Velocity vs Pressures...44-40...Loading in the Blind for Velocity no no's?

  • 827 Views
  • Last Post 30 March 2019
Bryan Austin posted this 02 March 2019

Sometimes I read where guys will load for velocity to estimate pressures. They say as long as you load your cartridges to produce "original" velocities, you should be fine on your pressures. 

I did some testing and that is not always a wise decision but still could be a rule of thumb with certain bullets.

This mornings results.

My results may not be accurate but are consistent. 

Target #233
Tests #78 thru #82

19.5gr IMR-4227...1,296fps @ 11,430 psi

24.5gr Reloder 7...1,342fps @ 9,883 psi

26gr IMR-4198 (case capacity)...1,512fps @ 15,145 psi

26gr H4198...1,380fps @ 11,707 psi

9gr Unique...1,305fps @ 12,654 psi

As we all expected, Unique is a great powder but an accidental double charge can be disastrous! What can also be seen is pressures created with bullets not listed in handloading manuals for a specific cartridge. The 200gr Hornady XTP is a very popular bullet that quite a few 44-40 guys load up for hunting loads. Some even load hotter than shown. Not bad at all for strong action rifles and can be very iffy for the Winchester 73' and revolvers.

I did notice, however, that Hornady's 10th edition manual does list 9.8gr of Unique and the 200gr XTP for Ruger BlackHawk. 

My plan was to load for 1,300fps with a popular 200gr hard cast LRNFP Magma type bullet.


 

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Squid Boy
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
RicinYakima posted this 02 March 2019

Thank you for letting us look at your data! I find this very interesting since my favorite is the 32/20 and it has similarities.

Attached Files

Squid Boy posted this 03 March 2019

Savvy, you are the first I have met who knows that pressure doesn't correspond with velocity. It is refreshing and your data looks good. I have access to a Pressure Trace and use it often for rifle. However, I wanted to buy my own but was actually dissuaded by one of the techs at PT because I wanted to measure pressure down into the 4K range and was told that readings would be erratic. I do a lot of low pressure shotgun development that I send out for testing using piezo systems. I see some of your readings are are under 10K. Have you had any issues with reading low pressure loadings? Very interesting work you are doing. Thanks for posting it.

Rich, I just started loading CB for the 32-20 myself. Thanks, Squid  

"Squid Pro Quo"

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 03 March 2019

You can buy mine when I am done!!!

yes, I am using a 1 1/4" diam barrel and is the thickest that is recommended. I am not a gadget guru but there is a formula Jim uses and mine is at max. I can not get an accurate reading below 6,000psi  which is why some modern factory loaded 44-40 ammunition gives me a hard time. Magtech 44-40 will not even register. The barrel flexes so little, and I have the sensitivity set so low....that someone shooting a 30-06 on the bench beside me can register...lol!!! It is recommended that I get my barrel turned down further but I want to test that max I can with some double charges of Unique before I am done. If I get my barrel turned down, my graph lines will be much smoother but it does not effect pressure readings.

Jim also said something about cell phone "guts"...electronics....when it gets cost effective, he will use a much better system but this is the best he can do so us hobbiests can afford them.

Attached Files

Squid Boy posted this 03 March 2019

Savvy, I had quite a long discussion about reading low pressures and barrel/chamber thickness with PT. I was thinking if I could pre-load the strain gauge to a certain level maybe 10K, it may be able to read the slight additional stretch. The fellow I was speaking with could not say yes or no to that idea. The shotgun thickness is considerably less than a rifle and that helps with the readings but the second issue is the length of the strain gauge strip. Very difficult to wrap it without getting into the action and the wires need a way to get out. I thought about cutting reliefs into the receiver that would get the wrap and clear the wires but that's another issue. I would consider buying yours when you are done just to experiment. Keep me in mind. Thanks, Squid Boy

"Squid Pro Quo"

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bryan Austin
JeffinNZ posted this 04 March 2019

Two observations here.

First, is is easy to see why folks have such good success loading Re7 and H4198.

Second, for anyone who though IMR4198 and H4198 were the same or similar, think again.

Good report.

Cheers from New Zealand

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 04 March 2019

Two observations here. First, is is easy to see why folks have such good success loading Re7 and H4198. Second, for anyone who though IMR4198 and H4198 were the same or similar, think again. Good report.  

Yeap, just because the two powders are back to back on burn rate certainly doesn't mean they burn the same!!!

Reloder 7 by far is the best powder for case capacity or near case capacity loads when using bullets that desire to sit on top of the powder.

After testing early black powder loads with semi-balloonhead cases, Swiss and Western headstampsed cases gave me the highest pressures. I have a sneaky suspicion that early pressures were closer to 14,000psi that 11,000psi. It is also, to my understanding, that these avg pressures have a spread of up to 2,300psi. I guess it may be no wonder, (this is certainly my opinion)...that if early high spiking Dupont #2 produced those pressures, no wonder they may not have been safe in black powder frame revolvers. Not only was the steel weaker, the cylinder walls are extremely thin!!!

I guess only SAAMI, Winchester, Colt and maybe a few others know the truth and I just can't get any reps to open up.

On a side note...I wish I could get a-hold of some SAAMI proof loads but they are only available to manufactures. 

For those that have yet to see the folowing, it is great information and the most I have ever had.

https://curtisshawk21.wixsite.com/44centerfire/pressure-testing

SAAMI barrels have minimum chambers and nominal bore dimensions. To mimic one, you have to get a barrel blank made to their bore cross-sectional area dimensions and then chamber it with a special reamer ground to produce the SAAMI minimum chamber diameters and not run it in past half a thousandth beyond what produces SAAMI minimum headspace. That's ±¼ of a thousandth, which can take some skill to do. Standard reamers are commonly made a little wider so they can be resharpened without losing dimensional precision. Denton Bramwell points out in the article[Link] most chambers made with standard reamers can expect to produce lower numbers.

SAAMI test barrels are fired with the cartridge manipulated to ensure the powder has fallen back over the flash hole. They are not tapped against anything to do this, as that packs the powder which can lower its burn rate a little. They want worst case highest pressure, so they just turn the case around to let the powder fall back to the rear, then load it carefully so as to avoid shifting the powder position. If you don't do that, you will get lower numbers than they do.

For rifle cartridges, SAAMI expects no more than 4% standard deviation in pressure. If your readings produce a higher SD than that, you are probably using a sample too small to be relied on to produce a good SD number. SAAMI uses ten rounds. Our own board member, Statshooter, who is a professor of statistics, says 30 rounds are needed. Denton Bramwell feels 15 rounds give him what he needs to know. So, why does SAAMI just use 10? They accept the SD results produced by 10 can be off on the high side by two standard errors (about another 2.5%), so they have a second number in addition to the MAP called the Maximum Probable Lot Mean, or MPLM, that allows the next sample of 10 from the same lot could produce a standard deviation that was different by that much. So, while the MAP is 11,000 psi, they allow they might get an average as high as 11,300 psi from another random sample of 10 from the same lot, and that is acceptable. They have a still higher number, called the Maximum Probable Sample Mean (MPSM) that allows that bullet bonding with the case and other factors can produce an increase in pressure as a lot of ammunition ages, and for the 44-40 that number is 11,700 psi. So, in effect, they are saying 11,700 psi is the safe limit, but, wait, there's more: All those numbers, the MAP, the MPLM, and the MPSM are averages produced by 10 round samples. The individual rounds making up that average will go above and below that average. SAAMI controls that by allowing what they call the Maximum Extreme Variation (MEV) which is the maximum spread between pressure readings for any of the 10 rounds in any sample taken at any time in the life of the lot. For the 44-40, the MEV is 2300 psi (this has to be calculated per the standard's instructions; it is not in a table). Theoretically, you could have aged loads centered on 11,700 psi whose 10 shots had one round as high as 13770 psi that would still be acceptable to SAAMI (though it is extremely improbable as it requires all 9 other shots to be exactly 11,470 psi). Mostly, though, you don't see individual rounds more than about ten percent above the MAP.

Even with all of that care, the fact is the absolute pressures are not exactly knowable. SAAMI reference cartridges are made in lots that are sent around to member's test facilities every two years to watch for reading changes. The members use SAAMI standard calibration methods (see the SAAMI standard) and report their results for both pressure and velocity from SAAMI standard test barrels. Interestingly, these vary more than the SAAMI standard deviation limit. The old 1992 standard gave an example for each method firing the same lots of reference loads, and the copper crushers, using targe tables for calibration, produced over 23% difference in average pressure for 10 shots among 9 labs. The transducers, using hydraulic pressure for calibration, produced over 11% difference in 10-shot averages among 7 labs. The reported results for each set of tests from each lab were, in turn, averaged and the final average was declared to be the pressure value that reference lot produced. This way, in effect, the reference lot pressure in the example was evaluated by looking at 90 and 70 total sample shots for the crusher and transducer, respectively. It compensates for average measurement calibration and operation errors, combined, to give a practical expected correct reading.

That approach may seem a bit tenuous, but understand the objective is to get everyone producing ammunition to the same standard, even if its absolute accuracy is not perfect. When a manufacturer wants to load a million rounds in a particular chambering, he buys a sample of a current lot of reference ammunition for that chambering and fires it in his own test equipment and compares his results to its agreed-upon rated pressure. This gives him a calibration factor for correcting his equipment's output to match the average output produced by the rest of the test labs that measured the lot. In the end, he doesn't load to the raw pressure readings his equipment provides, but to pressure readings corrected by what the reference load told him was his equipment's error factor.

So, if you wanted to compare strain gauge results to commercial equipment, one would ideally get some SAAMI reference ammunition to calibrate to. Unfortunately, reference ammunition is only sold to ammunition makers or others who can show a real need to have it. Otherwise, I think, they fear a run on it would occur that could interfere with the industry.

I notice all Hodgdon's psi-rated loads for the 44-40 exceed the SAAMI MAP, while their CUP-rated loads (in their pistol section) do not. Makes me wonder if someone confused the digits? It's still below the CIP's pressures, but those are measured on a different style of transducer (a channel transducer).

Regarding CUP ratings in manuals, while the correlation between CUP and psi is too poor for reliably converting one unit to the other over a range of chamberings, within a single chambering the conversion by the ratio of the CUP and psi maps within the SAAMI system is going to be close enough for practical work. That is, 11000 psi divided by 13000 CUP is 0.846 psi/CUP for the 44-40, so you can take the CUP numbers in the Lyman Manual and multiply them by 0.846 to get a reasonable expectation of psi. Conversely, dividing psi by that same number will come close to CUP."
 ~Uncklenick

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Squid Boy
Squid Boy posted this 04 March 2019

Statistical analysis, I find it very interesting and it seems there is a very wide opinion regarding sample size for testing. I attended a high end statistics seminar once where the fellow proposed and more or less proved statically that a random sample size of 7 would find all the major defects regardless of the lot size. I found that very hard to understand. I don't know if I would trust that to find one double charge in a hundred loaded rounds. I use ten because my lot sizes are generally small and that number seems to work for me. I saw that CUP/psi conversion factor somewhere before but I do not remember where. The results are close enough as he said. Burn rate charts can really give the wrong impression of a powder and cause serious issues. More data just leads to more questions. Great thread. Thanks, Squid

"Squid Pro Quo"

Attached Files

Larry Gibson posted this 04 March 2019

Having read the above comments [https://curtisshawk21.wixsite.com/44centerfire/pressure-testing] before and now having read them again I'm not quite sure the author understood the difference between a SAAMI MAP and the MPLM for a cartridge.  Also the use of the 10 shot sample has been and is validated.  That is not to say only a single 10 shot sample is used entirely as stand alone.  It is not and that is where the MPLM comes in as it is a measure for additional test variations.

 

SAAMI states; "Cartridge Pressure measurements are subject to statistical variation.  The average of several successive tests, e.g., 10 rounds drawn from an essentially homogenous quantity of ammunition [meaning the same load with the same lot number of each component] will usually differ, but will in general lie within certain limiting values both above and below the lot mean value that would be observed if all rounds from the lot from which the samples were drawn was to be tested."

The SAAMI MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) is simply the "recommended maximum pressure level for loading commercial sporting ammunition."  In reference to our reloads that means the average pressure should not exceed that.  However, we know with pressure measurements, just as with velocity measurements, that back to back tests of the same load will give different averages.  That's where the MPLM (Maximum Probable Lot Mean) comes in.

Simply put if we shot five 10 shot samples and the average psi was 50,000 when the load was developed then the highest average pressure any subsequent test samples should not exceed 51,300 fps.  That is based on 2 standard errors above the MAP. 

The MPSM (Maximum Probable Sample Mean) is the maximum expected average of any sample of the lot. That figure is based on 3 standard errors above the MAP. 

All that sounds a lot more complicated than it really is.  I have to admit it was daunting at first when I started measuring pressures but just as when I started measuring velocities years ago once you understand and work with it the differences are not that confusing. 

 

The only way to know the true value of the mean velocity and mean pressure would be to shoot up the entire lot testing each round.  Not practical for us as reloaders and certainly not practical for manufacturers.  The 10 shot samples SAAMI uses have been found adequate with subsequent sample testing.  That's why I develop and measure with 10 shot samples and then when a good load is found I "verify" with 3 additional 10 shot samples.

LMG

 

Concealment is not cover.........

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 05 March 2019

Larry's description above is close to the practice used by Ruger's engineering dept. when I worked there.  Some additional controls were required when using radial copper vs. piezoelectric pressure measurement, mainly with respect to conducting Knoop hardness measurements on the individual coppers to ensure they were all within specs.  Coppers were then, and are even moreso now a PITA.  Today only the government "C" size .225x.400" copper remains available. The last time I bought any (from Olin for use by a government contractor) the minimum order was 1000 pieces and they cost about $1 apiece...

Larry's Oehler 43 strain gage system appears to be the way to go if spending your own money. 

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 29 March 2019

Somewhat of a conclusion to my thinking. Sometimes the best way to get answers is to post conflicting information rather than simply asking a question.

So......
Recap
In 1894 Winchester first offered their smokeless powder for the 44–40. The new boxes had a Red label specifically marked for the Winchester 73 but NOT FOR PISTOLS. This new smokeless powder gave velocities to 1,300fps but produced high pressures. Dupont #2 powder was used. Dupont #2 was quickly replaced with Sharpshooter which was designed to be used in black powder firearms and produced less chamber pressures than black powder. Sharpshooter was used all the way up to 1948. However, Dupont #2 was not discontinued until 1926. In 1913 SR80 (Sporting Rifle 80) was introduced. SR80 was also used for High Velocity rounds in the 44–40. Published loads of 18gr of SR80 with a 200gr JSP produced 1,625fps. Even today, SAAMI list the 44–40 as a rifle cartridge.

Black Powder Testings
I have tested 40gr/w of Swiss FFG black powder with a .18″-.20″ compression with original early semi-balloonhead unheadstamped 1880’s brass and produced 1,373fps @ 14,285psi. Same loads using Goex FFG produced 1,356fps @ 12,648psi. The same loads using Starline Brass with .21″ compression produced only 10,000psi. The same loads used in post 1890’s semi-balloonhead mixed headstamped cases produced 10,500psi.

Early Smokeless Powder Thoughts

I am lead to believe that early 44–40 black powder cartridges produced around 14,000psi while early Dupont #2 smokeless powder produced even higher pressures which is why they should not be used in early black powder frame revolvers. I am lead to believe that when Winchester switched to Sharpshooter powder, the pressures dropped to the 11,000psi mark and is what set the standards of today. My testings have been consistent but I can not dig out actual historical pressures. I doubt I ever will.

My replicated High Velocity loads produce in the 18,000psi range which leads me to believe that this would be close to 22,000cup according to Lyman’s 49th handloading manuals load data and Winchester HV data.

Sounds reasonable but who knows...???

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 30 March 2019

oK,

I can't stand it any more.  Jack, Joe B. and John I really must point out one little error in your experimental design and conclusions ( it is a common flaw in people who have never done this stuff) .   You are comparing the pressure and velocity levels in the same cartridge with the same bullets (all fine and good and as it should be) , but you are comparing the pressure and velocity levels between different powders.  Why don't you just compare the 44/40 and 454 Casull, or 38/55 and 30/06.  If you want to draw decent honest conclusions compare pressure and velocity levels with the same powder and only varying the charges.  That would give you an honest look at the relationship between pressure and velocity.   Comparing the differences between the pressure of one powder and the the velocity of another powder is like comparing apples and oranges.

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 30 March 2019

I may be missing your point but I do want folks to understand that I am only comparing velocity vs pressures for only one cartridge, the 44-40. 

A person can not simply load the 44-40 with any bullet and any powder, achieve 1,300pfs and expect to safely remain under 11,000psi. That is the only thing my research is exploring.....and has been proven.

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 30 March 2019

Savy Jack said:" A person can not simply load the 44-40 with any bullet and any powder, achieve 1,300pfs and expect to safely remain under 11,000psi. That is the only thing my research is exploring.....and has been proven."

You don't need any "research" to prove that.  All you have to do is open a reloading manual that lists pressures, or simply look at different powder amounts to believe and agree with your statement. 

My problem lies with Ric, Joe, and John Alexander making foolish claims that : " This shows that there is no relationship between velocity and pressure."  Jack, your work does not show any thing like that.  Take one powder and chart the changes is velocity and pressure as you load it to your stated "maximum pressure".  That will show the relationship between pressure and velocity IN THAT CARTRIDGE AND WITH THAT POWDER AND BULLET.   and that is all it will show.

 

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 30 March 2019

No kidding, they can not BUT it is unbelievable the amount of people that do.....and was the reason for the topic. "Loading in the Blind".

Thanks, now I understand what you meant! !!!  :-)

Attached Files

Close