Can static electricity ignite black powder? Read this...

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:23 pm

http://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_exp ... parks.html

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:30 pm

Hmmmmmmmm, that's interesting.

I can't count how many times I've read: "Do not shake this container, static electricity may ignite the powder."

Again .......... Hmmmmm

Joe

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:32 pm

Neat experiment. Makes sense, given the carbon content of the powder.

cas · Post by **cas** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:33 pm

And yet, CVA has come out with an electronically fired muzzle loader.

Besides that... not all sparks are the same.

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:35 pm

cas wrote: not all sparks are the same.

That is true! Still a NEAT experiment.

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:53 pm

That's some cool stuff right there...
And NOW you know!

Pisgah · Post by **Pisgah** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:58 pm

Early in the last century, extensive experiments were done in Germany to see if static electricity could ignite black powder. Massive generators were used to apply a couple of million volts -- far more than you could ever get in an accidental situation -- with no ignition. The conclusion was that even high voltages of static electricity simply would not generate the heat needed for ignition.

cas · Post by **cas** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:34 pm

[quote="Pisgah"]...to see if static electricity could ignite black powder. Massive generators were used to apply a couple of million volts(/quote]

Hmmm. I've seen it ignite trees and houses. But not black powder

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:40 pm

I bet if you took really fine BP and dumped it onto a spark it might ignite (explode). Just figuring this is similiar to an organic powder dust explosion (like what happens in grain storage silos).

I happen to sell a cellulose-based powder for the company I work for. You could do the same thing - "spark" it, even burn it, and it would probably react similiarly. However, disperse it in air (thickly) and add an ignition source, and it goes "boom" in a big way!

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:18 am

I'm not sure if the test proves that it's 100% safe to use plastic tubes for pouring black powder through but for me I think I'll not just the same.

When I was hauling gas in a tanker we always grounded everything when we were loading and unloading. In fact if we used a bucket to drain a small amount of gas from a valve it had to be metal with no plastic on it at all so there would be no chance it would be insulated enough to cause a spark.

Now that this has come to mind I also remember refueling the Dept. Helicopter when I work for the S.O. The first thing we always did there was to attach a grounding wire to a stud.

I guess I'm just chicken. You know what they say... You can tell some folks and they'll believe you. Others, well they just have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.

Rusty <><

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:24 am

Ysabel Kid wrote:I bet if you took really fine BP and dumped it onto a spark it might ignite (explode). Just figuring this is similiar to an organic powder dust explosion (like what happens in grain storage silos).

I happen to sell a cellulose-based powder for the company I work for. You could do the same thing - "spark" it, even burn it, and it would probably react similiarly. However, disperse it in air (thickly) and add an ignition source, and it goes "boom" in a big way!

A cellulose-based powder will have fairly high electrical resistance, allowing the particles to heat up enough to ignite. The explanation for the experiment results with the BP is that it has a low resistance, so the electricity moves on through the particles without heating them up to ignition temp.

I'm not advocating anyone do any particular thing based on this experiment. I just thought folks here would find it interesting.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:05 am

So, and correct me if I'm wrong, black powder does not have enough resistance to heat up and ignite with static electrical sparks. But requires sparks that are from a heat producing source such as primers, flint, or percussion caps to ignite.

That seems to be what I'm reading.

Joe

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:23 am

J Miller wrote:So, and correct me if I'm wrong, black powder does not have enough resistance to heat up and ignite with static electrical sparks. But requires sparks that are from a heat producing source such as primers, flint, or percussion caps to ignite.

That seems to be what I'm reading.

Joe

That is basically what I am understanding, too.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:13 pm

That makes sence. With the high carbon content I imagine that the resistance is next to nothing some were around the hundredths of an Ohm mark. Not enough to heat up to the point of ignition. I still wouldnt temp the fates though all you need is to have a metal partical mixed with the powder to ruin your whole day.

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:33 pm

Hell guys, I sometimes have enough trouble getting ignition with a FLINT!!!

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:33 pm

Saloon slug wrote:That makes sence. With the high carbon content I imagine that the resistance is next to nothing some were around the hundredths of an Ohm mark. Not enough to heat up to the point of ignition. I still wouldnt temp the fates though all you need is to have a metal partical mixed with the powder to ruin your whole day.

Actually, all you need is some other particle with high enough resistance to create the heat required for ignition!

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:43 pm

VERY KEWL post . thanks.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:26 pm

cubrock yes any conductive mater with enough resistance would work I only used metal as an example because it would be more comon due to Goex coming in a metal container. But yes there are lots of things that would do the job. Thanks for pointing that out.

cubrock · Post by **cubrock** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:50 pm

Saloon slug wrote:cubrock yes any conductive mater with enough resistance would work I only used metal as an example because it would be more comon due to Goex coming in a metal container. But yes there are lots of things that would do the job. Thanks for pointing that out.

Whatever material it was, I wouldn't want to be around to witness it!

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:25 pm

Me neither brother

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:10 pm

Chickens. Here I thought you guys (cubrock and Saloon Slug) were going to do your own science-fair experiment!

Reminds me of something we do down here. What's the last thing a redneck says? "Ya 'all come here and watch this!"

I ressemble that remark!

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:47 am

Where the problem, a potentially deadly one, could surface, is if something else gets in the mix that DOES have enough resistance to ignite even one grain of BP, it will light the rest. And the rest will be history.

I'd say stick to what the factories recommend for safety. The GOEX plany just caught fire a while back, and you can bet someone didn't follow procedure 100%.

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:24 am

The USS Iowa...

On 19 April 1989, an explosion ripped through the number two 16 inch (406 mm) gun turret, killing 47 crewmen. Sailors quickly flooded the #2 powder magazine, likely preventing catastrophic damage to the ship. At first, the NCIS investigators theorized that one of the dead crewman, Clayton Hartwig, had detonated an explosive device in a suicide attempt after the end of an alleged homosexual affair with another sailor. This theory was later abandoned and Hartwig cleared. The cause of the explosion, though never determined with certainty, is generally believed to have been static electricity igniting loose powder.

Testing at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dalhgren, Virginia of powder in the same lot was able to reproduce spontaneous combustion of the powder, which had been originally milled in the 1930s and stored during a 1988 dry-docking of the Iowa in a barge at the Naval Weapons Station in Yorktown, Virginia. Gunpowder gives off ether gas as it degrades; the ether is highly flammable, and can be ignited by a spark. The captain of the Iowa, Fred Moosally, was severely criticized for his handling of the matter, and the Navy changed the powder-handling procedures. Iowa deployed to Europe and the Mediterranean Sea in mid-year. Turret Two remained unrepaired when the battleship was decommissioned in Norfolk for the last time, 26 October 1990.

w30wcf · Post by **w30wcf** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:00 pm

Hobie,
I remember... but that was with smokeless powder (The rear bag does contain a bit of b.p. to help ignition of the slower burning smokeless.).

Somewhat related to the topic ........ several years ago a firend told me that fast burning smokeless will ignite faster than b.p. with an open flame. I said, nope, b.p. will ignite faster.

To prove his point, he put a small gty. of Unique on a stone and applied a flame to it with a match...it went up fast. He then put the same small qty of b.p. and did the same thing. Result, it was noticably slower to ignite.

I have since demonstrated it myself after asking friends the same question and getting the answer that b.p. would ignite faster with an open flame. They were as surprised

as I once was.

w30wcf