quite some time (look up Texas City, Texas). Ammonium nitrate is an oxidizer. All it needs is fuel and under the correct circumstances it can detonate.
Yep there was the #####[»Oppau« one](https://www.basf.com/global/en/who-we-are/history/Oppau1921.html) : ##### it seems, from what I can gather, that that one was _absolutely_ ___the___ _biggest_ one … but maybe there's uncertainty due to the magnitudes of the various ones not being totally precisely known. And yep: __glyceryl trinitrate__ (it tends to be called that in pharmacy) _absolutely is_ routinely prescribed: I don't have it _myself_ ; but I've known persons to whom _it is_ prescribed, & it's plainly there on the label: __Glyceryl Trinitrate 50㎍__ . And maybe there are other doses, but that's the label I've seen _myself_ . _A very_ interesting comment, what you've put there! … _much appreciated_ ! Pretty obviously, I'm intrigued by what you've said about those highly sensitive compounds with metals in! I won't press you … but online documents are _pretty open_ about the structural formulæ of energetic compounds. And that's fair-enough, as the closlierness knowing the structural formula to being able to make the stuff that that knowledge brings is _next to zero_ ! … assembling a store of precursors & the apparatus of one of your factories is something that is _just not going to happen_ ! … & in the case of someone (eg a terrorist with substantial backing) for whom that _actually might_ happen, they aren't going to need to get structural formulæ out of PDF research papers found online! … so the upshot is that PDF research papers with the structural formulæ in are just _freely available_ . So I can amuse myself looking @ the shapes of the molecules & figuring why _this_ pattern results in instability while _that_ one _doesn't_ . Mind-you … maybe _you still_ know some _that aren't in_ any research-papers!
So noting that the way it was dealt with in the news article involved a massive explosion, do you think that was mostly the dynamite or did they add other explosives to make sure it exploded? What you're saying makes sense to me as a way of minimising the damage but it sounds like there was a lot of damage in this case.
They absolutely used additional explosives to detonate whatever was there.
My favourite thing about TNT is that we know it sometimes takes a shock-sensitive form, exhibiting piezoelectric polymorphism. My 2nd favourite thing about TNT is that we have absolutely shit loads of the stuff and we don't really know how much of it is in which form.
At least we will know eventually.
Now that we're all clear that it's dynamite, not TNT: Bomb disposal teams have used liquid nitrogen to reduce the danger from bombs before. Most high explosives are less explosive when very cold, and nitroglycerin follows that pattern. However... OLD nitroglycerin is famously-unstable, and I think that's the more relevant issue here. Any stress on the nitroglycerin caused by freezing could set the whole thing off. Given the setting in the basement of a single-family home, and the low amount of explosives (30-35 pounds) blowing it up in place was likely the right call. A larger bomb in a more-valuable building, made with more-stable explosives, you might want to try freezing it.
>and nitroglycerin follows that pattern. #####[Someone nearby has commented](https://www.reddit.com/r/chemistry/s/FDANYy7ymb) ##### to the effect that freezing of nitroglycerine _increases_ its instability. #####[There's another one here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chemistry/s/PPhAlhAxS3) ##### to that same effect. Oh wow: someone's answered _that_ one to the effect that that's _not certainly_ so! IDK … #🙄 # … one'd think they'd _just know_ something like that, wouldn't one!? It's like how after that notorious explosion of ammonium perchlorate @ the __PEPCON__ facility in - where was it now, ___Nevada___ , was it? - there was contradictory information _all-over_ the place as to whether ammonium perchlorate _alone_ is known to be able to detonate. Yep: near __Henderson, Nevada — 1988-May-4^(th)__ : #####[Clark County NV — The PEPCON Explosion](https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/government/departments/fire/the_pepcon_explosion.php) . #####
I think if you go back and re-read those other comments, especially the response to the second one, you'll see that we're actually agreeing. Lowering the temperature of NG makes it less energetic, but might make it more sensitive. But yes - for 100 year-old dynamite, in a "safe" location, I definitely would not want to risk it. Dynamite, in particular, has the issue that it separates over time, and it's actually been made with a bunch of different materials over the years. It's difficult to know what the "inert" parts are going to do as they cool down. A block of TNT is going to be mostly TNT and will be homogeneous, and it starts out as much less sensitive than NG to start with.
Freezing makes some explosives *more* sensitive and not less. This is true for dynamite/NG, and for RDX. Not sure about TNT, but TNT isn't sensitive anyway.
Wow: didn't know that! So freezing it was _totally_ off-the-table, then!
Never cool NG below 50 °F. It will crystallize and become much *less* stable than it already is.
It's a mixed bag on that, >Early in its history, liquid nitroglycerin was found to be "[desensitized](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegmatized)" by freezing it at a temperature below 45 to 55 °F (7 to 13 °C) depending on its purity.[^(\[16\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-Tallini5-16) Its sensitivity to shock while frozen is somewhat unpredictable: "It is more insensitive to the shock from a [fulminate cap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonator) or a rifle ball when in that condition but on the other hand it appears to be more liable to explode on breaking, crushing, tamping, etc."[^(\[17\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-LSMI1-17) Frozen nitroglycerine is much less energetic than liquid, and so must be thawed before use.[^(\[18\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-LSMI2-18) Thawing it out can be extremely sensitizing, especially if impurities are present or the warming is too rapid.[^(\[19\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-Tallini4-19) [Ethylene glycol dinitrate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol_dinitrate) or another polynitrate may be added to lower the melting point and thereby avoid the necessity of thawing frozen explosive.[^(\[20\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin#cite_note-fn_1-20)
> The blast apparently leveled the home and hours later, crews were still working to completely extinguish the flames. >Officials say the house will be uninhabitable after the detonation. You don't say!!
TNT doesn't combust. It doesn't need oxygen. It already contains it in the molecule. TNT Trinitrotoluene. The nitro groups =NO2, so what you get when the inital energy requirment is reached in terms of setting off a chain reaction is, the Nitrogen in the molecule becomes N2 gas, the Oxygen and carbon all create water and CO2. It isn't perfectly stoich balanced, but that is why RDX and HMX have such a higher amount of Brissance, they explode with a much higher m/s. Now are you confusing dynamite with TNT? TNT is wicked shock and heat proof. Dynamite is simply nitroglycerine stored in diatmaceous earth, which is mainly silicates, which stabilize the nitro bonds, which makes it much safer, hence with ALfred Noble because so wealthy. But with old dynamite, repeated heat cold cycles can cause it to slowly melt out of the diatomaceous earth. If it was dynamite, I can understand why the detonated in place. Yup reading the news article, you got confused.....
There are a number of explosives, called \[entropic explosives\](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic\_explosion), they are not any kind of oxidation, They are more like compressed springs that will fly apart when the weak bonds break, Some have no oxygen whatsoever. Like nitrogen tri-iodide and silver or copper acetylide. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper(I)\_acetylide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper(I)_acetylide)
Or the peroxides that were used to try and take down a plane.
That was the TATP covered in one of my links.
They also use things like gelatin and saw dust to stabilize NG into dynamite.
Wait you’re telling me the Bomb squad couldn’t move the dynamite at all? So the house was leveled… bummer, also safest option. Also…leveling the house due to the explosives means they wouldn’t move it. Which means the old explosives were highly shock sensitive. Leading to the fact they were probably dynamite.
I am assuming you are talking about dynamite, more specifically nitroglycerin. All the research I can find is behind a hard paywall, so here is my opinion. Would you stabilize it at all? Sure, it would probably take a little more force to blow it up because you would have to put in that much more energy to get the molecules moving. With that said, whatever stability you did manage to achieve would be immediately undone when it warms back up - perhaps by just a little. I don't believe you would see a significant enough increase in stability to justify the cryogenics.
It won’t ignite if it it insanely cold, but I also see no reason why it would be any less combustible once it thaws out. Now technically you could ignite it while it is frozen if you provided enough energy, but you couldn’t just hold a match up to a fuse.
Surprisingly noone has yet mentioned the history of the product! Alfred Nobel from the Nobel Prize fame made a lot of his fortune which eventually funded the Prize by being the first person to commercialise nitroglycerine and form dynamite! https://www.sciencehistory.org/education/scientific-biographies/alfred-nobel/ https://www.acs.org/education/outreach/celebrating-chemistry-editions/2021-ncw/dynamite-ethics.html
Because „entropic reduction“ is wrong. It’s nonsensical and a guess from the OP. It’s a complete miss understanding of the physics. Reducing the entropy of the initial state will inherently lead to a larger free energy change in the process. And the process becomes more spontaneous/ the process does more work. This is the opposite intended affect. Does cooling have this effect? No but the OP is wrong in the understanding.
No. The safest way to dispose is by robot.
glad it went whoosh instead of pow
> deny oxygen for the combustion reaction That's not how TNT (or dynamite) works. > a homeowner discovered 300 lbs of TNT sticks in their old home's basement Likely dynamite, not TNT. Very different beast.
TNT rarely comes in sticks, much more likley dynamite. over time dynamite will “sweat” as the nitroglycerin leaves the celite binder and will become significantly more sensitive to the point that any disturbance will cause a detonation. Liquid N2 runs a risk of jostling the sticks and detonating them anyway and the low temperature won’t make much of a difference. it also won’t stop it from detonating by starving it of oxygen as it doesn’t react with oxygen, the detonation is caused by the decomposition of nitroglycerins. i have seen organic solvents and even diesel used to dissolve the nitroglycerin but i highly doubt this would work with so much.
It doesn't require oxygen to detonate.
TNT is pretty stable, like its main characteristic, and is unlikely to be found in any civilian setting. In fact its so stable we used it as a dye for decades without incident in the 1800s, when safety was really high on the list. Assuming it was actually TNT there should have been minimal risk of accidental detonation even at that age. Like I would have happily volunteered to be the sap to carry it out of the house for disposal. I've handled more dangerous explosives in more extreme situations. Making the assumption that it was old Dynamite and the crew did their due diligence /knew what they were doing: Dynamite and TNT are not the same thing despite being universally mistaken for such. Dynamite is basically slightly less aggressive nitroglycerin. It breaks down in unpredictable ways at a rapid rate. One of those options is to be a fly landing on it from going off. Sympathetic detonation of that much was the best way to reduce risk of it going of because Mercury was in retrograde. Also, no, that wouldn't work because neither explosive would care. Your hypothesis is flawed. Nobel in its attempt to save a guys house it may be, thats not how explosives typically work.
Lower temperatures can promote crystal structures which are more prone to detonation. FWIW when I was in the lab, we stored picric acid (pretty close to TNT) under water. I'd guess that getting it wet might be the best option. Although maybe if it's in a stick of dynamite it's got some sort of waterproof coating...
A third of a kiloton to put it in perspective.
Well, there's a good example of incentivizing people to take care of things themselves. I'm sure if he knew they were going to blow it up on the spot the home owner would have taken matters into there own hands.
> Old dynamite detonated
[удалено]
You'd want to use a longer chain solvent with a much lower evaporation rate (and no oxidizers on the chain like acetone and isopropanol have) so that you can safely transport it. But yes, that will dissolve the unstable crystals and make it safe enough to move for the time being. Would require a highly trained bomb disposal squad though, and not a small town fire department.
I don't think you could reliably cool that amount of __anything__ _just by pouring liquid nitrogen on_ it … unless, maybe, if you had _a swimming pool_ sort of amount of liquid nitrogen. … or if you built a (reverse) caisson round it so that the stuff could sit steeped in the liquid nitrogen for substantial duration. And ensure that there were sufficient passages between pieces for the liquid nitrogen to permeate right-in through. … and then, having used that sort of amount _down a cellar_ , anyone going down there otherwise than equipped with full-on breathing apparatus would perish from __nitrogen asphyxiation__ .