Discussion:
Titanium sponge vs Ti powder
(too old to reply)
Bob Forward
2004-02-18 19:18:30 UTC
Permalink
Just curious. I've used titanium powder, but not sponge. Could
someone give me a short rundown of the differences between the two,
especially as related to pyrotechnics?
PyroLeo
2004-02-18 19:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Titanium Sponge is a mixture of irregularly shaped porous bits of titanium
metal, and usually tends to be fairly coarse. Because it has very good
ignition characteristics, a small amount is often added to salutes to give a
spray of yellowish-white sparks. It also has uses in things like fountains,
gerbs, tourbillions, and so on wherever you want it's spark effects. Because
the titanium metal is quite hard, it also tends to scratch and gouge your
rammers and spindles.

Leo
----------------------
Post by Bob Forward
Just curious. I've used titanium powder, but not sponge. Could
someone give me a short rundown of the differences between the two,
especially as related to pyrotechnics?
donald j haarmann
2004-02-18 22:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Forward
Just curious. I've used titanium powder, but not sponge. Could
someone give me a short rundown of the differences between the two,
especially as related to pyrotechnics?
Ti sponge is the mother of all Ti. The sponge is the starting material from
which ALL OTHER mesh sizes are created. Though used - I would posit not
much is ever actually ignited! Even easily ignited stars --- don't!! I remember watching
a Gruchi display at Shea Stadium syears back, standing just inside 20" or so high
elevated train station. [Da famous # 7 Train line!] Between the mortars and myself was
a parking lot for busses. A short time after each shell burst - the sound of stars striking
the busses could be herd!! At any PGII convention for example, walk the field down wind
of the nights display, you will amazed at the number of un-ignited stars, satines!
&c. that can be had.

Oh!! The amount of:- cardboard / paper /end plugs /&c. left upon the tracks
downwind of the firing line was amazing!! What a mess! Quite a few of the cylinder
shell containers came back intact excepting where their contents had burst through
one side. Not a good sign. However, they looked good in the air... so who am I to complain?!!
--
donald j haarmann - independently dubious
Piccolo Pete
2004-02-19 02:16:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald j haarmann
A short time after each shell burst - the sound of stars striking
the busses could be herd!! At any PGII convention for example, walk the field down wind
of the nights display, you will amazed at the number of un-ignited stars, satines!
&c. that can be had.
So THAT'S what it is - the sound heard after a store bought feastival ball
is shot is actually unburned stars? I thought it was slag from the stars.
W Klofkorn
2004-02-19 05:42:58 UTC
Permalink
Yer catching on...

"Piccolo Pete" <***@spamsucks.com> wrote in message news:28UYb.9782$***@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
[...]
Post by Piccolo Pete
So THAT'S what it is - the sound heard after a store bought feastival ball
is shot is actually unburned stars? I thought it was slag from the stars.
Old Dog
2004-02-19 06:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald j haarmann
Post by donald j haarmann
A short time after each shell burst - the sound of stars striking
the busses could be herd!! At any PGII convention for example, walk the
field down wind
Post by donald j haarmann
of the nights display, you will amazed at the number of un-ignited stars,
satines!
Post by donald j haarmann
&c. that can be had.
So THAT'S what it is - the sound heard after a store bought feastival ball
is shot is actually unburned stars? I thought it was slag from the stars.
It *can* be slag, solid pieces of ash and carbonates, clinkers from parlon, etc.
It can also be inert cores from rolled stars. Or bits and pieces of glue- or
paste-saturated paper. Or lengths of spent time fuse - the outer layers are not
consumed. Or end disks - some are pretty thick and heavy.

But there are generally also some unburnt stars - that's true of professional
product as well, not just indicative of amateur work.

In the case of Chinese festival balls, my guess would be the bulk of the stuff
coming down is inert star cores.

-Rich
donald j haarmann
2004-02-19 10:12:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Old Dog
It *can* be slag, solid pieces of ash and carbonates, clinkers from parlon, etc.
It can also be inert cores from rolled stars. Or bits and pieces of glue- or
paste-saturated paper. Or lengths of spent time fuse - the outer layers are not
consumed. Or end disks - some are pretty thick and heavy.
But there are generally also some unburnt stars - that's true of professional
product as well, not just indicative of amateur work.
In the case of Chinese festival balls, my guess would be the bulk of the stuff
coming down is inert star cores.
-Rich
-----
Could be, however, whatever it was — was betting a staccato tattoo
on the busses!! Cores? Not unless they were using ball bearings!! Remember
the tops of busses are heavy sheet metal. Paper? Not a chance in hell.
Reminds me of my first 3"shell fro which 5 red stars dribbled out!!
--
donald j haarmann — independently dubious
Robert Goodman
2004-02-19 16:27:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald j haarmann
Post by Old Dog
It *can* be slag, solid pieces of ash and carbonates, clinkers from parlon, etc.
It can also be inert cores from rolled stars. Or bits and pieces of glue- or
paste-saturated paper. Or lengths of spent time fuse - the outer layers are not
consumed. Or end disks - some are pretty thick and heavy.
But there are generally also some unburnt stars - that's true of professional
product as well, not just indicative of amateur work.
In the case of Chinese festival balls, my guess would be the bulk of the stuff
coming down is inert star cores.
-----
Could be, however, whatever it was — was betting a staccato tattoo
on the busses!! Cores? Not unless they were using ball bearings!! Remember
the tops of busses are heavy sheet metal. Paper? Not a chance in hell.
Reminds me of my first 3"shell fro which 5 red stars dribbled out!!
This is really boosting my ego, considering how much better my 1st two 3"
shells were than that. But I'd practiced on 1.75" shells before that, and I
had all the other CMPAers do their shell thing (and waited for the demise of
CMPA) before I even got into shell making. But even among the 1.75", I'd had
only one blow mostly blind -- the one I tried breaking with BP, which went
almost entirely blind in the sky over, ironically enough, Bellville, Long
Is. A flower pot & a low break among those efforts, but their stars lit.

But Don, I'm still not sure what the cx is here to Ti. We know it's easier
to ignite than spheric -- I sure showed that! Are you saying that Ti salute
shells were raining cold Ti on the buses, as well as other shells raining
blind stars?

Robert
donald j haarmann
2004-02-19 16:38:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Goodman
But Don, I'm still not sure what the cx is here to Ti. We know it's easier
to ignite than spheric -- I sure showed that! Are you saying that Ti salute
shells were raining cold Ti on the buses, as well as other shells raining
blind stars?
Robert
------
Nope.

I was referring to Ti sponge. Small pea sized pieces. Low surface
area. Low surface area - hi density. Good for absorbing heat. Poor
for ignition.

I don't know what Ti sponge is good for. And I do not know why
it should cost more than Ti of higher mesh size! When it is the native
material straight from the furnace!! Then —white phosphorus from which
red phosphorus is produced cost MORE than the red!!
--
donald j haarmann — independently dubious
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
2004-02-19 18:17:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by donald j haarmann
I was referring to Ti sponge. Small pea sized pieces. Low surface
area. Low surface area - hi density. Good for absorbing heat. Poor
for ignition.
--
Post by donald j haarmann
donald j haarmann - independently dubious
Don, I'm independently dubious of your description. When most professional
pyros talk about sponge Ti, they're not talking about raw crushings from the
furnace, they're talking about granulated material derived from raw sponge.

I've never seen any use of sponge Ti where the particle size was larger than
about ten mesh. Twenty mesh material can travel forty to fifty feet from
the point of projection.

Almost all silver-tailed effects (that use titanium) use -30 mesh or
smaller.

Further, in contradiction to your statement above, sponge Ti has a HUGE
surface area vs. weight; it truly is an open-celled sponge, with all sorts
of nooks, crannies, and sharp edges sticking out every-which-way. It's very
easy to ignite with black powder compositions, even in large particle sizes.

What you described sounds more like "spin" cores for stars -- small (say
1/8" to 3/16" dia) star cores of rolled flash powder made from medium-sized
flake aluminum and bound with dextrin. Those are "small pea-sized" items
that are smooth, dense, and hard to light. Every time I see a spin shell, I
duck from the inevitable ensuing rain of un-lit cores.

I don't know of anyone who uses -4 to +6 mesh Ti in anything.

LLoyd
Mark Herbert
2004-02-19 20:20:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
What you described sounds more like "spin" cores for stars -- small (say
1/8" to 3/16" dia) star cores of rolled flash powder made from medium-sized
flake aluminum and bound with dextrin. Those are "small pea-sized" items
that are smooth, dense, and hard to light. Every time I see a spin shell, I
duck from the inevitable ensuing rain of un-lit cores.
Why are they called "spin" cores?
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
2004-02-19 20:35:46 UTC
Permalink
The stars burn normally until the core is reached. The core composition is
hard to light, and tends to ignite asymmetrically, so the core "jets" in a
direction different from the star's original line of travel. Usually, but
not always, the thrust on the core is also asymmetrical to its center,
causing the star to spin in flight like a little torbillion.

LLoyd
Post by Mark Herbert
Why are they called "spin" cores?
Mark Herbert
2004-02-20 01:16:29 UTC
Permalink
Ah, of course. I have seen those, and wondered how the effect was
achieved. Thanks.
Post by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
The stars burn normally until the core is reached. The core composition is
hard to light, and tends to ignite asymmetrically, so the core "jets" in a
direction different from the star's original line of travel. Usually, but
not always, the thrust on the core is also asymmetrical to its center,
causing the star to spin in flight like a little torbillion.
LLoyd
Post by Mark Herbert
Why are they called "spin" cores?
donald j haarmann
2004-02-20 01:59:43 UTC
Permalink
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
Post by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
Don, I'm independently dubious of your description. When most professional
pyros talk about sponge Ti, they're not talking about raw crushings from the
furnace, they're talking about granulated material derived from raw sponge.
I've never seen any use of sponge Ti where the particle size was larger than
about ten mesh. Twenty mesh material can travel forty to fifty feet from
the point of projection.
Almost all silver-tailed effects (that use titanium) use -30 mesh or
smaller.
Well I can only speak of my experience. The sponge Ti I purchased years ago —
was just that — the raw material. Mesh? Split pea to green pea! T'was this that
I tried in da blender:—


-------------------------------------------
Tell the WiZ (Donald J Haarmann)
American Fireworks News
Number 19 March, 1983


Dear WiZ: I have, after a 25-year hiatus returned to fireworks, my renewed interest
in which coincided with the arrival of last year's tax refund. I promptly ran amok,
ordering a pound of this and that and soon had a fine collection of pyro chemicals. I
felt confident that I could, on a moment's notice, whip up any formula published.
Wrong. As luck would have it, when Jerry Pulice's Whistling Titanium Rocket article
was published (AFN #9) 1 found I lacked 10-28 mesh titanium and had only 100
mesh or some very coarse sponge which I had obtained from Jim Finckbones’ Mega
Tech (of whom it can be said, here is a pyro who has paid his dues).

The problem of reducing the 4 mesh sponge to 10-28 mesh seemed a simple
problem of running it through my kitchen blender. So I proceeded to dump the entire
pound in the blender and start it on Speed 1 (my blender has seven speeds).
Click-it-ter, click-it-ter, click, snap, crack, ting-ting; it would seem that a little higher
speed was in order. So, on to No. 2, then 3, now 4 and then 5 and WHAT-HO, along
with the click-it-ters, snaps, tik-tik, bang-bang, clinks and rattles, there were little
white sparks going around in circles, along with the titanium, when HOLY
PYROPHORIC BATMAN – the-the-the inside of the blender just lit up like a light
bulb! Now the top has blown off and titanium dioxide smoke and finely divided Ti is
issuing forth. It rapidly became a race to turn off the blender and at the same time
keep my laundry bill to a minimum.

Hummmmm, no doubt a fluke so this time I tried it again, but using a three-foot
dowel rod to push the buttons. All was OK.(even fine) until once again Speed 5 was
reached and once again FLASH-POP SMOKE. All of which leads me to write to my
WiZ with my plaintive question: WHY ME?

signed G. R. Phlegmone

Dear Phle: The answer to your question is less obvious than would appear. It would be
simple to put it down to "just another nut job", however we pyros as a group are given
to mixing together finely divided, highly reactive metals, along with strong and not
particularly stable oxidizing agents. Then, not being satisfied, we add fuels like gums
and charcoal. And for the height of folly, we put a match to it!

There is, of course, a rationale to all this: fireworks are fun.

Now as to what happened and what to do about it, the following may be of some
use/interest. As you have astutely observed ' titanium, along with several other metals,
is pyrophoric, that is, they are 1) capable of producing a spark when struck (as with a
blender blade), 2) burning in air spontaneously (indeed, some months ago a well known
pyro was burned when some Ti powder ignited as he was pouring from one container to
another). What probably saved you was the limited amount of oxygen available in the
blender and when the heat from burning raised the air pressure add blew the top off,
the powder was dispersed sufficiently so that the reaction was not sustained.

Now things to do. You could Simply buy coarse Ti but then I would be out of a job and I
need the money. Being a Wizard ain‘t cheap. Now, as the Ti is rather reactive with air,
we have the choice of either removing the air by placing the blender in a vacuum
chamber (shouldn't cost more than a couple of grand) or of placing the blender in a
cabinet and displacing the air with an inert gas such as krypton. This is simpler than the
vacuum chamber but lacks elegance.

What is needed is an inert gas that could be poured into the blender to displace the air;
as luck would have it, there is such a gas, sulfur hexafluoride. Not only is it inert and
non-toxic, but it is five times heavy as air.

There is the eternal problem: where to buy it? The Sears catalog doesn't list it and a
quick check of the J.C.Whitney catalog failed to reveal it. So. we have to call out the
heavy artillery, that is, to barter. If you live in a "closed" state and have access to Class
C, you have a great item to barter.

Now SF is commonly used as an insulator in high voltage work, so grab a handful of "C"
and truck over to your local power plant with a big plastic bag and trade for some. If you
choose to buy it, at $10.30 a pound in 10 pound lots liquefied in a steel cylinder, you
should have about a 7,000 year supply. If you don’t like the plastic bag idea and you
are a physics fan, the fact that the critical pressure of the gas is only 2,206 kPa & 21
deg. C. will be of some use:

When you get it home, pouring it into the blender will be a bit of a chore as it is
colorless . You will have to fall back on by-guess and by-gosh or if you have one
handy, a Schileren set-up will be useful. If you decide to use this method, please drop
me a note so that I can check the horizon for smoke now and then.

[Who would put titanium in a blender? I’ll never tell!] /djh/



donald j haarmann
----------------------------
Who may not be the brightest port
fire in da box ... but he do have fun!!
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
2004-02-20 02:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Yes, Don, I've read that story before <G>. But that is beside the point.
There is no practical use for titanium particles as large as 4-mesh in
pyrotechnics.

Although it is obvious one can _buy_ Ti that coarse, you'd, of needs, have
to reduce the particle size -- as your story relates.

But the point was, that I doubt the "rain" you heard on the bus roof that
day was pea-sized titanium, but rather some more dense, hard-to-light star
cores like "spin".
Sponge Ti is _easy_ to light, as your article would attempt to show.

LLoyd
Post by donald j haarmann
Well I can only speak of my experience. The sponge Ti I purchased years
ago -
Post by donald j haarmann
was just that - the raw material. Mesh? Split pea to green pea! T'was this
that
Post by donald j haarmann
I tried in da blender:-
donald j haarmann
2004-02-21 22:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
But the point was, that I doubt the "rain" you heard on the bus roof that
day was pea-sized titanium, but rather some more dense, hard-to-light star
cores like "spin".
Sponge Ti is _easy_ to light, as your article would attempt to show.
LLoyd
---------
Yes. The original post was titanium sponge. It morphed into unburned stars.
Was this I referred. Most would be surprised at the number of stars that do not
ignite! If anyone has the opportunity to examine the ground down wind from a
show.... bring a broom and a bucket!
--
donald j haarmann — independently dubious
Piccolo Pete
2004-02-22 01:27:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by PyroLeo
Post by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
But the point was, that I doubt the "rain" you heard on the bus roof that
day was pea-sized titanium, but rather some more dense, hard-to-light star
cores like "spin".
Sponge Ti is _easy_ to light, as your article would attempt to show.
LLoyd
---------
Yes. The original post was titanium sponge. It morphed into unburned stars.
Was this I referred. Most would be surprised at the number of stars that do not
ignite! If anyone has the opportunity to examine the ground down wind from a
show.... bring a broom and a bucket!
These things don't melt easily in a rain either, right? I found about 8
stars around my pool the other day. There were 2 rains since I had a bad
shoot night. I had not shot anything from the back yard since those shots.
Makes me worry a bit about pets, livestock, and wild animals eating unburned
stars...
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
2004-02-23 16:38:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Piccolo Pete
These things don't melt easily in a rain either, right? I found about 8
stars around my pool the other day. There were 2 rains since I had a bad
shoot night. I had not shot anything from the back yard since those shots.
Makes me worry a bit about pets, livestock, and wild animals eating unburned
stars...
Rolled and "normally" pressed stars soften up pretty quickly in water,
unless they're resin-bound.

We hard press some stars without solvent or binder (at 0.7 tons on about
1/20 square inch of die). A spill of some blue stars sat in a water puddle
over three weeks, and were still perfectly ignitable after merely wiping
them dry with a cloth - no "redrying time". My guess is that the red gum
undergoes plastic flow at that pressure, and essentially coats all other
particles in the star with a film of resin.

LLoyd
Piccolo Pete
2004-02-24 02:42:38 UTC
Permalink
These were lightly pumped - red gum and alcohol were part of the mix/process
but there was no serious pressure.

That is one reason I was looking for a safe and reliable prime. I don't
like dropping blind stars in the neighborhood.
Post by Piccolo Pete
Post by Piccolo Pete
These things don't melt easily in a rain either, right? I found about 8
stars around my pool the other day. There were 2 rains since I had a bad
shoot night. I had not shot anything from the back yard since those
shots.
Post by Piccolo Pete
Makes me worry a bit about pets, livestock, and wild animals eating
unburned
Post by Piccolo Pete
stars...
Rolled and "normally" pressed stars soften up pretty quickly in water,
unless they're resin-bound.
We hard press some stars without solvent or binder (at 0.7 tons on about
1/20 square inch of die). A spill of some blue stars sat in a water puddle
over three weeks, and were still perfectly ignitable after merely wiping
them dry with a cloth - no "redrying time". My guess is that the red gum
undergoes plastic flow at that pressure, and essentially coats all other
particles in the star with a film of resin.
LLoyd
PyroLeo
2004-02-20 16:44:21 UTC
Permalink
I think I was the one who brought up titanium's ignitability. I wasn't
necessarily promoting it for use in star primes. I was only saying that coarse
titanium can easily be ignited by the strongest flash powders while coming out
of a salute at high velocity. There are few other metals besides zirconium
that can match that, certainly not as cheaply. Cheaply is a relative term
here, since we all know Ti isn't exactly cheap either.

That being said, there are festival balls which use what is apparently a
mediocre flash powder to break them, and they seem to get good ignition. I
also know of at least one American manufacturer who only used a "slow nitrate"
flash for breaking their shells.

Leo
------------------------
Post by PyroLeo
Post by Robert Goodman
But Don, I'm still not sure what the cx is here to Ti. We know it's easier
to ignite than spheric -- I sure showed that! Are you saying that Ti
salute
Post by Robert Goodman
shells were raining cold Ti on the buses, as well as other shells raining
blind stars?
Robert
------
Nope.
I was referring to Ti sponge. Small pea sized pieces. Low surface
area. Low surface area - hi density. Good for absorbing heat. Poor
for ignition.
I don't know what Ti sponge is good for. And I do not know why
it should cost more than Ti of higher mesh size! When it is the native
material straight from the furnace!! Then —white phosphorus from which
red phosphorus is produced cost MORE than the red!!
--
donald j haarmann — independently dubious
Loading...