Why Fillers are dangerous???

[KCSO]

Here is an illustration of how to use fillers from a popular gun magazine. The text says to tamp the filler down on the powder and the illustration shows a large air space. With instructions like this...

[sundog]

I was at the range the other day when it was rather cold. Older gent in the all weather shooting building was shooting a single shot 30-30 and putting a tuft of kapok on a small charge of ?? powder and packing it down real hard with a tool had made specifically for that purpose. He claimed it was the best way to do it. I left.

[felix]

Think there is a need to install steel walled cubicles in that there shed, Corky? ... felix

[jonk]

Any filler should be ok in a straight walled case if properly used. For heavily bottlenecked cases, I only trust lubricating ballistic fillers like Pufflon.

[Maven]

It's the bad or poorly explained/half-assed advice + accompanying photos that are dangerous.

[35remington]

Any hints on just what magazine this is? Gimme the first and last letters and leave the middle out.

KCSO, perhaps you'd better invite the editor of that magazine to this site so some of the guys can fill him in, so to speak.

[JeffinNZ]

Surely this is relative to the powders used?

Exactly what about this scenario is dangerous.....excuse my ignorance.

[Bass Ackward]

Jeff,

Chamber ringing is believed to be a result of the filler slamming into the base of the bullet and then pressing out. Becoming a second projectile if you will.

The best method for using filler is believed to be any method to maintain contact with the base of the bullet.

What they are addressing is that a source of information is actually advising the WRONG way.

[arkypete]

I've never used a filler in a bottlenecked case. If I'm down loading a bottle necked round I use a slower powder or a bulkier powder like 800X.
I do use, occasionaly use a filler, actually it's more like a wad in straight walled case. I use a 2 by 2 inch piece of Kleenex tamped down on the powder. It's my opinion that the small piece of paper burns up with the combusion of the powder. Every once in a while I'll see flaming ash at firing.
im

[BruceB]

To date, I have loaded many, many thousands of rounds in everything from the 6.5 Mannlicher-Schoenauer to .416 Rigby using a dacron tuft that occupies ALL the empty space left in a case.

That is, the dacron has an UNCOMPRESSED volume a bit larger than the empty space in the case. The dacron is simply pushed into the case with a screwdriver or some such instrument until the tool contacts the powder, and the remainder is then tucked inside the mouth, where seating the bullet finishes installation of the dacron. There is no room for the powder to move into a different location, and there is NO MECHANICAL TAMPING or other tool-applied compression of the dacron.

Extensive chronographing has shown only very minor increases in velocity (hence, pressure) and generally more-uniform extreme spreads in speed. I say this because a great number of my loads have been identical comparison loadings, with and without dacron with no other differences. As I've become more and more experienced with using the dacron, I find that loads behave quite predictably, and I can often make a pretty accurate estimate of what loads will or will not benefit from use of the filler. Thus, I sometimes use dacron without loading a comparable no-dacron load.

Even with powders which many handloaders believe do NOT "require" dacron or other filler, there are benefits to be had in the form of more-consistent ignition and burning, shown by lower velocity spreads, and sometimes better accuracy. Among these powders are 2400, 5744, Unique, and a few others. Reloader 7 has shown me some radical accuracy improvements with dacron, compared with otherwise-identical loads without the white stuff.

Dacron does not burn in the firing of the shot, at least at the pressures at which I work. Bits of the stuff litter the benchrest in Der Schuetzenwagen when firing into any sort of a breeze.

I can't say it any plainer than this:

Leave NO, and I repeat, leave NO EMPTY AIRSPACE WHATEVER, in the case when using a filler. Any un-occupied airspace is a direct invitation to powder movement, and hence an unknown (and possibly hazardous) variable. If the powder is absolutely immobilized, it's a known condition and can be considered a non-variable. This is a far more-preferable situation.

[44man]

Bruce is right. I use dacron in my 45-70 and get better accuracy. I just push it in with a pencil just enough for the boolit to push it in a little more. I do not compress it to the powder. I also found what is called "garneted polyester fiberfill" and it doesn't have odd size strings in it. It is easy to work with.

[dk17hmr]

I am pretty new to the whole idea of filler. When loading light loads in my 45-70 I have been using 10.0grs of Unique with a 1"x1" square of the cotton batting for inside a quilt, my mom had some I took it. I have been tamping the cotton down with a marker or pencil on top of the powder charge. I havent had any problems, I have fired 50 or so like this out of my 45-70. Other then a little bit of burnt cotton lyin on the range I dont see a problem.

[Finn45]

Haven't seen this article printed, but from G&A's web site:


Most of these low-recoil loads use small-volume (for the calibers selected) powder charges. These can be made much more consistent by using a small plug of Dacron wool on top of the powder. Dacron wool is available as pillow stuffing and costs nearly nothing. It isn't necessary to fill the case. Just a small plug on top of the powder will hold the powder to the back of the case and improve ignition.

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/reloads/0601/#cont

[44man]

I am not too sure dacron is bad doing that, it is feather light and compresses to almost nothing. I still won't pack it and want a loose fill to the boolit.
Most trouble comes from the weird stuff some guys have used for filler were it gets so dense with pressure it acts like another projectile behind the boolit. An air space like that is asking for trouble. I am not too sure I would use cotton either unless it is a tuft right off the plant.
This is one of those things that a guy can get away with for years, then wham, the gun is ruined.
It is like using reduced loads of slow powder. You might go for years doing it until the gun blows up.
There have been enough warnings that it would be prudent to not do some things just because it is working now and the shots taken seemed all right.

[JeffinNZ]

How many documented cases of chamber ringing caused by fillers are there?

I ask because it seems that this is all rather theoretical with the greatest respect to all present.

I have been using dacron and my own fluffy wool 'wads' to hold reduced charges in place in 8X57 and .303 British for about 10 years and never had a problem. Powders have been 800X, H4227, Unique.

Maybe I have just been lucky but I doubt it.

[drinks]

This has been a subject of debate since at least the 1940's.
I have paid it some attention over the 50+ years I have been handloading, including waiting for someone to claim Brigg Hodgdon's $10,000 dollar reward to the person who can demonstrate, on demand, detonation and a number of pro and con about air space in cases.
I am willing to believe anyone who can consistently demonstrate either blowups due to explosive ignition or ringing with empty space, so far I know of no one who can.

[Dale53]

The only person I have known to actually do serious testing in an attempt to learn the causes of chamber ringing has been Charlie Dell. Charlie was a friend of mine (we spent time at each others houses) and we have discussed this at length.

The ringing force was actually discovered by a Frenchman named Vielle over a hundred years ago in reference to shotgun chamber ringing. Charlie's self appointed task was to "prove" Vielle's work.

Charlie reasoned that a barrel with less strength (that would yield at a lower pressure) would help in gaining repeatable results. He made barrels of brass and after some work was able to "ring" a barrel at will. This is important. Once you can ring a barrel at will, it no longer remains a "theory" but becomes fact.

Vielle postulated the ringing force was caused by a perpendicular wave front of the burning powder striking the bullet base, then going outwards. Charlie proved this by actually ringing barrels with NO wad, NO filler, by merely pointing a barrel straight up so that the powder was level in the barrel. THAT was what caused the ringing force - the powder being perpendicular to the bullet base.

He also found that, for some unknown reason, dacron INCREASED that force. Cotton, for instance, did not seem in increase the force (it did not lessen it, either).

Charlie further learned that a solid wad (say a .060" thick wad of cork or LDPE or even thicker floral foam) seated from .100"-.200" off the powder allowed the powder to "slump" reducing the ringing force to so little that it was no longer a problem.

Chrome moly barrels are much less likely to ring than the old soft steel barrels used during the Schuetzen era (whether Winchester, Stevens, or custom barrels of the era).

If you are going to use a wad to confine the powder towards the rear of the chamber (in a straight wall case) the safest is to use a wad just off the powder charge (.100"-.200"). This confines the powder sufficiently to reduce the ringing force below the danger threshold in modern chrome moly barrels and still has the desired effect. This wad may be either solid (cork, vegetable fiber, LDPE) or floral foam. Charlie turned a simple wad seater ( you can make from a variety of materials, micarta, wood, or brass) that will seat the wad over the powder charge of choice and position the wad off the powder the desired distance.

The above is NOT theory but proven practice done by Charlie Dell with witnesses.

Dale53

[grumpy one]

How many documented cases of chamber ringing caused by fillers are there?

I ask because it seems that this is all rather theoretical with the greatest respect to all present.

I have been using dacron and my own fluffy wool 'wads' to hold reduced charges in place in 8X57 and .303 British for about 10 years and never had a problem. Powders have been 800X, H4227, Unique.

Maybe I have just been lucky but I doubt it.

Jeff, I once produced case neck rings on every case in a five shot group, then aggravated it enough to permanently deform the chamber on the sixth shot (with the next step up in powder charge). I'm pretty sure I can do it every time if anyone wants to give me a supply of 30-30s they want damaged. I've posted here before how I did it, if you care to search. There isn't any trick to it. It happens at the shoulder/neck junction, and I don't think there is much danger of hurting anyone - but for Pete's sake don't take my word for that last part.

[montana_charlie]

I have never loaded a round that needed a filler, and don't expect that I ever will.
But, after reading Dale53's post, I am convinced that Charlie Dell had it figured right.

There are a lot of theories, mysteries, and old wives tales that will probably puzzle me till I die. But I now feel fully informed about chamber ringing...
CM

[grumpy one]

Having belatedly looked at my data, I see that I produced case neck rings on 21 shots, using two different powders and five different loads, then on the 22nd shot, the chamber neck finally had enough permanent deformation to cause the case to stick so I had to get it out with a cleaning rod. At that point I desisted.

If somebody wants load details for those groups I'm happy to post them. I'm personally confident that anyone who tries the top load will ruin his rifle, though. The lighter loads just damaged cases - the impact wasn't severe enough to damage the rifle.

Incidentally the same loading error (misuse of a dacron wad) didn't ring the cases with ultra-light loads.

[jhalcott]

an old gentleman my grandpa knew would carry his handloads around on the floor of his pick up , Gramps would NEVER let me shoot any of this guys loads. he felt they were dangerous because they were under loaded and bouncing around in the truck HAD to loosen things up. The guy used corn meal or some other cereal fillers. He shot a lot of deer and other animals with few problems. One night his gun burst as he was jacklighting a deer. He got some minor injuries but lived to tell about it.

[Dale53]

One thing that I neglected to mention (Grumpy One's post reminded me), is that chamber ringing is typically accumulative. The first several shots may not deform the metal of the barrel enough to permanently distort it. However, if the ringing force is present, it will eventually exceed the elastic limit of the barrel steel at which point case sticking starts. The "hoop strength" of the barrel steel has a serious effect. The stronger the barrel steel the less apt that chamber ringing occur. Keep in mind, however, that not only old soft barrels have been ringed. Chrome moly barrels, while much less apt to ring, have been rung....

"Grumpy One" has pointed out that in his case, the brass case was damaged first (that is the common path of these problems). However, very few would pick up on the problem at that point.

FWIW
Dale53

[Nueces]

Dale, thanks for reminding me of Charlie Dell's research. I had dimly recalled it, but had forgotten where it had been published.

So I sat for a minute, then turned and pulled my copy of The Modern Scheutzen Rifle from the shelf. There it is, Chapter 17B - Chamber Ringing. And then I remembered that I have never fully read this book. Got it during a hectic time and it's been shelved ever since.

So, double thanks! :drinks: Now, with the long-anticipated retirement just around the corner, I get to stroll through this volume that I waited years to get. Methinks a library inventory is in order. Who knows what other unread treasures are all rowed up.

Mark

[dromia]

I use carded wool as a space filler as per the originals in my .577" Snider and .450"/.577" Martini loads. All black powder.

Never tried fillers with the white stuff, I suppose I've never felt the need.

[leftiye]

Dale, Grumpy, Do I have this right? The dangerous situation is a level chamber (horizontal) where the powder lies along the bottom (lower side) of the case? This apparently causes a semi-hangfire, with a semi-SEE effect following when the hangfire takes off?

The other situation that causes problems is a filler that acts as a solid object inside the case, slamming into the back of the projectile and deflecting force at 90 degrees to the axis of the bore?

Most of my life I've had none of this type of problem because I read, heard about things like this, and avoided them appropriately. So while semi-well informed, I have little actual knowledge. This forum is the first place that I've heard of chamber ringing. Lickily, I've never used fillers much either.

[Dale53]

leftiye;
No, the ringing force is caused by the powder being perpendicular to the bullet base. This causes a perpendicular wave front that smashes into the base of the bullet, then the wave front is deflected into a "ringing force" around the base of the bullet.

To minimize the ringing force, you just need to allow the powder to slump (no longer "square to the bore"). It is done normally by just holdging the rifle to shoot. The powder slumps by itself, and all is good. The problem occurs when we put a wad down on the powder and HOLD the powder "square with the bore". So, if the wad is .100"-.200" off the powder, the powder is allowed to slump a bit, and the ringing force is minimized to the point that there is no damage.

Dale53

[grumpy one]

As a probably unnecessary clarification, what I did to cause ringing had nothing to do with SEE, and most likely little or nothing to do with wave fronts. I loaded pistol powder into a 30-30 with a 119 grain plain base bullet, and used a wad of dacron to hold the powder in place. I did this fairly extensively with a 30-06 and had no problems, but then in my ignorance I varied the process slightly when I started doing the same thing in the 30-30. I started pushing the wad of dacron down against the powder, instead of tucking it in without packing so it reached the neck. I did this with both the 30-30 and 30-06. I saw no signs of trouble with the 30-06 except that the compressed, blackened wad, with a hole through the centre, would stick to the rear web of the case and have to be extracted before reloading. However with the 30-30 there were neck rings, which I didn't notice until I'd fired so many shots that way (with increasing loads) that the permanent chamber ring at the neck-shoulder junction was big enough to cause a stuck case. Then (I'd done all this shooting with both rifles the same day at the range) I looked at the cases, and found all of the 30-30 ones were ringed except five with the lightest load of all, which I'd used for scope adjustment.

Dale's suggestion that the chamber damage arose cumulatively, rather than just with the last load increment, sounds right to me. I was on the second powder type when I got the stuck case, having gone to much higher loads with the first powder type before finishing that series and starting the second. However the second powder, when the real problem occurred, was much faster than the first.

What I did seems to me to be just a party trick. If you want to ring a chamber at the neck to shoulder junction, you can probably do it just by repeating what I did. I don't think it involved dangerous loads - it was just a matter of creating a localized impact between wad, case neck, and possibly bullet-base.

[35remington]

Dale, I don't know if I've got the terminology as regards "perpendicular" right in referring to the position of the powder charge front in relation the the base of the bullet. If level across the bottom of the case when it is in the upright position (as Charlie caused by holding the barrel straight up), it would seem that this powder front position would be "parallel" to the base of the bullet. If the powder is lying across the length of the cartridge when it is horizontal, or partially slumped, the orientation of the powder front would be perpendicular to the base of the bullet-or at least at an angle to it. The definition of perpendicular, as I understand it, is ninety degrees off.

The ringing force applied to the base is what would be perpendicular with a parallel powder front. To avoid perpendicular ringing forces, make sure the powder front is not oriented parallel to the base of the bullet, but rather perpendicular by letting it slump horizontally-as an unconfined powder charge in an unfilled case is likely to do.

I guess the bottom line is that I know what you meant, but I might have to describe it at some later date. I don't want to get it wrong if I am misunderstanding. If you reread leftiye's post he has the same confusion with your terms as I.

What luck did Charlie have holding wads of this sort off the powder in the specified .1 to .2 inch range when they were handled roughly? Any comment on the belief often printed elsewhere that leaving a space between wad and bullet was incorrect, as in the wad becoming a secondary projectile? Grumpy just mentioned his opinion on the matter, which was dacron impact as the cause in his bottleneck case. Was any work with bottleneck cases done to see what effect the shoulder had in breaking up any wave fronts? Obviously rigid or semi-rigid wads couldn't be effective in a bottleneck case, so it may be that bottleneck case shape mitigates any ringing of the sort Charlie produced in straightwall cases. Or that dacron in a bottleneck case could have no detrimental effect due to the broken up wave front if distributed throughout the case with no airspace. Or that a bottleneck focuses the waves differently. Or that dacron and airspace, or a wad and airspace are both incorrect in any but straight wall cases and Charlie needed to see if his theories held up in bottlenecks. Or maybe not. Still a whole slew of unanswered questions.

What powder types were used?

[SharpsShooter]

Really interesting read, but a quick question. If the powder being perpendicular to the boolits base and the resulting pressure wave is the ringing culrit, must an airspace be present to achieve the damage. Reason I ask is that some folks use 100% density fillers, COW etc. that when compressed surely keep the powder positioned as you describe, sans the airspace. I don't use fillers myself, but it is said by several that accuracy can be improved in some instances with its usage.

SS

[leftiye]

This is all quite interesting in regards to the powder being at the rear of the case against the web, (and the primer) causing problems; as that is where everyone tries to put their powder to get best (& most uniform) ignition. That is with or without the wad? Right? So holding the firearm vertical prior to firing is asking it to blow up (dependent upon the type and amuont of powder)?

[Dale53]

I'll try to clarify. Put a rather small charge of powder in a case. Holding the case upright, gently shake it until the powder is level with the case being vertical. THIS IS WHAT WE DO NOT WANT.

Take the same case and charge, and hold the case horizontal. When we do this, the powder will "slump". THIS IS WHAT WE DO WANT.

Charlie's experiments were done with Schuetzen rifles, his main interest. The rifles are mostly breechseated and loaded at the line. Each case is loaded just before inserting it in the rifle (some do ten-twenty at a time, but at the line).

Under those circumstances, no rough handling will be involved.

Now that we KNOW the forces that cause chamber ringing, just don't do those things that will set you up to take a fall. The same forces are at play with fixed ammo as well as breechseated.

Dale53