Black Powder Fouling

Retrieved: 12/12/2014
Last Post: 07/26/2009

It looks like a have all the right stuff for an experiment. That being the components and a digital camera that seems to take good close up pix.

What I plan to do is fire 30 rounds through a revolver and show before and after photos of what the inside of the barrel looks like with different powders.

So, I'll be using Winchester brass, and different brands of 2fg (Goex, Swiss and Schutzen) I may just do this with some subs as well becasue I have some 777 and APP on hand.

The question it, what to do about bullet lube, primers and maybe even vloume or powder.

John Boy
March 06, 2009

Virgil, be sure to determine the Relative Humidity/Temperature on the days that you do the tests. Black powder being hygroscopic will have different fouling: below RH 30% - Around 40% and higher than 40%. Look at Dutch Bill's posts on this thread... http://www.theopenrange.net/forum/index.php?topic=5258.msg39942#msg39942

Be tough, but if you could test all the powders on the same day with the weather being approximately the same - the test results would be more uniform

No suggestions on lube - primers and powder volume as long as the tests use all of the same. Be sure to patch the bores with dry patches too

Smokin Guns John
March 07, 2009

Good idea. Photographic documentation of different powders and granulations showing different amounts of fouling.

Just thinking, since you'll be shooting, you might also keep track of accuracy as fouling effects accuracy. Shoot paper, and each time you before you reload the pistol, photo the target? Or maybe shoot a fresh target with each reload? Not only would you demonstrate the fouling in the barrel, you would also demonstrate the effects on accuracy.

As far as cartridge assembly, it would be good to try and use all the same components as is possible: bullet design and weight, primers, casings, and yes, the lube. The big difference will be the powder charge in each batch of ammunition.

Granted, record keeping gets a bit tedious and will take some more time to accomplish, but provides a lot more information.

I'm looking forward to seeing your results, already.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 07, 2009

As for the lube... that introduces residue all by itself so lube choice is critical. I have some mixed thoughts here...

We know adding lube to bullets adds to the residue, yet it helps with reducing fouling shot after shot and helps with accuracy. So, I plan to do this with lubed bulets.

What lube though? SPG? 50/50 bees wax & Crisco? tough choice.

Lars
March 07, 2009

Roundly second the suggestion of shooting groups on paper. Pictures are nice but, groups are the functional criteria.

Unfortunately, both are subject to vagarities of how well developed each load is for the gun actually used -- which brings up all the issues of effectiveness of lube, is there enough lube for the fouling with that powder, bullet weight, diameter and type, hardness of lead alloy, sturdyness of crimp, etc. etc. Controlling at least these variables is something you apparently are going to do.

For lube I would go with SPG, unless cost rules it out, except perhaps with AAP. Hate to see you do all that work, just to find out the lube was not up to it.

Also second John Boy's suggestion to record best data available for humidity and air temperature. I would even go so far as to attempt keeping all ammo at same temperature.

Virgil Ray Hality

March 07, 2009

John Boy thanks for the link. The Relative Humidity/Temperature will be impossible to keep consistent across multiple days so I will have to try to do as much as I can on one day. I have 7 44-40 Uberti revolvers with very similar barrel/cylinder dimensions so I can test 7 different batchs of 30 rounds each on one day. I'll have to noodle on this as it will take some basic planning so I get different target sets and such.

let me know if this picture is visible: http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

Yep, the picture shows up. The problem is going to be depth of field. With an extreme closeup looking down the bore like in the picture, most of the bore is going to be out of focus.

Lars
March 07, 2009

Some photo suggestions that maybe are useful.

1) Use absolutely smallest apeture possible on lense. This may require really solid rest for camera and gun, as well as long exposure times.

2) Experiment with lighting till you find some combination that does not glare out part of the barrel.

3) Consider taking photo from both ends of barrel, if you can. I know, twice as much work, just to get pictures.

4) Perhaps take photos after 5 or more shots with each load. Maybe just down muzzle as far as focus is good.

Getting photos to show just what you see can be demanding of technique -- watch a professional forensic photog sometime.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 07, 2009

I'll do the best with the camera I have boys. It will be a trip and playing with a tripod is on the list. So is some expirimenting with how to light the bore without too much glare. This ain't easy and all I have is Fuji Coolpix.

Anyway, I now have 180 pieces of Winchester 44-40 brass primed and ready with CCI 300 LP primers.

The next task is "the bullet" I have Mav-D and 427666 on order, I may have to wait a tad. I need to decide on the lube.

My top 3 choices are 50/50 bees wax/lamb tallow; store bought SPG; and a 50/50 Bees wax/Canola mix. i do believe I need to noodle this around a little. Comments would help.

Lou Graham
March 07, 2009

I'd go with the SPG for lube. Everybody knows what it is and what it does. It's always the same. I don't know about you but when I make a batch of lube, it's not real precise. I just kind of eyeball it on the 50/50 mix.

Ranch 13
March 07, 2009

If you need to buy lube, then I'ld recommend Sage Brush Alox. www.sageoutfitters.com. If you have SPG on hand , then I'ld think that to be better than a homemade brew.

One thing you might want to ponder upon. Schueten 2f powder kernels are closer in size to Goex 3f, so there may be some difference in pressures (fouling), and probably velocity when you compare even weights of the European and the USA bilt powders.

Sounds like an interesting test, and looking forwards to seeing the results you come up with.

Dutch Bill
March 07, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality on March 07, 2009
I'll do the best with the camera I have boys. It will be a trip and playing with a tripod is on the list. So is some expirimenting with how to light the bore without too much glare. This ain't easy and all I have is Fuji Coolpix.

Virgil,

I don't want to be a wet blanket here but I wouldn't hold out too much hope for the Fugi Coolpix.

I have a FugiFilm FinePix 3800 that is about 4 years old. That one has the big thing around the lens that you can use to hold filters, etc. I bought a 3X magnification lens that screws onto that big thing. Now I can photograph pollen on bumble bees on the wife's flowers.

Then I bought me a small one to use around here in my war on neighborhhod drug lords. A Cannon PowerShot A590.

Now both of these digital cameras have problems if there is a really big difference between the light and dark stuff being photographed. And the color rendition with the Cannon sometimes is real iffy.

Trouble is that some of the differences in bp fouling are of a nature that can't be captured by a camera.

You may have to shoot over a chronograph and see if any velocity swings are accuracy changes relate to what you see in the bore.

Fairshake
March 08, 2009

I will +1 on Bill's post about the Finepix. Finally sold mine and purchased a Nikon with Micro and 7 pix for taking the closeup stuff. I'm by no means putting down on your equipment but telling of my own experience with the Fuji. I just ordered a chronograph to give me a little more info also. Later David

Virgil Ray Hality
March 08, 2009

If I can't get some good "before" pictures, I'll likely scout around for a friend with good camera to see what I can borrow (drum up) I am not likely to spend any big dollars on camera equipment just for this exercise. So, I'll see what I end up with.

Anyway Lou and others made the case for SPG being common and understood by all, even if it is not my personal choice, so I'll have to order up a few pounds.

Ranch, I'll weight out the charges and keep track of that as well. Thanks for that reminder.

Now Bill, what kind of differences in BP fouling don't show up or can't be captured by a camera? I know this is the dark side but... things you can see that can't be caught on film makes for an evil twist on the dark side.

As for todays exercise, I justculled out just over 200 MAV-D as cast bullets un-lubed bullets and set them aside. All these bullets weigh between 199.5 grains to as much as 200.5 grains. This should be tight enough for my work since accuracy as 10-15 yards is all I am thinking about.

Last unfortunate point about chronographs... the range I have access to where I can shoot BP is not likely going to let me use a chronograph. I'll either find a different place or skip the chronograph.

Dutch Bill
March 08, 2009

I am trying first to figure out why a shooting range might not allow the use of a chronograph.

I belong to a gun club just outside of this town about 2 miles from where Daniel Boone was born. A fair number of the shooters use chronographs to work up target loads. A large portion of the membership are competition shooters. Some using the AR and other using the MI. Bp shhoters such as myself are the bastard kids they hide in the closet when the REAL shooters show up.

But in working up accurate handloads for their high-price competition rifles some figure a chronograph is a must.

I used to use a Pact Professional that was given to me by the Elephant Black Powder Company. When that folded I shipped it back and then purchased CED Millennium repleat with the IR screens.

With the bp rifle I have to run the skyscreens out to the full length of the cables. That being 15 feet. I still get crud splattered on the skyscreens.

With both the Pact and the CED I have had problems that at certain times of the day during certain times of the year the shades over the photocells in the skyscreens does not keep out direct sunlight. That will prevent start or start readings. One guy at the club clamps the skyscreens on the paint can shelf on an old step ladder then clamps an umbrella on the other side to shade both skyscreens.

Me? I have a big white trash bag that gets clipped over the skyscreens with two dowels to expand the shade over the screens.

The skyscreens have plastic lens that direct light down onto a photocell. Direct sunlight will wash them out. They cannot detect the slight change in light as the bullet passes over the slot in the skyscreen above the individual photocell. These photocells work just like the so-called "cat eye" flame detector safety in a home heating unit that burns fuel oil.

The first thing about bp fouling in the bore is an understanding of the basic function of the patch or bullet lube.

No lube can actually reduce the amount of powder fouling left in the bore. Some may increase it a slight bit but NONE can reduce or eliminate the fouling in any measurable degree. I beat that horse to death in my 28" barrel ML rifle with a bunch of lubes.

The actual function of the patch or bullet lube is to act as a release agent. If you shoot bp in my .50 ML with just a dry atch the bore fouling feels like it is glued to the bore walls when you run another patch or patched ball down the bore. With this "release agent" thing think of how they spray tire molds before molding a car or truck tire. Or spray mold release into the mold halves when they injection mold plastic parts or blow mold plastic bottles.

To lay some ground work here.

When you shoot black powder 55% of the products of combustion will be solid particulate matter and 45% will be gases. So the bore fouling issue, in part, becomes one of how much of the total solid particulate matter is blown out of the bore suspended in the "spent" propelling gases versus how much is deposited on the bore walls.

First, powders.

In the 28" barrel ML rifle I shot GOEX, KIK, Elephant, Schuetzen and Swiss. I had developed an accurate method of recovering the fouling from each round fired. Running ten shots and then weighing the residue and working it out to per shot fired. I found that with the air temperature at 30 to 40 degrees I saw between 2.5 and 2.8% of the original charge weight as powder fouling left in the bore. There was NO great difference between the powders as to how much of the original charge weight was left in the bore after firing the shot. But when I repeated this same work with the same cans of powder several days later when the air temp hit 80 to 85 degrees I was looking at 14 to 15% of the original charge weight as fouling in the bore. The same cans of powder looked like totally different powders!

Black powder combustion is in no way effected/affected by pressures produced during the firing of the gun. But the combustion chemistry can be effected by the combustion temperatures. The proportions of potassium sulfate and potassium carbonate produced may vary.

Another thing is how hot the gases get behind the bullet/ball as it travels up the bore before exiting the muzzle. When the air temp was down around 30 to 40 F I was looking at bore fouling where the particle size looked like baby powder coating the bore. Then shooting at 80 to 85 F I had fouling on the swab that looked like tarry matter. Under the microscope I could see that the particle size of the fouling had increased dramatically. The key in this is that the solid particulate matter is mainly potassium carbonate, or potash. It has a melting temperature of 1630 degrees C. as the powder combustion gas temperatures get up close to that point you start to see agglomeration, fusing and melting of the particles of potash in the fouling.

ML shooters look at bore fouling almost entirely in how easy is it to load the next shoot without wiping or how difficult is it to get a damp patch down the bore and back out. A lot of this "feel" with the between shot swab involves how readily soluble is the fouling in the bore. If the fouling quickly dissolves into the water held in the swab it goes down the bore easy and comes back out easy. If the fouling has gotten into this agglomeration, fushion and melting thing the fouling does not readily dissolve into the patch and the patch comes back out looking like it had been dipped in tar.

You must understand that 99.99% of the residue left by black powder is soluble in water. A good part of how a shooter views the fouling depends on how quickly it dissolves in a damp cleaning swab.

Now when you guys shoot BP in your cartridge guns the lube must still act as a release agent, and a darned good one to be truely effective. If the fouling from a previous shots tends to stick to the bore it interferes with the movement of the bullet in the next round fired. If the second bullet sees a bit more drag on the walls you may see a bit higher velocity. Then a 3rd bullet might just scrub the bore walls clean. Then the next one might start the whole thing over again.

So if the bullet lube does not do a real good job in this release agent action you will see this with velocities over the chronograph. What you see on the targets will depend on the ranges you are shooting at.

Don't know if I skipped anything here but I think I covered the major points.

Been a fun couple of days around here. Mr. Drug Lord down the street ain't said another word that I should stay in the house. Course he got to see M. Smith and Mr. Wesson with me!

Fairshake
March 10, 2009

Thanks for a great post there Bill. The info will help as I just today received my new CED M2 and will be better prepared in my use of it.

Wills Point Pete
March 10, 2009

I'm not near smart enough to be any kind of an expert but I've seen different fouling on my shootin' irons with the same cartridge and powder depending on how the ammo is loaded. Whether or not it's been drop tubed, how much compression, a Big Lube bullet or one with a grease cookie. A card wad betwixt the powder and bullet also makes a difference.

While your test, Virgil, will give some information and information is always useful, be careful. You may become addicted and spend the rest of your life testing the difference between one eighth inch compression and one sixteenth. Does a grits filler add to the fouling or does it "sandblast" some of it out?

Good luck, I'll watch this space as you progress. But please, with all the possible variations, make sure your friends and family are ready to do an intervention.

Dutch Bill
March 11, 2009

I neglected to mention.

Any time you do this kind of work ALWAYS note the lot numbers of the brand of powder being used. With some brands you can see a good bit of lot to lot difference in both velocities and bore fouling. This is sort of a CYA thing. You might post your results and another shooter using a different lot of the same brand gets different results and turn around and brand you an idiot. Keeping track of lot numbers and the production periods/dates is also a good way of looking at just how big lot to lot variations can be. And if you run into an exceptionally good lot you might then be able to track down a large supply of it. Years back I had worked with several competition shooters along these lines.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 13, 2009

The reason I may not be able to use a chrony is that it is out of the ordinary. The range where I usually go, has had a rash of idiots shoot stuff that should not be shot, so having things out of the ordinary may be taboo. I have to find out. Otherwise, I have to travel quite a ways to find outdoor range access.

I have a beta chrony and it works rather well for catching bullet speed, so I am all set there, and 15 feet is what I have been using to avoid gas and splatter problems. To shade both skyscreens why not just use some white construction paper and cloth pins from CVS?

OK, given the strong feeling about lube as a release agent, I'll use lubed bullets (except for APP).

Hmmm, double the ambient temperature and the fouling goes way up

Dutch Bill March 13, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality on March 13, 2009
The reason I may not be able to use a chrony is that it is out of the ordinary. The range where I usually go, has had a rash of idiots shoot stuff that should not be shot, so having things out of the ordinary may be taboo. I have to find out. Otherwise, I have to travel quite a ways to find outdoor range access.

I have a beta chrony and it works rather well for catching bullet speed, so I am all set there, and 15 feet is what I have been using to avoid gas and splatter problems. To shade both skyscreens why not just use some white construction paper and cloth pins from CVS?

OK, given the strong feeling about lube as a release agent, I'll use lubed bullets (except for APP).

Hmmm, double the ambient temperature and the fouling goes way up

Virgil Ray Hality
March 14, 2009

OK, here are the powders I plan to use:
http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

I removed the pix of the bores and added in pix of powder flasks and pix of the lot numbers on the cans. It should got like this:

Swiss 2fg Lot No: 171.106
Schuetzen 2fg Lot No: 12.02.2008 WP-08B0020
Goex 2fg Lot No: 02 29 07JY17D
APP 2fg Lot No: 609132
Schockey's Gold 2fg Lot No: 809302
Pyrdex Select RS (=2fg) Lot No: 8/022/7274

Some of these were tough to read so if you think the lot numbers above are not correct, just post it so.

As for a chemical that produces water, I was thinking something else ... I have to check my notes.

rawdog
March 14, 2009

Quote from: Dutch Bill on March 13, 2009
With the thing about ambient temperature and bore fouling. It really has nothing to do with actual powder combustion chemistry as far as chemical combustion reactions go. It is mainly related to the particle size of the residue produced. real fine particles get carried along in the gasses. Larger, heavier particles do not so more is left in the bore. I use river gravel bars as an example. We have one about a city block long in the river that runs through this town. The upstream head of the gravel bar has bigger pebbles than the downstream end of the bar. The smaller ones are easier for the river to carry longer distances.

One of the early perplexities was that different experimenters got different results when they would analyze the combustion products, more than could be explained by difffering proportions of starting ingredients, though the composition of the charcoal was probably a strong variable. Noble and Able got results that were quite different in proportions of pottasium cabonate and sulfate, etc, that others. IIRC it was Debus in 1882 who first gave a theory that there were two phases, a combustion phase that went very fast and a further reduction phase that goes more slowly and takes the combustion products and gives further reactions depending on environment.

Thus, if the powder were set off in a closed bomb the complete set of both reactions might occur before gathering the physical results and analyzing them. Howeer, if the powder is set off in a gun the second reaction does not have as much time to complete before the environment (whether wet or dry, hot or cold) interacts and changes the reaction still further.

Is this your sense of it? and,

Is there something in this scheme that would explain why sometimes you might get "bigger pebbles" and sometimes "smaller pebbles?"

[edit] I went and looked to check my memory... an excellent reprisal of the development of understanding of chemistry of BP is given in Urbanski, "The Chemistry and TEchnology of Explosives" which can be downloaded at this link http://www.scribd.com/doc/6294444/Chemistry-and-Technology-of-Explosives-vol- 3-Urbanski about page 335.

Dutch Bill
March 14, 2009

If you read Nobel & Able you saw where they attempted to measure gas temperatures in their closed bombs using strips of pure metals with known melting points.

They found that a cannon powder would be expected to produce a maximum combustion temperature of 1800 C.

Then they found that a sporting powder would produce combustion temperatures of 2200 C.

The calculated maximum combustion temperature of black powder is usually listed at 2350 C.

Those temperatures were obtained with full pressure bomb charges. Which yielded the maximum temperatures.

Now in the gun you have a projectile moving away from the point of rest while the powder is undergoing combustion. You would not expect to see maximum temperatures under this condition.

When I looked at BP fouling in my ML rifle under different charges and different ambient temperatures I noticed something never seen before in writings on blasck powder. I noted that are low to moderate charge volumes and cool ambient temperatures the particle size of the recovered fouling was so small that I could not see individual particles of it when I looked at the samples under the 200 magnification microscope I hook into this computer.

Then as I increased charge volumes or shot at higher ambient temperatures I would see what looked like tiny white snowballs mixed in with the dark grey to black mass.

Then as I increased charge volumes somemore or shot at even higher ambient temperatures these snoballs would grow in size and some would become as clear as glass.

Then increase the charge again or shoot at a higher ambient and these balls would grow in size and all would be glass-like in appearance.

On a gut feeling I took some technical grade potassium carbonate powder and spread it on a steel plate. Then took a propane torch and heated the underside of the plate. The potassium carbonate would melt into a clear liquid. Looked like water on the plate. When cooled it was simply clear and very hard.

So I looked up the melting point of potassium carbonate. That being shown at 891 C.

The melting point of potassium sulfate being shown as 581 C.

I sort of assumed that the clear balls were melted and fused potassium carbonate. I had tried to melt tech grade potassium sulfate the same way but could not get it to form a clear liquid.

But I did figure that the formation of the balls in the fouling was related to the gas temperature behind the projectile. It appeared that during powder combustion some of the particles would be hot enough to agglomerate. This would be seen a the white "fluffy" snowballs which given more heat would begin to melt. Then the larger they got the more of them would be seen in the bore fouling simply because they became to large and too heavy to remain suspended in the gases for any length of time.

At high ambient, say 90 F, and with a large charge the recovered fouling looked like foundry slag under the microscope or the clinker ash that used to be kicked out of steam locomotive fireboxes.

rawdog
March 14, 2009

Very good stuff in your answer. I think I can see where you are going....in a 100% load density closed bomb like Noble and Abel I could expect around 96,000psi and 2350degC, but in a gun I get around 6,000 to 16,000psi peak and the powder mostly consumed in between 1 and 2milliseconds, while the bullet exits in about 4 milliseconds from a 28" barrel or more barrel. These numbers come from my spreadsheet simulations using Ingalls' textbook and the math of a adiabatic expansion of the gases pushing a given mass bullet up the barrel.

I do not track the temperature as a function of bullet position in that simulation, but that could be done. Basically, of course, as any gas expands (as it does pushing the bullet out of the way) it cools a given and calculable amount. Therefore you are pointing out another important difference between the closed bomb and a gun is the pressure and temp of the reaction.

What is more, since all the powder is not consumed at once some of it is consumed in higher pressure and higher temp environment that other of consumed later as the hot gases cool adiabatically expanding.

What is not clear to me is how this "average" temp of the mass affects the micro-localized temp of a given micro-mass of a grain combusting.....I would assume its localized temp is still near 2350, though with a strong gradient nearby.

Not being a chemist, I am a little helpless to speculate too much.

I look forward to your resumption, and thanks!

Dutch Bill March 14, 2009

In the thing about cooling gases during the firing in a gun you must also think about heat transferred to the bores surfaces. While the projectile dwell time in the bore is only 4 or 5 millisecnds there is a loss of heat to the bore walls.

When I got my hands on some of the first Swiss powder brought into the U.S. I was shocked at how hot the Trade Rifle barrel got after 5 quick shots. More than what I was used to seeing with GOEX or Elephant. I knew that the Swiss powder produced higher gas temperatures from what I had read and from my powder making experiments.

I had once gotten my hands on some duPont Eagle Brand Sporting Powder made around 1890 at the original duPont works near Wilmington. Some 3F Eagle Brand. So in the basement I primed my flintlock pan with some. Tripped the lock. The flash in the pan was soo fast that I could not see the light. But I could feel the wave of radiant heat given off by the powder buring in the pan. When I did this with GOEX I could see a fireball grown and then collapse over the pan.

So how much of the heat evolved (calories) is lost to the bore walls from the gases evolving off the surfaces of the burning grains of powder? I know from my work way back with Polymer Corp. and their fluidized bed coating process work that this rate of heat transfer into the metal has a temperature difference function that comes into play in how fast heat transfers from the gas into the surface of the metal.

If the surface of a burning grain of powder is actualy at or near the theoritical temperature of combustion the gradient going away from the grain must be very steep indeed.

Something I failed to mention about bore fouling.

Back when the first Chinese-made Lidu came onto the market out of Corman's the 3F was about the size of 1F and there 2F was more like artillery primer powder. When I shot the 2F there was almost no fouling in the bore and part of the charge was still burning as it left the muzzle. Keeping the gas temperature up for the entire length of the limited how much came out of the gases on the bore walls and of course gas temperatures were low enough so that there was minimal agglomeration and fusing of the solid particulate matter.

rawdog
March 14, 2009

Quote from: Dutch Bill on March 14, 2009
In the thing about cooling gases during the firing in a gun you must also think about heat transferred to the bores surfaces. While the projectile dwell time in the bore is only 4 or 5 millisecnds there is a loss of heat to the bore walls.

Yes, absolutely. And, this heat transfer affects the muzzle velocity some too, as any lost heat energy must. From thermodynamics of gasses, during an adiabatic expansion the heat lost to internal energy state (drop of temp) is taken care of by the exponent (gamma-1), where

New pressure = original pressure * [(original volume)/(new volume)] ^(gamma- 1)

where gamma = ratio of specific heats for the gasses ~ 1.32 (given by Ingalls, 1894)

Thus, the pressure on the bullet base, and therefore the force, and therefore the accelleration, and therefore the distance traveled in the barrel, and then resulting in a new pressure, etc, etc, can be computed instant by instant as the bullet travels the length of the barrel. Plot the pressures, distance traveled, and velocity all versus time, and that is how my spreadsheet works. I have a decent model of grain burn, but I do have not figured out how to model the inflammation versus time. It is not absolutely necessary, but it is not totally insignificant either (as opposed to my earlier "expressed hope" )

But since there is even more heat lost (to the barrel) than is represented by the adiabatic expansion equation, a common way to deal with this is to find an "effective" exponent value of gamma by experimentation and curve fitting, and gamma becomes a little larger than 1.32. Interestingly this varies with caliber (interior barrel area versus volume is less for larger calibers). I have tried to figure this out but have not worked on it lately.

So, if the load is heavier, the temp stays higher longer in the barrel and the fouling is "small pebbles?" And if the load is lighter it cools adiabatically to a point in the barrel where it leaves "larger pebbles?"

Seems like the difference in a hot ambient of 100degF or a cold ambient of 20degF would be miniscule compared to the kinds of drop from 2350deC that we are talking about... Still not sure I understand how ambient could be that much effect...

And, can you tell me (while I am thinking about it) what is the "red" fouling I sometimes see bit of? And what conditions favor it?

Dutch Bill
March 15, 2009

Red fouling,

At one time I thought that was condensed unreacted sulfur. Sufur that had melted but not converted into a compound. But then when I began to collect bore fouling to see how much of it was water-soluble I had to change my view.

The red beads or flakes are something condensed out of the gases. That is the only thing that would explain why they are not always seen.

In some lots of Elephant I would see this red stuff as very large flakes, usually something akin to long slivers. Then other times they would be perfect beads. Then sometimes I would see them and under different shooting conditions there were none to be seen.

When I got into the thing of ambient air temperatures and amounts of bore fouling I was puzzled, and still am puzzled. Given the gas temperatures in the bore I don't see how 50 or 60 degrees difference in air temperature can make such a difference. At 30 degrees F one can of powder would give 2.5% of the charge weight as revovered bore fouling and then when the same can is shot at 85 F the figure jumps to 15% of the charge weight.

I gave up on the project in disgust. Comments made by some ML people just turned me off. It would have involved a lot more work and since I was doing it out of pocket I questioned the worth of it all.

I would have set up a shooting session using powder kept below freezing in a cooler and then powder kept very warm in another cooler. Looking at the extremes of powder temperature at the time of loading.

I had looked at it in terms of barrel temperature but that did not have near the effect as changes in air temperature. The powder at the time of loading was at ambient air temperature.

That raised a question if the temperature of the powder grains at the time of ignition and intial burn has something to do with global gas temperatures in the bore. It was the only thing that made sense to me.

Let me run this one by you.

In some of the texts I have read they talk about potassium nitrate in the black powder. That its release of oxygen is controlled wich is why it is used where a "uniformity of action" is crucial.

Now this control is that potassium nitrate melts at 333 C and then decomposes to evolve oxygen at 400 C.

You might say that in this "system" you must first "pump" heat into it before it creates more heat to continue and expand the action.

The Arberdeen Proving Ground strand burning high-speed photography showed this when they observed the end of the strand melting and kicking particles of ingredients up into the combustion zone.

So does the temperature of the powder have an effect on this pumping heat into the powder in order to release more oxygen to promote/support additional combustion. The thing about pumping heat into it to get more out of it may be in some way effected by the temperature of the powder as it begins to go through this process. Calories in versus calories out and how many calories per unit of weight is required and will the temperature of the grains play a part in a rate of heating prior to feeding the combustion zone.

That is what I had hoped to look at simply by shooting charges that varied greatly in temperature at the time of firing.

Like I said. A lot of work and some expense and who would understand or even care. In the ML crowd I was dealing with a bunch who figured that everything made before 1850 was the product of beating it between two rocks.

rawdog
March 15, 2009

Thanks DutchBill, enjoyed reading your response.

I noticed some red-streak fouling bits near the muzzle of a .50cal last weekend, 70gr3F Goex PRB. The weather was dry and it was about 75degF.

those red-bits are not homogenous to the rest of the fouling, but I wonder if taken by themselves they are homogenous thru a glob or sliver of it... I mean, if it were sectioned it might show to be red on the surface and not homogenous thru out... but I don't know.

If that were the case, perhaps it could be unreacted sulfur that "floated" to the surface as a globule of fouling sublimated. And, then, when you did your solubility experiement, there would be so little actual sulfur that it would be miniscule? Again, I don't know, just stream-of-consciousness speculation.

It seems to me that I have read somewhere that the red fouling was usually associated with cold weather. Again, with this fouling I observed that never left the barrel, it is hard to imagine how ambient could influence, as you have also said Unless it is thru the starting temp.

Your description of the combustion process seems very consistent wtih what I have read (and I have only read BRL and other tech literature within the past 6months, so I am still new to the literature). It would seem to me that the entire process proceeds serially from events whose temp is high enough to make ambient relatively insignificiant. When you whack a cap or primer or snap a flint across steel you are sending relatively high temp particles out, for which the ambient is insignificant. In the case of a flinter, these high temp steel particles fall into powder and flash a high temp infrared wave into the main powder, and it would be interesting to be able to measure what THAT induced temp is, but experience seems to say that ambient temp is not a great variable (not so for moisture!). One might suspect that cold air with higher moisture content would be an issue though...

Virgil Ray Hality
March 15, 2009

As I went about pan lubing the bullets for the BP rounds in my test, I started to wonder abour card wads for the cartridges.

Does anyone care to offer a comment? Should I add a card wad or not?

I know APP and Schockley's Gold say use no lube, does Pyrodex require a lubed bullet?

rawdog
March 15, 2009

Quote from: Dutch Bill on March 15, 2009
Red fouling, At one time I thought that was condensed unreacted sulfur.

I went to Nobel and Abel's 1875 paper available online, and in their list of the fouling composition is listed KCNS at 2.4% by weight for a given cannon powder. I actually googled all the listed fouling components to see what the given appearance is for each chemical. Under potassium thiocynate, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_thiocyanate is this passage:

"Dilute aqueous KSCN is occasionally used for moderately realistic blood effects in film and theater. It can be painted onto a surface or kept as a colourless solution. When in contact with ferric chloride solution (or Iron Chloride), the product of the reaction is a blood red solution. Thus This chemical is often used to create the effect of 'stigmata'. Because both solutions are colourless, they can be placed separately on each hand. When the hands are brought into contact, the solutions react and the effect looks remarkably like stigmata."

So here is a thought: could some leftover fouling in a barrel be forming an iron chloride amongst some iron oxide perhaps, and this is combining with KSCN to form the red compound we are searching for?

YHS, rawdog (sorry Virgil RH, I have no experience and no idea about your question. I hope someone with knowlege will chime in on that.)

page 3
Virgil Ray Hality
March 15, 2009

OK, I think I will make 30 cartridges for Black Powders as follows:

1.9cc 2fg (Swiss, Schuetzen and Goex)
Big Lube bullets weighing 200 grains +/-0.5 grains
Bullets lubed with SPG
Bullets sized at 0.428
Winchester 44-40 shell casing
CCI 300 LP primers

For the Substitute Powders the loads will be as follow:

1.9cc 2fg (APP, Shockey's Gold and Pyrodex Select/RS)
Big Lube bullets weighing 200 grains +/-0.5 grains
Bullets will be unlubed
Bullets sized at 0.428
Winchester 44-40 shell casing
CCI 300 LP primers

I have to figure average weight of CC of each powder used and post it here for the records.

I have to decide on card wad or not, and I am leaning toward no card wad as that would provide a mechanical advantage to the black powders with no apparent advantage to subs. None that I could see anyway.

And, oh yes, find a cheap source of Ascorbic Acid (for another project).

Dutch Bill March 15, 2009

When I looked into the ascorbic acid based powders I bought two pounds of ascorbic acid on the Internet. Cost me about $15 per pound for the good stuff.

Of course you coud try grinding up vitamin C tablets.

Dutch Bill
March 15, 2009

Quote from: rawdog on March 15, 2009
I am hoping you have not overlooked my last two responses, vis a vis, red fouling, at the bottom of page 2 of this thread. I am anxious to know whether you think the KNCS + either rust or iron chloride could be the red fouling.

That is the most logical explanation for it that I have seen to date.

Speaking of chloride.

I never gave any thought to the red beads/flakes being related to any iron in the powder.

You mention chloride.

Some sources of potassium nitrate are nearly chloride free. With the potassium nitrate out of Haifa Chemical the chloride content was measured as just a few ppm. In the case of Vicksburg Chemical Company's potassium nitrate it was at the minimum 0.5%, but I suspect it might have been a good bit higher.

By 1968 we see the beginning of the process whereby potassium chloride is converted to potassium nitrate via a reaction with nitric acid. This basic concept had a number of ways of doing it so each way of doing it was covered under a patent rather than the basic chemical reaction. Some processes were more effecient than others. The one used by Vicksburg was claimed to give about 98% conversion effeciency. The Haifia process was less effecient in the conversion so they had to second pass or reflux the conversion process which gave a higher purity final product.

Dutch Bill
March 15, 2009

Quote from: rawdog on March 15, 2009
I thought that wikipedia comment might be it. I did not think about potassium chloride impurity but that is probably important too. I was thinking more of something in the charcoal probably giving the chlorine... but I don't recall that as a listed ingredient.

Normally you will see black powder ingredients written up as if they are in an analytical grade state of purity. Such is not the case.

Take sulfur for instance.

At one time the "gunpowder" companies imported raw sulfur from Italy. The purification process involved melting the sulfur and pouring into cylindrical molds. As it cooled and solidified the impurities would separate and form a band of dross. Once cool and solid the mold would be removed. The impurities simply cut off with a saw. The cut off impurities sections then being sold. The main impurity was arsenic. Used to make insecticides from about the mid- 1800's until recently.

Then we see Gulf Coast steam injection well sulfur come into use. Sold at a very high purity and acid free.

Then between high energy costs and a playing out of these wells the sulfur derived from the de-sulfurization of petroleum crude oil stocks comes into use. The crude oil derived sulfur being of lower purity than the Gulf Coast sulfur but still a good bit higher than crude sulfur mined in Italy.

There is a wide range in chemistry in the various charcoals being used in black powder today. Some years back I dealt with an ATF forensic lab on trace chemicals in BP that act as built in taggants unique to each powder company. They then did a very extensive breakdown of the various charcoals being used and found some significant differences in some of the hydrocarbons found in the various chars.

So given these impurities and differences you can expect to see some variation in the chemistry of the powder residues produced.

I looked at them simply from a forensic chemistry view since the impurities have very little effect on the ballistic performance of the powder. The exception is any chloride content which makes the powder's combustion residue corrosive in varying degrees. Potassium carbonate, in the residue, may promote very light and uniform surface rusting in a poorly protected bore while chlorides will promote active pit corrosion of the bore even when a bore protecter is used.

rawdog
March 15, 2009

Again WRT red fouling: This reference

http://books.google.com/books?id=v_oMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=potassium+sulfocyanate&source=bl&ots=_j-buahTgB&sig=mC9OSyOaD77d-3orJYCH9dFpuEw&hl=en&ei=x5u9Sc2DIZiLmQfd6eyfDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA31,M1 seems to suggest that only iron oxide is necessary to produce some red color from KNCS. BTW, the wikipedia says that potassium sulfocyanate is another name for potassium thiocyanate, or KNCS. A muzzleloading rifle is most likely to have some rust in the breech area where the powder touches off and is hottest... maybe no iron chloride is required afterall...

Virgil Ray Hality
March 15, 2009

I loaded up ammo with APP and Shockley's and will save the Pyrodex for tomorrrow night. An interesting thing I noticed and I'll have to put photos in the folder. Aside from being APP and Shockley's Gold dusty, by comparison to one another these "2fg" subs look like:

APP is light gray with medium sized grains

Shockley's Gold is medium gray with large sized grains

Pyrodex is dark gray, small sized grains

Lars
March 15, 2009

Pyrodex requires same BP-lubed bullets as traditional BPs. Perhaps you were thinking of 777, which does not require BP lube, just any good lube for nitro powders. When using 777 in revolvers with small clearances between cylinder pin and cylinder, a soft lube is good assurance against cylinder binding. Actually, just some soft lube or RemOil on cylinder pin will suffice.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 16, 2009

Thanks Lars. I checked the Hogdon web site and it never really said much about the lube needed or not. Capt Baylor's boot camp said the same thing you just did. So I will craft some cartridges using Pyrodex Select with SPG lubed bullets, for the volume of the 44-40 as prescribed on the Pyrodex flask.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 16, 2009

OK, course correction, I loaded up 30 rounds with Pyrodex Select and SPG lubed bullets, so I will have restated my loads. Also, I added gun powder pictures to my albumen:

http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

Here is what I will say about the difference in powders, and I have the list ranked by visual size of grains. I did not yet load rounds with black powders. I did load up shells with the substitute powders and I noticed bridging in my funnel with APP and Shockey's Gold, I had no bridging issues at all with Pyrodex Select.

Swiss: Surprisingly small 2fg grains that were highly polished, shiny and black with no dust

Schuetzen: Small 2fg grains that were somewhat polished/shiny and black with no dust

Goex: Small 2fg grains that were somewhat polished and black with no dust

Pyrodex: Medium RS/2fg grains that were roundish gray-black with no dust

APP: Large 2fg grains (irregular sizes) that were light gray with dust

Shockey's Gold: Very large 2fg grains (irregular sizes) that were gray with much dust

Assuming this shows in the Close Up photos you will see what I mean. As for screens... I don't have any.

Restated loads for 30 cartridges for Black Powders as follows without card wad:

1.9cc 2fg (Swiss, Schuetzen and Goex)
Big Lube bullets weighing 200 grains +/-0.5 grains
Bullets lubed with SPG
Bullets sized at 0.428
Winchester 44-40 shell casing
CCI 300 LP primers

Restated loads for 30 cartridges with Substitute Powders the loads will be as follows without card wad:

1.9cc 2fg (APP and Shockey's Gold)
Big Lube bullets weighing 200 grains +/-0.5 grains
Bullets will be unlubed
Bullets sized at 0.428
Winchester 44-40 shell casing
CCI 300 LP primers

1.9cc 2fg (Pyrodex Select/RS)
Big Lube bullets weighing 200 grains +/-0.5 grains
Bullets lubed with SPG
Bullets sized at 0.428
Winchester 44-40 shell casing
CCI 300 LP primers

I still have to figure out average weight of CC of each powder used and post it here for the records.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 17, 2009

A little bit about my loading technique. I like to dump a can of powder into a bowl from about 6 inches up and I have a small fan that causes a breeze. This is how I spot dust in the powder and also get rid of as much of it as I can. Then, I use a 1.9cc scoop (Lee) and pull it through the powder and when I bring it up and level, I tap the scoop with a finger to knock off the unstable grains. This is normally how I load my cartridges for CAS using BP.

For this test, I did something a bit different. I used my scoop technique but I dropped the powder onto an electronic scale to weight the powder in the scoop. I only did this measurement about a dozen times to come up with what a scoop of powder should weight. Homing in on the median weight of a properly filled scoop. Then, for this test I used the weight for that powder as the benchmark and weight out 30 charges on my scale so that each cartridge has the same weight of powder in that set. The weight will differ by powders, the volume does not.

Each powder is loaded into cartridges for what is right for that powder. For example, one 1.9cc scoop of APP weighs out on my scale at about 25 grains. This 1.9cc scoop of powder also fills the cartridge such that adding a bullet compresses the powder slightly. So, to be consistent for the set of cartridges filled with APP, each charge was weighed to 25 grains. Since APP has irregular grains I felt this to be most appropriate.

I did the same measurement with Shockey's Gold and settled in on 25 grains as well, filling the case properly.

When I loaded the Pyrodex Select, a 1.9cc scoop came out at 20 grains and also filled the case properly.

We shall see what 1.9cc weighs for Goes 2fg tonight.

Dutch Bill
March 17, 2009

When you compare volume to weigh with the subs you get a whole different set of data compared to BP.

APP the other version of it sold as Shockey's Gold, Pyrodex and 777 are NOT press densified as is black powder.

What are called "grains" in these subs are nothing more than massive agglomerations of ground ingredients.

With black powder the product from the wheel mill is run through a powder press that increases its density. Then when they "polish" the grains in the glazing barrels there is a slight increase in density.

In the explosives industry they measure "bulking density" or "apparent density" and express the results as grams per cubic centimeter, or g/cc.

With the agglomerated grain subs you usually see a "bulk", or "loading" density at around 0.75 g/cc.

In dealing with the various brands of black powder you this this "loading" density around 1.00 g/cc on up to 1.10 g/cc or a little higher.

Not get too wraped up in visual grain sizing with the subs. Their designations as 2F or 3F are strictly arbitrary and bear almost no relationship to the grain sizing of black powder.

And with black powder. When a powder, such as the Swiss, is polished to a high degree the roundness and smoothness of the grains gives something of an optical illusion as to their actual size.

Lars
March 17, 2009

With both Pyrodex and 777 FFg I used a conversion factor of 0,734. That is 22,0 grains by weight of either, divided by 0,734, gives almost exactly the 30 grains BP volume that Hodgdon gives for Pyrodex in 44-40 with 200 grain bullet.

I arrived at the 0,734 number by filling a 100 grain muzzleloader powder measure with both Goex FFg and Pyrodex/777. A full 100 grain measure of Pyrodex/777 ffg weighed an average of 73,4 grains. Cptn Baylor gives nearly identical number on his CAS BP loading webbpages.

As you can see, IF either Pyrodex or 777 were densified as traditional BP is, it would be a more powerful propellent.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 18, 2009

Yeah, Dutch Bill, and Lars, right on! I'll call them substitute powders little pebbles or something Anyway, don't get too concerned on my weight, it is just to keep the cartridges in any one set consistent, in as much as I can.

Anyway, the Swiss was highly polished and sure was visually impressive in as far as powder goes.

To match with the idea that BP is more dense, when I threw Goes 2fg tonight, it came to about 28 grains for 1.9cc. So, certainly heavier than the substitute powders. I have to add that my scooping technique was also very consistent and was never off by more than +/- 0.2 grains, so I did not get much use out of my powder trickler to get to 28 grains per cartridge. I could not say the same for APP and Shockey's which were a bit less consistent in weight when I scooped them.

Anyway, 30 Goex cartridges manufactured per my above specs. Tomorrow Schuetzen! page 4
Virgil Ray Hality
March 19, 2009

I loaded up 30 cartridges with Schuetzen! The natural 1.9cc charge seems to scoop out right around 30 grains, so, I loaded 30 grains by weight in each cartridge. The combination of components is as described above. Once again, this made a very pleasent crunch/squish noise as the bullets were seated slightly compressing the powder, as did the other charges. Norice that this powder was a tad more dense than Goex.

I did notice a disturbing, or rather disappointing cloud of dust as I poured out the flask of Schuetzen into my bowl. I did not see this same level of dust from the Goex! So, I was a bit disappointed to see that... I guess I was expecting "no dust"!

Anyway, tomorrow... Swiss

Virgil Ray Hality
March 20, 2009

As planned 30 cartridges filled with 1.9cc of Swiss which had a weight of 31 grains. No fuss no dust. Very consistent scoop-ability, usually within -0.3 grains to +0.1 grains.

The next step is to photo the revolver bores. But first, I am gonna attend a match on Sunday.

Dutch Bill
March 20, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality on March 19, 2009
I did notice a disturbing, or rather disappointing cloud of dust as I poured out the flask of Schuetzen into my bowl. I did not see this same level of dust from the Goex! So, I was a bit disappointed to see that... I guess I was expecting "no dust"!

Whenever I would check a powder for dust I would place a weighed amount in a plastic peanut butter jar. Then add a clean white circular cleaning patch. Then roll and tumble the jar for 5 minutes. Usually while watching the Military Channel. Then remove the patch and mount it on white paper. That way I could get something of a comparison as to how much graphite is used in each brand.

On to dust or no dust.

This depends on how the graphite is applied to the powder grains and when it is applied.

In some cases the powder plant adds the graphite to the powder right before it is screened. The graphite increases the pounds per hour output of the screening unit.

According to du Pont records and descriptions of how graphite was applied by duPont at the old Moosic plant. And assuming that the GOEX plant at Minden still follows the duPont method of drying and polishing the powder in one operation.

With the duPont process they would tumble the powder in the polishing barrel while blowing heated air into the barrel through a hollow trunion on one end. The air exhausted out the other end of the rotating barrel through a flapper valve that had a dust catching sock attached. When the powder reached a certain point in moisture content they would stop the barrel and add the graphite. Then continue to tumble and dry it. When the moisture content of the powder reacvhed 0.5% they would inject a "puff" of steam into the air going into the barrel. The steam would dampen the surfaces of the grains which would cause the graphite to adhere strongly to the surfaces of the grains. The graphite crystals would be physically bonded to the grains' surfaces.

In doing this they could apply a heavier coating of graphite to the grains without having it dust when handled.

This "technology" was developed in the 19th century when Lammot duPont came up with the sodium nitrate blasting powder. This heavy coating of graphite gives utterly no protection against moisture. It simply keeps the polished grains of powder from sticking together forming clumps that would have to be mannually broken up.

So if the graphite is applied dry you will always see some dusting when pouring the powder any distance through the air. If the graphite is applied "in the wet" there will normally be little dusting when pouring.

Remember. The only REAL purpose of the graphite is to provide a free flowing powder. No different than adding an "anti-blocking agent" to standard table salt. Crystalline things want to stick together to form larger crystals. potassium and sodium nitrate are crystalline materials.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 21, 2009

Well, now, does graphite burn well? If not, will rolling the pwoder arouns in a sock get it off/away? Does it really matter?

Dutch Bill
March 21, 2009

Graphite does not ignite until heated to around 2000 degrees and then burns only very slowly. Remember carbon arc lamps.

Just makes cleaning the bore a bit more troublesome.

You can clean the powder by rolling it around in a sock.

If the dust is only graphite it will have no effect on how the powder performs in the gun.

In the past I had looked at a few powders under the microscope and saw minute particles of powder dust clinging to the surfaces of the grains. I had seen this in one year's production of Elphant a a few stray lots of GOEX. Now the dust may sometimes degrade accuracy. If in doubt, sock it.

Virgil Ray Hality
March 23, 2009

Uploaded to the album is a picture of the six sixguns to be used in the test. All Uberti, all slug out very very close (+/-0.0005) in bore and cylinder mouth (+/-0.001) dimensions. That is the only picture added to the album: http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

Virgil Ray Hality
March 29, 2009

I uploaded pictures to the album, of the gun bores of the six sixguns to be used in the test.

Now numbered and tagged 1 through 6 along with 6 numbered boxes of ammo.

In one picture titled "Setup" you can see how I used a small mirror to reflect light back into the bore from the breach. Its the best I could do with what I got.

http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

Now to find a day off for the big test...

Smokin Guns John
March 29, 2009

Barrel pics are actually pretty good. Looking forward to the results!

Virgil Ray Hality
April 10, 2009

I have my fingers crossed, I may be able to get in some range time today... we will see as I have not forgot about this project.

Virgil Ray Hality
April 22, 2009

New plan... work is far too busy to get time off for the foreseeable future...

So, At the next monthly match I will shoot 25 rounds of powder 1 in pistol 1 and 25 rounds of powder 2 in pistol 2 at a match.

Pros:
This is at least real.
I can relay my pistol hits/miss data from the match.
I can still make photos of the bore afterward.
I can use the same pistols for the test.
I'll have at least one witness.

Cons:
I can't do an accuracy test nor chronograph the loads.
Temperature and humidity will vary over the next 3 months.

With the left over ammo I can try to find some range time during the summer.

I feel better now.

Virgil Ray Hality
April 26, 2009

OK, it was a 5 stage match in the Pine Barrens of NJ. The temperature was 87 degrees Fahrenheit. Humidity was 25% with wind from the West at about 3 MPH. Hot, dry and a light breeze.

I missed a few because I am not that good of a shot I alternated the revolvers between right an left hand so that I did not favor either revolver or load. Not that it matters much, since this is a question of fouling and not accuracy.

Revolver 1 had the APP loads and Revolver 2 had the Shockley's Gold load.

Stage 1: I missed one shot with Revolver 1 and one shot with Revolver 2.
Stage 2: I missed one shot with Revolver 1 and two shot with Revolver 2.
Stage 3: I missed one shot with Revolver 1 and zero shot with Revolver 2.
Stage 4: I missed one shot with Revolver 1 and one shot with Revolver 2.
Stage 5: Clean.

Summary: 4 missed shots with Revolver 1 and 4 missed shots with Revolver 2. Thats a lot...

The prognosis, APP and Shockley's Gold are quite similar. APP produced slightly more smoke and even a few streamers and left the bore less clean by comparison to Shockley's Gold. Shockley's Gold produced a slightly louder bang, ever so slightly less smoke, and a slightly cleaner bore.

At clean up time, neither gun would allow much fouling to be wiped out with one dry patch. The soot on the patches was barely noticeable and some dried crumbs fell out when a dry patch was pushed through each gun. Photo link follows. Revolver 1 (APP) had almost not fouling on the muzzle crown by comparison to Revolver 2 (Shockley's Gold) which had a build up of soot on the muzzle crown.

Clean up of both guns with soapy water was quick and easy. The soot dissolved very quickly. Not at all hard work. Neither Revolver had any sort of binding problems. Both had a few flakes of lead in the bore. Really minimal leading in the lans. Overall, both powders are really very good for cowboy action shooting in my humble opinion.

Photo Link: http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5310521796419232418 LINK 404

You will see photo labled APP Rev1-A and APP Rev1-B. These are 2 different pix of the bore for Revolver 1. Photos labled SG Rev2-A and SG Rev2-B are 2 different pix of the bore for Revolver 2. They were taken with a blue LED light stuck in the breech. The shinny spots are bare metal and you will see more shinny spots in the pix of Revolver 2. Lots of soot crumbs in Revolver 1. You will also see a random sample of the spent shells. The shells loaded with Shockley's Gold were slightly cleaner.

John Boy
April 26, 2009

Virgil - looks to me that the Shockley Gold on ignition is sealing the chamber better than APP (less foul on the cartridges). Believe the fps over the chrono will add more to the differences. The resulting bore foul differences are because of the chamber sealing and more velocity with the Gold stuff

Virgil Ray Hality
April 27, 2009

My thoughts as well John Boy. And I still have 5 rounds of each to chronograph if I can find time to get out to a range. Chronographing 6 or 7 sets or 5 is a lot easier than 6 sets of 30 bullets each. I can likely do the chrongraphing on a Sunday afternoon rather than a week day.

Now I can hope for similar weather conditions next month.

Dutch Bill
April 27, 2009

I have not taken a close look at this Shockey's Gold. My gut feeling is that is not materially different than the regular APP. They are selling a name to the in-line crowd who read his articles on hunting.

Keep in mind that there is often a good bit of lot to lot difference in the ascorbic acid powders simply do to the "crude" production methods. Compareed to producing the Holy Black the methods used to produce some of the subs are best described as crude.

The only way to step up the strength of these ascorbic acid powders is to heave in some potassium perchlorate which is seen in the Black Mag version. There are several patents for adding iron oxide to the ascorbic acid powders to improve their strength but that never really seemed to work.

So to judge one against the other you really need to look at lot to lot variations in these powders. So the higher price of the Shockey powder may not really be worth it.

Lars
April 27, 2009

Of all the variou

s smokey powders allowed in SASS, APP is probably the best choice for most folks shooting in Black Powder classes. The low velocities (hence recoil) it provides, the ability to be used with any lead bullets (not just special BP bullets and lubes), the freedom from binding problems, ease of cleaning, and abundant smoke are its strong points. Its extensive use in SASS Black Powder classes reflects this. Watching fellow shooters using it for years, I have seen essentially no problems in SASS-style shooting, especially so long as full case of powder, heavy bullets and strong crimps were used.

I do not use it and likely never will simply because I prefer other smokey powders (777 FFg primarily).

page 5 Virgil Ray Hality
April 29, 2009

Interesting thoughts around the differences, Pards. I like APP and that is what I was using in my 44-40 Schofields because it was clean enough to enable these Uberti revolvers to function well. I never did care for the lack of power and flame, as my preference leans toward the Warthog side or "dark". The other advantages were quite obvious as well. One point to note is that I lad my Schofield ammo without lube of any sort.

One of the comparisons I will have to do is to run some more ammo through my 44-40 Schofields to see how APP vs Shockley's Gold and 777 compare. I did this some years ago with 3fg grades of APP and 777 and decided to use APP because it seemed cleaner although it was way less potent. I'll have to run this again later this summer to see if Shockey's Gold is worth it in this particular useage case and be a bit more particular about the test parameters. I'll have to see if I can get 2fg 777, this was one of the limiting factors last time around.

Virgil Ray Hality
May 31, 2009

Once again the local match was 5 stages in the Pine Barrens of NJ. The RH was 40% and the temperature ranged from 70 oF to 80 oF. Visibility was 8 miles and dew point was 49oF. Wind speed ranged from 0mph to 15mph NNW. It was pretty much a glorious day for shooting, a bit overcast in the morning and barely any clouds by 1pm.

I missed a few of course. Anyway, I alternated the revolvers between right an left hand so that I did not favor either revolver or load. Revolver 1 had the Swiss and Revolver 2 had the Schuetzen load. The results were:

Stage 1: I missed 2 shots with Revolver 1 and 2 shots with Revolver 2.
Stage 2: I shot clean.
Stage 3: I missed 1 shot with Revolver 1 and 0 shots with Revolver 2.
Stage 4: I missed 1 shot with Revolver 1 and 0 shots with Revolver 2.
Stage 5: I missed 0 shots with Revolver 1 and 1 shot with Revolver 2.

Summary: 4 missed shots with Revolver 1 and 3 missed shots with Revolver 2. This was not the fault of the powder or gun, I am just not a good shot with revolvers. In my defense, it is very rare that I miss rifle shots.

The initial commentary for the range:

Swiss had more recoil than Schuetzen

Swiss produced more smoke than Schuetzen (according to an observer). I did not notice much of a difference.

Both loads offered up delightful quantities of fire and sparks and substantial noise, although the Swiss was louder.

Neither Revolver had any sort of binding problems.

Lars
May 31, 2009

Good report!

Will note that your 31 grains of Swiss FFg is less than I have ever used in 44-40, which was 33-34-35 grains by weight under 200+ grain bullet, COL nominal for 44-40. This is a quite stout load from a Ruger revolver and quite loud too, with plenty of smoke. This is NOT a load for SASS speed shooters!!! As I recall, my fellow shooters 44-40 loads of Schutzen were also in the 33-35 grains by weight range. I have no recollection of differences in loudness, which I doubt I could have done as we shot well apart in line-up. The Swiss FFg loads really rattled steel targets, even at 50-75 yards from a revolver with 5,5 inch barrel. This is one of the loads giving smallest 5-shot groups from that revolver and from my 92 Rossi, right in there with very best grouping loads in these guns, nitro or smokey powder. These loads give shooter a real, first-hand experience of what it was like to fire 44-40 BP loads from latter quarter of 1800s.

While I never did the dry patch wiping or photoing you did, I did see, as you did, that powder fouling DID NOT hide the lands and grooves at all -- really just a light, uniform coating all along bore that did not hide details of rifling, basically, just as you report. My cleaning was always a patch or three with some Windex, followed with a dry patch or two to remove any moisture.

Smokin Guns John
May 31, 2009

Well done.

I went back to your original post and reviewed the entire thread. This is perhaps the best post and subsequent series of conversations I've come across: COntracst and comparison of different BPs / subs from the shooters practical perspective. Your efforts are, in my humble opinion, noteworthy: thoughtful, consistent, notes, records, pics, observations.

It gives me renewed interest to do the same thing with an '86 vintage GOEX FF.

Looking forward to the next installment.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 01, 2009

Smokin Guns John, go for it! This is one of the fun parts of sooting! Uh, er, I mean Shooting.

Lars, I like the hot loads as well, and the realism is an extra benefit. Over the years, I have found that just a tad less powder was preferable to me.

This gives me another idea! There will be a winning powder from this experiment. I also believe different Pards with different preferences can and will debate which powder "wins". All that aside, I think I will take whichever powder seems to perform "the best" for me, and run an accuracy test for optimal powder quantity with accuracy being the sole measurement and goal.

Lars
June 01, 2009

As you implied, "Different BP shooters have different perspectives." For one such, I do not consider authentic late 1800s BP 44-40 loads to be "hot", but to be standard BP loads, reference loads really. See various of 44WCF's posts on this subject.

Using group size as basis for judging and selecting loads should be quite interesting. My experience with 44-40 loads, both BPs and nitro, is that loads achieving late 1800s BP velocities generally give smallest group sizes with most any decently cast, soft lead bullets and with jacketed bullets (both of proper size for bore of gun). Getting equally small groups with reduced loads, especially at longer distances (50+ yards for both revolvers and rifles), has often required more trial and error. Getting groups good enough for monthly SASS shoots has generally been much simpler -- and some we use are pretty much useless past SASS main match distances, generally giving too large vertical spreads.

Look forward to your next testing!

Dutch Bill
June 01, 2009

To explain some of the observations.

The Swiss powder is formulated with 78 parts of potassium nitrate while the Schuetzen (and other brands) is formulated with 75 parts of potassium nitrate.

Compared to the other brands of BP the Swiss produces a lesser volume of gases at a higher temperature during powder combustion. This is also supposed to give a more rapid pressure collapse when powder combustion is completed. This greater degree of "expansive force" gives greater recoil. In the shorter barrels of pistols you don't get to see the pressure collapse prior to the projectile leaving the muzzle as you would see in the longer barrel guns. This also makes the "report" louder with the Swiss.

All of the potassium nitrate in these different powders ends up in the solid products of combustion after powder combustion. So a powder formulated with 78 parts of potassium nitrate will produce more solids compared to one formulated with 75 parts of potassium nitrate. More "smoke" and more bore fouling. Where the bore fouling is involved the Swiss, in theory, produces a moist or wet fouling in the bore. So while the residue left in the bore might be greater than with a "common" powder the moist fouling is easier to deal with. With the moist fouling the gun becomes somewhat self-cleaning during shooting. As long as you don't get too carried away with the charges where you would get gas temperatures up where it would dry out and bake the fouling during the firing of the gun.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 01, 2009

Ah yes, the next test will be a comparison of Goex ffg and Pyrodex Select RS. I have 777 on hand and if I can think of another darksider powder to try out and I can get ahold of some, then I will have compared 8 powders. More testing on the way!!!

Bill, If I read your post right, I am astounded to find out that only 3 parts of potassium nitrate causes such a difference between powders! Is it the potassium nitrate that pulls in the moisture?

I would expect then that Goex has yet a lower "parts of potassium nitrate" content. What is the "parts of potassium nitrate" in Goex, and how should it compare, given that I will test this next month?

Dutch Bill
June 01, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality on June 01, 2009
Ah yes, the next test will be a comparison of Goex ffg and Pyrodex Select RS. I have 777 on hand and if I can think of another darksider powder to try out and I can get ahold of some, then I will have compared 8 powders. More testing on the way!

Bill, If I read your post right, I am astounded to find out that only 3 parts of potassium nitrate causes such a difference between powders! Is it the potassium nitrate that pulls in the moisture? I would expect then that Goex has yet a lower "parts of potassium nitrate" content. What is the "parts of potassium nitrate" in Goex, and how should it compare, given that I will test this next month? When I had looked at the subject of BP fouling in my ML rifle I found that on the day I shot different powders I had 2.8% of the charge weight as recovered bore fouling with GOEX and Elephant. With Swiss I had 3.5% of the original charge weight as recovered bore fouling. That higher percentage of charge weight as recovered bore fouling was the result of the higher amount of potassium nitrate combined with the "moist fouling" of the powder. When the Swiss powder produces water as a product of combustion it slightly increases the amount of solid residue versus how much is ejected with the spent gases as "smoke".

GOEX is formulated with 75 parts of potassium nitrate.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 01, 2009

OK, then with this limited info, I should expect performance from Goex that is similar or close to that of Schuetzen. My experience with Goex is that is will be a harder fouling, so does Goex burn hotter for some reason?

Dutch Bill
June 02, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality
on June 01, 2009, 06:15:04 PM OK, then with this limited info, I should expect performance from Goex that is similar or close to that of Schuetzen. My experience with Goex is that is will be a harder fouling, so does Goex burn hotter for some reason?

GOEX is sometimes a mixed bag on fouling. I have seen lots that burned very clean and then one that gave a tar-like bore residue. This relates to their source of charcoal. The Schuetzen was originally developed to almost exactly duplicate the ballistic performance of GOEX back in 2001. At the time of development the Schuetzen matched GOEX velocities in my ml rifles. Then in early 2001 GOEX got their charcoal supplier problem straightened out as best they could which bumped their velocities up higher than those with the Schuetzen.

But Schuetzen was formulated using a European Black Alder charcoal which gave it a bit of an edge over GOEX in bore fouling properties in most guns. The charcoal used in the Schuetzen is a commercial black alder charcoal out of one of the Balkan countries. The same supplier that had been used by the now defunct KIK-Kamnik company.

According to my source a few years back, GOEX tries to sort through the shipments of charcoal using the best for the sporting powders. WANO does the same thing with their shipments of the black alder charcoal. But when a company is entirely dependent on an outside source for a raw material you can end up having to use what you are shipped, like it or not.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 02, 2009

Thank for the explanation, Bill.

A question to the pards of theopenrange: Aside from Swiss, Goex, Schuetzen, 777, Pyrodex, APP and Schockeys, is there another black powder or substitute commercially available for purchase today?

I would really like to round out my test collection to 8 powders!

page 6
Wireman
June 02, 2009

Quote from: Virgil Ray Hality on June 01, 2009
My experience with Goex is that is will be a harder fouling, so does Goex burn hotter for some reason?

Hmmm... isn't the Fouling Hardness a result of Lube Choice?

I could be WAAAYYYY off base, but then why would I think that, I'm such a novice...

Virgil Ray Hality
June 05, 2009

Wireman, I believe the lube will play a part. The APP and Shockey's loads had unlubed bullets and could not be wiped clean with a couple of dry patches. The Schuetzen and Swiss load and SPG lubed bullets and came mostly clean with a couple of dry patches. The next test has pyrodex Select and SPG lubed bullets and the Goex load uses SPG lubed bullets as well. We shall see what happens at clean up time.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 28, 2009

This may be the last installment in my test....

Once again the local match was 5 stages in the Pine Barrens of NJ. The RH was 51% and the temperature ranged from 75 oF to 85 oF. Visibility was 8 miles and dew point was 62oF. Wind speed ranged from 5mph to 10mph SSW.

It was a really nice day for shooting, only a few rogue clouds to be seen.

Missed rounds on this day were IMHO the fault of the shooter. You will read why shortly.

Again I alternated the revolvers between right an left hand so that I did not favor either revolver or load.

Revolver 1 had the Pyrodex Select and Revolver 2 had the Goex load.

Stage 1: I missed 0 shots with Revolver 1 and 1 shot with Revolver 2.
Stage 2: I missed 1 shot with Revolver 1 and 0 shots with Revolver 2.
Stage 3: I missed 1 shot with Revolver 1 and 2 shots with Revolver 2.
Stage 4: I shot clean.
Stage 5: I missed 1 shot with Revolver 1 and 0 shots with Revolver 2.
Summary: 3 missed shots with Revolver 1 and 3 missed shots with Revolver 2.
And being out of character today I actually miss 2 rifle shots today on stage 3 of course.

The initial commentary for the range:

Neither load had any noticeably grater recoil.

Smoke was about the same and both loads offered up appropriate quantities of noise and ejected particles.

Neither Revolver had any sort of binding problems.

John Boy
June 28, 2009

Virgil... your link as written doesn't work. I interpret only one picture and here it is...

http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5352497843749012418 LINK 404

Virgil Ray Hality
June 29, 2009

Lets try this again.... as I make up another 25 round of Goex for the next match!!!!

http://picasaweb.google.com/dawilken/GunPix#5352497841129793490 LINK 404

There are arrows at the top of the pix to move forward. I hope this works.

Virgil Ray Hality
June 29, 2009

I should probably describe my revolver cleaning and preparation process. This is how I cleaned the guns before and during the test. Cleaning:

Clean the revolver with hot water and enough Dawn dish soap to turn the water light blue. This is about 1 tablespoon per gallon.

Remove cylinder, bushing and cylinder pin

Submerge barrel and brush outside with toothbrush

separate and submerge cylinder bushing and cylinder pin and brush outside with toothbrush

Run a wet patch or two through the bore and cylinder chambers

Hose down all parts with cheap non-chlorinated brake parts cleaner to expunge water

Submerge all parts and barrel in regular old drug store brand mineral oil

Wipe down with nasty very old dirty and oiled T-shirt

Wipe down the bore and cylinder chambers with patch soaked in mineral oil

Leave revolver in gun safe to drip if need be

Preparation before each match:

Wipe down outside of gun with a fairly clean dry T-shirt to remove excess oil

Run a DRY patch through the bore

This results in a dry yet lightly oiled bore. Oiled with straight up mineral oil.

Virgil Ray Hality
July 26, 2009

Fourth Test (and Last)

Once again the local match was 5 stages in the Pine Barrens of NJ. The RH was 58% and the temperature ranged from 74 oF to 87 oF. Visibility was 9 miles and dew point was 71oF. Wind speed ranged from 9mph SSW with an occasional gust at about 17mph. It was a really hot day for shooting in the Pine Barrens with a scant hazy cloud layer in the morning and bright hot sun in the afternoon.

I did miss a few targets. I only shot GOEX loads so I could capture the before and after pictures of the bore fouling. I also only shot right handed with the test rounds. So with the test revolver over 5 stages and 25 rounds: