Talk:Dry ice bomb

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-07-26. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Should this article exist?

I think it is significant because dry ice bombs are popular, and I think there should be a page on Wikipedia that explains what they are, how they work, why they are dangerous, etc. As long as there are no step-by-step details explaining how to create one, this article should be fine. It needs to be expanded, definitely. --Kinghajj 22:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is being asked, but if we truly took out the "How they are made" part, you must realize the "safety tips" part, as if we don't note construction, how to activate, etc, we also can't tell how people do this safely. Double edged sword. --MikedaSnipe 00:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shrapnel

The bomb can turn parts of the bottle into dangerous missiles, particularly the bottom and the neck. Shrapnel can cause eye damage.

If a part of the bottle is signficantly weaker than the rest, the whole bottle can turn into a missile flying several tens of meters. Skjæve 14:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One time, in physics class, a 1/2 litre bottle was filled with liquid nitrogen (similar results to dry ice expansion). The thing is, the cap was designed to tighten the seal as the pressure built up, leading to detonation. The bottle was in a small paper bin under a desk. It blew up, sending shrapnel, a piece of which got stuck on the ceiling. This was a plastic bottle, mind you. Imagine what glass would do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.229.69 (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i set a dry ice bomb off a few years ago which i had modified to be "unusually loud" as a result however, the shrapnel also moved much faster than it would otherwise, when i was about to put it down in my yard, and get to a safe distance, it went off in my hand, most of the shrapnel hit me in the groin, some of it hit my right knee, some of it hit the top of my feet some of it hit my face, and some of it hit the ground at such high velocity that i was showered with debris from the impact with the ground...i got extremely lucky, and none of the shrapnel penetrated, but i had one black eye, had a defeaning ringing in my ears for the next half-hour, a massive bruise on my knee, moderate bruising on my feet, and i was unable to feel my groin for the next few hours; i never found any of the fragments of it, and for the record, it was only made of plastic Omnipresentgnome (talk) 01:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tidy-up

A big improvement I think.--Snori 06:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about glass?

I know that it's more dangerous, but dry ice bombs are also commonly made with glass bottles. Why was this reverted?

I've now added back in, but as a more dangerous variation.

Please tell me Wikipedia cannot be sued for some dumb kid reading about a "glass" dry ice bomb. Is the concern more about liability, or are we trying to protect people from potentially dangerous info?Shimdidly 14:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People should be able to have information. It's what they do with that information that counts, and that is at the sole discretion of the person. WP:DISCLAIMER though does pretty much put all liability on the person who chooses to attempt the stunt. 74.38.33.15 07:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean?

"This negates a key attraction of the classic dry ice bomb for recreational users - its safety compared to other explosive devices." Whoever wrote this: can you rewrite it in plain English?

I've removed completly, and re-jigged Dangers and Safety sections and tried to keep to Plain English. Snori 18:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Safety Measures

I feel that the recent edits to this section are a little controvertial... well maybe just one of them. "Consider placing a light bucket over it." Whoever wrote this should take a look at some of the links at the bottom of the page to see why this might not be a good idea to "improve safety". I'm going to revert the section to my edits because I feel that being concise on an article this small isn't important, besides, we should be informative!Shimdidly 14:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legality

The statement that dry ice bombs are illegal in some places should be sourced. Just by googling, I found three examples: Arizona,[1] California,[2] and Nebraska.[3] However, these are only three random U.S. states, so it would be worth mentioning other countries to be more representative. Anyone knows about other countries or states? Itub 19:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, the California law notes that it is illegal to make a device that causes "an explosion... by chemical reaction." Should it be mentioned that this is a physical reaction (sublimation), so as not to confuse readers? 141.248.3.1 (talk) 22:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the California law is threefold: 1) CO2 is not a chemically reactive substance in the context of a dry ice bomb, 2) as noted above, the law specifies a chemical reaction, whereas this is a physical change of state (see the IUPAC Gold Book for chemical terminology, and 3) the law defines an explosion as sudden release of gas *and* heat, whereas no heat is released in the process of sublimnation.67.181.72.173 (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

Perhaps I am being unreasonable, but I think it would be best to remove any instances on this page that refer to the "detonation" of a dry ice bomb. These devices to not actually detonate. Detonation refers to the creation of a supersonic detonation wave in the explosive, and this does not occur in dry ice bombs, otherwise they would be regarded as a high explosive. To my knowledge, the containers merely burst. As this is my very first post on Wikipedia, and I have no verifiable source for the information I am providing, I leave it to more experienced Wikipedia members to decide what the best thing to do is.

I like your input on this and I'll change all instances of "detonate" as I see them when I get the time if it hasn't been done already. Shimdidly 17:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that the use of the term "explosion" is also innaccurate. An explosiong is defined as "an instantaneous or rapid release of gas and heat." [Cal Health and Saftey Code, Section 12000 - which is the source definition cited by the California law on destructive devices.] A dry ice 'bomb' releases *no* heat, and in fact absorbs heat. Terms such as explosion are too often misused to provke exaggerated or fearful responses. Dry ice 'bombs' do not meet the definition of an explosion or explosive. This article should not use a term incorrectly when it contradicts a legal definition.67.181.72.173 (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Someone changed the Construction and Explanation part so it read: homosexual bottle, screw on homosexually... etc. etc. I have changed the text to its normal state. PRhyu 14:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responsible solution

I see some of the debate, and I think I might have a solution.

Isn't there a general wikipedia policy against giving "advice" (health advice, safety guidelines, etc.)? If so, there's a good reason (besides its unencyclopedic nature). It's that the potential for bad advice (which might be foolishly trusted by some kid somewhere) is worse than no advice at all. Wikipedia shouldn't suppress information, but advice is not "information" in the appropriate sense.

Ice bombs are indeed culturally important enough to include in wikipedia, but the irresponsibility starts when we allow users to add their safety suggestions. Responsibility dictates that we avoid all appearance of giving advice on how to do this safely, which is not an appropriate task for an openly edited site (as we can plainly see: shoot it with a BB gun? WTF, dude?). Warn readers of the dangers, then link to a responsible site with instructions if one exists.209.59.32.96 08:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger?

There are a large number of similar devices, using various methods of generating gas, such as chlorine, CO₂, and hydrogen gas. All are primarily done as experiments or pranks, though at least one assault is documented (see http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/acidbomb.asp). I think maybe a merger is in order, with all individual instances redirecting to a page titled "gas pressure bomb" or the like, as that describes the common mode of operation. I'm cross-posting this to Talk:Chlorine bomb as well. scot 21:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS--here's a souce (an AZ law) that lumps these together under the name "gas-pressure bomb": http://www.gunlaws.com/agog2021.htm scot 22:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing instructional text

The result of the deletion review for this article was to not have instructional details, but they have slowly returned. I have removed them. --User101010 00:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use by serious criminals / terrorists?

Have such devices been used for serious crimes as well? Please mention. -- 92.229.188.129 (talk) 22:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi bomb

In the italian wikipedia, someone are discussin about an ice bomb, developed by the nazi. Here someone know something about that, more than this?--Llorenzi (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dry ice bomb. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070223113151/http://www.madphysics.com:80/exp/dry_ice_explosions.htm to http://www.madphysics.com/exp/dry_ice_explosions.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checked, all fine, set to "true". Snori (talk) 07:54, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Dry ice network" refers to some music-themed website rather than an info source about dry ice. I am inexperienced about editing wikipedia so would rather leave it to somrone who knows what they are doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:A812:AF00:C811:2CBB:36CB:7210 (talk) 17:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

dead links in "Dangers"

exteranl links [2] and [3] are both dead. external link [4] reference a case study about injuries resumted from a glass dry ice bomb (sharpnells). external link [5] is irrelevant to dry ice bombs and reffer to the dangers of carbon dioxide in general (it's relevant to dry ice bombs as much as it's relevant for carbonated beverages). 93.172.75.7 (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Return of the Popular media page

Someone removed the popular media page from this article without any discussion beforehand (as the last discussion was in 2007), on the basis of it being "unsourced". I think it should return 92.237.155.25 (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]