AIU,

I have never used Quickload, but I have had several operators of that software run loads for me over the years. It can be accurate, but typically (75+% of the time) it is wrong by at least 10% and often by as much as 20!

I really think it SUCKS!

I calculate my own internal ballistics. So I have no need for expensive software like Quickload.

Pressure transducers are not any more accurate in reality than a properly set up strain gage. As they are both in actuality strain gages.

I was under the impression that Hodgdon was using simulations to fill their load books now.

ASS_CLOWN

quote:

AC, are you saying that gun manufacturers (which have been working cooperatively with the military for decades, even centuries) have opted for steel that doesn't "fatigue all that well." I'm flabbergasted!

If I were making a machine gun, I'd use the best grade fatigue-resistant steel I could find. Machine guns, especially those in fighter airplanes - where sustained long-range performance is critical - must be operating at significant pressures. These guns are built to fire hundreds of thousands of rounds, and from very,very HOT actions and barrels. As a pilot or soldier I don't want my gun to wear-out, let alone blow-up from fatigue failure. Think of the devastation to the airplane - blow itself out-of-the-air!

You aren't making machine guns, and you clearly don't know what pressures the designers of commercial small arms are planning for. However, if you took the trouble to find out what SAAMI stands for, you might be able to figure it out.

I once read someplace (don't remember where and don't care) about an experience the writer had observed with a large-bore revolver (it was a .45ACP or .455 Webley or something similar) that had been routinely fired by its owner or custodian with heavy handloads that exceeded what everything in print said was safe. However, the shooter was sure that everybody else was wrong, because he couldn't see any damage to the gun. One day he dropped it, I think on a bathroom floor, and it shattered into pieces.

A word to the wise isn't what it's cracked up to be. Don't even ask about a word to an idiot.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Ol'Joe, how well does your pressure tracer system correlate with the NECO Quick Load program?

AIU,
I have NO experiance with the NECO program. I was simply wondering why one would question the usefulness of a strain gages direct reading and except as fact a indirect system that gives suggested loads and estimated results while claiming a possible err of 10%. I am not knocking QuikLoad I`m sure the information it gives is very close and useful or so many wouldn`t use it, but I`m curious as to why YOU feel it tells whats happening in your rifle better then the strain systems can.

Ol'Joe, if I were to invest in an internal ballistics system, I'd get a state-of-the-art piezo transducer system (like IMR/Hodgdon) wherein the measuring probe or device was actually in the chamber and not glued to the outside surface of the chamber.

Recono, how do you know what I do for a living? - you might be surprised.

Out of curiosity, who makes an "in chamber" transducer with a program? Also, how would the connectivity problem be solved with the bolt closed on the round?

Unfortunately, the way the connectivity issue is solved is drilling a hole in the chamber. A small steel rod is inserted in the hole, to transmit the pressure inside the case to a piezoelectric crystal That makes it a little impractical for anyone but a lab.

The chain of conversions for the piezo system is pressure to force, force to crystal strain, crystal strain to charge, charge to voltage, and voltage to a reading.

The conversion chain for the strain gage is pressure to stress, stress to metal strain, metal strain to voltage, and voltage to a reading.

The piezo system relies on the mechanical properties of the crystal, to convert stress to strain. The strain gage system relies on the mechanical properties of steel to convert stress to strain.

The piezo system is more familiar, but no more satisfactory.

Barnes Bullets uses strain gages to generate their data, and Dr. Lloyd Brownell used them to write one of the best sets of articles ever on pressure factors.

The end result of all this is that a strain gage is the best system we have available to check pressure of reloads, as it is really the only system we have. Even if it's off 5% which is possible that is only 3000 psi of a round that's actually 60000psi and that beats the hell out of guessing, hoping or using a computer program with no measurements of pressure.

I highly recommend all of you call IMR/Hodgdon Powder company and talk with their ballistic engineers (call 913-362-9455). They have been very friendly and answered all my questions, when I've called. Calling them will not cause you harm, although you may not believe what they tell you.

They work in the a world were a MISTAKE = BODILY INJURY = LAW SUIT = GONE OUT-OF-BUSINESS. Yes, very serious - their livelihood depends upon their expertise and mistake-free load recommendations.

They use the "best system available" (sic) for measuring internal chamber pressures - that is, the Oehler system 83, which is a piezo electric transducer system measuring internal chamber pressures. They don't use the Oehler system 43. Why? It's an indirect measure of internal chamber pressure, which they feel is much less accurate than the internal piezo electric system, especially at high and low PSI. In fact, they believe the Oehler system 43 is just a "crude estimate" of true chamber pressure, which doesn't correlate well with the system 83. They also say the NECO Internal ballistics program is a crude estimate - "but, it won't get you killed." (By the way, with the Oehler System 83, they don't see these peculiar secondary spikes, which is some artifact of the "stretchy" system 43. There are serious calibration/standarization issues with the system 43, which are obviated by the system 83.)

The cost of the Oehler System 83 is roughly $12,000 start-up with one barrel and universal receiver, and then $1400 for each additional barrel setup with the transducer. For those of you with money, these are not prohibitive costs.

For those of us, who don't have the System 83, they believe in monitoring pressure signs - one of the most reliable being extracter marks and loose primer pockets occurring at roughly 65,000 psi. At 70,000 psi you'll start popping primers with vast majority of primer pockets becoming toast in a new case with one firing at roughly 80,000 psi. Above ~80,000 psi you risk case-head separation and destruction of your gun by the massive release of gases back into the action - don't go there.

The say whatever system you're using to measure pressure always watch the physical signs of pressure developing in your cases as you increase powder charge, change bullets, shoot at high temperature, change primers, change powder lots, etc. The case is in the chamber! Use nothing but first-rate equipment and components. They also like using the "slowest burning powder possible" approach to achieve highest possible performance , while staying within SAAMI recommendations.

quote:

They use the "best system available" (sic) for measuring internal chamber pressures - that is, the Oehler system 83

As evidenced by what test?

By the way, the Oehler 43 is irrelevant. That's not the system we are using. If you say it is worse than the 83, it may be so. But it is still irrelevant.

quote:

Above ~80,000 psi you risk case-head separation and destruction of your gun by the massive release of gases back into the action - don't go there.

So it's not safe to go to 149,999 PSI? Release of gas into the action is not a benign event? I'm shocked.

Denton, I report what they tell me. Have you talked with them to get their point of view?

Long ago, and at great length. You can find a report of my conversation with them in one of my articles in Varmint Hunter.

The heirarchy of information quality is

Hard data,

Analysis based on data,

Opinion of someone in authority.

I have taken my data, and analyzed my results, and I've published them.

Your conversation with a tech at IMR/Hodgdon does not trump data.

Denton, are you saying IMR/Hodgdon doesn't have data?

I am saying that if you have data, you have shown no evidence of it.

When and if you perform, or find record of, a rigorous Measurement System Analysis, such as I have done, then you will have data.

Until then, you have opinion, the lowest quality of information in the heirarchy.

"I don't understand" is the beginning of all knowledge. Try it.

Denton, about all you've demonstrated to me is a fairly large ego. Good luck with yourself. Regards, AIU

Oh good grief...

If you come up with better data, or a better analysis of my data, I will be the first to acknowledge it, and to praise you for it.

The Pope, Steven Hawking, GWB, and I all have one thing in common: Just like everyone else, our opinion is subordinate to actual data. So is yours. Don't have a hissy fit just because your opinion isn't special enough to overturn that.

Denton, I'm just fine - you're the one having the hissyfit. All because someone doesn't worship your opinion. Goodbye.

Worship my opinion? What a bizarre thought.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
For those of us, who don't have the System 83, they believe in monitoring pressure signs - one of the most reliable being extracter marks and loose primer pockets occurring at roughly 65,000 psi. At 70,000 psi you'll start popping primers with vast majority of primer pockets becoming toast in a new case with one firing at roughly 80,000 psi. Above ~80,000 psi you risk case-head separation and destruction of your gun by the massive release of gases back into the action - don't go there.

Are you saying that Hodgdon authorized the above analysis in lieu of obeying their maximum published loads?

Or did they recommend the above analysis as supplemental to their load data?

I seriously doubt that they approve of your activities.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Denton, I'm just fine - you're the one having the hissyfit. All because someone doesn't worship your opinion. Goodbye.

Caught him again!

Of course, folks would be more apt to believe the resident lier " IF " he was correct - which he isn't - as usual.
---

Hey AIU, Though we apparently do not agree on how high to run the Pressure in a firearm, it is nice to see that you can also see through the total loonacy offered by some. Best of luck to you.

Name calling and insults = the last resort of people who can't substantiate what they have claimed.

Hot Core, you are personally responsible for more PressureTrace sales than anyone I know.

RH, let me clarify. The engineer I talked with stated that it was..."always best to monitor the actual PHYSICAL SIGNS OF PRESSURE and not relie entirely on your tracer data, NECO estimates, and/or loading manual recommendations - all of which can be in error." To me, this is GOOD ADVICE! - and advised as supplemental to their load data.

Obviously, the cartridge case is in the chamber and exposed to the REAL PRESSURE and, hence, going to show the results of that pressure exposure ("BUP - brass units of pressure"). If there's excessive pressure, there will be indications - that is, case-head expansion, loose primer pockets, and extracter marks. In my experience, the latter two go together. I don't measure case-head expansion, but it seems reasonable to me to expect that as the case-head expands the primer pockets are going to get loose quickly - only after a few loadings. According to both IMR/Hodgdon engineers I talked to said this begins to happen (in their lab) at ~65,000 psi. - but depending on your chamber tightness and the brass you're using. There are many variables. By ~80,000 psi virtually all new cases will develop a "toasted" primer pocket after one firing, becoming unsuitable for reloading a second time. Speer Bullets echoed this finding.

HC, I'm not certain we disagree that much. If those with a 300 RUM can run max/average pressures of 65,000 psi, why can't I - my guns and components are as good, probably better.

Regards, AIU

quote:

If those with a 300 RUM can run max/average pressures of 65,000 psi, why can't I - my guns and components are as good, probably better.

The 300 RUM has a larger head. Have you tested the mechanical properties of the 300 RUM brass vs your brass? If not you don't know.
What is the fascination with high pressure anyway?

quote:

The 300 RUM has a larger head. Have you tested the mechanical properties of the 300 RUM brass vs your brass?

The larger case head transfers more of the pressure to the bolt face then a smaller case will even though the pressures are the same. (psi= pressure over area) I think his idea is if the gun will take the pressure of the larger case why not the smaller one at the same pressure. He`s forgetting the case is the weak link, not the gun. The same M70 chambered for the 270 Win at one time was chambered in 22 Hornet. I doubt anyone wanted to run one at 270 pressures...........

Actually, this must be qualified.

A gentleman named David White did an experiment where he attempted to measure backthrust by firing rounds from an open breech and measuring the velocities of the flying cases with a chronograph.

He discovered that the straighter the case profile, the better the cases grabbed the chamber upon firing and the slower they shot out of the chamber.

Ackley Improved rounds stayed completely in the chamber and did not move at all. By that I infer that they will not cause any backthrust on the action.

When talking about backthrust caused by rounds with different casehead diameters, one must take the case profile into account.

quote:

Ackley Improved rounds stayed completely in the chamber and did not move at all. By that I infer that they will not cause any backthrust on the action.

If that was true it would mean a 6mm/284 with a few thou headspace would still have a few thou headspace after firing.

Mike

My 22-250 with lighter loads backs out the primer and maintains the headspace.

At a cretain pressure, AI rounds will create backthrust, just not at standard pressures (50-60K). The backthrust caused by AI rounds will be much less than from standard rounds.

With light loads I can go along with that but a little bit more pressure and you seem to cross a threshold.

When I had a 358 STA with very reduced loads, about 55 grains of Varget as I remember with 200 grain bullets...when fired in necked up 340 Wby brass they did not reform the Wby shoulder....but 60 grains did reform the shoulder.

By the way, a 22/250 is a pretty tapered case, along way from Ackley Improved.

Mike

In the above mentioned experiment, a 250 Savage AI remained in an open T/C chamber despite being fired at 50K PSI. The author claims that the .010" headspace was maintained.

The threshold probably depends on brass thickness, and the chamber pressure. Norma brass, which incidentally makes Weatherby brass, generally is twice as thick in the shoulder area than Win/R-P brass. This would explain your observation.

I think it might have also been caused by the shape of the Wby shoulder.

The same load fired in neck down 375 brass did form. Of course there would be slightly more pressure when fired in the smaller 375 case.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Recono, how do you know what I do for a living? - you might be surprised.

I don't know what makes you think that I think that I know what you do for a living, but if you have an urge to take a shot at surprising me, feel free to indulge it.

quote:

I think his idea is if the gun will take the pressure of the larger case why not the smaller one at the same pressure.

Actually the 300 RUM has more brass around the primer pocket. All things being equal it is probably harder to expand the primer pocket of a 300 RUM than it is to expand a 300 Mag that uses the H&H size head.

ireload2,
Acually I was refering to bolt thrust as the others implied. The increased area of the larger diameter case should give more "pressure" on the bolt & lugs then a small diameter one. The idea is similar to a piston. The same psi on a 1" piston will only do half as much work as a 2" piston due to the difference in area being worked on.- I know, I know "theoretically"

His comment was "If a 300 RUM can run at 65ksi why can't I?" Assuming both are fired in a rifle strong enough the action strength is not the limiting factor. The limiting factor is the strength of the case head.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
RH, let me clarify. The engineer I talked with stated that it was..."always best to monitor the actual PHYSICAL SIGNS OF PRESSURE and not relie entirely on your tracer data, NECO estimates, and/or loading manual recommendations - all of which can be in error." To me, this is GOOD ADVICE! - and advised as supplemental to their load data.

That was absolutely EXCELLENT advice from the Experts and I agree with your assessment.

Apparently the Experts understand it is far better to get "First Hand Pressure Indications" directly from the case rather than "Second Hand information from a Strain Gauge" due to the inaccuracy with Set-Ups and the totally wrong idea they do not need to be Calibrated to a Known Standard. (Boy, that sure sounds familiar. )

quote:

Obviously, the cartridge case is in the chamber and exposed to the REAL PRESSURE and, hence, going to show the results of that pressure exposure ("BUP - brass units of pressure"). If there's excessive pressure, there will be indications - that is, case-head expansion, loose primer pockets, and extracter marks. In my experience, the latter two go together.

Yes they do and it is a good observation on your part.

quote:

I don't measure case-head expansion, but it seems reasonable to me to expect that as the case-head expands the primer pockets are going to get loose quickly - only after a few loadings. According to both IMR/Hodgdon engineers I talked to said this begins to happen (in their lab) at ~65,000 psi. - but depending on your chamber tightness and the brass you're using. There are many variables. By ~80,000 psi virtually all new cases will develop a "toasted" primer pocket after one firing, becoming unsuitable for reloading a second time. Speer Bullets echoed this finding.

Here they are erring on the side of SAFETY for the unknown reloader. As for Case Head Expansion(CHE), their statement can be totally true, or slightly wrong. It actually depends on the strength of the "Load".

And of course, the very best Pressure Detection Method of all time - Pressure Ring Expansion(PRE) works even then. But as with every other Pressure Detection Method, there are specific ways to go about doing it. When done correctly, it is completely reliable and repeatable with complete SAFETY just as it has worked for well over 100 years.

quote:

HC, I'm not certain we disagree that much. If those with a 300 RUM can run max/average pressures of 65,000 psi, why can't I - my guns and components are as good, probably better. ...Regards, AIU

The part I disagree with is "giving the impression to the Rookies" that it is OK to go beyond SAAMI Pressure Limits. Once a person begins doing this, it tends to "mislead" some of the Beginners into thinking, "Hey, if he can go to those Pressures, there is no reason I can't!"

At the same time, I understand the point of your post. And, I really see no way to discuss this particular issue without laying the "ideas and concepts out in the open", but see no way to keep the people with little or know reloading knowledge from drawing improper conclusions.

So, I hope you see that my "concern" is only with the Rookies who try to understand a post "at this level".
---

And of course you have to wade through the "loonacy posts". I've found it best to ignore them until they become openly dangerous and then blow them out of the water.

Your personal buddy and resident Board Lier made a post recently about how to remove a Seated "Live Primer" by Hammer on the Anvil with a tool having a Sharp Point to drive it out of the case. If you do a search on, "The World's Most Ignorant Reloading Suggestion", you can see it for yourself and how the fool attempted to defend his postition. It will give you a real appreciation for his Reloading and Internal Ballistic knowledge.

And he tends to "skew" what you will post so it is no longer what you said or intended. Plus there are the outright Lies.

So, I tend to basically ignore the Lier's posts until he gets seriously dangerous. Unfortunately he has "BT Barnumed" a lot of folks into believing in a non-Calibrated HSGSs is useful and SAFE, when they certainly are not SAFE and questionable about their usefullness.

So, I am real glad to see your posting that the IMR/Hodgdon Experts also have little reguard for the HSGS fiascos.

Best of luck to you.

Hot Core, you have made so many ridiculous and unspportable statements, that nobody believes you anymore. It's embarrassing to see a grown man constantly pee all over his shoes that way, and in public, too.

Your silly rants are responsible for more strain gage system sales than any other factor I can think of.

If you keep it up, I'm sure they will eventually send you a system out of gratitude. That way, there is at least a possibility that you can raise your actual experience with the system from its present zero, total ignorance, condition.

The only thing necessary to ridicule Hot Core is to accurately quote him:

1. Standard list of Hot Core fabrications, unsupported by any known facts or credible references, all posted on this board by Hot Core, for everyone to see---
1.1. Mounting a strain gage on a rifle will spoil the accuracy.
1.2. You need a CMM to measure the ID and OD of a chamber.
1.3. Mounting a strain gage will cause your rifle to rust.
1.4. Strain gage systems cannot be calibrated, and the results are just a guess.
1.5. PRE is completely repeatable and reliable.
1.6. PRE is calibrated.
1.7. Claims to have 20 years of experience with strain gages.
1.8. Claims that strain gages don’t work outside a laboratory.
1.9 Quotes Ken Waters, the “father†of PRE to support his claims, when, in fact, Waters contradicts Hot Core.
1.10 Claims that a laptop computer and a $200 PressureTrace unit cost $3,750.
1.11 Claims that it takes about an hour to plug the PressureTrace into the computer, connect to the strain gage, and boot the computer.
1.12 Claims that measuring chamber dimensions with a dial caliper is just a guess at the dimensions.
1.13 Claims that the one and only way to calibrate anything is by direct comparison with a known artifact in the same units of measure. Can't explain how you calibrate an automobile speedometer using this method, how we know the mass of an electron without comparing it to a standard mass, and how we know the distances to other galaxies without comparing them to a meter stick.
1.14 Claims that he is an EE, when, in fact, he is not.
1.15 Publicly speculated that I may be “queer for himâ€.

2. Standard list of Hot Core self-contradictions—
2.1. Claims that you can use factory ammunition as a maximum pressure reference. Also claims that you cannot.
2.2. Claims that you need SAAMI standard ammunition to calibrate a strain gage, but that you don’t need it to calibrate PRE.
2.3. Claims that you cannot use chamber dimensions to calibrate a strain gage, but that you can use brass dimensions to calibrate PRE.
2.4. Claims that he gets four significant digits measuring brass with a micrometer, but the rest of us can’t get three when measuring a chamber.
2.5 Claims to be an EE, but can’t answer simple questions about analog electronic circuits.
2.6 Claims that PRE is calibrated, and accurate. Also claims that it is not, and that knowing actual pressure is irrelevant.
2.7 Falsely claims that the strain gage system is calibrated by repetitive firing of ammunition with an unknown pressure, failing to note that he proposed exactly this system for calibrating PRE.

3. Hot Core logical fallacies/half truths--
3.1 Hot Core can teach anyone to use a micrometer in five minutes, and it is a precise instrument. Since it is a precision instrument, and easy to use, it follows that the dimensions of a brass casing accurately and precisely reflect the pressure of a load.
3.2 Refuses/fails to provide any credible references or experimental data to support his assertions.
3.3 Argues that it is impossible to get adequately accurate chamber dimensions, because they involve a “double ogiveâ€. Obviously does not know where strain gages are actually applied, on the outside of the chamber over the middle of the cartridge case, and that the only chamber measurements needed are a single ID and OD.

My guarantee of truth: All these statements have been made by Hot Core, or are factual statements about things he has said. If there are errors in the list, anyone, including Hot Core can ask for changes, and, if they are reasonable, I will make them. If have made this offer many times, and no one, including Hot Core, has ever asked for a change.

HC, please remember that PO Ackley studied pressure effects in both 30-06 type cases and belted-magnum cases and found that both failed at about the same pressures - that is, 65,000 psi (CUP). PO Ackley concluded that there was no design advantage of the belted-magnum case over the traditional 30-06 style case - given that both are made of equivalent quality brass.

Also, because the internal diameter of the 30-06 style case is less than both the belted-magnum and 300 RUM cases - given the same internal pressure - there will be more bolt thrust and chamber wall tension created in the larger diameter cases. Actually the 30-06 style cases are intrinsically safer than the larger diameter cases.

what is an RSI pressure trace?

wombat, from what I've read on this forum, I don't anyone here knows what a RSI pressure tracing is?

quote:

Also, because the internal diameter of the 30-06 style case is less than both the belted-magnum and 300 RUM cases - given the same internal pressure - there will be more bolt thrust and chamber wall tension created in the larger diameter cases. Actually the 30-06 style cases are intrinsically safer than the larger diameter cases.

Does that mean a .222 or a Hornet case is safer than a .30/06 case? No - your argument makes no sense. True there is more bolt thrust but if the action is strong enough the case is still the weakest link.
By the way I don't remember Ackley mentioning that he had any pressure measuring equipment. If he did it wasn't a strain guage.