Author Topic: Detonation in LIGHT Loads  (Read 2870 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Barrika

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« on: February 22, 2003, 10:58:19 AM »
I've been building a lot of light loads lately in various calibers (25-06, 30-30, .270, & 6.5 mm).  I've heard something of severe detonation effects from light loads, and serached the net & found SOME data, but not much.  I do NO want to "go there", and do NOT intend to use any powder faster than IMR-3031:  that should help minimize the risk.  And yes, I WILL be DARN carefull not to throw double powder loads (but hey, then they'd not be light loads, would they?).    Is there any HARD data out there, in print, on the subject?
 :?:

Offline Robert

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
I have heard it called S.E.E. Secondary explosion effect.
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2003, 11:12:50 AM »
From loading large rifle case lower than 40% of capacity.  Insted of the primer igniting the powder at the end of the cartridge, the primer flash is permitted to travel the entire length of the shell rapidly igniting the entire charge.  Fast powders in small amounts are one way to go, but the safest way to go is with a bulky powder that fills the case more.  THE ABSOLUTE SAFEST way to go is with Accurate Powders #2 reloading book.   They have extensive reduced load data with almost every cartridge, mostly using XMP 5744 which is extremely well suited for this.  Go to www.accuratepowder.com
They are always very helpful on the phone as well.  Really good people. Dont blow your head off or lose your eyesight messing around with reduced loads.  Do the homework and DO IT RIGHT.
....make it count

Offline Groundhog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Posts: 2
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2003, 12:31:24 PM »
There was a great article in the Dec '99 issue of Handloader about reduced loads.  The article was about downloading the 7mag, but the same procedures could be used on other cartridges.  The author utilized shotgun buffer ( Dacron, Rem Buffer, Super Grex ) to force the powder to remain in the rear of the case.  This eliminated the chance of secondary ignition of the powder.

Offline Robert

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
make sure bullet has exited the barrel before rechambering
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2003, 01:30:30 PM »
Also, if the bullet dosent exit the barrel, high pressure can result and blow up the barrel.  Also....if the bullet dosent come out, wait a few minutes before opening the chamber, there could still be excessive pressure inside.  I have seen shells come flying out with sufficient force to put out an eye.  Wait till the pressure bleeds off.
....make it count

Offline savageT

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2003, 03:25:53 PM »
A few weeks ago I posted a query about reduced loads for .300Savage using Hogdon Powder H4895 using the 60% rule (based on cast-bullet use).

http://www.hodgdon.com/data/youth/index.php

Jim
savageT........Have you hugged a '99 lately?

Of all the things I've lost in my life, I miss my mind the most.

Offline ricciardelli

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1004
  • Gender: Male
    • http://stevespages.com/page8.htm
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2003, 06:14:51 PM »
I've heard all kinds of "war stories" about secondary ignition (detonation).  But, in over 40 years of loading I have never experienced it, and neither has anyone I know who loads.

Offline dharris

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Detonation
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2003, 02:28:15 PM »
I am new to the forum but have an interesting reply to this subject. I have been loading and shooting 41 years. Last August I had a catastrophic failure of a 257 Weatherby using 60 gns IMR-4831 and 120 grain bullets. The load had a lot of space in the case. The rifle and scope were totally destroyed. I was wearing shooting glasses and thankfully suffered only minor lacerations and bruising. After much research and calling toll free numbers at bullet and powder manufacturers I believe it had to be the infamous detonation scenario.

Offline chk

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2003, 02:36:25 PM »
I second what Robert had to say. I've read an article by a former Army ballistician that stated detonation occurs when the initial ignition is acorss the entire length of the powder charge. Dave

Offline PaulS

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2003, 03:00:10 PM »
Well Steve, it happened to me. I was loading a listed starting load of Winchester 760 in a neck-sized once fired 3006 with a 165 grain bullet seated as far out in the case as I could. The first round was a bit soft but I expected less than maximum recoil with a starting load. The bullet hit the target jut about dead center - next shot went puff.......   and then BOOM. The case was badly deformed with the head extruded to larger than normal, case body was bulged and the primer pocket was so big the primer was destroyed. After recovering from the shot I checked my gun and it seemed unharmed but I packed up and went to the gunsmith to have everything checked out. The weapon was fine - a Remington made 03A3 - and the only explaination was a "delayed detonation" from powder that was ignited poorly over a large surface area. In using low powder densities I always put the bullet to the OAL specified in the book.

PaulS
PaulS

Hodgdon, Lyman, Speer, Sierra, Hornady = reliable resources
so and so's pages on the internet = not reliable resources
Alway check loads you find on the internet against manuals.
NEVER exceed maximum listed loads.

Offline jhm

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3169
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2003, 03:47:58 PM »
Dave Harris:  60 gr. IMR 4831 isnt a light load its a 3050 fps load I would think there might be another area of concern other than a LIGHT load condition on that problem that is a ball park load for the 257 weatherby and shouldnt be a problem at all. :D   JIM

Offline jhalcott

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1869
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2003, 04:18:59 PM »
If you watch the black powder cartridge matches you will see the shooters raise their barrel to the sky. THEN slowly bring them down to firing position.This keeps the powder charge close to the primer and helps the group. As far as putting fillers in the case ,you MIGHT "ring " your chamber.The filler may also form an obstruction in the barrel.If at all possible use only reccommended loads in your gun! If you want gallery loads ,or have a need for less recoil,get a smaller caliber. If you want to plink in your basement use wax bullets and primers without a powder charge. These will punch holes in paper targets and get you familiar with the trigger. jh

Offline Paladin

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #11 on: March 25, 2003, 04:54:58 PM »
my friend and I was looking for  load in my mini  14 that would leave the case lying at your feet and would be accurate. a fifty five grain bullet,a case full of h4831 and a magnum primer worked perfect. than we tryed a lead bullet, (55 grains) and a regular primer. when I fired the rifle the fireing pin hit the primer, a mill sec delay and the gun fired. the bullet vaporised and the case welded it's self to the bolt head. I wasn't damaged and neither was the rifle. Lucky?  yes. will I do this again? no. this was a case full of powder that detonated because the primer was to lite.  I learned a hard lesson, that was about 15 years ago. haven't done anything stupied for a while!!!!!

Offline BruceP

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 697
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #12 on: March 25, 2003, 05:30:07 PM »
Hodgdon has some light loads listed now I think on their website. Accurate Arms does have some loads listed for several cartridges in their #2 manual and Lee has a formula for calculating reduced loads in their manual.
BruceP
Lord, Please help me
Keep my small mind open
and my big mouth shut.

Offline IronMonkey

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 96
aa 5744
« Reply #13 on: March 25, 2003, 06:26:57 PM »
I had a catastrophic detonation as well.  My friend was shooting the gun though.  I didn't have a crimper at the time and was shooting misc 150s.  There is no practical way to double charge it fills it up too much.  The gun went off, normal sound, but I didn't see where the bullet went.  My friend chambered another round and then I lost my 30-06.  The barrel went flying about 15 yards out, the scope almost hit me and my friend had splinters in his finger. God was watching out for us that day.  When you looked at the receiver, the ring was peeled back like an onion.  The case was permanently welded into the barrel.  Best we could finger out, without the crimp the first round had not exitted the barrel, the second ran into it and built up the pressure.  The case web consequently failed, gases accelerated and the remaining powder detonating.  I kept the receiver and barrel on my reloading bench to remind me to not do that again.  I stick with Unique and cast loads now.  I like my 8mm mauser and want to keep it intact.  Dan
Gun control is shooting 40x40!

Offline BCB

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 928
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2003, 12:20:29 PM »
I must agree with ricciardelli.  If indeed S.E.E. does exist, I would most certainly think the powder/bullet manufactures could produce it "on demand" under labratory conditions.  (I did read an article in a gun magazine some time ago about someone who could produce it on demand...Whatever.)  Yet, I haven't heard of that occuring.  Maybe they just don't admit that they can do it and elaborate on the data used for fear some idiot would attempt to do it in his or her Model 70 or 700 just to see what happens!!!

I think when unexplained detonations (and I am not sure that is the correct word to use) occur, it might have been the load fired before the round that caused the problem.  Maybe a STUCK bullet, or part of the bullet jacket, or a gas check, or the neck of the case, and then another round fired?  Or maybe the 1st round fired with a clump of mud or a bee's nest in the barrel?  Who knows...

I have used light charges of slow burners and light charges of fast burners (I always weigh and visually verify).  Yep, I have stuck bullets in the barrel.  BUT, I DIDN'T FIRE THE NEXT ROUND WITH THE BULLET STUCK!!!  When I am testing new "untried" loads, I always run a dry patch though the bore as a cleaner and to varify that nothing is in the bore.  I NEVER fire the 1st shot from any weapon without first looking through the bore.

Maybe this is why I have been so lucky and not experienced the S.E.E.  I would not even begin to think how many rounds I have reloaded in 35 years and fired downrange.  I assure you, it must be approaching the 100000 mark.  Good-luck with the S.E.E. concept...BCB

Offline dharris

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
detonation
« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2003, 01:23:17 PM »
jhm, 60 gns IMR4831 is the starting load for a 257 Wby in one of my manuals. There is a lot of airspace in the case with this load. I spoke with a ballistic tech from publisher of said manual. He told me it was a remote possibility that I had experienced detonation. He also said that it is common to see detonation in ballistic labs developing loads for overbore cartridges, especially at the lower end of the envelope. The 257 Wby is overbore.

This incident was a confidence shaker. I had never experienced anything even remotely like it.

Offline jhm

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3169
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #16 on: March 26, 2003, 02:33:04 PM »
dharris:  Not doubting the shakeup as I blew-up a smith model 19 years ago and it wasnt my gun it was a customers, but thats a whole different story I just dont use any ammo I dont know where it came from anymore and dont recomend any loads to anyone either. :D   JIM

Offline Leftoverdj

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2003, 05:18:28 PM »
SEE is well established in large rifle bottlenecked cases with slow burning rifle powder. That means 4350 and slower.

I have never heard a credible case involving powders in the 3031, 4895 range.

All the problems of which I am aware of  when using the normal pistol powders for very light loads have involved fillers or doublecharging. I would not try H-110 or 296 for such work, but Bullseye, Red Dot, and Unique do fine. I am partial to Red Dot for such loads since it bulks up so well as to make an undetected double charge highly unlikely.

I would also urge you to stick with cast bullets for the lighter loads. A stuck cast bullet is not a problem to get out. A stuck jacketed bullet is.
It is the duty of the good citizen to love his country and hate his gubmint.

Offline Larry Gibson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
S.E.E. and reduced loads
« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2003, 09:24:15 AM »
dharris/Paladin/BCB and others.

SEE is a theory that has been around for years.  It was never duplicated in a laboritory yet it seemed the most plausible explanation fro the blowups like dharris's.  However a few years ago a major ammo factory stumbled onto the real cause of these catastrophic failures.  They had produced high performance 6.5x55 ammo using extremely slow burning powder.  Their tests in a SAAMI spec pressure chamber/barrel proved it safe so they produced the ammo.  In short order there were several reports of catastrophic failure with the ammo in M96 Swede rifles.  The factory did not think it was the ammo as pressures were within the "design" limits of the M96 actions.  None the less they hooked up a pziezo node to a M96 and rand tests themselves.  They found that the pressures were normal for the first couple shots but then the pressures began to spike and a hangfire occured on the eigth round with pressures above proof loads.  the pressure readings indicated pressure would rise to 8,000+ psi and then drop to nothing only to spike very rapidly and disatrously.  They backed off the tests.  I

t was determined from this that the M96 with long throat (freebore to a Weatherby rifle) plus the slow powder created a bore obstruction.  The primer, because the powder did not fill the case, was able to push the bullet out of the case down the freebore and into the lead.  With the first couple rounds the lead was clean and and the bullet moved when pressure rose again.  However, after only a couple rounds the lead will get very dirty and gritty. Particularly if primer particles (primer compound has grit in it) blow past the powder and around the bullet before it seals the bore.  I can assure you that ajacketed bullet stuck in a gritty throat is very difficult to remove.  A rough throat exhasperates the problem.  It is when the bullet is thus stuck in the throat that it becomes a bore obstruction and when the powder gets around to burning a catastrophic failure is the result.  The factory was able to consistantly reproduce this and in fact finaly destroyed the M96 it was using for the test.  The ammo was recalled.  There was an article on this in one of the magazines several years ago.  Have it at home and will find if someone is interested.

So what all this means that with reduced loads of slow burning powder and a long through one is asking for a catastrophic failure.  Does this mean it is restricted to "over-bore" cartridges?  No as the 6.5x55 is not considered over-bore nore is the mentioned .223 when used with a case of 4831.  Also catastrophic failures of this type have been docutmented in large bore Contender pistols, 45-70 mostly.  In these cases a light jacketed bullet, 300-350 gr, was being used with reduced loads of 296 or H110.  The loads when tested of a bench and held level or tipped up before firing proved safe.  However, when in the field (where all blowups occured) the hand gun was held muzzle down and raised level to fire thus the powder was in the front of the case.  The primer was able to blow the bullet into the rifling/lead where it stuck, then the powder ignited.  All shooters described a "click-boom" type delay or "hangfire".  It always happened with the 3d or 4th shot out of a clean barrel.

The idea that light charges of fast burning powder will "detonate" was disproven by Federal and Hercules quite a few years ago.  There also hasn't been any documented blowups using the fast to medium powders which ignite easily, this excludes many ball type powders in that burning rate.  The Hornady "60% rule" is a good one with the 4895 powders and also works well with 3031.  

One must be very carefull when reducing any slow burning/hard to ignite powder in any cartridge.

Larry Gibson.

Offline savageT

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #19 on: March 27, 2003, 09:58:13 AM »
Larry Gibson,
Thanks for that informative essay.  My only comment is the 60% rule I believe belongs to Hodgdon's H4895 Powder.http://www.hodgdon.com/data/youth/index.php

I would be interested in seeing that write-up you mentioned.  Can you copy and post it?

Jim
savageT........Have you hugged a '99 lately?

Of all the things I've lost in my life, I miss my mind the most.

Offline Larry Gibson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2003, 11:53:37 AM »
savageT

Quote "Thanks for that informative essay.  My only comment is the 60% rule I believe belongs to Hodgdon's H4895 Powder.http://www.hodgdon.com/data/youth/index.php"

Yup, that's the case but for those of us who have been using H4895 (the original surplus powder), new H4895, IMR4895 and milsurp 4895 the 60% rule has been known for years.  I was first told about it by Hodgdon himself in the late '60s when I met him at an NRA Convention.  Was an interesting conversation.

Will find the article and try to scan it.

Larry Gibson

Offline Joe Kool

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2003, 02:10:59 AM »
LMG, the article you are refering to is in Handloader Magazine #187 June 1997. If you are using cast bullets, get a Lyman loading manual. They are full of reduced loads. I like the old Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook Third Edition. There was another Lyman manual near the same time period, that has both cast and jacketed bullets, the cover on my copy has been gone for years, so I can't tell you what the title is, but it has a mostly black cover.  There is an older Lyman cast bullet book, the Lyman Reloading Handbook 45th Edition that contains many loads that use fast pistol powders. I've tried many loads from this book with great success. All three of these books are full of great information. I see them for sale on ebay fairly often. Just search for Lyman.  8)

Offline IronKnees

  • IronKnees
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
  • Gender: Male
    • HANDLOADING FOR HUNTING
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2003, 03:55:43 AM »
On the question of light loads detonating in large cases, here is a simple explanation. With the slower powders used in large cases, you use up a great deal of space within the case itself. These (all) powders are designed to perform properly within certain confines. In large cases with slower powders, if you try to reduce the load below a certain point, the ignition becomes erratic and unpredictable. And, there is another phenomenon that happens. Look at it like this. The firing pin strikes the primer and starts the ignition process. Then, the powder starts to burn I.E. gasses begin the expansion process. And, the bullet begins to move. But, if detonation is in the offing, the powder begins burning very slowly, and does not kick the bullet on it's way like it should. Then, before the bullet has a chance to get out of the way, the pressure curve "spikes" so suddenly, that the bullet, not yet traveling fast enough through the barrel if at all, acts as a blockage, and ... "KaaBoom"... You have detonation...
Now, lighter loads are possible using some of the faster powders, and there is some limited data available in certain manuals... but the big thing to remember is:
NEVER TRY TO REDUCE LOADS BELOW LISTED DATA, ESPECIALLY USING THE LARGE CASES AND SLOWER POWDERS. A light charge will "blow" and cause pressure spikes just as quickly, if not even more so, than an over charge... Dave
I want to finish well
I want to end this race
Still leaning on HIS AMAZING GRACE

Offline ricciardelli

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1004
  • Gender: Male
    • http://stevespages.com/page8.htm
Re: Detonation
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2003, 10:49:49 AM »
Quote from: dharris
I am new to the forum but have an interesting reply to this subject. I have been loading and shooting 41 years. Last August I had a catastrophic failure of a 257 Weatherby using 60 gns IMR-4831 and 120 grain bullets. The load had a lot of space in the case. The rifle and scope were totally destroyed. I was wearing shooting glasses and thankfully suffered only minor lacerations and bruising. After much research and calling toll free numbers at bullet and powder manufacturers I believe it had to be the infamous detonation scenario.


THAT is NOT a "light load"...

For the .257 Weatherby with a 120 grain bullet, the loading range is:
IMR-4831 From 48.6 grains to 65.0 grains
 Federal 215 Primer

I would suggest that you check your loading technique...

Offline ricciardelli

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1004
  • Gender: Male
    • http://stevespages.com/page8.htm
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2003, 10:53:15 AM »
Quote from: PaulS
Well Steve, it happened to me. I was loading a listed starting load of Winchester 760 in a neck-sized once fired 3006 with a 165 grain bullet seated as far out in the case as I could. The first round was a bit soft but I expected less than maximum recoil with a starting load. The bullet hit the target jut about dead center - next shot went puff.......   and then BOOM. The case was badly deformed with the head extruded to larger than normal, case body was bulged and the primer pocket was so big the primer was destroyed. After recovering from the shot I checked my gun and it seemed unharmed but I packed up and went to the gunsmith to have everything checked out. The weapon was fine - a Remington made 03A3 - and the only explaination was a "delayed detonation" from powder that was ignited poorly over a large surface area. In using low powder densities I always put the bullet to the OAL specified in the book.

PaulS


And how much powder and what primer were you using?  The loading range for a 165 grain bullet in a .30-06 is:
W-760 From 46.2 grains to 59.5 grains
 Winchester WLR Primer

Offline MoustacheMike

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #25 on: March 30, 2003, 04:34:12 PM »
jhalcott Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 3:18 am    Post subject:  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
If you watch the black powder cartridge matches you will see the shooters raise their barrel to the sky. THEN slowly bring them down to firing position.This keeps the powder charge close to the primer and helps the group. As far as putting fillers in the case ,you MIGHT "ring " your chamber.The filler may also form an obstruction in the barrel.If at all possible use only reccommended loads in your gun! If you want gallery loads ,or have a need for less recoil,get a smaller caliber. If you want to plink in your basement use wax bullets and primers without a powder charge. These will punch holes in paper targets and get you familiar with the trigger. jh
 
 
********************************

I find this odd as every instruction I have seen for loading metallic cartridges with blackpowder indicate that BP is loaded by volume and is ALWAYS loaded to FILL the case.  If I may quote, in part, from Hodgdon's instructions:

"The modern loader must set aside his knowledge of loading with smokeless powders and embrace the ways of years gone by. [deletia] Never allow an air space in any cartridge.  The loading density must be 100% by light compression.  100% loading density may be accomplished in two ways:

1) The case is filled with powder to a level that will provide light compression of the powder (1/16" to 1/8") when the bullet is seated.  Bottle necked cartridges must be loaded in this manner.

2) In straight walled cases filler wads may be used to reduce the powder charge.  This is done by inserting card or polyethelyne wads between the base of the bullet and the powder.  Wads should be sized to the internal diameter of the case.  The loader must be careful to ensure that there are no void spaces in the assembled cartridge.  NEVER use any other type of filler material."

MM

Offline MoustacheMike

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #26 on: March 30, 2003, 04:46:42 PM »
IronMonkey posted, in part:

" without the crimp the first round had not exitted the barrel, the second ran into it and built up the pressure. The case web consequently failed, gases accelerated and the remaining powder detonating. "

******************************

What you are desribing is a classic bore obstruction, and not a light charge "detonation".  I'm sorry you lost your '06, and I truly hope that none of us ever have a similar experience, but lets not confuse the issue here.

Any Cowboy shooters here?  I've heard (and only heard, not experienced) that squib loads (a load so light that the bullet does not exit the barrel) are common enough in CAS that the range officers train for them and will stop the shooter if they think they perceive one.

MM

Offline dharris

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
detonation
« Reply #27 on: March 30, 2003, 05:40:51 PM »
Ricciardelli, OK, I am going to have to be a little more careful when posting. The load in question that destroyed my new 257 Wby was 100 gn flatbase spitzers( not 120 gns). That bullet manufacturers manual gives a starting load of 59.9 gns IMR4831. I used 60 gns. I also used new Norma brass and magnum primers. The rifle turned into shrapnel on the third round out of twenty that I had assembled the night before. Later, I disassembled the remaining rounds and all were OK.

The blow up was violent and totally unexpected. I have heard many comments from fellow rifleman about this incident. Some of my favorites are: How much powder did you put in that thing?; maybe you need new scales; you must have used pistol powder; the bullet must have stuck in the barrel, etc.

No, I did not make a mistake assembling those loads on that fateful night last August.  I have a new understanding about 50,000+psi two inches from my face. Thanks for the interest.
dharris

Offline IronKnees

  • IronKnees
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
  • Gender: Male
    • HANDLOADING FOR HUNTING
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #28 on: April 01, 2003, 04:57:12 AM »
MoustacheMike makes a good point in his post about "orienting" the powder within the case. In my .45-70 loads, I use a dacron wad over the powder, especially in the lighter, cast bullet loads. This, along with the use of a magnum primer (remember to count that as 1 1/2 to 2.0 grains of powder) keeps the powder neatly packed in a nice column right ahead of the primer, and works very well... REFER TO YOUR LOADING MANUAL THOUGH ON THIS, and remember that the little dacron wad takes up some space. As a rule, I try to count it as 0.5 to 1.0 grain of powder, and work up from there, using my chronograph as a guide...
I want to finish well
I want to end this race
Still leaning on HIS AMAZING GRACE

Offline Larry Gibson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1069
Detonation in LIGHT Loads
« Reply #29 on: April 01, 2003, 06:39:06 AM »
savageT

"I would be interested in seeing that write-up you mentioned.  Can you copy and post it?"

I could not find the actual article I was looking for, probably loaned it out.  It followed the following on which is from Handloader 187.  Took a little longer correcting the scan I did and I was unable to copy the pictures or the graph mentioned.  There may be further info in the article by Greanleaf mentioned also.  The article I couldn't find had more info (naturally) and I believe insinuated this was the problem with the PMC ammo that was recalled, not sure on that though.  Any way hear is the article titled "Mystery Solved!".  It is pretty informative.

Larry Gibson

Handloader- readers have doubtless heard of a term called secondary explosion effect (S.E.E.). It is a theory that attempts to explain the catastrophic failure of some rifles while firing seemingly reasonable handloads or reduced loads using slow-burning powders. Theories have been offered and debated in these pages and elsewhere, but they have been just that, theories, because no one has                             been able to reproduce effects under laboratory conditions.   The purpose here is not to debate S.E.E. but rather to report on a specific incident and the results of tests done to discover the cause of catastrophic failure.

One of the great problems with attempting to theorize on the cause of catastrophic failures is that we must do so after the fact.                              We have the corpse, usually with some parts missing and must try to figure out what went wrong. Learned theories are offered, sometimes conflicting, and we end up with a bunch of folks shouting in print, 'You're wrong.' "No, you’re wrong." Since the event they're arguing about what without benefit of instrumentation, either one could be right. The events I describe here represent the first instance of an event produced under controlled laboratory conditions and documented on industry standard pressure measuring equipment that provides a plausible explanation offered to explain S.E.E.    

The following is simple.  It goes all the way back to Shooting 101 where we learned that bore obstructions blow up guns.              There are no explosions, no mysterious wave amplifications; it's just a case of several factors, combining in worst case conditions to create a bore obstruction with the bullet.  

In early 1929 a major manufacturer began development of a load for the 6.5x55mm Swedish that was to be added to their product line. Development was uneventful and all work was done using the copper crusher pressure measuring system, for there were no standards established for piezo-electric pressure measurement in the 6.5x55mm.  The copper crusher method of pressure measurement has been with us for generations, but it is not without its limitations. The results obtained are not true "maximum" pressures, and it provides only a single data point. There is no way that one can deduce what is happening during the period the powder is burning, nor can one see other significant ballistic events.  

A quantity of ammunition was loaded using a relatively slow-burning, non-canister propellant with a 140-grain bullet.
After load development in ammunition manufacturer’s pressure guns, it is common practice to function test ammunition in a variety of available rifles to ensure satisfactory performance before it is released for sale to the public.

As function testing of the 6.5x55mm ammunition was begun using Swedish Mauser rifles, they noticed some of the
same signs of excess pressure every handloader is taught. to look for - flattened primers, enlarged primer pockets and
heavy bolt lift. All the ammunition fired in the pressure gun had been perfectly acceptable, but SAAMI test barrels and chambers are made to tightly controlled specifications so the first supposition was that some element within the test gun was contributing to high pressures.  Then a "spontaneous disassembly" occurred that destroyed the action but left the barrel undamaged. The bore was clear and showed no bulges. It was immediately identified as a high pressures failure and an investigation was begun. The barrel from the wrecked Mauser action was fitted with a collar that allowed it to be mounted in a universal receiver, and an industry standard conformal piezoelectric transducer was installed. Another test was performed using the Oehler Model 82 piezoelectric pressure measuring system equip ed with a trace hold oscilloscope.

(Fig !)    
round             pressure(psi)              velocity (fps)                                  
1                      48,820                           2,601                
2                      53,849                          2,662                  
3                      57,609                          2,708                   .
4                      57,999                          2,720                    
5                      54,093                          2,687                  
6                      58,634                          2,731                  
7                      62,150                          2,754                  
8                      82,120                          2,875                  

Pressure tests are commonly done with a 10-round string and as you can see from the chart, pressures increased very gradually on rounds I through 4. At the fifth shot, pressure dropped and then continued to increase until, at the eighth shot, pressure, went to 82,120 psi; and the technician wisely stopped the test. The raw data was then used to prepare additional graphs (fig. 1) which show that, after ignition, pressures dropped momentarily to near zero on the graph before beginning to rise again.                                        

To interpret this data we have to first understand the ground rules applicable to pressure testing with conformal transducers. The key term here is 'offset" which relates, primarily, to the specific cartridge and the brass used therein and must be determined for each transducer and lot of brass. The offset is the amount of pressure required to obturate the case to the chamber and begin to exert pressure upon the transducer. In this case the offset was 3,800 psi so when we look at the time./pressure curves produced in the test, we must understand that we are not actually seeing pressures below the level of the offset. There is a distinct dip in the curve, however, shortly after the pressure begins to rise when it drops to a level somewhere at or below the offset pressure. All we can say for sure is that, at this point, the pressure is <3,800 psi. Engineers calculated that for the specific bullet being used it would take pressure of at least 5,000 psi just to keep the bullet moving.

As I said, there are a number of variables at work here, but the main culprit is a very long leade or throat erosion. It takes relatively little pressure to eject the bullet from the cartridge case (de-bullet), which produces a significant increase in volume. Unless the rate of gas production is fast enough to keep up with the increase in volume, pressure must drop. The simple equation is PIVI=P2V' where P = pressure and V = volume. It is helpful in considering the phenomena reported here to view the rifle barrel and chamber as a cylinder whose volume is determined by the position of the bullet at any given point in time. If the bullet is moving, the volume is continuously increasing until the bullet exits the barrel.

If P2 is at or below the pressure required to keep the bullet moving it must stop. Then we run into our old friend inertia. Bodies at rest tend to remain at rest, but all the powder burning behind the resting bullet doesn't know about that. It keeps burning and pressure rises. Sometimes we get lucky and the bullet starts to move and relieve some of that pressure, but in a worst case of a rough bore and/or soft bullet it doesn't, and pressure continues to build until something else lets go. Most of the time this will occur around the primer pocket and gas will be released through the flash hole, but we're talking about events that are taking place quickly (milliseconds); and if pressure rises at a rate faster than it is being relieved, a catastrophic failure is inevitable It has been theorized that many 'accidents" represent a combination of effects which combine, in worst case conditions, to produce a catastrophic failure. Robert Greenleaf (Rifle No. 146) presents convincing evidence to show that conditions rarely remain the same, and the condition of the barrel and throat combined with different bullet characteristics can produce markedly different pressure levels for the same load. This is certainly seen in this data where a series of eight shots of the same ammunition delivered pressures ranging, and steadily increasing, from 48,820 psi up to 82,120 psi, at which point the test was stopped. We can, from looking at this test data, presume that all rounds (except perhaps the first) displayed some degree of temporary bore obstruction, but that the bullet was blown out of the barrel.  Fortunately universal receivers are capable of containing considerable pressures, and it is certainly possible that the pressure generated by the last shot would have wrecked a standard rifle.

One factor that cannot be accurately measured with this data is the possible contribution of fouling from the bullet itself. It seems reasonable to assume that some accumulated fouling was blown out on the fourth shot, which accounts for the drop in pressure at         hot No. 5.  

When the engineers were able to examine and expand the time/pressure curves produced during this test, it became obvious that each shot showed a pronounced drop in pressure very early in the ignition/burning cycle and, on the shot                                                                                    where the pressure reached 82,120 psi, it dropped to the baseline before resuming a climb to the stratosphere. It would be easy to                                                                                                      think that the fire went out, but a more reasonable explanation is that the burning rate of the powder became even slower.                                                                                                     We know that pressure is a major component of the burning rate of any powder, and it depends upon adequate pressure levels being reached and maintained. In fact, what is shown in this case is that the amount of gas being generated was not sufficient to                   .  keep the bullet moving. If pressures drop below some optimum level, burning slows down and is often incomplete. Of course there will always be a quantity of unburned powder from any shot, and this observation has led to some of the conclusions regarding S.E.E.                                          

In order for the pressure to raise to catastrophic proportions some other adverse conditions must also be present. These involve the cartridge case, the bullet, chamber and barrel and need to be discussed individually.  

Bullet pull: We know that an adequate amount of tension between the case neck and bullet is a prerequisite for uniform combustion. This term, called bullet pull, is independent of the firearm and is routinely measured in the factories. Crimps may or may not                  be used to increase bullet pull, but most centerfire rifle cartridges depend primarily on tension between the case and bullet. If you've ever committed the sin of firing a cartridge into which you have neglected to dispense powder, you know that the primer alone is          perfectly capable of propelling the bullet several inches down the barrel.   Pressure generated by a primer alone can be as much as 4,000 psi in a conventional centerfire rifle cartridge; so it is certainly possible, in a normal round, for the primer impulse alone to be sufficient to get the bullet moving before little if any pressure has been generated by the powder charge.                                

Chamber: In the area of the case   neck there must always be some clearance between the case and the chamber wall, but if this area is too large   there is little resistance and the bullet    can be released with very little pres sure behind it            

Condition of the barrel and throat: The impact of conditions within the chamber and throat are difficult for the   handloader to analyze, and a throat    that appears normal under cursory     inspection may be revealed to be rough and irregular when seen through  a bore scope. Greenleafs report (Rifle No. 146) details how pressure increased as the number of rounds fired   through a test barrel grew larger. This   can only be attributable to a deterioration of the throat and leade on that particular barrel. In this instance SAAMI standard barrels were used and    showed no irregularities, and it was   only when the same ammunition was fired in a 'field' barrel with more generous tolerances and wear in these areas that problems were seen                  

Bullet hardness and stiffness: The shape and construction of the specific    bullet used can be a major factor in the levels of pressure developed by any given load. Bullets undergo some degree of deformation as they enter the bore, and the force required for them to engrave the rifling and obturate to bore dimensions can vary considerably.

 Temperature: We know that pressures tend to increase as the barrel heats up, and a round that produces perfectly normal pressures from a cold barrel might show signs of excess pressure when the barrel is hot.
work presented here answers questions. Some of the findings support theories offered to explain S.E.E, some don't. We haven't, for ex- ample, seen any evidence to indicate that there is ever an explosion, and many authorities doubt that there is. Per- haps what we need is a better name. Taken to its most basic component, what we have is that most fundamental cause of catastrophic failures: a bore obstruction. The difference here is that the offender is the bullet itself effect rather than some external source is both predictable and reproducible in the light of this new evidence, but it is highly dependent upon a combination of factors that produce disastrous results. If one or more is absent, everything will probably turn out fine; but when all come together, pressures rise and, sooner or later, sooner or later, something will fail. While it would appear that slow-burning powders contribute significantly, until now we didn't exactly know what to look for. I think it's at least theoretically possible for a bullet to stop in a barrel if the other conditions are bad enough with propellants other than the slower grades.

Have you ever fired a load that you had used often and suddenly gotten signs of excess pressure such as difficult bolt lift or flattened primers, and then fired another that seemed perfectly normal? I think this happens with some frequency, and our normal recourse is to shrug our shoulders and also be a bright red flag waving in keep on shooting; h6wever, this could front of our nose that is telling us that something is wrong. In the light of these findings, it could be telling us that a bullet did a stutter step before it went on out the barrel. The question then becomes what should we do about it. My first suggestion would be a careful investigation of the condition of the bore, especially the throat or leade to see if there is any erosion or roughness followed by thorough cleaning. A chamber cast might be in order to get precise measurements.
If the barrel shows obvious signs of wear or throat erosion, the cure is obviously to replace it or set it back and rechamber. If the barrel appears to be within specifications, however, a change of bullet or propellant may be enough to solve the problem.
The importance of this information is that it explains, with laboratory documentation, what can happen when the wheels fall off in the worst way. It seems like such a reasonable answer to many of the mysterious ka-booms that good reloaders have had with good handloads, and it is something we all need to keep in the back of our minds in case we encounter something out of the ordinary. While the data here was generated using the 6.5x55 Swedish cartridge, the observations are not specific to that round. They could occur with almost anything.