:Talk:TNT

TNT must be heated greatly, or have a strong initiation source to explode. It melts at 82C and explodes at a higher temperature. This puts it at 3 for instability, and at 1 (or maybe 2 if the ignition temperature is less than 93C) for flamibility. Why does it say 4 for both! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11cookeaw1 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

• This sounds like a flip answer, but as a professional chemist, I am being completely serious. NFPA diagrams are created and applied by bureaucrats, not chemists nor explosives professionals. Everyone knows that TNT is dangerous, right? So clearly, it must represent a very large danger. A little less cynical, the NFPA diagrams reflect what might happen, and in a fire, TNT is clearly a major hazard. A documented plant explosion was caused by a worker tossing a cigarette butt that caused a burlap sack containing TNT to smoulder, resulting in a fire and subsequent explosion (See Urbanski, Chemistry and Technology of Explosives). Because TNT melts at below the boiling point of water, it can be present as liquid in a water-doused fire situation; the liquid is flammable in the presence of absorbative material (cf Candle). The "4" ratings are probably excessive, but considering the consequences of a fire and explosion, not entirely unwarranted. Norm Reitzel (talk) 13:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

:The explosive hazard of TNT is much less than that of PETN (which is sensitive to shock) and still PETN has a rating of 3. Is there some standard/reference where those values can be looked up? The values in Wikipedia seem arbitrary:

:TNT: 4 (very insensitive)

:RDX: 4 (very insensitive)

:HMX: 3 (also insensitive, but a stronger explosive)

:PETN: 3 (sensitive to shock)

:Nickel hydrazine nitrate: 3 (bordering a primary explosive) 78.10.207.114 (talk) 12:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Both articles will have this exact message added to their talk section. The explosive yield of both TNT and Dynamite are cited as different values in their respective articles, and as multiple different values within a single article. The Wikipedia article on Dynamite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamite) cites TNT and Dynamite to have explosive yields of 4.0 MJ/kg and 5 MJ/kg, respectively, whereas the Wikipedia article on TNT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene) cites TNT and Dynamite to have explosive yields of 2.8 MJ and 7.5 MJ/kg, respectively. In the TNT article, there is a line, "The explosive energy utilized by NIST is 4184 J/g (4.184 MJ/kg).[16]", which probably means to say that TNT has an explosive yield of 4.184 MH/kg, making for a probable third value, but the statement is ambiguous: On first read, I thought that NIST was an explosive that produced 4.184 MJ of explosive energy for every kg utilized. Suggest changing it to something like, "The NIST records the explosive yield of TNT as 4.184 MJ/kg.", if that is what is actually meant.

30px

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :C6H2(No2)3Ch. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 14#C6H2(No2)3Ch until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

I am not aware of naval battles between Germany and the UK in the years 1902-1907, as the article implies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.18.129 (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Activation energy is listed in kcal/mol (switching this to kJ/mol would help with consistency) while the "Energy content" section inexplicably switches between GJ/t MJ/kg without properly explaining that they are the exact same unit, and prior in the same section the article fails to mention the fact that the energy density NIST equivalent definition of 4.184 GJ/t, when the units of energy and mass are divided by 10⁹ and 10⁶ respectively, is simply 4,184 J/g, or 1 kCal/g, a semi-arbitrary number chosen (presumably) for simplicity because it lies close enough to the mean experimental value/range. AnOldSky (talk) 21:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

:Additionally, the final line of Energy content is unclear by saying "contains" given the section has just listed two different energy/mass contents of tnt (heat of combustion or energy density) (also, an apology to anyone trying to read this and not understanding I would be happy to reclarify anything energy/mass (which in base units ends up being just m²/s²) units are hard) AnOldSky (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)