measuring black powder

[animater9]

Don't know if I should go ahead with this what with so many showing such sarcasm toward science!

Oh well, here goes. This is going to be kinda long.

Comparison of powder by weight when measure is tapped and untapped before leveling the measure. If memory serves, this was done with scheutzen 3f.

First, the 10 that were poured and sheared without tapping the measure. This was done with a measure with a shear top funnel.

93.5
94.1
93.2
92.5
92.8
93.6
94.0
92.8
93.5
92.2

93.2 Average Weight
.63 Standard Deviation
1.9 Extreme Spread

Next, the ten that were tapped and then sheared

94.3
94.2
93.5
93.9
93.8
94.1
94.1
94.0
94.1
94.3

94.0 Average Weight
.25 Standard Deviation
.8 Extreme Spread

So, tapping is more consistent. I'm not impressed by the difference and have not taken up tapping!

Next, I set a benchtop powder measure at an arbitrary setting and dropped and weighed charges with a balance beam scale.

Graf 3f
55.9
55.5
55.5
55.3
-------
55.55

Goex 2f
51.1
51.7
51.3
51.4
-------
51.37

Goex 3f
52.2
52.1
52.5
52.2
--------
52.25

Elephant 2f
60.2
60.4
60.4
60.1
---------
60.27

Swiss 1.5f
55.9
56.1
56.4
56.2
------
56.15

Swiss 2f
57.4
57.2
57.2
57.4
-------
57.30

Pyrodex RS
37.0
37.1
37.5
36.8
-------
37.10

So, as you can see, volumes and weights vary widely from maker and granulation. Take what you want from this. For me it advised that you pick a powder and shoot it. That simple. Weight or volume, just be consistent. I wish I would have had some various lot numbers of the same brand and granulation to look for differences in lots.

This next data set tells us a bit more about the actual performance of these powders. Pay attention to the mass (weight) of the various powders based on the previous set of data and the velocities produced (energy output)


Average velocities for various powders with charges thrown from 50 grain volumetric measure. and shooting a .530 patched ball from a 32" .54 caliber barrel

Graf 3f

1405
1388
1370
1391
1396
Avg 1390


Elephant 2f

1135
1208
1215
1215
1238
Avg 1201


Swiss 2f

1546
1531
1574
1558
Avg 1552


Goex 2f

1349
1362
1376
Avg 1362


Goex 3f

1469
1516
Avg 1492


These two velocities were the only ones obtainable due to bright sun and erratic chrono behavior

Pyrodex RS

1494


Only one good reading due to changing light conditions on the chrono.

No surprises here. Swiss as expected is the most energetic. Notice however the clear loser on energy was the powder in the volume weight comparisons that threw the most weight by volume. I don't think Elephant is available anymore. The Brazilian factory had a safety record that made goex seem like a good place for a daycare center.

In the market today, the best buy in powder including subs is clearly pyrodex. it's less expensive than any of the holy black and Just as Hodgdon has always said, "more shots per pound" and performance right along with Goex.

That said, I use Scheutzen and have for a few years now. As good as pyrodex is performance wise my own experience says that it can be a bit picky in ignition. In a cap gun, little anomalies or fouling in the flash channel that are ignored by the black become a hangfire with Pyrodex.

As good as Swiss is, I get good velocities and accuracy with Scheutzen (and always have with Goex). The additional cost is enough to dissuade me from buying Swiss.

@Jitterbug This is why I don't consider the use of scales vs volume to be a safety factor. Even though there are differences between wgt and vol, there is not enough to make a difference in terms of safety. One might say that there is considerable difference with Pyrodex, but it's hard to actually buy Pyrodex without being informed of that and in addition, I don't believe there is enough difference to warrant concern.

When a rifle or barrel manufacturer says "max charge xx" it's obvious that there is wiggle room.

Once I did these tests I never again paid any attention to the popular ballistic tables in various manuals and books. They obviously are meaningless IF you want truly accurate information about your ball/patch/lube/powder/rifle/barrel length, etc.

The other thing that I no longer pay much attention to are the endless conversations about how much powder to take a (insert animal of choice). Clearly there is more to it than the volume or weight of the charge employed.

And, finally (whew is he finally done!) to me these numbers only say that there are or can be significant differences in powders but they are not etched in stone. Who knows what the differences may be between the powder tested today and these tested back then. Batches and lot numbers can vary. Just measure it your own way and shoot it.

I Laughed but don't let that fool you, the numbers never lie! I'm gonna try to print? Thanks for sharing!

 

[earlwb]

Thanks for doing all that work. That was actually enlightening. So your tapping method really works.

 

[No Second Place]

Many successful National BP champions just use a regular volumetric measure...

 

[sonny from st. louis]

I am back after taking time off. I really enjoyed the GOOD LAUGH section used in this site. I like to start the day with a good laugh or two. My wife had a successful knee replacement and rehabilitation. I got through the holidays, winter, and finally I got back to the range.

I created a load development chart using the laws of diminishing returns for an efficient powder charge. I am attaching a copy of the chart. I used Cabela’s Hawken 54 caliber cap lock rifle, patched round balls, FFg Goex powder, and CCI caps. The maximum load for this rifle was set at 100 grV by the gun manufacturer. I reduced the max load by 60% for a starting load and increased the load by 10% to maximum.

I created a powder charge table for 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 grV to convert powder charge to grW. I used the dry ingredients measuring method (chemistry - NO TAPPING) for measuring the powder. I weighed 10 powder charges for each grV and you can see the summery. The small standard deviation (S.D.) indicates a good measuring technique. I put the individual charges in Lane’s tubes for use at the range. Good product (thanks Lane’s tubes). I consider the grW to be a more accurate way of measuring powder charges.

I did a 5 shot velocity test for each powder charge using an Oehler 35P chronograph. The small standard deviation (S.D.) shows a very consistent loading technique. I considered the velocity at 80 grV to be a good performer. I did a ½ increment test of 85 grV as an additional check. This did not show any great promise, so I am sticking with the 80 grV powder charge.

There are other considerations for load development such as shot grouping, recoil, cost per shot, and solid powder residue. There are other calculations, that are footnoted, to calculate other results used in the chart. Before the invention of the micrometer, the number of balls per pound was used to determine the bore diameter. I did this for the historical value. We still use this calculation today but for shotgun gauges.

I worked on this during the winter and my wife’s surgery. I hope everyone enjoys the data from the chart.

 

[earlwb]

That is some interesting data. Nice job collecting the data too. Thanks for doing it as that takes some time and work to do it all.

I wonder how some of the different brands of black powder would compare. Such as the weight versus column measurements. Would the different brands have the same weight. Yeah I know that is now expanding the tests exponentially.

 

[Okie Hog]

I trying to find a way of getting a more accurate measure from load to load.

IME: You won't get that by introducing another factor into measuring the powder.

Got into muzzleloading in the 1950s. The old time winning shooters poured the powder into the measure and struck it level with a finger.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

That is some interesting data. Nice job collecting the data too. Thanks for doing it as that takes some time and work to do it all.

I wonder how some of the different brands of black powder would compare. Such as the weight versus column measurements. Would the different brands have the same weight. Yeah I know that is now expanding the tests exponentially.

I think brands would have different weight. I will even say a CHANGE in lot number would have a weight change. The Lyman people told me if I purchased a powder measure from each manufacturer the difference between the highest and lowest measure of powder could be up to 15%. Due to the inefficiency of the black powder there is not a problem. I will continue measuring and weighing my powder charges. I was an engineer at McDonnell Aircraft, McDonnell Douglas, and Boeing for 46 years + and flight test for seven years. The old engineering habits die hard. I took care in setting the measure with magnifying glass to preserve the repeatability. My next trip to the range, I will fire a 10 shot velocity test for setting the trajectory. I am using an Oehler ballistic explorer program. I will switch to the Gs drag function when I calculate the bullet trace. You may have noticed, I have been into ballistics since I was 16 years old.

 

[eekjellander]

I use volume instead of weight. To tap or not to tap doesn’t matter as long as you do it the same each time.

That is just another plus on weighting , I hate wasting powder so tapping or scraping excess powder away to get your supposed accurate volume does neither when weighted charges does the same(better) and if you shoot enough you get better results on less powder (WASTED) /Ed

 

[MrTom]

That is just another plus on weighting , I hate wasting powder so tapping or scraping excess powder away to get your supposed accurate volume does neither when weighted charges does the same(better) and if you shoot enough you get better results on less powder (WASTED) /Ed

Bingo!

 

[sonny from st. louis]

That is just another plus on weighting , I hate wasting powder so tapping or scraping excess powder away to get your supposed accurate volume does neither when weighted charges does the same(better) and if you shoot enough you get better results on less powder (WASTED) /Ed

Thank you for your reply. When I was measuring and weighing the charges, I had a glass mixing bowl to catch all the excess powder. When I went to a different measure, I tried to have my flask refilled to maintain the same amount of powder for each grV. I try NOT to waste powder because it is expensive and hard to get.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

Bingo!

Thank you for your reply. I used a glass mixing bowl to catch any excess powder from the scrap off. I tried to have the same amount of powder in the flask by refilling the flask between the grV. I hate to waste powder because it is expensive and hard yo get.

 

[MrTom]

Weighing eliminates any deviations that can occur when doing volumetric measurements and offers one less part of the over-all load equation....one less thing to go wrong or need to worry about going wrong.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

Thank you for your reply. That is what I proved with the chronograph. By weighing AND good loading procedures the standard deviation will be low. With a low S.D. I feel very confident in my average velocity. My next trip to the range, I will be doing a 10 shot velocity test at 80 grV. I will post the results.

 

[Apparition]

In an email from Hodgdon, they said they allow/cause the density to change in order to get consistent energy by volume of each batch. I believe weight is more consistent but if the density change is correct, you should establish your desired weight with each lot number.

 

[ElDiablo]

Yes - with BH209 that is surely the case. Goex is owned by Estes now.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

I agree 100%. In my chart, I have the manufacture, granulation, and lot number noted. Yesterday, I was weighing charges for the next day at the range. I set the table up in the chart last winter. The air was at 30% humidity. Yesterday the air was at 52% humidity with rain coming. The powder metered a little differently. So weighing the charge is more accurate and putting it into a tube (Lane's tube) is very good for the field. Thank you for your reply.

 

[Bowanna]

I to think that weighing over volumizing is a much better idea if you are trying to keep the variables to a minimum, but I have not yet been able to find a lot # on a bottle of T7 which like many other things manmade differ from lot to lot, i.e. concrete, brick colors,....... Hell, I get upset when I buy my annual case of 10ga. ammo before waterfowl season and there are different lot #'s in the case.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

Thank you for your reply. I agree 100%. Man, there should be a lot number somewhere just in case something goes wrong. My chronograph is a very good tool in finding inconsistency (S.D.). You can see in my Load Development the small S.D. for my 5 shot velocity test. Tomorrow I will be going to the range to do a 10 shot velocity test to create a bullet trace using the Oehler Ballistic Explorer program. I will post the results.

 

[Hanshi]

I always start off with a measured amount of BP in an adjustable measure. After I find a load I like I will make a measure for that amount out of antler, river cane, wood, etc. Lastly I may chronograph the load but not always. The accuracy from fixed measures is averaged on a scale and is most always quite uniform.

 

[sonny from st. louis]

Thank you for your reply