Author Topic: Not another sticky!  (Read 2121 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline GGaskill

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5668
  • Gender: Male
Not another sticky!
« on: December 15, 2011, 12:15:09 PM »
We continually see new cannon builders coming here for confirmation that their design is OK and leaving in a huff when we tell them it needs to be heavier around the chamber.  So maybe we should have another sticky (yeah, I know we already have a lot) titled ATTENTION NEW CANNON BUILDERS--CLICK HERE FOR DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.  They probably won't follow them but at least we will have gotten their attention with the correct info and won't have to get into drawn out discussions of how their last design used thinner pipe than this one and it didn't explode.
GG
“If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain.”
--Winston Churchill

Offline armorer77

  • GBO Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2011, 12:22:01 PM »
Sounds good . I got my first designs here . Armorer77

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2011, 01:13:14 PM »
We already have that sticky, nobody reads it...I modified the title a bit paraphrasing your suggestion George to fit the box,

Offline KABAR2

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2830
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2011, 01:19:19 PM »
Maybe someone should build some of the past not really a safe cannon blow them up and post photo's of the results as to why that won't work and why we build them this way....
Mr president I do not cling to either my gun or my Bible.... my gun is holstered on my side so I may carry my Bible and quote from it!

Sed tamen sal petrae LURO VOPO CAN UTRIET sulphuris; et sic facies tonituum et coruscationem si scias artficium

Offline rampa room artillery

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2011, 03:27:00 PM »
i am willing to proof test anyones barrel, i have access to a remote farm area here in the eastern part of va. where we are miles from anyone.  then we can post pics,


 rick bryan

Offline Cannoneer

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3950
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2011, 01:27:08 AM »
Believe it or not, I think that at one time we did have eleven stickies.
RIP John. While on vacation July 4th 2013 in northern Wisconsin, he was ATVing with family and pulled ahead of everyone and took off at break-neck speed without a helmet. He lost control.....hit a tree....and the tree won.  He died instantly.

The one thing that you can almost always rely on research leading to, is more research.

Offline jamesfrom180

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 192
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2011, 03:07:51 AM »
Its a good fight and another sticky would not bother me if it saved someones hand or life.  That said Double D usually points people to the stickies and they appear adequate.  Regulation and recommendations listed and laid out for anyone wanting to build a cannon. I myself am learning and just recently was told/taught when a design may or may-not need to be proofed.  I do not hold it against anyone for sharing their experience or knowledge.  So far this has been a very pleasant community to be part of.
AMMA Bosslopper 1988

Offline shred

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2011, 03:38:40 AM »
As a relatively newbie cannon-maker, I found the information I needed in the stickies, but it was a little difficult to dig it out, and often it refers the reader to off-line sources that a newbie might be tempted to skip over in haste to make a boom.   Perhaps a top-10 FAQ or something would be valuable.


Q: I'm making a cannon, how thick a barrel do I need?
A: Wall thickness the same as the bore diameter (see: this link for more details)

Q: What's the difference between a Mortar, Howitzer and Cannon?
A:.... (link)

Q: Rimbase?  Cascabel?  What are these things?
A: Here's a picture: <>


and so on..


Offline BoomLover

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1152
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2011, 08:30:01 AM »
Shred, that type of question listing, (FAQ), is a pretty good idea...it does take some time to review the stickies, but they are all there for good reason. A sticky as you suggest would be a good starting point, I think. Remember, taking the time to do the research is going to result in much better safety and design development! BoomLover
"Beware the Enemy With-in, for these are perilous times! Those who promise to protect and defend our Constitution, but do neither, should be evicted from public office in disgrace!

Offline Cat Whisperer

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7493
  • Gender: Male
  • Pulaski Coehorn Works
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2011, 12:45:49 PM »
DD & I have discussed different formats from time to time.

Having a section/sticky/sub-forum (whichever form it ends up) that deals with beginning construction techniques, design issues and so forth would be very functional.

Tim K                 www.GBOCANNONS.COM
Cat Whisperer
Chief of Smoke, Pulaski Coehorn Works & Winery
U.S.Army Retired
N 37.05224  W 80.78133 (front door +/- 15 feet)

Offline GGaskill

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5668
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2011, 01:16:26 PM »
I think there is some risk in providing complete construction plans.  Inevitably, someone will not follow them completely, have a disaster, and blame the forum and its contributors for their own failures.  Better to have guidelines, recommendations (especially if they can be linked to another organization) and no-no's (like DO NOT USE SMOKELESS POWDER) but leave decisions to the builder.
GG
“If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain.”
--Winston Churchill

Offline Ramrod

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2011, 03:58:03 PM »
We continually see new cannon builders coming here for confirmation that their design is OK and leaving in a huff when we tell them is needs to be heavier around the chamber.  So maybe we should have another sticky (yeah, I know we already have a lot) titled ATTENTION NEW CANNON BUILDERS--CLICK HERE FOR DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.  They probably won't follow them but at least we will have gotten their attention with the correct info and won't have to get into drawn out discussions of how their last design used thinner pipe than this one and it didn't explode.
Not looking to start anything here, but could it be that some builders just don't understand why some folks here on this board keep insisting that the rules of an obscure group of Civil War re-enactors are the be-all and end-all of cannon design? There are many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder. (with a correctly sized ball). I understand someone wanting to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to possible liability issues, but facts are facts.
"Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine." Patti Smith

Offline GGaskill

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5668
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2011, 04:52:24 PM »
There are many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder (with a correctly sized ball).

No offense intended here; if you are an engineer and have done all the stress/strain calculations and are dealing with known material and construction techniques, I have no quarrel.  After all, smokeless powder high power rifle barrels of 4140 steel are routinely only 2/3 as thick as the cartridge diameter. 

I don't get the impression that most of the people who come here have those qualifications.  And remember, we don't have reliable chamber pressure values to calculate with, so the numbers generated from calculation are always based on assumed chamber pressures versus known chamber pressures and the assumptions can be manipulated to suit the purpose of the assumer.

For example, with an assumed chamber pressure of 20000 psi, the stress in the barrel would be 25000 psi for a .5" bore, .5" wall gun, but over 47000 psi for a 1.75" bore, .5" wall gun.  A 2" x .5" gun would have 52000 psi stress, which is closing in on the nominal tensile strength of 1018 steel. 

We offer our advice for free and some people think it is worth what they paid for it.  That is their choice and they get to live with it.  Unfortunately, so do the people who are around their gun when it is fired.
GG
“If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain.”
--Winston Churchill

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2011, 05:25:24 PM »

Not looking to start anything here, but could it be that some builders just don't understand why some folks here on this board keep insisting that the rules of an obscure group of Civil War re-enactors are the be-all and end-all of cannon design?

First  neither the  North South Skirmish Association nor the American Artillery Association are obscure or reenactors.  The are a group active shooters who have been shooting live fire black powder artillery for many many years. They are not reenactors.  Anyone with  any experience or knowledge in the filed of live fire black powder artillery in the US is very much aware of them and their work.  They have years and years of laboratory testing and live fire under their belts.    The N-SSA is the preeminent authority of shooting  black powder artillery in the US and in my experience are recognized world wide.  By the very nature of your statement you show you  have limited  or no experience or knowledge in the field so I can understand why you would think them obscure.

Quote
There are many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder. (with a correctly sized ball). I understand someone wanting to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to possible liability issues, but facts are facts.

You are wrong when you say  "many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder."   

You would be correct to say,  "many people out there think that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder.  That is simply not true.  Not all steels have the correct characteristics.   Not all steels can stand the pressure.


With the correct steel you can indeed make a cannon  with 1/2 thick steel walls and safely fire the gun.  You statement would also be correct if you  said, "some people out there know that with the correct type of steel 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder.


There lies the problem.  Not everyone understands the metallurgy or the type pressures involved and I suspect you are one of them or you  would have never made the statement you did.  Please forgive mw, if you are knowledgeable, you just don't come across that way.

Many many of the people who come here do not understand the the differences of the type of steel and constructions.  When you  say facts are facts it is obvious that you  are one of those persons.    That is a fact, or you wouldn't have posed you question as you did.

In order to keep things safe we talk to the least experienced person who comes here. Absent any other credible source we point to the safety standards of the N-SSA as the guidelines for safe cannon construction.  It would be irresponsible for us to suggest otherwise.


Up until  the American civil war, with few exceptions most muzzle loading  artillery followed very closely this one caliber wall thickness rule.  After the Civil War advances in metallurgy along with the advent of of smokeless powders resulted in design changes including lighter thinner strong barrel steels.

We have advanced students here and they are building breech loaders of the type made after the civil war and prior to 1899 with lighter thinner barrels.  They also posses the special knowledge to under stand what steels to use to be safe.

It is very easy to identify who is knowledgeable and who is not.  We will always err on the side of safety and offer our guidance to the less knowledgeable.  We are acting to protect our hobby because every accident puts us in a bad light.

Keep in mind that this board is about pre 1899 black p[owder mortar and cannons and their replica.   It is not about making and shooting a tube full of black powder...

Offline Ramrod

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2011, 05:34:53 PM »
No offense intended here; if you are an engineer and have done all the stress/strain calculations and are dealing with known material and construction techniques, I have no quarrel. 
No offense taken. ;D   The only reason all that calculating is needed is that people refuse to accept the simple fact that you should use cannon grade powder in cannons. The pressures almost double simply by going to Fg, yet folks keep trying FFg, FFFg or worse yet, imitation black powder. No wonder they have to overbuild.
 
"Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine." Patti Smith

Offline Ramrod

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2011, 05:40:58 PM »
Oh, and Double D, you have no clue about my knowledge, so I won't even answer your personal attack. Are you really a moderator?
"Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine." Patti Smith

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2011, 05:41:53 PM »
No offense intended here; if you are an engineer and have done all the stress/strain calculations and are dealing with known material and construction techniques, I have no quarrel. 
No offense taken. ;D   The only reason all that calculating is needed is that people refuse to accept the simple fact that you should use cannon grade powder in cannons. The pressures almost double simply by going to Fg, yet folks keep trying FFg, FFFg or worse yet, imitation black powder. No wonder they have to overbuild.

Actually for equivalent service loads the difference is about 40% increase in pressure but that 's almost double.

Once you get down in cannons of rifle/pistol calibers you can use the powders recommended for those calibers.

Offline Ramrod

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2011, 05:52:51 PM »
 
 
<<<<IRA Barracks Buster. No Skirmishers needed. :o
"Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine." Patti Smith

Offline BoomLover

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1152
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2011, 06:05:33 PM »
Ramrod....since I came aboard as a really green newbie, Both Double D and Cat have been the moderators of this forum. Not only that, they founded this forum. Not to cast any aspersions on you, but to use your own words, "you have no clue". this is a serious forum, and the reason for that is to achieve SAFE building and firing practices for Cannons, Mortars, and Howitzers. It's simple, really, and I have built to specs, shot to specs, and couldn't be happier with overbuilding any of them, all in the name of SAFETY. Everybody is welcome to comment, and we are all happy to listen and offer advice, but it's never flippant, because the goal is to have fun, SAFELY! BoomLover.
"Beware the Enemy With-in, for these are perilous times! Those who promise to protect and defend our Constitution, but do neither, should be evicted from public office in disgrace!

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2011, 06:16:08 PM »
Oh, and Double D, you have no clue about my knowledge, so I won't even answer your personal attack. Are you really a moderator?


Sorry but your words speak for themselves.

Offline IvarForkbeard

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 116
  • Gender: Male
  • Former US Navy BB stacker
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2011, 06:42:47 PM »
"Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others"
One would have to be a fool to dismiss the research and body of work of people in a field that one is taking interest in. A group that has existed for 61 years dedicated to live firing of period cannon, can not be ignored. If you chose to THINK you know better, by all means, risk your own life, but please, don't involve others.
Former US Navy, living in West Michigan

Offline Warlock1

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #21 on: December 17, 2011, 06:02:13 AM »
I'm new to this site as well, I came here seeking help in learning how to safely do something I had no experience in. I read all the stickies ( some a few times) and found them to be a valued tool. Not everyone will agree with everything written in them, or with the advice given by other members. Please don't forget that some of us huff a bit, but do heed the advice of the more experienced. I would have to say that this forum has saved many from injuries. Thanks to all for your continued helpful advice. ;)

Offline Cat Whisperer

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7493
  • Gender: Male
  • Pulaski Coehorn Works
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #22 on: December 17, 2011, 03:30:32 PM »
....
Not looking to start anything here, but could it be that some builders just don't understand why some folks here on this board keep insisting that the rules of an obscure group of Civil War re-enactors are the be-all and end-all of cannon design? There are many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder. (with a correctly sized ball). I understand someone wanting to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to possible liability issues, but facts are facts.

SOME of us here have seen (from just a few feet away) cannons explode.

We understand the MOST folks do not have the engineering education AND experience to specify the materials and plan an adequate design coupled with reasonable charges/powder/projos to make from scratch a SAFE cannon or mortar.

What you don't know can kill  you and others - and hit the national news shortly thereafter.

You will see here much discussion laying out the designs and the issues with them.  That is to find the weaknesses BEFORE they're built into a cannon.

You're right, we choose to err on the side of caution, using designs that are proven thorugh MANY folks building and using them (as found in the two largest long-standing organizations: AAA and N-SSA).

Your knowledge is welcomed.
Tim K                 www.GBOCANNONS.COM
Cat Whisperer
Chief of Smoke, Pulaski Coehorn Works & Winery
U.S.Army Retired
N 37.05224  W 80.78133 (front door +/- 15 feet)

Offline Victor3

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (22)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #23 on: December 17, 2011, 11:16:02 PM »
Not looking to start anything here, but could it be that some builders just don't understand why some folks here on this board keep insisting that the rules of an obscure group of Civil War re-enactors are the be-all and end-all of cannon design? There are many people out there that know for a fact that 1/2 inch thick steel walls with a properly constructed breech plug will withstand any reasonable charge of cannon grade powder. (with a correctly sized ball). I understand someone wanting to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to possible liability issues, but facts are facts.

 Ramrod,
 
 About a year or two back, there was a long thread here examining what a few of us (who have backgrounds in mechanical engineering & related fields) know to be vague statements concerning what constitute safe cannon barrels & liners according to the N-SSA.
 
 Unfortunately, that thread seems to have been deleted.  ???  Too bad really; the manufacturing & materials data posted there was in the hope that those reading would have clearer info that could be used to construct their barrels more safely.
 
 That said, what you've posted above (that I've put in bold) is similar to what the N-SSA publishes in that it is vague regarding type of tubing, safe bore diameter for wall thickness and what a "properly constructed breech plug" actually entails.
 
Some might read your post and believe that any ol' steel tube of 1/2" wall, with a nicely welded in hunk of metal at the back end should do. Not so...
 
 
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

Sherlock Holmes

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #24 on: December 18, 2011, 02:39:07 AM »

 
 About a year or two back, there was a long thread here examining what a few of us (who have backgrounds in mechanical engineering & related fields) know to be vague statements concerning what constitute safe cannon barrels & liners according to the N-SSA.
 
 Unfortunately, that thread seems to have been deleted.  ???  Too bad really; the manufacturing & materials data posted there was in the hope that those reading would have clearer info that could be used to construct their barrels more safely.
 

Nope it has not been deleted.   It's still out there some were.   

N-SSA still hasn't got more specific,  but American Artillery Association now specifies a yield strength of 85,000 psi or greater for the liner.  Maybe AAA was listening to you Victor.

Offline Cat Whisperer

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7493
  • Gender: Male
  • Pulaski Coehorn Works
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #25 on: December 18, 2011, 04:03:56 AM »
That's right much high for yield (that's ok).

Note in the comparisons of the steels in this link that 1144 is rated very highly compared to hot and cold rolled flavors.

http://www.eaglesteel.com/download/techdocs/Carbon_Steel_Grades.pdf

Tim K                 www.GBOCANNONS.COM
Cat Whisperer
Chief of Smoke, Pulaski Coehorn Works & Winery
U.S.Army Retired
N 37.05224  W 80.78133 (front door +/- 15 feet)

Offline Victor3

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (22)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #26 on: December 18, 2011, 08:55:07 PM »
 Well, my searching abilitiy must not be too good because I can't find the thread where we were discussing 1144 (some years back) either...
 
 Although 1144 (Stressproof) does have some nice looking numbers, it's not an ideal material for a cannon barrel. Being resulfurized and having .44% carbon (a medium carbon steel), it's not recommended for welding unless special precautions are taken. Even then, it's not the greatest where the strength of welds is important. Post weld/post heat-treat NDT is recommended for 1144 to detect cracks.
 
 Another thing with 1144, although it's great for resistance to fatigue and stresses it might see in shafting (one of it's primary uses) it's not recommended for use as a pressure vessel. IIRC, it has something to do with the special drawing process used during the production of 1144 bars which gives the material a kind of 'stringy' (for lack of a $10 word) grain, parallel to the length of the bar.
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

Sherlock Holmes

Offline Cat Whisperer

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7493
  • Gender: Male
  • Pulaski Coehorn Works
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2011, 12:27:42 AM »
Victor,  THANKS!

THis is exactly the reason for discussion from several perspectives -- just reading a NUMBER can be misleading.  The word that I flashed on was ductility of 1144 being better than that of 1018.  BUT coupled with your reference of non-recomendation for pressure vessels is enough reason not to use it - or to limit it to shooting whiffle balls (or golf balls but NOT anything denser).

I'll go back to my two preferences - 1018 and 4140.



Tim K                 www.GBOCANNONS.COM
Cat Whisperer
Chief of Smoke, Pulaski Coehorn Works & Winery
U.S.Army Retired
N 37.05224  W 80.78133 (front door +/- 15 feet)

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #28 on: December 19, 2011, 04:31:35 AM »
Some years ago 1144 in particular La Salle Ebony Stress-proof was touted as the new miracle gun barrel steel...So I bought some and built two Parrot smooth bores on them.  Beautiful to machine, easy to bore. nice stuff to work with.  The came the reports of barrel failures and  Stress proof became "reviled" in gun work. 

I still have the one of the parrot barrels and I have never been able to track down the other.  The one I have sits over in the corner where it will sit until I get a liner for it.

Offline Ramrod

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
Re: Not another sticky!
« Reply #29 on: December 19, 2011, 08:31:09 PM »
Some years ago 1144 in particular La Salle Ebony Stress-proof was touted as the new miracle gun barrel steel...So I bought some and built two Parrot smooth bores on them.  Beautiful to machine, easy to bore. nice stuff to work with.  The came the reports of barrel failures and  Stress proof became "reviled" in gun work. 

I still have the one of the parrot barrels and I have never been able to track down the other.  The one I have sits over in the corner where it will sit until I get a liner for it.
So there is a potential pipe bomb out there, built by your own hands. Is this why you spend so much time here as the dictator of proper barrel construction? Guilty conscience?  ;D
"Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine." Patti Smith