Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
one of us |
I have read here on many occasions that the side by side double rifle is no were near as strong an action as bolt action is. Why? I just got my first double rifle yesterday and upon comparing the size of the locks they look bigger than the bolt lugs on my M77 ruger! I am not a mechanical engineer, like some people here, so I am dumbfounded by this. I plan on hand loading for this new rifle of mine and am concerned about strength. Some of the people I have spoken with, friends and relatives, seem to think I should have no problems with any load I use in it strengthwise, but I might have regulation issues. Thanks | ||
|
One of Us |
Hi Casey, You would be well advised to stay fairly close to the bullet weight and velocity for which your rifle was regulated. Although many of the double rifles have a massive appearance they are still among the weakest of actions. I'll let those who are much more knowledgeable than I expound the reasons for this. A danger of loading too hot is that your rifle could go "off the face" which can make it dangerous to shoot and is quite expensive to repair. Enough of that. What make and caliber rifle did you get? Welcome to a new "addiction"! Good Hunting, ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
My new rifle is a Davide Pedersoli Kodiak MkIV 45-70. I appreciate your response, I really do, but why is the double rifle action so weak? What makes it so weak? I looked it over like I said and the action appears to be at least as strong as my Ruger M77 bolt action. I mean the lugs on my double are bigger than those on the bolt of my M77. I think Casey | |||
|
one of us |
The design of the break open double is such that it is to used at about 14 tons...95% of doubles will shoot only one load...One hot round will shoot your double "off the face" and that is an expensive fix..A double is something one should not play with..find a nice load and shoot that one, end of story. That applies doubly with the Kodiak, which is actually a bit weaker than a convention double like a Jefferys or Searcy etc. That's why it is produced in the low pressured 45-70 round. ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
Ray, thank you for the information. What "fails" that causes the rifle to shoot off the face? Why is the Kodiak weaker than the Searcy? The pictures I have seen of the two they look alot alike from a size perspective. Can a double rifle safely handle a double i.e. both barrels going off accidently? Will this accident destroy the rifle? Casey | |||
|
one of us |
Casey, the reason the break top double rifle is not as strong as a bolt action has nothing to do with size, but geomtry. The normal bolt action is built around a bolt, with locking lugs on either side of the cartridge end of the bolt that mate up with a surface that is the leading edge of a very long action body. The cartridge is surrounded by the barrel butt, and the reciever ring of the action. The trust of the case when the cartridge is dirrectly in line with the bolt,and locking system, so that it pushes streight back, against almost 8" of solid steel. This makes for a very strong containment system for the pressure of the high pressure cartridge. Though a "NEW" double rifle may be made of real good steel, and be massive in size, the dynamics of the thrust on the double rifle has not changed since the design was invented. The break top double rifle is still 18th century technology, and to my knowledge, physics has not changed in that time. The chambers are, not only, not in line with the locking system, but above it. Additionally, the right barrel is not only above the horrizonal line of the locking system, but is also to the right of this line as well, with the left barrel being equilly as far above, and to the left of this line. This causes the action to bend down from the standing breach, forward, as well as twist to the left for the right barrel and the same but to the right for the left barrel, when fired. Though this bending, and twisting is microscopic, it is damageing to the steel of the action, and if abused by over pressure, will come off face. The first thing a person should do when he decides to buy a double rifle is admit he has no idea what he is doing, and that he must learn his riflery all over again from scratch. He will also find the rules for handloading a bolt rifle do not apply to double rifles. No other rifle in the world has the same rules to live by, as the S/S double rifle. This fact is not understood my many, otherwise knowledgable, people, even many well known custom gunsmiths, simply do not under stand how double rifle works, and one must pick his smith with caution, when he is dealing with double rifles. The S/S double rifle is designed around a particular cartridge, pressure, and bullet weight, at a given velocity. Sometimes a very well regulated double rifle, will go completely crazy when a scope is added, or a recoil reducer is installed after market. The rifle is regulated with what is on it when built, and any change in the mix can throw it into a frenzy of scattered shots. The care and feeding of a side by side double rifle is not something to be entered into lightly! Back to rifle school fellow, you will learn a bunch before you are a double rifleman! A person who is not willing to learn, or thinks he doesn't need to learn anything, is not the best candidate for double rifle ownership! ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
Mac, thanks again for all the information. I am still puzzled about the whole strength issue though and this may just be due to my very limited understanding of physics. The loads you provided earlier according to my reloading manuals state a breech pressure of about 38,000 CUP - 40,000 CUP. This is alot higher than the stock 45-70 ammo which is loaded around 18,000 CUP - 22,000 CUP. You stated that you rifle was regulated for the 300 grain factory load, but shot just fine with a 400 grain load pushed to a velocity, which again according to my reloading manuals, is slightly higher than the factory 300 grain load i.e. 300 grain factory load 1880 fps, 400 grain Speer with 58 grains of IMR 3031 2031 fps. I am also confused because in the bolt action the force is applied directly to the lug, but with the double barrel the load is reduced because of the leverage. I think Alf said it on that thread Todd E started. Alf said and I think he is right that the load is lower on the bite because the torque is less on the bite. It seems to me then that the double may actually be stronger than the bolt action if the lugs are the same size.
I know there are people here that can answer this question I am begging you guys to help me out. Mac I know you are trying but I am aweful dense or something. Casey | |||
|
one of us |
quote: #1 #2 #3 Todd E can give you the numbers, that is his game, I simply know what I know, and I find it hard to explian it, in any meaningful way, to someone else! Sorry! ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
Mac, I really appreciate all you attention at trying to educate an art teacher. I meant it when I said I didn't understand physics. Your experience and your willingness to share it means alot to guys like me, believe me. To be honest guys like Todd E scare me because they use all those numbers and I have no clue if any of it is true or if it is all just be BS. I will keep my pressures below 37,000 CUP as published then and approach that with caution. Obviously if I cannot hold the regulation any longer that is when I will have to stop. As I said earlier I just want to get the most out of the rifle I can without damaging the gun nor myself, while maintaining accuracy as well. A Big Thanks, | |||
|
one of us |
Great posts, Mac! I don't think it could be explained any better. No higher mathematics or physics is needed beyond this. The static bolting mechanisms and dynamic forces in firing are just two different animals between the [single-barrel-in-line-bolt action] and the [double-barreled-break-open action]. "Break open" is the key term. If wear and tear or compression or bending forces alter the tolerances that keep the underbolts and hinge pin snuggly mated in the bites of the lumps ... whether it is a static/at rest alteration or a dynamic momentary warp ...then all goes to heck in rapid progression, like dominoes falling: off face. A Mauserite bolt action thrives on slamming the bolt open and closed and laughs at a little grit or grime in the mechanism. A double's action cannot tolerate dirt nor slamming open and closed. They are as delicate and precise in their bolting mechanisms as they are effective in delivering that fast second shot. The bolt action simply does not suffer the same severe dynamic stresses. Any of the wear and tear short of catastrophic blowup simply develops excessive headspace in a slowly progressive manner, comparatively much more slowly than an abused double would. You cannot simply measure the surface area of the locking lugs of the bolt action and the bites of the double's lumps and expanse of the lumps and raceways and compare them as a comparison of strength. It's apples and oranges, two different animals. Mac has made this perfectly clear. If anyone doesn't understand this, he had better re-read Mac's posts above. ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
Casey, I can't add much to the above other than I belive the Kodiak is on a shotgun action and lacks the 3rd lug...It lacks the build up of metal on the sides and edge of the water table... I suspect it would be better at 20,000 PSI than at 38000...At any rate you really should ask Kodiak what their recommenddation for loads are and where their guarentees are...Many fine doubles need to be tightened up every 300 to 600 rounds...Many are off the face and the owners don't even know it and thats not good for the gun...I have my double checked over every year by my favorite double rifle smithy. Good double rifle smiths are L&L Interprises, Carson city Nv. and DAvid Yale, Yellow Jacket, Colo. ------------------ | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
Interesting responses. Mostly BS, but still interesting. I would not load that bad boy Pedersoli over 29,800 CUP in a case the size of the 45-70! If you go to the 9.3X74R or 8X57R then you could get by with 37,000 CUP max. The reason being concern over the fatigue life of the hinge pin. The Pedersoli uses a small little 8mm hinge pin. Even if you were to double the rifle at those loads you should not plastically deform the hinge pin. Plastic deformation would become a real concern with a double fire in your 45-70 if you loaded it to say 37,000 CUP. My adivse is use IMR4895 or H4895. With a 400 grain pill you will most likely be able to achieve a compresses load and keep the pressures below the 29,500 CUP mark. For the record Pedersoli states that the factory proof test load generates 28,000 psi. Too bad no one ever answered my questions. Alf tried and even got some partial credit due to partial correctness. Other did not even have the guts to try. Oh well, I am done now this is the last word for me anyway. Enjoy your double. I think with the right powder (like IMR4895) you can get a 400 grain pill to 1900 fps and maintain your regulation. That would be one potent close range North American woods rifle. Heck I might get one myself. Todd E [This message has been edited by Todd E (edited 05-22-2002).] | ||
one of us |
Todd E, Ta ta, R | |||
|
one of us |
/ | |||
|
one of us |
How critical is the size of the hinge pin? Is this something I should be concerned with? Casey | |||
|
<merkelmeister> |
Casey: relax and enjoy your new rifle!! these guys try and out tech each other, and while they are quite knowledgeable, they sometimes fail the test of the tool vs the purpose. Always, of course, in my humble opinion. Your 45-70 (if that is what you have) is made for its own uses. Your uses. your loads. your choices. Know the limitations of powder and pressure, and within them, I doubt you will wear that "weak action" out. And if you do, then certainly you have had thousands of rounds of enjoyment at quite a good bargain. And when you get as old as I am, and you see a safe full of guns and rifles that you do not have enough time left to wear out, then you will understand it when I say: If you take care of it, it will certainly do everything you ask of it and more than you will ever be able to ask of it. So forget the hinge pin, forget the max loads. Find a good load and go looking for things to use it on. this missive is to myself as well as anyone else, since I too spend more time keyboard hunting than critter shooting. Carried a shotgun for three days last week for turkey, and never pulled a trigger. Did not matter whether I had 3 inch duplex or 2 3/4 inch buffered, or what choke or what LOP... still a great hunt and saw two buddies each kill their first gobblers. shoot straight and waidmansheil. | ||
one of us |
quote: Well said.. | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
Alf, There is NO opinion here. This is not medicine it is mechanical engineering. That is the BIG difference between engineers and doctors. See a doctor is somewhat screwed, like a mechanic, in that he is stuck working with what he's got (in a patient that is) without the benefit of being able to know everything that there is to know about that patient. An engineer is more like God in that we specify every little thing and therefore know with a great degree of certainty what is wrong and why it is wrong. I can design a component to last 300,000 cycles under test conditions with a confidence of 98.5% and a reliabiltity of 99.5%. This is something a doctor just cannot do because of the current limitation of the Medical Art. To your specific question. I feel that I owe you at least some specifics since you tried to answer some of my questions and you did a decent job of it. The hinge pin is the weakest link in a properly designed double rifle. The water table or action ledge SHOULDN'T be deflecting so much as to cause the bites to lose contact with their respective bolts as RAB suggests. If this is the case then the action ledge is poorly designed and I would be afraid of that gun VERY AFRAID. The axial thrust of the cartridge is reacted against by the standing breech face and the hinge pin/lump race. The torque generated by this moment is reacted against by the bite(s) and bolt(s). The force directed against the bolts & bites is a ratio of the moment arms. The moment arm of the thrust force is the axial distance between the centerline of the bore and the centerline of the hinge pin. Lets assume this to be 1 inch. Therefore if you have a thrust force of 5000 pounds, you would have a thrust force generated torque of 5000 in-lbs. This 5000 in-lbs is reacted against by the bolting which have moment arms of, lets say, 0.7" and 1.4". These dimensions are measured from the centerline of the hinge pin to the center of the bite race. If you have Purdey Double Bites as in this description and they are correctly fitted then the thrust torque is generating an equal amount of stress on each bite. If they are not well fitted then one bite/bolt will carry all the load. If this is the case and the front (closest to the muzzle) bite/bolt were carring the load then the load on this bolt/bite would be, the in this example, 5000 in-lbs / 0.7 in. A value greater than the actual thrust of the cartridge. If the rear most bolt/bite carried the load then the load carried by the bolt/bite, in this example would be, 5000 in-lbs / 1.4 in. A value which is 40% lower than the cartridges thrust force. If both lugs bearing evenly and the spacing was per our example with a an axial distance of 2.1" from the standing breach to the centerline of the hinge pin then the loads on the bolt/bites, in this example, would be: front bite: (.33*thrust torque) / 0.7 in rear bite: (.67*thrust torque) / 1.4 in In other words they would be equal as I previously stated. The lateral torsional load is carried by the hinge pin in a similar matter. But this torque is also resisted somewhat by the action bars and the lump. I modeled the hinge pin subjected to the loading of this example and discovered that modelling hinge pin stresses as a load evenly distributed over the hinge pin was about 97% accurate as opposed to modelling with the two torsional loads applied 90 degrees apart. The stress in the hinge pin in this example is approximately 33% greater than the stresses in the bolts/bites (with properly fitted bolting). In reality, a properly fitted SXS double with properly designed Purdey Double Underbolting is stronger than a Mauser bolt action. THE MAJOR ISSUE WITH THE SXS IS WEAR. As the action wears with time and fits are relaxed the stresses can climb rapidly. Due caution must be taken with regard to proper maintenance and care of a SXS doubel rifle just as Mac has stated, but only due to the excessive wear that poor maintenance induces. Now I am done. You guys agrue too much for me and that gets my blood pressure up. There is no opinion here Alf only FACT. The patent history you quote from documents the learning curve of the early makers. They patented their enlightenments along the way. The system is simple and easily modeled. It is a bit more complex than a bolt gun but stronger. It has to be since some imbecile will undoubtedly double fire than dang gone thing and you cannot allow him to blow himself up can you (unless you like to pay lawyers lots of money). Todd E [ 05-26-2002, 18:45: Message edited by: Todd E ] | ||
one of us |
ToddE, it is quite evident that you are a very intelligent person, and trained in a thing that may as well be something written in GREEK to most people, myself included! The way you present the explanation almost made sense, even to a holder of PHD in "DUMB ASS" like me. Your confidence in your ability to put things on paper that will yeald 99.5% accuracy in application, is some confidence, I must say. This may be absouletely true, I can't tell, but we have all seen those 99.5%, sure things, put out by lesser machinical ingeneers, than yorself, that didn't work that way when sold to the public, and used in the real world. Your theories are correct, and will be 100% accurate as long as everything involved is done 100% perfectly. It is my opinion, however, that humans are not 100% perfect, like numbers are, and no fitting can be 100%. With that thought in mind, I suppose when we find a perfectly fitted action, we may apply your theory to it with confidence, but untill then I suppose we'll just have to muddle through in a trial and error system we find so well fitted to our limited intelect. | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
Mac, I do not wish to argue. My comments regarding the 99.5% reliability with 98.5% confidence are in the field under known test conditions. If you chose to drop the component off of a 500 foot cliff I could design it to perform to a given set of standards to those levels of reliability and confidence. This is no boast this is fact. The old doubles were not subjected to this level of engineering expertise. There was no reason since the Bar Association at that time was nowhere near as powerful as today. To provide you with some additional insight into the actual strength of a given action I have modeled my Kodiak. With a thrust force of 3950 lbs and 80% contact on the bites/bolts, which is approximately what my rifle should when blued in the stresses are as follow: Front: 25,200 psi Rear: 25,500 psi Hinge pin: 43,250 psi (this is due to the small 8 mm diameter of the hinge pin) The Ruger M77 in 416 Rigby has the following stresses at given thrust forces. This is with 100% contact so in reality the stresses will be much higher. 3950lbs = 73,500 psi (baseline to Kodiak) 5000lbs = 89,700 psi (actual thrust force from factory load) @ 80% contact these stresses become: 3950 lbs: 88,200 psi 5000 lbs: 111,600 psi It is obvious that the Mauser system is much higher stressed. It is also obvious that the mechanical advantage achieved by the double barrel action will always reduce the stress carried by the bolting (at least on the rear most bolt). Today we actually perform much of our analysis on computer simulations. These simulations have been correlated to real field events so our correlationship between simulation and the real world is typically 95% or better. As I said in a previous post. Davide Pedersoli designed the 45-70 to a breech pressure of 28,000 psi. The components of that rifle are sized to that breech pressure. Prudence dictates that you DO NOT exceed it on a regular basis. The SXS double as you yourself have stated requires a great deal of TLC! I agree wholeheartedly. Excessive wear will affect the operating stresses considerably. Please accept this analysis for what it is, FACT. Your double can survive both a double fire and the extreme pressure spike that was common with Cordite. They were designed for those occurrences. I stronly recommend against loading ammunition to those levels however. Now I hope the record is set straight. I believe I have stated the facts for all to see. I also believe that I have outlasted my usefulness on this board. So as RAB put it Ta Ta. Todd E | ||
<merkelmeister> |
"An engineer is more like God " I am quite sure that engineers appreciate this compliment. I would hope that God has a sense of humor about it. | ||
one of us |
ToddE, I wish to appoligise to you! My snide post was uncalled for, and I now see that what I thought was eliteism, was simply blind confidence in your ability, and not aimed at anyone's intelect. I'm sure most would agree that there are some things you just know. You don't know how you know it, and can't explain it to someone else. Many things are exactly that way for me, and have been born out over 59 of my 65 years dealing with guns, with 40 years of that being with double rifles. You on the other hand seem to know why these things happen, and are blessed with the ability to express it by the written word, eventhough most of us do not understand it. We are mostly glad just to know when we are about to blow something up, and as long as we don't, we are happy in our ignorance! I'm truely sorry if my comments have upset you, and I don't want to be the reason you would leave this forum. Your expertese is valuable, and for those who understand it, is a boon. Sadly I'm not amoung them, but that is my problem, not your's . | |||
|
<Butch Searcy> |
ToddE, your figures would work fine on a single shot break open rifle. You haven't pluged in all the factors required for a s/s tho. Because of the relationship of the bores to the centerline of the lumps, it requires added calculations as to the strength of a s/s action. There is alot more geometry one must consider in making an evaluation of strength. I assure you a mauser will stay together long after the best fitted s/s has gone to the way side. | ||
<500 AHR> |
Mac, You are not the reason I have decided to curtail my posting. There are others here, which are much more ignorant than yourself (and YOU are not really ignorant my friend). To me there is just too much petty arguing going on over opinion when facts are expressed. So don't upset yourself if I don't post much if at all anymore. Butch, I have posted stresses which are generated by the vertical couple if you will. I completely understand that there is also a horizontal couple. Most double rifles that I have had the pleasure of looking at have actions which are much stiffer in the horizontal than the vertical. I did model the stress on the hinge pin as a uniformly distributed load and as a the actual resultants of the two couples (horizontal and vertical). I will not go deeper into this discussion on a public forum for obvious reasons. I do have a couple quesitons though. Will one of you heavy double rifles (say 500 NE)survive a double fire? The reason I ask is that my old Jeffery boxlock (475 No2) and a H&H sidelock 500 NE I know of both have and still will. I have also seen one Berreta SXS in 458 Win Mag double more than once. Would you want to double charge a 416 Rigby and fire it off in you Mauser? I assure you if you could actually fit that much powder in the case (something like 190 grains of IMR4350) your mauser would not work anymore and you may not be functioning either (and not because of recoil). PLEASE NONE OF YOU GENIUSES OUT THERE TRY THAT AT HOME. YOU WILL RUIN A PERFECTLY GOOD MAGNUM MAUSER AND PROBABLY YOURSELF. Todd E | ||
one of us |
Todd E, I guess I am one of the more ignorant here. But, I do not see that the near simultaneous discharge of two normal pressure cartridges in a double rifle is analogous at all to the impossible charge in a single cartridge fired in a bolt rifle that you describe. If you mean a pressure greater than 100,000 psi or whatever, for the bolt rifle, the analogy is still no good. Some of the lateral couple forces in a double discharge with the side by side will be opposing each other, for example. Just not a good analogy. I think you are just evading Butch Searcy. Are you still enforcing the laws of nature? That is why you claim an occupation of "Law Enforcement" is it not? Do engineers in general think they are God, or is that just one of your idiosyncracies? It is just no fun to analyze out the BS from the truth with some of your posts. Frankly it is hard to believe many of the things you say that are not of a mathematically provable or basically logical nature, given your admitted track record. Just sign me one of the ignoramuses. Ta Ta, The Ignoramus | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
RAB, I do not believe you are an ignorant individual. YOU are not among those I dislike here. I apologize to those that I guess (surprise to me) actually found usefulness in some of my posts. I freely admit to posting erroneous BS to draw out someone elses ignorance. That was my intent with the response back to Mr. Searcy. This behavior is simply instinctive anymore as I have to cross examine suppliers like this all the time to expose their weaknesses (ignorance/lies). It is kind of a twist on good cop, bad cop. Mr. Searcy is wrong! There is only one force acting upon the action it is the thrust force. It is reacted against by the hinge pin. This reaction force generates two seperate moments. One is vertical (trying to open the action as you would to load a couple shells) and one which is horizontal. In typical double rifles the vertical moment is of greater magnitude than the horizontal. The vertical couple is reacted against by the bolting. The horizontal moment is reacted against by the lump/action bars and the standing breech/unfired vbarrel breech face. Both moments will cause microscopic deflections of the action bar. If the action is designed appropriately these deflections will be measureable in microns (1 millionth of a meter)! If the standing breech face is too thin you can have issues here as well. Essentially, a well maintained and designed double rifle is at least as strong if slightly less durable than a Mauser. You are of course correct in that the doubling effect will not simulate a double charge in a mauser. Did you know however that Cordite was notorious for excessive pressures, which could be 2.5 to 3 times the "normal" load pressures? That is no bullshit. The double rifle action is a very simple thing. You should try designing internal combustion engines, transmissions, tranfer cases, or even a hypoid drive axle. The loadings and deflections in these members and/or systems is much greater and beau coupe more complex. I have said it before and I say it again DO NOT OVERLOAD ANY OF YOUR FIREARMS REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY BARRELS THEY HAVE! Regarding my comments about the engineer and the Almighty. Yes that used to be a common joke among engineers. Since engineers create from nothing just like the Almighty did. Unfortunately, unlike the Almighty we engineers cannot perform miracles or defy the laws of nature. I admit to being surprised by your comments about this I thought you to have a much higher self-esteem. I mean I thought the comment was pretty obviously meant in jest. Anyone else need a direct good bye? I do not wish to leave anyone upset at me. The ignorant individuals that bother me aren't any of the old guys if that were the case I would have left long ago. It is mostly the younger bunch who argue every little thing. Oh, and the wolf debates (jest). One last clarification. The hinge pin stress I quoted in the previous post was the stress at a point 0.1" from the edge of the lump on the Pedersoli rifle. This is not the maxmium value. The maximum value is at the interface between the hinge pin and the action bar. For the load that I was using (3950 lbs of thrust) the hinge pin stress would be approximatley 73,000 psi. This is too high for repeated shooting! So just reiterate the Pedersoli double should not be loaded any hotter than 28,000 psi! Todd E [ 05-29-2002, 03:02: Message edited by: Todd E ] | ||
one of us |
Todd E, We certainly don't want you to "go away." I think that would be the concensus here. Help with the analysis of the engineering, math and physics is appreciated. Obviously you get bored with some of our less sophisticated approaches to some problems or questions, maybe even the questions themselves, eh? I sure don't want to see the good old boys kissing each other's ass nor anyone having to tiptoe around a topic. Cruel hard facts and truth are what we want to see here. Engineering expertise helps a lot toward that purpose. I have other little areas to be an "expert" in, or at least think I am. I'll sure jump on something I see as bogus being presented here, and I hope you will too. Having a bunch of different "experts" to add their views from time to time on the various topics across the board here is what makes this site so great. And if you want to call yourself a LEO, O.K., tongue in cheek. | |||
|
one of us |
/ | |||
|
one of us |
ALF, Baie baie dankie! Thanks for taking the time to post. Sometimes those with the big picture need to ride herd on the technicians. Thanks for keeping us on the right path. I am learning a lot here. | |||
|
Moderator |
Headgames divided by Headgames = Productive Interaction minus BS. | |||
|
one of us |
/ | |||
|
One of Us |
Todd E, Isn't there a left and right component of the thrust force as well? For example, when the right barrel of a double is fired, there would be a strong right hand force vector because the right barrel is off of centerline. Your explanation of 5/29 at 2:55 seems to ignore this factor. | |||
|
<George Hoffman> |
Gentlemen: I have read dthe above with some interest. I do not claim to have a number of engineering degrees behind my name. However, I have been around some and have done a few more. I have seen two double crack at the junction of the water table and standing breach. I have seen several that have "gone of the face" as they say. I had in my possission the last double that belonged to the famous J.A. Hunter, and it had a lot of slack in the acton. You could see it move by just holding it in your hands. Most of the older doubles used a third fastener to help keep the action of springing during firing. No way will a double take the hammering that a bolt acton will. FACT George | ||
one of us |
I am sorry I ever asked this question. I agree with Butch Searcy and 500grains in that Todd E cannot figure out that right and left force. I hope Todd E finally does what he has been saying he is going to do and LEAVE!!!! Casey | |||
|
one of us |
/ | |||
|
one of us |
Alf I don't mean to sound like a smart ass but I wouldn't brag about the hip and knee replacements. One of my teaching collegues has had a knee replacement last year and was told that he would need another in 5 - 10 years. The doctors did not want to replace his knee because he was only 48. They did however because he couldn't walk do to the pain. Anyway, cars last longer than 5 years. I have rad through the posts and it seems to me that Todd has answered most of the questions after all. He said there are two moments one vertical and one horizontal so if I understand it right that would be the up and down and the right and left forces. Is the O/U really stronger than the SXS? Casey | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
Alf, Have I ever told you how to cut up bones? Why do you continue to argue engineering principles with me? Principles which you obviously know very little if anything about. Well, you have seen through my conspiracy to trick the world into believing the hinge pin was the weakest link! You are of course correct. The water table to standing breech is the weak spot as your books indicated. Also, the rearward force is greater than the forward force, isn't it? You all saw through my exclusion of the right left force thing to. I can see there is no fooling you all. I have much to learn about a great many things. I shall go now and learn. Doctors are so very learned about physics! I should have known better than to try. George, One last attempt at conspiracy. There are many factors which will affect the fatigue life and strength of the action at the junction of the standing breech to action bars. I suggest you avoid rifles which do not have at least a 0.125" fillet radius in this area. Many of the old doubles I have seen had sharp corners to about .032" radii. This will design condition will generate a massive stress riser. Perhaps Alf's outdated experts have seen this. The best part of this entire discussion is that you were arguing with the results of a complete Finite Element Analysis conducted on a reverse engineered action. This means that the dimensions were taken from an action via a CMM machine (Coordinate Measuring Machine). I would have shared the knowledge, but since it is obviously too much BS on my part continue in you ignorant bliss. Mac, I believe that in many ways you and I agree wholeheartedly. I was only attempting to provide some engineering insight into key areas to look at in a double rifle action to understand the robustness of a given rifle's design. Todd E [ 05-31-2002, 02:59: Message edited by: Todd E ] | ||
one of us |
/ | |||
|
<500 AHR> |
Alf, Well I suppose you are like me then and have a hard time posting without people taking it the wrong way. I apologize then. I did not slander your profession either. Doctor's do not undertake years of training in physics. If you really want answers to the "questions" you asked I have answered then in a somewhat round about way. Here it is in a single comprehensive post. The analysis was conducted sometime ago and is not really pertinant to the original question asked on this thread. I apologize for the tangent. The analysis that I conducted was to determine the feasibility of rechambering a Kodiak MkIV to 450 NE from the strength and durability standpoint. I will provide the stress analysis and not the life estimates. I used a calculated thrust force, which I will not post here, but was substantially higher than that generated by a 45-70 loaded to a chamber pressure of 28,000 psi, and is more in tune with the thrust generated by a 470 NE. These were the results. von Mises Stress at junction of action bars and the standing breech: as a function of corner transition radius: 6mm radius: 43,000 psi 3mm radius: 54,000 psi 1mm radius: 95,000 psi One of those radii corresponds to the Pedersoli. The other two radii were reference calculations and based upon measurements taken from two English Double rifles of yesteryear's manufacture (two seperate English manufacturers) The large variation in stress illustrates the influence that a subtle design difference can have on the strength of the action as a whole. Action bar deflection: Vertical: 41 microns Horizontal: 33 microns Deflection @ the top of the standing breech: 26 microns Hinge Pin stress (maximum): 92,000 psi (this occurs at the junction of the hinge pin and the action bar on the side that is fired.) Bolting stress: (Bolts fitted to 80% contact with bite). Front: 32,000 psi Rear: 32,500 psi To answer your question about the strength of the action bar. Yes the action bar could be the weakest member if the stress riser (radius at the transition from action bar to standing breech) was too great i.e. too sharp of a corner. If I were shopping for a double rifle I would look closely at the following items: 1.) Hinge pin diameter: I would like to see .375" or larger. 2.) Lump thickness: A thickness at least equal to the hinge pin diameter. If it were me I would like it to be 0.0625" larger in thickness than the hinge pin is in diameter. 3.) Spacing of the bites. The should be equally spaced from hinge pin centerline to standing breech face. 4.) Corner radius diameter at the transition from the action bars to the standing breech. I would not consider anything less than 0.125" with BIGGER BEING BETTER. 5.) Action wall thickness at in the viscinity of the transition from action bar to standing breech. A thin section, particularly at the transition, will be prone to premature fracture. The highest stress on the action bar occurs at the outboard corner at the transition of the action bar to standing breech. 6.) Excessive wear on the standing breech face, breech face (barrels), bites, bolting, hinge pin, hinge pin race (in lump). Also look very closely for shiny spots on these surfaces. These shiny spots indicate high asperities i.e. localized contacts areas. These shiny areas are in fact the only physical contact between these two surfaces. It is an indication of poor fitting. It could also be a dishonest individual peening another loose and worn out action. I hope I have answered your questions. Todd E [ 05-31-2002, 04:36: Message edited by: Todd E ] | ||
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia