are you using dextrin (or something) to help your screened powder stick together ? I have screened here from 2015 thats still got decent grain formation - a little dusty but still ok.Originally Posted by Hossfly
|
   
   
|
|
are you using dextrin (or something) to help your screened powder stick together ? I have screened here from 2015 thats still got decent grain formation - a little dusty but still ok.
Im talking about compression to make the pucks for corning NOT compressing the powder in the cases. I personally only compress the powder about .3 in max but try to make it less after the drop tube. I am currently experimenting with duplex loads using 8 grains of 5744 over the primer, but thats another subject...
edit: The compression used to make the pucks will determine the puck density and therefore the density of each individual grain afterwards. The overall powder density is another thing although not completely unrelated. Once you break up the pucks, The grain shape, polish and dust content also affect the powders density. However, If the pucks making up the powder have largely different densities, for example, one puck is 1.8 g/cc and the other 1.5 g/cc, and these are broken up and mixed together, then a 20 mesh sized grain from the 1.8 puck will consume itself slower than the 20 mesh sized grain from the 1.6 g/cc puck. This will have a similar effect as mixing 3f with 1f for example. If the idea is a consistent velocity from shot to shot, this is not a desirable thing. A certain variance from puck to puck is unavoidable, however its ideal to keep it as small as possible. I measure the pucks after pressing and the weights are constant, but the thickness do vary slightly from 0.345in. to 0.355in. or so and my goal is 0.35 in.
Last edited by almar; 01-13-2022 at 08:21 AM.
“It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
― Winston S. Churchill
#1, I'll mind my P's and Q's. Didn't know the rules, and ignorance is no excuse. Thanks for reminder!
AlMar;
I don't know what it is but have my suspicions about your powder. I got carried away the other day and pressed a puck to 1.8 density, with less pressure than it used to take to do 1.5. My suspicions are, that all my powder up to now has probably been over cooked, to an extent. I think the brown powder probably compresses easier, because it has less carbon in it. I could see how pure carbon could be really resistant to compression, while the resistance would drop the less carbon that is in the powder. I could be totally wrong, but your powder definitely compresses easier than any I've done. There is no need to wait, and especially not an hour or more. I can press a puck in two minutes, easy.
On my press, I could probably easily compress a 1.6 puck, with my hand alone, on the jack handle receiver. But, I can feel the powder compress, and about how far to go with it, before it gets carried away. I use plastic spacers on my pucks, above and below. They seemed to help keep the pucks a little more uniform.
The 6 different recipes I used on the powder I hope to finish testing tomorrow made pressing densities pretty hard to predict. A small change in Nitrate and especially a change in Sulfur, and it will skew numbers on density. I did get very close to 1.6 on all of them. But nearly exact on only one. ha.
I made a sight mod on my rifle, because of a incident. Bad timing on that, but I made the mod and got it back very close to previous, with some of my older powder, this afternoon. Will try for 29 shots, with numbers, on your powder, tomorrow!
can we do that again - I confused things with sidetracks
question is - what is the RESULT - when we get down to the pointy end - how does the charge density of your finished powder compare to commercial ? do you get more in a drop tubed case? - less? - same amount ? ................................
It could simply be that the brown charcoal cooked at a lower temperature has a higher density to begin with.
“It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
― Winston S. Churchill
I get less total weight of powder per case with the same volume. But same performance or better.
“It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
― Winston S. Churchill
It seems this discussion has moved well past the nuts and bolts of simply making powder and is now more focused on making powder that is equal to or better than commercial powder. And I'm not saying there is anything wrong with striving for the best powder that can be made at home.
But I can't be the only one who is content making powder that shoots well in my guns even if it is slightly less than perfect. Seat of the pants I can't tell the difference between my powder and the Goex or Schuetzen powders I've used. The chronograph tells me my stuff is slightly less powerful, somewhere around 10% slower muzzle velocity. I can live with that. I don't see any difference in the reliability of ignition. I figure it costs me about $4 a lb and I can make all I want.
With that in mind and knowing it's not comparable to what some here are making, here's how I press mine.
I'm using a 3 inch puck press and press 3 pucks at a time at 30 grains green meal per puck. I have a 12 ton jack on my press and crank it as much as I'm able without trying to do a chinup on the handle. I do watch the piston position and see that it's at about the same place relative to the sleeve each time. I use delrin discs between the pucks. This gives me pucks of roughly 4mm thickness which (after drying of course) break up pretty well.
I tried to calculate the density of my pucks but it's hard to get accurate measurements of the puck thickness because no matter how I try to spread the meal before pressing they always are at least a little lopsided, and if the thickness measurement is off then the whole calculation is off. After measuring 30 or so pucks I kept calculating densities of between 1.6 and 1.7, so I think that's the ballpark I'm in.
So this is my powder making 101 and not the graduate level course that's currently being discussed, but there might be others like me who feel it's good enough.
While I find the discussion interesting, I am most interested in making powder that works well enough. If (when) the SHTF, I want to be certain that I can still defend my home, and I enjoy the process of making powder and casting bullets. Now I need to get a cap maker.So this is my powder making 101 and not the graduate level course that's currently being discussed, but there might be others like me who feel it's good enough.
Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.
That is about where I am in this process I would think. I strive to do everything as uniform as I can from one batch of powder to the other and certainly striving to get good charcoal. I have found that I can get decent enough results especially with Sassafras and even other woods, but will likely just stick to Black Willow in the future. Sassafras grows everywhere in Southern Missouri, but Black Willow is easy enough to find here as well.
As for my compression of the green meal, I measure by volume by filling level full, a medicine measuring cup that has a volume of about 75-80 cc or close to 6 Tablespoons, for each layer in my 3" die. I pour in one cup and then level as well as I can and place a delrin spacer and repeat. I get FOUR pucks per compression by placing one measure on the bottom and then a spacer between each measure. I have three spacers and use no spacer at the bottom or the top. Using a 12 ton press, this gives me fairly thin pucks, around 3mm I would guess, which are easy to bust up and grind.
I did decide that I would mill the screened powder to give the granules a more uniform shape and then screen the dust off one final time. This alone seemed to give me a bit more weight per measured volume bringing me closer to the weight of the same volume of commercial powder. In my case, it is some older Goex, probably 20 years old. My velocity is now matching the Goex even with a slightly lower charge weight.
I have certainly enjoyed the discussions throughout this whole long thread and I have learned a lot from the other contributors to this discussion. Although I do like to be as scientific as I can be in my methods, there is a limit to my patience I guess as I am fairly satisfied with my results. I will let others try to wring the last drop of performance out in this process and I certainly am sitting in the bleachers cheering them on. Even though I am mostly satisfied with my powder, I certainly do enjoy watching masters at work.
Last edited by HamGunner; 01-13-2022 at 01:16 PM.
73 de n0ubx, Rick
NRA Benefactor Life Member/VFW Life Member
My initial motivation for making my own powder is self-reliance, let's be realistic, with goex closing we have few options left for black powder. Swiss powder is probably the only decent powder left with performance that would be acceptable by the standards off the time. If they close, what is left? We probably will soon have only homemade black powder to shoot or that fake stuff hodgdon is twisting our arm to use. If we don't try to perfect the powder to peak levels, the knowledge will fade away. If i didn't have swiss powder to compare to, i would not have had the motivation to pursue the perfection of my powder. After all if they can do it, why cant i? there must be a way.
My first batches were pretty bad, they fouled the barrel excessively and produced alot of smoke and less than goex performance. but it wasn't too far off so i thought i would settle there and be happy with that. Then i read and learned and decided to try a few things. Until i got to the bottom of every variable that affected my powder i continued to unravel the unknowns until i got answers. My goal isn't to squeeze out every drop from my powder as much as it is to settle the unknowns to remove all the "art" and "alchemy" from the process. Each batch is repeatable every shot is the same and its now a boring easy recipe from batch to batch. I shared what i discovered here and wrote it down, i will teach my sons and hope they will someday carry on.
Last edited by almar; 01-13-2022 at 11:26 PM.
“It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
― Winston S. Churchill
This is an idle thought but has anyone considered using bone char or carbon black in place of charcoal? Bone char has a higher percentage of calcium but commercial carbon black is pretty much pure carbon. Bone black can be made at home but it’s also pretty cheap to purchase. I realize this takes something away from the self sufficiency aspect but it saves time and might produce softer/less fouling
I have not used either one, but wondered about the Carbon Black, a long while ago. I think it has been answered by the old Gunpowder manufacturers the reason Carbon Black is not used. You said it, when you said it is pretty much pure carbon. Back in the 1880's there were hundreds of Gunpowder manufacturers in the world and all of them were chasing a better recipe, or developing specialty loads. Their scientists concluded that the higher the carbon content in Charcoal, the more inefficient it became. That's where the idea of making charcoal with high amounts of volatiles left in it, was developed. They say any charcoal cooked higher than 600°F (some say over 700°F) raises the carbon content too high and is detrimental to burn efficiency. That is about where we are currently, in the quest of the Holy Black. ha
Almar; (and others interested)
We had a near perfect day for shooting today and I had to delay it for necessities. Didn't get started till around 3:30 PM, and only got to test three small (three and four shot) batches of the new AlMar Brown Black Willow Charcoal Powder, screened down to 2ff (<18 >30) . My thoughts on this powder, so far, are all positive.
Even though I was only shooting max 4 shots of each mix, the changes were subtle and followed the subtle changes in the recipes, though each change was definite.
75-15-10 density 1.66 2ff was the first batch and the three shot average of 1229 fps was close to the 1262 average I got with my own homemade brown Black Willow, which was a 20 shot test and was 1.72 density tested in October. That powder was screened <24 >50, and was the reason it was a little stronger, but not much. Given a true heads up, I think this powder is slightly better, actually.
The next batch of 4 shots was 76-15-9 2ff density 1.618. The 1174 fps average speed was my sign that this powder likes it's Sulfur and less is not better, even though four shots shot nearly on sight with a 2" 50 yard group. So maybe less is better. I could not tell a bit of difference in how it lit. Every shot was smooth and quick. It did seem to have less smoke, and I couldn't tell a difference in cleanliness, other than residue seemed more dry (flakey).
Next was three shots of 76-16-8 2ff density 1.655. Impact was about two inches above sight, and a group of about 3 inches. Average speed was 1165 fps. I think this was more evidence this powder likes it's Sulfur and increasing Nitrate and Charcoal both did not overcome the lack of Sulfur. Every shot lit well and they seemed to me to have more of a push than a sharp crack. Which may be why they grouped well. Fouling again seemed to be more dry than the previous sets, but not cooked on, by any means.
Loss of sunlight made me hold off on the 76-14-10, for today. It is screened equal to AlMar's and hopefully will be a good test. I made two batches of it and I think I have six shots of 2ff and three or four of 3fff. That should tell us if it likes the longer barrel.
I ordered a new powder scale today. I've used a set of Ohaus triple beams for thirty years or more balancing rods and pistons, etc. I used them on my powder, but have concluded I can do more precise weights on powder loads. I can only get close on a tenth of a gram, and when that is 3 grains or more, deviation, I'm thinking most of you guys would say that is unacceptable. In the last few posts, that acceptability has been addressed by several, and that is where I have been, but think fair tests probably need to be more precise. Hopefully the scales come in quickly and I will see how close my trips have been, before I make the last two or three tests I have made up, for this powder.
I have batches of 75-16-9, 78-14-8 and two batches of the 76-14-10 which was the reason for these tests, yet to do. With a front of snow and bad weather in the forecast, it may be a few days, but maybe it will be worth the wait.
Stay warm everyone and don't go Black if you plan to come back!
Last edited by DoubleBuck; 01-14-2022 at 06:05 AM.
Scales - I bought a little digital gold/jewellery scale of fleabay - much quicker and easier to use than my beam balance powder scale - less than 20 bucks a couple years ago. (spose now I get a lecture like Vettepilot got!!)
Interesting results DB, im not expecting much difference with the 76% batch compared to 75%. You seem to have got a lot better with sassfrass though if i remember correctly. I wish i could send you some of my finished powder to compare. what are you shooting and with what? 1853 enfield with RB? How are you measuring the loads? weight or powder measure? What load are you using? Do you have a benchmark with commercial powder?
Last edited by almar; 01-14-2022 at 10:29 AM.
“It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.”
― Winston S. Churchill
A note with regard to measuring anything - is to follow the 1 to 10 rule. If you are trying to measure to a single grain, you need one decimal - or .x resolution. If you want to measure to .x, you need .xx resolution. I work in a place where we regularly measure to .xxxx so we need 5 places on our instruments and a couple of our micrometers go to 6 decimal places.
DoubleBuck, you answered my random thought about the carbon black - thank you. I also have wondered about really soft local wood, like hackberry, which grows almost everywhere in the south and is considered a weed. Bamboo is another choice that is almost universal below the Mason-Dixon line. I've read that grapevine is good for charcoal and I have a really big one next to my front gate with 2" diameter vines.
I haven't made any BP yet but this thread is encouraging me in that direction, and I'm blessed with a well equipped home shop where I can produce much of the needed equipment (like the pistons to make pucks). I also have a 50 ton Dake and a 6 ton screw press - although I doubt the Dake tonnage is necessary.
My first try netted. me 600 fps. with a 405 and 22" bbl. About half of what i get with Swiss 2f. Maybe o,k, for pirates out of a front stuffer but not for me. Think i will ball mill and rescreen it.
"If everyone is thinking the same thing it means someone is not thinking"
"A rat became the unit of currency"
It sounds like we are compressing our pucks in very similar ways. I weigh out 30 gr of meal per puck instead of using volume but either way gives relatively consistent pucks. I only have two delrin discs so I also don't use one at the bottom and can only make three pucks at a time although there is room in the sleeve for another one. I found out I can order a couple more of the discs so once they arrive I'll press four pucks at a time. Not a huge time saver but I figure why not?
Switching gears to a different topic now. I've noticed that after screening I get mostly 3f, which is what I want, but I also get a fair amount of 4f and of course some fines. The fines are simply repressed on my next batch and I'd figured that when my supply of 4f got to be more than I'd ever need for priming I'd repress that as well. But then a discussion came up on another forum about whether 4f could be used as the charge instead of just for priming. As is normally the case opinions varied. Some said it was fine while others said you'd blow up your gun.
Since I'm using charges that are way below maximum I decided it couldn't hurt anything to try some of my 4f as charge. Yesterday I went to the range with both my Deerhunter 24" barrel and my Kentucky 33.5" barrel rifles. I ran some shots through both of them using 50 gr of 4f as the charge. Not only did my guns not blow up, but I couldn't tell any difference between those charges and the 3f I normally use. With that in mind I won't bother to repress any excess 4f I get, I'll just shoot it.
I just Repress any Excessive amount of 4f or the fines.
I only need a couple of pounds of 4f for my flinters.
But need more 2f and 3f , so why just keep making extra batches of powder to reach the quantity I need.
I took the leap and bought 5 lb bags of both KNO3 and Sulfur from Duda. I'm going to experiment with local woods in my area for the charcoal portion. I am expressly interested in cartridge BP at this point.
Many thanks to all who have posted on this thread to date. I will post results when I have something to write - or you will read about me in the newspaper...BOOM...<LOL>
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
Reply With Quote