Our first video of 2023 and we hope you enjoy it! We are busy getting the final details around the lab and range completed so we can get back to normal operations. We also have to get ready for SHOT show and IWA this year so we are doing our best to get filming done in between preparations for travel and also some testing we are doing for private contracts. We are getting back into shorts as YT supposedly fixed the algorithm for them. WE have a lot of fun ideas, too short for long videos, that we hope will do well in short video format. Stay tuned!
Hey ukra-nazi supporter, if RF tanks are in short supply, then why are the ukrops begging every country to send them more tanks and vehicles? And if it's RF that is losing soldiers at a higher rate, why is it then that it is the ukrops that are having their 5th mobilization, whereas RF only had 1 partial mobilization? Looking forward to seeing you on the 2 way range.
ahh, IWA, so close (living in Austria) yet so far (not qualified to visit). You don't need a self-sponsored tag-along for one day? I know you don't need a german translator though.. :-)
We the fans understand all good things take time, especially after all the unfortunate business and massive set back you guys suffered, good to see that you are getting back to business as usual as well your commitment to quality over quantity content. Can't wait to see what you have planned.
Sorry for the delay! It's just non-stop issues here. The house we were planning on living in still isn't done. So we are still camping and trying to film at the ranch. Once the house is up, we can finally get back to some regularity.
I only come on UA-cam for watching particular content. Your channel is one of the few channels I actually look forward to viewing. Thank you for your efforts.
hey jake, you might want to hide your publically viewable subscribed channel to that cannabis channel. ATF probably wouldn't like that. Just watching out for ya.
@Nick G I debated on that. I actually co-own a federally legal hemp business. This was disclosed to the ATF. They only are concerned if we start trying to move meth or nose candy. Lol
It sure was. I think it was best not to go ahead and heat sinter it. Unless done in a form or on a mandrel the printed item can sag or otherwise lose symmetry.
It is absolutely amazing what the copper filament was able to do. Especially since it is cheap(Relatively speaking anyway.) and can be burped out of a cheapo printer in very short order, and it's really easy/inexpensive to tweak the design. That really is fantastic and super interesting.
not cheap, not available, not easy to produce compared to taking a piece of pipe section slicing it and rolling it flat and hammering/pressing it into a cone shape. 3D printing is slow, the filament is expensive, and you might not always have a 3D printer or electricity to print the cones.
@@excitedbox5705 $26 dollars US per Kilo, assuming the cone is 4in wide by 3-4in tall 2mm thick at 50g a shot, a reasonably tuned 3d printer can knock out 4 in about 30-45 min. For war time manufacture yeah that's shit, but for testing geometries for penetration ability … that's what rapid prototyping (i.e. 3d Printing) is built for. Once the shape has been finalized, print off a mold for casting in aluminum, and injection mold the plastic and copper suckers. Drives the cost through the floor and produces hundreds of thousands per hour at a proper factory, or hundreds a day using a home brew injection molder and any sufficient heat source. All that's left is explosives and delivery.
@@thomasschulz2167 I totally agree that 3D printing shouldn't be used for mass production but it's perfect for testing different geometries. The output should be pretty well reproducible compared to most manual manufacturing methods and you could easily try stuff like having different wall thickness for different parts of the geometry.
One of the cool things about the 3-D printed liner is that you could trivially tinker with different liner geometry including parabolas, conic sections, variable cross-sectional and radial thickness. Would be interesting to see what happens if you mounted a small tungsten pellet at the base or out front of the liner. I’m guessing there are all sorts of research papers available on liner development.
@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket While a lot of this and similarly imilarly military applicable stuff is heavily classified, there's more in the public domain than most people seem to think, especially in brick and mortar libraries. Remember the guy who got a visit from the FBI for writing a science fiction story about nuclear bombs in the 1940s; his fictional design (which was not what the government had built but would have worked) was based on what was in the public domain at the time.
I think the 3D printed copper one allows you to do weirder and more varied layer thickness on the liner. So I highly suggest in testing more experimental prints with the 3D printed copper liner. Edit, adding in 3D printed Wave Shapers like in the M380A1 HEAT round or a much more pronounced and variable-thickness cone should add more penetration.
Very interesting video. Educational while being entertaining isn't easy to pull off, but once again you guys succeeded in spectacular fashion. Loved the way each explosion sounded better and better. Thanks for the new video. Be safe out there, and take it easy.
Impressed that the copper liner was discussed. Most "shaped charge" you tube videos just kinda' leave the whole copper cone/penetrator out of the picture..
Make one out of tantalum. That has malleability similar to copper but a much higher melting point. 3D printed explosives is a very neat idea, as it could make precision shock wave shapes similar to machined charges but far safer to manufacture. 🤓
There’s no 3D printer tech for tantalum as far as I know, you can’t DMLS it. Maybe one of the binder print then sinter methods, but it’s higher temperature pressure required than other metals even inconel…
Tantalum has a much higher melting point, has a higher density and is very ductile. It can form a higher density and higher energy projectile. Copper is fine for most uses though tantalum will go through stuff that copper will not.
One important thing to note: majority of the russian light IFV/APC used for troop transports use aluminium. The fronts use sloped armour but sides and the top extremely easy to penetrate with practically any shaped charge. Aluminium is light and easy to deform, it's mainly used against light shrapnel. Perhaps in the next tests, try the "least performing" charges against aluminium blocks and better performing with angled steel to see how they perform against them.
whoops probably shouldn't have clicked the video with 'revolutionary' and 'shaped charges' in the title. Dear SWAT: I will be waiting on my knees with my hands on my head and my dog is tied up 🥺
Your fans understand and have nothing but best wishes for all of you! It seems that the more you can delay the charge wave front, the more power hits the surface. Full piece copper shaped cone.
It would be interesting to see these test EFP's scaled up to 84-90 mm, that size would put it in range of the AT 4 warhead. Imagine that with 3D printed cone and casing. Make the cone from copper and the charge sleeve from pla or some other polymer.
I'm curious what sort of effect you might get from winding copper wire around a conic form. Would some gauges be better than others? Would the pressure and heat of the explosion weld them into a liner or blow them apart? Would it help to bind them with glue or solder or some other sort of binder? Would a composite liner help? How about multiple layers of copper sheet wrapped around a cone and cut to fit? I just wonder what would be easier to make expediently if one did not have a 3D printer.
@@acorgiwithacrown467 I think it would work with a small penalty, just like the PLA/Cu print here did. 58mm pen versus 45mm pen may be down to 90% fill with homogenous 10% 'dead space' in the cone material and a little more loss due to overall density and maybe a need to change the cone angle due to that. PLA/CU also gives the opportunity to rapidly test iterations on cone angle, wall thickness and variations of wall thickness, maybe even formulaic solutions (lens curves on algebraic formulas to better take advantage of pressure/time curves for what's really an unenclosed explosive with these light printed containers).
Gemini really is a great relaible consistent explosive, to my untrained eye at least, all those blasts were very similar in audio and appearance. Its a great explosive for this job as it almost removes a variable from the real sciencey stuff, like the way the penetrator develops according to shape and stand off required. Great work and, Fascinating stuff as always!!!
What exactly is Gemini? I can't find anything online, but from the results that do come up I assume it's another name for binary explosives in general?
You could use fluid 3D printing for castable burn out resin for vacuum casting. "VOGman" and "Clear Mind Jewellery" have examples of casted jewelry. Now if you would use that technique of vacuum casting. You could cast perfectly shaped copper shaped charge projectiles. Greetings, Jeff
Fantastic video guys👍But think about using molybdenum as a liner material. There is a reason why the K-charge of General dynamics exists also with Mo-liner. There is a reason why companies like HC starck solution and Plansee manufacture Mo-liners. Not to mention that in 2007 ruag achieved penetration depths with molybdenum liners that were over 10 times deeper than the diameter of the charge.
Why go for 10x penetration when he can just print ten charges a lot cheaper? I know they don't add linearly, but it's not really relevant to my point. The entire purpose of this design is that it's extremely rapid and very cheap to produce compared to a more traditional shaped charge.
the interesting thing about copper cones is that not only can you 3d print them, but you can also make the electrolytically. basically you have your copper plating solution and a metal cone with some graphite paint (so the copper releases and still has good conductivity, silver paint works too) and you can make copper cones of any thickness depending on the time left in the plating solution.
Think the best thing is this video is for "Educational purposes", As an engineer i love stuff like this and the possibilities it allows. As a human i worry about the other humans whos vision is slightly blurry haha. Keep it up and development is the only way to take lives when needed and save lots of others.
I read everywhere that a RPG and other anti tank weapons can penetrate 900mm of steel or even more, i know it use more explosives and a bigger cone but it would be nice to see you test that. But awesome first vid of 2023.
Jake has the reactor up so we can now produce other explosives in 10 or more kilogram batches. So recreating an RPG with a clone correct warhead to test performance is now doable.
theres metal filled FDM filaments. i wonder how they would preform as a penetrator. or using say metal dust like the fine fine alu or iron dust you can buy sandwiched between two forms to act as a molded container to form the jet. ANYWAYS i love seeing any sort of EFP content! love to see more. id love to see a tandem charge head done with that 3d printed copper charge! two lenses would be insane!
90% copper filament was used for the 3rd liner. Metal powders have been used as a liner. Mainly for bore hole related shaped charges. Dont eant solids to clog up that expensive drill attempt.
I think with the more dense materials it would tend to shatter rather than form into a cone, tungsten in particular is not particularly malleable not to mention alot more expensive. Tantalum on the other hand sounds kind of ideal I doubt they haven't tested those materials before yet copper is still the go to for shaped charges.
Hardness and density are likely less important than melting and evaporation points as far as determining whether a material behaves properly, shatters, or does some other crazy thing. Density would likely play a role in how much penetration is achieved, but it's possible that counterintuitively, less dense materials end up performing better as they convert to plasma. I'd bet that regardless of actual performance, the main reason copper is used as a standard rather than more exotic metals is due to cost of procurement and machining. Tungsten might perform 10% better, but for the cost of a tungsten liner you could maybe just triple the thickness of copper and get the same effect.
3D- printed copper liner: Check. 3D- printed rocket body: No problem. If you find a way to make an explosive filament, you could 3D- print the charge, as well.
Very good "proof of concept", I'm surprised the layered plastic/copper liner (first sample) did so poorly and that the 3D-printed copper (third sample) did so well. A point of interest is that the smallest Panzerfaust (Klein) had roughly 3.5~4 times the explosive fill, so viewers expecting this tiny thing to do more than "scratch" tank armour was (perhaps) a bit too much.
RE factor matters more than the amount of filler, but i don't know much about the explosive they are using so i can't really say what i'd expect. It appears similar in performance to RDX that has a RE of 1.6, but who knows.
Seems Steve is showing his human reaction to loss. My heart goes out to you, brother. It took me a year each to get over the loss of my mother and grandmother. They made me into the success I am today. I feel your loss. Time will help, but never heal one of life's greatest challenges! Kudos for all you guys do!!
Great stuff as ever! Would be interested to see how a cast copper cone would perform? Perhaps you could 3d print one, smooth it and make a silicone mold to make wax blanks to cast many? Keep up the good work y'all!
@@arturjogi2667 no you cast the silicone mold, make wax blanks then use the lost wax casting method with some plaster around the wax blank. the hot metal burns out the wax and you're left with a metal piece in plaster. at no time does hot metal get near silicone. my mistake, i didn't explain all the steps very well. hope that helps! :)
I’ve heard that magnesium is good but bronze cones or brass cones are just as good as pure annealed copper. You get significantly more penetration if the copper is annealed because it work hardens when it’s been formed into a cone and this slight bit of resistance can sap a little of the power of it turning inside out into a jet and also cracks can happen that let out hot gases which also effects penetration. It’s much better if you heat your copper up with a map gas torch first and dump it in some water to quench it. Not sure about printed cones though.
You can 3D print in tungsten (powder bed laser melting process). Some online 3D print services offer this material (beamler for instance). Probably fairly expensive. Would be interesting to see how it compares to copper...
That wont do you any good. the reason copper is used is because it reaches a certain acceleration where it becomes liquid or hydrodynamic and ''FLOWS'' through the armour. Now if you would use that tungsten as a solid penetrator, that would be effective. but then you are not making a anti armor rocket, but now you are designing a tankround. These charges have been around since 1886. And they still use copper today because it yields the best results. for a ligth caryable weapon.
@@EleaRevilsHeating and melting does not play a significant role in the physics of shaped charges. The effect creates a high velocity jet of material that acts as a projectile. Because it is a very small cross section (needle-like) moving very fast, it achieves a lot of penetration. I can imagine that shaping a correspondingly thinner solid tungsten cone would be very difficult, and that perhaps the thoughness of tungsten does not lend itself for the cone to easily form a clean jet. However, laser sintered tungsten powder is very different than solid tungsten. Much like the glass or copper infused 3d printer filament, it might „pulverize“ and yield to the explosive charge to form a clean jet. Shaped charges traditionally use copper because it is dense, inexpensive, easy to work into shape and malleable enough to yield to the explosive force. But back then laser sintering did not exist…
Very interesting. The fact that the D3 printed copper wasn't sintered and still performed so well is a surprise to me. It makes me wonder about specific hardnesses and alloys of copper. With the printer you can play with the shape, as others have mentioned. So many small details can be tweaked for maximum efficiency.
Those results absolutely blew me away (pun partially intended). I though there was *no way* that would ever work. Not only was I wrong, I was very wrong.
The fact that it wasn't sintered doesn't really matter. The base material can be what ever you want it to be, but to get the molten metal jet that does the penetrating you need to have enough copper mixed into the lens to do the job and designed in such a way that the jet will contact the smallest area on the armor allowing it to burn it's way through. Similar to a plasma lance.
@@thomasschulz2167 makes sense. We used to make shape charges without any metal material. Lensing wasn't exactly the way we were trained to look at it.
After a while you can hear if the shaped charge has penetrated just from the duller sound of the explosion. Presumably it's because you get better energy transfer or something.
Any plans to test different standoff distances? I've been told the maximum penetration happens at somewhere around 6-7 charge diameters of standoff. You seem to use something like 1 to 1.5 diameters.
Jake follows a formula for stand offs he refined for optimal distance. We can def do a video showing how different stand off distances affect penetration.
Please compare copper, aluminum, steel and tungsten cones. I have also heard that adding tungsten dust to explosives enhances its effect, check it out if possible.
@@OrdnanceLab thanks! try also various other metals, such as lead, and if possible fillers of aluminum powder to increase the temperature. also have an idea, plastic cone and tungsten powder filler
@@eugenef9021 I don't think anyone would want to test lead, especially with explosives. It adds too much mass to the front, and the flying of lead particles after an explosion or when handling it does our guys valuable brains no good.
Ever heard of explosive forming metal with water? I saw it in an old metal working book (1960ish) as a cheap alternative to large press applications or when you don't have a large press available but explosives are
Amazing performance. A fair bit of the performance difference would be the difference in density if the pure copper and the printed liner had the same dimensions if my understanding of the physics is correct.
I used to work down the street from Raytheon. That place is like a fortress you can't get anywhere near that place without clearance. My mother's brother worked there in the early 80s. He developed guidance chips and other military weapons. He died from a strange form of cancer due to radiation exposure. HMMMMM 🧐
The Rpg7 has a focus ring made of plastic about an inch above the ignitor. You haven't mentioned it so I'll assume there isn't one. If its in other stuff you probably need it to be effective.
It takes 80mm of penetration to destroy a T72 from the side having a tandem charge will allow for the charge to counter the ERA T72B (contact 1), T72B3 (contact 5), and T72B3/M (Relkit) side ERA. The T72BA1 (which was a non service prototype) has dual layer ERA (contact 5, then contact 1) so a tandem warhead won't be able to penetrate it.
For armor reference, most tanks in WWII and even modern day uses Rolled homogenous armor (RHA) for its steel armor (MBTs will have a mix of RHA, composites, heavy metals, and other materials in some areas that need the most protection like the front of the hull and the front of the turret, while the rest is typically just plane old RHA, though there could be composite screening, NERA, or ERA slapped on top to help defend against chemical and kinetic rounds in those areas.). I would say, the average side armor of a tank in WWII was between 30-50mm of RHA, while the front was typically thicker. The 3d printed copper would have gone through the side of many German tanks (All their light and medium tanks except Panther G and F), and the top of pretty much all of them. It could go through the top of pretty much every other tank in the war as well, and through the lower side plate behind the tracks of the Sherman. As for modern vehicles, this could easy go through a Bradley or BMP hull in many areas, and would do so against the BMP far easier as that has even less armor than the BMP, with most areas being less than 20mm thick, meaning it can be penned by .50 cal. For the Bradley, Im pretty sure it can go through the engine deck, the sides, and the rear, not sure about the front. The thing about MBTs though, is their armor is fairly classified, so maybe their top armor has some protective layer no one knows about that helps against these weaker shaped charge rounds, but based on what we know, most MBT's top armor is around 40mm thick for Nato, and slightly thicker for Russia and China I believe. I could be wrong.
The shaped copper cone one with over 50mm of pen though, thats insane! FOr a home made shaped charge, that can go through most modern armor vehicles and tanks from the top, and many from the rear and side. Even some from the front. If you put a impact fuse and set em on a drone, this would be insane to drop onto an unsuspecting vehicle, and could mission kill it if you aimed for the engine or turret.
@unexpectedspanishinquisiti3967 These guys actually did a video in the past explaining that using a drone to deploy explosives enters a whole other realm of the law (FAA), which is why they've never deployed munitions from drones...such a bummer; wish they could get creative with drones.
@lukebaehr3851 Oh, I know, I wasn't saying they should do it. I'm just saying if someone does it against actusly tanks, these homemade shaped charges could prove very effective. They probably cost around $100 a piece, and it only takes maybe 2 on the engine deck to mission kill a modern MBT, which costs tens of millions of dollars.
@unexpectedspanishinquisiti3967 right! Far far cheaper than conventional munitions paid for by the taxpayers. What's the cost of a single replcement Javelin or Tow Missle? They are probably many 10s of thousands per unit, if not more. Not to mention the platform they're deployed from.
@lukebaehr3851 the javelin and tow launchers themselves are reusable, as the missile is pre loaded into the launcher tube, which can be discarded once fired, ans a new one placed on the launcher platform.
I'd enjoy seeing a video on different thermites, particularly copper thermites as it reacts fast enough to be explosive when confined, and Thermate is the "military grade" variety of thermite. Thermites don't produce much gas so there's no possibility of them being anything but a generally weak low explosive, but they are still cool. I know other channels have already done extensive videos on thermites, but it's right up Oedanace Lab's alley. Codyslab had a video on copper thermite in a confined container but he had to take it down quite a while ago. Oh, and awesome video as always. Shaped charges still blow my mind.
What was the total weight on completed unit. One thing to consider is to vary the thickness and depth on the 3d printed coper cone, in order to get the proper liquefaction of the copper. Also there is the availability of 3d printed charge itself to increase the burn, think of solid rocket booster fuel shape.
many people have 3d printers nowadays even metal ones, its hard to get license for stuff like this, so i guess many more before you tried this but they just cant go public with it... so you can say you are the first doing this on youtube but not the only ones who did it tho 😉
So, I've heard of SO MANY gun fights in the middle east that consisted of the bad guys at the top of the concrete stairs shooting down at the good guys going up the stairs. In a shoot-out like that, could you use a shaped charge to blow the concrete floor out from under them?
Metal Casting, and distilling nitric acid from compost.... thats all the skills you need The taxi driver, but he knows how to operate a drill press, and wire D/C electricity...
Our first video of 2023 and we hope you enjoy it! We are busy getting the final details around the lab and range completed so we can get back to normal operations. We also have to get ready for SHOT show and IWA this year so we are doing our best to get filming done in between preparations for travel and also some testing we are doing for private contracts.
We are getting back into shorts as YT supposedly fixed the algorithm for them. WE have a lot of fun ideas, too short for long videos, that we hope will do well in short video format. Stay tuned!
Hello friend I did enjoy the video and I hope your work and videos go well
Hey ukra-nazi supporter, if RF tanks are in short supply, then why are the ukrops begging every country to send them more tanks and vehicles? And if it's RF that is losing soldiers at a higher rate, why is it then that it is the ukrops that are having their 5th mobilization, whereas RF only had 1 partial mobilization? Looking forward to seeing you on the 2 way range.
ahh, IWA, so close (living in Austria) yet so far (not qualified to visit). You don't need a self-sponsored tag-along for one day? I know you don't need a german translator though.. :-)
got a link to that copper filament?
We the fans understand all good things take time, especially after all the unfortunate business and massive set back you guys suffered, good to see that you are getting back to business as usual as well your commitment to quality over quantity content.
Can't wait to see what you have planned.
Sorry for the delay! It's just non-stop issues here. The house we were planning on living in still isn't done. So we are still camping and trying to film at the ranch. Once the house is up, we can finally get back to some regularity.
I only come on UA-cam for watching particular content. Your channel is one of the few channels I actually look forward to viewing. Thank you for your efforts.
hey jake, you might want to hide your publically viewable subscribed channel to that cannabis channel. ATF probably wouldn't like that. Just watching out for ya.
@Nick G I debated on that. I actually co-own a federally legal hemp business. This was disclosed to the ATF. They only are concerned if we start trying to move meth or nose candy. Lol
Hopefully things start getting better for you lads in 2023.
@@JoeSkylynx thinking positive thoughts!
1:58
"Plastic in the front, copper in the back"
Sounds like the explosive version of a mullet.
😅
That copper filament was really a game changer.
It sure was. I think it was best not to go ahead and heat sinter it. Unless done in a form or on a mandrel the printed item can sag or otherwise lose symmetry.
@@markfergerson2145 print with ceramic sinter the ceramic, and use that for support.
Is it ?
Press forming is one of the easier forming operations.
@@dwwolf4636 Can you do that on a 100-200 € machine which has a footprint of less than 0,5 m²?
It is absolutely amazing what the copper filament was able to do. Especially since it is cheap(Relatively speaking anyway.) and can be burped out of a cheapo printer in very short order, and it's really easy/inexpensive to tweak the design. That really is fantastic and super interesting.
If you have the tools, the last option is both a lot cheaper and faster then 3d-print. But it was cool that it worked.
not cheap, not available, not easy to produce compared to taking a piece of pipe section slicing it and rolling it flat and hammering/pressing it into a cone shape. 3D printing is slow, the filament is expensive, and you might not always have a 3D printer or electricity to print the cones.
@@excitedbox5705 Alrighty then. You do you, bud.
@@excitedbox5705 $26 dollars US per Kilo, assuming the cone is 4in wide by 3-4in tall 2mm thick at 50g a shot, a reasonably tuned 3d printer can knock out 4 in about 30-45 min. For war time manufacture yeah that's shit, but for testing geometries for penetration ability … that's what rapid prototyping (i.e. 3d Printing) is built for. Once the shape has been finalized, print off a mold for casting in aluminum, and injection mold the plastic and copper suckers. Drives the cost through the floor and produces hundreds of thousands per hour at a proper factory, or hundreds a day using a home brew injection molder and any sufficient heat source. All that's left is explosives and delivery.
@@thomasschulz2167 I totally agree that 3D printing shouldn't be used for mass production but it's perfect for testing different geometries. The output should be pretty well reproducible compared to most manual manufacturing methods and you could easily try stuff like having different wall thickness for different parts of the geometry.
One of the cool things about the 3-D printed liner is that you could trivially tinker with different liner geometry including parabolas, conic sections, variable cross-sectional and radial thickness. Would be interesting to see what happens if you mounted a small tungsten pellet at the base or out front of the liner. I’m guessing there are all sorts of research papers available on liner development.
I’ve seen EFP’s that have indents on them (like mk2 grenades) so the EFP turn to many small pieces of shrapnel instead of a big piece of shrapnel
In Minecraft of course 😂
@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket Science Madness forum has a whole section dedicated to energetics, and a host of threads dedicated shaped charges.
@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket While a lot of this and similarly imilarly military applicable stuff is heavily classified, there's more in the public domain than most people seem to think, especially in brick and mortar libraries. Remember the guy who got a visit from the FBI for writing a science fiction story about nuclear bombs in the 1940s; his fictional design (which was not what the government had built but would have worked) was based on what was in the public domain at the time.
@@evansoutdoors4022 you dont know what EFP means.
I think the 3D printed copper one allows you to do weirder and more varied layer thickness on the liner. So I highly suggest in testing more experimental prints with the 3D printed copper liner.
Edit, adding in 3D printed Wave Shapers like in the M380A1 HEAT round or a much more pronounced and variable-thickness cone should add more penetration.
Very interesting video. Educational while being entertaining isn't easy to pull off, but once again you guys succeeded in spectacular fashion. Loved the way each explosion sounded better and better. Thanks for the new video.
Be safe out there, and take it easy.
Impressed that the copper liner was discussed. Most "shaped charge" you tube videos just kinda' leave the whole copper cone/penetrator out of the picture..
So glad you guys are here and still on YT. Your content makes my day
Very good proofs of concept .
Be interesting to see what kind of consistent performance is achievable under less than ideal manufacturing conditions .
Wow! Amazing what you could 3d print. Great disclaimer about having all the correct papers on the wall. Keep up the great videos
Make one out of tantalum. That has malleability similar to copper but a much higher melting point. 3D printed explosives is a very neat idea, as it could make precision shock wave shapes similar to machined charges but far safer to manufacture. 🤓
There’s no 3D printer tech for tantalum as far as I know, you can’t DMLS it. Maybe one of the binder print then sinter methods, but it’s higher temperature pressure required than other metals even inconel…
What is the advantage of tantalum over copper? The liner doesn't melt anyway.
Tantalum has a much higher melting point, has a higher density and is very ductile. It can form a higher density and higher energy projectile. Copper is fine for most uses though tantalum will go through stuff that copper will not.
Finally! Have been waiting for this video for forever.
You guys should try to make some explosive reactive armor to complement the shaped charge series.
One important thing to note: majority of the russian light IFV/APC used for troop transports use aluminium. The fronts use sloped armour but sides and the top extremely easy to penetrate with practically any shaped charge. Aluminium is light and easy to deform, it's mainly used against light shrapnel.
Perhaps in the next tests, try the "least performing" charges against aluminium blocks and better performing with angled steel to see how they perform against them.
Best content creators on youtube!
Glad you appreciate the work!
@@OrdnanceLab this reminds me of the HEAT shells on tanks
whoops probably shouldn't have clicked the video with 'revolutionary' and 'shaped charges' in the title.
Dear SWAT: I will be waiting on my knees with my hands on my head and my dog is tied up 🥺
Your fans understand and have nothing but best wishes for all of you! It seems that the more you can delay the charge wave front, the more power hits the surface. Full piece copper shaped cone.
have you experimented with linear shaped charges?
We have! We are going to do a video on that comparing commercial liners and our own ones. Especially now that we have the lab up and running.
It would be interesting to see these test EFP's scaled up to 84-90 mm, that size would put it in range of the AT 4 warhead. Imagine that with 3D printed cone and casing. Make the cone from copper and the charge sleeve from pla or some other polymer.
Try casting the copper liner. It'll be brittle, but hard to deform and might work well.
Copper is easily annealed. A few hours in an oven and it’d be soft again. I’d be curious to see of the softness effects the penetrating
I'm curious what sort of effect you might get from winding copper wire around a conic form. Would some gauges be better than others? Would the pressure and heat of the explosion weld them into a liner or blow them apart? Would it help to bind them with glue or solder or some other sort of binder? Would a composite liner help? How about multiple layers of copper sheet wrapped around a cone and cut to fit? I just wonder what would be easier to make expediently if one did not have a 3D printer.
Oooh this is a very good topic to test.
I don't think that would work, the copper wire wouldn't deform evenly enough to form a concentric cone
@@acorgiwithacrown467 I think it would work with a small penalty, just like the PLA/Cu print here did. 58mm pen versus 45mm pen may be down to 90% fill with homogenous 10% 'dead space' in the cone material and a little more loss due to overall density and maybe a need to change the cone angle due to that.
PLA/CU also gives the opportunity to rapidly test iterations on cone angle, wall thickness and variations of wall thickness, maybe even formulaic solutions (lens curves on algebraic formulas to better take advantage of pressure/time curves for what's really an unenclosed explosive with these light printed containers).
Nice video. This one ought to really generate some calls to the RCMP.
I keep them on speed dial for when a new video posts.
Excellent footage guys!
Thanks my man!
Gemini really is a great relaible consistent explosive, to my untrained eye at least, all those blasts were very similar in audio and appearance. Its a great explosive for this job as it almost removes a variable from the real sciencey stuff, like the way the penetrator develops according to shape and stand off required. Great work and, Fascinating stuff as always!!!
What exactly is Gemini? I can't find anything online, but from the results that do come up I assume it's another name for binary explosives in general?
Super cool. Love the fun, science based approach to your guys videos!
You could use fluid 3D printing for castable burn out resin for vacuum casting. "VOGman" and "Clear Mind Jewellery" have examples of casted jewelry. Now if you would use that technique of vacuum casting. You could cast perfectly shaped copper shaped charge projectiles.
Greetings,
Jeff
Fantastic video guys👍But think about using molybdenum as a liner material. There is a reason why the K-charge of General dynamics exists also with Mo-liner.
There is a reason why companies like HC starck solution and Plansee manufacture Mo-liners. Not to mention that in 2007 ruag achieved penetration depths with molybdenum liners that were over 10 times deeper than the diameter of the charge.
Why go for 10x penetration when he can just print ten charges a lot cheaper? I know they don't add linearly, but it's not really relevant to my point. The entire purpose of this design is that it's extremely rapid and very cheap to produce compared to a more traditional shaped charge.
That cost analysis is probably why _all_ shaped charges don't use molybdenum. Copper's not exactly cheap, but it's not quite so rare and expensive.
You know it is gonna be good when the word 3D is in the title. Greetings from Spain. :D
the interesting thing about copper cones is that not only can you 3d print them, but you can also make the electrolytically. basically you have your copper plating solution and a metal cone with some graphite paint (so the copper releases and still has good conductivity, silver paint works too) and you can make copper cones of any thickness depending on the time left in the plating solution.
Faster and easier to make a sand mold using a plastic 3d printed shape, then cast said shape.
The president: you can't fight a tank with a ar15
The average 3d printing enthusiasts: and I took that personally.
Think the best thing is this video is for "Educational purposes", As an engineer i love stuff like this and the possibilities it allows. As a human i worry about the other humans whos vision is slightly blurry haha.
Keep it up and development is the only way to take lives when needed and save lots of others.
Outstanding!!!!
I read everywhere that a RPG and other anti tank weapons can penetrate 900mm of steel or even more, i know it use more explosives and a bigger cone but it would be nice to see you test that. But awesome first vid of 2023.
Jake has the reactor up so we can now produce other explosives in 10 or more kilogram batches. So recreating an RPG with a clone correct warhead to test performance is now doable.
@@OrdnanceLab Would be so awesome to see. Love all ur vids. Nothing more beautiful than explosves.
Next objective : 3d print a plastic explosive lens and support structure to improve overall performance.
Damn. That part of "They're making rockets on my internet!" had me dieing.
theres metal filled FDM filaments. i wonder how they would preform as a penetrator. or using say metal dust like the fine fine alu or iron dust you can buy sandwiched between two forms to act as a molded container to form the jet. ANYWAYS i love seeing any sort of EFP content! love to see more. id love to see a tandem charge head done with that 3d printed copper charge! two lenses would be insane!
90% copper filament was used for the 3rd liner.
Metal powders have been used as a liner. Mainly for bore hole related shaped charges. Dont eant solids to clog up that expensive drill attempt.
Hmmm come a long way from the hell cannon lol
6:37 "Play it cool. It wasn't that much of a flinch...OH the camera was watching"
How about using lead for a cone? Or even a segment testing different elements for the cones?
Titanium, osmium, maybe tungsten?
Might be fun
I think with the more dense materials it would tend to shatter rather than form into a cone, tungsten in particular is not particularly malleable not to mention alot more expensive. Tantalum on the other hand sounds kind of ideal
I doubt they haven't tested those materials before yet copper is still the go to for shaped charges.
Hardness and density are likely less important than melting and evaporation points as far as determining whether a material behaves properly, shatters, or does some other crazy thing. Density would likely play a role in how much penetration is achieved, but it's possible that counterintuitively, less dense materials end up performing better as they convert to plasma. I'd bet that regardless of actual performance, the main reason copper is used as a standard rather than more exotic metals is due to cost of procurement and machining. Tungsten might perform 10% better, but for the cost of a tungsten liner you could maybe just triple the thickness of copper and get the same effect.
3D- printed copper liner: Check. 3D- printed rocket body: No problem. If you find a way to make an explosive filament, you could 3D- print the charge, as well.
According to the law of averages, you guys should be smooth sailing for at least the next 20 years.
You are able to turn potential chemical energy into harmless fun , I guess it's called explosive magic.
3:26 the way the right guys wears his helmet lmao
3D printed + Explosive in the title. You guys are brave.
the art of get on a watchlist as quick as possible
Great stuff thank for all you guys are doing 👍👍👍
Very good "proof of concept", I'm surprised the layered plastic/copper liner (first sample) did so poorly and that the 3D-printed copper (third sample) did so well.
A point of interest is that the smallest Panzerfaust (Klein) had roughly 3.5~4 times the explosive fill, so viewers expecting this tiny thing to do more than "scratch" tank armour was (perhaps) a bit too much.
RE factor matters more than the amount of filler, but i don't know much about the explosive they are using so i can't really say what i'd expect. It appears similar in performance to RDX that has a RE of 1.6, but who knows.
First charge made homeboy flinch lol
"messed up with an f" is gonna be something i say on the daily hahaha
Why not just make a 3d printed form to press copper plate into a copper cone? Coppers pretty soft, you could just hammer the form together.
Did Steve not get enough coffee before filming?
Sean drank all his energy drinks
@@OrdnanceLab 😆
Seems Steve is showing his human reaction to loss. My heart goes out to you, brother. It took me a year each to get over the loss of my mother and grandmother. They made me into the success I am today. I feel your loss. Time will help, but never heal one of life's greatest challenges! Kudos for all you guys do!!
@@qinarizonaful no, I'm just always muted. Dan lost his grandmother.
awwww you literally have an ordnance lab out on the range as your supervisor haha. Doggo's are the best.
Great stuff as ever! Would be interested to see how a cast copper cone would perform? Perhaps you could 3d print one, smooth it and make a silicone mold to make wax blanks to cast many? Keep up the good work y'all!
casting copper in a silicone mold? Not gonna happen. Silicone burns at a much lower temperature than even lead melts at.
@@arturjogi2667 no you cast the silicone mold, make wax blanks then use the lost wax casting method with some plaster around the wax blank. the hot metal burns out the wax and you're left with a metal piece in plaster. at no time does hot metal get near silicone. my mistake, i didn't explain all the steps very well. hope that helps! :)
Don't forget to call the Mounties!
Jokes aside, this is pretty sick ngl. Maybe next time, we will see a homemade tandem shaped charge!
3:28 Ear pro only works when it’s actually over your ears.
I’ve heard that magnesium is good but bronze cones or brass cones are just as good as pure annealed copper. You get significantly more penetration if the copper is annealed because it work hardens when it’s been formed into a cone and this slight bit of resistance can sap a little of the power of it turning inside out into a jet and also cracks can happen that let out hot gases which also effects penetration. It’s much better if you heat your copper up with a map gas torch first and dump it in some water to quench it. Not sure about printed cones though.
Love the shape charge specials. Very cool MORE!
"Quarter inch? Half an inch?" Sounds like a disappointing night
You can 3D print in tungsten (powder bed laser melting process). Some online 3D print services offer this material (beamler for instance). Probably fairly expensive. Would be interesting to see how it compares to copper...
That wont do you any good. the reason copper is used is because it reaches a certain acceleration where it becomes liquid or hydrodynamic and ''FLOWS'' through the armour. Now if you would use that tungsten as a solid penetrator, that would be effective. but then you are not making a anti armor rocket, but now you are designing a tankround. These charges have been around since 1886. And they still use copper today because it yields the best results. for a ligth caryable weapon.
@@EleaRevilsHeating and melting does not play a significant role in the physics of shaped charges. The effect creates a high velocity jet of material that acts as a projectile. Because it is a very small cross section (needle-like) moving very fast, it achieves a lot of penetration. I can imagine that shaping a correspondingly thinner solid tungsten cone would be very difficult, and that perhaps the thoughness of tungsten does not lend itself for the cone to easily form a clean jet. However, laser sintered tungsten powder is very different than solid tungsten. Much like the glass or copper infused 3d printer filament, it might „pulverize“ and yield to the explosive charge to form a clean jet. Shaped charges traditionally use copper because it is dense, inexpensive, easy to work into shape and malleable enough to yield to the explosive force. But back then laser sintering did not exist…
@@pyalot Nobody ever mentioned heat or melting except you.
Very interesting. The fact that the D3 printed copper wasn't sintered and still performed so well is a surprise to me. It makes me wonder about specific hardnesses and alloys of copper. With the printer you can play with the shape, as others have mentioned. So many small details can be tweaked for maximum efficiency.
Those results absolutely blew me away (pun partially intended). I though there was *no way* that would ever work. Not only was I wrong, I was very wrong.
The fact that it wasn't sintered doesn't really matter. The base material can be what ever you want it to be, but to get the molten metal jet that does the penetrating you need to have enough copper mixed into the lens to do the job and designed in such a way that the jet will contact the smallest area on the armor allowing it to burn it's way through. Similar to a plasma lance.
@@thomasschulz2167 makes sense. We used to make shape charges without any metal material. Lensing wasn't exactly the way we were trained to look at it.
After a while you can hear if the shaped charge has penetrated just from the duller sound of the explosion. Presumably it's because you get better energy transfer or something.
This is great, it could be used with a simple sling. Nice job.
Any plans to test different standoff distances? I've been told the maximum penetration happens at somewhere around 6-7 charge diameters of standoff. You seem to use something like 1 to 1.5 diameters.
Jake follows a formula for stand offs he refined for optimal distance. We can def do a video showing how different stand off distances affect penetration.
Can we print it, yes we can.
It's literally impossible to say this line without using Bob the Builders voice.
So a pressed copper cone wins. Just like the ones we have been using since the 1940's. Well done.
Please compare copper, aluminum, steel and tungsten cones. I have also heard that adding tungsten dust to explosives enhances its effect, check it out if possible.
Jake is working on it
@@OrdnanceLab thanks! try also various other metals, such as lead, and if possible fillers of aluminum powder to increase the temperature. also have an idea, plastic cone and tungsten powder filler
@@eugenef9021 I don't think anyone would want to test lead, especially with explosives. It adds too much mass to the front, and the flying of lead particles after an explosion or when handling it does our guys valuable brains no good.
Ever heard of explosive forming metal with water? I saw it in an old metal working book (1960ish) as a cheap alternative to large press applications or when you don't have a large press available but explosives are
Backing the charge with water or tamping gel could possibly improve penetration by containing the energy more effectiveness
Harder to tell but homeboy flinched on the 3rd charge too🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This. Is. One. HECK of collab!
Homeboy flinched on 2nd charge too😂
Amazing performance.
A fair bit of the performance difference would be the difference in density if the pure copper and the printed liner had the same dimensions if my understanding of the physics is correct.
Very cool testing on that! Copper Man Bunday and the material makes the difference! Excellent 👌 video
yay! we're all on a list now!
I love the casual Borat references
I used to work down the street from Raytheon. That place is like a fortress you can't get anywhere near that place without clearance. My mother's brother worked there in the early 80s. He developed guidance chips and other military weapons. He died from a strange form of cancer due to radiation exposure. HMMMMM 🧐
The Rpg7 has a focus ring made of plastic about an inch above the ignitor. You haven't mentioned it so I'll assume there isn't one. If its in other stuff you probably need it to be effective.
It's completely f d up what they've done. They're using 3× less powerful explosive than they need and no wave shaper as you write. It's embarassing.
This is very educational. I hope UA-cam doesn’t demonetize your channel.👌🏻 keep up the good work and stay safe👍🏻
Can the performance of the cone increased when you using cold hammered copper? i think its harder than normal copper.
That is a solid question worth testing
It takes 80mm of penetration to destroy a T72 from the side having a tandem charge will allow for the charge to counter the ERA T72B (contact 1), T72B3 (contact 5), and T72B3/M (Relkit) side ERA. The T72BA1 (which was a non service prototype) has dual layer ERA (contact 5, then contact 1) so a tandem warhead won't be able to penetrate it.
For armor reference, most tanks in WWII and even modern day uses Rolled homogenous armor (RHA) for its steel armor (MBTs will have a mix of RHA, composites, heavy metals, and other materials in some areas that need the most protection like the front of the hull and the front of the turret, while the rest is typically just plane old RHA, though there could be composite screening, NERA, or ERA slapped on top to help defend against chemical and kinetic rounds in those areas.). I would say, the average side armor of a tank in WWII was between 30-50mm of RHA, while the front was typically thicker. The 3d printed copper would have gone through the side of many German tanks (All their light and medium tanks except Panther G and F), and the top of pretty much all of them. It could go through the top of pretty much every other tank in the war as well, and through the lower side plate behind the tracks of the Sherman. As for modern vehicles, this could easy go through a Bradley or BMP hull in many areas, and would do so against the BMP far easier as that has even less armor than the BMP, with most areas being less than 20mm thick, meaning it can be penned by .50 cal. For the Bradley, Im pretty sure it can go through the engine deck, the sides, and the rear, not sure about the front. The thing about MBTs though, is their armor is fairly classified, so maybe their top armor has some protective layer no one knows about that helps against these weaker shaped charge rounds, but based on what we know, most MBT's top armor is around 40mm thick for Nato, and slightly thicker for Russia and China I believe. I could be wrong.
The shaped copper cone one with over 50mm of pen though, thats insane! FOr a home made shaped charge, that can go through most modern armor vehicles and tanks from the top, and many from the rear and side. Even some from the front. If you put a impact fuse and set em on a drone, this would be insane to drop onto an unsuspecting vehicle, and could mission kill it if you aimed for the engine or turret.
@unexpectedspanishinquisiti3967 These guys actually did a video in the past explaining that using a drone to deploy explosives enters a whole other realm of the law (FAA), which is why they've never deployed munitions from drones...such a bummer; wish they could get creative with drones.
@lukebaehr3851 Oh, I know, I wasn't saying they should do it. I'm just saying if someone does it against actusly tanks, these homemade shaped charges could prove very effective. They probably cost around $100 a piece, and it only takes maybe 2 on the engine deck to mission kill a modern MBT, which costs tens of millions of dollars.
@unexpectedspanishinquisiti3967 right! Far far cheaper than conventional munitions paid for by the taxpayers. What's the cost of a single replcement Javelin or Tow Missle? They are probably many 10s of thousands per unit, if not more. Not to mention the platform they're deployed from.
@lukebaehr3851 the javelin and tow launchers themselves are reusable, as the missile is pre loaded into the launcher tube, which can be discarded once fired, ans a new one placed on the launcher platform.
Reminds me of testing things on the demo range at Ft Hood. Got the range shut down twice and weight limits for the range reduced twice.
I'm always looking out for your videos. Keep making them and I'll keep watching
You guys have more fun than normal people.
And Allie isn't autistic. She's just having fun too.
Crazy stuff! Shaped charges are wild...
I'd enjoy seeing a video on different thermites, particularly copper thermites as it reacts fast enough to be explosive when confined, and Thermate is the "military grade" variety of thermite. Thermites don't produce much gas so there's no possibility of them being anything but a generally weak low explosive, but they are still cool.
I know other channels have already done extensive videos on thermites, but it's right up Oedanace Lab's alley. Codyslab had a video on copper thermite in a confined container but he had to take it down quite a while ago.
Oh, and awesome video as always. Shaped charges still blow my mind.
What was the total weight on completed unit. One thing to consider is to vary the thickness and depth on the 3d printed coper cone, in order to get the proper liquefaction of the copper. Also there is the availability of 3d printed charge itself to increase the burn, think of solid rocket booster fuel shape.
OL: "Penetration is important for rockets"
Literally everyone: "giggity"
Thats it! Im calling the RCMP!!! Hahahah
Your videos are always interesting and entertaining. Curious; how far into the ground the explosive pressure is forcing your test media?
many people have 3d printers nowadays even metal ones, its hard to get license for stuff like this, so i guess many more before you tried this but they just cant go public with it... so you can say you are the first doing this on youtube but not the only ones who did it tho 😉
If it isn't published it doesn't exist, at least in the world of intellectual property.
@@tissuepaper9962 we are talking about claims, not inventions or patents...
Have you guys ever used brass instead of copper for the liner? it's a alloy of copper but it might have different properties when lensing.
So, I've heard of SO MANY gun fights in the middle east that consisted of the bad guys at the top of the concrete stairs shooting down at the good guys going up the stairs. In a shoot-out like that, could you use a shaped charge to blow the concrete floor out from under them?
Glad to see y’all back in the New Year! 🎉
You guys have way too much fun at work LOL
Yeah I’m likely never gonna do any of this, so I am glad I can see you do it. ;)
Metal Casting, and distilling nitric acid from compost.... thats all the skills you need
The taxi driver, but he knows how to operate a drill press, and wire D/C electricity...
it might work for a top down weapon as abrams is 38mm roof armor, leopard 2 is 40mm and t72/80/64/90 is 45mm not sure about t90m's roof armor
Let's just say that the rocket delivery is just for fun engineering. The top attack is what this was intended for all along. Drone drop.
Makes me reconsider getting rid of all the scrap copper I have.