Shane,
Thank you joining our group. We are glad to have you.
I think your post points out a clear misconception that many who come here, have.
This board is about making and shooting blackpowder antique mortars and cannons.
We have a wide cross section of people who come here, from folks who have no knowledge of how cannons are made or work, to engineers and scientists.
On this board in order to talk about cannon shooting and construction we had to establish a baseline of minimum standard-basic guidelines to go by for safety purposes. Thus we point to the Guidelines of the North-South Skirmish Association and the American Artillery Association.
If these guidelines are followed, the entry level cannon shooter or builder has a minimum standard to work with and can build a good safe cannon. Also, those who wish to buy a cannon have some guidelines to help them be assured what they are buying is safe. We work to the least knowledgeable person in our group
These are not maximum standards, but minimum standards. It is very easy for knowledgeable person to exceed these standards and still build a safe gun.
I might point out that with a few exceptions that if you were to build most any U.S. muzzle loading cannon up to the Civil war you will find most of them fall within the range safety guidelines as noted by N-SSA and AAA.
That’s why we recommend these safety guidelines.
Shane here from Loud Egineering.
Just thought I'd remind you that shooting projectiles only requires a 1/4 lb charge. Any more is just a waste. The larger loads are more for shock value when doing the blank loads. I couldnt remember if I had told you or not last time we spoke.
Your bore as per your website is 2 inches. A quarter pound is 4 oz. Per the suggested guidelines of the N-SSA the maximum charge for a projectile for 2 inch bore is 4 oz. of Fg or 6 oz. if using FFA or Cannon grade. Yes blank charges can be larger.
And by the way the standard regulation thickness around the breach area of the cannon being the same as the bore is only for cast barrels not solid steel.
Not true. The one caliber rules applies to all guns, not just cast.
Most barrels are made today with a 1/8" thick steel tube laid into a casting. It is the casting prosess that if not done right leaves voids and is also much more porous thus making it much more weak than a good grade solid steel.
I am unaware of anyone using 1/8” tube for a liner in a core casting. Core casting is not really recommended for cannons. The other problem is the liner can melt and move during the pour
The minimum recommended liner is 3/8” thickness. That is a minimum standard. That is not a maximum. A gun built from steel would exceed that minimum greatly. Bronze guns do not need a liner if they pass inspection.
I use only 4140 gun metal which will withstand pressures exceeding 90,000 psi for 1" thick, and the breech pressures in a cannon don't exceed more than 40,000 psi. at the very most extreme. If these theories that these other guys are telling you applied, than you would be seeing some really fat gun barels on handguns and shotguns etc. I read the blogs you were talking about and I got a kick out of it. That one guy was just trying to sell you someone elses cannons I'm sure.
You can indeed use special steel and safely decrease the wall thickness of any cannon, if you have the engineering skill and knowledge. If you do that, you can also shoot smokeless powder. But that is not what we are about here.
1018 is the preferred steel for building cannons. It has sufficient strength and has good weldablity. 4140 does not have good weld ability properties. 1018 is what we suggest for home hobby cannon builders.
I can assure you however that the folks who make handguns are not using 1018 steel.
And, yes I am trying to sell our sponsors cannons. They help pay the bills here and build their guns to a known safety standard. Their guns look good and they are one of us. If you became a sponsor here you would get the same recommendations they do.
I built my cannons extra tough so that I would never have to worry even the slightest that one of my cannons might possibly hurt someone because of faulty manufacturing, or construction. If anyone ever gets hurt it will be because they were miss using it and shot someone or miss use of the powder while handling but my cannons will not fail.
A definite right thing to do.
As for the comment on how the trunions seem to be more forward, it's because hey are. Positioning the trunions slightly more forward gives the cannon barrel more rear weight thus giving it more stability when firing a projectile so the muzzel wont dip. And the carriage is also exstended longer than a normal naval cannon as to prevent kick backs because of using larger powder loads. Shorter carriages will almost every time literally flip over backwards when using large loads i've seen it.
Sounds like you are reinventing the wheel. If you were to get yourself some plans from Antique Ordnance Publisher and built some cannons to scale you will find they were already designed to deal with the problems you mentioned. Preponderances are pre figured and carriages are designed to deal with the recoil factors…
If you are experiencing flipping cannons then that is indicative of an excessive load-especially if the load is a blank load. It might also indicate the carriage is not correctly built. If you look at how naval guns were deployed you will notice they were all secured to the bulkheads. Even then flipping cannons on a correctly built carriage indicate overloads.
You also might find your sales are increased by building a much more professional looking and appealing gun. Get some plans
I can offer you an AutoCAD drawing of an 1841 6 PDR . I believe this newer version of AutoCAD carries the code for many CNC controllers with in the drawing.
Believe me when I say you ot a really good cannon that will last your family for many generations. I've put so much time into researsh and development to produce the doughest most durable useable afordable loud cannon on the market today. By the way I got my cannon background from the Navy where I was a gunners mate on the battleship "New Jersey" BB62 where I worked on the big 16" guns that took 660 lbs of black either base blackpowder to fire a 2,700 lb projectile. The solid steel wall (not casting) was only 6" thick for a 16" bore. Thats less than half the thickness and I made mine half and didn't need to believe me. I am also a mechanical engineer specializing in making things stronger and always strong enough.
Thank you for your service. You will find a number of veterans here.
No doubt, from what you saying about how you build and design you cannons they are strong. That is good. Is that is reason to ignore safety standards? I don’t think so. Why not build them stronger-over build them to look like a cannon and not a piece of pipe you stuff powder in. . Advertising that your cannons meet or exceed recommended safety recommendations of the N-SSA is a good marketing tool. It will give your customers just one more reason to have confidence in your product.
There is a world of difference between the science of building artillery for the New Jersey and the cannons on the Constitution. The methods and materials used to construct a barrel for the New Jersey are just not available to the hobbyist, nor are you using that method to build your guns. Right now you can tell someone how you built your gun and how safe it is. But what about the next guy who buys your gun say 20 years from now, how will they know your gun is a safe gun. If they see a gun that looks professionally built and is built to known safety standards, they will have confidence your product and never even know anything about how you.
We are looking to keep this a simple and as safe as possible. Following the N-SSA and AAA guidelines and building to known designs does that.
