Alloy Calculator in Downloads ... Question

4K Views
Last Post 19 April 2008

CBA Member

John Boy posted this 12 December 2007

In the documentation, for RESULTS of a calculated batch .... BHN OF MIX is shown TOTAL PERCENT 100 BHN OF MIX 18.75

The actual program does not generate BHN OF MIX in Results ... ... BHN = “&G34

The program is the current download - not the old one and yes, macros are turned on. Is there a bug in the current program?

So, trying to determine the BHN of 75.7% of Lyman #2 plus 24.3% of 1:40 for a 7.075 pound batch

Attached Files

11 Comments

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes

Standard Member

CB posted this 12 December 2007

Hi John Boy

The current download of the alloy calculator has that function removed. One of the members here on the forum said it was incorrect, and thusly it was removed.

If you have questions regarding the alloy calculator you can address them to Jesse Dressler Jr. at [email protected]

Attached Files

CBA Member

John Boy posted this 12 December 2007

The current download of the alloy calculator has that function removed. Bummer! Sure is a neat feature when blending odds and ends. Should have saved the old version ... close is better than nothing!

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 12 December 2007

Sorry about that...

I guess that close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades...

Attached Files

CBA Member

John Boy posted this 12 December 2007

Thanks Jeff for the Bhn Cx program. Am appreciative.:dude: BTW - I use the horseshoes and hand grenades expression quite frequently ... an old 101st Airborne saying

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 11 February 2008

I tried the ally hardness calculator that is still posted in the download section and it doesn't give me any hardness results. I did turn the macros security down to low and still nothing.

Am I doing something wrong or is it broken?

Thanks,

Jerry

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 12 February 2008

Jerry Earilier in this discussion on the alloy calculator there was mention of why the bhn portion of it didnt work..

If you can hang in there until I get back home, I think I still have a copy of the one that does do the hardness calculation. It is not exactly perfect in the calculation, but it will get you in the ballpark.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 12 February 2008

Jeff,

I wasn't sure of what was going on with it.

Thanks,

Jerry

Attached Files

Standard Member

Calehedron posted this 19 April 2008

I have fixed the calculations and posted a fixed version on my webspace. The Alloy mix BHN calcs are hidden in column A so they cant be readily messed with. Feel free to try it out and let me know how it works for you.

http://members.cox.net/krferry/gunstuff/Alloy03.xls>http://members.cox.net/krferry/gunstuff/Alloy03.xls

:dude:

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 19 April 2008

Thank you,

Jerry

Attached Files

Standard Member

Calehedron posted this 19 April 2008

I got a PM last night/this morning about some of the calculations. From what He said and I tested, some of the purer alloys do not work. Like Lyman #2 for example, if you plug in the exact parts of lead/antimony/tin it comes out to 7.5 when published data shows 15. I am not sure why Lyman comes out that way or is there something that they did to their alloy to double the hardness shown.

One the other side, when I was testing my formulas that I had found in a few cast bullet articles and documents, I used the calculations just as I have in the past when I combine Wheel Weights with a little 95/5 tin antimony solder and came out with just about the BHN I tested myself.

One of the reasons I believe is that it doesnt take heat and rate of cooling into consideration. The antimony and even arsenic in Wheel Weights have a failrly dramatic effect on hardness and heating and cooling.

So for now, I will concede that some of the virgin mix alloys may come out wrong, but at least a few of pre made alloy combos get you pretty darn close. My aplologies to those that I may have “offended” coming in on my first post and “fixing” something. But I do promise to figure out WHY it doesnt work. I am a science and electronics geek at heart that has a giant love of shooting and hunting so I will not let it go for a while.

Edit: There are some pretty large differences in base metals/alloys from http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm>http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm and the spreadsheet. The biggest one is Tin showing 7vs30 BHN and Antimony being 50vs30 along with several smaller ones.

Attached Files

Standard Member

Calehedron posted this 19 April 2008

I have found some data to back up my theories of heat. From the current chart, 99.9% lead as cast or rolled has a BHN of 4. When you add in 4% Antimony and you roll it, it has a BHN of 8 but quench it and the BHN jumps to 24!

Antimony shows a BHN from 30-60 as cast, a huge variation.

Pure Tin cast or rolled has a BHN of 5-6, not 30 as the spreadsheet shows. If you add antimony and copper (its in the chart, I know we wouldnt do that) the BHN ranges from 17-30.

So the conclusion that I am drawing from this is the Antimony has the largest affect on hardness being heated, aligning in its crystalline structure and rapidity of cooling proved by the rolled versus cast, quenched and aged Pb/Sb.

Here is the link to the book: http://books.google.com/books?id=b-9LdJ5FHXYC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=BHN+table+chart+of+pure+metals&source=web&ots=A3g-nt1DfR&sig=tRGrEgGP58pX1Eh6LZdmzaFxw5U&hl=en#PPA171,M1>http://books.google.com/books?id=b-9LdJ5FHXYC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=BHN+table+chart+of+pure+metals&source=web&ots=A3g-nt1DfR&sig=tRGrEgGP58pX1Eh6LZdmzaFxw5U&hl=en#PPA171,M1