April
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Who's Online Now
4 members (griz, eightbore, ClapperZapper, Jtplumb), 1,313 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,469
Posts545,143
Members14,409
Most Online1,319
Apr 27th, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 9 of 10 1 2 7 8 9 10
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,393
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,393
I kept saying that you cannot get a double charge of any usual shotgun powder into a hull with a full load of shot, thank you Joe for vindicating me!
Mike

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 363
Likes: 16
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 363
Likes: 16
I have been told, by one who did fire a double-load in an AYA, and did replicate the load, that yes, you can put double load of powder in a shell and crimp it, but only in a loader that uses a full length die to support the shell when you crimp it. As with a PW. With a MEC loader, without a supporting die, shot is running out all over so the problem is more obvious.

It would be nice to have a final station that weighed the loaded shell and would warn of an over/under load. With todays electronic scales it really shouldn't be that hard.


Dennis Potter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,149
Likes: 1147
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,149
Likes: 1147
Originally Posted By: Mike Bonner
I kept saying that you cannot get a double charge of any usual shotgun powder into a hull with a full load of shot, thank you Joe for vindicating me!
Mike


What about the double load that Stallones described that happened to him on page 7 of this thread?

SRH


May God bless America and those who defend her.
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 314
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 314
Posted on another forum

"There are reports about NDT and magnaflux inspection of damascus, they are published in any number of reference books."

Gentlemen: I've done a lot of internet searching, but am unsure as to where to look. Does anyone here know of published images of any evaluation of pattern welded barrels?
Thank you!

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,343
Likes: 390
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,343
Likes: 390
I imagine you have done as much Damascus research as anyone. I've read a lot and never encountered any published references. That's why I questioned earlier if any of the European Proof Houses might have done and published testing to predict what barrels were most likely to fail proof. Maybe you could press the person who posted that on another forum to elaborate. I'll bet you won't get an answer. To me, the real experts are the ones who can say, "I don't know, but I'll try to find out."

In fact, I've only seen a couple articles on destructive testing which were very limited in scope... the Sherman Bell articles, and the articles by Missouri gunsmith Buck Hamlin who progressively loaded a Lefever with lengthened chambers and pitted barrels until it let loose with "nuclear loads".


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 314
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417
Likes: 314
I believe we are correct Keith, and have spent a long time trying to find something other than the same collection of BS, mythology and advice on various forums, many of which I have either contributed to, or which have information and images lifted from my website. And the internet has nothing from 'any number of reference books'.

Damascus SWORDS and ARMOUR have been Magnafluxed, but I have not yet found published evidence that a pattern welded shotgun barrel has been examined, despite all the advice out there to do so.

I had a long conversation with a NW gunsmith who HAS extensively tested Damascus barrels by MPI, and he has promised me some images. What we need though is to have a barrel with an abnormality by MPI, then try to blow it up and see if the failure is at that spot; which he has not been given permission to do by the owners of said barrels.

The only actual evaluation that I have found is this, from 'Zircon' back in 2007
http://www.familyfriendsfirearms.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-55364.html

I am doing a failure analysis of a pair of Parker barrels - one set damascus, and the other set homogenous Vulcan “fluid steel”. These barrels were used in the study by Sherman Bell and Tom Armbrust, published in Double Gun Journal. They subjected each barrel to increasingly heavier loads and they both failed at about 30,000 psi. Modern ammo gets up perhaps to 12,000 psi. Most folks that shoot these old gals use shells loaded to the 7,500 psi range.
During the failure analysis I noticed that the fracture length for the Vulcan barrels was substantially longer than for the damascus barrels. A close examination of the fracture surface showed progressive, low cycle fatigue marks on the damascus barrel. The crack advanced slightly with each increasingly higher pressured load. On the Vulcan barrels, both sides failed by a brittle fracture mechanism. By this, I mean the barrels let go in one fell swoop. Even though both sets of barrels failed at 30,000 psi, the behavior of the damascus barrels was superior to the Vulcan barrels, owing to the fact that the Vulcan barrels failed in a brittle fracture mode. A ductile fracture trumps a brittle fracture every time.
One of the (myths) with damascus is that it will fail at the welds where the original rods were forge-welded together. When I looked at this particular set of damascus barrels using a metallographically prepared sample, and up to 1,000X optical magnification, I saw NO EVIDENCE of weld joint failure, slag in the weld joints, porosity in the weld joints, etc. I have about 30 old barrels in this study, homogenous, damascus, and twist included. I am a practicing metallurgist who holds an M.S. degree, and am qualified to state the observations of barrel integrity made in this posting.
On the two old Parker barrels, there is a screw hole that comes up from the bottom and pins the extractors in place. Both barrels failed at that hole, because it takes a (segment) out of the side of the chamber and is the thinnest portion of the chambered area.
The damascus barrel let go by a mechanism known as low cycle fatigue. Each succeeding round had higher and higher pressure. After several rounds, a crack started at the extractor screw hole. Each successive round caused the crack to open up just a bit further, until finally the overpressure could not be contained and the (barrel) failed in a ductile fashion. Ductile failures in steel look like a taffy pull at about 1500 to 3000X magnification using scanning electron microscopy. There is a cup and cone appearance with a lot of micro-voids present. This appearance is a dead-set giveaway to a ductile fracture.
The "fluid steel" barrel failed by brittle rupture. The fracture surface is more or less smooth, but has some "rivulets" in it that point back towards the initiation point, which again was the screw hole. The fracture surface was about 3X as long as for the damascus barrels. In other words, the same 30,000 psi final internal load created a lot more fracture surface in the homogenous barrel than in the damascus barrel. This indicates that, for an equivalent-length fracture, it took less energy to open up the homogeneous barrel than for the damascus barrel. The words in the Sherman Bell article were that the Vulcan barrel failed much more abruptly and (violently) than the damascus barrel.
So the verbal description of the failures during firing and the visual observations of the fracture surfaces are in accord with each other. Both barrels ripped lengthwise for some distance and then the rupture terminated in a circumferential crack. In the case of the damascus barrels the crack spiraled around with the weld pattern, but it was not on a weld, rather it was on one of the in-between areas. After the damascus pattern is formed by wrapping rods together and forging them into a strip (the "skelp") which is wrapped around a mandrel, spiral paper-tube fashion, and is forge welded together. These spiral welds remained tight and the parent metal is what failed. This may seem pretty amazing, but in many, many instances the actual steel welded structure is stronger than parent metal.
Many microphotographs, chemical analysis of the steel, etc. (will) make up the (anticipated) article. I'll also be looking at several other barrel ruptures and measuring the strength of the various barrel steels in the "hoop" direction as the barrel will always fail in hoop tension with a lengthwise crack. Any internally pressurized cylinder has 2X the force in the hoop direction as in the longitudinal (axial) dimension, so it's no wonder why barrels all seem to blow out with lengthwise cracks.


To my knowledge, no further analysis has been published, and if anyone here knows Zircon, please tell him I'd love to have his collection of barrels.

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 271
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 271
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
Craig: It is hard to tell from small images, but the 'pit' is a crack, and the 'machine marks' are the crolle pattern




In the above picture, what has caused the rough surface on the top portion of the bore? Previously polished corrosion? Is that spot smooth or rough? I don't get to see the inside of a chamber from this angle and lighting very often, and they usually look to be pretty smooth from the vantage point of the end of the barrel. What I see in that picture appears to be small rings similar to what is visible after use of a Brush Research flex-hone if the bores have not been polished back to mirror. I looked at a 16ga Ideal Grade not too long ago that had opened chokes. The entire bore was mirror smooth from the chamber until the choke taper, at which point I could see the same tiny rings. I own a set of 16ga flex-hones, so I was familiar with the signature they leave behind. Again...I haven't seen many bores from this vantage point, so perhaps those ring marks are common, but it looks like the signature of a flex-hone. I am wrong about most things related to shotgun barrels, so that is likely also the case here. I'm asking the question for my own benefit, and not in an effort to offer up new information.

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 775
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 775
Drew:I remember when Zircon was posting his information on this site and have always wondered what happened to "the rest of the story". Would Dave Webber have contact in for Zircon?

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 73
Sidelock
Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 73
I have sent several emails to Zircon trying to recover samples I sent to him long ago to no avail.

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Does anybody know Zircon's name? Please don't post it if you do. But if someone knows his name perhaps they could send it to Drew or some other person here known to be affable and trustworthy.



I am glad to be here.
Page 9 of 10 1 2 7 8 9 10

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.091s Queries: 34 (0.065s) Memory: 0.8696 MB (Peak: 1.8991 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-04-27 13:31:55 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS