NiklasP:
Top of the morning to you too. Just my opinion, but I think the 1893 tube trials and 1896 rule changes for different powder types was a hand in hand learning curve for the strength of the types of materials that the tubes were constructed from and for the new types of powders that were being developed. Military applications ususally drives it and the sportsman is down the totem-pole just a bit. Usually due to military campaigns, advances were made in mining, forges & furnaces and in steel processing. Moving along the curve was also a result of the Industrial Revolution. It was an "on the fly" data collection venture on both sides. I know that most here don't like a rule of thumb, but the early procedures were possibly a rule thumb recipe in order to safeguard the consumer as well protect the maker's reputation and/or preserve their market. Today when you consider filling the tube w/ black powder and igniting it, the test might have been a bit much considering the service load. And more data from each side would help narrow the pressure window that the gun might be exposed to or was intended for.
Homeless: I would say yes by parallel to the Birmingham proofs info in Greg Tag's post and from the 1931 publication. Greener mentions it in the 9th edition so I assume it appealed to a worldwide market.
Kind Regards,
Raimey
rse
Last edited by ellenbr; 03/05/08 12:13 PM.
